PDA

View Full Version : Australian PM Howard wins re-election (with help from religous right)


Dynasty
10-09-2004, 05:13 PM
One of President George W. Bush's biggest allies in the War on Terror won a big re-election victory yesterday. Australian Prime Minister John Howard won a victory which some are describing as a "massacre". His opponent, Mark Latham, had pledged to pull Australian troops out of Iraq had he and his Labor Party won.

Here's a link: Howard Wins His Place in History (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/10/1097261869591.html)

And, the story:

[ QUOTE ]
Prime Minister John Howard swept the Coalition to a fourth term last night, cementing his place in Australian history and banishing Labor to another period in the political wilderness.

A grim-faced Labor leader, Mark Latham, conceded defeat just after 9.30pm as Labor struggled across the country to lift its primary vote above a dismal 39 per cent.

And to tumultuous cheers and applause, the fourth-term exuberant Prime Minister claimed victory at 10.40pm, declaring that Australia had not seen such an "extraordinary" electoral feat since the 1960s.

"Can I say first of all that I am truly humbled by this extraordinary expression of confidence in the leadership of this great nation by the Coalition," Mr Howard, flanked by his wife Janette and their children, told the 800-strong crowd of supporters at Sydney's Wentworth Hotel.

Australia stood on the threshold of "a new era of great achievement" and could achieve "anything it wanted", the Prime Minister said - seemingly close to tears.

The swing to the Government in what was expected to be a tightly fought contest, but ended up being a comfortable victory, was about 2 per cent on a two-party preferred basis. It was helped by preferences from the right-wing Family First Party, first-time entrants to the political arena whose strong vote suggests that the "religious right" has arrived in Australia.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Even the strong Greens vote - which topped 10 per cent in some electorates, with preferences flowing strongly to Labor - failed to dent the extraordinary swing to the incumbents, who campaigned heavily on mortgage belt issues.

Apart from increasing the Coalition's lower house majority by between two and nine seats, the Coalition was poised late last night to either control the senate outright or do so with the assistance of a Victorian Family First senator.

That would allow the Government, for the first time since the 1980s, to pass its controversial legislation without bartering with the left-wing parties.

"This swing to the Government is almost unprecedented," exuberant Liberal Party strategist Nick Minchin said, putting the emphatic result down to the unity of the front bench team and Mr Howard's intense focus.

Voters didn't just ignore Labor's $40 billion restructure of health, education and other social policies, they spurned the party's entire thrust.

Voters embraced the cash handouts offered by the Government and listened to the Prime Minister's consistent theme that to hand government to an "L-plated" Latham-led ALP would ensure interest rates would skyrocket.

The interest rate issue bit particularly hard in city seats, with the Coalition looking like losing only two city-based seats across Australia.

In the seat of Greenway, another so-called "McMansion" seat in Sydney's west where mortgages are high, the Liberals picked up a swing of about 4 per cent. Mortgage belt seats that were predicted to be line ball, such as Dobell on the Central Coast, recorded unprecedented swings of up to 5 per cent to the Government.

In the bellwether seat of Eden-Monaro, which stretches from Queanbeyan to South Coast areas and which Labor had hoped to win, the vote to the Government increased.

With 80 per cent of the vote counted, Labor was in danger of losing seven and possibly nine seats, delivering a comfortable majority to the Coalition and making Labor's task even greater at the next election.

The first seat to be conceded by Labor was Bass in Tasmania, a seat which has swung between the parties for two decades.

The Greens vote increased by more than 3.5 per cent in Victoria, 3.3 per cent in the ACT and nearly 2 per cent in the Northern Territory.

Greens Leader Senator Bob Brown said it was a great primary vote across the country. The Greens added at least one to their two-member representation in the Senate, with Christine Milne's win in Tasmania.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was something I hadn't been aware of. The religous right is gaining power in Australia. A small party called "Family First" allied itself with Prime Minister Howard and was helpful in delivering the election.

Link: Deal with Family First Delivers for Coalition (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/10/1097261869418.html)

Story:

[ QUOTE ]
A strong show of support for Family First was an important factor in the Howard victory, with preferences from the Christian-values party boosting the Coalition vote.

Late last night figures suggested the socially conservative party, which is affiliated with the Assemblies of God Church, had attracted more than 2 per cent of the vote, the majority of which flowed on to the Government.

Under a deal brokered before the election, preferences in all but three of the 126 seats the group contested went to the Coalition.

One exception was the seat of Leichhardt, where the party refused to preference Liberal MP Warren Entsch because he supports gay marriages.

Family First burst into the federal political arena this election, aiming to push socially conservative policies and counter the rise of Greens candidates.

Founded in 2002, the party's initial purpose was to help Assemblies of God pastor Andrew Evans win a seat in the South Australian Parliament.

Despite the benefit of Family First preferences, not all Coalition members were happy with the arrangement. Nationals Senate candidate Barnaby Joyce last week described the party as the "lunatic right".

In the seat of Brisbane, Family First directed its preferences to the Nationals because the Liberal candidate Ingrid Tall is a lesbian.

[/ QUOTE ]

vulturesrow
10-09-2004, 07:00 PM
Dynasty,

An interesting point that you didnt mention is that the polling has been very close in Australia in the weeks leading up the election, almost mirroring what was going on here. A great victory for a real ally.

Dynasty
10-09-2004, 07:19 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Dynasty,

An interesting point that you didnt mention is that the polling has been very close in Australia in the weeks leading up the election, almost mirroring what was going on here. A great victory for a real ally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was going to. But, articles indicated that domestic issues were driving the campaign rather than the war or overall foreign policy. So, I doubt if there is a correlation, especially since the war in Iraq is supposed to be very unpopular in Australia. But, it is possible.

Cyrus
10-10-2004, 03:30 AM
The two main Australian candidates focused more on domestic issues rather than anything else. Iraq was peripheral, as most polls about voters' concerns showed. The Australians voted not for Iraq or their troops but in consideration of interest rates and employment.

However, the international implications of this reversal are clear : The current United States administration gets a lift by the re-election of one of the strongest supporters of the foolish was against Iraq. Australian PM-elect Howard believed, like Dubya, that the war against terror means also a war against Iraq. Unfortunately, the utter idiocy of that argument was not rhe focus of the Aussie campaign.

(Well, there's always Berlusconi waiting to get his just desserts...)

stripsqueez
10-10-2004, 06:22 AM
i didnt vote for howard - if i'm any judge mark latham will be prime minister of this country next election - hes a smart, articulate, plain speaking sort of guy - latham only had 9 months as leader before the election whereas the electorate has had 3 decades of howard the last 9 years as prime minister - once Oz gets out of a sleepy conservative phase driven by one of the best performing economys in the world it wont fall for the comfort zone

latham didnt say pull the troops out straight away - he said that he would pull out non essential Oz troops before xmas - Oz has bugger all troops in iraq and he is not neccesarily advocating that we shouldnt have sent troops to iraq or that we shouldnt keep some troops there to finish what has been started

of-course latham is on record as describing george bush as "stupid and dangerous" and on howards relationship with bush his call was that howard was an "arse licker" - he said those things before he became leader of the Oz labor party and hes since toned it down a little - now he just says he doesnt agree with bush and that howard is a sychophant (?)

i reckon latham says what he thinks and long term that will resonate with Oz rather than the sit on the fence rhetoric of the conservatives

the family first party are simply religous bigots who did get a slice of votes but not that many - the biggest victory in this election in terms of improvement in number of votes was the green party whos policies and agenda are what you would reckon given there name

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

stripsqueez
10-10-2004, 06:27 AM
[ QUOTE ]
articles indicated that domestic issues were driving the campaign rather than the war or overall foreign policy. So, I doubt if there is a correlation

[/ QUOTE ]

thats correct - the labor party acknowledge that there is a good chance they too would of supported the war on iraq in some form and it seems they have therefore declined to be overly critical of the decisions the howard government took

stripsqueez - chickenhawk