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.
The major change out of this result and the one that will have long term political implication at the federal level is that the Libs have shown that they can win in the Hunter – the swing did not go to Independents it went to the Libs.
The Libs now have a chance to build up a political infrastructure in Newcastle and surrounds – and it may bring seats like Shortland and Newcastle into play federally over the next election or two.
Any chance you are a Sussex streeter Gary?
You need to take the glasses out of the box first before putting them on when looking at results…
Why all this love for the good Dr from Macq Fields? There is no way he would be leadership material. Please do not try to pretend that he has not benefited from the machine. He only has his seat in the first place because the machine imposed him when Chaytor got booted out.
The other interesting aspect of these results is that incumbency seems to be worth about 6 -7% – more than I would have ever imagined.
This incumbency factor may be a problem for the ALP at the next election in seats like Oatley or Kogarah should the MPs get fed up and retire.
The TPP is dead…. Long live the TCP
There are 28 seats (30% of the total) where the ALP-LNP TPP does not apply this morning or the SEO is rethinking its pre-election call (Maverick seats). Thirteen of these are seats where The Greens came second, most of the rest involve Independents. Newcastle is a special case of moving from a TCP to a TPP. The SEO has withdrawn last night’s TPP/TCP counts for 13 Mavericks, is recounting them and will probably have to recount more. These are all “Notional” TCP/TPPs…. we will probably have to wait for a full distribution of preferences before everything is clearer.
laz: I am not saying he is perfect…and in fact I have heard from a reliable source (although not from his mouth directly) that he has a great respect for Joe Tripodi. Fair to say not one of his views that leaves him with a golden glow.
I just know him and have worked with him. He is a really decent gentleman and a very intelligent man who will have the best interests of the state at heart. As I said before, I would have voted for him myself had I been in his electorate.
[Any chance you are a Sussex streeter Gary? You need to take the glasses out of the box first before putting them on when looking at results…]
Do they accept Victorians. I know I’ve got you beaten when you start with the personal stuff.
You’re making the mistake of equating state election results with federal. Nuff said.
Hanson can now rush back to Queensland and run for Ashgrove in the state election due about this time next year, I can guarantee her there will be cameras there willing to capture every move of any candidate with right wing tendencies.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/nsw-election-2011/hanson-loses-out/story-fn7q4q9f-1226028762696
…personal stuff? Sussex street is ALP headquarters how is that a personal insult? It was only a question anyway. I would have thought the glasses comment could have been taken as a fairly gentle joke (given the diatribe that passes for discussion on this blog sometimes!!!).
If you took any offence, I withdraw. You must have had a bad enough day without me making it worse!
My view on the Israel Boycott, Divestment, Sanction agenda, so there is no uncertainty at this time when it really matters to be clear – there are some more important things than winning a seat in NSW Parliament. One is to tell the truth about the fascist ‘settler’ movement associated with presidential assassin Yigal Amir, the moving feast of Israeli constitutional land law norms, and the threat of the ultra right of Israel with finger poised near the nuke weapon button of 100-200 weapons as they pursure Greater Israel imperialism, destablising security in the whole world.
These very real issues affect all people and that’s why Naomi Klein promotes the BDS and she is right. Sometimes one just has to stand by their values and say things people find taboo and confronting to their historical bias to Israel as the victim country.
Geoff Lambert,
You are quite right about TCP.
People are still quoting swings in TPP terms, when this is nonsense – in this election one should be looking at swings to or away from a candidate (as we used to do) to make much sense … and only in those where there were significant ind/other votes does TCP make sense.
The parties will also have to think again whether they want us to move to a de facto First Past the Post system by not suggesting 2nd and further preferences … some seats will be won by far less than 50% AFTER preferences
Wrong thread Tom?
[If you took any offence, I withdraw. You must have had a bad enough day without me making it worse!]
Not at all. I watched the election knowing the result. I’m a political junkie. I certainly am not upset by the result. Swimgs and roundabouts happen in politics. Barry, or the Libs at least, will meet their political maker again one day in NSW. That’s life.
I agree with OzPol Tragic re mixing up federal and state election results.
[OzPol Tragic
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 9:00 am | Permalink
They will considering what happened in NSW
And its contrarian political history. For example (and these area few recent examples):
NSW government was Liberal during the Whitlam years; however
In May 1976, six months after Gough Whitlam’s federal ALP government’s dismissal, Wran became NSW premier with a one-seat majority, defeating the Liberal Party’s Sir Eric Willis. In 1978, campaigning with the slogan ‘Wran’s our Man’, his government was returned with a ‘Wranslide’ election victory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Wran
At the height of the Hawke ascendancy
Nick Greiner was Premier and Treasurer of New South Wales from 1988-1992.
http://www.nickgreiner.com.au/
As the recession we had to have bit and Federal Labor was on the nose
In June 1992, Fahey was appointed Premier of New South Wales after Greiner was forced to resign as a result of an Independent Commission Against Corruption of New South Wales investigation. In 1994 NSW Parliament was prorogued on 7th December when the Fahey government was attempting to stop a committee’s work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fahey_%28politician%29
With Federal Labor heading for inevitable defeat after
26 January 1995, {when} Downer resigned as Liberal Leader and Howard was elected unopposed to replace him.[46] The Coalition subsequently opened a large lead over Labor in most opinion polls, and Howard overtook his old nemesis Paul Keating as preferred Prime Minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Howard#Opposition_years_.281983.E2.80.931996.29
Guess what happens in NSW!
In March 1995 Fahey’s government was narrowly defeated in a state election by the Labor opposition, led by Bob Carr.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fahey_%28politician%29
One could make a defensible case arguing that Labor unexpectedly triumphed in NSW Election07 because there was a possibility that Howard would be re-elected.
It’s called hedging one’s bets.
One would have to be a political nitwit, or disingenuous, to argue that a change of the political party in government in NSW presaged a similar change in Canberra. Could happen, of course. But, given NSW’s electoral history, it is the Gillard government, not the Opposition, that would be taking comfort from the NSW result – as several media commentators have notes … without giving the actual evidence.]
[Tom McLoughlin
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 9:31 am | Permalink
Oakes quotes Keating, attacking Robbo, ignoring Keating’s direct financial conflict of intrest as an investment bank employee, who falsely argued a wrong asset profile in the SMH opinion pages – only $$10-15 BILLION incorrect asset profile (deliberately confusing 1997, 2007 and 2008 versions of the privatisation proposals).]
And this is why it will be left to the Liberals to do the deed. Some in Labor destroyed a Government to stop it happening (in the short term), a battle won a war lost. Keating is right.
Having said that I love my Jewish friends and colleagues and hope they understand this perspective, but even if they don’t, this greenie is not for turning.
I won’t be listening, but Morrison you guys are still in opposition. There are no federal implications from what I can see.
[SCOTTMORRISONMP | 21 seconds ago
talking to ABC AM this morning about Fed implications of NSW election result – audiolink @ http://tinyurl.com/4ldctsh #auspol #nswvotes #fb]
If anyone thinks this result will make Oakeshott likely to change horses is frankly insane.
And yes, I’m looking at you, Michelle Grattan.
Why would an MP – already apparently “under fire” for choosing the “wrong” side swap sides again? It would be electoral suicide, primarily because it would hand government to a man who has said wants another election asap and, as a result of that, Oakeshott would lose his seat.
I know the Coalition want everyone to think that with Oaky back on the “right” side of the fence then it would appease all those National voters in his seat, but the truth is that many other people voted for him because he was an INDEPENDENT. Amongst those are people who would have preferenced Labor or the Greens and are therefore perfectly pleased with his decision. Then there are those who didn’t pay much attention after they put him at “1” and how no real opinion of who he should support – but who would be mightily unimpressed it, once he had made his decision, then changed his mind again purely because his electoral fortunes appear to have changed.
Make no mistake, when Oakeshott decided to back Labor he knew it was a career-ending decision either way. And he made it anyway, because he knew it was the best way of ensuring good outcomes for his electorate and his people. If they can’t see that then that’s their problem, but at least by sticking with his decision until the bitter end he will be seen to be a man of principle who put his electorate and the country before his own ambitions. A rarity in politics these days, I’m sure you will agree.
Keating is right, the way Enron didn’t happen and the GFC corruption which cost more then the first and 2nd WW, Vietnam and the great depression, didn’t happen either?
Spare me the corporation sheep.
Which is not just an ideological debate, because it underpins why Rhiannon has more credibility than the corporate sheep dare admit.
Danny Lewis
Another think re Oaky. He wants a price on Carbon. He wants the NBN. He wants a mining tax. The other mob don’t. So based on his own principles, why would he change sides?
sorry – thing
Bloody hell. When are we getting that edit button? 😉
Danny Lewis
I agree, Michelle Grattan and all those that believe this will put pressure on Oakeshott are full of it.
[Tom McLoughlin
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 10:06 am | Permalink
Keating is right, the way Enron didn’t happen and the GFC corruption which cost more then the first and 2nd WW, Vietnam and the great depression, didn’t happen either?
Spare me the corporation sheep.]
You missed the point Tom. It s going to happen, Liberals are now in power. Those that tried to stop it have destroyed the Labor party in NSW for nothing, zip, zero.
Victoria: I didn’t even both to look at policy because the Coalition’s argument doesn’t touch on policy; it’s all about who he “should” be supporting based on his background.
What that argument does, of course, is the deflect attention from the fact that the Coalition’s line on the NBN, carbon pricing and the mining tax is at odds with the benefits to its own electors in rural and regional seats. No way they want that can of worms opened up …
Once these things are bedded down and people can see the sky hasn’t fallen in (and won’t) then things will start to look up for Oaky. Doesn’t mean he’ll survive the next election, but that depends very much as well on what other issues occur over the next 2 years and what sort of campaign he runs.
[BOF is Ursula (then run by nuns), and Abbott is John 23rd – crusader misogynist?]
Tom McLoughlin – gee, I didn’t know BOF was at Ursies same time as me, he musta been REALLY low-key …
As to my own view, Tom. They are carbon fired power stations, old technology. The important thing was to transfer them to private hands before those willing to put money on the table woke up realised global warming is real.
The window is closing fast. Abbott and his anti science rabble may be able to keep it open for a few more years in the electorate, I suspect however that those that control the money have worked it out.
GRRR *Bother to look. I really need to stop tying so fast …
fredn,
suppose some would point the finger at those who tried to make it happen when they were opposed by their own membership, and it appears perhaps by the NSW public – if THEY had played their hand differently perhaps their party would not be where it is! Just saying..
Fair question about relevance of BDS soliliquy, but relevant because of Marrickville result and the assertions on Insiders about the result against the Green.
Actually the result is more to do with the $500K joint income per year of Albo and wifey resourcing, like door knob flyers night before the vote, and Kevin Rudd campaigning in the seat in the last few days.
The deeper analysis is that the Greens did so very well on primary vote in Marrickville still very solid despite the major press blowtorch in the last 2 weeks. If they hold their nerve all boats will rise on that performance. As GLambert implies there is a structural shift, if not headline results.
The scandal in Marrickville? The influence of Yvette Andrews at 4 hectare Addison Rd Community Centre and Reverse Garbage recycler in particular. Where is the lazy sheep media? Why don’t they report? Mediocre really. And I claim the funding for asbestos roof removal while I’m at it due to my blogging a while back about this disgraceful situation with kids nursery nearby.
Danny Lewis
Agree re Oakeshott, he and the Nationals are at war. The National just took back 34% of people who voted for Oakeshott, and in the process completely decimated Oakeshott’s friend and his mini-me in state politics. There is no chance Oakeshott will go back.
But there is every chance Oakeshott now will retire with Windsor
I’m saving my anecdote about Jamie Parker for the result.
[I agree, Michelle Grattan and all those that believe this will put pressure on Oakeshott are full of it]
Maybe there was still a very slight concern that labor could manage minority govt with the indies, so bye bye indies. Only the welded, bolted, tarzan grip, rusted ons could have voted labor yesterday.
I would not think Oakes would change sides, that is certain loss for him, would be viewed as weakness, unable to stand up for what he believes in.
If labor gets back in in 2013 then oakes will.
[kevrenor
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 10:15 am | Permalink
fredn,
suppose some would point the finger at those who tried to make it happen when they were opposed by their own membership, and it appears perhaps by the NSW public – if THEY had played their hand differently perhaps their party would not be where it is! Just saying..]
Those that tried to make it happen were dumped by the party, the pubic dumped the result.
MOD-LIB
I read in the Telegraph this morning that John Robertson has the backing of Eddie Obied. What more can I say? But on the other hand, it might be a good thing to get the Robertson leadership over and done with early in this term and then bringing in someone more viable later (e.g. Nathan Rees?). Dunno.
I’m in verity firth’s electorate and was tempted to vote green (as I did federally). but three things stopped me.
1. Verity is on the labor left;
1. Jamie Parker isn’t my cup of tea;
2. It was clear the result was going to be so bad for labor that I wanted to stop them being destroyed as a viable party. That wouldn’t be good for our system.
I wonder how many other people voted the way I did because it looked like the result for labor was going to be so terrible. Maybe that got verity over the line?
And those who thinks the Western Sydney seats will be returning to the ALP just like that.
That was used against the Howard government as well, and the Liberals held onto those while in government.
If OB does do infrastucture, unlike the ALP who talks about doing infrastructure, there is going to be a lot of gratitude for OB
fredn: the other issue that the problems in Japan have exposed is the reminder that, apart from the dangers of mucking around with uranium and other such minerals, they are also a finite resource.
Many people are asking whether it is worth the risk when our long-term energy needs can only be met with renewables. Once the minerals have gone; once the petroleum has gone; what then? You’ve got no choice but to turn to renewables, which is why we have to ensure the techologies are efficient and cost-effective enough to service large populations. To do that, we have to get working on it in earnest now.
Port Macquarie is a services based economy, not a redneck resource extraction economy which is minimal. Port voters will probably get duchessed to destablise Oakshott but that’s only as long as they keep him there. If they kill the golden goose they will be captured by the Coalition and royally ignored after that.
Clearly Port voters know how to run an indy profile to get ALP state bucks, and alp federal bucks. And now play indy fed, coalition state dynamic. But there is no show without Oakshott in place to keep the tension and govt dollars going.
[castle
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 10:17 am | Permalink
….
If labor gets back in in 2013 then oakes will.]
Agree 100%. And it will be Gillard, not the independents that will call the election day.
I agree with Mod Lib about Andrew McDonald – a really decent guy, who should have been promoted previously to the former Labor Ministry.
He and Nathan Rees have survived the purge of Labor Western Sydney MPs, so of course both should be Shadow Ministers.
McDonald with his medical background might be a good option to shadow Gillian Skinner.
Not at all enthused at the prospect of Robertson leading the party, but there’s probably no other option(assuming Carmel isn’t interested).
[If OB does do infrastucture, ]
He’s BO mate, BO
STEVE – Thanks for the Keating letter. Bob Carr/Mark Latham made the point this week that Robertson hasn’t even helped his union members by opposing electrical privatisation because now Fatty is going to privatise the lot without giving the members the sort of generous compo they could have expected from labor.
Rosa, you probably just got Falk elected for the Libs?
Is that a Falk related to the Phantom comics?
[If OB does do infrastucture, ]
BTW That should be IF…
Where’s the money coming from?
Well said Danny and Victoria. You also underline my point about Michelle Grattan made over at Pure Poison on the Pyne thread — that she is coalition-sympathetic and lazy in her analysis.
[Danny Lewis
Posted Sunday, March 27, 2011 at 10:22 am | Permalink
…..
To do that, we have to get working on it in earnest now.]
Agree, the solution isn’t to prop up old coal fired power stations, to look at the wonderful 2009 numbers and pretend that is going to be the future.
Seat of Wagga interesting, who was the Independent who got 9000+ votes?
Full marks to Carmel Tebutt(and potentially Verity Firth too), but I think it helped both of them that their Green opponents are certified fruit loops.