UPDATE: The Australian has published a Newspoll state voting intention poll with a set of numbers very like that of the 2018 election, with Labor leading 56-44 (compared with 57.3-42.7) from primary votes of Labor 41% (42.9%), Coalition 36% (35.2%) and Greens 13% (10.7%). Daniel Andrews has 54% approval and 41% disapproval while Matthew Guy is on 32% and 49%, with Andrews leading 51-34 on preferred premier. The poll was conducted Monday to Thursday from a sample of 1027.
Before we dive in, let it be noted that beneath this post lies post covering recent polls of state voting intention in Tasmania and one of the few federal voting intention polls since the election.
Roy Morgan produced another of its SMS Victorian state polls a week-and-a-half ago, and it produced another eye-popping two-party lead for Labor, this time of 60.5-39.5 (out from 59.5-40.5 in early July), from primary votes of Labor 40.5% (down three), Coalition 27.5% (up two), Greens 14% (up two) and 5% for “a teal independent” (up two). The poll was conducted Thursday, August 11 to Saturday, August 13 from a sample of 1097.
Further on the independent candidate front:
• Annika Smethurst of The Age reports Kate Lardner, a doctor at Frankston Hospital, former Greens member and co-founder of a group that “mobilises doctors to address climate change”, will run in Mornington, and quotes an unidentified Labor source saying their polling indicates she will outperform them. Another starter identified in the article is Sarah Fenton, co-owner of the Bellarine Smokehouse, who will run in Labor-held Bellarine, to be vacated with the retirement of Lisa Neville.
• Nomi Kaltmann, a legal interpretation analyst in the Commonwealth public service with a background as a staffer to state minister Marsha Thomson and electorate officer to Mark Dreyfus, has announced she will run as an independent against deputy Liberal leader David Southwick in Caulfield, a week after quitting the ALP. Kaltmann told the Financial Review she became alienated from Labor after its national executive installed Enver Erdogan to fill a Legislative Council vacancy in South Metropolitan region in 2019 without reference to the party membership with backing from the Right faction Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, despite him living in Melbourne’s north. However, The Australian reported on Friday that Kaltmann nominated for party office-holder positions as recently as February. The Financial Review further quoted Climate 200 convenor Simon Holmes a Court saying Kaltmann “had been in touch”.
• Jacqui Hawkins, a former adviser to federal Indi independent Cathy McGowan, will again run against Liberal member Bill Tilley in the northern Victorian seat of Benambra, having come within 2.4% of toppling Tilley on her first attempt in 2018.
• The Age reports two former Bayside mayors appear likely to enter the ring: Clarke Martin in Sandringham, where he managed a modest 8.4% on his first attempt in 2018, and former Liberal preselection aspirant Felicity Frederico in Brighton.
Further:
• Patrick Durkin of the Financial Review reported a fortnight ago that “confidential independent polling” put the Coalition “well short of the 18 seats it needs for victory”, but suggested Labor would lose up to six seats in “Victoria’s growth corridors”.
• Despite heavy publicity from the Herald Sun, which asserted the party was likely to feature in a massively expanded lower house cross-bench after the election, the Victorians Party has announced it will not contest the election “due to the limitations on new political parties raising campaign funding under Victoria’s electoral laws introduced after the last state election”. This presumably refers to laws that cap donations to political parties, old and new alike, at a rate presently set at $4320 over four years. The party was launched by Small Business Australia executive director Bill Lang and sought to attract support from lockdown opponents.
• In the regional seat of Euroa, which will be vacated with the retirement of Nationals member Steph Ryan, the new Nationals candidate is Annabelle Cleeland, editor of Fairfax Media title Stock & Land, while the Liberal candidate will be Brad Hearn, principal of the Flexible Learning Centre in Benalla.
• A Victorian Liberal upper house preselection I missed when summarising them in my previous post: Anne-Marie Hermans, a former Family First candidate, will lead the ticket in South Eastern Metropolitan, replacing the retiring Gordon Rich-Phillips.
• Tom McIntosh, an electrician and former staffer to federal MP Ged Kearney, has been sworn in to replace the late Jane Garrett as Labor’s member for Eastern Victoria region in the Legislative Council. McIntosh had already been preselected to succeed her at the election after she announced her intention to retire in December.
• The Victorian Electoral Commission has calculated its own two-candidate preferred margins for the newly redistributed electoral boundaries, which make use of its data recording which voters voted at which polling booths. It identifies Caulfield, Hastings, Pakenham (formerly Gembrook) and Ripon as having flipped from Liberal to Labor, Bass and Bayswater as having done the reverse, and Mildura as flipping from independent to Nationals. Labor-held Keysborough and Mount Waverley and Liberal-held Ferntree Gully are counted as abolished, and it credits Labor with margins of 22.0% and 23.4% in the new seats of Greenvale and Laverton, and Liberal with a 1.3% margin in Berwick.
UPDATE: The Age reports Resolve Strategic asked the 500 Victorian respondents from this week’s poll further questions about state political issues, and found 42% crediting Labor with greater integrity and honesty compared with 21% for the Coalition, and 53% expecting Labor to win the election compared with 18% for the Coalition.
Can we please keep this thread for discussion of Victorian politics. The general discussion thread continues here.
Yep, the poor lobster is ready for the cooking… But this time around chef ALP will enjoy the help of his new Teal assistants…. One cooking the lobster, the others adding the seasoning…. and the people of Victoria enjoying the eating….
Bon appétit!
🙂
The Victorians Party thing is embarrassing. I thought their presence would create an interesting preference dynamic.
A new Resolve Strategic poll in The Age this morning focusing on integrity has the following:
Which of the major parties do you believe will govern with greater integrity and honesty?
42% Labor
21% Coalition
37% Undecided
Regardless of who you would like to win the election in November, who do you think will win?
53% Labor
18% Coalition
29% Undecided
The win expectation question is usually a good indicator because it takes into account what people are hearing from family & friends and only 18% must be very concerning for the Liberals.
Still yet to be a single poll indicating that the Liberals have any chance whatsoever.
If the recent Resolve poll reporting of Victorian State party shares is even half correct, inner urban Liberals like Tim Smith must be in serious trouble. I know it is State not Federal voting intention, but the trend is stark.
The Age is loving talking up “teal” type independents. I seriously doubt they will have as much impact as at the federal election because the lack of mass mobilisation and the state government is not as on the nose like the Morrison government.
As for the Liberals doing well in the growth areas, it is likely they will do much better than they have in the past but the margins they need to over come are massive. They are likely to have more success in the South East than in the north and west.
“Emilius van der Lubbensays:
Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 9:38 am
The Victorians Party thing is embarrassing. I thought their presence would create an interesting preference dynamic.”
Don’t tell me that you are a member of the “Hung Parliament Prediction Club”?
Do you know that I collect failed “hung parliament” predictions made by all sorts of people across the board?
“B.S. Fairmansays:
Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 10:16 am
The Age is loving talking up “teal” type independents. I seriously doubt they will have as much impact as at the federal election because the lack of mass mobilisation and the state government is not as on the nose like the Morrison government.”…
That may be true, but don’t forget that the Teals have their major chances in seats held by the Coalition, as demonstrated at the last federal election. And in Victoria, at the state level, the Coalition and their leader are in serious troubles… So, perhaps, the Teals’ chances at the coming Vic state election shouldn’t be underestimated….
Alpo – There is not that many coalition held seats left within Teal friendly territory (perhaps Kew, Caulfield, Malvern & Brighton). But then again that is where the Age seems to think all of its readership lives.
Mornington is interesting as does have an Inner East feel to it even although it is not located there – the Teal in the federal election there in Flinders had the issues with “being employed in office of the crown” so the amount of support down there was not really tested.
I am still puzzled as to why Victoria remains the only Australian state/territory to keep the undemocratic “above the line group party” preference system in the Legislative Council. This system has allowed micro parties with as few as 0.28% to be elected ahead of other parties polling 8-10% in a particular region. Such a system makes a mockery of our democratic system of voting.
Why has the present Andrews Labor government not abolished this travesty of democracy in Victoria?
Is it a rather grubby approach to keep the Greens at bay in the Legislative Council? Is it thought by Labor powerbrokers better to have a sprinkling of individual MLCs from micro parties pursuing a limited range of issues with whom they can negotiate and use for the advantage of the Labor party?
As this is a Victorian State election thread and the Lib/nats are in trouble
Lol Taylormade
If the recent Resolve poll reporting of Victorian State party shares is even half correct, inner urban Liberals like Tim Smith must be in serious trouble. I know it is State not Federal voting intention, but the trend is stark.
@Socrates
Tim Smith is not recontesting his seat of Kew at the next election. The Liberal candidate that has been preselected to replace him is Jess Wilson a past advisor to former treasurer Josh Frydenberg. Your point still stands though they will likely face an uphill battle there.
There’s a 1996 feel about this election when Kennett suffered big swings yet only lost a small number of seats but Guy is such a poor leader that its possible Andrews could be the first Premier since Dick Hamer in 1973 and 1976 to score back to back swings to a sitting government.
Robbo @ #10 Thursday, August 25th, 2022 – 10:44 am
That’s been my presumption. That the ALP would rather have many paths via a rag-tag bunch of indies than a single path via the green. Worked out well this term but that’s, in part, thanks to the fantastic work of Fiona Patterson (who is a vocal critic of the group ticket system).
Socratessays:
Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 10:04 am
If the recent Resolve poll reporting of Victorian State party shares is even half correct, inner urban Liberals like Tim Smith must be in serious trouble. I know it is State not Federal voting intention, but the trend is stark.
_____________________
Tim Smith running again ?????
Probably wise to just stick with the Federal threads and leave the Victorian one’s alone.
Robbosays:
Thursday, August 25, 2022 at 10:44 am
Why has the present Andrews Labor government not abolished this travesty of democracy in Victoria?
_____________________
Always back self interest. At least you know it’s trying.
Tim Smith running again ?????
———————————–
Could very easily be the case – following another night on the piss and running from a crash scene.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/victorian-voters-give-labor-the-lead-on-integrity-20220824-p5bc9z.html
Victorian voters give Labor the lead on integrity
Annika Smethurst
August 25, 2022 — 5.00am
Twice as many voters trust Victorian Labor to govern with integrity compared with the Coalition, and the recent donor scandal and Scott Morrison’s multiple ministerial appointments are damaging the state opposition’s chances before the November election.
With 13 weeks until polling day, an exclusive survey for The Age shows 42 per cent of voters believe Labor is the best party to “govern with integrity and honesty”, compared with 21 per cent of respondents who selected the Coalition. However, the result was significantly tighter in key marginal electorates.
The survey, conducted by Resolve Strategic between August 17 and 21, also found that a majority of respondents – 53 per cent – were confident Labor would win the election, irrespective of their own personal voting intentions.
@B.S. Fairman: “The Age is loving talking up “teal” type independents. I seriously doubt they will have as much impact as at the federal election because the lack of mass mobilisation and the state government is not as on the nose like the Morrison government.
As for the Liberals doing well in the growth areas, it is likely they will do much better than they have in the past but the margins they need to over come are massive. They are likely to have more success in the South East than in the north and west.”
—-
I agree with all of the above.
Firstly regarding the growth areas, other than maybe Werribee & Melton, the margins are just too large in the outer north & west (15-20% or even more) but in the outer southeast there’s more around the 10% mark, and I think the Libs will almost certainly gain Pakenham.
Regarding The Age pushing the teal narrative, I’ve noticed this too and it’s been really frustrating. Especially the seats they are focused on.
They are forgetting one important thing – for a teal to win, they actually need to finish in the top 2 after minor preferences (including those of the Greens), and beat Labor on the way to beating the Liberals.
All The Age’s commentary seems to just assume that seats like Caulfield, Brighton & Sandringham will be LIB v IND contests. While I agree that the IND would win a theoretical LIB v IND contest, I wholeheartedly disagree that they will be LIB v IND contests.
If you look at the federal results in Kooyong & Goldstein (and the similar NSW seats), a full *two-thirds* of the teal independents’ vote corresponded with the swing against Labor & Greens, not the Liberals. In fact, Labor was the party they got most of their vote from, not the Liberals.
There are some very specific reasons that occurred which don’t apply at state level:
1. Labor had no chance of winning those federal seats, therefore Labor ran dead in them and Labor voters had motivation to strategically switch their #1 vote to the teal.
2. The Greens put the teals higher than Labor on the HTV cards. This was for two reasons: higher climate targets, and again, strategically to unseat the Liberal.
3. Those federal seats actually didn’t contain any really solid left/Labor/Green territory, so it was a “softer” Labor vote probably more suited to a teal.
At the state level, none of these things will apply:
1. Labor are within 0.5% of winning all 3 of those seats, and in fact already notionally hold Caulfield, so why would a Labor or Greens voter strategically switch to a teal when Labor themselves can win?
2. The Greens would be unlikely to preference a centrist teal over Australia’s most progressive Labor government, a) in a seat that Labor can win; and b) where climate targets are not an issue. Especially in Brighton where the “teal” is someone who lost the Liberal preselection.
3. Brighton & Caulfield in particular, unlike the state seat of Goldstein, contain some rock solid Greens/Labor suburbs such as Elwood, St Kilda East and Balaclava. These aren’t teal areas, they are solid left turf where the Labor/Greens vote is likely to hold up, making it harder for the teal to pass Labor.
Hawthorn is more of a teal demographic, but again currently being held by Labor, points 1 & 2 still apply. The same goes with Sandringham. While a teal could no doubt beat the Libs in a 2CP run-off, it will be an uphill battle for a teal to beat Labor into the 2CP count in any of those seats.
So I think The Age is really clutching at straws there and pushing a narrative that’s incorrectly focused on assuming a LIB v IND runoff which is unlikely to occur.
Now, Kew & Malvern? They could definitely be independent gains if there were a good teal candidate, but Malvern isn’t even being spoken about for some reason. In both of those seats:
1. Liberals are heavy favourites v Labor, so there is motivation for Labor voters to back a teal
2. That’s also a good reason for the Greens to strategically preference the teal
3. Neither seat has any solid left territory, perfect teal demographics
Int amazes me how people and the media refuse to concede just how on the nose the Libs and Matthew Guy are in Victoria. For years the 2PP voting numbers keep coming in at 60/40.
Everybody in Victoria knows that the Libs have been taken over completely and utterly by RWNJs. Then there is the residual repugnance to the blatantly racist campaign the libs ran last time.
The people who rant about how they hate Dan didn’t vote Labor in the first place. Covid has lost its bite. It is a one party state as the LNP have completely collapsed. Those who dislike Dan don’t want to vote for the Lobster with the Mobster.
Teals and Greens will pick up seats at the expense of the ALP, but the filthy rotten Libs will go back even further.
A thumping win for the ALP coming up.
And as for the Libs running yet another anti-infrastructure campaign ….. read the effing room! We need spending on public transport AND health. It is not either or. They are not mutually exclusive.
MABW out!
“Coalition too weak to capitalise fully on Labor’s difficulties come November.”
Sounds like something Sky News or the Herald Sun would write.
Kos Samaras spoke to Pat Karvelas.
He believes Labor will lose outer suburban seats.
—-
The Vic election, in some ways, will be a repeat of what occurred in May. There is a growing appetite for more. At this stage, the Liberals in Victoria are pushing up against some serious demographic head winds.
I joined PK this morning to discuss this.
https://t.co/NTwPKckrUc
“Fiona Patterson (who is a vocal critic of the group ticket system).” (Work To Rule above)
No she’s not actually. Fiona Patten is a vocal critic of the activity of preference harvester Glenn Druery and believes that payments to external consultants for preference harvesting should be banned. But she supports keeping Group Ticket Voting (after all she would almost certainly lose without it); she just thinks that every party should do its own negotiations using its own staff, MPs or volunteers. I’m not at all sure whether that would actually be an improvement, especially since Druery says he will do it for free if he is banned from making money out of it anyway.
Only the Greens have consistently opposed GTV during this term, having done nothing about it that I’m aware of in the previous term. The Liberals and Nationals opposed GTV in their Electoral Matters submissions but have done nothing to advance its abolition in the parliament.
I don’t get why Vic Labor didn’t reform group ticket voting. There must be some calculation that it will hurt Liberals more than it will hurt Labor. We know Greens lose out on this because they can’t attract preferences from minors.
It certainly would have hurt a lot of minor parties whose vote Labor needed in the Legislative Council, which is presumably why it didn’t happen.
I suppose you are right. The moment you made the reform you are a lame duck government in upper house and rushing it just before election is bad optics.
Still, it needs to be done.
@ Alpo
“Don’t tell me that you are a member of the “Hung Parliament Prediction Club”?
Do you know that I collect failed “hung parliament” predictions made by all sorts of people across the board?”
I never said that? Right now it seems likely that Labor will retain a majority in the Legislative Assembly. I was referring in my original comment to how the flow of voting preferences in the absence of a UAP-like party would operate and if the VP would act as a substitute for that flow. For voters who flirt with voting for minor parties, the order and presence of specific parties on the ballot strongly characterises what voters are thinking about as they mark the ballot with the stubby little pencil, so if the VP had fielded a candidate in every district like they said they were originally going to, that would have had a big impact imho.
To add to discussions about Legislative Council GVT, there is only one reason why Victoria is the only state to refuse to fully enfranchise upper house voting and abolish GVT – the Andrews government (and Coalition opposition) want to disenfranchise Greens voters and think (to be fair, correctly) that it is easier to negotiate with a trainwreck of randos who do not have a shred of real confidence from the voting electorate than an organised Greens (or Shooters) bloc that exists in NSW and SA. GVT is totally unethical and undemocratic, and frankly it totally undermines the purpose of upper houses in the first place. GVT is all well and good for the Andrews government and for Victorian democracy when confused people like Clifford Hayes, Rod Barton, Catherine Cumming are elected, but it won’t be a laughing matter when a fascist finds themselves occupying a seat of the Legislative Council based on the quote-unquote “preferences” of voters. There’s literally no argument for the preservation of GVT that is interested in democracy/not presented in frame of the interests of governments.
The Age is irrationally anti Dan, but their circulation is now less than 70,000.
The Herald/Sun is a Murdoch paper, no more needs to be said.
Frednk @ 0428
Agree. The Age is clearly running an anti-Dan agenda along with their usual moaning about level crossing removal projects, Metro Tunnel and the outer Suburban Rail Loop. I used to religiously read The Age ‘front to back’ but now the first thing I do is to read the letters to the Editor.
The paper is quickly becoming like the Herald-Sun – not a journal of record.
Re: GVT….
Let’s remember the voters’ responsibility on this issue. If you agree with your party on all major counts except their GVT, you vote below the line. If you don’t do so, then you may be voting against your own interests for the Upper House, hence you could qualify for the label of Voting Moron.
Yes, I know that it’s easier to just assume Voter Moronism and simply focus on changing the voting system, if the current one is seen as not being democratic enough. But hey, let’s not lose faith on the ability of the human spirit for redemption!
The age and the Feral Sun have certainly ramped up the anti andrews rhetoric.
Having said that. I linked interview above, between Pat Karvelas and Kos Samaras.
The anti andrews sentiment which was mainly due to the lockdowns during the pandemic, is problematic.
Victoriasays:
Friday, August 26, 2022 at 8:34 am
The anti andrews sentiment which was mainly due to the lockdowns during the pandemic, is problematic.
—
It’s a double-edged sword. While lockdowns were traumatic/destructive for some, i’m not sure the billboards and advertising reminding people of them is going to pay off. From my own experiences, it’s a time best left in the past, and i’m sure many, many feel the same way.
I feel like The Age’s constant pushing of the teal success narrative is part of their anti-Dan strategy. They know the Liberals are dead in the water and have no chance, so they’re trying to stomp on Labor’s chance of winning/holding seats like Caulfield, Hawthorn, Brighton & Sandringham as well as holding outer seats like Melton & Werribee which may have “purple” independents, by whipping up momentum for independents (which would mostly be at the expense of Labor, since the Lib vote is already gutted) by talking up their chances.
As I said, teals only won the federal seats in May because Labor & Greens voters swung to them as the best chance to unseat Liberals in seats Labor couldn’t win. That isn’t the case in the state election, but The Age is doing their best to create that same momentum, and create a perception that independents have a better chance than Labor in those seats which isn’t true.
They also know their readership is mostly the educated Labor/Greens voters who would need to swing to a teal (moreso than Liberal voters) for a teal/independent to win those seats.
They know they won’t be reporting a new Matthew Guy government at the end of November but would love to report that the Andrews government was reduced to a minority and that’s what they’re clearly trying to promote.
Their reporting of the Suburban Rail Loop too was extremely one sided. Article after article questioning its value and talking about the cost “blowouts” even though the only part that has actually been costed, was budgeted by the government at $34.5b and the PBO actually projected it below that at $33b.
The reason Labor has kept group voting in the upper house isn’t to disenfranchise Greens, although a few of the more rabid anti-Greens might consider that a happy bonus.
The true reason is that following the 2010 election, they realised they had made a horrible mistake.
If the LC voting were along the lines of the current Senate system, Labor and the Coalition would be (almost) guaranteed to get two seats per region, leaving one seat per region in doubt. Of those eight seats, three (the rural regions) lean heavily to the right and would usually, barring landslides, go to the coalition or their allies like Shooters And Fishers, while two (metro north and west) would be near certainties for Labor or Greens.
That leaves only three seats truly up for grabs, and – this is the crucial bit – the Coalition would need just one of them to have a blocking majority, or two for an outright majority. This means they could easily get a blocking majority when Labor gets a small lower house win, or, as they did in 2010, get an outright majority themselves in both houses with just a tiny majority of votes.
The obvious solution would be to have fewer regions with more seats per region, or abolish the regions altogether as per what WA just did. But – here’s the horrible mistake – the Bracks government enshrined the structure of the upper house in the constitution, and then passed legislation saying the constitution can only be changed by referendum.
Now, we all know a parliament can’t bind its successors, so the legislation requiring a referendum could be amended or repealed, but it would be an extremely bad look (extremely). And it doesn’t take much imagination to envisage the shitstorm that would ensue if the government were to pursue a referendum perceived to be favouring itself (which is how the opposition would paint it).
So it looks like we’re stuck with group voting for the foreseeable future.
While I’d agree that 60/40 looks eye-watering, it’s worth remembering the reactions to the way more eye watering polling numbers before the last WA election. Which turned out to be underestimates if anything (after all I’m sitting here in the ALP held electorate of Churchlands)
I wonder how Victorian Socialists will do this election? If their vote seriously increases in North Metro (at Ratnam’s expense), in the context of GVT they could direct preferences away from the Greens if they so desired and deprive them of filling a quota on primary vote. It’s an interesting possibility considering they came 4th last election with 4% and one-quarter of a quota filled on primaries.
I doubt they would be a popular pick for microparty GVTs though.
I suspect their 2018 performance had a lot to do with popular councillor Stephen Jolly being the candidate.
The age is on my view a good paper, the trouble is I start to get tempted to subscribe again and they publish another round of nonsense.
Kevin Bonham @ #23 Thursday, August 25th, 2022 – 9:35 pm
Thanks for clarifying Kevin, I recalled her criticism of Durery (and her taunting of him when she won a seat without his help) and presumed that extended to the group ticket system.
Although it does seem if you have a system that can be gamed – it’s likely to be gamed. Payment bans or not.
@frednk I agree. For the most part I think The Age is a really balanced newspaper that does some excellent investigative journalism. That’s why it’s been so disappointing to see them adopting such a blatantly biased anti-Andrews angle coming into the Victorian election. I expect that from the Herald Sun, not The Age.
I wonder how much being bought out by Channel 9 – chaired by Peter Costello and with Chris Uhlmann as Nine’s political editor – has been an influence on that. I do fear that if Costello & Uhlmann’s influence over The Age increases, Melbourne may as well just have 2 Herald Suns.
Some of Chris Uhlmann’s opinion pieces have been as bad as Sky News commentary, and Annika Smethurst as the state political reporter seems to have been tasked with a “Destroy Dan” directive.
My sources inside the ALP down here were not confident on doing anywhere nears as well as they did last time in the inner Eastern suburb seats about 12 months ago. They didn’t expect to hold Hawthorn hence they decided to let John Kennedy run for re-election despite being in his 70’s (and having had a heart attack last year). The last election was seen as a fluke and unlikely to repeated.
However, the “Teal” wave (& the win in Higgins by the ALP) at the federal election (and the return of that Guy) has changed that calculation. These areas have perhaps suffered less issues than other parts of Melbourne in the pandemic as a greater proportion of workers were able to work from home.
The areas that provoked the largest amounts of angst in the lockdown were the outer areas of Melbourne which are generally ALP held. But it was largely coming from non-labor voters, and as can be seen by the results at the federal election it is probably not enough to remove the sitting members.
I’m not really sure about Hawthorn & the inner-east, but my gut feeling is that Labor can match or even top their 2018 performance in the inner-south (Caulfield, Brighton & Sandringham).
2018 seemed like a high watermark at the time – or to put it a better way, a low point for the Liberals – but I think while Labor may not riding as high as in 2018, the Liberal brand has sunk even lower since then and has only become increasingly toxic across the inner-south over the past 4 years.
Labor’s primary vote may go backwards in those seats, but so will the Liberals’ and I think after a corresponding increase in support for the Greens & independents, Labor will have a slightly increased 2PP result in all 3 of those seats.
Hawthorn I’m not so sure because ex-Liberal voters might flock back to John Pesutto to save their party. And I still think a strong teal candidate could win either Kew or Malvern, if Labor ran dead in both.
The commentary absent from comments on here is the agenda the “Teals” took to the Federal election (in previous Liberal Party “blue ribbon” seats)
Climate and a Federal “ICAC”.
Also issues the ALP ran on.
The “Teals” are not going to take Seats because they simply present as “Teals”
They have to have an agenda which resonates with the voting public, as climate change and a Federal “ICAC” did in Liberal Party held Seats federally.
They rode on Labor’s coat tails in those Seats (and, maybe, cost Labor the Seats).
The Victorian Division of the Liberal Party (because it is the donors who pull the strings) has gone back to Guy as Leader.
The very same Leader who lead them into the last election.
Guy was re-located from an Upper House Region (North-West) to Bulleen, which was not in the North-West Region.
Bulleen is a Liberal Party Branch under the control of a family invested (principally) into real estate, including real estate re-zoned when Guy was the responsible Minister and where the family were advantaged by the re-zoning(s).
You do not have to dig too far to identify the names (and access photographs).
It will be interesting to see if the Costello Chaired 9 Entertainment choose to raise this issue or if the conversion of 2 failing media Companies to the Phoenix 9 Entertainment, under the Chair of Costello, refrains from again publishing these stories.
These people all move in the same circles.
And they donate to the Liberal Party.
Yes (re post by Eight ES above) the entrenchment was an absolute shocker.
But if it could be simply got rid of by legislation then I reckon nobody much would actually care – entrenching 8×5 long ago was obviously stupid and it would be easy to argue (for instance) that the entrenchment had been an error that was unfair to minor parties whose rise in voting share had not been forseen at the time. Something like this happened in SA where there was a widespread belief that the previous GTV system had been entrenched against a simple majority but it turned out that it hadn’t and the parliament just got rid of it. But there are, alas, plenty of views out there that parliaments can entrench against repeal without referendum in certain limited subject areas including electoral design.
The 2014 election is an interesting test case for the Coalition getting enough seats to block – had the 2014 votes been cast in a Senate-style system the Coalition would probably have got threes in E Metro, E Vic, N Vic and S Metro (but not W Vic) but they would probably only have got one in N Metro and their two in W Metro would have depended on a fairly strong flow of LDP prefs. So they probably wouldn’t have got 20 in that election where Labor won narrowly. (All a bit dated now with the rise in minor party voting but that rise also means that it’s harder for the Coalition to get enough threes for a majority when they narrowly win.)
During the Senate reform debate ALP people were unrealistically gloomy about their numbers under the new system, fearing they’d only ever be coming to power with a deadlocked Senate (which hasn’t come near happening). I suspect something of the same here. But even if under Victoria’s system there was ever an unrepresentative 20-20 deadlock, or even a representative one because the lower house had also been very close, then the state has double dissolutions.
I’m also disappointed that none of the ways that preference harvesting could be blunted without getting rid of it entirely were considered for 2022 – for instance threshholds (crude but better than nothing) or adding optional ATV preferences a la the Senate system (but a lone 1 ATL would still be distributed per GTV).
Just phoned polled by a mob probably working for Bernie Finn. Named him and asked about ‘moral issues
So the Greens should be a dead set lock in Richmond (unless the TERF issues rise up again) and Northcote (unless the candidates Idiot Rebellion activism is a vote loser).
The Greens may be in real trouble in Prahran, where the invisible Greens member can only be re-elected if Labor.come third.
Would not say Hibbins is “invisible,” his incumbency will greatly help him pushing Labor into 3rd
I think it’s likely the Greens vote will increase quite a bit in Prahran, at the expense of both the Libs and Labor.
Hibbins will most likely come first on primary votes this time.
Lib vote will probably collapse more than Labor, but not enough to drop below Labor (especially after minor preferences will probably favour them). That’s the most likely scenario I think and would be a double-digit Greens win v Libs.
In the event the Libs do fall to third (which they would have on overlapping federal numbers), I still wouldn’t rule out Hibbins holding. A GRN v ALP runoff could be around 50/50.
On overlapping federal numbers and accounting for the difference in non-ordinary votes, I calculated the following primary votes within the Prahran boundaries:
Greens – 37.5%
Labor – 30.5%
Liberal – 23%
I think the Greens result will be similar in November but ALP and LIB will both probably be closer to each other in the mid to high 20s. After minor preferences (of which Labor tend to get the least) I still tip LIB to finish second, even if ALP have a higher primary vote.
‘Patrick Durkin of the Financial Review reported a fortnight ago that “confidential independent polling” …’
Ahead of the federal election, Samantha Maiden repeatedly touted “confidential internal polling” that made Liberal insiders optimistic.
Turned out they were leading her up the garden path. Ms Maiden was not amused.
“Kevin Bonham@kevinbonham·1h
#Newspoll Vic (state) 56-44 to ALP
ALP 41 L-NP 36 Green 13 others 10 (rather similar to previous election)
Andrews net +13 (54-41)
Guy net -17 (32-49)
Better Premier Andrews leads 51-34 (a modest lead given Better Premier score and other results)”
The polls might get tighter as the Vic election gets closer. If not Matthew Guy will get flogged.
Having 5-member regions, as opposed to 7-member regions, was presumably (at least partly) an anti-Greens thing (same as in Tasmania).
However, the bigger mistake was probably shrinking the Legislative Council and entrenching it. The extra region, had a 9×5 system been adopted, would presumably be a relatively politically balanced region and required a majority to block because of the odd-number of seats.
However, had the ALP got the 300 or so more votes to win Bentleigh in 2010 and therefore tie the Legislative Assembly, the resulting constitutional crisis probably would have been used to add an extra region and accompanying 11 Legislative Assembly districts to have odd numbers in both houses. I suspect the Nats would have been particular supporters of the exra region, to keep the regional regions a regional as possible (i.e. Melton out of Western Vic, Yan Yean not entering Northern Vic in the 2013 redistribution and Eastern Vic having less Melbourne suburbs as well).