This election everyone is talking preferences. The Senate is a wild-card and no one is game to say how things will pan out. (Antony Green is scathing about our current system). The preference deals were subject to a major networking gambits with much wheeling and dealing behind the scenes.
Leon Ashby, president of the Climate Sceptics has been working very hard in South Australia, and convincingly makes a case that he has a very good chance. I wish him the best of luck. It would be something to see him beat Sarah Hansen Young of The Greens for the last senate seat position in South Australia. (The Shooters and Fishers Party took out the local Green Senator here in the West Australian State election last March. It happens).
Instead of accepting the preference deals, you may prefer to vote below the line but it means numbering up to 110 candidates. (Hints below for foreigners to follow the lingo*) Is it worth the effort? Above the line voting means preferences will flow as per these lists at the links below. It may be more effort to follow these lists than to number 1 – 110.
Australian Electoral Commission Links
On ABC radio yesterday, it was obvious a lot of people don’t understand the system. So at the risk of saying the obvious, the first choice on the ballot may score a few taxpayer dollars — which you may prefer not to give to a major party. The catch (or you might think “benefit”) is that a party needs to get 4% of the vote to get any funds at all — so if you vote for the micro-party first, they may get nothing. But it is a chance to spread the power away from the majors.
The Climate Realists at Five Dock looked at the climate policies of the NSW senate candidates. Jim Simpson sent me their recommended voting list for the Senate “below the line”. (The climate realists are an amazingly successful social group that came together through this blog three years ago and still meet every Thursday.)
Climate Realists NSW Voting list
Bernd has a diagram of preference flows for WA.
The Climate Sceptics “No Carbon Tax” Party controversially split their party preferences
Commenter Neville on this site spotted that the Climate Skeptics have split their preference ticket to Labor over Liberal in three of six states. Only in WA, SA and QLD does a 1 above the line for Climate Sceptics mean the Senate ticket ends (potentially) in Lib rather than Labor. In NSW, Vic, and Tas, the Climate Sceptics preferenced Labor before Liberal. Voters ought to be aware.
Bill Koutalianos of The Climate Skeptics, explains the decision below:.
Yes, we’ve put Libs ahead of Labor in QLD. So that works out to preferencing Labor ahead of the Libs in 3 states and the Libs ahead of Labor in 3 states.
Whilst we gravitate to the Libs on most policy areas, on the issue that’s most important to us, i.e. the climate deceit, the Libs are equally as complicit as Labor in deceiving the public and hence worthy of an equal amount of respect.
Whilst we had originally anticipated preferencing the Libs ahead of Labor, they have since had the gall to back the Kyoto 2 Protocol & apparently with some enthusiasm. Greg Hunt at his Sydney Institute speech of 30th May 2013 spoke approvingly of a ‘market mechanism’. What do you think he might be talking about?
We all know the sceptics’ case has become so much more compelling of late, so how much longer should we wait for the Libs to come clean on the climate issue? Should climate sceptics be satisfied with the Coalition’s Direct Action Plan because it might save a few dollars over Labor’s carbon tax/ETS? Or do we want to expose this scam once and for all?
The Libs have been marketing themselves as the ‘No Carbon Tax’ party since 1st December 2009 & where has it got us? I remember that day well and I was happy for my opponent in the Bradfield by-election to adopt my 3 word slogan, but as it turned out, it apparently means something completely different to the Libs.
By voting below the line you’re free to rectify any of our misdemeanors and mishaps and preference one set of fraudsters and liars over another, should you so desire. Please help support the No Carbon Tax Climate Sceptics Party with your first preference.
*Preferential voting — “What?” — it means voters have to number every candidate “below the line” or take the shortcut option “above the line” — where they choose one party and accept that party’s preference list as published at the Australian Electoral Commission (see link above). If your number 1 choice is knocked out, your vote moves to your number 2 choice and so on, down the list. Ultimately, unless a minor party wins the spot, your preference will end up with one of the two big parties, so even if Labor is your 96th choice, they may end up with your vote — sometimes it matters whether the liberal candidate is #95 or #97. Sometimes it can take days to shuffle the piles of ballots to decide the winner; usually it works faster somehow, and is not the mess it sounds like.