LIVE Federal Election Coverage 2016

[Ratts of Tobruk]

No, I'm saying it's very reasonable for parties to be LOOKING at the circumstances, and if they feel it warrants it, ASKING the CoDR to determine if those circumstances mean the result is still valid. Along way short of a by-election.

As I said, I don't know the circumstances...I just think that if it's close, then it's fair and reasonable to look closely. Indeed, I'd consider it an obligation to do so.

As for Scrutineering..I'm not aware of anyone objecting to how that was done, but if people who can/should vote are unable to, then you can't scrutineer votes that aren't made, can you?

WA got a state wide senate 'by election' due to 1300 votes missing, because the CoDR ruled that it was bigger than the margin, and therefore the only remedy was to do it again.

*IF* someone finds that >37 votes are missing in Herbert for whatever reason, then why the hell wouldn't they ask the CoDR to rule?


Checking like this is what ensures the process is done right, and that the AEC does it's job right. I know on election day a friend of mine in New England couldn't vote absentee because she hadn't updated her details they didn't have the right papers for her old electorate (somewhere in Canberra)...Now it doesn't really matter much to the result, because neither ACT seat is exactly marginal, but how would you feel if she was from Townsville? Should we accept it that the AEC just doesn't bother distributing such things or should people look closely at the results and call them on their 'errors'?

So to keep the AEC on their toes, and minimise cases like the above, results should be checked closely, and 'irregularities' examined, and to be realistic, this is only going to be done by the losing party in a close result because they're the only ones with sufficient self interest and motivation to put the time/money/effort into it.

That said, I don't care which party it is, they should ALL do it, and as I said before, I think they'd be derelict in their duties if they didn't. Hell, I'd be happy for there to be a law dictating that an inquiry be made into any that are under, say, 0.1% (~1000 votes) just to keep the AEC on their toes.


Look at some of the question marks that come up over voting in the US and tell me if you think the AEC shouldn't be scrutinised regularly and thoroughly.

Yes, they only have ballots for the state you're in. If you need to vote in another state you have to go to an interstate voting centre. That's not an AEC error. That's an error from your friend to not update her details. I've been critical of the AEC since the WA blunders showed they may not have been the reliable sorts we are told they are. But so far it's all second-hand info or unexplained reasons for why people couldn't vote. I see no reason why the situation wouldn't be out in the open if they were true - people not being able to vote is scandalous. The fact we aren't getting details makes me think this is the LNP trying to make a loss sound like a 'we woz robbed' narrative for the benefit of future press conferences.

There were quite a few tight races this election. I wonder how hard it would be to drum up rumours of problems in other tight electorates? These things need to be sorted on the day if they are happening unfairly. If there are 3 potential major problems in this one electorate, how many other electorates had problems, etc? Talking about people being denied a vote because a result is close is a bad reason. We should be talking about people being denied a vote, full stop, if it's happening.

 

[telsor]

Yes, they only have ballots for the state you're in. If you need to vote in another state you have to go to an interstate voting centre. That's not an AEC error. That's an error from your friend to not update her details. I've been critical of the AEC since the WA blunders showed they may not have been the reliable sorts we are told they are. But so far it's all second-hand info or unexplained reasons for why people couldn't vote. I see no reason why the situation wouldn't be out in the open if they were true - people not being able to vote is scandalous. The fact we aren't getting details makes me think this is the LNP trying to make a loss sound like a 'we woz robbed' narrative for the benefit of future press conferences.

Is that any reason not to look into it more closely?

and there will always be a few on any side who blow things out of proportion...and reporters who gravitate to them in order to sensationalise the story. Surely on a footy forum you wouldn't need me to tell you that. Don't be the person who thinks that because Maclure says something idiotic, that's the view of Carlton and all it's fans. So far, officially at least, they're just having a look, just as every party would, and should, do.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Is that any reason not to look into it more closely?

and there will always be a few on any side who blow things out of proportion...and reporters who gravitate to them in order to sensationalise the story. Surely on a footy forum you wouldn't need me to tell you that. Don't be the person who thinks that because Maclure says something idiotic, that's the view of Carlton and all it's fans. So far, officially at least, they're just having a look, just as every party would, and should, do.

You went further than that and suggested that the army may have somehow been let down by the AEC. I found that hard to believe. There doesn't need to be a court date for the facts of that situation to be explained.

 

[Pessimistic]

Not an army issue, it's an AEC issue, and don't pretend that it would be any different if the ALP was the one down by 37 votes and they got a sniff of votes unable to be cast.

Both parties, when on the losing side, would look into it more closely (which is all that's happened so far), and moreover, both parties SHOULD look into it more closely, because by doing so, they keep the AEC on the ball, and ensure that the vote is as full and fair as possible, which is, after all, what we want in a democracy, isn't it?

Postal votes were accepted ip to 13 days later. Whats the problem?

 

[Hank Scorpion]

Site which allows the user to explore referencing patterns (currently only has NT & Tas): http://pappubahry.com/pseph/aus_2016/tas_atl/

Tasmania is a small state so it's not entirely reliable to draw conclusions from, but a couple of findings thus far:
- Flows from the Liberals to the Liberal Democrats were only around 10% (recall that Tasmania has a fewer number of groups standing as well.) I'd predicted Leyonhjelm to retain in NSW based on a stronger flow than this.
- HTV cards are basically worthless
- There a number of parties where 2nd preferences splatter everywhere, including towards ideologically opposed parties. The picture may become clearer in some of the larger states, but I think that the results would encourage micros to merge or run on joint tickets.

 

[Penny78]

What is the difference between Scott Ryan and Bruce Bilson. Why not just have one of those things in your party.

 

[Slax]

37 votes was the margin.When you consider there are approaching 95,000 voters that's a small margin. A challenge to the C of DR is reasonable and I'm no reactionary.

And should be thrown out, there was clearly an option to vote, but some chose not too. As such why should a by-election be held because some people refused to vote. Let's recall every seat then where the margin of victory is under the non-voters. It's sour grapes by Jones nothing else, he was a useless fat member of parliament and honestly better off with him out of there. The Coalition has its majority so it doesn't matter.

 

[Subprime]

Postal votes were accepted ip to 13 days later. Whats the problem?

I think postal votes have to be applied for some weeks prior to the election by the voter.

I doubt anyone could have picked one up on the Monday following election day.

 

[pazza]

NT and ACT declared in Senate now.

Over the 2 it's 2 Labor and 2 Coalition.

Declared senators:

Labor 11
Coalition 11
Greens 4
One Nation 1
Lambie 1

 

[Slax]

Site which allows the user to explore referencing patterns (currently only has NT & Tas): http://pappubahry.com/pseph/aus_2016/tas_atl/

Tasmania is a small state so it's not entirely reliable to draw conclusions from, but a couple of findings thus far:
- Flows from the Liberals to the Liberal Democrats were only around 10% (recall that Tasmania has a fewer number of groups standing as well.) I'd predicted Leyonhjelm to retain in NSW based on a stronger flow than this.
- HTV cards are basically worthless
- There a number of parties where 2nd preferences splatter everywhere, including towards ideologically opposed parties. The picture may become clearer in some of the larger states, but I think that the results would encourage micros to merge or run on joint tickets.

In NSW Liberal preferences won't help the Liberal Democrats, they are below a full quota for the 5th seat so preferences they get will first flow on to fill this gap. There will be very little left over given that a lot of voters stopped at 6 above the line and weren't preferencing either major party.

The Christian Democrats are the threat to Lleyonhjelm, looking at it again I think they might get over the top of him. The reason I am saying this is because the gap is only 17,000 on first preferences. Preference flows I expect from those that voted Family First & DLP will likely contain CDP in them given both parties got just over 50k in votes this is a big boost. As One Nation also won't get a full quota they will also soak up preferences as they will not get to a full quota but will still gain the 10th or 11th seat.

But as I said before the final seat in NSW & Qld is going to be a bit of a raffle. I leant at the time to Lleyonhjelm because he was a sitting member but the more I look at it the more I have no idea what might happen.

 

[Slax]

NT and ACT declared in Senate now.

Over the 2 it's 2 Labor and 2 Coalition.

Declared senators:

Labor 11
Coalition 11
Greens 4
One Nation 1
Lambie 1

Why did it take so long to declare ACT, it's not like it was going any other way after the counted first preferences.

 

[Slax]

I think postal votes have to be applied for some weeks prior to the election by the voter.

I doubt anyone could have picked one up on the Monday following election day.

Applications for Postal Votes closed 6pm on the Tuesday before the election.

 

[Hank Scorpion]

SA Senate:

4 Liberal (-1)
3 Labor (-)
3 Xenophon (+2)
1 Green (-1)
1 Family First (-)

Final seat went to Bob Day ahead of the 4th Labor candidate, current senator Anne McEwen, which was mostly unexpected. Anne McEwen was shafted in the ticket order in favour of former Senator Don Farrell.

Liberal Sean Edwards and Green Robert Simms have been turfed out as expected.


National totals now sit at:
Coalition 15
Labor 14
Greens 5
Xenophon 3
One Nation 1
Lambie 1
Family First 1

with NSW, VIC and QLD to come

 

[Gough]

Greens in SA are not happy bunnies.

 

[Slax]

SA Senate:

4 Liberal (-1)
3 Labor (-)
3 Xenophon (+2)
1 Green (-1)
1 Family First (-)

Final seat went to Bob Day ahead of the 4th Labor candidate, current senator Anne McEwen, which was mostly unexpected. Anne McEwen was shafted in the ticket order in favour of former Senator Don Farrell.

Liberal Sean Edwards and Green Robert Simms have been turfed out as expected.


National totals now sit at:
Coalition 15
Labor 14
Greens 5
Xenophon 3
One Nation 1
Lambie 1
Family First 1

with NSW, VIC and QLD to come

Big surprise that Day got up over Labor. Just makes the Senate all the more interesting, helps consolidate Xenophon as he has Day's ear. Will also be interesting to see how they declare the order elected in SA, still suspect Lib 2, ALP 2, NXT 2.

AEC declared for WA the Senate elected order and thus recommended 6 year terms as follows
Mathias Cormann - Liberal
Sue Lines - ALP
Scott Ludlam - WA Greens
Michaelia Cash - Liberal
Glen Sterle - ALP
Dean Smith - Liberal

So up next time will be
Patrick Dodson - ALP
Linda Reynolds - Liberal
Chris Back - Liberal
Louise Pratt - ALP
Rodney Culleton - One Nation
Rachel Siewert - WA Greens

 

[telsor]

Greens in SA are not happy bunnies.

They keep pushing SHY, what do you expect?

 

[telsor]

You went further than that and suggested that the army may have somehow been let down by the AEC. I found that hard to believe. There doesn't need to be a court date for the facts of that situation to be explained.

Again, where did I say that?

I'd ask you to quote me, but really I think just having you reread what I wrote will be all the correction you need.

I AEC *cannot* let down the army...Because they have no responsibility/duty to serve the army. The AECs job is to serve the voters, some of whom are in the army. *IF* they didn't do that duty adequately, then they let THEM down.

 

[telsor]

Why did it take so long to declare ACT, it's not like it was going any other way after the counted first preferences.

Agreed.

In ACT, the Libs got .99% of a quota, in NT, the ALP got .98. (and they were the second place parties)

I can understand that senate votes get a quick count and are then set aside until the reps are done, but really, with the HoR seats there not being especially close either, they still should have been resolved before Herbert was concluded.

 

[Slax]

Greens in SA are not happy bunnies.

Got wiped out by Xenophon, whilst NXT remain at their current strength they will be lucky to win a Senate in a half Senate election going forward.

Look at it more closely as to how FF got over ALP for the final seat and appears that preferences from LDP & One Nation flowed much stronger to FF than I would of expected and thus got them over the line by a couple of thousand. Must say a little surprised. Whilst scrapped through this time reckon no chance next time.

Order elected in SA, so 6 year terms go to:
S. Birmingham - Liberal
P. Wong - ALP
N. Xenophon - NXT
C. Bernardi - Liberal
D. Farrell - ALP
S. Griff - NXT

Up for election next time:
A. Rushton - Liberal
A. Gallacher - ALP
D. Fawcett - Liberal
S. Kakosche-Moore - NXT (was probably better being #3 on this ticket than #2)
S. Hanson-Young - Greens
B. Day - Family First

 

[GreyCrow]

Well that went well for Malcolm then

 

[telsor]

SA Senate:

4 Liberal (-1)
3 Labor (-)
3 Xenophon (+2)
1 Green (-1)
1 Family First (-)

Final seat went to Bob Day ahead of the 4th Labor candidate, current senator Anne McEwen, which was mostly unexpected. Anne McEwen was shafted in the ticket order in favour of former Senator Don Farrell.

Was pretty close in the end...Day got the last seat by ~3500 votes over McEwen.

Mind you, the 3rd Xen & Greens both got in when ON was excluded and their votes distributed...Yes, SHY got reelected on One Nation preferences (in a manner of speaking).

Continuing my look at exhausted votes..only about 2% exhausted in SA. I clearly overestimated the laziness of Australian voters.

 

[telsor]

Look at it more closely as to how FF got over ALP for the final seat and appears that preferences from LDP & One Nation flowed much stronger to FF than I would of expected and thus got them over the line by a couple of thousand. Must say a little surprised. Whilst scrapped through this time reckon no chance next time.

LDP or Lib?

My read is that the big one for FF was probably Lib prefs. Until then, they had been neck and neck with ON, then the Libs got excluded and they got 10,000 to ONs 2000 and ON was next on the block.

I don't think that they did so well from ON prefs (or those Libs prefs) is such a big surprise whe you look at who was left by then. Libs getting excluded left...ALP, GRN, XEN, FF & ON, so FF doing well from Lib prefs (and subsequently ON prefs) isn't a big surprise given the options. Probably worth noting that XEN also did quite well from both of those distributions, it's just they were close enough to a quota already that it didn't matter all that much.

 

[Slax]

LDP or Lib?

My read is that the big one for FF was probably Lib prefs. Until then, they had been neck and neck with ON, then the Libs got excluded and they got 10,000 to ONs 2000 and ON was next on the block.

I don't think that they did so well from ON prefs (or those Libs prefs) is such a big surprise whe you look at who was left by then. Libs getting excluded left...ALP, GRN, XEN, FF & ON, so FF doing well from Lib prefs (and subsequently ON prefs) isn't a big surprise given the options. Probably worth noting that XEN also did quite well from both of those distributions, it's just they were close enough to a quota already that it didn't matter all that much.

It was really that the One Nation preferences went to FF at a 2:1 ratio over ALP. Liberal was always going to go FF over Labor. LDP I expected to flow far more to NXT that FF, which would probably of seen them die. Give him no chance of being re-elected in 3 years.

In the end I really don't think it matters too much. Libs will still need to get about 9 cross bench votes to get legislation passed, which means either do a deal with the Greens, which given some of their announcements already is going to be very difficult or try and negotiate between a mixture of ON, NXT and a few others. I'm tempted to try and start a book on who will be the first Coalition MP to lose it at the Senate calling it unworkable and saying that they have a mandate to get their policies through.

Leading my charge
Morrison
Pyne
Bernardi
Frydenberg

 

[telsor]

In the end I really don't think it matters too much. Libs will still need to get about 9 cross bench votes to get legislation passed, which means either do a deal with the Greens, which given some of their announcements already is going to be very difficult or try and negotiate between a mixture of ON, NXT and a few others. I'm tempted to try and start a book on who will be the first Coalition MP to lose it at the Senate calling it unworkable and saying that they have a mandate to get their policies through.

I think unworkable is a fair description. I dare say the Libs would have more chance of getting the ALP to help them most of the time than form a workable group from these minors.

 

[Slax]

I think unworkable is a fair description. I dare say the Libs would have more chance of getting the ALP to help them most of the time than form a workable group from these minors.

Agree, the Libs should start seriously thinking about dealing with Greens and Xenophon. Although dealing with Greens means they are going to have to change their stance on renewable energy as a bare minimum to any deals. Trying to do deals with the others isn't going to be easy.

Also interesting the Lleyohjelm gave the Liberals a blast over reneging on a deal they did with him about a sunset clause on the ban of importing Adler shotguns. Which personally as someone who holds a gun licence and aware of how they operate is an absolute crock, you can fire off rounds from a bolt action .303 faster than from the Adler shotgun if you know what you are doing, Ricky Muir showed this by getting it filmed. So he will not be so forthcoming in doing new deals with the Coalition.