As you can see in the post below this one, the Courier-Mail yesterday had a YouGov Galaxy state poll for Queensland that found both major parties stranded in the mid-thirties on the primary vote. State results from this series are usually followed a day or two later by federal ones, but no sign of that to this point. If it’s Queensland state politics reading you’re after, I can offer my guide to the Currumbin by-election, to be held on March 29. Other than that, there’s the following news on how various parliamentary vacancies around the place will be or might be filled:
• Noel Towell of The Age reports two former state MPs who fell victim to the Greens’ weak showing at the November 2018 state election are “potentially strong contenders” to take Richard Di Natale’s Senate seat when he leaves parliament, which will be determined by a vote of party members. These are Lidia Thorpe, who won the Northcote by-election from Labor in June 2018, and Huong Truong, who filled Colleen Hartland’s vacancy in the Western Metropolitan upper house seat in February 2018. The party’s four current state MPs have all ruled themselves out. Others said to be potential starters include Brian Walters, a barrister and former Liberty Victoria president, and Dinesh Mathew, a television actor who ran in the state seat of Caulfield in 2018.
• Former Tasmanian Premier Will Hodgman’s seat in parliament will be filled by Nic Street, following a preference countback of the votes Hodgman received in the seat of Franklin at the March 2018 election. This essentially amounted to a race between Street and the other Liberal who nominated for the recount, Simon Duffy. Given Street was only very narrowly unsuccessful when he ran as an incumbent at the election, being squeezed out for the last of the five seats by the Greens, it was little surprise that he easily won the countback with 8219 out of 11,863 (70.5%). This is the second time Street has made it to parliament on a countback, the first being in February 2016 on the retirement of Paul Harriss.
• The Age reports Mary Wooldridge’s vacancy in the Victorian Legislative Council is likely to be filled either by Emanuele Cicchiello, former Knox mayor and deputy principal at Lighthouse Christian College, or Asher Judah, who ran unsuccessfully in Bentleigh in 2018. Party sources are quoted expressing surprise that only four people have nominated, with the only woman being Maroondah councillor Nora Lamont, reportedly a long shot. Also in the field is Maxwell Gratton, chief executive of the Melbourne Queer Film Festival.
lizzie @ #396 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:26 pm
I blame David Speers. I expect he will be getting a very stern letter from Albo over this.
P1
It was a serious question.
Not good.
Boerwar @ #107 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 9:25 am
Self-destruction is increasingly looking like the Great Filter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter
lizzie @ #402 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:32 pm
Ok – try this: If Marles didn’t understand current ALP policy, he should not have done an interview on the subject. The problem, of course, is that Marles probably understands current ALP policy only too well. He just can’t defend it. But I don’t blame him – who could?
Lizzie
Marles did not announce any new Labor policies this morning.
All this ‘failed to rule out’ bullshit is lazy journalism by the Gotcha brigade – megaphoned by the PegaRex underminers.
P1
That wasn’t what I was asking.
Pegasus
Strong claim there Peg..
When it comes to High Speed Rail, the Greens blindly accept a 7 year old report carried out by highly paid consultants, being asked to solve the wrong problem by incompetent bureaucrats.
sprocket_ @ #405 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:36 pm
Labor undermines themselves by sending a turnip in to the most watched political show in the country hosted by the most effective velvet sledgehammer of the CPG.
It’s difficult to fathom why such a poor political performer as Marles is Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Merit obviously doesn’t come into it.
RD
It’s everyone else’s fault but Labor!
sprocket_
No, I understand that. I meant that it’s not up to Marles alone to change policy, is it.
OTOH he’s not the best person to send to Insiders, IMO, with Speers itching to prove himself as top dog interviewer.
To spell it out:
1) Labor lost the recent election on a early flagged, Big Target strategy, and all the policies will remain under review this side of the 2022 election.
2) Labor is not in government, and it’s job is to oppose/critique/suggest better ways to the Coalition.
3) Labor supports the Paris Accord, and Labor’s track record proves that ‘Emissions will always be lower under a Labor Government’
CC
Sure….I rarely speak in absolutes and qualify to indicate that.
Sure, parse every word I type…
The Greens party, a party that, generally speaking, bases its policies on evidence and research carried out by experts in their fields.
Peg, are you suggesting RDN was leader of the Greens on merit? You accept a low bar.
lizzie @ #407 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:37 pm
Perhaps I was not clear enough. No, it was not Marles’ fault, nor did he announce any new policies that I can see from the article. The problem is that the ALP does not have a coherent policy.
On that basis, he should probably have just said “We will answer all those questions once we have finalized our new policy, which will happen sometime prior to the next election”.
Of course, that would have been what is known as a “career limiting move”. So he was stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Lizzie
The ALP National Conference sets policy. The Parliamentary wing, through it’s executive, determines the priority, timing and focus of the ALP policy – and the tactics required to win government.
Pegasus @ #409 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:40 pm
Clare O’Neil was ‘managed out’ of the deputy leadership position by her colleagues it seems. Marles’ faction got the job done.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-26/clare-oneil-drops-out-of-labor-deputy-leader-race/11150540
Good lord, people – some of you talk as if you haven’t ever even ventured into the real world.
There is a cartoon about with two signs – one “Simple but Wrong” and the other “Complex but Right”.
I can understand the general public, for various reasons, going with “Simple But Wrong” but surely posters here should be a grade above that.
Demanding that Labor (or, indeed, any party) totally rule out X, Y or Z shows —
1. A contempt for experts.
2. A contempt for processes.
3. A very simplistic view of the world and the way it operates.
…at the very least.
Marles cannot come out and say, “If a coal mine proposal ticks all the regulatory boxes, including the most stringent environmental/climate change ones we can come up with, we’re still going to say no’ without being accused of instituting a Nazi state, sovereign risk, etc etc.
He has said a Labor government wouldn’t contribute funding.
I dislike governments banning anything outright – and so should we all, if we’re at all serious about ‘listening to the experts’. Regulate the sh*t out of something, fine – but if that results in one project going ahead because it ticks every box you’ve come up with, it goes ahead, BECAUSE, if you’ve done it properly, it is more beneficial than it not going ahead.
Marles isn’t doing a dance here, or a dangerous balancing act, or walking both sides of a barbed wire fence. His statement is incredibly clear.
If you don’t understand it, don’t shoot the messenger.
But apparently anything beyond a three word slogan is more than some here can even begin to grasp.
sprocket_
Exactly as I thought. 🙂
sprocket
I understand your need to always deflect. I hazard a guess you are gnashing your teeth that RDN has been replaced as leader of the Greens. The latter would now be regarded as a softer target.
I await with interest to see what memes you will put about re Adam Bandt. I hope you differentiate your talking points from the likes of Andrew Bolt, The Murdoch press and the Coalition. Though I have my doubts.
sprocket_ @ #413 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:44 pm
And if you want to understand why this is a really, really poor strategy, read the article on Marles’ interview. And then imagine this occurring every week, with every minister, between now and the next election 🙁
zoomster @ #420 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:48 pm
However, just because something is Complex does not mean it is Right.
peg
‘It’s difficult to fathom why such a poor political performer as Marles is Deputy Leader of the Opposition.’
Well, you had di Natale as LEADER, so you should be able to get a glimpse of understanding.
zoomster @ #425 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:52 pm
Ha! I’ll pay that one 🙂
P1
Get used to it. We are not playing pin the tail on the donkey.
Pegasus I’ve now finally watched that interview with Marles (takes time because my broadband is next to unusable). He did not perform poorly. He performed ok given the circumsntances. I also think that the interviewer posed some good questions.
Marles had no choice in how he responded. The real problem is the riding instructions given to him. If it were me advising Marles I’d have suggested that he answer as follows:
“As it stands, Labor does not oppose a new coal fired power station on principle.”. Give the interviewer a moment to confirm and then say “However, there are two things I need to say. Firstly a new coal fired power station is almost certainly never going to happen and especially not under Labor, because its unbankable. Secondly, to the extent that a new coal fired power station might be built, it will be built because of the actions of a Coalition government to throw tax payers money at what will become a stranded asset.”
By doing this Marles could be shown as honest. And also put the topic to bed.
Think about it. The news is going to pick this up and report it as “Labor isn’t going to oppose a new coal fired power station”, regardless. Its a no-win for Marles. However, being honest up front, defuses the topic and allows him more time to make more of his own points.
Pegasus – I agree that it would be nice to have a “no new coal fired power station policy”. However one thing you’re going to have to accept is that politically this wouldn’t be as good a thing for Labor as you think it is. Part of this is because of living in a Green bubble. I’d like that to not be true but that’s reality.
zoomster
Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:48 pm
Comment #420
Have you taken into account the desperate need for bloggers (generally speaking and therefore generally wrong) to be right/correct/superior in some way which means that somebody/anybody/everybody else must be wrong.
Therefore, after consulting with Brown Bear and Muriel, reading a book, listening to music, gardening, watching the rain, cooking or whatever else takes your fancy is a superior way/means of wending one’s way to Heaven/Valhall/Hell/Mount Olympus.
Here endeth the lesson. Peace be with you. 😇☕ and may the road rise up to meet you……………….
Pegasus
That truly took the cake. The ‘markets” always have our best interest at heart eh ? 🙂
peg
‘The Greens party, a party that, generally speaking, bases its policies on evidence and research carried out by experts in their fields.’
But I thought policy was determined by the membership????
I’ve tested a few Green experts in my time. Their understanding of the evidence and research was exceedingly shallow. Usually they just fell back on meaningless platitudes.
I suppose the Green ban on wind farms was based on ‘evidence and research’ rather than – as I was told as the time – that the Greens being unable to resolve the fracture in their ranks on the issue.
sprocket_ @ #427 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:54 pm
Oh, I am quite used to Labor being appallingly bad at political strategy. After all, we get to see so many examples of it.
Zoom
Bob Brown said the windfarms were ‘an eyesore’, denying the feasibility work. That is enough ‘evidence and research’ for some, it would seem.
Here endeth the lesson. Peace be with you. ☕ and may the road rise up to meet you………………
___________________________________
On PB, half the time that means you want someone to be caught in the middle of the street while there is an earthquake!
CC
And you know this how?
I don’t live in the inner city nor in a ‘tree-change’ community. I mix with a wide diversity of people in a wide diversity of settings including in outer suburbs of north, west and north-west Melbourne, and regional Gippsland.
We can disagree about the path to what we believe ought to be tread without the condescension.
Zoomster
What constitutes an environmental approval is itself a set of values of political choices. After all, you don’t have to go back more than a few decades to find a time when we essentially didn’t have environmental approvals.
Labor could take this to the front foot and say “We’re going to set new standards for power stations. Those standards will mean that coal or gas fired power stations will need carbon capture and storage”. “If it meets those environmental standards, we will approve.”
That’s a far cleverer stand than the one they are currently taking. Its not saying no and those who might object are going to have to acknowledge that CCS is never going to happen.
You see what I mean about Labor needing to take its policy and rhetoric to the next level?
TPOF (Block)
Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 5:59 pm
Comment #434
😍
Some desperate deflection, sophistry and misrepresentation going on by z and sprocket. Nothing new there and totally expected.
And I live close to Fitzgibbon’s electorate and I have to do business with coal miners. I talk to a lot of “dumbfuck little country town” people. Believe me, Labor doesn’t win elections by adopting a “no new coal fired power station” policy. Which is precisely what you’re on about.
Cud Chewer
The clever bit is the bastards who object are largely the same shonks and spivs who have been making out CCS for coal fired power stations is a viable solution.
Precisely 🙂
CC
It really would be fun to watch the resultant shonks’ ‘contortionist convention’ 🙂
CC
As I said, regulate the cr*p out of them, so that basically the only ones which go ahead are the ones which can demonstrate an overall environmental benefit — if none do, then none happen.
…I believe, however, that mining is firmly in the power of the States (It’s an ‘I believe’, note — ) so focusing on what federal Labor is saying it thus a bit moot. Really, ‘we won’t contribute money’ is about as far as they can go without actually mounting a coup.
peg
‘Some desperate deflection, sophistry and misrepresentation going on by z and sprocket..’
If you don’t understand an argument, or can’t refute it, just say so.
….however,
‘Nothing new there and totally expected.’
zoomster @ #444 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 6:15 pm
WB has manged to turn PB in to Climate Change Angst Central.
Apparently, it’s the only political issue going around.
lizzie @ #445 Sunday, February 9th, 2020 – 6:18 pm
If you believe the line that “we don’t need to do anything, the market will do it all for us” then I have some sure-fire financial investments you may be interested in 🙂
zoomster
Its simpler to say “it will be approved if it includes CCS” than it is to say “overall environmental benefit”.
Looks like the remaining fires down south are going to be finally blacked out tonight 🙂
Player One
The “market’ is damned good, stopped the use of asbestos, DDT , cut smoking and mercury in teething powders. 🙂