"The best way to limit suffrage is to end compulsory voting, the undesirable voters will simply not turn out and the undesirable candidates will not be nominated."

Good in theory but not in practice if we look at the USA, where the undesirable candidates just keep on coming. The voter turn out in the USA hardly ever gets above 50% which means getting 26% of the general population's support is enough to be elected.

Let's face it there is an inherit problem with all candidates. The desire to be a politician is almost a guarantee the person lacks any common sense. To get nominated usually requires years of arse kissing the 'right people.'

The independents tend to be either extremists, crackpots or in it for themselves. A candidate with integrity is rare breed.

Once an MP or senator is elected, they are essentially their own people. The only thing keeping them in the party is loyalty to the values of the party.

The problem with PUP is that its values are the interests of Clive, and these vary from day to day. His two present senators know which side their bread is buttered, Lambie has suddenly realized that people are listening to her and has become an attention whore, and with an IQ that would make Kim Kardashian look smart, has decided to focus on the only subject she has any understanding of.

Limiting suffrage only makes things more unfair. And the Senate, in difficult circumstances, is actually doing a very good job of limiting the damage of the Abbott government. Minor party senators are generally a good thing, and independents even better. I wouldn't vote for Lambie* and I wouldn't vote for Leyonhjelm either*, but at least they represent different Australian views and can hold the government to account. Their real power is very limited except on issues that the government and opposition disagree on.

* Our upper house voting system makes that claim technically inaccurate, but if I lived in a state where either of them was standing, I'd be unlikely to put them in the top 40.

And party loyalty is not a good thing – indeed IMO it's the worst aspect of the ALP. Politicians' loyalty should be to the country, not the party. Lambie's quitting the Puppies may be unfair to Clive Palmer, but he's big enough to look after himself.

First of all Jacqui Lambie primary job is to represent Tasmania regardless of the fact that initially she was selected by the pups as a candidates for the senate.
I think it is somewhat premature to make any judgment on her metal capacity, but she has certainly showed she is prepared to stick up for what she believes in and it is refreshing to see a politician get up and say sorry I got it wrong.
The criticism I would make is this she should not threaten to vote against all other legislation even when it has some merit, such a policy is disruptive and is not in the interests of either good government or Tasmania.

Aidan, Conservative Hippie,
America and Australia are two very different societies, we might as well talk about Indonesia in the same context, voting is voluntary there and they had a 70% voter turnout in the most recent election.
The Indian election just gone saw 66% voter turnout and participation in political activity and voting is on the rise, given that we're rapidly becoming an Asian society more relevant comparisons can be found in Asia rather than in North America.
What would happen if compulsory voting were to be scrapped here is that the Labor party vote would collapse and because the voting public are mostly conservative the Green and Coalition parties would become the duopoly.

The voting public are mostly concervative, how would you work that out.
The voting public must change their mind quite regularly. The critisism by SM is out of order, labelling Lambie a whore, she is a representative of Tasmania, such a label is not good at all.