Is the Electoral Commission really doing the

right thing?

We like to believe that actual elections (and thus referenda) in Downunder are "free and fair" and not subject to political interference. We also like to believe they cannot be manipulated in other ways.

This referendum is throwing up some issues that suggest the system may not be quite as perfect as we would like to believe. 

There has been the issue of "ticks" and "crosses". The instructions clearly state we need to write "yes" or "no". The Electoral Commission is saying they will accept both ticks and crosses - but only as "yes". Apparently it has been done before. If so then they will need to be accepted again - but the legislation needs to change so they will not be accepted in the future. Our community is so culturally diverse the idea that both a tick and a cross indicate "yes" is not acceptable.

There has been the issue of the A-frame advertising. At the last election there was more than one instance when the Electoral Commission required candidates to take down material. On one occasion the authorisation notice at the foot was too small and on another the colour was said to be too closely aligned with other material. In this referendum however complaints there were A-frames for the "Yes" side in an almost matching colour with the AEC's own material have simply been met with a requirement to move the frames a little further away. 

I looked at the information supplied to people who wanted to earn a little extra working for the AEC at polling stations. It actually stated that people in charge of polling stations would need to store voting papers at home in a "secure location".  Is this really "secure"? The first two problems seem small compared with this. The entire process is open to fraud if voting papers are not under lock and key - preferably in a location where it requires two or more people to access them.

The AEC then added to the problems by very publicly saying that if people voted twice then both votes would be counted. They say, rightly, that the vote is secret so there is no way they can know which way people vote. It is an offence to knowingly vote twice. At the last election the Senior Cat voted in the nursing home wanted him to vote a second time. He had already voted with my help. He trusted me to do exactly as he requested. He did not want to reveal his voting intentions to a member of staff.  I was told, "You should have let us do it for him." No. The AEC should only allow strangers to help those who need assistance. My own extensive research in the area indicates that too many people do get a second and even third or fourth vote if they "assist" people who are dependent on them. 

This time around with all the bitterness and division the question is causing there is every chance that someone is going to attempt to make trouble by going to vote in another's place and people will be accused of voting twice as a result. Yes, names are marked off manually on the roll but you do not need to show ID.

If the end result is very close (and it well might be) there may be some interesting questions about just how "free and fair" the system is. Even if it is not then I hope we learn something from all this.