Optional preferential voting: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Altered pages. Added date. Formatted dashes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Pancho507 | Linked from User:Pancho507/sandbox/2 | #UCB_webform_linked 1747/3850 |
||
| (82 intermediate revisions by 49 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|Type of preferential voting system}} |
|||
'''Optional Preferential Voting''' (OPV) is a system of vote-casting used in the states of [[Queensland]] and [[New South Wales]] in the [[Commonwealth of Australia]]. Most Australian elections are run under ho ho ho strict rules of [[preferential voting]], where all candidates must be numbered in order of the preference of the voter, or the vote will not be counted. Although complete numbering is not required under the OPV system, a single-preference vote must still use a '1' and not a tick or cross in order for the cast vote to be considered valid. |
|||
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2019}} |
|||
[[File:Preferential ballot.svg|right|thumb|Example of an optional preferential ballot paper]] |
|||
One of the ways in which [[ranked voting]] systems vary is whether an individual vote must express a minimum number of preferences to avoid being considered [[spoilt vote|invalid]] ("spoiled" or "informal" or "rejected"). |
|||
Possibilities are: |
|||
==Official description== |
|||
* '''Full preferential voting''' (FPV) requires all candidates to be ranked |
|||
* '''Optional preferential voting''' (OPV) requires only one candidate, the voter's first preference, to be indicated |
|||
* '''Semi-optional preferential voting''' requires ranking more than one candidate but not necessary to rank all the candidates. |
|||
Ranked-voting systems typically use a ballot paper in which the voter is required to write numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. opposite the name of the candidate who is their first, second, third, etc. preference. In OPV and semi-optional systems, candidates not explicitly ranked by the voter are implicitly ranked lower than all numbered candidates. Some OPV jurisdictions permit a ballot expressing a single preference to use some other mark than the digit '1', such as a cross or tick-mark, opposite the preferred candidate's name, on the basis that the voter's intention is clear; other do not, arguing for example that an 'X' might be an expression of dislike. FPV may not be possible if [[write-in candidate]]s are allowed. |
|||
As described by '''Electoral Commission Queensland''': |
|||
In a transferable-vote system like the [[single transferable vote]] (STV) or [[instant runoff voting]] (IRV), a ballot is initially allocated to the first-preference candidate but if the first preference candidate is elected or found to be un-electable, the vote may be transferred one or more times to successively lower preferences. If there is no lower preference available when such a transfer is applicable, the ballot is said to be ''exhausted''. |
|||
[http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/data/portal/00000005/content/12942001126163592578.pdf Official explanation] |
|||
FPV prevents exhausted ballots. On the other hand, FPV increases the risk of invalid ballots: the more numbers a voter is required to mark, the greater the opportunity for mistakes, by repeating or skipping numbers or skipping candidates. The Australian election systems used in almost all the state lower houses (all except Tasmania and New South Wales) and in the ACT mandate FPV but they reduce the number of informal (invalid) votes by adding [[group voting ticket]]s "above the line" on ballot papers. These allow voters to select a complete party list prepared by one of the parties, instead of manually entering personal preferences marked for individual candidates "below the line". |
|||
'''Queensland's voting system - optional preferential voting''' |
|||
Ranked vote systems vary in that some cast aside, at the start of the vote count, a ballot not correctly filled out but other systems allow a vote even if not fully and correctly marked to be used until the first mistake annuls the ballot. That was the case in federal Australian elections prior to 1998 (a [[Langer vote]]) but after 1998 Australia classified those votes as informal (invalid). Australia now allows ballots to express less than complete preferences ([[optional preferential voting]]) for Senate elections but full preferential voting is still used in the instant-runoff voting system used to elect members of Australia's House of Representatives.<ref>Bryant v Commonwealth of Australia [1998] FCA 1242 (30 September 1998)</ref> |
|||
Queensland State elections have used Optional Preferential Voting since the 1992 State election. OPV is also used in Queensland local government elections (in those councils divided into single member wards or divisions) and in the [[New South Wales]] Lower House. |
|||
==Australia== |
|||
OPV provides 3 options for voters’ so that a valid vote may be cast by: |
|||
The terms OPV and FPV are used mainly in Australia, in relation to elections at [[Electoral systems of the Australian states and territories|state and territory]] and [[Australian electoral system|Commonwealth]] (federal) level, which use [[proportional representation]] ([[Single transferable voting]]/STV) or [[preferential voting]] (IRV). |
|||
OPV is used in elections in the Australian state of [[New South Wales]].<ref>[http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/about_elections/voting_and_counting_systems/optional_preferential Optional Preferential: Elections NSW]</ref> It was used in [[Queensland|Queensland's]] system of [[instant-runoff voting]]<ref>{{cite web |last1=Stevens |first1=Bronwyn |title=Are Queenslanders in danger of 'wasting' their votes |url=https://www.theconversation.com/amp/are-queenslanders-in-danger-of-wasting-their-votes-35919 |access-date=28 November 2020 |website=The Conversation |date=27 January 2015 |language=en}}</ref> from 1992<ref>{{cite web|title=The Queensland Electoral System|url=https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Visit-and-learn/About-Us/The-Queensland-Electoral-System|website=Queensland Parliament|access-date=24 September 2024}}</ref> to 2015, when it was replaced by full-preferential voting.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Burke|first1=Gail|title=Compulsory preferential voting returns to Queensland as Parliament passes bill for more MPs|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-21/compulsory-prefential-voting-returns-qld-parliament-passes-bill/7348172|access-date=15 December 2017|publisher=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]]|date=22 April 2016}}</ref> |
|||
1. expressing a single primary preference for one candidate only, leaving all other squares blank (this is called ‘plumping’ for one candidate) |
|||
OPV was adopted in the [[Northern Territory]] in 2016.<ref>[http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/02/northern-territory-adopts-optional-preferential-voting-and-bans-campaigning-near-polling-places.html Northern Territory Adopts Optional Preferential Voting and Bans Campaigning Near Polling Places]: [[Antony Green]] ABC 11 February 2016</ref> |
|||
2. expressing a partial distribution of preferences by voting for some, but not all cand hee hee hee idates on the ballot paper (for example, voting 1, 2, 3 on a ballot with five candidates) |
|||
In both the [[Tasmanian House of Assembly]] and the [[Tasmanian Legislative Council]], semi-optional voting is used, with a minimum number of preferences required to be expressed. There is no requirement to complete the entire ballot paper (rank all the candidates). |
|||
3. expressing a full distribution of preferences (that is, marking every square in order of preference). |
|||
===Practical usage=== |
|||
Elections for all other Australian lower houses use full-preferential voting. |
|||
This form of voting allows for one single candidate or candidates of similar ideology to be endorsed by a voter rather than directing preferences to all candidates. |
|||
In the [[New South Wales Legislative Council]], semi-optional preferential voting has been used since 1978, with a minimum 10 preferences required for 15 seats before 1991, and 15 preferences for 21 seats since. Voters also have the option since 1984 of voting "above the line". |
|||
This has been the cause of some concern due to the use of the 'Just vote 1' system by Queenslanders in federal elections, where there is no optional preferential voting, and led to many votes (likely to be ALP votes due to their limited affiliation with minor parties) not being counted. Although it is an advantage to Labor at a state level, hum hum hum for this reason it seems to advantage the coalition parties on a federal level. |
|||
In the [[Victorian Legislative Council]], semi-optional preferential voting is used if a voter chooses to vote below the line. Voting above the line requires only a '1' being placed in one box, and [[group voting ticket]]s voting has applied since 1988.<ref>http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/bill/crb1988520.pdf {{Bare URL PDF|date=March 2022}}</ref> |
|||
[[Category:Instant-runoff voting]] |
|||
Around 1999 Melbourne's [[Albert Langer]] engaged in a campaign to assist voters to mark fewer than all the candidates but still have their vote not deemed informal and rejected. This was a way to use the vote as if under the optional preferential voting system.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Farrell and McAllister |title=The Australian Electoral System |pages=56–57}}</ref> |
|||
The [[Australian Senate]] voting reform of 2016 switched from full preferential voting to optional preferential voting. A minimum number is specified in the instructions on the ballot paper. Since in the past a single number '1' above the line was valid, that is still a formal vote even though voters are encouraged to rank six candidates. |
|||
==Elsewhere== |
|||
STV Elections [[Elections in Malta|in Malta]], [[Elections in the Republic of Ireland|in the Republic of Ireland]], and [[Elections in Northern Ireland|in Northern Ireland]] use OPV. The [[Instant-runoff voting in the United States|ranked-choice voting]] system used in [[Maine]], United States, [[Instant-runoff voting]], can be considered optional-preferential as voters are allowed to rank just one candidate. The system also allows voters to skip one ranking (e.g. marking a first choice and a third choice, but not a second choice). In that case, the next ranking would be advanced to the next highest ranking, but more than one skip exhausts the ballot. |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
[[Category:Instant-runoff voting]] |
|||
HELLO MOTO |
|||
Latest revision as of 16:42, 13 December 2024
One of the ways in which ranked voting systems vary is whether an individual vote must express a minimum number of preferences to avoid being considered invalid ("spoiled" or "informal" or "rejected").
Possibilities are:
- Full preferential voting (FPV) requires all candidates to be ranked
- Optional preferential voting (OPV) requires only one candidate, the voter's first preference, to be indicated
- Semi-optional preferential voting requires ranking more than one candidate but not necessary to rank all the candidates.
Ranked-voting systems typically use a ballot paper in which the voter is required to write numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. opposite the name of the candidate who is their first, second, third, etc. preference. In OPV and semi-optional systems, candidates not explicitly ranked by the voter are implicitly ranked lower than all numbered candidates. Some OPV jurisdictions permit a ballot expressing a single preference to use some other mark than the digit '1', such as a cross or tick-mark, opposite the preferred candidate's name, on the basis that the voter's intention is clear; other do not, arguing for example that an 'X' might be an expression of dislike. FPV may not be possible if write-in candidates are allowed.
In a transferable-vote system like the single transferable vote (STV) or instant runoff voting (IRV), a ballot is initially allocated to the first-preference candidate but if the first preference candidate is elected or found to be un-electable, the vote may be transferred one or more times to successively lower preferences. If there is no lower preference available when such a transfer is applicable, the ballot is said to be exhausted.
FPV prevents exhausted ballots. On the other hand, FPV increases the risk of invalid ballots: the more numbers a voter is required to mark, the greater the opportunity for mistakes, by repeating or skipping numbers or skipping candidates. The Australian election systems used in almost all the state lower houses (all except Tasmania and New South Wales) and in the ACT mandate FPV but they reduce the number of informal (invalid) votes by adding group voting tickets "above the line" on ballot papers. These allow voters to select a complete party list prepared by one of the parties, instead of manually entering personal preferences marked for individual candidates "below the line".
Ranked vote systems vary in that some cast aside, at the start of the vote count, a ballot not correctly filled out but other systems allow a vote even if not fully and correctly marked to be used until the first mistake annuls the ballot. That was the case in federal Australian elections prior to 1998 (a Langer vote) but after 1998 Australia classified those votes as informal (invalid). Australia now allows ballots to express less than complete preferences (optional preferential voting) for Senate elections but full preferential voting is still used in the instant-runoff voting system used to elect members of Australia's House of Representatives.[1]
Australia
[edit]The terms OPV and FPV are used mainly in Australia, in relation to elections at state and territory and Commonwealth (federal) level, which use proportional representation (Single transferable voting/STV) or preferential voting (IRV).
OPV is used in elections in the Australian state of New South Wales.[2] It was used in Queensland's system of instant-runoff voting[3] from 1992[4] to 2015, when it was replaced by full-preferential voting.[5]
OPV was adopted in the Northern Territory in 2016.[6]
In both the Tasmanian House of Assembly and the Tasmanian Legislative Council, semi-optional voting is used, with a minimum number of preferences required to be expressed. There is no requirement to complete the entire ballot paper (rank all the candidates).
Elections for all other Australian lower houses use full-preferential voting.
In the New South Wales Legislative Council, semi-optional preferential voting has been used since 1978, with a minimum 10 preferences required for 15 seats before 1991, and 15 preferences for 21 seats since. Voters also have the option since 1984 of voting "above the line".
In the Victorian Legislative Council, semi-optional preferential voting is used if a voter chooses to vote below the line. Voting above the line requires only a '1' being placed in one box, and group voting tickets voting has applied since 1988.[7]
Around 1999 Melbourne's Albert Langer engaged in a campaign to assist voters to mark fewer than all the candidates but still have their vote not deemed informal and rejected. This was a way to use the vote as if under the optional preferential voting system.[8]
The Australian Senate voting reform of 2016 switched from full preferential voting to optional preferential voting. A minimum number is specified in the instructions on the ballot paper. Since in the past a single number '1' above the line was valid, that is still a formal vote even though voters are encouraged to rank six candidates.
Elsewhere
[edit]STV Elections in Malta, in the Republic of Ireland, and in Northern Ireland use OPV. The ranked-choice voting system used in Maine, United States, Instant-runoff voting, can be considered optional-preferential as voters are allowed to rank just one candidate. The system also allows voters to skip one ranking (e.g. marking a first choice and a third choice, but not a second choice). In that case, the next ranking would be advanced to the next highest ranking, but more than one skip exhausts the ballot.
References
[edit]- ^ Bryant v Commonwealth of Australia [1998] FCA 1242 (30 September 1998)
- ^ Optional Preferential: Elections NSW
- ^ Stevens, Bronwyn (27 January 2015). "Are Queenslanders in danger of 'wasting' their votes". The Conversation. Retrieved 28 November 2020.
- ^ "The Queensland Electoral System". Queensland Parliament. Retrieved 24 September 2024.
- ^ Burke, Gail (22 April 2016). "Compulsory preferential voting returns to Queensland as Parliament passes bill for more MPs". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved 15 December 2017.
- ^ Northern Territory Adopts Optional Preferential Voting and Bans Campaigning Near Polling Places: Antony Green ABC 11 February 2016
- ^ http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/bill/crb1988520.pdf [bare URL PDF]
- ^ Farrell and McAllister. The Australian Electoral System. pp. 56–57.