Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Tasmanian election 2014

Jump to new
drsmith

drsmith

Joined
28 October 2008
Posts
8,609
Reactions
39
It will be sooner rather than later.

Labor has conveniently consigned its Green partners in government to a stint in the doghouse.

TASMANIA'S two Greens ministers have been told they will be sacked tomorrow, ending the state's four-year Labor-Green power-sharing government.

Premier Lara Giddings told Greens leader Nick McKim and fellow Greens MP Cassy O'Connor of the decision this morning and advised the Governor, Peter Underwood, to terminate their ministerial commissions from tomorrow morning.

Ms Giddings also visited the Governor to advise on a date for an election in March, it is understood.

This morning's meeting at Hobart's Government House was confirmed on the Governor's website.

Ms Giddings is expected to make an announcement later this afternoon on the dumping of the Labor-Green power-sharing alliance.
Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ia-election-date/story-e6frgczx-1226803080688
 
Re: Tasmanian election March 15 2014

noco said:
Doc, why did it take 4 years for Laura Giddings to wake up to the Greens?
Click to expand...
This I'd suggest is like federal Labor's attempts at border protection.

It's not about waking up to the Greens but rather giving them a stint in solitary for the purpose of an election. If Labor and the Greens were able to secure a majority between them, not much imagination is required to see them back together in short order. There's not much prospect of that though if the following poll is indicative so perhaps Labor might have to settle for the second prize of getting a few percentage points from the Greens.

The most recent EMRS opinion poll showed the ALP was unable to make an impression on voters, with 22 per cent backing, compared to the Greens' 19 per cent, and the Liberals' 49 per cent.
Click to expand...

The election has been announced for March 15.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...nounces-poll-for-march-15-20140116-30wxu.html
 
Labor hasn't been great but what's the alternative?

The only other party that could reasonably form government is the Liberals and their track record in Tasmania is one of running up huge debts and sending the place practically broke. Doom and gloom, doom and gloom - I remember it all too well from last time and would prefer to not go there again (though I do expect that the Liberals quite likely will win the election).

First Liberal government in Tas was in the early 1970's. It didn't do any real harm but didn't last long either. Labor was subsequently returned to power at the next election.

Second go was 1982 to 1989 and it ended with the state being pretty much broke. Nothing short of a disaster to be honest.

Then they had another go 1992 - 1998 which brought huge unemployment (over 13%) and stalling on Labor's debt reduction strategy.

As for Labor-Green governments, there have been two. The current one and a previous one 1989 - 1992 lead by Michael Field. Whilst the 1989 - 1992 government was hugely unpopular they did focus very heavily on getting the state's finances in order and managed to drastically reduce budget deficits very quickly. Much as I disagree with some of the ways they went about doing it, nobody could argue with the fact that they did achieve a lot and did so very quickly amidst a crisis.

So from a purely financial perspective, the track record is that Labor is vastly superior to Liberal. Given that Labor is also more socially progressive, albeit in a somewhat disorganised manner, I really can't see a reason to vote Liberal at the upcoming election. I'd rather have disorganised but reasonably prudent management versus a well organised bankruptcy.

As for Lara Giddings as premier, well in my opinion she's done better than her two immediate Labor predecessors David Bartlett (didn't seem to understand finance and was obsessed with IT) and Paul Lennon (always starting unnecessary conflict and doing things which looked suspicious). Her hands are tied on some issues by virtue of being in government with the Greens.

My prediction? Liberal wins this election but with a smaller majority than most seem to be expecting, partly due to the negative impact of federal issues (particularly the NBN and renewable energy, both of which have a lot of public support in Tas) on the Liberal party's overall brand. Within months we'll be mired in renewed conflict over development versus the environment (specifically forestry) and by mid-2016 the state will be practically broke. Then they'll either call it quits and call an election, or bumble along going nowhere for the next 2 years. The only thing that might save them is if a federal Coalition government hands Tas a heap of cash for political reasons - in that case everything changes but I wouldn't bet on it actually happening. :2twocents
 
Latest polls have the Libs romping this in.

Sportsbet has the Libs at $1.01, Labor at $12, the Greens at $26 and the Palmer outfit at $51.

The impression I got from ABC's AM yesterday was that Laura Giddings had all but raised the white flag.
 
Just when you thought nothing could top the excitement of a South Australian state election...;)
 
Practically every local comment I've heard is to the effect that:

1. A Liberal win is expected and
2. Nobody seems overly excited at the prospect

The Liberals seem determined to restart conflict over forests, an issue that practically everyone on both sides is well and truly fed up with. Nobody from the timber industry itself to the Wilderness Society (which is to the Greens what unions are to Labor) wants to go back to the war. Restarting that war along with the related pulp mill conflict serves only one purpose which is purely political. Diverting attention away from practically all other issues whilst holding out the remote possibility of a jobs bonanza should the mill be built.

If you want to start a conflict in Tas and divert attention from the real problems the state faces then it's just a matter of wheeling out one of the same old issues that have done the rounds previously:

*Forestry
*Pulp mill
*Cable car up Mt Wellington

Suffice to say that the Liberals have already got all 3 on the agenda and they're not even in government yet. So it's pretty obvious that conflict and division is likely to be a hallmark of the new government assuming it is indeed a Liberal majority.

What we really need is a government that goes forward, rather than one that wants a return to the same old ideas we've been hearing about since the 1980's. Next it'll be dams and something about peat moss..... :banghead:
 
Smurf1976 said:
A technicality but it's Lara not Laura. :2twocents
Click to expand...
My bad. :eek:

This time tomorrow she'll be political history but I don't know enough about Tasmanian politics to judge the current opposition. After the Gillard government though, I'm convinced that a majority government is better than a minority government.

sptrawler said:
Everyone's thrown their hat in the ring, for a dip at a tax payer funded future.:D
Click to expand...
I thought the ABC got enough as it was,

http://www.watoday.com.au/federal-p...ong-senate-candidate-pack-20140313-34onu.html
 
Something I've noticed in this campaign (and also in the SA one) is an apparent desire by some to confuse the public as to which party they are with.

There's a prominent sign on a road near me for a local Liberal candidate and it clearly names the candidate and also the word "Liberal" is clear too. Right next to it is a sign for the Labor candidate, his name and photo clearly displayed but the word "Labor" is so small that you'd never notice it without stopping. So that looks like a deliberate attempt by that candidate to distance himself from the Labor party, and maybe even confuse people into thinking he's a Liberal.

Also, I was in Adelaide a couple of weeks ago and noticed that there's a "vote 1" sign on what seems to be every lamp post in the CBD. And a lot of them had both Labor and Liberal candidates, in some cases one placing their sign over the top of the other. Hmm....

There's no law against any of that I suppose, but it does look a bit like an attempt to confuse the public as to which candidates are from which party.

Back to the Tassie election, I wouldn't be surprised if the results tomorrow contain a few surprises. Someone mentioned it at work today - people are unhappy with Labor but don't seem to be convinced that the Liberals would do much better, meanwhile many dislike the Greens. They were thinking the at the Palmer vote might end up significant not due to support for PUP as such, but simply due to lack of support for the others. This time tomorrow we'll know the answer.....
 
Smurf1976 said:
Something I've noticed in this campaign (and also in the SA one) is an apparent desire by some to confuse the public as to which party they are with.

There's a prominent sign on a road near me for a local Liberal candidate and it clearly names the candidate and also the word "Liberal" is clear too. Right next to it is a sign for the Labor candidate, his name and photo clearly displayed but the word "Labor" is so small that you'd never notice it without stopping. So that looks like a deliberate attempt by that candidate to distance himself from the Labor party, and maybe even confuse people into thinking he's a Liberal.

Also, I was in Adelaide a couple of weeks ago and noticed that there's a "vote 1" sign on what seems to be every lamp post in the CBD. And a lot of them had both Labor and Liberal candidates, in some cases one placing their sign over the top of the other. Hmm....

There's no law against any of that I suppose, but it does look a bit like an attempt to confuse the public as to which candidates are from which party.

Back to the Tassie election, I wouldn't be surprised if the results tomorrow contain a few surprises. Someone mentioned it at work today - people are unhappy with Labor but don't seem to be convinced that the Liberals would do much better, meanwhile many dislike the Greens. They were thinking the at the Palmer vote might end up significant not due to support for PUP as such, but simply due to lack of support for the others. This time tomorrow we'll know the answer.....
Click to expand...

Well I am pretty sure I read it costs $2,000 to nominate, then buy a cheap $60 lazer printer, use photoshop to make a flyer and away you go.
As long as you don't have a background littered with smutt, it's high fives all round.lol
 
All over in Tasmania with a 14% swing to the Libs.

The only interest now is the bite between the Greens representative on the ABC panel and Eric Abetz.

Labor representative Rebecca White is quiet attractive.
 
drsmith said:
All over in Tasmania with a 14% swing to the Libs.

The only interest now is the bite between the Greens representative on the ABC panel and Eric Abetz.

Labor representative Rebecca White is quiet attractive.
Click to expand...

14% swing, now that is a swing.
 
Looks like it will end up something like this:

Liberal = 14 seats most likely

Labor = 7 most likely

Greens = 4 most likely

That's just my interpretation looking at the "definite" seats plus the more likely outcomes for the as yet undetermined ones. Maybe +/- one or two in each case but that's roughly it.

Note - 5 electorates, 5 members in each electorate so 25 in total.

Now the real fun and games begin. Every analysis I've read on the subject is to the effect that there isn't enough money to deliver on the Liberals' promises. So either there's a deal within the party that the Australian Government will hand some extra cash to Tas on account of a Liberal win, or they're going to run the state into serious debt, or they can't deliver on their promises.

Something has to give and they're going to be under massive political pressure to deliver on unfunded promises. So I'm hoping that there actually is a deal within the party although I have my doubts. Time will tell. :2twocents
 
Smurf1976 said:
Looks like it will end up something like this:

Liberal = 14 seats most likely

Labor = 7 most likely

Greens = 4 most likely

That's just my interpretation looking at the "definite" seats plus the more likely outcomes for the as yet undetermined ones. Maybe +/- one or two in each case but that's roughly it.

Note - 5 electorates, 5 members in each electorate so 25 in total.

Now the real fun and games begin. Every analysis I've read on the subject is to the effect that there isn't enough money to deliver on the Liberals' promises. So either there's a deal within the party that the Australian Government will hand some extra cash to Tas on account of a Liberal win, or they're going to run the state into serious debt, or they can't deliver on their promises.

Something has to give and they're going to be under massive political pressure to deliver on unfunded promises. So I'm hoping that there actually is a deal within the party although I have my doubts. Time will tell. :2twocents
Click to expand...

Well lets be honest something has to happen in Tassie, it is costing a fortune to fund, as it is.
 


Write your reply...
Top