Comments on: EMRS: Labor 40, Liberal 35 in Tasmania

By: Socrates

Socrates — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 05:04:48 +0000

Gunns has just sold a large chunk of its assett bsae to pay back debt ($175m for forests in SA and VIC). Note that this does NOT get them the funds for the pulp mill – it just reduces their current debt. They still have no one in sight willing to fund the mill.
http://news.smh.com.au/business/gunns-sells-softwood-forests-for-175m-20081125-6gsy.html

This makes clear that Gunns are the ABC Learning of Forstry. First the over-expansion…

By: Kevin Bonham

Kevin Bonham — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:04:21 +0000

The pulp mill has never looked like being built to me at any stage. Tassie could do with downstream processing but Gunns lack the smarts for a project of the scale of the current proposal. Bartlett would do well to have it quietly put out of its misery or better still get the feds to do it.

I have an article up about the EMRS poll on Tasmanian Times now (first cab off the rank at http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/C64/). (For the benefit of interstate readers, the gentleman pictured is our new Premier and not me!)

By: Socrates

Socrates — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:41:43 +0000

Well at the risk of saying I told you so, it looks like Gunn’s policy of stubbornly trying to ram thorugh their pulp mill proposal, which was no better in economic terms than it was in environmental impact, is about to bring them undone. Their share price is tanking. I’d say some of their loans have come due and they may not have the cash:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/19/2423772.htm?section=justin

By: Kevin Bonham

Kevin Bonham — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:17:38 +0000

I’m actually not sure EMRS’s state polls have got better in recent years. For one thing they still have ridiculously high levels of undecided vote that very few other polls in the country have. They’ve had years to find out why this is the case and fix it but they haven’t done it.

Secondly they seem to be stressing the Preferred Premier score rather than polling and releasing leader approval ratings which are generally considered more relevant. Not that the media can tell the difference with PP scores frequently being reported as approval ratings or compared with past approval ratings.

Thirdly their polling was far more useless predictively in the leadup to the 2006 election than it was in the leadup to the 2002 one. Their only poll that was anywhere near the mark was the one just before the election and even it overestimated the Green vote.

The one thing I will give EMRS credit for is that they have stopped releasing 200-vote electorate breakdowns, which were extremely unreliable because of their high MOE on top of the undecided-voter problem, and which were leading to all kinds of inaccurate projections being released.

I dearly wish Morgan would start polling in Tasmania again but they have not done so for ages.

I think the Greens do have better chances of making the balance of power work if they get it this time around as Nick McKim appears to be their most pragmatic leader so far. That said, the obstacles to it working for them are considerable; I discussed some of those a few years back at http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/why-minority-government-matters/. Rereading that in light of the departure of old forest-war warriors Lennon and Putt (who I don’t think could have ever worked together), I still think there is a challenge for the Greens – how to deliver stable partnerships and still get enough continuing progress on their agenda to keep their own voters happy.

By: Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:27:23 +0000

Local government is not the same as a Parliament, but the Brisbane City Council had something roughly approaching a Grand Coalition between Labor and Liberal between 2004 and 2008. Both parties had spots in the Civic Cabinet, with the Mayor being a Liberal and the Deputy Mayor being Labor. There were no independent or third party Councillors to form an opposition, although a Liberal Councillor held the title of opposition leader. This only happened because the Mayopr is elected separately and voters chose a Liberal Mayor but an overall Council with a Labor majority. It couldn’t happen in a Parliamentary situation. It was all a bit messy in any case and didn’t work out well for Labor at all, as they got thumped at the subsequent poll.

In any case, I think party politics in Australia is far too rigid for there to be much chance of it happening in state or federal parliaments – even in Tasmania. Given Tasmania’s unique system, I guess it’s remotely possible that one major party might agree to support the other in a minority governent if they both decided it was unacceptable to work with the Greens. I don’t see why they would though – they have both run minority govenrments with Green support in the past (even though neither episode turned out very happily) and the Greens in Tasmania aren’t showing any signs of being overly intransigent.

By: filthmachine

filthmachine — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:41:39 +0000

Tassie doesn’t need a Laboral government (there already is one in major policy terms), or a hung parliament. It needs a Green government. Not because of the Greens themselves being able to govern, but because it is the only way the ALP and Liberal parties will clean out their house – and to get a full inquiry into the last 30 years of governance. If criminal action results from that inquiry, so be it.
And a Green government wouldn’t be able to do anything particularly radical, with the traditionally conservative Legislative Council able to block anything and not face the people.

As for EMRS, they have got better in recent years – but that’s a bit like Tassie’s economy; improved off an embarrassingly low position.

By: Kevin Bonham

Kevin Bonham — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:29:30 +0000

Post 11 looks exactly like so many others that were being written in the leadup to the 2006 election when virtually everyone was certain a hung parliament would occur; it didn’t.

While it is a likely result, jumping to the conclusion that it will definitely happen in 2010 is again premature. I think much will depend on the condition of the Tasmanian economy at that time.

By: J-D

J-D — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:41:36 +0000

I agree. It was ‘merely corroborative detail, intended to give artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative’.

Or something like that.

By: Adam in Canberra

Adam in Canberra — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:37:49 +0000

I think that qualifies as “almost never.”

By: J-D

J-D — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:49:22 +0000

bob1234 @ 9

What bizarre statements being made in here… since when has the non-Labor left won lower house seats from 1910 onward? Almost never?

Fred Paterson elected as a Communist for Bowen at the Queensland State elections of 1944 and 1947; Michael Organ elected as a Green for Cunningham at the Federal by-election of 2002.

There have also been several members elected as ‘Independent Labor’ or for various Labor splinter parties, but they are not so unambiguously ‘non-Labor’.