GOING after the integrity of Australia’s voting system is not a path any politician should pursue lightly.
And if they do, at a bare minimum it should come from an informed place.
Member for Farrer Sussan Ley appeared to fail on both fronts last week, when bizarrely taking aim at the Australian Electoral Commission.
When filling out their ballot paper for the Voice referendum on October 14, voters will have a simple job: write “yes” or “no” in the box provided.
This is made clear – in big letters under “Directions to voter” and again underneath the box.
The overwhelming majority of voters will follow these instructions just fine.
Inevitably, though, a small number will instead mark a tick or cross.
For these ballots, the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 stipulates that “the voter’s intention, so far as that intention is clear” must be taken into account.
As the AEC points out, this principle has been in place for at least 30 years and six referendum questions.
“The longstanding legal advice provides that a cross can be open to interpretation as to whether it denotes approval or disapproval: many people use it daily to indicate approval in checkboxes on forms,” the AEC said.
“The legal advice provides that for a single referendum question, a clear tick should be counted as formal and a cross should not.”
Ms Ley went on national television to argue a cross should be counted as a “no” anyway.
“It’s actually an issue for the AEC,” she told Sunrise.
“I think (Labor MP Jason Clare, also appearing on the show) should be talking to them and be absolutely firm on having a fair referendum.”
Actually, Ms Ley, it’s not the AEC’s job to be setting the rules.
It is the job of the parliament – the place you work.
As recently as this year, an amendment was passed specifying that “Y” and “N” should be counted as formal votes.
You didn’t pursue a ticks-and-crosses amendment then. Nor did the Coalition legislate such a change at any time while in government since 1984.
Your defence that Australia has added more residents from overseas since the last referendum doesn’t wash, either.
As psephologist Kevin Bonham points out, a cross is used to signify voting for a candidate in many overseas elections with multiple checkboxes.
Using a cross is even so commonplace on government forms that both Liberals leader Peter Dutton and Nationals leader David Littleproud marked crosses to indicate “yes” on their parliament qualification checklists last year.
The complaint also ignores that the 1999 referendum had a world-class formal-vote rate of 99.14 per cent – the system we have actually works remarkably well.
Ms Ley, by pushing the AEC to ignore consistent legal advice across six referendums, you are asking them to do something that is almost certainly illegal.
By impressing on the public that the AEC is ultimately responsible for something that isn’t their job, you are dabbling in misinformation about our highly regarded election authority.
By questioning whether the referendum can be considered “fair”, you are sowing doubt about its result.
All this sounds great if you’re an ego-obsessed American president who’s been booted out of the White House, but is that the level of discourse we need here?
You can do better than this.
