State political journalists in New South Wales are doing it tough just at the moment. Generating vaguely interesting material from a government that most people have written off and an Opposition that assumes (correctly) that it will dawdle into government in March 2011 must be pretty challenging. Even the disturbing developments surrounding Premier Keneally’s proroguing of parliament seem like a footnote to a book that was published and swiftly remaindered a year or two back. Most ordinary folks one talks to apropos of nothing are weary of politics, but when it comes to politics in New South Wales, they are livid. The trail of disappointments, petty infighting, incredulous scandals and broken promises has not just served to damage the Labor brand, but smashed the democracy brand altogether. The credibility of democracy in New South Wales is pretty much sub-zero; democracy as a celebration of mediocrity.
The most recent [PDF] bi-monthly Newspoll from early December painted a frankly disastrous picture for Premier Keneally and NSW Labor; Labor is sitting on just 39% of the two-party preferred vote – and a primary vote of just 24%. The pain that Labor feels is undoubtedly going to be sharpened by the optional preferential voting system that we have in New South Wales, whereby electors are able to exhaust their preferences in the lower house if they wish. One gets the feeling that there are going to be quite a few voters out there who cast a vote for a independent or minor party and neglect to preference either Labor or Barry O’Farrell’s evidently vision-free Opposition. Given the general ill-feeling out there in the electorate, it is difficult not to see this mentality strengthening O’Farrell’s hand and his grip on a massive parliamentary majority.
Interestingly enough, it is not just New South Wales where it seems that the conservatives have a whip hand in state politics. Anna Bligh’s team is struggling in Queensland. Ted Baillieu has of course recently lead the Coalition into power in Victoria, slightly surprisingly. A recent Newspoll [PDF] in Western Australia has Eric Ripper’s Opposition on the ropes, with Labor commanding just 29% of the primary vote and 42% on two-party preferred. Western Australia is arguably a unique case; although we always like to assume that people treat state and federal politics separately, it is difficult not to view politics in the West through the prism of the great mining tax kerfuffle that Federal Labor have yet to find a wholly decisive resolution to. I don’t think there is much doubt that some of the unseemly scuffles that Rudd and Gillard have been trying to fight through during the last couple of years have oozed into the consciousness of people weighing up their vote at a state level.
In New South Wales, of course, we will have a resolution first. In my view, the best argument for a vote or preference for Labor is that democracy in the state stands to be damaged further if the O’Farrell Opposition are gifted a monstrous majority by political circumstances. I’m not sure its in the interest of people in any state for a government to be crushingly controlled by any one party or coalition. The mandate that Barry O’Farrell will have, presuming his team takes power in March 2011, will be a mandate borne out of the chaos of the previous government, and hardly an ounce of his Coalition’s political ingenuity or vision. This hardly augurs well.
The dreadful truth is that the potential oppositions are so bad that changing government is unlikely to achieve any sort of improvement in governance. Just an exchange of one set of nitwits for another.
I suppose the positive side is that there are opportunities for independents and minor parties. Frankly, any minor party with some coherent and sensible policies is going to do well in this country over the next few electoral cycles.
What I would like to see is an examination of Labor’s successes and failures across key policy areas but instead we get meta analysis about what people think about what people think about Labor.
I could not agree more. I have not seen any evidence that the opposition would do any better. I feel that they could be worse. I am concerned that over the last thirty years, the Federal Government has slowly eroded the rights of the State unless there is a major examination of the power between the Federal and State governments, the States will become more ungovernable regardless of what party is in power. The way I see it, the Federal government has gained control of the purse strings while the States are responsible for delivering services. They are at the mercy of whatever Federal government is in power. This diminution of power has been going on since the States handed over their taxation power to the Commonwealth during WW2. If the States are to remain responsible for these services, they should be given the power back to be responsible for the raising of money. The Federal Government should not be involved in any way. I believe the Founding Fathers had it right. It is stupid for the Federal Government duplicate services the States are the responsibility of the States. No service can continue to have two masters. The result of this is waste and nothing worthwhile being done. It is the voter’s job to past judgement on the State Governments, not the Commonwealth Government. Mr. Whitlam did begin to Look at the Constitution, but very little has been done since, except for the Federal Government taking over by stealth.
I disagree Guy. I’d be happy for the ALP to have every one of its members of parliament ejected. That way, in practice, at least some Greens would be elected. That would be progress.
I just don’t see a difference betwen a majority of 25 and one of 75, except that in the latter case, the heaviest losses would be borne by those most responsible for the current malaise.
Apparently, donations to the ALP from business have crashed (by 2/3 since last year to $1.5million), which personally I think is a huge step backwards. ;-}
Apoparently, though, donations to the Libs from the reource induistry and clubs/hotels is up to %5million.
There’s a comforting thought.
Isn’t democracy grand?
Labor in WA has been pretty directionless since losing the last election ( a self inflicted wound that was) Labor haven’t been able to present themselves as being anywhere near an alternative government. Partly this is due to the changing nature of State governments – people are looking for competent administrators who can provide good service delivery, not the big policy ideas.
Labor was laughable in its response to changing trading hours. On the one had it realised that there was no sensible argument opposing what the Liberals were proposing, on the other they had to answer to Joe Bullock and his SDAEA union. In the end they just looked silly.
Federal Labor is on the nose here, yes, and it appears to have almost given up on WA. Labor failed to mount a case in WA for the RSPT – a case there to be made. After all even Premier Barnett and the Minerals Council conceded that the royalties regime was out of date and ineffective.
NSW is an example of how winning that one extra term can be worse than losing. It prolonged a government that should have lost, and it is now paying that price.
Think I prefer the NSW published polls to your “feelings”. They don’t support your ‘pox on both major parties’ theory. There WILL be more Independents (and maybe even a lower house Green elected) but, as in the Libs win in ’88, they’ll be from safe ALP seats the conservatives never had a hope in he’ll of winning. Bring on the change!
I’ll go Greens one and ALP two in NSW because I know what sort of fucked up class politics the Liberals represent. Numerous citizens of NSW are about to find out what it feels like to bent over the bonnet. Not suggesting that the ALP isn’t just an historical anomoly and as well deeply infiltrated by criminals of all sorts, but there you are, always preferable to the sheer nastiness of the Libs.
While Howard was in power there was a tendency to vote Labor at state level to provide balance. With Labor in power federally this tendency is reversed. Having said, that each state needs to be considered on an individual basis.
Brumby suffered from the perception that a vote for Brumby was a vote for a hung parliament. Might have got away with it if the Greens leader had had credibility but…
At a general level Labor seems to have collectively taken a small target approach. However, the Labor vote started plummeting when the ETS was dropped without an alternative and Labor moved its immigration policy towards the Abbott position.
Labor badly needs some differentiation from the conservatives. The smart thing that Abbott did was convince coalition supporters that he actually stood for the things that they wanted – result was a band of enthusiastic supporters. By contrast Gillard, Bligh and Keneally seem to be doing their best to piss off Labor supporters in their rush to win over a few hard core conservatives.
This articleCanberra can do better catches much of what is wrong with Labor (and the coalition) at the moment.
I think Labor has allowed Howard to control their thinking for far too long. We have had this obsession with balanced budgets, minimizing taxes, small government, “privatization is the answer” etc. for far too long.
The link through to Malcolm Turnbull on the Assagne case is worth following. Keep in mind that Turnbull was the defense lawyer in the famous spycatcher case.
It’s hard to notice any obsession with minimising taxes. Certainly not a real one as opposed to rhetoric. Revenue per capita, in real inflation adjusted terms, is through the roof compared to when Keating was in office. Canberra is a great big money suck hole.
Marks, think you’re right. There are plenty of opportunities for minor parties and independents to make ground over the coming decade.
Fran, the problem you would have there is that if all ALP members lost their seats, it would certainly be the case that the Coalition picked up most of them. Once you get outside the inner-city, I’m not sure that the Greens have the support they would need to pick up enough seats to be an effective Opposition.
Brad, its not just a case of “feelings” – its there to be seen in the polling as well. If you look at the Newspoll polling (e.g. particularly preferred premier, opposition leader effectiveness) for the NSW Coalition since 2007, it doesn’t paint a particularly rosy picture about their effectiveness in offering up an alternative government. Uncommitted respondents in the “effectiveness as Opposition Leader” polls have consistently been up around the 30% mark. Keneally is still just about beating O’Farrell in the preferred Premier polling, despite all that has happened. That’s an incredible and very telling result. The Coalition have been doing a bit better in recent months, but that’s mostly been a reaction to the recent rash of ALP sitting members resigning, and the general sense of impending doom for the government.
Are you looking forward to the NSW election more because you want to get rid of the current mob, or becuase you are excited about what the Coalition is going to bring to the table? I’d be very surprised if it was the latter.
Nick – think you’re right about the last NSW election – but that also had quite a bit to do with Peter Debnam’s failed leadership in Opposition.
If nothing else the sheer number of God botherers in the Coalition ranks should give voters pause when considering whether to hand them a thumping majority.
Whilst O’Farrell seems like a reasonable, socially moderate Liberal I dont trust him to be able to keep the likes of David Clarke and “the Uglies” in line once they have government.
Heres hoping for a Greens BOP in the upper house!
O’Farrell won’t be able to keep Clarke and the Uglies under control once he’s won the March election. NSW will be a terrible place to live for quite some years as a result. Further proof that what we have is not democracy but a rolling elective dictatorship.
Christian – I’ve been quite surprised by the number of God bothers within the federal ALP ranks with Rudd being amongst the more extreme. Also Keneally is quite devout. O’Farrell seems quite indifferent to God by comparison. Not that strong religious views and good leadership can’t coexist but it does surprise me.
Guy said:
That’s certainly plausible, but even then the advantage would be that at least none of the uglies were representing the ALP, so it would be a serious blow to RWDB influence. Would one rather be out of office with a bunch of RWDBs weighing you down, or out of office without them?