![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
|
Print Chapter 2 (PDF 286KB) | < - Report Home < - Chapter 1 : Chapter 3 - > |
Qualifications and disqualifications for enrolment
The enrolment process
Enrolment of itinerant and homeless persons
Silent enrolment
Proof of identity
The electoral roll used at the 2004 Election
Electoral Roll review
2.1 | The Australian democratic process requires that all qualified electors enrol and cast a ballot at each Federal Election.1 In order to give effect to this requirement, the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) maintains the Commonwealth’s electoral roll which contains information regarding all electors who have enrolled for Federal Elections.2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.2 | By its very nature, the electoral roll is a dynamic document requiring constant alteration and adjustment to reflect additions, deletions, transfers and corrections to the roll as they occur, or are notified to the AEC. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.3 | The Committee examined enrolment matters in some detail during this inquiry. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.4 | This chapter deals with those issues and makes recommendations accordingly. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Qualifications and disqualifications for enrolment |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.5 | Australian citizens over the age of 18 and British subjects who were enrolled as at 25 January 1984 are entitled and required to be enrolled for an address at which they have lived for one month or longer that is their real place of living. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.6 | Persons who are of unsound mind, are serving a prison sentence of three years or longer, or have been convicted of treason or treachery and have not been pardoned, are not entitled to enrol, or to remain enrolled. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.7 | Enrolment is compulsory for all eligible persons3 other than Australians residing overseas, Norfolk Islanders, itinerant electors and people aged between 17 and 18. These persons may enrol in accordance with other relevant sections of the Act.4 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The enrolment process |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.8 | Electors claim enrolment or make changes to their enrolment by completing an (enrolment form). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.9 | Enrolment forms must be signed by the claimant; and be attested by an elector or a person entitled to enrolment, who is required to sign the enrolment form as witness in his or her own handwriting.5 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.10 | Electors may notify changes to their electoral enrolment details using the enrolment form, or, where the change is within the division for which the elector is already enrolled, by giving written notice to the Divisional Returning Officer (DRO).6 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.11 | Enrolment forms are available for download from the AEC Website. They cannot be lodged electronically, as the AEC requires manuscript signatures. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.12 | Printed versions of the enrolment form are displayed and available at AEC Offices, State and Territory Electoral Offices and most Post Offices.7 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.13 | The Nationals express their concern that the act of enrolling to vote is too simple:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.14 | DROs who receive and action claims for enrolment are required to ensure the enrolee has supplied all necessary information; that the application is completed and signed by both the applicant and a witness; and to undertake a series of eligibility checks prior to adding new enrolees to the roll or making alterations to existing enrolment details.9 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.15 | The AEC’s ability to carry out thorough checks during the surge in enrolments in the seven days between the announcement of the election and the closing of roll (the close of roll period) has been raised as a concern in this and all recent election related inquiries. It was also examined by the Committee in its 2001 inquiry into the Integrity of the Electoral Roll10 and the October 2002 Review of ANAO Report No. 42 2001-02, The Integrity of the Electoral Roll.11 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.16 | In response to a request for information regarding its ability to carry out thorough checks on enrolment during the close of roll period, the AEC has advised the Committee:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.17 | The CEA provides for other actions that may occur to ensure the DRO is satisfied that the enrolment claim is in order before adding or changing the enrolment. These actions may include:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committee’s view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.18 | The Committee considers that the qualifications for electoral enrolment are appropriate, well accepted by the population, and generally well enforced. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.19 | The Committee considers that the process by which electors’ effect enrolment is appropriately accessible by those who are, in the normal course of life, able to access appropriate services, especially in urban areas. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.20 | The Committee notes, however, that in some rural and remote areas, access to enrolment-related material and forms may be more problematic. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.21 | The Committee continues to be concerned about the lack of identity verification required when electors enrol and change enrolment detail. These concerns will be addressed more fully later in this report. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.22 | The Committee notes the AEC’s response regarding the checking processes for enrolment forms, but continues to be concerned about the AEC’s ability to carry out the thorough checks required to ensure enrolment integrity during the close of rolls period. These concerns will also be more fully addressed later in this report. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.23 | In addressing its concerns about the availability of enrolment related forms and information, and to ensure that all electors and potential electors are able to avail themselves of such information, whilst being prompted to update electoral roll details in a timely manner, the Committee makes the following recommendations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.24 | Recommendation 1The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Electoral Act be amended to require that electoral enrolment forms, AEC reply paid envelopes and enrolment promotional material be prominently displayed at all times in every Australia Post, Medicare, Centrelink and Rural Transaction Centre outlet, including any agency or sub-agency, to encourage electors and potential electors to meet enrolment obligations. Further, all such material should be displayed without fee to the Commonwealth. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Enrolment of itinerant and homeless persons |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.25 | The CEA provides for enrolment by persons who have living arrangements or special enrolment requirements that are outside the scope of “ordinary” enrolment criteria. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.26 | These persons include Australians residing overseas, Norfolk Islanders, itinerant electors, prisoners, Silent Electors and persons aged between 17 and 18 years.18 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.27 | The inquiry received submissions and heard evidence which commented on and made recommendations regarding the itinerant elector provisions of the CEA, particularly in relation to homeless persons. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.28 | The ALP noted in its submission that:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.29 | The ALP requested the Committee to consider the following recommendation:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.30 | Professor Brian Costar and Mr David McKenzie made a detailed submission which canvassed some of the reasons that homeless people may be reticent to engage in electoral enrolment:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.31 | Many other submissions contained supporting information and recommendations in respect to the homeless, including that:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committee’s view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.32 | The Committee agrees with the comments made in relation to voting by Mrs Lindsay MacDonald and considers that they apply equally to enrolment:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.33 | The Committee believes that the AEC must use its resources to ensure that appropriate forms of enrolment are available to and accessible by those who have an entitlement, but who may suffer disadvantage because of social circumstances. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.34 | Such groups may include the homeless, itinerant persons, illiterate persons, persons with a disability and persons who reside in remote and isolated areas. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.35 | The Committee understands that the AEC has made some progress in identifying issues associated with homelessness in partnership with Swinburne University and notes the contents of the AEC’s Research Report Number 6 – Electorally Engaging the Homeless. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.36 | The Committee also notes that the AEC may be limited in its ability to be more proactive in its research and outreach activities due to funding constraints, however, the Committee is strongly of the view that these issues deserve greater, more focussed attention and accordingly, makes the following recommendations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.37 | Recommendation 2The Committee recommends that:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent enrolment |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.38 | Silent enrolment means that the address of the elector will not be shown on the publicly available electoral roll. Electors can apply for a silent enrolment if they believe that having their address printed on the publicly available electoral roll could put their personal safety or their family’s personal safety at risk.24 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.39 | The Liberal Party of Australia detailed its concerns with the AEC’s application of the provisions of the CEA in regards to Silent Electors. The Party’s Federal Director, Mr Brian Loughnane, stated in evidence:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committee’s view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.40 | The Committee considers that there is a need to carefully balance the requirement for address details of electors to be available on the electoral roll, against the need to minimise or eliminate any risk to the personal safety of any elector. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.41 | Whilst considering that the current legislative provisions are appropriate, the Committee is firmly of the view that the AEC must apply those provisions fairly and consistently, always ensuring that the safety of electors and their families remains the highest priority. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proof of identity |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.42 | Despite the recent tightening of witnessing provisions for enrolment, the most significant roll integrity issue remains ensuring that the identity of the person claiming electoral enrolment is verified. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.43 | There has been much debate and Committee consideration in recent years regarding proof of identity for applicants for enrolment and changes of enrolment details. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
244 | Submissions to this and previous inquiries have canvassed this issue, and there have been recent attempts by the Government to introduce Proof of Identity measures in order to prevent fraudulent enrolment activity and to ensure roll integrity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.45 | The Chair of this Committee is on the record as supporting proof of identity for enrolment:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.46 | There is a deal of history to proof of identity arguments. In its report on the 1996 Federal Election, the Committee recommended that proof of identity measures be adopted whereby electors would be required to produce at least one original item of documentary proof of identity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.47 | At that time the Committee asserted that acceptable documents might include photographic drivers licences, Birth Certificates or extracts, Social Security papers, Veterans Cards, Citizenship Certificates, passports, Medicare cards, or in some limited cases, written references.27 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.48 | After considering proof of identity issues in some detail, the Committee recommended in its May 2001 report: User Friendly, Not Abuser Friendly:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.49 | Those regulations would have implemented a system whereby documentary evidence of identity was required at time of enrolment. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.50 | Further, in its report into the conduct of the 2001 Federal Election, the Committee recommended:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.51 | The issue has, once again, been canvassed in many submissions to this inquiry. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.52 | Mrs Alison Cousland, an elector recently returned from overseas, notes that:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.53 | Mrs Cousland’s view receives support from The Nationals who submit:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.54 | The Nationals recommend:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.55 | In a similar vein the Festival of Light claimed:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.56 | The ALP, despite opposing any further strengthening of the verification of identity for enrolment, goes part of the way and submits:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.57 | Similarly, the Premier of Western Australia, Dr Geoff Gallop MLA, argues:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.58 | On the other hand, Dr Gallop also notes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committee’s view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.59 | The Committee, while noting that there are differences of opinion on the level of identity verification required for enrolment, is committed to ensuring that the process of enrolment is not conducive to electoral fraud or electoral roll manipulation. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.60 | The Committee notes that there have been past instances of electoral roll fraud. Whilst it is not proven that electoral roll fraud has changed or significantly affected election results, the Committee believes that the real issue to be addressed is the prevention of the possibility that electoral roll fraud may occur. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.61 | The Committee agrees with Mrs Alison Cousland and asserts that is not too onerous to require proof of identity for those seeking to enrol or change enrolment details. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.62 | The Committee argues that providing identification at the time of enrolling will not cause delays or inconvenience to electors attempting to enrol. In fact, Australians are becoming more and more used to providing proof of identity for such mundane tasks as joining a video library. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.63 | Australians are already required to provide proof of identity for many everyday undertakings such as opening a bank account, applying for a drivers licence, signing up for a mobile telephone, seeking rental accommodation, enrolling in educational programs, applying for a Medicare card, applying for welfare benefits, applying for a passport, applying for a credit card, seeking credit approvals and accessing licensed premises, along with a myriad of other situations encountered daily which require proof of identity, age or address. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.64 | The Committee notes that applicants for pre-paid mobile telephone services are currently required to provide the service provider with one of more of the following, in order to prove their identity:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.65 | Why should the act of enrolling to vote and choosing who should govern Australia, arguably one of the most important steps in our democratic society, be subject to any less scrutiny and verification than purchasing and enabling a pre-paid mobile telephone, or, as previous inquiries have stated, joining a video library? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.66 | In the Committee’s view, enrolling or changing enrolment details on the electoral roll must be supported by documentary evidence sufficient to identify the enrolee and the address for which they claim enrolment. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.67 | The Committee’s view is that acceptable identification37 and proof of address38 must be shown or provided to the AEC, or a person who can attest a claim for enrolment,39 before an enrolee is added to, or their details changed, on the electoral roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.68 | Acceptable identification should include, but not be limited to:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.69 | Persons who can attest a claim for enrolment should include, but not be limited to:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.70 | Those enrolling, re-enrolling, or changing enrolment details should have the choice of providing the required documents either in person at an AEC office, or to a person who can attest a claim for enrolment, or by posting or faxing those documents (or certified copies of those documents) and the enrolment form to which they relate to the AEC. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.71 | Where certified copies of documents are posted or faxed to the AEC, they must be certified to be true copies by the enrolee and witnessed by a person who is currently an enrolled elector. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.72 | Where the AEC receives an original document by post, the AEC must return the document to the enrolee by registered post unless the enrolee agrees to its return by other means. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.73 | Where the AEC, or a person who can attest a claim for enrolment, is handed an original document, the AEC or that person must hand the document back to the enrolee, unless the enrolee agrees to its return by other means. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.74 | These requirements would greatly increase the integrity and accuracy of the electoral roll by proving the identity of the enrolee. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.75 | Once proof of identity and address is provided, the electoral roll should be annotated to record that acceptable proof of identity documentation has been sighted for that elector. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.76 | The Committee notes that there will be some cases where an enrolee does not hold an acceptable identification document. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.77 | Should the enrolee be unable to provide an acceptable identification document, they would be required to supply written references given by any two persons on the electoral roll who can confirm the enrolee’s identity, and one proof of address document to the AEC. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.78 | The persons supplying the references must have known the enrolee for at least one month and must show their own acceptable identification document, or alternatively, supply their driver’s licence number to the AEC. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.79 | In such situations, the AEC should check and confirm the identity details of the referees and not the enrolee. This could be achieved by the AEC conducting one or more of the following checks:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.80 | In cases where the checks proved the identity of the referees, the AEC should enrol or change the enrolled details of the enrolee on the electoral roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.81 | In relation to driver’s license material, the Committee supports the AEC’s comments about the desirability of expanding its demand power40 to allow the AEC to access driver’s licence details held by some State and Territory authorities. In the Committee’s view this access would enable the AEC to give effect to the Committee’s recommendations. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.82 | Specific recommendations in respect of the demand powers are included below in the electoral roll review section of this chapter. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.83 | The Committee notes that in certain circumstances, the electoral roll itself is used to verify the identity of certain persons. For over 30 years the financial sector has relied on electoral enrolment as one of the checks required before approving and issuing credit to applicants.41 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.84 | The Committee is also aware that numerous other agencies and organisations rely on the veracity of the information contained on the electoral roll for verification of identity, in order that they are able to issue other identification documentation. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.85 | For instance; verification of electoral enrolment details may form 25 of the 100 points required towards: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.86 | The Committee believes that, in addition to the substantial need for roll integrity, organisations and agencies who issue identification documentation based on the accuracy of the electoral roll ought to be satisfied that the details contained on the electoral roll have been verified. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.87 | The electoral roll is a list of those Australians who share a common democratic right/privilege: Those who appear on it choose those who govern us. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.88 | Those who are not Australian Citizens, or who are by virtue of other circumstances, not entitled to join this roll, should not be permitted to do so. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.89 | Finally, the Committee believes that the integrity of the electoral roll will be enhanced and any risk of systemic electoral fraud mitigated to a high degree by requiring verification of identification and address for enrolment, and, as detailed later in this report, provisional voting. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.90 | Recommendation 3The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Electoral Act be amended to require all applicants for enrolment, re-enrolment or change of enrolment details be required to verify their identity and address. Regulations should be enacted as soon as possible to require persons applying to enrol or change their enrolment details, to verify their identity and address to the AEC by:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The electoral roll used at the 2004 Election |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.91 | In accordance with the CEA, the rolls closed for the 2004 election at 8.00pm on Tuesday 7 September 2004, seven days after the issue of the writs for the election. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.92 | As demonstrated by the following table, the electoral roll continues to grow at a significant rate from election to election. Table 2.1 Electors enrolled at close of rolls 1996 - 2004
Source AEC, Electoral Pocketbook, 2005, p. 62. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.93 | Between the 2001 and 2004 Federal Elections, the electoral roll grew by some 384,599 electors. Of this growth, some 62,583 or 16.27% occurred during the seven day close of rolls period for the 2004 election. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.94 | In those seven days the AEC actioned some 520,086 transactions against the electoral roll.45 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.95 | In order to put that number into perspective, the Committee compared the total number of transactions during the seven-day close of roll period for the 2004 election (520,086), to the total number of transactions made to the electoral roll during the 2004-05 financial year (2,976,181).46 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.96 | These statistics indicate that close of rolls transactions represent nearly 17.5% of the total enrolment activity (transactions) for the 2004-05 financial year as shown in figure 2.2. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.97 | Put another way, the AEC was required to action nearly 17.5% of its total yearly transactions in the first seven days of the 2004 election period. Figure 2.1 Close of rolls transactions as a proportion of 2004-05 enrolment activity Source AEC Submission Nos 165, p. 11; 205, p. 13, Table 2. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.98 | Further analysis of the 520,086 close of rolls transactions indicates that in those seven days:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.99 | The high volume of transactions made to the roll in the close of roll period has been noted in submissions to the Committee during each inquiry since the 1996 Federal election. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.100 | The majority of submissions to this inquiry repeat arguments and points of view that have been consistently put either for or against retaining the seven day close of rolls period. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.101 | The Festival of Light notes that the close of rolls period is the most vulnerable period for electoral fraud, due to the inability of the AEC to carry out thorough checks of enrolment claims: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.102 | This view is supported in the Liberal Party of Australia submission which states:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.103 | The Nationals submission indicates a concern with the current close of roll arrangements:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.104 | Other submissions assert that a close of rolls period should remain. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.105 | The Premier of Western Australia, Dr Geoff Gallop notes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.106 | The PILCH Homeless Persons Legal Clinic submission makes comments supporting the retention of the close of roll period, noting:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.107 | The submission from the Public Interest Advocacy Centre notes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.108 | The close of rolls argument and associated issues were examined at length during hearings. The Committee was presented with many arguments, both for and against closing the roll on the day of issue of the writ. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2109 | Mr Brian Loughnane presented the Liberal Party of Australia’s view:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.110 | The ALP’s position on the matter was expressed by Mr Tim Gartrell in his opening statement:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.111 | The AEC’s position on closing the roll was expressed by the Electoral Commissioner, Mr Ian Campbell, who gave the following evidence in response to a question from the Deputy Chair:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committee’s view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.112 | When expressed in terms of enrolment workload (transactions only) it could be said that the AEC processed approximately 17.5% of the 2004-–05 years enrolment transaction workload during the close of rolls for the 2004 Federal Election in only 3% of the available working time for the year.57 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.113 | Whilst acknowledging the efforts made by the AEC in attempting to ensure that the electoral roll is updated with integrity during the close of rolls period, the Committee considers that the volume of transactions which takes place during that period limits the AEC’s ability to conduct the thorough and appropriate checks required to ensure that integrity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.114 | The Committee notes that 60.5% of the enrolment transactions that occurred during the close of rolls period would not have been required, if electors had enrolled or changed their enrolment details at the time that their entitlement changed.58 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.115 | In the case of those turning 18, the Committee considers that the act of enrolling should be considered as much a symbol of transition to adulthood as applying for a proof of age card for entry to licensed premises or for a driver’s licence. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.116 | The Committee believes that the seven day close of roll period for Federal elections actually encourages electors and potential electors to neglect their obligations in respect of enrolment, believing that they can play “catch up” during the close of rolls period. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.117 | This “period of grace” has served to decrease the accuracy of the roll during non-election periods as a result of electors neglecting their lawful enrolment obligations. Those that argue otherwise acknowledge that electors act in this way, but still seek to allow the situation to continue unabated. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.118 | The Committee notes, with a high degree of concern, that a significant number of electors failed to update their enrolment details in the 12 months before the 2004 election writs were issued, despite having been contacted and prompted to do so by the AEC up to 12 months before the election was announced. Those same electors were later responsible for a large proportion of the enrolment transactions that the AEC was required to process during close of roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.119 | Statistics provided by the AEC indicate, that despite AEC efforts and the significant amount of taxpayer funds expended by them in contacting electors prior to elections being announced, that same pattern is repeated election after election. 59 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.120 | Not only do electors act unlawfully in not enrolling when entitled, they cause the wastage of a significant amount of taxpayer funds that the AEC is obliged to expend on postage and other measures, making repeated attempts to persuade those same electors to update their details on the electoral roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.121 | The Committee also agrees that the current close of roll arrangements present an opportunity for those who seek to manipulate the roll to do so at a time where little opportunity exists for the AEC to undertake the thorough checking required ensuring roll integrity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.122 | The Committee believes that those who argue for the retention of the seven day close of rolls and who promote the argument that there is no proof that enrolment fraud is sufficiently widespread to warrant any action, have missed the point. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.123 | The fundamental issue facing this Committee is to prevent any such fraud before it is able to occur. Failure to do so would amount to neglect. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.124 | While the risk exists that fraud sufficient to change the result of an election might occur, we are failing in our duty to protect and preserve the integrity of our electoral system and our democratic processes and principles. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.125 | Accordingly, the Committee recommends that the roll should be closed at 8.00pm on the day that the writ is issued. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.126 | This change, along with the introduction of proof of identify and address measures for enrolment and provisional voting, will ensure the electoral roll retains a high degree of accuracy and integrity, while reminding electors that the responsibility for ensuring that the electoral roll is updated in a timely manner rests with them. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.127 | Recommendation 4The Committee recommends that Section 155 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act be amended to provide that the date and time fixed for the close of the rolls be 8.00pm on the day of the writs. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.128 | Recommendation 5The Committee recommends:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Electoral Roll review |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.129 | The CEA requires the AEC to undertake reviews of electoral rolls with a view to ascertaining such information as is required for the preparation, maintenance and revision of the rolls.60 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.130 | The AEC conducts a number of activities aimed at reviewing the rolls.61 These processes are ongoing and include:62
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.131 | In examining the issues surrounding the updating of the roll, the Committee sought to gain an in-depth understanding of the amount of effort required of the AEC to update the electoral roll over a 3 year period, equivalent to a full three-year election cycle, which included a Federal Election. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.132 | The Committee sought statistics from the AEC in order to undertake such an analysis. In response to the Committee’s request, the AEC provided statistics for the 2002–03, 2003–04 and 2004–05 financial years.63 The 2004‑05 financial year (Table 2.2) incorporated the 2004 Federal Election. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.133 | The statistics show that the AEC made 2,836,267 changes to the electoral roll in the 2002-03 financial year, 2,792,172 in 2003-04, and 2,976,181 in 2004–05.64 Collectively, these years saw the AEC make some 8,604,620 enrolment changes, at an average of 2,868,206 transactions per year. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.134 | In the same three year period the electoral roll grew from 12,741,980 electors to 13,114,475 electors, indicating a net growth of 372,495 or 2.92%, at an average of 124,165 electors per year.65 Table 2.2 Total Electors on the Electoral Roll at 30 June: 2002 - 2005
Source AEC’s Annual Reports 2002-03; Submission No 205, (AEC), pp. 12-13. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.135 | The statistics indicate that for every 10 electors by which the roll grew during the three year period, the AEC was required to make an average of 231 changes to the electoral roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.136 | Further analysis indicates that for the individual years the number of changes made to the roll for each 10 electors added to the roll was 370 in 2002-–03; 196 in 2003–04; and 195 in 2004-–05. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.137 | Therefore, as can be clearly seen in the statistics, there is considerable variation in the number of changes made over a three year period, with a significant variation in the effect that those changes have on the size of the roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.138 | There may be any number of reasons for those differences. Federal, State, and local government elections and by-elections occur with varying frequency during any three-year period. Each of those events has a potential to impact on the enrolment rate and the number of electors on the roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.139 | In some cases these elections provide for a close of rolls period during which enrolment activity may peak. There are other cases where there is no close of rolls period. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.140 | Actions taken to remove electors from the roll because of death, a loss of entitlement to enrolment at a particular address or even duplicate entries on the roll may also occur at any time during any three year period. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.141 | These also have the potential to affect the enrolment rate and the number of electors on the roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.142 | There are however, three inescapable conclusions that can be drawn from any analysis of the above statistics:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.143 | Submissions to this inquiry which canvassed electoral roll review issues generally focussed on the issue of whether or not CRU was the most effective way of updating the roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.144 | Mr Bruce Kirkpatrick and Mr Peter Brun argued in a jointly signed submission that :
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.145 | Mr Michael Danby MP, Deputy Chair of the Committee, disagreed:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.146 | However, Mr Peter Brun who, with Mr Kirkpatrick, presented evidence to the Committee about door knocks undertaken by them to test the accuracy of the roll, also notes in his submission:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.147 | The Festival of Light appears to support the AEC’s use of CRU, noting in their submission:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.148 | The AEC’s operation of CRU was supported by the Committee in its October 2002 report The Integrity of the Electoral Roll which found that:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.149 | The ALP suggests that CRU might be improved by the introduction of Direct Address Change (DAC). The ALP submission notes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.150 | The AEC notes the obvious value of using data from agencies such as Centrelink and the RTA in New South Wales . for CRU activities, especially in relation to youth enrolment:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.151 | The AEC advises that it is continuing to refine CRU processes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.152 | The AEC has indicated to the Committee that there are data sources, which are currently unavailable to the AEC due to State and Territory privacy legislation, that would be of significant benefit to its CRU processes if an amendment was made to section 92 of the CEA:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Committees view |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.153 | The Committee is of the view that the AEC should continue with CRU as its primary roll update and review activity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.154 | The Committee notes that CRU already incorporates targeted Habitation Reviews in circumstances where the AEC considers it to be appropriate, and supports this approach. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.155 | The Committee agrees with Mr Peter Brun that “whenever the roll is examined, it will always be a snapshot of an earlier date”, however, the Committee is not convinced that that there is sufficient argument nor evidence for returning to full Habitation Reviews. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.156 | The Committee endorses the view expressed by its Deputy Chair, Mr Michael Danby MP about CRU:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.157 | The Committee recommends that the AEC remain focussed and innovative in relation to CRU, in order to continue to develop and refine those processes to maintain and enhance the integrity of the electoral roll. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.158 | The Committee notes, and is impressed by the claimed marked improvement in 18 year old enrolment resulting from the AEC’s initial use of data provided by Centrelink and the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority.75 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.159 | Similarly, the Committee acknowledges the AEC’s concerns regarding the unavailability of certain State and Territory data due to privacy constraints.76 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.160 | The Committee supports the AEC’s recommendation for a further strengthening of the demand power contained in section 92 of the CEA and recommends accordingly. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.161 | The Committee notes the ALP’s assertion that CRU might be improved by the incorporation of Direct Address Change and notes that this matter has been brought before previous Committee Inquiries. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.162 | The Committee considers that the AEC is best placed to undertake a detailed consideration of this matter and report its findings to the Committee for further, more detailed investigation. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.163 | Recommendation 6The Committee recommends that:
|
1 | CEA sections 101, 245. Back |
2 | The AEC also maintains electoral rolls for States and Territories in accordance with Joint Rolls Agreements. Back |
3 | CEA section 93. Back |
4 | CEA sections 94, 94A, 95, 95AA, 96, 99A and 100. Back |
5 | CEA section 98. The proof of identity provisions contained in the Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Enrolment Integrity and Other Measures) Act 2004 have not yet taken effect. Back |
6 | CEA section 105 (1) (b) and (ba). Back |
7 | AEC, General Enrolment - Frequently Asked Questions, www.aec.gov.au/_content/What/enrolment/faq_general.htm#4 Back |
8 | Submission No. 92, (The Nationals). Back |
9 | CEA section 93A and 102 (1A). These checks are outlined below. Back |
10 | JSCEM, User Friendly, Not Abuser Friendly: May 2001. Back |
11 | JSCEM, The Integrity of the Electoral Roll, October 2002. Back |
12 | Submission No. 205, (AEC), p. 6. Back |
13 | CEA section 102 (1A). Back |
14 | CEA section 98A. Back |
15 | CEA section 93(1) (b) (i). Back |
16 | CEA section 102 (1) (b). Back |
17 | CEA section 102 (1A). Back |
18 | CEA sections94, 94A, 95, 96, 96A and 104. Back |
19 | Submission No. 136, (ALP), p. 8. Back |
20 | Submission No. 136, (ALP), p. 10. Back |
21 | Submission No. 105, (Prof. B Costar & Mr D MacKenzie ), p. 5. Back |
22 | Submission No. 131, (PILCH), p. 8. Back |
23 | Submission No. 47, ( Mrs L MacDonald ). Back |
24 | AEC, “Silent Electors” in Research Report 3 - Analysis of Declaration Voting www.aec.gov.au/_content/How/research/papers/paper3/page3.htm Back |
25 | Mr B Loughnane, Federal Director, Liberal Party of Australia, Evidence , Monday, 8 August 2005, p. 22. Back |
26 | Mr Tony Smith MP, Second Reading Speech, Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Access to Electoral Roll and Other Measures) Bill 2004 Cognate Bill: Electoral and Referendum Amendment (Enrolment Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2004, House of Representatives, Hansard, 26 May 2004, p. 29217. Back |
27 | JSCEM, The 1996 Federal Election, June 1997, p. 9, Recommendation 3. Back |
28 | JSCEM, User Friendly, Not Abuser Friendly, May 2001, Recommendation 4. Back |
29 | JSCEM, The 2001 Federal Election, June 2003, p. 48, Recommendation 1. Back |
30 | Submission No. 30, (Ms A Cousland). Back |
31 | Submission No. 92, (The Nationals). Back |
32 | Submission No. 92, (The Nationals). Back |
33 | Submission No. 136, (ALP), p. 9. Back |
34 | Submission No. 60, ( Dr Geoff Gallop , Premier of Western Australia ). Back |
35 | Submission No. 60, ( Dr Geoff Gallop , Premier of Western Australia ). Back |
36 | Telecommunications (Service Provider — Identity Checks for Pre-paid Public Mobile Telecommunications Services) Determination 2000. Back |
37 | Acceptable identification should be defined as consisting of at least one document from a list of acceptable documents, which the AEC accepts as evidence of proof of identity. A number of suitable documents were listed in Schedule 5 of the Electoral and Referendum Amendment Regulations 2001. Back |
38 | Acceptable documentary evidence of an enrolee’s address should be defined as a document from a list of acceptable documents, which the AEC accepts as evidence of proof of address Back |
39 | A previous list of persons who can attest claims for enrolment was in Schedule 4 of the Electoral and Referendum Amendment Regulations 2000. This list will require some amendment to remove references to ATSIC, and is reproduced at Appendix F. Back |
40 | Submission No. 216, (AEC), p. 25. Back |
41 | Submission No. 70, (Institute of Mercantile Agents). Back |
42 | www.austrac.gov.au/guidelines/forms/201.pdf. Back |
43 | www.transport.nsw.gov.au/licensing/100-point-check.html. Back |
44 | www.newcastle.edu.au/study/forms/idrequest.pdf. Back |
45 | This figure is comprised of the 423,993 total enrolment transactions (column g of Appendix E) plus the 89, 529 objections, 6, 256 death deletions and the 308 duplicate deletions (columns i, j and k) removed from the roll during this period. Back |
46 | Submission No. 205, (AEC), Table 2, p. 13. Back |
47 | Submission No. 221, (AEC), pp. 4–5. Back |
48 | Submission No. 125, (Festival of Light), p. 1. Back |
49 | Submission No. 95, (Liberal Party of Australia ). Back |
50 | Submission No. 92, (The Nationals). Back |
51 | Submission No. 60, ( Dr Geoff Gallop , Premier of Western Australia ). Back |
52 | Submission No. 131, (PILCH). Back |
53 | Submission No. 144, (Public Interest Advocacy Centre). Back |
54 | Mr B Loughnane , Federal Director, Liberal Party of Australia , Evidence, Monday 8 August 2005 . p. 22. Back |
55 | Mr T Gartrell, National Secretary ALP, Evidence, Monday 8 August 2005 , pp. 36–37. Back |
56 | Mr I Campbell , Evidence, Friday 5 August 2005 , p. 55. Back |
57 | Assumes 227 working days and 7 days for close of roll. Back |
58 | Submission No. 221, (AEC), Attachment A. Back |
59 | 34.43% in 1999, 46.18% in 2001, and 60.5% in 2004. Submission No. 221, (AEC), Attachment A. Back |
60 | CEA section 92. Back |
61 | This aspect of roll management was discussed in detail in JSCEM, User Friendly, Not Abuser Friendly, May 2001. Back |
62 | JSCEM, User Friendly, Not Abuser Friendly. May 2001, p. 23. Back |
63 | Previously published in the AEC’s annual reports for the respective years. Back |
64 | AEC Annual Report 2002-03, Table 5; Submission No. 205, (AEC), Tables 1 and 2. Back |
65 | AEC, Enrolment Statistics as at 30 June 2005 www.aec.gov.au/_content/What/enrolment/stats/2005/06.htm Back |
66 | Submission No. 35, ( Mr B Kirkpatrick & Mr P Brun ), p. 4. Back |
67 | Mr M Danby MP, Transcript of evidence, 12 August 2005 , p. 14. Back |
68 | Submission No. 52, ( Mr P. Brun ). Back |
69 | Submission No. 125, (Festival of Light), p. 2. Back |
70 | JSCEM, The Integrity of the Electoral Roll, October 2002, pp. 18-20. Back |
71 | Submission No. 136, (ALP), p. 10. Back |
72 | Submission No. 216, (AEC), p. 17. Back |
73 | Submission No. 216, (AEC), pp. 25–26. Back |
74 | Mr M Danby MP, Transcript of evidence, 12 August 2005 , p. 14. Back |
75 | Submission No. 216, (AEC), p. 17. Back |
76 | Submission No. 216, (AEC), p. 17. Back |
Print Chapter 2 (PDF 286KB) | < - Report Home < - Chapter 1 : Chapter 3 - > |