Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I present the report of the Australian parliamentary observer delegation to the Solomon Islands, which took place from 31 March to 8 April 2006. I seek leave to move a motion to take note of the document.

Leave granted.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

This is a brief report from a delegation of parliamentary members and officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, AusAID and the ADF, amongst other areas, which visited the Solomon Islands in April of this year to observe the election which took place on 5 April. I want to thank my parliamentary colleagues Michael Ferguson and Bob Sercombe and other delegation members from both DFAT and AusAID for their assistance and contribution to the delegation. I particularly want to acknowledge Mr Bob Longland, a former electoral commissioner in the state of Queensland, whose professional expertise was very valuable to the committee, both in its consideration whilst in the Solomon Islands and in the development of this report, particularly the technical recommendations which appear as an appendix to the report.

I should also acknowledge an officer of the department, Anita Butler, for her significant effort in pulling together this report. Coordinating a number of members of the parliament, a range of officials and others is a very difficult task, and I think she has done an exceptional job and that we are tabling a very good report. I also want to acknowledge Ruth Pearce, who represented the Australian delegation as the senior official both at the beginning, before we were able to leave the sitting of the parliament, and at the conclusion of the election period, at the issuing of the joint interim statement on behalf of international observers.

The delegation went to the Solomon Islands with a particular set of terms of reference. We were established by the Australian government at the request of the government of the Solomon Islands and had four main objectives. The first was to observe relevant aspects of the organisation and conduct of the 5 April national election in the Solomon Islands, particularly assessing compliance with the electoral framework. The second objective was for the presence and visibility of the delegation to instil voter confidence as far as possible and to signal Australia’s very strong interest in the successful conduct of the election. The third objective was to make a judgement, as appropriate, on the extent to which conditions existed for a free and fair election and to which the election result reflected the will of the people of the Solomon Islands. The final objective was to provide constructive recommendations as appropriate to assist future electoral reform and the strengthening of democratic processes in the Solomon Islands.

This was, of course, the first election to take place in the Solomons since RAMSI, the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands, arrived in July 2003. The national elections which were held in 2001 were generally deemed to be free and fair but were held in an atmosphere of strong intimidation and a generally fraught environment, particularly as a result of the presence of a significant number of firearms. RAMSI, in the time it has been in place in the Solomon Islands, has removed in excess of 3,600 firearms from the Solomon Islands community. That act, along with the restoration of law and order, some work on the electoral act and a very widespread civic and voter education campaign, has gone a long way to making sure the environment for these elections was very different—and it was indeed. I want to commend officers of RAMSI, particularly the head of RAMSI, James Batley, and Australian representatives in particular from the ADF, the Australian Federal Police, the state police services and the Australian Protective Service who are present in the Solomon Islands on an ongoing basis as part of that process.

This was a very important election for the people of the Solomon Islands. It was an opportunity for them to participate in a free and fair electoral process which many of us—if not overwhelmingly the majority—in Australia take fairly much for granted. The Australian group was part of a significant number of international observers, including the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, the Commonwealth Secretariat, New Zealand, Japan and the United States. Our Australian group was deployed across seven different locations. This enabled us during the days before the election, on polling day and, for some, during the count afterwards to cover over 50 polling stations across the Solomon Islands. It is a very disparate community. The islands are far flung. From time to time, travel between them for those observers who were moving around to polling stations was by boat, four-wheel drive vehicle, small plane, helicopter and so on. Given the remoteness and the difficulties of access, it was a many and varied experience for observers.

We were very keen to support local Solomon Islanders in the work that they were doing as electoral officials. We went out of our way to meet those in the locations to which we were deployed to get feedback from them as to how well they were supported by the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission and what processes they had undergone to get to that point. We had opportunities to observe both the opening and closing of polling places and ballot boxes—the normal procedures that one would expect. We were very pleased to see the level of rigour that was applied through the work of the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission.

The Australian Electoral Commission has played a very significant role in that process. We have had a small team of Australian Electoral Commission officials in the Solomon Islands for some time, working with SIEC on preparations for this election. The voter education campaign in particular was remarked upon by locals as having been very useful in preparing them for this ballot. As a revolution in some ways in the electoral process of the Solomon Islands, it introduced the single ballot box and the single ballot paper, as a result of consultation with the AEC over some time, and that made a real change to the level of confidence people coming to the ballot box on that day had in the secrecy and fairness of the voting procedure.

Our general observations, which came together with those of other observers to form the interim observer statement, included the fact that polling day was essentially peaceful, calm and friendly. Voters were enthusiastic about casting their votes and many who had the opportunity to speak to members of our delegation spoke of their wish to see parliamentarians with integrity elected to their parliament. The turnout was significant. There are issues with the voter roll, and we have made technical recommendations in that regard. The habit, for example, of being enrolled in the capital city of Honiara and also in your home district tends to lead to some variations between the numbers on the electoral roll and the numbers who turn out on voting day.

The polling stations were very well organised. Information was available for people who needed to perhaps reread the voter education material. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the electoral officials were seen to have performed very well. The police presence was, as it should have been, generally unobtrusive. Both the Royal Solomon Islands Police and the PPF officers patrolled in roving movements across the islands, and that was mostly welcomed and not seen as intimidatory in any way.

I have noted the effectiveness of the civic education campaign. I would also like to note briefly the usefulness of the Commonwealth Secretariat’s efforts in encouraging domestic observers to participate for the first time in an election in the Solomon Islands. In an environment which has previously been tense and which has had difficulties in terms of free and fair elections, that can be a very challenging role for a local to take up. We were very pleased to see the confidence with which those Commonwealth Secretariat trained domestic observers went about their roles. As I said, we also noted some concerns in relation to the electoral roll and have made some technical recommendations in that regard.

As I noted, we were not able to cover the Solomon Islands from east to west and from north to south. That was far beyond our capacity—and our ambit, for that matter. But, notwithstanding those constraints and although our findings are based on the relatively short period of time we had in which to make our observations, we were very keen to compliment both the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission and the Solomon Islands government on the execution and success of a very complex logistical undertaking. It is not a simple task to carry out an election for a country of over 900 islands scattered over 1.34 million square kilometres of ocean and which has more than 60 different languages and an illiteracy rate of 24 per cent, based on the 1999 census. We particularly commend the excellent work of AEC advisers and the SIEC and the contribution of all of the members of RAMSI and other states of the Pacific.

We note in our report that the delegation was not charged with any observer responsibility in relation to the election of the Prime Minister. That is another matter in the process in the Solomon Islands and may be something that they wish to take up further. I commend the technical recommendations in the report to those who are interested.

Question agreed to.