Longman

Lloyd Russell - Liberal Democrats (LDP)

Policy Source: Following my approach adopted for previous LibDem candidates, I have deviated from the ABC's link and policy topics are taken from the LibDem's bio for Lloyd Russell, which helpfully states three economic reforms "Lloyd advocates for" and three policies the candidate "strongly advocates". The former forms one policy below, the latter two. Policy detail is taken from the LibDem policy pages.

Policy 1: Tax Reform. The first position on Mr Russell’s bio is the removal of GST from electricity supply. The idea was costed in this document and argues for GST removal from all supply of electricity except for buying batteries, but retains GST on generation expenses like solar panels. The other two tax reforms mentioned are part of LDP policy to “cut federal taxes by more than half, through:

·         lifting the tax free threshold to $40,000, cutting personal tax rates to a flat 20%, and cutting the company tax rate to 20%; and

·         abolishing tobacco, alcohol and fuel taxes, import tariffs, carbon pricing and mineral resource rent taxation.”

Policy 2: Cannabis and Vaping. The party supports the legalisation of cultivation, processing, possession, transport and sale of recreational cannabis, medicinal cannabis and cannabis products while supporting limits on selling cannabis to minors or driving while impaired by cannabis use. I could not find details about Vaping, but the LDP’s “pro-choice” views on smoking generally can be found here.

Policy 3: Self-defence. Mr Russell’s bio calls specifically to legalise pepper spray and tasers for non-lethal self-defence. I could not find further details on this policy anywhere, but regarding self-defence more generally it is long-standing LibDem policy that gun control should be relaxed, that firearms should be available for self-defence, that anyone over 18 (excluding people with violent criminal history etc.) should be automatically entitled to a gun licence and a concealed-carry licence, that long-arms should not need to be registered and that semi-automatic firearms should not be limited or prohibited.

Jim Saleam - Australia First Party (AFP)

Policy Source: The aim of the three-policy approach to summarising candidates is to give every candidate a fair representation in terms of space and diversity of views. Unfortunately, I feel like paraphrasing the AFP’s platform to reduce their 8 core policies to three might invite the perception that I am portraying the candidate as White Supremacist; I wouldn’t be the first to level that accusation at Mr Saleam, and it’s hard to avoid those kinds of implications for a party that has a page on the history of the White Australia Policy under its policies tab. Instead, here are the headings for the 8 core policies found on the ABC-recommended Facebook page and the AFP’s website.

1. Ensure Australia Retains Full Independence
2. Rebuild Australian Manufacturing Industries
3. Control Foreign Ownership
4. Reduce and Limit Immigration
5. Abolish Multiculturalism
6. Introduce Citizen’s Initiated Referenda
7. Strengthen the Family
8. Strive To Rebuild A United Australia

Gregory Bell - Labour DLP (DLP)

Policy Source: I admit I am reaching here, but the DLP has a long list of highly varied policies with no obvious way to sort them; I did notice, however, that the ABC-linked page for Mr Bell stated DLP policies are “are based first and foremost on what’s good for families, what’s good for workers and what’s good for local communities.” So with that in mind…

Policy 1: What’s good for families*. The DLP believes marriage is between a man and a woman and that children should be raised by their biological parents. They support “the rights and duty of parents to discipline their children”, an immediate overhaul of the Family Court, adoption programs and free pre-marital education for all couples. The party opposes same-sex marriage, civil unions and abortion. They also want Family Impact Statements introduced for legislation and a system where parents are trained in childcare and must be “on duty” one day in every five to qualify for childcare.

Policy 2: What’s good for workers*. The DLP is a pro-union party; wants to establish a scheme that allows sick, carer’s and long service leave accrued at one job to be redeemable at another job; and believes the minimum wage should be calculated based on the reasonable needs of a two-child family. The party would also abolish the Superannuation Guarantee age limit.

Policy 3: What’s good for communities*. This party wants to encourage rural development and growth through lower tax, lower home loans rates and infrastructure investment and supports Indigenous rights to title over traditional lands. The party also has a population plan which includes balancing the immigration rate and making most immigration and relocation within Australia boost regional communities.

*These statements do not indicate any opinion of my own as to whether or not these policies are good for families, workers or communities

Jackie Perkins - Independent (IND)

Policy Source: Consolidated from www.jackieperkins.com.au.

Policy 1: Political reform. Dr Perkins lists several proposed changes to how government is run, from more pay equality between ministers and shadow ministers, to term limits, to a 3-term requirement to qualify for parliamentary pensions, to clear job descriptions and online diaries for all politicians. She advocates moving most family court disputes online, a two-tier government where elected officials decide on the nation’s direction and social engineers develop detailed policy to achieve this, and retaining the monarchy “lest we become a “little America”.”

Policy 2: Oversight. The candidate wants a 5-yearly review of the public service, efficient redress for serious complaints regarding government and industry, and “reference to experts and stakeholders when enacting changes to prevent oversights and mistakes.”

Policy 3: Living Wage for All. This policy would require people seeking this wage to take on skills training or further education, or national service.

James Noonan- Science Party (SCI)

Policy Source: It seems the Caboolture Herald has done my job for me. Unfortunately, I could not find the corresponding summaries for the other candidates so easily.

Matthew Stephen- Pauline Hanson's One Nation (PHON)

Policy Source: One Nation has a number of policies I could choose from, but no obvious means of selecting which ones I should discuss. Mr Stephen’s Bio gave no real guidance beyond a general concern that government ignores voters and a need for jobs and infrastructure in the area. I could not find further practical details on PHON’s plans for these issues and to compound matters, many of the policies that are present are out of date (e.g. supporting a ‘referendum’ on Same-Sex Marriage).

However, the candidate’s campaign’s Facebook page does have some policy updates, so I have inserted them below and ignored the ABC’s recommended link to the PHON website.

Policy 1: Ice Epidemic (June 13, 17, 18). This topic is mentioned repeatedly throughout the history of the page at least as far back as May and prior to the finalisation of candidates for the by-election. The PHON ice epidemic policy was linked to on June 17 with the candidate’s approval, and states in full:

Build rehab facilities for addicted drug users to alleviate pressure on our hospital facilities. Treatment to be paid for by patients and not taxpayers. Life sentences for the big end of town drug dealers and manufacturers. Jailing expenses to be paid for by perpetrators with their assets and finances seized.

Policy 2: Australian Values (June 26). One of the most diverse policies on PHON, it was provided as a link by the candidate to his campaign Facebook, presumably receiving his full endorsement. This policy includes a royal commission to determine if Islam is a genuine religion, increased aged pensions, review and revoking trade agreements, review of family law, review of child support, review of government perks, responsible gun ownership and tougher penalties for gun crime, an Australian identity card and tax reform.

PHON opposes full foreign ownership of Australian land, privatisation of water or universities and CSG on farmland. The party also plans to introduce an apprenticeships scheme and prioritise Australians in job markets.

Policy 3: Immigration (July 16). The PHON party considers it important to have zero net immigration, sustainable refugee intake with temporary protection visas and no Muslim immigration. This party supports English as the official language

John Reece - Australian People's Party (APP)

Policy Source: Mr Reece’s bio gives me no direction on his personal issues of interest but party's policy page has several policies to sort through, so I have taken the three most expansively discussed as the "main platforms".

Policy 1: Taxation. This party wants to end tax deductions for work expenses*, increase the tax-free threshold, replace tax offsets for carers and people with disabilities with a payment, remove the beneficiary tax offset, reduce marginal tax rates, simplify GST and expand it to financial services, a 20% corporate tax rate with very few possible deductions; tax on all foreign businesses selling to Australians, and a 50% tax on property sales by foreign investors.

Policy 2: Immigration. The APP wants to reduce immigration for a 5-year period by: reducing visa numbers; abolishing temporary skilled migration; relying on temporary protection visas for refugees and repatriating them when it is safe to do so; providing visas for migrants to settle and remain in regional centres for 5 years; deporting all illegal immigrants; requiring family-sponsored immigrants of working age to have full-time employment for 5 years and not rely on welfare payments, with minors to be supported by family sponsors; and requiring immigrants to live here for 5 years, speak English and receive no convictions before seeking citizenship.

Policy 3: Social Security and Living Standards. APP policies call for: a $50 increase in the fortnightly single pension, $90 increase in the couples pension, Reduction of retirement age to 65, a reduction of gas and electricity bills by 50%, the implementation of a gas reservation policy, no expiration dates on any phone/internet data, unemployed people being made to work for councils or the military after 1 year, all welfare recipients to require photo ID, changing the NDIS to the National Investment Scheme, fully fund childcare only for working parents passing a means test, and all businesses with over 100 employees to have in-house childcare.

*The exact wording of this policy is "allow no work-related deductions". Though purely speculative, it is possible this should read "allow non-work-related deductions" which has the opposite effect of expanding rather than restricting tax deductions.

Susan Lamb - Australian Labor Party (ALP)

Policy Source: Following my pattern of my previous examinations of major parties, going to the photos of the Facebook page the ABC links to shows exactly which topics they are advocating regularly. Consulting the slogans in these images gives us the three topics below. Further details are drawn from the ALP website.

Policy 1: Healthcare. The ALP has a broader campaign to halt a calculated $175 m cut to hospitals over a 3-year period. Locally, Ms Lamb has promised a $1.5 m training ward for the local TAFE, a $17 m Urgent Care Clinic for Bribie and a $10 m chemotherapy service at Caboolture Hospital.

Policy 2: Education. Several cuts to education are opposed by the ALP—cuts to University, TAFE and schools—and is also concerned by the lack of confirmation for extending preschool funding beyond 2019. Locally the candidate has promised $1.5 m to Caboolture TAFE, and nationally the party promises to abolish caps on University places and promises 200,000 more university places. A promise in one image that “We put 100,000 TAFE places ahead of [tax cuts]” may indicate a commitment to providing these places or simply an opposition to current spending that they do not expect to be able to unwind.

Policy 3: Opposing Corporate Tax Cuts. All of the above cuts of concern, and all of the money allocated for promises, seems to carry the theme of reversing tax cuts to “big business” to fund essential services.  Exact details are hard to find, but that may be because removing tax concessions is a very simple idea to communicate, though potentially complex from an accountancy standpoint.

Trevor Ruthenberg - Liberal National Party of Queensland (LNP)

Policy Source: Another major party. Another Facebook page. Another consideration of the images—or a specific image—for a policy summary. It is interesting how these contrast with the ALP, now they are back to back on the ballot (note the differing views on corporate tax cuts and health spending in particular).

Policy 1: Cost of living. The LNP promises to reduce local unemployment as a result of tax cuts to locals and businesses, which combined with promises to reduce electricity bills is aimed at creating a more prosperous community.

Policy 2: Infrastructure. Mr Ruthenberg states he has secured funding for a 20-bed addiction recovery facility and that, contrary to the cuts cited by the ALP, the LNP is outspending Labor on funding Metro North hospitals. The party promises upgrades to several local roads, the Bruce Highway and the road to the island community of Bribie.

Policy 3: Border security. The policies listed here include support for cancelling the visas of major criminals—citing 900 Queensland visa cancellations already—and support for the coalitions’ ongoing border security measures.

Blair Ann Verrier- Australian Country Party (ACP)

Policy Source: Ms Verrier’s bio, like many, provide little guidance on her areas of keenest interest within the ACP policies. Without any guide to the candidate’s passions, I have simply taken the party’s three most extensive policies to be those they are most passionate about and summarised them below.

Policy 1: Agriculture. Perhaps most controversially, the ACP is in favour of live export, though they also stress “ACP supports good animal welfare practices which sit well with our need to export”. The party also seeks to strengthen AQIS to provide greater control over food imports, provide more staff to quarantine and customs to protect consumers and food producers and ensure more equitable management of water resources. The ACP wants more funding for agricultural research and better access to new technologies and information, and also wants to empower the ACCC to ensure domestic retailers do not gouge consumers or rip off producers.

Policy 2: Firearms. The ACP supports efforts to eradicate illegal firearms and an increase in penalties for gun theft and firearms crimes. The party also supports the use of firearms by farmers and hunters in pest control, encourages sport and competition shooting, and champions the rights of licenced firearms collectors who are members of police-approved clubs. ACP does not support further restrictions on hunting and shooting land and advocates for some national parks to increase access by hunters. The party recognises the importance of safe gun storage and licensing, but supports proposals to reduce any “red tape” that does not improve safety and believes a review of the current firearms categories is overdue.

Policy 3: Refugees. ACP agrees with UN programs settling refugees in the countries where they first seek asylum, does not support “asylum shopping”, disagrees with calls to increase the refugee quota and believes strong measures should be taken to discourage boat travel by refugees to Australia. The ACP believes all processing of asylum seekers should be conducted by Australian personnel on Australian territory.

Gavin Behrens- The Greens (GRN)

Policy Source: Mr Behrens’ states in his profile on the Greens’ website that “the issues that face us are… Rising power bills, transport costs, rates and rents are squeezing the very last dollar out of our pockets. Work is harder to find and harder to keep when you get it.” And later also mentions funding for health and education as major focuses. Further details are taken from the federal Greens’ policy pages.

Policy 1: Cost of Living. To tackle the cost of living the Greens argue the need for fast, frequent, reliable, affordable, accessible and safe public transport; affordable, ecologically sound, water and energy efficient development; the promotion of energy efficiency strategies; urban areas designed to reduce dependence on transport and reduce commuting; walking and cycling lanes; mandatory fuel efficiency standards and labelling; reforms to the taxation of superannuation to benefit lower income earners; tax reforms to reduce the cost of houses; land tax to replace stamp duty and government-ensured distribution of paid work.

Policy 2: Employment. With regards to job availability, the Greens support measures to make part-time or casual work better able to support workers through reforming industrial laws, make long service leave accrue over multiple jobs and give greater rights to casual employees including full rights to challenge unfair termination. More broadly for employment the party wants full protection of accrued entitlements of employees, improved minimum employment standards for trainees and apprentices, elimination of the gender pay gap, shorter standard working hours, incentives for workplace childcare, enhanced paid parental leave, five weeks annual leave for all workers, and strong industrial manslaughter and OH&S laws.

Policy 3: Health and Education. The official Greens policy on health has a lot about providing access and tailored health solutions to specific demographics, such as Indigenous, LGBT and other individuals. They also want improved access to medical services in rural and remote areas, universal publicly funded dental care, preventative measures (particularly those targeting diet), access to bulk-billing GPs, health insurance subsidies to be diverted to public health, continuation and full resourcing for Medicare and the PBS, access to free safe abortions, free birthing services and euthanasia, comprehensive medical research, rigorous regulation of pharmaceuticals and for regulation of blood donor deferrals to be based on scientific evidence.

With regards to education, they desire free tertiary education, needs-based funding for schools, an independent school resourcing body, restrictions on funding for private schools, LGBTIQ-sensitive school-aged education and support programs, education on consent and respectful relationships, redirecting funding from school chaplains to qualified support professionals,

Mayo

Tracey-Lee Cane - Christian Democratic Party (CDP)

Policy Source: As noted above, no online presence for Ms Cane has been identified by myself or the ABC that gives any indication of the candidate's personal views. She is even absent from the party's news updates. The CDP has a lot of policies to pick from, some with a heavy NSW focus, and no obvious method to go about it, except that one policy appears in a pop-up on each page. Policies 2 and 3 were selected based on the length of their discussion on the CDP site. I will add that the CDP policies are perhaps the best set-out and most readable of any policy page I have seen this election, often summarised in a few lines and very reader-friendly.

Policy 1: Marriage, Family and Gender. CDP, unsurprisingly for a conservative Christian party, believes marriage should be between one man and one woman and that "it seems unwise to discard this unique definition of marriage. The party adds that they "are carefully examining the full consequences" of the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

Policy 2: Housing. The CDP blames the current shortage of affordable housing on the abandonment of the government's Housing Commission to "economic rationalist market forces (private developers)" and excessive immigration. To reverse this, the party advocates a review of government charges on development and a return to government-led building rather than renting.

Policy 3: Infrastructure. The party insists infrastructure should be planned to support future generations and describes the access of infrastructure to the elderly and people with disabilities as a "One of the huge imperatives".

Kelsie Harfouche - Australian People's Party (APP)

Policy Source: Ms Harfouche's bio makes specific mention of a bill of rights though I could find no discussion of this idea among the parties' policies. I have taken the three most expansively discussed there as the "main platforms".

Policy 1: Taxation. This party wants to end tax deductions for work expenses*, increase the tax-free threshold, replace tax offsets for carers and people with disabilities with a payment, remove the beneficiary tax offset, reduce marginal tax rates, simplify GST and expand it to financial services, a 20% corporate tax rate with very few possible deductions; tax on all foreign businesses selling to Australians, and a 50% tax on property sales by foreign investors.

Policy 2: Immigration. The APP wants to reduce immigration for a 5-year period by: reducing visa numbers; abolishing temporary skilled migration; relying on temporary protection visas for refugees and repatriating them when it is safe to do so; providing visas for migrants to settle and remain in regional centres for 5 years; deporting all illegal immigrants; requiring family-sponsored immigrants of working age to have full-time employment for 5 years and not rely on welfare payments, with minors to be supported by family sponsors; and requiring immigrants to live here for 5 years, speak English and receive no convictions before seeking citizenship.

Policy 3: Social Security and Living Standards. APP policies call for: a $50 increase in the fortnightly single pension, $90 increase in the couples pension, Reduction of retirement age to 65, a reduction of gas and electricity bills by 50%, the implementation of a gas reservation policy, no expiration dates on any phone/internet data, unemployed people being made to work for councils or the military after 1 year, all welfare recipients to require photo ID, changing the NDIS to the National Investment Scheme, fully fund childcare only for working parents passing a means test, and all businesses with over 100 employees to have in-house childcare.

*The exact wording of this policy is "allow no work-related deductions". Though purely speculative, it is possible this should read "allow non-work-related deductions" which has the opposite effect of expanding rather than restricting tax deductions.

Major Sumner - Greens (GRN)

Policy Source: For the sake of full disclosure, I have met 'Uncle Moogy' previously in my university days and in my industry many people who I work with know him in some capacity. His bio is fertile ground for identifying policy areas he is passionate about, and these are reflected below. Details are taken from the Greens' policy page.

Policy 1: Water. The Greens want legal protections for waterways, a prohibition on large dams, national water testing and research, public ownership of major water systems, increased information on the safety of recycled water, ecologically sound water allocations, the National Water Commission to be reinstated, the return of water to the environment through water-efficient developments and water buyback from agricultural over-allocations, protection of marine mammals and habitats, national approach to dealing with marine pests, recognition and involvement of Indigenous stakeholders, pollution elimination, restrictions on the use of seismic devices, mining techniques and other technologies, including the testing of military and naval explosive devices in the oceans, for resource companies to be fully liable for clean-up costs, and the creation of marine reserves.

Policy 2: First Nations. The party's approach to issues facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders includes signing treaties with Indigenous groups; governmental policies that respect the need for self-determination of Indigenous groups; protection of cultural and IP rights; equality of outcomes for education, housing, safety and employment; increased resources and access to essential services, particularly in rural and regional Australia; community-based approaches to issues like domestic violence, alcoholism and drug abuse; revoking compulsory income management; compensation for loss of property or withheld wages; effective heritage protection; full support for native title; reduced incarceration rate for Indigenous people and a representative body of First Nations peoples to all levels of Government.

Policy 3: Renewable energy. The Greens want a shift to renewable, clean energy technology and a stronger Renewable Energy Target, 0 net emissions by 2040, orderly phasing out of fossil fuels, binding annual emissions targets, a ban on new coal-fired power stations and fossil fuel extraction and the government vehicle fleet to shift to zero-emissions vehicles.

Georgina Downer - Liberal (LIB)

Policy Source: georginadowner.com has nothing to say on policy, and mostly just redirects to the campaign's Facebook page. This poses a greater than usual difficulty, as I can (and have) extracted three promises from the page's images which is generally an effective way to identify local priorities. I'm not sure that has really identified the key concerns this time around, but the posts on the page are too diverse to select from with any impartial system. In the last week alone there has been a $200,000 investment in the Steamranger Heritage Railway, a promise of $1.2 m for mental health spending in the seat, $4.4 m for a regional sports hub in Mt Barker and 'a strategic traffic planning study' for the Adelaide Hills. I have done the best I can to be impartial and use these three images as per my previous treatment of the major parties, but really the Liberal party needs to put more thought into structuring campaigns to make my election-shaping blog represent them better.

Policy 1: Tax relief. "The tax relief plan will put more money back in the pockets of 58,700 hard-working people living in the Hills, Fleurieu and KI area. Local teachers, nurses, plumbers and police officers earning around $75,000 will save $530 each year. This means a family with two people working will have more than $1000 extra per year to help pay bills or to save some money towards getting ahead."

Policy 2: Mobile coverage. For many rural areas, mobile phone reception isn't just a convenience but can mean life or death in an emergency.

Policy 3: Aquatic Centre. One of the most publicised promises from the Liberals--at least from my perspective as a Mayo resident--has been the Mt Barker Pool upgrade. The contribution is for $10m, or 40% of the projected costs. There really isn't much more detail to add, except that this is separate to the above-mentioned $4.4 m sports hub (which has been criticised as a council and Labor state-funded project the Libs refused to contribute to until recently, but that's another matter).

Also, and this is completely irrelevant to anything electoral, Ms Downer has an IMDb bio for her appearances in interviews. I have not relied on that page for any information, partly because that bio simultaneously claims she was born in Belgium and England.

Rebekha Sharkie - Centre Alliance (CA)

Policy Source: Of the policies laid out on Ms Sharkie's website 8 have links to details. Three of these are sub-points under a broader health policy, two are limited to particular areas in Mayo (duplication of Victor Harbor Road and tax relief for Kangaroo Island) leaving us with the following topics:

Policy 1: Health and Aged Care. Ms Sharkie's ambitions for healthcare in Mayo include a renal dialysis unit in Mount Barker Hospital, a Medicare Service Centre in Victor Harbor, Medicare-rebatable MRIs in both Mount Barker and Victor Harbor and 'Headspace' (a Federal mental health service) to be available along the South Coast. Ms Sharkie also proposes legislation requiring publication of aged-care staff-to-patient ratios covering nurses, clinical nurses, personal care workers, allied health staff and other staff, and wants improved training for personal care workers--at a minimum requiring supervised work experience or placement prior to employment.

Policy 2: The ABC. The candidate wants funding to the ABC to be restored, winding back cuts claimed to date back to 2014.

Policy 3: Live Exports and Processing. Ms Sharkie opposes live exports on animal welfare grounds, but also sees the transition to processed and chilled meat exports as "a real opportunity to grow Australian jobs". The candidate will sign a Bill with multi-party support to encourage the processing of meat within Australia.

Stephen Humble - Liberal Democrats (LDP)

Policy Source: Previously the LDP candidate bios have provided topics for discussion, but Mr Humble's actually sets out his policies in detail. This means the following is presented in a particularly favourable light, smoothing over the more controversial topics of revoking defamation law and widespread privatisation; the following is directly quoted.

Policy 1: Cannabis. "Though it may have initially been well intended and not simply a cynical vote grab through scaremongering, the war on drugs has devolved into misleading propaganda and invasive, costly and harmful actions by government against many people. The war on drugs does not protect people from harm but instead created a whole criminal industry which causes far more harm overall than the drugs themselves would."

Policy 2: Cycling and transport. "Stephen supports repealing bicycle helmet laws and other unjustified or counterproductive and costly intrusions by government into people's individual freedom. Australia's punitive approach of applying fines discourages many people from riding at a time when other countries are supporting increased popularity of bikes, which reduces traffic congestion in cities and makes them more people friendly. Stephen also has an open motorbike license, and values riding. He believes the aim of legislation should be improved efficiency and safety of transport not a means to raise revenue to fill government coffers."

Policy 3: Personal freedoms. "Stephen is opposed to censorship of speech, movies and video games and opposes the imposition of data collection laws which drive up the cost of data services without justification.  He supports equal opportunity rights for all people, legally assisted suicide and is pro-choice.

"Stephen believes that people and the community get the greatest benefit when people are empowered to support themselves and local business rather than more of their money siphoned to Canberra to fund questionable projects. Stephen feels government must be accountable, efficient and benefit the community."

Reginald Coutts - Australian Labor Party (ALP)

Policy Source: Dr Coutts' bio lists telecommunications as an area of expertise for the candidate, but detailed policies on this are hard to find for the ALP. The now standard appeal to images provides a general theme of opposing tax cuts for 'the big end of town' and one banner to 'fix our hospitals' but not enough to form three policy topics. Fortunately, in a post dated June 8, Dr Coutts outlined the areas he believes need particular attention. The selections quoted below are based on the general themes observed above.

Policy 1: Tax cuts and general funding. "The Turnbull Government’s plans for an $80 billion tax cut for big business and an income tax plan that benefits the rich instead of working families are unfair. Meanwhile, they’re cutting funding for services that families, older Australians and young people depend on." "Getting the balance right between road infrastructure and public transport, health and aged-care services, employment opportunities for our young people and affordable housing for them to raise families in, are some of the key issues."

Policy 2: Communications. "l was involved in helping envisage the original National Broadband Network(NBN). This aimed to be a world-best system based on fibre optic cable to 95% of the nation’s households and businesses. It was envisioned to serve our needs into the future and provide the infrastructure that would attract the world’s leading-edge companies to create the jobs of the future in Australia. It’s with a sad heart that I’ve watched this dream turn to disappointment through the implementation of a revised second-rate system. Relying on copper connections for the final link to customers while argued to be cost effective, delivers less reliability, slower speeds, and ultimately higher costs.

"The second-rate NBN isn’t the only telecommunications challenge we face in Mayo. Mobile phone blackspots, variable signal strength and mobile towers not having power backup means we’re particularly vulnerable in emergency situations. Plus, there is legitimate concern when the NBN transfer means loss of the basic telephone line as an emergency lifeline."

Policy 3: Health. In addition to a banner advocating we "fix our hospitals" Dr Coutts points out "It has been Labor governments that have brought us Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). I am a strong advocate for the NDIS because I had a severely disabled son who lived a fulfilling life for many years but sadly died a short time ago."

This is the only policy of the three I could find discussed on the ALP website, opposing a calculated $715 m cut to hospitals as well as a link to a site advocating opposition to the claimed privatisation of Medicare by the Liberal party.

Perth

Julie Matheson - Western Australia Party (WAP)

Policy Source: Ms Matheson is the founder of the WAP, and although her bio that the ABC links to does not identify any key policy areas, it is fair to assume that her priorities and the party’s are going to be very closely aligned. A look at the ‘our vision’ page of the WAP website would indicate that this party is entirely concerned with getting WA a larger proportion of GST revenue. Even the ‘read more’ link under the heading ‘policies’ directs to a page titled ‘Truth about the GST’.

Yet the WAP does have other areas it cares, about specifically for the seat of Perth:

I will leave that to serve as a summary of WAP’s policies, trading depth of analysis for quantity, because as previously noted there is not much further detail to give other than on the topic of GST distribution.

Nicole Arielli - Animal Justice Party (AJP)

Policy Source: The AJP is a single-issue party, with all the risks that entails when unrelated legislation is before parliament. At times they have been referred to as extreme, for example in their push for vegetarian or vegan diets. Ms Arielli’s bio includes a statement that she has been “actively educating [her]self on the many animal harm issues including intensive farming, live export, companion animals, testing on animals, greyhound and horse racing, and animals in captivity”. My choice of AJP policy below has been guided by this statement.

Policy 1: Agriculture. The AJP advocates removing all funding from animal farming, a prohibition on advertising animal products, funding farmers to transition to plant-based crops, an end to live export, conscious-animal slaughter, tail docking, animal castration, branding, earmarking, teeth clipping, de-horning and mulesing. As Australians transition to a plant-based diet, the AJP seeks to slowly abolish breeding and rearing for slaughter.

Policy 2: Entertainment. The party seeks to end jumps racing in Victoria and SA and greyhound racing. Recreational hunting, fishing, rodeos, animals in circuses and marine parks, and horse-powered vehicles would also be banned immediately. The party would also phase out funding for zoos that do not exist for the benefit of the animals, favouring conservation parks and sanctuaries.

Policy 3: Companion animals. The AJP’s policy on companion animals is quite expansive in the topics it covers. The party’s desires include: funding for animal rehabilitation and no-kill shelters sufficient to accommodate all unwanted animals, an end to animal sale except from shelters and rescue, breeding by licensed breeders only, subsidising desexing, the abolition of bird cages, and legislation prohibiting landlords from discriminating against pet owners.

Jim Grayden - Independent Liberal (IND)

Policy Source: Mr Grayden is a Liberal-leaning independent candidate, and his website lists six policy areas concisely summarised. Those with “read more option” (two are under construction) all lead to a blog with four news articles, mostly about GST. To further complicate things, several other areas of interest are indicated in his brochures but constrained in detail for reasons of space. The policies below are drawn from the candidate’s policy summaries and blog posts selected based on the frequency related topics are mentioned in the brochure linked to above.

Policy 1: GST Reform. Mr Grayden is seeking “genuine GST reform”, including a minimum return for states of 75c in the dollar and the inclusion of gambling revenues in the GST. In his own words, “The CGC [the commission responsible for GST allocations] says that WA could have poker machines if we wanted to so they deem that WA receives the same revenue per capita that NSW, Victoria, Queensland, ACT and NT get from gambling taxes - the effect is that gambling taxes are effectively left out of the calculations when deciding GST distributions…

“The CGC includes mining royalties in its GST calculations even though the Eastern States have significant mineral resources that they choose not to exploit for political reasons. WA’s is penalised because we don’t have poker machines but the Eastern States are not penalised when they choose not to develop their mineral resources.”

Policy 2: Small Business. “Small business is a major employer and when small business is under stress, jobs suffer. Jobs that our children need whether that is a part-time job while studying or the first step on a career path.

“Jim is very aware of the challenges facing the WA retail sector since the end of the "mining boom" and from emerging online sellers.

“Working in the commercial property sector, Jim knows how business is struggling to survive and the need for real assistance.” [Directly quoted from the candidate’s website]

Policy 3: Resources. Mr Grayden is a “strong supporter” of WA investing in the mining of Lithium and rare earth elements used in modern electronics but notes that less than 1% of the money from lithium-ion batteries returns to WA. He argues that the traditional reasons for processing and manufacture abroad—namely cheaper labour—do not hold up in the modern age of mechanisation and that more of the energy minerals and production industry should be brought to WA.

The candidate also recognises that “as we transition from a fossil-fuel-based economy to a renewable energy based economy sustainability will be more and more important.”

Wesley Du Preez - Liberal Democrats (LDP)

Policy Source: Following my approach adopted for previous LibDem candidates, I have deviated from the ABC's link and policy topics are taken from the LibDem's bio for Wesley Du Preez, which helpfully states three ”simple but ambitious” aims. The former forms one policy below, the latter two. Policy detail is taken from the LibDem policy pages.

Policy 1: Cutting red tape. The party argues for the immediate deregulation of the taxi industry; removal of licensing and certification for various industries including auctioneers, hairdressers, bar workers and casino workers; deregulation of retail trading hours, gambling and poker machines, liquor licensing, radio and television broadcast licensing and workers compensation insurance.

Policy 2: Cutting spending. The party also wants the immediate privatisation of the NBN, ABC, SBS, Australia Post, electricity and public transport, with TAFE, universities, schools and hospitals to follow. With the savings from running such services, the LDP wants the government to have zero net worth in the future, and be funded entirely through taxation rather than borrowing.

Policy 3: Freedoms. The LDP believes in free speech and does not believe defamation, humiliation, intimidation or obscenity should be illegal, but later adds “[w]e should be free from harassment”. They also oppose current restrictions on the extent of media an individual can own and defend the right of journalists to conceal their sources. The LDP opposes the criminalisation of bikie gangs and terrorist organisations on the grounds that there should be freedom of association, along with rejecting curfews, laws against loitering, and limits on peaceful protest. The party also supports the rights to euthanasia, birth control, abortion and the refusal of medical treatment.

Colin Scott - Sustainable Australia (SA)

Policy Source: SA boasts over 20 separate and diverse policy areas on its policy page (24 at the time of writing) but heads this page with a discussion of four major themes: jobs, housing, planning and environment. These four themes are repeated—with specific implications for Perth—in the candidate’s bio. These seat-specific policies are quoted directly below; readers should be aware that the language used may be less neutral and balanced than I try to achieve in my own words.

Policy 1: Secure jobs. For Perth this means:

• Reducing our reliance on housing construction to drive 'growth' and re-allocating much of this 'property investment' speculation back into our factories, farms and small businesses
• Placing a strong emphasis on manufacturing in Perth, rather than importing products, including through helping small business start-ups and high tech robotics
• Better investing in education and skills training (and re-training)

Policy 2: Affordable housing and better planning. For Perth this means:

• Ending all future negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions for property investors
• Restricting the purchase of Australian housing and land to Australian citizens and long-term permanent residents
• Slowing population growth via lower immigration (whilst maintaining our current refugee intake) to save Perth from overdevelopment

…

• Limiting new housing developments to the ability of the local area's infrastructure (schools, hospitals, roads, public transport, parks, gardens, etc) to cope
• Applying more lateral and flexible thinking to improving our public transport network, for example, through bus networks across suburban areas rather than just into the CBD
• Containing our population growth to our ability to affordably and sustainably supply water

Policy 3: Sustainable environment and population. For Perth this means:

• A whole-of-catchment approach to delivering a clean and healthy Swan River
• Curtailing pollution in our living environment, including noise pollution through vehicles and construction
• Strengthening local environmental initiatives including waste recycling, biodiversity and animal habitat protection, soil health, waste recycling and community gardens

Ben Mullings - Australian Mental Health Party (AMHP)

Policy Source: As may be obvious from the party’s name, AMHP is a single issue party and thus it is difficult to predict how they will vote on matters not concerning their focus: mental health. However, the party does provide a page outlining three different policies within the subject of mental health, and these are discussed below.

Policy 1: Medicare. AMHP wants Medicare to be flexible enough to allow people with mental health issues to choose a therapist they trust, and an end to the inconsistent and often abruptly terminating support for therapy.

Policy 2: Education. The party wishes to adjust the curriculum in schools to encourage understanding of mental health issues and to improve cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal functioning among young people to minimise help manage the emergence and severity of mental health issues later in life.

Policy 3: Mental Health Targets. AMHP seeks to establish targets for suicide reduction, mental health funding, housing for people in need and other areas that the party believes will limit the severity of Australia’s mental health crisis.

Patrick Gorman - Labor Party (ALP)

Policy Source: As above for the larger parties with well-oiled social media machines I have inspected the images posted to summarise Mr Gorman’s priorities. Further details, where available, are provided from the national ALP campaigns page.

Policy 1: Education. Posts by the candidate indicate strong support for “properly funding schools”, and the ALP promise of waiving fees for 100,000 TAFE places. Federally the party also opposes cuts to university spending, increases to university fees and student debt, cuts to schools, $3b in funding cuts to TAFE.

Policy 2: Taxes and Wages. Mr Gorman’s images state he will fight for WA to receive a larger proportion of GST funding, reverse the cut to penalty rates, and support tax cuts for 70,000 WA workers rather than corporate tax cuts. The party generally also has issues with the overuse of labour-hire workers rather than employees.

Policy 3: Funding services. The ALP seeks to preserve funding for public services it sees as under threat from the Liberal government, including Medicare, the ABC and the SBS. The funding of the ABC has been one of many key issues in Mr Gorman’s campaign, along with providing a better NBN with less downtime and faster repairs, funding for local infrastructure including Gateway WA, and a promise to invest $2.8b in hospitals compared to a $7.8m cut to Perth Hospital and a $77m cut to hospitals across WA blamed on the current federal government. The ALP calculates federal funding to hospitals nationally between 2017 and 2020 will amount to $715m and opposes these cuts.

Gabriel Harfouche - Australian People's Party (APP)

Policy Source: Mr Reece’s bio gives me no direction on his personal issues of interest but party's policy page has several policies to sort through, so I have taken the three most expansively discussed as the "main platforms".

Policy 1: Taxation. This party wants to end tax deductions for work expenses*, increase the tax-free threshold, replace tax offsets for carers and people with disabilities with a payment, remove the beneficiary tax offset, reduce marginal tax rates, simplify GST and expand it to financial services, a 20% corporate tax rate with very few possible deductions; tax on all foreign businesses selling to Australians, and a 50% tax on property sales by foreign investors.

Policy 2: Immigration. The APP wants to reduce immigration for a 5-year period by: reducing visa numbers; abolishing temporary skilled migration; relying on temporary protection visas for refugees and repatriating them when it is safe to do so; providing visas for migrants to settle and remain in regional centres for 5 years; deporting all illegal immigrants; requiring family-sponsored immigrants of working age to have full-time employment for 5 years and not rely on welfare payments, with minors to be supported by family sponsors; and requiring immigrants to live here for 5 years, speak English and receive no convictions before seeking citizenship.

Policy 3: Social Security and Living Standards. APP policies call for: a $50 increase in the fortnightly single pension, $90 increase in the couples pension, Reduction of retirement age to 65, a reduction of gas and electricity bills by 50%, the implementation of a gas reservation policy, no expiration dates on any phone/internet data, unemployed people being made to work for councils or the military after 1 year, all welfare recipients to require photo ID, changing the NDIS to the National Investment Scheme, fully fund childcare only for working parents passing a means test, and all businesses with over 100 employees to have in-house childcare.

*The exact wording of this policy is "allow no work-related deductions". Though purely speculative, it is possible this should read "allow non-work-related deductions" which has the opposite effect of expanding rather than restricting tax deductions.

Paul Collins - Independent (IND)

Policy Source: Mr Collins is positioning himself as the closest thing Perth has to a Liberal candidate this election, but although he is a member of the Liberal party he has also stated he does not agree with them on everything. As such, I am not relying on the Liberal party policies for this write-up. In his posts on Facebook I can find a lot of ALP positions Mr Collins opposes, but few direct positions he will argue for except a 75c floor on GST returns to WA. There are some policies, however in the brochure shown below, so I will do the usual lazy shortcut of posting that instead of writing them up under three headings. Be aware that as this is written by (or at least for) the candidate, it may not be impartially worded.

Caroline Perks - The Greens (GRN)

Policy Source: Conveniently, the Greens have released specific policies for the WA by-elections in Fremantle and Perth. There are three policies from their general platform--'Ending Corporate Influence', 'World Class Social Services' and 'A Future For All Of Us'--and two other policies specifically released during WA by-election season--'Beyond Waste' and 'Getting Big Money Out Of Politics'. The latter are used as main policies below. Ignoring 'Ending Corporate Influence' as being synonymous with 'Getting Big Money Out Of Politics', the other two policies 'World Class Social Services' and 'A Future For All Of Us' are discussed as the third policy for Perth and Freemantle respectively, decided by a coin flip. Voters in either seat would do well to read both summaries.

Policy 1: Beyond Waste. The Greens' waste management policy is set out over four steps: investment in resource recovery (i.e. recycling) initiatives including through community grants, ending federal funding for waste incineration, phasing out single-use plastic products and introducing mandatory schemes to encourage the manufacture of recyclable products.

Policy 2: Getting Big Money Out Of Politics. The Greens' plan to limit the monetary influence of politicians is two-pronged: first by introducing a $30 carbon price on major polluters and removing fossil fuel subsidies which they argue encourage pollution thanks to the influence of the fossil fuel lobby, and secondly by banning political donations from mining, development, tobacco and alcohol industries, capping all other donations and demanding all donations over $1000 are reported to the public. Their ending corporate influence policy also mentions making corporations pay their 'fair share' of tax, opposing a corporate tax cut from 30% to 25%, and establishing a government-backed People’s Bank.

Policy 3: World Class Services. The first sentence of this policy page is: “The Greens are a party of essential services, not tax cuts”. These services include a $75 increase to the Newstart and Youth Allowance; more funding for primary, secondary and tertiary education; improvements to public health care; fully funding the NDIS; adding dental to Medicare; increasing access to bulk-billing GPs; further investment in mental health; providing accessible and affordable public transport.

Aaron Hammond - Science Party (SCI)

Policy Source: I was not easily able to determine a method of prioritising the policies of the Science Party (which covers a lot of topics) on either Mr Hammond’s Facebook or the party website, although Mr Hammond’s how to vote card does provide the small panel of policies below—a little lighter on detail than I prefer but a convenient summary.

Ellen Joubert- Australian Christians (AC)

Policy Source: There are 9 policy areas listed on the party's website with no obvious way to pick the main ones, but most can be folded into their broadest policy heading of 'Social Policies'. Three others remain: 'Environment and Climate' and 'Economy' which are long enough to deserve description below and their 'Religious Freedom' policy which is summarised in this one-page document they provide.

Policy 1: Social Policies. On the topic of family, the AC believes marriage should be between a man and a woman and supports adoption only by heterosexual couples, mentoring programs for men and boys without fathers, pre-marriage education for all couples, perjury laws to be applied to the Family Court, declassifying 'economic abuse' as a criminal offence. They oppose the introduction of voluntary euthanasia, abortion and IVF outside of heterosexual marriage. The party opposes the Safe Schools program, wants the national curriculum to be developed by stakeholders and supports the inclusion of Australia’s Christian heritage in the curriculum. It supports medical uses of cannabis but not recreational use. They oppose the inclusion of home ownership in the means testing of pensions, wants pensions to be indexed by a measure other than CPI and supports fully funding the NDIS. The party opposes prostitution but believes punishment should fall on the clients of sex workers rather than sex workers themselves, and ISP filters on pornographic material by default in Australia.

Policy 2: Environment and Climate. This party does not believe there is sufficient evidence for human-caused climate change and opposes any form of taxation or other burdens to this end, but supports "sensible pollution controls that do not unnecessarily and excessively burden businesses and increase the cost of living". This position heads all of their policies on the environment, be that generally, carbon taxation specifically, and even water management. These policies then all provide the '10 key aims' of their subsequent policies: recognition of pollution harms and adapting [sic] evidence-based solutions; land use management geared towards environmental sustainability; protecting natural biodiversity; ensuring air and water quality; managing vegetation and soil quality for agricultural sustainability; improving waste management; protecting coasts and rivers; ensuring sustainable resource development; balanced and sustainable consumption; promoting energy and resource production without favour to any approach.

Policy 3: Economy. The AC opposes keeping the minimum wage as high as it currently is, increasing taxes on businesses or implementing greater employment regulation (particularly in child care). They support income splitting for single-income families and the establishment of specialist banks for small and medium businesses.

Tony Robinson - Australian Liberty Alliance (ALA)

Policy Source: Mr Robinson is a co-founder of ALA, and on the party’s own statement that he would be contesting the seat of Perth it states that voting for the candidate will “show the corrupt career politicians that we have had enough of BIG government, BIG government waste, Islamisation and divisive multiculturalism”. The following policy areas are derived from this statement and filled with detail from the party’s policy page.

Policy 1: Small Government. The ALA seeks less bureaucracy and the reduction in government spending to below 20% of GDP. To do this, the ALA will push for a reduction in the number of ministers to only the positions they consider essential, reduce government overheads, and end government programs they determine to be wasteful.

Policy 2: Islam. The party views Islam as a totalitarian ideology that does not accept the separation of church and state. The party opposes all attempts to impose Sharia law on Australia “before the demographic, economic and sociopolitical realities make a peaceful solution impossible”, which presumably includes voluntary Sharia courts as used in the UK. Achieving this includes a 10-year ban on immigration from member nations of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (excepting non-Muslim refugees). Halal foods should be labelled according to the ALA, and certified at the producer’s cost and full-face coverings prohibited in public.

Policy 3: Multiculturalism. The ALA opposes the existence of dual citizenship, opposes affirmative action, and sees reconciliation with Aboriginal Australians as incompatible with the treatment of Indigenous people as a special class of citizens.

At first glance, it might make more sense to divide the three policy areas into small government, spending and multiculturalism including Islam, but the division of policies on the website makes it easier to disentangle island and multiculturalism generally rather than government size and spending.

Ian Britza - Independent (IND)

Policy Source: Mr Britza is surprisingly hard to track down, given that he has previously served in Liberal governments before leaving the party. I could find no website or policy discussion and no pamphlet in his name except this one from his time in the Liberal party with no real policy information. I did find a newspaper article that listed his priorities as GST, senior Australians and government accountability, but I don’t have any information to expand upon this. His Facebook page did not help much either but did provide me with a media release. While I can’t extract specific promises from this, here are two quoted segments that may give voters some idea of his priorities:

“Ian has said ‘Australian People are wanting to regain the ability to get ahead, see real reduction in the cost of living and the cost of doing business in Australia. People want fair and affordable access to quality health, education and essential services as well as being confident in their safety.’ Ian is committed to standing up for these issues regardless of a win or lose.”

…

“Lack of the Australian Tax and importation laws is seeing an unprecedented amount of small and family businesses fail and close. Again, bipartisan inaction by both parties is the main reason this is occurring, despite both their bureaucracy and Politicians being provided proof of what is going on. Australian Jobs are another area Ian is committed to fighting for in Canberra.”

Barry Mason - Citizens Electoral Council (CEC)

Policy Source: The CEC is a LaRouche-ian party that has not noticeably updated its site in the decade or so of my reporting on elections, so some information may be drastically out of date. Mr Mason’s priorities are set out in the opening paragraph of his bio: “‘Jail bankers for fraud; break up the corrupt and bankrupt banks and then generate cheap credit for productive industries and infrastructure by establishing a government-owned National bank.’ These are just a few of the key policies that Barry Mason your Citizens Electoral Council (CEC) candidate for the Perth by-election, says he will fight for when elected.” That is technically three promises, however I feel realistically these should be treated as one topic. There is also discussion of international relations, but no real detail can be found on this on the CEC’s policy page. This page is headed by three topics too: survival, recovery and prosperity. Again, the first two are banking-reform focussed. The third discusses infrastructure and forms a second point to discuss below. Of the topics listed below that as ‘policy initiatives’ three remain distinct from these two topics: electoral reform, food crisis and global warming being a hoax. Of these, I feel the latter is the most newsworthy.

Policy 1: Banking reform. In addition to imprisoning bankers, dismantling banks and establishing a federal bank, the party insists on ‘Glass-Steagall’ separation of commercial and investment banking, the restoration of trade tariffs as part of the ‘New Bretton Woods’ system and the freezing of all home and banking mortgages until the CEC determines the GFC to have passed (this last decade apparently still being one of depression worse than the 1930s according to the CEC site).

Policy 2: Industry and Infrastructure. Perhaps one of the most strikingly specific policy text on the CEC website is: “We Must Have a National Fertilizer Industry!”, in response to the previously mentioned perceived food crisis. This includes government regulation of fertiliser prices at 2006 levels, a Fertilizer Control and Development Board, outlawing Anglo-Dutch cartel involvement in Australian agriculture and establishing rail infrastructure. The party also wants nationalisation of oil, gas and raw materials industries, support for the pig, sheep and dairy industries, the end of Murray-Darling environmental flows and at least 18 water developments in the forms of dams, irrigation structures and so forth. Rail development around the nation, high-speed shipping, a moon/mars program and thorium nuclear energy are all proposed by the CEC

Policy 3: Global Warming. The CEC claims that “Man-made global warming is a fraud”. What follows in this policy can only be described as a conspiracy theory (I leave the reader to determine whether the recent pejorative connotations of the term apply) that involves Al Gore, the World Wildlife Fund, Thomas Malthus (on behalf of the British East India Company) and H.G. Wells to (and I am quoting here to avoid an appearance of exaggeration) “shut down farming, manufacturing and energy industries, and kill millions of people” while introducing “a world government (akin to Tim Flannery’s proposed Commission for Thermostatic Control)”.

I genuinely have no idea where to begin discussing this, so I won’t.

The good, the bad, the nitty-gritty, the legislative council and the Dark Knight.

We actually have four elections to recap--one predicted well, one poorly and two I didn't touch. First up:

TASMANIA

Not a huge amount to say here. These were my predictions:

These were the actual results:

The areas I got right really don't leave me much to talk about. They fell the way I said they would, presumably for the reasons I said they would. The only incorrect call is the final seat in Bass. The prediction for this was that the Greens would lead the 4-way race for this last seat. In quote fractions, this was incorrect as follows:

ALP: 0.58
GRN: 0.56

LIB: 0.53
JLN: 0.28

As such, my flow-on predictions did not work out. I did provide a short summary of what might happen if the ALP was ahead at this point, but it was basically a mess depending on who dropped out next and how JLN preferences distributed. At a basic level, though, my prediction failed because I assumed ALP would get 1Q+N votes and the greens M where Q is a full quota, and N < M < Q. in actual fact N > M by a very thin margin--an error of 297 first-preference votes in a seat with almost 65,000 formal ballots. That's pretty darn close to getting 100% on my predictions.

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

A somewhat less pleasing prediction result here, but one that I will break down into specific areas I did well in to soothe my wounded ego. While there may be a little counting to go in some seats, the results look reasonably clear:

That is 36 correct out of 47 or less than 77%. Not great. But there is some silver (or, at least, grey) lining. Normally the independents are hard to predict: they can come and go without warning, with no regular polling available and campaigns limited to individual seats making them very hard to research. Yet of the 15 lower house independent candidates, and with five seats previously held by independents, I managed to predict every single one. That's something of an accomplishment.

Additionally, and now famously, Xenophon's SA-Best party dramatically underperformed compared to expectations. On the numbers, I had 7 seats going to SA-Best but I did also say

My gut says SA-Best might get 3 seats at most, and the others go to the Libs

 I had no statistical basis for this, so didn't bother to specify which of the seven I would give to the Libs; that said, the Liberal party won every one of the SAB-predicted seats so it wouldn't have mattered. Going on my assumption four of those would be won by the Libs raises my hit rate to 40/47 or a respectable 85%. If my prediction that any possible SAB seat lost would be picked up by the Liberals was extended to all seven seats for a standard 2-party dominated election I would have scored 43/47 or 91%.

The other four are Adelaide, Giles, King and Mawson. Two were predicted for Labor and won by the Liberals, and the other two predicted for the Liberals and won by Labor. As a result, my prediction without SA-Best would have been ALP 19: LIB 25: IND 3--the actual result. That's a (rather fudged) 100%. Then again a recount in Adelaide is looking like it might actually pass to the ALP and if so: "Yay! Another seat right!" but also "There goes my post-hoc 100%"

So despite the rather poor result this election, in a race without Xenophon (assuming that did not shift preference flows etc), this would have been a solid result.

Thanks, Obama! Nick!

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

So I didn't make any predictions for the LegCo due to time constraints. That said, I think it's worth checking in on since I actually prefer voting for upper houses where there is a diversity of great and not-at-all-great candidates to balance.

Newspoll had the vote split as follows 2 days before the election: ALP 31: LIB 34: SAB 17: GRN 8: Other 10 (I am ignoring the ReachTEL poll of the same day since it only considered ALP, LIB and SAB with no GRN or Others). There were 11 seats to fill, and they need to reach the Droop Quota: that's (Total votes/( Seats+1))+1 or just over 1/12th (8.333%) of the vote in this case. So logically you'd expect ALP to win 3, LIB to win 4, SAB to win 2, with the last two up for grabs. GRN are a rounding error away from getting one too. So We could have predicted ALP 3: LIB 4: SAB 2: GRN 1. There is 10 sitting with the Others, but they are too diverse to likely scratch a seat together and it would be impossible to pick which party to give it to (possibly Dignity, based on their past election). Alternatively, The residual votes after the assigned Quotas would look something like ALP 6: LIB 0.333: SAB 0.333. The chance of far left and far right minor parties cooperating enough to outperform the ALP at that stage would have been unthinkable given the absence of preference tickets in modern voting. So the final prediction (postdiction?) would have to be ALP 4: LIB 4: SAB 2: GRN 1.

And that's exactly what the results came out as.

HOLY BY-ELECTION, BATMAN!

And lastly, of course, I did not make a prediction for the much-discussed Batman by-election which gripped most of the nation while SA was voting locally. I didn't even have time to predict the SA LegCo, so what do you expect?

The 2016 election had the ALP hold off the greens with 51% of the vote, 2-party preferred. Polling from February was predicting an ALP win of 53%, the only poll on the by-election's Wikipedia page. Off of that, I should have suspected the ALP would hold the seat, but many commentators were predicting a Greens victory. As a result, Labor's eventual victory is being hailed as a terrible loss for the Greens, but I don't see it that way at all.

There was a recorded swing to the ALP. But then the Liberal party didn't even run, and I don't see those voters (some of whom may have lingered briefly with the conservatives or other minor parties) flowing to the Greens very much. Then again, their eventual landing with the ALP would have happened after the Libs dropped out in 2016. So, yes, there was a swing against the Greens. On the other hand, the Greens still picked up almost 40% of the primary vote. That's not a bad result for a party often left in distant third place.

Staying in the lines

Been a while since I did one of these, but here is the old map-and-chart combo for those playing along at home during the election broadcast. Colour pencils not included.

SA-Best Guesses

Alright, it's election day tomorrow. We all know why we're here. Let's do some number crunching.

First up, here is the pendulum after the last boundary redistribution:

This redistribution put four Labor-held seats (Colton, Elder, Mawson and Newland) into the nominally Liberal range. Seats italicised are those that will deserve special consideration later on, either because the incumbent does not match the nominal 2-party margin (the four previous seats and those held by independents) or because they are on The Poll Bludger's list of possible wins for SA-Best. Two by-elections in SA (in the seats of Fisher and Davenport) also mean that applying the swing from 2014 (rather than the by-election year) may be flawed. Davenport already deserves special consideration as a possible SA-Best win; Fisher is no longer a seat. So let's just apply the predicted swing across the board to get us started.

A Swing and a Prayer

The interesting thing about this election is that, compared to 2014, both Labor and Liberal have reduced their primary vote (down 5.8 and 12.8 percentage points respectively, according to Newspoll). This is largely due to the rise of SA-Best--indeed polls have stopped publishing 2 party preferred data.

So in all non-italicised seats (where SA-Best is unlikely to win, and preferences will flow as normal), I have applied a slight swing calculated as follows:

In 2014 the 2pp vote was 47% ALP: 53% LIB
Xenophon votes generally split roughly 60:40 to the Liberals (Source: p.7)
Numbers on Greens votes are harder to find, but lets assume 90:10 to the ALP
'Others' are ignored as unpredictable
Using these ratios the latest polling of: ALP 30; LIB 32; SAB 21; GRN 7
Becomes: ALP 44.3; LIB 45.3
adjusted to sum to 100, this is rounded to: 49:51
And this equates to a 2% swing to the ALP

Applied to all 2-party contests the pendulum then looks something like:

Interestingly, this slight shift to the ALP is nowhere near enough to bring the four re-drawn seats that shifted to the Liberals back to Labor, nor does it change any seat except that it brought the surprise 2010 Lib win in Adelaide back to a tossup. Then again, the margin of error on these polls is around 2 to 3 percentage points, which would put Black and Gibson in doubt too. Let's add them to the list in need of review:

Adelaide, Black, Chaffey, Colton, Davenport, Elder, Finniss, Florey, Frome, Gibson, Giles, Hammond, Hartley, Heysen, Kavel, Mawson, Morialta, Morphett, Mt Gambier, Narungga, Newland, Stuart and Waite.

Holy Pebble-counters, that's a lot!

To have 23 uncertain seats from 47 (literally just under 50%) at this stage is a record for me. Let's look at the independents first:

Florey: Florey is a safe ALP seat on the numbers and by history. The current incumbent, Frances Bedford, was an ALP member until she became an independent last year. The biggest challenge to an independent is getting enough name recognition to beat the major parties, and sometimes being an incumbent is not enough. In Bedford's case, this hurdle appears to have been mounted; a poll in 2017 had her primary vote ahead of the ALP, and I suspect this has only grown with the exodus of support from the major parties.
Predict: IND

Frome: In 2014, Geoff Brock's primary vote almost out-polled Liberals and Labor combined; again, the hurdle of recognition has been beaten, although there may be some backlash against the candidate in the conservative seat for working with Labor.
Predict: IND


Morphet: Duncan McFetridge has had an unfortunate run of luck, first losing his shadow ministry, then losing preselection to run as a Liberal. As a sitting MP, he will have some traction but it will be an uphill battle to keep this staunch Liberal seat:
Predict: LIB

Mt Gambier: Despite controversy surrounding the financial actions of former-Liberal, independent incumbent Troy Bell, there was polling about a month back showing he would easily win the seat and I don't expect this to have changed. This seat was also listed as a potential Xenophon win, but this has been accounted for in the polls.
Predict: IND

Waite: Safe liberal seat, former Liberal leader Martin Hamilton-Smith became an independent shortly after the last election and notoriously assisted the ALP as a minister this term. Some retribution is to be expected here. This seat has also been singled out as a strong chance for SA-Best. Support for Xenophon in the seat during the federal election was around 23.5%, This is less than the primary vote for the ALP in 2014, though no doubt some of that will be eroded to SA-Best. It is therefore likely that SA-Best will beat the ALP, inherit a lot of preferences and may have a shot at Waite. I will tentatively give this seat to SA-Best, though a Liberal victory would not be surprising. My expectations are the Hamilton-Smith preferences will back SA-Best too, as conservatives disillusioned with the Liberal party, but we will have to wait (or Waite) and see...
Predict: SAB

Next, let's look at the other seats where SAB might do well. There are 13 of these, and support for SA-Best is hard to measure from the polling due to their new arrival in the stats. My back-of-the-envelope methods, then, are this:

The federal election was held in July 2016. At that time state polling included SAB support at 16pp. Federal results in these seats were over 23%. Since then, SAB primary vote statewide has improved by 5, or 31%. To be conservative, we will add a flat 5pp to the federal results (by which The Poll Bludger identified these as hot SAB seats) and compare that to the pendulum (ignoring the Davenport by-election) adjusted by the recent polling for the rise of SA-Best (ALP x83.8%; LIB x71.4%).

The test here is to see whether SA-Best can beat at least one major party so it can collect the flow-on preferences. The answer is yes in the case of Chaffey, Finniss, Hammond, Heysen and Kavel (parts of federal Mayo, which elected Xenophon's only lower house candidate in 2016) and Stuart. I will tentatively give these to SA-Best and the others to the major parties. Interestingly, this means Xenophon's own seat of Hartley is given to the LIBs.

Adelaide, Black, Colton and Elder. Just quickly: Adelaide has a strong ALP history; Paul Caica has held Colton since 2002, when Labor first got in, but his primary vote margin over the Libs was 0.1% and 3% 2pp--with the dropping of Labor's popularity and a tough redistribution I'm calling this LIB; Elder has been ALP since 1997, but the redistribution was rough--nominally LIB; Black used to be Mitchell which was all over the place historically so dart-at-a-dartboard this is LIB too.

Final Prediction:

 

ALP 19; LIB 18; SA-Best 7; IND 3. That's by the numbers, at least. My gut says SA-Best might get 3 seats at most, and the others go to the Libs giving them 22. I also feel the Indpendents and Xenophon will back the Libs to form minority government either way.