Dear Shadow Minister,

Unless both party's make some changes their support
by voters will keep on declining. Both need to listen
to voters. Both need to modernise and not allow
the party factions to dictate. Both need to confront
the fears of voters and remember that it's the
Australian people that put them either in government
or the opposition. Voters should not longer be ignored.

Paul.

".... they even spell the word differently, Labor and Labour."
and with good reason 'Labor' is the English spelling inherited in the ALP's case from the USA, that great repository of English spelling and tradition.
The Pommy Labour party uses the French spelling.

Shadow, I am fairly well versed in Australia's political history, so to make a statement like "I think that the rise of smaller parties is facilitated by the preferential system" shows a lack of understanding. Given in a close contest, the preferences of minor parties and independents plays an important roll, but that is as far as it goes. An anomaly in the returns is only evident when for some local reason a third party candidate becomes a first or second party candidate and thus has a chance of being elected, the independents Cathy McGowan and Andrew Wilkie are such anomalies. Any collusion between the big two could easily spell the death of the third party candidate, as was evident in the seat of Batman where the Green led on first preferences only to be defeated by Labor with Liberal support.
The Australian parliament began as a genuine three party organisation with (State) Labor being that third party and winning 16 of the original 75 seats. The big two at that time were the Protectionists and Free Traders, which later merged to form the one anti-socialists party. It didn't take long for the system to solidify into a two party contests between Labor and Anti-Labor, anti-labor went under various names until it settled on Nationalists. No third party or independents were evident in Federal parliament until the sectionalism party, aptly named Country Party gained prominence in the early 1920's, but it soon became part of the anti-socialists, and not being contested by the Nationalists to any great degree. The hiccup came in the form of the 'First Labor Split' in 1931 when Lang Labor gained 5 seats from the ALP, this was the result of internal rivalry and not a genuine third party formation Lang Labor later reverting back to official Labor. The Nationalists badgered themselves as the United Australia Party, later forming into today's Liberal Party.

cont

cont

The primary vote for the big two parties peaked at around 95% in the early 1950's, and that was from a historically high base prewar. Today's decline in the primary vote of Labor and the Coalition, and the rise of third parties has much more to do with disillusionment and the diversity of the electorate than anything to do with the voting system. Despite a plunging primary vote, the major parties still enjoy a disproportionate level of representation. That is what the voting system delivers for them.

Please provide evidence of your assertion, just as I have.

BTW, I have a close friend at 59 with dementia and its not a pretty sight, I am fortunate not to suffer from that horrid disease and I hope you never do either.

Paul,

My opinion of the benefit of preferential voting for small parties is founded on a few examples such as the Motoring enthusiasts party getting a senate seat with a handful of votes, and the greens consistently getting far more % of senate seats that their % votes based on preferences from Labor. If the lower house was purely first past the post, Labor would get a much smaller portion of seats, the greens a couple and everyone else nothing.

Well argued and written, Paul,