On reflection, my previous post, intended as the first in a series of “Call of the Board” posts reviewing in detail the result of the May 18 election, was deficient in two aspects. The first is that patterns in the results estimated by my demographic model were said to be “difficult to discern”, which can only have been because I didn’t look hard enough. In fact, the results provide evidence for remarkably strong incumbency effects. Of the 12 Liberals defending their seats in the Sydney area, all but Tony Abbott outperformed the modelled estimate of the Liberal two-party vote, by an average of 4.0%. Of the 15 Labor members, all but two (Julie Owens in Parramatta and Anne Stanley in Werriwa) outperformed the model, the average being 3.4%.
The other shortcoming of the post was that it did not, indeed, call the board – a now-abandoned ritual of election night broadcasting in which the results for each electorate were quickly reviewed in alphabetical order at the end of the night, so that nobody at home would feel left out. You can find this done for the Sydney seats over the fold, and it will be a feature of the Call of the Board series going forward.
Banks (Liberal 6.3%; 4.8% swing to Liberal): After winning the seat for the Liberals in 2013 for the first time since its creation in 1949, David Coleman has now scored three wins on the trot, the latest by comfortably his biggest margin to date: 6.3%, compared with 2.8% in 2013 and 1.4% in 2016. In a post-election account for the Age/Herald, Michael Koziol reported that Labor’s national secretariat and state branch were at loggerheads over the seat late in the campaign, with the former wishing to devote resources to the seat, and the latter recognising that they “didn’t stand a chance”.
Barton (Labor 9.4%; 1.1% swing to Labor): Located around the crossover point where the inner urban swing to Labor gave way to the outer urban swing to Liberal, Barton recorded a slight swing to Labor that was perhaps boosted by a sophomore effect for incumbent Linda Burney.
Bennelong (Liberal 6.9%; 2.8% swing to Labor): A fair bit has been written lately about Labor’s struggles with the Chinese community, particularly in New South Wales, but that did not stop the nation’s most Chinese electorate recording a reasonably solid swing to Labor. This perhaps reflected the quality of Labor’s candidate, neurosurgeon Brian Owler, but was also typical of a seat where Malcolm Turnbull had played well in 2016, when it swung 2.8% to the Liberals.
Berowra (Liberal 15.6%; 0.8% swing to Labor): Most of this outer northern Sydney seat is in the outer part of the zone that swung to Labor, barring a few lightly populated regions out north and west. However, Liberal member Julian Leeser is what I will call a half-sophomore – a first-term incumbent, but one who succeeded a member of the same party (in this case Philip Ruddock), so there was no reversal of the sitting member advantage. So the 0.8% swing to Labor is about par for the course.
Blaxland (Labor 14.7%; 4.8% swing to Liberal): The anti-Labor swing suffered by Jason Clare was fairly typical for Sydney’s south-west.
Bradfield (Liberal 16.6%; 4.5% swing to Labor): Apart from the exceptional cases of Warringah and Wentworth, this was the biggest swing against the Liberals in New South Wales. However, given it was only fractionally lower in neighbouring North Sydney, that’s unlikely to be a reflection on sitting member Paul Fletcher, instead reflecting the electorate’s affluence and proximity to the city. The seat also recorded the state’s biggest swing to the Greens, at 2.0%.
Chifley (Labor 12.4%; 6.8% swing to Liberal): Ed Husic suffered Labor’s biggest unfavourable swing in Sydney (and the second biggest in the state after Hunter), after enjoying the second biggest favourable swing in 2016 (after Macarthur).
Cook (Liberal 19.0%; 3.6% swing to Liberal): As noted in the previous post, Scott Morrison enjoys the biggest Liberal margin in New South Wales relative to what might be expected from the electorate’s demographic composition. Only part of this can be explained by a prime ministership effect, as his 3.6% swing ranked only twelfth out of the 47 seats in New South Wales.
Dobell (Labor 1.5%; 3.3% swing to Liberal): The two seats on the Central Coast behaved similarly to most of suburban Sydney in swinging solidly to the Liberals, but there was enough padding on the Labor margin to save Emma McBride in Dobell, a marginal seat that lands Labor’s way more often than not.
Fowler (Labor 14.0%; 3.5% swing to Liberal): Labor’s Chris Hayes suffered a swing unremarkable by the standards of western Sydney, or perhaps slightly at the low end of average.
Grayndler (Labor 16.3% versus Greens; 0.5% swing to Labor): As illustrated in the previous post, Anthony Albanese’s personal popularity continues to define results in Grayndler, where the Labor margin is well out of proportion to demographic indicators. Whereas the Greens hold the largely corresponding state seats of Balmain and Newtown, in Grayndler they struggle to harness enough of the left-of-centre vote to finish ahead of the Liberals. They just managed it on this occasion, as they had previously in 2010 and 2016, outpolling the Liberals 22.6% to 21.8% on the primary vote, narrowing to 24.2% to 23.8% after the exclusion of three other candidates. Albanese cleared 50% of the primary vote for the first time since 2007, helped by a smaller field of candidates than last time, and had a locally typical 1.5% two-party swing against the Liberals.
Greenway (Labor 2.8%; 3.5% swing to Liberal): The swing against Labor’s Michelle Rowland was typical for middle suburbia, and roughly reversed the swing in her favour in 2016.
Hughes (Liberal 9.8%; 0.5% swing to Liberal): Craig Kelly did rather poorly to gain a swing of only 0.5% – as a careful look at the results map shows, the boundary between Hughes and Cook marks a distinct point where Labor swings turn to Liberal ones. The demographic model suggests Kelly to be the third most poorly performing Liberal incumbent out of the 13 in the Sydney area, ahead of Tony Abbott (Warringah) and Lucy Wicks (Robertson).
Kingsford Smith (Labor 8.8%; 0.2% swing to Labor): It was noted here previously that Matt Thistlethwaite strongly outperforms the demographic model, but the near status quo result on this occsion did little to contribute to that. This seat was roughly on the geographic crossover point between the Labor swings of the city and the Liberal swings of the suburbs.
Lindsay (LIBERAL GAIN 5.0%; 6.2% swing to Liberal): One of five seats lost by Labor at the election, and the only one in Sydney. Like the others, Lindsay was gained by Labor in 2016, with Emma Husar scoring a 1.1% margin from a 4.1% swing. This was more than reversed in Husar’s absence, with Liberal candidate Melissa McIntosh prevailing by 5.0%. The 6.2% swing against Labor was the biggest in the Sydney area, and produced a Liberal margin comparable to Jackie Kelly’s strongest.
Macarthur (Labor 8.4%; 0.1% swing to Labor): To repeat what was said in the previous post: Labor strongly outpolled the demographic model in Macarthur, a seat the Liberals held from 1996 until 2016, when Russell Matheson suffered first an 8.3% reduction in his margin at a redistribution, and then an 11.7% swing to Labor’s Michael Freelander, a local paediatrician. The swing to Labor, tiny though it was, ran heavily against the trend of urban fringe seats across the country. In addition to Freelander’s apparent popularity, this probably reflected a lack of effort put into the Liberal campaign compared with last time, as the party narrowly focused on its offensive moves in Lindsay and Macquarie and defensive ones in Gilmore and Reid. Macarthur was one of six seats in New South Wales contested by One Nation, whose 8.6% seemed to be drawn equally from Labor and Liberal.
Mackellar (Liberal 13.2%; 2.5% swing to Labor): Jason Falinski’s northern beaches seat participated in the swing to Labor in inner and northern Sydney, though in this case it was a fairly modest 2.5%, perhaps reflecting Falinski’s half-sophomore effect. A 12.2% vote for independent Alice Thompson caught most of the combined 14.9% for three independents in 2016, leaving the large parties’ vote shares little changed.
Macquarie (Labor 0.2%; 2.0% swing to Liberal): A sophomore surge for Labor member Susan Templeman surely made the difference here, with the 2.0% swing to the Liberals being below the outer urban norm, and just short of what was required to take the seat.
McMahon (Labor 6.6%; 5.5% swing to Liberal): The swing against Chris Bowen was well at the higher end of the scale and, typically for such a result, followed a strong swing the other way in 2016, in this case of 7.5%. This was among the six seats in New South Wales contested by One Nation, whose 8.3% contributed to a 7.4% primary vote swing against Bowen, and perhaps also to the size of the two-party swing.
Mitchell (Liberal 18.6%; 0.8% swing to Liberal): Where most safe Liberal seats in Sydney were in the zone of inner and northern Sydney that swung to Labor, Mitchell is far enough west to encompass the crossover point where Labor swings gave way to Liberal ones. This translated into a modest 0.8% swing to Liberal member Alex Hawke, and very little change on the primary vote.
North Sydney (Liberal 9.3%; 4.3% swing to Labor): Trent Zimmerman’s seat caught the brunt of the inner urban swing to Labor, the 4.3% swing to Labor being the state’s fourth highest after Warringah, Wentworth and Bradfield, the latter of which just shaded it. Labor managed a hefty 8.3% gain on the primary vote, largely thanks to the absence of Stephen Ruff, who polled 12.8% as an independent in 2016. The one independent on this occasion was serial candidate Arthur Chesterfield-Evans, a former Democrats member of the state upper house, who managed only 4.4%.
Parramatta (Labor 3.5%; 4.2% swing to Liberal): Parramatta marks the crossover point where the Liberal swing in western Sydney begins, producing a 4.2% swing against Labor’s Julie Owens that only partly unwound the 6.4% swing she picked up in 2016.
Reid (Liberal 3.2%; 1.5% swing to Labor): The Liberals maintained their remarkable record in this seat going back to 2013, when they won it for the first time in the seat’s history, by limiting the swing to Labor to a manageable 1.5%. While the 3.2% margin is only modestly higher than that predicted by the demographic model, it was achieved despite the departure of two-term sitting member Craig Laundy, who is succeeded by Fiona Martin.
Robertson (Liberal 4.2%; 3.1% swing to Liberal): Similarly to neighbouring Dobell, the Central Coast seat of Robertson swung 3.1% to the Liberals, in this case boosting the margin of Lucy Wicks.
Sydney (Labor 18.7%; 3.4% swing to Labor): The inner urban swing to Labor added further padding to Tanya Plibersek’s margin. The Greens continue to run third behind the Liberals, who outpolled them by 26.6% to 18.1%. As is the case in Grayndler, this presumably reflects local left-wing voters’ satisfaction with the incumbent.
Warringah (INDEPENDENT GAIN 7.2% versus Liberal): Zali Steggall took a big chunk out of the big party contenders in recording 43.5% of the primary vote, but the largest of course came from Tony Abbott, down from 51.6% to 39.0%. Abbott won four booths around Forestville at the northern end of the electorate, but it was otherwise a clean sweep for Steggall. She particularly dominated on the coast around Manly, by margins ranging from 10% to 18%.
Watson (Labor 13.5%; 4.1% swing to Liberal): In a familiar suburban Sydney pattern, Tony Burke had an 8.8% swing in his favour from 2016 unwound by a 4.1% swing to the Liberals this time.
Wentworth (Liberal 1.3% versus Independent): Listed as a Liberal retain in a spirit of consistently comparing results from the 2016 election, this was of course a Liberal gain to the extent that it reversed their defeat at the hands of independent Kerryn Phelps at last October’s by-election. There was an unblemished divide between the northern end of the electorate, encompassing the coast north of Bondi and all but the westernmost part of the harbourside, where the Liberals won the two-candidate vote, and the southern end of the electorate, where Phelps did. As noted in the previous post, there was a swing to Labor of 7.9% on the two-party preferred count, but this was testament more than anything to Malcolm Turnbull’s local support.
Werriwa (Labor 5.5%; 2.7% swing to Liberal): A half-sophomore effect for Labor’s Anne Watson may have helped limit the swing here in this outer suburban seat.
Oh, and don’t you dare talk to me of ethics either when you’re the one supporting a party that locks up innocent people in concentration camps on remote islands. Don’t you dare.
Yoo hoo! The Coalition are the government, and have been for the last 6 years. 🙄
Btw, every one of those people is STILL there on Manus and Nauru because The Greens voted with Scott Morrison as Shadow Immigration Minister to scupper the Malaysian Agreement. You know, the one the UNHCR approved of.
So, trying to get all high and mighty with me about the asylum seekers on Manus and Nauru. Just. Won’t. Wash. Firefox.
guytaur
Don’t waste your energy on kate. She has form.
C@tmomma @ #617 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:22 pm
Wong can strategize in the background and silently pass the day’s marching orders up to MP’s in the HoR. She’d be the ultimate shadow operative. 🙂
lizzie @ #1172 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:30 pm
Given Labors illogical current voting pattern despite their protestations, you’re probably right.
Pegasus @ #1299 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:31 pm
Because, you are nothing if not predictable. And unoriginal.
“Seat of Robertson, 2019 election:
CONNOR, Cath The Greens 7,601 7.91% -0.44
Who knows, maybe 11, 12% next election? ”
***
Seat of Robertson, 2019 election:
Labor – CHARLTON, Anne -4.33%
…
Yikes. Not exactly the seat I would’ve picked to make that point, Cat.
https://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-24310-146.htm
a r @ #1302 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:32 pm
I think Labor would be laughed out of town long before that could happen.
Peg
I have made myself crystal clear now. However I have seen the trolls get the groupthink going when you are disagreeing with the group think.
Any port in a storm I think they call it.
Cat
If Labor keeps voting against the people they say they represent then yes Labor will get laughed out of town.
Timing is everything.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/23/labor-demands-boost-to-newstart-but-refuses-to-commit-to-size-of-increase
Firefox @ #1305 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:33 pm
Come in spinner! You have behaved exactly as I predicted to myself you would. And THAT’S why I chose it.
Nevertheless, if you were being truly fair, you would have noted my often repeated opinion about our candidate, not a lot of it flattering, so I don’t really care that you point out how we went in Robertson.
Now, about that flatlining Greens vote in Robertson, you would have thought they would have picked up some of Labor’s lost vote. Doesn’t look like it, does it?
Pegasus @ #1185 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 4:37 pm
They just love the self-wedge.
In case anyone missed it the Democrats had a win overnight
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-announces-support-for-two-year-bipartisan-budget-deal-that-boosts-spending-suspends-debt-limit/2019/07/22/94cf2172-acb6-11e9-8e77-03b30bc29f64_story.html?utm_term=.676bbce6628f
Also a victory for workers
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-23/masterchef-all-three-judges-not-returning-next-season/11339558
The Guardian
A Senate committee will look at press freedom. From Sarah Hanson-Young (who will chair it):
This week’s arrest of four French journalists highlights how badly we need to rethink press freedom in Australia.
Press and whistleblower protections have been steadily eroded and the government just wants to sweep this under the carpet.
Today the Senate voted for an inquiry into press freedom and whistleblower protection showing that there are some in our parliament who care about a frank and fearless media.
The raids on the ABC and a News Corp journalist sent chills through the country. The erosions of freedoms in Australia must be wound back.
The ability of citizens to speak truth to power must be maintained and that is why whistleblowers must be protected and journalists allowed to do their job.
This inquiry will get to the bottom of what has gone on and ensure a future for a free press in Australia.”
I am getting the impression that everyone who objects to Labor’s voting would prefer them to be like Tony Abbott and say NO to everything.
Politics with Michelle Grattan:
https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-centre-alliances-stirling-griff-on-newstart-120830
“Yoo hoo! The Coalition are the government, and have been for the last 6 years.”
***
Yep and Labor re-opened the camps before that 6 years started. What doesn’t wash is this nonsense argument that “oh but the Coalition are terrible so that means you can’t ever attack us when we do horrific things like they do.”
***
“Btw, every one of those people is STILL there on Manus and Nauru because The Greens voted with Scott Morrison as Shadow Immigration Minister to scupper the Malaysian Agreement. You know, the one the UNHCR approved of.
So, trying to get all high and mighty with me about the asylum seekers on Manus and Nauru. Just. Won’t. Wash. Firefox.”
***
The Malaysian “solution” was an abhorrent disgrace that was NOT “approved” of by the UNHCR. In fact, the UNHCR specifically said that their preferred option was that asylum seekers be processed in Australia. In other words, the UNHCR supported the Greens’ policy.
QUOTE:
“UNHCR’s preference has always been an arrangement which would enable all asylum-seekers arriving by boat into Australian territory to be processed in Australia. This would be consistent with general practice.”
https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2011/7/4e2d21c09/unhcr-statement-australia-malaysia-arrangement.html
Of course, what the UNHCR thought matted not as they weren’t signatories of the deal and Malaysia is not a signatory of the UN convention. Refugees and asylum seekers have no rights there, not that their rights are respected here either for that matter.
Lastly, the Malaysia “solution” was defeated in the HIGH COURT because it was ILLEGAL. Yes, you’re damn right the Greens voted against it too. Proud of them for doing so.
“The High Court decision on the Malaysian Solution
The Government proposal was that Australia would swap 800 asylum seekers held in detention centres for 4000 refugees waiting in Malaysia for resettlement.
Three prominent refugee advocates, led by Robert Manne, opposed the Government plan, and took the case of two Afghani asylum seekers to the High Court in an attempt to overturn the proposal.
On 31 August 2011, the High Court in a six to one decision, ruled that the Gillard Governments proposal to send unwanted asylum seekers to Malaysia was illegal.
The High Court ruled that the proposal contravened Section 198a of the Migration Act. The court judged that despite assurances from the Malaysian Government, the asylum seekers who were to be sent to Malaysia would have had no legal protection from further prosecution. This protection was a legal requirement under Section 198a of the Migration Act.
Prominent barrister and human rights campaigner, Julian Burnside, spoke to the University of Canberra Reporting Refugees Project prior to the subsequent attempt by the Gillard Government to override the High Court decision by amending the Migration Act.
Parliamentary debate on the proposed amendments to the Migration Act did not take place after both Opposition and Greens publicly rejected the amendments, prior to them being tabled in Parliament.”
https://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/11/23/3374312.htm
Lizzie
You may want to research hard particularly on breeders and longevity.
They have relatively short lives, very sadly.
Firefox
Just imagine if Labor had Mr Shorten’s policy of working with the UN for Regional Settlement Labor would not have had to try and over rule the High Court.
That would have made things very different for politics in this country.
“Come in spinner! You have behaved exactly as I predicted to myself you would. And THAT’S why I chose it.
Nevertheless, if you were being truly fair, you would have noted my often repeated opinion about our candidate, not a lot of it flattering, so I don’t really care that you point out how we went in Robertson.
Now, about that flatlining Greens vote in Robertson, you would have thought they would have picked up some of Labor’s lost vote. Doesn’t look like it, does it?”
Cat, you just keep digging holes for yourself. You pluck out a negative half a percentage swing for the Greens from a conservative leaning area where Labor got absolutely smashed and lost close to 5% of their primary. I can’t tell you exactly where the 0.44% from the Greens went but it sure as hell doesn’t look like it went to Labor lol. Should be noted that AJP ran in the seat for the first time and picked up 2%, so I’d say most of the -0.44% from the Greens has gone there instead. Whatever the case, Labor lost a hell of a lot more support than the Greens did in this seat.
shellbell
Thank you. Yes, I’m aware of shorter lives, but at my age … Also, even supposedly healthy dogs don’t always survive long. 🙂
As far as health goes, I shall look for a breeder who carries out appropriate scans and genetic selection.
I see that the Brits, at their moment of finally regaining control over their sovereignty, are asking for help from Europe to protect British shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
The Brits don’t want to join the US-led forces in the Strait because they reckon that Bolton&Co are trying to drag them into a war with Iran.
firefox
My point is that, given a fallen Labor vote, the Greens should have done a lot better than they did. Some of Labor’s lost vote should have gone their way.
Oh, and sorry about the 0.03.
Such straws apparently are worth clinging to.
But again, if the Greens seriously think that’s a result to boast about, and that RdN is a terrific leader, I’m happy to let them.
Have we all defeated Morrison yet?
lizzie
We contemplated Berneses, but our vet warned that if we bought one, he would quickly become a very rich man.
I hope everyone is enjoying the irony of why there are no MasterChef judges 🙂
The High Court ruled that the proposal contravened Section 198a of the Migration Act. The court judged that despite assurances from the Malaysian Government, the asylum seekers who were to be sent to Malaysia would have had no legal protection from further prosecution. This protection was a legal requirement under Section 198a of the Migration Act.
As you seem to be putting yourself up as an expert on this case, do tell what the asylum seekers would have been prosecuted with if they had gone on to Malaysia? Also I would question the fact that the High Court saw fit to not believe the assurances of the Malaysian government.
Nevertheless, you admit that The Greens did vote with the Morrison/Abbott Opposition to scupper the deal, which, yes, if The Greens were a party that acted in good faith wrt asylum seekers, they would have allowed the Gillard government to amend the Migration Act so that it became legal to send them away from Manus and Nauru to Malaysia and to follow that up with a Regional Framework solution to accommodate all asylum seekers that came by boat to Australia.
And I’m proud of the Labor Party for trying to depoliticise the asylum seeker issue and find a lasting solution to it.
But they are still there on Manus and Nauru today. I’m sure those asylum seekers are ever so grateful to The Greens for that.
It was a nice little earner for Julian Burnside though, I imagine.
Cat
The Greens have never been in government as Labor partisans keep telling us.
That means no credit for climate change policy. No blame for immigration policy. They are only a pointless protest party after all.
The Guardian
Peter Dutton is now on his feet, confirming the government will not be accepting Labor’s amendment to the temporary exclusion order.
Labor has already confirmed it will vote for the bill, even if the government rejects its amendments.
The old Sabre Toothed Bandicoot. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-21/riversleigh-queensland-hidden-fossil-deposit/11320236?section=science
I am so happy that the Greens have decided to do their best to support Labor to overthrow the Government that is trashing the environment.
At last! Workers united…!
By its very nature, health care lends itself to being delivered via a system where a currency-issuing national government pays all the bills. Such a government is constrained only by the availability of real goods and services that are for sale in its own currency. It is not financially constrained when it makes payments in its own currency. When it spends it is keystroking currency into existence and when it taxes it is keystroking currency out of existence.
Health insurance companies are grossly inefficient because of their need for a profit margin and their need for marketing and advertising budgets. A well-run government system is leaner than a private health insurance dominated system.
A lot of people think that if the US moved to a single payer system it would be necessary to enact fiscal offsets – tax increases and / or spending cuts – to prevent the additional government spending on health care from being inflationary. In fact, moving to single payer would be a deflationary event for the US economy because total spending on health care would fall significantly. The US Government would be spending more on health care than before but the private sector would be spending a lot less. So the macroeconomic challenge of enacting single payer in the US is that you would need to accompany it with a significant fiscal expansion – higher government spending and / or lower taxes – to create jobs for the many millions of workers displaced from the private health insurance industry.
zoomster
Yes, I’ve read all about that. I’m approaching the subject with caution and have plenty of time (I hope), but the more I read, the more problems various breeds seem to be carrying. Last year I lost a 3yr old Scottie with a stroke, and my previous Golden had to be put down at 2 yrs because of extreme epilepsy that wasn’t responding to medication. It’s all a bit of a gamble.
Keeping to the theme…
Re Penny Wong, I am under the impression that the Leader of the Opposition cannot be a senator, although not sure if thats due to the position being exclusive to the house of reps or Labor party practice.
Its an issue that came up in 2013, because Chris Bowen became interim leader of the opposition, while Shorten and Albanese contested the leadership of the Labor party.
Sure it does. Last time they had the left-of-Labor field to themselves, apart from some no-name independent, whereas this time there was Animal Justice and Sustainable Australia. In the Senate, where none of this applies, they were up from 7.1% to 8.5%. Besides, apart from its surfeit of tailgating meth-heads, what’s special about Robertson?
lizzie @ #1331 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 5:34 pm
❓ degrees of separation.
My wife had a beautiful Labrador guide dog who unfortunately had epilepsy.
On another note. SBS World Movies have been showing a movie with the tantalizing title of “The Parisian Bitch”.
and
The local postie assures me that “A Christmas Story” might be suitable entertainment for me.
Which one would be right for me ❓ 😎
“As you seem to be putting yourself up as an expert on this case, do tell what the asylum seekers would have been prosecuted with if they had gone on to Malaysia? Also I would question the fact that the High Court saw fit to not believe the assurances of the Malaysian government.”
***
That quote was from the ABC article I quoted. I’m not claiming to be an expert at all.
***
Nevertheless, you admit that The Greens did vote with the Morrison/Abbott Opposition to scupper the deal, which, yes, if The Greens were a party that acted in good faith wrt asylum seekers, they would have allowed the Gillard government to amend the Migration Act so that it became legal to send them away from Manus and Nauru to Malaysia and to follow that up with a Regional Framework solution to accommodate all asylum seekers that came by boat to Australia.
And I’m proud of the Labor Party for trying to depoliticise the asylum seeker issue and find a lasting solution to it.
But they are still there on Manus and Nauru today. I’m sure those asylum seekers are ever so grateful to The Greens for that.
It was a nice little earner for Julian Burnside though, I imagine.
***
Yes, the Greens proudly voted against the abhorrent Malaysia “solution” as it would’ve meant we were shipping people off to another country to be placed at the back of the queue in a country where they have no rights at all.
Just so you are clear, Cat, the Greens do not support any type of off shore processing that outsources Australia’s responsibilities. We don’t support the Coalition’s vile policies, nor do we support Labor’s. Frankly, this is one of those deal-breaker issues for me that will ensure Labor never gets my first preference again while they have policies such as this.
BW
They’re paying you for this….?
The Guardian
The House is going through the pretence that Labor’s amendments are going to change anything (the government has already said no, and Labor has already said it will vote for it anyway)
:::
All of these speeches are for when there is a challenge or failure of the legislation and Labor can say ‘told you so’
Still scarred?
There may be meth heads but the Central Coast also produced such wonderful people as myself, Natalie Imbuglia and Spike Milligan.
And a C@t.
lizzie @ #1315 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 2:48 pm
For all his faults, Abbott nearly won one election, and did win one. Despite them having different leaders at the next two elections the Libs won those as well, including the “unloseable election” just recently.
I know there were a whole range of reasons why Labor lost the last three elections, however their confusing stance on a range of issues, plus rolling over and voting for Lib policies have not helped them.
I hardly think the Central Coast “produced” Spike Milligan. Besides, we’ve got Ben Cousins.
Congratulations to Kim Carr in the senate
Bellowing out the facts and linking corrupt newsltd with libs/nats
As long as Albanese doesnt try to stop this to appease the media
,Labor will improve
Pegasus @ #1329 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 3:27 pm
So, after telling the Libs they’d vote for their bill without any amendments, I wonder why Dutton refused to allow these amendments?
Fucking hell, how incompetent can you get? “We’ll vote for your bill no matter what, but allow us this stunt so we can pretend to stand for something.”
Fucking hell. The entire leadership team for Labor, both inside and outside parliament needs to be purged. Immediately.
I will keep saying this Labor needs bellowers like Kim Carr in the house of reps
Otherwise bellowing Morrison and his cronies will continue to be on the front foot with the untrustworthy voting public
Guytaur
I enjoy the irony of the ill-named Liberal Party when they’ve in opposition.
Masterchef judges have shown themselves to be most un-liberal so probably are card carrying members of an ironically named political party.
Australia has been granted what it deserves in federal politics.
The next three years will be painful for many including many who voted for the ill-named pretenders.
Morrison’s LNP government is imaging itself as invasive sludge, its viscous toxicity penetrating every line in Australia’s ancient face, leaving a stench of impropriety lingering like billowing clouds of unfairness across the vast land.
How did we get to this place?
Fair enough. Plus Woy Woy is the arse end of the Coast.
I suppose that rules out Matthew McConaughey as well then.
Kasey Chambers?
C@t is a quintessential Golden Grove girl. The tracks go on and on forever.
William Bowe @ #1343 Tuesday, July 23rd, 2019 – 6:06 pm
No, but the Central Coast ‘produced’ the Spike Milligan Bridge and the ‘Spike Milligan Room’ at the Woy Woy Library, though. 🙂