Sunday, November 28, 2010

State Election 2010

It is becoming clear that the Liberals will win Bentliegh, thus handing them the 45 seats they need to form a majority in the Legislative Assembly, and so to Government. It seems clear the Labor Party were resigned to this as early as 9pm last night. I suspect the reason they haven't yet conceded is just to create the impression that it was closer than it actually was, so it doesn't look like a massive failure.
Of course they will do plenty of naval gazing, and many theories will be put forward as to why they lost. The message already coming out is that after 11 years, it just becomes too difficult to keep the message fresh - the 'time for change' argument. I don't think this is accurate. I certainly don't believe the Liberals convinced the public that they were a better alternative. I think the public wanted to punish Labor for their mistakes, and there was an ever growing perception that they had become arrogant and incompetent. Whatever their failings, I think this was exaggerated. The Herald Sun ran an anti Labor campaign for a long time. Scarcely a day went by without articles about 'Public Service fat cats' and most of them were blown out of all proportion.
I also think there was another problem with their campaign, which hasn't yet been identified by the experts. Too much of the party's resources were devoted to the inner Melbourne seats where they were under threat from the Greens, and this cost them dearly in the outer suburbs. The main reason for this is that many of the ALP apparatchiks live and work in inner Melbourne. They mix in circles of like minded people, and have a blinkered view of the mood of the electorate. To them, the battle actually was between the ALP and the Greens. The debate that raged amongst them and their type was about whether the drift to the Greens is a resurgence of the left, or a dangerous splintering of the left. They seemed blissfully unaware that out in the suburbs, people couldn't give a stuff about these debates. Rightly or wrongly they were preparing to punish the Government.
The other factor at play here was the fact that the threatened incumbents in inner Melbourne were high profile, senior members of the Government. The members in the suburbs on the other hand were people like Kirstie Marshall.
But it's not just the profile of the candidates, and the fact that few Brunswick residents could point to Forest Hill on a map that prevented these people fighting on the front line. The other factor at play here is resentment. I have lost count of the amount of discussions I had with inner suburban Labor people, during this and the Federal Election campaign, about this very issue. Their focus on the Greens was often bitter and venomous, and also irrational. They seemed to have saved their anger and hatred for a party that appeared, for all intents and purposes, to be similar ideologically to themselves. The Greens have surged in popularity as a direct result of people abandoning the left of the ALP. These are voters who are primarily concerned with social justice issues and the environment. Many come from within the Union movement - Labor's traditional heartland. I think they particularly annoy the rusted on party members, because they stand as a stark reminder of what the Labor party has abandoned. It is painful for them to be reminded that they belong to a party that has sold them out, and so they want to blame the messenger. I think many of them remain in the party just out of blind loyalty - their parents and grandparents were members, and they just can't bring themselves to quit. They come up with every excuse under the sun for Labor's increasingly right wing agenda, and hold on to this futile hope that if enough like minded people joined, they might be able to bring them back. Unfortunately, that ship sailed long ago, and it's not coming back.
So it seems they have succeeded this time. They all banded together and denied the Greens a lower house seat. Meanwhile, out in those suburbs beyond Burke Rd, the real enemy has won Government.
Nero fiddled, while Rome burned.

5 comments:

  1. Good analysis. I think the ALP made its mistake in continuing to fire on the Greens after the Libs announced they would preference the Greens last, effectively making the likelihood of Greens victories in the lower house very remote indeed. Just in the last week of the campaign, in Footscray, I got a mailout from the incumbent ALP member Marsha Thompson attacking the Greens. Marsha would have lost her seat if the Libs had preferenced Greens first, but we knew they wouldn't.

    But for ALP politicians I think the Greens are the real enemy (not for ALP voters so much, who I think are just mistaken in their allegiance). The Liberal Party are certainly the traditional "real enemy" but the appearance of the Greens on the scene risks upsetting that particular good cop/bad cop routine the 2 major parties use to keep the electorate under control.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, good points. Although I think most ALP members would say that the Liberals are an enemy. The problem is that I don't think they feel anywhere near the same level of hatred towards them as they do the Greens.

    ReplyDelete
  3. At the end of the day I don't really see much difference between Labor and Liberal at a state level. The status-quo will remain especially in Metropolitan seats. I am also very glad the far left agenda of The Greens has been dealt a blow.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree re the difference between the two, although I do expect the Tories to cut services and be a bit more nasty generally - they usually are.
    Re the Greens, I don't know what it is that is 'far left' about their agenda. Most of it seems pretty sensible to me, although I have been accused of being 'far left' too.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Far left"? Careful us socialists will get jealous if people go around calling the Greens that :P

    ReplyDelete