The post-budget polling bonanza continues to unfold, our first item of business being the latest fortnightly Essential Research poll courtesy of The Guardian. On voting intention, the poll finds the Coalition primary vote steady on 37%, Labor down one to 36%, the Greens up one to 10%, One Nation up one to 4% and the United Australia Party up one to 3%. A lower undecided rate and a stronger flow of preferences to Labor causes the gap to widen on the pollster’s 2PP+ measure, which has Labor up two to 50% and the Coalition up one to 45%, with 5% undecided.
The poll suggested the budget had received a lukewarm response, with 25% saying it had made them more likely to vote Coalition and 19% less so. Twenty-five per cent said it would be good for them personally, 33% rated that its inducements would make a significant difference to them, and 56% believed the budget’s main purpose was to help the Coalition win the election. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1086 – more comprehensive results will be along with the publication of the full report later today.
UPDATE: Full results here. Also out today is the monthly Resolve Strategic poll from the Age/Herald, showing Labor up three to 38%, the Coalition up one to 34%, the Greens up one to 11%, One Nation down one to 2% and the United Australia Party steady on 3%, and a Roy Morgan poll with Labor leading 57-43, which I’ll cover in a new post overnight.
Also out today from The Australian is the regular annual Newspoll results on response to the budget. Here too the results are not as strong as the government might have hoped, the clearest indication of which is the finding that 40% thought the opposition would do a better job with 42% thinking otherwise. As shown in the chart below, this is the weakest result on this question since the Coalition came to power, and the third weakest for any government since the inception of the series all the way back in 1988. While quite a few other results are within its margin of error, all were notably recorded by governments in their last terms before losing office.
The poll nonetheless found that 26% of respondents felt the budget would be good for them personally compared with 25% who thought the opposite and 49% who opted for neither, the net positive rating of 1% being the ninth best result out of the 35. However, the respective results of 33%, 23% and 44% for impact on the economy were relatively poor, with the net positive 10% rating being the worst since the Abbott government’s politically disastrous debut budget in 2014 and the eighth worst overall.
The following chart shows the relationship between the net results on personal and economic impact going back to 1988, with the current budget shown in red. Its position below the trendline is consistent with a budget that was perceived as prioritising votes over the economy – a budget received favourably enough to score a near net zero result on personal impact would typically land at around plus 25% for economic impact, rather than plus 10%.
Also out today courtesy of the Financial Review are state breakdowns from yesterday’s Ipsos poll. Given the poll’s large sample size of 2510, these results are quite robust for New South Wales (sample size 818), Victoria (644) and to some extent Queensland (514). Not much should be read into the results for the smaller states, although I’m actually quite pleased that the paper has gone so far as to provide the results for Tasmania and even the Australian Capital Territory (the Northern Territory is rolled together with South Australia), while making it clear that the error margins in these cases are in the order of 15%.
At the business end, the poll finds Labor leading 53-47 in New South Wales (a swing of around 5% with an error margin of 3.5%), 56-44 in Victoria (swing of 3%, error margin of 4.1%) and 54-46 in Queensland (swing of 12.5%, error margin of 4.4%). From here on, proceed with caution: 54-46 in Western Australia (sample of 251, error margin of 6.5%), 62-38 in South Australia/Northern Territory (sample of 186, error margin of 7.3%), 64-36 in Tasmania (sample of 54, error margin of 14.0%) and 57-43 in the ACT (sample of 43, error margin of 15.3%).
I laugh about the MSMs shite about Labor not doing anything much in their election promises/platform etc, but they are still shitting themselves at the prospect of Labor winning.
‘Astrobleme says:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 12:46 pm
“Bullshit, identify the Bike Paths right now!!!!”
It’s just endless bullshit with Boerwar!!
I mean he’s even saying the Greens need to account for schools, firestations, police stations etc. These are State responsibilities.
AND for some bizarre reason he thinks this means there’s a sudden increase in the population. Does he even understand the point of public housing?
It’s not to accommodate EXTRA people it’s to supply affordable homes to EXISTING people who want them. It’s just so stupid.’
——————————————————
So the idea is to move 2.6 million existing people out of existing houses because they WANT to?
I do wish the Greens would stop just doing slogans and do actually to some actual policy work.
Show us the costings. You promised to cost all your policies.
Sad to see Chalmers all in on the stage 3 tax cuts.
Sad to see Chalmers all in on the stage 3 tax cuts.??
He can always change his mind in Government. !
What is old “steak knives” doing at the NPC?
Chalmers – “we don’t rule out a (tax) conversation with the states”
Did I hear that right as him being open to a GST hike ..??
C@T
Regarding Palasczuk, the Newman years were terrible, an assault on all senses daily, arrogant, attacking and obnoxious. Palasczuk just seems to me to mostly go about the business of government in a quiet and mature fashion, minimum of fuss.
Don’t think this has been posted as yet.
More happy campers in the NSW Liberal Party.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/local-liberals-withdraw-from-sitting-mp-s-campaign-in-reid-20220404-p5aard.html
” but there are limits and even SfM is bound by them.”
jt1983…….you know that may not be a comment that ages well??
OK, here’s my smokey list (NSW only, at this stage)…
Page, because the feds and state LNP did poorly handling the ‘3 in 3500 year’ (or whatever) floods.
Bennelong, because outgoing member criticised his own govt’s approach on infrastructure.
Gilmore might go the other way because Andrew Constance isn’t hated.
@imacca – true, but if it doesn’t… I think it’d be the least of my concerns, lol.
Reid, where I live, must be favoured to go to labor now, with the lib vote splitting like that.
Rex Douglas,
if the alp win, Chalmers should hold a press conference about cobwebs in the cupboards and quote the fuck out of Joe hockey and then roll them back.
He should also include retrospective pension changes to former PM’s as part of the mix, Just to punish Scomo, Abbot and Howard who all live large on the public purse.
It is the way.
The Newman Government was perhaps one of the worst governments in recent history. The Mills/Giles Government in NT did give it a good run for its money though.
45% still cant see what a shit show of a Liberal govt this is.
Bloody hell, I can’t wait for the Greens to start with this one. No wonder there is a complete lack of costings for their one million homes. They don’t have a clue how much it is going to cost.
‘125,000 shared ownership homes for first home buyers to build a home WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE.’ (Caps mine but the text is word for word in the official Greens policy suite.)
Inner city, mate, where all the Greens live already! Instead of doing something silly like paying $2-$3 million for a house next door to DiNatale or Bandt, first home buyers will be able to do it for $300,000 WHERE THEY WANT TO LIVE. Which would you prefer? DiNatale or Bandt?
Player One says:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 12:06 pm
The point of the respective party positions – the Lying Reactionary Party, the Under-Reactionaries, the Alt-Reactionaries, the Lite Reactionaries and Labor – is to win as many of the 151 House contests and 40 (?) Senate contests as possible.
You might prefer it if Labor tried to lose the election. But that’s not the goal. Winning matters. Losing hurts. You might think the election won’t make any difference to things. You might be right. We might be the subject of continuing reactionary rule. History says the reactionaries, in one combination or another, will probably win. Current circumstances suggest change may be coming, but that will be a rare event if it happens.
Remember when Jen was ‘sickened” by PVOs revelations,,,,I wonder what she thinks about the almost daily parade of mostly liberal women denouncing him as a bully, liar etc? I wont speculate about their personal married life, but after years/decades of living with someone there wouldnt be any character flaws that each didnt know of the other. So she knows what he is, is she just being the loyal wife or Lady Macbeth egging him on?
NSW court of appeal youtube link:
https://youtu.be/3ik4cNS6gjY
2pm EST so nowish.
Bennelong,
It’s quite clear that the alleged independent is simply a running mate for Martin. There’ll be huffing and puffing but the preferences will be directed to Martin via a convoluted ticket that has the the Labor candidate below the incumbent.
It’s just a means of distracting and re-directing any protesting Liberal voters back to their home.
Labor just has to say if you are unhappy with the incumbent, vote Labor.
Court has ruled that it is not within its jurisdiction to determine internal political party matters. So Morrison has won.
case dismissed
off to Yarralumla with you Morrison…..no excuse now
Snappy Tom @ #298 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 1:15 pm
The official target may be 28%. but the government’s current projection is that we will beat that by up to 9% – i.e. 37%:
https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/australias-emissions-projections-2021
Why would the Liberals choose 37%? Could it be because this is a fairly safe bet given that it is the minimum the states are expected to achieve without them having to lift a finger?
And why would Labor choose 43%? Could it be because this is the maximum the states are expected to achieve without them having to lifting a finger? (ok, 1% more – how wonderfully ambitious of them).
I guess you could say that Labor is being more optimistic than the Liberals, and/or expects their policy to achieve a 1% improvement over what the states are already proposing. However, it is clear that neither of them expect to do much, if anything at all. My own view is that Labor probably chose 43% only because choosing 42% would look a bit too fishy.
As for me (and my partner) personally, not only have we done all we can to reduce our carbon footprint, we will also be voting to maximize the chances of getting some political action on climate change. Not final yet, since the campaign proper has not even begun, and things could change if one or the other of the major parties comes to their senses – but I think you can safely assume that our first preferences will probably not be for either Labor or Liberal 🙂
Smoko, just get on with it.
“Court has ruled that it is not within its jurisdiction to determine internal political party. So Morrison has won.”
Decided based on jurisdiction means that damage already done to the Morrison and the Liberal campaign though. 🙂
It doesn’t mean he was right to do what he did, just that the court declines to involve itself.
Wonder if the plaintiff will lodge an appeal??
Basten JA retires with barely a grey hair
If the punters are stupid enough to re elect Morrison, then this country will be a permanent lost cause.
“As for me (and my partner) personally, not only have we done all we can to reduce our carbon footprint, we will also be voting to maximize the chances of getting some political action on climate change.”
So, you will be preferencing the ALP above the Libs then P1?? Good to see. 🙂
Shellbell
Just like Gutwein.
shellbell says:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:13 pm
Basten JA retires with barely a grey hair
Hair dye
But wait… there’s more.
The one million ‘homes’ policy is being sold by Astrobleme and sundry others as being all about social housing with one having the temerity to ask me whether I even knew what social housing was.
The 125,000 homes will be owner occupied.
Bandt’s one million homes is an uncosted dog’s breakfast of populist slogans.
Is there a difference of view between NSW and Vic on justiciability?
If so, that would be a useful starting point on a HC special leave application but that application would then have to deal with the Court of Appeal’s assessment of the Fed lib constitution which does not sound like a special leave application in light of Asmar.
There was some High Court case in 1934 cited as the precedent for the court not involving itself. Basically the court cannot and will not decide the case, so it is dismissed. I am not legally trained so I only got that much.
A shame the court is an all old boys network of pucker accents.
So, are there any preselections outstanding? Assuming no further legal challenges in NSW
Henry – am in Reid too – am praying (and I am an atheist so that is going out on a proverbial limb) Sitou can prevail. There is a strong Labor constituency here and if that story is legit, what happened at state level recently in Strathfield, where the Indie bled votes from ALP even though Lee won, will happen against current member. As far as I can tell, Martin has done nothing for the electorate … we are one of the places where we are ignored/taken for granted.
Bennelong Lurker @ #307 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 1:43 pm
How bloody typical right wingnut Liberals.
The present incumbent is rational and isn’t one of us so she has to go.Don’t want her type poisoning our hard won religious rights to discriminate.
The question is do you actually take any of these numbers seriously at all from this government?
Bludging @ #317 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 2:00 pm
Your priority is for Labor to win the election no matter how feeble their policies are, whereas mine is to get some decent policies in place, on the particular issues I regard as so important that I no longer care (much) who offers them. I know your response will be that Labor is offering better policies, and my response would then be “What matters it, if their policies are sill not good enough to achieve what is needed?”. So perhaps we could just spare everyone else here this interminable and repetitive interaction and pretend that we have already done so 🙂
Legally the structure of the major parties is quite different. The Liberals is basically a confederation of strong state branches with a weaker federal branch whereas Labor is a federal party with state branches.
imacca @ #329 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 2:14 pm
Not decided yet. I have not heard a peep yet from either the Liberal or the Labor candidate in our area. Of course, we are a tad remote for anyone to bother door-knocking us! 🙂
fwiw, I think that Dr Fiona Martin is perfectly justified to live five minutes away from an electorate. They even move. It’s clear she’s from the community that she represents.
Scommo gets his candidates !!
p1
‘…As for me (and my partner) personally, not only have we done all we can to reduce our carbon footprint, we will also be voting to maximize the chances of getting some political action on climate change.
…’
——————————
Uh huh. Your business model depends on ICE vehicles being driven for hundreds of kilometers to and from your business. It depends on many kilometers of infrastructure – roads and bridges – being built and maintained. It depends on the forests round about to be fuel reduction burned. I don’t mind all that much. The reality is that most Australians, including most Bludgers, are net positive carbon emitters.
But claims of virtue, when used as a basis for standing in relation to voting intention with respect to climate policy, ought to be fair dinkum.
Nicko @ #339 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 2:19 pm
I reckon in this case that the Lib’s 37% is a fairly reliable guess. Labor’s 43% actually seems a bit optimistic, given their actual policy, which relies (as indeed they both do) on coal, gas and CCS.
B.S. Fairman says:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:20 pm
So state / local branches are a fig leaf offering the appearance of a Democrat process to cover up the reality of authoritarianism… a process the court declines to enter into.
Nicko says:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 2:19 pm
The official target may be 28%. but the government’s current projection is that we will beat that by up to 9% – i.e. 37%:
The question is do you actually take any of these numbers seriously at all from this government’
————————-
Angus Taylor.
Boerwar @ #345 Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 – 2:24 pm
Go plant some more trees, Boerwar. It seems to be your only useful contribution.
Isn’t the reason that all of these issues with state branches being different for the ALP/vic and LNP/nsw, the fact that Andrews called in the federal branch to fix a problem they had to take over selection until its fixed, and the LNP is trying to do the same thing, but simply don’t have the permission to do those things?
I haven’t read the court thing yet though, so definitely interested to hear what they say.