The eastern suburban Melbourne seat of Deakin was created in 1937, when it extended far beyond the city limits to Seymour and Mansfield. It gained its wholly urban orientation in 1969, and since losing Box Hill in 1977 has been centred on Blackburn and Nunawading (currently extending east down the Maroondah Highway to Ringwood and Croydon). Despite its middle suburban location, Deakin does not fit the mortgate belt mould: census figures show an average number of dwellings being purchased, a high level of full ownership and few renters. As my electorate maps at Crikey demonstrate, there is a clear trend of increasing support for the Liberals as the electorate extends eastward. This does not correlate with income levels, which are in fact slightly higher in the west, and might instead be explained by a notable lack of ethnic diversity in the east.
For a seat that has been marginal for most of its history, Deakin has brought Labor remarkably little joy. Their only win was when the Hawke government came to power in 1983, and it was lost again when Hawke went to the polls early in December 1984. The seat presented a picture of electoral stability from 1984 to 2001, when Liberal margins ranged only from 0.7 per cent to 2.5 per cent (although the 1990 redistribution muffled the impact of a 4.3 per cent Liberal swing). The 2004 election gave the Liberals their first comfortable win since 1977, with a 3.4 per cent swing that was evenly distributed from one of the electorate to the other. The 5.0 per cent shift required by Labor at the coming election would be the seat’s biggest since a 5.1 per cent swing in 1980, which came off the back of Labor’s twin disasters of 1975 and 1977. Phillip Barresi (right) has maintained an uncomfortable hold on the seat since the 1996 election, after he defeated incumbent Ken Aldred for preselection. Aldred in turn became member in 1990 after his predecessor, Julian Beale, defeated him for preselection in his existing seat of Bruce. He has since made more than one attempt at a comeback, most recently when he won preselection for the Labor-held seat of Holt for this year’s election. This was overturned by the state party’s Kroger-Costello dominated administration committee, which was concerned over his past history of eccentric pronouncements. Barresi’s preselection does not appear to have been challenged in his 11 years as member, despite his failure to win promotion.
Labor’s candidate is Electrical Trades Union official Mike Symon (left), who had a three-vote preselection win in March over local GP Peter Lynch, the candidate from 2004. A plebiscite of local party members reportedly gave Lynch 64.8 per cent support, but this was overwhelmed by the 50 per cent of the vote determined by the state party’s tightly factionalised Public Office Selection Committee. Lynch complained of irregularities, but his appeal was rebuffed by the national executive. In an email to party members published on Andrew Landeryou’s The Other Cheek, Lynch (who claimed support from the Left, Pledge and Independents factions) spoke of a deal between the Right and the Left sub-faction centred on Dean Mighell and the Electrical Trades Union, in which the former would support Symon and the latter would back Peter McMullin in Corangamite. Also on The Other Cheek was a letter from Kathy Jackson, a senior figure in the Health Services Union, which accused her own Right faction’s leadership of misleading Lynch into thinking he had their backing, while they instead marshalled support for Symon. Symon’s ETU links became a target of Coalition barbs following the controversies surrounding state secretary Dean Mighell and ousted Franklin candidate Kevin Harkins.
Dear William,
I love the site, but if you’re trying to get traffic down, couldn’t you provide a full text feed of the articles, rather than just the first couple of sentences?
Cheers!
Oh yeah, forgot to mention – please keep this thread on topic.
Telemachus, I’m only interested in getting traffic down up to a point. It’s actually bandwidth use I want to keep under control – I still want my hit counter to look good.
What are people’s feelings about this seat? I heard that Labor’s candidate isn’t too popular inside and outside the party.
friend of mine on the ground says there’s a strong anti-WorkChoices feeling, but 5 % still a huge task. Havent heard about the candidate but seems not very inspiring. Peter Lynch a GP may have been seen as a better choice than a union man
If there is a big swing it won’t matter whether the candidate is good or bad. The 1983 candidate was a union official and the seat was just as middle class then as it is now. He defeated a sitting member of 17 years’ standing. Having said that I think this is a borderline seat at best.
This is one of those seats that has been carefully targetted by the “Your Rights at Work campaign. Without wanting to go into too much detail I know this to be 100% true. I think it will be very effective.
I’m in this electorate (just). Andrew (#4) has captured the feeling of myself and other Labor voters I know. In 2004 Peter Lynch was always around, handing out pamphlets, shaking hands, asking for people to vote for him… He mustn’t have slept.
As for Symon, well, I know it’s early days yet, but I’ve not seen nor heard anything of him. I’ll vote for him, but reluctantly.
It seems Symon’s endorsement captures everything bad about the ALP – backroom deals, union hacks imposed by central office, local preferences ignored… I hope Symon wins, but if he doesn’t I won’t be entirely disappointed.
5% margin in Victoria seems to be eminently doable, especially since Vic seems to be swinging back strongly to Labor.
Deakin 5.1% the Liberals most marginal Melbourne seat with a very well liked local MP.
This seat being very diverse will be very interesting to watch, while the ALP only won 3 or 4 booths at the last election, yet in 2002 won all state seats in this area.
To show what type of area it is if you take Ringwood (eastern end) it has some very high income strong Liberal parts, yet within the same area you have area’s which look and are very different.
with lower income and its fair share of social problems which
I’m not surprised this area rejected Latham, for both his personality and the citylink issue hurt the ALP in this area.
the good news for ALP supporters is I’m sure they will do better this time in Nunawading, this part normally votes ALP but last time swung towards the Liberals.
I agree with the assessment that Deakin type seats could be the different between a narrow ALP win and a landslide.
The issue of the union background of candidate. I see no problem as long as he is a friendly type, if he is an aggressive thug type then the ALP have no hope in Deakin.
If I hadn’t been watching the polls I would be saying Barrasi is safe in Deakin, but if the polls are right, with talk of swings in other eastern suburban seats then I don’t see Deakin being excluded.
On the latest Newspoll qtr figures showing a 60-40 Labor 2PP in Vic, as well as Lib internal polling leaks, Deakin may well be a certain Labor gain.
I don’t really understand all the caution being expressed over Labor’s chances here. (Especially when at the same time we see much wilder predictions about the ALP’s chances in nearby seats like Kooyong and Goldstein – both blue ribbon Liberal.) Deakin surely vies with Corangamite as the most likely Coalition seat to fall in Victoria.
The current pendulum pours scorn on the suggestion that this is a landslide seat. Labor could hold hold Deakin even with a very slim parliamentary majority. Most of that 5% buffer was added in 2004.
Deakin’s long Liberal history can be misleading. As William alludes to, Deakin was made into a notionally Labor seat subsequent to the 1987 election. I don’t think its character has changed much in redistributions since. And 2007 is shaping up to be Labor’s best result in Victoria since 1987.
I’d be interested William, if your observation about the Liberals doing better at the eastern end of the electorate is particular to 2004, or fits the data from earlier years as well.
My contention is that a solid campaign against the East Link tolls by Mr. Barresi skewed the margin in the electorate as a whole, but was especially significant in the Ringwood area. I’ve argued that this factor was influential in Aston, Dunkley, Holt and probably Isaacs as well.
The contrary view would note that the State seats in the eastern end – part of Bayswater and Kilsyth – were both regained by the Liberals last November, after a single term, but Mitcham (i.e. Blacburn, Nunawading, Mitcham, Vermont) was retained by Labor, although with a greater swing to the Liberals, 6% approx..
I’m with Adam, I think Labor is virtually certain to win Deakin this time, barring an absolute meltdown in the current poll lead which they enjoy.
Just how far (if any) any seat will of will not actually is just supposition at this time as all we can go guage if from the seat’s electoral history and demographics.
I do agree with DW re the inflated margin in Deakin from 2004 however, I do come down on the side of other observers who suggest that the swing may be more muted in this seat than in others. Baressi appears to have been an effective local MP and whilst this factors rarely holds up against a landslide, it can have the effect of mitigating rendering a narrower result than otherwise. The relative “homogenity” of this seat may also play a part. If Labor wins this seat, it will be the western end of the seat that pulls them through. Correspondingly, if the Coalition’s “union scare” or further dirt on prominent unions gets any real leverage, then Labor’s choice of a union candidate may hurt
At this point in time, I favour Labor to win this seat but I suspect this will be close.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT-ZvaAMb94
Judge for yourself
11 David Walsh : asks why the caution with Deakin when we have discussed Kooyong and Goldstein.
From what I hear and have seen Barrasi is a good local MP for Deakin, unlike do nothing Petro.
I think the other thing is the polls are right then the swings in the safer Liberal seats are said to be bigger than in the marginal Liberal seats and I consider Deakin a marginal.
I’m tipping an ALP win in Deakin, for I would expect the Ringwood & Nunawading parts of the seat to return to their normal voting pattens for Citylink and Latham factors have been removed or become less of a factor.
Rudd’s personality and the ALP’s generally more sensible policy approach this time around along with the Liberals poor policies on I.R and Welfare changes should see a swing toward the ALP, with the only thing saving the Liberals is Barrasi is well regarded.
It’s not Barrasi, it’s BARRESI, B A R R E S I with an E – Ron Barassi is a football legend and a greater man than the whole Liberal Party put together will ever be.
Ooops sorry
Deakin looks about as winnable for the ALP as does another Victorian seat – La Trobe.
The last time I looked Portlandbet had the ALP as narrow favourites: 1.75 compared to 1.92 for the Libs. Incidentally La Trobe had slightly narrower odds: 1.80 for ALP compared to 1.87 for the Libs.
I think at the moment Portlandbet is the only betting market which has the ALP as the favourite in Deakin and La Trobe.
Adam, wasn’t there talk some years ago about Barassi as a Lib candidate.. would this make the part greater than the whole?
The ALP as narrow favourites in Deakin of course (not nationwide!)
Gipp Slander, not that I’ve ever heard.
I believe the Liberals have approched Ron before but he declinded.
Like the Waugh brothers, who are mentioned every election but never seem to materialise.
The other factor is the Greens. The candidate is well liked and has a large left wing following in ringwood, as well as being very involved in the YR@W campaign, which is well recieved here, as has been said. I know he wont win, but he could gather enough swing voters to help the ALP if they cant do it themselves.
Adam,@ #16
You condemn Mr Barassi with scant praise.
I think you could say the same about almost anyone :):):)
“For a seat that has been marginal for most of its history, Deakin has brought Labor remarkably little joy. Their only win was when the Hawke government came to power in 1983, and it was lost again when Hawke went to the polls early in December 1984. The seat presented a picture of electoral stability from 1984 to 2001, when Liberal margins ranged only from 0.7 per cent to 2.5 per cent”
Great analysis William, these are some very interesting facts. For a seat that seems to swing very little regardless of the political mood, it is difficult to see the ALP picking up the 5% needed all in one hit.
Just another Union hack representing the Labor Party…what a shame the ALP doesnt pre-select GP’s or small business operators instead? And you wonder why people call the Labor Party beholden to the Unions….
Deakin will survive why would you vote for a Union stooge over a good local MP…
Peter, as you can see on my Crikey maps, there was perhaps a slightly bigger swing to the Liberals in the eastern half at the last election, but there was not much in it. Therefore the pattern of higher Liberal support in the east also held in 2001. Perhaps things were different in 1998, or at state elections – I must confess I haven’t gone that far in depth.
Glen, you’re being silly. The ALP is probably the most closed, backward centre-left party in the English speaking Western world.
Given the choice of an accomplished doctor or some trade union hack from the thuggish ETU of course they’d choose the latter because he’s “part of the tribe”.
Having a narrow stream of low-quality, questionable candidates seems to be an ALP trademark this election.
Have any opinion polls been done in the Deakin electorate been published recently?
Unfortunatly this anylasis lacks a very vital element, the Green vote and the importance of who will decide or not, the outcome of many seats in this election and into the future.
For how long must the voter interested in election outcomes bare the 2PP figures being regurgetated over and over again, with out a mention or the hugely important growing Green vote.
Nowhere ealse in the world is a political party with 10% of the vote ignored to such an extent as the Greens are in Australia.
Is this just lazyness on behalf of the MSM, or a more sinister conspiracy, to manipulate the democratic process.
I think the LIB/LAB cosy relationship has not been very good for democracy and the voters seem to share my opinion as the Democrats and Green vote has demonstrated.
Thanks for this outlet to get my thoughts out.
“The ALP is probably the most closed, backward centre-left party in the English speaking Western world.”
Since there are only five centre-left parties in the English speaking Western world (the British, Irish, Australian and NZ labour parties and the Canadian NDP), that’s not saying much, even if it were true. It is in any case nonsense. Yes the ALP is based on the unions (as are three of the other four), but it is quite willing to look for candidates outside the unions. Examples at this election are Maxine McKew, Mike Bailey, George Newhouse, Mike Kelly, Jason Clare, Liz Prime, Melissa Parke, George Colbran, Mark Dreyfus, Peter Tinley, Gary Gray, Nicole Cornes and Rodney Cocks.
Of course, as soon as Labor starts choosing candidates from outside the union, we get slagged by people like A-C for choosing “celebrity candidates”. If Labor ran Nelson Mandela and Mother Theresa, A-C would find some line to use against them. This is no more than a well-rehearsed line of Liberal propaganda, which Labor quite rightly ignores, thanks very much.
Nevertheless, I have said all along that a unionist was probably not the best candidate for such a middle-class seat. As noted above, however, if the voters of Deakin want to vote for Kevin Rudd (another non-union recruit, by the way), they will do so regardless of the local candidate, who in a city seat will be just a name on a ballot paper for 80% of voters. As it happens, I’m told that Symon is working very hard and doing quite well. Six months ago Deakin was not on Labor’s list of likely gains. Now it is. Symon may or may not make a brilliant MP, but since Baressi is still on the backbench after 11 years, and is thus regarded as less talented than Danna Vale or Wilson Tuckey, people in glass houses should be careful throwing stones.
Glen (#27) is right. Baressi has been a good local member. Why didn’t the ALP nominate someone with a good local profile? Why did they impose a union hack on Deakin, especially when Deakin is archetypal middle-class suburban Melbourne? It didn’t need to be a celebrity candidate. What was wrong with Peter Lynch? He’d put in a solid effort last time.
I wasn’t impressed by Symon’s speech (thanks for the youtube link). Symon might be working hard but I’ve seen little evidence of it. Maybe he thinks our votes down the eastern end are sewn up.
However, it probably won’t make much difference either way. People (such as myself) who want to see the end of Howard will vote for Symon regardless. Nevertheless, these backroom deals irk me somewhat. The more I think about it the more I’m likely to vote Green (and preference Labor).
I really wouldn’t be betting against ‘Rowdy’* Phil just yet, he’s a survivor and he has luck. Deakin under his tenure has gone from very to barely marginal, and his lack of progress as an MP means that he is regularly seen in the electorate. I am a swinging Labour/Greens voter but in the last few years I have seen Phil picking up his kid from the kindergarten several times, and in cafes with his family on Sunday morning having a coffee. In contrast Kirsty Marshall the state Labour member is completely invisible except on Youtube. Phil’s campaign office is two doors down from Kirsty’s electoral office. I pass both places to get to the excellent Blackburn Cellars bottle shop on the corner, and I haven’t seen Kirsty once (and I’m a thirsty soul).
While Phil’s campaign photo does his middle aged features no favours, he comes across well personally. He has also positioned himself as someone sympathetic to the plight of the refugees (he is a psychologist), and one of the few times he made the media was a story in the GG a few years ago where it was asserted that he was one of a group of MPs who were working behind the scenes to move towards a more humane policy. Whatever the truth of this he has got the spin out successfully, and this will be keeping the Doctor’s Wives on side.
He has been targetted by the union campaigns and the ETU had a series of sausage sizzles outside local supermarkets a few months back, with an anti Workchoices petition, and a theme of ‘Why won’t Baressi debate Workchoices in Deakin’ (answer, because he’s not an idiot). I thought the ‘unionists with sausages’ theme was a brilliant one, but I like sausages and they had my vote already. They seem to have gone too hard too early however, and Phil has been responding with leafletters at Forest Hill Shopping Centre (our answer to Fountain Gate) concentrating on local issues and not mentioning Workchoices one tiny little bit. Phil was all over the toll road** issue at the last election, and this was a disaster for Labour.
Deakin is classic Australian suburbia, and almost all of is stats re age, home** ownership, etc, are very close to the national average. However it would be a mistake to just look at the swing required. Every election is a local election, and while I hope and expect to see the Libs as a whole turfed out it would not surprise me at all to see Baressi climbing out of the wreckage, dusting himself off, and resuming his career of calculated innofensiveness. On the other hand, if Deakin goes the libs are toast.
To go off topic for a second, love the site Wiiliam and as soon as my credit card has cooled I will make a contribution. You seem to have got the Oz Politics crowd over while damping the hostility that marred that site, and Antony Green and Possum are high quality contributers. I also suspect Charles of being a frequent returning officer at Melbourne Uni during the 1980’s and, if so, he is another heavy hitter. Cheers
*Baressi has spoken less in parliament than almost any other MP
** I have corrected my original typos, ‘Homo ownership’ and ‘Toll toad’ for the sake of clarity, but they were too good to lose entirely!
If Symon is a “union hack” then Barresi is a “small business hack”, of which the Liberal backbench has plenty. These are meaningless terms of abuse.
Glen asks why Labor doesn’t recruit small business operators. Well, duh, for the same reason the Liberals don’t recruit union officials. Labor and Liberal represent different classes. (In fact Labor has several small business candidates, and the Libs have one ETU member as a candidate, but my point is esentially correct.)
The difference being that Symon the union hack got paid for sitting on a gravy train whilst the small businessman actually employed people and contributed to his community.
The Liberal Party has many former Union members i.e.
Tony Abbort “media union”
Actually he got paid for defending the rights of low-paid workers, but never mind, we are obviously not going to agree about this. Who said class was dead in Australian politics? Howard has brought back class with a bang, and that’s why a million voters have flipped back to Labor. So you go on abusing the unions all you like, Swordfish, it’s all grist to our mill.
34 Blackburn Bob,
Nice post, must be thirsty after that effort 🙂
Forrest Hill is your Fountain Gate, I’m not sure if its on purpose but the irony of Kath & Kim is Fountain Gate (Holt) booth voted in 2004 ALP on the TPP, While Forrest Hill tends to vote Liberal.
While the characters live in Patterson lakes ( Dunkley) which is a very solid Liberal booth and the show is shot around Southland on the boundary of Hotham and Goldstein.
Class is mostly dead in Australian Politics which is part of why Lathem lost in 2004, but this time around Rudd has played a classless campaign while Howard has tried to turn it into a class campaign so what we are seeing is a reverse Lathem.
Can someone advise Howard that we want the date for our date with Anthony Green and co.
BMW, you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried. Class is alive and well in Australian politics, and has been dragged to the forefront by WorkChoices, the most naked, vindictive piece of class legislation since Stanley Bruce tried to abolish arbitration in 1929 (and we know what happened to him). That’s why the working class voters who deserted Keating’s “big picture” in 1996 and stuck with Howard over issues like immigration and terrorism are now going back to Labor. This will be the most class-polarised election in recent Australian history.
Swordfish @36
I am sick to the gills of people mouthing on about “union hacks”. Tiresome and not very grown up. Dogma-driven, unworthy of debate. Unions in this country have contributed to the betterment of workers, that is a fact, not a liberal factoid. It used to be reds under the beds, now it’s union hacks …
Seems to me liberals, generally, have a mental age of about three.
Gasp, now I feel better …
William,
Is there a steam-driven method to contribute to the cost of this site?
sorry to go off topic but i’m dying to ask — do you think Howard is delaying calling the election because he’s waiting for the polls to go up for him, or is it because he’s desperately trying to cook up and cost some policies that wont look too much as if they were scribbled on the back of an envelope, as his water and broadband policies were? the Laurie Oakes/Julia Gillard segment today was quite good.
Judy
Maybe the latter. He’s desperately trying to get up a few policies that might – just might – grab in the electorate. Although the polls are awful, punters like policies and, so far, he has come up with ziltch. Can’t see what he can do except maybe declare war on some hapless country like Fiji. Or Victoria.
I don’t necessarily care about whether it he is a “union hack” so to speak. What concerns me is the process involved in electing him. Fifty per cent of the vote came from the central committee, a committee made up of people predominately from the union movement whom as members of the ALP do not represent a significant proportion.. Therefore it is a undemocratic process… And on that why should 50 percent of the vote come from the central committee…
Nonetheless when people preselection they tend to always whinge about stacked positions and yes they occur but win they win they say nothing… Gavan O’Connor for one.. And Gavan how did you get the seat in the first place.. Bob Sercombe another the hypocrisy of these people..
I don’t necessarily care about whether it he is a “union hack” so to speak. What concerns me is the process involved in electing him. Fifty per cent of the vote came from the central committee, a committee made up of people predominately from the union movement whom as members of the ALP do not represent a significant proportion.. Therefore it is a undemocratic process… And on that why should 50 percent of the vote come from the central committee…
Nonetheless when people get preselection they tend to always whinge about stacked positions and yes they occur but win they win they say nothing… Gavan O’Connor for one.. And Gavan how did you get the seat in the first place.. Bob Sercombe another the hypocrisy of these people..
Whoops sorry about that…
Marky, the central panel is elected by state conference, which is made up of delegates elected by party branches and from affiliated unions. So it’s perfectly democratic. The reason the central panel gets a 50% say is so that the party membership as a whole shares in the choice of candidate. If it’s left entirely up to local branches there is a tendency to choose whoever is best liked in the local branches, which does not necessarily make for the best candidate, and also increases the risk of branch stacking. No system of candidate selection is perfect but this one is better than most and usually works fairly well. I think after the Ken Aldred and Michael Towke episodes the Liberal Party is in no position to be too sanctimonious on this subject.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Aldred-stripped-of-Liberal-preselection/2007/03/22/1174153254661.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Towke
I agree local branches can be stacked… but also getting to the central committee involves stacking as regards the area of the electorate hence the more members in an electorate the more delegates who get vote to become a conference delegate.
Also higher union membership means more delegates does it not… And generally with the central committee it is made up of yes people and factional servants… Adam i know the process and to me it is undemocratic… Love debating with you because your one of those yes men.. never got negative word to say against the Labor party.. maybe your free thinking been corrupted… Comrade
Adam, I know what you mean when you talk about Class, but I reject the notion of Class on the bases.
The so called Blue Collar earn in many cases more money than those who wear a suit.
My point being what the heck is this working class crap, you either have a job or you don’t, another way of looking at it a top quality tradesman will need to spend as much time studying at Tafe as the said Professional and their Uni decrees
This has been the beauty of Rudd he has stuck to issues and has run a very nice campaign, while Howard and Co appear to be looking for some mythical class based campaign which they started with that jokechoices act and the welfare changes.
Lets put this into a Deakin contest, Is Deakin anti working class since it has only ever returned one ALP member.
I wouldn’t think so, Deakin is the sort of seat which will swing to Rudd because he hasn’t run a “us vs them” lets bash those whom earn good money.
I think the closest we come to a class in this country is more postcode based.