First-time voters on the outer (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

First-time voters on the outer
June 11, 2005


First-time voters will not be given time to enrol after a federal election is called, under a rejig of the electoral system planned by the Government when it gains control of the Senate on July 1.

The changes include stricter proof of identity for voters and would deny prisoners the right to vote.

These changes have already been blocked in the Senate, but the Special Minister of State, Eric Abetz, plans to reintroduce them after the Coalition takes control of the upper house.

He is also working on two more changes that could be included or introduced separately.

These would lift the level of anonymous political donations from $1500 to $10,000, Government sources said. Senator Abetz also plans to increase from $100 to $1500 political donations that are tax deductible.

The Democratic Audit of Australia has said the changes are bad for democracy.

Professor Marian Sawer said the early closure of the rolls could disenfranchise thousands of young Australians voting for the first time. "Australia is out of kilter on this - other countries are making it easier to vote, while we are making it harder," she said.

She also criticised the proposed requirement that voters have documentary evidence of identity, because this would disproportionately affect indigenous communities, where such documents were not so prevalent.

The Labor Party has criticised the changes.

The national secretary of the Labor Party, Tim Gartrell, told the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters inquiry into last year's election that closing the electoral rolls the day a federal election was called, "thus potentially disenfranchising over 80,000 Australians [most of whom are under 21] and forcing 250,000-300,000 people to vote using the wrong address", was one of the major impacts of the proposed changes.

The changes would have "serious implications for Australian democracy", he said.

Louise Dodson
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Firsttime-voters-on-the-outer/2005/06/10/1118347602401.html

This issue has been mentioned on BOS before (this time last year), but at the time there was little to no chance of it becoming a reality. So much is going to change from 1 July. Here's to greater levels of disunity within the federal Coalition!

 

[Generator]

Coalition set to change the way we vote

 

[withoutaface]

I thought the compulsory voting thing was in the constitution?

 

[iamsickofyear12]

It doesn't bother me. But I have to enrol before the next federal election anyway I think.

 

[townie]

another stripping away of the democracy of Australia, with the average australian barley noticing it, or not caring, because "why should i care if it doesnt affect me". the herald summed it up perfectly in it's cartoon after the last federal elections

-Not Happy John *no tick*
-I'm allright Jack *tick*

more and more australains are caring about themselves rather than the whole country, and hope 2 sleep better at night by making an $100 donation to the tsunami relief, or criticisng the indonesian government on lack of democracy and unfair treatment of people when we're heading down the same road as them.


Shame Australia, Shame

 

[Monkey Butler]

It doesn't bother me

Well it should. Compulsory voting is a necessary evil - if nobody has to vote, campaigns will become like those in America: ignoring those who wouldn't vote anyway, and pandering even more to the swing voters.
The political bribes ("donations") changes are also dangerously undemocratic. Again, just look at America, where the lobby group rules. If ananymous donations are further encouraged how are we supposed to know where policies are coming from (media monopolies anyone?).
The closing the voting registers thing might not be all that bad. Closing the registers early would help streamline the processing of new enrolments, and really, there's no reason why you can't enrol earlier (you can enrol at 17).

 

[LaraB]

I thought the compulsory voting thing was in the constitution?

lol not really...most people think it is..

really, under law you just have to register and turn up if you'r a citizen and over 18,, you don't have to vote as such you just have to go to a voting centre and get your name marked off...

all this stuff mentioned in this post is exactly why i don't vote coalition in anything! lol

 

[withoutaface]

no...there are no positive rights in the constitution.. You dont have a RIGHT TO vote. S 41 of the AC is merely a negative right. In that the government is not allowed to stop you from voting. It doesnt have to do anything to make sure you vote.

It is characterised as an immunity rather than a right.

Wouldn't the prisoners thing contravene that?

 

[LaraB]

Well it should. Compulsory voting is a necessary evil - if nobody has to vote, campaigns will become like those in America: ignoring those who wouldn't vote anyway, and pandering even more to the swing voters.
The political bribes ("donations") changes are also dangerously undemocratic. Again, just look at America, where the lobby group rules. If ananymous donations are further encouraged how are we supposed to know where policies are coming from (media monopolies anyone?).
The closing the voting registers thing might not be all that bad. Closing the registers early would help streamline the processing of new enrolments, and really, there's no reason why you can't enrol earlier (you can enrol at 17).

yeah..its one of those topics where you don't win either way..

if you make voting compulsorary there'll be more fines handed out... more donkey votes.. more people who random vote and who don't care about who they tick so that's in a way votes to someone who didnt really "deserve" it..

but if its voluntary, people don't vote then have a huge bitch when whichever party gets voted in..

voluntary voting's been shown to potentially disadvantage lower socio-economic classes, migrants, indigenous etc because if there's no compulsorary voting, the campaigns will just becom elike the US and less an dless people will know their voting rights let alone who to vote for...

at least if its compulsorary potentially everyone knows what's going on and has the chance to vote pointless as it may seem if you're not a supporter of the coalition in federal elctions or labour in the case of state elections lol

 

[withoutaface]

Who is going to bring an action on behalf of prisoners to make sure their rights are not infringed?

Russell Crowe.

 

[jumb]

Russell Crowe.

Gladiator style.

 

[Rorix]

Can't see too many people defending the validity of this change.

 

[loquasagacious]

My understanding is that prisoners 'rights' would not be being infringed as the 'right to vote' is derived entirely from the Electoral Act which it is presumed is being amended by this act.

Far more concerning I would have said is the other 'reforms' in the jpg.

Specifically the exclusion of minorities from the senate through entry quotas (a move designed to reduce the Senate to a superflous rubber stamp).

And even more worryingly the proposed eventual move to a first past the post system, a system that might I remind everyone has seen British governments hold a huge majority over the opposition with votes split 40:30:independent. In fact theoretically a government could be formed and hold all seats but just 50%+1 of the vote.

Both of these reforms would serve to promote the interests of the major parties to the great detriment of Australia as a whole. The executive's powers would be swollen imensly as the executive would now by definition have absolute control of the legislature.

Off topic:

Voluntary voting has some advantages and could atually lead to a greater voice for the majority. Under our current system parties craft polices and construct pork barrels to lure swinging voters like the sysdney bible belt. Were voting voluntary strategies would shift from enticing swingers to getting out the vote as they would no longr be able to rely on the vast majority of Australians voting for the same party year in and year out for generations.

In this way rather than making policy to attract to 10-20% of Australia that swings parties would preach to the converted and make policies that reflected the 40% or so of people who always voted for them. Hence government could be considered more not less representative of the people.