National Party Senator Ron Boswell has taken a courageous stand against Pauline Hanson and One Nation. He has stated that he will put One Nation last on his how-to-vote cards. Senator Boswell, from Queensland, said he would put Labor, the Nationals traditional enemy, before One Nation. The move is not a hollow gesture. It could mean a Labor senator gets in ahead of One Nation.
Six senators, who were elected in 1996, come up for election at the next half-Senate election: 2 Labor, 2 Liberal, 1 National Party and 1 Democrat. At the last half-Senate election in 1998, One Nation got a seat in Queensland on first-preference votes, when the party was riding high. Now it might expect to need some preferences to get across the line, given that its vote has fallen since 1998 based on the Queensland state election and opinion polls.
If all major parties hold fast with a put-One-Nation-last policy, One Nation would likely not get across the line. For example, when that policy pertained in NSW at the last election, One Nation with two-thirds of a quota on first preferences lost out to a Democrat with just half a quota on preferences.
Preferences are crucial, so Senator Boswell’s gesture is very significant. If he gets fewer first-preferences than One Nation, he will be telling his voters he would prefer that Labor got the sixth seat (Labor 3, Liberals 2 and Democrats 1) rather than it went to One Nation (Labor 2, Liberals 2, Democrats 1 and One Nation 1). It is an honourable course. Senator Boswell rightly sees that One Nation presents greater dangers to Australia’s national interest than a mainstream party like Labor. Labor, too, has recognised it. It will be putting One Nation last, recognising that it poses greater danger to the national interest than the Liberal-National Coalition.
Senator Boswell rightly pointed out the destructive nature of One Nation’s protectionist, isolationist standpoint, its lack of policy in many other areas and its wrecking negativity. He has seen the destructive nature of far-right politics and has correctly concluded that it is as bad as far-left politics. Even when One Nation got seats (in the election before last in Queensland and in the Senate), the party structure disintegrated, individual members put themselves first and no policy gains were made.
So why, therefore, has the rest of the National Party’s leadership been so weak, ill-disciplined and so unpersuasive that only Ministers and parliamentary secretaries will be required to put One Nation last, leaving National backbenchers to do deals to save their hides. Doing preference deals with One Nation might help one or two National MPs in the long-term. In the long-term, however, it will mean the greater likelihood of One Nation gaining representation in the Parliament. All major parties should put One Nation last. That policy by Labor last election resulted in the Liberals taking the seat of Blair even though One Nation leader Pauline Hanson was leading on the primary vote. One Nation can only feed off the disunity shown by the Nationals this week
In the meantime, the major and minor parties should look to reforming the Senate preference system to give more voter choice. At present, a voter has to mark every square below the line in order or if voting above the line, the voter just marks a 1, surrendering all preference selection to what that party has registered with the Electoral Commission. Voters should be allowed to vote preferentially for parties above the line. Better still, the Senate should adopt a Hare-Clark, Robson rotation system like the ACT to deny power to political parties to do preference deals at all.