Congrats Australia, you have stopped the boats.

[Papewaio]

I just remembered that you guys vote for individual seats instead of individual parties...

When I voted a week ago, all I did was find the sheet of paper with the name of the party I wanted to vote, fold it and take it with me to the box. No writing, no chance of mistakes, no "lazy vote"...

Most people vote based on the party of the candidate not the name of the person since both are listed.

For the senate you can either number the individual candidates from 1 to n or you can just put 1 for the party of your choice.

So you have both voting for individuals or parties as by your preference for senate.

[HoreTore]

Individual seats is more democratic than parties. Since you are voting for the person on their principles opposed to affiliation. There are MP's or senators which do a very good job but are in the 'other party' than you might support if you chose on that basis. Party loyalty is a form of croynism and corruption of the process, taking the power out of voters in electing as they see fit to govern and ended up appointing those who are best at greasing the proverbial poles within party organisations.

Party-list is an woeful system and a step backwards.

This is an ideological disagreement, I believe politics shouldn't be about persons at all. It should be about politics. Who gets elected is irrelevant, what politics are elected is relevant.

Most people vote based on the party of the candidate not the name of the person since both are listed.

For the senate you can either number the individual candidates from 1 to n or you can just put 1 for the party of your choice.

So you have both voting for individuals or parties as by your preference for senate.

Yes, but my point is that you can still screw it up. When all you need to do is get a piece of paper and fold it, there's no way you can get it wrong.

[Beskar]

This is an ideological disagreement, I believe politics shouldn't be about persons at all. It should be about politics. Who gets elected is irrelevant, what politics are elected is relevant.

Which is why the individual is better. For example, our 'Labour' MP is a strong advocate of removing public funding from Higher Education, Tough Retaliatory Justice system, wants to dismantal the welfare state and pro-privatisation of the NHS. Pretty much a hard-right Tory all-but-party. For a representative of the party for the 'Working People' which Labour is meant to be his ideology is some where different.

You should vote the individual people based on their track records and their professed ideologies, what is the point of hardline right-winger getting into parliament on the back of a left-wing ticket ? Under partylist system, he gets a free seat in parliament based on how many votes the party gets without a democratic chance to get rid of him.

Parties are corrupt. They should be coalitions on like-minded ideology, opposed to champaign-political-career paths of red, blue and yellow.

[HoreTore]

Which is why the individual is better. For example, our 'Labour' MP is a strong advocate of removing public funding from Higher Education, Tough Retaliatory Justice system, wants to dismantal the welfare state and pro-privatisation of the NHS. Pretty much a hard-right Tory all-but-party. For a representative of the party for the 'Working People' which Labour is meant to be his ideology is some where different.

You should vote the individual people based on their track records and their professed ideologies, what is the point of hardline right-winger getting into parliament on the back of a left-wing ticket ? Under partylist system, he gets a free seat in parliament based on how many votes the party gets without a democratic chance to get rid of him.

Parties are corrupt. They should be coalitions on like-minded ideology, opposed to champaign-political-career paths of red, blue and yellow.

In a party system, his opinions are irrelevant.

I voted socialist left a few weeks ago, and I voted on the policies developed by the central committee of that party. Those are the policies they will enact, and so the opinions of the persons on their list is completely irrelevant.

For a practical example, the socialist left party contains quite a few Christians who have a conservative view of stuff related to artificial insemination. I am in favour. Does this mean I run the risk of voting for people who will vote against what I want? Nope, the party has determined that they are in favour, and so any representatives will have to vote in favour should the issue arise.

[Beskar]

Nope, the party has determined that they are in favour, and so any representatives will have to vote in favour should the issue arise.

Again, this is different because MPs can vote as they like, even with an issued triple-whip (though usually with consequences) such as the Syria vote, where there what we call a 'Backbench Rebellion'.

[HoreTore]

Again, this is different because MPs can vote as they like

Stop your blasphemous ways, heathen.

Bring back the party whip! Get the cronies back in line.

[Papewaio]

Doesn't quite work like that in Aus. Each party has a different degree of latitude for its MPs to go with. Traditional for Labor it is lockstep, do as they say or you are out. Liberals were well more liberal, but Abott has been referred to as disciplined and so has his team. However he rules a coalition and the partners are the Nationals who are about as individual as they come for a major party.

[CountArach]

Yes, but my point is that you can still screw it up. When all you need to do is get a piece of paper and fold it, there's no way you can get it wrong.

That couldn't work with our electoral system where all votes for minor parties will filter through to the major party of your choice in most cases:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

I really like it. It means that I can vote for my party (Greens) and still know that my vote isn't being wasted because I can then chose for it to go to Labor who may actually have a much better chance of being elected. So essentially I am getting two votes out of this - my real one and then my less-of-two-evils vote. Not only that but in our other chamber we have a modified proportional representation system that is really, really hard to explain, but once again my preferences in there can really make the difference.

Okay well Immigration Minister Scott Morrison is my esteemed local member and his margin is huge... so yeah... it is kind of wasted, but that's for a different reason.