Senate – South Australia – Australia 2022

Incumbent Senators

Term due to expire 2022 Term due to expire 2025
Simon Birmingham (Liberal) Alex Antic (Liberal)
Don Farrell (Labor) David Fawcett (Liberal)
Stirling Griff (Centre Alliance) Alex Gallacher (Labor)
Andrew McLachlan (Liberal)1 Sarah Hanson-Young (Greens)
Rex Patrick (Rex Patrick Team)2 Anne Ruston (Liberal)
Penny Wong (Labor) Marielle Smith (Labor)

1Andrew McLachlan replaced Cory Bernardi on 6 February 2020 following Bernardi’s resignation.
2Rex Patrick resigned from the Centre Alliance on 9 August 2020 to become an independent.

South Australia was represented by five Labor senators and five Liberal senators from 1951 until the 1961 election, when the ALP managed to gain a 6-4 majority. A 5-5 balance was restored in 1967.

Former Liberal premier Steele Hall was elected in 1974 on the ticket of the Liberal Movement, taking a seat away from the Liberal Party. Hall was re-elected in 1975, while the Liberals regained their fifth seat at the expense of the ALP. Hall retired in 1977 and was replaced by Janine Haines of the Democrats. The 1977 election saw the Democrats lose the seat, with the Liberals winning six seats to the ALP’s four.

Haines was returned to the Senate for the Democrats in 1980, alongside five Liberals and four ALP senators. The 1983 double dissolution saw the ALP win a fifth seat off the Liberals. In 1984, the Democrats won a second seat while each major party held five seats. This pattern continued until 1993, when the Liberals won a sixth seat off the ALP, producing a 6-4-2 pattern which was maintained until the 2004 election.

The 2004 election saw the former Democrats seat (belonging to Meg Lees) lost to the ALP, producing a 6-5-1 split. In 2007, Natasha Stott Despoja’s seat was lost. The Liberal Party also lost one of their six seats. The ALP and Liberals each now hold five Senate seats, along with independent Senator Nick Xenophon and Sarah Hanson-Young of the Greens.

In 2010, the ALP lost one of their three seats to the Greens’ Penny Wright, producing an overall split of 5 Liberals, 4 Labor, 2 Greens and one independent.

2013 was a low-point for Labor, falling into third place behind the Nick Xenophon group. Sarah Hanson-Young, Nick Xenophon and the two Liberal senators were re-elected, but Labor only retained one of their two seats, with the final seat falling to Family First’s Bob Day.

The Liberal Party and the Greens both lost seats in 2016. The Greens lost one of their two seats, while the Liberal Party dropped from five seats to four. Both of these seats went to the Nick Xenophon Team, who won a second and third seat.

Family First senator Bob Day was forced to resign from the Senate in 2016 due to ineligibility. He was replaced by Lucy Gichuhi, who went on to join the Liberal Party.

Nick Xenophon resigned from the Senate in 2017 to unsuccessfully contest the 2018 South Australian state election, and was replaced by Rex Patrick. Fellow NXT senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore was forced to resign due to citizenship issues, and she was replaced by Tim Storer, who had stood in 2016 for the Nick Xenophon Team but sat in the Senate as an independent. Xenophon withdrew from politics in 2018 and his party was renamed “Centre Alliance”.

Storer retired in 2019, and Kakoschke-Moore stood unsuccessfully. The third NXT seat, along with the Family First seat, were absorbed by the Labor and Liberal parties, who each gained one seat. The Greens retained their one seat, while the two Centre Alliance senators were not up for election.

2019 result

Group Votes % Swing Quota
Liberal 413,957 37.8 +5.2 2.6467
Labor 332,399 30.4 +3.0 2.1253
Greens 119,470 10.9 +5.0 0.7639
One Nation 53,314 4.9 +1.9 0.3409
United Australia Party 33,191 3.0 +3.0 0.2122
Centre Alliance 28,416 2.6 -19.2 0.1817
Help End Marijuana Prohibition 23,265 2.1 +2.1 0.1487
Animal Justice 20,445 1.9 +1.0 0.1307
Australian Conservatives 16,145 1.5 +1.5 0.1032
Great Australian Party 12,698 1.2 +1.2 0.0812
Shooters, Fishers and Farmers 12,003 1.1 +0.4 0.0767
Conservative National Party 7,829 0.7 +0.7 0.0501
Liberal Democrats 7,345 0.7 +0.0 0.0470
Australian Democrats 6,497 0.6 +0.6 0.0415
Others 7,849 0.7

Preference flows
Four seats were won on primary votes: two each for the Liberal and Labor parties.

Fast forward to the last nine candidates for the last two seats:

  • Sarah Hanson-Young (GRN) – 0.8062 quotas
  • Alex Antic (LIB) – 0.6736
  • Jennifer Game (ON) – 0.4119
  • Kristian Rees (UAP) – 0.2409
  • Skye Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2240
  • Angela Adams (HEMP) – 0.1837
  • Louise Pfeiffer (AJP) – 0.1565
  • Emily Gore (ALP) – 0.1517
  • Rikki Lambert (CON) – 0.1349

Conservatives preferences strongly favoured the Liberal Party, with some going to One Nation and the UAP:

  • Hanson-Young (GRN) – 0.8115
  • Antic (LIB) – 0.7334
  • Game (ON) – 0.4346
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.2642
  • Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2302
  • Adams (HEMP) – 0.1869
  • Pfeiffer (AJP) – 0.1614
  • Gore (ALP) – 0.1581

About half of the Labor preferences went to the Greens, with others going to Animal Justice and Liberal:

  • Hanson-Young (GRN) – 0.8873
  • Antic (LIB) – 0.7538
  • Game (ON) – 0.4441
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.2753
  • Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2367
  • Adams (HEMP) – 0.1960
  • Pfeiffer (AJP) – 0.1820

Animal Justice preferences pushed the Greens close to a quota:

  • Hanson-Young (GRN) – 0.9682
  • Antic (LIB) – 0.7715
  • Game (ON) – 0.4583
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.2923
  • Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2454
  • Adams (HEMP) – 0.2300

HEMP preferences flowed strongly to the Greens, electing Sarah Hanson-Young to the fifth seat:

  • Hanson-Young (GRN) – 1.0601
  • Antic (LIB) – 0.8018
  • Game (ON) – 0.4988
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.3176
  • Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2628

The Greens surplus favoured Kakoschke-Moore, but not enough to save her from being eliminated in the next round:

  • Antic (LIB) – 0.8018
  • Game (ON) – 0.5027
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.3230
  • Kakoschke-Moore (CA) – 0.2866

Centre Alliance preferences had a high exhaustion rate, but the remainder favoured the Liberal candidate:

  • Antic (LIB) – 0.9245
  • Game (ON) – 0.5633
  • Rees (UAP) – 0.3530

UAP preferences split roughly evenly, with a slight lean towards the Liberal candidate, which was enough to push Antic over quota for the final seat:

  • Antic (LIB) – 1.0648
  • Game (ON) – 0.6889


The Labor and Liberal parties should be able to retain their two seats each, with the two seats won by the Nick Xenophon Team in 2016 in play.

It seems likely that Nick Xenophon will at least regain his former seat, but whether he has enough strength after four years out of politics to challenge for a second seat is not clear. He polled almost 25% in 2013, which would probably be enough to win a second seat under the current system, but he polled around 19-21% in his most recent races, which may not.

The Greens will have a good chance at winning a seat. They have won a seat at every half-Senate election since 2007, but lost a seat in 2016 when they failed to retain two seats at the double dissolution.

The chances for a third Liberal seat were probably eliminated when Nick Xenophon announced he would run. In current circumstances, a single Xenophon seat would likely come from the right, leaving the left with three, but if Xenophon wins two the second seat would most likely defeat the Greens.

Become a Patron!


  1. The comment section won’t load on Spence for some reason.

    But as I said previously I expect 2 Lib, 2 Lab, 1 GRN and 1 minor party (Possible the revived Family First if they do well)

  2. If Nick Xenophon runs I think it will be 2 Labor, 2 Liberals, 1 Greens, and 1 Xenophon. If Xenophon doesn’t run I think it will be 2 Labor, 3 Liberals, and 1 Green.

    It is possible though the third Liberal doesn’t get up and filled by another minor party in Family First. But from what’s been announced they have said to plan to run candidates in the next SA state election but they have been quiet what they will do federally.

    Rex Patrick for the Rex Patrick Team party and Stirling Griff for Centre Alliance both will almost certainly will be defeated at the next federal election. Patrick replaced Xenophon in the senate and quit Centre Alliance and formed his own party.

  3. Will people call out Xenophon running because this jeopardises the chances of both Barbara Pocock (GRN) and Kerryne Liddle (3rd Lib), Liddle being an indigenous Australian?

  4. Is Xenophon running under the Centre Alliance banner or just as an independent?
    Interesting to note that his former CA colleagues- Rex Patrick and Sterling Griff’s terms also expire at the next election.
    Potentially groundswell for another political party if enough like-minded independents get elected in 2022. All seem to be fairly moderate and have similar belief re: climate change and establishing a federal ICAC

  5. If Xenophon runs as an independent it is pretty shabby treatment of both Rex Patrick and Stirling Griff – both of whom – but Patrick in particular – have been assets to the Senate. What is Xenophons greatest motivation – narcissism or relevance and attention deprivation? He has to make up his mind if he stays or goes.

    There was talk of Rex Patrick running for Grey – what happened to that?

  6. Is Xenophon as popular anymore? after his presidential style campaign in the 2018 state election which had high hopes at first but then didn’t bear fruit at the state election with no seats and even Nick himself failed to win Hartley.

    Sure this is the senate and preferences from Labor and the Greens will be key but afterall it is the same voters. Would Xenophon have won a senate seat based off the 2018 state election primaries? I would think so but it surely was a huge decline from their vote in 2016 federally.

    Xenophon has a fair chance but don’t be surprised if he doesn’t win because of his decline. I expect FF or even an outside chance of PHON to take the 6th seat instead.

  7. I don’t think Xenophon is treating Griff and Patrick badly. Their chances of re-election were basically zero, so nothing changes for them.

    Daniel, you’ve got it all wrong. The electoral system blunted Xenophon’s campaign but I don’t think it said anything about his statewide appeal. Yes people were less likely to vote for his other candidates when he wasn’t on the ballot, but he did poll 14% in the lower house, which is almost exactly a full Senate quota and a pretty impressive result for a minor party in a statewide election. I also suspect it’s harder for him to peel votes away from the major parties when they are associated with incumbent lower house MPs, unlike in statewide upper house elections where he’s had all his success. Meanwhile his team in the upper house polled 19.4%, just down from the 21.8% he polled in the Senate in 2016. On those numbers I wouldn’t rule out a second seat.

  8. I would rule out Xenophon getting a second senate seat. Because I don’t think he will get anything close to the 2016 federal election numbers or his state election numbers in 2018.

    It was Xenophon in his hey day. Quitting the party and having a couple of years in the wilderness will wear some of your gloss off with the voters. Pauline Hanson after the nineties had numerous failed political attempts before her reemergence in the federal senate in 2016. My guess is Xenophon will secure a senate seat but will have lossed a significant section of following with the voters.

  9. In 2013, Xenophon polled higher than 2016 by about 3%. It might not seem so obvious in hindsight because he didn’t elect a second senator – Stirling Griff getting shafted by the Group voting ticket process and the Greens and Family First getting up. The overall outcome was Lib 2 – ALP, Greens, X and FF – 1 each. Without the Group voting the final Greens / ALP would probably have been very close.
    In 2019, the various right wing groups got a combined vote of about 12% so someone from that sector could be in play if they have an effective preference swap. ON had the most with 4.87%.
    The outcome could quite possibly be Lib 2/ alp 2 / x 1/ Misc Right 1 with the Greens squeezed out. The Greens have the most to lose as they picked up 50% of their vote last time from X not running.

  10. One would assume that X would preference either CA (Griff) or Rex Patrick next, and that they would preference each other. It is possible that an X surplus would flow to either CA or Rex and that they would also pick up a Lib surplus. They may also pick up a Labor preference before the Greens. It is just possible if the cards fall the right way that CA or Rex might pick up a seat from a very low base as the SA political landscape is so splintered.

  11. @Tom the first and best

    Agree with your assessment. I know the election still possibly a couple months away. But there still has been relatively little coverage of Nick Xenophon senate candidacy. It does make me wonder if Xenophon will be going through the motions this time around compared to previous campaigns. I’m pretty sure Xenophon started his own law firm. And maybe preoccupied with that and may have other priorities in life at the moment. If he gets a senate seat then that’s a bonus.

  12. Hi Political Nightwatchman, While I agree with your predictions about the Senate results, Nick Xenophon has not confirmed he is running for parliament. Given his history of publicity stunts, if he decides to run for the Senate, he’ll make sure that pretty much every South Australian will know!

  13. LJ
    Rex Patrick departed Centre Alliance some time back – taking the view that he would have a better chance alone opposed to getting CA senators up. Not sure if they would swap preferences or not. It will be a hard ask for either Patrick or Griff to get up in May though both have built up some name recognition. It is a pity as both seem eminently sensible and treat the senate as a genuine house of review.

  14. What probably worries the Liberals here is that, at the state election, the Liberals got 33.1% of the vote, even after the collapse of SA-Best (gaining just 0.9%), while the ALP got 37.1%, which was an increase of 8.1%. Vote patterns like that are enough to move the Liberals to 2.317 quotas and Labor to 2.597 quotas, while the Greens are likely to stay on around 0.7 quotas (give or take 0.05 quotas or so). With these numbers, Labor+Greens could conceivably pick up four of the six seats, depending on the exhaustion patterns and how the minor parties perform.

    With recent SA federal polling numbers suggesting Labor on a 2PP of around 60%, it’s actually possible that the senate numbers will be even more in Labor’s favour for getting a third seat (with the Greens getting a seat). There are certainly wildcard factors, such as how well Centre Alliance does, and the ever-present possibility of polling inaccuracies and shifts prior to the election, but the Liberals appear to have an uphill battle, especially if the new Labor state government performs strongly in the first couple of months.

  15. @ Redistributed yes I would be inclined to wager One Nation gets 3 Senate spots in May: Queensland (Hanson herself), NSW and 1 from either SA, WA or Tas.

  16. LJ – do you honestly believe that, after getting only one seat in 2019, ONP would get three seats at this election despite all polling suggesting little movement for them compared with 2019? Note that the 2019 polling numbers were basically exactly right regarding ONP.

    It’s possible that ONP could manage to get the right flows in one state to nudge over the line (leaving Queensland as a special case), but it’s hard to believe it would happen in two places. And I’m not sure why you think NSW would be a fruitful place for ONP, given that they only got 5% of the senate vote in 2019, and they’re polling at about 1% (in 2019, in the leadup to the election being called, they were polling at 5-8%).

    Returning the discussion to SA, while it’s theoretically possible that ONP would manage to get a seat, and there hasn’t been a lot of polling to help, but what little polling there has been suggests that ONP are going to be at something like 1-2% (based on HoR vote)… which at most would expand to maybe 4% in the senate. I can’t see ONP being the one to get the final seat. More likely, it would be Centre Alliance, Family First, or, at a stretch, UAP.

  17. @Glen One Nation got 2 Upper House spots at the NSW 2019 election. They had also managed to procure one in NSW at the 2016 Federal election
    Latham has managed to wrangle a lot of LDP members as well as disaffected Libs and CDP/Family First members.
    The right vote is splintering and coupled with old Labor voters in the ex steel regions like the Hunter they could easily pick up a seat.
    SA is a potential especially given the state result.
    WA is also a potential, however least likely due to the under performance at the 2021 state election. However did win a Federal seat as recent as the 2016 election

  18. LJ – ONP got about 7% of the vote in 2019 in NSW… and they were still riding pretty high at that time. That election was in April 2019, and then the Federal election was in May… and their vote dropped from 6.9% to 5%. And they don’t have a high-profile name like Mark Latham running.

    The SA state result for ONP wasn’t good – they got 4.2% – 27,935 votes, which translates (using 2019 quota numbers) to 0.342 quotas. That’s not really enough to get them a seat, because not enough other parties will have their preferences flow to ONP. In 2019, their biggest preference flows were from Fraser Anning’s party (a little under 50%), and then UAP (a little under 40%). Neither party contested the SA state upper house. LDP votes flowed much more strongly to Labor and Liberals than to ONP. Family First is harder to call, as they weren’t around for the 2019 federal election, but the way they preferenced in SA seems to suggest that they’ll put other parties well above ONP, including Centre Alliance (SA-Best) and The Nationals – they could have allocated ONP a preference in their Senate HTV, but didn’t.

    I just can’t see how ONP gets close enough to a quota (even after factoring in exhaustion of votes), when it’s likely that both Labor and Liberals will end up with more excess quota, and Greens will likely get over the line for their seat on AJP and similar party (such as HEMP) preferences. There’s basically one seat up for grabs, and Labor and Liberals are well ahead of ONP, when it comes down to it.

    Incidentally, let’s suppose that all voters follow the HTV, and look at what quota ONP gets to in the SA upper house… they get preferences from LDP and Aust Family Party. No other party put them on their HTV (unless you count SA-Best, who didn’t put a number on them, you could just see them because they were adjacent). If all of their preferences flow perfectly, they barely get across the line…

    And that’s when there are 11 seats up for grabs, not 6. I just can’t see them getting enough.

  19. I agree more with Glen, whilst one nation have improved their vote, for a six seat contest their vote is just under the 0.5 quota mark required to be in with a chance for the final seat. Only Queensland is where one nation is strong.

  20. Also 2016 was a double dissolution where 12 senate spots were up for grabs, with the quota being 7% instead of 14%. That lower quota helps more minor parties become competitive for a senate seat.

  21. Doubt One Nation gets up for a seat here, but as Glen noted the ALP/GRN combining for 4 seats is definitely a possibility here. However, I’d imagine the most likely outcome is still LIB 3, ALP 2, GRN 1, with possibilities for 3-3 and 2-3-1.

  22. One Nation would have a better chance in SA (and WA, NSW and possibly Tasmania (at non-Lambie elections)) if there were 7 seats up for election at each half-Senate election because they would have a much high chance of outpolling the Liberals` surplus after the Liberals had elected their first 2-3 candidates but with at least 1 seat still being up for election.

  23. 3 Liberals ain’t happening on state election figures. They would only get 2 but of course I expect Centre Alliances votes to almost all flow to Rex Patrick and Stirling Griff (Both men compete for the same voters so both of them would never win at the same election) and small amounts to the rest of the parties.

    Labor will win 2 and the Greens 1 and that last seat is likely to be won by either Griff or Patrick or Xenophon if he runs. But all 3 men will compete for the same voters so preferences deals with each other may help one get over the line, It will make the difference between potentially a 3rd Labor senator which Labor would probably get close on state figures but not exactly sure.

    FF Is unlikely to get anything now and they even could preference Labor ahead of the coalition like they did in many seats at the state election.

    Liberals IMO are not getting 3 seats unless they can pull 2019/2013 results or better in the senate.

  24. I’d like to be wrong but I highly doubt any of the ex-Xenophon crew will have enough name recognition on their own to take a seat. It’s a pattern we’ve seen in both 2019 Fed and 2022 State now. The last state election even has quotas of 1/12 of the vote and SA-Best/Advance SA couldn’t even come close.

    The Liberals don’t need 2019 or 2013 results to get 3 seats. They simply need to get approximately 43% on TPP. For reference, 2019 was close to 50-50.

  25. To amend my last point – 43% TPP is a more-or-less necessary condition, not a sufficient one. If the Libs can only barely clear 2 quotas while clearing that mark it’s possible to have a right wing minor party get up. But that’s not particularly likely either.

  26. Now that it’s highly likely that OneNation will win a seat in the SA Upper house can we see OneNation winning a senate seat here, I know the quotas are different but still, they managed in the state election

  27. Mark, one nation would win a senate seat if they can poll at least 7%. So far they have only managed to achieve that level of vote in in Queensland but it is still possible for them to reach that target in other states, especially if they gather support from those who oppose covid restrictions and mandates.

  28. At this stage, it does look like 2 Lib, 2 ALP and 1 Green with the sixth seat could go anywhere as there are so many dogs and cats in SA. Based on the state election, One Nation do look like a chance – they did not run in a lot of seats but were >10% in some. If they ran in all seats in SA, they would have a Senate chance. Then there are Patrick and Griff – it would be hoped that they would at least preference each other (unless there is serious bad blood that is not known). It would seem safe to assume that one or other would pick up Lib overflows (though Family First could be lurking). It would also be assumed that they would pick up votes from the ALP once their overflow has gone to the Greens – if they are still in the race. If they both go out early, then the ALP could pick up their preferences (on the assumption that the Libs are already gone) – there might be enough for the ALP to get over the Greens … – if this was the case then it may be 3 ALP 2 Lib 1 ON – though it would seem more likely to be 2-2-1-1.

  29. I don’t think One Nation has any realistic shot at a South Australian Senate seat unless the Liberal vote craters. Plus one must assume that even if the Liberal primary does crater, a lot more of the random mish-mash preferences will be going their way than to One Nation.

    At time of writing, One Nation has 4% of the vote in the progressive count SA Legislative Council. In 2019 they had 4.87% in the SA Senate race. This is a far cry from the 14.3% quota in a half-Senate election so to win they need a very divided field, and to keep ahead of that field as preferences are thrown. If we assume the majors will each get over two quotas, and the Greens get their usual ~10%, then One Nation will most likely be competing against the third Liberal for the final seat and I can’t see the numbers shaking out in their favour. Add to that that the more crowded you make the field, which is necessary to make ~4% a viable vote share, the more potential competitors for that seat you necessarily introduce.

    All this is to say I can’t see the LC results as at all indicative of positive One Nation prospects in the Senate. They would probably need a larger vote share, in addition to the Liberals running badly, to the point that you’re changing so many things you’re not really talking about the election of a One Nation MLC in the state election at all.

  30. Aaaand Xenophon is running.

    How do you rate his chances? And how do you rate the chances of 2 Lab – 2 Lib – 1 Grn – 1 Xen?

    I’d have to assume he has a better chance than Patrick, which is a pity, as Patrick is actually good at the job.

  31. By the looks of it 4-2 left right split is very possible in every state except QLD. Also a remote chance of 2-0 in the ACT. Labor may well have a friendly (or left pulling) Senate.

  32. Looks like Xenophon is running as an independent for the senate, abandoning the Centre Alliance brand. Any chances he’d be able to get in?

  33. I’d say Xenophon’s name recognition should help, but he would be best off having a registered Xenophon Team again. Most people will vote above the line, and it’s best to have an above-the-line name to catch attention.

    I’d say that, if there’s one seat up for grabs (and I think there is), he’s in with a chance. The question is, can he get enough support to be competitive for that seat, and without having a direct source in SA to provide info, I can’t tell whether he’s likely to pull high numbers like in the past, or if the lustre has worn off.

  34. Ryan – in that case, I’d say his best chance would be to be part of a registered party for the duration of the election. The “Voices For The Senate” party is probably the only feasible option, assuming they get registered in time (apparently, their registration might be finalised in time if the Senate Election is called for the latest possible date).

    Failing that, he has a slim chance if he gets some extra independents to run with him as grouped independents. That will at least give him ATL positioning, allowing parties to preference him on their HTV cards.

  35. Xenophon should resurrect the Australian Democrats name, it’s not like anyone is using it.
    His presence will surely cost Labor a 3rd seat and possibly the Greens a spot.
    Scenario X for lack of a better term would see a 2-2-2 split. If Nick polls well enough on 1st quota, high residual plus the right preferences will tip Griff over the line for the 2nd.
    One Nation, Greens and 3rd Labor miss out

  36. The Democrats polled 0.2% last election so I’m thinking he’s better off not wasting his time with that.

  37. Still better than Centre Alliance and The New Liberals- pretty crappy names.
    Perhaps the Xenophon marketing machine could lean into the nostalgic aspects of the name.
    I’d love for the Dems to come back, I think the nation has been poorer for their absence and the Greens have still not adequately filled that 4th party spot in a lot of voters’ minds.
    It’s all to do with personality as well, the UAP and One Nation both polled poorly without a big name heading the ticket in the past but that changed with media coverage.
    Who knows he could even get some defections from both sides if he makes it back to Canberra. Politicians from both sides would be more inclined to join a standard party with a history than one simply named after the individual. Steggall, Wilkie and Haines come to mind especially as they may lose progressive leverage and attention under a Labor government.
    Be a better move to consolidate power and resources, and who knows one day have the balance of power, be offered a ministry if parliament goes into minority.
    Xenophon had the right idea at the state level with SA Best, I just think he can’t start an endeavour like that by himself. You also need a generic/established name for a party as a sign of good faith to persuade others to vote and then eventually join

  38. It’s not about the policies, although I don’t personally like those either. I’m talking purely about the Democrats’ name. It is objectively worthless. Certainly not something he should be worrying about rehabilitating weeks out from an election. If there is a brand for Democrat style politics with real electoral advantage, other than the ones Xenophon was personally involved in, it would be the Climate 200/’Voices of’ banner.

  39. I think the “Climate 200/Voices of” are too narrow in scope. I get people are very passionate about Climate Change and Government accountability but perceivably these “parties” for lack of a better term are largely wedded to affluent pockets in Sydney and Melbourne.
    I also think if you want to have the impact that these candidates are hoping for if elected, it would be better to corral under a banner.
    US have the Democrats, the UK has the Liberal Democrats and Canada the New Democratic Party. I wouldn’t say the name is entirely objectively worthless.
    What would be worthless is being a lone cross bencher with no real political allies in a non-minority parliament. And when the pendulum readjusts next election, which it inevitably will, unless these Voices Of MPs have runs on the board, they’ll be booted. Look at Kerryn Phelps.
    For all this talk about Labor also making inroads into Liberal heartland like North Sydney and Wentworth, the flip side of that is for the Liberals are becoming competitive in electorates like Parramatta, McMahon and Fowler.
    A centrist party at least could get more leverage from both the majors during an election and indeed in parliament.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here