BludgerTrack: 53.5-46.5 to Labor

The Coalition’s improved performance in the first Newspoll of the year makes little difference to the BludgerTrack poll aggregate. Also featured: a closer look at a recent union-commissioned poll of Greg Hunt’s seat of Flinders.

This week’s two-point move in Newspoll excited a certain amount of talk about a Coalition recovery, but it hasn’t impressed the BludgerTrack poll aggregate – the result landed pretty much bang on where it was already, being well in line with the only othe result published so far this year, namely the Essential Research poll of a fortnight ago. As such, the aggregate records a 0.2% shift in the Coalition’s favour on two-party preferred, no movements on the primary vote greater than 0.4%, and a one seat gain for the Coalition on the seat projection in Queensland. The leadership trends have Bill Shorten up a bit on net approval, but little change for Scott Morrison either on either his net approval or preferred prime minister lead. Full results through the link below:

I can also provide further detail on the uComms/ReachTEL poll from the seat of Flinders that was conducted last week for the CFMMEU and reported over the weekend. Labor’s two-party lead of 51-49 compares with Hunt’s redistribution-adjusted winning margin of 57.1-42.9 from 2016, and derives from a respondent-allocated preference split that gives Labor 62.7% of minor party and independent preferences. Labor’s share of the preferences in 2016 was 71.1%, which if applied to the primary vote numbers from this poll boosts Labor’s lead to 53-47. Compared with my own post-redistribution estimates from 2016, the primary votes from the poll have Greg Hunt down from 50.7% to 39.4%, Labor up from 27.4% to 35.2%, the Greens down from 11.2% to 9.1%, and One Nation debuting on 5.7%. All of which has been superseded to some extent by this week’s announcement that Julia Banks, the Liberal-turned-independent member for Chisholm, will be running in the seat.

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.

2,817 comments on “BludgerTrack: 53.5-46.5 to Labor”

  1. reensborough Growler says:
    Monday, February 4, 2019 at 10:20 pm
    Peter Stanton @ #2737 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 10:18 pm

    Greensborough Growler says:
    Monday, February 4, 2019 at 10:05 pm
    Peter Stanton @ #2712 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 10:03 pm

    Greensborough Growler says:
    Monday, February 4, 2019 at 9:38 pm
    Next time you or a dear one have a medical crisis, you go with that analogy, comrade.
    ————————————————

    We have already had a few medical crisis thanks. It happens when you are in your seventies. We went straight to a medical doctor rather than asking a broker to find one for us.

    I sincerely hope you are not dead! 5 scotches might just do that to you.
    —————————
    Sorry I stopped at 4.

    No you didn’t!
    ——————
    I hope your political skills are better than you psychic skills but I doubt it.

  2. Evening all. Put me down for essential 55 – 45 to Labor.

    Regarding the Banking RC, after a tedious time wading through pieces written about it, hearing Frytheplanet and still not finding a link to the document itself anywhere, my impressions are:

    1. The release has been a very managed process, with journo lockup, prepared pieces, and lots of coverage. It seems designed as a process to allow people to vent, let things blow over, then back to business as usual.

    2. None of them say very much. I finally found the report here.
    https://financialservices.royalcommission.gov.au/Pages/reports.aspx

    3. Josh Frydenburg has questions to answer. The report is scathing of most of his portfolio. Yet he takes no personal or government responsibility, no promise of specific action, in fact, no direct promise to actually implement any of the report’s findings. He says banking must change. But no statement of how, or who will make it happen? He says “government is acting”. How? Burning evidence? As minister responsible, Frydenburg should resign. But he is irresponsible.

    4. I raised the question of foreknowledge of recommendations and disposal of shares earlier. It needs to be asked again now. If the RC findings are implemented, the value of mortgage broker businesses, and banks and retail fund shares, will decline. Watch tomorrow’s markets. Did anyone in cabinet sell or buy any shares from Friday to today?

    5. With implementation still unresolved, and criminal charges at stake for organisations and individuals, should anyone accept political donations from banks between now and the election? The conflicts of interest are massive and obvious. It would be great if Labor could say they were not accepting bank donations between now and May. Then ScumMo could be asked another hard question.

    6. Despite hyperbole, the report was not that strong.
    (a) Like others, I cannot understand why individuals facing criminal charges were not named. They should stand aside from executive roles in the mean time. Unless there will be no charges?

    (b) Why should taxpayers pay for compensation? Why no promise from Josh to pursue organisations and individuals responsible to recover the cost of the comp? They can afford to pay, and should.

    So I give Haynes a “B” – good investigation, weak reporting.
    I give Frydenburg a “D” – no commitment, no action, no accountability.
    I give ASIC and APRA an “F” – their heads should have already resigned.

    After being bagged a decade ago in the HIH inquiry, APRA is to financial regulation what the catholic church is to child protection.

    Labor should go hard on this. It is not class warfare, but a law and order issue. And every social class is affected. Evening all.

  3. Remember when Bandt does same same he is attacking Labor for being like the Liberals. I disagree with this strategy but be in no doubt it’s an attack on the LNP.

  4. Leaving now for some quality time with my OH.
    Essential poll guess currently running at:

    PB mean: ALP 54.0 to 46.0 LNP
    PB median: ALP 54.0 to 46.0 LNP
    No. Of PB Respondents: 15

    Catch you later. 🙂

  5. I hope Banks runs on AGW in Flinders. Hunt has the worst record as environment minister as any other who preceded him that I can recall.

  6. Just an observation:

    The Greens and far-left bludgers on here seem very touchy lately. Note also that some of them cosying up with Nath the nasty right-wing troll.

  7. Observer @ #2741 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 10:21 pm

    There was a time (and post deregulation) when, to apply for a Housing Loan you made an appointment with your Bank Manager who may or may not have had a Lending Discretion to approve and if he/she did not have the Lending Discretion then they submitted the Application to the Area Lending Manager who had the Lending Discretion

    With the (yet again) closure of bank branches and the reductions in staff numbers at banks in the quest to reduce human overheads and representation overheads in pursuit of profit, the model to seek Home Mortgage Lending has been outsourced to Mortgage Brokers who are remunerated by the lender (they prefer for the reasons they do)

    The banks actively court Mortgage Brokers – witness the Bank of Queensland

    Equally the Mortgage Broker has a vested interest in referring business and having those loan applications approved – because they rely on these approvals for their income

    So there is vested interest on account of the lender and the introducer

    And that has led to major problems such as banks lending to people with a criminal history – as Mortgage Originators no less

    Obviously I am sometimes asked to represent (always pro bono)

    I attended a Mortgage Broker with a party known to me who was seeking a pre approval and raised the question of a specific lender being included in the Contract of Sale where the intention was for the Contract of Sale to be subject to finance

    Simply pre approval is what it is – virtually not worth the paper it is written on because of the Terms and Conditions

    The Mortgage Broker spoke against the finance clause and the inclusion of a specific lender

    I raised the prospect of the Contract of Sale including by extension that the Vendor could arrange finance making the Contract of Sale unconditional – and the finance provided thru the Vendor may be detrimental to the purchaser including against marketplace normals

    The Mortgage Broker response was that they had not thought about that but that I had a point

    The Mortgage Broker then identified the lender they would be approaching and why

    The Contract of Sale was then (ultimately) entered into including subject to finance being approved by the specific lender

    And the unconditional approval from the lender was ultimately obtained

    It appears to me that Mortgage Brokers are gung ho – don’t worry about subject to finance and don’t worry about a specific lender (because we will get you an approval, somewhere somehow)

    This puts risk with the purchaser

    Finance Advisers, who also receive commissions, take the position of telling you what you should do with your hard earned savings – and, later in life, you will not recover losses so there is a problem right there

    There may be reasons being lesser fees if you are contributing lump sums so you, as the person whose money it is, benefits on costs versus fees

    Apart from that diversification, compounding and time

    So those investing in ASX Companies paying fully franked dividends fail at the first hurdle (and where has their wealth gone because banks, Telstra and others are significantly down?)

    You seem to want to make a fairly straight forward transaction very opaque.

    I actively encourage buyers to insert a financial clause in any purchase transaction. Furthermor, I insist they consult with their conveyancer or lega l advisor regarding the wording. I never specify a particular Lender because deals can change.

    Pre-approvals are basically a hunting licence for home buyers. They tell the client that based on financial information submitted to the bank then the client is qualified for a loan of a particular amount against a specific property value.

    The banks usually reserve the right to ensure the value of the property is at market value and also more closely scrutinise the Borrowers servicing capacity.

    It’s not that hard!

  8. Fess

    The jig really should be up for the Liberal CC deniers. The cost of the current Townsville flood clean up will probably be considerably more than a new power plant is worth, with thousands of homes inundated. This highlights the folly of the “choice between green and cheap power” lies Hunt and Taylor have been telling.

  9. The purpose of Same-same from the Greens is:
    – to discourage the faithful from drifting back to Labor, a party that can actually attain power (as per Cheryl Kernot 20 years ago),
    – while picking off a few “Liberals” and protest voters who are liberals and/or are concerned about the climate and environment.

  10. The purpose of same-same is to point out that in a 2 party preferential voting system with near universal voting that both major parties will inevitably come to resemble each other and that ‘differences’ are mostly superficial and more about branding than anything significant.

  11. Steve

    Yeah. That’s why I dislike the strategy.

    I would prefer the issues to be enough.
    I think it’s the Greens over reaction to being called extreme.

  12. Steve

    There’s also the phenomena I’ve talked about before – when someone is somewhere you want to be, you can either put in the work to get there by yourself or you can tear them down.

  13. Soc:

    In my view the jig really is up for the denialists in the coalition and it’s growing from Liberal leaning indies running serious campaigns in safe Liberal seats. Sharkie, Phelps, Steggall all running on platforms that accept the scientific reality of AGW and wanting stronger action on that front from govt. It’s fantastic watching Abbott cop it in Warringah, I sincerely hope he loses.

  14. GG “Have never charged for a loan review in my life”

    Don’t believe it. Do you not get another cut when the lender changes the loan because of your review?

  15. 1. on the medical analogy, you could argue your GP is the mortgage broker who chooses a specialist if it’s serious

    2. Why are we getting another body to provide oversight of ASIC and APRA? Doesn’t Frydenberg have about 10,000 people in Treasury and Finance to do the bloody job? And countless parliamentary committees?

    3. guytaur
    “In politics turning up is vital.”
    Woody Allen observed that 80% of success is just showing up.

  16. Steve777:

    Same-same schtick is dishonest though. And lazy.

    If Greens can’t recognise that Labor and the Liberals are poles apart on AGW then they should pack up and go home.

  17. On the subject of same-same, all “Liberals” are same-same, regardless of their personal beliefs. They allowed the hard right, the dogwhistlers, the racists, the IPA ideologues, the religious crackpots, the wide boys, spivs and chancers, the misogynists and homophobes, to take over their party. They are are ciphers for a vicious right wing Government that seeks the votes of racists, that is in the pockets of the miners and big banks, that viciously attacks the unemployed and other disadvantaged, that believes in inequality, that suppresses wages and promotes trickle up, that lies with apparent impunity.

    Trent Zimmerman- Eric Abetz, same-same
    Tony Abbott – Malcolm Turnbull same-same
    Julia Banks (before she left) – Kevin Andrews same-same
    etc etc…

  18. PeeBee @ #2769 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 10:44 pm

    GG “Have never charged for a loan review in my life”

    Don’t believe it. Do you not get another cut when the lender changes the loan because of your review?

    People can choose to consolidate debt (e.g. credit cards, personal loans etc) against the revised security value of the property or decide to re-finance because their current deal sucks. Sometimes, given all the changeover costs and hassle, it’s not worth the effort. I always give clients that option.

    However, I have never charged anyone for doing the review.

  19. Confessions

    Labor does purely fictional attacks on the Greens for political reasons too.

    There is no pedestal here for either party and voters don’t like it from my anecdotal experience.

    I just assume political science dictates it. I accept it and don’t complain except to point out hypocrisy. Yes that’s hypocrisy of Greens as well as Labor.

  20. Steve

    I think it’s been a shock to many about how right wing the LNP has gone. Its why I have been with the Greens on AS policy.

    I do see once you throw the concept of compassion overboard and the principles of human rights that represents that compassion you are in trouble.

    That means having the compassion to understand why people would risk drowning at sea and not punishing them instead of the People Smugglers.

  21. “I think it’s the Greens over reaction to being called extreme.”

    The Greens do not believe that maximising your post-tax income and accumulated wealth is the purpose of life. They don’t chase the votes of people who think that it is.

    To “Liberals”, that’s extreme.

  22. Guytaur,
    “Labor does purely fictional attacks on the Greens for political reasons too.
    There is no pedestal here for either party and voters don’t like it from my anecdotal experience.
    I just assume political science dictates it. I accept it and don’t complain except to point out hypocrisy. Yes that’s hypocrisy of Greens as well as Labor.”

    Agreed. It’s good to see that not everyone on this blog is a Liberal/Labor/Green party partisan.

  23. Sohar @ #2777 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 11:01 pm

    Guytaur,
    “Labor does purely fictional attacks on the Greens for political reasons too.
    There is no pedestal here for either party and voters don’t like it from my anecdotal experience.
    I just assume political science dictates it. I accept it and don’t complain except to point out hypocrisy. Yes that’s hypocrisy of Greens as well as Labor.”

    Agreed. It’s good to see that not everyone on this blog is a Liberal/Labor/Green party partisan.

    It’s wonderful how all the partisans stand above the fray while stuck in the swamp!

  24. Trent Zimmerman- Eric Abetz, same-same
    Tony Abbott – Malcolm Turnbull same-same
    Julia Banks (before she left) – Kevin Andrews same-same
    etc etc…

    Except they are same-same. Not only because they sat in the same partyroom where policy positions were agreed upon.

    But saying the policy positions of Labor and Liberal on the environment are same-same isn’t just factually inaccurate, it’s fundamentally dishonest. And this is what Greens do in the name of politicising environmental policy rather than working towards an achievable outcome. It’s why I say the best thing for the environment is the incineration of the Greens in their current iteration.

  25. WeWantPaul,
    Here’s a few more podcasts. 🙂
    Jon Favreau
    @jonfavs
    I used to write speeches now I host pods. Check out my new documentary on the history and future of the Democratic Party: (link: http://www.thewildernesspodcast.com) thewildernesspodcast.com

    Ezra Klein
    @ezraklein
    Founder and editor-at-large, (link: http://Vox.com) Vox.com. Why yes, I do have a podcast. (link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1081584611) itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the…

    https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1081584611

    Questionable Adam
    @AdamReakes
    Sales guy. Critical thinking. Humour. Host of The #HerdMentality Podcast. I am my own parody account. Oh, and an #Atheist….

    Paul Colgan
    @Colgo
    Publisher and editor-in-chief, Business Insider Australia. Co-host of the Devils and Details podcast.

  26. Re: Corbyn & Brexit;

    Corbyn completely failed to understand what Labour has needed to do. In order of importance, Labour had to:

    – Arrive at and present a coherent, consistent policy on Brexit, and ensure all MPs were on-board with it;
    – Have a political strategy ready to go for if (when) May’s deal failed in the House;
    – Clearly and convincingly make it *very* clear that anti-semitism (as separate from criticism of Israel and its actions) is Not Welcome in the Labour Party;
    – Not get baited into making dramatic motions that were never going to pass the House (cf: the no-confidence motion, which was a nonstarter from the outset); and
    – Retain the confidence of his own Caucus, which necessarily involves Caucus members not only knowing what they’re supposed to do, but why they’re supposed to do it. Also, ensure that they’re on the same page on key issues, such as the no-confidence motion.

    I don’t believe that sitting MPs are considering ditching the Party for the hell of it. They’re considering ditching the Party because Corbyn’s leadership is not leading the Party in a direction anything like the direction they want to go. Some of this – possibly even most of it – is residual Blairism working itself out, which some people might argue to be a good thing. Up to a limited point, it is – but I’d like to point out to those people that Neil Kinnock never won an election, while Tony Blair won three. I’d also like to point out that Labour, like center-left Parties across the world, does best when it’s a big-tent Party where a degree of dissent on key issues is not only tolerated, but welcomed. The small-core, purity test right-wing nonsense won’t do anything to get Labour’s leader into No. 10 except as a guest.

    IMO, with the benefit of three years’ worth of data to look at Mr. Corbyn’s performance, it’s a mixed-bag. His skill at retail politics and his sincerity and honesty have done a lot to bring Labour closer to the voting public than it’s been in awhile; on the other hand, his judgment in handling the streak of anti-Semitism in Labour has been questionable, and his apparent lack of political strategy when it comes to Brexit has not made him appear to be a safe pair of hands. Also, he doesn’t seem to have learned much (if anything) about how to manage his own caucus.

    Corbyn can do better. For the sake of everyone who wants to see Britain return to sanity, he must do better. This is the time where future historians will place every piece of data they can get under a microscope, seeking as fine and nuanced an understanding of what happened (and why it happened) as they can possibly get.

  27. Late Riser

    Can you put me down for

    53-47 Essential

    Can’t PB much. but watching. Too wet Upnorth. Annastacia Palaszcuk and Townsville Labor Mayor Jenny Hill showing real leadership at the moment.

  28. UK Labor/Corbyn needed to get 100% behind Remain. Simples.

    The no-confidence motion wasn’t a bad idea, but you’ve gotta check the votes first and be reasonably satisfied that it’ll pass. And articulate a clear plan for when it does pass. Like Remain.

  29. Line of Credit Loan – State Custodians 13 72 62

    Use the State Custodians Low Rate LOC – LVR up to 80% (Owner Occupier, IO) to gain access to your equity with a low interest rate line of credit home loan. No application or ongoing fees.

    Interest rate of 3.93% p.a.
    Comparison rate of 3.94% p.a.

    Application fee of $0
    Maximum LVR: 80%
    Minimum borrowing: $100,000
    Max borrowing: $2,000,000

    This is the loan I have put myself, and five of my relatives/friends into.

    Never charged anybody a single cent, and never received a single cent for doing so.

    GG won’t see this, because he has blocked me, but I would bet a multiple of his accumulated trailing commissions that the loans he puts his ‘clients’ into are far inferior to this. It has no drawbacks. Principal repayments can be whatever you like, whenever you like. Ditto, redraws, up to the original borrowing. NO FEES, NO ESTABLISHMENT COST. No brokers’ commissions of any sort. Brokers can’t find this, of course, nothing in it for them .

  30. “It’s like the patient is presenting with heat stroke, and the Coalition is saying ‘let’s put them in a taxpayer funded sauna and see if that fixes it’ while Labor just doesn’t want the sauna to be taxpayer funded”.

    Adam Bandt not a waste of space. He had the best zinger of the night. With bonus points for factual accuracy via metaphor.

  31. a r @ #2784 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 9:02 pm

    UK Labor/Corbyn needed to get 100% behind Remain. Simples.

    Thereby losing Labor strongholds that voted overwhelmingly to leave.

    It is nowhere near as simple as you claim. And your advice to call those who voted to leave stupid, and tell them to put their trust in “the adults” shows how “simple” you are.

    Corbyn is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. No matter what side he takes, he loses vasts swathes of traditional Labour voters.

    Calling people stupid because they often vote against their own self interest will get you nowhere. Look at what’s happening in Australia. A sizeable portion of the populace are more than happy to vote against their interests. Same thing in the US. Look at how well Clinton calling people “deplorables” worked for her, despite the fact she was right. How many times has Pauline Hanson been (correctly) labelled a moron? The more that happens, the more her followers cling to her, because by default, you’ve called them morons.

    Nope, this is a very complex matter and it can’t be solved by “simple” solutions.

  32. Dan Gulberry @ #2784 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 11:24 pm

    Corbyn is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. No matter what side he takes, he loses vasts swathes of traditional Labour voters.

    You’ve got steps 1 and 2, but it’s a 4-step process. After damnation comes purgatory, and after purgatory comes redemption:

    Step 1 – Pick a goddamn side
    Step 2 – Alienate people who like the opposite side
    Step 3 – Prosecute the case for why your side is the right choice and win them back
    Step 4 – Win the next election

    Sitting around forever in limbo because every side has drawbacks isn’t a winning strategy. Being forever in limbo is its own drawback.

    You can’t make an omelette without breaking some eggs, etc., etc..

  33. Just watched 4 corners.

    My take is that there is some evidence that Australian Border Force personnel have been actively involved.

    Canceling Visa’s, and so blocking their travel when they find out that women intend to seek asylum??

    Somewhat different standards applied to Saudi women in danger as against Liberal mates au pairs??

    FFS. I really hope that Dutton gets a serious kicking over this. This is seriously wrong.

    The politics will get nasty when parliament goes back. Maybe we are headed for a “be scared of young Saudi women” election rather than the expected “be terrified of brown people in boats” election??

    Me angry at this.

  34. Matt @ #2780 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 7:54 pm

    Re: Corbyn & Brexit;

    Corbyn completely failed to understand what Labour has needed to do. In order of importance, Labour had to:

    – Arrive at and present a coherent, consistent policy on Brexit, and ensure all MPs were on-board with it;

    Well thought out, but unfortunately it I don’t think it would have got past here. 🙂

  35. Late Riser says:
    Monday, February 4, 2019 at 10:17 pm

    I’m not watching Q&A. But there is a fair bit of “same/same” messaging on PB. If this is strategic Greens Party messaging I don’t get it.

    It is intended to both tap into and to propagate voter disaffection. The Gs want to provoke protest voting and then to become the voice of protest. Their difficulty is that protests are coming from the Right – from voters to whom the Gs have never addressed their appeal. Labor-leaning voters may or may not be feeling a sense of protest, but in either case they are expressing this by hoping to change the government.

    The Gs celebrate voter disaffection. They take it as validation of their campaigns – campaigns which are, in fact, highly destructive. They propel discouragement, alienation, cynicism and abstention. The Gs have been the authors of mistrust. They should be ashamed of themselves. They make democratic politics much, much more difficult than it needs to be; and, in the same vein, licence anti-democratic responses.

  36. guytaur says:
    Monday, February 4, 2019 at 10:52 pm
    Confessions

    Labor does purely fictional attacks on the Greens for political reasons too.

    Labor ignores the Gs as a general rule. The less said of them, the better it goes for Labor.

  37. a r @ #2788 Monday, February 4th, 2019 – 9:34 pm

    Step 3 – Prosecute the case for why your side is the right choice and win them back

    This is where your “simple plan” falls in a heap. There is nothing simple at all about this step. It may take years and years to do this, if in fact you manage to do it at all. Plus it requires a lot of external forces that you have no control over to work with you.

    The 2016 US election is a prime example of why your “simple plan” is no such thing. Despite Clinton being the vastly superior candidate, despite having some of the best political brains in the world working for her, despite even winning the popular vote, she still couldn’t “prosecute her case” in the rust belt states where it mattered. She couldn’t even convince a lot of Democrats to get off their fat arses and actually vote.

    Not coincidentally, the same type of people who voted for Trump in the rust belt states are exactly the same type of traditional Labour voters in the industrial wastelands who voted to Leave. And for much the same reasons. Lecturing them is never going to win their hearts and minds. They will have to learn for themselves, just as a child needs to touch a burning stove in order to learn to never touch one again. Unfortunately, by the time voters have learnt this lesson, assuming they ever do, the damage that has been done in the meantime is irreparable, and you’re faced with a completely different set of challenges you need to convince them of.

    No my friend, life is never as simple as you claim it is.

  38. Essential

    52-48 to Labor

    The poll has the Coalition’s primary vote on 38% and Labor’s on 36%, and suggests the one-point tightening in the two-party preferred measure.

    Essential has changed its panel provider for the rolling survey from YourSource to Qualtrics. Peter Lewis, executive director of Essential says, the same methodology, weighting and quality control is being applied to the data provided.

    “Our final poll of 2018 conducted by the YourSource panel found a two party preferred result of 53-47, and our first vote of 2019 using the Qualtrics panel also found a 53-47 vote,” Lewis said.

    “This week’s poll shows a slight tightening, with one extended same 1500 respondents [survey] finding a two party preferred result of 52-48”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/04/essential-poll-labor-seizes-on-banking-brawl-as-lead-over-coalition-narrows

Leave a Reply

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