Hunter – Australia 2022

Does Dan Repacholi competing in the Olympics help his chances of re-election? Surely can’t hurt.

@Adam Given that he was elected on the basis that he’s a local and a well-known local who’s not really controversial (unless if you count his gaffe in India and also his comments about coal miners years ago which actually relates to those in Hunter), I agree that a higher-profile would certainly help Repacholi at a time when Labor needs to firm up in the Hunter region after nearly losing out in 2019.

I think Repacholi is very safe and seems like a good example for major parties of how to hang on even as seats demographically or ideologically move away from them. I wouldn’t bet against him even if Hunter becomes a mostly rural seat with Cessnock as the southern tip. Not sure his style would work for taking seats back that have been lost, but his is well suited for people who usually vote Labor to keep doing so and be happy with their local MP. Being “the politician at the Olympics” would only help with that.

If Labor goes into minority with support from the Greens, the Greens will push them to become very progressive (like Labour/Greens in NZ and Labor/Greens in the ACT) and they would be forced to recognise a Palestinian state, to introduce a carbon tax and a treaty despite the majority of Australians being neutral on the former and opposed to the latter two. Indigenous Australians even say that treaties need to be local because Indigenous people think differently and have different interests and beliefs in different areas depending on which language/dialect group they come from.

A carbon tax would be electoral suicide in the regions, not just because of emissions since it’s almost universally agreed upon (bipartisan support) for net zero and the Coalition is pushing for nuclear as a form of renewable energy (which would be great for the economy as it could employ ex-coal miners). The problem is A. such a move would be radically left-wing and B. people want less taxes, not more.

Some may argue that Labor held onto seats like Hunter in 2013 despite Labor’s carbon tax but the truth is it would be different this time since there isn’t just one Greens MP in the House, there’s now four and that could increase at the next election. Plus the Greens were left-wing back then and are even more left-wing now with their woke ecosocialism taking over their grassroots push for environmentalism which is why the party was created in the 1990s (it was a grassroots movement in Tasmania, this movement is now called the Tasmanian Greens, the Tasmanian branch of the Australian Greens, to stop logging and the building of the Franklin Dam; I’m pretty sure the Tasmanian Greens are the oldest green party in the world).

Plus, something that wasn’t the case in 2013 is the fact that many of these seats are already in the marginal or fairly safe category on the Mackerras pendulum. This is because Labor did terribly in these seats in 2019 and barely recovered in 2022, but even then most of the actual coal booths actually swung even further away from Labor so the swing to Labor was mostly in the urban areas. I analysed three Coal Country seats on another thread (I think it was the Capricornia thread); these seats were Capricornia (QLD), Flynn (QLD) and Hunter (NSW). The Labor vote crashed in 2019 to record lows with the vote going to the Coalition (those specific seats are all contested by members who, if elected, would sit with the National Party) and to One Nation, with the One Nation voters preferencing the Coalition above Labor and thus helped the Coalition greatly). It’s also different since in 2013 Rudd recovered by being less progressive than Gillard, which Shorten continued to do in 2016 before being a bit more progressive in 2019 and then Albo coming along and being a progressive leader like Gillard, so assuming Albo doesn’t resign or lose a potential leadership spill in the next four years we’ll still have the same leader from the same faction.

For example, the swing to Labor in Hunter was small on both TPP and primaries (remember that One Nation focusing more on lockdowns than agriculture/regional interests and immigration/border security hurt them in regional seats though they did have two elections where they had a lot of support so they were expected to go down at least a little bit anyway, their vote only increased nationwide because they contest 149/151 seats in 2022 whereas they contested three times less seats in 2019). The Nationals had a swing to them on primaries of over 3% because the One Nation vote collapsed and went to the Nationals.

Labor increased their vote in the Newcastle booths and in Cessnock (overlapping with the safe state Labor seat of Cessnock which is a Labor vs One Nation contest and with the very safe Labor seat of Wallsend which is Labor’s safest seat in NSW), but (even with the collapse of One Nation) they decreased their vote in rural mining towns like Musswellbrook and Singleton which are in the marginal Nationals-held state seat of Upper Hunter which I suspect will give one safer for the Nationals over time. Even then in some far southern suburbs of Newcastle on the western side of Lake Macquarie, Labor still actually went backwards in places like Coal Point.

For example, in 2022 in Hunter there was a 10.62% swing to Labor in Wyee Point, a suburb of Newcastle on the southern shore of Lake Macquarie. Labor won this booth with 54.29% of the TPP vote. However, in Muswellbrook there was a 4.35% swing against Labor which resulted in the Nationals winning that booth with exactly 51.00% of the TPP vote, and in Singleton there was a 3.37% swing against Labor which resulted in the Nationals winning that booth with 56.80% of the TPP vote.

There was even a small swing against Labor in Morisset in 2022.

@ nether portal
I agree signing a deal with the Greens will be suicide at a federal level for Labor. they may also insist on flag change republic referendum etc.
however I don’t think that will happen in 2010 the problem is that Labor did not go to the election with a climate change policy so Gillard was exposed. if they had a double dissolution with the cprs instead this could have been avoided. this is why Labor needs to pass all key legislation this term of parliament.
Also albo should look to Chris Minns for inspiration who while leads a minority government did not offer the Greens anything

@nimalan that’s because unlike Gillard Minns doesn’t need the greens for a majority. Hes got the independents giving him confidence and supply and doesn’t habe to go to the greens

@ John
if Labor gets to 74 they only need Dai Le and Wilkie they don’t need Greens both of them represent strong Labor seats so good chance they will back Labor. if they get to 70 seats they can simple dare the Greens to vote with Dutton on a motion of no confidence.

@Nimalan true, however, Dai Le may prefer to sit on the fence. Bob Katter would go with the Coalition, which would leave Helen Haines, Rebekha Sharkie, Andrew Wilkie and the teals as key people to win the support of (but they would most likely support Albo over Dutton) and then the Greens who will always support Labor.

If six Greens get elected (Macnamara and Wills) then the balance of power lies with the Greens. They would push for radical reforms which Labor would be obliged to agree to which would be electoral suicide outside the inner-city with the Old Labor voters turning to the Coalition, just like how coal miners turned their backs on Labor in 2019 and never came back.

This is off topic, on Hunter, but you must remember when a Labor majority was in doubt at the 2022 election, for Albanese to prove he had a majority on the floor and could govern he did not get the Greens support.

I cannot remember which independents he obtained support from (it may have included Katter who would vote Labor is Albanese was PM), but he definitely did not got to the Greens. Albanese has also spent time in Katter’s and STeggal’s seats since elected as PM. Labor will not be doing a deal with the Greens if it can be avoided.

@TJR Katter only supported Albo against a motion of no confidence because the Coalition wouldn’t have been able to govern. You also have to remember that the Coalition was well behind Labor due to the losses to teals. The last seat to be called was Gilmore where popular former Bega Liberal MP Andrew Constance came within 300 votes of gaining the seat from Labor’s Fiona Philips who won the seat from the Liberals in 2019.

@ Nether Portal
How much power or influence the Greens may have in a minority government depends on the number of seats each of the majority party has. In 2022 as the Real James stated correctly it was not clear on election night whether Labor won a majority or not. However, as the Coalition was so far behind they had no choice but to concede rather than trying to form a rainbow coalition. Antony Green was able to give a Victory speech and was actually sworn in to office before we knew if he had got a majority or not. This is different to 2010 when neither side could claim victory on election night. If you watch the Killing season, Gillard said she regretted signing the deal with the Greens but did so because she wanted to increase the seat count. If Gillard won 74 seats say she won Boothby and Dunkley at the 2010 election, the coalition would have only had 71 seats and would have conceded she would not have needed to sign the deal with the Greens so while 4 Greens were elected in the HOR in 2022 compared to only 1 the Greens would have had far less influence as there was no chance Libs could have formed a government. Also need to remember in 2010 the Coalition actually won the notional majority of 76 seats while in 2022 Labor actually won 84 notional seats.

@Nimalan *I think you mean Anthony Albanese not Antony Green was sworn in.

And yes the point I was making was that the Coalition couldn’t form government regardless of whether or not Labor won Gilmore and Macnamara (the last two seats to be decided). But if the Greens gain the two seats in Melbourne they’re closely eyeing (Macnamara and Wills; and they’ll also be closely eyeing the seats of Cooper and Higgins in Melbourne, Moreton in Brisbane and Richmond in NSW) then they may be forced to go with the Greens since they’ll have six seats (assuming they retain Brisbane, Griffith, Melbourne and Ryan).

Therefore if Labor doesn’t get a majority and the Greens push them to abolish Australia Day, change the flag, have 100% renewables, hold a Republic referendum, introduce a carbon tax, introduce a nationwide Treaty, etc then Labor will lose a landslide in 2028, with the Coalition likely winning a record >100 seats and probably coming close to wiping Labor out in Queensland and WA. Once solidly red seats like Oxley, Rankin and Shortland would be lost. In 2013 when Tony Abbott won a landslide with 90 seats (the third-largest seat total a party or coalition has won in Australian history) the Liberals won 41.17% of the TPP vote in Newcastle and gained Barton with 50.31% of the TPP vote.

I would also expect such a landslide to wipe them out in Tasmania and the NT too.

Sorry i meant to say Antony Green projected on election night that Labor would form a government and Albanese was sworn in before there was a majority confirmed sorry busy day yesterday.

I would think that Labor would seek the support of the independents before the Greens, in fact pretty much all of the independents and minors say they would support the party with most seats in the case of a hung parliament.
@Nether Portal That’s very much a Greens wishlist but I doubt Labor would adopt much of that, especially in the near future.

@Neither Portal, the Libs probably won’t get a landslide margin like they did in 2013 as Teals Voters are younger generations who will be less likely to vote Libs. Plus Gen Z (and later millianials) voters have much more apathy (and opposition) on issues such as Australia Day.

@ Nether Portal
On Climate change Labor has clear policies which it has already legislated, this includes 82% Renewable electricity by 2030 not 100%, Safeguard mechanism not Carbon tax. Labor did not have a climate policy going into 2010 which exposed Gillard to a Carbon tax. 43% target by 2030 and net zero by 2050. If the Liberals best hope to form government is simply relying on the Greens to drag labor to left then maybe they actually dont have confidence that they can beat Labor in the centre ground.

@Nether Portal (May 25, 2024 – 1:48pm)

“gained Barton with 50.31% of the TPP vote.”

Barton in 2013 looked much different to the Barton since 2016 until 2025. After the 2010 redistribution, Barton included suburbs like Ramsgate, Sandringham and Dolls Point, which at federal level currently are really good areas for the Liberals. Very affluent, beachside, and overall a good spot to make Barton marginal. 2013 came about a really bad time for NSW Labor: 2 years ago wiped out of government and federally they were on a knife edge. In 2013 the sitting Labor MP retired, and along with Tony Abbott’s strong appeal in NSW, Barton had just enough of a swing to flip very narrowly to the Liberals.

The redistribution for 2016 election, particularly in Barton, was a disaster. Focusing on this area, Hughes was underquota (as usual), so it had to push east of the Woronora River to gain electors from Cook. This left Cook with a shortfall, so the only logical explanation was to push north of the Georges River into areas between the Princes Highway and President Avenue (e.g. Ramsgate, Sans Souci), which were the best Liberal booths in Barton that year. Barton in turn gained electors north of the Cooks River from Grayndler (Albo’s seat) around Marrickville and Tempe. This in turn flipped Barton to a 4% Labor notional majority. Their candidate, then state Deputy Opposition Leader Linda Burney (now Indigenous Australians Minister), easily had popularity around Canterbury, and scored a 4 percent swing in her favour in 2016 to easily defeat the Liberal sitting MP, and holds it today easily.

@James good point and yes the past 11 years weren’t good for NSW Labor in fact they still haven’t fully recovered in some areas.

@Nimalan correct but changing positions would still hurt them a lot. But Julia Gillard also said that Labor wouldn’t introduce a carbon tax.

She said: “No, it’s not possible that we’re bringing in a carbon tax. That is a hysterically inaccurate claim being made by the Coalition.” But then she did it.

@ nether portal of course doing something without a mandate will hurt Labor we are in agreement about that. However, the gravest mistake Labor did was not to have a double dissolution on the CPRS when the libs and greens joined forces to vote it down despite Labor winning a mandate in 2007 for an ETS. if a Double dissolution took place then we would still have an emission trading scheme Tony Abbott would probably never have become PM and the climate wars would have ended. finally the difference now is that Labor has already legislated its new climate policy and the Libs have not said they will repeal it so it is a moot point if Labor will change position on climate

Today the Net Zero Economic Authority legislation has passed. This is a major milestone has Labor has managed to get all its climate legislation done in its first term something they could not do between 2007-2010 when the CPRS did not pass and led to a chain of events which led to Labor’s Downfall. i sometimes wonder what would have happened if Labor got the CPRS passed in its first term and then went into minority in 2010 with the Greens passed. If CPRS had already passed climate would not really have been discussed in 2010 and maybe the Greens would have demanded SSM instead.

@Nimalan You’d hope that the passing of this would mean that Labor will also do something to address the declining Coal industries in this electorate and neighbouring Paterson. Sooner or later coal will be phased out and given the reliance of industries here that has kept Labor in this area they need to have something ready for the people here otherwise they’ll flip and vote L/NP come next year and beyond in the same way regional Queensland already is.

@ Tommo9
I agree. However, how this is communicated is critical sometimes using the megaphone and talking about the end of Coal is hard because the LNP would argue that Coal can go on forever. The Hunter Region has a more diverified economy than the La Trobe Valley with house studs, cattle country, surf beaches and wineries

@Nimalan wouldn’t it just be fazed out by nuclear?

@ NP
Maybe Coal fired power stations can be fazed out by nuclear in the Hunter Region but not Coal mines as there are no Uranium deposits nearby so the future of Coal mining is still an issue even with nuclear.

Nuclear does not solve the problem and is not safe.

@Nimalan perhaps coal mining is, but coal is used for more than power. I thought by “coal” you were referencing coal power.

I think the nats will finally get their prize in the next couple of elections.

The redistribution didn’t hurt the coalitions chances here. I still think like Richmond and whitlam running both a liberal and national candidate hedges their bets in winning those seats. Richmond is probably the least likely to elect a national. They can’t beat Labor with that strong greens vote in Byron and I doubt their ability to win against the greens. But Hunter and whitlam are strong possible gains

Nats won’t win Whitlam. But the libs or a high profile independence are definitely in with a shot.

@stew I think it will flip in 2028 I don’t think they can get there in 2025. I think the fact that a Labor greens govt will cause more problems here and flip it after about a 3% swing in 2025