Menu lock

Now that things are winding down, some overdue consideration to the Senate, with a table at the bottom outlining where I perceive things to stand.

New South Wales

If preferences don’t change the order, the result will be Coalition 5, Labor 4 and one each for the Greens, One Nation and the Liberal Democrats. However, the Liberal Democrats just barely have their nose ahead of the Christian Democrats, which could potentially be reversed on preferences. Analysis of below-the-line votes from 2013 shows strong performances on preferences for both Liberal Democrats and Christian Democrats, but the Liberal Democrats would have the edge if nearly half of Labor’s voters follow the how-to-vote card, as they traditionally do for the lower house. Labor directed a sixth preference to the Liberal Democrats, and would have about 0.1 quotas distributed as preferences upon the exclusion of their fifth candidate. So it would seem that David Leyonhjelm is well placed to win the twelfth spot.

Victoria

The Coalition and Labor have enough full quotas to elect four each, the Greens have one, and Derryn Hinch is close enough that he’ll clearly win the tenth seat. That leaves the following contending for the last two seats: Greens #2 (0.39 quotas), Coalition #5 (0.34 quotas) and One Nation (0.23 quotas). Nothing in the past record of preference behaviour says One Nation will close the gap, so I think we can call this Coalition 5, Labor 4, Greens 2, Hinch 1.

Queensland

On full quotas, the Coalition elects four, Labor elect three and One Nation elects Pauline Hanson, while the Greens are close enough to a quota that Larissa Waters is assured of re-election. The front-runners for the other three seats are Coalition #5 (0.57 quotas), Labor #4 (0.49 quotas) and Liberal Democrats (0.35 quotas), unless Family First (0.25 quotas), Nick Xenophon Team (0.25 quotas) or the second One Nation candidate (0.17 quotas) achieve something extraordinary on preferences.

Western Australia

There are full quotas for five Liberal, three Labor and one Greens, with Labor #4 (0.70 quotas) and One Nation (0.50 quotas) assured of the next two spots. That leaves the last seat as a contest between the Nationals (0.34 quotas) and Greens #2 (0.33 quotas). The Nationals were outperformed by the Greens on below-the-line preferences in 2013, and the Liberals have very little to bequeath them in the way of a surplus, so the Greens seem the more likely winner at this stage unless their primary vote weakens significantly in late counting.

South Australia

A fairly clean result here, with four Liberal, three Labor and two NXT are elected off the bat, and NXT #3, Greens #1 and Labor #4 to follow shortly after.

Tasmania

The most fascinating contest is in Tasmania, given the very large number of major party voters who have gone below-the-line to give their votes to fifth-placed Liberal Richard Colbeck and sixth-placed Labor candidate Lisa Singh, who had been shafted by party powerbrokers in contentious preselection decisions. Ticket votes should be enough to elect the top four candidates on both Labor and Liberal tickets, with lead Greens candidate Peter Whish-Wilson and Jacqui Lambie also assured of seats, leaving two up for grabs at the end. Singh’s share of the Labor vote means that she rather than fifth-placed John Short will survive to the later stages of the count, and potentially emerge with Labor’s fifth seat. Colbeck’s vote may less consequential, since he holds fifth position on the ticket in any case, and would be just as well placed if most of his supporters had voted Liberal above the line. However, there is a potential scenario in which both Colbeck’s personal vote allows him to remain in the count concurrently with the fourth Liberal candidate long enough so that either McKim or Singh drops out ahead of them both, so that a fifth Liberal is elected at the expense of a fifth Labor or a second Greens. Such a result would deliver the Liberals a perverse benefit from giving Colbeck a low spot on the ticket and ensuring he received a vote base of his own.

2016-07-12-senate-counting

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

96 comments

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Kevin Bonham
Guest

Re #93 it’s also been suggested to me that they might be just formally reappointed every 3 months until the count concludes so it may just be a non-issue.

Airlines
Guest

Greens and Nats still have roughly the same distance between them (0.35 of a quota for the Greens compared to 0.32 for the Nats). Still pretty tight.

Chris McBride
Guest

does anyone have an update on the last senate seat in WA? Greens vs the National Party candidate who used to be a Green.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

matt @ #91 Friday, July 22, 2016 at 9:24 pm

Kevin @2:59pm:
“There was a fair bit of talk about Ministers potentially having to be temporarily replaced if not re-elected by the return of the writs (Aug 8) but I haven’t foll0wed the fine details of that.”
I shouldn’t imagine that to be a problem, at least for those confident of re-election – the Constitution does provide a grace period for any Minister to become a Member of Parliament, after all. For those whose seats are on the line, it would be a little different, but even then they’d remain as Ministers at least until it was clear if they’d win re-election or not.
Aug 9 is the deadline provided for by the Constitution (three months from the dissolution of Parliament, on May 9), and by then all the seats should have been given out.

It appears that the issue is that the grace period does actually expire at that time so they would cease to be Ministers; see http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/03/senate-electoral-reform-double-dissolutions-and-section-64-of-the-constitution.html but substitute August 9.

Matt
Guest

Re: Lisa Singh.
I’m heartened to see that my fellow ALP members have made their wishes clear via the ballot box. Sen. Singh is an excellent member of the Senate, and that blowhard apparatchik John Short should take the lesson with grace.

Matt
Guest

Kevin @2:59pm:

“There was a fair bit of talk about Ministers potentially having to be temporarily replaced if not re-elected by the return of the writs (Aug 8) but I haven’t foll0wed the fine details of that.”

I shouldn’t imagine that to be a problem, at least for those confident of re-election – the Constitution does provide a grace period for any Minister to become a Member of Parliament, after all. For those whose seats are on the line, it would be a little different, but even then they’d remain as Ministers at least until it was clear if they’d win re-election or not.

Aug 9 is the deadline provided for by the Constitution (three months from the dissolution of Parliament, on May 9), and by then all the seats should have been given out.

Jack A Randa
Guest

Raaraa, as far as I understand, when the writs are returned they’re endorsed with the names of the winning candidates – it’s the official counting people’s formal notification to the official head of government of who the new MPs are. So the writs can’t be returned until the count is complete. If the count hasn’t been completed by the due date they’ll have to ask for an extension.

SgtThursday
Guest

Or, perhaps to add a completely different angle to the story: LOTS OF PEOPLE VOTED FOR SINGH. Is that not what democracy is?

triton
Guest

Kevin Bonham

The fact is that a lot of the Singh vote is at the expense of the Greens and without Singh’s BTL campaign Labor would have very little if any chance of winning five even with their very strong preference flow.

I hope Singh and the rest of the party are aware of this, in case anyone else is thinking of criticizing her or punishing her when they should be thanking her. But I wonder how they’ll view her position on the ticket next time. Even without the influence of factional power plays they might decide they are better off keeping her in a vulnerable position.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

triton @ #83 Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 8:44 am

Labor’s failed Tasmanian Senate candidate John Short can’t hide his resentment towards Lisa Singh.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-19/tasmanian-alp-senate-candidate-john-short-urges-unity/7642984

The Tasmanian union leader who looks likely to lose the race for a Senate seat because of Lisa Singh’s vote below-the-line campaign says his party’s Senate team needs to work together.

Senator Singh ran a prominent campaign to encourage Tasmanians to vote for her below the line, which they appear to have done in their thousands.
Speaking to ABC News, Mr Short – who is the Tasmanian Secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union – pointed out it was not consistent with Labor policy.
“Our role as a team is to get as many people up as we can,” he said.

Well, it looks as though they got five up. Does he think all six would have been elected if not for Singh’s BTL campaign?

He can cry us all a river. The fact is that a lot of the Singh vote is at the expense of the Greens and without Singh’s BTL campaign Labor would have very little if any chance of winning five even with their very strong preference flow.

I do feel for him to a degree though as Labor’s incorrect handling of the Hare-Clark quota for their original preselection ballot robbed him of any chance of knocking off Polley for second position, which would have put Polley in the position he is now in if it happened. (Whether it would have happened or not I don’t know as I’ve never seen the full preference distribution for that ballot.)

It would have been good to have a new face in Labor’s Senate team instead of some of the invisible ones who will be returned. The worst thing about it all is that Labor looks like not only getting away with their dodgy preselection but benefiting from it by winning five.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

raaraa @ #81 Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 6:47 am

Will it be a problem if the Senate count isn’t fully conclusive when the writs are returned?
What will the procedure be if it comes really close to the first time Senate sits?

There was a fair bit of talk about Ministers potentially having to be temporarily replaced if not re-elected by the return of the writs (Aug 8) but I haven’t foll0wed the fine details of that.

Kevin Bonham
Guest

Updated my Senate coverage:

http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/2016-tasmania-senate-model-of-what.html

With further preference-sampling I still find McKim probably beating Colbeck for the last seat but it is not a very robust projected margin given the challenges involved in sampling. Button press expected Tuesday-Wednesday next week.

triton
Guest

Singh now on 15,745 BTL votes, 0.616 quotas.

triton
Guest

Labor’s failed Tasmanian Senate candidate John Short can’t hide his resentment towards Lisa Singh.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-19/tasmanian-alp-senate-candidate-john-short-urges-unity/7642984

The Tasmanian union leader who looks likely to lose the race for a Senate seat because of Lisa Singh’s vote below-the-line campaign says his party’s Senate team needs to work together.

Senator Singh ran a prominent campaign to encourage Tasmanians to vote for her below the line, which they appear to have done in their thousands.

Speaking to ABC News, Mr Short – who is the Tasmanian Secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union – pointed out it was not consistent with Labor policy.
“Our role as a team is to get as many people up as we can,” he said.

Well, it looks as though they got five up. Does he think all six would have been elected if not for Singh’s BTL campaign?

Raaraa
Guest

And I apologise once again for the choice of less than kind words the other day.

Raaraa
Guest

Will it be a problem if the Senate count isn’t fully conclusive when the writs are returned?

What will the procedure be if it comes really close to the first time Senate sits?

Kevin Bonham
Guest

jack a randa @ #76 Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 1:15 pm

So, Kevin, does mean that all the votes now listed as “unapportioned” are BTLs that haven’t yet been scanned and checked, or are there still unconsistencies in the way it’s being handled? I note that in your little State the “unapp’d” are now less than the total apportioned BTLs in each party group, while in huge (population-wise) NSW there are lots of “unappd’s” and only a few apportioned to particular candidates. Can we draw any conclusions from this as to how long the process is going to take? Do we have any direct info from the AEC itself about how many % of the way through the process they are, or are they so focussed on just getting it done that they’re forgetting to communicate?

As far as I can tell all the Unapportioned are now unallocated BTLs, but not all the unallocated BTLs are Unapportioned! Non-ordinary BTLs aren’t necessarily shown as unapportioned, they just appear in the count fully fledged, though they often lag the non-ordinary ATLs in doing so. For Denison and Franklin the postal BTLs have just become representative compared to the booth ones but in the other electorates they are lagging.

NSW is obviously very slow and I am receiving quite a few emails with detailed analysis of how slow they are and whether they can actually finish in time. I haven’t been following this closely enough to comment usefully. One of these referred to a Work In Progress figure of 70% complete but I don’t know the source of that yet. It seems only about 16% of votes in NSW are fully through the system at this stage – but that could be an underestimate if a similar issue applies to what was mentioned in Tas (ie the booth is not uploaded to candidate BTLs until every vote from it is processed).

I notice there’s really not that much to see in BTLs in states outside Tasmania. At least I can’t see them causing any interesting issues, unless maybe they alter the order of election here or there.

triton
Guest

raaraa @ #78 Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 6:59 am

Hope to see more of this BTL votes putting some candidates ahead of those prescribed by parties in the future.

I think we will, especially if parties are seen to be unfairly demoting a popular candidate. The voters for Lisa Singh have shown the way to the rest of the country, and voters will be more familiar with the new rules in future elections and be more prepared to do it anyway.

Raaraa
Guest

Hope to see more of this BTL votes putting some candidates ahead of those prescribed by parties in the future.

John Webster
Guest

Highlight of this election. Lisa Singh up, Louise Pratt returns and Penny Wong (in 2013) asserting themselves against the machine and winning. And Anne Aly against News Ltd. More power to them.

wpDiscuz