Following on from last weekend’s “50-50” result for Brand, The West Australian has produced another of its small-sample Westpoll surveys, conducted by Patterson Market Research. This one is statewide, and it does not bode well for the state’s already meagre Labor contingent. The poll has Labor’s primary vote at just 26 per cent, compared with the 36.8 per cent that won them four of the state’s 15 seats in 2007. The Coalition is on 52 per cent (including 5 per cent for the Nationals), against 47.1 per cent at the election. The Greens are only on 9 per cent, no different from the election and certainly not what they’re used to from polling recently. This pans out to 62-38 on two-party preferred, a swing of almost 9 per cent – enough to take out Stephen Smith in Perth, leaving just Melissa Parke in Fremantle. The poll also has just 19 per cent agreeing the RSPT will be positive to the state’s economy, against 63 per cent who say negative. Forty-three per cent say it will have a strong (quite or very) influence on their vote, 22 per cent say “no real influence” and 32 per cent say a “minor influence”.
The catch is that with a sample of just 400, the poll has a margin of error of about 5 per cent. However, it accords with the 63-37 result from WA in the most recent Nielsen poll, which would have involved a sample of about 150. If you add the two polls together, the margin of error comes down to about 4 per cent. At the lower end of that range is a swing against Labor of 4 or 5 per cent, which is what last week’s Brand poll pointed to if you distributed preferences as per the 2007 election. Even if that’s nearer the mark, it still suggests a distribution of primary votes that would leave Labor-plus-the-Greens short of a third Senate quota (and taken at face value, this poll shows Labor short of a second). With the Nationals in the hunt for the last seat, and likely to be boosted by preferences from WA First and right-wing micro-parties, this could lead to a Queensland 2004-style Senate result of three Liberal, one Nationals and two Labor. If the other states were to follow their usual three left-three right pattern, that could produce a Senate that differed from the current one in only one important respect: Steve Fielding’s Victorian seat would be taken by Labor, another fluke micro-party winner or, most probably, the Greens. Labor and the Greens would thus have 38 seats against 37 for the Coalition and one for Nick Xenophon. Instead of the Greens holding the balance of power, as most have been taking for granted, the Coalition plus Xenophon would have a blocking majority.
UPDATE: The latter sentence, of course, makes the unsafe assumption of Labor winning the election. I should also point out that the Liberals have a big hurdle to clear if they are to win three seats in Tasmania, where the result in 2010 was three Labor, two Liberal and one Greens. A three Liberal, two Labor and one Greens result would require a solid 5 per cent swing to the Liberals, which would probably win them Bass and Braddon.
Rosa,
Bernard Keane (Crikey) writes:
[…the industry campaign {is} starting to fall apart under the weight of its own hysteria]
http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/06/11/another-friday-another-round-of-rspt-cave-in-rumours/#comments
Gus
Another member of the Shovel Party perhaps 😉
this was posted a couple of days ago
Complete constituency figures for all 650 seats in the British elections: http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/b/britain/
Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)
[Except he says no such thing in the article you quote.]
Who? What?
You’re as bad as GP!
Gus
Synchophant
A misspelling of the word “sycophant” used by ignorant ghetto people and neocon morons.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=syncophant
rosa,
I imagine when the tele movie is made of this little saga (Working title is currently “RSPT me in the morning”) that it will be a love story with the love interest being a big bag of money that mysteriously disappears. The storyline is road style adventure type show with two cute animals (Twiggy and Hancock) setting off in pursuit of the love interest as it floats down the local river of gold with hilarious mischief and dangerous adventures aplenty.
Dio
You didnt need the mirror then?
Gus
There is another meaning of “syncophant” in that Urban Dictionary. It’s a neologism which hasn’t reached the mainstream dictionaries yet.
n. A person who enthusiastically toes the party line. A combination of “synch” and “sycophant.”
Growler – I hope the narrative arc shows them developing a bit of self-knowledge by the end of the movie. But somehow, I doubt that. Maybe the movie would be a bit like Rainman, but with both the main characters as high-functioning autistics.
Dio
Realistically I wouldnt call you or glen or even myself sy(n)cophants.
perhaps truthy is the lone one on this site?
Could be. But I was thinking along the lines of a straight steal from the classic ‘Milo and Otis”. Here’s the scene when Hancock first finds out about the tax.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSLRJx6l08E
I have “psychophant” printed somewhere. It ought to be a word.
You’d think the industry that a couple of weeks back was decrying the lack of skilled workers would have been a bit keener to hold on to the workers they already had.
Or is it a case of expecting the Government to stump up for the training of the workers, then to support them in the downtime? A case of privatising the profit, socialising the losses.
Evidently the Labor brand in WA in 2010 = the Labor brand in Tasmania circa 1992.
[I have “psychophant” printed somewhere. It ought to be a word.]
Ask and ye shall receive.
[1. psychophant
One who attempts to garner favour by flattering influential people, but does so to a psychotic, often violent degree. Usually someone who feels insignificant in their own life, this drives their need to tort the lives of others in a negative way to exercise any kind of power.
2. psychophant
psychophant: n. a person (most often found in chat) who sucks up by endorsing the craziest ideas or ridiculous subjects in hope of gaining attention to themselves.
3. psychophant
A fan who is so over the top in their adoration as to come across as a completely obsessed psychopath.]
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=psychophant
Growler – the crab will always win (if it stands as a universal symbol of the working classes)
More revelations on Xsrata:
[AS XSTRATA shelved $400 million in investment at a copper mine in Queensland, it was keeping its options there open by signing a new $3.4 million mining services contract.
On the same day the Anglo-Swiss company grabbed global headlines by freezing the underground expansion of the Ernest Henry copper mine last week, ASX-listed Industrea said it had recently won a new contract with the mine.
A spokeswoman for Xstrata said the work – for a facility to manage copper tailings – was required the keep the miner’s options open but did not mean it had decided on what it would do next at the mine.]
http://www.smh.com.au/business/xstrata-signs-new-contract-as-it-freezes-mine-expansion-20100611-y3r1.html
has any noticed. iam afraid papers do appear here some Saturdays. oh likes to read about the cars,
i have noticed that oakes seems to write alternate weeks negative / positive
is that having too bob each way or is that to keep others happy.
He has written some very good articles lately about Mr. Rudd.
Cuppa, with friends like you, who can say that WA Labor needs enemies.
The ‘orrible truth is that regardless of party affiliations, the tax is seen as a threat to the security of incomes right across the socio-economic spectrum. Blue collar voters are very conscious of threats to employment and will – very sensibly – vote in numbers against such threats. If this means voting against Kevin Rudd, people will do so without a lot of hesitation.
The reactions here – and elsewhere too – show there is very little understanding of WA society. For a start, it would be a mistake to conclude that just because there is not a lot of public rancour that opposition to the tax is not deeply held. WA is not a hot-bed of protest politics. It never has been. The citizens of WA like politics to be temperate, well-mannered and respectful. Anyone who misunderstands this will get WA very wrong.
It is quite possible that a large segment of the WA population favour increasing taxes on mining. Uncontroversially, successive State Governments have been increasing the public take from mining.
But there are ways of going about things in WA that are 100% guaranteed to result in failure. One of them is just announcing big changes without discussion. Another is to be given directions by “Canberra” without being given a chance to have some input into the process. Another is to be told that something we are concerned about and not happy about is in fact good for us. Another is to see a Government promising to take a whole slab of cash away with one hand, and offer a sop with the other. Yet another is to offer “consultation” and then not engage in consultation.
John Howard himself ran into problems in WA when – long ago – he introduced retrospective changes to the Income Tax laws. It took years for his standing to recover from that. Kevin Rudd has probably already done himself permanent damage in WA. He has also badly hurt Labor in general. It is going to take a long time to recover from the stupidity shown by Rudd, Gillard, Swan and Tanner, who will be remembered here forever as Tony Abbott’s best friends.
saw one business association having a go at Gerry harvey for winging
wtte how lucky we are 90 percent employment etc.Now that a good way to look at it instead of the unemployment figures just say
90/95 percent employment
.[ If this means voting against Kevin Rudd, people will do so without a lot of hesitation. ]
AHHH WORKCHOICES WOULD LOOSE A LOT MORE
mining tax GAIN A LOT MORE
[The ‘orrible truth is that regardless of party affiliations, the tax is seen as a threat to the security of incomes right across the socio-economic spectrum. Blue collar voters are very conscious of threats to employment and will – very sensibly – vote in numbers against such threats. If this means voting against Kevin Rudd, people will do so without a lot of hesitation.]
Really? Why aren’t all polls showing this?
[56
Cuppa
That is a shocking result, inflicted on the WA party by the PM
So you’re blaming one person (KR), while excusing the the majority of WAians who apparently wish to live under a virtual banana republic.
That’s lopsided fault-finding, don’t you think?
No more empty noises about seceding, they should just do it already! I can see it now. The Banana Republic of Redneck Wonderland. “In Billionaires we Trust.“]
Cuppa……what you’re saying is …”If you don’t agree with what we want to do to your economy, if you won’t quietly accept that we know what is best for you, you can and should F-off!”
That is not going to win hearts and minds here in the West, Cuppa.
briefly,
Those “Rolex” revolutionaries Twiggy and Hancock and their mates convinced me of their “Blue collar” credentials.
[121
Gary
The ‘orrible truth is that regardless of party affiliations, the tax is seen as a threat to the security of incomes right across the socio-economic spectrum. Blue collar voters are very conscious of threats to employment and will – very sensibly – vote in numbers against such threats. If this means voting against Kevin Rudd, people will do so without a lot of hesitation.
Really? Why aren’t all polls showing this?]
In WA, the polls are showing exactly this, Gary. I don’t know about other States. But in WA, it is a GBFU.
[Blue collar voters are very conscious of threats to employment and will – very sensibly – vote in numbers against such threats.]
WA was the only state that increased the Liberal vote at the last election. In contrast to the rest of the country they actually VOTED FOR SerfChoices. If they’d had their way all Australians in the workforce would right now be getting shafted by extreme anti-worker Liberal laws. With protection from Unfair Dismissal abolished, the lay-offs during the GFC would have been horrendous. (Perhaps that’s the reason up to 15 per cent of mining workers were sacked – they’d signed away their protections in their individual “agreements”). So they’d not only happily sign away their own workplace rights (and everyone else’s) – they’d also sacrifice OUR democracy – allowing unelected fatcat billionaires to determine public policy in preference to the elected government.
[In WA, the polls are showing exactly this, Gary. I don’t know about other States. But in WA, it is a GBFU.]
And if the polls are still showing Labor holding up in other states come the election WA won’t matter.
I support the mining tax but I wish people would stop bagging West Australians for having a contrary opinion. It is hardly going to inspire them to change their mind. It doesn’t help anyone except Tony Abbott. Likewise, harking back to the days when the east propped up the west is really ancient history. The west has been propping up all the east except Qld for most of my lifetime, and I suspect the lifetime of most people who post here.
When you look at the geography, history and economy of WA, you can easily see why they are anti-Canberra right now. Ironically I think Labor missed a great opportunity here. Under John Howard the Commonwalth spent very little in WA – he milked them merceilessly and spent the money in Tasmania, the north shore of Sydney, and rural electorates in Vic and NSW. But Labor didn’t say a peep in criticism. They were too busy angling for funds to bail out their incompetent state mates in NSW. If you analyse transport funding in the period 2000-2007 you will see that WA was indeed subsidising the east. The only reason the Perth – Mandurah railway was built was Alannah McTiernan and a few other committed people got it done with amazing economy using State funds. The same is true in health and education too.
Look at how under-resourced NW WA is – despite growing needs and some aweful poverty. Granted the gone State Labor government failed to spend any money up there, but neither did John Howard. Until now, neither has Kevin Rudd. As a result, WA voters rightly question why they should vote for him. From their point of view, he hasn’t changed anything, and is now planning to make things worse (for them), at least as far as they are being told.
Think about the WA economy in the past three years. It went from flat out (no thanks ot Canberra) to dead stopped (no thanks to Canberra). They got by no means a large share of stimulus funding. Now just as they are about to start booming again, and enjoy some better years, they fear the cream is being siphoned off. There are vague promises it wil be used for an infrastructure fudn that will fudn regions like their’s, but no specifics, and few clear rules. what % of the funds will be guaranteed to go to regions? Which regions? Who decides which projects – joint State/Commonwealth, or just Commonwealth? Name one tangible benefit WA voters will get from the RSPT? Until you can you can’t blame them for opposing it.
Also, the House of Reps isn’t the only issue. If Labor/Greens only get 2 senators in WA, and the coalition get four, will Labor still face a stalemate in the Senate? You can’t just “write off” a whole State. You don’t do it for Tasmanaia, why do it for WA?
Like I said, I support the mining tax. But Labor has some work to do in the west.
[Complete constituency figures for all 650 seats in the British elections: http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/b/britain/%5D
Psephos: thanks very much! 🙂
Posted Saturday, June 12, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Permalink
[I support the mining tax but I wish people would stop bagging West Australians for having a contrary opinion. It is hardly ]
i think we need to take a sympathy empathy for them and the word is
scared of the unknown, we have to give them time
but i think its very annoying in your state we have to register with e.g. Yhoo to write letters in your papers on line.
we all benefit from each other resources,
i was able to write a few things in some areas but not in many telling them how lucky they are with the tax and much they will benefit eg tas will get nothing form this only perhaps the super that will help all australians.
Let us hope with work choices soon to be discussed they realise which is the best for them both these good things or the other two with abbott that are very very bad
The thing i don’t understand. Is that West Australian’s seem to be 100% cool with increases to royalties but a profits based tax is the anti Christ?
Its the logically hypocrisy that makes West Australians look socially backwards.
[126 Gary
In WA, the polls are showing exactly this, Gary. I don’t know about other States. But in WA, it is a GBFU.
And if the polls are still showing Labor holding up in other states come the election WA won’t matter.]
That is just another way of say that WA is politically expendable. This is in ideal parallel to the tax itself, that says the jobs of West Australians are also expendable.
Rudd would be extremely unwise to rely on winning the election whilst losing all Labor seats in WA. He has a cushion of 9 seats. We have 4 here – every one of them at risk. There are several seats in QLD also at risk. Forgive my simple-minded approach to politics, but I thought it was about maximizing your support in every constituency possible.
But beyond this, your strategy is almost indefensible. It says to Labor-voting, blue-collar workers and their families in WA, we are going to sacrifice your economic welfare because it might help us win an election somewhere else. It is a strategy that should be condemned.
[But Labor has some work to do in the west.] Mr. Rudd has been there on average every month since elected he has been to tassie 4 times /5
we are not complaining.
You also need todo you own work TALK TO EACH OTHER.
Gary
Those comments were made about WA. I suspect Qld is similar although to a lesser extent.
Looking at Antony’s calculator, Labor loses two seats in WA pretty quickly with a swing and then loses another at 6%. After that the swing needs to be 9% before more go so I suspect 3 look in very big trouble. Still that would hardly be the end of Rudd. The Coalition, in effect, need to win 13 seats so there would still be a long way to go for them.
So when the Fed Libs ignore WA they get the majority of the vote and when Labor ignores them the Libs get the majority of the vote. Hmm.
Do News Ltd and “Their ABC” think that replacing Rudd with Gillard would mean that the government subsequently drops the resource profits tax from their agenda?
Today’s OO is unreadable tosh – just as well our family has cancelled our weekly subscription to the WEEKEND AUSTRALIAN.
[thing i don’t understand. Is that West Australian’s seem to be 100% cool with increases to royalties but a profits based tax is the anti Christ?
Its the logically hypocrisy that makes West Australians look socially backwards.]
Only because i do not think they get, there is to much talk on the negative for them to work through it.
But if we help letter writing and even their talk back have any of you thought of that.
YES MR RUDD DOES HAVE TO GO THERE AGAIN, IMAGINE LOOSING STEVEN SMITH
WA? Hasluck is probably gone – a shame, because Sharon Jackson is said to be a good local MP.
I’d bet on Gary Gray holding Brand, perhaps by only a few hundred votes.
Perth and Fremantle I wouldn’t worry too much about, if I was an ALP tactician.
[130
Scotty J
The thing i don’t understand. Is that West Australian’s seem to be 100% cool with increases to royalties but a profits based tax is the anti Christ?
Its the logically hypocrisy that makes West Australians look socially backwards.]
Scotty, the design of the tax is lousy. It is not the principle of taxing mining that is at issue. It is the way you go about it that is in dispute. The Henry Tax is a crock. It should be changed. Nearly every senior Labor figure in WA will privately say so. But the PM has evidently locked himself into this particular mechanism.
[That is just another way of say that WA is politically expendable.]
No, it’s another way of saying Labor can be returned without WA and that the mining tax can still happen.
[This is in ideal parallel to the tax itself, that says the jobs of West Australians are also expendable.]
Only if you buy the argument jobs are on the line, which I don’t.
Cuppa……what you’re saying is …”If you don’t agree with what we want to do to your economy, if you won’t quietly accept that we know what is best for you, you can and should F-off!”
No, it’s not what I’m saying, thank you. The RSPT will be good for the economy. It’s projected to ADD to economic growth. The tax was designed by economic experts and it’s got the backing of many economic experts. It will add to bricks and mortar infrastructure nationwide, reduce company tax, take the heat out of a deleterious two-speed economy, and boost the superannuation accounts of Australians. It ensures a more equitable distribution of the finite mineral wealth of our nation.
As for them f_ing off, they’re the ones who have been threatening to do this for a century; I’m simply wishing them ‘Bon Voyage’ – let them have the SerfChoices and banana republic status that they obviously endorse. Just don’t inflict it on the country they’ve long expressed the wish to break away from.
[Nearly every senior Labor figure in WA will privately say so.]
You’ve heard them say this?
[But beyond this, your strategy is almost indefensible. It says to Labor-voting, blue-collar workers and their families in WA, we are going to sacrifice your economic welfare because it might help us win an election somewhere else. It is a strategy that should be condemned.]
Sorry but this is just emotional BS.
I have sent a comment off to Sky News asking why they flog the WestPoll figures on their news reports and ignore the Morgan figures. Morgan is a national poll of some standing, Westpoll is a relatively minor, less significant poll. So why does one get highlighted, the other ignored.
I know it won’t do any good, but makes me feel better. No point writing to any of the papers, they all have their own polls to support and will ignore anything which doesn’t fit their agenda.
The fact that briefly has turned to emotional extremist arguments says it all really.
[123
Greensborough Growler
briefly,
Those “Rolex” revolutionaries Twiggy and Hancock and their mates convinced me of their “Blue collar” credentials.]
cute comment……but entirely disingenuous, GG. The workers of WA are not going to be swayed by Forrest or Hancock. But they will take note when the prospecting company has to lay off a couple of geologists and their mates, and the book-keeper has their hours cut by half. They will take note when some smallish, 3-year copper-gold project a couple of hours from Mt Magnet cannot get the funding needed to start up, and the machinery contracts are canceled.
And thanks, Socrates, for being a voice of reason and balance.
[144
Gary
The fact that briefly has turned to emotional extremist arguments says it all really.]
Gary, the polls are truly startling. It would be a good idea to try to understand them. You may think it is all a beat up. But I very well remember when WA had just one federal MP – first Kim Beazley and then John Dawkins. And, to reiterate, the view that says “WA will not matter” is a view that says the economic interests of working people in WA do not matter. In my opinion, this is indefensible. Now that might be an extreme and emotional view, but it is one that nearly every person in WA would share.
briefly,
You call me disingenuous when it is you that has been concern trolling on this issue since it was announced. Your arguments are confected fairy floss fed by the overly self interested miners and their political frontispiece the Liberal Party.
All the sensible commentary is that the tax is reasonable, that it works and that it will be good for all Australians. The Government isn’t backing down. Of course Miners have been running a scare campaign. But, it seems to my observation that they back down whenever some claim of closure is made because the Stock Exchange is watching for any misleading comments that would undermine their positions as Directors.
Maybe it is time for you to genuinely educate yourself (it’s not hard) and give up this “sky is falling schtick” that is based on your verbotem repetition of vested interests talking points.
Yet another Detention Camp being created by this government.
How many detention camps is that now? Like 5 new ones made since they came to power? Howard was CLOSING detention centres, Ruddies opening them up.
Can someone please tell me what electorate Dalby is in by the way, is it yet another Lib Party safe seat because Labor are too gutless to put them in their own electorates or marginals?
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/asylum-seeker-shock-for-dalby-with-plans-to-house-500/comments-e6freoof-1225878624290
[
DALBY could become home for up to 500 asylum seekers in a scheme that has shocked the mayor and the federal member.
The Immigration Department has confirmed it is in negotiations with private company Ausco Modular to house an overflow of about 200 asylum seekers in a camp used for mine workers 2km west of the Darling Downs town.
The camp has an occupancy of 552.
Dalby Mayor Ray Brown said he had been contacted by Immigration for preliminary discussions, but when and how many people might come had not been discussed.
Member for Maranoa Bruce Scott said there was a lack of consultation with the community.
“The community will see this as a slap in the face. They have no idea who these people are or their backgrounds. It’s just highlighting the abject failure of the Government in protecting Australia’s borders.”]
[Gary, the polls are truly startling. It would be a good idea to try to understand them]
This poll is truly startling. Remember, you don’t know about the others.
[And, to reiterate, the view that says “WA will not matter” is a view that says the economic interests of working people in WA do not matter. In my opinion, this is indefensible. Now that might be an extreme and emotional view, but it is one that nearly every person in WA would share.]
This is more of that emotional BS based on BS. I don’t accept the argument about jobs being lost nor do I accept that I’m saying that the workers in WA don’t matter.
I’m saying their opinion is not necessarily shared by the rest of the country as polls seem to indicate. Big difference.