The Coalition polled only 37.7 per cent in the 2013 Senate election. Almost two thirds of Australians voted against them, and almost a quarter of the population voted for micro-parties. That, not the supposedly broken voting system, is why they got so many seats.

The Senate balance of power has been held by minor parties almost continuously since 1955 (first by the DLP, then by the Democrats and more recently by the Greens). The Senate has been more democratically representative of the people than the House of Representatives since 1949, when the single transferable vote was introduced. (For tables of results for both Houses, see http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14427&page=0.)

Every one of the four referenda to reduce the role of the Senate has been defeated, and two of them were defeated despite both major parties being in favour and only the DLP and a few rebel Liberals being against.

I’ll take the Abbott government’s protestations seriously when and if it calls a double dissolution. Until then, it’s just hot air.

The sudden triumph of the micro-parties has created consternation across the land and predictable calls to “reform” the system. Some are thoughtful but most are knee-jerk, designed to advantage one particular party (the Greens) and/or deeply undemocratic.

There is nothing wrong with a candidate being elected from a tiny initial vote. After all, no one has ever objected to the number 2 and 3 major party candidates being elected in that way, as hundreds have been. There is nothing wrong with group voting tickets, which have halved the informal vote. The only change needed to the actual voting system is to make preferences below the line optional after a certain number so that those who are currently intimidated into not voting below the line can feel confident in doing so.

I have presented a longer argument at post 288 at http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/09/25/senate-call-of-the-board/?comment_page=6/#comments. An even more detailed argument is in my submissions to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (Nos 131 and 131.1 at http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Electoral_Matters/2013_General_Election/Submissions).

Typical tory "the system isnt giving me what I want so we need to change it" attitude to democracy.

If the Government doesn't like the senate; it can only blame itself and previous governments, who created the current voting system, replete with preferences that can and do, skew the results that completely counter the demonstrated will of the people.
If you're not happy Jan?
Then you have the power to fix it, and just by embracing optional preferring, and for both houses!
Which should exhaust according to the wishes of the voter, rather than the machinations of too clever by half pollies, who just don't want to held to account by the electorate!?
Face it, this is the government we voted for and are stuck with!
And if you don't like/can't change what the government does, then change the government!
And if young people are thoroughly pee'd off, by current political machinations, then they, particularly the 40% who don't vote! Need look no further than the nearest mirror, to find the true/real source of their discontent. [Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the most stupid fool of all?]
I mean, and seriously, just don't do something, stand there endlessly bitching about outcomes!
That'll work, but only on long suffering parents, maybe? Sometimes, occasionally?
Grow up poor little ickle diddums, accept your share of responsibility, and get out there and vote!
Then if you get a government you don't like, you can only blame yourselves, as opposed to virtually everyone else!
And then they say it's pollies who are first among equals in reapportioning blame for less than desirable outcomes!?
Rhrosty.

The Party duopoly liked the Senate system just fine when they were the beneficiaries of it, but as soon as the "little guys" figured out how to use it to advantage all of a sudden it's a problem
The ungrateful hoi-poloi are making a stab at power and politics, that's entirely unacceptable, so, change the system to make it even LESS democratic.
God forbid that the electors should have their wishes make any difference to the feeding frenzy at the golden trough!

The argument that "as soon as the little guys figured out how to use it (the voting system) to advantage all of a sudden it's a problem" doesn't hold water. The reality is that the Motoring Enthusiasts' senator was elected with only 0.51% of the primary vote in Victoria, the successful DLP candidate got only 2.3% (in Victoria in 2010), while the Family First senator got only 3.8% of the primary vote in SA.

So how did they get a Senate quota of 14.3% of the vote, after preferences were distributed? It was mainly courtesy of the back-room party boys who had control of the preferences of those who voted above the line.

Taking the power to allocate preferences away from the parties and giving it back to the voters is something that needs to happen urgently for the sake of democracy.

Interesting and mind boggling to hear tonight that members of the Senate are earning more than the American president. They are who? And do diddly what?