If the government and Parliament do not go ahead with abolishing group ticket voting as part of changing the Senate electoral system, there are several smaller changes that can be introduced without major administrative difficulty and without having to change Senate counting software.
I think the best solution is the proposal put forward by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) to abolish group ticket votes but allow optional preferential voting for parties above the line.
However, these changes would take time for the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) to implement and so require early legislation. This would leave the government at risk of having other legislation blocked in retribution by the Senate cross bench who oppose the electoral changes.
If the government chooses not to take on the cross bench, it would need a set of changes that could be implemented relatively late in the life of the current parliament. Hence the proposals in this blog post.
These changes would partly deal with the two major problems in the Senate's electoral system, namely -
- That voters do not have an easy option to express their own preferences, the only current alternative to voting for a ticket being to number every square.
- That the ballot papers are being swamped by candidates and parties, few of whom have any hope of being elected, yet as a consequence the Electoral Commission are forced to print ballot papers that voters cannot read and where voters cannot find the parties they do know from amongst the flood of unknown candidates.
If people keep wondering why I bang on about ballot paper size, it is because I think it is wrong that in 2013 voters had to be issued with magnifying sheets. to read their ballot papers. The ballot paper cannot be made bigger because it would not be possible to print the required number of ballot papers in time. In addition, the larger the ballot paper, the greater the confusion for voters, as was clearly evident in 2013.
I hold it as a fundamental principle that voters should be able to read the ballot paper when they vote, and that is a principle that will be broken if it continues to be so easy to get on Australian Senate ballot paper.
Here are my suggestions.
Recent Comments
Antony Question: Canada has non-compulsory voting? What have would changed if voting was compulsory? Further, the issue of preferential back in Australia, with the Country Party gaining ascendant after WW1: was the change from first-the-post difficul...
Hi Antony, would you be putting a post up about the North Sydney by-election on 5 December? COMMENT: There will be a background page up in the next few days....
Hi Antony, just checking will you be following the North Sydney By-election 2015 process on 5 December as I believe there are a number of declared candidates already? COMMENT: There will be a background page up in the next few days....
The Nanos survey data provides a great jumping off point for estimating what would have been different in this election with preferential voting. I’ve crunched the Nanos preferencing rates through a spreadsheet (a most tiresome task I assure readers!...