logo
Liberal Party paid $1.5m for polling that failed to predict election result

Liberal Party paid $1.5m for polling that failed to predict election result

News.com.au08-05-2025

EXCLUSIVE
Furious Liberals have revealed the party paid about $1.5 million to Freshwater Strategy for polling that was still telling them on the day of the election they would pick up seats.
The amount paid for the polling project can be revealed as some strategists push back on criticism insisting Peter Dutton made captain's calls.
As angry donors prepare to close their cheque books and complain about the millions of dollars handed over to make Mr Dutton prime minister, party strategists are counting the cost of the disastrous campaign.
High on the list of regrets is the money spent on the political research project designed to get Mr Dutton elected.
Liberal director Andrew Hirst and the pollster Freshwater have flatly refused to comment on the confidential contract but senior Liberals have told news.com.au that the final figure will be around $1.5 million.
'I understand the final would be north of $1 million. I don't know the exact amount but $1.5m would be around the mark at least, depending on any outgoings he has incurred,'' a Liberal source said.
The contract is known to be particularly expensive as it included focus group research with voters as well as quantitative poll research.
Peter Dutton's 'big surprise'
In the final week of the campaign, Mr Dutton said he was hopeful of a 2019 result when Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison triumphed over predictions of a Labor victory.
'I think we're seeing a 2019 situation, where you've got a lot of interesting contests playing on the ground, where we've had a very significant effort by great candidates.
'And I think there'll be some big surprises on election night, because people have had enough.'
He was right on the big surprises prediction but not on where their votes would land.
Liberal MPs insist polling was not accurate
'We had bad numbers, way off the mark, totally out of line with all of the published polling,' Liberal Senator Johnathon Duniam said.
'Our own polling here in Tasmania pointed to the wipe-out we ultimately got and so there are some people in our campaign headquarters who are going to have to answer some questions for us around what went wrong here.'
Hitting back at attempts to blame polling for the Liberal Party's woes however, some strategists insist that's simply 'not fair'.
'At no stage was anyone saying to Peter Dutton, 'you're going to win,'' a campaign insider insisted.
'I'll be absolutely honest with you, the polling definitely did not show us going backwards, either.'
The Freshwater poll never predicted a seat count for the Liberals in the 70s. At the highest point of the campaign, it predicted a count in the high 60s.
By the end of the campaign, Liberal Party director Mr Hirst expected, based on the polling, a seat count in the low 60s and the Labor Party with a slim majority.
Mr Dutton's constant suggestions that he could win the election and secret Liberal polling was at odds with published polls was nothing more than political spin.
Liberals want to dump pollster
A blame game has now erupted with the Liberals preparing to dump the pollster when his contract runs out in June and blaming the research for convincing Mr Dutton the situation wasn't as bad as it turned out to be on election night.
News.com.au understands there was a greater reliance on focus groups than there was in previous campaigns.
The focus groups are a room of around 10 people held in key electorates multiple times a week.
'The jury is still out on the efficacy of the polling. There are some MPs who weren't that close to the polling complaining about it,'' a Liberal strategist said.
'Did the track tell Peter Dutton to go out there and campaign for nuclear policy? No.
'Was it telling him to campaign to cut 41,000 public servants? Far from it. Was he advised not to do that? Of course. So, there's a little bit of corporate warfare here.'
The polling was overseen by Freshwater Strategy's Dr Mike Turner and involved a tracking poll that was conducted every second night in 15 key electorates across Australia in key marginal seats with 1200 votes.
'The starting point was really that our internal data was wrong,'' a Liberal strategist said.
'If we knew that was the situation we would have spent much more time and resources defending seats rather than trying to win seats.
'Clearly, then there's just a broad rejection of what we were offering Australian people.'
Freshwater Strategy
A pollster and strategist, Dr Turner has worked as a senior adviser on several pivotal election campaigns in the UK, Australia and New Zealand.
The polling company also provided a two-party preferred national poll for The Australian Financial Review that predicted before the election that the Albanese government faced a hung Parliament or around 76 seats.
With 80 per cent of the vote counted the Labor Party is currently on 89 seats and the Liberal Party 40 seats.
But as insiders point out, the tracking poll that political parties rely on is never a hard count of seats.
That formal work on modelling the seat estimation was actually contracted to a different company.
Nevertheless, Liberals who worked in the inner sanctum thought that some of Mr Dutton's predictions were based on Freshwater data.
'That would be guesstimates from (Freshwater), absolutely,'' a source said.
What is the tracking poll and what does it do?
What voters and the media sometimes fail to understand is that the political research for elections known as a tracking poll do not provide a hard count of seats or a two-party preferred prediction in the same way published polls do in newspapers.
The polling is also tightly controlled and only provided to the leader, the leader's office and Liberal Party directors which means many of the people complaining about the polling have never seen it making it difficult to analyse in a fair way.
A post-mortem will now be held into the result, with an experienced Liberal Party loyalist such as Brian Loughnane tasked with analysing where it all went wrong.
What did Freshwater's polling say?
Just days before the election, a Freshwater Strategy poll predicted in the Australian Financial Review that Labor was likely to form a minority government at Saturday's federal election.
The polling conducted predicted a 1.5-point swing towards Labor in a fortnight on a two-party preferred basis, with the government leading the Coalition by 51.5 per cent to 48.5 per cent.
The current estimated two-party preferred vote is 54.8 per cent for Labor and 45.2 per cent for the Liberals.
The figures in the poll just before the election represented a swing of 0.6 per cent since the 2022 election, and if applied across all electorates, the number of seats Labor holds would fall to 76 – the figure required to form majority government – down from the 78 it held at the start of the campaign.
The company, which includes a number of staff from the Liberal Party's previous pollster Crosby-Textor or CT, was established in 2022.
In a post-election opinion piece for the Fin, the pollster blamed a few factors.
'Like most other polls, Financial Review-Freshwater Strategy polling picked the trend, accurately estimated Labor's primary vote, but we underestimated its final TPP. After some initial analysis, we put this down to three main factors,'' the pollster Dr Turner said.
'First, polling appears to have over-estimated Labor 'defectors' to the Coalition. Particularly, those who voted No at the Voice referendum. Early indications suggest that 'Labor-No' voters just didn't switch over to the Coalition in the big numbers estimated.
'Second, 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.
'Third, the late swing. Given that all pollsters seem to have underestimated the swing to Labor, and everyone's fieldwork would have been over the earlier days in that week, it strongly suggests that there was a late swing among 'soft' or undecided voters in the final days that was very hard for pollsters to pick up.
'The Financial Review/Freshwater Strategy poll has a strong track record of calling election outcomes. We were the closest pollster for the Voice to Parliament referendum, we accurately called recent Victorian, NSW, Queensland and West Australian state elections. But this time some others were closer to the mark.'
Why the election swung so much
Dr Turner argued that Labor's strategy to move quickly to frame Mr Dutton, was highly effective.
'Every pollster showed the same trend of Dutton's net approval collapsing throughout the campaign, and Albanese's lead as preferred PM increasing,'' Dr Turner said.
'Labor timed its move well, characterising Dutton as someone who would cut essential public services if elected. The consequence of voting for your local Coalition candidate was getting a Dutton-led administration that was a 'risk' to services that people already had, and valued.
'In times of uncertainty people tend to stick with what they know. No doubt Trump's global tariff interventions played some part in creating greater hesitation about the future, particularly as the sharemarkets went flying.
'But when most of the 'soft' or undecided voters chose Albanese's Labor in 2022, as our polling suggested, it's easy to see how the final stages of a campaign could be so impactful to the final result.
'With former Labor voters considering switching to the Coalition but breaking back home to Labor in strong numbers, it's likely that some of the seats that Labor was hoping to pick up only materialised in the final days of the campaign.'
The Voice referendum and the 2025 election
As the post-mortem begins into how it all went wrong, Liberal strategists have told news.com.au that they believe they know three reasons why the polling did not predict the result.
The first reason is that the Voice referendum results were factored into the Liberal polling methodology over-inflating support for Mr Dutton among Labor's 'No' voters.
The second reason is that Gen Z and millennial voters are notoriously difficult to poll because many don't answer unknown numbers on mobile phones.
The third reason was that the Liberal Party didn't poll in Mr Dutton's seat in the final weeks of the campaign as it was thought it wasn't necessary as they were 'throwing everything' at the seat anyway.
After 24 years in parliament, voters in Dickson then hit the eject button on Mr Dutton's political career on Saturday night.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Albanese opens search for ideas to shape second-term agenda
Albanese opens search for ideas to shape second-term agenda

ABC News

time30 minutes ago

  • ABC News

Albanese opens search for ideas to shape second-term agenda

Anthony Albanese will convene experts, unions and business leaders in Canberra later this year to brainstorm ideas for economic growth, as his government seeks a reform agenda to capitalise on its new-found parliamentary dominance. The prime minister used a National Press Club address on Tuesday to announce an August round table on the themes of growth and productivity with the express purpose of preparing the ground for "further economic reform", led by Treasurer Jim Chalmers. "Our government has secured a mandate to act," he said. "What we want is a focused dialogue and constructive debate that leads to concrete and tangible action." The move mirrors the Jobs and Skills Summit held in the Albanese government's first term, which underlined the case for its expansive workplace relations agenda. While naming the implementation of Labor's election promises as his first priority, Mr Albanese said he wanted the round table to lead to "long-term, lasting change" by seeking broad consensus. "Change that is imposed unilaterally by government rarely endures. Key to lasting change is reform that Australians own and understand … That's the long-term, long-lasting change our government wants to deliver," he said. There is no shortage of economic reform ideas which advocates say could boost productivity and living standards, including redesigning the tax system, improving social services and removing regulatory "red tape". The PM did not point to any specific ideas but said the round table would be "streamlined" and consider "a more targeted set of issues". Among the priorities he cited were faster housing and energy approvals, a better skills system, more user-friendly government services, and regulation to balance the risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence. "Some of this is about government doing the basics better, targeting duplication, removing barriers to investment and reducing the cost of doing business. "But not every challenge can be solved by government stepping back. This is a time when government has to step up," he said. Mr Albanese also outlined a timeline for implementing the government's election policies, with 5 per cent home deposits slated to take effect "by next year" and all of the promised 50 new Medicare Urgent Care Clinics open by the mid-2026. The PM also used his speech to reveal key public service movements, with long-serving Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy to head up the prime minister's own department to replace the outgoing Glyn Davis. Jenny Wilkinson, the current Secretary of the Department of Finance, will become Treasury secretary, the first woman to hold the role. "We respect the vital role the Australian public service has to play … These outstanding public servants will continue to excel in their service to our nation." Mr Albanese again brushed off US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's suggestion that Australia lift its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP, well beyond the government's current plan to reach 2.3 per cent over a decade. "I think that Australia should decide what we spend on Australia's defence, simple as that," he said. "Arbitrary figures lead to a cul-de-sac, and we want to make sure as well that every single dollar that defence spends lead to actual assets. "It seems to me that if the health minister or the [communications] minister or the infrastructure minister came to us and said, 'we want you to spend X percentage of GDP but we won't tell you what it's for', that they wouldn't get far in an ERC process. "And there is no reason why defence shouldn't be governed by anything other than one factor: what do we need?" The prime minister also pointed to the importance of regional relationships as a complement to defence spending. "The work that we have done with our neighbours, including Papua New Guinea and Indonesia … is one of the things that we need to take account of as well, and something that my government is very focused on."

Lawyers argue preacher Wissam Haddad's lectures were 'humiliating' and 'offensive' to Jews
Lawyers argue preacher Wissam Haddad's lectures were 'humiliating' and 'offensive' to Jews

ABC News

timean hour ago

  • ABC News

Lawyers argue preacher Wissam Haddad's lectures were 'humiliating' and 'offensive' to Jews

Lawyers for the nation's peak Jewish body have told a judge speeches delivered by an Islamic preacher in Western Sydney contravened the Racial Discrimination Act and were calculated to "denigrate all Jewish people". The Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) took Wissam Haddad to the Federal Court over a series of lectures delivered at the Al Madina Dawah Centre in Bankstown in November 2023. Mr Haddad denies he breached anti-discrimination laws and will argue in part that the speeches were based on religious text. On the opening day of the four-day hearing, Peter Braham SC, representing the council, told the court the speeches attributed negative characteristics to Jewish people and encouraged the audience to hold those views. Mr Braham said the aim was to inform the audience about Jews "as a people" using stories from the time of the prophet, and make "a general point about race". He told Justice Angus Stewart the intent was to "persuade an audience that the Jewish people have certain immutable and eternal characteristics that cause them to come in conflict with Muslims" and to "be the objects of contempt and hatred". "It's that exercise that's so dangerous," Mr Braham said. "It's threatening, it's humiliating and it's offensive. It's calculated to denigrate all Jewish people, including the Australian Jews for whom we appear. "It involved repeating a large range of offensive tropes about Jews; they're mischievous, they're a vile people, that they're treacherous, and that they control the media and banks et cetera." Mr Haddad is expected to give evidence and be cross-examined during the proceedings. Counsel for Mr Haddad, Andrew Boe, said this was not a case about antisemitism and it will be resolved by "sober, objective analysis". Mr Boe said the court should not form a view about the merits or otherwise of the religious views expressed by Mr Haddad, or their theological foundations. Mr Boe said in a democratic society, there must be room for "the confronting, the challenging, even the shocking". He said it was important in these types of cases for courts to take a "rigorous and detached approach" to applying the Racial Discrimination Act. That approach must maintain the "intended balance between, on the one hand, proscribing racially motivated behaviour that may be harmful in the Australian community, and on the other hand, preserving the freedoms of speech and religion that are so essential to the continued existence of a free democracy". The ECAJ asked the court for orders that there was a contravention of the law and an order requiring videos of the speeches to be removed online. It has also requested the court make an order prohibiting Mr Haddad and the centre from participating in similar conduct in the future. In defence documents, Mr Haddad argued the speeches were derived in substance from the text of the Koran and Hadith — reports believed by Muslims to be the words of Mohammed, his family and companions. He said some contained direct and allegorical references to that material, together with "political commentary on the Gaza war". Mr Haddad's lawyers denied there was any breach of the Racial Discrimination Act and said the speeches were directed only at practising Muslims. They further argued the centre was not a public place because members of the public do not have access to it as a right — its attendees must be either Muslim or permitted by a member of its committee. Mr Haddad's legal team says that if the court does find there was a contravention of the law, then that section of the Racial Discrimination Act is unconstitutional because it would be prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store