The latest bi-monthly Newspoll survey of NSW state voting intention shows a slight recovery for Labor from the disastrous November-December result, while still pointing to a Coalition landslide. Labor’s primary vote is up four points from the last survey’s record low 26 per cent, while the Coalition is down one point to 42 per cent. The Coalition’s two-party lead has moderated from 59-41 to 56-44. Nathan Rees has regained the lead over Barry O’Farrell as preferred premier, leading 34-29 after trailing 30-33 last time (although what really stands out is that 37 per cent are uncommitted). Rees’ approval rating is up three points to 37 per cent, and his disapproval is down five to 42 per cent. O’Farrell’s ratings are said to be “steady”.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
128 Comments
56-44 is still good for the Coalition. If Rees were to call an election now, Labor would lose 35 seats to the Coalition. If Joe Hockey is NSW Liberal leader, I predict Labor would lose 40 seats. It just gets better for the Coalition.
How embarrassing for Labor. The only way they possibly turn it around is if those rumours of Tony Abbot leaving the Federal Parliament to become NSW leader came true.
#1
Why on earth would you want Hockey to come in and cause destabilisation within the party? Why draw attention to yourself when the public’s focus is squarely on Labor?
http://www.smh.com.au/national/rees-accused-over-family-ties-to-his-embattled-minister-20090302-8mef.html
Don’t worry Labor has decided that if there is good news for Rees, they are going to leak something to damage him. Labor is trying to self destruct before the next election
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25129239-5001021,00.html
Wow these clowns are really good, the Liberals do not have to attack labor, Labor is already doing a good job of it
labor is stuffed but any thoughts on the PP and Rees’ approval turnaround
I don’t think it’s unusual for even unpopular governments to win the preferred premier. Antony Green often reminds us of that one!
Possibly the public accept that the mess is not Rees’ fault personally, even though they want to give the government a huge kicking.
Yes, PP doesn’t mena much for Rees but watch out Fatty O’Barrel. The last thing that the NSW coalition needs is for those polss to keep rising.
Next NSW Premeier may even be Pru Goward?
I think the real question is whether O’Farrell will lead the Libs to the next election.
A drover’s dog’s tick would defeat Labor and the RW of the Libs know it. Barry O is performing poorly (PP numbers against Rees are woeful under the circumstances) but would still win. Throw in any other leader and the polls would not see any reduction in the Libs big lead.
Exactly two years to the next election – O’Farrell will not last the distance. The murmurings will start later this year as the RW gets behind one of its own.
Another Debnam would certainly spice things up!
There’s an unofficial line in the sand in a premier/PMs approval rating. When it gets below 50%, he/she is likely to lose the next election. Rees is only 37%, well within the losing category.
I was asking about Our old mate Nostradamus recently and his whereabouts. With a poll like this, one eyed logic would dictate the following,
“Clearly the trend is back to the Govt up from 41 TPP to 44 TPP, no doubt now that the movement is the Govt’s way. By the time of the election it will be ALP 53 LNP 47, a comfortable win.”
I can’t blame the NSW voters. Rees is just a symptom of the problem, not the cause. But he hasn’t turned out to be the solution either. They don’t deserve to win.
#9
Potential Liberal leadership is one thing that could take the gloss of the Libs. I don’t think it will cost them government, but might make it closer than it should be. It will be interesting to see whether Rees and co try to talk this up in the coming months.
#11
I wonder if any rusted on Labor types would even bother trying to spin for the NSW government anymore.
Graphic here:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/3marnewspoll.jpg
Interesting, when the article said Labor’s increase was at the loss of minors and independents, I presumed The Greens would have been down, but they’re up 1 point.
I even think the 2PP figure is inflated for Labor, as they won’t necessarily be able to count on Greens preferences.
Two years to go. I believe Labor will lose the next election and deserve to do so but, as the saying goes, a week is a long time in politics. It could be closer than we think yet.
The question for Labor is whether they can restrict their losses to a point where they are a competitive force at the next election in 2014. In 1988 they just managed this and held seats like Waverley, Drummoyne, Kogarah and Ashfield, in 2010 it will similar seats that make the difference between a bad loss and a total disaster. The fact that the core left vote of 40% is now divided between Labor & the Greens (unlike 1988) makes this more difficult. Is Nathan Rees where Anna Bligh will be 2 years from now?
as a Labor supporter I am of course pleased by this result. I don’t think that the Libs will take anything great away from it, the last one showed that the electorate was no longer listening to Labor (helped by the disgracefully biased media coverage I might say) this one indicates that they are starting to put that behind them and listen to us again. It also doesn’t bode well for O’Farell. to come second to Rees after the amount of garbage put on him by the media and toga party commentators on the radio can’t make him feel secure. The Labor government has a lot of capacity now to build up some momentum, this is a great start.
-yes, we would still loose the election if held this Saturday.
Eliis – Labor -I am pleased with the result, I don’t think that the Libs will take anything great away from it
Umm Labor’s vote is 30%, if the election was held today, Labor might not get 20 seats. The Liberal might control both houses of parliament based on this and might have a lower house Margin of 25-30.
That is a very good spin on the result as being great for Labor and bad for Liberal.
The two-party-preferred is meaningless when 28% are voting for a minor party/independent. The Greens are now sitting on 15%, which is now their highest vote in, like, forever. They have polled 13%+ at every poll since the beginning of 2008, with the exception of the first poll after Nathan Rees took over.
The Coalition is still on 42%, with the ALP still on a paltry 30%.
And yes, nearly every Preferred Premier/PM poll puts the incumbent ahead, even when they are clearly headed for electoral defeat. It’s pretty meaningless.
Oh, and look at Queensland, where the Greens are on the verge of exhausting statewide. And NSW is much worse than Queensland. If 12-13% vote Green (assuming that we’ll lose a bit off the top) and most of them exhaust the ALP will be devestated.
Someone can correct me if I’m wrong – but the interesting thing is that The Greens in Queensland are peeved at the government over the Traveston Dam and that’s the biggest factor when it comes to preference negotiations. In NSW, it’s not an environmental issue but a general level of antipathy towards Labor over their attempts at privatisation, planning law changes, lack of investment and general incompetence.
I think the 2PP figure is still meaningful, so long as the pollsters model it correctly. i.e. That they take into account realise that a large % of preferences will exhaust.
No matter how high their primary vote, the Greens are unlikely to win any seats, and they only run second in the really safe seats. So for the most part we’re only concerned with where their preferences go.
The key marginals in Sydney and the Central Coast will still be straightforward two party contests.
The most interesting aspect of the poll is that Labor’s decline may have bottomed and that there are signs of a revival. This is bad news for the Libs who have had all the pundits and commentators cheering them on for yonks.
I accept that trends are the most important thing for polls and that 56/44 is still a good result. However, it will be interesting to see if Labor can make further inroads at the next poll and at what stage do the Libs start to feel that the certainty of power may not be certain and how they then react.
Normally it’s based on preference flows at the last election. I don’t believe Greens preferences will flow to Labor as comfortably as last time.
Am I missing something, or would an average swing of 6% (as indicated by this poll) demolish Labor in Balmain?
The moment this is written the poll becomes meaningless. It isn’t being held today or tomorrow or next week. It may prove to be the case in two year’s time, who knows, but you cannot extrapolate from this poll what is going to happen 24 months down the track.
My working assumption has been that the Greens are unlikely to win any seats in NSW when they’re starved of Liberal preferences. But looking it up, Balmain 3.75%. I’ll concede it probably would be under threat.
Garry Bruce
Why have opinion polls then, just take a poll on the date of the election
It is an indication of how happy/unhappy people in a state are at the government and whether the government need to lift their act.
I think the people of NSW had spoken loudly, Labor is terminal in NSW, they are just fighting to see who will led the sinking ship in 2 years, whether it is Rees, Tebbett – who would lose her seat based on the poll, or Robertson.
They have ran the state broke, Health, Roads, Infrastructure are a mess. You cannot find a group of more incompetant people to run a state.
It looks like the greens may win three Legislative Council seats at the next election bringing their total to five because the quota is 13.64. Also if they get one or possibly more Legislative Assembly seats then they can ask questions of the majority of the government to whom they cannot at the moment as well as they are more likely to get media coverage for it. What are the requirements for parliamentary party status in NSW.
Agreed. I didn’t question this aspect of the poll. Read what I said.
You left out some important words in your sentence – “It is an indication of how happy/unhappy people in a state are at the government AT THAT TIME OF THE POLITICAL CYCLE and whether the government need to lift their act.
Geoff Robinson @17
The election is due in 2011, not 2010, and the one after is due in 2015, not 2014.
Dyno just don’t try and use the poll as a definite indication as what will happen in 24 months time. Surely that is a reasonable position to take.
Sorry, I meant Dovif.
The Liberals didn’t direct preference the Greens last time either – those margins are where they got all by themselves. With the swing that’s gonna happen to NSW Labor, Balmain and Marrickville are probably gone no matter what the Libs do; if the the Libs decide to change their 2007 policy and preference the Greens, well… they could be looking at a few more than that.
The whole state had gone to hell in a handbasket.I’m sure The Liberal party will just finish what labor started and stuff the place up completely.They will do this easily as they have not one policy worth a bumper ,just like Labor.I’d nearly vote for anyone even the east portland Billygoat ballbag dessicators party rather than vote for the major parties
Ellis @ 18. I disagree. There is now no capacity for this NSW ALP government to ‘build up some momentum’. The capacity will, of course, return in time but it will have to be in opposition. Further, you had better hope the ‘disaster’ scenario to which Geoff Robinson refers @ 17, does not come to be; otherwise, the time for the ALP to enliven some capacity might take longer than you wish.
David,
Labor has a war chest of capital expenditure projects that will start to roll out real soon. Spending money in local areas on things like kindergartens, schools, roads and sporting grounds. I doubt Labor will die wondering if they spent enough money to encourage people to vote for them.
GG @ 37 That is a fair point about the “war chest” and I acknowledge that if effectively implemented (that is, both administratively and politically), it gives the ALP some chance of averting the ‘disaster’ scenario.
Gary Bruce
Do you know what is asked in a opinion poll? if an election is held today, which side of politics would you vote for?
See this from Oz, if you do not understand
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/3marnewspoll.jpg
It is the best current guide for voter intention at the moment. So I am using the exact same word as an opinion poll, which you do not seem to comprehend
Yes the opinion poll could ask, what are your intention to vote in 24 months time, but since we do not know what will happen in 24 months time, that would just be moronic.
As for the ALP could improve in the next 24 months, well they have had 14 years of doing nothing, dispite the budget doubling and Rees has busily cut back spending at the start of a recession, what make anyone think they have any money to spend on capital project.
There was a recent artical that they have not even done budgets for the North West rail line, that was proposed 12 years ago. What make anyone think this will change?
To me, these polls are reflective of polls signalling the end of the Howard Government. Something COULD change, but it’s unlikely to.
What in the hell do you think I’ve been arguing?
For heaven sake Dovif let me repeat. Agreed. I didn’t question this aspect of the poll. It’s the interpretation that this will necessarily apply in two year’s time placed on it by others I question. As I said earlier I believe Labor will lose the next election and deserve to do so but, as the saying goes, a week is a long time in politics. It could be closer than we think yet.
Agreed, so let’s not even go there.
In conclusion, let me repeat, let’s just not try and use the poll as an indication as what will happen in 24 months time. Surely that is a reasonable position to take.
It’s true that the Greens have gotten to where they are in Balmain and Marrickville without Liberal preferences, unlike in Sydney federal, Grayndler, Melbourne federal, state Melbourne, Richmond, Northcote, Brunswick and Fremantle state.
But while Liberal preferences might seal Balmain and Marrickville and rack up the margins, there isn’t really a clear next contender. Seats like Keira, Coogee, Blue Mountains, Ballina and Heffron are all possible contenders, but none of them are such “perfect storms” as the two inner-city seats.
LOL @ ellis.
Mate, you must be living in the basement of ALP Headquarters at Sussex Street. They have utterly ruined NSW and are terminal, deservedly so.
I would be quite happy if the ALP retained just 10 seats in the lower house.
No 3
I agree. It makes no sense for Abbott or Hockey to cause instability in NSW. The NSW Liberals already have a commanding lead in the polls, thus any upheaval or show of disunity would be disastrous and would be a recipe for 4 more years in opposition.
NSW Labor must go.
#37
“Labor has a war chest of capital expenditure projects that will start to roll out real soon. Spending money in local areas on things like kindergartens, schools, roads and sporting grounds. I doubt Labor will die wondering if they spent enough money to encourage people to vote for them”
In theory, yes. In practise the NSW government has made a mess of many capital works projects, particularly road and rail infrastructure. M5 East, X-city tunnel, Lane Cove, Epping-Chatswood, Clearways, new ticketing system, on again/off again M4 East, on again/off again NW and SW rail, light rail and metro lines…..
Just too many things have been dumped, delayed, done half-arsed or otherwise fiddled with. I doubt they’ll start impoving after 16 years not getting it right. If these things were finally implemented the attitude from a tired and cynical electorate would be “About bloody time!” rather than “Wow what a visionary government!”
#42
In the current climate Coogee and BM would probably be won by the Liberals. At the very least, the Liberal vote would be too high for the Greens to finish second.
Keira is a bit of a dark horse for a Greens win in 2011. Northern Wollongong/Illawarra is becoming very good territory for them, especially with Labor on the nose.
So you don’t believe in strong oppositions then. Oh yeah, what am I thinking, you support a weak Federal opposition.
GP,
“Labor must go”.
The last person to resort to such hysterical humbug was John Hewson in 1993. And, that ended well didn’t it!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/03/2506486.htm
oops wrong thread!
dovif you might want to consider that other’s opinions are just as valid as yours. Even if those such as mine and yours come starkly from one side of the political spectrum. yes it is good for Labor and yes, there is time for Labor to recover. this is a fact. May be see it in comparison to what has gone before.
Importantly, the preferred premier stat can be seen as a barometer as to how much attention people are paying to the party leader, how much press they are getting (not an exact test but an indication). IUt is good news for my side of politics that the people of NSW are starting to pay attention to the good stories and work of the government. you may disagree, fine, but the stats show progress and that can’t be argued with. two years is a millennium in politics, and NSW likes the left side of politics.
whilst i accept the comments about approval and PPM in general, the question is, why have both turned in Rees’s favour since the last poll???
While Nathan Rees may be somewhat more popular than he was in Nov-Dec, the fact remains that the Labor party brand is absolutely on the nose in NSW. Some of the core vote has returned to Labor; that’s all that’s happened. Labor would need at least high 30’s to be in an election-winning position, and I certainly can’t see that happening.
Yeah, true. I wouldn’t write them off, though, considering they’re doing it the hard way. Back in 1988 there were a few WTF?! results like independents winning in the Hunter Valley… the Greens being bigger now than 20 years ago, you’d have to expect some unexpected results like that for them, although I don’t know NSW enough to say where.
(Expected unexpected results? Sheesh, I sound like Donald Rumsfeld tonight.)
And anyway… c’mon, Sydney boy. Shouldn’t you be cheering on yer own mob to be the first state with a lower house (well, single-member district) Greens MP? We may just beat you and the Vics if that by-election happens, y’know.
No 51
Ellis, please name a good story of this government. Its entire time in office has been one of gross atrocity and stupidity.
Well, they managed to not stuff up the Olympics way back when. They probably couldn’t organise an under 13’s footy carnival these days, but I guess that supports the argument that every govt has two terms in it.
ellis
the figures are 44-56, there is no way to spin the truth to say that is anything but an horrendeous result for the NSW ALP.
And this poll is assuming the greens wants to have anything to associate with this government or preference this incompetant government like the next election. I think it is more likely that the green draw up 6-7 seats and attack the ALP over them.
If the Greens does not preference the ALP, the 2PP is probably closer to 40-60.
I also think the Federal poll of 40.5-59.5 is horrible for the Lberals, if it improved to 44-56, it is just slightly less horrible, I would not call it a great result for the Liberals
Reminds me a bit of when Howard was going down in 2007: after a series of horrendous polls there’d be one that wasn’t quite as terrible, like 45-55. This would then be spun as “Howard’s back” and “Rudd no certainty” despite the fact that 45-55 is a thrashing. 44-56 only looks decent because it’s not as bad as the previous poll. That’s one good thing about hitting the bottom, I guess…the only way is up!
Just so I’m not misunderstood here let me say again I believe Labor will lose the next election and deserve to do so but we will not know whether this poll is a dead cat bounce or not until the next poll will we?
Andrew at 52
All that really has occurred is that Rees and his government have gone a few weeks without a really major stuff up. Although I should quickly add that that may not be especially relevant – aren’t these Newspolls taken over the preceding quarter?
In any case, I am sure there are plenty of opportunities to bugger things up over the next little while. The prisons issue may be bubbling up. Tripodi is still running around doing whatever it is he does. Transport is a total joke (trains, ferries, roads, even the pathetic new overseas passenger terminal), and Rudd’s $$$ can’t be expected to fix it. There are further risks around schools – particularly in relation to the allocation of the Rudd $$. It’s so fraught with risk that the Canberra bureaucrats should be told to keep a very close eye on things, to save the NSW government from itself. Hospitals and health care can flare up at any time. Not to mention the massive opportunities for the the broader planning area to cause ministerial headaches, following the reversal of Sartor’s reforms. Then there’s the electricity “reforms”…
On these polling figures the Nationals should be able to pick up Bathurst, Cessnock and Monaro from Labor and regain the Labor preferenced inspired seats of Northern Tablelands, Tamworth, Port Macquarie and Dubbo.
Paul Nash, you’re full of crap. Labor didn’t even run in Port Macquarie.
Dubbo and Tamworth would be serious possibilities- any general rise in the Coalition vote could/should get the nats over the line (similar to what happened in Manly and Pittwater in ‘07).
Don’t know about the new guy in Port Macquarie but Tablelands looks very safe for the Independent.
Yes they did at the last NEW SOUTH WALES General Election in March 2007 thats what i’m comparing not the by-elections that may have happened subsquently.
The independent in Northern Tablelands is also the speaker of the Legislative Assembly so he is a Labor mate and with Labor on the nose his seat is certain to fall back to the Nationals.
Without preferences, the Lib/Nat coalition wouldn’t exist. Do some research in to preferential voting. With first past the post voting Labor would dominate your arse.
LOL in 2007 the Independent won with 67% of the PRIMARY vote.
Give me another one Labor has scrapped in with Greens, Democrats and rag tag bunch of parties from socialist alliance to Nuclear Disarmament party over the years. Study the 1990 Federal Election results and you will know the truth Bob and don’t use such crass language.
Port Macquarie may have shown some odd results recently but it was held by prominent republican and minister in the Fahey Government Wendy Machin for the Nationals for many years and in the fullness of time this will be the case again.
The Democrats used to split 50/50 to the major parties so don’t give me that rubbish.
Shall we even bother going back to the DLP in the 50s and 60s?
Prior to the Democrat emergence in 1977, the Labor primary vote was practically it’s two-party vote. Politics used to be Labor v the rest. The conservatives introduced preferential voting to stop the conservative vote being split between the Lib/Nats. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swan_by-election,_1918
Yeah go have a cry when preferences don’t go your way, but your side has happily taken them to win for the past century.
I felt like telling you it’s not worth debating with such stupidity, but hey, pot kettle.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2004/guide/minorprefs.htm
So the Democrats aren’t a Labor preference boat as you might claim. And those who do preference Labor would have voted Labor without the Democrat choice anyway.
How about blaming the policies and politics of your party, rather than silly preferences, for having been in opposition for 13 years? That’s the problem with your side. The reason you’re in opposition is everyone elses fault rather than yours. Stand up and take some responsibility for once.
Oh, and the only times during 1996-2007 that the Liberal Party got a higher nationwide primary vote was 1996 and 2004. Labor got a higher primary in 1998, 2001, and 2007.
Not to mention prior to that, a higher primary vote in every single election going back to 1966.
And prior to 1966, it was 1934.
If O’Farrell stays Opposition Leader until 2011, don’t write off Labor’s chances of falling over the line. “Fatty O’Farrell” is the best thing Labor in this state has going for it.
If the Libs installed Mike Baird in the top job, they’d win the next election in a canter.
If Andrew Stoner was elevated to the Opposition Leaders position they’d win with an even wider margin.
Paul Nash, good idea you dropped your nonsensical argument over preferences. Now maybe you’ll realise how wrong you are.
The prospect of an O’Farrell/Stoner team running N.S.W is incentive enough to keep me voting Labor.
Bob1234
You’re overlooking the fairly obvious point that if we did have first past the post here, there probably wouldn’t be two competing conservative parties. You’d have one Tory party like they do in the UK.
Bob 1234 said
Oh, and the only times during 1996-2007 that the Liberal Party got a higher nationwide primary vote was 1996 and 2004. Labor got a higher primary in 1998, 2001, and 2007.
Not to mention prior to that, a higher primary vote in every single election going back to 1966.
That is a little misleading, considering that Liberals do not contest country seats held by the national, obviously they are unlikely to win a primary vote contest.
Evan14 – If a 3 legged dog was the leader of the Liberals, ALP will still lose
In the federal campaign, the ALP would not have won the following seats, if it was first past the post. In each of those seats Liberal/National vote was higher than the ALP, who rely on Green preferences to win the seats.
Bass, Benelong, Braddon, Corangamite, Deakin, Hasluck, Page, Robertson, Soloman
Flynn, Forde was 3 corner where the lib + Nat had the higher vote
Optional preferential voting would seem to benefits Lib/Nat while full distribution benefits the ALP. I think both system are as good as each other.
The Country Party came in and divided the vote, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swan_by-election,_1918
There’s no evidence to say they would have merged. Australia is far larger than the UK with much more of a “rural” area.
If we have first past the post I would have voted Labor, not Green.
And i’m sure many others would too.
#81
If having two competing parties consistently disadvantaged the conservatives, they’d take action to stop it. That’s obvious, surely? If we had FPP here, they’d either have merged by now or agreed not to compete directly against each other (no 3 cornered contests). It’s the only way they would have ever won government.
They wouldn’t just sit there and let themselves be defeated over and over again because they didn’t change.
Bob1234
If it is optional preferential voting, some people might not. A lot of Green voter would not have voted 1 labor, there would be about 8-9% according to the Green. Whether the Greens and the ALP would merge would be the other option
In Qld they did merge to stop the 3 corners, they merged, and Federally you could argue that they did too, The Coalition would probably have won Flynn and Forde if they were not 3 cornered
The Country Party was first led by William McWilliams. He wanted them to be a balance of power party, looking out for rural interests. They took seats off Labor too. They target particular seats. If FPP wasn’t brought in i’m sure conservative politics would have still survived. Would have just meant a bit of pride swallowed by the Nationalists and not contest seats they thought the Country Party would win.
The point though, is that the conservatives introduced preferential voting to accommodate the Country Party and not lose seats to Labor. And now in the modern day where parties to the left of the major parties exist and survive, with preferences from a slight to a strong majority going to Labor, the conservatives now scream and cry that this system of voting is crap and advantages Labor. It only began to advantage Labor from the time of the Democrats in the late 1970s. Prior to that, it was Labor v the rest, Labor’s primary vote was practically it’s two-party vote.
8-9% of Green voters don’t preference in OPV systems? That’s not very much. In the house of reps in 2007, the Greens got 7.8% of the vote. In OPV, that’s around 7% of the vote that still gets distributed.
For a start i wish people would stop peddling this nonsense of two conservative parties its two non-labor parties one is Liberal (LIBERAL PARTY) similar to the one that once was strong in the United Kingdom and one is Conservative (NATIONAL PARTY) Which has similar aspirations as the Republican Party GOP in the United States.
The Liberal Party houses Liberals and Conservatives, go back and study the merging of MPs of Liberal and Conservative leanings, who formed the Fusion, aka Commonwealth Liberal Party in 1909. It was ALP v CLP until 1916 when some of the pro-conscriptionist ALPers merged with the CLP to become the Nationalists. The Country Party formed in 1920, by rural farmers. They were agrarian socialists. Your analogy is completely and utterly incorrect.
“The point though, is that the conservatives introduced preferential voting to accommodate the Country Party and not lose seats to Labor”
And you could argue OPV was introduced to maximise the splitting of the conservative vote. Now, in an opposite scenario to CPV, this is working against Labor due to the strength of the Greens.
Partisan bulldust aside, I personally prefer OPV as it allows voters to refuse both major parties- or any minor party- if they want. It also helps limit the impact of the party machines and their preferencing ‘deals’.
A how to vote card is a suggestion. People can vote for who they want.
MDM,
Sure, the Greens not preferencing Labor might deliver a LNP government with all the outlook of Paul Nash but without his charm, logic and committment to Green causes.
Would have been fascinating to see if Menzies managed to remain PM for so long if we had OPV. I bet many DLP votes would have been exhausted.
He’s certainly very….”passionate”.
#93
Well, the DLP generally cut into the ALP primary vote, so wouldn’t that have made it easier for the Liberals to win under OPV in any case? A real close one like 1961 might have been different, I concede.
In addition, if there was FPP or OPV, would the DLP have even been a major force? People who thought the ALP was too left-wing may have been more likely to have voted Liberal directly.
Hey, so, how’s NSW?
(On topic?)
DLP preferences overwhelmingly went to the coalition. With OPV, i’m sure many would have exhausted.
A basket case.
“Hey, so, how’s NSW?”
Much worse than at the 2007 election, apparently…..
Here we go again, extrapolating this poll onto the election in 2011. Useless exercise. A week is a long time in politics, two years an eternity.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/nsw/2007/results/ntab.htm
Richard Torbay IND 32,615 72.7 +8.8
I think he’ll be safe. That’s his primary vote too. The Nats only have outside chances of picking up one or two independent seats and that’s all.
And Steve Whan is a popular local member who I expect to hold Monaro. Cessnock and Bathurst are solid Labor towns.
Phil at 101
Monaro, Cessnock and Bathurst are all seats where the Coalition would probably do better by running a Liberal. Compare the Fed seats of Eden-Monaro and Macquarie. They wouldn’t run a Nat in such seats in a pink fit.
Quite why they run a Nat in Fitzgibbon’s seat of Hunter is a bit beyond me. Basically, that seat has grape growing, coal mining and horse stud farms, with several large towns. Very little of the population in that seat lives in what you might call traditional hayseed country.
In any event, I fully expect that in 2011 “solid” ALP seats will be crossing over, so to speak.
Two stories on the ABC about two young people in court.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/04/2507446.htm?section=justin
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/03/04/2507298.htm?section=justin
Greg Smith the liberal shadow attorney general was very upset over one.
Which one upset the sensitivities of Greg?
Never underestimate the abilities of the liberal party.
I have figured out why the ALP vote went up over Christmas.
Since the Parliament did not sit for 3 months, that means there was less chance for a NSW ALP patented stuff up. It only took them 1 day to get back into it.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25140426-5001021,00.html
I guess if you do as little as the NSW ALP, you like to sleep too…… he really was reading his notes …. too bad the folder is closed, maybe he wrote in black ink on a black folder
Dovif, if that is the worst crime they committ between now and the election they may stand a chance of avoiding a complete wipeout. How bloody petty of the Daily Pornograph.
Gary
If I was found asleep at my work, I would be fired.
These people only work about 100 days a year, the least we could ask them for is to stay awake for those days.
It might not be hugh, but it speaks volume about how arrogant and out of touch some politicians are. It is also the second time he had done it
NSW Labor – Asleep on their Job!!!!
Gary
If I was found asleep at my work, I would be fired.
These people only work about 100 days a year, the least we could ask them for is to stay awake for those days.
It might not be hugh, but it speaks volume about how arrogant and out of touch some politicians are. It is also the second time he had done it
NSW Labor – Asleep on their Job!!!!
I’m sure questions would be asked first Dovif and you would be given the chance to explain yourself. You would probably be given a second chance too. Stop trying to make a minor matter into a federal case. It is BS.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/greens-attack-mp-on-jailer-donation-20090304-8okv.html
More Bribery allegation for the NSW ALP.
Paul MacLay, I wonder if he is related to Leo MacLay who was a federal member, who was caught for travel rote
Paul McLeay is Leo’s son, I believe.
Dovif, I think you’ll find that most politicians work nearly 365 days a year. They only sit in parliament for close to 100. (And I believe that the NSW Parliament sits more than any other in Australia)
And this bloke wants to be premier.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/ofarrell-ejected-from-parliament-20090305-8p7s.html
#112 Yes Gary he does. The Speaker is an Independent so it will be interesting to monitor his evenhandedness during the parliamentary sessions leading to the March 2011 poll.
Pity the poor Sergeant Of Arms who had the job of ejecting “Fatty O’Farrell” from parliament.
Nathan Rees is becoming arrogant and desperate. Barry O’Farrell was holding this disgraceful government to account and he gets kicked out. Nathan Rees and the Speaker should both be sacked right there for this injustice. Face it Nathan! Labor will be wiped out in 2011 so badly, it will take Labor 15 years to get out of opposition. The Liberals alone could win 60 seats in 2011 and then add the Nats.
The speaker is an independent, and I think he’s more of an conservative independent anyways…
He was focusing on the manner; even when there are things that outrage you, you still need to express it in a proper way…there are standard to abide by.
And Torbay will never lose his seat,..lol it’s one of the safest in the state I think?
Torbay’s from Armidale, which would make him an interesting guy if the people from there I’ve met are any guide. A large university town in the middle of a farming region, a couple of hours drive from Nimbin / Byron… it doesn’t really fall easily into any particular classification (urban trendy / rural conservative / whatever), so it makes plenty of sense he’s an independent.
As for those numbers: 72.7% primary vote, 2pp margin 30.3% v Nat. Those numbers say ‘job for life’, whatever happens to the govt. Northern Tablelands will also see one of the smallest swings against Labor (primary vote wise) anywhere in the state.
Haha, the NSW Labor Defence Force in this thread is amazing. 10/10 keep it up boys!
113 – Well David, how about he starts acting like he does.
118 – Intelligent comment that! NSW conservatives at their best.
So what do you think of the stories and stance at 103 Ryan.
Looks like a case of:
“ya all can jiggle my nanas titties but don’t ya all graffitti ma wall.”
# 119 Barry got fired up in Parliament over a DOCS issue. It has drawn attention to another failure of this government: child protection policy.
122 – No excuse. Follow the rules and show leadership.
If Rees had done that you’d be using it as a further example of how he is not up to it.
Certainly not a good look to have the opposition leader chucked out.
Sensible oppositions work out their tactics before QT – ie. when Barry gets his second warning, he sits down and someone relatively articulate like Smith or Berejiklian should maintain the rage. Or even Pru Goward, who is after all, the shadow in that portfolio.
Overall I doubt it will hurt the Libs. Rebel Sports sold out of baseball bats some time ago…
# 123 I agree, Gary, that parliamentarians should observe the rules (that is, the Standing Orders). It is also discourteous. However, I am less censorious than you about this instance of (mis)behaviour reflecting on O’Farrell’s leadership credentials or (as you would have it) lack thereof.
#124 Yes, I agree that Rees ‘is not up to it’. I expect he will be replaced before the election, probably by a woman. My guess is it will be either the Deputy Premier (only if she wants it and Albo supports her decision) or the Planning Minister. But it will not happen until Obeid and Tripodi have sorted out the factional machinations.
Hope you are well, Gary.
Thanks David. I enjoy our jousts.
How low can the NSW ALP go
NSW government contribute $250,000 to a project after allocating a $1 Billion business park project to a company who donated $150k to the NSW ALP. I guess if you give me $150k we will give you $250k of taxpayer’s money
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25174019-5006009,00.html
Hospital has no money to buy soap and hygene supplies, presumely the money had gone to ALP donor
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25173973-5001021,00.html