Question over Banks’ polling

Written By: - Date published: 12:32 pm, May 13th, 2010 - 18 comments
Categories: john banks, len brown - Tags: , , ,

I’ve been tipped off to a possible issue with Dodgy John ‘if I wear my policy on my sleeve, I won’t get elected’ Banks’ most recent mayoral poll.

I covered John Banks’ first poll release noting that he cheekily weighted his results on 2007 sub-regional turnout. Given this year’s election is likely to result in an uptick in voting, this is slightly dubious.

Banks’ second poll, which has him dead even with Len Brown, might have a bigger problem.

This news report notes the results are ‘from a Curia Market Research poll of 1500 ratepayers’ note that last word, ratepayers.

If Curia was only polling ‘ratepayers’ then it has missed a pretty big voter segment of the population that being non-ratepayers who might be more likely to vote Len Brown. Surely Curia wouldn’t be so silly?

I wonder if this is just a mistake because if it’s deliberate then people need to be very wary of claims of support for the Mayor for Remuera.

18 comments on “Question over Banks’ polling ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. wyndham 1
    13 May 2010 at 12:50 pm

    As Curia is our right wing friend David Farrar, then it’s highly likely that he only polled ratepayers. Smoke and mirrors.

  2. MikeG 2
    13 May 2010 at 1:40 pm

    interesting – I was rung for that poll and didn’t answer Banks for the unprompted question, but was not asked the head-to-head question – I guess they just inferred the answer. The pollster also seemed surprised at my response, perhaps it was due to the fact that me address is close to Remuera.

  3. mickysavage 3
    13 May 2010 at 1:42 pm

    Well spotted.

    Maybe the results were really bad but they discovered that if they used the ratepayer subset then the results were better. It certainly shoots a rather large hole in Farrar’s credibility. How could you trust any poll that Curia does if he performs these tricks?

    Your nuts you miss the point. All persons of the electoral roll can vote. Our law currently allows the poor as well as the wealthy to have a say in who their local leaders should be.

    Would you have it different?

  4. Buster 4
    13 May 2010 at 2:44 pm

    Banks is known for using dodgy polling to try and encourage people into running and boosting his public support.

  5. Bren 5
    13 May 2010 at 3:02 pm

    I hate to be a spoilsport but wouldn’t the simplest explanation be that NewstalkZB simply put the wrong word in the article?

    • ghostwhowalksnz 5.1
      13 May 2010 at 3:29 pm

      Ratepayers is the wrong word?
      Dont be silly , everybody would be thinking ‘voters’.
      If Farrars behind it , definitely a misleading choice of words hoping it wont be noticed. Thats what the guy does.

    • The Voice of Reason 5.2
      13 May 2010 at 5:04 pm

      This is from the Curia website:

      “Curia was commissioned to do a poll of 1,200 Auckland residents on the upcoming mayoral elections, on behalf of Hon John Banks.”

      Residents could be mistaken for ratepayers, I suppose. Especially if you were a NewstalkZB reporter and unfamiliar with the concept of accuracy in reporting.

  6. Loco 6
    13 May 2010 at 3:18 pm

    you’re nuts – “God forbid that ratepayers should actually have the casting vote in who gets elected”

    A lot of people’s rates are covered in their rents which are paid to the landlord who then pays the rates, do you want these people disenfranchised ?

  7. Bright Red 7
    13 May 2010 at 3:19 pm

    I take it someone other than Sam wrote the blurb! “sam cash has”.. reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons with Bob Dole http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK-VmMyjvaw

  8. graham 8
    13 May 2010 at 5:43 pm

    Rember the paula bennet story its not like the media to be wrong
    combined with sad gits here going off half cocked

  9. Jared 9
    13 May 2010 at 6:13 pm

    Releasing polling information in a manner that supports your viewpoint, or reflects positively on you is how politics work. In the same way Sam Cash is writing solely against John Banks on this blog is Len Brown’s campaign strategy, release as much damaging information as possible to discredit the opposition.

  10. Winner 10
    13 May 2010 at 9:59 pm

    Yes looks like a very dodgy poll and playing with figures to suit just like Banks Kiwi Saver company did with him directly miss leading the public. Oh yes he also did the same with his Bee Pollen company – surely the right can field a better option than Banks? Look forward to seeing an independant poll as surely the public see right through Banks seeing he hasn’t changed and is still dishonest.

  11. mickysavage 11
    14 May 2010 at 8:03 am

    This Morning’s Herald has the results of a poll considerably different to Curia’s with Len Brown well in front. The suggestion that Curia’s result was based on a poll of ratepayers rather than voters has just gained a lot of traction.

    Thank you Granny Herald. You have been very good lately.

    Gulp, did I just say that?

  12. Undecided 12
    14 May 2010 at 9:09 am

    Im now decided – decided Banks is a Fraudster given his polling methods. How can NZ’s most important job be entrusted to this man. DigiPoll (the first idependant poll) reflects the collective intelligence of the public showing Banks for what he real is, a washed up has been.

  13. Armchair Critic 13
    14 May 2010 at 9:31 am

    The Herald this morning has both Bernard Orsman and Rudmandisputing the Curia polling.
    The last paragraphs of Orsman’s article discuss the findings of the poll in a bit more detail – it shows the amalgamation is not popular. The best thing he can find is that the only slightly more people think management of Auckland will not be improved than people who think it will be improved. FFS Bernard, while it might be the smallest diference, it’s still twice the margin of error.

Links to post