tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/nick-xenophon-30591/articlesNick Xenophon – The Conversation2023-08-31T10:27:47Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2126062023-08-31T10:27:47Z2023-08-31T10:27:47ZGrattan on Friday: It can be a battle to get information from the Albanese government<p>Thank goodness for Senate committees. This week, they’ve proved, yet again, to be worth their weight in accountability gold.</p>
<p>On Monday, at an inquiry into the cost of living, senators from both sides gave Qantas boss Alan Joyce a salutary roughing-up, over everything from yet-to-be-returned flight credits to the government’s blocking of extra Qatar Airways flights and Joyce’s contacts with Anthony Albanese. (Subsequently, Qantas has announced it is removing the expiry date on the COVID travel credits.) </p>
<p>On Tuesday, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References
Committee, which is probing the operation of the federal Freedom of Information laws, heard disturbing evidence from former FOI commissioner Leo Hardiman, who months ago resigned only a year into his five-year term. </p>
<p>Hardiman detailed a litany of obstacles in resourcing and culture in the administration of FOI, which he could not overcome. </p>
<p>The regular Senate estimates hearings, which grill bureaucrats, are welcomed and feared, depending where people sit in the political process. </p>
<p>It was Senate inquiries, it might be remembered, that did the deep diving into the PwC scandal and the entrails of other consultancy firms that receive huge amounts of taxpayer money. Labor backbencher Deb O'Neill and the Greens’ Barbara Pocock were forensic in their questioning.</p>
<p>Like most governments, this one arrived in office promising more accountability and transparency. Also like others, in practice it has a penchant for control and secrecy. </p>
<p>It did set up the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and for that it has been rightly praised. </p>
<p>Even there, however, there’s arguably too much secrecy – and that’s leaving aside the minimalist approach to public hearings specified in the NACC legislation.</p>
<p>Surely it will be a problem if we are not told what inquiries the NACC is pursuing. </p>
<p>Serious allegations demand investigation, but if it’s not known whether the NACC has taken the matter up (or passed it to another agency), what can a government do? It can hardly set up another inquiry, given this information vacuum. </p>
<p>Once the NACC has decided on an investigation, there’s a solid case for it to say so – which it has the discretion to do. </p>
<p>Whatever one thinks of secrecy around the NACC, there are plenty of other areas where it is clearly excessive. </p>
<p>Rex Patrick is a former senator who started with the Nick Xenophon Team and later became an independent. He lost his seat in 2022. While in parliament, Patrick fought the Coalition government’s secrecy; out of parliament he is in full pursuit of its Labor successor. He’s able to devote himself to poking numerous bears thanks, in part, to financial backing from business figure Ian Melrose. </p>
<p>Patrick defeated, in a legal judgment, the Morrison government’s attempt to keep secret all the documents of the National Cabinet. After the election, he was still given the runaround, but finally he’s nailed that one. National Cabinet documents are now treated according to ordinary freedom-of-information provisions.</p>
<p>Currently, Patrick is after Anthony Albanese’s official diary, Treasury’s briefing to Treasurer Jim Chalmers on the Stage 3 tax cuts, material on AUKUS and much else besides. </p>
<p>The PM’s diary is particularly interesting. In opposition, then shadow Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus sought then Attorney-General George Brandis’ diary and finally, after some trouble, extracted it. </p>
<p>But Patrick’s attempt to peek more deeply into Albanese’s schedule was blocked, as was another application from the Australian Financial Review. </p>
<p>In a submission to the Senate FOI inquiry, Patrick noted the reason given was that processing “would unreasonably divert” staff resources and also unreasonably interfere with the PM’s work. </p>
<p>Patrick said this “flew in the face” of the Federal Court decision in the Dreyfus case, in which more days of the relevant diary were sought (causing more work for fewer staff). The matter has gone to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. </p>
<p>The reluctance to publish the PM’s diary is at odds with the release of those of most ministers (including Chalmers and Foreign Minister Penny Wong). </p>
<p>Why should we have leaders’ diaries? Among other reasons, because they show who has access to a government’s top decision-maker. In Albanese’s case, it might even yield the odd clue about his relationship with Alan Joyce - who, incidentally, has been asked by those pesky senators to supply dates of any Qantas contact with the PM over the Qatar matter. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, Greens Senator David Shoebridge is trying to get hold of a report on the national security threats global warming poses. Albanese before the election promised an inquiry into this, and later commissioned one from the Office of National Intelligence. Now, apparently even a redacted version is too sensitive to release – because of national security.</p>
<p>Other crossbench senators, including independent David Pocock, have been interested in this report too. But a move in the Senate to force the issue was stymied by a cosy alliance of government and Coalition. Interesting companionships can be formed in the name of confidentiality. </p>
<p>Separate efforts in the Senate by Shoebridge and One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts to obtain documents relating to the March ditching of a Taipan helicopter at Jervis Bay failed. The government said there was an inquiry, which we haven’t seen. Subsequently, another Taipan crashed off the Queensland coast, with multiple fatalities. </p>
<p>Then there’s the politically delicate issue of the passenger manifests of VIP flights. Once, destinations and passenger lists of these flights were routinely made available by governments. That stopped under the Morrison government, and the suppression remains. A review, chaired by the Australian Federal Police and launched in 2022, recommended continued secrecy.</p>
<p>Again, national security is the excuse. But it’s not convincing, review or not. Knowing, well after the event, that a PM took a couple of mates, relatives or political contacts on a flight can give insights into a leader’s use of their privileges, or reveal who’s in a PM’s ear.</p>
<p>To some extent, this secrecy has been stymied. Passenger lists might not be available but destinations of VIP flights are, through tracking apps. At present Deputy PM Richard Marles is under criticism for taking VIP flights to Avalon, near his Geelong base, rather than catching a commercial flight to Melbourne’s Tullamarine airport. </p>
<p>At Tuesday’s Senate Committee hearing, Hardiman said: “FOI may not be considered a sexy subject matter or as being of life-changing importance. […] however, the FOI system is an important adjunct to the doctrine of responsible government inherent in our Westminster system of government.”</p>
<p>At the moment, the problem is not just the serious flaws of the FOI regime, but that the government is not living up to its own commitments to the people’s right to know.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212606/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Like most governments, this one arrived in office promising more accountability and transparency. Also like others, in practice it has a penchant for control and secrecy.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/935692018-03-22T19:09:16Z2018-03-22T19:09:16ZAre the major parties on the nose and minors on the march? It’s not that simple<p>Three political parties – the ALP, the Liberal Party and the National Party – dominate Australian politics. This dominance is particularly noticeable in the electoral contests for parliamentary lower houses, especially where these involve single-member electoral districts and electors cast a preferential vote.</p>
<p>In general, the vast majority of Australians vote for the three main parties. The dominance of the three parties’ representatives in state and federal parliaments reflects this.</p>
<p>Occasionally, developments in the party system can challenge this major party dominance. In 1955, for instance, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-politics-explainer-the-labor-party-split-74149">Labor Party split</a> and the Democratic Labor Party (DLP) was created. During the 1980s and 1990s, the Australian Democrats party emerged, declaring it intended to “keep the bastards honest”. And in 1998, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation burst on the scene. </p>
<p>Neither the DLP nor the Democrats ever succeeded in winning a seat in the House of Representatives. One Nation also failed to win a lower house seat in the national parliament, although it did win seats in the Queensland parliament in 1998.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/liberals-win-south-australian-election-as-xenophon-crushed-while-labor-stuns-the-greens-in-batman-93355">Liberals win South Australian election as Xenophon crushed, while Labor stuns the Greens in Batman</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Here was prima facie evidence of the capacity of new parties to upset major party dominance over election outcomes. But this was to be overshadowed by another recurring theme – new parties quickly imploding due to weak organisation.</p>
<p>Within months, all the Queensland One Nation MPs left the party to form a new body (the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/stories/s197030.htm">City Country Alliance</a>). At the next election, they all lost their seats. </p>
<p>Since then, other minor parties have similarly secured stunning lower house victories, only to be overwhelmed by internal instability.</p>
<p>Clive Palmer and his <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/palmer-united-party-7490">Palmer United Party</a> secured a House of Representatives seat in 2013, after which the party fragmented. </p>
<p>In 2016, the Nick Xenophon Team’s (NXT) Rebekha Sharkie won the House of Representatives <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2016/guide/mayo/">seat of Mayo</a>. Fifteen months later, Xenophon <a href="https://theconversation.com/xenophons-shock-resignation-from-senate-to-run-for-state-seat-85322">resigned from the Senate</a> to create yet another party (SA-Best) to participate in the recent South Australian state election. SA-Best appears to have failed in its bid to win a seat in the SA Legislative Assembly, and the rump of the NXT left behind in the Senate now has no leader and apparently no organisation.</p>
<p>Arguably the non-major party with the greatest impact in the party system is the Australian Greens. The party has secured House of Representatives seats on four occasions (a byelection win in Cunningham in 2002, and the seat of Melbourne in general elections in 2010, 2013 and 2016). This was matched by a significant increase in the number of seats held in the Senate, and by lower house success in state elections in <a href="https://theconversation.com/victorian-election-labor-triumph-or-coalition-disaster-or-neither-34364">Victoria</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-01/nsw-2015-election-results-booth-map/6353688">New South Wales</a>, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-07/greens-claim-first-queensland-seat-in-wealthy-brisbane-suburbs/9234442">Queensland</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-15/greens-secure-second-seat-in-tasmanian-election/9550666">Tasmania</a> (albeit under a proportional electoral system). </p>
<p>It is stating the obvious to note that these minor party successes are the result of swings in voting behaviour at the expense of the major political parties. The total national primary vote cast for the main parties <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election-results-historical-comparison/7560888">has been in decline</a>.</p>
<p>But this in itself is no guarantee of inevitable change in the representational share between the major and minor parties, especially in single-member district electoral systems.</p>
<p>The shift of voter support away from the major parties has been variable and spread over a large number of alternative minor parties. In the 2013 and 2016 federal elections, more than 50 organisations registered as parties with the Australian Electoral Commission. Few of these parties polled over 1% of the vote. Only a handful polled over the <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/public_funding/index.htm">4% threshold</a> to qualify for public funding.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=333&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211505/original/file-20180322-165554-okq01q.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Primary vote trends in Australia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Once again, only the Greens – and, in the 2016 election, the NXT – have been capable of amassing a sufficient primary vote in a particular seat to have a chance of winning lower house representation.</p>
<p>But as the <a href="http://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-21751-199.htm">Batman byelection</a> reminds us, even a primary vote approaching 40% does not guarantee victory. Bland references to declining support for the major parties tend to obscure just how difficult it is for minor parties to win lower house seats, especially if their electoral support is evenly spread over a wide range of districts. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/after-16-years-electoral-dynamics-finally-caught-up-with-labor-in-south-australia-93553">After 16 years, electoral dynamics finally caught up with Labor in South Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By the same token, the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-03/election-results-historical-comparison/7560888">increasing proportion</a> of the Australian electorate casting a primary vote for a party other than Labor, Liberal or National is a significant development, and appears to be a recurring theme in recent elections.</p>
<p>It is also having a representational impact, but not in lower houses that use single-member electoral districts (that is, all Australian parliaments except Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory). </p>
<p>Rather, the real locus of minor party impact is to be found in those parliamentary chambers elected under a proportional system. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/liberals-win-south-australian-election-as-xenophon-crushed-while-labor-stuns-the-greens-in-batman-93355">SA-Best result in South Australia</a> is an example of this: while his party failed to win a lower house seat, Xenophon’s latest venture did secure two seats in the proportionally elected Legislative Council.</p>
<p>The Greens might have suffered an adverse swing in the last state election in Tasmania, but still hold two seats in the House of Assembly. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the minor parties have a significant impact on national policy debate by holding the balance of power in the Senate. This has been the reality in the Senate for some time.</p>
<p>The recent elections in Tasmania, South Australia and the byelection in Batman have left an impression that the advance of the minor parties has stalled, maybe permanently. This is not necessarily the case.</p>
<p>If the demographic patterns to the voting alignments in Batman are repeated at the Victorian state election on November 24, the Greens could win at least four lower house seats. Meanwhile, the current rate at which electors are voting for minor parties can still have significant representational consequences for proportionally elected chambers such as the Senate. </p>
<p>The sense of minor party failure associated with these recent election contests has been due in part to the tendency to make hyperbolic claims about their prospects in the first place.</p>
<p>The flipside of this is to guard against hyperbolically pessimistic conclusions on the basis of recent electoral events. Tasmania, South Australia and Batman were not good elections for SA-Best or the Greens (or, indeed, Rise Up Australia, the Jacqui Lambie Network or the Australian Conservatives), but that may have been due to the peculiarities of the particular elections.</p>
<p>There is a significant non-major party vote in the Australian system. The place to observe its impact is in the contest and representational outcomes for Australia’s proportionally elected upper houses, including the Senate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93569/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick Economou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The recent elections in Tasmania, South Australia and the byelection in Batman have left an impression that the advance of the minor parties has stalled. This is not necessarily the case.Nick Economou, Senior Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/935532018-03-18T02:31:26Z2018-03-18T02:31:26ZAfter 16 years, electoral dynamics finally caught up with Labor in South Australia<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210895/original/file-20180318-104699-1uhroka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Labor leader Jay Weatherill concedes defeat as South Australians opt to toss the party out after 16 years.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Mariuz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>History, finally, caught up with Labor in South Australia. After 16 years in office, and seeking a record fifth term, Jay Weatherill’s Labor has conceded to the Liberals. </p>
<p>While the results have not been finalised, the current state of play has Steven Marshall’s Liberals securing a majority. In the projected seat tally, the Liberals have won 24, Labor 18, independents three, and two seats remain undecided. This is a remarkable and unexpected result for a range of reasons.</p>
<p>Elections, as <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/xenophon-falls-short-in-major-election-disappointment-20180317-p4z4wf.html">Nick Xenophon is discovering</a>, have a cold, hard way of clarifying the minds of the voters. </p>
<p>Only two days before the election, most of the major betting agencies had far more favourable odds for a Labor win. <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/are-the-punters-better-than-the-pollsters-at-predicting-elections-20160528-gp64e9.html">Betting odds</a> are sometimes seen as better predictors of election results than polls.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/liberals-win-south-australian-election-as-xenophon-crushed-while-labor-stuns-the-greens-in-batman-93355">Liberals win South Australian election as Xenophon crushed, while Labor stuns the Greens in Batman</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So, as we still pick over the results, what seemed to go right for the Liberals and so wrong for Nick Xenophon’s SA-Best team? </p>
<p>For the Liberals, while this was a win, it was not as resounding as, say, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/elections/sa/2006/news/stories/1595270.htm?elections/sa/2006/">Mike Rann’s 2006</a> “Rann-slide”. Yet, it has been a result a long time coming, having won the popular vote in three of the past four state elections. Marshall’s campaign centred on him being a “safe” change-agent. </p>
<p>Marshall’s success lies in a range of incremental factors. First, he put to bed the historic divisions in the party. <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/sa-liberal-leader-ready-for-life-under-marshall-law/news-story/c64c7046b37201dff574cefa8f588e61">In a striking insight</a>, he followed John Howard’s advice not to have votes at shadow cabinet meetings, but decide by consensus. New leadership, coupled with the misery of the long years in the wilderness, helped cement party unity.</p>
<p>Second, Marshall’s policy agenda has remained consistent and undramatic. When he launched his first 100 days in office, this was a smart relaunch of policies already well-known. It might have lacked a “wow” factor, but this has proven to be an asset. South Australians will now see cuts to household bills, a roll-out of a home battery scheme, and a push to deregulate working hours. </p>
<p>Third, the Liberals finally managed to make the most of the ammunition of Labor’s 16 years in office, especially the release of the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/icac-report-on-oakden-aged-care-home-released/9492008">Oakden report</a> into abuse at the state-run mental health facility. The Liberals capitalised on this with a <a href="http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-oakden/video/378f935c807cd9b3877879b7093dd524">powerful campaign ad</a> by the son of one of the victims, saying he “had enough” of Labor. </p>
<p>Yet, the story of the night was the deflation of the Xenophon SA-Best threat to the major parties. SA-Best looks set to secure just 13.7% of the vote, much lower than even lowered expectations. </p>
<p>The Xenophon vote fail to carry through – arguably for the following reasons. </p>
<p>First, there was overreach by Xenophon, perhaps mistakenly buoyed by the <a href="https://theconversation.com/nick-xenophon-could-be-south-australias-next-premier-while-turnbull-loses-his-25th-successive-newspoll-89290">December Newspoll</a> that not only suggested his party could hoover up a third of the vote, but also dangling the prospect of Xenophon as future premier.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=430&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210896/original/file-20180318-104673-7e925n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=540&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Nick Xenophon and SA-Best may have been too ambitious at this election, with a disappointing result.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Kelly Barnes</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Running 36 SA-Best candidates proved a stretch too far for South Australian voters. </p>
<p>Second, the SA-Best machine seemed ill-equipped and under-prepared for the campaign. Policy announcements came late in the campaign, giving the veneer of “policy on the run”.</p>
<p>In other key seats, some untested SA-Best candidates met difficult challenges. In Colton, Matt Cowdrey, the Liberal candidate and former Paralympian, easily saw off the SA-Best candidate. In Mawson – a key SA-Best target – Leon Bignell the Labor (now former) minister ran a strong campaign to damage Xenophon hopes.</p>
<p>The thinness of the SA-Best “machine” might prove a factor, as candidates were recruited late in the piece, and some did not seem quite ready for the media scrutiny, nor have enough time to embed themselves as the SA-Best candidate in their seats. </p>
<p>Voters also seem to have pulled back from the unclear positioning of SA-Best. After the initial honeymoon, SA-Best shifted from its traditional “watchdog” role – previously held by the Democrats – to presenting as a “kingmaker”. This brought additional scrutiny and expectation, pushing Xenophon onto the back foot.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-south-australia-heads-to-the-polls-the-state-is-at-a-crossroads-93265">As South Australia heads to the polls, the state is at a crossroads</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In the final weeks of the campaign, Xenophon was playing to his familiar strength – gambling reform – but voters expected a more embracing policy agenda. </p>
<p>Finally, the Australian political system is undergoing change, but the institutional factors continue to suppress minor party challengers. The lower house, with its majoritarian electoral system, requires a strong performance by the next best-placed challenger. Three-into-two does not easily go. </p>
<p>It is notable too, that the election did not go as planned for other parties. The Australian Conservatives clearly failed to capitalise on their merger with Family First, with a drop in their vote share to 3.1%.</p>
<p>For Labor, the result is far from a disaster, and offers them the chance to rebuild, perhaps with a new leader in Peter Malinauskas.</p>
<p>Critically, Australian democracy seems more accelerated, with Liberal governments in Victoria and Queensland ejected after just one term. Marshall will need to move quickly to ensure his new government does not follow this new trend.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93553/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rob Manwaring is affiliated with The Fabians.</span></em></p>While Labor lost in South Australia it was far from a disaster, and new Liberal premier Steven Marshall will need to move quickly to ensure he does not test voters’ patience.Rob Manwaring, Senior Lecturer, Politics and Public Policy, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/933552018-03-17T23:05:12Z2018-03-17T23:05:12ZLiberals win South Australian election as Xenophon crushed, while Labor stuns the Greens in Batman<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210888/original/file-20180317-104650-2ol8ue.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Steven Marshall will become the next South Australian premier after defeating Jay Weatherill's Labor government.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Tracey Nearmy</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With 66% of enrolled voters counted in Saturday’s South Australian election, the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/sa-election-2018/results/">ABC is calling</a> 24 of the 47 lower house seats for the Liberals, 18 for Labor and three independents. Two seats – Adelaide and Mawson – <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/sa-election-2018/results/list/?selector=indoubt&sort=az">are in doubt</a>. Pre-poll, postal and absent votes will not start to be counted until Tuesday.</p>
<p>While the Liberals won the election, the biggest losers were Nick Xenophon and his SA-BEST party. SA-BEST does not appear to have won a single lower house seat, while the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/sa-election-2018/guide/hart/">Liberals crushed Xenophon</a> in Hartley 58.6-41.4. When preferences are distributed, Labor could eliminate Xenophon from the final two candidates on Greens’ preferences.</p>
<p>Statewide primary votes were 37.4% Liberals (down 7.4% since the 2014 election), 33.9% Labor (down 1.9%), 13.7% SA-BEST, 6.6% Greens (down 2.1%) and 3.1% Australian Conservatives (down 3.0% from Family First’s 2014 vote). When counting is complete, I would expect Labor to fall somewhat, with the Liberals and Greens gaining.</p>
<p>Family First merged into the Conservatives last year, but this was not successful in South Australia. In my opinion, Family First had a catchier name than the Australian Conservatives.</p>
<p>In an October-to-December Newspoll, SA-BEST had 32% of the South Australian primary vote, and it was plausible that Xenophon could be the next premier. In the lead-up to the election, Xenophon was attacked by all sides. I believe the biggest reason for Xenophon’s flop was that he lacked a clear agenda to distinguish his party from the major parties.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nick-xenophon-could-be-south-australias-next-premier-while-turnbull-loses-his-25th-successive-newspoll-89290">Nick Xenophon could be South Australia's next premier, while Turnbull loses his 25th successive Newspoll</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Labor had governed South Australia for 16 years, and the “it’s time” factor appears to have contributed to the result. But this election was not the disaster Labor suffered after 14 to 16 years in power in Queensland, New South Wales and Tasmania at elections between 2011 and 2014.</p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2018/03/18/third-time-lucky-2/">the Poll Bludger</a>, Labor achieved about a two-point swing in its favour in two-party terms from the 2014 election, but it needed a three-point swing to win after a hostile redistribution. In 2014, Labor clung to power, despite losing the two-party vote 53.0-47.0.</p>
<p>In the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/sa-election-2018/results/lc/">upper house</a>, half of the 22 members were up for election using statewide proportional representation. With 11 to be elected, a quota is one-twelfth of the vote, or 8.3%. Currently, the Liberals have 3.78 quotas, Labor 3.56, SA-BEST 2.27, the Greens 0.72 and the Conservatives 0.42.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/xenophons-sa-best-slumps-in-a-south-australian-newspoll-while-turnbulls-better-pm-lead-narrows-92803">Xenophon's SA-BEST slumps in a South Australian Newspoll, while Turnbull's better PM lead narrows</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Optional above-the-line preferential voting was used at this election. The Liberals will win four seats, Labor three, SA-BEST two and the Greens one. Labor is currently well ahead of the Conservatives in the race for the last seat, but Labor’s vote will probably drop after election day. However, preferences from Dignity, Animal Justice and SA-BEST should help Labor against the Conservatives, with only Liberal Democrats’ preferences likely to flow the other way.</p>
<p>If Labor wins a fourth upper house seat, SA-BEST’s two seats would come at the expense of Dignity and the Conservatives. The overall upper house would then be eight Liberals, eight Labor, two Greens, two SA-BEST, one Advance SA (formerly SA-BEST) and one Conservative. The Liberals would need all of SA-BEST, Advance SA and Conservative to pass legislation opposed by Labor and the Greens.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2018/03/16/reachtel-liberal-34-labor-31-sa-best-16-south-australia/">final polls</a> for the South Australian election, from Newspoll and ReachTEL, gave the Liberals 34%, Labor 31% and SA-BEST 16-17%. The major parties, particularly the Liberals, performed better than expected, while SA-BEST performed worse.</p>
<h2>Labor defeats the Greens 54.1-45.9 at the Batman byelection</h2>
<p>With 74.5% of enrolled voters counted at <a href="http://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-21751-199.htm">Saturday’s Batman byelection</a>, Labor’s Ged Kearney defeated the Greens’ Alex Bhathal by a 54.1-45.9 margin, a 3.1% swing to Labor since the 2016 election. Primary votes were 42.7% Kearney (up 7.4%), 40.3% Bhathal (up 4.1%), 6.4% Conservatives and 2.9% Animal Justice. The Liberals won 19.9% at the 2016 election, but did not contest the byelection.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210891/original/file-20180317-104699-xkaukn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ged Kearney celebrates her win in Batman with Opposition Leader Bill Shorten.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Crosling</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the <a href="http://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HousePollingPlaceFirstPrefs-21751-3099.htm">Northcote West</a> booth, Labor and the Greens’ two-party results are the wrong way round. The correction of this error will push Labor’s overall margin down to 53.8-46.2, but postals counted so far have strongly favoured Labor. </p>
<p>At byelections, there are no Greens-favouring absent votes, so Labor’s lead is likely to increase as more postals are counted.</p>
<p>Labor received large swings in its favour in the southern part of Batman, the more Greens-favouring part. Kearney was a far better fit for this part of the electorate than the right-aligned David Feeney. It is also possible there was a backlash against the Greens for <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/greens-make-eleventh-hour-pitch-for-conservative-vote-in-batman-20180316-p4z4rd.html">courting Liberal votes</a> over opposition to Labor’s plan to alter the tax treatment of franking credits.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/with-feeney-gone-greens-sniff-a-chance-in-batman-and-has-xenophons-bubble-burst-in-south-australia-91059">With Feeney gone, Greens sniff a chance in Batman, and has Xenophon's bubble burst in South Australia?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>For Bill Shorten and federal Labor, the Batman result will be a huge relief. If Labor had lost Batman, the media would have seen it as a backlash against Labor’s tax plan.</p>
<p>While Labor lost the South Australian election, it was not a disaster. Federal parties generally do better in states where the opposite party is in power, so Labor could do very well in South Australia at the next federal election.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93355/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After 16 years in government, the Liberals oust Labor in South Australia – but the biggest disasters of the night were Nick Xenophon and SA-BEST, with Xenophon not even winning his seat.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/934852018-03-16T02:21:54Z2018-03-16T02:21:54ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on a ‘super Saturday’ of elections<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Qb0jF_6-nrg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Lawrence Pratchett about this weekend’s federal Batman byelection and South Australian state election. They discuss the mood among voters, issues surrounding Adani and Bill Shorten’s tax policy announcement, as well as the federal implications of the South Australian result.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93485/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Lawrence Pratchett about this weekend’s elections.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLawrence Pratchett, Dean of Business, Government and Law, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/932652018-03-15T19:09:23Z2018-03-15T19:09:23ZAs South Australia heads to the polls, the state is at a crossroads<p>Uncertainty is nothing new to South Australia. Over the past decade, the state has faced a range of economic and political unknowns. </p>
<p>In 2014, BHP’s decision not to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/bhp-changes-its-tune-on-olympic-dam-project-20140802-zzp9d.html">expand its Olympic Dam site</a> triggered a period of economic uncertainty. A year later, South Australia had the highest unemployment in the nation. Further, the state was hit with the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-08/holden-closure-australia-history-car-manufacturing/9015562">closure of the Holden plant</a>, the uncertainty over the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-22/billion-dollar-whyalla-plan-unveiled/9282706">steelworks in Whyalla</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-caused-south-australias-state-wide-blackout-66268">the blackouts of 2016</a>. </p>
<p>The incumbent Labor government, seeking a record fifth term in office, has been active. Premier Jay Weatherill, and his indefatigable treasurer, Tom Koutsantonis, are keen to birth a “new economy” in South Australia. In effect, the government is trying to diversify and strengthen the state since the decline of the resources boom. </p>
<p>As South Australians head to the polls on Saturday, it remains unclear which vision of the state’s future will most likely attract their vote.</p>
<p>Labor is gambling big by spending big. Following classic Keynesian economics, its stimulus agenda includes a A$2 billion infrastructure spend, high-speed internet, extending the tram network, and a bold target of 75% renewables by 2025. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-would-pokies-reform-in-south-australia-wipe-out-many-of-26-000-jobs-93189">FactCheck: would pokies reform in South Australia wipe out 'many' of 26,000 jobs?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In contrast, Steven Marshall’s Liberals favour cuts to payroll tax, cuts to electricity bills, and less ambitious infrastructure spending (40,000 homes with solar and batteries, compared with Labor’s 50,000).</p>
<p>In addition, the Liberals have focused on improving electricity inflow from interstate, and new agencies to improve productivity and infrastructure development. They were also pointing to Labor’s policy problems in TAFE, health and – most notably – <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/icac-report-on-oakden-aged-care-home-released/9492008">child protection and mental health</a>.</p>
<p>Marshall has been more sure-footed in his second tilt at outwitting Labor’s formidable electoral machine. He has seemingly put to bed internal party divisions that haunted previous campaigns.</p>
<p>The Liberals are also hoping they can capitalise on a favourable <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Electorates/Redistributions/2017/sa/index.htm">electoral boundary redistribution</a>. The Liberal vote has long been concentrated in rural seats, and Marshall is seeking broader appeal with his vision for a “Strong Plan for Real Change”. </p>
<p>What was looking like a relatively classic Labor versus Liberal fight was thrown into confusion with Nick Xenophon’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/xenophons-shock-resignation-from-senate-to-run-for-state-seat-85322">return to South Australian politics</a>. An initial honeymoon saw a surge of support for his SA-Best party, now running 36 candidates across the 47 seats in the lower house.</p>
<p>In December, <a href="https://theconversation.com/nick-xenophon-could-be-south-australias-next-premier-while-turnbull-loses-his-25th-successive-newspoll-89290">a shock Newspoll</a> result had SA-Best’s primary vote at a huge 32%. Subsequent polls seem to suggest this might have deflated.</p>
<p>Xenophon is seeking to capitalise on what he perceives to the “broken politics” of the old two-party axis, with a tired Labor government and the Liberals with a leader whose personal popularity has rarely exceeded the premier’s. </p>
<p>Xenophon has managed something that Australian politics has not seen since the late 1990s, with a centrist challenger posing an electoral threat to the major parties. The vote for the two major parties has been in decline for some time in Australia. The 2016 federal election produced the largest-ever vote for the minors. </p>
<p>South Australian politics, likes its economy, is also in transition. </p>
<p>Ironically, the surge in support for the SA-Best candidates seems to have had a negative impact on the other minor parties. Polling suggests the vote share for the Greens is down from about 10% to 6%. In the Legislative Council, Kelly Vincent, the Dignity candidate, looks set to lose her seat. Limited media space means the other minors are struggling to get heard.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-australian-soft-voters-inclined-to-change-their-government-but-not-impressed-with-the-alternative-93198">South Australian 'soft' voters inclined to change their government but not impressed with the alternative</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The other striking development is that this is the first election to test the electoral strength of Cory Bernardi’s Australian Conservatives since their merger with Family First (another party with South Australian origins). The Australian Conservatives have taken up one of Labor’s abandoned causes: to establish a nuclear waste facility in South Australia.</p>
<p>With an electoral race this uncertain and with no clear front-runner, many close seats will come down to preferences and pre-polls. </p>
<p>Remarkably for a leader, Marshall has already cast his vote. Indeed, the Liberals are wagering that like-minded voters will also vote early, and they hope to capitalise on the release of the <a href="https://icac.sa.gov.au/content/oakden">ICAC report</a> into the abuse at the Oakden mental health facility. The report damaged Labor’s campaign a fortnight out from the polls.</p>
<p>Labor, ever-savvy, is playing a clever game with preferences, splitting the ticket across the state between SA-Best and the Liberals. </p>
<p>Intriguingly, Labor has done a deal with the Australian Conservatives to secure their preferences in three marginal Labor seats (Light, Lee and Newland), in return putting the Conservatives third on their Legislative Council ticket. </p>
<p>On Saturday night, the focus will be on the seat of Hartley – a microcosm of the election. Nick Xenophon will be seeking to beat Liberal incumbent Vincent Tarzia and fend off former ALP minister Grace Portolesi. The outcome of this three-horse race is still uncertain, much like the state’s wider economic and political future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93265/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rob Manwaring is a member of The Fabians. </span></em></p>Much is in play for South Australia in this weekend’s state election – politically and economically.Rob Manwaring, Senior Lecturer, Politics and Public Policy, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/929282018-03-13T10:33:48Z2018-03-13T10:33:48ZFactCheck: does South Australia have the ‘highest energy prices’ in the nation and ‘the least reliable grid’?<blockquote>
<p>Look, this is probably the single most important issue to most households in South Australia — what they’ve been left with now are the highest energy prices in Australia — some say in the world — and the least reliable grid.</p>
<p>And it’s all because this government decided we had to go headlong into intermittent renewable energy without the baseload to support that transition.</p>
<p><strong>– SA Liberal Party leader Steven Marshall, speaking at the <a href="http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/sa-votes-leaders-debate/NS1806S001S00">SA Votes: Leaders’ Debate</a>, Adelaide, March 5, 2018</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Electricity prices and the reliability of South Australia’s energy grid will be key issues for voters in this Saturday’s state election. </p>
<p>During a public leaders’ debate, SA Liberal Party leader Steven Marshall claimed that, under the Weatherill Labor government, South Australians had been left with “the highest energy prices in Australia – some say in the world – and the least reliable grid”.</p>
<p>Marshall said this was “all because this [Labor] government decided we had to go headlong into intermittent renewable energy without the baseload to support that transition”.</p>
<p>Let’s look at the evidence.</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>A spokesperson for Marshall told The Conversation that when the opposition leader said energy prices, he was referring to retail electricity prices.</p>
<p>To support Marshall’s statement, the spokesperson provided The Conversation with <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/45/ESOO_2017_AEMO20180326-22189-ni1kvl.PDF?1522072784">two</a> <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/46/SA_System_Strength_201720180326-22189-lnq050.pdf?1522072786">2017 documents</a> from the Australian Energy Market Operator, one 2015 document from the <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/47/AER_State_of_the_energy_market20180326-22189-3tnyfb.pdf?1522072788">Australian Energy Regulator</a>, <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/48/20170609-Electricity-1July2016SAElectricityPriceIncreases-AdviceToTreasu.._20180326-22189-16wvsmj.pdf?1522072790">a letter</a> from the Essential Services Commission of South Australia (ESCOSA) to the SA Minister for Energy Tom Koutsantonis, and a <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/49/highest_prices_AFR20180326-22189-lq1iyd.PDF?1522072792">2017 article</a> from the Australian Financial Review.</p>
<p>Regarding the reliability of South Australia’s grid, the spokesperson said the Australian Energy Market Operator’s <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/45/ESOO_2017_AEMO20180326-22189-ni1kvl.PDF?1522072784">Electricity Statement of Opportunities</a> shows that “in 2017-18 South Australia has the highest percentage of unserved energy at 0.0025%”, adding that “the reliability standard is 0.0020%”. </p>
<p>You can read the full response from Marshall’s office <a href="https://theconversation.com/full-response-from-steven-marshall-for-a-factcheck-on-electricity-prices-in-south-australia-93131">here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>SA Liberal Party leader Steven Marshall said South Australia has “the highest energy prices in Australia — some say in the world”.</p>
<p>It’s true that South Australia has the highest retail electricity prices in Australia (although not in the world). </p>
<p>Marshall also said South Australia has the “the least reliable grid”. </p>
<p>In the energy industry, the word “reliability” means having enough energy generation capacity and inter-regional network capacity to supply customers.</p>
<p>The Australian Energy Market Operator is currently preparing estimates of unserved energy (the measure of reliability) for 2016-17. It is possible that there will be unserved energy for South Australia over this period.</p>
<p>However, it’s far from clear that South Australia would have had the highest level of unserved energy in the National Electricity Market.</p>
<p>People in South Australia do experience interruptions to their electricity supply. </p>
<p>But more than 97% of these are due to distribution outages (caused by things like trees falling on power lines) and are unrelated to the source of electricity – renewable or otherwise – flowing through the power lines.</p>
<p>There are many factors that affect electricity prices, grid reliability and power outages. Increasing levels of renewable energy generation is one factor. </p>
<p>Therefore, Marshall’s assertion that these outcomes are “all because this [Labor] government decided we had to go headlong into intermittent renewable energy without the baseload to support that transition” is incorrect.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Responding to the sources</h2>
<p>The sources provided by Marshall’s spokesperson are from reputable government agencies. However, it’s far from clear that the sources support the conclusions Marshall drew in the leaders’ debate. </p>
<p>For example, the spokesperson cited an Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) report stating that South Australia would breach the regulator’s reliability standard in 2017-18.</p>
<p>But this is a projection, and doesn’t include some measures that have already been taken to ensure that the grid is reliable in 2017-18. </p>
<p>You can read more analysis of the sources provided by Marshall’s office <a href="https://theconversation.com/full-response-from-a-spokesperson-for-steven-marshall-for-a-factcheck-on-electricity-issues-in-south-australia-93131">here</a>.</p>
<h2>‘Energy’ vs ‘electricity’ prices</h2>
<p>In making his statement, Marshall referred to “energy” prices. Energy and electricity prices are different things. Marshall’s spokesperson later told The Conversation that the MP was referring to “household electricity prices”.</p>
<p>Energy is a broad term that includes sources such as petrol, diesel, gas and renewables, among other things. Electricity is a specific form of energy that can be produced from many different sources.</p>
<p>The retail electricity price is what you’ll typically see in your home electricity bill, and is usually expressed in cents per kilowatt-hour (c/kWh). </p>
<h2>Does South Australia have the highest retail electricity prices in the nation?</h2>
<p>According the Australian Energy Market <a href="https://www.aemc.gov.au/markets-reviews-advice/2017-residential-electricity-price-trends">2017 Residential Electricity Price Trends</a> report, South Australia does indeed have the highest retail prices in the nation. Current prices for the typical SA customer are 37.79c/kWh.</p>
<p>According to that report, the Australian Capital Territory has the lowest retail electricity prices in Australia, at around 23.68 c/kWh.</p>
<p>The retail electricity price includes the wholesale price of the electricity, the network costs (or the “poles and wires” that bring the electricity to your home), retailing costs, and levies related to “green schemes” (such as the renewable energy target or solar feed-in tariffs). </p>
<p>The chart below shows how the different components contributed the electricity price increase in South Australia between 2007-08 and 2015-16.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/NujQW/5/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="100%" height="450"></iframe>
<p>For many years the drivers for retail prices have been network costs – which have very little to do with renewables.</p>
<p>But over the past 18 months, there has also been a increase in <em>wholesale</em> electricity prices across the entire National Electricity Market. A range of factors have contributed to this. These include the increase in gas prices, and the tightening of the supply-demand balance.</p>
<p>The closures of South Australia’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Power_Station_(South_Australia)">Northern Power Station</a> in 2016 and Victoria’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_Power_Station">Hazelwood Power Station</a> have contributed to a reduction in electricity supply (capacity).</p>
<p>The ACCC is also <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Retail%20Electricity%20Inquiry%20-%20Preliminary%20report%20-%2013%20November%202017.pdf">investigating</a> “transfer pricing” – which is when a business that’s an energy generator as well as a retailer shifts costs from one part of its business to another. </p>
<p>But as I’ll explain below, even if wholesale prices become the main driver of retail prices, it’s not accurate to place the blame squarely on renewables.</p>
<h2>Does South Australia have the highest retail electricity prices in the world?</h2>
<p>Because of differences in tax structures and energy systems, it’s no simple matter to compare energy and electricity prices between countries. </p>
<p>A 2017 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission report <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Retail%20Electricity%20Inquiry%20-%20Preliminary%20report%20-%2013%20November%202017.pdf">compared retail electricity prices</a> among countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).</p>
<p>Australian prices were in the lower end of the range, but above the OECD total. While SA prices are above the Australian national average, they would still not be the most expensive in the OECD on a <a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-are-australians-paying-twice-as-much-for-electricity-as-americans-69980">purchasing power parity</a> basis. </p>
<h2>Does South Australia have the ‘least reliable grid’?</h2>
<p>In the context of energy supply, the word “reliable” will mean different things to different people. </p>
<p>The Australian Energy Market Commission defines “reliability” as having sufficient generation, demand side response, and interconnector capacity in the system to generate and transport electricity to meet consumer demand.</p>
<p>Under this definition, the National Energy Market meets a <a href="https://www.aemc.gov.au/markets-reviews-advice/reliability-standard-and-settings-review-2018">reliability standard</a> as long as the maximum expected amount of “unserved energy” in any region doesn’t exceed 0.002% of the region’s annual energy consumption.</p>
<p>“Unserved energy” means the amount of customer demand that can’t be supplied within a region of the National Electricity Market, <em>specifically</em> due to a shortage of generation or interconnector capacity.</p>
<p>Marshall’s office did refer The Conversation to the AEMO’s <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/45/ESOO_2017_AEMO20180326-22189-ni1kvl.PDF?1522072784">Electricity Statement of Opportunities</a>, which predicts South Australia’s unserved energy over 2017-18 at 0.0025%, just above the reliability standard.</p>
<p>However, and crucially, these projections do not include the new state-owned diesel generators (which can provide up to 276 megawatts) <a href="https://theconversation.com/full-response-from-steven-marshall-for-a-factcheck-on-electricity-prices-in-south-australia-93131">among other things</a>. And these projections are made in order for the market to respond, and prevent the shortfall from occurring.</p>
<p>Between 2010-11 and 2015-16, the amount of unserved energy in the National Electricity Market was zero. </p>
<p>AEMO is currently preparing estimates of unserved energy for 2016-17. It is possible that there will be unserved energy for South Australia over this period.</p>
<p>However, it’s far from clear that South Australia would have had the highest level of unserved energy.</p>
<p>In fact, AEMO directed more <a href="https://www.aemo.com.au/media/Files/About%20the%20industry/Fact%20sheets/AEMO_FactSheet_LoadShedding_2015.pdf">load-shedding</a> in New South Wales than South Australia on proportional basis. If this load-shedding were to be considered unserved energy, then New South Wales may technically have been less reliable.</p>
<h2>Then why has South Australia had so many blackouts?</h2>
<p>The technical definition above might not be of much comfort to South Australians experiencing power outages.</p>
<p>The average South Australian experienced <a href="https://www.aer.gov.au/networks-pipelines/network-performance/sa-power-networks-network-information-rin-responses">970 cumulative minutes of blackout in 2016-17</a>. This was extraordinarily high due to the statewide blackouts in September 2016 caused by extreme weather. In 2015-16, the average total was <a href="https://www.aer.gov.au/networks-pipelines/network-performance/sa-power-networks-network-information-rin-responses">173 minutes</a>. </p>
<p>But across the National Electricity Market the vast majority of these – over 97% – are due to distribution outages, which can be caused by anything from trees falling on power lines to “<a href="https://www.sapowernetworks.com.au/centric/customers/power_outages_information/high_voltage_interruptions_and_causes.jsp">possum flashovers</a>”. These occur regardless of the source of electricity flowing through the power lines.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209478/original/file-20180308-146675-yz0t0t.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sources of supply interruptions in the NEM: 2007-08 to 2015-16.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AEMC 2017, Reliability Frameworks Review, Interim Report (page 54)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>South Australia may have the highest number of supply interruptions, but this is essentially unrelated to electricity supply mix. </p>
<h2>Is this ‘all because’ of state Labor policy?</h2>
<p>No. Even if wholesale prices become the main driver of retail prices, it’s not accurate to place the blame squarely on renewables. </p>
<p>Increased renewable energy generation may have contributed to decisions for some power plants to close. But so would other factors – such the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-01/worksafe-notices-detail-extent-of-repairs-needed-at-hazelwood/8082318">A$400 million safety upgrade</a> required for the Hazelwood power plant to have stayed open.</p>
<p>As mentioned above, other factors such as gas prices and competition issues have also contributed to increases in wholesale electricity prices. And as shown below, these are not confined to South Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/210029/original/file-20180313-30979-jg4ezc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Electricity futures prices for 2017–18.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ACCC 2017, Retail Electricity Pricing
Inquiry, Preliminary report (page 56)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Gas prices are particularly important in the South Australian context, which is the most gas-dependent region in the National Electricity Market. </p>
<p>In addition, the SA market is the <a href="https://www.aer.gov.au/publications/state-of-the-energy-market-reports/state-of-the-energy-market-may-2017">most concentrated in terms of competition</a>.</p>
<p>In this sense, Marshall was not correct to say that price increases are “all because this [Labor] government decided we had to go headlong into intermittent renewable energy without the baseload to support that transition”. </p>
<p>Indeed, a large proportion of the existing renewable investment in South Australia has been financed as a result of the federal Renewable Energy Target, introduced by the Howard government, rather than state policy. <strong>– Dylan McConnell</strong></p>
<h2>Blind review</h2>
<p>I broadly agree with the verdict.</p>
<p>The price question is not contentious. South Australia has the highest retail electricity prices in Australia – but not in the world.</p>
<p>An argument could be made for South Australia being the least reliable system in the National Energy Market – if you look beyond the technical definition. A series of power losses and near misses in 2016-17 clearly raise questions for SA residents.</p>
<p>But, as the author rightly points out, the vast majority of these were caused by storms and other technical issues – not by renewables. <strong>– David Blowers</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>The Conversation is fact-checking the South Australian election. If you see a ‘fact’ you’d like checked, let us know by sending a note via <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">email</a>, <a href="http://www.twitter.com/conversationEDU">Twitter</a> or <a href="http://www.facebook.com/conversationEDU">Facebook</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>The Conversation thanks <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversation-is-fact-checking-the-south-australian-election-and-we-want-to-hear-from-you-92809">The University of South Australia</a> for its support.</strong></p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>The Conversation’s FactCheck unit is the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversations-factcheck-granted-accreditation-by-international-fact-checking-network-at-poynter-74363">Read more here</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Have you seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">checkit@theconversation.edu.au</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92928/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dylan McConnell has received funding from the AEMC's Consumer Advocacy Panel and Energy Consumers Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Blowers does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>SA Liberal Party leader Steven Marshall said that state Labor policy had left South Australians with ‘the highest energy prices in Australia’ and ‘the least reliable grid’. Is that right?Dylan McConnell, Researcher at the Australian German Climate and Energy College, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/931892018-03-13T10:33:18Z2018-03-13T10:33:18ZFactCheck: would pokies reform in South Australia wipe out ‘many’ of 26,000 jobs?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209872/original/file-20180312-30994-1tzmw8n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=4%2C3%2C1017%2C706&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Australian Hotels Association (South Australia) has campaigned against the SA Best party's proposed poker machine reforms.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/threthny/4853564182/in/photolist-8oTMx5-5QFRFa-4wy4pE-bA8vTo-bD7Z7u-4wy3QQ-9BUVPQ-6wLx96-KcQZ4j-4wy4tG-8sHLLK-AWggWg-4wtUrH-4EStJF-4NA64S-8j1Nea-8ypaEx-7DTtwD-asQgRY-7Zi8H3-brw3CQ-asQgTm-p8WtE-p8TF8-p8JR3-p8KL9-p8JkF-4ESu6c-4wy5f3-dMW9LX-4wy5by-8Fdwbz-6ezmJt-4wtTtg-4wy3M5-nepi4-8kr4kt-9bZVNf-4wtUki-BTuBzv-4wy4cU-7snQNm-8J8PhA-fr6Gnu-Kf9kF5-JjtovB-Ki4J3k-4wy48q-4wtT8z-4wtTMB">Threthny/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>This plan will decimate hotels across South Australia, wiping out many of the 26,000 jobs it directly creates.</p>
<p><strong>Australian Hotels Association (South Australia) chief executive Ian Horne, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/19/sa-best-gambling-policy-deal-maker-and-deal-breaker-nick-xenophon-says">quoted in The Guardian</a>, February 21, 2018</strong></p>
<p>… a majority of pub employees (over 26,000 in SA!) will likely lose their jobs.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/32/Lonsdale_Letter.pdf?1520471911">Letter</a> signed by the McCallum family, owners of The Lonsdale Hotel, February-March, 2018</strong> </p>
</blockquote>
<p>SA Best leader Nick Xenophon has said that if his party wins the balance of power in this Saturday’s South Australian state election, poker machine reform would be “a key issue in any negotiations” about the formation of the next government. </p>
<p>Among other reforms, Xenophon has <a href="https://sabest.org.au/state-policies/gambling-reform/">proposed</a> a reduction in the number of poker machines in some pubs by 50% over five years, and the introduction of a $1 maximum bet per spin for machines in all venues other than the Adelaide casino. </p>
<p>The South Australian branch of the Australian Hotels Association (AHA SA), led by chief executive Ian Horne, says the SA Best policy would “decimate hotels across South Australia, wiping out many of the 26,000 jobs it directly creates”. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/32/Lonsdale_Letter.pdf?1520471911">letter signed</a> and shared by the owners of one Adelaide hotel went further, saying “a majority” of 26,000 South Australian pub employees would “likely lose their jobs”.</p>
<p>Is that right?</p>
<h2>Checking the source</h2>
<p>In response to a request for sources to support the claim made in the Lonsdale Hotel letter, Keith McCallum referred The Conversation to the AHA SA. </p>
<p>A spokesperson for the AHA SA pointed The Conversation to a <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/38/Ferrier_Hodgeson_Newsletter_February_2018.pdf?1520737924">February 2018 newsletter</a> from Ferrier Hodgson Adelaide partner David Kidman, and the <a href="http://www.nowaynick.com.au/">‘No Way Nick’ website</a>, authorised by AHA SA chief executive Ian Horne.</p>
<p>The Conversation asked the AHA spokesperson to quantify what the association meant by “many” jobs, but did not receive a response to that question.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>The claim made by Australian Hotels Association of South Australia that proposed poker machine reforms would wipe out “many of the 26,000 jobs” in the South Australian hotel industry appears to be grossly exaggerated.</p>
<p>The Australian Hotels Association did not provide modelling or evidence to show how “many” jobs might be affected.</p>
<p>The number of gaming related jobs in South Australian hotels in 2015 was around 3,000. In the same year, less than 20% of the South Australian hotel industry’s revenue came from gaming. </p>
<p>The reforms proposed by SA Best aim to reduce the number of poker machines in some hotels, and reduce maximum bet limits, rather than removing the machines entirely. </p>
<p>Based on these factors, the Australian Hotels Association claim greatly overstates potential job losses.</p>
<p>In addition, at least some of the money not spent on poker machines would be spent on other recreational activities.</p>
<p>This means that potential job losses due to poker machine reforms may be partially offset by increases in employment elsewhere in the economy – or even within the same hotels.</p>
<hr>
<h2>What changes is SA Best proposing?</h2>
<p>Among a suite of reforms, the SA Best party <a href="https://sabest.org.au/state-policies/gambling-reform/">wants</a> to reduce the number of poker machines in pubs with 10 or more machines by 10% each year over the next five years. This reduction wouldn’t apply to not-for-profit community clubs or the Adelaide Casino. </p>
<p>SA Best is also proposing the introduction of a $1 maximum bet per spin and a maximum win of $500 for machines in pubs and and not-for-profit community clubs. </p>
<p>SA Best leader Nick Xenophon said these reforms would reduce the number of poker machines in South Australia from <a href="http://www.ahasa.com.au/__files/f/19639/Economic_Contribution_of_the_Hotel_Industry_in_South_Australia.pdf">around 12,000</a> to around 8,000, and reduce potential personal losses on pokies in pubs and community clubs from around $1,200 an hour to around $120 per hour.</p>
<p>The policy includes a poker machine buyback scheme, a “jobs fund” to assist affected employees, and the possibility of compensation for smaller poker machine operators.</p>
<h2>Would ‘many of 26,000 jobs’ be wiped out?</h2>
<p>First of all, let’s look at how many people work in the hotel industry in South Australia, and how many of those jobs are related to gaming. </p>
<p>This information is not available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.</p>
<p>However, in January 2016, the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies published a <a href="http://www.ahasa.com.au/__files/f/19639/Economic_Contribution_of_the_Hotel_Industry_in_South_Australia.pdf">report</a> that examined the economic contribution of the hotel industry in South Australia. </p>
<p>The report was commissioned by the AHA SA, but it adopts a sound statistical approach to measuring employment in the hotel sector.</p>
<p>According to that report, a total of 26,250 staff were employed in hotels in South Australia in 2015. Of those, 3,048 were classified as gaming staff (or 11.6% of total employment).</p>
<p>Of the 26,250 people employed across the industry, the majority were casual staff (rather than permanent or part-time staff).</p>
<p>The SA Best proposal is to reduce poker machine numbers and maximum bets in some venues, as opposed to removing pokies entirely. So it’s clear that not all 3,000 gaming staff would be at risk.</p>
<p>However, the AHA SA is arguing that reduced revenue from pokies would threaten other jobs. </p>
<p>According to the same <a href="http://www.ahasa.com.au/__files/f/19639/Economic_Contribution_of_the_Hotel_Industry_in_South_Australia.pdf">report</a>, in 2015, 17% of the South Australian hotel industry’s annual revenue came from gaming. Around 80% of revenue came from liquor sales, food and beverage sales and accommodation.</p>
<p>So even in light of reduced gaming revenue, assertions that “many” or “the majority” of 26,000 pub employees would be affected appear to be unsubstantiated. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/fN5nA/3/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<h2>Jobs may be shifted elsewhere</h2>
<p>To understand what might happen if Xenophon’s proposed reforms were introduced, we need to take two factors into account.</p>
<p>On the one hand, if less money is spent on poker machines, then the number of hours requested to service gaming activities decreases. This could result in less demand for labour, and hence a potential reduction in the number of those roles.</p>
<p>On the other hand, money not spent on gaming could be redirected to other recreational activities – like going to cafes, restaurants and cinemas – or to the retail sector. This would mean that new jobs would be created in other parts of the economy. </p>
<p>Spending diverted to food and beverage sales and other forms of entertainment could also see new jobs created within the same venues.</p>
<p>Another <a href="https://www.adelaide.edu.au/saces/docs/the-south-australian-gambling-industry.pdf">report conducted in 2006</a> by the South Australian Centre for Economic Studies, commissioned by the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority, found that following the introduction of electronic gaming machines in South Australia, employment in hotels did increase. </p>
<p>However, most of this increase came at the expense of other businesses, like cafes and restaurants. This shows that there is a strong substitution effect in employment between gaming activities and other recreational activities. </p>
<p>Having been published in 2006, the exact numbers in the report are dated. But the qualitative argument is unlikely to have changed. This conclusion is also supported by <a href="https://www.socialactionresearchcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Removing-poker-machines-from-hotels-and-clubs-in-Tasmania-Economic-Considerations.pdf">more recent studies</a>.</p>
<p>In summary, while some of the 3,000 gaming-related jobs in the hotel industry may be lost as a result of the proposed poker machine reforms, claims that “many” or “the majority” of 26,000 jobs would be lost are grossly exaggerated, and not supported by available evidence or existing research. <strong>– Fabrizio Carmignani</strong></p>
<h2>Blind review</h2>
<p>I agree with the conclusions of this FactCheck.</p>
<p>The assertions that “a majority” or “many” of the 26,000 jobs in the South Australian hotel industry would be lost if the proposals put forward by SA Best were to be implemented are gross exaggerations.</p>
<p>They might not be quite as gross an exaggeration as the <a href="https://theconversation.com/factcheck-are-around-5-000-jobs-at-risk-if-pokies-are-removed-from-pubs-and-clubs-in-tasmania-91149">analogous assertions</a> made in Tasmania during that state’s recent election campaign, but they are an exaggeration, nonetheless. <strong>– Saul Eslake</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>The Conversation is fact-checking the South Australian election. If you see a ‘fact’ you’d like checked, let us know by sending a note via <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">email</a>, <a href="http://www.twitter.com/conversationEDU">Twitter</a> or <a href="http://www.facebook.com/conversationEDU">Facebook</a>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>The Conversation thanks <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversation-is-fact-checking-the-south-australian-election-and-we-want-to-hear-from-you-92809">The University of South Australia</a> for its support.</strong></p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/162128/original/image-20170323-13486-72k52f.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Conversation FactCheck is accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>The Conversation’s FactCheck unit was the first fact-checking team in Australia and one of the first worldwide to be accredited by the International Fact-Checking Network, an alliance of fact-checkers hosted at the Poynter Institute in the US. <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conversations-factcheck-granted-accreditation-by-international-fact-checking-network-at-poynter-74363">Read more here</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>Have you seen a “fact” worth checking? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at <a href="mailto:checkit@theconversation.edu.au">checkit@theconversation.edu.au</a>. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link or a photo if possible.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93189/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fabrizio Carmignani received funding from the Australian Research Council for a project on the estimation of the linear continuous piecewise model and its application in macroeconomics.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Saul Eslake does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Australian Hotels Association of South Australia claims poker machine reforms proposed by Nick Xenophon’s SA Best party would wipe out ‘many of the 26,000’ jobs in the hotel industry. Is that right?Fabrizio Carmignani, Professor, Griffith Business School, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/930682018-03-12T19:02:34Z2018-03-12T19:02:34ZRise in protest votes sounds warning bell for major parties<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209633/original/file-20180309-30969-1c5bxrf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Minor parties led by high-profile candidates such as Nick Xenophon are particularly appealing away from the big cities.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Russell Millard</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Protest politics is on the rise in Australia. At the 2016 federal election, votes for minor parties hit their highest level since 1949. More than one in four Australians voted for someone other than the Liberals, Nationals, ALP or Greens in the Senate, and more than one in eight did likewise for the House of Representatives. First-preference Senate votes for minor parties leapt from 12% in 2004 to 26% in 2016. </p>
<p>The major parties are particularly on the nose in the regions. The further you drive from a capital city, the higher the minor party vote and the more it has risen.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209826/original/file-20180311-30961-e1ahad.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 1 – Minor party vote over time by distance to the GPO.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Grattan Institute</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What’s going on? <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/a-crisis-of-trust/">A new Grattan Institute report</a> finds that the minor party vote is mostly a protest against the major parties. It’s a vote for “anyone but them” in favour of a diverse group of parties, often headed by “brand name” personalities.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209827/original/file-20180311-30972-psksgm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 2 – Minor party vote by state 2016 election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Grattan Institute</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So why are Australian voters angry? And why are they particularly angry in the regions?</p>
<p>Falling trust in government explains much of the dissatisfaction. Since 2007, there has been a significant increase in the share of people who believe that politicians look after themselves and that government is run by a few big interests. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/209828/original/file-20180311-30986-h1e1a6.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Figure 3 – Trust in government over time.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Grattan Institute</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The growing belief that government is increasingly conducted in the interests of the rulers rather than the ruled feeds voter disillusionment. Minor party voters have less trust in government than those who vote for the majors. And outsider parties have tapped into these concerns with their promises to “keep the bastards honest” and to “drain the swamp”. </p>
<p>Economic factors are less important than you might expect. The rise in the minor party vote doesn’t seem to be about stagnant wages or rising inequality: <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/a-crisis-of-trust/">the vote grew most strongly when real wages were rising but inequality wasn’t</a>. And the biggest increase in the minor party vote was between 2010 and 2013 – <a href="http://ada.edu.au/ADAData/AES/Trends%20in%20Australian%20Political%20Opinion%201987-2016.pdf">when Australians were more optimistic about their immediate financial future</a> than at any other point in the past 15 years. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/discontents-identity-politics-and-institutions-in-a-time-of-populism-80882">Discontents: identity, politics and institutions in a time of populism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But economics is still relevant. The minor party vote increased as unemployment rose, and <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/globalisation">minor party voters are more likely</a> than others to have negative views about globalisation and <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/free-trade-agreements-generally-2">free trade</a>. The protectionist economic policies of many minor parties may therefore account for some of their appeal. And some of their anti-globalisation and “Australia first” rhetoric also <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/a-crisis-of-trust/">taps into broader cultural anxiety</a> about the pace and direction of change. </p>
<p>Many minor parties appeal to voters who don’t like the way our society is changing. Minor parties want to protect the cultural symbols and narratives associated with “traditional Australia”. They are <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/date-of-australia-day-2">more likely to oppose</a> changing the date of Australia Day, for example. </p>
<p>These views are particularly prominent among One Nation voters: <a href="http://scanlonfoundation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ScanlonFoundation_MappingSocialCohesion_2017.pdf">more than 90% of them strongly agree that maintaining an Australian way of life and culture is important</a>. They are also much more likely to be sceptical about the benefits of immigration: <a href="http://scanlonfoundation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ScanlonFoundation_MappingSocialCohesion_2017.pdf">about 50% of One Nation voters believe that multiculturalism has not been good for Australia</a>, compared with 15% of Liberal/Nationals voters (the next highest group). </p>
<p>This sense of being left behind by the pace of economic and social change is more prevalent in regional Australia, where the minor party vote is higher and growing faster. Regions hold <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/regional-patterns-of-australias-economy-and-population/">a falling share of Australia’s population and therefore of Australia’s economy</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-sex-marriage-results-crush-the-idea-that-australian-voters-crave-conservatism-87316">Same-sex marriage results crush the idea that Australian voters crave conservatism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the same time, Australia’s cultural symbols are becoming more city-centric: <a href="https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/essay/2011/06/fair-share">less about mateship and more about multiculturalism</a>. People in regional areas are sensitive to this cultural change and are attracted to parties that promise to restore cultural and political power to the regions. Several of the more popular minor parties to arrive on the political scene in recent years – notably One Nation and Nick Xenophon – have gained higher support in the country than they have in the cities. </p>
<p>The rising minor party vote sends a signal to our major party politicians: Australians are not satisfied with politics as usual. Major parties seeking to increase their appeal should focus on what matters to voters: restoring trust and social cohesion. </p>
<p>Rebuilding trust will be a slow process. A period of leadership stability and policy delivery could go a long way. And improving the way we do our politics – reforming political donation laws and tightening regulation of lobbying and political entitlements – could help reduce the incidence of trust-sapping scandals and reassure the public that the system is working for them. </p>
<p>Politicians should also seek to dampen rather than inflame cultural differences. Politicians can lead by stressing the common ground between city and country and between communities with different backgrounds. </p>
<p>Failure to heed the warning will mean more elections where Australians unleash their displeasure at the ballot box.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Grattan Institute began with contributions to its endowment of $15 million from each of the Federal and Victorian Governments, $4 million from BHP Billiton, and $1 million from NAB. In order to safeguard its independence, Grattan Institute’s board controls this endowment. The funds are invested and contribute to funding Grattan Institute's activities. Grattan Institute also receives funding from corporates, foundations, and individuals to support its general activities as disclosed on its website.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carmela Chivers and John Daley do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The minor party vote in Australia is historically high and growing, as trust in the bigger parties slides away.Danielle Wood, Program Director, Budget Policy and Institutions, Grattan InstituteCarmela Chivers, Associate, Grattan InstituteJohn Daley, Chief Executive Officer, Grattan InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/931282018-03-09T02:36:07Z2018-03-09T02:36:07ZVIDEO: Michelle Grattan on the battlegrounds of South Australia, Batman and Adani<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Dlwiw0bVqB0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics. They discuss the mood in South Australia ahead of the state election, the battle in the Batman byelection, and criticism of Bill Shorten’s position on the Adani mine.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93128/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Michelle Grattan speaks with Deep Saini about the week in Australian politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraPaddy Nixon, Vice-Chancellor and President, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/930232018-03-07T10:52:50Z2018-03-07T10:52:50ZPolitics podcast: the ‘X factor’ in the South Australian election<p>The South Australian election will be held on March 17 – the same day as the federal byelection in Batman. </p>
<p>Labor is pitching for a fifth term in South Australia, with former senator Nick Xenophon’s SA-Best party injecting a high element of unpredictability into the result.</p>
<p>Jobs and power prices are at the front of voters’ minds, while the gambling industry is investing heavily to try to fend off the “X factor”.</p>
<p>The Conversation spent two days in Adelaide; we interviewed Dean Jaensch, emeritus professor in politics from Flinders University, Carol Johnson, politics professor at the University of Adelaide, Premier Jay Weatherill, Xenophon, and South Australian federal Liberal cabinet minister Christopher Pyne.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93023/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Labor is pitching for a fifth term in South Australia.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/928032018-03-05T22:09:35Z2018-03-05T22:09:35ZXenophon’s SA-BEST slumps in a South Australian Newspoll, while Turnbull’s better PM lead narrows<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208858/original/file-20180305-65511-19ep8ib.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Although SA-BEST is averaging 27% in seats it is contesting, the major parties are less vulnerable to losing seats to SA-BEST than it may appear from primary votes. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Mariuz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The South Australian election will be held on March 17. A <a href="https://theaustralianatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/sa-newspoll.pdf">Newspoll</a>, conducted in the three days from February 27 to March 1 from a sample of 1,078, gave the Liberals 32% of the primary vote (up three since the October to December Newspoll), Labor 30% (up three), SA-BEST 21% (down 11), the Greens 7% (up one) and the Australian Conservatives 6%. No two-party figure was calculated.</p>
<p>About <a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2018/03/03/newspoll-liberal-32-labor-30-sa-best-21-south-australia/">half of SA-BEST’s drop</a> is because it is contesting 36 of the 47 lower house seats, and Newspoll did not offer SA-BEST as an option in the seats it is not contesting. In the seats SA-BEST is contesting, it averaged 27%.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/with-feeney-gone-greens-sniff-a-chance-in-batman-and-has-xenophons-bubble-burst-in-south-australia-91059">With Feeney gone, Greens sniff a chance in Batman, and has Xenophon's bubble burst in South Australia?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>On the three-way better premier question, 29% supported Nick Xenophon (down 17), 28% incumbent Jay Weatherill (up six) and 24% Opposition Leader Steven Marshall (up five). Weatherill led Marshall 38-31 head-to-head (37-32 previously).</p>
<p>Although SA-BEST and Xenophon’s support has slumped, neither of the two major party leaders is at all popular. Weatherill’s net approval is -21, down two points, and Marshall’s net approval is -26, down three points.</p>
<p>The Liberals led Labor 42-38 on best party for the South Australian economy, and led Labor 37-36 on best to maintain the energy supply and keep power prices lower. SA-BEST voters favoured the Liberals 37-33 on the economy and Labor 35-27 on energy.</p>
<p>Although SA-BEST is averaging 27% in seats it is contesting, the major parties are less vulnerable to losing seats to SA-BEST than it may appear from primary votes. Most Greens will preference Labor higher than SA-BEST, and most Conservatives will preference the Liberals higher.</p>
<p>Labor’s biggest problem in South Australia is that it has been in government since 2002. Old governments cannot blame problems on their predecessors, and there is an “It’s Time” factor. </p>
<p>14-to-16-year-old Labor governments in Queensland, New South Wales and Tasmania were smashed between 2011 and 2014, so Labor in South Australia is doing well to be competitive. Picking fights with the unpopular federal Coalition government probably explains Labor’s competitiveness.</p>
<p>Only once in the four elections since 2002 South Australian Labor won has the party received a majority of the two party vote (in 2006). At the 2014 election, despite losing the two-party vote 53.0-47.0, Labor won 23 of the 47 seats, and formed government with an independent’s support.</p>
<p>Unlike other Australian electoral commissions, the South Australian commission is required to create electorally fair boundaries. The 2018 boundaries were drawn so that, based on the last election’s results, a party that won a majority of the two-party vote should win a majority of the seats, ignoring independents.</p>
<p>The result of this requirement is that boundaries have been changed to favour the Liberals. According to the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-09/2018-south-australian-election---post-redistributuion-margins/9416052">ABC’s Antony Green</a>, the new boundaries notionally give the Liberals 27 seats out of 47, to Labor’s 20. Including independents, the Liberals have 24 seats, Labor has 19 and independents four. Ignoring independents, Labor needs a 3.1-point uniform swing to gain four seats from the Liberals and a majority.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/sa-election-2018/guide/lc/">South Australian upper house</a> has 22 members, with half up for election every four years. Statewide proportional representation is used to elect the upper house, with a similar system to the Senate. The South Australian parliament abolished group voting tickets last year. </p>
<p>The new system has optional preferential voting above the line; a single “1” vote above the line will expire within the chosen party, and will not be passed on as preferences to another party. Voters can direct preferences to other parties by marking “2”, “3”, and so on, above the line.</p>
<p>With 11 members to be elected, a quota is one-twelfth of the vote, or 8.3%. Overall, the upper house has eight Liberals, eight Labor, two Greens, two Conservatives, one Dignity and one Advance SA (formerly SA-BEST). At this election, the members up for election are four Liberals, four Labor, one Green, one Conservative and one Dignity.</p>
<h2>Federal Newspoll: 53-47 to Labor</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2018/03/04/newspoll-53-47-labor-12/">This week’s Newspoll</a>, conducted March 1-4 from a sample of 1,660, gave federal Labor a 53-47 lead, unchanged on last fortnight. Primary votes were 38% Labor (up one), 37% Coalition (up one), 9% Greens (down one) and 7% One Nation (down one).</p>
<p>This is Malcolm Turnbull’s 28th successive Newspoll loss, just two short of Tony Abbott. If Newspoll sticks to its schedule, Turnbull will hit his 30th loss in April, but parliament will not be sitting until the May budget.</p>
<p>Despite the argument about Bill Shorten and Labor’s stance on the Adani coal mine, Labor gained a point at the expense of the Greens on primary votes. However, the overall Labor/Greens primary is still stuck at 47%, where it has been since August.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s ratings appear to have suffered further from the Barnaby Joyce and Michaelia Cash controversies. 32% were satisfied with Turnbull (down two), and 57% were dissatified (up three), for a net approval of -25. Shorten’s net approval was down three points to -23. Turnbull’s lead as better PM narrowed from 40-33 to 37-35, his equal lowest better PM lead.</p>
<p>In the first Newspoll of the year, in early February, Turnbull was at a net -13 approval, Shorten at a net -18, and Turnbull led Shorten by an emphatic 45-31 as better PM. That Newspoll came after a controversy-free summer holiday period. Since then, Turnbull has lost 12 points of net approval, Shorten has lost five, and Turnbull’s better PM lead has narrowed from 14 points to two.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-and-the-coalition-begin-the-year-on-a-positive-polling-note-but-its-still-all-about-the-economy-91215">Turnbull and the Coalition begin the year on a positive polling note – but it's still all about the economy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Essential 53-47 to Labor</h2>
<p>In <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Essential-Report_270218-1.pdf">last week’s Essential</a>, conducted February 22-25 from a sample of 1,028, Labor led by 53-47, a one-point gain for the Coalition. Primary votes were 35% Coalition (down one), 35% Labor (down two), 10% Greens (steady) and 8% One Nation (up two).</p>
<p>By 50-32, voters supported a ban on sex between ministers and their staff. Voters also supported a ban on politicians having extra-marital sex 44-36, and a ban on sex between managers and their staff in the workplace 48-35. However, voters were opposed to a ban on sex between workmates 55-22.</p>
<p>A total of 60% thought Barnaby Joyce should resign, with 26% saying he should remain in parliament, and 34% saying he should leave parliament. Only 19% thought he should remain deputy PM.</p>
<p>By 44-41, voters approved of the media reporting on politicians’ private affairs.</p>
<p>Only 23% thought Joyce’s sexual relationship with his staffer was a major concern. On the other hand, 60% thought alleged excessive use of travel entitlements a major concern, and 50% thought finding the staff member work in another minister’s office a major concern.</p>
<p>Essential asked whether four Indigenous-related issues, the republic and changing Australia Day were a high priority. Just 11% thought changing the date of Australia Day was a high priority, and 21% becoming a republic. All the Indigenous-related issues scored higher.</p>
<p>By 48-32, voters would support abolishing private health insurance subsidies, and using this money to include dental care within Medicare.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92803/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Nick Xenophon’s SA-Best slumps while Labor fights the ‘It’s time’ factor in the lead-up to the South Australian election.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/920382018-02-20T23:22:22Z2018-02-20T23:22:22Z‘No pokies’ Xenophon goes for ‘some pokies’, but does his gambling policy go far enough?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207017/original/file-20180219-116327-1xls5ni.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The evidence behind Nick Xenophon's proposed gambling reforms in South Australia is reasonably strong. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Morgan Sette</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>SA-Best, led by high-profile former senator Nick Xenophon, has announced its <a href="https://sabest.org.au/media/sa-best-gambling-reform-policies-will-dramatically-reduce-pokies-addiction-and-community-harm/">gambling policy</a> ahead of next month’s South Australian election. Xenophon has backed away from the “no pokies” policy that characterised his earlier approach to gambling reform. However, the evidence behind his party’s proposed suite of measures is reasonably strong. </p>
<h2>What’s in the policy?</h2>
<p>Key aspects of SA-Best’s proposal are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>a five-year plan to cut poker machines numbers in South Australia from 12,100 to 8,100;</p></li>
<li><p>a reduction in maximum bets to A$1, from the current $5;</p></li>
<li><p>a reduction in maximum prizes from $10,000 to $500;</p></li>
<li><p>removing particularly addictive features such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/poker-machines-and-the-law-when-is-a-win-not-a-win-49580">“losses disguised as wins”</a>;</p></li>
<li><p>prohibition of political donations from gambling businesses; and</p></li>
<li><p>the removal of EFTPOS facilities from gambling venues.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>The policy would also empower the state’s <a href="http://iga.sa.gov.au/">Independent Gambling Authority</a> to implement and evaluate these proposals. </p>
<p>The policy is targeted at commercial hotel operators; clubs, “community hotels” and the casino are exempt from the reduction provisions. </p>
<p>There are also proposals to cut trading hours from 18 to 16 per day, with the introduction of a seven-year pokie licence for venues, from January 1, 2019. Increased resources would go to counselling and support for those with gambling problems.</p>
<p>Notably absent from the policy is the introduction of a <a href="https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/sites/default/files/publication-documents/agrc-precommitment-limit-setting.pdf">pre-commitment</a> system, which would enable pokie users to decide in advance how much they want to spend. Along with $1 maximum bets, this was a key recommendation of a <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/gambling-2009/report">Productivity Commission inquiry</a> in 2010.</p>
<p>The policy has attracted the <a href="https://www.theshout.com.au/australian-hotelier/xenophons-gaming-policy-blasted-aha-sa/">expected response</a> from the gambling industry. The Australian Hotels Association argued the changes would “rip the guts” out of the gambling industry and attack the “26,000 jobs” it claims the industry directly creates.</p>
<h2>Does evidence support SA Best’s policies?</h2>
<p>We’ve known for some time that <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-1-maximum-bet-on-pokies-would-reduce-gambling-harm-22931">reducing maximum bets</a> is likely to reduce the amount wagered by people experiencing severe gambling problems. This in turn reduces the harm they suffer.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-1-maximum-bet-on-pokies-would-reduce-gambling-harm-22931">A $1 maximum bet on pokies would reduce gambling harm</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Reducing maximum prizes reduces “<a href="https://aifs.gov.au/agrc/publications/how-electronic-gambling-machines-work/structural-characteristics-egms">volatility</a>”, meaning pokies may have more consistent loss rates.</p>
<p>Reducing access to pokies is also an important intervention, since easy access is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/too-close-to-home-people-who-live-near-pokie-venues-at-risk-20771">key risk factor</a> for developing a gambling problem. Reducing the number of machines, and the hours they are accessible, support this. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/too-close-to-home-people-who-live-near-pokie-venues-at-risk-20771">Too close to home: people who live near pokie venues at risk</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>However, <a href="https://www.adelaide.edu.au/saces/docs/study-of-the-impact-of-caps-on-electronic-gaming-machines.pdf">very substantial cuts in pokie numbers</a> are needed to meaningfully reduce harm. A cut of the magnitude SA-Best proposes may not be sufficient to prevent those with serious gambling habits from readily accessing pokies. This is because pokies are rarely fully utilised at all times of the week.</p>
<p>Removing <a href="https://www.responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/26881/Thomas-A-Evaluation-of-the-removal-of-ATMs-Victoria-Sept-2013.pdf">easy access to cash</a> has also been identified as an important harm-reduction intervention. This had a positive initial effect in Victoria (especially among high-risk gamblers), when ATMs were removed from pokie venues in 2012.</p>
<p>The harms associated with gambling generally affect <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14459795.2017.1331252?journalCode=rigs20">far more people</a> than just the gambler. The <a href="http://www.problemgambling.sa.gov.au/professionals/news_and_events/news-items/release-of-the-2012-gambling-prevalence-study-in-south-australia?a=13625">most recent study</a>, from 2012 indicates that 0.6% of the SA adult population is classified as at high risk of gambling harm, 2.5% are classified as at moderate risk, and another 7.1% at low risk.</p>
<p>Based on <a href="http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/communityprofile/4?opendocument">census data</a>, this equates to about 8,000 South Australians experiencing severe harm from gambling. Another 33,100 are experiencing significant harm, and about 94,000 are experiencing some harm.</p>
<p>However, each high-risk gambler affects six others; each moderate-risk gambler affects three others; and each low-risk gambler one other. So, the problems of each high-risk gambler affect another 47,660 South Australians. These are children, spouses, other relatives, friends, employers, the general community via the costs of crime, and so on. </p>
<p>Another 99,300 are affected by moderate-risk gambling, and another 94,000 by low-risk gambling. All up, this amounts to 241,000 people.</p>
<p>Of these, 190,000 are affected at high or significant levels. <a href="http://www.responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/28465/Browne_assessing_gambling-related_harm_in_Vic_Apr_2016-REPLACEMENT2.pdf">These harms include</a> financial disaster and bankruptcy, divorce or separation, neglect of children, intimate partner violence and other violent crime, crimes against property, mental and physical ill-health, and in some cases, suicide.</p>
<p>Most gambling problems (around 75%) <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/gambling-2009/report/gambling-report-volume1.pdf">are related to pokies</a>, and by far the greatest expenditure goes through them. Nothing has changed in this regard since the Productivity Commission identified this in 2010.</p>
<p>In this context, SA-Best’s policy has substantial justification.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/removing-pokies-from-tasmanias-clubs-and-pubs-would-help-gamblers-without-hurting-the-economy-90019">Removing pokies from Tasmania's clubs and pubs would help gamblers without hurting the economy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Does it go far enough?</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-20/greens-target-xenophon-with-policy-to-ban-pokies-angering-hotels/9344960">South Australian Greens</a>, like their <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-16/greens-to-force-tas-labor-hand-on-pokies-policy/9055102">counterparts in Tasmania</a> and the Tasmanian Labor Party, want to get all pokies out of pubs and clubs. They argue gambling’s social and economic costs are far in excess of the benefits. </p>
<p>For Tasmania, the costs of gambling can be estimated at about <a href="http://www.tai.org.au/content/estimating-revenue-share-farrell-group-and-other-gambling-industry-participants-gambling">$342 million per year</a>. This is more than three times as much as the total tax take from all gambling in the state.</p>
<p>A similar calculation for South Australia suggests its overall costs of problem gambling are more than $1.6 billion per year. This is more than four times the total taxes from gambling the South Australian government <a href="http://www.qgso.qld.gov.au/products/reports/aus-gambling-stats/">derived in 2015-16</a> ($380.3 million).</p>
<p>With a cost-benefit ratio like that, some strong measures could well be called for. Xenophon says the proposals encapsulated in his party’s policy are the start. However, Tasmanian Labor has set the new benchmark for pokie regulation – removing them entirely from pubs and clubs.</p>
<p>It is remarkable that a party traditionally in lockstep with – and <a href="https://theconversation.com/gambling-lobby-gives-big-to-political-parties-and-names-names-73131">substantially supported by</a> – the gambling industry has adopted such a position. Perhaps the harms have become too much to ignore?</p>
<p>How these policies might be implemented, amid the resistance they will face from a well-heeled and <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/the-lobby-group-that-got-much-more-bang-for-its-buck/">often-influential</a> gambling industry, presents an intriguing prospect over coming months.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92038/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, the (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority (the funds for which were derived from hypothecation of gambling tax revenue to research purposes), from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government, and from non-government organisations for research into multiple aspects of poker machine gambling, including regulatory reform, existing harm minimisation practices, and technical characteristics of gambling forms. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, and the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand. He is a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council funded project researching mechanisms of influence on government by the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries. He has undertaken consultancy research for local governments and non-government organisations in Australia and the UK seeking to restrict or reduce the concentration of poker machines and gambling impacts, and was a member of the Australian government's Ministerial Expert Advisory Group on Gambling in 2010-11. He is a member of the Australian Greens.</span></em></p>Nick Xenophon says the proposals encapsulated in his party’s gambling policy for the South Australian election are just the start of a wider push for reform.Charles Livingstone, Senior Lecturer, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/918472018-02-16T03:22:07Z2018-02-16T03:22:07ZIt’s 20 years since privatisation lit the spark under South Australia’s livewire energy politics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206718/original/file-20180216-131021-o4m3p6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Keeping the lights on has always been a stormy issue in South Australia.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ALightning_in_Adelaide%2C_South_Australia%2C_2014.jpg">Jon Westra/Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>February 17, 2018, marks the 20th anniversary of a momentous day in South Australian energy politics. The then premier, John Olsen, announced that, despite repeated promises during the previous year’s state election campaign, his Liberal government would be putting the Electricity Trust of South Australia (ETSA) up for sale. </p>
<p>ETSA had been <a href="http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/bob-byrne-the-playford-years-when-adelaide-was-a-powerhouse/news-story/528ee40bf2a65374eb3ca34267263b62">created in 1946</a> when a previous Liberal premier, Sir Thomas Playford, <a href="https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2017/01/18/playfords-lessons-in-power-for-the-current-sa-govt/">nationalised the Adelaide Electric Supply Company</a> (yes, you read that right).</p>
<p>Even when Olsen made his announcement, privatisation was on the nose with voters, literally as well as metaphorically. The “<a href="https://www.icij.org/investigations/waterbarons/big-pong-down-under/">big pong</a>” – a smell of rotten gas that pervaded Adelaide for several months during 1997 – had been traced back to a lack of maintenance after the privatisation of water treatment works.</p>
<p>Despite the big pong having put privatisation in bad odour, Olsen ploughed on. Faced with the impending launch of the National Electricity Market, and with the 1993 <a href="https://www.australiancompetitionlaw.org/reports/1993hilmer.html">Hilmer Report</a> having recommended competition as a way to drive down prices (although we all know <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-free-market-hasnt-slashed-power-prices-and-what-to-do-about-it-74441">how that worked out</a>), SA was set to follow in neighbouring Victoria’s footsteps and embrace deregulation. </p>
<h2>From state bank to bankrupt state</h2>
<p>The story had begun, as so many stories seem to, with hubris on the part of the financial sector. The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Bank_of_South_Australia">State Bank of South Australia</a> had, through reckless lending, got itself into a huge hole that ultimately led to the resignation of the Labor premier, John Bannon, in 1992 and a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_1993">heavy election defeat for the government</a> the following year.</p>
<p>Despite the Liberals’ thumping win in 1993, voters swung back again and the 1997 contest was far tighter than it had any right to be. ETSA had already been broken up into separate retail, transmission and energy subsidiaries in preparation for its participation in the NEM, and Labor seized on rumours of ETSA’s privatisation, despite adamant denials by the Liberals. On Nine News, Olsen flatly stated: “We are not pursuing a privatisation course with ETSA.” </p>
<p>Olsen’s Liberals were returned to government only thanks to the support of two conservative independents and one extremely independent National.</p>
<p>After Olsen’s February 1998 announcement, there were power plays back and forth. The Liberals were now claiming that privatising electricity assets would wipe out the state’s enormous debt, creating “an additional A$2 million a day to spend on things like schools, hospitals and other infrastructure”. </p>
<p>Labor and other opponents were, to put it mildly, sceptical. A normally pro-privatisation economist, <a href="https://indaily.com.au/contributors/richard-blandy/">Richard Blandy</a>, pointed out: “Mr Lucas keeps on talking about saving on interest but he ignores the aspect of lost revenue… Interest payments are now so low it is much less interesting to pay off debt.”</p>
<p>Nick Xenophon – at the time a newly elected independent state MP – indicated that he would support a long-term lease, but only if there were a referendum. Eventually, in June 1999, two Labor MPs switched sides and the privatisation went ahead. The journalist Chris Kenny put it best when he wrote in the Sunday Mail at the time:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Rumoured, denied, ruled-out, revealed, reviled, rejected, revamped, revived and ratified, John Olsen’s power privatisation deal has somehow, finally, sparked into life. Politics and economics in South Australia will not be the same. It is our millennial change – our circuit-breaker.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There was collateral damage. A proposed interconnector with New South Wales – to supplement the existing cable to Victoria completed in 1990 – was canned because it would have added more competition to the SA market, hitting the value of assets the Liberals wanted to sell. Xenophon was scathing, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/power-games---the-politics-of-electricity/3464756">accusing the government</a> of having a “blinkered view of just maximising the value of the assets rather than maximising the benefits to consumers”.</p>
<p>Over the past decade, South Australia has gone from zero (renewable energy) to hero (at least to environmentalists) for its staggering growth in wind generation, as well as its more recent trendsetting in solar and batteries. This is partly thanks to a Howard government decision: the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target (such are the ironies of history).</p>
<h2>Power still in play</h2>
<p>If – as the old adage goes – a week is a long time in politics, then two decades is several eternities. But remarkably, three players from this chapter of South Australia’s political life are still on the scene. </p>
<p>Rob Lucas was in 1997 the Liberal government’s treasurer, a post he might regain in next month’s state election. Nick Xenophon, who cautiously supported discussion of privatisation but then came out against it, is back in the running for state office after a decade in Canberra. And Tom Koutsantonis, currently SA treasurer, was by Kevin Foley’s side when they tried to stop those two Labor MPs from switching.</p>
<p>Since then, of course, there was also the notorious statewide blackout of September 2016 – an event that has had monumental political and economic consequences. Jay Weatherill’s Labor government, already a staunch backer of renewables, responded with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/south-australia-makes-a-fresh-power-play-in-its-bid-to-end-the-blackouts-74522">radical new plan for energy security</a> (including, famously, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-sas-battery-is-a-massive-battery-but-it-can-do-much-more-besides-88480">world’s biggest battery</a>), while the Liberal opposition has presented voters with its own <a href="https://www.saliberal.org.au/liberal_energy_solution">energy policy</a>. </p>
<p>In the past few weeks we have seen yet more headline-grabbing announcements from Weatherill’s government, including a “virtual power plant” made up of people’s rooftop panels and energy storage, and more money for <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/future-is-storage-sa-govt-pumps-for-four-more-hydro-projects-41345/">pumped hydro</a>.</p>
<p>South Australian energy and climate campaigners are trying to hold all the politicians’ feet to the fire, <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-should-aim-for-100-renewables-by-2025-not-50-34320/">calling on them to bring forward a 100% renewable target to 2025</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-year-since-the-sa-blackout-whos-winning-the-high-wattage-power-play-84416">A year since the SA blackout, who's winning the high-wattage power play?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In September 2016, just before the blackout, the Adelaide Advertiser <a href="http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/poll-finds-we-blame-etsa-sale-for-high-sa-power-prices/news-story/ddec625e5a8f091eec874c6ca8b1b88f">commissioned an opinion poll on electricity privatisation</a>. The front-page story relayed the “extraordinary finding”, to the palpable shock and disbelief of reporter Paul Starick, that 51% of those polled blamed Olsen’s sell-off for rising electricity prices. </p>
<p>The story added that “only 15% blamed Labor’s investment in renewable energy to replace coal, a significant factor in Port Augusta power station’s closure in May at the cost of more than 180 jobs”.</p>
<p>John Quiggin, an economist who fought in vain to keep ETSA in public hands, has <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-case-for-renationalising-australias-electricity-grid-73951">put the case for renationalising Australia’s electricity</a>. In the UK, Opposition Leader Jeremy Corbyn
has <a href="https://labourlist.org/2018/02/a-catapult-into-21st-century-public-ownership-corbyn-speech-on-new-economics/">proposed a similar move</a> as part of his policy platform.</p>
<p>But whatever happens, we can definitely say three things:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>This is not the issue on which the SA Liberals would have chosen to fight the coming election, for both state-based historical and federal-present reasons.</p></li>
<li><p>If Weatherill loses, opponents of renewables will label it a referendum on wind, solar and storage, regardless of voters’ actual opinions.</p></li>
<li><p>And two decades on, power policy is still just as much a red-hot political battleground as it was during South Australia’s millennial circuit-breaking moment.</p></li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91847/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Two decades ago, the then SA premier, John Olsen, defied a campaign promise and announced plans to privatise the state’s electricity industry. It’s been a high-voltage issue ever since.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/910592018-02-03T06:22:00Z2018-02-03T06:22:00ZWith Feeney gone, Greens sniff a chance in Batman, and has Xenophon’s bubble burst in South Australia?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204666/original/file-20180203-19937-unnmwm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ged Kearney has been announced as Labor's star candidate for the inner-Melbourne seat of Batman.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Crosling</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On February 1, Labor’s David Feeney <a href="https://theconversation.com/early-byelection-test-for-shorten-after-david-feeney-quits-parliament-91073">resigned</a> as the member for Batman, as he could not find proof that he had renounced his British citizenship. This will trigger a byelection in Batman, which Labor could lose to the Greens. In November 2017, Labor lost the Victorian state seat of Northcote to the Greens at a byelection.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/contradictory-polls-in-queensland-while-the-greens-storm-northcote-in-victoria-87516">Contradictory polls in Queensland, while the Greens storm Northcote in Victoria</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Victoria has 37 federal seats, and 88 lower house state seats, so federal seats have more than twice as many enrolled voters as state seats. Batman encompasses <a href="https://www.vec.vic.gov.au/ElectoralBoundaries/NorthcoteDistrictProfile.html">Northcote</a>, but also <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/profiles/vic/batman.htm">includes northern suburbs</a> away from the inner city, where Labor does relatively well and the Greens poorly.</p>
<p>The Poll Bludger’s booth map below shows the clear divide between north Batman (all red booths representing Labor two-party wins against the Greens in 2016) and south Batman (all but one booth Green). The state seat of Northcote is south Batman. Larger numbers on the map are booths where more people voted.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"959356718852464640"}"></div></p>
<p>During the 2016 election campaign, <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-david-feeney-didnt-declare-23m-house-and-doesnt-know-if-its-negatively-geared-20160517-gowys9.html">Feeney embarrassed Labor</a> when it was revealed he had not declared a A$2.3 million house. Feeney narrowly held Batman by 51-49 against the Greens at the election, a 9.6-point swing to the Greens. Labor will hope the large swing reflected anti-Feeney sentiment, and that a fresh Labor candidate – former ACTU president Ged Kearney – can hold Batman.</p>
<p>At the 2016 election, the Liberals directed preferences to Feeney, enabling him to win after trailing the Greens on primary votes. The Liberals are very unlikely to field a candidate at the byelection, and this will help the Greens.</p>
<p>Kearney is already well-known and will have a personal vote. She is from Labor’s left faction, and will be a better fit with the electorate than the right-aligned Feeney. Alex Bhathal will be the Greens’ candidate; she also stood at the 2016 election.</p>
<h2>Other Section 44 cases</h2>
<p>In late 2017, Tasmanian senator Jacqui Lambie resigned owing to a dual citizenship. However, Lambie’s number-two candidate, Steve Martin, <a href="http://www.examiner.com.au/story/5171256/one-nation-lawyer-questions-steve-martins-bid-to-enter-senate/">could also be disqualified</a>, as he was the Devonport mayor at the 2016 election. The High Court has not yet ruled on whether a local government position violates <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_44_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia">Section 44(iv) of the Constitution</a>, pertaining to public service employees.</p>
<p>If Martin is disqualified, her number three, Rob Waterman, <a href="https://twitter.com/smurray38/status/938929838886346753">also has problems</a>. If none of Lambie’s ticket are eligible, One Nation’s Kate McCullogh would win the final Tasmanian Senate seat.</p>
<p>SA-BEST’s number four, Tim Storer, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-01/tim-storer-steps-forward-to-replace-nick-xenophon-in-the-senate/9108390">attempted to replace Nick Xenophon</a> in the Senate, against his party’s wishes, when Xenophon resigned to contest the South Australian election. As a result, Storer was kicked out of the party. </p>
<p>However, SA-BEST senator Skye Kakoschke-Moore <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-22/sky-kakoschke-moore-reveals-dual-citizenship-concerns/9179502">resigned in November</a> as she had a dual citizenship. SA-BEST is arguing that <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-24/high-court-judge-declares-kakoschke-moore-senate-seat-vacant/9356224">Storer should not be allowed</a> to replace Kakoschke-Moore as he is no longer in SA-BEST; it wants Kakoschke-Moore to replace herself.</p>
<p>Labor’s ACT senator, Katy Gallagher, renounced her British citizenship <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/27/citizenship-case-labor-enlists-legal-firepower-in-bid-to-save-katy-gallagher">before nominations closed</a> for the 2016 election, but she did not receive confirmation of renunciation until after nominations closed. If the High Court rules against Gallagher, at least three Labor lower house members, whose circumstances are similar to Gallagher, will probably have to resign.</p>
<p>Another issue is assignment to short and long Senate terms. At the beginning of this parliamentary term, following the double-dissolution election, senators were assigned to either short terms (expiring June 2019) or long terms (expiring June 2022). If a long-term senator is replaced by someone on the ticket who should only get a short term, it creates a fairness problem.</p>
<p>In late December, Liberal Jim Molan was <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-22/jim-molan-replaces-fiona-nash-high-court-rules-dual-citizenship/9282354">declared elected</a> to the Senate by the High Court to replace National Fiona Nash, who had a long term. Molan accepted a short term, and the number four on the joint New South Wales Coalition ticket, Liberal Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, will be promoted from a short term to a long term.</p>
<p>Molan won his seat from number seven on the Coalition ticket, after Nash’s original replacement, the moderate Liberal Hollie Hughes, was disqualified for <a href="https://theconversation.com/bennelong-polls-galaxy-50-50-reachtel-53-47-to-liberal-87725">taking up public service work</a> following her failure in the 2016 election.</p>
<h2>Bob Day’s replacement in Senate, Lucy Gichuhi, becomes a Liberal</h2>
<p>In early 2017, before the citizenship crisis started, Family First senator Bob Day was declared ineligible to be elected by the High Court, and replaced by Family First’s South Australian number two, Lucy Gichuhi. </p>
<p>When Family First became part of Cory Bernardi’s Australian Conservatives, Gichuhi did not join the new party, instead sitting as an independent. Yesterday, Gichuhi <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-02/lucy-gichuhi-independent-senator-joins-liberal-party/9392018">joined the Liberals</a>.</p>
<p>This outcome gives the Coalition 30 of 76 Senate seats, making up for the loss of Bernardi. It is unlikely to have an impact on Senate votes, as Gichuhi voted with the Liberals a large proportion of the time. </p>
<p>While Gichuhi has a short Senate term, Bernardi has a long term, so he cannot be replaced until July 2022 barring a double dissolution.</p>
<h2>ReachTEL South Australian poll: just 17.6% for Xenophon’s SA-BEST</h2>
<p>The South Australian election will be held in six weeks, on March 17. A <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/02/01/20/44/new-poll-reveals-sa-best-popularity-may-be-waning">ReachTEL poll</a> for the Climate Council, conducted on January 29 from a sample of 1,054, gave the Liberals 33.4% of the primary vote, Labor 26.1%, Nick Xenophon’s SA-BEST 17.6%, the Greens 5.5%, Others 9.1% and 8.3% were undecided. </p>
<p>If undecided were excluded, primary votes would be 36.4% Liberal, 28.5% Labor, 19.2% SA-BEST, 6.0% Greens and 9.9% others.</p>
<p>There has been no statewide South Australian ReachTEL poll since the 2014 state election. An <a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRWr9FdVQAAY7yw.jpg">October to December Newspoll</a> gave SA-BEST 32%, ahead of both major parties. <a href="https://theconversation.com/tasmanian-election-likely-to-be-close-while-labor-continues-to-lead-federally-90827">Galaxy polling</a> conducted about three weeks ago gave SA-BEST primary vote leads in three seats it is contesting.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/nick-xenophon-could-be-south-australias-next-premier-while-turnbull-loses-his-25th-successive-newspoll-89290">Nick Xenophon could be South Australia's next premier, while Turnbull loses his 25th successive Newspoll</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>If this ReachTEL poll is correct, there has been a dramatic fall in SA-BEST support in the fortnight from when the Galaxy polls were conducted to the ReachTEL. The major South Australian parties started to vigorously campaign against SA-BEST after the Galaxy polls had been conducted.</p>
<p>I would like to see some more polls before concluding that Xenophon’s bubble has burst, but this ReachTEL is not at all good for him.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91059/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>As the fallout from the dual citizenship saga continues, the Greens and Labor are set to fight a close contest in Batman, while Nick Xenophon has work to do ahead of the South Australian election.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/908272018-01-30T04:35:17Z2018-01-30T04:35:17ZTasmanian election likely to be close, while Labor continues to lead federally<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203940/original/file-20180130-170413-11gb6dv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">If the Greens hold the sole balance of power after the Tasmanian election, the next parliamentary term could be a messy business for Labor's Rebecca White or the Liberals' Will Hodgman.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/The Conversation</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Sunday, Premier Will Hodgman called the Tasmanian election for March 3. Tasmania uses the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/elections/tas/2006/guide/hareclark.htm">Hare Clark system</a> for its lower house, with five electorates, each with five members. The electorates use the same names and boundaries as the five federal Tasmanian electorates of Bass, Braddon, Franklin, Denison and Lyons. A quota for election is one-sixth of the vote, or 16.7%.</p>
<p>At the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tasmanian_state_election,_2014">March 2014 election</a>, the Liberals won in a landslide, with 15 of the 25 seats, while seven went to Labor and three to the Greens. The Liberals won 51.2% of the vote, to 27.3% for Labor and 13.8% for the Greens. The Liberals won four of the five Braddon seats, three each in Bass, Franklin and Lyons, and two in Denison.</p>
<p>With all polls showing a substantial swing against the Liberals, they are likely to lose their fourth Braddon seat and third Franklin seat. If the Liberals lost another seat, they would lose their majority.</p>
<p>Psephologist <a href="http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2018/01/2018-tasmanian-state-election-guide_25.html">Kevin Bonham</a> expects the pivot seat to be the Liberals’ third Lyons seat. If the Liberals lose this seat, they are likely to lose their majority. If they win it, they will probably retain their majority.</p>
<p>Other than the established parties, the populist Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) has a realistic chance of winning seats – its main chance would be in Braddon.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/tasmania-the-first-test-in-an-election-laden-year-90828">Tasmania the first test in an election-laden year</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Both Hodgman and Labor leader Rebecca White have <a href="http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2018/01/tasmania-2018-what-happens-if-no-party.html">ruled out governing</a> with the Greens’ support. A large bloc of Tasmanians detests the Greens, and the three previous governments that involved the Greens have had major problems. If Hodgman and White stick to their promise after the election, and the Greens hold the sole balance of power, the next parliamentary term could be messy.</p>
<p>In most polls, the Liberals are leading Labor. The people who detest the Greens have in the past swung towards the major party most likely to win a majority. If this behaviour is repeated at this election, the Liberals could get home. On the other hand, the unpopularity of the federal Coalition government should help Labor.</p>
<p>In December, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jan/28/battle-over-poker-machines-to-take-centre-stage-in-tasmanias-election?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other">White announced</a> that a Labor government would remove poker machines from pubs and clubs within five years. I think this is good politics, as it differentiates Labor from the Liberals on an issue that neither major party had tackled in the past. I previously wrote that <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-elections-in-2018-see-2017s-left-wing-revival-continue-89922">left-wing parties</a> that differentiated themselves from conservative parties performed better in 2017 elections.</p>
<p>The Tasmanian upper house will not be up for election on March 3. The 15 upper house members have rotating six-year terms; every May, two or three electorates are up for election. Labor and left-wing independents currently have an upper house majority following a <a href="https://theconversation.com/dems-easily-win-virginia-and-new-jersey-governors-left-gains-control-of-tas-upper-house-86770">November byelection</a> win by Labor.</p>
<p>The last three Tasmanian elections have been held on the same day as the South Australian election (March 17 this year). So, the election date is good news for people interested in elections, as it avoids a clash.</p>
<h2>Xenophon’s party leading in Galaxy polls of three South Australian seats</h2>
<p>There is no sign of any drop in support for Nick Xenophon’s SA-BEST. According to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-29/nick-xenophon-sa-best-leading-in-key-seats-poll-shows/9370674">Galaxy polls</a> conducted January 11-14 for the corporate sector, SA-BEST had 37% in Liberal-held Hartley, which Xenophon will contest, followed by the Liberals with 32% and Labor with 21%; Xenophon led 57-43 after preferences. </p>
<p>In Labor-held Mawson, SA-BEST had 38%, the Liberals 25% and Labor 22%. In Labor-held Hurtle Vale, SA-BEST had 33%, Labor 29% and the Liberals 23%.</p>
<p>Galaxy also polled the federal South Australian seat of Mayo, where SA-BEST member Rebekha Sharkie could be disqualified over <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/citizenship-crisis-bites-nxt-mp-rebekha-sharkie-20171109-gzi5t9.html">the dual citizenship issue</a>. Sharkie would easily retain by a 59-41 margin against the Liberals, from primary votes of 37% Sharkie, 33% Liberal and 18% Labor.</p>
<h2>ReachTEL 52-48 to federal Labor</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2018/01/28/reachtel-52-48-labor-4/">ReachTEL poll</a> for Sky News, conducted January 25 from a sample of presumably about 2,300, gave Labor a 52-48 lead by respondent-allocated preferences, a one-point gain for the Coalition since a late November ReachTEL.</p>
<p>Primary votes were 36% Labor (steady), 34% Coalition (up one), 10% Greens (steady) and 8% One Nation (down one). The remaining 12% very likely included some undecided voters who were prompted to show which way they lean. As usual, media sources have not given full primary votes. <a href="https://twitter.com/kevinbonham/status/957440956080439296">Bonham</a> says this poll would be about 54-46 to Labor by 2016 preference flows.</p>
<p>Malcolm Turnbull’s ratings improved; 30% gave him a good rating (up six), 37% an average (up two) and 32% a poor rating (down eight). Bill Shorten’s ratings were 31% good (up one), 32% average (down four) and 36% poor (up three). Turnbull led Shorten by 54-46 as better prime minister, up from 52-48 in November. ReachTEL’s forced-choice “better prime minister” question usually gives opposition leaders better ratings than other polls.</p>
<p>I think Turnbull’s ratings have improved in parliament’s absence because the public is less exposed to the hard-right Coalition backbenchers.</p>
<p>By 44-32, voters opposed cutting the company tax rate for businesses with a turnover of more than A$50 million. By 39-20, voters thought trade deals were good for employment. However by 49-20, voters thought Labor should oppose the Trans Pacific Partnership if it did not protect jobs.</p>
<h2>Essential 54-46 to Labor</h2>
<p>In <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Essential-Report_300118.pdf">this week’s Essential</a>, conducted January 26-28 from a sample of 1,028, Labor led by 54-46, a one-point gain for Labor since last fortnight.</p>
<p>Primary votes were 36% Labor (down two), 35% Coalition (down two), 10% Greens (up one) and 8% One Nation (up two). <a href="https://theconversation.com/strong-us-economy-boosts-trumps-ratings-as-democrats-shut-down-government-for-three-days-90437">As noted last Friday</a>, Essential will appear fortnightly instead of weekly this year.</p>
<p>Essential asked whether the Liberals or Labor would be better at handling various issues. Labor’s position improved on economic management (from Liberals by 15 in June 2017 to Liberals by ten), interest rates (Liberals by ten to Liberals by four) and political leadership (Liberals by eight to Labor by two). The Liberals improved on water supply (Labor by five to Liberals by one).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/will-elections-in-2018-see-2017s-left-wing-revival-continue-89922">Will elections in 2018 see 2017's left-wing revival continue?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>48% (up four since November) thought Australia’s political and economic system is fundamentally sound, but needs refining, while 32% (steady) thought it should be fundamentally changed, and 8% (down two) thought the system was already working well.</p>
<p>There were large, favourable changes in perceptions of how the economy and unemployment have performed over the last year, compared to February 2016. There was relatively little movement on other economic issues.</p>
<p>51% (down two since August) thought their income had fallen behind the cost of living, 28% stayed even (up three) and 14% gone up more (down one). Private health insurance continued to be very negatively perceived, with the questions last asked in September.</p>
<p>Essential asked whether sports were exciting or boring to watch. Tennis was easily the best with a net +13 rating, followed by swimming at a net +3 and AFL football at a net +2. Twenty20 cricket had a net -7 rating, rugby league and soccer both had a net -15, Test cricket a net -24, rugby union a net -32, and golf was at the bottom on a net -54.</p>
<h2>Far-right Czech Republic president re-elected</h2>
<p>In the a presidential election runoff held January 26-27 in the Czech Republic, the far-right incumbent, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo%C5%A1_Zeman#Views">Miloš Zeman</a>, defeated his opponent, Jiří Drahoš, by a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_presidential_election,_2018">51.4-48.6 margin</a>. </p>
<p>After a <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-elections-in-2018-see-2017s-left-wing-revival-continue-89922">generally good year for the left</a> in 2017 elections, this was a bad start to 2018.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90827/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The polls are leaning towards the Liberals holding power in Tasmania, but the unpopularity of the federal Coalition government could help Labor get over the line.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/899702018-01-15T19:07:31Z2018-01-15T19:07:31ZClimate politics in 2018: another guide for the perplexed<p>As I <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-climate-politics-in-2017-a-guide-for-the-perplexed-70526">predicted a year ago</a>, 2017 was another vicious and bloody-minded year in Australian climate politics. Yet the <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-year-since-the-sa-blackout-whos-winning-the-high-wattage-power-play-84416">political bickering</a> belied the fact that it was actually a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/31/a-great-year-for-clean-energy-in-australia-ends-while-bad-news-for-coal-continues">great year for green energy</a>.</p>
<p>Nowhere was that more in evidence than in South Australia, which got its <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-sas-battery-is-a-massive-battery-but-it-can-do-much-more-besides-88480">big battery</a> inside 100-day deadline, with the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-14/solar-thermal-power-plant-announcement-for-port-augusta/8804628">world’s biggest solar thermal plant</a> set to begin construction this year. Elsewhere, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-unveils-snowy-plan-for-pumped-hydro-costing-billions-74686">talked up the prospects</a> of the Snowy 2.0 hydro storage project.</p>
<p>Yet the politics remain as rancorous as ever. The federal government unveiled its <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Guarantee">National Energy Guarantee</a> in November, after Chief Scientist Alan Finkel’s Clean Energy Target proved too rich for some in the Coalition. Just before Christmas, the long-awaited <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/review-climate-change-policies">climate policy review</a> was released, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-has-politicked-himself-into-irrelevance-on-energy-and-climate-in-2018-89368">immediately branded as weak</a>. </p>
<p>Both issues are unresolved, and are set to loom large on the landscape this year. But what else is on the horizon?</p>
<h2>Domestic bliss</h2>
<p>We should always expect the unexpected. But perhaps the most predictable “unexpected” event would be a heatwave, prompting one or more of our creaking coal-fired power stations to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-15/sa-power-aemo-report-into-rolling-blackouts-during-heatwave/8273836">have a meltdown</a>. Maybe the “<a href="http://www.afr.com/news/scott-morrison-mocks-sas-big-battery-as-like-the-big-banana-20170727-gxjqbz">Big Banana</a>” (as Elon Musk’s battery has been branded) will step in again, as it <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/speed-of-tesla-big-battery-leaves-rule-makers-struggling-to-catch-up-36135/">already has</a>.</p>
<p>If fossil fuel power stations fail again, expect to see the culture war heat up again, with coal’s defenders using ever more twisting logic to defend their dear dinosaur technology.</p>
<p>Barring the apocalypse, on March 17 South Australians will <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_2018">go to the polls</a>. Will Premier Jay Weatherill be returned to power, to continue his long-running stoush with federal energy minister Josh Frydenberg? Will heatwaves and power outages help or hinder him? At the moment, polls have <a href="https://indaily.com.au/news/politics/2017/12/19/xenophon-party-outpolls-labor-and-liberals/">former senator Nick Xenophon as putative premier</a>. My crystal ball is hazy on what this would mean for energy policy.</p>
<p>In April there will be a meeting of the <a href="http://www.coagenergycouncil.gov.au">COAG Energy Council</a> at which the NEG proposal will come under scrutiny. Expect it to be bloody. State governments have demanded more modelling, so they can compare the NEG to Finkel’s Clean Energy Target that Finkel suggested, and an emissions intensity scheme. </p>
<p>Current SA treasurer Tom Koutsantonis has <a href="https://www.governmentnews.com.au/2017/11/coag-energy-meeting-kicks-can-road/">raised several concerns</a> with the NEG, arguing that it doesn’t give a big enough boost to renewables, and would do nothing to break up the power of the big “gentailers”, who generate and sell electricity. </p>
<p>“To proceed, the NEG would require unanimous support at COAG, so this policy is either years away, or won’t happen at all,” Koutsantonis said. Expect a long-running pitched battle if Weatherill and Koutsantonis are still about, and perhaps even if they’re not.</p>
<h2>Funding issues</h2>
<p>In the May budget the Turnbull government is going to have to decide what to do about the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/government/emissions-reduction-fund">Emissions Reduction Fund</a>, the centrepiece of former prime minister Tony Abbott’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/direct-action-plan-5063">Direct Action policy</a>, which replaced his predecessor Julia Gillard’s carbon price.</p>
<p>The fund, which lets companies bid for public money to implement emissions-reduction projects, started at A$2.55bn, and there is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/19/coalitions-climate-policy-review-reveals-it-will-loosen-pollution-safeguard">about A$260 million left</a>.</p>
<p>Connected to these decisions are questions over whether and how the fund’s “<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-cap-on-emissions-is-a-trading-scheme-in-all-but-name-47035">safeguard mechanism</a>”, which is supposed to stop the system being gamed, will be modified. </p>
<p>Among the many criticisms levelled at the government’s <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/18690271-59ac-43c8-aee1-92d930141f54/files/2017-review-climate-change-policies.pdf">2017 climate policy review</a>, released with little fanfare the week before Christmas, was the proposal to make the already flexible mechanism <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-federal-climate-policy-review-a-recipe-for-business-as-usual-89372">even more flexible</a>, so as to “reduce the administrative and auditing costs” for businesses.</p>
<p>The government’s climate review also says that in 2018 it will start the process of developing a long-term emissions-reduction strategy, to be finalised by 2020. It has promised to “consult widely” with businesses, the community, states and territories, and other G20 nations. Time will tell exactly how wide this consultation turns out to be, although anything would be better than the Trump Adminstration’s <a href="https://envirodatagov.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Part-3-Changing-the-Digital-Climate.pdf">systematic removal of the term “climate change” from federal websites</a>.</p>
<h2>Overseas business</h2>
<p>The climate review suggests that the Turnbull government will push for more international carbon trading. An unlikely alliance has formed against the idea, consisting of those who view carbon credits as buck-passing, as well as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/19/coalitions-climate-policy-review-reveals-it-will-loosen-pollution-safeguard">Tony Abbott</a>, who thinks Australian money “shouldn’t be going offshore into dodgy carbon farms in Equatorial Guinea and Kazakhstan”. </p>
<p>His stance has already been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jan/03/abbotts-stance-on-international-carbon-credits-makes-no-sense-business-says">branded as nonsensical</a> by the business lobby – who, it must be said, stand to benefit significantly from carbon trading.</p>
<p>On the diplomatic front, the United Nations will hold a “<a href="http://unfccc.int/items/10265.php">2018 Talanoa dialogue</a>” process, featuring a series of meetings in which major economies will come under pressure to upgrade their climate commitments to meet the Paris target.</p>
<p>As <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/australia-under-new-pressure-to-get-serious-about-climate-in-2018-61812/">Giles Parkinson notes</a>, Australia had probably thought that they could get away with no climate target upgrades until around 2025. </p>
<p>In October the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will <a href="http://ipcc.ch/news_and_events/st_sr15_sod_leak.shtml">release a report</a> on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C – the more ambitious of the Paris Agreement’s twin goals – and the emissions pathways we would need to follow to get there. Expect climate deniers to get their retaliation in first.</p>
<p>The next UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (number 24 in a never-ending series) will be held in December in Katowice, in <a href="http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/06/01/un-climate-conference-2018-heads-heartland-polish-coal/">Poland’s coal heartland</a>.</p>
<h2>Others’ predictions and my own</h2>
<p>So, <a href="https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/niels_bohr_130288">prediction is very difficult</a>, but most of us like to indulge. Reneweconomy asked Frydenberg, his opposite number Mark Butler, and the Greens’ climate spokesperson Adam Bandt <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/coalition-labor-greens-and-the-future-of-energy-in-2018-2018/">what they thought was coming up</a>.</p>
<p>Frydenberg talked up “innovative projects” like this summer’s <a href="https://www.aemo.com.au/Media-Centre/AEMO-and-ARENA-demand-response-trial-to-provide-200MW-of-emergency-reserves-for-extreme-peaks">demand response trial</a> and Snowy 2.0.</p>
<p>Butler gloomily forecasted more policy chaos and renewables-blaming, while Bandt was sunnier, predicting that 2018 will be “the year of energy storage” as the economics for commercial and household batteries begin to stack up.</p>
<p>Bandt also thinks the public debate will heat up as extreme weather hits, and the national security implications become (more) obvious.</p>
<p>Well, it will be fun to see whether the Minerals Council pulls its horns in under the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/dec/19/bhp-could-end-2m-membership-of-minerals-council-over-policy-differences">threat of BHP pulling out</a>. Early signs would <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/11/minerals-council-of-australia-kicks-off-coal-power-campaign-despite-bhp-threat">suggest not</a>.</p>
<p>Will other mining companies defect? </p>
<p>Will battery storage get a <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/2018-when-battery-storage-gets-a-grip-on-the-grid-37990/">grip on the grid</a>? </p>
<p>Will Adani <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/18/adani-scraps-2bn-deal-to-outsource-carmichael-coalmine-operation">pull the plug on Carmichael</a> under continuing pressure from campaigners?</p>
<p>Well, here are some safe predictions.</p>
<p>Donald Trump will continue <a href="https://theconversation.com/time-for-china-and-europe-to-lead-as-trump-dumps-the-paris-climate-deal-78709">being Donald Trump</a>. Liberal and National backbenchers will put pressure on Turnbull to do what John Howard did when George W. Bush was in the Oval Office – namely, get into the United States’ slipstream and take advantage of the lowered ambition.</p>
<p>There will be further <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-month-in-teslas-sa-battery-is-surpassing-expectations-89770">stunning developments</a> in energy storage, and the prices of solar and wind will <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-the-net-cost-of-using-renewables-to-hit-australias-climate-target-nothing-88021">continue to plummet</a>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Australia’s emissions will <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-19/greenhouse-gas-emissions-increase-third-consecutive-year/9271176">continue to rise</a>, as will the atmosphere’s <a href="https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/">carbon dioxide concentrations</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89970/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Last year was a vicious one for climate and energy politics. And with a South Australian election and various other federal decisions in the offing, 2018 looks like being similarly rancorous.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/892902017-12-19T22:29:26Z2017-12-19T22:29:26ZNick Xenophon could be South Australia’s next premier, while Turnbull loses his 25th successive Newspoll<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/200046/original/file-20171219-4951-ew47yt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nick Xenophon won 46% of the preferred South Australian premier vote in a recent Newspoll.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Morgan Sette</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The next South Australian election will be held in three months, on March 17, 2018. A <a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRWr9FdVQAAY7yw.jpg">South Australian Newspoll</a>, conducted October to December from a sample of 800, had primary votes of 32% for Nick Xenophon’s SA-BEST party, 29% Liberal, 27% Labor, and 6% Greens.</p>
<p>On the better premier measure, Nick Xenophon had 46% of the vote, followed by incumbent Jay Weatherill on 22% and Opposition Leader Steven Marshall on 19%.</p>
<p>Xenophon’s strong performance is partly explained by the dire ratings of both Weatherill and Marshall. Weatherill had 53% dissatisfied, 34% satisfied, for a net approval of minus 19. Marshall had 50% dissatisfied, 27% satisfied, for a net approval of minus 23.</p>
<p>The previous South Australian Newspoll was taken in late 2015. A <a href="https://theconversation.com/labour-wins-nz-election-after-backing-from-nz-first-bankers-sa-galaxy-31-lib-30-sa-best-26-labor-85973">Galaxy poll</a> taken for the Australian Bankers’ Association in early October gave the Liberals 31% of the primary vote, SA-BEST 30%, and Labor 26%. The better premier measure in that poll had 41% Xenophon, with Weatherill and Marshall both on 21%.</p>
<p>If the primary votes in Newspoll were replicated at the March 2018 election, SA-BEST would probably win a clear majority of lower house seats. Both major parties’ supporters dislike the other major party, so most Labor voters will preference SA-BEST ahead of the Liberals, and vice versa.</p>
<p>There are still three months until the election, and SA-BEST will be attacked ferociously in the coming weeks. However, the disdain for both major parties, and Xenophon’s popularity, gives SA-BEST a real opportunity to end the major party duopoly in South Australia.</p>
<p>The total vote for all “others” in Newspoll is 6%. At the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_state_election,_2014">2014 state election</a>, Family First won 6%. This poll does not suggest the Australian Conservatives, formed by Cory Bernardi, are surging.</p>
<h2>Turnbull loses his 25th successive Newspoll, 53-47</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.pollbludger.net/2017/12/18/newspoll-53-47-labor-10/">This week’s Newspoll</a>, conducted December 14-17 from a sample of 1,670, gave federal Labor a 53-47 lead, unchanged from last fortnight. Primary votes were 37% Labor (steady), 36% Coalition (steady), 10% Greens (steady), and 7% One Nation (down one). </p>
<p>This is Malcolm Turnbull’s 25th successive Newspoll loss. Tony Abbott lost 30 in a row before he was dumped.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s ratings were unchanged at 57% dissatisfied, 32% satisfied, for a net approval of minus 25. Bill Shorten’s net approval fell three points to minus 24. Turnbull led by 41-34 as better prime minister (39-33 last fortnight).</p>
<p>The 7% for One Nation is its <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll">lowest support</a> in Newspoll since December 2016, before One Nation was included in the party readout. On the overall vote for left- and right-wing parties, the left leads by 47-43 in this Newspoll (47-44 last fortnight). This is the first change in the overall left/right balance since October.</p>
<p>The passage of same-sex marriage legislation through parliament and the media furore over Sam Dastyari do not appear to have improved the Coalition’s position. Most voters realise that the large “yes” vote in the plebiscite forced the Coalition to act. It is likely that only partisans are interested in Dastyari.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll/coalition-trails-labor-but-turnbull-extends-lead-as-preferred-pm/news-story/024e8fb5d66bddde4ae5bf593e3fed10">Newspoll</a> (paywalled) asked who was better at handling the economy, national security, asylum seekers, cost of living, and tax cuts. Turnbull had more than 20-point leads over Shorten on the first three issues, and a 40-33 lead on tax cuts. Shorten led by 43-41 on cost of living.</p>
<p>These questions are biased in favour of Turnbull, as they appeal to the Coalition’s perceived strength on the economy, national security and asylum seekers. There were no questions regarding issues like health, education and climate change, where Labor is perceived to be better than the Coalition. </p>
<p>Incumbent prime ministers tend to outperform their party, so Labor would probably have obtained more favourable results had Newspoll asked Coalition vs Labor, not Turnbull vs Shorten.</p>
<h2>Essential 53-47 to Labor</h2>
<p>In <a href="http://www.essentialvision.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Essential-Report_191217.pdf">this week’s Essential</a>, the Coalition gained two points since last fortnight, reducing Labor’s lead to 53-47. Primary votes were 38% Labor, 37% Coalition, 9% Greens and 7% One Nation. Essential uses a two-week sample of about 1,800, with additional questions based on one week’s sample.</p>
<p>All proposed reforms of political donations were very popular, with the exception of banning donations and making all political party spending taxpayer-funded (50-30 opposed).</p>
<p>Respondents were asked whether the last 12 months had been good or bad for various items. The economy had a net +11 rating, large companies a net +22, your workplace a net +34, and you and your family a net +27. The planet had a net -22 rating and Australian politics a net -36. </p>
<p>Respondents were also asked about their expectations for 2018, though Essential apparently thought the next year is 2017.</p>
<p>By 54-29, voters disapproved of the proposed A$50 billion in company tax cuts to medium and large businesses (50-30 in October). By 47-8, voters thought personal income tax cuts were more important than business tax cuts, with 33% for both being equally important.</p>
<p>37% thought interference in Australian politics by foreign countries is a major problem, 36% a minor problem, and 12% did not think it was a problem at all.</p>
<h2>Bennelong preference flows</h2>
<p>With virtually all votes counted in Saturday’s <a href="http://tallyroom.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-21379-105.htm">Bennelong byelection</a>, Liberal John Alexander defeated Labor’s Kristina Keneally by 54.9-45.1, a 4.9-point swing to Labor since the 2016 election. Primary votes were 45.1% Alexander, 35.8% Keneally, 6.7% Greens, 4.3% Australian Conservatives, and 3.1% Christian Democrats.</p>
<p>The informal rate of 8.1% is far too high, and indicates savings provisions should be introduced so that votes can still be counted even if voters do not number every square. There is confusion in New South Wales because state elections use optional preferential voting.</p>
<p>I have information about preference flows from one booth in Bennelong from a Labor scrutineer. At this booth, Keneally won 88% of Greens preferences, but Alexander won 85% of Australian Conservatives’ preferences and 77% of Christian Democrat preferences.</p>
<p>Preferences of other candidates split evenly between Keneally and Alexander. This booth may not be representative of the whole electorate, but these preference flows seem reasonable.</p>
<p>While Newspoll and Galaxy understated Alexander by four-to-five points, these polls were of one seat. Australian pollsters have been bad with seat polling, but very good with national and state polls. The error in Bennelong does not affect the trustworthiness of Newspoll’s national polls.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89290/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If the primary votes in Newspoll were replicated at the South Australian election, SA-BEST would probably win a clear majority of lower house seats.Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/853242017-10-27T07:24:54Z2017-10-27T07:24:54ZThe High Court sticks to the letter of the law on the ‘citizenship seven’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/192169/original/file-20171027-13355-8drbd7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The High Court has ruled Scott Ludlam, Larissa Waters, Fiona Nash, Barnaby Joyce and Malcolm Roberts ineligible to have stood for parliament at the 2016 election.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Shutterstock/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Today, the High Court <a href="https://theconversation.com/high-court-knocks-barnaby-joyce-out-in-dual-citizenship-case-as-byelection-looms-in-new-england-86470">announced</a> the fate of the “citizenship seven”, with only senators Nick Xenophon and Matt Canavan surviving the legal ordeal. (Although the victory will be of limited relevance to Xenophon, who has in the meantime <a href="https://theconversation.com/nick-xenophon-set-to-go-back-to-where-he-came-from-85338">announced</a> his resignation from the Senate to return to state politics in South Australia).</p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA//2017/45.html">the case</a>, the High Court, acting as the Court of Disputed Returns, found that four of the six senators referred to it, and the only member of the House of Representatives (Barnaby Joyce), were disqualified under Section 44 of the Constitution. With the exception of Xenophon and Canavan, it was found that the MPs had never been validly elected.</p>
<p>The court has declared all five seats vacant. The senators will be replaced through a recount from the 2016 election. The House of Representative seat of New England will go to a byelection on December 2, which Joyce will contest. </p>
<p>In the meantime, Labor has refused to offer the Coalition a pair for Joyce’s absence, and the Coalition will maintain government on a knife-edge, with 74 seats plus the support of the crossbench, and, if necessary, the Speaker’s casting vote.</p>
<p>Leaving to one side the immediate political consequences of the decision, what did the High Court say about the interpretation of the restriction on foreign citizens running for parliament in Section 44? And is this the last time we will have to think about the matter?</p>
<h2>The possible interpretations of Section 44</h2>
<p>The crux of the constitutional case was the interpretation of Section 44 of the Constitution – specifically sub-section (i). That, relevantly, provides:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Any person who … is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Importantly, if a person is found to be in breach of Section 44 at the time they nominated for election, they will never have been validly elected.</p>
<p>The High Court has held that if a person has never been validly elected, their parliamentary votes during the time they purported to sit would still be valid. </p>
<p>However, <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-high-court-decides-against-ministers-with-dual-citizenship-could-their-decisions-in-office-be-challenged-82688">questions have been raised</a> as to the validity of the decisions of ministers who were not validly elected. This means there are possibly further unresolved issues around the validity of decisions made by Joyce and Fiona Nash, who, unlike Canavan, did not step down from their ministerial posts while the High Court made its determination.</p>
<p>Another important point that the court has previously clarified is that foreign citizenship is determined according to the law of the foreign state concerned.</p>
<p>None of the interpretations that were urged by the parties on the High Court were strictly literal readings of the words “citizen of a foreign power”. All the parties accepted that there had to be some level of flexibility, allowing a person who was technically a foreign citizen to nonetheless be able to run for parliament.</p>
<p>The real argument in the case, then, was how much flexibility could be read into the section.</p>
<p>The reason all the parties accepted that there had to be some flexibility in the words, was that the High Court had held as much in a 1992 decision of <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/60.html">Sykes v Cleary</a>. Relevantly, this case did not concern people who were unaware of their foreign citizenship, and so did not directly address the main point that was in issue for the citizenship seven.</p>
<p>Rather, the case stood for the proposition that a person may be a dual citizen and not disqualified under Section 44 if that person has taken “reasonable steps to renounce” their foreign nationality.</p>
<p>In the course of his dissenting judgment, however, Justice Deane made a comment that the provision should really only apply to cases “where the relevant status, rights or privileges have been sought, accepted, asserted or acquiesced in by the person concerned”. In this way, Deane suggested there was a mental element to being in breach of the provision.</p>
<p>Many of the interpretations urged on the court drew on this idea. They ranged from requiring voluntary retention or acquisition of citizenship or requiring actual knowledge of foreign citizenship, to a test of whether a person was on sufficient “notice” to check their citizenship status, to a need for the person to have real allegiance to the foreign power.</p>
<h2>The High Court opts for certainty</h2>
<p>The High Court opted for an interpretation of the Constitution that promotes certainty for future cases.</p>
<p>In a (rare) unanimous decision, it adopted a reading that, as far as possible, adhered to the ordinary and natural meaning of the words. It accepted that the literal meaning would be adopted, with the only exceptions those that had been established in Sykes v Cleary.</p>
<p>The court refused to read further exceptions into the provision based on knowledge, notice or actual allegiance. It said to do so would import a worrying element of uncertainty into the provision, which would be “apt to undermine stable representative government”.</p>
<h2>The application to the ‘citizenship seven’</h2>
<p>Once the High Court resolved the interpretation of Section 44, it had to apply this interpretation to each of the citizenship seven. The only two MPs who they found <em>not</em> to have fallen foul of this strict reading were Xenophon and Canavan.</p>
<p>Xenophon had what was referred to as “British overseas citizenship”. This had been inherited through his father, who migrated from Cyprus while it was still a British territory. The court accepted that Xenophon, while technically a type of British “citizen”, held no right of entry or right of abode, and thus he did not have “citizenship” for the purposes of Section 44.</p>
<p>Canavan’s facts were more complicated. His alleged citizenship turned on a change in Italian citizenship law that occurred because of a decision of the Italian Constitutional Court when he was two. The court received expert evidence on the Italian legal position, and it ultimately accepted that they could not be satisfied that Canavan was, in fact, a citizen of Italy.</p>
<p>Each of the other senators and Joyce accepted that there were, technically, citizens of a foreign country at the time of their nomination. But they argued they had not known of this when they nominated for parliament. The court’s strict interpretation of Section 44 offered them no comfort.</p>
<h2>Is this the end of the parliament’s Section 44 dramas?</h2>
<p>In the immediate aftermath of the High Court’s decision, the government has <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2017-10-27/media-statement">announced</a> it will refer the decision to the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Electoral_Matters">Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters</a> to discuss, among other things, possible amendments to Section 44.</p>
<p>The issue, it would seem, is no longer the uncertainty around whether a person is or is not disqualified. Because of the strictness of the High Court’s interpretation, all potential parliamentarians are on notice to check thoroughly their citizenship status. Part of the referral to the committee is to investigate ways to “minimise the risk of candidates being in breach of Section 44”.</p>
<p>Rather, the more fundamental issue is now whether this is a desirable state of affairs given the large numbers of Australian citizens who are dual nationals, and who may not wish to renounce their citizenship to run for parliament. Thus, we as a nation stand to lose potential parliamentarians by excluding a pool of people that is likely to grow, not diminish.</p>
<p>Further, there is another question as to whether Section 44, when interpreted in this way, is apt to achieve its purpose. The High Court accepted that the purpose of Section 44 was to ensure that MPs do not have a split allegiance or loyalty. </p>
<p>Many might argue that this purpose is still an important one. Even if that is accepted, it would seem that denial of eligibility to a dual national is a particularly blunt instrument to achieve it. On the one hand, it captures many people who do not even know they are dual citizens. On the other hand, the relatively easy step (in most cases) of renouncement means that those people who do have a split allegiance, but who want to run for parliament, have only to fulfil these formalities to do so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85324/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gabrielle Appleby receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a constitutional consultant to the Clerk of the Commonwealth House of Representatives. </span></em></p>The question will now be whether Section 44 of the Constitution needs reform to enable dual citizens who may have a lot to offer to become MPs.Gabrielle Appleby, Associate Professor, UNSW Law School, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/838662017-10-17T22:00:12Z2017-10-17T22:00:12ZA ‘Hiero’ in the White House: Trump’s resemblance to a Greek tyrant<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188647/original/file-20171003-18144-cpw8my.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=308%2C12%2C3973%2C2625&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What can an ancient Greek text tell us about Donald Trump's tyrannical personality? Xenophon's Hiero provides some clues. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It may seem odd to use a text from ancient Greece to try to understand and explain Donald Trump.</p>
<p>But please indulge me as a scholar of political theory and philosophy. Like the rest of the world, I’ve been trying to make sense of the U.S. president.</p>
<p>Xenophon’s <a href="http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=1175"><em>Hiero</em></a> explains, to a great degree, what might drive a man like Trump and the double-edged nature of his success.</p>
<p>In the book, Simonides, a poet, discusses with Hiero, the tyrant, the differences between private life and the life of a tyrant. Hiero complains about living the life of a tyrant and the many problems he did not have as a private citizen.</p>
<p>Simonides’ initial argument is that average citizens in their private lives get great pleasure from the sensual activities of life and the joy of owning objects. He reasons that a tyrant’s life, therefore, must be even more pleasurable because a tyrant would have access to all the physical pleasures of life. Hiero, the tyrant, disagrees, stating:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“… tyrants have much fewer pleasures than private men who live on modest means, and they have far more and greater pains.”</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>What’s more, even if a tyrant is enjoying public festivities or lavish meals, he can never enjoy the simple pleasures of life because of a lack of trust and due to being accustomed to plentiful riches. </p>
<p>Trump has never known true deprivation. Meantime Hiero, our introspective tyrant, knows that such plenty will never satiate.</p>
<p>Hiero also complains he can never truly trust the opinions of his advisers, something Trump too <a href="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2017/02/16/Trumps-Risky-Message-He-Doesnt-Trust-His-Intelligence-Chiefs">has reportedly griped about</a> since becoming president. But the president’s distrust and disregard for his advisers was evident even before his time in the White House and witnessed in the simulated world of <em>The Celebrity Apprentice</em>. </p>
<p>In a famous scene from the reality program hosted by Trump, he asks his celebrity apprentices whether he should run for president. Of course, no one objects, and for good reason given Trump himself states that anyone who does will be sorry.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E3jN5EvRpYM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Of course, reading too much into this exchange, framed in a comedic tone, would be reckless. Yet the profound truth of it is plain; a man with wealth and power will find it difficult to enjoy mutually trustworthy and respectful relationships with his advisers.</p>
<p>Some of the most insightful passages of <em>Hiero</em> come from the segments where Hiero addresses the personal life of a tyrant. In the realm of marriage, tyrants, according to Hiero, are constrained because:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“…it is attentions from the proudest women which give the most pleasure, whereas attentions from slaves, even when they are available, do not content at all…”</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>That reasoning, fleshed out further in the text, holds that marriage is only pleasurable when it elevates the status of the couple. There is truth in this for almost any wealthy person. How can a couple with immense wealth inequality believe they’re together because of love rather than greed? Does Melania Trump, born of modest means in Slovenia, truly love Trump? Things seem chilly here:</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TXnMbOSeB1I?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The dilemma is, perhaps, one of the most profound problems that the tyrant must face: He cannot love and cannot be loved.</p>
<p>The inability to love or trust anyone leads to a fundamental problem of governance. Hiero grieves, saying that tyrants:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><em>“… fear the brave because they might dare something for the sake of freedom; the wise, because they might contrive something; and the just, because the multitude might desire to be ruled by them.”</em></p>
</blockquote>
<p>Perhaps this explains Trump’s hand-picked cabinet, including the selection of Rick Perry to head the Department of Energy. This is a portfolio that was helmed by a Nobel Prize-winning physicist under President Barack Obama. During the George W. Bush administration, a co-founder of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy held the job.</p>
<p>Perry, on the other hand, is famous for his “oops moment”
in 2011 in which he forgot the departments he wanted to cut, including Energy.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZCyTQEANlmM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Xenophon explains that Heiro cannot trust people who have motives outside of self-interest. He can understand this singular aspect of their character and can trust it because, as a self-motivated person himself, at least he knows where they’re coming from.</p>
<p>So what am I trying to say about Trump? It’s this: The president of the United States has a classical tyrannical soul. <em>Heiro</em> provides us with some insight into what a tyrant wants and what fuels his ambitions. </p>
<p>Trump is not a unique phenomenon in this respect. We all likely have tyrannical portions of our psyche — some of us want constant adoration, gratification and ever more material objects to both enjoy for ourselves and to make others jealous. This is the easy part of a tyrant to understand.</p>
<p>Perhaps this is why Trump connects with his supporters on at least one level. He is seemingly uncomplicated by a sense of remorse or good taste when it comes to his ambition to dominate others and show off his wealth. He is unabashed and unapologetic.</p>
<p>Some of us might see his wealth and power and feel jealousy that we cannot also parade our vanities as obviously and garishly as he does. </p>
<p>Thankfully, however, few of us embrace the tyrannical parts of our psyches with as much spectacle.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83866/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Antonio Redfern Pucci does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The president of the United States has a classical tyrannical soul. An ancient Greek text provides us with some insight into what a tyrant wants and what fuels his ambitions.Antonio Redfern Pucci, Ph.D.c. , Lakehead UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/853382017-10-06T08:28:27Z2017-10-06T08:28:27ZNick Xenophon set to go back to where he came from<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189142/original/file-20171006-25745-or4t25.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nick Xenophon is a tough dealmaker who demands concessions in return for his crucial numbers.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/David Mariuz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Nick Xenophon, the master of the stunt, is about to indulge in one more before he leaves the Senate for a run at ruling the South Australian roost from its crossbench.</p>
<p>After his shock announcement that he’s about to quit federal parliament, Xenophon is off to the US where, early on Monday morning Australian time, he’ll appear with Australian Ugg boot manufacturer Eddie Oygur to protest outside Deckers Outdoor Corporation headquarters in Santa Barbara.</p>
<p>The small business of “Aussie battler” Oygur is being sued for an alleged breach of trademark of the word “Ugg” and the boot’s patent design.</p>
<p>They’ll have with them, according to the pre-publicity screed from Xenophon’s office, “a flock of sheep”. It’s all about pulling wool over consumers’ eyes and fleecing Eddie, you see.</p>
<p>It’s typical Xenophon, an extraordinarily popular and populist politician who specialises in the corny as well as the canny.</p>
<p>Xenophon insists his resignation is not influenced by the cloud over his parliamentary eligibility – the High Court next week considers his, and other MPs’, dual citizenship. If that went badly for him, he’d be out of the Senate anyway.</p>
<p>We can accept his word. Not only do colleagues say he’s been chewing over the possible change for months – although the actual decision is recent – but a source within the government ruefully admits there were hints that weren’t picked up at the time.</p>
<p>Regardless of the court outcome, the Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) numbers are safe. If he loses the case, Xenophon’s Senate spot would be filled by the next person on the 2016 election ticket – Tim Storer, who runs a trade consultancy. If his position is upheld his party will choose his replacement.</p>
<p>At last year’s election Xenophon went from a one-man band to having a team of three senators and one lower house member. NXT Senate support is needed to pass government legislation that is opposed by Labor and the Greens.</p>
<p>With a government that wants to get measures through, the NXT – like Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, with four Senate votes – is in an enormously powerful position. The difference between Xenophon and Hanson is that he usually extracts a price.</p>
<p>He’s a tough dealmaker, who demands concessions in return for his crucial numbers.</p>
<p>Government negotiators sometimes can’t quite believe what they are having to give him. Most recently he received a package worth more than A$60 million for backing the media reform bill. </p>
<p>Earlier, as part of a deal to pass company tax cuts, he secured a one-off payment to help with high power prices for people on aged and disability pensions or the parenting payment, costing the budget some $260 million.</p>
<p>Leading his SA-BEST party for the March election, Xenophon wants to extend that power to state politics – where he started, elected in 1997 on an anti-pokies crusade.</p>
<p>“With SA-BEST and NXT holding the balance of power in both the state parliament and the federal Senate, we will work together as a united team under my leadership to drive real change to improve the lives of all South Australians,” he said in his statement announcing his resignation, which will wait until after the High Court decision.</p>
<p>All the signs are SA-BEST will do well, harvesting people’s discontent with the major parties. Xenophon himself will contest the marginal Liberal seat of Hartley, where he lives.</p>
<p>His personal entry into the SA contest will give much more heft to SA-BEST – already with a strong vote in private polls – and strike more alarm into both Liberals and Labor. He is keeping his counsel on which side he would support in a hung parliament, so maximising uncertainty. The party will not issue preferences.</p>
<p>ABC analyst Antony Green predicts Xenophon’s party “will poll well enough to finish first or second in enough seats to make it very unlikely either side can win a majority in its own right”.</p>
<p>There will be a dozen electorates in which SA-BEST will be very competitive, according to Green. He says Xenophon’s entry will be better for the Labor Party than the Liberal Party, because “he’ll be more of a challenge in Liberal seats”.</p>
<p>Xenophon’s departure leaves his Canberra team with considerable uncertainty. While its numbers are preserved, it has no experienced person to step into Xenophon’s shoes.</p>
<p>And from what Xenophon said on Friday, he wants to keep his own feet in those shoes a good deal. “I will still be heavily involved in federal decisions,” he said. “I won’t be micromanaging but I will have a good idea of what is going on and I will be part of key decisions, particularly insofar as they affect South Australia.”</p>
<p>That might sound all right in theory. In practice it would be complicated, especially when there is complex legislation and difficult negotiations.</p>
<p>Even over the last year, there have been a few suggestions of differences between Xenophon and members of his team. The more time passes, the greater the chance of Xenophon losing touch with the federal nitty-gritty and the federal team resenting input from afar.</p>
<p>The leadership within parliament would have to go to one of the two other current senators: Stirling Griff (most likely) or Skye Kakoschke-Moore.</p>
<p>There is some uncertainty about whether Xenophon would remain overall leader of the party, as well as the state leader. His comment, quoted above, referring to “under my leadership”, suggests he would. And Griff says “we still consider him the leader of the federal party” as well as of the state party.</p>
<p>Immediate future arrangements will be discussed when the NXT meets on parliament’s resumption the week after next.</p>
<p>The longer-term questions will remain. Among them will be the name of the party for the next federal election, and whether Xenophon – even if he stays overlord of the federal party – can retain as much of a national profile when his focus becomes South Australian politics.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85338/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Nick Xenophon, the master of the stunt, is about to indulge in one more before he leaves the Senate for a run at ruling the South Australian roost from its crossbench. After his shock announcement that…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/839572017-09-14T01:06:27Z2017-09-14T01:06:27ZMedia reform deals will reduce diversity and amount to little more than window dressing<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185801/original/file-20170913-20553-htodt4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The latest reforms will do nothing to prevent further concentration of Australia’s media landscape.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dean Lewins</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/government-set-to-win-senate-support-for-media-deregulation-84017">breakthrough in negotiations</a> with the Senate crossbenchers that the government has been chipping away at over media reform has finally arrived.</p>
<p>The deregulatory legislation, the <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5907">Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Broadcasting Reform) Bill 2017</a>, required 38 votes to pass the Senate, where the Coalition controls 29 votes. It had already secured the support of three crossbenchers and four One Nation senators, but was waiting for just two votes to get it over the line – until Nick Xenophon did the deal.</p>
<p>After protracted negotiations with Xenophon and his NXT party, the Coalition has arrived at a quid pro quo deal that sees the repeal of the remaining <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-media-at-a-crossroads-amid-threats-to-diversity-and-survival-77314">cross-media diversity rules</a>, after the government agreed to NXT’s proposal to introduce funding grants for small and regional publishers. Clearly, though, they are not the “substantial quid pro quo” for public interest journalism that Xenophon has trumpeted, which had previously included tax breaks.</p>
<p>The main features of the bill are:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>repeal of the “two-out-of-three” rule and the 75% reach rule;</p></li>
<li><p>the creation of a one-off A$50 million innovation fund for smaller and regional publishers, whose turnover is between A$300,000 and A$30 million. This is capped at $1 million per publisher and available from mid-2018; and</p></li>
<li><p>the creation of 200 cadetships and 60 scholarships.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>The government will also direct the ACCC to conduct an inquiry into the <a href="https://theconversation.com/google-tax-debate-pits-corporate-thieves-against-state-sovereignty-39681">advertising practices of Google and Facebook</a> and their impact on journalism.</p>
<p>Funding for these publishers will require them to meet specific eligibility criteria, including membership of the Australian Press Council and having ethical guidelines in place. It will need to be for the purposes of news production, and civic and public interest journalism from a local perspective. The Australian Communications and Media Authority will oversee the distribution of the funds. </p>
<p>Recipients of the grants must be majority Australian-owned, pass an independence test, and not be affiliated with a political party, union, super fund or lobby group.</p>
<p>These eligibility criteria means some publishers will not have access to these meagre funds. For example, offshore controlled or owned online publications such as The Guardian and Buzzfeed, or a publisher like The New Daily, which is closely affiliated with super funds, would miss out.</p>
<p>Other horsetrading has led to amendments that assist community television, a welcome rescue measure for the sector. It includes a controversial measure such as the A$30 million gift to Fox Sports for women’s and niche sports – a commercial broadcaster that can be accessed by less than 30% of the Australian population. </p>
<p>A major A$90 million gift to commercial free-to-air broadcasters in the form of licence fee removals raises the question of whether something was given in return.</p>
<p>The obvious quid pro quo here is an agreement secured to <a href="https://theconversation.com/wide-ranging-ban-on-gambling-ads-during-sport-broadcasts-is-needed-to-tackle-problem-gambling-74687">remove gambling advertising</a> in prime time.</p>
<p>In the wider frame of high industry concentration and the dominance of US-based hegemons, Xenophon’s measures are a minimalistic band-aid response, which will do nothing to prevent further concentration of Australia’s media landscape.</p>
<p>The NXT “wins” are really only window dressing. The One Nation “wins” in relation to further scrutiny on the ABC are a ludicrous attempt at payback for critical coverage.</p>
<p>The more principled approach of Labor and the Greens, who did not support the repeal of the two-out-of-three diversity maintaining rule, is laudable – and may yet form the basis of real media reform in their next federal election campaigns.</p>
<p>The earlier proposed tax breaks for genuine public interest journalism reporting the news and informing the public had the potential to help keep some small players afloat. But one-off grants of A$1 million are hardly going to save struggling publishers.</p>
<p>On the face of it since eligible beneficiaries will be News Corporation and Fairfax Media competitors, many would think this must be a step in the right direction. However, it really is a drop in the ocean compared with the resources of the majors. It will do nothing to remedy the major problem of longer term concentration which needs a complete redesign of the regulatory framework fit for the 21st century.</p>
<p>The opportunity for a root-and-branch analysis of media consumption by Australian audiences, an agency tasked to effectively do that and tracking the transitioning news industries, with commensurate resources and diversity mechanisms has, once again, been sidestepped.</p>
<p>These latest negotiations follow a decade of attempts by conservative governments to dismantle media ownership restrictions.</p>
<p>These minor funding measures do nothing to address the underlying problem of an increasingly concentrated media landscape (where the vast bulk of the eyeballs are anyway). The more serious mechanisms that have been ventilated in the Senate Select Committee <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Future_of_Public_Interest_Journalism/PublicInterestJournalism">Inquiry into the Future of Public Interest Journalism</a> — such as direct financial subsidies — have not got a look in. </p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/documents/MPP/LSE-MPP-Policy-Brief-11-Public-Funding-Private-Media.pdf">2014 study prepared for the London School of Economics</a> looked at countries with direct financial support for their news industries (the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, Austria, France). The support was for up to 50 years, no matter the party in power. The report concluded that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Policymakers can support private media organisations with mechanisms such as tax relief or even direct subsidies to specific media companies. Such support need not compromise media independence if safeguards such as statutory eligibility criteria are in place. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The authors’ view was that the reality of convergence meant support of private media should be extended to online media.</p>
<p>Serious diversity mechanisms such as indirect tax measures and direct measures like subsidies did not pass muster in the historically cosy relations between politicians and media proprietors. </p>
<p>Real alternatives with impact are possible. In the Swedish subsidy scheme, for example, eligible print or digital newspapers need to have less than 30% market share. </p>
<p>While subsidies contribute only 2-3% of total industry revenue, they amount to 15-20% of revenue for weaker titles that are their main beneficiaries. For a handful, the subsidy represents up to 33% of total earnings.</p>
<p>Of greater importance to the survival of smaller publishers, these minor funding measures do very little to address the fact that 90% of new online ad spending is controlled by Google and Facebook. So why doesn’t the government introduce a levy on these two players to fund public interest journalism as suggested by the Senate Select Committee on the Future of Public Interest Journalism?</p>
<p>While there are still some ownership controls (minimum of five media voices in metro and four in regional and rural markets), and local content requirements that remain in place, these will not stop further media concentration. </p>
<p>A single person cannot control more than two radio stations or more than one television station in a single market. In regional markets there is still a requirement of 21 minutes of local content a day – a fairly low bar most agree. However, News Corp Australia, for example, which already owns around two-thirds of the print media sector, would be allowed to buy up all the traditional categories of media (TV, radio, and print) in any single market. </p>
<p>In cities such as Brisbane, Adelaide and Hobart, where there is already only one daily newspaper, the consequences of further concentration are stark.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=3175&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=3175&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=3175&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=3990&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=3990&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/113345/original/image-20160301-4063-1lzv1m3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=3990&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83957/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Dwyer receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a project about sharing news online.</span></em></p>The last-minute bargaining on media reforms are a minimalistic band-aid response that will do nothing to prevent further concentration of Australia’s media landscape.Tim Dwyer, Associate Professor, Department of Media and Communications, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/834522017-09-04T12:11:40Z2017-09-04T12:11:40ZPolitics podcast: Nick Xenophon on media reform<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184495/original/file-20170904-16064-1jwe7az.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the leader of a Senate crossbench party, Nick Xenophon’s position on contentious legislation – currently media reform – is crucial for the government. </p>
<p>He says it’s “not for lack of trying” that the Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) has not yet reached an agreement with the government on media ownership rules. He is pushing for tax breaks for smaller organisations to promote media diversity. </p>
<p>He also opposes concessions that the government has made to Pauline Hanson that would <a href="https://theconversation.com/abc-targeted-in-government-deal-with-pauline-hanson-82535">clip the wings of the ABC</a>, saying the NXT would vote against them.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the discovery of his dual citizenship means he is among the MPs now before the High Court over their eligibility to be in parliament. He’s been advised he has “the best case of the High Court seven”. </p>
<p>He holds serious concerns about another sort of citizenship issue – the government’s proposed tightening of laws for people to become Australians. “I think parts of this legislation simply go too far.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83452/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Nick Xenophon's position on contentious legislation – currently media reform – is crucial for the government.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/746872017-03-16T23:31:03Z2017-03-16T23:31:03ZWide-ranging ban on gambling ads during sport broadcasts is needed to tackle problem gambling<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/161087/original/image-20170316-20774-1vpd0sw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nick Xenophon is again pushing for a ban on gambling ads during TV sport broadcasts.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Turnbull government is <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/government-could-slash-gambling-ads-during-tv-sport-to-win-critical-crossbench-votes-20170315-guykzt.html">reportedly considering</a> banning the advertising of gambling during televised sporting broadcasts. This is not a new idea: Senator Nick Xenophon has long championed a ban, as have many who <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=b09224d7-988b-4b34-af59-cb81143698de">work with problem gamblers</a>.</p>
<p>It has been reported that more than one-in-six ads shown during AFL matches <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/government-could-slash-gambling-ads-during-tv-sport-to-win-critical-crossbench-votes-20170315-guykzt.html">are gambling-related</a>. So, could advertising be linked with rates of problem gambling?</p>
<h2>Evidence suggests ads have an impact</h2>
<p>Increases in problem gambling linked to sports betting have been reported in recent years, particularly among young men. The numbers of 18-to-25-year-old men with problems related to sports betting <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/online-gambling-addictions-among-young-men-dramatic-increase/6504282">doubled between 2012 and 2015</a> at the University of Sydney’s Gambling Treatment Clinic (where I work). </p>
<p>At the same time, gambling odds and prices have become a central part of sporting culture. The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/overnights/thegamblification-of-sport/8355958">“gamblification” of sport</a> is now seen as both a normal and central component of it. In pre-game reporting, the prices and odds are seen as being as important as player injuries and weather conditions.</p>
<p>Being able to draw a clear line between increased promotion of gambling and rates of problem gambling is not easy. Given there are always multiple factors why someone develops a gambling problem, it is never as clear-cut as blaming advertising. However, some evidence exists to suggest advertising has impacts on problem gamblers. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14459795.2014.903989">Interview research</a> and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11469-014-9519-9">large-scale survey work</a> have both suggested that gambling ads during sport strongly affect many problem gamblers by increasing their desire to gamble when trying to cut down. Therefore, restrictions on advertising may be effective in helping those with problems to manage their urges to gamble.</p>
<p>Another widespread concern about gambling advertising during sports broadcasts is the impact it might be having on young people. There is evidence this advertising can have an impact.</p>
<p>A study of Canadian adolescents <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11469-009-9211-7">found the majority</a> had been exposed to gambling advertising. It also found this advertising was leading to the belief that the chance of winning was high, and that gambling was an easy way to make money. </p>
<p>These findings are particularly concerning. In our work with problem gamblers, we have found these beliefs are crucial to the development of gambling problems.</p>
<p>Typically, when examining a problem gambler’s history, we find they were exposed to gambling at a young age and developed positive attitudes toward gambling at the time. In particular, a distorted belief in the likelihood of winning appears to be a key driver in many of our patients who developed problems.</p>
<p>Thus, advertising that promotes the idea that gambling is an easy way to make money is likely to prime our kids for developing gambling problems in the future.</p>
<h2>What we can learn from tobacco ad bans</h2>
<p>Would a ban on the advertising of gambling during sport broadcasts change attitudes toward gambling and gambling behaviour? Here, evidence on the impacts of tobacco advertising is instructive.</p>
<p>Tobacco advertising has been progressively restricted or banned in many countries. Thus, considerable evidence is available to make conclusions. There appears to be clear evidence that tobacco advertising does result in <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003439/full">increased rates of smoking in adolescents</a>.</p>
<p>It has also <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629600000540">been found</a> that bans on tobacco advertising appear to be effective in reducing tobacco use – but only in the case of complete bans. In contrast, attempts to limit bans on advertising to certain mediums – such as banning ads on TV – appear not to be effective, as this simply results in increases in tobacco advertising in non-banned media (in print or on billboards, for instance). </p>
<p>This suggests that for any restriction of gambling advertising to be effective, it needs to be widespread. Such displacement has already been seen with gambling. There is evidence of <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10899-015-9525-2">increased social media promotion of gambling</a>, which has resulted in increases in positive attitudes toward gambling in those exposed to these promotions.</p>
<p>There is not yet any demonstrated definitive link between increases in gambling advertising during sports and problem gambling. However, the research that has been conducted indicates that advertising may result in increased gambling by problem gamblers and increases in distorted beliefs about gambling in young people. </p>
<p>If the government chooses to go down the path of increasing restrictions on gambling advertising, it is important that any restrictions are wide-ranging enough to have a clear impact on gambling behaviours and attitudes.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74687/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher John Hunt receives funding from NSW Responsible Gambling Fund. </span></em></p>Restrictions on gambling advertisements may be effective in helping those with problems manage their urges to gamble.Christopher John Hunt, Clinical Psychologist, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/731312017-02-22T19:19:27Z2017-02-22T19:19:27ZGambling lobby gives big to political parties, and names names<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157811/original/image-20170222-20339-10gccf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The gambling lobby continues to provide substantial support to political parties.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The gambling industry declared A$1,294,501 in donations to Australian political parties in 2015-16. Our analysis of the latest <a href="http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au">Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) donation</a> disclosures shows various branches of the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) were by far the biggest donors among gambling industry groups.</p>
<p>Collectively, the AHA showered the major parties with $522,478 in declared donations. Lagging a little behind the AHA last year was ClubsNSW, which donated $155,603.</p>
<p>Two casino operators, Crown and Star Entertainment, declared $168,491 and $77,200 respectively in 2015-16. Tabcorp and Tattersall’s chipped in $164,650 and $94,329 respectively. </p>
<p>Assorted other entities such as ClubsQld, the Sutherland Tradies Club and the Randwick Labor Club declared donations of between $17,050 and $50,000 each.</p>
<p>Overall, the Coalition parties were the “winners” from gambling donations reported in 2015-16, receiving a total of $770,861. The ALP received $523,640. This was a 60:40 split.</p>
<p>The gambling lobby invested quite disproportionately in individual Labor candidates, donating $116,000 to individual campaigns. Liberal and National Party candidates were recorded as receiving $41,000 in specific campaign donations. </p>
<p>This doesn’t mean such donations weren’t made – but it is revealing that mostly ALP candidates’ details were disclosed. </p>
<h2>Donations to MPs</h2>
<p>Big donations from the gambling lobby are clearly <a href="https://theconversation.com/paying-the-piper-and-calling-the-tune-following-clubsnsws-political-donations-60639">not new</a>. But this year’s returns demonstrate that even when the stakes aren’t that high, the gambling lobby continues to defend its interests with major political parties. </p>
<p>Between 2010 and 2012, when stakes were higher, these actors and others spent $3,478,581 on <a href="https://theconversation.com/paying-the-piper-and-calling-the-tune-following-clubsnsws-political-donations-60639">campaign costs to defeat</a> the gambling reforms agreed between then prime minister Julia Gillard and independent MP Andrew Wilkie. </p>
<p>Wilkie and another long-time gambling reformist, Senator Nick Xenophon, list <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2016/s4503734.htm">donations reform</a> as an important element of any decent gambling reform package. They know how much influence the gambling lobby can afford to buy. </p>
<p>The funding of specific politicians has also continued. ClubsNSW turned this into something of an art form when the Wilkie-Gillard reforms were proposed and then defeated. Undoubtedly, influential caucus members articulating the gambling lobby’s perspective helped underline the political dangers of reform. </p>
<p>The 2015-16 returns don’t include all the donations made in respect of the 2016 election. This was demonstrated by the curious case of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-01/turnbull-admits-donating-1.75-million-to-election-campaign/8233244">own donation of $1.75 million</a> to the Liberal Party. So, we can expect to find out a bit more in about a year – barring some much-needed substantial reform of the system.</p>
<p>In the 2015-16 returns, however, the federal branch of the AHA identified specific beneficiaries of its largesse. Its original return included notations of donations to the campaigns of the following politicians:</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/4i6qH/2/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="402"></iframe>
<p>A subsequent amendment to the return, dated February 1 2017, has now been submitted to the AEC, excluding these names. </p>
<p>ClubsNSW also noted donations on its return to the following:</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/HCRlw/3/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="262"></iframe>
<p>This may provide some insight into what the gambling lobby thinks is the best way to focus attention of specific members of parties. </p>
<p>For example, the effectiveness of the anti-reform campaign in 2010-11 was based on the carrot-and-stick approach <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/the-lobby-group-that-got-much-more-bang-for-its-buck">adopted under the leadership of ClubsNSW</a>. This involved campaigning against individual politicians who were seen to support the Gillard-Wilkie agreement. </p>
<p>At the same time, the lobby actively supported politicians who were <a href="https://theconversation.com/paying-the-piper-and-calling-the-tune-following-clubsnsws-political-donations-60639">perceived as friends</a> for whatever reason. </p>
<p>Federal MP Kevin Andrews also gleaned a contribution of $2,000 to his Menzies 200 campaign fund from ClubsNSW. This was for a dinner he organised at Melbourne’s Athenaeum Club. ClubsNSW donated a <a href="https://theconversation.com/paying-the-piper-and-calling-the-tune-following-clubsnsws-political-donations-60639">total of $40,000 between 2013 and 2015</a> to Andrews even though he represents a Victorian seat.</p>
<p>With donations from the AHA included, Andrews’ campaign fund <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/machine-men-how-the-aha-and-clubsnsw-seek-political-influence-20160929-grrxe9.html">received a total</a> of $90,000 from gambling industry interests over this period. </p>
<p>He was the opposition spokesman for gambling matters prior to the 2013 election. After this and on his appointment as the responsible minister, he quickly repealed the already watered-down pokie reforms the Gillard government had passed.</p>
<h2>Road to reform</h2>
<p>There is no suggestion or implication politicians or political parties are influenced in their decision-making or policy positions by political donations. Nonetheless, a more transparent and much more timely political donations reporting system would enhance public confidence in the quality of decision-making, and its relationship to the public’s best interests. </p>
<p>Details of donations are often lacking. This is because declaration requirements of the current system are limited. Donations of <a href="http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/financial_disclosure/Overview.htm">less than $13,000</a> do not need to be specifically disclosed. Cumulative donations to different branches of the same organisation (otherwise known as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-01/political-donations-likened-to-money-laundering/8227952">donation splitting</a>) can amount to more than this without any need for disclosure.</p>
<p>Further, donations to “associated entities” are used to muddy the waters – in effect, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-01/political-donations-likened-to-money-laundering/8227952">to “launder” donations</a> by disguising the name of the donor. This also avoids disclosure. </p>
<p>Both Labor leader <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/34396924/shorten-wants-more-donation-transparency/#page1">Bill Shorten</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-08/malcolm-turnbull-indicates-open-changing-political-donations-law/7826060">Turnbull</a> have signalled recently they want donations reform on the table. It may be time to remind them a complete loss of faith in political processes is not inevitable. It’s something politicians can tackle, and relatively easily. </p>
<p>Serious political donations reform is a big step towards a more trusted political system. You can bet on it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/73131/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation and The (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority (the funds for which were derived from hypothecation of gambling tax revenue to research purposes), from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government, and from non-government organisations for research into multiple aspects of poker machine gambling, including regulatory reform, existing harm minimisation practices, and technical characteristics of gambling forms. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, and the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand. He is a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council funded project researching mechanisms of influence on government by the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries. He has undertaken consultancy research for local governments and non-government organisations in Australia and the UK seeking to restrict or reduce the concentration of poker machines and gambling impacts, and was a member of the Australian government's Ministerial Expert Advisory Group on Gambling in 2010-11. He is a member of the Australian Greens.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maggie Johnson is a recipient of an Australian Postgraduate Award (APA) funded by the Australian government. She has also undertaken research on gambling industry political donations for the Alliance for Gambling Reform. </span></em></p>The gambling industry continues to make handsome donations to our politicians, and recently named some of those it supports.Charles Livingstone, Senior Lecturer, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash UniversityMaggie Johnson, PhD Student, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.