tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/sa-best-50648/articlesSA-Best – The Conversation2018-06-14T11:34:03Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/983362018-06-14T11:34:03Z2018-06-14T11:34:03ZGrattan on Friday: The loners who lead, and trash, ‘personality’ parties<p>Let the voter beware. We may be in a “celebrity” age but personality parties, based around a “name” implode, explode, or fizzle. In the last few years, we’ve seen them do all three.</p>
<p>On Thursday came the latest episode in the One Nation soapie, when senator Brian Burston announced he was leaving the party to sit as an independent. Pauline Hanson had effectively tossed him out anyway.</p>
<p>Only a couple of weeks ago, after their <a href="https://theconversation.com/pauline-unplugged-lets-rip-against-senate-colleague-97574">spectacular</a> falling out over company tax cuts, Burston was declaring Pauline had her moods and he hoped they’d make up. She responded by saying he should give up his seat.</p>
<p>So now Hanson is down from having four Senate numbers after the 2016 election to two, with multiple bizarre twists in the course of the shrinkage. The combination of a capricious leader and eccentric and accident prone followers has cost the party what was a pivotal power position in the Senate.</p>
<p>On the face of it, Pauline Hanson and Nick Xenophon have little in common. Hanson’s politics operate, in considerable part, around the extremes; she taps into some dark places and often generates outrage. Ex-senator Xenophon hoovered up those disillusioned with the major parties, but from a centrist position.</p>
<p>In terms of leadership style, however, we can see a certain commonality. As a leader, Xenophon was autocratic – albeit his was a much smoother, smiley face of autocracy than Hanson’s. As in any party based around a personality, it was all (or at least mostly) about him.</p>
<p>One paradox of leaders of personality parties is that while they attract voters and so can get others elected, this can be their downfall, because they are by nature loners not team people.</p>
<p>Like Hanson, Xenophon ended up harming his creation. In his case, the flaw was overreach. Consider what might have been if Xenophon had not left the Senate for his ill-fated bid to be, if not the king, at least the king-maker in South Australian politics (his SA-BEST <a href="https://theconversation.com/liberals-win-south-australian-election-as-xenophon-crushed-while-labor-stuns-the-greens-in-batman-93355">won only</a> two upper house seats in the March state election).</p>
<p>He would still be leader and chief negotiator for the group, which started this term with three votes in the Senate. He would have <a href="https://theconversation.com/citizenship-crisis-claims-nick-xenophon-teams-kakoschke-moore-87935">lost</a> one senator, Skye Kakoschke-Moore, to the citizenship crisis, but her replacement, Tim Storer would probably be part of the team, instead of sitting as an independent. Before the High Court elevated him, Storer had fallen out with the party when he wasn’t given the casual vacancy Xenophon’s departure created.</p>
<p>If the party presently had three senators – rather than two - it would still have a veto power over legislation that Labor and the Greens opposed.</p>
<p>Post Xenophon, the old “Nick Xenophon Team” has become the Centre Alliance – Xenophon himself had always said the name would be de-personalised – and the one-time leader has no role in it.</p>
<p>Contacted this week, Xenophon sent a text saying he was “not making comment on anything political – my former colleagues are more than capable”. It was a far cry from when he quit the Senate last year, promising to keep a hand and a voice in what was happening in federal politics.</p>
<p>He’s concentrating on building his legal practice. Some believe he might have another shot at the Senate; others say that is out of the question but he could end up in state parliament. He has not even appeared in the campaign in the Adelaide Hills seat of Mayo where the Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie, another citizenship casualty, is fighting for her political life.</p>
<p>The battle in Mayo, while important for Centre Alliance, is more interesting on other grounds. It is a test of the ability of a crossbencher who wins a seat from a major party to entrench themselves. Tony Windsor did it in New England (won from the Nationals). Cathy McGowan has done in Indi (seized from the Liberals), as has Andrew Wilkie in Denison (wrested from Labor).</p>
<p>Sharkie in 2016 defeated a Liberal who was on the nose; in the byelection, she is up against high-profile Liberal candidate Georgina Downer, daughter of former foreign minister Alexander Downer, who occupied the seat in 1984-2008.</p>
<p>Two recent polls have put Sharkie <a href="https://theconversation.com/liberals-georgina-downer-trailing-in-early-mayo-poll-97965">ahead</a> of Downer 58-42% in two-party terms. It’s a long time until election day (July 28), but if Sharkie does regain her seat, perceptions about her as a local member would likely have counted more than her party branding, despite what would be Centre Alliance’s celebrations.</p>
<p>In terms of its Senate future, the Centre Alliance has some breathing space – its two senators, Stirling Griff and Rex Patrick, are long-termers and so don’t face the people at the next election. But that election will be crucial for the party – to show it still has life, it needs to get a new senator elected (and it won’t have the 2016 advantage of the smaller quota that applies in a double dissolution).</p>
<p>What used to be the Xenophon party will eventually fade away federally: the question is how long that will take. Its cycle will be rather longer and less spectacular than the personality-based Palmer United Party, which came and went in a single parliamentary term.</p>
<p>Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, at least in its present form, will also disappear in the fullness of time. Hanson, like the Centre Alliance senators, isn’t up for re-election, so she will be around a while. But apart from in Queensland it will difficult (albeit not impossible) for her to get anyone else elected under the larger quota required in the coming half-Senate election.</p>
<p>Personality-centred parties are different from more broadly-based minor parties - the Greens and the now defunct Australian Democrats - although the latter parties may be heavily identified with particular leaders.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-clive-palmers-back-on-the-trail-with-brian-burston-in-tow-98501">View from The Hill: Clive Palmer's back on the trail, with Brian Burston in tow</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Strong leaders, to whom the public relate, attract supporters to such parties (the Greens’ Bob Brown; Don Chipp, Cheryl Kernot for the Australian Democrats). But these parties have firmer and deeper roots than the personality parties, so they survive well beyond an individual figure. Though the Democrats are gone, they lasted a generation, through several leaders.</p>
<p>Most small parties, whether personality-based or not, get their backing by tapping into the dissatisfaction felt by many voters with the major parties. The Senate proportional representational voting system means they can translate modest – in some cases minimal - support into maximum impact in the federal parliament.</p>
<p>Changes the government has made to the Senate electoral system will put a check on that ability, but not wipe it out. In the years to come, mega personalities potentially will still be able to create parties in their image that become bright flames. But as with others before them, such parties would seem destined to be flashes in the pan.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98336/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>One paradox of leaders of personality parties is that while they attract voters and so can get others elected, this can be their downfall, because they are by nature loners not team people.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/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.