Seat of the week: Kingston

Seat of the week continues mopping up South Australia in the wake of the recent state election, this week visiting Amanda Rishworth’s southern suburbs seat of Kingston.

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.

A traditionally marginal seat that has strengthened considerably for Labor over the past decade, Kingston covers the outer southern coastal suburbs of Adelaide, from Hallett Cove through Port Noarlunga to Sellicks Beach, and extends inland at its northern end to Happy Valley and Morphett Vale. When created with the expansion of parliament in 1949 it was based further north around Glenelg and Brighton, its then southernmost suburb of Hallett Cove being the only area still in the electorate today. Glenelg was hived off to since-abolished Hawker in 1984, and Brighton was absorbed by Boothby in the rearrangement caused by Hawker’s abolition in 1993.

Kingston had a notional Labor margin of 6.8% upon its creation, but the landslide that ejected the Chifley government from office saw the defeat of their candidate Thomas Sheehy, who had been the member for Boothby since 1943. Pat Galvin won the seat for Labor in 1951, and retained it on variable margins until 1966. It was then caught up in the statewide convulsions of 1966 and 1969, which produced double-digit swings first to Liberal and then to Labor in both Kingston specifically and South Australia as a whole. The Liberals thus held the seat for one term before it returned emphatically to Labor with Richard Gun’s victory in 1969. Kingston subsequently changed hands with the next three changes of government, being held during the Fraser years by Grant Chapman (later to return as a Senator in 1987), during the Hawke years by Gordon Bilney, and for the first term of the Howard government by Susan Jeanes. However, Jeanes did not emerge from the 1996 victory with enough fat on her margin to withstand the GST backlash of 1998, when Labor’s David Cox prevailed by 763 votes on the back of a 2.5% swing.

David Cox held the seat for Labor for two terms in opposition before suffering defeat in 2004 by a margin of 119 votes, having been handicapped by the electorate’s acquisition of the McLaren Vale area in the redistribution caused by the reduction in South Australia’s representation from 12 seats to 11. There followed a swing to the Liberals of 1.4%, which was precisely what Liberal candidate Kym Richardson required to win the seat. However, Richardson’s narrow win gave him no buffer to protect himself against the move to Labor at the 2007 election, although the 4.5% swing was below the South Australian average.

The seat has since been held for Labor by Amanda Rishworth, who achieved the best result of any Labor member at the 2010 election in picking up a 9.5% swing. She was assisted in some degree when Kym Richardson’s comeback bid was scuttled after it emerged he was the subject of a police investigation into allegations he had impersonated a police officer as he sought to have a hotel manager withdraw an allegation of assault against his son. Police did not proceed with a charge of impersonating a police officer as the statute of limitations had expired, and he was eventually acquitted on a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. Going into the 2013 election she received a 0.9% boost when the redistribution caused McLaren Vale to be moved back into Mayo, a consequence of the electorate’s population growth. The subsequent swing against her was 4.9%, well in line with a statewide result of 5.5% and leaving her with a secure margin of 9.7%.

Prior to entering parliament, Rishworth was a psychologist and an organiser for the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, which dominates the state party’s Right faction. She won promotion in March 2013 to parliamentary secretary for sustainability and disabilities, and was reassigned to the health portfolio following the September 2013 election defeat.

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.

382 comments on “Seat of the week: Kingston”

Comments Page 5 of 8
1 … 4 5 6 … 8

  3. [196
    Rex Douglas

    But did Bill Shorten pledge to restore Section 18C to its current form if he wins Govt ?]

    The Act has not been amended. The LNP have published a draft amendment. The chances of it eventually passing cannot be very strong. Every community group in the country is opposed to it while Brandis has now tagged himself the Attorney for Bigotry. If they persist with this they will unite the whole country in the belief that they are apologists for hate and contempt.

  4. Thanks for pointing that out Chris – there was a charge that was not proceeded with due to the statute of limitations, but another charge did come before court and he was indeed acquitted.

  5. While I don’t really agree with blanket bans on derogatory words, I can’t feel much sympathy for those “disadvantaged” by these laws. It’s not that hard to resist calling people niggers or kikes or fags or whatever, is it? Just because someone’s mind is full of racist/misogynistic/homophobic garbage doesn’t mean they have no choice but spew it out their mouth whenever they feel the urge.

    And here I was thinking the “age of entitlement” was over.

  6. @timwilsoncomau: Reports that I condone racist remarks are utterly false. I absolutely condemn racist language.

    You said if white people can’t call black people “n….r”, then black people should not be allowed to use it to each other. You either want black people to be prosecuted or you want white people to be let off.

    Your choice mate: tell us which one.

  8. Rex Douglas

    [I want to know whether a Bill Shorten Govt would restore an altered Section 18C ?]
    Why don’t you ask him ? Didn’t you ask the same question about the new you beaut lords and ladies ?

  9. [207
    Rex Douglas

    I want to know whether a Bill Shorten Govt would restore an altered Section 18C ?]

    You are whistling for the Tories again, RD. Of course Labor will oppose the changes if they ever come to the Parliament. Instead of asking what a future ALP government might do, why not add you voice to those opposing the LNP and help defeat the Brandis amendments?

  10. On the privacy article I posted above this bit is salient and what Tanya Plibersek should take note of. Jeff Davis writes:

    [I celebrate Judge Richard J Leon’s opinion that the government’s mass collection of communications metadata is “almost Orwellian”, and I decry Judge William H Pauley III’s decision that the NSA’s collection is both effective and legally perfectly peachy.]

  13. [ I want to know whether a Bill Shorten Govt would restore an altered Section 18C ? ]

    I’d prefer to see the ALP oppose Brandis’ changes, and IF they get through anyway (which is far from a given)then go with highly visible and wide ranging consultations as to how to strengthen the RDA in terms of protection and fairness, while considering free speech.

    It may well look much like the existing one, but have a proper policy process that people can own to see if it can be made better, and dont be seen to be reactive to the scum that are Brandis, Bolt and Wilson.

  14. [206
    Phil Vee

    @timwilsoncomau: Reports that I condone racist remarks are utterly false. I absolutely condemn racist language.]

    He is nonetheless still being disingenuous.

    He has been appointed a Commissioner under the Racial Discrimination Act. He is either going to oppose discrimination and racial hatred or not. If he is not going to oppose these things, he should resign.

  15. [212
    Rex Douglas

    poroti & briefly

    It’s strange that he didn’t offer the commitment of restoration if it was altered.]

    The issue is not Shorten. It is the proposal of the LNP, their values and their standing in the community that is at issue.

  22. briefly #215

    The issue is that over the last 6 years we’ve had major studies and recommendations by experts re climate change, tax, education, infrastructure, etc. and all I want is for the ALP to finally show some bloody spine and support the hard work those experts have done and commit to what’s in the long term interests of the country and not their own bloody careers !!

  24. [The issue is that over the last 6 years we’ve had major studies and recommendations by experts re climate change, tax, education, infrastructure, etc. and all I want is for the ALP to finally show some bloody spine and support the hard work those experts have done…]

    If you missed it The Liberal PArty of Australia are in a coalition Government with the National Party and parts of the LNP.

    The ALP can do sfa from opposition, how about you attack the real issue?

  25. MTBW

    [Why on earth do I keep getting double posts]

    Had the same problem a few weeks ago. It was a faulty mouse. Perhaps your idea to change the batteries (the left clicker was trigger happy in mine) is the correct way to fix the fault.

  26. Bludgers might like to now I have mailed this to the Commissioner for Defamation….

    [Dear Mr Wilson,

    Your remarks on the use of the word nigger and the question of equality before the law, published in today’s AGE, have prompted me to write to you, as follows:

    You are reported as asserting that individuals currently do not enjoy equality before the law with respect to the use of terms of racial abuse. This assertion has not been proven in any court, but is in any case contrary to a reasonable construction of the Racial Discrimination Act itself, as you should be aware. In case you have not read the Act, here is a citation.

    http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2014C00014/Html/Text#_Toc374610008

    Part II prohibits racial discrimination generally – at Section 9 – while Section 10 affirms the right of persons to equal treatment under the law.

    10 Rights to equality before the law

    (1) If, by reason of, or of a provision of, a law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory, persons of a particular race, colour or national or ethnic origin do not enjoy a right that is enjoyed by persons of another race, colour or national or ethnic origin, or enjoy a right to a more limited extent than persons of another race, colour or national or ethnic origin, then, notwithstanding anything in that law, persons of the first‑mentioned race, colour or national or ethnic origin shall, by force of this section, enjoy that right to the same extent as persons of that other race, colour or national or ethnic origin.

    Part II contains further prohibitions on specific forms of discrimination, as follows:

    11 Access to places and facilities
    12 Land, housing and other accommodation
    13 Provision of goods and services
    14 Right to join trade unions
    15 Employment
    16 Advertisements
    17 Unlawful to incite doing of unlawful acts

    It is pertinent to note that Part IIA is aimed expressly at racial hatred

    “Part IIA—Prohibition of offensive behaviour based on racial hatred…

    18C Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin

    (1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:

    (a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and

    (b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.”

    This section is not simply about speech in an abstract sense. It is about the performance of acts that may harm individuals because of their “race, colour, national or ethnic origin”. This is a very specifically qualified prohibition. There is no doubt it is included in the Act because acts expressing racial hatred underlie other acts of discrimination – acts such as those that are proscribed in Part II.

    The Racial Discrimination Act does not prescribe what people may believe or say to each other in private. Objections to the Act on these grounds are completely phoney, as you would be well aware. As a Commissioner, you should be forthright about this.

    What the Act does do is prohibit public acts of racial hatred that may give rise to harm to one or more persons where those acts are performed on racial grounds. This is about protecting persons from acts of hatred – acts that are not only objectionable in themselves but which if unchecked accompany discrimination generally, social and economic exclusion, entrenched prejudice and ultimately contribute to the use of inter-racial violence.

    You evidently wish to establish a legal right to carry out public acts of defamation even if their performance gives rise to, tends to justify or may otherwise promote racial hatred. This is an extraordinarily reckless wish. It privileges bigotry at the expense of decency and social inclusion. Nor will it do anything special to protect free speech – a freedom that is not in any meaningful sense abridged by the RD Act – but will give rise to the discrimination you are supposedly appointed to oppose. The mere fact that your claims can be well-ventilated in the media demonstrates that freedom of speech is not infringed by the Act as you purportedly believe to be the case.

    You have overtly identified yourself as an apologist for and protector of displays of bigotry. Considering your status as a Commissioner, the public are entitled to ask if you in fact oppose racial discrimination at all. I have heard you speak on the radio (ABC Classic FM) and can observe that you are an intelligent and educated person. You therefore cannot rely on ignorance as an excuse for your present errors. I hope you do not make the mistake of assuming the public are all as ignorant as you appear to think we are and that you will resile from the positions you have advocated hitherto.

    Yours in consternation,]

    briefly

  30. [The ALP can show some spine and offer a firm alternative to the crap being dished up now.]

    They’re opposing the changes, and will vote against the proposed amendments watering down the RDA, which is all they can do at the moment. The fact that they’re doing that could mean that such changes to the Act never occur, thereby making your demands entirely irrelevant.

  36. Just on the Adelaide Oval grand opening. Text messages me and my brother.

    Some people are here watching the disastrous footy, Pat.

    Helen. What disaster? I was at the game. The best event in Adelaide since the Beatles. A sensational day. Who gives a fuck who won.

    Disaster is context. It was a Fab day!

    Aaaand I am a Port member.

    Shit, Pat!

  37. [The ALP can show some spine and offer a firm alternative to the crap being dished up now.]

    Did I miss where they did not, or will you talk about Shorten’s haircut next?

  38. Why is Tim Wilson being paid $325,000 as the Lord High Executioner Anti-Discrimination Commissioner when he doesn’t get the most basic concept of discrimination?

    According to Timmy, it’s not okay to for ‘certain’ words to be used in ‘certain’ communities (as in taking ownership of offensive language and turning it back on those who would use it as a discriminatory put-down) in private, but it should be open slather for everyone to use in public and private.

    He just doesn’t get it.

    But like his fellow sookie prince at the Herald-Sun he’s now crying that he’s been misunderstood.

    Never mind, Timmy, here’s your apology.

    [EDITOR’S NOTE: An earlier version of this article had a misleading headline, ‘We should be able to say n****’. News.com.au apologises to Mr Wilson for any offence it may have caused.]

    Hope you’re feeling better now.

    http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/human-rights-commissioner-tim-wilson-believes-race-hate-laws-are-bizarre-and-unequal/story-fnj3rq0y-1226868911981

  42. Thanks kezza your advice was appropriate and I changed the batteries.

    bemused sometimes you are not nice 😆 it took two women to work it out 😡

  44. “@profsarahj: All true #insiders LNP digging a hole for selves on race hate, and have sold it terribly. The dangers of governing to satisfy Bolt & the IPA”

  46. MTBW@242

    Thanks kezza your advice was appropriate and I changed the batteries.

    bemused sometimes you are not nice it took two women to work it out

    I wasn’t being unkind because the same has happened to me.

  49. WordPress has an anti flood setting so that people cannot keep posting by clicking, it is usually set in milliseconds (faster than anyone should be able to double click).

    So a mouse hardware fault is the only logical reason for double posts.

    As a man I thought it so obvious I didn’t bother to post. 😆

Comments Page 5 of 8
1 … 4 5 6 … 8

Leave a Reply

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