The West Australian has published a Westpoll survey of 400 respondents, of whom 181 (exact figures provided) said they preferred that the Nationals form an alliance with the Liberals against 129 who preferred Labor (44 per cent to 32 per cent). Of the former group, “33 per cent said they believed National voters were traditionally more Liberal than Labor, 32 per cent said the big swing in the election showed voters wanted to get rid of Labor, 21 per cent said Labor had ignored country people, 15 per cent said they preferred Mr Barnett and 6 per cent said it was because of Labor’s one-vote, one-value legislation”. The Liberals were favoured 53-47 on voting intention, although Alan Carpenter retains a lead of 47 per cent to 37 per cent as preferred premier. “Nearly eight out of 10” expressed support for major city projects being shelved to accommodate Royalties for Regions.
The West also reports Jim McGinty “has conceded Labor has probably lost the crucial seats of Wanneroo and Riverton”, where the Liberals say they lead by 280 and 62 votes. The Liberals believe themselves to be 28 votes behind in Albany, whereas Labor thinks the Liberals are one vote ahead. Unless recounts are called, the matter should be settled with tomorrow’s full distribution of preferences. Other seats which might yet hold surprises in store:
North West. Labor’s Vince Catania is the presumed winner of this seat having gained a 1.3 per cent swing, an outwardly remarkable result. However, hidden within this figure is one of the stories of the election: the Nationals polled 22.3 per cent after failing to contest the equivalent seats in 2005, gouging 10.1 per cent from the Liberal primary vote along with 7.2 per cent from Labor. This puts them in third place on 22.3 per cent behind 36.4 per cent for Labor and 27.0 per cent for Liberal. Preferences from independent Lex Fullarton (7.1 per cent), and to a lesser extent Greens candidate Peter Shaw (7.2 per cent, most of which will flow to Labor) might yet give them the 4.7 per cent boost they need to get ahead of the Liberals, in which case they would comfortably win the seat on Liberal preferences. The difference between the primary and notional two-party results suggest as many as 40 per cent of Nationals preferences were flowing to Labor (UPDATE: A Labor source writes to say it was more like a third, Labor’s other preferences coming from Fullarton; expects a significant proportion of Fullarton votes, including donkey votes, to go straight to Labor rather than helping the Nationals close their gap on the Liberals). However, it would have been a very different story in the Agricultural and South West region seats which the Nationals actually won, and to which their MPs will have to return after deciding which horse to back.
Kwinana. Independent candidate Carol Adams, who it must be said has reason to be displeased with the ALP, may have crowed too early when she expressed interest in the police and local government portfolios. As the count progressed her primary vote deficit against Labor increased from 15.4 per cent to 18.7 per cent, leaving her needing 77 per cent of preferences from the other candidates. Antony Green estimates she will receive 85 per cent, perhaps 90 per cent, of the 18.8 per cent Liberal vote. However, her share of other candidates’ votes (10.5 per cent Greens, 3.8 per cent Family First and 1.7 per cent for another independent) is likely to be in the high sixties. That makes it a very close call.
Alfred Cove. On Wednesday, The West Australian reported that Liberal candidate Chris Back was “closing” on independent member Janet Woollard, who led by just 20 votes. However, nothing has been heard since. Woollard trails Back 43.3 per cent to 25.3 per cent on the primary vote, and will need about 73 per cent of the preferences from Labor (20.3 per cent), the Greens (9.5 per cent) and the Christian Democratic Party (1.5 per cent).
In the upper house, the only certain result is the reliable North Metropolitan region, which has returned three Liberal, two Labor and one Greens member. The Liberals have also done very well to win three seats in the other two metropolitan regions, in which the Greens and the third Labor are fighting for the final seats. The Nationals have won two seats in Agricultural and are in what looks like a winning battle with Family First for a third, with the remainder going two Liberal and one Labor. South West also has the Nationals leading Family First in a contest for the final seat, the others going three Liberal and two Labor. The Nationals have also won one seat and possibly two in Mining and Pastoral, the second seat coming down to a fight with the Greens, while Labor and the Liberals have won two each.
Labor will thus win between 11 and 13 seats, and the Nationals three to six. Getting a Labor-Nationals Royalties for Regions deal through without the support of the Greens or Family First would require the best case scenario for both parties, which almost certainly won’t happen: the Greens are ahead in all three of their doubtful seats, to add to their certain win in North Metropolitan. The Liberals on the other hand will definitely have a majority of the 36 seats together with the Nationals, appearing almost certain to win 16 seats.
UPDATE: It’s confirmed that Labor is home in North West and Pilbara. The Sunday Times has a very interesting article on the Nationals’ deliberations, suggesting Warren Truss is desperately trying to talk Brendon Grylls out of a possible deal with Labor. Nationals MP Max Trenorden, an opponent of the Labor option, says he is “not going to say whether I am happy with the decision or not, but I’m certainly not going to commit suicide over it”.
Pilbara looks a closer run for Labor than North West.
Labor can only lose Pilbara if they get less than 57 per cent of Greens preferences, which I would have thought very unlikely. Am I missing something?
William 52
Michael Gorey’s point was that the Pilbara result will be a close win to ALP over Nats rather than an easy 60/40 2PP ALP over Libs win being indicated by the WAEC website.
“LAZY” – we will have to wait and see if Carpenter is leader or not. That is up to the NATS now.
Like I said before the only reasons the NATS wouldn’t go with Labor is fear of voter backlash (if it is a net negative), resistance in the NAT ranks and, being unable to cope with Liberal/media pressure.
If they avoid ministerial positions (as offered by Barnett) then they can stay at arms length and avoid blame.
Other positives for them come from the Labor federal connection and it would be interesting to know what if anything has been suggested there. If they are ‘part’ of the Labor govt then that gives them ability to input, make recommendations and be part of other programs etc.
Thomas Paine
[ If they avoid ministerial positions…. then they can stay at arms length and avoid blame}
The Nats are already talking about 2 cabinet positions where they could be Ministers but would not caucus with the other party (be it Labor or Liberal). This is a similar model to South Australia.
So they already beleive they can BE Ministers and as long as they do not caucus they can still be independent and by definition “stay at arms length”.
An interesting proposition which I think they haven’t thought through properly.
that was meant to be
[If they avoid blame…..]
More ‘speculation’ from the West, about Labor’s uranium policy…
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=97613
I think they are kidding themselves if they think they can hold ministries and avoid blame if something goes wrong in their portfolio. Maybe they should ask for assistant ministries.
No they certainly could not avoid blame for actions within their ministries however they certainly could not be held responsible for broader government policy in areas where they have no direct control………….such as Uranium policy.
If they do not caucus then they are not involved in the governments party room deliberations and therefore are essentially “at arms length” when it comes to discussing and instigating policy from the backbench.
They are also not involved (at least directly) in such things as election of the leaders, deputy leaders etc.
An interesting perspective I think but at the end of the day I am with you…..a little bit of self deception is evident.
Are the Nats really after ministries or is that just what Barnet has offered?
From that article:
“But any deal that Mr Grylls does to allow Labor to form a government could prove highly destructive to the National Party with some MPs known to be strongly opposed to any arrangement with Labor because their real heartland would prefer a Liberal government.”
I wonder if that is true now days? Labor has moved to the center and may well not be seen as an ‘unpalatable left’ anymore.
ALSO from that article:
“The Nationals are strong advocates of the Aboriginal cause and regularly pushed issues such as Aboriginal health and education during the past four years.”
Now I think the hold up for the INPEX gas project was that Carpenter gave the Aboriginal land owners right of veto as it was their land that was needed. Not exactly sure about this. Barnett says he can get the project through which suggest taking away the veto.
[Are the Nats after Ministries or is that just what Barnett has offered?]
I think it is very clear that they would want at least one Ministry if not two. Grylls has indicated that he does not want to be Deputy Leader, but I think he would be very interested in being the Minister for Regions and therefore be able to oversee the Raoyalties for Regions scheme.
The South Australian Nat is in this position. She stood on a platform of funding for the Murray River and they made her the Minister for the Murray (or similar) overseeing the funding expenditure.
This is actually quite smart by Labor in SA as if it does not bear fruit (ie. the Murrays problems are not just about money) then they can say that the Nat member was the Minister, go blame her!
Our local member is a Nat and if I am readin git right they are looking for two Ministries with Grylls overseeing Regions.
Any news on what’s happening in Morley? I am really interested in how the preferences will flow in this seat.
But, just like the SA experience for Grylls to be Minister for the Regions would be a bit of a two edged sword for him. Whichever way he jumps will be problems.
I am pretty certain that in our area we could find projects for the whole $M 675, so while it sounds like a lot of mullah it will not go far. Therefore by definition there will be some very dissapointed regional areas waiting to have their say at the next election (which I think will be in the next 12 months after the “Grylls Plan” falls apart).
It is interesting to note that Brendon Grylls cites South Australian National MP Carlene Maywald as a role model for balance of power politics,so there might be some hope ?
Natalie, the scrutineers have been doing their own Labor-versus-Liberal preference tally in Morley, and both sides agree the Liberals are about 400 votes in front.
PoM
I think you may be on to something. The Nats are certainly quoting her experience widely.
do the CDP still have a chance of a seat in the upper house
Karlene Maywald is in WA to address the Nats. I wonder if this means anything?
Thanks William. Hope the thesis is going well. Cheers, Natalie
Jeez is Morley still a chance for Labor? I though the Whitby tilt had died in the arse last week. In that case I am looking at a Reece Whitby led labor opposition.
Goanna, the religious parties are unlikely to win the seats I predicted for them because they’ve been squeezed out by the Nationals’ strong performance, However, there’s a vague possibility they might still win in Agricultural if the Liberals lose ground in late counting. The CDP could then finish ahead of their third candidate and ride home on Liberal, Nationals and Family First preferences. That can’t happen for Family First because the Liberals have the second National behind CDP but ahead of Family First, so if the CDP gets excluded first the seat will go to the Nationals. In South West the CDP was strongly outpolled by Family First, presumably due to Dan Sullivan’s personal vote – but Sullivan is likely to be excluded before the second National, whose preferences will deliver the last seat to Liberal number three Barry House. I had calculated that the CDP might win a third conservative seat in East Metropolitan if the swing to the Liberals was just the right size, but it was actually too big so the Liberals win the third seat instead.
Natalie
“Posted Saturday, September 13, 2008 at 4:19 pm | Permalink
Any news on what’s happening in Morley? I am really interested in how the preferences will flow in this seat.”
Natalie , am not sure at what stage William’s 400 Liberal lead is at for Morley , but following would not greatly change my figures on pref flows At 90% count it seems Labor is only getting approx 60% to 65% of Greens prefs & 40% to under 45% of D’orazio’s prefs
So this Labor seat on those pref flows is virtually lost , solely because of poor Greens & poor D’orazio prefs
Well, Morley is a traditional Labor seat. So, D’Orazio has a personal following, but most of his followers are trad. Labor voters, who might not follow his how to vote card. The catch is that many of his followers are also elderly and Italian, so they could be less inclined to order their own preferences. It’s also interesting that the informal vote count is 6.6%.
Anyway, that’s why I am interested in the 2PP count.
Would FF and CDP have been better off giving their second preference to the Liberals instead of preferencing each other? Given that the Libs seem to be their 3rd preference.
The problem with Morley is that the WAEC completely messed up the count on the night, doing the notional 2PP between Labor and D’Orazio rather than the Libs.
Whilst the count was presumably redone – I’m guessing scrutineers were not present, and it was very late in the night, so who knows what errors will be found tomorrow.
A South Australian Nationals M-P, who’s a minister in the Labor government, is in Perth as the WA Nationals meet to decide which major party they will support to form government.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/13/2363692.htm?section=justin
TP
She will give them a few clues but don’t expect the Nat’s to announce their decision until the WAEC announces who won what! It may be that Labor may have enough seats to try to form a Government in which case it would be silly if the Nats had already announced they will fall in with the Libs….and vice versa.
It will, at the end of the day, be up to Carpenter whether he tries to form Government with or without the Nats, and he will only try without them dependant on the number of seats he ultimately wins in his own right (obviously).
Given the track record of the WAEC I would presume that they WILL NOT make an announcement tomorrow on all seats in doubt and therefore the Nats cannot make their announcement tomorrow either without taking a political risk – not in their makeup I’m afraid.
…just a thought…
Prepare for more Lib supporter hysteria. Maywald addressing the WA Nats while they decide who to support will have GP et al in a real sweat. The unthinkable is a real possibility.
But if by some chance the Nats do announce they will fall in behind the Libs, watch Carpenter try to form a Government without them, giving the independants back the balance of power..and won’t they love that! This presupposes Labor win 27 seats.
I think it’s past the point where there is any alternative to the Nationals.
And this is a whole day and neither the gravatar nor wordpress identity comes up.
Not sure if anyone is interested in the actual results anymore, but my latest news from WA is 100 Lib votes in Forrestfield have been found in ALP pile = 200 vote turnaround, putting Libs in front.
Albany still in play.
Libs safe in Riverton and Wanneroo.
NW still in play.
At least I don’t have to read The West Australian here. Can imagine the hyperbole they will come out with to sooth their seething hatred of non-Liberal.
The problem The Worst might now have is, having shown (I gather) a obvious bias against Labor they will be type-cast as a strong Liberal paper and their stories filtered accordingly. When your bias is obvious your message is lost.
Here is a copy of the 2004 Agreement:
http://www.sa.nationals.org.au/PDF/agreement04.pdf
Basically allows the Hon Maywald to be a Cabinet Minister, while still disagreeing with the Government.
Small history: 2002, ALP was one seat short of a Majority. Appointed Peter Lewis speaker (Independent) and formed Government. In Nov 2002, appointed Hon Rory McEwen a minister, to sure up support.
His agreement:
http://www.seo.sa.gov.au/apps/uploadedFiles/news/306/Exhibit_14.pdf
Then in 2004, appointed Kaylene as a Minister as well.
Kris Hanna resigned in Feb 06 and joined the Greens and Peter Lewis was disposed of as speaker, thus Labor still had just enough to guarantee supply with the two Independent ministers. (Though I very much doubt he would have voted against the ALP on a vote of confidence.)
It worked quiet well and Kaylene and Rory were both re-elected in 2006 as Independent’s and re-appointed as Ministers.
And interstingly, in 2006, when Maywald was re-appointed to the Cabinet, she was not required for the ‘numbers’. They just thought she was a good Minister and I suppose had got used to having her around!
Why can’t there be the Maywald agreement but with the Liberal Party??? As a conservative who wanted the corrupt and hated Carpenter Government gone I cannot believe the NP would jump into bed with those left-wingers. They wanted to destroy you via ‘electoral reform’ remember??? Grylls and every National Party MP is going to join Carpenter on Australia’s most hated list. You reap what you sow. We have long, long memories.
Good work William… you have blog UP a notch!!
This is like death by a thousand cuts…
Arrgh…not my real name!
And heres my gravitar!
Elf Rules
Maywald has been a bit of a disaster in SA regarding Water. Media Mike had had to resort to TV ads to band-aid over the Water problems. But in fairness to him, he has stuck with her despite endless calls for her to be sacked (I think the fault is his BTW). But it’s VERY CLEAR to the SA public that Rann is going to lose votes over Water because it’s his Government. No-one is thinking or saying that because Maywald is a National that it in any way helps Labor-Rann to be absolved or responsibility.
sunday times reports liberals want to put deidre wilmott into cabinet, despite her not being an MP
unconventional but legally sound apparently
I’d be guessing someone will be asked to resign from their safe seat or someone from the upper house will go and thus creating a vacancy, and she will be parachuted into place.
Don’t you love the Libs not playing by the rules 🙂
If they could have done that before, they would have done it. Now someone has just gotten elected, you think they are just going to stand aside?
BTW labor party stooges like yourself should realize the irony of saying people don’t play by the rules.
The Federal Constitution enables non parliamentary members to be Ministers for up to three months before joining the Parliament. Not sure about the states.
There is a Catholic priest who’s effectively a Cabinet minister in South Australia, I believe, just to continue the Rann Government’s exceptions to the rules.
I have it on very good authority that Arnie Vinnick @ 83 is mistaken, and that the situation in Forrestfield is much as it was before.
alp have secured pilbara and north west
No Nationals rabbits out of the hat in North West or Pilbara. They didn’t come second in the former, Labor winning 6103-5384 (margin 3.13 per cent). Peter Kennedy on ABC says Pilbara “retained” by Labor.
seesm libs promised nats 5 ministries, alp promised 6 !
0o
we are d00med no matter what!