24 Sep 2013

Thirty Thousand Votes And Abbott's Gone

By Phil Doyle

Eleven of the Coalition's new seats are held on a margin of less than 4000 votes. That isn't a clean sweep, no matter how the hacks spin it, writes Phil Doyle

Whichever way you want to look at the result of the recent Federal election, one argument that doesn't stack up is that this is some kind of landslide for the Coalition. That's how the election is being rewritten — but the figures don't support the story.

Fifteen of the Coalition's new seats are held on very thin margins. Eleven seats have margins of less than 4000 voters, according to AEC figures as at 24 September:

Barton (NSW) 493
Petrie (QLD) 971
Eden-Monaro (NSW) 1071
Capricornia (QLD) 1381
Dobell (NSW) 1189
Solomon (NT) 1492
Reid (NSW) 1490
Lyons (TAS) 1605
Banks (NSW) 3169
Braddon (TAS) 3398
Hindmarsh (SA) 3541

If Gilmore, Lindsay, Robertson, and Deakin are included, less than 30,000 voters nationally would need to change their minds for the government to change as well.

So what? There have always been marginal seats. MPs and governments have learnt to live with them. So what's the big deal?

Yes, there haves been marginal seats, but never in quite the quantity before, and never at a time when the electorate is in such a state of flux.

It also places a huge question mark over going to a double dissolution mid term when the Government has such a tenuous grip on the Treasury benches. Hawke tried it in 1984 and we came within a bee's dick of Andrew Peacock as Prime Minister.

The first preference House of Representatives vote for the old parties is its lowest since the World War II. At under 75 per cent of the vote what we are watching, as Guy Rundle has pointed out, is a new normal.

The result is a lot tighter than many pundits predicted. Firstly the dire warnings by pollsters of ALP "wipeouts" in Queensland and western Sydney simply didn't eventuate.

Lazy analysis that took national polling numbers and laid them over the Mackerass pendulum without any understanding of local conditions allowed this Chicken-Little number-crunching to crowd out how policy was affecting people's day-to-day lives.

Eventually someone is going to have to call bullshit on the cottage industry of nationwide polling as anything more than a vehicle for hack journalists to meet a deadline. Regional swings and variations are far more definitive than any blanket national assessment.

Polling has been used by the likes of the NSW ALP under Arbib and Dastyari, and by Kevin Rudd, to push personal agendas independent of the real business of government.

News Corporation threw the kitchen sink at the ALP and they didn't get much bang for their buck. Nationally the Coalition vote was up, but not by much.

People can safely draw a line through News Corporation as being an influence on public opinion. It still plays a role in setting the agenda for lazy TV news producers, but in the big scheme of things the internet is the go-to place for information.

Underlining this is the size of the informal vote, compounded by the significant numbers of people that couldn’t be arsed voting at all. While the informal vote stayed roughly at the same proportion, the turnout was significantly down.

Where people did vote informally was in "safe" ALP seats in western Sydney: Fowler, Watson,, Blaxland, Chifley and Werriwa were all in double digits. If these people aren't going to vote Liberal now, it's hard to see when they ever will.

For many people neither of the old parties is doing much to address their needs, hence the widespread disengagement.

Most of the ALP's "solutions" turn out to be market based bait-and-switch operations like the Job Network or privatised VET that gouge the millions of Australians who earn less than $30,000 a year, while the Coalition offers to make life equally as miserable. None of the major parties is doing anything to push down the price of rent or help the millions of Australian households over their heads in debt - the big reason why so many people feel economically set upon in an age of paper prosperity.

If someone starts engaging with this section of the electorate with economic heresies that help households (and possibly hurt corporations) then they may be surprised at how well such populism sells. Palmer's outsider campaign embodied some of that idea, but he couldn't pull it off successfully.

He needed an ordinary every(wo)man as a front to seriously shake the tree. Let's be honest, is Palmer going to do anything for people living on less than $30,000 except create more of them?

None of this is helped by a media that comes from a privileged narrow demographic that experiences few of the stresses most Australians know on a daily basis, or derisively sniggers at the "bogan" experience of life. It is systemic political failure on an epic scale, and cold comfort for the hardheads around the Coalition who must by now realise that they are far from in a comfortable situation. Unpopular policies will threaten more than their standing in the opinion polls. 

Log in or register to post comments

Discuss this article

To control your subscriptions to discussions you participate in go to your Account Settings preferences and click the Subscriptions tab.

Enter your comments here

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Griff
Posted Tuesday, September 24, 2013 - 18:25

Wish I could vote 30,000 times. Really, really wish I could.

Maximos
Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - 09:17

It's reassuring to read someone calling it on the old media's obsession with opinion polls. As the campaign progressed I became increasingly uncomfortable with the simplicity of the polls. How many does Murdoch own, afterall? The stories spun off these dubious polls, that invariably seem to ignore the declared margin of statistical error are, as you say, a means for "hack journalists to meet a deadline". 

News Corporation certainly did set the tone for lazy TV producers and I felt, at times, this extended to the ABC, particularly ABC News 24. What has engaged me in further reflection is the possibility that bottom feeding shock-jocks, while of no national significance, might have had an impact on some of the western Sydney marginals.

O. Puhleez
Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - 12:30

Let's see. A bit of a back-of-the-envelope calculation...

There are around 15 million Australians (15,000,000) on the electoral rolls. The 30,000 required to roll Abbott an all he stands for is only a small fraction of that (30,000/15,000,000 or 30/15,000, or 3/1,500).

Should be a shoo-in.

And those idiots try to tell me I'm no good at maths.

;-)

 

KaraNewman
Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - 13:52

Follow updates on the petition to dismiss Tony Abbott at www.facebook.com/DismissTony

Fair Suck of the Sav
Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - 20:16

Don't reckon Abbott will have the guts to go to a doubvle dissolution as he'll be too afraid of losing government, given that power seems his principal objective rather than the betterment of the Country. 

katoombawarren
Posted Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - 21:12

Terrific article, Phil. It is laughable to watch Shorten and Albo fall over each other in their desperation to help people on NewStart.  The confinement of debate within a narrow form of economics has had its effect. Our language has been trashed and we lack to tools to discuss a solution.

goatbeater
Posted Tuesday, December 31, 2013 - 18:52

And Robertson and Dobell were both gerrymandered with John Singleton funding high profile right-leaning candidates. Dobell would probably have gone anyway, but he screwed the voters of Robertson

eddietla
Posted Tuesday, February 25, 2014 - 00:54

Newspoll 54-46 Labor   LNP seats tick,tick,tick.