I’m currently working on my guide for the Brisbane City Council election, as well as updating my ward map of Queensland, both for the local government election on March 19.
On the same day as that election, Queenslanders will be voting in a constitutional referendum, which would fix state elections to be held on the same date, and extend the term from three years to four.
If this referendum is successful, the only remaining elected body in Australia running on three-year terms will be the federal Parliament, and all state and territory parliaments other than Tasmania will have put in place fixed four-terms in their state constitutions.
If I read the proposed change correctly, the first scheduled fixed-term election in Queensland would take place in October 2018, which would put the three biggest states in Australia on a schedule where all three would take place within five months from October to March every four years, starting in 2018/19. As someone who appreciates some lead-time before elections, I can’t say I’m looking forward to these three big elections basically happening simultaneously on a semi-permanent basis.
UPDATE: Thanks to Edward and Michael in comments who pointed out that the amendment would not take effect until after the next election, so if the election is in 2017 then future elections will be in 2020, 2024, 2028 etc, and if it’s in 2018 they’ll be in 2021, 2025, etc. Either way Queensland elections would be significantly separated from Victoria and New South Wales in time.
Thanks to these changes, we now have reasonably predictable timelines for all non-federal elections in Australia, and we can plot them out on a timetable which I’ve included below the fold.
| 2016/2020 | 2017/2021 | 2018/2022 | 2019/2023 | |
| NSW | March | |||
| VIC | November | |||
| QLD | October | |||
| WA | March | |||
| SA | March | |||
| TAS | March | |||
| ACT | October | |||
| NT | August | |||
| TAS Leg. Council | May | May | May | May |
| NSW councils | September | |||
| VIC councils | October | |||
| QLD councils | March | |||
| WA councils | October | October | ||
| SA councils | November | |||
| TAS councils | October |
These laws all generally require the election to be held in a specific week of a specific month once every four years, with exceptions for natural disasters, a clash with a federal election, and a process whereby an early election can be triggered if the government loses support of the lower house, and no other government can be formed.
New South Wales was the first to move to fixed terms following the 1991 election. Victoria and South Australia followed in the early 2000s, and Western Australia held their first fixed-date election in March 2013.
Tasmania planned to move to fixed terms in the mid-2000s, but the legislation never passed. Despite this, Tasmania has now held its election in the same week for the last three elections, in all three cases on the same date as South Australia.
At the same time, each state has moved to consistency around when council elections are held. Some states like Victoria previously had council elections every year, with different parts of the state voting in different years, and some wards electing different councillors in different years. Tasmania until recently had elections every two years with half of each council elected at each election, and Western Australia still follows that model.
Apart from Western Australia, every state’s councils now all go to election on the same regularly scheduled date.
NSW is scheduled to go to the polls to elect councils this September, although it’s possible these elections will be delayed due to the current process of council amalgamations.
Thanks to these developments, it’s now possible to put together a timetable of when each state’s next state and local elections are due, and barring gradual changes to local government timetables or major events such as hung parliaments triggering early elections, this timetable should stand well into the future.
My reading of this report, section 1.10.6, is that the next election would be held on the existing timetable (up to 3 years with the premier setting the exact date) but would be an “extraordinary” election. The subsequent election would take place in the October of the third following year.
http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/committees/FAC/2015/I4-Intro4yearterms/I4-rpt-016-9Nov2015.pdf
So if Palaszczuk called an election for 2018, the schedule would be 2018, Oct 2021, Oct 2025 etc. If she called the next election for 2019, the schedule would be 2019, Oct 2022, Oct 2026 etc.
Hi Ben
If the Yes vote wins on March 19 – the first full fixed four year term would occur at the election after next. If Labor decide to go to the polls in any time in 2017, the following election will be on the last Saturday in October in the third calendar year AFTER that year. So the election after a 2017 election would be held on 30 October 2020 and be held every four years after that. (2017, 2020, 2024, 2028 etc.)
If Labor go to the polls in 2018 (which I think is unlikely given 31 Jan was the last election date and was seen as too early. If they go after 31 Jan they will be seen as clinging to power) the following election will be on 30 October 2021 and will be held every four years after that. (2018, 2021, 2025, 2029 etc.)
Hope that helps 🙂 It’s extremely confusing….
You can’t assume those recommendations in that report were actually recommended.
Reading the actual amendments, section 94A says “For the purposes of Chapter 2, part 2A, the last general election held before the commencement of that part is taken to have been an extraordinary general election.”
To me that sounds like the 2015 election is the extraordinary general election.
I think we are in agreement that the next election after an extraordinary general election is held in the third year after, not the fourth year after, which to me suggests the next election would be due in October 2018.
It doesn’t make sense to me that the voters would pass a fixed term amendment which wouldn’t actually fix the next election date, and would then mean the next election was less than four years away.
Are you sure about that Michael? I really don’t think that’s what the amendments say.
Ah I see, the Act doesn’t actually commence until after the next election. Okay fair enough, will correct.
I agree that it’s strange that it doesn’t start until the election after next but I suppose it’s just makes for a smooth transition, ie. a three year term followed by a three to four year term followed by fixed four-year terms.
It means that the fixed date of elections in QLD (last Sat in October) will commence at the election after next.
All of this is a big big IF though – it will be a tough vote to win – for the record though I hope that it does. Election date speculation is horrendous and three year terms (they end up being two and half years in practice) are too short.
Will this put 4 year terms for the Commonwealth back on the agenda?
Could bipartisan agreement be reached on Senate term length?
Would it involve fixed terms?
Would fixing simultaneous elections be tried again?
Would this translate into the necessary double majority in a referendum?
The essential and vital ingredient of the westminster parliamentary system is the idea that the parliament is able to exercise dominance over the executive government on matters of policy, ministerial accountability and behaviour, and budget control. In other words, government is at the mercy of the parliament for its existence. This is meant to be on-going, a permanent feature; it is not something that can happen at fixed times. If an executive government thus loses “the confidence” of the parliament it can resign or hold elections. This is fundamental and must be a permanent and continuing feature. But a consequence is that the executive government also has a the ability and right to test or even capitalise on its popularity by holding an election at a time of its choosing.
Fixed terms are not compatible with westminster parliamentary systems, in the long term. To the extent they exist, necessarily weakens the power and authority of the parliament.
Fixed terms are a feature of Presidential systems where governments are not accountable on a day by day basis for their very existence. If their budgets don’t pass or their legislation fails, they just try again. That is, a parliament can frustrate a government’s legistative program but it can’t force a government from office or the holding of new elections.
When fixed terms are advocated, it is never made clear that their adoption is a step towards implementing a presidential system.
Fixed terms empower the parliament, not the executive which can no longer call elections at pleasure to take advantage of the current electoral situation.
Fixed terms are increasingly standard in Westminster systems, including the Westminster parliament itself. There is simply no comparison between the US where an early election cannot ever happen (except in states with recall) and a fixed term Westminster parliament where an early election can only be called if no government can be formed in the assembly.
The movement to fixed terms in Australia began as a term of the agreement between the NSW government and the independents who controlled the balance of power in the legislative assembly. It was not an initiative of the executive. The same is true in Britain where the Liberal Democrats feared the Cameron government would end the Coalition and dissolve parliament at any time they gained in the polls.
Personally I’m rather fond of the Swedish rule where the government can call as many early elections as it wishes, but the new parliament only serves the remaining term of the old parliament.
Brian, all of the fixed term rules in Australia still allow for an early election if the government loses confidence, it simply deprives them of the ability to call an election whenever they please when they still have confidence.
I don’t understand why we need to pair the ability to call an early election because the Parliament is no longer functional with the ability to call one willy-nilly.
Comments are closed.