Victory only prize for Pauline Hanson

Hanson's political comebacks

AS the lyrics to the John Farnham song go, this time Pauline Hanson is playing to win. Unless the former fish-and-chip shop owner from Queensland is unaware of the new laws in NSW.

Her decision to contest the Legislative Council at the looming NSW election must be about winning because, unlike previous elections she has contested, public funding rules no longer pay out large sums of money to failed candidates who win a low threshold of votes. To receive public funds now requires candidates to produce receipts for financial reimbursement and, even then, only if they meet the quota for election.

Hanson caused a furore at previous elections not only for the controversial issues she champions but for the money she has made from contesting polls.

She fell just short of a quota for the Senate in Queensland in 2001 when she won 10 per cent of the primary vote as a One Nation candidate (and the party received more than $400,000 in public funding), but she couldn't get to the 14.29 per cent quota needed because of a lack of preferences.

In 2003, she contested the state-wide Legislative Council, but won only 1.92 per cent of the vote, falling agonisingly short of a funding quota that would have delivered almost $100,000 in public funding. At the Queensland Senate contests of 2004 and 2007, Hanson was more successful. Financially, anyway, walking away with a total of more than $400,000 in tax-free income courtesy of public funding.

She campaigned through the free media, keeping expenses to a minimum. And, because federal elections don't require candidates to produce receipts, she was able to bank the money, no questions asked. Not bad for a few weeks' work on the hustings.

It was different in 2009 when she contested the Queensland state seat of Beaudesert, winning 21.2 per cent of the primary vote. Like NSW now, back then Queensland state elections paid public election funding only on receipts produced.

In NSW, she needs 4.55 per cent of the vote (after preferences) to win an upper house seat, not out of the question, but unlikely.

Hanson will secure some protest votes from anti-privatisation supporters and those in the community unhappy with immigration levels. But she isn't likely to pull off too many preference deals.

Unless, that is, she can pull off a deal with the Shooters Party, in which case the cautionary prediction should be: watch this space.