Antony Green's ongoing censorship of informed public debate on the need for senate electoral reform

You need to also explain that the system of calculating the Surplus Transfer Value (STV) and segmentation distorts the proportionality of the vote

In Western Australia if the Sports Party Preference chain is broken then based on current data the ALP is elected as opposed to the Greens with either LDP or PUP taking Sports Party's seat

The distortion created by the flawed Surplus Transfer Value calculation is showing up to be equivalent to 2000+ votes in WA

Segmentation also distorts the fold up and distribution of preferences.

Votes for excluded candidates should be redistributed as if the excluded candidates had not stood.

This is best achieved by resetting and restarting the count from afresh on each exclusion with a single weighted transaction per candidate. Only surpluses should be distributed on each iteration.

In 2007 The Queensland Election elected the wrong candidate as a result of segmentation.

If you count the 2007 Queensland Senate vote excluding all candidates except the last seven standing (3 ALP, 3 LNP and 1 Green) Larisa Waters should have been elected.

Another issue that should be discussed is the use of the Droop Quota. Why divide the cake by seven and throw away a slice when you could divide it by six.

Kindly publish this comment ans stop censoring public discussion and debate on the need for electoral reform


Posted by: demcracyATwork | September 13, 2013 at 07:14 PM

Antony Green's onging censorship of informed public debate on the need for senate electoral reform