Jest
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 1399
NSW South Coast
Gender: 
|
Mix_Master wrote on Dec 15 th, 2020 at 11:28am: Jest wrote on Dec 15 th, 2020 at 11:17am: Mix_Master wrote on Dec 15 th, 2020 at 7:36am: Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Dec 14 th, 2020 at 11:24pm: Never trust anything a government wants to do - it is invariably to favour them or their personal mates - and the 'side' of politics makes no difference.
It is almost always never to do good for the majority population, as their position requires them to do.... they don't see their position as service to the nation and people - they see it as control over that nation and its people to suit themselves and their party and ensure they are overfed forever.
Voluntary preferential voting is good - I would expect most to say No Preference From MY Vote - if they don't they are so dumb I give up on them...
I vote for Independents these days and I don't want my vote to end up with anyone that I oppose - and I oppose all parties these days for reasons both personal and of principle.
Betray me once - fool me.
Betray me twice - far greater fool you. For who, exactly? I'll admit, I mistook "voluntary preferential" for "non-compulsory", so I stuffed up there. That said, the idea of "voluntary preferential" voting is to "encourage" people to tick as few boxes as possible, and let "preference deals" ensure certain outcomes are met.From a discussion on the S.A Government's push to introduce voluntary preferential voting... Quote:"Optional preferential voting would mean that votes would be counted as long as there was a single ‘1’, even if there were no further preferences. Voters would still be able to mark preferences, but they would not be necessary for their vote to count. OPV is used to elect the New South Wales lower house, and has been used until recently in Queensland and the Northern Territory.
There are principled arguments in favour of OPV, but you can’t look past the political self-interest that motivates the Liberals to propose this change.
Under OPV, preferences are less likely to flow, and this tends to favour the candidate who is leading on primary votes. It’s harder to overtake a leading candidate when some preferences exhaust, and reduce the pool of preferences.
Labor tends to do better under CPV, primarily because of Greens preferences. Most Greens preferences flow to Labor when they are required to mark preferences, but a lot of Greens voters instead choose to exhaust when that’s an option.
Antony Green also points out that, in the South Australian context, compulsory preferences have helped independents win seats off the Liberals, usually with the benefit of Labor preferences. Of the 26 contests in South Australia since 1982 where a candidate trailing on primary votes went on to win, 14 were won by Labor, 11 were won by independents or minor parties, and just one was won by the Liberal Party. A number of those independents went on to support minority Labor governments after the 2002 and 2014 elections." <snip> https://www.tallyroom.com.au/39663 I thought what is being proposed is that after your first choice you can choose to cast a 2nd preference (or as many preferences as there are candidates) or choose not to cast any preference votes at all. That is, if you only insert a number in 1 box it means that you dont want anyone else to represent you but that candidate. It doesnt mean that you want some party mechanism to kick in to allocate preference votes to other candidates. I believe that that is essentially correct. But how does that work in practice? Quote:Under OPV, preferences are less likely to flow, and this tends to favour the candidate who is leading on primary votes. It’s harder to overtake a leading candidate when some preferences exhaust, and reduce the pool of preferences.
Labor tends to do better under CPV, primarily because of Greens preferences. Most Greens preferences flow to Labor when they are required to mark preferences, but a lot of Greens voters instead choose to exhaust when that’s an option. So under the current system, it would "appear" that Labor might do better (in S.A, at least). Under the proposed optional system, the LNP might do better. Hence an LNP Government there requesting the change. I can't imagine the LNP Federally agitating for such a change for, shall we say, "altruistic reasons"...(That isn't to say that the ALP wouldn't advocate for a system which helps their electoral chances, BTW). I have no doubt the LNP only proposed this because they see some advantage to them but Im more interested in putting more value in the vote for voters. Whatever advantage the LNP sees Im betting its short term. In the long run optional preferential voting is likely to breakup the duopoly and we desperatly need that if we're going to get a political system that is even remotely responsive to what the people want as opposed to the system we have now that essentially serves what the power elite wants.
|
Forum
Pages: 
