 |
| Red and blue numbers respectively indicate booths with two-party majorities for Labor and Liberal. Click for larger image. Map boundaries courtesy of Ben Raue at The Tally Room. |
The electorate of Adelaide has existed without fundamental change since South Australia was first divided into electorates in 1903, currently stretching from the city centre to the Labor strongholds of Prospect, Enfield and Brompton to the north and an electorally mixed bag of areas to the east and south. There are sources of Liberal strength in Walkerville to the north-east of the city, Toorak Gardens to the east and Malvern to the south. Labor first won Adelaide in 1908, and it was usually held by them from then until 1988. It was lost in that year at a by-election caused by the resignation of Chris Hurford, falling to Liberal candidate Mike Pratt with an 8.4% swing. Labor recovered the seat at the 1990 election, but an unfavourable redistribution together with a swing fuelled by hostility to the state government delivered it to Liberal candidate Trish Worth in 1993. Worth’s margin never rose above 3.5% in her 11 years as member, and she survived by just 343 votes in 2001. Labor finally toppled her in 2004 when inner-city seats across the land bucked the national shift to the Coalition, a decisive 1.9% swing delivering Adelaide to Kate Ellis. In keeping with statewide trends, the seat moved solidly to Labor in 2007 (by 7.2%), recorded little change in 2010 (a 0.8% Liberal swing), and swung to the Liberals in 2013 (reducing the margin from 7.5% to 3.6%).
Kate Ellis is associated with the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association and its attendant “Catholic Right” faction, and is close to its powerful state figurehead, outgoing Senator Don Farrell. After serving her apprenticeship as an adviser to state Industry Minister Rory McEwen and Treasurer Kevin Foley, Ellis won preselection for Adelaide at the age of 27 in 2004, following the late withdrawal of Tim Stanley, an industrial lawyer and later Supreme Court justice. Her path was smoothed by a three-way factional deal that secured Hindmarsh for Steve Georganas of the “soft Left” and Makin for Dana Wortley of the “hard Left” (who nevertheless lost the preselection to Tony Zappia, but was compensated with a Senate seat).
Ellis was promoted to the outer ministry at the age of 30 following the 2007 election victory, beating Paul Keating’s record as Labor’s youngest ever minister. Following the 2010 election she was reassigned from her portfolios of youth and sport to employment participation, childcare and the status of women, exchanging the latter for early childhood and youth when Kevin Rudd resumed the leadership in June 2013. In common with the rest of her faction, Ellis was a strong supporter of Julia Gillard’s leadership, making headlines shortly before Rudd’s February 2012 challenge by claiming Rudd had asked her and other SDA figures how they could reconcile their “conservative brand of Catholicism” with “a childless, atheist ex-communist as Labor leader”. Following the 2013 election defeat she received a substantial promotion to shadow cabinet in the education portfolio.
“@latikambourke: Paul Howes ‘I am not leaving this job to pursue a seat in parliament.’”
If Howes is intent on broadening his experience in the corporate world, then good luck to him.
The ALP can only benefit from having members and future parliamentarians from all walks of life.
guytaur
But would he refuse it if it was offered to him?
Wouldn’t trust him as far as I could kick him.
fess
[They don’t have to have him in the partyroom for that to happen. Just add Howes to one of Abbott’s business or IR committees, like he did with Warren Mundine on indigenous affairs. Then let him run away at the mouth, like Howes is so good at doing.]
Actually that’s a much better idea than mine. They get the best of both worlds.
I’m sure Paul Howes appreciates all the commentary, character evaluations and attendant publicity that builds his public profile.
For someone who is totally unsuitable for politics with either the left or right, he’s garnering a lot publicity.
Whether it’s good or bad is irrelevant. The punters will remember your name in the morning.
On another note – good to see the royal commission evidence exonerating Peter Garrett on the pink batts. Seems he was one of the good guys trying to bring order to the scheme with “others” making the running and courageously dumping him in it for its failure.
[725
guytaur
GG
Persoal attacks are not argument and it is about time you realised it.
Ypu think personal attacks discredit someone. They don’t. They just discredit you.]
Paul Howes might very well feel entitled to direct the same comments to you, guytaur.
Just watched the interview re children held in detention….since Australia is breaking International Law, couldn’t they then sue the government? Am so upset that all this is being done in our name!!!
Goodbye and good riddance to Paul Howes.
Nothing but bad news for Labor since appearing on the scene.
He helped the downfall of Labor back in 2010.
So rack off, egomaniac.
MTBW
Mr Howes like any one seeking to be a candidate would have to go for preselection to be a candidate.
By the time he does the corporate thing his political recognition will have changed as will have the Labor party.
So to get in he would have to mount a case as to why he would be a credible advantage to the ALP as a candidate who aligns with the party platform on policies.
If he can do that good luck to him. Its a big if that only time will tell as you are not the only Labor member with reservations.
@political_alert: Employment Minister @SenatorAbetz said allegations the Government sought to “massage” employment figures are false: http://t.co/m8RPx7CFLg
Now where would Paul Howes give his first interview?
[David Speers @David_Speers ·48 secs
Exclusive interview with Paul Howes at 1pm AEDT on why he’s decided to quit @SkyNewsAust]
@EDJ/756
Yet your totally fine with the corruption on ICAC.
[753
MTBW
guytaur
But would he refuse it if it was offered to him?
Wouldn’t trust him as far as I could kick him.]
Quite likely, Howes would feel the same way about you. My guess is that he has decided he can’t stand being surrounded by self-serving knockers and naysayers and is looking for a more positive and fulfilling career. Who can blame him for that?
briefly
I have not made personal attacks on Mr Howes.
Didn’t take long for Howes to pitch his tent in Murdochland.
confessions@745
Labor could destroy Howes hopes of being a Labor candidate just by spreading a story that he applied to the tories and they knocked him back.
ESJ,
The truth will set you free, comrade.
So Howes get’s to setup an Interview before he quits with Murdoch?
Poll Bludger seems to be stalling “Waiting for log.pinterest.com” every time I refresh the page. I have no idea what “pinterest.com” is, although I assume it’s collecting metrics of some sort, but it’s kind of annoying.
Howes has that Tory look about him. It must be the chin.
I always wonder about Howes, I never can quite work out what his motives are.
ery revealing and honest comment from Pell
He said that the Vatican even in the mid-90s believed that the accusations of child sex abuse were made exclusively or predominantly by enemies of the Catholic Church.
This changed when a deputation of American bishops visited the Vatican.
“They explained that it was not the enemies of the church who were doing this as the Nazis and possibly the communists had done but they were genuine complaints and good people, people who loved the church were saying it’s not being dealt with well enough,” Cardinal Pell said.
—–ah deblonay must be right – first the fascists have destroyed the church, now the motherland of russia.
Puffy,
He was born in the 80s. He’s a product of the Personal Computer generation. Has lived all his life in virtualy continuous prosperity and like most Australians of his age, is aspirational.
It’s more a changing of the guard than anything else.
Puff
Until proven otherwise accept the motives that the man himself has outlined.
For example he did thid at that speech at he National Press Club. It may have been bad politically, but having listened to the speech in full I was in no doubt the workers welfare was the basis of his motives.
The media and LNP jumping on an aspect of his speech about “flexibility” does not change that.
Who knows Mr Howes may be resigning because he thinks that speech damaged the cause of workers.
Pell!!!!
It is now all apparent …. those like & in Pell’s position are great at clouding issues… It comes from years of practice in preparation for being interrogated by God for entry to heaven.
Pinterest is a social media tool.
Gee you unreconstructed Labor Left types on PB are a giggle.
Paul Howes is a potential future Labor PM. He’s certainly got his faults: his ludicrous “look at me, look at me” behaviour when Rudd was removed in 2010 was extraordinarily damaging to Gillard. I know some Labor people who will take a long time to forgive him for that (indeed, rumour has it that it was a key consideration in preventing him from ascending to Carr’s senate seat).
But Howe looks like a potential winner to me. He’s smart, tough and articulate and has a significant appeal to the business sector. His life story will always be a winner for him.
You lefty Labor types have to appreciate that the sort of Labor leader you want to see in charge Federally will never succeed in getting the party out of opposition. Gillard was about as left-wing a Labor leader as you are ever likely to get, and she needed to move much closer to the right faction in order to make it. And, as things turned out, she was hampered by a lot of the left baggage she was carrying: ie, too much concern for manufacturing, people with disabilities and public school unions and teachers and not enough interest in the self-centred interests of “aspirational voters”.
Face facts: swinging voters are a conservative, self-centred bunch. They will generally vote according to what they see as their own self-interest. If the party they see as representing their interests seems to be overwhelmingly incompetent or crazy, then they might vote against their own interests.
This clearly happened in 1972, when the Liberals had totally run out of steam and McMahon was a complete joke as PM (but, even so, Labor achieved only 52.7% of the 2PP). It also happened in 1993, when I think the electorate was ready to go Liberal, but felt that Hewson was too much of a mad scientist.
The beauty of the Hawke-Keating era (up until Keating became all powerful in 1993 and was consumed by hubris, failing to recognise that the 60 per cent or more of people who were not rusted-on Labor voters had never really liked him much), was that, for the first and only period since 1949, Labor persuaded the aspirational swinging voters that they were the party best placed to deliver on what they wanted.
Labor needs to try to get back to this “natural party of government” position, and Howes – with all his faults – looks to me to be the sort of bloke who could achieve that goal. So might Shorten, but he lacks the sort of charisma that Howes brings to the table.
Darlings of the Labor faithful like Albo aren’t ever going to bridge the gulf to the aspirationals. The sort of sneering in Parliament that Albo (and Keating before him) engages in is an enormous turn off to the average voter. Albo’s close ties to the manufacturing and construction unions is also a significant problem for him.
Labor is always best placed federally (and normally at State level) when its leader is drawn from one of the right factions. A trade union background, as long as it’s in a moderate union like the AWU and not a more fiery bunch like the AMWU or CFMEU, is fine as well.
Australians are a fundamentally conservative people. As far as I can see, the big influx of Asian people who have come here over the last two decades has tended to intensify that basic conservatism: long gone are the dreamy days of the pro-Labor “ethnic vote”.
If Labor wants to remain relevant, it needs to get into government. Someone like Howes is far more likely to lead them into government and keep them there than anyone I can see on the horizon at the moment.
Greensborough Growler
[Posted Monday, March 24, 2014 at 12:03 pm | PERMALINK
Puffy,
He was born in the 80s. He’s a product of the Personal Computer generation. Has lived all his life in virtualy continuous prosperity and like most Australians of his age, is aspirational.
It’s more a changing of the guard than anything else.]
That is how I see it too
meher baba
[Gee you unreconstructed Labor Left types on PB are a giggle.]
And you are a smart arse!
For pity sake
Pell is beyond belief …. he can’t give one straight answer to any question… even if asked to do you want a cup of tea.
[But Howe looks like a potential winner to me. He’s smart, tough and articulate and has a significant appeal to the business sector. His life story will always be a winner for him.
]
If he was only 1/4 as good as he and you think it might be ok.
If he was smart he would not have been the public face of getting rid of Rudd and / or he would have had something to say that night that wasn’t an obvious lie.
[Labor needs to try to get back to this “natural party of government” position, and Howes – with all his faults – looks to me to be the sort of bloke who could achieve that goal. ]
Howes reminds me of another Rudd: an obsession with big-noting and ingratiating himself to Murdoch shills, combined with a care factor of zero when it comes to the good of the ALP.
Or made the gaffe about ‘some sectors are ripping off’.
Just gave Abbott & Co Ammo.
Pell finally asked by Commissioner does ‘Hem Hem “mean YES!
One avenue of escape for Pell cut off
What’s down at the bottom of the garden?
[Greens Senator Scott Ludlam is trying to have former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange called before a parliamentary committee to give evidence into what they might know about mass surveillance of Australian citizens.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-24/greens-want-to-call-assange-and-snowden-to-inquiry/5340794
meher baba – perhaps you could explain what Howes has brought to the table in terms of public discourse in his time in public life.
I’m not in the ALP, I support the ALP only because in my view there is no alternative at the moment. I certainly don’t have any great affection for the “ALP left”, or any other left really.
Howes has never impressed me for anything beyond speaking well.
Speaking well is not sufficient to make a good political leader. In my opinion.
I’ve never heard him articulate any particularly great or grand ideas, or even anything that I would classify as insightful. If there is anything you think Howes has done or said that we are overlooking that makes the case that he is a potential great leader … I’m all ears for examples.
As for Mr Howes becoming a future Liberal person my opinion is some thinMr Howe is far more right than he actually is.
Mr Pyne for example. One day that will bite them on the bum.
“@Volvo_of_doom: What MSM missed wasn’t the Marches themselves, but the rapid, growing, widespread and palpable anger Abbott is creating across demographics”
“@political_alert: Opposition Leader Bill Shorten will address the National Press Club here in Canberra on Wednesday #auspol”
Will he shine? My expectation is yes he will.
Meher Baba, good analysis.
Confessions@783: Howes has 20 times as much substance as Rudd. And probably several times as much as Shorten.
And Jackol@787, his National Press Club address was full of interesting insights and ideas. Until I heard it, I hadn’t thought all that much of Howes. Now I would consider him to be potentially the most intellectually substantial Labor figure since Latham: hopefully without all of the negative personality traits that Latham possesses: although Howes didn’t cover himself in glory in 2010, and this does remain a major concern for me.
Shorten will shine. He speaks very well.
He is streets ahead of Abbott in smarts, as well.
[Kate McClymont @Kate_McClymont ·28m
Nathan Rees thought AWH people were “a bunch of crooks” said Dr Schott of AWH’s attempts to go behind her back to lobby Rees #icac]
who is howes? why all this flap over one man?
Pell…
For the love of everything descent in our society Pell must Go,
Please look at live link…
http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/public-hearings/case-study-march-2014/
MTBW@780: Yes, I’m a smart arse. But I reckon I’m a smart smart arse.
And the reason I find some of the stuff you and others have had to say about Howes a giggle is exactly what GG said: if, in 5-10 years time, Howes looks like leading Labor to victory, you will all hero worship him. Then, in government, if he adopts the sort of middle of the road approach that Hawke adopted, you’ll all turn on him (just as the armchair lefties came to despise Hawke). Then, when he retires and becomes a respected party elder, you’ll all love him again.
Hawke was the only truly effective Federal leader the Labor party has had since Chifley. Howes reminds me a little bit of Hawke. Like the majority of voters, my preferred type of government in Australia sits right in the middle of the political mainstream: ie, either a pretty right wing Labor government, or a pragmatic sort of Coalition government. I don’t think we’re likely to see a pragmatic, non-ideological Coalition government again in a hurry, so I’m backing right wing Labor. Shorten will do for now, but Howes looks far more promising in the long run.
Lynchpin
The NPC will have Shorten looking Prime Ministerial if he does as he did at the Melbourne Press function.
A good thing in run up to WA by election
(I assume you’re talking his most recent effort – Howes has had a number of NPC addresses).
Which interesting insights and ideas?
The main idea, as it was reported, was this whole “new compact” between unions and business with government … on the sidelines or at least a non-political approach.
This was widely ridiculed, and rightly so. It seemed like Howes trying to connect with the halo of Hawke, and failing to make any account for the fact that the Australian political, business and IR landscape has changed irrevocably in the last 30 years, and there is no going back.
Why would business want to enter a compact with 17% of the workforce?
Why talk about taking the politics out of the IR landscape when the current government is clearly so determined to make it all about politics?
Why talk about bipartisanship in such an overtly partisan time with respect to IR?
He either has no clue or was just mouthing some feel good words from a time long past hoping no one would notice.
Maybe there was a whole bunch of interesting and insightful content that didn’t get reported, and you could outline the main points he was making for us?
meher,
You’ll incur the curse of the “black jelly bean” if you start agreeing with me.