Rowallan and Wellington live

WELLINGTON Primary Swing 2PP Swing
LABOR 43.2 -3.4 60.4 0.9
GREENS 26.1 -1.6 39.6 -0.9
Marti Zucco 14.4
Christian Democratic 5.3
Paul Hiscutt 8.1
Stephen Roomes 2.8 73% COUNTED

Sunday 4.00pm. The table has been amended to factor in late results and new intelligence on preference flows (thanks Kevin), and also to correct a calculation error that was inflating Labor’s vote after preferences.

7.38pm. Not sure if they do notional preference counts on election night – I could forgive them if they didn’t. In any case, we’re unlikely to get much more action tonight.

7.33pm. Creek Road, the last booth other than Launceston, has strengthened Parkinson still further in what looks pretty much like a status quo result.

7.29pm. All booths in from Rowallan, Hall is still on 82.3 per cent. Only waiting on Creek Road and the Launceston booth for primary votes in Wellington. Still no two-party preferred count.

7.25pm. A bunch of larger booths plus pre-polls are now in from Wellington. The primary vote swing against Labor has eased a little, such that I think we can safely call it for Doug Parkinson.

7.15pm. 74.0 per cent counted in Rowallan, Hall down ever so slightly to 82.3 per cent.

7.11pm. Preferences amended. I’ve now got 50 per cent of independents’ preferences going to the Greens and 30 per cent to Labor, the other way around for CDP, with the remainder exhausting.

7.10pm. A big flurry of booths in from Wellington, but the existing score hasn’t changed much. Labor are down about 5 per cent and the Greens are more or less steady. My arbitrary estimates showed Labor doing better on preferences than last time. I think I might amend that.

7.02pm. 60.8 per cent counted in Rowallan – possibly the quickest count I have seen, indicative of how this district is dominated by small towns. Little change in the figures: 82.5 per cent to 17.5 per cent.

6.54pm. 54.4 per cent now counted in Rowallan, Hall on 82.2 per cent, Greens on 17.8 per cent.

6.51pm. Six booths in for Wellington. My 5.0 per cent swing to Labor is based on pretty arbitrary preference calculations that probably flatter Labor. For the time being it might be safest just to trust the primary figures, which suggest Labor are losing votes to independents.

6.39pm. Oh dear – a sudden blurt of booth results for Rowallan after a quiet period. Hope it’s not like that for Wellington, of which there is still no word. 22.4 per cent counted in Rowallan, Hall leads 82.1 per cent to 17.9 per cent.

6.23pm. Those small town booths in northern Tasmania are coming in at a rapid clip. Seven booths now in, Hall leading Cassidy 685 to 130.

6.22pm. There are actually three booths in already from Rowallan, which is pretty impressive. Greg Hall leads the Greens 166 votes to 47.

6.20pm. All eyes are on Tasmania this evening as the events that have captured the nation’s imagination over the past two weeks build towards an emotional climax. That’s right folks, it’s the annual periodic elections for the Tasmanian Legislative Council. Since the seat of Rowallan looms as a certain victory for independent Greg Hall (his sole opponent is the Greens’ Karen Cassidy), the focus of attention here will be on Wellington, where it is at least theoretically possible that Greens candidate Marrette Corby or independent Hobart City Council alderman Marti Zucco could pull off an upset. Hopefully the booth arrangements haven’t changed too much since the last poll in 2000, and the calculations in place for the above table will prove of some use. Otherwise I will get rid of it and focus on off-the-cuff commentary. The Greens need a swing of 9.5 per cent to win the seat; if Zucco does better than expected and outpolls them, my table will not be of much use. First figures should be in around 6.40pm.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

17 comments on “Rowallan and Wellington live”

  1. This could be old bandwidth really fast but I shan’t be hugely surprised if Hiscutt rather than Zucco is the threat to it being an ALP/Greens contest.

    Greens are so far doing not well in Rowallan, at present even taking booth variations into account they are not currently on for 20%.

    I could use some fast Wellington figures, I’m going out around 8:15 pm!

  2. First Wellington figures up now. There is clearly no threat to the Greens/ALP 2PP on these. Surprisingly Fracalossi isn’t coming last, though Roomes has run a barely noticeable and very disorganised-looking campaign (eg running a paper ad apologising for his lack of signs!)

  3. G’day all
    I think i might be being a tad slow, but are the 2PP figures from last election eg 2000, or are they notionally based on something else?

  4. Josh, they’re based on a) my guess based on how preference are likely to flow, and b) comparison of today’s booth result with 2000’s. For the time being I would treat them with great caution.

  5. I’d guess about 2-1 to Parkinson for Zucco, 3-1 or more for Fracalossi, 55-45 for the other two. Haven’t put more than 30 seconds thought into this though.

  6. Actually 2-1 for Zucco might be a bit high given that he sprayed Parkinson in the campaign. Make it 60:40 of those expressing a preference.

    Worth noting that some preferences will exhaust as voters only need to vote for 3. I expect Zucco’s preferences to be prone to exhaust as he likes neither the Greens nor Parkinson and some of his voters may reason likewise and give preferences to neither.

  7. i cant seem to get results from the electoral commission site. which booths have come in so far and how do you think the 73% of the remaining will effect the outcome?

  8. 🙂 Huge update – 64% counted (really more than that with the high % who forget to vote), figures still about the same. Last big booth is Creek Road which favours Parkinson. I reckon with some allowance for exhaust there is not going to be much change in 2PP from last time, perhaps a small swing to the Greens if preferences favour Parkinson less than my guesses above.

  9. OK, Creek Road in now. Parkinson has 15.52% lead on primaries. Not much more action for tonight – wonderfully fast figures! I’ll be extremely surprised if he goes backwards from there on preferences although the Greens should pick up a smidgin on postals (they tend to do this lately in Tassie elections, Christine Milne called it the “backpacker vote”). If my assumptions re preferences are anywhere near valid then allowing for exhaust he could stretch by 5% on preferences. I’m expecting something between 57:43 and 62:38 final 2PP though not claiming it will definitely be in that range. Damn, wish I could have sucked Zucco into a pizza bet about whether he would beat 15% or not!

  10. I have heard that one sample of Zucco’s prefs has Parkinson getting 75% – I assume that is 2PP – while other prefs are “all over the place”. Not aware of sample size. My source suggested that Zucco voters are likely to be populist voters voting on profile and that therefore Parkinson is getting Zucco prefs irrespective of Zucco’s attack on Parkinson during the campaign.

    Parkinson’s lead is now out to 17% on primaries so I think it is now very likely he has increased his 2PP margin from last time’s 19% over the Greens. I have serious doubts it will even get to 2PP as currently Parkinson needs only 41.8% of the prefs of Fracalossi, Hiscutt and Roomes to go to him instead of to Zucco, Corby or exhaust and he will be over the line before Zucco is excluded.

  11. I’ll admit to being surprised (and dissappointed) with the preference flows. Last time I understand the candidate who came third was an endorsed Liberal, and their preferences split almost 50/50. Presumably most of the votes of the bottom four were people who would last time have gone in that direction, plus a few others (given the fall in primaries for both Labor and Greens). Yet this time the preferences run heavily in Parkinson’s favour.

    I wonder if this is short term flow on from the state election and the anti-Greens campaign, or whether there is a trend over the intervening six years with Liberal voters now more likely to see the Greens as the enemy rather than the ALP.

  12. Yes, there has been a really big change in the direction of preferences. 51/49 from the endorsed Liberal in 2000, 64/36 (excluding exhaust) from the four independents this time.

    I don’t have a firm view on this, but to the two hypotheses Stephen L gives above I’d like to add these:

    * Doug Parkinson has had twice as long to build his profile and Marrette Corby was just not as high-profile as the Greens’ 2000 candidate (and record vote-getter) Trish Moran. Profile is a very important factor in attracting preferences.

    * It could partly be a reaction to Peg Putt’s election night behaviour and the general Green sour-graping about the State result.

    * The swings in primary vote could be more complex than they appear. It may not be as simple as Labor and Green just losing a small number of primary votes to independents. It could be that Labor lost lots of votes to independents, Parkinson gained some primary votes off the Greens, and those who voted Liberal-Green last time tended to vote 1. Green this time whereas those who voted Liberal-Labor tended to vote Independent-Labor.

    I suspect the answer is “all of the above to some degree”.

Comments are closed.