Subscribe to the YouDecide2007 newsletter






 
Home arrow Opinion Archive arrow PR: Ending marginal seats and pork-barelling
PR: Ending marginal seats and pork-barelling

By Gerald Kelly,


It is frustrating living in a very safe seat.  I have been living in the Electorate of Mayo, held by Alexander Downer, since its inception in 1984.  

My vote has never been for the Liberals but it is a foregone conclusion here that the Liberals will win.  Living in a safe seat also means that you missout on all the goodies offered to the marginals. There has got to be a better way to manage an electoral system. And there is!

 

I have voted Democrat and Green in the lower house, knowing that my vote had no possibility of having an effect.  It seems to me to be very undemocratic that perhaps 8% of the country can vote for a minor party and yet there will not be one seat held by that party in parliament.  If we had proportional representation then everyone’s in every electorate will count. 

 

In systems like the one in Germany, one votes for the local member on one ballot and on another for the party one wants to be in power in the lower house.  The party vote determines the make up of the lower house.   Simply put, if 33% of the population votes Liberal on the party ballot then 33% percent of the seats in parliament will be Liberal.  If 6% votes Green then 6%of the seats will be Green. 

 

The parliament is made up of local members and “list” members.  List members do not represent any particular area but are chosen by the party in a simlar way to how the senate lists work here. So the parliament is made up of the local reps plus a “top up” from the “lists” to reflect the vote for the party. This has the great added advantage that local reps do not have to double as Ministers and Ministers do not have to worry about a local electorate. 

 

I wonder how much time Downer has to devote to Mayo or Howard to Benelong in an ordinary week.  The system makes it possible to vote for a good local member but to express your wish that a different party hold sway in the parliament. 

 

Most importantly it means that everyone’s vote counts equally, no matter where one lives.  The whole concept of a marginal seat goes out the window.  It would mean an end to that kind of pork-barrelling.  Politicians would have to pay equal attention to every electorate in the country.  Wouldn’t that be a good thing?

 

One objection could be that this seems to mean more politicians.  Perhaps not; it could mean that we reduce the number of seats, in both houses,  to make room for the list members.


   

Users' Comments  RSS feed comment

Display 2 of 2 comments

I concur

By: AlanK (Registered ) on 25-10-2007 12:36

Having lived in the 'safe' federal seat of Ryan for the past since 1969, in the area since 1961 when I purchased land for 1000 pounds, the majority of what existed then, is still here now. The same power poles, roads, water distribution, and telephone cables. 
You are taken for granted by whichever arm of government is in power for Local, State, or Federal interests. Nothing gets done, apart from maintenance, because you do not have to be impressed as you will be there next time. Planning is done, promises made, [sometimes delivered], for marginal areas only. 
In 1961 there was nothing past the Catholic Church along Moggill Road at Kenmore, until you hit Moggill. There was the Vet School and the Repat home opposite, but that was all that broke the monotony of the drive. How things have changed since, with sub-divisions and suburbia spreading. Why are the roads basically the same? Maybe widened here and there, but still the same. For 42 years, long before the sub-divisions, there was talk of a Western By-pass, that has never eventuated. Why has the western side of Brisbane NEVER had road or rail planned to relieve congestion? Could it be because it is a 'safe' coalition seat? Could it be because our elected members do not care? Could it be that following "The Party Line" is more important than presenting the issues that are 'Local' concerns. 
I am sure that a large Health Clinic in this area would not go astray. Colectively, I am sure that if enough voters lost their consanguinity, a shocking message could be sent to those elected members who are treating them, the voters, with contempt. 
I mention a Clinic, not for my interests, [it is 10 years since i visited a doctor], but because a large, well equipped centre is needed, so I am told.

» Report this comment to administrator

 

Safe seat ignored

By: Lizzy (Registered ) on 11-11-2007 05:40

I too, live in a safe seat, held by...the National Party. It is truely pathetic that it has been ever thus since it was called the "Country Party". They get less votes Nationally than do the Greens and yet they get to be part of the Government. Yes I know that is why it is called the 'Coalition' but it has done none here any good and yet the locals still vote! 
Now our member is rabbiting on about how great we have it for our Hospital ( totally over worked and under funded) and how they promise a new by-pass...after all these years of lobbying, signing petitions, going to meetings and pleading with the powers that be that it is in the best interests of safety for the citizens NOW they say it is going to happen? And also they add, Dental health will be a priority..after talking with, sending letters of frustration to this little chappy who ignored me, says ( after they de-funded the scheme) are going to put in place dental services for health card holders! 
I am gobsmacked! 
Please please if you live in Cowper vote for anyone except the National Party!!!

» Report this comment to administrator

 

Display 2 of 2 comments



Add your comment
Only registered users can comment an article. Please login or register.


mXcomment 1.0.2 © 2007-2008 - visualclinic.fr
License Creative Commons - Some rights reserved
 
< Prev   Next >