Faulty Procedures

The law says you can vote at any polling place in your electorate. Your name appears on every printed roll in every polling place on election day. A person can visit every polling place in their electorate and could vote up to 50 times in their own name without being prosecuted. If the voter gets an official letter demanding to know why they voted more than once, they can deny any wrong doing and avoid being charged because ballot papers are not signed by the voter so they cannot be traced to the voter. To cheat is too tempting.

Let’s tell our politicians to stop this racket. Tell them to pass legislation to bring in a master electronic roll that lets officials electronically mark voters’ names the first time they receive voting papers.

 

  1. For their convenience, voters can vote in any of up to 50 polling places in their electorate.
  2. However, so can imposters who enrol to vote in other people’s names.
  3. News reports confirm the fraud at every election and no one is being prosecuted.
  4. Restoring subdivision voting (voting at the polling place nearest to your home) can help discourage imposters from fraudulently lodging ballot papers in your and other people’s names multiple times at multiple polling places across an electorate.

 

Public trust in Australian elections is at risk.  Our democracy relies on that trust. Faulty procedures compromise free and fair election processes and undermine public confidence.

Do you agree?   Click here to sign our petition!


JOIN THE FIGHT

Add your name and let’s keep Australian elections free and fair.

  • commented on Unwanted influences on the voting system 2023-11-23 12:15:44 +1100
    Please I need your vote

  • signed Mark Off Voters Electronically 2023-10-04 12:37:02 +1100
    This must be done to ensure that a voter casts only one vote, besides proposed changes in this petition there should be way for voter to cross check their voting status (voted/yet to vote) for every election event

  • commented on Compulsory voting 2023-09-14 22:49:29 +1000
    John de Wit, less empty negative comments please.

    I’m happy to answer real questions if you’re not yet clear how DCAP works to guarantee fair results. I sympathise – it took me ages to fully understand why current voting systems fail voters and then years to work out how to correct it and then to twig to the simple maths behind it and finally to be able to give simple examples that demonstrate it.

    E.g. it is not obvious that my DCAP system is correct when it will declare that Party D, of 4 parties standing, and with 45% first preferences is the winner despite Party A having 51% first preferences. But that is correct IF, repeat IF, in the election Party A had 49% of 4th (or LAST) preferences and party D had 55% of 2nd preferences. I have proved that particular case, no matter what preferences parties B and C get within the values I specified. Can anyone prove me mathematically &/or logically wrong there? No way! The correct Proportional results in a 100 seat electorate is NOT A=51 seats and D=45 Seats. The correct results is A=27 Seats and D=41 seats with B&C sharing the remaining 33 seats.

    So, it will not be a majority Government for A in its own right. Rather, it will be a minority government, of probably D in coalition with B or C; or, a slim chance of A running a minority government. Apart from the speculation of who will arrange a coalition; who can logically prove I’m wrong and that that voters preferences showed that they collectively wanted A as a majority government? It can’t be done unless you ignore voters’ clear collective preferences. The fact is that a marginal “absolute majorities” may be a real win; or, a travesty of electoral justice simply because Distribution of Preferences (AKA Instant Run Off) and First-Past-The-Post systems are inherently incapable of guaranteeing a fair result.

    I have proved that. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong.

  • commented on Compulsory voting 2023-09-14 16:55:04 +1000
    Peter Newland,
    Your arithmetic is very complex compared to a single vote for the party of your choice. There is no assumption that you should agree with every policy of that party. You just choose the party and candidate you think is best.