Potential Issues with the AEC


The changes to the Electoral Act in 1983-4 established the AEC as a Statutory Authority no longer responsible to Parliament.

The Commission is managed by three members: 
  • the Chairman (who must be an active or retired judge of the Federal Court of Australia)
  • the Electoral Commissioner
  • the Australian Statistician (head of the Australian Bureau of Statistics)
In a 1998 interview, the then Electoral Commissioner stated that the aim of the Commission was to make as many electorates as possible marginal by redistributions at specified periods. The optimum population size in each electorate  is around 80,000-90,000 persons.

Decisions on boundaries are negotiated with and between the political parties based on the advice of the Australian Statistician.

Disputes arise with both Federal and State decisions about electorate boundaries. Submissions often follow to both the Federal and State Joint Standing Committees (JSCEMs) on Electoral matters. Cases affecting the outcomes of elections, dependent on evidence submitted, reflect on the reputation of the AEC and its officials.

The officials are meant to be politically impartial but evidence has been submitted to the JSCEMs claiming that bias exists amongst AEC employees working on election days. 

The investigation in early 2014 by former Federal Police Commission Mick Keelty into the loss of 1370 votes by the AEC in the 7 September 2013 WA Senate election showed inadequacies and incompetence by the AEC and the unchecked opportunities for political bias. Download the full report.


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

  • followed A fair voting system 2021-06-15 10:17:44 +1000

  • commented on A fair voting system 2021-06-04 08:44:15 +1000
    The statement: “The winning candidate is the most preferred or least disliked candidate by the entire electorate” is simply incorrect as can be easily proved. The fact is that the preferential voting system is seriously flawed because it effectively ignores last and near-last preferences.

    Now preferential VOTING is the best system available. Period. However: the so-called ‘counting’ method is seriously biased towards 1st preferences while totally ignoring last preferences. The result is that a candidate can “win the wooden spoon” as being the MOST DISLIKED candidate by a healthy margin and YET be declared the ‘winner after preferences’ by a narrow margin.

    This is proved in simple numerical examples at https colon slash slash tinyurl dot com slash ElectoralReformOz all one word. This is not just an obscure theoretical problem: it is a real issue that can and does gets candidates elected AGAINST the voters preferences. The above link shows that 3 of the 25 MLAs elected in the 2020 ACT election were elected against voters preferences – and the link names those wrongly elected and those wrongly eliminated including giving the exact counts showing how the eliminated candidate won against the ‘elected’ candidate in a virtual one-on-one run-off election as determined by the actual preference votes at the ElectionsACT website.

    The link also introduces the authors Average Preference Rating (APR) system of fairly counting preferential votes to guarantees to always exactly follow whatever preferences voters have marked. APR allows SPLIT Partial Preferential voting which allows voters to mark their first few, and their last few, preferences: the SPLIT option makes it easier for voters faced with ballot papers such as vote 1-32 Above the Line, Or 1-140 below the line.

    APR is very VERY fast to count provided that all votes are SCANNED &/OR DIGITISED. Votes could be scanned on site and a VERY small file uploaded from each polling place and amalgamated very quickly at the main electoral office. The reason for the small file size and speed of counting is that no votes are ever distributed, every preference mark is taken into account and the system is totally fair. The system easily allows multiple parallel audit trails that make election fraud extremely difficult – it ist even possible to allow a voter to check that their particular vote was actually counted and recorded correctly in the count by using unique random vote IDs generated when the voter votes – plus candidates, parties and media could get near real-time info re individual polling booths or electorate tallies as votes are counted. The system allows even a close Australian Federal Senate Election results to be available within hours of polls closing.

  • followed A fair voting system 2021-06-04 08:44:11 +1000

  • (@Lizzz777) is following @voteaustralia1 on Twitter 2021-06-03 18:00:47 +1000
    💐Mother of 2 Wonderful young people. Follower of Jesus Christ since I was 9!🦘 🔗All my links in one place:🔗🖥️ https://t.co/qB5QBbmMd6 ✝️JESUS IS LORD!✝️