Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016

[Antonio the Sixth]

So do we have the final seat tally at last?

[IceAgeComing]

Herbert is very, very close (last figure I saw had an ALP lead of 35 after the most recent recount; its very much in the position where the losing side will probably go to court to try and get a fresh election) and outside of Tasmania the Senate is still being counted (!) and although seat numbers .  The latter will take a long time just because of the voting system; with ticket voting they could do it quicker since 95%+ of ballots were people voting 1 above the line and so they could basically count it like a FPTP election, put the numbers of first preferences into the computer and press the button to allocate preferences and see who won with the below the line votes having to be entered manually but there weren't that many of them; while now they have to check preferences of literally every ballot and that takes a lot longer considering the large numbers of votes.  The general picture is clear though.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Labor has claimed Herbert, but the LNP will almost certainly challenge it.

[Lachi]

So do we have the final seat tally at last?

With Labor's claim in Herbert:
L/NP: 76 (-14)
LAB: 69 (+14)
GRN: 1
NXT: 1(+1)
IND: 2

[jimrtex]

Button pressed in Tasmania. 5 Labor (notably including Lisa Singh, elected ahead of Catryna Bilyk), 4 Liberal (not including Richard Colbeck, who didn't make it), 2 Greens, and 1 Jacqui Lambie. Last seat was between second Green and first One Nation candidate. Nothing too surprised, but at least movement is finally happening in the Senate.

EDIT: As an aside, the race for the last seat between Nick McKim (Greens) and Kate McCulloch (One Nation) was very close -- the margin was just 21247-21106, or 141 votes. (McKim was elected under quota, as the quota was 26,090). On an amusing note, Singh actually reached the quota on preferences from Colbeck. Some voters voted for the ideologically-opposite dissidents from both major parties. Lol.

Some observations.

Slates were limited to six candidates. Is this due to a rule peculiar to Tasmania? "You can't fool us. You were trying to get us to take our shoes off!"


The summary of first preferences showed:

339,159 formal votes 96.52%
12,221 informal votes 3.48%
351,330 total 96.04%

339159 / 351330 is indeed 96.52%

But what is the "total" 96.04% of? Is that turnout? Are there any consequences for the 3.96% who didn't vote.


I had thought that there was almost a reversal of above the line and below the line votes (from preliminary results), but 73.2% of ALP votes were "ticket" votes, and 75.7% of Coalition voters were "ticket" votes. These were the only groups with 6 candidates.

Were ballots that ranked the candidates 1,2,3,4,5,6 below the line reclassified as ticket votes?


The new voting system appears to work as intended. With 12 to be elected, you might expect more outsiders to be elected.

On first preferences:

ALP 4.3670 quotas.
Coalition 4.2284
Greens 1.4504
Lambie 1.0788

Total 11.1246
Others 1.8876

So you would kind of expect other parties to be able to scramble together enough for a 12th seat.

But after the initial 8 candidates were elected, and their surpluses distributed:

ALP (3) + 1.3584
Coalition (3) + 1.2087
Greens (1) + 0.4525
Lambie (1) + 0.0692

Total (8) + 3.0888
Others 1.9112

Rather than immediately electing their 4th Senator and leaving a smaller remnant, both ALP and the Coalition split between two candidates each with too much support to prevent early elimination, but with plenty of room to accept transfers. Meanwhile transfers among the others could not be organized, and they ended up being dissipated or exhausted.

As the minor groups were being excluded, around 40% of their votes were transferring to ALP, the Coalition, Greens, or Lambie.

Most of the transfers to ALP and the Coalition appear to have been ticket transfers.

After the initial distribution of the surpluses until Colbeck was excluded, Bushby the 4th Coalition candidate, received 86% of the transfers to the Coalition. The only notable exception was when the 6th Coalition candidate was excluded, and Colbeck received about 2/3 of the transfers. These were likely voters who voted 6,5,4,3,2,1.

Between the two final ALP candidates, Bilyk received about 81% of the transfers to he and Singh.

Singh was elected because of her large share of 1st Preferences. That she was put over the top by Colbeck transfers was not too remarkable, given that all his votes were below the line. His transfers were:

Bushby (Liberal) 74%
Singh (ALP) 13%
Exhausted 6%
McCulloch (One Nation) 3%
McKim (Greens) 2%
Bilyk (ALP) 2%.

With only 5 of 58 candidates remaining, most of the votes other than to Bushby may have been fairly deep on the preference lists. 3/4 of Colbeck's support would be from Liberal voters who didn't like the party's order. It would not matter if they ranked Bushby 2nd or 6th, he was the only Liberal remaining. There might have been a few who deliberately skipped Bushby if they somehow felt that would help Colbeck.

If you are ranking below the line, there is nothing that would be personally attractive about a 4th ALP candidate, a 2nd Green candidate or a One Nation candidate. There would be some sympathy for Singh since she was in the same place as Colbeck.


Both ALP and the Coalition could do better if they could develop a strategy for voters to vote below the line. Something along the line of "You Choose" along with biographies that would attract votes on a non-ideological basis.

[ag]

Western Australia Senate is out: 5 Libs, 4 Labs, 2 Greens, 1 fascist (assuming he does not got to prison).

And, of course, the territories are out: 2 Labs, 2 Libs.

So far it is 11 Libs, 11 Labs, 4 greens, 2 others.

[Vosem]

The button has also been pressed in Western Australia; the result is 5 Liberal, 4 Labor, 2 Greens, and 1 One Nation, with all those elected having made it over the quota fairly comfortably and only one unsuccessful candidate mustering up even half a quota (Kado Muir of the Nationals). Amusingly the final Labor Senator made it over the hump on preferences from Shooters candidate Andrew Skerritt (and One Nation and the Greens both made it off the elimination of the Nationals).

There seem to be questions about the eligibility of the elected One Nation Senator Rod Culleton connected to a larceny incident; if he were deemed ineligible, the party would be able to recommend a replacement. #2 on the WA ballot, and the likely replacement, is a certain Peter Georgiou, the brother-in-law of the elected Senator.

In terms of term length, either of the two discussed methods seems to give 3 Liberal, 2 Labor, and 1 Green longer, six-year terms while 2 Liberal, 2 Labor, 1 Green, and One Nation get three-year terms.

[Ebowed]

Western Australia Senate is out: 5 Libs, 4 Labs, 2 Greens, 1 fascist (assuming he does not got to prison).

And, of course, the territories are out: 2 Labs, 2 Libs.

So far it is 11 Libs, 11 Labs, 4 greens, 2 others.

Hahaha, Turnbull is just going to be in for a terrible time!

Serves him right for calling a double dissolution over his irrelevant and disturbing hatred of unions.  That CMFEU bashing nonsense will get no where in the Senate.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Western Australia Senate is out: 5 Libs, 4 Labs, 2 Greens, 1 fascist (assuming he does not got to prison).

And, of course, the territories are out: 2 Labs, 2 Libs.

So far it is 11 Libs, 11 Labs, 4 greens, 2 others.

Hahaha, Turnbull is just going to be in for a terrible time!

Serves him right for calling a double dissolution over his irrelevant and disturbing hatred of unions.  That CMFEU bashing nonsense will get no where in the Senate.

The thing is... EVERYONE said this would happen. He thought himself smarter than everyone, it's pretty typical of the Turnbull MO.

[Vosem]

First big SURPRISE of the Senate button pressing, in a little-predicted outcome -- Senator Bob Day of Family First, who sued to stop the changes to the voting system, was nevertheless reelected! South Australia has returned 4 Liberals, 3 Nick Xenophon Team, 3 Labor, 1 Green, and 1 Family First.

4 Liberals, 3 Labor, and 2 NXT were elected off direct votes, leaving the final three seats to be filled by preferences.

At the critical moment in the juncture after the elimination of the fifth Liberal, Sean Edwards, 5 candidates remained in the race for the remaining three seats -- in order, Sarah Hanson-Young of the Greens, Skye Kakoschke-Moore of the Xenophon Team, Anne McEwen of Labor, Bob Day of Family First, and Steven Burgess of One Nation. Edwards' preferences go heavily towards Day (who had previously been barely a few hundred votes ahead of Burgess), causing Burgess to be eliminated; Burgess' preferences are mainly split between Kakoschke-Moore and Day, but enough leak to elect Hanson-Young (along with comfortably getting Kakoschke-Moore over the hump). Kakoschke-Moore and Hanson-Young's surpluses both strongly go to Anne McEwen, but it isn't quite enough, and Day beats her for the final seat by 72,392-68,849, and is therefore elected while remaining well short of a quota.

Hard to say how many people followed it, but the Liberal how-to-vote (which recommended #2 Family First) certainly played a large role in Day's election; he started off behind One Nation, and while he got ahead of them after the distribution of preferences from Matt Attia (Christian Democratic Party), it was basically a case of there being several hundred votes between them right up until Liberal preferences were distributed, when Day ballooned out to a larger lead and leapfrogged the fourth Labor candidate.

[Vosem]

In more late-counting results, full distribution of preferences has revealed to Melbourne to be a Greens v. Liberal seat (just like Warringah ), and has seen Maranoa revealed to be non-classical as well, with One Nation making 2CP, not Labor, after preferences.

EDIT: And Port Adelaide is a Labor vs. NXT seat.

[ag]

So, for the moment it is 15 Libs, 14 Labs, 5 Greens, 3 Xenophons, 3 others.

[ag]

Victoria has reported.

Coalition 5 (4 Lib, 1 Nat), Lab 4, Green 2, Derryn Hinch 1.

The total so far is 20 Coalition (19 Lib, 1 Nat), 18 Lab, 7 Greens, 3 Xenophons, 4 others.

[Vosem]

Two candidates in Victoria eclipsed half a quota without being elected; the final two eliminated, Peter Bain of Family First and Meredith Doig of the Australian Sex Party. Even though the last elected Senator (the final Liberal) was well under quota, he still led Bain by more than 20,000 votes, so it wasn't that close. Amazingly, Bain (Family First) eclipsed five different minor parties on preferences -- the Australian Sex Party, the Nick Xenophon Team, the Liberal Democrats, the Animal Justice Party, and One Nation -- but it was still not even close to enough.

Unusually, instead of all the Senators being elected at either the very beginning or very end of the count, as was the case in all the other states, 2 Senators were elected midway through (4 Liberals, 3 Labor, 1 Greens won straight-away, and 1 Green and 1 Liberal won at the end; the fourth Labor candidate won on Count 671 of 825 after the elimination of the lead candidate of the Jacqui Lambie Network, while Derryn Hinch won Count 781 after the elimination of the Animal Justice Party).

[Vosem]

Button presses in Queensland and NSW, as reported by Kevin Bonham.

Queensland: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 2 One Nation, 1 Green. My LDP boy Gabe Buckley didn't make it
NSW: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 1 One Nation, 1 LDP, 1 Green.

Full distribution of preferences isn't posted yet. Australia-wide total:
30 Coalition
26 Labor
9 Greens
4 One Nation
3 Nick Xenophon Team
1 Liberal Democrats
1 Family First
1 Derryn Hinch
1 Jacqui Lambie

Labor+Greens+NXT have 38/76, enough to block any legislation.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Button presses in Queensland and NSW, as reported by Kevin Bonham.

Queensland: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 2 One Nation, 1 Green. My LDP boy Gabe Buckley didn't make it
NSW: 5 Coalition, 4 Labor, 1 One Nation, 1 LDP, 1 Green.

Full distribution of preferences isn't posted yet. Australia-wide total:
30 Coalition
26 Labor
9 Greens
4 One Nation
3 Nick Xenophon Team
1 Liberal Democrats
1 Family First
1 Derryn Hinch
1 Jacqui Lambie

Labor+Greens+NXT have 38/76, enough to block any legislation.

Indeed, well done Malcolm.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Could you say Turnbull got Whitlamed?

The next three years are gonna be fun.

[jimrtex]

The button has also been pressed in Western Australia; the result is 5 Liberal, 4 Labor, 2 Greens, and 1 One Nation, with all those elected having made it over the quota fairly comfortably and only one unsuccessful candidate mustering up even half a quota (Kado Muir of the Nationals). Amusingly the final Labor Senator made it over the hump on preferences from Shooters candidate Andrew Skerritt (and One Nation and the Greens both made it off the elimination of the Nationals).

There seem to be questions about the eligibility of the elected One Nation Senator Rod Culleton connected to a larceny incident; if he were deemed ineligible, the party would be able to recommend a replacement. #2 on the WA ballot, and the likely replacement, is a certain Peter Georgiou, the brother-in-law of the elected Senator.

In terms of term length, either of the two discussed methods seems to give 3 Liberal, 2 Labor, and 1 Green longer, six-year terms while 2 Liberal, 2 Labor, 1 Green, and One Nation get three-year terms.

Unlike in Tasmania, there were no secondary candidates. The Liberals had 5.004 quotas, and after distributing of surpluses had 0.987 quotas, almost all behind their 5th candidate.

Almost all the secondary candidates were eliminated before moving onto eliminating the first candidate of any group. The 5th Liberal candidate was soon pushed over the top, but with only an eleven vote surplus. After the distribution of the initial surpluses ALP and Greens together had about one quota, of the four outstanding, with three more to be elected. Because the transfers of the smaller parties were not directed, both a 4th ALP candidate and 2nd Green was elected, along with a One Nation candidate.

With five quotas of first preferences, you should be able to elect six candidates. The Liberals would have been better off with the Nationals in a group. It would actually be desirable for voters to vote below the line for a National Candidate, as long as they followed through with the Liberal candidates. Even if they stuck a few odd other candidates in their list, they would eventually flow back to the Liberals.

[Ebowed]

My god, look at his eyes

[Intell]

My god, look at his eyes

Still better than the liberals. :/

[aross]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-senate-count-favours-union-bill/news-story/6649054602cf478ca8115da14438b4b9

I'm aware of The Australian's biases, but what's the chance of this actually happening?

[Lachi]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-senate-count-favours-union-bill/news-story/6649054602cf478ca8115da14438b4b9

I'm aware of The Australian's biases, but what's the chance of this actually happening?

It would help if the news article wasn't behind a paywall...

[Phony Moderate]

So I don't know how many more votes there are to count, but turnout appears to have 'only' been 91%, which is the lowest in a federal election since compulsory voting was introduced in 1924.

[YL]

The button has also been pressed in Western Australia; the result is 5 Liberal, 4 Labor, 2 Greens, and 1 One Nation, with all those elected having made it over the quota fairly comfortably and only one unsuccessful candidate mustering up even half a quota (Kado Muir of the Nationals). Amusingly the final Labor Senator made it over the hump on preferences from Shooters candidate Andrew Skerritt (and One Nation and the Greens both made it off the elimination of the Nationals).

There seem to be questions about the eligibility of the elected One Nation Senator Rod Culleton connected to a larceny incident; if he were deemed ineligible, the party would be able to recommend a replacement. #2 on the WA ballot, and the likely replacement, is a certain Peter Georgiou, the brother-in-law of the elected Senator.

In terms of term length, either of the two discussed methods seems to give 3 Liberal, 2 Labor, and 1 Green longer, six-year terms while 2 Liberal, 2 Labor, 1 Green, and One Nation get three-year terms.

Unlike in Tasmania, there were no secondary candidates. The Liberals had 5.004 quotas, and after distributing of surpluses had 0.987 quotas, almost all behind their 5th candidate.

Almost all the secondary candidates were eliminated before moving onto eliminating the first candidate of any group. The 5th Liberal candidate was soon pushed over the top, but with only an eleven vote surplus. After the distribution of the initial surpluses ALP and Greens together had about one quota, of the four outstanding, with three more to be elected. Because the transfers of the smaller parties were not directed, both a 4th ALP candidate and 2nd Green was elected, along with a One Nation candidate.

With five quotas of first preferences, you should be able to elect six candidates. The Liberals would have been better off with the Nationals in a group. It would actually be desirable for voters to vote below the line for a National Candidate, as long as they followed through with the Liberal candidates. Even if they stuck a few odd other candidates in their list, they would eventually flow back to the Liberals.

Isn't this at least partly to do with the ticket system not balancing the candidates as Irish parties try to do?  After 9 counts the Liberals in WA were left with four candidates elected after reaching quota (which was 105,091), one candidate on 101,888 looking certain to be elected, and their other two candidates way back on 1,202 and 647 and so heading for elimination before there was much chance to pick up transfers.  If they'd tried to get six candidates on around 5/6 of a quota they'd probably all have got elected.

[aross]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-senate-count-favours-union-bill/news-story/6649054602cf478ca8115da14438b4b9

I'm aware of The Australian's biases, but what's the chance of this actually happening?

It would help if the news article wasn't behind a paywall...

Wasn't when I looked, but it appears to be now. Weird.
Anyway, main story: Turnbull might have a majority (Coalition+One Nation+right-wing micros and indos) to push through the ABCC bill in a joint sitting.