Daniel Wills: Nick Xenophon’s rivals say he would bring chaos to South Australia State Parliament

HIS rivals say voting for Nick Xenophon will unleash chaos and disruption. But maybe that’s exactly what many voters are looking for, writes Daniel Wills.

His rivals say voting for Nick Xenophon will unleash chaos and disruption. But maybe that’s exactly what many voters are looking for, writes Daniel Wills.

SENATOR Nick Xenophon comes into the state election like a wrecking ball.

An exclusive Advertiser-Galaxy poll this week show him on track to win his own seat, Hartley in the eastern suburbs, from the Liberals and Senator Xenophon poses a threat to both major parties in electorates everywhere, from Whyalla to Mt Gambier. Hartley alone could put him in the balance of power, and it is plausible SA Best will win many more seats than that.

Anyone making predictions about how it will all finally play out is a fool.

But here are a few plausible scenarios that could result, in an election likely to be the most volatile SA has seen since the early days of settlement.

There have been experiences before, in SA and elsewhere, where so-called third forces have emerged and attempted to shatter the governing duopoly.

In the 1970s, the Liberal Movement had ambitions of becoming the second largest party in the State Parliament but won just two seats before flaring out. The Greens and Democrats have both had significant Upper House support that has not converted to a significant number of SA seats downstairs. On a simple read, one could assume that Senator Xenophon and his SA Best face the same fate and that the superficial appeal of something different will fade away when people focus in on an election that is about deciding who will govern the state for the next four years.

But this ignores both the kind and size of support that he is getting, as well as the overwhelming mood of the age.

His rivals say voting for Nick Xenophon will unleash chaos and disruption. But maybe that’s exactly what many voters are looking for, writes Daniel Wills.

In raw numbers, Senator Xenophon actually is a genuine third force. He is polling about twice the number of votes that the Greens and Democrats did at their peak and is, amazingly, within striking distance of overtaking the entire Labor Party on primary support.

If it seems unbelievable that he could realise this at the ballot box, just look at the 2013 Senate results. There, he beat Labor and finished just behind the Liberal Party. That support dropped back last year, but the Nick Xenophon Team still got one in five votes and three senators. If this volume of support was transferred to the Lower House, which is a large assumption, almost every seat is in play if SA Best gets the right candidates and campaign infrastructure.

If his candidates can finish second on primary support in a seat, most likely in so-called “safe” electorates but possible anywhere, SA Best can stack enough preferences to claim victory.

Opposition Leader Steven Marshall was quick out of the blocks to say that he would do no coalition deals with SA Best. The explicit message is that voting Liberal is the only way to change the Government and, if you don’t like Labor, SA Best isn’t an option.

The first problem with this strategy is that no serious person believes him.

Imagine a situation where the Liberals win a lot of seats but not an outright majority. People who voted for Mr Marshall would be urging him to form a government. His party room, which holds the ultimate power to hire and fire, would be full of MPs who want to be ministers and can see their chance.

He would himself be on the threshold of becoming Premier. If he was really prepared to get that close but give it up, one would have to conclude he never really had much hunger for the job. It’s simply not at all plausible.

But the tactic is sensible enough, in a traditional sense. He’s betting people will back stability over chaos and, when forced back into a simple choice, will take the Liberals over an ageing Labor government in perpetual crisis.

But another significant problem with this strategy could be that people no longer think chaos is a bad thing.

The Advertiser has seen recent industry polling which inverts the conventional wisdom about elections.

When voters were asked their opinion about the prospect of a hung parliament — the outcome which Mr Marshall assumes the electorate considers so horrendous that they will vote to avoid — the results are quite shocking. Understandably, about a third of people respond that they don’t know.

It’s not the kind of thing you give much brain power to when you’ve got a day job and kids to worry about.

But of those who have an opinion, there is a near even split between people who think a hung parliament would be a good or bad thing for SA.

About one third of voters think that bringing disruption to the political order would be a desirable thing, and there’s room for that figure to grow, writes Daniel Wills.

About one third of voters think that bringing disruption to the political order would be a desirable thing, and there’s room for that figure to grow.

Really, it should come as no surprise.

This trend is sweeping the world, and has already mangled old political orders throughout Europe and the US.

For years now, Australians have been electing expanded Upper House and Senate crossbenches despite the big parties’ high-volume warnings.

Premier Jay Weatherill has taken a much more pragmatic approach to the new threat. Seeing SA Best as more a threat to the Liberals than Labor, and with the Government starting the campaign with four more MPs than the Opposition, he’s willing to do deals.

“We’ve got the former leader of the Liberal Party in our Cabinet,” he said.

“We want a majority. “(But) we’ll deal with the Parliament we’re given.

It might be that our politicians will have to, like many in the electorate already have, just embrace the chaos.

Follow @DanielWills