And then there's the SENATE! (EDITED)

At the moment the Australian Senate has extra prominence. The Government (based always in the House of Representatives) wants its Bill passed in the week ahead. That can only happen with support of sufficient Senators. (The Government do not have sufficient of their own party to pass the legislation.)

Our Senate has been called "unrepresentative swill". This came from a frustrated former PM.

The Senate was intended by the founders of the Commonwealth to be the defender of State rights. As they pursued Federation, they thought the new Commonwealth could be contained!

Ironically, after the Commonwealth came into being, State concerns very soon became subsumed under political party structures. Party members need the electoral endorsement of their party for nomination if they want to be on the ballot paper in the name of the party. That means discipline in terms of party policy, without regard to State issues.

States have differing elector population numbers. However, they have 12 Senators each; half retire at each election as routine. Disregarding preference distribution and exclusions, in 2025 each of 6 NSW Senators was elected by 1+4,986,832/7 votes; each of 6 Tasmanian Senators was elected by 1+ 371,790/7 votes. Not at all balanced, is it?

The voting system applied in the Senate (proportional representation with optional preferential voting) means that candidates with tiny first preference votes can end up (and do) being elected, as others are eliminated in the distribution of available preferences.

The "major parties" have large numbers of votes. However, the final result depends on enough votes to reach a quota for a position. (A quota in 2025 was the number of formal votes in the count divided by 7; add one vote.) Inevitably, some positions are filled by major parties on first preferences, but votes, and one or more positions are then "left over". The remaining vacancy(ies) are filled by preference distribution, with elimination of other candidates, starting from the one with the lowest total. That continues until a quota is reached or all remaining ballot papers are "exhausted". So, including by political deals in "how-to-vote" cards, people with tiny levels of support get into the Senate.

One or more candidates with tiny first preference numbers, and, for the last elected, even with less than a full quota, end up as Senators. They are equally Senators with all the others, paid the same and there for 6 years, and get to have their say. They may even command media attention. In some finely balanced circumstances their votes may change Senate outcomes.*

I think I can say with confidence, the Senate we have is not the Senate that was in mind back before 1901! 

An interesting current article re the Senate, etc, from an ABC journalist:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-23/senate-two-party-system-civic-duty-preferential-voting/105970018

From the Australian Parliament re the Senate:

https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/parliament-and-its-people/senate

image title: 2025 Victorian Senate Ballot Paper - first part only 

alt text: There are 20 columns of grouped candidates and 8 more independent ungrouped candidates

Yours sincerely

Allen Hampton

Coburg

achamptonmob@gmail.com

*SENATE!

This week a Senator has gained media attention by a "stunt".

That Senator was elected as 1 of 6 by preferences in 2022 in QLD.

Here are numbers from that QLD election:

3,013,868 Total formal votes

430,553 Quota for election

2 Senators elected on first count (ie, they had more than the quota; surplus to be distributed)

26,550 (0.88%) personal First Preference votes for that Senator stunt performer

222,925 (7.4%) First Preferences for that Senator's Group (all 3 candidates, plus Above the Line) 

428,718 for the Senator after all others excluded and all transfers = Elected on (last) count 266!

(So, almost 1 in 10 QLD electors might have been pleased because they wanted that party to represent them. The other 9 in 10 have to just grin and bear it.) 

Do you think it is all about publicity?