The biggest story today is obviously The Greens/ALP "preferences deal".
Preferences are a damaging issue as it makes voters think a vote for the
Greens is not meaningful - that it is being stolen from them and put
somewhere they didn’t decide, and that politics is about back room deals
they are not part of. We've therefore been asked by the National Committee
to focus on countering negative messages and providing correct and
positive information on this issue over the next few days.
Some points to note in your letters, blogs, posts, calls:
- Preference arrangements between parties are only valid to the voter if
they vote above the line. If I vote below the line then my preferences go
where I choose for them to go.
- Senator Bob Brown is saying voters should Vote 1 Australian Green and
after that it is up to them to decide where they vote based on each
candidate, their party and its policies.
- The preference arrangement between parties does flow down into "how to
vote cards" but they are a guide only. Each voter can and should put their
preferences in their own chosen order according to what they think of the
other parties and their policies. No one should feel their vote is being
decided by any party’s external arrangement.
- By law all political parties must lodge a preference arrangement with
*** WHERE TO COMMENT ONLINE ***
Labor, Greens seal preferences deal (ABC)
The Greens have confirmed that they have struck a preferences deal with
Labor, which will affect the Senate and some key House of Representatives
seats in the upcoming federal election. It is understood the deal involves
more than 50 key Lower House seats. The deal means Labor will direct its
Senate preferences to the Greens, while the Greens will direct preferences
to the ALP in the Lower House seats. But it is not yet known which seats
will be affected. The deal is likely to help the Greens secure the balance
of power in the Senate and may get Labor over the line in some key
marginal seats. Despite the deal Greens leader Bob Brown has told voters
to make their own decision. "I understand in the majority of the
contentious seats, there will be a preference arrangement to the Labor
party. Labor is giving their preferences to the Greens, but let me finish
that sentence by saying voters should make up their own minds," he said.
Senator Brown said said as far as he was aware the deal was not negotiated
on specific policy compromises. "I think it would be bad if people behind
closed doors were trading on issues that the electorate has the right to
decide on," he said. "I know of no policies that have been put on the line
in determining preferences. But I will note this today. Tony Abbott has
said there will never be a carbon price while he's around. That is highly
irresponsible." The agreement comes as a Newspoll in today's News Limited
papers shows support for the Greens on 12 per cent, up two points.
Please leave a comment online.
***
Greens confirm preference deal with Labor (Courier Mail)
THE Labor Party will direct its Senate preferences to the Australian
Greens ahead of all other parties. Local branches of the Greens have also
decided to direct preferences to the Labor Party ahead of the Coalition in
a number of lower house seats.
Please leave a comment online.
***
Essential: Gillard thrashing Abbott as preferred PM (Crikey)
The Greens continue to perform strongly, maintaining 13% of the primary
vote. This morning, the ALP and the Greens announced a preference deal
this morning covering the Senate and several House of Representatives
seats (according to one media outlet, 50 seats). But tellingly, both sides
are about the same on addressing climate change (18-16%), and the Greens
are way ahead — 36% of voters trust the Greens to best handle
climate change. The Greens also lead on “protecting the environment” and
“ensuring a quality water supply”. Labor also has a big lead on education.
The Coalition’s biggest leads are on national security and asylum
seekers.
You can leave a comment online in support.
***
Richardson: Labor gets a bonus from the Greens — sort of (Crikey)
But beware the equivocation here, from "preferences", meaning where votes
actually go when they're counted, to "preferences", meaning what a party
says on its how-to-vote cards. They're not the same thing. The first
matters a lot, but it doesn't follow that the second matters much, if at
all. It's scary how many people still don't understand this, but
preferences in the lower house, unlike the Senate, aren't controlled by
the parties. While some parties have mostly obedient voters who just
follow the how-to-vote cards, others, such as the Greens or previously One
Nation, attract a more ornery crowd who make up their own minds. And of
course the smaller the party, the less likely its voters are to get given
a how-to-vote card in the first place. Greens voters mostly come from the
left, and Greens preferences flow strongly to Labor regardless of what the
party says on its how-to-vote cards. Directing preferences to Labor rather
than leaving them open might make a difference of about 5%, maybe less. In
a typical outer-suburban marginal, where the Greens vote isn't very much
to begin with, that's only going to be about 0.2% or 0.3% of the total.
You can leave a comment online.
***
Greens putting forward alternative (Fairfax/Daily Advertiser)
GREENS candidate David Fletcher is determined to provide Riverina voters
with an alternative at the August 21 federal election. With just five
weeks to gather support, Mr Fletcher said his goal was to improve the
Greens' share of the vote compared to the last election -something he said
would be a challenge. "It's difficult for us because there's a bigger
field this time," he said.
You can post a comment online in support.
***
The case for the Greens (John Quiggin/Crikey)
Coming to the choice between Labor and the Greens, this isn’t the first
time I have given a first preference to the Greens, but it’s the first in
some years. The main substantive issues that concern me are economic
management and climate change, but these issues (and particularly climate
change) can’t be separate from questions about process and principle. The
government has done a good job on economic management, while the
opposition has been consistent only in error. On the other hand, the
government has made a terrible mess of climate change policy, almost
entirely because of its reluctance to deal with the Greens and to confront
the opposition and the lobby groups that back them. In the long run, the
only way they will be able to govern effectively is through co-operation
with the Greens, and the sooner they are forced to realise this the
better...
You can leave a comment online in support.
***
Greens tipped for balance of power (Fairfax/Qld Country Life)
THE Greens are widely tipped to hold the balance of power in the Senate
after August 21 and have promised to use their numbers to push for tougher
action on climate change and a more compassionate approach to asylum
seekers. Polling suggests the Greens could pick up an extra four Senate
spots, taking their numbers from five to nine.
Quite a few comments on here not supportive of The Greens. Please leave a
comment online in support.
***
Don't ignore the polls. It's the writing on the wall for politics (The Age/National Times)
The decline of Rudd was in the data. Others should take heed. Shortly
after Julia Gillard replaced Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister a journalist
asked me, facetiously I hope, "So, how does it feel to have blood on your
hands?" As a pollster, I didn't like the question any more than Bob Hawke
did in 1983 when it was put to him on the day he took over the ALP
leadership from Bill Hayden. The Nielsen poll the following week found the
ALP primary vote down three points to 39 per cent, Greens up three to 12
per cent and the Coalition steady on 42 per cent. It was the first poll in
four years to put Labor's primary vote below 40 per cent and it all went
to the Greens...
You can leave a comment online.
***
ALP-Greens deal will raise living costs, Fielding says (Australian Conservative)
Family First’s Senator Steve Fielding says a vote for Labor is now a vote
for the Greens and their extreme policies, following a preference deal
between the two earlier today. Senator Fielding said if anyone votes for
Labor or Greens they’ll be voting for new taxes which will severely raise
the cost of living.
You can try to leave a comment online...
*** OTHER NEWS ***
Brown at odds with Greens (AAP/SMH)
Australian Greens leader Bob Brown admits being "at odds" with his party
negotiating over preferences, saying he'd prefer voters to decide for
themselves. Senator Brown would not commit the Greens to favouring Labor
as it did at the 2007 election. "I want people to put their preferences
where they want them to be," he told reporters in Canberra on Sunday. "I'm
not here to advocate preferences, I'm here to advocate a number one vote
for the Greens." Any deal with the major parties to swap preferences would
be put on the public record, Senator Brown said, adding he was keen to
know what the two major parties were planning to do with their
preferences. "Because this is going to be very important to the Greens
having the balance of power in the Senate and potentially breaking through
in (lower house) seats like Melbourne." A Galaxy poll, published in News
Ltd papers on Sunday, shows support for the Greens rising to 13 per cent
at the expense of Labor. But Greens preferences helped Labor to an
election-winning lead - 52-48 per cent - over the coalition. Senator Brown
said the Greens were taking votes from the coalition as well as Labor
because small-l Liberals did not like the prospect of Tony Abbott becoming
prime minister. "That frightens a lot of Liberal voters ... who have voted
Liberal all their life."
***
Greens agreement to help Labor in marginals, as Brown says he's sick of backroom deals (The Australian/National Affairs)
BOB Brown has told Greens voters to make up their own minds about
preferences after a deal that will boost Labor's chances in marginal
seats. The Greens today confirmed they will receive Labor's Senate
preferences ahead of all other parties across all states and territories.
In return, Greens branches will direct preferences to the Labor Party in
an unspecified number of lower house seats at the August 21 election,
including in some key marginals. As well as shoring up Labor's hold on a
number of marginal seats, the deal paves the way for the Greens to hold
the balance of power in the Senate in their own right from July 1, 2011.
But the Greens leader declared he was against backroom preference deals
and told voters to “make up their own minds”. “I don't like backroom
preference negotiations with other parties. In fact, I'm sick of it,”
Senator Brown said in Hobart. Senator Brown refused to go into details of
the deal, saying he had not been involved in finalising the preference
arrangements. Instead, the party's national campaign coordinator Ebony
Bennett issued a statement, saying: “Local branches of the Greens have
chosen to direct preferences to the Labor Party ahead of the Coalition in
a number of lower house seats.” Senator Brown said the deal had not come
at the cost of policy concessions from either side...
***
Greens strike crucial Labor preferences deal (SMH)
The government's campaign spokesman, Chris Bowen, said the deal showed
Labor's climate change credentials were greater than those of the
Opposition. "They show that the Greeens recognise that the Labor Party is
a party which accepts that climate change is real, unlike mr Abbott,'' he
said. The Greens leader, Bob Brown, said there were no policy favours
promised as part of the deal...
***
Real chance for Greens in historical Labor bastion (The Age)
According to the latest Age/ACNielson poll, the Greens' primary vote is
now at 13 per cent - up from 10 per cent in February this year, but lower
than its peak of 15 per cent in June (or 16 per cent according to
Newspoll). The battle for the electorate is now a knife-edge contest
between Labor candidate Cath Bowtell, a former union official with the
ACTU, and Greens candidate Adam Bandt, an industrial relations barrister.
(The Liberals, who got less than 28 per cent of the two-party preferred
vote at the 2007 election, have preselected small business owner Simon
Olsen)...
***
Labor, Greens in preference deal - report (News.com.au)
LABOR and the Greens are about to seal a comprehensive preference deal
that would boost the ALP's chances of remaining in government while
helping the Greens achieve the balance of power in the Senate, Fairfax
reports.
Greens leader Bob Brown has indicated the deal is all but done, with
sources saying it's more comprehensive than that for the last election...
***
In search of a friendly Senate (SMH)
JULIA Gillard's main goal at this election is to win a second term. But
she also has a second aim: to return with a less obstructive Senate. If
the polls are right, she will get it. Labor and the Greens between them
are likely to win at least three seats in every state. And if that
happens, the Greens alone will have the balance of power from next July.
That matters. Kevin Rudd lost office, in part, because he could not get
the Senate to pass his emissions trading scheme. And that, in turn, was
because Labor suffered an electoral disaster when we elected half of this
Senate in 2004...
***
Senate seat fight (ABC)
The Greens Senate candidate for the ACT Lin Hatfield-Dodds says both major
parties have been taking Canberra for granted....
***
Greens lobby on health, environment (ABC)
The Greens candidate for the North West Tasmanian seat of Braddon wants
better health services for west coast residents. The Tarkine National
Coalition's Scott Jordan has been announced as the Greens candidate for
the federal seat of Braddon....
***
Major parties will cut public service: Greens (ABC)
The Greens say both major parties are threatening cuts to the public
service if they win government. Greens leader Bob Brown made a pitch to
local Canberra voters today, saying Tony Abbott plans to cut 12,000 jobs,
while Julia Gillard has referred to what she calls "unpopular cutbacks"
that need to be made...
***
Greens set to grab balance of power (The Australian / National Affairs)
BOB Brown's Greens look set to be big winners in the Senate race, gaining
the balance of power after the coming campaign. This will give the Greens
a seat at the table on issues such as climate change and the mining tax.
Greens sources have told The Australian they are confident of winning a
Senate seat in Queensland where the party's candidate, Larissa Waters, is
likely to win at the expense of the Liberals' Russell Trood, who holds the
fourth position on the joint Liberal National Party ticket. The Greens are
also confident of winning in Victoria at the expense of Family First's
Stephen Fielding, who won in 2004 with the benefit of an elaborate
preference deal that saw him elected despite his party gaining just under
2 per cent of the primary vote....
***
Why Queensland counts: the seats that matter (Brisbane Times)
It was no coincidence both Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott found themselves
in Brisbane on the day the federal election was called on Saturday.
Queensland is absolutely crucial to the 2010 campaign. Not only because of
a reported backlash against the way a Queenslander - Kevin Rudd - was
dumped to pave the way for Australia's first female prime minister, but
because 16 of the state's 30 seats have margins of less than five per
cent....
***
Greens-Labor preference deal (Fairfax/Brisbane Times/North QLD Register)
Labor and the Greens are on the verge of a comprehensive preference deal
that would boost the government's prospects of holding on to power while
helping the Greens achieve the balance of power in the Senate. Sources
said the deal was close to fruition and more comprehensive than that
crunched at the last election, while the Greens leader, Bob Brown,
indicated it was all but done...
***
Greens welcome gas project delays (Gladstone Observer)
Incumbent Queensland Greens Senate candidate Larissa Waters asked if Mr
Garrett were not considering the impacts of CSG mining on prime food
producing land, then who was. “The Queensland Government approved BG
Group’s CSG project despite the Co-ordinator General’s stated concerns
about the lack of information regarding groundwater and consequent impacts
on farmland,” Ms Waters said...
***
Greens have high hopes for election (Herald Sun)
THE Greens will focus on seizing the balance of power in the Senate at
this election, but they could also land their second-ever MP in the lower
house. The Greens' polling has been in record territory this year, peaking
in the mid-teens when dissatisfaction with Kevin Rudd's Labor government
was at its apex....
*** GREENS RELEASES ***
STATE HOOKED ON COAL - FEDERAL GOVT MUST ACT ON UNDERGROUND COAL (Qld
Greens)
If the state government is too hooked on coal royalties and donations to
ban the underground coal gasification industry, the federal government
must immediately act to protect human health and the groundwater of the
Darling Downs, said the Greens today. “The federal Environment Minister
must immediately list underground coal gasification as a trigger under the
federal environment laws so that he can ban any new coal gasification
projects," said Australian Greens lead Senate candidate for Queensland,
environmental lawyer Larissa Waters.
6 comments:
You can't say that the greens don't compromise, that's exactly what they do do in the senate - negotiate and compromise. they come from the standpoint of achieving better outcomes for all australians and thats what they have done on issues like child care, pensions, stimulus and environment. i say thank the lord that there's someone actually in government who's considering and speaking out for the small guy rather than the big guy. they'll never run the country, so relax everyone, but having them in the parliament - speaking up for those who are rarely heard - is in my opinion the best of both worlds.
At: http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/NewMessage.aspx?b=114&m=99629&ps=50&dm=2
re: preferences
Strangely (or not?) the media again only reporting half of the story.
Preference arrangements between parties are only valid to the voter if they vote above the line. If I vote below the line then my preferences go where I choose for them to go.
The preference arrangement between parties does flow down into "how to vote cards" but they are a guide only. Each voter can and should put their
preferences in their own chosen order according to what they think of the other parties and their policies. No one should feel their vote is being decided by any party’s external arrangement.
By law all political parties must lodge a preference arrangement with the AEC for the Senate.
So don't be lazy, vote below the line, fill out the entire card, and determine for yourself where your votes go.
At: http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=114&m=99768&ps=50&dm=2
RE: Greens supporting PInks
You all sound really surprised that the greens are leftys. YOu know they stand up at every opportunity and say they are the progressive left?!?!?! Its therefore no wonder that their policies align more to ALP than Coalition.. not rocket science guys? On the "vote for green = vote for labor" you're wrong unless you vote 1 Green and 2 Labor (which lets face it actually most greens supporters would given above). You're completely free to vote 1 Green and 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Coalition if you want to. You just need to do it below the line.
At: http://www2b.abc.net.au/tmb/Client/Message.aspx?b=114&m=99416&ps=50&dm=2
Nice post. In your final on Bob Brown though you fail to point out that Brown has long been anti-preference, has moved in parliament to have the system changed (he was voted down by Labor and Coalition) and has vowed to do so again in the next parliament. A preference arrangement is required by law to be lodged with the AEC regards the Senate. Bob Brown has always said and continues to say people should put their preferences where they choose. Preference arrangements between parties are only valid to the voter if they vote above the line. If I vote below the line then my preferences go where I choose for them to go - regardless of any arrangement that has been made by the parties. Strange how the media keep that little bit out of any reporting...
Posted at: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/election/hiding-abbott-a-pointless-tactic/story-fn5zmod2-1225894252184
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/queensland-greens-oppose-preference-deal-with-labor/story-fn5z3z83-1225894259246
Posted at: http://neilstockley.blogspot.com/2010/07/av-in-action-labor-and-greens-cut-deal.html
Neil, nice post. In your final comments on Bob Brown though you fail to point out that Brown has long been anti-preference, has moved in parliament to have the system changed (he was voted down by Labor and Coalition) and has vowed to do so again in the next parliament. A preference arrangement is required by law to be lodged with the AEC regards the Senate. Bob Brown has always said and continues to say people should put their preferences where they choose. Preference arrangements between parties are only valid to the voter if they vote above the line. If I vote below the line then my preferences go where I choose for them to go - regardless of any arrangement that has been made by the parties.
***
Neil, thanks. Yes I did mean Senator Brown is against preference deals (rather than preferences), thanks for allowing me to correct.
On the other, yes, that's right too. The Greens have tried to get law changed but both Labor and Coalition voted the motion down - so Bob Brown is encouraging all Australian’s to take charge of their vote and vote below the line on the Senate ballot paper to ensure their preferences go where they want them to go.
For the House, the voter chooses their own preferences anyway by numbering all the boxes.
Its a difficult issue for the party, and you're right, Senator Brown is distancing himself from the preference arrangement. This is because he does not believe in them and continues to fight against them. That said, they are a requirement for the Senate so an arrangement had to be made. We are told (and I believe) that Bob Brown was not involved in the making of the arrangement.
Over here there's a large chorus of "a vote for Green is a vote for Labor" - as if this is a bad thing and/or a reason not to vote Green. Preference deal or no preference deal, the Green/Labor connection is not surprising given that Greens policies and supporters lean more to left and are (generally speaking) fundamentally opposed to Coalition ideals and policies. So really, its just media hype that is misdirecting voters from real issues that they should be hearing about like health, education and climate change action.
This will be my first time voting Green. Labor has lost me because their policies are more and more aligned to Coalition policies, and even though that's not always a bad thing, someone needs to be hanging onto and representing the little guy on the left. That's what I think the Greens do - they offer an alternative voice and point of view - and that's why I think this year their vote will be higher than ever before.
Thanks again!
Thanks, that's one question answered ... I won't vote for either major party but it seems a lot of smaller parties and independents will sell their soul to get into some form of power.
However, what is the Greens' stance on Conroy's web filter? Do you support it or any similar version of it? I lived in China for years so I know web totalitarianism when I see it. I don't need a politician to be my conscience or nanny.
Post a Comment