Victorian COVID-19 polling, etc.

A new poll suggests Victorians remain sympathetic to Daniel Andrews, despite waning patience with COVID-19 restrictions.

It’s time for a new general discussion thread, but do take note of the other important new posts below this one before diving in:

• New state polling from Western Australia suggests there will be little left of the parliamentary Liberal Party after the election there in March;

• Guest contributor Adrian Beaumont offers his weekly situation report on the ever-eventful US election campaign;

• I launch my Queensland election guide, and in doing so provide a thread for discussion of that state’s October 31 election;

• I humbly plead for donations, as I do every two months.

Other than that, there is one further poll to report on in the shape of a Roy Morgan SMS poll from Victoria, following on from a similar efforts two and three weeks ago. This finds the Labor state government’s two-party lead unchanged at 51.5-48.5, but Daniel Andrews is down nine on approval to 61% and up nine on disapproval to 39%. There has also been movement in sentiment against existing COVID-19 restrictions, with a 61-39 split in favour of lifting the five kilometre rule (50-50 last time), 59-41 in favour of visits to immediate family members (55-45 in favour last time) and 56-44 in favour of a resumption of table service (63-37 against last time). The poll was conducted Monday and Tuesday from a sample of 2223.

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.

1,675 comments on “Victorian COVID-19 polling, etc.”

  1. NSW had a 51.78% Coalition 2PP, so they voted for the Coalition, but the ALP got 24 out of 47 seats (Coalition 22 and Independent (Steggall) 1). WA and Queensland were the only Coalition majority seat totals.

  2. WA can’t secede as the Constitution Act of 1900 says ‘one indissoluble commonwealth’.

    The actual Constitution seems to make it fairly straightforward to redraw State boundaries. I don’t think it would be very difficult to implement a practical secession if there was the will to do so on the part of the WA people, the WA parliament and the Commonwealth parliament.

    I don’t think it would be a good idea at all, but it doesn’t seem particularly hard to do.

  3. Who’s complaining?

    I was only responding in rebuttal to the condescending and unsupportable comment by Player One that WA is dependent on fossil fuel to maintain it’s economy. I was trying to make the point that it was much to the disadvantage of the other states if WA did secede, and not the other way around.

    I don’t agree with secession now, and never have.

    I’m also not responsible for the 50.5% of Australians cretinous enough to have given the LNP a 2PP majority at the last Federal election.

  4. https://www.pollbludger.net/2020/10/02/victorian-covid-19-polling-etc/comment-page-34/#comment-3490412

    Redrawing a boundary and a state leaving are different matters. The “Indissoluble Commonwealth” bit would need amending, which I believe requires a referendum, under the Australia Acts 1986 which transferred the authority to amend the Constitution Act from the UK Parliament and Commonwealth Parliament to the Commonwealth Parliament and the voters.

  5. ttfab – you’re not thinking creatively enough about s123 and s124 which provide basically as much flexibility as required to effectively allow a state to leave the commonwealth with not much more than a state referendum and the consent of the relevant state and commonwealth parliaments.

  6. WA does not export much coal. Both Griffen and Premier coal are on their knees financially and the export facility at Bunbury is not large.

    The WA government is putting a lot of effort into creating a hydrogen export industry, and received some good news today with one proponent appointing an EPC contractor ahead of a final investment decision early next year.

  7. https://www.pollbludger.net/2020/10/02/victorian-covid-19-polling-etc/comment-page-34/#comment-3490417

    No, I am being realistic as to the constraint imposed by Cause 3 of the Constitution Act, which I am sure would take precedence given it is directly speaking to departure of states (in a way that boundary amendments do not) and the Constitution Act was (apart from the Constitution itself) only able to be amended by the Commonwealth and voters alone from 1986.

  8. Grimace says Tuesday, October 6, 2020 at 12:35 am

    WA does not export much coal. Both Griffen and Premier coal are on their knees financially and the export facility at Bunbury is not large.
    The WA government is putting a lot of effort into creating a hydrogen export industry, and received some good news today with one proponent appointing an EPC contractor ahead of a final investment decision early next year.

    Is that blue or green hydrogen?

  9. ttfab – the Constitution, in s124, explicitly provides a mechanism for forming the union of two states into a new state. Necessarily that implies the possibility of dissolving one of those states for the purposes of the commonwealth (ok, technically dissolving both and creating a new state, but for the purposes of this discussion we can consider it the dissolution – for the purposes of the commonwealth – of one state). So, eg, the constitution should explicitly allow for WA and SA, eg, to be merged into a single state SA’. Add in s123 to edit boundaries as required to excise WA territory … voila secession.

    To my not-a-lawyer reading of the 1900 Constitution act, it is clearly intended to be the legal kickstart of the Federation based on the Constitution. I can’t see how that bootstrapping should override the actual text of the Constitution itself.

    If there is some magic legal reason why the Constitution as written doesn’t apply in this way, fine, I’m not a lawyer.

  10. bc says Tuesday, October 6, 2020 at 1:03 am

    Grimace says Tuesday, October 6, 2020 at 12:35 am

    WA does not export much coal. Both Griffen and Premier coal are on their knees financially and the export facility at Bunbury is not large.
    The WA government is putting a lot of effort into creating a hydrogen export industry, and received some good news today with one proponent appointing an EPC contractor ahead of a final investment decision early next year.

    Is that blue or green hydrogen?

    It’s green hydrogen. Source: http://www.drd.wa.gov.au/Publications/Documents/wa_renewable_hydrogen_strategy.pdf

  11. White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany has announced that she has tested positive for COVID-19.

    I wonder who the original source of this outbreak was? I guess we might never know.

  12. “Greens vote up across the board in Qld, record state vote if this pans out

    Seems sensible considering the state of the climate, society and world

    The party not beholden to donors and vested interests and therefore MPs more likely to act in the genuine interests of their electorates and Qld.

    With one of the highest rates of rooftop solar penetration in the world there must be widespread support and awareness of Qld’s renewable energy opportunities and Greens policies for 100% renewables grid by 2030. With a growing concern about the reef, forests and lands of Qld through more drought and heat. A post covid plan and stimulus ready to go, health, education, housing and Green steel. Seems like a rational stimulus to consider with voting, who will genuinely push for what is required and not sell out the state to the likes of Adani and add to the carbon pollution and ecological burden for everyone into the future.”

    ***

    100%. Well said.

  13. “Did someone say KFC?”

    ***

    Definitely not me. Won’t find me stuffing my face with that disgusting garbage, that’s for sure.

    As for the dis-endorsed Green, he was allegedly making unreasonable demands of the party for more funding for his local campaign. Sounds like the QLD Greens did the only thing they could do.

    The great news is that the dis-endorsed candidate is being replaced by an old favourite of Australian politics; former two-time senator, Andrew Bartlett. Definitely an upgrade if you ask me!

    Greens choose familiar face to replace dumped candidate

    Former senator Andrew Bartlett has been chosen to replace dumped Greens candidate John Meyer as the party’s Clayfield hopeful following a bitter internal feud over campaign funding.

    Mr Bartlett represented Queensland in the Senate from 1997 to 2008 as a member of the Australian Democrats.

    He joined the Greens in 2009, contested the federal seat of Brisbane in 2010 and 2019 and was the party’s Brisbane lord mayoral candidate in 2012.

    Mr Bartlett returned to the Senate in 2017 after Larissa Waters was disqualified from office over her dual citizenship.

    https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/greens-choose-familiar-face-to-replace-dumped-candidate-20200921-p55xs6.html

  14. WA can’t secede as the Constitution Act of 1900 says ‘one indissoluble commonwealth’.
    ————
    How can a clause in a legal document remove for all time the freedoms of future generations to even have the right to choose differently?

    Such clauses are intrinsically anti-democratic.

  15. Tom tfab

    “ It is not an insurmountable barrier, it just needs to be amended, but would require more outside of WA consent than just the Commonwealth Parliament to do so.”
    ————
    Since Westminster no longer has the power to amend the Constitution of Australia the only process of amendment is the provisions requiring and amendment to the Constitution approved by the Commonwealth Parliament and a referendum carried by the majority of voters and in the majority of States. If this is the only way, it means the voters elsewhere have power of veto.

    Unless of course a State just declared UDI and says it is now no longer part of the Commonwealth. Then it would depend on international recognition.

  16. https://www.pollbludger.net/2020/10/02/victorian-covid-19-polling-etc/comment-page-34/#comment-3490440

    It is the Constitution Act, not the Constitution itself, that needs amending. The Australia Acts appear to be silent on who can do this now the UK Parliament can`t, so that would need sorting and then the relevant solution applied, if there was sufficient agreement.

    A UDI would be unlikely to work. Australia would crush it quickly. International law isn`t to fond of recognising breakaway parts of countries as countries either.

Leave a Reply

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