Electoral (Legislative Council Voting) (Voter Choice) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 16 February 2017.)

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (16:40): I rise to speak in support of the Electoral (Legislative Council Voting) (Voter Choice) Amendment Bill. This bill seeks to reform the system of voting in the Legislative Council. Several parties have put forward various ideas and concepts for reform to both the government and the council for their consideration. The government originally sought to introduce a system of voting known as the Sainte-Laguë method, but has introduced this subsequent bill after it became apparent that there was very little support for that original bill.

Both of these bills, as well as the various methods put forward by other parties, share a very common goal, and that is to abolish the incredibly undemocratic and at times incredibly murky practice of preference harvesting. While preferencing itself clearly has a really important part to play in our electoral system, preference harvesting is a process which actually hides from the public who they end up voting for. This, in turn, can result in the election of candidates who have very little or no real public support. We have seen many examples of that, in the current commonwealth Senate in particular.

The bill before us also has an advantage in that it retains the system that voters have become accustomed to. If this bill passes, voters would notice no visual changes in their voting papers. The changes lie in the mechanics of the voting system, rather than at the front end. It gives voters more control over how they vote. If they want to vote above the line, they can be absolutely assured that their vote will only go to the party or group that they have selected, and not to a party that they might have little or no support for whatsoever. If they want to vote below the line, then the system remains unchanged and they are free to preference in whatever order they may wish.

As members would be well aware, the voting system for the Senate was recently amended to provide for a system of voting that requires people to vote for at least six parties or groups above the line or at least 12 individuals below the line. The feedback from that, Mr President—and I am sure you received similar feedback—was that it was very confusing for voters. Although I acknowledge that the intent was noble—the changes were made for the right reason—the risk of incorporating that type of method into this place is that voters may be forced to vote for parties that they have no intention of ever preferencing.

In fact, they might have a particular view that they would never want to have any of their vote or support go to that particular person or party. This, in turn, raises the risk of high levels of informal voting, because people just get jack of it. They say they are not sure about where their vote is going to go and it does not make any difference anyway, so the next thing is we have increases in the rates of informal voting, and we certainly want to avoid that at all costs.

There are several amendments that have been lodged by the Hon. Mark Parnell and the Hon. John Dawkins. The Attorney-General is keen to continue discussions with respect to these amendments, although I note that these matters will need to be dealt with in the near future so that the Electoral Commissioner can adequately prepare for the 2018 election, which we know is looming very quickly. It is the desire of this government to resolve these matters as quickly as possible and to put in place the best and fairest, whilst being simple, system of voting into this place. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the council.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. S.G. Wade.