Australian Electoral Systems PDF

Democracies are either direct democracies or representative democracies. Direct democracies allow citizens to make laws and govern themselves. o Citizens do not choose representatives They self-represent. o Everyone who is qualified as a citizen is automati...

Democracies are either direct democracies or representative democracies. Direct democracies allow citizens to make laws and govern themselves. o Citizens do not choose representatives They self-represent. o Everyone who is qualified as a citizen is automatically entitled to a position (a seat) in the legislature And can participate in debates and vote on proposed laws. Ancient Athens invented direct democracy. o The city-state had a law-making assembly called the Ekklesia. There were no Ekklesia elections because every citizen was a member. Representative democracies enable citizens to participate in law making and governing o Not all citizens do so directly. o Citizens are not automatically entitled to a seat in their country’s legislature. o Citizens are represented by a smaller number of citizens they choose to make laws and to govern on their behalf. o Representative democracy made it necessary to invent a way to choose representatives. That invention was the electoral system. Australia was created as a representative democracy. Electoral systems have been used to choose representatives for state and Commonwealth parliaments since federation. o The six pre-federation colonies were broadly self-governing representative democracies subject to the British parliament. o They had electoral systems. Australia has a long electoral history dating back as far as 1856. Australia has also been at the forefront of the world’s democracies in electoral system innovation and reform. o The secret ballot was invented in Australia and is used in every representative democracy today. Sometimes referred to as the ‘Australian ballot’. o Australia has one of the best electoral systems in the world today. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) is asked by emerging democracies to help them run their elections. Parliament (Our Representative Assembly) Australians elect the Commonwealth Parliament directly. o There are no direct elections for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. o It is Westminster convention that determines who forms government. The executive government is formed by the party that commands majority support in the lower house o The leader of this party becomes the Prime Minister. There is no minimum time between elections. o The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (the Constitution) limits the term of a parliament to three years. At least every three years Australians need to exercise their political right to vote in elections Fill their parliament with representatives to act as law makers and govern on their behalf. There are also elections for state and territory parliaments o Each of which has its own electoral laws. Western Australia (WA) has a fixed four-year parliamentary term. o Western Australian governments are formed in the Legislative Assembly following Westminster convention. o The majority party leader becomes the Premier. Federal and state governments are representative because they are formed by an elected and representative lower house o The people’s house (House of Representatives) Parliamentary Representation (What The Constitution Says) Elections should be regular and frequent enough to ensure parliament remains responsive to the will of the people and accountable to electors. The Commonwealth Parliament is a fully democratic bicameral parliament. o Both houses are ‘directly chosen by the people’. There are different rules governing the nature of representation in each house: o Section 24 of the Constitution specifies that members of the House of Representatives (MHRs) Have maximum three-year terms. All 1512 electorates must be re-elected every three years. MHRs represent people in electorates. Each state has electorates in proportion to its population  o New South Wales (NSW) has the most (47) o Tasmania has the least (5) This is due to the size of their population Section 7 of the Constitution: o Specifies that senators have six-year terms o Half the Senate elected alongside the House of Representatives every three years. o Senators represent people in all states. o All states have equal representation Currently 12 senators for each state. o The two territories have two senators each. o There are 76 senators in total. A Senate rotation is a feature of Australian upper house elections. o Electing only half the Senate every three years ensures the parliament retains ‘elders’ Who have experience of the last parliament A feature designed to provide continuity and stability in governance. The idea of a Senate rotation came from the United States of America (US). Calling an election Less than three years after the first sitting of a parliament the Prime Minister must; o Advise the Governor-General to dissolve the House of Representatives. The Governor-General Issues writs for a general election. o Section 24 of the Constitution gives the Governor-General the power to carry out these legal formalities The real power to call an election rests with the Prime Minister. o The Governor in each respective state possesses the power to issue writs for Senate elections. On occasions when the two houses are deadlocked over legislation o the Prime Minister may advise the Governor-General to dissolve both houses. o The Governor-General uses powers specified in Section 57 of the Constitution. To issue writs for a double dissolution election. House of Representatives (The people’s house) The House of Representatives has 151 representatives representing 151 electorates around the country. o States with larger populations have more electorates than those with smaller populations. There is approximately the same number of enrolled electors in NSW and Tasmania o Approximately 107,000 In each electorate. The House of Representatives represents the people equally o One representative for every 107,000 electors. o Equal representation makes this house a ‘popular chamber’ or people’s house Everyone’s vote has the same value. Equality of the political right to vote. o Each electorate elects one representative. They are single-member electorates. At a general election, all 151 seats are declared vacant. o Electoral contests take place in all 151 electorates. o Many candidates compete for each seat. o There are few qualifications for candidates. o Citizens only need to be eligible to be enrolled to vote to qualify to run in an election. Candidates come from: o Major parties The Liberal Party of Australia The Australian Labor Party o Minor parties The Australian Greens The Nationals Pauline Hanson’s One Nation o Micro parties The Justice Party The Central Alliance o Independents. Senate (The states’ house) The Senate has 76 representatives for eight electorates around Australia.  o The Six states are electorates 12 representatives each. o Two mainland territories are electorates with two representatives each. o Each state electorate has the same number of representatives no matter how large or small its population. The Senate is a ‘federal chamber’ because of the equal state representation. o At a general election, 36 of the Senate’s 72 state senators and all four of its territory senators are elected. At a double dissolution election, all 76 senators are elected. As for the lower house, candidates come from political parties or are independents. o All candidates contest the election within their state or territory. o Each state electorate elects 12 representatives. o The territory electorates elect two each. They are multi-member electorates. Electoral Systems An electoral system is a mechanism for choosing representatives to occupy elected positions in a legislative assembly o For example, Australian parliaments and US congresses. o Some countries also directly elect their executive Usually called a President. Australia does not use a separate election to choose its executive government. o A single parliamentary election produces a parliament of representatives A majority of whom (according to Westminster convention) Choose the executive government Hold it accountable until the next election. Australians also elect local governments o For Example, shire councils, town councils and city governments. Electorates Electorates are the basis of all electoral systems. o They are also called electoral divisions. An electorate is a geographical area containing many citizens o Who elect either one or several individuals to represent them in their representative legislature. They may also be multi-member electorates which elect more than one person to represent them. Types of Representation Electors in electorates always retain the power to govern o Referred to as popular sovereignty. They temporarily delegate their sovereignty to elected representatives. Representatives may represent their electors (called constituents): o Delegate representation When Constituents present their values, concerns and interests to their representative who then re-presents them to parliament. Delegate representatives have close links, through meetings or communications, with their constituents. They translate their constituents’ desires directly through law making. Their personal views do not count. o Trustee representation When constituents entrust their representative’s judgment to represent their best interests in parliament. They are less directly linked to their constituents. They are less reliant on frequent communication with them; To Discern the issues that matter or their opinions on the issues. Trustee representatives may rely on the commands of their own conscience rather than the dictates of constituents. o Partisan representation When representatives are members of disciplined political parties. Acts in parliament according to the dictates of their party Not so much the directions of their constituents or their own conscience. Partisan representation is justified  The overwhelming majority of electors intentionally vote for candidates based on a candidate’s political party membership Not their personal attributes. They, therefore, expect their representatives to ‘toe the party line’. o Mirror representation When a legislative chamber’s composition reflects the composition of the society it represents. For Example: Parliament should reflect society’s composition in terms of; Gender Ethnicity Indigeneity Age and other types of diversity. The Australian population is 49 per cent male and 51 per cent female. If the Parliament truly mirrored Australia, it would be 49 per cent male and 51 per cent female. How Electoral Systems Work Electoral systems are mechanisms for converting electors’ votes into seats in parliament. Electoral Systems Are Critically Important A poorly designed electoral system will severely compromise the operating principles of a liberal democracy. o Undermines the principles of Majority rule Equality of political rights Participation The political freedoms of citizens. o Adoption of an electoral system is an important choice for a democratic country. The choice will affect Democratic principles o There are many different types of electoral systems. Each one converts votes into seats differently. o Different electoral systems result in different outcomes o Some electoral systems are also fairer than others. Fair Elections Fairness is the Most Critical aspect of an electoral system. o Fairness in electoral systems applies to electors, candidates and political parties all citizens must have a political right to vote Electors must not be intimidated or pressured when voting Electors’ voting power must be equal. Nominations for candidates should be as open as possible Maximising political participation for citizens and political parties Political parties must be treated equally. Fairness also necessitates upholding the democratic principles A majority of votes must result in a majority of seats. Majority rule is a fundamental democratic principle The rights of minorities must be respected. Political rights and freedoms are fundamental liberal principles No distortion or manipulation in the conversion of votes into seats should occur. Equality of political rights and participation is an operating principle of a democracy Elections must be regular enough to make government responsive to the peoples’ will. Majority rule and popular participation are principles of a democracy Elections must be frequent enough to Allow electors to have a political choice And to hold representatives accountable through the ballot box. In Summary: o Produce effective and stable government Reflecting the freely expressed will of the majority (majority rule); o Provide accountability of representatives who have direct links to electors, Ensuring the parliament remains representative and responsible to electors Majority rule Participation o Be fair to electors, candidates and political parties  Equality of political rights Participation o Represent society’s diversity in gender, age, ethnicity, social values and so on Equality of political right Political freedoms Participation. An Ideal Electoral System: There are many electoral systems o Some are simple while others are complex. o Each electoral system may emphasise different elements of the four essential criteria. Despite the diversity of electoral systems o No system yet devised can achieve all the essential criteria for fairness. In short, there is no ideal electoral system. Some systems are good at achieving stable government and accountability. o Others are good at achieving fairness for participants and representing diversity. It is challenging for any system to achieve stable government and fairness for participants. Accountability and diversity are also difficult to achieve in one system. o best way to have an electoral system that is as close to the ideal as possible is to compromise between different types of electoral systems. Australia achieves such an electoral compromise by using two different systems. o An electoral compromise is achieved by using systems from each category. Classifying Electoral Systems Electoral systems fall into two broad categories: Majoritarian systems o Based on single-member electorates and are very effective at achieving Majority rule Strong representational links between elected members of parliament and their constituents. o Majoritarian systems suffer from weaknesses, They: Distort the size of the winner’s margin (the winner’s bonus) both in individual electorates and in parliament Reduce political participation by minimising minor party representation. Proportional systems. o Always based on multi-member electorates and are very effective at producing: Fairness for political parties Representation of diversity. o Proportional systems suffer weaknesses like: Undermine majority rule Weaken the links between representatives and their constituents. Fair electoral systems can only be achieved using both types of systems in some form of combination o Either as two complementary systems or blended into one hybrid system. o Fair electoral systems use complementary systems that are able to compensate for each other’s weaknesses. Australia uses two complementary systems to elect each house separately. Majoritarian Electoral Systems o First Past The Post First past the post (FPP), also called plurality voting, is the most straightforward electoral system. It has the following key features: o A simple majority is needed to win (a plurality) o Electors choose one candidate from amongst those on the ballot paper. o Advantages FPP’s virtue is its simplicity. o Electors can easily cast a ballot. o It is quick and easy to count. o There are no complicated calculations to find out who won. FPP effectively creates majority rule because it amplifies the winner’s margin to produce an exaggerated majority in the parliament. o The exaggerated majority occurs because FPP gives the successful candidate and party a winner’s bonus. o The winner’s bonus occurs because all single-member electoral systems have a ‘winner takes all’ bias.  o This occurs because there is only one seat to win in each electorate o So if a candidate wins a plurality of votes, they win the electorate. Another advantage is the fact that only one candidate represents electors. o Electors know who to hold responsible for the quality of representation they receive. o They know who to delegate their interests to or who to entrust to act for their welfare. o Their representative is under intense scrutiny because they are the only one representing the electorate as its delegate or trustee. It is easier for the electorate to hold their representative accountable for the quality of the representation they deliver. o Disadvantages FPP creates a two party system. o There is one winner and one loser. o Minor parties rarely win seats in parliament. Typically, anyone who votes for a minor party wastes their vote. Vote wastage occurs when an elector’s vote does not contribute to electing a representative. o Such electors are unrepresented in the parliament. Their vote did not count. Vote splitting occurs when the two or more similar political parties compete for the same electors. o A third party with less voter support might win because neither of the similar parties win enough votes on their own. o The popular parties lose because they divide the vote between them. o Vote splitting is a grave flaw in FPP elections where there are more than two candidates. In summary: o winner’s bonuses might be useful for creating majority rule they severely undermine representation and participation. o Electors who waste their votes will get no representation at all from an FPP system. o FPP is not fair to political parties o Can result in a less preferred candidate or party winning. o First Past The Post In Australia The first Commonwealth Parliament in 1901 was elected using colonial electoral systems o because there was no electoral Act governing federal elections. Two of the earliest Acts of the first parliament were the Commonwealth Franchise Act 1902 and the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1902 o Which established the electoral procedures for electing future parliaments. The House of Representatives and the Senate both used FPP from 1902. o FPP remained in use until the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 replaced both of the 1902 Acts. o First Past The Post (Representation And The Commonwealth Parliament) The use of FPP to elect both houses was efficient and quick, o resulted in strong majorities in both houses. o The Senate was usually dominated by the same political party that held the governing majority in the lower house. Occasionally it was controlled by the party in opposition. o A government dominated Senate meant the executive controlled both houses. Government controlled Senates tended to rubber stamp government legislation. Negotiation and consensus were hampered by the lack of alternative parties. o Scrutiny of bills and debate were ineffective. Captured by the governing party, the Senate was unable to effectively represent the states or act as a house of review. o Therefore, both its constitutional and Westminster roles were undermined by FPP. Opposition controlled Senates tended to be obstructionist. o The power of the Senate, which is co-equal to that of the House of Representatives, gave the opposition tremendous power. Such power could be used to frustrate a government By rejecting its legislation and moving anti-government motions in the upper house. o Obstructionist senates undermined majority rule in the lower house. o Preferential Voting Preferential voting (PV) is slightly more complicated than FPP o It is still a simple electoral system with many of the advantages of FPP, without its flaws. Its key features are:  an absolute majority is needed to win o ‘50 per cent plus one vote’ of the formal votes or 50% + 1 Electors number candidates from most preferred down to least preferred o ‘1’ indicates a primary vote (Most Preferred) o All other preferences from ‘2’ onwards (Second most Preferred and onwards) If no candidate wins an absolute majority of primary votes o Preferences are distributed until a candidate achieves an absolute majority. Some PV systems require preferencing every candidate. o Numbering all the candidates is called exhaustive preferential voting Or full preferential voting because electors have to exhaust all the options. o The House of Representatives uses exhaustive preferential voting. Others require the voter to number only as many candidates as they wish. o These systems are called optional preferential voting. o Some states have used optional Preferential Voting Queensland is one such example. o Advantages: The requirement for an absolute majority enhances majority rule by ensuring a majority preferred candidate is elected. Like FPP, PV produces exaggerated majorities due to a winner’s bonus o Strong at producing majority rule if used to elect a lower house — a house of government. Because electors can vote for alternative candidates, vote splitting is eliminated between related political parties. For example, if an elector votes for a political party that gets eliminated their vote is distributed to their second preferred candidate. Their vote will follow their preferences until someone is elected. The requirement for an absolute majority reduces vote wastage. o At least 50 per cent of all electors plus one more must have contributed to electing a representative meaning no more than half the votes can ever be wasted. In FPP, a vote for a defeated candidate is wasted. In PV, preferences mean that a primary vote for a defeated candidate will keep on counting until an absolute majority is reached. As with FPP, PV is a single-member system which promotes accountability. o It means only one candidate represents electors. o Citizens can easily know their delegate or trustee Know who to hold responsible for the quality of representation they receive. They know who to contact with their interests and issues. They know who to reward for effective representation and who to punish at the next election if they are not satisfied. o Disadvantages: The need for electors to number candidates in order of preference is more demanding than merely choosing one candidate o Not significantly so. PV does result in a higher number of informal votes by electors who have misunderstood how to vote o The rate of informal voting is still low. o Vote wastage occurs since anyone whose vote does not contribute to electing a representative has wasted their vote. o That number can be as high as 50 per cent less 1 vote. o There can never be a majority of votes wasted Which can happen under FPP. The winner’s bonus in PV is less extreme than in FPP, o It still promotes overrepresentation of major political parties. o It prevents electors who vote for losing parties getting any representation in the legislature This is underrepresentation. o There is some compensation because smaller parties or candidates can trade their preferences to other candidates In return for some policy commitments from them. Arrangements between candidates over preferences are called preference deals. Another type of winner’s bonus operates in both FPP and PV. o An even distribution of its supporters across many electorates benefits a party.  It may win more electorates by small margins. o A party with many supporters concentrated in fewer seats is disadvantaged. It will win fewer electorates by large margins. In extreme cases, such as the 1998 federal election, it is possible for a party with fewer votes overall to win a majority of seats and form government. PV does not reflect society’s diversity very well. Two party representation resulting from all single-member systems excludes many parties. The ‘winner takes all’ nature of single-member systems results in parties selecting ‘conventional’ or ‘safe’ low risk candidates. o In such high stakes win or lose contests ‘diversity candidates’ tend not to be selected because of a fear they may divide popular opinion and alienate parts of the electorate. o Well-founded or not, the fear is that ‘unconventional candidates’ are a higher risk. The result is the overrepresentation of white, middle class, tertiary educated males in parliament — conventional and safe candidates Quotas for women have been used by the ALP to force the election of more Labor women to the House of Representatives. o The Liberal Party does not have quotas and had a much greater gender imbalance in 2018 With only 21 per cent of its parliamentary membership being women. Without interventions like quotas, single-member electoral systems are biased towards conventional and safe candidates. There is one complication to a simple two party system in Australia. o The Nationals are a minor party that PV does not disadvantage. The Nationals have about the same support as the Greens across Australia. o The Greens vote is spread thinly throughout the 151 electorates They do not win an absolute majority of votes in any seat, except the inner-city electorate of Melbourne which the Greens won in 2010. The Nationals’ vote is concentrated heavily in rural seats in both NSW and Queensland. The Nationals can achieve an absolute majority of the votes in these agricultural electorates and, thus, win lower house seats. Australia’s system is a ‘two and a half party system’ because of the lower house representation of the Nationals. o Preferential Voting In Australia Federal elections have used exhaustive preferential voting since 1918. o Preferential voting replaced FPP as the electoral system for both houses. It continues in use today for the House of Representatives. o The Senate voting system stopped using PV in 1949. Preferential voting, representation and the Commonwealth Parliament PV is a majoritarian single-member electoral system like FPP. o There was little change in the composition of the houses in the period after FPP was discontinued. o There were still large majorities created by winner’s bonuses in both houses, Minor parties were underrepresented and adversarial partisanship continued. It continues to this day in the House of Representatives, but less so in the Senate since the 1949 electoral changes. Large majorities in the House of Representatives created stable governments that dominated the House. o Stable government is a positive outcome because the House of Representatives is the house of government A democratic government needs to embody the operating principle of majority rule. PV’s single-member electorates continued to create strong links between the people and their representatives o Also a good thing for the house of the people. A majority government is a firmly established characteristic of the Australian political system. o The Howard and Hawke/Keatings governments always enjoyed majorities (sometimes very significant ones) over their long periods in office. o The Gillard Government (2010–2013) was the first minority government in decades An event so rare in Australian history that the hung House of Representatives was unable to form a government for 17 days after the election. During this time Julia Gillard conducted negotiations with a small number of independents and the single Greens’ MHR in a bid to gain their support on confidence and supply and so form a government.  Under PV, Senates continued to be captured by the two major parties. Most Senates were government dominated, rubber stamp chambers with reduced potential for effective review or state representation. o Alternatively, they were obstructionist opposition dominated chambers. o PV did little to enhance the Senate’s review function or its capacity to represent states, be fair to all political parties or fairly reflect society’s diversity. A major positive change was increased electoral fairness for electors. Popular minority parties could no longer win by splitting the majority preferred vote of allied rival parties. Absolute majorities in each electorate meant parliamentary representation more accurately reflected the preferred will of a majority of electors in the legislative branch of government. The House of Representatives, enhanced with absolute majorities behind every member, o formed more representative executive governments Enhancing the principle of majority rule in the executive branch of government, too. There also was a small increase in fairness to minor parties because of opportunities to trade their preferences and make policy deals with major parties. o there was no way for a losing party to force a winning party to abide by a preference deal when in parliament. o Swapping second preferences is more like a promise than a contract. Breaking promises is easy in the rough and tumble of parliamentary politics especially after an election passes into history. o However, minor party voters may hold major parties to account at the next election if they break preference promises. Proportional Representation Systems Proportional representation (PR) systems aim to reflect the proportion of the vote received by a political party as a proportion of seats gained in the parliament. o For example, if a party received 30 per cent of the vote in an election, it would receive 30 per cent of the seats in the chamber. o Note the difference between majoritarian and proportional systems Majoritarian systems are high stakes ‘winner takes all’ systems Proportional systems are ‘get what you deserve’ systems. PR systems are much fairer to political parties than majoritarian systems. o Major parties are the winners under PV winners’ bonuses cause exaggerated majorities. o Under PR systems, minor parties get seats in proportion to their electoral support and there are no winner’s bonuses for a successful party. The key to proportional electoral systems is their multi-member electorates. o Each PR electorate elects multiple candidates to parliament. o PR systems tend to elect more diverse chambers with a greater variety of parties and independents being represented. o PR systems are also better at representing society’s diversity. o A parliamentary chamber elected using a PR system will be more diverse than a house elected under either FPP or PV. o Single Transferable Vote Proportional Representation From 1949, the Senate has been elected using single transferable vote proportional representation (STV/PR). o It was the first time in Australian federal history that the House of Representatives and the Senate had different electoral systems. o It would mean the composition of future Senates would come to be quite different from that of the House. STV/PR is a complicated electoral system. o It has the following key features: A quota, rather than a majority of votes, is needed to win a seat There is one quota per seat to be filled and multiple quotas because there are multiple members to elect per electorate Electors rank candidates (below the line) or political parties (above the line) in order of preference When a candidate’s votes exceed a quota (that is, they receive surplus votes), all votes are distributed to other candidates according to electors’ preferences, but at a reduced value (known as the transfer value)  Preference distributions continue until the last quota fills the final seat. A flow of lower order preferences, rather than first preferences, usually makes up the final quota. Note the relative unimportance of a majority in STV/PR. o Candidates do not have to win either a simple majority or absolute majority. To win requires a quota of votes instead. A quota is a fixed share of votes A set proportion of the formal votes cast which, once achieved, results in winning a seat. There are several quotas in each electorate o Which means that several candidates represent the same electorate. Hence the term, ‘multi-member’ electorate. Quotas are composed of far fewer votes than that of majorities. o For example, at the 2016 federal election, a quota in Tasmania was approximately 20,000 while a quota in NSW was approximately 350,000. o Interestingly, the quota for NSW is equivalent to the total number of voters in Tasmania. By replacing a majority with a quota, STV/PR can elect candidates from different parties to the same electorate An impossibility under single-member systems with only one representative per electorate. o Advantages STV/PR is much fairer to electors, candidates, and political parties o Because all candidates and parties that can achieve a quota can win a seat. o Quotas are much lower than an absolute majority (50% + 1) even simple majorities (more votes than any other candidate). In a federal general election for the Senate in each state o A quota is equivalent to approximately 14.3 per cent of the formal votes. o When a double dissolution election occurs and all twelve senators for a state are to be elected This quota is effectively halved. This results in minor political parties like the Greens, Nationals, and One Nation being elected. Other micro parties have been successful, as have some high-profile independents. Electors benefit in that their will is reflected in the election results. STV/PR creates a multi-party system. o A Senate elected this way more accurately mirrors the diversity of society. It helps achieve mirror representation. o STV/PR reduces the incentive for parties to pick ‘conventional’ or ‘safe’ candidates. Electors tend to vote for political parties rather than vote directly for individual candidates. o Most electors have no idea who the candidates are They focus on the party they want. Parties can, therefore, nominate ‘diversity candidates’ with less fear of alienating segments of the voting public. Examples of diversity candidates include: Candidates from indigenous or ethnic backgrounds Different sexual orientations Ages, and so on. Far more women get elected under STV proportional representation than preferential voting. STV/PR tends to produce a ‘hung’ Senate because there is no winner’s bonus to exaggerate a winner’s margin. o A hung house is one in which no party has a majority in its own right. o No party can control the procedures of a hung Senate or be guaranteed victory when voting on motions or bills. The result is a house in which multi-party negotiation and consensus building are essential. Compromises must be reached to achieve success in a hung Senate A useful feature for a house of review when scrutinising lower house government legislation. It is also effective when the upper house reviews estimates of government spending during the budget process. In other words, hung Senates are much more likely to check and balance a government dominated lower house and the government itself. o Hung Senates can be powerful institutions for accountability.  o The combination of mirror representation, diversity, and the need for compromise makes an STV/PR chamber a good protector of rights and freedoms, especially for minority groups that may well have representation in the Senate. o Where the government dominated House of Representatives is a majority-ruled, democratic house, the Senate is a philosophically liberal chamber because it protects rights. o Some of the Senate’s powerful committees guard against excessive executive power. Elected in different ways and with different aims in mind, the House of Representatives and the Senate together make for an effective liberal democratic bicameral parliament. o Disadvantages Electors find it almost impossible to understand how their votes are counted or how candidates are elected using STV/PR. o The reason is its complexity. The method used between 1949 and 1984 to fill in the Senate ballot paper was identified as tedious and led to rates of informal voting rising up to 10 per cent. Above the line voting, introduced in 1984, drastically reduced the informal vote but introduced new complications. o Recent reforms have simplified voting but introduced new problems. Hung Senates produced by STV/PR can lead to an impasse in parliament o Between the houses or the government and Senate If parties cannot achieve a compromise or reach consensus. In a system with strong bicameralism, such as Australia’s o It means the powerful upper house can block government bills transmitted from the lower house. A non-majority Senate blocking bills passed by a majority-controlled House of Representatives undermines the principle of majority rule. o The link between voter and representative is much weaker than in single-member systems such as FPP and PV Because electors tend to vote for parties (an option since 1984) rather than individual candidates. Direct accountability is weaker because there are multiple representatives per electorate. o Many electors know their House of Representatives member of parliament (MP) Few know who their Senate representatives are. In the case of the Senate, electors have 12 representatives instead of just one. o Electors would struggle to answer questions such as “Who is my representative in the Senate?” “Who do I write to, or go and see about my issues?” “How do I know which representatives to reward or punish at the next election?” o Because of the difficulty answering such questions, STV/PR weakens direct representation and accountability. All multi-member systems, especially those that use a ‘party vote’ instead of a ‘candidate vote,’ suffer this problem. It makes delegate and trustee forms of representation almost unworkable in such a system. o Single Transferable Vote Proportional Representation In Australia When STV/PR was first introduced, electors had to number every box on the ballot paper o They were required to make a ‘candidate vote’. Due to the size of the electorates and increasing numbers of parties and independents seeking election, the number of candidates rose. o According to the law, no errors in numbering the sequence of preferences were allowed. o In NSW, Senate ballot papers sometimes had 100 or more candidates listed on a huge and cumbersome ballot paper. o Other states’ ballot papers were similar. o The result was many informal votes. The complexity of STV/PR proved to be a barrier for many citizens trying to exercise their political rights to vote and participate. STV/PR was adopted in 1949 and has had two significant reforms since to address its weaknesses. o The reforms were: 1984: Introducing an option to vote for a ‘political party vote’ or group ticket voting (GTV) was added to the ballot paper 2016: Reducing political party control over preferences. o Group Ticket Voting And 'Preference Whispering'  Group tickets allowed parties to: o Pre-register a list of candidates (a party list) with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) before an election o Determine how the preferences of electors who vote for their political party would be allocated. Parties’ group tickets were publicly available so electors could research the distribution of each party’s preferences. o On the ballot paper Electors had the option of choosing the party they preferred (rather than individual candidates) Numbering all the individual candidates. o If a voter chose a party instead of preferencing all the candidates The party controlled how their preferences were counted. Hence, ballot papers from 1984 onwards contained two voting options. A heavy black line separated the ballot paper horizontally. o Above the line voting allowed electors to vote for a party by placing a ‘1’ in the box next to their preferred party. In return for ease of voting, electors surrendered control of their preferences to the party they chose. o Below the line voting allowed electors to vote by numbering all the candidates listed, as in the past. Below the line voting was much more complicated But it meant the elector controlled their preferences. The 1984 reforms relaxed the strict counting rules by allowing up to three breaks in the numbering sequence of candidates o Only 90 per cent of the boxes to be filled before a vote was declared informal. o Note that group ticket voting is more straightforward but has its problems. As many as 85 per cent of electors vote above the line (for a party) rather than below the line (for candidates). o Above the line voting further weakened the already weak link between electors and representatives By obscuring the names and personalities of the candidates. Above the line voting made delegate and trustee models of representation virtually impossible in the Senate. Surrendering control over preferences to political parties permitted inter-party preference trading in complicated deals brokered by specialists who were expert in trading preferences but had little regard for electors’ intentions. o The result was electors often ended up contributing to the election of Senators they would have never chosen themselves. o At best, inter-party preference trading undermined the Australian upper house democracy. o At worst, it corrupted it. o The 2013 election of Ricky Muir from the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party is a recent example of preference trading undermining democracy. Muir received 0.51 per cent of the primary vote yet won a seat via preference flows from 23 other minor and micro parties’ group tickets. The 24 parties concerned had hired the services of Glenn Drury the so-called ‘preference whisperer’ To construct complex preference trades between them. Drury’s method guaranteed at least one of the 24 minor parties’ candidates would win the 6th quota Through harvesting the preferences of other minor and micro parties. o Muir’s victory was a Senate election record for the lowest primary vote ever for a successfully elected senator. Muir won a seat with 100 times less primary vote support than: A member of the House of Representatives needs to win their seats under the preferential voting system. His election was the result of preference harvesting Which is an exploitation of the voting system by putting too much power in the hands of political parties and backroom deal makers with too little power in the hands of electors. Reducing Party Control Over Preferences In 2016, the preference harvesting corruption of the STV/PR preference system was addressed. o Through the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Act 2016 Group ticket voting was abolished The way electors cast their vote was changed Party identification was improved. o Electors can still vote for political parties (above the line) or candidates (below the line) but political parties can no longer determine how electors’ preferences flow. o The 2016 electoral reform puts electors in command of their preferences  Whether they vote above or below the line. o Instead of just placing ‘1’ next to their party of choice when voting above the line Electors must now number parties from ‘1’ to ‘6’ in order of their preference. Below the line voting was simplified by adopting optional preferential voting. o Electors no longer have to preference all the candidates. They must now preference a minimum of 12 candidates by numbering them from ‘1’ to ‘12’. In both above and below the line voting; o Electors can number more preferences than they are required to if they wish to ensure their vote is not exhausted in the count. o Above the line preferencing by electors replaced group ticket preferencing by parties. Electors now control their preferences. o Simplified below the line voting encourages more electors to vote for real people instead of parties because filling in 12 boxes is not as daunting as numbering several dozen. The 2016 electoral reforms also led to the introduction of political party logos on ballot papers for the Senate and House of Representatives. o This was done to reduce elector confusion between political parties with similar names Such as the Liberal Party of Australia and the Liberal Democrats. Single Transferable Vote Proportional Representation (An Example) There are eight Senate electorates in Australia o The six states and two territories. There are 12 representatives for each state o Two for each territory. At a general election, six of each state’s 12 senators are elected and all of the territory senators are elected. Note: a normal general election is a whole House of Representatives and half Senate election. Calculating The Quotas Senate quotas are calculated mathematically using the following formula: o The number of formal ballot papers divided by the number of seats to be elected plus one Plus one vote equals one quota Or (number of formal ballot papers/number of seats to be elected + 1) In a hypothetical STV/PR election for a state with 2,000,000 electors o The formula for a quota is: (2,000,000 / 6 + 1) + 1 = 285,715 votes comprising one quota. o A quota for an ordinary half-Senate election is 14.3 per cent of the entire electorate While for a double dissolution election the quota is 7.7 per cent Very much less than an absolute majority vote needed to win a PV election. o The low threshold is what makes Senate seats winnable for minor parties and independents. Counting Votes Candidates who win a quota are immediately elected. o An elected candidate’s votes exceeding the quota are called surplus votes and are calculated as follows: Total number of votes received by the candidate minus the quota required equals the number of surplus votes Total number of votes — quota = surplus votes. o In our hypothetical STV/PR election, if the candidate received 385,242 total votes o The surplus votes would be: 385,242 — 285,715 (quota) = 99,527 surplus votes. Votes are secret, and an elected candidate’s votes ‘in the quota’ compared to those which are ‘surplus’ cannot be known. o Therefore, all of their votes are transferred, but at a reduced value called the transfer value. o The transfer value is calculated as follows: Surplus votes divided by total votes for the candidate equals the transfer value; Surplus votes / total votes = transfer value. o In our hypothetical STV/PR election, if the candidate received more votes than the required quota: 99,527 / 385,242 = 0.25835 transfer value. o In this scenario, all the votes received by this candidate Who has already achieved the quota and will be elected — are redistributed at a value of approximately one quarter of a vote. The transfer value is a way of keeping all votes flowing according to electors’ preferences  o In the ongoing count without the problem of any votes counting more than the value of one vote. Once all candidates who have achieved a quota are elected o the process of elimination of candidates: o distribution of preferences o And transferring discounted surplus votes Continues until all quotas and seats are filled. Finalising the count If no further quotas are reached o The candidate with the least votes is eliminated (after the transfer of surplus votes) o And their votes are distributed to remaining candidates according to electors’ preferences. o This process of: Elimination Distribution of Preferences And transferring discounted surplus votes o Continues until all quotas and Senate seats are filled. Note: This method is very complicated o This is the reason why the average elector has no idea how their votes are counted and how candidates get elected! Single Transferable Vote Proportional Representation, Representation And The Commonwealth Parliament STV/PR transformed the Senate by breaking the ‘two-party system’ and the ability of major parties to capture the upper house. Prior to the 1984 reforms o The upper house was either a government-controlled rubber stamp or an opposition-controlled obstructionist house. o Now it is a multi-party chamber with a reduced likelihood that either major party can control a majority of seats. The Senate ‘Balance of Power' Since the 1980s, except for the period of 2005 to 2007 o The Senate has been a hung house in which a crossbench composed of minor party and independent senators has held the balance of power. Crossbenchers are in a strong position to influence lawmaking and hold the government accountable o Because of the combination of Senate power and the STV/PR electoral system. o The crossbench balance of power enhances the Senate’s ability to check and balance the House of Representatives And the government formed in that place. Ways in which governments can be accountable to a powerful ‘balance of power’ Senate: o Governments must persuade either the opposition or enough members of the crossbench to agree with its bills or motions before a government vote in the chamber can succeed o The opposition may persuade enough crossbench senators to vote against the government to defeat bills or motions o With crossbench support Oppositions may also force through motions to establish Senate inquiries into matters the government opposes o Senate committees form a robust and independent system of checks and balances within the political system. They can scrutinise legislation thoroughly and conduct inquiries against the wishes of the government. These aspects of Senate power enhance the Senate’s ‘house of review’ role. o The Senate can scrutinise government legislation or inquire into estimates of government spending. o Ultimately, it can use its power to check executive dominance of the parliament. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Enterprise Tax Plan) Bill 2016 clearly illustrates the power of the Senate crossbench. o The Turnbull Government’s planned reform to corporate taxes was defeated in the Senate when government senators could not persuade Senator Tim Storer An independent from South Australia and a member of the crossbench, to agree to the proposed tax cuts. o Another example demonstrates the power of the Senate to uphold rights The liberal part of liberal democracy. The National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Act 2017 o Was amended by the Senate to prevent the proposed law limiting press and media freedoms. o The government agreed to soften its proposed law by changing the original wording of the bill Requiring journalists to be ‘fair and accurate.’ o The words ‘reasonably believe that a story is in the public interest’ replaced the original words Reducing the risk for journalists publishing stories about national security.  The Senate amendment reduced the threat of journalists being criminally prosecuted And thus protects the freedom of the Press/media. Compulsory Voting Compulsory voting is a significant feature of Australia’s electoral system. Compulsory enrolment of eligible electors has been law since 1911. o Successive amendments to the Electoral Act 1902 added further compulsory elements to encourage political participation. o In 1915, Queensland introduced the first compulsory voting laws Requiring electors to attend a polling place, get their name marked off the electoral roll, and receive ballot papers. o In a rare example of a private member’s bill becoming law, The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1924 amended the Electoral Act 1902 by introducing compulsory voting for federal elections. The effect was a spectacular increase in voter turnout from 60 per cent in the 1922 election to 91 per cent at the 1925 election. Turnout has been very high ever since, and is much higher and more consistent than turnout in; Comparable democracies such as the United Kingdom, US, Canada, and New Zealand. In the years that followed, all the states introduced compulsory voting. Western Australia adopted it in 1936. o Advantages Of Compulsory Voting in advantages of compulsory voting are: o Increased voter turnout, resulting in increased political participation. o Increased education and understanding. Citizens know more about their democracy. o Enhancement of the liberal democratic operating principle of majority rule. o Increased democratic legitimacy and authority of parliaments and governments, that is, stronger mandates. o Reduced electoral impact of extreme political ideologies. o A greater focus on issues and policy. The fundamental operating principles of a liberal democracy are all enhanced by compulsory voting. o Majority rule is better established if more people vote and there is an increase in political participation. That is, if more people exercise political freedoms and rights. Parliaments and governments can claim to be enacting the true democratic will of the majority if all eligible electors have cast a ballot. o This also means that governments have a stronger claim to legitimacy o And authority when they try to persuade crossbench senators to pass their proposed laws. o A government’s claim to a ‘will of the majority mandate’ is stronger after an election in which people voted on specific policy promises. o For example, when Tony Abbott won the 2013 election with a 14-seat majority after campaigning vigorously to ‘axe the tax’ It was difficult for opponents to argue he did not have the authority to pass the Carbon Tax repeal bills. The Senate eventually passed them. A significant benefit is the ‘drowning out effect’ compulsory voting can have on extreme political views. o In any society, there are always highly motivated and well-organised minority groups Whose views are outside mainstream public values and opinions. o These groups are more likely to vote because of their passionately held beliefs. Moderate mainstream electors are less motivated to turn out on election day. o Extreme views can be overrepresented in systems with voluntary voting. o Arguably, the election of Donald Trump in the US and the British ‘yes’ vote in the Brexit referendum are examples of this distorting effect. If all moderately minded US and British electors had cast ballots in these polls The results might well have been different. Australia has a less polarised political climate because Australian political parties must not only win their core voter base o They must also win unconvinced swinging electors. American political parties tend to ‘play to their base’, with more extreme policies than their Australian counterparts as a result. Australian political parties that stray too far into the extremes of the political spectrum tend to get punished at elections. Another positive effect of compulsory voting is the enhanced quality of political debate.  o Political parties do not have to spend resources trying to motivate supporters to turn out on election day. There is less focus on lightweight, commercial-style advertising. o Parties can rely on high turnout rates and devote more effort to winning policy arguments against their political opponents. o The pre-election contest of ideas is more rigorous because political advertising does not have to focus on encouraging electors to vote. Disadvantages Of Compulsory Voting antages of compulsory voting include: Politically uninterested or disengaged electors, who often cast donkey votes, may affect election outcomes. Increased informal votes. Because voting is a right, compelling people to vote is seen as wrong by libertarians. The creation of predictably ‘safe seats’, which parties may ignore knowing they will win them. A great focus on ‘marginal seats’, where elections are won and lost. The biggest criticism of compulsory voting is its compulsion. o Citizens of democracies generally do not like being told what to do by governments Especially when it affects their rights. Forcing uninformed or uninterested electors to cast a ballot can result in high rates of informal votes. o It can result in donkey votes. A donkey vote is a randomly filled-in ballot paper Usually numbered in order from ‘1’ at the top down the ballot to the last candidate. Donkey votes are impossible to separate from formal votes because the voter may have considered their vote carefully and filled in their ballot the same way. Donkey votes are formal votes and are counted. They may affect the outcome in a close contest. Donkey votes are problematic because they are more likely to be influential in the few marginal seats that can change government. Certain demographic groups who tend to vote in predictable ways may dominate some electorates. o For example, lower middle class and working class electors clustered in lower socioeconomic suburbs near industrial or commercial areas tend to vote for the ALP. Farmers are clustered in rural areas and are more likely to vote for the Nationals. Expensive coastal and river suburbs are populated by professionals and business people, who tend to support the Liberal Party. o Compulsory voting can make these areas ‘safe seats’. Safe seats are predictable and are very unlikely to be tightly fought electoral contests. Parties may take them for granted or not bother running a candidate in a seat they know they cannot win. These decisions reduce political choice for electors living in safe seats. Two 2018 by-elections in the Western Australian electorates of Perth and Fremantle provide contemporary examples. o The Liberal Party did not run candidates in either of these safe Labor seats. In the 2016 election, there were 35,000 electors in the Perth electorate and 31,000 in Fremantle who voted for the Liberal Party. These 66,000 electors had no candidate espousing their worldview to vote for in the 2018 by- elections. Voluntary voting would reduce the tendency to create safe seats because particular issues may reduce the predictability of who will turn out to vote. The Integrity Of Australian Elections Elections are very easy to get wrong. Sometimes they are just poorly designed. Sometimes they are deliberately rigged in non-democratic countries. o The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) The best guarantee of electoral integrity is to remove the power to organise and run elections from those who benefit from elections. Political parties and members of parliament are the beneficiaries of elections, o So they should have nothing to do with running them. The AEC is an independent statutory authority established by law. o The AEC’s role is “to deliver the franchise: that is, an Australian citizen’s right to vote, as established by the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918.”  This Act gives the AEC powers to run all aspects of Australia’s electoral system. o Employees of the AEC cannot be members of political parties. o The AEC manages federal elections and referendums. Such is the integrity and reputation of the AEC that it is asked to assist with other countries’ elections. Each state has its own electoral commission. o The Western Australian Electoral Commission (WAEC) runs: Local government and State elections State referendums o Sometimes called upon to manage elections for significant non-government organisations like unions and other pressure groups. The AEC ensures fair elections by being entirely apolitical, independent, and disinterested in election outcomes. o It maintains electoral rolls and recruits, and trains thousands of temporary staff to work in polling places on election days. o It redistributes electorate divisions to maintain the equality of the political right to vote (one vote, one value) according to law. o It counts the votes and declares the winners. The AEC eliminated gerrymandering and other forms of electoral distortions and corruptions. o Malapportionment Equality of political rights is an operating principle of a liberal democracy. o Citizens should have the right to vote, but this is not enough in itself. o The values of citizens’ votes must be equal too. o The principle of one vote, one value is fundamental for the equality of the political right to vote. It means that the quantum (or amount) of voting power is the same. For example, in an electorate of 100,000 electors represented by one MP, electors have twice the voting power of those in an electorate of 200,000 represented by a single MP. There is a severe malapportionment of voting power in this simple example. For this system to be fair, the larger electorate should be divided into two, and the new electorate should have one MP o Then three electorates would each have 100,000 electors and one MP each. Australia has very little malapportionment in House of Representatives electorates within a state or territory. o The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 requires that electorates be within 10 per cent of the average electorate population. A redistribution will be triggered if more than one third of divisions in the state (or one in a territory) deviates from the average enrolment in the state or territory by more than plus or minus 10 per cent. Electorate populations change due to births, deaths, inward migration, and outward migration. o The average House of Representatives’ electorate size is calculated in the following way: Total number of enrolled electors in a state or territory divided by the number of electorates in the state or territory equals the average electorate size for the particular state or territory. There are a number of triggers that will cause the AEC to redistribute electorates. o If: the last redistribution was more than seven years past A state or territory becomes entitled to more or less representatives Or a state or territory’s electorates’ eligible population sizes changes beyond a certain threshold Then the AEC will redistribute electoral divisions within a state or territory. o Sometimes, state populations change enough that a state may gain or lose electorates. Western Australia gained a 16th electorate, named Burt, from the 2016 election onwards. NSW lost an electorate from 2016 and now has 47. One new electorate was added because of national population growth so that the House of Representatives will increase from 150 to 151 seats from the 2019 election. o As previously described, Tasmanian electors in the state’s five lower house electorates are overrepresented because Section 24 of the Constitution guarantees ‘Original states’ a minimum of five seats. o Each Tasmanian electorate has significantly less than the 107,000 average enrolled electors of other electorates. o It is difficult to manage territory electorates because of their small populations. Currently, the Australian Capital Territory has three seats and the Northern Territory, two. The Senate is a very different matter. o The constitutional requirement for equal state representation conflicts with equality of political rights and the principle of one vote, one value.  States vary significantly in population, yet they all have 12 senators, regardless. Malapportionment is a severe criticism of Senate representation o So much so that Prime Minister Paul Keating; Frustrated by the Senate’s refusal to pass government bills Famously derided the upper house as ‘unrepresentative swill’. o Some states’ upper houses, including the Western Australian Legislative Council Have malapportionment similar to that in the Senate. o The Legislative Council’s three regional electorates are represented by; Six members of the Legislative Council (MLCs), and the three city-based electorates also have six MLCs. o Despite Perth’s metropolitan area containing approximately 65 per cent of the state’s population It has the same number of MLCs as the regions, which have only 35 per cent of the population. Before the 2005 electoral reforms, WA’s Legislative Assembly electorates had a rural bias. o Allocating too many electorates to rural regions relative to Perth maintained the bias. o In effect, rural electorates had about half the number of enrolled electors compared to city electorates, Giving country electors twice the voting power and representation than city dwellers. A 2005 reform removed the rural bias in Western Australian lower house elections. On balance, Australia does well to maximise the principle of ‘one vote, one value’ within the constraints imposed by constitutional law and the realities of population distribution. o Gerrymanders A gerrymander is a deliberate drawing of electoral boundaries to disadvantage a political party. By concentrating the vote of an opposition party into fewer seats o A governing party can reduce its rival’s chances of winning a majority in the representative legislative chamber. Sometimes governments use their power to exert influence on the electoral process by manipulating electoral boundaries. o They have a firm grip on power and will use the parliament to make electoral laws to disadvantage the Runners’ Party in future elections. Gerrymandering deliberately denies equality of political rights and undermines majority rule o With the aim of maintaining the over-representation and power of a minority. o Gerrymandering is named after the Massachusetts State Governor, Elbridge Gerry Who in 1812 redrew his state’s Senate electoral boundaries to disadvantage his party’s rivals in US Senate elections. The Boston Gazette newspaper coined the term Gerrymander Because Massachusetts’ Senate electorate’s boundaries resembled the shape of a salamander (an amphibious creature). Odd-shaped and distorted electorate boundaries are an indication of gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is much more likely to occur when those with an interest in winning elections have the power to draw electoral boundaries. Section 60 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 gives the AEC the power to appoint a Redistribution Committee, o with the Australian Electoral Commissioner being a member of that committee. The AEC is independent of political parties and has no interest in who wins elections. Gerrymandering is common in US Congressional electorates and results in unfair electoral representation. Many electorates have extraordinary distortions with varying degrees of compactness. o Some electorates in the state of North Carolina, for example, are the most gerrymandered in the US. o Gerrymandering occurs because party-controlled US state legislatures draw the boundaries of their state’s federal electorates. They use their law-making powers to disadvantage the other major party in federal elections.