data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1f9f8/1f9f86299c71432a7c6a140c44cf4b2ec4782f04" alt="Joel Fitzgibbon Labor resources spokesman emissions targets"
On Monday morning, an energised Joel Fitzgibbon wanted the world to know that Labor had lost its base. A state byelection loss at the Upper Hunter over the weekend, deep in New South Wales coal country, was a sign working class men and women, with mining in their veins, were abandoning the party, leaving the ALP headed for another electoral disaster.
Every election brings with it a narrative. And just over two years on from the 2019 election, the story about Labor’s loss has hardened into one about the party’s failure to speak to blue-collar voters and offer miners a future. Through six media appearances before 9am on Monday, Fitzgibbon had helped strengthen the narrative.
But narratives are reductive, and can quickly sweep up all complicated data points. Upper Hunter has been a Nationals seat for 90 years. And while Labor certainly faces challenges, a look at the numbers suggests mining country alone will not decide the party’s electoral future.
Where is coal country?
“We have to win coal seats,” jittery Labor folk in the Hunter Valley told The Sydney Morning Herald yesterday.
But coal miners alone don’t decide an election. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the sector employs about 252,100 people, or less than 2% of the population.
Most “coal” seats are not traditional Labor strongholds. In Queensland, the heart of Morrison’s miracle, Maranoa, Flynn and Capricornia are the big mining seats. The former hasn’t been won by Labor since 1943. Labor picked up Flynn in the 2007 Ruddslide (when the seat was created), but haven’t ever since. Capricornia, home of Adani country, has historically been stronger territory for Labor, but the LNP’s Michelle Landry has held it since 2013.
Head north to Dawson, where George Christensen got an unexpected swing, and where the opposition has already unveiled a miner as its candidate, and Labor has won once in nearly 50 years. Herbert, taking in the Townsville area, was also a Labor target in 2019 — yet it’s only been held by the party once in 25 years.
These are marginal, bellwether seats, but hardly Labor’s base. Elsewhere, Victoria’s coal centre, the Latrobe Valley, falls in Gippsland, held forever by the Nats. Western Australia’s coal region centres on Collie, in the Coalition safe seat of O’Connor.
It’s only NSW coal country that could be described as Labor’s heartland. The party won Paterson, Robertson and Hunter in 2019, as it often does, but copped substantial swings in each. In Hunter, the Fitzgibbon family heirloom, there was a 9% swing against Labor. One Nation got a whopping 22% bump on primaries. In neighbouring Robertson, the swing was 5%. It was the same story in Paterson — although that’s a seat Labor only picked up in 2016 after 15 years of Liberal rule.
It’s swings like that which put the anxious grandstanding of people like Fitzgibbon, and Paterson MP Meryl Swanson, into perspective.
Labor’s problems aren’t just mining
The point is, we’re talking a handful of seats here. In the context of an incredibly tight election (the closeness of 2019 is often strangely forgotten), a handful of seats really matter. But this is not the entirety of Labor’s “blue-collar base”.
If the party loses a seat or two in the Hunter, things get tough. They need to make gains in Queensland, a state where they got positive swings in just two seats, and hold nothing north of Brisbane.
But the obsessive focus on miners obscures the fact Labor’s support base, the places it could be grown, and the things voters in those places care about, are pretty diverse. For example, the Morrison government’s toxicity in Victoria could put Melbourne targets such as Chisholm and Deakin well in play for the ALP. Nothing to do with coal.
Coal also doesn’t explain why the party can’t win highly multicultural seats in Sydney suburbs such as Reid, Bennelong and Banks, despite its post-Whitlam support for immigrants. It doesn’t explain the swings against the party in the diverse mortgage belts of Western Sydney last time around.
And it obscures the electorate’s complicated relationship with climate politics. The Australian Election Study found more voters rating the environment as the most important issue than at any point since 2007. Polling in the Upper Hunter found voters divided over what they want and expect about coal’s future. The party went full high-vis on the weekend, and didn’t come close. Maybe it needs to go another way.
Coal country is difficult for Labor. But the bigger problem is when a handful of seats get turned into a self-fulfilling narrative about a party that doesn’t know who it stands for.
Either the ALP is poor at communicating, or it thinks coal miners are dumb. It should be pretty easy to sell to miners the notion that the job you have now won’t exist in 15-20 years. It might not matter to you, but it will matter to your kids. The point of voting Labor is that we can see this coming and are working on the new jobs that you and your kids can have. The trouble is, that if you vote Liberal/National/One Nation, your job will still be gone, but those others won’t do anything to help. just look what they did to the car industry.
There you go Albo, Joel, some free and unsolicited input on communications and messaging. Don’t bother thanking me, I vote Green.
It seems the loss of votes from Labor did not go to the LNP, but to an independent who was saying exactly that – coal jobs are not long for this world.
A much better analysis Wayne, haven’t see one pundit from the press gallery mention this obvious point.
It’s not hard, is it Paul. Been saying that a while now, just a pinch of political courage required. There will be no jobs in coal mining in 20 years, probably very few in 15. Wake up to this FACT, and start making plans.
Labor was never going to win the by-election. If anyone lost anything, it was Joel Fitzgibbon. He is losing the trust of his own electorate. If he was any sort of competent representative he would have started helping the communities to transition to from coal and into renewable energy years ago instead of burying his own head into the coal pit. He should be putting renewable plans into action yet he chooses to do nothing.
What does Joel do? He blames Labor. I suggest you have a long hard look at yourself Joel. Lay the blame where it truely belongs…with you.
He inherited the seat from his father and was on easy street until the last election. Now he might actually have to work to keep his seat but he doesn’t know how. He could have been working with his electorate for years to get new jobs and industries into the area.
I hope Anthony/Labor apply enough pressure to force Joel to quit the party (don’t worry the Coal will snap him up). He has failed his electorate. Bring in someone who will help with transitioning the electorate responsibly into new renewable industries.
Agree. I read the line: In [2019 in] Hunter, the Fitzgibbon family heirloom, there was a 9% swing against Labor. And wondered to what extent Fitzgibbon had directly contributed to that 9% number. Maybe people just don’t like him. I was born in a coal-mining town, have usually voted ALP (occasionally Greens) and would never vote for someone like Fitzgibbon.
Well to be fair, there are now so many coal mines in the region, hazardous air quality alerts are frequent. If the Barillaro/ Pitt wet dream of 20 or so new coal mines there comes to pass, the place will be a lunar landscape.
So what other other industry is going to invest THERE?
Spot on JMNO – who knew that one might have to work to keep a sinecure?
Whatever. Fitzgibbon’s going to retire any minute now anyway and move to that well earned M$ job somewhere in the FF industry, all the while getting a handsome yearly pay out on the public purse. He really doesn’t care we all think…
Fortunately he’s not bright enough to become another RWNJ talking head on SKY though sufficiently venal and lacking in scruples to allow his name as a by-line for NewsCorpse pieces if the price is right.
Oh I don’t know, the bar is pretty low :-).
“ he’s not bright enough to become another RWNJ talking head on SKY”
Oh a low blow.
It’s very clear that if Labor is to gain any traction it has to identify and stick to its principles. IN particular a strong statement supporting renewables and turning Fossil fuels is critical. their problem is that Also is trying to be small target and rolls over to support the LNP policies as he is scared of being wedged.
He’s scared totally by Bill missing the line last election. but the only reason they missed wasn’t all the Shorten policies – it was the stupid and misguided last minute pledge to wind back franking credits – they lost huge numbers of their normal retiree voting base. that was one of the worst political decisions ever!
To hell with being wedged – just stand on what’s best for the country!!!!!
The Labor Party did not wind back franking credits, they planned to stop them abruptly for non tax paying retirees who had become dependent on them. Our personal superfund was paying about $72,000 p.a. to us, our sole source of income. Of this, about $18,000 was in the form of franking credits. The sudden loss of this component, though completely justified on logical grounds, would have been a sharp blow to our living standards. This measure should have been introduced in a staged fashion over at least five years to allow people to adjust.
Or grandfathered it so that there were no new entrants into the scheme.
Which is what I said by email to Andrew Leigh when Bowen announced the policy.
Which I recall Bill Shorten saying, but none of the MSM reported, being too busy cutting him off and turning away to support lies and smears by Shomo.
It was to be grandfathered.
I know people who live on much less than $54,000 and they have to make do. And they do.
The solution to low income in retirement is not upholding schemes like the franking credits but to increase pensions. This would benefit all retirees and not just those who own shares.
People seem to have forgotten that our grandparents, if on low incomes or pensions, had a council home safety net and could live with dignity. Other first world countries still have that. Somehow we’ve gone the American way and virtually got rid of all social housing. It’s high time to correct this!
i live by myself on $12,500 a year including rent. Not really comfortable, but liveable.
You’d have to admit almost no one could live and pay rent on $12,500 per year in this country.
Totally agree, just saying it’s doable and of course i’m white, an Aussie citizen, a
native English speaker and reasonably well educated. That puts me miles
ahead of many other residents in this country. Also, i rely a lot on the
salvos and know how to use government services,
You could of course use some of the million or so you have tucked away to cover the drop in living standards (pretty damn good by the way, $72K for retired couple is a small fortune, even $54K is a very very comfortable living).
Howard didn’t introduce it gradually. He knew how the snouts in the trough would love it. In fact it had no significant effect on the ALP/DLP vote, though its coal- and donations-huggers are anxious to pretend otherwise.
I’m 82, and a pensioner. Franking credits are the biggest RORT among retirees still in existence…thanks to the lying rodent!!
I feel sooo sorry for you, Emoticom, having to live on $54,000/year (if franking credits were removed), when I, and most of my contemporaries have to live on about half that amount.
And guess what…there are more of us than of your type, but not many of us complain!!
Yeh, but it’s hard to unfix when the entitled fix is in….the best that seems to come up is the grandfathering clause of “i got in for my chop, so chop it off for the rest”…Labor has a herculean hard task juggling act to perform when doling out Govt largesse & subsidies & attempting some sort of semblance of an iota of equity, equality & social justice..At least the other side has the added advantage of not even pretending to bother..
In order for “Labor” “to gain any traction it has to identify and stick to its principles.” it would first have to HAVE some.
Being a small target and not quite as reprehensible as the government is a risky, and proven, failed strategy.
Quick look at ABS labour force statistics. Mining in TOTAL employs around 250,000 Australians as of April 2021. Not sure where you got the figure of 250k in COAL mining.
And as AI robots take more and more jobs those numbers are dwindling every year!
A good example of the shallowness of research & analysis of the typical BA pumped out of the diploma mills these last decades.
Once is was scissors & paste, now just Ctrl+C=Crtl+V, comprehension not necessary.
The Clive Palmer factor appears to have been overlooked.