Preference system should be scrapped
I HAVE for many years advocated the scrapping of the preference system from the Australian political system.
It allows dirty deals to be done to advantage and disadvantage candidates.
Voting one only neither advantages nor disadvantages anyone.
If there are no preferences in the system each voter places his vote with the candidate of his choice and that’s where it ends.
Having only a single choice will still ensure that the candidate with the highest number of votes attains the seat and those with the courage of their convictions will, or should, know who they want and who they don’t.
Voters should be faced with a single choice and if their candidate wins or loses then they should accept the decision with maturity.
Think vertically. If “vote one only” was the system in place then each candidate’s totals could be stacked up and a winner clearly seen.
If 1000 votes made a hypothetical pile 30 centimetres high and other candidate’s piles made 10 or 20 centimetres then it would be obvious, without even counting the exact numbers (although you still would) that A had more votes than B, C and so on.
If I want A then I want A. If I loathe the ideology offered by E why then should I be compelled to give that ideology any support no matter how small that may be and how far down the scale?
Queensland waited a while to see who formed government because of this silly system. Had it been down to just single vote allocations the decision on individual seats and by extension the government could be over (excluding postals which are a valid part of the process) within a couple of days.
In the Melbourne Cup if there are 10 horses in the field and one wins (10 per cent) then 90 per cent lose. That’s the way it is. The preference system however deceptively uses the concept of percentages (the rest of the field) as the factor.
Should the winner of the cup be decided therefore by asking all the bookies how many punters backed each of the remaining horses?
That would take days ... I rest my case.