Melbourne – Election 2010

ALP vs GRN 4.7%

Incumbent MP
Lindsay Tanner, since 1993.

Geography
Inner Melbourne. Melbourne covers the CBD of Melbourne and inner suburbs. It includes the entirety of the City of Yarra, including the key suburbs of Richmond, Fitzroy and Collingwood. The seat also covers all of the City of Melbourne north of the Yarra River, including the suburbs of North Melbourne and Carlton. The seat also covers the suburbs of Ascot Vale, Kensington and Flemington in the northwestern corner of the seat.

History
Melbourne is an original Federation seat, and has been held by the ALP for over one hundred years.

The seat was first won by Malcolm McEacharn, the former Mayor of Melbourne, who joined the Protectionist Party. Although McEacharn had defeated his Labor opponent William Maloney with over 60% of the vote in 1901, the 1903 election saw McEacharn only defeat Maloney by 77 votes, and the result was declared void after allegations that the result was tainted.

Maloney defeated McEacharn at the following by-election in 1904, and the ALP have held Melbourne ever since. Maloney polled over 60% at the 1906 election, and never polled less than 60% as he held the seat right through to 1940. Indeed, Maloney was elected unopposed at two elections. Maloney retired in 1940 but died before the 1940 election. He never held a frontbench role, and holds the record for the longest term of service without serving as a frontbencher.

The seat was won in 1940 by Arthur Calwell. Calwell held the seat for thirty-two years. He served as Minister for Immigration in Ben Chifley’s government from 1945 to 1949. He served as HV Evatt’s Deputy Leader from 1951 until 1960, when he became Leader of the Opposition.

Calwell led the ALP into three federal elections. The ALP was defeated by a slim margin at the 1961 election, but suffered a larger defeat in 1963 and a solid Liberal landslide in 1966. Calwell was replaced as Leader by Gough Whitlam in 1967 and Calwell retired in 1972. At no time did the seat of Melbourne come under any serious danger of being lost.

The seat was won in 1972 by Ted Innes, who held the seat until 1983.

He was succeeded by Gerry Hand, who served as a federal minister from 1987 until his retirement at the 1993 election.

The seat was won in 1993 by Lindsay Tanner. Tanner became a frontbencher following the defeat of the Labor government in 1996, and served on the Labor frontbench right until the election of the Rudd government, and he has served as Finance Minister ever since.

The seat of Melbourne had been considered a safe Labor seat for over a century, but at the 2007 election the Greens overtook the Liberals on preferences and came second, and the two-candidate-preferred vote saw the ALP’s margin cut to 4.7%, which is the smallest margin for the seat since the 1904 by-election.

Candidates

  • Georgia Pearson (Family First)
  • Adam Bandt (Greens)
  • Joel Murray (Sex Party)
  • David Collyer (Democrats)
  • Penelope Green (Secular Party)
  • Cath Bowtell (Labor)
  • Simon Olsen (Liberal)

Political situation
Melbourne is the best chance for the Greens in 2010, and this will be reflected by the focus on the seat by the Greens and various progressive groups looking to pressure the ALP from its left. Bandt is a strong candidate, having stood before and raised his profile again by standing for Lord Mayor of Melbourne in 2008.

Tanner was a very serious roadblock to the Greens winning Melbourne. Without him contesting, Bandt becomes a much stronger contender. The result may depend on who the ALP can find to run.

2007 result

Candidate Party Votes % Swing
Lindsay Tanner ALP 43,363 49.51 -2.27
Andrea Del Ciotto LIB 20,577 23.49 -1.60
Adam Bandt GRN 19,967 22.80 +3.82
Tim Wright DEM 1,255 1.43 -0.20
Georgia Pearson FF 878 1.00 +0.12
Andrew Reed CEC 586 0.67 +0.49
Kylie McGregor IND 539 0.62 +0.62
Will Marshall SEP 418 0.48 +0.48

2007 two-candidate-preferred result

Candidate Party Votes % Swing
Lindsay Tanner ALP 47,916 54.71
Adam Bandt GRN 39,667 45.29

Booth breakdown
Booths in Melbourne have been divided into four areas:

  • Richmond – Suburbs in the southern parts of the City of Yarra, as well as East Melbourne.
  • Fitzroy-Collingwood – Suburbs in the northern parts of the City of Yarra, as well as those parts of Carlton included in the City of Melbourne. Main suburbs are Carlton, Fitzroy and Collingwood. Also covers the small part of Moreland LGA that lies within Melbourne.
  • North Melbourne – North Melbourne and the Melbourne CBD.
  • Ascot Vale – Northwest of the seat, including Ascot Vale, Flemington and Kensington.

The Greens polled 27% of the primary vote in Fitzroy-Collingwood and 22% in North Melbourne, with less in Richmond and Ascot Vale. Fitzroy-Collingwood was particularly bad for the Liberals, meaning that the Greens actually performed better in North Melbourne on a two-candidate-preferred basis, as the ALP primary vote was lower in North Melbourne than Fitzroy-Collingwood.

Polling booths in Melbourne. North Melbourne in yellow, Richmond in blue, Fitzroy-Collingwood in red, Ascot Vale in green.
Voter group LIB % GRN % ALP 2CP % Total votes % of votes
Fitzroy-Collingwood 17.55 27.86 54.51 27,012 30.84
Richmond 29.11 17.59 54.25 14,281 16.31
Ascot Vale 24.13 17.49 59.29 12,443 14.21
North Melbourne 25.77 22.92 52.74 9,598 10.96
Other votes 25.58 22.90 53.63 24,249 27.69
Polling booths in Melbourne, showing results of the 2007 election.

59 COMMENTS

  2. [My old electorate before the shift to Queensland].

    Tanner is a legendary figure in this seat with traditional support from the unions, many headquartered in the electorate. It also has the ACTU and the VTHC. Tanner will fight hard and win this one but 2013 is the real challenge. Even with ETU supporting the Greens they will fall short.

  3. Nothing to do with Lindsay Tanner. Everything to do with his party. If Minister for Finance and Deregulation Tanner, in spite of his supposed progressive views, is unable to actually advance any progressive agenda due to the regressive nature of his party, then why should the electors of Melbourne (of which I am one) vote for him? If I’m to be given the choice between a muzzled presumed progressive candidate, and an unmuzzled confirmed one, the choice is simple.

  6. That’s just like the constituency of Brighton, Pavillion in the United Kingdom. In the notional election results for 2005, the seat voted:

    Labour 36%, Conservatives 23%, Greens 22%, Liberal Democrats 16%

  8. This is an interesting seat.

    Rumors have it that the DLP will have a go and are looking to do a deal with the greens in an effort to remove Lindsay Tanner.

    Tanner is the stumbling block of the DLP’s development bank policy and the DLP are desparate to have him removed. If the greens put forward an acceptable candidate then it might yeild and interesting result.

    Tony

  10. Well, it rather depends what you call an “acceptable” candidate doesn’t it. But fear not, the Greens will pick who they think is the best candidate for the job in every seat, even if you don’t like them (and its Adam Bandt in Melbourne).

  11. Have never met or spoken to the man so I cant make a comment.
    I have been involved with discussions on this subject though.
    Deals have been done before with greens/DLP in both the upper house in Victoria and Moreland shire council, so its certainly not out of the realm of possibility.
    It would be a tough call for the Vics but still posssible.

  13. @Geoff Robinson

    That might be true but a 5% swing is possible.
    Tanner is a free marketeer. Believes in Debt driven economies and although well aware of the problems facing this country, is blocking means to revese the trend. A good well run campaign run from either end of the political spectrum on a common anti economic rationist stand could be just the campaign that would unseat him.

    As a young man he was well aware and warned of the coming corporatist system that he now supports.

    I think it would be a fitting end to a man who lost all his principles and beliefs along the way to support this corporate socialist state that he now adheres to.

  14. This will be a really bitter fight – given Tanner’s high profile status as a government minister. Strong ALP supporters in the blogosphere retain their venom for the Greens, the coalition they merely dismiss.

    On the ground this will be a seat to watch.

  17. A significant proportion of the difference between the Senate and HoR votes is likely to be explained by “vote for a minor in the Senate but they can`t win in the HoR so vote for the preferred major” factor. The Greens need to convince more of these people that they can (getting into the two candidate preferred should help this) and should win this seat. They say that the individual candidate has a maximum effect of only 2% in metropolitan seats.

  18. Not clever by the Libs preselectors, they don’t want to run second here. You would have thought a Wyatt Roy would have been perfect for them here

  19. “During his time in the US, Simon took advantage of an opportunity to become actively involved in the 2000 US Republican Presidential Campaign.”

    That’s just horrible.

  20. All the liberals have to do is preference the ALP before the greens and convince Lindsay Tanner to do the same. End of Story.
    Lindsay has changed his views as many times as his underpants and is a total free marketeer. (Far more at home with a coalition member)

    The Big question is not the greens or the common practice of the two headed beast preferencing each other, but what other candidate could break the deadlock.

    My personal opinion is none of the two challengers will worry Lindsay and by what ever means available to him (unless another candidate appears) he’ll win in a canter.

  21. This one will be tight between the Greens and Labor. The question is whether Tanner being an influential and high profile decision maker in the Government will get him enough votes to counter the recent decisions on climate change and immigration which will hurt in the inner-city seats.

    I can’t see Lindsay putting anyone other than the Libs last to be honest.

  23. “All the liberals have to do is preference the ALP before the greens and convince Lindsay Tanner to do the same. End of Story.”

    Why would they do that? It would ensure that Melbourne was safe Labor forever. The Libs preferencing the Greens means that Labor have to put in resources to defend Melbourne – resources that they would otherwise put into McEwan or La Trobe.

    As Labor will undoubtedly come either 1st or 2nd, which party they put last on their HTV cards is irrelevent.

  24. Here’s an interesting stat. Looking at the new electorate rankings based on 2006 census data just released by the Parliamentary Library, Melbourne has the highest rate of youth unemployment of any seat.

  26. ^

    I was just going to ask that question too. Lots of Uni students in the seat.

    Maybe the demographics have changed so much that the only “youth” still left are those from the older working class public housing areas……the newly-gentrified parts of Melbourne would tend to be working professionals and DINKs I guess.

  27. I don’t think they count people as unemployed if they’re studying. The next four seats at the top of the rankings are all in working class suburban areas, no unis.

  28. Linsday, you should be nervous …

    The ETS backflip will slash your vote

    You’ve managed to lose votes on boat people from both the Left and the Right !

    You might be looking for a job soon mate.

  34. I read over at PB that Tanner wants Waleed Aly to succeed him. First, what an awesome contest that would be. Second, that would really suck for the Greens who would probably loose. Third, surely he wouldn’t sacrifice the integrity he has built by revealing his cards so early in his career.

  35. Democrats preferences may be important in Melbourne – other small parties don’t poll well in this politically-aware electorate. Were the Democrats to preference the ALP ahead of the Greens in this seat, the ALP would widen the margin by up to 2.9 % of the vote, based on 2007.

    Here the Democrats vote may even increase in 2010 due to disenchantment with both the ALP and the Greens over climate change outcomes, the right-wing policies of the ‘liberal’ opposition and Senate obstructionism.

    However, İ fear that the imminent ALP preselection of an ALP-ACTU hack (rather than Waleed Ally, for example) will give the Democrats little cause to preference the ALP ahead of the Greens.

  36. I think it’s pretty much certain that Cath Bowtell will be the ALP’s candidate in Melbourne. She has resigned from her position at WorkSafe and the Socialist Left faction has thrown its support behind her.

    This probably makes it harder for the Greens — Tanner may have had a strong personal following, but he was becoming increasingly abrasive and desperate in interviews and his newspaper columns. As part of the “kitchen cabinet”, Tanner was at least partially responsible for a number of decisions that didn’t sit well with the Melbourne electorate. Clearly, he had frequent access to the PM and still couldn’t successfully advocate for more progressive positions, so it would have been easier to argue to progressive/left voters that there wasn’t much point in re-electing him.

  38. With Tony and Julia both beating up on the refugees, I think I’ll pencil this one in for the Greens.

  40. Mmm, that should have been “I don’t think that any challenging party is really in the position to pencil in gains just yet.”

  41. Of course, no candidate or party “ever” pencils in a win. I will though.

    Interestingly, sports bet are paying the following odds

    Any Other Party 1.67
    Australian Labor Party 2.13
    Coalition 21.00

    Tony Z – You’ve got to be happy with that

  42. Was looking forward not to vote for that arrogant so and so but he retired and I feel cheated. Can’t bring myself to vote for adam or cath but not willing to waste my vote and so it will be very hard come election day.

  44. Ben,

    The comments posted on this site are really detracting from your content. At a minimum, if someone purports to be an actual candidate, you should receive a confirmation email from their party email address.

    IN

  47. Yes it is.

    I still think a basic username and password function would help towards removing some of the partisan and or irrelevant posts from your otherwise quality site.

  48. I disagree. I think while this is an open yet closely watched site, comments like so-called “Simon Olsen’s” above can be quickly called out. Open discussion assists creating as much content as possible, even if it is not as much quality. Australian-run sites certainly do need content.

    Comments should close a couple of weeks after the poll though.

  50. I say this because I’m feeling provocative and because many Greens like to question the idea of a mandate just because a Government gains 50%+1 of seats in parliament.

    If Adam Bandt was elected the Member for Melbourne off 30% of the vote, when the Labor candidate got, say, 40%, how could he legitimately claim a mandate to be the Member for Melbourne? Obviously the answer is because he won the two party preferred vote. But, many Greens will argue that a 2PP victory doesn’t equate to a mandate in Government, so why would it in a single seat? Does the Greens winning seats off a significantly minority vote change how people feel about a Government claiming a mandate (or a limitied mandate as it may be because of numbers in the Senate) when the Government claims a majority in the House of Reps without a majority of primary votes? To me, there doesn’t seem a huge difference. People often question the ‘mandate’ for what seems ill-informed reasons. Yes, question the political system, but surely, with the system we have, gaining the majority of seats off less than half the primary vote is the same as gaining one seat off well under half the primary vote?

    Will be interested in peoples thoughts…

Newer Comments »

Comments are closed.