View from The Hill: Labor’s 55-45% Newspoll lead adds to Liberals’ weekend of woe


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

Labor has maintained a 55-45% two-party lead in the latest Newspoll,
in a weekend of woe for the Morrison government, which is trying to
play down the federal contribution to the Victorian Liberal wipeout.

The Coalition’s primary vote fell for the third consecutive
time, to 34%, in a poll that if replicated at an election would see a loss of 21 seats. Labor’s primary vote remained at 40%. One Nation rose 2
points to 8%; the Greens were steady on 9%.

Scott Morrison boosted his lead over Bill Shorten as better PM to 12
points, leading 46-34% compared with 42-36% a fortnight ago. Morrison
has a net positive satisfaction rating of plus one, improving from
minus 8 in the last poll.

The poll will reinforce Coalition gloom after Saturday’s Victorian
election which saw a swing to the Labor government estimated by ABC
election expert Antony Green at around 4% in two-party terms. While an
ALP win was expected, the stunning size of it came as a surprise.




Read more:
Labor has landslide win in Victoria


Even assuming the Victoria election was mainly won (or lost) on state
issues, there are clearly federal factors and lessons in this smashing
of the Liberals, which if translated federally would potentially put at risk half a dozen Victorian seats.

As Premier Daniel Andrews said, Victoria is a “progressive” state. It
stands to reason that Liberal infighting and the dumping of Malcolm
Turnbull, the trashing of the National Energy Guarantee and the
talking down of renewables, and the broad rightward lean of the
federal Coalition alienated many middle-of-the-road Liberal voters.

The anecdotal evidence backs the conclusion that Victorians were
sending strong messages to the Liberal party generally, including the
federal party.

But are the federal Liberals willing to hear those message? And anyway,
does Morrison have the capacity to respond to them effectively?

Morrison has so far demonstrated no personal vision for the country,
and his play-for-the-moment tactics are being increasingly seen as
unconvincing.




Read more:
Victorian Labor’s thumping win reveals how out of step with voters Liberals have become


Morrison took the unusual course of not saying anything about Victoria
on Saturday night or Sunday. He will meet the Victorian federal
Liberals on Monday to discuss the outcome.

Ahead of that meeting Treasurer Josh Frydenberg – who is from Victoria and is deputy Liberal leader – played down the federal implications. While conceding “the noise from Canberra certainly didn’t help”, he claimed in an ABC Sunday night interview that the lessons to be learned federally were about grassroots campaigning and the need to rebut “Labor lies”. He would not concede a recalibration of policy was needed.

Some in the right will try to write Victoria off as unrepresentative
of the nation, just as they did Wentworth. This flies in the face of
reality – there were big swings in the eastern suburbs and the sandbelt,
the sort of areas the Liberals would expect to be their middle class strongholds.

The government needs to pitch much more to the centre in policy terms
but it will be hard to do so.

Given its current positioning, how could it sound moderate on energy
and climate policy? It can’t go back to the NEG. It is stuck with its
obsessions about coal and its distrust of, or at least equivocation
about, renewables, as well as its business-bashing threat of
divestitures.

On issues such as coal and climate change, the party’s eyes have been
turned obsessively to Queensland, where there is a raft of marginal
seats, without sufficient regard to those in Victoria and NSW. Even in
relation to Queensland, there has been a failure to adequately
recognise that that state is not monolithic when it comes to issues
and priorities.

The right is unlikely to stop its determined effort to take over the
party, whatever the cost. Indeed some on the right will argue that the Morrison strategy should be to sharpen the policy differences further, rather than looking to the centre.

The right’s mood will be darkened by the Saturday dumping of rightwing senator Jim Molan to an unwinnable position on the NSW Liberal ticket. Molan has pulled out from Monday’s Q&A program; the ABC tweeted that he’d said he could “no longer defend the Liberals”.

As if the Victorian result was not sobering enough, the government
this week begins the final fortnight of parliament for the year in minority
government, with independent Kerryn Phelps sworn in on Monday as
Turnbull’s replacement in Wentworth.

The government wants the focus on national security legislation but
other issues will be political irritants for it.

Labor and crossbenchers are pushing the case for a federal
anti-corruption body – the sort of initiative that would appeal to
voters highly distrustful of politicians.

Crossbenchers Cathy McGowan and Rebekha Sharkie will introduce a
private member’s bill. 34 former judges have signed an open letter
advertisement calling for a national integrity commission.

They said: “Existing federal integrity agencies lack the necessary
jurisdiction, powers and know-how to investigate properly the
impartiality and bona fides of decisions made by, and
conduct of, the federal government and public sector.”

The government is resisting a new body but will need some convincing
alternative response.

The government will also be under pressure over Morrison’s pledge to
legislate to remove the opportunity for religious schools to
discriminate against gay students. Negotiations with the opposition
have been at an impasse, although the government says it still wants
legislation through this fortnight.

In the middle of the fortnight Morrison attends the G20, where he is
expected to have a meeting with Donald Trump. One would assume they
will canvass the Australian government’s consideration of moving our
embassy to Jerusalem, with Trump urging Morrison to go ahead with
the controversial move.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisements

Poll wrap: Labor’s worst polls since Turnbull; chaos likely in Victorian upper house



File 20181120 161641 45d9o3.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
This week’s Fairfax-Ipsos poll gives Labor a 52-48 lead over the government, the best result for the Coalition since Scott Morrison became PM.
AAP/Dan Peled

Adrian Beaumont, University of Melbourne

This week’s Fairfax Ipsos poll, conducted November 14-17 from a sample of 1,200, gave Labor just a 52-48 lead, a three-point gain for the Coalition since October. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (up two), 34% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (down two) and 5% One Nation (steady). As usual, the Greens are too high in Ipsos and Labor too low.

This poll is the Coalition’s best result from any pollster since Malcolm Turnbull was ousted. Last week, Newspoll gave Labor a 55-45 lead, and it is unlikely Labor lost three points in a week. Ipsos is the most volatile Australian pollster. However, Essential (see below) confirms Ipsos by also shifting to a 52-48 lead for Labor.

Respondent allocated preferences in Ipsos were 53-47 to Labor, one point better for Labor than the previous election method. Under Turnbull, Labor usually performed worse on respondent preferences, but the three Ipsos polls under Scott Morrison have Labor tied or ahead of the previous election method using respondent preferences. A stronger flow to Labor from the Greens and non-One Nation Others could be compensating for weaker flows from One Nation.

48% approved of Morrison (down two), and 36% disapproved (up three), for a net approval of +12. Last week’s Newspoll gave Morrison a -8 net approval; although Ipsos gives incumbent PMs much better ratings than Newspoll, the difference is very large this time. Bill Shorten’s net approval was up one point to -7. Morrison led Shorten by 47-35 as better PM (48-35 in October).

46% thought Muslim immigration should be reduced, 35% remain the same and 14% increased. In October, a question about all immigration found 45% wanted it reduced, 29% wanted it to stay the same, and 23% increased.

47% thought the government’s main priority on energy policy should be reducing household bills, 39% reducing carbon emissions and 13% reducing the risk of power blackouts. Labor will attempt to convince people that clean energy can be consistent with cheap energy.

I think the shift to the Coalition is more likely due to last week’s economic data than the Bourke Street attack. On November 14, the ABS reported September quarter wage growth data; according to The Guardian’s Greg Jericho, wages are growing more than inflation for the first time since 2013. On November 15, the ABS reported that 33,000 jobs were added in October, with the unemployment rate stable at 5.0%.

On November 14, Westpac reported that consumer sentiment increased 2.8% from October to 104.3 in November. If people feel good about their personal economic situation, it is more likely they will feel good about the government.

Essential: 52-48 to Labor

This week’s Essential poll, conducted November 15-18 from a sample of 1,027, gave Labor a 52-48 lead, a two-point gain for the Coalition since last fortnight. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (up one), 35% Labor (down four), 11% Greens (up one) and 7% One Nation (up one).

44% said their vote was very firm and unlikely to change, including 50% of Labor voters and 46% of Coalition voters.

By 35-28, voters thought the Liberal government and its ministers were poor, but they also thought the Labor opposition and its shadow ministers poor by 33-28. By 36-35, voters thought the Labor team would do a better job of governing than the Liberal team.

On a range of issues, more people thought the government was not doing enough than doing enough, particularly on the ageing population (67-17), transitioning to renewable energy (64-14) and affordable housing (64-16).

In additional questions from last week’s Newspoll, voters thought Shorten and Labor had the best approach to improve housing affordability by 45-35 over Morrison and the Coalition. By 47-33, voters were in favour of reducing negative gearing tax concessions (54-28 in April 2017).

Micro parties likely to win several seats in Victorian upper house

The Victorian election will be held on November 24. There have been no statewide media-commissioned polls since a late October Newspoll (54-46 to Labor). A ReachTEL poll for a left-wing organisation, conducted November 13 from a sample of 1,530, gave Labor a 56-44 lead, which would be a four-point gain for Labor since an early October ReachTEL poll for The Age.

I would like to see a media poll before concluding that the Victorian election will be a blowout win for Labor, but Labor is likely to win.

The Victorian upper house has eight five-member electorates. A quota is one-sixth of the vote, or 16.7%. During the last term, Labor never proposed any reforms to the upper house group voting system. As a result, there are many micro parties who are swapping preferences with each other so that one of them has a good chance of election.




Read more:
Victorian ReachTEL poll: 51-49 to Labor, and time running out for upper house reform


According to analyst Kevin Bonham’s simulations of upper house results, seven micro party representatives could be elected. While the particular micro party that wins could change, the overall numbers probably won’t unless the major parties and Greens do much better than expected, or there is a much higher rate of below-the-line voting.

The Greens in particular appear likely to lose seats that they would win with a sensible system. Labor may well have shot themselves in the foot by sticking with group ticket voting; with a sensible system, Labor and the Greens would probably win an overall upper house majority. Conservative micro party members are likely to stall progressive legislation.

It is easy to vote below-the-line in Victoria, as only five numbers are required for a formal vote, though voters can continue numbering beyond “5”. I recommend that voters number at least five boxes below-the-line, rather than voting above-the-line, where parties control their voters’ preferences. If enough people vote below-the-line, the micro parties’ preference harvesting could be thwarted.

UK’s Brexit debacle could lead to Labour landslide; Greens surge in Germany

Last week, UK PM Theresa May did a deal with the European Union regarding Brexit, but Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab and other ministers resigned in protest. It is likely that the UK House of Commons will reject the deal, owing to opposition from both the hard right and the left. A “no deal” Brexit is likely to greatly damage the UK economy, and could lead to a Labour landslide.

In March 2018, the German Social Democrats re-entered a grand coalition with the conservative Union parties – the same right/left coalition that governed Germany in three of the last four terms. Both the Union parties and Social Democrats have lost support, but it has gone much more to the Greens than the far-right AfD.

You can read more about Brexit and the German Greens’ surge on my personal website.The Conversation

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Government falls further behind – Labor leads 55-45% in Newspoll


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

The Coalition has taken another knock in Newspoll, now trailing Labor 45-55% on a two-party basis.

Scott Morrison’s personal ratings have also worsened, in a poll that comes in the wake of his intensive week of campaigning in the key state of Queensland.

This is the second consecutive Newspoll in which the two-party vote has gone backwards: the previous poll had a 46-54% result.

The Newspolls have been consistently worse for the Coalition since the
leadership change – before that Labor had been cut back to a narrow 51-49% lead.

Morrison’s net satisfaction rating is now minus 8, compared with minus 3 in the last poll a fortnight ago. Bill Shorten had a slight worsening on this measure – he is on minus 15 compared with minus 13 in the previous poll.

The gap on “better prime minister” has narrowed in Shorten’s favor – Morrison leads 42-36% compared with 43-35% previously.

Labor’s primary vote is up a point to 40%; the Coalition has dropped a point to 35%. The Greens remain on 9%; One Nation is steady on 6%.

Newspoll also found that only 40% of people now favour Australia becoming a republic, compared with 48% against. Shorten has promised
an early vote on the issue if he wins government.

Support for a republic was 50% in April this year, with 41% against.
The dramatic change suggests the big impact of the highly popular tour
of the young royals, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Although Coalition MPs have argued that Morrison has a better “cut through” than Malcolm Turnbull, Morrison’s sliding ratings suggests his “ordinary bloke” style isn’t going across as well as some expected.

The poll was taken Thursday to Sunday, so the publicity around Turnbull’s performance on Q&A on Thursday would have fed into it. He
declared that former colleagues had not so far answered the question
of why they had dumped him and owed an explanation to the Australian
public.




Read more:
Grattan on Friday: Turnbull tells Liberals to answer that unanswerable question


This week Morrison begins the “summit season” with the East Asia
summit in Singapore followed by APEC in Papua New Guinea.

POSTSCRIPT:

Morrison, asked about the poll, told Sky: “It’s a big mountain, and
I’m still climbing it”. He said the poll showed there was “a big risk”
of a Labor government.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Poll wrap: Morrison’s ratings slump in Newspoll; Wentworth’s huge difference in on-the-day and early voting



File 20181029 7074 1xxtfnb.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
It took six months for Malcolm Turnbull to receive his first negative Newspoll net approval as PM; it has taken Scott Morrison just two months.
AAP/Joel Carrett

Adrian Beaumont, University of Melbourne

This week’s Newspoll, conducted October 25-28 from a sample of 1,650, gave Labor a 54-46 lead, a one-point gain for Labor since last fortnight. Primary votes were 39% Labor (up one), 36% Coalition (down one), 9% Greens (down two) and 6% One Nation (steady). Rounding probably assisted Labor in this poll.

41% were satisfied with Scott Morrison (down four), and 44% were dissatisfied (up six), for a net approval of -3, down ten points. Bill Shorten’s net approval was up three points to -13. While Shorten’s ratings are poor, this is his best net approval this term. Morrison led Shorten by 43-35 as better PM (45-34 last fortnight).

58% thought Morrison should hold the election when due next year, while 33% thought he should call an early election before the end of this year.

Since Morrison became PM, his net approvals have been +2, +5, +7 and now -3. Turnbull’s first four net approvals were +18, +25, +35 and +32. It took six months for Turnbull to receive his first negative Newspoll net approval, it has taken Morrison just two months.

According to analyst Kevin Bonham, even if Morrison never receives another positive Newspoll net approval, he will still have more positive net approvals than either Tony Abbott (two) or Paul Keating (zero) did as PM.

Morrison’s slump could be caused by the Liberals’ loss of Wentworth, but it could also be due to increasingly bad perceptions of the Coalition over issues such as climate change. The falls in the stock market and house prices are likely to impact consumer confidence, and governments usually perform worse when the economy is not perceived to be doing well.

Essential: 53-47 to Labor

Last week’s Essential poll, mostly taken before the Wentworth byelection, gave Labor a 53-47 lead, unchanged from three weeks ago. Primary votes were also unchanged, with the Coalition on 38%, Labor 37%, the Greens 10% and One Nation 7%. This poll was conducted October 18-21 from a sample of 1,027.

Essential uses the previous election method to assign preferences, assuming One Nation preferences split about 50-50. Since December 2017, Newspoll has assumed One Nation preferences split about 60-40 to the Coalition. If Essential and Newspoll used the same method, there would probably be a two-point gap between the two. Since Morrison became PM, Newspoll has given Labor better two party results than Essential despite the One Nation adjustment.

60% (up nine since April) cited cost-of-living as one of their top three issues, while 37% cited health (up one), 29% housing affordability (steady) and 27% creating jobs (down five). Income and business tax cuts were at the bottom with just 12% and 5% respectively who thought they were important issues.

59% thought the change of PM had made no difference and the Morrison government was still the same government, while 20% thought it was a new government. By 35-28, they preferred Morrison to Turnbull as PM (57-29 among Coalition voters).

63% (down one since September 2017) thought that climate change was caused by human activity, while 25% (up one) thought we were just witnessing a normal fluctuation in the earth’s climate. 56% (steady) thought Australia was not doing enough to address climate change, 23% (up three) thought we were doing enough, and 7% (down one) thought we were doing too much.

37% did not support a separate national day to recognise Indigenous Australians, 36% supported a separate day alongside Australia Day, and just 14% supported a separate day instead of Australia Day.

Massive difference between on-the-day and early voting in Wentworth

With probably fewer than 1,000 postal votes to come before Friday’s deadline for reception, independent Kerryn Phelps won the October 20 Wentworth byelection by a 51.2-48.8 margin over Liberal Dave Sharma, a vote margin of 1,783, and a swing of 18.9% against the Liberals. Primary votes were 43.1% Liberal (down 19.1%), 29.2% Phelps, 11.5% Labor (down 6.2%) and 8.6% Greens (down 6.3%).




Read more:
Wentworth byelection called too early for Phelps as Liberals recover in late counting


Early on election night, Wentworth was called for Phelps owing to her strong performance on election-day booths. Pre-poll and postal votes counted by October 21 were much stronger than expected for Sharma, as this tweet from the ABC’s Antony Green shows.

Green also tweeted that there has been a big drop in Sharma’s percentage share of the postals as later batches are counted. Sharma was at 64.4% on postals counted by the morning of October 21, but dropped to just 44.3% in postals counted October 25. Later postals would have been sent closer to the election date.

Later postals tend to be less conservative-friendly than earlier ones, but not to this extent. It is clear from this data that Wentworth voters shifted decisively against the Liberals in the final days.

I think the most important reason for this shift was Coalition senators voting with Pauline Hanson on her “It’s OK to be white” motion. This motion would have absolutely no appeal to an electorate with a high level of educational attainment relative to the overall population.

Victorian Galaxy poll: 53-47 to Labor

The Victorian election will be held on November 24. A Galaxy poll for the Bus Association, conducted last week from an unknown sample, gave Labor a 53-47 lead, unchanged since September. Primary votes were 40% Labor (down two), 39% Coalition (down one) and 12% Greens (up two). This poll was probably close to 54-46 to Labor.

44% approved of Premier Daniel Andrews (up four), and 35% disapproved (down seven), for a net approval of +9, up eleven points. Opposition Leader Matthew Guy’s net approval was up one point to -18.

Since the change in PM, there have been two 53-47 to Labor results from Galaxy, and a 52-48 from ReachTEL. Labor is likely to win the Victorian election, though they could be forced into a minority government if the Greens take inner city seats.

US midterm elections, and far-right wins Brazil presidential election

US midterm elections will be held on November 6. I wrote for The Poll Bludger on Saturday that Democrats are likely to win the House, but Republicans are likely to retain the Senate. Trump’s ratings dropped from highs last seen in March 2017. The recent far-right terrorist events may shift public opinion.

The Brazilian presidential election runoff was held Sunday after no candidate won an outright majority in the first round on October 7. The far-right candidate, Jair Bolsonaro, defeated the left-wing Workers’ Party candidate, Fernando Haddad, by a 55.1-44.9 margin. Bolsonaro has made comments sympathetic to the 1964-85 Brazil military dictatorship. Corruption by the established parties and a recession are key reasons for this result.The Conversation

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Poll wrap: Coalition slumps to 55-45 deficit in Ipsos, and large swing to federal Labor in Queensland



File 20180820 30611 dfkhe0.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
The latest Fairfax Ipsos poll has brought bad news for Malcolm Turnbul – and good news for Bill Shorten.
AAP/Lukas Coch

Adrian Beaumont, University of Melbourne

This week’s Fairfax Ipsos poll, conducted August 15-18 from a sample of 1,200, gave Labor a landslide 55-45 lead, a four-point gain for Labor since late July. Primary votes were 35% Labor (up one), 33% Coalition (down six), 13% Greens (up one) and 19% for all Others (up four). Ipsos consistently has the Greens higher than other polls.

The respondent allocated two party figure was also 55-45 to Labor. During this term, Labor has usually performed worse on respondent allocated preferences than using the previous election method, and the Ipsos July poll had a 50-50 tie by this measure.

46% approved of Malcolm Turnbull (down nine), and 48% disapproved (up ten), for a net approval of -2, down 19 points since July. This is Turnbull’s first negative net approval in Ipsos since December 2017; Ipsos gives him better ratings than other pollsters. Bill Shorten’s net approval was -11, up five points. Turnbull led Shorten by 48-36 as better PM, a big decline from a 57-30 lead in July.

By 47-44, voters supported cutting the company tax rate from 30% to 25% over the next ten years (49-40 in April). In an additional question from last week’s Newspoll, voters thought the Senate should block, rather than pass, the tax cuts for companies with a turnover over $50 million by a 51-36 margin.

56% thought the government is doing too little to address climate change, 28% thought they are doing about the right amount, and just 13% thought they are doing too much. By 54-22, voters supported the National Energy Guarantee (NEG), including over 59% support from both major parties’ voters.

In last week’s article, I referred to divisions within the Coalition over the NEG and the company tax cuts as an explanation for Turnbull’s Newspoll ratings slump. Since then, those divisions have became much worse.




Read more:
Poll wrap: Turnbull’s Newspoll ratings slump; Labor leads in Victoria; Longman preferences helped LNP


In an attempt to fend off a potential challenge from Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, Turnbull on Monday abandoned the emissions target part of the NEG, in effect yielding to the 13% who say the government is doing too much on climate change.

This 13% of all voters is greatly over-represented within the parliamentary Coalition and among right-wing media commentators. By reserving their right to cross the floor on the NEG, some Coalition MPs have shown how out of touch they are with the electorate on climate change. This probably also contributed to the swing in this Ipsos poll.

Despite Turnbull’s current woes, I think it would be a mistake for the Liberals to replace him with Dutton. While Dutton would appeal to One Nation voters who have left the Coalition over dissatisfaction with Turnbull’s perceived moderation, more moderate Coalition voters would likely desert. About 60% of One Nation preferences will probably return to the Coalition, but if moderates leave, Labor is likely to benefit directly from the Coalition’s lost primary support.

Only three weeks ago, just before and immediately after the July 28 Super Saturday byelections, the Coalition and Turnbull had some of their best polling this term. Ipsos is more volatile than other pollsters, and it was taken at a time of great division within the Coalition. Now that Turnbull has dumped the emissions targets, the internal divisions may subside, and the Coalition’s polling could improve.




Read more:
Polls update: Trump’s ratings held up by US economy; Australian polls steady


On August 15, the ABS reported that wages grew at a 0.6% rate in the June quarter. Continued slow wage growth is likely to be a crucial issue at the next election.

Fieldwork for the two polls below was taken before last week’s parliamentary sitting.

Federal Queensland Galaxy: 50-50 tie

A federal Queensland Galaxy poll, conducted August 8-9 from a sample of 839, had a 50-50 tie, a two-point gain for Labor since May. Primary votes were 37% LNP (down three), 34% Labor (up one), 10% One Nation (steady) and 9% Greens (down one). This poll was conducted from the same sample that gave state Labor a 51-49 lead (see last week’s article).

This poll represents a 4% swing to Labor in Queensland since the 2016 election, and such a swing would probably result in Labor gaining many seats. According to The Poll Bludger’s BludgerTrack, eight LNP Queensland seats are held by less than 4%, including Dutton’s Dickson (a 2.0% margin).

There was no One Nation candidate in Dickson in 2016, when Dutton suffered a 5.1% swing against. A redistribution slightly increased Dutton’s margin from 1.6% to the current 2.0%. If Dutton becomes PM, he will probably receive an extra personal vote boost in Dickson, which could enable him to hold it. Otherwise, Dutton is vulnerable to the Queensland-wide swing in this Galaxy poll.

56% of Queenslanders opposed tax cuts for companies with turnovers over $50 million, just 16% fully supported these cuts, and 12% wanted the big banks excluded from the tax cuts. Many pollsters are making mistakes by asking whether voters support tax cuts for “all” businesses; the issue is the tax cuts for businesses with turnover over $50 million, not all businesses.

National Essential: 52-48 to Labor

Last week’s national Essential poll, conducted August 9-12 from a sample of 1,032, gave Labor a 52-48 lead, a one-point gain for Labor since three weeks ago. Primary votes were 39% Coalition (down two), 37% Labor (up one), 10% Greens (steady) and 6% One Nation (steady). Essential’s two party estimate uses 2016 election preference flows and it would probably be 51-49 using Newspoll’s new method.

Turnbull’s net approval dropped three points since early July to a net zero, while Shorten’s net approval increased six points to -10. Turnbull led Shorten by 41-27 as better PM (42-25 in July).

By 54-25, voters thought the current drought across eastern Australia is likely to be linked to climate change.

88% approved of drought relief for agriculture, 76% of subsidies for renewable energy and 73% of the private health insurance rebate. Just 33% approved of the fuel rebate for the mining industry and 36% approved of negative gearing.

Voters were not alarmed by the proposed merger between Nine and Fairfax. By 47-28, they thought the merger would be good for quality of news coverage, and by 42-34 they thought it would be good for diversity of news media.

In the context of large Internet company bans on alt-right speakers, 48% thought that an individual’s right to free speech does not mean these companies need to provide a platform, while 32% thought these companies should allow such people to speak even if they disagree with the speaker.

Electoral system not to blame for Fraser Anning

There has been much controversy following Queensland Senator Fraser Anning’s speech to the Senate on August 14. There have been suggestions the electoral system is at fault as Anning won just 19 personal votes at the 2016 double dissolution election.

Anning was the third candidate on One Nation’s Queensland Senate ticket. One Nation won 1.19 quotas, electing Pauline Hanson immediately. They then performed very well on preferences from populist parties, earning a second seat for Malcolm Roberts, who had just 77 personal votes.




Read more:
Final Senate results: 30 Coalition, 26 Labor, 9 Greens, 4 One Nation, 3 NXT, 4 Others


In October 2017, the High Court disqualified Roberts over the citizenship fiasco, and Anning was elected to replace him.

<!– Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. –>
The Conversation

Other than in Tasmania and the ACT, whose state electoral systems encourage below the line voting in the Senate, over 90% of Senate votes at the 2016 election were above the line ticket votes, according to analyst Kevin Bonham. In most cases, the number of personal below the line votes received by a candidate is irrelevant to the electoral process.

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

FactCheck: has Pauline Hanson voted ‘effectively 100% of the time with the Turnbull government’ in 2018?


Adrian Beaumont, University of Melbourne

This year [Pauline Hanson] has voted effectively 100% of the time with the Turnbull government. Honestly you may as well vote LNP if you are voting One Nation because there is no difference.

– Deputy opposition leader Tanya Plibersek, doorstop interview, Caboolture, Queensland, July 10, 2018

In recent weeks, senior Labor Party figures have sought to draw attention to the voting patterns of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party, arguing that a vote for the minor party is a vote for the Coalition.

At the Labor campaign launch in the Queensland seat of Longman ahead of Saturday’s crucial byelections, opposition leader Bill Shorten said it’s “a fact that if you vote One Nation, you are voting [Liberal National Party]. You are not protesting, you are being used to send a vote to the LNP.”

On the same day, shadow finance minister Jim Chalmers described One Nation as “the wholly-owned subsidiary of Malcolm Turnbull’s Liberal Party”.

Earlier this month, deputy opposition leader Tanya Plibersek said that in 2018, Pauline Hanson had “voted effectively 100% of the time with the Turnbull Government”.

Let’s look at the records.

Checking the source

In response to The Conversation’s request for sources and comment, Tanya Plibersek said:

Pauline Hanson voted with the Liberals to cut school funding and voted to cut family benefits while she voted herself a massive $7,000 a year tax cut. Australian voters deserve to know the truth about Hanson’s voting record in Canberra.

Plibersek’s comment related to votes on second and third reading votes (including amendments) on legislation.

Plibersek’s office highlighted 20 such votes in 2018 in which Labor and the Coalition disagreed. Of those, Hanson abstained from one vote, and voted 18 times with the government. (The equivalent of 95% of the time, with the abstention excluded.)

A spokesperson told The Conversation Plibersek used the qualifier “effectively” in her original comment to indicate that Hanson voted with the Coalition almost all of the time.


Verdict

Deputy opposition leader Tanya Plibersek said Pauline Hanson has “voted effectively 100% of the time with the Turnbull Government” in 2018.

Parliamentary records show the figure to be between 83-86%, depending on the measure used.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party has cast 169 formal votes in the Senate to date in 2018. Of those, it was in agreement with the government 83% of the time.

If we look at the 99 occasions where the government and opposition were in disagreement, and One Nation cast an influential vote, we see that the minor party voted with the government 86% of the time.


Voting in the Senate

Votes in the Senate can be determined “on the voices” or “by division”.

For a vote to pass on the voices, a majority of senators must call “aye” in response to the question posed by the chair.

If two or more senators challenge the chair’s conclusion about whether the “ayes” or “noes” are in the majority, a division is called.

Bells are then rung for four minutes to call senators to the chamber. The question is posed again, and senators vote by taking their place on the right or left hand side of the chair, before the votes are counted by tellers.

Voting records are only published for votes passed by division.

How has One Nation voted in 2018?

We can look to parliamentary records to test Plibersek’s claim.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party is represented in the parliament by party leader and Queensland senator Pauline Hanson, and West Australian senator Peter Georgiou. New South Wales senator Brian Burston was a One Nation senator until June 2018.

Plibersek’s comment referred to votes on the second and third readings of legislation in the full Senate, excluding procedural votes, motions and votes in Senate committees.

But votes that take place in Senate committees, after the second reading, but before the third, are also important. Much of the legislative process is done “in committee”, where various parties propose amendments to legislation, and these are voted on.

So counting only the full Senate votes on legislation as being significant, as Plibersek did, does not give the full picture.

Stages of consideration of bills in the Australian Senate.
Parliament of Australia, Brief Guides to Senate Procedure

In this FactCheck, I will consider all the divisions, from a number of different angles.

There have been 187 divisions in the Senate so far this year. Of those, One Nation:

  • voted with the Coalition on 141 occasions (or 75% of the time)
  • voted against the Coalition on 28 occasions (or 15% of the time), and
  • abstained from voting on 18 occasions (or 10% of the time).

Of the 169 divisions where One Nation voted, it was in agreement with the government 83% of the time.

But it’s important to consider the balance of power.

When the Coalition and Labor vote the same way, minor party votes do not affect the outcome. When the Coalition and Labor are in disagreement, minor party votes are all important.

There have been 110 such divisions between the Coalition and Labor in the Senate in 2018 to date.

In these 110 divisions, One Nation:

  • voted with the Coalition on 85 occasions (or 77% of the time)
  • voted against the Coalition on 14 occasions (or 13% of the time), and
  • abstained from voting on 11 occasions (10% of the time).

If we look at the 99 divisions where the Coalition and Labor were in disagreement, and One Nation cast an influential vote, we see that the party voted with the Coalition 86% of the time.

By comparison, in the 110 divisions where Labor opposed the government, the Australian Greens supported the Coalition 5% of the time, and the Centre Alliance (formerly Nick Xenophon Team) did so 56% of the time.

The calculations for the Greens and Centre Alliance above do not include abstentions and cases where the party vote was split. – Adrian Beaumont

Blind review

The author’s points and statistics appear to be all in order.

As the FactCheck shows, while One Nation has not voted with the government 100% of the time, it has supported the Coalition in a large majority of cases. – Zareh Ghazarian


The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.

The Conversation’s FactCheck unit was the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. Read more here.

The ConversationHave you seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Longman result shows Queensland vote is volatile and One Nation remains potent



File 20180730 106521 s3d9se.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
The most notable – and underestimated – aspect of the vote count in Longman was the fall in support for the Coalition.
AAP/Darren England

Chris Salisbury, The University of Queensland

As expected, the Longman by-election was the contest to watch on “Super Saturday”. But, as it turned out, it was for reasons that weren’t all anticipated.

Observers had predicted a tight race in the marginally-held seat north of Brisbane, with high poll support for Pauline Hanson’s One Nation adding to the unpredictability. Yet, Labor’s Susan Lamb defied the naysayers and secured a reassuring swing, regaining the seat she’d vacated owing to her former dual citizenship status.

For opposition leader Bill Shorten, the weekend’s byelection results provide a confidence boost and should dampen the leadership speculation that has animated sections of the media.

For Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, however, the Longman result especially (and South Australia’s Mayo to a similar extent) will prompt soul-searching in Coalition ranks ahead of the next federal election.




Read more:
View from The Hill: Malcolm Turnbull’s authority diminished after byelection failures


The most notable – and underestimated – aspect of the vote count in Longman was the fall in support for the Coalition. This flew in the face of opinion polls leading up to the byelection date, which suggested there was little between the major candidates. Warnings from election analysts about the reliability of single-seat polling might be heeded more closely in future.

The Coalition’s primary vote in Longman plunged 9.4% from the 2016 federal election, resulting in a two-party-preferred swing of 3.7% against LNP candidate Trevor Ruthenberg. While senior Coalition MPs have since put this down to an “average” anti-government swing at byelections, few in the party would have expected such a kicking in a historically conservative seat.

Ruthenberg came under scrutiny during the by-election campaign for a wrongly claimed military service medal. He also carried some baggage as MP for a nearby state seat during the single-term government of Campbell Newman. Combined, this probably turned away a number of potential voters, and contributed in part to Lamb increasing her primary vote from 35.4% to almost 40%. Queensland’s LNP faces fresh questions about its organisational and campaigning stocks following a disappointing showing at last November’s state election.

The bigger concern for the federal government is the extent to which its policies are on the nose with voters. Certainly, Labor focused much of its Longman campaign on the effects that penalty rate reductions and company tax cuts for big businesses would have on local job prospects and funding for hospitals and education services. ALP insiders were quietly confident of crafting a successful “class warfare”-style campaign in an electorate with higher than average unemployment and below average incomes.

In this respect, the Longman campaign offered a preview to the likely dimensions and key party messaging of the coming federal election campaign, expected in the first half of next year. Given the number of marginal federal seats in Queensland, this positions the state as the “battleground” where that election can be won and lost.

The fight for marginal seats

Byelection results shouldn’t, of course, be extrapolated to likely voting patterns at a general election. Many in Queensland remember John Howard’s Liberals losing a 2001 byelection for the Brisbane seat of Ryan, only to regain it comfortably at the national election later that year (aided by some notable external factors).

The Longman contest was fought on local as much as broader issues – with residents’ health, education and employment concerns front of mind for most. But these “bread and butter” issues, as well as Longman’s characterisation as a true marginal, urban fringe seat, make the fall of the votes here possibly indicative of wider trends. If the government’s intended tax cut package for large as well as smaller businesses turned off many Longman voters, it may well do so in marginal seats across the board.

In Queensland, where there is nearly a dozen such marginal seats – seven held by the Coalition – any inkling as to what might motivate voters in those electorates will be keenly sought by the major parties. The Coalition, in particular, stands to lose much if lessons can’t be drawn from voters’ messages.

After the weekend, MPs in the neighbouring electorates of Petrie (margin of 1.6%) and high-profile Dickson (held by Peter Dutton on the same margin), as well as Flynn (1%), Forde (0.6%) and Capricornia (0.6%), will be sitting more nervously in the Coalition party room.




Read more:
Super Saturday: Labor holds Braddon and easily wins Longman, while Sharkie thumps Downer in Mayo


The issues animating many Longman voters also feature in seats alongside it. Anti-government sentiment could well seep across electorate boundaries and threaten incumbents there. Notably, Dutton’s late arrival on the Longman campaign trail warning of the immigration policy “perils” of Shorten’s Labor didn’t much seem to stem the flow of votes away from Ruthenberg.

With Labor also holding a handful of marginal Queensland seats, both major parties will be conscious of shoring up an unstable vote base. It is this landscape, as much as Labor’s campaign messages about “big end of town” tax cuts, that likely determines how much the government refashions its policy agenda ahead of the federal election.

One Nation vote hurts the Coalition

One Nation’s considerable vote in Longman – almost 16% compared to the 9.4% it gained in 2016 – underlines the current strength of the minor party protest vote. Indeed, the increase in One Nation’s support in Longman came mainly at the expense of the Coalition’s candidate. In a field of eleven nominations, the next best vote was the Greens’ 4.8%.

There is residual irritation in the wider electorate about voters’ circumstances and about a perceived disconnection from their elected representatives. This alienation was again apparent in the Longman result, and signals a warning to both major parties about volatile voter sentiment in Queensland and elsewhere.

The high One Nation vote came after a more concerted and less gaffe-prone campaign, despite candidate Matthew Stephen facing persistent queries over his business history. This was achieved in the conspicuous absence of Pauline Hanson’s “star power” (dozens of cardboard cut-outs of the party leader notwithstanding).

But these circumstances are possible at a byelection more so than a general election, where One Nation’s modest resources are typically stretched. It may be that the party concentrates its federal campaigning and nominations on fewer seats so as not to spread itself too thinly (as it found to its cost at the recent Queensland election).

The ConversationThe way the party suggests its voters direct their preferences is regularly a mystery, as is how closely its voters follow those recommendations. But if One Nation focuses on the marginal seats in Queensland, those preferences might place the party in an influential position with the government on policy negotiations ahead of the next federal election.

Chris Salisbury, Research Associate, The University of Queensland

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

FactCheck: is Australia’s population the ‘highest growing in the world’?


Liz Allen, Australian National University

We’re the highest growing country in the world – with 1.6% increase, and that’s double than a lot of other countries.

– One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, interview on Sky News Australia, May 9, 2018

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has proposed a plebiscite be held in tandem with the next federal election to allow voters to have “a say in the level of migration coming into Australia”.

Hanson has suggested cutting Australia’s Migration Programme cap from the current 190,000 people per year to around 75,000-100,000 per year.

On Sky News, Hanson said Australia is “the highest growing country in the world”.

The senator added that at 1.6%, Australia’s population growth was “double [that of] a lot of other countries”.

Are those statements correct?

Checking the source

In response to The Conversation’s request for sources and comment, a spokesperson for Pauline Hanson said the senator “talks about population growth in the context of our high level of immigration because in recent years, immigration has accounted for around 60% of Australia’s population growth”.

The spokesperson added:

Australian Bureau of Statistics migration data for 2015-16 show that Australians born overseas represent 28% of the population, far higher than comparable countries like Canada (22%), UK (13%) or the US (14%).

World Bank data for 2017 show that Australia’s population growth was 1.6%, much higher than comparable countries with immigration programs like Canada (1.2%), the UK (0.6%) and the US (0.7%).


Verdict

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson was correct to say Australia’s population grew by 1.6% in the year to June 2017. But she was incorrect to say Australia is “the highest growing country in the world”.

According to the most accurate international data, the country with the fastest growing population is Oman, on the Arabian Peninsula.

Senator Hanson said Australia’s 1.6% population growth was “double than a lot of other countries”. It is fair to say that Australia’s population growth rate is double that of many other countries, including the United States (0.7%) and United Kingdom (0.7%), for example.

Since Hanson’s statement, Australia’s population growth rate for the period ending June 2017 has been revised upwards to 1.7%. But Hanson’s number was correct at the time of her statement, and the revision doesn’t change the outcome of this FactCheck.

In terms of the 35 countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Luxemberg was the fastest growing country in 2016, with Australia coming in fifth.

Caution must be used when making international population comparisons. It’s important to put the growth rates in the context of the total size, density and demographic makeup of the population, and the economic stage of the country.


How do we calculate population growth?

A country’s population growth, or decline, is determined by the change in the estimated number of residents. Those changes include the number of births and deaths (known as natural increase), and net overseas migration.

In Australia, both temporary and permanent overseas migrants are included in the calculation of population size.

According to Australian Bureau of Statistics data, Australia’s population grew by 1.6% in the year to June 2017 – as Senator Hanson said.

Since Hanson’s statement, Australia’s population growth rate for the period ending June 2017 has been revised upwards to 1.7%. But as said in the verdict, Hanson’s number was correct at the time of her statement, and the revision doesn’t change any of the other outcomes of this FactCheck.

That’s an increase of 407,000 people in a population of 24.6 million.

All states and territories saw positive population growth in the year to June 2017, with Victoria recording the fastest growth rate (2.4%), and South Australia recording the slowest growth rate (0.6%).




Read more:
FactCheck: is South Australia’s youth population rising or falling?


Is Australia’s population the ‘highest growing in the world’?

No, it’s not.

There are different ways of reporting population data.

Population projections are statements about future populations based on certain assumptions regarding the future of births, deaths and migration.

Population estimates are statistics based on data from a population for a previous time period. Population estimates provide a more accurate representation of actual dynamics.

World Bank data for 2016 (based on population estimates) provide us with the most accurate international comparison.

According to those data, Australia’s growth rate – 1.5% for 2016 – placed it at 86th in the world. The top 10 ranked countries grew by between 3-5%.

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/xmNEi/9/

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/QHYfE/5/

How does Australia’s growth compare to other OECD countries?

Comparison of Australia’s average annual population growth with other OECD countries shows Australia’s rate of population growth is among the highest in the OECD, but not the highest.

This is true whether we look at annual averages for five year bands between 1990 and 2015, or single year data.

Looking again at the World Bank data, Australia’s rate of population growth for 2016, at 1.5%, was double that of many other OECD countries, including the United Kingdom (0.7%) and United States (0.7%).

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/L8bMM/4/

Permanent vs temporary migration levels

Hanson has proposed a national vote on what she describes as Australia’s “run away rates of immigration”.

The senator has suggested reducing Australia’s Migration Programme cap from the current level of 190,000 people per year to 75-100,000 people per year. The expected intake of 190,000 permanent migrants was not met over the last few years. Permanent migration for 2017-18 has dropped to 162,400 people, due to changes in vetting processes.

The greatest contribution to the growth of the Australian population (63%) currently comes from overseas migration, as Hanson’s office noted in their response to The Conversation.

The origin countries of migrants are becoming more diverse, posing socioeconomic benefits and infrastructure challenges for Australia.

Sometimes people confuse net overseas migration (the total of all people moving in and out of Australia in a certain time frame), with permanent migration (the number of people who come to Australia to live). They are not the same thing.

Net overseas migration includes temporary migration. And net overseas migration is included in population data. This means our population growth reflects our permanent population, plus more.

Temporary migrants are a major contributor to population growth in Australia – in particular, international students.

In the most recent data (2014-15), net temporary migrants numbered just under 132,000, a figure that included just over 77,000 net temporary students.

The international student market is Australia’s third largest export.

Looking back at Australia’s population growth

Population changes track the history of the nation. This includes events like post-war rebuilding – including the baby boom and resettlement of displaced European nationals – to subsequent fluctuations in birth rates, and net overseas migration.

We can see these events reflected in the rates of growth from 1945 to the present.

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/urTQB/3/

The rate of population growth in Australia increased markedly in 2007, before peaking at 2.1% in 2009 (after the height of the global financial crisis, in which the Australian economy fared better than many others).

Since 2009, annual population growth has bounced around between a low of 1.4% and a high of 1.8%.

The longer term average for population growth rates since 1947 is 1.6% (the same as it is currently).

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CHC8w/1/

Interpreting population numbers

It’s worth remembering that a higher growth rate per annum coming from a lower population base is usually still lower growth in terms of actual numbers of people, when compared to a lower growth rate on a higher population base.

There can also be significant fluctuations in population growth rates from year to year – so we need to use caution when making assessments based on changes in annual rates.

Economic factors, government policies, and special events are just some of the things that can influence year-on-year population movements.

Other factors we should consider when making international comparisons include the:

  • total size of the population
  • population density
  • demographic composition, or age distribution, of the population, and
  • the economic stage of the country (for example, post industrialisation or otherwise).

Any changes to the migration program should be considered alongside the best available research. – Liz Allen


Blind review

The FactCheck is fair and correct.

The statement about Australia’s population growth rate over the year to June 30, 2017, is correct. The preliminary growth rate published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics at the time of Senator Hanson’s statement was 1.60%; the rate was subsequently revised to 1.68%.

It is also true that many developed countries have lower population growth rates than Australia, but some have higher rates. According to United Nations Population Division population estimates, Oman had the fastest growing population between 2014 and 2015 (the latest data available).

With regards to misinterpretations of net overseas migration, it should also be stated that some people think this refers to the number of people migrating to Australia. It is actually immigration minus emigration – the difference between the number arriving and the number leaving. – Tom Wilson


The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.

The Conversation’s FactCheck unit was the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. Read more here.

The ConversationHave you seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.

Liz Allen, Demographer, ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods, Australian National University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Super Saturday: Labor holds Braddon and easily wins Longman, while Sharkie thumps Downer in Mayo



File 20180728 106499 1nsf1ky.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1
Labor’s strong showing in its seats and the Liberals’ generally poor performance will be a huge fillip to Bill Shorten.
AAP/Dan Peled

Adrian Beaumont, University of Melbourne

Federal byelections were held in five seats on Saturday, four Labor-held and one held by the Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie. Labor and Sharkie retained all of their seats. I will go through these seats starting with the closest.

In the Tasmanian seat of Braddon, Labor’s Justine Keay defeated the Liberals’ Brett Whiteley by a 52.7-47.3 margin, a 0.5% swing to Labor since the 2016 election. Primary votes were 38.9% Liberal (down 2.7%), 37.0% Labor (down 3.0%), 11.0% for independent Craig Garland, 4.8% for the Shooters and 4.0% for the Greens (down 2.8%).

In the Queensland seat of Longman, Labor’s Susan Lamb defeated the LNP’s Trevor Ruthenberg by an emphatic 55.4-44.6 margin, a 4.6% swing to Labor. Primary votes were 40.7% Labor (up 5.3%), 28.6% LNP (down a large 10.4%), 16.1% One Nation (up 6.7%) and 5.0% Greens (up 0.6%). The LNP’s drop was 3.7% greater than One Nation’s gain.

In the South Australian seat of Mayo, Sharkie defeated the Liberals’ Georgina Downer by a massive 58.6-41.4 margin, a 3.6% swing to Sharkie. Primary votes were 45.2% Sharkie (up 10.3%), 36.3% Liberal (down 1.5%), 9.4% Greens (up 1.4%) and 6.0% Labor (down 7.6%). Sharkie is a popular incumbent, while Downer’s candidacy had problems.




Read more:
Poll wrap: Coalition’s record Newspoll losing streak, and Rebekha Sharkie has large lead in Mayo


With the Liberals not contesting, the Western Australian seats of Perth and Fremantle were easily retained by Labor with over 62% of the two-party vote against the Greens. Perth was the only Super Saturday byelection to be caused by the resignation of the sitting member; in the other four byelections, the sitting member successfully recontested after resigning due to the citizenship fiasco.

Postal votes have not yet been counted in any of the byelections, and they are likely to help the Liberals. In particular, the small swing to Labor in Braddon will probably become a small Liberal swing when postals are added.

Seat polls slightly understated the Labor vote in Braddon, and slightly overstated Sharkie’s vote in Mayo once postals are factored in. In Longman, there was a large error, with two polls taken in the penultimate week both giving the LNP a 51-49 lead. A Newspoll taken in the final days gave Labor a 51-49 lead, but Labor is likely to win at least 54% of the two party vote after postals.




Read more:
As Super Saturday nears, Labor gains poll lead in Braddon, but trails in Longman, while UK Tories slump


I believe Labor’s relatively poor performance in Bradddon is probably due to Tasmanian factors, in particular state Labor’s large loss at the March Tasmanian election.

These byelection results will be a huge boost for Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, who has been under pressure owing to poor head-to-head polling vs Malcolm Turnbull, especially as Labor’s national lead has narrowed. Shorten is now very likely to lead Labor to the next election.

At the June 2017 UK general election and the July 2018 Mexican presidential elections, left-wing leaders, respectively Jeremy Corbyn and Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), were well-known to the public before the election campaign began. Corbyn and AMLO both made big gains in the polls during the campaign, then outperformed their polls on election day.




Read more:
Conservatives suffer shock loss of majority at UK general election


In late May, Sky News ReachTEL polls gave the Liberals a 54-46 lead in Braddon and a 52-48 lead in Longman. The results in these byelections could be a sign that Australia may follow the UK and Mexico. Although Turnbull and the Coalition have substantially reduced Labor’s lead in the national polls, it could be a different story as the election approaches.




Read more:
ReachTEL polls: Labor trailing in Longman and Braddon, and how Senate changes helped the Coalition


National Ipsos: 51-49 to Labor (50-50 respondent allocated)

A national Ipsos poll, conducted for the Fairfax papers on July 18-21 from a sample of 1,200, gave Labor a 51-49 lead, a two-point gain for the Coalition since late June. Primary votes were 39% Coalition (up four), 34% Labor (down one), 12% Greens (steady) and 6% One Nation (steady).

The respondent allocated preference measure showed a 50-50 tie, a reversion to the normal pattern where the Coalition does a point better in respondent allocated preferences than last election preferences. In June, respondent allocated preferences had Labor ahead by 54-46.

55% approved of Turnbull’s performance (up five), and 38% disapproved (down six), for a net rating of +17, up 11 points. Shorten’s net approval dropped three points to -16. Turnbull led Shorten by a massive 57-30 as better PM (51-33 in June).

Both Turnbull’s approval rating and his better PM rating were his highest since March 2016. While Ipsos gives Turnbull better ratings than other polls, these ratings for Turnbull are still very strong.

The ConversationLabor led the Coalition by 48-41 on health (50-35 in June 2016). Labor also led on education 49-42 (51-37 previously) and the environment 49-35 (46-28). The Coalition led on the economy 60-33 (58-29), and on asylum seekers 45-41 (47-32 previously).

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Crucial Super Saturday Labor victories a major fillip for Shorten


Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

Bill Shorten has received a major boost from the Super Saturday byelections, retaining the crucial seats of Braddon and Longman and putting his hold on the Labor leadership beyond any doubt.

A triumphant Shorten, appearing on Saturday night with a victorious Susan Lamb in Longman, declared: “What a great night for the Labor party! What a great night for Labor women candidates!” Labor had won “four from four” of its seats in the Super Saturday contests.

Late Saturday night, on counting so far, Lamb led the Liberal National Party’s Trevor Ruthenberg by 55-45% on the two-party vote – a swing to Labor of about 4%.

The Liberal National Party primary vote plunged in the Queensland seat by around 10 percentage points, to about 28%, a big concern for the government in what will be a vital state at next year’s election. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation polled 15% – six percentage points higher than at the last election.

The ALP’s Justine Keay in Tasmania’s Braddon had a two-party lead of 52-48% over her Liberal opponent Brett Whiteley, almost no change from 2016.

The Liberals received a whipping in the South Australian seat of Mayo, where crossbencher Rebekha Sharkie held off a challenge from the Liberals’ Georgina Downer. Sharkie was leading 58-42% on the two-party vote, a swing towards her of about 3%.

In the other two contests, Fremantle and Perth in Western Australia, where the Liberals did not run, the ALP has predictably held its seats. Josh Wilson has been returned in Fremantle. Patrick Gorman, a one-time staffer to Kevin Rudd, is the new member for Perth, replacing Tim Hammond, who quit for family reasons.

Apart from Perth all the byelections were caused by the MPs having to resign in the citizenship crisis.

The Braddon and Longman outcomes dash the hopes of ALP frontbencher Anthony Albanese of wresting the opposition leadership from Shorten. Albanese had positioned himself in recent weeks in case the ALP had bad results.

The results also scotch any possibility of a premature election, although Malcolm Turnbull has always been adamant the poll will be next year.

Both government and Labor put enormous effort and resources into the battles in Longman and Braddon, with multiple visits by Shorten and Turnbull.

Despite it talking down expectations, the results are a deep disappointment for the government, which had hoped it might snatch at least one of Braddon or Longman, and at the start of the campaign had hopes of winning Mayo although it quickly gave these up.

Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen tweeted: “Malcolm Turnbull said these by-elections were a referendum on leadership. Labor is winning four and the Libs can’t regain the formerly safe seat of Mayo”.

The president of the Queensland Liberal National Party, Gary Spence said of the Longman outcome: “It wasn’t the result we were hoping for”; it was “somewhat of a disappointing result”.

He said it reflected that the Australian people were over the citizenship issues and wanted to pay respect to the 2016 election result. Other reasons included that byelection history was against the government, and Labor, with its leader under pressure, had spent a huge amount on advertising in the final week, Spence said.

Conceding in Longman, Ruthenberg said it had been “a strange election – in that while I have lost, the community will still benefit from the commitments I’ve been able to secure from the Prime Minister and his team of ministers.”

Liberal backbencher Trent Zimmerman, reflecting the government’s line, claimed on the ABC that the government had “done very well”, containing the swing.

In her victory speech Sharkie, from the Centre Alliance which was formerly the Nick Xenophon Team, said her win was “because of people power”. She said it showed “you don’t need huge wads of money”, “you don’t need huge political machines”. She had been “crushed” the day she resigned, “but today is really sweet”.

Among her thanks, she paid tribute to former senator Nick Xenophon, saying he had given her a chance in 2016, when she won the seat.

The ConversationDowner said that “a byelection is always tough for a government”. Liberals expect Downer to run again for the seat at next year’s election. Senator Anne Ruston told the Liberal campaign function: “ I have no doubt one day Georgina will be the member for Mayo”.

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.