Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Lifestyle

Canberra's most awarded family
owned real estate agency

Picking up the pieces post election

By johnboy 9 September 2013 30

zed

Well you’re all going to have to get used to Prime Minister Abbott for at least a little while.

Can anyone remember an election where the result was so clearly obvious in advance?

Here in the ACT there was a small swing to Liberal despite the scare campaigns on public service cuts.

In the Senate race Zed was a few hundred votes short of a quota but will likely win after some nail biting.

At the next election with the swing against him things could be tough if Simon Sheikh sticks around.

It’s worth noting Labor only just barely made a quota themselves for Kate Lundy.

The Animal Justice Party preferencing the Liberals appears to have been decisive, especially with their lucky placement on the ballot.

We humbly suggest to Zed and his team that an ability to answer questions will be key to getting cleanly over the line next time around.

For myself I think the Labor Party functionaries need to forever remember that political power in this country derives from the populace and is not their own plaything.

Tony Abbott is a lucky recipient of Labor’s internal failings.

But the harder we work the luckier we get. Opportunities multiply as they are seized.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
30 Responses to
Picking up the pieces post election
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
caf 7:27 pm 10 Sep 13

IrishPete said :

watto23 said :


I think though that Tasmania has 5 seats because that is the minimum a state can have vs the 2 seats a territory must have both mean that Canberra and the ACT suffer come election time. If the ACT had 5 seats you’d probably find at least 2 would be coalition. Even a third seat as what happened in the 96 election, it went to the coalition.

?eh?

States have 12 Senators each, methinks. And half are up for election at each Federal election, so 6 in each. If somewhere is showing only 5 Senators elected in Tassie, that’s because the 6th hasn’t been won yet – they’re still counting.

IP

The post you are replying to is referring to the House of Reps, in which each original state is indeed guaranteed at least 5 seats, Tasmania being the only current beneficiary of this rule.

IrishPete 5:34 pm 10 Sep 13

watto23 said :

HiddenDragon said :

Keep up, JB, next time around it will be Alistair – gotta keep that generational change thing rolling along.

In the meantime, this AEC table probably best illustrates why Canberra (Canute-berra?) is so special, and can probably look forward to some very special treatment in coming years:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTppByState-17496.htm

That said, Tasmania had a huge swing against them and liberal only just outpolled them, but more importantly won the 3 seats.

I think though that Tasmania has 5 seats because that is the minimum a state can have vs the 2 seats a territory must have both mean that Canberra and the ACT suffer come election time. If the ACT had 5 seats you’d probably find at least 2 would be coalition. Even a third seat as what happened in the 96 election, it went to the coalition.

I doubt though it will be a priority of any government to fix up the senate and house of reps, because the ACT gets a much smaller voice than many other citizens of other states and as a result its easy to just forget us and not give a shit.

So if Zed is the sole coalition member maybe its something he should raise with his party to get some amendments going.

Of course while democracies are great the downside is tony and the coalition said what it needed to gain power, just like every other previous government did and it doesn’t mean its what is best for the country, but its what won the most votes.

I’d also prefer say fixed 4 year terms as well, although happy to have provisions to sack a government within the fixed term. It means things can be planned a bit better.

?eh?

States have 12 Senators each, methinks. And half are up for election at each Federal election, so 6 in each. If somewhere is showing only 5 Senators elected in Tassie, that’s because the 6th hasn’t been won yet – they’re still counting.

IP

IrishPete 5:33 pm 10 Sep 13

MrBigEars said :

Voter turnout appears to have been quite low. (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTurnoutByState-17496.htm)
Results are obviously not final, but it would appear to be a fairly sizable drop in turnout compared to 2010.

I assume that the turnout appears low because they haven’t counted all the postal and pre-poll votes yet.

IP

caf 2:30 pm 10 Sep 13

Roundhead89 said :

Brendan Smyth (Lib) won the 1995 Canberra by-election when “Whiteboard Ros” Kelly (ALP) was forced to retire. The ACT then had two electorates. Following that win the Keating Labor government created an extra seat called Namadgi in the ACT to split the Liberal vote and regain all seats in the ACT. It worked. At the 1996 election Smyth ran for Namadgi and lost to Annette Ellis (ALP) – despite the landslide victory for Howard and the Libs nationwide – meaning the ACT had three Labor members in the lower house.

That is not what happened. The ACT acquired a third house of reps seat because its relative population growth meant that it went slightly over 2.5 quotas in the seat calculation that is dispassionately applied by the Electoral Commissioner. It lost that seat because of relative population decline in the wake of the new Howard Government’s public service cuts, and has never regained it. At the most recent determination, the ACT sat on 2.38 seat quotas.

There was no conspiracy.

Roundhead89 12:06 pm 10 Sep 13

watto23 said :

HiddenDragon said :

Keep up, JB, next time around it will be Alistair – gotta keep that generational change thing rolling along.

In the meantime, this AEC table probably best illustrates why Canberra (Canute-berra?) is so special, and can probably look forward to some very special treatment in coming years:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTppByState-17496.htm

That said, Tasmania had a huge swing against them and liberal only just outpolled them, but more importantly won the 3 seats.

I think though that Tasmania has 5 seats because that is the minimum a state can have vs the 2 seats a territory must have both mean that Canberra and the ACT suffer come election time. If the ACT had 5 seats you’d probably find at least 2 would be coalition. Even a third seat as what happened in the 96 election, it went to the coalition.

I’d also prefer say fixed 4 year terms as well, although happy to have provisions to sack a government within the fixed term. It means things can be planned a bit better.

Wrong. Brendan Smyth (Lib) won the 1995 Canberra by-election when “Whiteboard Ros” Kelly (ALP) was forced to retire. The ACT then had two electorates. Following that win the Keating Labor government created an extra seat called Namadgi in the ACT to split the Liberal vote and regain all seats in the ACT. It worked. At the 1996 election Smyth ran for Namadgi and lost to Annette Ellis (ALP) – despite the landslide victory for Howard and the Libs nationwide – meaning the ACT had three Labor members in the lower house.

As for fixed four year terms, are you serious? Did you really want the hated hung parliament to run an extra year and for us to wait until the end of next year to get things back to normal again? And have you forgotten NSW between 2007-11? The Labor government had become so rotten, corrupt and scandal plagued that everybody wanted an election but were told no because of the fixed four year term. People were even sending petitions to the state governor begging her to sack the government but she said her hands were tied by the fixed four year term. Even The Sydney Morning Herald – which had campaigned to have the system introduced in the early 1990s – began campaigning for either the restoration of floating three year terms or California-style recall elections where voters could bring on an election if enough signed a petition.

watto23 11:39 am 10 Sep 13

HiddenDragon said :

Keep up, JB, next time around it will be Alistair – gotta keep that generational change thing rolling along.

In the meantime, this AEC table probably best illustrates why Canberra (Canute-berra?) is so special, and can probably look forward to some very special treatment in coming years:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTppByState-17496.htm

That said, Tasmania had a huge swing against them and liberal only just outpolled them, but more importantly won the 3 seats.

I think though that Tasmania has 5 seats because that is the minimum a state can have vs the 2 seats a territory must have both mean that Canberra and the ACT suffer come election time. If the ACT had 5 seats you’d probably find at least 2 would be coalition. Even a third seat as what happened in the 96 election, it went to the coalition.

I doubt though it will be a priority of any government to fix up the senate and house of reps, because the ACT gets a much smaller voice than many other citizens of other states and as a result its easy to just forget us and not give a shit.

So if Zed is the sole coalition member maybe its something he should raise with his party to get some amendments going.

Of course while democracies are great the downside is tony and the coalition said what it needed to gain power, just like every other previous government did and it doesn’t mean its what is best for the country, but its what won the most votes.

I’d also prefer say fixed 4 year terms as well, although happy to have provisions to sack a government within the fixed term. It means things can be planned a bit better.

HiddenDragon 11:14 am 10 Sep 13

Keep up, JB, next time around it will be Alistair – gotta keep that generational change thing rolling along.

In the meantime, this AEC table probably best illustrates why Canberra (Canute-berra?) is so special, and can probably look forward to some very special treatment in coming years:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTppByState-17496.htm

MrBigEars 10:11 am 10 Sep 13

Voter turnout appears to have been quite low. (http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseTurnoutByState-17496.htm)
Results are obviously not final, but it would appear to be a fairly sizable drop in turnout compared to 2010.

DrKoresh 10:08 am 10 Sep 13

Darkfalz said :

Won’t happen. But SkyNews is a better product than ABCNews24. By a country mile.

Bahahahahaha! You are a piece of wit and no mistake.

davo101 10:06 am 10 Sep 13

IrishPete said :

Are you in breach of Godwin’s law??? Or is the Nazi reference just coincidental?

IP

Nah, just a coincidence. I was looking for a federal election where the result was fairly certain a long time before hand. I considered FDR’s or Regan’s second terms, as these were known four years in advance; or one of Chrétien’s victories; or maybe the INC. But none of them had the ironclad certainty. A high risk approach I’ll admit given that some numpty will grab the wrong end of the stick.

Anyway can you “breach” Godwin’s law? Given that it is just an observation that any debate carried on for “enough” time will cover “everything”. It’s like saying if you trip over you’re in breach of Newton’s law of gravity.

Darkfalz 9:32 am 10 Sep 13

JC said :

I have a prediction for one of Abbotts first acts as PM. The cancellation of the exclusive ABC contract to run the Australia Network, with it going to tender and being won by Sky News.

Won’t happen. But SkyNews is a better product than ABCNews24. By a country mile.

JC 10:47 pm 09 Sep 13

I have a prediction for one of Abbotts first acts as PM. The cancellation of the exclusive ABC contract to run the Australia Network, with it going to tender and being won by Sky News. I reckon Murdochs hatred of public servants is as a result of the Australia Network contract a few years back, which coincides with when he turned on Labor.

It would be perfect for Murdoch, to have the Australian Government to pay him to spread his propaganda to the region.

c_c™ 10:33 pm 09 Sep 13

miz said :

Some examples of foregone conclusions include Whitlam’s It’s Time win in 1972 (you could actually feel it in the air – it was bleeding obvious, and I was just a child at the time). Also John Hewson’s loss to Keating – though Keating was the incumbent.

People often forget that his gain in that election was actually very small, it’s not the landslide massive momentous event people seem to recall so fondly.

DrKoresh 10:32 pm 09 Sep 13

davo101 said :

Oh sorry. How about the German federal election 1938?

What about electing my fist to your face for saying a such profoundly pea-brained thing?

switch 10:06 pm 09 Sep 13

miz said :

Some examples of foregone conclusions include Whitlam’s It’s Time win in 1972

Or, even moreso, when he lost it in 1975. Didn’t Bob Hawke as a commentator call it lost about 15 minutes after the polls closed?

housebound 9:38 pm 09 Sep 13

Matt_Watts said :

“At the next election with the swing against him things could be tough if Simon Sheikh sticks around.”

Perhaps. Alternatively, looking at the ALP vote, it’s always possible Zed would make up ground so the second seat could be a battle between the Greens and the ALP!

Unlikely. Lundy is very, very safe.

Anyone know when they count the below-the-line prepoll votes?

Deref 8:52 pm 09 Sep 13

A bloody good reason, if we needed another one, to do Robson rotation in federal elections.

miz 8:37 pm 09 Sep 13

Some examples of foregone conclusions include Whitlam’s It’s Time win in 1972 (you could actually feel it in the air – it was bleeding obvious, and I was just a child at the time). Also John Hewson’s loss to Keating – though Keating was the incumbent.

IrishPete 8:25 pm 09 Sep 13

davo101 said :

johnboy said :

Talking about a federal election here.

Oh sorry. How about the German federal election 1938?

Are you in breach of Godwin’s law??? Or is the Nazi reference just coincidental?

IP

steveu 6:42 pm 09 Sep 13

neanderthalsis said :

Zed will probably do just as much work as Kate Lundy, Gai Wassername and Andrew Leigh; and we could expect that Simon Sheik would be much the same. In this here town we are cursed with a political class that takes our vote for granted, acts in their own interest or the interest of their cronies rather than in the broader interest of Canberrans.

Spot on. Kate Lundy did bring to the public attention the little swindle Telstra in all its goodness was doing with pair gain…I will give her due credit for this.

But as a public servant town, everyone here is terrified of politicians.

Canberrans perhaps should learn to think outside the box when voting and do something to make the politicians think. I guess will never happen given how under represented we are in reps and senate. How about we give up all our MLAs in return for a couple more senate and reps seats? I’m sure Canberrans would be supportive of that.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site