Surveying the damage region by region:
| 2011 PRIMARY VOTE | ALP 2PP | |||||
| ALP | L-NP | GRN | 2011 | 2007 | 2003 | |
| Inner Sydney | 29.3% | 36.9% | 21.2% | 47.4% | 59.6% | 64.1% |
| -12.9% | 12.0% | 0.0% | -12.2% | -4.6% | ||
| Northern Sydney | 12.2% | 67.6% | 14.0% | 19.2% | 35.5% | 42.3% |
| -8.8% | 16.2% | 2.5% | -16.2% | -6.9% | ||
| Western Sydney | 41.3% | 40.4% | 6.9% | 50.6% | 68.3% | 71.5% |
| -16.3% | 16.2% | 0.9% | -17.7% | -3.2% | ||
| Southern Sydney | 35.1% | 49.6% | 8.7% | 42.5% | 56.7% | 62.2% |
| -12.1% | 13.6% | 1.5% | -14.3% | -5.4% | ||
| Outer Sydney | 24.7% | 53.0% | 8.1% | 34.2% | 57.8% | 60.8% |
| -23.5% | 17.3% | 1.3% | -23.6% | -3.0% | ||
| SYDNEY | 28.5% | 50.7% | 11.1% | 37.9% | 55.3% | 59.9% |
| -14.5% | 15.7% | 1.6% | -17.5% | -4.5% | ||
| Central Coast | 28.7% | 51.5% | 12.0% | 37.6% | 51.9% | 57.5% |
| -12.9% | 12.9% | 4.8% | -14.3% | -5.6% | ||
| Hunter Region | 30.9% | 36.1% | 8.8% | 47.0% | 59.8% | 60.5% |
| -12.9% | 12.6% | -0.3% | -12.8% | -0.7% | ||
| Illawarra | 35.2% | 34.5% | 12.3% | 51.5% | 68.7% | 69.6% |
| -19.0% | 12.0% | 1.7% | -17.2% | -0.9% | ||
| North Coast | 12.7% | 60.7% | 13.1% | 22.9% | 35.9% | 41.5% |
| -11.7% | 12.4% | 2.6% | -13.0% | -5.6% | ||
| Regional | 16.5% | 59.7% | 6.1% | 25.8% | 36.8% | 40.6% |
| -11.0% | 29.5% | 0.5% | -11.0% | -3.8% | ||
| NON-SYDNEY | 22.7% | 50.8% | 9.1% | 34.2% | 46.1% | 48.5% |
| -14.5% | 15.7% | 1.6% | -11.9% | -2.4% | ||
Inner Sydney (6 seats). All seats had been held by Labor except Sydney; now they have lost Drummoyne and Coogee to the Liberals and are tussling with the Greens for Balmain and Marrickville (though they are probably home and hosed in the latter). Labor got pummelled by a 23.9 per cent swing in Drummoyne, and in the mid-teens in Heffron and Coogee. However, their vote held up a lot better where the campaign had been framed in the Labor-versus-Greens terms. The method I’ve used for approximating Labor-versus-Liberal two-party results doesn’t work so well when non-major parties take a big share of the vote, which applies to most of this area.
Northern Sydney (15 seats). By this I mean “the Liberal area” (albeit that it includes Ryde, which Labor won in 2007 – but which now has a Liberal margin of 26 per cent), and to this end I’ve stretched the definition of northern Sydney to include Vaucluse. This area recorded Labor’s lowest primary vote swing simply because they had the least to lose here – a swing as big as in outer Sydney would have sent them beyond the twilight zone and into negative territory.
Western Sydney (19 seats). All were held by Labor going into the election: now they’ve lost Camden, Campbelltown, Granville, Londonderry, Parramatta, Smithfield and Strathfield, and are going down to the wire in East Hills. The two worst swings were in seats they retained: Cabramatta and Lakemba. The 9.1 per cent swing in Macquarie Fields was about 5 per cent better than anything else in the region, and probably has something to do with the unusually big swing last time.
Southern Sydney (6 seats). This includes Liberal-held Cronulla and five Labor held-seats in the St George/Sutherland/Maroubra area. Labor has lost Miranda, Rockdale and probably Oatley. Swings in the Labor seats were in the 13 to 15 per cent range except Miranda, where a very slight margin was annihilated by a 21.8 per cent swing.
Outer Sydney (6 seats). The new suburbs are always the most volatile, and the 23.6 per cent two-party swing reflects this. Four of the seats recorded swings in the 20s, peaking with Riverstone at a giddy 29.9 per cent. Labor won all six seats at the 2007 election – now there are Liberal margins ranging from 4.7 per cent in Blue Mountains to 24.8 per cent in Menai.
Central Coast (4 seats). Featuring Terrigal, which the Liberals already held, and Gosford, Wyong and The Entrance, which they didn’t before but do now. Labor suffered a tellingly smaller swing in Wyong (9.5 per cent), where member David Harris stood and fought, than in Gosford (16.5 per cent) and The Entrance (17.1 per cent) which were vacated by sitting members.
Hunter Region (8 seats). Previously six Labor seats, one Liberal seat and an independent seat, now five Liberal seats, two Labor seats are an independent. Newcastle, Charlestown, Maitland and Swansea went Liberal, while Cessnock and Wallsend stayed Labor. None of the independents who were being touted proved a serious contender: Newcastle Lord Mayor John Tate managed less than half what he scored when he nearly won the seat in 2007 to finish in fourth place.
Illawarra (5 seats). All Labor before, now two Labor (Shellharbour and Keira), two Liberal (Kiama and Heathcote) with one going down to the wire between Labor member Noreen Hay and independent challenger Gordon Bradbery, who is the only potential new independent.
North Coast (7 seats). Six Nationals seats have become seven with Peter Besseling’s defeat in Port Macquarie.
Regional (17 seats). Previously accounted for two Labor (Bathurst and Monaro) and two independent (Tamworth and Dubbo) seats, now a conservative clean sweep. All four gains have been by the Nationals, most memorably Bathurst with its 36.3 per cent swing. Liberal held seats in this group are Albury, Bega, Goulburn, South Coast and Wagga Wagga).
The 2011 results in the table are based on almost the entire polling booth count, with a couple of booths still outstanding here and there. The swings are in comparison with the comparable figures from the last election. The two-party figures presented above are based on estimates in the many cases that were not Labor-versus-Coalition two-party contests, and are perhaps a little lacking in finesse. I have basically extrapolated the preference flows for the seats where there are Labor-versus-Coalition on to the ones where there aren’t. Independent and minor party preferences appeared to have divide about 24 per cent to Labor and 20 per cent to the Coalition, with 56 per cent exhausting. This compared with 30 per cent to Labor, 20 per cent to the Coalition and 50 per cent exhausting in 2007. The 2011 figure was determined with reference to 63 electorates where there were a) complete polling booth counts, and b) Labor-versus-Coalition preference figures available.
The upper house looks like 11 seats for the Coalition, five for Labor, three for the Greens and one each for Shooters and Fishers and the Christian Democratic Party, although Labor could perhaps yet poach the third Greens’ seat. If not, the numbers in the chamber will be Coalition 19 (12 Liberals and seven Nationals), Labor 14, Greens five, Shooters and Fishers two, Christian Democratic Party two.
DARN – Each to his own on that score, I suppose. But I think most voters rank competence a lot higher.
[Rees or anyone else leading Labor were heading for the same train wreck. To suggest otherwise is kidding ones self.]
Good thing then that nobody is suggesting otherwise.
[But I think most voters rank competence a lot higher.]
If “handed” the leadership when the party was politically dominant I have no doubt she would have kept it that way. As you admit she was given, handed, taken, call it what you will, a poison chalice. A miracle was not to be had.
[Good thing then that nobody is suggesting otherwise.]
You wouldn’t think so by the way some are canning KK.
Gary
Oh I definitely hope the ALP will continue to stick their heads in the sand and thinks nothing is happening, it is just NSW ALP
Mytwobobsworth,
Muchas Gracias for alerting us to the SMH articles.
[You wouldn’t think so by the way some are canning KK.]
KK is the past, not the future of NSW ALP.
I wouldn’t mind if she hung around as leader as a stop gap until a more substantive leader can be found, but she is not the future of the Party.
Rees tried to pull off the unimaginable. He tried to ditch Tripodi, Obeid, McDonald et al all in one fell swoop.
If he had succeeded he wouldnt have gotten 25% plus swings in Western Sydney.
[KK is the past, not the future of NSW ALP.]
Agreed and neither is any past leader IMHO.
[If he had succeeded he wouldnt have gotten 25% plus swings in Western Sydney.]
I think you mean ‘maybe’.
[Oh I definitely hope the ALP will continue to stick their heads in the sand and thinks nothing is happening, it is just NSW ALP]
Whatever rings your bell dovif but what I’ve stated still remains so. The indies federally are going no where. It is not in their interest to do so.
blue-green:
Nobody cheered Rees louder than me on that front.
Gary:
Yes, whoever leads Labor will only be a stop-gap leader, but it’s more than just that which is needed atm. Rees has shown a determination for Party reform – much needed by Labor. KK has not shown an ounce of inclination on that score. Probably not her fault, but we know from experience that if she stays on those hard decisions won’t get made. In any case, it’s irrelevent because KK has already resigned as leader.
Gary
Under Rees the coalition vote averaged under 42% primary.
Under Kenneally the coaltion average 46% primary.
At the election the coalition received 51% primary.
Don’t tell me there would be no difference under Rees. The stats speak for themselves.
Would everyone please stop speculating about Rob Oakeshott. He’s not about to change sides and embrace Tony Abbott. Here’s why.
Oakeshott’s deal wasn’t the main reason for Besseling losing Port Macquarie. There was a bit of a backlash, but local issues counted more. They were at play here in 2008, they’ve gone and the voters who opted for other conservative independents in the 2008 by-election have gone back to their National roots. I explained all that some pages back.
This area is staunchly National. National voters would happily vote for Bessie the Cow if she ran as a National candidate. It takes someone exceptional to break through that ‘I vote National because my great-grand-pappy always did’ mentality. That, and the mentality of a recent influx of Coalition voters moving up here to get away from what they perceive as the ruination of Sydney by too many immigrants who are not 100% white Anglo-Saxon. They can’t vote Liberal here, so they vote National.
Oakeshott sucessfully turned independent because voters knew him and appreciated his hard work for the electorate. He was the first politician in decades of National/Country Party rule to actually care about what happened here. That’s why he junped ship, he couldn’t stomach the party-first mentality of the Nats. The Nats campaigns against him have been filthy, Besso copped even more filth.
A lot of us here (including me) spent years voting Labor in state and federal elections, not out of any real liking for that party, but in the forlorn hope of at least making both seats marginal enough to get a government to take a bit of interest. When Oakeshott turned independent we got that attention. For a bit of insight do some research into the saga of Port Macquarie Base Hospital and the Coalition’s disastrous attempt to privatise it. No government would have dared come up with such an idea for a city Liberal electorate, but as a safe National seat we were fair game for a doomed experiment. Oakeshott won us back the hospital and in siding with Labor gained Federal funding for desperately needed improvements. The O’Farrell government, acting on orders, will now try to derail Oakeshott by crying poor and refusing to honour the Keneally government’s funding committments for the hospital. This, they hope, will paint Oakeshott as someone who breaks promises and has no power to get anything done.
Speculation about him changing sides is part of their derailment plans. The Coalition don’t and never did want him on side, they want him gone. Oakeshott knew last August that should he opt for Abbott the Mad Monk would go to an immediate election and the big guns would all be aimed at Oakeshott. Why would he change, when he knows that still applies?
If Labor wants to stay in office and keep Oakeshott on side they’ll steamroll over O’Farrell and make an immediate start on those hospital buildings. Oakeshott may well decide enough is enough and opt for a pleasant life as a country lawyer rather than try for another term. His family would love him to take that path. I know Oakeshott and I know one thing he won’t be doing. He won’t be turning to Abbott.
[If the Independants works together and they call themself a brand, I am not going to correct them]
Fair enough. But if they have started acting as a pseudo political party then that is what they are – not independents.
I would also remind you that it is not unusual for those who have just lost their seats to start looking for scapegoats (witness Cheryl Kernot’s famous whinge a few years back when she lost Dickson) and independents are no more immune from that than anyone else. I suspect we are seeing a bit of that in the fallout from Saturday’s rout.
Under Rees the ALP averaged PV of 30%
Under Kenneally they averaged ~26%
At the election they received ~26%
Scrutineered on Saturday night. Got a chance to see the dedicated work of the poll officials. Great company as well.
BLUE GREEN – Totally correct. The only way Labor was going to get back into the game (or at least minimise the loss) was to go through a major structural reform. Rees tried it and got the bullet. And the question is: who knocked him off? Mmm, I’ll have to get back to you on that one.
If Keneally goes to Federal politics, does her husband get the state seat???
O’Farrell and Stoner have been sworn in as a two man cabinet.
[Under Rees the coalition vote averaged under 42% primary.
Under Kenneally the coaltion average 46% primary.
At the election the coalition received 51% primary.
Don’t tell me there would be no difference under Rees. The stats speak for themselves.]
And you are absolutely certain that had Rees kept going as leader his figures would have remained at those levels? Just how can you be sure of that? Another couple of scandals, as there were under KK, and his numbers would have dived further I reckon.
[Under Rees the coalition vote averaged under 42% primary.
Under Kenneally the coaltion average 46% primary.
At the election the coalition received 51% primary.
Don’t tell me there would be no difference under Rees. The stats speak for themselves.]
That was after a few more scandals, resignations and other things totally out of her control.
Under the same circumstances Rees would have got just as big a thumping, probably worse.
K is the past, not the future of NSW ALP.
[Agreed and neither is any past leader IMHO}
Sadly, what some Victorian English polly applies to Rees and KK:
“Their futures are behind them.”
[That was after a few more scandals, resignations and other things totally out of her control.
Under the same circumstances Rees would have got just as big a thumping, probably worse.]
Exactly Darn.
ATTICUS: Menzies, Howard, Churchill… All came back from the political dead. The manner in which Rees left gives him a chance of being premier again. He’s certainly never been thrown out by the electorate. Dunno if it will happen. But I’d give him a much better chance than Robertson.
Some of the Kenneally scandals were beat ups. The gay bar thing had nothing to do with his ministerial performance. As did the pathetic public chastising she gave another senior figure for accessing porn from his computer.
They were made bigger than they needed to be.
leone (814)
Thanks for that post. Very insightful and well argued.
Let’s just hope Oakshott isn’t up against Bessie the Cow next time around.
[The manner in which Rees left gives him a chance of being premier again. He’s certainly never been thrown out by the electorate. Dunno if it will happen. But I’d give him a much better chance than Robertson.]
He was ridiculed and laughed at by the electorate while he was leader. Like KK he won’t be making any comeback.
821: No, the further collapse of the ALP vote and the 60+ 2PP results we saw this year were entirely caused by the bungled power privatisation and Keneally’s prorouging of Parliament.
A few excerpts from a circular letter I have just received from Luke Foley:
“The State Parliamentary Labor Party conducted its affairs in recent years in a way that destroyed the public’s faith in NSW Labor’s integrity. Labor will only recover if it is searingly honest about what happened over the last few years.
Many felt that we stopped being a Labor government: that we weren’t on the side of the people, but rather hostage to self interest and to special interests. Labor – the party formed to fight for the outsiders – ultimately became identified as a government for party insiders, property developers and coal mining companies.
Voters look to their state government for communal services: modern schools, state of the art hospitals and community health services, accessible public transport, safe streets, protection of vulnerable children, a flourishing artistic and cultural sector, social housing.
For the past seventy years our social democratic politics have dominated New South Wales, capturing the middle ground and delivering social reform.
Yet the breadth of State Labor’s agenda was assaulted by a very small clique inside the government after Bob Carr’s retirement…
A political model of corporate donors funding massive electronic advertising helped deliver election victories in the good times. When the tough times arrived, the corporate donors were long gone. The cost of the long neglect of the Party’s membership became clear…
This year, there will be a contract cleaner – she’s likely from a non English speaking background, she’s in her 50’s and she’s been doing this for twenty years at just above the minimum wage – who will get long service leave for the first time ever.
And she’ll get it because – for one brief, shining moment amidst the indulgence and debauchery of the last four years – a Labor government did what Labor is supposed to do, legislating for this right. When we debase the standing of the Labor Party it is the people who most need a Labor government who pay the price.
For that cleaner’s sake, and for the sake of hundreds of thousands of people for whom markets don’t always deliver a fair or decent outcome, we need to find the way back”.
One could ask why he didn’t publicly say this 18 months ago.
There is another way of looking at the would Rees have done better than KK and that is how they each performed in their local seat.
Rees suffered the smaller swing and before anyone says o but the two seats Toongabbie and Heffron are difference types of area i would counter that with but the swings in the area surrounding Toongabbie were bigger than the swings in the seats surrounding Heffron.
I think we can say that yes Rees might have done better in western sydney but the problems of the Hunter and the Illawarra would still have remained and in reality this result was always going to be bad regardless of who the ALP leader was.
[No, the further collapse of the ALP vote and the 60+ 2PP results we saw this year were entirely caused by the bungled power privatisation and Keneally’s prorouging of Parliament.]
Genuine question. I’ve seen no polling indicating the issues people were thinking about as they cast their vote on Saturday. Have you seen such polling?
OAKESHOTT – Everybody is going to be a reformer now.
but some will be more reformist than others
Just saw this on twitter
[meredithart
1. Greens Jamie Parker 40 votes ahead of Labor in Balmain. #nswvotes]
[I think we can say that yes Rees might have done better in western sydney]
The key word is “might”. We really don’t know.
leone
thanks for your insights. I have always felt that Oakeshott would never go to the coalition, and you have confirmed that for me.
Rosa,
You might be right about Rees. Please note I prefaced my comment with “sadly” because “burning” him as leader would be a pitiful waste, if that’s what’s happened.
As for giving him a better chance than Robertson, that’s not much of a yardstick.
[”I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the Labor Party,” Ms Judge, who lost the seat of Strathfield, said.
”There are certain individuals within the Labor Party who have not always had the community’s best interests at heart, who haven’t always acted ethically and responsibly, and I will not mention any names. But people know who they are, and I don’t think the party belongs to a few select individuals, the party belongs to its members.”]
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/state-election-2011/humiliated-labor-goes-gunning-for-scapegoats-20110327-1cbyk.html?from=smh_sb
Its all OK apparently.
Bruce Hawker makes some interesting points.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/lessons-from-the-past-show-all-is-not-lost-20110327-1cby8.html
[Most importantly, Sussex Street will have to work with the opposition leader to drive through reform, come down hard on disruptive and self-serving factional operatives and start the healing. The stuff of opposition is constant campaigning – and that starts today.]
Division is political death.
mexicanbeemer @ 831
[Rees suffered the smaller swing]
A fourteen percent swing vs a sixteen percent swing – that’s a really important distinction.
[Many felt that we stopped being a Labor government: that we weren’t on the side of the people, but rather hostage to self interest and to special interests. Labor – the party formed to fight for the outsiders – ultimately became identified as a government for party insiders, property developers and coal mining companies.]
That’s pretty much what happened in Victoria too IMHO. In the end we didn’t have a real Labor government – only in name.
One thing we do know is that (assuming he holds his seat), Nathan Rees is way out ahead:
1. He lost the premiership on a matter of principle;
2. He saved his seat;
3. He still has a political future (?).
Meanwhile, many of his political enemies lost their careers when the gravy train crashed.
I’d be celebrating (very quietly) if I was him.
It will be interesting to see if NSW Labor sticks with Bruce Hawker for campaigning strategy and advice.
[I’d be celebrating (very quietly) if I was him.]
I’m sure he is delighted at the prospect of being in opposition for sometime.
leonie (814)
I agree with what you say as regards RO, I used to live in the electorate and what you say about the people who live there is quite true, unfortunately I live in next electorate to you now where the mentality is even more pronounced. I admire RO and TW, and I agree RO has a good chance even despite the dirt thrown at him by Nats and the media, people know which side their bread is buttered on and how to get things done
Frankie V – Thanks for that, i was underimpression that and this waas from watching on Saturday but there was a time when i thought i heard that Rees swing was less than 10% and KK’s swing was in the mid teens.
OAKESHOTT / LEONIE / MARI – When is the NBN going to be rolled out in Oakeshott’s electorate? Is there a time-frame?
leone # 814
Thanks for that very informative post!
ATTICUS – More than anything, I sense a doggedness and determination about Rees that might see him return. I don’t know him personally, but I sense that he loves the game, which is a big plus.