| # | % | Swing | 2PP | Proj. | |
| Varga (IND) | 574 | 3.3% | |||
| Totten (CEC) | 44 | 0.3% | |||
| Ter Horst (IND) | 145 | 0.8% | |||
| Zagami (IND) | 927 | 5.3% | |||
| Boni (IND) | 302 | 1.7% | |||
| Du Plessis (FFP) | 158 | 0.9% | -0.8% | ||
| Tagliaferri (ALP) | 6,748 | 38.5% | -0.4% | 46.7% | 47.1% |
| Hollett (CDP) | 300 | 1.7% | -0.2% | ||
| Lorrimar (IND) | 136 | 0.8% | |||
| Carles (GRN) | 7,802 | 44.5% | 17.5% | 53.3% | 52.9% |
| Wainwright | 400 | 2.3% | |||
| TOTAL | 17,536 |
Monday
Here’s me on the by-election in Crikey.
Sunday
I’ve knocked up a map showing the primary vote swing to the Greens at the different booths. No visible pattern can be discerned, but I’ve done it so here it is. I’ve also tried to find correlations between votes, swings and demographics, and found only one worth mentioning: the Greens swing had a correlation with the Italian-speaking population of -0.47 and an R-squared value of 0.22. No doubt statisticians will tell me a sample of 10 booths doesn’t mean very much, but the scatterplot looks persuasive to my unpractised eye and it makes all kinds of sense intuitively. Equally interesting was the lack of a significant correlation between the Greens swing and the Liberal vote from the state election. That would seem to argue against the notion that a static Labor vote was swamped by Liberals moving to the Greens. Note that the lowest swing was recorded at a Catholic primary school, Christ the King in Beaconsfield. For what it’s worth, Alan Carpenter was handing out how-to-vote cards there.
Saturday
9.20pm. Antony Green: “There is a very important bit of history in this reslt. This is the first time at a state or federal election that the Greens have outpolled the Labor Party on primary votes. All previous cases where the Greens have won or come close to victory have seen Labor ahead on the primary vote and the Greens chasing Labor down on Liberal and Independent preferences.”
9.10pm. All together now …
Mea culpa to Greens pianist Geoffrey, who was told by me that his candidate would fall short by about 52-48, despite his enthusiastic protestations to the contrary.
8.42pm. So, the new maths for our already very exciting Legislative Assembly: Labor 27, Liberal 24, Nationals 4, Independent 3, Greens 1.
8.39pm. Carles now leads on the WAEC’s two-party count 8745 to 7370.
8.32pm. Now the WAEC has the Greens lead at a definitively insurmountable 7421 to 6395. I would like to thank them though for that little moment of excitement, while reminding them that that isn’t their brief.
8.30pm. Now the WAEC says Carles leads 6056 to 5535, which sounds still more like it. Too much to rein in on postals.
8.27pm. Beaconsfield PS and 1306 postal votes added. Despite what the 2PP says, I don’t see how Labor could win from those primaries.
8.24pm. WAEC count now has Carles leading 4900 to 4660, which sounds more like it. However, it does suggest that Labor are doing slightly better on preferences than I or Antony had projected. It might not even be over yet. But again, who knows.
8.22pm. So, to summarise. Thanks to the WAEC, I have absolutely no idea what’s going on. If anyone from the WAEC is reading this, please send a fact-finding mission to the Tasmanian Electoral Commission to find out how to conduct a count properly.
8.19pm. Antony Green also doesn’t appear to have any real world preference figures he can use. If the WAEC has decided that we only need to be given a lump sum two-party count, I can only say that they’ve bungled once again.
8.15pm. Hmm. The WAEC has a big, uninformative “notional distribution of preferences” which has Tagliaferri leading 4071-3824. This is extremely exasperating. Where are these votes from? Why haven’t they been recording them booth by booth like everybody else does?
8.04pm. Big win for Carles at Fremantle Primary School. I’m calling it for her.
8.01pm. Carles also has a big win at East Fremantle Primary School, making it very tempting to call it for her …
7.59pm. Carles wins the upmarket Bicton booth.
7.53pm. Carles wins Richmond Primary School, up near Bicton way, which gives Zagami his first big result. Nonetheless, that has Carles’ lead narrowing a little further on my estimate. I might also note that the Greens didn’t do a postal vote mailout.
7.52pm. ABC has Christ the King bringing Carles down only a little, to 53.2 per cent (exactly where I have it). Tagliaferri still needs some more big results.
7.46pm. Very good result for Tagliaferri at Christ the King School makes things interesting again. Interesting to note that Alan Carpenter was handing out how to vote cards there …
7.43pm. VERY surprised no other candidate is over 5 per cent.
7.41pm. Re the previous comment – White Gum Valley, the most Italian booth of all, was also a big win for Carles. No particular reason to expect the nearby Beaconsfield booths to behave differently.
7.23pm. Beaconsfield and Christ the King are two strongly Italian booths that are yet to report – but so was Palmyra, and Carles won that.
7.22pm. Another good result for Carles in White Gum Valley – 46 per cent to 39.5 per cent. Minor party vote lower than I might have thought.
7.21pm. Antony now has the Greens 2.5 per cent in front after preference projection.
7.20pm. Tagliaferri finally wins a booth, the solidly working class Phoenix.
7.18pm. Carles wins Anglican Church Hall as well, which is in a similar area.
7.16pm. Greens win the Palmyra booth as well, which isn’t their heartland. I suggest my projection flatters Labor a bit.
7.14pm. Antony’s projection has the Greens 3.4 per cent ahead.
7.13pm. St Patrick’s in – Carles wins the primary vote, but check out that projection …
7.08pm. Few teething problems with the table as usual – working through them.
7.06pm. 622 pre-polls added (along with Rottnest Island) – there’s reason to believe these might behave unusually, but at they’re at least a little bit exciting for the Greens.
6.37pm. Come on, you’d think at least Rottnest might have reported by now … Anyway, I’ve been doing a bit of work so I do get a projected two-party result, based on the booth figures calculated by Antony Green. I wouldn’t stake my wages on its accuracy though.
6.14pm. First trickle of daylight saving votes coming in. Big no majority, but it doesn’t mean anything yet.
6.05pm. Some explanations of what you will see above. Booth matching will be employed for the primary vote swings, but not the two-party preferred vote as no figures are available in Labor versus Greens terms from the state election. The figures will at first be estimates, but will be replaced with real world numbers as booths report their notional two-party counts.
6pm. Polls have closed, so welcome to the Poll Bludger’s live coverage of the Fremantle by-election count. I don’t think I’ll have much to say about the daylight saving referendum, which you will in any case find covered more than adequately at ABC Elections.
679 Comments
Those vote counts look a bit low!
(Probably because the polls haven`t closed yet).
Do these results mean Western Australians want time reset to zero?
But they have now.
That post is even funnier than mine.
But I still got first post.
Well at least this by-election will see the end of Eric Ripper.
Yay. Scarborough and Gosnells at least are voting YES to daylight saving.
Oh god, im sitting here hoping Glen is right about something!! While i dont think the ALP is going to get back in as long as Ripper is in charge, I’m not sure who would replace him.
Ripper just doesn’t project as Premier material, and i actually hope McTiernan does make the jump to federal politics. She was a very solid performer as a minister at state level.
Hopefully Ripper will get booted sometime, but i’m not sure it will be soon or as a result of one by-election loss.
If the Greens win tonight it will be interesting to see if the the Libs dare contest the seat ever again for fear of the ALP picking it up.
Who will the Liberal diehards be voting for?
I’m told Ben Wyatt is the next Labor Premier of WA. I don’t know much about him. Do WA people here share that view of his potential?
Either Zagami if they can’t stomach the ALP or Tagliaferri if they are a Lib who cannot stand the Greens.
Anyone got any Freo numbers yet?
Ben is the son of Indigenous leader Cederic Wyatt who once stood for the Liberal Party. Ben is young, good looking and may probably be leader if Lannie does decide to run for Canning.
Frank ive said before on the freo-post that my mum who votes Liberal is voting Greens.
If many of these Liberal voters switch to the Greens the ALP will lose it big time.
They shouldnt even be having a referendum it’s costing 30million dollars that could be spent on education and health in WA its just that all the political parties havent got the balls to just say we’re doing it end of story.
Nope. Hitting refresh on the WAEC every 20 seconds.
William,
I’m assuming the Referendum votes are taking precedence over the By -Election as thy are easier to count – Yes in one pile, No on the other.
Well that’s certainly a start, but is he, you know, smart as well?
not particularly from what i have heard of him.
he’s seen mainly as a young turk.
Good call, Frank. Yes, Psephos, Wyatt is very talented and appealing, performing well as Shadow Treasurer though early days yet. Needs more runs on the board. In case nobody’s mentioned, he’s part Aboriginal.
Ahhh the good old #DIV/0! error. Brings back so many memories.
Daylight saving not looking so good
I agree with imacca and so (gulp) also Glen. I hope Ripper goes (as leader) although I don’t see quite how that is going to happen because of tonight.
Wyatt is obviously being pushed as the next leader as he is treasurer and put forward by the opposition for many TV news sound bites.
That will be great to get firs indigenous premier.
Well there’s no figures from Fremantle for the referendum either, so maybe they’re just bludging.
Wouldn’t agree with that, every time I look the percentage has been closer than the last time.
Ripper was always going to be a stop-gap leader, I predict they’re grooming Wyatt to take over closer to the next State Election.
Can’t I do something to get rid of it without having to write instructions in every bloody cell?
They must be working on Fremantle Time
From the count on the WAAEC site i reckon daylight saving is over for a while. The country electorates seem well set against it.
William, Try this formula;
IFERROR(A2/A3,”-”)
It will return a “-” rather than #DIV/0! error (note that you’ll have to change the cells to the ones that you’re actually using)
Jules
I dunno if it’s worth it but you can use a simple IF statement to display “” if the denominator is 0.
eg. =IF(denominatorcell=0,”",numeratorcell/denominatorcell)
We have some numbers.
Candidate Votes Counted Percentage
VARGA – IND 2
2.44%
TOTTEN – CEC 0
0%
TER HORST – IND 2
2.44%
ZAGAMI – IND 2
2.44%
BONI – IND 0
0%
DU PLESSIS – FFP 0
0%
TAGLIAFERRI – ALP 21
25.61%
HOLLETT – CDP 0
0%
LORRIMAR – IND 2
2.44%
CARLES – GRN 49
59.76%
WAINWRIGHT 4
4.88%
Total Valid Votes 82
Informal 6
Total 88
Count Progress:
0.37%
First by-election results coming in…
And it’s only the Rottnest Booth.
Those Green voting Quokkas.
Carles has won, let’s go home.
Pre-polls as well.
So 0.37% is part of 1 booth?? At what percentage counted / sample will someone call a result do you think??
Haha, Rottnest. What were the figures for last time?
William,
Can you give us some seperate prepoll figures ?
At 0.37% according to #34.
William,
looks like it’s a very small margin on the prepolls on primaries for Tagliaferri & Carles.
don’t nother I looked on the WAEC site
How do prepolls usually go for the WA Greens? My experience is the Greens are usually weak in these areas. It either shows a brilliant result or an improvement in the Greens’ ground game.
Err, for Tags to have any chance he needs to be winning the primary.
Greens leading in St Patricks and Palmyra as well.
Does anyone have booth figures from the last election?
Antony Green has called the referendum as defeated.
But remember we only have 3 booths in
I’m not yet, I’m still yet to see the No percentage go up.
Yep, all over for DLS.
And all over for the ALP in Freo I’d say, Greens win their first seat.
Excellent, William has the booth figures on his last post.
Two of those three booths were ALP booths in 2008, according to the two-party-preferred calculation someone did on my blog way back then. I tried to post a link to the blog post I did, but the map I did then seems to have stopped working.
Wow, huge swing in White Gum.
No joke, Greens are winning White Gum which was 48% Labor primary last time.
I think Antony is right
This is also without the Bicton Primary booth which will go heavily for the Greens.
Where did Ant call the referendum? Online somewhere?
WAEC site is better for the Freo count, Antony’s is a bit slow. Labor can still win Freo
Well, SHE who must be obeyed will be happy about the DLS vote…
Good on the Greens if they do pull off a win in Freo. It’s good for democracy.
Yes http://www.abc.net.au/elections/wa/2009/daylightsaving/results-graphs.htm
Look below the graphs.
It’s Time: Found it, cheers – was stupidly looking on his blog.
Yep, Adele is only in front by a small margin in each booth, they aren’t huge numbers favouring either candidate.
William, White Gum was the most Italian (16%) and the most Labor and Carles cleaned up.
The Bicton Primary booth is a heavy Liberal voting area of the electorate and their numbers arent in yet. I suspect the Greens to romp that booth.
Bicton will be a good example to see which way the Libs broke.
But White Gum Valley was Zagamik’s best booth as well so the Italian vote must have been split.
But Zaga’s votes are goin to the Greens so unless the ALP do well in Bicton Primary they arent going to do well on the night IMHO.
Hence why Carles did well at that booth
I reckon the Greens have got this seat in the bag.
These are primary figures. No 2PP booth numbers coming out.
But hardly anybody is preferencing the ALP so if Carles can stay above 40 then the ALP are rooted.
still too early Glen
I think Carles more likely to win than not win, BUT we’ve had nothing from Beaconsfield which has the highest Italian population.
Yep, we’re only looking at Primary votes – maybe not everyone followed the HTV card to the letter.
Im going to enjoy watching the ALPers on this blog squirm when they lose Freo to the Greens LOL!
This is going to be sweet!
Are you calling it William?
Antony’s first graph is screwed
It looks to me like Antony’s 2pp values are stacking up remarkably well, considering the difficulty in calculating them. Labor seems to be doing about 2% better per booth than Antony has them last time (except Rottnest), which would translate to 52% for the Greens. Combine that with the prepolls favouring Carles and I’d say the major thing the Greens have to fear is a disaster on the postal votes.
Antony has pretty much called it.
That said, Antony’s projection has Carles 4.7 per cent ahead, which is just about insurmountable if he has the preferences right.
Spoken like a true politician William, no answer
Sorry, that comment doesn’t count White Gum Valley, where the Green vote is clearly better than Antony’s projection.
Glen cheering for the greens. Who would have thought.
Im going to enjoy the fact that you can only get your kicks from the left side of politics at the moment
You’re right, Oz. Was overlooking White Gum Valley.
I used to live in the Freo electorate before i came back to Melbourne and id have voted Greens if i still lived there. Why would a Liberal vote for the ALP? The Greens sure are radicals but how much damage can they do with 1 seat, plus a defeat of the ALP in Freo would ruin them politically. Also the Greens will struggle to hold the seat in the next election whenever it is unless the Libs dont run.
Can’t answer a question I didn’t hear, Stephen. No, I’m not calling it. Might do after I see either or both of Beaconsfield BS and Christ the King School.
Fair enough
No way. If Carles wins this she’ll win at the next election.
looking like a labor win
Tags in the lead! What happened there!
Christ the Church just came in, snap.
Stephen remember the Bicton booth hasnt reported and Carles will win that by a large margin.
Based on what, Stephen? Christ the King figures having come through? Bicton still to come for Carles…
Christ The King Booth has Tags in front 904 to Adele 562.
based on almost 1/3 counted and with Labor slightly ahead I reckon with preferences Labor can do it
Does anyone have a booth map? Where is Christ-the-king?
Like I note above, Alan Carpenter was handing out HTV cards there … coincidence no doubt …
Glen would vote for the Spartacist League if it would serve to embarrass Labor, and so would most Liberals.
Glen, if the only source of political pleasure you can find at present is cheering the parlour pinks of Freo casting a protest vote for the Greens, who am I to begrudge you?
Beaconsfield.
Interesting. Some Libs hate Labor so much that they vote for the Greens instead. Nevertheless, no strategic voting will get the Libs back into federal power for a decade (or much, much longer if Possum’s demographic analysis is half right). Maybe the Greens will win more Reps seats at the next federal election than the Libs (not to be confused with retaining existing seats).
Chris the King is a combination of working class and Italian.
Hmmm, a theology question. At the Lord’s right hand?
It ain’t over yet Stephen
*Damian D-M waves at Stephen Dawson*
CTK yet to be added to ABC count – will be interested to see projection when it is.
No doubt all the Italins send their kids to that school.
Boom, Carles back in front.
Carles only down a little to 53.2, exactly where I have it.
Richmond Primary School in, Carles regains the lead.
Carles will win Bicton by 60%2pp at least if not more.
Hardly any Labor voters there and the Libs there will most likely be voting Green or for Zaga whose votes will go to the Greens.
If Carles wins now, the only way she will hold the seat at the next poll is if the libs run dead.
which they will as they are fronted by barnet and chairman sniff and have a razor thin majority keeping them in government.
if this was a full election, with the possibility of a change in govt, and not just a by election that will have no influence on the current govts numbers, then many of the alp supporters who are voting green now, wouldn’t be.
Carles ahead on WAEC
Carles just won Richmond which was strong for the Libs last time. So we know which way they’re going.
Surely He transcends class and ethnicity?
Incidentally, far stronger results there for Boni and Zagami.
Carles wins Richmond Primary School, up near Bicton way, which gives Zagami his first big result. Nonetheless, that has Cares’ lead narrowing a little further on my estimate. I might also note that the Greens didn’t do a postal vote mailout.
Richmond Primary undoes most of Christ the King’s damage. Also the first time Zagami has really done well.
Richmond was good for Zagami as well, unsurprisingly, which means good for Carles.
See i told you all Liberal voters wont vote ALP if they are rusted they will vote Greens in protest. Hence the reason why Bicton will go heavily for Carles and she’ll win the seat with those figures.
Antony’s just added CTK. Greens still in the lead on 53.2 projected.
The challenge will be to see if the Zagami’s Lib preferences from Bicton all go to the Greens
Stephen buck it up the ALP are finished with these numbers and Bicton Primary to go.
Bicton as well – Carles slightly ahead.
Hmm, Varga’s best booth is Richmond as well isn’t he preferencing Tags ?
Not yet Glen, as much as you would like to see it
East Fremantle primary isnt in yet and i believe the greens carried it at the 2008 election. also was working it for labor and the greens seemed to be doing very well. should be one to look out for.
Bicton in. Not amazing for Carles, Zagami strong.
If the ALP lose this seat (which is almost a given now), maybe they should field a candidate who has some history with the ALP instead of someone who’s running just to get the Italian vote.
Yes but combine the two and she’s looking good early on in Bicton.
Doesn’t need to be amazing for Carles, Tags needs swings to him in those booths and he’s not getting them.
sounds like sour grapes Steve B
All over folks.
And on that note, the challenge suddenly got harder for Labor
Freo and East Freo. Game over.
there is east freo primary. i think its all over now
See ya later Ripper you’re gone mate!
Is there any online radio/tv coverage of this?
Antony has called it. It’s all over.
Holy crap, Carles completely rips East Fremantle and Fremantle.
Of course he is gone, he RETIRED!
No. 128, on the contrary. I expected the Greens to win given their swing towards them in the state election and if I was living in the Freo electorate I’d vote for them.
Okay, I’m calling it now.
I wonder if the Greens will make a deal with the Libs with preferences if they dont run in Fremantle?
Damn – didn’t see Antony.
Big call William. Way to wait till 70% of the vote was in.
How can you do a preference deal if you aren’t running…?
@Glen #140
Hahahahaha
No im saying no blanket preference deal with the ALP if we dont run a candidate in Fremantle!
I think it’s a correct call William
Oz
Before you get too pleased, just remember there is going to be hell to pay from GG.
It’s a great result.
As if the Libs wouldn’t run a candidate next time. You love being spoilers
The Liberals sort of had a candidate in Zagami but he’s just an independent to get votes away from the ALP.
Ahh, even the shrill cries of Labor hacks can’t ruin this.
History in the making, ladies and gents.
Oh yes i hadnt thought about that Dio.
GG will say that the Greens will form a minority government in 4 years time based on this result LOL!
Why wouldnt we Stephen. We’re never going to win Fremantle we might as well stop Labor winning it
Labor can be good at revenge Oz
Yup, ALP will lose this one, and frankly i think we deserve to. I really don’t think that there was any enthusiasm for Tagliaferri from people who are normally firm ALP supporters. Will be interesting to see how Carles behaves in parliament.
If the ALP get their act together with a decent candidate for leader and a decent local candidate they could get this seat back.
I suppose the sad thing for people like Glen is that even though he can enjoy an ALP defeat, its still not a Liberal win. The only way the Libs can inflict and damage on the ALP is to run away.
But Adele ran last time, thus having an advantage – Congratulations to her, though I’m pretty sure she’ll vote 99% of thev time with Labor in the house
Oh psht, 5 minutes ago it was “Looking like a Labor win”.
So very happy. Lived in Freo for 17 years – moved to Perth a few years ago. Handed out my share of HTVs for the greens in the past…
And Tagliaferri is the bloody Mayor! Can’t say Carles had any inherent advantage.
Wow, WAEC has a notional distribution of preferences and Tags is winning!
Tagliaferri was pretty strong on postals.
But the Fremantle Electorate doesn’t just cover the City of Fremantle though, Carles had an advantage from the last election which was only 8 months previously.
Not a chance I’m afraid, Glen. Might (and then only might) strengthen our position with respect to the negotiation of open tickets in a few key seats. That’s it.
Well the Greens didn’t run a postal votes campaign
Frank how does it feel to lose seats to the Greens???
We arent in danger of losing our seats to minor parties
Independents maybe but not the rabble that is the Greens lol!
This is different to Cunningham remember. In Cunningham the Labor vote got split. This was a head to head contest.
That alone makes it much more solid as a result and a seat for The Greens and also makes it much more likely to be held in subsequent elections.
Add to that the fact that Carles will be the incumbent and have massive resources available for campaigning and also add to that that The Greens in WA will now have more resources available as a party in parliament.
“And Tagliaferri is the bloody Mayor! ”
That seemed to work against him actually. He had a record and a lot of local enemies. Carles is new enough not to have that baggage.
Can anyone work out what the hell this is supposed to mean?
Chris if the Libs run in Freo i think Carles will struggle to win…
So if you want to keep your MLA in Parliament you’ll have to do deals with open tickets namely Alfred Cove ect
I’m worried about the 2PP.
no
Yeah what just happened.
No shrill cries from this hack. Well done Green-Liberal alliance. Labor only recently lost a state election, so of course we’re in a slump. In a bobo seat like Freo the Greens are an easy risk-free protest vote. We’ll get it back at the next election (see Cunningham). It makes no difference whatever to our ability to win the next election, indeed it may help by bringing forward the Ripperectomy which everyone knows is coming.
Yeah but in terms of name recognition, which is what Frank seemed to be arguing, Tagliaferri was surely way out in front of Carles.
GG must be out celebrating somewhere lol!
Sam is right, this is not like Cunningham.
And in addition to the reasons he listed, The Greens were close to winning at a general election anyway.
Ben Raue, I’m having to restrain from using the F word myself, but I’m afraid I don’t allow it here. Please rephrase. The WAEC are … (restrains himself).
Thank you!
Glen, i dont think anyone who supports or is involved with the liberal party should be accusing any other group of being a rabble. When you consider the Federal Libs behavior and general incompetence that really is the pot calling the kettle black.
And WTF with the WAEC site ?? ALP to win on prefs??
PHEW!
I’m wondering if it’s a case of most voters giving Tagliaferri their second preference and not following the Greens HTV card which is giving him the 2PP result ?
Notional 2PP is Green now.
Carles now just ahead on WAEC 2PP count.
Or they can’t run a by-election and a referendum at the same time (but they managed to do so in 2005. I’;m wondering if it’s the new head of the WAEC who is stuffing things around with staffing/resourcing.
Maybe someone at the WAEC had a brain-fart episode. Greens to win this one.
Beaconsfield in, another 300-vote primary gain by Carles…
Beaconsfield and 1306 postal votes now added.
Incidentally, the WAEC is in la-la land about the notional distribution. The switch to Carles being ahead is from 4660-4900 becoming 4900-4660… they’ve just swapped the figures around!
Frank, they were bloody hopeless at the state election as well. I was inclined to cut them some slack though because they couldn’t get good staff during a boom.
William there arent realistically any other lower house seats the Greens can win in WA.
They may be able to hang onto Freo but i cant see any inroads elsewhere as GG may posit.
Is now a more believable 6056-5535 notional to Carles, or 52.25%-47.75%.
Not sure why that’s directed at me, Glen.
Now the WAEC says 7421 to 6395, which is yet more believable still.
Make that 7421-6395 / 53.71%-46.29%, which must surely be insurmountable…
The Liberals will of course run in Freo in a general election if they dont they could lose there 3rd spot upper house spot to labor. If you look at 08 results the liberals won the fifth spot but If the liberal party does not run in freo then there voters that have allowed the greens to win in the by election may follow a green upper house ticket. the result would push the greens to win the 5th upper house spot and force the liberals to fight labor for the last one we could see 3 labor 1 green and two liberals.
Game over. Thanks William for your hard work
A 45% primary is pretty remarkable. Interesting to see some analysis of how much of this was Liberal and will leak back to them at the next election.
Sorry to bother William im just not up to scratch on the level of support for the Greens in lower house seats in WA and i know what an authority you are on election results well you and Adam.
Antony’s projection is remarkably similar to the notional count.
I suppose that’s why he’s who he is.
I would also speculate that the federal seat could be in troble as in the up coming DD election the greens poll well in all seats in the freo federal electorate
Sorry William, I wasn’t thinking. No worries, it’s irrelevant now.
perhaps the dawning of a new era
you’re dreamin
A mild suggestion for ALP and Liberal supporters here… You should try and understand what you are feeling right now, it’s something you are going to feel a few more times over coming elections.
Cunningham was a lucky break. This is the real deal.
One point I will also make about the Liberal voters in bicton and the other strong liberal areas look at safe liberal seats there are high green votes in all of them so that would suggest affleunt types are willing to vote green no suprise to me this result
The Liberals got 30% in Freo at the state election. Zagami the surrogate Liberal has 5%. So 25% of the electorate are Liberals who have tactically voted Green. Carles got 45%, so 55% of her voters are in fact Liberals. At the next election most of them will go back to the Libs, and she will lose.
I wish, but I don’t think so. Baby steps.
I really don’t think this seat is like Cunningham. Fremantle was already the strongest Greens seat in the state, it was the most likely to fall at a general election. Cunningham wasn’t.
The Greens polled in the low 20s in Cunningham. In contrast, this is the first electorate ever in Australia where we have cracked 40% and come first on primary votes.
unless the liberals run a dead campain which would still mean they can hold on to the upper house and allow the greens to win. the liberals not running in freo will not happen
I too will be very surprised if Carles doesn’t hold the seat at the next election. So, the new maths for our already very exciting Legislative Assembly: Labor 27, Liberal 24, Nationals 4, Independent 3, Greens 1.
and also with carles being an incumbent some of the 30% liberal voters may not go back as they no the liberals will never win it and prefer a green than labor
The Greens were assured of victory because the Libs didnt run.
I tend to agree with Adam on this one.
This is as much a victory made possible by Colin Barnett than by Carles IMHO.
If the Libs stand a candidate in the next election unless Carles has done a really really good job as a local member she’ll lose.
Seems likely if you believe what Pollytics has said recently
I think Labor is now tasteing what the Liberals have for a while in safe seats you can not take advantage of them and put dudds up it bites you in the bumb. Freo has been neclected for years because it was a safe seat jim would have done no work in a seat clearly with inderpendant tentancies
Sam Bauers must be taking something. Cunningham and Fremantle are very alike
Furthermore the ALP primary vote of 38% is the same as at the state election, so the only reason Labor has lost is that the Libs didn’t run and handed their vote to the Greens. Viewed that way, it’s actually not a bad result for Labor. At the Cunningham by-election our vote dropped 6%.
Adam would the Greens win the seat if the Libs didnt run next time?
This is wrong for a number of reasons, not least because there was a swing against Labor in most booths and that the other candidates who sucked up some Liberal votes are closer to 10%.
But hey, taking Fremantle for granted got you to this stage so I can understand why you’d want to do it again.
I doubt that glen she was really close to winning it in 08 on the libs primary results in 05 she would have won it I know for a fact that the libs ran a good campain in the seat above average for safe labor seats and they got a swing which would have also been due to the state wide swing
agreed Psephos. Bad result for Labor but an aberration
Bear in mind that the Greens almost overtook the Liberals on primary votes at the 2008 election in Fremantle. It’s quite likely we would’ve still come in the top two if the Liberals had run. If you assume that Carles, with the benefit of incumbency, can overcome the Liberals on primary vote, then any argument about the absence of Liberals has no bearing on her chances of reelection in 2012.
Of course, a lot can happen in the next three years, but I would give her a good chance of holding on to it.
What marvellous spin.
First time Labor’s not held the seat since 1924 and it’s “not a bad result”.
It is true that Labor needed a swing to hold the seat – of 4.3 per cent, by Antony’s reckoning. However, contra Adam, I think incumbency will be enough to get Carles over the Liberals in a three-cornered contest. I also think she would have cleared them if they had run at this by-election – the Liberals would have copped a flogging over the lead exports issue. Not sure if that will still be playing in 2012.
Carles is likely to be able to squeeze the ALP vote further, it is the type of seat where once the Greens get ahead they will consolidate further and mop up the left vote as Labor did in the old Deakinite protectionist seats long ago. But Labor’s candidates in the other Green-risk seats are much better.
I doubt the Libs would win the seat of Fremantle anytime soon, what demographic in the area would get them over the line?
Peter tags may have been why the primary labor vote did not decrese but yes the liberal vote won it for the greens but they may stay green it will only take a couple of hundred liberal voters to swith permant and the greens will overtake the libs and contunie to win the seat the greens vote in freo has increased every election it has run in freo since 2001 with an incumbent it will happen aswell
Yes, another reason why the comparison to Cunningham is inappropriate – the demographics.
Turnbull will be spinning this result tomorrow saying it is a rejection of the Federal budget.
Ah, no.
The swing to the Greens was about 17.5%. You are forgetting about Varga and Wainwright and a huge number of other factors.
The seat stays Green, sorry.
I think it all depends on what kind of job she does in Parliament. If she is a good local member she should be able to retain the seat but it will be hard if the Libs run IMHO.
Steve, it’s not that the Liberals could win – they couldn’t – it’s whether Carles would get ahead of the Liberals, and then win the seat on their preferences. She didn’t quite manage it last year; I happen to think she would if have if they had run at the by-election, though I think Adam might disagree; and I also think she’ll do it at the next election.
Malcolm can spin all he wants. The people of Freo wouldn’t even know who he is
Yer and as a liberal I clearly say this result has nothing to do with the budget and malcom would be wrong if he did say it
As someone who knows absolutely nothing about WA State politics, this has been a very very interesting night.
Thanks Billbowe.
Congrats Greens.
Glen: Don’t forget that your lot almost lost Downer’s old seat to the Greens in that by-election last year, I wouldn’t be getting too cocky about predicting a Liberal revival based on Labor losing one seat to the Greens.
Completely different numbers from Cunningham, which Michael Organ won off a 23% primary vote, far below Labor’s 38%, thanks to the direct prefs of anti-ALP Labor candidates polling above 10%. Adele just pulled off a 40%+ primary vote! There will be some very nervous people in Labor federally as we move into emissions trading negotiations…
Does this tell us something about the federal election? Are the Greens a legitimate threat in seats like Melbourne and Sydney?
If Carles works on her profile and gets results for the electorate then she may keep the seat next time. She will have to work hard though. In a general election i think she will struggle as a lot of people will be focusing on a result between Alp and Libs and give their primary vote to one of those. I think her large primary vote this time is because of the specific circumstances of this election and she cant rely on it repeating. It would be a great result for the Greens if it did though.
As far as this result translating to Brand?? Don’t think so. Parkes seems to have been working on her profile and getting exposure, being seen locally.
Thanks William, I’m off to lick my wounds
I’ve seen bad results for Labor and this isn’t one. A seriously bad result would surely have seen a drop in our primary vote. Labor has the same level of support in Freo we had at the state election. That’s notr spin, it’s a fact.
Obviously Labor will lose any seat where we don’t get 50% of the primary vote if everyone else ignores their political differences and swaps preferences against us. You can do that at a by-election, but not at a general election. There won’t (I assume) be a statewide Libs-Greens preference deal at the next WA state election. The Libs can’t “run dead” at a state election. They will have to contest Freo because they will be trying to save their South Metro LegCo seat.
And nearly lost Mayo to a popular Democrat in 1998.
Ah but that vote was a protest vote fair and square evan14 and all based on local issues which the Libs do badly on. Thus when it comes to federal election time and with the ALP running we’ll win back Independent/Green votes and hold the seat by a long way.
I’d say definitely Melbourne, but Tanner’s had a massive boost in profile over the last year or so and that’ll help him. I don’t think Sydney at the next election, maybe the one after that.
William what are your thoughts on the federal rammifcations this could have on the Federal seat of fremantle could the greens pick it up of labor like they have done here.
Which is not what happened. Carles had two candidates preferencing her and Tagliaferri had 7.
By-elections frequently produce odd results. They usually mean squat in terms of the next election.
Nah, federal Fremantle is a different kettle of fish. Once you leave the bounds of the state electorate and out to Willagee, Jandakot and Coogee, the Greens vote gets a lot more modest. However, there might be this federal ramification: Alannah MacTiernan becomes state leader and drops her plans for Canning, making that a less likely Labor gain at the next election.
Another factor to consider: Jim Mcginty would have had a large personal vote, the loss of that hurt the ALP.
I wonder if the government is thinking about this.
Even if the CPRS passes in its current form, I’m sure it would like ANOTHER major green policy to appeal to inner urban voters.
If all she has to do if finish above the Libs she should be able to do it as the sitting member. But it will be hard if the Libs stand.
Colin Barnett just cost the ALP another seat in the LA and it cost him nothing LOL!
ShowsOn: Tanner is too valuable an asset, if they were really scared about the Greens winning Melbourne, perhaps they’d move Lindsay into another seat, or the Senate?
Adam, I should point out that quite a few of the minors were directing preferences to Labor – CDP, Family First, DLP, Nik Varga and Steve Boni.
A lot of this is speculation but I think the main variable is who Labor runs at a candidate. If they can find someone amazing then maybe they can win it back but I think barring that and assuming Carles develops a profile she’s got it.
Time will tell.
But now Liberal and labor have a thing in common in wa for years now the libs have been losing safe seats to independants churchlands,alfred cove nedlands(almost) and the nats who I recon could pick seats like pilbara, North west coastal of labor per haps both partys could make deals to prefrence each other to keep these seats for yrs Labors prefrences have been allowing the nats/indenpendants to win in liberal seats this could change politics in wa
I personally don’t see how letting the Greens win in the longer term benefits the Liberals.
There is enough dead wood ALP MPs in Victoria to give him a safer seat.
I can see Melbourne being a Greens seat down the track.
I think if the Libs didnt run the ALP would struggle there.
I might also note that McGinty has been as quiet as a mouse over the past few weeks, not counting his diving expeditions.
Listening to the BBC Newshour on News Radio: The Congress Party in India won that election very decisively, not at all predicted by the pundits.
A rejection of religious fundamentalism.
None of whom polled at all well. The result was determined by the transfer of the Liberal vote to the Greens. That’s all. At the state election they polled 57.8% between them.
You wonder if Alan Carpenter will stay on the back bench for another 3 years or so?
I don’t see what Colin Barnett had to do with it at all.
The idea that Liberal voters all moved as a block to Zagami and The Greens is ridiculous. Many, many Liberal voters would have voted Labor. At least 10% of them if preference flows from other contests are consulted, but probably more as those flows that I know of are optional preferential.
The ALP is hemorrhaging voters out of its left arm at every single election. The swing to Green is not all these “tactical” Liberals.
Sam, let the ALP think that this was a “protest vote” (protest against who? Barnett?!) and that the voters of Fremantle will come to their senses at the next election. It’s that attitude that turned a safe seat into a virtual marginal at the State election and lost it at this election.
Oz
a small step for man , a giant step for greenkind
I’m sorry for asking a lazy question but is this the person who ran for the Greens at the last general election? and I congratule the Greens on actually winning a lower house seat.
Perhaps it’s a result of Australia’s two party dominance of politics. It seems Liberal voters will vote for any non-Labor candidate, regardless of their policies. But i can’t help thinking that it’s somewhat illogical.
Did the Greens in Fremantle campaign on federal issues, in particular an ETS?
If alannah does become leader labor certaily wont win canning i live in the seat and don randall is very popular but alannah is also and thats what may have dilvered her the seat I predict she will be leader Labor tends not to put people they think are to inexperinced as leader which wyatt is and they may risk doing what the libs did while in oppostion losing there leadership talent apart from alannah and wyatt who else is there carps like what robert taylor suggested (what a joke) the best thing for labor would be to run alannah as leader against col where she may win or lose if she loses thay have a back up wyatt but if they run wyatt and he loses who else is the no one and history tells us colin has a good chance of winning all state minority governments have increasted there majority some one landslides and wa likes to give a government 8 yrs in as well wyatt has the time to wait aswell
No it isn’t. Some Liberals will have voted Labor out of distaste for the Greens, but not many. Most will have taken the same view as Glen, that dishing Labor is the main game. Every Liberal I know in federal Melbourne (and I know a few) votes Green in the hope of beating Tanner.
Does anyone know if the Democrats ever held state seats?
Glen!! True the Greens are a change of winning the state seat of Melbourne but that depends on the Liberal vote not finally recovering to its pre-2001 voting levels which I am sure will happen at some point of time
right oz the same attuide that the libs had that lost them churchlands alfred cove labor for too long has treated there safe seats like crap they still do look at cannington is just one example of a Dudd hack of a MP you can not take advantage of safe seats anymore labor has now learnt the hard way like the libs before them
We also need to remember that Freo is the state capital of the Green-voting classes. There are probably more painters than wharfies in Freo these days. This is an inherently unstable and unreliable voting base, who enjoy casting protest votes. To see this result as some sort of seismic rejection of Labor by its base vote is incorrect. I doubt the Greens would have won a by-election in Balga tonight.
Psephos and others focussing on ALP not shifting much is not much help as analysis. Without a Lib candidate at least 5% of the ALP vote would be people who would normally vote Lib1 and ALP2. These are voters who dislike smaller parties. So the ALP has suffered a 5% plus loss of votes. Without some major stuffup by Greens ALP will struggle to win next time. ALP is in trouble in Fed Melbourne – Senate results in Melbourne last time would have given Greens the seat. Only a strong personal vote for Tanner stopped it. Will be tough call next time.
I don’t think the Democrats ever won a lower house seat, I believe in SA they came close to winning a seat in the southern suburbs of Adelaide
I think I’m going to take Oz’s advice and just let you believe that.
this is a big blow for labor fremantle was considered the jewel in labors crown in the state no more
This is the icing on the cake.
Antony Green: “There is a very important bit of history in this reslt. This is the first time at a state or federal election that the Greens have outpolled the Labor Party on primary votes. All previous cases where the Greens have won or come close to victory have seen Labor ahead on the primary vote and the Greens chasing Labor down on Liberal and Independent preferences.”
there are allot of voters who hate the greens and other minor partys and will allways vote either liberal or labor
Winston went:
“Perhaps it’s a result of Australia’s two party dominance of politics. It seems Liberal voters will vote for any non-Labor candidate, regardless of their policies. But i can’t help thinking that it’s somewhat illogical.”
Australia’s entire political history has really been a contest between Labour/Labor and non-Labour/Labor
It’s only been relatively recently – the last couple of decades – that professional marketing and branding by the political parties has changed the labels and the way that we think “we think” about politics.
But maybe, despite the glam and the marketing (which is really only aimed at swingable voters anyway) nothing much has greatly changed at it’s core, it’s just become a bit more complicated.
I may be incorrect but at the last Federal Election Tanner won Melbourne with somethign like 53% of the primary vote.
Tanner should be confortable in holding it.
The Greens have two problems at the next election, first it will be about the Economy and Turnbull is not the right wing nut job that Howard was.
yer your hippe/leftie tree huggings types the result of the socialist allaince clearly shows how left the seat is
The SA seat of Mitcham was held by the Democrats from 1977 when its formerly Liberal member, Robin Millhouse, brought his breakaway “New Liberal Movement” under the wing of the newly formed party. He retained the seat as a Democrat in 1979, and was was eventually appointed to the Supreme Court in 1982 by a Liberal government that hoped to win his seat back at a by-election. However, Heather Southcott retained it for the Democrats before losing to Liberal candidate Stephen Baker at the general election later that year.
Look this is an outstanding result for the Greens but lets not get excited for the WA ALP are at a low point and Fremantle is changing but lets not for a moment think that we can start calling federal seats.
turnbull will lose the election you lefties may hate johnie but it was him who allowed the liberals to be in power so long he could attract the tradional labor unoinst voter or as they are now called howard battlers malcom carnt even stick to a single policy postion
So when’s the last time a minor party (excluding the Nationals) won elections in two different seats?
Oh wait, that would’ve been One Nation.
Damn, I had almost erased them out of my memory.
australia is still a more conservative country than the left likes to admit it is espacially wa allot of the tradtional labor voters are what i would consder conservitve its just they cop for the whole class debate that labor represents the worker which it clearly does not now like its unoin buddys
I don’t think anyone’s calling Federal seats, just speculating about The Greens chances.
And then there is Gonwyn Pike and a couple of her colleagues in the Victorian Legislative Assembly.
The so called Howard battlers are a myth for the seats that elected Howard are the same seats that elected Hawke, Keating and Frazier and now Rudd
and those types are the ones who hate the greens and would rather vote liberal
Stuff them
this is a seismic shift in how politics is palyed in this country
We need a viable opposition,might as well be greens
I wonder what Insiders will be saying about this by-election tomorrow?
Psephos @ 267
Sorry but there is no evidence for your anecdotal argument. I don’t think the Lib voters in Melbourne have turned Green. Lib first preferences were 24% in 96 and 23% in 2007. It’s the Labor voters who have gone for the Greens. And the 2PP hasn’t changed much over the that time either.
then mexican explain how a howard the right wing nut job your words not mine was in power for ten years and even managed to servive 1998 when gst sould have booted him out
Mexicanbeemer – Tanner had a TP result of about 53/47 but if the Senate vote in Melbourne had been repeated in HR the result would have been about the reverse.
OZ! Good old fashsion nazel gazing! the next Victorian state election will be interesting for the Liberals are going nowhere, the Government has several big issues facing it and the Greens could beneift from this.
Pike is struggling in Melbourne but can she hang on, maybe but alot depends on what the Liberals do.
The next state poll will be about Public Transport, Roads, Planning and Water now unlike the federal issues these are strong areas for the Greens therefore we could see some swing towards them but alot will depend on how active they are and thus far they have a low profile.
the greens could never be an oppostion they agree and work with labor too much how can a far left party like the greens be one of the 2 major partys either labor would have to lose all of its support from the unoins to the greens and they take there place or the libs become defunct and labor takes there place as the right wing party
If there’s any group that thinks The Greens are irrelevant ferals, it’s the mainstream media. Particularly the dinosaurs that frequent Insiders.
I reckon, but I also know it’s going to be incredibly difficul going from a seat here, a seat there, to getting a decent cluster. I have little doubt it will happen soon enough but there is a tendency to latch onto a good result as the beginning of Green dominance when there’s still a long way to go for Greenies.
Also dont forget about the seat of Richmond too the Libs are a joke in Victoria and the protest vote could be on.
OR
The libs continue their inevitable decline into the abyss and the greens are seen by the voters as the only credible alternative
i can see it now if the greens where ever in power australia would break of the allaince with the u.s and forge one with chavez and castro and turn austrlia into a socailist utopia
Winson in the 1999 state poll the Liberals polled 33% last time they polled low 20s% the ALP were mostly unchanged with the Greens polling up over 10% I susgest that shows a swing from Liberal to the Greens within the seat of Melbourne.
Wakefield! Thank you for the correction.
Sothernboy! Howard was in Governemnt for 11 years for several reasons, first a booming economy, secondary an ALP that left office seriously unpopular and a decade of the ALP failing to address the reasons for this instead focusing on stunts and lazy policy development with poor leadership.
Anthony Green has my back…
Some call it the Domino theory, others the red peril, whereas we here at K.A.O.S. call it the pearls of pauline
that will never happend another concervitve party would form like thats why the liberal party formed because the concervitive force before them UAP declined and there was know party that atractted the middle class as menzies called it the forgtton class gusface you are wrong
this just shows labor that the greens are also a threat to them for too long they have loved having greens prefrences to get them over in marginals
I would suggest that what happened at the 2002 state election was that most of the Green vote was from Labor and that this was masked by voter switching from the Liberals to Labor (I think that a comment of a similar nature was made by either Anthony (not 100% sure though, it might have been Kerry) on the election coverage following a comment that it was Liberal voters switching to the Greens).
Socialist? The Greens can’t even spell the word. Oh, wait…
I don’t see a new conservatitive party forming for a start who is the modern day Menzies and the issues that shaped that era are different to today’s issues and really the problems for the Liberal Party will be worked though just as the ALP overcame its problems.
the only new conservative party would be a merged entity of Liberals and Nats into a Party with a new name.
but the point is the liberals and labor still dont see the greens as a threat of taking the 2 party place of them if they did they with the media would try to distroy them like they did with one nation
and aint it worked a treat in Qld
Mexican @ 303
Have a closer look at the results.
I was talking about the Federal seat but no matter.
Your comparison of the state seat in 99 and 2006 doesn’t stack up.
Wrong. The Labor vote dropped more than the Lib vote – from 59% to 45%. Main reason was there were only 3 candidates (and no Greens) in 99 and 6 candidates in 2006.
They already tried and are still trying. It hasn’t worked so far and probably won’t ever.
Gusface they didnt have a new name and it needs to be national IMHO…
Glen do you really want to be in the same party as Barnaby Joyce?
Glen
This is the clarion call to the Libs
unless you dudes sort your shite out
YOU WILL END UP AS THE MINORS
BTW 90% of us here have been trying to tell you guys this since 2007 and I think the electorate is moving on
Vale liberalus
Well look at this this way, Barnett will haver more trouble getting legislation through the lower house, especially environmental legislation with the Greens now having the balance of power in the lower house.
Yes Adam, all non-Labor centre-right politicians should be in the same political organisation, we have no need for country parties or city parties. Canada has shown that Conservatives divided fall but united stand to gain alot.
I hope i see the day that there is a single main stream conservative party in Australia.
And it will be called….. The Unified Reactionary Agrarian Socialist Conservative Party of Australia.
I don’t think our political spectrum divides in the same way as Canada, because Labor is a centrist party as much as it is a centre-Left party. That means the anti-Labor parties represent all sorts of contradictory positions that can’t be easily unified.
I don’t see the Greens winning anywhere much in the medium term future if there is a proper Lab/Lib contest going on in the seat, and that includes Fremantle at the next state election.
However, if the Liberals do start to pull out of contests where they don’t have much chance then there are a few other places where they could cause a similar close Green vs Labor race.
In WA state politics, Williagee is one example. In 2008, the results were ALP 51%, Lib 31%, Grn 17.4%. So if the Libs pulled out and a good many of their supporters wanted to hit the ALP, then it could be close.
However, games like this might be fun occasionally, but they will not last long if the Libs regard the Green candidates seriously rather than just ways of registering anti-Labor votes.
Canada will not have many Conservative Governments after it adopts PR because it has a natural left wing majority.
Which is why they wont and they still have FPTP.
Thanks Winston! I will revisit the VEC before I provide any further comment on Green vote!
When the Left get back in they are likely to adopt it because the NDP are likely to require it as party of a Coalition deal.
How?
Labor+Greens is still the same amount of seats as Labor on its own was before.
If he had a majority before the election on a piece of legislation, he’d have a majority after as well.
Ta Mr bowe for a quite informative and possibly historic thread
sometimes you really excel yourself
well done
Gusface
Yep, excellent job William, both he and I were wrong – but at least Freo hasn’t gone to the Libs
Greens winning one of these inner metro big city seats has been waiting to happen for years – often threatened, never quite got there one way or the other. And I agree with Antony; Labor could have its work cut out getting this one back, especially if the new member does a good job.
On Dems holding state seats (#268), Norm Sanders was elected as a Dem for the Tasmanian House of Assembly seat of Denison in the 1980 Denison by-election and re-elected in 1982; of course it was much easier for a Dem to get in under Hare-Clark than in a single-seat system.
And those of a pure heart can sleep a little easier tonite, saurons minions were smashed yet again, tho instead of the numoreans it was the halflings who prevailed
And remember Freo is no longer the home of the Wharfies and Meat workers and migrant women who worked in the Mills & Wares Biscuit Factory etc – it’s now a Bohemian Arty-Farty type of demographic – well educated types.
Glen if you think Joyce is “mainstream” you haven’t been listening to him recently. He’s completely crackers. Nor is he a conservative. He’s a sort of hysterical rural redneck populist. If you get in bed, politically speaking, with people like him you will *never* win another election.
personally I think he has been drinking the drench*
*Drench is what you give cows etc orally to kill worms, tho it sends livestock a bit “loco” for a while
This is state seast so it is unlikely that Rudd’s failure thus far to act with any sort of positive leadership on climate change would have made much difference to the result.
Gusface
lol.
There are drenches and drenches… He is one of the ones who missed out on his foot in mouth one…
It’s worth noting that both the UK and Canada, which are probably the closest comparisons to Australia’s political systems in terms of scale, have third political parties with about 10% of the seats in the national lower house. And that’s without preferences, which can result in Cunningham-style results where the Greens can win without coming close to the ALP on primaries.
I’m not saying that the NDP and the Lib Dems are the same as the Australian Greens, but there is that room for a third party, even with a traditional two-party system to get about 20% of the vote.
It should be noted that Adele Carles didn’t make any hare-brained promises or statements which would’ve frightened the horses – she didn’t look like your typical Feral Green type.
If Bob Brown and the Federal Greens adopted the same professional attitude, maybe they might win those seats, instead of looking like residents from Nimbin.
The Lib Dems though have gone from a major party to a rump. I don’t know much about the history of the NDP but they’ve been quite successful as a third party. However, even for them there was more space on the left as they became the part of organised Labor.
Other than ecological sustainability, the philosophy of The Greens in Australia is harder to pin down (at least in terms of perception). This is not to say they can’t become a third force akin to the Lib Dems or NDP but rather than being reduced to it, or tapping into a natural base they’re having to carve out their own – and so far, doing a very good job of it.
I think Adele Carles is more like the norm when it comes to Greens parliamentarians and members rather than the exception. Of course, this may not be your experience, but I daresay I’ve met more than you have.
I’m taliking public perception and how some members behave when protesting by getting themselves arrested etc – in the general public’s mind it paints them as radical ferals and are tantamount to Terrorists. This may not be true, but it’s amazing what 30 seconds of footage on the news can do to paint people perceptions of someone.
It’s true that the Liberal Democrats have their origins in the original Liberal major party, but it’s worth remembering that they had effectivley disappeared before the emergence of the SDP in the 1980s provided them with a new lease on life, so like the Greens they have had to build up from nothing.
The general public think that Greens are tantamount to terrorists? Really?
Ah cool, I didn’t know that.
Well amongst our more ultra conservative members they are, for example One Nation Voters, Family first, Christian Democrats etc.
People like that are never gonna vote Green. The major parties very rarely get a majority of the vote, and there’s probably 30-40% of the country who would never vote for each major party.
Actually, the Greens are aiming for the next 10%, who are largely Labor voters in inner-city seats with a high education, they are similar in a lot of ways to most current Greens voters. This would also put the Greens at the levels of the LibDems and the NDP.
Hi All,
Just got home from Freo.
While not normally being one to gloat….
Frank, how would you like those eggs you were talking about, fried, poached or scrambled?
I wasn’t the only one who called it wrong – so did young William
Adele only won because there was no Liberal Candidate
Adele won because she polled more votes than Tagliaferri, both on primary votes and on 2pp.
There were 11 candidates, who cares if the Libs ran or not.
Read and digest from Antony Green
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/wa/2009/fremantle/
And Repeat till the next State election
If we’re quoting Antony, let’s not be selective:
Frank,
I desperately hope the you and others in the ALP keep believeing this is an aberrant result and do nothing to mend your ways.
Frank Calabrese 338! It is really sad to read your comment ” Your typical Feral Green Type” Can I suggest you apologise to the 10,000 Members of the Australian Greens and the thousands of other Australian voters who support the Australian Greens. Your comments are FERAL and uneducated. Actually, completely ignorant. Back from the the theatre tonight to read of Adele Carles’ fabulous victory. A small beacon of light amongst the Conservative Mire of Australian Politics.
Hope not too many Lib voters wake up tomorrow with buyers regret
Brenton,
Your little rant has proven beyond any doubt why the Greens will never be a major force in mainstreams Politics, and you have the gall to call ALP supporters Arrogant.
Mr Pot, meet Mr Kettle.
Brenton @ 353, I think Frank was referrring to “typical feral” rather than “typical green”. Don’t be so sensitif!
Brenton (again) -you should have stayed at the theatre, where gesture and artifice are so much more forceful. “Adele Carles’ fabulous victory” is -in the REAL world- a step backwards for Fremantle.
I’d doubt that. Any Liberals who voted Greens did so to damage Labor, and have succeeded in that end. Speaking as one of Carles’s constituents, I expect my life to continue much as before.
By the way, what does your name stand for?
William,
I suspect that you’ll see a lot more of Premier Barnett and his Ministers in the electorate than you would’ve had Tagliaferri had retaqined the seat
I’m jealous.
Can we just get rid of this ridiculous idea that the Greens would not have won if the Liberals had run. While it is true that the Greens failed to outpoll the Liberals at the state election, the Greens ran incredibly close and you would have to think in a by-election between Labor and the Greens where the Liberal candidate had no chance of winning and was defending the government position, it would have not required much more than a breeze to push the Greens into second place, making the issue of Liberals running or not largely irrelevant.
I’m sure it would have been a different race if the Liberals ran, but Adele won because she was the clear choice, both on primary votes and preferences, not because of the list of minor candidates.
It doesn’t mean anything William, It’s a throwaway email address I signed up to crikey with for the free trial just before the fed election and appeared as my username first time I made a comment.
William
‘the Greens swing had a correlation with the Italian-speaking population of -0.47 and an R-squared value of 0.22′
Does this mean that the Italian-speaking population voted less, proportionately, for the Green candidate than for other candidates? And if ‘intuitively’, why?
If the result was due the Tories dogging it and not running a candidate, why didn’t their voters park their votes with the god-botherers first, then the right wing loons and independents and then give their final preferences to the socialists?
The god-botherers seem to have done quite poorly here.
Boerwar, because the Labor candidate was called Mr Tagliatelli, presumably.
William (or anyone else who knows), how did Labor campaign against the Greens? Did they run the same kind of negative campaign that Labor ran in Albert Park, pointing out far-left Green policies that voters wouldn’t like, or alleging a Green-Liberal alliance? These tactics worked in Albert Park. Were they not used in Freo, or were they used but didn’t bite?
I remember saying at the time of Albert Park that the Greens would have done much better had they chosen a more presentable candidate, preferably female, rather than the bearded Green stereotype they ran with. Obviously the WA Greens took this advice, which I should have kept to myself. Obviously also it helped Labor in Albert Park that Labor is a popular government in Victoria rather than a recently-defeated opposition.
Albert, because their objective was to dish Labor, and the simplest way to do that was vote Green.
“Equally interesting was the lack of a significant correlation between the Greens swing and the Liberal vote from the state election. That would seem to argue against the notion that a static Labor vote was swamped by Liberals moving to the Greens”
From whats been on here since last night i’m coming around to the view that Carles probably would have won even if the Libs had run a real candidate. As a resident in this electorate i can say there were a lot of people here i know who would normally vote ALP and preference Green (with the expectation that the Greens will run 3rd) who gave their vote to Green this time. Maybe the increase in Green vote was ALP voters jumping ship, and the ALP vote was held up by Libs who cant stomach the Greens no matter what?
Personally, mine went to the Socialist alliance dude first, but that’s just because i am not that enamored of Carles. Put Carles at 2 and then ALP as i am even less impressed with Tagliaferri. Sad for me have to decide on that basisas i’m usually solid ALP at a state level. Would have been a different story if this was a general election with the chance of changing the Government though and i think that Carles may have to keep that in mind as she considers alliances going forward as a member of parliament.
Carles has a chance to prove herself now and good luck to her if she can solidify her support. It certainly a wake up call for the ALP not to take safe seats for granted. I know in White Gum Valley (a traditionally strong booth for the ALP) we have seen very little campaigning in the 4 years we have lived here and have always assumed that its because we are in such a safe ALP area that no-one bothers from any party.
For myself I have no intention of voting Greens federally in the HoR as i think Parkes is shaping up pretty well and showing good sense in working on a local profile. In the Senate i’ll consider Green very carefully but my problem is when the Greens run fruitcake candidates. I wont vote for Siewert, but was impressed by Ludlam before the last election. I’ll preference them before the Libs for certain though.
I’d fully expect the Greens to run a strong campaign here at the next federal election to try and capitalize on this victory, but over the larger seat of Brand i don’t think they stand much chance. Unless the Libs decide to not run? Wonder if they would try that as a tactic at a federal election?
I’ve seen the name Brand come up a couple of times now… that’s further south, around Rockingham. The federal electorate containing Fremantle is called Fremantle too.
Psephos: Labor’s campaign in Fremantle was comparatively not dirty compared to past campaigns, such as you note in Albert Park.
Tagliaferri’s entire campaign basically consisted of “vote for me, I’m wonderful” – light on the policy, but he also didn’t really attack Adele much that I can remember.
The one attempt to play dirty backfired hilariously: a huge anti-lead shipping sign, in Green (same shade as our signs) that said Vote Tagliaferri. The problem was that the “Vote Tagliaferri” bit didn’t stand out, and until pointed out, everyone thought it was one of our signs… though it helped that it wound up ringed in Green triangle signs.
Boerwar: Tagliaferri does have a very strong following in the Italian community in Fremantle. We had many old Italian people showing up to vote in the morning who were only taking Labor HTVs, and a few actually told people along the lines of “I’m voting Labor – I’m Italian”. Although I did have one old Italian man, thick accent, who walked up to me near the close of polling and said “I hope you win…f**k Tagliaferri!”, which just summed up the day really.
I think we’ll hold this seat at the general election, if the Green campaign then is anything on par with what it was this time. We didn’t just scrape in on preferences – we won every booth bar two, and won easily in some territory which is traditionally very much not Green-friendly. I think this result’s going to scare a few Labor state MPs; some of the booths we won last night suggest that if the Vic Greens got their act together, we might well have a long-term shot at seats like Northcote.
#364
Possibly also because in somewhere like Fremantle, Liberal voters would likely be ’small l liberal’ types who would feel okay about voting Green, rather than CDP-voting Tories.
As a few people have commented upthread, I think in hindsight Labor’s preselection of Tagliaferri in the first place wasn’t the bright idea that they thought it was.
Tagliaferri has enormous name recognition down there, but I got the distinct impression out campaigning that a lot of people just hate his guts over some of the decisions he’s made as mayor, a lot of which seem to have been pretty controversial. I think he actually helped the Green margin; though I think they probably would have still lost, Labor would have done better, I think, to put in a cleanskin candidate.
Rebecca, Labor’s campaign in Albert Park wasn’t *dirty*, it was *negative*, which is a campaigner’s term-of-art, not a moral judgement. A negative campaign focusses on your opponent’s policies, seeking to portray them in a negative light. A positive campaign focusses on your own policies (or personality), putting them in a positive light. If Labor’s campaign in Freo was focussed on promoting Tagliaferri as a great candidate, that’s a positive campaign, though not a very effective one obviously. A negative campaign would have highlighted the more extreme elements of Greens policies, and also made the point that the Liberals wanted the Greens to win and were voting for the Green.
In Victoria, for example, the Greens have a policy of abolishing selective state high schools. Unfortunately for them, one of the best selective schools in Victoria, MacRobertson Girls’ High, is in Albert Park. So Labor ran ads asking why the Greens wanted to close MacRob and deny smart girls a quality education. The Greens fell for the bait and spent the campaign complaining about Labor’s tactics rather than promoting their own policies – always a fatal mistake.
…in other words, dirty.
How is it dirty?
I don’t live in this electorate, but read in the news this morning that the results here would quite likely cost Ripper his job. Don’t remember the ladies name but the article put her up as the most likely replacement. If I lived in this electorate, I would have remembered the name but I chucked the Sunday Times after reading it (while at my 11yo junior footy game). You all probably know who I am talking about though …..
Alannah Mactiernan probably.
If Ripper gets chopped and MacTiernan runs for a federal seat, will Ben Wyatt then become Leader straight away? Is there anyone else?
Weren’t used. They ran a positive campaign about Tagliaferri’s virtues, with a bit of drum-beating on the lead exports issue which in no way differentiated them from the Greens. Quite the contrary, in fact – these banners festooned every polling booth, making each one a sea of green.
Well there you go. Negative campaigning works. Everyone says they abhor and eschew it, but if you don’t do it you lose.
Juliem @ 375, Alannah Mactiernan may well replace Ripper quite soon, though it would be hard to justify on the basis of the anti-ALP swing, which was pretty small. But even the most ardent ALP supporter (Frank?) would have to concede that Alannah, though very competent, is a polarising figure and has a fair amount of baggage. Both Ripper and Mactiernan would only really be warming the seat for the next hot property, Ben Wyatt, who is steadily building his profile, has plenty of charisma and media smarts, and the chance to make history as the country’s first-ever indigenous party leader.
Psephos: I think that’s rather telling. The Greens can fight fair and win on our policies and our values; Labor can’t win unless they resort to dirty tactics.
I wrote that comment before reading Rebecca’s, which said exactly the same thing. I do think the green banners were a mistake.
Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. Beware the old “Labor lost so everything they did was wrong” fallacy. Only Labor so far as I’m aware have conducted actual market research on this, so they are best placed to know the answer. We do know it was telling them no one else could win for them a few months ago. However, I suspect the severity and intensity of the campaign against him by his local critics exacerbated the leakage of Labor votes to the Greens on a scale they didn’t see coming. You might well argue that they should have. Would they have done better with, say, Dave Kelly? Maybe, but I’d doubt it. I expect you’d be getting a slightly different formulation of the same discussion, i.e. Labor shouldn’t have run a union/party/factional hack.
Michelle Roberts probably fancies herself. She was Carpenter’s main rival to replace Gallop. Carpenter himself is probably a bit much to ask. I personally think Wyatt would be their best available option in that unfortunate set of circumstances. People mention the deputy, Roger Cook, as a future leader, but he’s only been in parliament since the September election when he was very nearly defeated by an independent.
The Greens didn’t do it and won…
Rebecca, pointing out one’s opponents’ policies is not a dirty tactic. If the Greens adopt policies which voters won’t like, that’s their choice. They can’t complain if other parties choose to draw them to the voters’ attention. Did you know that the Greens in Victoria have a policy banning the use of leather? I wanted to put out a poster with the heading “Say goodbye to your shoes”, but I wasn’t allowed to.
It’s dirty in this case because it is misleading and dishonest.
The Greens dont actually want to close those schools, they want them either less selective and exclusive or not get government funding. We dont believe you can do both.
The only reason for saying we want to shut them down is because the schools want to be exclusive AND funded.
If the Greens got their way, the girls would still get education, and the school would stay open
They didn’t have to because they had the Liberals and the WA anti-Labor media to do it for them. They were just the lucky beneficiaries of other people’s negative campaigns against Tagliaferri.
But I probably should have said: *When you’re on the defensive*, if you don’t do it you lose. When you’re ahead anyway, you can win on a smile and a promise.
I’m not an expert on the Victorian Greens policy but I think the idea behind the concept of that policy is that choosing certain schools to receive more funding and resources creates a schism within the public school system.
The response is to get rid of the two-tier system and ensure all public schools have at least the resources of current selective schools.
Of course Labor decides to run with the “They want to abolish good schools!” line, which is not only a misrepresentation, but the complete opposite of the policy.
Certainly there was no shortage of negative campaigning against Tagliaferri:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09heraldad0516markets.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09heraldadspeakout.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09antitagheraldad0805.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09marketsad0805.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09antitagheraldad0805b.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09lauderheraldad0805.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09asuheraldad0805.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/05/frem09dowsonherald3.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/04/frem09dowsonherald2.jpg
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/files/2009/04/frem09dowsonheraldad.jpg
However, none of it was from the Greens – officially, at least. If I were a suspicious type, I might suggest they pursued a deliberate strategy of keeping their own messages positive while outsourcing the negativity to third parties. Bloody good move, if so.
William,
You certainly sound like a suspicious type to me.
Of course if the ALP preselect a high profile candidate and seek to trade off their record, they have to expect the negative aspects of their record will be highlighted as well.
Adam, are you no longer in Canberra?
Is Labor on borrowed time in the inner-city seats? Would Labor hold Melbourne without Tanner? The rise of the Greens is like the rise of the Country Party perhaps. 20 years from now it is likely that the Greens may have supplanted Labor in the inner-city as the CP supplanted the Nationalists in the wheatbelt by the late 1920s. But if the policies of the Australian left as a whole were set by the Greens the Libs would probably be in power for ever.
Luke, I work in Canberra but I live in Queanbeyan.
Geoff, that’s quite possible, but Labor will fight them on the beaches and on the landing fields etc. If that does happen, no doubt we will come to some sort of modus vivendi with them (as we have done in the ACT), although it will drag us to the left and thus make beating the conservatives more difficult. On the other hand, maybe responsibility will draw the Greens toward the centre, as it did in Germany during the Schroeder-Fischer government.
I think that Melbourne will probably fall to the Greens next year because the government is seen as arrogant and the margin is so small.
If you mean state Melbourne, possibly. If you mean federal Melbourne, I doubt it very much.
I mean Gonwyn Pike`s seat.
>>Is Labor on borrowed time in the inner-city seats?
Did anyone notice that Albo was at great pains to deny on Insiders that the ever fragrant Mrs Albo was whiteanting Reesie for the chance to lead Catholic Action errrr… I mean the NSW ALP to electoral oblivion in 2011? Based on the WA action overnight Carmello will have her work cut out defending Marrickville especially if the Liberals run dead there.
In Marrickville the Greens ran second. The Liberals did not direct preferences/directed against them so most of their votes exhausted. If the Liberals preferenced the Greens then the seat would be closer (the margin would have been half or less in 2007 had they done so).
http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/state_government_elections/electoral_districts/all_districts_/marrickville/results_2007/perferential_count
And in Balmain the Greens would have one if the Liberals had directed preferences to them.
http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/state_government_elections/electoral_districts/all_districts_/balmain/results_2007/perferential_count
William,
Just a thought further to Ben and Adam’s comments. Turn-out is typically lower in by-elections where a major party doesn’t compete. And it appears (though this is harder to substantiate) that the electors who don’t turn up are some subset of that major party’s supporters: possibly their younger voters, I don’t know. But certainly the easiest way to explain Albert Park in 2007, for instance, is to assume a large portion of Liberal voters, perhaps 4,000 or so, stayed home rather than vote Labor or Green.
Don’t know if you know any work done on that front?
Anyway it’s an interesting Fremantle counter-factual: if it hadn’t coincided with the referendum, could you have taken ~1,200 Liberal prefs off Green pile?
Turn-out drop in fully-contested by-elections:
Lindsay (1996) -6.1%
Burwood (1999) -5.7%
Benalla (2000) -3.4%
Aston (2001) -4.1%
Ryan (2001) -5.7%
Gippsland (2008) -6.0%
Average: -5.2%
Turn-out drop in by-elections where major party didn’t compete:
Wentworth (1995) -18.8%
Blaxland (1996) -9.1%
Fraser (1997) -11.6%
Holt (1999) -1.2% *** coincided with republic referendum
Isaacs (2000) -14.6%
Cunningham (2002) -6.3%
Werriwa (2005) -8.7%
Williamstown (2007) -6.9%
Albert Park (2007) -15.0%
Kororoit (2008) -8.9%
Lyne (2008) -8.5%
Mayo (2008) -15.8%
Average: -10.0%
Well, there you go. Very interesting. We’ve actually had more polling booth votes cast at this by-election than at last year’s state election – 16,458 to 15,417 – although that would be influenced by the fact that Bicton PS was a dedicated Fremantle booth this time, whereas those who went there last year had to cast absent votes. Take them out and the turnout looks pretty much the same.
So, rule of thumb: you get a 5% drop when both majors contest, 10% when one doesn’t, and the effect is cancelled out by a coinciding referendum. You might argue that the Fremantle result would have been line-ball if it hadn’t been for the referendum. Then again, you might argue that Labor would have lost more votes if the by-election had forced people to polling booths unnecessarily.
The other point to make about Albert Park is that it was held on 15 September 2007, just as the federal campaign was about to begin. Voters in Albert Park were very keen to get rid of Howard, and knew that a win for the Greens would be portrayed as a setback for Labor – as it would have been. They weren’t in a mood to deliver any setbacks to Labor.
But the probably will in 2010.
The lack of a y on the they in the above post is an illusion.
I’m not exactly sure why Albert Park’s coming up here as a subject of comparison. While the Greens do well there, I wouldn’t call it a top-tier seat, and demographically it’s not quite the same as the seats the Greens have won or come close to winning in the past. It’s more in the league of Brisbane Central than Fremantle.
Beyond that, you also had an electorate that was a lot less disenchanted with Labor, a Greens candidate that fit into the old-guy-with-beard stereotype, and a not what you might call brilliant Greens campaign. All of these factors were different this time around.
I raised Albert Park to compare the difference in Labor tactics. There were, as you say, and as Nathan says, a number of other factors which also serve to explain why the two by-elections produced different results, although I don’t agree with you if you are suggesting that Albert Park is not demographically a seat which the Greens could win – it is. But I maintain my view that Labor’s tactics in Albert Park were effective. I don’t know Freo well enough to be able to say whether the same tactics would have worked there.
Of all the by-elections with only one major party competing, Cunningham ‘02 has the lowest drop in turnout. That could be because of low turnout in the preceding fed election, but I can’t think of any reason why that would be the case.
Off the top of my head I’ve come up with two broad reasons why there might have been a low drop in turnout there in ‘02:
1. A ‘baseball bats’ mood against the competing major – the ALP
2. A perception that the 3rd-party candidate was a viable option – namely the Greens’ Michael Organ, who held the seat until 2004
What do the PBludgers reckon? Also I think that Freo would have had a relatively low drop in turnout without the referendum, with a viable candidate for change and a reasonably close-knit (and geographically small) community.
The problem for the Greens is that the Liberal vote is too high for them to jump (unlike the 4 seats they are second in now) and so is the Labor vote (probably unlike Prahran).
Adam: Oh, they were effective, if dirty. I’m merely pointing out that they were helped by a) the fact the Green campaign was pretty awful, and that b) it’s just not as good a seat for the Greens as I think Labor claimed it was in their spin. It’s a Brisbane Central – a seat we could conceivably win in 15 years if things improved a lot; it’s no Fremantle.
Thanks to all those who responded on the Italian connection. Interesting stuff. The question I was getting around to:
‘Is there any evidence that Italians are more or less likely to vote Green than the general population?’
Rebecca, I don’t know what you base that view on. St Kilda, Elwood, South Melbourne, Albert park, are full of Green-voter types. At the 2001 Senate election, the Greens won the St Kilda Beach booth where I was scrutineering. Port Melbourne is not very good for the Greens, but that is true of parts of Freo as well. At the federal election the Greens polled 15% in Melbourne Ports v 14.6% in Fremantle.
I’d be fairly sure that voters of Italian background are more likely to vote for a candidate called Tagliaferri than a candidate called Carles.
Adam: Freo folk are an interesting bunch. The wrong italian surname might mean a lot of italians DON’T vote for you… feuds run long and hard…
Rebecca!! If you say Albert Park is like Brisbane Central then what Victorian seat would you say is most like Fremantle.
My view is Albert Part is potential a Green Seat the suburb of St Kilda is very green,. the biggest problem the Greens have is the best booth in St Kilda Reden Centre in St Kilda East is in the seat of Prahran
Elwood feels like a Liberal suburb but the Greens do very well.
Excellent weekend! Daylight saving is put into the bin for GOOD and Labor loses Fremantle!
Green Left Weekly on election result (brief article written for deadline – more to come next week)
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/795/40962
Ha! Trots claim victory with 2% of the vote, tail around after petit bourgeois greenies. Not much to show for 40 years of Australian Trotskyism, eh?
Adam said
I think that is right, swinging voters vote strategically for a desired goal. That is why I think the greens will do well in coming elections. The strategic voter will not be wanting to give labor too big a majority. The rabble called the liberal party need a good solid kick to force them to sort themselves out ( though I suspect it might be terminal), who does that leave; the Greens.
As for the god botherers and right wing nut cases they have no hope, if your into that sort of stuff the liberal party is for you, they are working hard to attract that demographic ( about 15% at best)
It will be interesting to see the collective decision on the senate, will they give it to labor, or the balance of power to the greens. I am hoping or the later because I want to see a carbon trading scheme for purely commercial reasons, a greens controlled senate will force it to happen and happen at a level that makes developing green alternatives profitable.
Mexicanbeemer,
Albert park is over quota (10% last time on the figures I saw) so it will lose bits of St Kilda to probably Prahran. Prahran is probably more winnable for the Greens than Albert Park at the moment.
Ya perhaps one day the party will reform itself and you will be able to celebrate a win, until then I suppose you have to be happy with the constellation prizes.
Catching up on Today’s stuff I tend with peshos’s assesment that the Greens picked an anti green type candidate – ie like I described last night which Brenton took grerat exception to, I also tend to agree with William that the Greens ran clean and outsourced the dirt to others with an axe to grind – why do you think Carles was involved with the meeting with the Fremantle Market stallholders ?
Re ALP Leadership, my money is on Alanah cos she jhas the balls to stand up to Barnett, and Liberals HATE Strong female types, closely followed by Ben Wyatt.
William,
Did you record Ch 7’s news coverage re the By-Election ? I just hope Adele’s final sound grab in that report doesn’t come back and bite her on the bum.
No, didn’t see either Seven or Nine. Care to illuminate? On Ten she said she had no idea what she was going to do next, if that’s what you mean.
Yep. exactly the killer quote – hopefully the ABC’s report will be uploaded later tonight.
Oh my god, you have caught her out already Frank. Quick, cancel the count and rerun the Poll. Whattya reckon Tags is doing next?
Speaking of outsourcing the dirt, I am looking forward to seeing the electoral return put in by the NPQ. I am sure all candidates denied receiving any support at the forum, I suspect that will not be the case after the retunrs are out.
I’m not sure the Greens should get too excited about this one. They have won on the back of conversatives like Glen’s mum trying to stick it to Labor
There is a saying loose lips sink ships – all I’m saying if she doesn’t succeed in stopping lead shipments, North Ports Quay etc, all it takes is for the ALP to run TV ads with that quote.
Andrew:
I totally agree with that statement, Adele appealed to the libs because she wasn’t Labor and with no Lib standing, she was the next best thing.
I don’t think Labor are going to be running television ads specifically for Fremantle, Frank.
As someone sympathetic to the Greens, I agree that it’s nice but nothing to get too excited about. By-elections often throw up wacky results and are notoriously unpredictable. The record on PB at picking results in general elections is excellent but the record on by-elections is not over-encumbered with achievements.
ha ha bring it on, that would be hysterical.
Boo hoo, we lost because the libs didn’t run, we lost because the West Australian doesn’t like us blah blah blah.
Its not us, its them.
Trust me Frank, its you.
“You” meaning the ALP, not you personally.
I dont think Labor will run negative campaigns directly against the Greens. To many of their own supporters are sympathetic to them, and even vote Green in the Senate.
I dont think that the Greens did outsource any mud slinging against Tagliaferri, particularly the Markets thing. He was always going to suffer from his time as mayor of Freo anyway and i think their involvement was more about harvesting existing dissatisfaction than creating it.
Interesting report on ABC news that the Greens now get funded for staff and offices?
Is that because of their numbers in parliament now or just somethign that comes with a lower house seat and not upper??
It’s because they now have five members.
Dumb question time.
Why is WA = Western Australia (not West Australia) and SA = South Australia (not Southern Australia)
It’s inconsistent.
5 mp’s gets you party status and with it extra staff and a caucus room in Parliament. They always had offices, just now they get to be a little bigger.
Thanks for that.
Socialist Alliance welcomes historic Greens win in Fremantle
http://socialistallianceperth.blogspot.com/2009/05/socialist-alliance-welcomes-historic.html
Maybe not a TV ad, but a press ad with that quote in a speech bubble…
Or a canny journalist replaying that soundbite.
Video of ABC News report.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/05/17/2572957.htm
Peter Dowding may well be correct on his assesment.
Frank, I’m overseas. Any links to the scurrilous soundbite?
Apparently from that ABC report, it was all because of a Green Tide according to McGinty. Must be phases of the moon, rather than public opinion. Is a waning moon for the ALP a Green tide?
Sorry disasterboy, no link to the soundbite yet.
But here is yesterday’s report by West TV – which concentrates on Adele Carles more than Labor.
http://www.westtv.com.au/?vxSiteId=43c6a3c7-abf1-4c32-b98d-c27f8fa83360&vxChannel=News&vxClipId=1416_WAU2549&vxBitrate=300
According to Antony Green on ABC Radio, Fremantle has been soft Labor and has always gone to preferences sin McGinty was first elected as an MP.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/16/2572628.htm
Certainly, weird things can happen at by-elections, but with that disclaimer…
I think it’s hogwash to suggest EVERY Liberal vote went to the Greens, solely because the Liberals hate the ALP that much. Certainly, some may, but as we’ve seen at more recent by-elections when only two of the three parties are running, and there’s no strong independent, a lot of the absent major party’s primary vote goes to the other major party (e.g. Williamstown, Albert Park) in addition to the Greens. For 100% of this to go to the Greens is phenomenal. What is more likely (as has been previously stated) is that the ALP picked up some of the Liberal vote, but had a hefty swing against it.
Certainly, a lot of comments here just after the by-election was announced seem to suggest that the Greens’ best shot was if the Liberals were to run.
Having said that, I’m not as smart as others to work out the finer details, or to even remember if this was the case for by-elections pre-2005.
And I’d suggest the reason there’s such a high turnout in Freo is because it’s William’s seat, and people don’t want to be embarrassed by not keeping the percentages high!
As a final question, does the party status also require the Greens to have at least one member in the lower house in WA? Or will 5 in the upper house do?
It was 5 in the Legislative Assembly until after the changeover of the Legislative Council in 2005 when it was changed to 5 overall (partly because of 1 vote one vale reducing the likelihood of the Nats getting 5).
Carles should be made leader (possibly after some time to get used to Parliament) to get her a more prominent seat in the Legislative Assembly and be in the same house as the other leaders and thus increase the prominence of the Greens and them not being seen as a upper house party.
Can someone tell me what it is with so many ex-Hobart Socialist Alliance types all ending up in Perth? Bainbridge, Emanuel, Ulasowski all certainly ex-Hobart (Wainwright as well? Not sure but the name sounds familiar). Did I really scare them all that far away?
Kevin, you’re also right on Wainwright. Former Tas Young Labor state secretary.
I agree and also (don’t shoot me) she presents a credible face for the Party as a moderate, and not as some evil feral radical like Giz Watson – and yes that is the perception that some people have of the Greens at the moment – even Bob Brown sahould take note on how Adele behaved during the campaign.
I was on the booth in White Gum Valley and had a number of middle aged women of the Doctors wives variety tell me they weren’t sure who to vote for until they saw the poster of Sam Wainwright which convinced them to vote for him.
I am not sure if they liked his policies or his swarthy good looks.
I suspect it was the latter as they did not seem to be the nationalise the mines type
Is Sam Wainwright related to City Of Swan Councillor Mick Wainwright and his Brother Steve who unsuccessfully stood for the Midland Ward and is one of Michelle Robert’s Staffters ?
http://cityofswan.com/default.asp?doc_id=11&parent_id=1&doc_type_id=2&councillor_id=3359
Or to Rufus, Martha and Loudon Wainwright?
Oh you would put in the musical Wainwrights.
Speaking of which here is the Patriach with an ode which would be msic to our Green Bludgers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doqTSev-_lQ
sthat should be Music – oh and he compares a skunk to a politician you don’t like in the Intro – so it’s on topic
Andrew Landeryou offers his perspective. Touchingly, he also flouts his ban on links to Crikey especially for me.
I am always vexed at how Andrew Landeryou and his warmongering lot label Green politicians whose goal is is a world characterised by peace, disarmament and non-violence as “Militant”.
They can surely come up with a more accurate epithet of resentment. Conflating the Greens politics to that of Communists is rather amusing. Apart from bothering to enter the political fray this is what Marx would think of The Greens:
“The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own surroundings, causes Socialists of this kind to consider themselves far superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class. For how can people, when once they understand their system, fail to see it in the best possible plan of the best possible state of society? Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary, action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social Gospel.”
c/-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_socialism
Random thought here. Fremantle just stopped being a safe Labor seat where they drop future ministers and forget about, and the next best idea (Tagliaferri) just failed too. Who the hell do they get to run in 2013 against Carles?
Peter Bell or Luc Longley.
Well, Robert Taylor has this to say in today’s/tomorrow’s West: “Tagliaferri said yesterday he would continue as an ALP member and hinted that he might contest the seat again in 2013 at the next State election”.
I understand PB was sounded out this time and politely declined the offer.
Interesting move, considering Tagliaferri statement last week saying he would retire from council and politics in general.
Uh oh.. I smell a scandal brewing, we can replay those comments on our tv ads.
I thought you meant me at first.
So did I, but your Facebook friendship with Martin Drum would be placed under intense scrutiny
The same kind of scrutiny as Carles ‘being linked to’ once living the other side of Carrington St, Frank?
I think Peter Bell lives in Geraldton, anyway. He was doing some weird FIFO thing with the Dockers for the last few months before he retired.
Nope, he’s returned from Geardton and is now playing for South Fremantle in the WAFL
As I said before, I think Tagliaferri wound up being a negative for the ALP this time around – he just had too much baggage, though he certainly did better than someone like Kelly would have. They’d be wise to try and coax someone of the ilk of Peter Bell in, or else get a genuine cleanskin candidate with the ability to put up a strong campaign personally.
As in Fi Fo Fo Fum?
The Fourth International decided that the prospects for imminent socialist revolution weren’t looking too good in Hobart (a well-known Menshevik stronghold), so these comrades were transferred to Perth, where, as is well known, the proletariat is seething on the brink of revolt. The stunning 400 votes polled by Comrade Wainwright shows that the workers of Fremantle only need the correct political leadership to rise up and overthrow the bourgeoisie.
Bree, you and the rest of the rusteds fascinate me. You hate Labor because you claim they are not economic conservatives, yet you prefer the Greens to win a seat rather than Labor?
I’ve never understood rusted Libs wanting the Greens to beat Labor. They’d prefer something more left wing would they?
All they care about is party politics rather than what they believe in.
All they care about is dishing Labor, they don’t care who does it. That’s why they voted for Carles. Compare this to Labor’s behaviour in 1998, when we saved their skins by preferencing them ahead of One Nation. Warren Truss for one would have lost his seat without our preferences.
Congratulations to the Carles campaign team on an impressive win.
There will be plenty of time for getting stuck back into the to-and-fro of what is the correct (read, according to your perspective) interpretation of the result and the ramifications for party politics in WA.
For now, I think the only thing that can reasonably be suggested is that the primary vote for Labor remained stable only because the inflow of otherwise Liberal voters equalled the outflow of disenchanted Labor voters. That may be simply stating the bleeding obvious.
“Compare this to Labor’s behaviour in 1998, when we saved their skins by preferencing them ahead of One Nation. Warren Truss for one would have lost his seat without our preferences.”
I’d like to think that this was based upon the ALP realising that One Nation was morally bankrupt rather than any political motive to save skins.
And you just wanted to be in Eden-Monaro didn’t you Adam?
I think that’s a telling comment, Adam – comparing the Greens to One Nation? The hacks of the Labor Right have been telling people that the Greens are just hippie ferals that they’ve believed their own propaganda.
Barnett, on the other hand, is smart enough to realise that given the choice, having a Green there is sensible; it’s someone that he’s actually going to be able to negotiate with outside of Labor – same logic as you so vigorously defended when you support the Fielding preference deal, but a little bit more rational in hindsight. As Liberal oppositions have found out elsewhere, they mightn’t like our views on social issues, but on issues like good governance, we’re perfectly capable of working with them to limit Labor excesses.
Bule: As you basically said, these results do not fit a general conclusion about which voters from which party went here.
We won in normally rusted-on Labor territory where we’ve never been seen as a threat before. We also won Liberal East Fremantle.
I thought the rationale behind the Fielding preference deal is that it was done in the aim of getting more Labor senators elected, rather than to help another party get its person elected.
The Greens got a very good primary vote there at the last election though.
Rebecca,
Your average conservative believes the Greens are Feral. especially when they look and act like that and make totally unrealistic comments and proposals.
Why do you think there was harfdly any media opportunities involving Giz Watson – Giz would scare the kiddies and most liberals – Adele looks non-threatrening – it’s a fact
And Colin Barnett would make a deal with Satan if it results in hurting Labor.
Oh and it doesn’t help your cause when you’ve got John Butler campaigning for you as well
, especially when he chose political expdiency in dumping his dand members to record as a solo artist so he could qualify for more awards etc.
Hi Rebecca. I disagree with you on this.
As far as I can see, the lower house seats where the Greens have consistently been a significant threat to either major party have only been Labor seats, and increasingly this is the case in the safer Labor seats. Two prominent examples of this are Melbourne and Sydney (which some here have been suggesting are the two most likely to go Green at a future federal election).
So Frank – are you always this opinionated? Or is just the Greens that really get you going?
Maybe you could cool it a little on the personal slurs on Giz Watson – for someone so completely un-electable in your eyes, she has done a pretty good job with her fourth term of parliament.
And really – what do you know about why John Butler might have gone solo? And this reflects poorly on the Greens? Clutching at straws Frank!
John Butler is awesome, leave him out of this.
The Greens won because of increasing inner-city Green ideology and a Labor Party in the trough of a political cycle.
I tend to agree that labelling the Greens as extremists is counter-productive for the major parties. It makes people look at aspects of the Greens, decide that they like them, and then feel alienated from the majors because they just labelled you an extremist.
Carles was a good candidate whereas Tags wasn’t perfect. I dare say that good Labor and poor Green candidates would have switched the result. Only time will tell, though it will be a seat to watch at the next WA.
Peter Kennedy, speaking to Eoin Cameron makes the point that ALP Branch Members have been upset about the lack of a “Rank & File” voted candidate for both State & Federal Members ever since Kim Beazley Snr retired over 30 years ago, so it’s been a festering sore for the local branch ever since.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/audio/2009/05/18/2573176.htm
Well I’m not sure if Butler is ‘awesome’, but agree that band politics falls somewhere outside the ambit of the usual range of political discussion on Pollbludger.
Bule, I think Rebecca might’ve been talking about the kind of historically Labor regions that aren’t inner city, well-educated etc. Hilton, for example – it’s an absolute hole, like any other poor pre-1970’s outer suburb, and therefore would be expected to get a similarly enormous Labor vote to Kelmscott or Balga or anywhere else you wouldn’t want to be after dark without a good reason. The Greens got 28% there last election. A Possum-style exercise might be to map demographic data across Freo / Willagee / Cockburn, and see how well it correlates to the Greens or Labor vote (or Greens + Mary Jenkins in Cockburn), or if it doesn’t.
Oh I see, thanks Bird of paradox. Personally I wouldn’t necessarily have that expectation of Hilton and those like it in the Fremantle electorate because I know that many poorer, reasonably educated people have moved there over the past 10 years simply because it is ‘the best of a bad lot’ in terms of affordability (which has been escalating as an issue over that period), by which I mean closer to Fremantle (and therefore preferable) as opposed to closer to Joondalup, Midland, Armadale or Rockingham.
It would be interesting know whether these areas have young families whose kids attend non-mainstream schools like Spearwood alternative, Lance Holt, Steiner School etc, as normally their parents would be the type who would support green type polices.
Midland people are traditionally ALP voters because of the midland workshops and have VERY long memopries of Richard Court closing them within weeks of becoming Premier – and even the tactic of the Libs putting in the current City of Swan Mayor Charlie Zannino to attract the Italian vote failed. In fact Michelle Roberts increased her vote.
Yeah, you’ve got a point there Bule – I know a few people like that, who maybe even have a decent income, who live in the region because it’s cheaper. It’s expensive all over, though – when I lived in Coolbellup, my flatmate owned the place, had bought it off Homeswest in the late 90’s for about $75k (lots of houses in the region are ex-Homewest, sold off by the govt), and several years later nothing sold in Cooby for under $300k (not sure if it’s eased since, but it was ridiculous for a while). Even a house across the street from the big water towers was on the market for something like $350k. Madness.
I’ll post this here, because it’s quieter than the other thread. There’s currently an argument going on about the federal seat of Melbourne in 2007, where the Greens came a close third to the Liberals, but leapfrogged them to second on the preferences of the Democrats, Family First etc. I’ve just realised it actually makes a difference to the two parties left in the final count if the parties coming 3rd, and lower on primary vote are excluded in a block, or one at a time – interesting. Could this actually change an election result? (Example: last state election in Freo.)
Hypothetically it could, which is probably why we don’t do it. It would be concievable (although perhaps not probable) for a candidate, albeit initially more popular, who was less preferred than another to defeat a candidate who received the most first preferences.
Bird of paradox was right, sorry for not making that clear.
There might have been some demographic change in those areas, but I think the point nonetheless stands that they’re not the sort of areas the Greens have traditionally done well in. The stereotypical areas that the Greens win are those like central Fremantle, St Kilda in Melbourne, and Marrickville in Sydney, all of which represent a certain demographic very strongly.
They might be growing in places like Hilton, but nowhere near in the same numbers. The fact that Carles could win booths like that suggests that we could potentially become competitive outside of the token one electorate in several states that it’s been up until now. One such example to me, seems like the Victorian state seat of Northcote, where I suspect similar voters have kept the seat strongly in Labor hands in the past despite a fairly rapid growth in typical Green types.
If we can keep winning over those voters, I think the Greens could start giving Labor a scare well into the inner city, and over the next few elections, start giving hacks in these inner-city seats like Fiona Richardson and Carlo Carli a good scare. Combined with the fact that I think we grabbed a decent chunk of the middle-class vote here, I also think it bodes well for our chances in seats like the state seat of Perth over the next few years.
This said, I wish Bob Brown would stop building up expectations about federal seats that the Greens cannot possibly hope to meet. There’s no way in hell that the Greens are going to present a serious challenge in seats like Fremantle and Grayndler in 2008, and by claiming that they’re in play, he’s just giving Labor something to crow about when the Greens fall short. It’s conceivable that there might be a challenge in Melbourne, but I wouldn’t give decent odds on it, and it’s politically dumb to be building up expectations there too.
Sorry, that should be 20*10* – had a brain lapse.
And The Greens are hypocrites to accuse Labor of taking seats for granted- if that attidude keeps up by both Brown & Carles, I wouldn’t be surprise that this will be a one term wonder result for Fremantle.
There is another downside to Brown’s comments: they highlight a trend that is less likely to continue if Labor takes it seriously. One thing the Greens have had going for them in contests like Fremantle and Melbourne at the last federal election was the element of surprise (less so in the by-election, obviously). There is no question that more Labor strategists will now be looking at precisely the kinds of seats that you mention from the perspective of getting caught in a pincer movement from the left and right.
Here’s me on the by-election in Crikey.
From John Walsh over at LP:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/05/11/the-battle-for-fremantle/#comment-735035
Frank Calabrese: The Greens are hardly ones to be taking seats for granted. Brown can get a bit optimistic from time to time, but I highly doubt anyone in Fremantle will be resting on their laurels in 2012. Carles won that seat because she comprehensively out-campaigned Labor, and she’s going to need a similar effort if she’s going to do it again – which I’m sure she will.
Bule: If the Greens are to keep on growing, they’re going to have to start taking on Labor in head-to-head fights and winning. Surprise victories like Cunningham don’t count for much if you can’t hang on to them in the general. This time, the ALP knew the Greens posed a huge threat in Fremantle, and yet the Greens ran a much more effective and targeted campaign than Labor, getting more volunteers on the ground both during the campaign and on election day, getting together the sort of resources that you need to win a campaign of that nature, and then putting it into practice very effectively. It’s a very good example of the sort of campaign the Greens are going to need to be doing if they’re going to get competitive in similar seats elsewhere.
I also don’t think it’s a bad thing if Labor starts considering the threat from the left as well as the right; if it stops the Labor Right comprehensively telling the left to get stuffed, and ends their tradition of stacking safe inner-city seats with party hacks, the Greens’ll have already achieved a hell of a lot. If this brings with it more of the sort of dirty campaign tactics Labor are so used to, then that’s something they’re going to have to get used to; if they keep getting candidates of the calibre of Carles, and as effective campaign teams as Carles had, I think that can be dealt with.
Oh, and Adam, your crowing about holding off the Greens in Albert Park? It’s a bit like crowing about holding off the Liberals in Holt. The alternative could conceivably happen, but don’t be surprised if you get looked at like you’re a bit nuts.
HEAR HEAR!!!
Sorry, Rebecca, but I have no idea what you’re talking about. Holt? What about Holt?
Oh Dear, so the Greens were campaigning against a proposal that wasn’t even going to be built in the Electorat ?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/18/2573993.htm
Transcript of Tonight’s 7.30 Report re Fremantle By-Election.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2574070.htm
Turn it up Frank, you know the area that will most affected by the development will be the port and Fremantle itself.
If NPQ didn’t feel it was a relevant issue for this election, why spedn so much of advertising and put up stooges to direct preferences away from the Greens?
Sucks to be them.
ha ha suffer in your jocks, Varga
North Freo, the suburb, is (usually) the token Labor voting booth in the seat of Cottesloe, as it’s north of the river. (And it’s still semi-industrial, but with more hippies all the time – maybe that explains the Greens almost outpolling Labor in Cottesloe, against Barnett’s 60%.) It is, however, in the City of Fremantle, and if you’ve ever driven that part of Stirling Hwy or caught a train between North Freo and Mosman Park, you’ll know why.
Something from Peter van Onselen on the 7.30 Report:
Federally, I’ve heard of Melbourne, Sydney and Grayndler, and thought about Denison (if the Greens think they can possibly get two seats there under Tassie PR, it’s gotta be on their radar), but I haven’t heard of Melbourne Ports before. I imagine that’s Williamstown / St Kilda etc, south of Melbourne CBD… Adam, you’re the obvious person to ask. Do the Greens have a great vote there, either federal / state / local govts, or did he just mix it up with Melbourne (Lindsay Tanner’s seat)?
Here is the video of the 7.30 Report.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/05/18/2574070.htm
William, get yourself a copy of the West – they go to town on this. (Tomorrow’s I think.) Both Paul Murray and Gerard Henderson have a go at it. Henderson wants a preference deal between the Greens and Libs, so that when the ALP/Lib/Grn vote goes something like 45/25/25, the Liberals have a chance to take seats like Grayndler or Melbourne off Labor the same way the Greens can. He has the grace not to mention the numerous policy similarities between the Libs and Greens that could make such a deal happen.
Murray has a big go at the Labor factional machine and Jim McGinty, and reckons it’s not Eric Ripper’s fault. Has a bit of a bash at the North Port Quay development too:
Ad then he has more of a go at the machine, and ‘a Labor rat’, who I’m not sure is supposed to be McGinty or Tagliaferri.
Bird, there’s a lot of discussion about this on the Newspoll thread. The Henderson article is here – I’ll have to wait until tomorrow to read Murray. I don’t think Henderson’s arguing that the Liberals could win Grayndler and Melbourne in particular – he’s saying they should do deals in which the Greens give the Liberals preferences in marginal Labor-Liberal seats, rather than just giving the Greens their preferences in Grayndler and Melbourne with no quid pro quo.
Video of Tonight’s ABC News Item on the By-election Wash up.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/05/19/2574226.htm
Bird of Parodox! Melbourne Ports does not include Williamstown, it did for many years but for the past few decades it has been south of the yarra. and yes I agree Prahran will be very Interesting at the next election, if the Greens can get a better candidate than last time they could surprise as they may do in Albert Park.
When Rebecca talks about Holt its clear what she means for the ALP should not but are always in danger of losing it to the Liberals just has Albert Park should not fall to the Greens but may one day do so.
Finally someone who agrees with me on Prahran. I would like to see the Labor response if the Greens put them in third place.
Tom! If you look at Prahran it is a very Interesting seat.
At the last federal election the Liberals were beaten by the ALP in all but three or four booths and in the area around Windsor and St Kilda East the Liberals were either beaten by the Greens or only narrowly were ahead.
If my memory is correct the only booths the Liberals won were Hawksburn, Toorak Central, Toorak West and Armadale, to my big surprise the ALP appear to have won the Domain booth on the back of the Green’s, Domain is normally a strong Liberal booth which along with St Kilda East is in Melbourne Ports. whilst the remainder is in Higgins.
If the Greens can crack South Yarra then based on their already strong vote in St Kilda East/Windsor they are a real change of finishing second but the South Yarra end is still a firm Liberal Vs ALP area.
At the next redistribution (2013 I think) Albert Park will need to be made smaller because it is well over quota and this would probably trigger a move in Prahran`s boundaries that might include a loss of Toorak and gains in St Kilda.
There used to be information on this on the EBC website which moved to the VEC website after the EBC website was scrapped but I can no longer find (where is Melbcity/Democracy@work when you need him?).
The West letter page correspondent Kevin Moran on the changing face of Fremantle:
Of course, i take all of my social cues from Kevin Moron.
But like it or not, that is the image of the Greens and their supporter base by your average voter.
I don’t see that Paul Murray piece online. Has anyone seen it yet?
The West are very slow in uploading content online – It should be up tomorrow.
Frank, Kevin Moron is not your average voter (especially not in Fremantle), he is a right wing twit of the highest order and he would most certainly not vote for the ALP.
I don’t know how you can claim that is the “image” of the Greens after you were so comprehensively spanked on Saturday. The people of Fremantle certainly don’t share your view.
You haven’t missed anything. It’s too easy for Paul – if Labor is pragmatic, he gets to bucket them for losing touch with their base; if they keep the base happy, he can accuse them of being out of touch with the mainstream.
There is the old saying of “action speak louder than words” and when you see pictures of protestors getting arrested and theit’re either wearing Greens T shirts and/or carrying Greens signs and Banners, the average punter will tar them with the “Radical Ferals tag.
It’s a political fact of life – either clean up your image to appeal to a broad userbase – and we ain’t talking Freo folk – that’s preaching to the Converted, I’m talking about the mum and dads who live the Northern suburbs who would turn against the Greens if it threatened their job.
Bird of paradox, I’ve read the Murray piece (available here http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=54&ContentID=142648).
Murray’s use of the phrase ‘Labor rat’ is… idiosyncratic. He’s clearly using it to describe Tagliaferri.
Traditionally, a rat is someone who has been a member of a party for a long time and then renounces their former loyalty for other, individualistic goals. Given that one of the points of criticism of Tagliaferri was that he joined the party just days before being nominated, its use here would hardly appear appropriate.
It seems like Murray was in search of a witty conclusion to his column, but has failed abysmally.
William: You ignore that every single other letter writer in The West today was absolutely bucketing Labor for neglecting Fremantle, preselecting Tagliaferri, and generally being incompetent. Even Moran’s piece was so rambling that I wasn’t too sure where he thought he was by the end of the article.
I thought Paul Murray’s article was apt, and I was a bit surprised to see it coming from him. It was a sight better than Henderson’s daft article, at any rate.
Henderson’s suggestion is idiotic: it would benefit Labor with zero benefit for either the Liberals or their agenda. The Liberals keep preferencing the Greens because it’s smart: they get to annoy the Libs, and elect MPs that they can work with as an alternative if they need to at the expense of Labor. They realise full well that there isn’t a chance of the Greens actually preferencing the Liberals for the time being (although if Adam’s ilk keep crying wolf when we split-ticket, they’re going to immunise us to that among the public and we may as well go do it – I’d love to see the response of the hacks if we did), and that one-way support of the Greens is the next best thing.
I also thought it was interesting in The West today that what I’ve been saying for a while now (and was dismissed for here a couple days ago) – that preselecting Tagliaferri was a disaster – seems to becoming generally accepted.
Numerous articles and letters (along with evidently a few figures from the ALP) bagging him as being out of touch with many voters and especially many Labor supporters, and suggesting that his pro-business political alignment was disastrous in a seat like Fremantle.
Frank Calabrese: The sort of voters you’re talking about are hardly going to vote Green, nor do I think they’re the sort of voters that the Greens are going to be chasing after anytime soon.
The Greens are a party of social justice, the environment and good government. This, unsurprisingly, appeals to a not insignificant community of voters in both major parties. One might think, however, that voters with minimal interest in those issues are probably not a good fit, and should go find some other party.
Have you heard of the term “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing” – To most non political people that’s what they think of the Greens, much like how the Libs describe them as Watermelons.
Perception is everything in Politics, and it’s hypocritical of the Greens to attack Labor and the Libs, and not look in their own backyard.
Frank, you appear to be suggesting the Greens have some sort of an image problem that needs to be remedied. If this is not what you are saying, can you please explain what you mean?
If this is what you are saying, doesn’t the result from Saturday demonstrate that is not a problem the public perceive, or at least is on track to being remedied?
Rebecca, #518 wasn’t intended as a representative sampling of The West’s letters page, I was just stirring the pot. Could be though that I’m being unfair to Mooner. He may have had a Damascene political conversion in the past week, and in future will present the perspective of a True Believer in the Light on the Hill. I await his next few columns with interest.
You obviously don’t get it – Fremantle is the exception to the rule. I’m refering to the Electorate in general in other seats.
As I’ve said, don’t come crying on Poll Bludger when Adele’s vote is used to bring in a policy which adversly affects Fremantle.
William,
Regarding teh Paul – refer to The Worst Of Perth on the method of Murray’s Madness
In particular the following Videos
http://www.youtube.com/my_subscriptions?pi=0&ps=20&sf=added&sa=0&sq=&dm=2&s=gjYDJkxRQ78#
http://www.youtube.com/my_subscriptions?pi=0&ps=20&sf=added&sa=0&sq=&dm=2&s=gjYDJkxRQ78#
http://www.youtube.com/my_subscriptions?pi=0&ps=20&sf=added&sa=0&sq=&dm=2&s=gjYDJkxRQ78#
Such a policy being…
I was not aware you had said that but given she is not bound to the ALP or Liberal caucus, why would she vote for a policy which adversely affects Freo?
If was an Environmentally Friendly Project, but would result in the loss of Jobs for workers in the electorate which would she choose ?
Such as NPQ?
I think we know the answer to that.
Or to be more precise, what if Barnett decided to Ban the Live Sheep Trade, but the result would be that there would massive job losses at the Port of Fremantle.
So you support a rise in Unemployment in Fremantle then ??
Real Smart
How many Fremantle jobs depend on the live sheep trade or on NPQ?
You may find it hard to believe, but most Wharfies live in the Fremantle electorate and surronds – same with Tradespeople etc who would be working on NPQ, and aslo they employment of young people who would be working in the Bars and Cafes as a result.
Sorry, I should clarify, how many wharfies are directly employed to work on the live sheep trade as opposed bulk and general and other cargo?
You may find this hard to believe Frank, but a number of my friends and work colleagues who are MUA members believe that NPQ is the greatest threat they face to the working port. As a result of residential buildup around the Port, they are already restricted in the hours they can load certain cargo such as scrap steel. If people have paid millions of dollars for property in NPQ, they won’t be very happy about having their sleep disturbed by the working port.
Further, if we scrapped the live sheep trade, the trade of meat to the middle east will not cease, but rather the meat will be processed here creating hundreds of jobs in the meat industry. That is why the AMIEU is so supportive of the campaign to ban the live sheep trade.
What else have you got?
Well maybe the last was a poor example, but what if Barnett decided to allow the construction of a Coal Fired Power Station in East Fremantle, bringing in more employment into the area ?
You haven’t been offered funding for your blogging by NPQ have you Frank?
If not, I can give John Halden a ring and see if he will put you on the payroll.
*facepalm*
And you think your last example was a poor one?
Why would they build a coal fired power station in East Freo so far from the coal?
Maybe the coal would be brought to the Power Station by Sea or Rail ?
YOU were the one who brought up NPQ, not me
I p;ointed out an obvious positive, and you pooh pooh it – talk about Nimbyism
It’s not a question of how they bring it, it is why they would do it. (Is it just me or is this starting to feel like a Monty Python sketch?)
It is no coincidence that the coal fired power stations are in Collie where the coal is.
But you’ve forgotten about the old South Fremantle Power Station haven’t you ??
http://perthsbest.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/south-fremantle-power-station/
So my example isn’t as stupid as make out to be
It is pretty close.
They are not going to build a base load coal fired power station in the middle of the metro area so I think Adele can probably sleep easy over that one.
It was a HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION !!!!!!
OK, hypothetically then, if I was the greens member for Freo and the Liberal Government supported by the ALP planned to build a Coal Fired power station I would oppose it and would look forward to the opportunity of being dragged off the protest line by the Police (in front of the rest of the population of Fremantle who would also be on the protest line) thereby ensuring my continuing re-election for the next 100 years while the ALP and libs were chucked out of office for introducing such a stpid policy in the first place.
Hooray for me!
And what if the REST of the Population was in support of it and as a result, decided to only vote for either Liberal and ALP in both houses resulting in only 1 green in the lower house (yourself and maybe 1 or 2 in the Upper House ?
I would take my chances on that one.
I would take my chances on that one.]
And if the Media paint you and your party as Economic Vandals, and as a result Energy Prices would go up even higher than ever and thus force more people into poverty ?
Interesting. I did not know that. So if its inhumaine and stops job growth why haven’t they banned it? Which powerful group is against doing this? Is it the Middle Eastern consumer or domestic business interests?
Also, I think Carles would lose alot of support within The Greens if she supported a Freo Coal power station and may well get kicked out of the party if she did it. I can’t see it happening though.
I don’t think we should build anymore coal-fired power stations in this country ever. Although the ones already in existence don’t need to be shut down immediately, just soonish.
Luke is making an awful lot of sense here.
But I understand the potential of hypothetical thinking. Maybe the problem Frank, is the wrong electorate is used in your Hypothetical? Maybe say Adele was hypothetically elected in Collie-Preston…
Still at core this idea that Environment and Community are fundamentally antithetical to Employment and Wealth is a nonsense myth as far as I’m concerned. Just a matter of style, choices and who profits. [Steelmaking is about the only major exception, and then there are ways and means]
Heyson @560
The Live Sheep Trade is worth A LOT of money. Also, I’m pretty sure that the Arab states promised to vote for Australia to be on the UN security council in return for not scraping the trade for x years.
Oil might be another reason.
Or it might simply be that the Union that benifits from the trade backs the Libs, as the contract has not come up for renewal under Rudd, far as I know.
Frank,
If the hypothetical question that is being posed is:
What would the Greens do if they were faced with a choice between an unpopular principled position and popular political pragmatism?
I would like to think the Greens would choose the principled position even if it meant short term political pain because at the end of the day if you don’t have your integrity, you don’t have anything.
Face it, Being principled will NEVER get you elected, see the ALP during the Howard Years.
Robert Taylor in Today’s West has summed it up perfectly. Pity it’s not online so I can’t paste the relevant quote.
Oh and don’t forget what happened to Tasmania during the 2004 election when Mark Latham pandered to Bob Brown on Old Growth Forests – John Howard being hailed a hero by the CFMEU and Labor losing EVERY seat in Tasmania.
Oh and Zoomster sums it all up on the main Newspoll Thread.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/18/newspoll-56-44-10/comment-page-18/#comment-275172
Frank,
See you’ve had your hands full. I notice a lot of the Greens acolytes here are overly impressed with their virtue and apparent moral superiority. A pity their preachy sanctimony does not generate any meaningful outcomes for the community.
Evidence today from Noel Pearson and Warren Mundine who provide character references for the Greens.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25509801-5013404,00.html#
Hey, you’ve ALL missed the boat. The Fremantle by election is peanuts the important vote was the DST one and I’m not lining to up whinge about that on the DST thread. I vote Labor #1 but am happy to see the Greens get up and do well as I like lots of their policies. Most notablely the refugee one which will trash all dentention centers, etc. etc. etc. Check their home page on refugee policy. Greens are #2 on my party ID list, Democrats #1. ALP are actually #3 but I vote ALP #1 atm as I’ve not got the Democrat option any more and the Greens aren’t electable at a Federal level here in WA
.
What’s the point of being elected if you don’t have any principles? Power for powers sake? Frank admission (woo, pun).
It should be noted that the Seat of Fremantle was one of the City Electorate which voted Yes for Daylight Savings.
GG,
Yep, they’re hypocrisy is astounding – phesphos is right that the Greens maintaining the Gerrymander in the Upper House has ensured that the Right will now have the Balance of Power and will ensure that Barnett will have a free ride in getting legislation passed to have Nuclear Power Stations, GM Crops and every other anti environment legislation.
They made their own bed
Yep, and look what happened to the Democrats
Pot meet Kettle.,
NEVER Frank, have you already wiped Fremantle from your mind. I presume you mean “almost never”.
Congratulations on admitting that the only reason you were able to beat Howard was because you abandoned those much vaunted “labor values”.
Maybe you were right that Tags does share your “labor values”. Meaning a willingness to sacrifice everything you believe in just to get into power.
Wow, it must actually feel shattering for you to admit that is what has occurred.
Read Robert Taylor in Today’s West an d educate yourself.
Enjoy being represented by a political orphan
I think the Democrats example supports my argument, not yours.
Nope, The Democrats now have NO representation in ANY Parliament, and haven’t even got the required 500 members for Party Status in WA.
My point remains.
Enjoy being politically impotent.
Obviously, the question is why. I believe one of the reasons was because they sold out their principles. You think it’s because they were too principled? I think you’re in a party of one with that train of thought.
No, because they got conned with 30 pieces of Silver from Howard, same with the Sale of Telstra.
Like I said, don’t come crying for Labor support when Barnett Screws Fremantle over, and he WILL !!!!!!
I am struggling to follow your point here Frank.
The Dems have all but disappeared because they compromised their principles and did a deal with Howard.
The Greens will refuse to compromise their principles resulting in an inability to obatin power and, presumably on your argument, also cease to exist.
They have a member in the South Australian Legislative Council.
When people find out that Femantle got shafted because The Greens opposed a measure which would bring benefit to the electorate they will dump the Greens like a ton of bricks.
Carles will NOT deliver on a light Rail system because basically she is a power of one.
If Labor promised it, when they retained Government they could deliver on the promise, the Greens can’t simply by numbers.
As I said, READ Robert Taylor.
Wow, that’s real power, just like the Barnett Government is the only Liberal Government in the Country.
Why would Barnett do this?
If I was Barnett, I would find it much more mirthful to do as much as possible to assist Carles in her first term to ensure her re-election and put the ALP one more seat away from majority Government.
That will NEVER Happen, if you believe that, I have a nice bridge for sale.
I was sure I detected some glee on barnetts face when the ALP lost on of their safest seats, maybe I was mistaken.
Now you are talking Frank. That is a perfect project for the Libs to fund just to demonstrate the power of one.
You have to be joking, The Libs bvuilding a Railway, this from the SAME party who closed the Fremantle Line.
Yep, The Greens really are deluded.
If I was a Liberal supporter I’d be loving this argument.
Please, carry on…
So you support the Liberals selling their souls to elect an impotent Green so they can maintain power.
You lot are just like the Democrats.
That’s right Bule, only the ALP are allowed to sell their souls to maintain power.
It’s called being pragmatic and being a realist, unlike the Greens and their holier than thou attitude.
And Bule just blew your little argument here.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/18/newspoll-56-44-10/comment-page-21/#comment-275324
Frank, I know you’re on a bit of a roll here, but let’s get something straight.
I’m a Labor supporter, you goose.
I see virtually no value in the argument you’re having here. The simple fact is that many members of our party (including, to a degree, me) share views that are remarkably similar to those of some Greens members. The difference between our Left and their Moderates (yes, that’s what I’m calling you) is not that great. Now, having said that, some in the Labor party share views remarkably similar with some of the more Moderate in the Liberal party (including, to a degree, me).
By carrying on in this way, in my opinion, you and others like you here (read, Greensborough Growler) do neither the Labor party nor progressive politics (which I consider Labor to be at the forefront of) more generally any favours.
All this achieves is giving succour to conservatives.
It appears to me, from the short time that I’ve been around Pollbludger, that it is the more moderate Greens that bother to post here, but the less moderate conservatives. If you’re trying to convince those moderate Greens of the virtues of Labor (which in my opinion at least partially align with the virtues of the Greens, while conceding that both parties have their flaws), in my opinion you’re failing.
If you’re trying to demoralize them by highlighting their flaws while diminishing their virtues, you’re failing.
That said, Greens commenters here (who should really know better) are enthusiastically joining the fray.
Like I said, if I were a Lib…
But I’m just exposing their hypocrisy, nothing mor, nothing less- they thing they are so pure of principle that they are willing to be elected by accepting the liberal vote then they’re seelling themselves out like the Democrats dis with the GST. And Luke and Rebecca and Oz Moderate ?
Gimme a Break, their the Greens answer to Glen and GP.
Unfair frank unfair
unlike the libs, at least the greens have compassion
Oh and knowledge as well
Yeah, we want to destroy all buildings, murder coal workers and live in trees don’tcha know.
I was referring more to their Zealtory than anything else.
Well that’s the image to your average non politically aware Australian.
Even though our electoral system has its flaws, I don’t think we are allowed to tell liberal voters that we don’t accept their vote. What exactly should we have done, insisted they vote for Tags?
We tried our best, we told them he was actually a Liberal draped in ALP clothes but they didn’t believe us. You insisted he held Labor values not us, we always said he was a Lib.
Hang on Frank, we are only hypothetically selling ourselves out, remember
But you are right, I don’t think I am a moderate.
Colin Barnett tells the ABC the North Port Quay backers’ campaign is a “waste of money”, and a redevelopment of the area is “years and years away”. Round one to Adele Carles?
Frightened Labor stooges do not make up the “average” Australian population.
But as Robert Talyor said, it didn’t matter WHO the ALP pre-selected, we wouldn’t have won without the Liberals standing a candidate. The Greens would’ve been crying foul if the Party pre-selected a local union hack.
The Double Standards by the Greens is astounding.
Amen Brother William.
Tell that to people who listen to Talkback Radio and and watch Commercial Television News & Current Affairs. Oh and voters in Country areas.
No, Colin is protecting the loss of Doctor’s Wives votes in Cottesloe to The Greens
Ouch.
‘Barnett threatens to cut Labor funding’.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/20/2575951.htm
Funny you should say that. An analysis by Antony Green just came in and in it are the highest primary votes by booth.
9/10 of them for The Greens are in regional areas.
no doubt all the Sea Changers, I’m talking about your traditional rurla voter who were born and bred there.
But to be fair Oz, most of them are small booths in the middle of a bunch of hippie communes.
Thank you Possum
You won’t find a high Green Primary Vote in Narrogin.
Frank, that is what you said before the election.
Post election you now say:
Incidentally, Taylor also said the Greens couldn’t win, now he says they were always destined to win.
The ALP always thought they were a shoe in and instead got spanked. You were outcampaigned and that is why you lost.
I should clarify my last comment by saying Colin is only trying to prevent a loss of support of the more greenish soft Liberal Voters to the Greens as there has been a very strong anti high rise development movement in his electorate.
But they’re in the country! =P
I got a giggle out of Elands and Nimbin.
And you won’t find a high Liberal Primary in Leichardt. Point?
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but remember it was the Laxck of a Liberal Candidate and the facts that those same Liberals voted Green is why the Greens won, nothing more, nothing less.
Had the Libs run a candidates and there were “independents” then the result would’ve have been so convincing for the Greens.
Basically The Greens won from dancing with the Devil, and sooner or later it will end in tears.
Very true!
Let it never be said that the Greens struggle with votes in the Dope Belt!
This is a supposition without any real statistical basis. How many new voters to the Greens were former ALP voters and how many were former Liberal Voters?
In my experience on polling day at White Gum Valley Primary, they appeared to be in equal numbers.
Look at the Liberal Primary Vote at the last State Election and the vote of “Liberal Independent” Carmelo Zagami. And note the at the Primary ALP Vote at both polls, there was only a 0.3% difference.
I rest my case
Frank
Are you suggesting that because the Libs didn’t put in a candidate the people who used to vote Lib shouldn’t be allowed to vote how they like? Are you suggesting that the Greens should have rejected those votes because they used to be Liberal voters? Are you suggesting that the Greens courted the Liberal vote?
It would seem strange that people who voted for a right wing party would prefer a further left-wing party to the centrist party… Or perhaps they just didn’t like the Labor Member.
I think you are being very insulting to the voters of Fremantle.
They obviously wanted a Adele Carles more than Tagliaferri, simple as that.
Are you suggesting that the ALP acquired no new votes and simply got exactly the same voters they got last time?
My suggestion is that these figures show that for every former Liberal voter they acquired for selecting a conservative candidate they lost a former Labor voter for the same reason for no net gain.
Sure, some Libs voted for the Greens but I suspect not all of them did.
In fact, the 0.4% loss on primaries would suggest that Labor bled more than was transfused.
They wanted Adele Carles because she didn’t look or behave like a Radical Feral, had the Greens pre-selected a person with Dreadlocks and who smoked Dope, then the Libs ‘wouldn’t have parked their vote there
THAT IS A FACT !!!
Oh and the Libs would vote for a Child Molester, as long as it hurt the ALP.
That 0.1% extra would be the Grizzling Branch members who were pissed off they didn’t get their way.
Frank
“They wanted Adele Carles because she didn’t look or behave like a Radical Feral, had the Greens pre-selected a person with Dreadlocks and who smoked Dope, ”
There are no Greens that I know who have dreadlocks and smoke dope.
Seriously, why did you even bother making the comment?
“Oh and the Libs would vote for a Child Molester, as long as it hurt the ALP.”
This is your ego talking. You can’t seem to comprehend that given the choice placed before the people, they chose Adele.
Heck by you logic we could now say that if the Libs didn’t put up any candidates anywhere in Australia, the Greens would be in power.
That is the image by the general population- especially during protests.
The Figures above speak for themselves, the Libs on masse without a candidate parked their votes with Adele Carles.
Your statistical analysis here is flawed.
Possum or William, what do you think?
Frank,
“That is the image by the general population- especially during protests.”
You speak for all of Australia now do you? Or is it that you would just rather promote an out-dated perception? This idea of the Greens being hippies is WAY out of date. This is probably why the ALP lost the by-election, you were all working from an out-dated idea of who the Greens are.
“The Figures above speak for themselves, the Libs on masse without a candidate parked their votes with Adele Carles.”
Again, they did this because they preferred her to Tagliaferri. Obviously they thought she was a better candidate DESPITE her ideology being further from the Libs.
Compare it to the 2008 Result:
Candidate Votes Counted % Valid Votes
CARLES – GRN 5,191 27.56%
McGINTY – ALP 7,286 38.69%
DU PLESSIS – FFP 318 1.69%
CHRISTIE – LIB 5,689 30.21%
HOLLETT – CDP 350 1.86%
Total Valid Votes 18,834 100.00%
Informal 1,132 5.67%
http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/election_results/2008_State_General_Election/District_of_Fremantle/District_results.php
Tell that to people who watch A Current Affair and who listen to Commercial Talkback
THEY are the people who decide who wins or loses elections.
You obviously didn’t read my earlier comments about the changing demographic of the Electorate, and the Letter from Kevin Moran and Paul Murray’s Column.
I am sorry frank, my brain hurts, cant talk anymore.
You win.
I think the strength of the idea is roughly proportional to the distance from the nearest decent latte.
Frank
“THEY are the people who decide who wins or loses elections.”
Yes, and they voted for Adele…
Possum
“I think the strength of the idea is roughly proportional to the distance from the nearest decent latte.”
Wouldn’t that be inversely proportional? You don’t have to go far to get a latte in Freo.
You still don’tget it, Fremantle is NOT your average electorate. I’m talking about your AVERAGE voter in the Mortgage Belt.
Or to the distance from the nearest pub with Emu Bitter on tap? They’re greening up too these days, well down Rockingham Rd from the cappuccino strip.
The larger the distance, the larger the idea.
Possum
Ok, got you.
Although, the idea is not very big at my place… in Mount Hawthorn… Hang on. Very easy to get a latte in Mount Hawthorn.
This would imply Fremantle will remain Greens for some time then… And that maybe Curtin will became Green too. Lots of lattes around Subi, Claremont, Cottesloe etc. I will look forward to the ousting of Julie Bishop with some glee!
Julie Bishop will only leave that Electorate in a pine box with Peter Nattrass as one of her Pall Bearers.
Look, obviously Green commenters here are getting a laugh out of stirring the possum a little.
The reality is, as you all know, the result in Fremantle simply cannot be extrapolated out to the broader electorate. I have not seen any serious suggestion here or anywhere else that it can. Maybe this will change over time, maybe not. You all seem to be suggesting that the Greens’ lack of popularity in the wider electorate has nothing to do with perceived radicalism, some of which is related to forest conservation protests. Surely you jest. Some of you seem to be attempting to argue that you’re more popular than is actually borne out by the figures.
As I said, it’s good for a laugh. But as I also said earlier, it’s pretty clear who’d be getting the biggest laugh out of all of this.
Certainly, the party has gone a long way in trying to distance itself from this image, but if that’s not the reason for the lack of support, what is?
The Greens can, and will, continue to seek to cherrypick the most likely looking seats from Labor, at the expense of Left Labor members of parliament, further entrenching the position within the ALP of the Labor Right. Perhaps a signficant reason that Fremantle was such a success for the Greens was that Tagliaferri wasn’t from the Left, and so more distant politically than in contests like Melbourne or Sydney.
However, assuming future Greens success in seats such as those, this is the real price to be paid for Greens success in these seats: no net gain for the left of Australian politics.
Now, I don’t agree with much of Frank’s arguments here, but it would appear to me that a zero sum game with the Labor Left, the only conceivable benefit of which could be perceived as the strategic political advantage of the Greens relative to other parties, is a genuine exercise in machine politics. I don’t deny that there is principle involved, including the principle that the Greens have superior principles to the Labor Left. The only perceivable difference is that it’s two machines rather than internal to one.
Bule
“You all seem to be suggesting that the Greens’ lack of popularity in the wider electorate has nothing to do with perceived radicalism, some of which is related to forest conservation protests.”
Of course the Greens understand this, just as they know it is untrue.
Just as all the Labor and Liberal posters here understand that they need to maintain the idea of radicalism.
For a different perspective: Perhaps the Labor party can thank the Greens. Here they have singlehandedly swung a huge right-wing package of voters over to the left… Perhaps for these new left voters it won;t be so scarey voting left in the future? perhaps the greens have done everyone a huge favour!
Bulldust,
Those voters will return back to the Liberal Fold when they have an actual Candidate to vote for.
You’re just lucky there was no Liberal Candidate.
Actually, Astrobleme, I earlier suggested that some members of the ALP share some perspectives with some more moderate members of the Greens, the latter which I perceived to be well represented by commenters here.
It was luke who quickly denied being moderate.
I bow to his self-assessment.
Bule
Well that’s nice to know. All the Greens I know are moderate people.
What did Luke say?
There are a lot of posters, like Frank and Greensborough Growler who just chant the radical line.
They are the exception to the rule.
See Diogene here re the Windfarms.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/18/newspoll-56-44-10/comment-page-24/#comment-275513
Astrobleme, here it is:
I should say, there may well be some ALP members who share some perspectives with radical members of the Greens as well
Well it doesn’t do your Party’s cause any good when their MP’s are involved in stuff like this.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25183070-5001021,00.html
And remember your average voter in MOST electorates get their news from sources such as this.
Bule
well I guess he is then!
I suppose now we should try and define ‘moderate’…
Maybe this is for others who know me to decide.
Clearly a moderate Green is someone who agrees with me.
Astrobleme,
I caught you out in a lie earlier regarding Peter Garrett and now strike 2.
I don’t do chants!
Greensborough Growler
Yes yes,
and I apologised for the ‘lie’ – you do understand the difference between a lie and a mistake, yes?
Not sure if anyone has noticed this piece by Robert Taylor in today’s West, which impresses me much more than Paul Murray’s lazy Labor-bashing from yesterday (in fact, I can detect Taylor taking a dig at it in a couple of places). I particularly agree with this:
Like he says, I’m yet to hear any critic of the Tagliaferri preselection suggest who they should have picked instead. As I’ve intimated though, I’m less sure about this:
While I’m here, Luke asked earlier what I thought of Frank’s rather crude interpretation of primary vote swings. I refer to this from my post:
William,
Thanks for for posting the Robert Taylor artich, which despite your misgivings about the final paragraph somes up what’ve I said along. It didn’t matter who the ALP pre-selected, the Greens still wouldd’ve won, it’s just the changing demographic of the state seat.
Astrobleme,
You’ll pardon my scepticism when a obvious Green plant comes on board and accidentally? makes a false claim against a Labor Minister. While, I might have let it go with your apology. However, you then compound my suspicions with an erroneous personal attack on myself.
As Auric Goldfinger might say, “Once is an accident, twice is a co-incidence and three times is enemy action”.
You;re correct that it was rather hamfisted, but the raw primary figures from both elections does suggest that may have been the case, considering the increased number of “Independents who had muddide the waters from the 2008 figures.
William, I did look for it earlier. I agree that the relationship between the Greens and the major parties in the lower house will only be proven with time, but find it hard to see the Greens supporting a Liberal government. Of course, with the way Frank’s going that may become more likely over time (joking, Frank
).
I’m not sure that this sentence makes a lot of sense:
I would have thought that if ‘parachuting’ is symptomatic of the factional system, then dismantling that system would be entirely consistent with criticism of ‘parachuting’.
Finally, this section is, I think, slightly mischievous:
Yep, of course no one wants to lose touch with reality. The reality is that in Fremantle there is a Greens member. Is Taylor suggesting that Labor should disregard the scare we got at the last general election in Fremantle?
That campaign is the one that matters far more than this by-election. I say that because the Greens’ result there was achieved in the context of a general election, and there’s been plenty of commentary around suggesting that by-election aberrations get resolved in general elections. It indicated a threat which must be met at the next State election. The by-election delivered on that threat.
I disagree with those commentators who now say that Fremantle is the Greens’ to lose. A strong Labor campaign must be mounted there, and appropriately tailored to take into account the trend that became apparent at the last State election, can deliver the seat to Labor. There is a balance to be reached between such an appropriately targeted campaign and ‘chasing the ground’ occupied by the Greens.
Exactly,
If Labor promises to deliver on the Light Rail and other issues Adele campaigned on, then we’ll regain the seat. As Peter Kennedy said on ABC Radio on Monday, Labor has been a festering sore ever since Kim Beazley Snr retired and have been pissed off with members preselected both State & federal since then.
Parachuting a not-so-Labor candidate, as Taylor says, is not consistent with the factional system. It doesn’t involve rewarding one of their own.
Greensbrough
“You’ll pardon my scepticism when a obvious Green plant comes on board and accidentally? makes a false claim against a Labor Minister”
Leave you conspiracy theories in your pants Growler. I freely admitted I was a Greens member. I gave you the link to the article that I was meaning to quote from.
As to the chants line, that was a joke. Of all the ridiculous things to get upset about! How could I seriously be accusing you of “chanting” when this is a written blog…
Leave your fake outrage at home it looks trivial
Reece Whitby in Morley being a prime example of it not working, while Peter Garratt in Kingsford-Smith and Maxine McKew in Bennelong produced the opposite effect.
I actually think Ken Travers is on the money here:
Astrademe,
How about we compromise. You don’t lie about me and I’ll tell the truth about the Greens.
William, actually on the history you’d have to say that it’s pretty consistent.
Alan Carpenter
Paul Papalia
Peter Tingley
Cheryl Kernot
The three examples cited by Frank (both for and against) etc
That’s all I can be bothered listing at the moment, but I’m sure there are others.
The factional system has become, at least in the last 15 years (which is probably long enough to declare a trend), just as interested in parachuting in star candidates as it has in rewarding longevity.
In any case, I’m not sure that ‘parachuting’ is used as a term to describe a pre-selection of anyone from within the party, so ‘not-so-Labor’ becomes almost a tautology.
You forgot Bob Kucera.
Greensborough
Sure we can be friends! Just don’t you steal my lunch money…
Parachuting a candidate in isn’t always a bad idea, but the problem is that Labor keeps parachuting the wrong people into the wrong kinds of seats. When you’re dumping a sitting member (Kucera) to put a lobbyist (Brown) in a key marginal, effectively ditching a very popular sitting member (Radisich) to put in your chief-of-staff (Saffioti), or putting a pro-business, Liberal-leaning candidate in a very left-wing seat, it’s bound to not go down very well.
On the other hand, if you put in someone that people actually like and respect (Garrett, McKew), or a genuine cleanskin that people can get behind (Papalia), it’s actually going to help you. Labor really needs to learn the difference.
I hope Labor takes winning Fremantle back for granted as much as Frank Calabrese does; considering Carles won on the back of vigorously opposing a number of proposals which Labor was more or less driving, either they’re going to have to do one hell of a backflip, or they’re going to go down in flames. At the very least, they need to distance themselves the hell away from North Port Quay; while it might be popular with Labor’s developer mates, threatening the future of the Port of Fremantle is a really bad idea if one wants to actually win the seat of Fremantle.
William, as for who they should have preselected instead of Tagliaferri: I’m not sure that anyone Labor had on offer this time around could have held the seat in the face of the campaign the Greens ran, but I think he was a net negative. The problem Labor faces in Fremantle at the moment is they don’t have anyone with the name recognition to match Carles who isn’t going to face a backlash of some sort (Tagliaferri and Kelly being obvious candidates in that category). Peter Bell could have won it if he’d accepted; I also think a decent cleanskin candidate could have had a chance if Labor had run a more competent campaign and paid a bit more attention to local feeling on key issues.
Carpenter wanted Radisich to run in Swan Hills, Jaye’s ego got the better of her so she jumped ship.
Agreed, Rebecca. I should make it clear that I don’t subscribe to the view that the factional system of the ALP should be dismantled because of parachuting, I was simply pointing out that the two issues are not inconsistent and that whatever else you might call rewarding longevity it isn’t parachuting.
You seem to forget that at the Last Election, the ALP was OPPOSED to the plan.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23777136-948,00.html
Bule, can you name a candidate who wasn’t preselected by the factional system as you would define it? If not, I don’t think the definition means very much – the “factional system” applies to anything Labor does.
Radisich was not ditched, effectively or otherwise. Her seat was Swan Hills, it was one of the least affected electorates under the redistribution, and nobody was preventing her from recontesting it.
Exactly, as I’ve said on many occasions, Radisich and Carpenter have always had problems with each other ever since Carpenter was Education Minister and Jaye was actvely campaigning for a High School in Elenbrook.
William, perhaps I’ve been unclear.
I was criticizing the application of the term ‘parachuting’ if it is used to describe someone who is not preselected from outside the party. ‘Parachuting’ and ‘not-so-Labor’, I was suggesting, is a tautology.
Of course the party is factional. I’m somewhat bemused that you would think that I would suggest anything else.
The critique probably falls down a bit. I’m not sure if in such an analysis Rita Saffioti’s preselection, for example, would constitute parachuting or not. Long time member, dedicated servant of the government, no particularly strong factional backing as far as I know.
In any case, I think it’s pretty safe to say that the then Premier actually thumbed his nose at the factional system in order to hand pick his own candidates.
So I guess, in a way, that’s the evidence you’re looking for of preselections that sit outside the normal factional process.
I would have thought one could quite reasonably use the term to describe the endorsement of Martin Ferguson in Batman, Greg Combet in Charlton or Bob Hawke in Wills. None had any connection with their electorates that I’m aware of, but they were unarguably “Labor”. It depends entirely on how you choose to define it, of course. I guess the bottom line is that I take Robert Taylor’s point – that the “parachuting” of Tagliaferri can’t reasonably be explained in terms of the factional system, which by my definition involves networks of patronage which serve their own ends – and you don’t, because define the term more broadly.
“Look, obviously Green commenters here are getting a laugh out of stirring the possum”
I object. I love Possum and have never stirred him in my life. Stroke perhaps, not stir.
The two-party figure was changed from 54.01% to 53.92% for the Greens at http://www.waec.wa.gov.au/elections/state_elections/2009_Fremantle_By-Election/District_of_Fremantle/notional_distribution_of_preferences.php
As it says “THIS RESULT WILL NOT CHANGE UNTIL THE FULL DISTRIBUTION IS COMPLETED”, does this mean counting has been completed?
I’m surprised that’s been updated – but no, the number of 2PP votes is still lower than primaries, and in any case the count will finish with publication of the full distribution (i.e. each candidate’s exclusion and the number of votes distributed to candidates still in the count).
This may be accounted for by those that exhaust before getting added to either of the final two.
I was about to say the difference between the two is too big for that – there’s usually little more than a dozen exhausted votes – but on closer inspection it’s only 49. No doubt though the result is almost final. However, it’s still only notional – not until we get the preference distribution will we have a definite two-party result.
Can future discussion please be directed to the WA Newspoll thread.