This is just a quick update piece (as semi-promised) to my Legislative Council preview filed after the close of nominations a few weeks ago. Polling in this unusually exciting and difficult to predict round of Upper House elections will be conducted this Saturday 7 May with polls closing at 6:00 pm. I will be posting comments on the primary count hopefully both on Pollbludger and here as results come in; usually the first booths are up around 6:30 or slightly later.
At the time of writing (Wednesday night) there has been very little online psephological coverage of this election during the campaign. Should anything go up between now and the election that is especially noteworthy I will update in comments to this piece. The ABC Radio podcasts for Launceston, Derwent and Rumney are recommended listening for those wanting to hear the candidates and their policies in a discussion setting; the first part of the Launceston forum is available in video form here and the Examiner’s candidate videos for Launceston can be seen here . A report of a Derwent candidates’ forum written by Derwent Valley Councillor Damien Bester is also worth a read (unfortunately only three of the five candidates attended.)
Derwent
Based on the campaign period, there is not much to add to my earlier comments on Derwent. The campaign for Derwent appears to have been relatively quiet and to have followed the standard Legislative Council pattern of candidates advancing their claims for office with little direct public conflict between candidates. On a trip through the electorate I noticed reasonably high levels of signage for both the Labor candidate Craig Farrell and the Green candidate Phillip Bingley, with modest signage levels for Deidre Flint and Jenny Branch and I didn’t see anything for Ray Williams. My view now is that Flint should be the best performed of the three vaguely Liberal-ish independents (followed by Branch and then Williams), as although her council voter base includes only a small percentage of the electorate, she is popular and established enough within it that this will spill over into adjacent areas. Also, while no longer being a Liberal as such, she has probably burnt the least bridges with the party (compared to Branch who quit the party on unfriendly terms and Williams who has dabbled with the Shooters and Fishers and even the CEC.) Bingley has campaigned energetically and might do a little better than the Greens’ usual 15%.
There are reasons to expect a primary-vote swing against Labor at this election – the general unpopularity of the state government (even compared with 2009), the early retirement of Aird, the reasonably low profile of Farrell and the number of candidates. My early assessment of a Labor primary of “well over 40” could have been a bit rosy, but even around 40 will be sufficient to win the seat and would be acceptable in the circumstances. It’s plausible it will be reasonably close but my prediction remains a comfortable Labor win.
Launceston
The Launceston campaign has been defined by the subtle-as-a-brick campaign by the Liberal Party’s Sam McQuestin. McQuestin has not only routinely engaged in government-bashing of a kind typically seen in Lower House elections but has also tried to smash the argument for voting independent in the Upper House by arguing that “recent elections have shown” a vote for independents can be a vote for Labor and the Greens. Apparently the voter is supposed to envisage an elected Clark or Armitage morphing into a Wilkie or Oakeshott. Even the Liberal leader Will Hodgman has been roped in to argue this case in a TV ad in which the candidate himself does not speak.
I cannot recall anything remotely like this scare campaign being attempted in an Upper House contest before. Normally candidates either boast of their independence and condemn the intrusion of party politics into the land of the fabled red couches, or else at least treat the argument that Legislative Councillors should be independent with some apologetic deference. The Liberals are trying to just dismiss all that tradition out of hand, and if they win this seat then campaign strategy for the Upper House will never be the same again and the floodgates may well open to many similarly brazen party bids.
I’m rather sceptical that they will win it, though, because I’m doubtful that their candidate has the wholehearted support of traditional Liberal voters. McQuestin is widely seen as a rather bad candidate, coming across as grating, unlikeable and boorish. Liberal voters who aren’t impressed with McQuestin are likely to see independents Armitage and Clark, both of whom have been mentioned as possible Liberal recruits in the past, as safe alternatives. It seems to be exactly this perception that the Liberals are determined to destroy.
With the Greens still offering unconvincing excuses for not nominating a candidate, there has been a lot of speculation about where their stray 21% of the vote is going to go. As the only candidate with a record of opposing the proposed Tamar Valley pulp mill, Armitage is generally seen as likely to get the biggest chunk, although some equivocal-sounding comments in her ABC interview (link above) drew some accusations of strategic fence-sitting to try to grab some pro-mill votes as well. On the other hand, the McQuestin camp have attempted to portray Armitage as a de facto Green candidate candidate provoking this from the Armitage campaign in response.
Although McQuestin has tried to stir up all his opponents (as a chessplayer I especially liked “Has Giddings Sacrificed Bishop?”) I suspect that the Liberals see Armitage as their most dangerous opponent, and that they are right. Her strong local government following plus her appeal to Greens voters mean that she should at least be able to avoid coming last on primaries, and unless somebody has a big primary lead that could be all it takes. While all the candidates have some sort of chance (indeed it’s difficult to even work out who is going to come last) I think the best chance is with Armitage.
Rumney
Far from receding, the pressure on incumbent Lin Thorp in this electorate has just continued through the campaign. This has included a major advertising campaign against her (although she was not named) by the Police Association, whose concerns were quite naturally lapped up by Tony Mulder, former long-serving policeman and “Independent Liberal” opponent. Thorp has also had to endure still further rounds of child protection allegations (firstly following news that a thirteen year old girl under state care had become pregnant, and second following a new round of revelations about the far more serious child sex scandal investigated by Paul Mason).
These factors combined have meant that the media attention on this seat has been dominated by Thorp, Mulder and Mason, with Cate Clark not much of a factor (especially not since she has had to endure a broken leg) and the Greens’ Penelope Ann and independent John Forster struggling for sideshow status (although Ann should still get above 15% in what is now a fairly Green electorate).
On a quick trip through part of this electorate I noticed far more signage for Mulder and Thorp than for other candidates, and this confirms my suspicion that these are the best resourced and most supported campaigns and that the election should be between these two. Rather than actually being elected, Mason is more likely to serve as a spoiler for Thorp – his presence as a high-profile candidate has continually wrecked her chances of getting any kind of clean air in the campaign, as well as highlighting the issues he wants to raise. He remains, for all that, a single-issue focussed candidate, and one who is easily seen to be carrying a grudge, so I doubt that he will actually poll all that strongly.
A win for Thorp by even a single vote would be an incredibly resilient result for the party given everything that has been thrown at her (and it) during the last several months, most of it self-inflicted. I would not write Thorp off completely – firstly because incumbents are seldom defeated in the Legislative Council and secondly because she does have the trump card of being the only candidate who lives in the electorate. But overall I think the damage from the endless rounds of negative publicity combined with the Government’s poor standing has been too prolonged, too multi-faceted and too much, and on that basis I consider it likely that Tony Mulder can get enough of a lead on primaries to unseat Thorp and become the MLC for Rumney.
Please feel encouraged to post your own predictions (preferably with reasons) in the comments section.
First published: 2011-05-05 07:29 AM
