Proposed legislation

The PRSAV-T considers that the most suitable Bill for introducing and protecting proportional representation for the Legislative Council would be one that:

• adopts the features and principles of a Hare-Clark system of proportional representation along the lines of the Electoral Act 1992 of the Australian Capital Territory¹¹, particularly the use of countback for filling casual vacancies, the printing of ballot-papers using Robson Rotation, the prohibition of measures such as Group Voting Tickets that would permit voters to register their order of preference without their marking a specific separate number against the name of each candidate they vote for, and requirements that a formal vote requires marking preferences for more candidates than there are vacancies; that
• establishes one of the above models, preferably Model 3 or 4, subject to the approval at a referendum, and not just a plebiscite, of the electors for the Legislative Council; that
• makes any future alteration of specified key changes, similar to those key attributes of Hare-Clark listed in the ACT's most commendable Proportional Representation (Hare-Clark) Entrenchment Act 1994¹² made subject to a referendum also, along the lines of the entrenchment of the direct election of all MPs introduced into the Western Australian Constitution Act by Sir Charles Court's Government; and that
• deals with no other matters, particularly matters not essential for the proper operation of a Hare-Clark electoral system, such as the powers of the Council, its term of office, any change in its size not required to implement Models 3 or 4, or the ratio between the number of members of the two chambers, as any such matters to be introduced should appear in other bills to be separately voted upon, thus not adversely affecting the prospects of a Bill and Referendum specifically to introduce a Hare-Clark system.

Arguments that rejection of a change to proportional representation for the Legislative Council is a protection of the public from an unwelcome change can be refuted simply by pointing out

• that the State Government has, at more than one election, included the proposed reform in its policy, and has subsequently achieved Government, and
• that any fears that the voters at large will have an unwanted system imposed on them can be overcome by wording the necessary Act so that actual implementation of the electoral system set out in the Act, rather than just its passage and proclamation, is entirely subject to its approval at a referendum by a prescribed date.

The Opposition should place its trust in the electors, and rely on the electors' ability to take stock of the various arguments for and against the introduction of a Hare-Clark system for the Council put by the Government, the Opposition and others, and make the most appropriate judgement on the way they want their votes counted. A genuine concern for protection of the voters would welcome the entrenchment in the Victorian Constitution Act of a provision that required a referendum before any prescribed Hare-Clark features could be introduced, and also before such features that might have achieved such an introduction could later be repealed.

Such an entrenchment would be a striking advance for a conservative viewpoint, as it would no longer be sufficient for a non-conservative party to win majorities in both Houses and then introduce an unpopular form of PR. Likewise the non-conservative parties should not consider that passing a change at a referendum requiring a simple majority of votes cast should be too daunting, as they would surely be claiming that the measure was popular. The electorate would then make a decision on this fundamental matter of concern to it, where there could be two competing, and possibly very self-interested claims.

The PRSAV-T recommends that the Bill be drafted so as to place the existing electoral laws together with the proposed changes in a straightforwardly and appositely named, clean-cut Act called the ``Electoral Act'', following the style now used in most Australian jurisdictions, in place of the existing gutted relic that is full of asterisked repealed sections and is confusingly named and listed, near the end of an alphabetical list, as ``The Constitution Act Amendment Act'' (not even as the ``Constitution Act Amendment Act'', after the style of the ``Constitution Act''), and that is unknown to very large numbers of Victorians.