The first poll since the election is the regular fortnightly Essential Research, but it does not feature voting intention, which was presumably considered superfluous in the week after the real thing. We do get leadership ratings for Anthony Albanese, who gets a six point post-election bump on approval to 50% with disapproval down eight to 39%, and, a little redundantly, for Peter Dutton, who gets insult added to injury with a ten point drop on approval to 29% and an eight point hike on disapproval to 59%. The “national mood” has improved for one reason or another: 37% now rate the country as headed in the right direction, up six from late April, with wrong track down ten to 42%.
Out of the few who had an opinion on the matter, Sussan Ley scored highest for preferred Liberal leader at 16%, followed by Angus Taylor on 12% and Dan Tehan on 7%, with 45% unsure and 20% for none of the above. The apparent swing to Labor as the election approached appears not to have reflected a dramatic change in national priorities, with 53% rating cost-of-living the most important determinant of vote choice. It is arguably telling that “wanting a stable government in an uncertain world” came second with 12%, but the result was scarcely different from 11% for health policies and 9% for energy policies and “not liking Peter Dutton”. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1137.
Douglas and Milko at 8.50 pm
With respect, while I understand your sentiments and the reasons for your approach to this matter of adequate welfare payments, the situation is significantly more complicated.
It is not true that the LNP has “at every turn” reduced aged pensions and the unemployment benefit.
Specifically, five years ago in the Covid recession, the latter benefit was doubled. Yes, only for 6 months and obviously for political reasons, because many Liberal voters found themselves unemployed overnight.
Eventually Morrison, after ending the temporary rise in the unemployment benefit far too soon, raised it by $50 per fortnight.
Far too little, but if we focus just on the unemployment payment and not rent assistance, the Morrison rise of $50/fortnight was $10 more than the only such rise during Albo’s first term.
Senator D. Pocock got Labor to set up an Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee, which twice said strongly that the unemployment benefit needs to be raised substantially, so that it is almost as much as the aged pension, which was the situation 30 years ago.
Twice the Albanese government did not act on that recommendation.
Now that a more senior minister is responsible, Tanya Plibersek, there will be expectations again that Labor will finally do the right thing, and raise the unemployment benefit to much nearer an adequate level.
There is simply no excuse for the Australian unemployment benefit to be the second lowest in the OECD, lower even than in New Zealand.
Confessions says:
Saturday, May 17, 2025 at 7:00 pm
Is there a link to the Sky News election night Youtube coverage? I can’t find it.
__________________
If you are seeking to find pain on Peta Credlin’s face good luck. She’s pretty tough. Not that intelligent though.
I wasn’t seeking to find Peta Credlin pain. I was asking for a Youtube link to the coverage.
Can you assist on that front?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
I found it just by accident, and it was the best couple of hours I spent after the election.
And yes, I did find Credlin’s pain and the more pain she suffered, the more I drank Champagne.
Talk about a LONG FACE.
The final nail in the coffin for the Torries was when Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock said on April 16th that ‘You’re all doing fine. and ‘The overall economy and households were in good shape’ and that homeowners were finding ways to meet their extra payments and the number of mortgages in arrears were falling’.
That’s when the polls turned dramatically in Labor’s favour.
Finally, voters could handle the TRUTH.
Ms Credlin must have believed the stories about the Liberal’s’ “internal polling” and was hoping for “pre-polls” to save the day..
Be that as it may, the election result exceeded Labor’s best expectations and the Coalition’s worst nightmares, with a Labor 2PP of 54.8% (AEC) or 54.5% (William’s projections). It’s the first time that Labor’s topped 54% since 1946 and it’s best since 1943 (when 58.2%)*.
Labor has an opportunity to entrench itself as the natural party of Government, which was last achieved under Hawke and Keating, under whom Labor held office for 13 years. They also have an opportunity to entrench real change, provided they choose their battles carefully.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_federal_elections#House_of_Representatives_primary,_two-party_and_seat_results
Albanese’s first speech in the House:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rjLVidUri8&t=481s
I see Keir Starmer isn’t the only person in the known universe who believes his polling hasn’t plummeted off the edge of the world. He’s 0ut-Trussing Liz. Incredible performance. Hard to imagine anyone could be more inept.
Steve777 says:
Saturday, May 17, 2025 at 10:39 pm
Ms Credlin must have believed the stories about the Liberal’s’ “internal polling” and was hoping for “pre-polls” to save the day..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
With absolutely no offence to Steve 777, does anyone believe that the Libs believed that their “internal polling” was correct especially in the face of all other polling showing the exact opposite.
Wouldn’t they have questioned the methods used to get those figures? and asked them to do it again.
Credlin is no fool when it comes to politics, but she had no other choice but to toe the party line, thinking she may have some influence through her show to stem the bleeding.
I have no doubt that Labor’s internal polling was more accurate than all those other polls and that they had it in a winning position for most or ALL of the previous 3 years.
And you could tell by Albo’s calm temperament, certainly since the Voice failure where he just wanted to get on with governing.
They don’t pay these pollsters a fortune for f***ing bullshit.
Don’t forget Joel Fitzgibbon’s comments on Sky’s election night when he said Albo must have had polling knowledge of his historic win.
I’m convinced he did.
Been there, done that!
New thread.
leftiebrawler @ 2.08pm
In the ten years of my GWS membership I have only witnessed or known of only one instance of trouble amongst supporters, of both competing teams.
Ironically, it was from two Essendon supporters, having a blue with each other, last year, as the Giants whipped Essendon by their largest winning margin.
I’m glad that you were able to leave so late for the game.
Due to the weekly near shut down of the Sydney Rail Network and the closure of the northern line into Sydney my Central Coast Giants mob have had to make a 3 hour journey to Olympic Park, rather than our usual 2 train connection which takes about 1.5 hours.
Where were you seated?
I sit alongside the players race to the right of the GWS players’ change rooms in front of the Members Bar.
Goll @ 7.39pm.
Comedic mastery.
Gabe Kaplan would be proud of your use of ‘ranking’.
Dr Doolittle last night: “There is simply no excuse for the Australian unemployment benefit to be the second lowest in the OECD, lower even than in New Zealand.”
——————————————————————————
It is necessary to be a little cautious when levels of unemployment benefit in different OECD countries to make sure that one is comparing apples and apples. OECD comparisons tend to work off averages, but these often mask the fact that, in many countries, the amount of unemployment assistance you receive will vary depending on factors such as who you are, your employment history, and where you live, whereas the Australian system – stingy though many accuse it of being – is relatively egalitarian.
Eg, quite a few European countries have social welfare systems in which the rates of benefit payable to people who have previously worked for a certain period as full-time permanent employees in particular sectors are much higher than the rate available to everybody else: sometimes double the rate or more. People who have never worked or who have only worked in casual jobs – a disproportionate number of whom are women or migrants – are significantly disadvantaged under these systems.
And the systems in many countries can be very complicated, requiring people to apply to different levels of government for specific payments for a range of specific things. Have a look at the US system, for example.
I reckon it’s very difficult to draw comparisons, but I don’t think our system is as harsh as many portray it. Another factor is that these critics tend to focus on the base rate of our unemployment benefits, and pay less attention to the amounts of additional assistance provided to renters and/or families with children.
IMO the biggest welfare problem in Australia is not the rates of welfare paid out, but the absurd unaffordability of housing across most of the country.