Vote above the line and elect a Greens senator without even trying

Take into account the hidden danger in the “easy” Senate voting method, warns the psefologist Lex Stewart, whom Cairns News has contacted to comment on the preferential voting system.

If you are among 91% who do not want to vote for the greens, then keep reading, because your vote can, without realizing, helping the greens.

The voting document (for the 2016 Senate voting method) specifies that you vote:
– either numbering 1 to at least 6 boxes /.
– or by number 1 to at least 12 boxes ‘under the line’ (BTL).

“Many voters do the easy and vote from 1 to 6 ATL without realizing that this type of vote favors the greens, helping them to obtain a seat in the Senate, although he did not mention the greens, nor does he want to help them,” says Stewart.

“This is because the new voting method allows a senator to be chosen in less than a complete quota, and also creates the ‘exhaustion’ of the votes. The previous method required that each senator obtains a complete quota (14.3%), but the new method gives the Greens an advantage, because the senators can participate in less than a quota.”

He says that under the old method, the greens had to obtain enough preferences to obtain about 9% of the votes (which is 0.63 of a quota) to achieve a complete quota of 14.3%.

“However, this new method was designed by the Greens, and for years it was defended by the Greens, but no one else, until Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull attacked him for Parliament,” says Stewart.

“Hansard shows that the ALP was furiously against this new method, because they understood that it would give an unfair advantage to the greens.” The vote counting procedure carried out by the AEC proceeds as follows:

(i) The AEC selects candidates with more than one quota (14.3%), that is, the first five senators chosen are one of the main parties, ALP and LIB/NATS;

(ii) The sixth seat depends on the assignment of preferences, and is “available”.

(iii) the AEC eliminates candidates with the least number of votes and distributes their preferences (if any) in those voting documents to other candidates;

(IV) But it numbered from 1 to 6, then its vote lacks 7,8,9,10, etc. Preferences to flow to build a rival to overcome the green sitting there with 0.63 of a quota and, therefore, many ‘escape’ votes have no more influence on the result.

Therefore, the Greens often end up winning the final seat in the Senate with only 0.63 of a quota, and you, who add up 1 to 6, have, without realizing, helped them get there.

Stewart points out that in the 2016 elections, the greens obtained 8.7% of the votes, but 12% of the senators and in the 2019 elections, the green ones obtained 10% of the votes, but 15% of the senators.

“If you want your Senate vote not to favor the greens, then, please, stay above the line, putting the greens at the end,” he says. “Or if I numerate squares below the line, then numbers more than 12, placing a number in each column, the number being in the Green column the last number.

“Strictly speaking, the new voting method of the Senate does not favor the greens by their name, but the mathematics of the voting method favor, for the sixth seat in the Senate, a” medium “game, that is, one that obtains approximately two thirds of a quota.

“The main parts exceed two quotas (28%), while minor parties get less than half a share. Greens are the only middle part.”

Lex Stewart, psefologist stewart.lex@gmail.com