Talk of an early federal election is putting the spotlight on Senate voting reform. With a strange alliance consisting of right-wing Labor Senators, Clive Palmer, the Liberal Democrats' David Leyonhjelm and Richard Dennis from the Australia Institute entering the debate ("Be careful what you wish for", Forum, July 4, p6), the range of ideas on the topic need to be carefully analysed.

The 2013 Senate election reignited interest in reform as some candidates were elected with incredibly small proportions of the vote – less than 1 per cent in some cases. This was the direct consequence of our system of "Group Voting Tickets" that takes the power to determine preferences out of the hands of voters and gives control to political parties.

The federal parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters in its unanimous report on the 2013 election recommended that the method of electing Senators be changed to a system known as Optional Preferential Voting above the line, which would allow voters to decide how their preferences are allocated.

This would mean the end of Group Voting Tickets which allow political parties to control the preferences of their voters. Ending Group Voting Tickets would mean no more back room negotiations between political party operators that determine the secretive and complex Senate preference deals. These deals leave most voters in the dark with regard to where their preferences will end up.

In some cases voters realised after election day that their preferences, which they had no control over, helped elect candidates who stood on a platform at odds with the voter's own beliefs.