Senate debates

Thursday, 13 May 2010

Committees

Electoral Matters Committee; Reference

9:31 am

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

(1)
That the following matters be referred to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters for inquiry and report:
(a)
the circumstances surrounding the impersonation of Family First polling booth workers and the distribution of misleading voting information at polling booths in the recent South Australian state election;
(b)
the extent to which this was a calculated activity designed to mislead voters into directing their preferences in a different direction from that of the official Family First voting information;
(c)
whether comparable activity would be considered to be legal under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, including the implications flowing from the decisions in Bray v Walsh (1976), Evans v Crichton-Browne (1981), Webster v Deahm (1993) and Re Carroll v Electoral Commission of Queensland (1998);
(d)
what changes would be required to the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 so as to prevent a political party (or others) engaging in such misleading and deceptive conduct at future federal elections;
(e)
the allegations that a single family illegally lodged more than 150 votes on polling day through impersonation of other voters; and
(f)
the allegations that a large number of votes remained uncollected from hospital facilities because of errors on the part of polling officials.
(2)
That in conducting the review the committee calls for public submissions and undertakes hearings in relevant capital cities.

Photo of Joe LudwigJoe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

The reason for not not granting leave in relation to this matter—clearly it is a matter we would not agree with—is that we would not have the numbers in the chamber.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

I hope you’re not opposing.

Photo of Joe LudwigJoe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

There was a double negative.

Photo of John HoggJohn Hogg (President) Share this | | Hansard source

A double negative, Senator Parry.

Photo of Joe LudwigJoe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

Yes, there was a double negative in that.

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | | Hansard source

Are you speaking to a motion?

Photo of Joe LudwigJoe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I am speaking to a motion. In doing so I recognise that the three signatures on the motion mean that we would not have a majority in the chamber. We would then waste time by going through a procedural motion which the government would lose. The government does not support the reference of these matters to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. Paragraphs (e) and (f) of the reference appear to be a direct investigation into a state election, without any reference to the Commonwealth Electoral Act or the Australian Electoral Commission. As such, this inquiry should be undertaken by the South Australian parliament. If not rejected, this would indicate to all state and territory parliaments that they have the right to investigate Commonwealth elections for partisan political purposes. This matter is a reference to a Commonwealth body and it should relate to Commonwealth matters.

Shortly after the first four paragraphs of the reference were reported to the media I asked the AEC for a briefing on these allegations and whether similar alleged conduct would be in breach of the Commonwealth Electoral Act. The AEC advised that these alleged activities would more likely than not be in breach of the act. However, in order to remove all doubt and to ensure that electors are made aware of on whose behalf how-to-vote cards are distributed, I requested the AEC to prepare possible amendments to the act. These amendments, which I table now, improve the authorisation requirements under the act so that it is made clear at the top of how-to-vote cards whether or not the card is being distributed on behalf of a political party or candidate. I will be seeking support for the amendments when further electoral legislation is debated in June and, of course, I look forward to the support of the movers of this reference for those amendments which make this inquiry unnecessary.

Unfortunately, I had very little time to be able to address the reference or hold consultations on it. Had I been afforded that opportunity I would have advised those supporting the motion that paragraphs (e) and (f) seem to be matters that should be dealt with by the relevant state authority and not matters that the Commonwealth should inquire into. Paragraphs (a) to (d) are clearly matters that raise concern. I expect Senator Fielding, having looked at that issue in detail, would acknowledge that the government has looked at acting to ensure that how-to-vote cards are dealt with in an appropriate manner and that the matter will be dealt with during the June sitting. If those amendments were to be a standalone bill, I would ask the opposition to indicate that they would not oppose any cut-off motion so that we can also deal with them.

9:36 am

Photo of Michael RonaldsonMichael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State and Scrutiny of Government Waste) Share this | | Hansard source

We will look at any amendments that the Special Minister of State wants to bring forward to the Commonwealth Electoral Act. From what he has said to me, I do not think this addresses in any way the matter that was the concern of Senator Xenophon, Senator Fielding and me and which led to this reference. Unless my colleagues tell me otherwise in light of these amendments, in my view we should continue to pursue this matter through the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. It was disgraceful, inexcusable behaviour in the South Australian election. We think it is intolerable and we think the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters is the body that should fully investigate the matter in the terms of the motion.

9:37 am

Photo of Steve FieldingSteve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | | Hansard source

This is a very serious issue, and we hear the Labor Party trying to weasel out of it. They ran around impersonating Family First in South Australia, and the Prime Minister has not got the guts to rule it out at the federal election. He should have come out the same day and ruled out doing these dirty tricks at this upcoming federal election. It was wrong. I am not just upset with the fact that they looked better than our people did! That was crazy. Maybe they got a discount on the shirts. I would like to know where they got the shirts from, because they were good shirts.

Photo of Steve HutchinsSteve Hutchins (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

We’ll give them to you!

Photo of Steve FieldingSteve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | | Hansard source

Great! Maybe you’ll get a bulk discount and give them to us. But it was totally wrong. It was misleading and deceptive, and here you are trying to stall on this issue. It is blatantly wrong and you should not be doing it. This motion has to go through today.

Photo of Joe LudwigJoe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

You’re stalling. You’re sending it to a committee.

Photo of Steve FieldingSteve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | | Hansard source

This is a serious issue and you are treating it as if it is not. What happened in South Australia is misleading and deceptive and should be ruled out. The Prime Minister should straight away rule this out for the upcoming election.

9:38 am

Photo of Nick XenophonNick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | | Hansard source

As a co-sponsor of this motion, I think what occurred in the South Australian election is something that needs to be looked at at a federal level. These terms of reference will deal with that. I note that the South Australian premier has indicated concerns and that there may well be changes to the South Australian Electoral Act so that this sort of thing does not occur again. Obviously Senator Brown is in a much better position to discuss this, but in previous years there was misleading conduct in relation to people saying they were Greens or associated with the Greens. I have heard stories about that occurring in years gone by. One of the problems that we have in relation to section 329 of the Electoral Act at the moment is that it deals with the issue of printed material. T-shirts are not included as printed material. I have drafted an amendment to the Electoral Act to include the issue of conduct and have forwarded copies of that to my colleagues. I would like to think it is something that will have bipartisan support, because clearly what occurred in South Australia indicates a problem: the possibility of abuse. I do not think anyone in this chamber would want to go down that path. For the next federal election I think it is important. We have been alerted to it; now we need to deal with it. That is why I support and have, in fact, co-sponsored these terms of reference to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters.

9:40 am

Photo of Bob BrownBob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

The Greens likewise will support any motion to clean up the rampant misrepresentation which goes on in the run to both state and federal elections and which is engaged in by the major political parties on both sides. We have seen from the Liberal Party in the past the electoral how-to-vote cards handed out that can confuse the voters into thinking they are coming from the Greens. But what is not covered in this motion is the deception of people in the run to elections through specifically targeted negative advertising. The Labor Party has become the doyenne of this deceptive activity. We saw it in the Tasmanian elections. We saw it in the South Australian elections. We saw it in the seat of Mitchell in South Australia, where arguably it changed the outcome of that election. On all occasions the Labor Party labelled its opponents—Liberal, Green or Independent—as wanting to promote illegal drugs and/or relationships with prisoners who had committed heinous crimes and who were in jail. We can expect more of it because it seems that it works, and it is not until we get truth in advertising and an end to the deliberate setting up of opponents, which seems to be coordinated and rampant in the Labor Party nationally, that we will get some protection for voters from this highly planned, misleading advertising.

Senator Fielding himself came in in an election in which his party is alleged to have spent a million dollars repeatedly advertising in my home state that I wanted to give drugs to children. So Family First is not clean from this tendency to want to besmirch untruthfully opponents in the run to elections. We should stop it. There is not in this proposal a motion for truth in advertising in the run to elections. There should be, and it is something the Greens—apparently alone, though perhaps with Senator Xenophon—will be campaigning for in the run to this election and consequently.

Question agreed to.