DOCSLIB.ORG

“Get Used to It” Senate Projections, Autumn 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
“Get Used to It” Senate Projections, Autumn 2018 “Get used to it” Senate projections, Autumn 2018 The Australia Institute’s 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. 1 Bill Browne May 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. Anyone wishing to donate can do so via the website at https://www.tai.org.au or by calling the Institute on 02 6130 0530. Our secure and user-friendly website allows donors to make either one-off or regular monthly donations and we encourage everyone who can to donate in this way as it assists our research in the most significant manner. Level 1, Endeavour House, 1 Franklin St Canberra, ACT 2601 Tel: (02) 61300530 Email: [email protected] Website: www.tai.org.au ISSN: 1836-9014 Summary The Australia Institute routinely polls a representative sample of the Australian population on a variety of issues, including how they intend to vote at the next election. While other pollsters only ask about House of Representatives voting intention, our polling also asks specifically about Senate voting intention. In this new report series, to be released quarterly, we will present and analyse the results of these Senate voting intention polls to project the potential makeup of the Senate following one or more elections. The first edition of Senate Projections finds that, on current polling, future elections are likely to return a crossbench that is about as large and divided as the current one. A future Coalition government would have to cooperate with the Greens or multiple non-Green crossbench parties and independents and a future Labor government would have to cooperate with the Greens and multiple non-Green crossbench parties and independents. Senate projections Autumn 2018 1 Polling results The results of our April 2018 poll show a continued improvement for the Labor Party’s prospects but an upturn for the LNP at the expense of smaller parties. However, the rolling average shows an ongoing decline for the LNP from its polling high in February 2016, with the Labor Party and independents strengthening their position. One Nation has plateaued since the middle of last year, but it is still polling well above its performance in the July 2016 election. Figure 1: National Senate polling (individual results and rolling average) 45% Actual Election Liberal / National Coalition 40% Results Labor 35% Greens 30% Pauline Hanson's One Nation Nick Xenophon Team 25% Independent/Other (broad) 20% Liberal / National Coalition 15% Labor 10% Greens 5% Pauline Hanson's One Nation 0% Nick Xenophon Team Independent/Other (broad) Jun-16 Jun-17 Oct-16 Oct-17 Apr-16 Apr-17 Apr-18 Feb-16 Feb-17 Feb-18 Dec-16 Dec-17 Aug-16 Aug-17 Note: Markers indicate the results of individual polls, with the line showing the rolling four-poll average. Note: Our polling pre-dates the change of name from “Nick Xenophon Team” to “Centre Alliance”. Our next batch of polling will ask about the Centre Alliance, and our Senate projections use the Nick Xenophon Team polling to forecast the results for the Centre Alliance. Senate projections Autumn 2018 2 Simulation Model explanation The Australia Institute conducts quarterly polling of Senate voting The Australia Institute uses a model to simulate intention by state. The most recent future Senate elections, based on inputs like four poll results for each party in polling results, historical performance, likely each state are combined in a rolling preference flows, and so on. average. As shown in the Senate results ranges below, For each of the six Senate seats the Senate is likely to retain a large and diverse available in each state (and two crossbench. Our simulations show the LNP able available in each territory) at an to achieve a majority with either the Greens or election, we either assign a party multiple non-Green crossbenchers in most guaranteed to win that seat (if that party is polling above or close to a cases. quota) or we run a simulation to see On the other hand, Labor and the Greens which party is likely to win that seat. together will not be sufficient to reach a Senate The odds are assigned based on our judgment, informed by the polling, majority. The additional cooperation of some historical performance, likely crossbenchers would be required. preference flows, and other factors. Of course, the Coalition and the Labor Party These simulations are run 1,000 voting together would have a majority without times and the results summed to get any crossbench cooperation. the percentage chance of different seat outcomes after the next Table 1: Senate results in the middle half of election and the one after. cases across 1,000 simulations For example, a party that has a 10% Party At 2016 Half- Two Half- chance in each state of winning a Senate Senates seat could win between zero and six LNP 30 32–34 30–33 seats in theory. Running the Labor 26 27–28 26–28 simulation 1,000 times allows us to Greens 9 7–8 8–10 explore the possibility of them One Nation 4 3–4 4–6 winning zero, one, two or even six Centre Alliance 3 3–4 2–3 seats. In practice, such a party is LDP 1 most likely to win no seats (in just Conservatives 1 1 under half of simulations), and it Lambie 1 0–1 winning five or six seats is extremely Justice 1 0–1 unlikely (occurring less than once every 1,000 simulations). See the appendices for more details. Senate projections Autumn 2018 3 Figure 2: Average Senate results (1,000 simulations) 76 Labor Greens Lambie Centre Alliance 38 Justice Independent One Nation LDP Conservatives 0 LNP At 2016 Half-Senate Two Half-Senates Note: The line at 38 seats marks the level required to block legislation. One additional vote (a total of 39) is required to pass legislation. Senate projections Autumn 2018 4 One Nation in Australian politics Since we began including One Nation in our polling April 2016, their support grew steadily until reaching a high of 13% in our March 2017 poll. Over the last four polls, their support has stayed within the band of 9–10%. This is about double their result in the July 2016 election. Partly because of an unfavourable distribution of Senate terms (i.e. most One Nation senators are up for re-election), the party is most likely to have three (34% chance) or four seats (31% chance) following the next half-Senate election. In practice, four seats would improve their position by one as Fraser Anning left the party to sit as an independent. However, there is a wide range of possibilities as they are competitive in several states – including dropping to two seats or increasing to six. By the time the second half- Senate election comes around, if polling remained static, an increased One Nation party room of five is the single most likely outcome (28% chance), with eight or nine senators an outside possibility. Our worst case, but certainly possible, scenario for One Nation sees them falling to two seats following the next election (winning one in Queensland, combined with Pauline Hanson’s six-year term). Figure 3: Likelihood of One Nation winning certain amounts of seats after the first and the second half-Senate election (1,000 simulations) 40% 34.0% 35% 31.2% 30% 25.1% 25.9% 25% 20.9% 19.0% 20% 15% 12.5% 13.4% 10.2% 10% 5% 2.7% 2.3% 1.8% 0.1% 0.6% 0.3% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Half-Senate Second Half-Senate Senate projections Autumn 2018 5 The Greens in the Senate Our polling shows a small decline in the Greens’ share of the vote since we began polling Senate intentions in February 2016. As with One Nation, the Greens are hindered by an unbalanced allocation of three- year-term Senate seats, which means their Senate representation is likely to go backwards at the next half-Senate election. However, their prospects look better at the subsequent half-Senate election, where nine seats is the single most likely outcome (31% chance). Rather than an improvement in the Greens vote, this reflects a fall in the major party vote, putting more Senate seats in play.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Australia
    14. South Australia Dean Jaensch South Australia was not expected to loom large in the federal election, with only 11 of the 150 seats. Of the 11, only four were marginal—requiring a swing of less than 5 per cent to be lost. Three were Liberal: Sturt (held by Christopher Pyne since 1993, 1 per cent margin), Boothby (Andrew Southcott since 1996, 3 per cent) and Grey (4.5 per cent). Of the Labor seats, only Kingston (4.5 per cent) was marginal. Table 14.1 Pre-Election Pendulum (per cent) ALP Liberal Party Electorate FP TPP Electorate FP TPP Kingston 46 .7 54 .4 Sturt 47 .2 50 .9 Hindmarsh 47 .2 55 .1 Boothby 46 .3 52 .9 Wakefield 48 .7 56 .6 Grey 47 .3 54 .4 Makin 51 .4 57 .7 Mayo 51 .1 57 .1 Adelaide 48 .2 58 .5 Barker 46 .8 59 .5 Port Adelaide 58 .2 69 .8 FP = first preference TPP = two-party preferred Labor won Kingston, Wakefield and Makin from the Liberal Party in 2007. The Liberal Party could win all three back. But, in early 2010, it was expected that if there was any change in South Australia, it would involve Liberal losses. The State election in March 2010, however, produced some shock results. The Rann Labor Government was returned to office, despite massive swings in its safe seats. In the last two weeks of the campaign, the polls showed Labor in trouble. The Rann Government—after four years of hubris, arrogance and spin—was in danger of defeat.
    [Show full text]
  • Compliance by Former Ministers of State With
    September 2018 Who’s in the room? Access and influence in Australian politics Danielle Wood and Kate Griffiths Who’s in the room? Access and influence in Australian politics Grattan Institute Support Grattan Institute Report No. 2018-12, September 2018 Founding members Endowment Supporters This report was written by Danielle Wood, Kate Griffiths and Carmela The Myer Foundation Chivers. Grattan interns Tim Asimakis, Matthew Bowes, Isabelle National Australia Bank Hughes and Anne Yang provided research assistance and made Susan McKinnon Foundation substantial contributions to the report. We would like to thank the members of Grattan Institute’s Public Policy Affiliate Partners Committee for their helpful comments. We also thank AJ Brown, Ken Medibank Private Coghill, Belinda Edwards, Darren Halpin, Serena Lillywhite, Cameron Susan McKinnon Foundation Murray, Joo-Cheong Tham and Anne Twomey for their suggestions, and staff of the Australian Electoral Commission, NSW Electoral Commission, NSW ICAC and other government and industry bodies for Senior Affiliates their technical input. Google Maddocks The opinions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Grattan Institute’s founding PwC members, affiliates, individual board members, committee members or McKinsey & Company reviewers. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. The Scanlon Foundation Grattan Institute is an independent think-tank focused on Australian Wesfarmers public policy. Our work is independent, practical and rigorous. We aim Westpac to improve policy outcomes by engaging with both decision-makers and the community. Affiliates For further information on the Institute’s programs, or to join our mailing Ashurst list, please go to: http://www.grattan.edu.au/.
    [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]
  • Commonwealth of Australia
    Commonwealth of Australia Author Wanna, John Published 2019 Journal Title Australian Journal of Politics and History Version Accepted Manuscript (AM) DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/ajph.12576 Copyright Statement © 2019 School of History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics, School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Commonwealth of Australia, Australian Journal of Politics and History, Volume 65, Issue 2, Pages 295-300, which has been published in final form at 10.1111/ajph.12576. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/388250 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Commonwealth of Australia John Wanna Turnbull’s Bizarre Departure, and a Return to Minority Government for the Morrison-led Coalition Just when political pundits thought federal parliament could not become even wackier than it had been in recent times, the inhabitants of Capital Hill continued to prove everyone wrong. Even serious journalists began referring to the national legislature metaphorically as the “monkey house” to encapsulate the farcical behaviour they were obliged to report. With Tony Abbott being pre-emptively ousted from the prime ministership by Malcolm Turnbull in 2015, Turnbull himself was, in turn, unceremoniously usurped in bizarre circumstances in August 2018, handing over the leadership to his slightly bemused Treasurer Scott Morrison. Suddenly, Australia was being branded as the notorious “coup capital of the Western democracies”, with five prime ministers in five years and only one losing the high office at a general election.
    [Show full text]
  • FUSA Student Council Meeting Agenda, August 5, 2014: 6:00Pm FUSA Meeting Room 1
    STUDENT COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 05 August 2014 FUSA Student Council Meeting Agenda, August 5, 2014: 6:00pm FUSA Meeting Room 1. Welcome and Meeting Open 2. Apologies: Caleb Pattinson 3. Welcome Guests: Adam Rau 4. Approval of minutes from last meeting 5. In camera discussion 6. Reports 6.1 Student President’s Report 6.2 General Secretary’s Report 6.3 Education Officer’s Report 6.4 Environment Officer’s Report 6.5 Queer Officer’s Report -None received 6.6 Women’s Officer’s Report 6.7 International Officer’s Report - None received 6.8 Welfare Officer’s Report 6.9 Social Activities Officer’s Report 6.10 Accessibility Officer’s Report – none received 6.11 Post-Graduate Officer’s Report 6.12 Indigenous Officer’s Report 6.13 MSE’s Report 7. Matters for Decision 7.1 NDA – Student President 7.2 Fee to re-take exam, an outrageous $750 money grab from Flinders University: - Student President 7.3 FUSA Elections – Student President 7.4 Election of Three Empire Times Editors – MSE 7.5 Student Council Representatives to Flinders One Student Consolation Groups (SCG’s) - MSE 7.6 FUSA Newsletter Proposal – Caleb Pattinson 7.7 Blue Stockings Week Event Proposal – Women’s officer 7.9 Student Council recommendation to increase Empire Times Editor’s honorariums – General Secretary 7.9 Student Council Sub-Committee Regulations – General Secretary 7.10 Student Council Forum – General Secretary 7.11 Student Council Training Day – General Secretary 7.12 FUSA promotion – General Secretary 7.13 Grading – Education Officer 7.14 Exam Feedback – Education Officer 7.15
    [Show full text]
  • Risks and Opportunities for the Australia–Us Alliance
    AGAINST COMPLACENCY: RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE AUSTRALIA–US ALLIANCE Richard Fontaine October 2016 Table of contents The United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney deepens Australia’s understanding of the Foreword 01 United States through research, teaching and public Executive summary 02 engagement. Through rigorous analysis of American politics, foreign policy, economics, culture, and history, Introduction 04 the Centre has become a national resource, building Australia’s awareness of the dynamics shaping American An allied pivot to Asia 05 society — and critically — their implications for Australia. Against complacency: 07 The Centre’s Alliance 21 Program is a multi-year research Four risks to the alliance initiative that examines the historically strong Australia- United States relationship and works to address the Carpe occasionem: 14 challenges and opportunities ahead as the alliance Twelve alliance opportunities evolves in a changing Asia. The Australian Government and corporate partners Boral, Dow, News Corp Australia, The ostrich or the emu? 18 and Northrop Grumman Australia support the program’s second phase, which commenced in July 2015 and is The American election 19 focused on the following core research areas: defence and the Australian alliance and security; resource sustainability; alliance systems in Asia; and trade, investment, and business innovation. Endnotes 20 The Alliance 21 Program receives funding support from About the author 23 the following partners. Research conclusions are derived independently and authors represent their own view not those of the United States Studies Centre. United States Studies Centre Institute Building (H03) The University of Sydney NSW 2006 Alliance 21 Fellowship partner Australia Phone: +61 2 9351 7249 Email: [email protected] Twitter: @ussc Website: ussc.edu.au UNITED STATES STUDIES CENTRE | ALLIANCE 21 PROGRAM AGAINST COMPLACENCY: RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE AUSTRALIA-US ALLIANCE Foreword In November 2014 the White House announced the is the result of those deliberations.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Paid Parental Leave: an Investigation and Analysis of Australian Paid Parental Leave Frameworks with Reference to Selected European OECD Countries
    The University of Notre Dame Australia ResearchOnline@ND Theses 2018 Paid parental leave: An investigation and analysis of Australian paid parental leave frameworks with reference to selected European OECD countries Greg Lynn The University of Notre Dame Australia Follow this and additional works at: https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/theses Part of the Law Commons COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 WARNING The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further copying or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice. Publication Details Lynn, G. (2018). Paid parental leave: An investigation and analysis of Australian paid parental leave frameworks with reference to selected European OECD countries (Master of Laws by Research). University of Notre Dame Australia. https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/theses/225 This dissertation/thesis is brought to you by ResearchOnline@ND. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of ResearchOnline@ND. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Notre Dame Australia School of Law PAID PARENTAL LEAVE: AN INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS OF AUSTRALIAN PAID PARENTAL LEAVE FRAMEWORKS WITH REFERENCE TO SELECTED EUROPEAN OECD COUNTRIES Greg Lynn LLB (Murdoch University) MA (The University of Notre Dame Australia) This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Master of Laws by Research 2018 DECLARATION This thesis does not, to the best of my knowledge, contain previously published or written material by another person except where due reference is made in the text, or any other material previously submitted for a degree in any other higher education institution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politics of Senate Electoral Reform 2016
    ELECTORAL REGULATION RESEARCH NETWORK/DEMOCRATIC AUDIT OF AUSTRALIA JOINT WORKING PAPER SERIES AN INSTANCE OF CARTEL BEHAVIOUR? THE POLITICS OF SENATE ELECTORAL REFORM 2016 Dr. Nick Economou (Monash University) WORKING PAPER NO. 40 (APRIL 2016) 1 Abstract This working paper outlines the history, politics and mechanics of the recent changes to Senate voting. *********** Introduction As the result of the count of the 2013 half-Senate election indicated that a high number of candidates from parties other than Labor, the Greens and the Liberal-National coalition had won seats in the Australian Senate, pressure began to mount on aspects of the Senate voting system. In particular, the ‘Group Vote Ticket’ (or GVT) (i.e. the option that electors have to vote for a party ticket rather than fill in preferences for all candidates) became the focus of criticism of the system. This option has been available to electors since 1983 when the then Labor government undertook extensive changes to the Electoral Act (1918) (see Rydon 1988, 1985). Since its introduction, the GVT has been immensely popular with voters (see Figure 1). However, it was also the case that the new system provided scope for the administrative executives of the political parties to seek to exercise influence over outcomes through the decisions they made on how preferences would be ordered. Parties could, and did, enter into negotiations over the allocation of preferences (the colloquial term for this being preference “wheeling and dealing” (Mayer 1980)). This aspect of the system became the source of controversy especially where there were contentious representational outcomes (see Green, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Minority and Majority Governments in Federal and State/Territory
    Minority and Majority Governments Name: ………………………… in Federal and State/Territory Parliaments 1. Answer the following questions: In which house is government formed? Lower What is majority government? Where a political party or a coalition of parties has a majority of the seats in the lower house. What is a minority government? Where a political party forms government but depends on the support (confidence) of other parties and/or independents as it was unable to achieve a majority of seats in the lower house in its own right. 2. Using the information in the following document https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/3681701/upload_binary/3681701.pdf (in particular, TABLE 1) determine what sort of government (either minority or majority) has currently been formed in our Federal Parliament and the 8 State/Territory Parliaments by completing the table on the reverse side of this worksheet. 3. Once you have completed the table answer these last two questions: How many minority governments are there currently in Australia? 2 How many majority governments are there currently in Australia? The Constitutional Centre of Western Australia Updated February 2019 7 2. Table to complete: Minority or Majority? Parliament Total # # of Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Seats Political Type of of seats seats won won won won won won won won won won won party/parties Government in Lower required by by by by by by by by by by by forming formed house to form ALP LIB NATS LNP CA CLP GRN KAP PHON SFF IND Government Govt.
    [Show full text]
  • Nick Xenophon 2011 National Conference Speech FINAL
    Perspectives of the associations sector from the Australian Senate, Senator Nick Xenophon, Independent Senator for South Australia Presentation to Associations Forum National Conference, Brisbane Exhibition and Convention Centre, Wednesday 27 July, 2011 Thank you for inviting me to speak to you today. At the outset, I’d like to say how pleased I am to be invited to talk today at the Associations Forum National Conference. Being an Independent politician I'm not really used to the sorts of issues many of you would face. I have my party room meetings with myself in the morning while I am shaving. Strangely, I don't always agree with me. I once even cut myself. It was, in the language of political parties, literally a spill. I have been asked to provide my perspectives on the Not for Profit sector. Some of you may know that I have taken a keen interest in this area in the last few years and I have become convinced Australia has a desperate need for a Charities Commission and a public benefit test to be applied to all charities and religions. I came to this issue by accident. Three years ago, I was doing a fairly routine interview with 'Today Tonight' journalist Bryan Seymour – it was about poker machines. At the end of the interview, I was chatting to Bryan about other issues. I mentioned how, while I was waiting to take my seat in the Senate, I did a talkback radio gig, and I had interviewed author David Marr about a piece he’d written on Scientology and their tax exempt status.
    [Show full text]
  • Please Find Attached My Submission to the Ministerial Expert Committee on Electoral Reform
    Please find attached my submission to the Ministerial Expert Committee on Electoral Reform. William Bowe Submission to Ministerial Expert Committee on Electoral Reform Firstly, I would like to add my support to the objective of achieving greater electoral equality through reform to the group voting ticket system and rural malapportionment for the Legislative Council, which are inconsistent with the principle that representative democracy should reflect the purposely expressed will of voters on an equal basis. However, since these arguments will be made more than adequately by others, the intention of my submission is to provide some analysis of the likely electoral impact of reforms along the lines of those introduced for the Senate in 2016. This will be done through comparison of the two federal elections held since these reforms were introduced, namely the double dissolution election of 2016 and half-Senate election of 2019, and the last half- Senate election held under the group voting ticket system in 2013. At the end of this submission are two tables, identified as Table 1 and Table 2, which illustrate how preferences flowed from the early to the final stages of the Senate election counts in Western Australia in 2013 and Tasmania in 2019. I have been unable to complete an equivalent analysis for Western Australia in 2019 before the deadline for submissions, but can provide one at a later time. While the former result was voided due to the loss of 1,375 ballot papers during a recount, it remains a better illustration of the effect of the group voting ticket system than the special election that followed in April 2014, since the provisional election of Wayne Dropulich of the Australian Sports Party from 0.23% of the vote on the earlier occasion is a notable example of the potential for group voting tickets to produce perverse results.
    [Show full text]