Todd Farrell Thesis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Todd Farrell Thesis The Australian Greens: Realignment Revisited in Australia Todd Farrell Submitted in fulfilment for the requirements of the Doctorate of Philosophy Swinburne University of Technology Faculty of Health, Arts and Design School of Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities 2020 ii I declare that this thesis does not incorporate without acknowledgement any material previously submitted for a degree in any university or another educational institution and to the best of my knowledge and belief it does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text. iii ABSTRACT Scholars have traditionally characterised Australian politics as a stable two-party system that features high levels of partisan identity, robust democratic features and strong electoral institutions (Aitkin 1982; McAllister 2011). However, this characterisation masks substantial recent changes within the Australian party system. Growing dissatisfaction with major parties and shifting political values have altered the partisan contest, especially in the proportionally- represented Senate. This thesis re-examines partisan realignment as an explanation for party system change in Australia. It draws on realignment theory to argue that the emergence and sustained success of the Greens represents a fundamental shift in the Australian party system. Drawing from Australian and international studies on realignment and party system reform, the thesis combines an historical institutionalist analysis of the Australian party system with multiple empirical measurements of Greens partisan and voter support. The historical institutionalist approach demonstrates how the combination of subnational voting mechanisms, distinctly postmaterialist social issues, federal electoral strategy and a weakened Labor party have driven a realignment on the centre-left of Australian politics substantial enough to transform the Senate party system. Exploratory factor analysis of divisional-level voting data from both houses between 1987-2019 is used to identify changing voting patterns. The thesis then examines Australian Election Study data between 1987-2016 to identify demographic and attitudinal bases for Greens partisanship and voting behaviour, employing multinomial logistic regression to demonstrate the significance and distinctiveness of Greens support compared to the major parties. The institutional analysis and behaviouralist methodologies demonstrate that the Australian party system has produced a small but significant realignment that has solidified the Greens as a distinct party, especially within the Australian Senate. Realignment has come iv primarily from converting former Australian Labor Party support among a cohort of young, university educated, non-religious postmaterialists with distinct attitudes on asylum seekers and the environment. While the contest for government remains framed by a two-party paradigm, multiparty dynamics have consolidated in the Senate. This has resulted in the Greens emerging as a viable component of the Australian party-system and a durable ‘third force’ that will remain for the foreseeable future. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis was the work of one person, but there were many more who went on the same journey. To my family, particularly my Mother for putting up with hearing the latest daily political news and supporting me through all my academic endeavours. For academic personnel, I would like to thank Professors Brian Costar and Michael Leach for their help in supervising and providing the boundless resources required for understanding Australian politics. Special thanks also go to Denny Meyer for help in refreshing my statistics knowledge and advice for some of my statistics questions. I would also like to thank my fellow 400B PhD candidates Bec, Cameron, Sarah, Chris, Gillian, Gerard, Ivana, Alena, Julie, James, Dimity and Nick for their support, lunches and especially drinks over the years. Most importantly, I would like to give all my thanks to my Principle Coordinating Supervisor Damon Alexander for everything he has done the past three years, including many coffee meetings, sessional work and his undying patience in supervising this project. This would definitely not have happened without you. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration............................................................................................................................................. ii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. iii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ xi List of abbreviations .......................................................................................................................... xiv Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Research aims ................................................................................................................................... 3 Thesis approach ................................................................................................................................ 6 Thesis structure ............................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 1: Realignment: Conception, definition and application ................................................. 17 Conceptual history of realignment .................................................................................................. 18 Theoretical criticisms ...................................................................................................................... 24 Alternative concepts to critical realignment .................................................................................. 28 Dealignment ............................................................................................................................ 28 Divided government ................................................................................................................ 30 Realignment today .......................................................................................................................... 32 Realignment outside America ......................................................................................................... 35 Realignment in Australia ......................................................................................................... 38 Approaching realignment in Australia ............................................................................................ 42 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 46 Chapter 2: Party systems: theoretical underpinnings and the postmaterialist thaw.................... 48 Party system typologies .................................................................................................................. 49 Social cleavages .............................................................................................................................. 52 The electoral institution and maintenance of party systems ........................................................... 58 Party identification .......................................................................................................................... 62 Postmaterialism and value change in party systems ....................................................................... 66 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 71 Chapter 3: The Australian party system part I: Stability (1901-1975) .......................................... 73 Traditional political parties in Australia ......................................................................................... 75 vii Centre-periphery: The federal compromise and small state tensions ..................................... 76 Labour-capital: The two-party system solidified .................................................................... 79 Rural-Urban: The Coalition and institutionalised agrarianism of The Nationals ................... 86 Church-state: Keeping the bastards out and the Democratic Labour Party ............................ 92 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 95 Chapter 4: The Australian Party System Part II: Change (1976-2019) ........................................ 98 The picture of change ................................................................................................................... 100 Australian party classifications ...................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Senate Crossbench Background 2016
    Barton Deakin Brief: Senate Crossbench 4 August 2016 The 2016 federal election resulted in a large number of Senators elected that were not members of the two major parties. Senators and Members of the House of Representatives who are not part of the Coalition Government or the Labor Opposition are referred to collectively as the Senate ‘crossbench’. This Barton Deakin Brief outlines the policy positions of the various minor parties that constitute the crossbench. Background Due to the six year terms of Senators, at a normal election (held every three years) only 38 of the Senate’s 76 seats are voted on. As the 2016 federal election was a double dissolution election, all 76 seats were contested. To pass legislation a Government needs 39 votes in the Senate. As the Coalition won just 30 seats it will have to rely on the support of minor parties and independents to pass legislation when it is opposed by Labor. Since the introduction of new voting reforms in the Senate, minor parties can no longer rely on the redistribution of above-the-line votes according to preference flows to satisfy the 14.3% quota (or, in the case of a double dissolution, 7.7%) needed to win a seat in Senate elections. The new Senate voting reforms allowed voters to control their preferences by numbering all candidates above the line, thereby reducing the effectiveness of preference deals that have previously resulted in Senators being elected with a small fraction of the primary vote. To read Barton Deakin’s Brief on the Senate Voting Reforms, click here.
    [Show full text]
  • Which Political Parties Are Standing up for Animals?
    Which political parties are standing up for animals? Has a formal animal Supports Independent Supports end to welfare policy? Office of Animal Welfare? live export? Australian Labor Party (ALP) YES YES1 NO Coalition (Liberal Party & National Party) NO2 NO NO The Australian Greens YES YES YES Animal Justice Party (AJP) YES YES YES Australian Sex Party YES YES YES Pirate Party Australia YES YES NO3 Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party YES No policy YES Sustainable Australia YES No policy YES Australian Democrats YES No policy No policy 1Labor recently announced it would establish an Independent Office of Animal Welfare if elected, however its structure is still unclear. Benefits for animals would depend on how the policy was executed and whether the Office is independent of the Department of Agriculture in its operations and decision-making.. Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) NO No policy NO4 2The Coalition has no formal animal welfare policy, but since first publication of this table they have announced a plan to ban the sale of new cosmetics tested on animals. Australian Independents Party NO No policy No policy 3Pirate Party Australia policy is to “Enact a package of reforms to transform and improve the live exports industry”, including “Provid[ing] assistance for willing live animal exporters to shift to chilled/frozen meat exports.” Family First NO5 No policy No policy 4Nick Xenophon Team’s policy on live export is ‘It is important that strict controls are placed on live animal exports to ensure animals are treated in accordance with Australian animal welfare standards. However, our preference is to have Democratic Labour Party (DLP) NO No policy No policy Australian processing and the exporting of chilled meat.’ 5Family First’s Senator Bob Day’s position policy on ‘Animal Protection’ supports Senator Chris Back’s Federal ‘ag-gag’ Bill, which could result in fines or imprisonment for animal advocates who publish in-depth evidence of animal cruelty The WikiLeaks Party NO No policy No policy from factory farms.
    [Show full text]
  • QLD Senate Results Report 2017
    Statement of Results Report Event: 2016 Federal Election - Full Senate Ballot: 2016 Federal Election - Full Senate Order Elected Candidates Elected Group Name 1 George BRANDIS Liberal National Party of Queensland 2 Murray WATT Australian Labor Party 3 Pauline HANSON Pauline Hanson's One Nation 4 Matthew CANAVAN Liberal National Party of Queensland 5 Anthony CHISHOLM Australian Labor Party 6 James McGRATH Liberal National Party of Queensland 7 Claire MOORE Australian Labor Party 8 Ian MACDONALD Liberal National Party of Queensland 9 Andrew BARTLETT The Greens 10 Barry O'SULLIVAN Liberal National Party of Queensland 11 Chris KETTER Australian Labor Party 12 Fraser ANNING Pauline Hanson's One Nation Senate 06 Nov 2017 11:50:21 Page 1 of 5 Statement of Results Report Event: 2016 Federal Election - Full Senate Ballot: 2016 Federal Election - Full Senate Order Excluded Candidates Excluded Group Name 1 Single Exclusion Craig GUNNIS Palmer United Party 2 Single Exclusion Ian EUGARDE 3 Single Exclusion Ludy Charles SWEERIS-SIGRIST Christian Democratic Party (Fred Nile Group) 4 Single Exclusion Terry JORGENSEN 5 Single Exclusion Reece FLOWERS VOTEFLUX.ORG | Upgrade Democracy! 6 Single Exclusion Gary James PEAD 7 Single Exclusion Stephen HARDING Citizens Electoral Council 8 Single Exclusion Erin COOKE Socialist Equality Party 9 Single Exclusion Neroli MOONEY Rise Up Australia Party 10 Single Exclusion David BUNDY 11 Single Exclusion John GIBSON 12 Single Exclusion Chelle DOBSON Australian Liberty Alliance 13 Single Exclusion Annette LOURIGAN Glenn
    [Show full text]
  • You Can't Be What You Can't See— Women
    Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory 49th Presiding Officers and Clerks Conference Wellington, New Zealand 8-13 July 2018 You can’t be what you can’t see— Women in the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory Paper to be presented by Joy Burch, MLA, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory Page 1 of 10 ‘Any way you look at it there are many, many women who are capable of that job of leadership and making an impact at every level of government and I think we should see more”1 “Women in politics do make a difference and they can change people’s perceptions of politics – they also change the structural discrimination of old-style political systems and parliamentary conventions”2 1 Rosemary Follett, ‘Rosemary Follett and Kate Carnell reunited to sight sexism in politics’ Canberra Times 7th March 2015. 2 Katy Gallagher, ACT Chief Minister, katygallagher.net/blog blog post, 1st October 2014. Page 2 of 10 Introduction Women have played an important and prominent role in the Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory since its establishment in 1989. The ACT was the first state or territory to have a woman as its Head of Government. In the Second Assembly, the positions of Speaker, Chief Minister and Leader of the Opposition were all held by women. Perhaps most significantly, at the Territory election for the Ninth Assembly in 2016, thirteen women were elected to the Assembly. It was the first time in Australian history that a majority of women had been elected to a parliament and one of the first jurisdictions in the world to have done so.3 It was also notable that the voters of the ACT returned this result even though only 36 percent of the total 140 candidates that stood for election were women.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Election 1996
    DEPARTMENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY Parliamentary Research Service Federal Elections 1996 Background Paper NO.6 1996-97 • ~ l '-\< ~.r /~( . ~__J .. ~r:_~'_r.T-rr-Ji,_.~:;~;.~:~~;:;;~~~5!~'~ ;aft~::.u...- ... ~ . ..x-"\.~. ~'d__~ 4 ...,,--.;." .. _"'J,.gp. ..... !:l,;:.1t ....... ISSN 1037-2938 © Copyrigbt Commonwealth of Australia 1996 Except to the extent of the uses pemtitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means including information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior written consent of the Department of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties. Tbis paper bas been prepared for general distribution to Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. Wbile great care is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the paper is written using information publicly available at the time of production. Tbe views expressed are those of the author and sbould not be attributed to the Parliamentary Researcb Service (PRS). Readers are reminded that the paper is not an official parliamentary or Australian government document. PRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with members of the public. Publisbed by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1996 Parliamentary Research Service Federal Elections 1996 Gerard Newman Andrew Kopras Statistics Group 4 November 1996 Background Paper No.6 1996-97 Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Brien Hallett, Australian Electoral Commission, and JanPearson for their assistance in preparing this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860
    PRESERVING THE WHITE MAN’S REPUBLIC: THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN CONSERVATISM, 1847-1860 Joshua A. Lynn A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2015 Approved by: Harry L. Watson William L. Barney Laura F. Edwards Joseph T. Glatthaar Michael Lienesch © 2015 Joshua A. Lynn ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joshua A. Lynn: Preserving the White Man’s Republic: The Democratic Party and the Transformation of American Conservatism, 1847-1860 (Under the direction of Harry L. Watson) In the late 1840s and 1850s, the American Democratic party redefined itself as “conservative.” Yet Democrats’ preexisting dedication to majoritarian democracy, liberal individualism, and white supremacy had not changed. Democrats believed that “fanatical” reformers, who opposed slavery and advanced the rights of African Americans and women, imperiled the white man’s republic they had crafted in the early 1800s. There were no more abstract notions of freedom to boundlessly unfold; there was only the existing liberty of white men to conserve. Democrats therefore recast democracy, previously a progressive means to expand rights, as a way for local majorities to police racial and gender boundaries. In the process, they reinvigorated American conservatism by placing it on a foundation of majoritarian democracy. Empowering white men to democratically govern all other Americans, Democrats contended, would preserve their prerogatives. With the policy of “popular sovereignty,” for instance, Democrats left slavery’s expansion to territorial settlers’ democratic decision-making.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance of Power Senate Projections, Spring 2018
    Balance of power Senate projections, Spring 2018 The Australia Institute conducts a quarterly poll of Senate voting intention. Our analysis shows that major parties should expect the crossbench to remain large and diverse for the foreseeable future. Senate projections series, no. 2 Bill Browne November 2018 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. We barrack for ideas, not political parties or candidates. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining. Environmental neglect continues despite heightened ecological awareness. A better balance is urgently needed. The Australia Institute’s directors, staff and supporters represent a broad range of views and priorities. What unites us is a belief that through a combination of research and creativity we can promote new solutions and ways of thinking. OUR PURPOSE – ‘RESEARCH THAT MATTERS’ The Institute publishes research that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful society. Our goal is to gather, interpret and communicate evidence in order to both diagnose the problems we face and propose new solutions to tackle them. The Institute is wholly independent and not affiliated with any other organisation. Donations to its Research Fund are tax deductible for the donor.
    [Show full text]
  • Senator Claire Moore
    Senator Claire Moore WEEKLY UPDATE: 1st June, 2018 Phone: (07) 3252 7101; email: [email protected]; Web:www.clairemoore.net; Twitter: www.twitter.com/SenClaireMoore; www.facebook.com/SenatorClaireMoore; ***** Labor’s National Conference will now be held in Adelaide from Sun 16 Dec to Tue 18 December. **** THIS WEEK: Apart for yet another implosion of One Nation this week, the main focus in Canberra has been on the changes the Government has proposed to the Family Court and the process of Senate Estimates. Labor welcomes the Government’s acknowledgement of the crisis in the family court system, and the pain it is causing families caught up in it. This situation has been going for far too long, and has worsened on the Government’s watch. Reform is needed but already serious concerns have been expressed as to some of the potential consequences of what the Government is proposing. This is especially the case in regard to the removal of the Appeals Division of the Family Court – which means that the toughest and most complex family law cases will no longer be heard by specialists. At the moment we have a lack of detail and will examines the legislation closely when it is made available. Estimates are a vital part of our parliamentary process and our democracy. They provide the opportunity for Senators to examine the performance of the Departments and Agencies. It allows us to scrutinise policy, programs and performance. Such scrutiny is very healthy for our political and administrative processes. It invariably provides many illuminating insights into the management of our government and it’s not, as this week’s Update will attest, – all good news.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Volume 1 the Senators, the Senate and Australia, 1901–1929 by Harry Evans, Clerk of the Senate 1988–2009
    Introduction to volume 1 The Senators, the Senate and Australia, 1901–1929 By Harry Evans, Clerk of the Senate 1988–2009 Biography may or may not be the key to history, but the biographies of those who served in institutions of government can throw great light on the workings of those institutions. These biographies of Australia’s senators are offered not only because they deal with interesting people, but because they inform an assessment of the Senate as an institution. They also provide insights into the history and identity of Australia. This first volume contains the biographies of senators who completed their service in the Senate in the period 1901 to 1929. This cut-off point involves some inconveniences, one being that it excludes senators who served in that period but who completed their service later. One such senator, George Pearce of Western Australia, was prominent and influential in the period covered but continued to be prominent and influential afterwards, and he is conspicuous by his absence from this volume. A cut-off has to be set, however, and the one chosen has considerable countervailing advantages. The period selected includes the formative years of the Senate, with the addition of a period of its operation as a going concern. The historian would readily see it as a rational first era to select. The historian would also see the era selected as falling naturally into three sub-eras, approximately corresponding to the first three decades of the twentieth century. The first of those decades would probably be called by our historian, in search of a neatly summarising title, The Founders’ Senate, 1901–1910.
    [Show full text]
  • Bicameralism in the New Zealand Context
    377 Bicameralism in the New Zealand context Andrew Stockley* In 1985, the newly elected Labour Government issued a White Paper proposing a Bill of Rights for New Zealand. One of the arguments in favour of the proposal is that New Zealand has only a one chamber Parliament and as a consequence there is less control over the executive than is desirable. The upper house, the Legislative Council, was abolished in 1951 and, despite various enquiries, has never been replaced. In this article, the writer calls for a reappraisal of the need for a second chamber. He argues that a second chamber could be one means among others of limiting the power of government. It is essential that a second chamber be independent, self-confident and sufficiently free of party politics. I. AN INTRODUCTION TO BICAMERALISM In 1950, the New Zealand Parliament, in the manner and form it was then constituted, altered its own composition. The legislative branch of government in New Zealand had hitherto been bicameral in nature, consisting of an upper chamber, the Legislative Council, and a lower chamber, the House of Representatives.*1 Some ninety-eight years after its inception2 however, the New Zealand legislature became unicameral. The Legislative Council Abolition Act 1950, passed by both chambers, did as its name implied, and abolished the Legislative Council as on 1 January 1951. What was perhaps most remarkable about this transformation from bicameral to unicameral government was the almost casual manner in which it occurred. The abolition bill was carried on a voice vote in the House of Representatives; very little excitement or concern was caused among the populace at large; and government as a whole seemed to continue quite normally.
    [Show full text]
  • Imagereal Capture
    FEDERAL DEADLOCKS : ORIGIN AND OPERATION OF SECTION 57 By J. E. RICHARDSON* This article deals with the interpretation of section 57 of the Con- stitution, and the consideration of deadlocks leading to the framing of a section at the Federal Convention Debates in Sydney in 1891 and in the three sessions held at Adelaide, Sydney and Melbourne respectively in 1897-8. It also includes a short assessment of the operation of section 57 since federation. Section 57 becomes explicable only after the nature of Senate legislative power as defined in section 53 is understood. Accordingly, the article commences by examining Senate legislative power. The two sections read: '53. Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment or appropriation of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law. The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or propoaed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government. The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any pro- posed charge or burden on the people. The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Representatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, requesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions therein. And the House of Representatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications.
    [Show full text]