AD-Lib Spring 2017 by SA Young Liberals

AD-Lib Th e S o u t h A u s t r a l i a n Yo u n g L i b e r a l M o v e m e n t M a g a z i n e Spring 2017

AD-Lib

Disclaimer The opinions expressed herein belong solely to the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editor or the South Australian Young Liberal Movement. Contributions to this edition of AD-Lib are from members and friends of the SAYLM. To contribute to the next issue of AD-Lib or to contact the Editor, email adlib@sayoungliberals.com. Authorised by Ms. Jocelyn Sutcliffe, President, SAYLM. 104 Greenhill Road, Unley, 5061.

Contents From the Editor 3 From the President 4 Convention 2017 - Nik Baric 5 Convention & Tonkin Dinner 8

The rise of minor political parties - Oliver Douglas

EDO Report from New Zealand - Hugh Sutton

A Game of Snakes and Ladders - Henry Davis

AD-Lib

From the Editor

elcome to the Spring 2017 edition of AD-Lib magazine, the quarterly publication of the South Australian Young Liberal Movement.

Much as happened since the last edition and we now find ourselves less than four months out from the 2018 State Election - possibly the most important, not only in generations, but for our generation. Within the Movement we had our AGM a number of months ago resulting in a new look executive team. Those elected include: President: Jocelyn Sutcliffe Vice-President: Kelvin Binns Policy Vice President: Nik Baric Administration Director: Jack Newton Membership Director: Dimitrios Trago Social Director: Will Van Disse Communications Director: Rowan Thomas Campaigns Director: Hugh Sutton Development Director: Laura Dickenson If you have any questions or issues, don’t hesitate to get in touch with any member of the Executive. We also had our 2017 Convention and Tonkin Dinner in October at the Rydges South Park. In what was a hugely successful day (and night), the movement debated dozens of policies, passing many, and even presented State Liberal Leader Steven Marshall MP with the first ever Young Liberal Policy booklet. It was a huge achievement and all credit has to go to Policy Vice President Nik Baric and his hard-working Policy Committee. You can read more about it in his report from page 5. In this issue Young Liberal Oliver Douglas has examined the rise of minor parties and the reasons behind their popularity. Can they be stopped? Who knows. Read Oliver’s report on page 10. The Liberal Movement’s Electorate Development Officer (EDO) program is one of the best ways for Young Liberals to get great campaign

experience at little to no cost to them. Flights and accommodation are usually paid for by the Federal Young Liberal Movement and members can spend upwards of a week assisting campaigns across the country and abroad. Our own Campaigns Director, Hugh Sutton, recently went to New Zealand as part of the EDO program to assist with the New Zealand National Party’s campaign. His report gives a fascinating insight into how they structure their campaigns and has many lessons for us about how we can run our campaign in March 2018. His report is on page 14. Lastly, Henry Davis takes a look at the future of politics and ponders whether it is inevitable that all politicians will end up being ‘taken out in a box’ as Paul Keating infamously said. Read his entertaining article on page 18 Thanks to all those who contributed to this edition of AD-Lib. As always, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with me if you are interested in writing an article for the magazine. All submissions are more than welcome and help get your name out there in the movement and wider party. Cheers, Rowan Thomas SAYLM Communications Director

AD-Lib

From the President

n Friday 14 July, the South Australian Young Liberals met for our Annual General Meeting to elect a new Executive body to lead the movement for the coming 12 months. This is my first Ad-Lib message since being elected President and I am pleased to report that we have hit the ground running! On 15 October, we hosted our state Convention at The Rydges which was a huge success â&#x20AC;&#x201C; we passed over 10 policy motions, generating rigorous debate and were joined by a number of key guest speakers including Steven Marshall MP, Dan Cregan, Kendall Jackson and Lachlan Clyne. Importantly, we unveiled and presented our first ever Policy Booklet to Steven Marshall MP. The Policy Committee, led by Policy Vice President, Nik Barik should be proud of the final product which was a true testament to their hard work over several months. In the evening, we returned for our annual Tonkin Dinner, in memory of the late Dr David Tonkin AO, former Premier of South Australia. Our guest speaker for the evening was The Hon John Olsen AO who recounted his time as Premier in what was a compelling and entertaining speech. Attendance at Convention and Tonkin Dinner was widespread from the Liberal Party membership, confirming yet again that the Young Liberals continue to impress and influence the broader Liberal Party â&#x20AC;&#x201C; we are grateful for the ongoing support. At state council on 20 October, I was pleased to move a motion on behalf of the Young Liberals in support of Australia Day remaining on 26 January each year. The motion passed unanimously and just 3 days later, Steven Marshall and his team announced their Election policy to legislate to ensure our national day is protected. Yet again, the Young

Liberals are making an impact, advocating to Parliamentarians about our values and policy platform. The coming months will see the Young Liberals focus on campaigning in the lead up to the March election. I will advocate to the Federal Young Liberal Executive for strong representation from across the country through a Federal EDO Programme, as has occurred in other divisions over election periods. Young Liberals are always willing to do the heavy lifting and I am confident that the South Australian election will be no exception, and that support to ensure a Liberal win will be forthcoming and far-reaching! Jocelyn Sutcliffe SAYLM President

AD-Lib

CON VEN TION 2017

Nik Baric outlines the great success that was Convention 2017 and the many policy motions that were passed successfully

n October, we held the annual Young Liberal Convention at Rydges South Park. This event is a highlight of the Young Liberal calendar and was a watershed moment for the Young Liberal Policy Committee.

In the morning, we were joined by the State Liberal Leader, Steven Marshall MP, who gave an insightful speech about the challenge ahead of the 2018 State Election. Following this speech, we unveiled our highly-anticipat-

AD-Lib

ed Policy Booklet, Propositions for our Future: A Young Liberal Perspective and presented a copy to the Leader. It is the first time in recent years that our organisation has developed a booklet which attempts to encapsulate the views of young people here in South Australia as effectively as we have done this year. After many months of hard work, drafting, brainstorming, and researching, we were able to finalise our 16-page final copy before distributing it to every South Australian Liberal MP.

We have worked tirelessly to communicate our message, that something needs to change in South Australia if we are to achieve a better future for our young people. I am proud that our message is finally being heard. The SALYM is very lucky to have such hard-working and intelligent people such as Ben Newell, Henry Davis, Georgia Williams, Luke Hanson, Dominic Olivieri and Zane Basic, who form our policy committee. Their commitment towards the development of our booklet has been outstanding. All of the design work was completed by our talented, Rowan Thom-

AD-Lib

as who assisted us to bring it all together and enhance our presentation.

policies of the South Australian Young Liberal Movement.

The feedback that we have received since unveiling this booklet has been overwhelming and the members of the policy committee have been congratulated on their efforts.

In line with our partyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s core beliefs, the policy motions that this organisation endorses are then communicated to the Federal Young Liberal Movement and the South Australian Liberal Party at large. It is a vital pillar of our youth political movement that we have the opportunity to directly influence policy development.

In addition to this outstanding achievement which became the centrepiece of the day, we held lively policy debate where we challenged a broad range of ideas including the State Bank Tax, the benefits of bicycle helmets and whether postal voting should be introduced for State and Federal Pre-selections.

Nik Baric is the Policy Vice-President of the South Australian Young Liberal Movement

At the conclusion of the Convention, we had passed ten key policies which are now official

AD-Lib

Convention 2017 & Tonkin Dinner

AD-Lib

“What are the determining factors which compel people to vote a certain way and how has this fuelled the rise of minor political parties in Australia?” Oliver Douglas examines the rise of minor parties and the factors that have contributed to their huge growth in recent years

here is substantial evidence supporting the view that voting patterns, policy, campaign tactics, uncertainty about the future, personal hardship, party leaders and small minor details are the factors, which influence voters and have coalesced to fuel the current rise of minor political parties in Australia. These factors are critical for understanding the recent rise of minor political parties. Previously these factors were manipulated by the two major parties to further their own goals and achieve electoral success. This has backfired recently with minor political parties exploiting these same factors. As an example, minor parties can prey on people’s fears about the future and offer populist, unrealistic policy to garner voter support. However, the other factors are just as important in understanding this extraordinary change in Australian Federal politics. Results gathered have led to the key finding that the share of Australian swing voters is growing and they are making the decision who to vote for progressively later in the campaign. According to Professor Haydon Manning, it is evident that 60% of Australians decide how to vote before the election, 30% during the campaign and 10% on polling day. This data demonstrates that roughly 40% of

Australian voters are ‘swing’ voters and therefore able to be coerced into voting for a 3rd party. AEC voting data indicates that these swinging voters over the last 50 years have started to abandon the two major parties, with the percentage of first preference vote going to the two major parties decreasing from a high of 96% in 1975 to 77% in 2016. Therefore, it is possible that minor political parties have become more adept at coercing voters during the campaign and on voting day. This claim can be backed up with state liberal leader Stephen Marshall’s gaffe on election night saying “If people want to grow our economy … they need to vote Labor tomorrow.” It is generally agreed this was the moment the Liberals lost. It would appear reasonable to conclude that by understanding when people decide to vote and how they can be influenced it can explain how minor political parties have gained popularity recently. Another major finding was how significant policy is for voters when deciding how to vote. According to Member for Boothby, Nicolle Flint, policy is “really important” for voters. This statement is supported by survey data which suggests about 40% of people used policy as the primary factor in determining how they would vote. Nicolle Flint states “a strong, sim-

AD-Lib

ple message which resonated with voters,” were the primary reasons for success liberal success in 2013 while the campaign slogan of “Jobs and Growth” and the corresponding economic policy with it brought about Coalition success in the 2016 Federal Election. Nicolle also explained that an “uncertain future” for voters coupled with impossibly good policy proposals from minor political parties had led to their increase in popularity. These unworkable popular proposals include a four-day working week proposal from the Greens and One Nation’s and Nick Xenophon’s belief they can revive Australia’s manufacturing industry. The reason minor political parties can promise such grandiose plans is because they will not have to govern the country and preside over the massive consequences of their actions. Therefore, evidence shows how minor political parties have sufficiently manipulated policy and its decisive role in voter decision making to increase their share of the vote in recent years. Research shows that campaign tactics are another pivotal factor in convincing voters to vote for a certain party. The message of parties is crucial in convincing voters because it gives people a sense of direction, hope and security about the future. H. Manning and R. Manwaring in their peer-reviewed political journal provide insight as to how the SA 2014 state election had a stark contrast between campaign messages, direction and vision. The Labor party

ran a strong state-wide positive campaign promising to “Build SA,” which linked neatly with large infrastructure projects on at the time like the Adelaide Oval, accompanying bridge and RAH. Along with macro-level positivity, Labor used seat level scare campaigns to secure marginal seats. In particular, the seat where Annabel Digance was up against Carolyn Habib. Labor released pamphlets with a bullet-riddled background and only Carolyn Habib’s middle-eastern sounding surname on it. This move plays on race baiting and people’s legitimate fears about terrorism and Muslim immigration to Australia. These tactics have been used effectively by Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party recently, as she has repeatedly called for a “Muslim Ban,” and offers a strong vision for an Australia under her control. There is little doubt this campaign rhetoric has brought her success as One Nation won four Senate seats and received 600,000 votes in the 2016 federal election. Thus, in summary, campaign tactics used by major political parties are essential for compelling voters and their effective use by minor political parties has played a pivotal role in their recent surge in popularity. Evidence gathered indicates an uncertain future plays a large role in determining which party people vote for. Nicolle Flint states, “we are in a time where people don’t feel as confident and secure as in the past.” She goes on to state that, during the “Howard & Costello years we had the mining boom, everyone who wanted a job could get a job and we (Australia) had

AD-Lib the highest employment and lowest unemployment rates we’ve seen.” However, this has since changed with unemployment increasing and the “mining boom dropping off.” On top of this is the ever-present threat of technological disruption which has led to Holden and Ford closing in Australia and “people feeling quite uncertain about their future.” Survey data suggests this has coincided with plummeting faith in Australia’s major parties with only 11% of people feeling like the two major parties best represent them. Minor political parties have then exploited this very apparent loss of blue-collar industrial jobs to criticise globalisation. This argument has been made more convincing by the fact that 58% of people say wealth inequality is a major issue and feel left behind. Therefore, in summary, it is clear minor political parties are exploiting voter uncertainty for the future by funnelling votes away from establishment major parties. Survey data indicates constituents are more likely to vote for a minor political party if they are experiencing personal hardship. Survey data proved that if going to the ballot today, people would cast 36% of votes in favour of minor political parties. When asked the same question but with themselves being in a hypothetical situation of personal hardship votes received by minor political parties jumps to 51%. Therefore evidence gathered supports the notion that current minor political party voters are struggling either financially, fearful of immigrants or are frustrated with inequality. Consequently, they are directing their votes

towards minor political parties. Data demonstrates that wage growth in Australia adjusted to inflation has been stagnant, migration rates to Australia are at all-time highs with the percentage of foreign-born Australians reaching 28% in 2014 and wealth inequality continues to increase. Minor political parties have taken advantage of this with Pauline Hanson playing on racial tension and proposing a Muslim ban. Nick Xenophon and his party have proposed trade protectionist policies to protect Australia’s manufacturing industry from globalism. Finally, the Greens propose increases to the minimum wage to boost wage growth. There is little doubt that these quick and simple solutions to vast and complex problems are very attractive to struggling Australians who feel cheated by the system and want a solution the mainstream parties are not offering them. One of the key determining factors for people are party leaders and they have been instrumental in increasing minor political parties vote share. An article published by the ABC on April 17, 2013, shows that 21% of people’s vote was determined by the party’s political leader. Survey evidence indicates 16% of people say the federal leader is the primary factor in which party they vote for. This positive leader effect is clear in Dean Jaensch’s peer-reviewed analysis of the 2001 NT territory election. The state Labor party had a bad image as the “Party of Aborigines” and as a “Poor economic manager” in NT, so to break this stereotype they chose Clare Martin as the leader. Clare

AD-Lib

Martin was relatively young and was the antithesis of the CLP governing party. She was young, female and widely respected as an ABC journalist. This then led to Territory Labor’s first ground-breaking electoral win. Nick Xenophon also plays a similar role in galvanising support for his minor political party (previously NXT now SA Best) by utilising his own popularity to ensure the success of his party candidates. Therefore it is clear that charismatic leaders play a decisive role in garnering support for minor political parties. Factors often seen trivial by the electorate can be critical in deciding what party people vote for. According to professor John Krosnick of Stanford University, candidates in elections have won “because their names were listed first on the ballot.” This is because research indicates name placement can increase the percentage vote for a candidate by up to 4%, a very significant number in an election. Professor John Krosnick also states this effect is acuter “If you are feeling uninformed and yet feel obligated to cast a vote - or if you are feeling deeply conflicted.” Due to Australia’s compulsory voting system, it is a logical inference to conclude some people are affected or swayed by this factor. Larger minor political parties are benefitting from this effect largely because they are receiving name placement above the ballot paper line which when there are in excess of 50 names below. Another factor oft talked about in politics is the gender of the candidate. Although pinning down exact numbers is difficult, the research paper co-authored by Nicolle Flint and Nick Cater for the Menzies Research Centre shows that women traditionally vote for the Coalition. However in 2010 women unexpectedly voted in droves

for Julia Gillard. This could be because she is a woman or because female tertiary education is at record levels and there tends to a bias towards progressive views amongst university students. This type of gender bias could play into support for Pauline Hanson or the Greens who field many female representatives. Therefore, there is little doubt that miscellaneous or minor factors play a significant role when bunched together as one factor. It can be concluded that the aforementioned factors play a decisive role in the way people vote and it is clear these same factors are responsible for the rise of minor political parties in Australia. The disruption of traditional voting patterns and the concurrent increase of swing voters in the electorate has helped minor political parties. Minor political parties have manipulated policy. Campaign tactics, particularly ones that play on fear and exploit the more numerous amount of swing voters has caused large swathes of Australians to embrace minor political parties. Uncertainty about the future has pushed people into minor party hands. People enduring personal hardship are more likely to vote for a minor political party. Charismatic minor party leaders have been able to funnel votes to their parties using celebrity alone. Finally, small minor factors like gender and ballot name placement are now serving to help minor parties gain support. This shows that the factors which decide a way a person will vote in a federal election are becoming perfectly aligned and allowing for the rise of minor political parties. Oliver Douglas is a member of the SAYLM

AD-Lib

EDOing in NZ Support for the New Zealand National Party election campaign came from far and wide thanks the the Federal Young Liberal’s EDO program. Our own Hugh Sutton was there to lend a hand and learn about how they do things across the ditch.

was lucky enough to be sent over to New Zealand on behalf of the Federal Young Liberals to campaign in their federal election. As an Electoral Development Officer, I was able to see firsthand the inner workings of the National campaign, in the hopes of bringing back some ideas we can use in our own state election next March. The Monday was our first day of campaigning with the Young Nationals, and my good friend from the Australian Capital Territory, Robert Bower. We were immediately thrust into the nitty gritty, up at 5am, to be out hoarding with Nikki Kaye MP at 6:30am. Nikki Kaye is best

known for obviously being an excellent member for the area, but also for defeating Jacinda Adern twice in the two previous elections. Adern couldn’t win the electorate on her own back, so she was catapulted into Parliament as a Labour List MP until this year when she moved into the safe Labour Seat of Mt Albert. Hoardings in New Zealand are what we call in Australia, roadsiding. Essentially standing on the side of a busy intersection or roundabout, and waving corflutes at the oncoming traffic. It’s essentially a giant visibility exercise, with the candidates joining in with the fun. After we finished with Nikki Kaye MP, the former Education Minister, we made a quick stop at

AD-Lib

Topham Guerin’s Digital Office to meet some of the team. TG were the masterminds behind the Senior Party’s media campaign. After TG, we went to Nikki Kaye’s Electorate Office and made some phone calls to the electorate, while meeting some of her staff. We then did some more hoardings for Nikki, before making our way over to a debate between the Presidents of Young National and Young Labour. This debate was held by a student group, Niesh, and was live-streamed on Facebook. This was an action-packed day to begin the campaign, and this was to be the standard for all the following days. The next day wasn’t as busy as the previous one, with some hoardings across the city with Chris Penk in Helensville and Erika Stanford in East Coast Bays. Wednesday began at the University of Auckland, with the Prime Minister, Bill English, making an appearance at the Science Faculty to announce an increase of funding for the sector. We followed the PM through the Press Pack, and managed to get a photo with the man! Around this time a story came to light about Jian Yiang, a National List MP, regarding his potential involvement with Chinese intelligence. A few of the Young Nationals, Robert, and I drove back to National HQ, where Yiang was to be giving a press conference. We showed up to provide support to Jiang during his presser, and it was incredibly interesting to be behind the scenes at a public grilling of a Federal Member of Parliament. After that episode, we returned to the normal schedule and went up to Te Atatu for Hoardings with

local List MP, Alfred Ngaro. We ended the day with dinner at a Chinese restaurant, a great bookend on a full on day. We began the day back at Nikki Kaye’s EO, stuffing envelopes and entering data. We did that for a while, before going out on another Auckland Central hoarding expedition. This time walking what felt like the entire electorate. The final event of the day was a live debate on TV, with representatives for all of the significant parties, major and minor. Within the crowd were representatives of all the youth wings of the parties, as well as select invitees from certain high schools. It was an entertaining debate, with Chris Bishop representing the National Party extremely well. Friday naturally started with hoardings, this time in Te Atatu, and ending with more hoardings in Helensville. The Epsom Markets was where we began the last Saturday before the election, and we were accompanying local List MP, Paul Goldsmith, and his little doggo. We walked around the markets in National shirts, handing out collateral and speaking to local constituents. We then moved on to Maungakiekie with Denise Lee, a local Councillor fighting to win the bellwether seat. An interesting fact about Lee, her father set up United Future, a failed (as tends to happen with parties such as this) centrist party. We had a good discussion about the pros, but mainly the cons, of Centrism as a political force and the lack of morals and values needed to be a ‘radical centrist’. Saturday was also the beginning of the 24 Hour

AD-Lib Campaign day, which wasn’t quite 24 hours, but we came close at 20 odd hours. We were lucky enough to be able to accompany Nikki Kaye to Waiheke Island, the home of the New Zealand Green movement, to letterbox and meet some locals. Nikki personally is much more popular in Waiheke than the National Party, so the campaigning was a tad different to the usual. It was more promoting Nikki herself as the local MP, than the National Party. We adjourned from campaigning for dinner and the All Blacks game (naturally), and it was good to settle down with some beers and get to know some of the volunteers. After dinner and the All Blacks game, we went out letterboxing in Maggie Barry’s seat of North Shore. We letterboxed into the early hours of the AM, before finally being able to get to sleep, ready for another day tomorrow.

find some time to do hoardings, so we helped out Chris Penk on the side of a busy roundabout. The day ended with an intimate dinner at the farm of Young National President, Stefan Sunde. The perfect end to a busy day. Monday was chock a block full of hoardings, out in Auckland Central, Te Atatu, Maungakiekie, East Coast Bays, and Northcote.

The second day of the campaign weekend started with Paul Goldsmith and Nikki Kaye at the Parnell Markets. We spoke to locals and enjoyed some of the local food stall goods. We were then surprised by the appearance of the PM, Bill English, who did the rounds of the market, speaking to stall owners, and customers alike. After the markets, we followed the PM around to shopping centres in Botany Bay and St Judes, moving in a mob of blue shirts behind the press pack. We, of course, had to

On Wednesday we flew down to Wellington with Stefan and some other Young Nationals, to prepare for the campaign bus with Bill. We had a tour of National HQ, as well as the surrounding areas of Wellington. We had a beer in the famous Back Benchers Pub, before having some pizza and watching a leaders debate.

Tuesday was much the same, with hoardings in Mt Albert and Hunua. We did end the day with a debate at the University of Auckland, ran by the Public Policy Club. The Young Nationals were represented at the ‘Baby Backbenchers’ by the very capable Dylan Parshotam, Co-Chair of the Northern Region Young Nationals. The debate surrounded issues that young people face, as well as some of the overarching issues of the election.

We got on the bus in Wellington, and drove to a café in Maungaraki, before moving through various malls in Johnsonville and Coastlands.

AD-Lib We ended the day at the Suncourt Hotel, where a reception was held for Bill by the local National members. On a chilly Friday morning, we boarded the bus and set out for a cafĂŠ in Taupo, where Bill had a press conference and a coffee. The PM was then greeted with a Haka in Rotorua, before going for a quick walk around the city. We did the usual shopping centre visits, but the highlight was dropping by Pokeno Village for some ice cream. I was lucky enough to be served by Deputy PM Paula Bennett, who scoops a ripper cone. We ended the final day of campaigning with beers at HQ Bar, hosted by Nikki Kaye. Election day was mainly calling voters to ensure they get out and vote. Afterwards, the party began, with the Election Day party being held at the Casino. I ran into the Leader, Steven Marshall, at the event, so we had a few beers and discussed what we can bring back from over the ditch into our campaign. All in all, it was an incredible experience, and I would recommend the YL EDO programme to anyone who would be interested. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve learnt so much that I can bring back in my role as Campaigns Director for the Movement. Hugh Sutton is the Campaign Director of the South Australian Young Liberal Movement

AD-Lib

A Game of Snakes and Ladders Henry Davis ponders the future of politics and wonders whether it is possible to avoid being ‘taken out in a box’.

udd, Gillard, Rudd, Abbott, Turnbull - 5 Prime Ministers in 5 years. What happened to the days of Menzies, Howard and Hawke who each held office for 18.5, 12.7, and 8.7 years respectively? Has the game changed or are the players just not as good? Maybe one thing to add to life’s list of certainties (Death and Taxes) is that a politician’s days are numbered. When Gillard got the chop Paul Keating rang her and said: “We all get taken out in a box, love”. With this dire forecast; for any of us who are thinking of a political career, you have to stop and ask yourself is there a way I can avoid Keating’s prophesy and ever live up to the legacy that Menzies has set?

So same thing happens in a political setting. Let’s say you have two policies, one reducing income tax and another policy increasing GST by an equivalent amount. The policies are balanced so that the person pays the same amount of tax now as they did before. The result is they fear the loss of the increased GST more than they appreciate the gain of the income tax cut.

Well like every other unqualified wannabe economist its far simpler to reduce highly complex situations into an oversimplified model that ends up having no basis in reality. So I have come up with two models to think about which aim to describe a politician’s lot: “Cutting the Political Cake” and “A Politician’s Paradox”:

Being the cunning politician you are, you decide that 66% is fantastic and that you will implement all three policies. You think you are on to a trifecta here and will win 75% of the vote at the next election (image over page)

Cutting the Political Cake: This idea is based on a concept called Loss Aversion (Wikipedia for the win). The idea is that humans are disappointed more with a loss than they are happy to receive a gain. For example, if you lose $10 out of your wallet you might be -10 units of happy. However, if you were to find $10 you might only be +3 units of happy.

The next element to introduce is demographics: let’s say we have 3 policies: 1- Tough on Crime, 2 - Increase Refugee Intake and 3 Lower Taxes. After some very accurate polling, it is determined that 66% of the population are in favour of each policy.

Next election comes around and after the votes are counted your 75% turns out to be 25%... Disastertastrophe! They say in law that a mediation has been successful if both parties walk away feeling unhappy. Loss Aversion, unfortunately, means you have to hit your core voters each time. Compromise will leave a politician without a base and without support. You can’t blow around the spectrum like a political windsock or you will lose your support 100% of the time.

AD-Lib

A Politician’s Paradox: This one is harder to wrap your head around. Let’s make the assumption that there are two parties and there is a total of 100 popularity points that are up for grabs. The leader with the most points wins at the next election. Here are the rules that determine how points are won or lost: 1. If a politician does something BAD they LOSE points. 2. If a politician (especially when in government) does NOTHING they LOSE points 3. If a politician does something GOOD they LOSE points The problem is that there is no option to actually gain points... so unfortunately in Australian politics... the aim of the game is to hope your opponent loses more points than you do. 1. The first rule is straightforward. Do something Bad and everyone likes you less. Easy. 2. The second rule is also simple. You have to introduce policy... that’s your job. If you don’t do your job you will lose points. It also assumes that you will steadily lose points no matter what. After a time people are going to want a change. Your “points bleed” will increase over time. 3. The third rule you might understandably object to; and fair enough. The reason why I say you do something GOOD and you lose points is because people then say: “Well it was so obviously a good idea, why did you wait so long?? You should have done it last year! You suck!” and so you lose points. So how do you get points if you can’t do anything good or bad and you have to do something?

Option 1: handle emergencies or new circumstances very well. If it isn’t something that you could have done before, then you can’t be criticised for not doing it sooner. Option 2: tell everyone that the other person is doing a much worse job than you are! This is basically why we have an hour of question time each day. Option 3: become an independent and do nothing! As an independent, you don’t lose points for doing nothing because you never want nor have the responsibility of actually writing a budget one day. Make sure you never have the balance of power, though, or else you might have to do something and just like the Democrats you’ll implode! It’s hard to keep the bastards honest when you are the bastard making the crappy decisions. Option 4: Can you think of another option? Message and let me know what you think. The last thing to think about is what role does the 24-hour news cycle and social media have to play in producing 5 prime ministers in 5 years. The news cycle continues to speed up and the loss from doing nothing seems to be increasing. Any good you do is so quickly shot down by internet trolls and nastiness from shock jock media. Are we going to get to the point where a year in office is considered a long time? Next article I might look at how it was that Menzies, Howard and Hawke held the population’s trust for such a long period of time. How did they cut their political cake and eat it too? Henry Davis is a member of the SAYLM and on the Policy Committee

AD-Lib Spring 2017 www.saylm.org.au