2011: episode one

Happy new year everybody. Limiting our brief to known knowns, we have the following entries in the 2011 electoral calendar.

• The NSW Labor government’s date for the electoral mincer is set for March 26. Mumble man Peter Brent has bravely ventured that Labor “will do better than opinion polls in 2010 said they would, perhaps emerging with around 30 out of 93 seats”. My tip is that this prediction of Brent’s won’t scrub up quite as nicely after the event as those he made in relation to Victoria.

• John Brumby’s exit from politics will result in a by-election in his ultra-safe northern Melbourne seat of Broadmeadows, probably in February or March. According to David Rood of The Age, early contenders for Labor preselection include “former Brumby adviser and Labor state secretary Nick Reece, former adviser to Steve Bracks and lobbyist Danny Pearson, Hume councillor Burhan Yigit, ex-Labor party officer and right-wing figure Mehmet Tillem, recently defeated Labor upper house MP Nathan Murphy and former Hobsons Bay Council mayor Bill Baarini”. One might surmise that other Victorian by-elections will follow before the year is through.

• Four of the 15 seats in Tasmania’s Legislative Council will become vacant this year, with elections almost certain to be held on May 7. These include two of the three seats held by Labor, with the other two being among the 11 held by independents (Vanessa Goodwin in Pembroke being the sole Liberal). In the normal course of events, two or three seats are on rotation to become vacant each year: this year is the turn of Launceston, Murchison and Rumney. Veteran independent Don Wing is retiring in Launceston, which will be constested for the Liberals by state party president Sam McQuestin. Sitting independent Ruth Forrest will seek another term in Murchison – she will be opposed by a Labor candidate in the person of Waratah-Wynyard mayor Kevin Hyland (UPDATE: Kevin Bonham in comments advises that Hyland is no longer a starter), but not by the Liberals. Labor’s Lin Thorp is up for re-election in Rumney, and I can find no mention of potential challengers (it’s not unknown for Legislative Council members to be returned unopposed, but the Greens at least can be relied upon to take a shot in metropolitan seats). The bonus fourth seat is a by-election caused by the retirement of former Treasurer Michael Aird. Labor’s new nominee is Derwent deputy mayor Craig Farrell.

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.

6,650 comments on “2011: episode one”

Comments Page 132 of 133
1 … 131 132 133

  1. Thanks SK I really appreciate the offer and the info. It seems to be moving fast over there and getting worse. I thought he lived well away from it all so had not been too worried. You reassure me. It sounds scary. I will ring my brother early tomorrow.

    PS Ron, Gus, Centre et.al you have all lost the plot – time for tactical withdrawal and regroup.

  2. Gusface #6539 , and bemused , siddin with greens smearing unloogical Debonlay , astrodome , youse is both fakes claiming suport for labor & traiters to labor party

    gusface “I have no idea what I am talking about but,…” , sums up your green sympatizing one liners

  5. [Of course it’s possible that they are ‘wrong’]

    That is my point. My whole debate has been based on that premise!

    Prove where it has not been!

    Also, I have never claimed to be an expert in climate science. If I come across assuming so, it’s the fault of the likes of Bemused and Astrobleme who fail with substance to win the debate.

  6. [If the Polly Sponsorship game is allowed to be played the way it is in the united states then we are on the way to destroying democracy in this country.]

    AGREE 100%

    tho I can understand MR wotiffs mojo, maybe the message is lost in transmission

    icky sums it up

    🙁

  8. Gweneth,

    If you don’t need anything else, I will head off to bed. If you experience any dramas and need a plan B, let me know and I will have William forward my email address to you.

  10. [the msm have taken time to NOT make that point”

    the article I read made it clear…]

    Astro

    true, until you succintly stated Mr Wotiffs mojo, it was obscured in the chatter

    I agrre with his passion,perhaps the delivery was a tad inconsistent?

  11. [GusfacePosted Tuesday, January 11, 2011 at 12:48 am | Permalinkbilbo
    pls NB
    I have not responded to 10 TEM attempted slanders
    one free shot
    PLZ

    ]

    You obviously missed this:

    [William BowePosted Tuesday, January 11, 2011 at 12:46 am | PermalinkI’m paying attention again now, so no more abuse please.
    ]

  13. Centre

    “That is my point. My whole debate has been based on that premise!”

    the point is that this is not anything you can base an argument or a case on.

    “they might be wrong” Doesn’t mean anything.

    To make an argument you need to be more precise. They might be wrong about what?

    And to claim that because the first ten years of the 21st Century weren’t so bad so the rest won’t be is dumb. The IPCC indicate that we won’t feel bad effects until the second half of this Century. And in fact MOST of the projections they made have understated the effects. Sea level is rising faster than they projected, the Arctic is melting faster than they projected, the CO2 level is rising faster than they thought it would… The only thing that isn;t rising as fast as they said is the Global temp, and that’s still inside the error margins they presented.

  16. Gusface

    “Astro

    true, until you succintly stated Mr Wotiffs mojo, it was obscured in the chatter

    I agrre with his passion,perhaps the delivery was a tad inconsistent?”

    I thoughht it would be good if people read, and considered an article – it appears the Frank and Ron don’t.

  18. Yes, it is hypocrisy to say no donations over $x then to take $xyz. There is no getting around that one. It is icky to some and outrageous to others. However it is not illegal and it would have been politically stupid to have said no to it and no political party would have done so. (Well, Labor would if it was Big Tobacco, to their credit but this wasn’t. The donation supported climate action, one of the Greens major policies.) And it is not like a bit of a scratch of the surface wouldn’t turn up similar hypocrisy in the other major parties, it is my guess.

    But the Greens do have now to accept theirs is a political party, where pragmatism must be balanced with ideology.

    The donation caps cannot be introduced soon enough, imo.

  19. Astrobleme,

    Why don’t you tell me what the economical consequences to industry, employment and cost of living would be to a country like Australia if we were to adopt the lunacy policy of the Greens – WHERE THE WORLDS MAJOR POLLUTERS REFUSE TO ACT!

    Your the one with no clue pal!

  21. harry snapper organs

    who magically appears to villfy myself on occassion

    the last being my contretemps with my bud ruawake

    according to my log

    HSO has attacked me for going

    scorpio

    RON

    frank

    centre

    ruawake

    et al

    only one seems to be a consistent

    the capitals are a clue

    🙁

  22. [SINGAPORE’S diplomats will “inevitably” be more guarded in exchanges with US counterparts following the disclosure of confidential cables by WikiLeaks, Foreign Minister George Yeo said.

    In separate remarks in parliament on Monday, Singaporean Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam warned that the government would not tolerate information leaks in a similar vein to the WikiLeaks saga.

    “We believe that everyone involved in a leak of information, whether in government or outside, should be dealt with firmly. We do not intend to encourage cat and mouse games,” he said.

    “Public interest in free flow of information cannot justify the abuse of confidential government information.”]

    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/singapore-cautious-after-wikileaks-cables/story-e6frea73-1225985228925

    Pretty similar lines to what I’ve seen on here before.

    [Mr Symons questioned the accuracy of the rankings on the basis that Singapore lacks a free and independent media – a crucial component of an open and incorrupt society:

    “One of the main precursors for an open and incorrupt society, as I understand it, is a strong, independent and free press that is not afraid to undertake investigative journalism to expose wrongdoers so that they can be prosecuted and tried in fair and unbiased courts.

    Singapore’s press, however, is ranked 133 on a world scale of 175 for freedom, languishing beneath such paragons of virtue as Bangladesh, the Central African Republic, Cambodia and Nicaragua.”]

    http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/29/thai-expat-singapore-corruption-ranking-is-a-joke/

  23. “One of the main precursors for an open and incorrupt society, as I understand it, is a strong, independent and free press that is not afraid to undertake investigative journalism to expose wrongdoers so that they can be prosecuted and tried in fair and unbiased courts.
    Singapore’s press, however, is ranked 133 on a world scale of 175 ]

    Well with our press, we must be 134th.

  24. Frank, I have no idea what 6576 means but
    [Gus, You have seriously jumped the shark here.]
    Well, you have been beating the crap out of him for the last hour.

  26. Puff @ 6568,

    [Yes, it is hypocrisy to say no donations over $x then to take $xyz. There is no getting around that one. It is icky to some and outrageous to others. However it is not illegal and it would have been politically stupid to have said no to it and no political party would have done so. (Well, Labor would if it was Big Tobacco, to their credit but this wasn’t. The donation supported climate action, one of the Greens major policies.) And it is not like a bit of a scratch of the surface wouldn’t turn up similar hypocrisy in the other major parties, it is my guess.

    But the Greens do have now to accept theirs is a political party, where pragmatism must be balanced with ideology.

    The donation caps cannot be introduced soon enough, imo.]

    Personally I don’t think it’s hypocritical at all. They are the rules of the game and until the Lab/Libs decide to change it. Yes, BB says he would like to see the rules changed, in the meantime? A known philanthropist comes offering a $1.5m cheque and he shouldn’t take it considering how little money the Greens have compared to the Libs and especially Labor who are swimming in money?

  31. Adam,
    [A known philanthropist comes offering a $1.5m cheque and he shouldn’t take it considering how little money the Greens have compared to the Libs and especially Labor who are swimming in money]
    That is why I called it pragmatic. And the other parties would do the same. And it is legal. But its talking the talk but not walking the walk, now isn’t it?

  38. No response to 6569.

    It’s 1.17 am.

    *night Astrobleme and Bemused, look forward to resuming the debate another time*

    Economic hypocrites!

  40. Puff @ 6581,

    [That is why I called it pragmatic. And the other parties would do the same. And it is legal. But its talking the talk but not walking the walk, now isn’t it?]

    I disagree, Puff. The rules of the game are weighted so in favour of the Big 2 so until they decide to change them? I’m not right up Greens policys or anything but I believe they’re against coal fired power stations so should they also refuse to use any energy from them?

  42. Frank @ 6595,

    [no, it’s about lecturing other parties from accepting large corporate donations and saying it’s bad, but in tyhe same breath you do exactly what you are complaining about.

    THAT is the Hypocritical part.]

    Firstly are you going to argue in good faith? IF so have you got any links to what BB has said about in this past? I’d like to know because from where I sit it doesn’t seem hypocritical at all.

  43. Ron,
    You are a Labor warrior and I admire your passion, but the Greens will be in control of the Senate come mid 2011. Then you will be wanting their co-operation. I am very angry still that the Greens ran in enough marginal Labor seats to almost give Abbott the Lodge, but I recognise they are in a position to deliver a Labor progressive agenda from July 2011. The Indies will provide the necessary brakes IMO, because anything outrageous, like estate taxes or uncosted social policies, won’t get past them and into the senate.

    As with the Wotif donation, slowly the realisation of the pragmatic mechanics of government, the horse-trading and compromise necessary, will come.

  44. [AdamPosted Tuesday, January 11, 2011 at 1:29 am | PermalinkFrank @ 6595,
    no, it’s about lecturing other parties from accepting large corporate donations and saying it’s bad, but in tyhe same breath you do exactly what you are complaining about.
    THAT is the Hypocritical part.
    Firstly are you going to argue in good faith? IF so have you got any links to what BB has said about in this past? I’d like to know because from where I sit it doesn’t seem hypocritical at all.
    ]

    The Age article for a start, plus Bob Brown’s comments about Kevin Rudd returning the Ute, while Bob Brown recieved a cash donation from Dick Smith to avoid bankruptecy and the possibibilty of losing his seanate seat.

  45. There has been an acrimonious discussion going on, most of it now deleted, about a commenter who has not left a comment here in five hours. Those participating should consider how boring and self-indulgent they’re being.

  47. Frank,
    The donation from Dick Smith was for BB personally, not the Greens. He is entitled to receive money for his own legal costs as long as he lists it on the register. (I assune he has to do that being a Senator.)

  48. [Puff, the Magic Dragon.Posted Tuesday, January 11, 2011 at 1:37 am | PermalinkFrank,
    The donation from Dick Smith was for BB personally, not the Greens. He is entitled to receive money for his own legal costs as long as he lists it on the register. (I assune he has to do that being a Senator.)
    ]

    And the ute was a personal Donation to Kevin Rudd MHR for use in his Electorate 🙂

  49. [care to check ru’s response to hso’s crap]

    No.

    [or is that an inconvenient truth?]

    The truth of this matter is not capable of inconveniencing me, as there is nothing in this world that I could care less about.

  50. Frank,
    [And the ute was a personal Donation to Kevin Rudd MHR for use in his Electorate 🙂 ]
    I agree. ‘Utegate’ was a complete beatup.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 132 of 133
1 … 131 132 133