Final decision scheduled for 8 October 2026.

After the latest Game of Thrones plot twist it's now Mark Parton's turn (previously Speaker) with first-termer Deborah Morris as deputy.

link www.aec.gov.au/redistributi...

My last-election prefs aggregate post Resolve 55.8 to ALP (-0.6), which is where it was before the last Newspoll. Very little movement in last election prefs 2PP land since the election.

On twitter there is just a massive scale of moaning about "preferential voting" supposedly causing Labor to win or to have a majority (neither of which is true)

Never gets old and this one is exactly that.

Would be fascinating to compare results like this to actual spending to see if the people who say they are going to spend less actually do.

yes, never gets old.

Nuclear for Australia in their release here fail to mention the leading questions in their poll and do not link to a full poll report.

www.nuclearforaustralia.com/media_releas...

I'll say that energy policy is in general one of the very worst polled issues in Australia. Almost every commissioned poll from any side of the debate has major flaws.

The first Q is bait for respondent to say no 100% renewables is unrealistic and the second Q can subtly imply that renewables are unreliable, expensive and bad for jobs. Then suddenly, hey, lightbulb moment, should we consider nuclear? Recommend completely ignoring results.

I had a go at informally classifying the indies for anyone who wants to attempt to add their votes up here kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2025/04/fede...

She is entitled to count above the lines for her party as votes for her. The system does.

(There were lower winning primaries, in most cases in the form of FPTP votes without preferences, in the first two elections 1901 and 1903 though 1903 especially comes with asterisks about "winning" and uncontested seats.)

The major parties are more likely to benefit because their votes are more likely to get inflated by the distortion, making their preferences more valuable than they should be.