> I agree that this is a good idea, but I can imagine Howard would be
> dubious on it giving voters too much power - at present most people
> think twice about attempting a below-the-line vote, so the major parties
> can count on almost all preferences going where they want them. And the
> present system does make counting and the distribution of preferences
> much simpler - probably only 2-3% of votes are below-the-line.
I still rue the loss of being able to number 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4 or even
just 1, 2, 3 on a ticket with more options.
I don't mind having to turn up to vote, but I shouldn't be forced to
vote for parties that I don't think deserve a vote.
Dad and I discussed this and there was some concern that the major
parties might try to influence people to only vote for them (rather an
distribute their preference - imagine this in Wentworth for example ;-])
so you'd probably need a system that says you need to complete at least
1/3 or the senate, or 2/3 of the house of reps. This would allow the
opportunity to register a lack of trust is a party, or group of parties
without having the big two abuse the system.
Oh, and there is a world of difference between giving a party your last
preference and not giving them a vote at all. At least there is for
me. ;-]
Rodd
--
>From the pain come the dream
>From the dream come the vision
>From the vision come the people
>From the people come the power
>From this power come the change
- Peter Gabriel
------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe
insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------
