Seat of the week: Corangamite
Corangamite has covered a shifting area around Colac 150 kilometres west of Melbourne since its creation at federation, its complexion changing somewhat with the absorption of the Geelong suburbs of South Barwon and Belmont in 1955. It was one of Labor’s two gains in Victoria when Kevin Rudd came to power in 2007, giving Labor its first win in the seat since the Great Depression. In its current form the electorate includes the Geelong suburbs south-west of the Barwon River and the Great Ocean Road as far as Apollo Bay, together with rural areas to the west and north. The Geelong suburbs, which include Liberal-leaning Highton and marginal Belmont and Grovedale, contain a little over a third of the electorate’s voters, and are distinguished (along with Torquay) by a younger demographic profile and a preponderance of mortgage payers. Growth in Geelong, Torquay and the Bellarine Peninsula left the seat over quota at the redistribution to take effect at the next election, resulting in the transfer of most of the Bellarine Peninsula (accounting for about 5700 voters) to Corio. This has had a negligible impact on the Labor margin, which on Antony Green’s calculation goes from 0.4% to 0.3%.
Labor’s only wins in Corangamite prior to 2007 were in 1910, when future Prime Minister Jim Scullin became member for a term (he would return as member for the inner Melbourne seat of Yarra in 1922), and at the 1929 election when Scullin’s short-lived government came to power. The Country Party held the seat for one term from 1931, after which it was held by the United Australia Party and then the Liberal Party. The enlargement of parliament in 1984 cost the electorate its most conservative rural territory in the west, but it took another 23 years before Labor was able to realise its hopes of gaining the seat. It was assisted to this end by the “sea change” phenomenon, the ABC TV series of that name having been set in the electorate at Barwon Heads. This has drained about 10% from the Liberal primary vote in the Great Ocean Road towns since the early 1990s, with the Greens vote there burgeoning to 17% at the 2010 election.
Corangamite was held from 1984 to 2007 by Stewart McArthur, who to the dismay of some in the Liberal Party sought another term in 2007 at the age of 70. His Labor challenger was 31-year-old Darren Cheeseman, an official with the Left faction Community and Public Sector Union who won a hotly contested preselection over Peter McMullin, the Right-backed mayor of Geelong and candidate from 2004. Cheeseman went on to overwhelm McArthur’s 5.3% margin with a 6.2% swing that was evenly distributed throughout the electorate. Faced at the 2010 election by a fresh Liberal candidate in Sarah Henderson, a former state host of The 7.30 Report and daughter of former state MP Ann Henderson, Cheeseman was brought within 771 votes of defeat by a 0.4% swing that went slightly against the trend of a 1.0% statewide swing to Labor. Cheeseman went on to receive substantial publicity in February 2012 when he declared Labor would be “decimated” if Julia Gillard led it to the election, which set the ball rolling on Kevin Rudd’s unsuccessful leadership challenge a week later.
Sarah Henderson will again represent the Liberals at the next election after winning a fiercely contested struggle for Liberal preselection against Rod Nockles, an internet security expert and former Peter Costello staffer who also sought preselection in 2010. Henderson’s backers reportedly included Tony Abbott and Michael Kroger, with Nockles having support from Peter Costello, Andrew Robb, Senators Arthur Sinodinos and Scott Ryan and Higgins MP Kelly O’Dwyer. In the event, Henderson won a surprisingly easy victory with an absolute majority on the first round.
Categories: Federal Election 2013, Federal Politics 2010-
Can only see that the greens policy allows more boats and encourages people smugglers,same goes for which ever policy abott ever settles on,turn back the boats does not stop the boats,they just get scuttled.
by Schnappi on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:17 am
Can only see that the greens policy allows more boats and encourages people smugglers,same goes for which ever policy abott ever settles on,turn back the boats does not stop the boats,they just get scuttled.
by Schnappi on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:17 am
Yes, I think Newspoll was 0.1% off at the last election wasn’t it?
Just appalling.
by Mod Lib on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:17 am
Womble – do you seriously imagine they WON’T discuss it?
by Just Saying’ on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:18 am
More Liberal nonsense:
David Johnson (LNP spokesdog for Defence) says government is treating the ADF like and ATM — “hllowing it out”.
This shows that the Liberals simply don’t understand the distinction on a balance sheet between debit and credit. Let’s hope none of them have credit cards.
by Fran Barlow on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:19 am
confessions
True
by victoria on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:19 am
Pyne on Lateline “I can’t answer that question because you didn’t say you were going to ask questions about Direct Action and I dont’ know the answer …. I haven’t been briefed”
Albo calls out “I know the answer!”
Classic!
by psyclaw on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:19 am
The Greens have a ducky way of stopping refugees drowning on the way to Australia.
They’re simply going to take everyone who is currently in camps in Indonesia.
There’s only a few thousand of them, but because the heartless government only takes 60 of these a year, they have absolutely no other choice but to get on the boats.
This is an incredibly simplistic approach to the problem, and ignores obvious consequences:
1. Firstly, it ignores the reason why Australia takes so few from Indonesian camps every year.
It’s because – at the recommendation of the UN – we take even more desperate people from Sudan and Somalia.
It’s quite possible to lead an active, happy life in Indonesia. Millions do, without ever so much as casting a longing eye at a boat. You can’t say the same about Somalia or the Sudan.
So the Greens policy either means we let refugees in genuine desperate need sit around in camps a bit longer, or we up our refugee intake to the point where we not only wipe out the backlog in Indonesia but take a proportionate share of the Sudan and Somalians as well.
2. It ignores the old ‘nature abhors a vacuum’ thing.
If Australia ups its intake from Indonesia, and basically signs a blank cheque that it will take any refugee who arrives there and is successfully processed, it doesn’t matter how many it takes, the camps will continue to fill.
After all, a plane journey from Pakistan to Indonesia is relatively risk free compared to some of the alternatives taken at present.
Given that there is an established pattern that one family member comes here as a refugee and that then the rest of the family follows, it is quite reasonable to expect that the number of AS arriving at Indonesian camps would increase tenfold if they were guaranteed risk free passage to Australia.
by zoomster on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:20 am
Victoria & BK
Add to that page 5 of today’s SMH reporting that Abbott has promised $1.5b ‘to kick start the M4 east’
by CO on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:20 am
Mod Lib
by victoria on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:21 am
Mod Lib
it was was still wrong
labor retain government and going on recent trend labor still has another 2 terms of governemnt
by Meguire Bob on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:21 am
DTT:
Did they tell you why? Did you ask them why?
I’m not surprised at their response, BTW. The Greens voters of that age that I know simply locked their vote in with the Greens and left it at that. They’re completely politically disengaged and couldn’t give a crap about how parliament works, but they like trees and animals.
A couple of them have become teachers since I first knew them. They’re starting to become a little more politically aware.
by Aguirre on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:21 am
HIlarious. Wish I’d watched it.
Know-it-all Pyne tripped up by his own blather.
by confessions on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:21 am
Schnappi
The ABC sent a journalist into the camps in Indonesia. The message from AS in the camp. Unless Australia slams the door on refugees 100% they are still going to get on boats.
That is no matter if we use Malaysia, Nauru or Onshore. That is the reality.
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:21 am
another two terms ever maybe, but definitely not another two terms with Gillard as leader.
Sorry, reality hits every now and then even in fantasty land.
Can I suggest you walk down the street and have a chat to a voter or two…see whether I am wrong about the view about Gillard.
Try it out.
by Mod Lib on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:23 am
Keep waiting! You lot thought the govt would not last until Christmas last year. Carbon Pricing,having a strong economy in an unstable environment, NBN, National disability scheme have all kicked in from this minority govt. In reality they are getting things done – you might love to talk it down and survive on the negative; I actually see some change. You might love what you see in the polls currently but this govt is actually initiating –
Keep waiting and enjoy the wait the sense of entitlement and born to rule concept does not always work
Keep waiting!
by scoutdog on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:24 am
daretotread @ 185
The limitations of your powers of explanation and persuasion is noted.
Run this past them:
by bemused on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:24 am
You are really easily convinced. A true believer. The green’s own Frank.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:25 am
Confessions
That the Abbotteers use Pyne as an attack dog shows how bereft of ANY form of talent they are.
Poodle: “woof woof, wiff wiff, lick lick!”
by psyclaw on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:25 am
There … I fixed that for you.
Just Sayin’
by Fran Barlow on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:25 am
@TheKouk: The only govt ever to have had zero govt net debt during its whole time in office was the Whitlam govt. Just saying.
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:25 am
Mod Lib went:
Meguire Bob went:
Comedy gold!
by Mod Lib on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:25 am
While the views of Mod Lib on relative economics performance are clearly a joke I am afraid he is probably pretty close to the money on the implications of the stubborn polls.
by CO on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
Perhaps. But my bulsh*t
detector{actuator} is in perfect working orderThere … I fixed that for you.
Just Sayin’
by Fran Barlow on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
From my perspective and what I see reported, Abbott has had a big fat victory re AS and over the ALP (Gillard) Government, no amount of trying to sugar coat the result in the Senate, will change things.
On Wednesday I was so thrilled the AS Bill was passed in the HOR and by Thursday midday, it became obvious the Bill would not pass in the Senate, I came down with a big thud.
by Muskiemp on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
They are not impressed with Abbott – have you asked that question?
by scoutdog on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
Schnappi
Malaysian solution IS a 100% door shut.
by psyclaw on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
zoomster:
Teh Greens can take all manner of crazed positions on whatever issue, it simply doesn’t matter.
As this week showed, the Greens are not a party of goverment, aren’t capable of legislating in the national interest, and when push comes to shove and they are expected to pony up and compromise in order to reach agreement, can only stand in the Senate bawling like babies.
Utterly unreliable and flaky IMO.
by confessions on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:26 am
Janice2 @ 174
A sweet analogy
by fiona on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:27 am
WeWantPaul
Now you are in denial. I said that was the message from the camp as relayed by the ABC.
No need to be convinced of anything.
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:27 am
ML@187
You are taking the proverbial aren’t you with the compare now Federally with what was NSW and Qld in the polls?
As one who is never lost for a word of wisdom, you know full-well that you are comparing oranges with apples.
The significant matter was that both the NSW and Qld government were old, old, old and past their use-by dates.
Strange to say, it happens with all parties viz. JWH in 2007.
If you genuinely link those real events to what is happening coincidentally in the polls you are either just pulling our legs or stupid.
On the basis of your past offerings I will currently opt for the former with you.
However, if this is the best you can do, I can certainly put you in the latter category.
by Tricot on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:27 am
Mod Lib @ 224
Lol ok i give you that one i misread, you won that one
what i was referring too is that opinions polls predicting government who have only been in office for 2 terms to be wiped out
They have an appalling record of being correct
how many have have those predictions been right
by Meguire Bob on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:28 am
Absolutely agree.
That is the difference between me and many other bloggers here, I am very happy to admit a cold hard reality without obfuscation.
The TPP provides the answer about how the unpopularity of BOTH current leaders plays out.
You can search back a couple of years and see my posts that the current fourseom (PM, Treasurer and their counterparts) are the WORST I CAN EVER REMEMBER in Australian political history. That is still my view.
by Mod Lib on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:28 am
I don’t think it is playing out against the Govt at all. I think seeing the reality of the stupidity they face highlights how brilliantly they have done till now. It also takes AS out of their hands, they have a solution and it worked before. Until we can try it again we can’t be sure to what extent it will work.
But if it helps stop just one boatload of people drowning you’d have to be a pretty cold hearted evil bastard to oppose it.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:28 am
Re-posting from last thread:
Posted Friday, June 29, 2012 at 11:18 pm | Permalink
Article by Sunili Govinnage, a Perth-based lawyer who has strong interests in human rights and social justice issues – Saving Lives and the Asylum Seeker Debate:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4097206.html
On the Oakeshott Bill:
by Pegasus on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:29 am
@latikambourke: 56th #libfed has condemned Federal Govt of policy of onshore processing of ‘illegal immigrants.’ #libfed
@latikambourke: 56th #libfed now debating motion for Libs to establish registered org. commission following HSU scandal.
@latikambourke: Interestingly, one speaker says these powers already in the Corporations Act and asks why the Libs would support a new bureaucracy. #libfed”
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:29 am
My point is it is one single claim through the media which you latch onto and express as ‘reality’ simply because you agree with it. It is a really poor way to argue.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
Aguirre
Firstly they were both practically oblivious to the whole thing – this is important for all parties – not like us political tragics these young people are just not up with the news – not even telly news. Internet generation and all.
Secondly these young ones have aligned themselves to greens much as we did when young to Labor over conscription.
One of my kids replies – great the Greens should stick up for their principles. This one is Green/Labor The other remains angry over the February events (although Gillardistas will be pleased that no longer intends to preference Liberals). He is more Labor/Greens. The third Kid I suspect is more Labor/LNP
by daretotread on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
Reposting from last thread..
Posted Friday, June 29, 2012 at 10:39 pm | Permalink
In 2001, 353 people drowned when the SIEV-X sank.
A little known fact is that in the 2004 election, Labor had in its policy platform a promise to hold a royal commission on SIEV X. This policy was quietly dropped in the revisions Kim Beazley brought about after Labor’s electoral rout.
The Greens pushed unsuccessfully for a Royal Commission into the tragedy when Howard was in power and again when Labor was elected.
Why did both major political express no interest or refuse to take action to determine the facts about this tragic event?
by Pegasus on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
Also realised, from Pyne’s effort last night, that the Coalition are boxed even further into a corner. Can’t talk about anything but boats and carbon pricing these days, and;
Boats: Can talk about ALP policy, can’t talk about Coalition policy.
CT: Can talk about ALP policy (now law, about to start), can’t talk about Coalition alternative.
So on their only topics left, they can only talk about them in a severly restricted way.
Every other subject is off the table.
by Aguirre on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
ML
Aha! I knew you’d have to resort to ‘look at the polls!’ when confronted with actual performance indicators. As Andrew Elder says, I know you don’t like him, polls are merely reaction to media waffle this far out from an election. The hip pocket and economic security/employment issues will matter a lot more on the day.
You’re from the health industry, I believe. Can you really believe that Essential Poll that rates the coalition as preferred policy choice on Health, I think, 46% to 39%? Does the coalition even have any health policies? Would you seriously rate Dutton as more credible than Plibersek?
If we can believe that type of sampling, and Essential is fairly reliable, the only conclusion you could reach is that doing nothing on health is preferable to having policies. It really doesn’t make any sense. Maybe more people listen to Hadley and Jones than I realised.
by Gorgeous Dunny on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
Muskiemp
Have you heard Abbott mention Slipper or Thomson lately? The AS issue will be the same for him soon enough. He will be neutered. Just wait and see
by victoria on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:31 am
WeWantPaul
What one single claim. I said the message from the camp was as stated. I did not say the journalist sent to the camp interviewed just one asylum seeker.
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:32 am
Aguirre
My point precisely. That is why Abbott is now pledging money for state projects. Mind you they already have a 70b black hole
by victoria on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:33 am
guytaur
It is also the view of Julian Burnside and George Newhouse who advocates for Refugees.
by MTBW on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:33 am
Reposting from last thread (with amendments)…..
In the 12 October 2011, one week before the tenth anniversary of the sinking of the SIEV X, SH-Y and Milne put a motion to the Senate:
http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fjournals%2F20111012_SJ058%2F0029%22
Labor and the Coalition voted together to defeat the motion.
Uncovering the circumstances and contributing factors that led to the SIEV X tragedy were as pertinent then as they are now.
However both major parties had no interest then and continue to have no interest now because it’s all about politics.
by Pegasus on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:34 am
@Colvinius: Rupe hates the Poms: but it’s nothing to do with the phone hacking inquiry, no. http://t.co/r904edV0
by guytaur on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:34 am
psyclaw @ 209
Except it wasn’t Albo, it was Emo aka Craig Emerson.
by bemused on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:34 am
So, Tone is retreating from Jacksonville and Lawlers Creek, preferring Abbotts Knob.
Very nicely put.
by This little black duck on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:34 am
Good to hear – you do not provide that balance with your posts though; criticism only goes one way. I agree that the current level of politics is low but i also think the govt has done some good stuff with the economy and policy initiaives more so than the coaltion
by scoutdog on Jun 30, 2012 at 10:34 am