The Australian (Tony Abbott calls for Senate referendum, warns 'we are turning into Italy') reports that relevance-deprived ex-PM Tony Abbott has called for a referendum to reduce the power of the Senate to obstruct government legislation.
As outlined, the plan would allow for a deadlock between the Houses to be broken by a joint sitting of both Houses without the need for a prior double-dissolution election. It appears that this follows one of two options outlined in this 2003 discussion paper on resolving deadlocks. These options were:
1. A joint sitting can be convened after a bill has been rejected twice with three months between rejections
2. A joint sitting can be convened after every election for the full House and half the Senate, rather than requiring a double dissolution
It appears Abbott favours the first option, but this is not yet totally clear. The 2003 proposals were killed off based on a finding that they would not pass a referendum.
ELECTORAL, POLLING AND POLITICAL ANALYSIS, COMMENT AND NEWS FROM THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CLARK. THIS MACHINE KILLS BAD ELECTORAL SYSTEMS. IF USING THIS SITE ON MOBILE YOU CAN SCROLL DOWN AND CLICK "VIEW WEB VERSION" TO SEE THE SIDEBAR FULL OF GOODIES.
Saturday, January 28, 2017
Friday, January 27, 2017
Hobart Council's Leaders Have A Batman Problem
![]() |
| Not quite your average fetish-goth website |
The page you might expect to be the council's Facebook page (linked for information only, not as an endorsement) is in fact a derogatory spoof page full of fictitious material and political attacks on aldermen and run by an anonymous person who often uses the alias "Batman". Reactions to this site from its primary targets have been front page news in Hobart in the last few days. The site has become not just a commentary on Council political issues but a Council political issue in itself, one that is becoming a serious distraction.
I normally only cover council politics in the leadup to an election, but I've decided to make an exception for this one, which may be of interest to audiences of council politics nationwide as a study in social-media (mis)management. At the last election, Alderman Sue Hickey, a well-known business figure and former Liberal preselection aspirant, ran for the mayoralty against the then Lord Mayor Damon Thomas. Hickey beat Thomas, and seemed set to follow the pattern of previous long-term mayors Doone Kennedy and Rob Valentine in that if you are popular enough to wrest the office from an incumbent mayor who rubbed people up the wrong way, the job is basically yours for life.
Monday, January 16, 2017
GetUp! National And Centrelink Poll Reporting Is A Trainwreck
GetUp! ReachTEL (undecided redistributed) Coalition 37.1 ALP 35 Green 9.8 PHON 10.6
Published 2PP 54-46 to Labor
2PP by 2016 preferences 52.1 to Labor
Verdict: Go back to sleep
[Updated 24 Jan with fresh Essential polling on Centrelink issues]
My little eyes lit up when I saw in my Twitter stream that I had somehow missed the release of a national ReachTEL at about midnight last night. There has not been a national ReachTEL since before the July election. Given the relative paucity of polling data since then, and the Centrelink and ministerial "entitlements" issues currently affecting the Turnbull Government, new data concerning where the government was standing could be quite interesting.
Unfortunately it turned out that this was not a new Seven or Fairfax ReachTEL, but rather one commissioned by the lobby group GetUp! Moreover, the level of immediate publication of the poll's details has been abysmal. Rather than it being promptly released with full details either on GetUp!'s website or the ReachTEL site, what seems to have happened is that it has been sent (in part or full, who knows) to a range of media agencies who have then presented us with a partially digested dog's breakfast of the findings.
Published 2PP 54-46 to Labor
2PP by 2016 preferences 52.1 to Labor
Verdict: Go back to sleep
[Updated 24 Jan with fresh Essential polling on Centrelink issues]
My little eyes lit up when I saw in my Twitter stream that I had somehow missed the release of a national ReachTEL at about midnight last night. There has not been a national ReachTEL since before the July election. Given the relative paucity of polling data since then, and the Centrelink and ministerial "entitlements" issues currently affecting the Turnbull Government, new data concerning where the government was standing could be quite interesting.
Unfortunately it turned out that this was not a new Seven or Fairfax ReachTEL, but rather one commissioned by the lobby group GetUp! Moreover, the level of immediate publication of the poll's details has been abysmal. Rather than it being promptly released with full details either on GetUp!'s website or the ReachTEL site, what seems to have happened is that it has been sent (in part or full, who knows) to a range of media agencies who have then presented us with a partially digested dog's breakfast of the findings.
Thursday, January 12, 2017
How many federal electorates have you visited?
Scroll down to bottom of page for my current tally
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this task I set a couple of ground rules.
Firstly I imposed an age limit - anywhere I went before I turned fifteen doesn't count. 15 is the age from which my travel decisions were generally independent. Before age ten I travelled around Brisbane and up and down the eastern seaboard with my family a lot, which would add many electorates to this list, but there's no hope of me remembering everywhere I went.
Secondly, I exclude any electorate I was just passing through (or over) for travel purposes between points outside that electorate and without staying overnight in the process. Last year I spent three hours in Moscow airport because flying from Baku to Dubai via Moscow was much cheaper than flying there direct and didn't get me home any later, but that doesn't really count as having "been to Russia".
Thursday, January 5, 2017
2016 Ehrlich Awards For Wrong Predictions
It's time for the fifth annual giving of the Ehrlich Awards, which round the start of each year go to the most amusingly or staggeringly wrong predictions I observe in any field of interest relating to the previous twelve months. The Ehrlichs are named for Paul Ehrlich, the evangelist of ecological end-times who put me on a path to a lifetime of health scepticism of dark green gloomery when he not just lost a famous bet with economist Julian Simon but also gave poor excuses for the defeat. For the past editions click the Ehrlich Awards tab at the bottom, and for the ground rules see the 2012 edition.
As usual I should note my own predictive efforts are hardly perfect, but I had a pretty good year in 2016, missing by only two on the Coalition's national Reps seat tally (for example). I did wrongly predict two Reps seats in my own home state, which was embarrassing, though I did indicate those were quite uncertain.
Two areas of widespread predictive failure that will dominate these Awards were the US election and Senate reform. They weren't the only ones I noticed. For instance the late Bob Ellis made a bold bid for posthumous glory with "It is likely, though not certain, that Malcolm Turnbull will lose his seat" - Turnbull won his seat 68:32 with a trivial 1.2% swing against him. But I think the two I've mentioned are the most interesting ones and I've decided to make the US election case the dishonourable mentions, saving Senate reform for the medals.
As usual I should note my own predictive efforts are hardly perfect, but I had a pretty good year in 2016, missing by only two on the Coalition's national Reps seat tally (for example). I did wrongly predict two Reps seats in my own home state, which was embarrassing, though I did indicate those were quite uncertain.
Two areas of widespread predictive failure that will dominate these Awards were the US election and Senate reform. They weren't the only ones I noticed. For instance the late Bob Ellis made a bold bid for posthumous glory with "It is likely, though not certain, that Malcolm Turnbull will lose his seat" - Turnbull won his seat 68:32 with a trivial 1.2% swing against him. But I think the two I've mentioned are the most interesting ones and I've decided to make the US election case the dishonourable mentions, saving Senate reform for the medals.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
2016 Site Review
Another year done for a site that is now just over four years old. When I started this site I intended it just as an interim site while I explored other options, but in spite of some very minor frustrations (like difficulty in stopping spammers from even submitting comments) I've seen no compelling reason to move.
This year was a federal election year and the activity pattern for the year looks like this (the units are sessions per week):
The federal election and its post-count events basically swamp everything else. Senate reform performance reviews maintained a high level of reader interest through to mid-August and after that the rest of the year was quieter, with little spikes for the ACT and NT elections. The massive federal election spike meant that this year had about 128% more traffic than last year, and about 60% more than the previous busiest year (2014).
This year was a federal election year and the activity pattern for the year looks like this (the units are sessions per week):
The federal election and its post-count events basically swamp everything else. Senate reform performance reviews maintained a high level of reader interest through to mid-August and after that the rest of the year was quieter, with little spikes for the ACT and NT elections. The massive federal election spike meant that this year had about 128% more traffic than last year, and about 60% more than the previous busiest year (2014).
Sunday, December 18, 2016
What Chance One Nation Seats In The Tasmanian Parliament?
Recently there have been some noises about Pauline Hanson's One Nation trying to break into Tasmanian state politics at the next election. The next state election still could be 15 months away, if the parliament goes full term, and before then we'll have the WA and probably the Queensland elections, which both look like fertile ground for the resurgent party. But anywhere might be fertile ground if a recent ReachTEL in Victoria that had the party on 9.4% there is to be taken even half-seriously. One Nation's current national surge might fall in a big heap by the time Tasmanians next go to the polls, but let's suppose it doesn't. I thought it was worth a detailed look at the sort of chances the party might have, supposing that it makes a serious effort.
The case for One Nation as a threat is pretty easily stated. The party very nearly won a seat in the state at the Senate election, albeit when competing for one of twelve seats rather than one in five per electorate. Its primary vote was low (2.57%) but it received about another 2% in preferences from micro-parties that might reasonably be expected not to contest the state election. Throw in regional variation and it's easy to project One Nation above 6% in both Lyons and Braddon. Throw in that the party's national polled support is running close to double what it polled in the Senate and something like 10% in these seats starts to look pretty viable.
One Nation might appeal to some voters who are displeased with the current state government but would hate to go back to another minority government where the Greens hold the balance of power.
The case for One Nation as a threat is pretty easily stated. The party very nearly won a seat in the state at the Senate election, albeit when competing for one of twelve seats rather than one in five per electorate. Its primary vote was low (2.57%) but it received about another 2% in preferences from micro-parties that might reasonably be expected not to contest the state election. Throw in regional variation and it's easy to project One Nation above 6% in both Lyons and Braddon. Throw in that the party's national polled support is running close to double what it polled in the Senate and something like 10% in these seats starts to look pretty viable.
One Nation might appeal to some voters who are displeased with the current state government but would hate to go back to another minority government where the Greens hold the balance of power.
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Poll Roundup: 2016 Year In Review
Aggregate 52.0 to ALP (+0.1)
Labor would win an election "held now"
It's about the time of year when polling shuts down for a few weeks, so as usual I will post an annual recap. If there are any late polls then I will edit the text to add them in.
In the three weeks since the last roundup, we've seen some evidence that the anti-Coalition trend in polling has softened, but not all that much. Newspoll has come in from 53:47 for Labor to 52:48, while Essential's last three readings for Labor have been 51, 52, 53. I aggregated the Newspoll at 52.1 and the Essentials at 51.3, 52 and 53.1. There was also the Ipsos discussed in the update to the previous piece. All up I have things at 52.0 to ALP, down from 52.4 three weeks ago:
Whatever is going on in February and March is likely to shape polling much more than whatever (if anything) is causing the very small comeback that we see here.
Labor would win an election "held now"
It's about the time of year when polling shuts down for a few weeks, so as usual I will post an annual recap. If there are any late polls then I will edit the text to add them in.
In the three weeks since the last roundup, we've seen some evidence that the anti-Coalition trend in polling has softened, but not all that much. Newspoll has come in from 53:47 for Labor to 52:48, while Essential's last three readings for Labor have been 51, 52, 53. I aggregated the Newspoll at 52.1 and the Essentials at 51.3, 52 and 53.1. There was also the Ipsos discussed in the update to the previous piece. All up I have things at 52.0 to ALP, down from 52.4 three weeks ago:
Whatever is going on in February and March is likely to shape polling much more than whatever (if anything) is causing the very small comeback that we see here.
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
SA's Voter Choice Bill Could Be Better
Earlier this year, the Australian federal parliament successfully passed Senate voting reform, which abolished the Group Voting Tickets that had trashed the 2013 election, and returned control over preferences to the voters. I've had plenty to say already about how successful that was (performance review part 1, part 2, JSCEM sub (PDF) etc). However, while Group Ticket Voting has been put in the bin at federal level, hopefully to remain there for good, it remains in place in the upper houses of Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia. (For completeness, NSW fixed its system after the 1999 debacle, Tasmania has a single-member-per-seat Upper House and Queensland has no Upper House at all).
I'm not going to expend a huge amount of energy on trying to get state upper house systems reformed in states other than my own. But with South Australia the first state where a move away from GVTs is the subject of legislation since the 2016 Senate outcome, I think it's interesting to have a look at what is being proposed. In attempting to get rid of Group Ticket Voting, the SA Labor government has come up with a near-polar opposite. The proposed alternative, while still much better than keeping GVTs (as is just about anything really) is so inferior to the Senate and NSW systems that I wondered for a moment if it was built to be voted down. It appears this isn't the case, so hopefully parties in the SA Upper House (where the Government holds just eight out of 22 seats) will be able to amend the legislation to improve it. An interview with the Attorney-General in July did suggest he was open to different models provided that preference harvesting got the chop, which is commendable.
I'm not going to expend a huge amount of energy on trying to get state upper house systems reformed in states other than my own. But with South Australia the first state where a move away from GVTs is the subject of legislation since the 2016 Senate outcome, I think it's interesting to have a look at what is being proposed. In attempting to get rid of Group Ticket Voting, the SA Labor government has come up with a near-polar opposite. The proposed alternative, while still much better than keeping GVTs (as is just about anything really) is so inferior to the Senate and NSW systems that I wondered for a moment if it was built to be voted down. It appears this isn't the case, so hopefully parties in the SA Upper House (where the Government holds just eight out of 22 seats) will be able to amend the legislation to improve it. An interview with the Attorney-General in July did suggest he was open to different models provided that preference harvesting got the chop, which is commendable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


