Anna Bligh was dressed in green today, touting green changes to the building code, promising a “green door” for eco-friendly development – all this a day after promising a green jobs army… anyone might think the ALP is angling for preferences from The Greens. That, of course, isn’t the case. According to Anna Bligh. She may be telling the truth. Labor would rather its high profile greenwash soak up some first preferences, and to cut The Greens as a party out of the equation. From the ALP’s point of view, the early election has at least one advantage – it gives The Greens little time to raise funds, build a profile, and communicate with the electorate. Indooroopilly MP Ronan Lee’s comments are only sought by the media when preferences are an issue, or when there’s an explicitly environmental angle. The Greens have little chance of getting a talking head on the nightly news – the only source of information (aside from party propaganda) for most voters. Except when Bob Brown comes to town.
On the other side of the fence, The Borg spent the day explaining away an asterisk in the small print for that perennial promise made by every single party in opposition from time immemorial – extending the railway line to Redcliffe. The project, the LNP material explained, would be subject to the impact of the GFC on state finances. Perhaps that’s wise. But it rather begs the question of the veracity of the promise, and today it inconveniently allowed Labor to bang the GFC denial drum, and to elicit an unconvincing riposte from Lawrence – all will be revealed tomorrow.
The big story of the day according to the media? The Abraham Lincoln of Beaudesert, Pauline Hanson.
21 Comments
The ALP skates on very thin ice berating the LNP for promising but not building a Redcliffe rail line, methinks.
I’m not so sure. I suspect a lot of any sentiment actually antagonistic on that issue would have worked itself out in the Redcliffe by-election in the last term. I don’t see the LNP having a realistic chance of taking Redcliffe itself, and I think the wider significance goes to the reminder about the extremely wonky messages about the GFC and funding of promises they’ve been sending.
Fair point. Plays well for Labor in the rest of the state.
Still, that train’s been on the drawing board since Adam was a boy.
I’m pretty sure Labor said “it will never be built” and provided a justification. But, yep, it’s the perennial promise, as I said!
Not so sure about that Sam, I know of a by election won by Houghton by promising a Redcliffe Railway and Terry Rogers won by promising a Redcliffe Railway line. The point this time is that the Nationals have made a very conditional non core promise and the electorate is just not buying Springborg’s unfunded promises this year.
It is an own goal by Springborg who has been in Parliament about twenty years but has not bothered to turn up at election time with policies that are fully costed.
Mea culpa.
I just *seems* to me that every time a ballot box is waved in front of a camera somebody mentions the Redcliffe Line…
Tomorrow is the most important day of the campaign so far. If The Nationals fail to convince the electorate that they have got policy that is fully funded, as well as explaining where the funding is for the almost $70 Billion that it cost Springborg in promises to get the merger up last year then the whole National party hillbilly act is at risk of falling over before they even begin to deal with the GFC.
Aside: Clive Palmer is bankrolling the Gold Coast Football Club that is entering into the A League next year. (What follows is quite a stretch for a terrible punchline.) If he comes to some funding deal with Lawrence that he wishes to advertise through his sporting interests then the team could become known as the GFC GCFCs.
It’s times that people wish I never learned to type.
Sam but one thing they won’t explain is where are the detailed costings for the Redcliffe Railway Line. It is not promising things like the Redcliffe Railway Line that is difficult any dope could do that. Can the Nationals provide proof that they can pay for this promise and if they can’t why promise a Redcliffe Railway Line?
Now the Throughbred Racing Industry is beginning to cast a wary eye over what the Nationals might get up to if they are allowed into government without scrutiny.
http://www.virtualformguide.com/cgi-bin/tvf/displaynewsitem.pl?20090302qldparties.txt
The word I’m hearing from the Greens in Queensland is that they aren’t bluffing about preferences. They’re not doing a deal with the ALP unless they cancel the Traveston Dam.
If the green’s preferences matter, I think the ALP will have bigger problems than the Traveston dam.
Ben, I’m afraid what The Greens do and don’t do isn’t all that important in an optional preferential system where there’s an ingrained culture of “Just Vote One”. Add that to a very small number of party members, and concentrating available resources in a few inner city seats, and a lot of candidates will struggle to cover booths. That’s what I’m getting at with the point about the timing of the campaign. Take a look at the exhaustion rate – Anna Bligh is talking over the heads of The Greens to their voters.
I’d add to that the point that with some exceptions the degree to which OPV impacts on the importance of preference allocations is very poorly understood by the media.
Hence the paradox that Ronan Lee can only get publicity by talking about preferences.
No way Bligh will cancel the Traveston Dam, I’d bet.
There are really only two seats impacted by the Traveston Crossing Dam from Labor’s point of view, Indooroopilly and Hervey Bay.
I just can’t imagine them losing any sleep over what happens in Gympie, Maryborough, Nicklin, Noosa, Callide, Maroochydore or Nanango on election day really. All are either Tory or Indy from the last election.
New post on The Greens and preferences:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/electioncentral/2009/03/03/voting-green/
Andrew Bartlett makes some pointed observations about the Redcliffe railway, in the context of a post on a state government website about 150 “Queensland icons” for the 150th anniversary of statehood this year:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/bartlett/2009/03/03/queensland-and-its-icons/
Of course the focus is on primaries.
For further perspectives on Green issues in the QLD election, see…
http://climatechangeperspectives.blogspot.com/2009/03/climate-change-in-queensland-election.html
And, to respond to Bligh’s announcement of ‘Green Jobs’… her idea of building boardwalks in national parks and on beaches does NOT sound like the revolution in education that we need…
We need education and training for people to become life-long renewable energy engineers and technicians.
We need institutes for carbon accounting to be established alongside financial accounting.
We need our agricultural universities to teach sustainable farming techniques.
We need serious investment in start-up industries, that will create LONG-TERM green jobs – not just giving a few school-leavers a summer holiday at the beach.