Tuesday, March 31, 2026

Tasmania Redistribution: The Reaction

Yesterday the AEC released public feedback on the proposed radical redistribution as previously covered here (Draft Scraps The Franklin Divide).  Frankly I thought there might be more complaints than there were, but some of those that there are are pretty punchy.  Of the 90 distinct submissions received, exactly half by my count discussed the proposed boundaries at all, and of these I counted 14 as purely supporting the proposal (one or two noting some initial reluctance in doing so) and 31 objecting, nearly all of these proposing something substantially different if they proposed anything at all.

Predictably the most common objections concerned the condition of Lyons and especially the placement of Glenorchy in it.  Objectors raised Glenorchy's disconnection from the bulk of Lyons through the inclusion of Brighton in Franklin, argued that neo-Lyons was thematically incoherent, complained about the severing of Glenorchy from Greater Hobart and also objected to rural Tasmania being fragmented into majority urban seats.  Submission 34 by Mark James is a good representative of the objections:

"Under the proposed model, rural/regional voters will be outnumbered by city voters in all five electorates. There is no community of interest at all between Glenorchy, Sheffield, and St. Helens. - For a state with a famously decentralised population, in which the majority of the population live outside the capital city, voters in the capital city will form the bulk of three out of five electorates."

Similarly, some submissions objected to the placement of Brighton or at least the whole thereof in Franklin on the grounds of it having stronger links to the southern midlands (in my view this is true of the Brighton part but not so much of the Bridgewater/Gagebrook part).  

A different objection in a small number of submissions was the position of Break O'Day in neo-Lyons as the only east coast touching council.  Some submissions preferred Break O'Day to go into Bass with the whole of Meander Valley LGA including Prospect Vale and Blackstone Heights remaining in Lyons.  This new Lyons would be virtually landlocked, touching the Derwent foreshore in Glenorchy but not reaching the actual sea as such anywhere. I certainly wouldn't be going there for any seashell collecting trips.  

Submission 83 by Aussies Elect raises a point also raised here in comments - some issues are caused by the weird boundaries of Southern Midlands if that council becomes the Lyons boundary.  In the area of Runnymede, Southern Midlands crosses the Tasman Highway, meaning that as one goes from Orford to Sorell and vice versa, the highway will briefly pass from Franklin to Lyons and then back to Franklin again.  Furthermore, the Southern Midlands boundary cuts Richmond (currently in Lyons) off Colebrook and Campania in the Coal River Valley.  If one is willing to break up LGAs then there's an opportunity here to expand the new Franklin in this area and in the process keep the northern part of Glamorgan-Spring Bay in Lyons.  

Local government areas often don't like being split between electorates and this redistribution process has made me wonder about the extent to which the tail wags the dog.  Why are Tasmania's local government boundaries like they are (in some cases I suspect the answer is about rates bases) and should LGA boundaries be adaptive to the needs of the federal boundary process rather than the other way around?  Anyway the Redistribution Committee can only work with what there is.


By far the most common suggested solution to the Lyons problem was to put Glenorchy into Franklin and keep the east coast in Lyons.  Those supporting this stressed that while this solution crosses the Derwent, the divide is nothing like the existing Franklin divide in that Glenorchy and Clarence are connected directly by at least one bridge (depending on exact boundaries) and there is significant direct commuting between the two, unlike the existing Franklin divide where the only connections with any real level of usage pass through Clark.

A minority supported putting Derwent Valley into Clark (see my comments on this in the "Clark extends up the river" section of my first article), which provides scope for maintaining more of Kingborough in the current Franklin.  I detected basically no support for the minimal change option of moving Clark further south into Kingborough, suggesting that most objectors realise this is a problem but prefer a different solution to the one found.

There were a number of eccentric proposals.  I'm not going to go through those in detail for cases where the submission doesn't realise this is a federal redistribution, hasn't noticed the number of seats is fixed at five, or is barely comprehensible.   (In at least one case the AEC seemed confused whether the submission actually referred to the boundaries or just the seat names).  However it was disappointing to see some people supporting putting Huon Valley and in cases parts of Kingborough into Lyons without noticing that these areas are essentially disconnected from the rest of Lyons with the connecting bushland having only one significant unsealed link road through it.  

The Glenorchy submission (72) caused serious threats to my Panadol supply and includes a bizarre example "contiguous Franklin" alternative in which in order to keep Glenorchy in the same seat as most of Hobart City and move Kingborough into Clark, a substantial chunk of inner Hobart political greenery is donated to Lyons, becoming an urban exclave and also meaning that to remain in Clark while commuting from Glenorchy to the remaining Hobart City part of it you would have to undertake a 13.5 km bushwalk from Tolosa St to Old Farm Road peaking at around 1120 m near Big Bend.   (Looks like a rather good walk actually).  If this submission was actually entirely written by humans then they've passed a reverse Turing test with flying colours (sorry this is not a compliment; hat tip to a colleague who suggested that it looked partially AI written.)

In terms of the draft redistribution proposal (as distinct from the daft redistribution proposals in some of the submissions) the Greens and Labor have supported it. The Liberals have opposed it without making further comment on any particular alternative.  Sorell Council has supported the proposal while Glenorchy, Break O'Day, Southern Midlands, Brighton and Central Highlands are objecting.  I am surprised more councils did not make submissions.

Meanwhile, readers of this site continue to have a positive view of the draft proposal.


Many new names were suggested for Franklin especially but I wasn't wildly enthused by the suggestions.  It just doesn't seem that there's anything near a community consensus on an individual with a strong link to the proposed new Franklin whose contribution is such as to deserve an electorate named after them.  Some submitters suggested calling the proposed Clark Franklin and vice versa, but this involves transplanting the name Clark to an area it entirely doesn't cover at the present (always best avoided if possible).  

What next?

There is now a phase in which people can reply to the submissions.  Following that the Augmented Electoral Commission (which adds the Chair and the non-judicial member of the AEC to the existing Redistribution Committee of two AEC and two non-AEC staff) can make a decision, and can hold public hearings prior to doing so if it wishes.  In the event that it now wished to switch from the initial proposal to one that was substantially different (such as Glenorchy into Franklin instead of the east coast) then there would be likely to be another round of ideas submission on the current proposal.  

Saturday, March 28, 2026

Legislative Council Voting Patterns 2022-6

In the leadup to the 2026 Legislative Council elections for Huon and Rosevears (link TBA when I've written it) this article is my annual review of voting patterns on divisions in the upper house in the previous four years.  But before I get into it, I need to deal with some methods nerdery at the start.

Shy Division Losing

Some Labor MLCs aren't particularly fond of my findings, and they were especially defensive about a stat that in the small sample added to the mix last year Labor had voted with the Liberal Government 90% of the time.  (Fear not, in this year's sample it is 86%).  This even led to an attempt on election night live TV to shoot down (but not shag or marry) my methods in which it was falsely claimed that if there were thirty divisions on a single Bill I would include them all in my assessment.  Fortunately the incorrect claim has since been retracted.  

What in particular the Labor MLCs do not like goes to an unfortunate quirk of the LegCo's standing orders. When votes are called for on a motion they are initially taken on the voices.  The President or whoever is in the chair at the time declares a provisional result, eg "I think the ayes have it".  At this point someone can call for a division - but only if they are voting on the side that lost the call on the voices.  

In a case where the Government has no friends on a vote they might vote one way on the voices, but then not bother having that vote recorded to avoid embarrassment.  And in this case, while Labor voted the other way, there is nothing Labor can do here to cause a division such that them voting on the other side shows up in my figures.  This does sometimes happen, though no evidence that it happens often has been presented.  (I had thought this was in contrast to federal parliament because of something that happened in the same-sex marriage vote, but was mistaken - see comments.)

Sunday, March 22, 2026

South Australia Postcount 2026: Finniss

FINNISS (Lib vs ALP 6.7%, Lib vs IND 0.7%)

David Basham (Lib) vs Lou Nicholson (IND) 

Nicholson wins from fourth position on primaries.  Unprecedented in state and federal elections

(Link to tallyboard thread)

The Victor Harbour/Goolwa seat of Finniss sees a similarly messy count to Kavel with four candidates with currently very similar primary votes, as I start this thread with the prepoll not yet in and sadly only 33.1% of enrolment counted.  It may be very different after prepoll and it was very different in 2022.  On the night Lou Nicholson was on 54.7% 2CP vs Basham and the doubt seemed to be would she make the final two or not.  She ended up making the final two but very poor numbers on prepolls and absents resulted in Basham winning (just) 50.7-49.3.  Now, the rematch ...

As with Kavel this is another seat where nobody has a quarter of the primary vote.  Currently One Nation's Greg Powell (23.6%) leads Basham by six votes, with Nicholson on 20.5% and Phoebe Redington (ALP) on 17.6%.  The Greens have 7.2% and the top of the ballot paper, and have recommended preferences to Nicholson.  The others are Bron Lewis (a tealish sounding independent on 4.3%), Animal Justice 1.6%, Aus Family 1.2% Fair Go 0.4%.  

South Australia Postcount 2026: Hammond (And Ngadjuri)

Hammond (Lib 5.1%)
Robert Roylance (ON) vs Simone Bailey (ALP) vs Adrian Pederick (Lib)
Roylance expected to win

The rural lower Murray seat of Hammond was one of those that stood out in pre-election modelling as being a seat on a relatively low Liberal vs ALP margin but nonetheless being apparently fertile ground for One Nation.  And this looks like this is how things have panned out.  As I start this article Simone Bailey (Labor) holds a thin lead with 27.5% over Robert Roylance (One Nation) on 27.0% with incumbent Adrian Pederick in third on 22.1%.  The most significant preference source is independent Airlie Keen on 10.4%.  Keen ran competitively in 2022 but there has been a large swing against her with the rise of One Nation.  The rest: the Greens 4.5% Legalise Cannabis 3.3% FF 1.9% Animal Justice 1.4% Lucas Hope (IND) 1.0% Aus Family 0.5% United Voice 0.4% Fair Go 0.1%.  Yes there is a candidate in this seat who actually at present has 27 votes, their presence on the ballot paper probably costing thousands of dollars in staffing costs.

South Australia Postcount 2026: Kavel

KAVEL (Retiring IND vs Lib 25.4, notional Liberal vs ALP 3.5)

Matt Schultz (IND) vs David Leach (ALP) vs Bradley Orr (Lib) - Schultz expected to win

Link back to summary page

Sunday 22nd 11:50am: I really wanted to wait til the prepolls were in before unrolling postcount threads for the messy seats, because prepolls often put scenarios to bed.  But as it's taking a while to get there on Sunday, I will start the Kavel thread before that point (and probably the Finniss one too) and if things do later simplify then this is at least a time capsule of how insane this seat looked.  

The problem with the Mt Barker / Adelaide Hills seat is simple; nobody has any votes.  The succession war for the former conservative Liberal turned indie/Speaker/Minister Dan Cregan has produced a splatter of primaries with nobody with even a quarter of the vote (I'm wondering if this is some kind of record for a mainland state seat if it persists).  With just 39.5% of enrolment counted, Labor's David Leach leads on 23.9%, Cregan's nominal successor Matt Schultz has 20.7%, Christiaan Loch of One Nation has 19.7% and the Liberals' Bradley Orr has 17.3%.  The Greens have 12.8% and the detritus (ballot clutter makes good snail food) is Family First 1.7% Animal Justice 1.6% Real Change 1.1% Australian Family 0.5% Jacob van Raalte (IND) 0.5% and Fair Go 0.2%.  

South Australia 2026: Postcount Summary, Links Hub and Basic 2CP Contests

SEATS WON ALP 34 Lib 5 ON 4 IND 4

Seats covered

Finniss (Liberal) - Liberal vs One Nation vs IND, IND has won from fourth

Kavel (IND vacancy) - Labor vs IND vs One Nation, IND stayed in top two and won easily

Hammond (Liberal) - ON win staying in top two and beating Labor on preferences

Heysen (Liberal) - Liberal vs ALP or Green, Greens narrowly missed final two with Liberal defeating Labor (Liberal probably would have won anyway)

Light (Labor) - close but Labor win

Mackillop (notional Liberal) - One Nation narrow win over Liberal

Narungga (IND) - One Nation appears to have very narrowly won subject to recount.

Morphett (Liberal) - narrow Labor win

Ngadjuri  One Nation win.  

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL  4 ALP 3 ON 2 Lib 1 Green,  ALP currently strongly leads for final seat.

South Australia 2026 Postcount: Heysen

HEYSEN (Lib 2.6%)

Josh Teague (Lib) vs Marisa Bell (Labor) and Genevieve Dawson-Scott (Green)

Teague very narrowly leads Bell, but Bell not sure of making the final two.  No direct information on Liberal vs Green flows

Link back to summary page

The first of my postcount threads focuses on the Adelaide Hills seat of Heysen, which was the Greens' biggest target seat at this election.  What do you get if you take Prahran 2014 and throw in a One Nation candidate with 14% of the vote?  Well something like whatever this is.  Because of the slow count in other threads and the relatively settled picture for the night in Heysen I've started writing this one on the night, and it will run ahead of the tally board thread.

Saturday, March 21, 2026

South Australia 2026 Live

START POSITION*: LABOR 29 LIB 14 IND 4

Labor re-elected with several seat gains.  Liberals and One Nation fighting for opposition status with Liberals currently best placed.  

Seats apparently changing (not all absolutely confirmed):

Liberal to Labor: Colton, Hartley, Unley, Morialta

IND to One Nation: Narungga

Notional Liberal to One Nation: Mackillop

Incumbents in trouble:

Liberal vs Labor: Morphett

Messy seats: 

Hammond (Liberal - exclusion order issue, Liberals currently trailing to One Nation)

Finniss (Liberal - Unclear if Nicholson makes 3CP or whether she defeats Liberal or One Nation if so)

Heysen (Liberal - Labor narrowly leads Greens for making 3CP, winner competes with Liberals for seat)

Kavel (IND - Schultz needs to make final two to win but could potentially be pushed to third behind Labor and One Nation)

Ngadjuri  (Liberal - unclear which of Liberal or One Nation is third, the other probably winning)

In doubt (not necessarily complete list)

Light (Labor) vs One Nation

Friday, March 20, 2026

South Australia 2026: Final Polls Still Have Liberals Third

Average of final week polls ALP 37.1% Liberal 17.6 One Nation 23.3 Greens 11.2 others 10.8

If polls are accurate, Labor wins election easily making several seat gains, with Liberals and One Nation probably winning a few seats each.  Independents could win a few to several seats.

The 2026 SA election has been a weird one for polls.  There's been a very decent amount for a state election, but there were four polls tightly clustered around the start of the formal campaign, Morgan a little later, then nothing til the final days.  Also while the early polls had quite a range of figures, the last-week polls by Fox&Hedgehog, YouGov and DemosAU came out with almost identical primaries.  All have Labor on 37-38%, Liberals 17-19%, and One Nation 21-23%.  Newspoll stood out a bit more with a 40 for Labor and a miserable 16 for the Liberals.  

In my previous article I outlined a way of using the 2022 Legislative Council results to roughly look at where the Liberals and One Nation might make the final two if the polling is accurate, and assuming a swing that is two-thirds proportional and one-third uniform.  I have a few more observations on this model based on the vote share average at the head of this post.  

Thursday, March 19, 2026

Legislative Council 2026: Huon

HUON (IND vs ALP 2.55%)

This is my first guide for the Tasmanian Legislative Council for this year.  An assessment of Legislative Council voting patterns has been updated and a guide to Rosevears has also finally appeared.

I expect to be doing live coverage of the Legislative Council elections on this site on election night, scheduled for Saturday May 2.  However, updates to this page in the lead-up will probably be less frequent than normal. 

The current numbers in the Council are three Liberal, three Labor, one Green and eight independents, with the independents ranging fairly evenly across the political spectrum.  Labor gives up one vote on the floor and in the committee stages because it holds the Presidency.  As the major parties frequently vote together, the Government has not had an especially difficult time of it in the upper chamber lately, most notably getting the hugely controversial Macquarie Point stadium through 9 votes to 5.  But that is not to say the Liberals get everything their own way, for instance having their legislation to wind up greyhound racing referred to an inquiry.

This year sees just two Legislative Council contests, being the first defence for independent Dean Harriss in Huon and likewise for Liberal Jo Palmer in Rosevears.  

Seat Profile

Huon (see map) includes the Huon Valley, the D'Entrecasteaux Channel, Bruny Island, part of Blackmans Bay and Huntingfield. In recent decades occupants have usually been conservative and have often had Liberal Party connections.  Past incumbents have included the Hodgman brothers Michael (Former Premier Will's father) and Peter, who won it as independents in their late 20s before going on to bigger things as Liberals.   Paul Harriss, whose LegCo career was bookended by Liberal runs, held the seat as a conservative independent for three terms from 1996, in which time nobody came close to beating him.  (Indeed in 2002 there was speculation Labor's Fran Bladel could unseat him at the height of the Jim Bacon years, but he was barely even taken to preferences.)  When Harriss senior switched to the Lower House in 2014, Peter Hodgman tried to win his old seat back for the party, and was blown away on preferences by then Huon Valley mayor Robert Armstrong.  Armstrong was a very conservative independent whose voting behaviour almost never gave the Liberal Party any cause for concern.  In 2020 Armstrong in turn was heavily defeated by Bastian Seidel (Labor), the first time Labor had won the seat since the 1940s.  However Seidel quit after less than two years (see background in 2022 edition) and Labor failed to retain Huon at the by-election, with Paul Harriss's son Dean Harriss winning the seat at his second attempt.

Huon is one of the greener Legislative Council electorates, but at the 2025 state and federal elections many of its voters switched from the big-G Greens to high profile anti-fish-farm tealish independent Peter George.  George was easily elected as an MP for Franklin in the 2025 state election.  His state election group topped the poll in its own right at traditional Greens Channel area booths of Cygnet, Woodbridge and Middleton, and the combined George group/Greens vote for the state election exceeded the vote for any other party in two thirds of the booths in Huon (the exceptions being mainly in the Huon Valley).  Overall with a rough adjustment for non-booth votes I estimate 2025 state election voting in Huon at Liberal 34.9% George group 20.9% Labor 19.7% Greens 15.1% David O'Byrne 8.4%.  In booth voting at the federal election, Labor only beat George 53.2-46.8 two-candidate preferred within Huon (while thumping the Liberals who have long given up on federal Franklin).  

Elections in Huon often see "favourite son" voting with strong local concentrations of support for candidates near where they live (the 2014 contest had a lot of this especially).

Incumbent

Dean Harriss (Facebook) is seeking a second term after filling the four-year remainder of Seidel's term.  Prior to politics Harriss was a Huonville builder and project manager and third generation A-grade cricketer.  In the last two years' voting patterns reviews I've assessed Harriss's voting pattern as centre-right on a spectrum running from Cassy O'Connor and Meg Webb to the Liberals (noting that this still placed him to the left of the ALP).  In the past four years he has voted with Labor 49% of the time and the Liberals 62% of the time, and most often votes with other conservative-leaning INDs such as Tania Rattray.  While generally joining the major parties in supporting resources industries, he also often seems to have a lot in common with the other independents generally.  Harriss is to my knowledge the only current Tasmanian state politician with Indigenous heritage.

Political disagreements aside, Harriss has not been involved in any personal controversies I am aware of in his term in the Council so far.  A notable event involving Harriss was his discovery of a large typo in the Government's interim supply bill tabled prior to the calling of the 2025 election, which required the figures to be amended - this even though Harriss had no familiarity with budget-speak prior to politics.  

Harriss, with Bec Thomas, was one of the two key independents whose votes the government needed at least one of to pass the stadium without complications.  Here Harriss's position has been a subject of a lot of commentary.  While wanting to see the AFL team which depended on the stadium go ahead, Harriss raised concerns about aspects of the approval and design process and the state of budget repair and obtained various commitments albeit not all he had asked for (his letter and the government's response were tabled and can be read here.)  (See stadium section below.)  

Challengers (5)

(Note: candidates may contact me once only to request a change to the link their name goes to, or additional links which will be added, or not, at my discretion and subject to my time.  I don't want to receive long emails or lobbying.  I will be mostly offline during mid to late April.  No other changes will be made on request except to correct clear factual errors, and I reserve the right not to correct errors caused by a candidate failing to keep their linkedin up to date. Any differences in the length of different candidate sections reflect differences in amount of available/(in my view) interesting material; candidate sections tend to be longer when candidates have past electoral form.) 

Challengers are listed in order of the timing of the first readily accessible announcement I could find.  All Huon candidates are believed to live in the electorate unless stated otherwise.  

Clare Glade-Wright (Facebook, candidacy announcement, linkedin)  is an independent candidate and the current Deputy Mayor of Kingborough.  She was elected as a Kingborough Councillor in a 2021 by-election and then led on primaries in the Deputy race in 2022 with 21.4% in a field of six, winning easily after preferences.  Glade-Wright ran for Franklin in the 2024 state election polling 1126 votes (1.6%).  Glade-Wright is a former ecotourism operator.  She is often associated with the community independents/teal movement and is endorsed by the Voices for Franklin group (not to be confused with Voices for Tasmania which was prominent in the 2024 election, though Michael Roberts who was the leader of it is her campaign agent).  More significantly I suspect, she is also endorsed by Peter George.  

Abby McKibben (Facebook, candidacy announcement, instgram, linkedin) is the endorsed Labor candidate. McKibben is the Manager of Communications, Engagement and Marketing at the Hobart City Council and is also co-owner and director of a pepper berry farm at Geeveston.  She has previously worked in marketing at Huon Acquaculture and in IT and business in Hong Kong.  McKibben's only previous political tilt known to me was a run for Huon Council in 2009 where she fairly narrowly missed out, polling 5% and finishing sixth in a race for five seats.

Michael Rowan (Facebook) is an independent candidate. He is a retired acadamic whose Doctor of Philosophy actually was in philosophy ("Hume, probability and induction" - very sound material here) and is now a frequent commentator for the Mercury, Tasmanian Times etc on education and also climate change and environmental issues.  In 2024 Rowan was prominent in debate about Tasmania's dire secondary education retention rates, appearing in panels with Saul Eslake and Lisa Denny.  He has an interest in the application of philosophy to environmental problems and a separate website on this subject. Rowan ran for Kingborough Council in 2022 polling 2%.  

Paul Gibson (Facebook) is the endorsed Greens candidate. Gibson is a Greens councillor on Huon Valley Council, who was the third candidate elected in 2018 with 7.3% of the vote, then again third elected in 2022 with 11% (I didn't say "re-elected" because the two Greens councillors actually resigned their seats in the leadup to the 2022 election in protest over the council's handling of the extremely controversial appointment of a now-departed General Manager).  Gibson also ran for Mayor in 2022 finishing second to Sally Doyle 44.3-55.7.  Gibson is an architect and builder and is also the partner of Greens' Leader Rosalie Woodruff.  

Tyler Petersen (Facebook, Instagram, linkedin) is an independent candidate.  He is currently Operations Manager at Rotor-Lift and has worked in hospitality and pubs in Tasmania and originally the USA.  He also at one stage part-owned Phat Fish Bar, a Salamanca seafood restaurant.  As far as I'm aware he has no prior political form.  His campaign material generally comes across to me as soft-left and services-focused and as likely to fit in with several of the other independents in the parliament; for instance he has networked with the electorally invincible Murchison MLC Ruth Forrest on Marinus Link.  

Not Running

The Liberal Party has shown no interest in contesting this seat, and ultimately didn't nominate. The Liberals generally only run against incumbents who annoy them a lot and it seems they would rather leave the seat to Harriss and focus on Rosevears after a somewhat embarrassing fourth place finish in 2022.  Eric Abetz in parliament recently referred to Harriss as 'the excellent local member for Huon' or similar.

Issues

Issues noted on the campaign trail will be listed here.  This list is not comprehensive or in order and issues may be added over time.  The presence of an item on the list does not necessarily mean it will sway votes, only that it is being talked about.  

1. The Stadium:  Although the contentious Macquarie Point stadium has been approved, it will continue to be talked about in particular from the perspective of inevitable cost blowouts.  Harriss and Thomas obtained commitments for their votes in favour, but will the commitments be honoured in full and how can they be enforced now that the stadium is on and nobody will want to kill it off?  Glade-Wright, who was at an early stage supportive of the stadium, posted in September that she'd changed her mind and now thought the stadium was "not sensible".  Labor voted for the stadium and the Greens voted against it.  The stadium is not a particularly big issue in Huon (part of Franklin which is overall the electorate where it gets closest to an even mix of support and opposition) but we won't get away from it on the campaign trail anyway.  

2. Rural Health: Rural health was the keystone issue of Labor's huge win in this seat in 2020 but the question is can they do it again or was it a one-off Tassie Labor case of doctor power (see Macarthur, Robertson, Bega etc).  Rural health along with childcare were highlighted by McKibben in her opening announcements.  Petersen has suggested that government interventions while welcome have suffered from being top-down.

3. Fisheries: Just to have something to talk about other than salmon all the time it's worth noting here that the entire coastline of Huon is affected by the recent ban on catching sand flathead due to overfishing. (Harriss criticised the government's original announcement of a review and said it needed to be more thorough). But salmon will also be on the menu as Huon was ground zero for Peter George's federal and state election campaigns on the issue.  The salmon industry's usage of the antibiotic florfenicol has recently been in the news, with the permit to use this antibiotic recently revoked.  The salmon issue particularly pits Glade-Wright and Gibson (as candidates raising environmental concerns about the industry, Rowan also expressed concerns in answer to a questioner on his site) against Harriss who has also criticised the government for breaching pre-election commitments to the industry.  Interestingly, McKibben has actually worked in the industry.

4. The Budget: Tasmania is in what is known technically as deep budgetary doo-dah as the state's debt continues to rise.  Outside of the stadium (which is opposed in the name of budget restraint mostly but not exclusively by people who never liked it anyway) I haven't seen a lot of debate about it in the context of Huon but with the Budget coming I expect there will be plenty.

5. Cost of living:  For years the staple of election campaigns everywhere (though I wouldn't expect the LegCo to have that much impact on it), this was starting to recede but there's nothing like $2.40 a litre for petrol to return it to number 1 on the doors.  

More issues may be added.  

Campaign

Campaign style issues and incidents may be noted here.  

1. Polarised Politics?  I evaluated the voting pattern at the 2025 Tasmanian state election as showing an increase in polarisation.  Votes moved from Labor to the Liberals, but on the other hand the non-major vote moved more to candidates with a stronger political identity than in 2024.  So it was interesting to see McKibben say that voters are actually sick of polarisation and want to hear more about services.  I doubt this line will do Harriss that much damage (he does tend to support controversial industries but then again so do Labor) but what do voters tossing up between Labor and anti-fishfarm candidates make of this?

2. Corflute Reports: Over Easter I spent time in parts of Huon travelling up and down the highway through Huonville to the far south.  The most corflutes were seen for, in order, Harriss, McKibben closely followed by Glade-Wright, then Gibson.  Good numbers of the first three at least and plenty of Glade-Wright in areas not near Kingborough.  

Prospects

Recontesting Legislative Council incumbents have an extremely high success rate.  In the last two cycles recontesting incumbents have won 19 times (mostly very easily) and lost just 3.  However, Huon in 2020 was the last case where a recontesting incumbent lost, Labor nearly won again in Huon 2022 (and usually does well in the south), and the support for green politics in the area is very high, so this defence is of some interest.  When incumbents do lose the reasons look obvious in retrospect, but because this doesn't happen often it is really hard to see it coming in advance.  (I predicted only one of these three losses, Rumney 2017).  

It seems highly likely that Harriss will make the final two, and indeed if there is no Liberal candidate in a field full of at least nominally left options I would expect him to be ahead, perhaps a lot ahead, on primaries.  Assuming that's the case the question then is what the gap is and is there a strong enough preference flow to anyone else.  In 2022 there wasn't; Labor were unable to fully erase a 12.5% three-candidate gap to Harriss on Greens preferences with only 64% reaching their candidate - the advantage for Harriss of being an independent.   I think that Harriss vs either McKibben (who seems like a stronger than average local Labor candidate) or Gibson would be the most commonly expected final two here, but we will see if that's correct.  It could be that Glade-Wright would actually be a harder opponent if she makes the final two since then the independent advantage for Harriss is lost and preferences from the Greens will flow heavily to her (Labor's I am not so sure about).  

There is a geographic oddness in that all of Harriss, Gibson and McKibben have their highest profile in the Huon Valley so we could see Glade-Wright poll well in the Kingborough booths, and it will be interesting to see where the massive anti-salmon vote along the Channel goes between Glade-Wright and the Greens; how much of the state George result is repeatable with a medium-profile candidate?  The problem for all challenger indies is that Harriss will suck up a lot of the independent-for-an-independent's-sake vote in this electorate, and I also think he's done far more than Armstrong did to avoid the dreaded "closet Liberal" tag.  

There is a fair chance the order of exclusion in this seat will not be clear on the night.  I should also note that there have been cases in the past where incumbents (including Harriss snr) retained Huon easily despite perceptions they were in for a tough fight,

At least two of the challenging campaign teams are saying they are encountering very low name recognition for the incumbent on the doors and that on that basis they think that they have a chance.  We shall see.

Saturday, March 7, 2026

Nightcliff By-Election (This May Be A Very Short Thread)

Just a quick thread on the Nightcliff by-election (NT) caused by the resignation of the Greens' Kat Macnamara. NT elections don't have many booths and at present we're waiting for the big prepoll which is most of the count, with Suki Dorras-Walker (Grn) leading Ed Smelt (ALP) by 22 votes 2CP 536-514 on the 2CP votes counted so far., with a small number counted only to primary  The big EVC could put this one to bed once it reports on primaries and 2CP... or it could be on we go.  

8:05 The primaries from the big prepoll are in and Dorras-Walker 1220 leads Smelt 1051 Paudel (CLP)  738 Scott (IND) 629.  With almost 1000 votes from Paudel and Scott to add, if the flow so far continues Labor will move to a substantial lead.

9:30 Long wait for the bomb to drop ... (apparently the count is done but has not been posted yet)

10:40 Finally up and subject to checking if the votes so far counted it appears that Labor have won as Smelt is 141 ahead after preferences.  Margins over 100 in general stick in the NT.

Sunday: If Labor's lead holds this will be another relatively rare case of a major party beating a non-major from behind on preferences. But this particular scenario (Labor beats Greens on Coalition preferences) is becoming more common.

Monday: A check count has increased Smelt's lead to 158 and confirmed that he will win. A very welcome urban gain for NT Labor after being reduced to four bush MPs in 2024.

Sunday, March 1, 2026

Tasmania Redistribution: Draft Scraps The Franklin Divide

 


The much-awaited proposal redistribution of Tasmania's federal (and by normal standards, state) electoral boundaries has been published.  I discussed the challenges facing the Redistribution Committee in my piece Clark Must Expand, But Where?  In the draft proposal, the winner is "south".

The Committee (note, it is not correct to refer to the Committee as "the AEC" as two members are AEC and two are not) has proposed one of the more radical options that was considered in the process.  Somewhat against my expectations based on the large movement of electors, they've decided that the further creep of Clark into Kingston, cutting parts further south off from their urban centre, really was unsustainable and it is now time to bite the bullet.  They have recommended the southern boundaries of Clark, Lyons and Franklin as proposed by former Clarence Mayor Doug Chipman (there was a similar proposal by current Clarence Councillor James Walker).  Clark becomes Hobart City, Kingborough and the Huon Valley, Franklin becomes Clarence, Brighton, Sorell and the lower and central east coast and Lyons becomes, well, whatever that is.  In the north they've gone for the orthodox approach of Blackstone Heights and Prospect Vale into Bass, so I don't think anybody got their exact suggestion in full.