Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters I present the committee's report, incorporating dissenting reports, together with a corrigendum to the report on the conduct of the 2013 federal election and matters related there to.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—The loss of 1,370 Senate votes in Western Australia at the 2013 federal election was the greatest failure in the history of the Australian Electoral Commission. It was caused by multiple failures at multiple levels within the AEC. The consequences included the necessity for a re-run election at a cost of over $21 million and unprecedented damage to the reputation of and confidence in the Electoral Commission.

This report outlines the failings that contributed to the loss of votes. It assesses in detail the reforms that have already been or are in the process of being implemented within the AEC to rectify the failings and, critically, it makes a number of unanimous recommendations for further reforms aimed at delivering a more competent, accountable AEC in which Australians can have a high degree of confidence.

The committee has closely monitored and analysed the actions of the AEC in response to the Keelty report. This, together with an important body of audit work undertaken by the Australian National Audit Office and a range of issues raised in submissions, public hearings, site visits and private briefings, has been the committee's focus since it commenced its inquiry in December 2013.

The committee acknowledge the work already undertaken by the AEC; nevertheless, we have identified a number of areas where we believe further changes are necessary, including the accountability of state manager positions, the development of key performance indicators for senior service delivery staff and the commencement of a corporate culture, leadership and performance measurement reform program. The recommendations for these important additional reforms are unanimous.

If these recommendations, together with the other critical reforms that comprise new Electoral Commissioner Mr Tom Rogers's plan, are fully implemented and the AEC as an organisation comprehends and supports rather than resists the necessary changes, the committee believes there is a high probability that in the years ahead the disastrous events of 2013 will be seen as a turning point. This must be the AEC's positive ambition: to embrace reform and to undertake it in order to create the best electoral administration possible and regain the confidence of the Australian people. If it is achieved, in the future the 2013 federal election will be seen as a catalyst that shattered carelessness and complacency and put professionalism and accountability front and centre within the AEC.

Mr Rogers has consistently and candidly acknowledged the failures and the reasons for them. The committee has found Mr Rogers to be open, committed to major reform and determined to lead the required transformation within the AEC, but the government majority strongly believes that further measures are necessary to ensure the integrity of, and public confidence in, our Australian electoral system. Australians deserve to know that the electoral roll is as accurate as it can be and that those entitled to vote vote only once. The government majority recommends that the automatic enrolment provisions be amended to require confirmation by the individual that the information is accurate before they can be added to the roll or have their details updated.

The majority also recommends that voter identification requirements be introduced for the next federal election to help reduce multiple voting. At present our system of voting is essentially trust based. If a voter is prepared to be dishonest, there is nothing to stop them voting at other polling locations within an electoral division on the day either in their own name or in another elector's name. With voter identification it is obviously much harder to vote in someone else's name. For those who would seek to vote multiple times in their own name at different locations, voter identification is a major disincentive. It is an additional hurdle for voters to seek to vote more than once. The identification is provided and the traditional defence that a second or subsequent vote must have been cast by another person is diluted.

I want to place on record my thanks to the permanent members of the committee during the inquiry. I make particular mention of the members for Brand and Moore, who are here in the chamber this afternoon. I particularly want to thank the deputy chair, the member for Bruce, Mr Griffin, for his cooperation and hard work on a range of difficult and complex issues. We have worked together with the committee to reach agreement on a number of recommendations for critical electoral reform. We have not in this report agreed on every issue, as I have indicated, and we have some major differences of opinion on those issues, but let me say that our disagreements have been at all times civil and professional, as you would expect from the premier committee of the parliament.

I would like to thank all of the staff of the secretariat for their valuable work, particularly committee secretaries Glenn Worthington and Nicholas Horne and all the staff who travelled and worked directly with committee members: Siobhan Leyne, Rebecca Gordon, Jeff Norris, who was seconded from the AEC, and James Bunce. They have all provided a high level of support to the committee and their work is greatly appreciated. In the coming weeks I will advise the House on the committee's further work priorities for the year.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I thank the member for Casey for his presentation of the 2013 federal election report and for his leadership of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and the deputy chair, the member for Bruce. I acknowledge the terrific contribution that has been made by the member for Moore to the vital work of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters.

Since the early 1980s the committee has provided a largely bipartisan system for evaluating and making recommendations on the conduct of federal elections in Australia. It is a unique vehicle for doing so. It is unique in parliamentary systems to have such a facility. It is an important facility too. Given the issues of the 2013 federal election—namely, the loss of ballots in Western Australia—the role of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters has never been more important.

Most of the recommendations in the final report tabled today will strengthen the already robust Australian electoral system; however, Labor members of the committee, rightly, had concerns about the intent of two recommendations, and I will specify these concerns. Firstly, it is inconceivable that with an estimated 1.5 million Australians not on the electoral roll the government majority on the committee thought it was acceptable to make it harder for the direct enrolment program to operate. Secondly, the introduction of identity requirements for casting a vote on election day will have serious implications for voter engagement for many groups of disadvantaged voters.

The report also captures the recommendations made by two interim reports regarding electronic voting and Senate reform. The electronic voting report is simply excellent. The report on Senate voting is critical. Australians have recently become aware of the damaging potential impact of electoral manipulation in the Senate. Last year's Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Interim report on the inquiry into the conduct of the 2013 federal election: Senate voting practices clearly identifies threats to the integrity of Senate elections. The report highlighted voters' lack of control over the distribution of their own preferences. Above-the-line voting relies on preference flows. Ninety-six point five per cent of formal Senate votes in the last federal election were above-the-line votes. To get a box above the ballot line, a party must lodge a valid group voting ticket, which dictates the flow of its preferences. The current system has encouraged the creation of microparties that harvest and then direct preferences to each other, from voters who have no practical way of knowing where their vote will ultimately land. Parties can garner primary votes above the line and then harvest the preferences in a cascade of preference swaps.

Recent state and federal elections have seen a proliferation of microparties, highlighting the ease with which parties can register and creating a risk of manipulation of election outcomes. The inquiry by the committee concluded that the risks were real. The committee's remedies encompassed better regulation of political parties, not allowing individuals to act on behalf of multiple parties, the removal of group voting tickets, the introduction of limited optional preferential above-the-line voting, and making voting below the line simpler.

The government is yet to respond to the recommendations of the May 2014 report. I hope that this delay does not indicate a lack of resolve. It would be a travesty for Australian democracy if these careful and thought-through reforms were not in place in time for the next federal election. These reforms will significantly strengthen our democratic process by reducing the capacity for manipulation and increasing transparency in our electoral system, which, despite these concerns, still remains among the most stable and effective in the world.

These reforms are not intended to stifle or prevent the formation of new parties or the operation of existing parties. People should be encouraged to join political parties, be involved in political debates and policy formulation, and actively participate in electoral processes. However political parties that field candidates for election should meet integrity standards. These standards are reasonable and are not a reflection on our current Senate composition; they are instead a safeguard against future manipulation.

We should see the government's response to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters report soon, I hope. Its response should be consistent with the committee's six recommendations. It should not break new ground, and it should attend to the clearly identified threat to the integrity of Senate elections—and that threat has been identified. If not, then Australians will be entitled to ask after the next election why we in this place did not act when we in this parliament knew and were aware of the integrity flaws and the threats to our electoral system.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.