Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Karen Cassidy on September 17, 2009 at 11:40am

Hi Allano,

The AEC requires that all parties who appear above the line on the Senate ticket lodge a form to indicate where preferences are to flow if a voter numbers '1' for them above the line. So in the case of the senate, the Greens don't have any choice about whether or not to allocate preferences - it's the law.

As far as the lower house goes, 'allocating preferences' is simply about numbers on a how-to-vote card. No one handed that card is obliged to follow it, so even if the Greens ask a voter to vote 2 Labor, you don't have to - every Green supporter can decide where his/her preferences go in the lower house.

Cheers,

Karen

Permalink Reply by Allan Maurice Taylor on September 17, 2009 at 1:41pm

Hi Karen
Thank you for explaining the current system of determining preferences in Oz elections both state and federal. Maybe I can make a few comments:

For the lower house, the Green Party decides that preferences should be directed to the Labor Party and "How to vote cards" are published expressing this view point.

You say that the voter is not obliged to follow this direction. However, I point out that in Oz you have compulsory voting. At a guess, I suggest that 50% of voters at least are non-political and just follow instructions given at the polling booth. What sort of sensible result do you get from that?

The problem is rather complex and who knows what the ideal voting system is.... e.g. Afghanastan!

I take this opportunity to express a few comments.

Very few countries have compulsory voting and I am against the idea. In my opinion it does not lead to an optimum result. Sensible voting is diluted down by bunkum voting by people who have no idea what day of the week it is.

New Zealand today is wondering whether their change from "first past the post" system to a complicated European system has been successful, and now they are looking at some modification of the Australian system of preferential voting to perhaps improve things.

In New Zealand (and USA and UK) there is no compulsory voting. A consequence of this is that the political parties have to get out amongst the populace and at first hand promote their policies. There is no sitting back and hoping that a few TV advertisements are going bring you success.

Also, in NZ to be elegible to vote there was some residency requirement, but not citizenship, as here in Australia. My view is that if you are a permanent resident and have a tax file number then should you automatically be on the electoral roll to vote. That's how the USA Constitution came into being.... there should be no taxation without representation! In Australia, this idea lingers on at council level where I found when living in the Dandenongs Vic, being a property owner, I could vote in the council elections, but not vote in the State or Federal elections. Nor could I vote in New Zealand because I am not a resident. This does not worry me because what is one personal vote.....buggar all, when by letter and opinion piece writing I can have an umpteen greater influence on the Oz political scene, and in NZ and the USA

Well, I have stirred up the waters sufficiently for one day. Thank you Karen again for you helpful reply.
Allano