Undoubtedly, Queensland will be a key battle ground in this federal election. Shortly, Iâ??ll be writing on the shape of the Sunshine State contest and key seats (some of them unexpected) to watch. But since the commonwealth election was called on the day after the state by-election for Brisbane Central was held to replace Peter Beattie in Parliament, itâ??s worth dwelling for a moment on its implications.
The failure of the Liberals to field a candidate (and the failure also of the Nationalsâ?? scramble to fill the void) obviously limits the degree to which federal implications can be drawn from Labor candidate Grace Graceâ??s convincing win on Saturday.
But convincing it was. Labor won its first by election victory since 2000, and under the new leadership of Anna Bligh, the ALP held the line on primaries.
The Greens exceeded the benchmark set for them on Friday by their state campaign coordinator, Ian Gittus, of 30%, polling 33.1% on primaries.
Whatâ??s interesting in the results, though, is what can be inferred about where the Liberal vote went. Family First candidate Mark A. Whiteâ??s 7.82% is well in excess of what would be expected in an inner city electorate which is certainly not home to large numbers of evangelical Christians or social conservatives. Brisbane Central wasnâ??t one of the seats contested by FF in the last state election, so no direct comparison is possible, but itâ??s probably that they picked up some of the hard core Coalition support this time around.
The Greens polled particularly well in two booths at the northern end of the electorate â?? Windsor and Wilston â?? which have traditionally been good booths for the Liberals. Since Laborâ??s vote basically held up, the 14.9% swing to the Greens must include many voters who would otherwise have been inclined to vote Liberal. As I reported in Crikey last week, Greens candidate Anne Boccabella made much of her small business background compared to Grace Graceâ??s work history as a union official and pitched directly to Liberal voters.
But what sort of Liberal voters are found in an inner city, generally progressive electorate? Theyâ??re likely to be younger and better educated than Coalition voters in mortgage belt seats. Many of these same voters have supported the Coalition in federal elections, and Labor strategists have been concerned for some time that they could desert the party at state level given the right candidate and a Liberal Party which effectively distinguished itself from the Queensland Nats.
Itâ??s interesting to ponder whether the willingness of many of these electors to vote for the Greens in this by-election reinforces the other evidence around that the Rudd wets in putatively safe Liberal strongholds have now turned against the Coalition in significant numbers.
The other message for the federal campaign? As Graham Young observes at Ambit Gambit, Anna Blighâ??s honeymoon has well and truly removed the negative pull of the tired Beattie government which may have favoured the conservatives in Queensland. â??New leadershipâ?? and â??fresh thinkingâ?? obviously went down well in Brisbane Central.
Alternatively, a large bloc of left-leaning Labor voters might have voted Green (knowing that Bligh would still be premier the day after, regardless) while the same number of Liberals, voted Labor (in the absence of one of their own to vote for, and to keep the Greens out).
Spiros, that’s entirely possible as well. Tactical voting brought about by the absence of the Libs simply to lock the Greens out.
I don’t think there are any federal implications for this poll; none at all. If you look at the dynamics of the seat and the dynamics of the state (and nation), you can’t infer anything other than this:
In the absence of the Liberals, Labor win.
I’m not so sure about that scenario, Spiros, as Bligh is to Beattie’s left and as I’ve commented previously, a lot of the oomph went out of the state issues/grudges/beefs when Beattie departed the scene.
Sam, I disagree for the reasons articulated in the post.
I think the only major Federal implication of the BC by election isn that if Arch Bevis isn’t challenged by a liberal, he will win
Sheesh! Think laterally!
I think that there could be implications in last weekend’s result for the BCC elections in March. What if there was a concerted campaign by Labor and Greens against sitting Libs at the local level? Rates increasing and a narrow focus on building tunnels might not be good news for sitting Liberal councillors.
Steve, I think that’d be more an uphill solo battle for the Greens as the ALP (especially their mayoral candidate) are “right behind” Newman’s tunnel plans.
Sam, Gridlock Campbell promised to keep rates at below the level of inflation and hasn’t been able to achiever this modest target. He has not lessened inner city gridlock as promised. People have been waiting for buses too full to stop to pick them up for most of the time he has been there. If local government is about rats, rates and rubbish then surely there is fodder to make life difficult for the Liberal councilors there.
I’d be tempted to run a campaign to keep Gridlock and replace his foot soldiers. I’m sure that working in the council with Greens and Labor councilors would be his worst nightmare.
Hard to read anything into this, even if the Libs had fielded a candidate. The State Libs have been such a sorry mob for decades, yet 10-20% of the electorate have been able to switch from voting Lab or Nat at State level to Lib at federal level, without apparently schizoidal effects.
And on the actual results, turnout was well down – if you were a true Tory, why would you have bothered to turnout? At best Grace/Bligh can say that govts usually suffer a swing against them. A good argument for a ‘none of the above’ option.
I was at Merthyr Uniting booth and though I decline to say what party I was there for, I agree that generalisations can’t really be made Federally here, particularly given the Coalition absence.
I too was surprised at the Family First vote. I used to spend a great deal of time in New Farm/Fortitude Valley in my youth and had friends who lived there and it is not abundant with either young families or happy clappers. I also spoke with the one and only guy on the booth who seemed a decent kind of guy and we spoke mostly about progressive policies, plight of the indigenous, refugees and environmental issues, which also surprised me.
Maybe the party is branching out a bit? Anyway, I note that the booth had the Greens second strongest at 37% but Family First got 9.34% which is really weird, since it was also their second strongest. I did find out that only 64% turned out to vote so maybe a chunk of coalition there. Greens certainly got some as well.
Interestingly, the 67% voter participation hasn’t been reported. Personally I find this very disappointing.
The fact that 1 in 3 people didn’t even bother to vote was something that I certainly wasn’t expecting.
For Labour to claim that Grace received such a high vote is very deceptive and for the media not to report the truth very un-democratic.
Now as I run for the Federal seat of Brisbane, the real crunch test comes.
Is family first the 21st century party that voters are really looking for?
For those who investigate the positive policies that we are offering, should find a plesant surprise.
Family First, the Caring, Compassionate and Commonsense Party supporting families and small business, which is, of course, the foundation of our society.
Mark A White
Family First Candidate for Brisbane
Mark, I don’t think you’re going to get much of a good run here, especially with the stuff about Quah and Jacobsen. You seem like an affable bloke, though; I was on Fortitude Valley SS and you were quite friendly even if I don’t agree with your party’s politics.