I don't know. There were some changes that resulted in the usual behind the scenes preference swaps and dirty deals done in the dead of night electoral manipulation being locked out; as pertaining to senate results!

And an extraordinary informal vote and lack of registration suggests that around 40% of otherwise eligible voters don't give a rats?

Those that do seem to be flocking in droves to minor parties? Even so the crowing greens wound up with one less seat! And a direct result of their own purile policy paradigm, unfundable promises listen to what I say, not what I do evocations, attempts at electoral manipulation and trying to deal the voter out of the result, with for them, unconscionable deals with the devil?

Even so, at no point is there any erstwhile and revealing published evidence of voters feeling locked out!? Just a few hard right dinosaurs demonstrably unhappy with the way the public was finally rejecting them and their usual born to rule crap?
Alan B.

This is now the rise of the minor parties, and the rise of the informal vote.

Incredibly, the electorate where most votes were 'intentionally informal' during the 2013 election was Canberra.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-canberra-claims-biggest-share-of-intentionally-informal-votes-20160505-gomw92.html

The fall of the major parties is expected, and I would think the Labor party will decline more quickly than the Liberal party. The Labor party seems to be most concerned with homosexuals, feminists and immigrants, and it will now follow the same course as the Australian Democrats.

One Nation will not go away until there is some rationality in the immigration system.

Interestingly, One Nation has a policy for citizens initiated referendums.

"If Australians collect 2% of elector’s signatures in the form of a petition asking for a referendum, the parliament is obligated to enforce it as law or it must be put to the electorate at the next general election. If the petition is to change or alter the constitution is must be put to the people in a referendum."

http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/cir

I am wondering if the major political parties attack Pauline Hanson so vehemently because they fear citizens initiated referendums, and they fear losing their so-called 'mandate' over the population.

A citizens initiated referendum is a great idea and likely to curb the power of the autocrats, who won't be satisfied until we have no real rights, just privileges that can be removed at the whim and caprice of the usual control freaks?

That said, I'd like a citizens referendum to be initiated with at least 5% support, indicating as that would, a very modest level of support for an expensive, time consuming operation, funded by finite taxpayer funds!

One of the things that would make that time and money wasting tail wagging the dog option less essential, would be a long overdue bill of irrevocable rights, with the only real opposition, the control freak politicians whose power would diminish if we joined the ranks of all the other developed nations, where we stand out like a big boulder of a boil on a diminutive backside, as the only holdout member not to have one!
Alan B.

I was shocked by how many misinformed constituents did vote for the major parties, not the reverse!
Politics is about who are the most likely lobbyists to succeed. And that knowledge can only be gained by transparency in political donations.
Currently, the system of declaring political donations is so obscured as to make the labelling of Chinese food stuffs in Australia, look like a front page newspaper add!
The slippery snakes in the grass are not snakes actually, they are Shorten and Turnbull dodging transparency on political donations!...and probably moonlighting by selling used cars!

There is not much difference between the minor partys and the major partys.

For instance Pauline Hanson leans more to the right wing side of politics,
Derryn Hynch leans more to the right wing also.

Jacqui Lambie seems more to espouse the cause of the everyday battler, so
I would guess she is more to the left wing Labour side.

The greens are far left, communistic, supported by Melbourne ethnic groups,
but really ready to sell their soul to any side to stay in their high powered positions.

The good thing about the minority parties in the senate is they dont have to vote
along party lines and can cross the floor n issues they disagree with. Which does make for a more democratic government.

I dont think the Australian people trust Labour or Liberal enough to give them total power by handing them the senate.

Alan B.

No political party seems to have a policy for a Bill of Rights, and the only way to get such a Bill of Rights would be through a citizens initiated referendum.

So the ability to have citizens initiated referendums would be more important than a Bill of Rights.

However, citizens initiated referendums or a Bill of Rights may take years to implement, and the best thing the public could do to safeguard themselves from political parties, is to not have a political party forming a majority government.

The public should be voting for a variety of political parties, so not one political party can form a majority government.

Minority governments are the norm in many countries, and the public would be much safer with minority governments.