+
+
Ballot Paper
Election of 9 Members
YOU MAY VOTE BY
A
EITHER
FAMILY FIRST
Placing the number 1 in the box above the group of your choice. You can show more choices if you want to by placing numbers in the other boxes starting with the number 2.
A
B
AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY B
2025
C
DAYLIGHT SAVING PARTY C
East Metropolitan Region
D
SOCIALIST ALLIANCE
E
MICRO BUSINESS PARTY
D
E
F
LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY F
G
THE GREENS G
H
LIBERAL PARTY
H
UNGROUPED
Frank PANGALLO
Thomas FRENCH
Nancy-Louise SCHERGER
Joanne ALLEN
Anthony SEDDON
David PINKERTON
Alison XAMON
Donna FARAGHER
OR
Luciano LOMBARDO
Katy GALLAGHER
Alvin HOPPER
Richard MULCAHY
Angus LABURN
David McALARY
Scott LUDLAM
Alyssa HAYDEN
Numbering at least 9 of these boxes in the order of your choice.
Phil THOMPSON
Hannah BEAZLEY
Owen SADDLER
Ben O’NEILL
Kim EVANS
Dylan COPELAND
Helen MORTON
Greg TANNAHILL
Simon CORBELL
Norvan VOGT
David CUMBERS
Samantha JENKINSON
Zed SESELJA
Tony FARRELL
David MATHEWS
Darren O’NEIL
Ziggy FATNOWNA
Victoria JACKSON
Kelly SHAY
Stuart GREEN
Ian JAMES
Tim WALTON
Hugh NGUYEN
Stephen ROWLAND
Gregg BOLAND
Belinda BARNIER
+
Helen CROSS INDEPENDENT
Kerri TARANTO INDEPENDENT
INDEPENDENT
+
17 March 2020
Malcolm Mackerras
While I am disappointed to give a mark of 55 per cent compared with the 75 per cent I had hoped to give, it still means that a “fail” mark for the present system is replaced by a “pass” mark for the new system. Essentially the reason for the increase is the elimination of the malapportionment. The mark for New South Wales being 58 per cent for its high district magnitude it would be 55 per cent for the lower WA district magnitude.
However, there are two aspects of WA that are notably more democratic than the two cases mentioned above. The first is that casual vacancies are filled by recounting votes, not by party machine appointment as is the case for NSW and SA. Second, their terms are eight years with rotation of members. By contrast, Western Australia did away with “staggered” terms entirely so the terms are of four years. Each of these elements deserves three marks so the overall mark would be 55 per cent.
Finally, what mark would I give to this reform? As a guide to my thinking let me remind readers that I gave a mark of 58 per cent for New South Wales where the district magnitude for the Legislative Council is 21 and a mark of 51 per cent for South Australia where the district magnitude for the Legislative Council is 11. On that basis I would give WA a mark of 49 per cent for the lower district magnitude of 9.
Giving a name to that amalgamated region is something of a challenge. I suggest it be called the “Agricultural, Mining, Pastoral and Tourism Region” and that it elects nine members – to bring the total number up to the present 36 members in the Legislative Council.
The rest of Western Australia has turned out to be easier to manage than I had expected. The equivalent numbers are 101,174 for the Agricultural Region, 67,686 for Mining and Pastoral and 231,173 for the South West Region. That adds up to 400,033, slightly more than for the East Metropolitan Region for which the ballot paper overleaf is designed as the model.
The way in which I would eliminate the malapportionment is the same in principle as for Plan A, but different in detail. These I now give, starting with the metropolitan area. According to the November 2019 WA distribution of seats the East Metropolitan Region has 399,462 electors, North Metropolitan Region 405,349 and South Metropolitan Region 421,949. So, there is no reason to change the boundaries of any of the three regions in the metropolitan area. Therefore, the “one vote, one value” principle would cause nine members to be elected in 2025 for each.
In several respects this ballot paper is identical to the original for Plan A. Candidate names are the same as are party names, as is the choice of the East Metropolitan Region and the WA coat of arms. The big difference is the inclusion of the ballot dividing line and party boxes above that line. The instructions, however, are taken from the now South Australian Legislative Council ballot paper with the difference that SA uses the word “squares” where WA would continue with the word “boxes”.
Had my WA reform been viable I would have given a distinction mark of 75 per cent to the system that resulted from my campaign, compared with the mark of 45 per cent I give for the present system. However, fearing my campaign was no longer viable I arranged to visit Perth early this year and spent Monday 10 February, Tuesday 11 February and Wednesday 12 February there, talking to politicians, journalists, academics and electoral officials. Those talks convinced me to abandon Plan A (under which above-the-line voting would be discontinued) and embark on Plan B for which the model ballot paper is overleaf.
For thirty years I have been trying to persuade Australian parliaments to get rid of above-the-line voting for PR systems. I succeeded in the Australian Capital Territory in 1995 but regret that only the two Hare-Clark systems now lack above-the-line voting. My campaign for reform for the Senate and Victoria continues very much on track but, regrettably, I have discontinued the campaign in respect of Western Australia.
On 14 November 2017 I published model ballot papers for my proposed reforms to upper house proportional representation systems in respect of the Senate and the Legislative Council of Western Australia. That model ballot paper was titled “Ballot Paper for the Election of 7 Members for each Region of Western Australia”. The Senate one was titled “Ballot Paper for the Election of 7 Senators for Victoria”. On 22 January 2019 I decided to include the Victorian Legislative Council on my agenda for reform. Consequently, I published “Ballot Paper for the Election of 5 Members for each Victorian Region”.
BALLOT PAPER FOR THE ELECTION OF 9 MEMBERS FOR EACH REGION OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA