East Hills – NSW 2011

ALP 14.1%

Incumbent MP
Alan Ashton, since 1999.

Geography
Southwestern Sydney. East Hills covers southern parts of the City of Bankstown, areas on the north and east shore of the Georges River. The seat covers the suburbs of Panania, Revesby, Padstow, Milperra and Condell Park.

History
The electoral district of East Hills was first created at the 1953 election. In the last half-century the seat has been always held by the ALP, with only four people ever holding the seat.

The seat was first won in 1953 by Arthur Williams. He had been a member of the Legislative Assembly since 1940, first holding the marginal seat of Ryde until 1941, then holding the seat of Georges River from 1941 to 1953. He held East Hills until his retirement in 1956.

Joe Kelly won East Hills for the ALP in 1956. He held the seat until 1973. He was succeeded by Pat Rogan, who held the seat until 1999.

East Hills has been held by Alan Ashton since 1999.

Candidates

Political situation
East Hills would normally be a safe Labor seat. It will be a challenge for the Liberals to win the seat, but it could certainly happen in 2011.

2007 result

Candidate Party Votes % Swing
Alan Ashton ALP 22,190 53.6 -1.6
Glenn Brookes LIB 11,352 27.4 +2.7
Stephen Chavura CDP 2,724 6.6 +2.7
Michael Tierney GRN 2,538 6.1 +0.1
Francis Dale AAFI 1,472 3.6 +2.1
Andy Truong UNI 1,109 2.7 +0.9

2007 two-candidate-preferred result

Candidate Party Votes % Swing
Alan Ashton ALP 23,921 64.1 -3.8
Glenn Brookes LIB 13,417 35.9 +3.8

Booth breakdown
Booths in East Hills have been divided into three areas. A small cluster of booths in the north of the seat have been grouped as “Condell Park”. Most booths lie in the south of the seat. Those booths have been divided between Padstow-Revesby in the east and Panania in the west.

The ALP’s vote varied from almost 70% in Condell Park to just over 60% in Panania. The Christian Democratic Party, who came third, got their best vote in Padstow-Revesby, while the best Greens vote was in Condell Park.

 

Polling booths in East Hills at the 2007 state election. Condell Park in green, Padstow-Revesby in blue, Panania in yellow.

 

Voter group GRN % CDP % ALP 2CP % Total votes % of votes
Padstow-Revesby 6.3 7.1 64.4 17,490 42.3
Panania 5.2 6.4 60.7 11,390 27.5
Condell Park 6.9 6.9 69.8 5,689 13.7
Other votes 6.6 5.2 64.7 6,816 16.5
Two-party-preferred votes in East Hills at the 2007 state election.

125 COMMENTS

  3. Not sure if this will impact the outcome but Batch is actually preferencing 2 Family First and 3 Labor. After initially showing himself to be a devout pro life catholic candidates targetting conservative voters, it is no apparent that he is firmly in the labor camp, chatting and siding with them on a regular basis.

    Not sure what you guys think but I guess this is a good example of the Labor form of democracy – running sympathetic candidates to help your cause. The liberals, FF, CDP and myself are not happy about this type of rubbish…

    If he gets the 25% that he thinks he will get then this will go down to the wire…

  4. Boutros – can you tell me what your preferencing and what CDP and FF are preferencing officially? I was unaware what Batch was doing, but I’d suggest he will probably poll the lowest.

  5. Not sure if you guys now but it turns out the Batch will be preferencing FF – 2 and Labor – 3. I find this astonishing given the fact that Batch originally portrayed himself to be a pro life conservative independent… It now appears that he is working to ensure that Ashton gets re-elected.

    I can tell you that the Liberals, FF, CDP and myself are really pissed off about this and further more there is evidence that Labor is running candidates in various other seats just to prop themselves up. This is so-called Labor democracy…

    I would be interested to know what people think about this and I believe the situation has just gotten a whole lot tighter especially since Batch has waged a strong campaign and expects 25% of the vote…

  6. Sorry I got a web error and didnt realise that my initial post went up. I am preferencing Liberal 2 and that its.

    Batch is FF 2 and Labor 3

    Hurley is Tony batch, liberal, me and then labor and cdp

    Greens not preferencing anyone.

    Not sure about CDP but I think it will be liberal before labor

  7. It certainly makes this a more even contest now depending on the vote Batch gets. He is not on council and I would really doubt that he will get anywhere near 25%, although he does have some small community connections around Panania. Polling is not showing his supposed popularity. Actually, no-one has mentioned him by name. He might think he is big, but I can’t see it. Frankly, East Hills has always been major party territory. I can’t see it really changing much this time. I still reckon it’s a Liberal win and Labor have written it off according to the Tele.

  8. Lets hope so DB, if we make East Hills a swinging seat then we should attract more funding from government for the area…

    Where do you see the current polling for this seat?

  9. Bwaa bwaaa bwaa,

    Your sanctimony or, to be kind political naivete, is amusing.

    Parties and/or individual candidates are creatures of free choice & therefore capable of making their own calls upon their own criteria. Contrary to your belief, this criteria may extend beyond one single issue. That this may not accord to your dictates … or mine … is their own call.

    The issue of dummy candidates & “false flagging” is as old as the hills. I detest the practice as much as you but it has been a fact of life in electoral politics (in many countries) for ages & ALL sides have indulged & will continue to indulge in the practice where they may consider it advantageous. Only the clumsy ever get caught out.

    Your “labour democracy” whine evidences either your naivete OR your inherant biases. Are you willing to be equally as scathing about the various Independent candidates in various seats that are most likely funded & resourced by the Libs ? Are you willing to defend or alternatively condemn the policy of political parties running “tickets” in local govt elections; authorised by people holding party offices but proclaiming themselves “True Independents” ?

    Do not kidd yourself that I am making this up. This practice is “the rule” in councils north of the harbour and in many regional areaqs. Oh ALP has indulged in this, and your dear friends in the CDP have been guilty but the Libs are the worst offenders. One of the few saving graces of the Greens in my eyes are that at least they have the balls to nail their colours to the mast.

    Well, my friend, does this conduct accord with your code of upright moral conduct OR in the eyes of the DLP, ends justify the means for august conservatives ?

  10. The previous post was pointed towards our emissary from the DLP.

    DB, I agree this area is essentially major party contest. As a rule, minor party candidates/Indies will do exceptionally to nudge 10% and the bulk will lose their deposit. This election may prove a slight anomaly but bulk of the vote switch will be from one major to the other.

    An almost certain Lib gain …. tenancy beyond the upcoming term … precarious I suspect.

  11. Mate, I am merely pointing out the situation in this electorate. If I was running in another electorate and it was a liberal hack that was running as independent to help them out and the roles were reversed then I would have said the same thing…

    Since my comment was in the “East Hills” electorate blog then I think I have a right to mention what the East Hills candidates are doing… I would recommend people do the same on the other electorate blogs irrespective of who the candidates are and who they are working for and what real intentions they have…

    You agree with me that it is not right… and so why can’t I mention it without getting a reply like yours?

  12. dirkprovin – well thank God for that sir!

    Boutros – the ALP have not outpolled the Liberals once in this seat during the campaign. If Batch got over 10-12% of the vote and 90% of his preferences went to the ALP, I reckon the ALP might possibly hold on. Even so, with his HTV, he will attract ALP supporters and not many Liberals. The ALP have given it up according to the Sunday Telegraph on 20/3. It was the highest margin they had given up as a lost cause. I reckon it is a correct call, but it might have been prematurely made before this preference deal (on the basis that they wouldn’t get one).

    Nonetheless, I had lived in East Hills (Picnic Point) for 30 years, and I had never heard of Batch. So I can’t see that he has such a massive following. Sure, his kids might play sport and he might have some rotary connections or similar, but that doesn’t equate to 25%. My prediction would be that CDP and FF combined will easily outpoll him.

    The only Independent ever in East Hills to get any real traction was Max Parker. He was a former Liberal who stood as an Independent and I think he is still on Council as an Independent (I could be wrong). But he was on South Ward council for more than 20 years and in 1991 (I think) he received 7000 odd votes and still finished 3rd in a 5 horse race out of 35,000 votes. I can’t see that this bloke is any Max Parker.

    But I agree it would be good for the locals to have a Liberal Member of Parliament this time. I think East Hills has been neglected compared to the areas I am around, so it would attract more funding if it were a swinging seat.

    It was clever of Batch to preference FF and then Ashton, knowing that FF won’t be in the contest. It makes him look like a family kind of guy. But he is certainly entitled to stand and preference as he wishes. And the Liberals will get most of the preferences here for sure overall. So if they outpoll on primaries (as I expect) then Ashton is no chance.

  13. Boutros – don’t worry. The Libs are going to win this. Batch will get less than 10%. Ashton will be lucky to get 35%. I am told that it is felt that Brookes should get well into the 40’s%. That suggests a 20-25% swing.

  14. Yes and if that’s the case Boutros, and I think you might be right; then why are you even bothering to run?

  17. My parents who are in their 70’s wanted to vote for Mr Glenn Brookes but when they turned up to their local polling booth at Condell park there were no Liberal’s to hand out a “How To Vote” flyer to them. The same thing happened to their friends. The Liberal’s have always neglected this area and do not deserve to win this seat.

  18. I agree Alison… this is the primary reason that I ran in this seat… but its not just condell park… its bankstown, auburn, lakemba etc…. been ignored for too long by the major parties… that why there were many independents running in these areas…

  19. Still ramming your inflated ego into this cyberspace? You must be chosing to ignore the cold hard facts about your vote that has been delivered to you. I don’t have the patience to go through it again but your vote will do squat! The swing was a direct swing from the ALP to the Coalition and you just picked up donkey vote and left-overs from no candidate from AAFI or Unity!

  20. Alison Mercury – that is disappointing to hear. But this is what happens when you don’t have local support. I’d suggest if Brookes wins the seat, you won’t have that problem next time.

  21. Finally, a swinging seat. Bye bye Alan. Next challenge: to get a Liberal on the Board of the Revesby Workers Club.

  23. Got it wrong Micky W. Looks like Boutros’ votes got Glenn Brookes over the line and helped me win $$$$

  25. HA! Thank you Chris for posting the Official Preference Flows. I find it absolutely hilarious that of all the 715 votes that Boutros Zalloua got, 414 exhausted. Of the remaining 301, 156 went to Alan Ashton anyway. Only 58 of your votes were preferenced to Glenn Brookes. Bravo. It just goes to show that Boutros’ vote did squat. If anything, they helped Alan Ashton by helping to claw back about 100 votes.

« Older Comments

Comments are closed.