By popular demand, I hereby open a new thread for discussion of the extraordinarily tight three-way race in the Victorian upper house region of Southern Metropolitan. Earlier expectations that the final seat would come down to a race between Labor’s Evan Thornley and the Greens’ Sue Pennicuik have been undone by an unexpectedly strong performance by the Liberals on postals, which has strengthened the hand of their third candidate David Southwick. Remarkably, the current result in quota terms is 3.00 for the Liberals, 1.99 for Labor and 1.00 for the Greens, making it a near-perfect three-way tie in the race for the final seat. The Greens have suffered the worst in late counting, such that the possibility has emerged of the Liberals winning the seat with a tiny surplus that helps elect Thornley, who will receive it as preferences ahead of the Greens’ Sue Pennicuik. The irony of Liberal preferences delivering Labor an upper house majority is being widely remarked upon, though their decision to put the Greens last always meant it was a serious possibility. Antony Green explains in comments that this is a rare occasion where below-the-line votes will prove decisive, so that "the models where you treat below-the-line votes as ticket votes" – such as the calculators at Upperhouse.info – "are too crude in such a close count":
What you need to do now is break the count into above and below the line votes. Add the tickets of Family First and the DLP to the Liberal vote. Add the Democrat ticket to the Greens, and People Power and Group C tickets to Labor’s vote. At this point, none of these three totals reaches a full quota, though the Greens are the closest. The balance is determined by the below the line votes. Unless the relative percentage of Labor, Liberal or Green increases against the other, none of these totals will reach a quota. The real unknown is what happens if enough BTL votes drift to the Greens. If this happens, then the Democrat ticket will elect the Green, and release a small number of ticket preferences for Labor … What Labor needs to win the last spot is for as many BTL votes to drift to the Greens before the Democrat ticket is distributed. Unless the relative %’s of the party change again, on the current count Labor will need a surplus from the Greens to win the last spot.
Antony, or anyone else, when you write “…If you take the three party totals plus assured ticket votes, then the Liberals are 1418 short of a quota, Labor 2519 and the Greens 547. There are 4,480 minor party…” Are you making the assumption that the votes that come in for the 22 odd % left will come in at the respective totals that the parties have already achieved. IE 45% of the votes that come in will be Libs, 13% Greens and 30% ALP. I have rounded.
I just saw the news Centaur… one of the first good things Labor has down in the past few years….
Well, it will be only about 15% to come, not 22%. The votes short figure is based on the progressive quota, not the final quota, and I am using the current % votes. These may change with the votes to come, so you can say I am assuming the %’s will not change. The point I’m making is that none of the parties reach a full quota based in ticket votes, which means the final seat will be decided by BTL votes.
When I say the Libs are 1,418 short, I am saying that the total Liberal group vote, plus Family First and DLP ticket votes, leaves the Liberals 1,418 votes short of the third quota on the current totals. Those 1,418 votes can come from the pool of 4,480 minor party BTL votes.
Close enough that final that the exhausted vote may play a part.
When will the counts be completed?
At the moment, across the regions, an average of 70% of the Booths seem to have returned BTL votes, about 130,000 votes in total. One might expect 183,000 at the end. The Greens vote is “enriched” by an average factor of 3.2 in the BTL compared to the Ticket. Disregarding enrichment or depletion in others’ BTL, this should see the Greens come out at the end of counting with about 0.025 extra quotas in each Region (avg). This won’t be enough to change any results, I expect, but obviously Absent and BTL aberrant BTLs could skew this either way. Are any Booth Tickets still outstanding? In the assembly, the TCP in the Absentee vote is about 5% higher than in the booths, although there are only Melb, Bruns, Northcote and Rich to go by.
It can’t be done???
(Greens currently have a quota on primaries in NMET.)
Current count expressed as quotas:
Liberal 2.9933
ALP 1.9921
Green 1.0097
Myers 0.0048
Thus Labor picks up a surplus of 0.0097 from the Greens, giving Thornley 2.0018 and the fifth seat. Labor will also get some of Myers’ votes. This of course assumes that the BTL votes stay within their tickets, or that the drift out of the tickets cancels out, and also assumes that Labor slips no further on the absent votes. All heroic assumptions, but at the moment ET is a ahead by a small nose.
Perhaps I am smoking the wrong stuff, but the DLP has hit the front in Western Victoria.
Yes. But have a look at the latest Western Vic results.
The Greens are making a late run and currently out poll the ALP. Assuming BTL votes follow the ticket, by my reckoning, the Greens are on 0.527 quotas and the ALP on 2.521 quotas. This would deliver the final seat to the DLP on ALP preferences, and depending on the results in South Metro, a share in the BoP with the Greens. The Greens must be hoping there run is curtailed, but there ain’t that many more votes to count.
This is another result that is likely to be decided by BTL votes.
Probably the best result as this would temper the exesses of the Greens on social policy.
well if nationals get above dlp then the greens win 3 senates in vic.
well if nationals get above dlp then the greens win 3 senates in vic. would that then be the bop for the greens?
Tom the Grouper, sorry for the delay in moderating your comments. I’m back in Perth now so will be dealing with these more promptly from now on.
Greetings all,
If you are here, clearly you have a strong interest in politics. In which case, I present to you Terra Politicus (www.mockparliament.com)
This is an online simulation of the Australian Parliament with mock parties and MPs who develop policy and run for office, with government, opposition, crossbenches and debate occuring through the media and the Parliament. I strongly encourage you to visit the website and take a look.
http://www.mockparliament.com
you hit that one on the head tp 😛
argh not the dlp again!!! cant they just ban that party?
You can’t ban the DLP. Kevin Rudd stated on The 7.70 Report tonight that his mother voted DLP. Steve Bracks, Clare Martin, and now Kevin Rudd – all from DLP families. That’s one third of ALP leaders in the country produced by DLP families. You better get used to it.
I don’t really see why we should get used to dlp influenced families, given the party is dead its hard to see the dozen remaining members of the party spawing to many future pollies.
ps hats of to all those making excellent contributions in this thread
In South Met, if all the votes were Tickets, the last seat is currently only a 40 vote margin to the Libs. BTL drift will weaken both of these, but probably weaken the ALP more. Greens have about a 646 surplus, any BTL drift is more likely to aid, rather than hinder them. PPV have 969BTL votes and DEM 1049. A 50% drift here will weaken Greens by 1000 votes, but BTL drift from the ALP would probably strengthen them to a greater degree. On election night, it was said 50% of the ALP BTL favoured Greens ahead of ALP #3. If so, this would be worth 2000 votes to Greens. Sounds a trifle optimistic, but still the real debate seems to be ALP vs LIB rather than GRN vs ALP vs LIB. If the DLP gains on FFV (even if FFV don’t fall back) the FFV exclusion would still leave the LIB 40 short of a quota (which would only be worse with FFV drift and if they fell back), then DEMs elect Greens and the Green surplus elects the ALP.
Someone standing in a queue for coffee at Parly House in Canberra tonight, was approached by an ALP strategist, who repeated the “last 100 votes from London will decide it” line and, if they lost, the ALP would mount a challenge. That may of course, just be repeating other peoples’ gossip, rather than being a definite statement of ALP intent.
Thanks Chris for your comments on the DLP. The DLP operating at the moment is comprised from those members who voted against the party voting itself out of existence in 1976. The DLP made a mistake voting against supply in 1974 when Vince Gair ratted on the party and accepted Gough’s not very principled appointment of himself as Ambassador to Ireland. Gough was happy to see the DLP eliminated, but the consequence was he had to deal with Liberal Senators who voted against much of the ALP government’s legislation. The DLP Senators voted with Whitlam more than the Liberals did, and his government would have been much better off with the DLP holding the balance of power, whatever he thought of DLP policies on social issues. While the DLP policies on moral issues where not those of Gough and much of the newer university educated socially liberal ALP MPs, it did support socially progressive social welfare issues, and it was a party that supported families, something Family First now claims to do but its members, and I’ve found them to be very nice people outside polling booths even if politically naive, come largely from a Pentecostal rather than from a Catholic background and do not have the same commitment to lower income people that the ALP traditionally has.
In 1974 the DLP lost all its four Senators, Byrne, Kane, McManus and Little. After that its branch structure in Victoria collapsed and the writing was on the wall. The trouble with the DLP was that it was most effective campaigning against the ALP. and particularly against Communist influence within the ALP. When the Whitlam government was elected in 1972 it lost one of its major campaigning slogans. Principle cost the DLP all its MPs in 1974. The DLP’s major problem was that it was too much a party of principle. It was too pure. The electorate seem to like their MPs to be a little bit naughty.
If Peter Kavanagh wins in Western Victoria (Country) Region he will be Victoria’s first DLP member of the upper house to have been elected as a DLP candidate (the former DLP MLCs were originally elected in 1952 and in one case in 1947 and in another at a by-election in 1954 as ALP candidates, for half of the Legislative Council retired every three years). He will be the first DLP member of that chamber since 1958, when the DLP led by Jack Little (not the boxing commentator on television) lost all its five members. The DLP also lost its sole remaining member in the lower house in 1958, Frank Scully in Richmond, who won election in 1955 as an Australian Labor Party (Anti-Communist) or Coleman-Barry Labor as the DLP was called at the first election it contested in Victoria after the ALP split. The ALP called itself Cain Labor at the first state election after the split in 1955, and also believe it or not at the federal election later in 1955, when, for example, Jim Cairns posters around Richmond called him the Cain Labor candidate, a fact that his recent biography doesn’t mention, possibly because Paul Strangio is not as old as I am and doesn’t remember it!
Well! looks like my vote could be decisive after all…..
Thanks for your summation, Lyle, and for some new information. I agree with almost all of it, but I would like to add some comments and at least one disagreement. I’ll be reasonably brief as I don’t want to frustrate some readers by having this discussion of the Victorian election hive off into the by-ways of the past.
When the Victorian Central Executive discussed how the DLP senators should vote on the deferment of supply in 1974, there was a strong division of opinion. Frank McManus had been told by Billy Snedden that there would be a joint LCP-DLP ticket if the DLP voted to defer Supply. I did not believe that would happen and thought that the DLP should not vote against Supply. Whatever the result of the coming half-Senate election, the long-term DLP senators would be there for another three years – where there’s life, there’s hope. A double dissolution would risk the party’s whole future. Being young at the time, I did not put my opinion as forcefully as I would today. The motion passed by the executive was to the effect that the senators should not vote to block Supply unless it was in the interest of the nation and the party, which of course left the decision up to the senators without any guidance from the executive. Of course, Billy Snedden did not – perhaps could not – keep his promise. By not forcefully distinguishing themselves from the Liberal opposition in the Whitlam years, the DLP senators had lost their identity as a clearly separate party – and they paid the price.
There were tensions in the DLP between those who saw it as a temporary necessity until the ALP reformed and those who saw it as centre party with its own future.
The DLP was closed down outside Victoria because it was not in other states as independent a political party as it was in Victoria. Frank Dowling and Jim Brosnan had worked very early in the DLP’s existence to ensure sources of funding separate from those of the NCC. So even though there was an attempt to amalgamate the DLP with the Country Party, the NCC couldn’t pull it off in Victoria. The Victorian DLP was not only independent of the NCC, but had members who were hostile to it. The party continued because the officials and the members in Victoria were committed to it. Tonight is the first time that I have heard that the DLP’s branch structure had collapsed. The basic reason for closing down was that we no longer had sufficient workers to raise the money. We still had, from memory, about 20,000 potential donors, and as far as I know we could man the booths on election days, but we did not have sufficient people to knock on doors and ask for the money.
The Family First booth worker I spoke to on election day to told me that 500 of the 800 members of his Church had volunteered to help in the campaign and that his Church had provided six candidates. When I pointed out to him that the Family First emblem looked like a bishop’s mitre, he said that they really didn’t have anything to do with Catholics. I was thinking Anglican!?
It seems that Evan Thornley may lose in Southern Metropolitan. In that case, if Peter Kavanagh wins in Western Victoria, it will increase the Bracks Government’s options in negotiations. It will have the DLP, the Greens and the Nationals to choose from. If Kim Beazley sees any return to politics by himself as Lazarus with a quadruple by-pass, the DLP’s resurrection would be more like Buffy’s.
PS Don’t forget Nino Randazzo in the Italian Senate.
I voted in BTL in South Met from the UK – Dem (No 3 candidate first though) then Labor by-passing the Greens, so that’s one London BTL vote Labor will pick up….
Guys You can not take the quota’s ate apply that logic to the count. Sorry but the fold up is a very important part of the results. As I have been saying since day one the system is not pure Proportional Representation there are a number of issues that need review. The Paper based surplus calculation and the system of segmentation. I am not the road. Heading to Turkey.. but if I can find time I will update my analysis to take into account the latest figures. If I recall correctly the order of distribution favours Labor and unless the Liberals party can secure 50% of the vote. Someone has to be the wasted quota and as it turns out the party that crosses the line first is often at a disadvantage in the fold up.
PS the statement above by John Myers was posted by me and not John Myers. I posted it here out of interest so people could see where his support base was likely coming from. I think he might have an issue and could have suffered and injustice. But I am not an expert in this area so I can not comment with any authority or detail of the issue at hand.
Nino Randazzo stood for the DLP in the 1961 State Election, in Bill Barry’s seat. The late Bill Barry is tPeter Kavanagh’s grandfather. The NCC in this state election were working with Family First, even having staff members running as candidates. This is why the DLP are a chance, its so NCC free!
Here’s another piece of pure gossip: The 15,000 outstanding votes in Souh Met are said to be languishing in boxes in the Sandringham office. True or not? Perhaps they will start counting them today?
Politics Obsessed,
I need to recant. Last friday I pronounced on Western Victoria:
So that’s a cast iron 3 ALP 2 Liberal.
Memo Geoff Lambert: I think you are reporting, possibly at second hand, a conversation I had with Bob Brown in the coffee queue at Parliament House yesterday. I am an ALP staffer (until 23 Dec), but not a “strategist.” I said to Bob that South Metro would be decided by a handful of votes, including those from overseas, and that if it was that close it would probably end up in court. I did NOT say that the ALP would mount a challenge, because (a) I have no knowledge of what the Vic ALP would or would not do, and (b) in my opinion there would no point in an ALP challenge if we narrowly lost, because historically governments always do badly at by-elections following court challenges.
Edit:
I inadvertently pressed submit:
I was intending to continue, that it now seems probable that the Greens late surge and the ALP decline will mean that Carbines will trail the Greens, and Labor preferences will elect the DLP candidate Kavanagh. I stress probable, but the seat is now definitely in the melting pot.
In my defence, it seems that in the most recent 12,000 odd votes counted, Labor has secured only about one-third (compared to 42.3% of the prior count), while the Greens percentage of the latest votes is around 11% (cfd. to under 8.5% up to that point).
Since they’re now over 90%, I’d tentatively suggest that there won’t be more twists, although the outcome is now definitely subject to the idiosyncrasies of BTL prefernces.
How many votes ARE outstanding?…. more than enough to make a big difference?
The registration is 413,508. LC Participation rate in this region in 2002 was 89.1%, and this would predict 368,000 votes to have been cast. Counted so far are 327,000 (79.1%), so the “outstanding†votes are currently about 41,000.
The web-site reports 155 out of 236 primary voting centres returned. I don’t really know what this means for votes, but I take it to most likely mean that this is the number that have returned BTLs. All have probably returned ATLs. On this basis, and all booths being roughly the same size(?) and there being no non-booth BTLs in the BTL total, there are now up to 10,000 booth BTLs outstanding.
The other 31,000 votes outstanding could be non-booth votes (ATL and BTL). Non-booth vote in southern Melbourne LA seats is currently running at around 10 or 11%. This would translate to about 39,000 in S Met (of which 35,000 would be ticket votes and 4.000 BTLs. Something has to give somewhere, probably booth BTL outstanding.
So, a very very rough compromise estimate might be
Booth BTLs 5,000- ish
Non-Booth Tickets 33,000-ish
Non-Booth BTLs 3,000-ish
All of these could potentially upset the current applecart, because any of them could show deviations from the Group %ages. Furthermore the BTL could also show drift. Debating about less than 100 seat margins and “ending up in court†seems a bit previous under such big uncertainties.
GUys I took time out while not sleeping waiting for my plane.
As of 5:00PM on December 4 results I do not see the Greens out polling the ALP. I have no real changes in the results. Have updated my count sheets (in part) http://melbcity.topcities.com
Sourthern Metroplotian is looking better for Evan but it still is a cliff hanger.
There should be a record well adn truely by now of how many ballot papers had been issued and how many are expected back. The quiality of public disclosure and accountabiliuty of the VEC count is appauling. If their is a msysterious box or too would not surpoises me. Somone needs to make sure the VEC is not providing a tally after the fact. By not disclosing the number of vaotes returned before they are counted raises ongoing concern, One reason why they should have publihsed the polling place details and provided a breakdown of postal votes issued.
One of these issues is the fauklt of Antony Green whoi in deciding he did not want polling place details the VEC decided not to publish the detailed results. The VEC has a wider public interest and responsibility and not just to the media. Previuos AEC elections pollingbooth results for the Sennate were avaliable thought out the election and should have been publihsed by the VEC. This is not an open and transparent count. A review is in the making.
Sorry I have just checked and whilst teh VEC published summary is showing December 4 17:00 as the latest update the FTP xml datafiles are dated December 3. It looks like the VEC has stopped updating it xml data feed. (Or at least there dated datasfeed. Not a very p[rofessionally managed show I am afraid. Anyway my results analysis data sheet is based on the Screen publihsed results and not their dodgy data feed files service. Accountability and professionalism is out the window with the VEC I am afraid. We seriously should be considering abolishing or restucturing tyhe Victorian Electoral Commission to make it much more accountable and professional, stop the duplication ans watse of limited public resources.
mmmmmm, DLP close gap on National in Western Vic, but Greens now 800 ahead of Labor. If DLP make up 100 on Nats on BTL votes, they win last seat, if not, the Greens do on the 11:27 count. In SOuth Met, Libs make advances and nudge back ahead on the all votes as tickets method. Breaking into ticket and BTL groups, Libs close to 864 short, Greens 413 but Labor now 3359 short.
Antony, what are the latest “confirmed” and uncertain numbers in the Legislative Council?
Certain are 19 ALP, 15 LIB, 2 NAT and 1 GRN. That is likely to become 2 GRN when the 4th seat is decided in South Metro. The 5th seat in South Metro is between Labor and Liberal, barring a fall in the Green vote. The 5th Seat in Western VIC is between Labor, DLP and GRN, with GRN favoured on the current count.
Thanks.
The more time goes on, the more Thornley is looking like a dead duck.
Someone fromm the VEC is monitoring this site. 🙂 They have now just updated their web site to include the December 4 data one day late?
XML data feed??
I think they are just a bit too busy down there to push the XML buttons very frequently. Yesterday the pushed them and we got Friday’s and Sunday’s updates. I imagine we might get a new feed this evening, if they can find time to scratch themselves.
If teh Greens vote outpoolls Labors surplus + BTL primaries in Western Victoria then in provided the DLP survive the NP the DLP are elected. If teh DLP fall below thye NP then the Greens might get up… I need to review the latest data just publihsed (one day late) VEC not at work. 🙂
Any news ifthe VEC will be publishing the BTL data-entry details periodically during the data-entry process. If not why not?
Does anybody remember the alien and un-Australian political tradition from whence the DLP came? Reactionary anti-modernist anti-enlightenment Catholicism played a considerable role in destroying interwar European democracy and paving the way for the Holocausts; Action Francaise (AD2000 like them), Father Tiso, Vichy France. German Catholic Centre party voting for Hitler etc. etc. Santamaria thought that Hitler wasn’t to blame for WW2. This is why sensible Christian democratic Catholics like Gilroy correctly judged Santamaria to be a dangerous man. Good work by the Victorian ALP.
VEC wib site reporting data updated as of 11:00 AM Dec 5 but data file is not available. It is one session behind. So much for online open transparency and professionalism.
VEC site still reporting not all polling booths counted. Again poor online mangement to blame here.
OK I have just updated my data with teh recently published out of date datafile…
Western Victoria is back on teh watch list alright. On a ticket vote anaysis the NP are up for a second position. Thanks to the DLP falling behind the NP. The Green/ALP raltionship is also very close.
Have to catch a lane.. will update my spreedsheet when I arirve in Turkey and can get hold of an internet connection.
XML data feed- more.
They just found time to scratch themselves! Two new XMLs have just been uploaded. A good fairy, making a meek enquiry, seems to have prompted this. (Not me).
see a doc MelbCity
I asked the VEC if they could keep updating the file, so I suppose that makes me the good fairy. My main concern was to get all the re-counts in the lower house to update the ABC website.
However, as they start doing all the BTL data entry for the LC, the data in the media feed will no longer be accurate. The results feed is generated from the election results reporting system, which is not intimately tied in to the BTL data entry system. The entry is being verified against the booth results entered, but it is unclear at what rate the results system will be udpated with corrections identified in the data entry of ballot papers.
But the website will be correct as an official source.
Can someone explain why in Ferntree Gully they have the Libs as winning here…
Results after distribution of preferencesCandidate Party Votes after distribution % votes
ECKSTEIN, Anne ALP 18287 49.98%
WAKELING, Nick Liberal 18304 50.02%
and the ALP winning here
Candidate Party Preferred votes % Preferred votes
ECKSTEIN, Anne ALP 18354 50.05%
WAKELING, Nick Liberal 18319 49.95%
Why are there different figures vetween the top and bottom and who has won – Eckstein or Wakeling?
I think I have it. The top one is the second count and the bottom one is the first count? So you would be pretty pissed off if you were Eckstein. One minute you have one and the next you have lost.
Make that TWO good fairies!
Antony, are you referring to the data entry of ballot paper “images” for the cut-up? They wouldn’t STOP doing BTL number updating on the other computer once they start entering the images, would they?
On the latest XML feed, the Libs margin has stretched to over 400 votes in E Met.
Which only goes to show