Newspoll: Deakin, Pearce, Herbert and Lindsay

Newspoll seat polls target four seats that are expected to go down to the wire, producing results to match.

The Australian has published what can doubtless be regarded as the most reliable – or at any rate, least unreliable – seat polls to emerge from the campaign so far, from four well-chosen electorates. These are automated phone polls conducted on Saturday and have modest samples, from 509 to 618, although they seem to fit very well with where the major parties believe things to stand. Among other things, this means each looks to be going down to the wire. Perhaps a little more surprisingly, they find Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party doing at least as well as the Palmer United Party did in 2013.

Deakin (Victoria, Liberal 6.4%): The Liberals are credited with a two-party lead of 51-49 in this eastern Melbourne seat, consistent with the general impression of a big swing to Labor in Victoria – though perhaps not quite enough to take out this particular seat, which is held by arch-conservative Michael Sukkar. The primary votes are Liberal 46%, compared with 50.3% in 2016; Labor 39%, compared with 30.1%; Greens 8%, compared with 11.3%; and 5% for the United Australia Party. The numbers for comparison here are as adjusted for the redistribution, which boosted the Liberal margin from 5.7% to 6.4%. The sample here was 535.

Pearce (WA, Liberal 3.6%): A dead heat on two-party preferred in Christian Porter’s seat on Perth’s northern fringes, from primary votes of Liberal 40% (45.4% in 2016), Labor 36% (34.3%), Greens 8% (11%), United Australia Party 8% and One Nation 6%. Sample: 509.

Herbert (Queensland, Labor 0.0%): The Coalition has high hopes invested in recovering this Townsville-based seat from Labor’s Cathy O’Toole due to the Adani controversy, but the poll’s two party preferred reading finds nothing to separate the two parties on the primary vote, in a seat Labor won by 37 votes in 2016. Presumably these polls use respondent-allocated preferences, as 2016 preference flows suggest this is more like 51-49 to Labor: their primary vote is only down from 30.5% to 29%, while the Liberal National Party is down from 35.5% to 31.1%. The United Australia Party does particularly well here, despite Palmer himself having baulked at his earlier plan to contest the seat. It records 14% of the vote, resulting in One Nation fading from 13.5% to 9%, although Katter’s Australian Party are up from 6.9% to 10%. The Greens are at 5%, down from 6.3%. Sample: 529.

Lindsay (NSW, Labor 1.1%): Another status quo result in a seat the Liberals are talking up as a gain from Labor, who are credited with a 51-49 lead. In this case, previous election preferences would probably have produced a stronger result for the Liberals, who are up from 39.3% to 41% on the primary vote with Labor down from 41.1% to 40%. The Greens are little changed on 4%, compared with 3.6% last time, and the United Australia Party are on 7%. Sample: 618.

It has been said around the place that Essential Research was not letting Easter deter it from following its fortnightly polling schedule over the weekend, but it may be causing them to delay its release by a day, because there’s nothing about it on The Guardian’s site.

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.

1,037 comments on “Newspoll: Deakin, Pearce, Herbert and Lindsay”

  1. D and M
    I seem to remember some research that found people who were well off were much more afraid of losing money than people who were less well off. It might explain why the “great big new tax” scare has worked so well for the conservatives.

  2. Further to some previous discussion by others regarding the tories prospects in Hotham, which does sound a bit far fetched, unsolicited, a Labor supporting friend voiced her concern at the performance of the “pretend Labor MP for our seat (Hotham) who lives in Toorak.” She was very upset to have lost Julian Hill as her MP in the re- distribution, so there may be something in all that. To be fair, Ms O’ Neil has never really captured my fancy as a legit Labor person either.

  3. Pegasus says:
    Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 11:56 pm

    Since its inception as a federated party in 1992 the Australian Greens and state Greens parties have been demonised and villified by the mainstream media and both major parties.

    It is an uphill battle to push against these combined forces with their negative stereotypes and memes.

    In such an hostile environment I actually believe capturing 10% Australia wide is quite a solid achievement, as is the number of parliamentarians and local councillors, including mayors the party has had over the years.

    But you tell us the people love the Greens, why won’t they vote for them?

  4. Why? In response to J’s and Cat’s claims i am misrepresenting…..Labor does not support a RC into the MDB plan. Has Shorten come out with a statement after Burke’s interview contradicting ABC RN Drive’s report? If so, I haven’t seen it and would appreciate a link to verify the counter claim.

  5. Pegasus @ #1005 Wednesday, April 24th, 2019 – 12:02 am

    Why? In response to J’s and Cat’s claims i am misrepresenting…..Labor does not support a RC into the MDB plan. Has Shorten come out with a statement after Burke’s interview contradicting ABC RN Drive’s report? If so, I haven’t seen it and would appreciate a link to verify the counter claim.

    Yes. He does actually.

    The Labor opposition has committed to a major inquiry into the water buyback scandal that has engulfed the government just weeks before the federal election, and has provocatively accused Prime Minister Scott Morrison of leading a “cover up”.

    Opposition Leader Bill Shorten will on Wednesday propose either a royal commission or a parliamentary commission of inquiry into the affair, both of which would have coercive powers and the capacity to put cabinet ministers on the stand – in scenes reminiscent of the Coalition’s royal commissions into trade unions and Labor’s home insulation program after Tony Abbott won the 2013 election.

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-calls-for-major-inquiry-into-water-scandal-and-accuses-scott-morrison-of-a-cover-up-20190423-p51glz.html

    Please accept my abject apology on behalf of Bill Shorten and the Labor Party that he didn’t come out with it soon enough for you, Pegasus.

  6. HughB @ #991 Tuesday, April 23rd, 2019 – 11:46 pm

    If, as has been claimed, there is a huge, pent-up demand in the mainstream for Green-like policies, can anyone explain to me, and others who might be curious, why the Green vote has been stuck at ~10% for decades, with no real indication that it’s going to go any higher, even in an election where climate change is more prominent than hitherto? Maybe I’m being thick – I frequently am – but there seems a bit of a disconnect there.

    Hi Hugh,

    I would say that there has been a gradual increase in Greens vote and despite the combination at time of Lab and Lib trying to use preferences to keep Greens out of the race. There is a continuing vote growth and recognition. In some ways it is when other parties take on Greens policy that ameliorates the pressure sometimes.

    For many Greens I would say it policy outcome that matters most, and as time goes by that policy change matters more than it did before.

    There’s a whole pile of mythology around the Greens, including the one about being at 10% for decades, and if you ever ask anyone who “hates” them why, there’s usually nothing specific they can say, just following the media crap.
    When asked about issues or policies without knowing they’re Green policies, many Australians agree with them.

    The extra heat and light both Labor and Lib direct to the Greens seems to be more of a symptom that they recognise the Greens as a growing political force.

    Indeed I think the Greens constituency is not going to go away, all parties are having to address what I believe will be an ever growing cohort in society. As the ecological systems and natural world we rely on start to fall apart. The Greens party represents a subset of the Greens constituency but obviously speak directly to their concerns more than either Lab or Lib

    In many ways,as a fifth generation Australian, Aust is also an infantile culture and we really need to grow up a bit and understand our system of government, how it works and how we contribute to it.

    In some ways it is ridiculous that criticising pollies is a great national pastime when we are the fools who put the idiots in there that costs us so much.

    Again shake it all up a bit and see what we can change, because business as usual is turning into a mess

  7. B in

    “But you tell us the people love the Greens,”

    Misrepresenting my views is all you have. I have never claimed this.

    Your continual penchant to put words in my mouth is obvious as it is tedious.

  8. Roger Miller,

    D and M
    I seem to remember some research that found people who were well off were much more afraid of losing money than people who were less well off. It might explain why the “great big new tax” scare has worked so well for the conservatives.

    Yes, this is so. It is also well substantiated that poorer people give a far larger portion of their income to charities / to help others than more well off people. Living on one of Sydney’s poorer pockets, I see this everyday. The sense of community here is fantastic.

  9. The extra heat and light both Labor and Lib direct to the Greens seems to be more of a symptom that they recognise the Greens as a growing political force.

    😆

    What was that calculation again? Something about the rate The Greens’ vote is going it will take them over a hundred years to actually be in a position to possibly form government. 🙂

  10. Douglas and Milko
    Tuesday, April 23rd, 2019 – 11:58 pm
    Comment #998

    Thanks for your posts tonight (plus Jenauthor).

    Extremely interesting material. Lots of stuff via Google relating to amygdala shrinkage and meditation.

    Goodnight again. 💤💤💤

  11. Doesn’t Labor only support an inquiry into the two transactions made in 2017 under Joyce? That’s what is being reported. That is not a wide-ranging RC into the MDB plan as advocated by the Greens and Centre Alliance.

  12. I listened to Burke’s entire interview – and the last bit about legality and Adani explains Labor’s stance and why they refuse to make ANY public statement of intention.

    Worth a listen

  13. Dr Anthony Lynham has finally given his side of the EAA story:

    The purchase was made while former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce was the minister. National Party colleagues defended Mr Joyce following an extraordinary and belligerent interview in which he maintained he had done nothing wrong and claimed it was “not his job” as minister to “second guess” a proposal that had been recommended to him by his department and the Queensland government.

    In November 2015, the Queensland Labor government’s Minister for State Development, Natural Resources and Mines, Anthony Lynham, proposed the federal government buy water entitlements from Eastern Australia Agriculture. However, Dr Lynham on Tuesday said the deal he proposed was “very, very different” to the one signed off by Mr Joyce two years later.

    Dr Lynham had suggested the Commonwealth buy the two cotton properties in their entirety, including almost 56,000 megalitres of water entitlements, infrastructure and the farm enterprises, with an expected cost of around $123 million.

    Under the deal signed by Mr Joyce, the Commonwealth received about 29,000 gigalitres of overland water flows – available only after rare flood events – for $79 million. This deal did not involve buying the farms or associated infrastructure.

    Dr Lynham told ABC Radio that Mr Joyce, as the federal minister, was also responsible for conducting due diligence on the deal and ensuring the price was fair, while the Queensland government’s role was “administrative”.

    He said while the 2015 proposal was “a good deal for Queensland”, the federal government abandoned discussions around the time Mr Joyce took the water portfolio.

    “It was a wasted opportunity … It was Barnaby Joyce’s decision to subsequently buy the unreliable overland flow of 28,000 megalitres in 2017 and it was his decision to pay $80 million,” Dr Lynham said.

    “There are some serious questions to be answered by Barnaby Joyce here.”

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-calls-for-major-inquiry-into-water-scandal-and-accuses-scott-morrison-of-a-cover-up-20190423-p51glz.html

  14. Douglas and Milko @ #998 Tuesday, April 23rd, 2019 – 11:58 pm

    jenauthor

    D&M you eloquently substantiated what I was trying to say.

    Thanks!

    Your post inspired me to go and find references to the scientific evidence, which I am well across, to back up your assertions.

    I find it depressing that some of the people who rely on the scientific evidence for why we need strong and fast action on climate change ignore the scientific evidence on how to get a majority of people to vote in they way they want them to.

    Hi D&M,

    I actually think it has been the lack of leadership and capitulation to the right wing LNP and capture by the vested interests along with the LNP, where our political system has been kind for sale over recent decades that has contributed to the perception, at least amongst Lab partisans here.

    It’s become a self-fulfilling prophesy for Lab it seems. At times it’s felt like Lab has been so willing to capitulate to the RWNJ without any debate or argument that they just reinforce those RWNJ as sensible human beings.

    Fostering feeling that they don’t stand for anything really because they cave before they even have chance.

    Look at when Lab actually got into govt by beating the LNP, I defy that it was when they appeared to be shrinking violets and useless sycophants to Lib policy.

  15. What is the point of a RC into the MDB Plan when the maladministration only occurred once Barnaby Joyce was handed the Water portfolio?

    A Review of the MDB Plan is all that is necessary.

  16. A fantastic brace of letters about Barnaby Joyce:

    Quote of the election campaign from Barnaby Joyce: “It’s not my job” (“Joyce in hot water over $79m buybacks”, April 23).

    Not your job as minister signing off on the deal to question your department’s decisions to spend large amounts of taxpayer money for water, the most precious resource of all for farmers and country towns, Barnaby? Not your job as minister to put water buybacks out to tender, as your Labor predecessors did? Not your job to check probity and value for taxpayer money? What was your job then, Barnaby? Over to you, New England voters. – Sue Lubbers, Killara

    ​If a Minister of the Crown is not held accountable for his department’s activities, then who should be held responsible? His senior public servants?

    If Joyce’s minions have done a dodgy deal, then voters and taxpayers need to hold Joyce accountable. Otherwise, all ministers can weasel out of their responsibilities, and senior public servants are in danger of being made scapegoats by incompetent ministers. – Geoff Black, Caves Beach

    There must be a mantra in the Coalition: if you can’t answer the question, then blame it on the Labor Party. Somehow I don’t think it’s that simple and it’s starting to sound like a broken record. – Janice Hull, Hat Head

    Having listened to Joyce ranting, obfuscating and stonewalling throughout the interview with Patricia Karvelas, I shake me head and wonder how he got elected (“‘We’re exciting’: Joyce opts for sensation over sobriety in spectacular interview”, April 23).

    I believe many in the bush believe in climate change, the vote for same sex-marriage was stronger than in many city electorates and migrants are warmly welcomed, so why do they keep voting for the dinosaurs of the National Party? – Nicholas Triggs, Katoomba

    Joyce wants to blame someone else for the “controversial water buyback deal”. I recall that he tried the same defence about 18 months ago. – Peter Hayes, Port Macquarie

    Joyce states he’s 100 per cent certain of the propriety of his former department’s handling of a water buyback that is being questioned. I seem to remember he was similarly certain about his citizenship status recently. – Bob Macfarlane, Mirrabooka

    The water buyback debacle pours cold water on Scott Morrison’s constant refrain that the Coalition is a superior and competent economic manager. – Alan Morris, Eastlakes

    How much are we paying the minister who is looking at these deals? It is a very costly exercise if Joyce is just signing off on the paperwork. – Helen Simpson, Curl Curl

    What stands out is that taxpayer funds, without any open tendering process to ensure transparency and sensible evidence of accountability, ended up in the bank account of a company registered in the Cayman Islands tax haven. As an Australian taxpayer I want to know how and why. – Anne Finnane, Marlee

    Joyce says he relied on competent advice from his department about water purchases from tax haven companies. Why then does he not rely on competent and expert advice about the science and reality of climate change? – John Burman, Lighthouse Beach

    Some of the excuses being proffered about the government’s dealings with Eastern Australia Agriculture are as weak as water. – Stewart Smith, Tea Gardens

  17. My original comment was

    “Greens and Centre Alliance say a RC into the MDB plan is needed.

    Coalition and Labor say there is no need for a RC.”

    Oh dear, i missed putting in “such” before “a RC” in the second sentence.

    My meaning was obvious in context.

    Anyway, sweet dreams to all.

  18. Pegasus says:
    Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 12:09 am

    B in

    “But you tell us the people love the Greens,”

    Misrepresenting my views is all you have. I have never claimed this.

    Your continual penchant to put words in my mouth is obvious as it is tedious.

    You did earlier when you posted your agreement with a post by Quoll where they argued that the Greens policies were widely popular and Labor would be in a better position if they adopted them.

  19. One interesting thing on the voterchoice survey website, because it is a longitudinal survey of the same pool of people, there is a graphic of the numbers of respondants who have changed their preferences since the last survey. To be viewed with caution though, as from a survey of a bit over a thousand, a movement that looks significant may represent only a few respondants.

  20. BiDL
    I think there is a chunk of voters who agree with Green policies who have decided to vote Labor because they see that as better value for their vote. Actually moving the government incrementaly to the left is better then dreaming of utopia.

  21. Red….I’m not buying the G anti-Labor tropes. They are splitters. They operate with the intention of spiting Labor at almost any cost. They have the nerve to sermonise against the very voters to whom they look for their own support. They have made life far, far more difficult than it needed to be. They are obstructions to progress on nearly everything, including in particular to progress on the environment.

    It’s hard for Labor to win. We’ve managed to win from opposition only very rarely. Labor apply everything they have to the task of creating policy and campaigning against the odds to implement those policies. The Gs deliberately set out to obstruct this. Not a day passes on which they do not practice to defeat Labor. The descriptions I’ve used for them are the most polite I can find.

    Of course, if Labor win the election, those who have opposed this result will immediately set out to destroy the new government. This is a certainty. Among those who threaten to do this are the Gs, who have already promised to obstruct Labor. In a very real sense, the election is just the beginning of the struggle. Labor will have to fight on. We have had many years of dysfunction in our political order. The Gs are in no small part responsible for this. I make no apologies for saying so. They have enabled Lib intransigence and done so for their own expedient purposes. The populists of both the left and the right are the suitors of grievance and truculence, the parents of defeatism and pessimism, of division and of malice. It is really high time we ditched them.

  22. Roger Miller says:
    Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 12:58 am

    BiDL
    I think there is a chunk of voters who agree with Green policies who have decided to vote Labor because they see that as better value for their vote. Actually moving the government incrementaly to the left is better then dreaming of utopia.

    Yep, in principle, but …

  23. The water buy back deal is crook. Some major politicians are involved. Demand of Morrison the names of the people behind the entities that made a financial gain from water buybacks.
    If Morrison refuses to be transparent, punish the LNP in the polls.
    The Murdoch media interests have next to no coverage of the water buybacks.
    Perhaps we need to be transparent about the state of the media interests in Australia while an investigation about the ‘hot water’ interests take place.
    Perhaps the government would like to buy the water flow that runs off your land on which your house sits. This would then be deducted from your water rates and usage charges.
    This stand off should not be allowed to go another day without resolution.
    The ball is in your court PM Morrison.

  24. The extreme right wing regime refuses to answer concerns about corruption and the compliant media interests have no interest in corruption allegations in the run up to an election.
    Peter Slipper an ex speaker was found guilty of misusing $900 of taxi vouchers.
    This water buyback scheme is as crook as anything that has occurred since the rum rebellion and the present government is hoping to hide it all under the carpet. The amount of money involved is in the hundreds of millions of dollars or possibly more.
    Australia is being run by a bunch of crooks and the fact that these same crooks are still in with some chance to retain power is a poor reflection of a spoilt, self centred population.
    The fact that there is no-one in the LNP prepared to enlighten the voters with the truth as to the extent of this crookery is damning of a government hoping to be re-elected.
    The apathy displayed by our representatives and the voting public is frightening.

Leave a Reply

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