Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The dead don't vote ...

By Terry Gygar - posted Monday, 14 January 2008


The recent appointment of former State MP Mike Kaiser as Queensland Premier Anna Bligh’s Chief of Staff has again drawn attention to the “elephant in the corner” that the Australian Electoral Commission, the ALP and (it seems) the Coalition Parties, don’t want to discuss - the ease with which the Australian Electoral Roll can be “rorted” to skew election results and the apparent frequency with which this occurs.

Kaiser was forced to resign from the ALP and his seat in the Queensland Parliament in 2001 after admitting to signing a false electoral enrolment declaration in 1986. This was apparently part of a branch stacking effort related to an ALP pre-selection ballot. The incident didn’t badly affect his career in the Labor Party however, as he moved on to become Assistant National Secretary of the ALP, then Chief of Staff to NSW Premier Morris Iemma in 2005 and now holds the same position for Queensland’s Anna Bligh.

Phoney electoral enrolments have apparently been part of ALP culture for time immemorial. Peter Beattie, who feigned shock and horror in 2001 when Kaiser’s “indiscretions” became public, admitted, in his earlier autobiographical book In the Arena when discussing the 1983 election campaign: “Doorknocking Alexandra Hills was an interesting affair. One female member of the Labour Party was not at home when I called on her at the vacant allotment where she purportedly lived. To my not particularly great surprise, she later voted in the pre-selection.”

Advertisement

This surprisingly candid admission not only shows that Peter was obviously not surprised to find ALP members engaging in false electoral enrolments, which apparently were quite common knowledge, but also illustrates one of the tried and true methods of fiddling electoral rolls. These obviously experienced rorters admitted to fiddling pre-selections, but in doing so they also had the capacity to significantly influence general election results.

There are three simple ways of fiddling the poll:

  1. enrol people at existing addresses when the person enrolled not exist or does not live there;
  2. enrol people at addresses that don’t exist; and
  3. don't deprive the dead of the right to vote, just because they are no longer alive.

All three methods have been proven to be historically popular with the ALP (in Queensland at least) especially in marginal seats, where a few dozen votes can often make all the difference.

Method one led to the downfall of Mr Kaiser, but is not popular with the foot soldiers because it gives a real address at which investigations can commence. Only the most dedicated would take that risk today.

Getting the dead to vote is another matter. On July 26, 1989, Darryl Leonard Cox, pleaded guilty before Mr Page SM in the Brisbane Magistrates Court to falsely and knowingly signing an application for a postal vote in respect of a person who was dead. His actions were excused (in Hansard) by the local ALP MP on the grounds that: “When Darryl Cox signed a statement to be helpful to an elderly person, he was not aware that the person was dead …”. The ALP “Campaign Director” and chief spokesman at the time, Wayne Swan, was conspicuous by his silence.

Advertisement

Enrolling people at non existent addresses is perhaps the safest way to organise a rort. You can then forge a postal vote application (if you have a secure “letter drop” address) or, a safer alternative, vote absentee miles away with little fear of detection.

When I was unexpectedly elected to Queensland Parliament in the 1974 anti-Whitlam landslide, I became one of the first MPs to engage in direct mail. Without computers, this was an enormously draining effort which required the entering of the details of every registered voter on a white system card and then sorting the tens of thousands of cards in to street order and personally signing letters to be hand delivered to them. While this task was in progress, some interesting anomalies emerged - people were enrolled in parks, creeks, vacant lots and, most notably, several dozen had their addresses in the Lutwyche cemetery.

The Electoral Office didn’t want to know about it (some things never change) and I was forced to physically post a letter to each of these “phantoms”, ensure they were returned by the Post Office, and then pay a fee to object to the presence of each on the electoral roll. As a result, over 600 people were removed from the roll before the next election and, to my not great surprise, my majority went up noticeably. Now I can’t say for sure that these “phantoms” all voted Labor, but they certainly weren’t voting for me.

Throughout this process, Wayne Swan continued to be less than enthusiastic and supportive of my efforts to clean up the roll. Bob Bottom, the investigative reporter who retired to Queensland, noted a similar phenomenon on the north coast in the early 1990’s - a whole list of people were enrolled on one side of a beach side road where there was only the sea wall.

Rorting postal votes is also very simple, especially if you have already “seeded” the role with non existent voters.

In my electorate the ALP got a steady 46 per cent of most classifications of votes in most years. The extraordinary postal voting results in Stafford in 1983 therefore raised suspicions. In that year, the number of postal voters increased significantly, and the ALP got an astonishing 72 per cent of the vote!

Why the ALP would get 72 per cent of the postal vote in 1983 is a significant mystery - it seems that about 70 staunch ALP supporters suddenly appeared on the scene in late 1983 and then equally suddenly had disappeared seven months later when a by-election became necessary. When the by-election was held, the then candidate had a different campaign organisation and the ALP postal vote results dropped back below 50 per cent - but only a suspicious minded person would attach any significance to this wouldn’t they?

The enduring mystery in this whole process is that, when they know how easy it is to register false enrolments and for the dead to vote, why does the Electoral Commission so adamantly oppose attempts to ensure the integrity not only of the roll, but of the vote?

In 1989, strong suspicions about potential vote rorting were wide spread in Queensland and the then (Cooper) Government proposed that the Electoral office (then under State control) should computer match the addresses on the electoral roll with those of the State Electricity Commission, based on the reasonable assumption that most inhabited addresses had electricity connected and those that didn’t should be investigated by the Electoral Commission. The screams of protest from the ALP, particularly State Campaign Director Wayne Swan, were almost deafening.

For all the above reasons, phoney postal voting is now a riskier process, and absentee voting is the apparently preferred modus operandi, but there is a very simple way of significantly improving the integrity of the polls - require each voter to present some form of identification when casting their ballot. This was floated by the Federal Liberal Party some years ago, followed by the predictable howls of protest from the ALP.

Yes, there is a risk that this can disadvantage indigent and disadvantaged voters and there are currently cases pending before the US Supreme Court challenging some US State laws which require voters to produce very specific identifying documents. However these objections can easily be over come (in people of good will) by providing only that any official document bearing the name and address of the alleged voter is required.

Realistically, there are very few adults in this country who could not produce a driver’s licence, bank statement, benefits letter or similar. Any special problems (for example, those faced by people in small Indigenous communities, nursing homes, hospices, and so on) could be further overcome by providing that such identification can be waived where the voter is personally known to either the polling officers, a government official or an employee of a relevant institution.

This isn’t rocket science. There is ample evidence of long standing, wide spread, deliberate rorting of our electoral system. A highly effective (even if not perfect) solution is simple, inexpensive and achievable.

Why aren’t we doing it?

Perhaps our Federal Treasurer, as a person with a long history of interest in this topic, might like to look into it?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Terry Gygar RFD, LL B (Hons) is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, Bond University.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Terry Gygar
Article Tools
Comment 13 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy