Peter Lindsay (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Prospect for his contribution. I hear his comments about when Labor comes to office, but I do not think that is going to happen anytime soon. Particularly after tonight when we are going to deliver the best budget that this country has seen for decades, I think the Australian people will be even more strongly supportive of the Howard government.

The Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Electoral Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2005 came about as a result of the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters inquiry into the conduct of the 2004 federal election. JSCEM conducts such an inquiry after each federal election and examines all the issues. In this inquiry the committee travelled around Australia and visited all of the capital cities. It also held public meetings in rural and regional areas in Queensland and New South Wales. This is a very comprehensive report. The committee took a lot of evidence and the legislation before the parliament is a result of that very thorough process. It is a very long document, running to over 350 pages, but it basically comes down to 56 recommendations. Some of those recommendations have been taken up by the government and they are incorporated in the legislation that the parliament is discussing this afternoon.

The committee indicated that there are a number of issues that, in their words, require immediate attention. This report was brought down in September 2005, and the response to the report is here in the parliament now in May 2006. It takes a lot of time. Understanding that, having had recommendations put to it, the government has to consider those recommendations, formulate its position and frame the necessary legislation, this has been quite a quick process.

I note that the chair of the committee at the time that this report was brought down, Mr Tony Smith, has just entered the chamber. I commend him on the thoroughness with which he and his committee have produced this report and on the important recommendations that have been made in it. Mr Smith has since moved on to higher and greater things, and I have taken his place as Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which is my privilege. I hope that, in our current inquiry, which I will deal with shortly, my committee will be able to produce just as good a report.

In relation to the items requiring ‘immediate attention’, the committee reported:

Present requirements for electoral enrolment result in an unacceptable level of inaccuracy in the electoral roll.

If the electors of Australia were to read this report and see that comment, they too would be concerned, as the government has been. The committee recommended:

… the adoption of two significant enrolment reforms designed to improve integrity and to prevent electoral fraud occurring.

We have just heard the opposition indicating that it does not agree with this response. It does not agree with the committee’s recommendations of reforms designed to improve the integrity of our electoral roll and to prevent electoral fraud occurring. Goodness me, how could that be? And why would the Labor Party want to do that? The answer clearly is encapsulated in the experience I have had in my electorate, where, some three or four years ago, there was significant rorting of the electoral roll by members of the Australian Labor Party. There was a celebrated court case over that. In fact, one state member of parliament, as I recollect, had to resign from the parliament. No wonder the Labor Party is railing against sensible measures designed to improve the integrity of the roll and to prevent electoral fraud occurring. I congratulate the committee on being pretty tough on this one, and I congratulate the government on taking up the recommendations.

The first requirement and recommendation encapsulated in this legislation is that of proof of identity. The legislation will introduce, for the first time, proof of identity requirements for people enrolling or updating their enrolment. Currently you can just fill out a form—you do not have to prove who you are—and you go on the electoral roll. That gives rise to a mechanism whereby you can actually put phantom people on the roll, if you choose. All we require in this instance is that people have a drivers licence number on their enrolment, which will be cross-checked by the AEC with state databases. If there is no drivers licence—some people do not have a drivers licence—and they want to be enrolled, it is as simple as providing a birth certificate or Medicare card, along with a person from a prescribed class being able to attest to the identity of the applicant. We still provide in the legislation for the unlikely case where there is no documentation—that would be really unlikely. Enrolment of the person will proceed, provided that that procedure is followed.

The second matter in relation to identity is the proof of ID for provisional voting. This is where someone comes to a polling station, finds they are not on the roll and says, ‘I’m entitled to be on the roll, I’m not enrolled and I demand my right to vote.’ Previously people have just been allowed to cast a vote; now they will have to prove who they are before the AEC officer will allow them to cast a provisional vote. There are also safeguards there: if you do not have your ID—that can happen—you have several days to submit it to the AEC. I think these are sensible reforms that the government has embraced.

The other matter that particularly drew the attention of the committee, which again was railed against by the Australian Labor Party, was the closing of the roll at 8 pm on the day that writs are issued. It has always puzzled me that so many people who know it is a legal requirement to enrol to vote do not do so and then, when an election is called, they pour in and say, ‘Gee, we want to get our name on the roll.’ They have got to do better than that, and I think the community expects people to be enrolled in our democratic system. That is our way. So the government is proposing to address that matter by simply closing the rolls at eight o’clock on the day the writ is issued for people who are not already on the roll and at 8 pm on the third working day after the issue of the writ for people updating their address details. I think that is sensible and prudent.

I note that the bill provides for people who turn 18 or who are due to be granted citizenship during the campaign to also have three working days to update their enrolment. When people are 17, I believe they can provisionally enrol and the AEC then automatically enrols them when they have their birthday. It puzzles me why it is necessary to have this but it is the Australian way. We are providing for all eventualities. There are a raft of other issues covered in this legislation. There is some more technical stuff in relation to prisoner voting, party registration, party names and internet authorisation requirements, just to name a few.

I would like to finish my contribution to the debate by observing that the committee also recommended a trial of electronic voting. I think there is a need for such a trial. The government has not taken up that recommendation. Electronic voting is used in other parts of the world. I visited the Election Commission of Thailand last week and they showed me their electronic voting machines. It is a particularly impressive system because it allows an easy way for blind voters to cast their vote without third parties being involved. I think a trial—if we are going to do a trial—should be initially with members of the Defence Force who are serving overseas. The electronic voting should be done over the defence integrated secure communications network so that there can be no question about the integrity of the vote. Alternatively, it may also be able to be done through the DFAT network at our posts around the world using DFAT’s secure communications service. I do not think we are going to see electronic voting over the internet at any time in the near or far future. It is too unreliable and people would have concerns with that. I will be pursuing that particular issue through the committee so that we can see whether we can get some action on that.

Finally, I note recommendation 56, which states:

The Committee recommends that the Parliament refer electoral education to the JSCEM for further examination and report.

See this speech in context