Cartoon posted:

Do we know what the makeup of the senate crossbench is? That would be actual useful information.

Wheezle posted:

So did lion hat get in or not?

ScreamingLlama posted:

SynthOrange posted:

http://imgur.com/fqDd5S2

open24hours posted:

Kat Delacour posted:

Is that the national % of the vote against the national proportional representation? It's an unfair calculation.

I keep editing this post cos I'm having trouble right now exactly articulating how I dislike it, but we've already come to terms with Seats of disproportional populations rather than raw percentages as the method of forming government.

MysticalMachineGun posted:

Is she pro-bloody-anything?

BBJoey posted:

Katter has threatened bloody murder if the coalition so much as brings the ABCC up at the joint sitting. He won't be voting for it.

Gorbash posted:

Via @pollytics, I give you Senator Elect Malcolm Roberts:

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/25780781/from-what-i-malcolm-ieuan-roberts-have-seen-galileo-movement

It's going to be a long three to six years

Zenithe posted:

Can someone explain what is going on, or is it all just pages of just as crazy.

Solemn Sloth posted:

And you know who controls the banks

quote:

To ultimately give the power of the preference back to the voter I suggested many changes during the electoral reform debate, including complete removal of above the line voting, introducing the Hare-Clarke system and/or introducing a Robson Rotation.

Mad Katter posted:

I don't see the huge problem with it. A Party's second and third candidates are always going to get lower primary votes and rely on the flow of preferences, right?

I don't consider that to be fundamentally undemocratic.

hooman posted:

If each senate paper is written on one atom how are we going to fold it up to put it in the white box?

Endman posted:

It takes a very special type of person to hear allegations made by children of sexual assault and immediately say "well they lie all the time you know"

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

They're even bringing up the fact that heavy handed paternalistic policing of indigenous children is leading to separating an entire generation from their parents! That makes people create uncomfortable associations to other Australian atrocities!

open24hours posted:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-11/uber-to-be-legalised-in-queensland/7719078

Shouldn't Uber be paying for this rather than the government?

open24hours posted:

If you want to argue that they shouldn't be compensated at all then ok but if they are going to be shouldn't those who are benefiting from the change be the ones paying for it?

open24hours posted:

Because their business model is basically just showing up and acting like the rules don't apply to them?

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

What if the cake shop was getting more profit than the bakery because they didn't bother to get any food handling certificates and were letting their cake makers work as contractors with the understanding they'd get that poo poo sorted themselves?

open24hours posted:

Seems like it's probably the fairest way. Guess they could have had a lottery.

EvilElmo posted:

You mean by doing the same thing that's happened every other time?

EvilElmo posted:

I'm not sure how it's unfair. Both systems have their benefits, both systems will have "losers". In this result, it will get rid of 3 racists, a bigot and two nuts. The Greens should rejoice. You'll get rid of Rhiannon early and pick up another Senator.

quote:

Senate Reforms are the reason we got 2/4 racists in the Senate. I said they were poo poo, they are poo poo. I'm not sure how many times I need to keep posting this. One day you might all admit the Senate reforms were rushed, poo poo policy and not well thought through.

quote:

But I guess you all still defend voting down the ETS..

EvilElmo posted:

Like, no it really is.

We got 2 from the DD because of the smaller quota. Then another 2 from the Senate reforms.

quote:

It would appear you want all 4 of the One Nation Senators to run out the full 6 years though.

EvilElmo posted:

Interesting article, will read on a not-Friday night. But there will be winners and losers, would I be on board if it wasn't going to result with 3 One Nation Senators staying full term? Maybe.

quote:

The Electoral Act requires the AEC to conduct a "Section 282 recount" to simulate which Senators would have filled the first six places at a half-Senate election based on the same votes, as an alternative to using the order-of-election method. However there is no requirement that the Senate use the recount to decide the order. While the Senate affirmed in both 1998 and 2010 that the recount should be used, those decisions were not binding on the current Senate, and were [not binding] under the old system anyway.

It happens that both major parties benefit from the agreement. Senators Lee Rhiannon (Greens NSW) and Derryn Hinch (Vic) are both given three year terms while Scott Ryan (Liberal, Victoria) and Deborah O'Neill (Labor, NSW) will not have to look for work again until at least 2022 (unless there is another double dissolution). This difference had previously been found by Grahame Bowland and the AEC has advised the Clerk of the Senate that Rhiannon and Hinch would get six-year terms if the Section 282 recount was the deciding factor.

quote:

I'll use Rhiannon's case as an example. Her primary vote was 0.947 quotas (including 1 Greens ticket votes). Because she was short of a quota on primary votes, she had to wait until the cascading surpluses at the start of the count elected eight major party candidates. But had she polled a quota in her own right (just another 0.41% of the primary vote) she would have been elected third and won a six-year term.

On the other side of that coin, Jacqui Lambie polled a primary vote of 1.068 quotas in her own right (including ticket votes). This meant Lambie was elected fourth by the order-of-election method, and therefore gets a six-year term. Yet the massive surpluses of the Tasmanian major party ticket leaders Abetz and Urquhart actually meant that seven Senators who won either on primaries or on cascading surpluses had more "support" than Lambie did. Thus, as a sign of her support relative to these major party candidates, one might say that her having polled a DD quota on primaries was far from conclusive.
...
The order of election system is also absurdly granular. In Tasmania the two major parties have about the same vote (Labor 33.6 Liberal 32.5) and get two six-year terms apiece. But this would also happen if the figures were Labor 46 Liberal 20, or the other way around.

quote:

There are issues, however, and a lot of them are created by the unexpected interface between the new Senate system and Section 282, which was written under a different system. Because the government left the implementation of Senate reform very late in its previous term (whether to avoid provoking the non-Green crossbench, in the hope of bipartisan support or simply because it was distracted by leadership fighting) a number of finer details were glossed over for the first run of the new system. The matter of the fairest term-allocation system, which had long been on the back-burner anyway, was one that was so obscure that it wasn't even on most psephologists' shopping lists for things to fix for the new system.

quote:

That's not to say S 282 is less fair than the order-of-election system. I think it's still fairer - just that it's hardly brilliant and it is worth a serious think about whether there could be a better approach than either for the new voting system.

There are also many ambiguities in applying S 282 to the new system. Some of these existed in the old system as well (The AEC recommended fixing them in 2011 but it never happened).

starkebn posted:

It's there an article someone can point me too that discusses why each state has 12 senators and what the pro and con arguments are? It's not an intuitive way for the system to be set up.

eXXon posted:

Was Q&A better in the past because every time I watch it there is at least one token loud idiot?

Anidav posted:

Prime Minister Hunt would be a coal miners wet dream.

Solemn Sloth posted:

paul keatings a fuckboi with lovely policies on just about everything who is idolised by idiots because he pulls out sick burns on people they don't like

EvilElmo posted:

8 posts.

New record for these threads.