Idle speculation: February edition

The previous federal election thread was getting long and unwieldy, so I’ve closed it and set up shop here. Perhaps you might like to discuss today’s front page splash in The Australian, "Labor in strongest electoral position since 2001", based on a 56-44 Newspoll result.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

324 comments on “Idle speculation: February edition”

Comments Page 6 of 7
1 … 5 6 7

  1. Alex makes a good point about 11/9 (day before month in this country, Alex), but let’s not forget that Howard set the template for his re-elections that year, namely spending like there was no tomorrow on every interest group he needed to get re-elected. The budget is well in surplus, so we can fully expect it to happen again.

    The question is, will it work for Howard this time?

  2. Of course it will happen again. This is the advantage of encumbancy that enables the PM to call the election at his whim. He can pork barrel to his hearts content just prior to the election, and because of economic lags, this fiscal irresponsibility will not be detected until after the election.

    When the resulting interest pressures emerge after the election the breaks will go on and the non-core promise arguement will be rolled out.

    Three strikes and your out Johnny. People have wised up to this tactic.

  3. 11/9 just doesn’t have the same ring to it does it 🙂

    Next Newspoll survey should be conducted over the next 3 days .. will be interesting to see how Howard’s National Security vote goes.

  4. I actually think that early 2007 has more parallels with early 2004 than early 2001 (although there clearly are many differences between Rudd and Latham which I’m not denying), and it’s also worth noting that Howard has gone into every election year since he has been Prime Minister as the underdog.

  5. For all the talk about Howard spending up big, he has a major problem – the Reserve Bank. If the surplus shrinks too much (as Costello has done at past pre-election budgets), especially if it is splurged on tax cuts, then the govt risks an interest rate rise.

    The RBA’s statement on monetary policy this week, although cutting the chance of a rate hike, also kept expected inflation forecasts at the top end of the bank’s comfort range.

    The last think Howard would need, campaigning on economic grounds, is for the RBA to lift rates a quarter of a percentage point, and then point the finger at the government for its loose fiscal policy stance.

    In the past three weeks, Howard has already committed $10 billion to the Murray-Darling and $1.5 billion to aged care. The surplus has already been trimmed by around $1.3 billion with those two. A substantial tax cut would set the government back anywhere between $2 billion and $5 billion a year.

    The money cupboard is already starting to look bare….

  7. What did other bloggers make of the IR debate on the 7.30 Report last night? I thought that Gillard won comfortably – she a very polished media performer, and came over as knowledgeable and on top of her brief, while never losing that pleasant public persona she has. Hockey, on the other hand, came over as a nice bloke who is a bit of of his depth. He certainly wasn’t able to put many holes into Gillard’s arguments.

    IR is a sleeper issue for the government, one that can (indeed, probably will) affect people who don’t otherwise have any interest in politics (which surely is the very definition of a swinging voter).

  8. I didn’t think Hockey was a very good choice for IR, he always comes across as a waffler and a blusterer. Andrews may have been a bit crazed but he usually knew what he was talking about. Hockey is no match for Gillard, who is very sharp. If Howard wanted to “humanise” the government’s image on IR after Andrews made them look cold and fanatical, Bishop would have been a better choice, with Hockey in education.

  10. Does anyone know Greg Sheridan’s background? Anyone that can come to the conclusion that Howard came out looking and sounding like roses over Iraq must have an axe to grind. His arguments are spurious to say the least. He must have an axe to grind surely. He seems to think the 2004 election was won on Howard’s Iraq policy. Hardly. What about the interest rate scare? He quotes the poll conducted by channel nine which had a response of 130,000. Look at the spin he puts on this unrealiable poll. “By the end of the week Howard had produced results that in their way are quite devastating for Rudd. According to the Nine network, 130,000 viewers responded yes to the question “Should Howard have criticised Obama?”, while only 20,000 said no. Does this really ring true? Not to me.

  11. Just base interest what is the take or guess as to Lindsay Tanner’s position in Melbourne. I assume that the Greens will try and take the seat but judging on the state election performance I doubt they will be able to.

    In terms of the poll data I am betting it will be October/November certainly not before July 1. Howard needs to be sure he can hold on to the senate as long as he can should there be a backlash against them and they only pickup 2 seats per state. If he goes before Jul1 then the newly elected senators take office on July 1 if he holds back then the senators take office on July 1 the following year.

    The other issue I would like feedback on is When will we move to fixed four year terms. I know it has been tried before and the Liberal party opportunistically opposed such a move but maybe they will think again. Your thoughts

  13. I think the TPP will be under 1% difference in Melbourne unless Garrett or someone else spreads lies again.
    As for fixed terms, I don’t think the Libs will go for it but the ALP probably will.

  14. Hugo Girard is a very good performer when it comes to issues of social justice and industrial affairs . I have had the pleasure of working with Julia over many years on a branch executive and also in her role as Chief of Staff working for John Brumby. To add to that your legal expertise and partnership with Slater and Gordon most certainly make her a formidable opponent and highly skilled member of the Federal Opposition. She would have made an excellent choice for Prime-minister.

    Labor is fortunate to have a wealth of talent with Gillard and Rudd heading up Labors team. Kevin Rudd was most impressive as Foreign Affairs spokesperson and I am sure he would make a equally impressive Prime-minister. The sooner Australia goes to the polls the better.

    I dont if Peter Costello will ever hold the keys to the lodge. He will at best be3come the leader of the opposition following the next Federal Elections only to be replaced soon after by Malcolm Turnbull.

    What is exciting about the next election is not only will we see a Labor Federal Government but a pro-republican parliament with the leaders of the main political parties all committed to an Australian republic and hopefully a new Australian Flag.

  15. Hugo

    Gillard is a very good performer when it comes to issues of social justice and industrial affairs .

    I have had the pleasure of working with Julia over many years on a branch executive and also in her role as Chief of Staff working for John Brumby. To add to that her legal expertise and partnership with Slater and Gordon most certainly make her a formidable opponent and highly skilled member of the Federal Opposition.

    She would have made an excellent choice for Prime-minister.

    Labor is fortunate to have a wealth of talent with Gillard and Rudd heading up Labors team.

    Kevin Rudd was most impressive as Foreign Affairs spokesperson and I am sure he would make a equally impressive Prime-minister.

    The sooner Australia goes to the polls the better.

    I don’t think Peter Costello will ever hold the keys to the lodge. He will at best become the leader of the opposition following the next Federal Elections only to be replaced soon after by Malcolm Turnbull.

    What is exciting about the next election is not only will we see a Labor Federal Government but a pro-republican parliament with the leaders of the main political parties all committed to an Australian republic and hopefully a new Australian Flag.

  16. The problem is not the four-year term itself or even the fixed term itself. It is the attitude people take to the Senate. I have no objection to eight-year terms for the upper houses elected by PR – it would have been a lot of use on Victoria in the Kennett era. – but some people do. Given that tradition is the most democratic system of all because it gives votes to the dead, eight years is not very long. There is something to be said for evening out wild swings in public opinion. So I would support a four-year tem for the House of Representatives that gave an eight-year term to the Senate.

    However, if you fix the terms, you need to deal with disagreements between the two houses. The ALP has still not got over 1975 and finds it hard to look at the Senate dispassionately. The Senate undoubtedly has the power to block Supply, and given that it is the more democratically representative house, I see no problem with that, not that I approved of its exercise of that power in 1975. If you have fixed terms and the Senate blocks Supply, there has to be a resolution of the issue. The government cannot continue, so the people must resolve the dispute.

    I have argued for some time that the current double dissolution procedures should be replaced by a referendum to be held at the following normal election. However, this will not work with Supply. You cannot defer the issue for two or three years. My suggestion is completely logical and totally impractical: you hold an immediate referendum, and then the house which loses faces an election and the house that wins stays in place, with the term of office for both being only the remainder of the fixed four-year term. This is not going to happen, is it? But then I never thought we would get PR for the Victorian Legislative Council.

  17. Look at the advance of fixed terms in state politics. We’ve now got it in three states (NSW, SA, Victoria, as well as the ACT), and in two of those cases it was introduced by a Labor government. So I wouldn’t be surprised if the agenda of a future Labor government included fixed terms. Of course, terms can’t be completely fixed without a referendum to abolish DDs, but you could have semi-fixed terms, where all half-senate and house elections occur according to a timetable which can only be altered by DD.

    And then there’s what I see is the ideal-but-not-practical solution. You just get rid of Double Dissolutions. Don’t replace them with anything else. If you can’t agree on a bill it doesn’t pass. If that bill is Supply, then the government doesn’t have money. At first glance this would appear to be a recipe for disaster, yet it is exactly what has happened in America (between the President and Congress, rather than between the two houses, but the principle is the same) for (I assume) over 200 years.

    Both houses have legitimate roles in representing the people. Thus if they are unable to come to an agreement, they should be required to negotiate to find a solution which overall represents the people. One house shouldn’t be able to go back to the voters because it didn’t like the result. Especially when the other house can’t. The Senate can’t call a DD if a bill is rejected by the House.

    MPs and Senators are elected to serve a term. Just because different parties control different houses is not a good reason to go back to the voters. If the country is so evenly divided that the Senate is controlled by one party and the House by another, then it’s probably a good thing that both sides are represented in decision-making.

    And MelbCity: there is no prospect of Howard calling a Half-Senate election prior to 1 July 2007, as it is not permitted. If he wishes to call a joint House and Half-Senate election, he must call it after 1 July 2007. It isn’t a question of what date the new Senators will take office. They will take office on 1 July 2008.

    And regarding the Greens in the lower house. I don’t believe it will be possible to do so in the 2007 federal election. My experience in Melbourne in 2006 was that we were actually winning in Melbourne early that last week. The whole split-ticket deal cut a few %s of our statewide vote and probably made the difference in Melbourne. And I believe there is a decent chance (note: “decent”, not “we’re gonna win it and 46 other seats”) in Balmain in NSW. But I actually think it’s harder against a Labor opposition. While the statewide or nationwide picture may be different, Labor in opposition is able to more effectively present itself as progressive than when it is in government. This is particularly true for Left MPs in inner-city seats, who, when in opposition, can present themselves as having a sort of independence which goes out the window when they enter Cabinet.

    Our best prospects in the federal HoR (this is about winning seats for the first time, not retaining them) will be after one or two terms of a Labor government, when people like Albanese, Plibersek and Tanner have been in Cabinet for a few years.

  18. Hi Bill,

    Sorry, what I meant to ask was that if the Greens win a seat in SA in 2007, which of Labor and the Libs will miss out on their 3rd seat? It would probably be Labor that misses out wouldn’t it?

  19. For MelbCity. There can’t be poll before July 1. The parliamentary library recently did a paper on when the next election. Effectively, anywhere between August 4 and January 19 2008. That’s why there has been some media speculation of Howard going for the early date, say Aug 4 or 11, but most money is Oct 13 or 20.

    Howard hosts the APEC leaders meeting in Sydney Sept 8 and 9. Parliament is then due to sit for the next fortnight. He could very well use the first week of the sitting to belt Labor over his great relationship with Bush, Putin et al, and then run a five week campaign and go to the polls Oct 20.

    Anyway, for the parliamentary library paper, go to http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2006-07/07rn14.pdf

  20. One possible wedge that Howard could use, although it is a dangerous, is a one about fear about Muslim immigration.

    Howard will portray Rudd as soft on Muslim immigration and promote a fear campign “that under labour, the country will be swmped with Muslims”

    Would work well in outer suburban marginals and with white blue collar traditional Labour supporters.

    Inner city Elites will hate it, but do they decide elections?

  23. A racist immigration policy has been popualr in Australia for all except the70’s and 80’s although it probably was then and just noone would talk about it..

    the ninemsn poll today is whether muslim immigration should be limited.

    M predition is it will come in overwhelmingly yes

  25. In an earlier post I was sceptical about a suggestion that Labor could win three Senate seats in Queensland, something Labor has never done at a half-Senate election. On looking at the figures, however, I now agree that this is a real possibility.

    With the Democrat vote collapsing, Andrew Bartlett’s seat will go to either Labor, the Greens or the Coalition. In 2004 the Coalition picked up the other Democrat seat, giving them 4 seats to 2.

    Queensland is the Greens’ weakest state (with a leader like Drew Hutton, I’m not surprised). Senate Green votes in 2004 were: Tas 13.3%, Vic 8.7%, WA 8.0%, NSW 7.3%, SA 6.5%, Qld 5.3%. Unless this vote increases substantially, the Greens will find it very hard to win a Senate seat, even with Labor’s surplus as preferences.

    To win four seats the Coalition needs 57.1%. In 2004 the Coalition + One Nation + Hanson vote was 53.7%, enough for them to sneak in on preferences.

    To win three seats Labor needs 42.9% after preferences. In 2004 Labor got 31.6%, while the Greens got 5.3%, a total of 36.9% – still 6% short.

    If there is a 5% swing to Labor, the Coalition vote will be 48.7% and the Labor+Green vote will be 41.9%, just short of three quotas. Labor would probably then win three seats.

    In fact there is a real possibility that Labor could win three seats everywhere except Tasmania, although I would think the Greens are favourites for the 6th seat in WA. Kerry Nettle seems eminently beatable in NSW, and the Greens could well fall short in Vic and SA as they did in 2004. But none of these gains would be at the expense of the Coalition.

  26. Why write off Tasmania, Adam?

    The Libs could be kept to two Senate seats there.

    In 1998 & 2001, the Lib HoR vote was 42.7% and 42.3% respectively. That’s less than three Senate quotas. How they attained three Senate seats in 2001 is anybody’s guess (Dem & ONP ATL votes perhaps? Or maybe the Labor HoR was inflated by the “personal vote”.)

    But an ALP 3 Grn 1 Lib 2 split in Tasmania is entirely possible in 2007.

  27. Mally wrote “More evidence of Petre Garret’s SELL OUT today he is supporting Guantanamoesque gulags on Australian territory.”

    Actually, he’s supporting a communications facility. It will not have a permanent on-site staff and it will also be used by the Australian military.

    However, after a week of “we’ll be in Iraq until Kate Ellis is 67” and “Rudd said he’ll abandon Iraq immediately”, i can certainly understand there’s a need for hyperbole just to compete for attention.

  28. Hard to say BenC there is a wave of anti Liberal Feeling here in SA join that with the fear of another Howard control of the senate and it could go either way

  29. Yes, Mally has some form with hyperbole, though you have to admire his chutzpah. The Greens are done no favours by such talk – while it might be a nice view from the high moral ground, they are an awfully long way from where the action is, and the Greens will continue to deal themselves out of deal making. THis is a shame in a way, as I’m not unsympathetic to them in a policy-sense, it’s just that I left university some years ago.

  30. Hi Hugo you said “This is a shame in a way, as I’m not unsympathetic to them in a policy-sense, it’s just that I left university some years ago” If you are sympathetic to Green policies who do you support then?

  32. I support a party who might have some chance of putting their policies into practice. I might like some of what the Greens stand for, but then politics is more than about feeling good about one’s own ideological purity. It’s about actually achieving some good for the nation, something that’s hard to do sitting on the cross-benches of the Senate and attracting around 5% of the popular vote.
    However, I think Adam is right, let’s get back to the main game, which is surely defeating this horrible reactionary rabble currently in power (or at least discussion thereof).

  33. The defeat of Howards Heroes would be good but it worries me what sort of government the Labor party will form. Its a right wing party. I am expecting the workers to be rewarded for putting them in Government but alas I doubt it

  34. I suspect that your cynicism is well founded, Bill. I’m a great believer that Labor governments are never as good as you expect them to be, but Liberal governments are always much, much worse than you feared.

  36. Poor Hugo, it bothers you that the main game is the survival of the planet as we know it, so you’re still peddling lies about the Greens vote. Let me remind you Queensland state election 5.2% the lowest area of support, Tasmania state election 10.2%, Victoria state election 8%, NSW 7.7%, 2004 federal elections 7.2%. Not struggling to get 5% as you repeatedly state.
    Some might like to change the subject, or just adopt the Greens policies, that is where the action is, that’s why the whole world is talking about Global Warming and how to stop it.
    We will see how much of the Green policies have had a major impact on Debernam and Iyemma tonite on the ABC.

  37. As Mally says, yes, some of us might like to change the subject, and to lead into it, he cites these figures for Green support: ‘Tasmania state election 10.2%, Victoria state election 8%’ which is uncannily amazing ! because between exactly 8 and 10.2 % of Indigenous adults in Australia are University graduates, 21,000 roughly as the Census 2006 will show, with about 1,500 graduating each year, many in Green fields, so to speak, such as Parks and Wildlife and Natural Resources Management and Environmental Management. Yes, up to a hundred Indigenous people have graduated from these fields of study around the country, with others graduated as vets, environmental economists, agronomists, etc. Yes, they are probably all potential Green supporters if you want to seek them out and make them feel welcome amongst the Green fraternity/sorority. A Green/Black coalition is des[erately needed – it surely has to happen – and maybe not so out of the question if you put your mind to it. Now, back to the important topic of replacing this crap government. G’day Bill. Joe

  39. Hi Joe, I couldn’t agree more, the Indigenous people of Australia have a lot of knowledge about our country and how to better manage things. The current thinking is heading up a dead end street, where as the Aboriginal societies couped for thousands of years in harmony with each other, the environment and their neighbours. In fact I will go so far as to say the only hope for the planet is to draw upon the knowledge of the worlds First Peoples and redirect our leaders away from the “moving forward”, “bottom line”, “at the end of the day”, war mongering neocons, that we are stuck with today.

    The Greens offer an alternative to the wheeling and dealing, sellout, LIB/LAB gangsters and welcome all people from any part of our beautiful globe to join us. So brother hope to see you and look forward to working together on getting this country back to a more healthy condition.

    best regards mally

  42. Adam the Greens are part of this election, A BIG PART. With our policies on IR and the environment, not forgetting social issues becoming center stage issues. Its not only important to gain a good vote but hopefully the ALP will implement what the Greens stand for. Thats the difference between us and all other parties. We are not only political but activist getting our hands dirty in community problems fighting in the trenches so to speak. Its great attending a community meeting and listening to the MPs and opposites sprouting party lines on issues and nothing seems to change. The Greens get involved as they are normally part of that community and things move. It sometimes is hindered by the government but community outrage wins in the end. How do i know this? It Happened for my branch while i was running for a State seat. People power beats politics everytime its just people don’t know it until an issue is on their doorstep

  44. Actually, didn’t the Vic Greens get 10% in 06? And I’m sure that the Tassie State election returned more than 10%, somewhere in the order of 15%?

    Andrew Wilkie is running second on the Tassie Greens Senate ticket. And Bob Brown will be no 1. Any thoughts? I reckon the personal votes will pull together a quota for the party, but only Bob will be elected.

  45. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the election – largely in a psephological sense. Of course that involves discussing party policies etc, but it DOESN’T mean just spouting party slogans, as Bill and Mally are doing. Apart from being disruptive, this is pointless, because everyone here already has firm political views and are not going to be persuaded by cheap sloganising and political abuse.

  46. The Garrett “sell outs” will have no effect on the election. The average voter will be totally unaware of this attack by the the Liberals and for those aware of it it will only reinforce the views they already hold one way or another. This story will be wrapped around tomorrow’s scraps, placed in the bin and forgotten in no time. The Libs will have to do more than this to turn the Garrett supporters off.

  48. I completely agree with Adam on this point. This is a psephological blog. Whatever people’s own personal political views it’s not intended to be somewhere to argue political slogans, etc. There’s plenty of other blogs for that.

    And anyway, who on this website doesn’t have a pretty solid idea of their politics, and indeed who they’re gonna vote for?

  50. Adam Black and Ben like the Parties you support you fear vocal enthusiastic minor party supporters. When people on here promote major party policies, peope and slogans nothing is said.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 6 of 7
1 … 5 6 7