longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

I'm not so sure. The order of election method would favour the Coalition.

ORDER OF ELECTION (states)

NSW: 3 Coalition 3 ALP, 2 Coalition, 1 ALP, 1 Grn, 1 ON, 1 LDP.
VIC: 3 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 2 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 1 Hinch.
QLD: 3 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 ON, 2 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 1 ON.
WA: 3 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 2 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 1 ON.
SA: 2 Coalition, 2 ALP, 2 NXT, 2 Coalition, 1 ALP, 1 NXT, 1 Grn, 1 FFP.
TAS: 2 Coalition, 2 ALP, 1 Grn, 1 Lambie, 2 Coalition, 3 ALP, 1 Grn.

TOTALS: 16 Coalition, 13 ALP, 3 Grn, 2 NXT, 1 ON, 1 Lambie, 12 Coalition, 11 ALP, 6 Grn, 3 ON, 1 LDP, 1 Hinch, 1 FFP, 1 NXT.

This split would strongly favour the Coalition 16-12, the ALP slightly 13-11 and heavily disadvantage the Greens 3-6. Sum of these differences is 9.

The s282 method would give Hinch and a NSW Green 6-year terms instead of a Victorian Liberal and NSW Labor candidate. This would give much fairer splits of 15-13 for the Coalition, 12-12 for ALP and 4-5 Greens. Sum of differences is 3 - clearly the s282 method is MUCH fairer.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

Hinch was elected 10th, so under the order of election mwthod he would get a 3-year term. Hinch would get a 6-year term under the recount method.

The same for the One Nation candidates - I think three of them would end up with 3-year terms under both methods. Hanson herself may get a 6-year term under both methods.

As long as most of One Nation get six I'm happy.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 6^th, 2016 at 5:49pm:


Anything that pisses off the ALP and Greens makes me happy

Pauline Hanson has secured a six-year Senate term, while Derryn Hinch has only three years before he faces re-election, under a deal struck by the major parties.

Senators are usually elected for six years at a time, but the July 2 double dissolution election put the fate of all 76 senators on the line.

A normal election sees only half the Senate face voters, with the exception of the ACT and Northern Territory, whose two senators each are up for re-election at every federal poll.

Cabinet Minister Mathias Cormann told Sky News the first six senators elected in each state will get six-year terms.

"Under the methodology used so far, the first six senators elected would get six years, whoever they are and whoever they represent," Senator Cormann said.

When pressed about whether minor party senators would be unfairly disadvantaged, he said the outcomes varied in different states.

The Opposition intends to back the move, ensuring it will be endorsed by the Senate.

Labor's Senate leader Penny Wong said: "Labor will support the Government's proposal to allocate senators' terms of office according to the order in which Senators were elected in each state."

"This is consistent with the Senate's previous practice following double dissolution elections and reflects the will of the voters."

There had been speculation about how the major parties would decide on the Senate terms.

There are two methods of allocation available — the "recount method" and the "order-elected method".

The latter method, which has been adopted by the Coalition and Labor after this year's poll, sees the first six senators elected in each state receive the longer terms, and the rest given three years in the Upper House.

In both 1998 and 2010, the Senate voted in favour of using the recount method following future double dissolutions.

That means Senator Hanson could lead her One Nation Party in the Senate for the next six years, alongside other crossbenchers, including South Australians Nick Xenophon and Stirling Griff from the Nick Xenophon Team and Tasmania's Jacqui Lambie.

Senator Hinch had pushed for the "recount method", arguing it would deliver a fairer result.

Bam wrote on Aug 6^th, 2016 at 2:23pm:


Labor would still. support the original method. The advatage to the libs of labor is slight at best and the disadvantage to both using s282 is substantial. Plus, it is in EVERYONEs benefit to get rid of Hanson and Hinch ASAP.