Talk of an illegitimate Gillard Government is just not legit!

#ausvotes

The Liberal party, distraught with the decision of the Independent's on who should govern Australia, are telling anyone that will listen that the Gillard Government is illegitimate and unstable.  George Brandis claims that the "most Australians wanted a change of government. Your government has as much legitimacy as the Pakistani cricket team."  A very funny comment but it’s not accurate.

Talk back radio is also in uproar.  Former Howard Government Minister turned fill in talk back host Gary Hardgrave told listeners last week that more people voted for the Coalition and that they should be in power.

But is this actually true? 

The arguments for these assertions are:

1. The ALP received less first preference votes than the Coalition
2. The ALP are losing the two party preferred vote (or at least they were last week)
3. The Coalition won more seats in the House of Representatives

 

Based on these three criteria the arguments made by the Coalition and their supported are right and also wrong. 

It is true that that the Coalition received more first preference votes than Labor.  However, when you break it down, the Coalition is made up of four separate groups.  The liberal Party, the National Party, the Queensland LNP and WA National (who claimed to be independent) Tony Crook.  The Coalition believe they are one group based on their Coalition agreement.  I guess that is fair.  But why then aren’t Labor and The Greens allowed to do the same.  Labor and the Greens have now formed an alliance not based solely on preference deals at election time.  Looking at the figures (which are not yet complete):

	First preference Vote
Australian Labor Party	4,711,369
The Greens	1,459,002
	6,170,371
Liberal	3,777,391
Liberal National Party of Queensland	1,130,525
The Nationals	462,391
	5,370,307

As at 15/9/10

Based on this Labor/the Greens have it won hands down.  But this doesn’t even take into account the 861, 724 people who voted for one of the other parties/independents at this election.   This is why the 2PP method is employed in Australia.  (Incidentally the UK is talking of introducing this method rather than their first past the post method)

On the second point, the 2PP vote is fluctuating daily.  Just last week the Coalition were ahead, but now Labor is back in front.  But the AEC website still doesn’t provide a clear picture of where the 2PP will land once counting stops. 

Paul Howes commented in the Sydney Morning Herald that:

The Australian Electoral Commission has the two-party vote neck and neck between Labor and the Coalition, but this count doesn't include the eight or so seats that are not contests between the major parties - those between Labor and the Greens or the Liberals and an independent.

The bulk of these seats are Labor, and once they're added to the final two-party vote when the counting is finished, Labor will have a clear majority.

Don't just take my word for it; just about every electoral expert, including Antony Green, agrees.

Antony Green makes his assessment of the AEC 2PP figures here.

That the 2-party preferred total displayed on the AEC's website is meaningless can be seen if you tally the members elected in these 142 electorates. You get Coalition 72, Labor 70. Missing are four Independents, a Green, a WA National and two Labor MPs.

The reality of forming government in the newly elected House of Representatives depends on those eight elected members, but the AEC's total of 2-party preferred vote currently excludes all votes cast in these eight electorates, the eight electorates whose elected members will determine who forms government.

Which illustrates why the AEC's incomplete 2-party preferred vote is pointless.

 

The third argument that the Coalition won more seats than Labor is true.  But this is not the basis on which elections in Australia are won or lost.  It is a complete distortion of how our system of Government is constituted.  Our system is one where the party who controls a majority of the votes in the House or Representatives forms Government.  This is the system and it may seem to have flaws at times, but generally the people who think it is flawed are on the losing side of a close election.  One like we saw this year. 

There is no easy way to decide on who forms Government.  No way that everyone will agree on.  The only way we can do this is by electing representatives who then vote according to their own beliefs at the time.  That may be along party lines or if independent this may be which ever way they choose.  That is what the Greens and the Independents did.  If there respective communities disagree with their choice I guess they will lose their seat at the next election.  That is the basis of our democracy.

To float statements like “utterly without mandate” or “illegitimate” are wrong and contemptuous of our entire system of Government.  The Gillard Government was formed according to the correct principles and conventions of the Westminster system.  They have a mandate to run the country.  If the Australian people disagree, they will surely change it at the next election.  That’s democracy!