Poll Roundup: Budget Does Nothing As Per Normal

2PP Aggregate 51.1 To ALP (2022 preferences) (-0.1 since end of last week)

With One Nation adjustment 50.5 to ALP
If polls are accurate, Labor would most likely win election "held now" (probably in minority but with a significant chance of majority)

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  The sidebar (scroll down and click on "view web version" if viewing via mobile) has Paypal or PayID instructions or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was intended to be a rolling Budget week poll roundup but over the Budget poll release weekend I was in Melbourne and too busy to write much, so it will have to be a retro one instead.  I was in Melbourne for primarily non-election reasons, staying in the electorate of Deakin with trips to several surrounding electorates.  I didn't see quite as much electoral activity as I expected at this early stage, though while on a bus through Warrandyte I did happen to look out the window and see the Member for Menzies at a fair.  

It's becoming better known in media circles that the once much anticipated "budget bounce" in polling is an elusive beast that is seldom sighted outside Coalition government election years, and there was less speculation about it this year than usual.  My own aggregate has found very little movement in the post-Budget polls, and such overall movement as it has found (Labor losing 0.1% since the end of last week) is because of the way it is responding to Morgan's recent strong results for Labor.  

Again I don't propose to run through primary votes that are covered elsewhere but just to mention how my aggregate has handled the recent batch of polls for 2PP purposes:

* YouGovMRP (entirely pre-Budget) with a 2PP of 50.2 to Labor by YouGov's modified (respondent and "past elections" model).  I got 51.4 by last-election preferences, aggregated as 50.3 because of recent strong numbers for Labor in YouGov.  Note that YouGov has now increased its estimate of Greens and One Nation preferences to Labor to 80% and 33% respectively.

* Redbridge (mostly pre-Budget) 51-49 to Labor by last-election preferences.  I got 51.3 by last-election preferencess, aggregated as such.

* Morgan (partly pre-Budget) 53-47 to Labor by respondent preferences, 53.5 by last-election preferences.  I got 53.5 but my aggregate is increasingly adjusting Morgan for its recent divergence from the other polls; aggregated at 51.7

* Newspoll 51-49 to Labor by previous election preferences with a One Nation modification.  I got 51.5 by last-election preferences, aggregated as such.  

* Freshwater 49-51 (Coalition ahead) by unknown preference method.  I got 50.2 by last-election preferences, aggregated as 50.6 as Freshwater has been slightly stronger for the Coalition off the primary votes than other pollsters over time but the difference seems to be reducing.  Freshwater has been in hot water over news it is working with an astroturf group on top of being the Coalition's internal pollster, but says it has adequate measures in place to manage potential conflicts of interest.  While that may very well be the case, this highlights the need for Freshwater to be far more transparent about its polling methods and for the AFR and other media publishers to insist on this.  

* Resolve 50-50 by respondent preferences, 51-49 to Labor by last-election preferences.  I got 50.5 by last-election preferences, aggregated as 51.2 as recent Resolves have been good for Coalition (especially their previous poll which was an outlier)

* Essential 48-47 (equivalent to 50.5-49.5) to Labor by primarily respondent preferences.  I got 51.2 by last-election preferences, aggregated as 50.8 as recent Essentials have been slightly good for Labor.

* YouGov public data poll 51-49 to Labor by YouGov modified preferences.  I got 52.1 by last-election preferences, aggregated as 51.0 as recent YouGovs have been strong for Labor.

While there was a 4% spread in the headline 2PPs my aggregate therefore thought it could be mostly explained by temporary house effects and preference calculation method differences, and converted every poll to a slim Labor lead on 2022 preferences with a 1.4% range from weakest to strongest.  The lead becomes slimmer if one assumes a weakening in Labor's preference flow but it's notable that the gap between respondent and last-election preferences doesn't seem to be as large lately as early in the term, usually around half a point to a point lately.  

The Budget

The Budget didn't poll very well in Newspoll, with 22% thinking it would be good for the economy vs 32% thinking it would be bad.  The net -10 result is the fourth worst in budget Newspoll history, trailing only the three Budgets between 1991 and 1993.  On personal impact 16% said they would be better off and 35% worse off (net -19 which is actually better than most ALP Budgets).  Here it is on my increasingly over-scribbled graph showing all Budgets since 1986 (yes 1986 Simon Benson, you keep wrongly saying Newspoll Budget polling only goes back to 1999):

What we see here is voter pessimism about whether anything can be done for the economy, but not an unusual level of pessimism about personal impact, especially for a Labor budget.  This is underlined by only 38% thinking the Coalition could have done better as opposed to 47% thinking otherwise, a worse net score (-9) than the -6 last year.  As shown by William Bowe, this is not a particularly strong reading for the Opposition, around where it was in the leadup to close losses in 1990 and 2010 rather than the sorts of numbers seen before the 1996 and 2013 landslides.  

Overall in polling terms the Budget appears to be a nothingburger and its presence in the news cycle is already being swamped by Donald Trump's latest tarriff warring.   As the government's 2PP is identical to the previous edition, there's not much to add to the assessment there of what it all means, except to note the latest YouGov MRP as a voice against the idea that the Coalition will overperform for a given 2PP.  

Leaderships

The most popular (or least unpopular) leader wins federal elections about three quarters of the time so it could be bothering the Coalition that their man's ratings are going south in some of the polls.  In the latest batch we had:

* Newspoll Albanese net -9 (43-52) Dutton net -18 (37-55, his worst since before the Voice referendum), Better PM (favours incumbents) Albanese leads 49-38 (first double-digit lead since last May)

* YouGov Albanese net -6 (44-50) Dutton net -15 (38-53, term worst from this pollster and down ten points in a fortnight), Better PM Albanese leads 45-38

* Resolve Albanese net -10 (39-49) Dutton net -10 (37-47) with the two leaders having the same netsat after Dutton's netsat was 27 points better than Albanese's in their previous (outlier) poll, preferred PM Albanese leads 42-33 after being four behind last time

* Freshwater Albanese net -12 (37-49) Dutton net -10 (37-47) preferred PM Albanese leads 46-45

* Essential Albanese net -6 (41-47) Dutton net -2 (44-46)

So three of the five polls in this cycle show movements that are significantly not in the Coalition's favour.

YouGov MRP

Said YouGov MRP was an eye-opener in that it had Labor knocking on the door of a majority with a median 75 seats off a 2PP of a mere 50.2%. That's two more than my model gives it, whereas previous MRPs have often had Labor underperforming by at least three.   However, the two more are because Labor wins seats from the Greens, not because Labor does especially well in the classic seats for the given swings.  

YouGov even had Labor holding steady in Victoria (swapping Deakin for Aston), which has not been a position with many takers.  This is interesting mainly as an "ain't necesssarily so" following previous MRPs that generally had the Coalition overperforming its 2PP, but would the Coalition's underperformance vs overperformance dynamic flip that strongly and that quickly?  In Victoria this YouGov has got something like the 2022 Victorian election, where the government made a seat gain despite a minor 2PP swing because the swing against it was wasted in NW Melbourne area seats on safe margins.  In particular the latest YouGov seems to have a more acute rich seat/poor seat dynamic than previous models that tended to find that Labor was just doing badly in Victoria generally.  Anyway the PM has already shown up in Deakin in a sign that Labor either thinks they really are competitive there or at least wants to provoke the Coalition into defending it.

The model has Labor losing Aston, Bennelong, Gilmore, Robertson (bellwether status RIP), Werriwa and Lyons and gaining Deakin as well as Brisbane and Griffith from the Greens.  It also has the Coalition dropping Cowper and Wannon to the independents who ran there last time.  I have not yet had time to unpick this MRP to see which seats (if any) would change with a less generalised preference flow than YouGov is using.  Similar issues occur as with the previous model in terms of some apparently excessive One Nation support levels in particular seats, though that shouldn't amount to much on a 2PP basis.  I will be much more interested to see what we get once individual seat candidates are known (if the MRP will still function on that basis).  

Teal Seat Poll Detritus

We continue to be treated to some unconvincing and/or unsatisfactory seat poll reports at this election.  A JWS poll of Goldstein and Kooyong commissioned by an energy group was published by the Herald-Sun with its usual breathless gloating about numbers that had the resident teals behind 46-54 in the former and, um, actually ahead 51-49 in the latter.  The Goldstein numbers are obviously not right; the primaries are Liberal 44 Teal 24 Labor 21 Greens 5 Other 6; we are supposed to believe that there will be a ten point swing against Zoe Daniel on primaries but that there will be a ten-point swing to Labor in Victoria?   

Even if these numbers were plausible the respondent preferences used to get to 46-54 would be highly doubtful anyway; hardly likely Daniel would get only 69% of preferences that were over 80% Labor or Green in origin when she got 73% of preferences in 2022 when only 74% were Labor or Green then.  It would be useful to know more about what this poll did so I could comment further on what's gone wrong with this sample but as usual when you get a non-Polling Council member reported by one of the nation's most sloppy outlets good luck with that.  The Herald Sun declares JWS to be a leading pollster when JWS has hardly been seen in voting intention polling in the last decade (being best known for an issue-poll series called True Issues that only I seem to pay much attention to).   How on earth can JWS say that the state Labor government being on the nose in Victoria is driving federal voting when one of the two seats surveyed has the government doubling its vote in a seat it doesn't even have a candidate running dead in yet?

Climate 200 promptly said "hold my beer" by enabling The Australian to publish a supposed finding that they were actually ahead 54-46 in Goldstein with no further details other than that it was "uComms polling of 1225 voters in Goldstein between March 18 and 25", that Wilson was ahead on primaries and that the primary margin narrowed when initially undecided voters were prodded.  

Betting

Betting is not reliably predictive but is something I like to keep an eye on, mainly because it is always interesting to watch how many times the view that the money never lies can be wrong without its adherents learning.  Labor finally flipped into a narrow favouritism the day after my last article which has mostly lasted since with a brief flip back; currently the headline markets give Labor something in the range of a 58% to 61% chance of remaining in office.  

This has been very slow to trickle through to the seat markets, which a few days ago had changed a little in months.  But looking at them just now the first flip back to Labor has occurred (Tangney) and all the Labor seats where Labor was at longer than $3 to hold now have Labor at $3 or shorter at least somewhere, except for Aston.  If Labor continues polling reasonably I expect there will be more flips.  Also a number of expected Labor holds are firming with the Coalition pushing outside the $3 range: Eden-Monaro, Parramatta, Bruce and Shortland.  In tealsville the Coalition is now favourite to take Kooyong from Monique Ryan, which I can only think is a reaction to the sign-stealing controversy involving Ryan's husband.  However there is no movement so far in response to the latest hint that Bradfield might have been the teal seat that missed in 2022 for a reason. (Here I reference both Women's Agenda highlighting that while Boele is guilty of a double standard she's far from the only one, and also The (teals-obsessed) Australian pointing out that this is not an isolated case of weirdness of some sort or other from the electorate's "shadow MP").

Overall markets now have Labor as favourite in 68.5 seats, the Coalition 69.5, the Greens 2 and others 10 (there's a split market in Brisbane).  After adjustment for close seats my read of what the seat betting markets "think" is ALP 68.7 L-NP 68.6 Green 2.5 Others 10.2.  This is consistent with the headline numbers because in a parliament with both majors roughly equal and nowhere near a majority, the most likely result would be Labor remaining in office.  

It is hard to believe the announcement of nominations is only a week away! When that happens I will be updating my Tasmanian Reps guide as well as rolling out a Tasmanian Senate guide, and other usual pre-election features will follow.  

Update Saturday: The new Redbridge came in at 52-48 to Labor off very similar primaries to the last election.  I got it as 52.1 by last election preferences, aggregated as such, which saw a new reading of 51.3.  

Legislative Council Voting Patterns 2021-25

A strange thing happened in the LegCo on the 20th of November last year.  In debate about the Expungement of Historical Offences Amendment Bill 2024 the major parties differed in their approach to setting compensation for victims of Tasmania's infamous former anti-gay laws (which were repealed in 1997).  The Greens had successfully moved an amendment regarding compensation levels to the Government's Bill in the Assembly and the Goverment wanted to move a different amendment on that subject in the Council.  Ruth Forrest moved that the issue be referred to the Gender and Equity Committee but Labor disagreed, arguing that the Council should be able to deal with the issue itself.  In the end the referral motion passed 8-5 with Government support but three independents joining Labor.  

What is unusual about that?  Well, in the last year it was one of only two cases I could find where the ALP, the official "Opposition", had voted against the Rockliff Liberal Government on the floor of the Council. the other being an attempt by the government to adjourn a debate on Development Assessment Panels (nobody but the government wanted to adjourn it).  A year in which the Government and Opposition voted together on 90% of recorded divisions in the Council highlighted an increasing trend towards "Laborial" politics in Tasmania, something I also picked up on last year and that has been growing since 2020.  There are signs of a similar dynamic downstairs though I haven't yet assessed the voting patterns there.  When independent Kristie Johnston declared recently for the second time that she had no confidence in the government, the charge to attack her for supposedly undermining business confidence with stunt motions was led not by the Liberal Party but by Labor's Josh Willie.  

Poll Roundup: Coalition Support Slides In Pre-Budget Polling

2PP Aggregate (Last-Election Preferences) 51.1 to ALP (+1.5 in last four weeks)
With One Nation Adjustment (Recommended) 50.5 to ALP
If polls are on average accurate, Labor would almost certainly win election "held now", probably in minority

In the four weeks since my previous instalment there's been a substantial shift in national polling and Labor has recaptured the lead in both versions of my 2PP aggregate.  Although not every poll in that time has supported the shift, the trend is overall so well supported that when Morgan came out with a 54.5-45.5 to Labor outlier on Monday, the three polls later in the week did scarcely anything to peg back the gain in my aggregate that Morgan produced.  Looking at primary vote aggregates the culprit here is the Coalition primary.  Of the six polls that polled at least once both prior to 25 Feb and since 25 Feb, on average the Coalition primary is 1.6% lower since 25 Feb, though much of the gain went to independents and non-Green minor parties.  The most recent polls are carrying a heavy weighting in my aggregate because there are so many of them, and the suggestion for now is that Labor's lead is continuing to build. However it is Budget week, and these are not the best of times for trying to use a Budget to fuel electoral success as the Coalition has often done in the past. One of the reasons that I want to put this article out now (and update it with polls that come out entirely before the Budget) is to have a clear baseline for where things stood before the Budget did its thing.  (A brief refresher: Budget bounces in polls rarely happen - on average following a Budget a government goes slightly backwards).  

Western Australia 2025 Legislative Assembly Postcount

SEATS WON ALP 46 LIB 7 NAT 6 

(Liberal win in Kalamunda subject to recount)

This is a relatively brief thread to update where the WA 2025 lower house postcount is at.  Because I was playing chess all weekend and then spent a day recovering from dehydration (oh yes chess is a sport) I have been slow getting onto this, but given how slow the counting is, I've hardly missed anything! 

As I start there are 51 seats the ABC has called (42 ALP 5 Lib 4 Nat).  I don't see any reason to doubt any of these (there is some weirdness in Geraldton where the Independent Shane van Styn might be more of a threat to the Nationals had not both the Liberals and Labor recommended preferences against him).  Of the eight the ABC shows as in doubt, I am also firmly expecting Labor to win:

Fremantle (ALP vs GRN 14.4%)  Here independent Kate Hulett won the ordinary booths 51.9-48.1 vs Labor's Simone McGurk but her chances have been wrecked by absent votes (56.8 to ALP - "absent" in WA includes out of electorate prepolls) and postals (59.8 to ALP).  These are common weak spots for independents but this is an extreme case because the Liberals recommended preferences to Labor.  Hulett is 342 behind (50.8 to ALP) and isn't likely to break even on remaining postals either.  She has flagged a possible challenge, I believe over voting day issues such as booths running out of ballot papers.  [Update Friday: 491 votes the margin now.]

Western Australia 2025 Legislative Council Postcount

WA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL: 37 SEATS

EXPECTED SEATS ALP 15 LIB 10 NAT 2 GRN 4 ON 1 LCP 1 AC 1

Apparent final three seats battle: Labor (16), Moermond, Animal Justice, One Nation (2), Liberal (11), Greens (5), perhaps Sustainable Australia.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  The sidebar (scroll down and click on "view web version" if viewing via mobile) has Paypal or PayID instructions or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------

Updates (Scrolling to the top)

Wednesday 2nd: After several days of inaction a sudden dump sees the count advance to 83.14%, suggesting something around 2.3% could be BTLs which is more in line with expectations.  This has seen the Liberals jump back into 36th place ahead of Moermond but with the reservation noted by Antony Green.

Saturday 29th: Not much has changed in the last week with the count stalled at 78.12%.  This raises the question, are there more ATLs to be added to the count or is the remaining c.7.3% BTLs or other types of votes that for some reason didn't make the ATL count?

Sunday night: It's got worse for the Liberals with the ATL count jumping to 75.73% of enrolment.  The leaders (bearing in mind three seats are to be filled) are now Labor 15.721 Q, Moermond 0.467 AJP 0.455 PHON 1.401 SAP 0.375 and then the Liberals on 10.370.  The Liberals could even fall behind SPPK now on 0.359.  Of note the Greens are now on 4.172 and the Nationals 2.084.  

Saturday night:  Antony Green suggests a possible risk to Labor's 16th seat - if differences in below the line rates are as stark as in 2021, even a slight proportional rediction on Labor's quota total could drop Labor back from the 15.7s to the 15.4s which could place them at risk of losing to, for instance, three of Moermond, AJP, One Nation and a fifth Green.  (In this scenario the Liberals most likely wipe out).  We don't know whether the differences will be that extreme or whether the Greens, who were dedicated BTL voters in 2021, were less inclined to use BTL this time.  Even so in a preference race Labor would probably beat at least some of these other parties anyway.  

Saturday morning: The count is now at 69.43% of enrolment and a fairly big change has happened in the last few percent.  The Moermond group (0.469 Q) leads Animal Justice (0.445), the Liberals (10.409), One Nation (1.376) and Sustainable Australia (0.371).  What is significant here is that the Nationals have fallen back to 2.125 so the Liberals may now have difficulty overtaking anyone else on their preferences depending on the rate of exhaust.  So I think it is now competitive for the final two seats.  

Tuesday: Very little progress with the count now at 65.45%. The numbers have however changed to the extent that the Moermond group (0.471 Q) has passed the Liberals (10.456) but is also being closed in on by Animal Justice (0.437).  

Saturday morning: The count is now at 62.66% and the numbers are changing very little.  Liberals 10.503 Q, Moermond 0.475, AJP 0.431, One Nation 1.350.  Sustainable Australia (0.365) are doing the same thing they often do in NSW postcounts of sitting on a potentially vaguely competitive total but then not making further progress, so I doubt they are in this.  

Thursday: Some improvement for the Liberals today, now up to 10.512 Q with 58.93% counted.  See Tally Room here for more detail about the issues with this count.  

Wednesday:  With thanks to Ben Raue and the WAEC I've been able to have a look at the booth data and some useful things can be seen.  The data don't list booths by electorate so I haven't checked to see if any booths are missing, but I can say that there don't seem to be many booths missing, about three prepolls and a handful of regular booths.  Postals are well represented in the count at about 8.3% of total, and have so far favoured both majors at the expense of nearly every minor party (one exception is AJP).  No absents are included.  

On the less useful side, I understand that BTL votes won't be reported until the final button press, which is not at all helpful for those of us trying to project the election.  But I have noticed that in general the number of formal and informal votes combined for the Council for a given booth is a few to several percent short of the count for the Assembly, which makes me wonder if the difference is below the lines or if there are other explanations.  (There are some booths with very incomplete counts.)  Anyway this is more work than I have time for at the moment but I note it for the interest of others.

As for the ATL count, it's at 57.00% of enrolment.  The last 1.1% of count has been good for ALP, Greens and Moermond and bad for the right, with the Liberals on 10.493 and Nats on 2.207 and the Moermond group up to 0.475 and in with a shout of passing the 11th Liberal into 36th place on primaries soon.  The count has been shifting quite quickly here and could well do so more when absents come in.  For now the Liberals would be fine on Nats preferences (and would also beat AJP anyway); AJP and SAP have barely moved.  One Nation is down a bit to 1.338.  Anyway for now I've upgraded ALP 16th to expected win status.  

NB I did not have time to do a lower house thread tonight.  

-------------------------------------------------

Intro (Tuesday Night)

Tonight I am putting up a thread on the WA Legislative Council postcount and tomorrow I will try to do one on the seats in doubt downstairs.  I have been updating Fremantle on the live count thread but have not had time and energy yet to look closely at the rest.  I've decided to put the Legislative Council thread up separately as I often find that these can get quite long - though in this case I don't have a lot of detail.

As I start this post the count is at 55.9% of enrolment and the best place to view party totals based on above the line votes only appears to be here.  At this stage I don't see any doubt that Labor will win at least 15 seats, Liberals 10, Nationals 2, Greens 4, One Nation, Australian Christians and Legalise Cannabis one each.  Labor are currently on 15.783 quotas (Q) and should win a sixteenth seat.  The Liberals have been falling back and are on 10.538, and can probably count on a good flow from the Nationals' surplus should it survive (the Nats are currently on 2.232).  Unless the Liberals collapse they should win an eleventh seat, leaving a fight for the final seat between IND (Moermond Group) 0.467, Animal Justice 0.426, Sustainable Australia 0.366 and One Nation 1.346.  Parties that currently don't appear competitive are SPPK 0.328, SFFPWA 0.281 and Libertarians 0.234 but these will be quite important as preference sources to the extent that their voters bothered to preference.  The Greens, Legalise Cannabis and Australian Christians are all on more or less full quotas for their seats and at this stage won't be significant on preference flows, but that can change.  

The count at this stage includes no below the line votes.  I have seen speculation that the below the line rate would fall to 2%,  but it's not obvious to me that this is logical with the reduction of the number of BTL squares needed to 20 (even if the main reason for voting BTL is gone, not everyone would realise that).  Assuming the 2% estimate was true, for parties fighting out the apparent final spot, if the party's BTL rate was actually 4% then that would mean a party on .400 Q would instead be on about .408 Q, so it wouldn't be a massive difference.  Experience in NSW suggests that minor parties will have higher below the line rates than major parties, which could be a problem for the Liberals should they fall back into the group of parties fighting for the final seat.  The independent Moermond ticket might have an especially high BTL rate even if the candidate who changed his name to "Aussie Trump" doesn't get anything to speak of.  

The rate of above the line preferencing is an unknown.  WA voters are used to being unable to give preferences above the line in Legislative Council elections, but are also used to giving preferences above the line in Senate elections, which has driven an increase in above the line preferencing rates in NSW.  I welcome any scrutineering data on this question.  Probably as with NSW, preferences are capable of switching the winner of the final seat if it is close.  

Minor party how to vote cards will have negligible follow rates but for what it's worth neither SPPK nor SAP recommended preferences.  Libertarians recommended preferences to SFFPWA, SPPK, One Nation, Moermond, Legalise Cannabis, National and Liberal in that order.  SFFPWA recommended preferences to Libertarians, Christians, One Nation, National and Liberal.  

In the Senate it has generally been the case that the major parties, Greens and One Nation outperform everyone else on ATL preferences.  In One Nation's case they will do well on minor right preferences whether a minor right party recommends preferences to them or not.  But in the NSW LegCo Animal Justice has at times done very well on preferences because it tends to benefit from left voters being more likely to vote through.  The difficulty here is that there really aren't a lot of left-wing preferences for AJP to benefit from if they remain behind the Moermond group.  

What would be of most use here is a stronger indication of where the counted votes did and didn't come from.  This is something I have not found on the WAEC website.  Four seats that had no within-division prepoll booth are likely to be undercounted (Baldivis, Butler, Forrestfield, Kalamunda) and a couple of these are good for One Nation, but they may not be especially undercounted cf others.  If anyone sees a link to progress by district that would be handy.

Another point is that the quotas are so small!  I am used to 0.1 Q being a big lead in such counts but in this case it's only 0.26%, which can easily come and go, especially for a major party.  The Liberal vote dropped by 0.016 Q in the time it took me to write this article.  For the minor parties the vote shares tend to move around less through the count.  While I've kept Sustainable Australia in the mix for now they are in a similar position to one I've seen in NSW Legislative Council counts, in which arena they've consistently done nothing and lost.  But because the quota is so small and there are a lot of uncertainties I think we should be cautious about assuming that only the last seat is in play.

No matter what, Labor and the Greens appear set for a combined majority.  I think Labor would like AJP to take the final seat as that gives them AJP + Legalise Cannabis as a possible route to majority that doesn't need the Greens.  

  

Western Australia 2025 Live

WA 2025 - STARTING POSITION (Notional) ALP 54 Nat 3 Lib 2

LABOR RE-ELECTED, Lib/Nat on track for about 13 seats

Seats appparently changing: 

Lib/Nat gain from ALP: Churchlands (2.2%), Carine (4%), Kalamunda (15.1%), Albany (10.7%),  Geraldton (9.3%),  Nedlands (3.0%)

Labor projecting behind in own seats: Murray-Wellington (17.3%), Warren-Blackwood (2.2%)

Interesting: ALP vs IND Fremantle (I project ALP ahead)

Updates will appear below the dotted line, scrolling to the top.  Refresh every 10 mins or so for updates

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Western Australia 2025: Final Polls Predict Another Drubbing

Note for Saturday night:  I have a clash with a chess tournament on the weekend and it is not clear whether or not I will be able to do live coverage or how much, though the time difference helps. If there is live coverage it may start late.  If I can do live coverage there will be a thread that I will keep open for a few days and then aim to have a more detailed look at how the Legislative Council contest is going (if still interesting) on Monday evening or Tuesday.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This will be a pretty quick post but I should note the two polls released today re the WA state election.  The campaign opened with a 56-44 Newspoll and some degree of narrowing from there would not have been a huge surprise, but two polls out today have slightly more lopsided readings.  The two sets of numbers are in fact as good as identical:  Newspoll has 57.5-42.5 off primaries of Labor 44 Liberal 29 Nationals 5 Green 10 One Nation 3 others 9.  DemosAU has 57-43 off Labor 43 Liberal 30 Nationals 5 Greens 11 and others (which includes One Nation) 11.   So between them about a 12.5% swing back.  

Prospects for the 2025 Senate Election

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  The sidebar (scroll down and click on "view web version" if viewing via mobile) has Paypal or PayID instructions or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a general (and maths-heavy) piece giving assessments of the 2025 half-Senate election in each state and territory and overall. A detailed Senate guide for Tasmania will be released soon after the announcement of nominations for the state.  Firstly, a look at which Senate seats are up for grabs at this election and which are continuing until 2028 (barring a double dissolution):

At present Labor holds 25 of the 76 seats.  Labor can pass legislation supported by the Greens (11 seats) and any three of a crossbench of 11.  The crossbench consists of David Pocock, ex-Greens defector Lidia Thorpe, ex-Labor defector Fatima Payman, Jacqui Lambie, ex-Lambie defector Tammy Tyrrell, two One Nation Senators, Ralph Babet (UAP, which still exists for parliamentary purposes), and two ex-Coalition defectors. The ability to block enquiries, motions and disallowances in the Senate is also very important and hereLabor and the Greens combined need two votes.

As I start this article polling is pointing to a substantial two-party swing in the House of Reps to the Coalition but either side could form government, probably in minority and perhaps deeply so.

If Labor wins narrowly then it could be little changes.  On the optimistic side they might improve by one by winning two in Queensland at the expense of the LNP, but that is no sure thing (see Queensland below).  

If the Coalition wins narrowly - or at least not by more than in 2019 - then upstairs could be a problem for them.  The left won a 19-16 majority in the 2022 election state slate (I have counted Tyrrell as neither, though a reader informs me that since splitting from JLN she has voted with the Governnent a lot).  It seems very difficult for the right to win more than 18 state seats even assuming that it wins four in Queensland.  Even if the Liberals recover their ACT seat, that then only gets the right to 36 and needing at least three votes (or two and an absence) out of Lambie, Tyrrell, Thorpe and Payman.  They can need Pocock as well if he gets re-elected at their expense, and if they also don't get a four-seat set anywhere they can need all five.  There's potential here for a double dissolution to get rid of the 2022 slate and get things moving well before the end of a first Coalition term, but that's very likely to throw a few Coalition seats to the minor right, so that's not ideal either.  

Resources

For this article, I mostly treat the 2022 election as the default result, and look at how much needs to change for something else to happen.  I'll add in mentions of Senate polling if I see any later, but Senate polling at recent elections has been pretty useless, outside the 2022 ACT contest where it did correctly point to a likely Pocock win.  The problem with Senate polling is it's very difficult to replicate the experience of a voter choosing between 20-25 different parties.  Minor parties that are named in Senate polling readouts tend to get higher vote shares than they actually poll.  Senate polling also tends to be conducted by low-quality outfits.  

For the purposes of this article I assume the current Reps polling is broadly correct - if there is a big shift in the leadup to the election or a polling error then some results will be different.   In current House of Representatives polling there is about a 3% two-party swing from Labor to the Coalition, assuming a modest degree of preference-shifting since the 2022 election.   By purely last-election preferences the swing is about 2.3%, but by purely pollster-released 2PPs it's approaching 4%.  The Coalition's primary vote is clearly up and Labor's down, but polls vary wildly in estimates of the Labor primary.  The Greens seem to be roughly holding steady.  One Nation appears to be polling very strongly (running at around 7.5, up 2.5 points on 2022, and in some recent cases hitting 9%) but its vote is probably being inflated by the use of "generic ballot" polling where it is one of the options listed but other minor right parties are not.  Another source of confusion regarding where the minor parties overall are sitting is the inflated Independent vote in some polls.  Independent-style campaigns aren't significant in the Senate, Pocock excepted, so it's hard to get a read on where the other minor parties might be travelling.

The minor party polling mix has also been unsettled by the disppearance of the UAP which polled 3.5% in the 2022 Senate election.  However, following its failure to get reregistered under its name, the UAP operation has transplanted itself to Trumpet of Patriots (a pre-existing rebadge of the Australian Federation Party which polled abysmally in 2022, but likely to behave more like the UAP in spending terms and garish yellow ads).  Other Senate lineup changes include the registration of the new Family First, which has polled 1.3% in NSW, 2% in Victoria and 3% in South Australia in state upper house elections, and the registration of Fatima Payman's Australia's Voice, an unknown quantity.  Eleven parties that ran in 2022 have been deregistered without being replaced, but in general these did not poll much.

A general rule in the Senate is that seats are mainly determined by primary votes.  Preferences are important around the edges but only change who gets elected about once in each half-Senate cycle.  The Coalition, Labor, Greens and One Nation tend to be the best performers on preferences (not necessarily in that order) and tend to outperform or overtake all other parties, except that David Pocock gets very strong preference flows in the ACT.   2022 saw an increase in preference flows between One Nation, the then UAP (now Trumpet of Patriots) and the then Liberal Democrats (now Libertarians) off the back of COVID-based discontents with the major parties and campaigns to increase preference flows between the mostly spuriously so-called "freedom friendly minor parties" (FFMPs).  How to vote cards have little influence, outside of those for major parties in the rare cases where a major party candidate with a substantial remainder gets excluded.   If you see a Senate model that uses how to vote cards as a major input, ignore it.  

At the moment I'm assuming Australia's Voice won't be competitive and that Trumpet of Patriots at least will not do better than the UAP did in 2022 - should evidence emerge otherwise, I will adjust accordingly.   

Below I mainly give seat totals in terms of quotas (Q).  A quota is effectively one-seventh of the total vote in each state (c. 14.29%) and one-third in the territories.  Through the article I talk a lot about possible swings between two parties, but this need not be an even gain and loss from one party to another.  For instance, a 3% swing from Labor to Coalition does not necessarily mean Labor primary down 3% and Coalition up 3% - it could be Labor down 2 and Coalition up 4, for example.  And it does not necessarily mean voters are moving between those two parties, just that those are changes in the totals.  

New South Wales

SEATS VACATED: 3 COALITION 2 LABOR 1 GREEN

2022 RESULT: 3 COALITION 2 LABOR 1 GREEN

 The 2022 NSW leaders were as follows:

Coalition (L-NP) 2.571 Q

ALP 2.131

Greens 0.802

One Nation 0.289

UAP 0.237

Legalise Cannabis (LCP) 0.182

Animal Justice (AJP) 0.151

LDP 0.148

Early in the count it had looked like One Nation might be a threat to the Coalition but as the Coalition's position strengthened I called the seat a week after election day.  

In the preference distribution, surpluses and exclusions from the bottom occurred until this position was reached in the race for the final two seats (after the first two for the minors):

Greens 0.983 Q

L-NP 0.691

ON 0.391

LCP 0.307

UAP 0.302

ALP 0.245

The Labor preferences here put the Greens over quota.  Surpluses and exclusions continued with the Coalition eventually beating One Nation .861 Q to .694 Q, or a margin of about 2.4%.  

NSW is the most populous state, generally falls close to the national average and tends to hug close to the national swing.  The Coalition vs One Nation contest for the final seat in 2022 was the only thing that was even remotely close and here it is notable that One Nation closed the gap by .115 Q (1.6%) on preferences.  It's plausible One Nation will make gains here considering their polling, but the Coalition is making gains in polling too, so the most likely result appears to be the status quo.

One Nation might also not do so well here because of internal tensions - in 2022 the party had Mark Latham as a high-profile state MLC but since then all the state One Nation MLCs have quit.  The Libertarians will be led by the former MP for Hughes and Azerbaijan Craig Kelly who is at least prominent (even if he has now been a member of four parties in four years).  However the party tends to do poorly on preferences and would need a very good primary vote to reach and stay at the head of the minor right pack.

Outlook: Most likely 3 Coalition 2 Labor 1 Green

Victoria

SEATS VACATED: 2 COALITION 2 LABOR 1 GREEN 1 IND (ELECTED AS LIB)

2022 RESULT: 2 COALITION 2 LABOR 1 GREEN 1 UAP (GREEN SINCE DEFECTED TO IND)

The 2022 Victorian Senate count was the only one where a scenario that had looked plausible in a few mainland states happened: neither major party got much in the race for the last seat, and a minor right party snuck through the middle.  Sadly it was the UAP, whose Ralph Babet was elected fair and square  and was the primary vote leader for the last seat despite all the rubbish people spout about his below the line vote, preferences or whatever.  That link gives the key points of the count; for this one I thought I'd do it in a table.

The table is a simplified version of the count and doesn't show the two quotas for which the Coalition and Labor secured seats at the start of the cutup, nor the Greens who polled a primary vote of 0.97Q and crossed on minor exclusions.  The key points are on the right, where:

* Labor outlasts Legalise Cannabis by 0.046 Q to be the remaining left party seeking a fourth left seat (I treat Legalise Cannabis as left though this is not straightforward - they also have rural appeal to One Nation voter types and some members will have more right-compatible views on vaccines or climate change.)  

* The UAP is ahead of One Nation by just 0.034 Q (about half a percent) in the race to be the remaining minor right party seeking to beat the Coalition.  (If the UAP is excluded at this point, One Nation wins but less convincingly as they are not on the Coalition how to vote card)

* The UAP outlasts the Coalition by 0.136 Q (just under 2%) and then beats Labor by .149 Q (2.15%)

Victoria appears to be Labor's worst state in swing terms, with the Bludger Track aggregate putting it down 4% there, which may even be conservative.  The federal party seems to be being dragged by the state party, which is polling terribly, though it did manage to barely hang on in the difficult Werribee by-election.  It's likely Labor will fall below two quotas here, or even if they don't that they at least will crash out early.  This will most likely leave Legalise Cannabis as the left contender for a fourth left seat that has been rendered unlikely by Labor's poor performance.  (Legalise Cannabis are running former Sex/Reason state MLC Fiona Patten as their candidate - Patten is very media-savvy and will play well in much of the Melbourne metro, perhaps less well rurally).

What appears quite likely in Victoria is that a swing between the major parties lifts the Coalition ticket so far ahead of UAP, ON, Libertarians etc that none of those can catch them.  The Coalition does on the above figures need about a 1.6% gain relative to whichever of those parties is on top of the pile this time around but that at present that shouldn't be difficult.  If there is a minor right seat, One Nation seem the best chance but Libertarians, Family First and Trumpet of Patriots will also be vying for it should they disappoint.

Because neither major party had much left over, the 2022 figures suggest Legalise Cannabis could be competitive for a seat if it could roughly double its vote to about 6%, which isn't unthinkable with the party having gained a foothold in the Legislative Council.  But with Labor likely to be short of two quotas, Legalise Cannabis could be starved of enough preference sources.  

The view that voters are giving both majors the thumbs down in Victoria gained strength following the Werribee by-election, but this was in fact a misreading of what had occurred.  Although primary votes splattered in a large field there, there was not a strong thorough anti-majors sentiment and both major parties drew away from the Independent Paul Hopper in the preference throw.  For this reason I would not take Werribee as evidence against a swing to Coalition in the Senate.

Outlook: Probably 3 Coalition 2 Labor 1 Green though a minor right seat is possible

Queensland

SEATS VACATED: 2 LNP 1 ALP 1 GREEN 1 ON 1 GRPF (ELECTED AS L-NP)

2022 RESULT: 2 LNP 2 ALP 1 GREEN 1 ON

In 2019 Labor had a terrible result in the Queensland Senate race, winning only one seat as the Coalition elected three with One Nation winning as well.  In 2022 they won two again, but it was closer than the early media suggested.

Election-night returns suggested Legalise Cannabis were in the mix for a seat and that Pauline Hanson was likely to lose, but these were based on an unrepresentative vote count and also a lack of appreciation of the strength of One Nation's preference flows. By the time the primary count was finished, One Nation were obviously ahead.  

Leading primaries were:

LNP 2.467 Q

Labor 1.729

Greens 0.867

ON 0.518

LCP 0.376

UAP 0.293

LDP 0.175

After the exclusions of everybody below Legalise Cannabis, the Greens finally crossed quota and the quotas in the race for the final two seats were as follows:

ON 0.876

ALP 0.853

LNP 0.646

LCP 0.536

One Nation did almost as well off the leafy preferences as Labor did and the count finished with One Nation (Hanson) 0.996 Q Anthony Chisholm (Labor) 0.974 and Amanda Stoker (LNP) missing out on .720.  This means that Stoker lost by 3.6%.   The interesting thing here is that One Nation did so well on minor right preferences (othat they gained a whopping 3.3% on Labor during the count and overtook them.  

Projections of the Queensland Senate race that I have seen have normally been along the lines that nothing is happening in Queensland federal polling therefore nothing will change and the result can be locked away at another 2-2-1-1. However people seem to have forgotten that Queensland federal polling is often unreliable, most notably in 2019 when a swing to Labor was expected then an hour or two into election night we were all going "Blair?  Is that actually a seat?"  So there is room for something else to happen, which would most likely be Labor having another shocker and again missing out on a second seat.  This only needs a 1.8% swing but with voters having taken out their frustrations on the former Palaszcuk/Miles government it may be this is less likely now.

The 5.4% vote for Legalise Cannabis in 2022 was impressive but they would need to grow that to at least 9% and perhaps more likely 10% to win. 

Gerard Rennick is running at the head of an eponymous party Gerard Rennick People First after being disendorsed.  Rennick has a degree of minor right following online but is fishing in the same pool as One Nation and TOP and is probably not well enough known to attract a competitive vote in this mix.  

Outlook: Probably 2 LNP 2 Labor 1 Green 1 ON but second Labor seat could be at risk to LNP

Western Australia

SEATS VACATED: 3 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN

2022 RESULT: 3 ALP 2 LIB 1 GREEN (1 ALP SINCE DEFECTED TO AUS VOICE)

Labor's strength in Western Australia in 2022 resulted in a 4-2 left-right result though their third Senator Fatima Payman has since quit the party and formed her own.  These were the leaders in 2022:

ALP 2.419 Q

Lib 2.217

Green 0.998

ON 0.244

LCP 0.237

Aus Christians 0.152

UAP 0.149

LDP 0.135

WA Party 0.122

This quickly elected 2 Labor, 2 Liberal and 1 Green leaving the question of whether anyone could catch Labor for the final seat.  With four left quotas were:

ALP 0.595

ON 0.526

Lib 0.404

LCP 0.379

After excluding Legalise Cannabis:

ALP 0.712

ON 0.611

Lib 0.456

After excluding Liberal, Labor (Payman) won 0.853 to One Nation 0.745, a margin of about 1.5%, meaning that a 2PP swing of less than 1% woild overturn it.  The One Nation to Liberal margin was 2.2%.

Although Labor had a remarkable 10.55% two-party swing to them in the Reps in 2022, generally Labor seems to be travelling OK in WA federal polling with the swing back looking like being only 2-3% (which is quite impressive if true).  That is, all else being equal, still enough to drop the seat to either One Nation or the Liberal ticket, but at the moment it is not clear who, and if Labor do slightly better than the current WA polls they could even win three again (seems rather improbable though as the WA polling is already at the better end of what seems credible).  The surge in the Liberal primary is enough at the moment to put them past One Nation - except that One Nation are also surging, although how much of that is real and how much is generic ballot polling inflating their vote isn't clear.

We should get a much better idea of how the One Nation brand is travelling in WA on the weekend and I'll amend this assessment if necessary then.  The other possibility here is Legalise Cannabis who might now have a more realistic path in WA than Victoria.  A plausible two-party swing of just over 1.5% puts Legalise Cannabis over Labor - this can be achieved with a LCP vote around 5%.  In 2022 the Liberals would have received more Labor preferences than Legalise Cannabis but that is because Legalise Cannabis were not on Labor's how to vote card.  Being listed on Labor's card for WA could in the very best case scenario be worth up to 0.85% for the party on preferences and could mean that 5% actually wins.  The dream scenario for LCP here is to just get over Labor then have One Nation excluded in a case where One Nation does not list the Coalition on their card.  A lot has to go right here and again we will also get a better idea of how LCP are travelling in WA on the weekend.

Outlook: 2 Labor 2 Liberal 1 Green with final seat probably either One Nation or Liberal, but possibly Legalise Cannabis

South Australia

SEATS VACATED: 3 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN

2022 RESULT: 3 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN

In SA in 2022 the Liberals had a small primary vote lead:

Lib 2.375 Q

ALP 2.259

Green 0.837

ON 0.281

UAP 0.212

Nick Xenophon 0.209

LCP 0.163

LDP 0.154

Rex Patrick Team 0.145

AJP 0.123

Former Senator Nick Xenophon had a blank above the line box, which results in miserable preference flows.  After his exclusion things stood at

Lib 0.628

Labor 0.518

ON 0.426

UAP 0.311

Now the UAP preferences put One Nation over Labor

Lib 0.668

ON 0.606

Labor 0.557

And the Labor preferences saw Liddle (Liberal) beat One Nation 0.868 Q to 0.668, a margin of 2.87%.

One would think from national polling that nothing is changing here; the Liberals would at worst hold station and again win three.  But at state level the Liberal brand is in terrible condition; the state party is being smashed in polling and has dropped two seats in by-elections to the government (the only previous real case of this happening coming in World War 2).  It is not just that it has lost these seats but also that it was slaughtered in the by-election for Black with a 12.6% swing.  Conversely One Nation have been polling fantastically in federal breakdowns in the state and their lone South Australian MLC Sarah Game, elected as a total unknown, has impressed.  Game's mother, Jennifer Game, is the lead SA candidate.  

The Liberal Senate preselection has also attracted criticism with Alex Antic, a Trumpy hard-righter who often votes with One Nation, Rennick and Babet, topping the ticket ahead of Anne Ruston.  While the Liberals could still get three (federal politics is not state politics after all) a straight read of the Bludgertrack Reps swings gives the seat to One Nation.  It's also not unthinkable that there could be a swing to Labor in South Australia so I wouldn't completely rule out the left bagging a four against the run of play (which would be a huge problem for the Coalition if it happened).  The swing wouldn't need to be large, around the 2% margin flowing through to Senate will do it.

Also of interest here is the performance of Family First.  The previous incarnation of this party often did well in South Australia and the new one wasn't too far behind One Nation so if One Nation implodes (as it does somewhere around the country on a regular basis) this party should also be considered in the minor right mix in the event that a seat is available.

Outlook: 2 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green, last seat One Nation seems a good chance, or possibly Liberal or Labor.

Tasmania

SEATS VACATED: 2 LIB 2 ALP 1 GRN 1 JLN

2022 RESULT: 2 LIB 2 ALP 1 GRN 1 JLN (JLN Senator defected to form own party)

It's a struggle to get excited about my home state.  The 2022 primaries were:

Lib 2.241 Q

ALP 1.893

Green 1.084

Jacqui Lambie Network 0.605

ON 0.271

LCP 0.212

LDP 0.136

UAP 0.114

Local Party 0.101

The Liberal vote was slightly inflated by a below the line campaign for then Senator Eric Abetz, who lost his seat after being demoted to third (he has since been elected to state parliament).  13.6% of Abetz's BTLs or 0.04 quotas leaked at 2 so were not really Liberal-ticket votes.

The gap between the top four is so wide here that a very great deal has to change for a different result.  After preferences JLN defeated One Nation 1.045 Q to 0.626 Q with some Liberal votes remaining that also favoured JLN, so they were running away with it.  For JLN to lose to any of the micro-parties they would have to lose at least half their primary vote, probably more.  The minor parties have basically no campaign presence in the state at present (Legalise Cannabis has named a candidate, that's about all).  

I suppose it is worth considering the possibility of the Liberals taking Lambie's seat but unless Lambie's vote goes down a lot, this would require a primary vote swing to the Liberals of something like 5%, and even that might not be enough as Lambie will tend to flog them on preferences.

The JLN outfit is looking and sounding battle-scarred.  In the past few years Lambie has seen Tyrrell defect, then three MPs have won election under her name to the state parliament, only for two of those to also defect.  However, support for JLN in state polling is still strong; JLN voters are often low-information types who probably don't care that the concept is a mess.  JLN billboards are prominent around Hobart though I've heard the candidate this time (Lambie herself) is not working the electorate as hard as in previous elections.  She did, interestingly, come out on the side of the Greens over Macquarie Harbour salmon management (a touchy point in parts of her best seat of Braddon), albeit in an amusingly sweary fashion.

Outlook: Probably 2 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 JLN

ACT

SEATS VACATED AND 2022 RESULT: 1 LABOR 1 POCOCK

The ACT was the only Senate contest in 2022 where a candidate who was trailing on primary quotas won.  The leaders in the primary count were (note: a quota is a third of the total in the ACT)

Labor 1.001 Q

Liberal 0.744

Pocock 0.635

Greens 0.309

Kim 4 Canberra 0.133

UAP 0.064

LCP 0.048

The Liberals had a lead of 3.6% but with the ACT having a very low exhaust rate, with 20.6% available in preferences and with Labor helpfully getting elected by themselves they were obviously going to get smashed here.  Pocock ended up winning with 1.090 quotas to Seselja (Liberal)'s 0.857 quotas, a margin of 7.77%.  

Pocock has had a successful first term and the Liberals have some issues going into the campaign.  Their intention to cut public service jobs looks like an obvious millstone and their candidate Jacob Vadakkedathu has faced branch stacking accusations that resulted in 40% of preselectors voting for a failed attempt to reopen preselections.  

Nonetheless early in the term there was speculation that Pocock might be such a runaway success that he might take enough votes from Labor for the seats to split Pocock-Liberal instead of Labor-Pocock.  Is this a real risk?

The best way to get a handle on this is via a Senate 3CP.  This is where the 2022 Senate preferences go between Labor, Liberal and Pocock:  

Labor 40.97%

Pocock 31.71%

Liberal 27.33%

This doesn't function the same way as a Reps 3CP.  In a Reps 3CP if you are third you lose, but in a Senate 3CP if the leader has more than 33.33%, then those votes are available to the other two.  In this case votes that didn't need to go to Labor because they had already won boosted Pocock by 3.39% out of 7.64%.  

If the Liberals get to 33.33% they win, but that requires them to take 6% from the other two.  They can also win by being ahead of Pocock by enough that he cannot beat them on the remainder, but if the Labor vote stays where it is that requires a 3.89% swing from Pocock to Liberal.

The scenario of Labor losing by fallinng below the Liberals requires at minimum a 6.82% swing from Labor to Liberal at the 3CP stage.  That could in theory be more a swing against Labor than to Liberal (eg Labor drops 11 points and the Liberals gain 3) but in that case votes are going to Pocock that can put him over quota and save Labor on preferences.  That suggests the swing required is even higher.  And in an election that has more of the inner city/outer city vibe that will benefit the broad left in most of the ACT that swing seems unlikely.  I'd probably not mind seeing the conclusion that Pocock will retain blessed by a reliable poll (the ACT being one of the few places where Senate polling even might work) but overall it's hard to see either path for the Liberals working.

Outlook: Probably 1 Labor and Pocock - in some order

Northern Territory

SEATS VACATED AND 2022 RESULT: 1 CLP 1 LABOR

The NT Senate would have been much more interesting this time around had it been expanded to four seats; that didn't happen.  The 2022 leaders were

Labor 0.989 Q

Country Liberals (CLP) 0.951

Greens 0.368

Liberal Democrats 0.278

LCP 0.187

Great Australians 0.132

Great Australians got a lot of the minor right vote in the absence of One Nation and UAP.  The high Liberal Democrat vote was because dumped CLP Senator Sam McMahon ran with them.  

There shouldn't be anything to see here.  The CLP should get quota, maybe easily.  Labor probably won't but will be way ahead of the Greens as the major competition.  Just in case something goes really pearshape for Labor (like it did in the NT election), the 2022 3CP was

Liberal 42.3%

Labor 38.4%

Greens 19.3%

So this needs a 9.6% swing from Labor to Green just to put the Greens into second on the 3CP, but even then the Greens still lose as the CLP preferences give Labor another circa 3.8% vs the Greens.  Not happening.

Outlook: 1 CLP 1 Labor

Lyons Recount 2025

LYONS Hare-Clark vacancy for seat held by Rebecca White (ALP)
Cause of vacancy: resignation to run for federal parliament
Labor will win the recount, winnning candidate to be determined.

Casey Farrell vs Ben Dudman with Farrell leading into final exclusion.

------------------------------------------------------------

Updates to be posted in this section, scrolling to the top

COUNTING WILL CONTINUE TONIGHT UNTIL A RESULT IS KNOWN

7:40 FINAL - CASEY FARRELL WINS BY 242 VOTES.  Farrell made a small further gain on the last throw.