Over the last few days, speculation over this Saturday’s election has turned to the prospect of a hung parliament. While Julia Gillard has generally led in the last few polls, the picture is unclear, with the ALP suffering swings in New South Wales and Queensland and benefiting from a positive swing in Victoria.
With both parties clearly in contention to win, attention has turned to the possibility of a hung parliament, with the media focusing on sitting independents Bob Katter, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott. The trio of regional MPs with National Party roots would likely work as a group if neither party secured a majority in the House of Representatives.
Yet, despite the lack of clarity about this weekend’s election, the chances of a hung parliament are relatively slim. There are two key factors that determine a hung parliament. The first is the closeness of the result (in terms of number of seats won). If the two major blocks win an even number of seats, the parliament will definitely be hung. Yet in some elections, a hung parliament can be elected despite one party winning many more seats than the other major party. This depends on the size of the crossbench, ie. those seats held by independents and minor parties.
In Parliaments where a lot of seats are held by crossbench MPs, a hung parliament can be achieved with relative ease. At the 2008 federal election in Canada, the Bloc Quebecoi, the New Democrats, and independents collectively won over 28% of seats in the House of Commons. This meant that, despite the Conservatives winning almost double the seats of the opposition Liberals (143 vs 77), they could not secure a majority.
Other examples include the recent general election in the United Kingdom, when 13% of seats were won by minor parties and independents, and the 2002 New Zealand election saw the Labour party win 52 seats to 27 for the Nationals, yet failed to win a majority. You tend to have large crossbenches in most parliaments elected using proportional representation, but the UK and Canada show that a multi-party system can produce regular hung parliaments in a single-member electorate system. Indeed, there is one case of a country, Malta, which does not have a single crossbench member of Parliament, despite using a proportional voting system. Due to this, it’s very hard to elect a hung parliament in Malta.
There are only three independents in the current House of Representatives. While there are chances for a Green to win a seat in Melbourne, an independent to win in Parkes, and a National (probably acting independently) in O’Connor, it’s unlikely that the crossbenches will grow a large number. So, assuming there are four crossbenchers, the gap between the major parties must be four seats or less to create a hung parliament.
In terms of what might happen in the case of a hung parliament, it seems most likely that we will see the three regional independents supporting whichever party wins the most seats.
Assuming that Windsor, Oakeshott and Kennedy are re-elected, and the Greens’ Adam Bandt wins Melbourne, that leaves 146 seats in the House of Representatives for the major parties. There are three options for a hung parliament: an even 73-73 split, a 74-72 split, or a 75-71 split.
Bandt has already made it clear that the Greens would support a Labor government rather than a Coalition government. Having said that, you would have to think that the ALP would rather work with the three regional independents than Bandt. A deal with the Greens would likely require a wide range of policy changes, considering the broad Greens agenda and the presence of a number of Greens in the Senate. The ALP would also be reluctant to give influence to a Greens MP in a seat that he had won off the ALP, preferring to work with independents who compete with Nationals in regional areas.
A single Greens MP could only ensure a working majority in the case of a 75-71 split. In those circumstances, there wouldn’t be a possible path for the party on 71 seats to form a government.
If there was a 74-72 split, it would also be extremely difficult for the smaller party to form a government, as this would require the support of all three independents and the Greens.
Only in the case of an even 73-73 split could we see the three independents with much of a choice in terms of who they support. When you look at it from that perspective, it is a very small target to hit at this year’s election.
Of course, it is possible we could see a hung parliament with independents deciding who forms government. But it is much more likely that a majority government will be formed, and it could be with a relatively solid majority.
The polls suggest a lot of seats might be close but that does not mean the final election result necessarily will be – if a lot of the close seats end up falling to the ALP by small margins we could have a Government with a majority not too far from what it had going into the election.
The ALP may have an advantage of being in Government and having the resources of sitting memebers to help them defend seats in chasing up prepoll votes etc.
Some slight evidence from the ACT for example that the Liberals are short on resources to do the basics
To call the Malta’s electoral system proportional I think is a bit of a stretch.
Also, keep in mind, the speaker of the House of Representatives does not vote, except for a casting vote. In a house of 150 members, effectively the speaker does not have a vote. This means you really need 76 to form a majority, and one of those 76 will need to be the speaker. This may be one of the independents if it’s close.
The two ACT seats are safe Labor so I doubt the Libs would be putting in a big effort there anyway (apart from Senate).
Malta uses the Hare-Clark system. Just like Tasmania and the ACT.
It is true that bonus seats are rewarded if a party wins a majority of votes but not a majority of seats, but it still allows small parties to win seats.
Doesn’t seem like that long ago that polls were 58-42 and people were talking about the Libs trying to save the furniture.
Just shows that anything can happen in the space of a parliamentary term.
There will be a swing back to the co-alition in two-party preferred terms (as there has been against every other first-term government since 1951), but it won’t be enough for Labor to lose government. It would always be reasonable to expect strong 2PP polling in the first year or two to an incumbent first-term government, while they are getting policy in place. So I expect Labor to win on either the same majority they have now or a smaller majority. Plus, after 10 years in government, an opposition would always be in dissaray early in the peace.
I think if the Libs have the courage to put Turnbull up again in the life of the next parliament (and I’m not sure that they will), Labor are likely to lose the following election if Gillard leads. Forgetting any partisan politics, Turnbull is the only one in parliament with any sense of vision for the future and has the acumen required on economic and finance matters, which frankly, Gillard does not possess given her background. Turnbull’s problem is his inexperience in politics (e.g. Grech affair). He should be better for that experience now.
To be fair, Turnbull probably could be on either side of politics given his progressive views. And I expect the public would sense his progressive views over time. The major problem for Labor will be, I expect, cost blow-outs in infrastructure projects in their next term. For instance, a contractor I know who runs a business that lays pipes and cables for Government suggests $42b for an NBN network is a far too conservative estimate. Given the history (e.g. insulation, BER), he is probably right. Therefore, the public will weigh more heavily economic accountability and interest rate issues at the next election than this one. I am in no doubt that interest rates will be higher in 3 years time than they are today. This will (again as in the 1990’s) become a critical electoral issue in 2013 and it will take someone strong on the economy to lead a Liberal Party to victory and engender economic confidence in the voting public.
I think, finally, where the ALP would be worried this time is that their primary vote will go from 43.4% in 2007 to around 38-39% this time. So they are just praying the Green preferences flow back by at least 80/20, which I expect would happen. But anything is possible.
So this thread seems as good as any to ask the question:
What are peoples election night plans?
Hamish,
Watching the ABC coverage.. Wife and kids are going to family barbeque and get to watch the whole thing unravel !
Should be good !
I’ll be at home with my list of seats that I believe need to fall for a change in government. And I’ll be switching it off quickly if it doesn’t happen.
It looks like I will be almost-live blogging to a comments thread on Tasmanian Times, and dropping into other sites as time permits.
Hung parliament is my tip.
Labor to lose these seats to the Coalition:
* Robertson, Macquarie, Gilmore, Bennelong, Eden-Monaro, Page, Dobell, Lindsay (NSW) – Labor stench in NSW, but notionally-gained seats of Macarthur and Greenway have departing Liberal MPs without whom I can’t see the Liberals win
* Herbert, Longman, Flynn, Dawson, Forde, Petrie, Bonner (QLD) – resentment over Rudd, but return of ex-retiree Warren Entsch in Leichhardt and attempted abandonment of Dickson by Peter Dutton makes me think Labor should hold
* Swan, Hasluck (WA) – mining tax will hurt Labor, but not overwhelmingly enough to sweep away Gary Gray in Brand and Stephen Smith in Perth
* Solomon (NT), Bass (TAS), Corangamite (VIC)
Labor to gain these seats to the Coalition:
* McEwen, La Trobe, Aston (VIC) – home girl factor in parochial VIC and departing Libs in two seats should see Labor gain
* Hughes (NSW), Sturt (SA), Ryan (QLD) – retirement of a popular Liberal MP and hostility over the Liberals’ cynicism over climate change will hurt the Liberals
Can’t wait to see the result!
I think this time last year I was the only person suggesting that this election might not necessarily be a Labor landslide…
Forgive me if I’ve missed this somewhere else, because I haven’t been keeping up with all of the news, but have GetUp! groups been running ads like this elsewhere, advising people to ‘Vote Independent for the Senate’? (Note illegality of ad with no authorisation):
http://www.echo.net.au/node/78789
Election night I’ll probably stay at home to follow the results. Will post comments here if Ben blogs.
Warren – interesting. I don’t think the Libs will do partularly well in regional NSW, although I get a feeling they could win Richmond, more than Eden-Monaro or Page.
Interesting what you say about Hughes. Scott Morrison said to me whoever wins Hughes will win the election. Interesting and I don’t know that I agree. Not many are talking about it now and I suppose expect the co-alition to win it. Although in reality, it is anyones. I generally agree on the rest of the Sydney based seats you mention. The ALP is just on the nose there and it doesn’t matter if it is Federal or State.
I don’t think the co-altion will win either of Solomon or Bass, but I think they could get Corangamite.
I think the Libs will win Sturt and Ryan. I’m not sure on QLD. Anything is possible. It could be 4 seats or it could be 10. I reckon Petrie is less likely and perhaps Bonner, but I really think Leichhardt will go to Entsch and Wright will be held by the Libs. The first thing we should be focussing on is what is happening around Brisbane and the Gold Coast, because the Libs must do well here to have any chance whatsoever. Swan’s seat of Lilley is also another I am interested in.
I reckon a close ALP victory outright is the most likely case, followed by a hung parliament. The 2PP I think will be around 51.5/48.5 this time. Looking forward to it though.
After an exhausting campaign, (this one seems to have been more exhausting than others), I will be sitting back with my fellow Hawkesbury Greens. I will be glued to my laptop watching results come in, on the phone to scrutineers, feeding results to my fellow colleagues.
This is hilarious. Why the hell would I listen to Angry Anderson?
http://www.youtube.com/liberalpartytv#p/c/F2A41F26A3FCB1E9/1/W1jzq95lHAA
……or Hamish Coffee….go figure
Comments are closed.