| ALP | LIB | Total | |
| Riverton | 8002 | 8034 | 16036 |
| Wanneroo | 7299 | 7293 | 14592 |
| Albany | 8182 | 8065 | 16247 |
| Forrestfield | 8177 | 7935 | 16112 |
| Collie-Preston | 8299 | 7883 | 16182 |
3pm Sunday. This post will be used to follow developments in the late count. Labor can still form a minority government if it wins four out of the above five seats, remembering that in 2005 they generally did about 2 per cent worse on absent and postal votes than on booth votes. Going on the 2005 result we could expect each to seat to have about 400 postal and 2000 absent votes outstanding, although I hear there was an unusually high number of absent votes due to confusion over the new boundaries.
356 Comments
One thing that had not been mentioned
Had the one vote one value hurt the Labor in this election, some of their members lost large chunks of their constituency or left the marginals to new candidates
Making it impossible for them to have incumbancy. That seem to have backfire on the ALP
However I think the 2PP is about 52-48 Lib, so they would have been wiped out under the old boundries
If the 2 percent worse on absent and postal votes holds true, then I can only see the ALP at best picking up 3 (Albany, Forrestfield and Collie-Preston). You would have to think that the Liberals will overcome the deficits in Riverton and Waneroo.
If Riverton and Wanneroo go to the Libs, and Labor win Albany, Forrestfield and Collie-Preston, then Labor would have 27 seats, with 2 Labor Independents? Which would obviously be 1 short of a majority. I think this is what is likely to happen, with the right leaning members having a 1 seat majority. Wont be easy to push legislation through.
When is the earliest Parliament can be recalled? They have to wait till the WAEC declares all the results is that correct? Which would obviously be several weeks.
I’d say the Libs have a better chance in Albany with Nat preferences than in Collie Preston.
But i suspect postals and prepolls will get the Libs over the line in Wanneroo and Riverton.
Forrestfield could go either way 50-50.
(I’ve been a lurker since shortly after the Federal election, but am back again today)
Can someone explain to me the circumstances under which (it is officially a hung parliament and then) they have to vote again? Or will one or the other leader be given a chance in turn to see what they can do? I’ve got a vested interest in this as when I last posted I lived in NSW, have been in Canberra since January, and am going to Perth this summer. I seem to remember Frank, as well as you, William, are both WA natives so maybe you can explain this to me
…. thanks 
…what about Alfred Cove, Nedlands and Kwinana – last word on those last night suggested that the first two were too close to call, and the media doesn’t seem to think Kwinana’s over yet?
In Alfred Cove nearly all the parties are preferencing Woollard, who has managed to stay ahead of the Labor vote, so she should win that seat…just.
In Nedlands the Greens for some insane reason preferenced Labor ahead of Walker, who will fall behind the Labor vote. Thus, the Liberals should go on to win the seat with a reasonable margin.
In Kwinana both the Liberals and Greens have preferenced Adams first. She should be able to stay ahead of the Liberals and with their preferences go on to win the seat.
Alfred Cove is undecided either way it will be a conservative seat, could be a Liberal seat if the Greens preferences back Labor. The independent in Kwinana has won and the Libs will gain Nedlands as far as ive heard.
The Green how to vote for Alfred Cove puts Woollard 2nd before the Labor candidate – I have no idea why they did that here and not in Nedlands though.
What happened in Albany? 1v1v was supposed to hurt Labor there, but they seem to be actually doing OK. It’s one of Labor’s best seats in terms of swing. So’s David Templeman in Mandurah, by the way.
Sue Walkers’ gone in Nedlands – ABC has a Lib/ALP 2pp, so I’m presuming the Greens prefs did her in. Janet Woolard’s making heavy weather in Alfred Cove. Kierath must’ve been hated alright… the unknown Liberal candidate this time did much better. Woolard easily came second, but the difference between her and Labor is less than the Green vote – she’ll be hoping she got at least half the Green prefs.
Kwinana – ABC has a ALP/Lib margin, which is wrong. If the Liberal prefs go to Adams, she’s in like Flynn.
Janet Woollard was on the radio yesterday night saying how happy she was that the Liberals were winning outside of Alfred Cove, she tried to be a Liberal For Forests so her politics are clear.
She would I expect support a Liberal government on most issues.
9 Duke: Woollard was ‘Libs For Forests’ once upon a time, so the Greens would like her a lot more than Walker. If they put her above Labor, she’s in then.
William says:
“Labor can still form a minority government if it wins four out of the above five seats”
So that means forming one with the Nationals is impossible?
ABC online is reporting that the meeting today between the ALP and the Nats has brought about the possibility of an ALP/National Coalition.
Who would have thought that was a serious possibility?
Nobody with a brain.
I think of the above seats, the Liberals will win in Riverton and Wanneroo. Albany hangs in the balance. Forrestfield and Collie-Preston will probably go Labor’s way.
Does anyone know how the Labor candidate did so well after preferences in North-West. Looking at the Liberal and National primary vote figures I thought one of those parties would have won. Did they fail to preference one another or something?
TPS: Labor can form a minority govt with Adams and Bowler… perhaps. They need 28 of their own seats to do that.
Duke, if the ALP is doing well out of Nat preferences in North West, I would suspect it has something to do with the Nats branding themselves as reigional independents. This would go down well. Whereas the Greens have clearly taken a lot of disaffected ALP vote, in the country the Nats could have done the same thing.
So Glen, being someone without a brain, please explain who will back down, the Nationals who said the Regional Royalty program is not negotiable or Barnett who said Regional Royalties isn’t going to happen?
Labor would impload if they had to cling to power on the backs of one of Brian Burke’s mates.
Carps is probably taking a line out of Big Kims book, give em what they want!
That’s what he said last night.
Isn’t it possible that Green and Independent preferences in North-West will push the Nationals vote past the Liberals, Liberal preferences then electing the Nationals candidate? The difference in votes is about 2% at the moment.
How’s Morley going? Is the Liberal guy all but elected or are D’Orazio preferences going Labor’s way?
Yes it would be interesting if the nationals grew up and put policy first, but I don’t think it is going to happen, they will form a coalition with the Liberals. The nationals will back down as always and the long decline of their party will continue.
I need to return to proper type and attack the 1 vote 1 value rubbish, what this election shows so very clearly is that all the right wing nonsense, trying to defend the indefensible for the complete rubbish that it is.
The idea that all people actually getting a fair shot and having an equal vote at an election neither aids labor nor hurts the Nationals, what is does is spread the decision fairly across the population.
Any idea that 1 v 1 v has backfired or hurt labor clearly fails to understand the very basis of the change which was to remove a basic undemocratic distortion, and to share the vote equally – that somehow this advantages labor is completely discredited by last night’s outcome, it only advantages labor when voters want it too.
“9 Duke: Woollard was ‘Libs For Forests’ once upon a time, so the Greens would like her a lot more than Walker. If they put her above Labor, she’s in then.”
Ahhh no. I wouldn’t be so sure on that. The greens are well aware that the return of liberals would be a return of the RFC era old growth logging. Thats a worst-of-all-scenarios outcome.
To be honest, amongst most of us greenies, libs-for-forrest and the related conservative-green tickets where really seen as feeders for liberal preferences, and as somewhat cynical ones. Whether that was true is another matter. Personally I always thought Woollard was both sincere, and somewhat brave for it. But that was the perception many of us had.
For reference, I’m refering to the original election that booted court out, in the above comment.
Truss has seen the light.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24307583-601,00.html
charles #23 – I think the Nationals would be putting policy first by assisting the Liberals to govern. Their voter base is mainly conservative socially and would not go down well with some of Labor’s policies. Whatever happens, I hope Grylls does not become Premier or anything crazy like that. That would be bad.
Ideally I would like to see Labor and the Liberals govern together, thereby sidelining the nationals, but given that’s not going to happen there isn’t much good to come of things. Maybe Labor will be able to govern with the support of independents?
Jasmine
Based on the Boundries and votes of the last election (before last night) Labor would pick up 8 seats from 1v1v, while the National/Liberal loses 6
That is why it advantages Labor, it is the fact that Carpenter had done a bad job ALP down 6%, Lib, Nat and Green up 2 each. That is why Labor had not benefited
The 2PP vote is 52-48 Liberal, yet Labor is still alive, that is an anomalie of the 1v1v
can someone explain to me what would be involved with the regional
loyalty program
of those seats I don’t think labor will win 4/5
I think they’ve won Collie-Preston & Albany
but they have sitting MPS for Wanneroo & Riverton… wouldn’t they be better at
organising pre-poll and postal votes on their behalf?
“Hung Parliament” is a descriptive term, rather than definitive.
The election elects individual MPs only. It’s up to them to form alliances that have a reasonable chance of acting as a government.
Hence, there is no such “official” thing as a hung Parliament and hence no need to have a fresh election.
I feel sorry for the man who will have to work with Lispy Grylls, that would really be a test of government.
Piping Shrike, I’ll eat my hat if the Nationals back a Labor government.
Too right he has GB (#27). The Nationals in the east, like those in the west are starting to realise why independents like Oakshott and Windsor do so well.
I must admit I find some of the remarks on this thread and yesterday’s WA thread unfathomable on the confidence that a WA Nationals-Labor deal will not happen.
The ABC is reporting that the WA Nationals are saying a coalition with the Libs is not the best deal for the regions and Barnett is digging in on regional royalties not happening under his watch which the Nationals claim is a deal breaker. Maybe it won’t happen but I just can’t see where this confidence that such a deal is impossible is coming from.
That may be worth seeing actually, nah.
Why dont the Nats just disband and all sit as Independents?
dovif
Its:
Libs +2.9%
Nats + 1.2%
Greens + 4%
A rough bit of arithmetic says thats 8.1%
Labor was -6% what happened to the other 2.1%? Was this 1v1v?
Whether you eat your hat William is up to you and your milliner but is there any reason why you are saying the ABC reports are wrong?
Glen (36) I think that’s what they are doing.
postals
Dovif, 1V1V only benefited the ALP in that it removed the bias against the metropolitan area that was around. This “benefit” was a one-off.
Yes with 2PP at 52-48, a party can still win with 48 (possibly). But this is not an anomoly of 1V1V, but rather a consequence of single member electorates.
The Nat vote does not justify winning 5 seats out of 59. The election method advantages the Nats over the greens who have double the Nat vote, because it rewards strong localised votes rather than total votes. In the same way, the independents probably only exist because of single member electorates. They would need 1/59th of the vote or maybe 5% under so called more democratic proportional systems.
This talk between Grylls and Carps, is just to get a better deal out of Colin tomorrow.
Still the election is by no means over, we’ve still got Monday to endure.
slightly off topic… but
long term the nationals have no future….. they for the most part cannot be independent of the Liberals and economic rationalism is poision in the bush
demographic changes will reduce the number of seats in regional areas make
them more marginal and/or more urban
even now of the nine seats the Nationals hold federally on 5 are safe from a popular independent or a a competent Labor or liberal candidate
Or stay as a party, but let their members’ have a conscience vote at every division.
If they did that some Liberals would defect and become Nats.
re my post 42 … I’d include Gippsland as a seat at risk
“long term the nationals have no future”
Agree as long as they remain the “yes men to the libs”
However with the democrats gone the Nats do have a unique opportunity to place themselves as a true independent party.
The democrats, for the most part worked deals with labor and lib, if the nats grab the bull by the nuts they have a chance to reestablish and rebrand themselves.
Could also do the same federally, pass labors budget measures in return for better deals in regional areas.
There are really only six Federal National seats, the 3 Qld Nats are now members of the Federal Liberal Party (Maybe).
The Nats know they are toast Federally and need to either merge or re-invent themselves, Grylls has shown them how to.
William do you prefer Tomato Sauce, HP or Soy with your hat?
The Nats would only have to guarantee Labor supply wouldn’t they? If Labor gave them the thing they wanted most in return, the Nats could still remain independent and vote on other issues as they wanted.
Just listening to Carpenter, he sounds confident. Hopefully the Nats screw the Libs over!
Never again would the National’s be taken for granted again.
and remember in SA the lone member of the National Party is in the Cabinet!
not that it seems to be working out for her at the moment!
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/909
Grog there is a reason why there is only a lone member of the National Party in SA.
51 Glen – and that reason would be the high intelligence of the SA voter?
As someone pointed out on the last thread our SA Nat actually supported Labor after Labor was first elected and both her and Labor were subsequently re elected easily, the following election.
No because they’ve sold themselves out to the Left.
I would suggest the Nats sold themselves out to the right a long time ago…if they’re slowly seeing the light, it’s because they want to survive.
Diana you do realise Lisp is only meeting Carps and RipsOff to get a better deal from Barnett and Sniff tomorrow.
Oh please Glen – from what I can see the Nats in SA have never held more than 1 seat in the lower house. They must have sold themselves out to the left back when they stopped being the Country League…
That may well be Glen, but you seem to be getting rather shrill on that point. Getting a little worried?
Gary Bruce from your perspective this was actually a pretty good result for Labor, surely?
Nope, not given those photo finishes above the posts, which point to Labor being SNAFU’d regardless.
Grog (50) that poll was rubbish for the reasons noted at the end of the post. The reason why the Nationals vote is low in SA has to do with the historical development of non-Labor parties in SA and the rural base of the LCL. It is certainly not to do with Maynard’s membership of the Rann cabinet. It has done her a lot of good because of the subsidies that are seen to flow directly to the Riverland and her ability to take credit for it.
It is no wonder that Grylls was saying she was an inspiration last night.
Barnett is digging in against regional royalties which Grylls says is a deal breaker and the ABC reports that:
“Mr Barnett hopes to form a coalition with the National Party, but the Nationals say that is not the best option for the regions.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/07/2357550.htm
Now maybe this deal won’t happen but so far I see only assertions why it won’t.
Here’s the slogan – ALP-Nats, puting the socialism back into Agrarian Socialism…
Shrike – I agree, that poll would have been like doing one of Lyne and not naming Oakeshott.
ALP-Nats – the Watermelon Coalition
ALP-Nats = A cow that leans to the left
The question seems to be if the Nationals can survive some sort of coalition or alliance with the ALP.
Which boils down to whether the $700M he is asking for (or whatever he settles for, say $500M or so…) is enough of a bribe for his base.
That is, if he can sell it as a win for the regions.
[I note that "regions" has seemed to replace "country" in the Nat's lingo].
If Grylls & co weigh that up, and come up with a “Yes”, and Barnett won’t deal, and Carps will, then it is game on.
Then Carps will fall after the CCC report and Gas report later this year…
Lisp will get his 700 odd millions from Sniff and Cautious tomorrow, the Libs like Troy can smell a win here they will do what is necessary for his support. Either that or its another 4 years of corruption and a Carps Lisp Coalition.
I think Carps is a moral to do the deal. We’ll see if Barnett is a man of his word.
Glen, we all know Grylls has a lisp, get over it.
Which ever way it goes this hotch potch will make a seriously unstable combination.
I thought Barnett has already rejected the mine royalties plan?
Why would the Nats side with Barnett when mine royalties was their biggest issue?
ALP-Nats A strawberry and lime icecream. Looks good till the heat comes on.
I should add to my earlier comments about Maywals that in SA we also have Rory McEwen who didn’t get Lib preselection a few elections back. He backed Rann two elections ago, along with Maywald, in exchange for a cabinet post (Forestry etc). He was also re-elected against a Liberal candidate by his very pleased constituents.
The message is that two National or Liberal independents have been re-elected in SA despite being “Benedict Arnolds” and helping Labor form government. It does give food for thought.
And I’d love to see whether William would really eat his hat.
“I thought Barnett has already rejected the mine royalties plan?” That’s what I mean. Will Barnett put power before principle, as Glen seems to be suggesting.
Kim Beazley said it last night. “Give the man what he wants.”
If Grylls forms a working agreement with Labor, and he hints that he may do so, this would lob a hand grenade into Federal Politics, so Stephen Smith may be wrong and the WA election will have Federal implications.
Will Grylls be the catalyst that allows the Nats to break the Lib shackles, he is on the record as saying the Nats get “done over” by the Libs in coalition.
Will Barnaby Joyce reform the Nats federally in Qld and challenge Truss for the Leadership?
Interesting times.
Yep, and straight from the Horse’s mouth
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/07/2357550.htm
Who knows what the deal will be, but why oh why would you prefer a patch work ALP minority administration to come out of this election when the CCC report and Gas report will destroy them?
Sniff and Cautious will give Lisp a choice, and most likely a deal.
I suspect Lisp will give the Libs a sniff of victory in the end.
If I were Colin Barnett – not having expected to get this far – I’d be *very* tempted to play the long game and stand firm against the Nationals’ demands and see them either a) fold and meekly support a minority Liberal government or b) cop the blame for propping up a mortally wounded minority Labor government – who most, if not all, of their voters want to see the back of. Whichever way Brendan Grylls jumps, it could be another nail in the National Party’s coffin.
I’m sure Rudd could help Carps out Frank.
They could of if they had managed to get up their luxury car tax what was that 550m lol!
The point is that rural politics is becoming about nothing more than subsidies. This is something that Vic Labor picked up in 1999 and why Bracks did so well. The problem for the Nationals federally is that by tying themselves into a losing party like the Libs, they have nothing to negotiate.
Does William really have a hat or was it just an empty gesture?
Actually Glen either way I’ll be happy. This patchwork will cause either contender for premier nightmares. If Barnett gets the poison chalice it will put to rest this idea that the Libs are the best thing since sliced bread.
Unfortunately for everyone, the situation will still be in a state of flux until the final results are known.
Delighted though I am that Alan Carpenter seems to have been plugged into the energy supply overnight, the position of strength he enjoys is dependent on two factors – the first of which is incumbency, which he will keep for the time being and from which he and Eric can open the coffers enough to reach a concordat with Grylls on greater resources for the regions.
The other is the notion that the most stable minority government for Western Australia would be between Labor and the Nationals. This is correct, SO LONG AS Labor win 27 seats so they can provide a Speaker and still command a majority on the floor of the Assembly with National support ONLY.
Anything less, and Carol Adams and John Bowler get involved. Given that Colin is likely to need Constable and Woollard, this would fatally weaken Labor’s argument.
80 Glen – No Glen, adjust the royalties split.
wouldn’t that put an even bigger black hole in the budget?
Any chance the four Nats could split apart in their support?
The money for regions could come from the gas distillate tax.
This was always just a tax break for Woodside in return for Howard negotiating that dreadful gas deal with China. The tax will just return it to an equitable measure. The companies have been making a motza over it and haven’t passed on any of the savings to their customer.
I think it works out to about $500 mill a year, trouble is it is being held up in the senate, though would need just WA nat senator to cross the floor or abstain.
diogenes (86) I think that is an important potential barrier to an ALP-Nat deal if he can’t bring the team with him. He would have to show a united party (although the logic of a party acting like Independents is that each of the members become so).
But they have all signed up to the regional royalties deal, as I understand it, so presumably they would have to justify their decision on that.
Talkon
Surely Carps would offer the Speaker job to a Labor independent. That’s one less he needs.
carps on abc radio- sounds chipper
esj,glen etc its getting dark again he he he
If you heard the Kwinana Independent MP she doesnt look like backing Carps and RippsOff.
I wouldn’t be so sure of that, I hear that Carol’s boss in the Police Union was in talks with Michelle Roberts about gaining her support
Not wholeheartedly Glen, no – but it’s more a case of personality than politics for Carol Adams and I think there’d be a revolt in Kwinana if she publicly threw her lot in with the Libs.
She certainly wouldn’t vote with Labor on everything, but probably would on no confidence motions and supply etc.
And Diogenes, I genuinely don’t think either Bowler or Adams would accept the Speakership if offered.
Ah the ALP ran a severely personal attack campaign towards her and she’s pissed off, royally i wouldnt be surprised if the former Mayor backs Cautious and Sniff.
well well well
the only guarantee is a a very short parliamentary term.
Basically both major parties were on the nose.
The comment ‘What’s the difference…bugger all’ was heard all day at the polling booth I was at. (working for the WAEC…not a party
).
Saying there is fed implications is laughable. It’s all united kingdom of western australia issues.
oh and Glen v Frank etc:
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff50/xebeche_tzu/internet.jpg
Piping Shrike – Paris is French and Berlin is German.
Of course, Glen is on the Right.
Anyone who thinks the Nats won’t do a deal with Labor probably thinks the Nats are a party of principle.
The Nats know their place, if they want to throw their lot in with a corrupt incompetent government that’s their choice, but i think they’ll know their place again and join us in creating a new non-labor administration.
Which principle of the WA Nats precludes them from support of a Labor government?
Glen says: The Nats know their place, if they want to throw their lot in with a corrupt incompetent government that’s their choice,
Which they did repeatedly with Howard.
wbj, where were they corrupt and i dont call economic prosperity, low inflation, high wages, low unemployment incompetent?
Howie was far more a leader than Carps.
Yeah Glen, pseudo dictators always look great.
Oh I wish the results would hurry up and get in. As someone mentioned earlier- perhaps the Nats are getting in early in case those seats Labor needs actually go their way.
And surely Adams and Bowler will support Labor, despite all the personal attacks? I’m sure they did some attacks too.
Well given WA’s enormous economic prosperity, nation leading wages and record low unemployment that means WA Labor was brilliant by your logic glen?
They’ve done it before; look at when they supported the Howard government from ‘96 – ‘07.
Here’s the other thing – Will Barnett call it a day if he sniffs he has lost all chance at Government or will he hang around waiting for Labor to falter and then support him?
There’s got to be a way of reaching an understanding with the Nats about their Regional Rorts which is mutually beneficial. The compromise could be made to look like “good government”.
In exchange to the Nats dropping the price to say $300M, Labor could;
1. Agree to expedite and ensure favourable consideration for approvals for regional programs
2. Agree to put in place programs which have been slowtracked to save money
3. Agree to a “regional and remote salary loading” for nurses, teachers etc
Where there’s a will, there’s a way.
Sorry I meant and then Nationals support him* .. would Carps hang around if the reverse happened?
Perhaps Centrebet and the rest should have put odds on Nationals winning Government – you’d get a return no matter what.
I think there is a lot of potential in an ALP/Nat government. Not a Coalition, just and ALP minority with Nat support, and one of the Labor “independents” as speaker.
That would be a lot more stable than a Liberal Minority Govt where Colin has Chairman Sniff creeping around looking for an opening all the while, with the Courts holding a quiet knife for Colin at the ready……..
It also a way for the Nats to survive and indeed prosper. I think they have to try and actually take on a new voter base made up of the less conservative people who vote them now, and a load of soft ALP voters who want their vote to filter down to somewhere other than the ALP for a change, but cant bring themselves to vote for the Libs. I reckon there are more of these than you might think who at the moment make up a lot of those who vote Green but preference the ALP before Lib.
The Nats have had to adapt in the face of 1v1v, and it looks like they have adapted in a way that is successfull at least in the short term. The challenge is for them to keep the course they have set and really be a balance of power party and make these new Nats viable. The danger for the Nats is if they seem to go back to being the bent over boys for the Libs. If they do that then no-one will trust thm if they appear to be changing again. Evolution is unforgiving and i reckon they get one shot at this, but WOW if they get it right!!
The whole political landscape shifts.
Had to laugh at Bishop last night. The arrogant way she declared that she knows what the people who voted for the Nats want!! They didnt vot for your lot Julie. According to her they want the Nats to be Lib lite. Still. it may just be that she is smart enough to grasp the major threat this election result implies for the Federal Libs if the Nats stick to their guns and be more than a tad frightened.
Glen says: wbj, where were they corrupt
Hmmm, Haneef, AWB wheat deals to Iraq, Reith and his Paticks collusion, children overboard spring to mind.
How is children overboard corruption?
LOLOL
I think then Libs talking to the NATS like they should know there place will not help their cause. And that is the problem for the NATS they are village idiots of the coalition and should just be humoured. There continual association with Libs blurs their identity with the electorate who problem see them as another type of junior Liberal.
Certainly the NATS on a State and Federal level being less trampled under foot by the Lib mafia would help their profile. They would have won plaudits for passing the Fuelwatch, Medicare Levy etc despite the Libs – and shown themselves to be a genuine party, independent and not just shadows.
On the federal scene the NATS will know they are in opposition for the next 6 years and that being the case their relevance level will continue to decline.
I can see why they might think of doing a deal with the ALP. But do they have the courage?
IMHO
The NATS want $700m over how many years?
Glen
Children Overboard is corruption in the sense that it involved using the public service in a way that corrupted its position. They became involved in the manipulation of images for the purpose of message. The Liberals made people become involved in lies about the true nature of what happened. They tried to silence the defence forces.
This is corruption or moral deterioration as my OED’s first definition says. It isn’t bribery.
wbj
we is laughing at u
Cant believe we are still debating that Howard and whether the little toerag was corrupt.
In 1998 Justice North ofhe Federal Court found that there was enough evidence to go to trial on whether Patricks and others (including Reith and Howard) had conspired to defraud various waterside workers of their entitlements.
Unfortunatley it was a mutually assured destruction scenario for all parties and the MUA put their members jobs first so it never went to trial.
If it had gone to trial there is no doubt that Howard and Rieth would have been up on charges of conspiracy just prior to the 98 election.
They were bent as a dogs hind leg. That to me is just the most glaring example. He well deserved to lose his seat.
And why oh why is this sneaky little opportunist such a hero to the people who support the party that he left in such a sad state of disrepair all for the sake of his ego??
111,
Not only laughing at Bishop, but Hockey too …. After 11 years of the Libs (96-07) and he’s got the nerve to say that people are tired of Labor after 10 months? Sounded just as bad/funny/strange as he does in Parliament [I was at Question Time last Thursday]
Why is he such a hero, imacca? Because he is the second best prime minister to ever lose his seat.
Hockey has, since Howard got in his ear for being too friendly with Rudd, has become a bitter and surly man. None of that ‘he is not a bad bloke character left’. Somehow Howard managed to move him to the dark side.
I have no time for him now days.
A few things…
The Sunday Times had an article slamming Carpenters ‘hand-picked candidates’, but mentioned Roger Cook as a winner in Kwinana. Hmm.
Neither SBS or ABC mentioned Carol Adams; SBS had Karen Middleton briefly mentioning the Greens coming close in Fremantle, nothing on ABC. Also, Joe Hockey acting like a goose and trying to draw conclusions about WA mattering federally.
Also in the Sunday Times… apparently Bowler is playing a similar game as the Nationals, asking for $100 million worth of stuff such as a new hospital in Kalgoorlie.
And Rita Saffiotti winning in West Swan, who will be the figurehead if Labor is returned and construction on the Ellenbrook rail line will commence in 2012, much to the Embarrassment to the Liberal member for Swan Hills
Listening to the Carpenter interview it seems the NATS have put something quite specific that he needs to get agreement on with his own crew but, he sounded quite positive about it all. Maybe just grateful that he is still in with a chance.
He wasn’t acting as though it was a long shot and kept going on about wanting wanting to provide good government on into the future and thats what they both want or some such thing.
The Libs are going to have to bend over themselves on this one – but the one ace they don’t have is a Federal Govt. There are lots of permutations and lots of advantages that could come to both Labor and the NATS from having some cooperation on a national and state level.
If the deal goes ahead it serves notice to the Federal Liberals. They wouldn’t want to go over-board getting stuck into the NATS though.
No federal politics on WA election threads, please.
Barnett seems very ungracious to the Nats… I wonder if this is why people in his party are/were so against him…
Is he going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? How hard can this actually be?
Yah boo-
Look back, Goss, Kennett also talked about solidering on when they lost their majority – they gave up the ghost in weeks.
But let them try – it’ll just make it worse for Labor – ultimately any new government needs to be tested on the floor of parliament. Labor may drag it out for weeks but the result will be the same – defeat.
The real question is who is going to administer the coup de grace to Labor?
A new story with the same information.
Posted 11 minutes ago
The leader of the Labor Party in Western Australia says he is excited about the possibility of forming government with the support of the Nationals.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/07/2357745.htm?section=justin
Peter @ 126…
If that is true – Colin has done it again. First with a billion dollar canal – then with ‘arrogance’… wait sorry that was meant to be for carps.
It all depends on these postals – which don’t close until Thursday morning. I know some people said they would flow more to the Libs- but surely with all this news- some might consider going back to Labor considering the comments put out in the media? Would make it very interesting.
If Labor does get the govt – how long do you reckon Colin will last around? I reckon a by-election isn’t too far off… and Deidre will be waiting.
This is hilarious.
Glen repeating the pre election Party line, pretending to know what he is talking about. Corruption over Varanus Island? It was an industrial accident for Christ’s sake. Corruption from the CCC report? The current party affiliations of members likely to be named is still the Liberal Party! Labor got rid of its crooks and incompetents, the Libs closed ranks around theirs.
And the glee club from last night (and I don’t criticism them for it, just reserve the right to laugh at their current discomfort) is now berating and abusing their bed partners of 60 plus years for contemplating infidelity.
Hey, if you chose to sleep with a tart, don’t be surprised if you get crabs once in a while. Or that she may try sell herself to others in the hope of a better offer after you tell her to naff off.
And what of Labor? Seriously considering marriage to a whore? Yeah, that’ll work out.
I stand by my prediction. the whole situation, whichever way it falls, will be untenable, and WA will be back to the polls within 6 – 12 months
If I were Alan Carpenter I would play poker with the Nats. Force a quick decision because the Nats aren’t sure who will form the government. The ALP are perilously close to retaining government.
With the increase in the number of issued absent votes it appears very likely that the ALP will win Albany, Forrestfield and Collie-Preston. It would appear Riverton is probably (but not certainly) lost. Meaning that Wanneroo is the pivotal seat.
Of course if Carpenter wins 4 of the 5 disputed seats the Nats become potentially expendable. So Carpenter has some bargaining chips. He could put an irresistable offer on the table for the Nats to accept within 48-72 hours. Take it or leave it and see if they buckle. If they agree then a press conference is held and an agreement is announced. Grills would have to be tempted to accept because he potentially risks losing the deal of a lifetime.
If the ALP do form a minority without needing the Nats, then they would show good faith and abide by the agreement, providing additional consolidation on the numbers in the chamber. If the ALP don’t win enough seats then Carpenter can claim to have out manouvered a cocky Colin Barnett.
Either way Carpenter protects the ALP’s incumbency and probably saves his leadership. Bit it is risky. Like a game of poker.
I really hope the Nats don’t throw in their lot with Labor but I have to admit today’s theatre is making me wonder …
Still, it is just theatre, so who knows what is really going on?
Hope Barnett doesn’t over-play his hand.
Fulvio #130
In 1999 Steve Bracks formed a minority government with the support of two very conservative independents from traditional NP heartland, Craig Ingram from Gippsland East & Russell Savage from Mildura. Nobody thought that would last either but it actually worked very well. The minority government was very stable.
I wouldn’t assume WA will go back to the polls quickly. Tight numbers tend to lend themselves to the government of the day being more disciplined.
I tend to agree with Sceptic – if the NATS and Labor are really serious about this then Carpenter will want to bed it down ASAP as insurance cutting Libs out of the picture while the final numbers are still not quite certain.
I don’t know why forming a coalition govt would be considered going to bed with a whore. It happens all the time around the world and in Australia. It is only as dirty as the compromises/sacrifices that are required to be made.
“I wouldn’t assume WA will go back to the polls quickly.”
I agree. The Independents (or Nats, or whoever) who hold the balance of power have every incentive to keep a hung Parliament alive as long as possible.
They’ll threaten and try to bluff the Govt, but ultimately they’re better off sticking with the current numbers than letting there be another election, and hoping that lightning strikes twice.
Minority govts get formed by parties on the way into power not by parties moving from majority to minority. Funnily enough the BOP holder is looking for longevity as BOP holder.
Riverton, Morely and Wanneroo will most likely fall to the Libs = 25 seats + 4 Nats and 2 Independents Liz and possibly Janet Woollard.
Labor to win Collie Preston and Forrestfield.
Nat preferences may decide North West and Albany 50-50.
End result is a change of government.
Another thing: if one accepts the view that late counting is likely to (slightly) favour the Libs (I don’t have a view on this, but a number of people have said so), then Carpenter really wants to get on his bike. Which it looks like he is doing.
Carpenter is a snake in my view, but he’s smart. I’m not ruling him out yet.
Minority governments are formed in situations where a majority government cannot be formed and it does not matter whether or not the minority government was previously a majority government or not.
I wonder how long Barnett will stick around if the ALP and Nats decide to marry. Will he stick around for the next election to possiably claim government or will he quit the party and let the Libs destroy themselves.
http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/election_results/2008_State_General_Election/District_of_Fremantle/notional_distribution_of_preferences.php
This notional distribution of preferences really does not do justice to the marginality of Fremantle and to who it is marginal to (a few hundred less liberal votes and a few hundred more Green votes and hey presto a different result).
The result of these tight seats does hinge on the number of absent votes cast. The ALP will benefit much better from these than the postals but I don’t have any local knowledge on how well the ALP organised their postals.
The ALP will win Albany. A lead of over 110 is a significant lead especially with many absents to count. Wanneroo (+6) and Riverton (-36) are much closer. They are a toss up and the ALP only needs to win one of them. Nothing can be assumed until the votes are counted.
This is Carpenter’s strong bargaining chip. It is like the quiz game Deal or no Deal. When do you take the bank offer? If the ALP can give the Nats what they want then they would be silly to reject it. Especially if the votes fall the ALP’s way.
Remember the ALP can promise the Nats minority govt, the Libs can’t.
Bennyboy @ 140 that’s what I’ve been asking earlier and said Deidre will probably get his prime seat… mind you… if it comes off the back a sentiment that a Labor-Nat coalition is good – then it could give Labor a chance at getting a seat. Possibly another independent. One must consider if the sniffer would call it a day? [if the libs lost] Unless the Libs like they’re idea of recycling leaders.
Sceptic @ 142 – nice analogy – I think Alan has one eye on the Case he’s picked [ie those close seats] and one eye on the bank offer [the Nats]. I think he’ll see how Monday goes – then meet with Grylls either Monday night or Tuesday morning and give him an ultimatum then of say 24-48hours [as suggested before] and hoping in the meantime those seats keep coming his way.
If Barnett calls it a day, then I recon the sniffer will be reelected leader and the backstabbing and infighting will start all over again. Sniffer will become the parliaments new clown and the ALP will be laughing to the bank.
Wonder if Grylls is talking to Truss who is also reassessing the role of the NATS. We might be seeing the first crack in the glass. That Truss is thinking like that makes it a little easier for Grylls.
Anybody see Rudd out and about this evening?
Surely the old coalition have actually won this thing? I am gobsmacked by the talk of anything else.
Still – it could make sense… the two socialist parties finally putting aside their differences and getting together…
TP
i will stake my left nut that carps has done a deal.
my right is on truss working the fed angle to the advantage of the nats
game on hombres
and don’t forget the hot sauce chullo
Grylls surely would have agreed to a Lib-nat things now if he was going to right?
Either way some turbulent times ahead
Julie Bishop reckons Federal Labor is so unpopular now thats why everyone voted against the Liberals and Nats in the federal by-elections.
Does this woman smoke crack?
Malcolm Farr reckons she is hot
The Libs couldn’t possibly re-elect Buswell as leader. Surely. Don’t they have anybody else.
I saw him interviewed on the ABC on election night and he made some double meaning comment on how needed to keep his extremeties warm in the evening chill. It came out of left field and I was rather surprised to hear this. So was the interviewer, she remarked how his comments could have been misinterpreted and how easily Buswell seems to get himself into trouble.
The man doesn’t seem to have the maturity or understanding on the expectations of behaviour required for a public figure. It was election night after all with a large captive audience.
Who else do they have and they are stupid?
I am interested to know which party was preferenced by the Nat voters in their winning seats.
surely they preferenced majority Liberal in all seats, and would abhor then going in cahoots with the ALP?
This could be a very risky strategy for Nat in the long run for short term gain.
I don’t think the 4 odd percent swing in the metro area to oust Labor would be real happy with the few voters for the Nats that would support Grylls actions
Besides Shadow Attorney General Christian Porter – not many.
William
In th list of 5 seats , notice you did not include Morley where Labor holds only 0.4% margin on 75.8% count , would hav thought that was equaly at least as marginal as Collie where Labors margin is 0.9% count 74.8%
Also Guys , can not believe this unrealistic media ’spin’ of Nats going into coalition with Labor , I’m so confident this is fairyland stuff if it happened then I’d spend a whole day here agreeing with everything ESJ said
hi frank
where do you feel this will end up
hell , not sure whether I should hav put some on conditions on ESJ there
ron
wash mouth soap
didnt the libs win morley
Yes the Libs won Morley. Best to use the WAEC figures, not the ABC figures.
That said, I notice the WAEC still have no preference count for Kwinana.
Nats will form an “alliance” with Labor in return with his Rural Royalty Fund – Libs pissed him off when Barnett publicly snubbed him on August 11th.
Barnett will retire again, he’ll be pilloried by losing the unlosable election for not playing footsies with The Nats, Deidre will win a By-Election and she will become Leader.
Seeing Barnett fail to form government in the circumstances contemplated would give me as much pleasure as watching eagles supporters faces as their team lost a game by a point from a goal kicked after the siren…………..
mmmmmmmmmmm the very thought….
thanks frank
will the public view it as the lesser of two evils (the lab-nat alliance that is)
do you think.
Good quesrtion, those who ring talkback and read perth now and The West and comment on their blogs will go feral at the Nats, Joe Bogan – who knows.
Morely , WAEC has same vote count figures as ABC (which shows Labor 50.4%)
http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/election_results/2008_State_General_Election/District_of_Morley/District_results.php
where are later figures
this is the only two party i could find for morley has the libs out in front by a little bit http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/election_results/2008_State_General_Election/District_of_Morley/notional_distribution_of_preferences.php
No counting today, recommence tomorrow, those figures at close of counting.
No 164
I don’t see how that could possibly be the case given the significant swing against the ALP statewide. Clearly, there was an intention to do major damage to Labor and thus they should be shafted to opposition. Either way, it is entirely likely that WA citizens will return to the polls momentarily as the Nats behaviour is unsustainable long term.
But the Libs only 2.1% of that swing, the rest went to the Greens and Independents, so it’s a bad result for the Libs as well.
GP@169
dude cut the numero crap (please)
the intent of the public was certainly clear BUT was it an outright flogging or perhaps a minor spanking
the fact that the naats have entered into formal negotians suggests a spanking
ps did the libs get over 50% plus 1 of the vote perchance generic person?
negotians should be negotiations
So it is not as though they wanted the Libs to be the govt either
The public basically said they dont want either
however ALP will have most seats, which you think would mean they are most entitled (and not by a lot) to form government
Cracks in the NATS would make the political scene so much more fun to watch and the OO worth reading again just to see their gnashing of teeth.
And none of the seats the Libs did win were won on Primaries alone, they ALL need preferences from the CDP & FF to get over the line.
No 170
According to the ABC site, 2.9% to the Libs and 1.2% to the Nats, yet there was a 2.1% swing away from from “Others” (which I presume mostly includes independents).
I’d say it’s a pretty bloody good result for the Libs considering:
1. Colin Barnett became leader just a day prior to the calling of the election
2. They were starved of 2 weeks of oxygen due to the Olympics
3. The Troy Buswell factor.
You’d have to be delusional to proclaim the result as anything but good for the Libs.
What’e the bet Labor pull the pin on the Ellenbrook rail line – they lost Swan Hills anyway – and pump the cash to the Nats’ slush fund in exchange for support?
I f***ing hate the Nationals, and tend to agree with Keating’s description of them as “that vile entity”, but hey, power is power….
frank
please clarify 176 – do you mean every seat?
No 171
I can hardly see the Nats getting into bed with Labor. Furthermore, given the immediate proximity of government, Barnett would be a fool not to capitulate to the Nationals. $700 million is doable with the enormous surpluses thanks to the mining boom.
Nats are a short-term phenomenon with these overstated numbers. Both Carps and Barnett should advise them accordingly but the ALP is desperately keen for salvage. I think the ALP will do a better deal by a long chalk (or should that be a country mile) than the Libs. But fi they do, it won’t hold. Grylls is trying to reverse the move to one-vote, one-value and the consequent diminishing of the Nats and has done a good job – but who else will support him? Only short term political needs will fill his wish list – the Nats will follow the South Australian example into oblivion. Being a Minister in a hostile government hasn’t helped them much there.
GP
its not doable under the present royalty equalisation arrangement with the Commonwealth
Somethign else would have to go
I should clarify my statement by saying that it’s based on the 2 or 3 lib gained seats I clicked on, but the general trend I noticed that I didn’t see any with 50.1% of the Primary vote.
Seats the Libs won off labor, which either a new seat, or a seat with no sitting member.
I think both major parties would do well to sideline the Nats, by either forming an understanding on some issues (eg confidence, supply) or by convincing some Nats to switch sides. The latter would really only apply to the Libs presumably. Hopefully we’ll have another election shortly and we can give one of the major parties the majority it needs in the lower house.
There is a big discreprency between the Primary votes counted in Wanneroo (18491 formal) and the amount shown in the Notional 2PP (14592).
My info is that Libs are actually reasonably ahead, not ALP by 6 votes.
No 176
I could say the same thing about Labor in the Federal Election. The ALP relied heavily on Green preferences to win. Howard won Bennelong on the primary vote, for example.
Frank for a long time now labor has won seats thanks to the greens preferences thats our system so you cant winge about losing seats because of the minor partys
I’m not whinging – I’m pointing out a political fact to the Libs here claiming Barnett is the second coming.
Frank
seems to me that it was more a ‘im pissed off vote’ than a clear “kick labor in the goolies vote”
the grand coalition (lab/nat) should help the nats maintain some sort of political relevance
this election has proven the lib brand electoral poison
Frank, political fact is five weeks ago the Liberals faced Queensland style oblivion.
Even if the Libs don’t form government, Colin Barnett has saved the party.
But the Libs also promised the Ellenbrook line, let them wear the cost overruns and budget blowouts when the boom go pearshaped
well regardless of if the nats dance with the devil (which will not go down well with there voters) and form government with labor wa has spoken labor has lost an estimated 8 to ten seats and have had huge swings in safe seats
people clearly wanted change or they would not have voted liberal and prefrence liberals in front of labor when voting green
Until Barnett pulls the pin because Brendan won’t let him play in the rural sandpit that is.
The Libs will payout BIGTIME if Barnett blows this. It will make the last ALP preselection battle look like the United Nations.
southernboy
“people clearly wanted change ”
then why wasnt a clear majority of seats won by the libs?
as people have mentioned on here usally is 70% preferance flow from green to labor not this election ill give you on exsample in darling range it was 40% to 45% to the liberals from the greens
No 182
Explain how it isn’t possible. Over 2.5 billion is received in royalties from the royalties equalisation agreement plus the government is running billion dollar surpluses. I’d say it’s affordable and I reiterate that Barnett would be dumb not to capitulate to most, if not all, of the Nats requests. Otherwise, why bother suspending your retirement if only to stay in opposition another four years.
Lol i think if bit city projects get canned, city voters will be rightfully pissed
This whole Nationals notion that simply becuase there are some mines and farms in the country that they somehow deserve all the money for being next to them is stupid.
No 195
gusface, stop trying to repackage what is undoubtedly a very poor result for Labor.
Labor should have easily maintained government given the amount of free kicks it got out of the Buswell scandal.
The numbers don’t lie – if the voters wanted a bloodbath, they would’ve placed Greens last.
No 198
Any form of socialism is logically stupid. But I’m sure you won’t criticise the ALP for that.
The Nats are a regional party – thus it is there job to spur government investment in regional areas.
the results have been odd and all over the place in soem seats joondalup and mindarie are examples but where there has not been an inumbent labor member or one of ALANS star candiates the libs have won although southern river was won from a member that did hardly any work before the election and goin on that shane hill must not have done much in the consertave part that used to be in greenough of geraldton which has clearly voted liberal
generic person@199
sorry but some times the truth is inconvenient
(thank you for not addressing me as a number but as a person)
No 200
A valiant effort Frank but I’m afraid your argument still fails.
The question is not why the loss wasn’t greater, but why the ALP sustained such a loss at all given the shambles the Libs were in just one day prior to the election being called.
The exception of course is West Swan, Gosnells with Chris Tallentine from the Conservation Council, and Bill Johnston in Cannington
ps
please try to extend that courtesy to all posters here (I think bilbo would like to hope we are all civilised on this site)
ta
correct you are totally right generic person it is a clear backlash regardless of minor party the libs surged in the primary vote state wide labour did not that clearly show that people did not want alan in for another 4 yrs
No 206.
but they are safe seats i sould have mentioned i was refering to marginals and what happend in morley probly wont hapend next time round thats all thanks to john d
GP @204
surely if the will of the people was so strong then the Libs(no matter what disarray they may have been in) should have romped this one in?
ps did you see my @206
tallentine got a huge swing from a campain that was proorly funded and the lib candiate not very spectalur it will now be considerd marginal
No 203
What’s inconvenient? The ALP didn’t just get a slap on the wrist (a few seats lost) as you’ve been trying to advance; rather, it got a 10 massive body blows to the extent that the Parliament is currently hung on the most recent counting.
But which party had more seats to get to the magic 30 ?
GP@212
but surely,as in the Federal sphere,when the people want change the people want change (i could bore you with precedents but i suspect you already know them)
So why did the voters of WA NOT give the libs a clear mandate GP -that my dera is the question!
everything else is “an inconvenient truth” to the libs and the MSM narrative
pps did you see my @206
“Mr Barnett, who took over the leadership from scandal-ridden Troy Buswell a day before the poll was called, was ear-to-ear smiles as yesterday. But he was cool on just how far he was prepared to go to get Nationals support.
“The state does receive very large sums of money in royalty income, but under the federal-state financial relationship Western Australia effectively loses commonwealth grants because we get the royalty income,” he said. “The net effect is about 10 per cent of the royalty income actually stays with Western Australia, so the numbers that have been talked about, this is not some cream on top of the cake, it’s actually in the cake itself.” “
For example:
ALP 18
Lib 40
Nat 4
OTH 4
It is not how many seats you have but how many you lose that is imporant in deciding government. If you had 45 and ended up with 35 then that is a clear message from the electorate that you should give up government. That would be a double 99
labour has gone from a ten seat majority government to a party with proably 26-27 seats thats says it all plus the libs just 5 weeks ago was poised to be voted into oblivon thanks to mr troy buswell polling was predicting the libs would have 8-10 seats that in its self shows that labor cocked up big time and i am sure that if labor does stay in government carps will be booted for mcgowan or wyatt mabye even allanah shes probaly the only popular minister labor has
TP
just finishing a bootle of st remy (thanks kids) wtf was 217 all about
No, it’s 30 seats, anything else is a bonus
THAT is the magic number which determines who gets the keys to the piggybank.
Having a joke gusface on the notion that if you have a big swing against you it is a message that the electorate dont want you, even if you are still the majority party. What do you do after 99..
thats like a 25 seat gain brian burke would have to be made premier again for that sort of number for the libs
Thomas,
makes my comment at 220 a bit redundant then
Oh the problems with posts coming while responding to the original one.
TP@221
normally most people would pray that they lived to 100
sorry,TP the ONLY issue here is that the libs have NO clear mandate to form gvt.
now we let the gods decide the fall of the cards.
And as it stands carps has the best hand.
labor should concede carps sould resign and start all over again and then you will be in a good chance of winnign 2012 when a barnett government has imploded and dealy with the nats and inds
No 221
That argument can be reversed: if the electorate clearly wanted Labor then why are its chances of retaining government on a knife-edge (and likely lost)?
it is also a good time to elevate ben wyatt mabye the next barrak obama of australia
William
I do not see how Labor has lost Morley , yet
refer Southernboy #167
That WAEC site Southernboy kindly linked is extraordinary , once you got out of it there’s no link to go back into it unlike all other Seats
Also it shows Liberals at 2PP 51.62% to Labor 48.38% on count 16131 (being 425 total votes less than WAEC & ABC show were then counted of 16556)
ABC site predicts on same total of 16556 total votes then counted Labor 50.4 to Liberals 49.6
WAEC hard to find 2PP site above (less 425 votes) shows 2PP Labor 48.38% to Libs 51.62% BUT that could only be achied by a pref flow to Labor of 20% CDP , 55% Greens , 15% Independent/donkey and 45% D’Orazio
Did D’Orazio pref Libs , and even so thats a low Greens & CDP pref flow
No 225
I’d say Labor already imploded whilst in office given that Carpenter had to sack 5 ministers for consorting with Mr Burke.
gp@226
thank you for that
“i understand that todays vote was a protest vote and i will take that onboard”
WHO said it AND when
Yep, D’Orazio did preference Libs, and put the Christian Democrats first in the Upper house.
No 230
No need to thank me.
“The protest vote” monicker can only be ascribed to the election once counting is finished.
Not THAT fairytale again I don’t think people had Burke on their mind when they cast their votes – The Libs campaigned on shockjock talking points.
Gp @232
actually one john winston howard
the beazley bungled election
GP when the people want change they get it in a clear unadulterated way
it hurts and i feel your pain,but hey get over it , i have
if the results are right on that waec link then i carnt see whitby scraping back
there is something i no clearly swan hills went nuts 8% swing in one of the ellenbrook booths only lost it by 40 votes and thats bullsbrook and gigdegannup are now like 60% liberal or close
Gus
I’m with you , its a totally irrelevant argument how many seats you lose , think TP is on that dream drink , queston always is if you hav enough to form Govt , fullstop
Oh and wasn’t one of Howard’s Minister’s “forced to resign”, for “Consorting with Mr Burke”, as well as the John McGrath & Anthony Fels, oh and Troy Buswell is no cleanskin either in that regard, considering he was Shire President during the whole Smiths Beach debacle.
the good people of swan hills clearly did not want gramae giffard
I’m interested Frank… what did they have in mind in Swan Hills when they delivered a 6+% swing to the Libs.
which party does brian burke come from which party made him premier thats just says it all
and on swan hill frank you had mendioned before abour frank albans unpopularity in eleenbrook due to him wanting them to pay more money in rates then why did the people over elenbrook vote against labour one answer alan carpenter DEAD MAN WALKING
SB
the issue aint personalities as such
more the substance behind each party
otherwise we would have seen a lib gvt
yes or no
Re Morley
BUT surely one would think over 70% of D’Orazio’s votes were Labor seeing voters had option of Independent & CDP & Liberal
ABC Antony has certainly assumed that & set his pref model accordingly , very ususual Labor only got approx 45% of his prefs
Frank.
Ian Campbell had one meeting with Mr Burke… one that Mr Burke wasn’t even invited to. He shouldn’t have resigned… but had to so that the feds could keep up pressure on Rudd, who canvassed Burkes support prior to his election to ALP leadership.
To put anyone in the same boat as the ALP Ministers who gave Cabinet information to a lobbyist (and got big fundraisers from the same lobbyist – not that there is any connection between the two) is ridiculous.
abour grove is the one i am talking about and coolamon is not a good area for the libs charollotes vineyard is better
No 242
We may yet still see a Liberal Government in WA. I’m quite confident that Barnett will secure the deal. It’s clearly quite untenable for the Nats to join with Labor. Sure, it might work short term, but they’ll end up eroding their base substantially.
ummmm
my NCB beats your BB anytime
just ask the electorate
No 245
Joe, you can keep talking to the cows come home but Frank will never sway from his indignant support for the ALP.
Keep dreaming, the Body language from Barnett on election night means Grylls will give him the Finger.
I can feel it in my waters.
GP – Pot meet Kettle re your support of the CONservatives.
Frank
LOL
No 250
Mr Calabrese, it is sickening to think that you are a fellow Italian. Then again, the Calabrians are responsible for the mess in NSW.
<>
That’s probably Al’s floating corpse.
GP
why do conservatives always scrape the barrel when defeated
sorry GP but you’ll never be capo di capo
Ahh, You cannot handle the facts so you attack the person.
Typical CONservative, they have to play the man and not the ball.
No 251
You need not engage in partisan rancour to want Corpse out of office.
NCB was not convicted for fraud he did not facilitate WA INC all he did was insult a woman which john howard used to get him expelled from the liberal party strait away brian burke was not expelled until 2 yrs ago that says it all
No 255
Sorry Frank, but I was labelled an irritating c**t by one of your ilk in a previous thread.
Pot, meet kettle.
Hey Frank,
The CONservatives are the people that Alan Carpenter may be about to get into bed with. If your support for the ALP is based on ideology – surely this is a problem for you.
I for one would be mortified if the Libs decided to go into Coalition with the greens…
GP@258
my dera you are
Diddums, but Barnett will go down in history as being the leader to lose an unlosable election TWICE in a row.
Frank
I think its about time Frank you were about in your place & told you ” show indignant support for Labor just because you use rational arguments , I mean after all Liberal Supporters & Greens suporters would never be indigant or partisan suporters and you should understand that , as I already do
Joe
please read the history of the national/country party
more socialist,in an agrarian sense, than stalin
No 259
As would I. Though, admittedly, Greens preferences did help the Libs in WA.
i think the one going down on losing an unlosable election will be carps who in the labour party thought they could lose 10 seats 5 weeks ago NO ONE
No 260
Always a pleasure to be at your service.
be honest frank did you think labor could lose ten seats i certanly did not
No 263
Yes, gusface, but the Nats are traditionally quite socially conservative which aligns with the Liberals quite well; and their coalition tends to temper outright of extremes of both parties.
Nobody did – I’ve always said it would be close.
GP@266
touche
ppps did you read my @206
may help how others perceive you
cheers
This is also a little bit of the planets aligning for Rudd. With the Fed and State NATS pondering the meaning of life for a moment.
How much would it be worth to him to have this deal done!?
Maybe they would be willing to pay almost anything to do this deal for its nation wide implication? How would the federal Libs react? And how would the Federal NATS react to the way the Fed Libs react.
History says the NATS that will most probably join with the Libs in a coalition. But that is not the message we are getting at the moment, so we can speculate. The only reason now for the NATS to join with the Libs is, thats what we used to do in the past.
Anyway its fun seeing it play out.
No 270
WB, shame on you for propagating such filth.
I withdraw my comments about WB. He has since deleted his post.
There certainly are some crazy ideas being bandied about here. For example, Thomas Paine @ 217:
What a quaint notion, which I presume only applies to Labor governments.
Oh, and getting “big fundraisers” from lobbyists is bad only when Labor politicians do it, right Joe @ 245?
So I suppose donations from… let’s see… Manildra (in return for the imposition of an alcohol excise tax), or The Exclusive Bretheren (in return for special Industrial Relations treatment), or the Liquor Lobby (in return for tax loopholes on alcopops)… they’re perfectly fine?
Maybe we should throw in the endorsement of Malcolm Turnbull by… oh my gosh… Conrad Black, from his jail cell in Florida, is quite OK with you? Tut, tut… and a convicted criminal, too.
Howard’s Rule… actually I think it was Costello’s in point of fact… was that if you had anything to do with Brian Burke you were tainted and should go. Campbell merely followed that rule, put in place by his own party. It is hard to see why Rudd should have done the same, as he is not – to my recal – a member of the Liberal Party.
Youse wingnuts sure do come up with some funny ideas, from time to time.
No 270
I will refer to posts as I wish. I am not here to indulge in a circle jerk of leftist backslapping; nor to seek the approval of others.
No 274
Conrad Black is a man of great integrity and intelligence.
BB I was having a joke.
Labor was punished for an excerable campaign and for Carpenters lack of political nouse. All things being equal a swing of 4 to 5 seats would have been par. Unfortunately our poor campaign, bad timing( trust me the party was advised to go the day the west ran the “replaciing Buswell with Barnett” story”, because many of us felt that the positive polling we were getting was nearly all anti buswell not pro labor!. We were aware that it was a completely different scenario facing Barnett. For reasons known only to Carpenter we waited too long then went straight after Buswell was rolled. The opposition campaign (and by this i mean the west australian newspaper not the liberal rabble) blew us out of the water. Not to mention we went to the polls two weeks too late with a lazy election campaign designed for the unelectable Buswell not the bland but competent Barnett.
The relentless attack on us by the West should have been anticipated. Unfortunately we had a totally ineffective response to their message, that appeared to change frequently in line with our panick. Polling after the election had been called told us what many of the more experineced heads in the party had been saying and that was that without Omodei or Buswell as our unelectable opposition we were in serious trouble.
This was made worse by the factional preselection deals that left us in my opinion with a range of unknown or unpopular candidates in seats we needed to win or hold. Our inability to articulate what had been nearly 2 terms of competent government and instead focus on gimmicks such a banning smoking or no nukes perplexed us all. There was simply no directon and no focus to the campaign. We didnt really have one. I honestly beleive we thought that the Libs were so unelectable that we could coast to a lazy victory. I hate to say it but we were bloody arrogant and too smart by half. A stronger more focused campaign and smarter preselections ie Kucera for Mt Lawley and whomever Dorazio chose for Morley would have seen us lose 3-5 seats maximum. As it was weve been bashed but the good citizens of WA were astute enough to not give the liberal party a majority in the own right.
Any arguements posted here that the libs have a mandate to govern are farcical. Labor will have a plurality (ie the most seats of any individual party in parliament) If the nationals maintain their commitment to not form a co-alition with the libs than labor will be the party looked upon to form a minority government. If Labor can convince the Nationals to co-operate in a minority government then one can argue that that best reflects the will of thge people as the party with the largest representation in the parliament is governing with assistance from minority parties. Currently i rate the chances of this at 40%. While Grylls is talking the talk, smart money would have to be on the nats buckling and forming a coalition with the libs. It wont be for lack of trying from an embarassed, shell shocked and chastened labor party. We dont want to swap sides in the house on the hill and the chatter is well do what we need to. Who knows premier Grylls has a ring to it!!
Channelling Norm Marlborough I see
Seems message from th election result is voters ar NOT happy with Labor with justification , BUT voters ar NOT satisfied with th Liberals either !
Given ‘Brian Burke’ factor , Carps ‘personality’ and a poor Labor electon campaign , Labor Party has “future upside” , whereas th Liberal hard heads should be more worried with this result in cool analysis with th political advantages they had …and in spite of th likelihood Liberals may hav a minority Govt after Nats reluctantly come on board to him …at a price
message for Greens…congratualtions on efectively prefferencing a PRO Uranium mining Party th Libs…so no more moralising as I’m gonna keep bringing this moralising sham up ‘dressed up’ as pref tactics
Greens in reality used politcal pref tactics which is fine but yous lost your moralising streak with it
275
if it helps you have my approval (from my right backslap that is)
274
so was gordon gecko
Labor and the Nationals together is in my view the worst result possible for this state. Grylls as Premier? I should certainly hope not, we’d become the laughing stock of the nation. This isn’t Queensland for goodness sake. If Labor and the Liberals had any sense they would both agree to refuse Gryll’s requests and see what happens. Another election would surely give one party a majority or close enough with independent support.
rumpolecat has summed it up perfectly Labor stuffed it up and we suffered for it but the Libs haven’t benefited from the result either.
You watch how the Kath & Kims in their McMansions react when a Minority Liberal Govt make some unpopular to appease Grylls – the next Poll they won’t be swinging Baseball bats, they’ll be bringing out the Ball and Chain.
Duke
can you feel,like sand, the power slipping thru the libs hands
Bushfire Bill @ 274
I don’t like the concept of any party receiving cash for policies. Though, the Alco-pop policy I am sure is based more on public disproval for the increase.
If you wish to defend conversations like the one in this article, go ahead – but it isn’t good for our political process.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21310984-5006789,00.html
the greens did not preferance libs they ran some open tickets and the only marginal was mt lawley but there was a unusal leakage from green prefrances to liberals instead of labour
No 282
Nope. Labor will do anything and everything to avoid another election in quick succession. They’ll sell their souls, but ultimately the Nats will side with the Liberals.
It’s frankly difficult to believe that the Nats could support a party of corrupt cretins, the ALP.
And if they do, will you do the Honourable thing and resign from the Liberal Party in protest that their junior party has acted in this way, and urge they withdraw from a federal coalition ?
No 283
I’d like to see some more detail on how the equalisation grants work, but on face value there is plenty of money to throw around unless Corpse has misappropriated it to Brian Burke.
# 284 gusface – A very amusing little rhyme you have there. I certainly can’t feel it, although they are being quite stupid. I’d prefer a majority Labor or Liberal government to this Grylls character. I can certainly feel power slipping – from the city to the country. Libs and Labor need to urgently get together (secretly of course to prevent greater Nationals support) and sort this mess out.
No 288
You’re hardly a bastion of honour, given your undying support for Brian Burke.
i no bredon grylls may be up for the idea of labor but i would not be sure of the others he has quote said in the media he will make the decsion when he talks to his party room and they will make the choice what i recon could happend is that both partys agree to what they want and offer more then it will be the choice of who they prefer and who there voters prefer which is clearly the libs they are members of strong conservative areas
Ron@280
NOWHERE did the Greens actively preference Lib over the ALP. There were a few open tickets, and I think a couple of seats where the Libs were preferenced over the Nats – in places the ALP wasn’t in the fight anyway.
Regardless, as the result shows, preference flows from the Greens have been unpredictable this time – as happens when a minor party doubles its vote in many electorates. If Greens voters followed the HTV as closely as in past elections, the ALP would be home in a couple of seats that are in doubt, but in some seats less than half of the Greens voters followed the HTV directly.
Who said I suported Brian Burke – I’m glad he got expelled from the Party and was bansihed.
For all his faults, I applaud Alan Carpenter for dealing with the Burke issue head on, unlike the libs with Buswel, NCB etc.
So stop putting words into my mouth.
No 292
Exactly southernboy. It would seem to me that if Nats voters wanted Labor, they would have voted so and sent the Nats into oblivion. Most Nats voters already entertain the idea of a LNP coalition, but they would not stomach an ALP/Nat coalition.
Jaysus – 10 posts while I was typing. Gotta be quick round here…
Southernboy@286 Mount Lawley HTV went to the ALP as well on election day. Some pre-poll ones were open.
The Reason why the Vote is all over the place is simple – a lot of people were refusing How To Vote Cards and were voting “blind” so to speak, so preference flows are all over the shop.
the problem is duke is carps no’s labor has been hurt at this election and he no’s hes will be blamed he will do anything to keep labor in government and if colin does play hard ball with the nats which he probly wont then i will applaud him for it although they will go with labor colin would not have conpromised his postion and would have not Supported somthign he think is not wise unfair and that is econmically bad
That doesn’t account for the sheer volume Frank.
Several Greens booths ran out of HTVs on polling day very early on – more people than ever were taking them.
I’d say Greens voters didn’t vote “blind”.
They saw things pretty clearly…
One bloke even took to carrying bags of rubbish in each hand so he couldn’t take a HTV card from ANY party, and a lot of the PYT’s in their late teens/early 20’s were the same, they’d walk straight past.
Upper Swan Primary School had the problem of one of their booth workers going home and the table being unattended for a while – I had to guard the table for a bit until her replacement arrived, and then Jenni Bowman arrived and she couldn’t hand them out while the worker changed into her T shirt, so our Booth Captain obliged.
And that’s all you had to do for an extra 10% or so of the vote…?
Gosh we’re nice.
what do u recon of the nats trying to make one of there conditions repealing the one vot one value law espacially since they will conrtol both houses
No 299
I’d have to agree that the Greens voters knew what they were doing with respect to preferences.
that would not have had much of an impact upper swan is the best liberal booth with most people from the vines voting there
i mean have balance of power in both houses
I wonder if Greens voters realised what they were doing in Fremantle? Now that they’ve come close to winning a seat, it’s definitely going to change the game for them… the Greens will become less of a protest vote option, and more of a genuine option of winning seats. I wonder how they’ll play it from here on in.
That booth has always been a Liberal Booth, as was Henley Brook Hall, but we gave that to Lisa to deal with
No 303
They won’t get that in my view. It’s totally out of line with other states and it is unrepresentative. The Nats really want the money at the end of the day.
Actually it’s people from Baskerville, and Brigadoon as well, plus a couple from Middle Swan- I should know, they live around the corner from me.
I was told, Jaye was popular in the Vally was because all the Slavs and Croats voted for her.
She had roots in the area.
Amd speaking of Ethnics – John D’Orazio’s low Primary vote has dispelled the myth that he was “Widely popular” in the Electorate.
Bird of paradox@307
One of the constant battles for the Greens is the whole “wasted vote” line from people that don’t understand preferential voting – probably the biggest, most attractive block of voters for us (which is why the Greens election material had the explaination of preferences on it). That myth vaporises when the Greens win a LH seat or two, and potentially the floodgates open…
yer jaye probaly was but her not being the incumbent has inpacted big just look at bullsbrook
Yeah, Jaye should’ve taken Carps advice and recontested Swan Hill, but she wanted a safer seat, but to her credit she did endorse Giffard via the Flyer and authorised a flyer on Trailbikes, but on Election day was campaigning for Michelle Roberts.
No 312
Given that Greens preferences almost always flow in favour of Labor, I fail to see the point in voting for them. Electors may as well vote Labor and be done with it. It can’t possibly be a protest vote if the vote still ends up in the ALP ledger.
This election is particularly volatile as nearly all the gained seats for each side have come from atypical preferencing. All things being equal an election between a competent opposition and government would not normally throw up results that looked like this. While it is certainly true the liberal party has done much better that anticipated, lets also note that a large number of those seats came off the back of atypical minor party preferencing including greens. In a “normal” election one would not expect the preferences from the greens to flow as readily to the libs, nor would one expect gifts like Morley which is patently not a holdable liberal seat. The call for another election asap by the libs would certainly favour labor. We would immediately win back Morley and with Kucera reclaim Mt Lawley. Kwinana would become labor held as we reendorse Carol Adams. Wanneroo would likey fall back to us as well assuming that the early election protest vote is targetted now at both parties not just labor. That would give us 32 seats including Comrade Bowlers in Kal before looking at winning back any of the other liberal gains. Bring it on!!.
Given that Greens preferences almost always flow in favour of Labor, I fail to see the point in voting for them. Electors may as well vote Labor and be done with it. It can’t possibly be a protest vote if the vote still ends up in the ALP ledger.
So I’m assuming that also applies for the Nationals prefrencing Liberal then ?
Watch this space re Adams – As I hear talks between Michelle Roberts and Mike Dean from the Police Union took place last night and since Adams is a lawyer for the above union, there may possibly be some co-operation for her support for Labor.
GP, the idea for the Greens is to build the vote and win some LH seats.
It’s not a protest vote any longer when it becomes a realistic alternative, as was (almost!!) the case in Freo, and has been in Tassie and elsewhere for some time.
When voters see that it is possible to elect a Green candidate, I’m optimistic that more will naturally follow. Until then, yes, you’re right, there’s always an element that will view it as nothing more than a protest vote.
But people wouldn’t protest if they didn’t yearn for something different.
Oh and why didn’t Carps invite Hawkey over to campaign – it sure helped Gallop in 2005.
And let us not forget Cunningham as well.
yer that may be but i would not suggest that she would welcome being rendorced thats a bit rich you did not want her twice but now that she won as an inderpendant thats fine what a joke labor should learn liek the liberal party has once a inderpendant get in its hard to beat just look at woolard constable and even walker got really close when she has done no work if she had we would have lost ill say that bowler will suport labor on one condition that carps go thats what i recon
if britza work really god damn hard and got a high name reconition he might just keep it mabye when it was ballajura it was held by the libs but its still unlikey next time but if labor parachutes someone in or puts a unoin hack in then i would say that it may stay lib
I’ve just noticed that Janine Freeman, anotherone of the “Dream Team”, is doing well in Nollamara.
http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/election_results/2008_State_General_Election/District_of_Nollamara/notional_distribution_of_preferences.php
i thought she was just a unoin drop in like rodger cook
319 paris: Post of the thread.
The Greens have been my protest vote of choice ever since the Democrats imploded. It’s true that I usually vote ALP above the Liberals, but that’s because I have to number them somewhere. If the ALP ran a dud candidate and the Libs a good one, and if the Libs weren’t being too objectionable at the time, I’d have no problem voting Green-Lib-ALP. And I’d love to see a Greens MP for my district, even though I know it’s unlikely… if I didn’t, I wouldn’t be voting for them.
And as for Adele Carles… it would’ve been bizarre, but then she would probably have made a better local MP for Freo than McGinty has been lately. That’s the kind of thing that would really make people take notice of the Greens. If they win Freo, the Herald would probably get behind them, and then they become the second party in neighbouring seats like Cottesloe and Cockburn.
she had a 5% swing against her in a safe seat not a fanatastic result in such a safe seat
Actually quite a bit of the old Ballajura seat got redistributed to West Swan, which may account for the low D’Orazio vote.
See the old boundary map here and you’ll see what I mean.
http://www.boundarieswa.com/2003/Boundaries/–East-Metropolitan/Ballajura/
No 319
I personally find all Greens policies objectionable, as does most of the electorate. I’d rather them stay out of the parliament as long as possible!
i doubt cottesloe very much as the green vote has been at the same level there as it has been for a while and if they had any chance of winning there the informed doctors wife that vote for them in cotteslow will stop voting for them beacuse deep down they are liberal they only vote green out of guilt
Greens can not hav it both ways and won’t
Greens gave ‘open prefs’ in NT allowing Green prefs to go to PRO Uranium dump CLP Party
Greens gave ‘open pref’ in WA allowing Greens prefs to go to PRO Uranium mining Liberal Party
So obviously uranium mining and uranium dumps ar not a priority to Greens any longer , so lets not hear any of this anti uranium hypocracy here
Whereas Labor Party NT opposed uranium dumps and Labor Party WA opposed uranium mining Time for reel Greens voters to dump th Greens Party in NT and WA …IF uranium is reely an issue to them
oh ok my bad frank mabye that is one reason why west swan had a large swing combined with the not local facor
somthing quite interesting is that the greens got so close to out polling labor in cottesloe the labour vote colapsed by 7.8 percent greens hardly changed greens missed out by 0.1
No 331
The Greens’ opposition to uranium mining and nuclear power is utterly stupid anyway. Nuclear electricity can jump start the move toward a low-emission economy whilst renewable technologies mature. Moreover, given the zillions of square kilometres of desert we have in Australia, there is plenty of room to store waste safely.
I’m amazed the Greens got 12% in an outer suburban seat like Nollamara (triple last time). That was the safest ALP seat, and note what happened to the second-safest – Kwinana’s another protest vote gone large.
As for Cottesloe: I’m not suggesting they’ll win it any time soon, but if they do win Freo, they could overtake the ALP in that seat. Never underestimate the power of the Fremantle Herald, and Freo locals.
And events like the Fremantle Festival. I think another reason why Carpenter went early was to avoid School Holidays and the Royal Show, which would’ve pissed more people off.
i suppose but the libs would have to put in a another doug shave for the greens to win
Generic Person
but thats not th point , Greens hav sold out there core , there supporters swhould dump them as per my #331 & vote NT and WA Labor who do oppose uranium dumps & uranium mining , because clearly Greens Party do not think its important
There trashing of there core policy would be equivalent to liberal Party being anti business (which it would NEVER do as its a core value) , its there hypocracy not there pref tactics I challenge
i think the greens could have won freo if the liberals had not manned booths or even put a real bad canditate like they did in kwinana an 18 yr old student
if labor dont form government mcginty will call it quits mabye libs sould not run a candidate that would be very intresting
No 338
I would agree.
Btw…”hypocrisy” is the correct spelling
its always for emphasis
As I suggested earlier , clearly voters ar not happy enough with either Party to give them a strong first pref overal % , so messages ar there both ways
Nite all
an intresting result is central wheatbelt bredon grylls had a 5.4 percent swing against him if that does not say somthing about going with labor i dont no what will and i no for a fact the librals spent nothing liek they did last time to win it somthing in the hundered thousand figure was spent and they ran a high profile candidate hardly made a dent 1.6 in merredin and then to compare with other nats you have grant woodhams who had a 6% swing in a seat which the liberals have had since it they were founded
Ehh, Grylls still has a enormous margin: 20.6%. The ’swing’ is probably due to the result being Nat/ALP on the redistributed figures, and Nat/Lib after the actual election… note on the ABC site, how Grylls has a 5.4% swing against him, but the Lib has a ’swing’ of 29.4%, up from nothing. It’ll be just a different flow of preferences caused by a different candidate running second, that’s all.
Speaking of which, I notice the ABC gives Terry Waldron a margin of 35.4% vs ALP. Rather odd… the other country seats are done as Nat/Lib. The margin will still be enormous either way.
labor should try and settle with the Nats aasap, they need them in the upper house as well as the lower house.
labor should try and settle with the Nats asap, they need them in the upper house as well as the lower house.
So the assumption is that today’s counting will favour the Liberals and Labor will lose the lead in a few seats?
Peter Van O was on News Radio this morning saying the ALP needs to win 3 out of the 5 doubtful seats and can form a minority govt with two ALP leaning independents. A scenario that he believed was a reasonable chance.
He also said the Libs weren’t confident of getting the same 52/48 benefit from postal and absentee votes, and that they may well break Labor’s way.
Either way, an ALP minority or a Lib minority, makes it hard to govern. Just ask Nick Greiner, although I think Bracks did OK with it in his first term.
Just as aside. Joe Hockey was on Meet the Press yesterday, and was making it up as he was going along. He claimed the Coalition had a swing to it at the last Federal election in WA. Not so, Joe.
In 2004 the ALP achieved 44.6% TPP, and in 2007 it achieved 46.7%. A swing away from the Coalition of 2.1%. Tsk, tsk, tsk, Joe!
William,
Any chance you could clarify your “Labor needs four out of five doubtfuls” versus Van Olsen’s “three out of five”?
Van Olsen was counting two Labor-leaning independents (Kwinana, Kalgoorlie) plus 25 Labor definites, leaving them three short.
25 Labor definites are below but maybe you have one of these out?
Armadale
Balcatta
Bassendean
Belmont
Cannington
Cockburn
Fremantle
Girrawheen
Gosnells
Joondalup
Kimberley
Mandurah
Maylands
Midland
Mindarie
Morley
Nollamara
North West
Perth
Pilbara
Rockingham
Victoria Park
Warnbro
West Swan
Willagee
Morley is out
Ron
You are missing a fairly fundamental point. The Greens aim to WIN seats, to change legislation…
A party is crap because in a preferential voting system the vote flows to a completely different party with completely different policies in boxes numbered by the voter…?
If the Greens agreed wholeheartedly with Labor, they wouldn’t preference Labor, they’d BE Labor. On the subject of hypocrisy, it might be more accurate to fulminate at Carps, who voted for uranium mining at the national ALP conference.
Uranium mining and Nukes are but one issue. The Greens are not a single issue party, and choices have to be made to deliver the best outcome possible. If anti-nuke, anti-uranium is an issue a voter is passionate about, they’ll know that the Greens have the strongest policies, and they’ll know to preference the ALP. If that’s your issue and you’re in South Australia, you’re kinda stuffed for choice as to where you number your boxes after the Greens.
As an example, The Greens could not actively preference a climate-change denying ALP candidate over a Liberal with a strong record in social justice, for fear of alienating their base. Nor can they can preference a party that has a record and policy platform that the Greens base finds abhorrent.
If the Greens won Freo, it would be on Liberal preference flow. And not because of some shared ideology or arrangement.
The point is, the vote will always go somewhere other than the Greens believe it should, until they start winning seats.
Thanks L.
I wouldn’t count on Morley being out yet. A mentioned by William in other thread, Peter Kennedy reported Labor “optimists” are not ruling Morley out. There is still a load of absentee and postal votes to come in, and I believe the Lib and D’Orazio won’t do anywhere nearly as well as Whitby.
325
southernboy Says:
September 8th, 2008 at 3:24 am
i thought she was just a unoin drop in like rodger cook
Let’s put paid this ‘union dropin’ horseshit.
Apart from the idiotic notion that union officials don’t know anything about ordinary people (I don’t know what you think union officials do all day, but the fact is they talk to ordinary people all day long about being shafted by their employers, and they do things like assist people who are struggling for money to the extent that they can’t affor to put petrol in the car to get to work.)
Apart from the fact that unions don’t ‘drop in’ candidates -they preselect them by using their votes within the party, legitimately held (no matter what you think of that) and they preselect active party members.
Both Janine and Roger have been active members of the ALP for at least 20 years. Roger has been president of the state party (an unpaid position) as well as all the usual activities like working on campaigns and being active in branches. Janine has likewise been an active branch member and run campaigns etc.
Janine, Chris Tallentire in Gosnells and Lisa Baker in Maylands all romped it home in safe labor seats. Janine’s the only one of those 3 who didn’t need a waive from State Exec to get preselected because she wasn’t a member of the party already.
Kobelke, a Minister in a safe seat, got a belting.
Carp’s picks got thumped. (Cook, Freeman, Baker and Tallentire were all left-endorsed candidates – they were not Carps’ picks).
Let’s face it the electorates were all over the place due to local factors, independents and the vagaries of preferences. Where those factors weren’t present, the labor vote held. Giving labor a range of new MP’s with credibility (and some even have vaginas, unlike the Libs).
Any ALP supporters here with 2 brain cells to rub together will be hoping they don’t form government with the Nats
It is electoral SUICIDE…why sell out your base (the city) to the tune of 2.6 BILLION in the next 4 years for a pack of inbred banjo-twanging economic illiterates who got 4% of the vote, hate you anyway and will only let you govern when they feel like it?
How do you think the elctorate will react when they are told that Carpenter and Grylls want to take away their school upgrades, stadiums and rail lines for a fookin’ road to Port Hedland or some such ridiculous boondoggle?
Tell the Nats to get stuffed, let the Libs wear the oppobrium from the sell-out of the city and then watch Barnett try to govern with a one seat majority, a coalition of agrarian socialists, certifiable independents and the Dalkeith Mafia, and Buswell and the Courts stalking him for a chance to slip the knife. All the while one by-election from oblivion.
Meanwhile, clean out the Caucus, re-generate, move on from Carps and his merry band of incompetent fools and take bake government in four years.
Whoever does the deal with the Nats will lose in 2012 – guaranteed.