Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Vic Libs smart anti-Greens preference strategy

By Graham Young - posted Wednesday, 24 November 2010


Labor will probably win the Victorian election, but they could have won by more if the Liberals had preferenced the Greens.

Most political commentators were struggling to understand why the Liberals have decided against preferencing the Greens.

The mainstream argument runs that by directing preferences to the Greens in seats like Melbourne, the Liberals would have created a problem for Labor on its left flank, forcing it to run two campaigns. They would also have cost Labor a number of seats (some seemed to think up to four) which could have gone to the Greens, and possibly others in blue collar conservative areas as they adopted more left-wing policies to counter the Greens, thus losing voters in the centre.

Advertisement

This sort of "fronts" analysis might work well in analysing military battles, but it doesn't really cut it in politics.

I'll admit to initially being puzzled about the decision myself as I bought the fronts argument.

I also had another reason for thinking that it would be smart politics.

While the Liberals can't win the Labor seats where the Greens are competitive, they can determine who can. This gives them a long-term strategic advantage.

Normally these seats are reserved for Labor high-flyers and talent. By handing them to the Greens the Liberals deny the Labor Party opportunities to inject strong talent into the parliament.

Then if the Liberals switch preferences back to Labor the election after next, they also deny the Greens the opportunity to build a strong presence in the lower house.

Advertisement

So directing preferences to the Greens could indeed change the nature of the Greens/Labor relationship making it more difficult for Labor to hold onto seats on its left and its right.

So why did the Liberals forego these advantages?

Some commentators have decided that the Liberals are incompetent while Barrie Cassidy in this piece puts it down to an ideological position, and Ted Baillieu's inherent honesty.

The minute I looked at our polling I understood what was going on.

In line with the quantitative polls ours suggests that the Liberals are close to winning. They need a 6.5% swing to win the election and when you analyse voters by how they intend to vote this election against how they voted last election that looks possible.

The table below shows that analysis, although you have to be careful to take into account that percentages shown are for just those intending to vote in a particular way, not the entire sample. So 50% of a group representing 14% is only 7% of the total sample.

Vote last election
Vote this election Greens Independent Labor Liberal Total
Greens 46% 1% 52% 1% 100%
Independent 0% 20% 80% 0% 100%
Labor 16% 0% 84% 0% 100%
Liberal 2% 2% 17% 79% 100%
Grand Total 27% 2% 52% 20% 100%

17% of those who intend to vote Liberal this election voted Labor last election. Assuming all other things are equal, and that the Liberal Primary vote is around 39% this is a swing of around 6.5%. So the Liberals are close.

At the same time 16% of the Labor vote this time voted Greens last time, but 52% of the Greens vote was Labor four years ago.

Given the relative sizes in the votes this is more or less churning. Labor is polling somewhere around 37%, according to Newspoll and 16% of this is 6%. The Greens are polling around 14% and 52% of this is 7%.

But why have these voters changed their allegiances?

Let's look at the Labor to Liberal vote first. The responses are typical of protest votes. No-one is voting for the Liberals, they are voting against Labor. "Liberals won't win, but Labor needs a kick up the proverbial." Male, 35-44, Lawyer

Reasons for moving from Labor to Greens are often couched in terms of issues, but ultimately mostly come down to a desire to change the behaviour of the government. Some of these behaviours, such as ones to do with the environment and climate change, are not issues that the Liberals could plausibly do anything to satisfy; but others to do with public transport are.

And there is a general feeling that Labor has been in long enough, and that a strong third party can deliver a shock to the government, as well as the major party duopoly.

While it isn't stated explicitly, the basis for this surge in Greens vote has to be an expectation that they will have seats in the next parliament and will be in a position to pressure a Labor government.

The problem for the Libs is that they need some of this protest vote to come to them to get the extra that they need to turn a near loss into a win.

And how can they do this? They have to take away the potential for the Greens to hold the balance of power in the next parliament. As the Greens need Liberal preferences to win any seats, denying them those preferences has that effect.

Not only does this make would-be protest voters reconsider how they will shape the next government's agenda but it also directs the media coverage of the election back onto the battle between the two major parties, so giving the Liberals a better chance of getting their message across.

Some might object that most of these Greens voters will return to Labor because they are too far removed from the Liberals. That is a valid objection, but it fails to take into account that while the public opinion polls show the Liberals close to winning, most voters expect a Labor win.

As can be seen in the table below, even amongst Liberal voters, only 22% expect a Liberal government after the next election, while for Greens it is only 3%. So a Greens voter could safely vote Liberal to send the government a message, because they "know" that the Liberals aren't going to win.

First preference this election
Who do you expect to win? Greens Independent Labor Liberal Total
Labor 36% 25% 74% 33% 44%
Liberal 3% 0% 0% 22% 7%
Neither (Hung Parliament) 51% 50% 13% 33% 37%
Unsure 10% 25% 13% 13% 12%
Grand Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

So needing an additional one or two percent of the total vote and with seven percent having shown some tendency to want to protest by going Greens, the Liberals have done the smart thing.

Barrie Cassidy might be right. Ted Baillieu may be motivated by principle, but happily for Baillieu, in this case principle and pragmatism come to the same conclusion.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Graham Young is chief editor and the publisher of On Line Opinion. He is executive director of the Australian Institute for Progress, an Australian think tank based in Brisbane, and the publisher of On Line Opinion.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Graham Young

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Graham Young
Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy