It’s not whether you win or lose

On its plain meaning her pitch will be well-received.

In research we undertook for the LGAQ last month we found the public is, at worst, resigned to population growth and, at best, enthusiastic about it. They see it as linked to economic growth, and their biggest concern is that infrastructure isn’t keeping pace.

Most concern about population growth occurs in the developing areas of south-east Queensland where it is changing the nature of neighbourhoods. Areas like this in Queensland and New South Wales will decide the results of the next election.

As enunciated by PM Gillard this policy takes on more strategic dimensions than just a policy to keep the urban fringe happy.

She framed it in terms of a fragile environment, a signal to Greens that climate change is not forgotten.

It also speaks to concerns about asylum seekers - “sustainable growth” is a left-wing version of “we will decide who comes …”.

And it reassures about the economy, a traditional Coalition strength, and frames this policy area in terms of infrastructure provision, an area stronger for Labor than the Coalition.

Yet according to our polling the pitch doesn’t work well. Greens and the remnants of the Australian Democrats are marginally convinced, but it doesn’t resonate with blue collar conservatives. (Not that Abbott’s mantra of waste, debt, taxes and boats does any better, in fact it does much worse.)

Responses to Gillard’s battle cry feature themes such as “spin”, “hot air”, “rhetoric” and “words”.

Most worryingly for her campaign, the “moving forward” motif is becoming an object of derision. As one respondent said:

“Gillard The Slogan Bogan. She's so backwards with her moving forward slogan. She's a policy free zone. Boat people policy? Maybe oneday. In Due Season. Nothing but a mess she's trying to run away from as fast as possible!”

So why is Abbott falling further behind? (Though he may have a bounce this week off the back of his debate performance.)