A polling bonanza for the Western Australian election, with a 51-49 result in Labor’s favour from Newspoll (UPDATE: Scanned graphic courtesy of James J; Peter Brent at Mumble doesn’t like the look of a mere 51-49 lead to Labor from even primary vote figures) and a comprehensive Westpoll survey in The West Australian. The latter includes a 50.2-49.8 statewide result in Labor’s favour from a sample of 400, plus electorate-level surveys of 400 voters from Scarborough (notional Liberal margin of 2.4 per cent, Liberals lead 52-48), Kingsley (notionally lineball, Liberals lead 54-46), Collie-Preston (notional Labor margin 0.9 per cent, 50-50), Kalamunda (notional Liberal margin 0.2 per cent, Liberals lead 54-46) and Riverton (notional Labor margin 2.1 per cent, Liberals lead 51-49). Full scan here. Other highlights of the past week:
• Nominations closed at noon yesterday, and the Poll Bludger election guide has accordingly been brought up to date with full candidate lists. A key feature is the late withdrawal of a large number of much-touted independent candidates. Two Labor-turned-independent MPs who had earlier planned on running evidently saw the writing on the wall: one-time Health Minister and Yokine MP Bob Kucera, who was earlier deliberating over whether to contest Nollamara or Mount Lawley, and Shelley Archer, the wife of CFMEU heavy Kevin Reynolds who was dumped from the party over dealings with Brian Burke, earlier weighing her options in Kimberley and her existing upper house seat in Mining and Pastoral region. On the other side of politics, former leader Paul Omodei has decided against nominating after most recently suggesting he would run for the South West upper house region. Troy Buswell’s predecessor as member for Vasse, Bernie Masters, has decided not to run against him after very nearly defeating him as an independent in 2005. The only remaining major party renegade still in the hunt is Ballajura MP John D’Orazio, contesting the new seat of Morley.
• Robert Taylor of The West Australian noted the Liberals’ unreadiness for the campaign in an article on Thursday, identifying two reasons for their lack of television advertising thus far: “The first is that they’re simply not ready. When the election was called, the Liberals did not even have advertising concepts in the can for former leader Troy Buswell, let alone a leader who had only been elected the previous day. The second is that they are woefully underfunded and Olympic period television advertising is extremely expensive. Labor is said to have booked significant airspace during the Olympics for about $250,000 … Liberal television advertisements are not expected to hit the airwaves until the Olympics are over, giving them roughly 10 days to establish their message before the media blackout comes into effect at midnight on the Wednesday before the poll.”
• On which subject, eastern states viewers can view the Labor television ad on the ALP site. Western Australian readers will have seen it a million times already. Interesting to note that the front page of the site includes a defence of the early election announcement.
• The Liberals do at least have two radio ads, both negative, which can be heard here. Message common to both: “If you couldn’t make things work with eight years of boom, what’s going to happen now that things are slowing down, prices are rising and interest rates are up?”
• Labor has also chosen the medium of radio to field its first negative ads, which fascinatingly pursue the theme of Liberal Party sexism: not conventional election campaign fodder, but well worth a run under the present extraordinary circumstances. As well as the lingering image problem from Troy Buswell’s tenure as leader, the Liberals can boast just one female candidate in a notionally Liberal lower house seat, and precious few in winnable Labor seats. The message is conveyed by a young girl declaring her aspirations for when she grows up, and the unlikelihood of them being realised through the vehicle of the Liberal Party. If you’re up early this morning (7am Saturday) you might hear me discussing the subject on the ABC’s AM program (UPDATE: Read and hear it here). More on the women candidates issue from Andrea Mayes of the Sunday Times.
• An interesting assessment of the overall situation from Kim Beazley in an article for WAToday, who in tipping a cliffhanger reminds readers that “the blue-collar component of the WA electorate is half that of Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide, and 50 per cent less than Brisbane”, and that “a large non-English speaking background electorate so richly supportive of Labor in the east” is “likewise missing”.
• The Liberals have landed an interesting candidate in the safe Labor southern suburbs seat of Cockburn: Corruption and Crime Commission intelligence analyst Donald Barrett, who has taken leave without pay from his position to stand against Energy Minister Fran Logan. Jessica Strutt of The West Australian reports that “some Labor MPs are simply paranoid about the Barrett factor – more particularly the ‘dirt’ he may have”.
• The Prime Minister was on the campaign trail in the northern outskirts seat of Mindarie on Thursday as Alan Carpenter announced a $147.5 million extension of the northern rail line.
• Deidre Willmott, who stood aside in Cottesloe to allow Colin Barnett to rescind his retirement plans, has been appointed Barnett’s chief-of-staff. There seems little doubt she will realise her claim to Cottesloe at a by-election if the Liberals fail to win government.
• State political editor Peter Kennedy told ABC Radio on Monday that a Labor source had revealed polling in Swan Hills showing 69 per cent believed the Liberals were not ready to govern, but clammed up when probed about voting intention or figures from other seats. However, Labor has been openly trumpeting polling from Jandakot showing them leading 56-44.
• Former Labor MP and lobbying kingpin MP John Halden made the eyebrow-raising claim in an article in Monday’s West Australian that Ben Wyatt, who replaced Geoff Gallop as member for Victoria Park in March 2006, would succeed Alan Carpenter as Premier before the next election. The following day he told the paper it was “no secret” in Labor ranks he was being groomed for the job.
• Crikey subscribers can read me having two bob each way on the relevance of the Northern Territory precedent.
277 Comments
Westpoll 2PP as calculated on Antony Greens’s Calculator.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/wa/2008/calculator/?wa=-2.3&retiringfactor=1
According to Anton’s machine there would need to be another 1.5% shift away from the lab party before there is any more change of seats. Is this a sensible conclusion – I think individual seats have a variation?
I was inclined to get worried, so then I went and researched the newspolls before the last state election, the Newspoll at the end of January 2005 before the late Feb election was a dead heat at 50-50. The gap in the pref prem was 21 as to 18 now to Gallop. I feel better now
Oh and re the Westpoll, I’m sure we all remember their ridiculous marginal seat polls in the run up to the last election, i think they must believe if they cook up enough results they will actually come true.
Well you can automatically discount the National vote as they Brendan Grylls will not do a backflip on going into a coalition with the Libs, and was just as adamant of this on Stateline.
Of course those Marginal seats look suss, what’s the bet they rang homes which corresponded to booths which went towards the Libs ?
From the Australian Article.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24188629-5013404,00.html
I wonder if there will also be pressure on Barnett to do a backflip re the Regional Royalty fund which Grylls is using as a Preference Lever ?
You know a great way to look at this West”poll” is to think that the last Westpoll in which Barnett was put as a leader to respondents the result was 57-43 to the Libs, so isnt the momentum going to Labor?
Yeah, that does make the result look a bit more heartening, so really the more Barnett is exposed in the media and the more he opens his mouth, the better for Labor
Aww, no Bernie Masters in Vasse. Buswell will have no troubles there, then.
Also on that list of candidates: there appears to be two Andrew Partingtons – one for the Liberals in Albany, the other for the CDP in Morley. I wonder if that’s a weird coincidence, or there’s been a mistake? That name isn’t that common…
BUt I’m sure the ALP will be hitting Vasse very hard with the material they would’ve used for a Statewide campaign against Buswell and I predict that his time as Shire President will be given a run in the local media there.
Oh, there’s no doubt about that. It’s not out of the question for Labor… the kind of people who vote for the CDP would probably vote Buswell last, and most of the Greens preferences would go to Labor too (they’d get an OK amount of the vote, considering Margaret River’s now in the seat). However, the Nationals aren’t running and neither are any major independents, so there’d be more conservative vote for Buswell. Plus, Labor only announced their candidate a few days ago, which makes them look not too serious.
In fact, now that I think of it, Vasse could be really good for the Christian Democrats. With no Masters or Omodei, they’re the non-Buswell conservatives. Maybe:
Lib 40%
ALP 35%
Grn 15%
CDP 10%
If the vote ends up something like that, and all the major parties preference Buswell last, then he’s in trouble. I can’t quite see it, though.
Anthony Fels is the lead Family First candidate for Agricultural. Dan Sullivan in South West.
That party is more and more becoming a haven for disaffected Liberals.
Have the Liberals found a way – ala Howard – to have the public pay for their advertising?
This WA election is getting a bigger run in Queensland than any previous WA elections with William Bowe on the ABC’s AM and the Curious Snail running a story about the Westpoll as is The Australian.
Somehow this one seems to be capturing a more national audience probably because of the chair-sniffing antics that have been widely publisised over the past few months.
Once again the bookies still have their odds unmoved from last night, they just do not seem to believe that a rabble will beat a Government no matter what figures Westpoll dredge up. Do Westpoll tend to be like Galaxy and get more accurate with bigger sample sizes in the poll just before the election?
The Australian seems to have pushed the envelope a little too far and confused everyone including themselves:
“On the question of which leader was more capable of handling the state’s economy, Mr Carpenter led Mr Barnett by 12 percentage points (49 to 37).
However, voters believed the Opposition was a better party to handle the economy and taxation matters than Labor.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24188629-5013404,00.html
Perhaps The Australian writes the spin first and adapts it to fit the Newspoll and the fantasy does not quite fit the reality of the Newspoll.
#14 LOL good pick-up, Steve. Tools.
But Steve there has been a massive shift back to Labor from the last Westpoll. I bet they didn’t couch the latest results in those terms though.
I think the Newspoll is significant but I also believe (and I could be wrong) that this is the Liberal’s high tide in the polls. When push comes to shove people don’t elect rabble to government unless the government is rabble itself which I understand isn’t the case here.
16 “But Steve there has been a massive shift back to Labor from the last Westpoll. I bet they didn’t couch the latest results in those terms though.”
Gary, Yahoo News covers all angles, possibilities, combinations and permutations, check out these two paragraphs from Yahoo news:
“1. The Liberal Party is capable of achieving an unlikely victory in the West Australian election while its new leader is closing the gap on Premier Alan Carpenter , a new poll shows…
6. A month ago Mr Carpenter led Mr Buswell 57 percentage points to 12 points, but this week’s poll had support for Mr Carpenter on 44 points, ahead of Mr Barnett on 31 points.”
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/4913399/wa-liberals-capable-election-victory
What the Westpoll actually said was that ‘if Barnett was the Leader’ the Liberals would lead Labor by 57/43.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/900
Considering the fact the Libs haven’t even commenced TV advertising at this stage and the corruption inquiry may yet release their results before polling day, these results show the Opposition in with a good chance.
The Curious Snail runs the same line.
“A month ago Mr Carpenter led Mr Buswell 57 percentage points to 12 points, but this week’s poll had support for Mr Carpenter on 44 points, ahead of Mr Barnett on 31 points.”
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24189969-5003402,00.html
20 AC they have got nothing to advertise yet, all the Liberal policies have been withdrawn and are being reassessed by Barnett.
Speaking of ethnics having an influence, are there any seats in WA that have a sufficient concentration of jaapies and rhodies lining up one way or another to make an difference?
Good to see the Daylight Saving Party will be putting in candidates for the metro upper house. For the first time in my life I wont be putting Labor number 1 on a ballot paper. Will still do so in the lower house though.
All those electorates having a river or ocean frontage….
The poor ones live in Joondalup.
For the record the survey period for the newspoll was 10-14 August, with a sample size of 1088. Full tables on p10 of the oz. (Including figures on Voter commitment, ‘Best to handle issues’, ‘Issues rated very important’, ‘Best words to decribe WA leaders’, ‘Best to handle to WA economy’, and ‘Who will win the WA election’.)
#14 I don’t understand what you’re talking about, it makes perfect sense to me.
In the paper the graphic shows voters think the Liberal Party are better at handling the economy and taxation than Labor, but when the question is framed around the leaders only, they think Carpenter is better for the economy than Barnett.
Theres no contradiction at all. I think you need to stop looking for excuses to bash The Oz and have a think about what they’re writing first.
“In the paper the graphic shows..”
Well there wasn’t any graphic with that story online was there, Stephen LLoyd.
Steve, you can see the graphic here:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/westpoll160808.jpg
William, it is the Newspoll graphic in the Australian newspaper version but not the online version apparently, that someone wants to be pedantic about. Why they don’t publish the graphic online makes no sense to me.
Sorry Steve – might scan that later as well.
Scanned newspoll graphic
http://www.ozforums.com.au/uploads/21_wanewspoll160808.jpg
The credibility of the Westpolls by seats looks pretty low when it has the Greens doing substantially better in Collie than Scarborough. I know the boundaries have shifted, but last time the Greens got 3.1% in Collie, while Scarborough has to be pretty strong territory – we got over 10% in the booths with that name despite Liz Constable sweeping the field.
The Australian also reckons 10% is “devastating” for us in the Newspoll. I can’t say I’m delighted, after 16% last time, but its still an increase of over 2% on the last actual election. If we can hold that vote on election day it may be enough for 3 in the LC.
Thanks James J and the whole difference of each party in handling the economy is one percent. Labor 40/ Liberal,national 41. Big deal.
What’s going on with political punters in Australia? Either the pools or the punters are wrong. The NT result was nothing like the punters confident predictions ($250,000 bet on Labor to $2,000 on CLP). This election is looking a bit like that. The LNP are still at $4.00. That has to be over the odds.
Hang on, who won the NT election again? Who collected their money?
Gary
You know what I mean. Labor fell over the line but were 20 to 1 on. The punters expected them to romp in.
If I were a betting man, which I’m not, I would be backing Labor in WA right now.
The Barnett factor has already kicked into these polls and Labor would still win an election on these figures. When a change is on you would expect the opposition to be in front now and all other factors, such as preferred premier and major issues going the opposition’s way. This is not happening in this Newspoll poll.
37 Diogenes – Labor also had a large majority in the NT and there were no polls to indicate what was going to happen. People foolishly went into that one blind unlike this WA poll.
It is interesting we have lots of talk about Liberal Brand Damage and lots of talk that Carpenter has led a really good government, but if these things were both true in the general public mind we should not even be considering a Labor loss, as our friend Frank, perhaps correctly is not.
The Libs have quite a bit of change over, so it will be interesting to see what talent they can compile, assuming a loss, post Colin. I know that many on the Labor side have looked at the opposition benches as completely without talent of any sort. Will be a worry if they have a shock win, but a close loss will be a rebuilding opportunity if they’ve preselected well (which seems unlikely).
Bottom line, betting is gambling, gambling is punting and huge, ornate punting palaces have been constructed just for the punters by disinterested cappos.
I notice that Mackerras has stated that he thinks the states/territories will go libnat now that the feds are lab.
Is it an immutable law in Australian politics that if there if the feds are labour, then the states/territories will go lib/nat, or vice versa?
If there is a statistical correlation, how strong is it?
Would it be enough to say, explain a swing of 1-2% away from lab to libnat in WA?
I guarantee you a poll figure of 10% after the calling of an election is far from “devastating for the Greens”…
41″Is it an immutable law in Australian politics that if there if the feds are labour, then the states/territories will go lib/nat, or vice versa?
If there is a statistical correlation, how strong is it?”
$weetie certainly believed that when he bought in the GST and said the rate could only be changed in the unlikely event of the same political colour in all states and Territories, Boerwar. I have never heard of it being any more than wild speculation by uninformed hopeful hacks but William, Antony,Adam or Possum would have a more detailed mathematical based idea than me.
Peter Brent at http://www.mumble.com.au has posted some interesting analysis of the preference flows from these polls.
“Newspoll has Labor on 51, but it should be 52 or 53″
He says that some Labor preferences are underestimated.
Nevertheless, it is a close race.
This is hardly a statistical analysis, but it’s kinda interesting: the years the Liberals and Labor have been in power in WA and federally since 1945 (from Wikipedia).
Fed/WA, 1945-2008 (63):
ALP/ALP: 1945-47, 1972-74, 1983-93, 2007-present. (15)
ALP/Lib: 1947-49, 1974-75, 1993-96. (6)
Lib/ALP: 1953-59, 1971-72, 2001-07. (13)
Lib/Lib: 1949-53, 1959-71, 1975-83, 1996-2001. (29)
So, in the last 63 years (basically since there was a Liberal Party), the probability of ALP state govt given ALP federal govt is 15/21 ~ 71%. (Statisticians, feel free to bite me on incorrect use of the word ‘probability’.
) The ALP/Lib figure is interesting: that’s the last few years of Chifley, Whitlam, and Keating, and after all those three the ALP was out of power federally for an awful long time.
Bird of paradox @ 45
They are an interesting set of numbers which seems to turn the proposition on its head. I am unstatistical, so would appreciate it if more learned minds could apply their curves to this one.
interesting westpoll figures for Scarborough though….based on the notional figures calculated by Anthony Green, its seems like a swing to the ALP candidate at this point.
Given that both Newspoll and Westpoll are products of professional polling organisations, who presumably know what the caper is all about, how is it that a person like Peter Brent can see the possible discrepencies in their polls and they can’t? I would have thought the idea behind the polls was to give the public the most accurate assessment possible.
To me there can only be 3 possible conclusions you can come to.
1) Their method of polling is done in a way that it is not possible to be as accurate as possible and they’re prepared to just go with that.
OR
2) It suits them to skew the results in a certain way for a particular reason.
OR
3) They really don’t know about the electorate they are polling.
Gary Bruce @ 48
Or is it that they just got the sums wrong? If so, I have deep empathy.
So a professional organisation, one that deals in polls on a fortnightly basis, just gets the sums wrong? That’s it? What are the chances?
Gary Bruce @ 50
Umm, I wouldn’t like to put a figure on the chances.
But if someone knows Peter Brent and could get his view on what was the most likely way of generating the original errors, I would be interested to know.
51: Email him. elect AT mumble.com.au
I suppose the other option is that Peter Brent is wrong but he is pretty cluey on these things.
Conspiracy theories Gary Bruce?
I’m devastated, Greens 30% increase on 2005 vote.
LOL
Before you all start getting excited about investigating some iron law of Australian politics that different parties will be put into power federally and in the states, you should recall that the history of pretty spectacular malapportionment of seats at the state level in South Australia, Queensland and WA means that it could be quite misleading just to look at who was in power for which periods.
For the benefit of those of us who are ignorant easterners, are the Daylight Saving Party for it or against it?
any incumbent govt has a head start
I would be not sure on uniform swings in the country seats Bunbury, Albany, collie-preston and Geraldton it would not suprise me if all those Mps were rtd…..I would still pick the most likely result as the Carpenter Govt being returned
54 Edward – what was conspiritorial about what I said? I gave all of the options. I’m just after answers. Hey Edward, you may have them.
Hmmm…
What would be the implications of a libnat victory in WA, fed/state relations-wise? Isn’t is often easier for fed/state opposing camps to reach real agreement in, say, COAG context?
I would have thought that at least the Libs would have been 50/50 or even ahead given the usual leadership change bounce and the contentious calling of an early election.
If this is their peak following a change of leader it doesnt look good for Barnett.
the libs will be making one of their first major election pledges 2mw… a $40m prison for young people, and $15m to start planning a major prison for adults. no i am not joking.
I cannot believe it – This is the Libs idea of Infrastructure ? This is straight out of 6PR Fantasy land, and no doubt to supplement their announcemnt re Mandatory Jail Terms for Assaulting Public officers.
This will backfire on them.
Note the Libs have twice blocked similar legislation in the Upper House.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/16/2337479.htm
Think Mumble is being a bit harsh on Newspoll in terms of how they calculate 2pp.
I acknowledge that distributing minor parties 55/45 is wrong if Greens vote has changed. I don’t actually know how Newspoll distribute preferences – but how much difference does it actually make?
I know I’m being pedantic about this but bear with me.
The Newspoll results were 42 Lib/Nat, 42 Lab, 10 Green and 6 other.
Mumble has allocated 8 of the Greens and 2 or 3 of the others to Labor giving 52/48 or 53/47 compared to Newspoll’s 51/49. He bases the Greens preferences on the 2007 Federal election (which may not necessarily apply to WA – but we’ll let that one go). If we accept that assumption (Greens 80/20) then the non-Green other votes will go 74/26 to Libs (based on the last state election).
Which gives us 52/48.
But another complication is rounding. If we round the figures at each stage of the calculation it can compound errors. It is better to calculate distribution of preferences to the decimal pont then only round the final figures.
Let’s say that the 42/42 first preference votes were really 42.4 Lib/Nat to 41.6 Labor. Then the allocation of preferences gives us 51/49.
So its quite possible Newspolls 2PP could be on the money.
No need for conspiracy theories.
Now this is better than a prison.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24191347-2761,00.html
I’m not surprised that now Howard is gone the Liberals are polling better at State level for I have felt for quite some time that one of the reasons why the ALP dominated State elections was that many Liberal voters were using State elections to send a message to Canberra one thing that feed that was for most of Howards 11 years the federal ALP were a joke and only got there act together under Rudd.
Great theory, but you’ll find Howard’s best state federally was WA and each time he came here he was treated like a hero and note that in the last Federal Election he only lost 1 seat which was Hasluck, even though the ones he retained and gained were by smaller margins than previously.
further to previous post! based on the strenght of the Economy I expect the ALP too be returned, I’m sure some outer suburbian seats and Mining booths may send a message to Canberra about the increasing cost of living and the possiblem impact of proposed climate change policies.
I’m reading people dismissing these polls, I recall people mocked Glen and co for predicting the Liberals would make gains in WA which actually happened
I think this election will be interesting for so many reasons for the WA Liberal party is a joke, the Government while sitting on the best economy in the country has several question marks hanging over it and whenever ther is a major redrawing of the seats always creates a few interesting results.
Winston, there were no conspiracy theories anyway. I think I’ll take more notice of Mumble, someone who not only knows what he is talking about but also someone that doesn’t have an axe to grind. Your theory should be called the “IF theory”. It is full of them.
“I’m reading people dismissing these polls, I recall people mocked Glen and co for predicting the Liberals would make gains in WA which actually happened”
I think you mean gain ie one seat. Overall there was a swing to Labor of 2.1%.
Hmm, This doesn’t look good for the Libs.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24191431-2761,00.html
And here is the Liberal Prison Plan.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24191504-5017005,00.html
“And here is the Liberal Prison Plan.”
Do they think that crime will increase so much if they are elected that WA will need 2 new prisons.
Well they have announced plans to introduce Mandatory Prison Terms of between 3-12 months Minimum for assaulting Public Officers, which was drafted in consultation with the Police Union, so they will need more room for the extra people sent to jail.
GB.
No axe. No theory. You are jumping at shadows.
Just don’t think we should dismiss poll results because they don’t fit our personal prejudices.
I agree Winston.
More perspective required GB.
The cash-for-comment scandal can’t be good for the Libs. He’s one of their better performers, but he’s in a do-or-die battle with Mick Murray, and I suspect Murray’s chances just got noticeably better.
Yep, And that seat Collie Preston was one of those Marginals highlighted in Westpoll which was a Dead Heat.
This has come at a VERY bad time for the Libs.
Frank
you were saying exactly the same thing last week about the Buswell story and look how the polls turned out on that?
But this is FAR more serious than the Buswell story and will be the local issue in that particular seat.
Yeah, if it were in another seat I wouldn’t place that much emphasis on it. But Murray is a very popular member, and Thomas already had a battle on his hands to win that one, and would need to hope there was enough of a statewide swing to overcome Murray’s personal vote. The last thing he needs is further individual factors playing against him in that seat.
But remember who leaked the email in last week’s story, it was inside the Liberal Party itself from people who may syill be angry that Buswell has been rewarded with a senior shadow cabinet desicion.
It may not have translated to anything in this poll, which I put down as a honeymoon poll whenever a leader is replaced, but there is still 3 weeks to go, and people will slowly realise the implications as the campaign progresses.
Thanks Gary! I wasn’t aware that WA swung over all to the ALP
76 Winston – “No axe. No theory.” LOL
77 Edward – LOL
Everybody wait for Barnett to deliver the coup de grace… he’ll announce the next power station in WA will be gas or nuclear powered, and get thumped in Collie. Yes, I’m being cynical, but the Libs seem good at shooting themselves in the foot lately… I wouldn’t be completely surprised if that actually happens.
For those who want to believe these polls are dead accurate I stick by what I said at 38.
I wonder if Bob Maumill will change his tune on the Labor Party now that their Racing Policy has been released, since Bob has been a very vocal critic about the lack of spending on the Horse Racing Industry.
http://www.visionwa.org.au/policy/racingpolicy160808.pdf
For those playing at home, these are the LIberal Party “Policies” announced to date.
http://www.wa.liberal.org.au/index.php?option=com_docman&Itemid=141
Westpoll is intersting but its samples too small for mine , both State wise and by electorate , do not undrstand why except for cost against diminished crdibility they do such small samples Newspoll however is a reliable “guide’ and 1100 people weighted by population and MOE of 3% is fine
Providing subsequent Newspolls show same data , ythis looks like a close Labor win but a nail biter with seats decided by few votes
Good signal out of Poll was Labor/Carpenter with significant leads over Barnett/Liberals in most categories , and for a close Liberal win , Barnett/Libewrals should be at least even if not in front in these , and thats an area I’m interested in next Poll rather than just State poll % , which can be misleading
ALP How To Vote Cards are up on the ALP Candidates page.
http://visionwa.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=26
Just noticed that not all seats are covered, but the Morley ticket is interesting , Labor are givinng their 3rd preference to John D’Orazio.
http://www.visionwa.org.au/htv/morley.pdf
Newspoll’s last 6 consolidated polls results since last electon , started from from Apl/June 07 , then July/Sept 07 , Oct/Dec 07 , first 2 quarters this year and 14/8 one
Taking Apl/June07 one as natural base to compare to Poll movements since , (but ignore Oct/Dec 07 one) , most of movements in Liberal vote % up or down hav followed movements in Greens vote % up or down
Gieven Libs ar ‘right’ of Labor and Greens ar further ‘left’ than ‘left’ Labor , these Liberal/greens movements seem surprising (and MOE on Greens share does not seem enough)
meant to say only EXCLUDE movement July/Sept Poll 07 vs Oct/Dec Poll 07 comparison of Libs vs Greens , but compare all other consecutive Poll movements of Libs vs Greens
Ron,
It would be interesting who the Greens preference when their HTV cards are released, as I notice the ALP are giving their first Preference to the Greens, from the HTV cards that are up at present.
The Nationals ticket will be interesting, to say the least – especially if they stay true to their promise and preference the Greens/ALP.
Absolutely Frank , very intersting
Unfortunately Greens made pref negotiations a public issue over uranium , sent ‘mixed’ messages to left’ voters that Labor and CLP ar same , which is negative on Labor vote (but zero effect on liberal vote)
It doesn’t matter whether one supports Carpenters ‘exploration’ but no mines decison or LCP will mine policy OR one opposes exploration aan d any mining , result of Greens public unbranium ‘negotions’ only could have ‘hurt’ Labor vote , to what extent one does not know
BUT that Greens vs Liberals News poll Trend Frank is strange ??
Also note ‘others’ got 11% last electon , know how that pref split ?
Donkey Vote in Churchlands
http://www.visionwa.org.au/htv/churchlands.pdf
“Blair Says:
For the benefit of those of us who are ignorant easterners, are the Daylight Saving Party for it or against it?”
They are for daylight saving.
http://www.daylightsavingparty.org.au/index.htm
Talk about decency/any clue deprivation syndrome.
The WA Libs have now come up with a real doosey to try and hit Labor over the head with.
Apparently the police here did not release for general exhibition a security camera tape which may or may not have shown someone who may or may not have had some involvement with the sickening Cottesloe serial killings in 1966/67.
This was a grave mistake according to the Liberals, and releasing the tape may have led to the apprehension of the offender.
A sombre Colin Barnett gave a press conference expressing feigned indignation over this, how terrible it was, and what a disgrace the local plod are. The implication of course was (is) that it has come to light in Labor’s watch, and Labor are therefore somehow responsible for the police failure, if not the actual murders.
Pathetic, sad stuff, beneath Colin’s usual standards, and a half baked opportunistic attempt to grt some mileage out of other people’s terrible misfortune.
The ironic thing is, that it all happened when the Libs were in power, in fact they remained in power for four years after the events, the very four years when the release of the tape may, just possibly, have been of maximum benefit.
Sad and ignoble.
1996/1997.
Maybe I’m a Barbarian , but re those serial killing tapes shaby Barnett Presss conference , Carpenter should call an immediate Press Conference with only one subject to discuss , Barrnett is a hypocrit upsetting those poor family survivors when he damn well knows Liberals were in power then and for following 4 years thereafter and there lack of public disclose then was a disgrace
AND Barnett’s ” tricky”support for th Liberals COVERUP disgrace should not be tolerated by voters
Yep, how ironic that this all happened under Richard Court’s watch
And the Police Minister at the time was Bob Wiese in 1996, and by the current Liberal Candidate for Kalamunda John Day in 1997.
The Merde is about to hit the cooling device once this is pointed out.
Fulvio,
I note all online stories on this don’t mention Barnett saying it was Labor’s fault – was it only on the TV Bulletins ?
Frank, I did not hear anyone say specifically it was Labor’s fault but the underlying implication was quite clear to me, and I think to every one hearing it, the implication being: why did the police under Labor’s watch not release the tape?
Why else would Barnett and the other braying hyena, Johnson, the shadow police minister and also I think Buswell, go public on it and attack the police during an election campaign? An election campaign in which they have again fixated on the non existent (in terms of an objectively identified spiralling out of control issue) law and order and police numbers?
Good question, and it should be pointed out that the head of the Macro Task Force David Caporn is also embroiled in the upcoming CCC inquiry into Andrew Mallard which the Libs were hoping to use to discredit John Quigley, but it’s also ironic that also took place within a similar time frame of the elusive security tapes, so they’d be VERY unwise to use that report as it may just come back and bite the Libs in the bum.
Hmm, while trying to look up Court Ministry stuff re the latest security tape scandal, I found this media release from Richard Court calling an Early Election in December 1996
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/cabinet/mediast/dg96-47/preelect.html
Good question, and it should be pointed out that the then head of the Macro Task Force is also embroiled in the upcoming CCC inquiry into Andrew Mallard which the Libs were hoping to use to discredit John Quigley, but it’s also ironic that also took place within a similar time frame of the elusive security tapes, so they’d be VERY unwise to use that report as it may just come back and bite the Libs in the bum.
So Frank, effectively in 1996, the Libs gave four weeks notice of an early election!
They have set the precedent, twice refused to agree to fixed terms when offered, and now have the gall to bleat about being hard done by!
Yep, what Hypocrites they are
And even more hypocritical, Colin Barnett was the Minister for RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT; ENERGY; EDUCATION; LEADER OF THE HOUSE IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY when that Poll was called
Swannie on Insiders today was decent but dull and repeated several times that the Government was ‘not apologising’ for something or other. Bad look. No-one is asking for an apology and it looks very defensive. He needs retraining and/or a new spin doctor badly.
Belinda Neale got a mention, with a suggestion that she may be in breach of the Crimes Act with the content of one of her letters to a witness of something or other. Has she actually contributed anything at all useful to Australia?
The WA labour negative radio ad on the lib boy’s club was played on Insiders. Noted only one lib woman candidate vs 13 women candidates for labour in held seats and made mention of Buswell’s bra snapping, seat sniffing antics. I trust that WA voters will do the right thing by Mr Buswell in particular and that parties will realize that sexual harassment by people in power is no longer something to be treated with a nudge, a wink and a spell in the backbenches. Misogyny by public humiliation is simply not acceptable from parliamentarians.
When confronted with 57:43 by Cassidy, Walsh and Hendo, without batting an eyelid, opined that Gippsland, NT and now the WA polls showed there seemed to be a change of mood in the electorate.
Swannie seemed to think that Tiptoe was likely to return. Swannie was unconvincing about ‘bring it on’. If Tiptoe does bring it on, he will cook Swannie’s goose, but Tanner would do Tiptoe.
Hendo thought that Tiptoe (aka the elusive Pimpernel?) had shown ‘courage’ in confronting Howard twice. LOl, good old sourpus Hendo made my day. He seemed to think that Tiptoe would take Rudd on, on ‘policy’ like Turnbull would, except that his colleagues don’t like him, but unlike Nelson, so in went two knives right there.
They were all pretty annoyed with Tiptoe’s silence. They thought that Tiptoe has not been stirring the pot, but failed to pick up on the ‘orchestration’ of the timing of that job offer. They also did not mention a certain private meeting between Tiptoe and Nelson.
BTW, is Nelson still alive?
Interesting tactic by the Libs not to bury Buswell, but to have him out front, attacking Carpenter (and Logan) over the gas pipeline explosion. On one level the Libs are saying ‘we are a strong, united team’. But on another, the message is ‘Troy is one of us, and when he grows up he will be our leader again.’ Obviously, this angle is exploitable by the ALP. Coupled with the woeful level of female representation among Liberal candidates, the Buswell issue can be shown to underscore a general misogyny in the party. Even Peter van Onselen castigates the Libs for their “blokiness” in the Sunday Times.
Those Labor negative radio ads are pathetic. Conservative parties will never be supported by the militant feminazi filth, which is the only group the ad will appeal to. They should be focusing on policy and character, not gender. These ads are a shameful low in terms of playing crass divisive politics.
“They should be focusing on policy and character, not gender.”
How’s this for character – the Liberal party is effectively saying that as a representation of the WA community, we could only find 6 women that are fit to serve as members of the parliament. Isn’t that something?!
“Conservative parties will never be supported by the militant feminazi filth, which is the only group the ad will appeal to.”
Um, in case you didn’t realise, the year is 2008 – the “militant feminazi filth” tend now to be successful women of all ages, equal to men in all respects, from every wing of the political spectrum.
“Conservative parties will never be supported by the militant feminazi filth,”
I agree Swordfish, women just do not know their place today.
That woman who had her bra unfastened by Buswell should have been rightly honoured that Buswell chose her bra to unfasten, likewise with Buswell’s female libs collegaue. Buswell just does not sniff any seat that has been sat upon by a female, well I’m pretty sure he doesn’t.
Same with Noel Crichton-Brown, when he said to that female journo he was going to screw her tits off. Does she say “Oh Mr Crichton-Brown, I’d be honoured to have you do that”. No, she complains, probably one of herhairy armpitted femo nazis.
But lets elect Buswell and co and bring back the old values, the true values, what say pip pip.
Swordfish @ 114
I would be curious to know how you would justify Buswell being still in the party and a candidate. Is it that what he did wasn’t wrong. Or that it was wrong, but not really important? Or that you think that he has already paid an appropriate price?
117 Boerwar – I’m getting the impression you’re not a Swannie fan. I think Costello will fail if he becomes leader and Swan will be one of the reasons why.
Can we please direct the Wayne Swan discussion to the other thread.
Labor should be pleased that the Libs have chosen to run on a bogus law-n-order scare. It’s what conservatives always do when they’ve got nothing better to run with. If the Libs have gone straight to the bottom of the policy barrel that’s a good sign for Labor. (Also, historically it never works. Conservatives do best when they stick to promising to put money in people’s pockets.)
OK William, going over to 57:43 on Swan.
Bishop says Independents are useless, unless it’s Liz Constable of course
http://www.postnewspapers.com.au/20080816/news/010.shtml
Barnett stands by his Man.
It sound like it’s only a matter of time before the Libs implode over there.
And Barnett goes for the Vigilante Vote, in a move which even the Police Commisioner opposes.
http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=506934
And from the original Sunday Times article, the Opposition Attorney General appears to have reservations over such a move.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24191498-948,00.html
Do these people talk to one another?
Not normally, they’re too busy infighting
“Liberals’ justice spokesman Christian Porter said his party would consider a public register for sex offenders,”
Does that include undoing womens underwear, sniffing their backsides, threatening to screw their tits off, or is that behaviour called just being a “lad”
But according to the Libs, that’s just good natured fun
But using that logic Messers Buswell and Crichton-Browne should be at the top of the list
Frank,
Perhaps you should ask the soon-to-be former member for Swan Hills about this question. Her opinion of our current Premier and his activities seems fairly plain. If she was not trying to get a federal seat I would think she would be a lot less inhibited.
That is a totally different scenario, as Buswell’s indiscretions took place at Parliament House during sitting hours, while the other took place at a private function.
Imagine the confusion the Opposition Environment spokesman would cause when Nelson brings in his ETS in 2012, 2013 or2020.
”Dr Thomas told the South West Times in November 2006 a new environmental contamination law would be an “impost” on Cable Sands and two other mining companies. South West Minister Mark McGowan says Dr Thomas, as a potential environment minister, should have been more scrupulous. ”
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=2&ContentID=92039
Steve @ 133
Are the libnats in WA giving Brian Burke a bit of run or is that now regarded as old hat?
There is already a brochure being distributed which mentions “The Crime an Corruption Commision’s (CCC) report into dealings with disgraced former Premier Brian Burke “and has a Silhouette of Brian Burke.
Frank Calabrese @ 135
Thank you. Do you think it will stick, or do you think Carpenter sufficiently distanced himself from Burke in voters minds?
I hope so Boerwar, it will add a bit of colour to the campaign. Nothing’s old hat when it comes to desperate tories.
So, Frank, it is OK in your book to lift up an unwilling woman’s shirt, exposing her bra, if this is done out of hours? You have an interesting view of OK (IMHO). It is still highly questionable behaviour, possibly amounting to assault.
One party leader had the honesty to admit to it and apologise for it. The other one did not. Is that OK as well?
Andrew Reynolds @ 138
I would appreciate knowing the background to this. Is there a link?
Look at Swan Hills on this very site:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/wa2008/swanhills.htm
You sir are a Hypocrite, it was a private function where there was no offence caused,Even Jaye said as much. I’d rather trust Senator Elect Louise Pratt’s account of the event, than gossip and Hearsay from The West.
Oh – and cowardly. Relying on the person concerned to keep silent. Buswell might have been an idiot to do what he did (and there is no real excuse for it) but at least he admitted and apologised. Carpenter did not even have the guts and honesty to do that.
I would suggest you leave this topic at this point, Frank. I am happy to do it if you are.
Frank,
I am not the hypocrite trying to launch attacks on people’s honesty and integrity while ignoring it in my own back yard. The fact that neither of the parties concerned will speak of it speaks volumes more than anyone else’s denials.
I would suggest you leave this topic at this point, Frank. I am happy to do it if you are.
Why ? Because you’ve been exposed as being wrong ?
You’re the one who raised it, so in effect YOU are the coward.
Andrew @ 140
Thank you.
With respect to possible comparisons:
1. Buswell only ‘fessed up’ when cornered like the rat he was.
2. He was a serial offender.
3. He humiliated women in public.
4. He was only dropped by his party when it was realized that it couldn’t possibly win with the serial offender, and also after the NT exponent of this sort of behaviour lost his seat.
None of Buswell’s wrongs make any similar wrong by Carpenter right.
I am still curious and would appreciate your views on three questions:
1. Is the Carpenter story validated in any way?
2. Is it known whether it was really ‘unwilling’?
3. What does it mean when the word ‘private’ is used.
No more name-calling, please.
Frank – with respect, you are the one who was more than happy to whittle on about Buswell’s idiocy, while ignoring what Carpenter is alleged to have done. Even our good host here repeats the story – and either of the people concerned could have killed it stone dead with an outright denial, which neither have done.
No – the suggestion to you was merely to allow you to save some face. If you choose not to, I am happy to continue. I am likely to enjoy the experience.
See William at Post 147 – I will respect his request.
Andrew & Boerwar,
Employing the old Liberal smear technique. Seen it a thousand times. Moral relativism is us. Find an alleged incident, then beat it up ferociously. Try and convince everyone that this means all politicians are the same.
Crap politics from crap people.
So a “refusal to deny” is an admission of impropriety? I don’t think so.
Carpenter denied it.
You seem to have selective memory, Carpenter DID deny it, as did several others including Ms Pratt.
And Jaye said this on the matter.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/premier-snaps-over-bra-strap-rap/2008/05/06/1209839631954.html
That to me sounds like a denial.
Ahh, I understand Frank’s puerile argument now.
Buswell is bad because his impropriety was done in Parliament.
Carpenter is good. The burden of proof is higher for him (non-denied rumours and media reports are not valid). And, even if Carpenter sexually assaulted someone it was not done in Parliament so it was ok.
By implication, the indiscretions of MPs are really open question when they take “place at Parliament during sitting hours” and misconduct at private functions is outside the realm of public judgement.
Frank, I’m sure your comrades at ALP HQ really appreciate this fine display of mately solidarity.
Frank,
If that is a denial to you, then you appear to have strong powers of selective reading. I quote back:
I suggest that, if that is a denial, then black, plainly, is white.
If you have a link to Carpenter denying it I request you put it up. I do not believe he has done so, but with a verified report I will concede on that.
As requested, here is Carpenter’s denial.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=71362
Boerwar,
Points 1 to 4 are conceded (apart from the “rat” bit, but I will take that as poetic license).
On your following points 1 to 3:
1. I understand that several eye witnesses have reported what happened and Jaye (for one) has not denied it. There have been various attempts to kill the story (one of which Frank has kindly reproduced above) but none of them have been by way of denial or any real attempt to explain the conduct. Considering the attendees at the function were all strong Labor sympathisers, this may be as good as we get. Personally, I would be satisified with a straight denial from Jaye.
2. Would you believe she would be willing to have this done? Rhetorical question, I know, but I like to apply the test of common sense.
3. Assault is assualt, whether public or private. An office in Parliament House can also be considered “private”. I would submit this is irrelevant.
I think it’s a bit of a laugh. Carpenter used to be a journo, Radisich used to be a student unionist; both professions known for their love of boozing and partying (hang around a university for a few years, you learn this). I wouldn’t be surprised if they got drunk and got silly one night, but it’s a case of “what happens on tour, stays on tour”. If nobody involved was offended in the morning, it doesn’t matter what happened. Doing something you later wish you hadn’t with the opposite sex while drunk is not the same thing as sexual assault.
The Australian wrote there was a denial.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23646314-5006789,00.html
Andrew,
You are starting to sound a tad desperate, despite these facts.
1. Buswell admitted sniffing a female staffers chair.
2. The victim said it happened.
3. Buswell admitted snapping open a female staffers bra.
4. The victim is on stress leave.
5. Carpenter denied lifting anyone’s top
6. Ms Radisich & Ms Pratt deny anything untoward happened.
Maybe we could get back to a policy debate, now that Buswell has moved on.
BoP
“Doing something you later wish you hadn’t with the opposite sex while drunk is not the same thing as sexual assault”
Actually, sometimes it is.
Andrew and others at various posts
Most regulars in this blog might have the view that I am even-handed on this issue, so I came to this string with an open mind on Carpenter, although my mind had been made up on Buswell and on Len the Feather Duster in Darwin.
For as long as Ms Radisch neither confirms nor denies, which is her right, there is no story. Apart from anything else, her decision and her privacy should be respected.
Spreading the non-story as if it might be true would have to be a fairly vicious sort of exercise which is possibly personally damaging to Ms Radisch.
My advice to the libnats is not to lower yourself to this sort of exercise and to focus on some quality policy instead. It is the thing that would make you look like a credible government in waiting.
Good question, there will be some people who will believe it, but I think in the main most fair minded people will see that Carpenter dealt with the problem promptly as evidenced in the former Peel By-Election (the seat is now abolished) with the ALP recieving a swing towards it, despite it being held at the height of the CCC hearings with daily releases of the phone taps between Burke and others.
Frank Calabrese @ 161
Thank you.
I should add that the By-Election was caused by the resignation of the first CCC scalp Norm Malborough.
There has been a sudden silence on the part of the Libs. on the withheld security tape issue. Iwonder why?
And former Lib turned Family Firat candidate Anthony Fels was on the ABC News talking about it, and it was mentioned that he raised it in 2001 with then Police Minister Kevin Prince, who appranently didn’t pursue the matter further.
Hmm, the plot thickens.
I actualy popped in to disagree with Mumble’s interpretaton of Newspoll’s 51/49 But what do I find ?
A liberal supporter Andrew making unsubstantiated allegations with no sworn affadavits made I hope you did not actualy think anyone would believe you
Did you hear the Lib. environment spokesman,Thomas, (he who enthusiastically backed eco destroying sand mining activities on behalf of a certain company and was given $30 per week rental accomodation by that company), on TV this evening?
Apparently his justification is that it was crappy accomodation anyway. So that makes it all right in Lib.LaLa Land.
Where do they get these guys from?
And more to the point, why aren’t they pilloried mercilessly by our free and independent press?
Because they are not in the ALP
And I note that he, and the others supporting him have been noticeably silent once Col & Boerwar pointed out how silly they looked by raising said allegations.
168 They are starting to get a bit of detail on the story now. It is all beginning to sound about as convincing as the Santo Santoro story in the senate last year which took a few days to get straight.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21498,24191431-2761,00.html?from=public_rss
I suppose, dirty, run down, rat infested houses are where rats live.
Did he give any indication of the purpose he rented it for?
I read somewhere else it was for his family to live, while their house got renovated. (In another world, that could be the premise for one of the Lockie Leonard books… anyone remember them?)
It could be interesting when he reveals his shareholdings he owns but I suppose they don’t need to go on the register until if/when some lobbying is done either.
It occurs to me he may have merely being trying to secure an appropriate venue for the next South West Liberal Party Council meeting.
In which case, entirely appropriate, and all is forgiven.
Frank,
I hope you will accept my apologies for going and having my dinner, leaving you here seemingly prematurely crowing.
Also apologies if I do not entirely believe a politician giving a seemingly half-hearted denial. I do not necessarily believe it when they come out with lines like “baseless smears”. As I said, I will accept a denial from Jaye – Carpenter’s seeming denial just seems weak, although I concede he has denied one specific accusation, if not any inappropriate behaviour.
I would, however, appreciate a withdrawal of the specific charge of hypocracy against me Equally, I think you should withdraw on the error you made that she had denied it.
I also think that your powers of mis-reading are showing themselves again, Frank. I did not request this continues, in fact I asked the exact reverse. I said I would continue if you did.
.
Boerwars,
I would think that any woman would be offended by the suggestion you have made that an assault on them could be “possibly personally damaging”. I accept you did not intend that, but I think it would be offensive.
As a side point, you called me a “libnat”. I am not currently a member of any political party, and have never had a paid position with any political party – although in the past I have been a member. I am currently merely an interested by-stander. I am happy to stick to the issues, and offer to drop this point too, provided others here also do so.
.
Ron,
There were no sworn affadavits in the Buswell incidents either. If nothing happened in politics until there were affadavits we would be all the poorer. Still, if no-one talks about it, then it did not happen, did it?
I’m sure there’s a valid explanation which will be forthcoming. There can only be improvement on today’s effort.
Frank,
My previous comment is held in moderation for the moment, so you can await that one.
.
Ron,
To add to it, though. If you want to have a word about “unsubstatiated allegations”, perhaps you should ask our good host here to change the Swan Hills page I linked to earlier.
Fulvio, scroll down to the list of companies in WA at the end of this fun list, more than enough to keep a budding Minister for the Environment busy for a while.
http://www.npi.gov.au/overview/reports/wa-facility-location.html#Details
And if it’s a personal attack on me, that’s where it will stay
I was feeling pretty smug until I read your list steve, but now I’m just sad…
Even though I live here, I’m getting on now. But my kids…
Andrew,
I’ve read your latest tirade and stand by what I’ve said.
Pot Meet Kettle
Frank I think the senator’s ‘rebuttal’ was the most insightful of all the comments. Didn’t she do a joke about men staring at her breasts all the time?
Think she did from memory. It’s a shame that hypocrites like Andrew can get all high and mighty criticising the left for this while ignoring more disgusting activities in their own backyard re BHuswell.
And here are Louise Pratt’s comments at the time.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23641464-2761,00.html
you know me Frank, if it was true, I’d be very critical of the Premier, as I was with chairman sniff, and then I’d be very critical of his not coming clean, if indeed he did it.
Having said that I think there is only one logical conclusion that can be drawn from the major players reactions / behaviour.
Yeah interesting quote, damning really if you ask me.
Andrew Reynolds
#176
“Ron,
There were no sworn affadavits in the Buswell incidents either. If nothing happened in politics until there were affadavits we would be all the poorer”
Andrew all you’ve engaged in is unsubstantiated mud throwing , now perhaps it helps your sense of helplessness as you notice your Liberal Party is not in power in any of th 9 Federal and State/Territory governemtns in ‘oz’ , if so fine
BUT you’ve only made me happy tonite to see that in midst of Liberal Party’s ruins , its suporters ar now actualy deluding themselves with ficticous sex storys to improve ther morale , instead of actualy producing relevant policys , so you ar actualy going backwards here
sorry Ron but why doesn’t the quote above provide Andrew with substantiation, would you still be refusing to accept the Buswell story if he’d stuck with his lie?
as I said the quote above is enough for me.
189 jasmine – I’m confused. Are you saying Andrew has a point because of the quote Frank provides at 185?
Jasmine
Louise Pratt’s denial Statement could not be more explicit in denying anything inappropriarte occurred at all re Carpenter
She probably could hav simply said last sentence which is an unqualifed denial
But before she did so , she wanted to make it clear subject was no one else’s business of a private Politicans Party anyway as it was indeed a private party and none of Press’s business further she is saying obviously they giggled etc at Party so what , she was not going to allow Press to turn there Party giggles to a politcal story , so effectively was saying …..to Press
Having made that pint , she clearly has denied th allegation of inappropriate behavour Now if people want to ‘twist’ her unambigous words , thats for them
yeah Gary I’m thinking the conclusion Andrew leans towards, is pretty sound based on everyone’s behaviour, that quote is priceless. Says so much, sounds so much like a denial, but it just isn’t. If it can’t be a denial then why? I’ll leave it at that.
Ron on the contrary it couldn’t be much less specific, it couldn’t avoid denying it any harder without just saying ‘look it happened ok get over it it doesn’t matter’. Look it, it isn’t even subtle.
It’s the ‘None of your business, stickybeak’ denial.
Which is what Jaye said in the first place – yes something along those lines happened, no I wasn’t offended, and I’m not saying anything else on the matter, now piss off
Jasmine , in place of Pratt’s last sentence of #185 , tell what ‘denial’ sentence of words would hav satisfied you ?
I can’t for the life of me see how anyone can equate what Buswell did with the thing Carpenter was supposed to have done.
I wish people would stop trying to argue the point here. You’re not convincing anyone either way. Poll Bludger was such a more interesting resource before the “let’s have a big political argument!” people with nothing insightful to add took over…
Yes, it’s turned into the “Labor fanclub” and “Liberal haters” of recent.
Saen and Rebecca , floor is yours for us to read
oh abuse is so much better than political banter
Carps on Newspoll, He’s got it about right
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24197126-5006789,00.html
yes Frank Carps went to the polls when he did to have an evenly balance contest ….
198 [Poll Bludger was such a more interesting resource before the “let’s have a big political argument!” people with nothing insightful to add took over…]
Cry me a river of crocodile tears. The other possibility is that Poll Bludger reflects the political reality of the times where the Liberals are unelectable at the Federal level and doing poorly in every state. They hold no position of power even in Brisbane City Hall since the Clive Palmer takeover, so of course their ideas are well outside the mainstream of Australian politics.
It really was an “insightful” addition to Poll Bludger the quotes at 198 and 199.
Rebecca
Were you at the Uni bar in 83?
The beauty of blogging sites is that if you don’t like them you can leave them. Very democratic. I feel inclined to suggest quit whingeing; if you don’t like it, leave. But I suppose constructive criticism should be welcomed.
On Dr Thomas and conflict of interest. There was a certain fed minister for minerals and energy in the early days of Howard/Costello whose family held large coal interests. Forgotten his name, but I seem to recall that he was a bosom buddy and sometime flatmate of the rodent. A sort of policy buddy on climate change?
On Dr Thomas I would suggest a more assertive policy approach by the libnats:
‘Clean sand: the answer to affordable housing.’
207 Boerwar – that is certainly the answer. I haven’t visited another blog (the one which shall remain nameless) for yonks. I didn’t like what I was reading so I left. So easy to do.
Here is the ABC News story on what Anthony Fels had to say about the Calremont Video debacle.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200808/r282900_1202856.asx
Oh and according to the dead tree version of The West, The Grrens have stated they will be directing their preferences to the ALP, which will be crucial in key marginal seats as a direct response to Colin’s announcement of Uranium Mining
ABC Political Reporter Peter Kennedy on the week in WA Politics.
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/audio/audio/200808/200808180-peter-kennedy.mp3
Andrew @ 156 and 176
Thank you for your reply and further comments. Our posts either crossed or I was playing with the sandman.
1. I am sorry that I implied you were a libnat when you are not. False assumption on my part.
2. In this case there it seems to me to be several ambiguities. It is one of the difficulties of sexual behaviour between people that things are not always black and white.
3. With respect to confirming or denying stories, I believe the individuals whom may or may not have been the victims should have the right to make a decision about how they engage. They are almost routinely bastardised either way. They have the right to privacy. So I would reiterate two things: The first: Their call in general and in this case Ms Radisich’s call. The second, that the libnats ought to get onto quality policy.
Ms Radisich started the media hoo-hah, Boerwar…started it and then piously claims to not want to engage in it, knowing that this does damage to the Premier.
If she confirmed she was assaulted, she’d be defaming Carps. If she dienied it she’d have no story running against him. So she says nothing.
It has bugger-all to do with victimhood, or media engagement.
L @ 213
Thank you. I didn’t know that.
Boerwar,
That is incorrect, she did NOT raise it all.
And your evidence is ? That is a total load of Horsepoop.
Which hit the airwaves first, the chair sniffing or the bra snapping? I suspect someone from the chair sniffing side found out about the bra snapping and released it to overcome their problems with their chair sniffing leader. Just a guess mind you.
The Bra Snapping came out fist which took place the same night that Troy entered the chamber drunk, there was video footage of him staggering into the chamber and he tried to snuggle up to Rob Johnston, and apparently grabbed the wedding tackle of the late Trevor Sprigg.
The Chair Sniffing came out a bit later on.
PM Story on the original Drunken noght which culminated in the Bra Snapping.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s2139116.htm
Georgraphe Gazette story.
http://geographegazette.com/node/124
Surprise Surprise, the Nationals will direct their preferences to the Libs in the Lower House.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/18/2338963.htm
And I’ve noticed they’ve updated the original story.
And this is interesting from Grylls.
Hmm, my last comment was caught up in the Blockquotes, but this really proves that the Nationals are puppets of the Liberal party, despite their recent bleatings to the contrary.
Frank
That is like saying the Greens are puppets of the ALP, I can think of a fair few people here who disagree with you.
The facts are the Nationals/Liberal/One Nation have similar ideals making them natural partners, but does not means they support each others 100%
It’s pleasing to see that the little hill billy’s attempt at blackmail fell flat on it’s face and that he and his party are again exposed for what they are, an impotent little dag on the rump of the Liberal Party.
I know, so much for all his posturing he made on the subject, I’m pretty sure the Party Seniors had a quiet word in his ear about not “scaring the horses”.
Fulvio, music to swap National preferences by.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KaBstIKXw0
hmm, Odds have shortened for the Libs.
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/bookies-drift-back-towards-libs-20080818-3xjn.html
No real money has been out on either side yet. The next round of polls following the NT payout will get them in. If Labor drifts out to $1.40 or $1.50 by then the cash will start flowing if Labor improve in the next round of polling.
It seems that Daffy is getting set to drift Labor out a bit further yet by the tone of his NT remarks.
I see that Norman Moore says the Libs will commit to 4 year terms if elected – can we believe him?
L@213
Frank Calabrese is calling you on this one. Do you have evidence?
I notice that the silence is deafening, it’s funny that, those on the right always take a long time to either respond to their allegations, or don’t bother to reply at all.
I wonder if they’re awaiting instructions from Menzies House ?
I notice in the Midland Echo, which has a 2 page spread of local candidates that the Liberal Candidate is lamenting the closure of the Midland Railway Workshops and the number of people losing their jobs etc.
Small problem, it was the Court Liberal Govt, who did this as one of their first acts when elected.
Talk about kicking an own Goal
I forgot to mention it is the Liberal Candidate for midland, Peter MacDowell, who is the President of the Swan Chamber of Commerce.
Also see the Libs will bring in GM crops if elected. Looks like they are trying to lose.
I’m pretty sure they only drafted Barnett in to reducing the Liberal Loss from a Bloodbath to a Flesh wound
Frank,
They can have all the flesh they like. Ain’t no good without guts and backbone.
Libs welcome Nat’s Preference Backflip.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/18/2339321.htm
Frank @182,
Are you denying then that your claims that Jaye had denied it were simply wrong, then – or is your denial somewhere in the (wide) Carpenter through Clinton range? The only denial we have here is the one word from Carpenter – not, as you all but claimed that all parties had denied it.
The end result is that we have a one word denial from the Premier, and all other parties have clammed up. Hardly a resounding chorus of denial – apart, perhaps, from you on the subject.
As for 232, I have never taken any instructions from Menzies House on any matter. Can you say the same as regards Curtin House?
As I offered earlier – and you seem to be steadfastly ignoring – I would suggest you cease and desist on this. Up to you of course.
.
On to the substantive debate (presuming you are happy to leave the chair sniffing, bra snapping and shirt-lifting behind).
I just think that the Libs are being sensible on the subject of uranium and GM cropping. Remember when parties actually looked at the evidence and came to a reasoned conclusion? Perhaps it will not prove as
populistpopular as blinkered opposition to them, but they may actually be the right call.Andrew
Build a Bridge, We are right, you are wrong
END OF DISCUSSION
Substantively then, let’s just call the Liberals’ current policies on GM and Uranium issues brave and interesting, shall we Andrew?
The implications have obviously been deeply researched and widely considered by the party in the two days since they ditched all previous positions on everything and embarked on Colin’s Excellent Adventure up the Canal Without a Paddle.
Somehow though, I doubt there will be many non rusted on voters gleefully jumping in their canoes to follow those little black canards.
Most remarkable feature of Louise Pratt affair I find , is NOT that unsubstantiated smear allegations hav been made made against Premier Carpenter , as thats simple dirty politcs by Liberals , but how any sensible person could posibly twist Louis Pratts unamgibuous denial to being an acknowledgment something may hav occured
Louise Pratt said
“I’m well known as a strong feminist. If anything inappropriate happened, I would raised it with Alan at the time.”
Now had th smearers simply said Louis pratt was a liar , they would hav looked very foolish seeing both Carpenter and Pratt were both unambigously denying it , and there is no credible substantiation of this smear in existense
So whats been amateurishly attempted is to suggest Louis Pratt should hav said ‘ no inappropriate behavour occurred’ , and because she did not use those particular Smearers’s desired words , therefore she is covering up
One may hav had 1% credibility running that line had she merely said “If anything inappropriate happened, I would raised it with Alan at the time” ,
(which is she needed to say reely)
BUT in fact Louis Pratt went out of her way to deliberately emphasie her credibility/standards as a ‘Feminist’ that she would never tolerate inappropriate behavour (by prefacing “I’m well known as a strong feminist”) in order to double emphasie no inappropriate behavour occured
Unless one guts th english language and ‘context’ of English , Louis Pratt’s denial is a premeditaed deliberate emphasied (via her ‘Feminist’ reference ) denial unambiguously of any inappropriate behavour For those that think otherwise , you will simply disbelieve anyones comments at will whatever evidence is to contrary
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23641464-2761,00.html
Discussion on the Liberal “Boys Club” over at larvatusprodeo which may be of interest in regards of recent accusations raised in this thread by posters of the right.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/08/19/wa-labor-takes-aim-at-the-liberals-boys-club/
How can the West lose the Energy Minister and the Shadow Energy Minister in the one day? Perhaps the pair could debate each other via TV studios from opposite ends of the state.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24203772-5006789,00.html
Then again, there does seem to be a good reason why the Shadow Minister would be reluctant to leave his electorate.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/wa2008/kalamunda.htm
And ironically one of his constituents is the ALP Candidate for Swan Hills whose street is right on the border between the 2 electorates in Glen Forrest.
From the Lavartus
“exposed by Troy “I did not have intercourse with that quokka” Buswell,”
Please tell that me Troy is not a quokka fokka.
Rod
the quokka story was a furphy, some smartarse blogger made up the story as a joke, and then lazy journos picked up the story and ran with it
http://matthayden.blog-city.com/troy_buswell_quokkakicking_scandal.htm
however there is rumour (that I can not substantiate) that there are plenty more Bad Boy Tory Troy stories out there, and it is only a matter of time before the other shoe drops. Most of the stories so far have been leaked from within the Libs, by people who did not want him leader, and there were threats to release more if he did not step aside. Now he has done that the leaks should stop, but Perth is a small town.
One sentence does not a denial make Ron; which ever season it is made in.
We weren’t there Ron, so we start out with each of our own subjective view of the credibility of the main players, our knowledge (or lack thereof) of the personality of the main players and we have to draw conclusions. My money would be on the non-denial of Ms Pratt and Ms Radisich and against the Premier. You money is clearly on the Premier. When has a politician ever attempted to mislead or lie to any of us? It is unchartered territory, it is not surprising we are having trouble.
Andrew to my cost in friendly fire I agree with you on uranium mining but I think the GM stuff is a mistake.
Jasmine
“One sentence does not a denial make Ron; which ever season it is made in.”
What do you want a book , Jasmine one sentence was always sufficent
Clearly Ms Pratt’s unambigous denial is not accepted by you , and you hav not even afforded her ‘benefit of th doubt’ principal that our fairness system relies on
However you hav not answered my earlier queston , please blog me a one liner of words Ms Pratt should hav used in your opinion to deny inappropriate behavour (and then tell me those words would hav 100% convinced you no inappropriate behavour occured)
Can we move on now please.
What the Green Groups want for WA.
“An independent climate change authority, greater protection of the state’s iconic areas and a commitment to a bottle and can refund scheme are among an election wishlist by WA’s environment groups.
They also want new coal-fired power stations to be rejected and bans on uranium mining and genetically modified crops to continue.
The wishlist, compiled by the Conservation Council, the Wilderness Society, Environs Kimberley and the Australian Conservation Foundation, has also called for a feed-in tariff of at least 50c a kilowatt-hour to ensure WA achieves a target of at least 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020.
It has also renewed calls for a 10c recycling refund for bottles and cans to “address the state’s waste and litter crisis”. It says such a scheme is supported by 90 per cent of WA’s residents and would lift the recycling rate from 20 per cent to 80 per cent.
Priority should be given to the protection of the Great Western Woodlands, Banded Ironstone Formation Ranges and a “sufficient part” of the Kimberley, while the Government should support “strong nationally legislated” greenhouse pollution reduction targets of at least 30 per cent by 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050.”
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/greenies-wishlist-revealed-20080819-3xw8.html
Peter Brent (Mumble) came up with a view that Newspoll’a 51 to 49 should be 52 to 48 , and said therefore on that Labor would win comfortabley
Whilst I agree with his basic reasons , a lower ‘right’ vote & therefore higher weightng of pref flows to Labor this time , I’m still inclibed to support Newspolls figure because an offsetting factor may be rounding effect of primary votes for all Partys This can amount to as much as 0.80% lower Labor vote than reported (or in reverse)
Further , Mumble’s was a straighht line method , and note Newspoll use State population weightings
So on these 2 basis I’m happy to accept Neewspolls data as is , suggesting a nail bite Labor win , and naturaly all these Polls have MOE factor anyway
Steve
#252
how economicaly & politcaly realistic ar those Greens proposals
253 Ron – why don’t you put this to Peter Brent and see if he replies?
254 Well Ron that has always been the tricky bit for the Greens and their supporters. Unfortunately for them they always end up a stride or two away from the mainstream debate on the fringe of where the main action happens to be.
One day they will do what the Germans did and take the mainstream debate headon I suppose but they don’t seem to have that mindset. They seem to have a long way to go in the rat cunning and elephant hide department.
I sometimes wonder if they have ever seriously sat down and had a think about what they would need to do to actually win lower house seats and get swinging voters to swing their way, apart from change the voting system to the Green way of thinking.
Even something as basic as taking marginal seats from Liberals never seems to make it onto the to do list.
Steve at 256 and Ron at 254
Don’t confuse the “green groups” referred to in the article with “The Greens” the political party. While The Greens may be supportive of the objectives of the green groups, they are not the same thing.
The Greens have targeted lower house seats in the past such as Fremantle in the last State Election and Nedlands in the by-election caused by Court’s retirement in 2001 with varying degreens of success.
The vote for the Greens has gone up solidly for a number of years and will soon have them knocking on the doors of the major parties. The reality of it is that they will most likely have success in the lower house in safe Liberal and Labor seats rather than marginal Liberal seats. It is just a matter of forcing one major party under 50% of the vote and then outpolling the other and picking up all the preferences. Easy
“varying degreens of success.”
Maybe the definition of success needs to be lifted somewhat, Luke.
“Maybe the definition of success needs to be lifted somewhat, Luke”
I suppose the measure of success depends on your objectives which may be different from the objectives of the major parties.
It’s a pretty standard definition, Luke. Mainstream success begins at fifty percent of the 2PP plus one vote .
Some of the Green groups wishlist of renewables power generation seems to be in the pipeline.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24206304-2761,00.html
Steve at 260.
So the message is “can’t win, don’t try”.
Thats fine, I was just trying to give you some insight but have it your way.
See you later.
Not at all, Luke. Change the mindset and win would be the sensible thing to do. I think the Greens actually owe it to their supporters to be more electorally successful than they have been to date.
Steve @ 261
I know that there are almost routine stoushes between yourself and Greens’ bloggers on this site, and I follow these with interest.
I would rate myself as someone who is a bit marooned by these stoushes.
Leaving aside the problems with the totality of the Greens’ platform, and in particular the economic side of things, and focusing on some benchmark environmental outcomes, the two main parties at both levels of jurisdiction appear, in general:
1. unable to reduce the rate biodiversity loss in Australia
2. unable to sort out water
3. unable to reduce the number of weed introductions and the rate of their spread
4. unable to reduce the amount of materials waste per capita
5. unable to reduce the energy use per capita
6. unable to reduce the spread of acid soils
7. unable to avoid the situation where many of the top 20 commercial fish species are overfished
8. unable to manage feral animals
and so on, and so on. There are temporary and regional variations in these, but the overall national trends would appear to be there and it does not seem to matter which of the main parties is holding the reins.
In other words, they just don’t seem to be able to cut it with respect to environmental sustainability.
I would be curious about your views on this proposition.
I look at it this way Boerwar, if the Labor states are going to topple eventually and the voters want an alternative to tories then the Greens need to position themselves to take the fight up to the tories. Sitting in a comfortable third position watching this happen would be a tragedy for them as far as I am concerned.
If they start tackling Liberals headon in marginal seats then sooner or later they will learn how it is done and will begin to win a few. While they are content to sit back in third they will get the same results. I think they spread their resources far too thinly. A more focused effort in the marginals seems a better approach.
Frank,
You seem pretty keen to try to “win” by using ALL CAPS. Of course, like others who try to win this way, it does not work. Check out Graeme Bird – but I refuse to link to him. Unless and until you can substantiate any of the positions you have taken on this (only one of which has proven half true – being the one word “denial” from our Premier) then you are not winning any argument on the subject.
As offered before, though – if you are happy to drop it I am.
.
Ron,
I suggest you read Sen. Pratt’s statement again if you consider that a denial. It is nothing of the sort.
.
On the “Green” issues Boerwar – can you indicate how the Greens policies will actually address these? Banning or restricting more efficient agricultural cropping will tend to increase the amount of land needed to supply a given amount of food, working against your criteria 1 and 2, possibly 3 and certainly 6. Refusing to accept nuclear power will eliminate a method of reducing the impact of 5. Point 7 probably cannot be addressed nationally, requiring international agreements or privatisation of the resources (another no-no) and managing feral animals is most poorly handled on government lands, meaning 8 is being hurt by the policies to increase national parks and other reserved lands.
Steve @ 265
Thank you.
Just moving along from the immediate political positioning issues, which appear to be matters of judgement for the Greens (clever according to them and wrong-headed according to yourself and others), I would appreciate it if you could respond to the basic proposition outlined above, which is that neither of the main parties appears to be able to deliver environmental sustainability.
Andrfew,
See William’s post here
I will no longer respond to ANY of your posts.
Andrew @ 266
I am not a Green, so one of the Greens might want to have a try at answering your quesitons.
My basic point is that I am concerned about environmental sustainability and I don’t believe that either of the two main parties have been able to deliver on it. I also believe that the party which is mostly interested in it, is most probably not going to be able to deliver on it for two reasons: (1) they are unlikely to gain government and (2) even if they did, it is fairly doubtful that their policy package would deliver on economic sustainability.
Frank,
I did miss it and my apologies to William for doing so. I will have to take it that you are not going to address the issues as you have not previously.
Does that mean that you will not even attempt to address any other point I may raise? Like the discussion above on the Greens policies?
Boerwar,
I would have to agree with you on both 1 and 2. I would say that the legislative solutions proposed by all of the parties are not going to deliver on questions of sustainability by their very nature – legislative solutions to complex problems are almost invariably bound to fail. The policies I have seen from the Greens in the past rely heavily on the powers of government, and those sorts of powers I deeply mistrust.
267 Boerwar, I personally think that every party needs to come to terms with economic and environmental sustainability. Every party has some aspects nailed down and some that elude them. I’m also sure that being in the centre is a different perspective to either of the outer fringes.
Steve @ 273
Thank you. I think your reply is reasonable given the circumstances, but you can probably understand why I feel marooned by the main parties and the Greens on environmental sustainability.
It’s a whole world problem Boerwar so I doubt we are going to solve it on our own anyway.
I note in the Liberals’ Taxi Policy that:
Well, as a person with a disabilty who relies on the Subsidy scheme, and living in the outer metropolitan area is the fact that unless you have a roster of drivers you can book direct, it is almost impossible to get a Multipurpose Taxi by booking through a Taxi Company, a point illustrated when I went to a function in Ellenbrook (at Jaye Radisich’s Electorate Office opening for the record) from Middle Swan and I had booked the cab on a Monday to pick me up at 3pm on the Friday Afternoon, the cab diddn’t arrive until 5pm, and the return was worst, I rang for a cab at 7.20pm and despite ringing every 30 minutes from a nearby business (I didn’t own a mobile at the time), the cab never turned up, I would’ve been left stranded, if not for the kindness of a lady buying a Pizza from the local Dominoes store.
It seems that all the MPT’s were in Northbridge, where they make more money on a Friday & Saturday Night carry drinking groups, instead of carrying people with disabilities.
Jaye raised the matter with the Transport minister and in her letter, Black & White Taxis pointed out that they rang the contact number (the electorate office), but got no reply – staff have conifirmed that there were no messages on the answering service.
In short, the problem won’t be solved until the DPI mandates that MPT drivers give priority to Special Needs passengers first, and that they only “normal work” if there is no MPT work available.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24206619-2761,00.html
New thread.