The only aboriginal federal parliamentarians to date have both been
senators. No aboriginal has ever been elected as a member of the House of
Representatives.

The first aboriginal senator was the late Neville Bonner, a Liberal, who
filled a Queensland
casual vacancy in 1971. He was elected as one of the ten senators for Queensland in the 1974
full Senate poll. He has the distinction of having obtained, in the 1975 full
Senate poll, the highest first preference
vote (56.1%) so far recorded for any state Senate candidate since
the introduction, in 1948, of quota-preferential proportional representation
for electing senators. Only eleven senate candidates have ever obtained an
absolute majority of the first preference votes in their State, and none of
those were obtained after 1975.

The second aboriginal to be elected, in 1998, Senator Aden Ridgeway, is an
Australian Democrat. He is one of the twelve senators for NSW - not a state
with nearly as high a percentage of aboriginal voters as some others - so he
too owed his election to the support of a great many more voters than
aboriginal voters alone.

Press reports have suggested an aboriginal Dubbocouncillor is a serious contender for the third
place on the ALP Group Voting Ticket for New South Wales. No suggestions have
appeared that any of the other parties presently represented in the
Parliament might give an aboriginal candidate a winnable place on the next
round of Senate and lower house ballot-papers.

Aboriginal members of State Legislatures

There has been no greater percentage of aboriginal members in any state
parliament than in the Federal Parliament. In the parliaments of Victoria and Queensland
the lack of any proportional representation system makes the election of
members identified with minority groups even less likely than it otherwise would
be.

The PRSA has, in articles criticizing views on the subject of some major
party MPs (QN71, QN74) referred to the widely prevalent
fallacy of too readily assuming that the parliamentary representative chosen
by a group of voters, whether it is a majority or a minority, necessarily has
to possess particular characteristics of that group of voters.

The word representative is a very ambiguous word in the English language.
The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines the noun as "Sample, specimen,
typical embodiment, analogue, of; person or firm's agent; delegate,
substitute, successor, heir; deputy in representative legislature".

A proper electoral system should leave it entirely up to electors to
freely choose, if they wish, a person with a totally different background
from themselves. The members of such groups might well decide to make that
choice on the quite appropriate grounds that they consider that the person's
views are closer to theirs than those of other people more readily and
outwardly recognizable as part of their group, or that the person has better
skills and ability to present those views to greatest effect.

Debates over the percentage of women that should be present in a
parliament have focussed on the mere fact of the
representatives being women or not, as opposed to the substantially more
important issue of having a percentage of the voters much higher than a mere
50% being in possession of the power to have their first significant
preference votes elect a group to represent their diversity of views as
electors. Diversity of effective choice for voters, in practice, produces
greater diversity in representatives, as any legislature elected by PR shows.

LET THE NORTHERN TERRITORY
VOTE ON PR

Aboriginal people form about 29% of the Northern Territory population, which is
almost ten times the percentage in any other Australian jurisdiction. All
seats in the NT legislature are filled on a winner-take-all basis, and it is
often the case that this large aboriginal minority are
the losers in electoral contests, and have little representation.

The unicameral legislature of the Northern Territory
has, under the Commonwealth's Northern Territory
(Self-Government) Act 1978, so far been able to consist only
of single-member electorates. By contrast, the only other internal
Commonwealth territory, the Australian
Capital Territory, has, by virtue of Commonwealth
law facilitating its adoption, a popular and successful Hare-Clark system
with multi-member electoral districts. That law enabled a 1992 plebiscite on
Hare-Clark versus single-member districts, and there was a successful
referendum in 1995 on entrenching its key principles, both of which were
supported by the Liberals and Australian Democrats.

This restriction to single-member electoral districts has adversely
affected representation of Northern
Territory voters from the very first election. No
ALP candidates were elected then although ALP candidates stood for all seats,
and the overall ALP first preference vote was over 30%.

The Commonwealth should give Northern Territory
voters a choice of having the present system changed to a Hare-Clark system, as it did for the Australian Capital Territory.
That would be an act of real practical reconciliation between aboriginal and
non-aboriginal Australians. Two of the three alternative election models in a
Final Draft Constitution tabled in August 1996, after unanimous support by
the NT Legislative Assembly's Sessional Committee
on Constitutional Development, explicitly allowed for a proportional
representation electoral system.

Initiatives they take in this area will help reveal the
various parties' commitment to real practical reconciliation.

Craig Ingram MLA Moves to Correct the
Flaws in Victoria's
Bill for Upper House PR

The Victorian ALP Government withdrew its Constitution (Reform) Bill
1999 (see QN2000A) and
replaced it with the Constitution (Proportional Representation) Bill 2000 and
the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2000. The majority of Legislative Councillors are in the Opposition Liberal Party, which
says it will reject both bills, passed by the Assembly in September, and to
be debated by MLCs in October.

Embarrassingly for the Government, one aspect it strongly supports in the Constitution
(Amendment) Bill 2000, removing the Council’s power to reject
supply bills, was opposed by two of the three independent MLAs,
the support of all of whom was initially required, and provided, to enable a
Labor Government to replace the previous Liberal Government. Since that
initial support was given, two seats have changed to Labor at by-elections,
thus enabling the ALP Government to have bills passed in the Assembly without
all three independents' votes.

The Bracks Government, as was foreshadowed in
the Governorís speech opening the 54th Parliament
(see QN1999D), has
declared that it will establish a Victorian Constitutional Commission for
consideration of the Bills and the desirability of obtaining the views of the
people of Victoria on Upper House reform. The last time such a plebiscite was
held in Victoria
was when the question of changing the closing hour of licensed hotels from 6
p.m. to 10 p.m. was put by the Bolte Liberal
Government.

The PRSAís Victoria-Tasmania Branch welcomes the
split into two bills. The Constitution (Proportional Representation) Bill
2000 is essentially confined to the electoral system. The other bill is
not a special focus of PRSA activities. The PRSA firmly believes that the PR
should be Hare-Clark PR, and definitely not PR as corrupted by the
voter-disempowering aspects included in the bill. These views were also
forcefully put by a key Independent, Mr Craig
Ingram, MLA for Gippsland
East, in the Assembly on 6th September 2000, after moving his amendment to
have all vacancies filled by countback.

Mr INGRAM: These amendments change
the way vacancies are to be filled when a person either ceases being a member
of the Legislative Council or dies. The amendments allow the filling of
casual vacancies by countbacks.

That is the system that will apply to the filling of casual vacancies
regardless of whether the person who has ceased to be a member of the Council
was elected as a member of a political party or as an Independent.

The reasons for moving the amendment are clear. Firstly, I have a
fundamental view that no-one should become an MP unless he or she has faced
the voters. In other words, before a party can put someone into a seat in the
Council, that person should have faced the voters. If a casual vacancy is
filled by a person who is nominated by a political party, in essence that
person could become a representative of the people without having faced them.

Mr BRACKS (Premier): The
Government would prefer to have the bill stand as it is, but it accepts the
argument put by the member for Gippsland East that
there is an alternative to filling vacancies with party choices, which was
the original intention. That is the case in the Senate, on which the
legislation is modelled, and it is also the case in
New South Wales and South Australia. We are aware that
vacancies are filled by countback in Western Australia, Tasmania
and the Australian Capital
Territory.

If a member has died or is no longer able to continue in office, a countback is held to fill the position with the
next preferred candidate. That is the system proposed by the member for Gippsland East. While it is not our first approved option
it is still a very workable option and it is one the Government will accept.
It does not at all detract from the bill. It is a method of filling a vacancy
which is legitimate, which is in place in a number of states, which is
workable, and which still reflects the choice at the ballot box at that time
and considers the next preferred choice. So in this case the Government
accepts the amendment.

Dr DEAN (Shadow Attorney-General): It is absolutely extraordinary
to hear what the Premier has just said. In effect he has said, 'We have gone
to a great deal of trouble to bring in a bill which we believe is an
appropriate way for the upper house to operate. Oh, by the way, we are now
going to change one of the fundamental tenets of the legislation simply
because the Independent member has decided to put that up.' I will go over
the reasons why it is inappropriate to simply have a countback.

If an MP retires prior to a general election and has to be replaced and
the introduction of proportional representation legislation prevents you from
having a by-election, you are left in the position of hoping to fill that
vacancy with a person of the same political view or the same persuasion as
the person who has left. The most likely way of achieving that is to have the
party from whom that person originated nominate another person of the same
political view.

If you remove that provision and simply operate on a countback
you are likely to end up with the reverse situation. If there is a contest
between groups of people - say, the Greens and the Removal of Trees Party -
and an issue such as the planting or chopping down of trees, one of those
groups will win and the one that came second is probably of the opposite
political persuasion. So with the countback
system, which the government has now agreed to put in, you
will probably get someone of the opposite political persuasion filling that
spot. It is absolute nonsense.

This is a situation where the very basis of trying to fill a vacancy in a
proportional representation situation requires the provision that the
Government had included in the bill and which it knew was correct. The
Government has made a complete fool of itself by removing it on the basis
that an Independent wants to go down that path. The Independent wants to go
that way for obvious reasons. I understand that and I accept them, because it
suits the Independent.

However, the Government has also gone down that track. Had it had the
courage to do what it should have done, it would have had the Opposition's
support and the provision would have been intact. The Opposition will vote
against the bill in total, but at least the Government would have been able
to walk out of this place with its integrity intact.

Mr LENDERS (ALP and, and a former PRSAV member): The honourable member for Berwick clearly does not understand
the amendment that has been moved by the honourable
member for Gippsland East to Clause 4, nor has he
listened to the Premier's comments. The Government was committed to a number
of provisions in the bill, and Clause 4 which deals with proportional
representation is one of them. There are different ways of filling casual
vacancies. As the Premier said, two models are being used throughout the
country. The preferred choice of the Government was the Senate, South
Australian and New South Wales model, but we
have accepted the amendment of the honourable
member for Gippsland East to support the amendment
of the honourable member for Gippsland
East that deals with the ACT, Tasmania
and Western Australian model.

The concerns of the honourable member for
Berwick would probably be legitimate concerns if political parties only ran
sufficient candidates for positions they might win, but what the Liberal
Party in Tasmania, the ACT and Western Australia
does, and what the Labor Party does, is to run more than sufficient
candidates. In almost all circumstances a countbackwill involve the same party providing the replacement as has occurred in
the three jurisdictions I mentioned - the Tasmanian Assembly, the ACT
Assembly and the Western Australian Legislative Council. It is a common
provision that was supported by the National Party in Western
Australia and by the Liberal Party in Tasmania and in the ACT. It is easy to
understand and it is the way countbacks are
done.

Mr INGRAM (Gippsland
East): I remind Opposition members that members of the parties would put
up enough members, usually one or two more than they would expect to get
elected at that election. If the opposition parties do not have the depth to
be able to put up enough good candidates in elections and if they cannot
handle it, that is up to them. The parties would put up enough members, at least
one or two more than they would expect to win in that election, so that on a countback the members that would be elected would
be members of that party. The amendment gives all members in those elections
an equal opportunity. It provides the same framework and restrictions for
Independents, members of minor parties and members of the major parties.

Dr Denis Napthine, Leader of the Opposition,spoke
next, in similar terms to the Shadow Attorney-General, as also happened in
the next debate, on above-the-line voting.

The committee divided on the amendments: The 44 Ayes consisted of ALP and
the three Independent MLAs, and the 41 Noes consisted of Liberal and National MLAs.

Mr INGRAM (Gippsland
East): I move the first of a large number of amendments that basically
set about removing the provision for above-the-line voting in the
bill. One of the basic principles of a democratic system is that people elect
their representatives. In my view a system in which people can vote for
parties undermines that principle.

Supporters of above-the-line voting say that people vote for
parties anyway by following the tickets, and that it does not matter if they
tick a party box. Independents cannot have above-the-line voting and
cannot group together as can candidates of parties, and the amendment will
provide equal opportunities for everyone. Because of the way the proposed
provinces are to be drawn up there would be a reasonably small number of
candidates - around 20 would be a fairly high number - and it would not be
too difficult to go through and individually number those in the standard way
we vote in normal elections.

Mr BRACKS (Premier): The
Government opposes Amendment no. 7 onwards. It opposes them for good and
valid reasons. One is that above-the-line voting, which has now been
well accepted for the Senate ballot paper, works to reduce informality. In
fact, Victorians voting for the Senate informally have gone down from double
figures to about 4%. It is important in our democracy and democratic system
to ensure that a vote is valid and to maximize the potential of a valid vote.

I also state for the record that above-the-line voting is a choice.
It is not as if it is a mandatory requirement that a voter must vote for a
party or a group which is otherwise not a party but which is still grouped above
the line. It is a matter of choice. Voters have the choice of marking
ballot papers above the line, which is a party vote, or below the
line, which is where they can fully fill out their ballot papers.
Individual voters can choose the facility the honourable
member for Gippsland East requires by filling their
ballot papers out fully and not going above the line.

That system, which has worked well in the past, balances the need to reduce
informal voting with the need to give voters the choice of filling out their
preferences extensively. However, if they choose to vote for a party, they
must realize that the party has already stipulated the preferential
arrangements that will flow from their filling out their ballot papers above
the line. Voters can make a conscious choice to do that. It is
interesting to note that, by choice, most voters vote above the line.
At the last federal election 97 per cent of Victorians chose above-the-line
voting. They have effectively voted to support the system under which the
Senate is elected.

Dr DEAN (Shadow Attorney-General): It has just been said that
although as a matter of convenience it was previously not necessary to have a
group or party vote, and although it is much more convenient than having a countback, all of a sudden convenience is
the go. During the debate on the previous amendment we were told we should
support it because if there are more members than are required within the
group, that person will slip in and therefore there will be no problem with
the countback because the party person will
be there. The honourable member is now moving to
abolish grouping, which means the basis of his argument in support of his
first amendment is now completely shot.

The committee divided on the amendments: The 3 Ayes
consisted of the three Independent MLAs, and the 82
Noes consisted of Labor, Liberal and National MLAs.

PRSA Submission to ATSIC Review Panel

The PRSA made a submission
(at www.prsa.org.au) in June 2000 to the Review
Panel on Elections to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission
that is formed after each round of Regional Council elections. Detailed
analysis of thirteen disparate Regional Council scrutinies
provided the empirical evidence to illustrate various effects in a
quota-preferential system with many good features (including optional
preferential voting) and to describe potential solutions to problems.

The Society pointed out how most of the problems arising from large
numbers of candidates being elected without a quota of votes can be dealt
with through simple alteration of the way the quota is struck and transfer
values are defined. We emphasized that the transfer value of a ballot-paper
should not rise in the course of a scrutiny.

Key points to promote vote effectiveness included:

the current
requirements for casting a formal vote should remain, and concerted
efforts be made to improve awareness of how to make full use of the
single transferable vote;

in setting ward
boundaries, except for compelling reasons to the contrary, an odd number
of vacancies, no fewer than 7, should apply;

to minimize the number of
wasted votes, the quota should be calculated with each vote having a
value of 100, and in distributing surpluses, the number of transferable
papers, or more generally the continuing vote weight, should be the
divisor in the calculation of the transfer value of a ballot-paper (with
a proviso that this value not increase).

Since the 1993 Regional Council elections, after which the
Society's previous submission was made, there has been a general reduction in
the number of vacancies in wards. In 1993, quite often between 40 and 100
candidates nominated when there were more than 12 vacancies. This meant that
voters in some areas received rather large ballot-papers, and although
casting a formal vote was straightforward, there were cases of high
informality and rather large numbers of exhausted votes.

At the 1999 Regional Council elections, 1044 candidates stood for 387
vacancies in 124 wards, an average of 2.69 candidates per vacancy. The
maximum number of candidates was 27, for 10 Alice
Springs vacancies. There were insufficient candidates in three
three-member wards, and candidates were unopposed in four one-member wards,
one two-member ward and one five-member ward.

While the ratio of candidates to vacancies declined slightly as the number
of vacancies rose, voters benefited from having many more candidates to
choose from, without their ballot-papers ever becoming unwieldy. As the
number of vacancies rose, the distribution of first preferences gained by
elected candidates spread out a little more widely in the scrutinies
perused (quotas ranged from 51 to 176). Only 3 candidates with more than half
a quota of first preferences failed to be elected.

Voter satisfaction, as measured by percentage of votes for elected
candidates, increased from the low 70s to the high 70s with number of
vacancies, while votes for the last unsuccessful candidate trailed off from
nearly 20 per cent to just 7 per cent in the larger electorates studied. The
level of exhausted votes was rather high at around 10 per cent -
unnecessarily so.

The Society was alarmed to find that in the transfer of surpluses
amounting to 327 votes, the extraordinarily high number of 166 votes was
deemed exhausted or lost by fractions. Suggestions made and worked through
numerically showed how these losses could be cut by well over 90 per cent
without any candidate having grounds for complaint. One scrutiny provided two
examples of the transfer value of some ballot-papers rising in mid-stream.
With computerized counting now in place, such defective procedures must be
replaced with sound ones before the next round of Regional Council elections.