Terry Sharples, Tweed Heads
Unlike the past, you cannot vote just ONE [1] above the line. Voters now have to distribute preferences for a valid vote at least 1 to 6. There are no negotiated preference deals between the parties any more.
Turnbull’s ‘clear out the Senate’ strategy of Double Dissolution means also that there are now 12, not 6 Senate spots up for grabs in the States.
In NSW there are 41 parties above the line to choose from. Voters will have to fold the ballot into thirds just to get it flat on the cardboard electoral box.
Senator positions are elected on a quota of votes, being the number of valid votes in the State or Territory, divided by the number of Senate positions.
As an example: the Senate quota in Tassie in 2013 was 48,084 votes. In Double Dissolution the quota is halved ie: 24,042 votes because there are 6 extra Senate positions to be filled.
The exhaustion of votes which will mean the last Senate position will be decided on way less than the quota for the other 11 Senators.
It’s a “Last Man Standing” scenario.
If there are 1000 votes left and one party has 601 and the other 399, then the party with the 601 votes wins the last Senate position.
But what, if there are no votes left, not even 3, to elect someone to the last Senate position. More than a possibility in Tasmania.
I rang the AEC on the question (reference AET 637) but not surprisingly no one rang back.