The Liberal Party has decided not to contest the Queensland state seat of Brisbane central, left vacant by the retirement of Peter Beattie. The by-election is on October 13. This decision has been taken against the wishes of the embattled Liberal leader, Dr Bruce Flegg, and the official line is that they’re saving their resources for the federal election. That’s probably true, but they’re also trying not to expose the low level of Liberal support in Brisbane and give federal Labor some more momentum. So those of us who live in Brisbane Central will face a choice between Labor and the Greens, with no opportunity to consider the claims of the state “opposition”. It’s very good news for Anna Bligh.
There’s another interesting story about where the various parties are focussing their resources. Reports that John Howard has been begging the retiring member for the South Australian seat of Grey (and possibly others) to stay on point to what sort of movement is happening on the ground in some Coalition seats. Grey is held by a margin of 13.9%. In Queensland, I’ve been told that Labor has moved resources into Coalition held seats with margins of over 8%. While there are still claims around that the “national polling” and the “seat polling” tell two different stories (driven both by wildly inaccurate interpretations of the aggregate Newspoll and the risible “betting markets” on individual seats), the parties don’t allocate campaign cash based on flawed and optimistic spin but on realities. If the firewall now has to be built around seats held by the government in some states by 10% or more, they’re in an astonishing amount of trouble.
Update: Graham Young’s take at Ambit Gambit.
Agree Mark. At this time in the electoral cycle don’t listen to what the Parties are saying, look at where they are expending their resources.
If Grey is now in play, then a massacre is on the cards.
As they say, where there is smoke, there be blue cod!
I’ve got a comment in the thread below, ‘the numbers game…’, about senior Libs, inc. John, trying to get 6 retiring Lib. MPs to reconsider.
All sorts of intruiging implications suggested by the panic stations mode of the Libs..
Same thing happened down in Victoria, with the Libs not standing candiates in either of the seats left vacant by Bracks and Thwaites, again against the wishes of the state leader.
Frankly, at this stage I would have thought the Libs would be starting to try and rebuild their state parties, as its likely they’re going to need to get some momentum from somewhere very soon. Its very weird. Its like the State Libs have been sacrificed for no good reason.
I find this trend a little disturbing. It would be nice to see the Greens candidate make a go of it and give ‘em a run for their money.
Well, it’s not just “still claims around”, concerning the difference between the national poll figures and figures in individual seats, is it?
It always happens! The votes cast in a general election for parties in any seat are ALWAYS different from the national aggregate votes for those parties.
That’s why the “electoral pendulum” is a fairly unhelpful concept: it’s too broad brush. Seats differ, Candidates differ. States differ. Issues have different importance in different seats. So what? Aren’t we all aware of that?
As a democrat, I’m very happy that we have single-member electorates: it gives electors a role as a “final filter”. We can fail to elect an unsatisfactory* candidate put forward by Party X , regardless of the fact that we may generally support Party X, on matters of policy, leadership etc.
cheerio
* (assessed as unsatisfactory on grounds of our own choosing)
The latest news suggests that the Nationals are going to run. What a poke in the eye for the Liberals.
I think one of the planks of Howard’s campaign is to torch the States. His musings about nuclear power didn’t help the Liberals in 2006 in Victoria at all – they issued denials and still say “we don’t need it here”.
Baillieu didn’t like being told not to run in the 2 byelections just held in Vic, one seat (Albert Park) was not even very safe for Labor.
I think State Liberals are being sacrificed for the cause of re-electing Howard. They know they are pushing it uphill with a pointy stick to win the federal elecion, so that is where they are putting all their effort.
Besides, no State Liberal government seems to be within a bulls roar of getting elected. So maybe their state parties are devolving to front groups for winning federal elections?
Yes, of course, Ambigulous, but the claim that somehow Labor is ahead in the “national polling” but behind in the “seat polling” is flat out wrong. Given the size of their lead, it’s illogical in the extreme to think that it would be the case, and in any event, the evidence from Newspoll contradicts it.
OK, Mark, you may be right: I haven’t analysed the Newspoll figures.
But the arithmetic CAN sometimes go like this: big swings to Labor in “safe ALP seats”. Much smaller swings to Labor in marginal or Liberal seats. Overall result? Very few lower house seats gained by Labor. Possibly “national majority” for ALP in the aggregate vote. Possible Senate gains, if voters generally vote similarly on the Senate ballot paper as they do on the Reps ballot. Outcome: ALP national vote rises, but ALP still in Opposition in Reps. Hung Senate or Senate hostile to re-elected Coalition.
The above is as speculative as anyone ele’s guesses, but I do believe this has actually happened once or twice in the past. And it would be consistent with poll results showing “a big swing to ALP nationally, with Libs/Nats retaining most House of Reps seats”.
cheerio
Ambigulous, Possum has analysed the Newspoll figures and they’re telling a very different story from the 1998 situation you describe. The link was in the post:
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2007/09/23/crimes-against-psephology-christopher-pearson-%e2%80%93you%e2%80%99re-nicked/
Hi Mark, I don’t think it was only in 1998 this occurred. It’s a matter of simple arithmetic. It can happen. To paraphrase Mae West, “Psephology had nuthin’ to do with it!”
Thanks for the link.
cheerio
It seems the Libs thought that standing a candidate was part of a Labor plot.
Can you believe this:
Now with all the usual infighting tactics of the Queensland opposition comes this. But with one day to find a candidate, it could be that they too will miss out.
Ambigulous, yes it can happen, but is really a possibility only when the gap between the two parties is narrow. As I’m arguing in the post, if the analysis of the aggregate Newspoll data looking at classes of seat and regional/State variation isn’t convincing enough, then follow the campaign cash allocation by the parties. It’s certainly not happening this year.
The libs wasted their best chance candidate ( he took 5% off pete last time) by standing him against Kev in Griffith. He’s campaigning on “local issues” ( = Kev’s too busy being important to look after home base,) despite not living in the electorate, but he says he’ll move if he wins. Good Luck.
The Liberal candidate for Griffith is absolutely hopeless – make no mistake. The swing against Beattie in his own seat had nothing to do with the Liberal candidate there – I can assure you of that!
Meanwhile, check out who the Libs have preselected in Rankin (marginal ALP seat – very winnable with a hot candidate).
I am so embarrassed of my party at the mo. They need an organisational enema.
Both Antony Green and the Queensland Liberal Party website have no candidate listed yet for Rankin.
No Steve, that’s right. This is an inside tip.
Keep your eyes peeled for the announcement.
Early 20s university student. No real work experience. Morbidly obese. Arrogant.
Candidate for Griffith on the Libs’ site.
Oops. Sorry – no idea why I thought we were discussing Griffith.
Yeah Alister, really sounds like the Mr Thomas is in touch with the values of Griffith residents. It seems OBVIOUS to me that the QLD state party has totally run out of ideas and good candidates. While the ALP are putting up candidates of the calibre of McKew in Bennelong, the state libs are preselecting cut’n'paste Liberal party men.
1) Male
2) Middle aged
3) Married
4) Small Business
5) Overweight
6) Balding optional
I mean, have these people ever walked the streets of West End, Dutton Park, Stones Corner or Bulimba?! Diversity is out there people!
Have a look at the candidates here http://www.qld.liberal.org.au/ourTeam.aspx and you can see what I mean.
Antonio: the libs have hardly got a monopoly on cut-n-paste candidates. McKew and Kelly type candidates are somewhat exceptions that prove the rule of the apparatchick elevator.
And I dunno how long it’s been since Kev “walked the streets of West End, Dutton Park, Stones Corner or Bulimba”, that would have been pre 2001, when he secured his comfortable margin.
Sure we get fridge magnets and report cards in the post, and there are the legendary, perhaps apocryphal, Rudd-Bikes, but that’s about it, it’s a well-oiled PR machine.
‘Frinstance, on a morning TV puff piece last week, he and therese are interviewed at their favourite Book&Tea shoppe ( don’t all suburbs have them? ) and he says he’s only been home about 5 times this year.
The local branch has troops down the corner of Boundary and Vulture on saturday mornings, handing out the Kev07 merchandise, but has Kev ever been to one of their branch meetings? Once, and not this year. But fair enough, there are 18 branches.
It raises the question, who’s gonna serve as our local member while Kev is busy being PM from the Lodge? That’s kinda what the lib candidate is trying to say, I think, but he’s not that articulate.
I reckon whichever electorate happens to draw the PM straw, should get to elect another local rep, like a runner for an injured batsman, in recognition of the clear fact that their time and attention is taken up on bigger issues.
What was this thread again?
I personally live in Griffith just down the road from a booth that went from Liberal in 1996 to 60-40 Rudd in 2004.
As a Liberal, I have to admit that Rudd worked the seat extremely hard and was very visible. Rudd’s great strength (weakness?) is his ability to relate to people of all different backgrounds. This plays ok from West End to South Brisbane.
My point is that dragging out another balding, middle aged, obese cut’n'paste Liberal man with no social skills and zero charisma is NOT the way the libs can put pressure on Rudd. Make no mistake, with a hot candidate Griffith could swing Liberal to a competitive extent. The fact is that the state libs are so incompetent that nooone good is either involved or keen to run.
Sure, the ALP run lots of talentless union hacks BUT the advantage the ALP has is that these unionists have had to learn the skills of negotiation and political organisation. Whereas, many Lib candidates think a political party is like a small business – ie. one or two directors and the rest as relatively expendible shop floor staff. As a result, the reality of campaigning tends to churn through a number of crap candidates. I just wonder when the state Libs are going to actually start learning.
Antonio, you said
Well, attacking, bullying and insulting your own supporters willy-nilly over a couple of decades probably isn’t such a great re-election strategy after all …. and it just might discourage excellent potential candidates from joining the party in the first place. Then again, I’m only a voter so what would I know ….
Mark:
Short of pulling an outrageous series of stunts prior to an election [God forbid!!], the Liberals in Queensland are just about cactus.
So, which party or group will pick up all the disillusioned, frustrated and angry ex-Liberals and all the former “aspirationals”?
Antonio, aren’t cut-and-paste candidates SOP for the Liberal party and has been nationwide for the last 20+ years? Isn’t that part of the problem and the reason that they’re failing everywhere except Federally? Our experience with them, at a professional level, is that they’re ridiculously insular and way too caught up in paternalistic ideologies. Not that the Labor party are much better, but to be told outright that they weren’t employing the services of anyone that wasn’t a die-hard member of the Liberal party is just crazy.
Graham: “which party or group will pick up all the disillusioned, frustrated and angry ex-Liberals ?”
Umm I’d imagine pauline is rubbing her hands pondering exactly that.
Antonio: I don’t get it… you characterise the template Lib as “Balding, middle aged, obese…with no social skills and zero charisma”, and reckon Rudd’s a hard worker who can relate to people of all different backgrounds, yet the way you say “I’m a liberal” means you are going to vote against who it sounds like who you think is the better man… why?
That’s rhetorical of course, the answer is idealogy, as you say you are “a liberal”.
Now please take this in the spirit of enquiry it’s meant, ‘cos I’ve always wondered about what passes for idealogy for liberals, and I think you have described it quite well as a world/electoral view,
” one or two directors and the rest as relatively expendible shop floor staff.”
That notion of expendability, whether it”s staff, or the environment, or principle, is the unacceptable dark heart of thatcherite-(so-called) liberalism, such as Howard perspires to.
More’s the pity because it leaves us with the slightly less unacceptable foibles of the other lot.
I’ve heard John Hewson speak on a few forums lately: I wasn’t here at the time, but it sounds like that’s where it all went wrong, you lot letting Howard do him in.
The exact same thing happened in two recent by-elections in safe Labor seats in Victoria.
It seems weird that the Libs are hard up for money given the wealth of many of their supporters.
Antonio: get rid of the uglies, if it is possible. They’re no good for Australia, and they’re no good for the Liberal Party. As example, I gather that the “gay smear” was formulated by the hard right against one of the moderates. That this might end up costing the Liberals one of their own in parliament doesn’t seem to bother that bunch.
The uglies are the bunch that have made me a rusted-on Labor preferencer against my will.
Danny:
Many will go to Labor, that’s fairly obvious, because this is 2007, not 1977, and there has been a convergence of Liberal voters interests and today’s mainstream Labor policies and attitudes. I don’t think too many will go to Pauline Hanson; too much divergence tnere [though I expect quite a lot of formerly rusted-on Labor voters would be attracted by her particular version of moderate nationalism].
Whether the Liberals in Queensland disband themselves or are shoved down the toilet, I wonder what assets they possess and who will end up with them?
DownAndOutInSaiGon:
You are no Robinson Crusoe there!
Err, no. The answer, if we’re talking state elections, has been blatantly obvious for the last 6 years over the 3 elections we’ve had in that period.
In 2001, 2004 and 2006, Labor won 33 out of the 35 electorates in Brisbane.
And the margin between that performance and a clean sweep was razor thin on all three occasions. Even last time around, if someone other than Liddy had been running again in Clayfield, and there’d been a strong local issue working against Flegg in Moggill, Labor could have taken them all. Go check out Flegg’s margin. It should be an ultra safe Liberal seat, but such is the reality of the Qld Libs that what ought to be their safe territory sociologically in Brisbane is safe to marginal Labor or held by them by the absolute skin of their teeth.
As to Craig Thomas, I gather he’s a good bloke to come and fix your computer. Whether you think that someone in their 40s who makes a living from going round to help people fix their home desktops is a dynamic small business person I suppose is a matter of opinion. Hmm…
Graham, it was only last year that the Queensland Libs were prepared to takeover all the assets of the Nats in a deal that was only stopped by the Federal Parties. Only with a takeover of Labor, the Nats, the Greens and Hanson’s Party could the Liberals muster the votes to win this election.
It will be a bit difficult for the Libs to achieve this unlikely event if they can’t afford the cash to run a candidate in Brisbane Central where one would logically think they will have to start winning seats to achieve major Party in the coalition status.
We have been assured for years that it is just around the corner for the Queensland liberals. Finally, they get their chance to prove their popularity in inner Brisbane and they cut and run.
It will also be a hoot if the Nats turn up with a candidate just in time to be flogged over horseflu. Sometimes circumstances coincide wonderfully.
“And I dunno how long itâ??s been since Kev â??walked the streets of West End, Dutton Park, Stones Corner or Bulimbaâ??, that would have been pre 2001, when he secured his comfortable margin.”
Oh, that’s just nonsense. I’ve said before that Kevin is *brilliant* at doing the ‘local member’ thing and should I ever have the honour of being an elected member I’ll be stealing er, borrowing, I mean, I’ll be inspired by the tricks I’ve seen from his book. (and for what it’s worth, the last time I ran into him ‘on the streets’ was at the zebra crossing on Logan Rd, Stones Corner in 2004.)
“It raises the question, whoâ??s gonna serve as our local member while Kev is busy being PM from the Lodge? ”
A powerful point. Has this country ever had a Prime Minister who has also been a local member? I doubt the polls are taking *that* into account!
And let me, as the Qld Convenor of the Greens, reassure Adam Gall that we are doing everything we can to make a go of it. Ultimately, it comes down to the electors of Brisbane Central. Are they ready to give the Greens a go?
d
I’ll be voting for them! (Speaking as one of the said electors of Brisbane Central.)
It’ll be the second time I’ve cast a first preference vote for The Greens in a Queensland election – the first being for Drew Hutton in Mt Cootha in 1995.
And let me, as the Qld Convenor of the Greens, reassure Adam Gall that we are doing everything we can to make a go of it. Ultimately, it comes down to the electors of Brisbane Central.
Any idea of the lucky lass or lad?
Brisbane Times latest
The Curious Snail says both Leader and Deputy Leader of the Libs were away when the decision not to run a candidate were taken.
Flegg was on holidays in Germany and McArdle was…
The GG view
Anna says she’s worried that the ex-premier’s seat may go green… having a look at the booth vote says that might be code for worrying about her own backyard.
The biggest one, closest to her office, went 33.9% primary to Greens, all the booths surrounding where she lives returned green as the second highest scoring party (25, 26, 31%.)
Maybe the riverside highrise dwellers (who are the lib stronghold of the seat) will wake up to the fact that they are in The Environment too, what with water shortages and their lifts not working during power outages, and start thinking greenishly. Maybe the greens and libs will start talking preference deals, like is happening in melbourne inner city seats.
While statewide everyone loves their white wedding and honeymoon with Anna, locally we’ve seen behind the fashion statements. She didn’t look good handling local concerns with the hale street bridge, (and it’s feeder mega-roads, which bound and bisect the state high campus), basically telling the community to stick it, it’s a done deal, there was nothing she could do.
Certainly her office has been being fortified for months, it’s amazing how long they can drag a fairly small size building extension on for, especially when we’ve seen ad naseum how quickly the big developers that are all over this part of the electorate get stuck into it once the right wheels have been greased.
Speaking of greasy wheels, this electorate is Union Central. There’s a funny story whereby the brains trust at peel st had a go at their local pub’s management about conditions they had some staff on. Staff told them they should mind their own business, and now, ( maybe it’s been fixed) known or suspected unionists are refused service at their local gatheringspace pub. Ha ha ha, talk about hitting where it hurts.
It was scary, like a scene out of a work choices ad, when they had to walk en masse a couple of hundred yards up the road to our local watering holes for a bijou little drinklet after a hard day’s march organising.
Libs cry poor while Nats meet
I’d agree with you MsLaurie, except for the “at this stage”.
Assuming an ALP victory, the Libs will not win federally unless they have won a few state elections and learned that Howard Is Not The Only Liberal Government, a lesson that they have spent the last decade unlearning and which may take another decade to learn.
It is amazing that Qld Libs are such rubbish, until you learn they have no money and all their people are clowns. A change of government will see a few Lib staffers freed from their current responsibilities, including a few non-Queenslanders seeking a change of scene from teh South. Once upon a time, head office could afford to let the Qld Libs have their frolic against Grace2 because there were rivers of cash flowing from Collins Street and Martin Place. Now those rivers are drying up and if the Qld brach can’t even pay their printers, how do you expect them to run a dozen marginal seat campaigns?
Why, Adam? People want to sell you product all the time, doesn’t mean you have to buy it. If someone doesn’t want to sell you a product, why keen for it?
No wpd, what a bunch of plonkers the Nats are. If you’re going to disparage the city as your raison d’etre, you shouldn’t waste your time running candidates there.
You’re implying that this is some new development, Peterc. Howard has undermined every leader in the Federal Libs he’s served under. He has never helped any state Liberal leader get elected. When he was leader in the ’80s he hung around Greiner a bit, but he hardly went out of his way to help him. During election campaigns he always hangs out with the incumbent Labor Premier, to make them look statesmanlike – his office never consults with or gives advance notice to the relevant liberal leader’s office, ambushing said leader. I wish one, just one of them arced up and shirtfronted him publicly about that. It wouldn’t have changed anything, but it would just have been nice.
By default, not design. Being starved of funds and resources, and with the best people on that side of politics given the clear message that federal politics is the
mainonly game, will do that. It all becomes possible for the state Libs once Howard gets his boots off their throats.Antonio, I feel your pain as I used to be a Lib (but I’m all better now). When the tide goes out the smell of decay can be overpowering. Mind you in 1992, when Hewson was 10% ahead of Keating, I was expecting a deluge, a veritable smorgasbord of quality candidates – but none came, and it sowed the seeds of doubt.
Or, who you imagine their supporters to be, melaleuca, which mightn’t be the same thing at all. I was a Liberal in eastern Sydney for over a decade and no Packers ever came to my branch meetings. Wealthy folk don’t get that way by throwing money away.
When you’re going down the gurgler you’re always “turning the corner”. Seriously though, when Howard’s gone and the wall-to-wall Labor thing starts to bite (and some Lib staffers get Relevance deprivation Syndrome really bad), it’ll be a case of Build It And They Will Come.
She would say that Danny, wouldn’t she. As if she’d say: we’ll piss it in, and all the Labor campaign workers and voters stay home, etc. They got rid of Beattie (and for that matter, Goss) because they wanted to lose the perception of complacency and arrogance.
Danny @ 10.15pm
… thatcherite … liberalism, such as Howard perspires to…
The Prime Minister
ASpires to many things, and if Mark et al are correct, he should be PERSpiring about many other things too, right now!
cheerio
Yes, Andrew E, it may indeed be a case of they need to deal with the fact that the Libs are not be-all and end-all Howard.
I’m not generally a Lib supporter, but its frankly bad for democracy and our society if we don’t have a decent opposition. And some of the current state governments (NSW for example) need a serious kick up the bum.
Maybe if they lose the next fed election (fingers crossed in all directions) they’ll suddenly re-discover their committment to States’ rights and get their act together?
Nats are unable to come up with a candidate by time the nominations close and Greens now claim to be defacto opposition.
Update: Graham Young’s take at Ambit Gambit.
Mark:
That was an interesting take over on Ambit Gambit.
My own personal take is that the Liberals in Queensland during the ‘Sixties were reasonably stong and competent; they did attract worthy candidates back then. However, during the ‘Seventies and ‘Eighties, they became terribly arrogant and lazy. They were happy just to make the bullets and get Joh Bjelke-Petersen to fire them; no need to worry about such inconsequential matters as negotiating policy, attracting voters, cultivating high-quality future candidates or any other menial stuff. By the ‘Nineties, they were becoming senescent and increasingly irrelevant; they attracted support – and money – out of habit, sentimentality and in the absence of any workable alternative to Labor.
In the Millenium, they have become a nuisance, still a potentially dangerous and busy nuisance …. but a nuisance nonetheless. Handy for manning [mostly with dear sweet little old ladies] each urban polling place during Federal elections but not much use for anything else.
Who will replace the Liberals in Queensland? After all “Nature abhors a vacuum”.