The Australian Electoral Commission has finalised the last of its two-party preferred Labor-versus Coalition counts, and it confirms Labor has won a narrow victory on the national total of 6,216,439 (50.12 per cent) to 6,185,949 (49.88 per cent), a margin of 30,490. If distinctions to the second decimal place are what matters to you, Labor did about 0.05 per cent worse than last time due to the arbitrary fact of the Nationals finishing ahead of Wilson Tuckey in O’Connor, meaning the AEC finalised a two-party result on a Nationals-versus-Labor basis where the 2007 Liberal-versus-Labor result was more favourable to them. So while I think it reasonable to cite the published figure as the definitive national result, a slight discount should be factored in when considering the matter of the swing, which should properly be rounded to 2.5 per cent rather than 2.6 per cent.
Whatever the specifics, the result leaves quite a few people looking foolish:
Barnaby Joyce: “We’d won the two-party preferred vote by the time the independents made their decision.” (Lateline, 7/9).
Andrew Bolt: “Labor won fewer votes, fewer seats of its own and less of the two-party preferred vote.” (Herald Sun, 8/9).
Alan Jones: “Is it a healthy democracy when a party wins the majority of the two party preferred, wins the majority of the primary vote and wins more seats in the Parliament than the other party but the other party forms government?” (2GB, 8/9).
Sarah Martin: “Yesterday, Julia Gillard’s Labor Party won government despite losing the primary vote and the two-party-preferred vote, or securing a majority of seats.” (The Advertiser, 7/9).
Kerry Chikarovski: “The Coalition won the primary vote, they won the two-party preferred …” (The Drum, 7/9).
Lateline: “Labor loses two-party preferred vote” (report headline, 30/8).
Kenneth Wiltshire: “It is probable that the Coalition will win more third-party preferences.” (NB: This of course is absurd – Labor got 65 per cent of third party preferences, much as they always do – but I think we know what he’s trying to say.) (The Australian 6/9).
Lisa Wilkinson (to Wayne Swan): “Now, you won fewer primary votes, fewer two-party preferred votes and fewer seats.”
(Swan explains to her that she’s wrong.)
Wilkinson: “But in the end you got 49.9 per cent of the vote and the Opposition got 50.1.”
Swan: “No, I don’t think that’s … Lisa, that is not a final count.”
Wilkinson: “Well, that’s what the AEC is saying and that’s what Australia said at the polls.” (The Today Show, Nine Network, 9/9).
No doubt there were others.
Our troubles here began on August 30, when the AEC removed three electorates from the national total on the basis that the Labor-versus-Liberal counts there had been discontinued after election night, as it became apparent the Greens (in the case of Batman and Grayndler) or Andrew Wilkie (in the case of Denison) rather than the Liberals would face Labor at the final count. As three of the weakest seats in the land for the Liberals, these were by extension among the strongest seats for Labor in two-party terms. The resulting adjustment in Labor’s two-party vote from 50.4 per cent 50.0 per cent led to a great many uncomprehending reports of a “surge” to the Coalition, which had an added edge due to Julia Gillard’s post-election claim that Labor had, apparently, won the two-party vote. Those who wanted a clear and accurate exposition of the news had to ignore, say, The Australian, and look to an evidently more reliable source of information in Bob Brown, who explained the absence of eight electorates from the published result and correctly concluded: “If you look at the whole of Australia and you treat every seat equally, when you do that Labor’s ahead and is likely to keep that lead right the way through to the finishing pole.”
Antony Green defends journalists on the basis that they were within their rights to take an official AEC figure at face value, but I’m not so kind. Even if awareness of the missing electorates was too much to ask, those quoted above should at least have been aware that the count was incomplete. As it stands, we have a result that leaves those of us who had done the sums with exactly what we were expecting, and a lot of dopey pundits and dishonest politicians with egg on their faces.
UPDATE: Morgan has published results from a phone poll of 541 respondents conducted on Wednesday and Thursday evening which has Labor leading 52-48 on two-party preferred from primary votes of 35.5 per cent for Labor, 42.5 per cent for the Coalition and 15 per cent for the Greens. The margin of error on the poll is about 4.2 per cent.
UPDATE 2: As Peter Brent points out, the 52-48 result comes from the less reliable two-party measure based on respondent-allocated preferences – going on previous elections, which the most recent election has again vindicated as the superior method, Labor’s lead is only 50.5-49.5.
BK, yeah, under the Constitution, Commonwealth law takes precedence over Territory law. This doesn’t mean that the Feds should be able to pass legislation overturning Territory law whenever they feel like it.
I have spent a great deal of time trying to convice myself that the asylum seeker issue is not that potent and that Australia had moved on from “Hansonism’.
Sadly the more I examine the evidence the more I come to the conclusion that I am wrong and I was just engaged to wishful thinking.
1994: Exactly. If the NT wanted state rights, they shouldn’t have voted against their 1998 statehood referendum.
*sleep calls*
B
silent number?
It’s a shame that Labor opposed NT Statehood at that referendum.
Ian – I think that the amount people gather information on public affars from the net is enormously overstated.Telivision, newspapers and radio are still the major league when it comes to politics and will be for a long time to come.
The sooner the ALP government allow Green’s policies to be costed by treasury the better then. Perhaps they should have a number. If so then both major parties should have numbers on how many migrants in total should be allowed in the country, and what level of population they wish Australia to have. Their policy is to respond to the situation as we find it, rather than to define a number. If a humanitarian crisis resulted in 50,00 people on our doorstep i hope we would process them in a humane way (which is what the Greens are advocating) rather than turn them around, which is what the ALP and Liberals and seemingly you wish for.
But to describe it as hypocritical sniping is rubbish. They have every right in the world to criticise government policy. By your reckoning only the opposition has the right to criticise, because they are the the only group in the country with costed policies (as dodgy as they are). All politicians are ultimately hypocrites, it comes with the territory.
Television – it’s been a long day.
The NT statehood proposal in 1998 was flawed because it gave the NT 3 Senators and so the High Court would likely have made the NT elect 1 and 2 Senators at alternating elections because the Constitution requires that the Senators from each state be divided into nearly as practicable half.
Tom 2010
Given the NTs increasing # of crocs- having 1.5 Senators elected is quite possible 😆
gough1
Posted Sunday, September 19, 2010 at 5:48 pm | Permalink
1/ “Ron
Abolishing mandatory detention involves saving lots of money and increasing bogan paranoia.”
but then you says :
gough1
Posted Sunday, September 19, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Permalink
2/ “Ron
Mandatory detention is arguably (what arguably !) on the basis of security and health checks. Patrolling borders is common sense.”
3/ “If we limit on shore detention to security and other screening and then release into community…”
Gough1 , you’ve argued 2 opposite views within 50 minutes , is it 1/ or 2/ (as I assume 2 & 3 is same) ?
Greens do not want mandatory detention , meaning boat peoples go straight into th Community & in tax paid housing & welfare BEFORE they is assessed if a false or a true refugee , and BEFORE they is assessed if they got health issues danger to oz public or our fauna , and BEFORE they is assessed for National security
that’s open door , open borders , meaning they can under Greens then disappear into th populaton with whatever health issues they got , and also may not even be true refugees anyways , and with possible national securty risks on them as well Such a-s will hav then disappeared , horse has bolted then A Nation cheks these matters first before puttin Public , environment and th Nation at risk Labor will never legislate such a foolish and dangerous polisy
As to offshore mandatory vs onshore , offshore keeps greedy lawers out chiseling our taxes for there gain , and if offshore located in Timor saves boat peoples from sailing furthr & drowning
Ron – Whatever you or I may think about the issue it is perfectly clear that if the Australian electorate were to even get a whiff that Labor were heading down the greens “open boarders” path, they would be voted out in a landslide.
hey Psesphos, you reading this?
The ALP ought to bring out press releases and talk to fifth estate about the substance of the policies that have been obstructed by the Opposition in this term, and what was obstructed in the previous term, like the {The Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill}, when the debate on passing Oakeshott’s reforms starts. If the Coalition refuses to pass that, call the “kinder, gentler polity” bluff and work with the Independents and the Greens. The people will probably lose their respect in the Liberal Party.
Better yet, have a site that doesn’t lash out at the Liberals at all, but deconstruct all of their lies. Put an eager group of junior staffers and retired politicians on it.
“Have we got dangerous levels of debt?” “No, and here’s why” – short ecop explanation.
“Is the government illegimate?” “No, and here’s why” – 76 MPs supply and confidence blahblahblah.
Word of mouth from trusted politico-heads (every community has one) will be a good source for those who don’t watch news.
Pedro
you is rite , Labor would get slaughtered with there polisy
however what i put is humane , A-S get looked after by our Defense peoples with proper food and doctors etc whilst being cheked for th3 issues, and THEN for most of these boat peoples they gt to come to oz as refugees and get looked after undr welfare etc
i’m frustrated that MSN do not inform public what DOES happen with all A-S peoples with my 3 listed checks done by Immigration Depts , Health etc , and instead th MSN do IMPLY these 3 cheks do NOT happen and THIS THEN allows Abbotts false fear campaign stop boats lie fear to be got away with
I think the fact so many of the refugees are from Afghanistan and it therefore merges with a deep suspicion of Islam is what is really giving the issue such kick out in the marginals.
Ron @ 2012
I haven’t contradicted myself. I am not a labor or green or lib booster.
Point 1 in your post is me simply stating my opinion as to the flow on from abolishing mandatory detention.
Points 2 & 3 on the reasonableness or efficacy of the measures.
I am not advocating the purity of any particular position.
The bogan factor complicates the making of good policy and if you contend there are a lot of bogans dressed up as ordinary Australians it doesn’t make a coherent policy any easier.
I do dispute your point though that many australians simply dont want queue jumpers and are happy to take genuine refugees.
Many people I talk to – good folk – make this argument for their ‘firm’ stance on border control. When I tell them there are more asylum seekers coming by plane and most are (deemed through refusal) not legitimate but they aren’t fussed nor are they fussed by th 50,000 queue jumpers who overstay their visas and some who then get impregnated by or impregnate good aussie stock to stay here.
All those things are fair enough so there is more at play here – sure the MSM has got into their heads – but its the convict guilt about boat people destroying another culture and the particular tye of refugee coming by boat – its not all beer and skittles and a fair go unfortunately, Ron
i have a comment in moderation
🙁
basically the fear is of the reffo rorting the system
sad but true
william/moderator
i am not using the term derogatorily
merely to hilight the latent rascism that is the core of the anti AS issue
Boerwar
Loved your Bluey series during the election.
Your green baiting is unbecoming though.
The 42 million unwashed on our doorsteps is the sort of tripe the libs or Murdoch runs with.
Harse has a good job in rebutting and does not need my help but I’ll stick my nose in anyway.
The Greens dont need to stipulate a target. At present there are 13,500 places per year available to refugees which have NEVER been filled by boatpeople.
As a rule of thumb once you start to exceed that target or a higher target of say 20,000 you may need to re- assess a non (long term) mandatory detention regime.
Geography prescribes its own limits though.
Some form of regional engagement and agreement makes sense in the mid to long term.
Wait till the islands start being submerged then we have a problm and Tony, his speedos and boatphone become even more important.
gough
if say the pac island go under where do they go
New Zealand
if the indian ocenas islands go under whence do they go
India/Indonesia
the issue aint
[we will be swamped]
more where do we position ourselves?
Pacific or Indian ocean?
Gough 1 – I think the real subtext here is Islam – mainstream anglo Australia has growen comfortable with migration from confucian countries but is very concerned about Islamic migration, particularly in the form of refugees.
They fear if Australia is seen as easy destination to gain permanent residence the trickle will become a flood, and they do not want Australia to have a large Islamic minority.
I have no answer to the political problem that does not cause me some degree of discomfort, but I do know that if Labor are not seen as running a tight ship with regards to asylum seekers from Afghanistan we can kiss the next election goodbye.
Pedro
why,pray tell, did Ed husic get elected?
Islam is not the issue
racism is
🙁
Gus
Truthy’s got the pacific covered with his tinny.
I’d stick a flashing light on Gina Reinhart and drag her out about 50 km off the West Australian coast to scare of the rest (and otherwise provide a barrier which boats will have to navigate around)
In years to come much deep sea diving can be undertaken off the Reinhart
John Curtin once wrote
(from the comfort of his home in WA)
Australia straddles both the new world and the old
our destiny is bound to the new world (pacific) but our legacy remains with the old (Indian)
It is for future generations to assume the mantle of defender of the old or torchbearere of the new
In light of the AS issue we may well rue the day he spoke those words
Gough
GR is OK
she has been known to support left causes
(but I didnt tell you that)
ps twiggy is GR’s mortal enemy
goes back to lang’s claim and all
😉
pps
the kimberly rhyolite et al and the MTP imbroglio and sundry matters
will forever stick in GR’s craw
as an aside the housemaid sold the jewels for a paupers breakfast
Pedro
Agree with your post and I touched on that obliquely in my post 2017.
I am also aware of the politics of the situation. Perhaps the best solution is a reverse lib.
They feed the social conservative biases of the “battlers” and then pick their pockets through work choices and defunding public health and education and regressing tax scales.
ALP should talk tough and act humanely subject to legitimate security concerns and work towards a sensible regional solution.
I’d also start shaming the libs for not being involved in a bipartisan solution to this very “evil” and wicked” and “serious” problem
2023 – I’d like to wager a bet if his name was Mohammed Abbass and he was standing for any but a handful of seats in Sydney or Melboune he would be lucky to pull 20% of the vote.
[They feed the social conservative biases of the “battlers” and then pick their pockets through work choices and defunding public health and education and regressing tax scales.]
pls pls pls
get that message thru your network
the time is ripe to rewrite how we do things here in Oz
solidarity thru common purpose
🙂
[GusfacePosted Monday, September 20, 2010 at 12:08 am | PermalinkPedro
why,pray tell, did Ed husic get elected?
Islam is not the issue
racism is
]
Depends iof the type of Islam image – Husic looked like your average joe – it’s those who dress funny and pray funny that upset the great unwashed.
The Victorian Swimming Pool dress beat up is a perfect example – A person I know who supported Julia unfriended me on Facebook cos I pointed out politely he was being manipulated by the Hearld Scum over the issue.
Pedro
and sadly if he was black
well we know the result then
🙁
Gus
That news (that I didn’t hear on GH) is surprising.
Is Rose still around? Maybe we can show before and after pictures of Rose to see Australia’s effect on her to potential asylum seekers or treat them to Twiggy’s monlogues of the poor poor little rich boy and that would get them heaving before they left dock.
Gough1
my #2012 was in part to clarify th 3 reasons why Mandatory detention is needed , be it offshore or onshore
And then to highlite th multitude of adverse consequenses of current Greens polisy which in effect is open door , in actual practical on ground complainse
I do believe you’ve under-estimated effect of Public not knowing NO A-S reach our shores , and that ALL A-S get refugee status checks , plus health and security cheks
That in itself breeds fear because public hear Abbott stop boats and assume they either do get to our mainland or A-S do not get checked at all for anyting Public may assume that if such checks were happening then Abbott would not be saying stop th boats !
You mentioned queu jumping concern said to you , well I can well believe that seeing it does fit in and feed on with Public’s ignorance of th 3 Govt checks that is done
Such mis info also prob feeds into public thnking refugees is burgulars coming whenever they want and ripping off welfare system And then many is Muslums as pedro said so another layer built
so when you say
“its not all beer and skittles and a fair go unfortunately, Ron” , yes i do concede that , but i do feel basic problm is Abbott with MSN compliance has created a narative implying boats arrive her or that A-S boats must get no security no refugee or health checks at all….and those grounds is a natural cause of legit fear….thru mis info or non informations to public Those adds issues you and Pedro raised just make issue harder to untangle for public to know relity This whole A-S thingo should be bi part humane based
gough
KP got bondy
twiggy got bendy
🙁
AND IF THE f***** MSM HAD A MEMERY SPAN LONGER THAN 5 SECONDS WE WOULD BE FULLY CONVERSANT WITH WHO IS UP WHO, AND WHO IS PAYING THE RENT
sorry
🙁
No I don’t agree, I think a Black or Asian candidate could win a seat in provincial Queensland no problem, a muslim wouldn’t stand a snowflakes chance in hell.
Pedro
ta for the LOL
[That news (that I didn’t hear on GH) is surprising]
i rarely hearnthe hancock these days
btw
the settlement details quite succintly who got what and who sold what to who
willy was wily
pps
FMG share register also adds a tad illumination
[PEDROPosted Monday, September 20, 2010 at 12:25 am | PermalinkNo I don’t agree, I think a Black or Asian candidate could win a seat in provincial Queensland no problem, a muslim wouldn’t stand a snowflakes chance in hell.
]
Note Ken Wyatt recieved hate mail about his Aboriginality in the days after he was declared the winner in Hasluck – apparently the photos used did not highlight his Aboriginality and thus some people thought he was a Southern European.
Ron
Politically ALP cannot retreat on mandatory detention at this point in time.
It is not needed off shore. While a regional solution including off shore processing may eventuate there is no reason we cant do more on shore processing as an adjunct to christmas island.
I would just process claims quicker and get familes out into comunity shelters and also get succesful applicants to regional areas where they are needed.
It is perhaps these sort of compacts that can resolve things at a regional level – protocols where refugees in larger numbers are taken by Australia – only where asylum seekers have agreed to settle in a particular area and work for a particular industry for a period of time.
If this is succesful formally at a regional level then in future it should not be difficult to quickly process unauthorised arrival into the community once approprite checks are completed.
Frank
sad but true
🙁
I understand that a few sandgropers were trying to repeal his election
FMD
is it 2010 or 1910
Further
I hope KW has read and learnt about Neville B
Gough 1 – I don’t have an answer to this: I’m sure brighter sparks than me are trying to get their heads around it, but I do know that it is pulling traditional blue collar Labor voters for the Tories, and that some creative thinking will be required if we are not simply going to either submit and head back to Naru, or alternatively simply lose a chunk of our base vote to the Tories that we simply can’t afford to lose.
pedro
way back in the mid 30’s
it was proposed to create economic zones within Oz
in the 70’s everingham cass et al tried to revive it
in the ’90’s it was known as the multipolis
we need to embrace Oz form the inland not the coastline
gough1
Posted Monday, September 20, 2010 at 12:35 am | Permalink
Ron
“Politically ALP cannot retreat on mandatory detention at this point in time.”
no it cann’t
but it can not do so anyway because its a Govts responsible to ensure peoples get health and security checks anyway , and that is true refugees
“It is not needed off shore. While a regional solution including off shore processing may eventuate there is no reason we cant do more on shore processing as an adjunct to christmas island.”
Advantages of offshore is 1/ if regional process eg Timor then less drown , and 2/ offshore keeps legal vultures out of it , and 3/ offshore keeps MSN away from creating actual visuakl pictures of it as a fear camiagn These is reasonable polisy based reasons , and w/o which i do not object to mandatory onshore process
your no of points thereafter re speed of process , regions , compacts and cohesion i fully suport
pps
stuff from the 1938 sesquicententary shows a massive inland network in the SE basin
Qld was to extend all the way to truthy town
WA similairly to hedland
bradfield covered the east coast and prpoposed similair for WA
the ord and teh snowt are all that remains of his vision
Gough 1 – The enviromental movements position on this issue is somewhat confusing though, on the one hand they advocate a more humane approach to refugees, but on the other they prosletyse this nonsense that Australia is overpopulated, which only gives the Tories indirectly more ammo.
we are but dwarfs when it comes to vision
who here can claim to remember the last major town to be developed???
crickets…………………..