Following the Australian federal election, questions have emerged concerning the accuracy of internal polling data used by the Liberal Party, led by Peter Dutton. Dutton consistently maintained that private polling data contradicted the negative public surveys, suggesting more promising results for the Coalition.
Sources within the Liberal Party claim that Dutton was misled by the internal polling, attributing the discrepancy to a change in polling firms from Crosby Textor to Freshwater Strategy. Some insiders also allege that political advisor Jamie Briggs cautioned against releasing research in the seat of Dickson to prevent opponents from exploiting the information.
Freshwater Strategy, in a column for the Australian Financial Review, acknowledged underestimating Labor's strength, citing three factors: overestimation of Labor voters defecting to the Coalition, failure of expected preference flows to materialize, and a late swing towards Labor in the final days of campaigning.
The Liberal Party's spending on internal polling has been reported to be in the âmillions of dollarsâ, funded by donations to the federal campaign. This raises concerns about the accuracy and value of the expensive polling services and the potential need for review of campaign strategies following such a significant loss.
The article ultimately leaves unanswered whether Peter Dutton was deliberately dishonest or simply misled by inaccurate internal polling. The significant discrepancy between the internal polling and election results prompts a need for an assessment of polling methodologies and the cost-effectiveness of the campaign strategies employed by the Liberal Party.
Where were Peter Duttonâs quiet Australians?Â
Even in the days before his partyâs devastating election loss, the opposition leader maintained the public polls didnât gel with what he was seeing from the private researchers contracted by the Liberal Party.
Confronted with dire public surveys, Dutton hinted on the campaign trail that he had seen internal numbers that were far more promising for the Coalition.Â
Related Article Block Placeholder Article ID: 1205370âWell, if you have a look at conversations weâre having and what weâre seeing in seats around the country at the moment, including outer-metropolitan electorates, thereâs a very different conversation going on,â he said on April 26. âThere are a lot of quiet Australians out there.âÂ
With such a decisive swing away from the Liberals â so far theyâve only picked up 39 seats against Laborâs 85 â it begs the question: was Dutton being dishonest about the internal polling, or was he being misled?Â
Liberal sources told Crikey they believed it was the latter.Â
âChanging from CT to Freshwater was disastrous, it seems,â one insider said.Â
Another said the partyâs internal polling was held extremely tightly during the campaign, with Dutton, his chief of staff, and the federal director of the Liberal Party among the few people who would have been privy to it.Â
But news.com.au reported this morning some insiders claimed Duttonâs political adviser Jamie Briggs had cautioned Freshwater Strategyâs pollster Michael Turner âabout research in the seat of Dickson because it might spook the leaderâ.
The research was considered a critical piece of intelligence that needed to be kept out of the media so that the partyâs opponents wouldnât be able to take advantage of it.Â
âEven I donât get to see them, and itâs because they know I talk to people like you,â a Coalition senator told Crikey earlier in the campaign.Â
Itâs unknown what the contract would have cost, but some Liberals have said itâs in the âmillions of dollarsâ. Itâs understood the contract was paid for by donations to the federal campaign.Â
The Liberal Party parted ways with its usual research firm CT Group, led by Lynton Crosby and Mark Textor, about a year ago. Rumours from inside the Liberal Party suggested that the break came after CT led polling for the Yes campaign in the Voice to Parliament referendum.Â
Related Article Block Placeholder Article ID: 1205351Freshwater Strategy, which also does polling for The Australian Financial Review, is directed by Turner, a former CT pollster. Turner acknowledged in a column for the AFR on Sunday that his firm had âunderestimatedâ Laborâs strength, owing to three factors.Â
The polling overestimated how many Labor voters would âdefectâ to the Coalition, âparticularly those who voted No at the Voice referendumâ, he wrote.Â
âSecond, for all the noise about the preference flows being different in a way that would substantially benefit Coalition performance, it appears that the outcome simply did not materialise. The primary vote collapse for the Coalition was too much for any benefit from additional preference flows,â Turner continued.
âThird, the late swing. Given that all pollsters seem to have underestimated the swing to Labor, and everyoneâs fieldwork would have been over the earlier days in that week, it strongly suggests that there was a late swing among âsoftâ or undecided voters in the final days that was very hard for pollsters to pick up.â
The Sydney Morning Herald reported on Sunday the Coalitionâs own polling indicated it would get 37% of the national primary vote, in numbers presented three days out from election day. The actual result was closer to 32%. âIt was definitely wrong,â a Liberal frontbencher told the SMH. âWe spent millions of dollars on it and will be keen to know what went wrong.â
Which, if any, polls can be trusted?
We want to hear from you. Write to us at letters@crikey.com.au to be published in Crikey. Please include your full name. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
If you often open multiple tabs and struggle to keep track of them, Tabs Reminder is the solution you need. Tabs Reminder lets you set reminders for tabs so you can close them and get notified about them later. Never lose track of important tabs again with Tabs Reminder!
Try our Chrome extension today!
Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more