The problem now is Hare-Clark which will make sure the smaller groups become fodder in the quota system. The missing part moving forward is forming party blocs to flow preferences between the micro-parties to the exclusion of the current three – but that will take both negotiation and desire.

I think Peter has missed the flaw in the Hare Clark gerrymander.

Firstly, preferential voting of the minor parties while leaving major parties last will still achieve a trickle down preference flow to those parties because Hark Clark also works on a quota system.

With these useless five seat electorates when no single representative is willing to take any responsibility, to get a certain seat, you need 16.68% of the vote. Party deals and voting cards make sure the excess quota votes then trickle to the next “worthy” candidate to the exclusion of the minor and micro parties.

Gaming the system is required. The system relies on a voter bias towards the easiest solution. For mine, not voting for the majors sends a much stronger message than every box.

The voter mood in Eden-Monaro should really be discussed in more detail because it flows directly into the ACT. If the two majors can only achieve a 50/50 split after five weeks of campaigning, then there is a problem with the product they are offering. It is not the voters’ fault, it is the lack of difference.

The minor and micro parties need to pick up on that and start building some better alliances, otherwise we are in a Romans versus People’s Front of Judea versus Judean People’s Front situation … again.