Bob's my Uncle.

I'll miss Bob Brown as Greens leader.  I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't.  But I miss Malcolm Turnbull as Libs leader, and Bob Hawke leading the Labs.  We always miss great leaders and the world is a poorer place when they retire.  But great leaders are never immortal.

Bob was one of those great statesmen, a phrase that's been bandied around all over the place.  He had class, charisma and spoke with a kind of clarity that's hard to come by in modern politics.  He was upfront and honest, but still retained that kind of quirky humanity, that underlying hippy Uncle who can tell you about the bad old days and how far we've come.  The Uncle who reminds you we've still got a hell of a long way to go, and maybe it's up to us to get there.

It was Bob's voice of reason that led me to vote for the Greens in 2010.  Amidst the scuffling and scurrying, the lies and frenzy of election campaigns I heard the calm tones of "this time I've voting Green in the Senate."  I don't vote for a leader, but Bob was speaking sense.  So I looked up the Greens policies and liked what I saw.

The Greens stand for what I think is right.

And when I go to vote again, I'll be voting for what I believe in, regardless of the leader.  Bob may be my uncle*, but the Greens are my political party.

*Bob is not my actual uncle, although I do have an actual uncle Bob, but that's a very different person.

viva la revolution - is democracy dead?

We've had a spectacular few years for uprising and revolution.  We've seen the "Arab Spring" lead to protesting on the streets, violence, civil  wars to overthrow dictatorships and widespread changes.  We've seen parts of Asia getting excited about the prospects of democratic elections.  We've seen London burning, Wall St "occupied" and Wikipedia come down.  Everywhere you look someone is fighting for a better life, a better vote, a better world.  E-petitions are signed for a thousand causes as Australians "fight" for change.

Then we go to the polling booth and vote like it's a pain in the arse.

Wake up, Australia.

It seems we're blinded by our "lucky country" status and can't see the democracy for the trees we're signing petitions to protect.  We already have such powerful systems in place to let our voices be heard and yet when we go to do so we're incoherent.
"Mumble.  I care about equal-marriage. Mumble.  I want action on climate change.  Mumble.  So I'm voting for ...mumble."  We cling to our secret ballot with some kind of troll-like satisfaction - "nobody knows who I've voted for. I'm smug and I'm clever and you'll never know what I said."  Congratulations.  The one time we can really petition for change and you've gone silent.

We need to look at the waves of revolution currently enjoying so much success for political inspiration.  The "Arab Spring" relied heavily on Twitter with users sharing statements of support and organising protests.  Occupy was only possible because people had intent and shared it, through Twitter, through Facebook, through whatever other medium they could.  Even the London riots required people to communicate their intent and targets out loud - one guy doing it in isolation is a burglary - not a riot.

If we want to organise our world for change, if we want to show the world what we care about, we should start by speaking out about our voting intentions.  Because whenever you vote, you are petitioning for the change you want to see in the world.  Make your voice heard before the ballot and lend it to a very tame form or revolution.

viva la vote! (for change.)

Disproportionate Representation.

Having just watched the Queensland election unfold I thought it might be an interesting idea to revisit the failings of a democratic system that doesn't represent its people.  Queensland elects on a first past the post system - whoever gets past 50% of the vote wins, and everyone else loses.

Consider the very simplest contest for an electorate - Party A vs Party B.
Party A gets 51%.
Party B gets 49%.
Based on these results, Party A gets elected and gets to speak in parliament and make decisions that will change the lives of everybody in the electorate.  Party A speaks for a (very slight) majority, but claims to have a "mandate."  However, 49% of people are now lacking any kind of representation.  Their views, and indeed their political existence has ceased to exist, as anyone who's contacted a Liberal member in support of equal marriage can attest.

How can we continue to support systems that offer us the option to choose who speaks for us and then silences our voices?  How can only the majority be "right"?

In Queensland the Liberals have secured just 49.9% of the total vote, but will soon have 87.6%* of the voice.  How is that effective representation?  51.1% of people did not vote for them.  How is that the government the people want?

If Queenslanders had proportional representation, more people would have their views heard in parliament.  Tasmania is an example of a state that uses the Hare-Clark system to elect five members per electorate, giving a more diverse parliament.
TAS: 10 Libs, 10 Labs, 5 Greens.

How might the Queensland parliament look different if they had proportional representation?**

A diversity of voices represented would lead to a much healthier democracy.  Proportional representation should become a key feature of all Australian democracies.

Because every Australian and every vote should count.


*calculated on the predicted outcome of 78 seats out of 89.
ABC QLD Election Coverage

**based on the raw statewide percentages as there is no current proposal to redraw the electorates for prop rep.  An actual proportional representation election might not have come out exactly like this.