Five electorates, Green pastures?

All we can hope for is fewer watermelons in power. Unless everybody in the ACT enjoys seeing more and more outdoor recreational areas have locked gates put on them. More and more of the bush is being locked up the longer these people are allowed to be in power, and for no good reason at all.

The pretend, short sighted “environmentalism” is becoming more and more transparent and the socialist agenda is being seen by more people, thankfully. These fools wouldn’t know the first bloody thing about real conservation. All they do is harp on about “climate change” because it’s popular. These inner city idiots have mostly never seen the bush, let alone got their hands dirty doing any REAL conservation. Coming up with stupid policies that actually damage the bush and damage the Agricultural industry are all they seem to do in that regard.

They were just about flat out rejected by the voting public at the last election. Ratface scraped in on preferences. He has done nothing of merit in his position, other than cost ACT taxpayers large amounts of money on hair brained “environmental” schemes.

Garfield said :

As I see it, the changed conditions for Tuggeranong in 2016 are:
– No Lib leader
– No south Woden suburbs
– Kambah likely to be included in new Woden-Weston electorate
– Light rail
– Rates increases

The polling booth results for Kambah and south Woden were better for Labor than the total Brindabella result so their exclusion from Tuggeranong is a plus for the Liberals, probably lifting their vote by 1%.

Looking at the distribution of Zed’s surplus votes, less than 10% left the Liberals, so not having the leader there is probably -2% for them.

Tuggeranong residents having to pay for light rail and not getting any benefit from it will be a plus for the Liberals.

In 2012 Labor claimed that the Libs campaign on Rates was just a scare campaign, but 4 years of 10% p.a. compounding rates increases will make it harder to refute in 2016.

If the light rail and rates issues combined only bring an extra 1% to the Libs, then they’ll be in the same position in 2016 as they were in 2012, even without having the leader there, and so should retain 3 seats.

As a Tuggeranong resident, I can say my rates are not increasing anywhere near as much as land closer to the city. So i don’t feel rates are as big an issue down south. We do seem to have a lot more conservatives down south though and I’m not sure why. I still think without Zed the 3rd seat is not a given. Also add into the fact that Liberals are not exactly winning over the country with their policies.
I’m eagerly awaiting to see what Jeremy Hanson proposes for the capital at the next election.

John Hargreaves said :

I agree with most of the postings here. But, there are a couple of issues which could be game changers. How’s this for a few (in no particular order:
.
I reckon the incumbent Chief Minister goes to an election with 1.3 ex officio quotas, to which is added a personal vote, which is why Jon and Katy got such a good vote.
.
The leader of the Opposition goes in with 0.9 of an ex officio quota, to which is added their personal vote. See Zed’s vote last time over Brendan’s the previous time.
.
Both need to bring someone in with them.
.
The Leader of the Opposition is not in Tuggeranong this time, opening up the contest again.

As I see it, the changed conditions for Tuggeranong in 2016 are:
– No Lib leader
– No south Woden suburbs
– Kambah likely to be included in new Woden-Weston electorate
– Light rail
– Rates increases

The polling booth results for Kambah and south Woden were better for Labor than the total Brindabella result so their exclusion from Tuggeranong is a plus for the Liberals, probably lifting their vote by 1%.

Looking at the distribution of Zed’s surplus votes, less than 10% left the Liberals, so not having the leader there is probably -2% for them.

Tuggeranong residents having to pay for light rail and not getting any benefit from it will be a plus for the Liberals.

In 2012 Labor claimed that the Libs campaign on Rates was just a scare campaign, but 4 years of 10% p.a. compounding rates increases will make it harder to refute in 2016.

If the light rail and rates issues combined only bring an extra 1% to the Libs, then they’ll be in the same position in 2016 as they were in 2012, even without having the leader there, and so should retain 3 seats.

rommeldog56 said :

If the current Labor/Greens ACT Gov’t are voted back in 2016, given their poor track record on fiscal management and priority setting, then they will probably never loose Government here. Voters have to ask themselves do we want this type of Government in the ACT potentially forever – because thats whats being asked of us – not so much what the alternatives are or what the Feds are doing (which was caused to correct the deficit left by the previous Federal Labor Gov’t).

As you say though the alternative isn’t that great either. Offering to build a pool in Lanyon valley when a 5 minute drive to Tuggeranong was possible is IMO not a great use of public funds either. Yes less than a new tram (which IMO is too slow to be useful). The only sense I’ve heard from Jeremy Hanson was his displeasure on the knighting of the Duke.

Politicians in general are failing to really strive in this modern internet connected society. They can no longer spin things the way they want them, because the “electronic graffiti” like Twitter and facebook, provide an alternative media source. Plus people can, if they want to can research the facts instead of swallowing the selected information a politician chooses to divulge. I’m certainly sick of the selected fact giving politics we still get, when its so easy to catch them out. Of course in some cases the ideology gets in the way of facts anyway so the facts are useless!

John Hargreaves said :

I agree with most of the postings here. But, there are a couple of issues which could be game changers. How’s this for a few (in no particular order:

.

I reckon the incumbent Chief Minister goes to an election with 1.3 ex officio quotas, to which is added a personal vote, which is why Jon and Katy got such a good vote.
.

The leader of the Opposition goes in with 0.9 of an ex officio quota, to which is added their personal vote. See Zed’s vote last time over Brendan’s the previous time.
.

Both need to bring someone in with them.
.

The Leader of the Opposition is not in Tuggeranong this time, opening up the contest again.
.

The only Greens MLA has been a tram pushing minister for the whole term. This could auger badly for the Greens opening up an opportunity for a clever minor party to fill that space.
.

The Labor Party have the “It’s Time” factor to deal with but the Opposition have not been effective in helping the Government lose office. They both have less than two years to fix the problem.
.

Right now and into 2016, the focus in people’s minds will be federal politics and the pain it delivers to Canberrans. If the feds deliver more it will hurt the local Libs, if they put out sweeteners, it may help.
.

Unless the local Libs define themselves differently to the feds they are gone.
The tram issue is largely a media beat up which has been swallowed by the electorate, with not much said about the financial burden of the Mr Fluffy issue which is almost as drastic. But most punters don’t look at the budget as defining, they look at their own quality of life. And it has not changed much.
.

Some in town remember the “true” independents, Osborne and Rugendyke, and before them Michael Moore. They remember Osborne for being a lazy MLA and Rugendyke for joining Osborne in his own party, They remember Michael for is needle exchange stance and taking a ministry. Not good track record for the “true” indies.
.

For poll watchers, it is historic that the party which gets one or two seats less than 50% of the House, ie 10 or 11, they will govern.
.

But at the end of the day, unless the ALP is decimated, if two Greens get elected it is all over Red Rover. So the people to watch are the Greens and if they get it in the neck, who it is who wields the knife.

There is so much wrong in the OP – but a few issues:

1) The Tram being a media beat up : A typically dismissive comment of a significant issue. Similar to the dismissiveness of Ratepayers/voters concerns over the Tram by the ACT Gov’t. The OP can not have read or understood what laughingly passed for the Tram’s Benefits Costs Ratio (BCR)/business case nor seen the “media beat up” over the boubling of the Territory’s 2014-15 budget deficit to $712 million (that + interest has to be repaid out of increased revenues – like ACT Gov’t Rates and Charges or a GST increase).

2) Personally, I don’t see on road cycle lanes as a vote winner – for all the green/health good they no doubt do, I wonder how many cyclists have been injured/killed due to putting themselves in more danger than necessary on roads from inept car drivers ?

3) Solar Farms : The increased cost of electricity to ACT residents is a negative to me because we have given away much of the natural advantage we had of lower electricity prices. That will not encourage large employers like manufacturing companies to set up here so bring jobs and wider employment/revenue earning base. Yes its green though.

4) The Budget : I agree that there seems to be a distinct apathy by ACT Voters/Ratepayers about the Territory’s ballooning budget deficit + the ACT Gov’t fiscal priority setting.

5) Mr Fluffy. As i recall, it was the then ACT Labor Gov’t that ignored or dismissed their knowledge of Mr Fluffy 9+ years ago. They took no action by admission by the ex Chief Minister. If it had of been fixed/the buyback done then, it would have been far less expensive for ACT Ratepayers and we may have got a better hearing re funding from a Federal Labor Gov’t (Rudd/Gillard/Rudd). The fact that existing affected affected homeowners can not buy back their remediated blocks is yet to be played out but that and valuations and compo for furnishings will be more clear by the next ACT election.

6) I agree that most ACT Voters/Ratepayers probably do not see much decline in their quality of life – the average income here is too high for that to be too obvious. But with high income there is also a tendency for apathy. The cost of living/quality of life in the ACT – especially the noticable degredation in municiple services against a background of avg.10% pa increase in Annual Rates over 20+ years, will increase by the 2016 election.

If the current Labor/Greens ACT Gov’t are voted back in 2016, given their poor track record on fiscal management and priority setting, then they will probably never loose Government here. Voters have to ask themselves do we want this type of Government in the ACT potentially forever – because thats whats being asked of us – not so much what the alternatives are or what the Feds are doing (which was caused to correct the deficit left by the previous Federal Labor Gov’t).

I agree with most of the postings here. But, there are a couple of issues which could be game changers. How’s this for a few (in no particular order:

. I reckon the incumbent Chief Minister goes to an election with 1.3 ex officio quotas, to which is added a personal vote, which is why Jon and Katy got such a good vote.
. The leader of the Opposition goes in with 0.9 of an ex officio quota, to which is added their personal vote. See Zed’s vote last time over Brendan’s the previous time.
. Both need to bring someone in with them.
. The Leader of the Opposition is not in Tuggeranong this time, opening up the contest again.
. The only Greens MLA has been a tram pushing minister for the whole term. This could auger badly for the Greens opening up an opportunity for a clever minor party to fill that space.
. The Labor Party have the “It’s Time” factor to deal with but the Opposition have not been effective in helping the Government lose office. They both have less than two years to fix the problem.
. Right now and into 2016, the focus in people’s minds will be federal politics and the pain it delivers to Canberrans. If the feds deliver more it will hurt the local Libs, if they put out sweeteners, it may help.
. Unless the local Libs define themselves differently to the feds they are gone.
The tram issue is largely a media beat up which has been swallowed by the electorate, with not much said about the financial burden of the Mr Fluffy issue which is almost as drastic. But most punters don’t look at the budget as defining, they look at their own quality of life. And it has not changed much.
. Some in town remember the “true” independents, Osborne and Rugendyke, and before them Michael Moore. They remember Osborne for being a lazy MLA and Rugendyke for joining Osborne in his own party, They remember Michael for is needle exchange stance and taking a ministry. Not good track record for the “true” indies.
. For poll watchers, it is historic that the party which gets one or two seats less than 50% of the House, ie 10 or 11, they will govern.
. But at the end of the day, unless the ALP is decimated, if two Greens get elected it is all over Red Rover. So the people to watch are the Greens and if they get it in the neck, who it is who wields the knife.

El_Mariachi said :

dungfungus said :

“The Light Rail mob is gone”.
What are you talking about, John?

I think he means the bullet train mob.

Well, he was a politician and they are skilled in saying one thing and meaning another.

dungfungus said :

“The Light Rail mob is gone”.
What are you talking about, John?

I think he means the bullet train mob.

miz said :

The four Greens were only voted in two elections ago because people wanted a third voice. The people were sorely disappointed at the result, and they were (mostly) voted out again. The Greens did a huge disservice to minor parties in general during that period, by primarily focusing on fringe issues and not governing for all. For example, the only thing I can remember about Caroline Le Couteur is her wish for the proposed new cemetery to be able to have natural burials.
I think we can all learn from this.

Caroline Le Couteur was a tireless worker behind the scenes. If someone wrote to her about an issue she would address it, follow it up and resolve it.
Unfortunately she wasn’t recognised for this. I think she has done more for The Greens than Shane Rattenbury will ever do.

The four Greens were only voted in two elections ago because people wanted a third voice. The people were sorely disappointed at the result, and they were (mostly) voted out again. The Greens did a huge disservice to minor parties in general during that period, by primarily focusing on fringe issues and not governing for all. For example, the only thing I can remember about Caroline Le Couteur is her wish for the proposed new cemetery to be able to have natural burials.
I think we can all learn from this.