Lee Rhiannon on Greens Results and Preferences
>How Howard won control of the Senate with Labor and Democratpreference deals and how the Greens fared in the 2004 election
>will be one of odious preference deals that have delivered the Howard
>Greens NSW MP
>The 2004 election memory for the Victorian ALP and the Democrats
government control of the Senate.
>First candidate winning the last Senate seat instead of the Greens.
>In Victoria Labor and the Democrats are responsible for the Family
Family First received preferences from both Labor and the Democrats,
who have effectively delivered control of the Senate to the
conservative side of politics. The Greens polled 8.65% of the Senate
vote, four times more than the 1.9% of the vote Family First picked
>flows from Labor and Democrat. In SA Family First look like gaining
>In South Australia Family First also received similar preference
Democrat preferences, which means Family First would be in front of
the Greens and the Greens could not leapfrog Labor. Labor looks like
winning the last seat on Greens preferences. The Democrats preference
decision is likely to cost the Greens another Senate seat.
>increase of nearly 3% on the 2001 vote. Despite this, Labor looks
>In NSW the Greens polled a solid 7.16% of the Senate vote, an
like winning the last Senate seat in NSW on the Greens' preferences.
The scenario may have been reversed if the Democrats had preferenced
the Greens instead of Glenn Druery from Liberals for Forests and Fred
Nile's Christian Democrats.
>in front of Labor. Labor also directed preferences to Liberals for
>Without Democrat preferences, the Greens in NSW were unable to get
Forests and then one-third to Fred Nile.
>seats with just 45,260 votes? In short, because virtually every other
>Tim Colebatch in the Age (11.10.04) summed it up:
>"How can Steve Fielding of Family First win one of Victoria's Senate
party - including Labor and the Democrats - preferred Family First to
the Greens and practically every other party."
>collapsed in this election. The Australian Greens gained a record
>And don't believe the pundits alleging that the Greens vote
vote of 7.5% national average in the Senate, an increase of about
2.5% on our 2001 vote.
>(Tasmania) and Rachel Siewert (WA) joining Kerry Nettle and Bob
>We now look like having four senators with Christine Milne
Brown, and there is a chance Drew Hutton from Queensland will join
them. Yes we lost Cunningham, but without proportional representation
it is hard for a non-major party to hold onto a lower house seat in a
>20% in 3 seats (Cunningham, Grayndler and Sydney). At the 2001
>The Greens polled in double figures in 14 NSW seats, including over
election, there were only 3 seats in double figures.
>the six North Shore seats (Bennelong, Berowra, Bradfield, Mackellar,
>The Greens vote increased significantly on Sydney's North Shore. In
North Sydney and Warringah), the Greens polled an average of 12%.
This compares with 5.9% in the 2001 election.
>In 12 Western Sydney seats in 2001, we polled an average of 3.7%.
>In western Sydney and rural NSW the Greens are winning more votes.
This time, that average is 5.9%. Our rural vote went from an average
of 4.2% in 2001 to 6.1% this time.
>mandate - he won 46.3% of the primary vote.
>And remember to reject any talk that Howard and the Coalition have a