Liberal Party organisation in Victoria, 1945-68

This thesis is a study of the Liberal Party's extra-parliamentary organisation in Victoria between 1945 and 1968. The first section provides an introductory chapter and an historical background. Thus, Chapter 2 surveys the development of non-Labor organisation in Victoria from 1910 to 1940, while Chapter 3 gives a more detailed account of the decay of the organisation of the Liberal Party's immediate predecessor - the United Australia Party - and of the moves in 1943 and 1944 to form a new party. The second section of the thesis looks at the structure and functioning of the Liberal Party's extra-parliamentary institutions and their relation with the parliamentary wing since 1945. Chapters 5 to 9 examine such aspects of organisation as the size and distribution of party membership, the recruitment of members and their roles, the location, structure and activities of branches, and the composition and role of the party's central and auxiliary organs. Chapters 10-13 are concerned with the way in which the organisation has performed its main functions of selecting parliamentary candidates, contesting elections, and shaping party policy

NZES1990: New Zealand Election Survey

<p>This post-election survey focused on voting trends and decision making in the 1990 New Zealand general election. Respondents were questioned on: the importance to them of various issues such as inflation, unemployment, economic growth, defence, health, social welfare, law and order, education; which party was most likely, as a government, to address these issues; opinions on existing policies, leaders of major parties and speed and direction of government actions; trends in respondent's financial status; party identification of respondent and parents; voting in the 1984 and 1987 elections; reasons for and timing of voting decisions.</p> <p> Background variables include sex, age, country of birth, place of residence, racial, religious and class identity, personal income, marital status, level of education, employment status and supervisory responsibilities of respondent and partner, number of dependent children, and household income.</p><p>The first mailout was despatched on election day, 27th October. A reminder postcard was sent to non-respondents 5th November, followed by a second questionnaire to non-respondents 19th November and a third copy by registered mail to remaining nonrespondents whose telephone number could not be identified, 7th December. A supplementary telephone survey was undertaken to raise the response rate and reduce the possibility of bias from reliance on a self-completion questionnaire. The interview lasted about 20 minutes and consisted of a simplified and shorter version of the mailed-out questionnaire. </p

NZES2002: New Zealand Election Study

<p>The 2002 NZES had five major components: A New General Sample, which involved a proportionately random selection from the general parliamentary electorates; the Election to Election Panels, which was conducted post-election and included respondents from the 1996 and 1999 NZESes; the Campaign Pre-Election Sample and Pre-Post Panel, which involved a random national sample and was conducted 36 days before the election; the Māori Election Study, which involved an over-sample from the Māori electoral rolls; and The Candidate Study, which was sent out to all candidates standing for parties in the House.</p><p>Variables include the respondent’s interest in politics, internet usage, how many hours spent watching television or listening to the radio, attitudes toward and trust in the government in general, opinions of other candidates, campaign involvement, attitudes to immigrants, group membership, voting preferences and confidence in the public service.</p><p>Background variables include gender, date of birth, country of birth, highest level of education, employment status, religious affiliation, and parents’ political views.</p><p>Response rate: New General Sample: The postal response rate was 44.6% (N = 1,338), with the telephone interviewing adding a further 8% (N = 248), resulting in a combined response rate of 52.2% (N = 1,586).</p><p>Election to Election Panels: The 1996 Panel had N = 533, and the 1999 Panel had N = 537. Of all the panel respondents, 1,040 completed the postal questionnaire and a further 120 were followed up by phone. Respondents within each panel were subject to different levels of response rate attrition, but no significant or obvious non-response bias was apparent.</p><p>The Campaign Pre-Election Sample and Pre-Post Panel: The Pre-Election campaign had N = 3,590, with a target of 100 interviews for the 36 days immediately before the election. The response rate was 34%. Campaign respondents were also asked to participate post-election and the 3,190 who agreed to do so were mailed the post-election questionnaire. Of these, 2,008 responded again by post and 514 by phone, resulting in a response rate of 79% of those who had agreed to participate.</p><p>Māori Election Study: This study had N = 500, with a corresponding response rate of 33.3%. 27% resulted from the mail questionnaire; 6.3% was achieved by telephone.</p

NZES1993: New Zealand Election Survey

<p>The post-election survey focused on voting trends and decision-making in the 1993 New Zealand general election. Voters were questioned on: parties/politicians and the politics and issues of each; economic policy; attitudes to other policies and values; their attitudes on the extent of representation and the level of participation; party preferences and voting; the role of elections and types of electoral reforms.</p> <p> Background variables include age, sex, country of birth, place of residence, racial, religious and class identity, personal income, marital status, level of education, employment status, income, spouse’s employment status and income.</p

NZES1999: New Zealand Election Study

<p>The 1999 survey comprised questions on respondents' interest in politics and the election campaign, the type of communication (e.g. phone calls, letters) received from members of campaigning parties, important election and social issues, democracy, parties and the political system, policies, party preference and voting, government and the electoral system and representation and participation.</p><p>Background variables included gender, date of birth, country of origin, marital status, occupation, income, highest formal qualification, collection of benefits, subjective class, religion, ethnic identity and occupation and partisanship of parents.</p

NZES1996: New Zealand Election Study

<p>The objectives of the 1996 election study were two-fold: to monitor the democratic process during New Zealand’s transition from a plurality (first-past-the-post) electoral system to a proportional (MMP) system, and to gauge the attitudes, opinions and behaviours of electors. Two election surveys were conducted – one during the campaign and the other after the election. The questionnaire and data set provided are from the post-election survey.</p><p>Electors surveyed in the pre-election phase answered questions on party affiliation, preferred Prime Minister, most important issue affecting voting choice, party and candidate most likely to choose, coalition preferences, parties expected to form the next government, and the relative importance of party and electoral votes under MMP.</p><p>Electors in the post-election phase were asked questions on their interest in politics, the type of communication (e.g. phone calls, letters) received from members of campaigning parties, previous and current party affiliation, the effectiveness of MPs, unity of the main political parties, the performance of the government, important election and social issues, the power of the vote and the need for a one-party government.</p><p>Background variables included age, gender, marital status, occupation, income, collection of benefits, subjective class, religion, ethnic identity, occupation and partisanship of parents.<br></p

Book reviews including 'Why Vietnam invaded Cambodia: political culture and the causes of war', by Stephen J. Morris

Keith Hancock reviews the book 'The unemployment crisis in Australia: which way out?, edited by Stephen Bell, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. Shaun Goldfinch reviews the book 'The politics of Australian society: political issues for the new century', edited by Paul Boreham, Geoffrey Stokes and Richard Hall, published by Longman, 2000. Rob Watts reviews the book 'Boy troubles: understanding rising suicide, rising crime and educational failure', by Jennifer Buckingham, published by the Centre for Independent Studies, 2000. Stephen Bell reviews the book 'How big business performs: private performance and public policy', edited by Peter Dawkins, Michael Harris and Stephen King, published by Allen & Unwin, 1999. John Uhr reviews the book 'Deadly disclosures: whistleblowing and the ethical meltdown of Australia', by William De Maria, published by Wakefield Press, 1999. Stephanie D. Short reviews the book 'Health policy in the market state,' edited by Linda Hancock, published by Allen & Unwin, 1999. John Chesterman reviews the book 'Rethinking Australian citizenship', edited by Wayne Hudson and John Kane, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. Peter Aimer reviews the book 'Building the Constitution', edited by Colin James, published by the Institute of Policy Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, 2000. Rodney Fopp reviews the book 'Struggles for subjectivity: identity, action and youth experience', by Kevin McDonald, published by Cambridge University Press, 1999. Paul Reynolds reviews the book 'Electoral research: the core and the boundaries', by Jane Peace and Janet Taylor, published by the South Australian State Electoral Office, 2000. Jane Robbins reviews the books 'Obliged to be difficult: Nugget Coombs' legacy in indigenous affairs', by Tim Rowse, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000, and 'Native title in Australia', by Richard H. Bartlett, published by Butterworth, 2000. Dennis Woodward reviews the book 'Howard's agenda: the 1998 Australian election', edited by Marian Simms and John Warhurst, published by University of Queensland Press, 2000. David Brown reviews the book 'Long-distance nationalism: diasporas, homelands and identities', by Zlatko Skrbis, published by Ashgate Publishing, 1999. Dennis Glover reviews the book 'The machine: Labor confronts the future', edited by John Warhurst and Andrew Parkin, published by Allen & Unwin, 2000. Winsome Roberts reviews the book 'Social capital and public policy in Australia', edited by Ian Winter, published by Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2000. Martin Griffiths reviews the book 'The United Nations at the end of the 1990s (3rd ed.)', by Peter R. Baehr and Leon Gordenker, published by Macmillan, 1999. Jeff Archer reviews the book 'Sacred cows and common sense: the symbolic statescraft of the British Labour Party', by Tim Bale, published by Ashgate, 1999. Peter Carroll reviews the book 'Global business regulation', by John Braithwaite and Peter Drahos, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. Di Zetlin reviews the book 'Women and trade unions: a comparative perspective', by Jennifer Curtin, published by Aldershot, 1999. John Connell reviews the book 'Getting under the skin: the Bougainville copper agreement and the creation of the Panguna Mine', by Donald Denoon, published by Melbourne University Press, 2000. Rouben Azizian reviews the book 'Russia's stillborn democracy? From Gorbachev to Yeltsin', by Graeme Gill and Roger D. Markwick, published by Oxford University Press, 2000. Jill M. Vickers reviews the book 'Women, public policy and the state', edited by Linda Hancock, published by Macmillan, 1999. C. L. Chiou reviews the book 'Nationalism, national identity and democratization in China', by Baogang He and Yingjie Guo, published by Ashgate Publishing, 2000. Andrew O'Neil reviews the books 'International Institute for Strategic Studies, strategic survey: 1999/2000', published by Oxford University Press, 2000, and 'Asia Pacific security outlook 2000', edited by Richard W. Baker and Charles E. Morrison, published by Japan Centre for International Exchange, 2000. Gary Vear reviews the book 'International toxic risk management: ideals, interests and implementation', by Aynsley Kellow, published by Cambridge University Press, 1999. Franz Oswald reviews the book 'The heart beats on the left', by Oskar Lafontaine, published by Polity Press, 2000. Terry Flew reviews the book 'News Corporation, technology and the workplace,' by Timothy Marjoribanks, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. Peter Coaldrake reviews the book 'Policy entrepreneurs and school choice', by Michael Mintrom, published by Georgetown University Press, 2000. Kelvin Rowley reviews the book 'Why Vietnam invaded Cambodia: political culture and the causes of war', by Stephen J. Morris, published by Stanford University Press, 1999. David E. Smith reviews the book 'The charter revolution and the court party', by F. L. Morton and Rainer Knopff, published by Broadview Press, 2000. Andrew Parkin reviews the book 'The turbulence of migration: globalization, deterritorialization and hybridity', by Nikos Papastergiadis, published by Polity Press, 2000. Alan J. Ward reviews the books 'Senates: bicameralism in the contemporary world', edited by Samuel C. Patterson and Anthony Mughan (eds), published by Ohio State University Press, 1999, and 'Reforming the House of Lords: lessons from overseas', by Meg Russell, published by Oxford University Press, 2000. Tomoko Akami reviews the book 'Understanding modern Japan: a political economy of development, culture and global power', by P.W. Preston, published by Sage, 2000. James Ferguson reviews the book 'Reform, identity and Chinese foreign policy', by Chih-yu Shih, published by Vanguard Institute for Policy Studies, 2000. Norma Kriger reviews the book 'Producing women and progress in Zimbabwe: narratives of identity and work from the 1980s', by Christine Sylvester, published by Heinemann, 2000. Michael D. Barr reviews the book 'Governing Singapore: a history of national development and democracy', by Raj Vasil, published by Allen & Unwin, 2000. Chin Liew Ten reviews the book 'Rereading power and freedom in J. S. Mill', by Bruce Baum, published by the University of Toronto Press, 2000. Richard Shapcott reviews the book 'Popular dissent, human agency and global politics', by Roland Bleiker, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. David Charnock reviews the book 'Democratic devices and desires', by Geoffrey Brennan and Paul Hamlin, published by Cambridge University Press, 2000. Sam Roggeveen reviews the book 'Oakeshott and his contemporaries: Montaigne, Hegel, St Augustine et al', by John Wendell Coats Jr, published by Susquehanna University Press, 2000. Damian Grace reviews the book 'Natural law and moral inquiry: ethics, metaphysics, and politics in the work of Germain Grisez', edited by Robert P. George, published by Georgetown University Press, 1998. Tony Lynch reviews the book 'International environmental law, policy and ethics', by Alexander Gillespie, published by Oxford University Press, 2000. David Martin Jones reviews the book 'The sovereignty of parliament: history and philosophy', by Jeffrey Goldsworthy, published by Clarendon Press, 1999. Don Fletcher reviews the book 'Writing: the political test', by Claude Lefort, translated and edited by David Ames Curtis, published by Duke University Press, 2000. Elisabeth Porter reviews the book 'Taking care of men: sexual politics in the public mind', by Anthony McMahon, published by the Cambridge University Press, 1999. John Uhr reviews the book 'Corruption and government: causes, consequences and reform,' by Susan Rose-Ackerman, published by Cambridge University Press, 1999. Fernand de Varennes reviews the book 'Self-determination and national minorities', by Thomas D. Musgrave, published by Oxford University Press, 2000. Simon Kerr reviews the book 'C.B. Macpherson and the problem of liberal democracy', by Jules Townshend, published by Edinburgh University Press, 2000