tip off

Seat of the week: Adelaide

Seat of the week returns after a few weeks on the back burner, with the focus remaining on South Australia.

Red and blue numbers respectively indicate booths with two-party majorities for Labor and Liberal. Click for larger image. Map boundaries courtesy of Ben Raue at The Tally Room.

The electorate of Adelaide has existed without fundamental change since South Australia was first divided into electorates in 1903, currently stretching from the city centre to the Labor strongholds of Prospect, Enfield and Brompton to the north and an electorally mixed bag of areas to the east and south. There are sources of Liberal strength in Walkerville to the north-east of the city, Toorak Gardens to the east and Malvern to the south. Labor first won Adelaide in 1908, and it was usually held by them from then until 1988. It was lost in that year at a by-election caused by the resignation of Chris Hurford, falling to Liberal candidate Mike Pratt with an 8.4% swing. Labor recovered the seat at the 1990 election, but an unfavourable redistribution together with a swing fuelled by hostility to the state government delivered it to Liberal candidate Trish Worth in 1993. Worth’s margin never rose above 3.5% in her 11 years as member, and she survived by just 343 votes in 2001. Labor finally toppled her in 2004 when inner-city seats across the land bucked the national shift to the Coalition, a decisive 1.9% swing delivering Adelaide to Kate Ellis. In keeping with statewide trends, the seat moved solidly to Labor in 2007 (by 7.2%), recorded little change in 2010 (a 0.8% Liberal swing), and swung to the Liberals in 2013 (reducing the margin from 7.5% to 3.6%).

Kate Ellis is associated with the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association and its attendant “Catholic Right” faction, and is close to its powerful state figurehead, outgoing Senator Don Farrell. After serving her apprenticeship as an adviser to state Industry Minister Rory McEwen and Treasurer Kevin Foley, Ellis won preselection for Adelaide at the age of 27 in 2004, following the late withdrawal of Tim Stanley, an industrial lawyer and later Supreme Court justice. Her path was smoothed by a three-way factional deal that secured Hindmarsh for Steve Georganas of the “soft Left” and Makin for Dana Wortley of the “hard Left” (who nevertheless lost the preselection to Tony Zappia, but was compensated with a Senate seat).

Ellis was promoted to the outer ministry at the age of 30 following the 2007 election victory, beating Paul Keating’s record as Labor’s youngest ever minister. Following the 2010 election she was reassigned from her portfolios of youth and sport to employment participation, childcare and the status of women, exchanging the latter for early childhood and youth when Kevin Rudd resumed the leadership in June 2013. In common with the rest of her faction, Ellis was a strong supporter of Julia Gillard’s leadership, making headlines shortly before Rudd’s February 2012 challenge by claiming Rudd had asked her and other SDA figures how they could reconcile their “conservative brand of Catholicism” with “a childless, atheist ex-communist as Labor leader”. Following the 2013 election defeat she received a substantial promotion to shadow cabinet in the education portfolio.

1361
  • 101
    Fran Barlow
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    ET/ML

    Can they 18C him over what he allows on his blog?

    Probably not, but that’s not the point. Bolt has no claim for an apology from the ABC about being insulted as a racist by a guest, while waving through expressly violent racist commentary on his blog.

  • 102
    AussieAchmed
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    First the Liberals get you in a war and then they screw the survivors and dead soldiers’ families.

    Abbott is taking $211 per year from the orphans of our armed servicemen and women who have been killed and disabled in the service of our country.

    Abbott is a heartless moron.

  • 103
    Jackol
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    Oh goody, Mod Lib and her very own stats. Even after acknowledging that at least 2 indicators don’t hold now after that debate with Zoomster.

  • 104
    poroti
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    Interesting “Air Crash Investigation” on last night about a Greek “ghost plane” plane that crashed in the mid “noughties” . Could have some relevance to the present. Hence their re-run. The cabin pressurization switch had been set to “Off” during a check by engineers. Really sad about a cabin crew member who survived by using the oxy bottles on board . He got through the locked cockpit door just before the fuel to run out and the plane crash killing everyone. Apparently the chief steward was the only member of cabin staff allowed to know the emergency over-ride code to unlock the cockpit.Fighter jets sent to look saw him enter the cockpit. Voice recorder got him calling mayday on the radio but it was set to a still set to Cyprus frequencies so no one heard his call.

    1) As the plane climbs the passengers oxygen masks drop. They have 12 minutes of oxygen
    2) BUT the oxygen masks in the cockpit are not set to drop automatically and so the pilots do not notice.

    Within 13 minutes, as the plane climbed, the air pressure slowly dropped. The effects of hypoxia (oxygen starvation) are insidious. The pilots' judgment became impaired without them realising it. Their radio calls to the ground made clear that they had misunderstood the true nature of the warning horn that was blaring on the flight deck.
    There were only minutes to go before both pilots slipped into unconsciousness.

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2006/dec/19/theairlineindustry.travel

  • 105
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    Well jackol the alp nurtured the viper to the bosom did they not ?

  • 106
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    Jackol:

    Only if you exclude some of the data without any justification for doing so.

    I used the entire dataset and examined the entire set of economic indicators. You can sub analyse to your hearts content, but you need to explain why you have excluded some data.

  • 107
    Jackol
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    Well jackol the alp nurtured the viper to the bosom did they not ?

    No idea what you are alluding to here.

  • 108
    Centre
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    AA

    On a serious note regarding interest rates. I know a couple who transferred from a variable to a fixed mortgage interest rate on their home after Rudd won the 2007 election.

    They feared interest rates will always be higher under Labor. They now detest and are appalled by politics.

    I would love to know how many did likewise?

    Of course, Everything would gain immense satisfaction and pleasure from hearing of the above!

  • 109
    guytaur
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    A blog is a publication. Open to all the legal action any publication is.

    Just ask William if you are still not sure.

  • 110
    Jackol
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    Only if you exclude some of the data without any justification for doing so.

    That’s not how I recall that conversation, but you keep throwing out your little list and think it proves something.

  • 111
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    ML,

    Averages are a rather simplistic way to measure economic performance. Obviously, you clutch to them in this instance because you are desperte to prove your point.

    However,in horse racing favourites win 30% of the time, second favourites about 18% of the time and third favourites around 10% of the time. In your simple world betting these three horses in a race would lead you to a world of riches. The problem is that the odds don’t always reflect the true chances of the horses participating. There are false favourites, market manipulation, speculation and the bookies margin and of course taxes that would affect the pure outcome or odds.

    Of course there is the ubiquious law of averages which says simply averages tell you about the past. They do not tell you what will haappen in Race 5.

    It’s also a guaranteed way to lose all your money if you follow averages.

    The important thing is to consider external factors such as growth of our competitors and trading partners over the same period.

    For example there is no doubt that Howard’s prosperity years were at a time of more benign world conditions. Realy he and Costello were down hill skiers for most of their term of office. Whereas, Labors performance after the GFC was far more superior than nearly every trading country in the world.

    So, my point is that you need to look beyond simple averages if you really want to measure the performace of a Government and an economy.

  • 112
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    Centre
    .....Of course, Everything would gain immense satisfaction and pleasure from hearing of the above!

    Project and then hate (oops….I always forget! I mean “despise”) the projection! ;)

  • 113
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    GG I love your agitprop. If only you had been born 50 years earlier – you would have written wonderful copy for Radio Free Europe and the like !

  • 114
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    ESJ,

    Re Bolt.

    At least he didn’t become PM like Fraser did for the Libs.

  • 115
    CTar1
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    The Fibs like to pretend the GFC never happened.

  • 116
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    But he is a product of the Victorian labor right like you GG , is he not ?

  • 117
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    GG:

    There is no doubt that making determinations about which side is the best at economic management is complex.

    There is also no doubt that it is perfectly reasonable for voters to continue to rate the Liberal party as the better economic managers.

    It may or may not be right, but the evidence is pretty clear, things are better in the years with Liberal governments over the last 40 years. That might change with the next update, lets see.

    Right now, that is what the data shows.

    Interpret and analyse yourself if you wish.

  • 118
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    Maybe in 15 years time you’ll be like Gary Johns writing for the IPA too GG ?

  • 119
    Fran Barlow
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    ESJ

    I have always found it deliciously ironic that Andrew Bolt was a Labor staffer in the 80′s. Was he bad then or did he go bad subsequently ?

    Unclear. I suspect the culture of the ALP aggravated whatever latent misanthropy and cynicism lurked within. Of course, the culture of the ALP is also a maladaptive response to boss class rule, of which Murdoch, Bolt’s employer, is and was at the time, a part. In those days, Murdoch and the ALP were much friendlier, as the ALP was then assisting Murdoch to get control of the instruments with which it would knock off the ALP when its usefulness in office fell below that of the LNP.

    So to return to the original point, there’s no irony in Bolt being attracted to the Murdoch-friendly Hawke-Keating ALP, just as there was no irony in Costello or Nelson or Abbott being attracted to them either. It’s not surprising that Obeid and Sinodinos can have common interests either. Prospective power over others has as alluring an aroma to spivs, careerists and narcissists as dung has to flies.

  • 120
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:47 am | Permalink

    ESJ,

    I don’t think Malcolm was ever a member of the Labor Right, do you?

  • 121
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    ML,

    Your esponse, is basically, “Don’t bother me with facts. I like my prejudices just the way they are”.

  • 122
    Steven Grant Haby
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Re: SA election update

    Any word if Jay has started his presser? Can’t see any ‘lead in’ stories on the ABC, Guardian, Fairfax etc sites…

  • 123
    bemused
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    I have to say the Bolt Report is good for a laugh… provided you don’t take it seriously.

  • 124
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:49 am | PERMALINK
    ML,

    Your esponse, is basically, “Don’t bother me with facts. I like my prejudices just the way they are”.

    Actually, I am providing the only facts, everything else is prejudice (i.e. subjective opinion).

  • 125
    guytaur
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    Regarding Bolt

    It is equally valid to argue that Bolt was not extreme until he left Labor employ and it was becoming a Murdoch employee that revealed the extreme views.

    Insiders certainly found out the progression.

  • 126
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    If only Jay had changed his first name to Jai he wouldn’t be stuck with minority government with one silly old coot independent and five councils pontificating on what the sa govt should or shouldn’t do with their limited funds.

  • 127
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    So you think the extreme views were always there guy taur ?

  • 128
    guytaur
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    SGH

    Its due about 11 EADST 10:30 CST

  • 129
    Centre
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    Everything, your economic indicators of the past are meaningless.

    They assume in the first instance and in the most simplest of terms that Liberal and Labor will produce the same standard of PM all the time.

    So according to your logic, Abbott will deliver and perform as well as Howard. Even with an IQ of 25, you would know that to be absurd!

  • 130
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    ML,

    You are being selective with your facts.

    As always, you ar economical with the truth.

  • 131
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    Centre
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:52 am | PERMALINK
    Everything, your economic indicators of the past are meaningless.

    They assume in the first instance and in the most simplest of terms that Liberal and Labor will produce the same standard of PM all the time.

    So according to your logic, Abbott will deliver and perform as well as Howard. Even with an IQ of 25, you would know that to be absurd!

    Again, more unsubstantiated projection. I make no such assumptions.

  • 132
    CTar1
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    If only Jay had changed his first name to Jai

    How inane is that!

  • 133
    guytaur
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    ESJ

    No idea. All we know is they have been expressed publicly in the period that Bolt has been a Murdoch employee

  • 134
    poroti
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    CTar1

    Or the first “Oil Shock” or the 1987 crash or the early 1990′s global interest rate spike or any other global down turn…………when Labor is in power. Of course the Asian Financial Crisis was only prevented from “rooning us all” by brilliant Liberal stewardship. Even if as people like Mega George pointed out it was more the “Labor” floating $ that protected us.

  • 135
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:53 am | PERMALINK
    ML,

    You are being selective with your facts.

    As always, you ar economical with the truth.

    I decided to examine the data on economic indicators.
    I found an objective source (The Australian Parliamentary Library)
    I used the entire dataset.
    I used all the common economic indicators (an a priori decision, I did not do the analysis and then decide what to present, I decided what I wanted to examine, and examined exactly those measures).
    I presented the entire data, without editing or adjusting any data.

  • 136
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    ESJ,

    Bolt’s journey to the dark side began with his years in Central Australia administering some programme to do with Aboriginal welfare.

    The schtick he goes on with today is just marketing.

  • 137
    CTar1
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    poroti – Don’t go putting up inconvenient facts!

  • 138
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Maybe guy taur labor should institute a vetting program to keep people with extreme views out ?

  • 139
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    …could it be that you don’t like the results so you decide to attack the researcher?

    not kewl! :devil:

  • 140
    lizzie
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    Which of these so-called definitive statistics includes either external factors or the happiness of individuals. I know which regime (thank you, Fran) I’d rather live under.

  • 141
    lizzie
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 10:59 am | Permalink

    GG

    Your point about averages was an excellent one. But the irritating trolling will continue.

  • 142
    Everything
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Fear not!

    The Troll is out to enjoy the sunlight (is that an oxymoron?).

    Enjoy your self-reassurances….looks like it is quite comforting for you all!

    Au revoir….

  • 143
    Henry
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Mod lib – am curious.
    From your link, how do you get an average for total labor and an average for total coalition of these economic indicators?

  • 144
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    ML,

    Yes, but being a parrot does not make you an economic expert either.

    Appropriate interpretation, providing balance to the argument and then ensuring the facts are an adequate explanation of the situation is most important.

    Under your summary, if your head is in the oven and your feet are in the freezer, you are on average warm. This would not be the best interpretation of the actual condition, would it?

  • 145
    AussieAchmed
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    Everything, your economic indicators of the past are meaningless.

    They assume in the first instance and in the most simplest of terms that Liberal and Labor will produce the same standard of PM all the time.

    They also assume the economic conditions internationally and nationally are exactly the same.

    Based on the negative Liberal responses to everything Labor did during the GFC we can be thankful we had a Labor Government.

  • 146
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    ESJ,

    Guytaur is not a member of the Labor Party. Neither are you. Our vetting is working well.

  • 147
    mari
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    I really can’t understand why people answer and try to rationally debate ML and ESJ, just use the scroll button :devil: So much easier

  • 148
    guytaur
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:04 am | Permalink

    ESJ

    I have no idea if Bolt has ever been a Labor member. This means of course if he was I do not know he remains a member.

    I assume you can work for a Labor government no matter what party you vote for.

  • 149
    WeWantPaul
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:04 am | Permalink

    It gave succour to those who say the royal commissions into corrupt unions and pink batts are politically motivated and hypocritical

    This was posted from some murdoch rag on the last thread, but I’m curious, surely everyone knows the two RC’s are politically motivated? The terms of reference alone would tell you that neither of them is really interested in anything but political narrative.

  • 150
    Edwina StJohn
    Posted Sunday, March 23, 2014 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Tell us more about the vetting GG ? Do you vet family members too ? is there a willingness to follow orders test or as the Russians called it an assessment of partiinost?

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...