David Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | Hansard source

I withdraw my amendment on sheet 7886, and I move amendment No. (1) on sheet 7868 standing in my name:

(1) Schedule 1, item 89, page 24 (lines 19 to 25), omit paragraphs 214A(3)(a) and (b), substitute:

  (a) no more than 3 logos may be printed adjacent to the square that is printed, in accordance with paragraph 214(2)(d), adjacent to the names of the parties; and

  (b) if more than 3 of those parties have logos entered in the Register—the parties must notify the Electoral Commission, in writing, which of the logos are to be printed adjacent to that square.

Existing electoral law allows candidates from different parties to appear in the same column on the ballot and for the names of each of these parties to be printed in that column above the line. There could be two, three, four or more parties that wish to share a column under this provision.

The government's bill allows for party logos to be printed above the line also. However, it does not allow for the logo of each party in a column to be printed above the line; it only allows for two logos to be printed in a column above the line. By sheer coincidence, I am sure, this assists the Liberal-National coalition. They have regularly used the existing provision to have their candidates appear in the same column. Now each of their logos will appear in that column above the line. This will make the Liberal-National coalition more prominent on the ballot compared to their rivals, like the Labor Party. I am surprised that the government did not go further and require that the logos of the Liberals and the Nationals should appear in colour while everyone else's logos must be in black and white.

However, in the preparation of the government's bills there has been an oversight. Because I want to help the government, my amendment addresses this oversight—after all, we crossbenchers are here to help. It appears that the drafters of the government's bill did not realise the potential for a Liberal-National-Greens coalition in the coming election and into the future. Because Senator Di Natale is a doctor and owns a farm, it seems he is welcome in the same column as the Liberal's Senator James Paterson and the National's Senator Bridget McKenzie. So to continue to assist those in power, Australia's electoral law should allow the logo of the Liberals, the logo of the National and the logo of the Greens to each appear in the one column. Every voter's eyes would be drawn to such a sight. Even if the Liberals, the Nationals and the Greens cannot see the potential for this coalition to be formalised in the coming weeks, surely they can see the potential for it over the coming years?

My amendment would allow for up to three logos to be printed in a column above the line. If the Liberals, National and Greens do not support this amendment, they owe it to the Australian people to explain why. What is the principle behind allowing two logos in a column and not just one? Or allowing three? Isn't it reminiscent of Robert Mugabe to amend the electoral law with such brazen self-interest?