Australian Senate voting reform

[timrollpickering]

The parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters has proposed reform of the voting system for the Senate as follows:

blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2014/06/how-the-senates-new-electoral-system-might-work-lessons-from-nsw.html

• The existing ballot paper with above or below the line voting is retained, with the voter having the option of voting for parties above the line or candidates below.
• Group preference tickets will be abolished, meaning a single '1' in a group voting square above the line will now only imply preferences for candidates of the chosen party. The vote will not have implied preferences for other parties on the ballot paper.
  
• A voter will have the option to give preferences for other parties above the line, to number, 1,2, 3 to however many preferences the voter wishes to express. This sort of vote will be treated as preferences for the candidates of the first preference party, then candidates of the second preference party, and so on. Preferences would be optional beyond the first preference.
• A elector can vote for candidates below the line, but will no longer be required to number every square. The elector will only have to give as many preferences as there are vacancies to fill, two for a Territory Senate contest, six for a state half-senate election, or 12 for a state double dissolution. Voters can number beyond the minimum preferences. The Committee has suggested that formality provisions should save as many ballot papers as possible from informality by incomplete numbering.
• The Committee has hinted at adopting transfer value formulas used in NSW that exclude ballot papers with exhausting preferences when calculating preference flows from candidates with surplus to quota votes. (I will write a separate post in the future on what this could mean.)
  

I presume the questions of party names, party registration and nomination requirements are being handled separately.

This is broadly the system used in the New South Wales Legislative Council (state upper house) except that:

• In NSW a voter has to express at least 15 preferences (a constitutional requirement that takes a referndum to unpick) either directly or via the ATL box so only a group only gets an above the line box if they stand at least 15 candidates.
  
• The NSW LC elects 21 members at a time. The Senate normally elects 6. The different quotas have quite an impact on the potential for large portions of votes exhausting and Senators being elected on fractions of quotas.
  
• (In NSW parties are required to nominated a second preference only if one of their candidates dies during the campaign in order to maintain the 15 preference rule.)
  

So an end to deals, microparties ganging up to elect one regardless of ideology, front parties serving as preference funnels - but voters will have work harder to vote in line with their party's recommendation and smaller parties could be squeezed. And Socialist Equality could finally stop part transferring to the Liberals.

[Devonian]

It certainly sounds like an improvement. When I read about Australia's voting system I did think it sounded like the worse electoral system ever.

[Tony Otim]

Several good steps in a sensible direction.