Election Wrap – 4 October

johnboy 4 October 2008 76


Roger Nicoll and James Sizer reckon they’re going to get the community to do the work for their environmental initiatives.


Andrew Barr is promising not to take ponies from PWAD kiddies as long as the nasty Liberals are sent packing.

The Labor media release page also sports the headline “Pressure building… How long before Libs back flip on Gungahlin pool? – 3 October 2008” but the link 404s. (This has now been fixed.

Katy Gallagher is hoping to win over some support with $500,000 in industrial relations advice for NGOs.

Labor is again promising to not sully sacred football grandfinals with grubby politicking.

bd84 is up in arms about Labor leafletters close to pre-polling places.


Paperboy sent in the following thoughts on the Canberra Times polling data which was discussed here and here. I’m rather pleased to see my own tip of 4 Greens looking good at this point (more because I like being right than for any political reason):

    The Canberra Times has published the first comprehensive opinion poll of the election campaign, and two weeks from polling day, Labor is in some trouble.

    The Patterson-Canberra Times poll (whatever happened to Datacol?) says Labor will win 6 seats, The Liberals 6 seats, The Greens 4 and one undecided.

    One of the three Ministers in Molonglo, Barr, Gallagher and Corbell is set to lose their seat.

    And Richard Mulcahy has almost no hope of being elected.

    The Greens result is about double their result in the last election.

    From the sidelines, I think the Libs would have to be happy. They’ve only made relatively minor announcements so far, so you’d imagine there are some big promises to come.

    The survey questioned 1200 residents this week by phone between between 4 and 9pm.

    The error rate is said to be up to 4.9% either way, so there’s a fair amount of room for movement. Although the Canberra Times says Patterson predicted Eden Monaro 53-47 to Labor in the Federal election, and the result came out at 54-46.

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
76 Responses to Election Wrap – 4 October
VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy 6:21 pm 06 Oct 08

…especially when you consider the impact of well thought out regulation on the economic aspects. Many of the US financial troubles can be laid squarely at the foot of failure to regulate (which is why Australia is likely to come through the US recession in OK shape).

Deadmandrinking Deadmandrinking 4:53 pm 06 Oct 08

PM, in extremes, neither is compatible. But I think elements of both libertarianism and socialism can work together, especially considering they can potentially cancel out each other’s worser elements.

The problem with libertarianism, as I understand it, is that it allows greed to prosper unchecked and can potentially leave a good deal of people behind – so therefore, socialist elements, such as welfare, public health, public education, public housing can ensure a safety-net and a balance from which people can experience equal opportunities in the ‘freer’ financial and social world beyond basic need.

If you think of socialism as a base on top of which libertarianism can thrive, then the two might not be as distant as you think.

PM PM 3:13 pm 06 Oct 08

johnboy said :

While large elements of the left let themselves down in their support of the Soviet Union, and continue to do so with blind anti-americanism as a hangover of that era, it would be a mistake to characterise all socialists in that light.

Correct – just as it’s possible for a Catholic priest and Stanhope to agree on many issues. I guess my point, in agreeing with mutley, was that socialists and libertarians, despite a number of similarities, possess different classes of political thought.

peter@home peter@home 3:03 pm 06 Oct 08

discussing socialism, capitalism and communism in the context of a local government election is a bit over the top, don’t you think? if the socialist alliance want to sway the voters to vote with a considered opinion, regardless of the party, they need to assume that not all of the voting public went to university, finished college or high school, and even knows what socialism is.

the problem faced by joe voter isn’t the lack of information, it is that there are too many choices.

I don’t know which way I will vote next week, (I am pre-polling) but I will think about what I want for my kids regarding the future of canberra and the time major mistakes will take to rectify.

johnboy johnboy 2:46 pm 06 Oct 08

A thinking libertarian and a thinking socialist have a lot more common ground with each other than they do with the collective corporatist fascism espoused by both the major parties.

While large elements of the left let themselves down in their support of the Soviet Union, and continue to do so with blind anti-americanism as a hangover of that era, it would be a mistake to characterise all socialists in that light.

PM PM 2:42 pm 06 Oct 08

I agree – I don’t want to rain on anybody’s parade, but a socialist claiming to be a libertarian is like Stanhope claiming he’s a Catholic priest.

mutley mutley 1:56 pm 06 Oct 08

Passy said: For me personally that means voting Green because socially they reflect my more libertarian views

Friendly Wikipedia states: Libertarianism is a term used by a broad spectrum of political philosophies which prioritize individual liberty and seek to minimize or even abolish the state.

Passy again: This side of workers’ revolution, I’d suggest cutting the working week to 30 hours without loss of pay, nationalising banks in the ACT or setting up a people’s bank, pegging interest rates, democratising workplaces, increasing taxes on well off suburbs and starting a set off public works needed to fix the place up (eg light rail) to name a few.

Hardly minimising or abolishing the state!

Passy Passy 1:27 pm 06 Oct 08

I know garbage bins are important, and I now know the various parties views on them at the Cotter etc, but with the possibility of the Australian economy tanking (and taking the ACT economy with it) I wonder what any of the parties or candidates will do if unemployment increases markedly, revenues fall (eg less payroll tax, less land tax as values plummet) and the feds stop giving us more money?

Cut ACT PS jobs? Cut ACT PS wages? Cut spending on a range of worthwhile projects? to welfare organisations? Ditch their promises in light of the black hole they inherited (from themselves if Labor is back in Government)? Who knows, since not one party seems even remotely interested in discussing the issue.

Do any readers know if ACT Treasury will release updated budget estimates before the election?.

johnboy johnboy 11:01 am 06 Oct 08

Braggs said :

I think Johnboy should stand at the next election.

I often get approached to do it, usually as a candidate for minor parties.

So having given it a lot of thought over the years I can say that:

a) I have nothing like the money I’d need to give it a serious shake.
b) I can do more good for the community by reporting on the elections than standing in them.

Braggs Braggs 9:38 am 06 Oct 08

I think Johnboy should stand at the next election.

Passy Passy 11:03 pm 05 Oct 08

Jakez, perhaps you could explain your exasperation with my views?


jakez jakez 9:18 pm 05 Oct 08

Passy said :

So I am forced into Hobson’s choice. For me personally that means voting Green because socially they reflect my more libertarian views and they at least have a clue about the environmental problems.


johnboy johnboy 9:18 pm 05 Oct 08

disenfranchised said :

Gun Street girl – if I could respond to your comment above regarding “that’s the mentality…etc”. Osborne got up because of his reputation as a Raiders footballer. He was in fact a right wing politician with strong christian values who took a very conservative line on issues. My point is that the majority of the people just want candidates to be small l in outlook, ie not too right wing or too left wing in outlook. There is plenty of room between the extremes. That may not be a fashionable view. I contend it represents political reality.

Also I didn’t suggest being a nice bloke, family man or football watcher were the criteria for selection. I used a term – a common sense approach. I reckon it never goes astray.

Boomacat: being on radio doesn’t disqualify you either for seeking political office.

You might ask if Zed’s not running a rather similar campaign,

gun street girl gun street girl 9:18 pm 05 Oct 08

sepi said :

In the absence of a party, we have no idea what someone like Mark Parton’s stance is on health funding, roads, or even public art.

I don’t think he’s in favour of the GDE artwork – we can ascertain that from the ads on telly. Apart from that, I don’t know what he stands for, either. I think he’s gone down on the record as having said he doesn’t have policies, because he’s an independent – that he wants to pick over what all the major parties have to say, and choose the best option (or blend them, if possible). Problem is, it’s asking a lot of the public to trust somebody to make the best – and most unbiased – decision on their behalf, particularly if you are not upfront about where you stand before you hold office. It’s not enough to simply present yourself as a nice, affable bloke if you’re putting your hand up for that sort of responsibility.

sepi sepi 9:11 pm 05 Oct 08

For mine ‘substance’ equates to either a relevant background/experience, or some public statements about their policies, or even their political leanings.

In the absence of a party, we have no idea what someone like Mark Parton’s stance is on health funding, roads, or even public art.

disenfranchised disenfranchised 8:46 pm 05 Oct 08

Kitchen Man – I agree with the thrust of your comments, particularly with regard to the issue of “substance”. From my perspective some of the candidates look like they have just come straight out of university. By the way I have never met Mark Parton. But I have no problem with him having been on radio earning a living. Given the power of the fourth estate in Australian politics that is probably useful background. So he trades on his name – welcome to Hare-Clarke!

Gun street girl. I did actually say Osborn got in because of his football credentials. Most who voted for him probably had no idea that he was a right wing politician with a strong set of Christian values.

Passy Passy 8:22 pm 05 Oct 08

Thumper, it’s not just Mark. All of a sudden these gnomes appear every four years trying to buy my vote with inane slogans like getting it done (whatever it is) and standing tall for whatever. And waving inanely to me from teh side of the Parkway. Then they disappear for another four years.

Personally voting tweedlee dee or tweedle dum is not much of a choice. All I ever hear every four years is how they have fixed or will fix health, education, transport etc while doing the exact opposite.

So I am forced into Hobson’s choice. For me personally that means voting Green because socially they reflect my more libertarian views and they at least have a clue about the environmental problems. I used to always vote Labor because no matter how warped the connection, they at least had some links to the working class. No more.

Parliamentary cretinism dominates everything, as if managing the system is somehow being in charge of it when most of the economic decisions – who is employed, at what wages etc – are made elsewhere.

Anyway, others will have different views obviously, but my criticism of Mark applies equally to CAP, Pangallo independents, Canberra party etc.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy 8:14 pm 05 Oct 08

I have to laugh whenever I hear the ‘socialist’ viewpoint expressed, for 2 reasons:

1) The people expressing the view are almost always students who have never had to work full time and genuinely support themselves, and have never missed a meal in their lives. Most of these people have no real memory of what working was like before the mid 90’s, when our period of unprecended prosperity started.

2) The world is currently experiencing a major shift in wealth, particularly towards some developing countries. This means that many ‘rich’ countries will naturally experience a drop in living standards (especially those people who demand luxuries and travel, and don’t earn enough to pay cash).

In a similar vein, I suspect that the Greens have gotten more play in recent years, simply because there aren’t the same pressing issues that we dealt with in days gone by. Frankly, I think the Greens are useless idiots, with very little grip on most peoples’ reality. Saving the trees is great, but wait until people have to choose between trees and feeding their kids.

Kitchen Man Kitchen Man 7:56 pm 05 Oct 08

Don’t get me wrong, because I’m not being critical. I just want to know what that bit more of substance is. And the question isn’t directed just at you Thumper. What is the bit more substance that’s required. Is it chasing the Japanese on a Greenpeace ship ? Is it working in media relations with the CFMEU ? Is it working for the last 8 years for a local politician and being effectively a ‘machine politician’ before you start. Is it being yet another Lawyer in the Assembly or is it having a number of university degrees. What is it exactly that tells you someone is much more suited than another to represent the people in the Assembly.

Thumper Thumper 5:15 pm 05 Oct 08

Actually Passy, to be fair, I totally agree with your sentiments about Mark Parton.

I like my politicians to have a bit more substance than minor fame on a local radio station.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site