Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

One of the petitions presented today has raised concerns around e-petitions and the signature collection process. Petition number EN5444 is published on the House e-petitions website and requests that the House prevent wind turbines being built off the Illawarra coastline. The petition received 11,291 signatures. From the outset, I'd like to say that the vast majority of these petitioners signed the petition in good faith. Unfortunately, the committee is aware that a small number of these signatures on the petition may have been collected through unethical means. We consider this to be a serious risk to the integrity of the petitions system.

Let me explain. It was brought to the committee's attention that a recent Illawarra Mercury newspaper article reported that an individual on social media was offering beautician service giveaways for signing the petition. Screenshots were supplied to the committee. As a consequence, the committee requested analysis of the petition's signatures be done by the secretariat. That showed duplication of nearly 200 names, up to 1.7 per cent of signatories, meaning they appear to have signed the petition more than once using the same name but different email accounts. It is not possible to verify if people signed the petition using different names as well as different email accounts. The committee also wrote to the principal petitioner, who has told us that he was unaware of the inducements being offered until he read our letter, that he had not seen the media coverage in the newspaper, and that the offer of prizes or gifts if people signed the petition had been quickly removed.

The committee would like to place on the record that offering any kind of incentive for signing a petition to the House of Representatives undermines the democratic process of petitioning, and the committee condemns such behaviour in the strongest terms. In order to spell out clearly the requirement that people sign petitions only once, the committee made changes to the signatory process. All signatories will now be required to check a box confirming that they have only signed the petition once. While it has been implied that a person may only sign a petition once, it is now explicitly spelt out. Signing a petition multiple times compromises the integrity of the petitions system by both increasing the number of signatories and misrepresenting the level of public support for a petition.

The committee accepts that principal petitioners cannot be responsible for the actions of every person in connection with their petition over the signature-collection period. However, we encourage principal petitioners, as campaign organisers and leaders, to play an active role in promoting ethical behaviour in relation to their petition to the parliament, particularly for larger and more politically charged petitions.

The current e-petitions system is designed to be secure while also being open and accessible. When signing a petition, a person provides their name and email address. An email is then sent to that email address, and the person must click on the link provided in the email to confirm their signature. The petition will only accept one signature from each unique email address. However, the system does not prevent a person from signing more than once using different email accounts. We believe that the multiple signing of petitions is rare. However, the committee will be monitoring this matter closely.

The committee has approached the issues I raise today as an opportunity to improve the House e-petitions system, introduced in 2016. We believe that the majority of people who engage with the House petitions process do so in good faith and in accordance with the rules.

I thank the House.

See this speech in context