24 October 2008

Indies show their true colours

| johnboy
Join the conversation
43

The Canberra Times reports that the desperately close race for the Molonglo seventh seat now has Elena Kirschbaum, Caroline le Couteur, and Giulia Jones locked ridiculously tight.

But with counting running to next week it’s all still speculative.

Of possibly more interest, and sure to be the subject of some degree of “I told you so” from Labor, is the new publicity alliance of The Australian Motorist Party, Mark Parton and the Community Alliance Party who are claiming that their combined 15% of the electorate (not that they managed to distribute preferences between themselves) are utterly opposed to Labor:

    They are asking the Greens to take this factor into account when deciding whether to throw their support behind a Liberal or Labor government.

Join the conversation

43
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

VicePope said :

Kitchen Man – hear hear. We’d get better people if it was a part time thing. As it is, most of the members since self-government have been hacks and hopefuls. Politics at this level should not be a career, much less one that requires the full swag of staff and cars and superannuation.

Personally I like New Hampshire’s state Government. A 1.2 million population is serviced by a 400 member House of Reps (third largest in the world). Members are paid $200 a year and receive petrol reimbursement for traveling to Concord (which is about a 30 minute to 1 hour drive from anywhere in the state).

There is something comforting about knowing that MPs need to have a real job and thus can’t focus all their time on screwing us over.

It’s not transferable to the ACT but the principle remains the same.

Kitchen Man – hear hear. We’d get better people if it was a part time thing. As it is, most of the members since self-government have been hacks and hopefuls. Politics at this level should not be a career, much less one that requires the full swag of staff and cars and superannuation.

Ant, that is the most sensible comment made on this thread. We lose sight of the fact that this is essentially a 17 member council. If the members spent less time fighting each other and working on finding solutions to the problems facing this city, everyone would be a winner. Don’t spoze that will ever happen….maybe this hung parliament gives us the opportunity as a community to be bold and trial a different form of government. The ball is in the Greens court and to some extent the ALP and the Libs. Maybe it is time to think outside the box.

I wish they’d ALL form government, that way the ACT might get a bit of value for money out of them. Party politics is silly when you’re running a town.

Clown Killer6:48 am 25 Oct 08

…unless that voter chose not give further preferences

My understanding from what has been reported was that many people voting for the Motorists Party didn’t preference anyone else – meaning, in my mind at least that they deliberately voted in a way that meant neither Liberal or Labor would benefit from their preferences. For the Motorists Party candidates to argue after the fact that what their supporters really wanted was for Labor to be deposed is simply fanciful.

Methinks these people are simply suffering a form of relevance deficit disorder – last week it was all media interviews, TV appearances, door stops and meet & greets … this week they’re actually starting to wonder if their phone has been disconnected because nobody’s rung (well except for that guy from TAMS wanting to know when their signs are going to be pulled down).

They’re showing that they are just like all the other pollies – talking crap that totally ignores how the voting system works. Since none of them made quota, that 15% is flowing, in full, onto Green/Labor/Liberal as each individual chose; unless that voter chose not give further preferences.

Right. We had an election. The mob previously in government lost but the previous opposition didn’t win. There’s three or four in the middle being courted by both sides.

And the the losers – the ones who couldn’t run a good enough campaign to get anyone up in any electorate – try to have their say. I was told well before that the Motorists Party was a facade for some business interests and some truly weird extremists – but by calling themselves the Motorists Party, they got some of the bogan vote. The C(R)AP – obviously a mob of flaming egos who really wanted Labor out and the Libs in, to the extent that this would be compatible with their incoherent “policies”. And the bloke who used to be on the radio – did he flirt with Pangallos or the C(R)AP at some time?

All together now. The Assembly consists of the people who got elected. Those who wanted to be elected but failed don’t get a vote in the Assembly or a say about how others should vote. There is no magic in a widely scattered 15% – one could get it by running on a dozen platforms for free beer, prohibition, concentration camps, compulsory veganism, sacking the entire ACT public sector, etc etc. It’s called representative democracy. Sometimes it’s tough and sometimes a different system would get some different people in. The system we have is one under which the mad, bad and hopeful share one thing – they lost. The Libs, the ALP and the Greens got in.

The other thing I’d like to point out is that the 15% have given their vote to these particular parties (and independent), not to the liberals. There will be those in the 15% that want a labor government. In-fact the only people who you could safely say wants Zed or Stanhope to form gov’t are the people who directly voted for these two people. Beyond that I’d say all bets are off on what people actually wanted in terms of whom they wanted as CM.

These guys need to realize that 15% voted for them, not voted for them in the hope of getting liberals in, if they wanted liberals they would have voted for them.

I am one of those people who failed to distribute preferences to Labor, Liberals, Greens, AMP

I saw my vote for the independents as a protest vote – I didn’t expect them to win, but I didn’t want my vote to help any other the other politicians get in either

Hopefully they’ll notice that 15% of people in the ACT also thinks that they are a pack of lying, sniveling and barely competent bastards, who’s only interest is in cheap political points and getting re-elected next election

harvyk1 said :

What are you talking about jakez? Of course your vote counts, but it mean shit when the majority of people vote for someone else.

I hate to point this out to you but “15% of the voice” basically means nothing. 85% of the population didn’t want these particular guys having a voice, in a democracy the wishes of 85% of the population need to outweigh 15% every time.

I note caf’s earlier comments, however 15% seems to be the magic number for this conversation.

It’s not nearly as simple as that Harvyk1. In a straight single seat election, the 85% does outweigh the 15%.

However in this situation, what they are basically saying (and this assumes that 15% wanted a Lib Govt which I think is a tenuous proposition at best), is that that 15% should be acknowledged by the greens in determining overall support for Stanhope et al.

I didn’t say that their vote is overwhelming, just that it should be considered as a representation of 15% of the ‘collective will’.

jakez said :

tom-tom said :

If that is the case, then democracy is a lie, and your vote does not count unless you win. Jeez it’s not often that someone outdoes me on cynicism over democracy.

Mate, 15% of the population said yes and so they have 15% of the voice.

thats not what i was saying; your vote does count towards electing your candidate of choice, but if that candidate doesn’t get up then they don’t have a role to play in government. what this group are doing is acting like they are above the result, you dont see the LDP, helen cross or richard mulchay suggesting that they should still get to choose the CM.

48%(roughly) of people said they didn’t want a federal labor govt last year, and you dont see the libs up on the hill pretending they can still decide who gets to be PM, (and that 48% is a much more significant figure than the 15% in this case) It’s how the system works, you win you make the decisions, you lose you dont.

its absolutely arrogant to for this mob tosuggest that the 15%’s opinion is more relevant than the other 85%. Roughly 5 out of 6 people decided that they didn’t want this mob involved; that says volumes to me.

sepi said :

Plus why hvae they now become a single group.

It isn’t 15% at all – it is 3 smaller groups of people, who now, after the event, claim to be speaking with one voice.

If that were true they should have all run as the ‘anyone but Jon’ party.

maybe next time they will, eh kitchen man??

Kitchen Man said :

Did the ALP not make is exceptionally clear in one of their high rotate TV ads in the last few days of the campaign…’a vote for anything else other than Labor is a vote for a Liberal government!’ ??

Actually what they really wanted people to know is that if you don’t directly vote for a labor government it’s a possibility that your vote could go to the liberals.

Plus why hvae they now become a single group.

It isn’t 15% at all – it is 3 smaller groups of people, who now, after the event, claim to be speaking with one voice.

If that were true they should have all run as the ‘anyone but Jon’ party.

What are you talking about jakez? Of course your vote counts, but it mean shit when the majority of people vote for someone else.

I hate to point this out to you but “15% of the voice” basically means nothing. 85% of the population didn’t want these particular guys having a voice, in a democracy the wishes of 85% of the population need to outweigh 15% every time.

Kitchen Man: The debunking of that particular brand of tripe will be a great side-effect if the ALP does end up in Government.

The 15% is a considerable overstatement. Territory-wide, CAP, AMP and Mark Parton garned 10.5% of the formal votes. Additionally, as I’ve already put above, many of these votes got passed on as preferences, so those voters views are already being represented by the people that actually got elected by them – CAP, AMP and Mark claiming to speak for them as well is “double-dipping”. I would even contend that those CAP, AMP and Parton votes that exhausted were also making a deliberate choice, of “any of the others, I don’t care”. If they wanted to preference Liberal, they could have.

tom-tom said :

jakez; if this group had been elected then they would be entitled to play a role in choosing who forms govt. They weren’t elected, so they dont have a role to play.

on election day the vast majority of canberrans took a look at them and decided that they didn’t want them making decisions like this. for this group to now suggest that they are above the result and have a role to play in government is absolute arrogance, there’s no other word for it.

the people have spoken; they didn’t want this group involoved, and they should respect that result.

If that is the case, then democracy is a lie, and your vote does not count unless you win. Jeez it’s not often that someone outdoes me on cynicism over democracy.

Mate, 15% of the population said yes and so they have 15% of the voice.

Jim Jones said :

Now who would have thought that the Motorists Party wouldn’t be very bright?

Heh!

I’m still amazed that they garnered as many votes as they did. I saw them as the huntin’ fishin’ drivin’ (and no brown people) party.

A Rights for Yobs conglomeration.

tom-tom said :

the people have spoken; they didn’t want this group involoved, and they should respect that result.

Except for Val Jeffrey. That guy is a crazy maverick who plays by his own rules.

jakez; if this group had been elected then they would be entitled to play a role in choosing who forms govt. They weren’t elected, so they dont have a role to play.

on election day the vast majority of canberrans took a look at them and decided that they didn’t want them making decisions like this. for this group to now suggest that they are above the result and have a role to play in government is absolute arrogance, there’s no other word for it.

the people have spoken; they didn’t want this group involoved, and they should respect that result.

Like anyone takes political advertising seriously.

Regardless, it’s patently ridiculous to assert that not voting for the incumbent party is inherently a vote for the largest opposition party (even if it wasn’t ACTUALLY a vote for the largest opposition party).

“Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos!”

Did the ALP not make is exceptionally clear in one of their high rotate TV ads in the last few days of the campaign…’a vote for anything else other than Labor is a vote for a Liberal government!’ ??

“more than half of the electorate seemingly went to the ballot box seeking a change of government”

With respect, that’s a bit of a stretch. Just because someone didn’t vote for the Labor Party doesn’t necessarily mean that they went seeking a change of government. If someone really wanted a change of government above all else, they would have voted Liberal in the first place.

Now who would have thought that the Motorists Party wouldn’t be very bright?

If the Motorists Party had not run the full ticket of candidates in Brindabella or Monlonglo the results would most likely have been different. Those who passionately voted just within the ticket for the motorists party, who you would expect to be right leaning, effectively delivered a Green member to Brindabella. If they had just run two candidates their preferences would have flowed back to candidates like Val Jeffrey.

johnboy said :

Well, there was the Liberal campaign which failed to sell its new faces.

Yet a few of the new faces got up – I reckon that shows they ran good individual campaigns.

Well, there was the Liberal campaign which failed to sell its new faces.

But I agree, the failure to preference other non-labor parties speaks against that 15% voting for change.

The Greens should consider the voting intentions of those that voted for them. Those who voted for Parton, AMP or CAP had the opportunity to have their votes preference the Liberals ahead of Labor, if that’s what they wanted to do. Presumably many did – so they’ve already helped elect Liberal candidates, there’s no reason why their vote should count twice.

No Jim, I think they were just respectfully asking the Greens to consider the size of that vote and to consider that more than half of the electorate seemingly went to the ballot box seeking a change of government, but that they may still get Jon as Chief Minister with Hargraves, Barr, Gallagher and Corbell on the front bench. That if the Greens were considering the voting intentions of Canberrans when deciding who to form an alliance with, that the 15% who voted for minor parties and independents should not be completely ignored.

“Like it or not they represent 15% of the population and that 15% of the population does deserve to be heard.”

Do you really mean to say that, because 15% of people voted for a wide range of independents and minor parties (from the nutsack Australian Motorists Party to the ‘these flaming mongrels have stuffed it up’ Community Alliance), that they have been entirely disenfranchised by the political system and that this should have the effect of overruling the actual election results?

jakez said :

I think your comment also smacks of arrogance.

Like it or not they represent 15% of the population and that 15% of the population does deserve to be heard.

Whether the claim that these 15% would prefer a Liberal Govt over an ALP Govt is accurate though…very subjective.

I’m going to say likewise. A democracy love it or hate it basically says “Majority Rules”. This 15% where heard, on the 18th. Given that they where told by the people “No, we don’t want you.” says something as far as I’m concerned. Them making comments about “what Canberra wants” seems a little academic. They haven’t finished counting so no one can yet truely say “what Canberra wants”.

tom-tom said :

i was under the impression that on october 18 the electorate decided that they didn’t want this lot to have a say in how the territory is governed. this just smacks of arrogance.

I think your comment also smacks of arrogance.

Like it or not they represent 15% of the population and that 15% of the population does deserve to be heard.

Whether the claim that these 15% would prefer a Liberal Govt over an ALP Govt is accurate though…very subjective.

The CAP is a bit of a general protest party- no real unity in the candidates’ views. Having said that, I didn’t note any leftist zeal in any of their pronouncements.

I think CAP would be left-ish, but hate labor over the fires and the school closures.

Odd… AMP and Parton I realised leant right, but I always perceived CAP as a centre-left protest vote.

Dante said :

Pity the Greens couldn’t pick and choose from either side.. Take that bi-partisan system!

In theory, it could happen. Strange alliances happen all the time at a council level in the states, and internationally there are plenty of examples.

It would be a complete and utter mess, but it’s possible nonetheless.

Hey, if they have to compromise and Katy’s not Deputy CM then I’d still be happy.

Pity the Greens couldn’t pick and choose from either side.. Take that bi-partisan system!

I still reckon the Greens might want to support Labor, but only on the condition that Stanhope isn’t leader.

i was under the impression that on october 18 the electorate decided that they didn’t want this lot to have a say in how the territory is governed. this just smacks of arrogance.

Yes, there are people who didn’t like the Stanhope gov’t, but there are obviously enough people out there who did \ still do.

Yes, a 10% loss is a big loss, but lest we forget the libs also had a 3% loss, so this means that 13% of people decided that they didn’t like the major parties – BOTH OF THEM.

The alliance shown by AMP,CAP and Mark Parton is not surprising as I believe they all have right leanings in them (I might be wrong), so of course they don’t want to see a left leaning labor gov’t

The “I told you so” will be expected, but can’t be justified. Whilst these particular indies are of an anti-Stanhope persuasion, the Libs actually did not benefit from their running.

As you mention, they didn’t distribute preferences.

The only effect that these indies had was to minimise the Libs’ primary vote. If the Libs had a higher primary vote in Molonglo, they possibily wouldn’t be in this tight run-off with the Greens for that last seat.

If the Libs wanted to run indies, they’d be marketed to attack the Labor base eg former union officials, etc, not people running on the basis that they didn’t think the Libs were up to the fight against Stanhope.

“are utterly opposed to Labor”

Yeah, but the Australian Motorists Party are essentially opposed to everything except for bourbon, boobs and burnouts anyway.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.