That the SA election result is grossly undemocratic is beyond debate.  When any party receives an almost landslide 2PP result combined with a massive primary vote lead and is still unable to govern, then there is definitely something wrong.  And this is not the kind of wrong a globally admired democracy wants to have happen and be visible to all. We are not Malaysia or Zimbabwe where their ‘democracy’ mysteriously returns the same party decade after decade despite popular support going elsewhere. We have a parliamentary democracy of which we are justly proud. But it is not perfect.  There have been gerrymanders on both side of the political divide, some accidental, some deliberate and some (Joh’s Queensland) deliberate and unapologetic. But in every case, they were ultimately overturned by popular revolt via the polling station.  That is not to in any way suggest that gerrymanders are to be tolerated or excused, but rather to suggest that our political and voting systems have survived such challenges to their integrity. That is no excuse however for their existence or their support.

The full-page article by current caretaker SA Premier Jay Weatherill  (Adelaide Advertiser 18/3/14) in defence of the current system was a tragic failing and potentially fatal mistake. No matter how pleased he may be to be in the position of possibly remaining in power after being comprehensively rejected by the electorate, to openly support the system that cheats rightful winners of power is poor form, even for a politician. The ALP already held power courtesy of the gerrymander present at the 2010 election where the Libs also received a significantly higher primary and 2PP vote.  The controversial hung parliament formed by Julia Gillard was nothing compared to the SA situation. The margin between the 2010 Federal parties parties was virtually non-existent ,but here in 2014, the margin between the Liberals and ALP is a gigantic gulf. And yet the Liberals cannot form government and may in fact be forced back into opposition.

So what is wrong with the system that lets such an event occur?

Well maybe nothing or perhaps only a little. Our preferential voting system has its drawbacks but it is not preferences per se that have caused this massively unbalanced result. Any system of distilling the raw votes from voters and forms them into seats will have a level of discrepancy between the 2PP figure and the number of seats.  However, there is a low tolerance of such discrepancies by both voters and MPs themselves.  John Howards Liberals benefited from better campaigning in marginal seats in the 1998 campaign to fall over the line with just 49.1%  while in 1990 the reverse was true when the Peacock Liberals failed to form government despite winning 50.2%.  But while these discrepancies may leave a sour taste in the mouths of losers, they are not intrinsically unfair but rather unfortunate and probably nothing more than uneven swings in voter movements.  But when the result is 53/47 then it cannot be excused away in such a cavalier manner as the ALP leader does. In other situations, the fortunate results are shared between parties and are rarely replicated in successive elections.  South Australia has the unenviable record of having a party that has one the 2PP figure only once in 29 years and yet been able to govern almost the entire time.

Even more telling is that in Federal elections, the results are completely different with numbers of MPs roughly reflecting the 2PP while at state level, the disconnect is enormous.

The AEC redistributes seat boundaries to ensure near equal numbers in each electorate, but its mandate is to do more than that.  It is supposed to redistribute so that the numbers of seats match the votes received and not the current system where beating the ALP requires not just a landslide but an overwhelming and massive torrent and then to be given at best a tiny majority.

SA needs massive electoral boundary redistribution with the goal of ensuring that  governments can once again be chosen by the voters instead of the joke that he current system is. Perhaps we need more seats to allow this to happen.  Certainly some reforms like OPV (Optional Preferential Voting) will help, but the problem remains that at its core, the current system in SA is a breach of the fundamental democratic right of voters to choose their own government. What is done is less important than we accept that something needs to, no DEMANDS to be done.

( ... and bear in mind, this was a "fork in the road" FEDERAL ELECTION - and "referendum" if you like - on ANOTHER new way to tax us all
As opposed to who will lead the"state of insignificance")

No more SA wine or Coopers beer for skippy

Don’t you forget it!

buzzanddidj wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 7:57pm:


and like every other hypocritical leftie you consider that any time 'you' were denied power by a SLIGHT 2PP discrepancy that makes every other event - even a massive gerrymander - okay.

do you even have a principle bone in your body?  All you do is beg the question of why every liberal govt doesn't immediately institute a massive gerrymander in their own favour.  AFter all, you don't seem to have any trouble with the concept.

The other GOOD thing coming out of SA is RAAF Base Edinburgh and the crews of the P-3C Orion aircraft. Those guys and girls are the best in the business and if I was lost at sea, I'd hope they were looking for me! Look at their rescue of Tony Bullimore from the round the world yacht race years ago way down in the Southern Ocean. Incredible people.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:41am:

So, you ignore the fact the govt doesn’t draw the boundaries. Typical of you.

Maybe the ALP is the better campaigner?

Single member electorates will from time to time throw up such results—if you really want reform you need to outline what reforms you would like to see—proportional voting, treating the state as one electorate will give results closer to the votes cast but leads, IMHO, to unstable govt by ramshackle coalitions and loses the representation that should not be lightly thrown out.

Or we can adopt the Tassie model, or parts of it, and have multimember electorates so some element of direct representation is preserved.

All I hear in this thread tho is Libs whining “we wuz robbed.” You pitiful babies! Some of my first political activities involved campaigning against the unrepresentative nature of the Legislative council in SA, where large parts of the electorate were disenfranchised! You want change then by crikey put up some positive proposals AND STOP WHINING!

cods wrote on Mar 21^st, 2014 at 7:54am:

Coopers is the most modern brewery in Australia. They use 150,000L mash tuns, lauter tuns, kettles and whirlpools to brew in. “Brew” means to boil so imagine 150,000 litres of wort boiling and the energy that goes into that.

Barrels are museum pieces—the day of 4" thick oak barrels conveying beer from brewery to pub have long gone here. Everything is gassy kegged or bottled beer.

Heh—something funny happened tho at the shiny ss brewery: they wanted to put out canned beer (“Dr Tim’s Pale Ale IIRC) so they filled hundred of thousands of cans, with a small amount of sugar and yeast squirted into each. Nobody thought to tell the warehouse. . .so the soft, thin–walled cans were racked pallet load on top of pallet load as normal and the crew went home: next morning thousands of cans had burst overnight and there was a sea of ale in the warehouse.

Hmmm yeah—Coopers is one of a handful of major breweries brewing ales not lagers.