The latest monthly Resolve Strategic federal poll for the Age/Herald marks a return to this series’ lean to the Coalition relative to other pollsters, with a two-point increase in their primary vote to 39% and a corresponding drop in Labor’s to 32%. The Greens, One Nation and other parties are steady at 11%, 3% and 5% respectively, with the low collective major party vote reflected in a likewise steady 9% for the pollster’s “independents” measure. The latter is a contentious feature of the poll, as it is unclear how or if the pollster deals with uncertainty as to where independents might run, as nothing is publicly known about how its questionnaire is structured.
Resolve Strategic doesn’t provide two-party preferred numbers, but I estimate a 51-49 break in favour of the Coalition on two-party preferred based on 2019 preference flows, reversing the result from last month. Breakdowns for the large states suggest the Coalition leads 53-47 in New South Wales, compared with 50-50 last time, and a swing of a bit over 1% in their favour compared with 2019; Labor leads 53-47 in Victoria, little changed on either the last poll or the 2019 election; and the Coalition leads 56-44 in Queensland, compared with 51-49 last time, for a swing to Labor of about 2.5%. Despite the voting intention numbers, the poll finds Scott Morrison has taken a solid hit on his personal ratings, consistent with the finding of other polls over the past month, with his approval rating down seven points to 40% and disapproval up to 49%. Anthony Albanese is respectively up one to 31% and four to 45%, and he has narrowed his deficit on preferred prime minister from to 44-26 to 40-29.
Full results from the poll, which was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1606, can be viewed here. Further results from the poll concerning the economic outlook (most expect it to improve) and immigration (most believe there should be less of it than pre-pandemic) can be viewed here. The pollster’s bi-monthly New South Wales state voting intention result will presumably be along this evening.
Also out yesterday was the regular fortnightly poll from Essential Research, which now comes with a flash new display, though I personally will miss the PDF that brought it all together in one easily stored file. This release features neither the monthly leadership ratings nor the quarterly dump of voting intention numbers. What it does include is the regular question on COVID-19 response by the federal government, whose good rating is down three to 45% with poor steady on 29%, and the state governments, with New South Wales’ good rating steady on 57%, Victoria’s down six to 50% and Queensland’s down two to 60%.
A question on best party to manage the economy does not follow the usual form for this issue in favouring the Coalition: instead, Labor and Liberal are tied on 34%. Furthermore, Labor leads 40-29 as the better party to “ensure the economy works in the interests of everyday Australians”, and 37-23 as best party to manage household expenses. Perhaps relatedly, fully 62% wanted the government to play a more active role in managing the economy, with only 16% wanting it to be less active and 22% thinking it has it about right. Further questions relate to government help for businesses to recover from the pandemic (respondents overwhelmingly in favour), an emissions target for 2030 (respondents believe it should be more ambitious) and freedom of speech (respondents actually aren’t all that keen on it). The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1095.
Finally, Sky News has a curious set of figures from a poll of 4010 respondents conducted way back in September by unheralded outfit Ergo Strategy, described as “News Corp’s final exclusive survey”, though I can’t find any record of anything earlier. No voting intention figures are provided, but we are told how voters for each party in 2019 intend to vote this time. Eleven per cent of Coalition voters said they were switching to Labor compared with 5% vice-versa, suggesting a shift of around 3% in favour of Labor.
nath
The purpose of history is to better understand the past, and learn from it. But I don’t see the point of dredging up the past merely for the sake of nursing a grudge.
D&M,
Depends if the Libs try to punish her for her waywardness.
Scrutiny of Govt is an affront to Morrison. He honestly feels that way.
He is utterly delusional and living a fantasy.
zoomster says:
Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 5:25 pm
No one had to do a deal with anyone to roll Rudd, MPs were crawling over each other in order to do it.
Gillard was – again, well known – a reluctant starter. She wasn’t running around doing deals.
____________
On the contrary, the SDA were very unsure of Gillard. Despite most in the ALP recognising she was a pragmatist the SDA were concerned about her atheism, her socialist past. It was absolutely a requirement for them to come on board. Labor Senator Louise Pratt spells it out perfectly well:
‘I can only imagine her leadership was conditional on not making progress on these things.’
Out of (morbid) curiosity, if someone proposed an assisted dying bill that only allowed a specific group of people access (white/black/yellow/green/blue/straight/gay/male/female/whatever) then what would you lot read into it?
After tossing in employment at 48 years of age to parent my young children, I was approached by many seeking my expertise (as described by them, not me)
Sometimes remunerated for my contributions, sometimes pro Bono depending on who and what
One approach was to frame a template application for Aged Care bed licences – incorporating an application for bank financing (so the application for finance approval by a bank as a given)
It was a comprehensive document (and by its nature it vetted applicants in regard the business case – so figures alone)
In the end the advice was that the bed licences were only being issued to Liberal Party donors – and there was no wider market for a Broker, which my contact was
I did not charge
During that process I asked if I could view the physical operation of a facility
I was told it was not a place I would wish to view and no visit ever occurred
The issue of the bed licences by Howard and Santoro was what it was
A licence to make money for selected people, Liberal Party people
And, all these years later
It was always coming
No wonder they do not want a Federal ICAC (and antecedent)
Same with Child Care and ABC Learning (Groves)
And what did that cost taxpayers?
Rex, scrutiny:
He comes from the City of Sydney,
The home of the brick and the hod
Where the Houstons speaks only to Scotty
And Scotty speaks only to God.
With apologies to the City of Boston.
Douglas and Milko @ #945 Thursday, November 25th, 2021 – 5:28 pm
The short answer is no. She would have had to gone Independent six months ago, had the on the ground back up of a ‘Voice of…..’ group and run a campaign on more than a Federal ICAC.
The cynic in me says she had a Damascus Road conversion to accountable governance in an attempt stop the bleeding of votes to the Jacquie Lambie Network candidate. According to Lambie, who got pissed off about her phone number being made public, JLN will be directing preferences AWAY from the Coalition in Tasmanian seats on election day. Given BASS only requires about 300 votes to flip back to Labor, Lambie is going to do some damage here in BASS and next door in BRADDON. AS for Archer, its too little too late : thank you for playing.
Asha @ 4.42
The issue of Julia Gillard’s personal opposition to marriage equality while she was PM is a red herring.
Two points:
1. I know of no social issue in my lifetime where community attitudes have changed so rapidly as marriage equality. None. It’s pointless to look at a decade ago on this issue through today’s eyes. It should be a dead issue, except for social historians and observers of historic Parliaments.
2. There is no way that it could possibly have happened without a free vote for all members of Parliament. Abbott’s Opposition was never going to agree to it. The idea of Labor pursuing a pointless objective, even with the PM’s support, when she had so little political capital left would have been catastrophic for her, her government and probably the movement itself as the Opposition launched itself into a massive attack on ‘identity politics’. You just have to look at the incredible contortions of Turnbull and his party years later to even progress the matter, and then only through the absurd and potentially damaging plebiscite, to know what a difficult task it was.
All this means that the argument in 2021 about what Julia Gillard and her government should have done in 2012 on this issue, is nothing more than a nasty, vicious attempt to attack her and her government. It is another example of the politics of those to the left of Labor and those to the right to combine to deflect from their own impotence (Greens) or malevolence (Coalition). And nothing at all about marriage equality.
Former ABC journalist to contest next election
Zoe Daniel is set to run for federal parliament as a pro-climate independent in the Melbourne electorate of Goldstein.
It would seem pretty obvious from the history of the last couple of decades that neither LNP nor Labor would do anything serious on climate and ending new coal and gas without Greens and independents to hold them to account before agreeing to supporting them in government.
If it was different then Australia and our climate (non)-policy would be in a far different place than it is today.
The only bipartisan commitment appears to have been towards their sponsors/donors and being beholden to the most regressive elements of their own or the other party.
Some people really do not seem to understand how our democracy works and how despite the rhetoric both the LNP and Labor will just have to suck up their recalcitrance if they want to govern and Greens and climate indies hold a larger cross bench. Or else they join each other just to keep the whole donor vested interests thing going for ever if they’re that desperate, just like they sit together now to support the Beetaloo and other massive new gas projects
Seems pretty naive to think that Greens and any of these indies lining up to run won’t make it a solid point of supporting any government that real action is taken. Being not beholden to all the same donor interests and factional or historical BS that both the LNP and Labor are.
nath
Yes, people’s imaginations trump facts every time.
zoomster says:
Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 5:53 pm
nath
Yes, people’s imaginations trump facts every time.
________
Your imagination seems to trump Senator Pratt’s.
Similar to Zoomster, I recall Gillard’s views on SSM (viewing marriage as being a religious anachronism) being a view that wasn’t idiosyncratic at one time, and consistent with how she lived her life (not marrying her long term partner). It does pay to remember that at one time marriages were expected to be conducted by a religious minister and often in a church (the switch to celebrants being relatively recent) – and there were a number of other implications of religious control over marriage that were somewhat unsavory. I found over the top bawling that she had simply invented the excuse when she explained them after her PMship was over quite distasteful in that regard.
That said, I find that people still need to raise the issue a decade later frankly quite bizarre. Seriously, move on with your life.
TPOF:
I’m not saying the Gillard government could have successfully legislated SSM. They almost certainly couldn’t have. My point is simply that her public opposition to SSM was an own goal that likely wound up turning people both for and against SSM against her – because it added to the (unfair, IMO) perception that she couldn’t be trusted – and that her reasons for her position never quite rang true to me (I admit the latter may well be a generational thing on my part.)
Labor in government is the only one that has done anything on climate change.
Of course some here who apparently want climate action, can never bring themselves to admit that.
Sad but makes you wonder if they really care for the truth anyway.
8 years of do nothing conservative rule, yet they rather punch Labor, and now we have the “Independent” hype train coming who don’t actually have solid policies to cut emissions.
Greens are the only ones saying they will close down coal and gas in 2030, wonder why independents don’t say that.
Quoll @ #962 Thursday, November 25th, 2021 – 5:53 pm
Just seems so pointless that the LNP and Labor both choose to give mainstream political space to ‘others’ through climate/energy policy. Self-defeating lunacy.
Nicko
And of course Labor – at a State level – is taking action on climate change, even where no Greens are involved.
Simon
I have the same recollection of Gillard’s views on SSM. BFD, I thought at the same time. My impression hasn’t changed ten years on.
Unlike nath, you don’t have your finger on the pulse of the ALP. So you can’t appreciate how every machination within the ALP has a direct connection to Shorten and/or the SDA.
😛
Can somebody help me with Scomo’s definition of the “rule of law”?
It seems to apply when a Minister facing rape allegations does not get investigated.
Yet when a premier accused of a conflict of interest by a legally constituted corruption inquiry starts getting investigated it is a “kangaroos court”
So is the kangaroo court the legal one or the non-existent one?
Socrates
The key point is that laws apply to *other people*.
That pic of Frydenberg is a shocker. It will cut through… in a bad way for him.
Abetz has a turn at getting stuck into the Government:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/25/australias-decision-to-scrap-antarctica-runway-exposes-government-divisions
Also, can anyone remember, did Morrison complain about “kangaroo courts” when Craig Thomson or Eddie Obeid were being investigated?
Or is it only a kangaroo court when a Liberal MP is being investigated?
The real problem with Julia Gillard was … she was just hopeless at politics. It’s a shame, because she actually had towering strengths as a leader and a human being. However, running a tight ship in parliament – which she mainly did in terms of legislative reforms – and brokering agreements with disparate players (whether it was the deal to oust Beasley, being a ‘reluctant starter’ in the Rudd coup, or the agreement she struck with the Greens and Independents) – she was utterly hopeless at political execution. I know that manny folk like to blame Rudd, or Shorten, or Abbott, or the media, but the truth is that she consistently – off her own bat – set herself up for political failure after political failure. Consider the following:
1. Reluctant starter or not, she knew that Arbib and Bitar had shifted their support away from the PM months before the coup. She did not warn her PM of the disgraceful, cowardly and frankly dumb as fuck behaviour of the Party’s National Secretary and the chief power broker in the the Rudd-Gillard alliance. And I hasten to add, that treachery was happening way way way ahead of Shorten agreeing to come on board (although he was aligned to the victorian and south Australian elements of the misrule ‘kill Rudd club’ that used to meet and cry over beers and Thai food in Marnika during parliamentary sitting – he notably absenting himself from their company as he got stuck into the NDIS project as parliamentary secretary).
2. Her ‘good government that lost its way’ [said as the most senior minister in said government that had allegedly lost its way]. I reckon 15 million Australians woke up one morning scratching their head as to what. the. fuck. just. actually. happened. Especially since Rudd had started to gain ascendency over Abbott in Parliament (with the treacherous Arbib tweeting himself ‘seriously got your mojo back’ etc) and Newspoll had snapped back in the government’s favour. The whole absurdity of the coup left a massive question mark over Gillard’s character and judgment, which she then proceeded to fill in by three bits of political bullshit that promptly blew up in her face:
3. The East Timor Solution. I remember watching the Lowy Institute Address when she outlined the solution and thinking that it was a master stroke. Never in my wildest dreams did i think that the Solution wasn’t a solid deal. I mean who would be so … galactically stupid to announce such a radical and bold initiative unless the deal was done and there was a treaty to ink the next day. Well colour me shocked! It turned out that next day that there was no treaty, no agreement, not even the hint of a real deal. The whole episode made ScoMo’s AUKUS pivot look like the stuff of genius.
4. The people’s convention on climate change. Not only was this – Prima facie – a galactically stupid notion – it set up most of the substantial fault lines that ran through the rest of her Prime Ministership. We can debate all day and every day whether she directly lied to the Australian people regarding the ‘carbon tax’ (spoiler alert: she didn’t), but regardless: it was fundamentally dishonest and misleading to suggest, in effect, fuck all action in the next term of government regarding either a ‘tax’ or even a carbon price, and then straight away thereafter do a deal for for a carbon pricing mechanism that contained flat (and high) ‘tax like’ charge for the first three years of operation.
5. Unleashing Ferguson to do the worst, terrible, no good mining tax (and watering down the bedded in and excellent petroleum resources rent tax in the process) ‘deal’ imaginable.
Those three pre-election fuck ups were before someone leaked Gillard’s alleged comments about pensioners and maternity leave in cabinet (and most folk look directly at Rudd or one of his proxies, but who knows? Politics is full of bitter and twisted people, and at least 70 folk would have been in the cabinet room when it happened). In reality, the leak itself wasn’t damaging in and of itself – because most folk would have given her the benefit of the doubt, given its her role as Deputy PM to question and reality check spending proposals that come before cabinet. No it was damaging because it reinforced something that had been percolating in the minds of the public for a couple of months: the lack of judgment and something ‘not right’ with her political character, given the episodes I’ve listed at 1 to 5 above.
I haven’t even started on what happened after the 2010 election, but in my view it was more of the same, only more so: Rudd, Abbott, Shorten and ‘the media’ are trotted out as excuses for her failure. The truth was it was always at its core down to her poor political judgement.
Display name
“The key point is that laws apply to *other people*.”
Yes I think that definition works well, looking at Morrison’s lack of objection to the Thomson and Obeid cases.
Morrison is not fit to weild the power of the PM’s office in the public interest.
I’m quite happy for the independents to eject Liberals from what are now safe Liberal seats. In my seat of North Sydney, un-winnable for Labor, I would consider voting strategically for the climate independent. I would not dream of it if I lived in a seat winnable for Labor.
Socrates
Laws are there to keep *bad* people or people with poor judgement in check. The riff raff. Since the Liberals are good and discerning people (definitely not riff raff), they have no need of them and quite frankly it’s insulting to suggest that they should be subjected to them.
Stop asking silly questions.
With so much happening regarding Woodside’s Scarborough project being like a giant gas flare lit by Smoko and Co, causing him to claim he had a jig at the news.
It’s probably a good time to remember just how much Labor, particularly in WA, are invested in the project too. Noteworthy that the first place Albo visited in WA when he could was Woodside’s gas operation in Karratha.
Ten tales of Woodside’s merry men: Mark, Bill and Ben
https://www.boilingcold.com.au/ten-tales-of-woodsides-merry-men-mark-bill-and-ben/
WA Government to Woodside: you scratch our back, we’ll scratch yours even more
https://www.michaelwest.com.au/revolving-doors-woodside-board-welcomes-former-wa-labor-treasurer/
Captured State: The influence of the gas lobby on WA
https://350perth.org.au/captured-state/
Mark McGowan flags government action if Woodside Supreme Court ruling threatens industry
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-24/markmcgowan-woodside-scarborough-ccwa-supreme-court-action/100646078
A_E
I disagree with a few of those, but the general thrust of it is correct.
I bought a copy of Gillard’s autobiography (from the lady herself).
I read a couple of pages about her original decision to support Rudd, closed the book and put it away.
She supported him recognising absolutely all his flaws, in the belief that he would change once he became PM.
My problem with Gillard was that she always thought the best of people….and this confirmed it!
(Your number 1, btw, is one of my problems with Albo — he not only knew MPs were plotting to roll Gillard, but he allowed them to use his office. It was absolutely his job to warn Gillard, and he didn’t).
Steve777
“I’m quite happy for the independents to eject Liberals from what are now safe Liberal seats. In my seat of North Sydney, un-winnable for Labor, I would consider voting strategically for the climate independent. I would not dream of it if I lived in a seat winnable for Labor.”
Yeah, my folks voted for Rob Oakeshott to keep the LNP candidate out of a non-Labor seat. Plus he was a great local member.
Display Name
Yes it is all clear to me now. I should have looked for guidance to the wise tomes written by the sages of Lord Murdoch.
Socrates
I’ve always been confident that you could be redeemed! 😉
I assume The Shire Liar will be getting his “ducks in a row” for when his turn to come before a Federal anti corruption commission comes about.
#WeatheronPB. Storms have crossed Sydney in the last hour or so, dumping up to 30 mm of rain in some suburbs. The evening peak must be great fun today.
The report on surveillance of citizens by state owned Vic Forest, due to also air on 7.30 tonight, seems to have got a few Labor noses out of joint, claiming it was all the Libs.
Though it’s only that the public evidence in the court case from the original private investigator was directly available. Whilst trying to ignore that the surveillance has apparently continued with ‘stories’ and dossiers on citizens and scientists continuing to put about by the state owned Vic Forests in an effort to destroy them and their reputations. With the Vic government recently trying to jump in to support their illegal practices to boot.
This all seems a rather bipartisan LNP and Labor effort
Environmental activists face ‘fever pitch’ of repression from Australian governments, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/25/environmental-activists-face-fever-pitch-of-repression-from-australian-governments-report-says
Earlwood
I would rather read the considered opinions of yourself and TPOF than the snarks of others. Thank you. Julia did some good things but in hindsight I find her judgement disappointing.
Albo wasn’t Gillard’s deputy. His loyalties were open and candid. It was Bowen who was running the counter coup via his office anyway. In hindsight, I really wished Shorten came on board in March, when Crean blew himself up spectacularly: if Rudd and Bowen had 6-8 weeks to craft the 2013 budget, then there would have been the opportunity to incorporate Combet’s deal to link the floating ETS to the European exchange rate (which at the time was hovering at a measles $6-9 dollars a ton, thus drawing much of ‘the sting’ out of the flat $20 tax rate) with a start date of 1 July 2013: that may have been a real game changer (as would another 10 weeks of Rudd’s ‘no visa’ deal regarding boat arrivals). I think Rudd would have probably won up to another 10 seats (but lost the election narrowly). At worst I think that Labor and the Greens would have ended up with the balance of power in the senate after the election and thus embedding the ETS into our policy framework until this very day. Sigh.
Socrates says:
Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 6:09 pm
Also, can anyone remember, did Morrison complain about “kangaroo courts” when Craig Thomson or Eddie Obeid were being investigated?
Or is it only a kangaroo court when a Liberal MP is being investigated?
—————————–
Or the failed kangaroo courts in the royal commission into pinkbatts and Unions , which were witch hunts to get Rudd , Gillard and Shorten
Earlwood:
Speaking as someone with a lot of respect for Gillard: this seems pretty spot-on to me, especially the assessment of what most of the country would have been thinking the day of the coup.
She got a poor hand, no doubt about it, and the way she was treated by the media and many on her own side was appalling, but her own missteps made things much worse than they needed to be.
Thanks Lizzie. I confess though that I do get quite aggressive at times in advancing my arguments and POV. Its a real failing. One which I’ve known about for years and why Ive never put my hand up for public office: I’m not suited to it. I’d like to take the opportunity to apologise to C@t as well: especially now that she has had a damascene experience regarding Australia’s relations with china and the ChiComms: i feel that we are nearly ad idem on that score. …
‘Gillard made a poor deal to roll Rudd. She made a very poor deal indeed to hold on after the near-miss in 2010. She was not up to it. Sad but true.’
There too many disconnected number crunchers involved. The likes of David Feeney and Mark Arbib who think the Prime Minstership is a play thing. Feeney motivation for getting rid of Kevin Rudd was quite selfish he felt left out of the circle and didn’t have portfolio. This guy who was only a first term senator.
They were running around too with flawed polling that was soft as butter. When Julia Gillard led Labor to the election in 2010 they lost eight seats in Queensland virtually cutting of Labors head.
Once those seats were gone they were gone. And they were going to be very hard to get back.
Gillard justification for toppling Rudd was insincere. Rudd sent out a adviser to see if his support was still solid. Gillard felt she was accused of disloyalty. Honestly, is that it? That’s a 10 minute conversation to sort out. Its more like Gillard was graping at straws for reasons to topple Rudd.
Scott
“Or the failed kangaroo courts in the royal commission into pinkbatts and Unions , which were witch hunts to get Rudd , Gillard and Shorten”
It seems the rule of law can be remarkably flexible when needs arise.
Gillard v Rudd The gift that keeps on giving.
Will still be at the forefront of voters minds when they have to front up again in 2022.
What federal Labor should be pointing out which will embarrass Morrison further
NSW ICAC was set up by the NSW Liberal/National state government
Andrew_Earlwood at 6:30 pm
There’s times and places when such a ‘Rottweiler’ is required. Especially one that is coherent and doesn’t froth at the mouth.
“ Gillard v Rudd The gift that keeps on giving.”
Agreed.
“Will still be at the forefront of voters minds when they have to front up again in 2022.”
That part is wishful thinking and projection on your behalf though, but we are all entitled to our own personal delusions.
Socrates says:
Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 6:32 pm
It seems the rule of law can be remarkably flexible when needs arise.
—————————-
Yes
Asha says:
Thursday, November 25, 2021 at 6:00 pm
TPOF:
I’m not saying the Gillard government could have successfully legislated SSM. They almost certainly couldn’t have. My point is simply that her public opposition to SSM was an own goal that likely wound up turning people both for and against SSM against her – because it added to the (unfair, IMO) perception that she couldn’t be trusted – and that her reasons for her position never quite rang true to me (I admit the latter may well be a generational thing on my part.)
____________________________________
I think the AE comments above probably deal better with the ‘trust’ issue. Suffice to say that the most criminal and effective hustlers are those who convey the appearance of trustworthiness to those who don’t know them intimately.
I agree with you about the ‘generational thing’. I said in my earlier post that community attitudes changed enormously in an incredibly short time on marriage equality. I also think that those changes were driven by straight children (who have no problem with non-straight friends and colleagues) educating their parents. I remember watching a panel show once (maybe Q and A) where Janet Albrechtson, of all people, talked about her teenage daughters convincing her that marriage equality just wasn’t an issue (i.e., would not destroy the world as they knew it).
Zoomster:
I still haven’t finished Gillard’s autobiography. Some parts are utterly fascinating, no doubt, but there’s also many sections are a real struggle to get through. The fact that it wasn’t written in (mostly) chronological order was a mistake, in my view – it means the first half of the book is frontloaded with the juicy stuff around the leadership and party disunity, whereas the second half tends to feature long, dry chapters on policy that constantly jump back and forth through the 2007-2013 period. A more balanced structure would have made it a lot more readable.