Bills Digest no. 183 2009–10
Electoral and Referendum Amendment
(How-to-Vote Cards and Other Measures) Bill 2010
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have
any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine
the subsequent official status of the Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Electoral and Referendum Amendment
(How-to-Vote Cards and Other Measures) Bill 2010
Date introduced: 2 June 2010
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Special Minister of State
Commencement: This clause specifies that sections 1 to 3 commence upon
Royal Assent. Schedules 1 and 2 commence on a single day to be fixed by
Proclamation or, if not proclaimed earlier, 6 months following Royal Assent.
Links: The links to the Bill, its Explanatory
Memorandum and second reading speech can be found on the Bills page, which is
at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/. When Bills have been passed they can
be found at ComLaw, which is at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
Purpose
The main purpose of the Bill is to amend the Commonwealth
Electoral Act 1918 and the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 (Cth) so as to:
- Expand the authorisation requirements for how-to-vote cards, and
- Expand misleading and deceptive publication provisions to include
material published on the internet and telephone.[1]
Both measures seek to
increase the level of transparency in election campaign advertising so that
voters may be better informed of the nature of the political material they
receive.
The practice of political parties distributing election
material such as how-to-vote cards outside polling places has become common in
federal and state elections. Aspects of the use of those cards are governed by
legislation in each jurisdiction. From time to time the content, authorisation
and distribution of how-to-cards has been the subject of controversy and legal
action. The main issues with how-to-vote cards have been that some cards have
been misleading and the behaviour of political party workers that distribute
them. The amount of paper they consume and the cost of how-to-vote cards has
also attracted some criticism in the past.[2]
Following the state election in South Australia on 20 March
2010, a number of allegations were raised about the distribution of misleading
how-to-vote cards, the impersonation of polling place workers, the
impersonation of voters and the conduct of polling officials. On 13 May 2010,
these matters were referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Maters
(JSCEM).[3] However, the motion was not supported by the Government. On speaking against
the motion the Special Minister of State, Senator Ludwig, tabled possible
amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act)
and the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 (the Referendum Act),
designed to clarify the law in relation to how-to-vote cards. On 2 June 2010,
those amendments were introduced into the House of Representatives as part of
the current Bill. The new measures concerning misleading or deceptive
publication over the telephone or internet follow allegations arising from the
state election in Tasmania.
In introducing the Bill the Parliamentary Secretary for
Western and Northern Australia, the Hon. Gary Gray MP, stated that the
amendments were aimed at providing voters ‘the means of making informed
decisions when voting’.[4] The proposals to include the internet and telephone within the legislative
definition of ‘publish’ were designed to expand the law in relation to the
publication of material ‘that is likely to mislead or deceive an elector in
relation to the casting of a vote’.[5]
The Bill is part of the Government’s broader electoral
reform agenda. In December 2008 the Government issued a green paper examining
electoral finance reform issues, and in September 2009 a second green paper was
issued examining broader electoral reform issues.[6] Both green papers
identified reform possibilities and invited comment.
In 2008 and 2009 the Government introduced Bills making
significant changes to the law relating to electoral funding, political
donations, disclosure and reporting, and certain offences and penalties.[7] The 2008 Bill
was defeated in the Senate in March 2009 and the 2009 Bill, which is a revised
version of the 2008 Bill, was introduced and passed in March 2009 in the House
of Representatives and is currently before the Senate.
On 11 February 2010, the Government introduced the Electoral
and Referendum Amendment (Close of Rolls and Other Measures) Bill 2010 into the
House of Representatives. The Bill contained the provisions to:
- fix the seventh day after the issue of federal election writs as
the date for the close of rolls
- repeal the evidence of identity requirements for provisional
electors and provide for a signature checking procedure
- make provision for electronic updating of electors’ details
- enable the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) to process
enrolment transactions outside the electoral division for which a person is
enrolling
- ‘enable pre-poll votes cast in an elector’s ‘home’ division to be
cast and counted as ordinary votes, wherever practicable’
- ‘restrict the number of candidates that can be endorsed by a
political party in each Division’,[8] and
- enable electronic voting for sight-impaired electors[9]
The close of rolls and evidence of identity requirements for
provisional electors measures in the Bill were opposed by the Opposition.[10] The Bill was passed by the House of Representatives on 10 March 2010 and introduced
into the Senate on 15 March 2010. It is expected to be withdrawn from the
Senate.
Also introduced in the House of Representatives on 2 June
2010 were three other electoral and referendum Bills:
- Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Close of Rolls and Other
Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2010, to advance the contentious components of the
previous Bill, the close of rolls and evidence of identity requirements for
provisional electors measures.
- Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Pre-poll Voting and Other
Measures) Bill 2010, to advance the other, non-controversial components of the
previous Bill.
- Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Modernisation and Other
Measures) Bill 2010, to introduce a series of operational changes to, inter
alia, make better use of electronic and online facilities.[11]
The Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Modernisation and Other
Measures) Bill 2010 and the current Bill, were referred to the Senate Finance
and Public Administration Committee for inquiry and report. The Committee tabled
its report on 17 June 2010, and recommended that the Bill be passed.[12]
The Opposition indicated its general support for the Bill,
but tabled amendments to increase the penalties relating to the proposed
how-to-vote cards measures.[13] Those amendments were not adopted by the House.[14] In additional comments to the Senate Committee inquiry into the Bill,
Australian Greens leader, Senator Bob Brown, recommended that the Bill be
amended to, among other things, reduce the voting age to 16, enable adequate
funding for youth electoral programs, and include truth in political
advertising provisions.[15] As yet, there is no indication of
the independent and Family First Party positions on the Bill.
The Government estimates that there are no costs associated
with implementation of the proposed amendments.[16]
How-to-vote cards fall within the electoral advertising
provisions of the Electoral Act. The law requires that the contact details of
the person who had authorised the material, and the printer, be included at the
end of the material. The main section of relevance is subsection 328(1)
which provides that:
(1) A person shall not print, publish or distribute or
cause, permit or authorize to be printed, published or distributed, an
electoral advertisement, handbill, pamphlet, poster or notice unless:
(a) the name and address of the person who authorized the
advertisement, handbill, pamphlet, poster or notice appears at the end thereof;
and
(b) in the case of an electoral advertisement, handbill,
pamphlet, poster or notice that is printed otherwise than in a newspaper--the
name and place of business of the printer appears at the end thereof.
The amendments in the Bill propose to:
- insert a definition of ‘how-to-vote card’ into the Electoral Act
- require that the name and address of the person who authorised
the card be placed at the top of each printed face of the material
- if the card was produced for an endorsed candidate of a
registered political party, require that the name of that political party must
be included on the card
- if the card was produced for a candidate who is not a member of a
registered political party, require that the word ‘candidate’ must be printed
on the card next to the name
- specify the size of the font to be used, at 10–20 points
depending on the size of the card, and
- introduce two new offences for those who do not comply with the
authorisation requirements and for those who publish or distribute how-to-vote
cards with false authorisation details. (The maximum penalty is 10 penalty units
or $1,100 in each case).
The amendments follow
the Queensland legislative approach.[17]
How-to-vote cards did not feature as a prominent issue in
the JSCEM report on the 2007 federal election. However, in his Second reading
speech, the Parliamentary Secretary noted that the Government was ‘mindful of
the views expressed’ in the JSCEM report on the 1998 federal election.[18] In that report, tabled on 26 June 2000, the Committee noted particular concerns
about the historically vexed issue of second preference how-to-vote cards, those
designed by one party to attract the second preference votes of electors who
support another party.[19] The Committee observed a decision of the Queensland Court of Disputed Returns
concerning the division of Macquarie following the 1993 federal election and
other complaints about second preference how-to-vote cards used in the 1998
election. The Committee recommended that the regulation of how-to-vote cards
include a broad definition of the cards to include narrative material, that the
authorisation details include the name of the party or candidate producing the
card be displayed prominently on each side of the card.[20]
In a dissenting report, the then Opposition (Labor) members
of JSCEM argued that the problem of differing laws and practices in relation to
how-to-vote cards, across nine jurisdictions, was of greater concern. It
proposed two alternative recommendations, that JSCEM ‘initiate a cooperative
interstate parliamentary committee’ to look at harmonising how-to-vote card regimes
across the country, and that the AEC conduct a trial, at a by-election, of
displaying how-to-vote cards in individual polling booths rather than have them
handed out outside polling places.[21]
In its response to the majority report of the Committee, the
Government argued that the definition of how-to-vote cards was adequately
addressed in existing legislation and that the further recommendations about
the display of authorisation details on the cards was ‘too prescriptive and unnecessary’.[22]
Previously, public funding in the form of parliamentarians’
entitlements, has been used as supplementary funding for the production and
distribution of postal vote applications. In 2009 the Australian National Audit
Office (ANAO) released a performance audit on the administration of
parliamentarians’ entitlements. In relation to the use of entitlements for
producing how-to-vote material, the ANAO noted that 43 Members of the House of
Representatives or 29 per cent ‘used their printing entitlement to produce a
total of 4.6 million ‘how to vote’ cards for the 3.97 million registered voters
in the electorates represented by those Members’.[23] The Government accepted all of the recommendations from the ANAO report
including ending the use of printing entitlements for electioneering.[24]
The broad policy options for dealing with how-to-vote cards
include banning them outright, banning just second preference cards, banning
all misleading cards and/or regulating them all.[25] Other possible reforms to how-to-vote cards that have been canvassed include:
- empowering the presiding officer of a polling booth to enforce
aspects of the Electoral Act, which may include the power to confiscate how-to-vote
cards deemed to be misleading, as suggested to JSCEM following the 2001
election.[26]
- requiring that the AEC approve all how-to-vote cards prior to
election day, as required in Queensland and Victoria.[27]
- requiring that how-to-vote cards include the full flow of
preferences (rather than just a first preference which could encourage the
casting of informal votes), as required in Victoria.[28]
- regulating the behaviour of political party workers who hand out
how-to-vote material.[29]
- working towards a standardisation or harmonisation of regimes in
relation to how-to-vote cards.[30]
- providing that how-to-vote cards be registered with the AEC prior
to election day, as required in New South Wales.[31]
Academic Associate Professor Graeme Orr outlined some of the
benefits for registering how-to-vote cards:
[Registration] has the benefit of educating campaigners, by
bringing them into the administrative net ahead of polling day. More
importantly, it gives the Commissions and parties advanced notice of material,
allowing time for a considered challenge to any dubious material. It also
offers a cleaner path to polling day enforcement for Commission staff:
unregistered material can be readily identified and its withdrawal requested,
on the spot, by polling officials, without drawing them into subjective or
difficult arguments about whether the material is misleading or the true source
of its authoriser.[32]
In its submission to the Senate Finance and Public
Administration Committee, the AEC argued that pre-registration systems for
how-to-vote cards may be manageable in a single jurisdiction, with a limited
number of candidates, in one time zone. However, at the federal level, such as
system would raise a number of practical difficulties and divert resources from
its core election activities.[33]
The Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee also
heard that the proposed new provisions may not adequately cover circumstances
where a supporter of a political party claims to have authorised how-to-vote
cards themselves. Professor Orr offered an alternative definition of the term
‘authorised by or on behalf of’ so as to deem a party or candidate to have
authorised a card where they meet all or part of the cost of producing the
card.[34]
According to the proposal, the maximum penalty for
how-to-vote cards that do not comply with the specified requirements, including
font size, is 10 penalty units or $1100. Contravention of the proposed
provisions relating to the publication of false authorisation details is the
same, at 10 penalty units. However, the penalty for misleading or deceptive
publications, under subsection 329(4) is set somewhat higher at $1000, six
months imprisonment or both. Professor Orr suggested that, as false
authorisation may also constitute a misleading publication, the new penalty of
10 penalty units under subsection 328B(5), relating to the publication of false
authorisation details, appears inadequate alongside the penalty for misleading
or deceptive publications.[35]
The Opposition considered the new penalties as generally
inadequate in relation to the seriousness of the offence. Their amendments to
the Bill proposed to increase the new penalties to 50 penalty units or $5500. Those
amendments were not adopted by the House.[36]
Following the 2001 federal election, JSCEM heard that the
Unity candidate in the electorate of Barton, Mr John Lau, distributed a
how-to-vote card with an order of preference different to that authorised by
his own party. The federal member for Barton, the Hon. Robert McClelland MP,
claimed that this ‘induced or, at the very least, had the potential to induce
people to record a vote that was not in accordance with their understanding
and, accordingly, intention’.[37] However, the AEC found that the cards were properly authorised under law and
submitted to JSCEM that ‘it had no powers to resolve what was in essence an
internal dispute within the Unity Party’.[38]
In it submission to the JSCEM inquiry into the 2004 federal
election, the National Party claimed that in the electorate of Richmond, the ‘Liberals
for Forests’ booth workers, wearing blue t-shirts with the word ‘Liberals’
emblazoned prominently on the front, handed out how-to-vote cards and asked
voters to ‘vote Liberal' as they entered the polling place.[39] The Liberals for Forests had directed their preferences to the Labor candidate.
The result was one of the closest of the 2004 Federal Election with a winning
margin of only 301 votes after the distribution of preferences. Only 151 people
needed to be misled to affect the result. The Committee concluded that Ms Justine
Elliot was elected as a result of preferences on the basis of deceptions by
Liberals for Forests.[40]
The Committee also received complaints that how-to-vote
cards for a Liberal Party candidate in Melbourne Ports resembled those of the
Australian Greens candidate.[41] The Committee considered that the Liberal party how-to-vote cards distributed
in that electorate were not misleading.[42]
At the 2010 state election in South Australia, Labor
campaign workers were reported to have handed out ‘put your FAMILY FIRST’
how-to-vote cards in the seats of Mawson, Morialta, Light and Hartley. The
cards included photographs of Family First candidates and recommended that
Family First supporters give Labor their second preference. A representative from
the Family First Party argued that the cards were a ‘deliberate and blatant
attempt to solicit Family First votes to Labor when there was no preference
arrangements’.[43] As noted above, these matters and others were referred to JSCEM for inquiry and
report. Submissions close 23 July 2010.[44]
Under current legislation, publications that are likely to
mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote are
prohibited. The Electoral Act and the Referendum Act both define the word
‘publish’ to include radio or television.[45] The new measures proposed in the Bill aim to expand the definition of publish
to include not only radio and television, but also the internet and telephone. The
amendments also cover material published on the internet from Australian
citizens or residents located overseas.[46]
According to the AEC submission to the Senate Finance and
Public Administration Committee, the amendments follow concerns raised by the
Greens about certain alleged misleading activities prior to the Tasmanian state
election.[47] Two days before that election, it was reported that the Australian Labor Party
had made 20 000 ‘robocalls’ or automated telephone messages. According to
the report, the messages alleged that the Greens supported the legalisation of
heroin, a claim which was later denied by the Greens. The report also stated
that the telephone messages did not include a statement that they were
authorised by the Australian Labor Party.[48]
While the intention of the proposed amendments is to clarify
the law by including the telephone and internet under the meaning of ‘publish’
it may be that those forms of publication were already covered. The word
publish is not exhaustively defined under the Electoral Act and the Referendum
Act.[49] It could be argued that the inclusion of ‘radio or television’ under current
provisions are to be regarded as be illustrative rather than exhaustive.
Item 1 inserts a definition of a ‘how-to-vote’ card
into subsection 4(1) the Electoral Act for the first time. It will include a
card, handbill or pamphlet that:
- represents a ballot paper or part of a ballot paper and is
‘apparently’ intended to affect or is likely to affect how votes are cast for
candidates, or
- lists the names of candidates with a number indication the order
of voting preference against the names of all or any of such candidates, or
- otherwise directs or encourages votes to use a particular order
of preference for all or any of the candidates.
Item 6 will insert new subsections 328B(1) to (6) into the Electoral Act stipulating the requirements relating to how-to-vote
cards. The requirements relate to the authorisation details such as the name
and address of the person who authorised the how-to-vote card, and to the
extent necessary, the political party of the candidate, and if the candidate is
not endorsed by a registered political party, then the name of the candidate
with the ‘candidate’ included (new subsection 328B(1).
New subsection 328(2) stipulates font requirements.
As discussed above, offences are created for not meeting the
requirements of these new provisions, and also for providing some or all false
authorisation details (see in particular new paragraph 328B(5)(d))
Items 2 and (4) have the effect of inserting
the additional words ‘internet or telephone’ into the Electoral Act and the
Referendum Act into the meaning of the word ‘publish’ in the relevant
provisions. This means that ‘publish’ will be expanded to include not only radio,
television, but also internet or telephone (see discussion above).
Members, Senators and
Parliamentary staff can obtain further information from the Parliamentary
Library on (02) 6277 2662.
Mark Rodrigues and Diane Spooner
18 June 2010
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted by the
Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any part of this
work by any process without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary
Librarian. This requirement does not apply to members of the Parliament
of Australia acting in the course of their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament
using information available at the time of production. The views expressed
do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary Library, nor
do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian.
Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications
with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients
may contact the author or the Library’s Central Entry Point for
referral.
|
