SELECT COMMITTEE ON MATTERS RELATED TO THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 20 MARCH 2010

The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (15:56): I move:

That it be an instruction to the Select Committee on Matters Related to the General Election of 20 March 2010 that its terms of reference be amended by inserting new paragraphs IA and AII as follows:

IA. To inquire into and report on matters related to the November 2010 local government elections, viz.:

(a) the security and scrutiny for postal voting;

(b) the cost effectiveness of the postal voting system and alternatives to it;

(c) the effectiveness of elector registration processes for non-resident electors;

(d) factors influencing voter turnout;

(e) possible provision for mayoral candidates to contest council positions;

(f) the length of council election terms; and

(g) any other relevant matters.

AII. That the report in relation to the state general election be tabled prior to the report on the November 2010 local government elections.

One of the reasons that prompted me to move this motion relates to my own personal experience with the most recent local government elections. In the lead-up to the 2010 local government elections I contacted the Electoral Commission to advise them that neither my wife nor I had received our ballot papers in the post. I was advised that I would need to complete a Re-issue of Voting Material form in order to receive additional ballot papers. That form was faxed back to the Electoral Commission on the same day it was received, and I was told that ballot papers would be posted to me within a couple of days.

Five days later I contacted the Electoral Commission again to advise that I still had not received the ballot papers. On the same day a message was left with my office advising that the voting material had not been reissued as the Electoral Commission had already received signed and completed voting papers from my wife and myself. I subsequently contacted the Electoral Commission again to query this, as neither my wife nor I had received ballot papers, let alone completed and returned them to the Electoral Commission.

During that conversation I was advised that the signatures on the returned ballot papers had been cross-referenced with those signatures held on file by the Electoral Commission and that they did not match. Following this I spoke to the Electoral Commissioner, Ms Kay Mousley, who indicated that every signature on returned ballot papers was cross-referenced with signatures held on file. I was also advised that no action would be taken in relation to my particular matter because it was an isolated incident out of a million voters.

I asked the commissioner if I could personally sight the ballot papers that had been returned to the Electoral Commission, but that request was denied. This prompted me to ask the commissioner whether a similar request from the police would also be denied. The commissioner indicated that no such request had been made.

I subsequently wrote to the commissioner and urged her to reconsider her decision not to investigate this matter or refer it to the government investigation unit. I also queried how my particular situation could arise if indeed the Electoral Commission cross-references signatures as previously indicated. Additionally, I wrote to the police commissioner in order to alert him of this situation. I advised the commissioner that a complaint had been lodged with the Norwood police and requested feedback as to how the matter would progress.

Following these events, a decision was made to refer the matter to the government investigation unit and an investigation was initiated. As I understand it, that investigation is still ongoing. This particular instance involved the Burnside council, which was already the subject of a $1 million investigation. I would have thought that any suggestion of deliberately falsifying ballot papers would have been of major concern to the commissioner much earlier.

It is my understanding that a number of other individuals also came forward and complained that they had not received their ballot papers. I think this example clearly demonstrates the need for an inquiry into the manner in which local government elections are conducted in this state. The inquiry would also provide an opportunity to closely examine other aspects of how local government elections are conducted, including their cost-effectiveness and voter turnout.

The amendments to the terms of reference that I am proposing in relation to local government elections are complementary to the current inquiry of the select committee on matters related to the general election of 20 March 2010. I would urge all honourable members to support the motion.

The Hon. S.G. WADE (16:01): I rise to speak on behalf of the Liberal Party very briefly. As the Hon. Mr Darley has indicated, he has raised publicly concerns with the security of the electoral process in relation to the 2010 local government elections. He did so publicly in the media last year and, of course, gave notice of this motion last year as well.

A range of issues have been raised by Liberal members. The concerns that the Hon. John Darley has raised have been added to by a number of Liberal members in discussions within our party room. We certainly share the concerns that the Hon. John Darley has that the electoral process in relation to local government be protected and that part of that effort by this council should be to ask the select committee in relation to the 2010 state election to take an additional reference in relation to the 2010 local government elections.

Both in relation to the state government elections and in relation to local government elections, the integrity of the electoral system is the foundation of democracy. Just as the Labor Party's immoral behaviour in the last state election undermined the moral authority of the Rann Labor government, likewise the flaws in the local government election process have served to undermine people's confidence in the local government processes.

The Liberal Party supports the extension of the terms of reference proposed by the motion. I agree with the Hon. John Darley in saying that they are complementary to that of the original reference to the committee, and I would commend the member for including in his terms of reference a range of issues that covers most of the issues that have been raised in the Liberal Party in terms of the election. I hope that the ‘Any other relevant matters' might well give any other members of the public who have concerns about the process an opportunity to air them.

The fact that we have had two electoral related references come before this house in the one year raises the issue of how best this house can handle electoral matters going forward. I note that the commonwealth parliament has a standing committee that deals with electoral matters. I understand that the Victorian parliament might well have a standing committee on electoral matters, but it may well be an issue for the council to consider in the future whether we need a standing committee on electoral matters or whether one of our current committees might take that as a particular focus within their activities.

In relation to this particular proposal, which is quite limited, this will remain a select committee and have merely one additional reference. We believe that that is an appropriate course of action and we support it, and we particularly appreciate part AII of the motion, which invites or requests the committee to deal with the state government election matters before it goes on to the local government matters. As chair of that committee I indicate that a report on the state electoral matters is not far away, and we would likewise intend to deal with the local government reference, if it is given to us, in a similarly expeditious manner.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. P. Holloway.