From: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/index.asp?URL=/state/4322552.htm (with my comment at end) Split the Bill 17mar99 NEARLY half the parties seeking election to the NSW Upper House have formed a secret alliance and preference deal to ensure at least one successful candidate from the "micro" parties. The Daily Telegraph has learned that at least 43 of the 99 parties listed on the ballot met in private earlier this year at the city restaurant Ocean Emperor to seek a deal whereby the parties agreed to split preferences. The deal was put together by first-timer and former head of the Outdoor Recreation Party, northern suburbs builder Glenn Druery, who is running as the new Republic 2001/People First party. As a result, voters on March 27 will now have to contend not only with a ballot paper the size of a tablecloth, they will also risk unwittingly giving their vote to a party of which they may have never heard. Parties which have joined the alliance include the Communist Party, Gay and Lesbian Party, Australians Against Further Immigration, Earth Save and the Make Billionaires Pay More Tax, Mr Druery admitted yesterday. Pauline Hanson's One Nation has also joined the rag-tag coalition. Party members at the meeting were given an ultimatum to agree to give preferences to at least 15 of the parties that were present or leave the room. Most remained at the restaurant in what Shooters Party's John Tingle called a "meat market" of preference swapping. The deal means people who vote for one of the minor parties may find their preferences flow through to single issue parties that have totally different platforms from the party for which they voted. Yesterday, Mr Druery, who stands to benefit most from the deal and who was dodging a barrage of criticism from the main political parties, admitted to the deal but said it was democracy in action. He said his party would receive preferences from about 43 parties. "It may be more, it may be less," he told The Daily Telegraph. But he denied any agreement made preferences to his party mandatory. He said: "We invited all the little people, all the smaller parties to give them a go. "In some countries people are getting killed over politics and here all we are concerned about is the size of a ballot paper. There is nothing wrong with what we have done, it is democracy." The State Electoral Office released Upper House preferences yesterday. Mr Druery said his platform was focused on decentralisation of infrastructure and Government agencies, fairer access to National Parks and bringing back trams as better means of public transport. "There could be some tightening up of the smaller parties," he said. The Greens, who launched their election campaign in Sydney yesterday, said that at least four of the parties were actually "fronts" for Mr Druery's party . Many were running under environmental masquerades. "People will be confronted with this enormous ballot paper and all they will be doing is helping elect a property developer from Hunters Hill who wants to open up National Parks for 4WDs," Greens candidate Lee Rhiannon said. Legal advice from constitutional lawyer Gary Corr suggested that the election, if decided by a small number of votes, could be declared invalid by the Court of Disputed Returns. This could happen if voters were found to have been deceived into voting for an unintended party. ***************************************************** PS - I don't understand why they bother. Every election at which I scrutineered the count - the only preferences that were allocated immediately after the primary vote were to 2 major parties. The only thing they look at on minor party tickets is whether Liberal is before Labor or vice versa & off go the tickets to that pile! Electoral office officials say that it's done this way because it produces the same results and is quicker. Because not everyone follows the minor party instructions, each minor party ticket goes through one more step - each minor party ticket is checked to see whether it should go to Liberal or Labor. I guess that was part of the reason for A. Langer's "Neither" campaign - to highlight the political duopoly. I would be interested to hear from other people who have scrutineered at polling booths to see if the same practice has been used elsewhere. Snez [LL Moderator's Note: Please reply to Snez directly rather than on the list.] Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink Unsub: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
