By Bruce Marlowe
Many voters are looking for an alternative to Labor and Liberal, but are fearful of inadvertently contributing to the return of a Liberal government. Some have been asking 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly how the preferences of the various "third parties" will flow.
Voters need to understand that their preferences are directed only in the case of above-the-line voting for the Senate. Both in below-the-line voting in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, voters are free to indicate whatever preference order they want — no matter what the party's how-to-vote card indicates.
Thus it's most important to know which way the third parties have directed their above-the-line Senate preferences. In particular, have they put the Labor before or after the Liberals?
With Australian Democrats above-the-line votes in the Senate, final preferences are divided equally between Liberal and Labor, after flowing through other "like-minded" parties, usually Greens.
In all cases above-the-line Senate voting for the various Green parties will ensure a vote for Labor before the Coalition. And in the vast majority of cases, Green how-to-vote cards for the House of Representatives will show preferences that go to Labor before the Coalition parties.
There are a few exceptions. In Queensland, in the safe Liberal seats of Moncrieff and Macpherson and notionally Liberal Fisher, the Green how-to-vote will simply tell the voters to "number every square".
In Western Australia the Greens (WA) lower house how-to-votes will run through to Labor before the Coalition, with two exceptions. In the safe Labor seat of Kalgoorlie, the Greens (WA) have put the development-at-any-price sitting member Graeme Campbell after the Coalition candidates. In the safe Liberal seat of Forrest, the Greens will be offering a split how-to-vote along Democrat lines.
The Australian Indigenous People's Party will be exchanging preferences with the Democrats, followed by the Greens and Labor.
Another common question is whether the "third parties" are giving preferences to each other.
Here the picture is much more confused. The Australian Greens, standing in the Senate in three states and the ACT, have a preference swap agreement with the Democrats. This could well ensure that either a Green or a Democrat wins the last Senate position in Queensland and Tasmania.
In NSW the Green Alliance is standing in the Senate, along with the Australian Greens. Green Alliance preferences go first to the Greens, The Australian Greens ticket runs first to the Democrats, then in succession to the Natural Law Party, the Republican Party of Australia and a group made up of Santa Claus and Lord Rolo before going to Green Alliance.
In South Australia the Democrats have divided their second preferences between the Greens and the "new age" Natural Law Party.
In Tasmania the Greens Senate preferences flow first to the Democrats, then to the first, second and fourth Labor Senate candidates, before running to Democratic Socialist candidate Ian Jamieson and returning to Labor's third candidate, timberworker Shane Murphy. Ian Jamieson's preferences go first to the Greens, then to the Democrats and finally to Labor.
In the House of Representatives, local Green and Democrat branches have generally swapped preferences. After the Democrats, Green preferences usually go to Democratic Socialist candidates in the 15 seats where the Democratic Socialists are standing. Democratic Socialist preferences usually run to Greens, Democrats and then Labor.
There are, however, some exceptions because Green and Democrat House of Representative preferences are decided by local branches.
In several seats local Greens (WA) groups have decided to pass their preferences directly to Labor. In Queensland, according to the Greens state campaign coordinator Malcolm Lewis, the "KISS principle (keep it simple, stupid)" in the design of Green how-to-votes has resulted in Green preferences going to right-wing parties like the Confederate Action Party before favouring Labor over Liberal.
In the NSW seat of Newcastle the Greens have recommended to their voters that they place the two major parties, as well as smaller right-wing parties such as Fred Nile's Call to Australia Party, before the Democratic Socialists. The Greens explained that, having first place on the ballot paper, they believe that asking their voters to number the candidates from top to bottom will enhance their chances of achieving the 4% vote needed to reclaim money spent on the campaign. The Democratic Socialists are giving their preferences to the Greens in Newcastle.
In the far northern Queensland seats of Kennedy and Leichhardt the Far North Greens offered the ALP a preference swap on condition that they oppose development of the Tully-Millstream dam and make $10 million available to buy up land being sold by private developers in the Daintree. Far North Greens co-convenor Colin Hunt told Green Left that Labor refused, so it will appear on the Greens how-to-vote in these seats after the Democrats and various independent candidates.
In general Democratic Socialist preferences run Green, Democrat, then Labor. Democratic Socialist Electoral League spokesperson Tom Flanagan said that the DSEL distributed preferences strictly on the basis of the policies of the various parties. In South Australia, where the Greens are running on a platform of zero population growth, sharply restricted immigration and acceptance of unemployment, the DSEL t, Labor, then Green.
"We think it's very important to read the various Green policy statements carefully", Flanagan said. "There are a lot of different shades of Green on offer — not all of them progressive."