The Western Australian Electoral Commission has completed its weekend preference distributions from seats in doubt, providing Labor with a small degree of consolation through wins in Albany (a heroic effort by sitting member Peter Watson, who picked up a 2.6 per cent swing to retain his notionally Liberal seat) and Kwinana (believed last week to have fallen to independent Carol Adams). That puts the final result at Labor 28, Liberal 24, and Nationals four, with three independents: Liz Constable (Churchlands), Janet Woollard (Alfred Cove) and John Bowler (Kalgoorlie). All are committed to support the new government in one way or another, with Constable promised a position in cabinet and Bowler agreeing to act in concert with the Nationals.
Before I launch into FIGJAM mode, it behoves me to own up to my various errors over the past six weeks. As is always the case when I ambitiously attempt to pick the result of every seat, I made quite a few wrong calls: I did not pick the Liberal wins in Jandakot, Southern River, Mount Lawley, Wanneroo and Morley, and I wrongly believed Labor would lose Albany, Collie-Preston and North West. In a nutshell, I underestimated the anti-Labor swing in Perth and overestimated it elsewhere. I was embarrassingly dismissive of what proved to be a spot-on Westpoll survey from Morley a week before the election, describing the ultimately victorious Ian Britza as the “stop-gap Liberal candidate”. The Nationals’ haul of five or even six upper house seats also came out of left field, defying my prediction that Christian parties would hold the balance of power. And of course, I hesitatingly predicted Labor would win the election with a one-seat majority: a pretty good call with regard to seat relativities, but wrong with respect to the direction of the result.
With that out the way, here are some highlights of my observations over the past six weeks.
Eleven seats and 5 per cent is certainly a big hurdle, but I don’t think it’s undoable. Labor should rue the missed opportunity of calling the election last week.
For all that, the Liberals have more going for them than interstate observers might assume. WA has hardly been a happy hunting ground for Labor in recent years: Geoff Gallop’s unspectacular re-election in 2005 was the only time the party’s primary vote has topped 40 per cent since 1989, a period covering seven federal and four state elections. Published polling during the Buswell period was not as bad for the Liberals as might have been expected, mostly putting Labor’s two-party lead at around 53-47. Buswell’s departure has also lanced a number of boils, reconciling vocal dissidents including former front-benchers Rob Johnson and Graham Jacobs. Underdogs they might remain, but discerning punters should find those odds from Centrebet more than a little tempting.
Of course, the polling leak and accompanying talk of internal panic might just be a ruse to boost Labor’s winning margin rather than avert defeat. On the other hand, the shift to the Liberals recorded in last weekend’s polls was entirely consistent with the anti-Troy Buswell effect that was well understood to be at work in the preceding surveys. We have evidence now that is not merely anecdotal that the perception of arrogance is starting to bite. And those generous odds from Centrebet are still there for the taking.
I’ll eat my hat if the Nationals back a Labor government.
Such conclusions required no great insight, based as they were (excluding the last one) on the state’s voting record, the well-understood workings of the political cycle and polling which showed Labor’s mid-year lead was built entirely on the unpopularity of Troy Buswell. These considerations nonetheless failed to penetrate the judgement of the ace political guns at The West Australian, who repeatedly insisted that Labor was home and hosed.
The Labor hierarchy knew better of course, and on two occasions presented the media with accurate internal polling which the paper’s too-clever-by-half commentators disdainfully dismissed out of hand. When the first such announcement was made in the second week of the campaign, The West’s report gave equal prominence to the views of optimistic “Labor insiders”, while Robert Taylor argued in his comment piece that Labor was cynically creating a misleading impression by providing selective data.
The second announcement came early in the final week when Labor’s scare campaigns over uranium mining and GM crops were reaching a hysterical pitch, collectively sending a message that was surely impossible to miss. However, Taylor responded with a piece which should sound eerily familiar to those old enough to remember last year’s federal election campaign:
While the nightly tracking poll on Monday recorded an alarming drop to 45 per cent for the ALP from a high of 52 per cent on a two-party preferred basis last Thursday — the same night the last Westpoll gave Labor a 54 per cent vote — other key indicators remained strong for the Government. Foremost among them were the 55 per cent of people who believed the Liberal Party was not ready to govern. It’s hard to see those people walking into the booth on Saturday and voting for a party they don’t believe can be in government. There’s no doubt that Labor heavies are worried by the sudden drop in support. But there’s also no doubt they believe the election is still there to be won and that the raw primary vote figure can recover just as quickly as it dropped. Even on the figures released yesterday, Labor only has to improve between 2 and 3 per cent by polling day and it wins. That’s because after the one vote, one value redistribution, on paper at least, Labor enjoys a 17-seat majority … But the poll produced by Labor yesterday wasn’t too much different from the way things were running in the last week of the 2005 election campaign when Geoff Gallop came from behind just a week out to record a comfortable victory. And it showed that the new train line to Ellenbrook and the blatant scare campaign on uranium were working, though it also confirmed that when the Liberals finally got on message at the weekend and hit the electorate with advertisements about Labor’s failed promises, people started to listen. But again, only 24 per cent of those polled said they could remember something that appealed to them about a Barnett message while 38 per cent said they could remember and liked something the Premier had said.
Note the writer’s determination to overlook the headline figure staring him in the face; his focus on whichever minor indicators happened to fit with his preconceptions; and most of all, his mystical faith in a “narrowing” that would swing the result the way of his prediction. Taylor’s conviction that Labor would enjoy a late 2 to 3 per cent swing was built largely on the fact that that’s what happened in 2005, which apparently had nothing at all to do with Colin Barnett’s last-minute costings debacle.
As notable as the actual content of the article was its placement on page seven. The next day, when Labor predictably declined to assemble the state’s media for a second successive poll leak announcement, the paper splashed a non-story across the front page of its first edition headlined: “Speculation ALP back on track as new polling figures withheld”. It soon became clear that Labor’s polling showed nothing of the kind. Meanwhile, Carpenter continued to signal his party’s very real desperation by repeating the same phrase 14 times in a single doorstop interview.
Such failings wouldn’t be worth remarking upon if all they amounted to was a wrong guess about an election result (there but for the grace of God go I). The problem was that the paper felt the certainty of Labor victory justified it in applying the blow-torch to the government day after day while all but ignoring the Liberals. One example was the feeding frenzy which followed Alan Carpenter’s refusal to confirm Michelle Roberts’ position in cabinet after the election. This prompted an overheated front-page lead headlined “I dare Premier to dump me: Roberts” (as former Liberal leader Matt Birney noted: “She never said any such thing”) plus a follow-up the next day, as well as inspiring the extraordinary lapse of editorial judgement shown to the right. By contrast, Colin Barnett’s refusal a week earlier to confirm Shadow Treasurer Troy Buswell’s tenure didn’t rate a single mention. It fell to other media to pressure Barnett into making what The West would have loudly trumpeted as a “backflip” if the shoe had been on the other foot.
Don’t take my word for it though: Matt Birney offered many pertinent observations about the paper’s story selection while appearing on 6PR’s election night panel, having earlier accused it of “aiding and abetting” his own side of politics throughout the campaign. For my part, I’ve pocketed a tidy sum from a bet laid on the Liberals at the peak of the market. I reckon I deserve it.
UPDATE (16/9/08): Eric Ripper elected new Labor leader following the withdrawal of the popular favourite Alannah MacTiernan. Remarkably, the deputy position has gone to newly elected Kwinana MP Roger Cook, who until a few days ago looked like he had lost the seat to an independent.
No 49
Yes, given the extreme generosity of Corpse’s offer, one can only reasonably assume that fiscal responsibility was thrown out the window.
No 43 – As someone else noted, not always.
Wishful thinking Gary.
Can I reiterate my call for a new thread on US politics. Pretty please William?
So, GP, do you think Rudd will win the next Federal election because only once has a government been thrown out after one term?
No 55
On current polling, he will win comfortably.
Good on ya GP, at least you show consistency.
That, by the way, was meant as a compliment, not a criticism.
How many Govts. have had there bums kicked for going to the polls early? WA and NT this year. Slick Nick in NSW – 1991.
Seems voters don’t really like early elections?
ruawake – that is a fair comment and a warning to others.
No 57
Why, thankyou. But as a Liberal supporter, there is always a hope. 😀
Certainly, if either Turnbull or Costello assume the leadership, things may change.
I personally think emissions trading will be troublesome for Rudd.
No 59
Only Menzies was the true master of snap elections.
Des Corcoran in SA in 1979 was another famous example, although his conspicuous failure to be Don Dunstan was another big factor.
I must say I agree with GP about the role of the media. The media everywhere is anti-Labor, violently so in some places, and it has never stopped competent Labor governments getting re-elected. The West may have been particularly egregious this time, and obviously that didn’t help Labor, but I don’t believe it was the major factor. From my distant perch, I think the major factors were (a) WA is a conservative state (b) unpopular early election (c) Brian Burke and other scandals.
Gough springing a DD on Snedden in 1974 was pretty good too.
And as a Labor supporter there is always hope in WA. If Barnett proves to be a good leader and people like what they see he could improve his position at the next election but the fact is if he doesn’t Labor is very much within striking distance. So, like you, I live in hope and who knows what will happen.
Was the 1961 Federal election a snap election?
63 Adam- You’re probably right.
No it was on time. Menzies went early in 1951 (DD), 1955, 1963.
To be honest I’m not so sure the result in WA would have been any better for Labor if they had gone in February. It may have possibly been worse.
No 63
I agree Adam. Participants here might discount the value of Burke, but practically half the ministry was sacked thanks to his insidious tentacles.
Oh Dear, Gearlton has 1500 ballot papers missing.
[WESTERN Australia’s electoral commission has suspended a vote count in a regional seat after more than 1000 ballot papers went missing.
Outgoing Labor member Shane Hill has conceded defeat to Liberal Ian Blayney in the mid-west seat of Geraldton, following the September 6 state election.
But the electoral commission cannot declare the seat until all preferences have been allocated.
A spokesman for the commission said the count would resume when the missing ballots were found.
“We’re quite confident that they’ll turn up,” the spokesman said.
“It’s just a matter of trying to track through it all.”]
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24348081-5005361,00.html
And the same thing will happen to Barnett unless he takes a tough line with Burke (who has friends on both sides of the aisle) and also NCB.
Another factor was the sudden resurrection of Barnett, who was the Libs’ most presentable leader. Although he was a retread and had lost before, he was a lot better than the three previous duds, and his return came at the crucial moment when the voters were making up their minds. This could be compared with the resurrection of Howard, also a previous failure, but who was seen as an improvement on Downer and thus an acceptable alternative to Keating.
[And the same thing will happen to Barnett unless he takes a tough line with Burke (who has friends on both sides of the aisle) and also NCB.]
And as illustrated by this article.
[Dumped shadow minister John McGrath believes he deserves another chance and wants to be in the running for a Cabinet post despite being tarnished by links to disgraced lobbyist Brian Burke.
Mr McGrath, who was ousted from shadow cabinet after the Corruption and Crime Commission revealed he introduced a road safety motion in Parliament secretly written by Mr Burke, said yesterday his strong election performance should count in his favour when Mr Barnett considered the make-up of his Cabinet. He increased his margin by about 9 per cent.
The South Perth MP said he would be interested in the racing and gaming, housing, seniors or sport portfolios. During the election campaign, Mr Barnett refused to say if Mr McGrath would be included in a Liberal Cabinet.
Mr McGrath said he would not be actively pressuring Mr Barnett.
“Of course I would (want a ministry), that’s what you work hard for in Opposition,” he said. “It’s Colin’s decision, he knows the contribution I’ve made .?.?. South Perth is a very good Liberal electorate and I had a resounding win at the election … and I think that was a vote of confidence that I’m sure Colin would be aware of. I’d like to be considered for the ministry.”]
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=97813
Anyone who has much to do with the Liberal party would know NCB has almost nothing to do with it these days. though some of his followers are still kicking around.
I love the way in post #71 Frank does “1500 ballot papers missing.” and then the article says 1000 papers missing 🙂
John Mcgrath’s sole claim to the ministry is that he is in one of the safest seats. Why he is in there is beyond me, he is a lazy MP who is definitely not a “big picture” guy… basically he is there as one of the “Northern Alliance” stooges who votes down the line and doesn’t ruffle too many feathers.
Actually Mea Culpa, you are correct, I got confused with the 1500 primary votes that the Liberal Candidate is ahead by.
Yes, Barnett must take a strong stance and avoid any association with Burke, if he wants to be re-elected. Now is the time.
averagejoe,
it is easily explained, Frank know the Liberals won the sea by 1,400 vote, so if he can cast enough doubt on the Liberals winning the seat, in his dreams his beloved ALP might still be in Government
The ALP regularly does this in their internal ballot
The people who counts the vote regularly losses the votes of the other side
Oh, and Frank, I think it’s about time you accepted the ALP lost. 😀
I Have, it’s just that it’s not going to help Barnett governing if his paperthin majority gets shrunk ever so slowly 🙂
Crazy Col is only in there ten minutes and he’s cost the tax-payers more with an expanded Ministry! I spose that provides NCB and Burkie a bigger menu to choose from.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/15/2364846.htm
OTOH – it is a habit of ministers in losing governments to retire early from Parliament afterwards – happens time and again. Who will be the first of Carpenter’s crew to leave? Alannah might find the party invitations dry up too quickly. If a couple of former ministers in (now) marginal seat leave the numbers may firm up nicely.
BTW…thats over half his caucus that will now be Ministers.
Governments very rarely win seats from oppositions. Labor did win Burwood and Benalla when Kennett and McNamara quit, but I doubt Barnett is as fantastically popular as Bracks was in 1999.
[BTW…thats over half his caucus that will now be Ministers.]
I’m assuming some of the Ministry will be from the Upper House, people like Simon O’Brien, Robin McSweeney & Donna Faragher will be ministers.
Can someone find some of those many statements by Grylls in which he said he would never, ever accept portfolios in a coalition government?
The excuses begin!
Next it will be Labors fault for leaving the economy in such bad shape. LOL
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=97725
“I’m assuming some of the Ministry will be from the Upper House, people like Simon O’Brien, Robin McSweeney & Donna Faragher will be ministers.”
Fair call….I meant LA Caucus.
No 87
What excuses Mr Orange? Get a grip and stop disingenuously beating up articles.
Labor should definitely stick around. They’ve got 28, the Libs/Nats have 28 and Inds 3. At this stage all 3 Inds are supporting Barnett, but this could change if they get offended, The worst thing Labor can do is give the Libs any possible by-elections. This happened in reverse in Vic after the 1999 election, when Labor held 42, Lib/Nats 43 and 3 Inds who all supported Labor. After Jeff and the Nats leader resigned, Labor won both seats and needed only one Ind to hold govt (and Susan Davies was Labor before she won Gippsland West as an Ind). Labor still holds Jeff’s old seat of Burwood, though Benalla has gone crushingly back to Nats.
The next election will have many soft Labor and Liberal seats Adam, so if Cautious does a good job he could well convince voters to back him and pick up some more soft ALP seats or alternatively if he doesnt do a good job there are several soft Lib seats that could bring down his government. The public are giving him a go and if he does well i wouldnt be surprised if he did win seats in 2012 or earlier.
Btw, Nelson is performing excellently in QT.
#89 GP ……..Excuses for not delivering on election promises! Delays, delays!
Most newly elected governments take a few weeks/months to try that spin. Surely this would have to be a record!
Worth watching GP?
I almost feel like putting in tapes of the good old days with Costello making Swan and Rudd look foolish. QT used to be fun to watch, now its a boring as bat well you know what i mean!
SNIP: Name-calling deleted – The Management.
GP, I meant at by-elections. If Labor ex-ministers quit sometime soon, I’d be surprised if the Libs could win those by-elections.
Of course anything could happen at the next election, which I believe will be in late 2012.
No 94
It’s not as funny as the Costello days, but it’s not bad.
Lord D,
It might not be up to the ALP to hold on to their members (LA members, of course). Some may actually resist the groupthink and retire of their own accord. There are several in seats in which their personal vote could have been a major factor in them holding their seats.
They may actually just not want to occupy their seats for four more years.
Well Adam, it would depend on the margins. Most of the ALP ministers hold seats by massive majorities but if they were marginal id say Cautious had a shot in them.
Granted if McGinty left, i would be telling the Liberal Party in WA not to contest i. Hell if Rudd can do it in Mayo and look how close the Greens came. Many a Liberal would vote for the Watermellons just to get rid of the ALP in Freo, after all it only would have take 500 Liberals to vote Green and Jim wouldnt have a job.
Generic Person
Posted Monday, September 15, 2008 at 2:27 am | Permalink
“No 4
Voters are not that stupid Frank.”
You obviously didn’t listen to any of the pre-election ‘vox pop.’ interviews.