Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Economy

Legislative Council 2015: Windermere, Mersey and Derwent Live And Post-Count

Derwent: Polls Open Until 6pm. Mersey: Polls Open Until 6pm. Windermere: Polls Open Until 6pm

Opening Post (midday): Welcome to my live comments on tonight’s three Legislative Council contests. Three of the fifteen seats in Tasmania’s upper house will be decided tonight. You can see my previews and form guides here:

Windermere
Derwent and Mersey
My in-depth statistical analysis of how Legislative Councillors vote can be seen here

There will be live comments throughout the counts. Polls are open until 6 pm, first figures may start appearing around 6:30 and based on past experience counting for the night could be done by about 9 pm. Windermere will very likely go to preferences and I will follow that count over coming days until it is settled. When I believe a candidate will definitely win the word CALLED will appear for that seat in the summary at the top of the page.

Craig Farrell (Derwent) and Mike Gaffney (Mersey) are facing only low-profile opposition and I very strongly expect them to both win easily, perhaps very easily.

Ivan Dean’s bid for a third term in Windermere is less straightforward – bidding to become the oldest LegCo winner since 1965, he’s been heavily targeted by Labor’s Jennifer Houston, while high-profile ex-Labor independent Scott McLean has kept out of controversy. The Greens’ Vanessa* Bleyer is also running …

Derwent: CALLED: Craig Farrell (ALP) re-elected
Mersey: CALLED: Mike Gaffney (IND) re-elected
Windermere: CALLED: Ivan Dean (IND) will be re-elected on preferences

Read more, Dr Kevin Bonham’s website, here

Ed: The sub-editor (he’s been sacked) should have picked up that error (original text had Jennifer … )

Kim Booth: Congratulations to Vanessa Bleyer as WINDERMERE member to be decided on Greens preference flows

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]
10 Comments

10 Comments

  1. Editor

    May 3, 2015 at 9:33 am

    Comments on this item are now closed.

  2. Andrew Ricketts

    May 3, 2015 at 4:09 am

    Thats the trouble: Tasmania is not civilised.

    Fooled by that “I’m an independent” rhetoric?

  3. Kevin Bonham

    May 3, 2015 at 3:38 am

    There was briefly that error in Vanessa Bleyer’s name when the article first went up on my site, which was spotted by one of my readers + fixed there a few hours later. (I don’t have a subeditor, but I always fix mistakes promptly when made aware of them).

    Apologies to the candidate and anyone confused for that. That said I definitely don’t appreciate the tone of #3 and in future all excerpts from my work I allow to feature on this site, without exception, will be on the strict condition: comments off.

  4. Dr.John R.Wilson

    May 2, 2015 at 11:38 pm

    I don’t pretend not to have any “bias”, Simon (#6 4.26).

    As far as I can see, everyone has inherent biases of one kind or another, and if they say they don’t, then they’re just deceiving themselves.

    In my (biased but well considered and experienced) view, the Tasmanian Upper House is not so much a “house of review” as a house of huff and puff, the main business of which is rubber stamping the legislation of conservative governments and obstructing the legislation of progressive governments.

    Also, it is not so much “dominated by independents” as dominated by conservatives who masquerade brazenly as “independents’.

    I respectfully disagree with you about the Upper House needing “to gauge the communities needs and ascertain the ability of the proposed legislation to meet those needs” for these are the responsibilities of the Government.

    However, I do find your idea of limiting the number of terms interesting, although some parliamentarians may have a lot to give, while others simply don’t.

    There’s also something to be said for valuing experience …

  5. Simon Warriner

    May 2, 2015 at 8:26 pm

    Dr Wilson’s party bias is peeking out over his belt.

    The Legco is a house of review. Its purpose is to prevent the excesses and errors of the lower, party dominated legislature from having nasty and negative
    impacts on the electorate. Originally it was probably designed to be a particular sector of the electorate but that is not the case to the same degree now. It is dominated by independent members and the changes Dr Wilson promotes would better suit the campaigning techniques of the party system and disadvantage the independents. As a house of review, policy is not the issue. What is at issue is the ability to gauge the communities needs and ascertain the ability of the proposed legislation to meet those needs.

    What is needed is limits on the number of terms any one individual can have.

  6. Dr.John R.Wilson

    May 2, 2015 at 4:22 pm

    If we must persist with having two Houses of Parliament here in Tasmania when only one is really required (as in Queensland and New Zealand, which are fairly civilised places, not unlike our own, and which seem to manage quite well without Upper Houses), then isn’t it about time we stopped holding Upper House elections in dribs and drabs outside of regular Lower House election times, all of which inhibits campaigning, dampens media interest and ensures there’s little or no public debates in any depth on policy issues, thereby helping the incumbents stay in power even though its widely recognised as far as their performances go they deserve to be kicked out to pasture …

    PS: Your poor old sub-editor (ex) has my deepest sympathies. I wouldn’t be one for love or money …

  7. Mike Adams

    May 2, 2015 at 12:40 pm

    Jennifer? Try Vanessa.

    Ed: The sub-editor (he’s been sacked) should have picked up that error (original text had Jennifer … )

  8. Estelle Ross

    May 2, 2015 at 12:32 pm

    He could at least have got VANESSA Bleyer’s name right !!!

    Ed: The sub-editor (he’s been sacked) should have picked up that error (original text had Jennifer … )

  9. Artemisia

    May 2, 2015 at 11:37 am

    Jennifer Bleyer? Vanessa’s sister?

    Ed: The sub-editor (he’s been sacked) should have picked up that error (original text had Jennifer … )

  10. Karl Stevens

    May 1, 2015 at 5:44 pm

    For me this poll has all the excitement of watching paint dry.
    Can Ivan Dean be unseated by the CFMEU bloke or Jennifer Houston?
    ‘How many cats in New York city, how many angels on a pin, how many notes on a saxophone, how many tears in a bottle of gin’?

Leave a Reply

To Top