Via Lateline (which will not be broadcast for another two hours in the Poll Bludger’s remote western outpost), Blair in comments informs us that Newspoll has jumped on the 61-39 bandwagon set in train by ACNielsen and Morgan. An appropriate note on which to open another exciting new instalment of Idle Speculation.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Idle speculation: 61-39 edition
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
214 Comments
Surely they cannot stuff this election up from here. Surely.
This is the Federal Labor Party: of course they can stuff up the election!
Don’t forget 2001 and 2004!
These poll numbers scare me: surely Rudd can’t be doing this well?
Ah, can you imagine if they actually won 61-39?
Crikey was saying that, in that case, only Nelson and Bishop would survive, out of the cabinet ministers.
The Howard government has become a joke. This is more likely to be fatal than being called evil by the usual suspects.
If Christopher Pearson reflects the continuing Liberal line with his statement, â€The idea of Rudd as a hostage to Burke, rather than merely his dupe, will begin to trouble more of those who already feel he hasn’t been completely truthful’ (“The overdrawn accountâ€, The Weekend Australian, March 17, 2007), then the government is gone. It has to re-engage on serious issues.
For the full entertaining article, go to:
0. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21393511-7583,00.html
Only one way to go from here: down. There is a core LNP vote in Australia that would continue to vote LNP (or at least preference it ahead of Labor) if Howard marched in gold spandex at Mardi Gras, and Vaile became an Aboriginal land rights campaigner. 39% 2PP must be getting pretty close to that point.
If Labor supporters were offered a guaranteed 53:47 on election day, they’d be mad not to take it in a trice. In the same way that Sydney Swans supporters were perfectly happy to take a 2 goal win over Port in the 2003 qualifying final, even though they were 7 goals up at half-time.
“This is the Federal Labor Party: of course they can stuff up the election!
Don’t forget 2001 and 2004!”
This is NOT 2001 or 2004. The game has fundamentally changed.
Yeah they can stuff it up – remember Julia “MEDICARE GOLD” Gillard is out there. working on POLICY.
Huge leads can disappear – witness Hewson’s lead before the ‘93 election (I’m not saying that this election will be similar, just that big changes in how people might vote can occur.)
the howard government is starting to drown under the weight of the the incumbant ministers thinking howard will win the election for them. If the ministers do not engage the electorate and the policies of their portfolios – instead of being fired for incompetent money for the boys attitudes Rudd will win , regardless of Julia,s incompetence
Remind us how far ahead Hewson was at the equivalent point in the 1993 cycle, Sasha. In fact perhaps someone can remind us whether an opposition has ever been this far ahead at this point (e minus 7 months) in the cycle.
After looking in comparison…
This is unprecandented. This is past honeymoon stats now. Rudd will really have to stuff this up to lose it from here.
Don’t think anyone ever has.
Latham peaked at about 54/46 on trend and distributing preferences sensibly. Beazley about 58/42 in 2001, maybe 55/45 in 1998. Howard probably 57/43 in 1995, Hewson peaked at about 58/42. Rudd appears to be ahead of all of them, but it is worth noting only one of the 5 opposition leaders, all of whom held strong leads, went on to win.
It is fascinating the way 1992, 1995, 1998, 2001, 2004 and (maybe?) 2007 have seen the opposition peak in February/March and decline in April/May. Seems like some kind of underlying psychological thing. Any ideas as to why?
WOW
WOW
WOW
WOW
WOW
WOW
What more can one say….
opposition peak in February/March and decline in April/May. Seems like some kind of underlying psychological thing. Any ideas as to why?
Because they stop being happy when the cold weather comes and get busy with work and their anxieties heap in on them and they start worrying about interest rates …. ??
“This is past honeymoon stats now.” C Woo
Exactly. Way past.
A fortnight ago, I took Newspoll’s 57-43 result as evidence of a very healthy, but static, Labor vote.
With the benefit of hindsight, it’s clear that it was instead the beginning of an upward trend.
Amazing really. As if Labor’s February polling numbers weren’t impressive enough.
How far can a Government fall?
Calm down! This is not (YET) the biggest drop the Howard Government has experienced. The biggest was in 1997-1998, bottoming out not long after One Nation’s 11-seats at the Qld election of 1998.
And now for something not quite so different….the names have not been altered to protect the guilty parties.
How far can a Minister fall? As featured in the Flying Circus TV Show – Episode 12
(A girl in bra and pants goes over to television and switches it on.)
Voice Over: … whilst Mary, Roger’s half-sister, settles down to watch television…
(On the screen comes the start of a Party Political Broadcast, complete with caption: ‘A PARTY POLITICAL BROADCAST ON BEHALF OF THE WOOD PARTY’)
Voice Over: There now follows a Party Political Broadcast on behalf of the Wood Party.
(Cut to a traditional grey-suited man at desk looking straight into camera. Superimposed caption: ‘THE RT. HON. LAMBERT WARBECK’)
Minister: Good evening. We in the Wood Party feel very strongly that the present weak drafting of the Local Government Bill leaves a lot to be desired, and we intend to fight.
(He thumps on the desk and he falls through the floor. As he falls he emits a long scream, fading away slowly. Another man comes and looks down into the pit.)
Man: Hello Helllllllllloooooooooo! (to camera) Er I, I’m afraid the minister’s fallen through the Earth’s crust. Er… excuse me a moment. (goes and looks at Pit) Helloooo.
Minister: (unseen, a long way down) Helloooooo.
Man:. Are you all fight minister?
Minister: I appear to have landed on this kind of ledge thing.
Man: Shall we lower down one of the BBC ropes?
Minister: If you’d be so kind.
Man: What length of BBC rope will we be likely to need?
Minister: I should use the longest BBC rope. That would be a good idea I would imagine.
Man: Okey doke chief. Er, Tex get the longest BBC rope, and bring it here pronto.
Minister: (still a long way down) In the meantime, since I am on all channels, perhaps I’d better carry on with this broadcast by shouting about our housing plans from down here as best I can. Could someone throw me down a script. (man drops the script down and Tex appears with enormous cod of rope) The script would appear to have landed on a different ledge somewhat out of my grasp, don’t you know.
Man: Er, well perhaps when the rope reaches you minister you could kind of swing over to the ledge and grab it.
Minister: Good idea.
(Cut to minister swinging on rope. Caption on screen: ‘THE RT. HON. LAMBERT WARBECK’)
Minister: Well I’m going to carry on, if I can read the script. He swings over to a ledge opposite with a script on it. As he gets near he peers and starts reading.
Minister: Good evening. We in the Wood Party (he swings away and then back) feel very strongly about (swings away and back) the present weak drafting of the Local Government Bill and no, no – it’s no good, it’s not working.., I think I’ll have to try and make a grab for it. Ah. There we are. (He swings over and grabs the script with one hand; he tries to turn to camera and continues) Good evening. We in the Wood Party feel very strongly about the present (he makes a vigourous gesture and in so doing lets go of rope and slips so that he is now hanging upside down) ugh, ugh. Oh dear. Hello!
Man: (out of vision) Hello.
Minister: Look, look, I must look a bit of a chump hanging upside down like this.
Man: (out of vision) Don’t worry minister. (cut to man looking off-camera) I think love if we turn the picture upside down we should help the minister, then.
Cut to minister. The picture is now the other way up. The minister now appears to be the might way up)
Minister: Oh good. Look, er, I’m sorry about this, but there seem to be a few gremlins about… I think I’d better start from the beginning. Er, good evening, we in the Wood Party feel very strongly about, oh … (he drops script) Bloody heck. Oh, oh dear, er terribly sorry about this, about saying bloody heck on all channels, but, er…
Man: (out of vision) There’s another script on the way down minister.
Minister: Oh good, good. Well … er… er… um… Good evening. Er … well… er… how are you? Er… Oh yes look, I don’t want you to think of the Wood Party as a load of old men that like hanging around on ropes only I … er … oh … oh.
(Meanwhile a man, the right way up, has been lowered down to the minister. As the picture is reversed, he appears to be moving straight up towards him. The minister sees him.)
Minister: Ah. Thank you. (taking script; the man on the rope starts to climb back up) Good evening, we in the Wood Party feel very strongly about the present weak drafting… (man falls past with a scream) Look. I think we’d better call it a day.
(Cut to two men at a desk in a discussion set.)
First Robert: Is this the furthest distance that a minister has fallen? Robert.
(Cut to Robert.)
Second Robert: Well surprisingly not. The Canadian Minister for External Affairs fell nearly seven miles during a Liberal Conference in Ottawa about six years ago, and then quite recently the Kenyan Minister for Agric. and Fish fell nearly twelve miles during a Nairobi debate in Parliament, although this hasn’t been ratified yet.
First Robert: Er, how far did the Filipino cabinet fall last March?
Second Robert: Er, well they fell nearly thirty-nine miles but it’s not really so remarkable as that was due to their combined weight, of course. Robert.
First Robert: Thank you, Robert. Well now what’s your reaction to all this, Robert?
(Cut to third Robert who is staring intently into camera. He is wearing a fright wig and has a left eyebrow four inches above his right one.)
Third Robert: Well, well Robert the main thing is that it’s terribly exciting. You see the minister is quite dearly lodged between rocks we know terribly little of. Terribly little. Of course the main thing is we’re getting colour pictures of an extraordinarily high quality. The important thing is, the really exciting thing is the minister will (as he gets more excited he starts to emit smoke) be bringing back samples of the Earth’s core which will give us a tremendous, really tremendous, tremendous, tremendous clue about the origins of the Earth and what God himself is made of. (he bursts into fire and someone has to throw a buckets of water over him) Oh, oh I needed that.
(Cut back to first Robert.)
First Robert: Thank you Robert. Well that seems to be about all we have time for tonight. Unless anyone has anything else to say. Has anyone anything else to say?
(Various ‘noes’ plus one ‘bloody fairy’ and more noes, from a very rapid montage of all the possible characters in this week’s show saying ‘no’. The last one we come to is the Spectrum presenter. He says more than no.)
Presenter: What do we mean by no, what do we mean by yes, what do we mean by no, no, no. Tonight Spectrum looks at the whole question of what is no.
(The sixteen-ton weight falls on him.)
I’ll happily take a 53-47 Labor win, which would guarantee Rudd a decent sized majority.
If the Newspoll result was ever reflected in an actual election, the Labor Party would win my seat of Berowra for the first time ever – it ain’t gonna happen, too many rusted on Libs round here.
The quicker a door swings open the quicker it shuts. The only way the polls can go from here is back to Howard bit by bit . I believe the ALP will win but it will be closer than what the polls indicate.
We have still yet to see policy. This is more about either sending a message to the government of dissatisfaction and a curiosity/liking of Rudd’s demeanor. Around 8 months to go, Howard is of course in trouble, but it’s a terribly long time in politics.
Stewart,
I’ve seen policy. Kevin Rudd has already announced that Labor will rip up Work Choices for Employers, abolish those disgracefully unAustralian AWAs, bring back collective bargaining, set up a plain-English national curriculum in co-operation with the states, maintain private school funding, fund shared facilities for state and private schools and invest in research on green fuel alternatives for cars. The “Labor has no policies†line is just as ineffective as the Burkegate and Farmgate attacks.
Good point Chris I move “The Mr Rudd just re-annouce those policies (plus or minus a few feel good motherhood policies about how nice and loving a Father to the Nation he’ll be) until people stop talking about no policy.
Not to much detail Mr Rudd.
We’re talking about DETAILED policy Chris, not just rhetoric and politics. They have yet to provide detailed information of their alternative industrial relations system, and how those ‘unaustralian’ AWA’s will be replaced with productive agreements.
Rhetoric, such as the ‘Education Devolution’ is one thing, however substance is another.
One thing that has thus far been left unsaid in the commentary is what must be happening to the lib caucus internally. There has been some comment on the newer members wondering what it was like in previous elections, but I wonder about those members who’s own careers would be progressed by a change of government?
Would there be some members of caucus ever-ever-so-slightly wondering what jobs would be up for grabs in the medium-term if Howard went down this year? Look at Chris Pyne. He’s waited far longer than anyone expected for a ministerial gig – had the coalition been wiped out last time (and he survived), he would have progressed higher in the long-term than he is now.
Just some food for thought.
Chris,
But until Rudd actually tells us what his alternative IR system is, it isn’t really much help to someone trying to make an informed decision, is it? Most of the other things you mention are either a copy of existing government policy or fairly minor commitments.
Now, I don’t know that Rudd needs policy to win. But it is a fair statement to say that, as of now, there isn’t a lot out there.
I am sure MEDICARE GOLD is working on the policy. I assume the ALP will try and wing it without putting out policies given the current poll lead but you have to assume the rodent will try and corner them into detailing policy.
PLEASE let’s hear no more about “policy”. Only people like us want policy, and we all know already who we are going to vote for. Elections are NOT about policy. They are about (a) do people think the present government is doing a good / bad job? (b) do people think that they personally will be better off / worse off under the alternative? (c) which of Mr A and Mr B do they prefer as PM?
That’s about right, Adam. Not many people could correctly quote Party A/B’s policy on any particular matter.
Well, not entirely true Adam… I’m waiting on Labor policy to make up my mind.
But you are right – to the voters who matter, the ‘vibe’ (as Mumble says) is far more important than policy detail. And Rudd’s vibe seems to be going down well, for reasons that, I must confess, mystify me.
It is simple and it is how Howard first won … just like them but a tiny bit newer, nicer and safer … that is the policy.
Chris said
I’ve seen policy. Kevin Rudd has already announced that Labor will rip up Work Choices for Employers, abolish those disgracefully unAustralian AWAs, bring back collective bargaining, set up a plain-English national curriculum in co-operation with the states, maintain private school funding, fund shared facilities for state and private schools and invest in research on green fuel alternatives for cars. The “Labor has no policies†line is just as ineffective as the Burkegate and Farmgate attacks.
I doubt if Rudd will attack work choices to that extent as he is moving more and more to keep up the Capitalist system at the expense of the workers. The funding of private schools will promote the Bourgeois to have an exclusively better education and promotes class distinction To think i pay for my children at a state school, I pay for the same in my taxes and i pay for THE RICH through taxes to have schools for their toffy kids. That seem fair to me
Yeah don’t worry about policy – shades of “small target” in that strategy.
Rudd is more Blair (the 1997 version!) than Latham … he’s a much smaller target. Practically every night he’s on the news making some announcement or other, where as Howard is nowhere to be seen. This is the problem for the Liberals, they are being out-sold brandwise.
Nothing lasts forever, and this government is currently on life-support…
Bill Weller you goose, your taxes barely fund your own draining of the system, not the education of others. In fact those private school families would pay alot more tax than you and use far less than you.
Take your Leninist diatribe back to Pyongyang.
George George George….
I know nothing about Bill’s personal finances and don’t want to, but your proposition is:
‘that those private school families would pay a lot more tax than you and use far less than you’
This seems to be assuming both a fair tax system and that private school families are wealthy. Neither proposition seems to have much support in fact. But please if as a tax professional my understanding of the income tax / indirect tax systems is insufficient please provide the evidence for your interesting proposition.
The Bourgeois who pay higher taxes and especially the top 5 percent actually do not produce anything being leeches of society holding the wealth while people in my electorate cannot afford healthy food , private education , private health etc. The history of the Libs shows them to be by descent Land owners and Industry owners, so to them watching the workers eek out a living has been going on for century’s. The sad thing with the ALP is that they becoming union bosses also watch the worker suffer. They both ride on the back of the worker. We see here in SA the ALP government one year in from last election and theres talk of budget blowouts etc. I don’t have to be a University graduate to know the worker, pensioner, student and unemployed will wear the brunt of budget cuts. It wont effect the private school club at all say maybe a few workers who sacrifice everything for their kids to go private. But then again private school is a privilege not a right, the same as University. And before anyone says it…… No people are not better off, credit cards and easy loans just make us think we are. And the must have latest model of everything or the wishing of it (consumerism in this throw away society benefits whom?) makes sure we never do reach prosperity.
I actually thought Medicare Gold was a good idea .. and it was presented to Gillard by a Catholic group as an impressive initiative to free up public hospital beds .. it wasn’t actually her idea
What are you talking about, bill? Who are the bourgeois? Have you been to countries where poverty is rife?
Bill, does Bob Brown know that his candidate in Kingston is a communist? (just curious)
This is getting way off topic here but
Yes Sacha i have. The bourgeois are the non producing top 5% richest in society. The, what people call ‘middle class’ or ‘petty bourgeois’ promote and support the agenda of the 5%. Do you ever think it strange that we produce enough food to feed the world yet we don’t? You can’t say that people in areas in Australia can’t know poverty because it’s worse somewhere else. It’s like pain. My wife has fought cancer most of her life and I have broken many bones. My pain was real to me yet my wifes was worse but we can only judge the pain on our circumstances. I don’t think that the idea thats promoted which is ‘people should be happy with their lot because it’s better than being in Africa’, etc should be a way governments and oppositions justify there decisions that affect the poor in society. It’s all a conditioning and desensitizing process to keep marginalizing the marginalized…
Ok, I haven’t commented on the several ‘idle speculation’ threads as I’ve thought they were all too hypothetical and far out to be of much real use but I have to comment on the public v private education thing that’s cropped up.
1. Many (that means not all but a significant number) of families accessing private education are not wealthy by any measure,
2. Historically (and typically) state governments carry the bulk of the funding burden for public schools and the federal government (obviously together with users) the bulk of private.
3. Under our tax system people on comparable taxable incomes pay comparable taxes on a federal level, income plays only an indirect role in payment of State taxes (putting aside things collected by the Feds and directed to the States – eg GST, fuel excise etc),
4. So users of the two schooling systems are treated no differently for tax purposes,
5. The users of both systems are subsidised by the tax system – although to different degrees,
6. The users of the private school system are entitled to public schooling places, and pay for the place through their taxes – but do not take up that place.
7. The users of the private system instead use a private space and susbside their choice through direct payments.
8. This means the public place they could have used (and have paid for) is available to some other child.
9. The users of public schools (of which I am one) are entitled to the public school place, pay for it through their taxes – and use that space.
10. It would appear as though private schooling users are effectively subsidising the public system by paying (as does everyone paying taxes but without public schooled children) for places that they are not using.
I am not sure that this argument is correct but I’ve heard lots of private schooled families use it.
Can anyone tell me how it is wrong?
Hi Adam. Just to put everyones mind at ease i am not a communist. Having studied this ideology have come to the conclusion that it is a form of state capitalism and no friend of the worker or the environment. I come from an ALP background not the CPA. I just see through my wifes studies and my personal ones the link between Governments, Capitalism and the destruction of the environment and promotion of poverty. Until profits at all cost is replaced by production for the benefit of the environment and its inhabitants, then things like Global warming and poverty will not be changed
Jesus said the poor will always be amongst you.
The problems i have with the private schools are
1. promotes elitism except in Catholic Schools
2. Puts those who can least afford it but want to give their kids the best into huge debt. except in Catholic Schools as their fees are reasonable
3. promotes religion
4. If people want private schools then why should the government help fund
them while it cant look after its own state schools.
5. promotes inequality as single parents, unemployed, disabled cannot even dream of private school.
The solution would be the proper care of state schools as they are in a total mess and let the churches ( who are never short of a quid) fund their own schools
Where does the figure of 5% come from? Who are the non-producing?
Edward said
Jesus said the poor will always be amongst you.
Thats a good cop out. Endure your reward is in heaven!
Sasha the CEOs, Board members, high fliers, multinationals bosses all ride on the back of the 95% and contribute nothing but a system of inequality and rape of the environment
Oh bill – what’s your world economic system that will alleviate poverty and hunger? And what will ensure that it works? And what incentives are you going to build into it to ensure that it does indeed work?
How did we get so far off the topic? oh yes i dared to say that Rudd wont rip up work choices. What ever happens at least we should see the end of Howard
Bill – I think you need to work on your terminology. the bourgeoisie are the MIDDLE class (as opposed to the aristocracy and/or ruling class) – lawyers, senior management etc – while the petty bourgeosie are the lower middle class (small business, police, teachers etc). If you insist on using dated expressions, you should at least get them right. It only undermines your otherwise laudable sentiments.
Did you just make up the figure of 5% ? 5% of Australia’s population is 1 million.
Actually it doesn’t matter. Your last comment just shows you’re not actual serious and economics and politics.
That should be: about economics, politics and environmentalism.
Jasmine,
My recollection of Ann Harding’s work on the progressivity of the Australian tax system is that the top 40% pay a lot more into the system than they take out of it, while the bottom 60% pay less than they get; the big winners are the second quintile.
That is just my recollection.
Adam, Sacha – don’t tease the watermelons.
While the polls look promising for Labor, I think we’ll be in something of a holding pattern until the Budget, which (I think) is another 5-6 weeks away. I’d imagine it’d suit Rudd and the ALP for the governmenht to spend this time slinging mud. It hasn’t done them any good so far, and I think these things show a diminishing return as more and more punters tune out. Why the government is not going in harder on the economic debate is beyond me – it’s the only advantage they have left now. Instead it looks as though (due to them being distracted by the politics of character, and losing that fight badly) the government will be giving the ALP a free ride through the conference next month. Time is running out for Howard to turn things around.
Nah Hugo,
A lot of people thought that way about the NSW State Government in August/September of last year and look whats going to happen on Saturday.
Yes, but Rudd is not Debnam
Nice try Edward, but with one important difference – a credible opposition. If the State Libs were in half as good a shape as Federal Labor, there’d be a change of government in Macquarie Street this weekend.
Having said that, you’re right to remind us on the hopeful left that no result is guaranteed. Howard has got out of these positions before, but he’s not getting any younger. Leaders only get so many “get out of jail free” cards (aka Mark Latham, Simon Crean).
Just wrote answers to all of you but lost the lot. seems to happen once and awhile on here. Sasha i meant 1 percent not 5 my mistake. Hugo i see the ruling class / bourgeosie as the same and the petty bourgeosie as the promoters of the above. Teachers police etc are actually workers. Thank Leopold for Adam, Sacha – don’t tease the watermelons.
haha.
Hugo,
Sacre Bleu, “half as good a shape as Federal Labor”, are you for real? Have you had a good look at the Federal Labor Party? without disparaging anyone by referring to specific pieces of deadwood, tell me how the Federal party compares to Hayden/Hawke’s front bench in 1983 – the comparison is absolutely woeful.
Is there anyone in the Federal Party who isnt a union hack/ state secretary hack of some form?
Sorry should have added hereditary peer too!
I can’t post anything, what’s going on?
anti watermelon feeling prob Adam
ok now this post is theory and on the off-topic thingy – and Rudd has already avoided walking this trap but here goes …
I understand the private school thingy from their perspective … we would have got a return on tax in a public school, we have saved the public system all this money, give us our fair share. Very neat very sexy. Whether yelled from the window of a nice Merc or older model falcon it is internally consistent.
The counter-argument (Rudd and the labor party is too smart to try and make) has the following limbs:
1. Taxes aren’t a fee for service and whether or not you use services is not relevant to the tax burden your rightly bear for freedom and citizenship of our fine country. The right wing has been very very effective at whittling away at this kind of thinking and replacing it with user pays.
2. There is an obligation on the State to provide everyone an opportunity of a good education and this must be funded.
3. If you consider yourself above public education, or wish to have your children schooled in private facilities – great go for it; but why should the State pay for your choice.
I have a lot of sympathy for this kind of argument as poorly as I’ve expressed it. But politically it has been defeated, Howard has built in the right to chose and insist on the Government paying for the choice.
Edward – are you suggesting that Federal Labor is in the same sorry state as NSW Liberal? You are more deluded than I thought! The point I was making (against your point that NSW Labor was heading for a loss 6 months ago) was that Federal Labor are clearly a credible opposition (not to you, obviously, but it appears 61% of the nation disagrees with you at present). NSW Liberals are clearly not a credible opposition, which is why they will lose in a big way on Saturday. Even if the Libs manage to hold on the Federal sphere, it is highly unlikely to be a landslide.
Your comparison to the Hawke 1983 front bench is an unfair one – no government or opposition in Australian history (including the Howard ministry) comes close to that one for talent. Federal Labor doesn’t look that bad at the moment. Sure there is some deadwood, but you seem to be supporting a government that recently had Santo Santoro as a minister, so I’m not sure teh government is in any better shape. Interesting that you couldn’t seem to find too many examples.
Frankly folks, when I visit the wonderful PollBludger site, I actually come looking for psephological insights from the world at large rather than the latest quasi marxist polemic being handed down by Chairman Bill and the Kingston politburo.
now that I’ve got that off my chest …..
Does anyone out there consider that the present state of the Howard govt and the forthcoming Debnam Disaster are actually feeding off each other and that once the NSW election is out the way and a small group of NSW libs have gone off into a dark corner, and the Iemma government goes back to doing what it does best … that the polls for the govt may actually improve.
Or
is there anyone out there who knows of a case (preferably in a Westminster system) where a leader with bad polls has been dumped 6 months or so out from an election and the new leader has actually pulled off a win? NZ 1990 and Canada 1993 but they were both disastrous for the governing party.
I will try again. WILLIAM, there seems to be glitch which intermittently prevents longer posts.
No, I still can’t post anything longer than 2 lines
The trend is clear the Ruddwagon is on a roll, the months of May – July will decide the next election, but if my reading of voterland is correct its been the ALP returning this Government rather than any love for it then Howard my slip even further for Rudd can over time start to reveal the side we see on Sunrise and match it with some policies, nothing on the fightback scale, we don’t need that but simple straight forward policy and the ALP are going to romp it in.
On my way too work I watch people reading the Herald Sun, these people live in a very safe Liberal part of town and they seem to snurl at stories on Iraq and seem generally unimpressed with the Government.
Blackburnpseph @ 6.05pm, first paragraph – nice work!! I come here to read the psephological musings of election tragics like myself. If I wanted to read all that other stuff, I would renew my Crikey account or log on to Get It Up or Get Off or whatever its called.
As for Hugo’s posting appearing immediately before Blackburnpseph, as a Tory, I don’t mind acknowledging that Rudd’s front bench is reasonably good. Furthermore, its the best the ALP has produced at least since about 1993. And they are still to add Shorten, someone in WA who I have momentarily forgotten and, who knows, maybe even Maxine. There are, of course, a couple of shockers in there, but that is always going to be a given in Australia because of factions on the ALP side and factions and the presence of the Nats on the Coalition side.
As for our side, lining up the present day front bench against the class of 1996 is, frankly, depressing
As for today’s Newspoll, I would be absolutely fascinated to see a state-by-state breakdown. It beggars belief that the 61-39 split is uniform, in which case the Coalition is actually, at this moment, almost certainly polling a lot worse than 39% 2PP in a couple of states.
I think that Maxine McKew, Gary Gray, Bill Shorten and Mark Dreyfus will all enter the frontbench immediately upon entering parliament, should they win their seats.
As for deadwood, there are a couple of out and out no-names that *should* find it very difficult to get into a Rudd Ministry. Kerry O’Brien and Alan Griffin are the obvious two. It could also be that Martin Ferguson’s time is up, and if *only* Stephen Conroy could be hidden away somewhere.
A certain state starting with Q for one
Adam, which Queensland seats would you think the ALP should be viewing as ‘winnable’ at the moment?
We are way too far from the election to call it yet. Like Chris from Edgecliff I’m hanging out to see a state by state breakdown of recent polls. Even then it is only the marginals that will decide the outcome. These latest polls show a national swing of nearly 14%. The only recent marginal seat poll had the ALP at 55% in Bennelong – a swing of around 9%. If these projected swings are cut back by 50% the Coalition could still conceivably just hang on – even with a 46-54 national vote against them. Unlikely maybe, but nonetheless possible. It all comes down to where the votes are cast.
Edward, as far as comparisons to NSW go maybe the key was that Carr got out at the right time, allowing Iemma to distance himself from previous mistakes and policies as well as giving the government a sense of renewal. Maybe if Howard had done the same thing late last year and handed over to Costello, then the Coalition may well have been shaping up much better than they appear to be at the moment.
No Hugo, the challenge was for you to name who is not a union/ political administrative hack or hereditary peer in the Labor Shadow Cabinet.
I am happy to provide an analysis – the results are illuminating.
Its not by job to defend the Libs but at least there’s some diversity there.
Howard can still pull a few rabbits out of the hat, Don’t you worry about that!
Jason, when you picture Howard, is he surrounded by the cast of “Annie”?
Just asking…
blackburnpseph Says
Frankly folks, when I visit the wonderful PollBludger site, I actually come looking for psephological insights from the world at large rather than the latest quasi marxist polemic being handed down by Chairman Bill and the Kingston politburo.
now that I’ve got that off my chest …..
Thanks for the compliment or is it a………I too come here to devour psephological insights and at this time reading through all the 2006 Vic election posts results news etc. I just seem to have my buttons pushed every so often and my reply s seem to do the same. I will try to keep on topic. And if i wasnt a candidate i would be more impartial. I enjoy everyone comments and insights immensely and stand in awe at the knowledge that many on here possess. Keep up the good work William (nice name) and everyone that contributes on here. Now that a s*** job
All Howard needs is a small terrorist attack in Australia and whammy hes back in front.
If you want to blame me for the long diversion into private school funding and quasi-Marxism, I’ve got broad shoulders.
Stewart,
The national curriculum policy runs to 21 pages. I think that is enough detail for one policy, and there will be other polices released as the year goes by.
Adam,
Most people don’t want lots of policy, but they want some! They also like to know any policies that might affect them. They do not need 1,000 pages of detail on the rip-up of WorkChoices for Employers, but they do need to know that it will be ripped up, that AWAs will be gone and that collective bargaining will be back. Basically, they want enough policy to know that their daughter won’t be told to sign an AWA that fines her $200 for not giving twelve hours notice of sick leave. They need some security, which is what Kevin Rudd has given with his private school funding announcement. (This does not have to mean another diversion.)
Leopold,
There’s enough for now.
howard ‘mishears’ question, lets slip on an irag withdrawl plan…
oh dear oh dear oh dear
santoro quits senate
now the Qld libs will enter into a huge bloody fight over Santoros replacement.
Who knows what the fallout from this fight will bring..
Nice and juicy
bill weller Says:
“All Howard needs is a small terrorist attack in Australia and whammy hes back in front.”
I dunno Bill. While Beasley was there I think many of us thought like that. I think that if it happens now a lot more people will blame Howard.
He might get a bounce, granted, but not like he got in 2001. I’d imagine that this scenario has been raised plenty amongt Labor’s leadership group and they’d be more ready for it this time. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen.
It also looks less likely that Rudd will throw away seats at the last minute like Latham did with “the handshake” and the Tasmania forest debacle. Or indeed go silly like Hewson did in the last days of the 1993 campaign. The pressure is on Howard this time alright.
Its seems the nasty infighting has yet another qld lib backbencher in trouble:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21419140-601,00.html
Qld potentially could be a disaster for the Libs!
Howard should have gone last year, and handed over the reins to Costello.
It’s personal vanity and this desire to outdo Menzies that is keeping him in the job, and Mrs Howard presumably enjoys playing Lady of the Manor at Kirribilli.
It seems that Aldred won’t be coming back after all: http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/libs-move-fast-to-stifle-aldred-comeback-attempt/2007/03/20/1174153063041.html
I suspect that there’s a certain unreality about these polls – I think people have tuned out after so much mud slinging. The polls after the budget will be interesting, although the government is rather boxed in in terms of what it can do. If the budget is too generous (in traditional pre-election budget style), they run the very real risk of an interest rate rise in, say, August, but if it is an austere budget, punters will be wondering “what’s in it for me?”. There’s an awful lot of ground for the government to make up in six months, and things like the Tampa & 11/9 only come around so often. I know my good friend EdwardStJohn will not agree with me, but the ALP is much more electable this year than it was in 2001 & 2004. I think we’re in for a noisy, but seminal, six months.
Hugo,
You are correct, I don’t agree.
Example: Important date: 1 July 2007 tax free super for a lot of self-indulgent 60+ retirees, I am sure a lot of them will be feeling chuffed to have been handed tax cuts of a minimum $75,000 on a $500,000 superannuation account.
Think many of these will be voting Labor with people like Doogie Cameron out there campaigning for the changes to be reversed?
Charlie, the interesting thing about Queensland is that for demographic reasons there are very few safe seats on either side. When Labor does badly, it loses almost everything. But when Labor does well, it can pick up a swag of seats. In 1983 Labor polled 46% of the vote and won 10 of 19 seats, gaining 5. Qld now has 29 seats, so a comparable gain would bring in 7 or 8 seats. In the current state of the polls, such gains seem quite possible. I would nominate in rough order Bonner, Moreton, Bowman, Petrie, Blair, and Herbert as likely gains, and Dickson, Leichhardt, Flynn, Hinkler, Forde and Ryan as possible gains.
Edward – I’d have thought that those retirees getting their hands on all that moolah come July would be unlikely to vote Labor anyway. It doesn’t really matter what Doug Cameron thinks (any more than it matters what Alby Shultz or Ross Lightfoot thinks), as ALP policy is to not reverse this tax cut.
I realise that you don’t like Labor, but that’s a different argument to saying that they are unelectable. The Labor front bench is not that shabby (as conceded by declared conservative Chris From Edgecliff, in an earlier post) and there’s no one there really who’s going to frighten the horses. I think your share & property portfolios will be perfectly safe under an ALP government.
I actually think Qld’s a state in which the Coalition would be doing better than in other states. For starters, Qld is natural conservative territory. Only twice since WWII have the ALP mustered a majority on the 2PP vote. The last time was in 1990 with 50.2%, hardly a resounding majority. My guess is that they are doing better than that, much better. But more than 61% right now? I strongly doubt it. For starters that would represent a swing of more than 18% (at least) since the 2004 election. I just can’t see that happening, even in a state that can be as volatile as Qld. My guess Labor is ahead by about 55/56 to 44/45. It’s in Tasmania, NSW, Vic and SA where Labor is romping it home. WA, I also doubt Labor is too far ahead there.
I’d have Herbert 3rd-most likely and Petrie in your ‘possibles’ group Adam. Aside from that your ordering on probability seems about right.
If Dr Laming is vindicated by the AFP investigation then I’d move Bowman into the second group as well.
Psephophile suggests that the Labor 2PV in Qld is currently 55%, not the 61% suggested in current polls. The Labor 2PV in 2004 in Qld was 42.9%, so if it is now 55% that is a swing of 12%, which would see Labor win Bonner, Moreton, Blair, Herbert, Flynn, Petrie, Hinkler, Dickson, Dawson and Ryan – which is more than I suggested above.
In fact a 12% swing would also see Labor win Kennedy from Katter.
Are we missing Longman?
Hugo
The Labor front bench “is not too shabby”, please justify that assertion with examples?
The StJohn family has a proud history of independence from both political parties, but just by way of example, there are 30 Labor shadow ministers, 6 are hereditary peers and 4 are former state or national secretaries, this is hardly the sign of a democratic and inclusive party.
I have not broken down the other 20 but no surprises nearly all are union hacks or people who had roles in the party machine. Unrepresentative and undemocratic.
The only defense is that “we are no worse than the Liberal party”, what a sad state of affairs for the ALP.
Yes I omitted Longman. That makes 11 gains plus Kennedy – and Labor only needs 16 nationwide to win the election.
Well done Edward for noticing that the Labor Party is a labour party, and draws most of its cadre from the ranks of the labour movement. Just as the Liberals draw theirs from the ranks of real estate agents and suburban solicitors, and the Nationals draw theirs from the ranks of elderly farmers. This has always been the case and has never made any difference to the quality of front benches on either side.
As for jibes about hereditary peers, what an insult to Alexander Downer, a third-generation Liberal parliamentarian. Phil Ruddock is also the son of a Liberal MP.
Ah Adam,
Yes of course its Ok if the Liberals do it? Maybe our democracy is very weak.
As for your trite line about “being a Labour Party” well on my count 7 of the remaining 20 are union officials who have never actually soiled there hands working on award wages. If you were objective you might say “union bureacrat party”
Of the other 13, one is a former assistant secretary and the other 12 are all staffers of some sort. Even you Adam have to concede this is a pretty inbred bunch.
On current polls it seems Labor would pick up a massive swag of Qld seats, definitely. But, I don’t think Labor will get 55% of the vote in Qld. In fact, I think they should be grateful if they end up cracking 50%. I say that only because history hasn’t been kind to Labor in Qld.
This is a common line of tripe in the tory press, and I suppose it’s no surprise that Edward echoes it here. Politics is a profession, and people who want a career in politics naturally set out to do the necessary apprenticeship to learn the trade before they put themselves forward for
preselection. In the ALP there are three career paths – through the party secretariats, through MPs offices, and through the unions. The Liberals have the first two but not the third. Where do you think Minchin and Robb came from? The Liberals also have old-school-tie networks in business and the professions, particlarly the bar. Criticising career politicians for being career politicians is like criticising barristers for not being astronauts. I don’t think a party which can produce and repeatedly promote someone like Santoro is in any position to be sanctimonious by the way.
These are the pre-Latham margins :
Blair 1.1%
Herbert 1.4%
Longman 1.5%
Moreton 1.2%
Petrie 3.5%
Add Bonner which will change hands with a sneeze and you have 6 with or without Lamming’s seat of Bowman.
Given that Rudd is a conservative queenslander I think it’s safe to assume that those that voted for Beazley in 01 would come back to Rudd. Meaning the amount of votes he has to turn is actually deceptively small.
Well said Adam .. though Labor also has a healthy representation on the bar. I think a law degree is also a natural precursor to politics .. the “law”, really, being simply an independant judicial wing of government.
Still .. law degree or not, everyone still has to prove themselves in front of the rank and file members for a particular seat to win pre selection (did someone mention democracy?)
Adam,
I am sure the Soviet nomenklatura had similar views about career paths too!
And hey it cant be bad because the other side is so much badder. How very relativistic! Are there no absolute truths left Adam?
ok .. caveat to the above .. you might get an easier ride through pre-selection of your Maxine Mekew or Peter Garret
or if you are functionally literate
You haven’t tried going for Labor pre-selection and lost the ballot by any chance have you Edward?
Lol, nah i dont think you can peg me in that box.
BTW does the union bureacractic Party still have preselection ballots? I thought everything was more of a Leninist organised flavour without the messiness of internal democracy in the ALP.
Yes you see Labor can’t win whatever we do. If we recruit our MPs from the labour movement, we are accused of promoting hacks and logs, while if we recruit outside the labour movement we are accused of celebrity hunting. Where would have us find our MPs, Edward? In the Melbourne Club? This is just routine Tony Abbot propaganda bullshit and quite frankly we ignore it, so Edward should save his keystrokes.
To get to the point of substance, the core members of a Rudd government will be Rudd, Swan, Gillard, Tanner, Garrett, Roxon, M Ferguson, Evans, Conroy, McClelland and Smith. All are perfectly competent and will be perfectly good ministers. Macklin, Emerson, Plibersek, Wong, Ludwig, Burke, Bevis and Bowen are also perfectly sound. There will be a few duds in the tail, as there are in all ministries, certainly in Howard’s. But that won’t matter much. As Jim Hackett once said, “don’t worry old boy, they do all the numbers for you.”
Is Bob McMullan still around?
ahh thats right .. Federal/State relations .. he’s also a competent minister with alot of experience
Well said, Adam – I would hope that the more right leaning contributors to this log might do better than resorting to tired old propaganda.
Lets take a look at the Howard government inner sanctum:
Howard – lived at home till 32, in parliament three years later, has spent his whole life being a political operative
Downer – son of a VERY privileged diplomatic dynasty (I mean, how many of us have Canberra suburbs named after anyone in their family?)
Abbott – Attended Riverview (expensive private school), & Syd Uni, student politician, trained to be a priest.
Costello – student politician, barrister.
Hmmm, can’t see too many “ordinary” Australians in there.
This is not to comment on their competence or otherwise, but to point out that it’s very easy to pigeonhole any of the main parties.
Yes McMullan is there too. I would also bring back Duncan Kerr, but I doubt that will happen. PLUS from Vic we will have Shorten, Dreyfus, Marles and Jacinta Collins arriving, and probably Feeney too – all very good prospects. I don’t know as much about new talent from other states.
Yes Rodney Cavalier and John Button – extreme right wing former Labor Ministers who have made exactly the same point about how incestuous and narrowly based the ALP is !
Embittered has-beens always say stuff like that. In Button’s case his whole vastly over-rated career was driven by colossal conceit and vanity so I am not terribly interested in his opinions.
Perhaps Labor should adopt the preselection processes of the Liberal Party, Edward? So that we too can have Noel Chrichton-Browne, Santo Santoro, Pauline Hanson and Ken Aldred as candidates? I can hardly wait.
The “team so far” in WA. http://www.wa.alp.org.au/about/upcomingcampaigns/federal.php
Peter Tinley for one is a good candidate I believe? Iraq vet even?
Why don’t we just say that there are not many regular workers/min wage/majority of Austrian type people in either party, and leave it at that?
The systems sucks but the people who run the system love it, so unless there is a coup, its gonna stay.
I mean one of the Vic Green MPs was/is a secretary in one of the unions. The Greens don’t get many from there but some.
The point is, if you want to do something political, there is activism (union, environmentalist, etc) or being rich and/or famous.
Did I miss a path?
Dave said
The systems sucks but the people who run the system love it, so unless there is a coup, its gonna stay.
exactly
I mean one of the Vic Green MPs was/is a secretary in one of the unions. The Greens don’t get many from there but some.
thats a growing trend
Why don’t we just say that there are not many regular workers/min wage/majority of Austrian type people in either party, and leave it at that?
What i have been saying all the long. I am a left unionist ordinary worker and Green candidate, The LABOR party choses someone that cannot relate to the ordinary person but with the ALP tribe mentality she will win and nothing in Kingston will change. Although i might not agree with the political positions of many Independents i have to admire those electorates brave and smart enough to see outside the tribes and look at the individual . Most independents work harder and have a huge following EG. Bob Such member for Fisher in SA
And what is your evidence that Amanda Rishworth cannot relate to the ordinary person? Do you think the good folk of Noarlunga are more likely to agree with her mild social democratic views or your 1970s-leftovers Marxoid views?
I don’t see why any swing from the Coalition to Labor should sweep Katter up in the tide.
I assume you have only listed Leichhardt and Forde because the sitting members are retiring? The other seat that looks like a ‘reach’ is Ryan, although to be fair the electorate has shown its willingness to turn around big margins to protest against the Howard Government before.
Thanks for the response. Can I trouble you for a wider assessment of which seats you think the ALP should be looking at in other states?
Adam, the assumption is based on the fact that I can’t think of a single ALP or Coalition member at any level who can relate to ordinary people.
Bill never actually said that people in Kingston would relate to him, just that he is an ordinary worker.
Adam you seem to have Marxaphobia. But you need not worry i am neither a Marxist, Maoist or Communist. I am a Unionist and Green if my views of the world ills worry you than can you please show us how the ALP will help the destitute, the pensioner , the unemployed etc. The people in Kingston that struggle day to day to survive where overjoyed at the prospect of broadband coverage. I struggle to pay for dial up.
I think the Liberal majority in Leichhardt is greatly inflated by Entsch’s personal popularity – he is certainly a member who can relate to local people, Dave (what an idiotic comment by the way – have you ever actually watched a competent politician campaign?). Forde is suburbanising rapidly and will be at risk if there is a big swing.
Charlie, outside Qld, if the current polls are even half accurate, Labor is looking at three gains in SA (Kingston, Makin and Wakefield), maybe two in Tas (Bass and Braddon, though these are parochial seats and hard to predict), Solomon in the NT (where we have found a candidate who is an even bigger ocker than Tollner), at least four in NSW (Parramatta, Lindsay, Eden-Monaro and Dobell), maybe more (Page, Robertson, plus of course Wentworth and Bennelong, although I rather doubt this), and maybe even something in Vic (Deakin perhaps). WA is too hard to call at present. We could lose two, we could win four (Stirling, Hasluck, Canning, Kalgoorlie). But seven months out all this is very tentative.
What about a few of the ‘fairly safe’ seats – let’s say Paterson, Hughes, Cowper, Boothby, Sturt, McMillan, Corangamite, La Trobe and Gippsland?
In Victoria the ALP should be able to get back McMillan, lost in 2004.
Deakin and Latrobe are possibles, with Corangamite and McEwen if the swing is really on.
But of course Victoria’s coming off a historically high base, so probably best to just put us down for one; two if we *really* have to
(Of course McMillan, lost at the last, was notionally Liberal after the restiribution, so not *really* lost but YKWIM…)
Yes but Zahra had some personal vote in the Valley which will now be lost. I think there would have to be a very big statewide swing before McMillan became a real prospect. I think Deakin and Corangamite are better chances, especially with a better candidate in Corangamite instead of McMullin.
Adam says
Labor is looking at three gains in SA (Kingston, Makin and Wakefield),
I would say Boothby is a real chance
Yes, CZ was a popular local member.
Still, it has to be a better proposition than La Trobe, and the sitting members in McEwen and Gippsland seem (to me as an outsider) more entrenched.
In any case, the bottom line is still that one, two at the outside from Victoria is the best to hope for for the ALP.
Martin B,
I’m speaking from memory – a highly unreliable resource for an old bloke – but I think you’ll find that Victoria is coming off a low base. Labor’s vote in 2004 in Victoria was its second worst since 1977 (1990 in the wake of the financial disasters attributed to the Cain Government was the only other worse result for Labor in that lengthy period). It’s very rare in recent history for Victoria not to have a 2PP Labor majority, and it looks very likely to occur this time, with the possibility that it will be big. If so, the fact that there are no seats on the pendulum at less than 5% is unlikely to protect Government candidates.
I don’t have 2PP figures for individual States to hand (Adam you quoted Queensland 2004 2PP figures, in a post to-day; can you point us to your source for 2PPs by individual State?)
sa 3-4 nsw 4 tas 2 nt 1 vic 1 wa say 2 how many in qld? how many to have a 2-3 seat majority?
Was speaking to one of my clients today and in general conversation said that he has been disappointed that Howard didn’t go last year and whilst he has voted Liberal more often than ALP (and has voted Lib since Howard won in 1996), he won’t be voting for the Libs whilst Howard is at the helm. Stated he was told old, has become arrogant and should have retired. He also stated that Howard and the Liberal Party had misread the 2004 result, it wasn’t a vote for Howard but a vote against Latham!
Interesting discussion but backs up what the electorate is thinking.
Don’t compare this year to 2001 or 2004 – the difference in 2007 is that Howard is now 7 years older (68yo) and he should have stepped down for the greater good of the Liberal party. He hasn’t and it will in all likelihood cost the the Coalition government. Simple as that.
Labor can’t win McMillan, I mean they preselected Ian Maxfield’s wife, and Ian was caned in Narracan in the state election. His name is NOT popular.
Broadbent is a perennial one term wonder but he’s been loud this term so he should have built the profile to hold it.
On Leichhardt I think there is a real chance the National Party will gain that seat.
who is this candidate in McMillan?
ah Christine Maxfield – thanks Google
Oh, well, if there’s a dud preselected that obviously doesn’t help. My comments were in ignorance of preselections.
Peter:
Sorry, my comment was ill advised. The ALP primary vote in 2004 was terrible and the 2PP was certainly down from the previous couple of elections.
However, despite this they held all of their seats (except McMillan ‘lost at the redistribution’). In terms of number of seats won you have to go back to 1987 to get a better result for the ALP.
So it’s certainly not a historically high base. But in relative terms, the seats held compared to the 2PP vote (let alone the primary!) is as good as it’s been in recent history.
So the end result, as discussed above, is that there are few Liberal seats in Victoria in the winnable range.
And it’s not just that a 5+% swing is needed, it’s that a few of those Lib/Nats in that 5-10% zones are popular members who will get a personal vote (McEwen, Gippsland, Higgins – though don’t ask me why…).
So if you think Bruce Bilson will get a 9.4% swing against him in Dunkley, that’s one thing, otherwise I think it’s the seats discussed above: Deakin, Corangamite, La Trobe and McMillan (if Christine is not as bad as George thinks
. Maybe Gippsland.
Labor’s big problem has been changing leaders repeatedly while in opposition, choosing a loony and then going to a staid repeat candidate who represented the last of a long dead ministry which didn’t appeal to a modern electorate. Hopefully, with Rudd, Labor has broken the cycle.
I think it will be time to talk about if the Labor vote has peaked when the 2PP is 63-37 in Labor’s favour. I just wanted to be first to say this. I’m not saying this level will hold up for the election, but Kevin’s cunning combination of conceding on Telstra and converting fraudband to broadband should be worth another two per cent.
Any predictions on Kevin’s next left-field throw?
Bill,
If the ordinary people did not want the Labor’s chosen candidates (or the Liberal ones for that matter), they wouldn’t vote for them. But they just keep on doing so. It’s frustrating for third parties, but that’s the way it is.
Quiz question: What is the false statement in the opening section of Fran Bailey’s website?
http://www.franbaileymp.com/about%20fran/biography/biography.htm
And just to fully correct my mistatement, apart from 1990, Labor’s 2PP in Victoria in 2004 was it’s lowest since 1977
Yet they still held a majority of seats…
Labor is very lucky with the current boundaries in Victoria. The commissioners would have been quite entitled to create two ultra-safe Labor seats in the corridor of suburbs running from Oakleigh to Dandenong. Instead they split it up so that it makes one fairly safe seat (Hotham), and provides enough votes to tip Isaacs, Bruce, Chisholm and Holt to Labor by small margins. Also Danby keeps Melbourne Ports Labor by winning Jewish votes in Caulfield. Plus we have good local members holding down Ballarat and Bendigo.
“Quiz question: What is the false statement in the opening section of Fran Bailey’s website?”
My suggestion: Fran claims to be “the first woman from any political party to represent a rural electorate”.
I’m not sure of the Federal Parliament but certainly in state parliaments there have been women representing rural electorates. Just to give one Valerie Callister was elected to represent the seat of Morwell in Victoria’s LA in 1981.
I’m sorry if what i posted was too long. Just thought the comments where interesting
Well, I think it’s clear she means in federal parliament. Also Morwell is hardly “rural.” Try again.
Just in case anyone’s confused, what Bill Weller has just referred to is not actually there.
Oh, and of course federally Enid Lyon’s seat was what is now Braddon. That’s fairly rural.
Well maybe, but there is a more clear-cut false statement
“Also Morwell is hardly “rural.†”
I don’t think someone who represents Hurstbridge, Warburton, Healesville and Craigieburn (until the redistribution) can get too pernickity about what’s *really* rural :-p
OK time’s up.
“the first Victorian woman to be elected to the House of Representatives”
Anyone remember Joan Child? Helen Mayer? Doris Blackburn?
Really Fran.
Does anyone think that i would be seem as a loose cannon by the Green Hierarchy? Or do i fit the image?
yes bill, you’re a self-righteous old-time Marxist who despises middle-class Australians, so you fit the image perfectly
Cool
On a serious note please please ALP dont stuff it up. We can work better with your lot. With the polls having the ALP so far ahead im more worried than if they were closer. You hear things like the governments tired and Howards arrogant etc but surely he has something up his sleeve. IR Iraq and Global warming are all issues that people i talk to think are important. The real fear that seems to work for Howard is the labor and interest rates connection. Yes they have gone up under Howard but if he promotes the idea that it will rise considerably higher under Labor it will bring votes in. After the 2004 Fed election the word i got was interest rates plain and simple. Money is the heart of the majority of voters and this surely wont happen again
You just get all your furry feral friends to give us their preferences and leave winning the election to us, ok?
Adam,
Obviously Fran only thinks Liberals qualify as “first woman elected to a Victorian House of Reps seat”.
Just a speculation: acknowledging Ms. Bailey’s assiduous attention to her constituency, is it possible that her accession to the Ministry, and the underwhelming performance in Tourism, might put her at risk this time?
Martin, your revised statement about Labor’s disproportionate number of seats is certainly reasonable. Adam’s explanation about the current boundaries is particularly relevant (although Christian Zahra would have a rather more jaundiced view of the pre-2004 redistribution, which in concert with the Latham factor sorted him).
I expect Labor to pick up seats in Victoria based on a return to pre-2004 voting patterns, together with the impact of interest rates and work choices in seats where the Liberals have maintained a lock since 1996. It’s why I think Aldred or no Aldred, it’s fanciful for the Liberals to imagine they have a real chance in Holt, or in Isaacs for that matter.
Yes I agree. The Aldred stuffup wouldn’t have happened if head office (ie Michael Kroger) thought they had a real chance of winning Holt. The only really serious candidate they’ve come up with so far is Adam Held in Melbourne Ports, though trying to get to the right of Danby will be a challenge. It looks increasingly like there will be a swing to Labor of some sort in Vic, though whether it will be enough to win any seats is another matter.
Adam Says:
March 21st, 2007 at 11:41 pm
You just get all your furry feral friends to give us their preferences and leave winning the election to us, ok?
We have done that in 98, 2001 and 2004. You aren’t that good at winning at the moment.
“You just get all your furry feral friends to give us their preferences and leave winning the election to us, ok?”
Appealing to the green (big G or small g) vote *is* part of the ALP’s responsibility for winning the election.
As I have remarked elsewhere, in 1990 appealing to a small, relatively disorganised environmental vote from government was widely hailed as a strategic masterstroke by the ALP.
Fast forward to today and, from opposition, sections of the ALP seem to expect the larger, more organized environmental vote to be handed to them with nothing in return.
I’m never quite sure why Labor goes to such efforts to get Green preferences – 80% end up coming back to Labor anyway, so there’s probably no real need to offer anything in return. Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy for Labor to be pulled a bit more left, but I think both parties are deluding themselves that it makes any difference.
That’s certainly fair enough. I guess I feel that the ALP can’t expect it both ways. They can either do nothing and then not complain when Greens flex their muscles in relatively unimportant seats (threatening to cut preference flows from 80% to 70%) OR they can actually make an effort to secure the 80% preference flow in all seats and accept that there might occasionally be a Green elected to the upper house on ALP preferences.
Of course most of the ‘preference deal’ discussion is just obvious tactical propaganda rather than genuine outrage so I guess there’s no point over-analysing it
Labor is dreaming if they think they can win Corangamite at this election unless there’s a big swing on and it gets caught up in the tide. They would’ve won it years ago if they’d stop running nameless hacks – after about a decade of Michael Bjork-Billings, they put up the ethically challenged McMullin, and now they’ve preselected some left hack no one has ever heard of. Labor had the perfect chance to find a decent candidate and get it across into the Labor column for the first time (as they did in 2002 with one of the corresponding state seats, South Barwon). Alas, maybe in 2010.
Yes Rebecca I have to agree. At least Mr Cheeseperson, by being totally unknown in the electorate (he was on the *Ballarat* city council apparently), has none of the negative baggage of McMullin. Without local knowledge I don’t know what the alternatives were, but this preselection doesn’t suggest that Corangamite is on head office’s short-list – probably a sound judgement.
Funnily enough .. with a 52% primary vote (last Newspoll) .. the ALP wouldn’t need ANY preferences .. green or otherwise
So back to Deakin as possible, La Trobe after that and just about anything else in Victoria needs a landslide?
Adam: I think it’s a bit wasteful if head office really is seeing Corangamite is unwinnable. It should be in the firing line on its margin alone, and it’s been getting increasingly more marginal for years, with some of the previously-safe Liberal state seats in the area having fallen to Labor in recent years. If they ran a decent candidate (ala 2002, where running a popular local mayor won them the state seat of South Barwon, which they had previously never won), I think it would fall. They had the perfect candidate this time in recently defeated state MLC Elaine Carbines, who was interested in running, well known in much of the electorate, and had the personal popularity to probably carry the seat, but unfortunately decided to go with the hack option.
Alex, you are asuming of course that the 52% appears in the right areas. as in not safe ALP like Scullin.
lol .. Labor won’t get a primary of 52% .. was merely drawing a lighthearted conclusion from a very early poll. All of the marginals will require some preference flows .. obviously
Well that assumes a big minor party vote. We have got used over the years to most marginal seats being decided on preferences – first the DLP, then the Australia Party, then the Dems, now the Greens. But the Dems are gone and the Greens, being a party of the left rather than the centre, have had the benefit of an anti-Labor left protest vote in recent elections. If the Rudd bandwagon really is taking off as polls suggest, that vote will come back to Labor, and the Greens will fall back to their core vote of tree-dwellers. In that case there will no significant minor party vote for the first time since 1955, and Labor really win most of the marginals on primaries. That also means, of course, that the Senate will split 3-3 in every state except Tasmania.
All this talk of the minor parties, but no mention of of Family First. Don’t be surprised to see them pick up 4, 5 or 6 p/c in seats, particularly in NSW, Qld and South Australia. The preferences of FF could be very important in tight races, if the swing is on.
Also, my understanding is that the ALP believes many of the “big” margins facing them this election are not real. They have been over-inflated by the Latham factor. Better, perhaps, to look at the margins from 2001.
And look for news tomorrow that Larry Anthony will not be standing for the Nats in Page at this election. This is the seat from which Ian Causley is retiring. The Nats had been banking on Anthony to run in a seat that has always threatened to swing Labor’s way.
Dave C said
Bill never actually said that people in Kingston would relate to him, just that he is an ordinary worker.
Thats correct but it also helps if the candidate can relate to the electorate and especially those who he/she claims to represent. How can a person from a wishy washy union which helps to screw the worker then jump on the IR laws when the said union has looked the other way while work choices type dealings have been going on for years?. Ive worked for 27 years in the same factory, lived in units in ‘ bad ‘ areas , lived in Public housing , suffered racism, have a child with a severe disability, had to fight for her rights all her life and many other things too personal for this forum. I relate to every struggler in this electorate, every parent who has a child with a disability, people that look for ways out. Politics has forgotten us, MP s and Major party candidates seem to be so far removed from ordinary people. What happened to the local MP who you would see at the local shops or have a beer with at the pub. Its about the people not Parties, people before profits , people like you and me
Adam said
In that case there will no significant minor party vote for the first time since 1955, and Labor really win most of the marginals on primaries.
And without the left minor parties pushing the ALP to be true to their promises the people once again will loose out. Watch for an ALP turnaround on parts of work choices. The ALP government in SA is so right wing its making the Libs here look like Socialists. Hospitals, Schools, Public housing etc are all dieing. These services are essential and needed for the ordinary person yet the Labor party sees fit to destroy them. I just don’t understand how a party from the workers and middle class interested in social justice and social welfare can do this. Minor parties are needed to be a voice for those that have lost faith in the tribes. The loss of this is a loss of Democracy
Coota Bulldog Says:
All this talk of the minor parties, but no mention of of Family First. Don’t be surprised to see them pick up 4, 5 or 6 p/c in seats, particularly in NSW, Qld and South Australia. The preferences of FF could be very important in tight races, if the swing is on.
Thats an important point and the ALP in marginals like Kingston need to understand this. If the vote gets tight and the Greens cannot match FF on primaries then Richardson will win. Richardson is in tight with the AOG church so expect a 80 % flow to him from FF at least. FF is huge here. For the ALP to minimize and belittle the Greens would be a bad decision
William is there something wrong with one of the comments i wrote at:
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Minor parties are only important (in Reps elections) if they have the potential to transfer votes from one major party to the other via preferences. DLP prefs were very important because they transfered Labor votes to the Liberals. Democrat prefs were important because they transfered at least some votes from the Liberals to Labor. Green prefs are NOT important, because nearly all Green votes come from Labor, and the prefs just go back to Labor. Family First will only be important if they take votes from Labor and give them to the Libs as prefs. I’m not persuaded that that will be the case – I think that most FF votes come from the Libs. I don’t know if there is any research on this.
Adam i have to disagree with you partly. In Kingston there is a large Green Lib voting pattern in country towns and along the beach. Thats the votes Rishworth needs to chase to make it 1 Green 2 ALP
Adam,
Do you think that a swing against the Liberal Party of about 7% to 8% in the Senate, in either TAS or ACT is an anywhere near realistic possibility ?
If so, given the 2004 results, wouldn’t that be about enough to reduce their representation by one (to 2 and 0 respectivly) in either of those ‘Divisions’ given that that would equate to a drop of about .5 of a quota in TAS and .25 of a quota in ACT?
Given that the Federal Gov’t is proposing to reduce the Workcover coverage of Federal Public Servants in several ways, including the exclusion of coverage of travel between home and work (and work and home) might not the ACT scenario be at least something that can not be ruled out, even if you do not rate it as ‘the highest probability’
Cheers.
Just an interesting point. why would the ACTU be trying to get Bob Brown to hold a meeting in Kingston?
Bill,
I appreciate the passionate commitment that has come from your personal experience of life, but you are being unfair to the SDA. If Joe de Bruyn called a “Waddawewanblahblawendawewanitnow†rally, do you really think the assistant sales managers of Myer and the schoolkids of Coles would turn up? The union responds to the characteristics of its members.
Lots of teachers moan about the AEU because it is so weak. What they don’t face is that its weakness is their weakness. The AEU is weak because teachers are industrially and politically naïve and weak. They won’t fight, so they get done over by Liberal and Labor governments. They are about to be done over again by the Victorian Labor government.
The last industrial agreement has led directly to increased teaching loads at my school, soul-destroying 72-minute periods, the abolition of the Management Advisory Committee despite the principal’s earlier agreement to it and the MAC’s replacement by a sham consultative process. The teachers of Victoria voted for all this.
The process in teaching is:
Step 1. Teachers moan and whinge about their lot in life.
Step 2. Union demands restoration of decent working conditions (possibly stolen by Farmer Jones) and some movement in salaries back to the professional levels that once applied.
Step 3. Government offers 3 per cent and demands a worsening of working conditions.
Step 4. Union huffs and puffs and jumps up and down.
Step 5. Union accepts 3 per cent and the worsening of working conditions, and declares victory.
Step 6. Teachers vote to overwhelmingly endorse the 3 per cent and the worsening of their working conditions.
Step 7/Step 1. Teachers moan and whinge about their lot in life.
This analysis is why I laugh whenever journalists mention the difficulty Kevin Rudd will have dealing with the “powerful†teacher unions. They will be a walkover.
You need some the good old TTUV Maoists back, Chris
mmm center.center…center..
April conference will be a cracker:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21431274-601,00.html
oh and yet another backfire:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21431204-601,00.html
another minor left party?
mmm Barry Gissell seems to be a shearer’s organiser:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/668/6603
the following also appeared in Goodle’s cache from the Law Society journal:
“”"
Country lawyer heads Restore the Workers’ Rights Party
August 2004 page 17
DAVID MCCABE, a workers compensation specialist who numbers members of
the NSW Shearers and Rural Workers Union among his clients, is the
founding president of the Restore the Workers’ Rights Party (RWRP)
which plans to run candidates in the 2007 NSW election.
High speed broadband looks to be a another winner for Rudd. Locked in the nerd/geek vote I would suspect. Howard’s going to have to come up with something better to win those votes back.
There has been a lot of conjecture in the media that we might be witnessing reruns of 2001 and 2004 where Labor was ahead at this time of the cycle and gradually fell away. I don’t think that is the case this time.
I think we are more likely witnessing a mirror image of 1995-1996 where Keating lost the electorate many months out. It was a different world then but Keating talked about a greater engagement with Asia that people didn’t relate to. Howard talks now about more war in Iraq and against refugees that many people don’t agree with.
But I think the main thing that is working against Howard now is that most of us while statistically making more money, are suffering from vastly increased working hours, loss of lifestyle and personal debt at frightening levels. Workchoices is also turning the battlers away in droves. The honeymoon for Rudd ended with the Brian Burke allegations. What has been most telling since then is that Rudd has improved in the polls and Howard has plummeted. The preferred PM polls are very different in this regard.
This is not following the 2001 & 2004 patterns. And yes when the nerds are polled post election I’d bet most of them made up their minds which way they were voting this week.
Largely agree with Ed the pseph, but ….. Yes, the broadband thing is good policy, and it fits into the narrative that Rudd is trying to weave, viz that he and Labor are of the future, Howard is of the past. However, can’t help thinking he’s given the government an opening by getting some of the cash from the Future Fund. I guess we won’t know for a while whether Costello’s confected outrage will translate into a swing back to the government. Like most people, I’m waiting for the bubble to pop – surely it has to eventually – but it’s equally possible that people have already made up their minds, and Rudd would have to be caught en flagrante with several barnyard animals to lose from here.
The next two months will be critical. If Labor can get past the budget without too many bruises, they should win in October/ November. If the government can knock over Labor’s economic cred in that time, they will be returned. Having said all that, this is proving to be an unusual year, so maybe the usual rules don’t apply.
New Morgan poll – http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4151/
2pp down for the ALP – 58.5/41.5
Have they hit a ceiling?
Bloody hell, if Morgan is giving the best polling for the government, then they are in serious trouble!
Cris Curtis said
I appreciate the passionate commitment that has come from your personal experience of life, but you are being unfair to the SDA. If Joe de Bruyn called a “Waddawewanblahblawendawewanitnow†rally, do you really think the assistant sales managers of Myer and the schoolkids of Coles would turn up? The union responds to the characteristics of its members.
So if theres no union activism and members have no support then why belong to it? And why pray tell does this type of union seems to produce ALP candidates? Is the motto in such unions ‘ dont rock the boat and you will end up in head office. From there if you dont organize the members to be militant then a life of ALP politics is for you’. The SDA has a massive opportunity to organize over so many issues. How would the multinationals feel if all SDA members walked of the job? With IR on the communities lips any action by unions would be supported.
JJ said
Have they hit a ceiling?
It had to happen some time
From the Morgan poll
On the weekend of March 17/18, despite negative publicity for the Coalition surrounding the Santo Santoro share scandal, primary support for the L-NP recovered 2% to be at 36% (down 10.4% since the 2004 election), the latest Morgan Poll finds.
Primary support for the ALP dropped 3% but still remains at a high 48.5% (up 10.9% since the 2004 election).
Support for the ALP on a two-party preferred basis is down 2.5% to 58.5%, 17% ahead of the L-NP (41.5%, up 2.5%). If an election had been held during the last week, the ALP would have won easily.
The proportion of electors who think the ALP will win the next election is 54.5% (up 4.5%), well ahead of those who think the Coalition Government will be retained (30.5%, down 5.5%).
Among the minor parties, support for The Greens is 8% (up 0.5%), Family First 2.5% (up 0.5%), Australian Democrats 1% (down 0.5%), One Nation 1% (unchanged), and Other Parties and Independent Candidates 3% (up 0.5%).
Bill, I agree that the SDA are not the most dynamic of unions, but Chris is right to point to the link between the union and its members. Any union will largely reflect the make-up of its members – they are democratic organisations after all. It is important to realise that there is a something of a symbiotic relationship between a union and its members: the more people who join, and the more active they are, the more effective that union will be – and the the more effective a union, the more people will join it. This is why public sector unions are often more active than private sector ones.
With the SDA, you have a further problem – The SDA has traditionally set up deals with employers (such as Myers and Coles) whereby the “default” position for any new employee is to join the union. This is not a closed shop, but an individual has to make the effort NOT to join. The problem here for the union is that they have a large membership, but not many active members. If a union doesn’t have active members, it’s probably not going to do much for its members apart from the usual (Award renewals, job protection etc), which people start to take for granted.
Where WorkChoices is an opportunity for the union movement is that the laws give unions the chance to remind members (and potential members) of all the things they have done (and continue to do) for them.
Im not one for amalgamations of smaller groups into one large one ( e.g woolworths, Coles Myers etc multinationals ) but maybe the idea of a world union has its merits. It seems as the world is quickly being run by super companies and competition is diminishing the Union movement should counter this by molding into one. The negative would be the leadership would have immense power and thinking about that scares me
This is a long-running dilemma for the union movement – do they try and be as big as possible (the rationale for the spate of union amalgamations in the late 1980s/ early 1990s) and so be more effective/ powerful, or do they stay smaller and more accessible to members? No easy answer to that one.
Adam’s right – waiting for Newspoll is better than Morgan.
Peter Stephens Says:
Adam’s right – waiting for Newspoll is better than Morgan.
Adams basking in the glory of his beloved ALP being way in front in the polls and he hopes the end of Minor Parties having any influence in elections. As the latest Morgan poll shows both the Greens and FF up .5 as the ALP vote drops. This i believe is the start of a more believable voting trend and to Adams horror the Greens, FF, Dems and one nations support will be crucial in the Marginals. The ALP cannot show itself to be arrogant and expect that any of the minor parties will automatically give preferences ANY! A quick look at Mawson in the last SA State election will show how crucial preferences can be. Interesting to note also that in Kingston Richardson seems to be more interested in Green preferences than Rishworth if this was to happen in a few more marginals with the national vote being tighter as we get closer to the election it could be disastrous for the ALP
Anyone know who the Labor candidate in LaTrobe is?
Bill, I’m an ALP supporter (not member) sympathetic to the Greens, and quite willing to vote for them depending on the quality of my local ALP candidate.
But if they direct preferences to the Howard Government in ANY seat that matters in this election, that to me will be an even worse betrayal than the ALP putting Steve Fielding in Parliament. That will be the end of any affections I have for the Greens.
Charlie I doubt that you need to worry but its up to the ALP candidates to make sure that happens. FF are big in some of the marginals and to match that the Greens need to poll well. As for the Broad Band issue. It has lost the ALP votes in Makin and Wakefield with the over 50 year olds due to the futures fund
No, I disagree Bill. The Greens don’t need me to tell them that if Howard is to be defeated it will be the ALP, not the Greens, that take power. So if you want to contribute to throwing out this Government, you shouldn’t quibble about preferences.
I should have also said that after getting my fingers burned on Fielding (I wouldn’t have gone above the line except that I was actually 17 and the booth official knew me, so had to get in and out before questions were asked
) I will now be voting Greens before ALP in all upper house elections. Unless, that is, they do something much worse than putting a FFP nutter in the Senate…
I never vote over the line
What i am saying is If the ALP candidates want to win the marginals it is up to them to work with the Greens not against them. I personally don’t need ALP preferences but she needs mine and so does the Libs.
You overrate your own importance, bill. In 2004 the Green got 5% in Kingston and 74% of her preferences went to Labor. You will poll about the same, maybe less if the disgrunted left vote goes back to Labor, and 70-80% of your voters (depending on ballot paper order) will preference Labor whatever you say or do. You could spend the next eight months in China and it wouldn’t make more than 1% worth of difference.
Adam if Labor stays at this poll level id still expect to get 6 % but i doubt that will happen and i should get more. As my wifes prefs gave Bignell the seat of Mawson. FF could do the same for Richardson. There is a chance three unsuccessful Mayor candidates in the local council area running as independents. I doubt very much if they will be pro ALP as one of them is a local who has anti ALP signs outside his house and the other two i would say are right wingers ( i could be wrong) Kingston could be more of a fight than you realize and Richardson is everywhere.
I wouldn’t have voted above the line under normal circumstances, Bill. I *thought*, however, that I would be fairly safe going for the ALP with the expectation that my vote would help a Democrat or Green get the last spot.
Never again. Lucky, too – the Victorian Branch tried to do it to me again in 2006… thankfully, my vote was not one of those that helped resurrect the DLP, but it was in my region.
Bill you are right that the ALP will need greens help in Kingston, many religious people respond well to strong individuals who can talk about politics as a battle of morals in a sincere manner, which Bob Brown does better then anyone.
The greens can be remarkably effective at blunting any advance by FF, which will be an issue in Kingston.
You are also right that the ALP struggles to play nicely with any other groups, but I think you would have to admit Bill that bagging the SDA and the Labor Left on a public website hardly makes you an exemplar of the generosity that is required to make inter party cooperation work
Union solidarity brother
Snow Says:
but I think you would have to admit Bill that bagging the SDA and the Labor Left on a public website……
Sorry but i cannot make any apologies about bagging the SDA and its ways but if you read my posts you will see i have never bagged the ALP left and its the right i have a problem with. At a YR@W meeting last year there where right ALP members praising Howards economic policies. Sorry but to me that is sickening. I was asked to join the ALP left by Kris Hannah in 2001 ish and both him and Bolkus said we need leftists like you. I went to the Greens and Hannah did what he did. What leftist need to realize is that they have no say in the ALP anymore. In the Greens I have a say and satisfaction in agitating the major parties and local council to do what they have promised. I have seen the sheer frustration of the ALP left in Kingston. The best candidate missed out and we will suffer that loss as he is an excellent comrade and brother. My wife and i, new to politics where treated as non important by the ALP candidates in our electorates in the state election That wont happen again. An interesting side piece was the help i received from Robert Brokenshire (ex lib MP for Mawson) putting up my Green signs at the polling booth. He gave me extra tape, Ladder and showed me the legal and illegal areas for signs etc. This was at 3 am in the morning ,my daughter (11yo) and i covered all the booths in the two electorates. My wife and i delivered approx 15000 leaflets on our own in both electorates and where totally bushed after visiting every booth and giving out chockys and drinks to the green booth workers. all this for just 4.7 and 5 percent and we loved every minute of it. This is involvement from corflutes, handing out HTV cards to meetings and running a branch. I love it . I have received bagging on here by some ALPers but that all part of the game and after the election i would have a beer or coffee with any of the candidates in my electorate. Pity that never seems to happen
“The honeymoon for Rudd ended with the Brian Burke allegations. What has been most telling since then is that Rudd has improved in the polls and Howard has plummeted. The preferred PM polls are very different in this regard.”
Ed the pseph.
As are the primary vote polls. Which is very important.
“This is not following the 2001 & 2004 patterns.”
Ed the pseph.
Absolutely correct. It is a very different game this time around.
Bill,
The Greens and the ALP are not comrades-in-arms. The Greens have voted in every vote in the Victorian Legislative Council against the ALP. That is more than 30 votes. By contrast the two Labor parties have voted together on five occasions. Lucky for the ALP that it helped elect a DLP MLC so that the Greens and the Opposition cannot defeat everything it wants!
You and I are never going to agree on the SDA. You expect its leaders to turn its members into something that they are not. I expect the members to elect leaders who follow what the members want. I see the SDA as representing its members. You see it as not doing so because it does not follow your agenda.
Teachers whinge about the AEU. The opposition group attacks the leadership but comes nowhere near winning a vote. I point out that the leaders represent the members and that it is the members who are weak, not the leaders. You, I guess, would expect the AEU leaders to take a more militant stance, even though the members will not follow.
You probably think of the AEU as a left-wing militant union. If it affiliated with the ALP, it would undoubtedly join the left faction. No teacher in the state of Victoria would be better off as a result, but the symbolism would be “rightâ€. Commentators, teachers and their enemies would all think everything fitted, but the reality would be that the AEU would become less willing to fight for decent conditions. It would gain nothing for its members, but perhaps a few pre-selections for its officials. I think the SDA is more effective.
I’d get over the idea that the “left†is progressive. It’s just another tribe in the Labor clan.
I had cordial relations with just about every other candidate in the six elections I contested. I think politics is a little theatrical, though there are some real hatreds in it too.
Labor has to win and it has to reach the right compromise between principles and pragmatism to do so.
Posted in the NSW election live thread probaly should be here
Edward StJohn Says:
Of course IR is finally being revealed for what it is – job protection and career advancement for union officials. I guess its such a vital issue that at least 4 union secretaries have reluctantly decided to leave their unions to run for the federal poll – what a joke
That is exactly how the swinging working class voters see it. The hostility the rank and file non activist union members have against the union bosses is big. People cannot believe that Doug Cameron from the AMWU is promoted by them to the hilt but a grass roots unionist who has no ambition to be a union boss has to fight to get acknowledged. The YR@W has been promoted as a anti Howard grouping yet in some of the marginals it has been totally hijacked by the ALP with a arrogance that smacks of Howardism. I have been involved in the YR@W and its predecessor here in Kingston for over 18 months. Thank god the ACTU organizer and The Fire Fighters union see the need to promote the Greens and others against neo conservatism. It would be interesting if i was a union boss running for the Greens how the Union hierarchy and ALP would react. I have the feeling that i am now being ignored by some union members as being too, how should i put it, non towing the ALP Union boss line. What they dont understand is that AMWU and other left union members are watching to see how they treat one of their own, someone who is known around the traps. The Union movement has a chance to become strong again or give it self up to the ever right moving ALP. I believe that the workers will suffer under Labor but by stealth and thats the message i am getting from members. Howards on the nose but it more to do with a tired government and arrogance rather than any real issue. I dont think we have ever had a opposition that is so similar to the Government ever and the same is happening in the States. Theres seems little choice anymore. I will be expecting a huge change for the workers when the ALP win as we have suffered enough
Cris said
You and I are never going to agree on the SDA. You expect its leaders to turn its members into something that they are not. I expect the members to elect leaders who follow what the members want. I see the SDA as representing its members. You see it as not doing so because it does not follow your agenda.
I dont expect the leaders to turn its members into what they are not. I would hope they would educate them on activism in light of work choices and not expect the activism of the AMWU and the Greens to do the union bosses jobs for them. Ironic really that the activist is normally a low paid worker doing the job that a union boss should do considering the activists union fees pays the boss
ALP – Union -Activism
Why is it that when the need for ALP candidates and MP’s support for Anti work choice actions ( re-Radio Rentals) was needed they hide? I have been to many actions over the years and its always minor parties that do the leg work. E.G. The last action we had in Kingston I organized Green members and supporters to attend, i had it advertised internally and through this the Greens MLC came and spoke. My work bolstered the action by at least 25% possibly 35 % and as anyone would know the bigger the crowd the bigger the support outside. The Unionists where amazed at the Greens support and have been ever since. This has grown to the stage that the YR@W group here are trying different avenues to have Bob Brown come and speak. We are not insignificant or commies or Hippies ( havent met one in the Greens yet) we are activists not scared to support in trenchers.
When are the respective Parties’ pre-selections for NSW due to take place?
The Sunday Age reports that Combet has backflipped on whether he is going to run, and is now looking like a sure thing to displace Kelly Hoare in Charlton.
Julia Irwin in Fowler and Michael Hatton in Blaxland also look like they’re in the gun – one of them, at least, will almost certainly make way for Mark Arbib. George Campbell is apparently unlikely to hold on to his spot on the Senate ticket, where Warren Mundine is seeking a winnable position. Ursula Stephens’ term is also expiring at this election. Unfortunately, Michael Forshaw and Steve Hutchins are both at liberty to pollute the ALP backbench until 2011.
Pure speculation on my part, but Daryl Melham (Banks), Roger Price (Chifley), Jill Hall (Shortland) and John Murphy (Lowe) are others that might enter calculations when the faction bosses put their heads together. All have had plenty of time to make a mark in Federal politics and with the exception of Melham have failed to do so.
On the Coalition side there are a number of members at retirement age, whether they acknowledge it or not. It’s currently unclear whether Phillip Ruddock (Berowra) intends to seek yet another term. Alan Cadman (Mitchell) and Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar) must be on borrowed time. Aside from those three (and, obviously, John Howard), Danna Vale (Hughes), Alby Schultz (Hume) and Joanna Gash (Gilmore) are over 60. So is Ken Ticehurst (Dobell) but it’s hard to see a two-term member in a marginal seat getting rolled. Ian Causley is retiring for the Nats in Page. Lastly, Kerry Bartlett (Macquarie) now sits on a notional ALP majority and has lost the area where he enjoyed strongest support.
Adam,
Re your March 23rd, 2007 at 1:09 am post: I taught in a school with a large TTUV/FTUV branch, and one of its members was an ex-La Trobe Maoist. The school had the most unfair teaching loads I have ever experienced, but the TTUV/FTUV branch was more interested in destroying the VSTA branch than in actual teaching conditions, so I don’t think getting those unionists back would be helpful to teachers. Luckily for the industrially awake and committed teachers, the school had the good sense to appoint a former DLP official as its acting vice principal and timetabler, so conditions on the ground improved and the VSTA prophetic shock minority had another victory over the Maoist-influenced TTUV/FTUV.
Charlie,
They wont touch Shortland (Jill Hall) after the debacle of Newcastle especially if they are intent on parachuting in Combet.
Roger Price would be a definite for the chop, Banks is shaky margin has declined for the last decade and its a big risk to role Melham for a new candidate – even though he only started door knocking last poll. The left’s likely candidate is weak and was rolled off the Local council by pro Iemma forces.
I’ve just come across this article from yesterday’s SMH.
Andren is to announce this Thursday which seat he’ll contest.