Are you proud to be an Australian?
In yesterday’s Weekend Oz, Dennis Shanahan accused Labor Candidates of being out of step with their electorates. His evidence was the Australian Candidate Study 2004. Leaving aside some of Shanahan’s questionable analysis, I was intrigued and decided to have a look at the study using Nesstar (go to ASSDA -> Australian Studies -> Politics -> Election and Campaign Studies).
The first thing I discovered was the sample size for each party was quite small. For the Coalition it was 81 respondents. Labor had 87. The Democrats had 92, the Greens 122. Family First, One Nation and the Citizen’s Electoral Council each had around 50. With the non-responders, the sample sizes for individual questions are even smaller. So take the results with a pinch of salt.
The first cross-tab I did, picked at random, absolutely floored me. The question was, ‘How proud are you to be an Australian?’ While 96 per cent of Coalition candidates were very proud to be an Australian almost two thirds of the Green’s candidates were either not very proud or not proud at all. It provides an interesting context for Howard’s use of the dog-whistle term, ‘un-Australian’.
Another huge divide between Coalition candidates and the candidates for other parties was their level of respect for individual freedom in respect of the question “How much respect is there for individual freedom and human rights nowadays in Australia?”
How about whether there is more or less racial prejudice in Australia today than five years ago or whether asylum seekers are political refugees.
The same-sex relationships and abortion questions brought the Family First candidates out in droves.
National service was an issue for One Nation. As was law and order, the death penalty, engagement with Asia and Indigenous affairs. No surprises there!
Also unremarkable was the 91 per cent of the Greens candidates who wanted stronger measures against pollution; however, I was intrigued by the almost 7 per cent who did not.
And I would like to meet the five Family First candidates who thought there was not enough nudity and sex in films and magazines. I want to ask them why and why they joined Family First.
Seriously, these last two results suggest some of the candidates may have had difficulty completing the survey forms! (Alternatively, political parties might not do a good job at screening candidates).
Still, all very interesting. It might provide a more empirical base for a party preference tool than my current test.