Proportional representation analysis 1996 POLLS FOR THE 38TH AUSTRALIAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Estimated no. of PR-STV (Hare-Clark) seats in possible multi-member divisions Copyright © Proportional Representation Society of Australia Inc. 2025: Tel. +61429176725 www.prsa.org.au info@prsa.org.au           Final AEC data, from www.aec.gov.au

Summary Table: Click on this table, which shows that the percentage of single-member seats won by the parties of the incoming Liberal Party and National Party Coalition Government (63.6%) is well in excess of the percentage of first preference votes they received (46.8%). The table shows that this injustice would not have occurred if a Hare-Clark form of proportional representation had been used as the electoral system. Under a Hare-Clark system, the percentage of Coalition seats would still have been an absolute majority, but it would have been 50.7%, which is much closer to the minority of votes they received (46.8%) than is the result under the distorting single-member system. The percentage of ALP Opposition seats (33.1%) is well below the percentage of voters that gave their first preference vote to the ALP (38.8%). With Hare-Clark casual vacancies filled by countback of general election ballot-papers, as for the Tasmanian and ACT Assemblies, the predictable party continuity lets Governments last full term. Details of the 25 Multi-member PR Districts: Click on details to see the PR districts, the votes in each, and the seats that would be won with that arrangement, compared with the single-member seats actually won. The single-member system reveals that in 63 of the 148 single-member districts (43%) an absolute majority of voters cast their first preference vote for a candidate other than the candidate that was elected. This election, like many under the single-member, winner-take-all system, shows that the diversity of views of the electorate would have been more faithfully represented, and less distorted, if a Hare-Clark multi-member PR electoral system had been used instead of single-member electoral districts. Under Hare-Clark PR in Tasmania a party has often won a majority of votes in one or more of that State's five multi-member districts, but only once has a Tasmanian MHA (Douglas Lowe in 1979) received an absolute majority of first preference votes, because the diversity of candidates and their support has nearly always let voters express their diverse views with a real chance of their being represented. There is no restrictive "winner-take-all" scheme operating for the Lower House of either Tasmania or the Australian Capital Territory, as there is in all the other Lower Houses in Australia, which still continue to be elected from single-member electorates. Click here to compare with other polls.

Proportional representation analysis

1996 POLLS: 38TH AUSTRALIAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SUMMARY

As the above table shows, the percentage of single-member seats won by the parties of the incoming Coalition Government (63.6%) is well in excess of the percentage of first preference votes they received (46.8%). The table shows that this injustice would not have occurred if a Hare-Clark form of proportional representation had been used as the electoral system.

Under a Hare-Clark system the percentage of Coalition seats would still have been an absolute majority, but it would have been 50.7%, which is much closer to the minority of votes they received (46.8%) than is the result under the distorting single-member system. The percentage of ALP Opposition seats (33.1%) is well below the percentage of voters that gave their first preference vote to the ALP (38.8%).

See details. With Hare-Clark casual vacancies filled by countback of general election ballot-papers, as in the Tasmanian and ACT Assemblies, the predictable party continuity lets Governments last full term.

Also, under Hare-Clark, at least 6.8% of MHRs would have represented one other significant body of opinion, that 6.8% of Australian voters that gave their first preference vote to the Australian Democrats. The present system excludes that significant AD minority entirely, yet it awards the 8.2% National Party minority vote 12.2% of the seats, not the fairer 8.8% that Hare-Clark would give.

********