Group Ticket Vote In Australia

The Parliament of Australia has dominated by three parties in its history- Australian Labor Party (ALP), Liberals and the Nationals. However, their position is not as secure as it was previously, there has been gradual increases in the percentage of votes against the major parties (Goot 2004). The increased success of representational outcomes for minor parties and independents has become more pronounced as voters swing away from the ALP and the Coalition. Minor parties and independents currently hold 18 seats (23.7 %) in Senate, a record high for the crossbench (Parliament of Australia 2015). Non-major party candidates in the House of Representatives occupy five seats (3.3%) by comparison (Parliament of Australia 2013). This disparity has

While features of the Senate, such as the Group Ticket Vote, can have unexpected results that misrepresents the Australian voters’ will, it is not necessarily more prominent than voter behaviour. The rise of post-materialism, lack of party identification and strategic voting all contribute swings away from major parties. The electoral system still has a very influential effect on representational outcomes (Stone 1998), however minor party success cannot solely understood as a fault to the system. This essay will look at the differences in representation for the two houses of parliament and how the electoral system and strategic vote results in the disparity. It intends to look at how preference deals and Group Ticket Votes can distort results and give power to all parties. It will also explore how post-materialism and social movements can influence voter

Sharman (1999) illustrates how non-major parties play an important role keeping the government constrained. Holding the balance of power allows minor parties to scrutinise legislation and make compromises with the government. The Senate, dubbed the “house of review” (Gauja 2010; Galligan 1985), and this important role began to gain visibility when the Democratic Labor Party (previously Australian Labor Party Anti-communist) gained a seat in the 1955 Senate election (Sharman 1999). Through exposure to the Democratic Labor Party challenging the major parties as part of the balance of power, the Australian voter recognised the potential of the Senate for their own strategic goals(Gauja 2010; Sharman 1999). Research suggests that the Australian Democrats in particular were used strategically by voters during the 1980s and 1990s to keep the government accountable (Gauja 2010). The “cross-over” strategy involves voting differently for each chamber (Galligan 1985). It was started to be rocognised from the polls of the 1984 federal election (first election after 1983 reforms), when a discrepancy between those who voted for ALP in the house and those who voted ALP in the senate was visible (Galligan 1985). Voters may have been using their votes to support the ALP in the House of