Count complete – Updated 5:00pm AEST Thursday 2 April March 2026.
Quick Summary – All deats declared. Labor has 34 seats, the Liberal Party 5, One Nation 4, Independents 4.
Who will be the Opposition Leader? With the Liberal Party winning a fifth seat it is clear Liberal Leader Ashton Hurn will retain the parliamentary position of Leader of the Opposition. But what if the Liberals had finished with the same number of seats as One Nation? Emeritus Professor Anne Twomey has produced a video on her Constitution Clarion YouTube site running through the known conventions on the subject.
Update on 2PP: I understand the Electoral Commission has chosen not to do alternate 2PP counts in every seat. That’s a sensible decision with only 13 Labor-Liberal finishes against 26 Labor-One Nation contests and one Labor-Independent finish. I understand the other seven contests where Labor is excluded will have an additional two-party preferred count done. So the state-wide after preferences count for the 2026 South Australian election will produce a state-wide contest between Labor and everyone else.
Notes on Preferences
So far preference distributions from around two-thirds of seats have been released. (Thursday – some final figures released today are yet to be added.) Looking at the point where only three candidates remain in the count, the preference flows we are seeing are –
- In 6 Labor-Liberal contests where One Nation candidates were the last excluded, preferences are splitting 31% to Labor, 69% to Liberal
- In 7 Labor-One Nation contests where Liberal candidates were the last excluded, preferences are splitting 32% Labor 68% One Nation.
- In 5 Labor Liberal contests where Green candidates were the last excluded, preferences are flowing 85% to Labor, 15% to Liberal.
- In 10 Labor-One Nation contests where Green candidates were the last excluded, preferences are flowing 81% to Labor, 19% to One Nation.
- The only count so far available where Labor was the last excluded is Chaffey where Labor’s preferences split 71% to Liberal 29% to One Nation.
- These statistics do not measure preference flows. They are from the distribution of preferences so all flows include preferences from other candidates excluded earlier in the count.
Finniss – Independent Lou Nicholson has won from fourth place after the distribution of preferences. I explain how in this post.
Croydon Premier Peter Malinauskas has easily retained his seat, but there has been a boilover with who finished second. Independent Ahmed Azhar was a candidate for the SA Socialists, a party not registered in time for its party name to appear on the ballot paper. Around 70% of Azhar’s preferences flowed to the Greens putting the Greens ahead of One Nation. Then the Liberal was excluded and less than half of preferences flowed to One Nation leaving the Greens ahead and finishing second after preferences. Malinauskas won easily 76% to Greens 24%.
Late Called Seats
Thursday 2 April
Narungga (ONE NATION GAIN) – rural Yorke Peninsula – One Nation’s Chantelle Thomas claimed victory initially by 71 votes over the Liberal Party. After a re-count her victory margin was 58 votes. Sitting Independent Fraser Ellis has been defeated and Narungga is One Nation’s fourth seat.
Monday 30 March
MacKillop (ONE NATION GAIN) – South-east rural seat – a Liberal versus One Nation count was clearly underway for several days but nothing was being reported on the ECSA website. Before there were any published updates, Liberal candidate Rebekah Rosser conceded defeat on her Facebook page. One Nation’s Jason Virgo became his party’s third elected MHA. Independent and former Liberal MP Nick McBride finished fourth and was defeated.
Sunday Noon
Morphett (LABOR GAIN) – based on Glenelg in Adelaide – Morphett had been a very close count but it became clear with 89.2% counted that there were not enough votes left to turn around Labor’s lead. Liberal Stephen Patterson has been defeated by Labor’s Toby Priest. Postal vote counting favoured the Liberal Party, but all other categories of declaration votes were for Labor, especially the numerous Absent votes. The defeat leaves the Liberal Party with only one metropolitan seat, Bragg, a seat that has long been the party’s safest Adelaide seat. There were a number of polling places in Morphett that could not open at 8am on polling day. Whether this could be grounds to challenge the result would be for the Court of Disputed Returns to determine. But the bigger the Labor lead, the harder it would be to overturn the result. Expect there to be much analysis of the results in polling places that opened late.
Friday 4:30pm
Heysen (LIBERAL RETAIN) – Adelaide Hills seat has been a tight contest between Liberal Josh Teague and Labor’s Marise Bell. There was a chance that the Greens may pass Labor to finish second but this faded with the Greens polling poorly with postal votes. Based on 2022 turnout there would be a maximum 900 votes to count, but on available postal numbers the votes to count is much lower. Most of the outstanding votes are postal votes which favour the Liberal Party. Teague’s lead of 264 won’t be overturned with the type of votes still outstanding.
Tables and more information on winners and losers inside the post.
| Party | % Vote | Change in Vote |
Seats Won |
Change in Seats |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labor Party | 37.5 | -2.5 | 34 | +5 |
| Liberal Party | 18.9 | -16.7 | 5 | -7 |
| One Nation | 22.9 | +20.3 | 2 | +2 |
| The Greens | 10.4 | +1.3 | .. | .. |
| Others | 10.3 | -2.3 | 4 | .. |
Final Turnout 88.5%, down slightly from 89.0% in 2022.
Changing seats
Labor gains from Liberal
- Colton (LIB 4.8%) – swing to Labor 14.4% – Liberal MP Matt Cowdrey retired. New Labor MP is Aria Bolkus.
- Hartley (LIB 3.6%) – swing to Labor 7.1% – Liberal MP Vincent Tarzia defeated by Labor’s Jenn Roberts.
- Morialta (LIB 1.4%) – swing to Labor 10.9% – Liberal MP John Gardner retired. New Labor is MP Matthew Marozzi, winning at his second attempt.
- Morphett (LIB 4.5%) – swing to Labor 5.2% – Liberal MP Stephen Patterson defeated. New Labor MP is Toby Priest. First Labor victory in the seat since 1977.
- Unley (LIB 2.2%) – swing to Labor 9.4% – Liberal MP David Pisoni retired. New Labor MP Alice Rolls has been immediately appointed to the new Malinauskas ministry.
Note that Labor won 27 seats at the 2022 election but gained the seats of Black and Dunstan at by-elections in 2024.
Independent gains from Liberal
- Finniss (LIB 0.7% v IND) – swing to Independent 9.8% – Independent Lou Nicholson defeats sitting Liberal David Basham at her second attempt.
Two other seats that can be classed as either Independent gain from Liberal or Independent retain. The new members are –
- Kavel (IND 26.2% or LIB 3.5% v ALP) – The seat of retiring Independent Dan Cregan. The new Independent MP is Matt Schultz. Was an IND v LIB contest in 2022, an IND v ALP contest in 2026. Swing against Independent after preferences 17.0%.
- Mount Gambier (IND 13.1% or LIB 13.8% v ALP) – seat of convicted for Independent MP Troy Bell. The New Independent MP is Travis Fatchen. Was an IND v LIB contest in 2022, an IND v ONP in 2026. A swing away from the Independent of 2.6%.
One Nation gains from Liberal
In both seat below, the sitting Liberal MPs slipped to third creating One Nation-Labor contests and making the calculation of a swing impossible.
- Hammond (LIB 5.1%) – Sitting MP Adrian Pederick defeated by One Nation’s Robert Roylance.
- MacKillop (LIB 22.6%) – Sitting MP Nick McBride resigned from the Liberal Party in 2023 and re-contested as an Independent. He finished fourt in the count. New Liberal candidate Rebekah Rosser has been defeated by One Nation’s Jason Virgo.
- Ngadjuri (IND 8.1% v LIB%) – a very unusual contest in that two sitting members have been defeated. Liberal MP Penny Pratt has been defeated. She represented the seat under its former name Frome. Also defeated is Labor’s Tony Piccolo who moved next door from his former seat of Light. The new MP is One Nation’s David Paton.
Gain from Independent
Narungga (LIB 3.2%) – Independent MHA Fraser Ellis finished third and has been defeated. But his preferences helped the Liberal candidate Tania Stock close a substantial One Nation lead on first preferences. After the distribution of preferences, One Nation’s Chantelle Thomas won by 71 votes and by 58 votes after a re-count.
Retiring, Defeated and New Members
District names shown in bold are districts that have changed party status at the 2026 election.
| District | Former Member | Cause | New Member |
|---|---|---|---|
| Colton | Matt Cowdrey (LIB) | Retired | Aria Bolkus (ALP) |
| Elizabeth | Lee Odenwalder (ALP) | Retired | Ella Shaw (ALP) |
| Enfield | Andrea Michaels (ALP) | Retired | Lawrence Ben (ALP) |
| Finniss | David Basham (LIB) | Defeated | Lou Nicholson (IND) |
| Hammond | Adrian Pederick (LIB) | Defeated | Robert Roylance (ONP) |
| Hartley | Vincent Tarzia (LIB) | Defeated | Jenn Roberts (ALP) |
| Kavel | Dan Cregan (IND) | Retired | Matt Schultz (IND) |
| Lee | Stephen Mullighan (ALP) | Retired | David Wilkins (ALP) |
| Light | Tony Piccolo (ALP) | Moved | James Agness (ALP) |
| MacKillop | Nick McBride (IND) | Defeated | Jason Virgo (ONP) |
| Mawson | Leon Bignell (ALP) | Retired | Jenni Mitton (ALP) |
| Morialta | John Gardner (LIB) | Retired | Matthew Marozzi |
| Morphett | Stephen Patterson (LIB) | Defeated | Toby Priest |
| Mount Gambier | Troy Bell (IND) | Resigned | Travis Fatchen (IND) |
| Narungga | Fraser Ellis (IND) | Defeated | Chantelle Thomas (ONP) |
| Ngadjuri | Tony Piccolo (ALP) | Defeated | Switched seat |
| Ngadjuri | Penny Pratt (LIB) | Defeated | David Paton (ONP) |
| Port Adelaide | Susan Close (ALP) | Retired | Cheyne Rich (ALP) |
| Torrens | Dana Wortley (ALP) | Retired | Meagan Spencer (ALP) |
| Unley | David Pisoni (LIB) | Retired | Alice Rolls (ALP) |
Sorry if this sounds silly or has been asked before, but why does the AEC “choose” to conduct new preferences between two parties?
Do they not just count up all the first preference votes by booth, and then bring them to a central spot to then allocate out the preferences?
COMMENT: Legally the winning candidate is always determined by the full distribution of preferences in each seat which will be conducted from Saturday.
So that everyone has some idea what the final result will be, the Electoral Commission conducts indicative preference counts between a nominated pair of final two candidates. A pairing is always chosen before election night. If the primary voye results indicate that the wrong pairing has been chosen, a new pairing will be chosen and the indicative counts re-done.
Even at this point it may be the wrong pairing is chosen. In the end it is the final full distribution of preferences, where candidates are excluded and distributed one by one, that determines the result.
Thanks, Antony.
Does SA publish full vote data, or can we only see preferences by where they flow at each elimination stage of the full distribution?
It would be interesting to see what would happen if you artificially elminated LAB first in every seat. Would LIB be the largest party based on the assumption that most LAB voters would preference LIB above ON?
The full distribution should still be very interesting as we should see how well/poorly the now 3 major parties show up in 2nd/3rd/4th preferences.
COMMENT: Full preference distributions will be published once completed this weekend. Later in the year preference flow data will also be published. Ballot papers are counted by hand so only distributions and one set of flow data per electorate will be published.
I notice that you have listed the new Kavel preference throw as between One Nation and Labor, and yet you then state (and abc website has the same) that the Independent will win the seat? Just a bit confused by what the expected final two candidates are in that seat given it’s a close 4 way seat.
COMMENT: Typing error now fixed. Kavel is Independent versus Labor.
Who is the official opposition if the Libs and One nation have the same number of seat?
COMMENT: Who the Speaker chooses, in which case a dissent motion can be moved and a ballot held on who should hold the post. The only time I am aware of it happening, the government did not vote in the ballot and opposition members decided. I’d point out both the QLD and WA Electoral Commissions have abandoned doing separate two-party preferred counts.
Ah, the opposition is not just for the lower house, the upper house also has an opposition. Since the Libs have a combined greater number of seats across both houses than ONP, they would be designated the official opposition (and as such, get more resources).
COMMENT: House standing orders give certain speaking right to someone called the Leader of the Opposition. And that person must be in the house. There is no requirement to take into account upper house numbers which is why the National Party Leader was Leader of the Opposition in WA 2021-2025.
Anne Twomey has posted a comment about this on Constutitional Clarion.
Do we know if the Electoral Commission will calculate a statewide two-party-preferred vote (either between Labor and One Nation, Labor and the Liberals, or both)?
COMMENT: I don’t know. I suspect they are still contemplating what to do. Based on history they do a Labor-Liberal 2PP as it is a historic sequence and in the past was used for redistributions. But is it worth doing given this result? If people want multiple different versions of preference counts, I suspect the government will need to provide funding as I doubt it is a task the small permanent staff of the Commission can take on.
LC? Do they ‘push the button’ on Saturday when they do full distributions in the lower house? Or will that be a longer, by-hand type process?
COMMENT: The lower house seats will have preference distribution down by hand this weekend. The LC count is done separately. All ballot papers with preferences are currently being scanned and data entered. The preference distribution is probably a fortnight away. The result is clear, Labor 5, One Nation 3, Liberal 2, Greens 1.
I’ve seen in the past as a scrutineer that some funny dealing have happened especially with those who only mark one candidate. This happens more in QLD because of no house of review. How certain can one be that extra numbers might slip onto a ballet?
COMMENT: Queensland used optional preferential voting from 1992 to 2015 and a 1 was formal. The average ballot paper in SA has 8 candidates so writing in new numbers is not something that could be done quickly. The ECSA staff are having enough difficulty counting the votes and any scrutineer who touches a ballot paper is breaking the law.
I’m slightly confused by what’s going on with Kavel.
My understanding was that Schultz would win on preferences if he made the final 2 but that there was still a chance to he could be overtaken by the Liberal candidate when One Nation preferences were redistributed so the seat was still considered in doubt. Now the seat seems to have been called by the ABC after this new preference count, but we already knew that Schultz would win this, so I don’t see what’s changed.
Is there some other information that shows Shultz will make the final 2 that I haven’t been able to find? Or have the ABC potentially called this seat prematurely?
COMMENT: The Electoral Commission examined the preferences of the One Nation and Greens candidates in selected polling places to determine if they would change the order of the top three candidates. Once they were satisfied that Kavel was a Labor-Independent count, everyone was able to fall back on the election night tally which showed Schutz clearly winning.
It would be heaps odd if Chantelle One Nation won Narungga as ALL the how to votes except family first put Liberal above one nation.
COMMENT: I wrote a post based on the SA2022 HTVs showing how few voters followed the recommendations.
Antony
“In Hammond we have no previous preference count, but with Labor and One Nation less than 100 votes apart and Liberal preference to comfortably favour One Nation, it looks a certain victory for One Nation’s Robert Roylance”.
Do we have any knowledge of how much of the Liberal preferences are drifting ultimately to Labor?
COMMENT: There are two hints. One is the clear flow of preferences to One Nation from excluded candidates in every other seat where they finish in a contest versus Labor. Second is the downcast gaze of the Labor scrutineers once they realised the Liberal would finish third in Hammond.
Hi Antony, I’m curious what happens to informal votes where PHON voters placed only a 1 in the PHON candidate’s box in a PHON vs other 2PP district during the re-check process? The ECSA website states “Some ballot papers that don’t have all the preferences marked on them can be accepted as formal if they match a voting ticket lodged by a candidate.” which I assume means that they can only be accepted as formal in a PHON 2PP head to head but informal in any other contests? I can’t find any information elsewhere about this phenomenon.
COMMENT: If a ballot paper has incomplete preferences, but the numbers written match the preferences to that number on the lodged ticket of the first preference candidate, then the ballot paper is admitted to the count. Most of the votes let in are for a single 1 rather than an incomplete sequence. The issue is whether a ballot paper matches the lodged ticket, not who the final candidates in the contest are.
I always thought of voting system was fair and honest, but it’s far from that
How come labour with 37.6% of the vote get 33 seats, while liberal with 19.2% get 4 seats, and one nation with 22.3% get 2 seats
If the system is honest, which now i don’t think it is, One Nation should have got 10 or 11 seats
And Labor should have no more than 18 seats.
COMMENT: The sort of result you suggest is only possible at elections that use electoral systems based on proportional representation. Australia elects members using single member electorates and has done for 125 years. It is a majoritarian system, designed to elect stable governments. It is not proportional representation. It rewards parties that achieve majority support in single member electorates which is why Labor wins many more seats. In single member electorates, parties with the highest votes top the polls in most seats, and the bigger the gap between the leading party and trailing parties, the bigger the winning bonus.
Proportional representation is used in Tasmania and the ACT, but every other state, territory and the Commonwealth has used single member majoritarian electoral systems for the past century.
The Lower House uses a majoritarian system on a seat by seat basis. This is why Labor has 33 seats – they have won a majority of votes (including preferences) in 33 seats.
The Upper House uses a proportional system on a statewide basis. This is why Labor have won 5 of 11 seats (45% of seats) on 38% of the votes (including preferences from minor parties that did not get enough votes for even one seat). This is the system you speak of.
I would also say a majoritarian method looks more fair when there are just 2 parties, when we can use the 2PP to better assess the support for each party. For example, at the SA2022 election, Labor won 27/47 seats (57.4%) off 55.4% of the 2PP vote.
Exactly. I note this is a common misconception – or argument. The candidates and parties also know the systems they are working to. If it was a different system, they would have campaigned differently, and the end result may or may not have been different.
I think the system we are used to is as, to paraphrase an old British P.M. , the worst possible one, except for all the others.
Mark, imagine Mary, John and Sue were running in a seat with 100 voters (for simple numbers).
May gets 35 first preference votes.
John gets 38 first preference votes.
Sue gets 27 first preference votes.
No clear winner right? You don’t want John to win as he only got 38/100.
So we go to second preference, and as Sue got the least amount of votes we look at her voter’s preferences.
Sue’s voters second preferences are as follows:
Mary: 20
John: 7
This means after this round of preferences, Mary has 55 votes and John has 45. Mary wins by clear majority.
Now imagine this happens almost everywhere, in 33 seats in this example. This is why Labor has so many seats and the other parties don’t.
COMMENT: No, Labor has 33 seats because it has by far the highest primary vote. It led the primary vote in 35 of the state’s 47 seats. Labor has such a huge majority because its primary vote was so high that nobody could defeat them on preferences. There is endless debate about preferences and most of it overlooks the importance of getting primary votes first.
Why aren’t full preferences counted, purely for statistical purposes? ie:
1. Count all the 1st preferences (usually on the night etc) add on absent/postal/etc after 1st count
2. For *all* 1st preference ballots, count 2nd – nth and accumulate so we know the exact preferences declared on the ballots.
3. Eliminate and distribute preferences as per current rules on last day and declare winners etc.
Wouldn’t that give us a complete picture of the flow of preferences from 1 – n in every seat? Or am I missing something?
COMMENT: All ordinary votes, that is polling day and early votes, are counted on election night. They are check counted in the days that follow as the official count. An indicative preference count is done at the same time. Because One Nation polled better than anticipated, the indicative preference counts had to be re-done as part of the check count which has delayed the count. After the check count, all declaration votes (Postals, Absents, etc)have their envelopes checked, ballots extracted and counted. A check count and indicative preference throw is also done on these votes.
A full distribution will be done once the primary count is complete. This will take place early next week.
Hey what’s the convention if ON and LNP happened to both end up on 4 seats? I understand this might not be statistically possible just based on how counts are playing out, but I’m just wondering what the convention is there.
COMMENT: The Leader of the Opposition is chosen by the Speaker. If some members of the opposition move dissent in the Speaker’s choice, a vote can be held to determine who should be Leader of the Opposition. The only time I’m aware of this procedure being used, government members did not take part in the vote. Sensibly the identity of the proposed Leader should be agreed between those on the opposition benches before the first sitting.
Thank you for the update Antony.
The first seat Greens ever won off Liberals, Prahran (Vic) 2014, had stronger Labor->Green preference flows than vice versa.
More recently I know federal QLD seats demonstrated the opposite – is that where is the assumption that it’s the case for Heysen coming from? Federally, Rebekah Sharkie’s presence muddies the data from Mayo (but maybe Senate data can shed light?)
It seems to me like the SA Greens are more moderate than other Greens, with the Heysen campaign being more like a Bob Brown era Greens campaign. The area has a left of Liberal independent federally, with Greens seeking to fill the same niche. So it seems possible to me the Green voters in Heysen are potentially more Liberal friendly, that’s baked in to the 2PP, and any Green vs Liberal 2CP might actually be less favourable for the Liberals than the 2PP.
COMMENT: The assumption is coming from my work on preference flows at the last two Federal elections and the 2022 Victorian election.
Fantastic analysis.
Did the Nationals field any candidates in the SA election? And do they still exist in SA?
COMMENT: Three. Didn’t poll much.
The Liberal ‘thin blue line’ from Bragg to Schubert via Heysen!
Yes – but have a look at the 1993 electoral map- a tiny cluster of red seats in the metro area only amongst a sea of blue! Inevitably things will swing back – because Australian voters eventually like a change of government which quite frankly is very sensible because it guards against nepotism, corruption and an abuse of power.
On Finniss, how do you think the conclusion they have reached is arrived at? Liberal and ON were ahead in the primary count that is shown, yet the two preference is showing only 4666 votes counted, and still between Liberal and the Ind candidates. Are we likely to see another count done between Liberal and ON given what we see here? If not, I’d love to learn about what the indications are here that mean it is not required. Love your commentary over the years, thanks for your consistent and enduring efforts!
COMMENT: The Commission did a test throw of preferences from the Green and second Independent Lewis. These indicate Lou Nicholson does much better than Labor on those candidate’s preferences and moves ahead into third place, from where Labor preferences put here into second place. Unless the test throw was done incorrectly, the final count will be Liberal versus Independent.
Can you please explain the result in Finniss? It looks like Liberals and One Nation will finish 1st and 2nd. With independent 4th. Unsure how the independent can win. Thanks.
COMMENT: Nicholson does much better than Labor in preferences from Independent Lewis and the Greens, getting into third place ahead of Labor. From there Nicholson benefits from Labor preferences to win.
Thanks, this is great article.
Hey Anthony! What a fascinating election!
Just curious if you know of any other candidates coming from 4th place on primaries to win aside Lou Nicholson here. I know the preference flows heavily favored her from lower finishing candidates. I can’t remember this happening, and projections being so sure of the win fairly early in counting.
COMMENT: I’m not aware of it happening at a state or federal election. I’m doing a post on it later today.
I’m not sure how the independents all lean, but would it be fair to say the Liberal party lost more seats to competitors on their left than competitors on their right?
COMMENT: The Liberal Party has lost 5 seats to Labor, 3 and maybe a fourth to One Nation, and one to an Independent. With the departure of sitting Independents, and replacement by new Independents, you could chalk up Kavel and Mount Gambier as fail to wins rather than Liberal defeats.
Hi Antony, when do you think the flow of preference data will be published for each electorate will be published by the SA Electoral Commission?
COMMENT: As I understand it, they will be published as each is finished over the next two days. Finniss was published today. I’m not sure what else has already been published. I’ve been a bit focused in Finniss.
Thank you
Hi Antony, follow up question. Do you have any idea why the Electoral Commission published the preference distribution for Finniss and then took them down again (as per 5.30 pm AEST today). The link to distribution of preferences has also been removed for that electorate but not others. Thanks in advance.
COMMENT: I’ve had my first day in a fortnight without talking to the Electoral Commission. The Finniss preference distribution was displayed very badly with no candidate or party labels and the candidates displayed in an order with no apparent meaning. I presume they’ve taken the distribution down to fix what they publish.
Thank you. I noticed they had it done in any user friendly way; and appreciate your time (and insights).
Do you know the latest on the ON lower house votes that only had the 1st preference completed? Some people say they will be counted. Some say that even preferences will be allocated using something called a “hidden ticket” submitted to the EC by ON.
All sounds very unlikely. Surely they are either informal, or the 1st preference is accepted, and then it exhausts.
COMMENT: It’s not just One Nation votes. All votes with incomplete preferences are considered for ‘saving’ using crietria set out in the Electoral Act. I explain how in an old post a re-published this week.
My son (11 yrs) asks, has there been elections that were bigger electoral landslides than the South Australian election this year?
COMMENT: By far the biggest landslide in Australian history was Labor’s win under Mark McGowan at the 2021 Western Australian election. Labor polled just short of 60% of the primary vote, just under 70% after preferences, and won 53 of the 59 seats in the lower house. Labor also won a majority in the upper house for the first time in WA history. The Liberal Party was reduced to just two seats and the National Party with four seats took over the opposition leadership.
In the 7 seats where Labor isn’t in the top 2, will their part in the statewide 2PP be Labor vs the winner of the seat, or will there be a full rethrow of preferences until only 1 non-Labor candidate remains. So for example would Finniss be ALP vs Nicholson, or ALP vs Liberal (who presumably doesn’t get overtaken by Nicholson without ALP preferences)?
COMMENT:
I can’t answer that question.A Labor-Liberal count has been done.