Roy Morgan and Essential Research polls

A new federal poll from Roy Morgan records a narrower Labor lead than Newspoll, but an apparently wider gender gap.

Two further polls in the wake of the weekend Newspoll, including voting intention numbers from Roy Morgan and its regularly conducted but irregularly published federal polling series. This shows Labor with a 50.5-49.5 lead on two-party preferred, unchanged from the last such poll a month ago, from primary votes of Coalition 41% (up one), Labor 34.5% (unchanged), Greens 12.5% (down half a point) and One Nation 2.5% (down one). The poll was conducted online and by telephone over the previous two weekends, from a sample of 2747.

The accompanying release takes a deep dive into gender breakdowns in light of recent events, as The Australian did yesterday with recent Newspoll data, which you can read about as an update at the bottom of this post. Whereas The Australian came up empty, Morgan tells us of a 4.3% differential in Coalition two-party preferred between April 2020 and early February (53.5% among men, 49.3% among women), but a 6.2% differential since late February (52.8% among men, 46.5% among women).

There is also the regular fortnightly Essential Research poll which includes the pollster’s monthly reading of leadership ratings. These have Scott Morrison down three on approval to 62% and up one on approval to 29%, Anthony Albanese up one to 41% and down one to 32%, and Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister narrowing slightly from 52-24 to 52-26.

Concerning recent rape allegations, 37% agree with Scott Morrison’s contention that an inquiry into the Christian Porter matter would “say the rule of law and our police are not competent to deal with these issues”, with 33% disagreeing. Sixty-seven per cent felt it was “time women were believed when they say they have been assaulted”, but 62% also felt that “because the charge of rape is so serious, the burden of proof needs to be high” – a difficult circle to square. Fifty-five per cent felt there needed to be an independent investigation compared with 45% who favoured an alternative proposition that “the police has said they will not be pressing charges and that should be the end of the matter”.

Regular questions on COVID-19 management find federal and state governments recovering ground that most had lost in the previous result a fortnight ago. The federal government’s good rating is up eight to 70% and its poor rating is down two to 12%. For the state governments, New South Wales’ good rating is up three to 75%, Victoria’s is up thirteen to 62%, Queensland is up two to 75%, Western Australia is up six to 91% and South Australia is up to 85%. For the small states especially, caution is required due to small sample sizes (though the WA result may be the highest yet recorded anywhere, which would be neat timing if so).

Also featured is an occasional suite of questions on trust in institutions, which finds 66% expressing a lot of or some trust in state and territory governments, up six points six August, and 72% doing so for border security agencies, up five. Other institutions record little change except the print media, which already rated poorly and is now down four points to 35%. The poll also found 38% support for an aged care levy with 30% opposed. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Monday from a sample of 1124.

Newspoll, Essential and Roy Morgan between them have amounted to a healthy infusion of data for the BludgerTrack poll aggregates, which you can see summarised on the sidebar and in much greater detail here. Labor is now credited with a 51.2-48.8 lead on two-party preferred, following a dead heat when the numbers were last updated three weeks ago.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

2,519 comments on “Roy Morgan and Essential Research polls”

Comments Page 8 of 51
1 … 7 8 9 … 51

  1. See Labor. Be loud challenge the narrative.

    @AmyRemeikis tweets
    Scott Morrison confirms the government is reviewing the recommendation domestic violence victims can access their super, after very loud concerns it will leave (mostly) women worse off financially.

  2. Honestly, the way Lib Lab and Greens partisans carry on, finding a decent Independent on the ballot is easily more appealing.

  3. guytaur says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 3:12 pm
    N

    Again let’s rip the lie that the Greens are not progressive

    Tells you everything about his political view

    The Greens are progressive in the same way that Clive Palmer is pro-worker.


  4. N says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 3:17 pm

    Labor voted to increase the benefit. The Greens voted against it. This is a binary choice. Yes/No. The Greens voted No. This is straight from Bob Brown Politician’s Almanac. The Greens will never willingly align themselves with Labor. Whenever possible they position themselves to blame/attack/deride Labor. I hope the day comes when Labor put them next to last on their HTV’s.

    What is worst, they are willing to risk further damaging the poor just so they can play their pathetic little games. Ya the Liberals aren’t great but the greens are willing to do further damage. They really are the lowest of the low.

  9. @deniseshrivell tweets
    What does Chris Uhlmann like about LNP so much?

    Is it their in plain sight corruption, climate change denialism, keeping people in indefinite detention?

    Maybe their policies keeping people in poverty?

    Hard to choose #auspol #qt

  10. guytaur says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 3:21 pm
    N

    Your lie just shows your stupidity

    Voters in WA have woken up to the Greens. Their vote has fallen by half since the 2008 State election. Not only are they imposters as progressives, they are GINO – Green in Name Only.

    In last weekend’s election, the Greens lost 3/4 seats. These seats have gone to Labor, who also won seats from the other Tories, the Liberals and Nationals. As a result, democratic reform of the Legislative Council will probably be enacted.

    The Greens are an obstruction to progress in this country. The sooner their support evaporates the better.

  12. “But Adam Bandt is a man with the ethics of a snake, and will vote against even a meagre $5 a day raise in order to maintain his idiotic sense of political purity.”

    The Coalition’s insulting amount is actually around $3.50 a day, not $5 (that would be an increase of $70/fn not $50). Since that’s such a pathetically small number and is accompanied by extra requirements that will impose further costs on JobSeekers, it really isn’t an increase at all. People will be worse off.

    Make no mistake, Labor has voted to hurt those on JobSeeker today, not help them. They voted against a raise to $80 a day and for more Coalition cruelty. It’s absolutely shameful.

    “That is your problem right there, basic arithmetic. How Labor votes has real world consequences. Bandt on the other hand, can pretend all day long that one plus one equals three, and it matters not a bit.”

    Yep, it does matter, and Labor voted to hurt those on JobSeeker today by imposing more burdens on them which will leave them worse off. They should not have voted for it at all. It’s a terrible policy. People will be worse off because Labor backed the Coalition.

    Oh, and lets not forget that this is also the very same Labor Party that voted with the Coalition to give tax cuts to billionaires. Punishing the poor while propping up the rich elite – that’s the Labor way.

  13. guytaur @ #358 Wednesday, March 17th, 2021 – 2:55 pm

    @deniseshrivell tweets
    What does Chris Uhlmann like about LNP so much?

    Is it their in plain sight corruption, climate change denialism, keeping people in indefinite detention?

    Maybe their policies keeping people in poverty?

    Hard to choose #auspol #qt

    They are players. Every journo has a bias, but impartial reporting is becoming rare. Insiders by name, players by nature.

  14. BW: “Fact: Labor wants a much bigger increase”

    For all the accusations of dishonesty being thrown by labor partisans, they should at least practice some honesty of their own and acknowledge a couple of uncomfortable truths – namely:

    1. Fact: labor are refusing to nominate exactly how much increase they want
    2. Fact: labor are too gutless to even agree that it should be at least above the poverty rate

    and the most uncomfortable truth of all:

    3. Fact: labor are voting for the government’s increase not because ‘something is better than nothing’ – but because they simply want the issue to go away, and so they don’t have to take an atual principled stand and take it to the election.

    As I said before, Labor could easily have taken a principled stand and nominated a more suitable increase and taken it to the election *WHILE AT THE SAME TIME* not obstructed the pathetic increase by the government – thus maintaining their “something’s better than nothing” stance. Partisans are lying, plain and simple, by claiming it can only be one or the other.

  16. Guytaur if Labor abstained the increase would have gone through and the MSM and the Libs would have their narrative, Labor didn’t support this increase. Labor don’t want our poorest to have a rise. Labor BAD BAD BAD

  17. guytaur says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 3:29 pm
    N

    There is the arrogance McGowan warned Labor against.

    This is not arrogance.

    The record is that since 2008 in State elections the Green PV has declined by about half. Their vote at the recent election was reduced to 6% of the total. One of the reasons their vote has declined is because of the substance of their campaigns, which are Labor-hostile at every turn. Voters are thoroughly disenchanted with that.

    If anyone is arrogant here, it is the Greens, who, like the Liberals, think their lies don’t count. They do count. They have wanted to have their cake and to eat it. Too bad. They blew it. Voters have figured them out.

  18. Assantdj

    See Biden popularity for what the increase would mean.

    It’s the same arguments the LNP used against Rudd too. If your argument is the Bandt increase becoming reality is bad for Labor I have a bridge to sell you.

  19. The next Labor government WILL increase Jobseeker by far more than the next Greens government. Unless the Greens block it in the Senate in order to grandstand.
    You never do know with the Greens.

  20. Bandt tried a stunt and it failed. It is precisely because the GINOs try such tricks that they’re in trouble in the electorate. They are too smart by half. Voters get that.

  21. “Guytaur if Labor abstained the increase would have gone through and the MSM and the Libs would have their narrative, Labor didn’t support this increase. Labor don’t want our poorest to have a rise. Labor BAD BAD BAD”

    Labor should have supported the Greens amendment, then they could have voted against the Coalition’s cruelty but would have still been able to make the argument that they voted to increase JobSeeker, as the Greens now can.

    Instead, Labor opposed lifting people out of poverty and supported the Coalition’s terrible policy of punishment. Terrible decision.

  22. One very useful outcome of the past few years is that the Greens no longer bother lying about how they are there to help Labor. That lie is past the Greens’ use-by date.

  24. Big A Adrian says:
    Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 3:33 pm

    Labor do not have to play in the GINO’s sandpit. They should stay right out of the chicanery and the deceptions.

  25. There is absolutely no point in Labor nominating their figure for JobSeeker when the Greens might succeed in keeping Labor out of power for another nine years.

  30. Labor are not going to block an increase in Jobseeker payments but theres no doubt they would have increased it more but they are NOT in government to do so.

  32. “Guytaur if Labor abstained the increase would have gone through and the MSM and the Libs would have their narrative, Labor didn’t support this increase.”

    Jesus, how difficult is it to say “…because we want the increase to be more!”

    You then follow up by saying “we abstained so as to not obstruct the bill because we know something is better than nothing”

    You could then, if you’re feeling really fiesty, even nominate an actual figure for what *YOU* think is an appropriate increase, argue the case and take it to the election.

    What part of that strategy is actually wrong? Oh thats right, the whole “taking a real stand supporting the poor and unemployed and taking it to an election” bit.

  33. In a tradition that dates back to 13th C England* and cemented in 1642 when Charles 1 entered the Commons with soldiers to effect the arrest of five members, a newly elected Speaker is dragged to his/her Chair in parliaments based on the Westminster model. The latest, rather odd, iteration of this tradition is to be found here:

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/berejiklian-s-pick-for-coveted-position-dealt-significant-blow-after-losing-vote-20210317-p57bjt.html

    * [‘This tradition dates back to the times when the Speaker’s function was to communicate the Commons’ opinions to the monarch.

    Often, if the monarch did not agree with the messages being communicated by the Commons, it would result in the early death of the Speaker.’]

  34. Big A Adrian
    Why would Labor nominate a figure now?
    Supposing the Greens succeed in nobbling Labor again, who knows what the Budget is going to be like in nine year’s time?

  35. Labor is not in government and therefore there is no point in naming a figure for “Jobseeker” now. What if the whole program was changed? These silly accusations are just anti-Labor rhetoric.

  37. Guytaur
    What makes you think that the increase would have been passed in the lower house. The current rate would have remained because the government would not have had time to send it to the lower house and back to the senate because the delay would give them a narrative which is better for them . They would then say Labor didn’t support the rise.
    Politics is about perception and power, any narrative that helps to sell the LNP ‘s narrative of choice can and will be used always by the current government. Labor cannot win power and affect positive change if it allows itself to be seen to be against the very people it most wants to help.

  38. No matter what number Labor nominate, the Greens will find fault with it. This is the recipe for GINO politics: attack Labor. The GINOs are irrelevant to Labor. Utterly irrelevant. The less attention given to the GINOs the better it will go for Labor.

  39. Shellbell wrote:

    I suppose one day we might find out on what terms Kate’s dossier was delivered to the media and whether it has been handled in accordance with those terms (if any).

    The dossier was delivered accompanied by an anonymous cover letter.

    Porter’s statement of claim stops not too far short of hinting that he’s not convinced “Anonymous” wasn’t Milligan herself, or someone she knew quite well.

    The relevant particular reads:

    “p) Milligan claims to have received a copy of the dossier from ‘friends of AB’ on Thursday 25 February 2021. “

    This, to me, is a funny way of discussing when Milligan received the document, unless you think something’s not quite as it appears.

    In a couple of other places he alleges Milligan was in close personal contact with “Kate’s” friends.

    Elsewhere, Porter outright accuses Milligan of orchestrating the whole affair because she was frustrated at not being able to run the story back in November. He also accuses her of selectively quoting from “Kate’s” dossier.

  40. Lizzie

    Labor can nominate $80 a day minimum figure. Poverty line.

    It’s simple. However if they had supported ending the punitive measures by using the power of veto they could have convinced Jacqui Lambie

    It’s not like Labor could not put their own motion up.

  42. Peter Khalil MP
    @PeterKhalilMP
    ·
    36m

    Will correct that our position should be known ahead of next election but I do not think is right to play games in house and senate with amendments that cannot pass & then wld delay passage of this bill into law and effectively delay or block small increase to people who need it.

  44. @andrewwhite tweets

    Rusted-ons accusing Zali Steggall of being a conservative stooge as she votes AGAINST government policy that LABOR IS SUPPORTING. This is a religion and it is a sickness.

  45. From The Shovel.

    Paul Syvret
    @PSyvret
    ·
    7h
    Dyson Launches New ‘Scott Morrison’ Range, “The World’s Most Impressive Leadership Vacuum”

  46. Big A Adrian @ #381 Wednesday, March 17th, 2021 – 3:46 pm

    “Guytaur if Labor abstained the increase would have gone through and the MSM and the Libs would have their narrative, Labor didn’t support this increase.”

    Jesus, how difficult is it to say “…because we want the increase to be more!”

    You then follow up by saying “we abstained so as to not obstruct the bill because we know something is better than nothing”

    You could then, if you’re feeling really fiesty, even nominate an actual figure for what *YOU* think is an appropriate increase, argue the case and take it to the election.

    What part of that strategy is actually wrong? Oh thats right, the whole “taking a real stand supporting the poor and unemployed and taking it to an election” bit.

    No, it’s the knowledge that Labor’s words are rarely reported with honesty or in such detail, nor with the repetitiveness that the opposite point of Labor not voting for an increase, any increase would be pushed by the media which is always seeking a wedge to push against Labor.

    Anyway, Labor have already stated that the increase they would mandate, if in government would equate to the Poverty Line in Australia, automatically indexed.

    So that’s enough for the silly back and forth with the irrelevant Greens and Cross bench representatives. The point has been clearly made enough already.

    Greens for $0 per fortnight increase in JobSeeker
    Labor for $50 per fortnight increase to JobSeeker

    In the real world.

  47. lizzie @ #389 Wednesday, March 17th, 2021 – 3:57 pm

    Peter Khalil MP
    @PeterKhalilMP
    ·
    36m

    Will correct that our position should be known ahead of next election but I do not think is right to play games in house and senate with amendments that cannot pass & then wld delay passage of this bill into law and effectively delay or block small increase to people who need it.

    …and people wonder why Labor can’t beat the muppet show

    Khalil is now known as the double muppet Khalil.

    What a hack this bloke is.

  48. Jobseeker does need to be raised but so does the rent allowance (also applies to other benefits) and probably a case for a transport allowance. The total effect of all this is what is important.

    There is a risk of leaving some recipients in a very different situation because of different personal circumstances.

  49. The Jobseeker payment does have a few problems that are not strictly related to the rate.
    One is housing, if you live in a home you own the baseline payment only has to cover bills including rates and day to day expenses. If you live in a rental you get a set rent rebate to assist with rental costs and your payment has to cover the rental difference and day to,day costs. If you are unfortunate enough to be buying your home you have to cover your mortgage and all other expenses but don’t get any rental assistance. Your option is sell and rent or more likely have your home repossessed if you can’t get a job.
    I thought I read somewhere that rather than just looking at an increase in the payment Labor is looking at all the implications of being unemployed and addressing the problem more comprehensively.

Comments Page 8 of 51
1 … 7 8 9 … 51

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *