When I was a young and foolish teenager (as opposed to being a late middle aged fool as I am right now), I felt an enthusiasm for the rather quixotic Joh For PM campaign (an early political intervention by Clive Palmer), and indeed a deep fondness for Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, the union bashing, lefty head-kicking, premier of Queensland.
Even now, despite all the evidence to the contrary, I still find it very hard to believe that Sir Joh was as crooked as most people believe.
After all, when all the universities in Queensland installed condom vending machines in their toilets in mid 1987, this matter somehow came up for discussion at Queensland state cabinet, and Sir Joh asked what a condom was. When the purpose of this item was explained to him (does anyone ever still use the slang term ‘franger’ anymore???), he expressed a shocked disgust and ordered their immediate removal. Hence I find it hard to accept that someone with that sort of naivety would be leading a government profiting from illegal brothels in Fortitude Valley.
After his reluctant resignation from the Premiership in late 1987 due to the latter issues, rather than the former decision, he decided to retire from parliament and a by-election was held for his seat in early 1988.
The result was that someone from the Citizens’ Electoral Council, a rather odd ball right wing movement, was able to win the seat in front of the National Party candidate.
That did spook people at the time, but was just a precursor to the electoral annihilation of the National Party in the 1989 state government, something which was, if I am being honest, richly deserved.
The victory of One Nation at the weekend, in the Farrer By-Election, forced by the resignation of the risibly ineffectual former Federal Opposition Leader Sussan Ley, has caused shockwaves across the Australian polity.
In winning over 40% of the primary vote to convincingly see off all other contenders, and cause something like a 30% swing against the Liberal Party who have held the seat for some 80 years, One Nation has made history by winning its first ever House of Representatives seat in an actual contest (Barnaby Joyce recently changing parties and Pauline Hanson winning a seat as a disendorsed Liberal in 1996 don’t count).
What does this actually mean? Some are seeing this as a tipping point (along with the recent South Australian State Election), where One Nation is going to replace the Liberals (and Nationals) as the popularly supported party of the conservative side of politics in Australia.
I am skeptical about calling that as such just yet: aside from the fact that I have never seen and still do not see One Nation now as a responsible protest vote, let alone as a credible and viable potential party of government [If you want to know why, please refer to my recent post about their ‘print more money and give it to the farmers’ finance policies.], there is an abundance of recent political electoral history to examine first.
Aside from that 1988 By-Election to replace Sir Joh, there are other anomalies. Let’s take the 1998 Queensland State Election, where One Nation outpolled the Nationals and Liberals and were able to take 11 out of the 89 seats in the Queensland Parliament. That was a much more significant outcome than the recent South Australian State Election, yet one which One Nation was unable of building upon, and from which One Nation then quickly imploded.
Then there have been various more recent Queensland State Elections, where first the incumbent ALP and then in the next election the incumbent LNP were virtually obliterated by their opponents. Not really One Nation related matters, but instances where significant electoral volatility and voter disillusionment caused significant change from previous outcomes.
And we have had various independents of different colours winning seats mostly off the Coalition in recent years, although we have had several doing so since at least the demise of the political career of current Teal Allegra Spender’s Liberal MP father John Spender in 1990.
With sufficient resources and voter disengagement, it is doubtful that any seat is absolutely safe, particularly if the candidate for the incumbent party is not appealing (eg Kristina Keneally, arguing the most electorally repulsive person in Australian political history).
And protest voting, in Queensland, in the countryside, and in by-elections, is a very normal state of affairs.
I hope, given that I prefer the relative responsibility of the Liberals over the boganesque chaos of One Nation, that this is only a flash in the pan.
But I could be wrong. I am after all, a fool in late middle age.
So… what could make this different and mean a permanent turn away from the Liberals and Nationals and to One Nation?
One new aspect to One Nation is that they are much disciplined than they have been in the past, with Pauline Hanson being better advised and using social media much more effectively than the other parties. She has mastered the weapon of ridicule in a way not seen since Keating, and before him, Whitlam. Recent defectors like Barnaby Joyce, despite his indiscretions with drinking and family values, add credibility – he was, after all, Deputy Prime Minister.
Another is that for some reason, there is now a mass protest movement behind One Nation. All the working class battlers who feel their standard of living and opportunity are being threatened by current policies are protesting against the major parties and deserting them. Similarly, people I speak to who are lifelong Liberal voters are openly expressing their patience with their part of choice has run out.
Liberal Party insiders are getting scared – the intelligent ones are starting to look at the patterns of political history which predate the creation of the Liberal Party in 1944 and starting to see instability. The rest are looking at whether there are better opportunities elsewhere.
For the first time in many years, I pulled out the reading list from a course I did during my part time Honours year in 1992: PLT 420 Electoral Behaviour. In this course, which I have kept at the back of my mind for more than thirty years, we read about the theories trying to explain why people vote the way that do, and why they tend to stay loyal to their party of choice, election after election.
Much of the reading list featured academics who argue that voter loyalty is not immutable – that there are times and reasons why a large number of voters can and will en masse abandon their party of choice for either an existing party or for a new party entirely. The 1932 US Presidential Election was one such election (particularly in that the blacks for the first time abandoned the Republican Party for the Democrats, marking the end of abolition as an electorally relevant issue), and I think that as we were studying the course, the postwar Italian political consensus unravelled to the point that I wrote my essay for that course on that issue.
There are still two years until the next Federal Election. The Victorian State Election may be a test in the meantime, as may be other elections that will occur between now and then. Circumstances may change. But I am unwilling to make the call that One Nation is going to attract a major voter realignment in its own favour just yet.
Lost For Words! 