[STV-voting] 02/02/02 - The New South Wales council:
Crabb, Deane (PIRSA)
Crabb.Deane at saugov.sa.gov.au
Thu Feb 7 01:21:46 PST 2002
Donald
In South Australia, a single candidate can have a box above the line. But
for the Australian Senate it had to be a group of two or more candidates.
This means ungrouped candidates are put together at the end of the ballot
paper and don't have a box above the line.
Votes above the line are counted as if the voter had voted below the line
but in the order as given in the lodged ticket for that group/party, so in
effect they are added to the votes below the line.
Yes, in New South Wales you will have the option of ranking the party lists.
The trouble with voting for a party is that the party decides the order its
candidates will be elected. In Tasmania, where the order within each party
list is rotated, voters are made to choose not only the party of their
choice but which candidates they want from that party to represent them ie
male or female, left or right wing, dry or wet faction, progressive or
conservative, or what ever the differences are.
I noted your comments about how I could vote. The point is why should I have
to vote for candidates I don't want or don't know any thing about, and I am
sure the party of my choice doesn't know either or has done a preference
deal and wants to manipulate the vote - and besides I want to vote for
candidates across the parties ie the third Democrat candidate, the second
Green, an Independent, the first from another party, the first Democrat,
etc, etc.
You asked also about why so many candidates (76 in 48 groups)are contesting
11 positions. Because 95% of voters will vote above the line and the groups
each have a voting ticket, it is possible for a small group to gather
preferences from smaller groups and then to pick up surplus votes from some
of the bigger parties and get elected. At the last election in South
Australia, a person standing on one issue (No poker machines) was able to
get elected in this manner. Voters don't realise that by voting above the
line, their vote may end up electing who knows who!
Deane Crabb (Mr)
-----Original Message-----
From: donald at mich.com [mailto:donald at mich.com]
Sent: Saturday, 2 February 2002 18:44
To: stv-voting at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [stv-voting] 02/02/02 - The New South Wales council:
02/02/02 - The New South Wales council:
Dear Deane,
Yes, I am very interested in your post of 30 Jan 2002.
I have a few questions. You stated that there are 76 candidates contesting
eleven seats. That seems like a lot of candidates under normal conditions
for only eleven seats.
One question is: In the current election are the parties required to have
a certain number of candidates in order to have a `Box' above the line?
If so, how many are they required to have in this upcoming election?
How are the votes above and below the line tallied? Are the votes mixed
somehow?
You wrote about the New South Wales council: "...or you can vote above the
line and mark more than a number one (means that you can choose between the
party lists)."
Does this mean that the voter will be able to rank political parties?
If so, this is something I am in favor of.
Since your society prefers not to have the system of `above and below the
line', your society should consider a system in which the voters will be
able to rank candidates and/or parties together in any mix, that's the
future.
Regards, Donald Davison
------------ Original Letter ------------
From: "Crabb, Deane (PIRSA)" <Crabb.Deane at saugov.sa.gov.au>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 10:05:21 +1030
Subject: RE: [STV-voting] 01/29/02 - The Australian Senate:
You may be interested in a current example - the South Australian State
election is on at February 9.
The Legislative Council (upper house) is elected in virtually the same
manner as for the Australian Senate.
The State is considered as one electorate with 11 Legislative Councillors to
be elected (half the Council is elected at each election).
There are 76 candidates contesting the election.
Candidates for each party are grouped together on the ballot paper in the
order chosen by that party. The positions of the parties on the ballot
paper is chosen at random.
To vote, an elector has the choice of voting above or below the line on the
ballot paper.
To vote above the line you only need to put a '1' next to a party box. This
means your vote will be counted as if you gave preferences to all 76
candidates but in the order as registered by that party.
To vote below the line, you have to mark a preference for all 76 candidates
1 to 76 in the order you choose.
As you can imagine, over 95% of voters will quite understandably vote above
the line and can you blame them! I am seriously thinking of doing this
myself - there are a few I like, some I don't, but most of the 76 candidates
I know nothing about at this stage of the campaign - should I try and work
out my preferences, or just accept the ticket from the party of my choice?
David Hill in the November 2000 issue of "Voting Matters" (British Electoral
Reform Society) summed this situation up well in an article "How to ruin
STV". I think we are coming to the stage where it has to be called a list
system.
There is some hope of getting a slight change. For the New South Wales
Legislative Council where there are 21 to be elected, optional preferential
voting has been introduced, so that below the line you only need to mark 15
preferences for a formal vote, or you can vote above the line and mark more
than a number one (means that you can choose between the party lists). But
only parties with 15 or more candidates will have a box above the line.
The Proportional Representation Society of Australia's preference is not to
have above and below the line voting at all, and with optional preferential
voting.
This is the case for Tasmania's Legislative Assembly (lower house) and now
for the Australian Capital Territory Assembly (both use STV). In addition,
the candidates within each party group are rotated (called the Robson
Rotation where ballot papers are printed in batches with different orders
used). This means that candidates even within a party have to compete to
get elected.
-----Original Message-----
From: donald at mich.com [mailto:donald at mich.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2002 19:19
To: stv-voting at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [stv-voting] 01/29/02 - The Australian Senate:
01/29/02 - The Australian Senate:
Dear Ren,
You wrote: "Donald once told me that such recognition is necessary if the
parties want to support STV. I must remind him, and everyone, of Australia,
and its so-called STV system they use for the Senate. There, people can
vote for parties, and the system makes it awfully enticing not to vote for
individual candidates. Then again, I remind readers of this list that the
PRSA believes that this system is not STV but a list system in disguise. -
- - Thank you to Donald and Tom for provoking our next thread of
discussion." Ren A.
Donald: Whatever the method is, it is not party list if a voter is free to
rank candidates across party lines.
Regards, Donald Davison, http://www.mich.com/~donald
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
| Q U O T A T I O N |
| "Democracy is a beautiful thing, |
| except that part about letting just any old yokel vote." |
| - Age 10 - |
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
stv-voting-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/DP4qlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
stv-voting-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list