Nominations have closed, and been announced, for this month’s Northern Territory election. The main story is the reduction in the field of candidates, with just eighty candidates running for the 25 seats.
The main reason for the reduction in ballot size is due to the absence of the Territory Alliance, who ran 21 candidates in 2020, along with 16 fewer independents and 12 fewer minor party candidates than in 2020.
There had been a big jump in the number of candidates in 2016, when 115 candidates. This was up from just 86 in 2012. Indeed the number of candidates had always been in the 60s or 80s from 1983 to 2012. The number shrunk slightly to 111 in 2020, but is now back to just eighty.
While you would normally expect Labor and the Country Liberal Party to run everywhere, Labor has chosen to not run against independent MP Yingiya Mark Guyula in Mulka. Interestingly this was the only seat where the CLP didn’t run in 2020.
The Greens are running in eleven seats. While those who follow elections in the larger states might expect the Greens to run everywhere, that’s equal to their best previous presence in an NT election. The party ran eleven candidates in 2006, but have otherwise run either six or ten candidates at each of the last five elections.
Not a single other minor party has turned out at this election. Last election there were 21 Territory Alliance candidates, 4 Federation Party candidates, and one candidate each from Animal Justice and Ban Fracking Fix Crime Protect Water. This absence explains most of the reduction in ballot size. The number of independents has dropped slight from 25 to 20.
Of course the reduction in the total number of candidates has led to smaller ballot papers.
In nine seats, there are just two candidates running. This includes Mulka and eight straight ALP-CLP contests. Of course there will be no preferences in these seats. Preferential voting becomes equivalent to first-past-the-post with just two candidates. There has only been one two-candidate race at each of the 2016 and 2020 elections, and four races in 2012. You have to go back to 2008 to see as many two-candidate races.
Six seats have three candidates each, and six others have four candidates.
Then there are four seats with five candidates: Araluen, Goyder, Nightcliff and Port Darwin.
I’ve now updated all candidate lists on my election guide. If you’re looking for an easily-downloadable spreadsheet of candidates, you can find it here.
Also if you want to understand the historical trends in nominations, check out Antony’s blog post which has all of the historical stats which I used for part of this post.
I have this feeling that having only two candidates on a ballot paper may increase informal voting. It’s because the voter could assume their job is done once they mark a 1 or they think “it’s obvious who I placed last”.
Looking at voting history, there are some seats where the informal rate increased when there were just two candidates. Perhaps there should be an exception where if you just mark 1 on a two-candidate ballot paper, it counts as formal.
I could be wrong, Votante, but in this case it might still be accepted because it’s still clear who is 1 and who is 2?
@JM from QLD I’m not sure. Queensland and the NT both used to have OPV which is still used in NSW. OPV would allow a voter to number any number of boxes but it has to be at least one. Conservative voters are more likely to exhaust their preferences (i.e they usually just but a one next to their favourite candidate).
@JM, not sure if a 1 without a 2 is accepted. I guess it’s not. I noticed a correlation when looking at voting history of certain seats – informal rates went up when just two candidates stood. It could be possible some deliberately voted informally because they wanted the “none of the above” or non-majors option.
At the federal level, page 34 of the Scrutineer’s Handbook makes clear that a single box can be left unmarked.
I don’t know for certain if the same rules apply in the NT, but I assume they would. What principle is violated? The voter’s intention is clear.
I suspect the issue in two-candidate races may actually be people ticking one of the boxes, which is still informal. I can understand that people might find it a bit strange or counterintuitive to be numbering two candidates.
In the NT, informal voting drops in two-candidate contests, and especially in remote seats.
In all elections, a vote is not informal if the last square is blank, if the other squares have a valid sequence.
Which means in 2-candidate contests, only one square must be marked. And I say marked because the NT Electoral Act states
(3) If there are only 2 candidates and the voter placed a mark in one candidate square and either placed a “2” in the remaining candidate square or left it blank:
(a) the candidate whose candidate square is marked is the voter’s first preference; and
(b) the other candidate is the voter’s last preference.
The act then goes on to define –
“mark” means a single “1”, tick, cross or any other writing or mark that indicates the voter’s intention.
So in a two candidate contest, a single tick or a cross is therefore accepted as a valid first preference and counts.
That didn’t used to be the rule when the Electoral Act was introduced in 2004. I wrote about how ticks and crosses could be allowed in two-candidate contests way back in 2008 and the law was changed to save ticks and crosses votes in 2-candidate contests.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-07-24/informal-voting-and-northern-territory-elections/9389016
@Antony Green interesting. Thanks for confirming.