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.
I agree the Ferals would be well placed to win a by-election in Fremantle.
What’s the news on who will be ALP leader?
There are one or two there – Kobelke in Balcatta may be an example.
Probably Ripper or Alannah.
McGowan is just a young Turk wannabe.
The ALP just want stability now. But Cautious would be glad to face Ripper who probably has the numbers.
[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.]
May I present Exhibit A 🙂
http://www.westtv.com.au/?vxSiteId=43c6a3c7-abf1-4c32-b98d-c27f8fa83360&vxChannel=News&vxClipId=1416_WAU1389&vxBitrate=300
Glen,
If the ALP are smart they will elect a Brendan leader – a reasonably safe pair of hands that can be dumped before the next election once it seems convenient.
Frank,
So you believe voters are only stupid when they disagree with you? Why vote at all then? Frank becomes the only elector?
[Frank,
So you believe voters are only stupid when they disagree with you? Why vote at all then? Frank becomes the only elector?]
Don’t be silly, I was Il.lustrating Rolly’s response with an ACTUAL example -and believe me, there are some stupid voters out there, like as I’ve mentioned MANY times, the gentleman at the Booth I was on whose entire vote was based on whichever Party was promising to bring the V8 Supercars onto the City Streets (It was your beloved Liberals btw).
As The Chaser say :”This Person Votes”
Frank,
Providing the “stupid” (your words) voters split in roughly the same proportions then they do not affect the overall vote. Problem is, as Bob Hawke pointed out, they do not. He as much as said so when he claimed that the high informal vote after the introduction of the new Senate voting papers adversely affected the ALP more than the Libs. The clear implication was that the ALP voters were more likely to misunderstand that there were two differing procedures to vote – i.e. they were more likely to be, in your words “stupid”.
In any case, I do not think that an inability to recognise a photo of Eric Ripper should necessarily qualify you as being “stupid”.
No 104
What a laugh. LOL
No 108
Correct. Apathetic, nonchalant or simply ignorant of politics is the better description.
I really think we’re getting hung up on the word “stupid”. I don’t believe they are stupid in the main. However, the majority IMHO lack knowledge of the political system and don’t care to learn. That doesn’t mean they are stupid. It means they are uninformed and apathetic.
Hence the election of Barnett. LOL
It’s hard to call them stupid, when none of them have been taught anything about politics in school in any depth, let alone been given the chance to develop an interest in it.
By your views then one could say, hence the election of Rudd.
I agree, “In any case, I do not think that an inability to recognise a photo of Eric Ripper should necessarily qualify you as being “stupid”.” – i think most people could easily confuse a photo of Eric with a lump of flesh with glasses.
Some people say it’s fortunate most people are apathetic about politics. If everyone was like us poli-fanatics, the country would be impossible to run.
Are you referring to me Glen? Did you actually read either post?
My first post contained “I don’t believe they are stupid in the main.”
My second comment was followed by a ” LOL”. Doesn’t that show I was joking when I made that comment?
Sheesh!!
SNIP: Poor quality comment deleted – The Management
Dont take it so seriously Gary, jj would have sufficed rather than LOL, IMHO.
Hmmm. Now, thanks to Labor winning in Kwinana, Barnett has to figure out who’s the Speaker, without making his majority disappear. Does this mean Labor have 29 seats, or am I missing something?
Cook victory in Kwinana leaves Speaker problem
I like your photo Glen, you look like someone I’ve seen before.
No Liberal will be as successful as Pig Iron Bob in my life time.
Funny thing if we had stuck to some of Menzies core beliefs perhaps we wouldnt be so on the nose federally as we are today ah well.
There is something not right with that article Bird. Even if the numbers were even on the floor, the speaker would have the deciding vote.
No 121
Come on Glen, you’re not seriously advocating that we reinstate the walls of protection and monopoly on Australia that existed under Bob?
Wow, that is pretty low rent ‘journalism’ even for Adshead…
Howard made Pig Iron look like a worm farming, tree hugging, socialist pinko.
121. Glen – I think you are right on that. From what I’ve been told Menzies wasn’t a bad PM at all. He would be considered “wet” by today’s standards I’m told.
That was primarily a conseqence of the Country Party and Black Jack McEwen.
Of course i dont, i am a free trader. Which i one of many reasons i back McCain.
No 127
The only true Republican is Ron Paul. What an inspiration that man is. Truly.
122 Gary: I’m not sure if the numbers are right. Correct me if wrong, but I think it’s ALP 28 / Lib 24 / Nat 4 / Ind 3. With all three indep’s supporting Barnett, that’s 31/28. If they choose one of their own as speaker (Bowler, Woollard, a Liberal, whoever), it goes to 30/28. Hell, even if the result in Geraldton gets annulled, it’s 29/28 – tough but doable.
I’d say that Barnett may pick an ALP member like Quigly as Speaker.
[122 Gary: I’m not sure if the numbers are right. Correct me if wrong, but I think it’s ALP 28 / Lib 24 / Nat 4 / Ind 3. With all three indep’s supporting Barnett, that’s 31/28. If they choose one of their own as speaker (Bowler, Woollard, a Liberal, whoever), it goes to 30/28. Hell, even if the result in Geraldton gets annulled, it’s 29/28 – tough but doable.]
And if the CCC make an adverse finding against Bowler, it will be deadlocked at 28/28 🙂
No 131
Nothing to suggest that Bowler’s seat could not be won by the Libs.
Bird, your numbers are correct. Having read the article again I think what it is saying is where Barnett can rely on the Nats to vote with him the independents may decide not to. Their only obligation is to provide supply. So in that case he may have trouble getting his legislation through.
If I were Labor I would decline the speakership. Keep the pressure on the government.
Why does Bowler feel so aggrieved with Labor, Frank, to vote with the Nats?
[Why does Bowler feel so aggrieved with Labor, Frank, to vote with the Nats?]
Because he got expelled from the Party of his leaking of Cabinet Documents to Grill and the fact the ALP Expelled his Best Friend, former Leader Ian Taylor for launching his election Campaign.
If Bowler were to be forced out would Labor have a good show of winning the seat?
[If Bowler were to be forced out would Labor have a good show of winning the seat?]
Well considering the fact that Bowler had a VERY large personal following in the region, I’d imagine that Labor might have a chance if they pre-selected someone with a high profile in the Electorate.
I’m still not convinced that Bowler would continue to allign himself with the conservatives. He has Labor running through his blood, my fiance knew him and his sons, and he is too pro Labor. He voted with Labor nearly on everything since he has been an idependent for 2 years. I think he just wants to make a point to the Labor Party at the moment.
If push comes to shove and he is in a position to form a Labor Government, he would do it. All what needs to happen is a by-election in one of the new marginal Liberal seats. Unlikely I know.
My memory suggests that when ever a party wins a minority election and there is a by-election, they normally wins the by election (or do better than a previous vote)
People likes to give the newly elected government at least a fair go
dovif, surely that depends when the byelection takes place, how far into the term. If the government has been doing a good job yes but if not …..
If there is another election say in three months, will there then be a combined lower and upper house election. Some Upper house newly-elected members wont take their seats until May 2009 (goodbye retiring Shelley Archer), and if there is an election in the meantime…?
[If there is another election say in three months, will there then be a combined lower and upper house election. Some Upper house newly-elected members wont take their seats until May 2009 (goodbye retiring Shelley Archer), and if there is an election in the meantime…?]
Nope, because the Upper House has Fixed Terms, then there would only be an election of the Lower House.
Steven, come what may the Legislative Council that has now been elected will serve for four years starting in late May 2009. Any election called before May 2012 will have to be for the Legislative Assembly only.
SNIP: Off topic – The Management.
SNIP: Off topic – The Management.
Hello to my fellow pollbludgers! God, I’m in a jolly mood today! I nominate Brendan Grylls for Australian of the Year- MARK MY WORDS.
Looks like Carpenter will remain in parliament. If the Libs disintegrate, which is possiblt let’s face it, hwe could make a comeback.
[Looks like Carpenter will remain in parliament. If the Libs disintegrate, which is possiblt let’s face it, hwe could make a comeback.]
Somehow I doubt it, too much baggage re time as Premier, but then again If Barnett can be recycled as leader….
My pick is Allanah McTeirnan, She’s a Woman with Balls and can easily go head to head against Barnett who when under pressure, will blow a Gasket.
I am looking forward to Barnett making fun of Allanah. Barnett will increase his majority in 2012 or maybe with a by-election. I doubt he would take the unhealthy risk of calling an early election given its a hung parliament.
Frank,
I would like to see Allanah as leader. The cartoons in The West would be priceless – but I would still not buy the thing.