Based around Penrith 50 kilometres west of Sydney, Lindsay was created with the expansion of parliament in 1984 to accommodate growth in the city’s outer west. It currently extends into conservative semi-rural territory to the north (Castlereagh and Llandilo) and south (Mulgoa and Orchard Hills), but most of the voters come from an urban concentration around Penrith. This area is stronger for the Liberals in the south and west (Glenmore Park and Emu Plains respectively) and for Labor in the east (Werrington). Before Lindsay was created, Penrith had shifted from Macquarie to Mitchell to Chifley, the general area becoming progressively stronger for Labor as it became more urbanised after the war. Lindsay had a notional Labor margin of 12.3 per cent when it was created, and the area remains a happy hunting ground for the party at state level: the corresponding seats are held by margins of 7.0 per cent (Londonderry), 9.2 per cent (Penrith) and 10.9 per cent (Mulgoa). My 2004 election booth result and swing maps for the electorate can be viewed at Crikey.
Labor’s Ross Free held Lindsay by margins of around 10 per cent throughout the Hawke-Keating years, having previously been member for Macquarie from 1980. He was most unpleasantly surprised to find himself voted out in 1996, following an epochal 11.9 per cent swing to Liberal candidate Jackie Kelly. Free was able to secure a re-match because Kelly, who did not expect to win, had failed to get her affairs in order before nominating (she was still serving as an RAAF officer, an “office for profit under the Crown”). Voters dragged back to the polls on a technicality rewarded Free with a further 6.8 per cent drop in the primary vote, and Kelly picked up another 5.0 per cent on two-party preferred. The combined 16.9 per cent swing to the Liberals meant the electorate’s demographic profile came to be seen as typifying John Howard’s constituency – high numbers of skilled workers on good incomes, low levels of tertiary education and a distinctly less multicultural flavour than suburbs closer to the city. Kelly was able to limit the Labor swing in 1998 to 0.3 per cent, one of a number of decisive marginal seat outcomes that ensured the return of the Howard government from a minority of the two-party vote. This secured Kelly’s status as a prime ministerial favourite, helping her win promotion to the position of Sport and Tourism Minister. Many thought this to be beyond her competence, and she did not return to the ministry after leaving it while pregnant immediately after the 2001 election. She nonetheless continued to perform well electorally, picking up a 2.4 per cent swing in 2001 and almost holding even in 2004.
Two events during the current term have given good cause to think that Lindsay might finally return to Labor at the coming election. The first was the unveiling of new electoral boundaries last July, which added Labor-voting St Marys, Oxley Park and Colyton in the east from Chifley, and transferred Liberal-leaning Glenbrook in the Blue Mountains foothills to Macquarie in the west. These changes cut the Liberal margin from 5.3 per cent to 2.9 per cent. The second came in May when Kelly announced her intention to retire, much to the Prime Minister’s dismay. Kelly immediately named Penrith councillor Mark Davies as her preferred successor, but he evidently found little support from the party. The Prime Minister and the Right faction hoped to enlist Penrith Panthers recruitment manager Peter Mulholland, but their approach was declined. The nomination instead went to Kelly’s electorate officer Karen Chijoff (right), who picked up a 6 per cent swing as candidate for Mulgoa at the March state election.
Labor’s candidate for the third successive election is David Bradbury (left), Blake Dawson Waldron lawyer, Penrith councillor and former mayor, who for all his campaign experience is still only 31. Bradbury was installed as candidate by the national executive using the power the national conference granted it in April to determine preselections in sensitive seats. This displeased the National Union of Workers, said by a number of sources to have been marshalling forces for union official Mark Ptolemy – although Brad Norington of The Australian reported in May that it was in fact backing Ptolemy’s fiancee, 23-year-old school teacher May Hayek. Ptolemy was Labor’s candidate for Macquarie in 2004, and turned his attention to Lindsay when it became clear the Macquarie nomination would go to Bob Debus. Norington reported the conflict in terms of a split in the Right, with Bradbury having “historical links” to the Transport Workers Union.
122 Comments
Judging by the exchange rate on offer from the orange-shirted “Your Rights at Work” unionists at last weekend’s Penrith Show, the Liberal’s Karen Chijoff is worth 3 of Labor’s David Bradbury!
Let me explain: I saw with my own eyes on 2 separate occassions the union boys asking children for their yellow Liberal helium balloons (which were promptly let go), and giving them 3 orange union balloons in exchange. One irate father gave these guys a real serve. Talk about “how to win friends and influence people”. I thought it was a real hoot!
Am I right in assuming that Lindsay was one of those Howard Battler seats that went to the Coalition in 1996 ?
If so, making allowances for the comparatively small 2PP margin (2.9), this seat might be one to watch in terms of getting a sense of whether or not the Howard battler dominated seats are coming back to Labor on election night.
Kelly retiring will do JWH no favours, her popularity might have acted as a buffer against any swing against the Coalition in NSW.
Then again, JWH is doing Turnbull no favours in Wentworth by demanding approval of the $2 Billion Gunns pulp mill project but it might keep Bass and Braddon in his pocket if he makes hay with his ‘pro jobs’ discourse.
I work in the Penrith region (drive through it every day) and must say I’m very surprised that this seat is not Labor territory. Penrith is very much a “westie” suburb, and thus I’m surprise there aren’t enough votes there for the ALP to tip the balance. The electoral realignment, though, does seem to point to this seat returning to Labor this time around.
Fascinating analyis, William. I’m starting to enjoy these forays into local politics, and it helps when the electorate is a familiar one.
Lindsay is interesting for the size of the swing Kelly got.
I think overall Howard got a 5% swing to him in 1996 and picked up around 29 seats, in NSW alone he picked up around 13 seats.
But in Lindsay Kelly got a 11.9% then a 5% swing one after the other.
Shows two things, if the mood is against the Howard government then big swings in individual seat will happen, say up to 12% or even 17%, and labor could pick up some extra seats in NSW.
“Am I right in assuming that Lindsay was one of those Howard Battler seats that went to the Coalition in 1996 ?”
I thought that Lindsay was the textbook definition of a Howard Battler seat.
William great analysis.This is my electorate and if I were Mr Rudd I would be confident of winning back this seat.Mr Rudd is not Mark Latham and from what I can see and hear he is extremely well liked.I would expect a big swing to the ALP in areas such as St Mary’s,St Mary’s South,St Marys North,Oxley Park,Clairmont Meadows,Werrington,Kingswood.I also would not be surprised to see areas such as Glenmore Park go to Labor either.
The main reasons I think the ALP will win is WorkChoices,Interest Rates and housing affordability.Five straight rate rises in a row will not help the Coalition here.
The price of fuel here is important as most people drive to work.You only have to look at the M4 at from 6.00am on any workday and the traffic heading east.We call ourselves”squinters”,we get the rising sun in the morning and the setting sun on the way home.
Although the Liberal candidate did get a swing at the last state election,that seat did not contain Penrith which recorded a swing TO the ALP.
Sondea I think “Squinters win back the Labor heartland” would be a great post election headline. I am thinking of other western suburb seats in other states around the country where they drive into the sun going to work and going home will be the key to this election. Go the “squinters”, much more appealing that the Howard battler tag.
I haven’t seen any polling done in Lindsay, but the punters in the betting markets at the moment certainly have Labor as the favourite to win the seat:
Coalition: Labor: Others:
Portlandbet: 2.80 1.36 81.00
Sportingbet: 2.50 1.40 26.00
So it looks like the battlers are definitely deserting Howard.
It is ALP territory. It just doesn’t happern to be so at Federal level at the moment. Lookt at http://elections.nsw.gov.au/state_government_elections/election_results for the state seats mentioned by Bill. You will see that even the CP vote did not flow reliably to the Libs as it did in most other electorates.
Bill: was it Free who petitiioned the Court of Disputed Returns? I thought it was one of the independents who ran at the March election who brought the case. In addition it was my understanding that Free was quite unhappy about the case and had to persuaded to run again.
You forgot to mention that the Liberal win was a complete surprise to the party. Kelly wan’t not even an Australian citiizen at the time of the election – or at least held dual nationality. In actual fact it was most improper )some would say incompetent) for the Liberal party to not have made sure that their candidate was properly qualified to take their seat. That was the proximate cause of the need for a special election.
However the rerun did open up the possibility for the issue of the Second Sydney Airport at Badgery’s Creek to be ventilated at in the long term Kelly’s conversion to the Anti side assisted with putting aside of the project for the time being.
If this seat falls, it will be “WorkChoices stupid”. Also, in the absence of Kellie, I think voters will reward Bradbury for his persistence/bloody mindedness.
Aussies love a fighter, and this guy just refuses to quit!
The increase in the Liberal vote in Mulgoa can be put down to:
a) no One Nation
b) the redistribution which took away strong ALP areas like Kingswood and brought in the rural areas etc around Ludenham and Wallacia
The constitution only bars people who are subjects or citezens of a foreign power or entitled to to the rights of a subject or citizen of a foreign power on citizen ship grounds.
There is an exemption for some naval and millitary personnel from the office of proffit or trust rule.
Read section 44 of the constitution.
Although Lindsay should technically have been a Labor seat, Howard’s stance on refugees and his leaning towards some of P Hanson’s policies are popular here. It’s also mortgage belt territory and there was a great fear of interest rate rises in the past. Jackie Kelly walks around the electorate in a track suit so as to identify with the battlers, despite her 7 investment properties. I hand out Green how to vote in this area and sometimes cop abuse from the voters.
My Sydney spies say that NSW Labor is absolutely confident of three seats: Parramatta, Dobell and Lindsay. The new boundaries, the retirement of Kelly and the threatened reintroduction of the Masters and Servants Act (WorkChoices II) will deliver Lindsay to Labor.
William, have you read that Greens-Liberal link on the front page? It’s absolute trash.
Tom: There were two issues with Kelly’s election the first time. One was “office under the crown”, the other was the rights to NZ citizenship which was a little less clear at time (It was One Nation Senator-elect Heather Hill’s case in 1998 that provided a clear ruling by the High Court; that is dual nationality with another Commonwealth nation is not acceptable). Of course, the first issue was easier to argue (even it was not a clear case; she was on permanment leave at the time).
Tom (and Bill)
(Obviously I was wrong to suggest that it was one of the independent candidates who challenged the validity of Kelly’s election.)
However I have read S 44 of No. 1 of 1901 and it says, inter alia:
In Free V Kelly (1996) Brennan CJ held
In that decision the question of dual citizenship was not decided.
Blair
You say
My understanding is that she wan’t ie. she did not take advantage of the dispensation engineered in the 1960s to allow serving members of the forces to stand for federal parliament. This was some device that was dreamt up that some nashos used to stand in 1966 and 1969 I think.
I thought that the One Nation senator-elect case`s was rulling that British Citizens were not allowed to be MPs because Britain is a foreign power and or the E.U. connection brought them under “entitled to the rights of a subject or citizen of a foreign popwer”.
The millitary exemtion is not an amendment. It is original.
At the 1945 British election hundreds of servicepersons, mostly “other ranks,” nominated for Parliament in order to get the leave that had traditionally been offered to officers who were candidates. Some were bona fide Labour candidates, but most were just taking a holiday. The rules were then changed to that servicepersons had to convince their CO that they were legit candidates before they could take leave.
The “office of profit” situation didn’t seem to apply to them, in fact many serving members of the armed forces have been simultaneously MPs (among them Churchill). There was a famous incident in 1940 when Admiral of the Fleet Sir Roger Keyes MP spoke about the Norway fiasco in the House, in full uniform with medals. I don’t know if this is still possible in the UK. This must also have been true in Australia, since Wilfrid Kent Hughes and Adair “Chill” Blain spent several years as PoWs of the Japanese without losing their seats. Blain was in fact re-elected in 1943 while a POW – the rules must have changed to allow him to be nominated by proxy.
In 96, Lindsay was one of the Sydney seats where the swing was boosted by Bob Carr’s broken toll-ways pledge after the 95 state election. Whilst there may have been legal justification for the legal challenge and subsequent by-election; it was politically ill-judged for the political climate and had the effect of actually giving Jackie Kelly a profile in the electorate.
Otherwise, she may well have been a “oncer”. Ross Free had been respected but his career was finished by the challenge and the ALP candidate in 98 was the hyper-ambitious but unelectable Cathy O’Toole.
I think you will find that New Zealand might be considered a foreign power (at least in Rubgy Union). Any legal attachment to NZ would have been via the UK and all of that would have been removed by the Australia Act 1986. It is a mess field and the best suggestion is that any candidate renounce any other citizenship if possible.
Personally, as one the 25% of Australians with dual citizenship I feel it is a rather poor law to have on the books.
Harold Holt served in WW2 briefly whilst an MP before the Canberra air crash. He was then recalled by Ming to serve in cabinet.
Lindsay voter is correct with his/her analysis of the seat in respect of his/her contention concerning refugees and the policies of Hanson.
However, I would guess that the interest rate campaigns of Howard in 2004 would have found fertile ground in this area. It is not that long ago that all that area south of the freeway (Glenmore Park area) was farm land but is now wall to wall McMansions.
This same area is also affected by increases in petrol price and other cost of living expenses.
It will be the reaction of the voters to these increasing costs (interest rates, petrol, child care, food, etc) that will determine what happens in Lindsay.
If the voters think that Howard can fix these problems then Lindsay will still be Liberal after the election but if they blame Howard for their financial stress than it could be a safe Labor seat in the next Government.
Adam,
I would have thought that Macquarie would have similar odds to those Divisions mentioned by you as changing sides considering that Macquarie is now notionally a Labor seat after the redistribution and the quality of the Labor candidate.
The new part of the division is in the west and is more inclined to vote Labor than the eastern end. Debus is very well known in the eastern end having been the state member for many years.
It is worth noting that the part of the old Macquarie (before redistribution) that got hived off to Greenway was a strong Liberal area.
I therefore would have thought that Macquarie would have been included in you list of seats that the Labor party was confidante of getting.
Living in the electorate until 97, I had assumed that Jackie Kelly would be a oncer. That was until the ALP right wing in NSW committed electoral suicide by putting unelectable candidates in the marginal seats e.g Belinda Neale (wife of de la Bosca) in Robertson and Cathy O’Toole in Lindsay.
O’Toole was a 22yr old law student and boy-friend of ETU sub-capo Peter Jones. She had already destroyed the spirit of the branches with some very tacky stacking. There was a ghost branch at Clearmont Meadows which I tried to join but no one could tell me when it met. Meanwhile, at one meeting of the Kingswood branch, 36 manly Philipino members of the ETU turned up for admission. At the next branch one of O’Toole’s advesaries rounded up 15 Irish navvies from the bar. While O’Toole was able to get helpers from Young Labor the local branches took a long time to recover and Jackie Kelly has been given a much better run than she should have.
I understand that O’Toole and Jones both fell foul of Sussex St and are
no longer interested in politics,
dirk provin,
The by-election subsequent to the 96 election was definitely ill judged in that (from memory) Kelly increased he winning margin in that by election.
Tom
You said
The millitary exemtion is not an amendment. It is original.
Please don’t be so obtuse. I didn’t say the constitution had been amended.
To explicate still further: back the 1960s it was argued that people doing National Service (ie. people who had been conscripted into the military by a coward too gutless to serve in the military himself, ie Robt. Menzies supported vociferously by the equally spineless J W Howard) should be allowed to stand for election. Some way was found to achieve this. I was trying to see if someone could explain how this was achieved and perhaps why Ms Kelly and her Party controllers did not avail themselves of such an option thus saving taxpayers the expense of a special election.
Blair
You say:
I feel it is a rather poor law to have on the books.
You are possibly right but when you seek to represent the people of a country you should be a committed citizen of that country ie. I can’t see how you can have a simultaneous allegience to two states although I suppose it could be argued that paying taxes to a state should be the qualifier rather than some outdated concept of national ein volk identity.
In any event such things are practically impossible to get changed given the way our constitution was formulated..
Yes, but some nations do not allow you to renounce citizenship. And others make it rather difficult to renounce. In such cases, swearing an oath would make more sense. Given that the number of dual citizen is set to only increase (due to citizen/dual citizen parent combos producing dual citizens) it will only increase the disengagement of public from the political process.
So, when did it become impossible for a serving member of the ADF to be a parliamentary candidate? Clearly it wasn’t during WW2, but clearly it is now. (Mike Kelly had to resign his commission before nominating). When and by what means was this change made?
Whogivesarats, I’m a she. The other reason why the Libs did well in the past is the increase of small business owners in this area. JK really hasn’t done much for this area.
WhoGivesaRats, Macquarie is a Labor seat on the new boundaries so it doesn’t appear on the list. My spies are confident that Labor will hold Macquarie.
Conversely, Parramatta has a sitting Labor member but is a Liberal seat on the new boundaries so it will count as a Labor gain. The Liberal candidate, a Mr Robinson, still has no website, and there is no mention of him at the Liberal Party website. Rumour suggests that he does not in fact exist.
If you add up all the seats your spies think they are going to win, does it come to a figure greater or less than 16?
Adam,
I would have thought Labor would have been confident of picking up Eden-Monaro as well (plus retaining Macquarie). Is there anything there that is concerning the ALP? Or are they just being cautious?
ONE PARENT FAMILIES: BEWARE THE MARGINAL SEAT ‘SLEEPER’.
Lindsay has a higher than average proportion of one parent families as have other Coalition marginal seats, so the following information should be taken into consideration when speculating on the outcome.
If you think one-parent families will have no profound influence the outcome of this election, think again. They are indeed going to be one of the ‘sleeper’ influences on the outcome of the 2007 election. This is primarily because of the draconian changes they are being put through by the Howard Government via Centrelink reviews of their payment obligations, as I write this, smack bang in the middle on an election period.
As reported in The Australian, there are 20 Coalition marginal seats with a higher than average proportion of one parent families. There is grounds for why I “titter so†[Life of Brian| on this issue, so lets look at the numbers from the ABS first.
In 2004–2006, there were on average 486,000 one-parent families with children under 15 years. One parent families accounted for 22% of all families with children under 15.
Government pensions and allowances are the largest single source of income for 61% of one-parent family households. 49% of one-parent family households with children under 15 years were simultaneously in the lowest three deciles of income and of net worth. This compared with 11% of couple families with children under 15 years.
(Source: http://www.csmc.org.au/fileadmin/files/ABS_One_Parent_Families.pdf )
The economic and social well – being of one-parent families has been a focus of social policy for some decades (see Australian Social Trends 2006, Children living apart from one parent, pp 44–48). Compared with other family types, one-parent families are considered to be at a higher risk of disadvantage including income, housing, employment and social participation.
So what does Howard introduce from July 1st 2007, a demand that sole parent families with children over the age of 7 must work or be looking for work 15 hours a week or risk having their Centrelink payment cut off for 8 weeks for ‘participation failures’. That’s right, participate or get no Parenting Payment Single for 8 weeks.
The proportion of lone mothers employed full-time was 19% in 2006. A further 32% worked part-time. It is the other 49 % of Australia’s 486,000 one-parent family heads that Howard is going after.
But, I hear people like Glen claim, they can put their children into child care places and after school care like one parent family heads working part time or full time already and stop ‘bludging off the system’.
Sorry, no they can’t. There is a massive shortage of child-care and after school care places and they cost the individual so much if they can get their child placed that is hardly worth the inconvenience and disruption to the families lifestyle. Howard says ‘go to work people’ but provides bugger all in the way of practical support mechanisms {child care; after school care; etc} to enable one parent families to do what he is demanding, typically.
Not very clever to introduce such a draconian social policy in the middle of an election period that directly affects one parent families not working now and those who might lose their jobs in the future. That is, almost half a million voters who are battlers struggling in the bottom 3 income tiers in this country and a good proportion of them living in Howard battler electorates. Too late to ‘campaign left’ on this one JWH.
Lindsay voter,
I don’t know about that he put all that money into that new grandstand for the “Panthersâ€
:).
On a more realistic note, outside of those personal costs what is required in the area is expenditure on things like public transport, education and health services. Now I now that these are “State issues†however with the Feds sitting on a huge surplus and the State stretched I guess most Lindsay voters would not be averse to a “Tasmanian Hospital†type approach to the areas problems.
Thanks to the “heads up†re the correct pronoun.
Section 44 of the constitution on eligibility of election:
iv.) Holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth
But sub-section iv. does not apply to the office of any of the Queen’s Ministers of State for the Commonwealth, or of any of the Queen’s Ministers for a State, or to the receipt of pay, half pay, or a pension, by any person as an officer or member of the Queen’s navy or army, or to the receipt of pay as an officer or member of the naval or military forces of the Commonwealth by any person whose services are not wholly employed by the Commonwealth.
This is an original section, so I presume that the military can still stand. Was Kelly’s election overturned because she was a Kiwi or because she was airforce (not the Queen’s navy or army) or both?
Adam, technical note, Mike Kelly hasn’t nominated. If he has resigned now, it’s a defence force thing about being involved in party politics. The constitutional bar doesn’t apply until nominations, which only occurs after the writ is issued.
The legal advice on the defence disqualification exemption is that it applies only to British armed force members and to Commonwealth reservists. It does not apply to serving members of the Commonwealth armed forces. It is one of those archaic provisions where the meaning of Queens forces has been modifed by the breaking of constiututional links with Westmnster.
My reference for this legal is the report of an inquiry by the House of Reps Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs into into Section 44.
To answer my own question, this is an abstract from the High Court (Disputed Returns) judgement:
By a petition addressed to the Court of Disputed Returns pursuant to s 353(1), Mr Free challenged the validity of the election of Ms Kelly as a member of the House of Representatives for the Division of Lindsay. The challenge was based on s 44(i) and (iv) of the Constitution. The former basis of challenge, an allegation that the first respondent held at the time of her nomination dual citizenship as an Australian and New Zealand citizen, was not pursued at the trial of the petition. But it is now common ground that, by reason of s 44(iv) of the Constitution, Ms Kelly was incapable of being chosen as a member of the House of Representatives while serving as an officer of the RAAF at the time of her nomination as a candidate. That is the relevant time for determining whether a person is incapable of being chosen on any of the grounds specified in s 44 of the Constitution . As Ms Kelly was incapable of being chosen as a member of the House of Representatives, an appropriate declaration of incapacity must be made.
Obviously the interpretation of the constitution is different to the plain English meaning.
Antony, you are right. Kelly resigned his commission before nominating for preselection. I’m still not clear from what you say at what date it became impossible for a serving ADF member to be a candidate, or even a candidate to be a candidate.
Swing Lowe, no my spies do not claim 16 seats in NSW
They put Eden-Monaro in the second tier, as a probable gain. The three they are absolutely certain of are Parramatta, Lindsay and Dobell. Personally I would put Eden-Monaro in that category too, but I don’t live there.
Adam,
Thanks for your reply.
I suppose it is how one looks at the seat. I understand the basis for your classification of both Macquarie and Parramatta however in my mind actual overrides notional.
I should have realised the basis of you approach as I have noted it previously.
It just seems strange that (say) in the case of Parramatta if Labor “retains†the seat it is considered a gain while in Macquarie if Labor does not win the seat and Bartlett is returned it will be considered a loss for Labor
I guess it is hard to override ones preconceptions and habits.
I can’t give you the full history of the defence exclusion, but it definately only applies to ‘Imperial’ forces, and if you read the section cerfully, it only applies to Commonwealth reservists, the reference to ’services not wholly employed by the Commonwealth’.
I can’t tell you when the meaning of Queen’s forces changed (Statute of Westminster or the Citizenship Act in the 1940s), but it was known in the 1960s. The Defence (Parliamentary Candidates) Act 1969 caused serving Commonwealth defence personal to be immediately classified as reservists if they nominated for Parliament to get around the Constitutional problem.
This is one for Graham Orr.
Adam, at the date of nomination, as specified in the writ. Kelly for instance is not currently a candidate in the legal sense because a writ has not been issued. I always get odd members of the public calling me at this point in the cycle protesting that the AEC will not tell them who the candidates are in their seat. I always have to placate them by saying that as far as the AEC is concerned, there is no election until the writ is issued and nominations called, so without an election there can’t be candidates. That’s why all of us who run websites manage to make a living.
Section 44 uses the disqualification ‘is incapable of being chosen’, which the High Court has taken to mean at the point of nomination. Party advice is that you must resign before you lodge your nominations. I think various Public Service Acts have been re-written so that whenever someone nominates for an election, they are automitically dismissed, as a belt and braces approach to ensuring election results aren’t overturned.
AG sez:
I wonder why that didn’t apply in Squadron Leader Kelly’s case? Incidenally given she is/was a lawyer should she have been fully aware of the situation?
and then:
It would have been a painless no brainer for her it seems…
‘May’ transfer. If the head of Defence declined to transfer, you couldn’t use the act. You’d have to know Kelly’s situation exactly and the attitudes of defence to candidacy to know whether you could use that act any more.
She was on maternity leave. Perhaps, the maternity leave legalisation (which I reckon might have been later than 1969) has something about not changing the woman’s status. I am not sure.
Phil Cleary was on Leave Without Pay as a teacher and judged to hold an office for profit. On maternity leave is not in the Reserves so the ban applied to Jackie Kelly.
I seem to recall that back in 1996 St Mary was in Lindsay and was removed after the 1998 retribution.
Lindsay is a seat the ALP should win, but haven we heard that before.
If I recall in 1996 there were other seats in Western Sydney which recorded bigger swings against the ALP, I think there were a few 12-14 percent swings in seats like Propects and Blaxland.
Lindsay or that the area covering Penrith has a history of going towards the Govt of the day, Frazier held this area and Hawke/Keating did as well and now Howard.
The thing I recall about 1996 was while Jackie Kelly had a high profile when selected, I remember her in an interview saying she didn’t expect to win it.
I suspect this is stating the obvious but I would expect this seat to fall before Wentworth and in the contest of the over all result is perhaps more important for the ALP to gain.
I’ll take a guess at the identity of ‘Adam’, who wouldn’t have mentioned Macquarie for a reason, because loss of preselection could be painful and the memory of it no better – because he is Adam Searle, who no doubt believed he had a good chance of being pre-selected by the ALP Left for Macquarie, until Bob Debus decided to ‘go Federal’ when Macquarie became notionally Labor. But Debus ought to shit it in, as I understand from Blue Mountains sources he is well liked up there. Debus might actually enjoy being a bankbencher again, but could even be made Federal Attorney General without frightening too many horses.
Labor will pick up at least five seats in NSW – Lindsay, Macquarie, Eden-Monaro, Page and maybe even Cowper, with Luke Hartsuyker from the Nats sounding vulnerable, as it seems he is a bit of a charisma bypass, according to PollBludger.
If they don’t pick up Cowper, there’s still the Jewel in the Crown of Bennelong – and Maxine has one of the cleverest political strategists living with her, in Bob Hogg – he maybe getting a bit old, but I bet it hasn’t hurt his political brain. Little Johnny has a genuine struggle there, much more so than Turnbull in Wentworth, but see below.
3 or 4 in South Australia makes a solid 9, with maybe 2 from Victoria if a solid swing is really on.
More problematic is Qld – maybe only 3 after Beattie’s council’s brainsnap – I smell something from ‘Breakfast Creek’ via Fortitude Valley – a lovely gang of ‘comrades’ – it’s well known Rudd hates Swan and junior Ludwig is one of the bludging lower ALP Frontbencher’s Kevvie has just given the ‘rocket’ speech to. They are the weakest frontbench in living memory, aside from Garrett. McLelland is an undertaker and another lawyer in the ALP Mob law firm of Turner Freeman.
No wonder Kevvie still says it will be desperately close, knowing what extra baggage he carries on his Frontbench – 1961 all over again, just as the great Mackerras believed last year, though I note he has changed his tune since late last year.
Turnbull should still hang on against the decidedly uncharismatic Newhouse ( the Liberals polling says “George who”. He has the NSW ALP Right ( or at least parts of it) behind him and knows Walt Secord, Rudd’s principal spin doctor very well from the Bondi ALP Branch, so he’ll get some money from ALP Head Office. But he really needed the Left’s Paul Tracey as campaign manager, not the lovely, but inexperienced, Rose Jackson ( daughter of Liz, the ABC journo) if he really wanted to have any chance of beating Turnbull. Looks like Rose is being groomed to take over Paul Pearce’s state seat of Coogee when Paul eventually takes the London option.
As for Bradbury – do the voters of Lindsay really want a previous two-time loser, albeit against the formidable tracksuited mum in Kelly – a young lawyer working for a big city law firm not known for being friends of the workers and someone controlled by the TWU? I can assure you TWU influence over the NSW government is enormous in certain portfolios ( not just Transport) and most pernicious.
Maybe more tomorrow, if you punters don’t ‘vote me off’.
Blair
You said “She was on maternity leave.”
Are you implying she was up the duff in March 1996? If so you’d have expected have the Bub by the October special/by-election which she hadn’t – well at least she didn’t turn up at the booth I was on pushing a stroller.
My recollection is that she married he beau, the dentist from Orange, after she was in Parly for some while.
Anthony/Adam – can you answer me this: my recollection from 1996 is that the AEC made a bit of a song and dance about the October re-run as being a “special election” rather than a by-election. But currently on the AEC site it refers to it as a by-election.
A “special election” just the US term for by-election.
A supplementary election is a contest that’s been deferred from general election day. Usually because of the death of a candidate. e.g. Newcastle 1998, Frankston East 1999
I’m pretty sure that contests that are disputed, overturned and re-run (e.g. Mundingburra 1996, Lindsay 1996) are termed by-elections rather than the supplementary elections.
Maybe it wasn’t maternity leave then. She was on some form of leave and doesn’t really matter what type, she stuffed up in being unable to stand, either because of a mistake or accident. And it was even bigger mistake of ALP to re-contest the election. The art of war says only fight battles that you don’t have to fight if you are confident of winning.
This bit about leave.
What about Bailey standing in Hockeys seat, I actually heard a ABC news director say that he may not be able to come back as he had declared his political allegiance, but would Bailey be eligible to stand if he is just on leave without pay.
And Pru stood in the NSW election yet Howard kept her job open until she was confirmed in her seat.
So far as I know, a by-election occurs when a member has taken their seat, and then for whatever reason the seat becomes vacant, which is what happened when Kelly’s election was declared void. The same thing happened in Melbourne in 1904, Echuca in 1906 and Ballaarat in 1919, and I think there have been others. A supplementary election happens when a candidate dies between the close of nominations and polling day, as happened in Dickson in 1993 and Newcastle in 1998.
Interesting archaelogical discussion about Sqd Ldr Kelly. Afraid I can’t help much! I only note that the 1969 Defence candidates Act isn’t an automatic safety net: the personnel member has to apply. Legislation as such can’t get around a constitutional barrier if it applies to a particular person: rather, what Acts like this and similar public service legislation does is provide a safety net (eg guaranteed reinstatement) and help the military/PS appear apolitical.
It’s possible (even as a legal officer) that it never occurred to Kelly that she might be disqualified because of her NZ birth or her occupation. Also, Liberal HQ probably didn’t do routine checks in those days. It’s not uncommon for those who run never expecting to win to get caught up in these thickets (in a sense this happened to Cleary) whereas those in marginal seats will be vetted and take no chances.
Prof Gerard Carney’s book on MP’s and their Entitlements is the definitive work on disqualifications. I’ll dip into it on Monday to see if it clarifies the evolution of the defence force/air force issue in the constitution. Presumably air forces were undreamt of in 1901!
This is moi. http://www.adam-carr.net/
Could be wrong, but I’ve always thought it was a requirement that a potential candidate formally resign his/her Government job in order to be eligible to stand for election. In the case of Bailey, I’d be surprised if that was not the case.
Doesn’t he have to get pre-selection first? If he gets it, then he resigns. If he doesn’t, he’s probably looking for a job somewhere outside the ABC.
Technically, Lindsay 1996 Pt 2 was a fresh election or ‘re-election’ – because the general election was declared void, ie it never occurred at law. Semantics really, as Adam says after a failed election due to candidate death the term used is ’supplementary election’ when the election was no more/less aborted.
My instinctual guess is the ABC, as a fully owned corp of the Cth, is part of ‘the Crown’. Someone like Mike Bailey can’t just take leave without pay – Phil Cleary had been on unpaid leave for a long time with the State teaching dept, and was still caught up in the net.
Well said Bazza,
Cathy O’Toole had the misfortune of running in 1998 (always hard against a first term government) what was Bradbury’s excuse?
Will the ALP abolish Lindsay it it doesnt vote correctly this time? Shades of Berthold Brecht
I agree Lindsay is a classic sample of the voting group in which Howard has done well. If this group comes back to Labor so will Lindsay. Lindsay in 1996 was seen as a big surprise but the state ALP had lost the western suburbs seats of Penrith and Michinbury in 1988 and Anne Cohen who won Michinbury was hard to shift. Is Possum right that Macpherson will be the Lindsay of 2007?
Barlin’s House of Reps Practice states that Ms Kelly had transferred to the air force reserves at the time of her nomination. (So as a lawyer she didn’t entirely have a fool for a client…)
I can only guess she was wrongly lulled by that entitlement in the 1969 Act into thinking that covered her as qualified to stand for Fed Parl. But it didn’t because she was in the wrong branch of the forces. All it really did was give her time to campaign without guilt.
It would have been enough if she’d been standing for most State Parls (eg Queensland Parl Act exempts service in the reserves).
Graeme
As I mentioned, I heard one of the ABC news ediitors or sub editors say on radio that Bailey may not be able to come back to the ABC as he had declared his allegiance.
How can a weatherman affect the impartiality of the ABC as I posted before, except maybe say that the lack of rain is due to Howard policies.
As for Pru I’m sure her job was held open for her by Howard, with her replacement not being announced until she was confirmed in her seat.
Graeme, the relevant point about Lindsay #1 is that Kelly took her seat and was thus duly elected as far as the House was concerned. The election following the voiding of her election was thus a by-election, not a supplementary or special election. Presumably if the election had been voided before she took her seat, it would not have been a by-election.
Note, however, that there have been two occasions on which a member died without taking their seats (Howroyd in 1917 and Clasby in 1931), and the elections following were certainly by-elections.
Arbie Jay,
Mike Bailey resigned from the ABC. Story is here.
Damian Sloan, O’Fool was just unelectable. If you need any more evidence look at the archives of the SMH to see the article and photo (that photo!) they published on her. Worse, her selection crippled the local party for years. Bradbury had the immigration (2001) and interest rate (2004) scares – both of which played well in Penrith.
Geoff Robinson, Anne Cohen was not particularly hard to shift. Minchinbury (along with Cessnock) was the real surprise in 1988- Cohen got over the line with the help of an extreme right wing nutter who got >10% – Joe Bryant I think. She had no chance of holding the seat so in a Brechtian move Minchinbury was abolished and she stood for Mulgoa which at least had the ‘pony club’ areas of Orchard Hills and Mulgoa. Labor did itself no advantages by preselecting Diane Beamer ( then wife of Senator Hutchison a leader of the TWU). That choice alone would have been enough to give Cohen another term. Admittedly Beamer was finally elected in 1995 by ~200 votes (and after the tally room was fire bombed).
Yes, Arbie, damn hard to read bias into the weather report. However, it’s probably a symptom of the present political climate.
Oakeshott,
Do you have a link?
I always thought the NSW Right didn’t tolerate failure? How come this Bradbury dude gets three goes and has to be shoehorned in for the third go? Whats the inside skinny on this one?
Arbie Jay:
Eoin Cameron is happily ensconced on ABC Radio in Perth after a term as the Liberal member for Stirling, and given that he interviews pols, does talkback (?) etc I can’t see how Mike Bailey would have problem returning to his old job … unless there are different rules depending on what party you nailed your colours to!
Oakeshott Country, the seat was called Badgerys Creek. Cohen won it in 1991, Beamer won it very narrowly in 1995, and it was abolished and replaced by the much safer seat of Mulgoa in 1999.
OFFS
Yeah, I was surprised with the comments re Bailey, but how(ard) was Pru’s position kept open?
Labor held the state seat of Penrith in the recent N.S.W election with a substantial swing to the Labor M.P – Lindsay covers this area.
I expect David Bradbury will win the federal seat for the ALP.
Interesting titbit from today’s Weekend Australian: both Liberal and Labor private polling shows Mal Brough’s seat of Longman is in danger of falling to Rudd.
Graham Creed has taken over Mike Bailey’s old job of weatherman on ABC TV Sydney news……Mr Bailey might have to look for a gig on a commercial network.
Thanks Antony, my memory is getting worse with old age.
Sorry Damien, I haven’t lived there for 10 years -so I don’t know why he has been given a third go. If he is supported by the TWU – this and Senator Hutchinson’s influence in the area may be the explanation.
I doubt if the herald article is on line after 9 years but it sure stuck in my mind – it was a contrast between Kelly, an obviously successful attractive and relatively mature woman who could play up her westie credentials to the nth degree (one local party member told me that she had been sworn in as a member of the house wearing a pair of white trousers and a black thong – very stylish in the west) and O’Toole a nerdy, pale, almost teenage student with a known history of branch manipulation – not someone Penrith could support and probably a worse profile than Tawok in Cook. Yet this was a seat that Labor had to win! The Genius of Sussex Street!
Yes indeed but did you never notice how when he was doing the weather on the 7.00 pm news that the warm fronts almost always moved across from the left hand side of the map.
I spoke to Richard Alston about this and he agreed that it was mighty suspicious. Pity he had to retire – he was going to investigate the Bureau of Meteorology too.
Re. (79)
“Labor held the state seat of Penrith in the recent N.S.W election with a substantial swing to the Labor M.P – Lindsay covers this area. I expect David Bradbury will win the federal seat for the ALP. Interesting titbit from today’s Weekend Australian: both Liberal and Labor private polling shows Mal Brough’s seat of Longman is in danger of falling to Rudd.”
HOW very appropriate then if Rudd shifts Peter into the Aboriginal Affairs ministry
:):) …. we can get the new Minister for this Department to fix up all of the mess which Howard has created in recent weeks/months as well as proper solutions for existing problems too. The Aborigines deserve much better than Howard/Brough.
Anyone want to comment on how long it will take Rudd to say “sorry”? We already know that a republic is on his agenda, so “sorry” can’t be far behind, especially if Peter gets that ministry …… Julie
Re Lindsay
I suggest if Labor wins government they’ll win this seat
it is even possible that they could win lindsay and not win govt.
a big factor in holding the seat was the personal vote of Jackie
Kelly which is now gone with her retirement
re Mike Bailey
it is most likely that Mr Hockey is re elected but like Bennelong or Wentworth he’ll be forced to spend time campaigning in his own
electorate. I’m sure Mr bailey would maintain his ABC employment if he loses
Pardon my ignorance, What are Bradbury’s historical links with the TWU?
Did he drive a truck or something?
Julie
The “sorry” should come within about 15 nanoseconds into a Rudd victory speech. If it happens.
Then we can all move along.
I never understood why Penrith voters were so enchanted by Jackie Kelly. If a local member who is apparently pro-working-families votes in an anti-working-families act like WorkChoices, then clearly the local member is either in the wrong party, or lying. Having checked out State Election figures, I’ll be pretty surprised if this seat doesn’t shift to the ALP.
Adam # 70
“Note, however, that there have been two occasions on which a member died without taking their seats (Howroyd in 1917 and Clasby in 1931), and the elections following were certainly by-elections.”
Is Eddie Ward the only man to have won 2 by-elections for the same seat?
Was Ward also technically still the sitting member even though he lost East Sydney at the general election? Clasby was declared the winner but didn’t take his seat in parliament.
Just looked through the odds on portlandbet and found ALP $1.36 and LP $2.80 for Lindsay. What I found most interesting was the seat of Greenway, which gave exactly the same odds but in favour of the LP. Given that this seat has a margin of 11.4% I found that rather surprising. You would be lucky to get more than $1.02 on the sitting member for most seats requiring this kind of swing. Are there any locals that can explain this for me?
Yes I think Ward is the only member to win two by-elections for the same seat, or indeed for any seats.
Members technically cease to be members when the House is dissolved, so Ward was not the member after the election. Although Clasby had not taken his seat he had been declared elected by the returning officer, so when he died a regular by-election was held.
So, the term “sitting member” actually means elected member.
A sitting member doesn’t need to have take their seat in the parliament.
Another similar analogy would have been Peter Reith who won the by-election for Flinders following the resignation of Phil Lynch in late 1982. But he never sat in parliament prior to Fraser’s snap DD in Feb 1983, with Reith losing to Bob Chynoweth.
During the ‘83 campaign Reith would have been the “sitting member”.
There are two definitions of “Member of Parliament.” As far as the House is concerned, you only become a member when you take the oath and take your seat. But for administrative purposes you become a member from the declaration of the poll. Thus Reith was a sitting member during the 1983 by-election, by virtue of having won the by-election, but he could not have gone to Parliament House and claimed the privileges of an MP, because he had not taken his seat.
Kev my seat is pretty close to Greenway. I think that in the last election the liberals ran a shocking campaign against the labor candidate because he was a muslim resulting in a win for Louise Markis who I think has support from the Hillsong Church.
Of course the boundaries have changed since but from what I have heard she has turned out to be a real floparoo of a member.
In reply to Geoff Robinson at # 67 I repost what I posted at Possum’s site with respect to the seat of Mcpherson.
“…the large intake of voters may itself gradually lead to a change in the margin, but you should take into account that the ALP votes at the Gold Coast state seats in 2007, especially in Robina, were influenced by the adverse reaction to the replacement of Liberal leader Bob Quinn just before the election. Also in the Currumbin seat, the vote was coming off a particularly low base (relativly speaking) in 2004 because of reaction there (then) to both the Tugun bypass route and the ‘Merri Rose affair’.
Also I do not agree that people who vote Liberal federally but for the ALP at the state level are necessarily swinging voters. They have now voted for Mr Howard 4 times and Mr Beattie 4 times, so they may be splitting their votes, but they are not swinging, in my opinion, anyway.”
Summarising, I think the ALP has buckleys of winning Mcpherson. As Adam and others have previously pointed out, state voting patterns are not good indicators of federal voting intentions. In any case the higher than average swing to the ALP in the Gold Coast seats at the last state election was in any case largely attributable to very local issues adversely affecting the Liberal vote in 2006, following local issues having adversely affected the ALP vote in 2004, and none of which will be factors in the upcoming federal election.
Thanks for that Adam. Very interesting.
Graeme, Antony, Adam, others;
Noting the discussion on disqualification for armed forces types – what’s your thoughts about local government employee’s? I know the candidates handbook says to seek legal advice, but otherwise skirts this issue as it has never been tested in the High Court. I’ve always wondered where the “forgotten tier of government” really does sit.
Thanks for the ‘vote’ Damian. Unless there is a chorus of opposition, I might post again.
For the record, Oakeshott Country needs to get Senator “Hutchinson’s” ( sic) name correct. I’m fairly certain it’s Hutchins and I believe he was a former Secretary of the TWU and one of the ‘hard men’ of the ALP Right.
Kelly was entrenched before anyone could react, that is unfortunately the genius of the Rodent and I haven’t heard anyone actually say Kelly was a dud legal officer. And what of Louise Markus in Greenway – the Hillsong MHR – sits just behind the PM in question time – with the Happy Clappers behind her she could be a future cabinet minister at least. “In God We Trust” – just not George W, or the Happy Clappers. Might have to return to the Catholics at this rate!
When the Liberal women first got hold of these marginal seats they clearly worked harder than most blokes could to hold onto them and in a number of cases pulled well away from Labor, especially in ‘04 – e.g. women like Danna Vale in Hughes and Kelly in Lindsay. Howard must have had some say in this ( or rather Janette told him the women would be an advantage) – I’ve heard some research suggests they actually have up to a 3 percentage point advantage over men in male-female contests.
Howard’s capturing the final Senate seat in Queensland with the mother of all scare campaigns about the second Coalition Senator’s spot being in danger in the 2004 election changed this country’s history, just ask Malcolm Mackerras exactly what happened – he even wrote a letter to Howard about it.
For some of us this is like a very bad black and white episode of Dr Who, with a Government full of the political equivalent of Daleks and Cybermen giving us Work Choices and many other legislative outrages, especially the ‘pro-terror’ laws.
If there’s a God in Heaven, pardon the blasphemy, Howard must lose his seat and join Stanley Melbourne Bruce in that ‘tragic’ place belonging to certain ‘class warriors’, as S.M. Bruce was – who tried to get complete power for the Federal government over industrial ‘arbitration’. Where Bruce failed, Howard succeeded and got the High Court to validate his ‘constitutional coup’.
‘Crash through or crash’ should be ‘worm your way into the apple and eat it away from within’ in little Johnny’s case.
That’s what he’s done with the universities in particular. And let’s not forget the Surplus Cyberman Costello. Wouldn’t it be lovely, Abbott and Costello as PM and Treasurer or vice versa – then we could really say the Government’s a farce!
History may yet record that Howard resurrected the class war, just at a time when independent contracting and consulting is big and the ‘us and them’ mentality was withering – there are more of such small business people than trade unionists in Oz, but to their credit Labor did see this and appointed Dr Emerson from Qld to the Shadow Small Business etc. spokesperson’s job – he ought to be Shadow Treasurer ahead of Swan, but has to content himself with ’small business’, as he’s a Lefty ( who used to have a thing with Julia) due to the Breakfast Creek mob and the Ludwig Ascendancy and their apparent support for Swan – Kevvie’s probably hated Swan since their school days at Nambour, so ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’. Kevvie will need all the intelligent and diligent help he can muster to unseat the Rodent.
I should have exempted Emerson from my previous diatribe about the Labor Frontbench. There might be a couple of others – Tanya Plibersek’s OK and Roxon is pretty good too. In fact the women are much better than the men generally.
Oakeshott Country needs one more correction – Mr Taouk changed his name to Towke by deed poll I believe – need to be a bit ‘anglicised’ for the good burghers of ‘the Shire’. Some very conservative people I know live there. He’s not the first person to ‘convert’ from ALP to Libs.
One has to wonder whether it matters much any more, given Bishop Kev’s ‘climbdowns’ on IR – leaving the existing ‘right of entry’ regime essentially in place is an abomination – and I’m not a union official! Any boss can just ‘cook the books’ and regularly do when they have 24 hours notice of a wage investigation – some aren’t very good at it and still get caught, but for much lesser ‘crimes’.
And apologies to both ‘Adams’ and thanks Bill for correcting me. Will give up on guessing identities. No doubt Mr Bowe will find me if he needs to.
Or I’ll be ‘disciplined’ by simply being ignored, which of course is the worst fate of all or just not posted if Bill thinks I’m too boring.
A political ‘junkie’ like me is wondering about the technicality of the debate re: Kelly’s ‘illegal’ candidature, but I can see how some find this fascinating if Sarah Brightman’s singing on SBS doesn’t turn them on.
She’s Ok, but this is more fun!
My thoughts are exactly the same as the candidate handbook, get legal advice. I don’t think the issue has never been to the High Court so remains legally open to challenge.
I reckon Ollie hit the nail on the head about Lindsay, when he said issues like housing costs, petrol prices, and child care would swing it back to Labor. And the tougher rules on single parents getting welfare aren’t getting a lot of publicity, but a lot of single mums are very worried about having to find a job with family-friendly hours or high enough wages to fund child care. I don’t think Labor is planning to repeal this change, but the Liberals will get any backlash from it.
Lindsay would be one of the classic seats where some house prices might be falling, while mortgage payments are rising. A slight interest rate rise could send families out the door. I’m sure Howard’s interest rate promise at the laast election would have won him votes.
I was interested in a TV current affairs segment earlier this year (can’t remember which program) where they interviewed a family in the outer suburbs who lived in a very big comfortable house, where the parents ran a trade business earning more than $100,000 a year. They looked pretty well off to me, but they were bitterly complaining that they couldn’t make ends meet because of child care costs.
If people with incomes like that claim they can’t afford child care, or can’t get child care places easily, it’s a big big issue in suburbia. I suspect both sides of policies have significant child care pledges to come in the election.
BTW I was previously known as “Tony” on this blog, but I notice another “Tony” is making comments too. I actually have no problem with what he’s been saying, and I don’t know whether he was here before me. But to avoid confusion, I’ve changed my name, to something appropriate for the latte set.
Antony Green
You wrote on another thread that the pattern for issuing of the writs (previous 6 federal elections) may be departed from on this occasion?
I did not quite understand your explanation, excuse me. Could you help again, please?
And I was wondering, if the writs were issued on say a Thursday or Friday, would that not make it nigh impossible to impossble for at least those without a driver’s license to get on the roll at all, given that others must send a form through the postal system.
Thank you
This is the piece, Antony Green
‘a few days to sort the writs out is because the State Governors issue the Senate writs, and they need to be found first.*
However, past practice may not be a good guide this time because of the change in close of rolls.
The government may issue the writ for the House at once* to fix the date and prevent the State’s delaying the Senate writs in an effort to keep the rolls open’.
Not sure what ‘found’ implies. Or if the State Governors issue the Senate writs, by what means can the government change the status quo?
Thanks again
Interesting to note that when Labor were in power at their height in 1990 they had 30 of 51 NSW seats a bastion of their power so it goes without saying that NSW will have to bring Labor crucial seats including Lindsay…the current 21 ALP 27 Coalition 2 Ind shows that Labor really does need seats to go their way in a big way and id say they’ll need seats like Bennelong, Lindsay, Macquarie, Eden Monaro, and Parramatta to cause the Libs trouble…
While back in 1990 the ALP were ahead on seats in NSW they were far far behind in Victoria with 24 Coalition to 14 ALP seats this has now turned around for them and it is their most successful state with a current lead of 19-18…
I suspect that QLD and WA will be the States to watch in 2007.
In 1990 the ALP had the most seats in WA with 8 to 6 while it led in QLD 15-9…thus if Labor can wins seats in WA and enough in QLD it should win…but i doubt Labor will make gains in WA and at best they should accept status quo…the Libs should pick up Swan and Cowan if that happens Rudd will need a landslide to win…and the council amalgamations have hurt Rudd so who knows how much that will prevent him from taking the 4-6 seats he needs if he’s to have a workable majority…
Lindsay will probably go to Labor but had Kelly stayed on i think the Libs could have saved the seat even though the ALP bloke is a three time loser he could get in on a general swing…i wonder if Kelly will help out the Liberal candidate???
Bradbury and the TWU. . . ?
ALP Senator Steve Hutchins is the former NSW State, then Federal President of the ALP if I recollect, and also former Federal Secretary of the TWU. Diane Beamer (former Minister for Western Sydney, former Minister for Fair Trading) the Member for Mulgoa is his former wife, currently married to David Humphries, former State political correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald. Anyway, I digress. . . To get anywhere on Penrith Council, then progress into NSW or Federal politics, currently one needs to be in bed with the NSW Right, and out here in Western Sydney, that means the bovver boys from the TWU.
Well, here’s a little history. . . ALP control of western Sydney seats / Council is dominated by the NSW Right. BTW, Bradbury wouldn’t know one end of a truck from another, trust me. . . I know
To illustrate by way of example, even though in terms of political alignment they are both from the Right, Bradbury and State Member for Penrith Karyn Paluzzano aren’t on speaking terms. She was effectively shunned on Penrith Council by the men from the ALP. People from the Paluzzano camp were leaking information to the Liberal camp [Mulgoa campaign] camp during the March state election. . . no love lost between Paluzzano and Beamer. . .
Councillor David Bradbury is a business taxation lawyer for Blake, Waldron, Dawson. Didn’t they draught and ‘legalise’ John Howard’s Work Choices legislation? If so, Mr Bradbury has some ‘explaining’ to do. . .
Crikey Whitey, what I mean is that if the government announces and issues the writs for an election on a Monday with the minimum campaign period, thay have to get all the Governors to issue the Senate writs on the same day. If one of the Senate writ signings was missed, then the Senate election in that state couldn’t be held the same day as the House election, which would stuff everyone. That’s why on past practice the government announces the election between 1 and 5 days before the issue of the writs.
However, announcing the election but not issuing the writs does not close the rolls. If the government really wanted to make use of the new close of rolls provisions, it could as usual announce the election a few days before the Monday, but issue the House writ at once. This would bring in the new close of roll arrangements and stop the states trying to keep the rolls open by not immediately signing the Senate writs. The only downside for the government is that it would go immediately into caretaker mode, rather than have a few extra days with full powers.
Antony, this hurts my brain to have to consider on a Sunday. But whilst it would be sensible to have the HoR and Senate writs issue on the same day, is it absolutely necessary?
* the Senate writs can still nominate the same day for close of noms, polling.
* enrolment is by Division (ie HoR seat). The prohibition on returning officers dealing with ‘late’ claims is measured from the close of rolls for ‘the Division’ – ie the date set in the writ for the HoR.
Am I missing something? (Colin Hughes cheekily suggested the States could tell their governors to delay the writs but looking at s 102 I’m not so sure).
Stewart J, on local government officials and federal candidature: who knows? I (and others) are arguing before a senate c’tee tomorrow that the federal bill attempting to override Qld on plebiscites is unconstitutional because it breaches a principle that the core functions of the State can’t be overridden. So there’s a strong argument that our system of local government is just a part of the Crown for each State. After all, they deliver essential services, through state legislated powers, and are dismissible by the same process.
Antony, sorry, I missed the ‘with the minimum campaign period’ assumption in your first para of post 122. (But does anyone think the PM’ll go for anything but a fairly long campaign?! He has a lot of ground to make up.)
They don’t have to be issued on the same day, but for all the elections to be held on the same day, they all have to be issued at least 33 days before polling day. All I’ve been pointing out is that the election is nornally announced a few days before the writ is issued, and it is the writ that closes the electoral roll, not the election announcement. The State’s could have played silly buggers with the writs to try and keep the rolls open for a week (which might have deferred the election a week), but the government can overcome this by issuing the House writ at once, which would prevent any manipulation of the Senate writs to try and keep the rolls open. So while on past practice the rolls won’t close when the election is announced, it may be the case this time it will if the government issues the writ the same day.
So if it was only a half Senate election (no HoR) then the states could keep the rolls open for up to 10 days, then, couldn`t they?
re post 121 and Glen’s post and mine earlier
The point I was trying to make is yes Mr Hockey will win in
North Sydney but he cannot take it for granted given it is inner city
has an unusual profile , has been won by a competent independent
ie Ted Mack in the past, and Mike Bailey being a good choice for the area
he needs to spend considerable time in the electorate to be sure
remember this post is mainly about Lindsay a ” safe” alp seat which has ..swung in excess of the margin of 10% (same as North Sydney’s margin)
Tom, yes, the orthodox understanding is the State Governors can reject the G-G’s (ie PM’s) recommendation as to the dates for a Senate election. Subject to meeting any restrictions from the Constitutional deadlines. That freedom is particularly so for any half Senate election, since the timetable is fairly flexible (the constitutional merely states that such an election has to be held within a year of the vacancies falling due).
By convention a State Governor only acts on their Premier’s advice – but I suspect they could get together and reject the advice of a rogue Premier, since they have the right to demand reasons and the reserve power to reject advice about calling an election, as Kerr did with Whitlam. But if all the Labor Premiers got together and gave the same advice? Who knows.
Wasn’t there speculation in 1975 that Sir Joh at least, if not other State Premiers, would have stalled on Whitlam’s preferred option for a half Senate poll to break the deadlock?
I think that the 1977 casual vacancies ammendment was the wrong amendment.
The should have put foward countback instead.
Commenters I have some serious late mail. As I was driving through the seat of Greenway earlier today, I noticed that the liberals have started putting up large posters of “Louise Markis vote for liberal” all over the place.
The election is very very close. I expect it will be called as soon as practicable after APEC.
I’m still tipping an Oct 27 poll.
Antony Green
Thanks for your explanation. I will keep a note of the way it pans out.
Many of you would read Mumble where Peter Brent has rejected the notion that Lindsay represent ‘battlers’.
In his words the demographics show that all the voters of the electorate are battling it’s for that second four wheel drive.
More here
Well, it seems there’s already ill-feeling on the ALP for Lindsay campaign trail, most notibly a falling -out twixt the successful Your Rights At Work campaign and Mr Personality, David Bradbury.
At the Penrith Show, the YR@W folks organised and paid for a stall space – and late in the morning Bradbury and his small team of, well, Teamsters rocked up and took over. The nice YR@W stalwarts didn’t take to kindly to this and got the huff. Remember Bradbury is a latecomer to the YR@W team in Lindsay – their choice of Lindsay candidate was Mark Ptolemy, one of the founding members of both the Lindsay & Macquarie Your Rights At Work Committees and one of the handful of campaigners who made the Lindsay operation the template YR@W campaign. Besides, Bradbury isnt well-known for treating his campaign people happy. He thinks yelling and abuse is a nice motivational tool.
Speaking of the mean spirited, where is Ptolemy and his NUW buddies? No doubt the Bradbury people and TWU would like to find out. Apparently the NUW is not helping any Labor candidate in NSW. With Ptolemy and his boss Derrick Belan sitting back and not campaigning, this means a very real dent in the ALP campaign pot o cash with no NUW dollars coming in. Word is that Belan & crew are still fuming over the double cross played on them by Mark Arbib over Lindsay. Belan has left Admin Committee and not spoken to Arbib or Karl Bitar since the Lindsay candidate was named by National Executive. The NUW supported NSW state MP Karyn Palluzzano and pumped in the big bucks and their big bus in the state campaign, getting Paluzzano a much bigger margin. The NUW claimed Lindsay but got screwed by Arbib. Ptolemy was to be the man in Lindsay and given his obsessive campaigning mentality and the NUW dollars, he would have a much better choice than the Two-time loser & Tax Lawyer Bradbury.
Anyway, if Bradbury isn’t careful he may burn off a lot more helpers. Labor shouldn’t take Lindsay for granted like Ross Free did!
Given the recent TCN-9 Sunday program exposes into the TWU’s “secret” Industrial Rights, Education and Training Fund [totally funded by large corporate "sponsors"], are we to expect some pressure on local ALP identities David Bradbury and Diane Beamer? They have extremely close links with the TWU. Karen Chijoff [Liberal, Lindsay] recently ran against Diane Beamer at the state election in March, and is now up against David Bradbury of the ALP for the prized federal seat of Lindsay.
I’m sure many some disgruntled local ALP rank and file will be more than happy to join the dots. . . ALP Senator Steve Hutchens has an office here in High Street, Penrith [former husband of Diane Beamer, former NSW and Federal General Secretary of the TWU], and close friend and confidant of David Bradbury.
Perhaps Mr Bradbury should have stuck with the NUW rather than the tainted TWU. Joe Hockey’s investigations couldn’t come at a more timely hour for the local Liberal campaign.
As a Lindsay resident, all I know is everytime I open a local newspaper I see my taxes being wasted by Jackie Kelly. For the past few weeks she’s had her newsletters inserted in the newspapers with photos of the candidate plastered all over them. It’s blatant politicking and it’s done with public money.
I think it’s a disgrace.
For three years we hear nothing from her, and then as she’s retiring she’s all of a sudden interested in communicating with the electorate? Hardly. I don’t think my tax dollars should be used as a proxy campaign fund funnelled through a retiring MP’s allowance.
With all the stuff flying around about the TWU – you’d think that David Bradbury would be in a constant cold sweat. With his very close association with Senator Steve Hutchins, former TWU boss, Bradbury has had a lot of assistance from the TWU…..in all of his campaigns. Bradbury is in debt to the TWU, so now that their flow of cash & help has dried up, I wonder who is going to step up for him.
As a TWU member or should I say EX-TWU member I was sickened to see the Sunday programs expose on the TWU especially that crook Tony Sheldon. Having been in the TWU for nearly 20 years I can add some further information because most of us know about a few of their skeltons.
The following glitterati of the ALP are closely associated to the TWU – that is, they have benefited either financially or thru their careers:
Mark Arbib
Steve Hutchins
Joe Tripodi
Prue Guillaume (ALP head office hack)
David Bradbury
Pat Sheehy
Diane Beamer (Steve Hutchins’ ex)
Michael Lee
John Della Bosca
Belinda Neale (Della’s wife)
and numerous others.
It is interesting to see Sheldon take the heat whereas he and his family have received nothing in return – politically.
It would be interesting if the numerous investigations announced by Joe Hockey would incorporate some of the people listed above.
As a person who has been a unionist all their life I am disgusted that not only a high level of corruption exists but all these pollies and would be pollies have their snouts in the trough. Especially those who have had no connection with workers, say for instance Bradbury – a tax lawyer who worked for Blake Dawson and Waldron – one of the companies hired by the Howard government to draft WORKCHOICES.
So, what happens if Hockey digs up the dirt? Will Steve Hutchins resign? Will Mark Arbib resign? Will David Bradbury resign (if elected)?
Will Della Bosca resign? And more importantly, will ALP head office finally get the guts to flush these parasites out of the party, the party that has always represented working people?
On a different note, what is Belinda Neale doing – the wife of a senior State government Minister and Chief of Staff to another, stating that if Rudd wins, he will ban with the Labor state governments and they will raise the level of the GST! Unfortunately, she is well placed to have this information.
Ah….so some of the Bradbury / Transport Workers Union dirt is starting to seep out…
What I cannot believe is:
A) That the ALP preselected Bradbury – well, I suppose the TWU bought the preselection for him.
B) That St Kevin Rudd isn’t telling the TWU to bugger off. If he had any guts or morals he would
C) The media isn’t going to town on the Sheldon dirty money scam. I mean, taking money off companies for trade for inferior agreements at their worksites is morally abhorrant. Is the media so dumb and lazy that they cannot dig a little. If they scratched the surface there would have to be a resignation of a ALP candidate in a marginal seat (Bradbury) and quite possibly the resignation of a sitting Senator (Steve Hutchins) and maybe the disgrace of a ALP Senate candidate and former NSW General Secretary (Mark Arbib).
But what we’ll end up with is another lawyer -turned -politician who got to Canberra using the blood money taken from honest union members. What a joyful thing party politics is! I hope all those ALP party members are happy that their representatives are as rotten as a bucket of prawns left on cement in a heatwave.
I was at Penrith Plaza today and witnessed the entire Howard visit. I can tell you first hand that the media has not given the whole story (as usual). For starters, there was a grand total of 3 people who were not pleased to see Mr Howard – the joker who didn’t shake his hand, the hippy who banged on about kyoto and the classy woman in the your rights at work tshirt who so eloquently called the prime minister of her country scum. A union surely would be the only group that could possibly be proud of that kind of classless behaviour. The rest of the crowd, and there were hundreds of them, were eager to shake his hand and wish him well. The media of course zones in on the three tools that wanted to spoil the moment for the rest of us. Secondly, Mr Howard was very concerned about the lady who fell over – he stayed by her side while she was attended to even though his bodyguards were urging him to move on. After witnessing the event with my own eyes confirms to me that the media will twist everything so that we see things from a perspective that isn’t even close to the real picture. Judging by the reaction in Penrith today I think Labor would be very foolish to assume they have the seat of Lindsay won.
Strange sighting in Lindsay today:
Here I was driving down Jamison Road. Penrith, when a bus pulled out in front of me, in an obvious hurry. It was a blue and white ex-NSW Transit Authority, emblazoned with Kevin Rudd and Maxine McKew, complete with “Maxine McKew for Bennelong”. I thought the ex-leafy North Shore Mosman girl was a candidate for Bennelong, not Lindsay. Maybe she got lost withut her GPS, a bit like Bob and Blanche Hawke, when they missed the 2 Penrith turnoffs and kept on to Springwood before eventually finding their way back to Bob Carr’s 2003 campaign launch. Ah, there North Shore people, they make you laugh.
I suspect the bus was put into Lindsay as a stop-gap emergency measure to counter Karen Chijoff’s new huge mobile advertising billboard. Talk about confusing the electorate!
Local ALP scuttlebutt going around says that the Bradbury campaign is falling apart in the home stretch.
With the campaign director, Health Services Union official Mike Dickson having lots of trouble keeping the candidate focussed on being a candidate – with no help from a demanding candidate’s wife, poor old Mike has now got to deal with volunteers calling it quits with Bradbury because of his petulant attitude.
Frequent tantrums, dramas at home and a sense that he’s got it in the bag has Bradbury’s campaign director sweating bullets.
Meanwhile, over at the Your Rights At Work camp, true believers are getting peeved that Bradbury is taking them all for granted despite the promise to give Linda Everingham, local single mum and face of the local YR at W campaign an electorate officer’s possie in the new member’s office.
Y R at Workers are doing the loins’ share of hard slog, letter boxing etc while the Laborites aint doing much at all.
Nothing like Labor complacency.
Mea culpa – Bradbury’s campaign boss isn’t Mike Dickson – it’s Mike O’Donnell. Mike Dickson works on the Macquarie campaign for Balmain Bob Debus.
Nice to see fully sik thinks he/she knows whats going on. Would like to know where their devine information is coming from.
Very funny that fully sik made a mistake with another campaigners name. Just seems like a disgruntled individual who not only seems to know a few people within the labor party, but likes attacking a hardworking and genuine local candidate who has doorknocked a legitimate and significant number of houses in the electorate of Lindsay (i know my friends and I have been doorknocked).
On another note. By observation and from word of mouth I have noted a significant amount of Chijoff’s (VERY SIGNIFICANT) and Bradbury’s material in the letterboxes of Lindsay, but not a single piece from YRAW. Nice to see that YRAW are hard at work.
I have buckets of anti-Workchoices information in my letterbox. I have been doorknocked TWICE by local union people, ONCE by Karen Chijoff and NEVER by the Labor guy. I have actually gotten a clear idea what the laws do and can do to me and later on my kids. Labor has not really enlightened ame. I feel it is just more “me-too”ism from them.
The unionists have their own office in Penrith and it has been there for yonks. They have been busy and don’t deserve any criticism from the previous contributor.
I’m not sure where the person above was during the PM’s at Penrith. But I object to ‘the classy woman in the your rights at work tshirt who so eloquently called the prime minister of her country scum’. Yes I am classy (thanks), but I did not call the PM scum. I called him a disgrace (you can see it on 4 corners if you wish!). I was also warmly congratulated afterwards. About 6 people made their way over to me and shook my hand.
As for the observation ‘The rest of the crowd, and there were hundreds of them, were eager to shake his hand and wish him well’, COW PATTIES!!! I joined the ’scrum’ outside Target and most of the people around the PM were the media and his minders. Others rushed up to see who the fuss was about saw it was the PM and ran away.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it must be acknowledged that the last few posts on this section were so out of whack it’s laughable. And as I was working in Penrith for the YR@W campaign over the last month I wonder what planet these people are from. Even before the Mr Kelly and Mr Chijoff scandal the writing was on the wall.