Victoria has been dominated by Liberal and anti-Labor parties for most of its electoral history. It is only in the last twenty years that Labor has become competitive in the state.
The state was sufficiently anti-Labor that there was a competitive electoral market for many non-labor parties such as the Conservative Party, the Reform Party, the Country Party, the UAP, the Electoral Reform Party (which held a minority government for a few days) and the Liberal and Country party. The latter held government for 27 years until the Liberals were able to win government on their own in 1972. (more)
The state was sufficiently anti-Labor that there was a competitive electoral market for many non-labor parties such as the Conservative Party, the Reform Party, the Country Party, the UAP, the Electoral Reform Party (which held a minority government for a few days) and the Liberal and Country party. The latter held government for 27 years until the Liberals were able to win government on their own in 1972. (more) adam : Your colour scheme is still doing my head in. It's like the political science Stroop effect.
cam : Yeh I got them back to front originally in the series so have had to continue them being back to front.
Like South Australia, Tasmania has been pretty competitive other than one period of 30+ years of dominance between 1934 and 1969 by the Labor Party.
Aynsley Kellow argues that during Labor's hold on Tasmanian politics between 1934 and 1982 the politics were "distributive rather than redistributive in flavour, what Lowi calls patronage politics." State sponsored development for industrialisation, mineral extraction and hydro-electric power led to electoral success. (more)
Aynsley Kellow argues that during Labor's hold on Tasmanian politics between 1934 and 1982 the politics were "distributive rather than redistributive in flavour, what Lowi calls patronage politics." State sponsored development for industrialisation, mineral extraction and hydro-electric power led to electoral success. (more) South Australia has been a very competitive state between Labor and the Liberals.
Other than one period of Liberal Country League dominance for over thirty years, South Australia has seen the frequent switch between governments of differing parties. (more)
Other than one period of Liberal Country League dominance for over thirty years, South Australia has seen the frequent switch between governments of differing parties. (more) Clinton Barnes : The biggest precursor for the Democrats, however, was the Australia Party, which is how they managed to have national appeal and significance.
Still, the heartland was South Australia, although today party activity is strongest in the more populated states on the eastern seaboard.
NSW has two periods of party activity. The first is prior to the 1930s when most governments were minority governments and elections highly competitive. Since the 1930s and the UAP winning the election after Lang's dismissal NSW has seen the increasing party discipline form of government with strong majorities and long electoral success.
The party system as we know it in Australia is Labor's innovation. Prior to Labor's appearance in Australian electoral politics the governments were fluid bodies of coalitions who would often form around a strong leader. Because of the pledge and Labor's discipline to the party's national executive this factional form of organisation was broken.
The Liberals formed in 1904 as a response to Labor and basically out party organised the Protectionists and Ministerialists such that the latter two parties were not electorally competitive. (more)
The party system as we know it in Australia is Labor's innovation. Prior to Labor's appearance in Australian electoral politics the governments were fluid bodies of coalitions who would often form around a strong leader. Because of the pledge and Labor's discipline to the party's national executive this factional form of organisation was broken.
The Liberals formed in 1904 as a response to Labor and basically out party organised the Protectionists and Ministerialists such that the latter two parties were not electorally competitive. (more) Oz : It also helped that NSW did not have a split in the 50s unlike Victoria and Queensland (which kept Labor out for a generation).
Queensland has had long periods of party hegemony interspersed with short cycles of volatility and electoral competition.
I think it is safe to say that the periods where the parties are competitive are short and don't seem to last beyond a party establishing itself as the dominant party of government. (more)
I think it is safe to say that the periods where the parties are competitive are short and don't seem to last beyond a party establishing itself as the dominant party of government. (more) Felix the Cassowary : That's exactly what John Wanna said, isn't it? If you're trying to draw a contrast I don't understand it; if you're trying to emphasise his point your expression to do that is unusal.
