Broadmeadows by-election live

106 comments on “Broadmeadows by-election live”

1. 48

   If the member representing an electorate lives in that electorate then they have a better understanding of the electorate through experience and come into contact with their voters more often.

   I think that it should be compulsory to live in electorates to represent them as it used to be in Victoria.

2. Tom! Frank spent his childhood and early adulthood in Broady and i don’t think the suburb has changed that much.

   I think there would be an issue if Frank was attempting to win a country seat for he clearly has no background but state politics is bascially about services and infrastructure

3. And what does Andrew Robb have in common with Brighton when he is from Reservoir

4. [I think that it should be compulsory to live in electorates to represent them as it used to be in Victoria.]

   Great idea. That way Liberal members get to live in Kew, Brighton and Sandringham, while Labor members can enjoy life in Broadmeadows and Altona. When redistributions put them on the wrong side of a boundary, why, they’ll just have to move, won’t they. And if the voters want to be represented by someone who doesn’t live in the electorate, to hell with them.

5. Didn’t Brumby end up not living in Broadmeadows because of a redistribution?

6. Most politcal leaders in Federal and State history have not held a seat covering the place they spent most of their lives.

   John Brumby was a Bendigo boy but held Broady
   Steve Bracks was from Ballarat but held Williamstown
   Gough Whitlam was from Kew but held Werriwa
   Bob Menzies was from the Mallee but held Kooyong

   I could go and on

7. Offically yes but Strathmore just happens to be one of the best part of the North-Western suburbs.

8. Re residence in electorate ..Tom 52

   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
   Tom..where did you get the info re Victorian residence requirements for MP’s
   I have lived and voted in Victoria all my life ,and have been a candidate and had many involvements with campaigns all my life,and I have never heard of that!
   .
   Are you sure that members in Victoria were once required to live in their electorate?
   I very much doubt that ? When was it so ?

9. I don’t believe Victoria has ever had a requirement for MP’s to actually live in the seat they hold.

10. Whitlam was born in Melbourne because his father was a Commonwealth public servant in 1916 Melbourne was the capital of Australia. But he was in no sense “from” Victoria. He went to school in Canberra and Sydney, went to university in Sydney, and has lived in Sydney all his adult life. On this logic Gillard would have to sit for a seat in Wales.

11. Psephos – And i think the Whitlam story is an example as too why Tom’s suggestion whilst a nice idea might actually have adverse effect on the political process.

12. I don’t think even Tom would suggest that MPs should have to sit for the seat where they were born. For the record, I think MPs ought to live in the seat they represent, but not that it should be compulsory.

13. I’ve heard Eddie McGuire and Andrew Demetriou both mentioned as possible Labor candidates.

14. Dio – I have heard both men say they are Left of Center. Eddie would be more likely to go into politics than Andrew but they are both from the Northern suburbs

15. 54

    Are you saying that Broadmeadows and Altona are places unworthy of an MP living in? Anyway if they are it should be the MPs job to get that fixed not just solve the problem only for themself.

    When was the last time you herd of voters naming not living in their electorate as a positive? The candidate can always move.

16. Re MP’s residenc
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
    I have just checked with a friend who was once a Federal Labor MP and he tells me that a Federal MP can choose to be placed on the roll for his electorate even if ( he or she) lives outside it(and can thus vote there on polling day)

17. [Are you saying that Broadmeadows and Altona are places unworthy of an MP living in? ]

    Unworthy has nothing to do with it. Most people don’t want to live there – not me, not you, and not anyone who would make a good minister. By forcing them to live in Melbourne’s worst suburbs, you’re inflicting Labor aspirants with a gigantic disincentive to pursue a career in politics.

    [Anyway if they are it should be the MPs job to get that fixed not just solve the problem only for themself.]

    Through vigorous door-knocking and effective lobbying, Frank McGuire has it in his power to transform Broadmeadows into a new Beverly Hills. Christ on a bike …

18. Phone rings

    William – Hello William speaking
    Voice on the phone – Hey William, its Joola here
    William – Hi Julia
    Voice – Just cvalled to let you in on a little secret just between us
    William – Okay just between us
    Voice – I am the PM and my house is in Altona

19. In all seriouslness Altona has some nice parts around Point Cook whilst Broady is a tough place to live

20. bilbo

    so PJK never lived in bankstown

    Hmmmm

    🙁

21. 67

    Introduce PR in the lower house and there will be seats covering a wider range of area that ALP candidates can win. Candidate electorate residency may well help the ALP select some more selfless people into parliaments.

22. Tom – No PR is needed for as we found out in Victorian the likes of Greg Barber only represented the area in Zone 1 asnd didn’t care for people from the northern part of his seat.

    I’m sorry but no thanks to PR

23. Some of you guys are a scream…thankfully William and Psephos bring logic to the debate.

    Forcing MPs to live in their electorate is just plain silly. Redistributions put paid to that idea. If an MP representing a northern or western suburbs seat lives in the leafy east, then the locals can take that into account…if anyone bothers to tell them. If they live in the general area, that’s OK by me.

    The ALP member for the poorest seat in SA lives in the richest suburb in Adelaide – over 30kms away. He even occasionally gets to visit the area to see how the other half live.

24. IT – I agree butn only Tom thinks MPs should be required to live in their seats and while it is a nice idea but living in the general area is find by me.

25. 72

    That was a particularly stupid statement by Barber (if it has not been misinterpreted and/or misrepresented).

26. MB

    actually tom aint alone in his thinking

    Why shouldnt a local represent a seat

    Seems to me that the middle class ethos has become the norm

    🙁

27. In an ideal world the MP would live in his/her seat but if they are just outside the seat due to a boundary change ot if the suburb they live in happens to overlap boundaries then i am happy for the MP to live just outside the seat.

28. 77

    I think that there might be a case for a spot of grandfathering in the case of redistributions moving the seat away from an MP.

29. mb is right – we had a case here in SA where an MP who felt particularly strong on the local bit and who lived in the electorate when first elected and then found herself living one suburb outside after the redistrution. She moved, and the same thing happened next redistribution. Her family told her to stay put, and I agree – she is close enough.
    Frank McGuire grew up in Broady and his parents still live there (in the same street as a friend of mine). It’s not that bad an area to live in, but maybe then again, having lived in working class areas most of my life I suppose I am used to it unlike the chardonnay sipping Labor political class.

30. In any case, it has to be up to the voters to decide if it bothers them whether a candidate lives in the electorate or not. It’s anathema to democracy to prescribe such things by legislation.

31. bilbo

    Hmmm

    you seem to confuse 2 issues here

    1 being the right to represent

    v

    2 the right to live where you want

    tho having a coterie of fibs in the eastern suburbs would save the fibs heaps

32. Back on the Broady result, there would be a lot of Liberal voters who failed to show, voted Indy (inc Sahin) or informal. This happens every time when one of the majors fails to front – informal gets their deposit back.

    The Labor dive is about what you’d expect, and will be forgotten within a month. Good on Sahin for having a go, and probably soaked up all the Turkish voters he could who liked him.

    The Greens on the other hand, ouch. Working class people does not equal Green. Their demographics are increasingly being narrowed into trendy inner city seats in Melbourne and Sydney and the Hills in Adelaide (please advise in other capitals) – Tasmania is of course a different situation where they appeal to a broader church and are known as local people too.

    I think the only other lesson from the result is that the ALP prepoll and postal result (when it is counted) show the value of the efforts in those areas.

33. William Bowe @ 67

    [Most people don’t want to live there – not me, not you, and not anyone who would make a good minister.]

    Yes, it’s one thing for Labor politicians to talk the talk of multiculturalism, and for them to label those with differing views on the subject as monsters, but it’s just plain unreasonable to expect them to actually live next door to darkies and Chinamen.

34. frankie v

    LOL

35. Independently Thinking@82: The Greens on the other hand, ouch. Working class people does not equal Green. Their demographics are increasingly being narrowed into trendy inner city seats in Melbourne and Sydney and the Hills in Adelaide (please advise in other capitals) – Tasmania is of course a different situation where they appeal to a broader church and are known as local people too.

    This is bollocks. The Greens, like every other party, have seats where they don’t do well. These tend to be places with either a) a very large religious base (like Armadale in WA), seats with a high migrant population (as Labor harnesses these groups extremely well and the Greens haven’t learned to crack that – yet), or seats with a particular type of working-class dynamic (socially conservative; outer suburban; weak sense of local community).

    It’s not working-class voters generally that the Greens have a problem with; some of the biggest Green swings here in WA have been in working-class seats, and the Greens outright won some very working-class booths and in Fremantle that Labor thought they had downpat. Labor fans love to stereotype the Greens, but the actual reality when you look at the hard data paints quite a different picture.

    And back to my original point – no one makes exclamations of surprise when Labor does badly in Kooyong, or the Liberals do badly in Calwell, but any time an election is held in a seat that isn’t great for the Greens, it’s portrayed as some sort of catastrophic defeat. These hypocritical expectations are passe.

36. Why is the VEC giving a ALP/Green 2PP when it is clearly ALP/Sahin? Antony Green has it at 69/31 ALP/Ind Sahin.

    This is the second by-election since the Federal election where the Greens have come in a poor third although no Liberal candidate was standing. It also occurred in the Armadale (WA) by-election where without a Liberal candidate it was a 70/30 ALP/CDP 2PP. At least then the WAEC caught on early on that 2PP was not ALP/Greens as widely expected but ALP/CDP.

    It seems the Greens Adam Bandt’s hasty support for Gillard is costing them dearly. They used to be the second party of choice for many Liberal voters. It gave the Greens Melbourne (federal) and Fremantle (state). No more

37. Rebecca and lenwx:

    All I will say is welcome to Democracy 🙂

38. lenwx: It might help if you read the post directly above.

    Both Armadale (semi-rural; socially conservative; extremely religious) and Broadmeadows (socially conservative; outer suburban; weak sense of community) are very bad areas for the Greens. The Greens knew damn well they were going to come third in Armadale, and I assume they figured as much in Broadmeadows as well.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: why is it that the Greens doing badly in their worst seats in the entire country seems to make ALP fans think the Greens have had a tremendous defeat, and why don’t those same people go ballistic when Labor surprisingly fails to win Kooyong at each election?

39. Frank #87

    So if the Greens manage to wrest away another seat off Labor you won’t throw tantrums again?

    Rebecca #88

    They don’t go ballistic because only half the Liberal candidates are to the left of them and the choose to only see those to the right. 😛

40. I think the reason the Greens should have done better is because there was NO LIBERAL CANDIDATE. Fremantle doesn’t disprove the point, it bolsters it. The Greens won because the Liberals sat out meaning a not inconsiderable slice of the vote (even in a seat traditionally bad for that party) was up for grabs. They should have done better. Perhaps Bailieu has really demonised the party for wet Libs for the time being.

41. I think Bailieu / Kennett deserve a lot of credit for the underperformance of the greens in the last few months within Victoria.

    I will also think that Bailieu will split a lot of the grass-roots “green” groups from the greens – for e.g. PTUA – as what was done with the old BLF for labor.

    As Ive mentioned before, I dont vote for any single party consistantly; but I voted for the libs because Im sick of “pollywaffle” that tends to come from the labor side these days.

    In the early days, bracks used to talk fairly straight – which I liked – but after his second victory it just become unbearable to listen to. Then Kevin Rudd did exactly the same thing – I could not understand a word he was saying.

    Now Julia Gillard has exactly the same problem – though not as verbose. She was on 774 the other day and her answers (and Chris Bowen’s) was so “public-servant speak” that I could of sworn I was listening to a radio play of Yes Minister.

    I don’t understand what JG has achieved with the health scheme, but it sounded like “We are going to reduce bureaucracy by increasing it.” Who was the labor-staffer numbskull who told her to say that?

    Now, contrast that to the interview John Fayne did with Peter Ryan – in which (even though I may not have agreed with everything) straight forward answers were forthcoming.

    As far as stopping the boats and all that nonsense, its easy to understand but I have severe misgivings with it and TA in general.

    If labor could deliver a clear and simple message, that hasnt come directly from an episode of Yes Minister, then they would be miles in front.. but no one has a procreational idea about what they are saying.

    Red tape is NOT fun.

42. Rebecca @ 85

    [The Greens, like every other party, have seats where they don’t do well. These tend to be places with either a) a very large religious base (like Armadale in WA), seats with a high migrant population (as Labor harnesses these groups extremely well and the Greens haven’t learned to crack that – yet), or seats with a particular type of working-class dynamic (socially conservative; outer suburban; weak sense of local community).]

    Yes, as Independently Thinking said, all the places where well-to-do trendies don’t live.

    [seats with a high migrant population (as Labor harnesses these groups extremely well and the Greens haven’t learned to crack that – yet)]

    I’m pretty sure the ALP aren’t using mind control. Immigrants have their own reasons for not voting Greens. As there isn’t an immigrant group (including the poms) that isn’t more socially conservative than the ‘working-class dynamic’ you patronise, the Greens shall continue as a boutique party for upper middle class white folk with a penchant for sanctimony and a willful ignorance of the limitations of renewable energy technology.

    [any time an election is held in a seat that isn’t great for the Greens, it’s portrayed as some sort of catastrophic defeat.]

    And anytime the Greens manage to outpoll the Christian Democrats or DLP it’s hailed by Bob and co. as the end of the two party system.

43. Frankie V.@92: Yes, as Independently Thinking said, all the places where well-to-do trendies don’t live.

    Except that this is crap. There are working-class seats where everyone, including the Greens, expects them to do very badly. There are working-class seats where the Greens expect to do pretty damn well. Is there something that makes Labor voters on this site allergic to looking at actual data?

    I’m pretty sure the ALP aren’t using mind control. Immigrants have their own reasons for not voting Greens.>

    This is very true. I’m simply pointing out that it’s one demographic weakness for the party, and that it shouldn’t a great shock when heavily migrant seats aren’t great for the Greens. It doesn’t hold true across the board, though; there’s booths in such areas where they’re still getting a solid 20+% of the vote.

    As there isn’t an immigrant group (including the poms) that isn’t more socially conservative than the ‘working-class dynamic’ you patronise, the Greens shall continue as a boutique party for upper middle class white folk with a penchant for sanctimony and a willful ignorance of the limitations of renewable energy technology.

    …and ne’er shall reality interfere with Poll Bludger’s Labor fans deep and abiding love for dumb stereotypes.

    And anytime the Greens manage to outpoll the Christian Democrats or DLP it’s hailed by Bob and co. as the end of the two party system.

    Certain elements in the press (and Labor supporters on this site, apparently) love to spout this tripe so they can tear the Greens down when they inevitably don’t meet ridiculously inflated expectations. While Bob can get a bit carried away when the Greens actually take lower house seats, you’ll very rarely hear this talk coming from the Greens short of outright wins in the lower house.

    Once again, the Greens tend to be pretty realistic about their hopes. Psephos still loves to crow about how Labor mightily held off the forces of the Greens in the Albert Park by-election in 2008 when no one in the Greens thought they had a damn bit of a chance there. You can build up ridiculous expectations and then crow when the Greens fail to meet those; you shouldn’t be surprised when more sensible people look at you like you’re a bit bloody daft for doing so though.

44. Rebecca, are you going to deny tha the Greens thought they would take at least one, maybe up to four lower house seats in Victoria recently?

    To be fair, many Sex Party votes would have otherwise gone the Greens’ way, which to me suggests a lot of blue-greens may be looking elsewhere for their vote. But if there are still enough rusted-ons to poll 5% in Broadmeadows, even at a by-election where they should have done better, the Greens’ future in Victoria looks reasonable rosy.

45. In an ideal world the MP would live in his/her seat but if they are just outside the seat due to a boundary change ot if the suburb they live in happens to overlap boundaries then i am happy for the MP to live just outside the seat.

    The worst case is the candidate that gets parachuted in by the ALP machine, promises to move to the electorate if returned and then stays put in a leafy suburb some distance away eg. Paul Gibson who is for the time being the ALP member of Blacktown. But then, that’s the Zanu-ALP way.

46. Rebecca, are you going to deny tha the Greens thought they would take at least one, maybe up to four lower house seats in Victoria recently?

    They thought that they might win up to four seats on the assumption that they would have Liberal preferences. Had that assumption been correct, they’d still have won three seats (despite what I personally think was a piss-poor state campaign) and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Without, I think they and everyone else realised that was going to be a bloody hard slog, and it’s the next challenge they’re going to have to get over.

    To be fair, many Sex Party votes would have otherwise gone the Greens’ way, which to me suggests a lot of blue-greens may be looking elsewhere for their vote. But if there are still enough rusted-ons to poll 5% in Broadmeadows, even at a by-election where they should have done better, the Greens’ future in Victoria looks reasonable rosy.

    I don’t think these sorts of obscure by-elections say much of anything about the Greens’ future: the only reason the Greens even contested Armadale and Broadmeadows is because they contest everything.

    I’ll be more interested to see how they go in New South Wales, with a drastically unpopular Labor government, Optional Preferential, and without the baggage of Greg Barber (though admittedly against two much stronger Labor members).

47. [iBoth Armadale (semi-rural; socially conservative; extremely religious)/i]

    Rebecca, the Armadale state electorate has no rural elements at all. It is the inner parts of the regional centre. The Greens candidate made the same mistake, he went to cast his vote with the TV cameras watching and was turned back because wasn’t on the Armadale roll (he was in the adjacent electorate of Darling Range!).

    Extremely religious? According to the census figures 25% of the Canning electorate, of which Armadale is a big part, consider themselves of no religious affiliation. That is in the top 10% of all electorates.

    [iThe Greens knew damn well they were going to come third in Armadale….
    the only reason the Greens even contested Armadale and Broadmeadows is because they contest everything./i]

    The Greens put a lot of resources and manpower into the Armadale by-election. Without a Liberal candidate they expected a 2 party contest with lots of publicity. In the end it backfired on them – epitomised by the candidate’s blunder of not even knowing which electorate he resided in. Also the media were caught by surprise and some first reported the 70/30 2PP as ALP/Greens rather than ALP/CDP even though the WAEC already early on got it right.

    It is true the CDP poll well in Armadale. However in the Federal election 4 weeks earlier the Greens outpolled the CDP easily in most Armadale booths with the exception of two. Overall the Greens performance in Canning was the worst of all the WA federal electorates. In part that was because there was a good ALP candidate, even though she lost. In the immediately following state election, the CDP outpolled Greens almost 2 to 1.

    I still maintain it was Adam Bandt’s hasty alliance with Gillard which turned the Liberals away and will continue to do so. In 2009 in both the Willagee and Fremantle by-elections, where there was no Liberal candidate, the Greens got most of the Liberal votes. No more.

48. From what I hear from infomed sources (I live in an adjacent electorate and helped out on one of the polling booths on saturday) sahin has close links to the local liberal party organisation and was supported by them. The alp/sahin 2PP is a reasonable proxy for the alp/lib 2PP i’d suggest.

49. Rebecca
    I am not a Labor troll. I have never voted Labor (or Liberal) in my life. Heck, I even include a Greens MP amongst my friends!
    I appreciate your spirited and sensible defence of the Greens, and I think most on PB do too. It makes a change from cheer squads who call each other names and wackos who are eventually banned.

    Now, to the debate. IMHO, the Greens, like the Democrats to a degree, appeal to a similar (not identical I stress) demographic, but that can change depending on circumstances in an election or byelection.
    Unfortunately for the Greens, they may have no problems with the working class, but the working class has problems with them.
    The Greens appeal to the intelligentsia; educated, tolerant, deep thinking people who believe in a different type of world to what we have now. They also appeal to ecolgists, obviously. They will also appeal to people who are not happy with Labor or Liberal and are happy to vote something else who are an organised alternative. The Democrats lost this vote to the Greens after they imploded. This is a component of the so called ‘protest vote’.
    Who they do not appeal to – but want to – are the working class (I include what Marxists would call the under class) who, if they are on the electoral roll at all, feel marginalised all the time. They are generally Labor voters, but not always. Some hate unions, some love them and others are indifferent. What they generally care about is something I learnt from eastern European politics. THEY WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE.
    They don’t want big government, but they distrust the bosses (extend that to the Liberals). They want welfare, if required, for them. Not for migrants. They are generally racist. They are also generally under-educated and that is part of the problem for their distrust and phobias. Tony Abbott and co’s patently racist calls are aimed for these people – they form a lot of what became known as ‘Howard’s battlers’ but some of them had always voted Liberal anyway.
    Now, to those of more recent immigration, yes it is true the ALP and the Liberals to a smaller extent has spent a lot of effort to woo these communities. Does it help them? Of course it does. But if the ALP and Liberals did nothing with these communities I am not so sure the results would be much different. What the Greens offer are not policies, with the exception of multiculturalism etc that these communities desire.
    What they want is, surprise, surprise, economic success. The Greens don’t seem to offer this. Scratch the average recent immigrant, and their desires are not much different to the working class. They want their families to be able to succeed in their new country, probably more than the working class who are generally happy to just survive. The new immigrants on the whole are also racist against people who are not like them (sorry, I work with these communities, I know) and just as scared as the working class (remember, they are not generally from educated stock).
    This summary is not much succour to the Greens, but I am sure the Greens’ hierachy understand this. The ALP and Liberal bosses sure do, and play to it.
    If you want to know how to overcome it, feel free to ask, I am not sure I have all the answers, but I am available for consultancy work to anyone. I charge, but not as much as Hawker Britton.

50. Frankie:

    [ the Greens shall continue as a boutique party for upper middle class white folk with a penchant for sanctimony and a willful ignorance of the limitations of renewable energy technology. ]

    Last time I looked at my group certificate last financial year it said I’d earnt 28 grand, so I guess that means I’m hanging on by my fingernails to the lower middle class. I’ve lived in Armadale (I don’t remember that many Christians, just lots of drainage ditches and dogs running around the street), and also Coolbellup, Cloverdale and plenty of other suburbs not known for their ‘trendy’ population. (Cooby, by the way, gets something around 20% for the Greens – not bad for a decaying Homeswest suburb that isn’t that close to Freo.) Before that, I grew up as bogan scum from the wheatbelt, and still have a weakness for Emu Export, steelcap boots and Bob Katter. And I vote Green. Deal with it.

    As for your working class seats, Rebecca, you should pull out some real examples (they’re easy to come by, just plug a pile of WAEC data into Excel). One I remember is Nollamara – the Greens polled ridiculously well, up to 20%-odd in a few random booths round that area. Even the seat of Bassendean was quite good for them… sure, it’s by the river, but way too close to Lockridge for those la-di-da trendy types I keep hearing about to live in. Eden Hill’s abandoned old shopping centre is more likely to be featured on The Worst Of Perth than a latte appreciation website.