

Why voters are turned off, tuned out and unmoved

With two weeks until election day, exclusive focus group testing of Bill Shorten and Scott Morrison and their policies reveals worrying signs for both major parties.

Key Points

  • A record 510,000 people have already voted early
  • The Ipsos focus group research featured voters from Western Sydney aged under 45 who voted Liberal in 2016 but are now undecided
  • The second focus group featured Melburnians aged over 45  in marginal seats, all of whom voted Labor in 2016 but are now undecided
  • Sydney swing voters were more positive on Scott Morrison than Melburnians
  • Both Sydney and Melbourne swing voters had negative views of Bill Shorten's union roots

Typically, big queues outside polling booths early on election day don't bode well for the incumbent. It usually means the voters want change, as was the case in 2007 and 2013, the last two occasions in which a government was removed from office.

With the advent of pre-poll voting, the modern equivalent of the big queues may be people voting early in large numbers. That has certainly been the case this time. The polls opened on Monday and by Thursday, a record 510,000 of the 16 million enrolled voters had cast a ballot.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison with LNP candidate for Herbert Philip Thompson at a barbeque breakfast in Townsville this week.  Dominic Lorrimer

That was 200,000 more than at the same point in the 2016 campaign.

Bill Shorten, who has been clinging to the lead for the duration, would have us believe voters want to turf out the government.

"I think people are voting early because they want a change of government,'' he said at Monday night's leaders' debate in Perth.


"People are keen to vote early. I don't think it is just a question of convenience. I think there is a mood for change in Australia."

Another way of looking at it, however, is that early voting is a cultural shift, a matter of convenience, and the mood for change is not as universal as Labor says.

Voters, unswayed by the election campaign, are simply voting along predetermined positions. If those positions reflect the opinion polls for the past two years, then that should favour Labor.

Or, it could benefit the Coalition because the leadership upheaval of the last nine years has reflected poorly on both major parties and there is a significant swag of voters who are sick of change and that means they don't want another prime minister.

Bill Shorten, left, and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews (right) announcing $2b for Melbourne's Metro Tunnel on Friday. AAP

This week, The Australian Financial Review, via poll company Ipsos, conducted focus group research in two key battlegrounds.

On Tuesday night in western Sydney, a group of under 45s was interviewed. All of them voted Liberal in 2016 but are now undecided.


The next night, a group of over-45 undecided marginal seat Melburnians, all of whom voted Labor in 2016, were tested.

'No silver bullet'

If there was a single takeout, it was that both groups of voters are proving hard to convince to vote differently.

"There appears to be no silver bullet policy areas that are critical to these currently undecided voters and neither leader is seen as particularly charismatic nor presenting a compelling case as having a vision for the future of Australia,'' the research concludes.

"This current lack of momentum in the campaign suggests that these voters may still find themselves undecided as they approach election day, and the focus group discussion suggests that many may fall back on partisan voting habits."

Melbourne participants were not necessarily enthusiastic or excited about potential change.

The discussions in both groups "were marked by the lack of any sense of urgency in relation to policy issues, leadership choice or governing party".

"The election campaign was not yet seen as particularly engaging, nor was there any sense of a strong need for change, or attraction to a particular vision for the future of the country.''


"Melbourne participants (who had all voted for a Labor candidate in 2016) were more likely to feel that a change of government was needed, but were not necessarily enthusiastic or excited about potential change.

"Participants were more focused on unseating what they saw as an unfocused and unproductive incumbent government."

At the end of the Melbourne session, the eight interviewees were asked to raise their hand as to how they would most likely vote. Seven said they would stick with Labor, reflecting the view that Victoria could cost the Coalition government.

With both parties expecting little movement in NSW, normally a critical state, the focus groups also reflect this. There was a strong sense people are sick of the political instability.

It seems that after having five different Prime Ministers since 2010, there was little appetite for a sixth.

Peter, a manufacturing worker aged in his early 40s, spoke for many when he described the current state of politics as a "shambles". There was a consensus politicians of all stripes were more focused on the three years between elections rather than the long-term.

Now with social media everything they do is scrutinised, they have to keep changing what they say to make everybody happy.

"They don't listen to the people of Australia. We're the ones that vote at the end of day but after it all, it's like 'Thanks for voting for us but we're not going to listen to you any more'," says Tammy, a 35-year-old childcare worker.


Morris, a soon-to-be-father in his early 30s, says: "They are too concerned with keeping their own job and with their own interests. I feel like that's why they swap leaders all the time. Now with social media everything they do is so scrutinised, they have to keep changing what they say to make everybody happy."

'I feel kind of embarrassed for the country'

However, this anger and cynicism did not translate into a burning desire to kick out the Coalition.

"We don't want to influence that change, that revolving door thing that's been happening in the last few years in politics," Peter says.

"Keep them [the Coalition] going, give them another go, see what they are going to do."

Tammy says: "I feel kind of embarrassed for the country... how many times have we changed leaders? I feel really sorry for the Queen because she has got to write a letter to them all the time saying congratulations. She probably sits there going 'Oh my god, what is
going on?'

"We've had so many different changes in the last couple of years, that you just go 'Really Bill, are you going to really change, is it going to change?'"

When Scott Morrison, pictured with his new Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, replaced Malcolm Turnbull is was too much for many voters. Bloomberg


Morris adds: "We've had so many changes, it really hasn't done anything." This sentiment of "better the devil you know" comes despite the participants feeling like Australians have been treading water economically for the last three years.

"[We're] stuck in a rut. We haven't gone forward," says Dale, a father in his early 40s.

Failure to cut through

Neither leader was seen as inspiring. Both groups praised Julie Bishop and still saw her as the best choice for Liberal leader.

On the upside for Shorten, he was described as calm and level-headed, a family man, and his length in tenure was recognised as bringing a wealth of experience in a leadership role.

Conversely, both Melbourne and Western Sydney voters negatively recalled his roots in the union movement, and remained concerned that this was an overly strong influence on him.

In terms of his presence, they described him as being a ‘bit of a dag’, and looking ‘lost in the crowd’.


While the Melburnians wanted to see the back of the government, "there was little enthusiasm for a Shorten prime ministership''.

Their view of Morrison was one of indifference whereas the Sydneysiders were more positive.

They considered him family-orientated, emotionally in touch, interested in sport, and coming across as an ‘average Joe’. He was also considered arrogant, nerdy – due to the frequency of references to the Cronulla Sharks – lacking confidence in his decision-making and not as intelligent as Malcolm Turnbull.

While the Sydney participants said policies were more important than leadership in swinging their vote, perhaps worryingly for Shorten his sweeping manifesto has not cut through.

There was no mention of climate change or free cancer treatment; even two childcare workers appeared ignorant of Shorten's $9.9 billion promise to boost their pay by $11,300 over eight years.

One participant, Adam who works for a software company, did recall one policy that cut through the "white noise" of negative campaign ads: Clive Palmer's pledge to build a bullet train, lauded as the kind of positive initiatives he wanted to hear.

Participants described Palmer as "Australia's Trump" and Peter said he was willing to consider voting for the United Australia Party but would not want Palmer in "100 per cent control" of the country.

Michelle, who works in human resources, says she doesn't think Morrison believes in what he is selling.

Although some gave credit to Shorten for longevity, his union background was a negative and Tammy describes him as a "dag". "I don't know if it's his shortness but he always looks a bit lost in the crowd," she says.

Phillip Coorey
Andrew Tillett

Most Viewed In Politics