Two further additions to the post-election budget polling pile (perhaps shortly to be joined by Essential Research). The fortnightly Sky News Pulse poll by YouGov finds Labor down two points to 28%, the Coalition up two to 23%, One Nation up one to 25% and the Greens down one to 13%. Labor has two-party leads of 52-48 against the Coalition and 53-47 against One Nation, which are in from 54-46 and 57-43 last time (the latter seemingly being an aberration, the previous result having been 54-46).
Anthony Albanese’s leads as preferred prime minister are in from 45-36 to 41-38 against Angus Taylor and from 54-35 to 50-38 against Pauline Hanson. Approval and disapproval ratings are not yet available, but we are told Anthony Albanese has gone from a net minus 14 to minus 19 (UPDATE: Albanese is down two on approval to 37% and up two on disapproval to 56%; Angus Taylor is down two to 36% and steady on 42%). The poll finds 9% expecting the budget will leave them better off and 44% worse off, with 47% for about the same. Thirty-one per cent agreed the negative gearing and capital gains tax changes would help first homebuyers, with 38% disagreeing and 31% unsure. The poll was conducted last Tuesday to Monday, from a sample of around 1500 (UPDATE: 1504, to be precise). I will have further detail later today.
The weekly Roy Morgan poll has Labor down a point to 29.5%, the Coalition down one to 24%, One Nation up two-and-a-half to 24.5% and the Greens steady on 11.5%. Labor leads 54-46 on respondent-allocated preferences, out from 53.5-46.5, and 52.5-47.5 on previous election preference flows, in from 53.5-46.5. The poll was conducted last Monday to Sunday from a sample of 1668.
Asha, I would’ve had a lot more respect for them if they had just said “It’s Labor’s position to oppose, and I always support the party line” because at least they’re being honest, instead of the twisted logic they provided and pretending they reached their stance on the issue organically and rationally.
‘Blue baggers’ evolved over decades, starting way back in the days of the old Reckitts Blue bags of laundry bluing blocks. People compared the players to the blue bags.
Looks like the SoH is not the only place were fuel is cut off. Fuel supplies from Russia to Crimea have been cut too.
“Shortages of petrol and rising fuel prices have been observed in Sevastopol since the evening of 21 May.
“After representatives of the Russian authorities announced limits on the amount of petrol sold per customer
, citing ‘logistical difficulties’, long queues of cars had formed at filling stations by the evening,” a local resident said.”
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/05/23/8036056/
Confession:
Oh, come on. Victorian Labor has been in office for nearly twelve years and won two landslide victories. They have a huge house majority and – as far as I can tell – a relatively cooperative upper house. The opposition is, as you correctly point is, a total shambles.
There is zero excuse for the Victorian government not to pass these reforms which nearly everybody with expertise on the subject has been desperately calling for for well over a decade now.
Serious question: what is your opinion of Group Ticket Voting? Do you support it or not? If you do, then… why? And if you don’t, why would you any issue with it being repealed?
IIRC, I think there was a minimum 12 candidates you had to number below the line at the last Victorian election. It wasn’t an arduous task, at all.
Voting above the line is for the lazy slothful voter who has no appreciation of the importance of a vote.
Rex:
Well, that’s certainly a lot better than the ridiculous system we had federally before 2016, but I can still see no conceivable reason (beyond keeping parasites like Glenn Druery employed) why Victorians shouldn’t be able to preference above the line as well.
Preferences should be distributed by voters, not by parties, and especially not by “preference whisperers.”
Omar and Nath’ are the one and is working as a special operative for WB.
Bystander says:
Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 4:26 pm
…
I don’t see why. The Israel democracy mightn’t be perfect but it’s the closest thing to one anywhere in the Middle east.
A state where half the population can’t vote because of their ethnicity is not a democracy, it is apartheid, it is now a state that tried/tries to commit genocide.
Is is worse than a military junta that kills it’s citizens, no, it it better no.
Omar and Nath’ are a crack team!
I think it’s high time Victoria joined the rest of the country and I will be surprised if this doesn’t happen. But on that front I will note that plenty anti Labor advocates were all in for Glen Druery and his preference whispering when it suited their political outcomes.
But I’m apparently a stooge after all and am therefore going to get my licks in on the anti Labor whiners who for years have criticised Labor for not acting on issue X whilst in opposition by turning the tables on them on this particular issue.
Asha says:
Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 9:22 pm
Rex:
“Well, that’s certainly a lot better than the ridiculous system we had federally before 2016, but I can still see no conceivable reason (beyond keeping parasites like Glenn Druery employed) why Victorians shouldn’t be able to preference above the line as well.
Preferences should be distributed by voters, not by parties, and especially not by “preference whisperers.”
+1 (and more if I could vote twice). Silly and outdated system. It assumes electors are simply party sheep.
Blues are 6 goals up deep into the 3rd qtr.
It is now that I must switch it off, as watching the conclusion is unbearable.
Goodnight.
Confessionssays:
But I’m apparently a stooge after all and am therefore going to get my licks in on the anti Labor whiners who for years have criticised Labor for not acting on issue X whilst in opposition by turning the tables on them on this particular issue.
__________
If you think I’m anti-Labor you need to get out more.
Rex:
Not always.
Some people work on a Saturday and only have a short window of time to get to and from the nearest voting booth, and can’t be wasting that time deciding who they prefer out of the Great Australia Party, Australian Christians, the Informed Medical Opinions Party, and Group K.
Some people have numeracy or vision issues that makes numbering 100+ boxes without screwing up a single one far more difficult than it would be for you or I.
Some people simply arn’t particularly informed on how our voting system works and (understandably, I think) assume that voting 1 above the line is just a vote for that party and nobody else, much as in OPV or FPTP.
And when you can order your own preferences above the line – as is now the case federally and in every other state with a proportional upper house – the only real reason to vote below the line is if you have particularly strong opinions on certain candidates on the party tickets. Victoria remains the one state where you need to vote below the line if you want control over your preferences.
Asha, if you selfishly want to starve the families of hardworking preference dealmakers, whisperers and harvesters, then that’s your problem. The Victorian Labor Government is about protecting jobs of hardworking Australians! 😛
Asha@7.53pm, and Nath
I must have missed the 2016 Victorian carry-on, but I presume these “genius” Labor strategists are the same ones that decided to swap Federal group senate votes preferences with Family first in 2004, thinking that Family First preferences would help elect an extra Labour senator from Victoria. Instead, Steve Fielding from Family First gets elected as a Victorian senator with Labor group HTV preferences.
And Fielding is there for two terms! So, when Rudd wins in 2007, he has a hostile senate. The Greens and Labor are not enough to get legislation through the senate, so both Fielding and the Greens are needed. Getting the CPRS through parliament – forget it!
There is no overlap between what the Greens will acted in a carbon pricing scheme, and what Fielding will accept. The overlap is the empty set: {}, nada.
And, that , to me set up Labor to fail after the 2007 election. A lot of other bad shit happened, and Rudd should absolutely have call a DD in January 2009, or thereabouts.
But like Whitlam with his hostile senates, actually getting anything done in the 2007 term was difficult and fractious.
Since parties can be ranked now, voting above the line perfectly reasonable. In fact it was before as well because people can vote however the hell they want.
Confessions:
You do realise I am a Labor supporter too, right? Nor have I ever accused you (or anyone, for that matter) of being a “stooge” as far as I can recall. Have you confused me for someone else?
I don’t give a shit which sides of the political spectrum are for or against Group Ticket Voting. I just want it gone. Partisanship should always come second to democracy.
Jesus, just look at what is happening in the US right now. We are privileged in this country to have a democratic system that – aside from a few flaws here and there – is one of the fairest and most robust in the world. We need to fight for our democracy, both to retain what we already have and to improve it where should be improved.
Rex
Thanks for the baggers explanation. I guess you have to live there.
Dr D, last page: my point was that Hastie could easily lose his seat to One Nation. Come to think of it, Hume also fits that exurban / hinterland marginal Lib type – Taylor might be in trouble there too. Next year’s NSW election will be a good guide to that.
I wonder what editorial line the West takes if Hastie becomes Lib leader. On on side they’re a parochial anti-Labor paper and he’ll be their golden boy (first WA leader of a major party since Beazley 20 years ago = lots of adoring front pages); on the other hand, they’ve gone all in for Ben Roberts-Smith.
Kevin Warsh will fulfil his life’s crowning ambition on Friday, when Donald Trump swears him in as chairman of the US central bank, the Federal Reserve. But his dream job is rapidly turning into a nightmare.
His instruction from Trump is to cut interest rates. Yet as the war in Iran stokes inflation and batters the bond market, he is being pulled in precisely the opposite direction. Markets expect that, at the very least, the Fed will have to leave the benchmark interest rate untouched. If inflation starts to get sticky, the rate may even need to start climbing.
Warsh is trapped in a dilemma. If he raises interest rates, then he may suffer the fate of his predecessor, Jay Powell, who was swept up in an avalanche of presidential abuse and persecution. Yet if he favours his patron’s desire instead of the market’s expectations and lowers US borrowing costs, he risks living up to accusations that he is Trump’s “sock puppet”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/05/22/bond-vigilantes-throw-trumps-sock-puppet-kevin-warsh-off/
D&M:
That was a typo on my part. I meant the 2016 federal Senate reforms. If you weren’t on Poll Bludger during that time, well, you are luckier than you know.
But, yes, you are utterly correct re Fielding and the ongoing conseuences of his own GTV-assisted victory.
See also: Labor SA Senate preferences for Family First vs. Nick Xenophon’s ticket in 2013. I know of a few ATL Labor voters who were horrified to learn their preferences went to Bob Day when there was still a viable less-nutty alternative in the mix.
Also, apropos of nothing, I know someone who resigned from the Australian Democrats (she was a high up in their operational ranks in the state at the time) the day they chose to preference Family First above more reasonable tickets back in 2004.
Truth be told, some recent HTV choices from parties have been a bit annoying to, but the difference there is they’re only recommendations and you can just ignore them and send your preferences whatever way you want.
Asha says:
Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 9:45 pm
Confessions:
You do realise I am a Labor supporter too, right? Nor have I ever accused you (or anyone, for that matter) of being a “stooge” as far as I can recall. Have you confused me for someone else?
I don’t give a shit which sides of the political spectrum are for or against Group Ticket Voting. I just want it gone. Partisanship should always come second to democracy.
Jesus, just look at what is happening in the US right now. We are privileged in this country to have a democratic system that – aside from a few flaws here and there – is one of the fairest and most robust in the world. We need to fight for our democracy, both to retain what we already have and to improve it where should be improved.
________
Good post. We don’t realise what we have until it is gone.
You don’t have to tell me what is happening in the US right now. I post about it daily. And I thank the gods that we live in Australia where electoral boundaries are decided by independent commissions and the like.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/aspiration-for-all-emotional-albanese-doubles-down-on-tax-changes-20260523-p60001.html
Some interesting takes:
“ Federal Labor figures have softened their language in recent days about how the new inflation model for taxing capital gains could adversely affect businesses that start from a very low cost base.
Assistant Minister for the Digital Economy Andrew Charlton said on Friday that start-up founders and small business owners had expressed “real concerns” and that the government was consulting them.
But Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the online meme campaign claiming the government’s tax plan would give them a 47 per cent stake in start-ups – a reference to the top marginal tax rate – was “essentially rubbish”. “We’re making a very sensible, very common-sense change,” he said.
The Albanese government’s post-budget sales mission has also been complicated by criticism from NSW Premier Chris Minns, who attacked his federal Labor counterparts for failing to hand back bigger tax cuts to workers. Taylor has vowed to do so by indexing income tax thresholds.
On Saturday, Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan did not say whether she backed the idea of lowering the top marginal tax rate and lifting the minimum threshold. But she did back the principles behind Albanese’s speech.
“The prime minister and the federal treasurer are more than capable of speaking for themselves on their budget, but it is a budget that is about understanding that systems need to change for the future,” Allan said.
“You can see that federal Labor is working incredibly hard to make sure the settings are there to continue to support workers, to support families
help young people get into a home.”
_______
In my spare time after a solid day clocking up my carbon footprint whilst doing touristy things in Italy (Hi Boerwar, Hi P1) I’ve been using Google AI to war game the annual costs of various possible future changes to the notional rates of tax.
IMO, the budget, whilst definitely heading in the right direction missed an historic opportunity to strike a sort of ‘grand bargain’ whereby various tax rorts and loopholes could be closed in exchange for lowing the tax rates, thereby relieving on Paul Keating’s old maxim that the rates of tax generally ought to reflect the amount of tax collected, and not the amount of tax avoided. Perhaps next budget, as we enter the home straight before the next federal election will be the best time to pitch such a concept.
Of course, becuase most of the rorts and loopholes we want to close down – or at least limit – favour folk who have gross incomes well into the top tax brackets, any such ‘grand bargain’ would have to cater to their needs – and those of the ‘aspirationals’ that Howard so carefully cultivated during his awful, no good reign, but IMO much of the ‘heavy lifting’ in these days of the ‘cost of living crisis’ are being done by folk with incomes below $100K pa.
In my view the range of the 30% tax rate ($45,001 to $135,000) is simply too large. This is an legacy of the ‘Henry’ cargo culture (embraced by KRudd and just about everyone else circa 2008) that we need to ‘simplify’ the income tax system by, inter alia, flattened the tax brackets. IMO this concept is not really fit for purpose in 2026, if it ever was. Don’t get me wrong – once a taxpayer falls into an income bracket that approaches double the median income there is no reason – other than class warfare and spite – to keep racketing up the tax rates. In other words, the tax rates can flatten out once we get to around A$150K pa, or thereabouts. BUT before that, the rates of tax should still be radically progressive in design.
In my view it is to Labor’s great credit that the tax free income threshold is $18,600 pa (Gillard/Swan 2013), that the lowest tax rate ($18,601-$45,000) has been reduced from 19% to 14% (Albo/Chalmers: 2024-27), and that the 37% rate($135,001-$190,000) was reinserted into ‘Stage 3’ cuts (Albo/Chalmers 2024).
That being said, there is a real opportunity to deliver meaningful lower middle class tax rate cuts by introducing another lower income tax rate – a 25% rate. Initially (because of the enormous cost to the annual federal budget) IMO the government should aim to introduce a fairly narrow income range ($45,001 – $60,000), but this would really target those folk really feeling the cost of living squeeze the most (noting that the effective rate of income tax below $45,000 is already – thanks to Labor – very low and folk wholly or substantially within that range are better served by things live family tax benefits and energy rebates etc).
Using Google AI, I came up with the following as something of a sweet spot (to be rolled out in thirds across a 3-5 year period), made up of three structural changes:
Increasing the tax free threshold by $500 to $19,100, thes introduction of a 25% rate, and reducing the top marginal rate to 40%:
The Fiscal Impact to the budget is set out in the Summary Table below:
Policy Component Bracket Span Proposed Rate Change Net Budget Impact (Annual)
Tax-Free Expansion Up to $19,100 Structural baseline hike -$1.8B to -$2.1B
Extended Middle Cut $45,001 to $60,000 From 30% down to 25% -$6.0B to -$6.5B
High-Income Bracket $135,001 to $190,000 No change (Stays at 37%) $0.0B (No Impact)
Reduce Top Bracket Over $190,000 From 45% down to 40% -$3.0B to -$5.0B
Total Net Budget Cost — — -$10.8B to -$13.6B
The trick will be how to pay for this. I reckon another crack at franking credit cash backs and reducing the amount that any gas company can write off from 90% pa to 75% would go a long way. Plus a bunch of other small rorts, like giving novated leasing for employees a haircut for example …
Andrew_Earlwood: Albo has already said a big NO to imputation credit changes and would lose another chunk of older voters if he tried to do that. It would also end the little chance that Chalmers would have of becoming PM.
I like it Earlwood.
Wat:
What really baffled me during that time wasn’t so much the one-eyed Labor acolytes here who went all in there opposition to the changes (despite many being the same people in the 2013 live thread lamenting all the weird senators elected on tiny primary votes and demanding something be done about it), but the fact that federal Labor thought it was somehow in either their own or the country’s interest to oppose the reforms.
It made zero sense to me from either a political or policy perspective, especially just how hard they went against what was probably one of the few decent things the ATM government ever did. It was one of those surreal situations you typically only see once in a blue moon, where the Coalition actually had the moral high ground over Labor. Why on earth didn’t they just go the bipartisan approach and waive through the changes? Surely it wouldn’t have made any difference to their electoral chances in 2016?
Nato forces have taken over a London Tube station to use as their underground HQ as they simulate launching “deep strike” operations on Russia in the event of an attack on a member state.
In a ramping up of preparations for war, the UK-led Nato Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC) moved its military capability to a disused platform at Charing Cross station.
As part of Operation Arrcade Strike, soldiers are testing Nato’s capacity to use electronic warfare to jam Russia’s communications and down the Kremlin’s drones in the event of a Russian invasion of a Baltic country.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nato-russia-attack-plans-uk-london-tube-b2981775.html
Vic is just gonna have to wait for some outrageously antidemocratic result before they’re forced to get rid of GVTs. Federally there was the election of Wayne Dropulich off a tiny vote, and then the lost votes fiasco that meant they couldn’t even figure out if he’d won or not; WA had the Daylight Savings guy win with less than 100 votes; NSW had the tablecloth ballot back in 1999. Vic had the bizarre liquorice allsorts upper house in 2018, with 2022 not much better… if that’s not perverse enough, I’m not sure what would be. One of Avi Yemini’s fake parties winning a seat?
I think the Bracks government erred in their reforms of the upper House. They should have expanded the LC to 50 and had PR with the quota at 2%
Yeah, I think there is about as much chance of Labor touching franking credits this term as there is of Anne Hathaway turning up naked at my house tonight and demanding to have her way with me.
Next term, maybe, but I think they would want to telegraph it before the election. Breaking election promises is kind of like changing universes in Rick and Morty – you can only get away with it a few times.
I actually applaud the WA Labor Government for acting on GTV after that election. They could have easily just shrugged it off and said “Well we have 22 out of 36 seats in the chamber, so the vote of Tucker (the Daylight Savings candidate) will be irrelevant when it comes to legislation, so there’s nothing to worry about”, instead choosing to use their big majority to implement much needed upper house reforms (removing GTV and making it a proportional chamber), even if it means not having a majority again.
Fess:
Victorian Labor have spent only four of the last twenty-seven years in opposition.
Wat:
Agreed.
Further to my post above (9:54pm), the tangible benefits of the first two – lower and middle class targeted – cuts would be thus:
Component 1: Universal Threshold Extension ($18,200 to $19,100)
Annual Cost: $1.8 billion to $2.1 billion
.
The Change: Shields an extra $900 from the current lowest marginal rate (15%)
.
Impact: Saves $135 per year flat for nearly all 14 million active individual taxpayers
.
Component 2: Extended Middle-Income Cut ($45,001 to $60,000)
Annual Cost: $6.0 billion to $6.5 billion
.
The Change: Reduces the tax rate from 30% down to 25% across a full $15,000 income band
.
Impact: Anyone earning above $60,000 secures a maximum structural saving of $750 per year
.
_______
Obviously, the government will not want to spike inflation, so paying in the changes in roughly equal thirds (for example increase the tax free threshold to say $18,850, introduce a narrow 25 bracket of say $45,001-$50,000 and an initial reduction in the top rate to say 43% from 1 July 2027, with further stages to follow in 2028 and 2030) would be the way to go, IMO.
So, in sum I propose that by 20203 there be a $885 pa tax cut for lower-middle income folk, plus a reduction of the top marginal rate to 40%.
Later on, when more tax loophole/savings can be identified, the government could then aim to gradually increase the 25% tax bracket to something like $45,001-$90,000 pa. IMO there is no need to focus any further on ‘bracket creep’ or the higher rates during the 2030s – just constant focus on increasing the range of the new 25% the middle class rate (although the tax free threshold could also be gradually increased throughout that decade). This all could be done over the course of the decade following the first stages of the structural reform I propose are bedded in.
Ashasays:
Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 10:09 pm
Yeah, I think there is about as much chance of Labor touching franking credits this term as there is of Anne Hathaway turning up naked at my house tonight and demanding to have her way with me.
________________
I fantasize about being Penny Wong’s bodyguard. Close Personal Protection and slapping the shit out of anyone who looks at her sideways.
“ Andrew_Earlwood: Albo has already said a big NO to imputation credit changes and would lose another chunk of older voters if he tried to do that.”
_____
IMO, there are no more chunks of older voters still to lose with these sort of changes. Those oldies who are triggered by inter generational fairness have already left for the LNP a decade ago and are now morphing into ON hardboiled cookers (and will remain thus, before being called to account by their maker).
Fuck them
.
Wat: In WA, Labor was never going to have another upper house majority either way thanks to rural malapportionment (rotten boroughs for the Nats), so they didn’t have a down side. The Libs squealed about it at the time, but next time they’re in government they’ll have a choice of minor parties to get things through, not just the Nats, so I don’t think they mind too much.
Bird of paradox at 9.47 and 10.31 pm
Re Hastie, my point is that, if it is conceivable (not necessarily even likely) that Hastie might lose Canning in autumn 2028, then it is in Hastie’s and the Lib parliamentary majority’s interests to install Hastie sooner not later.
The MRP thing is simplistic speculation, like picking current performance of footy teams while disregarding injuries and much else. In a different type of electoral system, like NZ, where the final result is not determined by candidate factors but rather by the list vote, MRP might be sensible.
Above you refer to the WA Libs in a conventional way: “next time they’re in government”. If the existential danger to the Libs over East worsens, then the fallout will affect the WA Libs substantially, though they’ve less to lose.
Nath:
Being both Penny Wong and Taylormade’s bodyguard could create some conflicts of interest. What happens if they end up in a brawl?
Actually, thinking about it further, you could probably just stand back and let Wong beat the crap out of Taylormade. She strikes me as being a bit tougher than the children Taylormade is so scared of.
Douglas and Milko says:
Saturday, May 23, 2026 at 9:41 pm
Yup! That was the last time (and coincidentally the first time) I ever gave a 1 to Labor rather than filling in all the boxes.
My vote helped elect Family First over the Greens or labor. I was and remain ropable. That was why I quit the ALP and joined the Greens. (Former ALP candidate and all, for what it is worth.)
Group ticket voting has to go. I am stunned that the ALP didn’t get rid of it while they could.
mabwm: ” That was the last time (and coincidentally the first time) I ever gave a 1 to Labor”
Hilarious. You blame the ALP, because decades ago, you were too lazy to vote below the line.
@pi.
No. I’d been on the booth all day, there was a late rush and I had about 5 minutes to vote before scrutineering.
I mismanaged my day.
And then I inadvertently voted for Family First because I didn’t realise I couldn’t trust my then party.
It was the only time I ever voted above the line, as I said….. ….rather than filling in all the boxes.
Lazy? Get out of town.
Ashasays:
Being both Penny Wong and Taylormade’s bodyguard could create some conflicts of interest. What happens if they end up in a brawl?
__________________
I’m not looking out for TM any more. I don’t hate the guy but I’m off him.
Petrie is one of them, although I question the MRP’s seat by seat result given that it has given Mayo and Fowler to Labor.
@Bludgeoned Westie
It’s plausible that One Nation is scaring progressives and moderates back into the arms of Labor, though. The poll also has Labor taking Ryan off the Greens. Tony Barry mentioned in a podcast that he thinks that’s going on at the moment after the Greens’ woeful performance in Farrer. Even Larissa Waters thought Trump was a factor in Labor taking seats off the Greens in the last election, with similar parallels due to One Nation’s close alignment with Trump.
I remember the first time I turned up to vote at a federal election, back in 2007 when I was a rather uninformed 19-year-old. It was a pretty bewildering experience having the electoral worker explain to me just how the Senate ballot worked.
“Wait, so I can either just put a single number up top or I have to number all eighty boxes below? Why can’t I number my preference above the line?”
(Shrug) “Them’s the rules.”
I was on my break from work at the time and had to take a bus to and from the booth due to my workplace being a bit of a distance from my electorate. No way could I have filled out a BTL ballot without being written up for being late returning to my shift. So, the Greens got my 1 vote and Christ only knows where those preferences eventually went.
Nath:
Damn, guess he can’t go to any sporting events anymore.