Having picked the Liberal Party dead zone of Northern Metropolitan to open the batting for my upper house summaries, I shall tackle the rest in ascending order of Coalition strength. Next cab off the rank is Western Metropolitan, which differs significantly from Northern Metropolitan in that it lacks its strong inner-city component and accompanying new-left Greens-voting element. On 2002 figures (as calculated by Antony Green), this area gave Labor 62.2 per cent of the vote (3.73 quotas) compared with 25.6 per cent (1.54) for the Liberals and 9.6 per cent (0.58) for the Greens. The respective figures for Northern Metropolitan are 57.4 per cent (3.45), 23.0 per cent (1.38) and 16.8 per cent (1.01). As such, the region is by no means a sure thing for the Greens, although they would have won a seat in 2002 by getting ahead of Labor’s fourth candidate on Democrats preferences and picking up the Labor surplus. This would have been a close-run thing, and it is quite possible that Labor could have won a fourth seat instead.
It remains all but certain that of the first four seats, Labor will win three and the Liberals will win one. The final seat is very much up for grabs, and the result will depend as much on preference deals as votes. For the Greens to win, they will need to stay ahead of the fourth Labor candidate: this will be made easier by the likely decline in the Labor vote, but harder by the drying up of preferences from the declining Democrats. If this hurdle is cleared, it is likely that Labor’s surplus will give them enough preferences to win them the seat. Talk that the Liberals might put the Greens last is very unlikely to matter here: if the Liberals do not win the seat themselves, their second candidate seems sure to be the last man standing and his preferences will not be distributed. Alternatively, the Greens could fail to overtake the fourth Labor candidate, who would then receive their preferences and thus win the seat. The other most likely scenario is that the Liberal primary vote will increase by enough to either win them a second quota in their own right, or come close enough that minor and micro-party preferences will do the rest. There is also a fourth possibility: that a minor or even micro-party candidate will harvest enough preferences to get ahead of the fourth Labor, second Liberal or first Greens candidate, and thus to snowball their way to a quota. Indeed, the arithmetic is such that this region seems to offer the best prospects for an upset win by Family First, People Power or some other independent force yet to appear on the radar.
Labor thus had three safe seats to play with during preselections – and as in Northern Metropolitan, this left them with too many pegs and not enough holes. Western Metropolitan covers: a) the entire area of two abolished provinces represented by two Labor members, Doutta Galla (Justin Madden and Monica Gould) and Melbourne West (Kaye Darveniza and Sang Ngyuen); b) half the area of one other, Melbourne North (Marsha Thomson and Candy Broad); and c) a quarter of the area of a fourth, Melbourne (Glenyys Romanes and Gavin Jennings). Monica Gould, who was a minister in the Bracks government’s first term and Legislative Council president in its second, has done her party a favour by retiring, despite being only 49. Candy Broad and Kaye Darveniza has been accommodated in Northern Victoria, while Marsha Thomson will move to the safe lower house seat of Footscray. The big loser is Sang Nguyen, who in 1996 became Australia’s first Vietnamese-born parliamentarian. Nguyen will exit politics after being dumped by his Labor Unity faction; he complained at the time that "everyone in the Labor Unity leadership group promised me if I looked after Bill Shorten, they would look after me".
As in Northern Metropolitan, the first and third positions have gone to the Right and the second to the Left. Top of the ticket is Sports Minister Justin Madden, known far beyond Victoria as the towering ruckman who played 332 VFL/AFL games for Carlton and Essendon between 1980 and 1995. Madden came to politics via his role as president of the AFL Players Association, and was recruited for the safe upper house seat of Douta Galla within two years of his last AFL game. He was immediately made Sports Minister in the Bracks government, a position which was expanded during the current term with responsibility for the Commonwealth Games. Doubts were initially raised over the security of his position in parliament resulting from the cut in upper house numbers, but these were settled by Steve Bracks’ edict that seats be found for all ministers. It was originally planned that Madden would move to the lower house by replacing the retiring Sherryl Garbutt in Bundoora, an arrangement that froze out long-term aspirant Colin Brooks. However, the late announcement of Northcote MP Mary Delahunty’s retirement led Bracks to insist on a new arrangement to accommodate Brooks. This was done by switching Madden to Western Metropolitan in place of Right faction convenor Fiona Richardson, who was instead preselected for Northcote, while Brooks took Bundoora.
The Left originally wished for the second position to go to Hume councillor Mohamad Abbouche, following a deal in which Abbouche defected from the Right and delivered his numbers to federal MP Maria Vamvakinou in the Calwell preselection. However, this was vetoed by Steve Bracks, presumably due to controversies surrounding Abbouche involving allegations of branch stacking and failure to declare a donation. His replacement was another figure in the Arab community, Khalil Eideh, millionaire manager of family-owned transport company Blue Star Logistics and president of the Alawi Islamic Association. Mark Davis of the Financial Review described the latter organisation as "strongly pro-Syrian in the complex world of Lebanese politics", and said Eideh was "known inside the Labor Party for definite pro-Syrian views on Middle East affairs". This point was sharply underscored in June with the emergence of a letter from Eideh to the Syrian government, in which Eideh promised "absolute loyalty" to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and warned that "the threat from the colonial and Zionist is increasing on our Arabic world". Soon afterwards, Ellen Whinnett of the Herald-Sun reported that the Left and Right were considering a deal in which the former would dump Eideh and the latter would dispose of controversial Keilor MP George Seitz. Eideh secured his position in August after meeting with Jewish leaders and convincing them of his contrition.
Third on the ticket is National Union of Workers state secretary Martin Pakula, who emerged as the influential union’s leading figure after the departure of Greg Sword in 2004. Pakula is associated in the public mind not with the seat he will soon be assuming, but with his unsuccessful preselection challenge against Simon Crean in Hotham. Factional alignments and the support of influential Cambodian community figurehead and Clayton MP Hong Lim led to a general expectation that Pakula had the numbers, so there was great surprise when Crean decisively won the local ballot 190 votes to 88. Weeks later, Pakula declared his interest in a state upper house seat and had his nomination accepted by the national executive a month after the official deadline. Pakula’s preselection froze out Sam Nguyen and another hopeful, Geelong MLC Elaine Carbines, who has had to settle for the undesirable third place on the Northern Victoria ticket.
The theoretically winnable fourth position has gone to another member of the Right, Henry Barlow, a former Wyndham mayor and current adviser to Energy Industries and Resources Minister Theo Theophanous. Barlow ruffled factional feathers by nominating against Steve Bracks’s chief-of-staff Tim Pallas for the Tarneit preselection, but he was persuaded to withdraw.
Pole position on the Liberal ticket is occupied by Bernie Finn, who has been rewarded for his persistence after a failed attempt to return to parliament in Macedon at the 2002 election. Finn had earlier been the member for Tullamarine from his surprise victory at the 1992 election until his defeat in the successor seat of Yuroke in 1999. Finn is also known for his other career as an outspoken radio announcer (he recently volunteered to personally execute the Bali nine), having worked over the years for 3AW and the now-defunct 3AK. He is now listed as "a ministerial adviser to a federal parliamentarian". Paul Austin of The Age reported that Finn secured support from the Kroger-Costello camp to win last October’s preselection ballot over Kennett camp rival Jenny Matic by 25 votes to 18. His wife, Catherine Finn, has been nominated as the party’s candidate in her husband’s old stamping ground of Yuroke. The potentially winnable second position is occupied by Stephen Reynolds, a former police officer and current public service compliance officer.
The Greens have nominated Colleen Hartland, a Footscray public housing support worker, former Maribyrnong councillor and party spokesperson on drugs policy. Hartland once stood as an independent in Footscray way back in 1992, but did not much trouble the tally board operators. In yesterday’s Sunday Herald-Sun, Channel Seven political reporter Brendan Donohoe showed what they pay him for with this line about her old gig on the Parliament House catering staff: "she may have served tea and scones to the politicians sometimes through gritted teeth, but in a few weeks she could be back to serve them all some political curry – a green curry that Bracks and others may find hard to digest".
We’re probably looking ALP v Lib v Greens for the final seat. With the Libs shut out because the other two won’t preference them.
I don’t think a drop off in the Labor vote is a given. Hence it could be Liberal preferences which are key. But I suspect that, of the minor parties, only the Greens will still be alive to feed on those preferences.
Let’s say any of the three are equally likely to be eliminated at the 3-candidate stage.
My assessment:
ALP 3 Lib 1 Grn 1 (2 in 3 chance)
ALP 4 Lib 1 (1 in 3 chance)
Switch those odds if the Liberals really do put the Greens last.
Western Metro should elect 3 ALP & 1 Liberal, 5th seat too close to call but with the strenght of the ALP vote in the outer suburbs of seat, I think the ALP may pick up a fourth seat, interesting to see if rise in interest rates and response to IR changes hurt Liberal vote.
I don’t see many Green votes in this area, but something they may run hard on is Liberal policy to build a dam in the area.
The Greens ran dead in a large part of the western Met, 3 of the Melb North districts for example, so I dont really see any indicators of how high their vote really is based on 2002.
Hi. Again I need to stress a comparison with the 2002 Legislative Council vote is misleading. However I agree that the outcome of this election will go 3 ALP 1 Liberal with a contest for the last seat between the ALP or the Greens. I do not see the Liberal Party Securing sufficient support or preferences to win a second seat.
Comparison with the 2004 senate vote shows the seat to deliver to following quotas
3.87 ALP 1.43 LIB 0.54 GRN 0.16 DEM
This is the ALP’s strongest seat. The 2004 Senate vote was the liberal parties best result. We can expect they will go backwards. On the 2004 results it would be executed that the Liberal Party would top up the Greens who would still need Democrat preferences to secure a seat. As the democrats and not an issue in this election the question is what effect if any will Family First have in this electorate. Any significant drift in Preferences can decide the outcome. Below the line line votes could come into play. If the ALP can pick up its vote then the ALP is is in a chance of wining four Libs one. My assessment is ALP 60% chance of winning the last spot. Greens 40%. This is a seat where the order of elimination will decide. Its a fight between Labour and the Greens. A fourth labor seat will be cream on top, a bonus for Labor..
Hi. Again I need to stress a comparison with the 2002 Legislative Council vote is misleading. However I agree that the outcome of this election will go 3 ALP 1 Liberal with a contest for the last seat between the ALP or the Greens. I do not see the Liberal Party Securing sufficient support or preferences to win a second seat.
Comparison with the 2004 senate vote shows the seat to deliver to following quotas
3.87 ALP 1.43 LIB 0.54 GRN 0.16 DEM
This is the ALP’s strongest seat. The 2004 Senate vote was the liberal parties best result. We can expect they will go backwards. On the 2004 results it would be expected that the Liberal Party would top up the Greens who would still need Democrat preferences to secure a seat. As the democrats and not an issue in this election the question is what effect if any will Family First have in this electorate. Any significant drift in Preferences can decide the outcome. Below the line line votes could come into play. If the ALP can pick up its vote then the ALP is is in a chance of wining four Libs one. My assessment is ALP 60% chance of winning the last spot. Greens 40%. Possible higher odds in the ALP’s favor. This is a seat where the order of elimination will decide. Its a fight between Labour and the Greens. A fourth labor seat will be cream on top, a bonus for Labor.
To add to Labor’s chances is the Maddern factor. Football is a sacred religion this region. The Greens vote is locked up in the inner city and they have never been able to break into the outer suburbs and thier campiagn workers feel out of place in this region. Labor could win a fourth seat odds are in their favour. Greens should talk to Family first and the DLP both who do not support the Greens agenda, Greens hope to picvk up preferences by default but will they. We will know the likely outcome next week.
melbcity,
The applicability of the 2004 federal results is most dubious… you’re very much on your own with that one.
I don’t know why you trash the 2002 state results as a starting point. As if whether or not the chamber is a proportionally elected is a bigger concern for voters than the politicians involved.
Fair point about Madden. But does he have much pull with non-Carlton supporters?
Correction: 2004 Senate results show:
2.910 ALP
2.003 LIB
0.374 Green
0.093 Family First
Figuars above were inital analysis of the various models presented by the Electorsal Boundaries Commission based on State elction results.
Again this was the Liberal Party’s best result. If this resukt was replicated then the result would be ALP 3 Liberal 2. I expect the Liberal Party to fall below 2 seats but remain above the Greens.
Missing above is Others (representing a total of 0.619 Quota).
David. I am not on my own I have received a number of email from others who are also experienced in electoral analysis. Making a comparison between the 2002 results and the new system is like comparing apples with oranges. The data-set is incomplete and the bias that creeps in with multiple single-member electorates further diminishes the value of using 2002 results.
The Senate system data-set is complete. It uses the same voting system and ballot paper format. Yes there are different issues at play. Never the less it is a valid comparison and worth considering. I would dismiss the 2002 result more then 2004 senate results for reasons stated above.
Again I must stress and agree with comments made by Antony Green that the 2004 senate results were the Liberal Party’s best result and the ALP’s worst. (The Greens did not favor well either).
When I first did my analysis of various models (over 17 years ago) I looked at the results of all public elections going back 2 -3 election cycles. To best understand a political profile you need to look at the highs and lows over time and the current opinion polls.
2002 Was the ALP’s and Greens highest vote.
The change of electoral system is significant Look at the House of reps to the Senate as a comparison. If I had time I would go back to the 2001 senate election and also the 1999 State Election.
It’s not clear to me Melbcity why you would think that the peculiar character of the Howard/Latham 2004 contest is any more comparable to the Bracks/Baillieu Legislative Council battle on 25 November than the 2002 votes on a non-PR system. Both are misleading in different ways, but we rely on them as the only recent evidence available, modified by reading the tea leaves of recent opinion polls, and drawing inferences therefrom.
I would offer a number of speculations:
1. Both the Labor and Liberal vote in the LC will be lower than their vote in the corresponding Assembly seats. This gap may be as little as 1% or as high as 5%. (These are roughly the lkimits of the difference over a number of Federal Reps/Senate comparisons.)
2. PR is both an opportunity for non-major parties, but also a challenge. Greens for example may poll higher because there is a prospect of their being elected; however, the scare campaigns – already running and bound to intensify – will act as an offset, because of the increased attention. Note also that in 2002, the Greens were virtually the only non-major in the vast majority of seats, and therefore mopped up all the protest against the majors vote.
3. Above the line preference allocations will determine the outcome of all eight contests for the 5th seat. While there is likely to be a modest increase in below-the-line voting, it will not be sufficiently common to be decisive.
4. Barring some extreme good fortune with preference deals, I don’t rate the chances of FF, PP or the DLP. Any of these outfits will do remarkably well to reach 3% in any of the eight Upper House constituencies. From there, it will be a huge climb to 16.67%.
David: In re-thinking the likely outcome which will be known better after above-the-line preferences are finalised I think your assessment of 3 ALP 2 Liberal is realistic with a 40% chance that the Greens can arrest a set off the Liberals.
To respond to Peter Comments
The Senate vote is not a Howard vs Latham for the same reasons you have indicated that the Council seat will not reflect the Assembly.
In a PR ballot it is more the Party that takes the focus. Yes the leadership might help which party they vote.
Item 1. I agree as above – This is a given.
Item 2. yes and no. I do not agree that the Greens mopped up the protest vote. i also think the 2002 was their best result and this is reflected in part by the fact they did not do so well in the Senate in this seat in particular.
Item 3. Again yes and No. There are some seats where the minor parties will not come into contention. I think in one seat it is possible that the below the line will play a line. To early to say if this a fact.
Item 4. I think the minor parties outside of the ALP/LNP and Greens will collectively represent 0.3 to 0.6 of a quota. ( 0.47 to 0.84 in the Senate vote) The fold up and order of elimination will be crucial in Most if not all electrates. We will know next week. I also think that as a result of the Senate outcome that it will be difficult to have a fold-up situation as existed in 2004, Why beacuse each party minor party wants to be in taht psoition and they will rip over each other. So yes I do not think an outside party will climb out of the pile in this election. Again next week will tell all.
Assuming hat the 2002 result was the ALP and Green’s highest vote and the 2004 Senate the Liberal/Nationals highest we can opt to consider the average between them in which case the result could be.
ALP LNP GRN OTH
Northern Metropolitan 2.99 1.70 0.91 0.40
Eastern Metropolitan 2.27 2.80 0.57 0.36
Southern Metropolitan 2.00 2.81 0.90 0.29
Western Metropolitan 3.32 1.76 0.48 0.43
South Eastern Metro 2.82 2.32 0.46 0.40
Northern Victoria 1.98 3.07 0.43 0.52
Western Victoria 2.47 2.67 0.47 0.38
Eastern Victoria 2.15 2.94 0.53 0.38
The Greens are hoping that any shift away from the ALP will flow down their river but it wont because that assumes the Liberal catchment will not increase. (Pardon teh water poun in a time of drought)
The Question I want to ask is there a relatively fixed percentage ratio of each party vote for each electorate in comparison to the State average? Maybe Antony Green has done this analysis. I would assume that it floats but to what extent. This would help weight any opinion poll that does not provide a breakdown into Upper-house seats.
If there is any poblic pollsters out there here is your chance to provide a public poll of voter intentions broken down into upper-house electorates. Media Barons note you can get good milages on such a poll. 🙂
Wasted opportunity for the Liberals rerunning Finn, why didn’t they run an Asian-Australian candidate?. The Alawi are an interesting group, regarded as heretical by more orthodox Muslims and their views on gender equality wouldn’t be approved of by a certain Sydney sheikh.
OT
Anybody know what’s happened to Palmer’s ozpolitics.info?
Great question, Marcus. His domain is listed on Whois as “Inactive”, and since his email address is tied to it I haven’t been able to contact him.
I read somewhere (can’t remember where) that Bryan Palmer’s IP server contract may have expired.
I stress that this is a non-authoritative rumour.
The two most important seats for the Libs to win in the Council are the final spots in Western Metro & Southern Metro. If the non-Labor parties could win 9 country LC spots, 3 in Southern & Eastern, and two in South Eastern & Western, and 1 in Northern, it would give them 20 seats and blocking power in the Council. The breakdown would be LNP 20, ALP 19, GRN 1.
Of course the ALP is a big chance to win 3 spots in Western Country as the region includes Ballarat & Geelong.
Do you all know how nuch the ALP is hated here in the inner west at the moment. You need to get out to th einner west and feel the mood.