• Full Story

The polls don't lie - Labour needs a miracle

Print

Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:20p.m.

Phil Goff (NZPA)

Phil Goff (NZPA)

By Dan Satherley

Just over seven months out from the election and things are not looking good for Phil Goff and Labour.

The latest 3 News-Reid Research poll has National sitting pretty on 57.5 percent, more than double Labour's share of the vote, at 27.1 percent.

Prime Minister John Key towers over Mr Goff in the preferred leader stakes, polling 52.4 percent to his rival's 6.8 percent.

Six months is a long time in politics, but is there enough time for Labour to claw their way back?

Looking at polling half-a-year out from the previous few elections, probably not – though the election is likely to be a bit closer than current polling suggests. Unfortunately for Mr Goff, that's about the only good news history has to deliver.

Let's start by looking at the 2008 election. National scored just shy of 45 percent of the vote that year, 11 points ahead of Labour's 34 percent.

In April 2008 – six months beforehand – Labour averaged a poll rating of 35.9 percent in polls conducted by the Digipoll, TNS, Colmar Brunton, Nielsen and three by Roy Morgan (which we have counted once, using an average of the three). This is 2 percent higher than their election day result.

Using the same polls and methodology, National polled an average 51 percent – 14.9 percent ahead of Labour, and a massive 6 percent higher than what they achieved in November.

Still, the bad news for Labour is that the polls in April 2008 only boosted National's lead over Labour – compared to the election – by 3.9 percent. The problem for Mr Goff and co is that the gap in our latest poll is over 30 percent, so they will need a swing much larger than 3.9 percent if they're to take power.

Even with the Greens (at approx 7.7 percent) and New Zealand First (assuming they get 5 percent) on side, a 4 percent swing only brings them to 42.7 percent of the vote, far short of what's required. The ad-hoc coalition Labour formed after the nail-biting 2005 election – with the Progressives, United Future and New Zealand First – collected 50.65 percent of the vote, barely forming a mandate.

Polling six months out from that cliffhanger 2005 election showed Labour with a narrow 3.1 percent lead over National. Averaging the results from six polls (including two by Digipoll) from April and May 2005, Labour on 40.6 percent led National, on 37.5 percent.

In November, Labour narrowly defeated the Don Brash led opposition by 2 percent, securing 41.1 percent of the vote to National's 39.1.

The polls – even six months out – were pretty close to the final result showing no obvious bias towards National and, suggesting the controversial Exclusive Brethren campaign in the following months didn't do much to put voters off Dr Brash's party.

So is Labour doomed to another spell in opposition? It seems very likely, unless something very dramatic occurs – like the rise of a new potential coalition partner, for example.

Such a thing happened in the months leading up to the 2002 election, not that Labour needed it. Peter Dunne's United New Zealand won a single seat in Parliament at the 1999 election, and its future coalition partner – Future New Zealand – had none. They combined forces in 2000, and were going nowhere until only weeks before the 2002 election, when a strong TV appearance from Mr Dunne shot the party to 6.7 percent of the vote, winning eight seats in Parliament.

Could something happen this year? If the rumoured left-wing collaboration between ex-Green Sue Bradford and maverick Maori Party rebel Hone Harawira comes to fruition, possibly – though they'd be coming from nowhere, and would be more likely to cannibalise votes from Labour and the Greens than National, their ideological opposites.

TV3's polling in the run up to the 2005 and 2008 elections was recognised as the most accurate in a study last year, so Mr Goff looks almost certain to be leading the Labour Party to a heavy defeat in November.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

21 Apr 2011 05:03p.m.

Brent wrote:

Hey hilda, hope you didn't dish out $10 for a stop sign.

19 Apr 2011 08:11p.m.

hilda ogden wrote:

why vote labour when nz is booming, poverty,unemployment,
cost of living,gst, inflation,all booming and jobless now half a million. property prices collapse, low wage economy
and milk to expensive to feed the baby. national are doing so well . if you don't vote for more of this you must be mad, the polls say nz loves it.

19 Apr 2011 07:30p.m.

heather wrote:

yes they do, and so does the media all the time .

19 Apr 2011 05:19p.m.

James J Read wrote:

As a largely secular party, Labour supporters don't believe in miracles and something of that nature would be needed to bring about a Labour victory in November. Phil Goff ought to follow Helen's example and resign if he loses, then a new leader can be chosen.

19 Apr 2011 08:46a.m.

Yeah right wrote:

Hi when I was polled I said I would vote National, but I will actually vote labour. I always do this when surveyed, and I encourage everyone I know to do likewise. This is done tactically so that polls incorrectly appear to favour National, which should inturn encourage more labour voter turnout, and encourage less National turnout (since they think they will romp in). Looks like everything is going according to plan and Labour will win it easily judging by your poll results. Polls cannot lie, but the participants can.

18 Apr 2011 09:23p.m.

curious wrote:

What was the sample size? Little bits of data like that mean more to me than sensationalist headlines. The Roy Morgan poll (who sample nz voting mood fortnightly) place it more at 55ish:45ish split atmo between the party blocs, and that's assuming act, uf and the maori party get in and support national. It could end up coming down to Nats vs NZF + Labour + greens. 5% difference is hardly newsworthy, it's a shame TV3 couldn't also comment on other studies that have been done lately. Or be more frank about their research methods.

18 Apr 2011 08:06p.m.

al wrote:

the big problem Goff, and Labour, have is that the figure of Helen Clark still dominates much of the party thinking.She is still the third most popular choice for PM and not far behind Goff, although working for the UN on the other side of the world. Her influence is holding the party back.

18 Apr 2011 06:27p.m.

kane wrote:

It will be a lose for them no doubt about it... Its just how much of a loss its going to be 30% would be ok anything under 25% will mean only the Labour loyal voted for them... I expect National will get 60-70% at the top end they will rule on their own... Which is very much a reality at the moment...

18 Apr 2011 05:40p.m.

cyril wrote:

@Henry. How much of the Nets problems have been caused by things they cant do much about such as earthquake and world recetion plus they were left a mess by a Labour lead goverment that was determined to leave us in the biggest hole they could for daring to vote them out. I think they are doing a better job than Labour could have done under Helen and unfortunately for Goff it wouldnt matter what he did it wouldnt be enough because the NZ public have had enough of Labour. I predict the Nats will get at least 3 terms before people forget what Helen and her gaggle of gays have done and give them another chance.

18 Apr 2011 05:18p.m.

Henry wrote:

@Jeremy No matter what you think of Labour or what a mess they're right now, you have to see what a rubbish job National has done with this country. You're deluding yourself if you think that they've done a single bit of good. I'm not saying you should go out and vote for Labour, but let's face it, the National government has been far from stellar for the average New Zealander.