Comments on: Polls: this, that and the other

By: Peter K

Peter K — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 02:54:12 +0000

Long serving members who lost…two that come to mind..Former Qld Liberal leader Sir William Knox lost Nundah in Brisbane in 1989 after 32 years. Federally, Ian Robinson lost Page in 1990 after first being elected in 1963.

By: Antony Green

Antony Green — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:03:41 +0000

I think you mean James McGowan, and Holman lost after 22 years in Parliament. He could have accepted an offer to move to the city. He was defeated by a Progressive candidate in the new mutli-member electorate of Cootamundra in 1920. The two sitting Labor MPs were elected, but Holman was defeated by a competing conservative candidate.

By: William Bowe

William Bowe — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:50:29 +0000

Stephen, I have only just noticed that the person who sent me the EMRS data included their own table of party totals after exclusion of the undecided which differs slightly from mine – it has Labor on 40, Liberal 33 and Greens 22. All I did was divide the party scores by 0.77 (23 per cent being the undecided figure) and mutliply by 100, which may not have been the most sophisticated way of going about it.

By: Geoff R

Geoff R — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 06:10:29 +0000

Good question about long-serving MPs. Generally if you have held a seat for long time it must be ultra-safe so losing becomes unlikely. Gunn’s problem is the redistribution. John McGowan lost Redfern in 1917 after 26 years but that was because he had left Labor over conscription. William Holman lost Cootamundra in 1920 after 26 years but that was due to new boundaries under PR. Possibly some of Vince Gair’s supporters in Qld also.

By: Cameron smith

Cameron smith — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:32:00 +0000

id imagine the difference between 100 would either be for other parties, dont know/informal, and rounding.

By: Stephen L

Stephen L — Thu, 23 Feb 2006 02:45:59 +0000

Thanks for posting those William, but it strikes me that the figures don’t add up. If the sample is the same in each seat Labor’s vote can’t be as high as 42, nor the Libs as low as 32. The Greens figure is probably right.

This may just mean that the sample size in Lyons is larger than the others, but in that case the total figure should be weighted to reflect that.

Given the margins for error this is probably a trivial point, but it does make me question the whole poll a bit.

By: Dave S

Dave S — Wed, 22 Feb 2006 03:42:37 +0000

A question for the experts … if Graham Gunn falls in the seat of Stuart would this represent some sort of record as he has been MP for the seat for nigh on 36 years? Has any MP lost election after such a lengthy time in parliament? I’m aware that Earle Page lost Cowper in NSW after 42 years (dying without knowing he had lost!!) but that was in 1961. Are there any other old-timers who were bumped out at election have extreme lengths of time in parliament?