To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Unlock with Patreon
Mick.
What was the significance of all of those election years?
Vis a vis your other wish list …
The changes require a referendum so hard to justify.
The 4 year term is most desirable but the problem has always been that it results in an 8 year term which is very long – though they do have them in NSW. The senate is a fixed term – except when a DD resets the calendar so that constrains the timing of elections.
@redistributed all states Has have fixed 4 year terms the plus side is it provides certainty and the downside is it removes the flexibility for a leader to go when it is most advantageous and they are polling well.
@james moving this discussion to the Macarthur thread
I’m not sure but I think the Senate is there by the constitution as well. Abolishing that would also require a referendum and Tbh I would vote against that because like in NZ and QLD that effectively gives the government absolute power and could do whatever they wanted without any restraint or anything to keep them in check.
@Darth Vader, regarding “effectively gives the government absolute power and could do whatever they wanted without any restraint or anything to keep them in check”, that is the case in QLD but NZ is only if the party vote reaches 50%
From 1949 to 1998 there should have been an election every 3 years. Note the number of early elections. Part.of thr argument for fixed terms
@Mary yes but whatever government be it majority or a coalition has that power.
@NP: “A 5% swing is unlikely anywhere except WA and maybe the NT”: The recent quarterly Newspoll aggregate published in December 2024 recorded a 50% Labor 2PP in Victoria, which is equivalent to a 5% 2PP swing against Labor. Coalition polling 50% 2PP in Victoria is a very bad result for Labor and in my view pretty unrealistic.
50% 2PP in Victoria will put normally fairly safe seats like Bruce, Holt and Hawke at risk. Since 1983, Coalition only recorded 2PP above 49.5% in Victoria in four (1990, 1996, 2004 and 2013) federal elections, and in all but one (1990) of these elections the Coalition won a landslide victory. Even without wining back the then Liberal heartland seats that are now teal seats, the Coalition would have still won a solid majority in the 1996, 2004 and 2013 federal elections. It’s hard to imagine that the Coalition can poll a 2PP of 50% in Victoria but does not win a majority of seats nationwide. (A nationwide 50% Coalition 2PP as recorded in this aggregate won’t get the Coalition anywhere close to a majority).
Assuming Labor still does well with university educated, high income and Chinese Australian voters in the inner and middle suburbs, the swings against Labor in the outer suburbs snd regions need to be extraordinarily large to achieve a Coalition 2PP of 50%. At a Coalition 2PP of 50% in Victoria, we could be looking at some interesting and even astonishing results: Swings close to or greater than 10% against Labor in seats like Casey, McEwen, Indi, La Trobe, Flinders and Monash. Labor in serious trouble or even lose reasonably safe seats like Hawke, Holt and Corangamite. Gorton, Calwell and Lalor become marginal Labor seats.
The same Newspoll aggregare also recorded an LNP 2PP of 53% in Queensland, which is equivalent of 1.05% swing TOWARDS Labor. A swing towards Labor in Queensland makes you question the reliability of the state 2PP figures in this aggregate even more.
Labor still did very well in WA. Labor 2PP in WA in this aggregate was 54%, which was equivalent to only a 1% 2PP swing against Labor, making Labor the flavourite to retain Tangney and leaving only Bullwinkel in play.
As for Bruce, Labor is the flavourite to win, mostly due to Julian Hill’s personal vote, but the race could be close. Right wing minor party voters switching to the Liberal Party, many of whom would have preferenced Labor last election, and some Labor losing votes mainly to the Greens due to the Israel-Palestine conflict issue (not all Greens voters will preference Labor) and some others to the Liberals could make the race close. The good news is that Liberal results in the eastern part of new Bruce that were in La Trobe may have been inflated by MP Jason Wood’s strong personal vote. Liberal support in these areas may drop when Jason Wood is no longer on the ballot, helping Labor to retain the seat.
@ joseph those swings in qld and wa are within the margin of error a 5% swing is not and indicates serious problems for labor