The surprise and perfectly-executed change in Labour leadership from Jacinda Ardern to Chris Hipkins has delivered just the polling shot in the arm the Government was hoping for.
It only took a week. It's early days, but the polls also show a wide trust deficit for now that favour Chris (Hipkins) over Christopher (Luxon), giving Labour plenty of hope that a campaign to attack Luxon's suitability to be PM could be fruitful.
Polls from 1News/Kantar and Newshub/Reid Research out on Monday night both showed support for Labour bounced back to just in front of National, with new Prime Minister Chris Hipkins immediately jumping above National Leader Christopher Luxon as preferred Prime Minister. The polls were done last week in the immediate wake of Hipkins' being selected as leader and then sworn in PM, and included his first press conferences as party leader and then PM.
The 1News/Kantar poll found support for Labour rose five percentage points to 38% in the poll of 1,008 eligible voters from Jan 25 to Jan 29, vs the last 1News/Kantar poll taken in December. That put Labour ahead of National on 37%, which fell 1 percentage point. However, the lead is not enough for Labour/Green to govern alone again, or for National/ACT to govern alone. If replicated in the October 14 election, the result would be a hung parliament. (See poll numbers below).
The Newshub/Reid Research poll taken from Jan 22 to Jan 27 showed Labour up an even bigger 5.7% to 38% and National down 4.1% to 36.6%, with the result also too close to call if replicated in the election.
Interestingly, both polls showed voters trusted and liked Hipkins more than Luxon. Newshub/Reid Research showed Hipkins immediately above Luxon as Preferred PM at 19.6% to 18.8%, with Luxon down 2.7% from the same poll taken in December. The 1News/Kantar poll showed Hipkins just ahead of Luxon as preferred PM at 23% to 22%, with Luxon down one from last month.
Hipkins' approval rating at 46% was above Luxon on on 43% in the 1News/Kantar poll, but Hipkins net approval rating of 33% after taking away the 10% who disapproved was well ahead of Luxon on 9%, given 34% disapproved of Luxon.
The Newshub/Reid Research poll asked if voters trusted Hipkins and Luxon. It found a net 26% trusted Hipkins (52.9% trusted and 26.9% distrusted), while a net 6.9% distrusted Luxon (36.9% trusted him and 43.8% distrusted him). This poll, however, found National was perceived by 42.8% of voters as the party most trusted for managing the predicted recession, compared with 37.8% who trusted Labour to manage the economy best.
The 1News poll found 28% thought the economy would be better in 12 months, up 10 percentage points from the same poll in December.
42 Comments
Yes that strategic voting is very likely to reappear. Last time National were a self inflicted cot case. This time even though Luxon is hardly an inspirational type leader they are regathered and stable, so far that is. As well they have on hand ACT as a viable coalition partner, a factor missing in the last three elections.If the electorate sizeably last time strategised to vote Labour to stymie the Greens , keep them out of actual government, then one would think it would view a coalition of Labour, breaking ranks and cracking, with the Greens & TMP actually in cabinet, as even more alarming and therefore that sentiment, that strategy in voting will head towards NationalACT provided they keep their houses in order.
... a genuinely nice guy , and only mildly incompetent compared to most of them in his cabinet ...there has been a collective sigh of relief around the nation that Ardern is leaving ... so he gets a dead cat bounce in the polls ...
Until ... until the Maori caucus resume pushing their agenda ... when Mahuta & Jackson push hard against Chippy , for their projects ....
At least a couple of snarly moments though weren’t there during the height of the lockdown(s) etc and that includes a woeful lack of self discipline in the handling of the Charlotte Bellis situation. The point is though, all those problems, dissension, breaking of the ranks are still there and they had become sufficiently severe to pressure PM Ardern to kick for touch. A new captain yes but still a divided, discordant crew that looks to be verging on mutiny if certain factions don’t get their own way. Said it before, say it again, a house divided cannot stand.
Expecting Greens to lose both their share of party votes and the Auckland Central electorate from the 2020 election. They peaked in 2020 because 18–24-year-olds turned up to the booths to vote on the cannabis referendum.
We will likely have well-over 100k new permanent residents eligible to vote by Oct 2023, thanks to the 2021 Resident Visa scheme. This large cohort of mostly working-age people includes those who wouldn't have gotten their residency without Labour's generosity.
Dead cat bounce.
Hipkins' record of shame (not exhaustive):
- Northland women during COVID
- Allowing gangs to do as they pleased during COVID
- Charlotte Bellis - leaking of private information
- Crime and ram raids
- School truancy
- And don't forget, he supported everything JA stood for.
Surely the most damning is Two Shots for Summer Hipkins ignoring MOH advice on experimental gene therapy for young people.
“...consequently, CV TAG expressed concern about vaccine mandates requiring younger age groups (e.g. <18 years) to be vaccinated with 2 doses of the Pfizer vaccine and stated: ‘consideration should be given to permitting younger people who have had one dose to be permitted to work or undertake other activities covered by the mandate’. This particular detail has not been carried through to the implementation of this advice”
https://cranmer.substack.com/p/covid-and-our-kiwi-kids-part-2?r=1q83zj&…
"In addition, there is clear evidence in the official documents that it was agreed that references to increasing dosing intervals as a method of potentially providing some protection against myocarditis should be removed from public communications."
https://cranmer.substack.com/p/covid-and-our-kiwi-kids-part-1
"The median Infection Fatality Rate was 0.0003% at 0–19 years, 0.002% at 20–29 years"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512201982X
"...We perform matched case-control studies and find increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis during the first week following vaccination, and particularly after the second dose"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31401-5
"We estimate that 22,000 - 30,000 previously uninfected adults aged 18-29 must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation. Using CDC and sponsor-reported adverse event data, we find that booster mandates may cause a net expected harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented in previously uninfected young adults, we anticipate 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males, and 1,373 to 3,234 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity which interferes with daily activities. Given the high prevalence of post-infection immunity, this risk-benefit profile is even less favourable. University booster mandates are unethical because: 1) no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group; 2) vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people; 3) mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission;"
Yawn, most of us have moved on. The mandates were unfortunate and may bite them in the bum but so what - it happened. They did their best under the circumstances and the huge majority of us didn't have an issue with the vaccine or closed borders - so - meh, barking at cars. If you want to do a better job get on the hustings and put yourself forward.
I'm in two minds about this.
On one hand, ~5% is not much of a honeymoon bump when you consider that - according to the wall-to-wall media coverage - Hipkins can walk on Auckland flood waters, heal the sick still suffering after 9 long years of National neglect (never mind the last 5 trips around the sun) and "Fix It" better than one cartoon builder named Bob. He's also made Bogan Chic fashionable again ... go long on Dirty Dog speed dealer sunnies and spray-painted VF Commodores. I suspect that ones the lustre wears off - as it always does - Labour will slip back.
On the other hand, it goes to show just how relentlessly dreary Luxon is. The Two Ticks Blue brigade (e.g. the commenters over at Kiwiblog, or some of the business owners who I am forced to mix with on occasion) will never admit it, but the truth is plain for everyone else to see.
The nanosecond someone with Chill Vibes and a smidgen of "positive" personality comes along, a substantial number of people are happy to jump off the Waka Kahurangi, having only hopped on to escape the increasingly condescending and unpleasant Ardern (who, in her glory days, was of course the pound-for-pound personality politics champion)
National's only hope is probably to abandon any pretence of winning the personality battle, and going for the jugular in terms of pointing out that Hipkins is really just a fresh dusting of glitter on yesterday's stale excreta, and as Labour's "Mr Fix It" (who appears never to have fixed anything) he has clearly been donkey-deep in the internal machinations and goings-on that have been hidden from the public.
Oh and they might want to release a policy or two as well, and not just ones that benefit the Knights of the Business Roundtable.
They all fawned over John Key too until the Mossack Fonseca and hair pulling incidents took away the ratings gloss ... however they still roll him out for a few clicks.
Chippy is just a faux pas away from a good kicking.
How anyone puts any faith in advertising pimps and their prostitutes is beyond me.
Looks like Labours property policies still have some chance of staying which is good news. The real estate agents will have even less to try create FOMO now. No doubt they will move to talking about the inversion of interest rates. Get in now before rates fall and everyone else starts buying!
Another sad legacy of the Ardern years is that now, thanks to her ever-adoring media acolytes, we seem to be firmly entrenched in a 'presidential' style of politics where the personal appeal (or otherwise) of a leader is regarded as more important than the policies or performance of their political parties. Even the poll questions seem to be framed towards it being a popularity contest.
Anyway, when the Labour/media spin around Hipkins loses its new re-spray gloss (no matter how carefully the predominantly left-wing media here try to shield Hipkins from the bright lights of honest political inspection) then the real state of New Zealand under Labour will once again become the issue voters will consider. If the next election does descend into a mere leadership popularity contest then I suspect Luxon would not fare that well. So for this reason National will be sure to push voter focus on the current government's performance (or non-performance) and policies will once again come to the fore.
I think the respective parties’ income tax policies will be very influential in deciding the election.
Having said that, not sure if they will be that different! I think both parties will put raising thresholds on the table.
what will be interesting to see is how Labour can afford it, especially as outgoings will keep rising in terms of benefits, as unemployment rises. I don’t think they have the balls to consider a wealth tax or a land tax.
It’s an easier proposition for National as they will no doubt cut, cut, cut to help pay for tax cuts.
the popularity of the Greens and Act will also be important. I think it’s very likely that Labour or National will need one of these parties to form a government.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.