In this post I’ll first summarise why the GVT system is so wrong using past election results. I’ll also look at evidence from NSW elections about how the Senate’s minimum preference numbers rule has caused more voters to complete further preferences at Legislative Council elections.
Thank god, group voting tickets was so dumb.
Personally I do think there should be a minimum number of preferences you need to fill out. It forces parties to be clear on who they would like you to preference on their how-to-vote cards. Which is one extra piece of information voters can use.
In a Melbourne Council election, the incumbent party preferenced a party called “rip up the bike lanes”, so I could immediately decide not to vote for either of them without even needing to discover news articles or policy on the topic.
If you’re preferencing a party like that, then I know you’re stupid and don’t deserve my vote.
Personally I do think there should be a minimum number of preferences you need to fill out. It forces parties to be clear on who they would like you to preference on their how-to-vote cards.
It doesn’t force them to. I’ve seen HTV flyers that say something like ‘Vote 1 for PARTY X and number boxes 2-6 as you like’. I don’t think it really has any bearing either way.
The Senate system of instructing voters to number at least 1-6, while still counting ballots with only a first preference, seems a pretty reasonable balance.
Besides, you shouldn’t rely on party names, as we’ve seen recently.
I just want to reiterate what you said about party names.
Do not vote for a party you’ve never heard of just because you like the message in their name. Their name does not necessarily reflect their values at all, in fact it is often quite the opposite.
Read candidate statements and decide (at least roughly) who you will vote for before you go to the voting booth.
Oh 100%, it was rather when I was looking into each of the parties, I also looked up their preferences.
And they were very much telling on themselves by highly preferencing a party with a name which I think is terrible urban planning.
This was for a council election, and that’s all by post in Victoria.
Just wanted to reply here also that I didn’t vote based on THEIR party name, but rather (in addition to their policies on their website) them preferencing another party, with a name which makes it incredibly clear I would not want them in government.
In addition to them (the incumbents) already putting a moratorium on new bike lanes when they gained power, preferercing that party made their position even more clear.
Voting FOR a party based on name is silly. Voting against a party with a name like “rip up the bike lanes” is not a silly choice, provided you look into the other parties available.
