Created with the expansion of parliament in 1984, Goldstein covers coastal southern Melbourne starting from Brighton, located about 10 kilometres from the city centre, and proceeding southwards through Hampton, Sandringham and Black Rock to Beamaris. The northern part of the electorate extends inland beyond the Nepean Highway to accommodate Caulfield South, Bentleigh and surrounding suburbs. The more inland areas are naturally marginal, but the affluence of the coastal suburbs has kept the seat in Liberal hands by stable margins ranging from 5.5% in 1993 to a new high of 11.0% in 2013.
 |
| Blue and red numbers respectively indicate size of two-party majorities for Liberal and Labor. Click for larger image. Map boundaries courtesy of Ben Raue at The Tally Room. |
The area now covered by Goldstein was accommodated by the electorate of Balaclava in the years immediately after federation, and then by the new seat of Henty when Balaclava was pushed northwards by a redistribution in 1913. Brighton was put back into Balaclava after 1937, and the new seat of Higinbotham covered the remainder after parliament was expanded in 1949. When Higinbotham was abolished in 1969, the area was divided between Balaclava, Henty and the new seats of Hotham and Isaacs. Beaumaris and Black Rock remained in Isaacs after Goldstein was created in 1984, at which time the new electorate extended northwards to St Kilda East. It assumed a more familiar form when it absorbed Beaumaris in the redistribution of 1996, which greatly reduced the Liberals’ competitiveness in Isaacs.
The various electorates which dominated the modern area of Goldstein were at all times in conservative hands, with the partial exception of Labor’s win in Isaacs at the 1974 election. Don Chipp held Higinbotham for the Liberals from 1960 to 1969, at which time he moved to the new seat of Hotham. Balaclava and then Goldstein were held from 1974 to 1990 by Ian Macphee, who emerged as the figurehead of the party’s moderates. Macphee was ultimately defeated for preselection ahead of the 1990 election by David Kemp, an intellectual leader of the party’s rising neo-liberal tendency, an event that provided a catalyst for Andrew Peacock’s successful challenge to John Howard’s leadership in May 1989. Kemp went on to serve in the Howard cabinet from October 1997 until his retirement at the 2004 election, as Education Minister until 2001 and Environment Minister thereafter.
Goldstein has since been held by Andrew Robb, a former Liberal Party federal director who had long been spoken of as a potential candidate for safe seats in New South Wales, where he had lived for two decades. However, Robb had originally hailed from Victoria, having been raised in a working-class Catholic family that supported the Democratic Labor Party. He came to the Liberal Party via student politics and a job at the newly established National Farmers Federation, which was an assertive voice for labour market deregulation during his period as executive director after 1985. As federal director of the Liberal Party, Robb oversaw the 1990, 1993 and 1996 election campaigns, after which he set up the marketing company Acxiom for Kerry Packer. His first term in parliament was the last of the Howard government, in which he was promoted to parliamentary secretary in January 2006 and thence to the outer ministry as Vocational and Further Education Minister in January 2007.
Robb nominated for the deputy leadership after the 2007 election, but was defeated by Julie Bishop. He instead became Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister, and was briefly discussed as a leadership candidate when Malcolm Turnbull was embroiled in the “Utegate” affair in the middle of 2009. Shortly afterwards he made the surprise announcement that he was moving to the back bench owing to a depressive illness. He returned to the front bench in the finance portfolio in March 2010, from which he was resassigned to trade and investment after the 2013 election victory.
Thanks Poroti
darn
The decision is especially important as so many American’s health care cover is supplied by their employer .
I don’t know why The Age wants Andrews to answer questions, they claim to have all of the answers. The longer it goes the fewer the answers we know they have.
Middle East Explained
Confused by what’s going on in the Middle East
We support the Iraq Govt in fighting against the ISIS
We don’t like ISIS, but ISIS is supported by Saudi Arabia
[Who we like]
We don’t like Assad, in Syria, We support the fight against him, but ISIS who we don’t like is also fighting against him
We don’t like Iran, but Iran supports the Iraq Gov’t in its fight against ISIS
So, some of our friends support our enemies, and some enemies are now our friends
And some of our enemies are fighting against our other enemies, who we want to lose
But we don’t want our enemies who are fighting our enemies
to win
If the people we want to defeat are defeated, they could be replaced by people we like even less
And all this was started by us invading a country to drive out terrorists
Who were not actually there until we went in to drive them out
Back briefly. I was pleased to see this article with the Frontline team about to do a parody of infrastructure funding in Australia. It really does deserve parody. Both sides are guilty in different areas. The same bad management processes that stuffed delivery of the NBN are now being applied to roads. Again, billions will be wasted.
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/peter-martin-abbott-and-infrastructure-nation-building-one-elephant-at-a-time-20140725-zwolj.html
Happily here in Adelaide DPTI is not proceeding with any toll road tunnel madness on South Road, though the recent federal budget has stupidly stalled finishing the rail electrification.
Houston shooting down Tonka Tony’s brain farts.
[Australian troops will not enter the crash site of MH17 in eastern Ukraine, according to Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s special envoy on the ground, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston.
“One of the important things here is to posture a non-threatening force, a non-threatening force that will go in with civilian specialists in white vehicles who will do the job on the crash site,” he said.]
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-days-away-from-sending-nonthreatening-force-into-mh17-crash-site-20140727-zxbfd.html#ixzz38d5jKhrB
FarQU
OH watches Bolt ….. I leave room but not quick enough….. saw him slagging off ABC for broadcasting the very reprehensible Al Jazeera.
Next week he’ll be promoting Peter Greste case without missing a beat.
Al Jazeera bad, but Peter Greste who makes AlJazeera’s very bad bulletins is good.
As to Tanya’s great crime of not praising Abbott, and Bolt’s “why didn’t she?”, there’s an easiy answer.
Tanya, like Houston, thinks Abbott’s views are shite but she’s smart enough to avoid a side circus and a no-win circumstance, so she refrains from being sucked in.
Every day things look just a little better for 2016.
BBC reporter Jon Donnison is sticking by his claim that Israeli police spokesperson Mickey Rosenfeld told him that the 3 murdered Israeli teens were not kidnapped and killed on orders of Hamas leadership.
What a double act on 24. A great speech by Shorten.
Followed by SHY outlining how dire Morrison’s legal position is. 🙂
ho hum speech by Bill Shorten I thought
Clive Palmer @CliveFPalmer 10m
The move by @TonyAbbottMHR govt to shut down the Parliament House childcare centre in Canberra highlights govt’s sexist attitude #auspol
Rex
It was a great speech. Rousing for the troops but crafted with some irresistible soundbites for the media.
On Insiders today Andrew Katsaras gave his monthly poll of polls report.
The panel had been considering (and Stutchbury claiming) a long term bounce for Abbott after MH17.
But Katsaras’s info was very pessimistic for the Abbotteers. Amongst other info he showed a graph comparing the Howard post 1996 election polling for 10 months, Rudd’s 2007 and Abbott’s 2013.
The graphic looked sooooo bad for Abbott. Howard and Rudd lines running across top of graph going higher …… Abbott’s line going across the bottom and falling.
Katsaras said it looks very bleak for Abbott. I felt do sad!!!!!
Rex
I missed Shorten but judging by your comment it sounds like he did pretty good.
[ho hum speech by Bill Shorten I thought]
You don’t really even need to watch them to draw that conclusion do you.
For what it is worth, if it weren’t for Poll Bludger comments here, I would have no clue who Andrews was, let alone “dictaphonegate”.
I am not in Victoria, but still. I wasn’t in NSW when the O’Farrell ICAC scandal broke either, yet you couldn’t escape coverage and water cooler comment on that (this was before resignation).
Methinks this is just a beat up by one publication — desperate to keep a non-story alive for base political purposes…
Shorten’s speech got this headline in the SMH
[An ‘arrogant, cigar-chomping’ treasurer]
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bill-shorten-hits-out-at-arrogant-joe-hockey-20140727-zxbur.html
I can understand how it could titillate the blinkered partisan cheerleaders from both sides but for those only interested in good and efficient social policy it’s irrelevant noise.
[For what it is worth, if it weren’t for Poll Bludger comments here, I would have no clue who Andrews was, let alone “dictaphonegate”.]
Ditto. It’s the same with the unions RC for me. It’s a non issue here.
WWP
The budget reply speech was inspiring.
Todays speech was ho hum.
Rex
You don’t understand speeches then. Look at President Obama not every set piece speech is of soaring rhetoric.
He has great workmanlike speeches too.
An enterprising couple make it to the crash site.
[An Australian couple who lost their daughter in downed Malaysia Airlines flight 17 has visited the crash site in rebel-held east Ukraine, the first relatives of victims to arrive at the scene.
They then flew to Kiev and made their way to rebel-held Donetsk and then on to the site of the crash without any armed escort.]
http://www.smh.com.au/national/grieving-aussie-couple-who-lost-daughter-fatima-dyczynski-visit-crash-site-20140727-zxapl.html#ixzz38dEofMTT
victoria
the trouble with the campaign that ‘The Age’ is waging is that there’s no way to counter it, even if you are innocent.
Probably particularly if you are innocent – at least if you’re guilty you can do a bit of a showpiece on it…
Comparison Poll – Abbott rock bottom
The MSM have their eggbeaters on full throttle over the Baillieau tape matter. I doubt that it has registered in the minds of the voters despite an all mighty attempt to convert a lost and found story in to a major scandal to rival Watergate.
As yet, Baillieau has not denied he did the interview and the disparaging remarks he made of his Liberal Party colleagues obviously stand. There’s your story. “Liberal Split!”
If Ted doesn’t want taped private conversations to be broadcast, my advice is to not allow them to be taped. It’s like those vids of alleged celebrities having sex or the photo of that Rugby Player having a drink from a non-traditional source. If you don’t want it to leak out, then don’t indulge in the activity and don’t allow anyone with a camera, microphone or taperecorder to be in the room with you while you indulge.
The Age’s reporter has to cop a fair share of the blame as well. Fancy leaving a highly sensitive tape of controversial interest in a place where it could be be found by your subjects political enemies. I’d say incompetence, immaturity and simple lack of decency and integrity by the reporter are a major factor in this story as anything else.
For once I agree with Bemused, it’s time for the Age and Herald to put up or shut up about what crime has been committed, who committed it and whether they should be pinged for being stupid while in charge of sensitive information.
Last time I checked, listening to a tape is not a crime.
guytaur
It’s in the eye of the beholder I suppose.
guytaur
[I just said that you cannot say the public prefers the Federal System we have.]
No, you didn’t.
And neither did I.
My point was that the two party system is one that the voting public created…and that, regardless of the voting system used, the one they still indicate (by the way they direct their votes) that they prefer.
If they preferred independents, then under a system like Hare-Clark they would vote them into Parliament.
Instead, even under H-C, the majority still vote for one of the major parties.
And it’s the wishes of the majority we’re talking about.
Zoomster
You said the results are the same. I raised Hare Clark to prove that was not the case.
That was all.
I see Faulkner’s reforms didn’t get up at the State Conferences – what a surprise – the Right don’t like change.
GG
[If Ted doesn’t want taped private conversations to be broadcast, my advice is to not allow them to be taped.]
I gather the Age taped the conversation without Ballieu’s permission so it’s not his fault.
MTBW
Yes that would have been great. At least NSW has improved on the leadership vote for members.
Diog
If that can be proved isn’t that against the law. Same one that applied to the royal hoax call?
guytaur
Changes in the ALP are not liked by the Right faction leaders shame on them!
guytaur
no, actually, I asked you how the results were different under H-C and you answered in such a way that I assumed they weren’t.
guytaur
[If that can be proved isn’t that against the law. Same one that applied to the royal hoax call?]
I asked the same question yesterday but I don’t think it was answered.I found this site which says in most states in Australia that it is illegal.
[Private Conversations
In most cases, it’s not ok to record a private conversation—even if you are a part of it.
A private conversation is a discussion that’s meant to stay between the people involved. In most states and territories, a conversation is not considered private if the people involved should reasonably expect that someone could overhear it–for example, if they were talking loudly around other people. But in some states and territories, a conversation can still be considered private when a third person overhears it, as long as those involved in the conversation know that the third person can hear it.
While the laws are a little bit different in each state and territory, in most cases, it’s illegal to use your phone or another device to record a conversation without the knowledge and permission of everyone involved. It is illegal to publish the private conversation whether or not you were a part of it–for example, by posting it on YouTube.]
http://www.lawstuff.org.au/topics/article10
zoomster
You mean you ignored what you did not like. That is the only way you can construe a Green Minister is not a different result.
To understand the difference get an expert to model it for you.
MTBW
to be fair – and I’d like to see the reforms get up, btw – all reports are that significant numbers on the Left didn’t support them either.
Diogs,
See my bit about the reporter’s responsibility.
The question is also if he did not want the information disseminated why say what he did?
Are you arguing that without the tape Baillieau had plausibile deniability? So, he could have effectively lied!
Baillieau is a lonmg time political operator. I wouldn’t waste my sympathy on him.
Dictaphonegate does have a similar ring to AWUgate. It’s agreed by the media that there are “questions to answer”, but the media either doesn’t know what those questions are, because the answers are apparently wrong no matter what’s said or how accurately it correlates to history, or refuses to say what they do know on the matter, preferring to spread innuendo rather than report what they know (which is, again, probably quite little).
If there was really anything interesting or in the public interest to report I’m sure they would have done so by now. My guess is that they sincerely believe Labor officials had listened to it and then distributed the recording to Liberal party members via a third party, but are unable to prove so. They want Andrews to keep the issue going because it has no momentum of its own.
Doug Cameron just told the ALP Conference that the Chairman that he was as bad as Bronwyn Bishop. 😆
MTBW
The unions particularly own the upper houses. That’s the top priority as far as breaking the nexus is concerned.
Given the different voting systems for each house, ($the whole state as an electorate for upper house but
j individual littler electorates for lower house), mathematically whoever is put up for upper house gets elected, save for the odd change if the last quota is lost.
Whereas if a dud union hack is parachuted into a lower house seat, it is easier theoretically and mathematically for an annoyed electorate to object by voting otherwise.
So the real duds who wield power but don’t have the guts to “put up”, go for the upper house and invariably make it. No town halls or shopping centre appearances for them.
guytaur
I have, I’ve read Antony Green’s paper, which I posted here.
According to Antony, H-C would not translate to the federal system, and in fact might lead to the opposite result from what its supporters intend – a more Senate-like system, where voters are distanced from their representatives.
My original point – to get back to it – is that we have a two party system because historically Australians vote for one of two parties, even when they’re given other options. Even under H-C, that remains true.
the second “that the” was not necessary!
GG
I don’t have sympathy for anyone involved.
The reporter illegally recorded a private, off-the-record conversation.
Bailleu slagged off his colleagues to a journalist.
Labor COS listened to the recording (I’m guessing it’s not definite) but didn’t use the recording
Libs disseminated the private conversation
I don’t think anyone looks good but I don’t think Andrews has done anything wrong and should stick to his guns.
psyclaw
Yes and that is what Faulkner is trying to end!
Diogs
[Private Conversations
While the laws are a little bit different in each state and territory, in most cases, it’s illegal to use your phone or another device to record a conversation without the knowledge and permission of everyone involved.]
According to HeydonJ, at the RC into Unions, it’s A OK in Victoria to record private phone conversations without the other party knowing.
And then to replay them at a public hearing.
Tony Burke just giving a good speech!
kezza
It’s okay if you have a court order.
Diogenes,
[Labor COS listened to the recording (I’m guessing it’s not definite) but didn’t use the recording]
Are you saying that, while you don’t believe they did, it would be better if Labor had used the recordings for political ends?
I doubt Labor’s particularly worried by this. Even if Labor did exactly what it’s accused of doing it’s hardly the scandal of the century. I don’t read the Age or the Sun anymore so if it wasn’t for PB I wouldn’t have heard it, despite being politically engaged and a ALP member.
Even, hypothetically, if it had filtered through to the wider electorate, because state Newspolls are taken over three months it probably wouldn’t be reflected in any meaningful way in the overall result. If the Age really wanted to do damage they shouldn’t have wasted their last state Nielsen before this went out.
zoomster
I disagree with Mr Green on that. Any Tasmanian can tell you how approachable their state member is.
Same seats apply in Federal elections. All the difference HC makes is that you have more members to represent you.
(This fact is why Tasmania has the most politicians per capita)