Not sure about NOTA. Politicians already see informal votes as no threat. Wouldn't they see NOTA in the same light, only just more of the cranky, inept, can't be bothered and so on?
My preference is non-compulsory, non-preferential voting.I hate this business of numbering all boxes knowing my vote might end up with someone whose policies I loathe.
My theory is that if politicians had to persuade voters to the ballot box they might devise better policies, sell them clearly and honestly and those policies would have to fit with the concerns of the everyman.
None of this will happen without thoroughgoing reform of political parties. Having once been a member of a party I am only too aware of just how undemocratic they are.
When grassroot members get agitated about not having a say in policy, politicians of the party canvass ideas which they then ignore.
Often a local candidate, sometimes a longterm member of the party with much experience is outvoted by head office because they prefer a more maleable candidate ahead of the principled one.
I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think NOTA is it.

Mr. Alan Tapper,

So far no one has proved that ours is a Democracy.

All the uncorrupted among Australians would be able to prove the contrary.

The fault is not in the way we vote, it is in the fact that we vote.

Why vote when we cannot achieve Democracy?

Year after year we have gone through this senseless ritual, mindlessly. If we cannot change any thing by voting please let us stop the charade. At least will save the paper

Formersnag, if you FORCE people to vote for a party, you do not have democracy.

Worse, compulsory preferences effectively pervert the process to reinforce the hegemony of Liberal and Labor by making everyone vote for THEM.

If I don't like Liberal or Labor, I deserve the right to terminate my vote upon the candidate or party I would chance putting into government, and I am quite happy that this vote ultimately raises the profile of a minor instead of helping a party I don't actually support at all;
-For the sole reason, I might add, to placate the paranoid "must-vote-for-least-worst-major-to-ensure-worst-worst-doesn't-get-in" crowd, who are very much to blame for why Australian politics is in the sorry state it is now.

To put it bluntly, I'm helping the most detrimental voting discourse that makes this country worse.

There should also be no incentive or disincentive to vote- I would find it preferable that election day would attract people interested in politics or concerned about our governance, than someone who doesn't care and is only signing his name up for a handout (or avoiding a fine).

Perhaps electorates in which NOTA received the lion's share of votes could get what they wish - no representation for the next term of parliament. That would be democratic. It might also compel some of those who are absolutely disgusted with the options available to them to run for parliament as an alternative.

If an MP can get in despite being the second most popular option (the most popular being NOTA), then what does s/he care about the NOTA vote?

Skeptic,

I hear your anger and frustration and empathise with it.

Prior to elections we get a party spiel about what they will or will not do, the moment they are elected, the reverse is often the case.

This is, not democracy but a form of dictatorship.

The fact that we vote in elections does not make us a democracy in the fullest sense. Freedoms such as speech, rule of law, religion, do, and some of those are not in our constitution but have become accepted as if they were.

What we see now is a gradual erosion of the freedoms and censures (legal system) we value and this really does put us on a slippery slope to something other than democracy.

Who is to blame for this? The short answer - all of us. The longer follows:

1. Politicians - they lie. They act on their own ideas as opposed to the majority view which they are happy to ignore.

2. The media (most of it and particularly the electronic tabloids) because they are lazy, biased, don't report fact, think opinion is what we need to hear and generally abdicate their role of impartial informers.

3. The education system at all levels which tends to be more focused on what unions think and want and brainwashing students rather than objectivity and teaching good analysis such that a student, of any age, is equiped to form their own opinions.

4. Voters because and are apathetic. We should develop a culture of protest (non-violent) and really let politicians know what we think of their policies. The farmers and others caught up in the water furore are an example of this. They have the government scared and it is now about to undertake a review of the MDWR as a consequence of their anger.

I'm sure others could add to the list.

It goes without saying that, at bottom, democracy is corruptible because it is about power for the few at the expense of the majority.

I'm surprised that Albert Langer wasn't mentioned in the article and hasn't been in comments here either yet...