Adam wondered how including elections that were contested but lost would change the previous bar graph looking at upper boundaries to re-election. The change is significant. The darker party colour indicates a lost election.

Suddenly Howard and Whitlam jump Hawke in the list. Curtin and Chifley do not come off well either while McMahon lost the only election he contested as party leader.

A larger version of the same chart can be seen here.
Bryan Palmer is trying to construct a thesis of why and how governments lose elections. Another approach might be to look at the maximum a government can achieve in electability when constantly facing the voters to retain their legitimacy.

This is a chart of the number of elections a party leader has won and includes the election they won to come into power. For instance Menzies first election win made him Prime Minister and he then won six as the incumbent giving him a total of seven.

Howard is already on the upper end of what history indicates is achievable in winning elections. Unlike Menzies he does not have a split Labor party to campaign against. Menzies also had a quick run of elections in 1949, 51, 54 and 55. So in a six year period he won four elections which inflates Menzies numbers a bit in this graph, whereas Howard has tended to use the full three year term and in the first six years of his government only contested three elections and after the 2001 win not going up for election until 2004.

We could argue then that Menzies electoral achievements are only a little above what Howard and Hawke have managed. This suggests that there may be an upper barrier in Australian national electoral history that Howard is fast approaching. So rather than looking at the economy, recessions, corruption, etc, there may be a hard barrier in which a party leader ceases to be electable any longer. (more)
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)
We often forget about the role of the Executive council in post-colonial Westminster systems. This body, presided over in Australian states by a Governor, officially advises the Sovereign's representative. In today's Courier Mail , David Solomon writes on the importance of the independence of the Governor from the Premier - and why that means the Governor should be elected. (more)
I received my postal vote a few days ago. I must say I felt a rush of pride when I opened the envelope and unfolded the Senate paper across the length of the table. There are 50 candidates on the list, and in Australian elections you can list them in the order you choose. I always number every box for the Senate. That, my friends, is representative democracy.

Having the leisure of an internet connection this year, and being happily free of thugs intimidating me to vote a certain way, I decided to drill down a little further than usual. In extravagant detail, even. Who are these people, anyway? (more)
Cam Riley: South Sea Republic. Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic.