VIC2026 – Mapping One Nation’s 2025 Federal Result

Six weeks remain until the Victorian election, and the interest remains – how will One Nation poll. Which parties will One Nation take votes from? What will be the impact of preferences in a multi-party contest? Can One Nation do well enough to prevent the Coalition achieving a majority government?

In this post I’ll replicate analysis I published last week on the pattern of One Nation support in NSW state electorates.

For Victoria I’ll use lower house result from last year’s Federal election. I’ve converted the House of Representatives votes by party to match Victoria’s state electoral electorates.

One Nation’s Victorian vote in the House at least year’s federal election was 5.8%, lower than other states but the highest vote ever recorded by the party in Victoria.

As I wrote in my NSW post, my experience over many years in analysing One Nation results is that whatever the party’s level of support, it always has the same geographic variation across electoral districts. One Nation support is always higher in rural and regional seats, lower but still high in outer suburban seats, but support fades away the closer you get to the centre of capital cities.

And that’s exactly what we saw in Victoria at last year’s Federal election. One Nation polled 8.2% in rural and regional seats, 6.2% in outer Melbourne seats, and 3.5% in inner Melbourne seats. By federal division, results ranged from 1.0% in Kooyong to 14.4% in Gippsland.

I need to stress that the maps in this post are of last year’s Federal results and not predictions of what One Nation will poll. I am mapping where One Nation support tends to be high or low, not predicting a percentage vote.

But as a guide, One Nation’s percentage vote in current polling is in the low 20s. That’s three to four times the level of last-year’s Federal election as mapped in this post.

If a seat in my map has One Nation polling 8-10% at last year’s Federal election, there is a good chance the party could poll 25-35% in the seat at the Victorian election.

All the seats where One Nation support last year was above 8-10% could see One Nation finish in the final count pairing after preferences.

That doesn’t mean One Nation will win these seats. If polling has One Nation in third place state-wide behind the Coalition and Labor come election day, we may see a repeat of the South Australian election result where One Nation had a lot of second place finishes but few wins. One Nation finished in the final pairing in 25 of South Australia’s 47 seats for just four wins.

In many rural and regional seats, One Nation victories will need the party to outpoll Liberal and National candidates by enough to withstand flows to the Coalition from third placed Labor candidates. With polls showing the Coalition leading One Nation state-wide by several points on first preferences, it will be hard for One Nation to turn votes into seats.

In South Australia One Nation did outpoll the Liberal Party in more than half of seats, but at an election where One Nation had the higher state-wide vote. In Victoria the Coalition has the higher state-wide vote, which makes it harder for One Nation to have the higher primary vote in individual seats.

In traditional Labor seats, the Liberal Party may slip to third and help One Nation with preferences. But if trends in safe Labor seats in South Australia are a guide, One Nation may take so many votes from the Liberal Party that there won’t be many Liberal preferences available to help.

And in large parts of eastern Melbourne, One Nation candidates are likely to finish third and it is One Nation preferences that will determine the chances of Liberal candidates.

Rural and Regional Victoria


Read More »VIC2026 – Mapping One Nation’s 2025 Federal Result

The Pattern of One Nation support in NSW

In the near three decades I’ve been following One Nation’s election results, one thing has been constant. Whatever the party’s overall level of vote, its geographic distribution or pattern of support by electorate, has not changed.

One Nation support is always stronger in rural and regional city seats. It is stronger in outer suburban seats with a lower proportion of residents from a non-English speaking background. One Nation support declines as you approach the centre of cities.

The party’s performance at the South Australian election in March 2026, and its results in the Farrer (Fed), Nepean (VIC) and Secret Harbour (WA) by-elections, fit the same pattern. Just with a much higher level of support.

I expect this geographic pattern to repeat at Victoria’s state election in November, and at the NSW state election next March.

In this post I’m going to look NSW, at one Nation’s support by state seat. To get state-wide figures, I’m using electorate level One Nation support using 2023 Legislative Council (upper house) results.

In 2023 One Nation contested only 17 lower house districts, giving it an oft reported but misleadingly low 1.8% of the state-wide vote. Looking only at seats the party contested, One Nation polled a more impressive 9.7%. The party’s best results were 14.6% in Wyong and 15.3% in Cessnock, boosted in both seats by the Coalition being forced to disendorse candidates. In the other 15 seats, One Nation’s vote ranged from 5.1% in Parramatta to 13.8% in Camden.

In a larger upper house field, One Nation polled 5.9%, not far from the 6.0% the party polled at the 2025 House of Representatives election.

2023 saw One Nation leader Mark Latham win a new eight-year Legislative Council term, swapping from the eight-year seat he had won in 2019. It brought to three the number of One Nation MLCs. That representation has since fallen to zero.

In August 2023 Pauline Hanson removed One Nation’s NSW state executive and sacked Mark Latham as party leader, resulting in Latham and fellow MLC Rod Roberts resigning from the party. The next year they were followed by the party’s third member, Tania Mihailuk. The terms of Roberts and Mihailuk expire at the 2027 election while Latham’s term continues until 2031.

One Nation’s state-wide 5.9% in the Legislative Council hides a wide range of results by lower house electorate, from 1.75% in Newtown to 12.75% in Wollondilly.

One Nation’s LC result was 7.2% in rural and regional seats, the same in the Hunter and Illawarra, and 5.1% in greater Sydney. Rural support was stronger west of the Great Diving Range compared to along the coast. Support was stronger in outer Sydney with support trailing away in seats closer to central Sydney.

One Nation’s rural vote in 2023 may have been suppressed by on-going support for the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party. The SFF polled 7.2% in country seats, 3.7% in the Hunter/Illawarra and only 1.3% in greater Sydney.

The interaction of One Nation and SFF support is backed by 2025 Federal House results. From a state-wide vote of 6.0%, One Nation polled 8.4% in rural and regional seats, 8.1% in the Hunter/Illawarra and a lower 4.6% in Sydney.

In this post I’ll map One Nation’s Legislative Council vote distribution across the state to speculate on where One Nation has its best chance of winning seats next March.

Let me stress these maps are not predicting what One Nation will poll at the 2027 election. I expect One Nation’s percentage to be three to four times as high in 2027. But the distribution of where One Nation support will be high or low will be similar to the pattern of support mapped in this post.

So in seats where One Nation’s LC vote was around 10% in 2023, it could be 30-40% in 2027. In these seats One Nation is likely to finish in the final pairing after preference and have a good chance of winning, dependent on preferences.

Data Source

Data mapped in this post is drawn from three publications I prepared for the NSW Parliamentary Research Service. All are based on the NSW Electoral Commission’s published results.

You can find the One Nation Legislative Council results in this two-page document. It also includes comparisons between One Nation’s upper and lower house results.

These two pages are extracted from a longer publication on the 2023 Legislative Council result. There is also a previous publication summarising the result of the 2023 election in both houses.
Read More »The Pattern of One Nation support in NSW

NSW2027 – How Optional Preferential Voting could Re-elect the Minns Government

At March’s South Australian election, One Nation polled 22.9% of the vote, relegating the Liberal Party on 18.9% to third place.

While a good result for One Nation, it had no impact on the landslide re-election of Premier Peter Malinauskas and his Labor government. The expectation that Labor would be re-elected may have even boosted One Nation by giving voters freedom to cast a protest vote.

November’s Victorian election will be very different. Against an unpopular third term Labor government, and with the Liberal/National Coalition failing to establish a clear lead in opinion polls, a vote for One Nation will have consequences for who forms government after the election.

Even if One Nation falls short of the balance of power, the party will have a critical presence in the Victorian upper house. A vote for One Nation in November could determine who governs Victoria, and a significant presence in both houses will see One Nation influence how a new (and presumably) Coalition government controls the levers of state.

Four months later in March 2027, New South Wales goes to the polls. As in South Australia, the election will see a first term Labor government seeking re-election. Polling indicates the Minns government remains broadly popular without scaling the heights of popularity achieved by SA Labor.

There have been reports that One Nation is more confident of its prospects in NSW than Victoria. That’s backed by past election results where One Nation consistently attracts stronger support in New South Wales compared to Victoria.

The Minns government fell short of a majority in 2023, but the government’s grip on office has never been threatened. Labor has good working relations with the large lower house crossbench populated by Greens and Independents. The government’s bigger hurdles have been in Legislative Council.

Based on the result of the Farrer Federal by-election in May, there is every chance the NSW election will see the National Party reduced to a rump.

One Nation will also be hoping to repeat its success against Labor at the recent WA Secret Harbour by-election. There is a strong chance One Nation will be Labor’s major opponent in the industrial areas of the Hunter Valley and Illawarra. One Nation will also challenge Labor in a string of outer Sydney seats.

The Liberal Party will be squeezed, possibly losing its remaining rural seats, and face further challenges from Independents in traditional Liberal heartland seats. As I discuss below, the Liberals will also struggle against Labor in a string of marginal Sydney seats.

Opinion polls have pointed to Labor having the highest state-wide primary vote with One Nation and the Coalition splitting the non-Labor vote.

Even if Labor’s vote is down compared to 2023, odds are Labor will still emerge from the election with the most lower house seats, perhaps even with a lower house majority.

There are two reasons why Labor must be favourite to win.

The first is that Labor’s vote is likely to be more effectively distributed to turn votes into seats. Labor polled 37.0% in 2023, broken down to 40.8% in greater Sydney to win 31 of 59 seats and 49.8% to win 10 of 12 seats in the Hunter and Illawarra. But Labor polled only 22.7% in rural and regional areas to win 4 of 22 seats.

Labor’s vote could slip to single digits across rural NSW, areas where Labor has little hope of gaining seats. But where Labor needs to win seats, on the coast from Port Stephens to Kiama, Labor is best placed to lead on first preferences.

The Liberal Party was fortunate to win as many greater Sydney seats as it did in 2023. The party goes into the 2027 election defending seven seats on margins under 2.3%, Ryde, Holsworthy, Oatley, Terrigal, Drummoyne, Winston Hills and Miranda. Any switch of Liberal support to One Nation in these seats will leave Labor with the highest primary vote and well placed to win.

Which is where the second reason Labor is favoured to win comes into play.

That is Optional Preferential Voting (OPV). At Federal elections, and elections in other mainland states, voters are required to complete a full sequence of ballot paper preferences. In NSW they are not. Preferences beyond a ‘1’ vote are optional.

In this post I’ll explain why OPV will favour Labor. I also explain why under OPV it is critical for the Coalition and One Nation to reciprocate on preferences. To not recommend preferences would split the non-Labor vote and increase the number of exhausted preferences.
Read More »NSW2027 – How Optional Preferential Voting could Re-elect the Minns Government

Preference Flows at the Secret Harbour By-Election

Update after full distribution of preferences published: The Liberal Party polled 4,777 votes. During the distribution of preferences, its tally rose to 6,018 votes. When excluded, 3,549 votes transferred to One Nation. That means it is mathematically impossible for Liberal preferences to flow to One Nation at a rate higher than 74.3%. (3549/4777).

My original estimate based on flow data counted out for the Early Voting Centre was that 70.2% of Liberal preferences flowed to One Nation. While I cannot update that number from the distribution of preferences, the lower Liberal vote on polling day suggests to me the % flow of Liberal preferences to One Nation is under 70%.

A quick break from my holiday to deal with some nonsense claims made about preference flows at the Secret Harbour by-election.

In this YouTube video, Topher Field uses some weird maths to come to the conclusion that the Secret Harbour by-election saw a record flow of Liberal and right-wing candidate preference flows to One Nation.

It is a bit hard to be clear what he is saying, but I think he comes to the conclusion that once you exclude left-wing parties from the calculations, 88% of preferences from right parties, including the Liberal Party, flowed to One Nation.

This claim is rubbish and preference flow data released by the WA Electoral Commission shows that claim to be wrong.
Read More »Preference Flows at the Secret Harbour By-Election

Break in Transmission

A quick post to let everyone know that I won’t be doing much posting on politics through September. That includes there being no coverage of the Secret Harbour (WA) by-election on 29 August.

I’m currently in Bled, Slovenia, where I’m heading off on my latest European cycling holiday. More detail inside the post for those interested. If I have the energy I might do the odd post on the trip here, but more likely I’ll post pictures on X.
Read More »Break in Transmission

One Nation and its Elected MPs

Since One Nation’s breakthrough at the 1998 Queensland election, the party has had a mixed record of maintaining parliamentary beachheads.

By half way through its first term in the Queensland Parliament, the party had lost all its elected members. There were numerous disputes between Pauline Hanson, her close party confidants and the elected members. It was not helped the legal action that led to the parties de-registration.

In the party’s first decade, there were 20 elected or appointed One Nation members of parliament. Seventeen split from the party, one was defeated, one disqualified and only one re-elected.

After Hanson’s departure in the early 2000s, the party became largely irrelevant. That changed when Hanson returned to the fold in 2013. The party elected its first new members of parliament at the 2016 Senate election and has reached new levels of success over the last year.

Since 2016, One Nation has had 31 members. 16 are current members, the party boosted by four new Federal members and seven members elected at the March 2026 South Australian election.

But until the last year, the pattern of losing elected members continued. Two members were re-elected but subsequently left the party with Mark Latham still in Parliament. Another eight left the party before facing election of whom three in addition to Latham remain in parliament. Four One Nation members were defeated while still in the party. One Senator resigned due to ill-health.

The party’s record of hanging on to members remains patchy, though surging opinion polls and the recent success of the party have certainly provided an incentive for elected members to stay with the party.

I’ve been keeping track of elected One Nation since that first election in 1998. When the party returned to the Senate in 2016 and began losing members to disqualification and resignation, I published a list of elected One Nation members and their fate in 2018.

When Pauline Hanson sacked the NSW Executive of One Nation and dismissed Mark Latham as the party’s NSW leader, I published a blog post on the party’s record of losing its parliamentary members.

I’ve been asked numerous times over the last year if I could update the list. I’ve finally done it and you can find all the details on the party’s 51 elected or appointed members of state and federal parliaments here.

Trying to pick apart whether members were expelled from the party or resigned can be a little difficult. I tend to use a generic ‘departed’ as the description to get around the participants in the departure having different views on what happened.

Inside the post I’ll publish the overall summary of representation from that document, but you can check the full detail using the above link.

And let me know if you spot any errors.
Read More »One Nation and its Elected MPs

Why Australia Doesn’t Have Novelty Candidates like Count Binface

As I wait to hear the result of the UK’s Clacton by-election, I thought I should ponder the question of why Australia doesn’t have novelty candidates.

The Clacton by-election was triggered by the resignation of Reform Party Leader Nigel Farage. The announcement came amid parliamentary scrutiny of Farage’s personal finances, and allegations concerning undeclared gifts and support. He is re-contesting the seat to, as he puts it, let the people rather than the establishment decide his fate.

It has rather backfired on Farage as none of the ‘establishment’ parties are contesting. His major opponent has turned out to be serial novelty candidate Count Binface, in real life known as Jonathan David Harvey, an Oxford classics graduate and television comedy writer.

The record field of 34 also includes Nick the Incredible Flying Brick, Howling Laud Hope and Baron Von Thunderclap, candidates for Britain’s ‘establishment’ novelty party, the Monster Raving Loony Party.

So how is this allowed and why doesn’t it occur in Australia?

Well, it sort of used to occur, but the law was tightened after several protest candidates representing the Abolish Child Support/Family Court Party adopted vvvveeerrrryyyy lloonngg names to contest the 1998 Federal election.Read More »Why Australia Doesn’t Have Novelty Candidates like Count Binface

How GVTs Have Distorted Victorian Legislative Council Elections

Summary: Change is coming to the Victorian Legislative Council’s electoral system for November’s state election. Victoria becomes the last jurisdiction to abolish group voting tickets, a system that allowed parties to control preference flows and distort election results. Voters will now control between-party preferences and the method of voting mimics the Senate system in use since 2016. The change favours parties that campaign for votes over parties that rely on preferences. Based on past results, the big losers will be minor parties whose election from low votes has been achieved by “preference harvesting” tactics, something that is impossible with group voting tickets abolished.

The Victorian Labor government’s bill to abolish group voting tickets (GVTs) for Legislative Council elections was introduced on Tuesday 28 July, passed the lower house the next day with no opposition, and will be debated in the the upper house on Tuesday 11 August.

The bill is supported by the government, opposition and Greens and will pass by week’s end. The new voting rules will be in place for November’s state election.

(Update 9:30pm 11 August: the bill passed the upper house without amendment. The next step is royal assent by the Governor at which point the amendments in the bill are incorporated into the Electoral Act.)

Inside this post I look back at the five Victorian elections that have used GVTs and estimate how the results might have looked without GVTs. In summary –

  • The new system will favour parties that attract significant first preference support and disadvantage parties that rely heavily on preferences. Based on my analysis of post-GVT Senate results, (see this post), weaker preference flows will make it very difficult for a party to be elected with less than 6% in a region.
  • Across the 2014, 2018 and 2022 elections, 24 leading candidates who began the preference distribution with more than 6% of the vote were defeated by lower polling candidates. Three of the defeated candidates polled above 12% or 0.7 quotas.
  • At the same elections there were 20 candidates elected from under 6%, including nine that polled below 3%.
  • Without GVTs, the 2014 election would have seen five fewer minor party MLCs elected, the seats instead going one Labor, two Coalition and two Greens.
  • Without GVTs, the 2018 election would have seen seven fewer minor party MLCs elected, the seats instead going one Labor, three Coalition and three Greens.
  • Without GVTs, the 2022 result would have seen six fewer minor party MLCs elected, the seats instead going one Labor, one Coalition and four Greens.
  • Over the last three elections, the number of non-Green minor party members would have fallen from 22 to 4. The number of Greens elected would have risen from 10 to 19, Labor from 47 to 50, and the Coalition from 41 to 47.

Table 1 below shows a four party breakdown of seats won at elections since 2006, along with my estimated results had there been no GVTs. My estimates assume the same parties contested election and the same party vote shares were recorded. I explain my method for estimating results inside the post.

Table 1 – Legislative Council Seats 2006-2022 – With and Without GVTs
Election Alternatives ALP L/NP GRN OTH
2006 Actual result 19 17 3 1
Estimate without GVTs 20 17 3 ..
2010 Actual result 16 21 3 ..
Estimate without GVTs 16 21 3 ..
2014 Actual result 14 16 5 5
Estimate without GVTs 15 18 7 ..
2018 Actual result 18 11 1 10
Estimate without GVTs 19 14 4 3
2022 Actual result 15 14 4 7
Estimate without GVTs 16 15 8 1

Source: Estimated results without GVTs calculated by Antony Green as set out in the post.

The changed results are due to weaker preference flows with the abolition of GVTs. Preference ‘deals’ implemented by GVTs were previously used to engineer results. Even the smallest parties could deliver preference flows above 90%. GVT deals could deliver victory to parties with little electoral support at the expense parties with up to 14 times the vote. These remarkable come from behind victories were created by GVT preference deals, not by the actions of voters.

Three of the more remarkable results occurred in 2018. In Eastern Metropolitan Region, the Transport Matters Party was elected from 0.62%, defeating a Greens candidate who began the count with 9.0%. In Southern-Eastern Metropolitan Region, the Liberal Democrats polled just 0.84% but defeated the second Liberal candidate who began the count with 12.3%. In Southern Metropolitan Region, the Sustainable Australia Party polled 1.32% but defeated the Greens on 13.5%. (Data in this paragraph has been corrected.)

Results such as these could only happen under an electoral system where voters are herded into voting for above-the-line for tickets with preferences controlled by parties.

A decade of experience with Senate elections since GVTs were abolished, and evidence from Legislative Council elections in other states, shows that preference flows are much weaker without GVTs. Larger parties that campaign actively can still influence preference decisions and create stronger preference flows, but the flows of smaller parties become almost random. This decreases the ability of parties to win from trailing positions.

When voters control preferences rather than parties, the system rewards parties that attract first preference votes over parties that rely on opaque and labyrinthine preference deals. The days of preference ‘whisperers’, preference ‘harvesting’ and ‘corralling’ preferences disappear when GVTs are abolished. Voters first preference party choices play a greater role in determining which parties elect members.

But I need to stress that the analysis in this post is about the parties that have contested the last five Victorian Legislative Council elections, not the parties contested the 2026 election.

It is clear from polls that Pauline Hanson’s One Nation will poll strongly, will elect MLCs, and probably outpoll the Greens. I make no comment on whether abolishing GVTs increases or decreases the number of MLCs that One Nation might elect.

What is certain is that abolishing GVTs will see the number of MLCs elected by party more accurately reflect vote share by party. The new system will better translate the will of the electorate into representation than any election conducted with GVTs.

Read More »How GVTs Have Distorted Victorian Legislative Council Elections

The Record of Late-Term Succession Premiers

Multi-term periods of party government in Australia have usually come to be associated with the leader that brought the party to office. We often call these periods of government eras.

The less common type of era is multi-term governments with the same Prime Minister or Premier from first election to defeat. In this category we have the Fraser era (Fed 1975-83), the Howard era (Fed 1996-2007) and the Kennett era (Victoria 1992-1999).

One term government don’t qualify for eras so there is no Steven Marshall era (SA 2018-22) or Campbell Newman era (QLD 2012-15).

Some eras become associated with more than one leader, such as the Hawke-Keating era (Fed 1983-1996). Some of the long periods of post-war party government, such as Labor in NSW and Tasmania, or several times in Queensland, never attract the name of a single Premier.

The Menzies era (1949-1972) is different simply because of how long Menzies served as Prime Minister. He was succeeded by three Prime Ministers of diminishing stature before the Coalition lost office two elections after his retirement.

The current leadership ructions in the Victorian Labor Party ahead of a likely defeat in November fits the long-term pattern of Australian elections. Parties that come to power under one Premier who wins re-election at least once, is often succeeded by a new Premier, sometimes several, who lead the party to defeat.

The current period of Labor government in Victoria will be remembered by history as the Andrews era, whoever leads the party to probable defeat in November. Daniel Andrews led Labor to office in 2014 and won landslide re-elections in 2018 and 2022 before resigning two years ago. His indelible mark remains on the current government.

If Jacinta Allan is deposed this week, it will be one of the latest in term change of leader before an election. Julia Gillard became leader on 24 June 2010 and called an election for 21 August, 58 days. When Kevin Rudd returned as Prime Minister on 27 June 2013, he lost the election called for 7 September which was 72 days. These two changes took place in the first and second term of a government and are not relevant for comparison with longer term governments.

Among short term state Premiers, Russell Cooper became National Premier of Queensland 73 days before losing the 1989 election. Eric Willis became NSW Premier on 23 Januay 1976 and called an election for 1 May, a little over three months in office at the end of 11 years of Coalition government. Steven Miles took over as Queensland Premier a little over 10 months before an election was due.

SA Premier Rob Kerin took over as SA Premier after John Olsen resigned and just five months before losing the March 2002 election. Des Corcoran could have been in office longer after taking over from Don Dunstan but called a snap election for September 1979, just seven months into office. Eva Lawler became NT Chief Minister in 2024 eight months before an election and lost.

If Ben Carroll or someone else takes over before the election, it will be a rare case of three Premiers in a single term or Parliament. It happened in Queensland 1986-1989) with Joh Bjelke-Petersen, Mike Ahern and Russell Cooper, and NSW 1973-76 with Bob Askin, Tom Lewis and Eric Willis. There another in NSW 2007-2011 (Morris Iemma, Nathan Rees, Kristina Keneally) and the Northern Territory 2020-2024 (Michael Gunner, Natasha Fyles, Eva Lawler). All four of these government were defeated.

(Someone pointed out another three leader term. Northern Territory 1983-87 with Chief Ministers Paul Everingham, Ian Tuxworth and Steve Hatton.)

Let me me walk down memory lane and look at the record of ‘era’ governments and how they so often come to an inglorious end under a new leader.Read More »The Record of Late-Term Succession Premiers

2026 Victorian Election Pendulum

(Update – Three days after this post was published, Jacinta Allan was replaced as Premier by Ben Carroll. The post has been left as originally published.)

Victoria’s state election on 28 November will see voters pass judgment on Premier Jacinta Allen’s unpopular government and 12 years of Labor rule.

Most recent Victorian opinion polls reveal a three-way split of support between Labor, the Coalition and One Nation. Several have reported One Nation with the highest primary vote.

These are extra-ordinary polls in a state where two-party politics has traditionally been strongest and One Nation’s electoral support weakest.

One Nation’s poll ratings are also remarkable given the party has no state leader, no announced state policies, one upper house member and just one lower house candidate.

Were it not for other results this year, I would dismiss One Nation’s ratings as unlikely to hold until November, especially if it doesn’t hurry up and announce a leader.

But polls proved right in predicting One Nation would outpoll the Liberal Party at the South Australian election. The party polled well at the Nepean state by-election in May, and a week later matched expectations by easily winning the Farrer federal by-election.

If current polls prove correct, the result in November will have greater consequences for the course of national politics than any state election in my lifetime.

Australia’s two-sided party system has been around for more than a century. The two major parties have always clustered left and right of the centre. Smaller parties have come and gone, the most significant until now being the Greens who have staked out a significant base to the left of Labor.

Other prominent minor parties, like the DLP and Australian Democrats, lasted two decades and never built a base that could transmit loyalties to another generation. In retrospect, both were parties of transition, pathways for voters to change major party loyalty.

Until now, no new political entrant has threatened the foundations on which Australia’s two-party system is built. But the surge in One Nation support suggests the Coalition is in danger of being supplanted as Labor’s major opponent.

Is the Coalition about to fade away and be replaced by One Nation? Or will the Coalition and One Nation grow closer together and a new type of coalition emerge on the right?

It may sound odd to predict problems for the federal Coalition when it is a deeply unpopular Labor state government facing defeat in Victoria.

But if the Liberal-National Coalition cannot capitalise on Labor’s woes by winning majority government in Victoria, if it is forced into some governing arrangement with One Nation in a state where the party has previously barely rated, then there are consequences across the country.

It raises serious question about the Coalition’s future in states where One Nation has a stronger base. First cab off the rank will be the NSW election next March where optional preferential voting will magnify splits between the Coalition and One Nation.

Under optional preferential voting, parties can’t rely on voters to complete preference sequences. Especially if NSW Labor fills the airwaves with “Just Vote 1” messages. Many Coalition and One Nation voters will exhaust preferences and help deliver a comfortable majority to the Minns Labor government.

One Nation capturing the balance of power in Victoria will force some form of governing arrangement on the Liberal Party and (whatever remains of) the National Party. For the first time One Nation would have a say on who governs a state and how.

To date One Nation has been a powerless crossbench upper house party that chucks metaphorical rocks at government. It will need to learn new ways to behave if the election result draws it closer to the levers of government. Chucking rocks becomes a dangerous pastime from inside the glasshouse of government.

Plus One Nation has a terrible record of keeping its elected members within the party. If instability were to strike while One Nation filled a starring or support role in Victorian government, every failing of the party would be highlighted across the nation by its political opponents.

I’ve seen the pressure of governing splinter third parties before. At the 1996 New Zealand election, a similar populist party to One Nation, Winston Peters’ New Zealand First, won the balance of power. After weeks of negotiation, the party joined with National to form government. Over the next three years New Zealand First splintered, popular slogans mugged by the reality of governing. Its more sensible members were lured away by its coalition partner, the less sensible ostracised.

If the polls prove right, converting a three-way split of primary votes into seats in parliament has a range of possible outcomes. Some could produce a majority Coalition government. If not a majority, the question will be how far short of majority the Coalition finishes and whether a government supported by One Nation is possible.Read More »2026 Victorian Election Pendulum