Comments on: Westpoll: 51.6-48.4 to Labor in WA

By: fred

fred — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:00:02 +0000

RE SA water
But if you look at the composition of R. Murray Advisory boards, in SA and elsewhere including at Federal level, and the ilk, and the composition of R.Murray Local Government Councils you will note that Nationalist/Liberal aligned irrigators are the dominant force.
This is a local speaking [well typing I suppose].
Water policy along the Murray is dominated by and directed at serving the needers of irrigators with token platitudes for the environment and other users.
Its the single reason why nothing has been done and will not be done even under a Federal system.
Until we recognise that more water has to be put into the River [note the ramifications for farm dams, bores and land usage along the catchment] and less taken out [and irrigation exceeds all other uses by several times] then the problems will continue until even the irrigators will suffer.

Sort of like over-fishing fisheries until the fishers have no fish.

Desalination, recycled water, stormwater collection, domestic tanks, urban restrictions are all cute measures but in themselves do not solve the essential problem, sort of they will save the equivalent of ‘a piss in the ocean’.
We use too much water for irrigation.
That has to change.

By: David Jackmanson

David Jackmanson — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:12:12 +0000

RE: SA's water being run by the Nats? Not really. Karlene Maywald, a National, is the Minister for the River Murray in the Rann Labor Government. But any big plans on her part are still going to have to go through a budget process dominated by ALP agendas.

By: Pete from Perth

Pete from Perth — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:36:57 +0000

Re 22 by Possum Comitatus: “Why is Canning more winnable than itâ€™s margin suggests?”

Having once upon a time been a local to the area, large chunks are urban, semi and light industrial. This is the heartland of the semi- and un-skilled labour that would be most fearful of WorkChoices.

By: Dr Good

Dr Good — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:25:51 +0000

And to put that in context…

In 2004 election in WA it was:
ALP: 34.75%
Coal: 48.76%
others: 16.49%

So the swings since 2004 are:
9% to ALP
5% away from Coal
4% away from others

By: Dr Good

Dr Good — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:18:47 +0000

Primary voting figures are out now for the Westpoll.

See
http://www.marketresearch.com.au/our_services__westpoll__history_of_voting_intent_federal.90.html

and click on the graph.

It’s
ALP: 44%
Coal: 44%
others: 12%

By: The Piping Shrike

The Piping Shrike — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:04:07 +0000

On Antonioâ€™s comments re the rural areas (108). I think we are going to see a very different pattern emerge on election than some are expecting. Especially the way some commentators still keep seeing it as a contest over Howardâ€™s mythical â€˜battlersâ€™ in the outer-suburban areas, which is too much seeing it in terms of the past. I suspect this will be less a case of Labor regaining its heartland than the coalition losing theirs. In the rural areas the rise and fall of One Nation has softened the coalitionâ€™s hold on rural seats which others are starting to pick up, especially with younger voters, and we are already seeing in some state results. I would see it more as a result of the old conservative agenda having less relevance and people more just focussing on service provision, which Vic and Qu Labor has played well. This election is truly going to change the ground rules.

By: Lindsay voter

Lindsay voter — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:34:15 +0000

I have many relatives and friends in Perth. Must have a word with the lot of them!

By: Martin B

Martin B — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:50:01 +0000

Is WA not the strongest of the States for Howard?

At this stage, ‘least catastrophic’ looks more accurate than ’strongest’.

By: barry

barry — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:16:19 +0000

Is WA not the strongest of the States for Howard? I wonder how the AWA scare campaign has been playing out there and whether the Rudd ’soft IR’ response will contain the angst in the West?

By: Mr Q

Mr Q — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:41:50 +0000

Were WA to have a 7% swing, I’d think it highly unlikely to be anything like uniform. The loss of incumbency would probably mean Cowan wouldn’t swing as much, while O’Connor’s only likely to swing from the Libs to the Nats if it does anything. To balance those, I reckon the swing would be larger in Canning and Forrest; the former because it just swung too much at the last election, and the latter as I feel it’s becoming less and less rural and more and more provincial with growth in the regional centers in the South West.

I don’t really think Labor would stand a chance of picking up any of the other metro seats; I know people have mentioned Moore a couple of times, but I just can’t see it (though I can’t really see Forrest either except if the Libs suffer a Kevtastrophe). Forrest on the other hand might be primed to be taken by an Independent, and there’s a number of seats I could see being troublesome for the Libs with a theoretical good Independent candidate – particularly blue-ribbon Curtin