Australia desperately needs many electoral reforms, and there’s much debate to be had about them. We must face the reality that compulsory voting and electioneering at polling places give far too many uncaring and lazy people an influence on the future of our nation. That can only accidentally result in good policy, but never has.

When we do have electoral “reform”, it is not to advance proportionate representation but to entrench the political duopoly of major party power in Parliaments. Nothing threatens the duopoly like minor parties on the centre right advancing popular agendas like small government, family values and sensible immigration policy.

Nearly ten years ago, the duopoly under PM Turnbull overhauled the Senate voting system and quietly handicapped these minor parties, and incompetently handed the “Greens” a distinct advantage.

Australian psephologist and advanced mathematics nerd, Lex Stewart, insists the changes were not simply innocent but intentionally boosted the Greens. This was at the expense of those right of Labor and unsatisfied with how they were being represented by the Liberal/National coalition.

Previously, a candidate could not become a Senator without a full quota (14%) of valid votes. This is very difficult without the full flow-on of preferences. The previous system allowed voters to fully control their vote by completing boxes below the line, or if this was too hard, to voluntarily and deliberately give their preferred party the control of how their vote would flow. This did not help the extreme Greens.

The new method (since 2016) dramatically increases the rate at which Senate votes are exhausted, meaning by not numbering every box, your ballot is at real risk of not being considered further when the crucial, final Senate positions in each state are contested by minor parties and independents.

Now the final Senator (or even final two) can be elected on less than a partial quota. In an article this week in the Daily Declaration, Stewart says:

“Suggesting that voters need to number only their top six preferences above the line may have seemed like a simple change. But in reality, it was a carefully constructed method designed to favour the Greens… While the public might have thought this was a positive step to simplify voting, it was, in truth, a dangerous shift that undermines the integrity of our democracy.”

The devastating impact on the quality of Australia’s representative democracy was immediately and continues to be felt. In 2016, the Greens secured 12% of Senate seats with only 8.7% of the vote. The combined vote of all minor parties achieved far more than the 14% quota required to win a seat but missed out, according to Stewart, due to the new voting system and voters doing only the bare minimum.

In 2019, again, the Greens gained 15% of Senate seats with only 10% of the votes, while combined minor parties were effectively ignored despite a massive 18.6% of the vote. Lex Stewart argues that voters numbering every box instead of the bare minimum would have denied the Greens at least one Senate seat, add benefited a minor party or independent candidate.

The solution is obvious: don’t be lazy! Responsible voters need to number as many boxes as they can, if not every box, to maximise the integrity and fairness of a flawed election system.

I’ve long believed in voting beneath the line and choosing my own preferences rather than giving my vote away or risking it being exhausted. It’s illogical, if not reckless, to refuse to give low or last preferences to the handful or more of candidates you despise as if that were somehow a lukewarm endorsement of them. It’s not!

The only thing that happens when you waste your vote or allow it to be exhausted is that you leave the decision up to others. If the better options have been excluded and it’s a choice between bad and worse, hold your nose and preference the lesser of two evils. The alternative is leaving that choice to other, less informed, less moral voters – and that itself is, in my honest opinion, lazy and wicked.

If we accept as a premise that there are no good candidates who deserve our preferences (which isn’t true, but assuming it is), then the very least Christian and conservative voters should do is everything within the power of their ballot to make sure the Greens have the hardest time possible winning a seat in the Senate. This is impossible unless you number every box.

My encouragement to all voters is to understand that we all are being asked to influence the future government of Australia, and consequently, the justice and flourishing of our neighbours and nation. This isn’t a trivial matter, so take the significant responsibility of such power seriously and expect to invest some effort and suffer some inconvenience. This is the small price of democracy, and the cost of tyranny is much greater.

Just because we shouldn’t complain if it isn’t easy doesn’t mean we shouldn’t accept help to learn what we can about the candidates and resources for the task before us. Searching for a tool I’ve used before to help me pre-plan my Senate preferences, I couldn’t find anything, and none of the political types/influencers I asked knew of one either. It seemed there were only parties and bloggers telling me how to vote, and only the bare minimum, then.

Having a talented web developer on my team, we discussed building one for future elections, but managed to grab the AEC data and construct something quite easy to use and helpful in just a few days! The great news is that NumberEveryBox.au is live and ready to use right now, giving you full control over your ballot right to the very last Senate seat decision being made, helping you turn up when you’re needed.

Let’s make “It Isn’t Easy Being Green” the new theme song of that party of globalist communists, antisemites and fascists – every one of them a muppet – and number every box above or below the line on our Senate ballots this election.