Belly,

"The will of over 80 percent of voters can be over turned because one of the two, with the support of minors, can stop bills just for the sake of it"

What party ever got 80% of the vote?

How do you know that they stop bills just for the sake of it?

Maybe they stop them because the majority, having been deceived by the Government, want them stopped.

"ismise unable to continue to debate on fairness we are too far apart"

Not surprised as you seem to be quite unaware of what democracy is and unable to understand the concept of fairness.

is mise as hard as it will be for you to understand
Here is why my figures [while proven wrong by Paul] still matter
A center exists, not left not Conservative
That center has both Liberal and Labor voters in it
We saw John Howard own that center
Hawk and Rudd briefly did too
Such as the greens/one nation/the then dreadful lost, Democrats, all used power they, in my view, never should have had
And insulted that center
EG
Next election that center in part, will reject Liberalism, because it has concerns not shared by them, about climate change
PS that center is about 65 percent of voters from each side

Belly,

What have you got against majority rule?

Hi Issy and belly.

The principle of one vote one value, should be up held at all times. However the original concept of the Senate being a states house, with each state (colony) given equal representation, was in principle reasonable for the conditions that existed in 1901. Perth was over 2,000 miles away from the Capital Melbourne, even further by sea. Brisbane was 600 miles from the largest city Sydney. Impossible distances in those days when you consider a 30 mile journey was a major undertaking. To entice the smaller isolated colonies to federate the Senate was the carrot at the end of the stick. WA was extremely isolated thought of as nothing more than a sparsely populated desert, with nothing of value in it.

Issy, you like me, like a little bit of history. A gun story for you. I was out and about, now we are living in Brisbane, came across an old cannon (cast in 1800) in a park. Back in around 1870 Queen Victoria (probably her government) dispatched, I think it was 12, smooth bore cannons from the Napoleonic era, out of date even then, to defend the defenceless colony of Queensland. The military set up a battery of these old cannons on the shores of the Brisbane River to defend Her Majesties Queensland colony, I think from the Russians at that time. I don't know what they would have done if the Russians had landed even 10 miles to the north or south of the city. Surrender!

>Tell me you think that is fair
>The will of over 80 percent of voters can be over turned because one of the two,
>with the support of minors, can stop bills just for the sake of it

Yes that's fair.
The situation you've described is extremely unlikely. Something supported by >80% of voters is unlikely to be opposed by both a major party and enough minor parties to stop it getting over the line. But even if that occurs, having minors holding the balance of power is much better than blindly letting the government get its own way all the time, and also much better than the power to block legislation resting with the other major party alone.

OK so tell me we saw a woman put in to the senate because another was removed
Her total numbers of votes is not at hand, but likely to be no more than the 19 a one nation person got
She then left the party that saw her? well inserted,
How many who voted for her wanted to elect a Liberal
Hard question
Would your view change if she had become a Labor Senator
Now tell me the chook pen Senate is worth saving