The government is not about to face any respite from those bad poll headlines: News Limited papers are today carrying a Galaxy poll which shows the Prime Minister heading for defeat in Bennelong, where he trails Labor’s Maxine McKew 53-47 on two-candidate preferred (a similar poll three months ago had it at 52-48). The Labor primary vote is at 47 per cent, compared with 28 per cent at the previous election (when much of the anti-Howard vote was harvested by Greens candidate Andrew Wilkie), while the Liberal vote is down from 50 per cent to 44 per cent. No quibbling with the sample size this time, either – there were 800 respondents, double the amount Westpoll used to gauge an entire state.
“90
Eddie says:
In the NSW Senate what is the best way that I can do my bit to help Labor and the Greens get four seats between them.
Would it be by my giving my 1 and 2 to Labor No. 3 the Greens No.1”
Eddie. You cannot really ensure it on your own. To get 4 senators, there needs to be 4 quotas. If your candidates don’t get enough then it doesn’t matter whether you choose 1, 2 or 3 or Green first.
What matters is the leakage away from a party.
Assume the quota is 500,000 and the first candidate gets 1,500,000 votes. There is 1,000,000 over quota. To work out who gets the extras, all of the 2nd preferences of the 1,500,000 are distributed at a value of the excess, ie 1,000,000/1,500,000. If they all go to the second candidate, that candidate then gets 1,000,000 votes or 2 quotas. These are then distributed at 500,000/1,500,000. If they all go to the third candidate, that candidate then gets 500,000 votes or a quota.
If however, there is leakage, then the candidates get only a portion of the vote.
To personally do your best, you can number all the squares, going ALP and 1st greens 1 to 4 and then doing whatever after that. Otherwise a ticket vote for either should ensure. NB Unless the ALP does a Senate preference swap with Family First so that the preferences get to FF before the Greens.
Thank you for your help Blair S. Fairman and Michael Proud
Hi all,
I have done a major update of Cassandra!, my senate calculator.
Now:-
– users can now select a state to run a simulation on.
– real data from the 2004 election is used for the voting tickets
– all candidates from the 2004 election are simulated (63 in Victoria!)
– users can edit the primary vote of as many or as few candidates as they wish
– the output is much more readable
Disclaimer: Cassandra accurately simulates Steven Fielding getting elected in Victoria, but it does seem to struggle on other tight contests due to it using 100% above-the-line voting in its simulation.
woot!
could anyone tell me if fairfax becomes winnable for the alp. with a 7% SWING?
All this talk about Labor facing an uphill battle in the sence of it needing to take 16 seats off the government is rubbish
At the end of the day on election day no party holds any seats
the score is NIL – NIL.
Lets take a game of footy for example,
after last years grand final TEAM A beat TEAM B by 16 points,
The two teams meet in the grand final the following year, however this time TEAM B has all the form heading into the grand final
Its like suggesting that despite the fact that TEAM B has all the form in the up comming grand final, that TEAM B is automatically disadvantaged by 16 points because they lost the Last Grand final by 16 points,
What a load of rubbish, the 2nd grand final starts from scratch again the scores start al NIL ALL,
TEAM A doesnt carry on its 16 point advantage from the grand final from the previous year
TEAM B are the ones who are in form so they are the ones who are favourites,
Can you see my comparison?
The Coalition isnt 16 points ahead in the next Grand final (Election day), they start with no points just as Labor start with no points
Labor are the faviourtes because they are the ones with all the form comming into the election
And So Says Steveo!!!
The Funniest Scenario I can think of is if the Libs replace Howard with Costello and make Turnbull his Deputy and all three lose their seats in the Ruddslide
The Liberal majority in Fairfax is 13.3%. Although the Sunshine Coast is slowly drifting towards Labor as it urbanises, it would take an electoral tsunami to threaten Fairfax, or Fisher – Labor will be concentrating on Longman.
On the reversal of trend in the polls, see Jason Koutsoukis is today’s Sunday Age
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/pms-vote-flatlining/2007/08/11/1186530671379.html
I wouldn’t regard Blair as a “certain” gain. I might class it as “probable” at the moment.
Possum is back and has a very interesting piece about the trend away from the Coalition since 2004.
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/
Assuming Rudd wins the election, here my predictions for Labor gains:
Parramatta(currently notionally Liberal although the sitting member is Labor)
Macquarie(sitting Liberal member but notionally Labor on redrawn boundaries)
Kingston
Wakefield
Makin
Bass
Braddon
Stirling
Hasluck
Bonner
Moreton
Blair
Eden Monaro
Lindsay
Page
Dobell
Corrangamite
La Trobe
Solomon
I’m more hesistant about these as possible Labor gains:
Bennelong
Wentworth
Herbert
Deakin
Patterson
Boothby
Sturt
Canning
Petrie
We all seem to be agreed on the seats that Labor would win if they won the election. This isn’t a very difficult exercise. There may be a few “bolters” in either direction, but as a general rule the seats will fall in pendulum order. You can’t claim both Parramatta and Macquarie as Labor gains. I think it’s too early to say whether a new candidate makes La Trobe a likely gain – it’s a pretty solidly middleclass area these days. http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/2007maps/latrobebig.shtml
The Possum is back with a cracker of a piece that puts the sword to the theory that the ALP vote is somehow soft or that JWH can turn around a 3 year downward poll trend in 3 months. http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/for-whom-the-inertia-tolls/
Perhaps one of the poll experts here could answer this question on Bennelong.
I was wondering is Howard’s margin is understated due to the high profile candidate Wilkie at the last election. That is some conservative votes would have leaked to Wilkie and not all of them would have found their way back to Howard.
On that basis is a 53/47 poll worse than it seems?
Strop, why so Stroppy? I was simply replying to someone who presumed to know my political biases, by explaining that I sublimate these. I’m legally trained and I write about electoral regulation: so I have both a limited capacity (legal training doesn’t make you a political scientist/psephologist) and a limited interest in engaging in partisan debate.
I don’t come here to ‘correct’ others: though it’s fair to say this blog has become less valuable for people like me, who don’t come here for an argument, since it became heavy with partisans.
Of course I respect folk like Dr Adam Carr who can balance their prodigious learning and databases with being open about their party-affiliation and indeed factional leanings. But not everyone can do that. Look at George Williams, our most prominent constitutional commentator: it hasn’t really helped his public influence having to constantly declare recently that he is an ALP member/pre-selection candidate.
Graeme, you’re too kind.
Eddie, I can assure you Costello is not going to lose Higgins. There may or may not be a swing developing in Victoria, but 8.8% in a stable inner-urban area with a high-profile sitting member who takes care to be seen in his electorate is not going to happen. It Labor dumps its candidate and the National Executive installs B1 and B2, then you can start to dream…
I don’t understand how a political party association with either main brand has any implication whatsoever on ones ability to read / understand / explain Australian Constitutional Law. I also don’t understand how a relationship between expertise in Constitutional Law, which no sane person would question, and ‘public influence’.
The key as Colin Powell found out, as the whole world watched him present something completely lacking in fact or credibility, is to not compromise ones expertise in the service to ones party.
As an unashamed partisan I think pre-Howard this would not have been an exceptional observation. Sadly the ‘party before all else’ philosophy of Bush and Howard, and some on our side, sadly, makes the concept of Country, Honesty, Credibility before party had to imagine, let alone accept as a basic standard.
In response to previous posters who discussed the NESB demographic in Bennelong as a factor.
I think it’s likely that non-Anglo ethnic groups will tend to vote Labor. However, this cannot be simply assumed as a given. Labor often has work to do to build bridges/do deals with local ethnic groups.
Also, many people may have forgotten Howard’s anti-Asian sentiments of 2 decades ago. He and his colleagues have always been very careful to dog-whistle, rather than make explicit statements about ethnic groups or individuals, and this was the case even with Dr Haneef. Also, compared to the Hansonites, who are more blunt and clumsy, the Libs may be able to pass themselves off as ‘tolerant’. I speaking very relatively, of course.
In particular, I’m thinking of my native Melbourne here. In some Eastern suburbs, there is a massive Chinese contingent. Yet it would be very naive to assume these folk will automatically vote Labor. Many are small business owners, who actually adorn their businesses with pro-Lib material, and who wouldn’t necessarily identify themselves as traditional immigrant battlers.
If Maxine can reach out to the Chinese and Indian parts of her electorate, and convince them that Labor has something to offer them, she would go a long way towards winning.
Can somebody please enlighten on what brought about the preselection change in La Trobe?
Graeme I became Stroppy as you put it primarily because I felt, and still do, that you are acting like some kind of class monitor in here more than anything else.
Maybe I am wrong (no surprises there) but you havent responded to my questions either. What, in your opinion (it is ok to have one) are the ‘economic fundamentals’ you speak of and how and why will these ‘economic fundamentals’ “tighten†the election race ?
The City to Surf poll was overwhelmingly in favour of the ALP with only Kevin07 tees being in evidence as the field passed the drink station at Hopetoun Ave. No Liberal or Greens tees passed by – they were probably still abed.
166, Revolutionary– Howard represents the anti-multicultural camp in the Liberals, the king chief himself, so I’m guessing that the NESB’s would be firmly against him. Lots of NESB’s who are wealthy no doubt want to vote Liberal but don’t because of the Libs’ hostility to multiculturalism. On the other hand, the Libs’ get votes from poor Labor areas due to their stance on m-ism, but with Workchoices, they can kiss those goodbye.
Hostility to multiculturalism won’t stop Howard (and others) schmoozing with ethnic communties if they think it’ll win votes. I just think these things cannot be taken for granted.
Possibly class is more important than ethnicity here – in Melbourne, a working class Vietnamese from Footscray will probably vote very differently to a middle class Chinese in Box Hill. I would imagine there might be similar things at play in Sydney. In any case, I think many people, irrespective of ethnicity, don’t necessarily buy into Howard’s non-stop cultural warfare.
There has been so much hubris displayed on this blog because so few right wingers or independents are prepared to post…the fact that you are contemplating certain gains is a joke…must i remind you that while Labor is ahead by 12% in the polls that doesn’t guarantee you’ll win government…also swings are also never uniform and while i am prepared to admit the Coalition will suffer in QLD and SA they could well make gains in WA and VIC…
Also Wentworth is not going to fall the only reason it was a marginal was because King polled about 15% of the primary vote more than 2/3rds of this vote should come back to Turnbull. Also i would suggest Stirling and Hasluck will also not be lost as most often new sitting members often retain their vote in their next election after defeating a sitting MP…and no matter what Westpoll says massive gain for no reason sounds like a rogue poll to me the Coalition is far more likely to pick up Swan and Cowan…
After all Labor has to hold its marginal seats, if they lose a few of them it will make a Kevin 07 victory very tough…clearly the Coalition is struggling ill admit that but on paper it has alot to be proud about regardless of the petty quarrels of the left have to say they do have a good story to tell whereas Rudd will be arguing the country is terrible. So long as Howard can highlight Rudd’s inexperience and his own inexperienced front bench made up of nobodies Howard should stand a good chance of holding onto power. Let’s face it the Coalition has much more to lose than the ALP…if Labor loses they’ll stand a great chance in 2010 but if the Coalition loses they wont get back till at least 2013 or 2016.
The Coalition has a chance of winning the election by focusing on those 16 marginals that Labor could win, while semi-abandoning those seats held by more than 7% as they would most likely survive a swing against…might i not remind you all the government won the 1998 election via this strategy by holding on to its marginals…
Personally i can only see Howard losing if it is indeed a landslide victory for KR unless this happens i dont think Howard will lose his seat and the election…
I know a lot of quite wealthy Asian-Australians, some of them immigrants, some 2nd generation, one whose family have been here since 1850. Few of them would consider voting Liberal, because they see the Libs as anti-Asian and anti-immigrant. They see Labor as the multicultural party. Trying to be fair, I sometimes remind them of Labor’s virulently anti-Chinese past. Most of them have never heard about this, but they all remember Howard’s comments at the time of the 1988 Geoffrey Blainey controversy. http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/when-talk-of-racism-is-just-not-cricket/2005/12/15/1134500961607.html I’m told these comments are regularly republished in the Chinese-language press and quoted on SBS Chinese radio. You can bet they are being distributed in Bennelong. Even though Howard has retracted these comment, some mistakes can never be fixed.
121, Revolutionary– I can see dangers in generalising (I do hope it wouldn’t be seen as ‘stereotyping’ or something like that), but on the whole, I believe that my assumptions are correct. After all, I’m going on statistics charted wonderfully by the parliamentary library!
123, Adam– Thank you for backing me up there! And, interestingly, I’ve just finished reading Geoffery’s book (“All for Australia”) explaining his point of view. To me, his views, and that broadly of the anti-multicultural camp, don’t come off as racist (or anything near). But I’m not someone on the receiving end, so their perception is obviously much different.
The inevitable political repercussions! Another idea for your guide might be some charts detailing trends based on demographics, but I doubt you need more to add to the pile.
I think the debate about the multicultural nature of Benelong is very interesting, and I’d be keen to know if there are any recent studies of how various ethnic groups tend to vote. I would doubt that there’d be any real bloc vote these days for one major party or another, but, as I was brought up in a very multicultural area and have always been interested in this topic, here are a few random observations..
1. Many migrants tend to vote for the party that was in government when they arrived. Some recent arrivals, eg Chinese and Indians, may support John Howard because they are grateful to the government that he leads for letting them make a new life in this country.
2. Chinese and Indians place great stress on education, and most of the recent arrivals are skilled or business migrants, and are well-educated themselves. They may like Labor’s stress on education policy.
3. I doubt that many Muslims will support the Howard Government.
4. Don’t forget that Kevin Rudd speaks Mandarin, and has no doubt forged strong links with Australia’s Chinese communities. A few Labor ads on Chinese radio programs etc, with Kevin speaking in Chinese, could do wonders for Labor’s vote in Benelong. No doubt there’s some campaigning already going on along these lines, that most of us are unaware of.
5. While many Asian voters are indeed in small business, and may support the coalition, many recent arrivals have been skilled professionals, who may support Labor.
6. I doubt that things John Howard said two decades ago, in a “dog-whistle” manner, may hurt him at the polls.
7. Immigrants from former Communist countries (eg the Baltic states in the past, and Vietnamese in the present) may support the conservative sside of politics, because they see it as strongly anti-communist.
On balance, I think the strong NESB presence will work against John Howard in benelong this time, but it’s not a simple issue.
Glen, I agree there has been some Labor hubris on this blog. That has mostly been in response to the repetitive, aggressive, personally offensive spamming of the blog by people like Snoopy, Edward and Cerdic, no doubt friends of yours. But hubris is always to be deplored. Sensible Labor people know that a lot can happen between now and the election and that this election is far from won.
Nevertheless, most of the factual assertions in your post are just wishful thinking. Swings are nearly always uniform, at least in city seats, and the deviations from the swing tend to cancel each out. There is no polling evidence that Labor is going to lose seats in Victoria. The available polling evidence is that WA has now joined the swing to Labor. It is not true that first-term members do better at holding their seats than anyone else (this is true in the US because of the fundraising advantage of incumbents, but not here). ALL the available evidence is that there is a 2-party of at least 5% looming. If that happens, Howard will lose. You can argue that things will turn around, but you can’t just dismiss the available objective evidence.
Hi,
You may remember me from blog sites such as Ozpolitics.
I urge caution over this Galaxy Bennelong poll. This is a very diverse electorate and even with 800 voters polled I suspect a large error margin. (Which of course could add or subtract from a candidate’s result.)
Howard is assiduously working the various Asian communities. But Maxime does have many people out working for her. We met her yesterday down on Rowe Street when Howard was doing a presser. She presented beautifully and was winning everyone she spoke with. Howard was posing for lots of photos with people but I’m not convinced it was people wanting anything more than a picture of themselves with the current PM.
My prediction still stands. Howard will get his place in history, as the 2nd PM to lose his seat. Close, but he’ll lose. He should have studied the demographics and got out before his impending but richly deserved humiliation.
Actually, Adam and Michael are correct, if I may retract my comments slightly.
Returning to the comparison I made, I compared 2004 election results by booths. Box Hill Central (Chisolm, big Chine precinct) has Labor 58% 2PP. Footscray Central (big Vietnamese and African population, Gellibrand) had Labor 72%. Of course, there must be local and other factors at play, but both results show that there may at least be a correlation between ethnicity and voting patterns. However, the disparity between booths may in part be accounted for by class, given that one booth is more obviously working class than the other.
There must be studies on these things out there. Melbourne lends itself to these sorts of analyses. If we look at the metro region (excluding the south), we see a trend emerging, in my opinion. As you go from West to East, you find demographics that are progressively more monocutural, more middle class, and more likely to vote Liberal. In the Northern suburbs in particular, the north-west (very ethnically diverse) is a Labor stronghold, whilst the north-east (mostly middle-class Anglo areas in Jagajaga and Scullin) have several booths that are strongly Liberal.
Another thing to consider – if you walk into any authentic yum cha place, for instance, you’ll find Chinese language press, often with a good deal of Australian political content. Since most of the media watchers on this site presumably don’t know the language, we don’t know much about it. Yet thousands of locals read this stuff, and I think it’s likely to be more important to its readers than say, the Oz.
Quick research, if we are to continue this topic.
Using 2001 census figures and boundaries before the 2004 election:
Of the divisions with 0-5% of the population from a non-English speaking country
11 ALP (24%)
35 LIB (76%)
Of the divisions with 5-10% of the population from a non-English speaking country
7 ALP (23%)
24 LIB (77%)
Of the divisions with 10%+ of the population from a non-English speaking country
46 ALP (60%)
29 LIB (40%)
Of the divisions with 20%+ of the population from a non-English speaking country
29 ALP (88%)
4 LIB (12%)
Of the divisions with 30%+ of the population from a non-English speaking country
10 ALP (91%)
1 LIB (9%)
Interesting figures Michael – I guess the trend is clear. I’m just trying to be mindful of fatal exceptions to the rule!
Tony had a good point:
Immigrants from former Communist countries (eg the Baltic states in the past, and Vietnamese in the present) may support the conservative side of politics, because they see it as strongly anti-communist.
Eastern Europeans come to mind here. Old Hungarians I know, who left after 1956, won’t go anywhere near a ‘Labor’ party, despite being well aware of the Liberal’s faults. This generation is getting older now, and perhaps less influential, but I suspect that, like many ethnic groups, they are not equally distributed about the place. For instance, I’d guess that Wentworth (and to a lesser extent, Melbourne Ports) has traditionally had a higher than usual proportion of Eastern Europeans. As these people get older, or move away, the demographic may become more pro-Labor. Don’t know about the Vietnamese though – they’re certainly not fans of communism, but I don’t see them voting Tory.
The irony of Howard’s “Asian immigration” dog-whistle of 1988 is that today nobody cares at all about Asian immigration – that is, East Asian, South-East Asian or Indian immigration. All the xenophobe sentiment has shifted to MGBs, for obvious reasons. Thanks again, Sheikh Hilali. But Howard is stuck with the memory of his opportunist behaviour then, and its impact on his chances of holding a seat filling up with Asians. (This might be a problem for Kevin Andrews, too, by the way. Menzies also has a high NESB %, and a lot of this is Asian.)
Nearly all the post-WW2 East European immigrants in Melbourne Ports are Jews, and are very solid Labor. This is less true of their children and grand-children of course.
The Vietnamese and Khmers are interesting. As refugees from Communism, and generally social conservatives too, they should have been natural Liberals. But the perception that the Libs are anti-Asian has driven them en bloc to Labor – look at the vote in Fowler and Hotham.
Glen suggests that the Coalition could make gains in Victoriato balance against losses elsewhere. I am not sure how the election will go, but I am certain that Victorians are waiting for Howard with baseball bats. Howard has only ever gained a 2pp majority here in 2004, and only because Latham was even more ‘Sydney’ than Howard. Expect an ALP 2pp vote of 55+ in Vic.
Jasmine & aussie b, like yourselves I get somewhat nervous about the effect of localised issues on voting behaviour. I raised it in an earlier thread to which Strop took exception on account of my saying that as many of the Q’L’D population fell beneath the average I.Q. , it was a possibility that they would either confuse or deliberately vote against Labor at a level of government different to that which was responsible for whatever it was. I suspect Strop did not get what I was on about ( Strop I am quite across that given a statistically significant sample, you’ll get the same bell curve). My concern is that people, above or below average I.Q., will conflate local government, state and federal governent, beyond the really big ones, such as I.R..
Apart from that, the poll in Bennelong – Oh frabjous day!
I have several friends who are the children of Vietnamese refugees, and are staunch Liberals. However, they are also very strict Catholics, so is the bigger influence religion, or anti-communism?
Thanks, Adam, for those figures on the Vietnamese vote. I may have been wrong, then, to suggest that Howard’s past anti-Asian comments would have been forgotten by now.
But I’d still be very interested to know how the recent arrivals from Hong Kong etc might vote. They are not refugees and not poor, and very aspirational for their children. No doubt the major parties are monitoring the local Chinese media for clues.
I wonder how long it will be before Kevin Rudd himself does some campaigning in Benelong, and speaks the lingo with a few Chinese shopkeepers from Eastwood.
On another issue, I agree with Nath that Victoria has potential gains for Labor. If there’s a swing of five per cent or so, a string of seats will fall. I remain amazed that the coalition keeps holding Corangamite easily, but state seats in that area have been moving in Labor’s direction for a while now. On the other hand, I think Fran Bailey’s profile will help her in McEwen. What don’t help here are the chunks of northern Melbourne mortgage belt in the electorate, with new residents moving in every day, who probably don’t know what electorate they’re in, let alone have any loyalty to Fran Bailey. They may well vote on interest rates, child care and education, rather than local issues.
Re Vietnamese voters
Blaxland and Fowler have big Vietnamese populations however both are safe ALP. I suggest the Vietnamese people in those 2 electorates are voting ALP similar to the other voters in those electorates
Found! The only known photo of the mysterious John “Wacca” Williams, Nationals NSW Senate candidate:
http://guyra.yourguide.com.au/viewimage.asp?id=329183
Also the Nats have at last come up with a candidate against Tony Windsor, Tamworth Deputy Mayor Phil Betts. Anyone know anything about him?
Re Fairfax.
Alex Somlyay looks very safe, but he has lost Noosa in the redistribution, some of his best booths.
Also peregian springs booth had 400 voters last election, there are now 7,000 houses there. House prices have fallen on the Sunshine Coast especially in peregian springs and twin waters (about $150,000). Interest rates and negative equity will play some kind of a role in the election.
Last election the labour candidate (Ivan Malloy – Kate’s husband) was widely condemned for his link with terrorists (a Hick’s type photo) and a crass bumper sticker he had on his car. (ie he was a super dud candidate).
Not saying that Alex is in trouble, but it will be closer than many think.
Sorry I mis-spelled Bennelong! I am horrified. Must be something funny in this glass of cheap red that sits beside my keyboard.
I could see Labor’s 2PP being huge in Vic, without there neccessarily being any gains. They should have considered another candidate in Deakin.
McEwen has an odd demographic mix. I think the increased mortgage belt in the electorate will help Labor, and I’m not convinced that Bailey is seen as particularly useful or charismatic. She have have just enough of a buffer, though.
Off topic, but if possible, back to Wentowrth for a moment. Commenters here have suggested that Turnbull will save the seat by pouring loads of his own cash into the campaign. The anecdotal stuff I hear from the electorate suggests he’s gone. Is anybody aware of any evidence of a big spending campaign turning things around for a struggling candidate? Or conversely, of a big spending campaign that only hardened pre-existing cynicism?
That’s ‘may have’ enough of a buffer…
With that high non-English speaking background demographic it seems to me that Bennelong is only a Liberal seat because of Howard. Surely it will turn to a Labor marginal after he retires / gets voted out.
What about Corangamite then Happy ?
I remember adopting the conventional wisdom that Victoria has pretty much exhausted it’s quota in Victoria despite Labor have only lost one seat to the Coalition since the landslide in 1996 (McMillan) and that thanks in part at least to a 5.0 percent redistribution in 2004 if i remember correctly.
If we were looking to support an alternative view [ie. the suggestion Victorian’s are waiting for Howard with baseball bats which someone suggested earlier today], woulid be looking for the ‘Howard Battlers’ dominated seats with high mortgage presence and families unhappy with the implications of Workchoices, and if so, which seats ?
I seem to recall seeing some research which suggested that Asian voters in Bennelong split roughly 50-50 (in the context of their swelling population balancing a declining and strongly pro-Liberal WASP vote). Can’t remember the source. I also suspect that the voting behaviour of Chinese will depend a lot on their background; for example, a lot of the Chinese in Menzies are Hong Kong Chinese who migrated in the lead-up to the 1997 handover, and might be expected to be politically conservative.
#128 – there used to be strongly pro-Liberal areas in Jagajaga but are no longer – even the East Ivanhoe and Eaglemont areas were about 48% 2PP for Labor in 2004 (remarkably high given the demographics). The only booth where Labor did worse than this was in the small semi-rural pocket of Lower Plenty. In this part of town, the most revealing numbers I’ve seen in recent times have been the relative swings – over the 2001 and 2004 elections, the Ivanhoe end of Jagajaga swung by several percent towards Labor, and the West Heidelberg and Watsonia end by several percent against it. (To give some examples, Ivanhoe East was 42.8 ALP 2PP in 1998 and 48.4 in 2004, a swing of +5.6; conversely, Heidelberg West went from 77.9 to 71.4, and Watsonia from 61.1 to 55.3, swings of -6.5 and -5.8 respectively).
Jasmin 97 – Sorry for being late to answer:
65 – Aussie Bob could you explain the rail thing a bit more; why the line should be crooked how far down the process the State Govt is, how much money moving the tunnel will cost and whether or not that creates a new set of losers, just different ones?
Ok, the rail thing…
The state government wants to build a much needed rail link to Rouse Hill in Sydney’s west, via Epping, Pennant Hills, Castle Hill, Norwest Business Park and on to Rouse Hill.
They had a preferred option that ran above ground to Beecroft (where I live) and thence underground to Pennant Hills (about a 4 kilometre tunnel) and after that on to Rouse Hill. However, local Beecroft protests got that option killed in May.
In June other Beecroft residents (of which I am one), plus Epping residents (in Bennelong) were told that there would now be a tunnel all the way, running under Epping then under Beecroft to Pennant Hills. Half way along there would need to be an “egress and ventilation facility” built. The halfway point is in an area called “Chilworth Reserve” in Beecroft which has been free-standing bush since the 1850s. I live right on Chilworth Reserve and the tunnel passes under my house (40 metres deep, but just down the road it’s only 20 metres deep… it’s a hilly area criss-crossed by creeks and valleys). Hence I am interested.
Local real estate agents have “blacklisted” the entire area. This means they don’t believe they can sell properties for what they were worth in May. Drop 15% and you might get some interest. In my case this means I have lost over $150,000 immediately. Many others are in the same boat.
In May we werwe told we had until early July to make submissions regarding the new preferred route. That’s 6 weeks to organize, hold meetings, construct strategies, get to know neighbours, find out facts, learn all about building tunnels and then write the submissions. The previous preferred route had 2 YEARS to do all this.
And this is why people are pissed off: they feel the state government has lost so much time on the first proposal that they’re going to… forgive the expression… “railroad” the new preferred route over the objections of residents.
You ask about foisting the railway off on other people. That’s not the way I do business. I have proposed an alternative route that runs underneath the M2 Motorway (existing infrastructure corridor) and the under the VERY large Pennant Hills Golf Course, effectively cutting the number of residences affected by 90%. The 10% remaining are already right on Pennant Hills Rd. – a very major artery, being the main link to Sydney’s north for trucks etc. – and have already taken a hit on their property values 20 years ago because of this.
In the Epping area, my route bypasses most of the flats and unit buildings and takes a more northerly route to deliberately avoid built-up areas. The state government infrastructure group (TIDC: Trainsport Infrastructure Development Corporation) have taken my suggestion seriously and are spending $150,000 on surveying it for feasibility (why oh why didn’t they think of this themselves?). I have been informed by letter this is definitely happening. My aim has always been to move the corridor to somewhere where there are no residents who will be affected in a meaningful way by the rail link.
Howard’s involvement in all this?
He’s desperate. He’s appointed minders to look into it. This is a VERY Liberal area. Howard is the natural choice to approach for 75% of residents. The “citizens group” is full of Howard Huggers. They have approached him. What more can I say?
It seems to me that this is perfect for his “Bash the states” + “infrastructure” + “people’s democracy” agenda.
Maxine McKew ignores it at her peril.
There are perhaps 1500-200 votes in it for Howard. He needs every vote he can get. He will do something if it’s possible to do it. The logic goes like this:
1. If Howard is PM he’ll help.
2. To be PM he must be member for Bennelong.
3. To get elected for Bennelong he’ll do anything (money no object) to accomplish this task.
There’s much more detail – to-ing and fro-ing, intrigue, Machiavellian antics etc. – to it than this, but I hope you get the picture.
It’s a Big One in Bennelong.
Jasmin: a further note re. the “egress and ventilation facility” in Chilworth Reserve – this will mean that not only is the tunnel shallow under surrunding houses, but also that 400 trees will need to be cut down, creeks re-routed, valleys levelled, reinforced driveways constructed and concrete poured over a one hectare area BEFORE even construction starts.
Other facilities like this on previously constructed lines (Chatswood-Epping) have taken up similar areas of devastation.
It’s vandalism.
Pure and simple.
Nevertheless Nath Brumby is not popular and i think the fact that the Vic Govt has abandoned the Murray-Darling initiative will hurt the ALP also let’s not forget there was a swing albeit small towards the Coalition in the State Election in 2006…Clearly it will be a dogfight in Victoria but the Liberal marginals are held by more than 5% thus they should hold on the best result would be status quo and i dont think Labor will make any gains in Vic they are more likely to in TAS, QLD and SA.
Melbourne Ports my electorate will never go to the Libs…the Greens poll about 10% and when they do the ALP are always safe.
Looks like it is not only Bennelong where the Liberals have huge problems today.
It appears that the Queensland council amalgamations issue is set to claim it’s first two scalps not Beattie or Rudd but Liberal Leader Flegg and Deputy McArdle are set to be rolled by the Member for Clayfield and the Member for Robina is said to have the numbers to be Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party in Queensland.
Infighting in the Queensland Parliamentary Liberal Party and also between Liberals and the state Nationals flared last Monday and it appears Howard’s intervention in the affair has damaged his own side