Any system is better than this unwieldy, exclusive one
I would like to respond to the assertions from Bruce Hyland, Peninsula News (December 22).
Mr Hyland states that to make the system of electing our councillors more fair we should have a system of "15 one-member wards" and that "there should be no party affiliations shown on the ballot paper".
Such a system would ensure that only members of the Labor or Liberal parties or extremely wealthy individuals would have any chance of being elected.
He continues " a voter should have to fill in every box (or perhaps, a minimum number of boxes) in the order of preference: this will give every elector an incentive, at least, to know the names of the candidates".
Again the big parties or wealthy individuals would benefit by being able to flood the letterboxes of the electorate with how-to-vote cards and employ their members to stand at the booths spruiking their candidates.
Given that most people vote the ticket or simply vote to avoid a fine only the donkey would gain any benefit and chaos at the booth would be guaranteed. What fun!
Noting that the Labor Party has vowed to dismantle the forced mergers and a return to 10 member councils, a mixed member proportional or Hare Clark system would be a better outcome.
Any system, other than the Gosford Council we had before the merger, has to be better than this unwieldy and exclusive system.
Wards were never a good idea.
Email, 10 Jan 2018
Bryan Ellis, Umina
Add a comment
Comments entered here may be published in the Forum section of Peninsula News.
Name, full residential address and daytime telephone number are required, but
only name and suburb will be published. This is a moderated forum: Contributions
will not appear here until they are approved by the editor. Contributions may appear in an edited form.