Thursday, 20 February 2025
Committees
Electoral Matters Committee
Please do not quote
Proof only
Committees
Electoral Matters Committee
Reference
That this house refers an inquiry into the conduct of the 2025 by-elections for the districts of Prahran and Werribee to the Electoral Matters Committee for consideration and report no later than 8 December 2025 and the committee should examine:
(1) the conduct of, and processes implemented by, the Victorian Electoral Commission and its officials; and
(2) voter turnout.
This is an important inquiry, and I know that the new chair of the committee the member for Tarneit will be looking forward to that inquiry. It is important when we have by-elections like this that we take the opportunity to review what worked and what did not work. We know the Victorian Electoral Commission told us that they prioritise accuracy over timeliness, but there has got to be a balance there, I think. We are all here for accuracy, but I think we can all probably agree that the timeliness could perhaps be improved. I think this is an important inquiry, and I commend it to the house.
Sam GROTH (Nepean) (15:51): The Liberals and Nationals support the government’s motion for an inquiry on these by-elections. It is imperative we uphold our democratic values here. I think after what we saw in Prahran and Werribee – and there are many members of the chamber who spent time on the polling booths, in scrutineering post election day and also spent plenty of time on the recounts – we know there were challenges right across the various polling booths with scrutineers, many of them not just members of this chamber, who did turn up, but also volunteers from many political parties.
Across various booths we saw a huge number of instances where scrutineers were unjustly locked out. At Riverbend Primary School they were locked out for a period of time while the election officials had a meal break. At Manorvale Primary School. Liberal and Hopper volunteers were locked out. At Iramoo scout hall scrutineers were locked out until 6:30, hindering their oversight; the same at Wyndham Park Primary, where they were locked out for 25 minutes. At Iramoo Primary they were locked out for over 30 minutes. I mean, we cannot be locking scrutineers out when votes are inside with no-one overseeing them. At the Manor Lakes booth the vote counting did not start until 25 minutes after a meal break. At Thomas Chirnside Primary School scrutineers were allowed inside before the doors were locked but then had to wait 25 minutes for the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to take their meal break. It indicates a proper lack of planning due to scrutineer access, and it affects the transparency of counting. At Westgrove Primary School scrutineers were told at 6:15 that due to a meal break they would have to wait. At Werribee Secondary College voting did not start counting until 6:45 pm. I know the Leader of the House said we need to do things in a timely manner and accurately; well, none of this reflects a timely manner. At Riverwalk Primary School a scrutineer had already signed in and was told he had to wait outside while new scrutineers were registered. This did not follow proper protocol. There were delays in counting at several polling booths. These cannot be overlooked, and such delays honestly erode public confidence in our electoral system.
The count in Werribee was described as disastrous by officials from both the Labor and the Liberal parties, and starting half an hour late at some counting places and finishing close to 1:00 am produced a painstakingly slow release of results. The pre-poll period was equally chaotic. There have been reports of wildly inaccurate vote tallies, unorganised ballots left unsupervised, and the VEC’s reconciliation account was found to be 1300 votes off, a glaring discrepancy that raised alarm bells about the integrity of our electoral processes.
If we cannot trust the counting of our votes, how can we trust the outcomes of our elections? I know the Leader the House mentioned voter turnout, and we know in Prahran that was extremely low, but we also know from the inquiry into the 2022 election, and also some questions that were asked during that inquiry in regard to the Warrandyte by-election, that the VEC in that by-election in Warrandyte only spent $150,000 on digital advertising, but they said it was in line with the Victorian government strategy – and you have to question why the independent VEC is following a Labor government’s digital strategy when it comes to getting information out to voters about an election. My opinion is that if every voter has an address, why cannot the VEC send every voter a letter or information in regard to an election when they are happy to send information to every voter who does not turn up to vote? If you are happy to send them a fine, then be more than happy to send them the information about –
Iwan Walters: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I think it is very dangerous, particularly in the context of this debate, for members on either side to impugn those opposite and to suggest that there is a political conspiracy in the context of the VEC. Imputations on other members are unparliamentary.
Sam GROTH: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, I did not refer to any member. We have had that ruling from the Speaker many times today, including in question time.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Daniela De Martino): I remind the member on his feet to address the motion. There was no imputation.
Sam GROTH: When you talk about voter turnout, I think the VEC should also look at some of those locations for pre-poll. For anyone who did attend the Prahran pre-poll, there was one on Chapel Street, but the one down on Wilson Street was hidden away. There was no parking. There was a whole bunch of traffic work going on, and it actually ended up resulting in one of the volunteers being hit by a car, which is not something we want to see when people are turning out to volunteer at elections.
We need to see the VEC take an approach that reflects the needs of all members of the community. Social media is great for younger members, but there are a whole lot of people in our community who are older. Like I said, everybody has a postal address. Everybody has the ability to receive information in regard to a by-election or a regular election.
I want to refer to an article from 14 November 2024 in the Sydney Morning Herald in regard to the VEC commissioner’s defeatist attitude when it comes to elections. Commissioner Sven Bluemmel stated in this article that despite the scale and complexity:
The prescribed timeline for Victorian elections is the shortest in the nation …
He further added:
As electoral participation continues to grow, it is increasingly difficult to meet these timelines, and there is no longer any contingency for unforeseen disruptions or failures.
For me this signals a lack of confidence in the VEC’s ability to effectively manage elections, which is deeply concerning. But his notion that ‘The risk of an election failure is now real’ is not a message that should be coming from the head of our electoral commission. Instead, we need to be instilling confidence in the electorate that we are equipped to handle the complexities of modern elections.
Another issue that emerged during these by-elections was the apparent lack of impartiality from election officials. In Prahran polling place managers were reported to have made inappropriate comments about Liberal Party posters while failing to address similar issues with posters from other parties. This behaviour undermines the professionalism expected from our electoral officers and raises concerns around bias in the administration of our elections. It was disheartening to see a junior official in Werribee removed following a Labor complaint while no similar actions were taken against senior officials in Prahran who exhibited partisan behaviour. The inconsistent handling of complaints is troubling and calls into question the VEC’s commitment to impartiality and fairness.
It is our duty to ensure electoral processes are conducted with the highest standards of integrity, and the inquiry into the Prahran and Werribee by-elections is not merely a procedural step, it is necessary to restore public confidence in our democratic system. We must hold the VEC accountable for its actions and ensure that all electoral officials adhere to principles of fairness and transparency. The inquiry needs to focus on several key areas, including scrutineer access and treatment, delays in counting, impartiality of election officials and pre-polling procedures. We will absolutely support this, and we look forward to these matters being addressed when the inquiry comes to the committee.
Dylan WIGHT (Tarneit) (15:59): I would like to rise in support of the motion this afternoon, and in doing so I would like to congratulate the brand new member for Werribee John Lister, who was sworn in yesterday and who will make an absolutely fantastic local representative for the people of Werribee and continue to fight for them every single day.
There is a referral proposed here for an inquiry with a narrow term of reference into the Werribee and Prahran by-elections. The reason for those narrow terms of reference is that a 2022 state election review has already been undertaken. We thought it was important for this inquiry to only really deal with the issues that presented themselves in those by-elections.
As to the terms of reference or the two points to this motion, it will review the conduct and processes implemented by the Victorian Electoral Commission and its officials, and it will examine voter turnout. By-elections historically have low voter turnout already, and indeed elections held in electorates with a high multicultural population typically have pretty low voter turnout as well, but only 79.91 per cent in Werribee and then, shockingly, 68.28 per cent in Prahran is a real problem. This inquiry needs to get to the bottom of why that is and what processes can be strengthened around the VEC and the way that they communicate with voters as to notifying them of elections. That is incredibly important.
The conduct of the VEC and their systems will be reviewed as well, which is also incredibly important. An independent electoral commission is a fundamental pillar of our democracy, and I will not question that, like the member for Nepean just did, because I think that is incredibly dangerous. It is dangerous; it is hurtful to our democracy. In saying that, we need to make sure that the VEC’s systems that they put in place and the training that they provide are adequate – not just adequate but as good as they possibly can be. The member for Nepean used the example of one VEC employee or volunteer in Werribee directing people how to vote in a polling booth. That is pretty bad stuff. That is something that is incredibly dangerous to our democracy. The VEC has to maintain its independence at all times. Political parties have to be confident of that, but voters have to be confident of that. This is one of the greatest democracies in the world, and the fact that we have independent electoral commissions is a really large part of that. I am sure that will come under scrutiny as part of this inquiry.
The member for Nepean also mentioned some situations where scrutineers were locked out of polling booths after the voting period had concluded, so after 6 pm. I have heard of an example where one voting centre manager wanted to lock out scrutineers for half an hour whilst there were open ballots on the table in the voting booth. I am not going to stand here and blame workers and I am not going to blame volunteers – I am not going to do that – but the VEC’s processes and training around those things have to be robust. We have to be as confident as we possibly can that all of that has been adequate leading up to the election.
This is what the inquiry will deal with. As I said, narrow scope, narrow terms of reference, and it is an inquiry that we will be able to knock over relatively quickly and report on in December. I look forward, as the chair of the Electoral Matters Committee, to undertaking that work, and I commend the motion to the house.
James NEWBURY (Brighton) (16:03): I will start by agreeing with the previous speaker and reiterate that the coalition will be supporting the motion that the government has moved in relation to the inquiry into the two by-elections. It is important to make sure that, as we have one of the best democratic systems in the world, the systems that make that happen, that are in place, are robust and they work. At times they will not be perfect, but this review is an opportunity to look at where things can be improved and where we can do better.
I think it is also important to start by noting that the Victorian Electoral Commission enlists, at times of election, the most wonderful people to take part in the democratic process. People from all of our communities put their hand up to be part of votes when they take place, whether it be a general election, whether it be a by-election or whether it be a federal or state election. Often when you are in your community you will see people that you know, and obviously when you go into a voting place you will show them the respect they deserve, because they are there to make sure the system works and to make sure we all get the chance to vote. They are good people; they are great staff. I am sure that everybody in this place would agree that the VEC enlists the best parts of the community to be part of the system.
This inquiry hopefully will look at some very important issues. When we talked about things that do need to be addressed, I know that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition noted a number of things like making sure that scrutineers had access to buildings at the right time. I am aware of other instances where people were let into buildings unaccompanied. I saw votes being found, and in no way am I casting any aspersion upon anybody. Nothing is ever perfect, but when you see boxes open that have not been sealed and significant numbers of votes found in wrong boxes, you want to make sure that those issues, in terms of the way the VEC operates and the processes around them, those mistakes, do not occur, because we need to make sure that our system is beyond reproach. There are things that have occurred in the by-elections that need to be addressed, and we need to make sure that we go through and enhance our processes. I saw a lot of those issues firsthand scrutineering in Werribee on the first day. A number of us on this side of the chamber were there scrutineering as those votes were being counted, and so were a lot of the staff of the Labor members on the other side of the chamber. There were a lot of us in the room, and we were all there for the scrutineering. Both state and federal staff of the government members were there.
There were a number of other issues that hopefully we can look at as part of the inquiry, not just things to do with the count and scrutineering but also making sure that with pre-poll, which more people want to do, we do not look for ways to make that difficult for people. My view is we want to make sure that people have the longest opportunity. As someone who at every pre-poll in my own elections will stand there for every minute of every day, it would be easier to say let us do it for a day or two less, but my personal view is it is a really fantastic way to engage people. If we are talking about turnout and we want people to turn out, the best way to do that is provide them more opportunity to vote. I think we always have to fight against a push to truncate voting. I think that people want to vote earlier. They want the option and convenience of voting at pre-poll. I think we need to give them that chance, and we as members and our campaign staff around us, we just need to stand there for longer, frankly. I know that many will not love me saying that, but I really do think that is important.
I do want to note one real concern I had in the by-election process, and that was the VEC seeking to require sign-in for volunteers who were working at booths. I very strongly oppose the requirement to disenfranchise people from attending a polling booth and having their voice heard in terms of campaigning for candidates. The idea that big government needs to record who is there and record the details of those people and enforce some kind of ‘big government’ bureaucracy over people expressing themselves is very, very concerning. I know that the coalition have already spoken about our concerns about that. But I think it would be wrong to think that the VEC should trial that any further, and it would be wrong for the VEC to think that that would in any way be appropriate in an election. Effectively it would run against the grain of you having the right to a freedom of association and to a freedom of choice around your own vote. To have government recording people and how they vote – because that is effectively what it is, recording people’s votes, and government would hold the data of any campaign worker that the VEC collected in terms of how they were campaigning – is a very dangerous path. It runs against, in my view, both federal and state law.
I am sure that the VEC has not looked into the legality of what they were asking people to do, but I suspect that there would be serious legal issues with it, and I was shocked to see them trying to do that.
I hope that this review also goes into some of the broader structural issues with the VEC that played out in this by-election – as we talked about, things like scrutineers et cetera and some processes around that. They are not unique to this by-election. We have seen some of these issues play out. I know in the last state election there were polling places that ran out of ballots. We have seen final counts still not being done on a number of seats for the 2022 election – the two-party preferred votes have not been done on a number of seats still to this day. So not everything is perfect, and though this review goes to this specific by-election, I think it would be fair to say that there are some processes in relation to the VEC that are starting to look shabby. Hopefully this review will assist in making sure that we can clean up the edges of those problems that do exist before the next state election.
If I can finish on a final point, I was just speaking about the sign-in and the requirement for big government to hold data on that. I note that when we talk about turnout and the issue with turnout at this by-election, perhaps the VEC could focus more on getting people out to vote than trying to record the campaign workers who are there to express their view. I think we need to forget and focus less on the bureaucracy and more on the engagement. That is I think something that government departments and government agencies forget – they forget the outwardness of their job and focus more on the internal. I am not saying there are not internal issues that need to be addressed, and hopefully they are, but I think the VEC needs to look frankly at the way the AEC operates. The AEC tries very hard to be an outward organisation in terms of encouraging voter turnout, and they do a good job. They try and be as cool as they possibly can considering they are an electoral organisation, but they try really hard on that engagement piece. That is something I think the VEC can learn from, and this review would be an opportunity to do that. Just to reiterate, the coalition will be supporting this motion. It is a good opportunity.
Sarah CONNOLLY (Laverton) (16:13): I too rise to speak on the motion put forward by the Leader of the House – it is a really important motion before the house this afternoon – but in doing so I briefly want to reflect on the recent Werribee by-election. I have to extend my heartfelt congratulations to the new Labor member for Werribee John Lister, or Johnny Lister, for persevering and getting over the line. As a Wyndham MP I know he will be a tremendous addition to this side of the house and an excellent representative for the folks in the Werribee district. I cannot wait to work collaboratively with him over many years to deliver the services, the infrastructure, the amenities that the folks in the outer west need and deserve. We know that by-elections are never an easy race, but what I do know is, having campaigned alongside John this January, he is up to the task of fighting for the people of Werribee, and that is exactly what they need and deserve and will get in John Lister.
This motion seeks to refer both the Werribee and Prahran by-elections to an inquiry by the Electoral Matters Committee, and I have to say I support this motion wholeheartedly. Like so many of my colleagues and those opposite, I was out on the booths in Werribee on the day of the by-election – at Iramoo Primary School in fact – and throughout election day I heard from so many folks who were out volunteering on the day about some of the shocking conduct that they were seeing during this by-election. At the Manor Lakes booth, one of the busiest booths in the Werribee by-election, there was a Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) employee who was supposed to be independent and impartial, and that person was allegedly telling people to vote for the Liberal candidate.
I also want to note, and I just find this incredible because in my experience most of the VEC staff do everything they can to be totally impartial – they do not want to look at you, they do not want to talk to you; we cannot even use the bathrooms in many instances – that this same volunteer was seen out speaking to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and former Premier Jeff Kennett, telling them she hoped they would win. Can you believe that? It does not matter whether you are in government or not in government, that kind of thing is absolutely amazing.
A member interjected.
Sarah CONNOLLY: That is right. It is absolutely not on. It is inappropriate. Regardless of your political leanings, I think that we can all agree that this is extremely concerning behaviour in a VEC official – a person who has been charged with the responsibility of conducting these elections, of assisting voters, of managing and counting votes behaving in such a partisan manner. If this was the other way round, those opposite would be saying, ‘I know exactly the same thing,’ and rightly so. It is not on.
We also saw other I think strange behaviour by VEC volunteers throughout the day. I heard from volunteers who were kept waiting for half an hour after the polls were closed so that VEC staff could take a half-hour meal break. I do not think anyone here would deny staff who had been working all day the chance to grab something to eat, to go to the bathroom, after polls had closed after the last few voters have cast their votes. But to actually go ahead and lock out scrutineers for half an hour whilst votes are potentially left unattended is something that we need to think about, and it is cause for alarm. That is half an hour when scrutineers cannot see the ballot boxes and ensure that they have not been tampered with. I do not want to veer into the realm of election conspiracy theories – we are not the Republican Party – but this does create major anxieties and uncertainties over the conduct of vote-counting processes, and scrutineers should be allowed to be in the room.
We also saw major delays in vote counting, which took place all night. We know that the last counts to be returned on the night were at 12:45 in the morning. That is hours and hours and hours of counting, and on some booths I know that scrutineers had been there so long that the school gates had closed. Can you believe that? The school gates were closed, and they had to then jump over the fences to get out. Imagine that: scrutineering all night for hours only to be locked in the school. I certainly hope those volunteers, some of whom were some of our wonderful young Labor team, consider making submissions to the committee recounting the things that they saw throughout this by-election and the issues that they had with how it was conducted. We always need to look for ways to improve, and the VEC are no different.
This inquiry is also going to look at the issues surrounding turnout at these by-elections. I know that previous speakers to this motion on both sides of the chamber have talked about that.
The way in which elections are conducted matters. It does not just matter here in this place; it matters to the broader Victorian public. It is a serious matter. All Victorians, no matter their political stripes or leanings, should have faith in the integrity of their vote and the impartiality and independence of the VEC in conducting elections. It is for these reasons that I commend the motion to the house.
Will FOWLES (Ringwood) (16:19): I rise to make a contribution on this motion regarding the referral of the by-elections for the districts of Prahran and Werribee to the Electoral Matters Committee (EMC) for consideration and report. I am moved to do so because of the contribution made by the member for Brighton actually. The member for Brighton raised an issue regarding registration of campaign workers, and he alleged in his contribution that we are talking about big government in that circumstance retaining data about campaign workers. I do not know if there was a specific regulation put in place for the purposes of those by-elections. I do not know whether there was actually a head of power for the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to compel campaign workers, and if there was not, then of course that is not appropriate. But I would say to the general proposition that the member for Brighton takes such strong disagreement with that we absolutely should as a Parliament be ensuring that there is accountability for those workers who, as part of the electoral process, present themselves to voters at voting places.
Those campaign workers have a special responsibility in our democracy to conduct themselves with a degree of integrity and a degree of decency.
I have to say, whether it is the clowns to the left of me, the socialists, or whether it is the jokers to the right, the Freedom Party, there are participants in Victoria’s democratic processes who actually do not believe in those processes. There are participants in Victoria’s democratic processes who actively seek to undermine those processes. On the polling lines – and I refer back particularly to the 2022 general election – we saw all sorts of just rank behaviour. I know over in the west the member for Footscray had to deal with the Victorian Socialists behaving in an appalling fashion. I know that my polling booths in Ringwood had to deal with the Freedom Party behaving in an appalling fashion. We also had to deal with Liberal Party volunteers behaving in an appalling fashion. I was assaulted by the Liberal candidate’s husband during the course of the 2022 general election, and it was just disgusting conduct, outrageous conduct.
The problem that the VEC have presently is that they do not have a set of enforcement powers – they do not have a suspension power, they do not have an identification power – and they remain sort of toy soldiers in the electoral movement, where they purport to be able to do things but actually have no real power, no real grunt and no real ability to ensure that polling places are free from harassment, hate speech and a whole bunch of things that we frequently talk about in this place as being really, really important. I think it is entirely appropriate for the EMC, in considering the processes implemented by the Victorian Electoral Commission, to consider whether any campaign or identification process was implemented and, if it was, whether it worked and whether there was an appropriate statutory or regulatory head for the exercise of that power.
Members interjecting.
Will FOWLES: No, that is fine. I am just asking them to consider it, boys; calm down. I am asking whether the EMC ought to consider that and in doing so turn their minds to what happens next. The general election is not that far away, some 20 months away, I think, and we should turn our minds to whether campaigners ought not to be so much identified but identifiable. That is, in the event of a complaint, is there not a mechanism by which people can be identified? We saw this a bit in the 2022 general election, when the cookers, the Freedom Party and their mad associates, would turn up en masse to a polling place, harass me and my campaign staff, harass Greens party members and their staff and then scoot off really quickly before complaints could be filed and before we could actually get action out of staff. We even had that nutter who ran for the seat of Mulgrave – we even had his people turning up to our polling place to vote absentee, wearing their campaign shirts, wearing them into the polling place, in clear violation of the rules. But by the time polling staff finally realised they needed to act on that, the people involved had fled the scene.
It is not important that government keep tabs on who is or who is not participating in the democratic process – I do not think anyone in this chamber is necessarily going to support that – but identifiability is different to being identified and retained and having records kept on you by, to use the member for Brighton’s somewhat hysterical phrase, big government. I think it is far better that we do, though, have a system of registering campaigners so that they cannot be at a public place handing out material for a political party if they are not registered with the VEC. That would ensure some accountability.
Another thing I would encourage the EMC to consider and one of the things we were in the process of considering when I chaired that august committee is whether or not we ought to limit the number of campaign workers at any given polling place. It is one of the challenges we have, and I am sure Liberal members in this place will be pleased, with the possibility of the teal countdown down in the Scottocracy of Kooyong, that we could cut down from 120 hander-outers and maybe get it down to 20 or 15 or maybe 10. The Libs were outnumbered 10 to one down at Kooyong in the 2022 federal general election, and I am sure they would love to see that particular trend constrained. Yes, there is a matter of reasonableness and the need to be able to demonstrate to voters that you have a broad-based body of support.
What we have now are polling places that are so intimidating to so many that people are choosing to vote early. That means that we are our own enemy there as practitioners of politics. We are our own enemy because the environment we present to voters in polling places is in fact so hostile, so awful and so challenging that people do not vote there at all. Then you lose the opportunity to engage with that voter whatsoever, because if they are a voter – and there are thousands of them in my electorate –that lives in a secure apartment block or if they are a voter who is on the silent roll, you simply have no ability to engage with them. We would all hope in this place that we would have at least have the ability to engage with voters and at least have the opportunity to engage with voters.
One of the reasons why I think this is so important is that the safety, the approachability and the experience of the voter when being in a polling place is absolutely critical to the important democratic tenet of people casting an informed vote. So often we answer questions in polling places. Yes, at times there can be spirited debate between campaign workers or candidates and campaign workers. I appreciate that. We never want it to get out of hand, like the sort of disgusting conduct that was meted my way in 2022. What we do want is the opportunity to be able to have those conversations, that civil discourse, with voters. For as long as we as parties in this place, as political practitioners, allow polling places to –
The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): Order! There is a little too much chatter in the house. It is hard to hear the speaker on his feet.
Will FOWLES: For as long as we sit by and allow polling places to be hostile environments for normals, for people who do not practise politics – for as long as that is the case – we will continue to have this nexus between the representatives and the people they represent continuing to be eroded. If there is a flaw in modern parliamentary democracy, it is the erosion of that nexus, the erosion of that link between the represented and the representative. For as long as we make polling places hostile environments – nearly alien environments – we will continue to reduce the opportunities we have to engage with voters in civil discourse, to put our views about what the future of the state ought to be and to put our views about what the future of our communities ought to look like. These are very, very important matters. It is important then that we address the safety and the approachability and the reasonable engagement that ought be protected by polling places that are appropriately regulated.
The VEC has a range of cultural issues. I have absolutely no doubt of that, and I hope that the EMC tackles those matters head on. I hope that the EMC does that without the shadow of partisan advantage infecting their thinking, because I think we have seen examples of that in the past as well. It is absolutely critical that the VEC does better. It is also critical that we put in place a set of rules that allow us as professional practitioners of politics and allow us as people who want to put a view to citizens to put it in a reasoned way and a civil way. The onus then is on us. The rules ought be created by us to deliver up a system that is better not just for us as practitioners but, most importantly, a system that is better for voters, better for our constituents and better for the very people that we are put in this place to represent.
Matthew GUY (Bulleen) (16:29): I will be prompt because I know the chamber needs to be. First of all, I want to say that unlike previous speakers I am not going to be so polite. Secondly, I want to congratulate the minister for bringing this motion to the chamber and then to the committee. I think the minister has moved this motion for a reason, an important reason.
All of us as members of Parliament should put our political parties aside. As members of Parliament, we need an electoral commission that operates utterly impartially. I know a number of members from all sides will have examples where they have heard things on election day or otherwise. My comments are not about election day workers at all. Many of those workers are people who also work for the Australian Electoral Commission as much as the Victorian Electoral Commission, and I think the AEC does an exceptionally good job. My comments are about the VEC leadership and particularly a previous inquiry where the VEC was referred to the Electoral Matters Committee and were utterly hostile to all members of that inquiry, particularly the former commissioner Warwick Gately and the head of communications Sue Lang.
They had a lot of questions to answer for given their utterly partial behaviour at the 2022 election, for which those two individuals should be referred to the anti-corruption commission under electoral interference for misconduct in public office. It is wrong that those people have not been the subject of an own-motion inquiry for one of our investigatory bodies to look at their conduct as supposedly senior members of the Victorian Electoral Commission who utterly politicised their position during the last state election. They were utterly hostile to all members – Liberal, Labor and otherwise – of the Electoral Matters Committee when we asked them to come and present themselves to that committee after the last election.
I congratulate the minister and all members who have spoken so far for saying we want the VEC, albeit under a different commissioner, to answer for some of the complete incompetence that occurred during the Werribee and Prahran by-elections. I would urge the Electoral Matters Committee not to stop there but to again go back and ask why the VEC’s head of communications would offer up an interview to Neil Mitchell in the middle of an election and then say:
But in fact I would offer that it was the Liberal Party’s response to my interview that kept the negative media going for several days.
That is what an operative, a senior member of staff of a supposedly impartial body established to count votes and manage the conduct of elections, said during the last state election inquiry. Now that person could say it against the Liberal Party, the Labor Party, anyone in the future. They should not be saying it against any political party.
It is important for us as MPs in this chamber to ensure that that body is doing their job impartially in every circumstance and, I might add, competently, because what we saw in 2022 was utter incompetence and there was again utter incompetence at both the Werribee and Prahran by-elections for members on both sides, with very important and relevant examples of that. I cannot say enough. Whether it is losing votes in Bass or telling people how to vote in Eltham at the last state election or the examples that both sides have mentioned during the two by-elections, it is utterly improper.
The leadership of the Victorian Electoral Commission is so discredited after the actions of the former commissioner Warwick Gately and the head of communications Sue Lang, who should never occupy independent positions like this again because we cannot have those people being trusted for Labor or Liberal, the Nationals or the Greens or anyone in this chamber. We need an independent body. I urge the committee in its reference – which the minister has correctly done in this chamber – to look at either abolishing or removing the VEC from future by-elections or elections in this term coming up, to employ the AEC – because the AEC and VEC have the same workers on the ground – to manage the next election and to utterly either abolish or review the operations of the VEC as part of the recommendations of this committee, because they have shown from the last state election that their actions, particularly of the two individuals I have mentioned, were utterly improper. I thank the minister again for bringing this motion to the house and for all parties for vocally supporting it.
Tim READ (Brunswick) (16:33): I will say on behalf of the Greens that we support this referral to the Electoral Matters Committee. I will take this opportunity before I begin to congratulate the victors of the two by-elections, Rachel Westaway and John Lister, for their successes. I would also like to acknowledge the hard work of the many unsuccessful candidates. I would particularly single out the Greens: Angelica Di Camillo in Prahran and Rifai Raheem in Werribee.
Notwithstanding the comments and the terms of reference, which are appropriate, I know that the Victorian Electoral Commission and their staff do need to be thanked for their hard work. I want to focus now on the second point in the terms of reference, which is voter turnout. I want to start with a couple of numbers to draw attention to this. In 2022 in Werribee turnout was about 85.5 per cent, and that dropped to 79.9 – almost 80 per cent – a couple of weeks ago. In Werribee in 2022 there were just over 1500 absentee votes compared to 72 at the recent by-election. Now contrast those figures to Prahran. Remember that turnout in Werribee dropped by about 5.5 per cent.
In Prahran turnout was about 83 per cent in 2022 and just over 68 per cent earlier this month. Absentee votes were about 3500 in 2022 and 79 at the by-election. So turnout dropped by about 5.5 per cent in Werribee, and it dropped by about 14.5 per cent in Prahran. Absentee votes dropped by about 1500 in Werribee and by about 3500 in Prahran. In Prahran there were 7500 fewer voters, and almost half of them were the missing absentee votes. Antony Green wrote about this:
… turnout is always lower at by-elections.
And it is always substantially lower in geographically small high rental electorates like Prahran.
If you look at the Prahran electorate, 57 per cent of people in Prahran are renters. That is higher than Germany, at 52 per cent. Prahran is also one of the smallest electorates, at 11 square kilometres. Werribee is 32 per cent renters, which is actually still above the Victorian state average of 25 per cent, and it is almost 340 square kilometres.
It turns out Antony Green wrote about this 10 years ago. In October 2014 he wrote an article, ‘A comment on New South Wales by-election turnouts’. He listed all the reasons for the low turnout in small, inner-city electorates with a lot of renters. Briefly, people in those electorates who move house in the inner city are more likely to cross an electoral boundary compared to those who move house in larger, country electorates. If you move 5 kilometres, you will probably still be in Werribee, but you certainly will not be in Prahran anymore. People who move are often unaware that they have moved across a state electoral boundary. It is common for people to name their municipality when you ask them their state electorate. Let us face it, folks, we are not the most famous people in Victoria, and our electorates and our electoral boundaries are perhaps not as well known as they should be. More renters in an electorate means more recent arrivals to that electorate who may not be aware of their new electorate and may not have updated their enrolment.
Finally, absentee voting is not available in by-elections unless you happen to have moved from Prahran to Werribee or vice versa. If you are out of the area on polling day you cannot vote. Renters and more mobile younger people are therefore less likely to vote in by-elections and therefore to have their views represented in the result. When I was doorknocking in Prahran we came across quite a few homes where the names on the roll were not the names of the people currently living at that house. We know many renters moved out of Prahran without updating the roll, and most of their homes are not empty, so others have moved in and presumably mostly not voted. Given problems with access and awareness, it seems that many people would have a reasonable excuse, by the way, for not voting, and I would hope that they are not fined.
So those moving house are more likely to be younger and renters and to have different political views which are underrepresented in by-elections. The Electoral Matters Committee needs to consider whether they regard this as important. I think it is, and I hope that the Electoral Matters Committee will look at what practically can be done to alleviate it. We expect some lower turnout, and lower turnout would be fine if the people who did not vote were just the same politically as the people who did. But when there is a systematic difference between voters and non-voters in by-elections, then there is a systematic bias in the results. That is a problem that the Electoral Matters Committee should try and fix.
Motion agreed to.