Confusion at the Ballot Box !

When we cast our votes on May 18 a lot of people are going to be unsure just how they deal with the massive Senate paper because the instructions are misleading.  In the past it was a choice of voting above or below the line.  Select and mark just one box above the line, or number all the candidates in your selected order below the line.

That changed at the 2016 election when voters were urged to select as many as six boxes above the line, and as a result some candidates received votes that were clearly not the wishes of the people making a vote.  When the nationality issue rocked the Australian parliament and some elected members were forced to step down because they held dual citizenship in another country their replacement gained office by gaining less than twenty votes on the countback.

Many people confused that request to mark six boxes with the protocol often followed in their vote for the lower house of representatives in which they graded all candidates from first to last, marking the last the person they least wished to see gain the seat.

When they used this thinking in the Senate paper, they were actually elevating those six choices above all the other parties vying for a vote.  The intention was to get people to select six parties in the order of choice that they preferred, not to grade them first to last across the entire voting spectrum.

This time those same instructions apply.  Voters are urged to select their choice of at least six boxes above the line and it is likely that many will use that same " first and least preferred "  choice and unknowingly deliver a vote to someone they least want elected.

We might achieve clarity by asking voters to number their  choice across the entire number of parties above the line.   That way they would give their first preference to the party of their choice and obviously the last to the one they least prefer to see gain office.  This selection of " first to last " would give a more accurate account of voters intentions.

The intention was clear when the ballot moved away from just a single vote above the line.  Those voting for the two major parties quickly exhausted the quotas needed to elect Senators and delivered no second choices.  By spreading the vote beyond a single choice a clear decision on voters wishes could be obtained.

Now the Electoral Commission has a short time to get that message to the voters.   Hopefully, most people have made a voting choice in the days before the election and that has resulted from careful consideration of what the parties are offering.  Australia is one of the few world countries that insists that voting in a government is a duty rather than an optional choice.  The government that evolves is clearly the people's choice !