With five more days to go:
• Nigel Adlam of the Northern Territory News wrote on Saturday that Labor’s Chris Natt faces a tough fight to hold Drysdale, but should be helped by Labor’s promise to build a water park and sports complex in Palmerston; tips the CLP’s Kezia Purich to gain Goyder from Labor’s Ted Warren; declares himself surprised that the bookies have Labor’s James Burke down to retain Brennan; says the CLP should have no trouble reclaiming Braitling with the retirement of independent Loraine Braham; and ultimately tips a result of Labor 14 and CLP 10 with independent Gerry Wood retaining Nelson.
• Fong Lim CLP candidate and former Solomon MP David Tollner was seen to confirm his lack of interest in serving under Terry Mills’ leadership last week, when he talked over him to answer a journalist’s question regarding the party’s embarrassing failure to find candidates in Macdonnell and Arnhem. Former Darwin lord mayor Garry Lambert has given an “absolute undertaking” he won’t challenge Mills, but before not doing so he must win the outgoing Clare Martin’s seat of Fannie Bay. Lambert says he supports Mills’ leadership, “at the moment”. Jodeen Carney, member for the Alice Springs seat of Araluen and party leader until January, says “nothing’s ruled in, nothing’s ruled out”.
• The Radio National program The National Interest featured a lengthy item on the election on Friday, featuring interviews with Terry Mills, Loraine Braham and Treasurer Delia Lawrie. Transcripts from Friday’s action-packed episode of Stateline should also come online shortly.
200 Comments
No posts yet! Oh, well, looks like the typical down south mob don’t give a rat’s arse about top enders.
It used to be that you could tell an NT election coming on because of all the dog whistles. Usually it was bloody land rights (aka knock the blacks), law and order (aka knock the blacks), those interfering bloody feds (aka knock the pro-black, chardonney guzzling, know-nothing, bleeding heart pinkos from down south), give Kakadu back to Territorians (aka knock the blacks), and let’s dig a mine where Indigenous people were negotiating a deal (aka knock the blacks). It all ran like a tram on a track. Most elections, one or more of the candidates would punch somebody in a pub. No-one cared. The voting patterns were fairly predictable, even if Gough Letts did lose out on first chief minister glory because Korean war vet Jack Doolan rolled him with a huge majority of the Indigenous vote. The CLP would usually just romp it in.
In some interesting reversals, Labour appears to have developed a habit of government, it is getting a bit of a flogging from the conservative commentariat for is failure to deliver gap-closing services to Indigenous people, no-one seems to have noticed the feds, Labour is calling the election to give ‘business certainty’ for a gas plant, and law and order seems not to be an election issue.
Tollner is an amiable old-style Territorian and, given changes in Indigenous demographics, an increasing proportion of mining in the economy, and an increasingly sophisticated population in Darwin, could well have reached his use-by date.
A Labor win will be good, and the bigger the margin the better!!
The only thing worrying Territorians is where and when to vote. You can bet they will be asking ‘are we supposed to vote today?’ Many will vote according to perceptions of the NT News and local TV news except where candidates have some sort of local character and profile, but I cant think of any who have that.
Yes the dog-whistling elections of the CLP days are well gone (must be something about Liberal types that they love to use bigotry, racism and fear as their main election tools when in power). The CLP used to be able to get the local population to feel the Aboriginals had it too good, were getting too much for nothing, would take over your backyards and so on. The only thing the CLP had to avoid is the bigotry/racism bit with ethnic minorities since there are many of them in Darwin.
Couldn’t have a Howard type comment that ‘we will be over run with Asians..’ in Darwin.
Territory politics and Territorians improved when that nasty piece of work Shane Stone left the scene.
Hmmm, interesting about the Greens standing in all 3 Alice seats – will this impact on Braitling and Greatorex, given they are both marginal (although I realise that Braitling is really a CLP seat, but will Alice Springs Councillor Jane Clark standing help or hinder Melky)? Also Green-turned-Independent Justin Tutty in Drysdale – will this impact on the result or simply make a marginal ALP seat a safe CLP seat?
Gough Letts
Minor nitpick: It was Goff Letts.
The rest of your post is spot on.
Territory politics and Territorians improved when that nasty piece of work Shane Stone left the scene.
They sure have. He is by far the most arrogant politician I have ever seen in action. He single-handedly lost the referendum up here on statehood a few years back, despite polls consistently showing a clear majority in favour of it. He was gone from Territory politics not long after that.
Just Me @ 5
Thanks for reminding me that the spelling was ‘Goff’. I plead the ravages of time.
Around about that time there were some stories doing the rounds that may or may not have been 9/10ths bullshit. Who knows? Stories often go around during elections and in the Territory they were generally well-fueled and singularly lacking in opportunities for making judgements about validity and reliability. There were no blogs to establish the truth in those days.
Anyway, according to some of his constituents, a certain CLP politician who shall remain nameless, had made the fairly basic political error of telling some his voters-to-be that they were ‘too dirty’ to live in ‘proper’ houses. (In those days the ‘proper houses’ element of this proposition was not so often tested in the Territory). This was supposed to have been said when limited self government and elections were a gleam in the eyes of frontier folk, but before they got ‘real’. This politician apparently found it impossible to even think that such folk would vote at all, let alone vote against him. As it turned out, some other folk thought it was quite a privilege to make sure everybody who was entitled to be on the roll was registered and that the transport was available to the nearest polling station on polling day. I am not sure, but I have heard it said that the majority of such voters still signed their names with an ‘x’, so the ‘Gap’ was alive and well in those days.
I am not sure of the truth of any of this, it is a long time ago, and I never saw any actual evidence that would hold up in court. Perhaps, it was a sophisticated disinformation campaign. Perhaps his constituents misheard him, but, by golly, they certainly voted on what they said they thought they had heard.
On the other hand, some people had a bit of an idea that Jack Doolan may have helped certain of his homeless voters-to-be ‘borrow’ some corrugated iron from the back of the Katherine meat works buildings in the off-season. Jack had some very considerable human failings, but he lacked neither an action-orientation nor common human decency, so both the failings and the strengths may have combined to lead to some real housing results, albeit he never did get around to helping liberate wood for the floors and glass for the windows. The story about Jack may have been true; maybe not.
In the event, some of the more sophisticated post-election statistical analysis, as reported in the NT News, did miss this bit of qualitative insight, which was enough to explain why Jack Doolan won his seat. Always, of course, if the stories are true.
On another topic raised above. I would never ever say anything other than that as a great leader of the Territory, he was a very nice man, a very modest man, a true visionary, a genuine leader, very insightful, humane, caring, incisive, intelligent, inclusive, a great public speaker, a great gift to his party and and an unforgettable boon to the peoples. You may find it difficult to know who I mean, because there have been many such wonderful men in the Territory’s political history. I also understand he will quite rightly litigate to protect such a fine reputation.
On a final topic, if you want blanket and breathless election coverage for your candidate on the front page of the NT News, I suggest you run with a Saltwater Crocodile, preferably one that chews up the odd outboard, eats the odd tourist, leaps out at passing four wheel drives and turns up in a Darwin swimming pool.
Labor is very short odds to win.
http://www.way2bet.com.au/odds_comparison/20922/20923/44826/Northern+Territory+Elections
The headlines can be written now for the Northern Territory election: Topend Poll Setback for Rudd
A swing and loss of seats are inevitable after the landslide last time. The intervention and the often inaccurate claims that the labor government was doing nothing about indigenous issues will bite. So will fishing versus sea rights, the 130km/hr speed limit and the change of leader. For more try the link.
If a tree falls in the forest and no body hears it does it happen?
9 dovif – I want what you’re on.
Kevin Rennie @ 8
Do you think that the old truism about Australian voters being able to discriminate between state/territory and federal elections no longer holds? Or that incompetent journos will think it no longer holds?
Come to think about it, I just ducked out and despite nine months of wall-to-wall labour governments the sky is still there. Phew. However, there were still some headless chooks out there fluttering around looking for a Messiah Rooster Sans Cojones.
7 Aristotle
But look at Lasseter’s, they’re giving out 6.50-1 on Labor (these are even longer odds than most agencies are giving the CLP). Someone must have dumped a huge amount of money on the CLP with them (either that, or one of the techies has seriously stuffed up and is moments away from a sacking).
A swing and loss of seats are inevitable after the landslide last time.
Agree.
The intervention and the often inaccurate claims that the labor government was doing nothing about indigenous issues will bite.
Maybe. The indigenous issue is already more or less factored into voting patterns in the NT.
So will fishing versus sea rights, the 130km/hr speed limit and the change of leader. For more try the link.
Doubt they will be a significant factor against Labor. Voters who claim their vote is influenced by such things (especially the first two) are almost certainly not Labor voters to start with and are just using them as excuses to appear like they have changed their vote as a ‘protest’. I don’t buy it at all, and I think the CLP are wasting their time trying to run on these things.
Henderson is an excellent choice for leader, and comes across very well.
Boerwar
You obviously have some history up here. Jack Doolan goes back some way indeed. An interesting character, who certainly had his flaws, such as a deep and troubled relationship with ethanol laced fluids, but certainly possessing a solid streak of basic decency.
As to identity of that noble leader you mention. well, far be it from me to cast stones in any direction.
Just Me @ 14
Right on the first point.
I seem to recall that Jack had had a fairly traumatic time of it in Korea which may have caused him some problems in later life. A forgotten participant in a forgotten war and, yes, he had his problems with the demon rum. He didn’t exactly shine in the House, and I didn’t actually agree with him on a fair bit of stuff, but I had a lot of time for him because there was virtually no separation between what Jack thought, said and did. He had a burning hatred for injustice. That was enough for me. As I recall the story, he did help liberate some sheets of tin for Indigenous housing purposes. They were pulled off the walls of the meatworks. He had to borrow the truck to do it but I was never entirely clear about how much permission he had to borrow the truck. Jack would have seen it as part of the class war against the Vesteys mob. We have had some pilfering politicians in Australian history but very few who have taken from the rich and given to the poor in such a direct way. Jack could well be unique.
The Greens have announced they will preference the CLP ahead of Labor in all seats bar Port Darwin, where negotiations are ongoing. The effect of this on Saturday’s poll – limited. The effect of this on the credibility of the Greens in the NT – huge.
Can you call yourself a “Green” party when you preference the party that wants a uranium dump in Central Australia and to destroy the Daly River via land clearing for agriculture?
What reason did they give for it Grace?
Grace@16 – where did you hear this? Given the Greens are running a NO ALICE DUMP campaign I find this a bit strange, so I’d like to find out why as well.
Grace@16
Where did you hear this? Given the Greens are apparently running a NO ALICE DUMP campaign I find this a bit strange, so I’d like to see the reasons why.
Apologies for the double post.
#16
Does Labor support the dump too? If so, the Greens could try to market it as a “lesser of two evils”-type compromise.
The effect of this on Saturday’s poll – limited.
Virtually nil, I would say. Individual Greens voters are very unlikely to preference the CLP, no matter what the party’s HTV cards suggest.
The effect of this on the credibility of the Greens in the NT – huge.
Yup.
What were they thinking? If they think their policies will get a more sympathetic hearing from a CLP government then they are well and truly off with the astral-travelling organic fairies.
All they had to do was not preference.
MDMConnell I’m fairly certain Labor has a no nuclear waste dump policy across the board.
The Greens certainly paint a contradictory picture. On the one hand calling for the Federal Government to quickly repeal the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act 2005 and stop the development of a nuclear waste facility at Muckaty, and on the other hand they’re willing to preference a party who wishes to build that facility.
Really dumb.
Mention of Jack Doolan prompts me to ask: whatever happened to (a) Jon Isaacs and (b) Neville Perkins?
This might be a case of having shot yourself in the foot.
About three weeks ago there was a lot of media about the funding of the Environment Centre and its environmental advocacy commitments. Government committed only $65k for the coming year, of the $185k wanted.
The CLP environment announcement of last week was to commit to the full $185k amount, plus a boost for ALEC..
Secondly, as a green vision, a reduction in Government (ie the biggest employer and therefore opinion leader and benchmark) produced greenhouse gases of 20% by 2020…
and giving the EPA some more powers
I dont think there has been a comparable commitment from the existing government.
Actually Grace is incorrect.
The Greens are not directing preference to either party in the NT in all seats except Port Darwin, where they are negotiating with the ALP.
In other news, the CLP have embarassed donors by sending out bulk emails asking for funds. This revealed the identities of some of the donors to the media.
“The email is attributed to party director Bob Johnston and reads: “Your voluntary contribution is greatly appreciated, but at present we’re very short of cash … We would want $10,000 by the end of the week and would really appreciate your support – Bankcard accepted.”"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/04/2323483.htm
Embarassing.
LTEP,
From your link.
“In other election news, the Greens will deny Labor their preferences in all but one crucial seat in the Northern Territory election.
In one of the Territory’s most marginal seats, Port Darwin, negotiations over preferences between Labor and the Greens are taking place”.
Grace is right.
The Greens are not directing preference to either party in the NT in all seats except Port Darwin, where they are negotiating with the ALP.
Well, that certainly makes more sense.
Adam in Canberra @ 24
For Perkins it is clear:
On, Perkins, from Wikipedia: He later served as Secretary of the New South Wales Department of Aboriginal Affairs from 1987 to 1988. He is the Founder of the Central Australian Aboriginal Congress, a Founder of the Central Australian Aboriginal Legal Aid Service, former Labor Member for MacDonnell and Deputy Leader in the NT Parliament, the first Aboriginal General Manager of Aboriginal Hostels Limited, first Aboriginal General Manager of Imparja Television Pty Limited. He is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management.
Not sure if it is the same Jon Isaacs, but a certain Jon Isaacs:
recently stepped down as Chairman of Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority after eleven and a half years on the Board, the last three as Chairman.
is independent Chair of the joint venture vehicle developing The New Rouse Hill, a $1.2 billion regional centre in Sydney’s north-west.
is the Deputy Chair of the NSW Ambulance Service Advisory Council and chairs its Clinical Governance Committee.
In other election news, the Greens will deny Labor their preferences in all but one crucial seat in the Northern Territory election.
Which is not the same as directing preferences to the CLP.
GG get your facts right, for a change.
Grace is wrong.
The Greens will not preference the CLP
I’m pretty confident that when the ABC report says “the Greens will deny Labor their preferences in all but one crucial seat”, what they mean is that they won’t be making a direction. It is extremely rare for the Greens to actively preference the conservatives – the only actual example I can think of is in a few seats in Queensland in 1995.
Grace said,
“The effect of this on Saturday’s poll – limited. The effect of this on the credibility of the Greens in the NT – huge”.
Grace is right.
Although not exactly Grace’s words, I would also add, Can you call yourself a “Green” party when you preference “or are indifferent” to the party that wants a uranium dump in Central Australia and to destroy the Daly River via land clearing for agriculture?
Wriggle on that, Green worms.
Even if the Greens did preference the CLP – the obvious question to ask is how many Greens voters would actually follow sucha HTV?
My guess -it isn’t many!
Possum,
What do the Greens stand for?
Enough did so in Qld in 1995 to bring down the Labor government, and thus to consign Drew Hutton and the Greens generally to the fires of hell in perptuo as far as Qld Labor people (such as the PM for one) are concerned.
The Greens stand for shrill self-righteousness punctuated by bursts of shameless opportunism.
I give up Judge Growler? (I hope this a joke!)
Welcome back to Oz Mr Carr… BTW.
In Canberra because it’s the easiest way to acclimatise to Oz from the Tundra of Europe?
That’s Dr Carr to you…
Yes Canberra in August reminds me very much of Berlin in March, but without the nice cake shops.
Adam,
Stealing punchlines on day 1. Oh well. nothing changes. Welcome back.
#36
That was over the Koala Tollway, am I right? You can hardly blame the Greens for that. How “Green” would it have been to support bulldozing a koala habitat for a freeway?
OK I will try to be nice, but I warn you that I am now a member of the NSW Labor Right and will thus not be trifled with.
How Green was it to support the Qld Nats, who would turn every koala in Australia into burger patties if they thought they could get away with it?
Sussex Street suits you well – now in gods name, when will you blokes knock off that useless git Iemma?
yes blow away Zombie Iemma
I’ve only been a NSW resident for a week, so I don’t think I’ll comment on state matters just yet.
#44
This is actually an interesting question. How do you believe the Greens should deal with unco-operative Labor governments? You and others might argue that they should never support conservatives for ideological reasons, but how credible can they be if they just line up behind an environmentally irresponsible ALP, just because they’re the ALP? If they genuinely aspire to be a legitimate third-force party and not just a fringe organisation, surely they need to show they can deal constructively with the Coalition parties, and direct preferences accordingly in certain circumstances (like Qld 1995).
That dilemma flows from the fundamental mistake made by the environmental movement in the 1980s in copying the German Greens and becoming a political party rather than a lobbying movement. Our electoral system forces that choice on minor parties. The greenies would have done much better to stick to the strategy that worked very well for them over the Franklin dam in 1983, rather than turn themselves into an ineffective political party.
Drew Hutton was an environmentalist first and a lefty second… something thats unfortunately hard to find in the Greens these days…
Since I have undertaken to be nice, I will not share my opinion of Drew Hutton with you. You can read all about his doings here
http://www.aph.gov.au/Hansard/joint/commttee/J8527.pdf
Maybe that’s the way forward for the Greens; to take the genuine environmentalists like Hutton and set up a more centrist Green party. The attempts of parties like Liberals for Forests in WA showed that conservatives might vote for a purely environmental party without all the ideological baggage. The more radical Greens members could then go off and form their own Left Party or join the Socialist Alliance or something.
Adam makes reference to Koala burger patties.
Where are these available?
At McDonald’s, apparently.
If Labor activists are so worried about the Greens preferencing the conservatives then they’d be better off not telling lies. If when the Greens choose to not make a recommendation (hardly a radical position) they have people like Grace saying this means we are putting the CLP ahead of Labor then all it does is make people think
a) if Labor is this dishonest they don’t deserve preferences.
b) If we’re going to cop the allegation of preferencing the coalition anyway we may as well actually do it.
Obviously there are arguements against not directing preferences, but its a very different thing from preferencing the CLP, and spreading lies about which one the NT Greens are doing doesn’t help your cause.
i suspect Grace is involved in discussions with The NT Greens,
and is trying to put pressure on The Greens,
instead Grace only made a fool of the serial megaphones spewing ‘hate’ and lies about the visionary Greens.
If the Greens are so visionary, why do we only ever hear their noise?
good to see your hearing something GG,
perhaps something will sink in.
try this:-
http://www.democracy4sale.org/
Feral sparrowhawk #55 AND the Judge #56
Both calling Grace ‘a liar’ for outing yous Looney left Greens , for being santimonious lightweight butterflys for being indifferent to preferences going to CLP
Lets see , a CLP happy to have a uranium dump in central Australia and a looney left Greens Party moralising as a core principal against uranium , yes I can understand Feral sparrowhawk AND the Judge why you both feel helplessly foolish , and irrelevant
So, the Greens NOT preferencing the ALP is some sort of traitorous position? To whom is this so? With the ALP committed to uranium mining, not committed to climate change (and don’t give me the palaver that Senator Wong is here to the save the day – the concessions to motorists and industry undermine any legitimacy of the emissions trading scheme in dealing with climate change), not committed to adequate support for advocacy and community groups (following on from the footsteps of the Howard Govt in this manner), and (for you Dr Carr, now a member of the NSW Right) totally committed to mining the crap out of NSW, selling it off to the highest bidder, and (in my opinion) apparently deeply corrupt if Wollongong Council is anything to go by I find it hard to believe they are not punishing the ALP MORE.
The fact remains that there is on too many issues little daylight between ALP & LP/NP/LNP/CLP positions. On some issues there are clear distinctions (signing Kyoto was a start, but not setting real targets and a setting up a trading scheme that looks suspiciously like more handouts to business diminishes this achievement – and then we get to Workchoices light…) and they should be applauded for good policy (increased child care, and even just for considering paid maternity leave), but lets not pretend they are all gleaming white knights.
In the NT I personally would have thought there were good reasons for not supporting the CLP (the last 25 years for instance…), but this should not provide an automatic preference for the ALP. I would suggest that in NSW there is ample evidence for not supporting the ALP, and even for the need for a change of government, but a preference for the LP/NP would be a very serious measure to take – more likely the same ‘open ticket’ approach would be adopted. But if the Greens believe that the ALP has failed the test of good government, good policy, transparency and probity why should they slavishly support them? I take you back to the Cunningham byelection when ALP branches (I know at least 2) refused to support Sharon Bird in all but the most token of manners (providing $1 to the campaign) and members actively campaigned against her.
Slavish following the old “left to right” preferencing model relies on parties fitting this model – by peoples own admission on this site the ALP does what it needs to get elected, including ditching policies that don’t appear to win support across the board. I would suggest the days of the ideology-driven mass party are over and with it this model.
Oh, and Dr Carr @51 – your link just shows how miserable, bitter & twisted some members of the Liberal Party are. Your former employer Mr Danby seems to have not managed to keep them in line either (although not being the Chair doesn’t help).
Stewart J,
So many words, so little to say. The Greens are just ideologically driven ratbags that won’t be satisfied till we are all living in caves.
“Grace Says:
August 4th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
The Greens have announced they will preference the CLP ahead of Labor in all seats bar Port Darwin”
are you completely incapable of understanding the facts ron?
Grace is not telling the truth and you are parroting her lies.
Let me say one more time,
The Greens are NOT preferencing the CLP in the NT election
Get over your jealousy/hatred of the inspirational Greens ron,
learn to live with the future and the truth.
GG
Hmmm, this would imply (following the same train of thought it seems) that the ALP would have us living in holes in the ground…
nothing sinking in GG, maybe to much ear wax
Apolgies to all PBers – when I posted yesterday afternoon, I was not lying, not in negotiations with the Greens and trying to put pressure on them but relying what I had heard on radio – I then double-checked with ABC Online which confirmed what I posted.
The ABC News @ 7.00 however said that the Greens were not directing preferences to either party – which if I had known earlier would have changed some of my post.
Having said that – I still don’t see why the Greens cannot differentiate between the CLP who have repeatedly called for the Labor Govt to open up the Daly River area for development; and support a nuclear waste dump for Central Australia and the NT ALP, (although their environmental position on issues could certainly improve).
BTW
I also apologise for not providing the link in my original post.
Cheers
good on you Grace,
now waiting for ron, GG to apologise……
……i’m a dreamer.
Thanks judge, I wouldn’t knowingly post incorrect information.
Good on you Grace for clearing that up.
It’s just bloody irritating when people run with that line – just because Greens allow the voter to make up their own mind in most seats (it’s not like many of them will preference the CLP, but it’s a valid point that NT Labor isn’t always the most impressive of parties) DOES NOT mean that there’s any ‘dealing’ or otherwise with the conservatives. It was the same lie in Victoria 06 – they tried and failed in NSW 07 – it’s just something Greens are accustomed to from the ALP now.
I’d preference the ALP – but then that’s just me
Besides – if the Greens want to become/have just become the third force in Aus politics, they can’t be a sweetie party for one or another big party. A bit of independence isn’t a bad move – and voters can make up their own minds rather than have parties do it for them.
I can understand Grace, the MSM have never been fair to The Greens,
especially in the last few days of an election.
When over ONE MILLION Australians Vote1 The Greens its a miracle.
Such a miracle sends shiver down the spines (i’m being generous), of the LIB/LAB nepotistic/incestuous, 2PP CLUB.
The Old School can only lie, bully, abuse and name call from their ivory towers, as The Green go from strength to strength.
Some in the ALP thinks that the Green is a branch of their party and thinks that the Green has to do what the ALP wants.
If the Greens want to be someone’s lackey, then they will follow the ALP in everything. Eventually all their supporter will just vote the ALP.
If they want to be a real party, they will look at the merit of both ALP’s argument and the Conservative’s argument and make up their mind what is best for the electorate, only then will they cease being a fringe party and have some power to shape Australia.
Unfortunitely that will make them a centrist party, and alienate them from their current following.
The Greens are just ideologically driven ratbags that won’t be satisfied till we are all living in caves.
Talk in vacuous ideological clichés much, GG?
GG lives in caves dug by ron
I was told that Terry Mills either said or implied that he would cut the Public Service in the NT. I don’t know if that is true but if it is it would be a very silly thing indeed to say. And if he did Im not sure how many picked up on it.
The NT Govt having such a large area to service but having a small population neccessarily has a larger percentage of Public Servants making up the population. The PS with their families and friends not to mention the amount of revenue they give to small business is a significant voting block all round.
It is coincidental that I was saying only last week to a friend that the CLP could guarantee itself extra votes by promising to not cut the PS.
Clair Martin I believe picked up a number of votes when she first won govt by saying there would be no PS reduction.
The Judge
Australian Greens hav become th harlot of Liberals/CLP
Santimonious Greens supposedly anti Uranium , ar indifferent to preferences going to CLP who want a uranium dump in central Australia
But a Greens fruitcake like you is oblivious to how stupid Australian Greens now look
ron your funny.
stick this in your solar grid:-
http://icantseeyou.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/08/major-discovery-from-mit-primed-to-unleash-solar-revolution.html
Can we get to the serious business of forecasting how many seats each side?
Is Nigel Adlam on the money tipping a result of Labor 14 and CLP 10 with independent Gerry Wood retaining Nelson?
Stewart J
#60
Another looney left Greens party faction member
Your post is typical of why 92% of th Public regard your Party as made up of extremists and loons
you wrote alot of words , but deceptiverly NEVER addressed th point raised at all NT Greens with Bob Brown shamefully hiding away , hav trashed there core for existence , pro environment & anti Uranium
ie by being indifferent to Greens preferences going to CLP who suport opening up the Daly River area for development (anti environment) and who support a nuclear waste dump for Central Australia (pro Uranium)
Does not matter how you try to ’spin’ your way out of your NT Greens Partys pitiful decsion , its a hypocritcal stanse ditching your very core and you and Judge lack th moral conviction to disagree
the Judge
#76
could not answer my point could you , not surprising seeing its a PUBLISHED FACT
ron says
“Your post is typical of why 92% of th Public regard your Party as made up of extremists and loons ”
where is thal poll published?
another of your facts ron?
i’m still laughing about “Hawk saving the Franklyn River”
I think the possibilities of this exchange have been exhausted now.
Ron@78
Often you have not been so abusive, so I can only assume that you are in fact a welded on ALP voter who can’t bear to think of someone not agreeing with you. I did note the policy differences between the ALP and CLP, but I also noted that the ALP is PRO-URANIUM and PRO-DEVELOPMENT, which you accuse the Greens of pandering to in not actively supporting the ALP. I would suggest that the ALP are the rank hypocrites here. On the one hadn its okay to open up uranium mines (even consider nuclear energy), but its not okay to then take the rubbish created back. On the one hand its okay to take money from developers, over-rule local communities and pander to the Property Council, but on the other they are magically better than the CLP/LP/NP? In case you failed to note it, I said I would expect an open-ticket, not saying that the Greens support the policies of the CLP/LP/NP, and I expect that to be the same in NSW.
By your logic you would have the Greens as the “harlots” of the ALP. Oh, and as for “92% of the Public regard your party as made up of extremists and loons”, the same logic suggests that 56% of the Public think your party is also made up of extremists and loons. Neither is correct, you know it, and you are engaged in simple abuse because you don’t like the result. Get over it.
Apologies William, comments crossed. Will cease rant now.
That’s okay Stewart, it wasn’t directed at you and your comment was reasonable as always.
Hi William, How about a Lyne by-election thread. My namesake is about to deprive the Nationals of one of their safer seats. This could well have significant effects on the party’s future.
Yep, you’ll definitely get one soon, OC. Very exciting news.
Thomas Paine @ 74
Yes, Terry Mills has promised to cut $50 million from the public service
“Mr Mills said his razor gang would target senior public servants and high-priced consultants.
“There’s a lot of fat in the public service, especially in the senior levels,” he said
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/08/01/4915_ntelection08.html
As you said … brave
Yes, great news on Lyne (if it’s official). My parents retired up there, and they despised Vaile but adore Oakeshott. They’re rusted-on ALP voters, so they get to stick it to the Nats in a seat that the ALP could never win.
Has anyone seen the CLP email begging forcash that was accidentally sent to the media, yesterday? The email by CLP director Bob Johnston referred to the party being under severe financial strain.
“Your voluntary contribution is greatly appreciated, but at present we are very short of cash,” he wrote.
The Johnston memo asked members to provide a total of $10,000 by the end of the week.
It was also sent to the media, providing a list of the party’s members and financial backers.”
Having an inquisitive disposition I would love to read that list!
The link for my posting @ 87 is:-
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/08/05/4966_ntelection08.html
Yeah not very smart
Lets try to get people to vote for you while threatening their/their friends/ their family’s job
Mr Mills just got everyone who is a member of PS, who has family in the PS, or who know someone in public service to vote against him
From that link:
“LABOR yesterday promised to expand the NT’s public service to keep up with the booming population.
The Territory’s public service has grown to more than 16,000 people – despite repeated promises by former treasurer Syd Stirling that numbers would drop through natural attrition. ”
………………”The Chief Minister said Opposition Leader Terry Mills wanted to slash $50 million from the public sector in the first year of the next government.
Mr Henderson said this equated to the loss of 500 jobs. …”
Well seems the ALP knows what it is doing here. Normally you wouldn’t make such a promise except maybe in the NT and Canberra.
If Terry is smart he will come out very quickly and guarantee the jobs of PS or at least say that he is only refering to E01 and above or some such thing.
Luckily it wasnt a Saturday or Sunday paper which most people would read.
On the Lyne/Oakeshott thing… a piece of trivia. If this seat (Lyne) falls to an Independent, it will mean that no federal seat that has ever been held by a National Party or Country Party leader will be currently held by a National – with the sole exception of Earle Page’s seat of Cowper. The federal seats once held by Cameron, Fadden, McEwen, (Doug) Anthony, Sinclair, Blunt, Fischer and Anderson are now either held by another party/Independents, or were abolished. It’s sort of a metaphor for the plight of the National Party.
With regard to cutting public service numbers, one statistic is bandied about broadly by the CLP.
There are more journalists and PR people employed by the NT Government than there are journalists and PR people in the entire Northern Territory media machine.
Im guessing thats where the snipping will start.
Gonna cut 500 PS jobs eh?
Good luck, Mr Mills.
Expect Labor to win government and expect its environmental credentials of opposing th opening up the Daly River area for development to be a winner This issue voters will see as a clear choice of Labor opposing , CLP in favor , and Greens regarded as suspiciously equivocal due to no preferencing It could be Labor still gets approx 70% of Greens votes anyway by voters simply ignoring there own Partys stanse , and if so th credibilty damage (correctly) will go against th greens party itself severely , rather than against its members
Publication of members & financial backers & dealyed Party name chang will simply reconfirm CLP incompetence Its ironical another river (th Daly) is suported by Labor , seeing th last time Labor ran on a platform of saving a river , Tasies Franklyn river (which Hawke’s Labor govt actualy did) , despite knowing in advance it would lose all 5 Tas Federal seats (which it also ultimately did) Stewart J , If you throw stones as you did in #60 against a Party (and incorectly as well) , don’t whine as you did if they come back
Oakeshott has officially announced he will run as an independent (ABC news) My prediction: Oakeshotte will get 55 -60% primary vote.
legitimate predictions are usually based on a rigorous analysis of who will win and why; not based on blind ideological or party loyalties and who you would like to win.
John ,I predict there is nothing blind about oakshott country’s prediction.
Publication of members & financial backers & dealyed Party name chang will simply reconfirm CLP incompetence
plus publicising the fact (via the same document) that they are broke and are pleading for money.
This is a really, really bad look for the CLP, especially at this stage in an election campaign, and will cost them votes from many fence sitters. Now they simply cannot make any allegations of financial/administrative incompetence against the government and expect to be taken seriously. Effectively they have demonstrated they are not ready for government yet.
An unbelievably stupid mistake. Expect resignations over this one from within the party machine.
I think this stumble has sealed the election.
I am sticking with my original prediction of Labor losing 2-3 seats, and the CLP gaining 3-4 (they will probably pick the formerly independent seat of Braitling).
It also didn’t help that there was a story running that there could be a CLP leadership challenge after the election. What a stupid thing to do one week from an election, these guys are crazy.
Wonder if Peter Murphy is their adviser – wouldn’t be surprised. He prefers to wave the anti-Labor flag in the Sunday Territorian but no gonads to go for pre-selection himself.
ALP 20 (picking up Katherine)
CLP 4 (losing Katherine but picking up Braitling)
Ind 1 (Gerry, unfortunately, holding his own)
That comment under Demon should be under me. Dont know why the name filled in like that.
101
Exactly.
And what don’t you like about Mr Wood?
On the subject of caves, I believe that they have been unfairly maligned for party political purposes on this blog.
Caves are excellent.
Individual caves have been lived in for much, much longer than any artificial cave constructions such as brick veneer.
They have kept humans safe from the wind, rain and snow for tens of thousands of years.
In really tough ice-sheet climate times they have been ideal retreats.
They provided good places for burial of the dead, and for storage of food.
In the desert caves were, and are (see coober pedy artificial caves), cool.
They provide excellent gallery space for some of the world’s very best, ur, well, cave art.
There have been some problems with caves. These include Cave Bears, Trolls, and Sabre-toothed Tigers wanting to share the cave space and cave hospitality, but caves plus fire sorted this problem out nicely.
Caves, particularly caves part way up cliffs, were excellent defensive positions.
Caves are designated as profound spiritual places by religions, hermits and the like.
Caves are obviously a complex but neglected policy instrument. When the messiah has returned to his cave, the Opposition should have a good hard policy look at what role caves might play in mitigating CC.
In regards to post 96 about Hawke saving the Franklin.
This is indirectly true.
Bob Brown and the rest of the Wilderness Society stirred up so much international condemnation that Federal Labor caved.
Yes, they say they never give in to pressure but they did.
And dont forget it was also the ALP that wanted the dam.
Hawke looks good by making others in his own party overturn policy. No wonder the ALP has so many factions.
Gerry Wood is the best opposition party the NT has.
Interesting questions and points with regards to Green preferencing and the ALP.
In QLD, Labor are very concerned. Anna Bligh has been talking to Koalas this week:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24131146-29277,00.html
Though, many still see through it:
http://www.koalagroup.asn.au/newsletter.htm
Bludging pollster aka Steve
#108″
Interesting questions and points with regards to Green preferencing and the ALP
Anna Bligh has been talking to Koalas ”
who ar they preferencing
Dedmon22: Something must have changed in Katherine since we left at the end of 2002.
Take a look at this for a monster bet on the election.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24135751-5003402,00.html
Yikes. That reminds me of an AFL game a few years ago, where the unbackable favourite lost (probably to Fremantle – doing the unthinkable since 1995
), and some mug lost a five or six figure heap of money. There must be easier ways of increasing your stash…
Gary Bruce @ 111
I wonder if the bet was laid after watching Terry Mills refuse to confirm that he would be the leader of the CLP after Saturday?
Dave Tollner surrendered on Stateline on last Friday saying the CLP was aiming to win extra seats to be an effective opposition.
Now the leader is saying – we are not going to win and I expect a challenge to my position after the election!
Re:113
Terry Mills refused to confirm his leadership post the election on ABC News (NT) last night.
cheers
ron on August 5th, 2008 at 7:56 pm,
A donkey vote?
113 Grace – “I wonder if the bet was laid after watching Terry Mills refuse to confirm that he would be the leader of the CLP after Saturday?” That could be so.
It sounds like the CLP are running a shocking campaign up there.
An unfortunate set of circumstances to say the least.
http://news.smh.com.au/national/nt-election-heats-up-over-letter-drop-20080806-3quj.html
It sounds like the CLP are running a shocking campaign up there.
Going from bad to worse. They really have become a shambles since losing power. Makes the federal coalition look like an A-grade team.
Greens press release on preferences:-
https://promo-manager.server-secure.com/em/message/email/view.php?id=83742&u=2852
the Judge @ 119 do you have any idea of what the Greens mean by fighting CC using ‘feed in laws?’ (second diamond point in the link you provided). At first I thought it might be something about feeding the in-laws which did not make sense, but then I realized the stress must be on the first and third words, not the last two words.
As for the rest of the press release, it is a reasonably clear about why the Greens won’t be preferencing anybody else this time around. Presumably they are keeping their powder dry so they can fire it off next time around, which seems to be a reasonable long term strategy for making sure their preferences are not taken for granted. It is doubly reasonable to hold preference fire if labour is going to romp it in because the prefs won’t be making any difference any way – ie you get to make your point without any real pain.
Policy wise, the Greens appear to like public servants, the service industry, service industry clients and anything that might stop CC except for anything to do with uranium. They don’t like Harbour industrialisation, parties being obssessed about locking up lawbreakers, and uranium mining and putting uranium in a dump.
Boerwar,
don’t you hate it when those politicians go all nepotistic (feed-in-laws).
it’s not big and slick like some, but here’s the NT Greens site;-
http://www.nt.greens.org.au/index.html
further more as to preferences,
The Greens in NSW don’t get told by head office how to preference.
each local group decide how to preference, giving members hands on power to make a difference.
the judge @122
thank you. on the NSW Greens, that is very democratic, but I suspect that the rigid party-wide discipline of the old DLP might have been more effective. On the other hand, I suppose that there was never much doubt about where the DLP’s preferences were going to go.
with the emphasis is on ‘OLD’ DLP.
getting orders from a foreign country,
lead to their demise
Boerwar
#120
“a reasonable long term strategy for making sure their preferences are not taken for granted”
Unfortunately thats th ’spin’ given by th Party Boerwar One Politcal consequensae is for next three whole years , th greens will be totally irrlevant regarding Parliamnet , Labor will govern uninfluenced by anyone including Greens , not clever politcs Now given Labor’s ascendancy a repeat following electon and another 3 years of Greens irrelevance !
Reasons given by Greens Party for no preferencng are paultry BUT instead had Labor proposed to either support th Uranium dump or support development/Daly river or claimed a serous and i mean credible policy dispute in preferense negotiations , then Greens Party could hav used those reasons , improved there credibelity now , and in 3 years time reminded voters of those rasons (and oerhaps increased its vote) , again not clever politcs Why not write to your Paarty and advise them that zero leveraging your prefs leaves Greens neither Policy credibility (’indifferent to CLP geting your prefs) nor policy influencing Labor
the Judge @ 124
LOL. I had better come out of the closet. I once assisted in giving out DLP how-to-vote cards. That is, my old man gave them out, it was a small rural booth, and I spent the day in the booth to keep him company. I enjoyed it tremendously. There was a Communist Party candidate in the electorate and I recall that it was a booth with one of the very high voting percentages for the Communist Party. DLPer Dad and the Commo had a very entertaining day, sparring away in an amiable, civilised sort of way.
If Dad was a representative DLPer, no foreign orders were needed. It came from the heart. He had fled Europe at a time of rising east/west tensions, partly out of fear of having to survive yet another bloody war having been very lucky to survive the last one. Unlike many of the intelligentsia of the day (and he was not a member of that group), Dad knew perfectly well that Stalin was a mass murderous fibber and knew perfectly well what the Russians were up to in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. Like many DLPers, he was less open to some other realities such what the Americans and the Australians were up to Vietnam.
Lots of things led to the DLP demise, including the Vietnam war and changes in the labour party.
Labor MP, Len Kiely (Sanderson), is in deep doo-doos. The female security guard who was crudely propositioned by a drunk Len awhile back has been personally letter boxing his electorate about the incident and his unfitness to be a member of parliament.
A senior Labor party member in Alice Springs is criticising the party over the proposed uranium dump near the town.
NT teachers going on strike for 4 hours tomorrow morning.
Both sides claiming the others election promises can’t be paid for, ‘economically irresponsible’, ‘will blow the budget’,… you know the, usual stuff.
I thought drunken groping was a plus in NT
Ron @ 125
I wouldn’t join any party that would have me as a member. Seriously, I don’t belong to the Greens or any other party. Over a life time I have voted for most of the parties at one time or another. That said, I do think the Greens got it right faster on CC than any of the others, and I rate that as far and away the No 1 issue we are all facing.
On green preferences, I think your arguments have merit and that it is a judgement call.
I would question that Labour would take any notice of the Greens if the Greens did not have sufficient preferences to make a difference in an individual seat or in who gains government. Similarly, if the Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate, Labour (or Liberals) will deal because they have to.
If that is so, then holding back on preferences from time to time would make sense for the Greens. If Labour came to think that it is the ‘natural’ recipient of Green preferences it would tend to take the Greens for granted. Bottom negotiating line in terms of program and statutory deals is that because the Greens are at the margins in terms of popular support, the Greens are only going to be able to influence outcomes at the margins. They might be important margins and have a significant impact in specific areas, but they won’t have large systemic impacts. In the negotiating sense, the Greens have to establish that they have coin and that they are willing to dispose of the coin to their best advantage. To do that, they have to avoid being predictable when it comes to allocating preferences. A related problematic issue for the Greens has been discussed extensively in this blog and that is the impact of deals on their credibility and their ’soft’ power. I suspect this may be an even more important role for the greens than getting some marginal ‘real’ changes going as a result of a deal here and a deal there.
Zombie Mao @128
The woman was doing her job. The job was not high status. She stuck to her guns, which must have been very hard to do. He abused his position of power. If he can’t get that right, what can he get right? As usual in NT politics, grog was involved.
He apologised, went to the back bench and after a short stint on the backbench was reincarnated as a minister. She has not taken kindly to this. Good on her.
Buswell rightly got the chop for much the same reasons and I trust the voters of all genders will do the right thing by this chap as well.
My delayed apologies to Grace for the accusation of lying. An honest mistake is a very different thing. Greensborough Growler’s attempts to fudge the differences is in another category.
BTW, were I in the NT Greens I would probably have pushed for preferences to go to the ALP in at least some seats. My point is not that going open is the necessarily the best thing to do, but that it is legitimate.
Can’t see it mattering much anyway – most of the seats the Greens are running in are pretty safe one way or another.
Will we see the return of the eloquent Dave Tollner? Is he hoping for an upset win by denying any chance of CLP success?
feral sparrowhawk,
Greens are a bunch of unethial hypocrites.
What part of this is a fudge?
GG
only fudge I could see was your generosities regarding there looney economic models
Boerwar
#129
Just scrolled back and saw your thoughtfully reply , giving a diferent view
Before repiing to our Post’s substanse ie preferencing , two asides you made
Re your Dad’s DLP , his ‘cmmunist’ experiense in Europe history & philosphihys were probaly similar to many DLP voter at time Some reality driven FA changes by Labor probqbly brought most ‘home’ to Labor in 70’s Re CC , its an incorect asserion Greens hav made but ACTUAL dates of actions demolish there ’spin’ CC was ‘owned’ by Labor , and was factualy regarded as important in 1991 As a rwsult Labor signed th IPPCC convention in 1992 In 1992 Austalian Geens effectively did not even exist (th WA Greens did , based on th German Greens ad like German greens were anti nuke/war/ unranium) Austrlalian geens did not even get to Fed parliament till 1996 , 5 years after Labors IPPCC convention signing , and on mainly an envorontment policy , hence there Greens name Dates kill th Greens spin on CC That CC was Labor teritory True in recent years BOTH ‘left’ party now hav reely highlighlighted CC , and great , but since 2006 Rudd has ‘taken’ CC again , due to Greens politcal treatment of CC
Prerencing , envoronment is an area Greens hav ‘owned’ , rightly so , and suggest there clever use of prefs 9unlike what I’m saying NT greens have done) has influenced Labor envornmental policy , for th better , and i acknowledge that That liason started at Franklin river with Brown & Hawke , an has grown withGreens influencing Labor policy due to prefs Your view of “coinage” is a theoretical reason & persausiv However in practise , approx 70% of Greens will pref Labor anyway , as no one else to pref !! Labor know this is a fact and so does Bob Brown they both know th reason is this 70% actualy believe is a ‘left’ Party vs th Liberal conservatives and th gap is huge , otherwise a non pref policy would not deliver Labor 70% (given over 20% ar Lib voters who’ll always pref Libs) so th ’spin’ by th rusted on Greeens , its a choise between beter of 2 evils or ‘old Parties has always been nonsense
Where th prefs ar important to both Bob Brown & Kevin07 is th ‘leakage’ from Lavbor over about 70% , which direcrt preferencing zeros out , and that non leakage i th reel levarage , in some Electon cases (but not prsent NT one) Th queston is how to maximise it , with a ‘win’ ‘win’ for both Partys , or for Greens Party a ‘win’ at , least for dems That why think ‘coinage’ fails here in NT , as its been used in NT for no benefit both politcaly or for policy advantage Greens vs Labor I’m saying th ‘coinage’ works if you hav a legitimate policy diference , rathen than here th reverse is case , it deems Greens ar amivalent to CLP policy of having a unranium dump & hurting Daly river ‘Coinage’ is useful if applied Nationaly & in all States as a prefs policy solely based on politcs and a credible policy objecton (none in NT , reverse anti Greens credibility applies , so should hav pref Labor BUT say Yemma wants a non solar powerd desal for a Desal plant then thats when no prefs policy can have an impact , at least for Greens policy credibility , and sometimes politcaly as a particular electon/some seats will be close
Because Greens hav a crazy economic model as there policy base , there badge is reely environment , CC , Water and nuclar power/anti unranium So I understand your point Boerwar , but think was wrong State elecyton to do it on and on non core Greens policys , and as th non prefs favor th CLP (and unranium dump & Dley river Devopment also foolisgly hypocritical or naieve
dear ron/GG,
sorry to upset you guys but the Greens are an independent party and can preference whoever they like.
just like Labor can preference Family First and get Steve Fielding in the senate, where the headaches and real damage lasts for 8 years.
Ron @ 135
I accept your point on the CC history. I didn’t know it. I agree that leakage is a problem for the Greens in terms of gaining agreements with the majors. As for the NT, the Greens appear to have made a decision that involves short term versus long term trade offs. It is their judgement and their call to do so. If greens voters don’t like it they don’t have to vote for the greens. It would only be hypocritical if they were secretly trying to ensure that there was a radiation dump but in public saying the opposite. My view is that they don’t like the dump and they don’t like other things and have a long term view to maximise their influence to get the things they want. In some ways, if members of either or both of the major parties are either irritated or gratified by this approach, it might actually show that the greens strategy is working.
Is there anyway from people from interstate to watch the election coverage?>
Is anyone going to digitally tape the election?
The ABC should show the Election Coverage nation wide on ABC2…
My concern is that the Greens have not mentioned the nuclear dump at all in the press release the Judge posted for us or on their website. The sole focus is on the proposed Angela/Pamela uranium mine, 25Kms south of Alice Springs.
I know from talk radio that the Greens think the mine is a vote changer, which makes me suspect that the decision not to preference either party, is actually attempt to attract disgruntled CLP voters in the notoriously conservative seat of Braitling.
Whatever, I do think its cyncial of the Greens to refrain from mentioning the nuclear dump, which is a real point of difference between the CLP and ALP.
The proposed nuclear dump would have a devastating effect on the Aboriginal Communities that live near the proposed sites.
Grace @ 139 Am curious: Why do you think the dump would have a devastating effect on Aboriginal communities? How far do they live from the proposed sites?
re the dump: isn’t the decision a federal one? In which case it would be federal Labor making the decision, and with the NT a territory there’d be no way to stop it either? So the NT ALP can have its cake and eat it to, I presume, by opposing the dump during the election while knowing what they say is irrelevant. Plus we do have a policy fudge with uranium with the ALP supporting its mining, at times discussing using it as a fuel, but not accepting responsibility for its use or waste. I realise that’s an internal policy compromise, as much for the factions as for the public, but its still a fudge. I would have thought all state ALP branches would equally be saying no to mining and no to the dump, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. And you can make a similar claim for coal mining in respect of its effect on communities, particularly where its linked to power production.
WRT to effects of mining or dumps on communities, these should be acknowledged. The downstream impact of mining is well recorded, and of course you often have the situation of cultural heritage being destroyed. The explicit effect of the dump I am at this stage unsure, but I would assume that at the very least there’d be an exclusion zone (thus cutting people off from cultural sites), and the potential for leaks or accidents (thus impacting on those people living or travelling nearby). A separate issue is land rights for the dump site itself, which would need to be decided prior to the site actually coming into operation, so I’m sure that is a factor in any decision about placement. Coupled to that then is compensation and/or royalty issues (if this dump accepts waste for a fee then there would be a royalty for the use of the land). THEN we can get onto deciding environmental factors…
Personally I don’t want either mine or dump, I have campaigned against both and will continue to do so. I am not privy to the rationale used by the NT Greens in their decision, but if the ALP, at a state or federal level, is still making the decision about uranium mining and dumping then I would suggest the action of not preferencing either party in the NT is aimed at the party at which ever level is making the decision.
I think the NT Assembly is about Tollner’s level. He was seriously underqualified to be a federal MP, even when sober.
Does Adam Giles have any chance of election? He seems to be a much smarter guy and may have leadership potential in the very shallow talent pool of NT politics.
Boerwar
140
Not far enough
What they call the Harts Range site is actually land on Alcoota Station and in close proximity to the communities of Engawala, Mulga Bore and Angula. This Station was bought for the TO’s in 1993. It is still a very successful pastoral property. The Land Claim work has been completed and the TO’s are waiting (and waiting for years) for the Indigenous Affairs Minister to sign off on the claim so that it becomes Aboriginal Freehold.
The area is chock-a-block full of sacred sites as well as a major fossil site of dinosaurs.
East along the Plenty Highway (est 70kms) are the Communities of Atitjere (Harts Range), Irrelirre and Mt. Eaglebeak. North along the Sandover are the Utopia outstations (the nearest within 50K)
The Hamilton Downs Site is located near the outstation in the ranges north of Alice Springs and the Ingkerrerke Outstations along the north road.
Muckaty Station is 120 kms north of Tennant Creek and there is a community on the station. The Land Council were able to purchase the station for the TO’s because it had been badly degraded due to overstocking. The TO’s have worked for years with LandCare to repair the country and begin to run it as a sustainable station.
Stewart J
141
You are right it is the Federal Government that makes the decision and being a Territory they can over-ride any blocking legislation that a Territory Govt passed.
Given all of that I still don’t think we should lay down and let the Federal Govt put its waste dump in the NT.
Yes Giles will probably be elcted in Braitling. However to say that he is much smarter than Tollner does not give us an indication if he is smart compared to your average Territorian. I have been recieving mail from him consistently (I think he is very keen to get into parliament at some level after 3 or 4 failed attempts). My take on Giles is that although he is a Western NSW blackfella he is a true CLP’an. Running on nothing but law and order rubbish and with no long term view of how to address the critical racial divide in Alice Springs. Anyway I will bug him relentlessly when he gets in amd I do think that he will try to do a good job (inasmuch as that is possible within the Country Liberal framework).
My main observation about the election campaign here in Alice Springs is the incredibly poor effort on behalf of the Labor party. They have put up poor candidates who don’t appear to give a toss, which only adds to the perception that Labor doesn’t care about Central Australia. And it is more than a perception, one senior Labor figure once said in relation to the voters in Alice Springs “well the c..nts don’t vote for us so why should we give them anything”.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it ends up 14 ALP, 10 CLP and 1 independent which results in the people of Central Australia getting f;;ked over once again. Perhaps I need to move back to northern suburbs of Darwin…
Grace @ 143 Thank you for those details. Brings back memories of some hauntingly beautiful country.
Adam in Canberra
“Does Adam Giles have any chance of election?”
Not sure. The Alice Springs town booths are notoriously conservative so it will either be won by the CLP (Giles) or the independent (Melky).
Eli Melky is associated with a group called Advance Alice that seem to hold the view everything that is wrong with Alice Springs is equally the fault of the Indigenous inhabitants of Alice Springs, and the Government in Darwin. He stood for CLP pre-selection but was beaten by Adam Giles.
Adam Giles stood against Warren Snowdon in November for Lingiari. He increased the CLP vote in the Alice Springs town booths but lost badly everywhere else, particularly in the Indigenous communities where booths went 95% to the ALP. He campaigned in the bush on stopping welfare to Aboriginal people – not very smart really.
The ALP will increase its primary vote because of the inclusion of the Alice Springs town camps so the outcome will depend on Labor preferences.
roger@145
“And it is more than a perception, one senior Labor figure once said in relation to the voters in Alice Springs “well the c..nts don’t vote for us so why should we give them anything”
Who was this senior Labor figure who said this? Can you post a reference for this?
I would have said the vast majority of those 90% plus results in the booths in indigenous communities were primarily because of the howard/brough intervention rather than any shortcomings in giles style. He has a free reign this time to take what position he wants, so will be interesting to see how it pans out for him
Who was this senior Labor figure who said this? Can you post a reference for this?
Yes, I’d also like to see good evidence for that claim. I’m inclined to the view that if there were any it would have been all over the media by now, I mean, this is an election campaign.
No, no reference available in the public domain (surprisingly). My source is impeccable though I am not able to say who it was (which also goes for the identity of the senior Labor figure). Of course no one would be surprised if this was said in a private setting would they?
Also this was not during this campaign but obviously some time in the last 7 years.
Stewart J
#141
You’ve misunderstood th extent of NT Greens ditching opposition to a uranium dump
We ar talking about a NT Territory Government election right now , and as Grace said in #144 NT Assembly has power What has been raised is criticism of Australian Greens , a Party contesting THIS NT Election
Australian Greens hav NOT seriousley highlighted there Unranium dump opposition and also has shown ambilevance to a uranium dump (by being indifferent to CLP (who do support th uranium dump) getting Greens prefs)
Changing goal posts by talking about Federal Labor’s powers & what they may do is a red herring It is Australiaqn Greens who made this prefs decision , and th buck stops with them for it , regarding non preferencing in this NT Electon
Changing goal posts by claiming Labor expects there prefs is simply another way of clouding that this prefs buck decion is with Australian Greens solely
Changing goal posts by claiming Labor may suport Uranium mining is also further way of clouding that this prefs buck decion is with Australian Greens solely
Australin Greens alone made this decision on this particular isie for this particular NT electon , and must wear any criticism and consequenses to its credibility
That being th case , it is quite legitmate to criticise Australina Greens prefs policy for this NT Election , and I do , its either hypocritial or naieve , or both , at a policy level and I think not prudent at a credibility level
Boerwar
#137
Thanks for your reply on prefs and I agree with first 1/2 of your #137 post Regarding th 2nd part of your post , as you’ll note from my #152 my only reaction is it is solely Australian Greens decion , but having made it they then hav to wear both consequences of doing so and its accompanying criticism
Now as you suggest they may hav made it probabley for long term reasons , but I criticise it as I think there long term political strategy (regarding prefs , by non prreferencing now) is counterproductive to themselves , but as you say thats there thoughts I also criticise it on both policy & credivbility grounds
Ron @ 153
Thank you. The proof will be in the pudding. We can both now sit and watch for a couple of elections to see whether the greens strategists got it right.
roger
141
“Of course no one would be surprised if this was said in a private setting would they?”
I would be surprised if this was said in private setting and I have never heard any of the Labor people I know talk in such terms. Despite the lack of success in winning town seats in NT elections Alice Springs has a large ALP branch.
I know people in Alice Springs think that the NTG ignore the needs of Alice Springs but I don’t think that actually reflects reality. The major population centres have their needs very well catered for – towns of comparable size would love to have the services and facilities that AS enjoys.
Since self-government the major population centres have benefited from Government largesse – this has been at the expense of remote communities.
Ok, for those going for a thumping Labor victory and getting very excited about it i suggest you think again.
As a Territorian i can assure you the 05 election was a protest against the then recycled Opposition Leader D Burke (prev chief min 98-01). He was so arrogant and out of touch he refused to accept that voters actually dared to kick him and his party out of office back in 2001.
Add to that he had created so many enemies during his time in office (including NT News) and was like a military leader seeking revenge on the people for voting him out lol. He and a few of the other old schoolers ran the show in the clp and even in their Opposition days dictated and overrode policies put forward by hard working party members/candidates and back benches, sounds awfully similar to the current state of the NSW ALP.
Anyway a lot has happened since then and a Federal Labor Government installed in Canberra, furthermore, no popular female Chief Minister such as Clare Martin is running again (amazing how she got out so quick, wonder what she was caught doing in parliament house during the evening of last years federal election?).
DONT FORGET the speed limit issue which is still festering in the hearts of many territorians, many who are not politically alligned and feel they were lied too and hood winked by Labor for not being upfront, much like JH and Workchoices. irrespective of any safety views southerners have, the speed limit thing was symbolic, one of the few remaining things that made the territory different free from the bondage and chains.
Add to that you have that mess of council amalgamations and absolutely no change in indigenous affairs, don’t even mention crime.
The political landscape has changed and from what i can see the Labor Government have lost some credibility.The biggest risk people took was voting for Federal Labor last year and it demonstrated the electorate is not scared of change when the ‘experience and trust’ cards come out (as they have).
Despite Mills not being the strongest leader he has enormous community respect and is very genuine, his decision to step down before last election was due to Burkes Army sabotage and blackmail and good riddance to them, as they were all booted out once and for all.
If the Country Libs had a few more elected members it would be in a highly winnable situation, the fact is though, they don’t with some hefty margins to make up. Full credit to them though for trying hard and re emerging from the rubble, good to see a new logo and some positive talk, the electorate will be kinder to them this time around.
I reckon Country Libs will pick up Brennan, Port Darwin, Fannie Bay, Fong Lim, Goyder and possibly a Palmerston seat, i also think there is a possibility of at least one surprise in Darwins Northern Suburbs.
CL 10,
Labor 14,
Ind 1
We need a more balanced parliament for the health of our democracy here in the NT. The current margins are ludicrous and even more ludicrous when coupled with a Fed Labor Government in Canberra…
Ron@152
Thank you for your response. I don’t agree that this is ‘changing the goal posts’ as I rather would consider that these are all linked issues, with the buck stopping for mining and dumping with the ALP (whether at a Territory or Federal level). As to whether this backfires or not, well, as Boerwar says, the proof will be in the pudding. I think that the ALP as a party can’t continually rely on Green prefernces, although most Greens don’t want a return to Federal Liberal or Territory CLP govt.
But consider this – if the Greens don’t preference the ALP in NT then the ALP has to think about getting their preferences Australia-wide. This will have impacts across all states and territories as they come up for election. I imagine that in WA the existing good relations between the ALP & Greens will continue. In NSW it will be up for grabs, but the NSW Labor doesn’t like the Greens and the Greens don’t like them – expect dirty play. in the ACT I don’t expect any effect. SA, Qld & Vic I am less sure of.
The upshot is – as a strategic decision it does have merit. In terms of credibility, that will most likely play out on a seat by seat basis, dependent on the demographics and interest of the electorate in preference issues. I rather suspect that these decisions agitate us political tragics more than it does most voters.
However, (concession coming) you are right to say they haven’t campaigned heavily on the dump, but on the mine, as far I am aware of. Greens in SA & WA campaigned far more heavily on potential dump sites, so I would have thought there would have been some advice there – but I am not privy to it.
NT Storm
DONT FORGET the speed limit issue which is still festering in the hearts of many territorians, many who are not politically alligned and feel they were lied too and hood winked by Labor for not being upfront, much like JH and Workchoices. irrespective of any safety views southerners have, the speed limit thing was symbolic, one of the few remaining things that made the territory different free from the bondage and chains.
Complete bollocks. It is of virtually no significance at all. People do not vote on such issues. Those who are claiming they will change their vote on the basis of altered speed limit laws, almost certainly never voted Labor to start with, and are just using it as a front to pretend they are swinging voters who are going to ‘punish’ Labor. We still have the highest speed limits of anywhere in Australia. If it wasn’t speed limits, they would just make up some other bogus ’symbolic’ issue. It will make not difference at all to the outcome of the election. It will be decided primarily on economic factors, and the useless state of the opposition.
Add to that you have that mess of council amalgamations and absolutely no change in indigenous affairs, don’t even mention crime.
Yep, they stuffed the politics of council amalgamations, even though it is a good idea in principle. However, you will notice that Henderson immediately shelved those plans when he became Chief Minister.
No NT government is in a position to make a huge impact on indigenous affairs, they simply do not have the resources to do so (and constitutionally their power is limited as well). The CLP certainly fared no better when they held government for a quarter century. Labor’s Clare Martin pleaded with the Howard government to help, but Mr H refused to even acknowledge there was a problem, until suddenly (just months before he himself faced an election) it became convenient for him to declare a state of emergency about it and try to paint himself as the saviour of indigenous people, after the NT Labor government had (allegedly) failed to deliver the solution, and after Mr H had virtually ignored indigenous affairs for almost the entire lifetime of his long standing government. One of the most hypocritical, dishonest, and disgraceful pieces of political propaganda and manipulation I have ever seen in my lifetime.
Not to mention that indigenous issues are already largely factored into voting patterns in the NT. It will not be an important issue in the ballot box.
All categories of crime, except non-sexual assault, have fallen across the NT in the last few years, and it is not clear whether the assault cases are actually rising, or are just being reported more. Plus, being a small population, stats on these kind of things tends to vary about a fair bit, regardless of the long term trend.
The political landscape has changed and from what i can see the Labor Government have lost some credibility.
Yup, just like all governments who have been in for more than 2-3 three terms, after the gloss wears off. Broadly speaking, they have managed the place pretty well.
Despite Mills not being the strongest leader he has enormous community respect…
Not as a political leader he doesn’t, quite the contrary. Voters don’t vote for Mr Nice Guy, they vote for the leader (and party) they think has the best chance of getting the job done.
If the Country Libs had a few more elected members it would be in a highly winnable situation
If, if, if. If only I had a couple of million bucks in my account I wouldn’t have to work again. The fact remains, as you concede, there is virtually no chance of them winning. They cannot blame anybody else for that.
Full credit to them though for trying hard and re emerging from the rubble, good to see a new logo and some positive talk, the electorate will be kinder to them this time around.
Talking points straight from CLP (or is it CL?) headquarters. They have yet to re-emerge from the rubble. If they do not convincingly win at least another 4-5 seats this time around, they will still be in the rubble. They have yet to sort out their leadership problems. For f***s sake, they were still publicly speculating on it just a few days ago, in the middle of an election campaign! They have a long way to go.
I reckon Country Libs will pick up Brennan, Fannie Bay, Fong Lim, Goyder and possibly a Palmerston seat, i also think there is a possibility of at least one surprise in Darwins Northern Suburbs.
Good chance that Goyder and Fannie Bay will go from Labor to CLP. The CLP has good candidates in those seats (Purick and Lambert).
Brennan and Port Darwin, borderline.
Brennan is a Palmerston seat, and Mills himself is not exactly out of trouble in his own seat of Blain (in Palmerston), seeing as he only has a slim margin.
Dave Tollner is certainly not hot favourite for Fong Lim, he is not really widely respected. Many regard him as a boorish, pushy clown, whose ambitions far exceed his abilities. Did you see him talk straight over his leader, Mills, at a press conference the other day? Amazing. And Mills just meekly took from behind, not a peep from him. A genuine leader would have firmly put Tollner in his place immediately, in front of the cameras.
Surprise in the Northern suburbs? You mean Len Kiely, who many already think is in trouble? No surprise if he gets the boot. Did you have some other seat in mind?
They CLP will probably also get Braitling back from the retiring independent.
However, the surprise seat just might be Katherine, it will be an interesting one to watch on election night, and I do not think the CLP can take it for granted this time around.
CL 10,?Labor 14,?Ind 1
The CLP will be doing extremely well indeed to get 10 seats out of this election, my bet is it will be more like 7-8. As it currently stands, they are not even on track to be seriously competitive in the 2012 election.
The current margins are ludicrous and even more ludicrous when coupled with a Fed Labor Government in Canberra…
That was the voter’s choice last time around. Are you saying they got it wrong? And, following your line of logic, I presume that next time there is a Coalition government in Canberra, that you will be voting Labor in the NT if the CLP has government by a large margin? Somehow I suspect not.
I agree that healthy oppositions are necessary to well functioning democracies. Better have a chat to the CLP/CL about their truly woeful performance over the last few years.
Called them before, but these are the seats to watch:
Braitling
Brennan
Drysdale
Fannie Bay
Fong Lim
Goyder
Port Darwin
Sanderson is in play, with the NT version of the phantom letterboxers currently underway.
that could then be twelve v twelve and a hung parliament, with Gerry Wood breaking the tie.
Johnston (particularly with Sangster v Burns) and Karama are the bridge that Labour needs to be defend.
C’mon people, lets have some logical arguement and logical punditry rather than what you hope will happen.
Here’s how I see it.
ARAFURA ALP
ARALUEN CLP
ARNHEM ALP
BARKLY ALP
BLAIN CLP
BRAITLING CLP
Brennan ALP
CASUARINA ALP
DALY ALP
DRYSDALE CLP
FANNIE BAY CLP
FONG LIM CLP
GOYDER CLP
GREATOREX CLP
JOHNSTON ALP
KARAMA ALP
KATHERINE CLP
MACDONNELL ALP
NELSON Ind
NHULUNBUY ALP
NIGHTCLIFF ALP
PORT DARWIN CLP
SANDERSON CLP
STUART ALP
WANGURI ALP
ALP 13
CLP 11
Ind 1
I would move Brennan across to the other side for a number of factors.
1) 2850 votes were cast at Bakewell at the Federal Election and the 2PP was 55/45 to the CLP
2) The local factor of the high profile leader attaching to the other two Palmerston CLP candidates.
3) A swing away from the incumbent which could occur against government overall.
The factors in favour of Labour retaining the seat are the comparable strength of profile between the two candidates, particularly one as local member and the other only being known as a candidate in the last 5 weeks.
It will basically depend on how many doors are knocked and the general public overall view of how government has performed and, of course, what the people of Palmerston can be convinced by…
a Water Park or a Hospital, they are the options.
ALP 16 CLP 8 Ind 1
CLP to pick up Braitling, Brennan, Drysdale and Goyder.
Boerwar
#154
Indeed you ar right Boerwar , time will play Greens preference stategy out re its success as you said I’m going to reply to Stewart J #157 post now and some extra thoughts may be in there , as it seems th Greens pref policy is strategy based , not policy based
Hi ‘Just Me’
My later comments regarding the ‘ludicrous situation’ simply express the same amount of outrage around at the time the Coalition took control of the Senate shortly after the previous Federal Election. Too much power leads to the abuse of power and i’m sure you will agree with that.
The Labor Party holds quite alot of power now and i attribute alot of that to the poor State of Oppositions that had enormous difficulty in differentiating themselves from the increasingly right winged JH Federal government. State Oppositions lacked the ability to set a moderate policy agenda. Labor won this hands down (and probably always will) and was the party of choice.
As conservatives sink their head in despair and cop it sweet, one must accept that the political tides do change (as frustrating as it can be) and already have, Labor State and Territory Governments will be fighting the swings away from them, some will survive, others may not. You never know, the Opposition Leader might parade himself in budgie smugglers during the election campaign!!!
qoute “Surprise in the Northern suburbs? You mean Len Kiely, who many already think is in trouble? No surprise if he gets the boot. Did you have some other seat in mind?”
Sanderson is Labors weakest link in the Suburbs,however i do not believe he will loose it by much IF indeed he does loose. Pity the Country Libs should have pre selected Jo for this seat, a perfect contrast.
I think Jo will give Burns a run, though he is one of Hendos better Ministers so should retain providing there aren’t a heap of cancer sufferers in his electorate. As for Tollner winning, well i just have a feeling Bonsons luck has finally run out. Don’t believe Katherine will fall to the ALP, definitely not after my last visit there a few weeks back…
2011-12 definitely a return to a conservative territory government imo, torrid political times ahead for the Labor machine as reality bites, argghh!!!!
As conservatives sink their head in despair and cop it sweet, one must accept that the political tides do change (as frustrating as it can be) and already have, Labor State and Territory Governments will be fighting the swings away from them, some will survive, others may not.
Yes and no. Conservative oppositions still have to get their act together first. They are not going to get handed power just because voters are pissed off with the government, the opposition has to be credible as well.
2011-12 definitely a return to a conservative territory government imo,
Such certainty is brave, my friend. Henderson is going to be a formidable opponent, especially if the economy keeps going well (and it shows no sign of slacking off anytime soon). If he wins this weekend, he will have the authority to remake the government and deal with any problems left over from the Martin era.
Stewart J
#157
Thanks for a detailed reply in #157 and if I can quote from your post
Th issues for mine ar Greens effect on this electon , Greens prefs strategyy , Greens prefs effect Nationaly and Greens policy credibility
I think you’ve acknowledged I do not argue there is a queston of Greens having th right to make no prefs decisions or it being ‘expected’
“However, (concession coming) you are right to say they haven’t campaigned heavily on the dump, but on the mine, as far I am aware of.”
This I think was a gross credibility error Similar to Labor “allowing” prefs to a candiddate who’d prefer Medicare phased out Anti uranium dumpps ar a core Greens policy and it was dropped I believe in favor of future prefs strategy (as assume NT Greens ar violently opposed to it) Th claim of hypocracy rests on that point (a core policy ignord) , NOT on either Greens right to do so or why it did
Second matter is Greens National policy credibility Being a non mainstream large Party , part of its promotion & distinctiveness has been th claim its not policy hypocritical for politcal advantage And further Greens Party and Greens posters hav previousley quoted examples where Labor or Liberals had been but that Greens Party had not A uranium dump think could not be more close to Greens harts , and yet ditched for strategy So th claim of Greens policy hypocracy should stand I don’t make that nastily , Labor has had those claims made against it in past So thought Greens decison was policy hypocritiacly & an anti credibility decsion for Greens Party Hard to win that polcy ‘purity’ tag as a brand , and easy to lose it
“But consider this – if the Greens don’t preference the ALP in NT then the ALP has to think about getting their preferences Australia-wide. This will have impacts across all states and territories as they come up for election’
Theoreticaly you ar quite correct But in practise I thought there was no policy benefit to th Greens here (ie. to say after publicly to voters , we did not pref because Labor supported a uranium dump…that is not th case , but had it been then yes , there WOULD hav been a policy benefit to throw at future Labor contested State electons (that we Greens want policy ‘consideraton’ AT LEAST , for our prefs)
“The upshot is – as a strategic decision it does have merit.”
Also , as Greens will likely not influense NT seats , why pick that particular State electon , instead of one where prefs will count Labor ar more likely to take future notice if th no prefs decsion had ‘numbers’ merit , and Labor now ar more likely to think Greens do not ‘get it’ about politcs leverage per this case , and take Greens future ‘threats ‘with little credibility
” In terms of “credibility, that will most likely play out on a seat by seat basis, dependent on the demographics and interest of the electorate in preference issues.”
Agre , although probably about 70% will pref Labor anyway BUT that means 70% of Greens voters ar ignoring there own Party , and many will staret wondering why th hell Greens Party ar indifferent to there own members preferencing CLP’s support of a unranium dump That is playing dagerous games with your member base on a core Greens issue Think not clever
This leads to my non prefs politcal strategy argument A Party who is perceived by th wider Greens voters to be reely invoronment , CC and anti Uranium based almost exclusively as it core , and not “bribable” Yet to ditch one of those core issues tarnishs its purity brand and can rightly be accused of hypocracy on core policy for politcal gain and I believe it to be so
Having said that i acknowledge politcs at ‘mainstream’ polical numbers able to win/hold government Labor & liberal level must involve some policy compromidses , because thats reeality of actualy governing for all , so hypocracy charges can be made , but even there I’d argue th degree of variance to a Partys core policys (equivalent to Greens anti uranium dump views) ar rarer , whilst to non core more often NT greens hav made that decison noww for stegy reasons , it frankley doen’t worry me as I think its effect in NT electon will be minimal , and gav my view on policy integrity and stetegy as a pundit as think Labor will win with about 15 seats
Ron@166
Thanks for your reply. While what you say does have merit, I think it worth considering that the Greens already does have to balance policy credibility across a range of policy areas and details. The problem has been that in too many areas the ALP and LP/NP/CLP have been shades of the same colour in policy terms, leading to the accusation (and Greens weren’t the first to suggest this) of “tweedledum & tweedledee”. Now, when making a distinction do you say that one area (in this instance the dump) is more important than the perceived failure of the ALP to act more aggressively on IR, CC, Indigenous Affairs, water etc, especially where ALP policy direction appears to take as a starting point LP policy?
You could argue that the point of distinction provides the reason to preference them, but you could equally argue that the point of distinction is not enough to sway you when all the other (also core) policy areas are not being covered off. The Greens of course are not suggesting preferencing the CLP in the NT, but rather suggesting that voters themselves need to try and distinguish between the two major parties – because as a party the Greens see it as close run thing. Perhaps the other issue is that I know personally many Greens who are continually disappointed by the ALP, when the actions don’t match the rhetoric, promises are broken, and core policies are dumped (”was that a core or none-core promise” – albeit thrown at Howard).
I should add that the Greens have made many preference arrangements based on policy requests of major parties (well, the ALP anyway), but just as equally have gone in with a view to swapping seats for seats (ie; HoR’s for Senate). Which approach to take remains an ongoing debate within the party, and will remain so while there are serious activists (of a variety of flavours) still in the party. As to why pick NT – well, the NSW & Vic state elections have passed (were there are very strong state parties plus upper house seats to win) as has the Federal election (with a national approach to be taken by hard-headed numbers people who are not me!). The NT election I would suggest provides an opportunity to tie the uranium mining and dumping issues together, given ability of Federal Govt to make decisions regardless of NT Govt wishes (note the Intervention).
But as I also said before, I’m not privy to the rationale for the decisions, and am basing my comments on what has happened in the past, and what I know has occured in other states. I do think the immediate impact of such a preference decision will be relatively contained (it is after all an NT election without widespread media coverage) but will have a broader political impact.
Best wishes to all the Territory’s passionate bloggers, letter-box-droppers, chook-rafflers, how-to-vote card hander-outers, and poster-putter-uppers for tomorrow.
This morning the CPSU was handing out phamplets in the front of government buildings on how the CLP’s Public Serive reduction plans was going to affect everyone. Didn’t sound good at all.
Bad strategic advice given to the CLP. Was that a Peter Murphy gem? I would laugh myself silly if it was – couldn’t come from a nicer wker.
Certainly sounds like an idea that Murphy would be obsessed with.
Yes good luck to all for tomorrow!!!
Being in Government for the next 3-4 years will be a poison chalice for whoever takes power imo, not only in this NT Election but the WA and ACT as well. State budgets will go to pooh soon as the slumping housing market and economic slowdown hits them hard (perhaps to a lesser extent in the NT), meanwhile the public will be demanding the services and infrastructure in which they have become accustomed too.
BTW ‘Just Me’ IMO i believe the best thing for conservatives has ultimately been their staggering run of defeats and complete loss of power which has enabled a regrouping of core supporters and some fresh blood who like it or not do not share the same views as Labor Governments, many feel somewhat disenfranchised with the community and extremely frustrated that they have not been adequately represented, particularly the moderate rights or ’social conservatives’. Conservative parties have no choice but to reform and thats not a bad thing..
Furthermore there is no-one to blame for emerging problems over the coming years except Labor, no buck passing. Mistakes and policy failures are inevitable ….
Remember It was only 12 months out before the last Federal Election that the then Federal opposition was considered unelectable and lets not forget that Labor only held 7 seats before its 2001 election victory, even some of their strongest supporters did not believe they could actually win. If people want a change they know how to vote for it. My prediction of a change in the Territory Government in 2011-12 is no bolder than saying it wont (providing the clp win back a few seats tomorrow)!!!
Grace @155
I can assure you this was said by a senior Labor figure. As to the “facts” about where the money gets spent I cannot say, however there is the perception, as noted earlier, that Alice Springs misses out and the northern suburbs of Darwin gets the booty. Have you ever been to the Leanyer water park? And I hear there is another vote winner (oops I mean water park) promised somewhere else up north during this campaign.
Grace I admire your willingness to believe that this is not all about politics and dollars and votes, however the precedents from around the country over many years as seeing government as a way of financially supporting your constituency would have me believe otherwise. The shame of this of course is the blackfellas in the bush seats who are overwhelmingly Labor supporters (mainly probably because the other mob are too awful to contemplate- and they still have form) continue to not get much because they are not in marginal/ potentially marginal seats- their continued voting ALP actually counts against their interests.
As someone much wiser than me said “you should always vote for the opposition, it is the only way to keep the government on their toes”.
I thought that the CLP would pick up a few seats this time around but now I am not sure how the 16,000 public servants and their partners and family and friends will react to their PS reduction policy. Likely that many may not be aware of it.
If the LNG plant goes ahead and it generates 4,ooo jobs as they say then that is going to put even more pressure on the housing market and rental market in Darwin which, has already accelerated out the reach of many young people and young families. I know the PS is working hard on readying new land releases to keep up.
If the defence build up continues and so forth there will be lots of pressure on rental and housing prices and of course all those services needed – dental, child care, police, doctors, hospital and so forth. Wonder where the revenue is going to come from.
By the time of the election following this they may well be many disgruntled Territorians at the lack of sufficient services. The govt may end up the victim of the growth it is promoting.
Wonder where the revenue is going to come from.
I think revenue is allocated from the commonwealth mainly on a per capita basis (with extra for the large land area to administer, defence related stuff, and indigenous affairs). So in theory revenue should keep up with population growth. Any problems with services are not exactly exclusive to the NT, most places in Australia are experiencing these problems.
Darwin has a simple geographical problem with housing, there is limited space around Darwin to build more suburbs. That is why there are so many large hi-rise apartment blocks going up, and why the nearby satellite city of Palmerston was developed.
Now the PSU with email access to all government employees has the advantage of contacting all if they have a ‘employment’ related issue. To that end they have emailed all public servents on the mail list with a message thus:
Quote:
“Plan to slash PS jobs irresponsible and counter productive”
An election commitment from CLP to sack hundreds public servants will have a devastating effect on public sector service delivery, CPSU has warned.
Opposition Leader Terry Mills has vowed to axe over 700 public sector positions if elected.
CPSU Regional Secretary Naomi Porrovecchio described the CLP plan as bad news for Northern Territory Public Service (NTPS) employees.
“Terry Mills has revealed his true colours when it comes to the Public Sector.
“After initially lining up senior public servants, he’s now shifted his focus to target general staff. The knock-on effect to front line services would be disastrous.
“After changing his position on which jobs would go, it’s hard to believe Terry Mills when he says theses cuts will be achieved through natural attrition.
“Our economy is growing and fuelling greater demand on public services as the population increases. Attacking our social infrastructure by slashing the ranks of the public sector is irresponsible and counterproductive,” she said.
Ms Porrovecchio repeated CPSU’s call for all political parties to commit to greater investment in public sector jobs.
“The NTPS is already struggling to attract and retain employees in a tight labour market. To remain competitive in the battle for talent requires quality jobs, competitive pay and conditions, opportunities for personal development and career advancement.
“Threatening the job security of public servants will do nothing to ensure the ranks of the public sector are staffed by our best and brightest,” she said.
There will be an inevitable lag between the provision of services and the need.
That is correct all developer leases are now occuring out Palmerston way. The government will need to start decentralisng parts of itself as well unless if it wants perpetual traffic jams on the way in to Darwin or plan a light rail or spend on widening both sets of roads.
Centrebet has the CLP out to $8.00. Hell.
The PS generally do have trouble finding enough people to fill vacated positions and as such people do find it much easier to progress to higher positions there, simply due to lack of available talent. Any young person with talent in the southern states may find a quick path up the PS ladder if they move themselves to Darwin.
Labor tipped to win NT election
Centrebet political analyst Neil Evans called the leader’s remarks “a massive understatement”.
“There’ll have to be a full moon tonight, and some bizarre turnaround, for this to become a political contest,” Mr Evans said as the gulf widened to CLP odds of $8 compared with Labor’s $1.07.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24148130-5001028,00.html
“After initially lining up senior public servants, he’s now shifted his focus to target general staff. The knock-on effect to front line services would be disastrous.”
Indeed, far worse than anything Labor could do in their next term (if they win tomorrow).
There will be an inevitable lag between the provision of services and the need.
Not always inevitable, but generally I agree. But if the CLP is threatening mass PS cuts at the next election, they won’t be winning the services provision debate. Voters are often faced with a choice between the bad, and the far worse (see NSW, for example). Sad but true.
That is correct all developer leases are now occuring out Palmerston way. The government will need to start decentralisng parts of itself as well unless if it wants perpetual traffic jams on the way in to Darwin or plan a light rail or spend on widening both sets of roads.
There certainly is a rush hour traffic issue between the northern suburbs and the city. Mind you, there was 25 years ago when I was travelling into the city/Winnellie each day. The more things change, etc….
From the article Gary Bruce linked to:
…the opposition’s four sitting members have struggled to land any punches in the past 18 days.
That is certainly how I see it. I am beginning to wonder if my prediction of Labor losing 2-3 seats might be a little pessimistic.
Does anyone know where there will be coverage of the election count in the southern states (i.e. Victoria)? ABC? Sky? Or just online?
I guessing online would be your best bet.
No doubt Newsradio will be covering the election results live (ie from when the polls close)
I remember watching the 2005 ABC election count from Perth – I think it was on Sky. However, I don’t see anything on either the ABC2 or Sky schedule.
My prediction @ #102 still stands!
My musings on the Mills NTG cuts.
http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/08/08/terry-mills-has-a-fatal-flaw/
ABC NT Coverage infor from the ABC’s election page.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/nt/2008/
Betting on the NT election. All an opposition plot to win votes according to Labor.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/08/2329392.htm
From the link provided by Steve 89
“The CLP poll of 200 people gives Garry Lambert a 51 to 49 per cent two party lead and shows twice as many voters view him favourably when compared with Labor’s Michael Gunner.”
“The poll also indicates CLP Leader Terry Mills has a 1 per cent lead over Chief Minister Paul Henderson …”
They have to be joking surely. I wonder how many CLP members have bet their hard earned on this actually happening?
Gary looks like the bookies want a few mugs to take the 8:1 and donate to the bookies’ xmas fund.
ABC Should broadcast the election coverage on ABC2. Online streaming can have issues. It should not be hard to broadcast on ABC2!
Stewart J
#167
thanks for your reply , just a few final points from your post as electon tomorrow gives closure to prefs decsion
“I think it worth considering that the Greens already does have to balance policy credibility across a range of policy areas and details”
This belief would hav been in mind when making th prefs decison , a belief Greens voters already themselves hav reluctanse following a prefs vote card to pref Labor for many policy reasons And therefore consequentley greens voters will ‘understand’ non preferencing , because they ar already to reluctant to pref I’ve noticed this perseption with most Greens ‘tragics’ I feel this perseption is flawed and I think most non tragic greens voters also think there is no Twiddle dee /dum choice Th proof is a 70% plus pref despite a no preferencing card
Excecutive memebers ar more likely to ‘dumb down’ there own voters knowledge (they reely don’t understand) vs maybe there may be merit in our voters perseption , or maybe voters do NOT agree with all our policys , or maybe a core Labor policy is more important than our opposing one , but just maybe maybe voters do see a very distinctive ‘left’ vs right’ Partys diference that executive perhaps ar too pure (or proud) to acknowledge or risk politcal costs to acknowledge , if so then th non prefs decision would cause wonderment at minimum to non tragic greens members
I think from talking to green suports its reason after ‘but’ , and perhaps some core Labor policys That suggested wondarment is reflected inmy views as well
Which is why I’ve persued th dump (where Labor publicly opposes) it will be perceived non prefs a\occured when there WAS agreement 9and that Labor , not Greens pushed it hard publicly So am unconvinced either non tragic Greens members or Labor executive would understand doing so on this Electon , will future influence Labor more so
Also , I am suggesting politcal use of prefs is more understandable to Labor when it was ‘policy worth’ a fight on , and also to non tragic Greens members (seeing my earlier coment on they may see major Partys divide signicantley greater than its executive does
It could in adition also be that th nature restrictons on realistic policy formulaton & implement as a Government ar too discounted by tragics & executive causing an unrealatic gulf of expectatons , thereby causing a tweedle process
“You could argue that the point of distinction provides the reason to preference them, but you could equally argue that the point of distinction is not enough..”
Believe non tragic Greens voters HAPPILY think th first phrase , and tragic greens voters (and Greens exec) th second phrase & seems aparent on this site , some but not you actualy with some biterness Converseley you being seemingly more policy orientated , probaly in my ‘frustrated’ policy camp
“just as equally have gone in with a view to swapping seats for seats (ie; HoR’s for Senate”
I have no problem with this approach , in politcs one need members , danger always is to know ones limitations Go for House seats & broaden policy & lose integritys or remain thinner in numbers but Senat influensial with policy integrity
risk of former is if Labor tries to protect itself and move more ‘left’ , one could (not will) risk th wholle cake Your thoughts
“The NT election I would suggest provides an opportunity to tie the uranium mining and dumping issues together, given ability of Federal Govt to make decisions regardless of NT Govt wishes (note the Intervention).”
I’ve looked at this proposition objectively , and was not persuaded at all of th
“to tie the uranium mining and dumping issues together” Think reverse actualy , think highlighted policy wise ‘a mixed mesage’ and thats WHY I thought it had to be a strategy based decsion
Agree decision won’t signif affect this election result
“The CLP poll of 200 people gives Garry Lambert a 51 to 49 per cent two party lead and shows twice as many voters view him favourably when compared with Labor’s Michael Gunner.”
I would give Lambert about an even chance.
Ron@193
I understand what you mean about party executives being out of touch with the general electorate – this is after all what is often leveled at politicians of all shades. Sadly it is all too often true, and the Greens aren’t so very different to other parties to be immune to this. I would add, though, that in speaking to Green voters in the community (not members, but people who identify as a Green voter at community events, at stalls, or through community organisations) I have found a high level of scepticism with the ALP’s performance. That may, of course, simply be a factor of where I live (Randwick NSW), and it certainly colours my perception of what goes on in other states. That said, I did note an article in the NTNews regarding ALP members in Alice Springs deserting the ALP to campaign for the Greens:
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/08/07/5038_ntelection08.html
WRT to your question re broadening policy and being perceived to lose integrity to win HoR’s seats – yes, that is a real issue. It ultimately comes down to whether the party sees itself as a potential party of government (thus needing to win seats), or conceptualises itself as something quite different – a protest party, the ‘wing’ of a broader movement (with parliament as a side issue), a balance to major parties (aka the Democrats) and so on. For some parties this is straight forward, but as I think I’ve mentioned before, for the Greens its an ongoing internal debate. The various debates around forestry have lead to some sharp conflicts with external NGO’s (ie; the Wilderness Society) over particular parliamentary activities not being “pure” enough – and this has been reflected in a number of internal policy struggles too.
Ultimately if the Greens keeps balancing the these ‘forces’ within itself it has the potential to win HoR’s seats and not be ghetto-ised into the Senate, but the nature of parties is that the forces at play are working to have their viewpoint ascendant – thus one ’side’ of the argument wins. Personally, I think this would be a damaging and ultimately fatal outcome for the Greens. This would be especially true if Labor did move to the left, but I’m not entirely convinced that are able to do so anymore, although this wont stop them making it appear to be the possible or the case – I do note that Henderson has released the letter to PM Rudd asking him to repeal legislation regarding the dump.
Bludgers, have any of you tried to exercise your right to postal vote in N.T. elections from overseas?
In fact, my attempts to postal vote have been ignored for the last two territory elections. In both cases I printed off an on-line application form and sent it by registered mail to the N.T. electoral office on the day the elections were called. I am a confirmed registered voter in Casuarina.
I sent another registered letter to my Darwin address on the same day and that item arrived on Tuesday of last week. So, there should have been plenty of time to send voting papers to me and for my return letter to be duly registered before today.
This is just not good enough as I would have enjoyed feasting on the CLP carcass. Does anyone else feel a bellyache at the mention of the N.T. electoral office?
Is there going to be a thread for the actual count?
Yes indeed Rebecca, stay tuned.
If all goes well for them the CLP gould win up to 12 seats, the 4 they hold plus Braitling, Brennan, Drysdale, Port Darwin, Fong Lim, Fannie Bay, Goyder & Sanderson.
Could happen as I think the people underestimate the effect of a change in federal government. Gippsland shows its not to early in the cycle to see a protest vote.
However, its unlikely all cards will fall the CLPs way (as they fell Labor’s way in Vic in 1999). I think some of the more marginal seats may present ’suprise’ ALP holds, thinking of Port Darwin, Drysdale & Brennan.
But the NT is fickle, as is any voting at such a micro-level. Those punting 50 or 100k on this result are out on a limb.
Btw..no mention anywhere of Nhulunbuy…could this be the CLPs most unlikely chance? Its an open seat and a mostly non-indigenous population.
Live blogging thread open.