Originally posted by Minskaya
View Post
Every electoral system has huge flaws in it.
We have a system that mitigates strongly against minor parties, at least in the lower house, where government is formed. The result is that each election tends to focus on a small handful of marginal seats. Granted, boundaries change and it isn't always the same seats, but in any given election the vast majority of voters get ignored. I have heard some people describe this as 'electoral apartheid'. A bit excessive, but there is a point in there somewhere. Our upper house gives much more scope to minor parties. They can force governments to amend legislation & even block it sometimes, but their power is limited when it comes to making & breaking governments.
We also have an often complex system of preferential voting which can create some perverse outcomes. In the case of the Upper house Senators have been elected with as little as .2% of the popular vote in their state.
Personally I think our system works well overall, though I would tinker with aspects. Others feel that something like Israel is far more democratic. Bottom line, there are always problems when you try to popularly elect governments. You fix one issue you create another. It comes down to which issues pertaining to representation you are more worried about.
Comment