Highlights of days three and four

Pre-election High Court action, reports of a Labor surge in the Melbourne seat of Dunkley, Labor’s candidate crisis in Fremantle, and a closer look at Labor’s now-finalised Senate tickets.

Noteworthy developments since my last federal election post 24 hours ago:

• Ahead of the High Court’s ruling on Senator Bob Day’s challenge to the constitutionality of Senate electoral reform, to be delivered at 10am today, Jeremy Gans at the University of Melbourne portends its rejection. Gans notes the court has failed to issue orders in advance of written reasons, as it likely would have done if its ruling was anything the Australian Electoral Commission needed to know about.

• Another, less publicised election-related High Court challenge met an unsuccessful conclusion last night, with the rejection of a bid to keep the electoral roll open beyond its scheduled close of 8pm on Monday. The challenge sought to build on the High Court’s ruling during the 2010 campaign which invalidated Howard-era amendments that closed the roll to new enrolments on the evening the writs were issued, and to updating of addresses three days subsequently.

• A report by Rick Wallace of The Australian talks up Labor’s prospects in the Liberal-held outer Melbourne seat of Dunkley. The seat is being vacated with the retirement of Liberal member Bruce Billson, who narrowly retained it through the Rudd-Gillard years and bequeaths a 5.6% margin to the new Liberal candidate, Chris Crewther. According to Labor sources cited in the report, “one recent sample of a tracking poll in the southeast Melbourne seat had the ALP in front 52-48 per cent after preferences” – though based on what I know of tracking polling, the sample in question would have been about 200. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister is taking the seat seriously enough that he campaigned there yesterday. Notwithstanding Labor’s apparently strong show in this seat, the report also relates that concerns remain about the Melbourne seats of Chisholm and Bruce, where Labor is losing sitting members with the retirements of Anna Burke and Alan Griffin.

• The Australian’s report also says the Nationals are “increasingly optimistic” that their candidate for the seat of Murray, state upper house MP Damian Drum, will win the rural seat of Murray, which is being vacated with the retirement of Liberal member Sharman Stone. However, Labor is said to be dangling a carrot before the Liberals by offering to direct preferences to their candidate ahead of Drum, in exchange for the Liberals dropping their plans to preference the Greens ahead of Labor in the inner northern Melbourne seat of Wills.

• Labor has a new candidate for Fremantle following the disendorsement of Maritime Union of Australia organiser Chris Brown, who failed to disclose past convictions on his candidate nomination form. The national executive convened yesterday to replace him with Josh Wilson, deputy mayor of Fremantle and a staffer for the seat’s outgoing member, Melissa Parke. Brown won the initial preselection through the support of the Left unions on the party’s state executive, despite Wilson defeating him by a 155-110 margin in the ballot of the local membership. On Tuesday it emerged that Brown had spent convictions dating from his late teenage years for assaulting a police officer and driving under the influence. Brown claims to have raised the matter with party officials in April, only to be told spent convictions did not have to be disclosed (although the question on the nomination form is whether the prospective candidate has “ever been found guilty of any offence”). He also claimed his contact with the police officer arose accidentally while he was defending himself from an unprovoked attack by three assailants, and said the court had recognised mitigating circumstances when it gave him a good behaviour bond. I had a lot more to say about this in a paywalled article in Crikey today. One of the issues dealt with was the notion that Labor’s troubles might cause the seat to fall to the Greens, despite their modest 11.9% share of the vote in 2013. While the Greens were sufficiently strong in the immediate vicinity of Fremantle to win the state seat at a by-election in 2009, support for the party is a good deal lower on those parts of the federal electorate not covered by the state seat. This is indicated by the map below, which shows federal boundaries in red and state boundaries in blue, with numbers indicating polling booth locations and the Greens primary vote.

2016-05-12-fremantle-greens-map

• Labor’s national executive has signed off on its Senate preselections today, capping a process that has produced two particularly contentious outcomes: the return of Don Farrell in second position in South Australia, and the sixth placing given to incumbent Lisa Singh in Tasmania. In turn:

New South Wales: 1. Sam Dastyari (Right), factional powerbroker and former general secretary of the state party branch, who filled the casual vacancy created when his predecessor as general secretary, Matt Thistlethwaite, moved to the lower house seat of Kingsford Smith at the 2013 election; 2. Jenny McAllister (Left), former party national president and technical director of a civil engineering firm, who came to the Senate in May last year in place of John Faulkner; 3. Deborah O’Neill (Right), member for the Central Coast seat of Robertson from 2010 until her defeat in 2013, who filled Bob Carr’s Senate vacancy in November 2013; 4. Doug Cameron (Left), former Australian Manufacturing Workers Union national secretary who was elected from number two in 2007 and 2013; 5. Tara Moriarty (Right), state secretary of United Voice.

Victoria: 1. Kim Carr (Left), leading figure in the Victorian Left, elected from number two in 1993 and 1998, and number one in 2004 and 2010; 2. Stephen Conroy (Right), an ally of Bill Shorten’s in the dominant sub-faction of the Victorian Right, who filled a casual vacancy in 1996, held top position in 1998, then second position in 2004 and 2010; 3. Jacinta Collins (Right), a former official with the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association who entered the Senate in 1995, lost her seat from the number three position at the 2004 election after the party’s preference deal with Family First backfired (ironically, given her renown as a social conservative), won it back from top position in 2007, and held second position in 2013; 4. Gavin Marshall (Left), former Electrical Trades Union official who entered the Senate in 2002, and had top position in 2013; 5. Jennifer Yang (unaligned), scientist and former mayor of Manningham who unsuccessfully sought preselection for the lower house seat of Chisholm, and ran for the state seat of Mount Waverley in 2014; 6. Louise Persse (Left, I assume), former national secretary of the Community and Public Sector Union.

Queensland: 1. Murray Watt (Left), Maurice Blackburn lawyer and state member for Everton from 2009 until his defeat in the cleanout of 2012, who last year defeated incumbent Jan McLucas to win the Left’s endorsement for top position on the half-Senate ticket; 2. Anthony Chisholm (Right), former party state secretary who last year won Right endorsement to succeed Joe Ludwig after he announced he would not seek another term; 3. Claire Moore (Left), who was first elected in 2001 and held second position on the ticket in 2001, 2007 and 2013; 4. Chris Ketter (Right), former state secretary of the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, who was first elected from top of the ticket in 2013; 5. Jane Casey, who I can’t tell you much about, except that she’s fron Mackay.

Western Australia: 1. Sue Lines (Left), former assistant national secretary of United Voice, who filled Chris Evans’ Senate vacancy in May 2013; 2. Glenn Sterle (Right), former Transport Workers Union organiser, elected from number two in 2004 and 2010; 3. Pat Dodson (unaligned), indigenous leader and former Roman Catholic priest, anointed by Bill Shorten to fill Joe Bullock’s Senate vacancy in March, which he eventually filled a fortnight ago; 4. Louise Pratt (Left), state upper house member from 2001 and 2007, elected to the Senate from top of the ticket in 2007, then relegated to what proved to be the losing proposition of number two in 2013; 5. Mark Reed (Left), director of campaigns and communications at United Voice.

South Australia: 1. Penny Wong (Left), the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, first elected from top of the ticket in 2001, relegated to number two in 2007, and promoted to number one only after a backlash against Don Farrell’s initial preselection win in 2013; 2. Don Farrell (Right), former state secretary and national president of the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Union, elected to the Senate from number one in 2007, then voluntarily bumped to number two in 2013 (see above), from which he was unexpectedly defeated; 3. Alex Gallacher (Right), former state secretary of the Transport Workers Union, elected from top of the ticket in 2010; 4. Anne McEwen (Left), former state secretary of the Australian Services Union, elected from number on 2004, re-elected from number two in 2010, and now shunted to number four to accommodate Farrell; 5. Michael Allison (not known), network controller for SA Power Networks and delegate for the Communications Electrical and Plumbing Union.

Tasmania: 1. Anne Urquhart (Left), former state secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, first elected from number two in 2010; 2. Helen Polley (Right), former staffer to Premiers Jim Bacon and Paul Lennon, first elected from number two in 2004, re-elected from number two in 2010; 3. Carol Brown (Left), who filled a casual vacancy in August 2005, was elected from number two in 2007, and re-elected from number one in 2013; 4. Catryna Bilyk (Right), a former state political staffer, elected from number three in 2007 and number two in 2013; 5. John Short (Left), state secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union; 6. Lisa Singh (Left), elected to the state lower house in Denison at the 2006 election, defeated in 2010, and elected to the Senate from third position in 2013, then contentiously dumped to fourth position at the half-Senate preselection in June last year.

Australian Capital Territory: 1. Katy Gallagher (Left), the territory’s Chief Minister from 2011 until her resignation in 2014, when she resigned pending her transfer to Senate in March 2015 on the retirement of Kate Lundy.

Northern Territory: 1. Nova Peris, former Olympic hockey player and sprinter, who was installed as candidate at the 2013 on the insistence of then Prime Minister Julia Gillard at the expense of the incumbent, Trish Crossin.

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.

862 comments on “Highlights of days three and four”

Comments Page 15 of 18
1 14 15 16 18
  1. Bevan Shields (Canberra Bureau Chief for SMH) on Twitter: “No disasters. Malcolm Turnbull wins – just “.
    Dozens of incredulous tweets in reply to that, ranging from “you have got to be kidding” to “And Fairfax sacked Michael West ????” to “are you f*ckn on drugs?” Not one tweet in agreement of Bev’s assessment.

  2. Isn’t it the Banks and Big Business that need to ‘Live Within Their Means’ and not keep ripping US off for fun and profit!?!

  3. An analysis of the questions asked and not asked gives a good idea of what’s really on voters’ minds.
    And it’s not good news for the Coalition.

  4. shiftaling @ #695 Friday, May 13, 2016 at 8:51 pm

    I might be a bit naive but I actually respect Turnbull for going into that style of debate………

    ………………………………………………….

    Err. He is not there by choice. In fact he would give his left nut not to be there.

    It pretty simple – *He had no choice*

    Not being there would have resulted in a very poor outcome.

  5. d-money @ #700 Friday, May 13, 2016 at 8:55 pm

    Briefly @8.39
    Despite the likely positive impact of their NG policy on tenants as well as first home buyers, Labor’s Amanda Rishworth got a bit spanked by Andrew Lamming on 7.30. Amanda is not very good at cutting through.

    That’s a pity. I should send her my -ve gearing notes. (Having met her, I have to say I’m a fan. She has great vitality.)

  6. #BREAKING: The audience has declared Opposition Leader Bill Shorten the Sky News People’s Forum winner, 42 votes to 29 with 29 undecided.

    Seems unusual for Murdoch organ to give anything to Labor. Putting the wind up Malcolm?

  7. Shorten utterly destroyed Turnbull tonight. Anyone who didn’t know would have imagined he, not Turnbull, was the current Aus PM. Pity it was tucked away on pay TV at time when few would be watching. 42 to 29 is the biggest winning margin I can remember in any of these debates.

  8. It’s also interesting the LNP are desperately trying to catch up on Labor in the areas of education and health…they know they are miles behind.

  9. Briefly Amanda did look a bit disheartened / flustered at the finish and would welcome your notes if she is going to have to front the cameras again

  10. Email from Shorten:

    I just finished the first debate. The team tells me we’ve had fantastic support online, thanks so much!

    The main thing I take out of tonight is that every chance we get to talk about our positive policies, we win the argument. That’s where you come in.

    We really need your contributions to help us get the message out in key marginal electorates. Can I count on you to chip in $10 and help power our campaign?

    https://australianlaborparty.nationbuilder.com/lets_put_people_first

    Every dollar counts, so thanks for your help.

    Bill

  11. There will be nothing in “The Australian” on the debate.
    Last time you will see a Turnbull/Shorten debate (tempted to include parliament )

  12. Yeah I agree. Gotta give Turnbull some credit. He is on a hiding to nothing, yet still has to somehow make his way through these events with very little to work with. Shorten has much more ammunition at his disposal. I know we can all be very critical of politicians, especially on the right, but it’s a bloody tough gig.

  13. Watched from halfway on. Shorten came across as more aware of not verbally bludgeoning his audience into submission but of respecting their time, common sense and intelligence. Malcolm, while not repulsive and monosyllabic like his reptilian predecessor, fell into a pattern of hectoring and spieling – in short he ended up talking AT his audience and became progressively harder to listen to attentively.

    Only one winner out of this. Not Malcolm.

  14. While I think 7.30 was a points loss for Labor over negative gearing, I don’t think the margin of the loss was anywhere near Bill’s 42 – 29 Mauling of Mal. This election could be a cakewalk…

  15. rabbithat @ #668 Friday, May 13, 2016 at 8:26 pm

    Ruawake

    I know I am biased but surely nobody could call Turnbull close to a winner.

    Agree it would be very hard to spin that performance as a win. Daily Telegraph will probably have to just run with Shorten “failed to land a knockout blow” or something.

    Not the Daily Telegraph, but…

    Election 2016: Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten trade blows but no knockout punch
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-malcolm-turnbull-and-bill-shorten-trade-blows-but-no-knockout-punch-20160513-gouz8v.html#ixzz48X5V38rU
    Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

  16. Briefly – I’m going door-knocking on Sunday – I’d be very grateful for a few pointers on negative gearing?

  17. confessions @ #713 Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:01 pm

    Email from Shorten:

    I just finished the first debate. The team tells me we’ve had fantastic support online, thanks so much!
    The main thing I take out of tonight is that every chance we get to talk about our positive policies, we win the argument. That’s where you come in.
    We really need your contributions to help us get the message out in key marginal electorates. Can I count on you to chip in $10 and help power our campaign?
    https://australianlaborparty.nationbuilder.com/lets_put_people_first
    Every dollar counts, so thanks for your help.
    Bill

    Beat me to it 🙂

  18. WTH! Paul Kelly is saying, well, the questions were mostly about Labor’s agenda, so…

    Maybe that’s because Labor has a well-articulated agenda that people are interested in when it comes to themselves and their family! The Coalition have glossy booklets.

  19. Shiftaling – yep and Shorten was phenomenal with his sceptical line on Turnbull “lecturing” of the banks.

  20. WTH! Paul Kelly is saying, well, the questions were mostly about Labor’s agenda, so…

    With all of these debates it matters less what the questions are and more how they are responded to. I couldn’t see all of it due to breaks in the feed and other interruptions, but it seems to me that Shorten connected better. He could have done better than that if he answered the question first in every instance, rather than digressing to get some policy point across.

    Turnbull digressed all the time. I’m surprised that it was as close as 42/29.

    Shame that it was not broadcast more widely, but Turnbull’s team will be worrying about his responsiveness though, hopefully, falsely reassured that he was only 13 votes behind with this group.

  21. Paul Murray declares it a win for Malcolm because the expectations for Malcolm were low…

    Surely not?
    The man’s a dickhead!

  22. Journos still not getting that the issues favoured Shorten because Shorten’s issues are the ones people interested in.

  23. Spot on Pritu 9:03,
    I noticed the same. Turnbull doesn’t seem to be aware when he is insulting people. Can’t say I share the admiration some have expressed for him doing his bloody job.
    42-29 to Shorten seems about right.

  24. Abbott stands ready to provide some coaching to Turnbull on electioneering. After all, it is an Abbott-Turnbull government:

    Tony Abbott has talked up the merits of the “Abbott-Turnbull government” on the hustings in north Queensland.

    The former prime minister campaigned in the Liberal National Party-held seat of Dawson on Friday ahead of the July 2 election. Speaking at the property of Michael Deguara, which he first visited in 2012, Mr Abbott said it was “lovely to be back here at Mick’s farm to remind people of the strong record that the government has, the Abbott-Turnbull government has, when it comes to this area”.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-live-shorten-turnbull-campaign-ahead-of-debate/news-story/20351c2ca092555dadd6c067d158c25e

  25. One thing starting to bug me in the ‘Class Warfare’ category around this debate is the moaning about how much is spent on individuals relative to tax paid.
    If I work for a simple wage, rather than a profit derived from the success of a large corporation then of course my tax bill is small, but turning up to work every day I cost Australia almost nothing. The massive profits generated within the corporate sector are boosted hugely by subsidised infrastructure. For example large companies and their high paid execs get vastly more benefits from Airports, Road and rail transport, International trade [with all its government backing], the stock exchange etc etc.The ability to generate wealth is also protected and guaranteed by military and security operations, the rule of law [courts being very expensive ] and the smooth processes of government and governance we enjoy. The incredible wealth generated in the corporate sector is only possible because of all that and more at great expense which goes unnoticed. Birth place is a very significant determinant of earning capacity. If you add Tax Break Giveaways to the costs imposed by wealthy people and corporations you may be able to make a pretty fair argument that the big folk, sure, pay most of the tax, but also get the most benefit back from the taxpayer / government.

  26. Jimmy…the proponents of -ve gearing claim the concessions will reduce rents by increasing the supply of rental housing. The system actually works the other way.

    The concessions are a subsidy that is currently available for all housing, so 93% of -vely geared buying goes into existing housing, which means there is no addition to the supply of housing. It simply means that one class of buyer has an advantage over other buyers.

    -vely geared buyers receive a subsidy that enables them to pay more for property than their unsubsidised competitors. So the subsidised end up owning an increasing share of the market. The unsubsidised are progressively excluded from home ownership, so the demand for tenancies increases. That is, -ve gearing increases the supply tenants. Greater demand for rental housing results in rents that are higher than they otherwise would be.

    As well, since their losses are party covered by taxpayers, -vely geared owners can afford to leave property with tenants. They are under less pressure to accept lower rents than would otherwise be the case.

    So -ve gearing as it now operates increases the demand for rentals and increases rents.

    It also means home ownership rates among the young should fall…which is exactly what has been happening. Home ownership entry is being suppressed, in part by -ve gearing. Would-be home-owners not only pay rent instead of paying off their homes, they also pay more tax than they otherwise would.

    This is all bad enough. But it has also led to a bubble in land in some places. A lot of Australians have been speculating in land instead of investing in the real economy.

    So -ve gearing hurts home-buyers. It hurts those who must rent. It hurts the economy generally. It increases the risks in the property market.

    We should reform the system as Labor propose – by using the concessions to increase the supply of housing.

  27. If Abbott is going to keep referring to the ‘Abbott-Turnbull government’ Labor should put him on the payroll

  28. One correction…

    As well, since their losses are party covered by taxpayers, -vely geared owners can afford to leave property WITHOUT tenants. They are under less pressure to accept lower rents than would otherwise be the case.

    🙂

Comments Page 15 of 18
1 14 15 16 18

Leave a Reply

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