This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/14/south-australia-elections-the-countrys-conservative-moment

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
South Australia elections: the country's conservative moment? South Australia elections: the country's conservative moment?
(6 months later)
On 15 March, South Australia goes to the On 15 March, South Australia goes to the polls, and looks set to eject the ALP after 12 years of office. On the same day, Tasmanians are also expected to elect a Liberal government.
polls, and looks set to eject the ALP after 12 years of office. On the same If the Liberals win, this will herald a remarkable turnaround for the Liberals at the state level, with the ALP in office only in the ACT. In its heyday of the mid 2000s, the ALP dominated every state and territory. With Tony Abbott in office at the federal level, would this mean that Australians have embraced a new conservative settlement?
day, Tasmanians are also expected to elect a Liberal government. In South Australia, the story is mixed – and as with all elections, local factors play a part. Mike Rann dominated SA politics since winning office with a minority in 2002, and Jay Weatherill has struggled to impose his own vision. Weatherill was dealt a tough deal when the Olympic Dam expansion was cancelled shortly after he took over the leadership, and with the devastation of the Holden pull-out, the economic situation has been precarious for a while.
If the Liberals win, this will herald a The difficulty for Labor is the problem all long-term established governments face: how to renew in office. The last time a government won four straight elections in SA was under Don Dunstan in the 1970s, but the elections cycles were shorter. Thomas Playford may have won nine straight elections from 1938-1962, but he was helped by the infamous “playmander”.
remarkable turnaround for the Liberals at the state level, with the ALP in More recently, and unlike the last state election, there appear to be ideological differences between Weatherill’s ALP and Steven Marshall’s Liberals. Weatherill has repeatedly shown a preference for big government, and his focus on state-sponsored infrastructure spending to lift the economy draws upon his Keynesian economics. Marshall, conversely, sees SA as over-taxed, and has in sights reform of the Land tax and also repeal of the car park tax. In contrast, at the 2010 election, the main difference between Mike Rann and then Liberal leader, Isobel Redmond, was whether to build a new, or refurbish the Royal Adelaide Hospital.
office only in the ACT. In its heyday of the mid 2000s, the ALP dominated every The ideological fault-lines between the major parties are now more pronounced. Yet, the ALP’s attempt to portray Marshall as the latest carnation of a “slash and burn” Campbell Newman is failing to stick, despite Marshall seeking advice from neo-liberals such as Jeff Kennett. In part, that’s because Marshall is a more socially progressive Liberal taking a practical, rather than ideological, approach. His predecessor tripped up over a series of gaffes and confusion about cuts to the public sector, but Marshall has neutralised this debate by matching the same cuts proposed by the ALP.
state and territory. With Tony Abbott in office at the federal The frustration with the Marshall campaign is the so-called “small target” strategy. The Liberals have run a smooth campaign, and used a series of TV ads with Marshall promising to improve health and “get SA back on track”, but with little detail. Indeed, the Liberals are only planning to hold their official campaign launch just seven days before the election. But meanwhile, the “small government” message resonates well with the wider population. The common analogy is that if your household is getting further into debt, then the last thing you do is get another credit card. This is a failure on the ALP’s part to dispel this image: government debt is distinct from personal debt, not least as government has the power to raise revenue.
level, would this mean that Australians have embraced a new conservative Overall, the reasons why political parties attract voters is a murky, and imprecise science. Data from the Australian election study tells us that, over time, voters see less difference between the major parties, but crucially do see some difference. At the federal level, in 1993, 44% saw a “good deal” of difference between the two, which declined to just 26% in 2010.
settlement? In South Australia, local factors – such as the Debelle Inquiry into the Education department, and the so-called “It’s Time” factor – may be the main reasons that the ALP might lose office. Again, survey data shows that Australians tend to have a very high opinion of their democracy. For some, changing the government is more important than continuing with the status-quo, even if this means handing power to a new Premier with only one-term’s experience as a politician.
In South Australia, the story is mixed – and
as with all elections, local factors play a part. Mike Rann dominated SA
politics since winning office with a minority in 2002, and Jay Weatherill has
struggled to impose his own vision. Weatherill was dealt a tough deal when the Olympic
Dam expansion was cancelled shortly after he took over the leadership, and with
the devastation of the Holden pull-out, the economic situation has been
precarious for a while.
The difficulty for Labor is the
problem all long-term established governments face: how to renew in office.
The last time a government won four straight elections in SA was under Don
Dunstan in the 1970s, but the elections cycles were shorter. Thomas Playford may have won nine straight
elections from 1938-1962, but he was helped by the infamous “playmander”.
More recently, and unlike the last state election,
there appear to be ideological differences between Weatherill’s ALP and Steven
Marshall’s Liberals. Weatherill has repeatedly shown a preference for big
government, and his focus on state-sponsored infrastructure spending to lift
the economy draws upon his Keynesian economics. Marshall, conversely, sees SA
as over-taxed, and has in sights reform of the Land tax and also repeal of the car park tax. In contrast, at the 2010 election, the main
difference between Mike Rann and then Liberal leader, Isobel Redmond, was whether
to build a new, or refurbish the Royal Adelaide Hospital.
The ideological fault-lines between the
major parties are now more pronounced. Yet, the ALP’s attempt to portray Marshall as the latest carnation of a “slash and burn” Campbell Newman is
failing to stick, despite Marshall seeking advice from neo-liberals such as
Jeff Kennett. In part, that’s because Marshall is a more socially progressive Liberal taking a practical, rather than ideological, approach. His predecessor tripped up over a series of gaffes and confusion about cuts to the public
sector, but Marshall has neutralised this debate by matching the same cuts proposed
by the ALP.
The frustration with the Marshall campaign is the so-called “small target” strategy. The Liberals have run a smooth campaign, and used a
series of TV ads with Marshall promising to improve health and “get SA back on
track”, but with little detail. Indeed, the Liberals are only planning to
hold their official campaign launch just seven days before the election. But meanwhile, the “small government” message resonates
well with the wider population. The common analogy is that if your household is
getting further into debt, then the last thing you do is get another credit
card. This is a failure on the ALP’s part to dispel this image: government
debt is distinct from personal debt, not least as government has the power to
raise revenue.
Overall, the reasons why political parties
attract voters is a murky, and imprecise science. Data from the Australian election study
tells us that, over time, voters see less difference between the major parties,
but crucially do see some difference. At the federal level, in 1993, 44% saw a “good deal” of difference between the two, which declined to just 26% in 2010.
In South Australia, local factors – such as
the Debelle Inquiry into the Education department, and the so-called “It’s
Time” factor – may be the main reasons that the ALP might lose office. Again,
survey data shows that Australians tend to have a very high opinion of their
democracy. For some, changing the government is more important than continuing
with the status-quo, even if this means handing power to a new Premier with
only one-term’s experience as a politician.