Oz Politics Blog

Bob Carr, the nation’s longest serving premier, has announced his resignation. Morris Iemma is Premier designate in the premier state.

The big question is how will this affect the next New South Wales election, set for 24 March 2007.

The punters at Centrebet favour John Brogden and the Coalition. Centrebet is currently paying $1.57 for a Coalition win and $2.25 for a Labor win. That equates to a probability of 59 per cent for a Coalition win and 41 per cent for a Labor win. Although this is a slight softening from when the books opened at $1.50 to $2.50.

The latest state Morgan Poll was looking good for Bob Carr. The poll was taken during July before Carr announced his resignation. The headline message was a two-party preferred result with Labor on 53.5 per cent. A 7 per cent lead over the Coalition on 46.5 per cent (albeit, down from 10 per cent at the last election).

Perhaps the poll that most interested me was the Internet poll by the SMH, on who should be Bob Carr’s replacement. After some 16,000 votes there was no stand-out candidate. Iemma’s performance suggests he is relatively unknown in the public’s mind.

And me? I am with the punters at the moment. Iemma has a huge task ahead of him. I would need to see an heroic effort before I thought he was not walking in the steps of Barrie Unsworth.

Today’s Tiser reports an Ipsos poll on the Liberal party deputy leadership

Treasurer Peter Costello, the present deputy, is the overwhelming favourite to succeed Prime Minister John Howard, should he retire this term.

But Mr Costello’s potential leadership rivals, Health Minister Tony Abbott and Education Minister Brendan Nelson, did not match Mr Downer in the poll for the deputy leadership.

Asked who would make the best deputy if the office became vacant soon, 27 per cent of the 1000 respondents favoured Mr Downer, 21 per cent Mr Abbott and 13 per cent Dr Nelson.

It is interesting to compare these results with Centrebet’s odds on who will lead the Liberal Party to the next election.

While the subject of analysis is different, the punters appear to rate Nelson much higher than the pollsters.

The latest Newspoll two-party preferred result is a tick in the Government’s direction. The Coalition received 51 per cent compared to 49 per cent for Labor. This is a statistically insignificant change from 50-50 earlier in the month.

On the primary votes, the Government is on 45 per cent and Labor is on 39 per cent. The general rule of thumb is that Labor needs 40 per cent or more of the primary vote to win government. Primary vote support for the Greens is 5 per cent, which is at the low end of their typical range since the last election.

Today’s media focused on Beazley’s poor performance in the attitudinal polling:

• Satisfaction with Beazley’s performance fell from 39 per cent earlier this month to a record low 33 per cent last weekend; down from 52 per cent in mid April
• Dissatisfaction with Beazley’s performance rose from 45 to 46 per cent
• Satisfaction with Howard’s performance rose from 47 to 49 per cent
• Dissatisfaction with Howard’s performance fell from 44 to 40 per cent
• 55 per cent of those polled preferred Howard as Prime Minister (up four) while 25 preferred Beazley (down four)

Since the 2004 election, Newspoll has been typically more favourable to the government in its opinion polls than Morgan or ACNielsen. Much of the difference between Newspoll and Morgan in 2002 and 2003 was due to their different polling methodologies. Newspoll used the 2001 election result to allocate preferences and Morgan used its polling. In 2004 both used polling, and in 2005 both have used the 2004 election result to allocate preferences. Paradoxically yet, since the 2004 election, Newspoll appears to favour the government by one or two percentage points over Morgan. I wonder why?

The usual graphs are here. (You may need to hit the reload button on your browser when you get there to see them).

The latest Morgan poll of 2049 electors over the weekends of 2-3 and 9-10 July, predicted a two-party preferred vote of 51 to 49 per cent in Labor’s favour. The pollster made the following comments,

“Despite continued criticism of the Government’s proposed Industrial Relations reforms, primary support for the L-NP rose slightly (0.5%). Special Morgan Poll Qualitative Research shows economic stability is a driving force behind this. It is interesting to note that none of the L-NP supporters mentioned concerns with the proposed Industrial Relations reforms.

“Primary support for the ALP also rose (1%). This increase in support is a reflection of public reaction towards the L-NP’s proposed Industrial Relations changes.

“This latest Morgan Poll shows primary support polarising towards the major parties at the expense of the Greens and other minor parties.”

If you look at my usual poll graphs, you can see that all polls are trending towards Labor at the moment. (Note: You may need to hit the refresh button on your browser when you get to the graphs page).

Labor is also firming just a tad with the punters. At Centrebet, Labor has firmed slightly since the beginning of the month (from $2.55 to $2.50 for a win).

Today’s Sunday Telegraph reported a Galaxy poll conducted on 8-9 July about the Howard Government’s proposed industrial relations changes. Since the detailed poll results do not appear to be available on the Internet, I will recap them here.

1. Would you be in favour or against strike or other industrial action to prevent new industrial relations laws? Total % White Collar % Blue Collar % In favour 44 41 47 Against 44 49 38 Uncommitted 12 10 15

2. Which one, John Howard or Kim Beazley, would you prefer as Prime Minister? Total % Male % Female % John Howard 49 43 56 Kim Beazley 29 33 24 Uncommitted 22 24 20

3. Has the government done enough to explain the new industrial relations laws? Total % Howard Supporters % Beazley Supporters % Yes/done enough 11 16 7 No/not enough 78 71 90 Uncommitted 11 13 3

4. Are you worried that employers may use the new laws to force workers into accepting lower pay and worse conditions? Total % White Collar % Blue Collar % Yes/worried 63 57 71 No/not worried 26 33 18 Uncommitted 11 11 11

5. Do you agree or disagree that if new laws are introduced businesses will benefit and this will lead to more jobs? Total % Howard Supporters % Beazley Supporters % Agree 33 44 19 Disagree 47 36 67 Uncommitted 20 20 14

6. Do you the union campaign has been appropriate or do you think the unions have created undue fear in the community? Total % Howard Supporters % Beazley Supporters % Appropriate 43 20 77 Created undue fear 41 64 11 Uncommitted 16 16 12

What does it all mean

With a sample size of 500, a little caution is warranted. When it comes to making an inference about the Australian population, this sample has a 95 per cent confidence interval of a touch over plus or minus four percentage points for each question. However, inferences about the Australian population may not be possible. The Sunday Telegraph does not discuss the sampling frame. We do not know whether the sample was selected randomly. We do not know whether it only contains people from Sydney, urban areas more generally, or whether it is a truly random cross section of all Australians. Nonetheless, if we suspend our doubts on these matters for a moment, there are some interesting factoids here.

Table 1 above is an interesting question. It may go to the heart of the government’s political strategy. The government knows that if it can provoke the union into an over-reaction on any issue it has a better chance of capturing the moderate middle ground. The irony with these provocations is that the union members do not realise they are being used — remember the 20,000 union demonstrators at parliament house in August 1996 who trashed the front doors and bookshop, or the stevedores and the Patrick’s dispute. I don’t think the government would be too worried about demonstrations and pre-emptive industrial action.

It is clear from table 2 above that Howard is the preferred Prime Minister for 49 per cent of people compared to Beazley’s 29 per cent. This is almost identical to the latest Newspoll result (although ACNielsen has Beazley’s support 10 points higher, and the uncommitted 10 points lower). The gender differences reported here are interesting.

Table 3 is self evident. The government has done little to sell its message. Perhaps the More Jobs, Higher Wages, A Stronger Economy adverts in today’s papers are a step in the right direction on this front. It would be interesting to see this poll question repeated in 6 months time.

Table 4 goes to the central fear with the new arrangements — will my employer be able to reduce my wages or conditions? While a large proportion of people expressed some worry, more analysis is needed here to assess the depth of the worry. If the worry is deep seated, the government may have a problem. However, if it turns out to be the usual run-of-the uncertainty associated with any change process, then industrial relations reform could end up being another GST.

The question in table 5 is difficult to interpret. It is a two-part question and it is difficult to assess whether the majority of respondents think the new laws will not benefit business or whether they will not lead to more jobs. The response may simply reflect prejudices about big business. Notwithstanding this, the construct should have been put as two questions.

Question 6 is the flip side of question 1. The challenge for the unions will be to keep on the “appropriate” side of the ledger. To be so close to “inappropriate” at this early stage in its campaign is very risky. As I noted above, the government would be hoping the unions over-reach in their opposition to the new industrial relations laws, and these data suggest the unions do not have far to go.

All-in-all, a very interesting set of questions.