Interesting post at last. Thanks, Alister. Mr Egan should also look at
the level of voting for major-party candidates other than the No 1s (ie,
their actual personal support). I have a feeling, in the light of the
results, that moves to abolish the Upper House would be a particularly
dramatic vot-loser for any party supporting it. Crafty electoral
amendments are another matter, and we can expect to see some wondrous
drafting from Carr's backroom boys.
In the early 1980s, I had a conversation with Kim Beazley Jnr about
Democrat ideas for reform of the WA Upper House (which were implemented
before 1989). Beazley said: "We wouldn't mind some Democrats as a
half-way house - we can get rid of Democrats more easily than Libs."
When the reforms were legislated (by the Burke Government), the Nationals
had a balance of power and were able to retain the 3:1 malapportionment
for out-of-town voters.
I see that the NSW Legislative Council results, including notionally
elected members, have been posted by the SEO at
http://www.seo.nsw.gov.au/results/elect99/lcresults.htm
They show that quite a few chickens have come home to roost for the major
parties - and for the corruption of proportional representation by the
system of party-list voting.
The 'above the line' voting which was devised to make nonconformist votes
trickle back to Labor and Liberal has backfired, enabling the election of
candidates with almost no primary votes. There also seems to have been
further use of the ticket-vote system to 'disfranchise' voters for the
One Nation group whose 6.2% was thus effective in securing only one seat
(though Oldfield was third to be elected after the No 1 candidates of
Liberal and Labor).
I have looked only briefly at the two PHON voting tickets (which are
available at http://www.seo.nsw.gov.au/results/elect99/tickets.htm
However, it would seem that the election of Malcolm Jones (Outdoor
Recreation Party - 0.2% primaries) AHEAD OF the Democrats and Greens
resulted largely from transfer of One Nation and major-party preferences.
This suggests that 'dummy' candidates can in future be used to counter
preference gang-bangs, as well as their traditional use to harvest
'protest vote' preferences for major-party candidates.
I confess to being mystified by the lack of success of Gun Owners and
Sporting Hunters' Rights, since they received all PHON preferences ahead
of Malcolm Jones. The answer must lie in the transfer of most major-party
preferences to Jones ahead of GOSHR.
I note that the voting was 'optional preferential' for a minimum of 15
candidates, meaning that party tickets can sweep away their most feared
opponents simply by not ranking them at all. This principle if applied
to Senate voting could provide a MUCH more representative result apropos
the major parties! However the results could be a nightmare for all of
us, as well as for Mr Egan and his ilk.
It is generally pleasing to see that 7 of the 21 seats were won by
'alternative' groups, and that these seem genuinely representative of
community viewpoints, notwithstanding the attack on PHON voters. Now
let's hear whether the Australian Democrats still prefer representative
democracy to effective participation, and whether they will continue to
place their 'electoral objective' ahead of democratic principle now that
their 1-seat Upper House representation has been outstripped by the
Greens (2 seats).
Brian Jenkins
-----Original Message-----
From: alister air <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, 26 April 1999 12:26
Subject: Upper House Must Go, says Egan
|
|Hi everyone,
|
|This was in today's Sydney Morning Herald. I don't know if this idea is
|catching, but it must be in the major parties in NSW. Is an election on
|0.2% of the primary vote undemocratic? There's no doubt that front
|parties were funnelling votes, in a very clever use of the electoral
|system. The Gay and Lesian Party, Animal Rights (or Liberation?) Party
|and others were funnelling preferences back to the Outdoor Recreation
|Party - who support 4WDs and motorbikes in national parks. I think with
|a ballot paper that was one metre by two metres, there will be pressure
|to "reform" the upper house electoral system somehow...
|
|On a better note, Lee Rhiannon from the Greens got elected, which I
|think is a very good thing.
|
|Alister
|
|----------------------
|
|Monday, April 26, 1999
|
|Upper House must go: Egan
|
|By MARK ROBINSON
|
|The State Treasurer, Mr Egan, last night promised to renew his campaign
|to abolish the Legislative Council after the final result showed almost
|one third of its members will be minor party and Independent MPs.
|
|Seven crossbench MPs were elected, bringing to a record 13 the number in
|the 42-member Upper House.
|
|The biggest surprise when the distribution of preferences finished on
|Saturday was the election of an Outdoor Recreation Party candidate, Mr
|Malcolm Jones, who recorded only 7,264 primary votes - 0.2 per cent of
|the State-wide total.
|
|Mr Egan, the Government's leader in the Upper House, said it was a
|"travesty of democracy" that MPs could be elected with less than 1per
|cent of the vote.
|
|"An electoral system that throws up a result like this is bonkers," he
said.
|
|A long-term campaigner for the abolition of the Upper House, Mr Egan
|said it was time to move again for it to be shut down.
|
|"I still have to convince my own colleagues ... but I am increasingly
|confident that I can give the game away by abolishing the Upper House,"
|he said.
|
|The make-up of the new Council is being viewed as favourable to Labor,
|which has 16 seats and will require the support of six of the crossbench
|MPs to pass legislation.
|
|The newly elected group includes a second Green MP, Ms Lee Rhiannon,
|Unity's Mr Peter Wong and Lismore lawyer Mr Peter Breen from the Reform
|the Legal System party, all of whom are considered likely supporters of
|social justice and environmental reforms.
|
|Labor backbenchers last night predicted that the Carr Government would
|be able to push through some of the reforms it did not tackle in its
|first term, including recognising the rights of couples in same-sex
|relationships and reducing penalties for possession of soft drugs.
|
|But Mr Egan rejected any suggestion that Labor would have an easier time
|getting through its legislative program than in the last Parliament,
|when it was confronted with nine crossbench MPs.
|
|"It is essentially a lucky dip," the Treasurer said.
|
|Mr Egan vowed that the Government would not engage in the "horse trade"
|with the minor party MPs that took place over the past four years.
|
|The final result in the Upper House came after a month spent counting
|the votes given to a record 264 candidates.
|
|An elaborate series of preference deals pushed Mr Jones over the line,
|along with Mr Breen, who recorded 35,000 primary votes, or around 1 per
|cent, of the total.
|
|The two will sit on the cross benches with a group that represents the
|full political spectrum, from the Rev Fred Nile and One Nation's Mr
|David Oldfield to the Australian Democrats' Dr Arthur
Chesterfield-Evans.
|
|After its heavy defeat in the Lower House, the Coalition's reduced vote
|in the Upper House has seen its numbers cut to 13, the same as the cross
bench.
|
|Liberal Upper House leader Mr Michael Gallacher last night predicted it
|would be difficult for the Coalition to block government legislation and
|called on the minor party MPs not to be "stooges" for Labor.
|
|"The Government obviously has all the goodies and we have an empty
|showbag, so it depends how serious they are," he said.
|
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general
discussion.
|
|To unsubscribe click here
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
|To subscribe click here
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
|
|For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
|For archives
|http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
|
