Sunday
6pm. The Nationals have roared back into contention in Lismore with the counting of 504 postal votes, 56.9% of which have been primary votes for the Nationals. This is 17.5% higher than their polling booth vote, compared with only an 8.2% difference in 2011. The ABC is saying the Greens are on 50.4% two-party preferred, but I’m presuming this is based on a speculative preference flow – if you’re out there Antony, clarification would be much appreciated. The NSWEC has pulled its original preference count and is telling us we won’t get anything back until “the Distribution of Preferences has been completed for all Districts and candidates have been declared elected”, which strongly suggests to me there’s no new indicative count being done. In any case, if the ABC preference flow is correct, it would seem extremely likely that the postal trend will continue decisively in the Nationals favour.
1am. As best as I can tell, the two-party swing has been 9.4%, suggesting a final result of 54.8% for the Coalition and 45.2% for Labor, with preferences breaking about 33% to Labor and 19% to the Coalition, with 48% exhausting. This compares with 24%, 21% and 55% in 2011 – using those numbers would have caused you to overstate the Coalition two-party vote by a bit over 1%. The change in preference behaviour is roughly half that at the Queensland election, when Labor got 48% (up from 27%), the Liberal National Party got 16% (down from 22%) and the exhausted rate was 36% (down from 51%).
Saturday
11.31pm. The NSWEC announces counting has completed for the night. So there doesn’t seem to be much uncertainty left, apart from the narrowness of Labor’s leads in Gosford (0.6%), The Entrance (0.9%) and Strathfield at a pinch (1.3%), and maybe whether Liberal preferences flow heavily enough to the independent in Wollongong to endanger Noreen Hay.
11.16pm. Little further progress, except that the tide keeps ebbing towards Jodi McKay in Strathfield, who should now be okay with a 1.3% projected margin.
10.23pm. Not sure exactly why the Upper Hunter 2PP is entering in one surge, but now we’ve got 30 out of 45 and the Nationals are out of the woods.
10.15pm. Upper Hunter 2PP count now up to 16 booths out of 45, and the Nationals lead has dropped from 2.9% to 1.8%.
10.03pm. Earlier I noted the Nationals lead in Upper Hunter snapped from 0.2% to 2.9% — that turns out to have been because the 2PP booth count went from four out of 45 to 13. These are small booths so you wouldn’t want to be too confident, but it would still be a surprise if Labor won. In any case, the swing is a highly notable 20.3%.
10.01pm. Jodi McKay continues edging very slightly further ahead in Strathfield, her lead now 0.9%.
9.59pm. Antony explains peculiarity of Upper Hunter count, with lots of primaries and few 2PPs, and says on his view the Nationals primary vote is low enough that they’re in trouble. So we will keep that on the watch list.
9.56pm. Noreen Hay up a bit in Wollongong to 41.4%. Independent Arthur Rorris leads Liberal 20.9% to 19.4% — I suppose it’s possible he’ll do less well in late counting, which you often see with independents and minor parties, and that he won’t finish second. If he does, he’ll need a very strong flow of Liberal preferences. Whether he’ll get it is a question we won’t know the answer to this evening.
9.54pm. Another booth in Strathfield shifts ALP lead from 0.7% to 0.8%.
9.51pm. And now the lead’s recorded at 2.9%, so not sure what’s happening here.
9.49pm. Surprise late movement in Upper Hunter — 44.2% counted, 22.7% swing, projected Nationals lead 0.3%. However, there’s a big mismatch here between the number of booths reporting on two-party (four) and primary (37), so I suspect we may have an anomaly here.
9.45pm. 13% counted for upper house, and Land Tax Party’s vote has gone down from 1.8% last I looked to 1.6%. Probably nine seat to Coalition with one each as usual for Christians and Shooters, which would get the Coalition what they wanted, namely one cross-bench micro-party to sway rather than two. Too early to say anything with confidence though.
9.44pm. Another booth, another 0.1% on Labor’s projected lead in The Entrance — now at 0.8%.
9.40pm. Gosford right on the line, flipping between Liberal ahead and Labor ahead on the ABC projection with nearly every update.
9.37pm. ABC now calling East Hills after long have Liberal merely “ahead”, with a fairly substantial lead of 2.2%.
9.33pm. ABC now back to Labor gain in The Entrance, but all it’s down to is a shift in the predicted margin from 0.5% to 0.7%. With 56.6% counted, this needs to stay on the watch list. A long history of very close results in this seat.
9.27pm. Other than that, Gosford and The Entrance very much in doubt. But as far as I can tell, all other results are settling in.
9.25pm. Jodi McKay losing ground in Strathfield: projected lead now only 0.6%, and ABC downgrades her from win to ahead. Noreen Hay now down to 40.5% in Wollongong, to the point where she could conceivably be in trouble. Independent Arthur Rorris’s 21.6% to 19.7% lead over the Liberals is narrow, but almost certainly sufficient.
8.58pm. Berejiklian asks a good question about preference exhaustion, but it wouldn’t appear that anyone’s placed to answer that. My vague sense though is that ReachTEL’s projections were about right.
8.57pm. ABC determining no swing at all in Monaro, with Nationals margin of 2.0%.
8.49pm. Antony says Queanbeyan results indicate Nationals to hold Monaro. Labor concedes Newtown, says Chris Uhlmann.
8.48pm. Labor gains Londonderry, vacated by Bart Bassett, with 15.8% swing off a third counted.
8.47pm. Hadn’t mentioned Tamworth – Peter Draper has fallen a bit flat there, safe Nationals retain.
8.45pm. The Entrance very, very close. Ditto Gosford.
8.44pm. Berejiklian points to 12.2% Christian Democrats vote in Granville, up from 5.3% last time, which has evidently not converted into a strong flow of Liberal preferences.
8.42pm. As Antony Green notes, Alex Greenwich’s 44.0% is well clear of Clover Moore’s career best of 39.8%.
8.41pm. Seat projection now closer to the respondent-allocated than the previous-election preference model.
8.37pm. Greens big show looking very much like the luck of the draw — their primary vote is essentially unchanged on 2011.
8.35pm. Prospect has now tipped over to the point where the ABC computer is providing 2PP projections and not just raw numbers (it took me a while to twig that it was working that way), and despite a slow count it’s calling it for Labor.
8.31pm. No Land Tax’s 1.9% suggests they’re a show for an upper house seat, I would have thought.
8.29pm. Long night ahead in Monaro. The ABC had a slight swing to the Nationals before, but now it’s a slight swing to Labor — 1.1%, with a margin of 2%. Slow count, with the picture unlikely to be clear until we see those big Queanbeyan booths.
8.27pm. Very good result for Liberal member Gareth Ward in Kiama, who has worked very hard from what I can tell, and is credited with a 1.4% swing. Nearby, Noreen Hay’s primary vote of 43% plus should see her right, despite the independent finishing second.
8.23pm. ABC calling for Londonderry, adding to Sydney area gains that include Blue Mountains, Campbelltown, Granville, Rockdale and Strathfield. But they don’t include East Hills, which isn’t looking good for them, or Seven Hills and Oatley, where the Liberals have won — never mind Coogee, Seven Hills, Holsworthy, Mulgoa, Parramatta and Penrith (if you were wondering about Jackie Kelly, she’s on 8.3%).
8.19pm. Labor now ahead in Gosford, which if sustained would add to Central Coast/Hunter gains in Maitland, Port Stephens, Swansea and Wyong, to which you could add Newcastle and Charlestown if using the 2011 election as your base.
8.18pm. The ABC computer has demoted Labor to “ahead” in The Entrance.
8.16pm. Antony not entirely convinced by his Strathfield numbers, but it would be very odd for the ABC to be wrong about a 3.7% lead with over 30% counted.
8.15pm. ABC projections filling out. Big Labor-versus-Coalition question marks are East Hills, Gosford, Monaro. Slow count in Liverpool and Prospect. Independent now second in Wollongong, which might be dangerous for Noreen Hay, but you’d think her 44.4% primary vote would be enough.
8.14pm. Despite hopeful talk from Berejiklian, the ABC is putting Labor 3.7% ahead and calling it.
8.11pm. Evenly allocated the ABC’s five undecided seats, result looks somewhere between the 2011 preferences and respondent-allocated preferences projections on my poll tracker — the primary votes of which are basically correct, with Labor 0.9% too low on the primary, the Greens 0.5% too high, the Coalition 0.3% too high.
8.05pm. Looks like a good night for the Greens, who might win as many as four lower house seats. ABC computer confident Labor will win Ballina if they get ahead of the Greens, but that’s not looking likely — Greens 30.0%, Labor 25.7%. The Greens are also well ahead of Labor in Lismore, so I’m guessing that’s looking a close-run thing between Nationals and Greens. ABC computer calling Newtown and Balmain for them.
8.05pm. ABC calling Oatley for Liberal.
7.57pm. I’m now getting that correction I anticipated in Strathfield. Now it’s projected that McKay is 1.7% ahead, although it’s not calling it yet.
7.55pm. Antony crediting Labor’s strong recovery in Hunter and Illawarra to electricity privatisation, and recalling something similar happening in 1991.
7.51pm. Overall, the election is playing very much according to script. Nationals in trouble in Ballina and Lismore, as forecast. Strong performance by Labor in Hunter and Central Coast. But Labor is falling short in Sydney, although an uneven picture with some stronger performances for Labor (Campbelltown, Blue Mountains) and some weaker (East Hills, Oatley).
7.50pm. Berejiklian calling Oatley and getting “positive messages” about East Hills, which would both be demoralising losses for Labor given their 3.8% and 0.2% margins.
7.49pm. But Greens well ahead of Labor for second place in Lismore, and surely looking good to win on Labor preferences.
7.48pm. Ballina on a three-way knife edge. Nothing between Labor and Greens for second place, nothing between Labor and Nationals if it’s Labor who gets ahead. Presumably Greens will win if they finish ahead of Labor.
7.47pm. Central Coast and Hunter going according to script for Labor. Very good result by the looks in Port Stephens; Maitland, Wyong, The Entrance, Swansea look like gains.
7.45pm. Monaro will clearly be close, but hard to pick given its diversity. You’d rather be the Nationals at this stage.
7.40pm. Very early numbers good for Labor in Macquarie Fields, and they’re well ahead in Campbelltown, looking good in Londonderry. Granville being called for Labor. But “Liberal ahead” in East Hills. Strikingly good result for Liberal in Strathfield — too striking I think, will want to see more numbers there. Still too early to say much about Seven Hills. Nothing doing for Labor in Sydney in seats beyond 8% – Holsworthy, Mulgoa and Parramatta looking safe for the Liberals.
7.38pm. Antony’s projected primary vote totals broadly in line with the polls, with the Coalition maybe a big higher than my poll aggregate. I’m not able to get a clear sense though of what preferences are doing in aggregate.
7.33pm. Labor “ahead” in Port Stephens, which is good news for them. ABC calls 49 seats for Coalition, 30 for Labor, one for the Greens (that’s Newtown I guess, but that’s off very early numbers) and two independents, meaning Greg Piper and (I guess) Alex Greenwich.
7.33pm. Seven Hills looking close. Sensing western Sydney slightly better for Labor than some commentary was indicating.
7.29pm. Liberals looking okay in Kiama. Only 3.4% counted in Wollongong, but the mooted independent is third on 18.6%. He’ll first need to overtake the Liberals on 21.4%, then get strong preferences to overtake Hay, who is on 38.4%.
7.29pm. ABC has Coogee called for the Liberals, so I ran down the garden path a little on that one earlier.
7.28pm. Campbelltown looking strong for Labor, despite talk they would struggle
7.26pm. ABC calls Maitland for Labor. Independent Philip Penfold doing well on 22.6%, but still running third. Elsewhere on the Central Coast, The Entrance remains called for Labor, and they’re ahead in Wyong on 4.5%. Liberals ahead in Gosford.
7.24pm. Blue Mountains looking good for Labor.
7.23pm. Greens looking strong on 3.7% counted in Newtown; close on Balmain in 1.4%. Early days yet in both.
7.22pm. Greg Piper returned in Lake Macquarie.
7.20pm. Still only 5.4% counted, but Ballina looking either Labor or Greens, barring a late Nationals recovery. No worries for the Nationals in Clarence though, and likely to get home in Tweed.
7.19pm. Remarkably strong early results for the Liberals in Oatley, with 4.8% counted.
7.18pm. Antony’s display has Nats “ahead” rather than confirmed in Lismore.
7.17pm. Greens matching it with Labor on 2.7% counted in Heffron, but no idea what booth it is — Greens vote is strong here at the northern, city end of the seat.
7.15pm. ABC computer calling Goulburn for the Liberals.
7.14pm. The ABC computer is calling Lismore for the Nationals, but the question is whether a Nationals-versus-Greens result might tell a different story.
7.13pm. Antony talking up the Liberals in a few seats where I’m not seeing numbers yet. Berejiklian says they’re “looking like a chance” in The Entrance, but I’m not sure if she’s actually looked at the figures.
7.12pm. ABC computer calls The Entrance for Labor from 16.3% counted.
7.12pm. First numbers from Tweed have 18.0% swing to Labor with Nationals 3.6% ahead; 4.9% counted.
7.11pm. And Antony cautious says ABC computer “indicative” of Coalition victory.
7.10pm. Antony brings up bad early number for Labor in Monaro, but cautions the seat will be decided in Queanbeyan rather than these rural areas, where things could be very different.
7.09pm. Lineball between Labor and Greens for second place in Lismore, but with Labor looking to be falling short if it’s them.
7.05pm. Not sure what’s going on in Coogee. Antony is obviously seeing something different from me, because I just heard him refer to encouraging numbers for Liberal member Bruce Notley-Smith. And the ABC numbers I was just citing have essentially disappeared – now they’ve got a 2PP with only 141 votes counted.
7.03pm. Encouraging numbers for Labor in Coogee — 6.7% counted, 9.4% swing, Labor 1.1% ahead.
7.02pm. Richo on Sky appears to suggest he’s thinking the Greens will win Lismore.
7.01pm. Antony brings up a Goulburn two-party result that bears out what I just said — big swing, but not big enough.
6.59pm. Very strong looking results for the Greens in Ballina, even taking the booths into account, but unfortunately here too the notional count is Nationals-versus-Labor.
6.56pm. It’s actually looking like Pru Goward is down about 20% on the primary vote with Labor up 4%. That’s still not enough to account for her 26.8% margin.
6.52pm. The most advanced count is in the who-cares electorate of Cootamundra.
6.49pm. Early figures for Goulburn look superficially good for Pru Goward, giving her 53.2% of the primary vote, but there’s nothing in from Goulburn proper.
6.46pm. Greens on 29.9% and Nationals on 40.8% in Lismore, suggesting preferences from the 23.8% Labor vote will be decisive, which is no surprise. Antony appears to be doing an estimated Nationals-versus-Greens throw, but the NSWEC count is Nationals-versus-Labor.
6.40pm. Most a case of primary vote counts in safe Nationals areas at this stage. Still not seeing any two-party counts so I can get a bead on preferences.
6.37pm. Lismore is geared for a Nationals-versus-Greens count, which is good. With 1% counted, there’s a projected Nationals margin of 2.4%, but it’s too early at this point. Meaninglessly early figures for Golburn and Rockdale, both lineball at this very early stage.
6.28pm. A few tiny booths in from around the place. One is Fairy Hill Hall in Lismore, but it only amounts to 62 votes, which seems a bit odd because there were 420 here last time.
6pm. Polls have closed, and we should get the first and smallest booths in in about half an hour or so. There are two exit polls doing the rounds, ReachTEL with 54-46 to the Coalition, Galaxy with 55-45 from primary of 46% for the Coalition, 34% for Labor and 11% for the Greens – so very well in line with the poll tracker, in other words.
[ Puff, the Magic Dragon.
Posted Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 12:31 am | Permalink
Homage to NSW. ]
Hard to argue Puff 🙁
If tonight was a good night for Abbott then it was a bad night for the Coalition federally.
davidwh@502
Plus it would have been worse if abbott had been in NSW mouthing off.
476
It is not that the Greens don`t want Liberal seats, the Greens want as many seats as they can get, it is that the Greens recognise that, as a left-wing party, most of the Liberal seats have not enough left-wing voters to elect us.
[“If tonight was a good night for Abbott then it was a bad night for the Coalition federally.”]
Please pass the joint.
Questions will be asked about Shorten who is going to have further scrutiny the closer we get to the Federal Election
Tom the first and best @504:
[It is not that the Greens don`t want Liberal seats, the Greens want as many seats as they can get, it is that the Greens recognise that, as a left-wing party, most of the Liberal seats have not enough left-wing voters to elect us.]
Which is why we need to cultivate the socially-liberal, economically-centrist/conservative voters.
You know, the Turnbull voters (aka the “doctors’ wives”).
TBA my craziness is natural without any chemical assistance 🙂
davidwh,
Your comment was perfectly sensible. Even PvO and Savva agree with you.
Calling people drunk or drugged or stoned is what people who are drunk or drugged or stoned do.
Matt@506: That way lies irrelevancy, because the Greens base won’t stomach overtly selling out to the right on economic issues. It would be a sure way to lose a substantial portion of already the voters the Greens already have in the pursuit of voters they won’t get. (Also, we had a party like this: they were called the Democrats, and they ended so well.)
I think tonight is evidence that the NSW Greens, who are the most economically left state branch, have got the balance pretty right.
Rebecca @509:
[I think tonight is evidence that the NSW Greens, who are the most economically left state branch, have got the balance pretty right.]
By going after the Nats’ turf instead?
Well, I guess the Nats always were agrarian socialists, and with the dire economic straits rural areas are in, social issues take a backseat.
Just got back after going to dinner after being on the hustings in the eastern end of Seven HIlls for a few hours this arvo. After 50 years of handing out HTVs I draw your attention to the following:
* me and the CDP bloke were the only ones at the booth of Anglo-Celtic origin. All the rest ALP, the other two GRNs, Libs, NLT were south Asian (and under 60).
* the numbers casting their votes at the booth was way down on previous years – could this be due to increased pre-poll and confusion over which div they were supposed to vote in (changed boundaries and division named).
* no 6.00 pm rush
* a large number of people refused ANY HTVs
Rebecca
ms fredex, me and at least a dozen people I know would give up on the Greens if they moved to the right.
On economics, I don’t think the Greens need to become right wing as such to broaden their base, just become less anti wealth creation.
For example at the last federal election the Greens ran with a pretty good wide ranging small business policy which touched on many of the issues which small business are concerned about, such as excessive market power of the big two supermarkets.
fredex
They don’t need to move to the right, they just need to be less anti wealth, in other words be more selective on what they would tax.
I don’t think I advocated the Greens moving to the right. But in campaigning, you obviously focus on those parts of your platform that will play best with your target audience, that’s all.
[ Rebecca
ms fredex, me and at least a dozen people I know would give up on the Greens if they moved to the right. ]
To the right of what though? The Greens have moved towards rightwing type politics since Dr Brown left but apparently they still have leftwing policies
514
That is a move to the right. Australia needs the Greens not to move to the right. The pendulum has swung to far to the right and is starting to move back.
Tom
Why do you say being selective on taxation or wealth creation is a shift to the right?
Here is a little example.
Currently the federal government is sulking that people who go to University will earn up to 75% more than those who don’t go to University.
This opens the door for either the Greens or the ALP to argue that yep we support increasing income by 75% and the best way to achieve this is to invest in higher education.
This then becomes the bases for a proactive economic policy while still being left wing as in the focus is on higher education.
Most students who go to University have one eye on their post study income potential.
TBA, ESJ and Happiness – you’re delusional if you think this is a good result for the LNP. They have a 5 or 6 seat majority, not a 20 seat majority as TBA claims @452. As for ESJ’s assertion that Labor can’t win at the next election, they should be aware that Port Stephens, a seat the Libs held with a 14% margin, swung to Labor by 20.3% last night. Upper Hunter swung by 18%. Terrigal swung by 13%. None of these seats are natural Labor seats. So those seats like Holworthy, Heathcote and Mulgoa etc. all covered areas that voted Labor through out the 1996-2011 ALP Govt. So it is very clear that Labor can win the 10% swing it needs to form government next time.
With the ICAC report due in June and the very reasonable prospect that privatisation of poles and wires will be a fiasco (the assets will probably sell for a lot less than the Government claims they will, as these things tend to do) and will lead to higher electricity prices as the private sector is forced to grapple with the high maintenance costs of a gold-plated over-built distribution network. This combined with the sleeper issue of the creeping strangulation and privatisation of child and community services all add up to potential big scandals in the next four years.
Happiness – you should be very worried if the Coalition ends up with a majority on the Council. That’s exactly the sort of result that leads to poor policy decision-making e.g. WorkChoices.
ESJ, TBA and Happiness – you demonstrate the overblown arrogance that has troubled the Federal Coalition over the last 18 months.
In hindsight labor could have taken lake macquarie if foley had bothered to visit and offer some goodies eg toronto bypass ,glendale interchange,morisset general hospital,expect them to offer something in 2019
Labor are delusional in trying to spin this one as anything other than a disaster. Even the most pessimistic assumptions of tonight, even four years back, would have expected some reasonable recovery that might put them in with a fair shot at 2019.
That has not happened. Failing to dislodge Brookes, Barilaro, and Coure is an embarassment. You’ve still got a pendulum where seats Labor had held comfortably in government are still held by the Liberals with margins of over 10%, including seats like Riverstone that were supposed to be safe Labor. Seats like Parramatta which have been overwhelmingly Labor in recent decades even saw swings to the Liberals, with 64% of the 2PP there. Labor actually managed to lose Miranda again, and got an amazingly solid kicking from the Greens in Newtown.
If they failed to save the furniture in 2011, they’ve done a bloody poor job of getting it back this time around.
Ironically, it’s the Liberals and the Greens having a wonderful night, while Labor and the Nationals both face the reality that they’re going to have to go back and their life choices if they don’t want to pull a particularly epic stint in opposition.
And if, in less than six months, you’ve seen two of your state counterparts pull unexpected and victorious campaigns out of a hat, perhaps it’s time to stop doing the “nananana the status quo is awesome” dance. (And the last thing they should be stressing about is bloody Lake Macquarie.)
Queensland or Victoria could have done the same thing. If Victoria had gone the hack route and ousted Daniel Andrews in favour of Tim Holding, or Queensland had parachuted in Cameron Dick and ousted Palasczuk, they also would be resting in opposition telling themselves what a fine job they’d done. Instead, they’re in government and NSW is left making excuses on their own.
(They’re not the only ones who could do to learn from this, though. State Greens branches who aren’t NSW would do very well to heed a lot of lessons from this Greens campaign.)
The result will have interesting ramifications federally in the inner-city of Sydney. You can see Sydney and grayndler as greens seats soon. It may be the case that labor has to abandon the inner cities to the greens, after all how can you out left the greens in thos seats?
It is an ongoing issue of course. According to everything Greens supporters on PB say, they want the ALP to move more to the Left, but if the Greens do actually succeed in driving Plibersek or Albanese (or their Left leaning successors) from Sydney/Grayndler, and the ALP don’t feel like they can win them in the future … the ALP necessarily drifts further right.
Of course it’s not up to the Greens whether the ALP are competitive in these seats or not, but it could well be a consequence of Greens being particularly successful.
Oh well. My solution is that we need more viable parties to better cover the disparate points of view in the voting public – the megalithic ALP and Libs are not functional at adequately representing their supposed broad constituencies, and the tensions of trying to do so is paralyzing both as far as I can tell.
Bring on MMP and fluid multi-party government I say, but the media will have to grow up first and not go on about “chaos” every time there is a dispute or disagreement.
Looks like Labor still need to do some cleaning out of the poo house that is their headquarters in Sydney. Their old supporters, like me, remain unconvinced that they have done so yet. Re. Lismore and Ballina – demographic change has brought with it, over 4 decades, a slow opening of the eyes of even the older, farming mob as their kids have gone to school with the in-comers’ kids who are now grown up.
A lot of the in-comers have much in common with the inner city lot. In fact many are from there. Just my lay observations, no science.
Disastrous result for the alp. While a few safe alp Newcastle seat went back to the alp. The alp basically is non existent in Sydney and is stuck on 34% primary. Seat that alp traditional holds like parramatta, Oakley, ryde, Penrith, Coogee remain safe liberals and the alp lost more ground to the greens. There are some seats in Sydney where alp barely got 10-15% support. It is still a long road back from the alp
Jamie! Time to take a walk outside of the tent! For the good of the party! Just tell them you want to spend more time on your first love Stamp Collecting.
I am not sure why it would be that the ABC web site has more of a count of the Legaslative Council than the Electoral Commission web site. I would have thought the data was put into a computer once and then fed through. One or both web sites must be manually updated from the data that is on the main system.
Andrew Bartlett 460
The number of votes in the legislative council is the same on the ABC and Electoral Commission Websites. The ABC has discarded blank (informal) and votes from below the line to come up with the percentages while the Electoral Commission hasn’t. Therefore, each party’s vote is understated by the Electoral Commission.
So, it looks like Libs/Nats 10, Labor 7, Greens 2, S&F 1, Fred Nile 1 and a fight between No Land Tax, Animal Justice, Greens and probably someone I don’t know of.
Greens winning National seats.
This is interesting on several levels.
I’ll probably make a heap of howlers over this one, so feel free to shoot me down, PBers, but here goes –
1. The Greens are, in fact, more likely to take National seats than Labor is. The ‘unions, boo!’ mentality is alive and well in the bush.
I’m often stopped by Nats who can’t understand why their party doesn’t align more with Labor, and see themselves as far closer to Labor than they are to the Libs.
But one of the memes precious to farmers is that workers are paid too much.
So, in a backlash against the Coalition, I can see why Nats voters might move towards the Greens over Labor.
(That said, Victorian Labor won a few seats off the Nats in the Bracks era).
2. However, if the Greens won on the CSG issue, this points to a weakness in their victory.
CSG is generally mined in areas which were or are coal producing.
CSG is seen as a more environmentally friendly form of energy than coal. Most of the opposition to it is based on the American experience.
The Australian CSG industry (and its regulators) have (a) learnt from this experience and (ii) use different techniques to the US.
So, firstly, (and I don’t know), if the Greens have been pushing for anything other than a moratorium (the recommendation of CSIRO) than they’ve been scare mongering.
What’s more, they’ve been scaremongering to a population which has had no problems in the past with coal mining and probably doesn’t in the future either.
Basically, if you’ve looked at the science, then you’d plump for CSG over coal, but ideally for a moratorium on one and the elimination of the other.
But, of course, lots of Nats voters don’t believe in action on climate change, because the Nats have encouraged the same anti science mindset it appears the Greens have done on CSG.
So a former Nat voter would be quite comfortable voting for an anti CSG lobbyist, because they don’t see a problem with coal mining, because they don’t believe in climate change.
This means that, to keep these seats, the Greens somehow have to juggle climate change denialists and people who want action on climate change now, which will be interesting, to say the least.
Er, what?
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-state-election-2015/nsw-election-2015-little-comfort-for-prime-minister-tony-abbott-in-strong-mike-baird-win-20150328-1m9xgg.html
[…But a swing to Labor of about 10 per cent was underwhelming …]
OK, not as bad as a loss to the Liberals, but a 10% swing against you isn’t a vote of confidence.
Given the really, really bad state of NSW Labor, and the amount of time it takes to rebuild a party after that kind of damage (and that’s assuming all the bad bugs have been winkled out…), let alone rebuilding its image and creating trust with the voters, there should have been a swing TO Baird (just as Bracks got a massive swing to him after ousting Kennett), not a 10% swing against him.
To casually dismiss swings of this nature as ‘underwhelming’ is absurd.
Who was the Labor leader?
If they put in a leader who was kinda known by a few voters they might have have had half a chance.
Losers:
NSW Labor -They chose poles and wires as the defining issue and a campaign. Strong “put the Coalition last in the upper house”. The coalition lost 4.5% in the upper house, after the swing last time this would have been expected without Labor saying anything.
No Land Tax -for obvious reasons
Christian Democrats – Last time there was a Family First candidate who would have taken some votes from them. This time, with their leader running they only managed the same as last time.
Cyclists -Turns out that lycra isn’t as popular as they thought.
Australian Democrats -This may be their last time round
Motorists -Despite gaining a profile with a federal member, they got virtually nothing.
Bill Shorten -Momentum means a lot in politics. This has slowed or stopped the momentum. It has shown NSW branch with issues and also shown that union based campaigns will not necessarily have an impact. He also said if you vote in Luke on Saturday then Tony will be gone on Monday. Labor has in the past overestimated the
Winners:
Mike Baird -He looks like controlling both houses.
Tony Abbott -You can’t argue that he didn’t turn up in Queensland but had an effect and then say the reason he didn’t have an effect in NSW was because he didn’t turn up. Either he owns part of both results or he owns neither, either way the narrative is better for him. It now becomes “Coalition won a majority of the votes in SA and NSW and local issues in Queensland and Vic.
Coalition Federally –They now have a rock-star premier who will be out on the hustings next federal election with hard-hat and hi-vis jacket
[Tony Abbott -You can’t argue that he didn’t turn up in Queensland but had an effect and then say the reason he didn’t have an effect in NSW was because he didn’t turn up. Either he owns part of both results or he owns neither, either way the narrative is better for him. It now becomes “Coalition won a majority of the votes in SA and NSW and local issues in Queensland and Vic.]
But you can say that the result might have been worse for the Liberals if he did turn up.
It’s obvious the Liberals themselves recognised that, or he’d have been all over both states.
A 10% swing against a government isn’t a great result. That it didn’t do what 10% swings normally do and unseat them is because NSW Labor has been on the nose for at least a decade, and you don’t undo that kind of damage overnight (look at how long it took for the Liberals in Victoria to become competitive again after Kennett trashed the brand there).
The NSW Liberal government has been the Coalition’s star performer amongst State governments. In a second election against a severely (some thought mortally) wounded state Labor party, with ICAC still running investigations, Baird should arguably have increased his majority, particularly given he was governing (apparently) competently and not being particularly Liberal party insane.
On Lismore
Antony Green is having to estimate preferences because the electoral commission is counting Labor/Nat but the actual count puts Labour third 39/30/25.
I could only find two cases last time where Labor preferences came into play last time. In those cases Labor preferences went 28% Green, 8% Coalition and the rest were exhausted. This would translate to an extra 7% of the total vote for the Greens and 2% for Nats. Of course it will be more because of preferencing deals.
Also, last time ordinary votes went 59% nats 20% Greens but pre-poll and postal went 62% 18%. And last time there were 34,000 counted on the night, this time 27,000.
With so many more pre-poll votes which are likely to favour the Nats more than the Greens, I’m thinking Lismore is a narrow win to the Nats.
So, the lesson from this result is: the coalition can win an election if it hides Abbott from the punters? Yes, the feds should take great encouragement from that pattern.
It’s Time
I like the meme that 44% of those exit polled said that the Federal Libs influenced their vote but 39% said it didn’t, so it evens out, thus proving that the Federal Libs had no effect on the vote.
Baird and the State Liberals will know whether or not Abbott had an effect on the vote (well, they already do, which is why they used Malcolm – a huge hint about which way the winds are blowing).
Although we talk as if Federal and State MPs are two different subsets, at a State level they’re not (I once said to a party organiser that couldn’t decide which level of government to focus on – I was more interested in Federal issues, but my friends in the party were State MPs. He said that the latter doesn’t change, even for Federal MPs).
So if you have State Liberals who had to spend more time and effort to get elected (or even worse, not elected) because of Abbott, (i) they will know this and (ii) they will know that, in four years time, it will be better for them if Abbott isn’t around.
They will also have a really good understanding of whether or not Abbott will cost them votes at the next Federal election, and will be making this plain to their friends in the Federal sphere.
IF Abbott was a factor – and seriously, against a severely weakened Labor party, with the majority of opinion being that Baird has been doing well, Labor shouldn’t have done as well as it has – then the NSW Libs will know this, and act accordingly.
Political observers may flippantly dismiss this result as having no impact on federal politics, but the actual politicians will know better.
Well at the end of the day a 10% swing is a 10% swing so labor can take some comfort from that.
The margin blew out slightly over the last week of the campaign largely IMO due to the parade of labor stalwarts coming out to support the electricity sell off. That muddied the waters and took a lot of the steam out of the ALP campaign.
In my own seat Drummoyne (inner west Sydney) the lib incumbent actually had a swing towards him. Labor ran a shocking campaign with the labor candidate non existent throughout.
I was also surprised to see my accountant at my polling place and discovered he was the local representative of the No Land Tax party. Go figure!
[OK, not as bad as a loss to the Liberals, but a 10% swing against you isn’t a vote of confidence.
Given the really, really bad state of NSW Labor, and the amount of time it takes to rebuild a party after that kind of damage (and that’s assuming all the bad bugs have been winkled out…), let alone rebuilding its image and creating trust with the voters, there should have been a swing TO Baird (just as Bracks got a massive swing to him after ousting Kennett), not a 10% swing against him.]
Agreed. The electoral pendulum isn’t some natural law of politics, it’s comprised of voters who changed their minds at this election. A very large number of people changed their mind from 2007-2011 due to the issues with NSW Labor.
Now a smaller but still very large number of people have changed their mind about the O’Farrell/Baird coalition government.
by the look of it some of the polls got it right . it varied from 52/48 to 57/43 so you will excuse me for doubting them. it appears 55/45 was about right. well done again……ken m.
Re It’s Time @536: yes, something like that. A moderate, competent Liberal government with a popular leader can win running a reasonably honest campaign, without dogwhistling and without too much scare campaigning about the Opposition. It can even overcome the disadvantage of an incompetent and malevolent Federal Government of the same political colour. It helped that the major newspaper in the State was actively campaigning for a return of a conservative Government.
Morning all.
Just recalling something the ABC’s election night panel said last night when reflecting on those 1st termers who were voted out. They said it was a bit rough that someone gets performance reviewed every 4 years only to be effectively left out of a job on the whim of voters.
There are many Australians who are performance reviewed way more frequently than once every 4 years, and who can be, and are sacked on flimsy grounds, even the whim of their employer. I’d bet these people aren’t paid anywhere near as much as NSW MPs are paid.
At the end of the day this election was Baird’s GST election.
He had a huge majority, similar to Howard in 98 and was prepared to burn some of it to push through an unpopular policy.
Confessions. Large employers need to give several warnings on performance before terminating employment. The solution seems obvious, 12 year terms with feedback every 4 years.
Today’s Mumble in audio format, discussing the NSW vote.
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/sundayextra/2015-03-29/6354814
Meanwhile in Queensland…. “I’m a Crook”
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-labor-government-in-crisis-as-mp-admits-to-criminal-past/story-fnihsrf2-1227283072295
Didn’t an independent say something about one of his terms for the support of the minority Labor Government was he wouldn’t stand for any corruption or criminal activity? Hmmm?
ifonly@544
And be stuck with the likes of abbott for 12 year as PM.
No thanks.
One of the strengths of democracy is that politicians can be removed if they fail to perform etc.
They know the score going into it and still people line up to have even a chance of securing a seat.
Most of those who get into parliament receive the best pay and conditions they will ever get. But they know what is involved.
Voters need to constantly remind them all that they work for *US*.
12 year terms would be a disaster. Imagine having the dysfunctional, incompetent and chaotic Abbott govt for 12 years,
So in Queensland we now have a Labor MP who:
1. Doesn’t file his tax returns which is an offence
2. Avoided paying child support by not filing said tax returns
3. Has an AVO(Apprehended Violence Order, aka domestic violence)
4. Break and Enter Offences
5. Breached Bail Offences
Well that’s what we know so far.. Anna 2.0 seems to be “discovering” new things every day about this guy, what else is Anna and Billy Gordon hiding that we haven’t found out yet?
The Greens winning two inner city seas might be part of a trend, but I think that the winning of two regional seats from Nationals, if that ends up happening, seems to me to be likely to be a one-off.
Usual caveats, late counting always favours the Coalition, with Labor and Green leads being whittled away and often reversed, so we shall see.