From today’s Crikey email:
The Victorian election is the first to be held since the crystallisation of the link between the drought and climate change has fundamentally shifted the politics of both the environment and infrastructure across Australia.
Quantitative and qualitative research conducted by Graham Young and me for The National Forum shines a light on the importance of these issues. Water has been one of the few issues in the campaign to get much traction in the public mind. In our quantitative polling, 36% of 250 respondents nominated water as a key issue.
While Melbourne faces only level two water restrictions, regional cities are not so lucky. Bendigo and Ballarat are both at level four, and Geelong is about to join them. Victorian voters are keenly aware of the water crisis, and many have made the link with climate change. The polling is intriguing, therefore, in that it sheds light on how these issues will play out electorally.
The story is good news for the Bracks government. Respondents were appreciative of the appointment of John Thwaites to a portfolio including water, and there’s no evidence that voters are inclined to ascribe blame to Labor.
The Baillieu led Opposition has tried to dramatise the issue by promising to build a desalination plant, and a new dam on the Maribynong River. Neither promise has cut much ice with voters in our focus group. They’re sceptical about whether desalination is either viable or cost effective. And the dam is dismissed with scorn, with one focus group participant deriding it as “fatuous�. Several respondents pointed out that for a dam to fill, you need rain.
As David, 80, of Fairfield, put it, “Perhaps Family First could all pray for rain�.
Baillieu’s promises seem to be consistent with the Liberals’ policy approach generally – promising quick and expensive fixes to problems voters perceive as ingrained. But they’re met with scepticism, while Labor’s policy work on water was characterised by Jamie, 59, of Frankston:
“Bracks and co were the first to realize that water needed real attention. A dedicated, senior minister. Again, real policy takes time and work. They started 4 yrs ago.�
There’s probably a message for the Federal Government too. Voters are sceptical of responses which can be characterised as “pulling a rabbit out of a hat� and respectful of a record of serious recognition of environmental issues and their infrastructure implications.
Elsewhere: Graham Young discusses the Greens’ lower house chances.
Oh look, can I just say that I’m not interested in commenting on this post, that the Victorian election is boring, that Bracks will be returned, and we should just move on?
Just had a look at my wall map, it doesn’t show Victoria.
Agree with Christine, Victoria is somewhere else.
We’ll move on once we’ve seen how the Greens have gone. It’s as exciting as it gets, believe me.
I’ll go with that wbb.
A month ago I would have agreed but with the senior state going to the polls next March I find the Vic scene and the water issue extremely compelling. The public is way ahead of the politicos on this point. I can see a point where local government will be stripped of all water powers other than maintenance. New dams simply won’t wash and desal plants will get a similar thumbs down. A Bracks win on maybe a better water policy, but sexier issues will get the media attention in the ‘why he won’ post mortems.
Well, in that case, the Federal ALP are screwed, aren’t they? I read the papers diligently, and I couldn’t name one distinctive ALP policy on the environment.
Oh, wait, yes … they’ll ratify Kyoto. That’s it. A signature on paper promising something they’ll never possibly achieve.
We’re going to have fun here at LP in the lead-up to the next Federal poll, as we attempt to predict how much the Liberal majority will increase by.
Forget Centrebet, I’ll take your money off you now, Paulus, if you care to make a serious wager on the Libs picking up seats in the Federal election!
Several respondents pointed out that for a dam to fill, you need rain.
I guess this just shows the rather sad short sightednes of many/most people. When the rains do come and the dams are filling up it may be too late to start on a new dam for the next drought.
I think if the link between climate change and the “drought” is made, it shows the opposite, Peter.
In SEQ and Perth, as I understand it, the shift to a drier climate has been underway for around two decades. There are also shifts in SEQ which mean that rain now rarely crosses the Great Dividing Ranges as it used to, so the catchments for the dams are in the wrong places.
If Baillieu has just pulled the Maribynong site out of his hat, then it’s a nonsense.
My understanding is that Melbourne has much more dam capacity than most other cities anyway. That’s the reason why it’s only at level 2 water restrictions.
Oh well, Mark, nice to know that I seemed to read the politics of this one vaguely right, or at least consistent with your focus groups…
Baillieu didn’t pull the Maribyrnong site out of his arse, if I recall correctly he got lobbied by a retired Melbourne Water employee with a bee in his bonnet and didn’t do enough sanity checking.
Frankly, I’d like to play the same game with the dam advocates as you lot like to play with Howard’s nukes - tell us where you’d put your dams. Pretty much all the rivers anywhere near Melbourne have already been tapped, and any further diversion is going to screw the environment well and good.
Thanks, Robert. Also some confirmation from internal party polling that water is the most important issue. The question is - is it a vote-switcher?
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/baillieus-daunting-challenge/2006/11/22/1163871477838.html?page=2
“The dam is dismissed ..as “fatuousâ€?. Several respondents pointed out that for a dam to fill, you need rain.”
Now that last comment is what I call fatuous.