Speaker 1: I'm Daniel James and you're listening to seven AM. Last
Speaker 1: weekend South Australian election wasn't just a wipeout for the
Speaker 1: Liberals and a triumph for Labor. It was a sign
Speaker 1: that political discontent is beginning to find a new home
Speaker 1: in an old brand one nation. Pauline Hanson's party show
Speaker 1: just how much room there is for anger on the right,
Speaker 1: even in a traditionally progressive state. But the rise in
Speaker 1: One Nation's popularity isn't discontained to South Australia. Nationally and
Speaker 1: in States Love Victoria, discontent is growing and the far
Speaker 1: right is capitalizing, and with the war and I Run
Speaker 1: exacerbating the cost of living crisis, that frustration with the
Speaker 1: two major parties may only deepened today. Wali d Ali
Speaker 1: on what the South Australian result says about the mood
Speaker 1: of the electorate and where that mood could go next.
Speaker 1: It's Saturday, March twenty eight. Well, the political landscape has
Speaker 1: been shifting for a while in this country, but what
Speaker 1: happened in South Australia last weekend really laid it out
Speaker 1: there for all to sea. I mean, do we even
Speaker 1: have a functional opposition there at this point.
Speaker 2: No, we don't because the Liberal Party has been reduced
Speaker 2: to so few seats. We don't know exactly how many yet,
Speaker 2: but it'll be single digits and one nation if it
Speaker 2: does really, really well out of the parliamentary result, it's
Speaker 2: going to end up with maybe four seats.
Speaker 3: So that's I mean.
Speaker 2: Paul and Hanson referred to the MPs that will be
Speaker 2: left in South Australia's land mines.
Speaker 4: I am leaving tomorrow to go to Canberra to continue
Speaker 4: my duties. But guess what, mate, I'm leaving use some landmines.
Speaker 4: They're called one Nation Nomber's apartment.
Speaker 2: You don't refer to an opposition as land mines, but
Speaker 2: they are the second biggest party on primary vert even
Speaker 2: though that's not how it shook out in the parliamentary
Speaker 2: arithmetic once you do preferences. So I think what was
Speaker 2: really interesting is that Peter malinaskus when he starts talking
Speaker 2: his victory speech, he says there are no such thing
Speaker 2: as safe seats anymore.
Speaker 3: He's right.
Speaker 2: Once you start entering three cornered contests, it only takes
Speaker 2: the votes to fall a certain way and the whole
Speaker 2: thing changes. In a preferential system, so it's really unpredictable.
Speaker 2: Once he started quoting Henry Lawson and talking about patriotism
Speaker 2: and so on. We've seen a little bit of that
Speaker 2: from Anthony Alberinezi as well.
Speaker 5: When a man or nation visits in the heyday of
Speaker 5: its pride, tias the duty of Australians to be kind
Speaker 5: but dignified.
Speaker 2: That's very much directed at the votes that appealing off
Speaker 2: to one nation, some of which have started appealing off
Speaker 2: from labor. You do that if you see one nation
Speaker 2: as your major threat rather than the Coalition.
Speaker 3: I think.
Speaker 1: Are the Liberals the seats they have? Are they there
Speaker 1: partly because of labor and growing preferences?
Speaker 2: Yes, so Labor preference the Liberal Party over one nation.
Speaker 2: So yes, the seats one nation has it only has
Speaker 2: because the Liberal Party preferenced one nation over the Labor Party,
Speaker 2: which is a radical departure from the John Howard days.
Speaker 2: Although John Howard I think has now said he would
Speaker 2: do the same, he would preference one nation over labor.
Speaker 2: So yeah, the preferential voting system does favor the Coalition
Speaker 2: over one nation as it stands, but that could very
Speaker 2: easily flip if one nation can just can consistently get
Speaker 2: above the Liberal Party, and it's not doing that in
Speaker 2: the inner city. It's only doing that really in the
Speaker 2: rural areas and on the suburban fringe. But if you
Speaker 2: can start doing that consistently, then to the extent we
Speaker 2: have a two party system at all, it will be
Speaker 2: labor and one nation. That's the future that we're looking
Speaker 2: at there. It's a long way from happening. A lot
Speaker 2: has to go right for one nation for that to happen,
Speaker 2: but that's a possibility.
Speaker 4: The last time I saw a crowd like this was
Speaker 4: when we won eleven seats in Queensland and nineteen ninety eight,
Speaker 4: and that's how long ago it was.
Speaker 1: You've written that interpreting this election is a little bit
Speaker 1: like a choose your own adventure.
Speaker 2: What did you mean by that, Well, we're in the
Speaker 2: process of one of an old political order sort of
Speaker 2: slowly collapsing, and maybe a new one forming, although even
Speaker 2: that's not clear at this point. I think the metaphor
Speaker 2: I used briefly in that piece was the idea of
Speaker 2: a hall of mirrors. You look around in every image
Speaker 2: is a bit of a mirage. We don't know exactly
Speaker 2: what it means. There are weird shapes being thrown at you.
Speaker 2: There are phantoms everywhere. It's like you're jumping at these phantoms.
Speaker 2: And so what that means is when you get a
Speaker 2: result like you get in South Australia, it could mean anything.
Speaker 3: I mean.
Speaker 2: It could mean the onset of a totally new politic order.
Speaker 2: It could be a blip that historians will find as
Speaker 2: a curious footnote. It could be the complete demise of
Speaker 2: the coalition happening in real time.
Speaker 3: It could be thecent of one nation. Or it could
Speaker 3: mean that.
Speaker 2: It just scorches the earth for some new we've not
Speaker 2: even heard of yet to emerge. And so at this
Speaker 2: point in time, really all you can do is look
Speaker 2: at the imponderables and ponder them.
Speaker 1: If you look at the first path that you ruminate
Speaker 1: on in your piece, if you look at the result
Speaker 1: and think the electorate has shifted sharply to the right,
Speaker 1: what is the case for that.
Speaker 2: Well, the case for that is that one nation. Obviously,
Speaker 2: the one nation surge is real. We've seen one nation
Speaker 2: surges before in the polls. They've not turned into votes
Speaker 2: before outside Queensland.
Speaker 3: Now they have.
Speaker 2: South Australia is one of the more progressive states in
Speaker 2: the country in the sense that it tends to vote Labor.
Speaker 2: So the fact that it's done that there is proof
Speaker 2: of a certain concept One Nation has now proven and
Speaker 2: its support is real, and that it can replicate that
Speaker 2: at the ballot box. But the other element of it is,
Speaker 2: once you start looking at the numbers, the swing to
Speaker 2: One Nation was bigger than the swing away from the coalition,
Speaker 2: So it is picking up votes from what you might,
Speaker 2: in very crude terms, call the left, and Peter Malinosk
Speaker 2: has acknowledged this that we've started seeing votes bleed from
Speaker 2: Labor to One Nation. So the overall swing, if you
Speaker 2: look at all the election, the overall swing is probably
Speaker 2: a little bit to the right. There were some really
Speaker 2: weird quirks. Family First, for example, had a two percent
Speaker 2: swing against it, and it only had three point seven
Speaker 2: percent of the vote to begin with, So there are
Speaker 2: little things like that. But if you look at it
Speaker 2: really broadly, the swing has been to the right. So
Speaker 2: you could argue that two things are happening. One that
Speaker 2: the center of gravity is moving slightly to the right,
Speaker 2: but also that within the right, the center gravity is
Speaker 2: moving harder and harder right, or at least to a
Speaker 2: more disillusioned right.
Speaker 1: And what's the other case. What was the other scenario
Speaker 1: that you ruminate on, which is all we can do
Speaker 1: at this point?
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: Well, the other way of looking at it is, yeah,
Speaker 2: there was a bit of a swing right. Yes, there's
Speaker 2: a civil war going on within the right. That means
Speaker 2: that you're getting a certain protest vote there that manifests
Speaker 2: in hard right vote voting. But actually, when you look
Speaker 2: at it overall, the Greens had a swing, not a
Speaker 2: huge one, but it had a swing. Labor had a
Speaker 2: modest swing against it too, and a bit percent. It's
Speaker 2: a first term government, it's meant to have a swing
Speaker 2: against it at the next election.
Speaker 3: If you add the Labor and Green vote.
Speaker 2: Up, it's a bigger share, significantly bigger share than the
Speaker 2: Liberal one nation vote. So basically the left vote is
Speaker 2: still a bigger vote in South Australia than the right vote.
Speaker 2: And so it's really then just a question of whether
Speaker 2: or not you think you're at the beginning of a
Speaker 2: process of seeing let the Labor vote lead to one nation,
Speaker 2: or you think the center of gravity in Australian politics,
Speaker 2: the place where you win is still the center slash
Speaker 2: maybe even slightly to the left at the moment, and
Speaker 2: I'll give you an answer a couple of years.
Speaker 1: Oh thanks, We'll just keep your window open. Your broader point,
Speaker 1: as you've outlined, is that you can look at the
Speaker 1: same result and come up with a very very very
Speaker 1: different conclusions, which is so twenty twenty six. So I'm
Speaker 1: going to put you under the pump here. So, having
Speaker 1: explored all the options, what do you think this election
Speaker 1: is really telling us.
Speaker 2: I think what it's telling us is that the one
Speaker 2: nation thing is real, and it's real across the country.
Speaker 2: I voted labor every state election leading up to it,
Speaker 2: but this time I voted for one nation.
Speaker 3: The young ones can't buy houses now.
Speaker 2: There's just they're flooding Australia with immigrants.
Speaker 3: I'm not racist.
Speaker 6: I don't have a problem with it, but I just
Speaker 6: have a problem with the numbers.
Speaker 2: I think it's telling us that elections are still for
Speaker 2: the moment one in the center.
Speaker 3: The thing that it is not.
Speaker 2: Telling us, which we will get a better answer to,
Speaker 2: probably in Victoria in November and in New South Wales
Speaker 2: in March, is whether or not this is now at
Speaker 2: its ceiling.
Speaker 3: And my main variable.
Speaker 2: Here is the upheaval that the war in Iran is unleashing.
Speaker 2: I think everyone's aware that it's going to hurt, and
Speaker 2: we're seeing petrol prices go up, and anyone who thinks
Speaker 2: about that for a moment will see that that flows
Speaker 2: through to everything else, because anything that required transport, like food,
Speaker 2: then go up. But like fertilizer, I think it's something
Speaker 2: like eighty percent of austraight as fertilizer goes through the
Speaker 2: straight upore moves. Think about what happens if we can't
Speaker 2: get fertilizer and the level of desperation that that unleashes,
Speaker 2: and then think about the political history of radicalization within
Speaker 2: populations when serious economic straits hit. If it plays out
Speaker 2: that way, then we're only at the beginning. Actually, But
Speaker 2: if things go seriously bad, I could easily I could
Speaker 2: see a scenario where one nation is outpolling the Labor
Speaker 2: Party and has the highest primary vote in the country.
Speaker 2: I could see that scenario occurring. It'll depend a little
Speaker 2: bit on just how bad the economic situation.
Speaker 1: Gets coming up. Is this the beginning of the end
Speaker 1: of the political order as we know it? Well, you
Speaker 1: mentioned Victoria, but what's the real next big test for
Speaker 1: one nation. How obstructive is Farah. The by election in
Speaker 1: Susan Lee's old seat going to be, for instance, later
Speaker 1: this month. Will it give us an indication as to
Speaker 1: whether the swing to the right when it comes to
Speaker 1: grievance is a national trend.
Speaker 3: So I think Pharaoh.
Speaker 2: Will give us an indication of the state of the
Speaker 2: civil war within conservative politics. It won't give us much
Speaker 2: of an indication of the extent to which the bleeding
Speaker 2: will now come from the Labor Party, which is really
Speaker 2: the next big question as far as the center of
Speaker 2: gravity of Australian politics as a whole.
Speaker 4: I think the rest of Austroa is going to be
Speaker 4: watching what's happening here tonight, and I think it's a
Speaker 4: very important to see for Farah. And I also will
Speaker 4: set a strong team for Victoria. So if you're from Victoria,
Speaker 4: you're watching this, We're coming to support you down there,
Speaker 4: Sam Candos.
Speaker 2: Victoria is a much more interesting case study, I think,
Speaker 2: because Victoria is the most urbanized state in the country,
Speaker 2: it's the most progressive state in the country. It's also
Speaker 2: the state that's the most bonkers because of its experience
Speaker 2: in COVID. Speaking yourself, well, yeah, indeed, but it's not
Speaker 2: a surprise that you know, when Neo Nazis are getting
Speaker 2: up on stage at rallies. It's happening in Victoria. There's
Speaker 2: a reason that that sort of thing's happening. So it's
Speaker 2: a really interesting test case. And also the Labor government
Speaker 2: is deeply unpopular and the coalition is in disarray. So
Speaker 2: on the one hand, it's not favorable conditions for one nation.
Speaker 2: On the other hand, it's perfect conditions for one nation,
Speaker 2: and you see which one of those will prevail. And
Speaker 2: then New South Wales is fascinating because a little tiny
Speaker 2: quirk which doesn't get any attention really is New South Wales.
Speaker 2: You don't have to vote preferentially. You can just mark
Speaker 2: one and leave it at that. So it's all to
Speaker 2: be discovered and they're the two big data points. And also,
Speaker 2: don't forget those elections will come when we're much further
Speaker 2: down the economic road of the consequences of what's happening
Speaker 2: in Iran. Maybe the war's still going, maybe it's over
Speaker 2: all these sorts of things. That's where things will be
Speaker 2: really instructive and will have a much clearer sense of
Speaker 2: the path.
Speaker 1: That Australia's treading currently one nation polling around twenty three
Speaker 1: point five percent nationally. You mentioned that that could easily
Speaker 1: grow given circumstance, and things are ominous right now. What
Speaker 1: do you think the appeal is.
Speaker 2: It's years and years ago, when Brexit happened and Trump
Speaker 2: happened and Bolsonaro was elected in Brazil. I heard someone
Speaker 2: weirdly on a sports podcast make the point that if
Speaker 2: you give people a big button that says f off
Speaker 2: right now, they will hit that button. And that people
Speaker 2: are hitting that button. It's pretty clear when you look
Speaker 2: at the reasons people give for voting one nation at
Speaker 2: the moment, they're not detailed, so they don't go, well,
Speaker 2: you know, I'm concerned about this aspect of the economy,
Speaker 2: and they've got this policy that responds to this thing,
Speaker 2: so broad things maybe to do with migration, actually less
Speaker 2: to do with migration than you might assume when you're
Speaker 2: just reading the reporting. It's very clearly a protest vote
Speaker 2: that is based on affectation. There is a sense of
Speaker 2: they're real, they care about the country, and we're desperate
Speaker 2: and we don't like the offering, and they're there and
Speaker 2: they've been there and consistent for thirty years.
Speaker 1: Everyone knows who Paul Enhancing is now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the interesting thing is that what nation sort of
Speaker 2: surged into the twenties and it has kind of stayed there.
Speaker 2: So maybe that's the limit. And that's the argument that
Speaker 2: you could run that you know, we've hit the limit.
Speaker 2: It's just that if we're going to have another really
Speaker 2: bad economic turn, then we might see that limit raised.
Speaker 1: Save the support does stay at twenty three to twenty
Speaker 1: four percent, what does that mean in terms of the parliament.
Speaker 1: What would the Parliament look like federally if their support
Speaker 1: was to stay at that level, and what kind of
Speaker 1: power on influence could that actually translate to, Well.
Speaker 2: It translates to obvious power in the Senate, in the House,
Speaker 2: not necessarily One nation would then be really at the
Speaker 2: mercy of Liberal preferences.
Speaker 3: If that's the case, then.
Speaker 2: Really it comes down to will the Liberal Party hand
Speaker 2: one nation any seats? Not just Liberal Party by though
Speaker 2: the Nats as well. Now that's where things get interesting.
Speaker 2: I think there's a live debate within the Coalition at
Speaker 2: the moment as to what the correct course of action is.
Speaker 2: I happened to interview Dan teen, a shadow Ministry of
Speaker 2: the coalition earlier this week, and he surprised me with
Speaker 2: the strateacy of his language. He basically said, well, the
Speaker 2: Greens and Labor gang up on the Conservatives in the
Speaker 2: way they do preferences, and he used the phrase that
Speaker 2: the Conservatives have to hunt in packs to get rid
Speaker 2: of labor governments. I don't know if he'll win that argument,
Speaker 2: but if he does, then you'll start seeing one Nation
Speaker 2: win seats.
Speaker 1: I meaning in Victoria. Jeff Kennett, you know, the out
Speaker 1: of statesman of the Victorian Liberal Party, is very openly
Speaker 1: saying that Jess Wilson the Liberal Party should form a
Speaker 1: coalition with one Nation.
Speaker 6: I'm not necessarily saying there has to be agreements between
Speaker 6: the parties and that includes one Nation, but I hope
Speaker 6: all of those other parties will say no to corruption
Speaker 6: and therefore will support each other.
Speaker 1: Given what's happened in South Australia. Is that something that
Speaker 1: you think they'll be seriously considering.
Speaker 2: So the question I would ask is, sure, I can
Speaker 2: understand you want to combine, but if you're actually fighting
Speaker 2: over the same turf anyway, how does that expand your
Speaker 2: parliamentary footprint? How does a liberal national one nation start
Speaker 2: winning back presence in the cities. I get where Jeff
Speaker 2: Kinnet's coming from in that his whole thing is, this
Speaker 2: is a terrible government in Victoria. It's corrupt, there's all
Speaker 2: sorts of horrible things. Frankly, most Victorians would probably agree
Speaker 2: with that assessment. His next step is to say it
Speaker 2: therefore must go by any means, and if a coalition
Speaker 2: with one nation is the means to do that, we
Speaker 2: should do that. I'm just a little more skeptical as
Speaker 2: to whether or not that would actually achieve the results,
Speaker 2: or maybe what you get is what you got in
Speaker 2: South Australia, where it actually increases the Labor majority.
Speaker 3: We're getting at this weird situation where.
Speaker 2: Labor doesn't have a huge amount of support in terms
Speaker 2: of its primary vote at any level of government, but
Speaker 2: its parliamentary dominance is the stuff we've never seen before,
Speaker 2: and that's a weird paradox.
Speaker 1: If they have a big but shallow electoral pool. Finally,
Speaker 1: while lead, what's your feeling about the permanency of this shift?
Speaker 1: Do you think it's something that we're going to be
Speaker 1: dealing with used down the track, or could you even
Speaker 1: go as far as to say that this could potentially
Speaker 1: be the end of the two party system.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's the end of the two party
Speaker 2: system just because preferential voting makes a two party system
Speaker 2: really hard to dismantle. It might be a change in
Speaker 2: the two party system. You know, there is a possibility
Speaker 2: that one nation becomes the conservative alternative. That's possible, or
Speaker 2: some new conservative formation arises. It's really hard to imagine
Speaker 2: what a more than two party system in a preferential
Speaker 2: voting system looks like, other than perpetual labor governments. And
Speaker 2: I don't think you're going to get perpetual labor governments
Speaker 2: just because that's just not the way politics. Eventually, people
Speaker 2: get fed up enough that something changes. That said, I
Speaker 2: can see us moving into a scenario where there are
Speaker 2: all sorts of minority governments, but it would still be
Speaker 2: I think two major or dominant parties in that scenario.
Speaker 3: No doubt, events.
Speaker 2: Will make a fool of me, because that's just the
Speaker 2: way that events are, and we are in a particularly
Speaker 2: chaotic period. I don't think the shift in people's sentiments,
Speaker 2: in the sentiment of the electorate that embraces what were
Speaker 2: once more fringe ideas and more fringe politics I don't
Speaker 2: think that will stop. I think that's here to stay,
Speaker 2: because there's no sign the upheavel's going away.
Speaker 3: It's now global in nature.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you so much for your time, and go.
Speaker 3: Tykes go takes. Probably not the best year for that either.
Speaker 1: Seven Am is a daily show from Solstice Media. Is
Speaker 1: made by Atticus Bastow, Ariel Richards, Chris Dangate, Crystal Color,
Speaker 1: Nicole Johnston, Travis Evans, Zotonfecho and me Daniel James. Our
Speaker 1: theme music is by Ned Beckley and Josh Hogan of
Speaker 1: Envelope Portio. Thanks for listening to seven Am this week.
Speaker 1: Please have yourself a great weekend