As I type, polling booths in South Australia are set to close at any tick of the clock. I do so from the studios of ABC Television in Adelaide, where I’ll be standing in for Antony Green, who spends the evening grappling with Tasmania’s high-maintenance electoral system. Obviously I won’t have much to offer in the way of live commentary on this site, but here’s a thread where you can call the toss as the results roll in.
The current American example makes it obvious that heavily one-sided electorates are bad for democracy as local members in impregnable seats will have little incentive or opportunity to try to appeal to the other side. In America, it also has had the effect of disenfranchising blacks and latinos who tend to be crammed into a few lop-sided districts rather than being able to influence many districts. Representatives should be encouraged to balance the desires of their constituents with the good of the wider community.
The fairness clause is a nice idea. It would be good if you could make is so that every electorate was within, say, 5% of the state-wide result, so that no-one was absolutely safe. However, even if you could do that with one-sided urban seats, there are not enough Labour voters anywhere near the seat of Flinders to achieve the goal.
I remember that Greenway in western Sydney went from safe Labor to marginal after a change in its boundary.
Some here may recall that after the 1980 federal election, Arthur Gietzelt, then shadow minister for electoral matters, tried to persuade the ALP to endorse STV for the House of Reps. Robert Ray described the idea at the time as a neutron bomb which would destroy the ALP without causing undue collateral damage.
391
You estimated the ALP 2PP at 49.75%. Within the margin of error but still an ALP loss.
I really what they have going in NZ. PR would have been the way in my books.
@Dio/399
Abbott will keep on about having a mandate though, he mentioned one other day, on the PPL scheme.
Centre
I have an idea as the votes of the Liberal Country League are tied up in rural electorates we could have fewer people in those seats – that would balance things up. As country people are also the basis of SA’s great wealth it would only be fair.
Carey
yes, that did not go to plan, LOL.
And there was people here who thought the X-team would not get enough votes to win a seat.
I was only out by about a whole quota. They got closer to getting two than not getting one.
So now the ABC results calculation has been revised. Adelaide prediction now “In doubt, Libs ahead”. Can’t see if things have truly changed in terms of swing.
I must confess I put a bit too much faith into D4D’s electoral appeal!
The Henley group certainly seems to have had an invisible campaign and achieved a commensurate? vote. The Leg Council result is about the expected result based on current projections. 4 Lib, 4 Labor 1 X, 1 Green, 1 FF. I find it hard to believe 12.9% of voters think John Darley will eran his keep. But at least their is a second candidate to take over when he retires.
Adam Rosser @ 400: If all seats are created marginal – from some perspectives not a bad idea – the underlying mathematics increases the probability that a party with a TPP majority will lose
purely because of random variations.
More seriously one way to do PR reasonably in this situation is the method used in the Irish Dail, Tasmania, NSW in the 1920s and I think the Victorian LC. Divide the state into maximum 5 member electorates with a quota of ~ 16%. In this election that would give proportional representation while keeping the nut jobs out
@408 – the swing is now out to 3% and the vote difference on 2PP is 368 votes… I don’t expect that gap to be made up however.
zoid
[Abbott will keep on about having a mandate though, he mentioned one other day, on the PPL scheme.]
One of the best decisions Abbott could make for Australia is to bring in his full PPL as it is electoral poison and would help make him a one termer.
How come this team losing the popular vote tending to win doesn’t keep happening in other states?
I may be wrong but I think only four countries have this dishonest system: Westminster, USA, Canada and Australia. The other 100 or so “democracies” have fairer representative governments.
Luckily Scotland, being wise, has rejected it at Holyrood. 🙂
pedant
Yes, if all seats were created marginal, the 2PP figure could blow out yet deliver the wrong party for government.
It’s all about balance.
Diogs @ 415
Good question.
Pedant (411), while I can see how mathematically that might be the case, I do not think it would work that way in practice. If ‘communities of interest’ were split up, then there is less chance of ping swings being lost in one-sided electorates. A state-wide swing should be more uniformly distributed if each electorate is more ‘representative’ of the whole population. While electorate swings will still vary around a mean (and perhaps vary more randomly), the variation should be smaller. Imagine two neighbouring electorates with close to a 50-50 ALB-LIB split. It is almost inconceivable that one could swing 5% one way and the other 5% opposite.
Of course, the downside to my idea (and it is a big one), is that you run the risk of a relatively small swing entirely wiping out a party in one election.
Centre
“Balance” is the most measily dishonest meaningless word you can use.
Whenever a politician uses it, I know he/she is lying.
[Don Farrell reconfirms that he’s out of politics.]
Good riddance.
[What on earth has gone wrong for the Tories?]
Getting that job-killer Abbott to campaign for them wasnt the smartest move.
Swamprat
Do you want first past the post voting?
That’s as ridiculous as saying you can’t back two or more horses in the one race.
Looking at individual seats i see the ALP scored a 3% swing in the seat of Davenport a seat which on paper is blue blooded Liberal.
Suspect this says a lot about the SA result.
Centre, I want parliament to reflect the first choices of voters as close as possible.
Swamprat
Try not to spit the dummy, because the Loon vote got smashed in Tassie and recorded a puny % in SA, by making outrageous statements.
It’s due to much of the conservative vote being locked in the rural seats. Why Old Tom made sure that Adelaide didn’t get too many electorates.
It could potentially happen in NSW where the conservative vote is tied up in the country and North Shore. 1991 was a virtual dead heat in seats despite a 52.5 – 47.5 2pp result to the liberal /nationals
Swamprat
I want more money than Rupert Murdoch to put it to decent use.
Centre
I am talking of principle go parliament reflecting the voters intent. That should be the aim.
I think something like NZ system would be more “democratic” in spirit, though it is not real democracy. Australia’s system is worse.
Goyder another super safe Liberal seat with a 3% towards the ALP.
Clearly even the Liberal heartland haven got excited tonight.
You would be happy with a Lib/Family First coalition after tonight?
mexicanbeemer (429), part of that is easily explained by those seats having obtained a big swing to the Libs last time (though, not sure about Goyder in particular). Reversion to a more accurate long-term position. Perhaps indicative of a dull-as-dishwater campaign (from both sides).
Why have Liberal seats swung against Liberals?
Is it Abbott? Or local issues?
Kavel
is another safe Liberal seat with a 3% swing towards the ALP.
swamprat
There is nothing to stop the Greens from winning 50% + 1 of the vote if they are good enough, just like the rest.
Preferential voting is the most democratic and the best. It allows voters to rank their choice from top to bottom.
The Senate is a different story. It should reflect the primary vote for the house of reps. No more big white paper – yay!
Country safe Liberal seats have swung against the Liberals because Labor ran an upper house campaign for the first time since 1973. As a side effect it means they were running a country campaign and they had a presence in many areas they normally do not ha presence.
Source Michael Atkinson on ABC Radio coverage.
If I were the SA Liberals, I would be arguing for a version of Mixed Member Proportional, the system used in NZ, but with fewer top up seats and the allocation of top up seats based on the 2PP not the primary vote.
I think we can make one very firm prediction from tonight: you wont be seeing Abbott campaigning in the VIC election later this year.
I forgot that ALP won the 1995 NSW election with a little under 49% of the 2PP
The Tories hold 90 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives, did they get 60 per cent of the vote?
No.
It’s a bit cute to complain about winning the TPP but not the seats. The system is the system and I don’t recall either major party suggesting that it should be changed.
JWH had control of both houses of the federal parliament for a while and his main interest was screwing workers not overhauling the electoral system to entrench his position.
That must mean something.
@Edi/434
Is this a precursor to WA rerun and Victoria election, using an upper house Campaign ?
Centre how do you say a system is “best”. You mean best for established parties.nagreed.
I know preferential is a little better than FPTP but totally dishonest in reflecting the real choices of voters.
It was a response to Don Farrell not getting elected at the Federal election from second position on the senate ticket.
Rossmcg
The system is BAD and needs to be reformed.
Swam peat
Tell me how … And remember, be careful what you wish for
Swam peat? That’s swamprat. It’s getting late
I don’t think there is an ideal way, multi member seats breed no named MPs getting in on only as small number of votes.
Sure single member seats have their issues but at least the local MP is the one and only local MP.
Swamprat
The preferential system of voting is the best and most democratic because it allows the voter to rank his/her selections from the top to the bottom.
If you feel that you prefer two or more parties ahead of another, you should be given the right to express so accordingly.
What if I wanted to vote Greens, hang on, let’s say if someone wanted to vote Greens 🙂 but were too chicken that if you voted against Labor, the Libs could get elected?
The system of ranking reflects the wishes of the electorate best!
In NZ they have both local MPs and list MPs to ensure the parliament is a fair representation of the voters votes.
I am hardly surprised that contemporary Australians would find such things inconceivable.
It is a reflection of the state of our polity.
Interesting day on the voting front.
Two conclusions can be drawn;
1)the Libs performed much worse than expected in SA which must sound alarm bells for Abbott, and
2)the Greens should change leader from Milne to Bandt asap.
*me crash