Mining and Pastoral – WA 2021

Incumbent MLCs

  • Ken Baston (Liberal), since 2005.
  • Jacqui Boydell (Nationals), since 2013.
  • Robin Chapple (Greens), since 2009. Previously 2001-2005.
  • Stephen Dawson (Labor), since 2013.
  • Kyle McGinn (Labor), since 2017.
  • Robin Scott (One Nation), since 2017.

Geography

ElectorateMarginElectorateMargin
KalgoorlieLIB 6.2%North West CentralNAT 10.1% vs ALP
KimberleyALP 13.0%PilbaraALP 2.3%

Mining and Pastoral covers a majority of the state’s land mass, stretching from Kalgoorlie to the Kimberley and as far west as Carnarvon.

Labor holds two seats while the Nationals and the Liberal Party hold one each.

You can click through to individual seat profiles on the table above or on the map below.

Redistribution
There was only one small change to the external boundaries of this region: the area around Kalbarri was moved from the seat of Moore in the Agricultural region into the seat of North West Central in the Mining and Pastoral region. No changes were made to Kalgoorlie, and no other changes were made to North West Central. A large land mass containing very few people was moved from Pilbara to Kimberley.

History
Mining and Pastoral was created as a five-member electorate in 1989.

The ALP won three seats in 1989, and the Liberal Party won two seats. The same result was replicated in 1993 and 1996.

In 2001, both the ALP and the Liberal Party lost a seat, with those seats going to the Greens and One Nation.

In 2005, the Greens and One Nation both lost their seats, returning to the pattern of three Labor and two Liberal.

In 2009, Mining and Pastoral gained a sixth seat. The ALP lost their third seat, and the two leftover seats went to the Greens and the Nationals. This was the first time the Nationals won a seat in Mining and Pastoral.

In 2013, the Liberal Party maintained its two seats, and the Greens maintained their one seat. Labor lost its second seat to the Nationals.

In 2017, the Greens maintained their one seat. The Liberal and National parties each lost one of their two seats. Labor picked up a second seat while One Nation won a seat for the first time since 2005.

2017 result

GroupVotes%SwingQuotaSeatsRedist %Redist q.
Labor 16,84634.211.82.3912234.02.3808
Nationals 9,35619.0-9.01.3280119.21.3441
Liberal 7,73515.7-16.41.0979115.61.0943
One Nation6,75413.713.70.9587113.70.9606
Greens 2,8005.7-3.30.397415.70.3956
Shooters, Fishers and Farmers2,5395.11.40.360405.10.3594
Australian Christians7431.5-0.30.105501.50.1040
Family First5091.0-1.20.072201.00.0719
Flux5051.01.00.071701.00.0711
Others1,5243.10.216303.10.2178
Informal1,2532.5

Four seats were decided on primary votes: two Labor, one Liberal and one National. This left two seats in play.

Let’s fast forward to the final seven candidates in the race for those two seats:

  • Robin Scott (ON) – 0.962 quotas
  • Robin Chapple (GRN) – 0.407
  • Peter Foster (ALP) – 0.399
  • Stefan Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.395
  • Dave Grills (NAT) – 0.334
  • Kai Shanks (FLUX) – 0.302
  • Grahame Gould (CHR) – 0.197

It’s worth noting the Flux party on 0.3 quotas – the party had barely passed 0.07 quotas on primary votes but had more than quadrupled that vote to reach sixth in the race.

Gould’s preferences split roughly evenly between One Nation and the Shooters, pushing One Nation over quota:

  • Scott (ON) – 1.055
  • Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.493
  • Chapple (GRN) – 0.408
  • Foster (ALP) – 0.400
  • Grills (NAT) – 0.338
  • Shanks (FLUX) – 0.303

The One Nation surplus mostly flowed to Flux, pushing Shanks ahead of the Nationals candidate:

  • Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.498
  • Chapple (GRN) – 0.408
  • Foster (ALP) – 0.400
  • Shanks (FLUX) – 0.352
  • Grills (NAT) – 0.338

Most preferences from the Nationals flowed to the Shooters:

  • Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.804
  • Chapple (GRN) – 0.420
  • Foster (ALP) – 0.414
  • Shanks (FLUX) – 0.357

Flux preferences scattered amongst the three remaining candidates:

  • Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.928
  • Chapple (GRN) – 0.547
  • Foster (ALP) – 0.520

Labor preferences elected Chapple:

  • Chapple (GRN) – 1.049
  • Colagiuri (SFP) – 0.944

Candidates

  • A – Tayla Squires (Independent)
  • B – Curtis Greening (Flux / Liberals for Climate)
  • C – Brian Mollan (Sustainable Australia)
  • D – James Brown (Legalise Cannabis)
  • E – Matt Priest (Shooters, Fishers and Farmers)
  • F – Brenden Hatton (Waxit)
  • G – Wilson Tucker (Daylight Saving Party)
  • H – Christine Jeanette Kelly (Independent)
  • I – Kimberly Smith (Greens)
  • J – Dave Grills (Western Australia Party)
  • K – Emmarae Cole-Darby (Animal Justice)
    • L – Liberal
      1. Neil Thomson
      2. Michael Huston
      3. Jodie Richardson
      4. Matt Blampey
  • M – Anthony Fels (Independent)
  • N – Nathan Webb-Smith (Great Australian Party)
  • O – Teddy Craies (Health Australia)
  • P – Robbie Parr (Liberal Democrats)
  • S – Andrew Charles Middleton (No Mandatory Vaccination)
  • T – Jacky Young (Australian Christians)
  • U – Robin Scott (One Nation)

Preferences
Labor preferenced the Shooters second, followed by the six parties in the micro-party alliance, then the Greens.

The micro-party alliance have preferenced the Daylight Saving Party second, as have the Greens.

The Nationals have preferenced the Liberal Party and then the Shooters, putting One Nation near the end just before the Greens and after Labor.

The Liberal Party have preferenced the Nationals, then the Australian Christians, then the lead One Nation candidate, then the Shooters.

Assessment
Labor’s first seat is very safe. It’s probably safe to say that the sole Liberal and Nationals seats are also safe. Labor’s second seat is probably secure if Labor remains on track to retain government.

The third left seat is anything but safe. The Greens barely squeaked in ahead of Labor in 2017, and in 2013 the combined Labor-Greens parties only managed two seats. A relatively small swing from the left to the right would have seen the Shooters and Fishers pick up the sixth seat instead of the Greens in 2017. This time around, Labor are instead preferencing the Shooters over the Greens.

Labor will be hoping to pick up the Greens seat. The Shooters, whether they gain the Greens seat or the One Nation seat, are in a reasonably strong preference position.

In addition to the Greens seat possibly being under threat from Labor or the Shooters, the One Nation seat could also be in play. One Nation did poorly from preferences in 2017 but scraped by thanks to polling almost a full quota on primary votes. Either of these seats could be under threat from Liberal, Nationals or the Shooters.

The Daylight Saving Party has also done well from preferences and could be a surprise contender.

Regional breakdown
Labor topped the vote in Mining and Pastoral, with their vote ranging from 28.5% in North West Central to 44.3% in Kimberley.

The Nationals vote ranged from 13.5% in Kimberley to 26.6% in North West Central.

The Liberal primary vote ranged from 13.5% in Pilbara to 18.6% in Kalgoorlie.

The One Nation primary vote ranged from 8.2% in Kimberley to 17.4% in Kalgoorlie.

The Greens primary vote ranged from 3.8% in Kalgoorlie to 9.9% in Kimberley.

Results of the 2017 WA upper house election in the Mining and Pastoral region, by 2021 electorate

9 COMMENTS

  1. If Chapple retiring wasnt enough to end the Greens presence here, the ALP-Shooters preference deal will see them off. Its an incredible deal for the shooters, who only have to give up unreliable lower house preferences in return for rock solid upper house preferences.

    Greens will do decently well in North West Central (Exmouth) and Kimberley over local issues, but their miraculous ability to win seats off tiny primaries is gone.

  2. I guess Labor are betting they’ll get three quotas (in the rotten borough that is M&P, 0.6 quotas = 4000 votes), or close enough that they’ll get a third seat on either Shooter or Green prefs. Or maybe that One Nation’s vote will go down far enough that the Shooters will take a seat off them instead of the Greens. Whatever it is, they’ll look pretty stupid if it blows up in their face and costs them (with the Greens) an upper house majority.

    It makes more sense in Agricultural region. Labor will never get a third seat there; if they get just over two quotas, their surplus elects the Shooters over One Nation (like 2017); if just under, they’ll get a second seat on Shooters prefs.

  3. John,
    I doubt that an ‘ALP-Shooters preference deal’ will happen anywhere in any election.
    If you have a link, I will be happy to be proved wrong.

  4. @Watson Watch,

    Labor is preferencing the Shooters second in the upper house regions of Mining & Pastoral and Agricultural, and third in South West. This alone seems pretty damning considering how ideologically opposed the two are.

  5. @Watson Watch, while there wasn’t necessarily a formal deal, Labor and the Shooters have traded preferences several times in NSW. The Orange byelection they won is largely due to ALP preferences (The Shooters actually won the primary vote in Barwon and Murray 2019). Similarly the Shooters preferenced the ALP over the Liberals in Eden-Monaro, and in such a close election that probably helped.

    I think the SFF get support from unions, and I’ve seen people hand out both ALP and SFF cards. On one level it’s to weaken the Nats, but on a policy level it also makes sense. Gun issues aside, they are challenging the Nats from the left on issues like water management and fracking. NSW Labor voters can happily preference the Shooters over Liberals and Nationals with a straight face.

    No idea what the WA Shooters are like.

  6. John,
    I live in NSW.
    In NSW state elections, HTVs have to be registered and all of the HTVs can be viewed on the electoral commission website prior to the election. In 2019 state election, all of the Shooters HTVs recommended a first preference only.
    Clearly, there was no preference deal between The Shooters and any other party in that election.

    I didn’t see any HTVs in for the Orange by-election, but I suspect the Shooters Party would have recommended only a first preference.

    Shooters etc Party have put Labor after Liberals/Nationals in all regions. If that’s a deal, Labor should sack their negotiators.

  7. I think Shooters preferenced Labor in the Cootamundra byelection (where Labor was actually trying to win for themselves). And we have the example of Eden-Monaro. But yes generally the cosiness is that Shooters run as their own entity and they are boosted by Labor preferences.

    The alleged deal exchanges upper house preferences for lower house preferences (I assume for Murray Wellington, Geraldton and Pilbara?). So far the deal has gone exactly as projected (Shooters are Labor’s 2nd in Agricultural and Mining & Pastoral) and we’ll see when the lower house HTV cards come out.

    But it is a stupid deal. HTVs for minor parties have poor follow rates. Once all the dust settles I suspect it won’t have made a difference. The biggest difference would be the optics of it, which the Liberals will no doubt deploy to hold on to wet Liberals in Perth’s western suburbs.

    And unless Labor are confident win 3 here, or they’ve stitched up reliable upper house friends in the Shooters, this decision will make the legislative council more difficult.

    Mind you, the Greens have been outstandingly lucky to be elected here. From memory, Chapple’s 2017 win was completely unexpected until the button push. And it’s not all over for the Greens, who have a few issues in the mix this election that could win votes for them (Fracking being a big one).

  8. The Libs have a huge problem here: “Liberals for Climate” (aka Flux) drew the easy-to-see second column, and their GVT specifically puts Neil Thomson (the Libs #1 candidate) dead last. The rest of the Libs are in the middle order, ahead of Nats, Labor and the Greens… just not the one Lib likely to win a seat. LDP, WAP and HAP have all done pretty much the same thing. No ATL vote for these four parties will ever reach Thomson.

    In South Metro 2017, about 3% voted for the LDP when they were looking for the Libs – that’s about 0.2 quotas. The Libs only got 1.1 quotas last time, so that would take them well into the danger zone, and that’s before considering any swing to Labor. They’ll end up relying on the Nat surplus (if there is one), or BTL votes, just to get one seat.

    On the bright side, M&P region being so small makes it easier for BTL votes to change the result. The Nats almost lost a second seat to the Shooters in 2013 despite getting 1.96 quotas, but they just got home on BTLs. (That lucky second Nat, Dave Grills, is now running for WAP.)

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here