Siejka to resign in August so by-election soon after that for #Pembroke (ALP 8.7% but historically a swing seat). Winner will get an approx 2.5 year term through to 2025 elections. #politas#LegCo
Labor plus left independents currently hold 8/15 seats so there's potential for the left to lose its upper house majority here.
It's common for a few Clarence councillors to run for Pembroke. Will be interesting to see how the timing of the by-election fits in with the council elections and who if anyone runs for both.
Pembroke will have had four of the last six Legislative Council by-elections: 1999, 2009, 2017, 2022. The others were Derwent 2011 and Huon 2022. In total Pembroke will have had eight by-elections, the most of any seat.
Also at stake here will be the combined major party majority in the LegCo, which has existed (for the only time in the chamber's history) since 2020.
The Liberal Party has immediately announced it will contest Pembroke and called for preselection applications.
Oh no it doesn't. In FPP you can have parties winning large majorities off vote shares in the mid 30s without any evidence of what the remaining voters thought of them. Here we know Labor was the preferred party.
FPP is not a fair electoral system. Under FPP voters who prefer minor parties have to choose between voting tactically and wasting their vote while voters who prefer major parties generally don't. This massively distorts vote share and is discriminatory.
In fact the conservative side junked FPP over 100 years ago to get rid of absurd seat results where it was abundantly clear that the seat winner did not have a mandate, like this:
In fact the gap between election day and resumption is exactly the same as for the Abbott Liberal government in 2013 (66 days) and also the Fraser Liberal government in 1976. Is Canavan saying those governments had no plan and no agenda?
(Also I believe "longest possible time" is not quite true, albeit by 2 days.)
In 1950 the new Menzies govt took 74 days to resume post election and in 2008 the new Rudd govt took 80. The current govt wasn't even able to take that long if it wanted because of the compressed schedule left by the previous govt waiting til May 21.
Largely for amusement value I decided to check what the 2019 and 2022 half-Senate results would have looked like on the absurd premise that every major party or standalone Nats candidate was disqualified.
2019 half-Senate without major parties:
Greens 17
UAP 10
One Nation 6
JLN 2
Lib Dems 2
DHJP, Christian Dems, WAP 1 each
2 Greens in ACT.
2022 half-Senate without major parties:
Greens 18
Lib Dems 6
One Nation 5
UAP 3
JLN 2
Pocock, Legalise Cannabis, WAP, DHJP, Aus Christians, Bob Day 1 each
Very well-spotted by @gamertime58 who has found what, rather surprisingly at this late stage, strongly appears to be a substantial uncorrected booth 2PP error in #Sturt.
@gamertime58 Massive outlier. (The other outlier is a hospital team with 45 votes).
It looks like the usual problem with the 2PP add-ons written the right way around, especially given that Sturt has this unusual curved distribution of Liberal vote vs preference share.
@gamertime58 If verified about 468 votes of James Stevens' 1481 vote 2PP margin is incorrect. He still wins by c. 1013 (a few hundred still to count) and in fact #Sturt has already been declared.
Not madness - the primary vote was evenly split between two candidates who were both strongly preferred to the Coalition candidate overall. Can argue about which of Labor and Greens most deserved to win but would be madness if one of them didn't.
(The argument for Labor there is that our system takes into account the preferences of voters for the defeated right micros but ignores the preferences of voters for the defeated LNP candidate. But finding a good practical system around that idea (ie Condorcet) is not simple.)
In the division of Nicholls, the Nationals candidate (who will easily win) was not the first choice of 73.9% - is that madness?
Does anyone remember which seat and year it was where there was a theory during the postcount that a Democrat might win off a primary vote around the mid teens (it ended up not happening)? (NB not Mayo 1998.)