| Proportional Representation |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by John Dryzek |
|
Currently Australia's House of Representatives is elected by preferential voting. This almost guarantees a two-party system, because minor parties find it very difficult to even become a credible challenger in any electoral district. Proportional representation involves awarding seats in parliament on a basis that is roughly proportional to the number of votes a party receives. So, if, for example, a party receives 35 per cent of the votes in an election, it should also receive around 35 per cent of the seats in parliament. There are many different kinds of proportional representation used in different countries - including Australia, where the federal Senate and some State and Territory legislatures are elected this way. The most extreme form involves treating the whole country as one electoral division, and allocating seats in parliament in exact proportion to the number of votes nationally that a party gets. But most forms of proportional representation involve having districts with around three to five members, so if a party gets around 20 per cent of votes in a district, it may still have one of its members elected. Arguments in favour of proportional representation Fairness: if a party gets say 20 per cent of the votes nationally, doesn't it deserve 20 per cent of the seats? In a preferential voting system, such a party might well end up with no seats. Anyone voting for a party that has no chance of getting more than 50 per cent in an electoral district may see their vote as 'wasted' and themselves as not represented in parliament - even if they voted for one of the major parties that is successful in other electoral districts. With proportional representation, there are many fewer 'wasted' votes. Stability: proportional representation ensures that different parts of society are represented. Under preferential voting, or 'first past the post' voting as used in the UK and the US, a movement's representatives may not be able be elected to parliament, and so be tempted by more extreme political action. Counter arguments Under proportional representation, there is no single member per electoral district, so the idea of a 'local member' that people can contact and who represents the particular concerns of the people in the electoral division disappears. It may be possible to get around this with a mixed system of some local embers and other members elected in regional or national lists, but that gets very complicated. Proportional representation allows extremist parties a foothold in Parliament. (In Germany there is a law that says parties must obtain at least five per cent of the national vote to have any representation in parliament. This law was designed to prevent a small party that tried to revive Nazi ideas getting into parliament). Proportional representation is very likely to lead to a multi-party system in which no single party has a majority of seats. So governments must be formed by coalitions of different parties. Such governments involve a lot of compromise and so may find it hard to take decisive action when needed. Policy-making is likely to be very cautious. The composition of the government depends not just on what happens on election day - but in bargaining between parties after the election is over. |
