Covering the greater part of Hobart, Denison produced one of the most significant results of the 2010 election, sending one of five cross-bench members to the first hung parliament since World War II. Andrew Wilkie achieved his win with just 21.2% of the primary vote, giving him a crucial lead over the Greens who polled 19.0%. The distribution of Greens preferences put Wilkie well clear of the Liberal candidate, who polled 22.6% of the primary vote, and Liberal preferences in turn favoured Wilkie over Labor by a factor of nearly four to one. Wilkie emerged at the final count with a 1.2% lead over Labor, which had lost the personal vote of its long-term sitting member Duncan Kerr.
Like all of the state’s electorates, Denison has been little changed since Tasmania was divided into single-member electorates in 1903, with the state’s representation at all times set at the constitutional minimum of five electorates per state. It encompasses the western shore of Hobart’s Derwent River and hinterland beyond, with the eastern shore suburbs and the southern outskirts township of Kingston accommodated by the seat of Franklin. It is one of the strongest electorates in the country for the Greens, who managed to increase their vote slightly from 18.6% to 19.0% despite the formidable competition offered by Wilkie. Booth results show a clear north-south divide in the electorate, with Greens support concentrated around the town centre and its immediate surrounds in the south and Labor continuing to hold sway in the working class northern suburbs.
Labor’s first win in Denison came with their first parliamentary majority at the 1910 election, but the 1917 split cost them the seat with incumbent William Laird Smith joining Billy Hughes in the Nationalist Party. The seat was fiercely contested over subsequent decades, changing hands in 1922, 1925, 1928, 1931, 1934, 1940 and 1943. It thereafter went with the winning party until 1983, changing hands in 1949, 1972 and 1975. The 1983 election saw Tasmania buck the national trend, the Franklin dam issue helping the Liberals return their full complement of five sitting members with increased majorities. Hodgman’s margin wore away over the next two elections, and he was defeated by Labor’s Duncan Kerr in 1987, later to return for a long stretch in state parliament (he is the father of Will Hodgman, the state’s Liberal Opposition Leader). The drift to Labor evident in 1984 and 1987 was maintained during Kerr’s tenure in the job, giving him consistent double-digit margins after 1993 (substantially assisted by Greens preferences).
Kerr bowed out in 2010 after a career that included a four-week stint as Attorney-General after the 1993 election when it appeared uncertain that incumbent Michael Lavarch had retained his seat, and a rather longer spell as Keating government Justice Minister. The ensuing Labor preselection kept the seat in the Left faction fold with the endorsement of Jonathan Jackson, a chartered accountant and the son of former state attorney-general Judy Jackson. What was presumed to be a safe passage to parliament for Jackson was instead thwarted by Andrew Wilkie, a former Office of National Assessments officer who came to national attention in 2003 when he resigned in protest over the Iraq war. Wilkie ran against John Howard as the Greens candidate for Bennelong in 2004, and as the second candidate on the Greens’ Tasmanian Senate ticket in 2007. He then broke ranks with the party to run as an independent in Denison at the 2010 election, falling narrowly short of winning one of the five seats with 9.0% of the vote.
Placed in the centre of the maelstrom by his surprise win at the 2010 election, Wilkie declared himself open to negotiation with both parties as they sought to piece together a majority. The Liberals took this seriously enough to offer $1 billion for the rebuilding of Royal Hobart Hospital. In becoming the first of the independents to declare his hand for Labor, Wilkie criticised the promise as “almost reckless”, prompting suggestions his approach to the Liberals had been less than sincere. Wilkie’s deal with Labor included $340 million for the hospital and what proved to be a politically troublesome promise to legislate for mandatory pre-commitment for poker machines. This met fierce resistance from the powerful clubs industry, and the government retreated from it after Peter Slipper’s move to the Speaker’s chair appeared to free it from dependence on Wilkie’s vote. Wilkie withdraw his formal support for the government in response, but it has never appeared likely that he would use his vote to bring it down.
Labor’s candidate for the coming election is Jane Austin, a policy officer with Tasmania’s Mental Health Services, who emerged as the preferred candidate of the still dominant Left. The Greens candidate is Anne Reynolds, an adviser to Christine Milne. The Liberals are yet to choose a candidate, prompting Labor to claim the party proposes to play dead in order to boost Wilkie. A ReachTEL poll of 644 respondents in mid-2012 had Wilkie well placed with 40% of the primary vote to 28% for the Liberals, 17% for Labor and 14% for the Greens.
“Abbott will scrap the SchoolKids Bonus for 1.3 million families”
But he said that no household will be worse off under his Govt.
So far he is removing the schoolkids money and opposing the lower baby “bonus” payment.
Is the the policy of you will be no worse off with less??
I didn’t say Nikki Savva WAS a dog.
The longest bow you could draw out of what I said was that it’s possible a dog could be named after her.
I have a dog called “Bob”, named after “Aussie Bob” Trimboli, because he is a naughty pooch.
So Meguire, is Northern Tablelands more pro-Nat or less pro-Nat than New England in your view?
Plibersek presser 24 now
No worries BB: as long as we know the rules of the game so you will not complain if the same is done in relation to Gillard????
[BB,
Yep]
BW, note that the Insiders didn’t agree with Barrie about the early announcement of the election date.
They discard their set memes very reluctantly.
Guytaur @ 97
The areas covered by Northern Tablelands are the areas of New England where Labor has always traditionally done best. If MB had made that comment, then he really can’t differentiate between his arse and his elbow.
[No worries BB: as long as we know the rules of the game so you will not complain if the same is done in relation to Gillard????]
It’s already been done with reference to “Bill Shorten”, after whom Gillard’s dog in the At Home With Julia show was named.
I remember you thought that show was a hoot.
BBP
Where in the comment I posted was the word Labor?
Hi zoomster I see you are around this morning.
You asked me to clarify Friday night (7.12 pm a few things that seemed strange to you in the Marcel Crok article I linked to. Namely : –
http://www.staatvanhetklimaat.nl/
There’s nothing strange here. He was replicating the figures that Brandon Shollenberger got on Lucia’s Blackboard blog. These can be obtained by the link at the bottom of Marcel’s post (link above) to the Skeptical Science (Cook) “Search Abstracts”. Click on “Endorsement Level”. From searching the number of abstracts in each category is in ( ).
http://www.skepticalscience.com/tcp.php?t=search
1. Explicitly endorses and quantifies AGW as 50+% (65)
2. Explicitly but does not quantify or minimize (934)
3. Implicitly endorses AGW without minimizing it. (2933)
4. No position (8261)
5. Implicitly minimizes /rejects AGW (53)
6. Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW but does not quantify (53)
7. Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW as less than 50% (15)
8. Undecided (10)
The 97% is arrived at by adding up the numbers categories 1 to 3 and taking that as a percentage of all categories except 4. i.e . 3932/4010
I knew a family that had a dog called Trotsky … never sure why ..
Daughter Pseph is on a constant campaign for a dog … I wouldn’t mind calling it Capitalist Running … but Mrs Pseph thought the idea was stupid.
Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:15 am | PERMALINK
So Meguire, is Northern Tablelands more pro-Nat or less pro-Nat than New England in your view?
——————————-
Mod like you tell me lets have a look
Torbay – labor member – labor supported independent
Marshall – labor and national , supporting independent at the same time
Marshall supported nbn,gonski
Did not campaign much on the coalition policies
Speaking as someone with a basset hound, I must take exception to comments that she resembles Niki Savva.
[Bushfire Bill
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:03 am | PERMALINK
Is your dog a basset hound.
Or is he Nikki Savva?]
So, henceforth “Is your dog a basset hound. Or is he Gillard?” is perfectly acceptable for PB bloggers, is it?
Zoomster has no problems with such a post?
Confessions?
Well, I don’t agree, but it is your game here so if thems the rules don’t blame other posters from playing within them (wont be me, but no doubt others will take up the chance)
mod lib i mean
[ I wouldn’t mind calling it Capitalist Running … but Mrs Pseph thought the idea was stupid.]
I would laugh but my puppy has an even more stupid name so I can’t :devil:
Since most PBers profess to care for others, although I suspect that in reality for some it extends only as far as “provided you have the same political views as me”, please give generously to today’s Red Shield appeal. No organisation is perfect but they are the best imho and do wonderful selfless work, and they DON’T insist on any religious affiliation. Have a nice day.
[Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:14 am | PERMALINK
mari
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:11 am | PERMALINK
MOD LIB
You didn’t answer my comment 33 wonder why?
This was a serious question? YIKES, this really is an alternate universe.
Ha Ha enjoy yourself over in Europe Mod and after seeing what has happened over there I am sure you will happily pay extra money to Keep the PM here, a vote for ALP in September will suffice as a down payment though]
It was a serious question , as I was also wondering how long since you were over there last. I go over each year and have noticed how things are deteriorating rapidly in most of Europe and now UK. I also have friends over there and all they can say is how they wish they could be in Australia with the government we have, this is also true. So please don’t try and brush off a serious question by being flippant. An answer please
[To be fair to MB he always said the area of NT was conservative compared to other parts of New England.]
[Where in the comment I posted was the word Labor?]
Guytaur,
In a political sense, Labor is the inverse of conservative. MB has dug himself into a hole, and you shouldn’t put yourself down there with him.
Mod Lib
Barnaby Joyce will also be campaigning mainly on labor policies , from what we have seen from the state nationals
blackburnpseph
no i haven’t , what is shown that people liked labor policies no ifs or buts
the nationals didnt have their own to campaign for , or felt embarrassed on campaigning for the liberal broadband
[So, henceforth “Is your dog a basset hound. Or is he Gillard?” is perfectly acceptable for PB bloggers, is it?]
I don’t know why you call yourself “Mod Lib”.
You’re a raving, over-sensitive, pouting ratbag.
I’m thinking of naming a dog after you.
MICK77
I have already donated to Red Shield this morning. I assume you have?
I also knew a family that had a basset hound that liked lying around on their cowskin rugs. It was a grumpy hound – probably because it got stepped on all the time.
I never thought Nikki Savva had big ears that almost dragged along the floor ….
I will admitt it was a good ploy by the nationals to tell people that the NBN was the broadband choice to go for
Further my 109 above to zoomster
There’s no argument over these categories or numbers; the debate is over the ratios that are been reported. For example Marcel say’s in the above link: –
Misleading
Now here comes the misleading part. If an abstract/paper “endorses AGW”, what would this mean for most people? Let’s look again at the tweet of Obama: “#climate change is real, man-made and dangerous”. If this is what it means for the president of the US, it probably means the same for many citizens who heard the news in the media. However, can this be sustantiated by the survey results? In no way.
I posted previously what one of the author’s said: –
http://www.australasianscience.com.au/news/may-2013/consensus-humans-cause-climate-change.html
Now mostly means >50%. There’s only 2 options here; manmade or natural global warming. Therefore if you’re saying mostly then you should only use Category 1 = 65 & the ratio turns out to be 65/4010 =1.62%. Not 97%
They’re simply using the analysis to spin.
MB @ 120
I think that where the Northern Tablelands by election is concerned the only course of action is to point and yell out – “Scoreboard!!!!!”
BBP
I a making the point that predictions MB has made about the battle for the seat of New England should not be confused with those made for the by election for NorthernTablelands.
That is not even saying I agree with said predictions. So hardly flinging myself in the same hole.
I found it interesting earlier on in the program when Nikki Savva – chief among the “Resistance is useless!” spruikers for Abbott – called for a toning down of the hubris.
Too late, Prune Face.
Barnaby Joyce will also be campaigning mainly on labor policies , from what we have seen from the state nationals
He’s not the only one. Even Abbott is campaigning on Labor policies after his support for the Labor budget cuts
Gauss
[There’s nothing strange here. He was replicating the figures that Brandon Shollenberger got on Lucia’s Blackboard blog]
er, what? He claimed he was outlining the criteria used by Crook. He wasn’t.
It’s interesting that you still don’t actually link to the Crook article, but always to other sources.
[1. Explicitly endorses and quantifies AGW as 50+% (65)
2. Explicitly but does not quantify or minimize (934)
3. Implicitly endorses AGW without minimizing it. (2933)
4. No position (8261)
5. Implicitly minimizes /rejects AGW (53)
6. Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW but does not quantify (53)
7. Explicitly minimizes/rejects AGW as less than 50% (15)
8. Undecided (10)]
Firstly, Crook doesn’t have 8 categories anywhere. Secondly, where he does give a breakdown of articles per category, he only uses four groups.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article#erl460291s3
You seem to be playing Chinese whispers here – trying to critique an article by reading blogs about it which refer to other blogs about it (none of which, unlike the article, were peer reviewed). You accept – without checking – that these blogs are reporting accurately the contents of the article, where (the very few) examples I’ve highlighted show that they are not.
You cannot claim to be a sceptical or objective thinker if you continue to do this.
As for the numbers, yes, that’s what I said.
[Too late, Prune Face]
Is such abuse really necessary? You may disagree but is the abuse warranted? And would you be as abusive if it was Nicholas Savva?
[Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 9:25 am | Permalink
You may be surprised to find that the electorate would be happy to pay a dollar a day to be rid of Gillard.]
I suspect most PBs would pay double that to get rid of you 😆 (just joshing.)
[Is such abuse really necessary? You may disagree but is the abuse warranted? And would you be as abusive if it was Nicholas Savva?]
My, my, the wingnuts here are suddenly touchy-feely, aren’t they?
Precious petals the lot of them.
AussieAchmed
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:30 am | PERMALINK
He’s not the only one. Even Abbott is campaigning on Labor policies after his support for the Labor budget cuts
———————————-
Yes , so why bother to change , when Abbott is incompetent
BB:
Your personal attacks notwithstanding, you have yet to acknowledge the comment was sexist and was equating Nikki with being a dog.
…..as long as we know the new rules here, it can be handed out evenly, eh?
And on a related but distinct matter to do with voting … the secrecy of the ballot …
People make an enormous fuss about this question … one that is out of all proportion, IMO, to to its contemporary significance in this country at this time.
Don’t get me wrong. There are good reasons for maintaining and protecting privacy in general, but like other worthy things, one should probably not go overboard about it.
While I’ve said that I don’t regard governance in this country as properly democratic (it’s not inclusive enough IMO) we do have a history of robust civil rights, the rule of law, separation of powers etc. Our AEC is, as far as I can tell, honest and competent. One could set up obstacles under an e-voting system to prevent identity theft or spamming or state officials or others deriving your vote that would make the game not worth the candle.
Now personally, I couldn’t care less if some petty official of state finds out how I personally voted. There’s really nothing he or she can do to harm me, and obviously, they can’t officially use that information anywhere anyway. I’m not reluctant to share it either. In a way, I’d be rather flattered that anyone would think it worth the trouble finding out. I’d be somewhat more concerned about my vote being spoofed than revealed — and even then, as things stand, conservatives of one kind or another always win so the point is probably moot.
Absolute secrecy of the ballot is important in places where civil rights and the separation of powers are still a work in progress. Personally, I’d be happy with the voting equivalent of the privacy one gets when handing over your credit card.
I authenticated my new credit card just the other day, over the phone. I’ve authenticated phone banking. I don’t see why citizens couldn’t have a voting card with a chip in it and a PIN and they could perhaps be sent single use PINs for voting events. They’d use the card to authenticate and the single use pin to cast the vote. A Screen capture of the vote could be printed by a parallel system and placed by the elector into a box for auditing if there were some subsequent contest about the integrity of the e-voting machine. The elector could retain a stamped duplicate if desired.
Pretty simple really.
Re N.T. election the bookies (sportingbet anyway) seem to have extrapolated the results for Fed and now have New England $1.30 LNP to $3.00 Windsor which is the shortest I’ve seen for LNP. Overall Abbott has blown out from $1.04 to $1.09, probably based on slight polling improvement for Gillard ($7.00) following budget. Converted to probabilities after allowing for margins it means that Abbott is now rated as say an 88% chance of winning compared with 93% chance a couple of weeks back. Now there’s some encouragement for you Magoo Bob!
BB:
What is the name of that photographer you admire and try to emulate?
blackburnpseph , modlib , compact crank and other coalition supporters
i make no apologies for my prediction , i call it as i see it
Gauss
[There’s no argument over these categories or numbers; the debate is over the ratios that are been reported]
Incorrect. The numbers and the ratios agree.
[Now here comes the misleading part. If an abstract/paper “endorses AGW”, what would this mean for most people? ]
Er, no.
Laypeople misunderstanding what a scientific abstract is saying is not the fault of the article. It is the fault of the way it is being reported and/or understood.
There is no way the paper or its authors can be blamed for that, unless you can prove that they themselves pushed that interpretation.
[Now mostly means >50%. There’s only 2 options here; manmade or natural global warming. Therefore if you’re saying mostly then you should only use Category 1 = 65 & the ratio turns out to be 65/4010 =1.62%. Not 97%]
No, this is based on your misunderstanding (blindly copied from someone else) of the way the categories were defined.
The term ‘mostly’ appears in none of the original criteria. Neither is there any reference to >50%, or indeed anything that could be interpreted as ‘mostly’.
Mari
[I have already donated to Red Shield this morning. I assume you have?]
(At last we agree on something.)
Yes – it’s what triggered my post.
[Bushfire Bill
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:30 am | PERMALINK
I found it interesting earlier on in the program when Nikki Savva – chief among the “Resistance is useless!” spruikers for Abbott – called for a toning down of the hubris.
Too late, Prune Face.]
zoomster?
confessions?
You appear to support BB, but there appears to be silence from you…….
(crickets heard)
Mick77
If you want to take the odds against the beast Windsor that is your risk
[Meguire Bob
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:37 am | PERMALINK
blackburnpseph , modlib , compact crank and other coalition supporters
i make no apologies for my prediction , i call it as i see it]
Nobody is asking you to apologise. We are asking you to admit you were totally wrong.
[Darn
Posted Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 10:34 am | PERMALINK
…
I suspect most PBs would pay double that to get rid of you (just joshing.)]
Are you kidding me? Most would pay ten times that to stop me disturbing the equanimity of the echo chamber here!
Mod Lib
There’s a difference between metaphor and simile, as I assume you know. Saying someone looks like something is not the same as saying they are that thing.
I wish people would stop replying to your stirring. It’s very irritating.
Magoo Bob 139
[i make no apologies for my prediction , i call it as i see it]
Well who’s gonna apologise for them if not you? You must be seeing some things not visible to others – certainly the Magoo Bob name seems appropriate.
Magoo Bob 143
[If you want to take the odds against the beast Windsor that is your risk]
Tell us again how you’ve already backed Windsor and what odds you got. I’ll then compare with the last time you lied about it on PB.
Meguire Bob @ 76
Mod lib
I was wrong of the overall result , but i was right on where i got the vibe from they didnt support the nationals :0
How wrong?
Meguire Bob on the Northern Tablelands tread, May 25 6.17 am
Actual 9.04 Sunday, 26 May.
Votes counted 71.8%
NAT 62.6%
CLR 6.3%
Best IND 13.9%
Excuses, excuses
Pull the other thingy Bob