The flawed voting system: A critical look at Australia's preference vote

 The recent 2025 federal election in Australia has stirred a considerable amount of debate among political analysts, journalists and voters alike. The preference voting system, designed to ensure that elected officials have broad support, is proving to be more of a hindrance than a help. As renowned journalist and Sky News presenter Peta Credlin delves into the intricacies of this electoral mechanism, it becomes clear that many voters are left feeling disenfranchised and confused. 

Historically, the primary vote percentages in Australia have not always reflected the proportionality of seats won. For instance, in the 2007 election Kevin Rudd’s Labor Party won 43.3% of the primary vote, but secured 83 seats. In contrast, the 2016 election saw Turnbull's Coalition winning 42% of the primary vote, yet capturing 76 seats. The most recent outcomes from 2019 further complicated matters where the Coalition's 41.4% of the primary vote translated into a commanding majority of 77 seats. This discrepancy in votes versus seats raises urgent questions about the efficacy of the current electoral system. 

Fast forward to the 2025 elections where Australia voted with a notable divergence: Labor received 4.62 million votes against the Coalition's 4.23 million. Despite Labor trailing in the primary vote, initially the flow of preferences saw them clinch victory, demonstrating a flaw in the system that allows a party to emerge victorious without attaining a true majority. The voting results underscore the complex interplay of preferences, a tactic that sometimes rewards parties for strategic alliances rather than genuine public support. 

Adding to the discontent was the voter turnout, which reached an alarming low of 77%, the most dismal numbers since World War II. This propensity to abstain speaks volumes about public sentiment and the growing disenfranchisement many Australians feel towards their political representatives. The electorate’s decision to re-elect a government perceived as unsuccessful begs the question: why did voters cast their lots with Labor despite blatant misinformation? 

Labor leader Anthony Albanese’s strident claims during the campaign came under scrutiny, especially when he stumbled over simple truths, such as a fall from stage - a metaphor perhaps for the party's broader credibility issues. Meanwhile, the Coalition's downfall can be attributed to an absence of clear compelling policies and a staggering drop in party membership. A former Liberal minister recently noted that the party's inability to connect with voters has put them in a precarious position. 

As the Liberal Party grapples with these setbacks, they look toward new leadership under Sussan Ley, Australia’s first female leader of the party. Ley’s ascendance brings with it a glimmer of hope and her ambition to redefine the party's platform could shift the electoral landscape. However her challenge remains formidable. Can she steer the party back from the brink or will the far-right, like Pauline Hanson's One Nation, capitalise on the Liberal Party's disarray, drawing defectors and further polarising the political climate? 

As Australians face the prospect of three more years under a familiar administration, they wrestle with the reality of having re-elected what many consider a failed government. Voter engagement may be dwindling, but has Australia's choice truly reflected what the people desire or has the labyrinth of preferences obscured honest representation? The journey to restoring faith in the electoral process requires introspection, accountability and a renewed commitment to transparency in governance—a crucial endeavor if Australia hopes to heal from this current political malaise.