Abolition of Preferential Voting in Australia

The process of preferential voting, introduced in 1918, is ripe for corruption and should be discarded. We see at elections many underhanded practices carried out so as to 'fiddle the books' and sway preferences from voters, even to point of fraudulent and mis-leading How To Vote cards.

The candidate who achieves the highest individual tally of first [ and only ] votes should win the seat - likewise, by extension, the government is elected. The decision of the people would be known so much the sooner without the schermozzle of preference allocations.

In 1000 voters and five candidates, each may receive 200 - an even spread. More likely, though, is that A receives 400, leaving 600 spread over B, C, D and E who receive each 150. The balance is NOT given to one person , as it would be in a two candidate contest - in that case the 600 candidate would be the clear winner.

Candidate A has INDIVIDUALLY defeated each opponent by 250 votes. When A can be the clear winner yet be defeated by B, who has added the conglomerate of votes of C, D and E [ 450 ] to his 150 and thus accumulated 600 is a clear mis-carriage of justice to any fair minded person.

In The Melbourne Cup imagine the outcry if Horse A was only a few feet from the line then had its tail grabbed by Horse B, allowing Horse C to get past and thus win First Place. B, C and all other riders have colluded to achieve this and collusion is effectively what happens with preferential voting although that somewhat dis-comforting situation is not realised.

It is simple - give the seat to the candidate who achieves the highest count of votes.

Having one choice only will also ensure that every voter thinks long and hard on his or her choice - there will be no 'second bite of the apple'. Considered and weighed choice can only be for the best for the nation.

If we choose a candidate from a fringe party who has small chance of winning then we should stand by our choice come what may. Likewise the candidate should stand or fall by the exact number who want him or her.

This does not rule out the possibility that a candidate from even the most unlikely ideology can win if enough people give him or her that vital 1 vote.