The latest bi-monthly New South Wales state Newspoll result is about what you’d expect. Conducted through November and the first half of December, it has Labor’s primary vote down four points to 26 per cent, the Coalition up two to 44 per cent and the Greens vaulting five to an unprecedented 17 per cent. Labor’s primary vote equals the record low set in November-December last year, which is three points lower than the next worst ever major party result (as I illustrated at the time with this chart). The Coalition is up from 55-45 to 59-41 on a two-party measure that tells you less than the primary vote, due to optional preferential voting and a combined minor party and independent vote that exceeds Labor’s.
For all that, Kristina Keneally’s personal ratings are better than she might have feared. From a sample of the 637 most recent respondents, she leads Barry O’Farrell as preferred premier 35 per cent to 34 per cent, and more say she will be a better leader than Nathan Rees (24 per cent) than worse (16 per cent). The former ratings are about the same as Nathan Rees’s towards the end, but they have been achieved against an O’Farrell whose approval rating has improved six points to 44 per cent, with disapproval down seven to 30 per cent. Approval and disapproval ratings for Keneally are not provided.
222 Comments
As I have said elsewhere these are very interesting figures.
Labor are down from Sept-Oct 4 points to 26, and down 13 points from the 2007 election of 39%.
The Greens are up 5 points from Sept-Oct to 17, which is in itself an 8 point increase of the 2007 election of 9%.
The coalition picked up only 2 points from the Sept-Oct Newspoll.
The 2007 results in Balmain were 39% Labor, 30% Greens and Liberals 24%.
In Marrickville, it was 47% Labor, 33% Green and 13% Liberals.
The last NSW poll thread didn’t even make it to 20. Wonder how long this one will go?
I’m sure the Liberals are thanking Nathan Rees for writing their attacks and campaign advertisements for them.
I hope this kills dead the movement towards four year terms.
Greens at 17% in NSW?
Almost a fifth of all of NSW are prepared to vote Green?
Wow.
MDMConnell = 2
Possibly shorter than 20.
If you look at any other thread a large number of the posts are intimate in house off topic tete a tete’s between the ruling clique on here.
It would seem that it is impossible for even them to spin these results. So they won’t even try, preferring to stick their heads in the sand and prefer to pretend NSW doesn’t exist. This has been the tactic adopted by the PM. It is little wonder therefore that progressive thinking NSW people are looking to an alternative to Labor.
In my humble opinion the welded on support for the big party’s is somewhere between 15-30%. Labor is already down to 26%. What is the nadir? Is it 15%, 20% or 25%.
For those getting excited about the Green Party poll result, I bet the result on the day will be significantly below 17%.
When state governments have changed over in the past the “others” vote has ballooned. This was previously represented by people parking their vote with “Independent”, regardless of if there was a viable independent they knew of in their seat or nor. The Green Party is filling this function now. People know the name “Green Party” and they also know the Green Party will run in their seat.
However on the day, a large number of those votes will go with the Independents who will doubtlessly crop up in many Labor seats.
So enjoy these numbers while they last. It’s not support for the Green Party, it’s disatisfaction with NSW ALP.
allegory, at the WA state election where Labor lost government, Newspoll predicted 12% Greens, and that’s what they got
Since Iemma and Rees had a higher primary vote than KKK, does that mean they will knife her before Xmas.
Is this a record for number of premier (the party in government) had in one term of election – 3
I know it must hurt died in the wool Labor hacks though. So much pain must be caused by the fact that there’s an entire 17% from the left who did not pick Labor first.
OUCH!
I believe this would reduce the number of ALP seats in parliament to the lower 30s. I want ALP to lose government but not that badly! The only hope for democracy in NSW is a hung parliament with the Greens. This poll shows that as more likely happening in 2015 than 2011 though
dovif – 8
Sir Robert Askin – up to 3 January 1975, Thomas Lewis to 23 January 1976 and then Sir Eric Willis until the election on 1 May 1976.
Antony Green has an article on this period:
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2009/11/nsw-liberal-leadership-churn.html
I am looking through the history books to see if there are other examples.
“The only hope for democracy in NSW is a hung parliament with the Greens.”
I’d have thought that seeing a universally despised and dysfunctional government getting a monumental kick up the arse suggests that democracy’s in pretty good shape…..
Who is looking forward to March 2011 more
a. The Liberals
b. The NSW people
C. The Greens
d. Nathan Rees
I am going to say a will be last
Considering the Libs will be winning government, i’m guessing them?
8 – After one Newspoll and after being in the job for what, two weeks? How ridiculous.
GB
It is NSW labor, where anything can happen
Hahahaha she is already beating the barrell on prefered prime minister, you go girl. Some furniture will be saved yet.
9 – If this is not child like behaviour I’ll go he.
I know O’Farrell’s job satisfaction ratings have improved but that preferred premier number must be a worry. What’s that that bloke got to do?
Replaced with another less-despised and waiting-to-be-dysfunctional government? Not my preferred outcome – although I’ll take that over what we’ve got now.
My preferred outcome would be a hung parliament. It would take at least 2 elections to shake all the dross out of the parliament we have; a hung parliament would more likely have a 2nd election called sooner through a possible no-confidence vote.
Who cares? So what?
I hope Tripodi, Obeid and the other nutters are happy! They’ve consigned their party to the electoral graveyard!
O’Farrell is a dud, but he’ll win by default!
A sad state of affairs for the people of New South Wales!
I’d agree if the other mob were any better, but sadly they’re not!
And having Labor reduced to a rump of 20-30 MPs in 2011 would hardly be good for democracy, but that’s where we’re headed.
oops that was preferred premier. Look ye all NSW lib gain is a given. The question is will KKK reduce the loss more than Rees. We will never really know but we can only go on the polls. I suspect that she will, so therefore job done. A good move to pick a sassy las like her. A working mum with a young family
Leaving a rump of 30MP is good for Labor?
Lets look at the margins, the MP that are left will be named Tripoli, Obeid, Sartor, Della Bosca, KKK, Kopenberg etc. If they remain in parliament, ALP will be unelectable until 2030.
I think for Labor, 6MPs would be good and clean out the garbage
A garbageman would do better than a charity coordinator when it comes to the current government. Kristina Keneally’s got as much backbone as a box jellyfish.
The NSW public hasn’t been swallowing the ALP spin since Iemma’s days.
#23
I’d say they’d be better, partly because they can’t possibly be worse, but mostly because at least they’ll be new and fresh. By 2019 they’ll probably be displaying the same decaying signs as Labor now, but for the first couple of terms new governments are generally okay.
And I don’t remember too many Labor types complaining about “democracy” when the Liberals were reduced to a rump through 1999-2007, so it’s hard to complain now the boot’s on the other foot.
#24
Antony Green has written post after post demonstrating that preferred premier means little, if anything. Opposition Leaders almost never win PP no matter how dire the government (e.g. Keating beat Howard in PP, Kirner beat Kennett). A close PP is a good performance from an OL’s viewpoint, not a bad one.
So leaving a rump will make the ALP unelectable until 2030 by leaving a rump of 30 but will be good for Labor if they’re left with 6? I don’t think so.
Tripoli, Obeid, Sartor, Della Bosca and Kopenberg will leave parliament I believe in by -elections during the next parliament. Why would they stick around for at least 8 years in opposition after experiencing power for so long?
The tipping point for this NSW government was when they lost the fight with the unions (and the parliament) over the electricity privitisation. Before that they were most likely to lose government – afterwards they were destined to lose government. Ironically, the liberals will almost certainly flog it all off after they win in any case.
The problem for the Libs will be the expectations on them to fix everything. When it becomes glaringly obvious they’re no better the disappointment will be massive. How long this will take is anybody’s guess but it will happen.
Gary,
I thought Koperberg was quitting in 2011?
http://www.nswalp.com/content/upload/files/Pendulums/Pendulum_State_2008.pdf
So how far will the pendulum swing? Are there any local members working their electorates hard that might buck the trend?
I doubt Tripodi and Obeid would stick around if there’s a slaughter in 2011!
I doubt Koperberg will recontest Blue Mountains at the next election!
Keneally will wear the blame for the defeat, and Michael Daley will take over as Opposition Leader(you can assume Labor will retain Maroubra).
re : 3 or more Premiers from one party in a parliament.
I have gone back to 1900 and the only occassions there have been 3 or more Premiers from the one party during the course of a parliament are :
Askin-Lewis-Willis (1973-1976) Liberal Party. At the 1 May 1976 election the Liberal government was defeated by Labor, lead by Neville Wran.
Iemma-Rees-Keneally – ? (2007-2011). Labor.
The reason I haven’t looked prior to 1900 is that there were frequent changes of Premier, however, the 2 rigid 2 big party system we now have was not in place.
The parliament resulting from the 1920 election is interesting but does not technically qualify. The 1920 election resulted basically in a house split equally (45 each) between progressives and conservatives. John Storey (Labor) was appointed Premier. He died and Labor appointed James Dooley as Premier. The Speaker of the LA (a conservative supporter) resigned as Speaker and Labor appointed a Labor MP as Speaker and then lost a vote 44-45. Premier Dooley asked the Governor to dissolve the parliament and hold an election. The Governor refused to do so. Premier Dooley tendered the government’s resignation, and opposition leader George Fuller (Nationalist Party) was made Premier. His premiership lasted 7 hours. When parliament resumed after Fuller’s appointment, the Labor Speaker resigned. No one was prepared to take the Speaker’s job, and the parliament sat paralysed. Eventually the original conservative Speaker, Daniel Levy, accepted the position on the condition he would seek a dissolution and fresh election from the Governor. This request was refused. The 7 hour Premier, George Fuller then resigned his government and the Governor appointed James Dooley as Premier, on condition he request an election. This occurred in December 1921 and an election was held in March 1922. At the 1922 election Labor led by Dooley was defeated. Fuller won the election and became Premier.
When the swing is on, the marginal seats fall, it doesn’t matter how hard the local members have worked! Geoff Corrigan and Phil Costa are said to be decent local MPs, but you’d have very strong doubts that they can hold Camden and Wollindilly respectively.
#32
Monaro’s the one that’s always talked about as bucking the trend. From all accounts Whan is a good MP, and personal votes tend to be higher in country seats. Maybe Bathurst too?
I don’t know whether the personal vote in urban seats is strong enough to resist any statewide swing.
I tell you what you do hear though plenty of conservatives and their supporters wanting an early election to get rid of a very long lasting government that has out lived usefulness. Guess why it was such a long lasting government. Yes, you guessed it, because they won elections that reduced the Liberals to a rump through 1999-2007. Was that good for “democracy” ? Not too many people would be saying “yes” to that today but I bet all those Lib and Nat supporters will be over the moon when that happens and will not be caring too much about the good of “democracy”. Hypocracy is a two way street.
You could very well be right. I’m a Victorian taking my cues from you New South Welshmen.
Rudd must feel like a fool! He was forced into publicly supporting Nathan Rees, all for nothing!
Time for some federal intervention of some sort!
EVAN 14
I do not believe a Prime Minister had ever been slapped in the face by a state branch like that ever before. I believe there will be some form of pay back after the climate talks
The best thing for NSW ALP will be the likes of Obeid etc to be disendorsed
#37
Winning landslides as a tired and worn-out 8 or 12 year old government is not quite the same as winning one as a fresh and enthusiastic new government. If Labor is still an unelectable rump in 2019, I’d agree with you.
Your broader point I agree with, though; I like to see a consistent turnover of governments after 10 or so years, which is about their useful lifetime (e.g. Keating and Howard both deserved to be put out of their misery when they were).
#38
I’m a Victorian too, but lived in NSW for several years.
#39
Yes, silly move by Rudd. Just throw NSW under the bus until 2011.
peter young
Thanks
That is good research
MDM
It was really funny
K Rudd spend the first 2 years ignoring NSW (the biggest state) and pretending it did not exist. When he finally made a comment about NSW …. it bit him
centaur009 – 24
For years now NSW Labor has been holding out a carrot on a stick…‘Things will get better’. However, nothing has really changed. Why would they change? Keneally is like Abbott, an accidental leader, appointed as a knee-jerk reaction to circumstances. In Labor’s case one has an uncomfortable feeling the circumstances causing the knee-jerk reaction was Rees’ announcement of his intention to reform political donations, his sacking of Tripodi and the possibility of a Sartor premiership. Keneally comes to the job without a plan. What does she have going for her apart from being pretty?
Frank Sartor and John Della Bosca both had prepared 100 day plans for action. Keneally does not have one.
When Della Bosca was effectively eliminated from the race, Sartor was the only one with a plan. Reports are that last minute switches in support caused Sartor to lose the right wing faction support by just 2 votes. Why the last minute vote switches? One suspects it may have something to do with the animity Tripodi holds toward Sartor and possibly as a Labor outsider, he could not be trusted to observe the right wing’s code of silence.
It is extremely difficult to see how Keneally will do any better than Rees. After being hampered throughout his term, it was only in the last month or so he was starting to hit his straps.
Governance has been stymied because of the changeover. The $35 million electorate stimulus package was to have been announced on 4 December 009 – the day they lynched Rees. It is still not announced. Right wing Labor puts its factional interests ahead of NSW people. Why should Keneally make a difference?
Sartor isn’t popular, but he at least knows how to make some firm decisions!
Perhaps what is needed in NSW until March 2011 is a caretaker government of some sort, made up of all sides(Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Greens etc)!
Gary Bruce – 38
I don’t know what Koperberg plans on doing. He is a Labor outsider of course.
However, I overheard a conversation he was having with another Labor MP (it was either 2nd or 3rd December 2009 – just days before the Rees lynching).
He was saying words to the effect. Politics is a nasty business. It turns people into nasty bits of work. Look at XXX……was a very nice person before (he/she) came into parliament.
He sounded extremely disillusioned.
I still think there is a case to treat NSW like a dysfunctional local council, and put in an administrator until the next scheduled election. Surely there is a moderately skilled accountant somewhere with a bit of free time?
No, NOT you, Barnaby!
Jean
President, IWSNL
(Inner Western Sydney Nimby League)
“but for the first couple of terms new governments are generally okay”
Anyone teaching in a NSW public school during the Greiner years would emphatically beg to differ!
That said, the NSW electorate is presented with god-awful alternatives between crap and schiess.
#47
Well if O’Farrell carries on like that, he’ll get his majority wiped out after one term, just like Greiner.
Well this won’t help if they run with it:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/15/2771897.htm
The earlier posts regarding ALP seats bucking the trend is an interesting issue. I agree Monaro is a likely candidate. If I am not mistaken, most of that electorate is within the ‘footprint’ of the ACT media and therefore presumably does not hear as much about what is going in Sydney and probably also relies on ACT government for some of its services.
How may apparently safe ALP seats are highly vulnerable to Independents and Green candidates? Surely Balmain and Marrickville but where else? If – and its a big if – the Greens continue to poll around 17% its hard to see how they could not snag at least a couple of seats in March 2011.
Anyone care to speculate on the seats vulnerable to Independents?
Will be interesting to see whether a “just vote 1 in the Liberal box” strategy is employed by the Libs
37
So supporters of the big 2 partys are accusing each other of hypocrisy over the question whether wiping out the opposition is ‘good for democracy’. The accusations of hypocrisy by both sides are probably correct.
I suspect that is one reason people are looking to a 3rd party alternative like the Greens, as demonstrated in the 5 point rise in the Newspoll.
# 34, you’ve gone back to 1900 and can only find two times where there’s been three Premiers in one term?
How about adding:
Bjelke-Petersen, Ahern and Cooper from 86 to 89.
Burke, Dowding and Lawrence from 89 to 93.
And federally … maybe even Holt, McEwen and Gorton 66-69?
And again …
Lyons, Page, Menzies. 1938-41
Curtain, Forde, Chifley. 1943-46.
And the best …
Nicklin, Pizzey, Chalk, Bjelke-Petersen – all in one term.
Ben Raue has suggested that Coogee, Blue Mountains and Heffron (KKK’s own seat!) could potentially fall to the Greens in addition to the previous two. He admits this is all a bit of a thought experiment as it is very hard to predict how preferences will flow – if at all – in Optional Preferential voting.
I’d possibly chuck Kiama into the mix if the ALP voters vote Green in droves, enough to nudge the ALP beneath the Greens + Lib primaries, then ALP secondary preferences deciding it for the Greens.
It would behoove the ALP to encourage voters to go Green if they won’t go ALP (2nd pref to Greens on HTV cards, local branches informally suggest voters in ALP heartland seats go Green) – the last thing the ALP wants is the Libs to get so large a swing as to send the ALP to the wilderness for multiple elections. They should want to keep the electoral air as competitive as possible.
52 and 56 – I would also suggest Maroubra, Canterbury, Strathfield and Drummoyne as outside possibilities if the Greens can pull ahead of Labor and gain their preferences.
Burke retired in 1988. Dowding won the 1989 election.
#57
Surely the last two (esp Drummoyne) will be won by the Liberals before the Greens?
I’ve wondered about Maroubra: certainly parts of it are gentrifying, but it’s probably behind Heffron in that respect.
The real story behind the Greens high vote is how much it will cause Labor’s vote to splinter, which under OPV obviously improves the Liberal position in inner/middle seats such as Coogee, Rockdale, Strathfield, Kogarah and Drummoyne.
This is pie-in-the-sky stuff.
Strathfield and Drummoyne will be Liberal v Labor affairs.
Maroubra and Canterbury are Labor heartland seats; there isn’t enough of that inner city demographic to aid the Greens.
#54
I think he may have been referring to the NSW Parliament…….
Balmain will probably go Green, depending on the candidate. Marrickville could but certainly not a lay-down misere because there’s a higher gap in the primary from last time. People in the inner west of Sydney probably already voted Green if they were angry already, and in Marrickville the rusted-ons will keep them the seat, I don’t think there’s that much more room for the protest vote to grow. I mean, to be honest, the government’s no worse than in 2007, I can’t see that big 47% primary going down that much.
I cannot see the Greens getting close in any other Labor-held seats because the Liberal vote is going to go up a lot and they will come second. Coming second in say North Shore, Vaucluse again is very likely but if people get excited about that, they might as well get excited about anything.
er, to clarify, that much more room to grow in inner Sydney. The Green vote will probably go up more on the North Shore and the west, especially the latter where they haven’t had much reach before. But the idea of them challenging for Canterbury is very funny, even for a thought experiment, and the Libs will poll too well in Drummoyne and Strathfield.
Caltonbloke.= 54
I was only looking at NSW because this thread is about NSW politics.
I was trying to stay on thread.
Blue Mountains will be a Labor v Liberal affair.
Kiama will be a Labor v Liberal affair (perhaps you meant the safe Labor seat of Keira which overlaps with federal Cunningham? Although the state results aren’t that encouraging there either.)
Coogee is interesting. A strong Greens vote, but also a healthy Labor and Liberal vote. You’d think if Labor is doing badly enough to slip below the Greens, then the Liberals are doing well enough to win it almost without preferences.
Heffron isn’t inner city enough to be winnable for the Greens. Plus having the Premier as the sitting member will help.
SNIP: Enough already – The Management.
SNIP: Ditto – The Management.
http://www.newspoll.com.au/image_uploads/091204 NSW Voting Intention & Leaders Ratings Nov – Dec.pdf
As much as I hate O’Farrell and the Libs, it’s interesting to see that for the first time his satisfaction is above his dissatisfaction – a whole 14% ahead infact.
Carltonbloke 54&55
The tangential reference to 3 Premiers in states other than NSW might add credence to the argument that at the following election the government is likely to be defeated.
Except perhaps for Nicklin, Pizzey, Chalk, Bjelke-Petersen (Qld).
No-god help us if Keneally is a modern day Joh.
Argh, people, let’s not talk about Keira either. I recall in the lead-up to the 2007 Federal election people breathlessly talking about Cunningham as an “inner city” seat like Sydney which would be vulnerable to the Greens just because it went there at a by-election. And what happened? Labor won easily, and the Greens weren’t even close to second.
The quiet NW suburbs of Wollongong ain’t Green territory. And Keira is about as likely to turn Green as Kiama. David Campbell, my opinion on his tenure as a Minister aside, is a vigorous local member and his office handles correspondence and dealings with the public in a very professional manner, and he’d be safer than he looks even if his margin were 5%. Which it’s not. It’s a lot more than that.
Bob1234
Sorry there was excessive happiness in your posts. That has got to change
that 5% is just protest vote by left wing Labor voters. They will return to Labor once the madness stops
But for so long the folklore has been that Labor voters will refuse to choose/vote rather than to go the Libs/Greens. Now the Labor vote is only 9% higher than the Greens. Scary stuff. If you’re not afraid, you should be, hubris is fatal as Howard well knows.
bob didn’t you look at the Higgins by election result? All the labor booths had a very large non attendance, making it look like it swung to the libs. Meanwhile the lib booths swung to the greens. End result lib with increased majority, and you guys green egg on your faces!
But you may get a seat or 2 in NSW, which will be good for democracy, but as effective as a tofu sandwich at the carnivores picnic
With the Greens polling up to 17% it seems very likely that they will get 3 quota in the Legislative Council (13.64%) and might even get a fourth on one of the last quotas when the micro parties are excluded.
The big question with Marrickville and Balmain is whether the Libs will direct preferences to the Greens. I think they way things are now the Greens could win Balmain without them but need them for Marrickville.
centaur009, but in this poll Labor has only 9% more than the Greens.
It speaks volumes.
Of course they will. The Libs can’t win these so they’d rather the Greens do than Labor.
Yeah but your point of ALP voters voting Green/LIb is not supported and clearly in Higgins was demonstrated exactly what you refute. You will only ever be a thorn in the side of whoever is in power, and you will always be close but no tofu burger. Like the democrats pains takingly at every election since their formation, they never ever managed to secure a lower house seat.
The Liberals barely crack double figures in Marrickville, so I don’t know whether their preferences would make that big a difference (allowing for leakage or those who simply don’t direct).
The primary vote changes for this poll are Labor down 13, Greens up 8. Even assuming a few % swing back to Labor by election day, the Greens should win Marrickville on primaries, no matter what the Liberals do.
Not necessarily Bob, with OPV the Libs didn’t preference last time. The argument being that the Libs could alienate some of their base/the mainstream (that is mainstream to a Liberal) if they preference the Greens in Balmain and Marrickville, which could cost them votes in winnable seats. (It would also open O’Farrell up to further ‘stand for nothing’ accusations if he preferences an ideologically opposing party).
17% won’t happen, but Balmain and Marrickville are both very much in play. Carmel Tebbutt is a good local member with a lot of local support, and I’m sure will find a lot of head office dollars heading her way, so I wouldn’t count that second chicken yet in any case, let alone beyond Marrickville.
I don’t buy the first paragraph, Hamish. It’s tactical voting, nothing to do with ideology. Just like how Labor preferences the Nationals over the Liberals in states where they’re not in Coalition. That’s never upset large sections of Labor’s base.
I agree with hamish
I would be surprise if the Libs preference the Green
To the Libs they are as bad, so unless Green offers something in return, the liberals will exhaust
I agree with hamish
I would be surprise if the Libs preference the Green
To the Libs they are as bad, so unless Green offers something in return, the liberals will exhaust
If the Libs were to act tactically in Balmain and Marrickville and direct preferences to the Greens that would change my view from likely Greens wins to certain Greens wins. Unfortunately, I doubt they will.
The Libs would probably like to get Verity Firth and Carmel Tebutt booted out of parliament, so I’m sure they’d preference the Greens in Balmain and Marrickville.
The distant NSW election will be a very acrimonious affair. By the time March 2011 comes around, the battle lines will be etched like crevices. I can’t see any of the three parties working out preference deals: ALP will want to scrape as much vote as they can keep; Libs want as much power and swing as they can get; the Greens get the leftovers.
Balmain yes; the Greens candidate is very electorate-friendly. Marrickville – if Fiona Byrne runs again, I’d say yes – she’s been an excellent deputy mayor.
Unlikely any others due to minimum preferencing and lack of brand recognition in the public sphere about the Greens yet.
The Greens may sacrifice lower house votes for upper house preference deals though. If the Greens can pick up the quota remainders from both Libs & ALP, they may get 4 MLCs in. Smart lower-house preferencing on HTVs may earn the Greens that.
I wonder whether the Greens are contemplating a Faustian pact with the Libs for that extra MLC…
Hamish Coffee -79
The problem for Labor in both Marrickville and Balmain is that both MPs are cabinet ministers. They don’t have the luxury of distancing themselves from the ‘on the nose government’ as many others do, for example Paul Pearce in Coogee and Gerard Martin in Bathurst who are constantly letting it be known locally that they disagree with the government.
How much money can Labor throw at these seats to save them? Every extra dollar spent in these electorates is a dollar deprived from other electorates. The hard heads in the Labor machine will be looking carefully at that question. Whats the point of spending an extra dollar in Balmain, if the same dollar spent elsewhere could save 3 seats. Hard decision, but is it really worth losing 3 seats to retain one, which is held in any event by the despised so called left. NSW Labor is indoctrinated with the cold blooded philosophy of ‘Richo’.
As for the alleged “popularity” of Carmel I am yet to find any tangible evidence of it.
I can’t provide concrete evidence of Tebbutt’s popularity, but from what I’ve seen she have strong personal support, partly from her role as councillor in the area. Yes, dollars spent somewhere will be dollars not spent elsewhere, but Marrickville does have a 7.5% buffer so it would be brave to call it a right off. I very much expect it to be a battleground.
Centeur
Is that how you are spinning the bi-election. Yeap it was a major win by Labor LOL
“bob didn’t you look at the Higgins by election result? All the labor booths had a very large non attendance, making it look like it swung to the libs. Meanwhile the lib booths swung to the greens. End result lib with increased majority, and you guys green egg on your faces!
But you may get a seat or 2 in NSW, which will be good for democracy, but as effective as a tofu sandwich at the carnivores picnic
Of course not Dovif, we were completely stuffed for not running. But most people thought that the ALP would naturely convert to the Greens but it didn’t. They decided to stay home instead!!!
Before going into further discussion,perhaps another point to consider come the election is this.
the actual voter turnout.
some may consider not voting at all as a protest.
deconst way back at 20
I think this would be a terrible outcome in terms of quality of public administration.
Gusface – 90
How realistic do you think that is a possibility? Is there any evidence of a similar voter reaction anywhere in Australia at a general election at a time a government is ‘on the nose’. Why would people risk a fine, albeit small.Maybe there are a lot of traditional Labor supporters who are just as anxious to beat the current mob with a baseball bat, in order to see it cleaned of the scum that is the cancer Rees spoke of. They might see it as their duty to vote to save their beloved party. This is their chance to have a say – in a secret ballot.
I hope we don’t get a hung parliament in 2011, or if so the Coalition has the numbers with some independents. It would be a nightmare for the Greens to have to choose between propping up the hated ALP government and working with the Liberals. Thankfully I think it’s extremely unlikely the Greens will decide who forms the next government. Even if it’s a hung parliament there will be enough independents and they would be the ones the Liberals would work with.
Blue Mountains is certainly not a safe seat. Coogee and Blue Mountains have the real potential to be three-way marginals in the near future.
I calculated that the Greens have a chance of coming second and indeed having a chance of winning on preferences in Coogee, Blue Mountains and Heffron. I don’t think we will at the moment, but those places are real shots for us.
Its amazing how words like hate seem to enter the Greens political vernacular at the drop of a poll number. Of course, when the same measures are applied to them they scream their self righteous anger at being abused and misunderstood.
Yep, last year in WA – turnout was about 86% I think. The WA Labor government didn’t deserve to be on the nose as much as NSW, but I guess it kinda was.
Who was Robert Stock, the independent in Blue Mountains in 2007? He did OK, 11% of the vote.
“Of course they will. The Libs can’t win these so they’d rather the Greens do than Labor.”
Got a flash for you Mr 1234. I’m in Heffron. I’ve voted ALP for 34 years, but not in the next state election. It will be Liberal and none other. Not ALP. Never Green. And then back to the ALP after that, once the two bob mafia are gone. Notice how I am able to differentiate between state and federal? I wonder if others think the same way? Although I may get a bit sentimental closer to the event and vote informal.
You have to understand that you put people off the Greens with your “I’m a Green” one day and concern trollery for the Liberals the other six days of the week. I would never vote for a party that could claim even one seventh of you. I can honestly tell you that, as an “inner city” type who gets out and about, I have heard nothing but bad news for long, tall Kristina. And nothing at all about the Greens. Not a thing. Why? Because they aren’t players. Pests, yes, but not players. You see, Bob, everyday people either think the Greens belong in a circus or are simply best left ignored.
My tip? Zero seats for the Greens and a majority of about ten for the Libs. It will tighten up significantly between now and election day and way too tightly for enough people to send a member with no clout in either party to Macquarie St.
Roy
To be fair the Greens Bob is not representative of greens and I truly can’t recall Bob discussing a green policy or issue.
There used to be a poster called Nostrodamus, so much like Bob in his postings, except Nostro posted as a lib supporter and like Bob his postings put people off the party he proposed to support.
Funny thing with Nostro, there was a rumour that he was a Monash uni student who created the persona as a joke.
I’ve met and talked with a few greens, admire Kerry Tucker, she almost did Dumbries on the night. They have also have their Bigwoods, Joyces Neals and Tuckeys but maost are decent reasonable people.
I wonder; have the federal and NSW polls been so different before?
And as i’ve said so many times, i’m happy with that. All I want is for a progressive third party to hold the sole balance of power and keep Labor (1970s Liberals) and the Liberals accountable in the Senate and amend legislation when possible.
I was over the moon on November 24, 2007.
Didn’t your mother ever tell you to enjoy your side of greens? They aren’t the main meal but they’re definately important and good for you
Isn’t funny how theres now near unanimous agreement that the Greens will win multiple lower house seats in NSW… this never used to happen.
Not to mention the fact that it will most likely be the first time the Greens win a seat(s) at a general election.
Yeah, the Greens are definately imploding! LOL! Wishful thinking by Labor hacks.
Yes, no longer can the right be appeased at the expense of the left.
More crap. The majority of Labor votes went to the Greens over the Libs or informal/not voting, at a better rate this by-election than previous by-elections.
Still can’t believe it…
Coalition 44%
Labor 26%
Greens 17%
This looks like figures more for any current UK Con/Lab/LibDem poll…
Labor needs a good flushing out, in terms of both internal personnel and MPs… until they do this they will not be a viable competent government. I hope this happens sooner rather than quicker. Some on this forum have the exact same attitudes Liberals had in 2007… and still have today…
NSW Labor will be out for at least two terms. Let’s hope they can renew rather than delay and stall which all too often happens by naval gasers inside and outside the party who are too stubborn to admit where they went wrong and how to fix it.
*gazers
How do I get that stfu thing? So I don’t have to read bob’s idiocy.
Before you get too excited, look at the Tory / Labour / SDP-Liberal vote split in the 1983 UK election. Then look at the number of seats each party got. The two-party is a powerful beast.
* ‘two-party’ = ‘two-party system’.
Get Firefox.
Download Greasemonkey add on
Install Script from here.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/63741
Enjoy the silence
Legend. Ta.
Ahh, the sweet sound of no dissent. Much as Bob bugs me sometimes, I don’t believe in blocking people’s posts just because I don’t agree with them. I think it’s a fairly unpleasant move.
It’s their way of throwing in the towel. Their choice but it speaks volumes about them
106
That was with fptp. NSW has optional preferential which is not as bad. UK 1983 with compulsory preferential would have looked a bit different in seat outcome.
Bird of Paradise – #96
Thanks for that information. It has inspired me to look at the WA State election for 2008. I will also look at the 1988 NSW State election. I want to see if there are trends for a reduced turnout and/or increased informal vote at such elections.
Anyone aware of any other state elections, where Labor governments were on the nose (either in reality or perceived to be) ?
I am thinking of a theory for NSW state Labor (based only on instinct) along these lines:
Labor voters comprise:
1. Welded on voters. These are people who would vote Labor, irrespective of the circumstances or the candidate e.g. Mickey Mouse. My gut feeling is these are 15-30% of the formal vote. The NSW Nov-Dec Newspoll gave Labor 26%. In the 2008 Sydney City Council election Labor scored 17% in the councillor election and 15% in the mayoral contest. The council elections were held a week or two after Iemma was lynched following his attempts to privatise electricity assets.
2. Rusted on voters.
a. Strongly rusted on. These people cannot bring themselves to vote anything other than Labor. Where a Labor government is on the nose, they will either:
(i) Fail to attend a polling booth, or
(ii) Vote informal.
b. Lightly rusted on. These people will normally vote Labor, but when it is clear that Labor is completely useless e.g. Labor doesn’t field a candidate, will vote on a 2CP basis possibly in the proportion Greens (70-80%) and Liberal (20-30%) – based on Dr Good’s work.
3. Swinging voters who change their vote from Labor to Liberal to Green etc, depending on the circumstances.
The categories are not mutually exclusive.
re: Reduced turnout
I have looked at the WA state election results to see if voters fail to turn-out when a government is on the nose.
Figures are available from the WAEC for the 1993, 1996, 2001, 2005 and 2008 elections. Voter turnout as a percentage of those enrolled was:
1993 – 93.5
1996 – 90
2001 – 90.5
2005 – 89.8
2008 – 86.5
Change elections (those at which the government were defeated) were 1993 (Labor defeated), 2001 (Liberal defeated) and 2008 (Labor defeated).
Bird of Paradise – #96 – says the Labor government in 2008 was painted as being on the nose.
The turnout figures generally show a downward trend since 1993. If this non-turnout effect does exist , it would not be more than 4% of the electorate.
Informal voting:
From the WAEC the informal vote as a percentage of votes cast was:
1993 – 4.1%
1996 – 4.4%
2001 – 4.5%
2005 – 5.2%
2008 – 5.3%
These figures show an upward trend in informal voting since 1993.
A bunch of WA elections might not be the best to compare with each other… in particular, 2001 had One Nation, which is gonna be remembered most in 50 years time as an annoying blip that makes turn-of-the-century data a pain to analyse. Try comparing NSW 1988 and the 1992/3 elections in Vic, SA and WA; they all featured broken-down old ALP governments being taken out the back and given a bullet. Qld 1995 might fit the bill too, although that was a little bit different (Qld always is).
# 115
Thanks for that. Difficulty is that basically results are available on the web only for elections subsequent to 1990. Which means I have to go to the Library and do a paper based search. Urrrrrrrgh.
Hmm, not even at Psephos apparently.
I’ve gotta go to the Alexander Library sometime, I haven’t for ages – I might tomorrow. They’ve got a bunch of old WA stuff on the top floor. Hopefully it’s open…
(Friendly warning to the Sydneysiders: our new Liberal premier has many cost-saving ideas, one of which was closing the state museum and art gallery for a day each week – not sure if the library got that treatment too. Hopefully he doesn’t give O’Farrell too many bad ideas.)
Bird of paradox – #117
I have found a website which might just solve my problems – currently checking it out.
http://elections.uwa.edu.au/
re: Voting turnout.
That website at the University of Western Australia is perfect for my needs.
http://elections.uwa.edu.au/
I was looking at turnout/informal when Labor was on the nose. From my understanding there is no such election in Queensland in modern times. However, the 1989 election was one in which the conservatives were on the nose. That election followed a 3 Premier (Bjelke-Petersen, Ahern, Cooper) term, and the incumbent Nationals were defeated. Labor won the 1995 election, but a re-run in a seat ordered by the Court of Disputed Returns, resulted in Labor losing the seat and the Nationals formed government with the support of an independent. The Nationals went to the 1998 polls as the government, but were defeated by Labor led by Peter Beattie.
The turnout figures with the informal vote in brackets is:
1986 – 91.3% (2.2%)
1989 – 91.2% (3%)
1992 – 91.5% (2.3%)
1995 – 91.4% (1.8%)
1998 – 92.9% (1.5%)
2001 – 92.6% (2.3%)
2004 – 91.4% (2%)
2006 – 90.5% (2%)
2009 – 91% (1.9%)
Do you think that the low voter turnout has something to do with the knowledge that if you don’t vote, you get fined, a reminder and then nothing else. ie it is not enforced so people are saying stuff it.
re : Voter turnout in WA – Addendum to #114
The figures in #114 were from the information provided on the WAEC website. The discovery of the UWA website (see #118) enables results prior to 1993 to be tabulated.
Voter turnout with informal in brackets is:
1980 – 88.4% (3.5%)
1983 – 89% (2.8%)
1986 – 91.4% (2.6%)
1989 – 90.7% (7.4%).
Change elections in this period were 1983 (Liberal defeated).
re: Voter turnout and informal – NSW
From the UWA website (see #118) voter turnout with informal in brackets is:
1981 – 91.2% (3.1%)
1984 – 92.5% (2.4%)
1988 – 93.6% (3.3%)
1991 – 93.6% (9.3%)
1995 – 93.8% (5.2%)
1999 – 93.1% (2.5%)
2003 – 91.9% (2.6%)
2007 – 92.6% (2.8%)
Change elections were 1988 (Labor defeated) and 1995 (Liberal minority government defeated. The 1991 election saw the Liberal government led by Nick Greiner retaining government, but as a minority government with support of independents.
Over the period voter turnout is fairly stable. Likewise the informal vote except in 1991 and 1995 when they were high. The informal vote in the change election (Labor defeated) of 1988 was the 3rd highest in the period.
Wonder what caused the high informal rate in 1991?
“Greiner scares me but the other mob aren’t ready to govern, so stuff ‘em both”, perhaps?
MDMConnell – #123
Your suggestion seems feasible.
MDMConnell – #123
However this is another explanation:
see: AEC, Research Report 10 – Informal Voting at State and Territory Elections
http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/publications/Strategy_Research_Analysis/paper10/page01.htm
I hate it when people say that. I remember people said the same after Latham and after Debnam. Elections are never for sure.
re: Voter turnout and informal – VICTORIA
From the UWA website (see #118) voter turnout with informal in brackets is:
1979 – 93.3% (3.0%)
1982 – 94% (2.6%)
1985 – 93.2% (2.7%)
1988 – 92.4% (3.9%)
1992 – 95.1% (3.8%)
1996 – 94.1% (2.3%)
1999 – 93.2% (3.0%)
2002 – 93.2% (3.4%)
2006 – 92.7% (4.6%)
Change elections were 1982 (Liberal defeated), 1992 (Labor defeated) and 1999 (Liberal defeated).
re: Voter turnout and informal – SOUTH AUSTRALIA
From the UWA website (see #118) voter turnout with informal in brackets is:
1977 – 93.4% (2.7%)
1979 – 93.0% (4.4%)
1982 – 93.2% (5.8%)
1985 – 93.5% (3.5%)
1989 – 94.4% (2.8%)
1993 – 93.6% (3.1%)
1997 – 91.8% (4.0%)
2002 – 93.6% (3.1%)
2006 – 92.3% (3.6%)
Change elections were 1979 (Labor defeated) 1982 (Liberal defeated) 1993 (Labor defeated) and 2002 (Liberal minority government defeated and replaced by a Labor minority government).
Hung parliaments with the Greens can work: ACT is exemplary. I agree that Labor needs to be chastened and the only way that’ll happen is if they’re out of office.
Yes given that there are no Greens in NSW lower house and it took 5 elections before the ACT greens had enough MLAs to govern with the ALP – also the ALP in ACT is a very different beast to the NSW ALP – this is as fantastic a discussion as they come. Fun to needle the Labor hacks though!
A hung parliament given these swings is very unlikely anyway, outright Coalition is what we’ll have. If we had a hung parliament it’d make NSW politics much more interesting though…
They were already in opposition. NSW Labor isn’t. They won’t be given a majority by the voters the first election after being voted out. Any belief otherwise is silly.
It has been put forward on this website that rusted on Labor voters, who have lost faith with the NSW Labor government for reasons including it has lost it’s way, it’s old and tired and/or is perceived as being on the nose, will, rather than giving their vote to any other candidate/party, fail to ‘vote’ or record an informal vote at the 2011 NSW state election.
Could someone explain, apart from anecdotal evidence of what they or members of their close circle of friends will do/have done, the basis on which this assertion is made and the quantum of enrolled electors who might be expected to act in this fashion.
The voter turnout and informal vote figures for recent years are set out above. NSW @ #122, Victoria @ #127, Qld @ #119, WA @ #114 and #121, and SA @ #128.
The turnout at the next NSW election will fall several percent. That will be because automatic enrolment is being introduced. Instead of people who never get around to enrolling, next time these people will be on the roll and not get round to voting.
Why is it silly? The NSW Libs are nutters and are led by a man that the public doesn’t know what he stands for. It’s silly to say that a major party will be unable to win an election for 8 years.
Antony Green – 132
That is a very good point. It is like comparing apples with oranges. After the 2011 election the high “fail to attend booth” figures will be explainable by that, not by “disillusioned Labor voters refusing to support other candidates/party’s”.
They did in 1995. Beazley very nearly won after a single term in 1998.
The problem with state turnout figures is that they are also affected by the proximity of Federal elections, and by how ‘sudden’ the election was. The AEC supervises most of the roll processing under the Joint Roll arrangement. Historically they do a major purge of the roll 6-12 months before a Federal election, removing names of people who have moved. The enrolment drops at that point, so a state election held before the purge will contain a slightly higher proportion of people on the roll who have moved and so won’t vote. The AEC and state authorities try to do purges before state polls as well, but this doesn’t happen with snap state polls.
So last year’s WA election was early and sudden and the roll was not in as good a state as if the election had occurred at the normal time. Snap elections also seem to affect the number of people arranging postal votes. elections held at an expected time normally get a higher turn out than unexpected elections.
Hung parliaments with the Greens can work: ACT is exemplary. I agree that Labor needs to be chastened and the only way that’ll happen is if they’re out of office.
Hung parliaments with the Greens can certainly work, and like you say, I think the situation in the ACT is ideal.
The problem with achieving the same result in NSW is that you’d be in a Sophie’s choice situation – be responsible for re-electing the most incompetent government in Australian history, or for electing a government that makes Ghengis Khan look positively progressive. You can’t win with those choices.
That is a very good point. It is like comparing apples with oranges. After the 2011 election the high “fail to attend booth” figures will be explainable by that, not by “disillusioned Labor voters refusing to support other candidates/party’s”.
I doubt it. What else do you think people who are fed up with Labor, think the Clarkist Liberals are nutters, and don’t want to go to the Greens are going to do?
Yes, but making those choices is what the balance of power is about. Responsibility comes with power. You are either a serious player in politics and make that sort of decision, or you’re dillettantes.
The German Greens had to make a choice in 1999 on the Kosovo war. Agree to Nato’s decision to bomb Belgrade, or sit idly by while the Milosevic governing expelled more that a million people from their homes and country. Not choosing wasn’t an option. Holding power can involve tough and unsavoury decisions. You don’t get to pick and choose which decisions you make.
For what it’s worth I give the Greens no hope in Heffron. Sure, half the electorate, from Tempe to Waterloo and Kensington is your sort of inner-city environment that could just, on occasion, elect a Green (assuming the Libs running third AND preferencing the Greens).
The other half of the electorate is nothing at all like that. Have any of you ever driven through Rosebery, Eastlakes and Mascot (going to the airport doesn’t count)? Not much gentrification or “inner city” character. The voters in these places aren’t going to vote Green (or Liberal).
http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/state_government_elections/electoral_districts/all_districts_/heffron/results_2007/first_candidates_post
I don’t really understand the angst against the NSW Government. I think that they’re actually pretty good at governing; they’re just terrible at politics and the latter has been dragged through the media and people have linked the unable-to-look-after-the-party to unable-to-look-after-the-state. If you look at the stats, NSW Hospitals have the shortest waiting lists in Australia, the average NSW student score was the highest in the 2009 nationwide exams and certainly where in Sydney I live the public transport is great.
The Libs are kind of the opposite. They have terrible inter-party brawls and have genuine Keith Windshuttle fan clubbers, but manage to keep a lid on it, and then they have pretty well no policies but seem to get by on a ‘fixing the state’ mantra.
Just my thoughts, but I will certainly be filling all the boxes and putting the Libs below the Government.
Hamish, the Cons have 44%, Lab 26%, Green 17%. They are incompetent and inept.
It is worth remarking on how health has been kept out of the media compared with the other states. I’m sure Carmel Tebbutt is glad that her portfolio hasn’t been the media nightmare that it has been under previous ministers (Reba anyone?).
Education hasn’t been quite so lucky – that’s been more federal focused. It’s also John Kaye’s pet portfolio so I don’t think the NSW Greens will ever stop needling the government where they can.
The Coalition won’t contest the election on those two issues as they know it’s a quagmire for them; rather I think it’ll be law & order, planning and the managing of the state economy that’ll be used to thwack the government down.
Certainly on planning they’ll be whipping out their election-drawer policies to get into office, then quietly do a policy switcharoo. When that happens I think the public will swing back support for the ALP.
rogan – 140
I have actually walked all around it !!!
I agree it has characteristics that make it strong Labor territory. However, it is changing, particularly with the new large scale apartment style buildings e.g. around Green Square. There is a push commencing for gentrification in the workman style cottages as well. Conveniently located close to the CBD and relatively inexpensive this push will continue. Just have to be able to put up with the airport noise
I am not predicting which way it will go politically. I am saying it is changing.
I think Labor supporters need to get together and agree on their lines.
Half of them are claiming O’Farrell is a vicious rightwing wolf in sheep’s clothing who’ll unleash a secret radical agenda.
And the other half claim he’s an empty vessel who has no policies and stands for nothing.
He can’t be both at the same time. SO which is it?
Peter – then you would know!
Green Square is about 5 streets, admittedly with higher density living than other areas of the seat. Lots of people in Eastlakes and Mascot though. It could change character sufficiently in maybe 5-10 years. Not in 2011 though.
So anthony or anyone else, what can the ALP do to save some furniture.A. Go hard on schools and hospitals, jobs? B. Be as quiet as possible to take out the heat or C. attack the opposition for lack of policies.
My guess is B for next year, 6 months out switch to A and a bit of C
The election is still a very long time a way. plenty of time for warm and fluffies to be paraded here and there. You know like hey I was so mad about the state of the Government, but isn’t that dog cute hahah things aren’t that bad are they
Do I know you? I was simply giving my opinion, as we are all entitled to. A bit of civility never goes astray on a blog.
I wouldn’t consider O’Farrell to be particularly ‘right.’ He is in the moderate faction of the Libs. I’m concerned my some of the others in the NSW Libs though, who of which is well documented. It’s hard to say if he stands for anything. He may, but he seems to be taking a very cautious approach by not voicing anything too controversial and simply letting the media focus on the Gov. No doubt some policies will come closer to the election, but hopefully not in the same vein as Debnam chose.
I suppose they’ll try all the above, fail miserably and head for a wipeout.
Hamish Coffee
The problem of the NSW ALP government is well known to anyone living in NSW, I know of a lot of people who will be voting Liberal for the first time in their life
If you name something, they have screwed it up
Cross city tunnell, they closed off city streets to force people to use the tunnell, leading to congestions in the city, government is being sue by developers for agreeing to close those street, and then reopening them. The operator has promise to never do business in Australia again
Lack of rail infrastructure means gridlock in the north west – esp Paramatta road and Victoria road
Lack of Power infrastructure means that electricity is expected to raise by 50% in 3 years
Government agree to new Orange (?) hospital, but the floors does not have enough support for medical machinery, some operation room was too small, plan and hospital will have to be remade costing millions of dollars more
Hospital nurses had to buy their own hospital supplies
Rail time table was changed so they can say more trains are on time, instead of solving the problem, they used spin
Rail maintenance corruption cost state millions of dollar more, no one looked at it for 15 years
I think it is possible to conclude that the following are myths:
1. Traditional Labor voters, feeling disappointed with Labor, will never vote Greens.
2. Traditional Labor voters, feeling disappointed with Labor, would prefer to stay away from the booths or vote informal, rather than record a vote for Green or Liberal.
There may be some people who will act like the myth dictates.
1. Possibility up to 30%.
2. Negligible and hardly measurable.
In up to date news, projects for the $35million electorate stimulus package have finally been announced, albeit 2 weeks late.
Unusually caucus (pronounced by the Premier as a slang term for the male organ followed by “us”), is meeting today. Interesting to see if she announces any plans today.
I like Keneally’s accent.
Yes, I saw the stimulus, called a Community Building Partnership isn’t it? It’s paying for a shade roof to be made and installed for my niece’s pre-school.
dovif (and in answer to Hamish) – and you could add:
1. Hugely expensive desalination plant that wasn’t needed (designed only to counter Debnam’s proposal, which had a “yuck” factor, but was perfectly safe)
2. Garling commission of inquiry.
3. Department of Community Services failures
(I interpose that IMO the practice of blaming the minister every time an abused child dies or someone is mistreated by a hospital emergency room is very unfair, but it’s grist to the mill of an opposition.)
4. The power fiasco, the only enduring effect of which has been to destroy the government’s standing in the polls. In particular, the timing of the announcement was egregiously cynical. Particularly after going to the 2007 election attacking Debnam on the basis of “Ooh the Libs will privatise stuff”.
5. Other cynical stuff, like the timing of the abandonment of the new Spit crossing (5 weeks after an election?).
6. The total waste of funds on the City Metro that should never be built and few people want or will use. The Darwin to Alice Springs Railway (itself no shining example of proper transport policy) cost about $1 billion for 1500 km of railway. The NSW Government can give us 7 km of white elephant railway for a mere 5 or 6 times the cost.
7. The northwest railway/metro, which has been announced and pulled 3 times now, by my count. But who cares about those idiots in their McMansions, they don’t vote ALP anyway.
8. The trains more generally, slowing down all timetables by 10-20 minutes over the route, so that trains now run on time.
Ultimately, state government is about quality of life issues. In my view, the one thing that REALLY p’s people off is sitting in traffic. Realistically, if you live and work in 70% of Sydney and your commute is greater than about 10 km, it is likely that you spend a considerable amount of time every week stuck in traffic or sitting on a bus or train going nowhere. Obviously it doesn’t affect Hamish Coffee and in fairness I wouldn’t have a clue where he lives, but I make the point that the swinging voters in the critical marginal seats surrounding Sydney (Miranda, Menai, Camden, Wollondilly, Blue Mountains, Penrith, Riverstone and Londonderry) do grapple with this issue. It’s not easy to get to Parramatta from Narellan or from Llandilo to Bankstown or from Lugarno to the CBD or from Blaxland to Uni of NSW. Unless you have a car and a high degree of patience.
Transport is the real retail politics quality of life question – which affects more Sydney residents on more days than any other issue. And having completely stuffed up the last two transport PPPs (CCT and Lane Cove) and crying poor over the budget (help us Kevin, please!), the current government has shown no aptitude for fixing it.
The few proposals they can generate seem, to say the least, politically motivated (the CBD metro could-have-but-now-won’t save Verity Firth, and the pie in the sky Western Metro extension of the CBD Metro, the proponents of which include identities not a million miles away from the NSW ALP).
Here’s my favourite.
There’s a newsagent across the road from my local railway station. You can buy a bus weekly there. You can buy a bus/rail weekly there. But you cannot by a rail weekly. You have to join the snaking queue at the railway station to buy a rail ticket.
What or who do you think is stopping the government from allowing newsagents to sell weekly rail tickets?
Sydney’s private bus companies are all basically broke, so broke the government now buys their busses for them. The government could take them all over and introduce the same ticketing that applies to the public bus system. Why doesn’t it do it and who’s stopping them?
Here’s a hint. Carl Scully while transport minister took over the Parramatta-Ryde bus company because it was insolvent. The TWU hit the roof. Is it a union coverage issue that’s stopping sensible rationalisation of the system?
Why does the government stick to a point-to-point fare structure rather than rationalise the system into a zonal system. That’s what’s happened in Perth and Brisbane in recent years, and happened in Melbourne 25 years ago, and appllies in every big city in the world. Why do you still sit on busses in Sydney watching the driver and a passenger engaging in coversation about how far they are travelling and therefore how far a passenger is going and therefore how much the fare will be. Even if you use the travel tens, you still have to know how many sections you are going so you can use the right coloured ticket. Why do they maintain this complex point to point ticket structure?
Why can’t you get an equivalent of a travel ten for trains, or even a London style carnet to cover a standard fare you might travel a couple of times a week. Why if you don’t have a weekly, but you travel a certain number of days a week, do you have to queue to buy a ticket on each day of travel.
Why can’t you buy a daily equivalent of a weekly. There is one that costs $17 and covers the entire metropolitan area, but is priced to make it uneconomical for people in the public transport dense inner city buying it.
They already have a zonal system for their TravelPass and other mixed-mode tickets (e.g. red zone, green zone, purple..). When I lived in Sydney I just got a red Travelpass and could use train, bus, and ferry. You’d think that system could easily be expanded into a full zonal fare structure.
#165
Scrapping the metro and promising to use the money to fund NW and/or SW rail link was a no-brainer for the Liberals. Might tip the balance in Londonderry and Riverstone.
Also interesting to note Rees’ promise to duplicate the M5 tunnels. WHile I agree the existing tunnels are woeful, I wonder how well this will go down in seats like Rockdale, and I’m curious to see what O’Farrell will say about it.
MDM – but that zonal system only applies for weeklies, and it does not extend beyond the reach of the current government bus system. It does not apply in the outer suburbs where the private busses run. The only place you can buy a combined bus/rail day ticket is in the eastern suburbs, a system introduced when the eastern suburbs line was opened in the 1970s and the busses were terminated at Bondi Junction and Edgecliffe. Despite the success of those combined tickets, they have never been extended elsewhere in the system.
The whole structure of the multi-mode ticket system is built around weeklies. So if you don’t travel every day and so don’t buy a weekly, you have to go point-to-point fares. If you change bus or change mode, you have to buy another ticket.
Where I live in the inner city, i either cycle to work or catch the bus. Thankfully I have only a single bus, but if I ever end up on a bus that terminates at the QVB rather than go to Circular Quay, I have to pay an extra fare because I changed bus, where it would cost me no extra if the bus had gone straight through. I get the same multiple ticket/mode problem every time I go to Bondi Junction. If I go on a straight through bus its a single fare, if I change bus or change mode, its another fare. The distance is the same either way but the fare changes depending on the mode.
Is it any wonder people find public transport in Sydney confusing.
On weekends I tend to like catching the train into the CBD because the busses get caught in the abysmal traffic jams that clog the inner-city outside of peak hours. I catch the Newtown-City train dozens of times a year. But every time I do it, I have to queue at the station to buy a ticket. You can only use tickets on the day of purchase.
In Londond, the train ticket machines at tube stations are pretty standard, seeling the same collection of zonal tcikets. The equivalent machines in Sydney are different at every station because the tickets are point to point, so at every station you have a different combination of buttons. You have to work out which range of stations your destination lies in so that you can select the correct button on the machine.
All that may sound nit-picking, but if you want to run an effecient public transport system, you need an effecient fare structure that makes it easy for people to pay. That is a simple administrative/management task, but it seems to be completely beyond the wit of government to fix.
Before the 1991 election Bruce Baird had a complete plan to re-work the fare structure of Sydney public transport. Unfortunately, the Greiner government lost its majority in 1991 and completely lost the will to take on such a politically sensitive task.
Those plans still sit in someone’s draw in the transport department. I don’t doubt the Opposition also has a copy, given barry O’Farrell was Baird’s chief of staff.
Those plans will carry pain for some people who catch public transport on strange cross-subsidised fares. They will also carry considerable pain for people whose current job is to sell tickets.
I should add, Melbourne managed to introduce a full zonal system in 1984 that covered trains, trams and busses, both public and private, in 1984 with a paper ticket system. You don’t need fancy technology to do it. But as NSW discovered with the TCard, if you don’t start with a rational fare structure, technology won’t solve the problem for you.
No noos yet out of the ‘caucus’ meeting.
However, it looks like Keneally has been unable to avert a 24 hour bus drivers strike over pay. Buses will be off the road for 24 hours from 4am Friday 18 December.
SNIP: Hysterical comment deleted – The Management.
Name names truthy. Feel free to contribute to the “Buy a Labor politician a swimming pool” appeal.
I’m sure William will match you dollar for dollar.
I don’t know what hysterical means, perhaps it’s so unbelievably tragic that it’s laughable whats happening in NSW.
At least here in Queensland we know we are being robbed (30% increase in rego’s and scrapping of fuel subsidy a month after the election, thank you Anna!),
News to hand on the marathon caucus meeting chaired by Keneally.
It was a whiteboard style brain-storming session.
No formal announcements made of any new initiatives or policy directions.
see: http://www.smh.com.au/national/its-back-to-the-drawing-board-20091217-l01f.html
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/indepth/labor-has-a-day-at-the-office/story-fn4lqo4t-1225811533365
MDM at 157
Ahh yes, the M5 East tunnel. Thanks for reminding me. Traffic modelling, design, engineering and construction all carried out on the basis that it would be a toll road. As an election stunt (for 1999?) Carr decides that it will not be a toll road. No change to the actual road though.
Unsurprisingly, traffic well and truly exceeds projections, and is currently operating at something like 150% of its intended capacity. It’s the worst road in Australia for congestion and pollution
And is duplicating the M5 East without expanding General Holmes Drive and Southern Cross Drive going to achieve much?
As for the ticketing system
In Hong Kong, they have a system, where all you need is a cash card and scan it on the buses, scan it on the trains and at the end of your ride, the computer calculate how much you pay.
This would decrease ticketing queues, people missing train and allow people to have 1 card which will operate on all transport, it is even used in supermarkets
Another plus it is technology produced by an Australian company
The state govenment was looking into it. I believe union pressure forced the govenment to keep us waiting in queues to buy tickets
The QLD fuel subsidy was a disgrace. Imagine subsidising motorists; what kind of message is that sending out to people?
Yeah, we’ve had that in Perth for years – the Smartrider, it’s an excellent little thing. Barry O’Farrell could pretty much take a Transperth promo video, overdub it with his voice and use that as a campaign advert, and get elected on the promise to build the stuff featured. Maybe the Telegraph could steal that TV special they did on the new Mandurah line and rebadge it “Castle Hill, this could be you”.
I think the HK scan card is called the Octopussy.
Sheer delight to use.
The plot thickens even more on the sale of Currawong, if that is possible. It has now emerged that the sale to the two mates of the ALP (apparently Robertson’s) was not for the oft-repeated 15 mill, but was actually for 11 mill. This is exactly the price National Parks was prepared to pay a couple of years ago to take the site back into the Kuringai national park. Is there no end to the evil-doings of the NSW party?
I’ll be there in a couple of weeks for one of the last stays before it is bastardised by the new owners. Sad.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/millions-go-missing-from-sale-price-of-union-cottages-20091217-l01w.html
#167
I think that’s what melbourne’s long-awaited MYKI is supposed to be, although the government has made a bit of a mess of its implementation.
Christ you southerners aren’t too bright.
It wasn’t subsidising jack, the government already charges about 48 cents in tax on fuel, whoopsy doo’s they gave us a measily 9 cents of that back.
If Anna Blight wanted to scrap the fuel subsidy why didn’t she announce it at the election rather than putting it and the 30% rego increase in place a month after the election?
Perth has switched to a zonal and timed ticket system like Melbourne. Except for weeklies, Sydney doesn’t have zones and its tickets aren’t timed. The electronic ticket system they tried to introduce fell in a screaming heap because of the point to point fare structure.
In Perth you buy a three hour zonal ticket and you hop on and off modes. In Sydney every different mode is a seperate fare. There are no timed or day fares on Sydney public transport. You can check the zonal map in Perth to work out how much your ticket will cost. In Sydney uou have to ask the bus driver or ticket seller.
In fairness to the Qlders, the real story is well known, and as follows:
1. Most states (but not Qld) implemented a “franchise fee” system under which a state-based excise was charged on fuel sold within each state.
2. These systems were declared an unconstitutional excise by the High Court in August 1997. The “other” states faced the loss of $5 billion revenue (that figure may include alcohol and cigarettes).
3. Howard and Costello immediately moved to replace the stated based fuel excise with a constitutional federal fuel excise (a supplementary excise, I’m sure there already was a federal excise at a lower level). But federal excises must apply equally to all goods sold throughout the land.
4. This meant revenue neutrality, and motorists in states other than Qld weren’t going to be pinged, or at least not much.
5. Qld motorists were going to be pinged, about 8c a litre. Borbidge introduced an excise rebate system. The only way to do it (for other constitutional reasons) was at the bowser.
6. The system has simply continued up until now, and Beattie in particular did not have a bar of suggestions that he reconsider the rebate.
But the argument has been – Qld never had franchise fees on petrol, why should Qld motorists pay extra just because the other states imposed an invalid unconstitutional excise and had to be bailed out by the feds? And there is some merit to that argument. Less merit in these days of great concern about emissions, but some.
But what if you are queued up at a petrol station on a Tuesday night in a Tarago, with 5 kids and a wheelchair in the back? Ask yourself, would that 9 cents a litre make a difference?
That 5 cent per litre made a huge difference to the QLD budget. Money that could, nay should have been spent on hospitals, education, public transport etc.
Antony at 174: so that’s why a ticket from Parramatta to city was different to one from Parramatta to Newtown, then… that was annoying. (Come to think of it, my attempt at getting from Newtown to Parramatta ended me up in flippin’ Cabramatta somehow. Damn tourists, eh…
)
Also, the Perth fare structure has an even better feature: there’s single tickets (last for two hours in zones 1-4, three in zones 5-8), but there’s also day tickets which cost about as much as a zone 6 or 7 ticket. Therefore if you live in somewhere like Mandurah, it makes more sense to buy a day ticket. The beauty of the Smartrider is that it automagically raises the number of zones on a single ticket to whatever it needs to be, and caps the fare for any day at the price of the day ticket. Here’s an example:
I used to live in Armadale (an outer suburb), and every Thursday one semester I had lectures at both UWA and Murdoch uni. I would catch the bus from my house to Armadale station, and be charged a zone 1 fare (90c); catch a train Armadale-city (4 zones), and be charged the difference between a z4 and z1 fare; then catch another bus to UWA for free. Total cost: a z4 ticket, about $1.60 I think. (As you can see, it gets rid of the problem of buying one ticket, then realising “oh bugger, it won’t get me far enough”.) Later in the arvo, I’d catch another bus back into the city (z1) and then another bus down to Murdoch uni in zone 2 (again, getting charged z2-z1). Total cost: a z2 ticket, about $1.30, so I’m up to about $2.90 for the day. After that lecture, I’d go back home, and because the day fare was about $3.20, it only cost me about 30c to get home. And if I wanted to go out later in the evening, it’s a free ride. (Being a student in Perth, you don’t even have to budget for public transport… I’d just put $20 on the card and that was my week sorted.)
Anyway, imagine trying to do those sums in your head, and trying to figure out on the fly whether you should get a zone 4, zone 2 or day ticket. That’s why I love the card so much, it does the thinking for me and saves me a heap of money in the process. Melbourne should be even simpler, with only 3 zones… I don’t know what’s taking them so long. C’mon easterners!
178
Melbourne now has 2 zones (election promises from the 2006 election).
Didn’t blight just put Queensland into massive deficit?
Yep another few billion pissed up against the wall. The less tax we are pay the less the government wastes is my motto.
Yesterday, I spent a few hours experiencing part of the failure of the last 30 years of public administration in Sydney’s transport.
First I went out west on Parramatta Road. Traffic on Saturday afternoon was a such a shocker from the CityWest Link to the M4, that I had plenty of spare time and no forward momentum that would make me worry about a crash, to think about the decision to cancel the inner urban freeways in Sydney back in the 70s. Now I am not at all unsympathetic to the argument that they should never be built, given the urban blight they cause etc (indeed, I have this wonderful DMR artist’s rendition of the F7 which replaces my own current abode with a freeway offramp).
The failure of public administation was to simply cancel this form of urban transportation without replacing it with anything else. The population of Sydney was still to rise (and the long-term forecasts of Sydney’s population have been very accurate). This population would require a form of transport. But the (lack of) decision from the state was to do nothing and save [sic] money. Result, is that we have a modified Cumberland Plan based Metro designed around significant car use, without an urban freeway system, nor an alternate transport network.
On the return, I drove along the M2, Lane Cove Tunnel (receivers appointed) and Harbour Tunnel, which as urban drives go, was a delightful experience of an affected bushland parkway at an average speed of about 90km/hour. However, at cost of $13+ in tolls. For an everday commuter, this would be $130/week, or $6,500pa. I think this is a reasonable amount of coin and stretches my definition of affordabe urban transportation. So from the northside/hills we have a very nice technical achievemnt of the road/tunnel (though on a workday I suspect the average speed is far lower than 90kmph) but a failure of public economics in deliverying an affordable transport system.
Yep the short Greiner government was a disappointment, but the reality is that Labor Party has been in power for the vast period of the decline (debauchment?) of public administration of this state, and worse, give no confidence of any plan of going forward. I love voting generally, but I will be heading to the state poll in March 2011 with an unusual alacrity.
Antony Green
I attended an open for inspection on a Saturday in Newtown once, I was interested until, I tried to get to the city by car (about 2 km down the road) It took me 30 minute, I do not know how anyone lives in the area
dovif – I live in Newtown and I sold my 14-year-old Commodore to a kid in Villawood for $1000 because it was more trouble than it was worth in the area. I joined GoGet car share and haven’t had any parking problems since – because of dedicated parking pods!
I would love to see Japanese-style ticketing introduced in Sydney. It’s sort of point-to-point except there are no beginning and ending destinations marked: “This is the basic cost to get from A to B, which applies to all regular train tickets. The basic fare depends on the travel distance between your departure and destination station. The cost per kilometer is around 20 Yen for short distances, and decreases to under 10 Yen for long distances.” The Suika card system is brilliant too.
I would like to comment on the current state of affairs of NSW Politics. It is not surprising that NSW Labor is doing badly. The only surprise is that their poor showing is not even worse. The Labor Party in NSW is to be despised because of all the damage and suffering they have done to the people of NSW. Really.
How many failed Labor Premiers are we up to right now ? We had Iemma who wouldn’t even support the Labor Pledge. He was run out of town along with half his cabinet. Next we had Nathan Rees, the guy who couldn’t even be bothered getting a Driving License. Some Labor man supporting the people. Now we have Kristina “I’m going to do all of Nathan’s stuff” Keneally apparently in charge of the state.
Labor in NSW is a disgrace to the platform they believe in. Let’s look at the CBD Metro. Expensive, unsafe, unworthy. A burdon on every member of the public of NSW. NSW Labor is not even respecting the Department Of Planning. The CBD Metro has NO approval as a construction project, yet the Keneally Government is acquiring properties in Rozelle, Pyrmont and Park Street, City. They will demolish the iconic Woolworths building on the corner just to try and get votes.
NSW Labor is probably the most sickening and unfair Government there has ever been.
Rig the CBD Metro Kristina Keneally and David Campbell, we need more pain, unemployment and unhappiness.
Please continue to accept campaign donations from the failed Balmain Leagues Club and protect the new developer. They won’t be making onebit of sacrafice for the CBD Metro. I always thought the Queensland Gerrymander was the worst in Australian Politics. Now we all know that’s wrong. It’s NSW Labor and the CBD Metro.
David
Local Rozelle Shopkeeper (Fighting for his job against the CBD Metro)
No zones in Adelaide, you can travel as far as you want and then within two hours catch connecting buses for free. Red tickets for peak, black tickets for off peak and green free tickets for seniors during off peak. Each ticket comes with 2 or 3 lame words of wisdom or sayings on the back. They work on bus, train, trams and obahn. You can buy a single or a ten use ticket with no expirery (once when I’d seen they’d raised the price I went to a deli which still had tickets at the old price and bought up heaps). A multitrip with ten rides is for a student $13.?? for a peak and $7.?? for an off peak. I suppose managment gets harder in bigger cities. Our system seems quite good after reading what Sydney is like, although those auto-zappy things that you don’t even need to take out of your wallet look good.
185
Adelaide has the most expensive short trip PT of Australian capitals because of the flat fare.
Do they have periodicals (dailies, weeklies, etc.) in Adelaide?
There are dailies but regular uses are best off buying a multitrip ticket of 10.
deconst
Never to be, but I would love a Tokyo style subway. A Japanese friend of mine was visiting Sydney and found the whole system of buying tickets (“Seriously? You go to a window in the wall to buy a train ticket?”) so comical that she thought it a joke.
David Hunt…
Hopefully your Xmas present must be improved confidence that this silly project will never proceed
Deconst at 183, etc: having a smallish number of well-defined zones works well enough. In Perth, it’s very simple: they’re defined by circles, multiples of 10 km from the city centre. That effectively makes the outer zones kinda oblong shapes, because Perth has such an long narrow metro area. In Sydney you might want to base your zones around major regional centres (CBD, Parramatta, Strathfield, Hornsby etc), because Sydney metro area is less elongated. Same principle though… the only complication would be making sure no shortish journey near a point where three zones meet gets a more expensive fare; that could be done by clever design of zone boundaries. Run them along the freeways or something.
Another cool thing Perth has is the free transit zones. In the CBD, the CAT buses are free and so are any other buses once they get into the FTZ. From the bus stop nearest to my house, the bus that comes down from Morley costs a 2 section fare (that’s like half a zone), but get on down the other side of Newcastle St and it’s no ticket required. Central Fremantle and Joondalup have a similar thing. (That’s for the CAT buses anyway… not sure about regular routes there. William, you’d know this: does something like the 920 need a ticket if you’re going from, say, the train station to the hospital?)
Finally, Keneally has made an announcement. The development of Bangaroo. However, it seems in her haste to get some runs on the board, she has overlooked some “minor” details. The planned White Bay domestic shipping terminal may be a “white elephant”. Claims have been made that many cruise liners will not be able to use the terminal for the simple reason they are too large to fit under the Harbour Bridge. Thus an additional terminal east of the bridge is necessary.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/white-bay-hiccup-new-ships-too-tall-to-fit-under-bridge-20091221-la2b.html
It’s like the Chatswood-Epping rail link which most newer trains can’t use because they built it too steep.
I see Paul Keating has his hands on the Bangaroo development.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/grand-slam-for-barangaroos-grand-plan-harbour-makeover-looks-like-worst-of-dubai-20091221-la26.html
I walk past Keating’s house at least 2 times a day. Over an extended period I have been able to make observations of the goings on. In my humble opinion, if I was doing an infrastructure project, I would not let Keating anywhere near it.
PY
Cos it would deprive you of your twice daily perve?
Gusface.
LOL.. I was actually talking about my observations of the construction work being done, and done again, and redone ……..and my conversations with some of the trades people.
MDMConnell
…because of a rather strange last minute change from a bridge to a tunnel
Some extracts from the SMH on Barangaroo…
http://www.smh.com.au/national/grand-slam-for-barangaroos-grand-plan-harbour-makeover-looks-like-worst-of-dubai-20091221-la26.html?autostart=1
Which just goes to show that the Herald didn’t even bother to look at the plans. There are huge green public spaces in the plan.
Hamish – #197
The SMH has another article today about public/private spaces at Bangaroo.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/developer-will-take-over-site-architect-20091222-lbsu.html
OOps….and I forgot to add the opinion piece by Elizabeth Farrelly as well about Barangaroo.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/another-bastard-for-the-colonies-20091222-lbu6.html
The SMH reports that Keneally’s attempt to establish a “Working Together” accord between Labor and the unions has failed.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/premier-faces-union-strife-as-accord-fails-20091223-ldel.html
However the Australian newspaper claims that Keneally has “capitulated” to unions in deciding not to privatise Ferries.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/keneally-capitulates-to-unions/story-e6frg71x-1225813297233
Maybe the NSW Premier is finding it difficult to cut through to the media on her government or any of her policies, so suffering relevance deficiency syndrome (RDS) has taken to commenting on things over which she has no control and are not within the responsibilities of the NSW government.
http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Politics/2009/12/27/Premier_confident_in_airlines_411124.html
For those not familiar with NSW Labor politics, I want to offer an insight into why the NSW government is in such a dire situation in the polls at present. With Labor polling comfortably in most states, and in some extraordinarily well, one can’t help but notice the differential performance in NSW.
This is not meant to be an explanation of the reason why NSW is performing so badly. Rather it is an explanation of one of the reasons why. Further it is a thumb nail sketch – and not a learned academic article. To examine the causes of NSW Labor’s present woes in such a manner would take up the space of a very large book.
Up until the 1990′s Young Labor was controlled by the Left. Along comes Joe Tripodi and Reba Meagher, from the Right. They share an almost a pathological contempt for the Left, and anyone who has views differing to the Right. They set about taking control of YL for the Right. They succeed. They crush the Left. At the same time Tripodi is mentored by Eddie Obeid. Both Obeid and Tripodi serve Labor well. They do the hard yards. They recruit many new members to the ALP.
As a result of a tragic set of circumstances, Reba Meagher is given an opportunity and seizes it, to enter parliament at the age of 26. It is a safe Labor seat. (In 2008 she leaves parliament and at the subsequent by-election Labor suffers a 22% swing against it, but still retains the seat with a 8% margin). Shortly afterwards, Tripodi is elected to the parliament at the 1995 general election. Tripodi and Obeid are able to work hard to encourage like minded people into the parliament, whilst at the same time keeping at bay the Left. They are dismissive of anyone with views contrary to theirs. They are particularly supporters of business and are pro development. Bob Carr, the Premier at the time exerts a tight rein on Labor. As a result Obeid and Tripodi are marginalised. Indeed Carr had little time for Obeid. After the 2003 election he sacked Obeid from the ministry. Carr wrote in his diary: I took on the Obeid faction, the Terrigals, and forced their leader out. Squalls and turbulence but I won, breaking Obeid’s power. Now he flutters around me, desperately reasserting his relevance by managing and massaging backbenchers.
Carr retired in 2005. At that stage everyone expected Carl Scully to be elected as the new Labor leader, although Morris Iemma (who actually became leader) was highly respected. Scully himself understood Obeid was supporting him. However, when Obeid told him he did not have his support, Scully withdrew and Iemma was elected unopposed.
In 2008, Tripodi and Obeid withdrew support from Iemma (as a result of the disastrous plan to sell off NSW electricity, which they supported) and Rees was elected unopposed as Leader. Rees, from the Left was in an unusual position. He was reliant on continued support from the Right (the numbers in caucus are about 50 Right – 20 Left). Frank Sartor was sacked from cabinet. Sartor claimed that he was sacked because he did not approve enough developments. Keneally was installed as Planning Minister.
In November 2009, Rees with the blessing and support of PM Rudd was able to get the authority of state conference to appoint his own cabinet. He sacked Tripodi from the ministry.
On 3rd December 2009 Rees lost a leadership ballot to Keneally, who became Premier.
All these changes in personnel, whilst perhaps the grist of politics to some, and perhaps emanating from skills finely honed in YL, do not impress the electorate. The change from Iemma to Rees can be understood by the electorate. Iemma had staked his premiership on electricity privatisation. Electricity privatisation was hugely unpopular in the electorate. The change from Rees to Keneally is not understood. The most charitable explanation for it is personality politics. Simply put, the electorate detests the government being used as a private battlefield on which personality politics are to be carried out.
Nathan Rees himself spoke of wanting government based on merit and integrity. He said:
“I will not sacrifice the interests of the people of NSW to the vested interests of self appointed power brokers.”
In those words, Rees seems to have accurately captured the thoughts of the electorate. Hence Labor’s standing in opinion polls.
The cost to the NSW electorate of the recent Rees-Keneally change is yet to be fully tabulated. There are 2 periods of paralysis or partial paralysis of governance in NSW in 2009:-
1. The period during which Rees was distracted from his job of governing by infighting (this dates back to September 2009 at least).
2. The period following the assassination until Keneally is eventually able to catch up with where the government should have been.
Another example of this leadership battle cost is the delay in implementation of the FOI laws. Had there been no distractions, and given the vital priority Rees had placed on FOI reform, one would expect a minister would be applying extreme pressure, suggesting alternative courses of action etc to ensure critical times were met, They have not been. FOI reform is now delayed considerably. An uncharitable person might suggest that there was a deliberate “go-slow” campaign. I do not.
#204
Web link re above:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/shortage-of-candidates-stalls-foi-20091227-lgac.html
It will be interesting to see what consequences Keneally’s “preaching the Bible” has on the electorate.
Keneally said at the launch of a ferry named Mary McKillop:
“The Lord calmed the seas of Galilee and brought his disciples to safety, and we commend those who use this ferry to his care.”
The vessel was blessed by Cardinal George Pell at the launch.
For those who believe the story that Jesus Christ caused the seas to be calmed, is a gigantic fairy tale, I suspect will not be impressed by such statements by a secular leader.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/a-blessing-come-hell-or-high-heeler/story-e6freuy9-1225813995017
It would be interesting what the Secular Party’s views might be on the subject.
http://www.secular.org.au/
Hopefully the lead up to the 2011 election will not see another Law & Order bidding war, with each of the major parties attempting to show that “mine is bigger than yours”, by promising increased sentences.
However, the administration of the criminal justice system may become an election issue, unless the government moves in 2010 to increase funding to the DPP to enable cases to be prosecuted in a timely manner (without undue pressure to take short-cuts).
In Wollongong, there are concerns of a blow-out in listing times between charge and final hearing. The courts have offered to extend sitting hours available by making an additional judge available to hear cases, but the DPP has claimed it is insufficiently resourced to make available the necessary personnel to present the cases to the court.
This is not a problem confined to Wollongong. Wollongong is merely an example of a problem occurring in many centres.
http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/news/local/news/general/plan-for-second-wollongong-court-thwarted/1710114.aspx?storypage=1
Heh, I voted for them in 2007 (I’m one of these weirdos who researches every group on the upper house list, no matter how eeny weeny). The mighty Group Q Independents, who managed to finish dead last with 271 votes out of more than a million (compare to the 100,000+ the Greens got). They could probably get it together a little bit more for next time.
Keneally has announced an extension to cuts in stamp duty on new homes.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/cut-in-stamp-duty-on-new-homes-extended-20091228-lhbg.html
Peter Young 203
“Electricity privatisation was hugely unpopular in the electorate.”
Try Electicity privatisation was hugely unpopular in the unions, most other states had privatised theie electricity, and not privatising it will means NSW will pay an estimated 60% more in the next 3 years.
The only people who would benefit from not privatising is the unions. It tells you how NSW Labor works, they have no plans for the future and are just looking after their hangers on
One of the conditions Nathan Rees imposed on becoming a member of Keneally’s cabinet was the continuation of campaign donation reform. Keneally did not agree to Rees’ conditions and he was not appointed to cabinet. One doesn’t know whether Keneally disagreed with all Rees’ conditions or just some of them. Time, and Keneally’s actions or inactions, will eventually provide the answer.
Whether donation reform may have been a sticking point is a moot point. However, it would seem from past behaviour, that Keneally was involved in “donation games”.
In 2007 Frank Sartor’s Rockdale campaign gave over $19,000 to Keneally. Days later Keneally gave $20,000 to Linda Scott, the ALP candidate for Sydney.
Scott did not disclose the donation from Keneally to the EFA.
This was said to have been an oversight. By August 2008, Labor was aware of the oversight, but at that time had not filed an amending disclosure return to correct it.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/labor-election-funds-tangled-in-development/2008/08/24/1219516262700.html%20
One of the problems with the EFA has been that up until August 2008 it had no legislated audit powers.
In other words, it merely received disclosure returns, filed them away, published them and sent out the cheques for election funding entitlements. It was not pro-actively involved in checking returns etc, for example if candidate X disclosed a donation to candidate Y, it didn’t check if candidate Y had disclosed it. The EFA relied on reports being made to it by the public (that is it was reliant upon the public being the auditor). In it’s annual report it disclosed it’s modus operandi:-
a. Complaints were required to be supported by evidence (in other words the public needed to be able to prove their complaint before any action would be taken
b. Persons responsible for lodging disclosures might be asked to file amended returns where there was inadvertence.
c. On a case by case basis a decision would be made if enforcement action for non-compliance would be taken if there is evidence that a person made a false disclosure.
The August 2008 audit powers were inserted following a bill introduced by the Iemma government.
The 2008-09 annual report dated 30 October 2009 stated:
“The EFA plans to conduct regular compliance reviews of disclosures lodged by political parties, groups, candidates and elected members and investigate disclosure matters that come to notice.”
The report also disclosed that following the Iemma amendments the budget allocation to the EFA was increased, allowing for 6 new positions to carry out the additional duties. However, by 30 June 2009, only 2 of the 6 positions had been filled. The report does not disclose any work done by the audit division, other than work on developing an audit policy.
Up until 30 June 2008, the EFA had only 2 full time employees working in administrative capacities (to receive,file and publish returns and send out cheques and other duties). It can easily be understood the EFA was under resourced to do much more than ensure returns were lodged.
Incidentally, I have searched the EFA website to the best of my ability. I am unable to find any reference to an amended return lodged by Linda Scott, to incorporate the $20,000 donation from Kristina Keneally (as stated in the SMH article #211, the original return only shows $1,320 donated by Keneally).
see: http://www.efa.nsw.gov.au/disclosures_and_reports/state_elections_prior_to_2007/state_general_election_2007
The EFA website lists amendments made to the original declarations – on 12 March 2008, 2 April 2008, 27 June 2008 and 29 January 2009. None relate to Linda Scott.
Fresh from attempting to unsuccessfully ban the wearing of “annoying” t-shirts during the Popes pilgrimage to Sydney in 2008 (current High Court CJ French, then of the Federal Court ruled the law invalid), Kristina Keneally has called on clothing store Supre to withdraw from sale t-shirts bearing slogans such as ‘Santas Bitch’ and ‘North Pole Dancer’. Presumably she realises that legislating won’t be effective and is hoping ‘Catholic guilt’ might influence the store.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/premier-kristina-keneally-gets-shirty-at-supre-t-shirt-slogans-santas-bitch-north-pole-dancer/story-e6freuy9-1225816054764
NSW Labor continues on its usual path -
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/meet-the-alp-bunch-kristina-keneallys-relatives-in-parliament/story-e6freuy9-1225816065003
Someone once said that to win an election in NSW you have to have the Police, Teachers and Nurses onside.
It looks like the Libs have the Police onside with ex-copper Mike Gallacher as shadow police spokesman.
It;s a bit scarey where this might end up.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/05/2785865.htm
Looks like John Della Bosca is ” keeping the dream alive “, by continuing to promote himself in the background to the media. It seems, he has accepted he will not be Premier in this term of Parliament, and is positioning himself for the position of Leader of the Opposition after 2011 and will use that position as a springboard into the Premier’s job.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/della-can-breathe-life-back-into-the-moribund-party/story-e6frg7eo-1225815257385
KK has been spreading some Xmas cheer around some of her suffering colleagues.
Tony Stewart got the gig after the NSW election in 2007, as Deputy Speaker (extra salary and expense allowance -$53,000), then dropped that gig for a spot as a Minister ( extras $81,000), but then had to make do without any extra pay for about 14 months after being sacked by Nathan Rees in November 2008. During this period he racked up huge legal bills mounting a doomed Supreme Court challenge to his sacking. So the extras of $26,000 a year he will now get as a Parliamentary Secretary will be a welcome relief.
Likewise, for Noreen Hay. Although, she has never made the heady heights of a ministerial position, she has been in and out of a Parliamentary Secretary’s job like a proverbial jack in the box.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/premier-promotes-stewart-20100106-ludp.html
This peculiar letter appeared in the January 6 2010 edition of Central Magazine.
I am a member of the ALP and secretary of the Darlington branch of the party and a member of a different faction to the Premier for the first time in years. I see a small ray of hope and if I was Barry (O’Farrell) I would be a very nervous . If I was the Greens I would not bother campaigning in Balmain or Marrickville. Kristina may work.
TREVOR DAVIES, Darlington
Mr Davies was placed No 4 on the ALP group ticket in the City of Sydney Council elections in September 2008. He scored 43 below the line votes. The ALP dropped from 3 councillors to just one (1) in the new council. The Greens doubled their representatives on the council, going from 1 to 2 councillors.
Mr Davies is a regular columnist in and News Editor of the South Sydney Herald, a free monthly newspaper.
“For 15 years Labor’s worked hard for one job creations program that’s for its members and not for the people of NSW.
“The hidden aspect of this jobs creation program is the flow on consequences for superannuation payments, which are based on total salary for those Labor MPs.”
Barry O’Farrell.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-labor-mps-accused-of-double-dipping-on-salaries/story-e6freuy9-1225817143152
NSW labor are good for job creation …. for themselve and their families
Now we know how Mrs “do you know who I am” get her job
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-labor-mps-accused-of-double-dipping-on-salaries/story-e6freuy9-1225817143152
A small poll has suggested Matt Brown will lose the seat of Kiama.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/underwear-scandal-mp-faces-fight-to-keep-seat-20100109-lzvq.html
Way ahead of you, Peter. In fact, I’ll close this thread – anyone who wishes to keep any discussions here going can do it at the thread I’ve just linked to.