Comments on: Nationals experiment with open primaries

By: Goanna

Goanna — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:28:40 +0000

i think a primary is a great idea for democracy, but of course it should be limited to party members. It is a good way for minor parties to engage the grass roots support base the need. i can see other minor parties such as the DLP using this model. Maybe they do have something similar. The Democrats also had a similar idea, where all party members could vote to select a candidate

By: J

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:34:25 +0000

This would certainly help to end ‘toeing the party line’ that is too much of a problem in Australian politics. I think this is a good idea; a move to something closer to the US system, where candidates have more of an individual say in their positions. This would promote more discussion. We might see some more Barnaby Joyces. This would also promote regional diversity, whereby candidates could reflect the concerns of their electorate much more closely, rather than having to follow the centralised party doctrine.

By: Stephen L

Stephen L — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:59:32 +0000

The big question that usually gets ignored in these debates is how many people will vote. If the answer is “a lot” then they have value, although that has to be weighed against the many problems people raise. But if the answer is “not many” then its an expensive waste of time that really just means the person with the most friends in the seat wins. Having a large friendship group might be a good sign, but people whose friends are concentrated in one seat will be privileged over those spread far and wide.

I think it could work for the Nationals, and in rural seats in general. People feel more connected to their area, the local media will cover it, candidates will mostly know people from the electorate.

However, I think it will be a disaster in suburban electorates. How many people will bother to vote – if less than 10,000 people voted when Boris Johnson (a bona fide celebrity who also has parliamentary experience) ran for Lord Mayor of London (with novelty value thrown in) you’re likely to get less than 100 votes in an Australian suburban electorate, leaving aside those who are effectively stacked in by the candidates. Even less in state seats.

By: Oz

Oz — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:58:38 +0000

Strange post from Tim Andrews.

Has a nice rant about your penchant for PR and then ends up agreeing with the crux of your post via a proxy representative who spoke at a Young Liberals conference?

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:26:21 +0000

It’s incompatible with strict party discipline, that’s for sure. But I don’t know what that has to do with responsible government. It would simply replicate within political parties what we see between political parties in PR systems where a party rarely wins a majority of seats (like New Zealand).

By: Geoff Robinson

Geoff Robinson — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:15:11 +0000

On what basis will primary candidates compete? If it’s more than just personality than they will have to promise to vote differently in parliament. How compatible is this with responsible government?