The Coalition has again narrowed the gap in this fortnight’s Newspoll, although it remains at a daunting 57-43. Lateline reports that Kevin Rudd’s preferred prime minister rating is down two points to 46 per cent, with John Howard’s up three points to 39 per cent. The Australian’s report is not online yet, but will be by the time most of you read this. In other developments from the past week:
• Labor’s national executive has acted quickly on the authority it received from the national conference to preselect candidates for 25 New South Wales seats, nominating military lawyer Colonel Mike Kelly to run against Liberal member Gary Nairn in Eden-Monaro. In his role with the coalition provisional authority after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Kelly is credited with efforts to blow the whistle on mistreatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib and AWB’s payment of kickbacks to Saddam Hussein’s regime. David Humphries and Andrew Clennell of the Sydney Morning Herald assess the state of play elsewhere as follows:
Greg Combet, the ACTU secretary, will be candidate for the Hunter seat of Charlton, replacing Kelly Hoare, who replaced her father, the former minister Bob Brown, in 1998. The right wing will decide replacements for Michael Hatton, who filled Paul Keating’s vacancy in Blaxland in 1996, and Julia Irwin, the MP for Fowler, also in Sydney’s south-west, since 1998. If Mr Rudd got his way, the likely candidate in Blaxland would be the University of NSW constitutional lawyer George Williams. But speculation is that the contest will be between Tania Mihailuk, the Mayor of Bankstown, and Bernie Riordan, the Electrical Trades Union boss. The favourite in Fowler, Warren Mundine, the former ALP president, may be overlooked because of demands to strengthen the number of women candidates.
• Following Senator Amanda Vanstone’s appointment as ambassador to Rome, the South Australian Liberal Party will hold its preselection to replace her on May 25, with nominations to close on Thursday. This is the third South Australian Liberal Senate vacancy in little over a year, following Robert Hill’s departure last March and Jeannie Ferris’s death earlier this month. As was the case with Santo Santoro’s vacancy in Queensland, the party administration has opted for a new ballot rather than promote an existing candidate for the coming federal election. The position would otherwise have gone to Maria Kourtesis, head of the nursing agency Prime Medical Placements. Kourtesis has been preselected for the unwinnable fourth position on the Senate ticket (which she also filled at the 1996 election), behind Cory Bernardi (who replaced Hill), Simon Birmingham (who will replace Ferris) and Grant Chapman, a Senator since 1987. Kourtesis’s defeat at the hands of the long-serving but little-known Chapman caused considerable angst due to the state party’s poor record on female representation. It was also a defeat for the beleagured moderates faction; Vanstone, also a moderate, is among those who have called for the balance to be redressed by having Kourtesis take her spot. Kourtesis will instead face opposition from the Right’s Mary Jo Fisher, workplace relations lawyer and manager at Business SA. The winner will not face election later this year, as Vanstone’s term does not expire until 2011.
• Also in South Australia, Labor has endorsed Nicole Cornes, columnist for the Sunday Mail newspaper and wife of football identity Graham Cornes, to run against Liberal member Andrew Southcott in the Adelaide seat of Boothby. Cornes admits to having voted Liberal in the past, and wrote in her column in 2004 that John Howard had “proved himself to be a fine PM”. In the other normally safe Liberal seat in Adelaide, Sturt, Labor has nominated Mia Handshin – a former Young South Australian of the Year and “founder of inspirational speaking and consultancy group Mana of Speaking” – to run against Christopher Pyne.
• Western Australian Liberal Senator Ross Lightfoot announced he would retire from politics on Friday after it became clear he would lose the number three position to Mathias Corman, state party senior vice-president. Corman is linked with fellow WA Senators Chris Ellison and Ian Campbell in a pro-Howard camp opposed by forces aligned with indestructible powerbroker Noel Crichton-Browne. Last year, Lightfoot said he would have “no honourable course” but to quit the Liberal Party and serve out his term as an independent if he was dumped in an “undignified” manner. The Prime Minister reportedly instructed the state party to hold off on its preselection for as long as possible to minimise the effect of such an eventuality. However, despite Lightfoot’s complaint that the party should have chosen someone “more appropriate with respect to family values”, it does not appear that he plans to do so. The other incumbents, Alan Eggleston and David Johnston, have been re-nominated.
• New South Wales Labor Senator George Campbell has announced he will retire from politics when his term expires in mid-2008, rather than face an inevitable preselection defeat. Campbell’s seat will go to his successor as national secretary of the Left faction Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, Doug Cameron, who by all accounts had stitched up the numbers to depose the 65-year-old Campbell long before. The other NSW Labor Senator up for re-election, Ursula Stephens, is reportedly at risk of being demoted in favour of the party’s high profile state secretary, Mark Arbib, who it was earlier believed had his eyes on Michael Hatton’s seat of Blaxland.
• The Northern News reports that the Liberal preselection for the safe northern Sydney seat of Mitchell will be held on an “unspecified date in May”. Under-achieving sitting member Alan Cadman, now 69, is apparently set on contesting again, despite having survived a challenge ahead of the 2004 election 58 votes to 55. Andrew Clennell of the Sydney Morning Herald reports that the party’s state vice-president, Nick Campbell, has been “encouraged” by two federal ministers to nominate. Others mentioned as contenders are Australian Hotels Association deputy chief executive David Elliott and solicitor Mark Blanche.
• The Poll Bludger has just had to cough up $239 in web hosting fees for the privilege of keeping you all entertained for another year. Contributions are welcome.
333 Comments
Let´s assume that the recent polls show a genuine downward drift in Labor support, and not just a bouncing around within the margin of error, which is an equally valid interpretation. If you look at the second table down the page on the OzPolitics blog (http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/) you can see that Labor is at least 3 or 4% ahead of where they were at the same point in 2001 and 2004. So if Labor drifts downward at the same rate they did in those two years, they will still finish ahead in the 2PV. The problem with that is a 2PV of under 52% does not guarantee Labor a majority of seats, as Beazley discovered in 1998. So it all depends on where the swing is happening. The news on that is good at present for Labor, because the swing appears to be biggest in Qld and SA, where there are the biggest hauls of seats to be won. Obviously Labor is NOT going to win 105 seats, as the current Newspoll suggests: the Labor vote can drift slowly down from now till October and Labor will still win. That´s why Howard HAS to seize the initiative somehow – just hanging on and hoping will not be enough. So a lot hangs on the budget, and on whether he and Costello have enough credibility left in the bank for a giveaway budget actually to win voters back rather than just arouse cynicism. If the budget doesn´t give him a big bounce, it is hard to see what else he can do.
I’m intrigued by the irony that affirmative action rules might exclude from Labor ranks its first indigenous MP.
If Labor had a lead, these “celebrity” candidates are going to cut it right down. They are not people who will appeal to the middle–Mia Handshin is a nonsense, mind-in-the-clouds, spiritual nothing, whilst Mrs. Cornes is a rich prudish wife like someone straight out of a trashy TV programme.
They are alienating and distant from most people. Far more alienating than the incumbent members. Labor should be concentrating on Makin, Wakefield and Kingston, and staying out of this territory.
I believe that the poll numbers will drop in SA for Labor.
Thank you David, I was thinking the very same thing!
after having the Mean Fiddler (large pub in Rouse Hill – edge of Mitchell) exposed for making patrons pay a public holiday surcharge on ANZAC day without paying the staff penalties – would the Libs be so silly as to endorse the AHA bloke?
With traditional candidates (I was one of them), Labor has not won Sturt since 1969 and not won Boothby since 1946. Ms Handshin and Mrs Cornes couldn’t do any worse and may well do a lot better.
Michael, Pseph, I completely disagree. While Cornes perhaps may appear like a character out of a trashy TV programme, a surprising amount of people like those shows and if that was the only demographic that swung towards Cornes she might have a shot.
The other thing about Cornes is that she is getting so much media she might swing the daytime tv demographic to Labor in other seats.
Handshin on the other hand won’t have such a significant effect. She is a nonsense, mind-in-the-clouds, spiritual nothing who is also intelligent, ambitious and relatively young, except for being female she is a mirror image of Pyne. I cannot see any clear electoral strategy justification why she was chosen instead of running Barca again
Hopefully the advertiser will do another poll soon so we can see what effect they have
Snow, I was agreeing with David and his comment on the irony that Warren Mundine may be discriminated against on the basis of affirmative action rules.
Cornes is a big mistake in Boothy. She’s a gossip columnist who couldn’t answer any questions about Labor policy in yesterday’s Adelaide Advertiser. Her candidacy was announced too early and without proper preparation (such behaviour is not unusual from Kevin Foley, SA Deputy Premier and all round idiot). This is generally a bad move for the Labor Party. Hanshin is an articulate individual who could do reasonably well but Pyne will be secure, his seat has a large bedrock of Liberal support which I don’t think will shift any more than 2-3% towards Labor.
I think my fellow blosters are missing the point about these so-called “celebrity” candidates, especially those being run in Liberal seats with decent margins (eg Boothby, Sturt, Bennelong). Candidates like these will attract a lot of media attention (rightly or wrongly) and will require the Libs to divert a lot of time, effort and money into defending seats that probably should not be at risk. The rise of such candidates can be seen as yet more evidence of Rudd “playing with Howard’s head”.
The other thing that these candidates signify is that it looks like that Middle Australia is swinging behind Rudd and Labor. After all, I didn’t see many candidates of this nature lining up to get ALP pre-selection in previous elections.
Newspoll provides more of the same, despite certain media commentators suggesting the country was swinging back to Howard – the moves since the last Newspoll are well within a normal margin of error, and I don’t think the Libs can take that much comfort from them. As other blogsters have pointed out, the Budget is possibly Howard’s last chance to get onto the front foot.
With the size of the swing apparent Labor may have had a chance of taking Boothby. Not anymore. By making such a shallow selection of someone who previously voted for her opponent, they will also jeopodise the other seats in Adelaide that they would expect to win.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/478#comment-14586
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/478#comment-14612
I don’t know much about Ms Cornes, but my instinct is that it doesn’t seem like a very good move. So far, the only media interest she has generated has been a front page backlash on the Advertiser. Surely this is not the sort of media coverage that Labor was hoping for … ?
And on another front, the Labor-Business rift appears to be deepening not helped my Gillard’s unhelpful comments about business “getting injured” if they come in to bat for Howard. What are our thoughts on this development? Personally, I think it’s bad for Labor. The economy is the one thing Labor had no room for error and it looks like, even if it’s just perception, that they are not doing too well on this front.
Ms Cornes has also indicated she has previously voted for Howard. She is also a long term resident of Boothby. So, she’s confessing that she has voted for Andrew Southcott, her now opponent. What better endorsement can Andrew Southcott get than his opponent having voted for him?
On the topic of Cornes, has anyone seen Strewth in today’s Oz.
See http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21648577-25090,00.html
Sounds like she might just be a bit out of her depth…
Celebrity candidates and candidates who are drafted are always the worst.
Celebrity candidates never understand actual politics, or the internal machine. They jump and down and cry when they dont get there way.
Mckew may be different because of her husband, she may in fact understand what really goes on
but if parties, and i mean all parties, think that people will vote for someone merely because they are famous, then they are greatly misinformed.
ps the Australian also made note of Graham Cornes also being a former Liberal party member.
That Australian report is extraordinary. Surely she or her minders could have come up with something better than ‘I won’t come on because you’ll ask hard questions’…..
On Mitchell
I thought political parties had rules that weighed heavily against preselection for those over 65? I’m sure exceptions are made for party leaders, senior ministers and such, but Alan Cadman is not exactly of that calibre……
“I thought political parties had rules that weighed heavily against preselection for those over 65?”
Not the Libs, as far as I know. Only the ALP (of the two majors)
OMG. All the Libs need to do to smear Ms Handshin is link to her company’s website:
THE STORY OF MANA
A very long time ago in the islands of the Pacific there were wise men and women who looked at the world, observed the patterns of nature, the behaviour of animals, plants and human beings, and they came to some conclusions about life, about what life is all about, about how life works. This knowledge, known as Huna Wisdom, led to seven ideas or principles of which Mana is one. Those who practiced this knowledge had a special way of looking at life, a particular vision.
THE STORY OF MANA OF SPEAKING
Some time ago on the vast island of Australia Mia Handshin was born. She looked at the world as she grew, she observed, explored, participated, engaged, debated, wrote, heard, felt, developed, advocated, articulated, absorbed and came to some conclusions about what she could do to be creative in her own unique way.
Then again, Sturt has lots of rich hippies/’spiritual’ people south of Payneham Rd. Maybe she’s just the ticket.
Bloody hippies.
More Mia Handshin:
http://www.speakingquest.com/newsletter_archive/2006fall.htm#article2
Gees, what was Labor thinking ? She sounds very flakey.
Perhaps rather than focussing on personal aspects of the Labor candidate for Sturt, readers may care to read her actual biography. (see link below)
Mia was appointed by John Howard as a South Australian representative at the Constitutional Convention in 1999, has been involved in the South Australian Youth Affairs council, been the governor-general of the youth parliament, south australian UNESCO youth network representative, was co-chair of the Federation Youth Advisory committee, and has worked as an associate to an Adelaide Barrister.
A much more impressive CV than many of the labor and liberal candidates I can think of !
http://www.manaofspeaking.com.au/about%20mia%20handshin.htm
Yes, there has been a fair degree of jaundiced feeling on this site towards these two candidates. Surely Jackie Kelly and Dana Vale show that you don’t need to be terribly bright or switched on politically to make a decent backbencher. But the real point is that these two seats probably lie outside what is possible for Labor (when compared to Kingston, Makin etc), so putting in a high-profile “non-Labor” ALP candidate could be a masterstroke. Even if they don’t win, they (like Maxine in Bennelong) will chew up a lot of time and money that I’m sure the Libs would rather spend elsewhere.
The northern half of Sturt is Labor territory–and like typical working-class Labor territory, it’s been gradually getting more Liberal over the past few elections.
The southern half of Sturt is blue-ribbon Liberal territory–and so the ‘doctors wives’ effect has been working well, with a nice chunky green vote (spiritual people).
These two effects cancel each other out to a degree, and that’s why Sturt’s margins haven’t changed much at all. Look at the both results and you’ll get what I’m saying.
Mia will absolutely alienate northern Sturt without gaining anything new from southern Sturt.
Why all the angst over Boothby and Sturt? Unless it’s a huge swing to Rudd, the ALP is unlikely to win either or both.
Yes, the News Ltd media is going after Rudd in a big way today: obviously that chat with Rupert didn’t go too well LOL
The Ruddster hates bad publicity: I bet he delivers some sort of compromise on AWAs, in the next few months.
I already had.
Her diary of her time at the ConCon doesn’t even spell out how she voted, but is full of seemingly-reasonable, conservative pro-republic claptrap:
And junior political networking helps the average voter exactly how?
Some politician or bureaucrat appointed a nice conformist youngster to a totally meaningless charade.
See above.
Which means she did what, exactly?
Oh, an actual job. The only one you’ve mentioned.
Oh wait, she’s also eben a newspaper columnist. For the Advertiser. Well, that makes me sure she’ll stand up for a left-wing agenda.
You haven’t met many young aspiring politicians, have you? They all collect these glorified CV-filling positions, and most of them have worked as lawyers or in legal offices.
To me, she sounds like the typical, New-Agey but ultimately very conservative (Oh no! We can’t have conflict – even if it’s caused by people standing up for themselves).
She says she supports Mr Rudd because he talks of bringing back ‘compassion’ into politics. Presumably Ms Handshin also supports Mr Rudd’s destruction of the right to strike? After all, if there are fewer strikes, there is less conflict. And that’s nice.
She might be bright, but people who “sit in meditation spaces” should be running for the Greens, not labor.
If you follow the link I provided.. is Mia wearing a Che Guevera singlet ?
I hope not.
(btw – she fills it quite distractingly)
Ms Handshin’s online diary of the Constitutional Convention is here
I thought that too, Mr Speaker, but it’s not Che.
She’s a New Ager, not a pretend-socialist.
David:
I think we are attacking her from different directions, however I agree with your analysis about her only ever having had one real job.
I’d rather some no-name mum with two kids who works with her hands for a living (ie a real person) than a new age crystal worshipper.
I wonder if she gets her “Aura Rebalanced” ?
OK enough about girls filling tops, when ever does any of this kind of analysis go on with the twit boys ((whether they be ‘celebrity’ or just the run of the mill idiots who hang around until they get preselection to enusre they get out of the way of whoever is wasting taxpayer money on them until them)) both sides seem to have in never ending supply. Got to say it is all smelling a bit sexist to me.
Preselections have been called for the remaining NSW seats. I understand something like nine or ten marginal and/or contentious seats will be determined by the national executive to get the process over and done with, and the remaining seats to be decided by N40 ballot.
Among those going to the National executive, obviously Charlton will go to Combet, Blaxland will be fought out by Tania Mihailuk and possibly George Williams/Bernie Riordan, and Fowler between Julia Irwin and Warren Mundine.
Other seats to have clear favourites are George Newhouse in Wentworth, David Bradbury in Lindsay and Michael Kelly in Eden-Monaro.
The difficult position the ALP has found itself in in delaying NSW preselections so long is that it now must contravene the normal rank-and-file process and determine the seats among the top brass. The difficulty lies in the fact that any further delay will put candidates behind the proverbial eight-ball, but the circumvention of the party’s grassroots leaves them open to criticism.
Confirming a candidate like Bradbury for Lindsay will allow the party big guns to deny they have ignored the will of the branches, with Bradbury (a popular former Mayor and current councillor) understood to have long held the numbers to win either an N40 or a rank-and-file ballot. This will be contrasted by the more bitter stoushes likely to occur in Charlton once Kelly Hoare is given the boot and Combet shunted in. Even in Eden-Monaro, where the going is relatively smooth, the would-have-been candidate came out in the press to express his disappointment, albeit with a good word for the in-coming Colonel Kelly, at being overlooked.
Having candidates in marginal NSW seats should turn the pressure up on a number of Coalition backbenchers, who will in turn ramp up the pressure for Howard to claw back some popularity in the polls. Things will become very interesting indeed.
Well spoken Jasmine – as always the girls get considerably closer scrutiny than the boys.
Jasmine:
when ever does any of this kind of analysis go on with the twit boys..Got to say it is all smelling a bit sexist to me.
Answer: Debnam and Beleau wearing speedos.
I await your apology.
Are the qualifications and resume of a female candidate off-limits for discussion?
Do you have any male candidates you’d like to name who you think are worthy of harsh criticism?
I don’t vote for “twit boys” either.
Mr Speaker, saying people who meditate should run for the Greens, means all religious people should do so, something I doubt FF agrees with.
Meditation is used to communicate with a being not visible, eg: God, Jesus, Allah. It is also known as praying.
Yes meditation is used to relax, but its primary use is to communicate.
It seems to me that the disagreements on this board regarding selection of candidates comes down to what one considers as a good candidate. Its easy to knock someone because theyve been on this committee or that, or been a success in business. Its also easy to knock people if theyve been columnists in dodgy newspapers. Hell if the Advertiser came knocking for me to write a dull as dishwater column I’d be interested. Whether they’d be interested in a column on quantum chemistry, I’m not so sure. A
At the end of the day, the liberal party will have plenty to think about in Adelaide at the coming election, and things are looking rather ugly for them at the moment. The Mike Rann effect is giving labor a feel-good vibe in the state, especially as he got a huge amount of credit in the local media regarding the river murray deal.
My personal view is Mia Handshin will be an excellent candidate in Sturt, but I have my doubts about Nicole Cornes in Boothby. If I was on the ALP executive, I would have made the preselection the other way around.
I most certainly are not going to apologise for expressing my suspicion that a level and kind of evaluation of candidates was going on because the candidates in question were female.
As a strongly labor person I have no kind words to say about Jackie Kelly nor Dana Vale but I will say that there are much bigger dimwit males (on both sides of the isle) about and the negative press they get seems to be disproprotionate to that other deadweights in Parliament get, assuming they deserve the deadweight tag in the first place.
And attacking a leaders chosen public appearances in swimwear or italian suits (Keating) is hardly comparable to scrutinising candidates for election.
And I have no problem at all with considering the qualifications and cv’s of any sitting members or candidates but my suggestion was, and remains that these candidates are getting a focused attention disproprotionate to there significance to the election and campaign.
And where do boys jokes about filling t-shirts, the suggestion the candidate is not a real person, and the speculative snide comments about non-traditional forms of religious and / or personal health practice fit into the whole qualifications and cv discussion.
Give me any male candidate whose CV has been torn apart line by line on this blog?
I wait your apology but expect it about the time the PM delivers his to the stolen generation and actively pursues reconcilliation.
This airy-fairy spiritual stuff is grossly distant from the working slug that most Australians go through. They don’t spend their lives as a media darling, giving inspirational speeches and seminars, and going on vacation in Hawaii.
She’s an outright insult to the ‘battlers’ that both parties want to win. So why–why on earth–when Labor wants to win back the battlers, would they nominate someone like this? Her target base is tiny and the Greens already have it.
In her little feel-good clique, she is adored, but by the average person, and with good reason, she will not be seen in the same light.
Sexism? No. She’s getting ripped apart like any candidate with these characteristics would be.
Why can’t people have “airy-fairy” spiritual attitiudes, if thats your interpretation. Its no different than having a particular religious conviction after all. But that’s “normal” I suppose. We all have different aspects to our personalities, and to me its nothing short of discriminatory to attack someone for these beliefs. Its no different to having a go at someone because theyre aboriginal or gay. Does it affect their ability to think, and perform well for their electorates ? I think not. After all, Bill Heffernan is still in parliament.
Speaking of airy fairy can you define what spiritual beliefs she has that are relevant to her ability or her election.
Can you tell us what the good reasons that an ‘average person’ will not like her are?
The only other media darling I can think of is John Howard who can say and do some really stupid things without risk the Australian or most capital city newspapers will even pick it up. What has that go to do with either her abilitiy or electability. And profile, whether you approve or not is an electability issue.
Again I don’t see how her holiday reflects on her ability to be elected or her ability if elected. The PM holidayed in Broome, not many of us can afford that but how is that relevant to his election in Benelong?
You haven’t given any characteristics I can pin down at all – so I’m back at sexism as the only credible explanation.
It is so easy to cry “sexism” when you do not like the arguments being presented; it is a crutch, an excuse, for those who cannot stand on their own two feet.
It is sickening to think that for some the criterion for someone’s electability is their gender (or race/sexuality/etc).
People are judged–and voted for–on their characteristics and beliefs. I think that Mia’s characteristics and beliefs are alienating and distant to the voters of Sturt. It’s just like putting a capitalist bible-basher in Grayndler; it’s bizarre and won’t work.
The preselection of Cornes just shows the Labor parties contempt for the local electorate and shows that it has no credible members who could be candidates. Imagine her in parliament another yes person, with no brains or independent thinking and who actually believes in anything.. that is the problem with todays politicians they are rigid control freaks without policy or ideas. Cornes once voted liberal, this just shows the lack of difference between the major parties on ideology and just how much Labor will do if it wins… and finally Rudd will be the most conservative leader of the labor party ever if he wins..
This is not even an affirmative action issue so don’t start me on the boys club and the affirmative action fictions used inconsistently and pathetically to justify the unjust. But I’ll illustrate an organisation where at the top levels you’d say ‘they should only make it if they are good enough – business shouldn’t have to carry deadweight for some hippy reasons.
At the bottom level where 70 – 80 of the best candidates are female they boys at the top employ pretty much 50:50% in the interests of ‘balance’. Wouldn’t want too many hormone driven graduates filling up a workspace. It is a great double standard, some affirmative action at the bottom to save the medicore boys but nothing at the top.
And other than imbalance, which remains unanswered and seems unanswerable, I do not complain about any of the ‘arguments’ that are being put, it just seems to me much more like petty personal attacks without much argument at all.
I take it she is much better known locally and these views and things your refer to are matters of common knowledge. For your conclusion to be sound the people of Sturt are pretty stupid rednecks? You know ‘You might be a redneck if …If your dad walks you to school because your in the same grade… you might be a redneck.’
I support pragmatism and for example it would be better for all concerned if Labor didn’t run not christians in that red-neck bible bashing area near Sydney. But where they do it is not an excuse to attack the persons religion. And not the time to attack the brave decision.
For the record I think voters are a lot lot smarter than you give them credit for, even those right-wing religious red-necks from Hillsong.
Pseph Says:
May 1st, 2007 at 11:48
Ms Cornes has also indicated she has previously voted for Howard. She is also a long term resident of Boothby. So, she’s confessing that she has voted for Andrew Southcott, her now opponent. What better endorsement can Andrew Southcott get than his opponent having voted for him?
now thats funny
From what I know, Nicole Cornes is not just a pretty face. She is a fighter. She has suffered pain in her life but is very determined to succeed. Her detractors do not know her. She will not be a pushover.
Mia Handshin I do not know, but she is very articulate. On state election figures, Sturt would be a Labor seat.
It’s a big ask, but I wouldn’t write either seat off for Labor.
News from my workplace. Voters are drifting back to Howard. These are blue collar workers not huge numbers yet but i will predict a close election with Howard over the line. And sorry Adam but minor parties will play a huge part if the ALP wants to win
jasmine_Anadyr I believe women make as good MPs as men do. In fact they would be better i believe in blue collar areas where the struggle is day to day. The problem with Cornes is shes been thrown in at the deep end with no political history etc. Shes probably a very nice woman but is way out of her depth. The good thing for her shes had the media heat straight away so it will die down now and she can find her feet.
According to the latest Your Rights At Work email-out we must now line up
behind the ALP, even if it’s “not 100 percent perfect”:
“Nearly 10,000 Rights at Work supporters took the time to write to Kevin
Rudd and the Labor team asking for them to give us an alternative IR policy
we can fight for”.
They ask for feedback and I think they need some:
http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/campaigns/choice
What i found interesting is when i asked for support from the ACTU they told me they are not supporting any anti Howard party. Thats changed.
Was your nutty rant directed at me ?
It was actually David Jackmanson who tore apart her CV.
William instead of Idle speculation: national conference edition maybe you should have called this Idle speculation: celebrity candidate edition.
An Australian Hotels Association member running in Mitchell, the god-squad of the region will be up in arms. Before the last election Malcolm Turnbull tested the waters in this seat until settling for the more precarious Wentworth – Turnbull is a hundred times more talented than Cadman, and if he loses his seat I can guarantee that neither Cadman or Campbell will be capable of landing even the slightest of blows on the new government.
I used to live in the seat of Mitchell, and this quote from Christian Kerr of Crickey sums of the politics of the region:
“Cadman’s support base … comes from the congregation of the Redeemer Baptist Church – who have fought so successfully against pubs in the area that thirsty locals have to search through an industrial estate to find the Castle Hill Tavern or brave the traffic of Old Northern Road to stop by the Hillside Tavern – and those Good Weekend cover girls and boys at Hillsong, who draw thousands and take a million plus collection plate each Sunday.â€
If the “Bible belt” didn’t like Turnbull, they are going to despite the AHA guy, the choice between candidates will be “dead-wood” vs “even deader-wood”. If a tree falls in a forest at least some environmentalist might care, but no-one is going to care about the result of this pre-selection (except the lucky bugger with the 100K+ ticket to Canberra), apparent Campbell has claimed that Cadman isn’t “right-wing enough”, next he’ll be suggesting “Genghis Khan is too left-wing”
I seem to recall Liberal pretty boy Simon Birmingham copping a few serves in the 2004 campaign.
I don’t have any objection to Miss Handshin’s spiritual beliefs (I have none personally), but if the Libs put Alex Hawke up to take on Plibersek in Sydney, I’m fairly sure a few of us would be mocking his ’spiritual’ beliefs in the context of the electorate.
I made a very soft point about balance and an appearance in an apparent lack of balance that the intensive attack on the candidate is probably best explained by sexism.
I am not directing at anyone, it is pretty much if a cap fits wear it type situation. I didn’t mean to attack anyone personally at all, I was just trying to point out that the thread as a whole seemed to reflect an unfair imbalance. I don’t care who points me to an attack on a male candidate, if it is there my observations about balance are incorrect and I would admit that.
Michael’s posts I did find disturbing – and whether or not the two candidates in question can stand on their own two feet and beat quite a distasteful personal attack is quite irrelevant – the question is whether they should in a fair society have to take a nasty attack because they are women (this assumes my observation about imbalance was correct).
Until now I haven’t even pointed out that this stream also has the number 3 WA Liberal senante candidate who will almost certainly be elected to Parliament without any discussion of whether or not he is fit to be an Australian Senator.
I know I am female but I can read that funny word at the top of each post, um what is it … ah a name (I got a boy to help me remember it).
Finally I give up I apologise for being female and for not being in a kitchen:
“LIBERAL Senator Bill Heffernan says he stands by comments that Labor Deputy Leader Julia Gillard is not qualified to lead the country because she is deliberately “barren”.”
This from the Australian PM’s right-hand man. We are back in the 60’s.
Heffernan is a ****wit.
My attack wasn’t based on gender I assure you. I clearly mocked her spiritual views.
See!
I’m sure you can’t object to this after your own comments:
Now you and I can be friends again and bathe in the warmth of shared bigotry.
The Speaker said. Now you and I can be friends again and bathe in the warmth of shared bigotry.
Everyone is full of humor today!
“Now you and I can be friends again and bathe in the warmth of shared bigotry.”
Is Mel Gibson invited too?
Stop it Stop it you guys are killing me. LOL
No I objected to the nature and quality of the attack on the two female candidates which seemed disproprotionate to the actual evaluation of her. Much of the attack seemed pretty superficial and nasty and I suggested that sexism would be an explanation.
I’m not quite sure my ‘you might be a redneck’ stuff aimed at a strong majority in a seat, who I say I believe is much more intelligent than many would give them credit for is quite the same as a suggestion an individual is an unfit candidate based on an allegation she once may have had her aura balanced.
Heffernan is a key man in the Government of the Country, that you are right in your evaluation of him says a lot about the PM, the Country and our values.
bill weller – given what Labor has been saying for months on IR what the bloody hell did those workers you talk about expect, a ringing endorsement of the Liberals policy? Sorry Bill but I don’t buy your assessment of the final result. The IR campaign will be in full swing during the election and there is only one party that will favour.
Handshin good, but Cornes. To anyone who lives in Adelaide, people are shaking their heads, but I do believe a new ministry will be created for her, from reading her column. She’ll be the Minister for Sunshine, Ponies and Candy. You knew it would be Foley’s idea.
Hockey and Gillard were on 3AW this morning debating IR. Gillard 1, Hockey 0. She cleaned him up.
well duh..
now they have wheeled out heffernan.
THEY MUST BE REALLY DESPERATE!
Well, it is very telling of the quality of our politicians – especially since the same could be side of a number on both sides.
Don’t think it says anything about the country.
C-Woo
Could you expand on your ‘Handshin good’ statement?
Gary Bruce Says:
May 1st, 2007 at 7:44 pm
The IR campaign will be in full swing during the election and there is only one party that will favor.
Lets see if Rudd keeps to his word on his ” Not 100% but better than the Libs policy”
If the ALP win with a 3 seat majority i will be surprised.
The strange thing i find is that i work in a factory, i have connections to community groups in Kingston. People seek me out to talk to about the election yet what i am hearing seems to upset bloggers on here. This is grassroots stuff no party polls or media opinion. Next week it all could change again. What i am saying is at this point of time some people are moving back to Howard and others are wavering. 3 live in boothby and when they found out Cornes was the candidate they decided to back Southcott. Pick what i say to bits but ive seen this before. I have made my own polls before elections and even the Republic refo in my workplace. Very interesting that it does follow the major polls quite well
Seems more intelligent than Cornes. I don’t really need to say anymore. And Bill Weller, I see your point and I don’t blame ‘em. I just hope this doesn’t affect Labor nationally.
Well Bill, all I can say is that it hasn’t been picked up in the polls yet. Besides how do you know it is not confined to Boothby ie a local issue? I’m convinced much of Labor’s vote in the polls is solid. The next few weeks will tell us more.
Mr Greg Combet is another likely ALP candidate who I think will also be a large part of making sure that the union movement in Australia does not become too powerful or strong.
While his CV is more substantial than Ms Handshin’s, his job over the time of the ‘Your Rights At Work’ campaign has been to make sure that people vote for the ALP, without ever actually becoming powerful enough to take direct action themselves.
Mr Combet will swallow every right-wing, anti-union policy that Rudd wants him to. Mr Combet will, I predict, refuse to oppose, Mr Rudd’s policy that would keep it illegal to stop work to take part in a ‘Your Rights At Work’ rally!
On perhaps a more practical level, Mr Rudd will also make it very difficult indeed for union safety officers to inspect workplaces. Mr Combet, if a candidate and if elected, will support him.
Mr Combet is already an important part of the team who makes certain that the union movement is usually disempowered and unprepared to fight in the interests of workers. While he’s had a high-profile victory in a good cause in the James Hardie case, he is helping the system that will make abuse of workers’ health and safety possible.
He, and everyone who does what he does, are planning to make us slightly better-treated wage slaves than we are under Mr Howard.
Mr Combet is just as unsuitable a representative, in my opinion, as Ms Handshin, and given his greater seniority, certainly does deserve more attention.
I agree that remarks about physical attractiveness are better left out of a discussion about political candidates (I meant to agree with Mr Speaker that I thought it was a Che shirt that Ms Handshin is wearing, rather than agree with the comment about Ms Handshin’s looks, but did not express that clearly).
I would say that tearing apart the CV of a candidate for Federal Parliament is fair enough.
I also think that Ms Handshin’s spiritual views are likely to lead to her taking conservative, anti-conflict positions on many issues, which is relevant to a discussion about her politics.
I do agree that it is important to make sure that female candidates are subject to the same level of scrutiny, and the same standards, as male candidates, and not higher ones.
jasmine_Anadyr, do you have any examples of a male candidate whose CV you think I should give the same level of attention to as I have Ms Handshin?
I disagree with David about discussing the attractiveness of candidates, I think its relevant to the extent that it effects the campaign. I recall hearing about some research that attractive candidates are more likely to win.
So here’s a question, do you think Kevin Foley and the alp executive sat down and decided to recruit attractive women who work for the advertiser. You have to admit that its a but funny that after months of speculation about people like Linda Kirk in Boothby and Tony Pilkington in sturt that they end up with two women from the same occupation and same company.
Oh there are many many very average candidates and you need me to do you a list? How about Stewart Henry in Hasluck, what of his qualifications has him untouchable while you look to do in the two female candidates in SA?
Bill, isn’t Cornes in Boothby, not Kingston.
Better looking people do get more votes than less good looking people. it is a fact
also
If you look at the leaders of the US UK and Australia there is only one bald person since the advent of televisions in every home (Howard, however Keating was balding also)- just an interesting tidbit, draw your own conclusions
In regards to the views of candidates, and particularly ALP ones, their personal views don’t matter. they sign the pledge, become part of the machine and the organisation moves forward.
David Jackmanson, your complaints about Combet are bizarre. The man isn’t even in parliament yet and you are already accusing him of selling out! Give the guy a chance – I’m sure you’ll have plenty of time to re-hash your rant in a couple of years, but for the moment, perhaps you could restrict your critique to things he has actually done or said up till now.
Jasmine, good on you for sticking it up the boy’s club that exists on this site.
Bill, I suspect that you’re in for a bit of disappointment regarding the size of Green vote in the coming election. I think the Rudd factor is mopping up all those disaffected ALP voters who have been flirting with the Greens, and I’d be surprised if the Green vote is much over 4% (obviously it will be much higher in Kingston, where I understand the Greens have a pretty dynamic candidate), with the re-election of a single Senator (Bob Brown).
Mr. Weller, I think you’re a rather genuine bloke and I hope you get your campaign into full-swing (and I say this even though I am on the other side of the fence). You’re a working class lad, right? And the official Labor candidate is a wealthy Psychologist!
Kingston is more working class territory, so, in reality, the ‘true’ Labor candidate is yourself! Pretty strange that they chose someone so distant from the people of the electorate to run. Here’s to you making inroads.
Some tidbits from today’s SMH:
And the Australian Jewish News has already called Wentworth for Labor:
Erk, my bad. Somehow I missed the word ‘attempt’.
Amanda Rishworth will be amused at the suggestion that she is wealthy. As for Kingston’s being working class, well yes, a lot of it is but a lot isn’t. That’s why it’s a marginal seat. Bill Weller seems a genuine guy – if I was in Kingston I might even give him my first preference – but Amanda perhaps represents the aspirational female part of the electorate.
Interesting to hear state MP Kris Hanna, former ALP, former Green, now Independent, come out in support of Nicole Cornes because she’s not a member of the political caste system from which so many candidates come. Hanna’s seat of Mitchell is within Boothby. He could be a valuable ally for her.
I’m reaching here but is ‘true labor’ a bloke in a blue singlet with a beer in his hand and a dog in his ute?
I’m not quite sure I’m buying the rest of the image but I know you’all would like the girl in the blue singlet just so long as the blue singlet was a bit small and tight and she doesn’t have the gall to run for parliament!!!!!!!!!!!
bill weller Says: May 1st, 2007 at 6:33 pm – “News from my workplace. Voters are drifting back to Howard. These are blue collar workers not huge numbers yet BUT I WILL PREDICT a close election with Howard over the line.”
bill weller Says: May 1st, 2007 at 8:17 pm – “This is grassroots stuff no party polls or media opinion. NEXT WEEK IT COULD CHANGE AGAIN. What i am saying is AT THIS POINT IN TIME some people are moving back to Howard and others are wavering.”
So Bill, you are prepared to make a prediction six months out from the election on very limited information which, in your own words, “next week it could change” and is limited to “at this point in time”. Hmm.
Many of us are considering with interest the prospects of the Australian Labor Party at the next election; indeed, some are desiring that the PPP (as Alan Ramsey has dubbed him) will be the next Prime Minister of the country we all love. The opinion polls are lookin’ good for the ALP but the reality is there are another six months to the actual poll so let’s not get ahead of ourselves, however noble those sentiments (and I daresay, hopes) about the outcome of that poll . That is friendly advice to those who “wear their hearts on their sleeve”, as far as the Australian Labor Party is concerned. I think Bill Weller is quite entitled to share his musings about “grassroots stuff”.
Any updated word on George Williams’ chances in Blaxland? Both Rudd and even Whitlam have endorsed him. It would be a total screw up if he doesn’t make it to federal parliament. Maybe the Senate would be better, because he is a nuts and bolts guy.
I’m a liitle suspicious of other contributors trying to define the “real” Labor voter, something which Jasmine has alluded to. It might seem obvious, but Australia is one of the most middle class nations in the world, and it is in this demographic that the election will be won or lost. The so-called “battlers” have always been a bit of self-serving myth.
The whole IR debate is getting interesting. Both big business and big media are clearly taking the gloves off, now that the ALP has an actual policy to aim at, and the battle lines are well and truly drawn. However, I wonder how effective all this right wing bluster is. It could well be that WorkChoices is so toxic for the government, that whenever IR gets on the front page (in whatever context), it’s a net negative for Howard. Kind of like the refugee thing (in reverse) in 2001. Word came out in the week of the election that Howard and Reith had lied, but all it did was put the issue of refugees back in the front of people’s minds. I suspect the same thing might be happening here with IR. Don’t forget, your average swinging voter doesn’t pay too much attention to politics outside of election campaigns.
Today The Advertiser announced Labor candidates for Barker (Karen Lock), Grey (Karin Bolton), Mayo (Mary Brewerton), Boothby (Nicole Cornes) and Sturt (Mia Handshin) – all women, but there has been commentary on only two of them.
Throw in the candidate for Kingston (Amanda Rishworth) and the member for Adelaide (Kate Ellis), and you are left with only SA four seats with male Labor candidates – Hindmarsh (Steve Georganas MHR), Makin (Tony Zappia), Port Adelaide (Mark Butler) and Wakefield (Nick Champion).
Having said that, the four men have a strong chance of victory but only two of the women are in that category.
The ALP IR policy is a dog.
what a let off, it should be the first lesson in “How to let an opponent back in the Game”
It shows the ALP to be:
under the control of unions;
regressive and backward looking;
not serious about economic growth and productivity.
Further if people want to rip up someone for nutty religious beliefs then Alex Hawke is a good place for the discussion to move to
“but is ‘true labor’ a bloke in a blue singlet with a beer in his hand and a dog in his ute?”
Only if he has bare feet.
The ALP IR policy is a dog. Hmm thanks … the Offical Government News Agency and the disinterested business community have mentioned this.
Any evidence the opponent is back in the game other than the biased press reflected in your post?
I take your points in order-
- um really – took you 100 years to notice the link between the labor movement and the Labor Party. Pretty sharp observation. However, there is no evidence the Parliamentary Party is acting in accordance with union instructions in fact it seems mostly the other way around. A distinction the Liberals and Big Business couldn’t draw.
- yeah back to a fair go, back to the most economically advantageous system, that benefits productivity which is growing at an ever slower rate under the neglect of Howard and his clowns.
- um nice government talking point – got any substance at all?
I suppose a if a fair go if someone in an office whose never worked in my field, deems my value as a worker then i can see the link.
when creating a good or service a firm mixes labour and capital to achieve a point in production where the firm produces the right number of goods to supply the market at the best price available to both producer and consumer.
when the cost of labour increases the cost of overall production increases this means that for the firm to aachieve the profits it sought when it began producing will either have to produce and sell more items or reduce the cost of production.
so when faced with this choice, the easiest short term answer is to let staff go, and produce at a lower more profitable point.
another point, when dealing at near full employment a number of things happen, one of which is waged based inflation, by arbitrarily setting base minimums too high it will only force inflation higher.
the Labor model will see salaries go up but not real wages.
the Liberal model will see a range of price variations while real wages grow.
I would also appreciate it if you going to accuse me of spouting Lib talking points not to use the standard labor line, please try to be more creative in your attack next time
Goodness, every one back to their corners! It seems that as the election gets closer, we are all being a bit guilty of spouting the party line. I trust I’m not breaking some sacred blogger code by pointing out that each of us is talking out of our respective backsides when we’re crystal ball gazing about the likely fall out of this or that.
The next Newspoll, however, should be instructive – this will appear after the ALP’s IR position has taken root in people’s minds, and of course the Budget. Much to play for this month for both sides, methinks.
Well there are points made by both sides of politics that have some substance. No-one is seriously arguing that worstchoices doesn’t remove fairness and drive down wages and conditions – it is just whether this is a good thing or not. Essentially whether business profits justifies exploitation of young kinds and the disadvantaged of society. Rio BHP and the Government delighted to support exploitation; labor not so delighted. Plenty of substance there but not that much disagreement on the substance just the outcomes.
And then there is truthiness talking points; like the war in Iraq is going well; like there was a link between Iraq and 9/11; labor is bad for the economy.
Well if you are going to make a substantive point out of labor being bad for the economy you might start by explaining why Keating and Hawke created this economy given labor isn’t interested in the economy?
THe Greatest thing that i never understood about the Labor party is why Whitlam is the Hero and not Hawke.
i never got it
Keating and Hawke remade Austrlia, with a great deal of support from the Opposition of the Day.
Then Keating Loses and the old ACTU hacks like Crean and the Labor gentry like Beazley just chuck it out.
and now 11 years later Labor is trying to take it back, well its a bit late now.
15 years ago Labor had all the answers but since Keating they have soundly rejected Keatingism.
Blackjack said:
If it’s a clean four wheel drive he’s a Liberal voter.
If he has two dogs on his ute he’s a National Party Voter.
If he has a gun in his ute he’s a One Nation voter.
If it’s a Prius he’s a Greens voter.
Just to put the IR debate into perspective I had a look at the ABS jobs figures. In the year to March 2007 employment grew by 2.8%. Not bad but not far above the average of 2.2% since the boom began in the early 1990s. Higher growth rates were achieved pre-WorkChoices over the same period in 2005 and 2000. The best growth rate – 4.1% – was in the year to March 1995 under Keating.
Not sure what that proves except that it’s very difficult to attribute a macro-economic impact to any one piece of micro-economic reform and most of the current union-bashing is just old fashioned political posturing. Anyone who has had anything to do with these business groups knows that they are just as full of political hacks and no more representative of today’s real business world than the unions are of today’s workforce.
To put it very simply, up until now Labor has been playing to its base – the workers – and Howard to his base – employers. Labor is in front because there are more workers than employers.
But to win an election both parties need broader appeal. Labor now has a credibility problem with business but the Libs have arguably a bigger problem with the so-called Howard battlers who delivered three of the last four elections. We’ll see how the tackle that one in the budget.
I think what may ultimately lose the ALP this election is the quality of its candidates. It seems to have nominated too many union hacjs/officials for seats where that particular demographic does not play well -take Craig Thompson in Dobell, Mike Symons in Deakin and I’m quite sure there are quite a few other examples
I think imposing Combet on Charlton is probably a mistake, although he’ll likely win the seat. While I will concede that Kelly Hoare is certainly not the most high profile or the most high flying MP in Canberra, she has a great deal of local name recognition and profile due to the fact that both she and her father have represented the electorate since its establishment. After the fallout from the pre-selection saga involving Bryce Gaudry in neighboring Newcastle, the intervention of the ALP executive once again to impose a candidate on local branches may leave a bad taste in the mouths of many local ALP branches and traditional Labor voters. I do realize that Ms Hoare’s father has recently been expelled from the party for daring to have the audacity to question His Mighty Highness Mark Il-Arbib’s decision to impose Jodi McKay on the electorate and perhaps this is further payback but I think the ALP is hurting its long term prospects in the Hunter region by treating the local ALP branches with such contempt time and time again
Having said that, both Irwin and Hatton need replacing -they are both talentless party hacks with absolutely nothing to contribute to either their electorates or the nation. And I think Warren Mundine should have entered Parliament a long time ago -he is truly one of the bright lights of the party
I do not agree with the criticism of Mia Handshin -despite all her New Age philosophy, she seems to have an impressive CV and background. Natalie Cornes is a different matter -she seems to be a political opportunist at the very least considering her sudden reversal of political ideology. I think Labor has made a very bad choice here. And it’s all very well to nominatre Mike Kelly for Eden-Monaro because of his admirable views on the Iraq war -and I do think he should be given a seat somewhere -but does he have the local profile necessary to win a seat like Eden-Monaro?. In the end, I think that this will be the crucial factor in winning the seat
Natalie Cornes?
Nicole’s mother has just sent me the following plea, which I pass on:
To all the critics of Nicole Cornes for the seat of Boothby, where is the Australian way of giving everyone a fair go? Give me a break. Try to break someone before they start. Boothby people, do you all realize Nicole has been bought up there most of her life, and by a single working mother. We had to stick to a strict budget, no silver spoon. Nicole worked since she was 13 years of age in a nursing home to get money for anything she wanted. And she also helped me and my son to wash laundry bags for them at $7 a bag. That was just the beginning. I could go on if I wanted to. She had various jobs, until becoming receptionist at 5AA, then secretary to general manager David Whiteman. She got that job because she was honest and could be trusted. I’m not sorry that she met Graham, and it hasn’t been easy there either. When they first met and fell in love, they lived in a poky 2 bedroom flat. Graham has got where he is by hard work, and so has Nicole. BOOTHBY, GIVE HER A CHANCE. That’s all. Meet her and talk to her first before you all pass judgement on her. She will be doing the hard yards and walking the streets and working at shopping centres. Give her a fair go. Denese O’Connor. Her mother.
… Maxine McKew, Gary Gray, Peter Tinley, Mark Dreyfus, Michael Kelly and Ross Daniels are all clearly union hacks. I see it now.
# C-Woo Says:
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 am
Bill, isn’t Cornes in Boothby, not Kingston.
Yes she is but many of my workmates live in Boothby as i did many years ago
Hugo Says:
May 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 am
Bill, I suspect that you’re in for a bit of disappointment regarding the size of Green vote in the coming election. I think the Rudd factor is mopping up all those disaffected ALP voters who have been flirting with the Greens, and I’d be surprised if the Green vote is much over 4% (obviously it will be much higher in Kingston, where I understand the Greens have a pretty dynamic candidate), with the re-election of a single Senator (Bob Brown).
Thanks for the plug Hugo. On your other comment i feel that when things get closer between the ALP and Libs the minor parties will become very important be it 4% or 8 %. The smart candidates are courting us right at this time the arrogant ones could miss out.
On the letter by Cornes mother. Shes right The media has hounded the poor woman and most of us have bagged her as well. Lets give her a fair go and see how she goes. I have been told to give Rishworth a fair go so maybe people should give Cornes that go too and at least she lives in Boothby and is honest that she voted for Southcott before.
Greetings from Weimar, home of the world´s most unfortunate exercise in constitution-writing – but otherwise a beautiful place. How many cafes and hotels can one small city name after Goethe and Schiller?
What a lot of tosh is being written here about ALP candidates (I pass over all debate about IR and other policy matters, which are not actually the topic of William´s website).
In country seats the personal profile of candidates matters, which is why Mike Kelly is such an excellent choice for Eden-Monaro. If the Libs try to get to the right of Kelly, they will fall off the planet.
But in suburban seats almost no-one either knows or cares who the candidates are. I´m sorry to have to point this out again to my fellow political obsessives, but it is very easy to forget. Most people in Boothby will vote for Howard or Rudd, and Cornes will only be a name on a ballot paper.
This will apply particularly to the floating 20% of voters who will decide who wins the seat. Compulsory voting means that all close elections are decided by the people who know and care least about politics. Those who know enough about Cornes to form an opinion about her will nearly all be committed partisans already.
Obviously it is better to choose good candidates than bad ones, particularly in seats one actually hopes to win, but unless the result is extremely close, in a suburban seat the quality of the candidates is unlikely to be decisive.
In any case, Boothby and Sturt are not frontline seats, and the purpose of Cornes and Handshin´s candidacies is obviously to force the Libs to divert resources from Kingston and Makin, and also to help create a “Rudd bandwagon” effect.
This last point is important, and shows how stupid is the criticism of Cornes for saying she is a former Liberal voter. Who exactly is the target group in Boothby, a seat Labor hasn´t won since 1946, if not wavering Liberal voters? I would have thought being a confessed convert is an excellent credential in a middle-class suburban seat.
Finally, I am sick to HERE [indicates back teeth] with criticism that Labor is choosing “celebrity candidates”. For years we have been criticised (with some justice) for putting too many union secretaries and factional hacks in Parliament. Now we are getting rid of some of them, and picking candidates with non-union and non-faction backgrounds, and we are criticised all over again, by the same people! We are we supposed to get our candidates from? At random off the street? From the Melbourne Club? [makes contemptuous gesture]
I don’t think it’s fair Adam to call people’s comments on this page “stupid”. We all have our opinions and however much you might disagree with them, most comments have some degree of merit. So I would ask that you refrain from making unnecessary remarks like that.. it’s simply inappropriate.
Yes, Labor needs to win votes from former Liberal voters but that doesn’t mean Labor should start imitating Liberal voters in order to win them over. I don’t recall Howard ever putting up former openly-supporting Labor supporters in order to woo Labor voters.
Jasmine
Sorry I have to disagree with you
Wages are determined by market forces, it is driven by the supply and demand for employees. And yes over the last few years, China and India had put downward presure on wages. This is taught in Economics to every year 8 and 9 student in our school. A brief explanation can be found here and has been mainstream economic rationale since 1767
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
There are 3 ways to increase wages
Decrease Supply
Price Floor
Increase Demand.
Decrease supply
I am assuming people are not going to start killing other workers to increase their wage, so I won’t go there.
Price Floor
An Union can find it fun to coerce employer to lift wages, or A government can set standard to ensure employee get a high wage. This is the Labor principle. By setting a price floor (minimum wage) the following happens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_floor
In the long term, the least efficient manufacturer will find the wages too high and exit the market (ie Mitsubishi closing its plants, Telstra taking its call center to India). The people who are unemployed increase the supply of labour and put further downward presure on wages. (again supply and demand)
This is also shown in the US labor market. In the US, there are very powerful Farmers unions, Manufacturing unions (esp car). Therefore wages are high if you belongs in a union, however there are so many unemployed people, minimum wages is low.
Increase demand for labour
If we can increase the demand for labour wages will rise. An excellent example is the mining industry. Since a third of AWA contract is in the mining industry and AWA is supposed to be bad. Why had wages risen 100% over 4 years? This is because if you can raise demand for labour and unemployment is low and employer are looking for people to work, they will be forced to raised wages, this again is simple supply and demand principle.
This leds me to ask this question. If encouraging employer to employ people increase wages (any year 9 student knows this) Why is Dillard and the unions trying to “coerce” and “hurt” employer. If all these scared employer are going to stop hiring people, how is that fair for the unemployed, and if they set price floors, how is that fair for the people losing their job (Mitsubishi plant and Call center)
I totally agree that some stupid employers will see workchoice and reduce the condition of their employees. But they are going get theirs
a. staff morale will be low
b. the better staff will find better job
Media release – 02.05.2007
Socialist Alliance has announced two Gold Coast candidates to stand in
this year’s federal election. Amelia Taylor will be standing for the
Senate in conjunction with Aboriginal activist and university lecturer
Sam Watson. Tim Kirchler will be standing for the seat of Moncrieff,
currently held by Liberal MP Steven Ciobo.
I accept the arguments that celebrity candidates can suck resources away from the other side in relatively safe seats. But celebrity candidates also need to be plausible.
Ms Cornes is not plausible. She appears to be out of her depth and doesn’t appear to be coping with the political hurly burly. That is not knocking her, it’s just that some people are not suited to politics.
Ms Handshin is interesting. I’ve read her biography and she is intelligent, motivated and educated. But she is young and appears to be very much a know all. She’s done this, she’s done that. She wants to rule the world. Ra ra ra. I think she crosses the line from go-getter to downright insufferable. She’ll grate more people than she impresses.
Just my humble opinion.
Other ALP candidates such as the SAS colonel in Eden-Monaro and Ms McKew are clever choices. The Liberals will need their war chest topped up if they are to be re-elected. Another reason why some in the opposition are peeved that Julia Gillard’s IR policy is antagonising business so much.
Will this negative response by business and the papers effect Labor’s standing in the polls over the next couple of weeks? Can Gillard placate big business and the mining sector in particular? I f somehow she does will this have any effect?
I believe that the negative action by business and the media will make Rudds position in the electorate fall. The only way the ALP can placate the mining sector is to go back on its no AWAs policy. Im expecting that announcement anytime now
Gary if the polls don’t shift after the recent publicity about the ALP’s IR policy, especially after the shadow minister’s clumsy analogy between football injuries and business participation in the political IR debate, then you’d have to conclude that the goverment is deep in the poo.
So deep that they won’t have time to extracate themselves. Barring something out of left field (such as a twin towers scenario).
I reckon if the status quo remains until July, the coldest and most miserable month of the year, then it is likely that change is afoot.
I don’t think business will be placated unless it looks like the opposition is going to be elected. Then they will hedge their bets and tone their comments down. But that won’t happen, if at all, until the election is much closer.
Bill the ALP can’t scrap their “no AWA” policy. The unions and the rank and file would go ape droppings and the deputy leader of the opposition would be humiliated beyond belief. Fatally.
I suspect the opposition will accept that AWA’s are unpopular with the punters and that there are net votes in abolishing them. I also suspect that they know that business will never support the ALP before the coalition so why bother. Look at the background of some of the CEO’s from some of the business lobby groups.
Furthermore if Howard smells blood then that will totally rejuvinate the government. Plus I can see the conservative leaning media labelling Rudd weak, spineless, unprincipled etc.
It all comes down to votes.
I must say I’m not sure how this is all going to go down. I think the soft vote will be weeded out over the next fortnight leaving the hard core vote. What that will be I’m not sure. There will be some erosion of the Labor vote but will it be enough to put the government back in the game at this point?
I suspect Gillard will come up with some compromise which will involve the AWA’s with a different name and basic conditions protected, which will get the mining industries off their back at least.
The first indication will be the Morgan Poll.
I don’t think Bill Heffernan did his party anfy favours. That took the heat off Gillard.
Pseph,
What about Nelson, a former ALP member?
Yes, I agree. Should get IR off the pages for a few days and then it’s Budget time. Labor was always going to lose a bit of skin once they announced a policy, and I suspect the worst of it is over. I think the rather hysterical tone by opponents of the policy might be counter-productive. Adam was right to remind us (albeit in a different context) that the 20% of people who change elections probably aren’t switched on like us.
And at any rate, as long as IR is leading the news, it’s a minus for the government – it just reminds those above-mentioned voters that they don’t like these laws, and that Howard sneaked it in on them.
The next two weeks will be seminal – despite all the blather about IR etc, if the government doesn’t get a bounce from giving away lots of cash in the Budget, then they are done for.
its not just Nelson who used to support the ALP, Heffernan has been working for the ALP for years. Anytime the ALP’s in trouble, and he can give a hand, he just opens his mouth and suddenly no one cares what any labor person said
But seriously, this budget is going to be weird because I think it is unusually well understood in the electorate that tax cuts cause inflation which cause interest rate rises.
It would be something if the Liberals lost because they couldn’t give out tax cuts due to the strong economy putting pressure on inflation, it would be unusual for a government to lose for making the economy too strong
The ALP should be ashamed of itself for so thoroughly debasing the entire process of candidate selection in the major parties.
That Cornes woman in Boothby is nothing but a BAM.
The people of Boothby, including the rank and file ALP members in the seat deserve so much better than some peroxide obsessed typist whose only claim to fame is the names Cornes plus a few pathetic ghost written columns in a fifth rate newspaper.
That letter by her mother surely must be a fake. I just love her wailing and lamentations that poor Nicole and her broken down husband had to live in, wait for it, a ‘two bedroom apartment’.
Oh the horror! How ever did they survive such poverty? She IS an inspiration to drag herself from the sewer like world of apartment living!
Just goes to show just how out of touch this prissy little princess (and her clown-like family) really is.
Southcott surely can’t believe his luck. Chloe Fox was worth a thousand Nicole Cornes.
Not dissimilar to own constitution, was it not – give or take the elected president? Nonetheless, point taken.
Goodness Isabella, must be hard to live with all that bile.
Just got an email from my token Tory mate. Earlier today he was crowing, telling me that he was more confident about the election that he had been for 6 months. Only for Heff to blow it. Isn’t it great how all that low political muck-raking that the Libs have perfected (to their benefit, you’d have to say) is finally biting them on their collective (even though they don’t like that word) posteriors?
He’s not untouchable, jasmine_Anadyr. Do you usually put the boot in when someone you’ve criticised admits you have a point?
And if you’ll read my comments, you’ll see I’ve said not one word about Ms Cornes.
Fact is, I’ve never heard of Mr Henry up till you just mentioned him, but I have heard of Ms Handshin, given that I grew up in SA where she has been a quite shallow newspaper columnist for years now.
Since I’ve made very few other comments about anyone or anything here, you don’t have enough data to draw conclusions about my patterns of criticism, especially I as just subjected Mr Combet to just as harsh, IMO, criticism as Ms Handshin.
Now, to Mr Henry:
In his maiden speech, I note that he proudly admits that he hopes to help in the destruction of the TAFE system, to the profit of businessmen like himself:
In the same speech, Mr Henry also indulges in typical right-wing idealisation of small business:
Which completely ignores those people who want to or have to work for a boss for a living – a boss who will have Mr Henry’s enthusiastic support, as we can see from what he said about the laughably-named “Workplace Relations Amendment (Small Business Employment Protection Bill)” of 2004:
Ignoring the fact that this means that two classes of employee are thus created in Australia – people working for small businesses have less rights
than those who don’t.
Spoken like the bosses representative that he is:
Pity about the people who work for them who get less right to redundancy. But I guess they should be greatful to have jobs.
Possibly true, but ignores the fact that the business community donates huge amounts of money to the Liberal Party.
In Mr Stewart’s speech on the Workchoices bill, he comes close to outright deception:
There are two main things wrong with this.
1) How do you prove that people have been dismissed for those reasons? All an employer has to do is claim ‘operational reasons’ and it’s all nice and legal.
2) Many other protections against unfair dismissal were removed with the Workchoices law.
And then there is the Big Lie of Workchoices:
No, it isn’t. The idea that an individual worker has the power to negotiate this sort of thing with an unwilling boss is laughable. And no matter how many times it is repeated, Australian workers see right through it.
Really? Businesses don’t want to increase their profits? Yeah, whatever, Mr Stewart.
Mr Stewart also enthusiastically supported the Government’s Bill that made it compulsory for universities to employ people under the Government’s terms.
It is clear that Mr Stewart is a firm and happy supporter of the right-wing agenda of cutting pay and benefits to workers. Apparently, as long as we all have a job – no matter how awful – things will be OK.
I note that Hugo chose not to actually refute or deny anything I said about Mr Combet, but merely seems to think he is beyond criticism. Even if Mr Combet does not run for Parliament, but remains ACTU Secretary, he will remain part of the team of right-wingers who are deliberately holding down workers’ pay and conditions – he is already doing that job.
There is no reason at all to think he would act any differently if he stands for, and is elected to, Parliament.
Hugo praised jasmine_Anadyr’s criticism of my criticism of Ms Handshin, and said that ‘as always the girls get considerably closer scrutiny than the boys.’ Yet, when I begin to scrutinise Mr Combet, he complains. Perhaps he thinks the ACTU Secretary is irrelevant to the labour movement?
I’d also be wary of accepting Snow’s contention that physical attractiveness has a great impact on how people vote. Parliament does not seem to contain many more greatly attractive people than the country at large – there are plenty of MPs and Senators, male and female, who I doubt would be rated as attractive by Australians.
Heffernan has alienated a large number of women at least I’m sure. The fact that he is close friends with Howard will not help Howard’s cause.
Heffernan’s continued presence as a Liberal Senator and the PM’s close adviser is perplexing.
In the Liberal Party’s NSW branch the PM uses Heffernan as his internal party henchman to deal with dissenters, silence those that might be seeking an answer, etc.
How can the PM have any credibility within the NSW Liberal Party while he continues to use Heffernan as his spokesman and representative?
Adam.
It’s because she is an idiot.
Thanks dovif … my economics prize was at a higher level than 8 or 9 and your reverting to year 8 and 9 economics of little interest to me so i’m taking Hugo’s offtopic advice and leaving you to your textbook, without conceding you are making any sense at all even by year 8 and 9 standards.
C-Woo, my point is that even if she (I assume you mean Cornes) is an idiot (which I don´t accept), it won´t make much difference because the people who will actually decide who wins Boothby are the people least likely to be paying any attention to politics. To them Cornes and Southcott will just be names on a ballot paper – they will be voting for or against Howard and Rudd, and they will only start registering there is an election on at all two weeks before polling day. That´s why all this frenzy of candidate-analysis among the cogniscenti such as everyone here is completely pointless.
Isabella, I would have thought the reason Howard keeps Heffernan on is obvious – Heffernan says what Howard thinks, but can´t say for himself. Every time he makes one of his revolting comments he sends a signal to Alan-Jones-land that the PM is still One of Them even if his present position prevents him from saying so.
William, I don´t there is much of a parallel between the Weimar constitution and ours. The fatal flaw of the Weimar constitution was the power it gave to the President to rule by decree. This was put in the constitution as a safeguard against the possibility (which seemed very real in 1919) of a violent revolutionary attempt – the President was seen as the final bulwark of constitutional rule. Unfortunately, when in 1930 the Nazis and Communists between them won a majority of seats in the Reichstag, thus making parliamentary government impossible, Bruning took to advising the President to issue decrees, thus paving the way for Hitler. The real failure of the Weimar Republic was political, not constitutional. When the majority of voters support anti-democratic parties, there is no constitutional way out of the impasse.
Isabella, I can assure you that Denese O’Connor wrote that letter about her daughter from her heart. Nicole may be a bit politically naive at this stage but she’s not a fool and she has inner toughness.
Yes Isabella again you do not have an argument.
ps you should read more carefully, ie I said that it is mainstream economic argument taught to anyone who had study econmics.
You can ask any economist that
I agree that a “bounce” from the budget would be welcomed by JWH but I do not agree that he is “done for” if such “bounce” does not register in the opinion polling conducted after the budget, whatever those who “wear their hearts on their sleeves” may opine.
dovif earlier raised an interesting question:
>Decrease supply
>I am assuming people are not going to start killing other workers to increase >their wage, so I won’t go there.
In fact there is another option, where indeed the Left seem never to want to go.
IIRC, only a few days ago, Bracks called for an increase in immigration. In other words, increase labour supply.
If demand is unchanged, the price of labour drops. Economics 101.
The fact that the Lunar Right are huge enthusiasts of immigration might tell you something. But apparently no.
I could go on. But I have to go out now and buy a bag of rice to pay my Filipino maid.
“I don’t recall Howard ever putting up former openly-supporting Labor supporters in order to woo Labor voters.”
If you are talking about individual personalities, Pseph, perhaps. But didn’t Andrew Robb coin the phrase that Howard was winning over The Battlers and was really The Battlers’ Friend? Wonder how many still feel that way after Workchoices.
I know nothing of Mia Handshin (but what a name, for starters) other than what I’ve read here. But from that it seems that she’s much like a younger version of that delightful marriage celebrant character that Marg Downey created in “Kath and Kim”.
Jasmine’s right. She and Cornes are getting a lot of attention for people standing in ‘long shot’ seats. There are plenty of male berks around occupying safe seats and endorsements. Anyone remember Mal Colston who had been discovered rorting perks about a decade before he was finally exposed? Probably only publicised even then because he walked out on the party in return for Howard’s promise of perks.
I’ll be visiting my closest friends in Malvern SA in the next few weeks, and will try and get some local info on Cornes’ chances. They are ex-Labor, resigning membership after Labor’s cave-in on Tampa and ‘Border Protection’.
They were pretty disappointed after writing to the State Secretary resigning their membership after 40+ years along with their reasons, to get merely a standard reply acknowledging the resignation.
I assume Labor’s improved a bit in SA since then.
David Charles – Make of this what you will but as one who puts forward the contention you disagree with I object to being referred to as one of those who “wear their hearts on their sleevesâ€. Disagree all you like and make a case for it but give the name calling a miss thanks. It’s in the realms of being called a “Howard Hater” – designed as a put down and an opinion stopper.
Tell me David, what is your political bias? If I’m going to be grouped under the heading of those who “wear their hearts on their sleeves†I would like to know if you wear your heart on your sleeve for another party.
I will quite proudly be known as a “bleeding heart”. It’s a sign of the moral bankruptcy of the Right that they can make being compassionate a fault.
‘being compasionate a fault’
A very very very telling observation.
jasmine_Anadyr – Could you expand on that observation? I’m not sure what you are getting at there?
My apologies Gary it was a clumsy attempt to underline the insightful comments of Hugo.
In the context that Australia it is generally accepted that mainstream politics in Australia is now Right and far Right a realisation that being compasionate is a fault right across the broad mainstream political spectrum is very troubling.
Bad enough that human rights, and compassion are being thrown overboard (historical pun and reference intended) but for ‘compassion’ to actually become a fault in what was once a country of a fair go is very interesting observation.
I agree there can be an element of moral bankruptcy on the Right but I do not know about those on the Left being compassionate. I do not apologise for urging caution in making assessments of the likely outcome of an election six months before the event nor do I resile from my distaste for extreme positions on either side of the political spectrum (yes, that means the Right as well as the Left). Gary (thought you were a political observer whose opinions were worthy of due consideration!): last time I looked we had a secret ballot, but since you have taken an interest, I have supported both of the major parties in past federal elections sometimes splitting my support for them between the House and the Senate. I have not decided how I will cast my vote in either the House or the Senate at the next Federal poll and I don’t expect I will do so until much closer to election day. I can say that Mr Rudd (although not his deputy) is doing somewhat better than you are in persuading me to vote for the Australian Labor Party and that might influence how I answer a question like “to which party are you leaning?” should I share your recent experience of being interviewed by an opinion polling agency.
Clearly us ALP types should shut up and let K-Rudd weave his magic on the David Charles of the world! Don’t suppose you live in a marginal seat, David?
Is Bennelong marginal?
David Charles – thankyou for answering my question in such detail and so honestly. I am an observer, and to be honest, am not trying to convince anyone of voting any which way. I too have voted for both main parties but I have come to the conclusion Howard has to go. IMHO when parties stay in power too long and have unfetted power the extemes start ruling the roost and it is time for them to go.
I enjoy reasoned debate and respect others opinions, I just reject being labelled in a negative fashion. It is unnecessary and it does nothing to enhance an argument. I also think just rejecting an opinion without putting up a reasoned case against it is basically a waste of everyone’s time. Why bother? The “fun” in debating is talking over the “facts of the case”.
As a matter of interest what is your objection to Julia Gillard?
jasmine_Anadyr – thanks for that, I tend to agree with you.
I have no personal objection to Julia Gillard but I have to say that I am disappointed with the way she has steered the direction of workplace relations policy. In my opinion, AWAs should be retained for those on higher incomes (say, over $90K) or at least, there should be AWAs with a “no disadvantage test”, thereby checking the propensity of AWAs to undercut awards. I also believe she (or her more “centrist” sensitive leader) should ditch the proposed minimum employment standard which directs employers to tell staff how to join a union and where to sign up.
Why is there such a fear of unions? It’s not like they are that powerful these days. I’d have thought that the condition of “directing people to the union” could be covered with a sign on a noticeboard. That should ensure that the clearly over-stimulated sensitivities of some could be allowed for. It would still be a free country under Labor, and people would free to join or not, but they would at least be aware that a) a union covered their workplace, and b) that their boss wasn’t some rabid anti-union crusader.
A report in the Newcastle Herald today indicates that Jim Arneman, who narrowly lost Port Stephens in the NSW election in March, is favoured to be the ALP candidate for Paterson.
He has a big job up against Bob Baldwin, but even though he lost Port Stephens it was only by 68 votes and there was an unfavourable redistribution against him. Also the marine park in Port Stephens was a major issue in the state election, which will not be the case for the Federal. I believe the ALP were surprised they did not suffer a larger swing.
Labor should do well in the new areas of Metford, East Maitland, and Tenambit, but I dont think they will be able to pull back the margin of over 6% in 2007.
The fact is I worked at the time of the Hawke/Keating governments and was not once directed to join a union and for most part I didn’t. I had a free choice.
What’s this “minimum employment standard”? Does that force people to join a union?
“I want you to know that also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” -Ronald Reagan during a 1984 presidential debate with WALTER MONDALE.
“I could probably borrow that famous line of Ronald Reagan’s about JIMMY CARTER: ‘If you don’t talk about my age, I won’t talk about your inexperience.” – John Howard, answering Labor claims that he is old and tired.
That employment standard should be excised from ALP policy because it is unnecessary. Unions are quite capable of making themselves known to those employees who need their assistance without that kind of regulation.
Yes, you’d have to say that Ronnie said it with a bit more panache.
Perhaps you’re right, David – how do you suggest? Should they wait outside on the footpath? Should they have a right of access to workplaces to try and recruit members? (A right unions have even under WorkChoices). It seems the ALP position is probably the least inconvenient – just stick a poster on the wall, and be done with it.
David Charles – politically there is some merit in what you suggest with AWA’s at the moment but I think most people perceive AWA’s as wage and condition reducers rather than enhancers. Wait until there is a down turn in the economy and then see what is being offerred.
Phil Robins – I’m intrigued to know how Rudd’s words have been interpreted to mean Howard is too old. At no stage has he said that. He has many times hinted and said that Howard’s ideas and policies are old hat but not Howard himself. Can you supply the evidence that shows Rudd saying that Howard is too old to be working or to be PM?
I’ve watched Rudd’s conference speech and gone over the transcript and I can’t find that evidence Phil. Maybe you will have better luck.
I think the unions are resourceful enough to work out ways of making themselves known to employees who need their assistance. Regulation would be required if the unions did not have right of access to workplaces but, as Hugo notes, that is not the case.
What would be different then in regard to unions under Labor’s policy if they already can go into the workplace and make themselves known?
The difference is contained in, and evidenced by, regulation involving a minimum employment standard which, in my opinion, is not necessary. There may also be political benefit for Mr Rudd in dropping this part of the ALP’s policy because its removal would be contrary to a perception (whether correct or incorrect) that the ALP’s workplace relations policy is written for, and on behalf of, unions.
Reading through this thread I had planned many ripostes to things said above, but most of my comments have already been made by Hugo, Jasmine and Adam.
However, I do disagree with Adam to some extent – while the impact of individual candidates in urban seats is usually very low, I do think there is an overall impression created by candidate selection. The ALP has rightly been criticized in the past for having candidates who seemed to have come out of a cookie cutter.
This time they have totally thrown that off, and selected a bunch of people who are at least interesting and who give the impression of being diverse.
Individually I don’t think much of some of them, and have doubts about others. However, the overall impression is of a party that touches many aspects of Australia, rather than the narrowly based Liberals, and even more narrowly based ALP of 98, 01, 04.
Hmmm, perhaps you’re right, David, though it hardly seems like a “die in a ditch” issue, and I personally I don’t think there’s much there for people to worry about. Besides, it will give the Libs something to aim at when they get re-elected in around 2017.
The fact that she voted for Howard means that Cornes would probably push policies I would not like as an MP, but having voted for Southcott is a vote winner not loser. She can say “like you I preferred him, but now the Liberals true colours have been revealed and it is time to throw them out”. Still she clearly does need more training – admitting she can’t face hard questioning is not a good look in any circumstance.
I did not mention Rudd. Howard implied it was Rudd. The Oz said Howard was responding to ‘Labor’ claims that he was old and tired. The point is that Howard mentioned Carter instead of Mondale.
Surely the selection process should require the candidate to demonstrate some level of political awareness, at least to differentiate between left and right, and to be able to argue the Labor cause with conviction.
Cornes does not pass any of these tests, but God she looks good. She would get my vote in a beauty contest, but not in the ballot box.
If that’s what the ALP rely on, then they don’t deserve Government.
Oh one more thing – The assessments that people who “sit in meditation spaces†should be running for the Greens, not labor. and “Her target base is tiny and the Greens already have it” indicate little knowledge of both the New Age Movement and The Greens.
There is certainly an overlap between the two, but there are many, many Greens who are not in the least New Age. What is more the numbers of people who dabble in the sorts of things that Handshin seems to be pushing is huge, probably larger than the total Green vote, and certainly most don’t vote for us. In fact elements of that movement are actually very anti-Green in the sense of an obsession with self which undermines care for the planet or other humans.
I have no idea where in the movement Handshin sits, or anything else about her, but I suspect there are quite a few voters across all parties who will like the statements quoted above, although personally they make me a touch nauseous.
Sorry Phil, I missed that point you were making. This wasn’t picked up by anyone else either, I don’t think.
Ray, Ray, Ray, Ray, Ray.
“Cornes does not pass any of these tests, but God she looks good. She would get my vote in a beauty contest, but not in the ballot box.”
This says a lot about you – nothing at all about the candidate, except in you eye as a beholder.
“be able to argue the Labor cause with conviction.”
Oh honey, oh sweetie. I almost agree with you. And conviction is soooo sweet when you see it, feel it, you can almost taste it and it is better than a fine Margaret River Red, an open fire and someone you love to c.
On both sides of the isle there are many who wouldn’t even be able to identify a ‘labor cause’ or a ‘liberal cause’ if they fell over it. At a State level it is even worse. There are many who would struggle to identify and convince me today is Thursday. Quite frankly I have more faith in Mr Gates’ software which tells me it definitely is Thursday.
I agree with more training, I agree it should have happened before she was exposed to the media (perhaps like a pregnancy in the good ol day an impending female candidate should be sent to the country to have the new age taken out of the girl before she announces).
But really expecting any candidate male or female to be able to argue the labor cause with passion is going to restrict your potential talent pool to about 5% of the inside hacks inside hacks.
While I generally agree with Jasmine’s comments about how female candidates are given more scrutiny – if they are attractive looking it is assumed to be there only strong point – I do find the following pretty damning:
“But really expecting any candidate male or female to be able to argue the labor cause with passion is going to restrict your potential talent pool to about 5% of the inside hacks inside hacks.”
Labor stands for so little these days that it is not surprising few candidates can find much passion for the cause.
I largely agree Stephen, but I think the disease crossed the isle.
One of the problems of the Greens is that they have, like the NDP before them, become a magnet for many of the outdated and discredited far-left. For example, as Adam mentioned in another thread, Greens NSW MLC Lee Rhiannon is the daughter of two important CPA members and was involved herself in many far-left groups.
News that the Government is going to give the above $75000 wage earners a tax cut must make MPs like Richardson in marginals quake in their boots. The above $75000 workers are more incline to vote for the Libs anyway. The reaction by my workmates was total disappointment as their seems to be nothing for them in the coming budget.
Peter, that’s true to an extent, but so what? People with those views are into being involved, and we shouldn’t be dissing them just because they hold views we might consider outdated. After all, these people have to go somewhere, and Australia is hardly over-burdened with far-Left groups. By way of contrast, the recent French presidential election had FOUR far-Left candidates, totalling 10% of the vote. Last time I went France, it didn’t seem to have done them much harm. We live in a democracy, after all, and it would be a very dull world if everyone agreed with each other.
Bill, in a perverse way, we can only hope that’s true. But one should always be wary of pre-Budget leaks, and it would seem a very odd thing for a government fighting for its life to do. Maybe they’ve given up on the election already and will try and look after their own while they can!
# Peter Stephens Says:
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:51 pm
One of the problems of the Greens is that they have, like the NDP before them, become a magnet for many of the outdated and discredited far-left. For example, as Adam mentioned in another thread, Greens NSW MLC Lee Rhiannon is the daughter of two important CPA members and was involved herself in many far-left groups.
As a Green member i have not found this to be the case. The majority of Green members that i have met would be more of your Democrat type people in Liberal seats, environmental and active community people in seats like Kingston with only a small number of ” far left activists ” in strong ALP areas
Yes, I think the true “hard Left” are still too busy getting over the collapse of the USSR to get too involved in party politics, being as it is, a bourgeois scam.
The other thing is if a person was an ex CPA or DSP and found that their “beliefs” to be outdated why cant they look for somewhere else to go? The Greens would be attractive to them because of their activism and grass roots membership rather than the Democrats or ALP where the Left is slowing being weeded out.
The Greens attract disillusioned far left people as well as the left of the ALP,join this with ex Dems small l libs and community activists and you have a real multi dimensional party. If anyone would check on the Bios of Greens candidates in this election you will see a wide range of political etc backgrounds
But tell me, Bill – what do you see as the future for the Greens? Will they always stay as a splinter group (and a useful one, I think – the Greens are good at keeping unfashioable issues on the table; David Hicks is a good example), or can you see the Greens growing into a viable third party, a la the UK Lib Dems?
Personally, I think the Greens are about as big as they are ever going to be, but what do I know? I was convinced that no one would ever vote to make John Howard PM!
Hugo the Greens growing into a viable third party, a la the UK Lib Dems?is what i see as the future
David, in answer to your question earlier, Bennelong is most certainly a marginal, when by one John Winston Howard by 4.2%. If the ALP were to win office later this year, it probably win this seat in the process. I actually grew up in this seat (and JWH came to talk at my school once or twice), and I’d be surprised (though elated) if Labor wins it.
However, it’s very much in play, and part of the point of running McKew here is to require Howard to spend some time trying to save his own seat, as opposed to trying to save his tired old government.
Actually, perhaps the Lib Dems were a bad example – they have a strong geographic base in the South-West of England. Is there anywhere in Oz that you think the Greens might develop a stronghold? They will certainly have a presence in the Senate (probably with 3-6 seats for the next decade), but it’s hard to see them winning more than a couple of seats in the inner cities of Sydney and Melbourne (Kingston notwithstanding….).
I suspect crunch time will come for the Greens when Bob Brown decides to call it a day. He’s now in his 60s, and (assuming that he gets re-elected later this year, which I think is a pretty safe bet) this may well be his last term.
Some eejit a while back saidL “Celebrity candidates and candidates who are drafted are always the worst.
Celebrity candidates never understand actual politics, or the internal machine. They jump and down and cry when they dont get there way.”
Now Louise Markus may not be a celeb but her successful candidacy in Greenway last time around is an object lesson on how to do it properly. Rule 1: you throw a motza at the electorate and Rule 2: part of that goes on minders who make sure the candidate never opens their trap in public or least not without adequate rehearsal. In Cornes case the ALP seems to have forgotten rule 2 but there is plenty of time and it is Croweaterland.
I think Howard will win Bennelong at the general election, even if the ALP forms government.
However, if the ALP wins, then Howard resigns, I think the ALP will take the seat at a by-election. Especially if McKew runs again. I think Howard’s personal vote is what has retained the seat for the Libs, even as the demographics have changed.
Some flamin’ half wit said: “Greens NSW MLC Lee Rhiannon is the daughter of two important CPA members”
At least they weren’t impotent.
And JWH’s old man and his grandfaither were card carrying members of the New Guard. And your point is?
A popular smear among Howard’s more unhinged detractors, but one for which no evidence exists.
Yeah, but if you’re going to have a bogeyman, you might as well go all the way. Anyway, his big hero (and Rudd’s too it seems) Menzies was not unsympathetic to the Nazi regime in the 1930s, as were many on the Right.
Mind you, I guess we on the Left are not innocent in this regard, as there was no small attachment to Uncle Joe on our side.
Phil, Hugo and Gary have all alluded to Howard’s misquote of Reagan on “Sunday”, last week-end. I didn’t see the interview, just a brief grab on a Sunday evening news service, and so didn’t realise that he’d referred to Carter rather than Mondale.
However, my memory is that like the professional deliverer of lines that he was, Reagan said something more clever, than the “if you don’t… I won’t….” that the PM used in the Oakes interview. I was astounded that Howard would risk an unchecked memory of the quote and circumstances.
As I recall, when the issue of his age was raised with Reagan, he said something like “I don’t think my opponent’s youth should disqualify him from office”. This was a far more effective way of neutralising the supposed negative factor of Reagan’s age than Howard’s clumsy effort.
I infer that Howard dreamed this one up all by himself, since his minders would have been careful to get the story (and the year and opponent) right.
Simon… “I think Howard will win Bennelong at the general election, even if the ALP forms government.”
Of course Costello’s preferred option is for those two events to be transposed. It will be the one and only chance in his life time of being PM. If Howard has the chance to annoint a successor it will be Turnbull.
Not to be taken seriously.. “Rule 2: make sure the candidate never opens their trap in public”
I don’t take you seriously. What does it say about the quality of the debate in our parliament if a party has to invoke Rule 2 to get a celebrity candidate elected. A celebrity candidate who can’t string two words together or at least formulate a coherent arguement, based on their own political conviction is not someone I would wish to represent me in parliament.
And as for Jasmine, who has to stutter my name… if you think it is OK to vote for a candidate just because they look good, male or female, then it says something about you and you deserve the parliament you get.
It was said against Mondale in the 1984 debates. Mondale was Carter’s VP, so I guess Howard was close, and anyway, he was busy undermining Andrew Peacock that year.
The attacks on Ms Cornes are not surprising, but may be a little premature. Assuming that the ALP are serious about pushing her barrow, I think her story is one that might resonate strongly with a middle class electorate. A young woman from a poor single parent family, dragged herself up to a University education, acquired a good job, (working in a radio station would appeal to many younger voters), held conservative views till turned off by Howards recent behaviour especially workchoices, now married to a prominent sportsman/businessman who would appear prima facie to be a conservatives pin-up. Theres a lot to like in that story if it is put out into the electorate effectively, and it would resonate well beyond just Boothby.
The first half of the narrative seems very like the story sold so well early in the piece by Mark Latham.
Her nomination may be a better tactic than many think.
Hmmm…some very interesting developments
I think people are being a little too hard on Mia Handshin -she has an impressive CV and background and may prove a strong candidate in a seat like Sturt. I doubt she’ll give Pyne any sleepless nights but she may very well prove her credentials in that seat and may make the seat competitive
I’m uneasy about Nicole Cornes -she acclaimed Howard less than three years ago and now she’s suddenly on board as a Labor candidate? I suppose her selection is designed to appeal to Liberals looking for a safe alternative replacement to Southcott -someone who was ‘one of them’ just recently. And she’s got a local profile I guess from her columns. I just wonder whether she’s the right choice but let’s wait and see
The selection of Mike Kelly is a good one -I greatly admire him -but I’m not sure whether the conservative-leaning Eden-Monaro is the best place for him. Is he a ‘local boy’ from the electorate? If so, he may have a better chance than if he were parachuted from outside. But regardless, I think he has the potential to be a good candidate.
The Oz has some info about very funny goings on in Lindsay:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21668824-601,00.html
Seems an inter-factional battle is taking place there, with the NUW running an unknown teacher (who is reported to be the fiance of their media officer, himself a failed Federal candidate) against the very experienced, and dogged, David Bradbury – a wall of TUW people, branch presidents and prominent local Lindsay Laborites are against her.
My opinion is that Bradbury is the natural candidate, and these shenanigans (particularly nasty comments to the press) just embarrass the party.
And as for Nicole Cornes – she seems a good person, who will be liked for her honesty, and there is no doubt that having voted for Howard but being prepared to run for Labor now sends a clear message. (If she looked like a typical aspirant pollie you would doubt her motives, but she seems very sincere to me).
Do other contributors think that Howard’s ‘backflip’ re WorkChoices will make any difference? I’m thinking it allows him to look reasonable (and he’s already tried to claim the centre ground), but the problem for him is that people might have already written him off on this issue. The Libs will have a credibility problem with IR come the election – it will be easy for Labor to run a scare campaign about WorkChoices II (expect to hear that recording of Minchin talking to the HR Nicholls Society).
My name is David, I’m from Sydney and I’m not here to be dismissively admonished for (supposedly) engaging towards Gary Bruce, in some kind of “name calling…in the realms of being called a Howard-Hater”. Who are “Howard-Haters”? Is the expression in particular contexts, an offensive sobriquet? Is the use of it in reference to others, an “opinion stopper”? Is it any different from name calling (sometimes, amusing) which can be seen on any side of politics (that is, name calling seen both from participants in, and interested observers of, politics)? For example, I am aware that JWH has been pilloried by the person who seeks to supplant him as Prime Minister, for being like the geriatric nuclear power station owner in The Simpsons cartoon, and also by the predecessor Prime Minister as a “dessicated coconut”. I know my questions are a liitle off the topic of this thread but I am curious, so others’ opinions on these matters might enlighten me.
He’s left himself exposed on this – he was prepared to hang low and middle income earners out to dry for a year.
(I really hate how comments bob up while you are writing a response to a previous comment and render your comment inept and irrelevant).
To reiterate (and make more sense), in response to Hugo’s question about Johnny’s backflip, Howard is exposed. He hung middle and lower income workers out to dry for a year and has only collapsed under election pressure and when he realised that even the mining companies are prepared to brook the no-disadvantage test.
anonymousie : there’s one thing worse. Writing an excellent comment, that ends up in moderation and by the time it’s released it is halfway up the thread and no one reads it.
Actually I am looking forward to the death of this thread. It’s gotten too Workchoicey. (New word I invented)
Gimme some juicy marginal seat demographics and obscure electoral trivia anyday.
Mr Speaker, I too enjoy a good number crunching of marginal seat stats, but I suspect in this election at least that you will have to put up with “WorkChoicey” posts – this will be the defining issue of the election after all, and any analysis of marginal seats etc will be seen through this prism to some extent.
Louise Markus was a special – she was specifically chosen to counter Ed Husic’s ‘Muslimness’. She (like Cornes) was not a member of the party that chose her. And she still has no political acumen three years later. I wonder how she’ll go now it is a FACT that there are fraudsters smongst the Hillsong faithful?
I think Howard deals himself right back into the game if he relents a little on workchoices.
See everyone, I’ve listened and I’ve softened some of the harsher elements. And, of course, I’m still the one you can trust to run the economy. Not like Mr Rudd who will blow it – he will wreck business.
He’s not dead yet.
As for Louise Markus, whatever her political ability, with the redistribution of Greenway she is as safe as houses.
Mr Speaker,
Hear hear!
Having watched Ozpolitics.com degenerate into “Howard’s a liar, Rudd’s an idiot, no he’s not, yes he is” sniping over the past months, I’d hate for a similar thing to happen here.
I hear you Speaker!!
Marcus, too right…
The latest Morgan poll is fun reading, ALP up.
of course look at the poll dates, and remember its morgan…
still at the very least shanahans juggernaut coming to a halt comments look a little optimistic.
Not so much a stutter as chanting in disbelief until my aura balances and my understanding of the Christian concept of the trinity can be explained coherently without using a three leaf clover example.
I 100% agree with you Ray we do indeed get the Government we deserve.
I just repeat I promise for the last time – the bars being setup for the female candidates in South Australia for seats that probably need a really strong Rudd win would trip up (and i’m making these numbers up completely) 30% of Federal Members of Parliament (to day nothing of those they defeated) and up to 60% of members of State Parliament (perhaps 80% of State upper houses).
Mr Speaker,
Here is an obscure point of electoral trivia.
According to Wikipedia, Mr Justice Callinan’s birthday is 1 September, which this year is the date of his mandatory retirement. The replacement must made by the Governor-General in Council, which means a date no earlier than 2 September.
Events this week show how quickly the tide could turn against the ALP, on this occasion halted only by Senator Heffernan’s innovative intervention.
But consideration of the High Court position could be a very serious deterrent to Howard calling a snap election in the winter, even if the ALP suddenly seemed in free-fall.
For if Howard should lose, then Rudd would get to make three High Court nominations rather than two.
If that happened, Howard in his retirement might be as popular with the establishment as, well, Malcolm. This is a prospect, one suspects, that he may find unattractive.
If the Coalition wants a functioning Executive Council on 2 September, and does not want to lose days of campaigning to the APEC meeting on 8 and 9 September, then the earliest day to call the election would be late on 9 September.
This gives 13 October as the earliest possible election date, if my calculations are right.
I see Morgan has it back to 61-39 again.
My initial reaction to the Nicole Cornes interview was OMG. However on further reflection I think that this may well have been a more shrewd move than meets the eye. I agree with anonymousie above that she seems sincere. My thoughts were that she seemed to be without guile. This combined with the fact that she had previously voted for Howard could resonate with a certain segment of usual liberal voters. And not necessarily just in Boothby. Rudd’s performance yesterday with her and Handshin indicated that Labor think they are a chance in both Sturt and Boothby.
It would be good to get a new thread leading up to the budget.
Yes, it is only a Morgan poll, and only takren up till last weekend, but still – Labor with 52% of the PRIMARY vote. I guess the Newspoll (due 15/5) will be the most instructive – not so much because it’s a Newspoll, but rather the timing will mean that the Labor IR stuff and the Budget will be taken into account.
With every week my Dad’s prediction (made before Easter) that “people have already made up their minds – it will be a Labor landslide” (and dad is by nature a pretty cautious bloke) is looking more prescient. It could be that Rudd needs to be responsible for a terrorist act himself and be caught doing it on live TV to lose from here.
However, never under-estimate the ability of parties from the Left to lose the unloseable.
Opinions on the Workchoices backflip by Howard ?
It seems to me that Howard has lost the “who will blink first” test on IR. In fact I would go further to say that he may well have just signed his own political death warrant by the admission today that elements of workchoices have removed certain protections. He has admitted that workers who signed AWAs in the past year and lost conditions have no recourse to win them back. This really is trouble with a capital T.
The polls seem remarkably consistent, jumping either side of the 59-41 mark, within a fairly reasonable margin of error, and as such I’d be very disinclined to think there’s actually much movement in the bulk of the electorate at the moment. One or two point swings in polling from poll to poll don’t seem to me to be indicative of either party doing anything to really change the situation.
I suspect that we won’t see much change unless something dramatic happens (ie 9/11) until the general populace come to grips with the concept there’s an election coming up. At the moment, I’d guess they just like the idea of a change, and Rudd seems to suit that.
I support your opinion 100%.
The comments area there is has been ruined by partisan fighting. I stopped reading it six months ago.
blackjack said:
(I didn’t close my “blockquote” tag properly above – apologies)
Don’t you believe it – APEC will be a PR disaster. Half of Sydney will be locked down (and it only takes a small prang to cause traffic chaos in this town, so something this big will make ripples across the city), and I’m not sure George W is going to be quite the electoral asset that Howard was hoping for. Dick Cheney was in town about a month ago, and it wasn’t a popular visit. I think Howard would be much more likely to let the dust settle – the AFL and NRL Grand Finals are two weeks later, and my guess is he’ll call the election then. This points to an early November date (3rd or 10th), but if the polls stay as they are, we might have to wait till early December – you’d think the 8th would be the last possible date.
A PR disaster? I wouldn’t bet on it. The punters get a holiday on the Friday, and it’s all over by Sunday evening.
W. is a classy, engaging and wily campaigner. One thing he can do.
The interesting question, just IMHO, is how much W. is going to be prepared to help a little mate in trouble.
I suspect that it will be PR nightmare in part due to inadequacies of the State (ALP) government, but I don’t think the average punter will draw that distinction. Yes, we get a holiday (woo-hoo!), but I stand by my comment that it won’t be a huge plus for Howard.
Your comments about W are curious – yes, he has been effective campaigner in the American context, but you’d be way off course suggesting that he has ever been good at convincing anyone outside of Nortn America – he is the most unpopular president in living memory. I have no doubt that he’ll try and help JWH out – after all, he did over mad Mark in 2004 – but Bush does not enjoy the same status that he did three years ago, so it’d be a mixed blessing at best Howard.
“We are we supposed to get our candidates from? At random off the street?”
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter…
I see La Hore as Adam calls her has chucked another fit now she’s been dumped for Combet.
“Na Na Na Naah, Way Hey Hey and Goodbye!”
Well Martin I see no-one has even tried to answer that question which I posed yesterday.
William, do we understand that Ian Campbell has (a) resigned immediately (b) will resign at election time (c) will serve out his term?
Thank goodness Combet has taken the plunge. Bye bye Kelly The. What is the current state of gossip over Blaxland and Fowler?
Has a Liberal candidate for Parramatta appeared yet? If not, is this not somewhat amazing?
Greetings from Dresden, comrades
Good to hear from you Herr Doktor – where else in Germany are you travelling?
As for Blaxland i hear that Hatton is doing a Hoare – trying every trick in the book to delay the inevitable.
Prague, Nuremberg, Munich, Brussells, WW1 battlefields (my grandfather was gassed at Ypres), Paris, Edinburgh, London. My feet are already killing me. Yesterday I did Buchenwald – very upsetting.
I am currently stuck in an internet cafe offloading about 300 photos because my camera is full.
Memo: don´t come to Germany if you want to lose weight. Mein gott these people can eat.
Labour doesn´t seem to be doing as badly in the Scottish and Welsh elections as predicted.
I realise I’m drawing a a bit of a long bow here but surely Campbell would be back in Howard’s ministry after the election if the Libs win. Is this a sign he has his doubts about the prospects of the party at the next election? Will we see more resignations if the polls remain bad? Speaking of which, what is the feeling regarding Howard’s IR backflip? I notice it’s being likened, by the news services, to Howard’s petrol backflip in 2001 and his resultant victory. I’m not convinced.
There was talk a few weeks ago that there are some health issues in Campbell’s family, and that after the initial shock of his downfall Campbell came to view it as a blessing in disguise.
“I see no-one has even tried to answer that question which I posed yesterday.”
That’s cause it’s simple. To guarantee victory the ALP merely need to select candidates that
have a lifetime devotion to the labo(u)r cause (lest they be opportunistic) but have never had a job that reflects that (lest they be a hack);
be well-known in their electorate (lest they be a blow-in) but not actually be famous for anything (lest they be a celebrity);
be an ordinary person yet have a full command of all aspects of public policy;
be good looking (but not too good looking);
be intelligent (but not too intelligent);
be ambitious (but not too ambitious);
Meanwhile a knockabout farmer who knows nothin and likes it that way is just fine for the coaltion…
On your question above, none of the above. It is reported that “The resignation would take effect in a few weeks.”
oh Martin B i love You …
You omitted ‘Not be a useless female’
With Campbell its family and a huge corporate gig in WA
seen the Money been splashed around WA at the moment ?
He could name his price.
He was one of the rare decent coalition MPs too
Blacklight Says: “He (Campbell) was one of the rare decent coalition MPs too.” I tend to agree with that although the parrot incident was a silly decision.
More than 7 women have nominated against Doug Cameron to fill the Left’s vacancy in the Senate.
meh Doug Cameron is a bit of a girl too ….
A pity that Campbell is going … I think he should have given Howard a bit of a kick on the way out. Even though he did absolutely nothing wrong, his forced resignation will ensure that his name will appear (erroneously) tainted. A pity.
I’m curious … all these Labor MPs who won’t get preselected for the next term – Hoare, Hatton, Irwin – were they all Beazley supporters? I know Irwin was… On that note, do we have a complete list somewhere of who voted Beazley and who voted Rudd?
How many Senators have the Coalition lost this year so far?
-Santoro
-Campbell
-Vanstone
-Ferris
Is this a lot?
And Robert Hill left last year.
And so it has turned out…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21674788-5006784,00.html
More photo-downloading at 10pm, which I think is 6am in Australien. I had dinner tonight sitting in a restaurant with a view of the floodlit Frauenkirch, which must be one of the most beautiful buildings in the world. Its reconstruction is one of the great stories of international reconciliation. I recommend it to all.
http://www.frauenkirche.ipro-dresden.de/e_index01.html
(And yes, before anyone asks, I think the Allies were perfectly justified in bombing Dresden. By that I mean that although the area bombing campaign was probably militarily misguided, it was *morally* just because it was part of a war of self-defence against a ruthless enemy against whom any measures short of actual genocide were justified. The Desdeners were quite happy to cheer when it was Warsaw or London being bombed, or indeed synagogues in their own city being burned down. Some at least recognise this. There is a big plaque on the front of the Kreuzkirche, another big Dresden church which was burnt out though not destroyed in the bombing, headed “with shame and faith,” which says that the houses of God in Dresden were burned because the Christians of Dresden had sinned by doing nothing to resist the Nazis or to help the Jews. A very sound historical judgement.)
Totally off-topic, sorry.
Ben, you also need to add Ross Lightfoot to your list.
All had lost the support of the PM with the exception of Jeannie Ferris who sadly passed away after a long illness.
I wonder if Bill Heffernan might be next?
Adam, see here in response to your question about Ian Campbell’s immediate future. Mixed metaphor of the year: “the resignation creates an opportunity to parachute new blood into the Government before the election”.
When should the NSW candidates being decided today be announced?
I have been away for a while but heard Kelly Hoare (nee Brown) speak for the first time yesterday. Does anyone else think she suffers from developmental delay?
Adam has said that the Weimar constitution was flawed and different from ours because the president could rule by decree during a declared emergency (this was only to suspend named civil rights). We have very few named civil rights and the Governor-General can rule by decree without even having an emergency declared.
Yes, but the Australian Constitution works so well because we ignore 90% of it, a display of good old Aussie pragmatism.
Charlie – looks like they’ll be trickling through this afternoon. The former Carr staffer won Blaxland preselection.
Neil – Lightfoot is serving out his term.
I can’t beleive that George Williams didn’t get pre-selected for Blaxland. They should at least do the right thing and put him at a winnable spot on the Senate ticket:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200705/s1915232.htm
Same with Warren Mundine as well.
OK. Here we go. The results of Super Saturday:
Blaxland – Jason Cla(i?)re
Charlton – Greg Combet
Eden-Monaro – Mike Kelly
Fowler – Julia Irwin
Hughes – Greg Holland
Lindsay – David Bradbury
Paterson – Tim Arneman
Robertson – Belinda Neal
Throsby – Jennie George
Wentworth – George Newhouse
Rudd’s candidate losing out in Blaxland… is that the first time he’s demanded something and been knocked back?
Have just checked out Poll Bludger for the first time in a few days and I cannot believe it has taken until this afternoon for somebody to comment on Kelly Hoare’s performance on radio yesterday. I heard her on AM – “I’m a single mother with a child at university, I could lose my house as a result of this”!!! – it was unbelievable stuff, what a completely hopeless individual! I can’t help but be amazed at the sledging Paris Cornes has been copping – she couldn’t be any sillier than Kelly Hoare, someone who has been allowed to mark time in a safe ALP seat for 9 years.
Two other things about Paris and Boothby: I agree with the school of thought that in metropolitan seats, Cornes and Southcott are just names on a ballot paper and their presence a footnote to the real issues such as the economy, WorkChoices etc. However, if this is wrong, Cornes may well be a big asset as someone who has abandoned JWH and the Liberals – and that has got to count for something in a traditonally Liberal seat where the key to victory is convincing lifelong Liberals to follow the example of the ALP candidate. US analogies are not always helpful, not least of all because of non-compulsory voting, but its noteworthy that last year the Democrats regained control of the US Senate by winning the Virginia and Montana races (two Republican-Red states) with candidates who were former Republicans. Given the razor thin margins in each of these contests, the candidates’ history may well have been decisive. Of course, all of this is overlooking one other undeniable fact: at the very least, the Cornes factor will consume valuable Liberal resources that would otherwise be deployed in Kingston, Wakefield and Makin.
Also, one other thing: how does everyone think Rudd will match up against Howard in the inevitable pre-poll debate? And will it matter?
Interesting list of ALP candidates. Readers will recall, of course, that Belinda Neal was a Senator for NSW and ran for Robertson in 1998. An SMH story (from Wednesday) on the preselections is here: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/alp-preselection-bloodletting-begins/2007/05/01/1177788142488.html
It’s Jim Arneman, not Tim Arneman. Ambo from Port Stephens who missed out on last state election by a whisker.
Am surprised George Williams did not prosper in Blaxland.
I too am a liitle surprised and a bit disappointed that neither George Williams or Warren Mundine got up – they’d both be superior additions to Caucus than those who won. Still, overall it’s one of the best list of candidates Labor has fielded in NSW for years.
Saw a poll from Bennelong the other day – actually it was more analysis of the NSW State election results – which suggested that this seat is considerably more marginal than previously thought. McKew is definitely having an impact and seems to have been well received by the locals. You’d have to think that it’s too late for JWH to cut and run (though I wouldn’t totally discount the chances of it happening), but he may well be in serious trouble if he doesn’t.
Ah hah. Good pick up, anonymousie.
Which would make Jim-not-Tim the sole beneficiary (so far as I can tell) of delaying the federal preselections until after the state election.
I stuffed up the link in my previous post. Here it is again.
Hugo , i would have thought that you wouldn’t have fallen for that old ploy of transposing state results to federal seats etc. In Bennelong, it may be so, but what does it prove?
You could go through every seat and find some sort of outcome that suits whatever argument someone is pushing. Maybe, even the avid readers of this site should pay more attention to the nous, interest, concerns and even wisdom of the average voter rather than treating them like some sort of mindless jelly like blob that only drags themselves away from the telly on election day because they have to.
BTW, George Williams and Blaxland are not a good fit. Senate, inner city but not Blaxland.
But the point is Blaxland is a safe seat. Shouldn’t that be the general strategy? Get your hard nose policy people into parliament via safe seats, then use popular community focussed, and grass roots candidates in more marginal electorates. Pat Farmer finds it hard to talk during parliamentary debates, but he has strong local support which keeps that seat on the LIberals side.
France
Any last minute predictions for tomorrow ?
I’ll guess narrow Sarcozy victory as per the polls (yes – I’m way out on a limb!)
Oakshott, where in the constitution does it say that the GG can govern by decree? What is a “decree” under Australian law?
Hugo, I disagree that this is a got outcome by the NSW ALP. Hoare and Hatton rolled, to be sure, but Hatton replaced by an unknown, and the appalling Irwin spared under “affirmative action.” What a wimp Mundine turned out to be – he certainly shouldn´t get Senate spot now.
William, it seems that Cormann has been chosen to replace Campbell. Presumably they will have to reopen selections for the Senate ticket, since Cormann can´t serve out Campell´s term and be a candidate this year. Will Lightfoot be reprieved, or will they find someone else?
I’m very disappointed about Mundine not challenging Irwin. Of all of Labor’s pathetic MP’s, she was surely the worst. Terrible
I agree about Irwin. Anyway, “Affirmative action” is a real problem in the long term – people will be so used to it in time that moving on to the “proper” final stage of everyone being treated solely by their merit and not their sex will be that much harder.
Good rumblings for the Greens in Kingston , also strong backing from a source not official yet
Interesting questions, Adam. If Lightfoot has indeed been given a reprieve, he doesn’t sound too grateful for it. I get the impression that Lightfoot’s main motivation behind seeking another term was to deny Cormann and the faction he represents – he probably wouldn’t have stuck around for long afterwards.
Hopefully if Roger Price retires George Williams will get Chifley. I’m astonished that he wasn’t pre-selected – I had him pegged as the next Attorney-General (beating out another MP-in-waiting in Mark Dreyfus).
Mrs Della Bosca in Robertson again! It is enough to make you vote Liberal, particularly as the dropping of Kelly Hoare made me think that Labor was moving away from family dynasties.
Hi Adam,
After the putsch of 75, Donald Horne wrote a satire on the Australian constitution called “His Excellency’s Pleasure”. While it is difficult to make legislation without a parliament, executive government can often be controlled and changed by regulation viz. any edition of the Government Gazette.
Given this I think the GG’s main sources of power are sects 61 & 62.:
61.The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen’s representative, and extends to the execution and maintenance of this Constitution, and of the laws of the Commonwealth.
62. There shall be a Federal Executive Council to advise the Governor-General in the government of the Commonwealth, and the members of the Council shall be chosen and summoned by the Governor-General and sworn as Executive Councillors, and shall hold office during his pleasure.
While sect 63 says that the GG must sometimes act “in council” it does not say that he must necessarily follow the majority advice of the council. Section 64 has department heads (presumably ministers) quite separate from the GG’s council. Sect 65 says that non parliamentarians can be ministers for a maximun of 3 months – raising the prospect of a rotating panel of flunkies heading the departments for 90 days each. Finally sects. 5 & 6 show that the GG can control the sitting of parliament provided he lets it sit for a least one day a year.
Sorry Correction,
Ministers must be members of the council but members of the council are not necessarily ministers and the GG can decide which members of the council are in attendance.
I saw Lightfoot interviewed the other day (might have been Stateline here in Perth), and he clearly declared he was retiring – and indeed that he’d always planned on retiring, and the only reason he nominated was to put the wind up someone else (unspecified, but you’d think he clearly meant Cormann). So I’d guess even if he wanted to have another go, he’d burnt everything resembling a bridge he could find.
http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/wa/content/2006/s1909838.htm
Yuck. Now the Tele is smearing Kelly Hoare with some spurious sexual harassment allegation.
http://www.news.com.au/sundaytelegraph/story/0,22049,21678365-5001021,00.html
As if her weekend wasn’t awful enough. Much as I approve of the choice of Combet for the seat, it’s grubby to tell these sorts of tales.
Combet is a sell out and Hoare has every right to be upset
I don’t get the accusation that Combet is a sell out. He can keep working for the unions, staring down both the government and business, and hoping to influence policy or he can actually get into government and set the policy. To me the latter course of action is the logical extension of his activism.
Yes, not sure how a trade unionist becoming a Labor MP constitutes selling out – perhaps you’d like to explain that one Bill. He’ll be staying at the helm of the ACTU and running the Your Rights @ Work campaign pretty much until the election – after all, it’s not like he’ll need to campaign in Charlton much.
can anyone tell me how much of the state seat of lake Macquarie
overlaps Charlton?
Re Transposing state and Federal Figures I find it very interesting because it shows what is possible and maybe gives an indication of personal votes
in Country seats.
Yes I feel terrible for Hoare this morning…
I had Debus pegged as the next AG. Dreyfus will have to serve out a bit of time on the backbench before he gets into Cabinet.
What’s the story with Chifley? Is that the last seat to be filled by a Labor candidate?
Yes I am feeling sorry for Hoare too. I feel as if she’s a lonely single mum getting picked on by the machine men.
On the other hand, if she was a guy and did the same thing would I feel sorry for her ? Probably not.
Combet is in the party that will ultimately screw the worker. as i wrote back to him when he sent me a email on his intentions –
Hi Greg it is disappointing that you are supporting and standing for a
party that will not look after workers. You are a candidate in the most
right wing ALP grouping ever and your lone voice will amount to nothing.
The ALP policy in your words is ” not 100% yet you are supporting a
party that will not protect workers who organize a YR@W campaign if
elected. If the ALP wins and Rudd gets his way you will go down in
history as the ACTU leader that stood up for us then sold us out. Think
on that!
As Adam has stated on here Rudd and co will squash the left. The difference between both major parties are narrowing and despite what commentators on here have predicted about the importance of minor parties this election ( esp the Greens) their is a move to us in the marginals including Boothby
Yes and no, Bill. You’re probably right to assume that a Rudd government will end up doing things that both you and I won’t be haapy with, but Combet realises that a Labor government will still provide a fairer IR system than the Libs. Politics is the art of compromise, and Combet (and for that matter Garrett) knows that. That’s why Labor forms government quite often and the Greens don’t.
Honestly Bill, you’re pulling your pud if you think the Greens (you as candidate, presumably) are going to get anywhere in Kingston. If Janine Haines couldn’t make it as a centrist candidate, there’s no way the electors are going to leapfrog from a right wing candidate to you.
Keep up the chatter though, I always find it msot amusing when no-hoper candidates talk up their chances of a “come from behind” victory!
PS. You’re demonstrating your idelogically rigid credentials by paying our Combet for running as a Labor candidate. The far left will *never* get anywhere because they view any deviation from their ideology as a sellout to the cause.
Unfortunately for you, 95% of people don’t work that way. We know that life isn’t perfect and sometimes you need to compromise to get things done (well, adults do at any rate). Further, mainstream parties believe it’s better to be in government and get some of what you want done, rather than remain impotent but pure in opposition.
Just a thought.
Many Labor voters on the left of the party have views more in line with the Greens policies than with the modern ALP. The Greens vote could increase quite a bit by attracting these voters (which would put them in with a higher chance of winning some lower house seats). Having a labor government will help sway some of these voters because it will the difference between these voters views and the policies of the ALP.
That’s true, Tom – the Greens always seem to do best when they can run from the Left against a Labor government or can appear a principled opposition when Labor has appeared an ineffectual Opposition. The latter clearly won’t be an issue this year – Labor is rejuvenated under Rudd and also the issues in play come election time (eg WorkChoices, global warming etc) will I suspect be rather polarising, squeezing the minor parties in the process.
I suspect the best strategy for you, Bill, would be to pray for a Rudd victory, minimise the damage and hope to pick up extra Senate spots in the ensuing Double Dissolution.
Bill, I’m afraid you are showing us that the Greens are much further left of the Labor Party, which will only keep your status as a minor party well intact.
# Jack Says:
May 6th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Honestly Bill, you’re pulling your pud if you think the Greens (you as candidate, presumably) are going to get anywhere in Kingston. If Janine Haines couldn’t make it as a centrist candidate, there’s no way the electors are going to leapfrog from a right wing candidate to you.
Keep up the chatter though, I always find it msot amusing when no-hoper candidates talk up their chances of a “come from behind†victory!
What i define as getting somewhere and what you do are two different things. A win for me will not be winning the seat but its a nice thought!
What im happy to hear is the talk of many ALPers that see the only way forward for a Rudd led government is to have a Green held Senate. As it is impossible for the ALP to win the Senate its imperative that the Greens do.
# Gary Bruce Says:
May 6th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Bill, I’m afraid you are showing us that the Greens are much further left of the Labor Party, which will only keep your status as a minor party well intact.
Further left than the ALP? thats not hard as the Dems seem to fit there too. But as an AMWU delegate the Greens are not far left at all in fact theres more common ground between us than the AMWU and Labor
Doug Cameron is one of the only shinning lights in the ALP but sadly one of the only voices for the left.
There is some overlap between Lake Macquarie and Charlton (which the Daily Horror repeatedly called Charlestown on Thursday). The big difference is Charlton includes much of Wallsend, which has, under various names, been Labor since 1897. My personal belief is that Labor lost Lake Macquarie because of the log who held it Jeff Hunter, son of the previous member, Merv Hunter who was also a log.
Taking into account today’s revelations and her interview on AM, I am concerned Kerry Hoare may be suffering from mental illness – I am thinking a bipolar type problem. This is only a guess but if this is so the ALP should have found some more dignified way to remove her.
Adam, when I grew up in Hunter and later kept an interest in the seat, I had great respect for Bob Brown. Remember that the previous 4 members for Hunter were Matt Charlton (probably the most ineffective leader of the ALP in recorded history), a rapidly dementing Dr Evatt and the hillbilly father and son duo, Rowley and Bert James. The last 3 were within my memory. Compared to them Bob Brown actually behaved like a member of parliament. Having said that, he sucked on the teat of Labor for more than 20 years before eventually ratting. Unlike his daughter, he does not have my sympathy.
Newcastle is ripe for a shake-up. Combet’s installation (and Jodi Mackay’s the state seat of Newcastle) provides some much-needed new blood. For such a rock solid Labor area, it’s instructive that very few figures of significance have ever come from there. I’d be interested if other contributors can recall any PM/ Premier/ leader or senior cabinet minister who has represented a Hunter seat?
Whilst I am in hiatus and will not be returning on a permanent basis until late June, I could not leave the Kelly Hoare situation unremarked upon.
Anyone who refers to Kelly Hoare as “Kelly La Hoare” is not being witty but misogynistic and offensive. Adam Carr you stand accused.
Secondly does anybody seriously doubt the leak in today’s papers about Kelly Hoare was anything but payback for the temerity of the woman complaining about being dumped. It really is a matter for the ALP if the national executive thinks it is a good thing for Combet to fly in like the lord of the manor to meet his new peasants on Friday and no doubt Kelly Hoare was never going to be a world beater but most parties function because there backbenches have liberal sprinklings of indians and not chiefs.
But the lack of compassion for this women is truly chilling! It seems Latham really did have a point when he talked about the suicide of the former Member for Isaacs – Greg Wilton and the role of people inside the ALP. Extremely regrettable.
here here Edward StJohn
I like these crocodile tears from politicians who know all parties are as ruthless as one another. Give us a break, you know politics is a dirty business and it isn’t confined to one side of politics. It’s obviously not pretty or fair but if you can’t stand the heat …..
Gary Bruce who are you referring too?
I agree with you Gary Bruce – Kelly Hoare is a professional politician and she’s basically carried on like a goose recently – witness threatening an unfair dismissal case, bemoaning that she might lose her house etc. Not once have we heard anything from her about policy or indeed any reason why should she keep such a plum seat other than that she is the incumbent. Indeed, we’ve heard more from her in the last few weeks than we have in the last 9 years that she has been in parliament. My parents live in this seat, and they claim they’ve rarely seen or her from her. Of course, the allegation that came up today must be upsetting for her, but she’s a big girl and after that long in Canberra, she should be able to handle it.
By the way, nice to have a cameo from Edward St John.
Greetings from Prague
Since I am editing here under my own name, my comments on Hoare will need to be carefully phrased. Let me just say that my view that she is an object undeserving of sympathy is almost universal among those who have worked in Canberra in any capacity in recent years, regardless of party, faction or gender. Let me also suggest that the Tele doesn’t often tell the truth about people in the Labor Party – but sometimes it does.
Bill, could you at least try to be consistent? You complain all the time that Labor is selling out to the bosses etc etc. So we give a safe seat to the leader of the labour movement’s militant resistance to the IR laws, ditching a totally useless sitting member in the process, and you come out in support of said totally useless sitting member! There is an old Labor saying “When you want to hit a dog, any stick will do.” This is exactly your attitude. You echo any and all criticisms of Labor, regardless of whether they come from left, right or centre, and regardless of consistency.
Adam i just like the idea of candidates living in their electorate. As for Combet i hope that he will make sure the ALP does not go down any of the work choices path and if the workers suffer under the ALP that he will do something about it. As a union activist ( not a union boss) i am very interested in the workings of the ALP and hope that we are protected from any anti worker , anti community and anti family policies by them. What would be the point of me bagging a party ( Libs ) that will not listen to the working class. Better to work on the left of the ALP for the workers i represent.
Well said Adam – the Left has a long and inglorious history of being far too concerned about fellow comrades on the Left rather than the real enemy that is the Right. It seems that the real contest is regarding who can be the most ideologically pure, rather than actually winning power and doing something constructive. While I do think that the Greens have a role to play, they too often fall for this trap.
Adam how are you liking Europe? I loved it when i went 7? years ago. I was lucky enough to have someone pay for the trip and i stayed with family in Germany and Holland
Hugo you said “rather than the real enemy that is the Right” yet Adam is part of the Right as it would seem most ALPers are now. Do you mean the conservative right? And what about the left Libs or moderates? isn’t the enemy people who do not work for the community in which they LIVE and represent? The ALP history and outward speal is that of fairness for workers and a buffer against the historically Rich landowner / capitalist conservative Libs. Nowadays and this has to be accepted because the ” ordinary person ” on the street sees both parties as extremely similar and as years go by it seems to be more the case. Again this is from the working and living community that i talk to not people that study politics or analyze, candidates stats or party philosophies. These same people depending on their beliefs see FF , Greens and in the past Dems and One Nation as a true alternative but in the end on polling day most succumb to a vote for what they think is a better of the two ” evils ” major parties. There will come a time that a third party will click with the electorate and start to gain support that has never been seen before.
Ms Hoare: Undeserving of sympathy? Surely no one should be see them sent off from parliament in such an undignified way, no matter how much of a “log” they are.
Anyway, I have been amazed by the lack of talent coming from the Labor party in the Hunter region. I mean, seriously, Joel Fitzgibbon? Is that the best the Hunter can produce? Hopefully Combet will inject some much needed blood.
I like the two major party system, it keeps the real nut jobs out of power.
The truth is probably somewhere in the middle anyway, meaning extreme right or left positions are usually wrong.
I’ve been away in Perth and am just catching up.
I’m interested in others’ views on the politics of IR. It seems to me that Kevin Rudd has presented what is, for want of a more specific word, a very right-wing IR policy, the most right-wing we have seen from Labor, and, predictably, the business world, the Liberals and The Australian have responded with “the sky will fall in†comments. I think the Howard Government’s IR laws are rightly seen as a disgrace and are the strongest reason Labor is in front. (I think John Howard agrees with me, except for the “rightlyâ€.) What I do not understand is the fear that Labor seems to have in advocating its cause. It’s as if being criticised by business is making Labor fragile. Where once it would have stood its ground, it is now so anxious to appease the commentators of The Australian. I know that very few people now belong to unions, but I do not think that the public sees them as being such an evil force that Labor must, politically speaking, distance itself from them. Did I miss a great social change while I was in Perth?
I’m not sure I agree Chris – the Labor IR policy does give the unions much of what they wanted, not least the collective bargaining rights enjoyed by employees in most Western countries.
However, I am in agreement that the voting public don’t see unions as the threat that the government and the big end of town is portraying. People hate WorkChoices (rightly) and are largely on the side of the unions in this regard. Indeed, the polling that I have seen suggests that while people are prepared to vote against the government on this issue, they don’t believe that Labor will change it. Consequently, the Labor IR policy is, despite the press, a winner in that respect. In most elections it’s in Labor’s interest to differentiate themsleves from the unions, but not this time.
Bill, I am in favour of *members* living in their electorates, but to say that *candidates* can only come from within a given electorate is ridiculous. Apart from my former boss, who was born in Elwood, I can’t think of many urban members who are actually native to the slab of suburbia they represent. Not Howard, Costello, Rudd, Beazley or Crean. And nor were Barton, Deakin, Watson, Reid, Fisher, Cook, Hughes, Bruce, Scullin, Curtin, Menzies, Holt, Gorton, Whitlam or Hawke native to their seats. And frankly, so what? City voters could not care less.
Europe is fantastische, although my feet are killing me after hiking over all these cobble-stones. I can report that Good King Wenceslas is still looking out, although there is no snow, deep and crisp and even or otherwise, at present. I have just finished touring the old Jewish Ghetto area of Prague, and now my camera battery is flat so I have had to come back to the hotel to recharge. It is raining here which is a nice change after Germany, which was very hot. Tomorrow Hradcany Castle.
No-one answered my question about a Liberal candidate for Parramatta. Does one exist? If not why not?
Sarkozy victory in France.
Nicolas Sarkozy: 53.3%
Segolene Royal: 46.7%
The argument about candidates living in their electorate is about where they reside at the time they stand not where they were born.
This argument about where MPs live is getting rather tiresome. Adam is right, in metropolitan electorates, it doesn’t really matter where candidates live, and three quarters of their potential constituents don’t know who they are anyway. People mostly vote for one of the major parties, not on individual candidates. Of course, in the bush the role of the candidate is much more important, but given that over 80% of Australians live in cities, it’s a safe bet that the overwhelming majority of voters could not name their local MP, much less where they live.
Are any of you bright sparks able to tell me which electorates Melton (Victoria) has been part of?
It’s currently in Lalor and prior to 2004 was part of Burke. But what was it in prior to that?
I reckon there’s a limit to how far out of an area an MP (or even a major candidate) should live, but further than just the electorate.
For example, Latham didn’t live in Werriwa, but he lived in Campbelltown, and in a city the size of Sydney, that’s close enough. People in Minto or Liverpool aren’t gonna vote against someone because they live in Campbelltown.
However, there are some ridiculous cases. Reba Meagher represents Cabramatta while living in Coogee. It’s not an issue because Cabramatta is the safest Labor turf in the country, but that’s what I find abhorrent, Cabramatta is taken completely for granted and completely ignored, as a punishment for its loyalty to the ALP.
Gordon Chalk, the former Liberal Deputy Premier of Qld to Joh, apparently lived in Taringa/Indooroopilly while representing Lockyer (according to my politics lecturer many years ago). Taringa/Indooroopilly was/is a wealthy middle class suburb in Brisbane’s western suburbs while Lockyer was an electorate in the Brisbane valley between Ipswich and Toowoomba.
It’s sort of on topic to disclose that Maxine McKew will shortly be a neighbour (literally a couple of doors up) in Bennelong. Those of you with very long memories will remember the cliched white picket fence on the cover of one JW Howard’s ill-judged “Incentivation” manifesto that helped bring him down in 1989. Well it’s that house, or the spitting image of it. Has also been used as a film set (was Georgie Parker’s house in All Saints) so it seems a good prop for this quite theatrical campaign.
Anyway looking forward to chatting with Bob across my picket fence as he wanders up to the very good fruit shop on the corner for papers and milk. Don’t expect to see so much of Max. It’s a good debating point as to whether residence matters but plainly the hard heads in the ALP thought Mosman was a bridge too far from Bennelong. Remains to be seen whether Kirribilli is any better. The sitting member has never lived anywhere near the current boundaries but still manages to bob up at most envelope openings.
Well with the revelations coming thick and fast about Kelly Hoare from the Labor Party in an attempt to destroy any chance she may have as an Independent – I think it is about time that a feminist critique was applied to the whole episode – and I am would probably be better described as a misogynist – so I am not pushing my own barrow here.
The way the Kelly Hoare affair has played out is a classic case of men in power denying women sexuality and making women look dirty. You know – women are objects of men for sexual purposes, they are not supposed to actually enjoy sex (mainly because the men in power would be incapable of sexually satisfying a woman) and unless they are of an age and have the looks of a Paris Hilton they must not pursue sex- for a woman who is not Paris Hiltonesque – it is dirty.
Well, to be fair, we don’t know for sure that the muck-raking has come from the ALP (though no doubt a valid assumption) – the allegation first ran in the Terror, which has no end of muck-rakers on the payroll.
While I agree with Alex Turbey that women in politics generally get a raw deal and are frequently victims of double standards, I’m not sure that’s true in this case. Kelly Hoare was a highly ineffective politician who has got where she is because she is the daughter of the former member. And really, she hasn’t really been gone over that badly – just one allegation that she tried it on (unsuccessfully) with her driver, something she herself has admitted is true. Really not that bad or scandalous in this day and age I would have thought. Kelly Hoare was dumped for all the right reasons, and all this other stuff is just blather.
Re: Talent from the Hunter.
I am hard pressed to name anyone. Charlie Jones, transport minister in the Whitlam government was a man without an education who impressed me with his commitment to the Left. Harold Hawkins was a senior minister in the Cahill and Heffron state governments – he died in 1971.
Perhaps the best known name, which I hear allthe time, is the former member for Charlestowm and minister for Gaming, the Hon. Dick Face.
Yeh, pretty disappointing for a string of safe seats really.
The Speaker: Expect more hand-wringing in certain newspapers about how Royal’s failure (and the possibility of Hillary failing) will “haunt, and be used to intimidate, women politicians for a generation” as The Grauniad put it.
I’m not sure that Sego’s failure will translate into a wider women in power thing – after all Angela Merkel has ruled quite adequately in neighbouring Germany for a year now, and rumour has it she would win an election now hands down. Royal’s main problem was that she wasn’t much of a candidate. She looked the goods at first, but then there was nothing to follow it up – no detail on policy, no overall philosophy, and no real response to rise the of Sarkozy until the final debate – a bit late to start fighting, methinks. It probably didn’t help her that the Socialist Party is so faction-ridden that it was unable to unite behind her.
As always, the far Left would rather be pure in Opposition than compromised in government.
bill weller Says: May 6th, 2007 at 7:12 pm – Gary Bruce who are you referring too? Sorry, Bill haven’t been on for awhile. I’m referring to anyone who may feel it applies to them. If that’s not you then so be it.
The Oz is running a second story about Kelly Hoare on their website this afternoon, again quoting ‘Labor Party Sources’. If the whole business is coming out of the ALP, this is one of the shabbiest little stories that has been around for a while. And if it is revealed that the source has been the ALP – will there be the cries of righteous outrage from Joan Kirner, Meredith Burgmann etc?? Kelly Hoare has lost preselection – and probably quite rightly – but why do they need to destroy the poor woman, not only her parliamentary career but her public standing and possibly marriage as well?
You will hate me but I suspect, without knowing myself that, the characterisation of Ms Hoare (that is as the most useless of all backbenchers) is probably much more suspect, on a discriminatory basis, that the post loss hatchet job. If you look at the deadwood in both houses the chances of her actually been the very worst seems unlikely to me. Have any of you who hate her so much actually met Senator Lightfoot? Do you have some grudging respect for Senator Heffernan?
So I suspect, without much evidence, an element of latent ‘girl wasting a boys seat’ sexism in this judgement. But I could be wrong.
I firmly believe in affirmative action, and if Ms Hoare cannot get preselection in an environment with affirmative action well there is a risk she is indeed as bad a seat waster as the score of boys who will return to the post election benches without her.
Can someone please tell me what the ALP affirmative action policy has actually achieved except divert an unwarranted amount of time and energy away from finding the ‘best’ candidate to finding one with the right biology (and most likely one that agrees with the Emily’s List sub faction to boot). The Libs, Nats and Dems manage to preselect women to safe and or winnable seats without an affirmative action policy. In many cases, they have been proven vote winners, Jackie Kelly and Danna Vale being 2. There are ALP women MPs who would be preselected regardless of gender – Julia Gillard and Nicola Roxon for example. By all means don’t put barriers in front on women wanting preselection but don’t put barriers up to men either – such as Fremantle being earmarked as a ‘woman’s seat’ – or Warren Mundine being unable to get a guernsey because of the Affirmative action policy. And once ALP women are in parliament, does that gaurantee them adavncement? Not in Victoria, where there are now far fewer women in the cabinet than 1999 and the women on the ALP front bench are easily outnumbered by those on the Libs bench. The best candidate for the party is that person who can connect with voters and get elected. By all means we need diversity, but we need talent too – from all sides.
Jasmine, while I agree that women politicians often get more vicious scrutiny, I think it is unlikely you will find an MP who has been in as long as Kelly Hoare has who has less to show for it in terms of real achievements. There may be some with equally low records, but not many. Even someone like Bill Heffernan, objectionable as he is, has managed to raise the debate on some issues (eg forests and water) while lowering it on others.
Hoare’s claims to financial distress are also ridiculous. She is eligible for the parliamentary pension, so she won’t starve, and if after 9 years on an MP’s salary she can’t have a house in the Hunter paid off then she is either living in a mansion or hasn’t been spending sensibly.
However, if she is genuienly suffering from depression or other mental illness then she deserves sympathy – anyone in that situation does.
I’d have more sympathy for La Hoare if she wasn’t acting like a child that’s had their favourite toy snatched away – “I *must* have Charlton!”
By the way Edward, that nickname is pretty common and is no different to “Shrub” for a certain George W. Bush
Blackburnpseph asks what affirmative action has achieved.
1. In any system where quotas, targets etc are employed, AA opens every woman, however talented, to the accusation that she got there only on account of her sex.
2. AA systems are open to colonisation by groups who can hand out the goodies. For example, Emily’s List (its website lists Ms Hoare as a member) has had the effect that the range of views of the women elected is narrower than that of men.
Blackburn is correct about affirmative action. It has been a totally counter-productive exercise from the point of view of both Labor and women. It has been used to dump a succession of untalented wives, ex-wives, girlfriends and relatives of male faction bosses in safe seats. Hoare is a particularly egregious example, but not the only one.
Carmen Lawrence and co put up affirmative action no doubt with good intentions, but it has just become a factional rort. Every time one of these cases comes up the Left Women’s Caucus (known as the “moaning Joans” after their most prominent spokeswoman) send up their wail about sexism etc, regardless of the merits, thus making everyone else extremely cynical. As someone above noted, talented women have no difficulty getting selected and elected – Gillard, Roxon, Plibersek, Burke, Wong, many more at state level, such as the next Premier of Qld.
On whether Hoare is the deadest piece of deadwood in Canberra. I worked there for three years, and my view is that she was the most useless MP on the Labor side. Did and said almost nothing, and when challenged, replied: “Don’t care. I’ve got the numbers”, meaning her numbers in the Charlton branches.
She cannot be compared to Lightfoot and Heffernan, who people hate because of their *actions* not because they are deadwood. Lightfoot actually works very hard, as obsessives do. I don’t know much about Heffernan apart from his obnoxiousness but Howard obviously doesn’t think he’s deadwood. Better comparisons are with Cadman, 30 years a backbencher, or Stewie McArthur and Senator Chapman, who treat Canberra like a country club. But even McArthur does his bit as a whip, and Cadman is always willing to read out any speech he is given late at night.
RE TALENT FROM THE HUNTER
TRY KEN BOOTH AND BOB HORNE
Ken Booth was one of the most pleasant men I have ever met but I have always felt he was an example of the Peter’s principle – due to factions he was promoted way beyond his talent. Still he was a much better minister than the former gaming minister.
Why Bob Horne?
Hope you all watched whatever that show on the ABC is called tonight.
Only failure of affirmative action is that it hasn’t got rid of enough mediocre men and ensure mediocre women have plenty of company.
The liberal party position is much much worse – it amounts to let men decide which women are not threats and put them up. Look at Julie bishop, the exception that proves my rule, don’t agree with her politics and know many her hate her from her time as Chairperson of the law firm, but she is more talented than the rest of cabinet put together and took ages to get in there.
What rubbish, Jasmine. Bishop has been promoted quite rapidly and in accord with her obvious talent. But she is a rare exception in the Liberal ranks – a talented woman given preferment. (Personally I find the way she exploits her sex appeal rather offensive, but since I’m in a 5% minority on such matters I will bow to the majority view).
The Liberals operate on fuhrerprinzip – the Leader promotes whomever he likes. His choice of women has generally been poor – Danna Vale, Jaquie Kelly, Judi Moylan, De-Anne Kelly, Kay Patterson, all duds. (I don’t blame Howard for Bronwyn Bishop, he had to give her something in 1996.) Vanstone and Newman were just passable. Of the current lot, Sharman Stone seems capable, but I’m stretched to think of anyone else.
Marise Payne … there’s one true talent who has been overlooked…
Adam, how about the member for Indi?
In relation to Julie Bishop your definition of quite rapidly and mine Adam are clearly quite different. She was held back for years as a Costello backer wasn’t she? I would compare her to Garrett and Turnbull, favorably, and they were a week or two more preferred weren’t they? I would do the maths but I can’t be bothered.
You can’t oppose affirmative action using as the sole base for your opposition the stupidy of the current male dominated cultures and systems that put in candidates that are just as bad as the kind of male candidates they replaced. If anything it is evidence for additional affirmative action not less.
And the whingy whiney labor boys I know to have been deprived by affirmative action (and there are that many there isn’t as much affirmative action as might be hoped for) are even stronger evidence of how good it has done for Labor. Mr Mundine would make a fantastic candidate and I hope he is found a seat.
I go back to my example of affirmative action, and that is a boys club partnership I had the honor of working for, they wouldn’t have in a million years had affirmative action into the partner ranks, but I sat in recruitment meeting after recruitment meeting where the intake was affirmatively actioned – to save the boys who were too lazy or too stupid to do as well at uni. Depending on the sophistication of the partner the excuse went from ‘maintaining a balance’ at the sophisticated end, to ’she will just leave us and have babies’ at the crude end.
I am glad I stumbled across that show last night … clearly some of you need to look for the repeat on ABC 2.
Any discussion of deadwood in parliament has to mention Alby Schultz, he is too dead to use as firewood!
Wilson Tuckey would also get a mention and Annette Ellis from Canberra, who has health problems and would benefit the party enormously by giving up her ultra safe seat for a talented up and comer.
I believe that all parties should be compelled to cull 10% of members at each election. I know it would never happen, but it’s a great fantasy.
Is it almost time for “Idle Speculation: the Budget edition”?
The ALP is at 57-43 at what stage will it be a close election? 54 -46 ? can anyone tell me what the minimum 2pp vote will get the ALP over the line. That if all ALP marginals stay ALP and the swing is uniform in the marginals needed
I beleive the ALP need at least 51.3% 2 party prefered. This would give them 75 seats on a uniform swing. However the last of those seats is Bennelong, which I don’t think Howard will lose. So in practice they would need a uniform 2PP vote of 52.1%. But this doesn’t really bare relation to practice. I think there will be a swing, but it needs to happen in the right places for the government to fall. Look what happened in 1990.
interesting to see what the budget does to the Libs standing. I still get the feeling Howard will fall over the line.
I am sorry – this is probably the wrong place for this – BUT is anyone able to say where one can get an authoritive list of which faction/sub-faction etc of the ALP, members of the NSW Legislative Assembly belong to ?
Wouldn’t you write to the factional convenor / president / secretary and to remain accurate repeat monthy?
Peter Botsman had a list about two years ago. It’s changed a little since then.
Will Howard and Costello get the predicted poll bounce from the budget?
If tax cut bribery doesn’t significantly narrow Rudd’s poll lead, the Libs are stuffed.