Since 1918, it has been compulsory to enrol to vote in Australia . Compulsory turnout at the polls came later — but the two go hand-in-hand, making good the principle that every voice matters.
In practice, we know that people new to the system — first-time voters such as the young and recent citizens — are less likely to be enrolled. Worse, many thousands are “cleansed” from the rolls each year because the government has data showing they have moved addresses. Letters are sent chasing them, but those letters may never reach their recipients. Forms are received, but people don’t act on them (especially given the identification requirements the Howard government required).
Perversely, the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) cannot use the same data to automatically enroll you or update your address. So the rolls are cleansed, but not refilled. The law doesn’t even allow the AEC to provide for an online enrolment process. Paper forms must be signed, witnessed, identification cited and posted to local offices for processing.
The New South Wales parliament, with bipartisan support, enacted an “automatic enrolment” system late last year. It’s not 100% automatic, mind you. It will permit the NSW electoral commission to write, advising people they are going to be enrolled. This can be by email or SMS. People will have at least a week to correct the data if needs be. Data relying on school enrolments and drivers licensing is known to be highly reliable.
The federal government wants to follow suit.
On Thursday, Andrew Robb stood in parliament and threw a big spanner. He denounced automatic enrolment as “radical”, “untried” and a threat to electoral “integrity”. No evidence was given for the latter claim.
To be generous to the federal Opposition, let us assume they are not in this for partisan effect. After all it is not just the young and migrants who are less likely to be enrolled: roll cleansing affects all classes of people in a mobile community.
Their position is classically conservative in three ways. One is the claim that enrolment must remain ultimately an individual’s responsibility. If this claim is sincere, it may as well be a mask for voluntary enrolment, and hence voting.
The second conservative element is the “don’t try anything new” line. Yet that didn’t stop the Howard government introducing early roll closure and extra identification requirements. And since the NSW commission and the AEC are happy with automatic enrolment, it is hardly “radical”.
The third conservative angle is to fear for the “integrity” of the rolls. But a significantly incomplete roll inherently lacks integrity. Not just because comprehensiveness is as important as accuracy, but because if one wanted to rort the roll the best gift the law could give would be a pool of tens of thousands of citizens, in every street in the nation, to personate.
If automatic federal enrolment is not enacted it won’t just be a victory for less comprehensive rolls. And it won’t just mean a return to the inefficiencies of the decades predating joint federal-state roll arrangements.
The federal election in the NSW “battleground” may end up an almighty mess. If you are automatically enrolled in New South Wales, why would you imagine you had to go through the paper trail of enrolling federally? A disjointed system risks mass disenfranchisement — and it will bring the federal roll into disrepute.
The NSW system is not being rushed in. The laws are yet to be started, pending careful operational development. They may even be delayed until after the federal election, to at least avoid chaos at this year’s federal poll.
But what about the next electoral cycle? It would be ironic if the much-maligned NSW political system moved into the 21st century while the federal system was left languishing in early 20th.
I recall when Howard changed the Laws, many people knew that it would affect the young and people who may be more likely not to support the Coalition – they can huff and puff all they like, but the reason is still the same! It’s amazing the contempt they have for the ordinary voters isn’t it? We’re all these horrible criminals, intent on any means to commit our crimes by voting many times?
What about the homeless? Their problems are reinforced as theirs, as they’re not eligible to vote either are they? All these qualified legal people who obviously don’t have a problem with disenfranchising the young, the recently moved or just those who are busy or lazy and haven’t got around to doing the paperwork. They should have up until the last date that is appropriate to have the paper work done for polling day – or vote absent from their old address? There is a way, they just don’t want to find it! They’ll be spruiking about ‘our democracy’ soon! YUK!
I get letters three or four times a year for some guy who hasn’t lived on the place for at least 8 years. I used to return to sender the letters saying please amend your records but these pointers never got throught to the AEC. I just throw the letters in the bin now. What a waste of time…
The tethering of the Australian Electoral Commission to 19th century technology is most disappointing. Of course it should have automatic and online enrolment.
Now let’s get onto some advances of substance. First, voting in polling booths by computer would be easier for voters and could build in some simple checks for completeness and internal coherence to reduce informal votes. This might in turn increase voting ‘below the line’, to use a metaphor from the paper ballot. It would make counting much faster, easier and more accurate. That would change election nite parties since the result would be known within 30 minutes of closing the polls, but I’m sure Aussies are resourceful enough to find another way of organising a piss-up.
Next, the Australian Electoral Commission should start working on online ballots. There are several issues with this, of course, but if the banks can work out out to secure their millions of customers’ online transfers of up to several thousands of dollars surely the electoral commission can trial some ideas for securing the transfer of a few votes.