Comments on: Greens back in the spotlight after the WA election? http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/ Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:53:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Chris (a different one) http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215345 Chris (a different one) Thu, 11 Sep 2008 01:20:02 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215345 Even if you could trust the internet for voting, there are still serious problems around people being coerced or bribed to vote a certain way. Its an important criteria for voting systems that you can not prove to anyone else how you voted. Ie you don't get a receipt that you can show someone else which shows how you voted and no one can watch over your shoulder to see you vote. This stops people from being bribed or coerced. On direct democracy - it puts a huge burden on the voting public to educate themselves to a level on each issue to a point where they can make an informed decision. I though thats what we elected our representatives to do? Even if you could trust the internet for voting, there are still serious problems around people being coerced or bribed to vote a certain way. Its an important criteria for voting systems that you can not prove to anyone else how you voted.

Ie you don’t get a receipt that you can show someone else which shows how you voted and no one can watch over your shoulder to see you vote. This stops people from being bribed or coerced.

On direct democracy – it puts a huge burden on the voting public to educate themselves to a level on each issue to a point where they can make an informed decision. I though thats what we elected our representatives to do?

]]> By: Andrew Reynolds http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215344 Andrew Reynolds Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:41:19 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215344 rat, I think you are trusting too much in the internet. There may come a time in the future when every adult is able and willing to trust it for everything. That time is not now, nor is it in the foreseeable future. rat,
I think you are trusting too much in the internet. There may come a time in the future when every adult is able and willing to trust it for everything. That time is not now, nor is it in the foreseeable future.

]]> By: professor rat http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215343 professor rat Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:06:12 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215343 Tinkering is not enough now we have the net. The first order of business is clearly a republic and then net-based referendums on every major issue. We on the Libertarian-socialist left have long argued for recallable, rotatable and strictly mandated delegates to any constituent assembly. The administration of things; not people... and now we have the net there can be no more excuses. First the republic then direct democracy. The government that governs least. Tinkering is not enough now we have the net. The first order of business is clearly a republic and then net-based referendums on every major issue. We on the Libertarian-socialist left have long argued for recallable, rotatable and strictly mandated delegates to any constituent assembly. The administration of things; not people… and now we have the net there can be no more excuses.

First the republic then direct democracy. The government that governs least.

]]> By: Chris Pascoe http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215342 Chris Pascoe Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:39:41 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215342 I wasn't suggesting NZ's system was the best fit for us, they're a small country with a much more integrated culture - I meant the idea of proportional more generally, that if you have a large region with a bunch of MPs elected by the entire region, then there are questions about local representation, and I wasn't sure if independents can actually get in and stay in under such a system without the huge public profile of, say, someone like Nick Xenophon. I wasn’t suggesting NZ’s system was the best fit for us, they’re a small country with a much more integrated culture – I meant the idea of proportional more generally, that if you have a large region with a bunch of MPs elected by the entire region, then there are questions about local representation, and I wasn’t sure if independents can actually get in and stay in under such a system without the huge public profile of, say, someone like Nick Xenophon.

]]> By: Chris (a different one) http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215341 Chris (a different one) Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:53:54 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215341 Idiot/Savant - thanks for the explanation - I think it would be bad to have a system where people do not get the option of voting for elected members directly. Sounds like a recipe for strengthening the influence of party hacks. Idiot/Savant – thanks for the explanation – I think it would be bad to have a system where people do not get the option of voting for elected members directly. Sounds like a recipe for strengthening the influence of party hacks.

]]> By: Idiot/Savant http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215340 Idiot/Savant Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:29:41 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215340 Chris Pascoe: MMP isn't STV. Under STV, you are always voting for candidates. Under MMP, you really vote for parties, and in a closed-list system such as New Zealand, you never get to vote directly "on" the party's list. Your ballot paper simply has two columns - one where you choose between electorate candidates, and another where you choose between parties. And that's it. The party lists are published, and they really do affect voter decisions, but voters have no direct way of affecting their order. You may want to read the basic introduction to the system <a HREF="http://www.elections.org.nz/voting/mmp/two-ticks-too-easy.html" rel="nofollow">here</A>. Again, NZ MMP isn't the be-all and end-all, and TIMTOWTDI. I swing towards open lists myself (hell, I swing towards abolishing the threshold, since small parties have as much right to be represented as large ones, even if I hate the Christian freaks this would see elected), and maybe that would be more to Australia's liking. Chris Pascoe: MMP isn’t STV. Under STV, you are always voting for candidates. Under MMP, you really vote for parties, and in a closed-list system such as New Zealand, you never get to vote directly “on” the party’s list. Your ballot paper simply has two columns – one where you choose between electorate candidates, and another where you choose between parties. And that’s it. The party lists are published, and they really do affect voter decisions, but voters have no direct way of affecting their order.

You may want to read the basic introduction to the system here.

Again, NZ MMP isn’t the be-all and end-all, and TIMTOWTDI. I swing towards open lists myself (hell, I swing towards abolishing the threshold, since small parties have as much right to be represented as large ones, even if I hate the Christian freaks this would see elected), and maybe that would be more to Australia’s liking.

]]> By: Chris Pascoe http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215339 Chris Pascoe Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:19:18 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215339 My understanding of Robson rotation is that it means no candidate is consistently #1 on their party's list. This is the system in place in Tasmania and means that it's about the strength of the candidate, not as much the party. My understanding of Robson rotation is that it means no candidate is consistently #1 on their party’s list. This is the system in place in Tasmania and means that it’s about the strength of the candidate, not as much the party.

]]> By: Idiot/Savant http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215338 Idiot/Savant Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:04:09 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215338 Different Chris @29: <I>One way to avoid this is to create multiple ballot sheets randomising the order of the candidates for each party - they do this for the ACT elections - Robinson rotation I think its called.</I> I think you've missed somethign there. The "ballot" in question isn't the ballot presented to the voter, but the party list, whose order is drawn up by the party. Though I'd also question Antonio's characterisation - in NZ, party lists have tended to be used to protect incumbents and promote talent and diversity. They can also be used to incentivise candidates in marginal seats, and ACT is using it to push its party vote by putting former finance minister Roger Douglas (yes, the antichrist) at position 3, so he won't get in unless their vote improves. But they're not usually used to put unpopular people at the top, and popular ones at the bottom (and anyway, the latter would simply get elected in their constiuencies, reducing the number of slots available to the former). There <I>are</I> ways of giving people more control over he list. Several European jurisdictions use open list systems, with the voter taking a ballot for a particular party and voting for a candidate or candidates on it; those getting more than a cerain threshold of votes go to the top of the list - a system which both gives significant respect to party decisions, while allowing the voters to have their say. Different Chris @29: One way to avoid this is to create multiple ballot sheets randomising the order of the candidates for each party – they do this for the ACT elections – Robinson rotation I think its called.

I think you’ve missed somethign there. The “ballot” in question isn’t the ballot presented to the voter, but the party list, whose order is drawn up by the party. Though I’d also question Antonio’s characterisation – in NZ, party lists have tended to be used to protect incumbents and promote talent and diversity. They can also be used to incentivise candidates in marginal seats, and ACT is using it to push its party vote by putting former finance minister Roger Douglas (yes, the antichrist) at position 3, so he won’t get in unless their vote improves. But they’re not usually used to put unpopular people at the top, and popular ones at the bottom (and anyway, the latter would simply get elected in their constiuencies, reducing the number of slots available to the former).

There are ways of giving people more control over he list. Several European jurisdictions use open list systems, with the voter taking a ballot for a particular party and voting for a candidate or candidates on it; those getting more than a cerain threshold of votes go to the top of the list – a system which both gives significant respect to party decisions, while allowing the voters to have their say.

]]> By: the-paris-site http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215337 the-paris-site Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:40:19 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215337 It's worth noting that the preference flow through to the ALP here in WA from the Greens was very low in some electorates - as little as 55% in districts where the HTV suggested the ALP at 2, and lower still when there were independents in the mix. Past elections it's been up at 85ish%. I don't know if this suggests that the detractors writing off the high Green vote as a protest vote against the two majors are right, but it is certainly a new element to consider for both the Greens and the other parties. It’s worth noting that the preference flow through to the ALP here in WA from the Greens was very low in some electorates – as little as 55% in districts where the HTV suggested the ALP at 2, and lower still when there were independents in the mix.

Past elections it’s been up at 85ish%. I don’t know if this suggests that the detractors writing off the high Green vote as a protest vote against the two majors are right, but it is certainly a new element to consider for both the Greens and the other parties.

]]> By: Chris Pascoe http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215336 Chris Pascoe Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:38:48 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/10/greens-back-in-the-spotlight-after-the-wa-election/#comment-215336 In response to Ben Raue, I think a big factor in the WA election was that the Greens actually bothered to campaign this time. For a number of years the two elected Greens had been completely missing in action in WA, neither seen nor heard. The Victoria Park and Peel by-election results were utter disappointments for the party. The 2005 campaign was half hearted at best and you had to go and get your own "how to vote" off a pile at many booths and there was no volunteers of whom questions could be asked. However in the four months leading to the election they actually started campaigning, advertising, getting out there. Booths were very well covered from what I saw. That's probably a big part of the difference in the vote this time, in my opinion. I agree with the idea we should have proportional voting. I am a Labor supporter myself but I am such mainly because we're stuck with two alternatives. The only question is where it would leave local independents like Constable and Woollard, I'm not sure quite how the New Zealand system works with regards to those. In response to Ben Raue, I think a big factor in the WA election was that the Greens actually bothered to campaign this time. For a number of years the two elected Greens had been completely missing in action in WA, neither seen nor heard. The Victoria Park and Peel by-election results were utter disappointments for the party. The 2005 campaign was half hearted at best and you had to go and get your own “how to vote” off a pile at many booths and there was no volunteers of whom questions could be asked. However in the four months leading to the election they actually started campaigning, advertising, getting out there. Booths were very well covered from what I saw. That’s probably a big part of the difference in the vote this time, in my opinion.

I agree with the idea we should have proportional voting. I am a Labor supporter myself but I am such mainly because we’re stuck with two alternatives. The only question is where it would leave local independents like Constable and Woollard, I’m not sure quite how the New Zealand system works with regards to those.

]]>