Bob McMullan (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Federal/State Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last year I made a speech in this House outlining my critique of the manner in which the published opinion polls were being reported. I believe subsequent events have borne out the validity of that analysis. This afternoon I want to add a further chapter to the ongoing debate about what the polls tell us. This is not to comment on the recent boost in support for the opposition in the polls—that is much too recent to give any confidence as the basis of analysis. All those polls tell us is that the next election is likely to be close and that the opposition has a chance. Rather, I want to look at an apparently unnoticed long-term trend which has developed over the full 2½ years of this term.

Since the beginning of 2005 there has been a long-term trend decline in public approval of the Prime Minister. Even though reporting has suggested continuing strength in the standing of the Prime Minister, the facts point to the opposite conclusion. I have had a graph produced, which I am unable to incorporate in Hansard but the trend line of which is crystal clear to any observer. Since the beginning of 2005, which was the first real polling after the 2004 election, the Prime Minister’s approval rating has fallen steadily and his disapproval rating has risen steadily. In that January 2005 poll, the Prime Minister’s net approval rating in Newspoll was 30 per cent: 60 per cent positive and 30 per cent negative—a net 30 per cent. By January 2006, it had fallen to a net 11 per cent—51 per cent positive and 40 per cent negative. In the most recent poll, the Prime Minister’s net approval rating was zero—44 per cent positive and 44 per cent negative.

Why has this trend been hidden? First, because it has been slow and gradual rather than sharp and sudden. It has not been the sort of change that would feature in a fortnightly commentary. Second, it has been disguised by two years of internal instability in my party which propped up the coalition’s vote and deflected attention from this long-term trend decline. Third, commentators are so beguiled by the Prime Minister’s undoubted and deserved status as a wily old politician that they have not noticed that the public mood has been shifting. Perhaps there is a fourth factor. The skill with which the Prime Minister dominates his own party and outmanoeuvred his deputy, Peter Costello, last year might well have reinforced his image of wiliness and enduring success as a leader, despite the emerging evidence of his decline.

The explanation of the decline is more speculative. The numbers tell us what is happening but not necessarily why. On the basis of experience and observation, let me venture to suggest some of the reasons. Firstly, the industrial relations changes were so extreme they shocked a lot of so-called Howard battlers who have gradually become disillusioned with the Prime Minister’s intransigence on this matter. Secondly, a new cohort of voters has gone onto the rolls, to whom the Prime Minister seems out of touch and out of date, particularly on issues like climate change. Thirdly, the war in Iraq has directly alienated some voters and indirectly affected others by changing their perception of the Prime Minister’s management of national security. Fourthly, there has been the regular drumbeat of interest rate rises since the election against the promise at that election that this would not happen. Fifthly, after more than 10 years, some of the old tricks like blaming the states and blaming the Keating government for everything are beginning to wear thin.

I appreciate that others might have better and different explanations—as I say, the polls tell us what is happening but they do not tell us why. We can all speculate about why that might be but I think those five factors are in there. Whatever the reasons, none of this changes the fact that incumbent federal governments are very difficult to defeat, particularly during a resources boom. All one can say is that the aura of invincibility has decisively fallen away from the Prime Minister. He is still a clever politician; he will still be hard to beat. But if we were to get proper analysis of poll trends they should tell objective observers that the Prime Minister is not the asset to the Liberal Party he once was.