The West Australian, which has been gunning hard for the removal of Troy Buswell from the Liberal leadership for the past week, has published a “snap” Westpoll survey of 400 votes showing the Liberals would lead 57-43 on two-party preferred if Colin Barnett was leader. It also finds they would be in front even with Buswell at the helm, but only by 51-49. One normally likes to exercise caution in interpreting poll results, but I think it can be stated with confidence that the latter finding is definitely wrong. This means we can either dismiss the poll as rubbish and pay it no further mind, or take the view that the six-point difference says something enormously significant about the Liberal leadership even if it does come from a dud sample. Excitingly, the paper reports that the election “could be called as early as tomorrow”.
UPDATE: Click here for a timely trip down memory lane, back to a month before the 2005 election.
UPDATE 2: The following questions are not meant to indicate a conspiratorial mindset: they are merely questions that have sprung to my mind, as questions sometimes do.
• What do the dashes following “don’t know” indicate? That all but a statistically insignificant number of respondents did know, or that those who didn’t have been excluded from the calculation?
• Why would you lump “informal” together with “other”, rather than with “don’t know”?
• Given that this has been done, we can ascertain that the “others” vote is less than 4 per cent under Buswell, or less than 2 per cent under Barnett. This compares with 11.2 per cent at the 2005 election and between 8 per cent and 12 per cent in the past six Newspoll surveys. The Greens vote at least is in the ballpark of the 2005 election, down only from 7.6 per cent to 7 per cent (The West Australian rarely provides figures for the Greens, but on the four occasions it has done so in the previous year they have been between 8 per cent and 11 per cent). In the current political environment, would we really expect the combined major party vote to have shot from 81.2 per cent at the election to either 88 per cent (under Buswell) or 89 per cent (under Barnett)? The two Newspoll surveys this year have had it at 80 per cent and 76 per cent.
• Shouldn’t we expect the 7 per cent of respondents who would vote Coalition under Barnett but not Buswell to be largely parking their votes with minor parties or independents, rather than going straight for Labor?
UPDATE 3 (28/7/08): Robert Taylor in The West Australian:
Troy Buswell will not step side and Colin Barnett will not challenge for the Liberal leadership despite overwhelming evidence that the Cottesloe MP is the party’s best chance of defeating Alan Carpenter’s Labor Government at the coming election. Mr Barnett again made it clear yesteday that he was availbale to lead the Liberals despite having already announced his retirement at the next election. But Mr Buswell was adamant that no one had asked him to step down in favour of the former Opposition leader and he intended continuing in the role. And Mr Buswell received strong support from Liberal Party president Barry Court, who clutched a Bible as he said the chair-sniffing, bra-snapping Opposition Leader had shown strength to push through his problems and was beginning to have an impact on the Government in the polls.
UPDATE 4 (29/7/08): Peter Kennedy reports on ABC TV news that “Labor strategists have put a plan to the Premier” for an election on September 13 or September 20, thereby preventing the resumption of parliament in two weeks.
UPDATE 5 (4/8/08): Buswell quits.
232 Comments
Ummmm…
I don’t know what to say…
I think I am going to have to go with: “What a load of toss!”
Agreed, unless Pattersons polled the entire Barnett Clan and his electoral staff and their families
Did they do this ’snap’ poll at the John Howard dinner last week? There was probably about 400 guests there.
THE-PARIS-SITE, aha, you’ve hit the nail on the head i think, where else could you find 400 peple who think in one mind lol?
Betting markets have the ALP very short odds to win.
http://www.way2bet.com.au/odds_comparison/20929/20930/44843/West+Australian+State+Election
With October 11 the most likely date.
http://www.way2bet.com.au/odds_comparison/20929/20930/44844/West+Australian+State+Election
considering all the polling is showing like a 5% swing against liberal those results seem rather incredible.
51-49 with buswell seems impossible to credit. Was this the same outfit that predicted the Libs would win 58-42 a month out from 2005??
I don’t doubt that Barnett is a far better prospect- perhaps the best they’ve got. It’s worth remembering that despite being burderned with the canal fiasco, Barnett kept the swing to Labor down in 2005, in good economic times, and when every other state labor government was winning mega-landslides.
If ever you needed evidence to dismiss Westpoll this is it. They are going to end up with egg all over their faces. What a joke.
Something does not add up for the Premier is the perferred Premier regardless of who the Liberal leader is.
While on paper the WA Government would appear the most at risk of falling I don’t see the Liberals winning, remembering the WA economy is still in great shape and is there any real reason to throw the Government out of office.
Westpoll makes Morgan look sane.
good lord – anyone seen the headline of today’s West Australian…?
“Barnett could lead Liberals to Landslide” or something similar. Just how removed from reality is this ‘newspaper’ going to get?
Dunno whether it’s a joke. Afterall, Rudd’s miserable government (and his former opposition) had such bloated margins before.
12 A-C – Ah, a Westpoll executive. Makes as much sense.
Take a look at the Newspoll results AC and remember the “Chair Sniffer’? Honestly.
http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl
If only…
I wonder if things would change much if Stokes gets on the WAN board? He won’t give up and he has increased his stake. Without WAN in their corner would the WA division of the careerists have a sniff of anything at all?
What are they smoking in the offices of Westpoll?
THe funny thing is it was the West who were touting for Buswell in the first place after Omodei imploded and that now that their “saviour”, is nothing like a potty mouthed school kid, they want blood.
Oh and it was funny that the “West Magazine” was still running a feature article on Barnett’s “Successor” Deidre Willmont and is touting her as a future leader of the Libs.
Suppose it was a bit too late to pulp the insert
I think if our dear leader carps can possibly call an election tomorrow he would – the libs would start the campaign unsure who would lead them to the end, and assuming they stuck with sniffer they’d look like they only did so because they had no choice, ie they wanted to swap to Barnett but ran out of time….
An election call tomorrow would be the definitive disaster for them, unless Barnett comes out tonight and shuts the door….
15 John – well put John. Fair dinkum, if I thought this result was possible I’d be saying so but anyone with any sense of what is going on would have to come to your conclusion.
And here is Robert Taylor’s “Story”.
But what they don’t tell you thast the Nats aren’t in a Coalition and will be running 3 cornered contests in most, if not all rural seats.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=87200
And Graham Jacobs responds to Bill Hassell.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/26/2315347.htm
19 Jasmine
“the libs would start the campaign unsure who would lead them to the end”
Well this would make a lot of sense. Remembering in Queensland the last minute dumping of Tim Quinn for [I actually can't remember his name] actually won Beattie a few extra seats at a time when he was deeply unpopular.
I expect Captain Bligh will get the same advantage from the emerging feud between Lawrence “We’ll merge even if the Liberals don’t want to” Springborg and Mal-contented Brough.
Jacobs really is a people person isn’t he.
He’s a Doctor, who aren’t known for their tact and empathy towards their patients
Well isn’t life interesting, the Liberals now have no state branch in Queensland.
Oh Dear, Troy only has 8 friends.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24082335-2761,00.html
Barnett would surely only consider it if he had a chance of winning. Why would he do it just to minimise liberal losses? Is it likely he’d be allowed to tilt again for a third time, even if the Libs didn’t go backwards at the next election? There’s nothing in it for him to be a loser again. There would need to be a lot more polls like the westpoll to make him consider it seriously.
Good questions Worst – what is in in for Barnett? If I were him I’d wait until all hope seemed lost – then ride in on my white charger. At that point anything short of total annihilation will seem like a triumph and I can reap the credit. Expectation management is perhaps the most important function of political leadership nowadays it seems – tragic, isn’t it.
That said, Barnett has categorically stated he will not challenge for the leadership but might step up if approached. What do people think of someone who doesn’t have the bottle to take on a deeply unpopular leader if he won’t go voluntarily? I personally can see some good and bad on both sides – just wonder if a strong challenge from Barnett might lift his image…???
You know, I seem to recall hearing Colin say once that the reason why he wasn’t boss was because Omodei was his numbers man!
Early Poll tipped for September 20
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24082437-5017005,00.html
Well, here we go again. A poll result that doesn’t support our personal view so it must be rubbish. A poll of 400 (admittedly not a bit light on) is dismissed because . . . why? Recent polls (e.g Qld) have suggested that incumbent Labor Governments aren’t as secure as might be commonly believed. The other interesting aspect of the WA poll is that although the Libs are performing well, Buswell is not. This suggests that Australian voters are intelligent enough to know the difference between leader and party.
Sorry, I meant a bit light on (in terms of sample size).
Winston I’m thinking you wish this was true and why, because you support the Libs.
It’s rubbish because it goes against commonsense, nothing more, nothing less.
I’m not the greatest mathematician in the world, but hows this one work out:
ALP: 41%
Coalition: + 47%
One Nation: + 1%
Democrats: + 1%
Greens: + 7%
Other/Informal + 4%
= 101%?!
Sure some of these were probably partial percentages rounded up, but why the hell would you put a TOTAL number down the bottom if they don’t actually add up to 100%?
Grow up Gary.
“Well, here we go again. A poll result that doesn’t support our personal view so it must be rubbish.” This is a mature comment is it?
“Recent polls (e.g Qld) have suggested that incumbent Labor Governments aren’t as secure as might be commonly believed.”
Look at the Newspoll and even the Galaxy Poll have Labor well in front in QLD.
“The other interesting aspect of the WA poll is that although the Libs are performing well.” In the poll maybe but they are a joke on the ground.
Yes VPL, but remember Barnett’s already been there, so for him a “triumphant” not catastrophic loss doesn’t help him either. If it was his first challenge yes, but Barnett can only be in it for a win, not a good loss. A creditable loss will be a waste of time for him.
I can understand a Lib supporter getting hot and sweety over these numbers but can anyone really believe WA voters would want Buswell as their premier, which this poll suggests could happen? Hardly.
Don’t you mean Clin “CAnal” Barnett over Buswell ? But I think I know where you’re coming from – this poll is an attempt to replace one clown with a person who lost the unlosable 2005 election because of a ill thought out and uncosted plan to build a canal, and then 2 days prior to the election couldn’t even see there was a big hole in the lib’s election costings. – that’s the the depth of the talent in the WA Libs.
Hi can anyone proviode me with a link to the rules and procedures related to the Western Australia Upperhouse count…
I have written a discussion paper on introducing a simplified Reiterative Proportional STV Count Link See Main Submisson Document also.
Constructive feedback welcomed.
Was this a “snap” poll or a Flashpoll?
“The Flashpoll twice-monthly polling program has run uninterrupted for the last 18 years. It remains the most cost effective and reliable survey program for clients seeking answers for up to six or eight questions. Essentially an Omnibus program is a gathering of several relatively short surveys into one.”
Why would The West use the term “snap”?
I’d say a “snap” poll is one where the moe can’t or won’t be divulged. LOL.
WA has new rules for the Legislative Council to be used at this election. It has switched to using what is known as a Weighted Inclusive Gregory calculation based on determining surplus to quota preferences based on votes, not ballot papers. It is the first Australian administration to move in this way.
If you’re after the detail of the count, it is at
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/FileStore.nsf/Documents/MRDocument:7628H/$FILE/ElectoralAct1907_14-b0-00.html?OpenElement
Electoral Act 1907
All the LC Counct detail is in Schedule 1
Sorry, it’s a database so you can’t link. Try
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/default.html
Select Acts in force, then ‘e’, then Electoral Act 1907
I see that Centrebet has Labor at $1.18 to the Coalition $4.25. Considering the odds last week were (something like) $1.25/$3.50 it shows what the bookies think of the Westpoll (unless Centrebet hasn’t re-assessed the odds since the poll’s publication, which I doubt.) http://centrebet.com/cust?action=GoSports
I suspect not many of your correspondents are out on the street talking to people about what they’re thinking. I’m honest enough to say that the science of polling is not my field, and 400 is a very small sample (frequent criticism of westpoll). But if anyone thinks that Labor isn’t seriously on the nose in WA on the issues of energy supply, law and order, education and health and quite a few others, you aint listening brother. Anybody who sits on these sites and criticises other correspondents for political bias is a fool. We’re all political junkies, and that nearly always goes with a party preference. Anthony excused.
47
Labor “seriously on the nose”?
That’s the Opp leaders forte.
Labor couldn’t touch him on that.
All I’ve got to say to this is…. BAHAHAHAHA. The West Australian is the main political opposition to the Labor govt here, but this is weird even for them. Does this report even take into consideration the boundary changes, which give Labor an extra half a dozen seats just for turning up? I want an ounce of whatever they’ve been smoking…
Plus the fact that the libs aren’t in coalition with the Nationals and will be facing 3 cornered contests in rural seats, thereby splitting the rural conservative vote.
The West is just pissed off that their Golden Boy Troy turned out to be nothing more than a 40 plus “Schoolie”
“The West is just pissed off that their Golden Boy Troy turned out to be nothing more than a 40 plus “Schoolie”
”
Which was flamin’ obvious to anyone with the brains of a stunned herring long before he ascended to the leadership.
As for the govt being on the nose on so many issues, I really don’t think so. I work in the relatively conservative world of engineering and I rarely hear the govt mentioned in a negative light or the opposition in a positive one. Indeed, I can’t remember a time when state politics in general was a less common topic of conversation in the world beyond the ‘net.
I’m not sure what this actually signifies. Maybe people have abandoned all interest in the subject in despair at the general standard of our state pollies. Or maybe they’ve decided that the Opposition are so dreadful right now that there’s no point getting worked up about the forthcoming election.
Whatever the case, I don’t see a state that, not so very many years ago, comprehensively turfed the generally unpleasant but at least halfway competent Court government electing Tory Thugswell and Co, many of whom manage to combine deep personal unpalatability with a perceived level of ability and political maturity that would shame a primary school class.
“We’re all political junkies, and that nearly always goes with a party preference.” As with you Buster old boy and just what is that preference of yours?
Buster, don’t worry about that poor little sycophant Gary. According to him the worst thing about the Rudd government is the PM’s hairstyle (I’m serious!).
“A sycophant (from the Greek ?????????? sykophánt?s) is a servile person who, acting in his or her own self interest, attempts to win favor by flattering one or more influential persons, with an undertone that these actions are executed at the cost of his or her own personal pride, principles, and peer respect.”
A-C please explain how Gary is a sycophant? Surely this derogatory term is better suited to previous members of various conservative Governments.
53 A-C – LOL, I must have it a few home runs against you with the anger you’re showing. Let me quote one of your fellow conservative pals “grow up”.
it = hit
Buster
“We’re all political junkies, and that nearly always goes with a party preference.”
I think you will find many here quite prepared to criticise on policies rather than parties.
Not being from WA I don’t know what is happening there but Frank, Jasmine and Fulvio give nice commentaries on what seems to be the mood and it is not always pro labor.
But if Carpenter has to call a snap election due to the leadership woes in the libs it may be that he is not traveling as well as you say.
Similar with Bligh in QLD, she acknowledge herself that the political mood on QLD can be very quick to change and she is facing a historic test of being the first female premier elected to office. Female leaders of government in Carnell, Follet and Martin have been elected in the territories but none at a state or federal level.
54 ruawake – thanks for that. As we can see A-C has difficulties in more ways than one.
“But if Carpenter has to call a snap election due to the leadership woes in the libs it may be that he is not traveling as well as you say.” What type of logic is this? He’s doing poorly so he calls a snap election? He has a rabble for an opposition so he waits until the last minute? I’m missing something.
“Similar with Bligh in QLD, she acknowledge herself that the political mood on QLD can be very quick to change and she is facing a historic test of being the first female premier elected to office.”
Beattie used to say he was going to struggle at the upcoming election and we see what happened there.
“Female leaders of government in Carnell, Follet and Martin have been elected in the territories but none at a state or federal level.” It’s never been done before therefore it in improbable? More strange logic.
Opposition leaders often use the “early election scare” to shore up their leadership – if you dump me it will force an election etc etc.
In States without fixed terms this will always be the case. Capt. Bligh has said she has no intention of calling an early election, has Carpenter said anything?
Nope, only a story in the Sunday Times, as well as speculation from The West.
Story here:
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24082437-5017005,00.html
So given that elections rarely occur in Dec-Jan it looks like the normal timeframe would be Oct-Nov.
So Carpenter only has 4 weeks to call an “early” election.
Traditionally they’re held in February, as I believe the Education Dept don’t allow access to School facitlites for polling booths during schol holidays for security reasons.
I think Buster and the Intellectual Bogan are both onto something. The fact that we are all here discussing this stuff makes us somewhat unusual. I LOVE elections – from what I can tell, a significant part of the electorate find them an inconvenience at best and a downright imposition at worst. I have been an electoral junkie since my teenage years – you can imagine how that went down with the ladies!
Anyways – I work in a normally conservative field which is rather over-represented in the parliamentary classes… and most of the comments I am hearing regarding politics is that my colleagues would LOVE to have an alternative at the State level that they could actually bring themselves to vote for. They are reluctant to vote ALP and are no fans of the current government (and certainly wouldn’t be what anyone would consider natural Labor voters in any event) but can’t bring themselves to vote for such an incompetent and downright offensive Opposition. So where does that leave them…??? Many of them are considering minor parties but are reluctant to go down that path too… I suspect many of them will return to the fold and vote Lib eventually anyways but it’ll pain them to do it.
The Nationals ?
Lol
WA has the best State Government by far
When a lot of the major projects start to be completed and begin in the next few years people will truly start to realise
The social reforms and massive infrastructure projects will place Gallop and Carpenter higher than Sir Charles Court in history.
Robert Taylor in The West Australian:
And old Charlie must be spinning in his grave, while Margaret must be praying VERY hard in the Victory Life Centre
http://www.victorylifecentre.com.au/statement.htm
This is so tiresome – can we just get a reliable poll?
It’s like watching idiots make a fool of themselves in the street, mildly amusing at first, but you rapidly get bored of it and want it to stop, and after a while, it becomes a nuisance…
A reliable poll would be interesting, but it certainly won’t be published in the West.
Paul Murray would be unable to bring himself to reveal information suggesting that his continual attacks on McGinty et al have failed to register with the electorate, or haven’t been reinforced by an even slightly competent opposition.
So that just leaves the Murdoch press…
As for the early election – Carpenter has bleated about a troublesome upper house, and regardless of when the election is, the MLCs all stay put until May? Will this have any bearing on his decision? Or is it less about passing legislation, and entirely about kicking the Lbs while they’re down?
Why does the West Australian bother? A sample of 400 is ridiculously small, given the diversity of WA electorates. The MOE must be just about high enough to make reliable conclusions about the meaning of the data impossible. Knowing the West’s propensity for journalistic shortcuts, they likely sent a junior reporter down to the cafes of Cottesloe to ask people who look like they own uranium shares what they thought.
I am curious – it is sometime until News Limited publish a WA Newspoll isn’t it?
There are a couple of possibilities, firstly the Govt would know lib factional issues more intimately than me. Is it possible they, the Libs, are stupid enough to spend a couple of weeks making themselves look less organised and electable?
Dear Leader Carps might be waiting for greater uncertainty and confusion. Also each week of phony campaign makes it harder for the libs to credibly change pre-selections.
Secondly there must be internal Govt polling.
I don’t buy law and order as an issue. Carps and Ginty are effectively a liberal government on law and order. No left wing bleeding hearts there (although occasionally responsible Ministers remember some social conscience and respond badly to press requests and forget to reiterate the tough line on everyone law and order wise, not too often even though those lefty roots run deep and long and are actually based on criminology as opposed to irrational responses – opps bias alert).
However I have a feel that hip-pocket issues are biting in an anti-govt way, not supported by anything scientific or sound, and all the experts are talking landslide, but the woman and man on my street aren’t happy. I think Colin and a couple of ‘rifts healed’ press releases (regardless of the reality) could cause serious enough concern for the Govt to be worried, but obviously they don’t and aren’t, or there was something preventing them move …
or could just be I’m impatient and the Governor will get a visit sometime this week.
Just checked centerbet
Labor 1.80
Coalition 1.95
It is getting close
Taken from the same sample as the westpoll
TV stations were (last week) taking very hush-hush bookings from ALP for ad space from Aug 1. So I hear.
#73
Dovif to which election betting are you referring? The odds on centrebet for the WA Election are:
LABOR 1.18
COALITION 4.25
Or are you being obscurely sarcastic?
I think he’s just being ‘tongue-in-cheek’. I wouldn’t say sarcasm fits… I had a laugh, though.
we would be waiting for the libs to blow out to 9 or 10 wouldn’t we, assuming the labor landslide people are right?
In reply to
Antony Green 43
Stay tuned. There are more changes on the way as to how we count votes in the Senate and other. The aim is to simplify the counting process and to do away with the distortion in the value of the votes created by the method used to calculate the surplus transfer value.
The other change under consideration is a reiterative count where the count is re-started following every exclusion. This will do away with the segmentation system currently in use and by default takes into consideration of “optional voting” as the quota is re-calculated on each reiteration. The count continues until all vacancies are filled without the need for further exclusions. The last reiteration determining the results of the election.
This proposal was submitted to the Victorian EMC last week and will be presented to the JSCEM next month.
More information here
Further Information
Having briefly read schedule 1 on the WA Electoral Act
The WA legislation is similar the system proposed above in so far that it seeks to implement a value based Surplus Transfer System (Surplus/Candidates Total value of votes * value of the vote). This is one small but significant step in the right direction BUT it needs to go a few more steps forward
The proposed “Wright system” seeks to replace the segmentation of the ballot (Which produces all kinds of distortions in the results of the election and replace it with a reiterative count. Votes from minor candidates can be included and form part of the surplus of other candidates, the order of exclusion being more significant then the order of election. As votes are transferred any candidates that receive a total value equal or greater then the quota is provisionally declared elected. The results of the election being declared following the last reiteration.
I not also with interest and some amusement that the WA legislation provides for the publication of the electronic data files that the VEC in relation to it primary counts clams have been “destroyed” and overwritten (A statement that that is highly questionable and in doubt – more like a deliberate attempt to mislead and avoid scrutiny of the results) In any event scrutineers and the public will not have to wait until 3 months have elapsed to obtain this important information. Hopefully polling place data will also be made available on election night as and when it be`comes available and not according to the needs and requirements of certain media commentators whose interest is not in the scrutiny of the poll but in the theatrics of election night. This information is essential to a proper scrutiny of an electronic computerised count. (along with statistics on Postal, Prepoll, absentee and section votes issues and received back)
enjoy.
I’m sorry Senate watch, your language can be extraordinarily imprecise. Are you saying that you are proposing changes or that there ‘are’ changes on the way? Because I find it very hard to believe that anyone is about to adopt an iterative process.
And one final point, you might have a little more luck convincing people of your points if you didn’t go out of your way to be completely offensive to anyone and everyone else in the country who has some vague ability to understand what you are talking about.
It is a re-iterative process.
a yes I believe there is support for int. I note that you have no comments as to the merits or otherwise, But as I have stated I am more interested in the scrutiny and audit of the count and not those that make false and misleading statements that seek to cover up and gloss over obvious mistakes in the process of the count. Tell me if x number of voters vote in an election then how many votes should their be and if the number of total votes in the first count do not equal the number of total votes in the second count (Some 500 odd votes GOP missing say) and the information and statistics in relation to the vote are not published or as some claim have been “deleted”: or “overwritten” what does that say about the process of the count. Surely the Electoral Authority should produce stats on the number of postal votes, pre-poll votes, absentee and second votes and publish these as and when they become available? Should not this information be readily available and published prior to the final counting of the votes. And should not the data files that are transcribed be also published in an open transparent system? I would love to know exactly where and why votes went missing in Victoria. And do you honestly believe that a professionally run IT department would not maintain copies and backup of data files? a bi9t liek teh false statements that publishing teh upperhouse resulst woudl slow down the lower house count. BS..
A reiterative count is by far a better option then the seriously flawed paper based Surplus transfer value and Segmented distribution. WA got rid of one part now is the time to exclude the other.
And yes there is support for a reiterative count.. I wonder what the ABC position is? LOL
I very much doubt the ABC has a position on the use of a re-iterative count.
Now, now – there’s no need for this to get antagonistic. Besides – this is a thread on the Westpoll and WA election prospects in general.
I’m not sure WA counts much in a close election, the farce we have before us seems unlikely to count that much.
If the Govt wins big and doesn’t get the LC then nothing really changes except a few seats and the New Carps Faction is seated.
I doubt the ABC get it right on many occasion.
Here is one comment we have received in response to the proposed electoral reform, reform which WA has partially adopted.
“Clearly this addresses the “captured surpluses” issue of the 2007 Senate
Election here in Victoria, but wouldn’t you improve the system even further
in a computerised count if you recalculated the quota each time a candidate
was eliminated and did a complete recount from the start as it would more
accurately reflect the distribution of both preferences (i.e. a voter is
effectively denied the choice of effectively voting for an elected
candidate if the voter’s 2nd preference is only distributed after their 2nd
choice has been declared elected!). This would also help address the
current problem in the NSW Upper House in particular, but also in Tasmania
and the ACT where the last elected person(s) often come in with an
effective quota well below those earlier elected.” -(Name withheld)
The system of a reiterative count address exactly the issues raised above. It provides for a more accurate and reflective count as it seeks to remove the distortion and bias null into the system that is currently in place., A reiterative count is the way forward to addressing this issue.
Having thought of numerous responses, I’ll say nothing in the end, as I don’t wish to wear out Williams patience or bandwidth.
Is SenateWatch the same guy as Melbcity- the one who wrote about 10,000 posts attacking the head of the VEC??
Peter Kennedy on ABC TV news reports that “Labor strategists have put a plan to the Premier” for an election on September 13 or September 20, thereby preventing the resumption of parliament in two weeks.
that is interesting it is 4 weeks sooner than the labor rumor I heard
And also just before School holidays and the Royal Show as well, and no doubt designed to prevent the Libs blooding a new leader and leaving Buswell as a sacrificial lamb.
Expect the opposition to meet in a broom cupboard.
Well, at least there is no chance of finals football to get in the way.
MDMConnell #87:
Yes, yes he is (or so I believe). “Senate Watch” is, indeed, the same virulently anti-Green, pro-Coalition person who once posted under the name “MelbCity”.
Mathew, I’m sure he can and will speak for himself, but I don’t believe he’s “pro-Coalition”.
As to the Westpoll, I have only this to say:
Thank God that we, the voters of WA, have the West Australian to act as an Opposition, no matter how laughable, inept or self-contradictory they can be at times.
At least they’re trying to do the job, unlike the Liberals.
William #93:
Noted. I will moderate my rhetoric henceforth.
I didn’t mean for it to be taken that way, Mathew – it’s just that I’m pretty sure that our friend is or has been aligned with the ALP.
Could a September election really be possible? Wouldnt COAG give Carps the chance to look Premierly? Negotiate some great deal for WA and eliminate the fears of folks who dont like ALP State & Federal. Wouldnt the Regional Parliament be a great chance to win over Bunbury? Wouldnt queueing to vote in rainy September irritate people? Besides they want to decimate the opposition without looking mercenary & over-confident.
Post Newspaper article on Barnett saying he will be quitting.
http://www.postnewspapers.com.au/20080802/news/005.shtml
Rebecca Carmody has reported on ABC Radio that Troy Buswell will quit as Liberal leader in the next few days.
and here’s the article:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/04/2323098.htm?section=justin
Rebecca Carmody reports Troy Buswell will hold a press conference at noon.
Common sense at last. Perhaps also it will let the opposition enjoy the Bunbury sittings, now the Premier seems to have committed to them with his tough on ‘one strike’ laws.
It will be a setback for WA Labor, if Opposition leader Troy Buswell confirms he will resign. I dub him Shadow Minister for Losing Women’s Votes.
“Liberal forces say that Mr Buswell saw internal party polling on Friday night which showed him that the Liberals would be devastated under his leadership at the next election.”
Hang on, Westpoll suggested Buswell would come close didn’t it? What happened?
Like I said at the time, my favourite explanation of Westpoll is that the sample was skewed heavily to the Liberals, but that the finding that they would be 6 per cent better off with any other leader rang true. No doubt the Liberal polling showed a close result under Barnett and a wipeout under Buswell.
Very interesting… it actually surprises me that this resignation hasn’t come sooner. Colin Barnett doesn’t have a good media presence but he really is the only one left (much like Howard was in his day).
He’s Gooooooooooooooooooooooooneee !
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24125418-5005361,00.html
It will be interesting to see how the West Australian paper reports this. How did they handle the reporting of the change from Barnet to Buswell?
I’m sure Carpenter would compliment Buswell on his time in the leader’s job, and thank him for his service.
The WEst were touting Buswell as “The Saviour of The Liberal Party”, during the leadership challenge of Paul Omodei, who was the second leader after the Election loss after Matt Birney imploded.
Frankly, all Labor has to do is recyvle the 2005 Election material they have on Barnett, who will no doubt attempt to pull another “Canal” type stunt, plus the Libs don’t have the safety net of the Nationals, who are running candidates against the Libs in every rural seat, this splitting the Conservative vote.
Comment from Joe Spagnolo.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24125592-5005371,00.html
Video of Buswell’s Announcement.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200808/r278394_1178703.asx
WA Libs Doomed Whoever Leads.
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/wa-libs-doomed-whoever-leads-analyst-20080804-3pmu.html
Barnett’s Full Statement.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24125758-948,00.html
So, what are the odds on Carpenter calling a snap poll? I can’t remember (or find) the info from Antony Green on what were the dates for calling an election (keeping the two houses in sync etc), but I figure it must be soon.
Anyway, good government relies on there being good alternatives, and a Buswell-lead Liberal Party couldn’t be good for quality parliamentary scrutiny (not that I considered Omodei was any better). But I would question David Black’s comment about a Barnett leadership being short-term – with Carpenter possibly to call an election asap, such a move would position the next Lib leader as the challenger, so would have to be serious. So either Barnett says ‘Yes’ to being leader and rolls Wilmott to keep his own seat in the election and beyond, or he says ‘No’ and retires. The only other scenario would be to say ‘Yes’ but retire anyway, which would be somewhat quixotic and not likely to save the Liberal Party from loss.
Keeping the houses in sync ceased to be an issue a while ago, so there’s nothing stopping Carpenter calling an election now. While Labor would have to start favourites, I’d have hedged my bets a little more if I were David Black. However much everyone has been expecting a blowout over the past few months, all the published polls other than last week’s Westpoll rogue have been stubbornly around 53-47 and 54-46. Whatever its faults, clearly the Westpoll indicated that a new leader would give the Liberals a bounce, which on any metric would turn the election into a contest. Don’t forget how much of a Liberal state WA is – Labor have only topped 40 per cent on the primary vote once at a state or federal election since 1987, which was at the last state election when they polled 41.9 per cent. That makes it pretty tough for them to win an election unless everything lines up their way.
Frank Calabrese, a little premature aren’t you?
Stewart J, I believe the point is that it’s surprising Barnett would agree to run as leader again given his extremely low profile since the last election, the fact that he was going to quit and the fact that they’d already chosen someone else for his seat.
What does it say about the party if the person they’ve chosen to have lead them was more or less ready to quit? The Labor Party would be foolish not to highlight this fact over and over in a campaign. Colin Barnett had only 1 plan for the future, his retirement plan.
Well now we will have at least a test of the Government; Colin sans canal v Labor sans Gallop.
Frank and Mr Black are almost certain to be right re the final result, but a very close election would not be what our dear leader wants … if it is a close election it will look a lot like dear leader carps should have called last weekend.
They have no choice they have to give Colin his seat back (surely); win he is Premier and can find a job for the about to retire candidate; lose he can retire and the by-election pops the now retiring candidate back into another campaign.
If he wins he can be premier as long as he wants surely? But no-one thinks he will.
No-one thought Dr Gallop would beat the two term Court Govt either, and he ran on fix police, schools etcetera just like Troy is suggesting the Libs should do.
Maybe not game on; but at least there is a game.
Couple thoughts:
1. I still think it reflects badly on the Libs that Buswell took so long to see the writing on the wall and that he wasn’t dumped in what could have been a strong signal about that the Libs expect from a leader, a parliamentarian and a person. Don’t get me wrong – I don’t expect perfection but I (and I believe most people) expected more and better.
2. Of course Barnett’s planned retirement is going to be a big issue. It might well be as significant as Howard’s retirement speculation – who knows how long he’ll hang around for. If I was Deidre Willmott I’d be wondering what my position is – I hope someone has clued her in…
I must say that IMHO this change has made it easier to see people voting Lib. Many naturally conservative voters would have had a battle of conscious to vote for them under Buswell if they are anything like me.
Yes, surely some journalist will have already called Ms Willmott to ask her whether she intends to challenge Mr Barnett for Cottesloe still.
LTEP the only really neat way is for Ms Willmott to withdraw, the party reopen nominations and close as quick as is possible under their rules.
Unless they have great rules, squashing Ms Willmott and installing Colin could lead to all sorts of legal nightmares.
I would have thought a photo-op with Ms Willmott handing over to Colin, and a press release saying she was delighted to pull out for the next premier of WA and that what is more she’d cut-off her left arm to see Labor defeated would be a good start.
Jasmine – you couldn’t be more right about the dream hand-over.
It would be a good start to the new line-up, show a great deal of class and give her a real boost for wherever she ends up. I would have thought they could at least line her up for a winnable upper house slot. Today’s West was saying that there were a bunch of seats with no endorsed candidate as yet – albeit most of them considered to be fairly safe ALP seats (not too many that aren’t nowadays).
Now, let’s just see if they can pull that off or if it will descend into another debacle.
Oh, another thought. I thought that Anthony Fels was a Barnett supporter.
With the change will that mean the untimely demise of the anti-daylight saving party?
Any speculation on winning back any of the others? Maybe Katie, probably not Sue, Dan might be a stretch…
VPL I think the damage from Buswell is pretty terminal. The material the ALP now has to work with is going to be like a phone-book thick.
Another couple thoughts
1. Does anyone think that bringing in Barnett is an attempt to have a shot at WINNING or is it merely a last ditch attempt to hold the line and avoid a massacre???
2. Does Barnett disassociate himself from the canal (this issue from the last election seems to be the crux of lots of the flakaimed at him) with a ‘never ever’ type promise, does he stick with it or does he leave the option open but not commit to anything???
Hmm, the WA Constitution allows for someone to be elected Premier without holdin a seat.
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/constitution-favours-barnett-20080804-3psv.html
Joe Spagnolo on the Return of Barnett.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24126002-5008620,00.html
#124
1- Damage minimisation at the moment, I’d think. If Barnett gives them a poll boost, they could dare to dream, but not yet.
2- Not sure how good Colin is at humour, but i think a very self-depreciating “yeah, well, I’m not gonna try that one again” might be the way to go. The canal seems to have been regarded as a huge joke, so better to have them laugh with you than at you.
Interesting to hear Diedre Willmont’s comments on Ten News urging the Liberal Party to find Colin Batnett a new seat, instead of her giving up the pre-selection meaning it’s going to get ugly.
125- The Federal Consitution also allows this. Howard did it for nine days last year. Gorton did it changing from senate to HoR. Bruce did it briefly like Howard and Barton did it for before any elections were held.
However, I can’t see the public standing for it. It would result in the total sidelining parliament, making it something like the American electoral college. That would put the cat amongst the pigeons.
I forgot to add that according to Ten News, Liberal internal polling revealed they would’ve lost EVERY Lower House seat except for Nedlands.
It is an interesting idea. I have a vague recollection from Con Law that none of the executive in WA need be in Parliament.
You could have the Premier and entire Cabinet outside parliament if this memory is true. But it the ‘convention’ of the whole executive holding a seat in Parliament is pretty ingrained.
But practically as one of the items above seems to accept, there is a question of whether the electorate would cope with the idea of a Premier elected without a seat.
Also the parties aren’t really setup for it I am assuming – I assume they would have to be amended to allow the Premier to be part of caucus. But this is cart in a different paddock to the horse stuff.
If you don’t like the libs having Ms Willmott doing exactly the wrong thing would make you deliriously happy; if indeed that is the path she is taking. Shouldn’t someone mention to them a ‘look’ of unity, even if it is entirely untrue is important for the next three of four months?
Didn’t hear that, Frank. Gee. I’ve got to say though, Nedlands seems an unlikely exception – surely Sue Walker would hold it under those circumstances.
The libs could endorse Fat Cat as a candidate in Nedlands and would win with a swing to it
, which is how entrenched the Liberal vote is.
I believe that in WA s43(3) of the Constitution Acts Amendment Act 1899 sets out that at least one Minster must be a member of the Legislative Council, but no other stipulations. So, it appears it would be legally valid. But I agree it would be a hard pill for the public to swallow.
Blair, the Commonwealth Constitution only allows that for 3 months.
As for Western Australia, the state does not have an consolidated constitution act. There are constitutional provisions dotted across a range of Acts. In addition, just because there is no specific provision does not mean that the convention on Ministers being in Parliament doesn’t apply. The Constitution was passed under powers granted by a UK Act of Parliament granting responsible government to the colony, the same Act that allowed self-government in the other states. There was clear implication by the UK parliament that government was to be resonsible, implying elected.
A now removed Section 29 also said that Ministers must be eligible for re-election, also implying election was required.
Isn’t it is part of the old tradition that an MP could not accept an office of the crown (like being a minister) without resigning? So if you became a minister, you would then go for a by-election in your seat to get approval of the voters to the dual role?
That used to be the way in the states, though it never applied in the Commonwealth. It applied in NSW until 1906, and I think in WA until the 1940s. I don’t know about other states. But yes, after an election, a new government would form and all the ministers used to resign their seats in Parliament.
Ah, no, that’s not quite right.
There was never a constitutional necessity for a government to resign and a new one to be formed after each election. If the government wasn’t defeated at the election, it could just continue in office, and any ministers continuing in office wouldn’t need to resign and face by-elections. _If_ a new government was formed, then all ministers would have to resign and face by-elections–but this didn’t necessarily happen after an election–and also _could_ happen at other times. We are used to thinking now of elections as being the normal time when government changes, but in earlier times that wasn’t the case–changes of government in between elections were at least as common.
Also, of course, if a new minister was appointed to an existing government, that one new minister alone would have to resign and face a by-election.
Back in the days when these things happened, however, it was common (although not invariable) for ministerial by-elections to be uncontested. When the first Labor government in Victoria was formed, all the ministers had to resign and face by-elections and all were unopposed. However, they were technically out of Parliament while the formal processes were carried out and had to sit in the gallery to watch the debates about the future of their government. Once they were formally re-elected and could return to the chamber, their opponents had patched up their differences and promptly voted their government out again.
I agree entirely. My wording was loose. I meant only if after an election a new government was formed. And also any time a new government formed mid-term. And it wasn’t if it was defeated at the election. In the 19th century, government didn’t change until the parliament sat because the parties were so loose. In NSW, the first election which caused a change of government before parliament sat was in 1894.
I agree entirely that if a government continued on, only the new ministers had to resign and face by-elections. In the first 18 months of self-government in NSW, there were four ministries appointed, and every one of them brought on a suite of by-elections.
I’ve indexed all NSW by-elections, and as you can see, there could sometimes be a dozen or more by-elections in each parliament caused by ministerial appointments.
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/resources/nswelectionsanalysis/ElectionIndexes/ByElectionIndex.htm
Mr Bowe. It looks like you will need to update your WA Election graphic to reflect the change of leadership. Perhaps for now a black silhouette with a question mark would suffice.
Well, Barnett has now officially declared he will stand for Liberal party leadership tomorrow.
Apparently the issue of the unfortunate candidate nominated for the seat he was supposed to vacate is not his problem, but one for the party, and he’ll address his Canal issues with reporters tomorrow also, (together with, one would assume. an assurance that his familiarity with basic maths has improved dramatically since the eve of the last election he lost).
Good luck.
Meanwhile, Noel Crichton-Brown seems to think it’s Omodei’s fault. There’s some bitterness there, obviously…
link: http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20080805-Buswell-The-latest-political-tragedy-for-the-WA-Liberal-party.html
Ouch!
Can someone remind me exactly happened with Matt Birney? I understood the party was doing not-too-bad under him, then one or two poor polls came out and they panicked into picking Omodei, which then led to the merry-go-round circus we’ve seen in the past year. Was Birney really that bad…or more accurately, would he have been any worse than the last two?
So, what do they do about the woman already preselected as candidate for Cottosloe? I’d laugh if she decides to stand as an independent in protest!
That’s a good question MDMConnell – after Buswell I’m starting to think that Birney maybe should have been allowed to stay on.
It all seems fairly minor now – comment about the Pope having a partner, drinking, being over-friendly with some press, altering the share register, perhaps being a bit young, inexperienced and unsophisticated, perhaps not being the world’s greatest intellect.. Given what has happened since I’m sure there are many people in the parlt Lib party who probably wish they’d given him more of a go.
As for Diedre Wilmott – wasn’t she Richard Court’s former Chief of Staff? I would suspect that she’ll go if a place can be found for her but it looks like she ain’t going to take it lying down.
As I read it now that ‘altering the share register’ seems to really jump out. The rest you could maybe shrug off, not too sure that one falls into the same category…
My understanding is that Deidre Wilmott’s current position is still that she’s the endorsed candidate for Cottesloe?
I imagine there’s a lot of negotiating/pleading going on in the Liberal party right now.
It really is a mess. The kid shooter didn’t work. The chair sniffer didn’t work. Let’s go back to the canal guy who is retiring – you know, the one that will reduce our chances to attack the ALP on the gas crisis because he was the Energy and Resources minister that privatised our gas supply…? (I probably have that completely wrong actually)
So, October 18 it is then?
No, you are indeed correct as he was the Minister responsible under Richard Court for that mess
Ok, maybe I’m being a bit sensitive about this but it seems to me that the ‘gas crisis’ issue isn’t legitimately capable of political mileage on either side (of course, putting aside cheap stunts). Are you suggesting that the explosion on Varanus Island was the former Energy Minister’s fault, or simply that more wasn’t done by him (and presumably his forebears and successors in that role) to protect the gas supply?
If the former then you are crazy, if the latter then no-one is innocent and both major parties are equally guilty.
How do you think that would run – Lib ‘this is the government of cold showers’, ALP ‘you cocked it up when you were in power’, Lib ‘you didn’t fix it either’ Both ‘nah nah na na nah’…???
Like I said, maybe I’m a bit sensitive about it.
WA Govt bids for the Commonwealth Games and the Naysayers come out of the Woodwork.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24131261-948,00.html
Hmm, According to Ch 10 News, Barnett will promote Buswell to the Front Bench, possibly Treasurer.
BAD move, easy for Labor to campaign on a vote for Barnett is a vote for Buswell. You’d think Buswell to move to the backbench to bide his time and grow up a bit.
Exactly, Labor can easily spin the whole Buswell resignation… state that there is a plan to handover from Barnett to Buswell soon after the election, given that Barnett was going to quite in any case. Buswell did not lose the support of the party, he just wants to be handed the premiership without having to be chosen by the people etc. etc.
Last Night’s 7.30 Report video of Buswell’s resignation.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200808/r278547_1179475.asx
*facepalm*
They are trying to lose this election, I swear. Trying quite hard.
Anyone wanna bet Christian Porter’ll be the opposition leader this time next year? Or Brendan Grylls or Liz Constable, in the case that the Libs don’t get to be called the opposition?
VPL @150
Definitely the latter…
And you’re absolutely right – both major parties have their share of the blame to wear.
I think your last part sums it up quite nicely; it would definitely deteriorate to something like that – particularly in our high-minded parliamentary elections.
Couldn’t agree more Frank – placing Buswell on the front bench is yet another “Kick Me” sign that they’d be taping to their own backs…
I disagree – mostly because I can’t help myself.
Buswell should absolutely be on the front bench. He is a solid performer who stepped down voluntarily and continues to support and serve. I do, however, agree that opposition spokesperson for something less high profile than Treasury would be a better move – but it also needs to be something he can get his teeth into, perform on, and maybe start to get some traction… what are some key areas? Let me suggest a couple options – housing (affordability is a key area), infrastructure (lots of big projects), resources (again, a massive issue here in the West)… Something with a bit of oomph but not one of the top jobs.
Barnett has got some ’splainin’ to do about at least the following:
1. Canal
2. Retirement
3. Why trust him with our votes this time around – is it any different to the last time
4. Can he heal a deeply divided party
5. What is going to happen with Deirdre Willmott
and he needs to sort this stuff out quickly.
Here is Tonight’s Nine News Bulletin, which leads with BArnett’s Announcement – note the footage of the stoush when Barnett was Education Minister and then Shadow Minister and now Premier, Alan Carpenter.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/video?vxSiteId=1929a7b6-d2c6-4f56-bacf-9ca1759ced99&vxChannel=Nine%20News&vxClipId=1201_080805_ninenews&vxBitrate=300
Barnett comes across as decent, slightly prudish, petulant and over sensitive.
He appears guileless and unable to hide his feelings.
He on occasions displays a reckless streak, and an innate obstinacy in his outlook.
He presents as having a propensity to avoid, or fail to accept responsibility for, or make decisions on, unpleasant issues within his control.
He is human, fallible, but the best of a very seedy and laughably incompetent group of opposition members.
And under his leadership, or that of any of his current opposition colleagues, in opposition his party appears destined to remain.
Oh – let me add another possible portfolio for Buswell – Edumacation!
Barnett elected leader.
“The former leader Colin Barnett will lead the West Australian Liberal Party to the next state election.
At a partyroom meeting lasting just under one and a half hours, MPs voted unanimously for Mr Barnett to replace Troy Buswell, who stood down on Monday.
Mr Barnett will contest his seat of Cottesloe despite Diedre Willmott already being preselected for that seat after Mr Barnett announced he was going to retire.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/06/2325949.htm?section=justin
The Gas Crisis has ended too.
“The Premier says Western Australia’s energy crisis is effectively over after Apache Energy resumed processing gas at its Varanus Island plant.
Alan Carpenter has visited the site to oversee the resumption of partial supplies, two months after Apache’s pipe exploded, cutting a third of the state’s energy supplies.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/06/2325993.htm?section=justin
They should gone the whole hog and brought back Charles Court. I know he’s dead, but so is Barnett.
Yep, a CGI generated Charlie would be more credible than Barney Rubble.
I’m amazed they’d even considered the idea of parachuting him in my emlectorate of Swan Hills, using the justification that his farm is in Toodyay, which I might add isn’t part of the electorate to start with.
Does this mean the Grand Canal is back?
Who knows, but it WILL come back to haunt him, the ALP will see to that
With Colin back it is the Liberals in a landslide. No doubt. This will be the first Labor State to fall. About time.
Frank
I thought the West today said his Toodyay farm is in the electorate. Looking at the new boundaries the farm would have to be no closer to Toodyay than the Avon Valley National Park…
Moose – I can’t see it being a landslide either way but time will tell.
Mr Barnett was Leader of the Opposition and leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party from February 2001 to March 2005. He came within four seats of regaining government for the Liberals in the 2005 state election…..
Within Four Seats and that was after his “Canal” policy and budget blowout. I would be scared if I was the Labor Party…..
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=89474
I think it will look like a landslide for a while which might mean that Sept 13/20 are out for now.
Moose,
You’re Dreaming, The Libs don’t have the Nationals Coattails to hang onto, plus with One Vote One Value there will be 3 way contests in all rural seats splitting the Conservative vote.
VPL,
I can assure you that Toodyay was NEVER a part of Swan Hills, however it is a part of the federal seat of Pearce which does take in Swan Hills.
It did say that in The West today: “Mr Barnett’s Toodyay farm is even in the electorate, so unlike Mr Whitby (in Morley) he can lay some claim to the neighbourhood.”
But this is irrelevant because he will stand for Cottesloe again, yes?
Here is the map of Swan Hills, and I don’t see Toodyay there.
http://boundarieswa.com/2007/Final-Boundaries/East-Metropolitan/Swan-Hills/
Channel Seven’s offices are in Dianella, so I’d say Mr Whitby’s relationship to Morley is about the same as a farm in Toodyay is to Swan Hills.
Small problem, the Endorsed Candidate for Cottesloe has no intention of giving up the preselection for the return of the Messiah and his canal, hence the specualation and handwringing over finding a seat for Colin to stand in.
Yes Adam, this morning that particular issue was not clear, but it is now.
Frank, I believe the state council or executive has the power to force the issue. The problem now is accommodating Willmott, who was the only female Liberal or Nationals candidate in a safe seat. She’s turned down Nedlands.
Willmott has in fact resigned as Cottesloe candidate.
But all indications are she is staying put in Cottesloe and is not moving for anyone.
As I said yesterday, it’s going to get ugly and the Party will be the losers.
Hmm, well that makes post 180 obsolete then
Don’t you hate it when you’re typing a post and new info is posted BEFORE you hit the submit button.
She can stand for one of the seats being vacated by the other three or four failed Liberal leaders, no?
Alas, no. Nobody has mentioned Matt Birney’s seat of Kalgoorlie, which is hardly a good match for her. Paul Omodei himself was left without a seat after insisting on an upper house berth when the redistribution turned Warren-Blackwood into Blackwood-Stirling and put it under threat from the Nationals. Buswell isn’t going. I believe the most plausible option is to put her at the top of the North Metropolitan upper house ticket, which would only displace a non-incumbent I’ve never heard of before. She could then take Cottesloe at a by-election when Barnett goes if the Liberals lose. Two drawbacks: Barnett would have to make explicit that that’s what he would do, and she’s apparently not keen on the idea anyway. Other options are Scarborough, a new notionally Liberal marginal seat, or its safe northern neighbour Carine. The latter would be very hard on candidate Tony Krsticevic, who has had to quit his job with the ATO.
Like I said on the other thread, I think this is pretty small beer in the broader scheme of things. They’ve got Rob Johnson returning to the front bench, Paul Omodei trying to make amends (fat chance I’d guess), Graham Jacobs is happy again, Barnett’s foes have no choice but to bite it, and there’s even talk of an arrangement of some kind with Elizabeth Constable.
WA Today Story on Willmont “Standing Down”.
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/willmott-to-stand-down-as-cottesloe-candidate-20080806-3r0x.html
Oh dear, with him and Buswell on the Front Bench together is going to see some fun times ahead
You didn’t mention Nedlands William – again, hard on the endorsed candidate but seems the more logical fit since its geographically close, similar demographic, no sitting Lib member. Would people think less of me if I throw in that it would also have the advantage of swapping a woman for a woman? I don’t mean it in any sort of perjorative or condescending way – I only mean that it has a nice balance if Nedlands keeps a female member and if Walker stands as an independent then the gender issue wouldn’t be one…
As for the Toodyay farm issue – Frank I don’t believe that the ‘Toodyay farm’ is actually required to be IN Toodyay itself. In fact, I acknowldged the absence of Toodyay from the seat in my post when I said Swan Hills only goes as far as the Avon Valley National Park. It may be that the Toodyay farm is actually located in the locality of Bailup for example. This could be the case in the same way I say I’m holidaying in Busselton even if the holiday house is actually in Vasse or Abbey???
VPL, I mentioned Nedlands in an earlier comment – she’s refused it. Presumably she would do the same for Alfred Cove (and certainly for Churchlands).
Speaking of Alfred Cove, are the Libs doing much down there this election? I was living in Mt Pleasant last time around, and that was… interesting. Woollard as independent, Graham Kierath as ‘the real Liberal’, the mayor of Melville as an almost-but-not-quite Liberal, Labor doing not much, every shop in Applecross putting up Woollard posters to annoy Melville City Council, huge adverts in the Herald every week… that made the election more interesting than it otherwise would have been. Shame I’m now living in a safe Labor seat this time.
Hmmm, This is going to be interesting.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24131027-948,00.html
And note that Perth Now haven’t coverted Deidre Willmont’s “Resignation” as the candidate for Cottesloe.
Willmott would be mad to contest Nedlands, considering that Walker shows all the signs that I can see of being the next Liz Constable, and a big fat loss to an independent wouldn’t look good on her record (Ken Court anyone?). She’d be better off taking the Legislative Council option, or else making a deal to get her preselection back when Barnett inevitably stands down after losing the election (which may well be what she’s already done).
Oh Dear, the Canal is coming back. And the Libs wondered why they lost the Election.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=89474
There’s also talk on the ABC that Barnett is trying to persuade Birney to stay on.
Geez, talk about Back To The Future, THere will be heaps of dirt that the ALP will be able to use in the campaign, especially the Inside Cover piece abot Birney removing all traces of Colin Barnett from the Liberal Banners and How To Vote Cards.
Apparently he wants Birney to run in Alfred Cove. Birney says it’s “unlikely”.
This is amazing stuff, talk about a rabble.
hmm I dunno
I reckon Colin could pull this off.
Now with peace offers to Liz Constable.
The Court Family must be spitting blood.
Read my response to Moose – New boundries due to One Vote, One Value – no Nationals to form a coalition. He hasn’t ruled out the Canal coming back.
Listening to Frank saves us looking at the official alp website. Gawd, yesterday he even quoted channel 10 in one of his posts.. I sense a slight level of desperation in his deliberations. Got any tips on the forthcoming ccc report?
If Barnett wants to do an indepth study of his canal so be it. Probably make more sense than closing Royal Perth Hospital to build the monster Fiona Stanley in the boondocks.
As a distant observer in NSW, it seems that the Liberals are a tad confused about their future direction at the moment. Of course, I’m sure they could sort themselves out (perhaps) in a few months once they work out who is standing where and who is getting punted.
Which seems (to me) to provide ample excuse for Carpenter to call the election now (or in the very near future) – Barnett will have little or no honeymoon by virtue of his previous stint in the job and Labor has the natural advantage from the shift to “one man, one vote”…
And the Nats have ruled out a coalition despite there being a new leader.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24137095-2702,00.html
Hey Buster, one man’s Boondocks is another man’s backyard…
It makes perfect sense to me. And while I can walk there, you can catch the train, infrastructure kindly supplied courtesy of you friendly local Labor Government.
Last I heard, emergency treatment wasn’t reserved for fatcats and fatheads from the Western Suburbs with unwarranted superiority complexes.
As for the CCC report, the Liberals and their hangers on have more to fear from it than anyone left in the Labor Party, who have shown a determination to exterminate their rats, not harbour, nuture and protect them.
Fulvio, the canal could float a whole heap of new rats down from the north though.
Cane toads too.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24138053-1245,00.html
Another day, another Liberal leader, another shot in the foot.
At least Omodei shot someone else.
hmmmm
I’m no lib supporter. Well derr.
Still, WA Labor ain’t exactly loved. All Colin needs to do is go through the motions. Unlike Elmer and Sniff, I reckon Colin has learned from his mistakes
This will get interesting.
Mr. Mao, no argument there.
I haven’t been following WA politics very closely (ie, at all) this year, but a quick look at William’s pendulum suggests that the Libs need a two-party swing of about 5% across the board to win the necessary 11 seats. Given that they’ve been behaving like complete idiots ever since the last election, does anyone with better local knowledge that me really think this is possible? Carpenter may not be loved, but nor was Iemma and he was easily re-elected because the voters didn’t accept that there was a credible alternative.
Well for a start there is no coalition, which means the libs and nats will be running candidates against each other in rural seats.
Secondly there is One vote, One value, which means less rural seats
Also, Barnett hasn’t ruled out staying a full term if he loses the election.
Finally there is still of the Canal making a comeback.
Maybe, but he still has the baggage from The Canal, plus the fact he more or less lied to his electorate about retiring, plus the fact he hasn’t given a commitment to serving a full term representing the electors of Cottesloe if he doesn’t win.
And with Buswell on the Front Bench, the ALP can campaign on this fact and mention that a Vote for Colin Barnett is really a vote for Troy Buswell.
And regarding the CCC, the govt can claim they dealt with troublemakers by forcing them out of office and the Party, while the Libs protected and rewarded them, vis a vis John McGrath, and to a lesser extent Buswell.
I’m not sure the lack of a coalition makes as much difference as Frank thinks. All the affected seats are very safe for the conservatives, so the only plus for Labor is the diversion of Liberal resources. With regard to Adam’s NSW analogy, WA is a very different place. Labor has topped 40 per cent on the primary vote only once at a state or federal election since 1987, barely managing it in 2005. It’s NSW in reverse: other things being equal the Liberals will win, and they’re up against an eight-year-old government. Carpenter’s unpopularity is not their problem – the last Newspoll had his approval rating at 53 per cent, which was unusually low for him, against 32 per cent for Morris Iemma. Eleven seats and 5 per cent is certainly a big hurdle, but I don’t think it’s undoable. Labor should rue the missed opportunity of calling the election last week.
Adam, the Liberals have the advantage of an enthusiastic claque within the WA press, be it the West Australian (stand alone Neocons), the Sunday Times (Murdoch – say no more), ABC (still stacked with Liberal sycophants), or the various beholden tv networks.
Add to this a naturally conservative electorate (hear the banjos?), a Government too straight laced and honest to use the benefits of incumbency to it’s advantage, and the fact that it has served (let’s be honest) two competent but uninspiring terms, and you have the unlikely possibility, but the possibility nevertheless,that a bland latter day failure like Barnett, leading a disperate band of incompetent political thugs, might gather enough impetus to fall over the line.
I’ve lived in this state too long, and suffered the stupidity of it’s electorate too often, to doubt it.
Correction: Labor polled over 40 per cent at the 1989 state election.
You forgot to add 6PR, with it’s populist announcers like Howard Sattler and Simon Beaumont, plus the Excercable Millsy & Tony Mac, who potray themselves as the Refined Gentleman and the Yobbo.
But basically Fulvio, you’ve summed up the General Situation perfectly
William,
I think you should update this page in light of events of the last 24 hours
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/wa2008/cottesloe.htm
William says that “other things being equal the Liberals will win” WA elections, but in fact Labor has won five of the last seven, which suggests that all other things are not equal very often. My view of state elections is that Labor is now the default party: if the economy is reasonably healthy, there is no major scandal, and Labor has a more popular leader than the Libs do, Labor will win. The press is anti-Labor everywhere but it doesn’t seem to make much difference to election results.
Here is Brendan Grylls Media Release ruling out a coalition and/or a merger with the Liberal Party at both State and Federal Levels.
http://www.nationalswa.com/news/pdf/080728%20Independent%20Nationals.pdf
Yeah, bugger off, William. you bring us bad luck!
Seriously Adam, I hope you are right in your assessment, and your statistics would seem to indicate that.
My view was the opposite. I thought that Labor here was the party of last resort, to be turned to when things couldn’t possibly get any worse, and to be discarded like a holey sock when Labor turned things around.
We’ll see, as that’s the point we’re now at. Labor has sorted out the Liberal’s mess. we’ll now see how grateful the electorate is prepared to be.
Not very if you read the comments on Perthnow and the listeners of 6PR.
Fulvio, I note that The West have suffered a drop in circulation, so maybe it will be a bit harder for them to campaign for the Libs
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/06/2326193.htm
BTW, what’s the bet that Pattersons are working the phones tonight in readiness for a Westpoll on saturday
When has the West NOT campaigned for the Libs? Has it prevented Labor from winning five out of seven elections? No. As I frequently said during last year’s federal election, when everyone here was in hysterics about The Australian, the chattering classes (that’s us) VASTLY over-rate the importance of the media, and particularly newspapers, in deciding who wins elections.
Your point about five out of seven elections is true enough, Adam, but one of those wins (1989) was achieved with 47.8 per cent of the 2PP vote and another (2001) with 37.2 per cent of the primary vote and a possibly decisive avalanche of preferences from apathetic One Nation voters. And why stop at seven? Seven of the eight previous elections were won by the Coalition. That makes only four fair-and-square wins for Labor out of 15.
Off topic, but Access 31 closed their doors suddenly tonight.
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2008/08/access-31-off-air.html
Robert Taylor on Liberal polling in The West:
Presumably this was if Barnett was leader, as otherwise Buswell wouldn’t have gone. I also presume these four seats were the only ones polled, and that there weren’t others where they were behind, but the wording leaves room for doubt on this point (he didn’t say the four seats polled).
The West also reports Constable has “agreed to join forces with the Liberals at the next election”, but has ruled out joining the party. However, there doesn’t seem to be any meat on these bones beyond the fact that she will be “involved with the campaign”. That she would support a minority Liberal government was never in doubt. The report quotes Constable speculating on the possibility of her joining cabinet and citing the Karlene Maywald precedent, but there’s not much to the story unless she gets a concrete offer.
As for Deidre Willmott, Carine is “shaping up as one of the most likely options”. Perhaps the existing candidate Tony Krsticevic could be given the North Metro upper house seat instead.
Hmm, I wonder if Swan Hills was one of the other 4 marginals polled, which would add weight to the parachuting of Barnett into the seat if Deidre refused to budge ?
Liz has always said she’d support a Minority Liberal Govt, it was even speculated she would at the last election as well.
So basically there is nothing new to report from Robert Taylor then ?
This is going to backfire when Noel Chrichton-Browne. John McGrath & Anthony Fels are mentioned in response
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24140133-5006789,00.html
So Buswell will still be there looking for a promotion to Treasurer.
“Mr Buswell is expected to get a key portfolio, possibly Treasury, despite his chair-sniffing scandal. Mr Barnett said he had immense ability and could win back community confidence.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24140133-5006789,00.html
“Mr Barnett said the canal plans had “probably been too much, too quickly, for people to absorb.”
But he indicated they were still firmly on his agenda.
“In WA we happen to have one of the world’s greatest water resources, and we should use that for the state,” he said.”
Barnett needs to start thinking on a national scale, not just WA.
A canal from the Kimberleys through Alice Springs down to the Murray. Could then float barges laden with goods from the Alice down to Adelaide and Melbourne, save on transport costs, solve the Murray water crisis, bring water to the Gippsland basin,across to NSW. Cubby can also keep their water.
He needs to get the lib leaders in SA, Vic, NSW, QLD and federally on board.
@214 and 220
Why not take the largest possible sample? The first Western Australian election which was clearly a two-sided contest between Liberal and Labor was in 1905. If we start the count with that one, we have a total of thirty-two elections, and each side has won sixteen.
Dr Adam
I always felt, growing up in WA, that it was a very Liberal state, but J-D is right in that it has had periods of conservative and ALP governments, whether we consider the last Court govt as an interregnum or as a return to previous pattern might help. When Richard Court was in things seemed to turn back to the bad old days of old style Liberal govt of “if it moves, shoot it; if it doesn’t, mine it”, but Gallop was a genuine change. I disliked Burke because he was, frankly, dishonest and corrupt, but still, much good also came from his government. Gallop steadied the ship, was a good premier, and allowed significant developments to go ahead but not at the expense of communities. Carpenter appears to be in the same mould, if a tad more conservative.
WA would then appear to be an inherently conservative state (which is not necessarily Liberal). The odd policy mix of One Nation seemed to do well, linked as it was to protectionism and conservatism, and the ALP in WA has also seemed to be centre-right govt. The issue for the Liberals is that they really haven’t had a lot of places to go, policy-wise, to differentiate themselves. Barnett’s canal was an attempt to provide a radical policy solution to break this nexus, but was a VERY dumb idea. But this shouldn’t mean that Barnett, portrayed as a safe pair of hands, middle-of-the-road kinda guy wont get up this time either. The redistribution works against him this time, but in future could well deliver a Liberal govt not reliant on the Nats.
Heard from a friend that someone was trying to poll swan hills last night. Friend to lazy to listen to questions – told them to sod off. Will be interesting if it ever comes out.
Carps is on his way to the govs joint to penicil in a snap sept 6th election
Considering both major parties till do not have a full list of candidates yet…
IT’S OOOOOOOOOON
Carps definitely scared of Cuddly Colin
New thread.