Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Muir is of course right. The advice and instruction on the ballot paper will be explicit. It will be there at the time when a voter casts their vote for the Senate, and the instruction to vote above the line will be to number at least six boxes in order of preference, with 1 being the highest preference.

In relation to information that may or may not be provided by political parties, let me just say again, as I have said several times before, the Liberal Party gave evidence to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters inquiry to indicate that our intention is to provide advice and guidance on our how-to-vote card consistent with what is on the ballot paper. The approach that is taken by other parties—by the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party, the Family First party or the Labor Party—is a matter for those parties.

But the section in the Electoral Act that any party has to comply with is the section which prohibits misleading or deceptive publications et cetera. I read that section for the benefit of the chamber. I have done it before, but I will do it again. I will read out the relevant section of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, section 329(1):

(1) A person shall not, during the relevant period in relation to an election under this Act, print, publish or distribute, or cause, permit or authorize to be printed, published or distributed, any matter or thing that is likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote.

That is pretty self-explanatory:

(1) A person shall not, during the relevant period in relation to an election under this Act, print, publish or distribute, or cause, permit or authorize to be printed, published or distributed, any matter or thing that is likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote.

Senator Muir interjecting—

Well, if you are not being misleading or deceptive then obviously you are not acting in contravention of this section. That is pretty self-evident. I am actually wondering what the question is. We are going around and around in circles. We have been having a debate over the last six years. If somebody is not misleading or deceiving voters, then obviously they are not contravening this section and they are not going to be penalised.

But in relation to a person who does mislead or engage in deceptive publications:

(4) A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence punishable on conviction:

(a) if the offender is a natural person—by a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 6 months, or both; or

(b) if the offender is a body corporate—by a fine not exceeding $5,000.

There are a range of other things that I am quite happy to read into Hansard again, but I think you get the gist.