The Poll Bludger’s popular Call of the Board series, in which results for each individual electorate at the May 18 federal election are being broken down region by region, underwent a bit of a hiatus over the past month or so after a laptop theft deprived me of my collection of geospatial files. However, it now returns in fine style by reviewing the business end of the state which, once again, proved to be the crucible of the entire election. Earlier instalments covered Sydney, here and here; regional New South Wales; Melbourne; and regional Victoria.
First up, the colour-coded maps below show the pattern of the two-party swing by allocating to each polling booth a geographic catchment area through a method that was described here (click for enlarged images). The first focuses on metropolitan Brisbane, while the second zooms out to further include the seats of the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast. As was the case in Sydney and Melbourne, these maps show a clear pattern in which Labor had its best results (in swing terms) in wealthy inner urban areas (for which I will henceforth use the shorthand of the “inner urban effect”, occasionally contrasted with an “outer urban effect” that went the other way). However, they are also bluer overall, reflecting Labor’s generally poor show across Queensland (albeit not as poor in the south-east as in central Queensland).
|
|
The seat-by-seat analysis is guided by comparison of the actual results with those estimated by two alternative metrics, which are laid out in the table below (using the two-party measure for Labor). The first of these, which I employ here for the first time, is a two-party estimate based on Senate rather than House of Representatives results. This is achieved using party vote totals for the Senate and allocating Greens, One Nation and “others” preferences using the flows recorded for the House. These results are of particular value in identifying the extent to which results reflected the popularity or otherwise of the sitting member.
The other metric consists of estimates derived from a linear regression model, in which relationships were measured between booths results and a range of demographic and geographic variables. This allows for observation of the extent to which results differed from what might have been expected of a given electorate based on its demography. Such a model was previously employed in the previous Call of the Board posts for Sydney and Melbourne. However, it may be less robust on this occasion as its estimates consistently landed on the high side for Labor. I have dealt with this by applying an across-the-board adjustment to bring the overall average in line with the actual results. Results for the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast seats are not shown, owing to the difficulty involved in classifying them as metropolitan or regional (and I have found the model to be of limited value in regional electorates). The coefficients underlying the model can be viewed here.
And now to review each seat in turn:
Blair (Labor 1.2%; 6.9% swing to LNP): Shayne Neumann has held Blair since taking it from the Liberals in 2007, on the back of a favourable redistribution and Labor’s Kevin Rudd-inspired sweep across Queensland. His margins had hitherto been remarkably stable by Queensland standards, but this time he suffered a 9.8% drop in the primary vote (partly due to a more crowded field than last time), and his two-party margin compares with a previous low point of 4.2% in 2010. Nonetheless, the metrics suggest he did well to hang on: he outperformed the Senate measure, and the demographic measure was Labor’s weakest out of the six Queensland seats it actually won (largely a function of the electorate’s lack of ethnic diversity).
Bonner (LNP 7.4%; 4.0% swing to LNP): Bonner was a notionally Labor seat when it was created in 2004, and it says a lot about recent political history that they have only won it since at the high water mark of 2007. Ross Vasta has held it for the LNP for all but the one term from 2007 to 2010, and his new margin of 7.4% is easily the biggest he has yet enjoyed, the previous peak being 3.7% in 2013. Labor generally did better in swing terms around Mount Gravatt in the south-west of the electorate, for no reason immediately obvious reason.
Bowman (LNP 10.2%; 3.2% swing to LNP): Andrew Laming has held Bowman for the Liberals/LNP since it was reshaped with the creation of its northern neighbour Bonner in 2004, his closest scrape being a 64-vote winning margin with the Kevin Rudd aberration in 2007. This time he picked up a fairly typical swing of 3.2%, boosting his margin to 10.2%, a shade below his career best of 10.4% in 2013.
Brisbane (LNP 4.9%; 1.1% swing to Labor): Brisbane has been held for the Liberal National Party since a redistribution added the affluent Clayfield area in the electorate’s east in 2010, making it the only seat bearing the name of a state capital to be held by the Coalition since Adelaide went to Labor in 2004. The city end participated in the national trend to Labor in inner urban areas, but swings the other way around Clayfield and Alderley in the north-west reduced the swing to 1.1%. Trevor Evans, who has held the seat since 2016, outperformed both the Senate vote and the demographic model, his liberalism perhaps being a good fit for the electorate. Andrew Bartlett added 2.9% to the Greens primary vote in recording 22.4%, which would have been the party’s best ever result in a federal seat in Queensland had it not been surpassed in Griffith. This compared with Labor’s 24.5%, with Labor leading by 25.4% to 23.7% at the second last preference count.
Dickson (LNP 4.6%; 3.0% swing to LNP): The shared dream of Labor and GetUp! of unseating Peter Dutton hit the wall of two broader trends to the Coalition, in outer urban areas generally and Queensland specifically. However, as the map shows, there was a pronounced distinction between the affluent hills areas in the electorate’s south, which swung to Labor, and the working class suburbia of Kallangur, which went strongly the other way. Dutton’s result was well in line with the Senate vote, but actually slightly below par compared with the demographic model. It may be thought significant that One Nation struggled for air in competition with Dutton, scoring a modest 5.2%.
Fadden (LNP 14.2%; 2.9% swing to LNP): The three electorates of the Gold Coast all recorded below-average swings to the LNP, and were as always comfortably retained by the party in each case. Fadden accordingly remains secure for Stuart Robert, who had held it since 2007.
Fairfax (LNP 13.4%; 2.6% swing to LNP): The northern Sunshine Coast seat of Fairfax will forever wear the ignominy of having sent Clive Palmer to parliament in 2013, but Ted O’Brien recovered the seat for the Liberal National Party when Palmer bowed out of politics all-too-temporarily in 2016, and was uneventfully re-elected this time.
Fisher (LNP 12.7%; 3.6% swing to LNP): Second term LNP member Andrew Wallace did not enjoy a noticeable sophomore surge in his Sunshine Coast seat, picking up a slightly below par swing. All told though, this was an unexceptional result.
Forde (LNP 8.6%; 8.0% swing to LNP): This seat on Brisbane’s southern fringe maintained its recent habit of disappointing Labor, comfortably returning Bert van Manen, who gained it with the 2010 backlash after one term of Labor control. Reflecting the outer urban effect, van Manen gained the biggest swing to the LNP in south-east Queensland, and was able to achieve an improvement on the primary vote despite the entry of One Nation, who polled 11.8%. His 8.6% margin easily surpassed his previous career best of 4.4% in 2013, when his opponent was Peter Beattie.
Griffith (Labor 2.9%; 1.4% swing to Labor): It’s been touch and go for Labor’s Terri Butler since she succeeded Kevin Rudd at a by-election in 2014, but this time she was a beneficiary of the inner urban effect, which helped her eke out a 1.4% swing against the statewide trend. Of particular note was a surge in support for the Greens, who were up by 6.7% to 23.7%, their strongest result ever in a Queensland federal seat. Butler’s 31.0% primary vote was well below the LNP’s 41.0%, but Greens preferences were more than sufficient to make up the difference.
Lilley (Labor 0.6%; 5.0% swing to LNP): One of the worst aspects of Labor’s thoroughly grim election night was newcomer Anika Wells’ struggle to retain Lilley upon the retirement of Wayne Swan, who himself experienced a career interruption in the seat when it was lost in the landslide of 1996. However, the metrics suggest the 5.0% swing was fuelled by the loss of Swan’s personal vote, showing barely any difference between the actual result and the Senate and demographic measures. The Labor primary vote plunged 8.1%, partly reflecting the entry of One Nation, who scored 5.3%.
Longman (LNP GAIN 3.3%; 4.1% swing to LNP): One of the two seats gained by the LNP from Labor in Queensland, together with the Townsville-based seat of Herbert (which will be covered in the next episode), Longman can be viewed two ways: in comparison with the 2016 election or the July 2018 by-election, which more than anything served as the catalyst for Malcolm Turnbull’s demise. On the former count, the 4.1% swing was broadly in line with the statewide trend, and comfortably sufficed to account for Susan Lamb’s 0.8% margin when she unseated Wyatt Roy in 2016. On the latter, the result amounted to a reversal of 7.7% in two-party terms, with victorious LNP candidate Terry Young doing 9.0% better on the primary vote than defeated by-election candidate Trevor Ruthenberg, recording 38.6%. One Nation scored 13.2%, which compared with 9.4% in 2016 and 15.9% at the by-election. Lamb actually outperformed the Senate and especially the demographic metric, suggesting a sophomore surge may have been buried within the broader outer urban effect. Despite the electorate’s demographic divide between working class Caboolture and retiree Bribie Island, the swing was consistent throughout the electorate.
McPherson (LNP 12.2%; 0.6% swing to LNP): As noted above in relation to Fadden, the results from the three Gold Coast seats did not provide good copy. McPherson produced a negligible swing in favour of LNP incumbent Karen Andrews, with both major parties slightly down on the primary vote, mostly due to the entry of One Nation with 5.9%.
Moncrieff (LNP 15.4%; 0.8% swing to LNP): The third of the Gold Coast seats was vacated with the retirement of Steve Ciobo, but the result was little different from neighbouring McPherson. On the right, a fall in the LNP primary vote roughly matched the 6.4% accounted for by the entry of One Nation; on the left, Animal Justice’s 3.9% roughly matched the drop in the Labor vote, while the Greens held steady. The collective stasis between left and right was reflected in the minor two-party swing.
Moreton (Labor 1.9%; 2.1% swing to LNP): This seat is something of an anomaly for Queensland in that it was held by the Liberals throughout the Howard years, but has since remained with Labor. This partly reflects a 1.3% shift in the redistribution before the 2007 election, at which it was gained for Labor by the current member, Graham Perrett. The swing on this occasion was slightly at the low end of the Queensland scale, thanks to the inner urban effect at the electorate’s northern end. Relatedly, it was a particularly good result for the Greens, whose primary vote improved from 12.7% to 16.8%.
Oxley (Labor 6.4%; 2.6% swing to LNP): Only Pauline Hanson’s historic win in 1996 has prevented this seat from sharing with Rankin the distinction of being the only Queensland seat to stay with Labor through recent history. Second term member Milton Dick was not seriously endangered on this occasion, his two-party margin being clipped only slightly amid modest shifts on the primary vote as compared with the 2016 result.
Petrie (LNP 8.4%; 6.8% swing to LNP): This seat maintained a bellwether record going back to 1987 by giving Labor one of its most dispiriting results of the election, which no doubt left LNP member Luke Howarth feeling vindicated in his agitation for a leadership change after the party’s poor by-election result in neighbouring Longman. Howarth strongly outperformed both the Senate and especially the demographic metrics, after also recording a favourable swing against the trend in 2016. He also managed a 3.4% improvement on the primary vote, despite facing new competition from One Nation, who polled 7.5% – exactly equal to the primary vote swing against Labor.
Rankin (Labor 6.4%; 4.9% swing to LNP): Rankin retained its status as Labor’s safest seat in Queensland, but only just: the margin was 6.44% at the second decimal place, compared with 6.39% in Oxley. Jim Chalmers copped a 7.9% hit on the primary vote in the face of new competition from One Nation (8.6%) and the United Australia Party (3.7%), while both the LNP and the Greens were up by a little under 3%. Nonetheless, Chalmers strongly outperformed both the Senate and demographic metrics. That the latter scarcely recognises Rankin as a Labor seat reflects the electorate’s large Chinese population, which at this election associated negatively with Labor support in metropolitan areas.
Ryan (LNP 6.0%; 3.0% swing to Labor): LNP newcomer Julian Simmonds was in no way threatened, but he suffered the biggest of the three swings against his party in Queensland, all of which were recorded in inner Brisbane. As well as the inner urban effect, this no doubt reflects ill-feeling arising from his preselection coup against Jane Prentice. It is tempting to imagine what might have happened if Prentice sought to press the issue by running as an independent.
ANNOUNCEMENT: If this painstakingly compiled post interested you enough that you have made it all the way through to the end, perhaps you might care to make a donation. These are gratefully received via the “become a supporter” button that appears just below, or the PressPatron button at the top of the page.
We MUST have harms to the environment included in economic measures. We should be changing how we measure GDP that says reconstruction after a bushfire is good and preventing the bushfire is bad.
On this basis, bludging is definitely negative for GDP. Arguing with Greens is a huge negative for GDP.
‘Think globally, act locally.’
Will that fit on a pair of earrings? 🙂
Pity the locals don’t want you to do the acting for them from the safety of your Green Inner City redoubts in SE Queensland and further south.
C@tmomma says:
Pity the locals don’t want you to do the acting for them from the safety of your Green Inner City redoubts in SE Queensland and further south.
____________________
You say it like its a bad thing. Inner city redoubts are the best places to live!
“I, in my great and unmatched wisdom.”
Trump is now speaking as the Master of the World. Obviously the End is Nigh. Pentecostalists will be cheering.
‘Think globally, act locally.’
All I see in this respect is financially comfortable and physically secure Greens urging others to do things that will make these Greens better off in some way. This is not ‘acting locally’. It’s free-loading.
Bellwether
Groundswell? Think globally?
In China, Russia, Vietnam, North Korea, Laos, Cambodia, and Burma any groundswell is limited by the mechanisms of state control regardless of the political economic model.
To a somewhat lesser extent, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, the Phillipines and PNG are rather more democratic than the previous set but in all those states a biodiversity holocaust is in train.
Regardless of the governance and/or economic model all of these states are smashing their biodiversity and contributing heavily to the Anthropocene Extinction Event.
There has been no serious discussion about how the Extinction Rebellion and the Revolution are going to deliver a Golden Ecological Era.
Arguably, it is the existence of a substantial middle class which wants environmental amenity (parks, drinkable water, breathable air, eatable food) combined with some form of population-wide voting capacity that delivers at least something for the environment. But it is the middle class which is the enemy of the Revolution. IMO, the current global political disruption is closely related to the erosion of the middle class in the West.
Dictatorships typically fare very badly when it comes to the environment. Yet another bout of dictatorships of the proletariat, or whatever form of central top-down control the ecofascists have wet dreams about, is not a promising solution for the Anthropocene Extinction Event.
C@tmomma @ #854 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:00 pm
????????? I live 250 klms from the closest city.
Morrison must be in a tizzy.
Morrison thinks HE has great and unmatched wisdom.
An Melbourne inner city redoubt: 🙂
Labor heartland:
Oh, the Laborite partisans are almost getting to Betoota Advocate level reality over recent days. Though still considerably less funny.
Aside from doubling or tripling down on their LNP talking points, the party of Eddie Obied and many other is now offering moral advice on how important democracy is, whilst they suck up millions of dollars of fossil fuel funding and organised sinecures for post-politiccs life. No corrupiton or influence here.
Nothing about Climate Change policy and either ALP and LNP inaction and BS, which we see trotted out repeatedly here, has anything to do with the millions of dollars in donations they recieve from fossil industry?
Honestly the rabid and frankly delusional posts that have been coming thick and fast from the usual suspects here seems to be more indicative of how insecure and feeble some folks feel about their position.
Why the ALP feels the need to pay apparently professional trolls to dominate PB for ever and a day instead of tackling real issues in regard to the future of Australia, also seems to indicate just how feeble and mediocre any of their political aspirations are. Oh well, if they’re happy to continue to see PB as a forum for exhibiting just what a spiteful and mediocre mob the ALP is, based on the febrile arguments and posts of the partisans here, so be it.
Haven’t noticed any of the gutless wonders talking up Adani and Nth Qld jobs aren’t paying any attention to the possible even greater number of jobs for Townsville from a battery gigafactory.
https://reneweconomy.com.au/magnis-puts-cost-of-townsville-battery-gigafactory-at-3-billion-85691/
nath, that second picture is actually a group of Collingwood supporters
Boer, the tactics used by the XR mob will only make it more difficult to obtain the political ‘permission’ required to retard the Holocene extinction event.
We are useless as a species at this kind of problem. The people who are most sensitised to the issue have chosen the least effective means to do anything about it. The least powerful have chosen to act in ways that will ensure they remain deprived of power. The Right will be rejoicing. Their plurality has been buttressed by their critics.
Bellwether @ #859 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:10 pm
…And Green redoubts further south. I should have said because I know that there are redoubts among the Tree Changers and Sea Changers. So, is that you? Do you live in a State or territory south of Queensland then?
Also, being pedantic around the salient point that the Green Convoy to Queensland paid no heed to the locals, kind of proves to me you just want to evade the point.
nathsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 11:53 am
Now you’re touching on reasons a mine shouldn’t be approved.
That’s where the discussion should be.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/oct/08/australia-on-track-for-record-number-of-asylum-seekers-arriving-by-plane?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Boerwar
I know, it’s a complete and monumental fuck-up and I, like many, am torn between hope (and action) and despair (just shutting up, staying home and looking after number one).
Why the ALP feels the need to pay apparently professional trolls to dominate PB for ever and a day
Would you kindly stop making this slanderous assertion please? The Greens and their supporters are supposed to be the kumbayah caring and sharing party with concerns about everyone’s feelings, after all.
Though, going on the general tenor of your posts, Quoll, I sincerely doubt that’s the case any more. You’re just another Angry Green Ant who has lost touch with reality. Hope you’re happy with your Coalition overlords, far into the future. Might have to change your nom to Quoll RIP, when they become extinct due to habitat destruction and Climate Change, as a result of Coalition governments as far as the eye can see.
Lizzie
The war continues one battle defeat doesn’t mean the war is lost Labor has to fight like it’s Medibank. Climate policy is too important. This means ordering Treasury to change these economic measures. Not accepting we can’t do it excuses.
New Zealand Scotland and Iceland have done it.
Just as Labor should go back to the full carbon price policy. It’s to the Labor parties credit they bent over backwards to help Turnbull with the NEG. The LNP proved the deniers make watering down climate policy is futile. There is no bipartisan position. The LNP believe the deniers won the election.
Labor has to realise this. Compromise just makes them look like weak and craven on climate policy.
That’s not saying Labor cannot pursue renewables. It’s just saying recognising why the Adani mine has become the third rail of politics for Labor is vital.
Embracing coal by saying yes to Adani only makes Labor look weak as it ignores the science in favour of the “We Must Win The Politics” narrative. To win the politics you have to advocate the science position.
To win the politics. Go back to quoting Lord Stern and other economists.
Labor did win an election doing that. The 07 one. It’s not going to be exactly the same but Australian voters did understand the message of the 07 election.
Be strong on the message. Have a citizens assembly so voters know they are included in solutions. Cite that very reason. The toxic politics requiring citizens ownership of the policy solutions.
Seize control of the narrative. Make the LNP pay for the fantasy that coal is good for you. We know it’s bad for your health. We know it’s bad for the planet.
Stuff like that. Labor does have time. However Queensland Labor approving Adani wedges Federal Labor. Just like Tasmanian Labor approving the Franklin Dam wedged Labor. Labor needs a Hawke style gutsy leader. I mean the word leader. A leader leads not follows. Hawke led and took the people with him.
Shorten tried he just did not have the trust of the people that Hawke did.
That’s where Albanese is right about going on the Breakfast Television and other media. To do anything you have to be familiar to the voters. Argue your case every day on the tele.
Keneally is showing how you do it too on AS.
That getting the voters trusting you means you have to be authentic and real about your policies.
For Labor that means being real about accepting the science and understanding that one of the changes since 07 is that Labor cannot be neutral about new coal mines.
Just wondering if any other ‘poll aggregating sites’ are kin with RealClearPolitcs…
“The company behind the non-partisan news site RealClearPolitics has been secretly running a Facebook page filled with far-right memes and Islamophobic smears, The Daily Beast has learned.
Called “Conservative Country,” the Facebook page was founded in 2014 and now boasts nearly 800,000 followers for its mix of Donald Trump hagiography and ultra-conservative memes. One recent post showed a man training two assault rifles at a closed door with the caption “Just sitting here waiting on Beto.” Others wink at right-wing conspiracy theories about Barack Obama’s “ties to Islam” or the Clintons having their enemies killed, or portray Muslim members of Congress as terrorist infiltrators. The page is effusive with praise for Vladimir Putin, and one post portrays Russia as the last bastion of freedom in Europe.
It’s a far cry from the usual fare on RealClearPolitics. Founded in 2000, the site was an early online aggregator of political news, curating links to widely read politics stories and opinion articles in other major outlets. The site has become synonymous with its polling aggregator, which is regularly cited by news organizations on both sides of the aisle as an objective metric of major political races. In recent years, the site has expanded to cover health care, finance, foreign policy, and more.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/realclear-media-has-a-secret-facebook-page-filled-with-far-right-memes
Bellwether
Yep. It’s hard.
I’m in the hope and action camp.
Quoll….the inference that I or any of the other bludgers could be getting paid is just wrong. I can aver I’ve never had a single penny from anyone for this advocacy or any other political contributions I’ve made. Not a penny. I do this cos I think I’m right and cos it’s an important argument to have.
There’s no bad faith at this table. There is analysis and commentary.
You have to get over the idea that those who disagree with you are corrupt. This is an insult to the intelligence of the bludgers and, indirectly, to yourself as well. I’m here to get you to think about your tactics and their consequences.
The acts you support will have the opposite effects from the ones to which you purport to subscribe. They should be subject to questioning.
RI @ #852 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 11:57 am
We’ve been through this one in detail before, briefly. You didn’t get it the first time around, so there’s not much point in going through the same thing again. It takes some twisted kind of logic to conclude that opening new coal mines is going to help the problem caused by existing coal mines, and I’m not sure I want to delve any deeper into your inner mental world. It must be hell in there 🙁
Why do you always bring the Greens into every discussion? You are so obsessed with them that you are just not thinking straight.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/oct/08/australia-on-track-for-record-number-of-asylum-seekers-arriving-by-plane?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Oh well, at least The Greens will be happy about this. Sarah Hanson-Young spent years advocating that asylum seekers should be allowed to just fly directly into the country.
Coalition-Greens
Same-Same
🙂
Quoll
I find your accusation insulting.
Should I stop posting here because unless I attack Labor policies I am a paid ‘Labor troll’?
Well, a little extra cash would be nice, but I’d rather criticise the Libs, thank you.
g….for the little it’s worth, Labor are not going to take lessons from a bludger who does not support it, does not belong to it and plays in the reserves for another anti-Labor party….You can stop telling Labor what it ‘should’ do.
C@tmomma
Damn southerners trying to invade your lands!!! Last time I heard so many references to ‘redoubts’ was in Idriess’s account of serving in Palestine in WW1.
Boerwar @ #874 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:28 pm
Me too, the vast majority of the time.
Actually, rather than getting paid, I pay William for the privilege of posting here.
How many of you others do? (Yes, I know you do C@t).
RI
You lie. I have stated my progressive view and why I wanted Labor to win publicly numerous times.
Calling me an anti Labor poster is a pure lie.
Let’s unpack this thang.
1. Omniscient. Tick.
2. Omnipotent. Tick.
3. The One. Tick
4. The True. Tick
5. The Holy. Tick.
Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.
Player One says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 12:29 pm
RI @ #852 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 11:57 am
PO…Bell….so in short, you are unable to show how the decoy proposed for the Galilee will stop so much as a single tonne of coal being combusted in India or anywhere else. It is practically ineffectual. But it has been politically profitable. The profits include the prevention of any national policy on climate change. Well done.
We’ve been through this one in detail before…..
No we haven’t. You cannot show cause and effect here. You cannot show how the Decoy proposed will prevent the combustion of coal anywhere. You cannot show how the Decoy will accelerate the adoption of renewables. You cannot show how the Decoy has helped strengthen the political numbers in favour of change.
guytaur says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 12:36 pm
RI
You lie. I have stated my progressive view and why I wanted Labor to win publicly numerous times.
Calling me an anti Labor poster is a pure lie.
You run on as a reserve for the Greens. You are an anti-Labor rover.
RI
This is an example of the bad faith message you post every day. Yet you think you can be free of bad faith questions every day. We see you.
Enough of all this kowtowing to somebody else’s agenda.
Did we all know that the male Emu has an erectile penis?
https://www.nature.com/news/ostrich-penis-clears-up-evolutionary-mystery-1.9600
Barney in Tanjung Bunga
says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 12:20 pm
nathsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 11:53 am
Bellwether says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 11:45 am
Ever heard the expression “think globally, act locally”? It’s all the average Australian can do, along with a hope that there is a similar groundswell in other more significant countries like India.
_____________________________
Also, regardless of any argument about the supposed insignificance of individual coal mines on total global emissions, ensuring that local groundwater is not contaminated is pretty important. Coal mines contaminate groundwater. That is enough of a reason to be against them.
Now you’re touching on reasons a mine shouldn’t be approved.
That’s where the discussion should be.
______________________________
The Greens have also been making this point for years. Good to have you join the convoy Barney.
g…..you should stop telling Labor what to do….if there is something you want to do, do it. Stop the free-loading.
RI @ #885 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:38 pm
You need to go back and reread the posts. I think you can no longer even recognize a valid counter argument. Your view of economics is badly distorted by your apparent need to justify a patently absurd policy position. When your reasoning leads you to believe that opening new coal mines is going to help solve the problems caused by all the old coal mines, then clearly either your assumptions are wrong or your reasoning is flawed. Possibly both. Until you can get that straightened out, it is really not worth trying to convince you otherwise.
Guytaur
A carbon price isn’t needed because the purpose of shifting the cost advantage from coal to renewables has been achieved.
Player One @ #882 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:36 pm
I do – and once a month I get an email to confirm. I have an understanding that I don’t have to post anything that makes sense. Seems to work well for me and many others. 😛
Bellwether @ #880 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:34 pm
And that is relevant because!?!
Anyway, still haven’t addressed my main point, which was, why don’t The Greens think that the people in rural and regional Queensland electorates deserve a say?
KayJay @ #895 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:49 pm
Your posts make a lot more sense than many here do … and they are fun to read! 🙂
Mexican.
A carbon price is needed. Even today Turnbull attacked Morrison for his watered down version of the NEG.
Of course we need one. If for no other reason than to beat others in the renewables race. The whole point about a carbon price is investment certainty and working with China India and the EU.
The whole maximise not minimise renewables approach.
For Australia we might even then be in the race to have a renewable manufacturing industry and not just be a quarry
“my plan is to encourage those very same voters – the ones you need to vote for you – not to wait, but to educate and inform themselves, make noise, raise awareness of the issue, and generally upset the navel gazers” …
So, piss and wind, sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Not one tonne of CO2 emissions will be reduced by your “plan”.
A plan has to have an end game. After you upset us navel gazers what’s your next step? How are you going to harness all that sound and fury into global action that reduces emissions to zero over the next one, two or three decades?
Please explain dearest noble Player One!
Judging by the quality of the posts, I sincerely doubt whether anyone gets paid to post here, from either Labor or Greens.
For a couple of thousand bucks you can reach millions on Facebook. Why bother paying anyone at all to change the minds of half a dozen tragics who’d give concrete a go for being set in their ways?
Well met Guytaur. A glass of wine with you!
Last page nath posted two images: one of the inner city redoubt and another of bogans in Labor’s heartland. This was a piss take however a picture paints a thousand words, so my challenge to you is to articulate a policy umbrella that both the woke inner city types and the bogans can fit under: because we need both: and to be clear neither harking back to the glory of 2011 federally or the ACT government is going to cut it.
C@tsmomma
Stuffed if I know, I’m not a Green. Ask them. Although I would say in general the idea that a community should have total discretion over what happens in their local area seems a bit wrong to me. Last time I looked Australia was a federation of states.
P1
I started paying here as I found the company was informative and interesting, and very supportive when I was widowed, but I must admit that there have been occasions recently when I have been disappointed, but hang on because I am a natural chatterer and also admire William’s occasional flashes of wit.
Andrew_Earlwood @ #899 Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 12:54 pm
So, your criticism of my plan is essentially that it is too much like Labor party policy?
You just need to wait a bit longer to find out how wrong you are.
Enjoy your navel gazing.