The election could deliver another hung parliament. Here’s what that means

It’s the nightmare scenario for many politicians out on the campaign trail: An inconclusive result that sends the major parties into brutal negotiations with a handful of new crossbench MPs.

If there is no clear majority after the ballots are counted, the outcome of the election is deemed a ‘hung parliament’.

That’s one where either the Coalition or Labor must seek an agreement with the rump of a minor party or any independent MPs that will be sitting between them in order to govern.

For the Coalition, losing even a single seat would require them to seek a deal with crossbench MPs to govern in a minority government.

While polling has pointed towards a decisive Labor victory, that could also result in a hung parliament if the swing does not go their way in a few key seats.

The major parties obviously want to govern in their own right and will often portray a minority government as a poor outcome.

However, there are plenty of people who believe hung parliaments can be a good thing for the country.

What happens in a hung parliament?

In the 151-seat House of Representatives, Labor or the Coalition (the name for the alliance of Liberal and National MPs) must win at least 76 seats to govern in their own right.

Any less and they must seek the support of MPs outside their party.

Illustration Lower House seats
The election began with eight lower house MPs on the crossbench, following the resignation of George Christensen from the LNP.

Usually, that means guaranteeing what is called “confidence and supply” from those MPs, a promise that they will support the government in any votes on its legitimacy and the passage of budget bills to allow the government to continue functioning.

The concern for governments running the country as a minority is that every controversy is heightened as a threat to their continuing existence, as the loss of a single MP could spell the end of their term in power.

Back in 2010, a hung parliament resulted in Labor striking a formal agreement with the Greens that required weekly meetings with the party to discuss the government’s legislative agenda, as well as undertakings with three independents in exchange for their support.

The deal also resulted in a reversal of Ms Gillard’s promise not to introduce a price on carbon, a moment that many have come to associate with a hung parliament scenario.

That term of government was marked by constant leadership speculation and perceptions of instability, though much of that related to division within Labor’s own ranks.

Still, the Coalition has sought to capitalize on memories of that time as a pitch to stick with them and not to vote, in protest, for high-profile independents.

This time around, both parties have been eager to make clear that they would not do deals with the Greens if they could not win a majority – whether that actually holds in a hung parliament scenario would remain to be seen.

Is a hung parliament a bad thing?

Despite perceptions that former prime minister Julia Gillard’s term was unstable, her minority government managed to pass more than 560 pieces of legislation – more than the preceding Rudd government and more than John Howard when he controlled both government houses between 2005 and 2007.

Whether the passage of that legislation was good or bad depends on your politics, but it shows that minority government is not necessarily a barrier to legislating.

In fact, governments normally have to negotiate to get their agendas through parliament anyway and neither party has held a majority in the senate since 2007.

.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.