nsw politics
8 Dec 2009
Hang This!
Voters in NSW are facing a choice between dumb and dumber at the next state election. Greens MP Lee Rhiannon explains why we should be hoping (and voting) for a hung parliament
Long before Premier Kristina Keneally was tapped on the shoulder by NSW Labor powerbrokers in the political execution of Nathan Rees, the people of NSW had given up on the current state government. A common refrain that I have been hearing for months at public meetings and private briefings — even from left leaning people — is that Labor deserves to lose the next state election and they need a term out of office. Of course, a significant number of people also add "and in no way do the Coalition deserve to win".
After a year of scandals in both the Labor and Coalition camps, Premier Keneally and Opposition leader Barry O’Farrell must be looking forward to the holiday season. Time can heal many wounds but for Labor, who have experienced so many nights of the long knives, it is hard to see how the Christmas break will lessen voter anger.
Managing this anger will be the job of Labor strategists in the new year. Of the 93 seats in the NSW lower house, Labor holds 51 and the Coalition 36. The remaining six are held by independents. As the Coalition has to win 11 seats to form government, it is a fair bet that in the run up to the 2011 state election, Keneally and her ministers will be making regular visits to their marginal seats on the central coast and in south-west and western Sydney.
But Labor will also pay close attention to the electorates of the six independent lower house MPs — and any other electorate where an independent has a chance of winning a seat from the Coalition.
This strategy was honed by Labor under former premier Bob Carr, who saw the small cluster of diverse independents in the NSW parliament as Labor’s insurance policy — if Labor could not win the election then a hung parliament scenario such as that created by the 1991 election was the next best option. For more than a decade the Labor Government has provided a range of programs and service upgrades for these electorates. The independent MPs in these seats are seen as effective advocates and in many cases win comfortably.
And behind closed doors, Labor strategists may have determined that a hung parliament is in fact the best outcome they can possibly hope for in the next election. According to ABC psephologist Antony Green, a uniform swing of between 4.9 per cent and 7.6 per cent would produce a NSW lower house where no one party had the numbers to form government in their own right. That means Labor will be aiming to contain the overall swing to under 7.6 per cent and limit the Coalition’s gain in seats to 10 or less.
Of course, the Coalition’s game plan is certainly not for a hung parliament — taking government is their aim. While the Liberal and National parties are light on policy details, their MPs are already out and about attending public events and making promises that it is hard to believe they will keep.
On the central coast, federal and state Coalition MPs have backed a strong, well-resourced local campaign to stop a Korean coal company, Kores, from opening up a coal mine. And Liberal MPs have apparently taken a stand against over-development in a number of Sydney suburbs and have singled out the notorious Part 3A of the Environmental, Planning and Assessment Act for repeal.
But these positions are out of step with the Coalition parties’ usual policies, which are traditionally geared to the interests of the big end of town.
The last Liberal premier in NSW, Nick Greiner, provided an insight into his party’s MO when commenting on how he won office in 1988:
"We ruthlessly separated the issues of getting elected from the issues of governing. I literally had a drawer for elections and a drawer for government … We had directions rather than policies that avoided the pitfalls of detail. I remember the transport one which managed to convey in positive terms the directions [in which] we were going to go rather than we are going to shed 33 per cent of the workforce … In most cases we had a directions speech, which we published, and in most cases we had a policy behind it, which we didn’t publish."
This honest assessment of how the Liberal Party operates from one of their own strengthens the argument that, despite their pre-election promises, the Coalition do not deserve to win government.
The increased influence of the extreme right faction of the NSW Liberal party is also a concern. This group, dominated by the upper house member David Clarke, controls the numbers on the Liberal State Executive which gives it a much greater say on preselection outcomes in seats that could determine who forms the next government.
While O’Farrell has worked hard to create a veneer of unity, the tension between Liberal factions is considerable and at times breaks out publicly. Branch stacking, abusive YouTube postings and harassment at local party branch meetings have brought the tactics associated with the NSW Labor Right into the heart of the Liberal Party. The falling out between David Clarke and his former staffer Alex Hawke, now the member for the federal seat of Mitchell, has been particularly unpleasant.
The public are fed up with such antics on all sides of politics, and when it comes to the ballot box, the choice between a Coalition dominated by an extremist group and a dysfunctional right wing Labor government will look like no choice.
In the end, a hung parliament with more independents and minor party MPs holding the balance of power will be the best possible outcome for the people of NSW. (And this scenario could well include a first lower house seat for the Greens, who are well placed to take Balmain from Labor’s Verity Firth.) Imagine the NSW parliament engaging in common sense debates on policy platforms and serious negotiations on government proposals! Without absolute power, the party in government would be forced to engage in a more democratic and consultative process — and that would be a breakthrough for the state of New South Wales.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Twitter
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Lee, it’s a nice thought, but I wouldn’t hold out too much hope. Hung Parliaments also have their downsides in terms of instability, too.
I guess it is possible Lee, but the electorate might take a look at Labor and decide hanging is too good for them, and vote Liberal en masse.
My question for the Greens is how, if in a hung parliament, they will avoid pissing off their support base when making deals with Labor.
Everyone loved the Democrats till they started ‘keeping the bastards honest, like mostly, unless we need to wring out some GST concessions or something’. It just didn’t have the same ring to it.
I disagree Ben, using Tasmania as an example. Lee could have been writing about our upcoming State election in March 2010. We are praying fior a hung parliament — rather let us say a minority government, which is less tendentious.
Political commentator Richard Herr recently pointed out that contrary to myth, minority governments of different forms can be stable, effective and productive. Of the three longest reigning governments in Tasmania, two were by minority government; 42% of our elections have produced minority governments which reigned for 38% of the time. These minority governments have produced the most worthwhile and acceptable legislation in a popular sense precisely because ideas were debated and differences resolved, unlike the present government where debate is minimal.
The shortest lived of the 19 elected governments since the second world war was in fact a majority government. The legislation that people like least of all, such as the pulp mill or the 40% pay rise politicians voted themselves, were enacted by majority governments. Unpopular or ill-considered legislation is typical of stable majority governments because they don’t have to negotiate the outcomes or even debate in committee. The three major minority governments delivered more reforms and creative legislation than a long stable government that had gone stale, particularly a majority government in a reduced Parliament as is the case here in Tasmania. The major parties in 1998 deliberately reduced the size of Parliament in order to kill off the Greens under our Hare-Clark system of voting. It didn’t work, but it did give us 11 years of increasingly and grotesquely incompetent government.
We need a minority government to bring some thoughtfulness back into Parliament — and we also need about 10 more Parliamentarians to bring in fresh blood and ministerial loads that can be managed effectively.
I also have been wondering for some time if the best result for this state is to have a hung parliament with the Greens holding the balance of power.
The state ALP is in dire straights with rank and file members pissed off with what has been happening for some years, but still hanging in hoping the govt’s performance will improve.
Unfortunately having the “usual suspects” stage a successful coup against Reece and put into position their person is the alst straw for many of us within the party.
Yesterday 3 of us resigned in disgust from our local branch, between us we have over 100 years of helping the ALP during election campaigns. I am sure we are not the only ones and more will probably follow until those who are in the ALP for their own personal purposes are expelled.
Whatever anyone thought of Reece’s ability he should not have been deposed/executed by the factional warlords and power hungry politicians before the next election. All they have done is placed the final nail in the ALP’s coffin with Kenneally’s elevation which unfortunately will also bury a few worthwhile and talented people that are in the government
Some 10 years ago the West Australian newspaper (…Perth’s only) did a reader poll on capital punishment. There was overwhelming support for it. The politicians, in that instant, rejected the clear desire of the electorate. Most likely this is because throughout history it has been politicians who have paid with their lives when the people they are meant to be serving feel slighted.
However what is clear is that politicians must be held in some way responsible for any incompetence or corruption they indulge in. I just feel that hanging them all might be a more suitable third or fourth option……. Surely there’s another way.
“Stupidity got us into this mess … why can’t it get us out?”
But it is not just ALP members who are disenchanted. Lee R. is correct when she noted that faction fighting within the Liberal Party has seen members leave in droves. Several Liberal Party branches actually folded after the Howard gun laws, not helped by Madam Kerry Chicka appearing at an anti-gun rally and NSW Liberal M.P.s persisting to follow an anti-gun program. What was “liberal” about taking guns from law abiding citizens and leaving the crims with their guns? It was against all the Liberals used to stand for. The Liberal Democratic Party is positioning itself as an alternative opposition in 2011. Bring it on.
Peter Whelan
President, Liberal Democrats
This probably should have been the approach in 1999 let alone 2009.
I’ve been pushing that view for some years now so it’s encouraging to have Lee’s opinion piece here. When I worked for Clover Moore one Spring parliamentary session in 1992 I co-operated with the staff in the cross bench MP offices of (Dr) Peter Macdonald and John Hatton MP (esteemed corruption fighter).
Contrary to Nick Greiner’s claims these folks were hardly ‘drunk with power’. In reality they put a brake on abuse of power and worked on the merits of every piece of legislation. That 6 weeks was like a year of experience. I have fond memories of John Hatton saying “I feel stronger every day” between power naps. He was referring to the cross bench team too.
Another time his staffer Arthur King cutting me short with the priceless advice “brevity is golden” as we cross briefed eachother on different matters.
I would have stuck at it working for The Clover who was quite a good boss but I elected to return to forest protection campaigning exclusively, so it was off to the green NGO sector. That’s another story.
“If only” comes to mind when reading this article. Scottyea says “stupidity got us into this mess”…quite right. The people of NSW (and Australia) have been voting for two institutions that have been responsible for all that is wrong in our society today. They will keep voting for these two dominant parties because they are stupid and cannot see that everything that is wrong with government lays at the feet of these two groups.
If people really want things to change then they have to vote for it by voting for something different. Unfortunately, no matter how bad things get people will continue to vote for traditional parties who are very clearly hopeless and incompetent. “If only” people woke up to themselves - but they won’t.
I am convinced that the party that can do the most for people and society (The Greens) will probably continue to be on-the-outer because people are stupid. When “the Greens” are mentioned suddenly all the ills of the other parties are forgotten and it is the Greens that have issues. How can people continue have little faith in the Greens when the same people do not give them sufficient opportunity? The Greens are not the Democrats - they have their own policies, their own history, a unique way of doing things. It is time for trust and it is time for change.
Be the change you want to see
www.adambutler.com.au
In my view, a hung parliament is definitely the lesser of …several evils.
Doing your masters bidding again by sowing the seeds of doubt?
“…..yeah the ALPs on the nose but jeez would ya really wan big nad gun totin Bazza in charge of the nuthouse…..com on give us nice cuddly shrub hugging Greens ya vote….”
You are only here spruiking Lee because Big Bazza has said he will NOT deal with the Greens and your only hope is for another ALP government.
Which is of course why you will just push the preferences back to the ALP where it counts so the ALP gets in again but owing the Greens a debt that will have to be repaid.
I hope that the swinging voters can see through this Green wash but the young gullible ones will fall for it cos they haven’t got a clue about the sleazy preference deals!
I urge readers again to look at what the Greens DO and not what they SAY.
Dr Dog asks “My question for the Greens is how, if in a hung parliament, they will avoid pissing off their support base when making deals with Labor.”
We have the living proof to answer this question: how the current crop of Greens MPs in the NSW Upper House work with the government and opposition.
Ian Cohen, our first Greens MP elected to the NSW Upper House, established a clear and principled way to negotiate. He never engaged in horse trading across issues. Legislation as with everything that comes before the House is judged by the Greens MPs on its merits. The Greens have a range of policies and principles that provide a framework for this decision making.
This is also how Greens MPs operate in other states and in federal parliament.
Certainly a hung parliament would be a bit tougher but I believe that style of work would be retained and the experience to date would stand us in good stead.
So if you look at the Greens progress over the fourteen years we have been in the NSW parliament you see that rather than ‘piss off’ our support base we are expanding it through our style of work.
Lee Rhiannon
We need a NSW Greens government and this is something that the Greens should be publicly saying too. The Greens need to be taken seriously in NSW and talking like they are ready to take over from the rest of the NSW deadwood.
“Ian Cohen, our first Greens MP elected to the NSW Upper House, established a clear and principled way to negotiate. “
So no deals are done for preferences, no special provisions in legislation for greens members (AKA “environmentalists”) on advisory boards or committees, no negotiated “jobs for “the boys” in key positions in education, environment or planning, no negotiated back door funding for “green support” bases masquerading as “environmental organisations” like WWF, ACF, NPA, NCC, TEC and the plethora of phoney “community organisations” which turn out in force with HTV cards at election time, no secret slush funds to “buy votes” via environmental land resumptions, no special direction of how to spend preciously small legal aid (i.e. EDO directed cases), etc etc etc and pigs fly ……
The mad scurrying to and thro between Greens and Carr’s office used make heads spin, even hard core ALP deal makers like Egan, Costa and Obeid would dry retch after the meetings with “Bob the Builder” and/or “Devious”.
Again people, look at what they DO and not what they SAY