Menu lock

Federal Election 2016

Jul 12, 2014

Seat of the week: Lyons

The central Tasmanian electorate of Lyons covers some of the poorest and least ethnically diverse territory in the country, and it recorded the nation's biggest anti-Labor swing at the 2013 election.

Known prior to 1983 as Wilmot, Lyons covers what’s left over of Tasmania after the north-west coast (Braddon), north-east coast (Bass), central Hobart (Denison) and Hobart’s outskirts (Franklin) are ordered into natural communities of interest. It thus includes small towns on either side of Tasmania’s pronounced north-south divide, including New Norfolk outside Hobart and the southern outskirts of Launceston, along with fishing towns and tourist centres on the east coast and rural territory in between, together with a short stretch of the northern coast between Braddon and Bass at Port Sorell. According to the 2011 census, Lyons has the lowest proportion of non-English speakers of any electorate in the country, along with the second lowest proportion of people who finished high school and the sixth lowest median family income. The Liberals gained the seat in 2013 on the back of the election’s biggest swing, which converted an existing Labor margin of 11.9% into a Liberal margin of 1.2%.

Blue and red numbers respectively indicate size of two-party majorities for Liberal and Labor. Click for larger image. Map boundaries courtesy of Ben Raue at The Tally Room.

Wilmot was in conservative hands from 1901 to 1929, when it was won for Labor by the man whose name it now bears. Joseph Lyons had been Tasmania’s Premier until the defeat of his minority government in 1928, and upon entering federal parliament he assumed the position of Postmaster-General in the newly elected government of Jim Scullin. However, Lyons and his followers split from Labor in 1931 after a dispute over economic policy in response to the Depression. Joining with the opposition to become the leader of the new conservative United Australia Party, Lyons became Prime Minister after a landslide win at the election held the following December, retaining the position through two further election victories until his death in 1939.

Labor briefly resumed its hold on Wilmot after the by-election that followed Lyons’ death, but Allan Guy recovered it for the United Australia Party at the general election of 1940. It next changed hands at the 1946 election when Labor’s Gil Duthie unseated Guy against the trend of a national swing to the newly formed Liberal Party. Duthie went on to hold the seat for nearly three decades, until all five Tasmanian seats went from Labor to Liberal in 1975. The 9.9% swing that delivered the seat to Max Burr in 1975 was cemented by an 8.0% swing at the next election in 1977, and the Franklin dam issue ensured the entire state remained on side with the Liberals in 1983 and 1984. The realignment when Burr retired at the 1993 election, when the loss of Burr’s personal vote combined with the statewide backlash against John Hewson’s proposed goods and services tax delivered a decisive 5.6% swing to Labor.

Labor’s member for the next two decades was Dick Adams, a former state government minister who had lost his seat in 1982. Adams survived a swing in 1996 before piling 9.3% on to his margin in 1998, enough of a buffer to survive a small swing in 2001 and a large one in 2004, as northern Tasmania reacted against Labor forestry policies which Adams had bitterly opposed. Strong successive performances in 2007 and 2010 left Adams with what appeared to be a secure buffer, but this proved illusory in the face of a swing in 2013 that reached double figures in all but a handful of the electorate’s booths, and in several cases topped 20%. The victorious Liberal candidate was Eric Hutchinson, a wool marketer with Tasmanian agribusiness company Roberts Limited, who had also run in 2010.

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

1035 comments

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Steve777
Guest

Re BB @1016: Rupert of course ‘forgot’ to mention that as the climate changed through natural causes in the past, millions died. When the rains failed, the people mostly died. The sea level rose, tribes moved inland and took their chances with the environment and those who were already there. Bloody wars would have ensued. And in this century, changes to climate and rainfall patterns would cause massive economic dislocation – rather worse than a carbon tax. In places like Bangladesh and the Pacific Islands, people will just drown or starve. Some may escape but their reception will make Scott Morrison look like a humanitarian.

But hey, the elites will be OK, as always.

Steve777
Guest

Re LL @1021: I suppose Newscorp didn’t ask how many voters wanted the end of bulk billing blocked; the doubling of tertiary fees and crushing young people with debt at the start of their careers blocked; cuts to health and pensions blocked; work till you drop blocked; free rein to spivs blocked; abolition of unemployment benefits for the young blocked; the attack on disability pensioners blocked.

deblonay
Guest

Dare to Tread
Mondoweiss site

great stuuf daily
chttp://www.juancole.com/

deblonay
Guest

Dare to Tread
The Mondoweiss site…today they day the message for the Palestinians is”submit,’leave or die”… as some Israelis call for an end even to the idea of a Palestinian state

http://mondoweiss.net/

deblonay
Guest

Dare to Tread
_________
Glad you find my ME posting of interest
I agree with you re the “abused becme the abuser” argument
This is the view of Uri Avnery,whose family escaped the Nazis
and as a young man he became a Labor-zionist -soldier in 1948

He detests Netanyahu and what he sees a a kind of racist/fascist mindset around him…which he says may end with the collapse of what he calls the zionist project

Could I suggest you read two sites ( I’ll put them up”) the site of Prof Cole…”informed Comment” and also of Mondoweiss…a lively NY-USA site from anti-Netanyahu young US jewish writers( it is hard to denounce these ae anit-semitic isn’t it ?)
Thanks for your comment

matt31
Guest

@BB

I’d hardly call a 1 percent move in 2pp a surge. I’d call it margin of error. Still to see actual numbers though.

swamprat
Guest

zoidlord

[LOL News Ltd relying on Carbon “tax”, my how many people will be fooled once it’s removed.]

Surely Abbott /Credlin are setting themselves up for a big “the boy who cried wolf” moment when the carbon tax is removed and no one notices any change!

zoidlord
Guest

LOL News Ltd relying on Carbon “tax”, my how many people will be fooled once it’s removed.

Bushfire Bill
Guest

Newspoll is just resting. It’s having a breather on the way up for Labor.

swamprat
Guest

well 46 to 54 in favour of ALP 2PP

Bushfire Bill
Guest

Just missed those 2PP numbers.

Look like there’s been a positive SURRRRRRGGGGGE! of support for Tones.

Bushfire Bill
Guest

I smell panic:

[Repeal carbon tax: Newspoll
THE AUSTRALIAN JULY 13, 2014 10:45PM

Phillip Hudson
Bureau Chief
Canberra

Sid Maher

National Affairs Editor
Canberra

A MAJORITY of voters want Clive Palmer and his senators to immediately support the removal of the carbon tax as the repeal legislation is expected to be reintroduced into parliament today.

A Newspoll conducted exclusively for The Australian after last Thursday’s chaos in the Senate saw the repeal bills rejected, reveals 53 per cent want the controversial tax to be abolished.

Only 35 per cent want the Palmer United Party to continue to block the removal of the tax, while 12 per cent are uncommitted.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/repeal-carbon-tax-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1226987586528 ]

Whenever they hide the obvious numbers, you know they’re going to be stinkers.

The obvious question is: if they’re so sure Palmer will repeal the tax, why bother with a Newspoll question about it?

Leroy Lynch
Guest

Opps, it is all out! They are just emphasising the CT question in the teaser article.

Leroy Lynch
Guest

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/repeal-carbon-tax-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1226987586528
[Repeal carbon tax: Newspoll
The Australian July 13, 2014 10:45PM

Phillip Hudson
Bureau Chief
Canberra

Sid Maher
National Affairs Editor
Canberra

A MAJORITY of voters want Clive Palmer and his senators to immediately support the removal of the carbon tax as the repeal legislation is expected to be reintroduced into parliament today.

A Newspoll conducted exclusively for The Australian after last Thursday’s chaos in the Senate saw the repeal bills rejected, reveals 53 per cent want the controversial tax to be abolished.

Only 35 per cent want the Palmer United Party to continue to block the removal of the tax, while 12 per cent are uncommitted.

Read the full story in tomorrow’s The Australian.]

I presume the main poll will be out a day after.

guytaur
Guest

“@GhostWhoVotes: #Newspoll 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 46 (+1) ALP 54 (-1) #auspol”

guytaur
Guest

“@peterjukes: One reason the papers failed to expose Savile: his connections. He spent 11 New Year’s Eves with Thatcher: Rupert Murdoch every Christmas”

BlindFreddy
Guest
Bemused Comrade No, it is you who is dead wrong about Cuneen. Now she says it was not her personal opinion but a legal view, relevant to what a jury might believe. But lawyers are experts at the fine and defined use of the language if nothing else. Her words were “it is unbelievable that a 13 year old could experience an orgasm ……”. She did not say ” a jury would find it unbelievable that …….” The proof of the pudding that it was her personal view is her rationalisation “In the 100s of cases across my desk I haven’t seen cases of female orgasm associated with sexual assault……” Ditto re 13 year old girl swimmers not having breasts words. Again, she did not say “a jury might easily accept that a 13 year old girl swimmer even has breasts…” She stated her view of it. Waterstreet’s view of it is quite correct. As I said a few days back, experts are aplenty in the forensic health and sexual assault support services who could easily straighten her naive view out. I suspect she now does not hold the same views after her Special Commission, since I know she has certainly heard over the past year explicit evidence about young boys experiencing orgasm at the hands of clergy . And in her report she does not refute such evidence Maybe her issue is that she can conceive it of boys, but not girls. This would be very interesting, and certainly a personal and ill informed view. We all live and learn and professionally develop over the decades. The pity is that she now resiles from nothing …… not even admitting that her wording allows an interpretation that her legal view was worded clumsily and in hindsight is stated clumsily in the first person. And there is another more troubling aspect. Her opinion went to the DPP Cowdrey who admitted to the RC that he used her work verbatim in advising the Qld DPP. Cuneen expressed the view to the RC that her notes were in fact in-house, never being intended for public consumption. So here we have the NSW DPP at least wording in-house advices in the structure of written personal opinion, then presented externally, still structured as personal opinion, and the advice giver Cuneen and the DPP now arguing that it was a legal view, not a personal view.… Read more »
swamprat
Guest

Newscorp is to journalism as the IPA is to ‘think’ tank.

Bushfire Bill
Guest

Rupert Murdoch today:

[”The world has been changing for thousands and thousands of years. It’s just a lot more complicated because we are so much more advanced.”

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/fight-climate-change-by-building-away-from-sea-rupert-murdoch-20140713-zt66s.html#ixzz37M0NGNFV ]

The problem is that the last time temperatures rose (and not by as much as they are going rise this time), the world population was around 1/30th of what it is today.

That’s more than “a lot more complicated”. Thats a f**king disaster looming.

wpDiscuz