NEWS

MEDIA RELEASE - Can we rely on By-election results being correct?

25 July 2018

On Sunday 22 July 2018 on SkyNews, doubts were cast whether we can trust the results of the looming five By-elections.

Our Electoral Rolls lack integrity, thus enabling vote frauds,” said Lex Stewart, President of Vote Australia, on the Outsiders program, where Rowan Dean asked questions about a list of 16 electoral fraud cases in Australia, while Ross Cameron provided information about vote frauds in USA.

(VIDEO - Electoral legislation 'enables voter fraud' - Sky News.com.au)

It is not just me who is concerned.  Reports by the Australian National Audit office state that the electoral rolls are in a shambles.”

Official advice to me recently is that the electoral roll contains at least 248,000 incorrect enrolments, many of which have been deliberately falsified.”

Two recent events highlight the ongoing vulnerability of the electoral roll to manipulation. 

Salim Mehajer, former Deputy Mayor of Auburn (NSW), was sentenced last month to 11 months in jail for fraudulently enrolling voters in the Auburn electorate who in fact lived outside the electoral boundary.  In another case this year, a senior electorate staffer who worked for NSW State MP, Noreen Hay, was found guilty in May of forging enrolment documents ahead of the NSW state election in 2015.

Vote Australia considers that there are numerous other instances of roll manipulation that went undetected and which influenced the outcome of elections.

Australia is one of the few countries in the world that lacks a requirement on voters to identify themselves when they go to polling places to vote,” said Mr Stewart.

Voter ID is required in most countries. Kenya and Iraq introduced it last year.”

Using vote frauds, marginal seats can be won by candidates who are not the ones for whom the majority of voters truly voted for.

 “Our voting systems are simply not capable of delivering true democracy,” said Mr Stewart.

“The government needs to urgently consider amending the Commonwealth Electoral Act to curb vote frauds.


For further information contact Lex Stewart,  mobile 0424 077746

COMMENTS

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.

JOIN THE FIGHT

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

  • signed up on Subscribe 2024-04-18 16:11:18 +1000

  • 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.