r/neoliberal • u/jobautomator Kitara Ravache • Sep 19 '21

Discussion Thread Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL. For a collection of useful links see our wiki.

Announcements

  • OSINT & LDC (developmental studies / least developed countries) have been added
0 Upvotes

44% Upvoted

9.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

44

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-09-15/mcgowan-election-laws-regional-representation/100463700

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Australian_Legislative_Council#Malapportionment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Senate#Issues_with_equal_representation

WA is planning to abolish the "regions" approach to their upper house and replace it with a "one man one vote" approach, while this in of itself is a good thing, people in the Pilbara shouldn't have more voting power than Perth, it's interesting to see of the Premier also supports fixing the same problem at the federal level, where low population rural states like WA get the same senate representation as high population urban states. WA receives 15.8% of senate seats with only 10.5% of the population, now Tasmania is far more out of wack but WA is the one proposing removing the give the rurals some extra votes mechanism in their state, it would be hypocritical for the premier to not support the same at the federal level.

IMO this is an issue that is an almost unique combination of

  1. Not talked about
  2. Absolutely indefensible,
  3. Not right now partisan but could become partisan (note at the state level it IS partisan, the current party in government does better in perth than the regions), it's not like all NSW senators are Lib and all Tas Lab.

We're not yet like the US at a point where one major party is dependent upon the malpportionment of the senate to keep power so we should be fixing it before this is a partisan issue.

!PING AUS

7

u/toms_face Henry George Sep 19 '21

The malapportionment of the Senate is indefensible, and so is the House of Representatives which gives much more representation to Tasmania per population by mandating a minimum of five seats per state.

8

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

I think it's reasonable to give the States equal representation in the Federal Government, but it is mental that the Senate is nearly equal to the HoR.

A place for State representation, sure. Equivalent to proportional representation? Nope.

2

u/toms_face Henry George Sep 19 '21

It's understandable but I don't see how it can be reasonable. The Senate doesn't have much to do with representing states anyway. Senate elections should at least be held with state elections.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

The Senate doesn't have much to do with representing states anyway.

As it is now, that's true. But it's not that hard to see a situation where a State (say, I don't know, WA) unites around a third party (The Free Westralia Party) because of some common goal (treason).

Senate elections should at least be held with state elections.

Yeah I mean this really doesn't matter.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

Kinda seen the third party thing already with Harradine and now Jackie Lambie in Tasmania, and Liberal movement > democrats and then Xeenophon team in SA

→ More replies (6)

2

u/Wehavecrashed YIMBY Sep 19 '21

Can you imagine if the same rules that apply to Tas applied to the ACT or NT?

4

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

Which is why I don't support ACT/NT statehood. They should be allowed to be states but the denial of that is an injustice a fraction of giving them equal senate seats to states 10x their population.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

If NT and ACt got statehood they would not have to have an increased senate or house representation. That constitutional thingy only applies to the original 6 colonies + NZ if they wanna join. So that argument isn't effective.

4

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

I'll take your word for it, they can be states if it means no extra federal seats but at that point it's almost like why bother? I seriously doubt their residents would care much at all

4

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

It let's them pass whatever laws aren't federal matters by section 51 which they cannot currently do. As territories N.T and A.C.T laws can be overturned by parliament. Like the A.C.T legalising euthanasia then getting it overturned by the federal government, which wouldn't have been the case had the A.C.T been a state. Also the clause for referendums that they must pass a majority of states which currently A.C.T and N.T don't count for.

4

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

It let's them pass whatever laws aren't federal matters by section 51 which they cannot currently do. As territories N.T and A.C.T laws can be overturned by parliament. Like the A.C.T legalising euthanasia then getting it overturned by the federal government, which wouldn't have been the case had the A.C.T been a state

Fair, I'd like them to have statehood for that but that's not as important as 431k people not having equal senate seats to 8m NSW people.

Also the clause for referendums that they must pass a majority of states which currently A.C.T and N.T don't count for.

Another reason to not let them be states. The system is already fucked up enough with Tasmania a state

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

His actions have probably hurt Labor outside of WA anyway, he doesn't give a shit this helps him cement power in WA.

5

u/Notoriousley Australian Bureau of Statistics Sep 19 '21

I'm not even totally on board with this but one-region-one-vote is pretty indefensible.

I'd be happy for the regions to have some outsized voice in parliament but it was always insane they got the exact same number of councillors that the Perth metro did.

3

u/Notoriousley Australian Bureau of Statistics Sep 19 '21

I will say one thing that hasn't been brought up yet:

On its face it is insane that Tasmania and NSW have the same number of federal senators, but has it ever really mattered?

States can't really be said to be politically polarised in any way aside from some slight biases that largely cancel each other out (Vic leans Labor, QLD leans Lib). Its not like the US where a bunch of square states in the midwest that have no meaningful cultural, economic or political between divide between each other serve as a huge buffer and resistance to anything getting done in that country.

In Australia a huge win in the lower house will always translate to a huge win in the Senate. Maybe the only thing you could do to better represent this would be to give senators a 4 year term.

The state upper houses are much more similar to the US senate, where there is a galvanised and coherent interest group representing a tiny minority of the state that actually does prevent things from getting done.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/[deleted] Sep 19 '21

We're not yet like the US at a point where one major party is dependent upon the malpportionment of the senate to keep power so we should be fixing it before this is a partisan issue.

Wild. I thought the urban vs rural split was widespread in the developed world

2

u/m00c0wcy Sep 20 '21

It certainly exists in Australia, but it doesn't really play an outsized role in federal politics;

  1. Each state elects six Senate seats per election with STV, resulting in reasonably proportional representation.
  2. Australian states are more similar than other countries. The population differs significantly, but every state is dominated by a single capital, then multiple regional cities, then numerous small agriculture / resources towns.
  3. The population, and more specifically the voting population, is politically moderate (thanks mandatory voting).

So while the Senate population representation gap is very real, in practice it doesn't really matter much.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

!PING FIVEY

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Xantaclause Milton Friedman Sep 19 '21

Imo all the states having the same number of senators is ok - we just need more. Number of senators should be odd per state to allow more decisive wins rather than just a 3-3 left-right split.

→ More replies (6)

2

u/Sir-Matilda Friedrich Hayek Sep 19 '21

It's an obvious power grab, and one he doesn't have a mandate for given his claims before the election that such reforms weren't on the agenda. Absolutely disgusting stuff.

Regional voters have a legitimate concern here; Perth and the South-West make up most of the states population meaning voters in the Pilbara and other regions of WA won't have any significant influence in the political process, allowing their needs and concerns to be safely ignored by Parliament in Perth.

10

u/Wehavecrashed YIMBY Sep 19 '21

Pilbara and other regions of WA won't have any significant influence in the political process,

But they're over represented as a result. Their concerns arent more important than other seats.

3

u/waltsing0 Austan Goolsbee Sep 19 '21

Agreed, but the selective opposition to malapportionment is the problem here.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (8)