tip off

Labor’s rocky road: what Gillard has to do to hold on

That we’re going to an election in September was no surprise. But the date doesn’t make Julia Gillard’s road to retaining government any easier. Crikey’s poll cruncher looks at what she has to do to hold on.

Diverting though yesterday’s election date announcement may have been, its contribution to the sum of human knowledge should not be overestimated. There was already no remaining doubt the Prime Minister was budgeting for a normal full-term election for the House and half the Senate, which left her with a fairly narrow window of opportunity for its timing.

The unorthodox alternative of an earlier poll exclusively for the House of Representatives was, and remains, foreseeable only in the event of parliamentary rebellion or leadership change. These are distant prospects, but they haven’t been made any more so by Gillard announcing when she will, God willing, hold the election.

Nonetheless, the occasion provides a useful focusing moment to survey the electoral terrain ahead of what some would characterise as an eight-month election campaign.

Polling aggregators having proved their worth at the US presidential election last year; a number have sprung up in Australia with a view to ironing out the biases and volatility that apply when following an individual poll series. Whatever their methodology, each says much the same thing: the Coalition has a polling lead of around 52.5-47.5, and has done so since a trend to Labor levelled off about three months ago.

But published polling offers at best a limited guide as to how the swing might be distributed geographically. The best resources available are the mainland state breakdowns featured in Newspoll’s quarterly aggregates and the regular monthly results from Nielsen.

The former appear infrequently, are partly out of date when they arrive, and are subject to the fairly luxurious margins of error which apply to individual poll results even when they come from solid samples. Nielsen doesn’t wait to accumulate three months of data before publishing state-level results, which means its samples for individual states are in some cases vanishingly small.

And aggregated measures of the two pollsters do not sit comfortably with the consensus inside the beltway, which is presumably informed by better targeted internal polling. Here the view is that Labor faces potentially insurmountable difficulties in Sydney, with none of the 11 seats held on margins of less than 10% to be considered bolted down. However, Newspoll and Nielsen furnish no evidence of an unusually severe swing in New South Wales, if anything showing slightly bigger swings (off a much higher base) in Victoria.

A poll did finally emerge earlier this week which went according to script. Conducted by automated phone pollsters JWS Research for a Liberal-linked client, it pointed to a collective double-digit swing across the state’s marginals.

Labor’s other mooted disaster zone is Tasmania, which appears headed for one of its occasional realignments (the Liberals having held all five seats from 1975 to 1987, and Labor doing so more often than not since 1998). Here evidence is even scarcer, as neither Newspoll nor Nielsen publishes results for the state owing to prohibitively small samples. But what little polling has emerged — like last week’s ReachTEL result pointing to a crushing Liberal victory in Bass — has supported the view that all four of Labor’s seats are at risk.

The fundamental task for Labor over the next six months is to claim ownership of the strong economy …”

Even leaving polling aside, the consensus view has much to offer it intuitively, particularly if it is accepted state factors are likely to play their part.

In NSW, the voluminous dirty laundry of the previous government continues to receive a daily airing via the Independent Commission Against Corruption, while disappointment with Barry O’Farrell remains within acceptable limits. In Tasmania, a Labor government that had reached the end of its natural life by the March 2010 election has governed since in coalition with the Greens, activating hostility among blue-collar workers outside Hobart and providing unhelpful parallels with the Gillard government’s minority and Greens-supported position in Canberra.

The other side of the challenge for Labor is winning new seats in the more welcoming environments of the other states, which they will need to do even on the happiest of scenarios in NSW and Tasmania.

The technicality of Craig Thomson’s independent status aside, Labor holds 72 seats in a chamber of 150, and has next to no chance of repeating the coup of having the votes of New England (Tony Windsor) and Lyne (Rob Oakeshott) in its column. The most promising prospect for covering the gap is Queensland, where the travails of the Newman government have helped Labor claw back to something like its 2010 election position less than a year after appearing headed for total annihilation.

Elsewhere around the country, battleground seats are relatively thin on the ground.

Labor will have its work cut out defending a number of marginals in and around Melbourne, but the election is nonetheless likely to continue a trend going back to 2007 of Victoria assuming lesser tactical importance than its northern neighbours. Sydney, Brisbane, Tasmania and the central coast of NSW may be the crucibles, but it doesn’t follow that Labor can build a strategy out of sandbagging marginals and surgically targeting Coalition weak spots.

Raising the boats will require a higher tide, which means an improvement in Labor’s position nationally.

The fundamental task for Labor over the next six months is to claim ownership of the strong economy, promote a cohesive positive message from government policy initiatives and make hard political capital out of the electorate’s palpable disquiet about Tony Abbott.

Unless these prerequisites are met, a well-targeted ground campaign can’t hope to achieve any more than limiting the damage.

16
  • 1
    Lucky Phil
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Surprised that more hasn’t been made of Gillard’s fragile majority with the demise of Peter Slipper and the potential for a successful no confidence motion by Abbott early in the sitting year. Naming the date might be more about pulling the rug out from under Abbott forcing an early election rather than the worry of a non-existent Rudd Challenge.

  • 2
    John Bennetts
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Phil, when you mentioned Peter Slipper, did it cross your mind to mention those who stood by him for a decade or more as he relentlessly and systematically rorted, or those who tried to set him up via an underling’s trumped-up complaint and civil action?

    Methinks the slender majority is not as frail as some wish it to be.

    September is a long way off.

  • 3
    John Bennetts
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    Would somebody please give William Bowe a phrase to use instead of the awful, meaningless, American cliche, “inside the beltway”?

  • 4
    Bill Hilliger
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    @John Bennetts - hear, hear! We should not try so hard to always ape Americans.

  • 5
    billie
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    Tony Abbott endorsed Richard Torbay’s canditure for seat of Lyne or New England saying he had been his best man. Some endorsement Tony Abbott was Peter Slipper’s best man

  • 6
    Paddy Forsayeth
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Tones doesn’t have to worry too much…the MSM would never publish his glaring turnarounds, contradictions and the odd somersault.

  • 7
    Savonrepus
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    Rocky road alright - Day 1: Craig Thomson arrested

  • 8
    Damian O''Connor
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Yep, as a newbie psephologist I agree with all your good work above. The only point on which I might differ is that, should the Government have been in a winning position now, I don’t think they’d be bothered about having a later half Senate election. They’d go. In short, not just rebellion or leadership - pollcrunch.wordpress.com

  • 9
    Steve Fleay
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

    Reality says it’s all about Labor limiting the damage at this election to start a little closer in 2016.
    The telling point is to ask what seats could Labor gain?
    Unfortunately the best outcome we could hope for would be for Malcolm to depose Tony which is unlikely with current polling. Conservatism of the Abbott religious flavour will cast a pall over Australia.

  • 10
    wilful
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    If “inside the beltway” isn’t punishable by some sort of whipping from the Crikey subbie, I’m not sure what is.

  • 11
    Bill Parker
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    Inside the beltway? How about “top of the trousers”?

  • 12
    AR
    Posted Thursday, 31 January 2013 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Why not adopt yet another tired amerikan cliche with “Foggy Bottom” - those Burly Griffin mists do make the rheumy worse in winter and in summer the miasma from the ever incipient red algae does strange things to whatever passes for minds on that long ago ruined sheep station.

  • 13
    Steve Ellis
    Posted Friday, 1 February 2013 at 2:39 am | Permalink

    Labor has spent no time damning and taking advantage of The Howard Dark Years. Howard was no economic manager and surfed on the Hawke-Keating reforms. As well as that, he had a $334billion resources boom. There is enough on the Howard Years to keep Labor in govt for 10 years yet they have not used any of it. Even John Hewson expressed his amazement at this….but 24/7 we get it in the neck from Abbott. And what does Labor do? Just turn the other cheek. Even at the press Club Address-Gillard said nothing against the Howard years or Abbott. But as soon as it was Abbott’s turn it was on again. Labor will lose the election and have to suffer 10 years of school halls and pink batts…and why? Because they failed at selling their policies and strong economic credentials. In short they let Abbott con the electorate saying we are in debt up to our ears when clearly our debt is minimal. And don’t tell me negative politics does not work. Abbott will become PM as a result of it.

  • 14
    the duke
    Posted Friday, 1 February 2013 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    only the most optimistic and staunch lefty would suggest that the ALP has a chance of winning the next election. Despite all the ridiculous ‘new age’ bickering between left and right, right and left, we have a government that is not able to connect with the electorate of business community. We have an old school and uncharismatic treasurer that cannot connect with the business community. Kudos to the Government for the way they handled the GFC, and our level of debt to GDP is still ridiculously low despite the scare tactics of the right, we have been treading water for a number of years now. Rudd/Gillard have had their time.

  • 15
    the duke
    Posted Friday, 1 February 2013 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    the ALP should be more worried about stemming the loss of blood, and finding relevance as a party, rather than trying to win the coming election. Love or hate Abbott, and in my view he will only be a short term PM once elected, he has proven to be a good leader.

  • 16
    Steve Ellis
    Posted Friday, 1 February 2013 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

    I have read the Coalition’s booklet. It is a book full (“Our Plan-Real Solutions” ) of what Abbott calls “aspirations”….flowery words with not ONE costing or meaningful policy statement.The new spin word is “its in our DNA”… Get ready to hear a lot of this phrase which he flogged from my posts on this blog….I said “mass sackings, cuts to health, schools and hospitals are in the Liberals DNA”-he liked it, stole it and turned it around. Unlike Beazley, who beat Howard by 400,000 in the GST election (but accepted the umpire’s decision) Abbott has NEVER accepted the umpire’s decision OR the legitimacy of the govt. The hypocrisy of this is that Abbott would have gladly formed an alliance with the Greens and the Independents, just like Labor did if his people skills had been up to it to form government…but they were not. The evidence said he begged and begged them. To have any chance in the election Labor needs to 1. Reveal the lies of the Howard Dark Years-this has never been done,especially the structural debt/deficit Howard has left our kids. 2. Stop treating the Libs with kid gloves-do what Abbott does “Buckets Jackson” them. 3. Sell the government’s strong economic credentials 4. Demonstrate that our debt is minimal, manageable and largely cause by international factors 4. Have ONE big turd on Abbott to be saved for the last week of the campaign to tip on him 5. Get on talkback radio and take on the biased shock jocks at their mown game. 6. School halls and Pink batts were not failures but Labor have never challenged the Libs on this. These things must be done daily at every opportunity,every doorstop. Just like Howard and Costello used to.7. Have open debates with as many Liberals as possible-their front bench is very frail. That said, there is no way Labor can win because this should have been done from day one. In fact they don’t even deserve to win. They have let a great opportunity slip by to be totally outclassed and outmaneuvered by the Libs who are masters of the negative. Labor should battle on with no campaign slogan. They are a waste of time. Put simply, the Libs have been much more skilled at selling their negative message than Labor has at selling the good things it has done.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...