TASMANIAN HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS - FRANKLIN, 1972
FIG. 3-B. SENATE-STYLE REGIMENTED VOTING WOULD HAVE CAUSED A  
LESS PROPORTIONAL, LESS FAIR RESULT.
 
THIS GRAPH SHOWS HOW, IF A SENATE-STYLE TICKET HAD BEEN FOLLOWED, THE ACTUAL RESULT OF 4-3 WOULD HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO 4-2-1 (4 ALP, 2 LIB + 1 UTG)
Click here to compare to 3-A.
 
Quota = 4,840
CANDIDATES:-  
LIB. 1 - BEATTIE  
        2 - CLARK   
        3 - PEARSALL 
UTG  -  BROWN 
ALP 1 - BARNARD 
        2 - DAVIDSON  
         3 - FROST  
         4 - LOWE  
         5 - NEILSON
EACH COLUMN SHOWS THE NO. OF VOTES FOR THE RESPECTIVE CANDIDATES.
 
UNDER SENATE-STYLE REGIMENTED VOTING THE CONCENTRATION OF PRIMARY VOTES ON THE FIRST-LISTED LIB. CANDIDATE, WITH A CONCENTRATION OF PREFERENCES FLOWING TO THE 2ND. LIB. WOULD LEAVE FEWER VOTES FOR THE THIRD LIB. THE 3RD. LIB WOULD THEN HAVE FEWER VOTES THAT THE UTG (UNITED TASMANIA GROUP) CANDIDATE. (SEE TEXT FOR FURTHER EXPLANATIONS AND FOR REASONS WHY A 4-3 DIVISION, AS IN FACT OCCURRED UNDER NON-REGIMENTED VOTING, IS A MORE EQUITABLE RESULT THAN 3-3-1.)
Report to Tasmanian Parliament by
Dr George Howatt,
Hobart, 1979
 
This Figure 4-A was digitized by the Proportional Representation Society of Australia in 2003, from Dr Howatt's Report, from a copy kindly obtained from the Library of the Parliament of Tasmania by Hon. Neil Robson.