The Great Unknown of YOUR Senate Vote

I might be way off beam in my thinking in comparison to how others think, but for what it's worth, this is why I am so annoyed with the carry on by some micro Senators over Senate Reform. 

When I vote for a major party I know what I am voting for. I’ve voted Labor in the past. That said, that isn’t unusual when you are a student. At the time their policies aligned with my idealist beliefs. I then grew up and I have been a Liberal voter for the vast majority of my voting life. I don’t agree with every policy the Liberals put on the table. Anyone who follows me on social media or who reads my blog knows I am very critical of some things the Liberals propose and do. I vote for the major parties because they usually manage to get things that I believe are important done. Or they did. But, that has become much, much harder than it was over recent years due to the major failures within our voting system. 

I vote for the Liberals in both houses. Why, because I do my homework and I can’t see the logic of supporting a party, putting them into power in the lower house only to have their progress blocked in the upper chamber. In not into two way betting. In voting for the Liberals, I know where their preferences, go and therefore I can make an informed decision with regards to supporting it or not. In other words, I know what my vote buys me and usually preferences are given to others who are somewhat aligned in thinking albeit there are differences. Conservative candidates may support different causes, but their fundamental conservative values are usually very much aligned. 

I've read some comments from people taking aim at the majors accusing them of doing preference deals for years. It's true they do but we know what those deals are, where the preferences go and informed people make choices based on that knowledge. If I were to vote for a micro in the Senate, which is what micros target, I would have no idea where my preferences would end up. That was highlighted in the joint committee review of the 2013 election. 

A classic example of that would be Senator Ricky Muir and the Motoring Enthusiasts Party. Ricky is very upset that Malcolm Turnbull singled him out as you will see from the following tweet. 

If the truth offends Mr Muir tough & I’m furious that because the truth is spoken you responds with threats. So typical of the senate cross-benchers behaviour. There isn’t a more graphic example of the failure of the senate voting than Senator Muir. Mr Muir got a measly 0.51 per cent of first preference votes (or just 0.0354 of a Senate quota) and he ended up with a seat in the Senate. How? Because of a backroom deal done by his party HQ to achieve the transfer of 143,118 votes from the Australian Sex Party. As was pointed out today by Paul Kelly in the Australian, Ricky Muir’s election had nothing to do with public support, but everything to do with manipulation of the preference system.

So, here are some of the policy snippets from the Australian Sex Party’s website: 

Advocate for the sale of X rated films be legalised in all states, including the introduction an X rating for computer games.

Remove criminal sanctions for the purchase, possession and consumption of all drugs for personal use, such quantity to be defined as an amount equal or less than 14 days supply for one person

Extend a non-compulsory voting franchise to young people aged 16 to 18, to encourage engagement by interested individuals and in young people’s social networks.

Bring about equal numbers of women in the Parliament through enabling the Federal Discrimination Act to have jurisdiction extending to political parties (so law takes precedent over talent, no thank you)

An abortion may be performed at any time with the consent of the woman and if a medical practitioner certifies that it is appropriate under the circumstances.

Minors (under the age of 16) may obtain an abortion without the consent of a parent/guardian.

Can anyone tell me what these policies would have in common with people who would support a motoring party? I would be surprised if some of the people who voted for the Motoring Enthusiasts know what the Sex Party stands for. It could have been worse, however, they could have voted for the Motoring Enthusiasts and if a different deal had been done, they may have helped put a Sex Party candidate into a power position. 

ABC analyst Antony Green got it right when addressing the 2013 election results, he said of the current system: “It has produced results that were engineered by the preference deals rather than by the votes cast by voters. Voters have to have some ability to know what is happening with their vote. The system, if changed, should advantage parties which campaign, not parties which arrange preference deals.” 

Hear, hear Mr Green, I could not agree more. 

Time To Rid Ourselves of Petulant Crossbenchers

Crossbench senator Glenn Lazarus has hit out at Malcolm Turnbull's "nasty" Government, saying he will snub a dinner invite to The Lodge in protest against Senate reforms aimed at disenfranchising the "common man". 

The snubbing of the PM's dinner invitation by some of the crossbenchers highlights two things for me. Let's face it, Lazarus has history when it comes to refusing to meet with the Government to discuss issues. I could say the ‘block-head’ reference applies to more than just his physical appearance because his behaviour is certainly ‘block-head’ behaviour. But I digress, so back to the point. 

Firstly, what an immature, ignorant bunch of petulant twits some of the cross-benchers are. From where I sit, it highlights why with that mentality they simply shouldn't be in charge of voting on laws that impact on our lives. 

Secondly, it's proof positive (at least for me) that their reactions to the proposed Senate reforms which gives us the right to decide on where our preferences go smacks of self-interest and denial of our rights. Most of the crossbenchers in the Senate got there because of backroom deals which is not democratic in my opinion. 

There is no guarantee, with new legislation in place that we won't end up with sub-standard representatives in the senate. You only have to cast your eye across the major parties to see a sprinkling of less than desirable seat dwellers. But, at least within the major parties there are others to pull the seat dwellers into line. The same doesn’t apply to independents who often hold the balance of power. We have witnessed time and again the chaos some of the crossbenchers have created under the existing Parliament.  If under the new law we do end up with sub-standard independents and micros we will only have ourselves to blame. We will have put them there not some wheeler-dealer doing dodgy deals in secret. 

I have read some comments from people who are concerned because in their opinion the 'real people' won't stand a chance of getting into Parliament. I don't agree with that thinking. Nothing stops people from nominating. Nothing stops us from voting for them. If they get a seat, it will be because a core of people supports them which to me is democratic. It also means that someone who got less than 400 votes and was assisted by backroom deals, will never be elected again and that can't be a bad thing.  

I can't wait to see the back of people like Lazarus, Lambie and I’ll put Leyonhejlm (given some of his idiotic comments) in that bucket as well. I’m praying like mad that the legislation passes, that Turnbull calls a double-dissolution and that we wipe the slate clean and chuck the rubbish out. 

They say everyone has a breaking point and I've reached mine. I'm over the dummy spits, the grandstanding, the blackmail and the lack of intelligent debate and decision making. Time to lift the IQ of the Parliament above that of the footy field (due respect to footy players) and the schoolyard. 

Why Senate Reform is Essential

 

Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm is warning the government it will have to deal with at least seven 'very cranky' cross-benchers if they push ahead with Senate voting reform. In making that statement, Senator David Leyonhjelm has just proven why senate reform is essential in my book. 

Senator Leyonhejlm and the bunch of ‘very cranky cross-benchers’ are declaring their intention to deny you and me the right to choose where our preferences go. More importantly,  Leyonhjelm (and he isn’t the only one) has threatened to block passing the reinstatement of  the building industry watchdog!!!!! Leyonhejlm has supported this policy previously. If he therefore blocks the passing now, it will be an act of blatant self-interest, bordering on blackmail gorilla tactics. 

Whilst minority groups have a right to be heard, they have to achieve that voice on their own merits and not by doing back room deals with other equally unrepresentative parties. Or in the case of Leyonhjelm, a 'slight of hand' party name coupled with a fortuitous senate paper voting placement. If their cause is just and if it is supported then people will vote for them. If not, they won't. 

I for one, am very angry about the carry on by some of the people representing us in the senate. The likes of Lambie, Lazarus and Leyonhjelm being points in case. Leyonhjelm in my humble opinion has just proven (yet again) the folly of having minority groups deciding for the majority. 

I am not a fan of the preferential voting system. I much prefer first passed the post, but we have a preferential system so that needs to work for us, not cancers like Leyonhejlm. We must decide how our preferences are distributed not 'preference whisperers’ and dodgy 'wannabe senators'. We cannot have a system where good policy is blocked by the Self-Protectionists’ who are more interested in hanging on to their positions of power than our rights and what is in the best interest of the country. 

We must demand senate reform. Enough Is enough....