The latest bi-monthly New South Wales state Newspoll shows the Coalition maintaining its 52-48 lead, although Labor has recovered a point on the primary vote. Barry O’Farrell’s lead over Morris Iemma as preferred Premier is steady at 39-32, and his satisfaction rating is up three points to 40 per cent. Morris Iemma’s approval rating remains at a disastrous 26 per cent, although his disapproval is down three points to 60 per cent.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Newspoll: 52-48 to Coalition in NSW
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
133 Comments
There is no doubt Labor are in trouble in NSW but it is a bit too early to be totally writing them off as the headline gleefully in the OO does – “Morris Iemma’s Labor dead in water” To me the figures show there is some hope (as explained in the last thread) if Iemma goes. I would agree with a headline that said “Morris Iemma is dead in water”.
Time for a severe pruning of the whole tree. Too much deadwood is what this poll is saying .
Labor under Iemma is toast no matter which way you slice the bread.
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2008/08/19/nsw-newspoll-constipation-more-popular-than-the-alp/
Every qualitative metric has fallen over a cliff – the trends are making me wonder if the ALP in NSW is even paying attention, as it’s only a matter of time before the TPP vote collapses. In over 23 years of Newspolling, both Federal and States, no government has ever recovered from the position NSW Labor now finds itself in – even Howard in 2001 wasn’t this far behind.
And the TPP vote is misleading – being behind 52/48 looks good compared to what it actually means with both OPV in NSW and the qual metrics running the way they are.
Undecideds have broken against the Premier, and they dont come back.
Anyone know what the average age of the NSW Cabinet is? They always look about the same if not worse than the Queensland Pineapple Party’s 49.1years to me.
4 And that is after the latest Shadow Cabinet pruning.
Labor’s 48% 2PP in NSW is imaginary. At 33% primary vote, Labor can’t win under optional preferential voting. There will be 25-30 seats that will not finish as Labor versus coalition contests. On those primary votes, the Coalition will win easily because Labor will be fighting wildfires in its own safe seats against Green and Independents.
2PP analysis only works when then are two clear major parties in the overwhelming majority of seats. If minor party vote gets above 25%, you get too many seats where a major party candidate is eliminated, so you can’t get a statewide 2PP which is anything other than a book-keeping entry that allows you to order seats. This is even more the case where optional preferential voting is used, as in NSW.
On those primary votes, there will be a string of safe Labor seats where the Liberals will run dead and be lucky to poll double figures. But there will be many many more of them than in 2007, while I would expect there to be less Coalition seats under threat from Independents.
Tick off Greens or Independents winning Balmain, Marrickville, any Hunter or Illawarra seat you choose to pick, and try and figure out how Labor can possibly end up with more seats than the Coalition on those figures.
Possum @3. Your analysis did not surprise me at all. There is ineffective leadership with Morrie (a decent guy yet a classic example of a person who has risen above the level of his own competence) but there is also a broader perception in New South Wales of a hapless, helpless and hopeless government which has been there too long, and which no amount of leadership rearranging will fix.
By contrast the average age of the members of the Queensland cabinet is in the low forties but some female Ministers don’t disclose their age.
NSW Labor have noone else. I suspect they will hold on til the last possible date. Doubt there’ll be much need for a leadership change in the NSW Libs anymore so they can’t expect any party infighting in the Libs to help them out. On the contrary Labor may have some embarassing fights as they panic.
Antony,
How was OPV introduced (legislation, referendum?) and how can it be removed?
I went to sleep thinking the 2PP Club and the “Big Boys” would rule forever.
I woke up (like others) to see:-
“only a matter of time before the TPP vote collapses”
and
“Labor’s 48% 2PP in NSW is imaginary”
written by a couple of the greatest minds in the political field.
I’m very happy to see some people are paying attention.
Lets dream that the MSM wakes up to the fact that
The Greens are a major factor in Australian elections.
The beauty of democracy. Sooner or later all governments get on the nose and they get turfed out for a period of renewal while some other mob have a go.
A hypothesis would be that urban problems grow at geometric rates when urban populations grow at arithmatic rates and that the incumbents have failed to address that challenge.
Optional preferential voting was introduced by normal legislation in 1980, but entrenched in the constitution. It can now only be removed by referendum.
I recommend Iemma and Co stop wearing panama hats, black glasses, black shirt, thin white tie and white shoes and put those violin cases away.
They of course need a dramatic shake up and change in people and policy. As is they haven’t known for a while?
I suspect a lot of Green voters are so uninspired with Labor they are likely to vote 1 only and not bother with preferences. Labor’s best hope would be to highlight the social conservatism of the NSW Libs to hold this constituency. But overall it’s 1988 all over again. Iemma personally is reasonably competent but the govt is dragged by the legacy of Carr’s short-termism on infrastructure and the deadwood of the NSW right, maybe all the bright Labor right-wingers are off in the corporate sector making mega $$.
Three years is a long time. If I were a betting man I’d say Labor is gone but I’m not prepared to say it is totally over yet. On these figures Labor wouldn’t win according to those in the know and they’re right obviously. It’s a matter of if these will be the figures in 3 years time. That’s all I’m saying.
For Labor to survive in NSW, they need to dump Iemma for someone new. As highlighted above, the problem is that there does not seem to be anyone decent around.
However, one option for the NSW Labor party is to do a “Iemma” and pick some random non-entity minister (much like Iemma was when Carr retired) who has done reasonably well in their portfolio (this criteria would narrow the field considerably
) and elevate him (or her) to the Premier-ship.
Hence, the recent calls for Nathan Rees. I’m sure there are others like him lurking in the multitude of Labor seats in Western Sydney…
Labor, in its present set up will lose the next election but they have nothing to lose by trying tyros if need be. If you’re going to lose don’t do it by doing nothing.
Not only change those at he top but buy the electorate, do a Howard, it worked for him for years. It probably won’t work but there is no use going on as is and copping a pasting.
Another excellent policy prescription from GB, bribe the electorate.
Bet on the Federal Coalition running against state Labor in the next Federal campaign, after which the state Coalition can start to give a more positive picture of their own plans.
Another line dropped into the water by ESJ. I knew I could bring him out again.
Must be lunch break. That bell must be going soon.
People have shown that they can distinguish between state and federal issues and governments.
GB (22) are you disagreeing with Antony (20)? Not sure what is your problem with ESJ either. The school analogies are tiresome.
Actually, I do think voters can distinguish between state and federal politics. But I hardly think that the image of the state Labor government is going to be improved by the next Federal election campaign.
Antony @ 24
Have you got a view on if labour in at the fed level then out in the states/territory level, and, for liberals, vice versa?
Mackerras has indicated that he holds to this view.
A blogger in another thread did some figures for WA, since I think 1948, which showed that there was a 70% probability that if labour was in government at federal then it would hold government at state level.
re: 15
“Labor’s best hope would be to highlight the social conservatism of the NSW Libs to hold this constituency.”
As opposed to the social conservatism of the NSW Labor Party who are absolutely in no way progressive, and aren’t going to get my vote because of some myth they’re “slightly better” on things like the environment, socially progressive issues, public transport etc. They’re not.
#22
1990 was a good example of an election where federal Labor was both punished and rewarded in different states depending on the performance of the various state governments. They were hammered in Victoria in the middle of the Cain/Kirner fiasco, but did very well in Qld with the new, popular Goss government in power. 1993 was a bit the same with states swinging both ways. So it does happen.
Chairman Mo should initiate a “mid-term” election and call 7 or 8 by-elections in seats the ALP is likely to lose, thereby handing the poisoned chalice of minority government to the un-ready O’Barrel and the downright evil right-wing of the NSW Liberal Party.
Seriously though…
Rudd, Faulkner & Co. are surely growing uneasy about the antics of Tripodi, Meagher, Sartor, Costa, Della Bosca et al.
Mo & Co. need to be bashed about the head.
In hindsight, Mo was a dreadful choice to replace Carr.
Where’s Carl Scully when you need him?
23 David – don’t read them David.
ESJ likes to snipe rather than argue a case. If he wants to debate me properly I’d be delighted but a 15 yo schoolboy could do what he does.
Who knows what the state government will do in the next 3 years. I’ll say it again they probably will get done but it is 3 years away. Who knows what will happen? Writing them off totally now is a little silly IMHO, no matter what the Federal Libs (whose situation we’re yet to be certain of) will do.
My view is that it depends. Clearly sometimes it matters, at other times it doesn’t. When is voting at the two levels causally linked and when is it coincedentally linked? In 1976, Neville Wran struggled to win a state election in NSW because of the Whitlam legacy. In 1978 and 1981, he won thumping victories in results that had no relationship whatsoever with the 1977 and 1980 Federal elections. Clearly there was a relationship in 1975-6, but not 1978-81.
It’s the old glass half full/half empty argument. Yes there is a relationship, but at other times there isn’t a relationship. There is likely to be swings against state Labor government in the next year or two. Is that because there is now a Federal Labor government, or because most of those state governments are coming off high votes?
A 70% probability means that in 30% of cases there isn’t a relationship. Of the next 6 state and territory elections, 4 will have some Federal relationship, and two won’t. With 70% probability, I’d reckon looking at each election on a case by case basis is a better way to asses the matter than applying a standard rule.
I think some people can differentiate between state and federal, but not all.
The Iemma government was only elected at the last election based on 3 factor
a. Howard Government
b. Iemma saying he will make a difference
c. the inept opposition leader
So i think the Federal tired Howard government had a role in Iemma’s re-election.
The problem with the NSW ALP is that
a. since Iemma had done nothing since the election on Hospital/infrastructure/transport etc, another premier is not going to do them any good.
b. Since the Labor government have preferred to use money to produce “Spin” rather than to use money to fix hospital/infrastructure/transport etc. People are turned off from the ALP and the ALP no longer have the budget to build the hospiral/infrastructure/transport
The only way the NSW ALP to survive is to cut cost, spend the money on infrastructure, without going into budget deficit or increasing state debt. That would get the people of NSW to notice
The price of Spin Bob Carr created this Carr wreck for NSW. Labor is going to pay for it, kind of similar to Howard and federal Liberal.
Of course, it’s worth remembering that the Federal Coalition tried to run against state Labor governments (in almost all the states) in last year’s election and it didn’t help them at all.
So I doubt it would work particularly well in 2010 (or whenever the next Fed election), unless things continue to get worse for state Labor governments (which could happen…)
As for the 1990 comparison, it is worth remembering that the state ALP government in Victoria almost bankrupted the state with the failure of the State Bank. Whilst Iemma has been pretty terrible as a Premier, I doubt his failures will ever reach those levels (and have the same effect on federal politics)…
Antony @ 30
Thank you.
BTW, I made a mistake in my original posting. The blogger who did the stats on fed/state probabilities and came up with 70%, did it for WA alone and not for all states/territories.
“b. Since the Labor government have preferred to use money to produce “Spin” rather than to use money to fix hospital/infrastructure/transport etc. People are turned off from the ALP and the ALP no longer have the budget to build the hospiral/infrastructure/transport”. I really don’t buy this point of your argument. Sleeze or the perception of sleeze will turn people off more than anything and this government has had more than it’s fair share of that rather than an over abundance of spin. All governments spin.
I do agree with the spending of money on the areas that count but a new leader would also do them the world of good. Changes and big ones need to occur for them to have any chance.
I was wopndering about that. Over the last few decades, WA has the highest incidence of the same party being in government at state and federal level, while NSW has the lowest, which is odd given state identity would be much higher in WA than NSW.
Does the WA election result mean that the ALP has a buffer of 4 seats, depending also how the independents go? Oh oo? Looks like trouble to me
What?
Centrebet odds on the NSW election.
AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY 1.90
COALITION 1.90
Lots of crystal ball gazing going on.
The last NSW election is generally accepted as a LNP loss against an on the nose Govt.
Never underestimate the Liberal Parties brilliance at turning a winning position into a defeat.
The length of time that parties overlap in government at state and federal levels is not surprising considering the lack of turnover at federal level in some states. In NSW, the state ALP (elected in 1941) had to cohabit with the Menzies government through to 1965, unlike other states the Libs (Nick Greiner) were in office for a substantial period of the Hawke Keating era. In QLD the CP/ Nats sat right across the last 15 years of conservative rule plus all the Fraser years.
When it comes to the number of occurences, SA comes out the winner (since 1945) with 7, followed by WA on 6 and the rest on 5 (Victoria counted since 1952 only – before that it just too hard). SA comes out the winner as it has more one term governments than the others.
Umm, blackburnpseph @ 39, your first sentence is hard to parse.
Does anyone think that Iemma’s determination to privatise electricity in NSW is a factor in his government’s loss of support?
“The last NSW election is generally accepted as a LNP loss against an on the nose Govt.”
Work Choices helped in NSW and QLD, Pru said it was worth at least 5% and NSW and QLD premiers said it was a big factor.
As well as costing Howard government Work Choices kept labor in in NSW and helped them keep a healthy margin in QLD.
41 Darn – The only thing I would say about that is why would someone critical of the electricity decision turn to an opposition that is also in favour of privatising electricity? If anything they would turn to parties against it. Maybe they have but how do you determine who has and who hasn’t?
I believe it’s the sleeze factor personally. People can wear a lot of things but sleeze, corruption call it what you will, that is a different story.
Gary Bruce @ 43
Spot on. They are on the nose. Administration of NSW needs a big clean up.
The only thing that could save them is a public outbreak of right wing religious mania in the Opposition. Unlikely, but the ground work has been laid.
Gary B,
You clearly called for bribery in your earlier post.
The NSW Government is in trouble because of its absolute capitulation to is public sector union base. Essentially the NSW Government excessively taxes wealth creators not to provide services but to featherbed union numbers. Costa and Iemma to their credit finally decided to take this on with electricity privatisation.
The dovif prescription is the correct one – the suggestion that a change of face will do the trick is facile.
45 Edward – I stand by my suggestions made earlier. Governments bribe electorates on a regular basis. Howard was a past master at it and it worked for most elections. You may be right about a change of face not working but all I’m saying is if what is being done is not working changes have to be made. Am I wrong? A government in trouble has nothing to lose by making the changes I suggested. I really don’t see why that is so unreasonable.
Is there any substance behind the Libs in NSW?
I’ve heard of Farrell. Who is the hard man (or woman) that will deliver the reforms?
How does Mr and mrs. Dubbo think about the Government?
GG you’ve hit the nail on the head. Given the disaster which is the NSW government the real question is why are the Libs not further ahead? It is a very shallow talent pool in the NSW Libs.
Time to move to North Queensland?
ESJ 48
Without wanting to sound too unkind the talent pool of liberals all round Australia seems very shallow to me. Can anyone suggest any really bright lights among them?
Darn, more to the point the talent pool is shallow in most parliaments irrespective of party.
Really strip away the supportive cocoon of a bureacracy and not many mp’s come up to good.
The parliaments of Australia – especially the Labor side is made up of people who couldnt cut it in the private sector.
ESJ – “Given the disaster which is the NSW government the real question is why are the Libs not further ahead?” The very point I made earlier on a previous thread and alluded to earlier on this thread. The Libs/Nats should be a mile in front. They just make it to 40%. That’s 3% more than the last election.
“The parliaments of Australia – especially the Labor side is made up of people who couldnt cut it in the private sector.’ And the Libs would? What is this observation based on except political bias?
GB thats misleading. The 2PP Was 52.5 /47.5 as i recall. The poll shows there is a large undecided vote waiting to see if the Libs are acceptable and secondly the Labor vote has collapsed ie a primary of 33%. Therefore the point as has been made elsewhere is that 52:48 is misleading.
Nevertheless NSW is a natural Labor state and this is the election in which Labor should go into meltdown. This should give the Libs 2 terms to clean house. The fear is that we replace a do nothing Labor government with a do nothing Liberal government. That’s a real possibility on these figures
GB – um look at the backgrounds of MPs before they get in – very ordinary. And yes there is an extreme degree of Labcest in NSW. It seems to be a departmental head now you need to be an ex Labor staffer.
Or ESJ are you saying the Lib/Nat side of politics are sucessful in the private sector but that they are lousy in parliament, in which case may be that is the answer. They need people outside of the private sector.
No in the case of NSW most of the parliament are oxygen thieves.
ESJ,
Love the lectures. Cossie ran the economy for 12 years and can’t get a job. Not what you would call a ringing endorsement of his achievements.
Why do I have to defend Costello GG? Never asked for the role of chief defender. He was someone who couldnt cut it as a barrister – he admitted as much himself.
53 Edward – if you are talking about the Newspoll Edward it was 48 – 52 with 4% uncommitted. Have a look on the Newspoll site. No one has said any different with proof.
GB I was referring to the last election 47.5 – 52.5 2PP in NSW.
The uncommitted’s can be seen in the score on fav/unfav on O’Farell in Newspoll.
60 Edward – and I was talking about the Liberal Party’s primary vote last election. There wasn’t a large undecided vote. Where did you get that from?
61 Edward – that’s only on Barry, not whether they’ll vote for his party or not.
ESJ 50
I’m not sure that the ability to feather one’s own nest and make a pile of money for ones self is necessarily the quallity we are looking for in our prospective politicians. It takes a few more skills than that.
ESJ,
Balance you old sod.
“The parliaments of Australia – especially the Labor side is made up of people who couldnt cut it in the private sector”.
Hawke, Keating , Wran, John Brown and others have made squillions.
Downer takes a bureaucratic role. Cossie can’t secure a postion. Andrew Peacock helped send ABC broke.
The truth is hurtful. It’s the libs that are duds in practicing their attachment to private enterprise.
LOL, geez Edward I’m equating you with a 15 year old and GG is calling you an old sod. I suspect the reality lies somewhere in the middle.
LOL GG. Para 4 of your 65 is a hoot.
And supermodels marry men 40 years older than them because its love. Ex politicians make lots of money because they have great business brains. ROFLMAO.
ESJ,
Maybe life for politicians after politics is anthetical to their ideological espousals.
Well its taken a long tome for Polls in NSW to finally catch up with ’sentiment’
Thought Labor was fortunate last electon to win with Yemma , and suspect incompetent Libs State leadership , howard on ‘nose’ , workchoices amongst other saved Labor then All of these factors reely gone now , and voter sentimant against Yemma has no impedements
Surely reality requires Yemma’s replacement , 26% vs 40% re approval , and 32% to 39% on preferred says it all UNTIL he is rtemoved th disasterous 33% primary vote adressing by NSW Labor and policys as well , ar reely academic I think , won’t even both to see how hell they got 33% primary up to 48% 2PP
I think Gary Bruce is making a key point here though: the next election is two and a half years away – there are lots of ways the Libs could mess it up. The most likely is to pick another right-winger like Debnam, because O’Farrell is “too boring” (as if being boring would stop the Libs winning in NSW against this Govt!).
But, sure, hard to see Iemma keeping his job much longer.
Yes Dyno
Implicit in my 370 is all is not lost , there’s 2.5 years to go
Having said that , NSW Labor should take note of 11% or whatever approval for Nelson , but consistent 45% 2PP for Libs vs 26% approval BUT only 33% primary vote So problem in NSW is both Leader and Partys perception and policys
they need to do first (remove Yemma) then proceed to policys and 3rd its politcal strategy should be to concentrate irrespective to concentrate on NSW seats , where Greens vote may increase and ensure Labor wins more votes than Greens in those specific seats …being in govt allows such policy concentration
so whilst gloomy not impossible , especialy with Labor + Greens at 47% primary vote , and share of 14% others to divide (anyone know pref break up last time of 15% vote that ‘others’ got
Ron – refer to Geoff at 15. Unless the Greens run a HTV specifically saying ‘Greens 1, Labor 2′, don’t count on being able to add their primary votes together and call the sum Labor. Plus, there’s a few seats where the Greens vote will be in direct opposition to Labor… the seats they almost won last time may swing to them next time.
Having look at data from last election on prefs from parliament , and I’d defy Newspoll to justify how they got 52% to 47% 2PP , and more importantly its relevance as it seems its totally irelevant , ESPECIALY with a low Labor primary at 33%
Last electon , of 93 seats , Greens got 8.5% but only contested 73 , CDP got 4.6% but only contested 43 seats , Total Unity got 3.7% but only contested 25 seeats , AAFI got 2.5% but only contested 46 seats , Democrats got 2% but only contestd 19 seats , Fishing Party 5.3% but onlty contested 3 seats ,Independents got 7.9% but only contested 45 seats (BUT actualy won 6 seats)
More complicating is most of these Partys issued HTV ’s in some seats AND none in other seats Result being in seats where no HTV was given (recommendation to there voters for prefs to xhaust) This caused a significantly lower number of prefs flowed to Labor in those seats approx 13% (from Green votes) , a lower number of prefs flowed to Liberals approx 18% (from CDP) , a lower number of prefs flowed to Labor (from total Unity
But CDP and Total Unity a few times also pref th reverse party a well in a few seats
Further other Partys above pref flows varied by seat
So with a drop in Labors primary vote , one would need to look by seat in a huge number of seats out of th 93 , look at last electon actaul results , THEN have a fair idea of general polling currently by Party by close seat , and in many cases including polling of alot of these minor partys by seat
Then one would need to know if those Partys for that seat ar or not going to issue HTV’s , becausee per above th minor Partys were not consistent (example Greens 73 seats with 8.55 , they isued HTV’s in 43 but nonne in other 30) , CDPonly issued HTV’s in 35 out of 43 but 2 to Labor , Total Unity issued only 14 out of 25 but 4 to Liberals) Other minor Partys one can imagine
So can see zero value in 52% to 48% Newspoll headline , nor how it means anything All one can say is Labor at 33% primary would almost certainly lose
Sorry Bird of paradox , just saw your post , you ar completely corect thanks
th % listed of a lower number of prefs flows to Labor or to liberals is th % diference of lost prefs between an HTV being issued vs none isued , and is an average of those seats where they were or were not issued
Of course Labor members of parliament do well after retirement, they still belong to their factions and still talk to their mate.
For example
Burke in WA
Mac Bank has been getting many infrastructure deals in NSW as well
Many of Howard’s men found good jobs too, particularly when Howard was PM.
Anyone would think corruption is all on one side of politics – let’s just say “Askin” and “Jo” shall we and leave it at that.
No GB,
We wont leave it at that.
The ALP has made an artform of merging hackdom, bureacracy and “business” in NSW.
79 Edward – Yes I will Edward. Have a nice day.
Every Polican who retires is going to get another job , and use ghis contacts to get one , hell thats normal reality , this is all MSN beatup stuff And where they’re Govt jobs why wouldn’t they be most qualified anyway
Labor , Greens liberal politcans do it and there’s nothing wrong , except by MSN trying to sell newspapers
As for corruption , only evidence we actualy hav is thats its been minimal , far less than average population , again MSN sensationising to make it appear its endemnic when , there’s no evidence at all it is Sometimes think MSN delberately confuse public with poor governance and administraton procedures to imply what is not , other than its poor mangemant process which occurs in private industry every day
Doesn’t really seem to make much of difference what colour they were when they were in. The post-parliamentary go getters just go and get. BTW Barnett of the CT thought that Dolly’s new job in Cypress was rather more difficult than being PM of Australia. Pratt.
There are several sides to this issue:
1. people who leave parliament often still want, or have to, work. Remuneration of pollie ministers is pathetic compared with the private sector.
2. they sometimes have particular expertise and understanding that could be useful. Lots of them can go back to applying in one way or another the legislation they have just helped pass.
3. they sometimes have networks of domestic and international contacts that can be useful to businesses.
4. they sometimes have inside knowledge of current government processes which are not available to others.
Points 1-3 should be used, people are wasted otherwise.
Point 4. Where there is a clear overlap between areas of Ministerial responsibility and a company, there should be a decent interval after which it is deemed that a minister is unlikely to have conflict of interest, or unfair competitive advantage in terms of having inside knowledge knowing what Governments are up to. I think 12-18 months would be a good, mandatory cooling off period. 12-18 months would also reduce the likelihood that a pollie makes a decision favourable to a company and then walks into a position in the company after retirement.
The numbers Ron quotes are all taken from research I undertook for the NSW Parliamentary Library, and can be found in the following publication
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/publications.nsf/0/399440F051AE6096CA2573F00018CA2C/$File/2007ELection%20Final.pdf
The preference details start at page 55.
And the Greens contested all 93 seats, its just preference tallies in Labor/Coalition contests are only available for 73.
Antony
I might add your info is not only well detailed , but th level you needed to go to find out so many variable and differing pref flows is indicated by summary of just some data I posted Presume NSW Parliamentary Research service ar aware , bit probably not most Pollies
Interestingly I started searching NSW parliament info internet sites for purpose of understanding how Newspoll came up with 52% to 48% 2PP as an ‘informative credible’ figure , and with me thinking despite my extreme doubts as to how Newspoll could hav possibly come up with such a 2PP figure as being ‘informative credible’ , thought well there must hav been a some logicol basis for Newspolls assessment and it had to be in NSW 2006 electon figures !
In fact , after coming accross your detailed analysis , I’m none th wiser where Newspoll got impression such a 2PP figure could be regarded as ‘informative credible’ , as for mine its a meaningless figure , with only informative Poll section being resspective Primary votes by Party
Actually, the current Newspoll is the first where the 2PP has been calculated using a formula for optional preferential voting which I provided for them. Whether the figure is useful or not is another matter entirely, but people expect Newspoll to provide a 2PP, and they are at least now using the best calculation method available.
79
ESJ
(_E=mc2_)
I rather think the question of ‘corruption’ is misplaced, as we are really talking about unethical behaviour. And of course we, the public, are quite good at not spelling out quite what that unethical behaviour is. However, it is the perception (and in politics its all so often about perception) of unethical behaviour (ie; Noreen Hay’s failure to disclose a donation from a developer who asks for assistance later on; or Joe Scimone, associate of Joe Tripodi, getting a job in the same department as Tripodi is the Minister for) that causes people to leap to the conclusion that there must be ’smoking gun’, or ‘brown satchel’ if you prefer…
And this is not suggest that in either case there was any attempt to defraud or pervert the actions of others. I’m sure many ALP members work for departments whose Minister they know – but this doesn’t make their appointment ‘corrupt’. While I have my own opinion of the shenigans down in Wollongong, the declaration of the donation would have made no difference to her approach to the local Councillor – ICAC themselves said there was no case to answer. But in the mind of the general public there is perceived to be something wrong about it – not corrupt, maybe unethical, definitely problematic (well, we’ll see what happens come March 2011).
But of course ‘ethics in parliament’ sounds like some academic course, and how it would actually play out in “Ministerial Codes of Conduct” and the like is another question. Maybe the court of public opinion, replete with undefined perceptions of ethical/unethical behaviour is still the best way to go? Except maybe for the donations part…
I agree – former pollies should be able to go on to work in the private sector or where-ever. These days there are MP’s starting in their 20’s & 30’s – so they may have a very real need for a 2nd career after politics. And whose to say that they may in fact serve the community better in the private sector with their experience and knowledge (hopefully about good governance!). But the cooling off period is equally important, if not just for perception’s sake.
Stewart J @ 87
Spot on. Perceptions are what count. Most folk I know use the common sense duck test on governments that are on the nose:
‘If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck.’
Hmm, Internal ALP polling reveals Iemma would lose an Election if held Today.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24213939-5005361,00.html
It is interesting all this talk about corruption. Bob Askin was not universally seen as corrupt until years after his departure from the political scene. Nick Greiner lost his whole political career on an advesre corruption finding that years later was thrown out.
So these theories about the community’s “bulldust detectors” seeing through the nonsense are really nonsense pedalled by a box of quackers.
I wonder if it’s because people can turn a blind eye when a conservative politician is involved because “it’s the Free Market At Work”, while at the same time get all pious when a left leaning politician does exactly the same thing ?
GG @ 90
Interesting points.
Could it be that electors quite often knowingly tolerate crooked governments provided they are delivering what the voters want? I suggest that many nat voters knew perfectly well that JBP was crooked but supported him because he delivered what they wanted?
Similarly, lots of folk knew that Askin was on the nose but stuck with him. Not so sure about the circumstances surrounding Greiner, so will have to pass on that one
Nothing much has changed with respect to labour in NSW as far as being on the nose is concerned. Is it just that folk have finally got sick of the incompetence, not the smell?
As I said yesterday, what about Mr and Mrs Dubbo. What do they think?
The MSM ran a relentless anti Government campaign in the last election. And, Labor was returned. Why was that? Probably, what the MSM and the blogging intelligentsia aren’t in touch with what the people want outside a small group with whom they regularly convrse.
Is Labor on the nose? Probably. Can it be fixed? Not sure.
Iemma has fought a brave fight for privatisation of electricity. This stuff was done years ago in Victoria, so why the angst?
The headline seekers in the Union movement need to decide whether they will be modernised by a reformist Labor Government or excoriated by a bunch of Liberal zealots.
They get to choose how they die.
GG @ 93
Well, the last time I was talking to some folk around Dubbo, and they may very well not have been very representative of anything, they were saying things like:
1. The drought is very bad. Farming is tough.
2. The drought is not due to climate change because the Federation drought was worse. They kept repeating this, so I suspect that they were shit-scared that the drought was due to climate change and that, long term, they are stuffed.
3. If the drought keeps going, people are going to return their machinery (to machinery vendors). Some folk were already returning their machinery and some folk were already being forced off their land. They were saying that one more bad season would drive large numbers of farmers off the land. (BTW, some really good falls over the next couple of months will make an enormous difference to the people of Dubbo).
4. Town business is bad because of the drought. (enumerating shops and businesses that were closing or struggling)
5. They were worried about the AWB stuff up and what was going to happen to the Single Desk.
6. They were profoundly distrustful and/or scornful of anything coming from the wrong side of the Blue Mountains.
7. They were a little bit predisposed to believe the NSW farmers federation (or whatever it is called), the Nats, and the NFF.
8. They didn’t say anything about electricity privatisation, but if they have seen how electricity prices have gone in Victoria since privatisation they might get that way. Probably, if they had been asked, they would have agreed to anything that was going to be bad for the unions.
9. While I didn’t ask them, I am reasonably sure that they would have given a rat’s for bloggers, intelligentsia whatever that is, journos, pollies, or any of those other fast-talking flash city slickers who are up themselves.
BTW, I would agree with your point on unions and electricity privatization in NSW. There is something very conservative about some unions which prevents them from joining in reform in a positive and strategic way that benefits workers. Frustrating.
GG 93 – perceptive comments as usual.
The NSW Unions are going to have a whole lot of reform coming their way real soon. We are talking about a group of people whose IR view of the world predates 1993 federally and 1988 in most other states.
Iemma is actually telling it to them straight – they really believe ignoring reality is in their best interests because they assume it can go on as before.
ESJ @ 95
Golly, I am in agreement with yourself and GG.
Forgive my ignorance, but why are 1993 and 1988 significant dates in this context?
1993 – Start of Keating Government enterprise bargaining
1988 – most State governments started ditching their union dominated IR systems.
ESJ @ 97
Thank you.
Talking about NSW unions, I heard two tales, apocryphal, perhaps, about the Sydney ferry drivers. I wonder if anyone knows whether there is any substance in them?
1. Whenever there is a bit of pressure, management-wise, they start crashing, marooning or breaking down a few ferries. Then they blame the new CEO, of whom there is a steady stream.
It sounded strange to me, but my interlocutor was emphatic about it. He was a regular ferry passenger and may have just caught the Manly Ferry during a strong nor-westerly swell. (It might be one of those urban myths and perhaps related to the endless stories about QANTAS that mysteriously turn up whenever the engineers are negotiating a deal. I have no idea if it is true.)
2. That ads for ferry drivers are never in the newspapers because they jobs are handed down father to son.
I was a tad sceptical about that one, this not being the mediaeval ages, and ferry drivers not being media barons and all, but I have to say I am curious about it.
Yes Boerwar, I think you will find the State Government plan is to hand them “ferries” over to privatisation soon after the electricity is done.
ESJ,
The privitisation of homosexual behaviour. Interesting. That’s never been tried before. Hope they like it.
The funniest thing GG is that if Barry O’Farrell is the first new Liberal Premier since what 2002 he will be the conservative version of Neville Wran.
ESJ,
How so? I’m sure you’ve got an archaic connection to back your statement.
LOL GG, you know me so well.
Umm Wran was the first new Labor premier after EGW went down, perhaps Barry will be the first Liberal premier elected after JWH went down.
Meanwhile GG, BHO has begun his long relentless decline to defeat in the polls.
Obama’s decline is not sudden. It has been apparent and ongoing since Super Tuesday. Basically, Obama caught a parked car and has wondered WTF to do with it ever since.
McCain has actually set the agenda re Oil drilling locally rather than depending on the Arabs. The “surge’ has clearly worked at this point in Iraq. I dare say Putin took the $3.50 on offer and has been providing a bit of insurance of his own.
I thought that it was going to be real close. But now, McCain comfortably for me.
“Documents leaked to the Nine Network (of Labor internal polling) show NSW Labor would shed 21 seats and lose by five seats if the election were held today.”
As I posted in #74 from part of Antony Greens analysis supplied to NSW Parliamentary Research service , so many combinations of electon results by seat ar possible with varying primary bvotes obtained couplled with optional pref voting , Minority partys someimes giving out HTV’s by seat and sometimes not in other seats , pref Labor in one seat and Liberals in another seat etc , so predicted 21 seat loss as of now by internal polling is not necessarily same ‘quality accuracy ‘ as if it was done in another State
However given abov ‘combinations’ menetioned , a 21 seat loss over 93 seats is still indicative of gross magnatude of voter disatisfacton , “message” is there that problem is not perseption but both leader and policy , conversely ‘five seats loss’ means a window of opportunity is there to redeeem
re: ESJ @ #101
Aren’t you a long way off track comparing Barry O’Farrell to Neville Wran?
O’Farrell is using the same policies that proved so successful for Peter Coleman in 1978!
IMHO O’Farrell will go down in history in the same group as John Mason and Tom Lewis.
The slippery slide of the ALP in NSW has been apparent and ongoing for some time.
The corrupt, bullying, reputation they have will cost the ALP dearly in the council elections.
The thugs running the circus don’t care about the party, their snout is so far into the pork barrel even their ears are covered.
Of course judge that’s why the NSW Greens will preference the ALP in the council elections isnt it?
No Eddy,
The Greens preferences are decided by local groups, not head office, and preferences are optional.
Do local council elections have Optional Pref Voting? The Greens could always refuse to direct preferences.
Yes of course “judge” your obviously an East German People’s Court variety of judge with wordplay like that. The local people’s committees will ironically all decide in the same way of course.
ESJ@112
Perhaps you should wait and see what happens…
I just hope they can keep Barry out of the surf.
The Judge
As you say
“The slippery slide of the ALP in NSW has been apparent and ongoing for some time.
The corrupt, bullying, reputation they have will cost the ALP dearly in the council elections.
The thugs running the circus don’t care about the party, their snout is so far into the pork barrel even their ears are covered.”
The biggest question for the Green is whether they will in the next NSW election support such a regime, and thus making it impossible for the NSW ALP to stay in power.
Or whether they will preference the ALP and shows that they are just Lackeys of the ALP
Besides “Judge” didnt a certain ALP comrade with bad dental work order that colleagues on Leichardt council vote with the Libs against the Greens? Surely the people demand swift vengeance?
If that’s so Eddy, it woulden’t supprise any one.
The Greens are used to the dirty tactics of the LIB/LAB Club.
Still over one million Australians have seen past their bully tactics and voted Greens, amazing really.
117 the judge – but most have preferenced one or other of the major players second.
Let me add to my 118 post “in other states and federally.”
Council elections? Who cares? Get a life.
At last a bank that is willing to play the cpmpetition game, to some extent anyway.
http://business.theage.com.au/business/well-pass-on-rate-cut-nab-says-20080821-3z5c.html
In Blacktown at the last state election the Greens did not preference the ALP. In fact there were no directions as to preferences at all on the HTV a luxury afforded to the politically pure at heart by the optional preferential system pertaining in NSW.
Not that it made one whit of difference as the Funky Gibson romped home despite having been as recently as 1998 been the subject of comment at the ICAC:
But it has to be said that he is a dab hand at raising funds for the party. And since his re-election he has opposed the privatisation of the electricity industry although whether this is un-adjacent to his somewhat sharpish dumping from the post election ministry by Mo Io is open to speculation by the unkind and cynical.
Gazza who said intemperately
must be from one of the smaller states or territories. The fact is that on September 13 far more people will vote for their LGA representatives than will vote in upcoming WA election. Indeed the turnout for the election of the Blacktown City councillors will be greater than that in the NT recently. And bear in mind that each councillor will represent about 2.5 times as many people as in any of the NT’s pocket electorates.
It is a matter of some regret that Bill won’t open a thread on this statewide plebiscite of the mood of the people and which perhaps will be a bellwether of Mo Io’s fate in the coming weeks.
Well, Albert, wrong again. Here in Victoria (oh, what a small state that is) council elections have as much interest as watching paint dry. I’m very politically minded but I couldn’t tell you who, on my council, is with which party or faction. It just isn’t a big deal. So try again.
And Surprise Surprise, The Tip has piked on challenging as leader.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24218429-5005361,00.html
As I said on another thread, you get the feeling Cossie is protecting Brendan from Malcolm. All Brendan has to do now is not call for a leadership spill because Malcolm won’t dare challenge while Cossie is there.
re Post 1125,
Sorry, wrong thread and I notice it’s being discussed in the AC Neilson thread.
Mexican Gazza invitingly says:
Well Vic is a big state (full of big hearted people like Cossie) I will concede.
Your attitude is probably coloured by the history of LG in Vic. My understanding is that until they were given the Jeff treatment they were tiny entities without a lot of power. Since amalgamation they are much bigger and have widerish powers but I suppose that the attitude that they are very parish pump is going to take a long time to change.
In NSW LGAs have tended to be bigger and with amalgamations over the last 40 years have got bigger. They have had fairly wide powers and have been battlegrounds between the ALP (and its factions) and the dark forces of the right either through proxies such as Civic Reform/Residents Action Groups or more latterly as out of the closet endorsed Liberals. Service as a councillor and especially as mayor has been seen as a stepping stone to greater glory at State and Federal level.
The political parties and the various independents take the NSW LGA elections seriously although the powers of the LGAs have steadily been eroded and there always seems to be quite a deal of public interest in the elections and the subsequent activities of those elected.
Gary, please don’t leave childish comments like 120.
Childish comment number 2 – “Mexican Gazza invitingly”
You are right Albert, my attitude is coloured by the way we see councils here in Victoria and I stick by it. Enough said.
Gary,
What’s this “we” whiteman.
Let me modify that for GG’s sake. “My attitude is coloured by the way me and most Victorians see councils here in Victoria and I stick by it.”