Lots of stuff going on at the moment – there’s a great roundup at The Poll Bludger of this week’s retirements and preselections. And Antony Green’s election guide is up.
Note that this doesn’t necessarily imply that an election is imminent. It does show that all the ducks are being lined up. That’s not quite the same thing. The conditions for an election announcement are being created – for the first time since all the speculation began, but the finger might be on the trigger for a while longer.
But I’ll have more to say about the timing of the election over the next couple of days – got a bit more “picking up the phone” to do. I will join the predictions crowd on the basis of what I’ve been hearing from Labor folks so far, though. I’d say the odds are good that the election will be announced next week or the week after. But a final decision hasn’t been taken, as I understand it. If we get through the next fortnight or so without an announcement, it’s likely that the window of opportunity will be closed and we’ll be looking at an election date much closer to full term – probably in August.
Update [by Kim]: Link rich state of play in the Queensland politics stakes at Woolly Days.
To be called Monday or Tuesday next week
Does this mean that you jumped the gun a bit with your criticism of the Oz in the previous post?
No, with all due respect to the News Ltd wizards, I don’t think so! … Because they were writing the same story basically every day, and it really didn’t look like they made much attempt to confirm any of it with anyone in the Labor Party. It’s more a case of the usual schtick of hearing rumours, then linking speculation with whatever has happened most recently (ie because a Labor MP announced their retirement, therefore the election will be called soon). What I’ve been doing is keeping in touch with folks I know in the Labor hierarchy to get an idea of what’s actually being contemplated and how the political dynamic is developing/changing.
Which is all kinda ironic, I reckon, given some of the claims most commonly made in the blogger/journo debate.
Fair enough
The shorter story, LO, and I’ve been waiting to confirm it from more than a couple of sources is that the slate of MPs announcing their retirement this week had to increase a bit beyond its earlier dimensions to accommodate the interests of the left. The other thing is that Labor wanted to wait until the stimulus package was passed – that’s not unrelated to the election timing. And whether the Feds were really seriously contemplating an election later in the year. Having said that, there’s a slim chance the trigger won’t be pulled, but I think it’s unlikely. I was hearing last week about local and regional campaigns gearing up. In theory, I don’t think Anna has given the go ahead, and it’s possible that she won’t. But unlikely. If it’s not called in the next fortnight, they’ll probably go full term(ish) – in about August.
Do you think the likely upcoming recession is affecting their thinking on the timing of the election? That is, do you think they would rather go before the unemployment rate starts increasing? Or is it a non-issue?
It’s definitely an issue. As I understand it, things are still relatively ok in employment terms in Brisbane, and that’s where the seats that count are (Labor can afford to lose a few regional ones and still have a big buffer). I also think that a lot of the campaign will effectively be on federal issues – not so much cosying up to Rudd, but trying to align the local LNP with the disunity of their federal counterparts and making good use of all those grabs from Barnaby about how terrible the stimulus package is. The timing of the stimulus package is a huge influence on the timing of the election, in other words.
Short answer LO from another outsider is yes. Commodity jobs, particularly mining, will be a significant trigger. I have predicted an April poll – the 4th appeals – and that takes in a month of drying out for all those flood affected and hopefully before the angst over disputed insurance claims which will inevitably drag in the Bligh Government starts to weigh heavily in the meeja. I mean Rudd has set the course on insurance difficulties and who-do-you-call with the Victorian fires.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the election called on Monday for a date in early April as opposed to 28 March which is the most common assumption. Could the Borg handle a long campaign? On the other hand, does Labor want its record under scrutiny for longer than necessary?
“Could the Borg handle a long campaign? ”
Or more importantly, his tired, old Shadow Ministry. Haven’t the Nationals any concept of renewal?
Ted Malone 1943
Mike Horan 1944
Rosemary Menkins 1946
Vaughan Johnson 1947
Howard Hobbs 1950
I don’t know that age is the most important factor here – I wouldn’t attack pollies or anyone else for how old they are. It might be better, and indeed more relevant, to look at how long some of those folk have been in Parliament and what sort of impact they’ve had.
I mean The Borg is only just 41 and has been an MP for two decades.
I ‘guessed’ some time ago that Anna would choose to go early because of the deteriorating economic situation but the ‘early’ decision certainly exposes her to the false promises made to run full-term.
I don’t think she has a compelling trigger at this very moment and I think her position would be improved if she could develop one over the week-end.
They seem to have been there a long time anyway, Mark.
Hobbs was first elected in 1986,Horan 1991,Johnson 1989 and Malone 1994.
wpd @12 – a trigger may develop if one of the MPs – maybe Pitt or Reynolds – has to stand down early due to deteriorating health. Save the cost of a by-election, ensure the good folk of Mulgrave and/or Townsville enjoy continuing representation, etc.
More broadly, I think the rhetoric will be the opposition of the LNP to doing anything to save the economy. Ie running against Malcolm Turnbull etc. Peter Costello’s op/ed which Bligh is painting as threatening Qld jobs will help make this case.
The more obvious one is Jim Pearce. His seat is being abolished. What’s the point of holding as by-election.
All the retirement announcements have been a carbon copy of 2006, so all we need now is a resignation as with Nita Cunningham in 2006.
Yep. Spot on, Antony.
Btw, props for the work that must have gone into the election guide – this section is particularly impressive:
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/qld/2009/guide/summary.htm
I’d love to put up the candidate profiles as well. They are all in the same format as the retiring MPs page. But they have two problems. One, they just generate complaints because candidates complain about what you have written. Second, other candidates complain they aren’t profiled, which we don’t have to do as it is a news site, not a public access site, but it still generates complaints.
And non-trivial ones as well. A candidate has launched an election writ against the Lyne by-election result conjoining the ABC with the AEC because we didn’t give him equal coverage. I suspect it will be unsuccessful, but it still generates unwanted legal work.
Mark and Antony, your speculation involving Jim Pearce is completely insensitive. Jim’s medical issues are on the public record as are his reasons for returning to work.
concerned, I think you’ve misinterpreted me.
I wasn’t commenting directly on Jim Pearce’s state of health – I was agreeing with Antony that there was a parallel with 2006. I didn’t mention the nature of Reynolds’ or Pitt’s health issues either.
I used to know Jim Pearce and liked him and in any case I’m particularly sympathetic to depression sufferers having been there myself.
I’m sorry if I was misunderstood. I really don’t want to make any personal reflections.
Incidentally, it may be thought to be cynical by some for the Labor party to engineer a by-election on the grounds of a member’s ill health to manipulate election timing. The counter to that is that they’ve already announced their decision to retire, and it may be reasonable to conclude that the electorate would be better served by a member who’s intending to stick around.
Antony @ 17 – that’s a pity about the reasons for no candidate profiles.
Jim Pearce is a really good guy, and would have won his seat no matter who he stood for.
There are precedents with recent elections called based on MPs retiring due to ill health – remember Peter Beattie calling the last election because of Nita Cunninghams (Member for Bundaberg) health problems.
Yep, Stuart, I used to enjoy having a beer with Jim in the Strangers’ Bar back in my Young Labor days – that’s a while ago – but I’ve got a lot of respect for him still!
Maybe Gary Fenlon might be a better choice his soon to be public ‘problems’ may be reason enough to leave the country.
sorry – just realised Antony had cited the Nita example previously (15). Nita was also a nice person who I thought should never have left local government. She was a real legend in council before running for Parliament.
And what a terrific thing it is for another (still) sitting MP to be engaging here in the unprivelaged parliament of varied public discussion that is LP: onya Stuart.
Is there another Australian blog that has had as many actually serving members actively participating in it’s discourse? Props LP I suppose. You never know, one day it might become du jour for parliamentary cafeteria conversations to include ” Well, in this stoush on LP they’re saying (our/their) policy of (…) is (…)…”
For readers interested in some of the take-home messages of the immanently outgoing member, especially how the committee system is used and abused in Queensland government: Stuart posted on OnlineOpinion on Tuesday