danieldwilliam: (Default)
danieldwilliam ([personal profile] danieldwilliam) wrote 2021-05-12 09:50 am (UTC)

Yeah, it's a difficulty. The manageability of the ballot is something that needs to be considered.

I've never voted in an Australian Federal election myself so I've never operated the system they use. They have STV for senate elections. Each state has 12 senators, elected in two divisions of 6 each election cycle. The system I think has changed recently but used to be

You can either vote for six parties *above* the line adopt their Group Voting Ticket - their list of how to distribute preferences - presumable 1st to 6th for their own party, then 7th to 12th for their allies, 13th onwards.

Or you can vote *below* the line, voting for at least 12 candidates

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_voting_ticket

That allows Australian Senate elections for 6 seats at a time with up to 7 or 8 parties on the ballot.

You might just about be able to extend that to Scotland by making the current regions with approx 18 seats single STV constituencies. Which would give you a quota of about 5.5% and probably getting elected on 3%-4% if you had decent second preferences. Or you could divide the existing regions in to two or three with 9 or 6 seats each.

I think I would rather have MMP with larger regional lists, as we currently do, than STV with 3 or 4 seat constituencies. My observation of Scottish local council elections is that 3 or 4 seats is too few to get the benefits of STV in practice. Certainly when we have 5 or 6 or 7 parties operating.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting