Senate – Queensland – Australia 2013

Incumbent Senators

Term expires 2014 Term expires 2017
Ron Boswell (LNP)George Brandis (LNP)
Sue Boyce (LNP)Barnaby Joyce (LNP)
Mark Furner (ALP)Joe Ludwig (ALP)
John Hogg (ALP)Jan McLucas (ALP)
Ian Macdonald (LNP)Brett Mason (LNP)
Claire Moore (ALP) Larissa Waters (GRN)

History
For the vast majority of the time since proportional representation was introduced, Queensland has had a majority of Senators from right-wing parties such as the Liberals, Nationals, DLP and One Nation. Indeed, the ALP maintained a consistent number of senators for most of this period, holding four Queensland senators continuously from 1951 to 1984. They held a fifth seat from the 1984 election until 1990, when they fell back to four seats. They gained a fifth again in 2007.

From 1951 until the 1964 election, Queensland had four ALP senators, four Liberal senators and two Country Party senators. The 1964 election saw the Liberals lose a seat to the Democratic Labor Party candidate (and ex-Premier) Vince Gair. They won a second seat in 1967, which resulted in the Liberals, Country Party and DLP each holding two senate seats in Queensland, alongside four ALP senators. The 1970 election maintained the status quo.

The 1974 double dissolution saw the DLP lose both their seats, with the Liberal and Country parties each winning a third seat. The Queensland delegation remained steady at four ALP and three for each of the coalition parties until 1980, when the National Country Party lost one of their three seats to the Democrats. The 1980 election was the first time that the Coalition parties ran separate Senate tickets in Queensland, after running jointly for the previous thirty years. The 1983 double dissolution saw the Nationals win back a third seat at the expense of the Liberals, who by this point in time had begun to run on separate tickets. Throughout the 1980s the Nationals held more Senate seats in Queensland than the Liberals.

The 1984 election saw an enlargement in the Senate, with the ALP winning a fifth Senate seat for the first time and the Nationals electing a fourth senator. This balance of five ALP, four Nationals, two Liberals and a Democrat was maintained at the 1987 double dissolution election.

The 1990 election saw the Liberals overtake the Nationals. After the 1987 double dissolution the Senate had decided that two ALP, two Liberal and two National senators would have six-year terms, despite the fact that the Liberals had won half the number of seats of either other party. This gave them a boost in 1990, as they won two seats to the Nationals one, while not having any incumbents up for election. In practice this meant that the Liberals won two seats, one off the ALP and the other off the Nationals. The ALP was reduced back to four seats, and the Coalition again gained a majority of Queensland senate seats.

The 1993 election saw the Democrats win a second Queensland seat, at the expense of the Nationals. This produced a result of four each for the ALP and Liberal Party and two each for the Nationals and Democrats.

The 1993 election result was maintained in 1996, but in 1998 the Nationals lost one of their two seats to One Nation. In 2001 there were again no changes, and in 2004 the Nationals and Liberals each gained a seat, with One Nation losing their seat and one of the two Democrats being defeated. The 2007 election saw the defeat of the last remaining Democrat, producing an overall result of five senators each for the Labor and Liberal parties and two Nationals senators.

In 2010, the LNP went in to the election with four incumbent senators, and retained three of those seats. Labor maintained their two seats, and the Greens’ Larissa Waters won the first ever Greens Senate seat in Queensland.

Number of Queensland Senators from each party after each Senate election, 1951-2010. Click to view interactive chart.
Number of Queensland Senators from each party after each Senate election, 1951-2010. Click to view interactive chart.

2010 result

GroupVotes%SwingQuota
Liberal National Party1,015,06241.42+1.022.8996
Labor720,18229.39-9.812.0572
The Greens312,80412.76+5.440.8935
Family First83,7863.42+1.220.2393
Australian Sex Party63,5862.59+2.590.1816
Liberal Democrats55,2222.25+2.090.1577
Fishing and Lifestyle48,5471.98+1.190.1387
Shooters and Fishers42,6691.74+1.210.1219
One Nation22,3530.91+0.740.0639
Australian Democrats19,0190.78-1.100.0543
Others67,2812.760.1922

The ALP and the Liberal National Party each won two seats on primary votes.

We enter the race when there are nine candidates left:

  • Larissa Waters (GRN) – 0.9624 quotas
  • Brett Mason (LNP) – 0.9077
  • Wendy Francis (FF) – 0.2839
  • Desiree Gibson (SXP) – 0.1848
  • Jim Fryar (LDP) – 0.1595
  • Keith Douglas (AFLP) – 0.1489
  • Andrew Peter (SHO) – 0.1237
  • Rod Evans (ON) – 0.1235
  • Paul Stevenson (DEM) – 0.1046

The exclusion of the Democrat pushed Waters just over the line, and elected the first Green to the Senate from Queensland. The other benificiaries were the LNP and the Liberal Democrats. Waters had a .0186 surplus over the quota, and after the distribution of this small surplus the race stood as follows:

  • Mason (LNP) – 0.9262
  • Francis (FF) – 0.2844
  • Gibson (SXP) – 0.1958
  • Fryar (LDP) – 0.1825
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.1619
  • Evans (ON) – 0.1242
  • Peter (SHO) 0.1240

At this point, the LNP is far out in front, but without any favourable preferences was vulnerable to one out of the bunch of small right-wing parties pushing into the lead. The elimination of the Shooters candidate pushed the Fishing and Lifestyle candidate from fifth to third place.

  • Mason (LNP) – 0.9273
  • Francis (FF) – 0.2858
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.2795
  • Gibson (SXP) – 0.1970
  • Fryar (LDP) – 0.1827
  • Evans (ON) 0.1265

The elimination of the One Nation candidate pushed the Fishing and Lifestyle candidate out ahead of the other minor parties. Three quarters of One Nation’s preferences went to the AFLP, with most of the remainder going to Family First.

  • Mason (LNP) – 0.9287
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.3692
  • Francis (FF) – 0.3194
  • Gibson (SXP) – 0.1982
  • Fryar (LDP) – 0.1833

Almost all of Fryar’s preferences flowed to the Sex Party, pushing them ahead.

  • Mason (LNP) – 0.9304
  • Gibson (SXP) – 0.3774
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.3702
  • Francis (FF) – 0.3203

The elimination of Wendy Francis pushed Douglas out to almost two-thirds of a quota.

  • Mason (LNP) – 0.9750
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.6426
  • Gibson (SXP) – 0.3801

At this point Mason was very close to a quota at this point, and only a very strong preference flow from the Sex Party would have elected the Fishing and Lifestyle candidate. While most of the preferences that the Sex Party had built up through the count flowed to Douglas, the Sex Party’s primary votes flowed to the LNP, and elected Mason.

  • Mason (LNP) – 1.1573
  • Douglas (AFLP) – 0.8335
Final rounds of Queensland Senate preference distribution. Click to view interactive chart.
Final rounds of Queensland Senate preference distribution. Click to view interactive chart.

Candidates
The Liberal National Party is running:

  1. Ian Macdonald, sitting Senator
  2. James McGrath
  3. Matthew Canavan
  4. David Goodwin
  5. Theresa Craig
  6. Amanda Stoker

The Labor Party is running:

  1. Chris Ketter
  2. Claire Moore, sitting Senator
  3. Mark Furner, sitting Senator

The Greens are standing Adam Stone. The Pirate Party are running Melanie Thomas. Katter’s Australian Party is running James Blundell. The Palmer United Party is running Glenn Lazarus. Greg Rudd, brother of the former Prime Minister, is running as an independent. Patricia Petersen is running for her Australian Independents party. Family First are running Sally Vincent. The Stable Population Party is running Jane O’Sullivan. The 21st Century Australia Party is running Grace Cobb. The Secular Party are running Hilton Travis. The Socialist Equality Party are running Mike Head.

Assessment
A swing of less than 2.3% from the LNP to the minor right-wing parties would see a minor right-wing candidate defeating the third LNP candidate. However in current circumstances it seems that the LNP is set to increase their seat and lock in their third seat.

In 2010, the combined vote for the Greens and Labor after preferences reached 3.02 quotas. The Sex Party’s preferences would have favoured the Greens and Labor, and their preferences increase this figure to 3.2 quotas.

If there is a significant swing to the LNP away from Labor (as seems likely), the ALP and Greens will fall short of winning a third seat.

In current circumstances, Katter’s Australian Party will be a serious contender to win a seat off the ALP.

If you fit the results of the 2012 state election onto Senate quotas, the LNP wins three seats with half a quota of surplus, the ALP falls just short of a second quota. The Greens would win barely half a quota, while the KAP would be well on their way to winning a seat.

It seems most likely that the final seat will be a race between Katter’s party and the Greens, with an outside possibility that the Greens and KAP could both win a seat, with Labor reduced to a single seat.

121 COMMENTS

  1. It looks like Labor will get much the better side of their preference deal with KAP. Labor’s Senate vote is likely to be a bit lower than 2010, given the new minor parties, putting them at or just under 2 quotas. So there will be hardly any Labor preferences to be distributed to KAP in the Senate, but Labor benefits from KAP recommending preferences to them in some Lower House seats.

  2. I agree with you Edward, The KAP deal has certainly saved Labor’s chances of retaining Capricornia and kept them in the running to take Herbert, but in the Senate, I think it all depends on just how far the Labor vote falls. They only need to lose 0.82% to fall below two quotas, but then they’re in a very strong position to win that second quota. If their vote falls by about 3% (which is reasonably consistent with polls isn’t it?), they would be down to 1.82 quotas.

    Now obviously, it’s incredibly difficult to predict just how the votes will fall and preferences will flow, but KAP may have done themselves in by agreeing to this deal, because they need to get in front of Labor to take their preferences, which I’m not sure I can see happening.

    My prediction is the LNP to win 2 quotas off primary and PUP preferences push them over a 3rd, ALP to win 1 quota off preferences and start very high on second quota. Greens to fall short of one quota primaries, but to win on minor party preferences (Sex, Democrats, etc). The final seat will be between KAP and Labor and will depend on hard the swing against Labor is (KAP will need about a 5% swing) how strongly preferences from other parties flow towards KAP to push them ahead of Labor.

  3. I think we should not discount Family First if the LNP get above 3 quotas. Say they get up to 3.3 or 3.4 quotas and that surplus goes to Family First. Many of the right wing minors and KAP have also preferenced Family First highly. It could get them over the line.

  4. It is ludicrous to expect the LNP to get all the way to 3.3 quotas on primary vote in Queensland. They’re facing competition from the KAP and PUP, which will undoubtedly sap some of their votes, and the majority of other new minor parties (in the Queensland senate context) are right-wing, too.

    Basically, it’s expecting the LNP to nearly get 50% of the vote in the senate, which simply will not happen, and wouldn’t even if the LNP were polling 55% primary vote in the house.

  5. We will see Glenn, you may be surprised. The LNP Senate team has been hard at work campaigning in communities across the state. They are very high profile for a Senate ticket.

  6. I have to say I agree with Glen. I just struggle to see the LNP getting up over 3 quotas on primary.

    I think the LNP’s loses to KAP and PUP will largely be offset by swings from the ALP and Greens, but I struggle to see a significant net increase in votes that will see them get to that level. Even in 2004, with the Liberals and Nationals running separate tickets, they still only received a combined 3.1427 quotas on primary votes. That election is probably a good one to compare against because Labor performed poorly (2.2156 quotas) and there were strong performances by other right wing candidates (One Nation, Pauline Hanson (IND) and Family First received a combined 0.773 quotas).

    However, at that election, the Greens only got 0.3782 quotas on primaries and they’ll obviously be in a stronger position this time.

    So I think you’ll almost certainly see four right-wing senators elected this year (including KAP as right-wing), but I don’t think the LNP will poll as well as you suggest QO.

  7. Queensland Observer — I admit I’m being hopeful. One thing I didn’t mention is that Fishing have also done well with preferences, so it could be them instead of Family First that collects ~8% of the micro-right. That doesn’t make much difference to the subsequent analysis.

    One Nation don’t pick up any early preferences and will be eliminated. Their preferences will go to Family First or Fishing, where they will hide until the “end game”. Likewise, the Shooters preferences will go to either Family First or Fishing, where they will hide until the “end game”. My analysis doesn’t assume that Shooters or One Nation comes to LDP early.

    Can the Liberal Democrats get to >8% and then pick up the FF/Fishing preferences? It’s not likely, but this is how it could happen…

    They start with getting Smokers, Republicans and anti-Greens straight away, which should take them to 4-5%. At that point they could pick up Sex preferences, heading up to around 6%. Katter will have been starved of preferences and will likely get less than 6% primary, so then his vote goes to the Liberal Democrats. That should push them up to 9%.

    And 9% > 8% = Happy LDP 🙂

  8. John – there’s just one problem; the final seat is decided on the majority out of about 28.6% of the vote. 8%+9% = 17%, leaving 11.6% unaccounted for. Whoever holds that 11.6% needs to only get another 2.7% to get them over the line. If we assume that 11.6% is the Greens, then the key source of votes for them if LDP is knocked out will be the Sex Party, who have preferenced Greens above FF and Fishing. The Sex Party got 2.6% of the vote in 2010. On the flipside, if it’s FF/Fishing that gets knocked out, then PUP preferences flow to Greens, as do Democrats and Stop CSG, depending on whether it’s FF or Fishing that got ahead.

    And that’s assuming that the Greens don’t get near the number they got in 2010 (since they’d presumably be getting Labor preferences along the way).

    Note that I’m assuming that the KAP get the second last seat (beating the Liberals for it). If they don’t, then we can pretty much be confident that it’ll be Greens vs KAP for the final seat.

    In the unlikely case that Labor does so poorly that it loses its preferences to KAP in the senate, KAP will get the fifth seat, and then the sixth will go to the Greens – because if Labor is haemorrhaging that badly, a lot of it will flow to Greens, and they’ll get there on leftover Labor preferences (after remaining KAP quota knocked out) alone.

  9. Glen — I think it will be tough for Katter. I doubt they will poll much above 4% and they get no preferences (except maybe DLP) so they may well fall early, and their preferences will be distributed.

    I’m assuming that the Liberals pick up three full quotas (with nearly no excess) and Labor picks up two full quotas (with nearly no excess). That seems reasonable based on 2010 performance. Greens vote will go down to about 10% this time around, so even with Palmer (or Sex/HEMP) they will be short of a quota.

    That means the “end game” will have the Greens on maybe 12%, Family First on about 8%, and the Liberal Democrats on about 9%. At that point, whoever wins out of FF or LDP picks up nearly all the other preferences and gets over the line.

    ========

    If Katter does pick up more of the vote (say 7%), the extra will largely come from One Nation, Christians, Shooters, Family First and Fishers… which will depress their vote. If they end up with less than 5% then their preferences will flow to the Liberal Democrats early, taking them up to around 10% and in front of Katter.

  10. I heard recently that they were polling around 2% in QLD and 1% in NSW/WA and less elsewhere. I think that’s too low, but it puts it into perspective.

    In the QLD election there weren’t many parties to choose from, so Katter monopolised the protest vote. This time around there are plenty of parties, so that vote will fragment. I have no idea what it will be… but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was 3% or 8% or anywhere in between.

  11. I find that hard to believe… but suspending my disbelief for a second, where do you think he’ll get that vote from? Will he push the Labor primary vote to near 25% and/or the Liberal vote below 35% and/or will he steal the micro-right vote from FF, Christians, DLP, Shooters & Fishers?

    Whatever answer throws up interesting other scenarios. For Katter to get anywhere near 9% he creates other holes in the system that can lead to strange outcomes.

  12. I thought this would be best to poll here rather than each individual seat.

    Eight marginals Newspoll 20/8 Sample 1382 ALP 2PP 40%

    This from Pollbludger: “There is also a combined Newspoll result from 1382 respondents covering eight LNP-held Queensland marginals (Brisbane, Forde, Flynn, Longman, Herbert, Dawson, Fisher and Bonner) showing the LNP ahead 60-40, suggesting a swing of about 7.5%. The primary votes are 32% for Labor (compared with 36.5% in the relevant seats in 2010) and 54% for the LNP (45.6%), with Tony Abbott leading as preferred prime minister by 49-39”.

    Again, this is not automated. It is a person instigated phone-poll by the most acclaimed pollster in the country and shows a swing to the Coalition since the last election combined of about 7-8%. If this is correct, Labor cannot win the election and they are heading for a landslide worse than 1996 and probably towards 1975.

    Essentially, on this poll, I’d suggest the LNP would be arguably looking to pick up every seat in QLD in only two weeks time., which is interesting because I have just seen an internal poll which indicates the LNP are well poised in Lilley and now Petrie.

  13. I am basing that 8 or 9 percent figure on how high his state election vote was coupled with how plenty of lnp and labor voters in the lower house do something different in the senate

  14. Having gone through Antony Green’s calculator, the Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party is better positioned to take a seat here than both Katter and the Greens. Their preference flow is unbelievable!

    Why aren’t they being talked about.

    Palmer won’t secure a seat here by the looks of it. The PUP preference flow is far too weak, even when he is on 6-7%.

  15. One of the reason’s I feel that the LNP PV (54% in LNP marginal seats) is getting stronger is that they have had it with minority government and want a definite result. They are not willing to experiment, at the moment, with KAP, PUP or other minors. They want the ALP gone and a majority government.

  16. I can see a scenario with Labor only taking 1 of the 6 seats if the KAP takes a chunk out of their voting base.

    How about:

    3 LNP
    1 LAB
    1 KAP
    1 Fishing and Lifestyle (not Shooters and Fishers)

    Odd I know, but possible if Labor gets squeezed enough.

  17. JA – it’s not going to happen – Labor+Greens will get, at minimum, two seats. What you’re basically suggesting is that the Right will win five of the six seats, and that’s just not feasible.

  18. DB – how is it possible that, in the 8 marginal seats, there’s a swing of 7.5% to the LNP, yet Queensland-wide polls put Labor at about 47% 2PP (depending on the specific poll – only one has shown a swing against Labor at all, and that was only by 1%), which would be a swing of around 2% to the ALP? Are we really to believe that marginals are swinging heavily towards the LNP but “safe” Labor and Liberal seats are swinging to Labor with a swing of the order of 4-5%?

  19. Glen – I think if you follow Bludgertrack, the polls are saying about 55/45 in QLD, not 53/47, or little change since the last election. Only time will tend whether the mainstream polls are right or whether the individual seat polls are right.

    The samples seem to be much much larger in the marginal seats rather than state wide. Perhaps they are more accurate?

  20. BludgerTrack are estimating around 53/47 IIRC.

    Current Queensland polls:

    Statewide Nielsen 7/8 280 47 +2
    Statewide Galaxy 8/8 800 44 -1
    Statewide Morgan 10/8 743 48 +3
    Statewide Newspoll 10-17/8 550 46 +1
    Statewide Morgan 17/8 876 46 +1
    Statewide Lonergan 18/8 345 48 +3
    Statewide Nielsen 20/8 504 45 0
    Statewide Essential 27/7-17/8 741 49 +4

    And electorate-by-electorate:

    Griffith ReachTEL 05/8 702 46 -4
    Forde ReachTEL 08/8 725 46 -3
    Forde Lonergan 15/8 1160 40 -9
    Forde JWS Research 15/8 568 40 -9
    Brisbane JWS Research 15/8 607 46 -3
    Eight marginals Newspoll 20/8 1382 40 -8
    Griffith Newspoll 22/8 500 48 -10
    Griffith Lonergan 21/8 958 48 -10

    Someone has to be wrong…..

  21. DB – Bludgertrack has QLD at 46.7% ALP to 53.3% LNP right now.

    And it’s not just one statewide poll, it’s all of them. I just checked, and with the sample size they have across all of the statewide polls, there’s a 95% margin of error of 1.4% (less, really – I’m using the “pretend that the population is infinite” approximate MoE, rather than the one corrected for real population), and, scaling for sample size (and ignoring that they’re rounding the numbers to begin with), the average 2PP for Labor across the polls is 46.5%, which would be a swing of 1.6% to Labor. And if you restrict attention to only the ones that have occurred on the 17th or later, the average 2PP is 46.1% with less than 2.4% MoE – so this isn’t a matter of MoE, because even in the worst case, you’re not seeing anywhere near a 7% swing against the ALP statewide.

  22. Based on state-specific polls, it looks like the return of Rudd (over Gillard) has helped the ALP in Queensland. The main winner from in the Senate is Katter’s candidate, who pick up any excess Labor vote.

    JA — Glen is right that the left is guaranteed two spots. There is an interesting possibility that it could be one Labor and one Green, but I think more likely two Labor. There is a possibility that Fishing (or Family First, or Liberal Democrats) could challenge Katter. So much will depend on the primary votes and the order in which the minor parties fall out.

    Queensland observer — you may be right about a high Katter vote, but that still leaves the question of where it comes from. If Katter’s vote steals partly from the Liberals then they are starved of preferences and could miss out on their third spot… leaving open one more spot for a micro-party. Also, the only early preferences for Katter is the Labor party (and insignificant Protectionists)… but if Katter steals votes from the Labor party then they won’t have any excess to distribute, potentially leaving Katter stranded.

  23. The last two Senate spots are going to be a race between Katter, Family First, Greens, Australian Independents, Fishing and Lifestyle and Greens.
    ALP is unlikely to get 2 seats, LNP is unlikely to get 4 seats.
    There will be two Senate seats taken by minor parties.
    The last two Senate seats will go to the parties listed above.
    Katter is likely to win a seat from ALP preferences.
    Family First can only win if Australian Independents do well.
    Greens are unlikely to get more than 8% in QLD and rely on Australian Independents preferences to get up. Given Australian Independents didn’t end up getting the preferences they were promised from Shooters and Fishers, it’s unlikely the Greens will win a seat. Family First are in the same boat.
    If Australian Independents poll greater than 2% which is unlikely, they will win a seat.
    I think that the last two Senate seats will go to Fishing and Lifestyle and Katter.
    Had Shooters and Fishers don’t gone back on their deal with Australian Independents, it would be Australian Independents and Katter.
    Why Australian Independents thought for a second that Shooters and Fishers would stick to the preference deal that they had with them is anyone’s guess. First timers I guess.

  24. Had Shooters and Fishers not gone back on their deal with Australian Independents, it would be Australian Independents and Katter I meant.

  25. Okay I have been playing with the Senate calculator all morning. I keep getting Mc Linden elected, even when he has less than 3% of the vote while katter has 8% and greens 11%. The preference flow is very strong to family first. He basically has to drop around 2.5% while katter plus greens have to stay at 18% total for Mc Linden not to get elected

  26. Glen, interesting. I thought the Lonergan and ReachTel were crap initially. Then I saw Newspoll and Galaxy pretty much confirm them on a seat-by-seat basis. Don’t think they can all be wrong, particularly with Newscorp confirming it all. They have much larger samples in these individual seats or within a group of seats. The mainstream, nationwide polls, only are on much smaller samples. But we will have to wait and see.

  27. Having looked at the calculator again, the Greens could get elected on Palmer preferences. But to be honest, I haven’t a clue how well Palmer’s party will do. I don’t really see any momentum, but as has been said before his pockets are huge.

    I understand that only one LAB/GRN seat is very unlikely, so perhaps the Greens could get a second seat at the expense of the LNP, assuming that they finish with about 2.6-7 quotas.

  28. Glen – from Kevin Bonham’s site today:

    “Several of the seat-poll results that have been obtained by relatively new robo-poll companies have now been obtained by established companies too, either using robo-polling themselves or by conventional phone-poll means. At this point, of the three newish robo-pollsters active, ReachTEL is the one not showing an average skew to the Coalition in seat polls, as compared to established polling. It seems this is about something more significant than just suspicious or new polling methods, and perhaps for once the repeatedly-discredited scenario of the national polls being inaccurate while the local polls – on average, with the usual errors caused by small sample size – reveal a more accurate picture might have something in it. Something like this happened in the last US Presidential election”.

  29. Glen’s concern about undecideds may well apply to Lonergan and AMR, but ReachTEL reports undecideds on primary votes (it is on BPM where they force), so that isn’t a factor in their primaries. ReachTEL did poll some Queensland seats at the 2010 election, so there is some basis for comparison, albeit with a number of caveats.

    Its final round of numbers in nine seats were published via twitter on 20 August 2010. In Blair, the Labor TPP was overstated by about a half of a point, pretty good. The rest leaned anywhere from a couple of points, these were seats the LNP won with about 60% of the vote, to the worst, Longman, where they were off by 10 points (albeit with a huge undecided figure). The others were around from four to eight points too favourable to the LNP. Only in one seat, Petrie, did they actually get the direction wrong; they incorrectly predicted an LNP gain.

    Now some caveats. Perhaps the most important is that we don’t know what sorts of tweaks ReachTEL has made to its methodology since the last election. While it has shown large swings to the Coalition, it is also more or less in line with Newspoll and short of where Lonergan and the other one (JWS) doing seat robopolls. Still, any changes in methodology could be driving the numbers ever further out of whack. We just don’t know. Also, they only polled seven seats, all in one state that was a bit out of step with the other states for local reasons having to do with the fact Rudd was their guy and with the unpopularity of the Bligh government. It may be the polls, for whatever reason, were susceptible to overemphasizing LNP (and Green) support based on that. I think that is in line with one of Glen’s theories about what is going on now. Another thing to consider is that at least some of those TPP numbers seem to be respondent-based. In the polling figures I saw where both were included, the respondent-based TPP was about a point or two above 2007-flow calculation. Finally, with a set of nine polls with errors distributed fairly evenly from -0.5 to +10 on the LNP TPP, it’s hard to say what conclusions can really be drawn from 2010 ReachTEL polling other than that they tended to get the direction of the swing right, but were unable to get the amount. Which isn’t terribly impressive.

  30. Okay I get most often 3 lnp 2 alp and one of either family first, katter or aus independents. The greens need to hold their 2010 vote or have labor fail to get two senators.

  31. I find I can get the the Greens elected with only half a quota and a combined Greens/PUP vote well short of a quota, so long as FF gets knocked out before PUP.

  32. I’d expect KAP and to a lesser extent PUP to unify the right-wing populist vote, meaning a swing against the rest of the minor-right, except maybe the Christian Right parties.

  33. Kes’ suggestion is also how I feel, although I’d put it slightly differently.

    A portion of the minor party vote is the “protest vote”. But when people do a protest vote in the senate, they usually want to actually get a different party to hold a seat. Usually, this gets spread pretty thinly across the various parties, producing typical votes of 0.5-2% for each (for non-micro-parties), making it hard for any one of them to get a seat.

    But at this election, the KAP and PUP are going to be seen as parties with serious chances of getting a seat. This will cause them to attract more of the protest vote than usual, at the expense of the other minor and micro parties. This is especially true in Queensland, where both parties are seen as serious alternatives (whereas they’re seen with more scepticism outside of the state). KAP’s state parliament presence and PUP’s billionaire funding source will also help them to attract further support.

    I think KAP will draw some support from Labor, Nationals, and minor parties. I think PUP will draw some support from Liberals and minor parties.

    And as Kes points out, this will apply to most parties, with perhaps the Christian parties being exceptions – it’s hard to say how Family First will perform, but if they struggle, it won’t be due to KAP/PUP.

  34. Kes what preferences go to the greens under that model? I had question marks on how katter affects the shooters and the fishing lifestyle parties. What percentage did u have them?

  35. QO:
    Animal Rights has the donkey vote, Pirates and HEMP have eye catching names and there is also Stop CSG and Secular, I figure they can get 1.5% between them. Then a further 2% or so from SEX, and 4% from PUP + 7% for the Greens comes to 14.5%.

    I may have the LNP too low at 35%-38% or so because I often end up getting KAP (6-9%) or Fishing and Lifestyle elected with 1% (I give Shooters roughly 1% too). While KAP don’t get many high preferences they still do much better than LNP who seem to need to get really close to 3 quota’s on primaries to get there if PUP out-polls FF. Whether PUP or FF goes out first is the crucial point in the count!

  36. I’d urge Greens supporters in QLD to vote strategically below the line for one of the lower ranked Greens (so that the Greens get the public finance $2) and then preference PUP before returning to the Greens lead candidate. This would help ensure PUP stays ahead of FF, therefore the Greens get PUP’s preferences, not FF. There is no chance of this backfiring and accidentally electing PUP because PUP are getting no preferences and so cannot win. Do not cut corners and vote PUP above the line as this could backfire, if FF stays in front anyway.

  37. 1.5% is too high. for those parties. Stop CSG will go ok, but by that I mean 0.4 or 0.5%. The rest of those will struggle. It will be lucky to add to 1%.

    I doubt Sex Party will hold its 2.5% – too many other non big 3 parties to park a protest or alternative vote on.

    AS for PUP – 4% is a good estimate, but Family First still overtakes them when I do the calculator due to the LNP surplus (even when they start with 2.9 quotas and creep over) and the micro right parties.

  38. QO
    SEX voters are a different demographic to the other minor right parties and the reduced Greens vote has to go somewhere, 2% seems possible. At the last NSW senate election the Socialist Alliance suddenly shot up to 0.56% with the donkey vote, so could Animal Rights. Good names make a big difference and HEMP, Pirates and SEX all have good names (as is Stop the Greens unfortunately). There are otherwise apolitical nerds out there who care deeply about internet stuff, Pirates can get 0.3% even in the crowded field and at the 2006 SA state election, when Mr X got over 20%, HEMP got 0.7%. So I think 1.5% between them and No CSG is quite possible, not that 1.5% matters that much of course.

  39. Kes, good points on the smaller parties. I think Animal Justice will get 0.3% or so. I have doubts about Hemp and Pirate grabbing more than 0.2% each. I guess with Stop CSG that does get them over 1%.

    On the Sex Party, I really think you will find there was a high protest vote from the left and a heap of swinging voters with a tiny amount of the right last election. Those of the right that parked a vote there and a large portion of the swinging voters parked their vote on the sex Party as they won’t ever vote for the Greens. Now they have two high profile choices in Katter and Palmer as well as the fact I think some will go back to the LNP. I think the Sex Party could go as low as 1.3% or 1.4%.

    I am interested in who had the donkey vote in each state last election as that may inflate some of the numbers in the caculator

    Anyway, Adam Stone gets up on multiple scenarios I have run through the calculator – just McLinden and Blundell seem more likely. I have Stone also getting up instead of the second Labor senator if the Labor vote collapses.

    Lastly, the LNP vote won’t dip below 38%. It was 41% last time and their is a swing to the LNP this election. Even factoring in the splintering of the vote by Palmer and Katter (I believe Katter will mainly pinch voters from Labor and the minor right parties though), I think that splintering will be offset by the swing of Labor voters to the LNP.

  40. For what it’s worth, my senate calculator prediction gave 2 LNP, 2 ALP, 1 Green and 1 KAP from numbers of 40%, 27%, 8% and 4% – Katter pipping the Libs for the final spot. It wouldn’t have been my original prediction, but it would be an interesting result.

  41. QO – this is Queensland, polls have been indicating a swing towards the ALP of roughly 1.5% on 2PP. It’s unlikely that there’ll be some sort of swing towards the LNP on primary vote.

    It is entirely believable that the LNP loses about 1.5% primary vote in the senate, bringing them down to 39.9%, and then loses another 2% primary vote to PUP, bringing them to 37.9%. Note that this is ignoring any pinching of rural LNP votes by the KAP, as well as the increased number of right-wing minor and micro-parties at this election. I really think we might see the LNP get around 36-37% primary vote in the senate.

  42. marginal seat polling is still saying a swing to the LNP in Queensland. Katter will take votes off labor more than the LNP.

    As I said I have played a lot of scenarios with the LNP getting anywhere between 38% and 43% of the vote. Is no one else getting Family First winning the last seat instead of Katter?

  43. The marginal polls are certainly interesting from the point of view of who will win Government – the main game – but it is entirely unpersuasive to then extrapolate them to the entire state and make Senate predictions on that basis. The net statewide swing is what matters for the Senate.

  44. I did a calculation based off my own best estimates (read: guesses) – and while I am certainly no authority on polling or potential outcomes, I got 1 ALP, 1 Green, 1 Katter, 2 LNP and 1 Family First.

    Would certainly make for an interesting senate contingent with a third of Queensland senators coming from Minor parties.

  45. I just had a go with the election calculator, and got the result I most expect – 2 Labor, 2 LNP, 1 KAP, 1 Greens.

    I was a bit simplistic with the micro-parties, pretty much giving a party 0 if I didn’t think they’d make a solid 0.1% of the vote. I had Labor down slightly to 29% (up 2% from the Qld swing, down a little over 2% lost to KAP), Greens down to 11% (some protest vote lost to KAP or PUP), LNP at 36.5% (down 2% from Qld swing, down another 2% lost to PUP and KAP), KAP at 8% (down slightly from their primary vote in Qld election), PUP at 3% (about 50% of that from LNP, other 50% from protest vote change). Parties over 1% generally lost a bit, while those below 1% typically stayed fairly steady – One Nation was my one exception, which lost a noticeable amount.

    In the end, I got the final two seats coming down to a three corner race between KAP, Greens, and Liberal, with KAP and Greens each getting more than 1 quota at that point.

    Greens get preferences from Sex Party, Secular Party, and PUP, bringing them enough vote to push up to a full quota and then a bit extra. KAP gets preferences from ALP, LDP, DLP, Democrats, HEMP, FF, AF, ON, Climate Sceptics, Senator Online, and Shooters & Fishers.

Comments are closed.