Page 1216 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
can you come up with that will provide people with information from political parties on how to vote that does not offend against Mr Humphries's amendment? I have no doubt that people will come up with methods of doing it. Rather than banning how-to-vote cards, Mr Humphries simply is making the whole issue of how to get political parties' information to voters very much more difficult and more complicated.
I realise that the reason why Mr Humphries has not sought to ban how-to-vote cards outright is that he is not game. It would have been the honest thing to do. He knows that in this Territory people do value that right to freedom of expression and the right to obtain political information.
Mr Humphries: It is not done in Tasmania.
MS FOLLETT: Mr Humphries makes much of the fact that it is not done in Tasmania. No, it is not; but in the legislation we have made some departures from what occurs in Tasmania. We have already done that. Madam Speaker, there is no way in which the banning of how-to-vote cards is integral to the Hare-Clark system with Robson rotation. As I have said many times, it is difficult to have a how-to-vote card that is effective, but just because it is difficult is no reason to ban it. I believe that in this Territory people do value that information. They look for it on polling day. Often they rely upon it in order to cast a vote, particularly those people who may have literacy problems or who may be from non-English-speaking backgrounds. For those reasons, I would urge members to oppose Mr Humphries's amendment and allow the people of this Territory to have the advantage of how-to-vote cards if they want to use them. They do not have to. There is no compulsion about taking a how-to-vote card or using it. Madam Speaker, I suggest that it is a gross infringement of political liberty to ban them in the way that Mr Humphries suggests.
MS SZUTY (4.50): I spoke during the in-principle debate about my views in general on this Bill, and I have spoken briefly on other amendments as they have come before this chamber. I would like to spend some time talking about this issue of banning how-to-vote cards from within 100 metres of a polling booth. Quite simply, I believe that Canberrans expect their new electoral system to reflect their choice at the referendum, the Hare-Clark system, as described in the Electoral Commission's referendum booklet, and as practised in Tasmania, as most people understand it.
The Tasmanian electoral system has evolved over the years to the system in operation today. Indeed, Madam Speaker, Tasmanians have done good work in ironing out the wrinkles, and the electors of the ACT can benefit from this. The aim of virtually all the changes to the Hare-Clark system in Tasmania since 1907 has been to achieve greater fairness for candidates. It is accepted that, on polling day, voters will make the final decision about who is elected to the Assembly. Party preselection, where it occurs, is seen as an important part of the process, but not as the final arbiter in determining who is elected. There is no need to try to reinvent the system. Add-ons, like how-to-vote cards, are nothing more than a denial of the current Tasmanian experience.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .