Posted on April 21, 2010
The Liberal Party and the Family First Party today announced that they will move to establish a Legislative Council inquiry into the fake How-to-Vote cards distributed by the Australian Labor Party at the 20 March State Election.
The announcement follows the decision by the Electoral Commissioner not to take action against the Labor Party.
Shadow Attorney-General, Stephen Wade said that “Commissioner Mousley’s reading of the Electoral Act nullifies the intended affect of section 112B of the Act. We believe her interpretation of the Act is wrong and contrary to parliament’s clear intent. Section 112B of the Act was inserted into the Act only last year to deal with bogus How-to-Vote cards like the Family First card.
On Election Day, the Labor Party used its Party members, wearing T-shirts emblazoned with a Family First slogan, to distribute How-to-Vote cards, also bearing the Family First slogan, but directing preferences contrary to the registered Family First How-to-Vote card.
Dennis Hood, Parliamentary Leader of Family First said that it was vital for the integrity of the electoral process that people could not be deceived into directing their vote to a Party based on a fake How-to-Vote card.
“We need an inquiry to recommend water tight amendments to the Electoral Act to make it doubly clear that what is unethical is also illegal.”
Mr Wade said “In distributing the fake HTV cards, the Rann Government did exactly what it said it wanted to stop when it amended the Act to insert section 112B to deal specifically with bogus How-to-Vote cards”. (See quotes in the Attachment).
In Attorney-General Atkinson’s Second Reading Speech he said:
“Although the Government believes there is nothing wrong with attempting to solicit the second-preferences of voters honestly, it does not believe the same can be said where bogus cards, purporting to be issued by an independent or minor party, dishonestly direct preferences to a major party (or any party or candidate)”.
The ALP’s use of fake How-to-Vote cards was a new low for South Australian politics. The Liberal Party and Family First will now move to ensure that this dishonest conduct cannot be perpetrated on the South Australian people again.
Michael Atkinson Press Release
Election law changes to keep up with the times
5 March 2009
“Changes to election advertising and party naming laws …
* Banning bogus how-to-vote cards, for example second-preference cards designed to look like they come from the candidate himself or herself but do not.”
House of Assembly Hansard
ELECTORAL (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL
Second Reading
5 March 2009
Hon M Atkinson:
Bogus how-to-vote cards
The Commissioner has raised concerns about the potential for bogus how-to-vote cards to be used at State elections.
The main type of bogus how-to-vote card that has caused problems interstate is the second-preference card, which is aimed at capturing the second preferences of persons who intend voting for one party, particularly a minor party or independent.
These bogus cards, although advocating a vote for the minor party or independent, allocate preferences to one of the major parties. They are constructed to look like a minor party or independent issued them.
Although the Government believes there is nothing wrong with attempting to solicit the second-preferences of voters honestly, it does not believe the same can be said where bogus cards, purporting to be issued by an independent or minor party, dishonestly direct preferences to a major party (or any party or candidate). Bogus how-to-vote cards could, in a worst-case scenario, affect the outcome of an election decided on preferences. At the very least, they could affect voter confidence in the electoral process.
To address this problem, the Bill inserts two new sections, sections 112A and 112B, into the Act.
New section 112A requires that how-to-vote cards distributed during an election must include both the name and address of the person who authorised the card and the name of the relevant party (or independent candidate).
New section 112B prohibits a person from publishing or distributing how-to-vote cards or electoral advertisements that identify a candidate by reference to the name of a registered political party, or uses words that constitute a distinctive part of the name of another party, unless that person is an endorsed candidate of the party or the party has consented to the use of the particular words.
In Committee
14 May 2009
The Hon. I.F. EVANS: I want to ask the question again then. In previous elections, how-to-vote cards have been put out that said 'If you are thinking of voting Greens but want to give Iain Evans your second preference, put Greens 1, Evans 2, Labor 3, someone else 4' and it has been properly authorised. That is an accurate piece of material, so why we are banning that, if we are banning that?
What is wrong with a candidate being honest enough to say that they are voting Democrats (and they were always going to vote Democrats) but if you want to give Evans your second or third preference above Labor then this is how you do it, and as long as it is accurate and endorsed what is wrong with that?
Mr Hanna: As long as you're not pretending to be them.
The Hon. I.F. EVANS: No; that's right.
The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: My understanding is that what I am trying to do is say that is not legitimate any more, that if you want to put out a how-to-vote card which is for another candidate, say, 'Vote 1 Hanna, but don't follow Hanna's how-to-vote card, follow this how-to-vote card', you cannot do it except with Hanna's consent.
I stand by that because I have seen so many examples of that kind of ticket being passed off as the official ticket. We saw Labor do it, I think, some years ago in the Nunawading by-election and we saw the Liberals do it at the last general election to Family First, so that people were misled at the polling booth into believing they were receiving the Family First voting ticket when in fact they were receiving a Liberal alteration of the Family First how-to-vote ticket.
My view is that I do not think it is really possible to hand out such a how-to-vote ticket and to make it clear to the voter that this is not the ticket of the candidate, and, rather, it is someone substituting their order of preferences for that nominated by the candidate. I will give you an example so that it is plain. Let us take Davenport, which is the last speaker's electorate. He puts out a how-to-vote card saying 'Vote Iain Evans Liberal 1', and then he gives his preferences through to the last candidate consecutive numbers.
Is it okay for another person or another candidate to say, 'Yes, vote Iain Evans 1', but put the preferences in a completely different order so that if Iain Evans is eliminated in the count and his preferences distributed, that vote will have a completely different effect from the effect that Iain Evans, the candidate, wants. It is simply no good dressing it up as how to vote for Iain Evans but really vote for Labor.