| ALP | LIB | Total | |
| Riverton | 8002 | 8034 | 16036 |
| Wanneroo | 7299 | 7293 | 14592 |
| Albany | 8182 | 8065 | 16247 |
| Forrestfield | 8177 | 7935 | 16112 |
| Collie-Preston | 8299 | 7883 | 16182 |
3pm Sunday. This post will be used to follow developments in the late count. Labor can still form a minority government if it wins four out of the above five seats, remembering that in 2005 they generally did about 2 per cent worse on absent and postal votes than on booth votes. Going on the 2005 result we could expect each to seat to have about 400 postal and 2000 absent votes outstanding, although I hear there was an unusually high number of absent votes due to confusion over the new boundaries.
Grog there is a reason why there is only a lone member of the National Party in SA.
51 Glen – and that reason would be the high intelligence of the SA voter?
As someone pointed out on the last thread our SA Nat actually supported Labor after Labor was first elected and both her and Labor were subsequently re elected easily, the following election.
No because they’ve sold themselves out to the Left.
I would suggest the Nats sold themselves out to the right a long time ago…if they’re slowly seeing the light, it’s because they want to survive.
Diana you do realise Lisp is only meeting Carps and RipsOff to get a better deal from Barnett and Sniff tomorrow.
Oh please Glen – from what I can see the Nats in SA have never held more than 1 seat in the lower house. They must have sold themselves out to the left back when they stopped being the Country League…
That may well be Glen, but you seem to be getting rather shrill on that point. Getting a little worried?
Gary Bruce from your perspective this was actually a pretty good result for Labor, surely?
Nope, not given those photo finishes above the posts, which point to Labor being SNAFU’d regardless.
Grog (50) that poll was rubbish for the reasons noted at the end of the post. The reason why the Nationals vote is low in SA has to do with the historical development of non-Labor parties in SA and the rural base of the LCL. It is certainly not to do with Maynard’s membership of the Rann cabinet. It has done her a lot of good because of the subsidies that are seen to flow directly to the Riverland and her ability to take credit for it.
It is no wonder that Grylls was saying she was an inspiration last night.
Barnett is digging in against regional royalties which Grylls says is a deal breaker and the ABC reports that:
“Mr Barnett hopes to form a coalition with the National Party, but the Nationals say that is not the best option for the regions.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/07/2357550.htm
Now maybe this deal won’t happen but so far I see only assertions why it won’t.
Here’s the slogan – ALP-Nats, puting the socialism back into Agrarian Socialism… 🙂
Shrike – I agree, that poll would have been like doing one of Lyne and not naming Oakeshott.
ALP-Nats – the Watermelon Coalition
ALP-Nats = A cow that leans to the left 🙂
The question seems to be if the Nationals can survive some sort of coalition or alliance with the ALP.
Which boils down to whether the $700M he is asking for (or whatever he settles for, say $500M or so…) is enough of a bribe for his base.
That is, if he can sell it as a win for the regions.
[I note that “regions” has seemed to replace “country” in the Nat’s lingo].
If Grylls & co weigh that up, and come up with a “Yes”, and Barnett won’t deal, and Carps will, then it is game on.
Then Carps will fall after the CCC report and Gas report later this year…
Lisp will get his 700 odd millions from Sniff and Cautious tomorrow, the Libs like Troy can smell a win here they will do what is necessary for his support. Either that or its another 4 years of corruption and a Carps Lisp Coalition.
I think Carps is a moral to do the deal. We’ll see if Barnett is a man of his word.
Glen, we all know Grylls has a lisp, get over it.
Which ever way it goes this hotch potch will make a seriously unstable combination.
[We’ll see if Barnett is a man of his word.]
I thought Barnett has already rejected the mine royalties plan?
Why would the Nats side with Barnett when mine royalties was their biggest issue?
ALP-Nats A strawberry and lime icecream. Looks good till the heat comes on.
I should add to my earlier comments about Maywals that in SA we also have Rory McEwen who didn’t get Lib preselection a few elections back. He backed Rann two elections ago, along with Maywald, in exchange for a cabinet post (Forestry etc). He was also re-elected against a Liberal candidate by his very pleased constituents.
The message is that two National or Liberal independents have been re-elected in SA despite being “Benedict Arnolds” and helping Labor form government. It does give food for thought.
And I’d love to see whether William would really eat his hat.
“I thought Barnett has already rejected the mine royalties plan?” That’s what I mean. Will Barnett put power before principle, as Glen seems to be suggesting.
Kim Beazley said it last night. “Give the man what he wants.”
If Grylls forms a working agreement with Labor, and he hints that he may do so, this would lob a hand grenade into Federal Politics, so Stephen Smith may be wrong and the WA election will have Federal implications.
Will Grylls be the catalyst that allows the Nats to break the Lib shackles, he is on the record as saying the Nats get “done over” by the Libs in coalition.
Will Barnaby Joyce reform the Nats federally in Qld and challenge Truss for the Leadership?
Interesting times. 😛
Yep, and straight from the Horse’s mouth 🙂
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/07/2357550.htm
Who knows what the deal will be, but why oh why would you prefer a patch work ALP minority administration to come out of this election when the CCC report and Gas report will destroy them?
Sniff and Cautious will give Lisp a choice, and most likely a deal.
I suspect Lisp will give the Libs a sniff of victory in the end.
If I were Colin Barnett – not having expected to get this far – I’d be *very* tempted to play the long game and stand firm against the Nationals’ demands and see them either a) fold and meekly support a minority Liberal government or b) cop the blame for propping up a mortally wounded minority Labor government – who most, if not all, of their voters want to see the back of. Whichever way Brendan Grylls jumps, it could be another nail in the National Party’s coffin.
I’m sure Rudd could help Carps out Frank.
They could of if they had managed to get up their luxury car tax what was that 550m lol!
The point is that rural politics is becoming about nothing more than subsidies. This is something that Vic Labor picked up in 1999 and why Bracks did so well. The problem for the Nationals federally is that by tying themselves into a losing party like the Libs, they have nothing to negotiate.
Does William really have a hat or was it just an empty gesture?
Actually Glen either way I’ll be happy. This patchwork will cause either contender for premier nightmares. If Barnett gets the poison chalice it will put to rest this idea that the Libs are the best thing since sliced bread.
Unfortunately for everyone, the situation will still be in a state of flux until the final results are known.
Delighted though I am that Alan Carpenter seems to have been plugged into the energy supply overnight, the position of strength he enjoys is dependent on two factors – the first of which is incumbency, which he will keep for the time being and from which he and Eric can open the coffers enough to reach a concordat with Grylls on greater resources for the regions.
The other is the notion that the most stable minority government for Western Australia would be between Labor and the Nationals. This is correct, SO LONG AS Labor win 27 seats so they can provide a Speaker and still command a majority on the floor of the Assembly with National support ONLY.
Anything less, and Carol Adams and John Bowler get involved. Given that Colin is likely to need Constable and Woollard, this would fatally weaken Labor’s argument.
80 Glen – No Glen, adjust the royalties split.
wouldn’t that put an even bigger black hole in the budget?
Any chance the four Nats could split apart in their support?
The money for regions could come from the gas distillate tax.
This was always just a tax break for Woodside in return for Howard negotiating that dreadful gas deal with China. The tax will just return it to an equitable measure. The companies have been making a motza over it and haven’t passed on any of the savings to their customer.
I think it works out to about $500 mill a year, trouble is it is being held up in the senate, though would need just WA nat senator to cross the floor or abstain.
diogenes (86) I think that is an important potential barrier to an ALP-Nat deal if he can’t bring the team with him. He would have to show a united party (although the logic of a party acting like Independents is that each of the members become so).
But they have all signed up to the regional royalties deal, as I understand it, so presumably they would have to justify their decision on that.
Talkon
Surely Carps would offer the Speaker job to a Labor independent. That’s one less he needs.
carps on abc radio- sounds chipper
esj,glen etc its getting dark again he he he
If you heard the Kwinana Independent MP she doesnt look like backing Carps and RippsOff.
I wouldn’t be so sure of that, I hear that Carol’s boss in the Police Union was in talks with Michelle Roberts about gaining her support 🙂
Not wholeheartedly Glen, no – but it’s more a case of personality than politics for Carol Adams and I think there’d be a revolt in Kwinana if she publicly threw her lot in with the Libs.
She certainly wouldn’t vote with Labor on everything, but probably would on no confidence motions and supply etc.
And Diogenes, I genuinely don’t think either Bowler or Adams would accept the Speakership if offered.
Ah the ALP ran a severely personal attack campaign towards her and she’s pissed off, royally i wouldnt be surprised if the former Mayor backs Cautious and Sniff.
well well well
the only guarantee is a a very short parliamentary term.
Basically both major parties were on the nose.
The comment ‘What’s the difference…bugger all’ was heard all day at the polling booth I was at. (working for the WAEC…not a party 😛 ).
Saying there is fed implications is laughable. It’s all united kingdom of western australia issues.
oh and Glen v Frank etc:
Piping Shrike – Paris is French and Berlin is German.
[
]
Of course, Glen is on the Right.
Anyone who thinks the Nats won’t do a deal with Labor probably thinks the Nats are a party of principle.
The Nats know their place, if they want to throw their lot in with a corrupt incompetent government that’s their choice, but i think they’ll know their place again and join us in creating a new non-labor administration.