I haven’t put much online since the rather hurried piece on the night of the election and quite a deal has changed since then. This is my impression of the count based on figures available as of 6pm Tuesday.
Lyons
This seat is no longer of interest. The Greens have firmed by about 0.03 quotas or 300 votes compared to the Liberals as primaries have been added, and may firm slightly more before the primary count is completed. Tim Morris will be re-elected.
Franklin (Based on update 4:41 pm)
On election night I modelled a 450-vote win to Goodwin, later changed to a 290-vote win after I found a mistake in my assumptions. I have been using a spreadsheet created by a friend (who I don’t think I can name for employment sensitivity reasons but thanks, you know who you are, and I now owe you beer!) to explore the figures based on preference distributions from past polls.
Some interesting aspects of past Franklin preferences, that are not always reflected statewide, are that Green preferences favour Labor very strongly, as do Socialist Alliance preferences, and most importantly the Liberal Party leaks more to Labor than vice versa (which is odd). During the counting of primaries the Greens firmed by about 0.02 quotas compared to polling night, which gives Labor more potential preferences.
All things considered, the spreadsheet was last night (based on Friday figures) forecasting a 200-vote win to Labor. It is now obvious that leakage from Will Hodgman has been far more severe than leakage from Paul Lennon — this was always the great unknown in Franklin but makes sense in view of the relatively low profile of Vanessa Goodwin compared to Paula Wriedt. Labor now trails by only 259 votes and there are still 1915 Green votes and 983 from Ian Hall to go, plus Labor is less exposed to leakage (2434 votes compared to 5085) than the Liberals.
On this basis this seat is now a very likely win to Wriedt, and the spreadsheet mentioned is now putting her 700 votes ahead, though I would not call it just yet.
Bass (based on update 5:13 pm)
The final primary figures showed Kim Booth notionally 1525 votes (0.150 quotas) behind Labor, having picked up on pre-poll votes from his election night position of 0.175 quotas behind. (About 150 votes of that pickup was in the last day of counting.) He could reasonably expect a pickup of maybe 500 votes from Les Rochester and would then need to make up the remaining 1000 or so from leakage. With Labor’s leakage exposure much greater (7952 votes to the Greens’ 2578) and with Labor leakage tending historically to go to the Liberals rather than the Greens in that seat, that looked like a tall order – Labor would need to leak an average of about 13-14% for it to happen.
Booth’s position now after the distribution of O’Byrne’s surplus is actually not too bad. It appears O’Byrne’s surplus has leaked considerably as Labor has dropped 427 votes despite the exclusion of 700 votes worth of minor candidates. Booth is now only 1093 votes behind. Assuming Booth’s gain from Rochester is still around the same he will need to pick up c. 600 votes on Labor from leakage. This is plausible as Labor has 5644 votes that may leak as opposed to only 1696 for the Greens. An average Labor leak (to all other sources including the Liberals and exhaust) of around 12% could now see Booth home, and that is plausible.
An added factor is the likely small Liberal surplus but most of that will exhaust and what is left should not advantage Labor by more than 50 votes. I think this seat is now right on the line and have no firm feeling about which way it will go. It is typically easier for the sitting candidate with profile and primaries in the bag to hold off the challenger in cases like this provided they can get close enough to have a chance. This is now the really close seat in this election, and many papers were wrong to prematurely call it when it still remained in doubt.
The outcome
After all that, the most likely distributions are now 14-7-4 (no change at all — wonder what that would do to the parliamentary arrangement debate) or 15-7-3 (Labor winning Bass off the Greens). If Goodwin gets up, 13-8-4 and 14-8-3 remain possible, but that is not looking likely. It will be most remarkable if Booth wins and after everything that has happened in this campaign the net result is no change in the parliament or in any seat apart from the replacement of old members with new in some parties.
Kevin Bonham wishes to use the bio space to shamelessly advertise his interest in finding a defamation lawyer willing to fire off a nasty letter to one of his adversaries, for no fee in return for future scrutineering assistance, beer, ecological advice or anything else he can provide of use at any time. Nothing to do with psephology or this site!
Kevin Bonham
March 28, 2006 at 17:01
Update (close of counting Tuesday night).
Paula Wriedt now leads Vanessa Goodwin by an effective 381 votes with only the 2381 votes of Labor’s Ross Butler, the 3712 votes of the Liberals’ Mike Allie and the 2182 Green preferences to go. Everything is on Wriedt’s side now. She is leading, she has less exposure to leakage, the Liberals will probably proportionally leak more anyway, and above all the Green preferences will favour her strongly. Wriedt will win this seat rather comfortably in the end, probably by c. 1000 votes.
In Bass, Kim Booth trails Steve Reissig by a notional 583 votes, with 775 votes from Labor’s Grant Courtney, 3790 votes from Labor’s Michelle Cripps, and 4984 votes from the Liberals’ David Fry (most of which will go towards putting fellow Liberals Peter Gutwein and Sue Napier over the line) left to throw. Currently the Liberals’ surplus is 1343 votes, which will have to be allocated between Labor, Green and exhaust either as surpluses from Gutwein and Napier or as leakage from Fry. Labor is unlikely to gain more than 300 on the Greens (if that) out of these votes as many will exhaust and the Greens will get some, so the question is how much Labor will lose relative to Booth because of leakage. Based on the bulk of Courtney’s votes, Booth is going like a train – he has closed from 952 votes behind with 5946 Labor left to throw to 583 behind with 4565 left to throw. It doesn’t help Labor that many of Courtney’s have gone to Cripps and will now have to be thrown again giving them another opportunity to leak. If the leak in the rest of the Labor votes is as severe as it has been from Courtney so far then Booth should win by about 400. It may not be that bad, but at this moment Booth is not only in the race but if anything is a very slight favourite – don’t believe anything you hear on the ABC news!
Dr Kevin Bonham
March 29, 2006 at 04:56
The leak from the remainder of Courtney’s votes was less severe than from the first lot. Booth now notionally trails by 523 with 4122 from Cripps plus Fry’s 4986 to throw.
If Cripps leaks as much as Courtney did in total, Booth will be 446 ahead of Reissig with Fry to throw, and should win by at least 200 from there.
Justa Bloke
March 29, 2006 at 06:06
Otherwise, if he has to depend on Fry’s surplus, Booth is stuffed.
Dr Kevin Bonham
March 29, 2006 at 07:18
Something of mild interest in Denison – Lisa Singh is caning Graeme Sturges on preferences by 910 votes with 958 from Cassy O’Connor and 6406 from Louise Sullivan to throw (I do not think Sullivan can bridge the 319 she trails Dixon by off O’Connor’s 958.) Before the election it was widely predicted that Sturges would poll extremely well, maybe even over a quota, and Bartlett was considered to be the one who might struggle. In fact Sturges, while he will be elected, has been beaten in by a member elected on a recount after him and looks like also being beaten in by a new candidate. Indeed he is only 805 ahead of Sullivan.
Justa Bloke: correct. Booth must lead before Fry’s surplus, and probably needs a three-figure lead. I have just heard Bruce Taylor say on radio that Labor is now more likely to win but do not know the basis (if any) of these comments. No TE update since 10:40am – it will take a fair while to throw, count and confirm Cripps’ first bundle of c.3000 votes.
Paula Wriedt has just been elected – 308 votes ahead of Allie and Goodwin combined so I don’t think we will get a margin for Wriedt over Goodwin, but it would be substantial.
Justa Bloke
March 29, 2006 at 07:18
Fry’s preferences, I meant.
Dr Kevin Bonham
March 29, 2006 at 08:10
Cripps has been thrown and Booth leads Reissig by 425 votes. Fry has 5068 to throw but 3352 will be used up electing Gutwein and Napier, leaving 1716 to be split between Booth, Reissig and exhaust. This looks good for Booth but will have some further projection detail shortly.
Rob
March 29, 2006 at 09:02
Kevin the psephologist said: “If Cripps leaks as much as Courtney did in total, Booth will be 446 ahead of Reissig with Fry to throw, and should win by at least 200 from there.”
Only 25 or so out. I’m impressed.
So we’ll be left with 14 Labor, 7 Liberal and 4 Green.
I wonder if Putt is feeling even sillier about her emotional outburst on election night.
Dr Kevin Bonham
March 29, 2006 at 09:14
There are two comparable recent cases in which a Liberal was excluded from the count and all remaining Liberals elected as a result, leaving the remaining votes to split between Labor, Green and exhaust.
In Denison 1998, 2861 votes split Labor 683, Green 541 and exhaust 1637, for a Labor gain of .049 votes per vote thrown (about 1 vote in 20), or a 56:44 split Labor/Green of those not exhausting.
In Franklin 1998, 2867 votes split Labor 888, Green 640 and exhaust 1339, for a Labor gain of .087 votes per vote thrown (about 1 vote in 11), or a 58:42 split Labor/Green of those not exhausting. However there were two Labor candidates still in the count so that figure is inflated compared with Bass.
This election, 1716 votes will be split between Labor, Green and exhaust. Assuming exhaust is the same as in Denison 1998 (57% of votes leaving the Liberals), Reissig needs a 79:21 split Labor/Green of those not exhausting.
While Fry is extremely conservative, even when he was excluded from Bass in 1998 his leakage favoured Labor over Greens 75:25 when there were four Labor candidates left to one Green and Booth’s profile was way lower than it is now. The split is unlikely to be that drastic this time and while Reissig may still close this is now a very likely Green win.
Cassy O'Connor
March 29, 2006 at 10:17
Rob, her name is Peg. She is a great leader and what she said on election night was true.
If Kim Booth pulls through in Bass it will reinforce the real strength of the Greens; to hold our ground in the face of such an alignment of collaborating, anti-Green forces would be an extraordinary feat.
The Greens will only get stronger.
Kevin, I am REALLY enjoying your analysis!
Thank you
Cass.
Dr Kevin Bonham
March 29, 2006 at 11:03
It’s over! The final result was closer than I expected a few hours ago, and it looks like many who voted Liberal down the line kept going to give preferences to Labor but Booth has won by 136 votes.
I will have a full psephelogical wrapup piece soon, hopefully tonight or tomorrow.
Cassy O'Connor
March 29, 2006 at 11:06
… Can you hear it? Sounds of joyous laughter all over Tasmania. Sheer, unbridled elation.
Bless the intricate beauty of Hare Clark!
; o ) Cackling Cassy
cassandra
March 29, 2006 at 11:43
Cassy: I’ll drink to that. But wait … oh yes ….. I’m am!!!!!! Like Kim said: it twern’t over till it was over!