Yes, looks like it will be about 56-44 (a 12% swing or so). Not sure whether to read more into it than a standard protest-vote swing in a low-consequence by-election, although by-elections caused by death usually don't have as big a swing as those caused by the incumbent resigning to take a cushy job somewhere.
Not totally unexpected, being south of Bell St...?
In a sense, no - the state results more or less matched the federal ones, which hasn't previously been the case. I had thought Labor would do better than they did federally, partly because the asylum-seeker issue hurt them badly here in the federal election but that isn't a state issue, and partly because our federal candidate had a certain amount of baggage (I've long said that individual candidates don't normally matter that much in a general election in a metropolitan seat - except if your candidate stuffs up badly enough to make the national news).
An interesting point made by someone in the news today is that the demographics in Northcote have changed, in as much as the post-war immigrant community, long reliable Labor voters, whilst still prominent (Greek in Fairfield, Italian further north and west), is gradually dying out and being replaced by people likely to be more sympathetic to the Greens - Batman is one of (I think) only four federal electorates where the overseas-born population decreased between 2011 and 2016. This might take a bit longer to catch up with Brunswick, as their major immigrant communities (many Middle Eastern) are more recent arrivals and therefore younger.
Your previous statement confuses me. Shouldn't it be the Liberals who have an image problem in relation to (their treatment of) asylum seekers?
I think it was Rudd who re-opened Manus.
Unless the "perpetrator" is still in the mix or very recently so, if the current regime supports it it reflects on them.
In Melbourne, at least, the Greens' campaign material strongly targets Labor rather than Liberal, because it's mostly Labor seats that they're chasing. You'll see lots of Greens posters saying things like "Stop Labor's Adani Mine".
(As far as I can tell, Labor's actual policy on Adani, at least at federal level, is that they don't want it but also don't want to be seen to be the ones who killed it, so are waiting it to fall over for lack of economic viability, as it surely will unless massively subsidised. There do seem to be some Labor people in Queensland, the Premier included, who actually want it to happen).
I don't think its right to have a policy on a single new mine proposal: shouldn't policy be based around environmental, economic or social issues? So Labor I think has a policy that 50% of Australia's energy should be supplied by renewables by 2030. That is up from last years 17%.
Decisions on what goes into that have been left to the market for many years, not least since the Governments stopped running power generation. The "market" depends on raising money to build power stations and infrastructure including mines - and to raise money a clear process of permitting is required to make that investment.
The support proposed by Government in Adani's case I think is for the railway, not the mine, which would therefore be open to other uses.
The Greens policy is not stated either, but seems to come down to No coal, No gas, No brown coal, No hydro, No nuclear, No wind farms that make infrasound, No offshore wind or wave power and No waste to energy.
Damn those chickens laying their double-yolked eggs.
We're already at the stage where new coal-fired power is not cost-competitive in most countries (even without a carbon price), which means demand for coal is falling sharply. What we're seeing at the moment is largely about holders of existing assets (either generation or mining) trying desperately to get another 5 or 10 years out of those assets before the market completely collapses and those assets become worthless.
Adani may not have a viable mine, but they are very good at playing politicians off against each other to extract money from them (exhibit A; somehow convincing the Townsville and Rockhampton councils to pay for an airstrip hundreds of kilometres from either city). Even if they do manage to produce some coal, I'm not sure what they propose to do with it when the Indian government has publicly committed to phasing out coal imports by 2020.
Where have the Greens ever sided with the "infrasound" crazies? Or opposed offshore wind and wave power? I don't agree 100% with their blatant opposition to nuclear but you have to admit it has some (pretty massive) drawbacks.
I certainly don't dismiss nuclear out of hand, but I've yet to see any evidence that it's cost-effective against other forms of zero-emissions power (unless, like coal, you're dealing with old existing plants which are already largely depreciated).
This discussion thread is closed.