Surveying the damage region by region:
| 2011 PRIMARY VOTE | ALP 2PP | |||||
| ALP | L-NP | GRN | 2011 | 2007 | 2003 | |
| Inner Sydney | 29.3% | 36.9% | 21.2% | 47.4% | 59.6% | 64.1% |
| -12.9% | 12.0% | 0.0% | -12.2% | -4.6% | ||
| Northern Sydney | 12.2% | 67.6% | 14.0% | 19.2% | 35.5% | 42.3% |
| -8.8% | 16.2% | 2.5% | -16.2% | -6.9% | ||
| Western Sydney | 41.3% | 40.4% | 6.9% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 71.5% |
| -16.3% | 16.2% | 0.9% | -17.7% | -3.2% | ||
| Southern Sydney | 35.1% | 49.6% | 8.7% | 42.5% | 56.7% | 62.2% |
| -12.1% | 13.6% | 1.5% | -14.3% | -5.4% | ||
| Outer Sydney | 24.7% | 53.0% | 8.1% | 34.2% | 57.8% | 60.8% |
| -23.5% | 17.3% | 1.3% | -23.6% | -3.0% | ||
| SYDNEY | 28.5% | 50.7% | 11.1% | 37.9% | 55.3% | 59.9% |
| -14.5% | 15.7% | 1.6% | -17.5% | -4.5% | ||
| Central Coast | 28.7% | 51.5% | 12.0% | 37.6% | 51.9% | 57.5% |
| -12.9% | 12.9% | 4.8% | -14.3% | -5.6% | ||
| Hunter Region | 30.9% | 36.1% | 8.8% | 47.0% | 59.8% | 60.5% |
| -12.9% | 12.6% | -0.3% | -12.8% | -0.7% | ||
| Illawarra | 35.2% | 34.5% | 12.3% | 51.5% | 68.7% | 69.6% |
| -19.0% | 12.0% | 1.7% | -17.2% | -0.9% | ||
| North Coast | 12.7% | 60.7% | 13.1% | 22.9% | 35.9% | 41.5% |
| -11.7% | 12.4% | 2.6% | -13.0% | -5.6% | ||
| Regional | 16.5% | 59.7% | 6.1% | 25.8% | 36.8% | 40.6% |
| -11.0% | 29.5% | 0.5% | -11.0% | -3.8% | ||
| NON-SYDNEY | 22.7% | 50.8% | 9.1% | 34.2% | 46.1% | 48.5% |
| -14.5% | 15.7% | 1.6% | -11.9% | -2.4% | ||
Inner Sydney (6 seats). All seats had been held by Labor except Sydney; now they have lost Drummoyne and Coogee to the Liberals and are tussling with the Greens for Balmain and Marrickville (though they are probably home and hosed in the latter). Labor got pummelled by a 23.9 per cent swing in Drummoyne, and in the mid-teens in Heffron and Coogee. However, their vote held up a lot better where the campaign had been framed in the Labor-versus-Greens terms. The method I’ve used for approximating Labor-versus-Liberal two-party results doesn’t work so well when non-major parties take a big share of the vote, which applies to most of this area.
Northern Sydney (15 seats). By this I mean “the Liberal area” (albeit that it includes Ryde, which Labor won in 2007 – but which now has a Liberal margin of 26 per cent), and to this end I’ve stretched the definition of northern Sydney to include Vaucluse. This area recorded Labor’s lowest primary vote swing simply because they had the least to lose here – a swing as big as in outer Sydney would have sent them beyond the twilight zone and into negative territory.
Western Sydney (19 seats). All were held by Labor going into the election: now they’ve lost Camden, Campbelltown, Granville, Londonderry, Parramatta, Smithfield and Strathfield, and are going down to the wire in East Hills. The two worst swings were in seats they retained: Cabramatta and Lakemba. The 9.1 per cent swing in Macquarie Fields was about 5 per cent better than anything else in the region, and probably has something to do with the unusually big swing last time.
Southern Sydney (6 seats). This includes Liberal-held Cronulla and five Labor held-seats in the St George/Sutherland/Maroubra area. Labor has lost Miranda, Rockdale and probably Oatley. Swings in the Labor seats were in the 13 to 15 per cent range except Miranda, where a very slight margin was annihilated by a 21.8 per cent swing.
Outer Sydney (6 seats). The new suburbs are always the most volatile, and the 23.6 per cent two-party swing reflects this. Four of the seats recorded swings in the 20s, peaking with Riverstone at a giddy 29.9 per cent. Labor won all six seats at the 2007 election – now there are Liberal margins ranging from 4.7 per cent in Blue Mountains to 24.8 per cent in Menai.
Central Coast (4 seats). Featuring Terrigal, which the Liberals already held, and Gosford, Wyong and The Entrance, which they didn’t before but do now. Labor suffered a tellingly smaller swing in Wyong (9.5 per cent), where member David Harris stood and fought, than in Gosford (16.5 per cent) and The Entrance (17.1 per cent) which were vacated by sitting members.
Hunter Region (8 seats). Previously six Labor seats, one Liberal seat and an independent seat, now five Liberal seats, two Labor seats are an independent. Newcastle, Charlestown, Maitland and Swansea went Liberal, while Cessnock and Wallsend stayed Labor. None of the independents who were being touted proved a serious contender: Newcastle Lord Mayor John Tate managed less than half what he scored when he nearly won the seat in 2007 to finish in fourth place.
Illawarra (5 seats). All Labor before, now two Labor (Shellharbour and Keira), two Liberal (Kiama and Heathcote) with one going down to the wire between Labor member Noreen Hay and independent challenger Gordon Bradbery, who is the only potential new independent.
North Coast (7 seats). Six Nationals seats have become seven with Peter Besseling’s defeat in Port Macquarie.
Regional (17 seats). Previously accounted for two Labor (Bathurst and Monaro) and two independent (Tamworth and Dubbo) seats, now a conservative clean sweep. All four gains have been by the Nationals, most memorably Bathurst with its 36.3 per cent swing. Liberal held seats in this group are Albury, Bega, Goulburn, South Coast and Wagga Wagga).
The 2011 results in the table are based on almost the entire polling booth count, with a couple of booths still outstanding here and there. The swings are in comparison with the comparable figures from the last election. The two-party figures presented above are based on estimates in the many cases that were not Labor-versus-Coalition two-party contests, and are perhaps a little lacking in finesse. I have basically extrapolated the preference flows for the seats where there are Labor-versus-Coalition on to the ones where there aren’t. Independent and minor party preferences appeared to have divide about 24 per cent to Labor and 20 per cent to the Coalition, with 56 per cent exhausting. This compared with 30 per cent to Labor, 20 per cent to the Coalition and 50 per cent exhausting in 2007. The 2011 figure was determined with reference to 63 electorates where there were a) complete polling booth counts, and b) Labor-versus-Coalition preference figures available.
The upper house looks like 11 seats for the Coalition, five for Labor, three for the Greens and one each for Shooters and Fishers and the Christian Democratic Party, although Labor could perhaps yet poach the third Greens’ seat. If not, the numbers in the chamber will be Coalition 19 (12 Liberals and seven Nationals), Labor 14, Greens five, Shooters and Fishers two, Christian Democratic Party two.
NSW electoral commission says Parker has won Balmain.
I think it was 7 news tonight also said Labor had lost Balmain?
No they don’t, they say Parker is ahead in Balmain. They haven’t said anyone has won anything yet.
Sorry, yes. The Greens are ahead in Balmain.
The feds don’t count votes on Sundays. Does NSW?
Not correct. The NSWEC does not say the Greens are ahead. They have done a ALP-GRN preference count from election night, but if you look at the first preference count, the Liberals are leading, so it will either be a Liberal-Labor finish or a Liberal-Green finish, and currently the Greens are running third.
You will also notice the NSWEC have released no check counts for the seat. There will be some very serious scrutineering going on as who finishes second will be elected on the preferences of who finishes third.
I expect the NSWEC will release no further preference counts, and concentrate on finishing the first preference count and then determine the winner by the formal distribution of preferences. That would be the most appropriate decision for a Commissioner to make rather than try and work out who will finish second and third. Mucking about with indicative preference counts in this case can only interfere with the Commissioner’s proper role, which is to determine the winner of the seat and do it in a manner that can withstand a legal challenge.
Your comments on East Hills and Wollongong, Antony?
[I think it was 7 news tonight also said Labor had lost Balmain?]
Amigo Vera, the looney Rights in USA still ask: “Who lost China?”
The looney Left here is asking: “Who lost Balmain?”
Amigo, this loony doesn’t care just so long as we don’t lose our dolphin 😀
The NSWEC have done a preference count in Wollongong that indicates Labor retains it. East Hills has an incomplete check count which I could only analyse with a great deal of effort that I can’t particularly be bothered doing on a Sunday night.
The ABC website hasn’t been updated since last night because of issues to do with the inconstent manner by in which check count data is released. I’ll sort that out tomorrow when the relevant staff are around and when the check count is completed.
Antony Green:
Thank you for your comments. I appreciate them.
fess,
+1
Funny how no-one is questioning Antony’s politics now. Gutless hacks.
Antony: great job last night.
GP:
Those people aren’t here right now.
🙂
I was very amused by one post I saw from someone complaining about my bias because I was highlighting the massive swings and not bringing up seats where the swing was only 10-15%. It’s a bit a bit hard to ignore swings of above 30%.
GP
None of the “hacks’ present criticised AG
I said a 36% swing would be a one in a lifetime event so why wouldn’t Anthony get a little bit excited
And GP as you re aware several of us also called people on their silliness.
Candles,
[Funny how no-one is questioning Antony’s politics now. Gutless hacks.
Antony: great job last night.]
Three conflicting in three sentences. Not bad. Go for four.
[The ABC website hasn’t been updated since last night because of issues to do with the inconstent manner by in which check count data is released. I’ll sort that out tomorrow when the relevant staff are around and when the check count is completed.]
Thanks Antony….was wondering what had happened when I got back to check on progress today.
So what say you about Whan, Dr McDonald, Nathan, Verity and Carmel?
(given Cabramatta is a definite ALP retain)
Mod Lib: I think Carmel has definitely won Marrickville, although she hasn’t yet claimed victory.
Whan has lost Monaro – there was talk tonight on 7 News that they’re going to find a spot for him in the Upper House.
Andrew McDonald has retained Macquarie Fields – 52% 2PP.
I’m happy for Antony to correct me on any of these, he’s far more qualified than me in this area.
Balmain and Wollongong would get Labor to 21 seats, East Hills to 22. That seems to be the upper limit possible at present. With 22, Labor would only have to regain 25 seats to win in 2015. Piece of cake. 🙂
I presume we’re awarding Noreen Hay Wollongong, because Bradbury wouldn’t have been able to mount a postal vote campaign?
From Illawarra Mercury
[I was very amused by one post I saw from someone complaining about my bias because I was highlighting the massive swings and not bringing up seats where the swing was only 10-15%. It’s a bit a bit hard to ignore swings of above 30%.]
Antony, i was complaining about you, that you didnt call the election at 5:59pm
[Antony, i was complaining about you, that you didnt call the election at 5:59pm]
5:59pm on March 26th
(2010)
[evan14
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 11:17 pm | Permalink
Mod Lib: I think Carmel has definitely won Marrickville, although she hasn’t yet claimed victory.
Whan has lost Monaro – there was talk tonight on 7 News that they’re going to find a spot for him in the Upper House.
Andrew McDonald has retained Macquarie Fields – 52% 2PP.
I’m happy for Antony to correct me on any of these, he’s far more qualified than me in this area.]
I don’t disagree with any of those seat predictions, its just that the VTR results are reporting results from about 30k of 50k eligible voters, so these are still not decided I wouldn’t have thought???
Like Mod Lib, I’m an Andrew McDonald fan – I think he’d be a perfect Shadow Health Minister, considering his medical background. 😉
….oops….did I forget about exhaustions?
I’m really upset about what happened to David Borger in Granville – he is a good guy, even Ray Hadley on normally anti-Labor 2GB was praising Borger last week.
No 729
I’m not upset. David Borger is responsible for mobile speed cameras being reintroduced. Thankfully, the days of using Sydney’s roads as a revenue-raising bonanza are now at an end.
[Thankfully, the days of using Sydney’s roads as a revenue-raising bonanza are now at an end.]
I might ask you for an update on that one in a few years’ time.
[Thankfully, the days of using Sydney’s roads as a revenue-raising bonanza are now at an end.]
LOL! You’re in a total dreamland. You really think the Liberals will give up that revenue?
If so, which services will they cut to make up the shortfall? O’Farell has only promised to spend a few billion on some new train lines. How is he going to pay for that?
[an update on that one in a few years’ time.]
Six months, maximum.
Generic Person: I can’t wait – rampant speeding on the roads, shooting of native animals in national parks, unlimited land clearing, environmental degradation, compulsory scripture lessons in schools – welcome to the O’Farrell/Shooters/Christian Democrats Dictatorship. 🙂
But David Borger did do one very good thing in his time as Minister for Roads. In return for approving the widening the M2, Hills Motorway agreed to delete the clause allowing them to claim compensation if a competing public transport facility, eg. the North West Rail Link, is built. In negotiating this change he’s done the new Liberal government and the community a favour.
GP Are you encouraging law breaking.
I have never understood why motorist cannot drive under the speed limit it really isn’t that hard.
No 734
Sounds glorious.
[I have never understood why motorist cannot drive under the speed limit it really isn’t that hard.]
Saying that speed cameras are simply a “revenue raising measure” is a standard opposition tactic. Once an opposition becomes a government they have the responsibility of actually making the budget add up, so at that point speed cameras magically go from being a revenue raising measure to a very important part of road safety.
If the Liberals are smart, they will stop talking about speed cameras ASAP.
No 736
Um, not when the government reduces speed limits, places cameras at the bottom of hills, plans to delete the 3kmh margin of error even though Australian Standards allow up to a 10% margin of error for speedometers, so on and so forth.
Time for a purge of the RTA I think. Let the mass sackings begin.
[plans to delete the 3kmh margin of error even though Australian Standards allow up to a 10% margin of error for speedometers, so on and so forth. ]
Serious? A 10% margin of error? That sounds extraordinarily unsafe.
No 740
How is it “extraordinarily unsafe”? This is another lie perpetrated by the Labor Party.
Stoner has already announced plans to rationalise speed limits and change the balance of traffic law enforcement to visible policing over covert policing. Sounds good to me.
[How is it “extraordinarily unsafe”? This is another lie perpetrated by the Labor Party.
Because 10% is enough difference to either injure or kill someone.
I’m astonished that a 10% margin of error could be legal.
[Stoner has already announced plans to rationalise speed limits and change the balance of traffic law enforcement to visible policing over covert policing. Sounds good to me.]
Yeah sounds fantastic. Now let’s see how that changing of the balance will be paid for.
See Australian Design Rule 18.5: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/F3E9920BE1FC56A5CA257257001E1849/$file/ADR1800comp1FINALFRLI.pdf
And your hysteria about a 10% margin of area isn’t borne out statistically. The safety studies relied on by the previous Government neglected to demarcate the accident data between ‘above the limit speeding’ and ‘speeds deemed unsafe for conditions, but below the signposted limit’; the effect of which is to distort crash data to include a raft of accidents for which below the limit speeding was a factor.
Sorry, should read ‘margin of error’ not ‘area’.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/state-election-2011/humiliated-labor-goes-gunning-for-scapegoats-20110327-1cbyk.html?from=smh_sb
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/result-is-no-party-for-tony-windsor-and-rob-oakeshott/story-e6freuy9-1226029001420
Draper, Fardell, Torbay all said that Windsor and Oakeshott has damaged the Independant brand and were the reason for the swing to the Nationals at the NSW election
While Basseling says he will leave the public to make up their mind.
Except Nthern Tableland, the National got >50 of primaries in each of those seats
[Draper, Fardell, Torbay all said that Windsor and Oakeshott has damaged the Independant brand and were the reason for the swing to the Nationals at the NSW election]
Evidence?
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/no-time-for-fighting-fix-the-factions-and-let-the-learning-begin-20110327-1cbtb.html
NSW ALP Campaign Director Sam Dastyari