Sunday
While Terri Butler’s 2.3% buffer at the end of the night is enough to secure her victory, Bill Glasson can at least claim the uncommon feat of delivering a by-election swing to the party in government. The current margin represents a 0.7% two-party swing to the Liberal National Party compared with the September election result, which is likely to widen a little further on postals.
Commentators around the place have been scrambling to place the result into historical context, mostly with reference to the long record of federal by-elections. A general paucity of swings to governments is easy to spot, but closer examination shows how much swings can vary according to the circumstances of the by-election, and how unreliable a guide they can be to a government’s future electoral performance. The last pro-government swing federally was achieved when Carmen Lawrence moved from state to federal politics in Fremantle in 1994, and it was followed by a shellacking for the Keating government at the next general election two years later. The most recent state example I can think of is the Peel by-election in Western Australia in February 2007, when Alan Carpenter’s Labor government boosted its margin 18 months before being dumped from office.
Given the array of circumstances that can bring by-elections about, an effort should be made to compare like with like. Griffith is part of a long tradition of by-elections held when a member of a defeated government decides opposition isn’t for them. Unfortunately, those involved tend to be senior figures representing safe seats which the opposing party doesn’t bother to contest. During its first term, Rudd Labor only took the field when Peter McGauran departed in the seemingly winnable seat of Gippsland, only to cop a bloody nose for its trouble. Few were surprised Labor stayed out of the fray in Higgins (Peter Costello), Bradfield (Brendan Nelson), Mayo (Alexander Downer) and Lyne (Mark Vaile). Labor likewise went undisturbed during John Howard’s first term at by-elections to replace Paul Keating in Blaxland and John Langmore in Fraser.
The one by-election held during the parliament elected in December 1975 was occasioned by the death of Rex Connor, with the remainder of Labor’s diminished caucus staying put. It was a different story early in the life of the Hawke government, as Malcolm Fraser (Wannon), Doug Anthony (Richmond), Billy Snedden (Bruce), Jim Killen (Moreton) and Tony Street (Corangamite) headed for the exit at a time when forfeiting a by-election was still thought poor form. The last useable example in anything resembling modern history is the Parramatta by-election of 1973, which brought Philip Ruddock to parliament.
From this field of seven, the only result to match Griffith is Richmond in 1984, when Labor picked up a slight swing upon the retirement of Doug Anthony. No doubt this reflected an unlocking of the loyalty accumulating to brand Anthony, which between father Larry and son Doug had occupied the seat for an unbroken 46 years. Even so, the other Hawke government by-elections weren’t far behind, with the exception of Bruce where voters seemed to take a shine to Liberal candidate Kenneth Aldred for some reason. Coincidentally or otherwise, the two worst swings, in Gippsland (a 6.1% swing against Rudd Labor in 2008) and Parramatta (a 7.0% swing against Whitlam Labor in 1973) were suffered by the two shortest-lived governments of the modern era.
However, Griffith looks quite a bit less exceptional if the eight state results I can identify going back to the early 1990s are thrown into the mix. Four swings in particular dwarf those in Griffith, the two biggest being at by-elections held in country seats in New South Wales on May 25, 1996. Results in Clarence and Orange provided a fillip to Bob Carr’s year-old Labor government and a severe blow to the Nationals, perhaps reflecting the party’s recent acquiescence to the Howard government’s post-Port Arthur gun laws. On the very same day, Labor had an historically mediocre result against the Liberals in the Sydney seat of Strathfield, and finished third behind the Democrats in the Liberal stronghold of Pittwater.
The third and fourth placed results are from early in the life of the Bracks government in Victoria, when Labor pulled off rare victories in Jeff Kennett’s seat of Burwood in 1999 and Nationals leader Pat McNamara’s seat of Benalla in 2000. Also higher up the order than Griffith is the Elizabeth by-election of 1994, held four months after Dean Brown’s Liberal government came to power in South Australia. This may have indicated the popularity of outgoing member Martyn Evans, soon to be Labor’s federal member for Bonython, who had been designated as “independent Labor” for most of his ten years as a state member. Rob Borbidge’s Queensland government of 1996 to 1998 did less well, with the looming Liberal collapse in that state foreshadowed by swings to Labor in the Brisbane seats of Lytton and Kurwongbah.
All of this is laid out in the chart above, which ranks swings to the government (positive at the top, negative at the bottom) from the eight federal and eight state by-elections just discussed. Red and blue respectively indicate Labor and Coalition governments, the lighter shades representing state and the darker representing federal. Stats enthusiasts may care to know that the model y=10+44.3x explains 38% of the variability, where y is the government’s eventual longevity in office measured in years and x is the swing to the government across 15 observed by-elections. For what very little it may be worth, the positive 0.5% swing in Griffith associates with 10.3 years in government.
Saturday
| # | % | Swing | 2PP (proj.) | Swing | |
| Timothy Lawrence (SPP) | 570 | 0.8% | +0.7% | ||
| Geoff Ebbs (Greens) | 6,890 | 10.2% | +0.3% | ||
| Christopher Williams (FFP) | 651 | 1.0% | +0.3% | ||
| Karel Boele (IND) | 458 | 0.7% | |||
| Anthony Ackroyd (BTA) | 526 | 0.8% | |||
| Anne Reid (SPA) | 379 | 0.6% | +0.1% | ||
| Terri Butler (Labor) | 26,356 | 39.0% | -1.6% | 52.5% | -0.5% |
| Melanie Thomas (PPA) | 1,051 | 1.6% | |||
| Travis Windsor (Independent) | 585 | 0.9% | |||
| Ron Sawyer (KAP) | 694 | 1.0% | +0.4% | ||
| Bill Glasson (Liberal National) | 29,456 | 43.6% | +0.9% | 47.5% | +0.5% |
| FORMAL/TURNOUT | 67,616 | 71.2% | |||
| Informal | 2,093 | 3.0% | -1.8% | ||
| Booths reporting: | 42 out of 42 | ||||
Midnight. Finally got around to adding the Coorparoo pre-poll voting centre result.
9.22pm. Or perhaps not – Coorparoo pre-poll voting centre still to report, which is likely to amount for a lot – 5859 votes cast there at the federal election.
8.51pm. Morningside 2PP now in, and I’d say that’s us done for the night.
8.36pm. Camp Hill reports 2PP, leaving just Morningside. Glasson and LNP reportedly not conceding, but 2.4% leads (which accounts for the fact that the LNP is likely to do better on postals – Labor’s raw lead is 3.3%) don’t get overturned on late counting.
8.29pm. That’s all the fixed booths in on the primary vote; the outstanding ones referred to in the table are special hospital booths that may not actually exist (but did in 2013). Camp Hill and Morningside still to come in on two-party, and then I think we’re done for the night. It’s been a pretty quick count.
8.03pm. Two more booths a slight move to the LNP.
8.00pm. Four more booths in and a slight tick in Labor’s favour on the swing projection.
7.53pm. One more primary result and a number more on two-party preferred, it remains unclear who will end up with bragging rights to the negligible swing. What is clear though is that Terri Butler is over the line.
7.45pm. Thirty-two of 43 booths reporting, and the picture of a status quo result is unchanged.
7.36pm. A big rush of results that taxed my data entry chops to the limit has produced very little change to the projection, which essentially looks like no swing at all.
7.26pm. Coorparoo Central was a tricky one from a booth-matching perspective, as it’s a “merger” of two booths from the 2013 election.
7.25pm. Coorparoo Central, Greenslopes, Morningside South and West End in on the primary; Buranda West and Norman Park South on two-party. Upshot: a bit more breathing space for Terri Butler, who will be difficult to pull in from here.
7.19pm. The informal vote seems to be down pretty solidly.
7.18pm. I note that none of the booths from the electorate’s north-western latte belt have reported yet.
7.15pm. Bulimba, Carina Heights, Greenmeadows and Norman Park find Labor still with its nose in front, despite a slight swing against. Annerley has also reported a two-party result, so I’ve switched on preference projections based on the booths that have reported so far. This finds Labor’s share of preferences up 6% on 2013.
7.12pm. Annerley, Bulimba Heights and Norman Park South booth results provide better news for Labor, with Butler now pulling into a projected lead. However, I’m still going off 2013 preferences here, as only two very small booths have reported two-party results.
7.03pm. Holland Park and Buranda West are in, and also Murarrie on two-party, and the swing to the LNP is sticking, as is the extremely close projected result.
6.53pm. Another small booth on the fringe of the electorate – Mount Gravatt East in the south-east – and it’s another bad result for Labor, down almost double digits on the primary vote. I’ve switched off the preference swing calculation for now, so the two-party is going off 2013 preference flows.
6.50pm. The preference result is in from Holland Park West, and Labor has 7.2% more preferences than it got in 2013 – but we’re only going off 14 votes here. Nonetheless, my model is extrapolating off it to project the result for the other booth, causing Labor to go up about 1%. Bottom line: hold off reading anything into anything yet.l
6.42pm. Both booths are on the very fringes of the electorate: Holland Park West in the south and Murarrie in the east. The dynamic nearer the city may well be very different. I’ll stop getting a “#VALUE!” result on the Stable Population Party when I get a result from a booth where their vote in 2013 wasn’t zero.
6.38pm. Two very small booths on the primary vote provide a measure of encouragement for Bill Glasson, suggesting a very close result if 2013 preferences are any guide.
6.30pm. There have apparently been 2090 ballots cast at the Whites Hill booth, which compared with the 2083 cast at the election suggests a pretty healthy turnout.
6pm. Welcome to the Poll Bludger’s live coverage of the Griffith by-election. With polls closing round about now, first results should be in in maybe about an hour, although this can be a bit variable. Results in the table will show raw figures for the primary vote and booth-matched swings for both primary and two-party vote, together with a projected two-party total based on the booth-matching. Where available, the latter will be based on booth two-party results; at booths where only primary vote totals have been reported, two-party projections will be derived from 2013 preference flows taken together with the “swing” in preferences recorded across booths where two-party results have been reported. I’ll be copping my results off the ABC Elections page, as the AEC annoyingly does not publish booth results as they are reported (or at least, never has in the past). So those without a minute to lose should note that my table updates will lag about that far behind the ABC.
Today’s Mumble on the Griffith by-election.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/mumble/index.php/theaustralian/comments/not_what_shorten_wanted/
I think William gives a better summary of the historical context.
And he lies, again!
Just saw a snippet of OTT in August last year – the money for Cadbury was for an investment to increase production and therefore exports. Nothing, repeat nothing, to do with tourism.
The man is a liar, where is the MSM doing its work. Lazy pack of bastards.
This result is like a 1 all draw in football.
Labor keeps the seat. Abbott picked up an unexpected swing. Both sides can take positives from the result.
But I’ do think there were too many other factors in play to draw any strong conclusions from the result, as other have noted.
[
Kirky
Posted Sunday, February 9, 2014 at 9:32 am | Permalink
….
The man is a liar, where is the MSM doing its work. Lazy pack of bastards.
]
The Murdoch press is there to sell papers; they aren’t even doing a good job of that; perhaps people want to buy papers for news not propaganda. Propaganda normally gets thrown out of aeroplanes and is free.
Outsider
Exactly.
Frednk re your 392
Too hard to resist. In the comments of the article you referenced ‘Stop Looking At My Chest’
“I am a male who is large in the pants department. When I wear jockets it lifts my junk up and forward. So If I am wearing suit pants and particularly jeans it is rather obvious and grabs peoples attention. All people stare at it realise they are then glance at me and get embarrassed and look away. That includes you ladies!
I see it more as what tha type of reaction rather than it being lewd behaviour from people.
I have women and some men who don’t look embarrassed and maintain eye contact on the junk. They like it and maybe have ambitions but that’s normal I think. So its all about sense of self and just accepting it.
Mind you if your to accepting everyone does start to openly discuss it with you and joke allot and you can be more remembered for it than your work performance which is annoying.
My nickname is moby and that’s what my friends named me. It was fine until I was about 17 and a girls father I was very keen on asked why my mates called me moby. I said nervously I liked wales allot, he laughed and then replied well keep that harpoon in your pants for at least six months or you will be deaiing with me…what tha!
I wear boxers to work most often and it all hangs down and no ones the wiser. So really its been the unwanted attention and some reactions like the above that have moved me in that direction. Its less support and can be uncomfortable but people know me by my first name now.
You can take people on about staring but you wont stop it. Change the clothing is the way to go.
Commenter
Mark Location oz
Date and time February 07, 2014, 9:45AM
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/small-business/trends/blogs/the-big-idea/stop-looking-at-my-chest-20140203-31x7u.html#ixzz2slxGW8GO
According to Possum on twitter last night, the LNP spent well north of seven figures on the campaign for this by-election and only got a 0.5% swing and Peter Brent saying they did alright. If that’s true then I can Imagine their organisation will be pretty pissed by this result. You don’t spend money like that with the expectation of losing, especially when the candidate has a profile like Glasson.
No ringing endorsement for Abbott and his inept Govt and their shitty policies
This is a typical by-election result. The low turnout would have been the major factor. The issue raised during the campaign were nothing new. I guess the fact that the LNP did not secure or hold on to the ABC 4.7% Swing predicted early in the count is a clear indication that the LNP has reach a turning point and its not going to be a landslide next election.
Minor parties and independent candidates did not fare well.
Its just god to see the back of Kevin Rudd and his betrayal of the ALP.
[23:55 – All final figures for Saturday night. Figures shown are swings compared to the full election result in 2013.
22:08 – Turns out there are only 42 polling places. There are two ‘polling places’ that don’t actually take on the day votes but are called polling places for technical reasons. I’ve removed them from the list so only Coorparoo pre-poll voting centre is outstanding.]
Final on the night figures show a comparison swing to final 2013 results. So odes that man they are not matched like for like? Were the Earlier pescentage swings match booth Swings or a comparison to the 2013 percentages?
What was the basis of calculating the wild ABC predictions that showed up during counting. it is this another ABC coverup.. opps two polling places do not exist. William when are you going to take over the ABC mantle and put the spring back in the Bow.
ML
Yep — geez, you’re clever.
….and how come, ModLib, you’re allowed to come on this blog with the stated purpose of outting hypocrisy and I’m not?
Oh, the irony. It hurts.
Everything
Posted Saturday, February 8, 2014 at 10:49 pm | Permalink
Abbott was there
Bishop was there (although she thought she was somewhere else!)
Where was Kev?
Where was Gillard?
———————————–
Did you miss the news? They both retired from politics.
A swing to the LNP suggests Bill Shorten isn’t engaging well enough with the casual observer regarding how inept, destructive and deceitful this Govt is.
Congratulations to Terri Butler.
Lift your game Bill Shorten and the ALP.
[zoomster
Posted Sunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:35 am | PERMALINK
ML
Yep — geez, you’re clever.]
I know….its the albatross around my neck!
[zoomster
Posted Sunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:36 am | PERMALINK
….and how come, ModLib, you’re allowed to come on this blog with the stated purpose of outting hypocrisy and I’m not?
Oh, the irony. It hurts.]
What hypocrisy?
I am constantly criticised her for being a Liberal apologist. Then when I make the simple comment that the Liberals did better than expected in a by-election, I am accused of being a hypocrite for saying exactly what all the commentators are saying.
Whatever rocks your boat, zoomster.
I can see how devastated you are from this result, but don’t shoot the messenger! :devil:
The good news is Im out a here so you can self-reassure each other without fear of me pointing out any inconsistencies*
*sorry, should add….until Newspoll! 🙂
Keep it real bludgers.
Absolutely on the money Rex Douglas:
A swing to the LNP suggests Bill Shorten isn’t engaging well enough with the casual observer regarding how inept, destructive and deceitful this Govt is.
A swing to the LNP suggests Bill Shorten isn’t engaging well enough with the casual observer regarding how inept, destructive and deceitful this Govt is.
===========================================
When your enemy is making a mistake – don’t interrupt him
ML
don’t be twee, it doesn’t suit you.
You know perfectly well the accusation of hypocrisy was based on your supposed opposition to Abbott and his government and your supposed wish to see Turnbull reinstated.
It’s been quite obvious, following last night’s comments, that you were cheering the Libs all the way — a position contradictory to your own repeated claims.
[Labor held ground. The LNP remained flat after spending a lot of money and effort. Abbott is still in the lodge.]
BUT ABBOTT IS A DUMB MUMMA FARQUER
fess @401
I agree, I liked the summary by William – good work and much appreciated.
I also liked Lenore –
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/08/spinmeisters-desperately-trying-not-to-trip-up-on-a-footnote-in-election-history
I voted postal this week because I could not be bothered with returning home because Rudd let us down. I don’t think labour has got the message.. I voted liberal for the first time for abbott in the last election. And I have done it again this bi election.
If labour has any hope, dump the greens, yes it will hurt preferences, take up the old values, not the unions, some of us have investments properties now and now my friends consider me ” rich !!!! “.
I cannot help but think that if Labor does these two simply things, people will flock back
[ BUT ABBOTT IS A DUMB MUMMA FARQUER]
I think we can do without this sort of inane shouting.
Ordinarily, I think the LNP would have been happy with this modest swing to them.
But given their investment, I think they will be a bit disappointed as the money could have been better directed to the WA vote that might pop up soon, which actually will have a bearing on their ability to pass legislation.
Given our new era where the Age of Entitlement is over, I am Dr Glasson will be billed by LNP for this failure, personal responsibility and all that.
[A swing to the LNP suggests Bill Shorten isn’t engaging well enough with the casual observer regarding how inept, destructive and deceitful this Govt is.
Congratulations to Terri Butler.
Lift your game Bill Shorten and the ALP.]
Perhaps. I think its as likely that we just found out Rudd’s personal vote was somewhere around 3% in excess of the ALP in general.
Dont forget this is seat with long term gentrification happening constantly, disengaged noveauu unit dwellers, yuppie apartments increasing over time etc.
Which group of workers hv seen the biggest wage hikes in the past 10 yrs? http://www.afr.com/p/national/are_you_paid_too_much_JPDQ6YwSFw0iG6HqbhR4fJ … pic.twitter.com/3EmodWYfTU
For all Abbott’s yelping about the Unions forcing up wages = higher costs to companies. His comments about SPC EBA were found out as a lie.
Shame on the media for not making it front page news.
The truth is out there and it ain’t coming from the inept pathetic ant-worker Liberals.
I don’t think too much can be drawn from this result as a guide to the next federal election.
I would trade a swing to the LNP here for a better Newspoll to the ALP.
In fact, Im a bit annoyed at the coverage of this: the LNP had a great candidate (by their standards), who had the benefit of a type of virtual incumbency via familiarity, against an unknown ALP first timer – and the latter won in a strolling canter.
But why oh why was there a swing?!! It couldnt possibly be that a former PM had a personal vote in his own seat, cos I read otherwise in comments @ PB.!
Seems a rather likely explanation to me.
[Keep it real bludgers.]
Not responding to any of your posts will go a fair way to doing that.
Abbott SPC v Cadbury
lefty e
I don’t think Labor have won in a canter but yes, I agree, the conclusion can be made that Rudd had a lot of support in his own seat.
Also some may have punished Labor for forcing the by-election on them through the retirement of Rudd.
Labor has hung on to seats in recent Queensland and Victorian by-elections and had a roaring victory in a by-election in NSW. Not such a bad record.
tom jones
I think people that make posts here at PB are generally pretty intelligent with the exception of one or two (will I name them 😈 ) so how in the hell could you seriously vote for an idiot like Abbott?
I don’t think you can count this as a win to either party, on the one hand, Rudd was a massively popular candidate, and a swing against Labor because of that was inevitable. On the other, the LNP did pick up a portion of the vote, even if not enough to dethrone the ALP.
While I was hoping for a massive swing against the LNP on the back of their horrific policies and terrible governance, I think I can make do with the result today.
SPUR212 – I want to know what peter brent gets for being on the news corpse website. You lie down with dogs… Etc etc. And if he’s not getting anything its very poor judgment on his part.
Be fair K17. Mumbles has to make a living. Plenty of good people work for Mordor. The employment choices in that field aren’t wide.
Something else that can be drawn from this result?
No honeymoon for Abbott!
You have a newly elected government along with the retirement of the popular Rudd yet the Libs could only manage a narrow swing to them.
We should not forget the arrogance and confidence the LNP were showing for their prospects in this by-election when it was announced.
I think Shorten is close to the mark, Abbott’s unpopularity cost them the seat.
Do you think Turnbull as leader could have won it for the Libs?
K17
There are plenty that reluctantly kiss arse in Ltd News.
You can distinguish between those and the stooges with close observation 😎
Hope Abbott/Hockey and supporters fall from this mountain
My analysis:
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/griffith-sound-and-fury-signifying.html
Griffith: Sound And Fury, Signifying Little
from Twitter
TO TONY ABBOTT
Glasson’s lost 2 polls
5 MONTHS (record)
A FANTASTIC RESULT
BE READY TO BE A 1 term PM
tom jones
Posted Sunday, February 9, 2014 at 12:36 pm | Permalink
———————————————
Its LABOR, not labour.
Aussie Achmed
Read on my friend ( the spell check is no ones friend ), however since you raised it, Labor used to be the domain for labourers. I don’t feel that anymore.
At a recent BBQ before xmas weekend with old friends, all of us in our early twenties, had a job and we all voted labor. Although only two of us had voted the other way this time round, we all agreed that we were not happy with the ” new Labor “, no one was happy about the carbon tax and the cost of living, no one was happy about boat people and no one was in a union anymore.
Maybe we are getting older in our late forties, however we all could not help but notice that all our kids, most in their late teens, most without a jobs, most not in a union, most critical of politics, however like their parents, vote labor or greens.. How things change, is this who Labor now represents.
For those that think Abbot is a one term government, you living in la la land. Your the problem that pushes the agenda that most Labourers of labor have lost faith in.
Aussie Achmed
Read on my friend ( the spell check is no ones friend ), however since you raised it, Labor used to be the domain for labourers. I don’t feel that anymore.
At a recent BBQ before xmas weekend with old friends, all of us in our early twenties, had a job and we all voted labor. Although only two of us had voted the other way this time round, we all agreed that we were not happy with the ” new Labor “, no one was happy about the carbon tax and the cost of living, no one was happy about boat people and no one was in a union anymore.
Maybe we are getting older in our late forties, however we all could not help but notice that all our kids, most in their late teens, most without a jobs, most not in a union, most critical of politics, however like their parents, vote labor or greens.. How things change, is this who Labor now represents.
For those that think Abbot is a one term government, you living in la la land. Your the problem that pushes the agenda that most Labourers of labor have lost faith in.
tom jones
So you are not happy with the carbon tax?
Are you aware that it converts to an ETS in this term of government?
Are you aware that the revenue the scheme raises is fully returned to people and trade exposed industries?
In other words, the cost of living from the carbon tax/ETS amounts to the astronomical figure of ZERO.
tom jones
You don’t have to live in la la land to concede that Abbott is unpopular, therefore the possibility of him being a one termer is quite real.
tom jones
Also, you are not very observant not knowing what Labor stands for, are you?
[lefty e
I don’t think Labor have won in a canter but yes, I agree, the conclusion can be made that Rudd had a lot of support in his own seat.
Also some may have punished Labor for forcing the by-election on them through the retirement of Rudd.]
Yes, I am probably overestating it *slightly* as a ‘canter’, but 52.3% is pretty damn comfortable.
And yes, very latest reports I have just seen now have that reported 3% swing under 1%.
So any pro-LNP angles on this result from earlier today will probably have to go back to Crosby-Textor for focus grouping.
tom jones
A tip:
Stop reading the Daily Telegraph 😆
lefty e
But Gerard Henderson (you know that little serious old looking LNP stooge that would have less intelligence with all his degrees than I have on betting in a single unshaven four day growth facial hair) said that the by-election was a great result for the LNP given the commentary that Abbott has had a poor start to government.