Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook

Issues Paper

The Independent Reviewer, Ms Margaret Wagstaff, after consultation with the Reference Group, has released for public consultation and community engagement, three Issues Papers, based on the Review's Terms of Reference.   Each of the papers is available in a web (HTML) format as well as a printable (PDF) format:

 

  1. Improving Voter Participation  

    (HTML format)  (PDF format)

  2. Improving Representation 

    (HTML format)   (PDF format)

  3. Improving Election Process  

    (HTML format)  (PDF format)


These three Issues Papers canvass dozens of issues, in fact all the matters raised in the Review's Terms of Reference.  

There is also a short version.  On this, initial page, Ms Wagstaff has highlighted what are considered to be the six main issues, plus two questions about you.    If you don't have the time to delve into all the issues within the three separate Issues Papers, then at least we hope you will take the ten minute survey.


N.B.  Your responses to the survey and/or the Issues Papers will be published on this web site, (subject to the moderation of the Independent Reviewer) unless you indicate that your responses should be treated as confidential.

 

THE TEN MINUTE SURVEY

There are two ways of responding to this 10-minute survey.

Either:

  1. put your responses in an email to [email protected] ; 

    or

  2. print a two-page PDF questionnaire that you can post (reply-paid) or fax to the Independent Reviewer. 

 

N.B.  Your responses to the survey and/or the Issues Papers will be published on this web site, (subject to the moderation of the Independent Reviewer) unless you indicate that your responses should be treated as confidential. 

 

Improving voter participation

Improving Representation

Improving election process 

                                                 

1. Responsibility for election promotion

4. Encouraging and supporting future candidates

6. Caretaker conventions

7. About you

2. The property franchise

5. Dual candidacy

 

8.  Voting

3. Compulsory versus voluntary voting

1.  Responsibility for election promotion

Legislation gives the responsibility of improving voter participation primarily to councils.  Section 12 of the Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 makes it clear that the Returning Officer (the Electoral Commissioner) is responsible for the actual conduct of the election, but each council is responsible for "the provision of information, education and publicity designed to promote public participation in the electoral processes for its area, to inform potential voters about the candidates who are standing for election in its area, and to advise its local community about the outcome of elections and polls conducted in its area."

There is sometimes criticism that this legislatively-assigned role represents a conflict of interest for elected council members.  Any councilor who wishes to be re-elected at a forthcoming election has a disincentive to approve an increased budget for promoting the process by which a rival may replace him/her in office. 

After the 2006 local government elections, only four metropolitan councils self-reported spending of $10,000 or more, while four rural councils reported zero expenditure on election promotion.  The median amount spent was $1,000.  

  • Could local government election promotion be done better?
  • If so, how?
  • Who should be responsible for promoting elections?

 - Local government (as it is at present)?
 - The State Electoral Office? 
 - Some other body (which one)?

2. The property franchise


Local government elections in South Australia are unique (compared to federal and state elections) in permitting property owners to lodge a vote in respect of property they own, even when they are not resident in the area.  An owner can be a couple, a group or a corporation although each couple/group/corporation can exercise only one joint vote in each local government contest in which the owner has property.

There is further complexity involved because occupiers of commercial/industrial premises (not just residents) are entitled to vote in reliance on the property franchise.

Those entitled to the property franchise do not need to enrol to vote and their entitlement exists independently of whether or not they choose to exercise it.

In South Australia, relatively few property owners choose to exercise their property franchise right to vote in local government elections (as distinct from their rights as residents), except in the City of Adelaide where the percentage of voters exercising their property franchise has recently been as high as 47%. 

  • Is the property franchise fair?
  • Should it be changed? 
  • If so, how?

3.  Compulsory versus voluntary voting


At State and Federal elections, it is compulsory to attend at a polling booth.  There are fines for non-compliance.  Voting in local government elections, in South Australia, by contrast, historically has been voluntary.  The three most populous States (NSW, Victoria and Queensland) have compulsory voting for local government elections (at least for residents) while Tasmania, and Western Australia, like S.A. have voluntary voting.

In most democracies, voting in all elections is voluntary.  Australia is the only English-speaking country where voting is compulsory but there are at least 20 nations where compulsory voting is used.  It is, of course, likely that a change to compulsory voting would lift participation rates up to or well past the target of 50% participation.

Should voting in local government elections:

  • Become compulsory?
  • Should anyone be exempted from being required to vote?  If so, who and why?

 

 4. Encouraging and supporting future candidates

 

There was a record field of candidates in the 2006 local government elections.  The proportion of women who nominated (27.3%) was also a record.    In 2006, there was also significant progress in attracting younger candidates.

On the other hand, there would seem to have been little, if any progress in 2006, in attracting candidates from under-represented groups such as aboriginal people, persons from non-English speaking backgrounds, and non-professional workers. 

  • Should we encourage a more diverse range of candidates?
  • If so, how?

 

5. Dual Candidacy

A person can be a candidate for only one position on the Council at the close of nominations.   Therefore, a serving councillor who makes an unsuccessful attempt to contest the Mayoral position at a periodic election, is lost to local government entirely.   It has been suggested that this provision results in the loss to local government of persons who may have valuable skills and talents.  It may also restrict the field of candidates in mayoral elections, denying the electorate the opportunity to support two or more worthy candidates at election.


WA and NSW legislation allows candidates to nominate for both Mayor and Councillor positions. If the candidate is successful in the Mayoral election his or her nomination is not considered in the count for councillor.

  • Should candidates be permitted to nominate for councillor and Mayor in the same election?

 

6. Caretaker period before elections

Pre-election “caretaker” conventions at the State and Federal level discourage or prohibit incumbent governments from:

  • making policy decisions that would bind an incoming government;
  • using public resources in ways that are seen as advantaging or promoting the existing government; and
  • ensuring public servants act impartially in relation to members of parliament and candidates.

Historically, local government has not been subject to the same caretaker conventions.  Only in Victoria has there been legislation enacted for this purpose.

  • Should councils be subject to caretaker rules before elections?
  • If so, should all councils have exactly the same rules?
  • At what point (for how long before an election) should a caretaker period commence?
  • What are the most important restrictions that should be in caretaker rules?

 

7. About you: 

  • Your name (optional):
  • Are you an elected council member? 
  • Are you a local government employee? 
  • Are you a ratepayer?
  • Do you have one or more property franchise votes?

8.  Voting 

  • Did you vote in the November 2006 local gov’t elections?
  • If not, why not?
  • Thinking about yourself, your family and your friends, what encourages people to vote in local government elections?
  • Only about 30% of people eligible to vote in local government elections actually vote. Why do you think the other 70% don’t?
  • If you were charged with substantially increasing voter participation in local government elections, what would you do?

There are two ways of responding to this 10-minute survey.

Either:

  1. put your responses in an email to [email protected] ; 

    or

  2. print a two-page PDF questionnaire that you can post (reply-paid) or fax to the Independent Reviewer. 

 

N.B.  Your responses to the survey and/or the Issues Papers will be published on this web site, (subject to the moderation of the Independent Reviewer) unless you indicate that your responses should be treated as confidential. 

 

 

For more information about the questions above, and more questions, refer to the three Issues Papers:

  1. Improving Voter Participation   (HTML format)  (PDF format)

  2. Improving Representation  (HTML format)   (PDF format)

  3. Improving Election Process  (HTML format)  (PDF format)

 

Top