Seat of the week: Casey

Held since 2001 by Tony Smith, the outer eastern Melbourne seat of Casey flowed with the electoral tide from its creation in 1969 until 1984, but has strengthened for the Liberals.

Blue and red numbers respectively indicate booths with two-party majorities for the Liberal and Labor parties. Click for larger image. Map boundaries courtesy of Ben Raue at The Tally Room.

Held by the Liberals without interruption since 1984, Casey covers Melbourne’s eastern suburban fringe at Lilydale, Kilsyth and Monbulk, together with the Yarra Valley townships of Yarra Glen, Healesville and Warburton and unpopulated Yarra Ranges areas further afield. The suburban areas are Liberal-leaning, middle-income and culturally homogenous, with an above-average number of mortgage payers. Outcrops of Labor support further afield coincide with lower incomes at Healesville, a “tree-changer” tendency around Monbulk, and a combination of the two at Warburton (the Greens outpolled Labor at the 2013 election at the Warburton booth and The Patch just south of Monbulk). Healesville and Warburton were added with the redistribution before the 2013 election, which further cut the Liberal margin through the transfer of Croydon and Ringwood to Menzies and Deakin.

Casey was oriented further westwards when it was created in 1969, extending northwards from Ringwood to Kinglake. The bulk of the modern electorate remained in La Trobe, the area having previously been divided between it and Deakin. Casey assumed approximately its current dimensions when the expansion of parliament in 1984 pushed it further east into the Yarra Valley, and the 1990 redistribution added some of its present outer suburbs territory. The seat has been in Liberal hands outside of two interruptions, from 1972 to 1975 and 1983 to 1984. The inaugural member was Peter Howson, who had previously held the abolished inner urban electorate of Fawkner since 1951. Race Mathews won the seat for Labor with the election of the Whitlam government, and after being unseated in 1975 entered state politics as member for Oakleigh in 1979. Peter Falcolner held the seat for the Liberals through the Fraser years, before being unseated by Labor’s Peter Steedman when the Hawke government came to power in 1983.

Steedman was in turn unseated after a single term by Robert Halverson in 1984, with some assistance from redistribution, and the seat has been in Liberal hands ever since. Halverson’s retirement in 1998 made the seat available as a safe haven for Howard government Health Minister Michael Wooldridge, whose position in Chisholm had been weakened by redistribution in 1996. However, Wooldridge only served a single term before quitting politics at the 2001 election, at which time he was succeeded by Tony Smith. During Smith’s tenure the Liberal margin broke double digits for only the second time at the 2004 election, but he went into the 2013 election with a margin of only 1.9% following successive swings and an unfavourable redistribution. He nonetheless retained the seat easily on the back of a statewide Liberal swing that pushed his margin out to 7.2%.

Smith’s entry to politics came via a staff position with Peter Costello, with whom he remained closely associated. After the 2007 election defeat he won promotion to the shadow cabinet in the education portfolio, but Malcolm Turnbull demoted him to Assistant Treasurer when he became leader in September 2008. Smith formed part of the front-bench exodus in the final days of Turnbull’s leadership, together with Tony Abbott and Nick Minchin, in protest against Turnbull’s support for an emissions trading scheme. He duly emerged a strong backer of Abbott in the ensuing leadership contest, and returned to shadow cabinet in broadband and communications. However, Smith was widely thought to have struggled during the 2010 campaign and was demoted after the election for a second time, this time down to parliamentary secretary level. With the election of the Abbott government he was dropped altogether, making way for the promotion of fellow Victorians Josh Frydenberg and Alan Tudge.

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.

723 comments on “Seat of the week: Casey”

Comments Page 3 of 15
1 2 3 4 … 15

  1. [Fran Barlow
    ….
    This misstates the consensus here. As I read it, the consensus here is that allowable expenses should realte directly to once public duties rather than private amusment/social obligations.

    Given the rancour earlier over your rather loose language — and your complaint about how that was dealt with — I believe you should observe greater care in characterising the positions of others who don’t share your cultural disposition in order to avoid offering evidence for those inclined to accuse you of trolling.]

    Oh dear, so much to discuss there.

    Lets start with “loose language”…..what loose language would that be?

  2. oops …

    [This misstates the consensus here. As I read it, the consensus here is that allowable expenses should relate directly to one’s public duties rather than private amusment/social obligations.]

    Better …

  4. To get back to the analogy I have been using, of local councillors’ expenses, the Mayor is entitled (as in, doesn’t even have to put in a claim) to expenses normal councillors are not, because the Mayor has a different role to other councillors.

    For example, councillors can only claim car costs on official business, and when coucil can’t provide a car for them. A Mayor is given a car which they can use however they want, and all costs associated with that car (including fuel) are covered by council.

    That’s because, wherever they go and whatever they do, a Mayor is basically never off duty.

  5. [As I read it, the consensus here is that allowable expenses should realte directly to once public duties rather than private amusment/social obligations.]

    This is my understanding as well.

  6. zoomster

    [The biggest expense incurred as part of being PM would be the 24/7 protective detail.]

    Fraser used to drive the Copper’s mad as he would drive one of his Lanciers to Canberra and apparently drove like a madman.

    They had to pre-position a car in Albury to give chase up the Hume Highway bit.

  7. ML

    [Let’s start with “loose language”…..what loose language would that be?]

    Your introduction of the matter of meal allowances as if it were salient to the travel rorts matter, only later to acknowledge that it wasn’t but was merely tangential …

    and here, your mischaracterisation of the PB consensus obviously, which sounded a lot like the stereotypic strawman.

  8. ML

    Stop ignoring the reality of the difference of being PM. I fully expect as PM Abbott to use VIP jets and expenses associated with the office.

    Rightly so.

    However as LOTO he did not have those constraints. He could fly commercial for example

  12. [Fran Barlow
    Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 at 10:31 am | PERMALINK
    ML

    Let’s start with “loose language”…..what loose language would that be?

    Your introduction of the matter of meal allowances as if it were salient to the travel rorts matter, only later to acknowledge that it wasn’t but was merely tangential …]

    Ahem, that is completely false.

    I did not equate the Meal Entertainment scheme to the travel rorts, I was just making an off hand comment that there is a way to have wedding expenses tax deductible, and there is.

    If you can provide any post where I did what you claim please do so, if you cannot please withdraw*

    *I know this is not going to happen here, but may as well introduce a little bit of real world practices to the alternate reality just so you can experience reality every now and then!

  13. confessions@105

    As I read it, the consensus here is that allowable expenses should realte directly to once public duties rather than private amusment/social obligations.


    This is my understanding as well.

    Determining what are public duties is where the problem lies.

    Do duties for a members party constitute public duties?

    Their local member attended both my parents funerals in his capacity as their local member. Was that a public duty or purely a private matter?

  14. [Fran Barlow
    Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 at 10:17 am | PERMALINK
    Rummell

    Im laughing at all the Team Left hate… Talk about out of the blocks early and what about giving the PM respect and all that Labor went on about with Gillard? lol

    It’s telling that you put an equal sign between criticism and hatred when the criticism is directed at bona fide breaches of public trust by the Liberals, but resisted putting an equals sign between criticism of Gillard and hatred when the criticism was merely about her treatment of Rudd or love of knitting or a troll based on whether a carbon price was in fact a tax.]

    I love that you have distinctions between criticism and hatred now Fran. Any criticism of Gillard here on PB, or anywhere on earth for that mater was deemed hatred most times and Misogyny on more then a few times

  16. bemused

    If there in an official capacity representing the government you can claim.

    If there as an MP its party political and will be a party or private expense

  19. guytaur@116

    bemused

    If there in an official capacity representing the government you can claim.

    If there as an MP its party political and will be a party or private expense

    Oh I see.
    So when caucus members flew to Canberra last week for a meeting of caucus, it was purely a private matter?

    I think you are out of your depth.

  22. ML’s continual sweeping everyone here into a single straw basket is extremely annoying, which of course is what is intended. And Rummel has attached himself to the skirts.
    Can’t we ignore them, please?

  23. lizzie

    He used to drive himself around in Canberra as well (the car park spot immediately to the left of the old Parliament Hse steps was his).

    If he had a choice on where a meeting was, getting out of Parliament Hse and driving around was his choice.

  26. Fran

    “There is a way to have wedding expenses tax deductible”

    There is today’s classic loose language.

    Doesn’t even know what “tax deductible” means.

  27. my say:

    That article actually reassures me a little about Morrison!

    “While his faith animates his politics, he is on the record as saying “the Bible is not a policy handbook, and I get very worried when people try to treat it like one”.

  28. guytaur@125

    bemused

    Yes a travel allowance is given for that. Not a right to claim expenses

    They would claim for accommodation if staying overnight.

    Then there are constituency duties that are not part of governing, but which a member is supposed to perform such as attending all manner of functions. Many of which they would probably prefer not to be at.

  29. Lizzie

    I’ve learned the lesson that it is more word and time economical to talk “about” rather than “to” some with fluid positions.

  33. With you lefties “winning” on wedding rorts, you’d think you would be ahead in the polls.. alas, you aren’t, the Coalition is well ahead and will remain so.

    The public realise that while pollie rorts are bad, both sides are as guilty as each other.

  35. bemused

    [Their local member attended both my parents funerals in his capacity as their local member. Was that a public duty or purely a private matter?]

    The key word here is ‘local member’. Your parents were his constituents, I would assume their funeral took place in his electorate.

    The kind of expenses referred to are (I believe) to do with travel outside an electorate.

    An MP can attend as many weddings in their electorate as they like. They can’t claim for them, as there’s no reason for them not to be sleeping in their own bed, and their travel expenses are part of their normal duties.

    An MP within their own electorate is always on duty!

  36. Mod Lib@127

    my say:

    That article actually reassures me a little about Morrison!

    “While his faith animates his politics, he is on the record as saying “the Bible is not a policy handbook, and I get very worried when people try to treat it like one”.

    Not much reassurance in that when he is a fundy nutter and tuned in to all their rantings.

  37. ML

    [I did not equate the Meal Entertainment scheme to the travel rorts, I was just making an off hand comment that there is a way to have wedding expenses tax deductible, and there is.]

    OK … if that’s what you claimed, I will withdraw that part of the claim. I seem to recall a closer connection than that, but I found the whole exchange too tiresome to follow closely.

    Rummell

    [I love that you have distinctions between criticism and hatred now Fran.]

    Here’s some news for you Rummell. Every thoughtful person has them. Sometimes it’s tricky in practice distinguishing them, but one must make the effort in all cases if one takes ideas seriously.

  38. [psyclaw
    Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 at 10:47 am | PERMALINK
    Fran

    “There is a way to have wedding expenses tax deductible”

    There is today’s classic loose language.

    Doesn’t even know what “tax deductible” means.]

    Case 1:
    $100k salary
    $ 10k tax deduction
    $ 90k taxable income

    Case 2*:
    $100k salary
    $ 10k meal entertainment claim for wedding catering
    $ 90k taxable income

    What part of this are people struggling with?

    *The only difference is that in NSW (and not in NT and other places) the Hospital takes half the benefit as I stated from the outset.

  40. ModLib uses the techniques she does because she thinks she’s cleverer than everyone else here. To admit that she’s used those techniques would be to admit that we’ve noticed them, which obviously we can’t, because we’re not as clever as ModLib.

  43. [Fran Barlow
    ….OK … if that’s what you claimed, I will withdraw that part of the claim. I seem to recall a closer connection than that, but I found the whole exchange too tiresome to follow closely.]

    Appreciated….I wish more had your character!

    i have no problem with people scrolling past it all if they are not interested, but those who have made directed comments at me will find they need to defend their statements.

    I also note the paucity of comments against posters saying “utter crap” and “shame” and “despise” and sundry other things directed at me….all of which is fine, but me defending myself is apparently unacceptable! Well, get used to it folks! :devil:

  44. [I love that you have distinctions between criticism and hatred now Fran. Any criticism of Gillard here on PB, or anywhere on earth for that mater was deemed hatred most times and Misogyny on more then a few times]

    Don’t forget, under the politics of Gillard desperation and hate wearing a blue tie to work or looking at your watch is a sign you are a bigoted misogynistic woman hater.

    Gillard truly was the most divisive and hate filled politician of our time.

  46. I am hoping rummel will realise now all we told him that would
    happen is mostly coming to pass

    it must be awful 4 you now to realise you voted for the wrong person,

    sad

  48. psyclaw

    🙂
    Endless discussions of “did you mean a or b” when you said … are, IMV, strong evidence of an unhappy (unbalanced) relationship. Been there, done that, have no wish to repeat.

  49. [zoomster
    Posted Sunday, October 13, 2013 at 10:52 am | PERMALINK
    ModLib uses the techniques she does because she thinks she’s cleverer than everyone else here. To admit that she’s used those techniques would be to admit that we’ve noticed them, which obviously we can’t, because we’re not as clever as ModLib.]

    Another unsubstantiated allegation….you are in good form these days aren’t you?

Comments Page 3 of 15
1 2 3 4 … 15

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *