Proportional representation must be the way forward for Australian politics

The short article below was published  first by the National Times. It attracted 42 comments in two days. The comments were then closed. Do you want to add to the comments here on this blog? The political system is in crisis but very, very few political analysts appear interested in talking about alternatives. Why is this? The voters are not at all happy with the existing system but there is no information and no discussion about alternatives. Journalists stick to current affairs within the existing system. Political scientists appear not to be interested in entering the publlc arena as reformers. Perhaps they all retired years ago. The constitution, the electoral system and the Westminster system are responsible for the crisis that Australia is saddled with. 

It is nonsense to say that the system has served Australia well. Quarry Australia may have served Australia well but that may come to an end sooner or later. We need to improve on the quality of our politicians URGENTLY. The best people are not in our parliaments, indeed most of them wouldn't want to run as candidates for the major parties. Is this a healthy situation? The 3.25 m people who didn't vote in the 2010 federal election didn't think so, probably many more than that figure but they voted for Independents and for the least objectionable major party candidates. Surely, Australia can do much better than that.

Klaas Woldring

May 2, 2011

• Comments 42

In most other representative democracies a number of parties seek co-operation to form majority government. It is refreshing to gain just a glimpse of that in Australia now with the hung federal parliament but unless there's concerted action to change the electoral system we may soon be back in full adversarial mode.

Australia's two-party system is increasingly dysfunctional. It cannot even achieve parliamentary majorities where they exist and are badly needed, such as the wrangle over dealing with climate change, where carping about the carbon tax replaces real debate about policy, and the mining super profits tax, which was diluted after a concerted advertising campaign by mining companies.

With no imperative to seize or keep power, these measures would most likely have passed through parliament by now. In quite other areas, for instance constitutional reform, Australia's two-party system is a huge cause of stagnation because the major parties need to agree on amendment proposals for them to be carried by a referendum. And this rarely happens.

Advertisement: Story continues below

There is a better way. The European model of proportional representation is co-operative, rather than adversarial in nature. The task of the voter is very easy: with just one vote, the person marks their preferred party and, at the same time, a preferred candidate on its list of candidates. This system is known as the ''party list''.

Candidates need to achieve a quota to be elected. The system results in multiple party parliaments and coalition government. Apart from being co-operative, it also ensures diverse and democratic representation. There are no byelections, pork-barrelling or horse trading on preferences behind closed doors. Counting votes is fast.

And it would be a simple system to introduce, requiring a change in the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. No constitutional amendment is required.

In Europe, 21 of 28 countries use proportional representation, including Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

Where new constitutions were introduced in the past few decades, proportional representation was mostly adopted and often enshrined in the constitutions themselves such as in Portugal (1974), South Africa (1996), almost all of Eastern Europe (1991) and New Zealand, with more than 80 per cent of these systems being ''party list''.

While the Australian Greens have proportional representation as a policy, they have been quiet on calling for a review of our voting processes, despite it being in their interest given the party is grossly under-represented in lower houses.

A simple examination of the problems in our current system shows why we need that kind proportional representation.

- There is a serious lack of diversity in the House of Representatives. The 2009 Electoral Reform Inquiry's first Green paper explained correctly that diversity has increased greatly in Australian society since 1945, yet this is hardly reflected in the Parliament. But the second Green Paper  deliberately encouraged only piecemeal tinkering in the way of system reforms.

- The single-member district system has resulted in frequent boundary changes, a costly and often controversial process; pork barrelling; little economic development or government assistance in ''safe'' seats. Costly byelections are a by-product of this system. In proportional representation (using the open party list system) casual vacancies are filled by the next on the list at the previous election.

- The highly undesirable system dominance of the two major parties would end, replaced by a search for common ground.

- The lack of democracy in representation would be remedied. Currently with single-member electoral districts candidates are often elected on the basis of only about 40 per cent of first preference votes. The other 60 per cent are in fact not represented in their own electorate.

- The two-party system and compulsory voting forces the major parties to pitch their policies at the ''middle ground'' (about 20 per cent plus of voters). Not surprisingly 3.25 million Australians avoided to vote in the 2010 election.

- Proportional representation or a variation of it would also improve the percentage of women in parliament as shown in the Scandanavian countries, and also New Zealand, Germany, Iceland, Argentina and South Africa.

- The existing regime is also biased against migrant candidates and indigenous people. There is now a high percentage of the population of non-English speaking background of both first and second generation.

The introduction of proportional representation would change the political culture of this country for the better. It is a fairer system, more democratic, simpler for the voters, easier to count, less expensive and it provides diversity, flexibility and new ideas in our parliaments.

Klaas Woldring is a former associate professor of Southern Cross University and Convenor of Republic Now Association Inc.