|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
Letter published
in The Age, Page 12, on A
matter of thresholds MPs such as Helen Coonan (Opinion 4/2), campaigning to have the
Senate electoral system impose thresholds for election - a proviso additional
to the existing quotas - speak of ‘thresholds’, misleadingly
linking ‘thresholds’ to the thresholds used in proportional
representation systems overseas. They omit the fact that those thresholds operate quite
differently. The “party list” proportional representation systems
in They have much larger electorates, with more vacancies and much
lower quotas than ours. The purpose of “party list” threshold
provisos is to discourage party fragmentation and splitting of the vote,
which low quotas with lack of transferable votes encourage. Our high quotas with preferential voting make thresholds
unnecessary. “Party list” thresholds for election are a much
larger percentage than the quota, which is the minimum vote percentage to
elect each candidate. They relate to a party’s entire percentage of the
vote. In contrast the Australian campaign seeks threshold provisos,
much lower than the quota, relating to first preference votes only, not total
votes. Their purpose is to skew the system in favour of candidates from
larger parties. Larger parties always elect more senators than the smaller
parties, but not disproportionately more - yet. This campaign misuses
thresholds, and seeks less proportionality. vice-president, Proportional Representation Society of Beaumaris |