Category: Federal Politics 2022-2025

Three slabs of minor polling news in lieu of what I’d consider a proper federal opinion poll:

• The quarterly JWS Research True Issues survey of issue salience finds concerns about the cost of living have shot up since March, with 38% choosing it as one of the three issues the federal government should be most focused on, up from 16%. This pushes hospitals, health care and ageing to second place, down from 37% to 34%. Twenty per cent think the national economy headed in the right direction, down eight points since March, compared with 33% for wrong direction, up three, maintaining a downward trend going back to early last year. The new federal government scores 54% on an index score for its general performance, meaning it scored very slightly above par overall on a measure where respondents were asked to rank it on a five-point scale, which compares with 47% for the previous government in March. The survey was conducted August 12 to 15 from a sample of 1000.

• SEC Newgate’s monthly Mood of the Nation attitudinal polling, conducted from a sample of 1800, finds 47% consider the federal government is doing a good to excellent job, up eight points since June. Fifty-seven per cent expressed support for an indigenous voice to parliament, down one on May, with opposition at 19%, up three. There was a ten-point increase in positivity towards “Australia transitioning its electricity generation to renewables” since June, now at 70%, with 12% negatively disposed, down seven.

• Roy Morgan’s weekly update video informs us that its polling conducted from August 22 to 28 had Labor’s lead at 52-48, in from 53-47 a week earlier and a good deal narrower than recent results from Newspoll and Resolve Strategic. Primary votes are Labor 36% (down one-and-a-half), Coalition 39.5% (up one), Greens 10.5% (down one) and One Nation 4% (up one-and-a-half).

The Age/Herald has also trickled out the further results from last week’s Resolve Strategic poll:

• The government’s legislated target of a 43% reduction in carbon emissions was supported by 62%, including 27% who strongly supported it, and opposed by 19%, including 10% who were strongly opposed.

• The 500 New South Wales respondents from the poll included 56% who reckoned John Barilaro’s trade commissioner appointment a case of “jobs for the boys”, compared with only 14% for the alternative option that he was a worthy candidate in a fair process, and 45% who felt Dominic Perrottet had handled the matter badly compared with 27% who thought he had handled it well.

• The 500 Victorian respondents included 42% who credited state Labor with greater integrity and honesty compared with 21% for the Coalition, and 53% who expected Labor to win the election compared with 18% for the Coalition.

• Only 7% expect COVID-19 numbers to increase in the coming months, down from 20% in March; 33% expect roughly the same numbers “perhaps for months/years”, down six from March; and 42% expect numbers to decrease, up from 28%, which includes 25% who thought they would later come back again, up from 18%.

The Age/Herald today brings its first Resolve Strategic poll federal poll since the election, which I count as the third set of fully published federal poll results since the election, together with one Newspoll and one Roy Morgan (so not counting various sketchily reported Roy Morgan results over the last few weeks). This is by some distance Labor’s best result of the three, crediting them with 42% of the primary vote (compared with 32.6% at the election, 37% from Newspoll and 36% from Morgan), the Coalition with 28% (35.7% at the election, 33% from Newspoll, 37% from Roy Morgan), the Greens with 12% (12.3% at the election), One Nation with 5% (5.0%), the United Australia Party with 2% (4.1%), independents with 8% (5.3%) and others with 3%.

Resolve Strategic does not provide two-party preferred results, but my calculation based on flows from the recent election, matched by that of Kevin Bonham, has Labor with a lead of 61.3-38.7, compared with 52.1-47.9 at the election, 56-44 from Newspoll and 53-47 from Roy Morgan (which is also about where Morgan’s sketchily reported recent polls have had it). As with its pre-election polling, Resolve provides breakdowns for the three largest states, which by my calculation produce Labor two-party leads of 60.1-39.9 in New South Wales (51.4-48.6 at the election), 64.2-35.8 in Victoria (54.8-45.2) and 59.1-40.9 in Queensland (reversing a 54.0-46.0 advantage at the election).

Anthony Albanese records an approval rating of 61% (combining responses of very good and good), the same as his result from Newspoll, and a disapproval rating of 22% (very poor plus poor), compared with Newspoll’s 26%. Peter Dutton respectively comes in at 30% and 37%, whereas Newspoll had it at 37% and 41%, consistent with its tendency to produce lower uncommitted ratings. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 2011.

The Guardian reports the fortnightly Essential Research poll asked voters to rank both leaders on a ten-point scale, which found 43% scoring Anthony Albanese between seven and ten, 23% rating him between zero and three and the rest rating him between four and six. Peter Dutton was ranked positively by 26%, negatively by 34% and neutral by the rest. The poll also found 80% believed governments should take an active role in the economy compared with only 20% who believed who believed it should leave things to the market, reflected in further findings of 70% support for government-imposed limits on prices for essential services such as energy, with only 7% opposed, and 61% in favour of taxes on companies that make additional profits due to rising inflation, with unopposed specified. It also found 47% in favour of higher skilled migration, with 18% opposed. The poll had a sample of 1065 and was, I assume, conducted from Wednesday to Sunday – the full report should be published on the pollster’s website later today. UPDATE: Full results here.

We have also had from Ipsos a global poll on attitudes to abortion, which finds 45% of Australians believe abortion should be legal in all cases and 25% legal in most, compared with 6% for illegal in all cases and 9% for illegal in most. The respect combined results for the 27 countries surveyed were 30% and 29%, and 10% and 16% – Australians were roughly as Liberal as those in most European countries except Sweden and France, and more so than Americans, Latin Americans and Asians.

That Scott Morrison’s secret assumption of various ministerial offices in 2020 and 2021 was a bad thing is matter of uncommonly unanimous agreement. It violated many of the precepts of our system of government, even if they were not the ones that are legally enforceable by virtue of being written down. While most of the powers he assumed were not acted upon, Morrison did scuttle a gas project off the coast of Newcastle against the wishes of Keith Pitt, whom the public and parliament understood to be the one and only Minister for Energy, and his colleagues in the Nationals. This Morrison was able to do without going through the appropriate channel of overruling Pitt in cabinet, making it distinctly the act of a President rather than a Prime Minister.

The more contentious question is the extent to which the Governor-General, David Hurley, erred not only in signing the instruments that conferred the ministerial offices upon Morrison, but in passively acquiescing to Morrison’s determination to keep the matter quiet even from the affected ministers. In a statement issued on Wednesday, Hurley said he had “no reason to believe that appointments would not be communicated”. A common sense response would seem to be that this might have made sense when Morrison was appointment to the health and finance portfolios in March 2020, but not when he further assumed industry, science, energy and resources in April 2021 and home affairs and Treasury a month after.

However, Anne Twomey, professor of constitutional law at the University of Sydney, stressed in the Financial Review that the publication of ministerial appointments is a convention rather than a legal requirement, however unfortunate a state of affairs that may be. The Australian quoted another academic authority on constitutional law, Greg Craven, offering the orthodox view that Hurley was “bound by constitutional convention” to follow the advice of the Prime Minister, with whom the responsibility lies entirely.

Anthony Albanese would seem to concur, although it might be thought he is doing so with a view to keeping the heat concentrated on the Coalition. For what it’s worth, it seems clear to me that Gough Whitlam would agree if he were alive today, given his vehemence about the Governor-General’s duty to act exclusively on the advice of the Prime Minister. A former Prime Minister with a contrary view is Malcolm Turnbull, who said he was “astonished that the Governor-General was party to it”.

Writing in The Guardian, Jenny Hocking, emeritus professor at Monash University and author of multiple books on Gough Whitlam and his dismissal, describes Hurley’s actions and inactions as “troubling” and says he “must now consider his position”. Hocking draws attention to the following passage from the parliamentary handbook:

The approval of the Governor-General to the composition of the Ministry, the creation of departments, the allocation of portfolios and any ministerial and departmental change is notified publicly and announced in the House. The principal areas of departmental responsibility and enactments administered by the respective Ministers are notified publicly by order of the Governor-General.

The first of these sentences unhelpfully lacks a direct subject, but Hurley is evidently of the view that it falls to the government to follow through here. A footnote clarifies that the second sentence refers to the Administrative Arrangements Order, which lays out in general terms which ministers have which powers derived from various acts of parliament. A more transparently minded Prime Minister might have availed himself of the powers he desired through a change to this instrument, but Morrison’s adoption of already established ministerial powers left it undisturbed. In any case, Hocking indicates that Hurley would have been correct not to have made a public announcement if directly advised to that effect by the Prime Minister, and says he “should now make this clear”.

Roy Morgan’s weekly update reveals that its latest voting intention figures have Labor’s two-party lead out from 52.5-47.5 to 53-47, but does not treat us to primary vote numbers on this occasion. If I’m reading the blurry fine print correctly, the polling was conducted from August 8 to 14. Assuming Newspoll has resumed its previously established schedule of a poll of every three weeks, that should be along with us on Sunday evening.

Also of note:

• An article in Crikey last week provided details from YouGov’s Co-operative Election Survey panel survey, conducting during the campaign from May 2 to 18 from a sample of 5978. It indicates that the cohorts most likely to defect to Labor were the well educated, those with few assets, those identifying as having no religion, and those from non-English backgrounds. Also featured were those aged 18 to 34, although this cohort was the most volatile across the board – the voters least likely to defect from Labor were the oldest. Similarly, high income earners were both more likely to those on low and middle incomes both to defect to and from Labor.

• Michael Koziol of the Age/Herald explores the impact of young inner-city renters on the Morrison government’s defeat. Kos Samaras of Redbridge Group is quoted saying such voters are keen to get into the property market but “do not want to relocate to the outskirts of western Sydney or Melbourne”, and have “really looked down on conservative politicians mocking them on their lifestyle choices”. Such voters were attracted to the teal independents over Labor because they favour “a modern solution to their hunger for a different form of politics”, and over the Greens because of their “positions on housing and development at a local level, where ‘not in my backyard’ attitudes constrain supply”. The latter is particularly an issue at state level, to which the New South Wales government has responded by providing the option to pay annual land tax instead of upfront stamp duty and unveiling a plan for 4500 new homes around a railway station in Hornsby.

• The by-election for the Northern Territory seat of Fannie Bay, vacated by the retirement of former Chief Minister Michael Gunner, will be held tomorrow. Labor’s Brent Potter will defend a 9.6% margin against Country Liberal Party candidate Ben Hosking and four others.

Not a whole lot to report from within what this site regards as its wheelhouse, but past time for a new post nonetheless. Here’s what I’ve got:

• Roy Morgan continues to eke out polling information in an unpredictable fashion on its weekly update videos, the latest of which features a full set of voting intention numbers from polling conducted August 1 to 7. This has Labor’s two-party lead narrowing, apparently from a week previously, from 54-46 to 52.5-47.5, from primary votes of Labor 37% (up one), Coalition 38.5% (up two-and-a-half), Greens 11.5% (down one) and One Nation 3.5% (steady). They also had a second SMS poll of Victorian voting intention which I’ll cover in a state-specific poll later this week.

• US pollster Morning Consult’s tracking poll of global leaders’ domestic approval records little change in Anthony Albanese’s numbers – his approval rating of 58% is unchanged on a month ago and his disapproval is up three to 29%.

• The membership of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters is now settled, with Labor’s Kate Thwaites as chair joined by party colleagues Karen Grogan, Shayne Neumann, Sam Rae and Marielle Smith; former chair James McGrath now deputy chair, joined by Coalition colleagues Darren Chester, Marise Payne and James Stevens; and Larissa Waters continuing to represent the Greens.

Essential Research’s fortnightly report continues to not feature voting intention, and its monthly leadership ratings are continuing to not feature Peter Dutton. Anthony Albanese is down one on approval to 55% in this month’s result, while his disapproval is up four to 28%. Some steam has also gone out of a post-election surge on a monthly national direction question, on which 43% find Australia headed in the right direction, down four, with wrong direction up three to 31%.

In a series of “performance of the Albanese government” questions, there was a 56-44 majority in favour of it having its priorities right, 54-46 majorities for getting things done and being in touch and 52-48 for addressing long-term problems, although a 51-49 majority felt it too idealistic. A series on “support for federal government measures is less good: 60% want the fuel excise cut extended, with only 12% supporting the government’s intention to not do so, 44% support higher JobSeeker payments, with 27% opposed, and 42% want a delay in “stage three income tax cuts, which predominantly benefits higher income earners”, with 25% opposed.

“Awareness of proposed Voice to Parliament” would appear to be fairly low, with 33% saying they had heard nothing of it in the past month and 32% saying hardly anything, compared with 5% for a lot and 29% for a fair amount. With the notion explained, 65% said they were in favour and 35% opposed. Seventy-five per cent supported a parliamentary pledge to “Australia and the Australian people”, with only 15% opting for the Queen. The survey was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1075.

Also out this week is a post-election survey report from JWS Research, conducted from a sample of 1000 in the two days after the May 21 election. Asked what was most important in deciding their vote, more chose for “the party as a whole” than for “specific policies or issues”, and fewer still for the leaders and candidates, but Coalition voters were most inclined to rate the first of these and Greens voters uniquely favoured the second.

On issue salience, there was a 53-10 majority for economic over environmental issues among Coalition voters, but a 36-29 majority the other way among Labor voters, both sets of numbers being hardly changed from a similar survey after the 2019 election. An exercise in which respondents were asked whether or not the election campaign possessed various qualities also produced results very similar to 2019: 56-16 for important over not important, 39-30 for not interesting over interesting, 38-27 for negative over positive, 42-24 for deceitful over honest, 51-22 for same old stuff over new and different. For whatever reason, impressions were more negative across the board in 2016.

Thirty-six per cent rated the Labor campaign positive and 35% negative, compared with 28% and 44% for the Coalition. From 44% who said they favoured a Labor government, 25% favoured a majority and 19% a minority government; from 33% who favoured a Coalition government, 24% favoured a majority and 9% a majority.