JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

Fairfax-Ipsos poll points to knife-edge election between Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten

EXCLUSIVE

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Video will begin in 5 seconds.

Video settings

Please Log in to update your video settings

Labor surge suggests cliff-hanger election

Labor and the Coalition are fifty-fifty in the latest Fairfax-Ipsos poll, as Malcolm Turnbull's once-soaring approval rating continues to decline. Mark Kenny explains.

PT2M34S 620 349

The Turnbull government's strong lead over the opposition has evaporated just as it enters a risky three-week special sitting of Parliament, attempts to secure an unlikely political bounce from a tight budget, and tries to justify an early election on July 2.

Months of perceived government dithering over tax reform and more recently, indifference over the banks, coupled with disappointment over social policy and confusion over hospitals and schools, have savaged Mr Turnbull's previously stratospheric personal standing, and wiped out his government's poll advantage.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's government is neck and neck with Labor in the latest Fairfax-Ipsos poll.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's government is neck and neck with Labor in the latest Fairfax-Ipsos poll. Photo: Andrew Meares

The latest Fairfax-Ipsos poll conducted over the weekend put support for the Coalition and Labor across the country on a knife-edge at 50-50, assuming an allocation of preferences similar to those at the last election.

The national survey of 1402 electors was conducted between April 14-16 and showed support for the Coalition had dropped by a statistically significant 3 percentage points since the March poll.

This equates to a 3.5 per cent swing away from the Coalition's share of the vote achieved at the September 2013 election, raising the prospect the election could produce a government with a wafer-thin majority or even another hung Parliament.

The Prime Minister's net approval rating has dropped by 10 points since March and his preferred prime minister rating has also fallen by seven points over that time, although he still leads Opposition Leader Bill Shorten comfortably on that head-to-head comparison with double the support at 54-27.

Pollster Jessica Elgood said the result was still a good one for Mr Turnbull because Mr Shorten's own numbers had hardly moved "and would need to improve significantly to give him a chance of being prime minister".

Mr Turnbull's disapproval rating has jumped up six points as voters marked him down severely on a range of 11 leadership characteristics including a staggering 25 per cent drop in his ability to make things happen, a 20 per cent drop in his perceived strength as a leader, a 17 per cent drop on his authority over his party, and a 13 per cent drop in his perceived competence.

Those percentage falls are measured against the extremely high results achieved when they were last surveyed by Fairfax-Ipsos in October, 2015. They show Mr Turnbull is still highly regarded and leads his opponent on all but two of the positive characteristics, "has the confidence of his party" which is 58-50 in Mr Shorten's favour, and "has a firm grasp of social policy" in which the Opposition Leader is up 54-47.



Driving the falling numbers are the government's apparent sluggishness to outline policy on a range of policy fronts compared to Labor and its politically hamfisted responses to several challenges, not least, Labor's backing of a royal commission into the banks if elected.

A sizeable 65 per cent of electors believe such an inquiry is needed after a slew of controversies in which customers have been gouged through interest rates, denied insurance pay-outs for which they had duly paid, heard allegations of financial market manipulation, and been ripped off with excessive transaction fees.

With the government holding out against a royal commission on banks, the survey shows it is firmly on the wrong side of public opinion, with just one in four voters also opposed to the special investigation. Even among Coalition supporters, more than half, at 53 per cent, think a royal commission is justified. That figure jumps sharply to 78 and 79 per cent respectively for Labor and Greens voters.

Among the few bright spots for Mr Turnbull ahead of his high-stakes gamble of either forcing the Senate cross-bench to support his building industry watchdog, the ABCC, or face a double dissolution election, is Labor's poor primary vote. It stands at a paltry 33 per cent, which is right where it was when Labor was bundled out of office in 2013 under Kevin Rudd's second leadership stint. However, that is still an improvement of two points in Labor's primary support since March.

The Coalition's primary support has actually fallen since the March survey to 42 per cent – three points down since March and four points down on its 2013 election result achieved under Tony Abbott's leadership.

The poll will be another morale booster for Labor as the nation's 226 federal parliamentarians filter backed into the capital on Monday for the special sittings.

The government is banking on the defeat of its ABCC bill as crossbench senators continue to signal their hostility. Mr Turnbull has effectively placed the timing of the election in their hands by stipulating that unless the ABCC bills pass, and another dealing with union governance (registered organisations), then he will advise Governor-General Sir Peter Cosgrove to dissolve both houses for a July 2, election.

Labor has flagged its intent to use the special sittings – which at this stage contain just two scheduled sitting days for the House of Representatives – to ratchet up the pressure over the banking royal commission.

Follow us on Twitter

26 comments

  • The cons can thank the Senate for them being in this position.
    If they hadn't blocked the 2014 budget they would now be facing electoral annihilation.
    Vote Con, give the rest of your country away, just to please the IPA.

    Commenter
    fizzybeer
    Date and time
    April 18, 2016, 9:04AM
    • Maybe, but the economy would be in a lot better shape. The simple fact is that we cannot continue spending at GFC levels. Why should our grandchildren pay for the lifestyle of today? When are todays lefties going to do something for tomorrows? Or do you all see the solution as higher taxes for those who earn more? Not those who have more, only those people earning and already contributing the vast majority of taxes.
      A choice between dumb and dumber now exists and if Shorten is the dummy that wins then future generations can at least start to plan for a lower standard of living but at least progressives will continue to receive their taxpayer funded lifestyle.

      Commenter
      southpark
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 9:28AM
    • no need for higher taxes who earn more.
      No need for a GST to penalise those who earn less.
      Some very generous concessions from another time can be reigned in, and the biggie, corporate tax avoidance and the Panama Papers.
      Perhaps our PM can set an example to us and the PMs of Iceland and Great Britain.

      Commenter
      fizzybeer
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 9:49AM
    • southpark, what are you talking about? The Liberals are spending far more than Labor did with the exception being when the stimulus package was spent to fight the GFC. The only differences in spending seem to be that the Libs don't like spending it where it is necessary, but in cash splashes on their already wealthy constituents. That and expensive war planes.

      Commenter
      Andy
      Location
      Epping
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 9:52AM
    • I’m not sure what ground-breaking economic idea have been put forward in the last three years. They abolished some taxes and in one instance replaced it with a taxpayer funded scheme as opposed to the traditional market based solution. So net loss. They put forward the idea to uncap university costs while maintaining the existing funding scheme which would have blown out the costs of the HECS/HELP scheme tenfold, to prop up university profits, and the slashed funding on infrastructure, health and education even though they are 3 of the biggest contributors to a economic growth and stability. Not sure what you think they have either done or attempted to do that is economically ground-breaking here. They basically outsourced their lack of policy in 2014 and haven’t had any real ideas since. Though we do have some more knights I believe.

      Commenter
      Sand
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 10:06AM
    • “but the economy would be in a lot better shape” – southpark

      This is ONLY the opinion of the economically illiterate and of the vested interests who want to find some other way of balancing the budget which avoids removing the structural rorts of NG, CGT & Super concessions etc! There is ZERO evidence that attacking the less well-off is a successful way to help the economy! There is a lot of evidence that doing this would HURT the economy as attacking the disposable income of the less well-off reduces demand for good & service and other ideas like charging many times more for uni fees would reduce the number of Australians with degrees! The economic reality is that every dollar spend on a degree can return $6 to the economy! Abbott’s budget was economically damaging and socially offensive at every level. It was REJECTED for the right reasons! Abbott was trying to fix a broken leg by cutting it off!

      And no-one is proposing “higher taxes for those who earn more”. Can you name ANYONE who has made such a proposal in any way, shape or form? There has been a call for the removal of structural rorts of NG, CGT & Super concessions etc which is REDUCTION in taxpayer money being returned to mostly well-off people with NO BELIEVABLE ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION!

      Commenter
      QED
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 10:15AM
    • Sure it would southpark. You've only got to look at the economic utopia that ultra conservatives have created in the US state of Kansas to realise the true power of spending cuts and trickle down economics.

      In the meantime I have some amazing magic beans that perhaps you'd like to buy ?

      Commenter
      Joe Blow
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 11:14AM
    • Vote Cross benchs and lets get rid of both sides. Have not a capable Gov.t since Howard. Time both sides had a shake up. Off and good on the Senate for REVEIWING and not just rubber stamping.

      Commenter
      Steve
      Location
      Nedlands
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 3:09PM
  • Remember the UK polls had election on knife edge right up to polling day. The result was a landslide to the Conservatives. People in the end are not fools and do have memories.

    Commenter
    Better Days
    Location
    South Melbourne
    Date and time
    April 18, 2016, 9:08AM
    • Better Days, I bet many poms regret that given the revelations found in the Panama papers about PM David Cameron.

      Commenter
      Andy
      Location
      Epping
      Date and time
      April 18, 2016, 9:54AM

More comments

Comments are now closed

Related Coverage

HuffPost Australia

Follow Us

Featured advertisers

Special offers

Credit card, savings and loan rates by Mozo