The Australian Electoral Commission quietly published the full distributions of lower house preferences earlier this week, shedding light on the election’s remaining known unknown: how close One Nation came to maybe pulling off a miracle in Hunter. Joel Fitzgibbon retained the seat for Labor with a margin of 2.98% over the Nationals, landing him on the wrong end of a 9.48% swing – the third biggest of the election after the central Queensland seats of Capricornia and Dawson, the politics of coal mining being the common thread between all three seats.
The wild card in the deck was that Hunter was also the seat where One Nation polled strongest, in what a dare say was a first for a non-Queensland seat – 21.59%, compared with 23.47% for the Nationals and 35.57% for Labor. That raised the question of how One Nation might have done in the final count if they emerged ahead of the Nationals on preferences. The answer is assuredly not-quite-well-enough, but we’ll never know for sure. As preferences from mostly left-leaning minor candidates were distributed, the gap between Nationals and One Nation barely moved, the Nationals gaining 4.81% to reach 28.28% at the final distribution, and One Nation gaining 4.79% to fall short with 26.38%. One Nation preferences then proceeded to flow to the Nationals with noteworthy force, with the final exclusion sending 19,120 votes (71.03%) to the Nationals and 28.97% to Labor.
Speaking of, the flow of minor party preferences between the Coalition and Labor is the one detail of the election result on which the AEC is still holding out. However, as a sequel to last week’s offering on Senate preferences, I offer the following comparison of flows in Queensland in 2016 and 2019. This is based on Senate ballot paper data, observing the number that placed one major party ahead of the either, or included neither major party in their preference order. In the case of the 2016 election, this is based on a sampling of one ballot paper in 50; the 2019 data is from the full set of results.
It has been widely noted that the Coalition enjoyed a greatly improved flow of One Nation preferences in the lower house, but the Senate results offer the interesting twist that Labor’s share hardly changed – evidently many One Nation voters who numbered neither major party in 2016 jumped off the fence and preferenced the Coalition this time. Also notable is that Labor received an even stronger share of Greens preferences than in 2016. If this was reflected nationally, it’s a phenomenon that has passed unnoticed, since the flow of One Nation and United Australia Party preferences was the larger and more telling story.
Other electorally relevant developments of the past week or so:
• Laura Jayes of Sky News raises the prospect of the Nationals asserting a claim to the Liberal Senate vacancy created by Arthur Sinodinos’s appointment to Washington. The Nationals lost one of their two New South Wales seats when Fiona Nash fell foul of Section 44 in late 2017, resulting in a recount that delivered to the Liberals a seat that would otherwise have been held by the Nationals until 2022. Since that is also when Sinodinos’s term expires, giving the Nationals the seat would restore an order in which the Nationals held two out of the five Coalition seats.
• Fresh from her win over Tony Abbott in Warringah, The Australian reported on Tuesday that Zali Steggall was refusing to deny suggestions she might be persuaded to join the Liberal Party, although she subsequently complained the paper had twisted her words. A report in The Age today notes both “allies and opponents” believe Steggall will struggle to win re-election as an independent with Abbott out of the picture, and gives cause to doubt she would survive a preselection challenge as a Liberal.
• Labor is undergoing a personnel change in the Victorian Legislative Council after the resignation of Philip Dalidakis, who led the party’s ticket for Southern Metropolitan region at both the 2014 and 2018 elections. Preserving the claim of the Right faction Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, the national executive is set to anoint Enver Erdogan, a workplace lawyer for Maurice Blackburn, former Moreland councillor and member of the Kurdish community. The Australian reports former Melbourne Ports MP Michael Danby has joined the party’s Prahran and Brighton branches in registering displeasure that the national executive is circumventing a rank-and-file plebiscite. Particularly contentious is Erdogan’s record of criticism of Israel, a sore point in a region that encompasses Melbourne’s Jewish stronghold around Caulfield.
😆 Yeah , it would be sooo not like how a large part of the world think of Americans .
lizzie @ #298 Friday, July 5th, 2019 – 4:57 pm
In other words we’ll blame it on something or other but the names Shorten or Bowen won’t be mentioned.
The Australian household sector’s level of gross debt is at the historic high of 120 percent of GDP. This is one of the most important aspects of Australia’s economy yet the government and the media hardly ever mention it. Instead there are frequent mentions of a plan for an utterly pointless federal government surplus (which is really just a non-government deficit, and not a positive thing unless you have a roaring current account surplus that is overheating your domestic private sector). There are also a lot of mentions of the Reserve Bank’s official cash rate, which is relevant to the extent that it affects people with variable rate mortgages, but it is a lot less relevant than the overall level of household debt.
There are many reasons for needing the federal government to increase its fiscal deficit. One of them is to enable households to deleverage.
lizzie @ #297 Friday, July 5th, 2019 – 4:56 pm
If that’s a shot at the Greens then he might consider the value of all those 2nd prefs that props up his party.
Tax cuts………..bit like Rudd’s $900 (which did not come my way) – criticised by the conservatives as not appropriate, spent on TVs and the like by the lumpen masses, never really acknowledged or appreciated and contested on how useful it was in staving off an economic down turn. Who remembers/cares in any event?
What other election promises did the LNP have…………………..????…………the sounds of silence.
It is clear that the US military establishment did what it could to sabotage the Generalissimo’s Gambit.
None of the bigwigs turned up.
At least one of the tanks that DID turn up had tatty damage to it.
The tanks were NOT allowed to move across the asphalt.
What Watt should have done is to advise Australians to be very, very patient and to praise the Greens for their 27 year long march to the ever-pending eventual glorious victory on the hustings.
lizzie @ #302 Friday, July 5th, 2019 – 4:56 pm
Somehow, by any means fair or foul, the supply of stupid pills without prescription must be curtailed. The investigation of this matter by the organisation supplying umbrellas for the Great Barrier Reef is nearing an end and only awaits a further $444 million to enable the production of an initial report.😈
Boerwar @ #304 Friday, July 5th, 2019 – 5:16 pm
Watt, like many Labor partisans, needs to visit the room of mirrors…
I have to wonder whether Noah Carroll will carry the can as the scapegoat for the election result.
It’s troubling when you consider the very effective job he did with Daniel Andrews.
How much influence did Carroll actually have in the Shorten yrs. ..?
What Watt should have done is to advise Australians to be very, very patient while waiting for the Greens to conclude their long march to glorious victory on the hustings.
Comrades, 27 years is but a pup!
Comrades, while we are waiting for our political Nirvana, let a thousand Greens announcements bloom.
Comrades, while we Greens wait and wait and wait for the other 90% of Australians to wake to our destiny, let us snark Labor with a million mighty tweets!
A long read, but worth it, I think.
https://polyfeministix.wordpress.com/2019/07/05/choose-or-the-left-may-die/
‘As in Paddy Manning’s article in The Monthly; he speaks to the fact how the Greens will use this to their advantage.’
Oh noes! Not the noble Greens!
‘Labor needs to really push the Greens and be very vocal about WHY the Greens are too lazy to do any of the hard work in convincing the Cross Bench to oppose the Liberal Bill or support Labor’s amendments. They need to insist that the Greens explain themselves to voters on this.’
What short of bullshit is this? It is the historic destiny of the Greens to sit around and criticize Labor and to wait and wait and wait and wait.
Boerwar @ #312 Friday, July 5th, 2019 – 5:40 pm
Labor deserves criticism for
– turning a blind eye to offshore torture of asylum seekers
– backing more thermal coal mining/export
– ignoring the starving and destitute on Newstart
– voting FOR irresponsible and unaffordable tax cuts
……
Thanks Lizzie great article by Trish Corry
As a counterpoint to the article linked to by lizzie, an article penned by self-described socialist Trish Corry who has “chosen Labor” …
Peter Boyle – Labor votes for Coalition’s billions in tax cuts for the rich:
https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/labor-votes-coalitions-billions-tax-cuts-rich
Nicholas says:
Friday, July 5, 2019 at 5:02 pm
The Australian household sector’s level of gross debt is at the historic high of 120 percent of GDP. This is one of the most important aspects of Australia’s economy yet the government and the media hardly ever mention it
As the land bubble deflates, the ratio of household debt:equity is also worsening. Parts of the household sector are in a very tight debt trap.
As per capita real disposable income declines households are responding to their worsening income and net debt positions by trying to pay off debts and, commensurately, trying to curtail discretionary spending. This is accentuating an already-weak level of consumer spending and adding to the repression of household income growth….and in turn intensifying efforts to pay off debts/further cut discretionary spending.
There has been a deceleration in the global growth rate, especially in industrial production and in international trade. In Australia, this has been reflected in a decline in the exchange rate, which has pushed up the price of imports, including staples such as fuels. The prices of many foodstuffs have also risen, just as softening demand for labour has been putting downward pressure on nominal wages.
This is a vicious cycle. Weaker demand, higher consumer prices, declining land values, repression in the labour market, debt-liquidation….all these things are driving distinctly higher unemployment and in turn further depressing demand, profitability, investment and asset values.
The solution here is to significantly increase public sector demand. The Liberals will not do this. They should run a deficit of 2-3-4% of GDP for as long as necessary to restore full employment. However, they will continue to run a tight policy and further repress the debt, land and labour markets.
Pegasus says:
Friday, July 5, 2019 at 5:54 pm
Once again, a Green blames Labor for policies enacted by the Liberals.
The bottom line here is that neither the Liberals nor the Greens subscribe to economic stimulus. They propose further repression in the labour market.
Pegasus
I thought that Trish Corry’s article might suggest positive, realistic thoughts from sad Laborites, rather than blindly hitting out in all directions.
briefly
Once again, briefly blames the Greens for policies enacted by the Liberals with the support of Labor who voted together with the Coalition to ensure such legislation passed the parliament.
While I do not wish to join in the current and long standing Green Bash here, I do wish they, the Greens, would stop pretending that they will, in any kind of normal future, be able to actually “do” anything other than sit outside the game and offer their gems of political wisdom. If those who speak for the Greens here are anything like their real membership, they need to work out who the real enemy is. Green voters have it sorted. If not Green then Labor. Yet, somehow, the Green supporters here seem to think they can have it both ways – gratuitous advice to Labor without getting their political fingers dirty. My question? Who is the political enemy?
The Greens are co-authors with the Liberals of our offshore detention facilities – facilities in which Australia keeps a population of political prisoners. These are hostages of the Abbott/Brown project. The conspicuous cruelties and depravities carried out in these facilities serve the political purposes of the Liberals and the Greens.
No-one should be mistaken about any of this.
lizzie,
That’s fine. I wasn’t having a go at you for posting it. It made for interesting reading.
Pegasus says:
Friday, July 5, 2019 at 6:01 pm
I haven’t attributed the passage of tax rebates to the Greens. They opposed this. It’s entirely fair to say the Greens oppose stimulus. That is, they support the economically repressive policies of the LNP.
The Greens have not called for expansionary policies. They stand for higher taxes on working people. Labor oppose these taxes. This is a sound – an admirably sound – position. It should be taken much further.
Briefly’s a parody bludger surely at this point?
Tricot
Lordy, lordy, I must be reading a different blog to you. Gratuitous advice to Greens by Laborites never occurs here on a daily basis. Sure, sure.
The perceived problem by some Laborites is they refuse to accept the Greens party has its own policy platform and does not exist to rubber stamp Labor’s political strategies and policies.
Long may democracy flourish despite the two-party system.
The Greens oppose tax cuts for working people. They go so far as to practically deny the existence of working people at all. They are defenders of economic repression; of the repression of labour. This is perfectly clear. The Greens and the Liberals are on the same page here.
Briefly is what my old nan used to politely call “touched”.
Pegasus
All good 🙂
Lars Von Trier says:
Friday, July 5, 2019 at 6:13 pm
Briefly is what my old nan used to politely call “touched”.
__________________
lol. My nan would have called him an ‘odd duck’. My grandfather would have called him a ‘local crank’.
Peg, as I never tire of pointing out, we do accept the Greens have their own goals and campaigns. We get it. We are prepared to critique these campaigns. Rely on it.
The Greens are not proxies for Labor. They are not allies. They are not fellow-travellers. They are not collaborators. They are among the several anti-Labor voices. We really do understand that. What this means is that the Greens are opposed to the political, social and economic interests of working people. This is not in dispute. For good measure, the Greens have never denied it.
Briefly
“The Greens are co-authors with the Liberals of our offshore detention facilities”
ARE YOU JOKING?!?
WHO WROTE THOSE LAWS?
J… F… C…
Again, why do you hold the ONLY party that opposed those laws responsible for their creation?
It’s 1984 here, indulging in Doublethink
Labor – the party of the workers, not so much. When in government under Rudd and Gillard, Labor continued to support the ABCC. The “need for a tough cop on the beat” – ring any bells?
Labor proclaimed long and hard that it had entirely dismantled the WorkChoices architecture – a blatant myth of its own making.
You might live in denial about what the ALP has become, but others do not.
Reminder – here’s the enemy:
The Greens are a bourgeois outfit. They make no bones about it. Inasmuch as they do not seek to serve and represent working people, they have even less claim to their political support than the Liberals, who at least go through the motions of trying to serve working people.
Astrobleme says:
Friday, July 5, 2019 at 6:19 pm
“The Greens are co-authors with the Liberals of our offshore detention facilities”
__________________
Astro, he’s just looking for a reaction with the most ridiculous statements he can conjure. Of course it was the ALP who implemented asylum detention and it was Beazley that said there was a ‘cigarette paper’ of difference between the ALP and the Liberals.
“The Greens are not proxies for Labor.”
Of course they’re not!
“They are not allies. ”
They kind of are…
“They are not collaborators. ”
They have, many times collaborated
“They are among the several anti-Labor voices.”
In your paranoid world, yes, but actually they are consistently speak their own message and this will clash with Labor
” What this means is that the Greens are opposed to the political, social and economic interests of working people. ”
There is no logic behind this claim, it’s just emotional vomit.
“This is not in dispute. ”
Absolutely it’s in dispute, it’s crazy talk.
“For good measure, the Greens have never denied it.”
Why would they deny the emotional vomit you just barfed up?
Rudd and Gillard spouted anti-union rhetoric during their reigns dog-whistling to the usual.
It was the Greens Party who never stopped campaigning against the ABCC and anti-worker measures.
Labor – the party of the workers – in your dreams.
The Greens colluded with Abbott, Astro. The result is the gulag. The Greens profit from this. They always have. It’s a steady earner for them.
What BS.
The votes of the ALP made no difference to the outcome. It is pure cold hard reality that, in this media environment and at a time of just losing an election, voting against it would be turned against them regardless of the facts. Turned against them now, and repeated over and over at every opportunity from now to the next election.
FFS, they just lost an election on progressive tax policies. Talk about kicking someone when they are down.
Now; if they dont have a policy to stop the 2024 stage of tax cuts come the next election – I will join you all in the kicking.
You are right that the federal government should be running large fiscal deficits. I agree with you that this government is philosophically and culturally opposed to doing this. They will run a combination of small deficits and small surpluses…. basically a balanced fiscal position and they will tout this as evidence of good economic management. They will invoke the metaphor that the federal government is like a household that must live within its means and “save” for the future (what does it even mean to save a currency that you keystroke into existence thousands of times per day?).
I wonder if the ALP will be politically adroit enough to exploit the economic damage that will be palpable to voters over the next three years.
I think they need to be aggressive and persistent in campaigning on economic justice themes coupled with concrete plans to create jobs for the unemployed and to massively expand and improve public services and infrastructure.
I think the ALP need to openly kill the fake knowledge behind the surplus fetish that blights economic policy-making. They need to explain that federal government deficits are non-government surpluses. They need to explain that the constraints on the federal government’s spending are real resource availability, not finance.
My old man used to call people like Lars and nath drongos.
But I think that is far to harsh a term for such erudite and worldly contributors to this forum.
Shoosh all, borewar is in the soaking bath having special time with “bluey”…..
Trumps 4th of July address is surreal throughout but saying the army took over the airports in 1775! If he’d just said “I mean the ports” and made a funny of it OK bad enough. But to just keep droning on proves there is a total lack of his brain realising what his mouth is saying. doG help us.
Nath
“Astro, he’s just looking for a reaction with the most ridiculous statements he can conjure. Of course it was the ALP who implemented asylum detention and it was Beazley that said there was a ‘cigarette paper’ of difference between the ALP and the Liberals.”
I get it…
Nice name by the way…
Reminds me of my own…