03-01-2011, 07:18 AM
We actually have both systems, Howard !. For all 'upper house' elections ( we have an elected upper house rather than a House of Lords) nationally and in most states,and some lower house elections, we have an STV system.
For the National lower house elections we have a 'preferential' system whereby you rank candidates in order of preference. The one with the least number of [1]votes is eliminated, and those votes are then distributed to the voters [2] selection and so on until a candidate achieves an absolute majority.
Both systems are fairer than the FPTP system in use in the UK, but like I said they don't cure the usual ills of politics....... not least that we don't get a "democratic" result.
Those who live in 'safe' seats are stuck with that candidate, and the only voters who have any real say are the few who live in 'marginal' ( i.e. seats that could elect any one of several candidates) and who are 'swinging' voters ( i.e. who vote on actual issues, not just party loyalty.
Of course, what none of the parties will tell you is that in the electronic/computer/handheld device age, we no longer need 'representatives' ( who in fact represent party interests, not voters interests) to vote in parliament for us - we can all potentially vote electronically ourselves on every issue.
For the first time in history since ancient Athens, when the citizens were rounded up with a red-painted rope to go to the Agora, listen to debate, and then vote on an issue, we actually have the potential ability to take part in a REAL democracy !!!!
For the National lower house elections we have a 'preferential' system whereby you rank candidates in order of preference. The one with the least number of [1]votes is eliminated, and those votes are then distributed to the voters [2] selection and so on until a candidate achieves an absolute majority.
Both systems are fairer than the FPTP system in use in the UK, but like I said they don't cure the usual ills of politics....... not least that we don't get a "democratic" result.
Those who live in 'safe' seats are stuck with that candidate, and the only voters who have any real say are the few who live in 'marginal' ( i.e. seats that could elect any one of several candidates) and who are 'swinging' voters ( i.e. who vote on actual issues, not just party loyalty.
Of course, what none of the parties will tell you is that in the electronic/computer/handheld device age, we no longer need 'representatives' ( who in fact represent party interests, not voters interests) to vote in parliament for us - we can all potentially vote electronically ourselves on every issue.
For the first time in history since ancient Athens, when the citizens were rounded up with a red-painted rope to go to the Agora, listen to debate, and then vote on an issue, we actually have the potential ability to take part in a REAL democracy !!!!
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
