Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Politics

Economy is behind the drift of voters to minor parties

Published

on

Economic pessimism is behind the drift of voters to minor parties and independents

Viet Nguyen, The University of Melbourne; Ferdi Botha, The University of Melbourne, and Kyle Peyton, The University of Melbourne

Growing economic pessimism appears to have pushed many voters away from Australia’s two major parties, Labor and the Coalition. Support for minor parties and independents has doubled since the Global Financial Crisis in 2008.

In the latest federal election, minor parties and independents are on track to gain a record share of the vote, at 33.4%. Although Labor won just 34.6% and the Coalition 32% of first preferences, Labor secured a majority after preference flows, reflecting a broader shift away from the major parties.

Commentary in both Australian media and in the United States framed the result as a reaction against US President Donald Trump’s return to politics. That echoed analysis of Canada’s surprise centre-left Liberal party win a week earlier.

But a more straightforward explanation lies in Australian voters’ dissatisfaction with economic conditions.

In a new study, we used three decades of data from the leading monthly consumer sentiment survey, the Consumer Attitudes, Sentiments and Expectations in Australia (CASiE) Survey, to study how shifts in economic expectations align with changes in voting behaviour.

Support for minor parties and independents has been rising

In the 2007 federal election, minor parties and independents won just 15% of first‑preference votes and two seats in the House of Representatives. By 2022 their primary vote had doubled to 31.7%, delivering a record 16 seats.

In the latest federal election, their first‑preference share rose further to 33.4% (as of May 14). But because of preference flows, they secured fewer lower house seats than in 2022. The underlying shift away from the major parties therefore continues, even though it is not reflected in seat numbers.

This realignment has unfolded alongside a sustained slide in political trust. Surveys such as the Australian Election Study show satisfaction with democracy is at its lowest level on record.

The decline is often linked to perceptions of poor economic management, leadership instability, and unresponsive government. Voters repeatedly cite housing affordability, cost‑of‑living pressures and difficulty accessing health care as unmet concerns.

Minor party support differs across demographic groups

The shift away from the political mainstream is broadly distributed across demographic groups, indicating widespread economic disaffection rather than isolated grievances.

Younger Australians, facing acute economic challenges, have increasingly supported the Greens. Older voters have turned to One Nation and Teals amid broader dissatisfaction with economic management.

Support for minor parties and independents has climbed among both men and women, though the pattern differs. Women lean more toward the Greens; men more toward other minors and independents.

Economic pessimism matters at the ballot box

Rising economic pessimism, along with other social and cultural factors, has been a driving force behind the collapse in support for the political mainstream.

Since 2010, the average share of Australians saying their finances have improved over the past 12 months fell from 27% to 20%. The share reporting deterioration increased from 34% to 37%. That means a net shift of 10 percentage points toward pessimism.

Looking ahead, more Australians expect their household finances and the national economy to worsen over the next year than to improve.

The charts below show support for minor parties has climbed across the board since the mid‑2010s. It is consistently highest among voters who expect their household finances and the national economy to get worse.

Voters who feel worse off have consistently been more inclined to back minor parties or independents. The gap between pessimists and optimists has widened under both Coalition and Labor administrations.

The divergence is most pronounced for expectations about national economic conditions. This suggests political disaffection is increasingly linked to pessimism about Australia’s economic outlook.

Growing economic pessimism is consistent with a broader picture of weaker economic growth, lower living standards, a fall in productivity and slower wage growth over the past decade.

For example, economic growth (gross domestic product or GDP after inflation) slowed from an average of 3.5% between 1995 and 2009 to 2.4% between 2010 and 2024. Growth in GDP per person, a more direct measure of living standards, slowed even more, from an average of 2.1% to just 0.9%.

Since both actual and perceived economic conditions influence voting choices, collapsing support for mainstream political parties is perhaps no surprise.

Voters are increasingly drifting towards the minor parties.
Ymgerman/Shutterstock

Implications for the future

Because of the complex flow of voting preferences, a smaller vote share going to major parties does not always translate into fewer seats in parliament. However, vote shares and seat counts tend to be highly correlated over time.

Sustained declines in primary vote shares going to the major parties will eventually translate into reduced legislative power.

The trends in Australia’s voting patterns are consistent with voters’ growing dissatisfaction with the performance of successive governments.

While the rise of non-mainstream parties may signal political renewal, it also carries risks. In the absence of credible responses to persistent social and economic challenges, political resentment is likely to deepen.

Decades of policy responses have failed to address the scale or structural nature of the country’s economic problems. This has contributed to mounting pressures.

Without meaningful reform, Australia risks following the trajectory seen in parts of Europe and the US, where the weakening of mainstream parties has created space for more radical and anti-democratic political movements.

Viet Nguyen, Principal Research Fellow, Macroeconomics Research Program, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne; Ferdi Botha, Senior Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, and Kyle Peyton, Senior research fellow, The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Politics

Musk calls for Americans to oppose Trump’s tax bill

Elon Musk urges Americans to oppose Trump’s tax bill, calling it a “disgusting abomination” amid rising criticism.

Published

on

Elon Musk urges Americans to oppose Trump’s tax bill, calling it a “disgusting abomination” amid rising criticism.

In Short:
Elon Musk has strongly opposed Donald Trump’s tax bill, labelling it a “disgusting abomination” and urging Americans to contact their lawmakers. His criticism comes amid Republican scrutiny of the legislation, which could lead to significant increases in US budget deficits.

Elon Musk has intensified his opposition to Donald Trump’s tax bill, urging Americans to take action.

Musk posted on social media, calling for individuals to contact their lawmakers. He expressed strong disapproval of the legislation, labelling it a “disgusting abomination” that threatens to bankrupt the nation.

This criticism follows increased scrutiny from Republican fiscal conservatives regarding the extensive fiscal package.

While Trump has not publicly reacted to Musk’s comments, the White House defended the bill, stating it would lead to substantial economic growth. House Speaker Mike Johnson also countered Musk’s statements, asserting that the tax cuts would be self-financing through economic expansion.

Musk’s strong stance on the tax legislation aligns him against the president during a pivotal moment, as Trump seeks to persuade hesitant lawmakers. Musk’s campaign against the bill could complicate and delay its implementation, along with the associated debt ceiling increase.

This opposition occurred shortly after Musk completed a brief role aimed at reducing federal spending. The effect of his involvement in the Trump administration has reportedly diminished Tesla’s brand reputation, contributing to a decline in electric vehicle sales.

According to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, the tax and spending plan passed by the House could increase US budget deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade.

Continue Reading

Politics

Australia’s lowest paid workers receive a 3.5% wage increase

Published

on

Australia’s lowest paid workers just got a 3.5% wage increase. Their next boost could be even better

Carlos Castilla/Shutterstock

John Buchanan, University of Sydney

A week ago, the Australian Financial Review released this year’s “Rich List”. It reported the number of billionaires in Australia increased from 150 to 166 between 2024 and 2025.

A very different story is happening at the other end of the market. On Tuesday the Fair Work Commission awarded the lowest paid 20% of wage earners a 3.5% increase as a result of its annual review.

The commission acknowledged even with this increase, our lowest paid employees will not be earning as much in real terms as they did before the post-COVID inflationary surge of 2021-2022.

Why such a meagre increase?

In Australia it has long been accepted that – all things being equal – wages should move with both prices and productivity.

Adjusting them for inflation ensures their real value is maintained. Adjusting them for productivity means employees share in rising prosperity associated with society becoming more productive over time.

This “prices plus productivity” model of wage rises is, however, subject to economic circumstances. In recent times the key circumstance of concern has been inflation.

Depending how it is measured it peaked at between 6.5% and 9.6% in 2022-2023.

Since 2022, economic agencies such as the Reserve Bank and state treasuries, along with finance sector economists, have been preaching about the threat of inflation persisting.

Cutting real wages to control inflation

Interest rates were increased to tame the inflation dragon. And these
agencies all issued dire warnings about the threat of long-term inflationary pressure if wages were adjusted to maintain lower and middle income earners living standards.

In its last three decisions the Fair Work Commission accommodated this narrative. Since July 2021 it ensured wages for the lowest paid 20% of employees did not keep up with inflation.

Unsurprisingly, real wages for award-dependent employees fell.

The commission has done its best to look after those on the absolute lowest rates: that is the 1% or so on the national minimum wage.

Their wages have fallen by 0.8% over the period since July 2021. For those in the middle of the bottom 20% of employees dependent on awards the fall has been in the order of 4.5%.

For example, this is the fall experienced by an entry level tradesperson in manufacturing dependent on an award.

Because inflation is currently running at about 2.4%, the 3.5% increase marks a modest 1% real wage gain for a worker on or close to the entry level manufacturing tradesperson rates.

In making this increase, the commission argued if real wage cuts continued, the entrenchment of lower minimum award rates was likely. It noted the economy is in pretty good shape – not just in terms of inflation and employment – but also many firms are turning a profit.

What about productivity?

The other striking feature of the post-COVID economic recovery has been poor productivity performance. It initially went backwards and more recently has flatlined.

The commission rejected arguments recent poor performance in national productivity numbers should prevent raising the minimum award higher than inflation.

It did this because it distinguished between productivity in the market and non-market sectors. In the former, productivity growth has been modest, but positive.

Poor numbers in the non-market sector like health and social services were an artefact of both measurement problems and the need for more workers per unit output to boost the quality of these services.

Silver linings?

It is always a judgement call as to what is the appropriate scale of any wage increase. Given low paid workers were not the source of recent inflationary pressure, it is reasonable to claim now is the time to reverse the recent trends of cutting their real wages.

Whether the increase had to be so modest is something the commission has
indicated it is open to considering in future hearings. It has sent this signal by floating two novel arguments.

The first argument concerns how cuts in real pay are calculated. In its decision it makes the very important point that conventional measures of real wage movements use monthly measures of inflation but wages only increase annually.

It’s on this basis the 4.5% cut for the benchmark entry level trade worker in manufacturing was calculated.

The commission notes, however, that if you take into account wages only rise once a year and inflation rises continuously, the overall loss of earnings power for such workers has been 14.4% since July 2021.

This is a much higher account of real wage cuts than has previously informed debates on wages policy.


FairWork Commission Annual Wage Review 2025, CC BY-NC-ND

Secondly, the commission has noted consideration should be given to phasing out some of the lowest classifications in the award system. This is something it has done in the past.

In this way it does not have to “increase rates” for low paid
classifications as such. Rather, it just eliminates the possibility of having rates for exceptionally low paid jobs – and so raises the base rates dramatically for the lowest paid workers.

Next year, things could be better. Australia has a long history of having a wages system that takes seriously the needs of all workers, and especially the low paid. This decision marks a break with the recent habit of using the lowest paid workers as a shock absorber for macroeconomic policy.

The 3.5% rise is a modest increase but an important one. More important is the framework the commission has set up for decisions in future years. Devising a more accurate measure of real wage cuts and noting the importance of abolishing whole classifications of low paid work lays the foundations for potentially very exciting developments in Australian wages policy in coming years.

John Buchanan, Professor, Discipline of Business Information Systems, University of Sydney Business School, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Politics

Coalition backs remote work for increased productivity

Coalition shifts stance, supports working from home to boost productivity and embrace AI, prioritising flexibility and deregulation.

Published

on

Coalition shifts stance, supports working from home to boost productivity and embrace AI, prioritising flexibility and deregulation.

In Short:
The Coalition now supports remote work to boost productivity, a change from Peter Dutton’s earlier position. Opposition spokesman Andrew Bragg aims to address barriers to working from home, acknowledging its benefits for the economy and job satisfaction.

The Coalition will support removing barriers to working from home to enhance productivity, a significant shift from Peter Dutton’s previous stance during the election.

Opposition spokesman Andrew Bragg stated that the Coalition aims to promote working-from-home arrangements to create a more dynamic economy. His comments follow a trend among senior MPs who have acknowledged the mistake of advocating a ban on remote work for federal public servants.

Bragg’s commitment to championing working from home coincides with considerations by the Fair Work Commission and increased pressure from some employers for staff to spend more time in the office. He endorsed a recent Productivity Commission report highlighting the benefits of working from home for productivity and job satisfaction.

Promote flexibility

Bragg emphasised the importance of identifying and addressing barriers to effective remote work. He expressed a desire to promote flexibility in the workforce, noting that working from home often supports productivity.

Meanwhile, Dutton abandoned his previous policy requiring public servants to work onsite, attributing the shift to voter misunderstandings regarding its applicability to the private sector.

Bragg will collaborate with Tim Wilson, the new industrial relations and small business spokesman, on a workplace strategy embracing the benefits of artificial intelligence. Bragg advocated for a balanced regulatory approach, viewing AI as a potential driver of productivity rather than a risk.

Continue Reading

Trending Now