No it isn't according to the definition everyone else uses for "gerrymandering" (drawing specific electorate boundaries with partisan goals).<p>What he's complaining about (that the system of one representative from each electorate biases against candidates who could never win in one electorate but have a modest amount of support in the entire population) is worth contemplating, but isn't gerrymandering. New Zealand addresses this problem by giving everyone two votes, an electorate vote and a party vote, and members are chosen from electorates and party lists. New Zealand only has one chamber. Australia has two. Australia's Upper House is elected at a state level with multiple members from each state, so this is where minor party candidates get elected.
This guy claims that proportional representation is undemocratic and uses primary votes (first past the post, a truly undemocratic system that favors bigger parties) to prove his point. He then calls it gerrymandering against all known definitions of the word (boundaries are set by an independent commission).<p>He goes on to say an unconventional approach (no electoral boundaries) is better and the politicians are guilty of not adopting it out of self interest, even though no one has seriously proposed or considered it, and in Australia this would have essentially no support in the electorate (Australians having no problem with their system).<p>Anyone can make outrageous claims to promote their blog, why is this getting any attention.
The primary votes are just an artifact of Lib/Nat being further right than Labour is left due to the existence of the very left Greens. That and a low number of preferences from Independents picking up center right votes from people disillusioned by Lib/Nat blatant inability to smoothly handle any major event.
Provocative headline which hides a real conversation about preference voting. Optional preferential is one idea that the Lib/Nat side have toyed with. I think their hope is that it would permit more wins for them.
So having a non-political organisation drawing electoral maps with near to identical numbers of people within these zones who vote preferentially sp that their least popular candidate loses is gerrymandering?
Best part of that result is Labor lost primary votes but gained seats and have a razor thin margin.<p>Not much of a mandate, to win government by losing votes. Here's hoping if they break their promise on income tax they'll be tossed soon enough.