Oz Politics Blog

Before it hit the self-destruct button, one of the secrets of success for the Australian Democrats was its capacity to attract a substantially increased vote in the Senate compared with the House of Representatives. The party’s psephologist, John Cherry, called this increased vote the Senate uplift factor. There are some interesting stories in the Senate uplift factors for 2004, especially when compared with 2001 and 1998.

2004 Federal Election

2001 Federal Election

1998 Federal Election

Liberals for Forests wins the uplift factor prize for 2004. For every primary vote Liberals for Forests got in the House of Representatives they multiplied it by just over 13 primary votes in the Senate. While some micro parties (not listed above) achieved a higher uplift factor, they did much poorer in their total number of Senate votes. Of the 107,130 Senate votes for Liberals for Forests in 2004, 55,170 came from Victoria. This was down on the more than 70,000 Victorian votes cast in 2001, but then the party held the donkey vote winning first column position. The other big supporters of Liberals for Forests in 2004 were New South Wales (21,179), Queensland (22,283) and Western Australia (5680). The Victorian success for Liberals for Forests in 2004 is particularly remarkable as the party had no House of Representatives candidates in Victoria. Liberals for Forests may be able to achieve a higher Senate vote in the next election by increasing its presence at the polling booth with more candidates in the House of Representatives.

Whereas the Liberals for Forests won the uplift factor prize, the loser was the new party for 2004: Family First. Family First only managed to translate 90 per cent of its House of Representatives vote into a Senate vote of 210,567. Family First is not likely to do as favourably in the exchange of preferences for the next election, so it will need to boost its uplift factor. It might learn how to do this from the other Christian party: the Christian Democrats (also known as Call to Australia and the Fred Nile Group). While Family First out polled the Christian Democrats in 2004, the Christian Democrats have increased their vote from 123 thousand in 1998, to 130 thousand in 2001, to 141 thousand in 2004. More importantly, the Christian Democrats have achieved a Senate uplift factor around 2 at each of these three elections. For every vote they got in the House of Representatives they received two votes in the Senate. If Family First could achieve an uplift factor of 2 it might become a big league player in future Senate elections.

The big vote improver over the past three Federal elections has been the Greens. In round terms, it has increased its Senate primary vote from 300 thousand in 1998, to 575 thousand in 2001, to 915 thousand in 2004. However, at each of these election it failed to achieve a significant uplift over its House of Representatives vote.

The big vote decliners over the period have been One Nation and the Australian Democrats.

One Nation’s Senate vote fell from 1 million in 1998, to 640 thousand in 2001 to just over 200 thousand in 2004 (although you could add a further 100 thousand if you count the votes Pauline Hanson got as an independent in Queensland). Surprisingly, as One Nation has lost its share of the Senate vote, it has managed to improve its uplift factor from 1.08 to 1.29 to 1.48.

The Australian Democrats had a similar experience in respect of its primary Senate vote. Its Senate vote fell from just under 1 million in 1998, to 840 thousand in 2001, to 250 thousand in 2004. However its uplift factor has oscillated from 1.66 to 1.36 to 1.73. The Australian Democrats may have a better uplift factor than the Greens because of the “keep the bastards honest” role it cast for itself.

Of the two major parties, the Coalition has managed to retain almost all of its House of Representatives vote in the Senate, particularly in 2001 and 2004. Labor, on the other hand, lost between 5 and 8 per cent of its primary vote at each election. With the state quota for three seats being 43 per cent, the Coalition is much better placed to win a majority of seats with a national Senate primary vote of 45 per cent compared with Labor’s 35 per cent.