http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/legislative-council-voting-patterns.html

Analysis of Tasmanian Legislative Council voting patterns on divisions since 2010. Shows that voting in chamber is unpredictable but rather conservative.

I have just released:

http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2012/11/the-legcos-claimed-reasons-for.html

Analysis of the Tasmanian Legislative Council vote against state same-sex marriage a few months ago. Mainly focuses on categorising (and in some cases lambasting) the arguments advanced against the bill. Also takes to task some MLCs who said silly things about the measurement of public opinion.

* The god-botherer aspect of Ferguson and Petrusma bothers me greatly; unfortunately, I see no evidence at all that it bothers the electorate at the moment (beyond those who would not vote Liberal anyway) so I must discount it in assessing their performance.

* Yes Ferguson is a “failed” federal pollie but the loss of that seat was inevitable and it was surprising in the end that he came so close to holding it. The “future leader” thing has fizzled largely because the Libs have absolutely no reason to change leader. Hodgman is indeed a stodge and a plodder and apparently not very bright but the party rides so high by default it does not matter.

* Archer seems to me to be an effective media headkicker; quite prominent in TV news for instance. It’s a wonder that she even got elected at all but I think she is making the most of it.

* Brooks – I am not sure whether the public sees him as out of touch; I think he has a bit of a cult following even.

Of course, there tends to be nothing very special about any bunch of Tasmanian politicians.

Will Hodgman: his father was a terrific guy and an effective politician in his own eccentric way. Hodgman jnr is bland, uncharismatic and comes across as not believing much of what he has to say (especially about the forests)

Jacquie Petrusma: god botherer/happy clapper

Matthew Groom: came into Parliament with big wraps, but is quite unimpressive both in the media and one on one

Elise Archer: the best thing I think I can say about her is that her husband is a very important person in the Tasmanian Liberal Party. To be fair, she has performed a bit better in Parliament that just about anyone expected (perhaps even her)

Rene Hidding: gives the impression that he is winding down towards retirement (which, in the Tasmanian context, means he is likely to remain in Parliament for another 3 terms at least)

Mark Shelton – as the saying goes, has risen without trace

Michael Ferguson – a failed Federal pollie and another god-botherer. Was vaunted as a future leader after being elected in 2010. Has been almost invisible since then

Peter Gutwein – easily the Libs’ most impressive performer at the moment, almost exclusively in an attack dog role

Jeremy Rockliff – urbane (despite being a farmer), charming, moderate, rational, but has kept a very low profile

Adam Brooks – a sort of miniature Clive Palmer: a guy with a lot of money (by northern Tasmanian standards) and a big enthusiasm for politics, but little ability to engage with the public in the way that the public expects to be engaged with by pollies (but he’s had a very low profile, so I might be underestimating him a bit)

So, in my view Kevin, there’s nothing very special about this bunch.

I’d be interested in your views.

When Kevin Rudd was elected, he did not release any policies until 3 months before the election, and most of those were “me too” I am a fiscal conservative like the Howard government.

The only difference I could spot was the meaningless “Sorry” and Populist Workchoice

If it worked for Kevin and the ALP, I do not understand why there is a call for the Liberals to release policies much earlier then the election.

Also concerns me that the religious right will be extremely powerful in a future Liberal government.

However, all of the above Governments, and the Federal Libs and particularly the Tasmanian Libs, are amazingly light on in terms of policy. Their main claim to the right to govern is an assertion that they will do a better job than the Labor Party. The Liberal Party used to stand for some things, but now it generally stands for absolutely nothing whatsoever.

And the Tassie Libs are at the apogee (or perhaps the correct word is nadir) of this sort of policy vacuousness. It’s called trying to get elected by default. Because Australians are always likely at some point to want to give the opposition a go, it is working quite well for the Libs at the moment, possibly even at the Federal level (although that remains to be seen).

That doesn’t mean I have to admire it.

And down here in Tassie, it is difficult to see how a Liberal Government, bent on turning back the clock to the “dam it and chop it down” era, can hope to achieve anything other than to take us further into the Slough of Despond.

Oh yeah I have heard that in Qld, NSW and NT already and When Howard was elected, that was the end of the world too.

Guess what the world not only did not end when the Liberals got in. In NSW, things are getting done. Unless you call Bob Carr announcing the NW Railroad for the 5th time as getting something done. PS in NSW Obeid, MacDonald, Tripoli are getting into the same mess as Thompson

This means even if the ALP does not lose seats in SA, they will need to win 6-8 seats elsewhere (WA, Qld and Vic) to get back to minority government