Higgins by-election: December 5

Friday, December 4

LATE: Michelle Grattan of The Age reports “Liberal sources” believe the situation in Higgins to be “lineball”.

EARLY: Apologies for lack of updates. Malcolm Mackerras is tipping a Greens boilover: he says the Liberal vote will sink to 44 per cent, and presumably expects something like 70 per cent of preferences to go to the Greens. That would entail a 10 per cent drop on the primary vote, which is not dissimilar to what happened in somewhat similar circumstances in Mayo last year. However, Higgins is notable for its lack of volatility, so Mackerras is taking a bold punt on the force of the Abbott/ETS backlash. I can’t help recalling Mackerras’s prediction of a John Kerry landslide in 2004, which appeared to be rooted in a conviction that voters would prove as angered by the Iraq war as he was – his talk of “resentment at climate change denialists” strikes me as being cut from the same cloth. I’m tipping an uncomfortable night for Kelly O’Dwyer, but expect she will get up. At this point, Greens supporters with long memories will be recalling I said much the same thing before the Fremantle by-election.

Word on the ground is that the Liberal campaign has focused on O’Dwyer’s positives, rather than attack Hamilton as an extremist as might have been expected if they were really worried. However, it seems the party has embarked on a significant change of tack in the past week, with O’Dwyer “issuing a last-minute mail-out to voters to assert her views on climate change”.

As always, tune in tomorrow night for live coverage.

Tuesday, November 17

Blogger and former Liberal Party activist Tim Andrews offers a colourful take on the Greens preselection process, alleging widespread discontent in local branches over the imposition of Clive Hamilton.

Friday, November 13

The ballot paper draw has been conducted, and the order of candidates can be viewed here. Candidates I hadn’t known about: independent Peter Brohier (“lawyer”), Isaac Roberts of the Liberal Democratic Party (“accountant”) and Democratic Labor Party regular John Mulholland (“psychologist”).

Friday, November 6

AAP reports Steve Raskovy, “a 72-year-old former Hungarian wrestler and refugee”, will run for One Nation. Antony Green has embellished his by-election page with candidate details.

Wednesday, November 4

From Friedrich in comments we learn that Joseph Toscano, Anarchist Media Institute director and prolific writer of letters to the editor, is seeking the local residents’ signatures required to lodge a nomination.

Tuesday, November 3

LATE: The Australian Democrats have announced their candidate will be David Collyer, who contributes regular posts to the blog of the party’s Victorian division.

EARLY: Climate Sceptics announces that Stephen Murphy, a Melbourne computer programmer who “speaks five languages”, will run as an “Independent Climate Sceptic”.

Thursday, October 29

Antony Green weighs in on the by-election, adding further voice to the consensus that the Greens’ nomination of Clive Hamilton is tactically unsound. Danielle Crowe of the Manningham Leader reports Crikey empire founder, Manningham councillor and perennial deposit non-recoverer Stephen Mayne has “not ruled out” running as an independent. Nominations close November 12, with the ballot draw to follow the next day.

Monday, October 26

Speaker Harry Jenkins has confirmed that the Higgins and Bradfield by-elections will be held on December 5.

Saturday, October 24

A wide-ranging chorus of critics has chimed in to argue Hamilton’s decidedly non-liberal political and economic philosophies are a poor fit for the electorate he has chosen to contest. As “Carlton’s lone classical liberal” Andrew Norton puts it: “It’s not often that Pollytics, Andrew Bolt and Catallaxy blogs all reach the same conclusion”. Christian Kerr of The Australian reports similar sentiments from RMIT University economist and Institute of Public Affairs senior fellow Sinclair Davidson, who argues voters in Higgins (which as Kerr notes includes “Chapel Street, Toorak Road and the High Street strip”) are unlikely to respond to the “ascetic” and “spartan” lifestyle Hamilton demands to ward off ecological apocalypse, to be achieved if need be by “the suspension of democratic processes”. On top of which, his views on internet filtering could potentially alienate parts of the Greens’ core constituency, particularly if they have an alternative candidate to turn to.

Friday, October 23

The Greens have unveiled a high-profile candidate in Clive Hamilton, founder and former executive director of left-wing think tank the Australia Institute and current professor of public ethics at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics.

Thursday, October 22

Labor has slightly surprisingly decided it won’t be entering the fray. Andrew Landeryou at VexNews reports: “Labor insiders who spoke on condition of anonymity explained that the widespread presumption of demographic change in Higgins, and a big swing more generally, was not substantiated by the party’s secret polling, presented on Powerpoint to the Prime Minister recently, which showed a likely Liberal victory even in the tough circumstances in Malcolm Turnbull’s Liberals find themselves.”

Monday, October 19

Peter Costello formally tendered his resignation today to Speaker Harry Jenkins, who is expected to announce an election date of November 28 or December 5 in the coming days.

Saturday, October 10

Phillip Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald reports Peter Costello will officially resign when parliament resumes on October 19. Given a campaign of average length, this will mean a polling date of November 28 or December 5: after “the final two-week parliamentary sitting in which the Coalition – if it doesn’t filibuster – will have to vote on Labor’s emissions trading scheme”. Antony Green at the ABC and Ben Raue at The Tally Room have guides to the by-election posted.

Wednesday, October 7

Samantha Maiden of The Australian reports Peter Costello is “set to resign from Parliament today”, which will most likely result in a by-election for his seat of Higgins on the same yet-to-be-announced date as the one for Bradfield. Costello holds the eastern suburbs Melbourne seat with a margin of 7.0 per cent, having suffered a swing of 1.7 per cent at the 2007 election. The preselection to replace him at the next election was held a fortnight ago and won by his former staffer Kelly O’Dwyer.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

484 comments on “Higgins by-election: December 5”

Comments Page 8 of 10
1 … 7 8 9 10

  2. GG and Frank are actually displaying a really important part of the ALP strategy on Global Warming. Don’t mention it, don’t try and resolve it simply spin and support the dirty old CO2 emmiters. Both Frank and GG actually don’t believe that there is anything to worry about. This is important as the ALp have tried to portray themselves as Global Warming Warriors. Ha, krud walking the world stage them having the sham of the CPRS. It simply won’t work, most of the savings are off shore credits, followed by Carbon Capture and sequestration. What a farce.
    However, the fundamental issue is the ALP’s inability to see past their own spin. Politics , to them, is all about spin and power. Well thats fine but the point they don’t get is that the laws of thermodynamics don’t repond to spin. the role of Carbon in the atmosphere doesn’t repond to abuse.
    The sooner these loonys’ join with the COALlusion and stop the farce of tweedle dum and dummer the better. What is the difference? Seems to be only who can get more donations from vested interests followed by who can give them back more in consessions and ‘compensation’.

  3. Barking,

    I’ve really lost interest in anything the Greens have to say about global warming, climate change and the ETS. You’ve dealt yourself out of the biggest debate of our time through your irresponsibility and selfishness. While I understand the frustration and hysteria being expressed through the never ending abusive posts of you and your compadres, you’ve only got yourself to blame.

    So as you ramp up the rhetoric, all I hear are the sound of losing whingers gargling their last breath of relevance.

  5. Why can’t the government listen to the scientists and do something to save us?

    Oh! 30 pieces of silver, is the answer.

    Clive Hamilton Greens candidate for Higging says

    [We all hoped that the Rudd Labor government would take a leadership role, and certainly Kevin Rudd spoke some bold and reassuring words early in the piece.

    But it’s quite clear the greenhouse mafia — the term the fossil fuel lobbyists use to describe themselves — have been extremely effective in Canberra at capturing the government.

    So the polices Labor is pursuing are really pathetic. They won’t go nearly far enough to tackle Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. They’ve been designed to pacify the carbon lobby. So Labor has failed grievously on this the most important issue. ]

    More from Clive here:-

    http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/818/42047

  6. Well said Clive,
    It is becoming clear that the ALP and the COALlusion are totally in the thrall of the ‘Carbon Mafia.”
    For the rest of the Community it is clear that the early adaptors, the change agents, the innovators will be the ones who come out best in the future. The people and communities that lead the post Carbon economy will be in the poll position to thrive.
    Typical of Australian Business to want subsidies etc, protection etc, whilst rattling on about the ‘free market etc, they are just a sheltered workshop. That the ALp is totally tied to these backward thinkers is a shocker.
    The Greens are the only party that embraces these challenges, encourages 21st century development and Jobs.

  8. #355

    I seriously doubt that “scientists” are predicting an apocalypse or engaging in conspiracy-mongering about Big Carbon.

  9. I seriously doubt that “scientists” are predicting an apocalypse or engaging in conspiracy-mongering about Big Carbon.
    This statement tends to lend itself to the thought that you actually haven’t spend a great deal of time checking what the scientists are saying. Having read many and met quite a few its is exactly what they are saying. Please make the effort to read something. Try Lovelock, try the IPCC, (The thing to remember is that their projections are all turning out on the worst case side of the probability curves.
    GG I suggest with the greatest respect, that you could indulge yourself with a bit of scientific backgrounding as well.

  10. I am a scientist myself (although not a climatologist) so I know full well that doomsday scenarios, scare mongering, emotional hyperbole, personal abuse and alleging that anyone who disagrees with me is in the pocket of Big X, is not the way scientists conduct themselves.

    It’s ironic that both the true believers and hardcore denialists invoke “The Science”, yet the behaviour of both sides is utterly inconsistent with the scientific method.

  11. Dear MDM, Your comments sound like the good old ‘we need balance/the jury is still out.
    Just what is outcome of your scientifc considerations.
    ‘Brief note to GG, Frank, others. Sorry if you think that the Greens bloggers get stuck in a bit here. Can I just say to the ALP rusties and the COAllusions members. “Thank you, you guys taught us every thing we know about abuse and playing the man.”
    MDM, one other point, I go out of my way to never say, ‘I believe,’ no one here is the slightest bit interested in my unscientific understanding of Climate Science and the rapidly growing evidence of Global Warming. I simply go to the reputable ‘Climate Science.’

  14. #361

    Of course I believe Climate Change is occuring and we need to take the appropriate steps. There are scientific arguments at the margins which denialists try to beat up, but I have no problem with the general consensus.

    But the deliberate exaggeration and hyperbole on the part of some of the more enthusiastic environmentalists does them no favours. No scientist is claiming we won’t be around in 50 years (like one comment here claimed). No scientist is claiming seas will rise 200 metres, like that WA Greens poster showing water levels submerging Perth’s skyscrapers. Scientists generally don’t resort to personal abuse or conspiracy mongering to make their point.

    If you want to invoke “The Science”, either do it properly or don’t do it at all.

    (end rant).

  16. MDMConnell,

    Does catastrophic mean anything to you or is that [“deliberate exaggeration and hyperbole” ]

    Clive on the science

    “After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 the ‘green scare’ replaced the ‘red scare’ in the demonology of the right. The repudiation of climate science by Minchin, Joyce and the other deniers is rooted in a visceral hatred of environmentalism that has been largely suppressed in the face of widespread and deep public concern over environmental decline, but which is now spilling out in the most extraordinary way”

    http://clivehamilton09.blogspot.com/

    There aren’t two sides of the science, as you suggest, and shooting the messanger will not stop catastrophic global warming.

  17. Marg- getting back to the Higgins bi-election, you’ve run an uninspiring campaign, you will pick up more votes only because the ALP are not running. It will hurt as the money you will get reimbursed will be used against the government in the next election. I am fully aware of your shoestring budgets so this will be a profit making event for you. I am giving my $2 to the democrats.

  19. MDM,
    I think I get your point,. In response I’d say, don’t worry to much, personally I’m in despair over the general discussion/debate around Global Warming. One of the things these blogs and by-elections allow is for the ‘message’ to be reduced to 7 second grabs and the like.
    I hear your critisism around the language, I take it as a given that you think the ‘Minchin’ crowd are absolutely off what remains of the planet.

  20. Barking, re the “Minchin crowd”

    1. I probably have more sympathy for AGW deniers than other forms of anti-scientific nuttery, precisely because of the apocalyptic doom-mongering by the more extreme pro-AGW crowd. I can understand a confused “What? Melbourne’s not going to by drowned under 100 metres of sea! That’s ridiculous! This Climate stuff must be a load of crap!” argument in that context.

    2. Whether or not we should have an ETS is also slightly different from whether AGW exists. You can acknowledge AGW while also accepting that any action Australia takes will achieve little in the overall scheme of things. Again, I can understand the “all pain no gain” argument against the ETS if we continue to see no serious action from the big polluters.

  21. MDM,
    Re Minchin crowd.
    1) like many scientific issues I doubt tha 10% of those involved in the debate have read or understand much of what is happening in the scientific literature.
    2) Personally I object to the ETS as a), its futile, and b), it deflects the argument away from the measures that are needed. Which gets us back to your point 1) I think you are trivialising the severity of the issue, I have seen the Gore thingo presented and can’t remember any mention of 100 m. The science says 6m for Greenland, 6 more for the Antarctic and the absolute tops of 35m if we get 5-8 degrees with all the worst feedbacks. This would take maybe 2-300 years.There would still be lots of places that would be great to live in/on , just not quite enough for 9 billion. Life would go on etc. don’t panic, if 50% of species become extinct, bang, such is life.

  26. same as before Barking…bucklies and none..It aint gunna swing for you…you’ve done next to nothing to win the seat….no letters, one crumey flyer and one crumey add. You won’t even get all of the ALP voters

  29. The Democrats got nearly 6% at the 2007 Albert Park by-election in nearby Port Melbourne. You’d think they’d be hoping to repeat that in Higgins.

  30. Ok, so now the Libs have completely blown up, the monk is the new leader, there are splits and blood all over the floor of the Senate, and there are people here who think that its all about the amount of resources that the Greens pour into a campaign where there candidate has a huge profile and the Libs is a staffer. The depth of analysis here sometimes amazes me. Is that the depth of the character of the Australian Voting public. Actually it will be a fascinating by-election as we now see a unique set of circumstances. The next poll next tuesday could be interesting.

  31. #380

    Doesn’t really change the fact that Hamilton is a poor fit for the seat. A more moderate Green candidate might have seen them in with a real chance now, but I just can’t see Hamilton doing it.

  32. Barkers really 90% don’t give a toss and vote because they have to. You can bet your bottom dollar if the average shmo’s back pocket was severley hurt by the ETS then that would ensure that the ALP would have a really fast trip back to the opposition benches. It’s all great in principle to try and do more, but you can’t do anything if your not in power.

  33. I think that both seats will be retained by the Libs, but I do think they may vote for a conservative party. It will be interesting to see how it all washes out.

    I just wish the by-elections were this weekend along with Willagee in WA. I bet Jenkins is kicking himself right about now.

  34. ANYONE LISTENING TO RN??? 😀

    Antony Green says the Greens WILL hold the BOP after the next election assuming Labor retain government!!!!

    *moons the lot of the CLLRs*

  38. Interesting that the libs are really ramping up expenditure in Higgins and I imagine the other byelections. Normal, or just worried.
    Prediction,
    Libs just, oh only just.
    56-44% Well really, lets all have a cold shower, the average punter will forget ot vote.

  40. My prediction is pretty much in line with Centaur’s.

    And yes, the WA Fremantle and Willagee by-elections have been an object lesson in respectively how to, and how not to, run a Greens election campaign.

    The near-religious fanaticism and name-calling adopted by the respective sides of the climate change debate is pretty depressing.

  41. My very conservative grandmother shocked me by voting Green in Higgins on her postal vote. Her reasons are that she thinks her son will vote Green, the Lib’s a woman, and the Lib could be a Catholic!!!

    The thing that’s surprised me most about this by-election is that we haven’t got any mail from the Libs telling us how radical Hamilton is. Without that, people may think Hamilton’s just a nice Green, and vote for him. Personally, I’ll put him one preference before the Lib, and that only because in the last month the Libs have proved themselves so backward.

  43. Given the activity this week, and that 6 – possibly 7 based on unknown independent Peter Brohier’s website http://maptag.com.au/ – out of 10 candidates will direct voters to preference Greens ahead of Liberals, despite running Clive in this seat there’s a slim chance the Greens might bring off the impossible this weekend.

    Does anyone know where deposed DLP-candidate-in-name-only Mulholland will direct preferences? Will he even run a campaign now that he has absolutely no party support?

    I’m 100% behind Clive, and I don’t really think his profile will have a big impact on his chances in the seat, because the Libs have been jeopardising their own chances. The best outcome for Clive would be if Abbott secured leadership or Minchin forced Hockey to defer the ETS.

  44. Can somone please get a comment out of the Lib candidate around her attitude on Global Warming. She must make a comment, what does she support? Now that Abbott is her leader, will she say that humans are not contributing to Global Warming.
    Haaaa

  45. Game on in Higgins- irrelevant question- Why does the DLP logo look like Dunlop Tyres? I got a flyer from Mullholand Today

    Deconst your wish has been granted….

    Oh and DLP has Lib at 3rd before Green

  47. Barking,

    See my post #370 point (2). Believing in AGW is not the same as supporting the ETS.

    Which you youself sort of agreed with in your reply #371.

  48. Dr Clive Hamilton suggested HTV

    http://greens.org.au/higgins/how-to-vote

    “The Liberal Party is in complete disarray. Tony Abbott has won the Liberal leadership and the climate sceptics and deniers are leading the Liberal Party. We need to show Liberal voters that they have an alternative – they don’t have to vote for climate sceptics.
    Voting Greens next Saturday is a vote for leadership on climate change”

  50. Barking @ 394: Kelly O’Dwyer seem to not want to talk about climate change at all. I have friends in the Australian Youth Climate Coalition who are trying to interview all the candidates in Higgins and Bradfield and put them up on YouTube. Kelly has repeatedly refused to be interviewed, and has also refused to appear in candidates forums run by the AYCC. I’ve been doorknocking for the Greens and last night one of my colleagues spoke to a guy who said that he’d voted liberal all his life, and had recently greened up his small business far beyond what the ETS would require. He said he’s been calling and emailing O’Dwyer’s office for weeks trying to get a statement on climate change, and has got nothing, which has pissed him off enough to vote Green.

    All anecdotal, but there you go.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 8 of 10
1 … 7 8 9 10