Countries pulled right and left at election time

28 February 2023

Most Australians have mixed feelings about elections. Generally they’re the only things that make them take notice of politics, and even when they need to vote at election time, they’re not necessarily doing so with a great deal of enthusiasm. But sometimes they feel inspired when they vote.

At least they enjoy the freedom to vote. And perhaps rarely have there been instances of elections being fiddled with, especially when it comes to people being prevented from voting or brutal forces rigging with results to ensure their preferred outcomes.

The same can’t be said of many other countries. In a world of differences between people and their governments, many countries effectively have no democracy, or even prevent voting entirely.

Despite these flaws, every year we see democracy appearing to play out in one country after another in one way or another. For sure, elections in other countries can be suspicious, but most of the time, people enjoy the freedom to vote, and to turf out their leaders if they wish.

Theoretically at least, it matters little who serves as President or Prime Minister of any country, with the freedom to change one’s mind so precious and important. And things will change over time.

Last year, Anthony Albanese became one of several new PMs to emerge, as voters across Australia elected him amid an environment of strong dislike for the incumbent PM. Few Australians look like wishing for a different result to have taken place. The year after next will be when Australians have the opportunity to either endorse their PM or elect a different one.

And of course, there were changes along similar lines elsewhere in the world.

In the Asia-Pacific, there were some changes. Fiji had an election featuring two leaders who’d taken power in their country previously by military coups. Papua New Guinea had an election which saw its incumbent PM returned, but there were violent scenes at times during the contest. Malaysia had an election with an unclear result, and finally a former prisoner was made PM. The Philippines had an election to replace its outgoing incumbent President, and the incumbent’s deputy ended up losing to a challenger whose father was the country’s dictator long ago.

There was also action on the Korean Peninsula. Nothing happened in North Korea, with democracy non-existent in a military regime there. But in South Korea, with a liberal incumbent stepping down as President, voters elected a conservative replacement, amid an apparent backlash against feminism and perceptions of women getting opportunities on the basis of gender.

In the Middle East, for the umpteenth time in recent years, voters in Israel had an election, because parties were failing to achieve workable majorities or alliances. This time they saw a controversial former PM come back to power. But how long the PM lasts might be anyone’s guess.

In Africa, there was a bit of action. One of its most populous countries, Kenya, saw its incumbent President retire and endorse a former rival as a successor, but the incumbent’s former deputy ended up winning the top job. Another populous country, Angola, saw its incumbent President hold power and continue nearly fifty years of governing by the President’s party, but only after a close contest.

In Europe, there were changes in direction. France returned its incumbent President, but this result was more about rejecting a challenger who was more right-wing. Hungary saw voters return their right-wing PM. Italy saw a right-wing PM emerge, as did Sweden, while Denmark saw a left-wing PM emerge. This showed how much the political scene in the mix of Europe differs. This continent is thought to represent a bit of a picture of countries being pulled left and right at election time.

In the Americas, two populous countries had left-wingers winning presidential elections. Colombia turned left after its incumbent right-wing President retired, but Brazil had its incumbent right-wing President refusing to accept defeat and supporters staged a riot as a result.

But a lot of attention was paid to the United States of America, where a congressional election took place. Although not directly impacting on the incumbent President, it was a sign of what the voters thought of the incumbent. In the end, the incumbent’s party only narrowly lost control of the House of Representatives, but it was tipped to be worse, while it kept control of the Senate.

This year sees more elections worldwide. I consider the elections of note to be taking place in New Zealand, Thailand, Turkey, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Greece, and Argentina. But even while no election of note takes place in the US, much attention will remain on a poll happening there next year.

More new leaders worldwide will emerge from elections before this year concludes.

Voter revolt’s ethnic look

26 February 2023

The Labor Party might sit pretty these days. But it’s displayed ignorance, or even arrogance, regarding some warning signs from a Federal election that it won last year. And I wonder if it’ll even notice the warning signs.

The result last year was more a rejection of the Liberal Party, and particularly of Prime Minister Scott Morrison, than a clear endorsement of the main alternative. Morrison became really unpopular, especially among voters in what’d been, normally, his party’s safest seats. The rise of Independent candidates in wealthy parts of State capital cities was typical of the unusual nature of the result – at least in terms of those whom voters endorsed.

In previous elections, Independents had taken three Liberal seats that Labor had a chance of winning. Another six Liberal seats also fell in the election last year.

The presence of the Independents disproves Labor’s claims of endorsement by voters. For sure, Labor won a very narrow majority in the House of Representatives, and didn’t need crossbench support there. But if the Independents didn’t contest the Liberal seats that they won, the Liberals would still hold them now, putting them closer to Labor.

Significantly, however, Labor had won inexplicable loss, despite its overall election victory. The safe Labor seat of Fowler, in Sydney’s south-west, fell to an Independent, in a contest that the Liberals couldn’t ever win. The story of Fowler appears similar to the stories from Liberal seats that Independents won.

Being in an area with a massive ethnic population, especially descending from Asia, rank-and-file Labor people in Fowler pushed to have a Labor candidate of Asian heritage standing. But Labor instead decided to impose one of its frontbenchers on the seat, despite the fact that the frontbencher didn’t live anywhere near the area – let alone understand it.

However, while locals might’ve been angry with Labor, they couldn’t bring themselves to switch to the Liberals. As such, Labor shouldn’t have been expected to lose.

And then up stepped Dai Le.

Born in Vietnam before arriving in Australia, Le became popular among locals, especially in the Cabramatta region, where she was elected as a local councillor. She also stood as a State election candidate. Subsequently, after Labor’s controversial decision to impose an “outsider” as its Fowler candidate, people began to look for a credible non-Liberal alternative. Then Le was encouraged to run, which she did. A massive local campaign was run to entice voters in Fowler, many of them from either Vietnam or other Asian countries, to support the popular local councillor, who could’ve been regarded as one of their own. In the end, she won the seat.

Although the win wasn’t by much, it was humiliating for Labor. Having long prided itself on an ability to appeal to ethnic minorities and communities a lot better than the Liberals could, while also often trying to paint the Liberals as “racist” white people, it felt that it “owned” the ethnic vote. But while it sometimes got candidates elected from various ethnic minorities in some contests, it didn’t necessarily choose such candidates for seats where these minorities were concentrated.

That said, I’ve seen nothing since then to suggest that Le’s success in Fowler could be repeated in other areas with big ethnic communities. It’s been said that people in ethnic groups ignore politics and just concentrate on living their lives, often just grateful for opportunities to live freely and do things in Australia that they couldn’t do in their homelands. But I can’t recall any other instances where they actively got behind individual candidates, especially of their own backgrounds, for election contests, either before or since Le won Fowler.

Mind you, while Fowler had a voter revolt, I feel that if Le didn’t stand, Labor would’ve held the seat. Neither the Liberals nor any other minor parties could’ve won it. The revolt was perhaps a one-off, in terms of someone of an ethnic background running as an Independent and winning. Voters need to feel able to support alternatives. Some might see the Fowler result as an indication of the voter revolt’s ethnic look, but for now it’s yet to clearly inspire ethnic communities elsewhere to look at putting up candidates of their own backgrounds to run against the major parties in seats where they’ve got big numbers.

Of course, we’ve got more diversity among our parliamentarians now. The Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk, descends from Poland, in eastern Europe, while Gladys Berejiklian, who was Premier of New South Wales in recent years, descends from Armenia, near the Middle East – and both were women. Who would’ve thought, a few generations ago, that women, especially of ethnic backgrounds with surnames that other people often couldn’t spell or pronounce, would become successful political leaders in Australia? They both show how much change there’s been over time. And we’ll be definitely seeing more people of different ethnic backgrounds becoming political leaders across Australia in future.

But last year’s result in Fowler shows that ethnic communities can stand up to political parties if they feel ignored, though they first need to feel inspired to do so.

Perrottet staying put as others swap seats

20 February 2023

The next State election in New South Wales will bring an unlikely “first” for Dominic Perrottet. But it has nothing to do with the fact that he goes into the election as Premier, whereas someone else had that job going into the last election, in 2019. Ironically, his little “first” comes at a time when circumstances often prompt politicians to make some changes ahead of elections.

What could this be? Well, for the first time since entering Parliament in 2011, Perrottet will recontest his seat. Incredibly, until now, he’s never stood in the same seat twice.

The irony relates to the fact that an electoral redistribution took place in NSW following the 2019 election. Usually taking place every ten years or so, electoral redistributions are necessary to give electorates as near as possible to an equal number of voters. With populations growing in some areas and declining in others, redistributions factor in both actual and forecast population change. But often they also prompt politicians to contest other electorates, especially if their present electorates are abolished. Indeed the next election in NSW sees several politicians making such changes.

Admittedly, Perrottet doesn’t really have any reason to change seats now. He currently holds the seat of Epping, which isn’t exactly a marginal seat that he could lose – the sort of reasoning which also prompts politicians to make changes before elections. But still it seems unusual that he’d be staying put in a seat at a time when other politicians play seat switcheroo, especially as he’s changed seats at all past elections that he’s contested.

With the Liberal Party seeking a fourth term in power in the election, it’s got a number of its MPs contesting other seats. Although the redistribution saw some seats disappear while others emerged, most of the affected MPs were simply able to go into new seats near where their existing seats were lost.

While the redistribution didn’t impact on the Labor Party too much, it had the awkward situation of a sitting MP having initially nowhere to go after a seat abolition. Possibly only a change of mind resolved the matter.

Unlike Liberal MPs who managed able to find new seats close to abolished seats, Labor MP Jihad Dib was initially stranded when his seat of Lakemba was abolished. He was finally moved to the seat of Bankstown, but Labor was probably likely to force several MPs to swap seats until Tania Mihailuk, the incumbent Bankstown MP, made a sudden departure to the crossbench. She later chose to leave Bankstown and run for the Upper House with a minor party.

Going back to Perrottet, he entered Parliament at an election in 2011, winning the seat of Castle Hill after veteran Liberal MP Michael Richardson retired. He changed seats in 2015, moving to Hawkesbury, in a swap with Liberal MP Ray Williams, who’d won that seat eight years earlier. There was an electoral redistribution ahead of the election in 2015, which was the most recent until the one ahead of next month’s election.

In 2019, Perrottet changed seats again, moving to Epping. Out of the seat went Liberal MP Damien Tudehope, who’d only won it in 2015. He ended up in the Upper House.

Now Perrottet, who became Premier less than two years ago after the shock resignation of the relatively popular Gladys Berejiklian, will recontest a seat for the first time since entering Parliament. As noted earlier, it’s rather unusual for him to be staying put, after changing seats at every previous election, as others change seats at this election.

The Liberals look like struggling to win the election itself. Governments often struggle to win three terms in power – let alone four terms, which the Liberals are seeking when voters in NSW head to the polls next month. But Perrottet seems quite popular, which makes critics reluctant to write him off, even though the odds are against him. Victory would do much for both them and him, regardless of which seat he represents.

Another verdict from Aston voters looming

17 February 2023

Voters in part of Melbourne’s south-east will soon head to the polls. Barely a year has passed since they, and every other voter in Australia, passed judgement in a Federal election, and now they find themselves having to go back.

The Federal election, of last May, saw a massive rejection of the Liberal Party, which was defeated in a big way. It lost many seats, to a mixture of the Labor Party and the Greens and a number of Independents. Now, with a new leader and an opponent in power who appears more popular than before, it faces a significant test with a pending by-election.

But the by-election looks like representing a verdict on various things, beyond just whoever holds the seat where it’s taking place. And it’s also potentially a case of history revisited.

With the resignation of Liberal MP and former minister Alan Tudge, there’ll soon be a chance for voters to pass judgement on not just the Liberals but also on Labor.

The by-election will take place in Aston, a seat in the outer south-east of Melbourne, which Tudge won in 2010. The Liberals lost a number of seats around Melbourne last year, with Tudge among only a handful of Liberal MPs in that area surviving.

With Tudge now departing, the resulting by-election raises several questions.

Will Aston voters turf the Liberals out, in protest over going back to the polls as a result of their sitting MP’s reluctance to stick around until the next general election, due in 2025?

Will they swing back to the Liberals with the unpopular Scott Morrison no longer Liberal leader?

Are they at least tolerant, if not possibly approving, of Peter Dutton as Liberal leader, given that Dutton has been unpopular among Victorian voters?

Will they approve of the Labor Government and Anthony Albanese as Prime Minister, given that things have been tough of late and look like getting tougher?

Basically, if the Liberals lose Aston, Dutton may look like a dead man walking. If they hold with any kind of swing, they and Dutton should feel encouraged.

In terms of things getting tough, people have long been complaining about the cost of living, with prices of pretty much everything going up. They really notice when costs rise in relation to food, electricity, petrol, and mortgage repayments or rent. These have all gone up, and will go up more.

The Aston by-election will show whether or not voters in outer suburbs of major cities in particular approve, or least understand, whatever Albanese and Labor are doing about tackling these costs.

A swing to Labor, if not a win, might imply that voters see Albanese and Labor as trying whatever they can to tackle these costs – though such efforts take time to bear fruit. A swing against Labor might imply that they have major doubts.

In terms of history repeating, Aston was previously the scene of a by-election which represented some kind of verdict on the Liberals, back in 2001, when John Howard was Prime Minister.

Concerns over the cost of living were hurting the Liberals back then, and in previous months they were thumped in two State elections and had lost one of their safest Federal seats in a by-election, though this by-election came after a dumped minister chose to quit Parliament promptly.

The Aston by-election of 2001 followed the sudden death of Liberal MP Peter Nugent. Probably stung by election results elsewhere, Howard made some policy changes to tackle voters’ concerns about the cost of living. The by-election came soon after, and the Liberals managed to hold Aston, despite a small swing to Labor.

This was a turning point for the Liberals and Howard. Aston wasn’t as marginal as various other seats, so it wouldn’t really have been a target seat for Labor. But somehow the Liberals were able to arrest the slide against them from earlier in the year. From here, they went on to win an election which came before the end of that year.

Often by-elections are signs of how voters feel about governments, and their opponents. As such, the pending by-election in Aston will be no exception. But many Liberals will recall their success in holding Aston at a previous by-election, which in many people’s minds they should’ve lost, and they might well pray that, with another verdict from Aston voters looming, history will repeat.

As for Labor, it won Aston in 1984 and 1987, but lost it in 1990 and hasn’t won it since.

Plenty of questions linger over this pending by-election. A win for Labor could finish off Dutton, who has never been popular in Victoria, but a swing to the Liberals would give hope to both them and him, while Labor would know that it must do a better job in governing. Voters in Aston soon get to show what they think of both sides, and what voters in outer suburbs of big cities elsewhere around Australia might also be thinking at the moment.