The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > NSW state election: competing interpretations > Comments

NSW state election: competing interpretations : Comments

By John Warhurst, published 30/3/2011

Is the Labor defeat in NSW a harbinger of wider change, or a case of a defeat on local issues unconnected to the national Labor brand?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
While I generally agree with John Warhurst's analysis, I would like to point out that the 2011 election in New South Wales did not have an unprecedented result. Indeed, it was in many respects a re-run of the election of 1932, when Labor endured a swing against of it of nearly 27%, and was reduced to 24 seats in a Legislative Assembly of 90. That was 'a dream result for the Coalition', too, and there were no Greens or Independents to worry about. The three major parties won all the seats and all but 5 per cent of the votes.

As in 2011, disunity within the Labor Party was a key factor, though that disunity had been produced by the impact of the great Depression. Labor finally learned its lesson about unity and disunity, and the McKell-led ALP of 1941 governed, with a continuing series of leaders, until 1964. How long will it take for Labor to sort out its problems this time?
Posted by Don Aitkin, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 7:20:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The vote on Saturday was noting more that the electorate wanting to punish the Labor Government for 4 years of arrogance, ineptitude, criminality etc etc. Out door knocking before the election, for the Greens, I found for every one that said "I like Liberal" ten said "I hate Labor". In Heffron I didn't perceive any 'hate' for Keneally the person, most tended to like her, nor could I perceive any 'love' for Pandelious, most said "Pan who"? In Heffron with a poor candidate and little campaigning the Liberals still achieved a 16% swing against Keneally.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 7:58:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's Pendelos .. so if you were asking, who is Pandelious, of course they would say "Pan who?"

No wonder the Greens did so well !
Posted by Amicus, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 9:48:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"And who shall decide when doctors disagree?"- Alexander Pope.

A couple of modest comments from a rank amateur.

1. Bob Carr was king in his time. Opposition was feeble, and the media were tamed. Carr had been a journalist, and knew how to feed the chooks. These days Carr is widely criticised: inaction on the railways. No attempt to challenge powerful unions in education, transport and so on. RTA left to do whatever it wanted, and so on.

2. After the electricity privatisation debacle, it was Iemma then Rees and the whole mess began to fall apart. Rees was incoherent and bumbling. His speech on Saturday was an embarrassing incoherent tirade. Then when he was brought down, he labelled Keneally a puppet of Obeid and Tripodi.

3. From this point on it was the Comedy Festival. Only we had to live with it.e.g. Huge problems on the F3 and a very poor transport between Sydney and Newcastle. Notice the huge swings against Labor right through the Central Coast and Newcastle up to the Hunter.
Western Sydney felt neglected. All talk, no action. The largest donations got what they wanted for the donors: Hotels Association, Taxi Council, land developers....

4. Federation was a plot designed to take money away from the wealthier , large-tax States of NSW and Victoria. The Federal Government has money for all its extravagances: our toy Navy, submarines that don't work, planes that can't fly, the disgraceful Building the Education Revolution, especially hideous in NSW; and God knows how much we spend on refugees. The States have to pick up the pieces, make trains work, struggle with old hospitals, educate the masses from 50 different countries - some of whom can't read in any language.

We poor denizens of darkest NSW expect Barry O'Farrell to rule for the next 8 to 12 years. Let's hope he does something good, rather than endless plans, reviews and announcements. We've waited a long time.
Posted by Bronte, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 9:50:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia looks at Labor’s defeat and concentrating on them alone. Costello described a Labor’s party machine in which players are drunk on power and adept at thuggery to gain ascendency. Behind this are generations of such behaviour within unions – despite being a former federal delegate on a union I refuse to join the union covering my workplace because of the self serving behaviour of union officials protecting unacceptable actions.

John states the route will “alter the face of Australian governments for some time”. It may change the labels of those in government it will not change government per se.

Yes, Labor reeks of malfeasance. That Arbib remains in parliament let alone within Labor having taken privileged information from cabinet and been paid to inform others measures Labor’s failure and its odium to the nation.

Are Liberal’s really different? O’Farrell has within the Liberal party elements that are identical to those that brought Labor undone. Clarke and Moore-Wilton are the Liberal’s version of the ‘shysters’ of Labor.

No, the true face of Australian governments is not changing.

What is that face? It reflects the belief within society based on individuals maximising their personal benefit. It is a belief that the individual is the ultimate judge of good/bad, right/wrong – and the criteria are personal benefit.

We get the governments we deserve as they do truly reflect the society they exist in. If Labor was 16 years of self serving abuse of power based on believing in one’s personal supremacy then NSW society was that.

The rule allowing massive corruption/fraud is “if all the pigs have their snout in the trough then none squeal”. In NSW the population was so busy with their snout in some trough or other they were unwilling to fix the problems – let journos in particular consider they only ever got news from the ‘chook run’ of media releases.

Barry, the seeds of your party’s demise following Labor’s malfeasance is already there, beware. Labor, what do you believe in apart from seeing power as the end in itself – you bought power and lost your souls.
Posted by Cronus, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 11:04:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
John the next Federal Election is already decided and it has been for some time..

That it was reinforced by the NSW voters in Port Macquarrie and New England surely is quite clear even to you rusted on academic's who seem forever espousing how grand are the possibilites of the long dead and now obviously irrelevant labor party.

It wasn't the academic's, unionists, trendies and matriculated who dumped labor it was the same people who once voted Labor at states and voted Howard and Menzies federally. All that's happened is they've realised state labor is as pathetic at looking after them as federal labor.

You know ... they'll never go back to Labor State or Federally now.

The sun has set on the ideals of the original labor people and their party has been pulled down by the academic's, unionists, trendies and matriculated who would have been utterly rejected by those original members of the labor party. They would have told them to simply p.ss off.

The last Labor PM who had any real sort of association with working people and who understood their lives was Paul Keating and the last Labor leader to know and understand was Mark Latham. Both men are despised in modern Labor and doesn't that bloody say it all.

While I was opposed utterly to both I respected them for their attachment to and understanding of original labor. Parts of my family were original labor so I recognised something of them that was once in my family. They represented the past beliefs of some parts of my family.
Posted by keith, Wednesday, 30 March 2011 3:01:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy