I crawl out from under a day which started with tying coloured balloons to the gate of a local primary school and ended with a particularly boisterous victory party (praise daylight saving!) to deliver this analysis of last night’s results.
In a broad sense, many predictions proved correct – that the swing against the government was not uniform, but differed across seats and areas, and in some places – particularly the traditionally working class Western Suburbs – involved a swing towards Labor. Perhaps Merrick and Rosso’s sentiments weren’t far off the mark when they told Peter Debnam that the reason not everybody goes to the beach every morning is that some of them live in Penrith (for the record, Debnam is officially the Shadow Minister for the Western Suburbs).
However, several results demonstrate that certain trends have completely gone under the radar of most commentators – and perhaps, also, that over-analysis has distorted predictions. The decisions people made were, ultimately, much less complex than many had predicted. In fact, it largely appears most people have voted on local issues and based on their respect for individual local members and candidates. Fancy that!
Read on if, like me, you like to talk (and talk and talk) about these arcane things …
As I predicted, the Greens primary vote remained nearly static, both in the Upper and Lower houses. In the inner city seats such as Balmain, seen as serious prospects, the party’s primary vote was almost completely static (intriguingly, the Liberal Party made the bigger improvement, up 2.4%), and the seat was in the end won easily by the ALP’s Verity Firth. Things initially looked a little more dicey in neighbouring Marrickville but sitting member Carmel Tebbutt was ultimately returned convincingly. Perhaps it’s premature to declare the chances of the Greens winning a Lower House seat entirely over – but it’s certainly significant to note that they have never once met the high expectations they and others have consistently predicted of them, and that statewide, the Christian Democrats won a larger swing.
One intriguing and unexpected turn of events is the fortunes of the National Party’s sitting MPs, who have seen healthy swings towards them in nearly all the seats they hold. This would ostensibly seem to challenge the prevailing wisdom – especially given the distinctly unspectacular Federal National party – that the party is gradually being marginalised by Independents who are seen as better advocates for local issues. However, it also demonstrates the phenomenon – well known to Federal Labor – that it’s all very well having the most popular local members, but it won’t do you a bit of good if you don’t win seats. Nevertheless, the party are likely to be pleased with Geoff Provost’s defeat of sitting Labor MP Neville Newell in Tweed, the state’s most marginal seat. Iin the end, it wasn’t `Better The Neville You Know’. Instead, voters decided to `Give Geoff A Go’. (Yes, those were the real campaign slogans. And the NSW ALP copped it for `Heading In The Right Direction’!)
What of those high profile independents we heard so much about – in particular, the triumvirate of Hunter Valley local mayors, Peter Blackmore for Maitland, John Tate for Newcastle, and Greg Piper for Lake Macquarie? Despite Blackmore winning a large swing towards him and coming second on primaries, Frank Terenzini (succeeding the retiring John Price) retained the seat of Maitland for the ALP. The ALP also held Newcastle, after a controversial and closely run race (which, at one point last night, the ABC’s Antony Green called in favour of Tate with some confidence). Dumped MP Bryce Gaudry may have left his run too late and split the Independent vote.
In the end, it was Greg Piper, who was given the smallest chance of the three, who in fact won the safe Labor seat off incumbent Jeff Hunter, in an intriguing result that nobody seemed to see coming. Thinking back, it’s a wonder this is the case. Hunter has had to see off a number of high profile local issues – most notably, the highly controversial Centennial Coal mine at Cooranbong, the subject of the landmark Land and Environment Court obliging the company to take the greenhouse gas pollution potential of their product into account. Some pundits suggested this ruling would be a factor in left-leaning urban seats hundreds of miles away – in the end, it doesn’t even seem to have been a factor in its own electorate. Instead, a loss of faith not only in Labor, who have held the seat since its creation, but all the major parties (the Liberal and Greens both saw major losses) – was clearly a deciding factor. Though rural independents have made ground, one interesting point is that the majority of gains made by the Liberal Party have come at the expense of urban Independents, such as Manly’s David Barr and Pittwater’s Alex McTaggart (the latter elected in somewhat abberant circumstances – the by-election following former Liberal leader John Brogden’s resignation)
The Centennial Coal issue is a good demonstration of the impact of the `vocal majority’ on policymaking and electioneering – well organised interest groups who are ultimately unrepresentative of the larger community. They exist on both ends of the political spectrum. Parties do listen to them, but in many cases, a little too closely. Take the seat of Monaro, for example, where the creation of the Batemans Marine Park stirred massive protests from environment groups, who thought protection measures were not great enough, and local fishermen, who though protection measures were far too stringent. Both groups threatened to use their influence to tip the incumbent, Steve Whan from his seat. In the event, he was returned with an increased majority.
I think it’s also fair to attribute this victory – like that of Barry Collier and Alison Meggarrity in Miranda and Menai, their fourth successive victory in `naturally Liberal’ seats – to local members who work incredibly hard, sometimes in opposition to their own parties (Whan was a vocal opponent of the government’s plan to sell the Snowy Hydro scheme) on obtaining results and winning the trust of their local communities. At a time of endless celebrity candidates, the ultimate value of a good local member is something that must never, ever be neglected.
I won’t take off my psephologist hat and make too many broad statements about why the government won and the Liberal Party lost, but suffice to say, this was a poor result for the Opposition and, at least numerically, a pretty spectacular result for a government about to enter its fourth term. However, there is some truth in Peter Debnam’s proclamation of the victory as voters giving `one last chance’ to the current government, and I say that as a member of the ALP. To win a fifth term without performing spectacularly will be a big ask – almost unprecedented – especially if the Opposition finally get their act together. The Iemma Government will have to work hard to retain or obtain the trust of those who did not vote Labor out of any particular passion. It is possible, especially if Iemma elevates the best talent and continues working hard on defining the party as something new and different from the Carr Government. It’ll just be an awful lot of work.
Is Peter Blackmore definitely out of the hunt in Maitland? No two-candidate count has been conducted between Blackmore and Labor – the reason the ABC says “Labor retain” is that the NSWEC wrongly assumed the final count would be Labor versus Liberal when it conducted its notional preference count. Blackmore’s primary vote numbers are a little better than Paul Stephenson’s in Goulburn – 27.1 per cent to Labor’s 39.8 per cent and the Liberals’ 20.1 per cent, against 25.0 per cent for Stephenson, 39.9 per cent for Goward and 22.4 per cent for Labor.
Us obsessive watchers of NSW politics are a sad bunch, to be sure, to be sure. My thoughts here. In short, I think Debnam must go, Labor really needs to deliver now to survive next time, and the Greens have some thinking to do.
I think you may be right there on Maitland, Poll Bludger. Does not look like a “Labor retain” to me right now.
One thing I haven’t heard yet is how did the seats that are in the Federal seat of Bennelong fare?
“……..and the Greens have some thinking to do” says Guy.
Yep, thinking that they have done very well. They have a swing at this stage in the counting and it will widen. Rumours of a Green demise are traditional on the night of each election count. The number of seats and votes continues upwards albeit gradually. Policy is sound and progressive and worthy of imitation.
This is a great chance to bring back Broggie…that is unless he hung himself on the internet the other day.
Maybe Chikka chikka boom boom would be a better bet.
Steve, a mixed result in Bennelong as far as I can see. Ryde and Epping recorded swings against the Libs on primaries, but Anthony Roberts in Lane Cove recorded a large swing to him.
Joe2, I suppose you need to look at what the Greens were trying to achieve electorally during the election to determine how successful they were. Personally, I think they could have done better. Considering how things could be done better is part of the normal process that all parties should be going through over the coming weeks – including the Greens.
MM: …
Even Cherie Burton had the grace to correct a supporter and call it a “post-election” party NOT a “victory” party.
The ALP has nothing to crow about, or celebrate, except of course the prize of power, for its own sake and material rewards for, well, the victors, i.e., themselves and their staff.
Thanks Guy, it appears that on the stength of that there is much work to be done if there is to be a change at the Federal level.
if an election were a test of competence, probity and vision in managing the state- once again the pollies won, the people lost.
but here in nsw, and in oz generally, it’s not.
here it’s gangs contending for the right to reward their supporters, so they can be re-elected, so they can reward their …
my consolation is, the people who participate in this tawdry charade they mistakenly call democracy have to live with the results when the ‘other mob’ gets in, and don’t get much out of ‘victory’ by their mob’.
the hospitals are staggering, the public schools withering, transport gridlocked whenever a fuse burns, and electricity supply remains dependent on coal fires.
are you really pleased that labor won, again?
The vote for Greens in Balmain and Marrickville is already marginally upwards, Guy. It will increase, if as usual , sensible folk have left the madness to commune with nature elsewhere. Antony Green on todays “The National Interest” already pushed aside another predictable claim that the Greens’ had done badly.
It gets down to ‘according to whose expectations’ and disappointment at Green election results is as predictable as it is boring. A lower house seat is always going to be a big ask, anywhere, for Greens. You would need a very big bong to imagine otherwise. Cheers, Guy.
Guy, I thought this was an excellent point:
It was bizarre watching Piers try to spin the result as a positive for the LNP on the Insiders this morning (because the margins on all those seats that the ALP won, but the Libs didn’t, have now been reduced so the Libs are in striking distance next time). I hope that the Libs aren’t actually thinking along those lines, or we might as well archive these stories so that we can roll them out again in four years time.
Howard, I think, actually sums up the situation quite well:
Having policies that are a bit more detailed and sophisticated than simply sacking more and more of an apparently inexhaustible supply of public servants would be a start.
I’d have thought that Debnam should go, any honest appraisal of the Libs’ performance would indicate that he’s not up to the job. Keeping him as leader would just allow him to demonstrate this for another four years. Barry O’Farrell is the obvious replacement, but iirc he refused to run after Brogden was cast off because he thought that he’d be white anted by elements of the party if he won. I wonder if the circumstances have changed enough that this is no longer the case.
Absolutely!
Stuff like not having a transport policy until he made one up last week out of whole cloth, and not turning up to his own costings thing (after refusing Treasury costings) – presumably out of embarrassment that no one could reconcile almost 10 billion dollars worth of promises with any possible funding mechanism wouldn’t have helped Debnam either!
Scarily similar to the Queensland campaign where incredibly the new Liberal leader, Bruce Flegg, having been Health shadow since the last election had no health policy and invented one on the second day of the campaign in concert with Nats MP Rob Messenger who’d just achieved the unbelievable trick of carrying on like such a pork chop that the Patel Victims Support Group actually endorsed Labor…
If Howard loses, this Liberal mob are going to be in very deep trouble. Reportedly after the Debus/Heffernan/discredited allegations made by jailed pedophile own goal, Debnam had one of Howard’s staffers imposed on him. Whatever did this operative do?
Mal, that is identical to the speech that Howard gave to the coalition after the Queensland election. It has all been studiously ignored and the coaliution has voted against every bit of legislation to improve the water supply including every pipe North,South, East and West of Brisbane and the purified water that is to run through it.
The only piece of policy that has been agreed is that Seeney will be premier no matter who has more seats and that policy will probably unravel at the Liberal party meeting today.
Speaking of Policy,pots, and kettles loved the quote from the Macquarie Bank’
The economy has been better for the Howard Government than the Howard Government has been for the economy.
After one of the most extraordinarily one-sided media
coveragecampaigns I have witnessed in any election (and I remember 1975) the princes of print must feel like right dorks this morning, when their customers seemed not to heed their relentless hooting and jeering to dump Labor. Indeed, the Herald was obliged to change its standfirst dinkus from the very partisan “State of Disaster” to “Hard Choice” and ultimately to “Battle for NSW” when the consecutive polls showed their customers weren’t buying the propaganda. Even the The Australian People’s Daily seemed more measured, albeit the Terrorgraph was up to its usual hysteria on some key days.And my point is?
I hope this will embolden politicians of all persuasions to tell the media moguls to stick it up where the sun don’t shine because the emperor has no clothes. Increasingly, MSM is becoming marginalised as citizens inform and influence each other via the Net and blogs such as this.
I know, I know, Casing Broke – its teh sticky keybroad
It was a party for a progressive candidate who richly deserved to be elected to their first term in office, and on whose campaign I had just worked 18 hours straight.
What was not to be victorious about?
This is the point I was making, too. The Greens primary vote has remained largely unchanged for years (usually somewhere around 10% in both houses), but there seems to be a certain mentality that all they have to do is exactly what they’ve always done, and people will eventually see their point and join them. They haven’t done much that is likely to extend their reach beyond their rusted-on support base and allow them to win a Lower House seat (given that the party’s ethos tends to have more to do with idealism than pragmatism, I suspect they never will).
10% of the primary vote’s nothing to be sniffed at, but if they were more realistic and concentrated on their ability to effect change via the Upper House, they would be able to achieve more for their members and supporters.
Thanks Mark. I think its actually a point raised by someone else I have talked to recently about the election – so kudos to whoever that was!
Joe2 – I haven’t said that the Greens did badly – all I am saying is that they could have done better. In the interests of trying to do better in future, an analysis of how they did this time might well be prudent.
Bart getting zapped by the electric cupcake five times in a row may have been funny but of course it was not very smart.
The Greens have won a lower house seat in NSW before, if you recall – so it is not as if such a result would be entirely unprecendented. It’s doable – the Greens need to work out how they can do it.
I’ve said elsewhere that I think the screeching hysteria about the apocalyptic collapse of state infrastructure, third world health-care and a train system that apparently compared invidiously with Nazi cattle trucks was overblown and ultimately counter-productive. No-one likes a train breakdown but some perspective is required. Particularly when the leader writers, columnists and talkback hosts who constantly insisted that the train service was Mumbai-like in it’s inadequacy, wouldn’t travel on the bloody things from one year to the next. Ironically, the train-dependent seats in western and southern Sydney all returned ALP members, including the Shire seats that are “naturally” Liberal voting.
I’m glad that someone has raised the politically priceless gift that Bob Carr gave to his party in departing when he did. He should also be thanked to the heavens for patiently pointing out to moronic “reporters” yesterday (while handing out HTV’s in Maroubra) that “no, he doesn’t resent not featuring in ALP campaign material because he opted to leave the stage and that’s actually political reality.”
As for Debnam, by the last week of the campaign he was Almodovarian in his desperation – “Woman on the edge of a nervous breakdown, in budgie smugglers.”
What a goose. From the disgraceful, deservedly back-firing, Heffernan-sourced smear of Debus when the government was actually on the scandal ropes, to the weird conceit that he and his wife were actually running for office as a kind of beige-toned duopoly, to the constant nerdy kayaking, to the mantra like citing of “Tripodi, Costa and Sartor,” until even the densest voter had worked out that he was saying that dirty, greasy, wog pollies were all corrupt and not to be trusted (enter Senator Santo Santoro, stage right), he blundered around snatching defeat from the jaws of victory whenever opportunity presented.
As a colleague said to me last week, “hasn’t the dude worked out that there are hundreds of thousands of voters with names that sound like Iemma, Della Bosca, Costa, Tripodi and Sartor? And names even more wog-sounding?”
To hear him whining about being the victim of an unprecedented personal attack last night (John Brogden might have an opinion on that) – shortly after congratulating himself for the staggering achievement of taking back a couple of Liberal-voting seats previously held by independents – was surely the last straw.
And the Sydney Morning Herald actually urged its readers to vote for this guy.
Oh, I know, I know. I couldn’t believe that they could endorse him. Line from ‘a Labor source’ in the paper today was that the bullets were being fired at the government but Debnam kept jumping in front of them. (Debnam really needed a flak jacket, not speedos).
And to the sour graper up there who chastised Modia Minotaur for daring to call the party she went to a victory party – cheesh!! I hope you had one for me. I actually do think it’s something to celebrate, and a new MP is a beautiful thing.
Inner West greens well-wisher ( a la Moe Siszlak) here:
Psephologically issues like most Libs prefering to preference Labor aside; I think the basic problem with the Greens in Balmain and Marrickville is that they haven’t been able to find either an inspiring, hard-working local candidate with some profile or a pressing local issue to lock on to and hammer Labor on. The latter is probably outside of their control for the present, but recent candidates haven’t really (looked/)been all that enthusiastic, and change from election to election without much profile buildup.
Meh.
In my electorate, independent Clover Moore received a 3% swing to further entrench her (and became the longest running woman member of state parliament). So from where I’m standing, predictions of an increased vote against the major parties and for independents came to pass. Maybe this is a case of someone with clearly articulated (progressive) policies in opposition to a lot of what Labor does in office having a lot of appeal.
I was interested to note that Iemma personally received a 5% swing in his favour making his the safest Labor seat in the state. (Maybe the safest seat?)
“Maybe this is a case of someone with clearly articulated (progressive) policies in opposition to a lot of what Labor does in office having a lot of appeal.”
Well, Clover is kind of unique, suz. She’s the consummate pollie and can work every side of an issue, simultaneously. She was an enthusiastic supporter of Cross City Tunnel road closures because it worked with her “City of Villages” concept, that seems to rely on keeping the riff raff out via large concrete barriers. When the government eventually yanked them out to placate eastern Sydney residents who did not want to be forced into using the bloody tunnel, she was totally supportive and wondered at the government’s incompetence in thinking it would ever work. I can well remember Virginia Trioli being momentarily speechless at her chutzpah.
She’s a proud supporter of the Sex Workers Outreach Project and vigilant in her excoriation of street based sex work and the seamy wickedness of Darlinghurst Road.
And I love the way she kind of infers that “Kerryn Phelps Lesbian” public persona thing in juxtaposition with her devoted heterosexual Catholic wife and mum lived reality.
She’s impressive.
It’s interesting that Neville Wran has just been on the noos, saying that in all his years in politics he has never seen such virulent campaign in the print media. You heard it here first.
I think the swing in Iemma’s seat can be contributed to the bizarro-world that is the deranged consciousness of Reverend Nile. I think you’ll find a lot of the goldie-oldies in Lakemba voted CDP, which normally through preferences float back to the Liberals. But Fred being in a different dimension of reality after drug-testing himself (you have to read the hilarious way the Daily Telegraph covered this stunt press conference), decided that he would preference Labor in seats in which Liberals ran Muslim-sounding names – so the poor old restuarant-owner in Iemma’s electorate who probably had as much in common with radical Islam as Pat Boone bursting into “Enter Sandman” lost a swag of votes from disgruntled pensioners and assorted wowsers. Near where I live I think the Liberals candidate John Chedid might have suffered a similar fate.
The million-dollar question is did Rev. Nile check each of the Liberal candidates were not Maronite Christians, or did he just preference against any Arabic sounding surname? Funny because if he did, he may in one or two instances preferenced against some of the professional branch-stackers who are so fervently infatuated in moving the Liberal Party towards the Wowser Central of the Festival of Light crowd.
MM worked for 18 hours straight. Jeez, that must have been a shock to the system.
In less than two decades the Greens’ achievement is remarkable: Accepting no corporate donations – unlike the ALP, and which were a huge factor in NSW Labor’s latest campaign; relying overwhelmingly on volunteers with full time jobs who do the hard yards of campaigning, including letterboxing – unlike the ALP which pays for delivery by Australia Post; rounding up volunteers for staffing polling booths – unlike the ALP, which is reduced to paying people for staffing them: the Greens, as MLC Lee Rhiannon writes today, achieved this:
“In Marrickville the two party preferred vote is Labor 58 per cent to Greens 42 per cent.
“The Greens polled over 30 per cent in two seats – Marrickville and Balmain. In three more we polled over 20 per cent – Coogee, Ballina and Peter Debnam’s seat of Vaucluse – and in 10 or more we recorded over 15 per cent.
“There have been strong swings to the Greens in Heffron and Canterbury. In a number of northern Sydney seats – Pittwater, Manly and North Shore – the Greens candidate gained more votes than the Labor candidate.
“These results show that the Greens are eroding Labor’s vote in an increasing number of seats. Considering Labor outspends the Greens by about 20 to one this is a pleasing outcome.”
Next state election will be very interesting. In between times, pity the poor people of NSW. How they will suffer, under Labor. How many more people tired of waiting for chemotherapy or dental surgery, or hip replacements, will suicide because of intolerable hospital waiting list times and lack of beds and staff.
But, no matter, MM is “victorious”. What else matters?
When you consider: the perceived (and actual) uber-crappy state of NSW schools, hospitals and public transport; Orkopoulos etc; 12 years in office; the Macquarie Filed riots; the Middle Eastern gang rapists out of control etc; the budget gone to deficit; the cross city tunnel; the housing investors who did their dough over the last few years; the mishandled Cronulla riots and their mishandled aftermath; the quality (LOL) over the ministry …. have I left anything out …?
And then consider: the Liberals did not take one seat from the Labor Party, not a single one …, well, it’s just extraordinary. And last night and today the Liberals and boosters were pattintg themselves on the back about what a great result it was for them.
I don’t know what they’re on, but I want a kilo of it.
But, you never know. If the Libs have a good 4 years, they might do well enough at the 2011 election to give themlselves a shot in 2015.
Not very likely on past form, however. So realistically they’re not coming back till 2019. Maybe 2023.
The Labor Party should be very grateful to Clover Moore. It was she and a couple of other independents who forced John Fahey to put in 4 year fixed terms when he was Premier in the early 90s. This has given the Labor Party, government in four year licks, which is a long time, especially when you get term after term. (As I recall, Moore and her mates were advised by Paddy McGuiness at the time. How ironic).
Hmmm, Nita, there is no doubt the Greens performed well – and I don’t think anyone is saying they didn’t, as you say, they were great results in two seats – however, you are being a little disingenuous with your results quoting.
The Greens (like my own party, the Dems, I might add) have not, at this stage, increased their primary vote support in this election. At all. Now, with postals, this might go up a little, but even so that is – whatever way you slice it – a disappointing result in an election where – ostensibly – there were a hell of a lot of protest votes floating around (a perception enforced by the huge swings many popular independents saw).
The fact that there was similar lack of primary support in the Victorian election (when ratio-ed against with the number of candidates) where there should also have been a lot of protest votes, suggests that the Greens – as they currently stand – have reached their carrying capacity.
Indeed, I’m inclined to think the relatively steady levels of support (or lack thereof) all the minor left parties tallied at this election lends some credence to the oft-voiced theory that there basically a small percentage of voters who are prepared to vote outside the two major parties, and rather than adding to the percentage, smaller parties simply tend to swap votes between themselves.
Of course, these are all generalisations, and there some exceptions. Nor am I trying to take away from your hard work, and the hard work of many volunteers, of many political stripes. I’m sure their hard work made a difference in this election, as it does in every election.
However, the fact remains: the Greens’ lack of improvement on first preference vote – not in one seat or two that went up or down accordingly, but across the board – is, and should, be a little disappointing for them. As Modia and Guy suggest, some good, post-election analysis is just what the doctor ordered.
Nita, is this pain-in-the-arse routine all you’ve got? MM attended a victory party. That’s what it was. Simple as that.
And I love the way she kind of infers that “Kerryn Phelps Lesbian� public persona thing in juxtaposition with her devoted heterosexual Catholic wife and mum lived reality.
Clover Moore is much more butch than Kerryn Phelps (in every sense) Geoff.
MM attended a victory party. That’s what it was. Simple as that.
“The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.” Oscar Wilde
This is the most unforgiveable thing about ALP hacks. They are so shallow and crude – apart, of course, from sinister.
So well said Nita.
Essentially, the game is always on to fox the Greens into ‘dumbing down’. If you actually have sound progressive policy, rather than focus groups, you wait patiently for catch up and imitation. It’s proved once again a great successful volunteers organisation, as you say, and has nowhere near the need to naval gaze than the two major parties.
I don’t think it’s well said at all, joe2, since she’s obviously targetting MM as the subject of her vitriol. I noticed that on another thread – very personalised comments.
It’s fine to debate the relative merits of the Greens and the ALP but it’s not fine to make constant nasty comments about someone else on this blog.
Please see the comments policy:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/about-larvatus-prodeo/comments-policy/
Oh come on Spiros, don’t believe everything that’s served up to you by the Parrot and its feathered friends.
Your knowledge is scant, your memory short. The four-year fixed term amendment to the Constitution Act was introduced into NSW parliament by Tim Moore, member of the Greiner Government on October 1991 to start as of elections of 1995. It was supported by the ALP and later by the Democrats and Fred Nile in the Upper House.
The Independents’ advisor was not Paddy McGuinness but Arthur King, (albeit, Paddy and Arthur are old friends as they both started as members of the Sydney Libertarians – of the anarchist kind, the Heyekian bit came later for Paddy).
The advisory role for the Independents came as a result of Arthur’s historic role as an advisor to John Hatton, an Independent MP for the South Coast. Both John and Arthur were crusaders to clean up the NSW police force, which they did. Until then, there was a corrupt nexus beteen organised crime and police.
It was to Clover’s credit and guts that she joined Ted Mack, Peter Macdonald and John Hatton to use their balance of power on the floor of the house to enable the creation of the Wood Royal Commission and thus ending the reign of criminal cops in NSW.
I’d like to hear or see evidence of this, Nita, unless you count sandwiches, fruit and free sunscreen as wages. Having more than passing contact with the Labor Party, I can tell you that pay for ALP booth-workers is total urban mythology.
Lee Rhiannon is flat wrong. In Balmain and Marrickville at least, increases in Green votes have come at the expense of the Liberals and Independents, where the Coalition has simply conceded the role of Opposition.
And as for the guff about the overall result being good for the Greens: in the Legislative Council, where the Greens vote really counts, there has been a .5% swing against them. In a mood of such supposed hostility to the major Parties, as patrickg said, that’s not a creditable showing at all.
Modia Minotaur, you missed one important name, likely to be bumped (back) into Parliament: Dawn Fraser.
FDG, Dawn Fraser is in no danger of winning a seat. One other thing regarding MM’s post: I think it’s a bit early to call Lake Macquarie for Greg Piper. Labor is actually ahead on the current count, although past trends suggest it’s unlikely to stay that way.
Stephen Hill: wow! The Nilesta shivved the Mansour Brothers (Morris, who ran in Iemma’s seat, has an excellent Egyptian resteraunt on New Canterbury road (last time I was there, anyway)) because they had
terroristIslamic-sounding names? Just too funny…What, no lamingtons?
The Liberals on my booth were delivered moon cakes in a bicycle trailer, Kim, believe it or not.
To expand on my comments, I *have* encountered paid booth-workers, but only ever at the local council level for cashed-up Independents. You can spot them a kilometre away—they’re the ones who don’t care how many votes their candidate gets.
Poll Bludger: fair enough. To be honest, I’m still a bit hungover from polling night.
I’m actually feeling sympathy for ALP hacks thanks to this constant needling. Stop it, please, you are making my brain hurt.
I don’t think they’re sinister, but the pros do scowl a lot. I am always amused when the Labor boys turn up to the polling booth in jeans and sports jackets.
Perhaps, Nita, since you think the Greens are doing very well, you’d like to say what Lower House seats you think the Greens will win, and when they will win them. Or perhaps a date for the Greens to hit their next Upper House quota?
I guarantee you in the seat of Marrickville all ALP booths were staffed and organised by volunteers (many of us even have full time jobs!!), as was the letter boxing, as were the pre poll booths, as was the postal voting organisation, as was pretty much everything else involving the campaign. I have no problem with the Greens but this halo act got old a long time ago.
And how about corporate donations? No money from Meriton for Labor? Why did Paul Keating call Cranky Frankie Sartor the minister for Meriton?
I’ve covered the same booth in the southern suburbs for two state elections and one federal, and worked on other booths in the area in council elections, and I know quite a few of the local Labor and Liberal people. The Libs routinely use paid polling booth staff. In fact, this election was the first time I’ve seen real Liberals staffing my booth.
Don’t have any first-hand evidence about Labor on booths, but I’ve heard that they have been reduced to that in some places. Some of their biggest branches have crashed. Cranky Frankie is a blow-in, and a lot of the locals don’t care for him very much.
Labor down this way hardly does any letterboxing these days. They pay Aussie Post, no doubt with a big vote of thanks to Meriton, Tristar, etc.
Paying Australia Post to deliver mail. Whatever next.
“I don’t think it’s well said at all, joe2, since she’s obviously targetting MM as the subject of her vitriol….”
Kim, timing is everything and I seem to have walked into the doggy do. If you check Nita and my comments they are one minute apart. I was endorsing her previous and longer general comments(9.09 pm) that included a quote from Lee Rhiannon and were predominantly on topic.
I was not responding with glee to an attack on another commentator as you seem to imagine . I had not even seen it. Sorry for any offense I seem to have caused by accident.
“It was to Clover’s credit and guts that she joined Ted Mack, Peter Macdonald and John Hatton to use their balance of power on the floor of the house to enable the creation of the Wood Royal Commission and thus ending the reign of criminal cops in NSW.”
Ted Mack? I think not, Sir Henry.
Ted Mack was elected to the House of Representatives in the seat of North Sydney at the federal election of 1990. He defeated John Spender who, on election night, when asked what contribution he thought Ted Mack would make, responded
“Nothing. He did nothing in the state parliament and he’ll do nothing in the federal parliament”.
(By the way, I never listen to the Parrot. It was clear recollection that McGuiness was involved advising the independents and they forced four year terms onto the reluctant government of the day.)
Modia Minotaur: You’ve got your facts completely wrong with Monaro. I really don’t think the Batemans Marine Park was a big issue in Queanbeyan and Braidwood – you’re getting the state electorate of Monaro with the federal electorate of Eden-Monaro. Moreover, Whan was *not* a vocal opponent of the Snowy Hydro selloff – he said basically nothing until Howard terminated the idea, upon which time Iemma tried to spin it in Whan’s favour. It wasn’t for no reason that Whan’s advertising in Monaro said absolutely nothing about the Snowy – only the Sydney papers suggested it was ever going to be a factor in his favour.
It’s also a bit pre-emptive to be making a post-mortem on the independents when most of their races are still undecided.
The wailing about the supposed failing to materialise of the Greens vote happens every election, and it’s nonsense in this case. Most people I saw thought the Greens would win two LC seats, and they did. Equally, they gave them no chance of an Assembly seat, and while they didn’t get it, they came a hell of a lot closer than most people expected, giving Carmel Tebbutt quite a scare and having the partisans quite worried for a while on election night. You’ve got to remember that in Tebbutt – as with Bronwyn Pike in Melbourne in Victoria – the Greens are up against a very high-profile, very senior minister from the left of the party. If the Greens are doing this well against incumbent members of this nature, I think the ALP have reason to be very worried about their chances when the likes of Tebbutt and Pike retire and have to be replaced with new, more unknown candidates.
Rebecca, YOU are wrong about Steve Whan – he ran hard on the Snowy, from the second it was announced, as did most ALP branch members. He complained to the press and the public and lobbied within parliament and the caucus. We rank and file were feckin’ furious, and Steve was carrying our torches for us. He didn’t need to mention it in his campaign advertising, because it was done and dusted quite some time ago – in fact, before the last ALP state conference, where it would have been rolled on the floor. He has a consistent record of achievement, which is why he not only won, but increased his margin.
And the marine park issue WAS red hot down there, as any reader of the Tele would know.
Your concern for the future of seats like Marrickville is touching, but don’t worry on our behalf. If Carmel ever stands down, fear not. She will be replaced by a young, high profile left member who will still blitz it. Inner Sydney is crawling with hard working lefties with strong community links who have solid records of achievement on mainstream issues.
What I’ve never been able to understand is why the Greens think it is a good thing to devote their resources to such seats. If they ever knock off a good inner-city lefty all they will have achieved is to reduce the capacity of a party which will form government to introduce policies that suit their agenda. The Greens are politicians, just like everyone else, and are just as craven.
And the ALP prides itself on NEVER having to pay booth workers – believe it or not, we are a grassroots party, still.
You Greens think you are so pure.
A key reason the ALP has to pay people to work on polling booths and Australia Post rather than volunteers to letterbox and doorknock is that the ALP branches are crumbling and failing to replenish their membership with a younger generation of activists. In large swathes of the state, ALP membership is ageing with little influx of new, especially young, members. Hence, the need to pay relatives, other supporters, get union officials to work the booths (paid from union coffers), etc., and with overall less numbers on booths making it a hard day indeed for the core of 40-60 year olds rusted-oners doing it for free.
Yep. They are a party to, which makes the phrase “giving Carmel Tebbutt quite a scare and having the partisans quite worried for a while on election night” rather interesting.
Speaking as a sometime Green voter, the party really should have done better at a time when disaffection with the major parties was at an all time high.
If Nita’s attitude is symptomatic of the wider membership, then they will have to content themselves with marginal status in the obvious electorates and a few upper house seats.
That’s not what I’ve heard about booth workers, Lefty Puppy, but I’ll reserve judgment until I get hard evidence. On letterboxing it’s pretty clear the workers’ party doesn’t have the footsloggers it used to out in the burbs, but it has plenty of enthusiasts at the big end of town.
I’m not sure why you raise the issue of purity, Puppy. Are you perhaps a bit uneasy about corporate electioneering?
I’ll reserve judgment until I get hard evidence
You do that. I have certainly never heard of anything like it. Although even if it occurs I really fail to see what the big scandal is. Everyone knows political party membership, across the spectrum, have been declining for a long time — not exactly front page news there, Scoop. I really doubt it happens but if so, so what?
Letterboxing is often a nice excuse for an afternoon walk, catch up on some podcast listening and whatnot but it is extremely time consuming, labour intensive and probably a fairly inefficient way to spend the precious time of your hardworking rank and file. From my experience it still happens alot, exclusively volunteers, but if the process has been streamlined — great. A very strange way to gauge political purity if you ask me.
Ok, we’ve had the Greens v. Labor bitchfest. Can we stay on topic please, and focus on the election results and their implications?
The Australian is now reporting that Barry O’Farrel is set to announce a challenge for the Liberal leadership in the next 90 minutes.
Well, the implications are obvious Kimmeh. The Greens didn’t move in their vote (sorry, couldn’t resist).
The Libs only got traction in their trad strongholds and in the pissed off Hunter seats. That’s because Debnam was unappealing to all but the north shore types and Vauclusians. The Nats did significantly better by campaigning on core, agrarian socialist issues, so they should be quite pleased with themselves.
Labor did well where WorkChoices was a big deal, like Western Sydney, which remains a sea of rusted on red voters. Penrith is particularly interesting. You had a sitting MP, who had minimal voter recognition – 80% of focus groups did not know who she was six months ago, even though she’s been with them for a term. You had against her a superstar local hero, former police officer, disability activist mum, etc. It votes Liberal at the Federal. Oh, and commuters there have a choice between toll roads and grossly overcrowded trains, the hospital is busy and stressed and there was a lot of whingeing about the government. Penrith swung TO Labor. The reason? The sitting member’s hard work out and about and particularly on the Your Rights at Work campaign and the stupidity of Debnam, who went to the electorate to parade a pair of ‘battlers’, without realising that they only owned eight houses.
Overall, local candidates with demonstrated records of achievement did very well indeed. The stars did good where they had roots – like Koperberg in the Blue Mountains and Annesley in Miranda.
“What I’ve never been able to understand is why the Greens think it is a good thing to devote their resources to such seats.”
Because they are the only kinds of seats they can win.
The Greens will never win any outer suburban seats, like Penrith, occupied by a Labor right winger. They might one day win an inner city seat ocupied by a Labor left winger. But since the Labor Party always has left wing candidates in these seats, the Greens will always find it very hard to break through. They could try and broaden their base by moving a bit to the right, but then they would lose votes on their left. It’s a dilemma faced by all niche parties.
This isn’t a criticism of either outer suburban Labor or inner city Labor voters. They just have, on the whole, different priorities and different values. It’s just the way it is.
As A Green I’ve been privately predicting for some time that the Green vote would plateau at a figure roughly similar to the figure attained in the two most recent NSW and Victorian State elections (i.e. in the range 8-10 per cent). The factors driving the rapid increase in the Green vote in 2000-2004 have played themselves out for now.
8 to 10 per cent is actually quite high by the standard of Green parties internationally – higher than in most of Europe and most of the English-speaking world – and gives the Greens something to work with, especially where it has been translated into parliamentary representation. Speaking as an individual I think the Greens’ best shot for the coming few years is to develop a strategy of consolidation, policy and organisational development, and steady incremental growth based on using the leverage obtained in the period of rapid growth which now appears to be at an end.
In Australia the Green brand is pretty well branded now – and it’s a left-of-Labor brand which includes some stances to which a majority of voters can only be converted over time, if at all. Moving away from these stances will lead to the problem Spiros refers to, perhaps without any countervailing benefit. Simple dissatisfaction with the major parties will probably not manifest itself in a rapid increase in the Green vote in the absence of a positive identification with the Green message – or a paradigm shift in Australian politics.
Beyond that, my comradely admonitions against sectarianism by Greens and ALP Lefties alike still stand.
On the booth I scrutineered, the returning officer started putting the LC votes for Fraser in a separate pile, but almost immediately realised it wasn’t worth the trouble. If she was serious, she shouldn’t have left her run so late.
I do apologise in regards to Lake Macquarie, I was going off the ABC website which had declared it with reasonable confidence. Hunter certainly won on first preferences – I wish I knew more about the specifics so I could have a stab at preference flows. The Electoral Council’s website currently has Hunter ahead by about 150 votes.
I’ve been peripherally involved in the marine parks issue. Believe me, throw media hysteria into the mix of two groups that will never, ever, agree – environmentalists and commercial fishermen – and you have something that isn’t pretty.
As Leftist Sock Puppet says, the assertion about Whan and the Snowy Hydro sell-off is simply untrue. He is on the record numerous times opposing the sale; his own electorate office released a pamphlet detailing his opposition over a month before the sale was called off. Given the swing, it’s hard to conclude that his stance wasn’t a factor.
It is striking how quickly the Greens’ vote falls away the further one goes from the CBD. Much of it is safe Liberal seats close to the CBD (North Shore and Lane Cove, in the NSW case). This is a precarious position to be in. If the Greens ever lose their appeal to the inner city voters, they will be decimated.
Like other posts, I think MM might have called the Hunter seats of Newcastle and Maitland too early as ALP wins – perhaps his victory party got the better of him. Also he wrongly attributed Centennial Coal at Cooranbong as being called to book by the Land & Environment Court over consideration of burning coal in their environmental statement. It is actually their proposed mine at Anvil Hill in the Upper Hunter that received the ‘please explain’ from the judge.
This was a Green supported issue and we ’boutique’ left of centre supporters have to wonder what the ALP will do when big coal and power unions seek new mines and power generators for the stuff. The antagonism over the supposed threat to jobs in the Greens no-new-mines platform was a big contributor to a stalled Green vote I believe.
The Cooranbong proposal was knocked out by broad residential opposition and goes some way to explain why an independent may win the Lake Macquarie seat. This would be an interesting seat for post election analysis.
As a one time ALP member I have to smile at the comments on developer contributions to meet Australia Post mail outs. Having a few postal workers on your books capable of using a franking machine saved many a branch touching the big end of town for that sort of service.
But such a scenario could only occur if (a) the political sociology and demography of the inner city changes to the detriment of the Greens – not an immediate or short-run future prospect) or (b) the Greens voluntarily adopt a course of action which could risk estranging inner city voters – which is not likely given the influence of said inner city voters and their values and priorities, and suburban and regional voters who by dint of education and occupation share such values and priorities, within the Greens.
Saying this does, of course, pose the question of how the Greens could improve their levels of support amongst punters outside of these circles.
An important point which all of this discussion raises is that there must be a lot of voters out there who are not strongly ideologically committed, who fit in the part of the political spectrum from moderately conservative to moderately progressive and who want a government which is accountable and can run services and infrastructure competently, who are currently not represented by any party of significance in New South Wales.
Pablo, MM is a she not a he. The gravatar should be the giveaway!
Apologies Minotaur, I missed the gravatar. Not enough gravitas applied perhaps.
Modia Minotaur,
I think if the backlash against the marine park had any impact it would have impacted upon the seat of Bega, not Eden-Monaro. My best mate lives in Batesman Bay, and I’ve seen some of the hysterical press while down there. Yet Bega moved a paltry 0.2% to the Liberals, so it seems the park has been a big non-issue despite Andrew Constance’s efforts. I think similarly this happened in one of the WA coastal seats which was very marginal at the state election and was comfortably returned, so despite the fear campaign if the idea of the marine park is communicated well most sensible people see its merit and these that disagree don’t see it as a big enough issue to change votes.
MM can’t have it both ways, though he/she tries – (sorry, it is a gender neutral moniker and a gravitar guarantees nothing, and anyway the gender of the poster is irrevelant).
Either people vote for good, trustworthy local “celebrity” candidates (like corrupt Frank Sartor, and lying Carmel Tebbutt per chance?) or people vote for or against the given political alternatives, dire or unsatisfactory as all might be perceived to be.
A pretty sorry state of affairs, for which we can largely blame Labor.
Indeed the Socialist Equality “Party” apparently only contesting the seat of Marrickville and proud winner of 175 votes (and counting) reckons the problem with Socialist Alliance and the Greens is that they both consist of detached, middle class, inner city bourgeois types. I can only imagine where the SEP might be positioning themselves as they, ironically perhaps, contest an inner city seat themselves.
Nita, all I can say is that compared to say, Paul Norton’s thoughtfulness, this “ALP is evil” stuff really turns me off the Greens. And I’m contemplating voting for them in the federal election. But all this purer than thou stuff, and the tone of a lot of comments of yours, really makes me more inclined to stick with Labor.
Just sayin…
Modia Minotaur:
All the NSW election has done is confirm Australia’s position as being fairly close to a One Party country ….. with the two major Factions [called "Parties" locally] putting on staged events from time to time so as to keep the citizenry amused and believing that playing musical-chairs inside the Party will somehow change their lives.
Given all the public dissatsfaction with both sides of politics, it is amazing that any Liberals or Labor candidates were elected at all.
people vote for or against the given political alternatives, dire or unsatisfactory as all might be perceived to be.
A pretty sorry state of affairs, for which we can largely blame Labor
So Labor is to blame for how people vote? A curious assessment. I actually think the privacy of a ballot box is that one impulsive moment when you can do what you want to do. If da people don’t choose you, they don’t choose you. So build a bridge, and get over it.
And lay off Carmel Tebbutt. She’s been a great minister.
I’m with Kim. The holier-than-thou attitude is very off putting. Standing on a polling booth all day on Saturday, the only people who were rude to us poor sods handing out how-to-votes were some Greens voters, who would sneer as if even touching one of our how-to-votes would sully them. I just don’t get it, because if the Greens ever did hold the balance of power, it would be Labor they would have to unite with.
Kim, thanks for the compliment.
lsp, the only people who’ve ever been rude to me when I’ve been handing out Green HTVs have been ageing Liberal or National voters. I’ve never had any problem with Labor campaigners or voters at polling booths.
Now that the tumult and the shouting of the election campaign have died down, I think it would be beneficial for members and supporters of the Greens and ALP Left to ask themselves – and perhaps post on a forum such as this – what their goals are for social change, what their preferred strategy is for achieving those goals, and where their activity in the Greens and the ALP Left respectively fits into that strategy. When I ask myself these questions and think about the answers carefully I always find myself concluding that both the Greens and the ALP Left have an important part to play, and that their relationship should be as cooperative as wider political circumstances permit. I will concede that the circumstances of inner-city Sydney and Melbourne electorates on election day, in an electoral system based on single-member constituencies, doesn’t permit an awful lot of cooperation. However I think it behooves both Greens and ALP Lefties to attempt to quarantine the friction which can arise in these circumstances so that it doesn’t infect our relations at other times, and in particular so that it doesn’t spill over and harm the internal unity of social movements and community groups in which we both participate. I’m given to believe that the latter has, unfortunately, occurred in some progressive quarters in the southern capitals.
Paul, may I suggest a post on that?
I think it would be a great post.
Kim, I’ll try to have something on Thursday or Friday, if my teaching commitments permit. If not, I’ll have something by next Monday.
Not according to the NSW Teachers Federation, she ain’t. According to the NSWTF President Maree O’Halloran “Tebbutt’s modus operandi seemed to be based on a desire to be more conservative, indeed reactionary, than the Federal Liberal Government.”
And in two consecutive state election campaigns, Tebbutt deliberately lied and smeared the Greens in relation to preference allocations and other false accusations in her usual desperate attempt to reduce the huge, ongoing Green threat to the ALP’s “ownership” of the seat of Marrickville.
As an erstwhile member of the NSW Teachers’ Federation, I think they are not a union you should go to seeking fair opinions about Education Ministers, of any persuasion.
And lies and smears cut both ways – myself, I don’t see it.
The NSWTF is probably the best union in the country, certainly the most democratic, representative and active on behalf of its members. No, in NSW it hasn’t usually been effusive about various state (ALP most recently) education ministers, in the same way, health workers haven’t been about health ministers, transport workers about transport ministers, and so on and so forth.
The fact that it has been the ALP in government which has run-down and mismanaged all these sectors adds to the strength of feeling against the ALP and is the main reason why many public sectors workers and trade unionists have now joined and/or give their primary vote to the Greens.
I wasn’t slagging the Teachers’ Federation – they are a good union, although I have to say I think that the employment practices they defend discriminate against younger teachers entering the system – but was simply pointing out that they are not given to fair assessments of the merits of Education Ministers. In Tebbutt’s time the teachers saw the biggest pay rise they have ever had, which was negotiated without a squeak from the unions, and you have to give credit to her for standing up to the ridiculous attempts by both parties at Federal level to try to enforce ‘national standards’. She’s defended NSW’s educational standards, with good reason. The only real grounds the Federation has to attack her on is the report card system, which I myself don’t agree with, but she went against right-wing members of her party to make it a little more palatable. She’s done a good job.
Your assertions about the conversion of public sector workers and unionists to the Green cause are meaningless. Teachers also vote Liberal, even when unionised, and I would hazard a guess that more of them vote that way than Green. In fact, the Federation rep at my former school is a Liberal. Unionists also vote for John Howard – more than vote for the Greens.
Well you can argue from a position of ignorance all you like sockpuppet, but fact is public sector workers, and teachers would be at the top of the list, form a major part of the active membership of Greens and their local groups in Sydney at least, and I know the same goes for Melbourne.
Not that this is unusual given the role of students, and teachers, in the environmental movement historically dating back to the 60s. What is unusual though is that many of the most progressive, active and experienced rank-and-file membership of trade unions, which after all are affiliated to the ALP are, in fact, the backbone of the Greens in the cities where the Greens get their highest votes. These factors are deeply connected.
“However I think it behooves both Greens and ALP Lefties to attempt to quarantine the friction which can arise in these circumstances so that it doesn’t infect our relations at other times, and in particular so that it doesn’t spill over and harm the internal unity of social movements and community groups in which we both participate. I’m given to believe that the latter has, unfortunately, occurred in some progressive quarters in the southern capitals.”
Wise and pragmatic words from Paul Norton. It must be a great joy for the majority right wingers, of both major parties, as they watch progressives at each others throats. The naughty children fighting over the final piece of cake while they so sensibly stuff large chunks in napkins and are out the door before the bill is paid.
I think this is more a Melbourne thing, Paul. In NSW there’s ill-feeling amongst the paid staffers, petty hacks, back-room zombies, shills and zealots (ie. people like me and Karen), but other Greens and Laborites in unions and NGOs seem to get along pretty well. That goes double for the set of high-profile public sector unions like the Teachers’ Fed, Nurses Association and FBEU who don’t affiliate to the State branch of the Labor Party. The whole entrist ‘Workers First’ union election bunfight of a couple of years ago, for instance, didn’t really get much traction north of the Murray, though there were anti-Labor tickets running in most of the Left unions. Don’t know about any of the other States, but I’d be surprised if WF succeeded.
Karen, I’m prepared to believe that public sector workers form a significant fraction of the Greens membership base, but you can’t infer from that anything much about the voting behaviour of non-member public sector workers. I’d guess that the rest vote along pretty much the same lines the rest of us do: income bracket and geographical area.
BTW: ‘Best’ union in what sense? Achieving results in pay and conditions for their members, supporting the rights of entry-level potential members and recruiting, achieving social change, or improving work quality? I’d say the NSWTF only does the first well.
Well you can argue from a position of ignorance all you like sockpuppet, but fact is public sector workers, and teachers would be at the top of the list, form a major part of the active membership of Greens and their local groups in Sydney at least, and I know the same goes for Melbourne.
Very nice of you to assume my ignorance Karen. I am not in the least bit ignorant of the composition of Greens membership, in Sydney or elsewhere, but I am utterly confident that the number of teachers in the Greens is vastly outnumbered by the number of teachers who vote Liberal, whether they are unionised or not.
I am supremely confident that the number of teachers and public sector workers in the Labor Party blitzes the number of teachers the Greens have.
But, what Fiasco Da Gama has just said.
BTW, I also think Greens and other Laborites get along quite well. The biggest bunfights seem to occur when Greens or Labor people are competing for the same turf – e.g., if both come close to having control of a council or somesuch. Which bears out the point that this sort of barney only serves the interests of the right.
“public sector workers, and teachers would be at the top of the list, form a major part of the active membership of Greens”
Without a doubt, this is true, and goes a long way to explaining why the green vote is capped in the high single digits.
If one day the Greens could attract to their ranks cleaners, shop assistants and people who work in factories, which is to say, the working class, they might also get a few votes in areas that are further than cycling distance to CBDs.
Not that there’s anything wrong with people who work in the public sector, live in the inner city, and spend their leisure time reading the collected works of Hugo Chavez (some of my best friends etc) but most people, the great majority in fact, don’t.
Seems to be leaps of logic and false attribution going on with LSP and FDG. I never implied that all, or even most public sector workers, or teachers, vote or are members of the Greens.
What I did say was this:
The Greens exist because of the failure, inadequacy and just plain absence of core principles and policies, and methods of organisation around and on which the Greens were founded, so in that sense the ALP in power are often political opponents of the Greens. This is a feature of “parliamentary democracy” which the ALP supposedly supports.
As far as the Greens and the ALP getting on, they don’t, largely because the ALP (in particular its so-called “left”) hates the Greens even more than it does far right political organisations. This becomes most clear at election times ande in parliamentary or council meetings which are virtually the only time most Greens and ALP members have anything to do with each other.
The Greens and the ALP left are bidding for the same piece of political real estate. It’s not a big piece so the chances of coming to a sharing arrangement are nil. Of course they’re not going to get on. It’s like the National Party and One Nation. Or the Sunnis and the Shiites.
And in comments fields, forums, and all of the worthy successors to alt.flame. Bang a gong, get it on.
Seriously though, do you really think Labor and Green member/supporters have that little contact with each other outside election time, or that democratic politics outside the state/territory branches of the Greens Party is that barren? What a pessimistic assumption for the social movements for which Paul Norton and I share hope.
More seriously still, Karen, I think your insistence on purity in Party behaviour and political ‘principle’ shows an ignorance of the behaviour of Greens parties in the rest of the world. Die Grünen in Germany, for instance, have a very successful history of compromises to their Left and Right, and have recently forged a working, if not happy, coalition with the Social Democrats. Needless to say I think you’re entirely wrong about co-operation, Spiros.
I think that getting along, as in all relationships, requires maturity and an acceptance of the validity of the beliefs of others.
I’ll offer my two cents’ worth on the source of the antipathy of ALP left-wingers to the Greens; the ALP left has seen many of its good members desert and leave them to carry on the fight for good progressive policies within the ALP, against the right. We also watch, dismayed, as other good community people refuse to join Labor. Then, as many of those new Green members have turned into candidates, you have excellent left-wingers in inner-city seats vulnerable.
It’s also quite annoying to be accused of being a hack, simply because you’ve decided that the best thing to do is to work for progressive policy within a party that will form government. Remember, we hold the line on many, many issues, both social and environmental, and we rarely get any credit for that.
As for why Greens are antipathetic to the ALP, well, I’m not going to hazard a guess.
But for myself, my father is a Green and I always hug the Greens candidate when I see him, which is a lot, because he is very community minded and so am I.
Or if another party comes to be seen by those inner city voters as more likely to be able to achieve real policy outcomes on the environment. Or if those inner city types decide there’s an issue of more immediate importance that election. Or if the Greens actually gain the balance of power somewhere and do a Meg Lees.
I have a hunch (and it’s no more than that) that if you surveyed the religious backgrounds of Greens and ALP Lefties you would find people from a Protestant (especially evangelical/non-conformist) background were over-represented in the former and people from a Catholic background were over-represented in the latter. You might also then want to develop and test some hypotheses about how the differing mindsets of people from these different religious backgrounds could affect the cultures of the two organisations. Calling all political sociologists!
Rebekka I would contend that stances on environmental issues are perhaps not the main determinant of the Greens’ high level of support in inner-city areas. Remember that the big boost in the Green vote (and arguably the beginning of the intensified Green/Labor competition for the inner city seats) occurred in the 2001 election and was largely driven by issues other than the environment (i.e. Tampa and responses to the War on Terror). As I have argued elsewhere, there are a lot of voters (perhaps more than a third of the electorate) who are comfortable with Greens (and green) positions on the environment but uncomfortable with Greens policies on a range of social, economic and foreign policy issues. The inner-city folk are more likely to be comfortable with the whole kit and caboodle of Green positions.
BTW Spiros, the clerical staff, maintenance workers, gardeners, traffic and security staff, catering staff, printing workers, lab assistants, library workers, technical support staff, etc., at my public sector workplace may have a problem with your implication that they are not part of the working class. So too might the growing ranks of sessional and casual teaching and research staff up here who need to call on Centrelink for parts of the year to supplement their income.
Ye Gods, I think you are almost certainly right (does quick mental tally of known religious background of ALP left friends versus known religious backgrounds of Green friends, confirms you are actually right), but then it would be truly awful to drag sectarianism into this too …
Signing off now folks – good discussion, don’t let my overnight absence slow you down…
Paul, do the clerical workers etc at your public sector workplace vote for the Greens?
My point, which you know is true, is that the great bulk of support for the Greens comes from the middle class or indeed the upper middle class. This is why the Greens get many more votes in Cremorne than they get in Campbelltown and many more votes in Brighton than in Braybrook.
Of course not all Green supporters are the flighty children of the bourgeoise who vote Green as a fashion statement. Some, like you, are seriously committed environmentalists. But people like you are rare.
Rebekka, I don’t agree with this bit. A major part of the Greens’ electoral appeal is their emphasis on the quality of the political process, rather than the quality of political outcome, the traditional objective of social democratic/labourist parties.
Paul, in NSW the Catholic Education Office apparently distributed a leaflet to principals at Catholic schools, asking them to inform parents that the Greens’ education policies, if enacted, would lead to underfunding and disadvantage of Catholic systemic schools compared to local State schools. I heard the Green on my polling booth tell the parent who asked about it that that was “rather the point”.
Honest to a fault, I’ll give them that.
PS. Wasn’t one of the aggravating factors of the ‘55 split the overwhelming Protestantism (and Freemasonry) of the then Steering Committee/Socialist Left in Victoria?
I am an (ex) Catholic, Greens supporter, and have worked as a low-paid clerical worker for 20 years. And my local (suburban Sydney) Greens group includes a MSM journalist, cleaner, teachers, disability pensioner, corner shopkeeper, self-employed IT worker, HR private sector manager, two secretaries and university students.
And, Leftist Soft Puppet, history is always a good reference point and guide, but to come to the present, even, take this report from today’s OZ as to why “Greens” might be “antipathetic to the ALP.
“Rudd set for brawl with Labor’s Left”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21452720-601,00.html
And, furthermore, apropos Paul Norton’s contestable remarks, everyone always used to joke about the high proportion of Catholic-educated feminists and communists in the social movements of the 70s and 80s.
Then, of course, there was the Irish Catholic contribution to that era, and to today. All those Fenian troublemakers, many now in the Greens, still shooting our mouths off and standing on polling booths and running for election, all the mad wild intransigent, “pure”-hearted rebels that have felt this way since we were, well, in my case, 12.
Check out Pat Mackie. He started it.
Bridie, two things:
One: there’s more to the Rudd industry policy than meets the eye. It’s predominantly a punch-on with the manufacturing and manufacturing-support unions, which aren’t nearly exclusively Left. In fact, I’d put money on the members of Parliament aligned to the SL taking sides on this one against their erstwhile union comrades. It’s also a policy designed to appeal to people fed up with the slavishly pro-cartel industry and trade behaviour of the Howard government, which is certainly not a strictly left-right issue; recall Kerry Packer’s apocryphal words to Keating:
Two: Catholics in Australia aren’t just Irish. In the social movements of the 1990s and 2000s, the Jesuit arguments, the Mercy sense of right and wrong, the Marist energy and the Good Sam arse-kickery come with wog names. Y’know, like Sartor, Tripodi, Costa, and Della Bosca.
The Green representatives in the Senate are Brown, Siewert, Nettle and Milne, the Greens in the NSW LC are Hale, Rhiannon, Cohen, and likely Kaye. AFAIK, only Milne could be suspected of Roman tendencies at all, having attended a Catholic boarding school. (Though I give credit to Rose Porteous for a creditable showing in Marrickville, and Richard Di Natale for winning Victorian Federal Senate preselection).
Angharad: thanks for bringing up the SEP, their flyer was one of the few fun reads this whole campaign:
“…[W]e are placing at the very centre of our NSW election campaign the struggle against militarism and war”
Priceless.
And their shopfront in King St, Newtown! what was that about?
Fiasco, you are taking all my best lines. You’re right. The manufacturing protectionism is not something many of us SL peeps would die in a ditch for – and neither should any self-respecting Green.
Jaysus, you’d have us protecting the coal industry next.
How about the basket weaving industry?
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Heh
My sources inform me that Labor is in a battle for the last LC spot with the Australians Against Further Immigration, with all of the micro-party preferences spreading everywhere like egg on a hot pan.
I hope Derrida Derider never wants to move back to Sydderney, because if AAFI get up, interstate immigration’s gunna get cut dramatically. I can just see the State policies now:
- More border police checking eskies for fruit on the Murray bridge at Albury
- No QLD patients in Tweed Heads medical centres
- Keep Our Rail Gauge Secure
- Rugby League to be made official football code, Australian Rules banned in schools
- Bring back State tarriffs
And a rush of industry welfare to revive the Coffs Harbour banana plantations in order to eliminate dependence on imports from Queensland.
FDG, it looks very much like to me like there’s little doubt Labor will win nine seats, and that the contest for the final seat is between the Coalition and three minor players – Democrats, AAFI and Vexatious Litigants R Us (aka the Fishing Party). Did you mean the Coalition rather than Labor? If so, can you be more specific about why the AAFI are better placed than the Dems and VLRU?
I’m glad to hear you say so—hooray for Mick Veitch, he got my #1 below the line. Too bad about the dipshits higher up on the ticket.
I’ve only the pathetic begging email from Head Office asking for volunteers to go to Riverwood to scrutineer, Poll Bludger, to back up my ill-supported assertion. Where electoral failure of the Labor Party (NSW Branch) is concerned, though, I’ve always put my faith in Sussex Street. That, and I was looking for a pretext to unfunnily mock the AAFI.
Also, to return to an abandoned subject, here are occasional commenter Oz’s wise words on the so-called ‘Rudd/Left’ battle.
Public-private partnerships from the UK to Canada to NSW are well documented disasters. Creative accounting for private profit that fails to mask the inevitable spectacular bankruptcies, environmental and construction disasters, legal disputes and service cuts.
Of course, the federal ALP will go for them. One would expect them to. And the band will play Waltzing Matilda.
So, do or do not the Seagulls want to keep playing in the Queensland Cup?
Quid pro quo.
Back on topic, as the count progresses it appears that the Green percentage of the pre-poll vote is lower than the Greens’ percentage of the polling day vote. The trend is not going to prevent the Greens picking up two of the Council seats, but it is interesting as it runs counter to what we’ve seen in the last Federal election and the last two Victorian elections. At this stage I’m not going to speculate on an explanation.
And We finally have a winner in Goulburn,
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,21471321-5005361,00.html
I never evah believed the rumours about John and Pru til I saw her on the telly on Saturday night – she’s become a dead ringer for Janette. Is this some sort of Hivemind-written-on-the-body thing that happens when you defect to the dark side of the Force?
Just wonderin…
There are 10 new Ministers in the cabinet announced this afternoon
Exciting late-count development from Lake Macquarie, where Labor’s Jeff Hunter has snatched a last-minute lead over independent Greg Piper. The completion of the notional preference count in Port Stephens indicates that the Liberal candidate has won by 19 votes, but this may yet be overturned by the “proper” preference count.
Are you sure we saw it in the last Vic election, Paul? I reckon this is one of those old wives tales.
No, Kim, she was just doing in-depth research for her husband’s book.