With just over a month to go to the state election, Victorian politics is gradually easing into campaign mode. Yesterday saw the debut of the Liberals’ first TV ad, attacking Labor’s profligate spending on government advertising.
Clearly a major part of Ted Baillieu’s strategy is to portray the Brumby government as not just incompetent but morally questionable. And Labor often seems to play right into his hands: as with its move to set up a front group with the business community to pressure the Liberals over preferencing the Greens.
A strong Green vote is more likely to be an asset to Labor than a liability; the evidence suggests Green voters are more likely to come from the Coalition and give preferences to Labor than the other way around (although the effect is small either way: most preferences just go back to where the voters came from). Moreover, the Greens presence highlights issues that tend to play in Labor’s favor. But the Labor machine, whose apparatchiks are concentrated in the inner-city seats the Greens threaten, clearly doesn’t see things that way.
The Liberals, at least for the moment, have the luxury of not being distracted in this fashion. No Liberal seats are in any real danger from the Greens, although that could well change by 2014. If Labor chooses to spend its time and resources fighting the Greens in the inner city, that’s a double bonus for Baillieu: it gives him a clearer run in the outer-suburban marginals he needs to win, and it will make the Greens less likely to side with Labor should they end up with the balance of power.
Labor cares a great deal about whether the Liberals give preferences to the Greens, but for the Liberals it shouldn’t be a matter of much importance. Having some Greens in the lower house to complicate matters would certainly work to the Liberals’ advantage, but what they really need is support in marginal seats — most of which are a long way from Richmond and Brunswick.
If playing hardball with the Greens improves their chance of getting a preference deal, then of course that’s what they should do — and that means the Liberals have to credibly threaten to preference Labor, or to run an open ticket. They’re not likely to get much from the Greens in any case; on the other hand they’re certainly not going to get anything useful from the ALP, so they’ll have to be realistic about what a preference deal might achieve.
Both parties also need to be aware of the risks of being perceived to be too cozy with the Greens. This was the argument yesterday of Craig Ingram, the conservative independent MP for Gippsland East, who said the Coalition would “cop enormous grief” from his constituents if they preferenced the Greens in the inner city.
Ingram, the last survivor of the trio of independents who terminated Jeff Kennett’s career in 1999, is also thinking about his own position in a possible hung parliament, saying “he would prefer to support a government that didn’t need the Greens’ votes”. But as he evidently realises, his power in such a situation would probably be negligible.
In an even-numbered house of parliament (Victoria has 88 lower house MPs), a single independent has very little leverage. Even if the major parties split 44-43, the independent has no real choice — they can either allow the party with more seats to form government, or create a deadlock and get blamed for it. Not surprisingly, they invariably do the former.
So if Ingram and a single Green MP are returned, and the others split 43-all, Ingram and the Green would be the kingmakers — but only if they act together, which is the very thing Ingram says he doesn’t want to do.
In any other situation, whether there are multiple Greens or none, his vote will basically be irrelevant.
The Greens, however, just might emerge in a position of power — but only if Baillieu can first make up the eight or ten seats he needs to be within striking distance. Odds are he can’t, but if Labor keeps its eye off the ball for long enough, you never know.
I find it amusing that people keep saying that Liberal and Labor need to both be careful lest they be seen to be too cosy with the Greens.
I think the day is coming when the real danger for the major parties, is that they be seen for what they are: too similar to each other. If they are too cosy with each other (the reality of their similar policies) then voters might just wake up and say: “hang on… they are not really all that different at all – maybe the real alternative, the real opposition, is the Greens”.
If Labor and Liberal do deals for preferences from each other (to keep the Greens out of winning lower house seats) more and more voters will realise: yes, they are much the same, see – they even give each other preferences now. They use to be different and opposed to each others policies. But clearly they are almost identical now.
Ahh… the day that reality strikes enough voters, will be a very exciting day in politics!
Look at Albert Park. If Serge Thomann defeats ALP’s Martin Foley with Liberal and Green preferences, there could be at least two independents in the next Parliament. If the major parties (and Greens) are split 43 – 43 then he and Craig Ingram could have the balance of power. Thomann as former unChain St Kilda President became well known in the St Kilda Triangle battle. He was elected to the Port Phillip Council in 2008 and has a powerful support base. After the 1999 elections the independents were responsible for the most sweeping changes to the Victorian constitution in 150 years. After this election the independents could again bring about much needed changes to the way that Victoria grows.
Jim Reiher – got it in one! When the two major parties would rather preference each other than the Greens, you know they’re running scared.
SCREW YOU LABOR!!!! At least the Coalition are more open about being cynical b*stards who’ll do anything to get into power.
PS – this is starting to sound like early in Federation, when the Free Traders and Protectionists, who’d been sworn enemies, starting working together against the upstart Labor Party.
@Jim: that’s true, there’s a risk for the major parties as well if they’re seen to be too close to each other – not that I think there’s any chance of Labor preferencing the Liberals ahead of the Greens (& it probably wouldn’t matter anywhere except in the upper house), but anything that looks like a conspiracy between them risks a backlash, as in Tasmania when they combined to reduce the size of the lower house to try to screw the Greens.
@Peter: yes, if a second independent were to get up that would certainly change the possibilities, but Albert Park strikes me as unlikely – I think the base Labor & Liberal vote is too high for anyone else to get ahead of them. But I could be wrong.