BludgerTrack: 56.0-44.0 to Labor

BludgerTrack catches up with Newspoll, as the second round of post-coup polls proves hardly better for the Coalition than the first.

First up, note that developments in Wentworth, including Dave Sharma’s Liberal preselection win overnight, are being tracked in the post below.

There have now been four polls since the leadership change, two apiece by Newspoll and Essential Research, the first pair conducted in the immediate aftermath, the second a fortnight hence and released earlier this week. Essential recorded a slight softening in the post-coup blowout, but Newspoll did not. BludgerTrack is now reflecting the Newspolls in having Labor leading 56.0-44.0, translating into a 97-49 lead on the seat projection that I don’t advise waiting up for.

In any case, BludgerTrack is in methodological limbo at the moment, as its smoothing method is not designed for convulsions such as the one that set in three weeks ago. Whereas the smoothing parameter is normally determined by something called the Aikake information criterion, this has lately been causing a problem in producing a very low value for the Coalition and a very high one for Labor. The effect of this has been that the current reading of the Coalition primary vote has reflected the sudden change in fortunes, but Labor’s has not.

As a result, I have junked my usual method for the major parties and simply applied arbitrary low values that get them to the ballpark of where their latest poll results have been. The sizeable increase in the Labor primary vote this week is only because I have moved them from a high to a low smoothing parameter – the latest polls have in fact had them down slightly. When enough data is available from the Morrison era for it to work, I will start up a new series using only post-leadership change data.

Also in limbo for now are the leadership ratings measures. For Scott Morrison’s net approval and Morrison-versus-Shorten preferred prime minister trends, there will not be enough data for a couple of months. There’s nothing to stop me maintaining Bill Shorten’s net approval rating, but keeping it going in the absence of the Turnbull measures will require a bit of code tinkering I haven’t got around to yet.

Full results featuring state breakdowns:

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,744 comments on “BludgerTrack: 56.0-44.0 to Labor”

Comments Page 34 of 35
1 … 33 34 35

  4. JimmyD @ #1650 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 5:52 pm

    PlayerOne
    If you refuse to comply with the terms of the treaty, the ISDS provisions would come into play.

    That’s incorrect, as ISDS applies only between governments and businesses. Failure to comply with and/or uphold the provisions of a treaty by a signatory would be an issue for the signatories to the treaty which, obviously, are governments, not businesses.

    I know that. But if you try to disallow a significant term of the treaty, it would presumably be to either advantage some companies, or disadvantage others (it is a trade treaty, after all) – and either way there will be candidates who have the right to an ISDS claim. Which they would have a good chance of winning.

  5. Talk about latent racism on Poll Bludger. Because a toaster is made by Chinese or Asian laborers it’s somehow inferior to some American brand put together in generally non unionized work force? The fact that Australian workers and consumers have access to far cheaper manufactured products because of free and open markets is one of the great achievements of the Hawks-Keating Labor Governments. The TPP with appropriate protections will bring jobs and a better deal for mums and dads. It won’t burn the house down and it won’t see Reds under the Bed.

  6. U
    That may be so. But the Feds just spent $39 million defending the right of Australia to impose plain packaging on a bunch of shyster poison mongers.

  7. Nicholas says:
    Sunday, September 16, 2018 at 5:33 pm

    The UK does not lose any spending power because of financial firms leaving the UK. Anyone who believes otherwise doesn’t understand how taxation works.

    The UK relies to some extent on imports, meaning it’s able to satisfy some of its demand for goods and services by calling on the productive capacity of other economies. It can pay for these imports by exporting some of the goods and services created internally or by issuing currency, which is to say, by creating liabilities owed to foreigners.

    The UK is about to smash its ability to to sell its goods and services in its (by far) largest market. If it’s going to continue to import goods and services (used for both consumption and capital purposes) it will either have to find new markets for its export-facing production, increase import-substituting production or increase the issue currency or all three.

    It’s not going to be easy to replicate a market the size of the EU in anything less than at least 100 years nor will it be possible to replace all its imports with domestically-produced goods and services at competitive prices, so either the supply of imports will fall (there will be less consumption in the UK economy) or the price of imports will rise (following a depreciation)…or both. There will be a terms of trade shift that will shrink real wages in the UK.

    As consumption and real wages fall, so will labour demand also fall and unemployment will rise. Brexit will necessarily result in a reduction in the real size if the UK economy, even if the Ns of the world were to have their day and to be permitted to Print! at will. Real per capita incomes will fall, and the losses will be the greatest among working people. This is plain as day.

    The Trumpy claims to the contrary are an invitation to ruin. This is a deliberately chosen goal. The pseudo-left and the neo-fa both want to precipitate a collapse…and are willing to subvert the institutional order to do it.

  8. PlayerOne
    and either way there will be candidates who have the right to an ISDS claim. Which they would have a good chance of winning.

    Again, incorrect. ISDS only applies in investment-specific circumstances, specifically, to the TERMS of investment contract agreements, not the entirety of the treaty itself.

    If the Australian government was to renegotiate aspects of the treaty, e.g. via side letters or domestic legislation proscribing the use of ISDS, or failing that, withdrawing from aspects of the treaty, there is absolutely nothing any business could do. They certainly wouldn’t have any chance of winning, let alone a good one.

    An ISDS tribunal cannot overturn domestic laws and regulations. The tribunal is limited to determining breaches of certain investment obligations. ISDS does not give foreign investors the right to enforce the entire FTA, including, for example, the intellectual property chapter.

    https://dfat.gov.au/trade/investment/Pages/investor-state-dispute-settlement.aspx

  10. Observer @ #1580 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 4:26 pm

    IIRC there was a period when Aged Care facilities were put to tender – and it was well known that the successful bidders were Coalition supporters rewarded with the Tender by a Queensland Senator whose name escapes me but he subsequently left politics in disgrace – but may have remained the President if the Party in Queensland

    With Child Care we had ABC Learning, a Coalition donor where Anthony was in the Board

    And, of course, Dutton is now invested into Child Care facilities – so former ABC Learning facilities?

    ABC Learning went belly up

    Privatisations have been to the benefit of Coalition mates

    Senator Santo Santoro. The name is of Sicilian origin

  11. JimmyD @ #1658 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 6:12 pm

    If the Australian government was to renegotiate aspects of the treaty, e.g. via side letters or domestic legislation proscribing the use of ISDS, or failing that,ing withdraw from aspects of the treaty, there is absolutely nothing any business could do. They certainly wouldn’t have any chance of winning, let alone a good one.

    LOL. Which “aspects of the treaty” do you suppose we could change that would not affect any of the businesses that trade under its auspices? And if they don’t, why would we want to?

    I guess we could lobby to substitute a semi-colon for a comma here and there. Unless it actually had a material effect, of course. 🙂

  12. Labor really need to get information out on what TPP will mean to our country & voters – benefits and negatives – and they need to do it quickly.

  14. PlayerOne
    Which “aspects of the treaty” do you suppose we could change that would not affect any of the businesses that trade under its auspices? And if they don’t, why would we want to?

    I never said that a decision to change Australia’s obligations with respect to ISDS would not affect any businesses, just that there would be nothing they could do about it.

    ISDS does not, and is not intended to, prevent governments from making policy decisions that negatively affect businesses, as Philip Morris found out. It is intended to enforce contract agreements between governments and businesses that governments are failing to adhere to.

  15. Morrison starts as he means to go on, apparently. Lying.

    Rick Morton‏Verified account @SquigglyRick

    Scott Morrison flat out denied to me in presser that the Aged Care Funding Instrument has had changes (now an indexation freeze) worth almost $2bn in his time as Treasurer. At presser today he said “that’s what the Labor Party says. They’re allowed to put questions, not lies.”
    …
    Two things. The figures are there in budget papers and in MYEFO. Also the insinuation I took the question from Labor is ridiculous. Haven’t discussed it with them at all (and I’ve been reporting this area for five years now.) I got my own questions!

  16. Upnorth @ #1651 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 6:08 pm

    Talk about latent racism on Poll Bludger. Because a toaster is made by Chinese or Asian laborers it’s somehow inferior to some American brand put together in generally non unionized work force? The fact that Australian workers and consumers have access to far cheaper manufactured products because of free and open markets is one of the great achievements of the Hawks-Keating Labor Governments. The TPP with appropriate protections will bring jobs and a better deal for mums and dads. It won’t burn the house down and it won’t see Reds under the Bed.

    No Upnorth – or not from me. I often willingly buy Chinese made stuff and it is often of very good quality.

    I think the key word is CHEAP. If it is cheap it is probably shoddy – especially if it comes from Chna – The reason is in fact the very success of China. As wages and conditions improve for the Chinese working class so too does the cost of production increase. So if you buy cheap from China there is an increasing chance it will be shoddy.

    Compare the trajectories of Japan and China. Years ago Made in Japan was a synonym for cheap and shoddy. Then as Japan advanced it is almost as good as saying made in Germany.

    China is now well down the Japan path. I think that that the new cheap but quality manufacturing hubs are now Vietnam, Turkey and maybe Indonesia.

  18. dave @ #1658 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 6:20 pm

    Labor really need to get information out on what TPP will mean to our country & voters – benefits and negatives – and they need to do it quickly.

    Well I know for a certain fact that it was a battle in caucus – left versus right, Right won.

    However as someone said earlier

    It is now going to be very, very hard to counter the Green argument Labor Liberal same same. Oddly enough it will also decrease the % of PHON and Katter preferences which land with Labor. This is an issue that matters to them – the voters not the MPs

  20. JimmyD @ #1664 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 6:26 pm

    ISDS does not, and is not intended to, prevent governments from making decisions that negatively affect businesses, as Philip Morris found out. It is intended to enforce contract agreements between governments and businesses that governments are failing to adhere to.

    Sure. We can do whatever we like. But we cannot violate the terms of the treaty without potentially subjecting ourselves to an ISDS dispute. And that allows for affected companies to claim compensation.

    From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlement …

    ISDS cannot overturn local laws (unlike the World Trade Organization) which violate trade agreements, but can grant monetary damages to investors adversely affected by such laws. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, ISDS requires specific treaty violations, and does not allow corporations to sue solely over “lost profits”. However, such violations may be difficult to foresee, and the threat of exorbitant fines may cause a chilling effect which halts regulation or legislation in the public interest (e.g. human health and environmental protection). Critics also state that treaties are written so that any legislation causing lost profits is per definition a treaty violation, rendering the argument null that only treaty violations are subject to ISDS.

    Philip Morris Asia lost because of a technicality concerning when they acquired the affected subsidiary, which they did specifically to lodge an ISDS claim. If they had already owned Philiip Morris (Aust), they probably would have won.

  21. Weird about the WA earthquake. The official site says the depth is zero Km. Plus its a deeper red than larger earthquakes elsewhere. Anyone know how that works?

  22. lizzie @ #1664 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 6:28 pm

    Morrison starts as he means to go on, apparently. Lying.

    Rick Morton‏Verified account @SquigglyRick

    Scott Morrison flat out denied to me in presser that the Aged Care Funding Instrument has had changes (now an indexation freeze) worth almost $2bn in his time as Treasurer. At presser today he said “that’s what the Labor Party says. They’re allowed to put questions, not lies.”
    …
    Two things. The figures are there in budget papers and in MYEFO. Also the insinuation I took the question from Labor is ridiculous. Haven’t discussed it with them at all (and I’ve been reporting this area for five years now.) I got my own questions!

    Not sure if overall this is good or bad, but the Morrison seems to be focussed on the Shorten opposition, and not on the people of Australia. I’m going to plump for overall good.

  25. Stupid voters

    GhostWhoVotes
    @GhostWhoVotes
    ·
    58s
    #Ipsos
    Poll Shorten: Approve 44 (+3) Disapprove 48 (-4)
    #auspol
    1
    6
    5
    GhostWhoVotes
    GhostWhoVotes
    @GhostWhoVotes
    ·
    1m
    #Ipsos
    Poll Morrison: Approve 46 (0 compared to Turnbull) Disapprove 36 (-12)
    #auspol
    2
    4
    GhostWhoVotes
    GhostWhoVotes
    @GhostWhoVotes
    ·
    2m
    #Ipsos
    Poll Federal 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 47 (+2) ALP 53 (-2)
    #auspol

  26. The one and only real earthquake I’ve experienced I half slept through. That was the Newcastle earthquake and being 30 Km north of Newcastle it was still pretty intense – like a big fairground ride. Big rolling waves.

    Since I live near the RAAF base my first half-conscious thoughts were that they were bombing (the bombing range isn’t too far from here). Then I noticed that my head was banging against the wall (through a pillow).

    When I sat up I noticed some interesting physics. The bed was heavy and on castors which made it a nice inertial frame of reference. The bed was staying still whilst the rest of the world (and the floor under it) was rolling back and forth. Plus the tall trees out the window were being shaken back and forth by their roots. And the window frame going in and out of square.

    We had it strong enough to be a pretty convincing demonstration of enormous power without anything actually breaking. A little bit harder and yes things would have fallen off shelves or fallen over. You never forget an experience like that.

  28. JimmyD @ #1650 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 3:52 pm

    PlayerOne
    If you refuse to comply with the terms of the treaty, the ISDS provisions would come into play.

    That’s incorrect, as ISDS applies only between governments and businesses. Failure to comply with and/or uphold the provisions of a treaty by a signatory would be an issue for the signatories to the treaty which, obviously, are governments not businesses.

    wRONg.

    Any changes to the labour testing clauses (such as the ones proclaimed by Mr Shorten) would affect companies ability to profit, therefore triggering all sorts of ISDS disputes from corporations based in those countries, but not the governments of those countries.

  33. Firstly, Penny Wong for one argued strongly in favour of the TPP in the caucus meeting and Pat Conroy during HOR debate on the legislation was pragmatic re the TPP and while expressing concern about some aspects was in favour so the left v right caucus battle is bullshit.

    Secondly, late last week Penny Wong explained clearly and succinctly during a interview on RN Drive why labor was supporting the TPP and how labor would address concerns raised in caucus and by unions.

    I suggest posters check it out before assuming anything re the legislation.

    Thirdly, with all due respect, while posters here hyperventilate re the voter reaction to labor agreeing to support the TPP it should be considered that most may not have a clue what it was about and how it would affect individual lives and unless they can touch and or feel it’s direct implications could not give a shit.

    The upcoming aged care debate will be of more concern to voters as will the continuing effects of stagnant wages and soaring power prices.

    Cheers and a great night to all.

  35. ajm

    Yes, Santoro

    I was approached by a friend of mine seeking any contacts I had who could assist in the placing of his Mother in an Aged Care facility

    I knew a business broker who I knew was an applicant for Tenders with a view of on selling, so he applied for multiple Tenders

    I contacted the business broker to query if he knew of any operators or potential operators – or knew anyone who knew operators

    It was this business broker who told me he was unsuccessful in applying for Tenders as were any others who were not donors to the Coalition because the Tenders were exclusively granted to donors to the Coalition as a reward for the donations and support

    I have in mind that there was some public reporting with Santoro then resigning – so problem fixed

    Except ………

  36. Regardless of reservations about TPP and whether Labor can do enough to protect workers from negative impacts of the treaty, I have found Bill Shorten to be quite comfortable and not least bothered on the issue. Considering TPP is a bit of a sticky point within Labor, it just shows me that Shorten is supremely confident of his internal authority and policy direction of ALP under his leadership.

  37. Pseudo Cud Chewer @ #1668 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 4:44 pm

    Weird about the WA earthquake. The official site says the depth is zero Km. Plus its a deeper red than larger earthquakes elsewhere. Anyone know how that works?

    News reports have it as a 2km depth. Not sure why they are different from official recordings, but from what I understand, generally the shallower the depth, the more intense the quake is felt.

  39. I’m calling bullshit on these Ipsos primaries

    The Fairfax-Ipsos survey of 1,200 respondents was taken from Wednesday to Saturday and has a margin of error of 2.9 per cent.

    The Coalition primary vote increased from 33 to 34 per cent while the Labor primary vote fell from 35 to 31 per cent and the Greens primary vote increased from 13 to 15 per cent when compared to previous survey published on August 19.

  42. “The Coalition primary vote increased from 33 to 34 per cent while the Labor primary vote fell from 35 to 31 per cent and the Greens primary vote increased from 13 to 15 per cent when compared to previous survey published on August 19.”

    Is that a fuckin joke?

  46. Dan Gulberry
    Any changes to the labour testing clauses (such as the ones proclaimed by Mr Shorten) would affect companies ability to profit, therefore triggering all sorts of ISDS disputes from corporations based in those countries, but not the governments of those countries.

    I don’t agree, because the TPP ISDS provisions specifically acknowledge the right of governments to legislate in the public interest.

    The TPP ISDS provisions represent the most modern iteration of this process. Specifically, the ISDS scheme in the TPP contain the following improvement over previous ISDS provisions:
    – it ties the definition of fair and equitable treatment of investors to the customary international law minimum standards of treatment of aliens.21 There is case history setting out the customary international law minimum standards of treatment of aliens which sets a high bar of proof for an investor wishing to make a claim;22
    – it sets out a specific set of criteria for determining whether an indirect expropriation has occurred, which, taken together, mean that non-discriminatory regulatory action by a Government in areas that have historically been associated with regulation (such as health care and the environment), would be unlikely to qualify as indirect appropriation;23
    – it contains a provision that, in effect, permits Governments to take any measure that it considers appropriate to ensure that investment activity is undertaken in a way that is sensitive to environment, health or other objectives.24 According to Dr Sam Luttrell, this provision is taken from the United States Model Bilateral Investment Treaty, and is intended to communicate to investors that TPP parties reserve the right to regulate in these areas;25
    – it requires all cases taken under the TPP ISDS provisions to be conducted in public;26 and
    it limits awards in ISDS cases to actual monetary loss with applicable interest.27

    https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Treaties/TransPacificPartnership/Report_165/section?id=committees%2Freportjnt%2F024012%2F24257

    I agree, however, with the ALP that this needs further clarification and confirmation, such as what NZ has obtained.

  47. LU not logged in @ #1579 Sunday, September 16th, 2018 – 5:13 pm

    The ALP is apparently supporting a treaty that they promise they will make it illegal for them to support once they are in government.

    What? How the hell does a country bind itself to a treaty that it cannot exit from? What international body can enforce it? What kind of repercussions are real, credible threats from the countersignatories?

    First get power, then use that power.

    The terms of the TPP can be changed.

    Sounds awfully Trumpian…

  49. Thanks JimmyD.

    I just don’t see how a Govt can bind future Govts to a piece of legislation. Regardless of ISDS or treaties or whatever.

Comments Page 34 of 35
1 … 33 34 35

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *