John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I understand that in my absence I have been called ‘one of the two Fs’—fair enough—by the A over there. Senator Abetz asked why I intervened in the debate. I intervened in the debate, even though the opposition is supporting the government on this provision, as you rightly say, to point out the utter and stupendous hypocrisy of your statements about the extension of the franchise, which I think stand utterly repudiated by the facts. There is no extension or expansion of the franchise here at all. You are claiming great credit for, in very small measure, in a very limited area, partially giving back what you are taking away through other provisions of the bill. It is as simple as that.

You are the Minister representing the Special Minister of State on this legislation—but in fact it was Senator Abetz who was the minister responsible for this legislation originally—that represents the most massive limitation of the franchise in Australian electoral history. The vote is being ripped off people left, right and centre. New enrollees, young people particularly, are going to be stopped from enrolling, stopped from participating in the democratic process and stopped from casting a vote in the next elections. It is true also of those people who are re-enrolling and in the case of many people who want to change their electoral enrolment to the right electorate—the electorate in which they reside at the time of an election being held. In other words, very responsible people who want to do the right thing by the electoral process and who want to vote in the right electorate—where they live—are going to be blocked from doing that. This is a massive limitation of the franchise, so I am explaining, Chair, why I intervened in the debate. I intervened in the debate for a little bit of a reality check on this minister, who is massively misleading this committee and massively misleading the Senate.