O’Hanlon quits race

MIKE O’HANLON has withdrawn from the race for lord mayor of Perth, throwing his support behind Reece Harley.

“The election is a ‘first past the post’ affair and as such, two similar candidates would realistically split the progressive vote in half,” Mr O’Hanlon told his 1100 Facebook supporters on Tuesday.

“In doing so, we create a situation where the majority of votes go to us, but neither of us wins. If the election allowed preferences deals as per state/federal elections, I would have very much enjoyed running against Reece. There would have been a healthy debate around our differences.”

The two candidates both agree on a major policy of removing a gag order on councillors that prevents them openly speaking their minds about council issues.

“The current gag order is responsible for most of the dysfunction in our local government,” Mr O’Hanlon says. “With Reece in charge we can look forward to a far more transparent local government, and that means better opportunities for everybody”.

While off the campaign trail, the entrepreneurial Mr O’Hanlon has plenty to keep him busy: in preparing for the election he’s looked into the economics of distributed solar power generation, composing, car sharing and investing in the start-up sector, and intends to continue many of these projects from the private sector. He currently runs sandwich bar Toastface Grillah, software company Gramercy Studios and O’Hanlon Electric Motorsport.

Call to dump first past post

THE first past the post system used for local government elections should be dumped says Notre Dame politics lecturer Martin Drum.

First past the post means voters pick one candidate and whoever gets the most votes is elected.

Dr Drum says elections should be preferential, so the candidate most preferred by most voters is successful.

“Mr O’Hanlon’s argument is a fair and a reasonable one,” he says. “The common argument for retaining ‘first past the post is the fear that allowing preferences might allow groups to run multiple candidates and have them direct preferences to each other.”

He says the argument doesn’t stack up, with plenty of opportunity for evidence to be gathered from decades of preferential voting at state and federal elections.

“Any system which discourages candidates from standing, as has happened here, is disappointing,” he said.