Page 4686 - Week 15 - Thursday, 21 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would draw everyone's attention to tables 7.1 and 7.2 in the report of the inquiry into the ACT election and electoral system. Table 7.1 shows the advantages of various systems. The Hare-Clark system gets a great deal of support; it is not at all attacked anywhere in table 7.2 - that is, no party, not even the Labor Party, attacks the Hare-Clark system. I am very pleased to have it on the record that the Labor Party does not oppose the Hare-Clark system. Is it not interesting that the Labor Party does not oppose the Hare-Clark system, as shown in table 7.2?
According to table 7.1, one other system that is not opposed by the Labor Party - I am intrigued by this - is the approval system. While we are talking about these matters, I think the approval system that is described in this booklet is very good, and I am very glad that the Labor Party has not opposed it. The approval system that was put up by Mr Lyall Gillespie, I take it, treats Canberra as a whole electorate, with 17 members; with this system each voter can vote for the 17 candidates whom they prefer; the 17 highest polling candidates are elected. I bet that if you put that system, among all these other systems, to the people of Canberra, it would seem the simplest, easiest and most direct.
Mr Kaine: That is the one that we used for the old House of Assembly.
DR KINLOCH: It is an excellent system. Of course, it would devastate the plans of the Labor Party for single-member electorates. However, I have to stress that, according to table 7.2, the Labor Party does not oppose the Gillespie approval system. So, I would like to suggest, along with Mr Moore's suggestion of using the Senate system - we are, after all, only chatting - that the approval system ought to be given another look and very formidable approval.
MR DUBY (4.13): This has proved to be an interesting discussion. There is no question that it is a matter of public importance; which form of electoral system will be used in the coming election is very important because certain people's futures depend upon it. That has become abundantly clear from what the various speakers have had to say.
At the outset, let me say that the modified, remodified, demodified d'Hondt system that is currently to be used in the 15 February election does not have my support. It clearly is a deficient system and will take a very great length of time to count. However, I also have grave doubts as to why Mr Moore, with his mentor, the learned psephologist Mr Malcolm Mackerras, would be trying to have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .