Tasmanian election call of the board

One clear change of government overnight at least, with a landslide win for Will Hodgman’s Liberals and a grim night for Labor, Greens and PUP alike.

Late news: a thumping win for Will Hodgman and the Liberals in Tasmania, on 14 or maybe even 15 seats in a chamber of 25. A very quick review of the results which I’m just now perusing for the first time, as much to get this straight in my head as anything else:

Bass. The ABC computer is calling it three seats to the Liberals and one to Labor, and it seems to me the last seat is likely to stay with the Greens, which would amount to the Liberals gaining a seat from Labor. So Peter Gutwein and Michael Ferguson re-elected for the Liberals and likely to be joined by Sarah Courtney; Michelle O’Byrne re-elected for Labor, but fellow incumbent Brian Wightman defeated; and Kim Booth re-elected for the Greens.

Braddon. Liberals three, Labor one; the last seat might be a fourth for the Liberals, which would be quite something. Or it could be a second Labor seat or a first for the Greens. What it won’t be is a win for Kevin Morgan of the Palmer United Party, for whom the party had high hopes. Adam Brooks and Jeremy Rockliff re-elected for the Liberals, newcomers Roger Jaensch and Joan Rylah fighting it out for a third or potentially both getting elected. Bryan Green to retain his seat for Labor, fellow incumbent Brenton Best only to make it if Labor wins a second seat. Greens MP Paul O’Halloran struggling to hold his seat.

Denison. A status quo result of two Labor, two Liberal, one Greens. Matthew Groom and Elise Archer re-elected for the Liberals; Scott Bacon re-elected for Labor, the second seat a four-way lottery between newcomers; Cassy O’Connor re-elected for the Greens.

Franklin. The Liberals gain a seat from Labor for a result of three Liberal, one Labor, one Greens. Will Hodgman and Jacquie Petrusma re-elected for the Liberals, to be joined by upper house ex-independent Paul Harriss. For Labor, Lara Giddings re-elected and David O’Byrne defeated, although the latter would be back on a re-count if the former didn’t hang around. Nick McKim re-elected for the Greens.

Lyons. Three Liberal, one Labor, with Labor and the Greens grappling for a final seat. So a Liberal gain either from Labor or the Greens. Rene Hidding and Mark Shelton re-elected for the Liberals, to be joined by Guy Barnett. Rebecca White re-elected for Labor, possibly to be joined by David Llewellyn, attempting to return after his defeat in 2010. Tim Morris struggling to win re-election for the Greens.

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.

22 comments on “Tasmanian election call of the board”

  1. http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/tasmanian-state-election-late-night-wrap.html

    Denison 2-2-1. Called.
    Franklin 3-1-1. Almost certain but if Labor can lift dramatically in late counting 2-2-1 is still possible.
    Bass 3-1-1. Almost certain with a sliver of a chance of 3-2-0 off the back of anti-Green preferences and Ginninderra effect.
    Lyons 3-1-1 or 3-2-0. Tossup until I look at it much more closely.
    Braddon slightly leaning 4-1-0 (yikes), otherwise 3-2-0. PUP and the Greens look busted.

    Probably 14-6-3 with 1 unclear ALP/Lib, 1 unclear ALP/Grn.

    Worst Labor vote since Hare-Clark began in 1909. But still better than polls (or I) expected!

  2. Note that one of the newcomers in Denison is an oldcomer – Julian Amos was MHA for Denison 1976-86 and 1992-6.

    O’Halloran is toast in Braddon – PUP preferences federally split to the majors over the Greens in Tas so even if he outlasts Morgan he’s still stuffed.

    Glad I took heed of the Newspoll and pulled my projected PUP seat from Braddon. But 4-1-0 which I thought even less likely is a big chance now.

  5. Kevin – I know Hare-Clarke is “quirky” but 4-1! Isn’t that like getting the equivalent of 4 quotas in an (old) half-Senate which is sort of like 83%. Has there ever been any party close to a 4-1 before in Tasmania?

  7. Rocket Rocket@5

    Kevin – I know Hare-Clarke is “quirky” but 4-1! Isn’t that like getting the equivalent of 4 quotas in an (old) half-Senate which is sort of like 83%. Has there ever been any party close to a 4-1 before in Tasmania?

    We’ve only had the 5-seat system since 1998 and in that time it’s not been anywhere near happening; some thought it wasn’t even possible. In the old seven-seat system there were two cases of a party winning five – Labor in Braddon in 1972, Liberals in Braddon in 1992. 5/7 is marginally easier than 4/5 but not much.

    When the Libs got five in Braddon in 1992 they polled 65.7% which would probably have just won 4/5 in the current system.

    Four is on the cards off only 3.5 quotas now because of the spread of opposing parties (and exhaust when a party is excluded) plus candidate effects if the parties stay close together. It’s a bit flukey that it’s coming up off 59% which would not usually be enough.

  8. Sorry Kevin – maths brain fade – yes it would be 66.7% (like ALP nearly winning 2 Senate seats in ACT, which has seemed possible a few times but never happenmed).

    How do think this total result would have played out in the old 35 seat House?

    Also a bit off-topic but as there are comments on the SA thread favoring Prop.Rep or MM/top up schemes – do you think that in the last 30 years Tasmania has been generally better off with majority or coalition governments?

  10. A improbable what-if question, if I may?

    If we applied last night’s result to the original 7-seat electorates instead of the current 5, what would the breakdown be?

  12. OK the inevitable 35 vs 25 question.

    In the 35 seat system:

    Bass 4-2-1
    Braddon probably 5-2-0, maybe 4-2-0-1
    Lyons 4-2-1
    Franklin 4-2-1
    Denison 3-3-1 or 3-2-2

    Lib 19-20 ALP 10-11 Green 4-5 PUP 0-1

  13. Rocket Rocket@8


    Also a bit off-topic but as there are comments on the SA thread favoring Prop.Rep or MM/top up schemes – do you think that in the last 30 years Tasmania has been generally better off with majority or coalition governments?

    Much of a muchness to me. Some of the majority governments have been good, others just corrupt and economically inept. The hung parliaments have generally had some good policy outcomes but been unstable and economically troubled.

    I think the important thing here is that it’s not about majority vs minority government specifically, but about Tasmania’s three-cornered landscape in which there is a major issue (forestry) on which the majors and the Greens oppose each other. That always creates instability.

  15. Wow Kevin, thanks for all your efforts! HC is all kinds of confusing for me, but I can still follow your commentary. Thank you.

  17. Psephos@14

    Some of the majority governments have been good, others just corrupt and economically inept.


    Who would you describe as corrupt and in what way?

    I would say that the blue team never really unanswered the questions about football socks and unexplained money in freezers from a very long time ago. I am not convinced the red team were necessarily corrupt as such, but they were at one stage very good at bumbling and lying their way into giving the impression that they were.

  20. ALP scrutineers have drawn my attention to vast leaks from the Lib ticket at some booths in Bass, which will also happen in Braddon. The ramifications of this:

    Bass:

    http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/state-election-post-count-thread-bass.html

    Booth should win but I am still not calling that Wightman will not.

    Braddon:

    http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2014/03/state-election-post-count-thread-braddon.html

    Leakage and competing with an incumbent will make it quite tricky for the Libs to get their four and beat Best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *