|
QUOTA Newsletter of the Proportional Representation Society of
Australia QN2005A March 2005 www.prsa.org.au ·
AEC Fails in its Statutory Duty to Display Group
Voting Ticket Pamphlets or Posters ·
The Labor Party Achieves
the First Majority Government in the ACT ·
List of issues of Quota Notes AEC
Fails in its Statutory Duty to Display Group Voting Ticket Pamphlets or
Posters Following
the 2004 federal election, the Proportional Representation Society of
Australia wrote to the Australian Electoral
Commission and appropriate politicians pointing out widespread
breaches of Section 216
of the Commonwealth Electoral Act
1918, which requires the display of posters or pamphlets
detailing Senate Group Voting Tickets. Section 216 (1)
states that If one or more group voting tickets are registered for the purposes of a Senate election, the Australian Electoral Officer must ensure that either or both of the following are prominently displayed at each polling booth: ·
a
poster showing the tickets ·
a
pamphlet showing the tickets The
PRSA presented the AEC with a number of cases of the failure of divisional
officers to prominently display these posters or pamphlets in polling booths
on the day of the 2004 Federal election. In Victoria, at Sandringham, a PRSA
member asked to see the pamphlet, and was requested to wait for about 10
minutes while the pamphlet was found. At Hawthorn East, one of our members
was asked to return to the booth later in the day, and then told that he
would have to go to the Divisional Officer if he wanted to see them. At
Brunswick, another of our members, after seeing that no posters were
displayed, asked to see the pamphlet. The Officer-in-Charge refused to show
it to him. Obviously
the requirements of Section 216 were
not met at the Federal election. This section was introduced so that voters could
find out where their Senate preferences would be directed if they voted above-the-line,
as most now do. In the recent election, in Victoria, the election of
Senator-elect Steve Fielding (Family First Party) depended on his receiving
preferences that were directed to him by the ALP and Australian Democrat
tickets, among others. Few voters for those parties would have been aware
that their party of choice was directing preferences to Family First ahead of
the Australian Greens, let alone aware of the detail of the way their
preferences were directed to flow. This almost complete failure to fulfil the
requirements of Section 216 meant that few voters that might have wished to
understand where their preferences might go could have found out that
information on election day in the manner expressly provided for in the Act.
In fact many could only have found out where the preferences were directed by
consulting the AEC Web site, where the pages were somewhat obscure, and
presented in a way that made reading or downloading them very slow and
difficult. The
PRSA received a response from Senator Hon. Eric Abetz,
Special Minister of State, who admitted that “there were administrative
problems in ensuring Section 216 of
the Electoral Act was fully complied with on election day” and added that the
AEC “apologizes for any inconvenience that this caused you and other members
of the Proportional Representation Society on election day.” As the
“inconvenience” affected almost the entire community and public satisfaction
with electoral arrangements, members may rest assured that the PRSA will
continue to draw attention to the unsatisfactory nature of the above- and
below-the-line voting system used at Senate elections. This
was among the matters raised prominently in the March submission of the
Electoral Reform Society of South Australia on the conduct of the 2004
federal elections and related matters (www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/elect04/subs/sub100.pdf).
Citing collated details in several States of the failure to have Senate Group
Voting Tickets available for inspection on polling day, the Society indicated
that above-the-line voting should be abolished, or otherwise perhaps a
booklet setting out all ticket orders should be included in the package
despatched to those on the roll just before an election. The
submission noted the large levels of vote wastage in House of Representatives
elections and the disproportionate share of 58% of seats obtained nationally
by the Coalition Government, which received 46.6% of first preference votes.
As set out in the multi-member simulation that was attached, a fairer
majority would have been obtained under proportional representation. In South
Australia, 47.4% of first preferences translated into 73% of seats for the
Liberal Party, instead of 55% under quota-preferential arrangements. The
Society lamented the lack of publicity surrounding the call for submissions
to the Joint Committee inquiry. It took up the issue of the defective Senate
transfer value definition, asking what work had been carried out, as
promised, after evidence taken at the previous inquiry into the 2001 general
elections. In an attachment, it gave particulars of the Western Australian
legislation designed to implement the Weighted Inclusive Gregory Transfer,
which considers all papers contributing to a candidate’s election for further
transfer, but avoids the possibility of a transfer value ever increasing. Having
achieved radio publicity for its observation that the two seats with margins
of just over 100 votes in South Australia had been determined by the draw for
the donkey vote, the Society recommended that Robson Rotation apply in House
of Representatives elections even if its suggestion of multi-member
electorates was not taken up. It also highlighted evidence of problems with
postal voting in the form of a surprisingly large number of telephone calls
received in the days before and on 9th October 2004 because postal votes had
not yet been delivered, and suggested that the location of polling places be
stated in a mailout to voters, customized for each
electorate. Referring
to legislation introduced by Greens Senator Bob Brown in December 2004, the
Society pointed out that the NSW Legislative Council above-the-line
approach of requiring voters to individually order parties was of no use to
voters wishing to depart from the order chosen by the preselectors, or
wishing to vote for an ungrouped candidate without access to a party box.
Optional preferential voting without any party boxes was preferable. The submission also drew attention to substantial disparities in federal electorate enrolments, with instance ranging from 75,368 in Moore (WA) to 100,691 in Barker (SA) among mainland States whose entitlement is recalculated strictly on a population ratio after each election. The introduction of multi-member electorates would make it easier to maintain equality and would reduce the frequency of redistributions. The Labor Party Achieves the First Majority Government in the
ACT With
its vote rising more than 5% to 46.8% of first preferences at the election on
16th October 2004, Labor gained the first-ever ACT
Assembly majority for a single party. That aspect of the outcome was clear on
election night, but some observers, who did not notice the great
concentration of the Labor vote on the three
ministerial incumbents in Molonglo, thought there was a possibility of a
tenth seat. The
Australian Democrat vote fell by nearly three-quarters to just 2.3%. All AD
candidates, except the sitting member, Roslyn Dundas, lost their deposits.
The Liberal Party vote rose by 3% to 34.8%, mainly because of strong
improvement in the southern Brindabella electorate, while support for the ACT
Greens rose from 9.1% to 9.3%. Campaigning was in the shadow of the federal
election held a week earlier (ACT legislation contains a provision moving the
election date to early December in case the Prime Minister chooses the day
normally fixed for ACT elections, the third Saturday in October). The Liberal
Party sought momentum in the final week with an advertising blitz indicating
that funds intended for the building of a prison would instead be spent
tackling hospital waiting lists. One
long-serving member from each of the Labor and
Liberal parties retired at the election, and Green Kerrie Tucker had resigned
to contest the Senate election, unsuccessfully. Labor
gained a seat from the Australian Democrats in Ginninderra, and in Molonglo
the Liberals ousted Helen Cross, who had been elected in 2001 under their
banner. As a result, five new MLAs were elected, on a par with previous
experience. Six women succeeded, three Labor, two Liberal, and one Green - the only crossbencher
left. The
ACT had moved to four-year terms late in 2003 after a rapid parliamentary
inquiry and passage of legislation. The
possibility had been suggested by the Pettit Joint Working Party in April
1998 (QN 1998C),
but a select committee of the ACT Assembly recommended by a majority in June
1999 that the term remain at three years. Labor had
since changed its view. After
earlier mention when an inquiry into the future size of the Assembly was
held, a short inquiry was advertised in September 2003. The Australian
Democrats and Malcolm Mackerras made submissions against an extension of
terms. The PRSA’s ACT Branch indicated it does not have a strong view, even
though its inclination is always towards increasing rather than reducing
voter involvement in determining the destiny of the ACT. Specious comparisons
should not be made with jurisdictions that do not have a fixed term. Decaying
governments clinging to power elsewhere through a fourth year might make
voters reticent about accepting change. The growing imbalance of resources
and information between the Executive and other MLAs needs to be dealt with,
and stronger accountability measures introduced to assist new governments to
change Budget priorities quickly rather than feeling they have to wait nearly
a year through the normal budgetary cycle. The
ACT Greens said such a change should not be made before the Assembly
increased in size, and that there should be approval at a referendum. After a
majority recommendation in favour, the Electoral Amendment Bill 2003 (No
2) was introduced on 20th November and passed on 27th November 2003. Electoral
legislation arising mainly from the regular review of elections by the
Electoral Commissioner had been introduced in May 2003, but despite several
false starts over possible deals, the Electoral Amendment Bill 2003
did not come on for debate until 14th May 2004. The ACT Branch was
particularly concerned about the attempt to do away with columns for
non-party groupings and particularly lobbied crossbenchers on this matter,
pointing out that such columns were depicted in the original official
Hare-Clark material of 1991, and that no other jurisdiction has taken this
step. Somewhat
by surprise, a raft of amendments to do away with ballot groups (columns made
available to elected candidates without their needing to go through a charade
of registering a political party) emerged on the evening before debate took
place. Both the ACT Greens and the Australian Democrats supported the
Government. The
30th June 2004 became the new deadline for lodging applications for party
registration rather than having action on registration processes discontinued
during the election period after the Greens supported the argument of the
Chief Minister that events to do with the registration of One Nation in
Queensland showed the need for change. However,
all but Government MLAs voted to retain columns for non-party groups
nominating more than one candidate, and this feature persisted by a 9-8
margin. The
Australian Democrat, Roslyn Dundas, was successful in moving that postal
votes be returned only to the Electoral Commission rather than to parties.
Independent Helen Cross failed in her attempts to have the column(s) for
Independents positioned at random rather than at the right-hand end of the
ballot-paper. After
early-morning debate, both the Labor and Liberal
parties combined to maintain the alignment of party reporting obligations
with federal legislation, and to remove inconsistencies from the reporting
framework (raising the disclosure threshold from $200 to $1,500 for
individual candidates and non-party groups). Kerrie Tucker argued for a $200
threshold, noting that audit activity by the ACT Electoral Commission had
uncovered evidence of some donors making multiple donations of just less than
the threshold applying for parties, sometimes several times on the one day.
Because their total donations had exceeded the reporting threshold they were
obliged to submit late returns as individuals. The
election one week after the federal poll drew just 77 candidates, 33 of them
in Molonglo, 31 women and 46 men. This decline from 108 and 94 at the two
previous elections brought numbers to the levels Hare-Clark supporters had
anticipated during the campaigns of the early 1990s. Liberal and Labor teams were as large as the number of vacancies but,
in line with an earlier trend (QN 2001D), and perhaps also owing to
past loss of deposits, other groupings were of two candidates, with one ACT
Greens exception. Enrolments
had risen by just 3.4% in three years. Turnout rose nearly 2% to 92.8%. With
optional preferential voting applying in practice, informal voting fell by
one-third to 2.7%, lowest in the central seven-member electorate, reflecting
further defusing of earlier disquiet about self-government in some quarters. The
Labor Party achieved majorities in both the
five-member electorates, starting with respectively 50.1% and 45.7% of first
preferences in Ginninderra and Brindabella. In Molonglo, it started with
45.3%, largely concentrated on three ministers, but found the Liberal Party
vote very evenly split among three candidates, two of whom had not previously
stood. The fourth ALP candidate finished some 600 votes behind the third
Liberal. Seventeen
candidates were excluded before the first was elected. Labor
took the first three places, then the ACT Greens one, then
three Liberals were elected at the very end, upon the exclusion of former
basketball champion Lucille Bailie. Richard Mulcahy,
with an extensive background working for Liberal politicians in Victoria and
Tasmania, and more recently the tobacco and hotel industries, started with
two-thirds of a quota and was the first Liberal to be elected. There were
three new members, in place of two people that had retired or resigned, and
Helen Cross, who had been elected as a Liberal. Ms Cross reached 35% of a
quota at exclusion, and well-known winemaker Ken Helm had 25%, as an
Independent. In
Brindabella, two candidates, the Liberal Leader and one Labor
incumbent, were elected on first preferences. The Greens found only three-quarters
of their second candidate’s votes adhering, and one-third of the lead
candidate’s votes were exhausted when she was excluded with 60% of a quota.
Incumbent Liberal Steve Pratt started only 140 votes ahead of his nearest
internal challenger, moved 400 further ahead when surplus votes were
transferred from Leader Brendan Smyth, and stretched that lead to nearly
1,000 when a final Liberal exclusion was necessary. A strong cascading
vote among Labor women supporters was noticeable,
re-electing Karin McDonald when Rebecca Logue was excluded. Newcomer Mick
Gentleman replaced Bill Wood, who had retired. In
Ginninderra, the Chief Minister, Jon Stanhope, started with nearly 22,000 of
60,000 votes (his 36.9% is the highest achieved to date by an individual),
and Liberal Deputy Leader Bill Stefaniak was also
elected on first preference votes. The Speaker, Wayne Berry, received
one-third of Mr Stanhope’s surplus, and at the end of the scrutiny, 60% of
Susan McCarthy’s votes went to Mary Porter, who was the third ALP candidate
elected. Harold Hird, a former Liberal, stood as an
Independent. He was excluded with 15% of a quota, and lost his deposit.
Roslyn Dundas, a Democrat, was excluded with 35% of a quota, and the last
Green reached 75% of a quota. Only
35 of the 59 defeated candidates lost their deposits. None of those were ACT
Greens, one each of them was endorsed by Labor and
the Liberals, and five were Australian Democrats. The table below sets out
key particulars of the voting and counting.
Source
code for the electronic counting that occurs can be found at www.elections.act.gov.au/Elecvote.html by
clicking on the specific option sought, and details of the availability for
purchase of a CD-ROM of all preferences can be found at the Elections ACT Web
site. © 2005 Proportional Representation Society of
Australia National President: Bogey Musidlak
14 Strzelecki Cr. NARRABUNDAH 2604 National Secretary: Dr Stephen Morey 4 Sims Street SANDRINGHAM 3191 Tel: (02) 6295 8137, (03) 9598 1122 info@prsa.org.au Printed by Prestige Copying & Printing, 97 Pirie Street ADELAIDE SA 5000 |
