The Poll Bludger has posted a very comprehensive guide to Saturday’s Brisbane City Council elections, about which I’ve previously written a couple of posts here. As usual, the quality of the information presented is superb, but I’d take exception to part of William’s analysis:
A poll conducted by Galaxy and published in the Courier-Mail the Sunday before last showed Campbell Newman set for a landslide re-election with a primary vote of 59 per cent to Rowell’s 30 per cent, translating into 63-37 on two-party preferred. However, a separate question on ward voting intention had the gap at a mere 52-48. I personally find a disparity of this size very hard to believe, and point to the fact that polls of Senate voting intention greatly exaggerate the level of split voting. I suspect the poll has picked up a real sentiment that Labor does not need to be given yet more power along with general satisfaction with Newman, and that this will translate into a strong Liberal performance on the wards as well as the mayoralty.
I’m not surprised by the disparity at all. Brisbane effectively has a natural Labor majority, and Campbell’s election was an artefact in 2004 of Labor’s time in office and a very weak Labor candidate – the lacklustre Tim Quinn who followed the very popular long term mayor Jim Soorley. Campbell didn’t win big, but has had four years’ worth of incumbency, with the added advantage of divided control lessening his accountability – anything people like he can blame (fairly or unfairly) on the Labor majority in Council. He’s also not running a Liberal campaign, downplaying his party affiliation constantly and branding his team as “Can-Do Councillors (and Candidates)”. I think Brisneylanders quite like having some checks and balances through a Mayor and Council of different stripe, and though I think he’ll lift the Liberal boat in the wards a smidgeon, the best bet is still a Labor majority, though it will be tight. The Greens’ chances in Toowong, The Gabba, and Central (in that order) are also a factor.
Just went to have a look on the Courier-Mail’s website to see if I could find anything about the elections, but there was zilch from what I could see.
“…followed the very popular long term mayor Jim Soorley.”
Soorley wasn’t that popular in the last days of his reign. Indeed, he surely retired partly because he saw the writing on the wall (unlike other pollies who choose to ignore it).
“…anything people like he can blame (fairly or unfairly) on the Labor majority in Council.”
Surely, that’s got to help the Liberal (or “Can-do”) vote in the wards.
Incidentally, the top story at the C-M is about a drink driving mum from Geebung.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/03/05/queensland-media-missing-in-action/
Like I said, Darlene, the coverage in the mainstream media has been even lamer than the campaign!
Fair point about Soorley – he was popular for a long time though, I guess I meant.
Not necessarily, because it cuts both ways. They blame him for anything people don’t like. The waters get so muddy that people ignore the noise and vote for who they were inclined to anyway.
Thanks.
So what do you make of the Labor candidate? The Liberals ran with some shockers before they found Campbell.
Nevertheless, Quinn was a decent bloke, and I think he suffered as much from Brisbies wanting an end to the Soorley era (and Quinn was of course associated with that).
It could be the case that Brisbanites get tired of the whole Lib/Lab split in Council in the coming years, and they’ll no doubt tire of Campbell as well. Time will tell.
On an individual level, my mum rang up to get a sign put in her yard of the local ALP candidate, and nobody even got back to her. A sign of nothing perhaps, or a sign they’re not even bothering
He seems likeable enough, but not all that prepossessing.
There’s a lot of stories around the traps about the Labor campaign being somewhat sloppy and haphazard. That could partly be election fatigue, and partly because Milton Dick is running himself instead of running the campaign. But with the campaign for the Lord Mayoralty, they’ve effectively conceded defeat. Rowell’s just there flying the flag to maintain the Labor ward vote and take some of the gloss off Can-Do.
Never having set foot in Brisbane in my life, I defer to your superior local knowledge. Still, if the disparity between the ward and mayoralty vote is as high as 11 per cent, I shall be more than a little surprised.
I think it may come down a bit – but possibly through an erosion of Campbell’s primary. Or possibly through a lift in the Libs’ ward vote. But I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a difference somewhere between 6 and 10%.
Anyone got any news as to preference deals in say, wooloongabba, central, and morningside?
The ALP aren’t going to get wiped out this election but there’s going to be a big swing against them. Kevin Rudd’s flying high but Anna Bligh is still suffering from inheriting the mess Beattie left the state ALP. The Liberals are going to pick up a number of outer suburban wards off the ALP and it’s going to be a three-way race in Toowong, Central and The Gabba.
The best result the ALP can hope for is that their loss of majority is countered in part by electing a Green or two to hold the balance of power. If the Liberals pick up a majority in the Council, Campbell will claim a mandate to send the city bankrupt to build TransApex. Rates will rise much higher than CPI to help come up with the extra cash needed and departments other than transport will see their funding cut right back (like the Air Quality team has already) so that Newman can say he’s working hard to deliver his platform.
I bloody well hope the ALP can get their act together by 2012 or else we’re all doomed to live in a bankrupt, unlivable city.
“The best result..( WE ALL ) can hope for is … electing a Green or two to hold the balance of power”.
Whcih brings me back to that question about preferences in those seats with greens in a position to win and/or influence result.
I think the ALP has seriously botched the campaign, and if they lose a few wards, it won’t be undeserved.
Rowell has real reasons to be aggrieved by the way he’s been served by the campaign machine – for mine he’s been hung out to dry because no one more experienced or ambitious wanted to be seen to lose (and lose badly) to a rampaging Newman.
He hasn’t been given many good things to say, and a lot of Labor’s advertising has simply been negative on Newman. If you didn’t know better, you’d say that they stuck Rowell out front (he’ll do) in service of a two-term strategy that’s focussed on implanting some lines about Newman’s spending that they can pick up on next time if (when) the tunnels schemes blow out further in cost.
But it’s another case of too-clever-by-half Macchiavellianism on the part of the Peel Street brains trust – people aren’t stupid, and they may choose not to reward Labor for a half-hearted Mayoral campaign. It smacks of complacency about outcomes and way too much concern with personal and factional ALP positioning. That’s what sunk them in 2004.
Relatedly, the way this has been covered in the C-M is a disgrace. I say this as someone who thinks that the paper has gotten a lot better in recent years.
The whole political class – including journalists, operators, pundits and career politicians – show all the signs of just not taking local politics seriously any more. Is it not glamorous enough? Is it too hard? It’s a crying shame, and you were right to point this out in earlier posts, Mark.
Agree wholeheartedly, Jason.
Danny, the Greens are only allocating preferences in two wards – to the Libs in Morningside and to Labor in Holland Park. “Just vote one” everywhere else.
Mark: and in return, Libs/ Labor are allocating prefs in ???? to greens?
If the answer is in wards where Greens can get #2, could be interesting.
They may be greens, but they weren’t all born yesterday, surely!?
I don’t know, helloworld, but I suspect the answer in most if not all wards would be “just vote one” all round. The fact that the Greens aren’t allocating preferences in Toowong (where they have their best chance) suggests they aren’t getting preferences there either.
I don’t think you have really made a case regarding the disparity between mayor/wards. As pointed out on pollbludger there was very little diparity last time.
It is difficult to imagine any real disparity appearing this time. I think Labor will be slaughtered in the wards, on the back of the feeble mayoral campaign.
I think if anything this election exposes the weakness within peel street. Milton Dick and others were passengers more than drivers of the recent federal and state campaigns in Qld. I don’t think Beattie/Rudd would allow Milton Dick to play any real planning role let alone a strategic role in their respective campaigns.
You have to feel sorry for Greg Rowel, I would love to know the lies he was told by peel street to convince him to run!
Because Campbell wasn’t the incumbent, and Quinn was a weak incumbent.
Labor may or may not be slaughtered in the wards. But the parties’ private polling a couple of weeks ago had the same sort of disparity as the Galaxy poll. It’s possible that Labor may pay a price for a lacklustre campaign (and I suspect you’re right about Peel Street), but that doesn’t mean that the disparity wasn’t there in public opinion before people focussed their minds on how they’re going to vote.
Anyway, it is good to finally read something about the local government election!
I live outside of Brisbane, and the media won’t or don’t cover local government, other than identifying the candidates, here despite taking a fortune in advertising.
A free for all at High Noon on Friday. HEEHAA
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/candidates-to-slug-it-out-on-election-eve/2008/03/11/1205125906708.html
The Greens announce free transport for children.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/greens-promise-free-public-transport-for-kids/2008/03/11/1205125904148.html
Michael, as Jason noted above, the Brisbane media haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory in terms of the amount of coverage.
Living in the area, I really wonder why the Greens are preferencing ALP in Holland Park but Lib in Morningside. Intriguing…
Mark, I do think that the ALP will lose its council majority. Despite the appalling cheesiness of the Can-Do ads, Newman has been quite an effective campaigner. The quality of a number of his Can-Do candidates is terrible though – particularly in marginal wards. The institutional weakness of the Queensland Libs in attracting decent talent can only be papered over by a Presidential style campaign for so long.
I agree that Greg Rowell has been totally hung out to dry. Like him or loathe him, Newman had clearly identifiable policies in the last election – tunnels, tunnels, tunnels. The otherwise formidable Queensland ALP machine seems to have fallen asleep at the wheel here. I think Rowell is actually quite personable and charismatic, but he hasn’t been given the oxygen to enunciate a single clearly identifiable policy.
Equally, I haven’t seen any significant improvement in the Greens campaign in the Gabba since the last time I wrote. Helen Abrahams should be home. With a vote 1 campaign, two Left candidates and a Liberal in the race – the race is pretty much first past the post. Even if the Greens come second, why would a statistically significant number of Liberal voters preference them without any clear indication to do so on a HTV card? Toowong will be harder for the Liberals to retain, but Yvonne Li has run an invisible campaign. I work in the area and our letterbox has been bucketed by Matic material and appearances on Corro Drive and at the train station. Still yet to see Li or the Green candidate.
Ok, just putting it out there but here are my picks:
LIB
Tennyson: Could be very close. Interesting Stephen Gay is running for the ALP. He was responsible for the infamous defection of a bunch of AWU peeps over to the Queensland Left of the ALP back in 98. Not sure how much ALP HQ love there is for him. Will be a very close contest but I’m picking Nicole (the Lib) here.
Parkinson: The Libs AOT will win this one. She has run for Acacia Ridge in every election for the last 12 years, progressively halving the margin. She is a strong campaigner so I expect her to pick this up.
Karawatha: Very close. Despite the great hair and the admirable local profile Gail McP is in real trouble. My understanding is that many AWU types who live in the area are boycotting her campaign. Olive is running an ok campaign as well.
Wishart: Very VERY close but I think the Libs will squeak home here. THe ALP have a great candidate but the Libs candidate is formidable as well with strong funding behind her. One to watch.
McDowall (Approx. Liberal 8.5%): Safe as houses
Macgregor (New ward: Approx. Liberal 9.0%): Safe as houses. Paul Norton can tell you many stories about Jacques Develder from his time on the Griffith Uni student council.
Marchant: With Hayes’ retirement and a more vigorous Lib campaign I think this seat will fall to the Libs.
Toowong (Liberal 12.7% on old boundaries): Will be closer due to the reasonable but I think matic will be comfortable.
Hamilton: Safe as houses.
The Gap: Safe as houses.
Chandler: Safe as houses.
Walter Taylor: Safe as houses.
Bracken Ridge: Safe as houses.
Pullenvale: The Wit machine will ensure this ward remains a Liberal ghetto.
ALP
Holland Park: My home ward. Birmingham should retain this. The Lib candidate has run a lazy campaign. Coreflutes by the side of the road in the mornings don’t win a campaign.
Morningside: Sutton should sneak home with a reduced margin. Interesting that the prefs are going against her.
Doboy: Fairly safe ward for Labor. Uninspiring Lib candidate.
Wynnum-Manly: Will be close but I expect the Vastinator to lose. Many libs resent his presence out in the far East and he is very poor at one on one campaigning.
Northgate: Despite the scandals, Parer (son of party prez), won’t pick this up even though he has tried previously. He really isn’t a great candidate and lacks the work ethic and toughness of Flesser.
Moorooka: Marie Jackson works hard but the Lib party organisation here is really lacklustre.
Jamboree: Great enthusiastic Liberal candidate but I fear the margin may just be too great.
The Gabba (New ward): THe only interesting thing about this ward will be watching who comes third.
Enoggera: Safe as houses
Deagon: Safe as houses
Central: Safe as houses, again watch for who comes third.
Richlands: I would be VERY surprised if the ALP lose this ward despite the scuttlebutt that a swing is on.
Overall predicted Lib majority in council 14-12.
Ok now watch me get it totally wrong on Saturday night!
Mind you, the last three times the Mayoralty changed at the ballot box have all been more-or-less upset victories, so maybe it’s a sneakily subtle campaign
There will be a big swing in Richlands!
Hard to imagine the good people of Inala coping some churchie old boy toff, just because he has ALP next to his name.
Well, I suppose I can live with the Libs seizing control of the BCC – provided they don’t get all uppity and start thinking they’re ready to run a state, or a nation!
Marchant, Enoggera, Parkinson, Karawatha to go to the libs.
Alderlian, why Enoggera? As much as I am a fan of Andrew Wines, he hasn’t really had the time to mount a big campaign to overhaul the almost 10% margin.
Enoggera won’t fall to the Libs. To big a margin and a campaign with some hiccups.
Anyone who suggests the Lib candidate down there won’t come close to winning (within 1000 vctes) doesn’t understand the dynamics of the Ward and the current landscape within the community.
Nguyen (a top performer) needs about 14% to win and is in a Ward where 19% are Vietnamese (who traditionally vote ALP, but are more nationalistic). That is roughly 4500 people. Add to that, the swing against Dick for dumping Les.
I think you have a contest on your hands. Even if he doesn’t win. He will come very VERY close.
Richlands will swing. And it will swing heavily. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn’t understand the dynamics of the situation down in Richlands at the moment.
The question will remain whether it’ll be enough or not. I, for hope, hope it will be.
-Dave
Lookout, I know Andrew Nguyen. I respect him as a young person who is motivated by moderate Liberal politics.
That said, he is no hope against Milton Dick. Andrew has never run in a political campaign before and has no practical experience as against an experienced veteran like Milton Dick. The fact that he is Vietnamese ergo he will get heaps of Vietnamese votes is really a bit rude to Vietnamese people. Most Vietnamese people I know are pretty cynical when it comes to someone using Vietnamese ancestry to get their vote. Many Vietnamese people remain ALP voters thanks to Bob Hawke’s generous refugee and settlement plans in the early 1980s. Both Milton Dick and Andrew Nguyen are well-educated & middle class, so each will have an equal disadvantage in terms of personal identification with working class voters in that ward. However, the very fact that Milton Dick is running for the ALP will give him an automatic ALP-brand buffer of around 40-45% in that ward.
As much as I would like Andrew to win, this really is balone.
Antonio, basically because of the retirement of Bennison and the lame duck Labor candidate they threw in, who isn’t even a local. It is going to be very close.
Same situation in Richlands. Just because Milton can sit behind a desk and do a good job winning elections doesn’t necessary translate to good grassroots campaigning…
Dig Antony Green’s guide to the BCC election.
Should probably have linked here.
Very spiffy work there from Antony!
Brisbane Times has listed seats to watch
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/the-battle-for-brisbane/2008/03/14/1205126155100.html
Three are the seats the Greens are targetting and the other 2 are Enoggera and Richlands.
Antonio wrote:
“Macgregor (New ward: Approx. Liberal 9.0%): Safe as houses. Paul Norton can tell you many stories about Jacques Develder from his time on the Griffith Uni student council.”
Just like we could tell many stories about you Antonio out at Griffith and at UQ lol
Seems that Antonio is a bit out of touch overall with his ‘Liberal’ insights and they way things work- a few glaring errors in what you write Antonio
Feel free to point out any errors in what I wrote David S!
Good prediction, Antonio!
I’m glad I didn’t take the bet on the biggest swing in the Brisbane wards to the Libs being the one against Milton Dick!
Props to all the people here who were tipping it.
Antonio wrote:
“Feel free to point out any errors in what I wrote David S!”
For someone who claims to have such inside knowledge of the Liberal Party and its inner workings as the result showed you were a fair way off my friend, something that could only have been pointed out after the election which I’m sure you could appreciate seeing as you ‘recieve’ such “Top Secret” and sensitive information from various powerbrokers lmao.
Reality is that if you recieved the information you claim to do your predictions and insights would have been very different- there was only two real surprises in the council elections and aside from that the rest was well known to appropriate people (on both sides of the game)well before the day.
David S, I don’t think I have ever claimed to be a Liberal party insider, have I? Former party member – yes, insider – no!
First you claimed I had made “glaring errors”, now you claim I had nothing valuable to say and the result was an entirely predictable foregone conclusion. Obviously you have some personal problem with me that really has nothing to do with discussing council election results – ie. the topic of this thread!
David S, I think it’s actually you that’s hinting at insider aspirations. Regardless of which, I hope you put down some money on the result based on your expert sources!
Hi Antonio,
Glaring errors- I would have hoped you would have picked up yourself- example- Kevin Parer is not the Libs Prez’s son at all- investigate this!
I claim that what you have to say is based on an aura of ‘insider’ knowledge, you are trying to make yourself out as some Liberal Party powerbroker or something- look at your posts in #22. An example- “but the Libs candidate is formidable as well with strong funding behind her.” How would you know this? Does this not give the impression that you have insider knowledge as funding for candidates is kept to the campaign team and within that usually only Senior positions and not widely spread around- politics 101 young Padawan- no campaign goes around telling anyone how much is actually being spent.
Do I have insider knowledge- it would seem my sources are better than yours lmao but no insider knowledge that I would gamble money on, I am smart enough to know you don’t gamble on elections and as I said there were some upsets nobody picked but- the swing was on mate, everyone knew in the last week that wards were going to go with CanDo- was even in the papers and online news stories
Do I know you? The answer is only by reputation so to have a personal problem with you would require me to meet you- something I am not interested in doing sorry!
I think claiming that you know the resources of various campaigns and how a vast majority of candidates are conducting their campaigning reeks of a claim about ‘insider’ knowledge and is misleading to the poor people reading this thread about elections so a correction as to what you know is very relevant to this is it not?
Apologies David S, K.Par is actually the nephew of W.Par. Thanks for pointing out my error! Apart from that, any other errors?
Krista Adams campaign was well-funded by certain non-Santo business people on the Southside, is there any disagreement here?
And I disagree with you, people that want to make fairly serious predictions about the result of elections should put their money where their mouth is! It adds to credibility and your wallet – if you are right that is!
Antonio,
As I said I have no idea of funding for Krista Adams, especially who is funding her etc. I would be horrified if I was as you claim them to be “a local Southside Business” and someone such as yourself who claims not to be in the party and hence should not know who has donated what to ANY campaign period! has such knowledge- that would be very disturbing indeed. So in short I cannot agree or disagree with you on who funded her campaign as I was not a part of it in anyway that would allow me to know these things and if you are NOT a member as you claim then neither should you!
As for gambling- lets put that down to ideological differences- I see it as a conflict of interest- an ethical viewpoint so to speak
Other mistakes- there are some more- lets see if you can spot them- I know you can- certain statements you made seem to be a ’slip of the keyboard’ so to speak
However, overall the elections were a great success for Campbell Newman and his “Cando team”. Some of the races are very close and it looks like while Hinchcliffe will hold on that Andrew Wines will pull off an amazing win in a very tight race. I also did not realise he was only 25! WOW- what a great result (if he wins) for young people as a whole and them having a true youthful voice in this great Democracy of ours- (also looking at a few sites and Matthew Bourke seems to be in the 25-30 age group as well!)
Yes, I’m over the moon with excitement about the brilliant insights a Young Liberal will no doubt bring to Council.
You lads might consider getting a room. I think this interchange between you is a tad personal. We don’t encourage that!
Andrew Wines is actually 23. If he holds on he will be the youngest councillor in BCC history. Imagine if you were Dart, your factional power forced your pre-selection ahead of the local branch’s choice, only to be beaten by someone so young and with 1/10 of the money!
I guess it will be back to the drawing board for Dart now, seems he missed the target lol
But possibly the key with what now seems to be Councillor Wines is that I am told that he is a local- grew up around there and went to school around there so it is ironic that you write that Dart went over the local branches choice!
I was talking about within the Labor party. There was a pre-selection dispute with between two Labor candidates vying to run. The local Labor guy actually won pre-selection convincingly but then it was altered centrally to get Dart over the line (by giving more weight to certain votes). He is subsequently referred to within the party as the blow-in from Bardon.
Yeah but smell the irony there and the poetic justice- local Enoggera ‘Liberal’ Boy beats fancied blowin from the ALP
One cannot help but think how the other locally selected candidate would have gone.
Yes some sweet justice I would say. No doubt Fraser’s faction has a bit of egg on their face at this moment!
I was reading some of the entries on this site and came across Antonio. What a joke. Just about every prediction (be it result or how close) wrong!! Yet he wrote like an expert political commentator.
After investigating (and having meet the little bug on a couple of occassions), I found out this guy is not respected, feared or listened to by anyone in politics – essential if you are to be a commentator in politics.
He left politics because of lack of credability. You only have to look at his comments to see this.
For example, some of his predictions:
“Jamboree – won’t fall margin too great” oops
“Ennogera – Safe as houses (for Labor)” oops
“Central – Safe as houses (for Labor)” came down to 100 votes – oops again
“Wynnum Manly – very close” yeah, if you call 3500 vote margin out of 20,000 votes close
“Wishart – very close” the margin was 25%
“Tennyson – very close” the margin was close to 30%
The comment he made on Parer was also of interest. Having met Parer during our uni days, his work ethic was very sound, and is quite a bright and approachable bloke. I started following his ward when he appeared in the paper regardng his signs. I then found out Flessers work ethic is actually hopeless (not Parers – I actually met up with Parer to offer a hand during the campaign, believe me, he wasn’t bludging), and Parer has also managed to claw back the margin from 33% to 3%. Hmmm, so why did Anonio attack Parer?? Apparently something to do with Uni days.
If I were you Anonio, I’d give up politics. When you don’t have it, don’t pretend to have it!
We don’t provide a forum for gratuitous swipes at other commenters. Please take note.
“We don’t provide a forum for gratuitous swipes at other commenters. Please take note.”
I agree under normal instances however Antonio takes very nasty and personal swipes at a number of people so in a way it is poetic justice of sorts.
Also you have to remember that this Antonio guy is using this forum to take ‘gratuitous swipes’ at people who have routed him time and time again within various organisations whether it be at Uni or where the real big boys play and I would take them as defamatory.