First up, two seat polling anecdotes to relate, one new, the other not so much:
• The Geelong Advertiser yesterday published a ReachTEL poll from Corangamite, showing Labor trailing 52-48 in the must-win seat. After exclusion of the 3.5% undecided, the primary votes are Liberal 42.1%, Labor 34.9%, Greens 8.2%, United Australia Party 5.7% and others 5.6%. The results are radically unlike those of the last such poll in December, which had primary votes of Labor 42.8%, Liberal 33.7% and Greens 11.7%. The poll was conducted “earlier this week” from a sample of 788.
• Further results have emerged from the uComms/ReachTEL poll of Bass, conducted for the Australian Forest Products Association and covered here in a post on Wednesday, have emerged: specifically, the full primary vote totals, both for the initial question and the forced-response follow-up for the undecided. However, there was evidently an error in the latter set of results, as they added up to 131.4%.
Other assessments of the situation from around the place:
• Contrary to a growing view that the Coalition might be back in business, David Crowe of the Sydney Morning Herald reports Labor is confident it can win more than 15 seats, which includes “a handful in Victoria, some in Western Australia and several in Queensland, not least Peter Dutton’s seat of Dickson”.
• On Tuesday, Michael Koziol of The Age said the consensus from Victoria is that the Coalition would lose three to five seats: “Corangamite and Dunkley seem likely to fall, Chisholm too, while La Trobe and Casey are marginal”. Not included in the list is Deakin, where Liberal sources cited in The Australian, also on Tuesday, said they were “fairly comfortable”. Contra ReachTEL, the Liberal sources rated Corangamite a “near-certain loss” – an assessment that did not stop Scott Morrison campaigning in the seat that very day.
Greens should only have negotiating power, and so should stop issuing ultimatums to negotiate?
:eyeroll:
Diogenes @ #693 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:11 pm
It was never repealed. It just hasn’t been applied for many years.
They have now gone out and hired an executioner and that is what the story was about.
Toby Esterhase @ #696 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:15 pm
Agree. Most of the ideas expressed are just nuts.
Interesting that my deliberately provocative suggestion seemed to be taken as just part of the nutty conversation.
ratsak @ #697 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:16 pm
I may be wrong, but I thought excess quotas were the last to be distributed, after all the lowest ranked candidates had been progressively eliminated and their votes distributed. So those Lib preferences may never be distributed or they would only be distributed when things got down to two other minor candidates were left in the race. I hope that makes sense.
C@t….The current arrangements mean that candidates that have no electoral support whatsoever can become Senators. Senators exercise a lot of power. This is most undesirable. Vacancies should be filled by candidates that can win elections.
Martin B @ #700 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:18 pm
Disingenuous response, to say the least. Well, as a Greens’ supporter you should at least know that they have done more than issued an ultimatum to negotiate. They issued an ultimatum to go ‘my way or the highway’.
OOI, do you think the idea of MMP in Australia is “nutty”?
Obviously, as I said, it’s almost completely unachievable in practical terms, at least without decades of effort in constitutional reform, but do you have any reason to think it could not work in principle?
https://www.pollbludger.net/2019/04/21/election-minus-four-weeks/comment-page-14/#comment-3138981
Linking the elections of the House of Reps and Senate together is an idea of considerable merit, stopping both House only and Senate only elections, however it has been put to the voters 4 times and rejected each time (3 times as a stand alone proposition, once as part of wider reform). The second time, 1977, it got 62% nationally but only got a majority in 3 states and thus lost and this was (at least according to a theory, Gough Whitlam`s I believe) due to Fraser holding the referendum as a stand alone vote, causing a by-election effect and thus costing at majorities in WA and Queensland, in order to allow for a second-half of 1978 House and half-Senate election. The other times it has been put up by the ALP and lost even the national vote because the conservatives have opposed it. The only way to get it back on the agenda is for ALP premiers to issue the writs for snap half-Senate elections, without any input from the PM, late on Monday afternoons/evenings, when there is a Liberal Prime Minister to suffer a giant by-election swing against the Coalition, then potentially causing the Coalition (at least at Commonwealth level) to potentially support reform.
Abolishing electing the Senate in halves has merit but the only time it has been put, as part of a wider package, it was defeated.
Removing the ability to block supply`s best chance was if Gough had fended off the dismissal and then called a referendum to do so at the first possible opportunity. The ALP`s policy of never blocking supply to a Coalition Government will almost certainly not get the power to block supply removed, likely only blocking supply to a Coalition Government (which cannot be done without the ALP) will get such a change to happen.
A single member electorate system risks being favourable to the Coalition, giving them at least half the Senate most of the time and thus making it more obstructionist to ALP governments.
briefly @ #704 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:30 pm
I’m just pointing out that it would be an expensive exercise in true democracy.
How the Senate result is determined
https://www.aec.gov.au/voting/counting/senate_count.htm
Toby Esterhase @ #695 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:15 pm
Well, instead of being so condescending, you could instead contribute your obviously superior knowledge of these things to the debate. 😐
“They issued an ultimatum to go ‘my way or the highway’.”
As an ALP supporter, you should know that is entirely untrue.
The article posted the other day to ‘support’ this claim contained not a *single* sentence of this kind, but from the headline down described calls for negotiation such as I described.
Martin B @ #707 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:31 pm
That conversation is just a bunch of individuals riding their particular hobby horse.
I thought excess quotas were the last to be distributed,
Treated the same as any other block of votes. If it’s the smallest packet of votes in the count it gets excluded and the preferences distributed. There’s nothing magical about it. If the Liberals get 2.1 quotas their surplus will get distributed fairly early. If they get 2.3 it will be distributed fairly late. If they get 2.4 or more they might even pull off a surprise 3rd seat.
Did someone say Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Minor parties have disproportionate power in upper houses because major parties, through reducing their members to ciphers for the party line, give it to them. In particular, the Coalition, through blanket opposition to anything a Labor Government does, deal themselves out.
The G-Libs are promising to oppose Labor’s policies on climate change by exercising a B-o-P in the reactionary chamber, the Senate. This promises to be an outrageous abuse of the Senate’s powers.
Pegasus @ #710 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:33 pm
That uses a lot more words than I did, but in essence I was right.
I assumed / skipped over the step of transferring the surplus.
briefly – it is entirely undemocratic that a senator elected with a quota requirement of 14.3 (or 7.7 in a DD) resigns and then a by-election occurs where the “quota” will be 50%. Replacement by the State Parliament based on a person from the same party is fair. There is a little bit of flexibility and needs yo be if an independent resigns. There there is a problem when a senator resigns from a party – but no-one has come up with anything remotely likely to fit the Constitution and fly on this so status quo remains.
MMP is the worst electoral system ever devised. You can lose your electorate but stay in Parliament if you’re high enough on the list and your place on the list is entirely in the gift of your party. Plus, the threshold is — at the same time — necessary but totally arbitrary.
It’s simply untrue to say that Senators in the current system have negligible electoral support, because, as pointed out, it’s a quasi-list system, and the *parties* they represent have considerable electoral support.
It’s a reasonable position to oppose list systems and support candidate-centred systems^ but (to use a word of the moment) it is entirely disingenuous to criticise a list system *as if it were* a candidate system.
^ How anyone could look at some of the dropkicks that get elected to parliament and claim that they did so through their qualities as a candidate rather than having been placed on the ballot paper by their parties beats me, but there you go.
Oh, and Centre Alliance doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning a Senate seat. The only people who even know it exists are nerds like us!
Toby Esterhase @ #696 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:15 pm
—
Well aren’t you the bastion all that is right and true. Does your superior intellect move beyond cheap anonymous sniping ? Thought not. Go back to insulting your bus driver and check out chick under your breath and imagining what you could do if you were Prime Wanker at the bowls club. Oh, you are already ? Sweet Jesus.
Spence, what is undemocratic is the election of candidates to the more powerful chamber without ever having to secure any electoral support at all.
Toby Esterhase @ #722 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 10:43 pm
–Oh we are a prophet too — I think I am in love.
“MMP is the worst electoral system ever devised. You can lose your electorate but stay in Parliament if you’re high enough on the list and your place on the list is entirely in the gift of your party. Plus, the threshold is — at the same time — necessary but totally arbitrary.”
Since those criticisms are even *more* pertinent to list PR systems, seems harsh to say MMP is ‘the worst’.
But in any case, this seems to be going towards a discussion about what people like, rather than what works. As it happens, a number of people seem to actually admire the NZ government in recent times…
Toby – Centre Alliance has a reasonable chance of a Senator from SA. Running at 7% vote on Bludgertrack at present.
Ratsak,
Lol yes a daygo. You too I gather.
Yeah Vale ended up the first Campbelltown junior to play first grade for wests. I’m not sure what happened to Robby. I heard he ended up a “professional punter” but I never had much to do with him, and nothing after school.
What year did you finish up there?
briefly – the main beneficiaries of the list system seem to have been the major parties. Most minor parties never elect more than 1 senator. The issue has mainly arisen for small parties because of s44.
Do you have a problem with the lists presented by the ALP?
https://www.pollbludger.net/2019/04/21/election-minus-four-weeks/comment-page-15/#comment-3139039
The Centre Alliance has no change, out SA where it has 2 incumbent Senators (with continuing terms), an ex-incumbent Senator (thanks to section 44), an incumbent MP, at least some party members and a natural constiuency served previously by Nick Xenophon, the Democrats and Steel Hall.
ajm @ #518 Sunday, April 21st, 2019 – 7:48 pm
Indeed a stupidly simplistic analysis if that was what McCrann actually wrote.
Yes, if demand for oil and thermal coal collapsed then there would be some excess supply going cheap for a while. But as the world transitions to renewables over 20-50 years there will just be less new supply. The cost of production of oil and coal is not going to reduce just because demand reduces. Indeed new finds will most likely continue to get more expensive to exploit.
So any significant drop in price will just cause a drop in future supply.
At some point in the transition, EV’s (or hydrogen) will become so clearly technically, economically and environmentally superior that new investment in oil will dry up. I expect the exit of $ will be quicker than the uptake of the new vehicles and likely result in a shortage of oil and price surge that will punish the laggards and bring a rapid end to the common usage oil for ground transport.
Sally McManus
Verified account @sallymcmanus
48m48 minutes ago
It seems Colin Riddell (who has now either deleted his account or has been suspended) who sharing fake tweets pretending to be me to spread misinformation about Labor Party policy to influence the election does have some mates outside his nest of trolls
I kind of like the idea of a MMP unicameral Parliament. It would act a bit like a permanent joint sitting of parliament after a DD election. Having single member electorates would allow for geographical diversity, whilst having PR members would allow for ideological diversity. NZ seems to work OK.
I reckon that something like a 250 member parliament would be ok – with between 180 and 200 single member electorate MPs, with the remainder being PR senators (with a 2% primary vote threshold to qualify for a PR seat). 10 senate seats should be reserved for indigenous senators.
MMP can be improved by the introduction of preferences (both for single member seats and eliminated parties from the proportional count).
Pure MMP would be near impossible to introduce in Australia (at least at Commonwealth level) because it would potentially diminish the proportionate representation of each state in the House of Reps and thus would require a majority in each state at a referendum.
Hatton 4 Hume
@mattjhatton
12h12 hours ago
Happy Easter. Here is Scott Morrison’s o-face.
I like the Tasmanian Electoral System. Not just because of Hare/Clark. Also for things like the Robson rotation which derails the number 1 2 3 etc on a ticket.
That’s decided by lottery not by the party.
More than 200 dead in SL. The government has blocked social media to stop fakenews spreading (or to stop the terrorists communicating with each other or to stop lynch mobs).
Oh, and Centre Alliance doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning a Senate seat.
Not running as SA Best is an unnecessary and stupid self imposed handicap, but if they can pull 19% in the LC last year I’d be surprised if they couldn’t rustle up the 7 or 8% that will have them just about certs in the Senate. This is an election where a lot of weak Lib voters will be looking for a home. And when you think weak Lib you think CA.
Marian Rumens
@mrumens
#ScottMorrison at his church today, happy clapping and talking about love and hope. A little disabled boy from the Maldives who is not allowed to stay in Australia because of his disability even though the rest of the family can stay. How sickeningly obscene. How disturbing.
Perhaps reducing the powers of the Senate may be more useful than changing its method of election. As things stand, Senators improve their own prospects of re-election by obstructing the House. This is nonsensical. It rewards intransigent opposition to the democratically elected House. The Senate is not democratically constituted. Yet it exercises powers the House does not have. This is anomalous. It should be reformed.
A_E – single house with mix of local and PR seats makes a lot of sense. Also solves the problem of overhang senators, senators having fixed 6 year terms etc. which are a significant problem. Constitution change would be needed tho.
‘Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a Mercedes Benz!’
Petrol-powered, of course.
🙂
“Pure MMP would be near impossible to introduce in Australia (at least at Commonwealth level) because it would potentially diminish the proportionate representation of each state in the House of Reps and thus would require a majority in each state at a referendum.”
Not to mention getting rid of all of the provisions about the Senate…
Let’s just say we’d have to entirely rewrite the constitution, and hence it isn’t (short-term) achievable.
Twitter is doing its thing today.
Journalists like Chris Uhlmann are complaining about all the bias complaints they are receiving.
Also remember the Sirs and Dames after Abbott’s knighthood proposal.
Those supporting Waterbuyback media investigators have added the water drop emoji to their twitter Handle.
What year did you finish up there?
88
It’s possible the LNP would agree to reform of the Senate. If Labor and Lib-Lib were to agree, then passage of Constitutional reform might be do-able.
Scott Williams
@ScartWilliams
Apr 20
How CORRUPT is the LNP govt?
#PaladinAffair
#WaterGate
#ReefGate
#AWUraids
#HelloWorld
#ChristmasIsland
#Serco
#Adani
#HomeInternet
#AuPairs
#CashForVisas
#Rolexs
#Lobsters
#PrintingServices
#FrankingCreditsInquiry
#TravelRorts
#auspol #ausvotes #ausvotes2019
53 replies 797 retweets 1,205 likes
The Morrison pic definitely needs the full hand raise shown. Just needs some clapping hands pics to create the full picture!
I go away from this place for a week and I see MMT has been replace with MMP.
Lucky I’m gong to the beach tomorrow.
Longer ago than we’d both care to remember.