Page 1687 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
parties was introduced, non-party groups were commonly all members of the same political party.
It is now arguable that the facility for candidates to stand in non-party groups is most commonly used as a vehicle for 2 or more candidates to distinguish themselves on the ballot paper by being listed in a separate group. There is no requirement or expectation that candidates listed in a non-party group have anything in common other than a desire to be listed together in a separate column. Indeed, it is possible that 1 of the 2 candidates listed in the column may only have agreed to be nominated in order to allow the other candidate to be listed in a non-party group on the ballot paper.
I make the point that I think we are all aware that that occurs. I will read further from the review of the Electoral Act:
Therefore it is apparent that the existence of non-party groups does not assist voters by providing them with any meaningful information about why such candidates are grouped together.
By contrast, candidates who are grouped under a registered party name have gone through a public registration process, which includes a requirement to make party constitutions available for public inspection. Consequently, voters can inform themselves about the policies and ideals of registered political parties and use that information to make judgments about candidates grouped together on the ballot paper in a party group.
The facility that allows 2 candidates to form a non-party group could have significant consequences for the size of Legislative Assembly ballot papers. As each column on the ballot paper increases the width of the ballot paper, a relatively small number of candidates forming several non-party groups with as few as 2 candidates in each group could result in a ballot paper that was unmanageably wide.
Wider ballot papers impose significant costs. They cost more to print, they use more paper, they are more difficult to store and handle, and they are more difficult and time-consuming to count and data-enter. With electronic voting, the more columns listed on the ballot paper, the more difficult it is to list all columns on screen so that they are all visible at a readable point size. If a large number of columns are required on a ballot paper—say more than 20—it may not be possible to use the existing electronic voting system.
The non-party group facility could be used by a relatively small number of mischievous persons to frustrate the electoral process by causing ballot papers to be over large and difficult to manage, at considerable cost to the public purse. By contrast, persons wishing to run in party columns have to prove a significant level of public support in order to register a political party.
I add that this would be at least 100 members. The commission continues:
In voting against this proposal in the Assembly in May 2004, Members expressed the view that this proposal was not healthy for democracy.
That is the same argument we have heard tonight. But what does the Electoral Commission say? The commission says:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .