To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Unlock with Patreon
I wouldn’t suprise me if an Independent wins or a complex primary vote occurs especially Liberals preselect a conservative male candidate.
It voted largely YES in October + has alot of wealthy small l liberal voters that turned towards Kate Chaney more than any part of the Curtin electorate.
A strong Greens candidate (strong Upper House vote) could also do well.
Based on that CG Labor could hang on here.
Thinking seats should be split into 2021 gains, 2017 gains and pre 2017 – it will be interesting which of the former stay red and which of the latter don’t.
Agree John and CG, many of these affluent seats that were won by Labor in 2021 may well record smaller than average swings. At the same time, some of the regional and outer suburban seats like Murray-Wellington, Kalamunda, Albany and Swan Hills which were gained by Labor in 2017 could see above average swings to the Liberal Party and be lost first.
I actually disagree, i dont think it is in the long term interest for Labor to waste resources in holding these super-wealthy electorates. Kate Chaney has criticized WA Labor for its proposed Climate change Bill as it does not include a 2030 target and a Teal may run in this seat and Churchlands, Cottsoloe etc to challenge both parties. In Victoria, the Labor party had little interest in holding the seat of Hawthorn and despite a sitting MP was happy to run dead and they were even accused of running a push poll to support Melissa Lowe. If a Teal ran in Nedlands it would take a lot of vote from Labor as the vote for Labor in such seats is soft. On the other hand seats such as Swan Hills is a bellwether and mortgage belt the sort of seat that determines elections. In Albany, a sitting MP can actually build a personal vote and withstand swings as Peter Watson did so it would be better to focus on Albany, Geraldton, Joondalup etc. Also look at the biggest brand equity of this government which is Metronet and the seats that will benefit the most. These include Burns Beach, Wanneroo, Swan Hills, West Swan, Forrestfield, Jandekrot, Darling Range. These are seats that Labor needs to focus on to retain government.
Fair point Nimalan about the affluent seats preferring a teal/independent type candidate rather than Labor.
If the Liberals are still struggling to recover, they could end up in a situation similar to Victoria 2022 where they fail to make much headway in both their traditional grounds and also the swing type outer suburban seats. Like Victoria and Dan Andrews with the SRL and a strong focus on rail infrastructure improvements, the Metronet program developed by McGowan is also one that is seen as a ‘game changer’ and difficult for the opposition to push back against, given that former Liberal Premier Colin Barnett was against rail expansion.
Agree Yoh An
At a state level, voters reward delivery more than anything else. Metronet has been the key selling point of this period of Labour government and will be its legacy when the history books are written it will be train line to Ellenbrook, Yanchep and the level crossing removals (Inner Armadale line) that will be remembered, not the closed borders during the pandemic. This is the same in Victoria where the focus on service delivery is why Labor did very well in the traditional marginal seats. Labor lost elite Hawthorn but picked up middle class Glen Waverley/Bayswater, they lost Nepean with its clifftop mansions and picked up Hastings a more middle class tradie area. As you correctly pointed Colin Barnett did squander the mining boom and did not expand Perth’s rail network adequately unlike the NSW state Libs. The 2001-2008 Labor government on the hand doubled the size of Perth’s metro rail network with the Mandurah line, Thornlie line & Clarkson extention. Furthermore, having a strong Labor brand in the outer suburbs of Perth will assist Labor at a federal level in Pearce & Hasluck as Metronet is partially federally funded as well.
@yoh an the wa liberals aren’t as useless as Vic. They are coming from a clean slate.