Miscellany: Fadden by-election, Liberal and Greens candidate selection (open thread)

A date set for the Fadden by-election, and an LNP candidate soon to be as well — along with a Liberal successor to the late Jim Molan in the Senate.

Before we proceed to a brief summary of electorally relevant current events in federal politics, please note the other quality content that it’s pushing down the order: a guest post from Adrian Beaumont on the threat of US debt default and other international events, a post on a Tasmanian poll with a summary of recent events in that state, and a detailed analysis of results from last year’s federal election in thirteen seats in inner Melbourne.

• The Fadden by-election has been set for July 25, with nominations to close on June 23. As was covered in the previous post, a Liberal National Party preselection that has attracted five nominees will be conducted today. Phillip Coorey of the Financial Review reports that Anthony Albanese would rather Labor forfeit the by-election for a seat the LNP holds on a 10.6% margin, but must reckon with a local branch “agitating to run a candidate”.

• The New South Wales Liberal Party will hold its preselection this weekend to fill the Senate vacancy resulting from the death of Jim Molan in January. The field have candidates has narrowed to three: former state Transport Minister Andrew Constance, former state party president Maria Kovacic and Space Industry Association chief executive James Brown. The Sydney Morning Herald reports the latter has a long list of high-profile backers including John Howard, Julie Bishop and Dave Sharma.

• The Byron Shire Echo reports comedian Mandy Nolan will again run as the Greens candidate for the Byron Bay and Tweed Heads region seat of Richmond at the next federal election. Nolan added 5.0% to the party’s primary vote share last May to outpoll the Nationals, although preferences from right-wing minor parties pushed the Nationals candidate ahead of her at the final exclusion.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,384 comments on “Miscellany: Fadden by-election, Liberal and Greens candidate selection (open thread)”

Comments Page 27 of 28
1 26 27 28
  1. A new report from The Daily Beast claims that former President Donald Trump’s legal team has been beset by infighting and paranoia, with some attorneys fearing that others in the group have been snitching to the feds.

    One of the biggest problems for the Trump legal team, according to the publication’s sources, is that Trump’s own actions have turned some of his own attorneys into potential witnesses against him, which has led to fears that they will save themselves by ratting out their client or fellow lawyers.

    “The Department of Justice already has one Trump attorney’s professional notes, which could position him as a future witness against his own client, and the DOJ has another lawyer who said too much in an unrelated case and has positioned herself as yet another potential witness against her client,” the report notes.

    The Daily Beast also notes that longtime Trump ally Boris Epshteyn has been a source of chaos in legal proceedings, as he has apparently blocked more experienced attorneys’ legal strategies in the federal Mar-a-Lago documents probe.

  2. What will remain of the Liberal party when the NACC begins its work and makes its findings known?
    Liberals …. corruption is thy name !

  3. Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov has announced that the Storm Shadow cruise missiles supplied by the UK have successfully hit all of their Russian targets so far. The missiles, delivered earlier this month, are expected to provide long-range strike capability to Kyiv’s forces in support of their planned spring offensive.“Out of the total number of Storm Shadow launches that have already taken place, all 100% hit the targets set by the General Staff,” Reznikov told a local television station. British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said the weapon system gives Ukraine the “best chance” to defend itself against Moscow’s continued “brutality.” He also stated that the Storm Shadow would allow the war-torn nation to push back invading Russian forces.

  4. Cronus:

    Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 7:45 pm

    [‘Again this is a form of chicanery by Campbell. Senior officers have never been accused of committing crimes, the issue is of knowing of serious allegations of crimes but not taking appropriate action. They are not only accountable for their actions but in certain circumstances, their inaction.’]

    I think that’s the crux of the issue. In law, omission is sometimes equivalent to the commission. I think a new CDF is nigh.

  5. Confessions/rhwombat presumably the same person- there is no direct faq on any “yes” or “no” campaign website that addresses my questions.
    Very arrogant of you to presume that people should just be able to find answers out of thin air.
    Happy to support the referendum but would like to know post the success of it, how it will take shape.
    The government will need to plan and at least begin to establish the foundational aspects of the voice- otherwise it’s more stalling for another several years

  6. Willie: “The government will need to plan”

    Fundamental misunderstaning of the mechanics of a constitution. It is human rights. Is it the right thing to do? Yes/No. Yes it is. Establish that and then figure out how to make things right. The Australian constitution makes no mention of a prime minister. That is the system we have, because that’s the one that aligns with the constitution.

  7. Willie Doit:

    Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 8:40 pm

    [‘Confessions/rhwombat presumably the same person’]

    They’re definitely not, dear.

  8. Have to agree with both Clem and Wat when it comes to Keir Starmer. Choosing to go into coalition with Conservatives when there is a progressive option available is just… I don’t even know what to say.

  9. Pi @ #1306 Tuesday, May 30th, 2023 – 8:43 pm

    Willie: “The government will need to plan”

    Fundamental misunderstaning of the mechanics of a constitution. It is human rights. Is it the right thing to do? Yes/No. Yes it is. Establish that and then figure out how to make things right. The Australian constitution makes no mention of a prime minister. That is the system we have, because that’s the one that aligns with the constitution.

    Wrong Constitution. Willie ain’t from around here. My guess is Arsehole Tx or Zadnitsagrad. Same funder.

  10. Willie Doit:

    Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 8:40 pm

    I’d add, Willie, seek & you’ll perhaps find, but only if you want to.

  11. Here is the truth that certain self-interested people on this blog don’t want you to know:

    Sir Keir Starmer and Sir Ed Davey were seated next to each other in Westminster Abbey for the coronation. For these knights of the opposition realm, it was an opportunity to exchange mutual congratulations on their successes in the local elections. For everyone else, the pairing provided a glimpse of one possible future for this country in which prime minister Starmer and deputy PM Davey have agreed to form a Lab-Lib coalition. I don’t say this will happen. No one can predict exactly how the chips will fall. I do say both men should be thinking about and preparing for hung parliament scenarios because there’s a significant level of probability that the next election will produce one.

    Sir Keir has credible grounds for saying he will become prime minister, but his MPs struggle to sound genuinely confident that Labour will secure a parliamentary majority. The explanation is the national mood and the electoral maths. As one of the Labour leader’s inner circle puts it, “the maths is very difficult”. Sir Keir has sought to efface the Jeremy Corbyn years, but he can’t rewrite the party’s cataclysmically atrocious performance at the last election, which crushed the number of Labour MPs in the Commons to its lowest tally since 1935. Climbing a towering mountain from such a very low base presents a vertiginous challenge. To get to a parliamentary majority of just one, Labour must win 123 more seats than it did in 2019. Sir Keir would need a majority substantially better than one to sustain a reforming government through a full parliamentary term. Seat gains on that scale rarely happen. History suggests it is not mission impossible, but it is mission extremely bloody difficult.

    There’s a nightmare that stalks the Conservative party. It is that Sir Keir and Sir Ed strike a deal
    That’s the hard maths of the next election. Then there’s the bitter mood of the electorate. Campaigners from all the parties agree that the animating theme of the locals was seething anger in all kinds of areas among all kinds of folk towards the Tories. Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens were beneficiaries of this fierce fury with the incumbents. There was less evidence of effervescent enthusiasm for the main party of opposition. The results were encouraging for Labour, but not so stupendous that you would be sensible to bet the farm on Sir Keir winning the general election outright.

    That’s prompted the Tories and their megaphones in the rightwing media to try to curdle the blood with the alleged horrors of hung parliaments, “dirty deals” and coalitions. The Conservatives will try to terrorise the electorate because they are so terrified themselves. There’s a nightmare that stalks the Conservative party. It is that Sir Keir and Sir Ed strike a deal in which the Lib Dems cooperate with Labour in return for a referendum on proportional representation. There’s a lot more support for electoral reform among Labour people than there once was and last year’s party conference overwhelmingly backed change to a proportional system. The referendum is held, first-past-the-post is consigned to the dustbin and the rules of the game are changed. Never again will the Tories be able to rely on an antiquated electoral system to turn a minority share of the vote into majoritarian power for them. PR would not exclude the Conservatives from government for ever. It would make it impossible to impose a rightwing agenda when most of the country didn’t want one.

    That’s the primal fear of the Conservative party. This is combined with shameless hypocrisy about deals between parties. Two of our most recent four elections have produced hung parliaments. In 2010, David Cameron found himself short of a majority and brokered a coalition with the Lib Dems. In 2017, Theresa May threw away her majority and struck a desperate bargain with the DUP to stay afloat. In neither case had this been advertised to the electorate in advance. In neither case had the voters been warned that the Tories would cut a deal with another party in order to secure power. So it is rich for Conservative politicians and commentators to demand that Sir Keir spells out in every detail what he would do in the event that the next election leaves him short of a majority.

    The Labour leader has been unambiguous on one crucial question. He has categorically ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP under any circumstances. He’s learned the lesson from 2015 when his predecessor Ed Miliband was too slow to realise that equivocation would be costly. This allowed the Tories to monger scares that a hung parliament would result in a “coalition of chaos”. They produced a deadly attack ad in which a tiny Mr Miliband was imprisoned in the pocket of a giant Alex Salmond. This proved potent in scaring swing voters in England away from Labour and the Lib Dems and into the arms of the Conservatives.

    They will probably try to reprise some version of this gambit at the next election, but there is a lot of doubt even among Tories that it will be effective. Not least because the party that brought you the disasters of Brexit, the bedlam of Boris Johnson and the madness of Liz Truss have been the true cavaliers of chaos.

    Neither Sir Keir nor Sir Ed are keen to get entangled in talk about a hung parliament, but both have kept the door open to a post-election deal. There are respects in which the stars are aligned. The two men have an amiable relationship and a compatible outlook. They are united in believing that the national interest demands the eviction of the Tories. Sir Ed says it is his “most important job”. His deputy, Daisy Cooper, describes it as a “moral responsibility”. Sir Ed is rarely critical of Labour and Sir Keir doesn’t make nasty remarks about the Lib Dems. Nothing is likely to be said before the election that would preclude an agreement between them after it.

    A formal electoral pact will not happen because neither leader thinks it is a smart idea and both worry about the several ways in which it could backfire. Both assume that anti-Tory voters will be able to work out for themselves how to maximise the punishment of the Conservatives. For the Tories, one of the frightening dimensions of the local elections was the amount of tactical voting to unseat them.

    Labour and the Lib Dems will continue to concentrate resources where each is best placed to beat the Tories and avoid pointless competition between them. The electoral map helps. There is only one Labour-Lib Dem marginal parliamentary constituency. That is Sheffield Hallam, which was Nick Clegg’s seat before it was taken by Labour. There are some policy differences between the two parties, but none so gaping that it would make a coalition undoable. There is also policy overlap. Lib Dems like to point out that they pushed for a windfall tax on the hydrocarbon majors before it was adopted by Labour.

    For Sir Ed’s party, another chance to participate in government would be a big opportunity, but it would come attached to a big worry. They were eviscerated at the end of their five years of cohabitation with the Tories and there are a lot of Lib Dems who are extremely nervous that they would meet the same fate if they went into coalition with Labour.

    Would Sir Keir issue an invitation to dance anyway? If he finds himself short of a majority or with a small one, there are several ways he could go. One option would be to try to emulate the Wilson model. Harold Wilson won the 1964 election, but with an unworkable majority of just four, which he judged too precarious to sustain a Labour government over a full term. So he established his authority at Number 10, burnished his personal popularity and then went back to the country in 1966 with the slogan “You know Labour government works”. His reward was a much heftier majority of 98 seats. He repeated this two-bites approach, though with less success, in 1974 by forming a minority government after the February election of that year and then going back to the country in October to seek a majority.

    Absent the use of a time machine, we can’t know exactly what the numbers will look like or how the atmosphere will feel after the next election. So no one can be certain, including Sir Keir himself, what he will do if he comes up short. This we do know. Whenever he’s asked to name the past Labour leader that he most admires, his answer is always Wilson.

    Andrew Rawnsley is Chief Political Commentator of the Observer

    So, the ONLY coalition, and then not even a formal one, would be between the Labour Party and the Lib-Dems. And if you want to characterise that as an unholy alliance then you simply want the REAL Tories to win again.

  12. Telling people to go and look it up is the problem with the yes campaign because if all they have is go look it up just call the referendum off.

  13. Mexicanbeemer @ #1315 Tuesday, May 30th, 2023 – 8:39 pm

    Telling people to go and look it up is the problem with the yes campaign because if all they have is go look it up just call the referendum off.

    Agreed. I actually find the whole “It’s on the website. Look it up!” line very condescending and off-putting when certain activists/supporters use it. It’s effectively calling the other person stupid and lazy, as if they should already know because the knowledge is out there. Most of the time, it’s meant in total bad faith, of course.

  14. C@t, we’re talking about recent goings-on in UK local government, not hypothetical arrangements after the next general election.

  15. Wat:

    Agreed. I actually find the whole “It’s on the website. Look it up!” line very condescending and off-putting when certain activists/supporters use it. It’s effectively calling the other person stupid and lazy, as if they should already know because the knowledge is out there. Most of the time, it’s meant in total bad faith, of course.

    +1

  16. Wombat- if you’re trying to proselytise the “Yes” vote, you screwed up. I think it would be best for you to sit this one out the next few months
    Mavis- again using empathy put yourself in the average voters mind, and if you have to travel down a convoluted path to seek answers to benign and simple questions, it comes across more as a used car salesman pitch to just “trust the dealership”
    Pi- I actually don’t think it is a human rights issue but a governance issue. That doesn’t mean the voice doesn’t have merit but to say get on with it and don’t worry about the details is why the republic failed in 99.
    I think “yes” campaign has the emotive argument won but the substance and mechanical aspects of the constitutional change still need to be addressed. For example, why doesn’t the “Yes” campaign put some tentative names forward so that the public can become familiar with operationally how it would work and the ideas that would be advocated.

  17. Willie: ” I actually don’t think it is a human rights issue but a governance issue. ”

    That’s the reason you don’t understand why that argument failed. Because your assertion as to the requirement of having ‘certainty’ of the governance model before the adoption of change, is completely undone by the reality that our parliamentary governance model isn’t detailed in the constitution. And that’s the larger problem. People trying to argue other peoples arguments. You don’t even know your own.

  18. Asha @ #1226 Tuesday, May 30th, 2023 – 9:16 pm

    C@t, we’re talking about recent goings-on in the UK local councils, not hypothetical arrangements after the next general election.

    Yes, but there’s an element of projection and postulation occurring that is trying to suggest that if it occurs on a council it could occur after the general election too.

    Also, as the Andrew Rawnsley article states, it was the Lib Dems, The Greens and Labour who benefited from the Council elections and the Tories were decimated, so if there were actually any Labour-Conservative alliances it would be small in number and may have a decent reason behind it. As I would be pretty sure that it would have to be okayed by the national leadership to happen and they wouldn’t agree unless there WAS a very good reason.

  19. Were Starmer to renounce his knighthood, he’d be far more electable, albeit he was elevated due to his office of the DPP. Labour (UK) supporters don’t support titles until one has left office, such as dear cleme’s favourite, the First Earl Attlee, who in retrospect probably earned his elevation to the Lords, but was nevertheless a class traitor. Both the Right, the Left, and everything in between eventually succumbs to baubles of office.

  20. MexicanBeamer- That is correct. The “Yes” campaign should be explaining how is going to work instead of the motherhood campaign that they are running.
    Also screaming down anyone asking questions as racist is not a way of get them onside.

  21. Cat wrote,

    “So, the ONLY coalition, and then not even a formal one, would be between the Labour Party and the Lib-Dems. And if you want to characterise that as an unholy alliance then you simply want the REAL Tories to win again.”

    What are you raving on about. We are talking about the directive for Labour council administrations to enter coalitions with the Tories. OMG!

  22. B.S. Fairmansays:
    Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 9:25 pm
    MexicanBeamer- That is correct. The “Yes” campaign should be explaining how is going to work instead of the motherhood campaign that they are running.
    Also screaming down anyone asking questions as racist is not a way of get them onside.
    ———————–
    It should be easy to show how the local community could benefit from the voice even if they are not first nation people.

  23. Right, Particularly if streamlines the existing frameworks of consultations etc.

    But talking about that is what is missing from the “yes” campaign.

  24. Mavis wrote, “were Starmer to renounce his knighthood, he’d be far more electable, albeit he was elevated due to his office of the DPP. Labour (UK) supporters don’t support titles until one has left office, such as dear Cleme’s favourite, the First Earl Attlee, who in retrospect probably earned his elevation to the Lords, but was nevertheless a class traitor. Both the Right, the Left, and everything in between eventually succumbs to baubles of office.”

    As I have made clear previously, you are inadvertently correct, in that Attlee was a class traitor, in that he betrayed the establishment class, being a a member of it and not the working class. He got plenty of stick for it and his pro worker, socialist policies from his bourgeois critics.

  25. I agree with the above statements. The “Yes” campaign would do well to move past all the “We need to do this; it’s morally right; this is the moment of reconciliation; etc.” speeches and start the “This is what’s going to happen if this referendum passes” speeches, with solid, relatable examples of what positive changes it would make for everyone involved.

    Endlessly droning on with “Blah blah, constitutional framework, 300 page report, look it up” isn’t going to win this. That’s just political mist, with no substance or weight.

  26. This might be second hand but I have just chanced on information that the Tax Office were aware of PwC dodgy dealing in 2017 and referred it to the federal cops in 2018. Guess what the cops did, not much it would appear.

    And guess who was Treasurer at the time, none other that Morrison. Add that to your list of achievements Taylormade.

    If the Northern Territory can have a police force, then surely the ACT can too. It’s time.

  27. Mavis:

    Starmer’s unpopularity with sections of the UK Labour base has nothing to do with his knighthood and everything to do with him abandoning nearly every principle he claimed to have and nearly every promise he made during the post-2019 leadership election, for repeatedly failing to support striking workers, for having a number of left-wing MPs expelled from the party while also welcoming Conservative defectors into the party, and generally just dragging Labour screaming to the centre-right.

  28. ”Telling people to go and look it up is the problem with the yes campaign because if all they have is go look it up just call the referendum off.”

    Mr Albanese announced the Voice Referendum in his victory speech. Calling off the Referendum isn’t an option. It would be a “Rudd abandoning the CPRS” moment. For better or worse, the Referendum’s on in the next 6 months. If lost, maybe there’ll be another one under another Labor PM in the 2040’s.

  29. well speaking of lords blair was not interested in becoming a member in factt the last pm to be apointed was fatcher or major

  30. Asha:

    Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 9:46 pm

    I’m not so sure, the details you’ve canvassed are perhaps over the heads of the average voter. I think what Labour (UK) voters are seeking is a Kuhnian political paradigmatic shift, even though they might not be able to articulate the same. I think we’re witnessing this in Oz, where most seem to be over the politics of division, of overt hatred of some sections of the community. And that’s why I think the referendum will get up. Anyway, I’m off for beauty sleep.

  31. Asha wrote,

    Mavis:

    “Starmer’s unpopularity with sections of the UK Labour base has nothing to do with his knighthood and everything to do with him abandoning nearly every principle he claimed to have and nearly every promise he made during the post-2019 leadership election, for repeatedly failing to support striking workers, for having a number of left-wing MPs expelled from the party while also welcoming Conservative defectors into the party, and generally just dragging Labour screaming to the centre-right.”

    This!

  32. Wat Tyler wrote,

    “Starmer should renounce his “Keir” and go for a “Hugh” instead. It suits him better.”

    This is why I and many others refer to the prick as ‘Keith.’

  33. Sadly #Cat the ‘I fight Tories’ line doesn’t mean much any more with Elmo as PM, and the Stage 3 tax cuts locked in.
    Maybe ‘I fund Tories’ is more accurate?

  34. “Sadly #Cat the ‘I fight Tories’ line doesn’t mean much any more with Elmo as PM, and the Stage 3 tax cuts locked in.
    Maybe ‘I fund Tories’ is more accurate?”

    Most apt.

  35. Much harrumphing by the crypto trot ‘true labour’ types on bludger tonight I see.

    Keir Starmer is a good and true Labour man.

    Which is why the likes of Clem of the Seagulls hats him. Squark. Squark!

    Then we have this contribution:

    “Have to agree with both Clem and Wat when it comes to Keir Starmer. Choosing to go into coalition with Conservatives when there is a progressive option available is just… I don’t even know what to say.”

    It’s hard to view exactly what is happening at this distance with local government shenanigans in the UK I reckon. Also zero fucks are given all round. Local government. Pothole maintenance. Perspective. As I said. Zero fucks given.

    Further, if one wants to harrumph about doing deals with the devil, one can look closer to home. Inner West Council (Sydney). Having fallen short of a majority, or a coalition with a tame independent the Labor mayor for the former council of Leichhardt, Darcy Byrne did a deal with the two Liberals elected to the amalgamated council in 2019 (?) where in return for THEIR support of him being mayor of the new mega council, the liberal Julie Passos would get the deputy position: all so that the greens could be blocked from taking control.

    Passos was no ordinary Liberal either. She had form. For decades. Racially abusing people. Abusing people on account of their sexuality. Assaulting people – usually Labor campaign workers (including me). Dodging up campaign material. Baseless defamation suits against other councillors – usually labor ones. And so on. A one woman disaster zone. Yet Byrne backed her in as Deputy Mayor.

    Byrne also is a member of the socialist left. Just like Clem was. Until he ratted.

    Of course the Byrne-Passos pact didn’t last long.

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/call-the-police-sydney-councillor-refuses-to-leave-fiery-meeting-20210415-p57jht.html

  36. I wondered how long it would take for the NSW Right ‘voice of reason’ to pipe up. Ha, how have I ratted AE. Still voting Labor in Victoria for our great socialist premier Dan Andrews. You should know that in the unitary system, (devolution excepted), local councils are no small thing in Britain. Yeah KeIth Starmer, Labour to his boot straps, yeah about as much as Ramsay MacDonald I reckon. I bet you think he was good Labour man too and Snow as well. Still, it’s what I expect from a nominal, such as yourself.

  37. This details an amusing clash between Passas and Labor MLC Amanda Fazio back in 2012.

    Passas’s ‘citizen’s right of reply’:

    https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/inquiries/2083/Report%20No.%2064%20-%20Citizen's%20Right%20of%20Reply%20-%20Mrs%20Julie%20Passas%20-%20No.%203.pdf

    Amanda’s version of Passas’s campaign behaviour is completely consistent with my experiences with the same woman in 1996 campaigning in Lowe at that year’s federal election.

  38. The NSW Right… no low that they will not stoop to, no smear that they will not try to stick, no fabrication they will not construct, no lie they will not whisper and no bribe they will not accept.


  39. clem attlee says:
    ..and the Stage 3 tax cuts locked in.

    So sad, chanting S3 tax cuts is all he Greens have to offer. Oh and blocking climate change action and housing action. So so sad. So much noise, so little policy development, destruction that is all that is on offer.

  40. Not fully au fait with the situation in the UK but from this distance a Labour-Liberal-Democrat Coalition seems to be a reasonable response to a hung Parliament situation. What would be the alternative? Have a go at minority Government? Let the Tories continue in minority and hope they fall over? With all the money and most of the media behind them? Or maybe see the LDs go into coalition with the Tories? Although the LDs surely wouldn’t be such idiots as to fall for that again.

Comments Page 27 of 28
1 26 27 28

Leave a Reply

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