Bills Digest no. 133 2009–10
Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of Rolls and
Other Measures) Bill 2010
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of
Rolls and Other Measures) Bill 2010
Date introduced: 11 February 2010
House: House
of Representatives (the Bill passed the House on 10 March
2010)
Portfolio: Special Minister of State
Commencement: Sections 1–3, Schedules 1–3, and
Schedules 5–6 commence on the day the Act receives Royal
Assent. Schedule 4 commences on a day to be fixed by Proclamation,
or on the day after 6 months from Royal Assent, whichever occurs
first.
Links: The
relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second
reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/.
When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is
at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The main purpose of the Bill is
to amend the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 and the
Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 (Cth) so as
to:
- fix the seventh day after the issue of federal election writs
as the date for the close of rolls
- repeal the evidence of identity requirements for provisional
electors and provide for a signature checking procedure
- make provision for electronic updating of electors’
details
- enable the AEC to process enrolment transactions outside the
electoral division for which a person is enrolling
- ‘enable pre-poll votes cast in an elector’s
‘home’ division to be cast and counted as ordinary
votes, wherever practicable’
- ‘restrict the number of candidates that can be endorsed
by a political party in each Division’,[1] and
- enable electronic voting for sight-impaired electors.[2]
In 2006 the Howard Government introduced a suite of significant
changes to electoral and referendum administration with the
Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Electoral Integrity and
Other Measures) Act 2006 (Cth). Changes included:
- the introduction of evidence of identity requirements for
enrolments and provisional voting
- changing the date for the close of rolls from the seventh day
after the issue of the federal election writs to the third working
day after the issue of the writs for certain categories of
enrolment (for updating details; for those turning 18 years of age
between the issue of the writs and polling day; and for those
gaining citizenship between the issue of the writs and polling
day)
- changing the date for the close of rolls from the seventh day
after the issue of the federal election writs to the date of the
issue of the writs for other new enrolments and re-enrolments,
and
- increasing political finance disclosure thresholds from $1 500
to more than $10 000 (CPI indexed).[3]
The measures in the Electoral and Referendum Amendment
(Electoral Integrity and Other Measures) Act 2006 (Cth) were
controversial and were opposed by the Australian Labor Party (ALP)
(then in Opposition) and by the minor parties.[4]
The Second Reading speech states that the Bill fulfils two ALP
election commitments.[5] In its 2007 National Platform the ALP indicated that it
would reverse a number of the 2006 Howard Government changes to
electoral administration including the changes to the date for the
close of rolls and evidence of identity requirements.[6]
The Second Reading speech also states that the Bill implements a
number of recommendations arising from the Joint Standing Committee
on Electoral Matters’ (JSCEM) inquiry into the conduct of the
2007 federal election and related matters (referred to the JSCEM by
the Special Minister of State on 27 February 2008 and by the Senate
on 12 March 2008).[7]
In its inquiry report (June 2009), a majority of the JSCEM made 53
recommendations relating to a range of electoral administration
matters including the date for the close of rolls, evidence of
identity, enrolment and participation, pre-poll voting, informal
voting, electoral administration, penalties, prisoner voting
rights, and overseas electors.[8] Specific recommendations relevant to the Bill
included:
- fixing the date for the close of rolls to seven days after the
date of federal election writs (Recommendation 1)
- repeal of the evidence of identity requirements for provisional
electors and the introduction of a signature checking process for
declaration votes where necessary (Recommendation 2)
- provision for the establishment of an enrolment website for
enrolled electors to facilitate timely updating of the electoral
roll by the AEC (Recommendation 9)
- provision ‘to allow pre-poll votes cast at a pre-poll
voting centre in an elector’s home division prior to polling
day to be cast as ordinary votes, wherever practicable’
(Recommendation 22)
- provision for the AEC to manage its workload between elections
by ‘allowing enrolment transactions to be processed outside
the division for which the person is enrolling, provided that those
transactions are processed by a division that is within the same
state or territory’ (Recommendation 42), and
- incorporation of recommended amendments to the Commonwealth
Electoral Act 1918 into the Referendum (Machinery
Provisions) Act 1984 (Cth) where appropriate ‘to ensure
consistency between the provisions applying to elections and
referenda’ (Recommendation 45).[9]
Opposition members of the JSCEM dissented from a number of the
Committee majority’s recommendations including
Recommendations 1 and 2 concerning the close of rolls date and
evidence of identity for provisional electors.[10]
The Second Reading speech further indicates that the amendments
in the Bill restricting the number of candidates that can be
endorsed by a political party in a single electoral division arise
from the 2009 Bradfield by-election. At the Bradfield by-election
there were 22 candidates, nine of whom were endorsed by one
political party; the informal vote was nine per cent.[11] The Second Reading
speech states that:
The practice of multiple candidates for a
single Division being endorsed by the registered officer of a
political party has not emerged on this scale prior to the 2009
Bradfield by-election. Legislative amendment is required to prevent
a similar rise in the informality rate in multiple Divisions at the
next federal election.[12]
Government amendments to the Bill to enable electronic voting
for sight-impaired electors give effect to recommendation 49 of the
JSCEM report on the 2007 election and recommendation one of the
JSCEM report on the electronic voting trials at that
election.[13]
The Bill’s proposed amendments to the Referendum
(Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 (Cth) do not implement the
recommendations made by the House of Representatives Standing
Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in its recent report
on the effectiveness of that Act as a framework for conducting
referendums.[14]
The Bill is part of the Government’s broader electoral
reform agenda. In December 2008 the Government issued a green paper
examining electoral finance reform issues, and in September 2009 a
second green paper was issued examining broader electoral reform
issues.[15] Both
green papers identified reform possibilities and invited
comment.
In 2008 and 2009 the Government introduced Bills making
significant changes to the law relating to electoral funding,
political donations, disclosure and reporting, and certain offences
and penalties.[16]
The 2008 Bill was defeated in the Senate in March 2009 and the 2009
Bill, which is a revised version of the 2008 Bill, was introduced
and passed in March 2009 in the House of Representatives and is
currently before the Senate.[17]
In addition to the Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of
Rolls and Other Measures) Bill 2010, the Government is currently
proposing to introduce two further items of electoral legislation
in the 2010 Autumn sittings:
- a second electoral and referendum amendment Bill to
‘correct technical errors and make amendments of a minor
nature in the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 and the
Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984’ in order
to ‘enable the Australian Electoral Commission to administer
electoral laws more effectively’, and
- an electoral amendment Bill to ‘implement further reforms
to the campaign funding and financial disclosure laws’ in
order to ‘implement the Government’s legislative
response to the issues raised in the Electoral Reform Green
Paper “Donations, Funding and Expenditure”
(released in December 2008) and related submissions’.[18]
The Opposition has indicated that it will oppose the measures in
Schedules 1 and 2 of the Bill relating to the close of rolls and
evidence of identity for provisional electors, but will support the
other measures in Schedules 3–6 of the Bill.[19] The Opposition’s stance on
Schedules 1 and 2 is consistent with the JSCEM Opposition
members’ dissent, in the Committee’s report on the 2007
election, from the majority recommendations concerning the close of
rolls and evidence of identity for provisional electors.[20]
The Australian Greens have endorsed the Bill but have also
signalled their intention to move an amendment in the Senate
requiring truth in political advertising.[21]
Family First Senator Steve Fielding and Independent Senator Nick
Xenophon have not yet indicated their positions on the Bill.
The Government estimates that the cost of implementing the
measures in schedules 1–5 of the Bill will be just over $1
million. The estimated cost of implementing the measures in
schedule 6 of the Bill (electronic voting for sight-impaired
people) is $370,000. However, the Government expects that the
measures in the Bill will also result in net savings of $5.7
million over the forward period due mainly to ‘efficiencies
in pre-poll voting at the next and subsequent federal
elections’.[22]
Currently under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918
(the Electoral Act) and the Referendum (Machinery Provisions)
Act 1984 (Cth) (the Referendum Act) the electoral and
referendum rolls close on the third working day after the issue of
the federal election/referendum writs for those updating their
details and for those turning 18 years of age or gaining
citizenship between the issue of the writs and polling day. For
other new enrolments and for re-enrolments the electoral rolls
close on the date of the issue of the writs. The rolls close at
8:00 pm on the relevant day as this is the deadline by which claims
or applications for enrolment must be made.
The Bill proposes to amend the Electoral Act and Referendum Act
so as to fix the seventh day after the issue of the federal
election/referendum writs as the date for the close of the rolls.
This closure date would apply for all categories of enrolment
including new enrolments, updating details, those applying for
enrolment at 17 years of age, and applications for enrolment from
eligible overseas electors, itinerant electors, and those set to
gain citizenship between the issue of the writs and polling day.
The deadline for the making of claims or applications for enrolment
(and therefore the point at which the rolls would close) would be
8:00 pm on the seventh day after the issue of the writs.
The new date for the close of the rolls would also apply to the
removal of electors from the rolls resulting from an objection to
their enrolment, so that removal could not occur between 8:00 pm on
the day of the close of rolls and the close of polling on polling
day.
The Second Reading speech states that the new measures in
Schedule 1 will ‘provide sufficient time for new voters to
enrol to vote for a federal election or existing electors to update
their address details with the AEC’.[23] Reversal of the reduction in the
close of rolls changes introduced by the Howard Government in 2006
has been ALP policy since before the 2007 election (see above). The
main issues in contention in relation to roll closure have been
electoral roll integrity and voting fraud and restriction of the
vote/disenfranchisement.[24]
Whereas currently the Electoral Act and Referendum Act both
specify that the close of rolls is to take place on the third
working day after the issue of the writs (defined as any day except
a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in any state or territory),
the proposed amendments fixing the seventh day after the issue of
the writs as the date for the close of rolls does not specify that
the seventh day must be a working day. The Bill proposes to repeal
the current definition of ‘working day’ from the
Electoral Act and the Referendum Act. In relation to the latter
Act, the Explanatory Memorandum states this is because it is
‘now otiose’.[25]
Currently under the Electoral Act and the Referendum Act
electors casting provisional votes at elections and referendums are
required to provide evidence of identity either at the time of
voting or by the first Friday following the polling day.[26] If provided at the
time of voting, the evidence of identity must be the original of
either the elector’s driver’s licence or one of a
prescribed set of documents (e.g. a birth certificate, a
certificate of Australian citizenship, a current Australian
passport, or a current credit or bank account card). If provided by
the first Friday after the polling day, the evidence of identity
must be the original or an attested copy of the elector’s
driver’s licence or prescribed document. If the prescribed
evidence of identity is not provided within the timeframe the
provisional vote is not counted.
The Bill proposes to repeal the evidence of identity
requirements for provisional electors from both the Electoral Act
and the Referendum Act. In place of these requirements, Divisional
Returning Officers (DROs) would be required to check the signature
of an elector on the envelope containing the provisional vote
against the most recent record of that elector’s signature
(if any) where the DRO had reason to doubt that the signature on
the envelope was genuine. If the signature on the envelope was not
that of the elector, the provisional vote would not be counted. The
Explanatory Memorandum states that in most cases the most recent
record ‘will be the signature on the claim for enrolment
form’;[27]
the Bill is silent however regarding arrangements where no recent
record of an elector’s signature was available.
The Second Reading speech states that, along with Schedule 1,
the new measures in Schedule 2 will ‘implement
recommendations of the JSCEM supported by the Government as
necessary to provide eligible electors with the greatest
opportunity to enrol and vote in an election.[28] Reversal of the evidence of
identity requirements introduced by the Howard Government in 2006
has been ALP policy since before the 2007 election (see above). The
main issues in contention in relation to evidence of identity for
provisional electors have been enrolment integrity and integrity of
the provisional voting system, and restriction of the
vote/disenfranchisement.[29]
Under current legislation, pre-poll votes are not counted on
election night as each declaration accompanying each vote is
required to be scrutinised to determine that the elector has a
valid entitlement to vote.[30] The Bill proposes to amend the Electoral Act and the
Referendum Act to provide a new category of pre-poll vote,
‘pre-poll ordinary votes’, as distinct from the renamed
category of ‘pre-poll declaration votes’. The inclusion
of pre-poll ordinary votes would enable pre-poll votes cast in an
elector’s ‘home’ division to be treated as
ordinary votes and counted on election night. ‘Home’
division refers to the division in which the elector is
enrolled.
Under the measures in the Bill pre-poll ordinary voting would
take place in a pre-poll voting office or the office of the DRO
within an elector’s division in separate voting compartments
where voting can be undertaken in private. The AEC could also
determine, in writing, the availability of pre-poll ordinary voting
at specified places. Those provisionally enrolled and those
applying at the office of an Assistant Returning Officer (ARO),
including an ARO outside of Australia, would not be entitled to
cast a pre-poll ordinary vote.[31] The Bill also proposes to introduce new
procedures for the handling and transportation of boxes housing
pre-poll ordinary votes.
Over successive elections, the long-held assumption that
electors will vote in person at their local polling booth on
election day is becoming less realistic. Changes to demographic and
work patterns over recent decades have driven an increase in demand
for early voting, particularly in pre-poll and postal voting. At
the 1993 federal election, the number of pre-poll votes cast was
just under 400 000. By 2007 the number of pre-poll votes cast had
more than doubled to about 1.1 million votes.[32] Pre-poll votes comprised about
38 per cent of all declaration votes cast at the 2007 election. The
number of pre-poll votes cast from within electors’ home
divisions amounted to 667 625 votes or 60 per cent of all pre-poll
votes. In total, home pre-poll votes account for 5 per cent of all
votes cast at the election.[33]
The growth in early voting at elections has a number of
implications. Early voting adds to the administrative cost of
elections as each declaration vote must be individually assessed to
confirm their validity in accordance with electoral law. Given that
early votes are not counted on election night, a growth in their
proportion of the total vote would decrease the probability of
reaching a definitive result on election night. At the 2007
election, ordinary votes made up around 80 per cent of the total
vote. If home division pre-poll votes were treated as ordinary
votes at that election, 85 per cent of all votes cast would have
been counted on election night.[34]
In its submission to the JSCEM, the AEC noted some advantages of
the proposed reform including:
- reducing the likelihood of delaying the election result until
after election night when the pre-poll votes are counted; and
- decreasing the work required to scrutinise declaration votes as
electors using pre-poll votes would be marked off the certified
vote list within their home divisions.
The AEC has also noted that the procedure is in operation at the
federal level for mobile polling and has been adopted and used in
Victoria, Queensland, Tasmania and the territories.[35]
Since 1993 the AEC has advocated for home division pre-poll
votes be counted as ordinary votes on polling night. However, the
reform has been resisted by the JSCEM in the past, primarily
because the Committee wanted to encourage electors to vote in
person on polling day.[36]
Currently under the Electoral Act and the Referendum Act the AEC
processes enrolment applications and enrolment changes during the
non-election period in the home divisions of electors. After an
election is called the Electoral Act enables the AEC to process
enrolment transactions across its divisional office network. The
Bill proposes to enable the AEC to share its enrolment workload
across its divisional offices during non-election periods so that
it can manage its work with greater flexibility, as it currently
does during the election period. The aim of the proposal is to
enable the AEC to more efficiently manage its workload regardless
of the stage of the election cycle. In its submission to the JSCEM
2007 election inquiry the AEC noted that the measure would provide
more effective handling of roll close processing arrangements and
broader work scheduling concerning staff availability and training
requirements.[37]
The proposal departs from JSCEM’s recommendation in one
respect. The Committee recommended that the AEC be enabled to
process enrolment transactions outside the home division of
electors, but within the same state or territory. The proposed
measure in the Bill does not stipulate that transactions be
processed within the home state or territory of electors. The Bill
proposes to provide greater flexibility than the JSCEM
recommendation ‘so that all staff and geographical locations
can be utilised to derive maximum efficiency in enrolment
processing’.[38] In making its recommendation, the
JSCEM expressed concern that the AEC does not alter the current
divisional office structure and its physical presence in almost all
divisions across the country.[39] The Bill does not propose
to do so.
The proposed measure specifies the Electoral Commissioner as
responsible for receiving and processing enrolment transactions
rather than the DRO or the Australian Electoral Officer. New
provisions would then enable the Electoral Commissioner to delegate
his or her enrolment powers to any office or staff member within
the AEC. Enrolment transactions covered under the proposal include
‘entering a person’s details on the electoral roll or
annotating an enrolment record to identify a special category of
elector, such as an eligible overseas elector’.[40]
Currently electors are required to complete and sign a hard copy
form in order to enrol or update their enrolment details.[41] Provisions under
Schedule 4 of the Bill propose to enable electors who are already
on the roll to update their details electronically. The Bill also
provides for the making of regulations to prescribe minimum
verification information, such as date of birth and drivers licence
details, to confirm the authenticity of online transactions.
At June 2009 it was estimated that 1 232 935 eligible people
were not on the electoral roll, equating to 8.2 per cent of the
eligible population. Over the past ten years, the estimated
proportion of eligible people enrolled has fluctuated between a
high of 93.2 per cent at the 2001 election and just over 90 per
cent in June 2006.[42] The AEC conducts enrolment
campaigns and writes to electors as part of its roll review and
stimulation activities, although ultimately it is an
elector’s responsibility to enrol and maintain their own
enrolment. Currently practices to update the roll have not been
particularly effective. Of the letters sent by the AEC to over
three million people in 2007-08, only 700 000 completed
application forms were returned.[43]
The proposed measures to enable electronic enrolment updates are
part of a broader government plan to reform and modernise electoral
administration to increase enrolment and the integrity of the roll.
In 2009 the Special Minister of State asked the JSCEM to inquire
into the New South Wales Parliamentary Electorates and Elections
Amendment (Automatic Enrolment) Bill and its consequences for the
purposes of Commonwealth elections.[44] That Bill,
which gained royal assent on 14 December 2009, amended the
Parliamentary Elections and Elections Act 1912 (NSW) to,
inter alia, implement the ‘Smart roll’ system
of automatic enrolment for state and local government elections and
to enable electors to enrol and cast a provisional vote on polling
day.[45]
In its February 2010 inquiry report the JSCEM noted that the AEC
supported the NSW amendments. A majority of the Committee
recommended that the Electoral Act be amended to harmonise with NSW
by enabling the automatic enrolment of electors on the basis of
data provided by trusted agencies, and providing enrolment on
polling day for provisional voting.[46] Opposition
members of the JSCEM dissented from the majority
recommendations.[47] The report now awaits a
government response.
Currently under the Electoral Act there is no limitation on the
number of candidates that can be endorsed by a single party in one
division. The Bill proposes to limit the number of candidates that
can be endorsed by a registered political party in a single
division to one. As noted above, this measure arises from the
circumstances at the 2009 Bradfield by-election where nine of the
22 candidates were endorsed by a single party, the Christian
Democratic Party (Fred Nile Group). Given the large number of
candidates standing for that division, the possibility of electors
making inadvertent errors increased, and there was an unusually
high rate of informal votes at 9 per cent.[48] The rate of informal votes at the
by-election were the highest recorded for the division and more
than double the nation average of informal votes of 3.95 per cent
at the 2007 election. The aim of the proposal is to prevent such a
high informal vote from reoccurring as a result of the endorsement
of multiple candidates by one party in a single division.[49]
In order to be registered in accordance with the Electoral Act,
a political party must have at least 500 members and meet other
conditions.[50] Candidates of registered parties
only require the endorsement of a single registered officer of
their party to stand for election. They also benefit having their
party name listed alongside their own name on the ballot paper.
Independent candidates, and candidates who do not obtain the
official endorsement of a registered political party, are required
to demonstrate, among other things, the support of 50 electors in
the division in which they are seeking to nominate in order to be
listed on the ballot. Under the proposal, if a registered party
wished to nominate more than one candidate in a division, the
nomination for all of those candidates in that division would be
rejected.
At the most recent federal election there were no divisions in
which more than one candidate was endorsed by one party. The
practice of registered parties endorsing more than one candidate in
a single division appears to be rare in federal electoral history.
This suggests that such a practice may not be in the electoral
interests of political parties.[51] While there may not be a
clear electoral advantage for a registered party to endorse more
than one candidate in a division, the need to set the limit per
division at one, in electoral law, could be questioned. For
example, is it worth limiting democratic choice for a possible
reduction in the rate of informal voting? Some relevant election
statistics in relation to the endorsement of candidates by
registered parties include:
- at the 2007 federal election, at total of 1 054 candidates
stood for election in the 150 House of Representatives seats across
Australia, with an average of about seven per division. In each of
those divisions, there was a maximum of one candidate endorsed by
each registered political party. The division with the highest
number of candidates in 2007 was Bennelong with 13
candidates.[52]
- by-elections have tended to attract a greater number of
candidates per division compared with general elections, with an
average of about 10.4 candidates per by-election since
2000.[53]
- the 2009 by-election in the division of Bradfield equalled the
record for the highest number of candidates for a division (at 22
candidates). Until 2009, the election or by-election with the
highest number of candidates was the 1992 by-election in the
Victorian division of Wills, vacated by the former Prime Minister
Bob Hawke. In that by-election, 22 candidates competed for the
seat, four of which were endorsed by political parities. The
informal vote recorded at that by-election was 6.4 per
cent.[54]
- the rate of informal voting at the Bradfield by-election was 9
per cent. The highest rate of informal voting at the 2007 general
election was 9.5 per cent in the NSW division of Blaxland. The
highest rate of informal voting over the previous four general
elections was in 2001 in the NSW division of Fowler.[55]
- the rate of informal voting at the Higgins by-election which
was contested by 10 candidates (and held on the same day as the
Bradfield by-election) was 4.2 per cent. The Australian Labor Party
did not endorse a candidate in each of those by-elections,
continuing the historically recent trend of governments not
nominating candidates for by-elections in their opponents’
safe seats.[56]
The AEC conducted a trial of electronic voting for
sight-impaired electors and defence personnel serving outside
Australia as part of the 2007 federal election. The provision for
electronic voting was a one-off trial for the 2007 election only,
enabled by the Electoral and Referendum Amendment Act
2007. The Bill proposes to amend the Electoral Act and
Referendum Act to establish a framework for providing
electronically assisted voting for sight impaired electors at
future referenda and at general, Senate and by- elections. The Bill
would also enable the further development of electronically
assisted voting methods in the future. Finally, the Bill provides
for the making of regulations to address procedural matters
regarding the process of casting electronically assisted votes,
dealing with privacy and secrecy issues, the availability of
electronically assisted voting and the retention and treatment of
records of such votes.[57] The amendments would not reinstate the conduct of
electronic voting for defence personnel serving outside
Australia.
Under the proposed measure, electors who met the conditions for
casting electronically assisted votes would be able to do so at an
AEC Divisional Office. The conditions for casting electronically
assisted votes will be set out in regulations. The previous
practice of applying to use an electronic assisted facility would
no longer be required. Regulations will also provide that a record
of the vote can be printed, handwritten or provided in electronic
form.[58] As an
interim measure (for the next federal election), the AEC intends to
implement assisted voting by providing a private area within its
Divisional Offices where eligible electors can cast a secret vote
by speaking with call centre operators who will then complete the
ballots according to their instructions.[59] One possible area of contention
concerning the planned implementation is that, without detail on
how secrecy and the independence of voters are to be protected, the
method may not facilitate a fully secret and independent
vote.[60] Another
possible area of contention is that the trial of electronic voting
for defence personnel serving outside Australia will not be
continued.
The method of electronic voting used in the trial at the 2007
election was via a machine, with a 21-inch flat screen monitor for
those with some vision or with pre-recorded voice or Braille
instructions for blind electors. The preferences of voters were
recorded on a two-dimensional barcode to protect the secrecy of the
vote. The trial was implemented in 29 sites across Australia
(compared with over 8 000 polling places).[61] The cost of implementing the trial of
electronic voting for sight impaired electors was $2.2
million.[62] By
contrast, the intended implementation of the proposed measure, via
a call centre, is estimated to cost $370 000.[63] It was estimated that
910–1 550 voters would use the facility in 2007. The actual
number of voters who used the facility was 881. Estimates of the
number of Australians who are blind or have low vision varies from
about 160 000 to up to 300 000.[64]
Prior to the trial of electronic voting, electors with impaired
vision required the assistance of another person to complete their
ballot papers. As a result, the votes of vision impaired electors
were not secret and, potentially, not independent. Previously
concerns were also raised about the application of traditional
voting methods for Australian defence personnel in conflict zones
overseas. In response to these issues, in its report on the 2004
federal election the JSCEM recommended a trial of electronically
assisted voting.[65] The 2007 trial of electronic voting for sight impaired
and overseas defence personnel was reviewed in a separate inquiry
of the JSCEM. In that inquiry, the Committee noted that the
combined cost of both trials at over $4 million equated to an
average cost of $2 597 per vote for sight impaired electors and $1
159 per vote for defence force personnel serving overseas, compared
with the average cost per elector at the 2007 election of
$8.36.[66] In view
of these costs, the Committee recommended, among other things, that
the trials be discontinued.[67] In its report on the 2007 election, the committee
further examined the issue and recommended continued investigation
into the ‘viability and sustainability of assisted voting
arrangements aimed at providing secret and independent voting for
electors who are blind or have low vision’.[68] The proposed new measures to
enable electronic voting for sight-impaired electors are a response
to that recommendation.
Only significant amendments are dealt with in this part of the
Digest. In most instances amendments to the Electoral Act are
mentioned as most amendments to the Referendum Act are in similar
terms.
Item 6 repeals subsections 102(4),
(4AA) and (4AB) and substitutes
new section 102(4) of the Electoral Act to ensure
that a claim by a person, made after the close of polls and before
the election, to have his or her name put on the roll cannot be
considered until after the close of polling (that is, until after
the election).
The major amendment in this Schedule is made by item
12 which repeals and substitutes section
155 of the Electoral Act to provide that the date for the
close of the rolls is the seventh day after the date of the writ.
Item 14 makes the same amendment to the Referendum
Act by the repeal and substitution of subsection
9(1) of that Act.
By repealing the whole of section 155, the definition of
‘working day’ in subsection 155(2) is repealed, and
item 15 repeals the definition of ‘working
day’ from the Electoral Act.
Schedule 2 amends both the Electoral Act and
the Referendum Act to provide that the DRO must check the most
recent record of an elector’s signature in the circumstance
that the DRO has doubts about the authenticity of the
elector’s signature on the envelope that purports to contain
the provisional vote ballot paper. As discussed above, the
proposed amendment does not address the possibility that there may
be no earlier signature on record.
Part 1 items 1-39 amend the Electoral Act, and
items 40-76 amend the Referendum Act in a similar
way. The effect of the amendments is that there are 2 types of
pre-poll vote, the ordinary vote, and the declaration vote
(new section 200AA). As discussed in the
background section of this Digest the new category of pre-poll
ordinary votes would enable pre-poll votes cast in an
elector’s ‘home’ division to be treated as
ordinary votes and counted on election night.
A pre-poll ordinary vote is made in accordance with Division 3,
and a pre-poll declaration vote is made in accordance with Division
4.
Item 7 amends subsection 200A(2) to add a note
that explains that a person who is provisionally enrolled is not
entitled to vote by pre-poll ordinary vote. Item
14 inserts new Division 3 sections 200DC
to 200DR which determine how voting by pre-poll
ordinary vote is to occur.
New section 200DD provides that pre-poll
ordinary voting can be carried out at:
- any pre-poll voting office in the division
- any other specified place declared by the Electoral Commission
(see new subsection 200BA(1A))
- the office of the DRO for the division.
New section 200DG provides for when a voter is
and is not entitled to vote by pre-poll ordinary vote. The
circumstances for when a voter is not entitled to vote are set out
in new subsection 200DG(2) and include matters
such as failure to comply with the requirements relating to signing
the pre-poll vote certificate for ordinary voting, failing the
tests relating to answering to questions set out in new
section 200DI (name, address and whether voter has already
voted), if the information on the roll is not in accordance with
the requirements or if the voter is provisionally enrolled.
Division 4 makes minor amendments to the
Electoral Act to incorporate the concept of a (pre-poll)
declaration vote into the part of the Act relating to pre-poll
voting. The Division applies to persons who have applied to
pre-poll vote who are not entitled to vote by (pre-poll) ordinary
vote.
Much of Schedule 4 concerns the ability of the Electoral
Commissioner to delegate his or her powers and functions to any
officer or member to the staff of the Electoral Commission.
New subsection 28(4) extends the powers and
functions of the Electoral Commissioner that can be delegated to
those contained in:
- sections 86 and 87
- the provisions of Parts VII, VIII, IX and X
- sections 184A to 185C, and
- section 249.
These pertain to new rolls and additions to the rolls,
qualifications and disqualifications for enrolment and voting,
enrolment, objections, review of decisions, postal vote
applications and processes, and Antarctic electors
respectively. As explained in the background to this Digest,
these amendments will enable the AEC to share its enrolment
workload across its divisional offices during non-election
periods.
Item 2 inserts new subsection
166(1AA) into the Electoral Act so that in a House of
Representatives election the registered officer of a registered
political party is prohibited from nominating more than one
candidate for a particular Division.. If they do so the nominations
will be rejected under section 172(1), although item
4 inserts new subsection 172(1A) which
has the effect that where:
a bulk nomination has been received by the AEO and it includes 2
or more candidates for a single Division (in breach of the
requirements of new subsection 166(1AA)), the AEO must reject the
bulk nomination for the 2 or more same Division candidates, but the
remainder of the bulk nomination will be valid.[69]
Part XVB of the Electoral Act relating to electronic voting
methods is amended so that it applies only to electronic assisted
voting for sight-impaired people. Item 20
accordingly repeals Division 2 of Part XVB which provides for
remote electronic voting for defence personnel serving outside
Australia.
Nicholas Horne, Mark Rodrigues and Diane Spooner
15 March 2010
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
Back to top