You may have noticed recently there has been a lot of talk about the election – perhaps even more now the whole thing’s over.
However, there has not been all that much talk about the Senate and there was even less before polling day.
Unlike 95 per cent of Australians, I feel obliged to vote below the line in the Senate, if only to actually get MY choice of preferences rather than who some party thinks I might like to vote for.
Previously I have voted in the ACT where, with only about 16 candidates standing, this task is not too strenuous. Also, the Canberra Times used to profile each of the Senate candidates, the same way they did the House of Representative ones.
This year I voted in NSW where there was 79 candidates.
Quite apart from having to keep track of where your vote is up to, it turned out that with that many people vying for my number 1, I had no idea who most of them were.
In fact, I’d only heard of less than half of the 20 or so groups in my ballot paper and only a vague idea of what anyone other than Liberal, Labor, Greens, Democrats, CDP and One Nation stood for (and I’m not certain I even know what One Nation really stands for any more).
I read the Sydney metros, the Australian and my local daily, the Illawarra Mercury, every day and there was no discussion before the election of who the Senate candidates were, let alone which parties were fielding candidates.
The only parties I heard from regularly via my office’s generic press release email address promoting their Senate candidates were the CDP (with the well-branded Paul Green, who is also a relative local), Family First (though they never returned phone calls or emails) and either One Nation or the Pauline party (I didn’t quite work out which was which).
While the Senate may not be as exciting since it doesn’t contribute to who forms government, we have seen in the past few years just how important its makeup can be and how having a decent number of minor party or independent Senators can be vital to the big parties not just getting every single thing they want.
It seems to me that the current voting system favours the major parties and if the media does not play its role in creating informed citizens, this major party bias in increased tenfold since people will probably not vote for someone they’ve never heard of.
I think the below the line voting should be changed to make it easier and to encourage people to think for themselves a bit more. Perhaps you could say you have to number at least 15 candidates in order and then it’s up to you how far you go on after this. Surely that would give enough data to be able to get six seats and not put people off by saying you to write 1 to 23,584,932 in order on this bit of paper (and then wrestle into a small enough shape to fit in the ballot box…)