Anthem for Tomorrow’s Child

By Roger Chao Anthem for Tomorrow’s Child Dear child of mine, a seed of…

Inter-Generational Trauma

Trauma slithers epigenetically through time with nipping-sharp teeth. It fastens to bloodlines…

Reaching Out to the Metropolitan Growth Corridors in…

By Denis Bright Metropolitan growth plans for inner city and outer suburban residential…

Experts Call For Transfer of Last Refugees in…

Media Release Religious leaders and healthcare professionals present Open Letters calling for the immediate transfer to Australia of the…

Battle Cry of the Unbowed

By Roger Chao Battle Cry of the Unbowed In this hallowed land downunder, where…

Rot in the Civil Service: Farewelling Mike Pezzullo

There was no better example of Australia’s politicised public service than its…

Brownsville, We Have a Problem

By James Moore I have never bought into the hype and general BS…

It's You Lot Again !

Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock has now told us that the latest…


Voter ID and dead cats

By 2353NM

If you are over 18 you will be legally required to vote in a Federal Election between now and next May. If the Coalition Government gets its way, next time you vote in a Federal Election you will have to produce proof of identity before you are handed the ballot papers. The Coalition have been talking about this for quite some time. After the 2016 election the Liberal Party aligned chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, James McGrath said

it was a “regrettable omission” that Australia did not “treat elections with the same gravity as a visit to a surf club or entering a Brisbane CBD pub after 10pm on a Friday night”, both of which require ID.

He said the reform should be implemented “promptly” to counter “the current mistrust of politicians and the democratic process by the voting public”.


The Labor members [of the Committee} said claims of double voting were “unsupported by the evidence” and Coalition senators did not identify a single irregularity in the 2016 election.

They noted Coalition members had made a similar call after the 2013 election and the introduction of voter ID laws in Queensland [by the Newman LNP Government] had lowered turnout in the 2015 election before the requirement was repealed.

The Coalition Government under Morrison has revisited the issue and claims that identification of voters is required to ‘reduce voter fraud’. However, as Greens Senator Larissa Walters points out

voter ID laws were “a solution in search of a problem” with just 19 verified instances of double voting at the last election.

“There is zero credible evidence that election outcomes are being corrupted by voter fraud,” she said in a statement.

In addition there is evidence that a significant number of the poor, dispossessed and homeless don’t have identification to demonstrate that they live at a ‘fixed address’.

The Guardian recently reported

One Nation leader, Pauline Hanson, has claimed credit for the Coalition’s voter integrity bill, saying she made voter identification a condition for her support on another electoral bill.

Hanson told Guardian Australia on Thursday she had “had a gutful” of the Morrison government taking credit for her ideas and the voter ID bill “wouldn’t be happening without me”.

Coalition Senator Simon Birmingham is quoted as saying

“Public confidence can be eroded by actual areas of risk in the electoral system and perceived areas of risk in the electoral system.”

There are probably areas of risk in running an election. Australia’s compulsory voting system reduces the risk considerably, as we know prior to the election the number of votes we should get (the number of people aged 18 and above a week or two prior to the election, less those that have a lawful excuse). In countries with optional voting, there is no way of knowing how many votes there should be. This leads to claims from those that lose elections (the immediate past President of the USA comes to mind) that boxes of votes mysteriously appear or disappear from the counting rooms in areas that favour the victor.

And the same people that are worried about a handful of double votes in a Federal Election (where around 15 million votes are legitimately cast by Australians) are fighting the creation of a corruption commission that can investigate alleged incidents where someone elected to Parliament has not kept the high ethical and moral standards they all claim to follow, which also may be a large contributor to “the current mistrust of politicians and the democratic process by the voting public” (to coin a phrase).

Prime Minister Morrison acknowledged prior to the last election that a federal independent corruption commission would be introduced in the next (current) Parliament. However, after 11 months of ‘consultation’, disgraced former Attorney-General Christian Porter earlier in the year gave us a result that is less than encouraging.

Former NSW Supreme Court judge Anthony Whealy, QC, the chair of the Centre for Public Integrity, said the proposed national corruption body would be the “weakest watchdog in the country” because of the restrictions in the draft law.

“It would not be able to begin investigations into the majority of cases, as it is limited to only investigating a specific list of criminal offences,” he said.

Meanwhile Morrison

is adamant it will not have the same power as the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, a view shared by ministers and backbenchers.

Mr Morrison said on Tuesday there was a “real problem” with the ICAC model after the state commission announced an investigation into Gladys Berejiklian last Friday, prompting her to announce her resignation as NSW premier that day.

“You’ve got to have processes that assume people are innocent before thought to be guilty and that is a real problem. So it’s not a model that we’ve ever contemplated at a federal level,” he said.

“And I’m sure there are millions of people who’ve seen what’s happened to Gladys Berejiklian, they’ll understand that’s a pretty good call not to follow that model.”

On October 8, The Sydney Morning Herald’s editorial suggested

Mr Morrison is entitled to defend Ms Berejiklian but his remarks show a fundamental misunderstanding of how the ICAC operates.

The ICAC has not found Ms Berejiklian guilty or even implied it. All it has done is announce public hearings into whether Ms Berejiklian broke any rules relating to state government grants paid to bodies in Wagga Wagga and Dubbo in which her secret lover, former MP Daryl Maguire, had an interest.

It was Ms Berejiklian’s choice to stand down and resign from Parliament. Mr Morrison and the public should wait until the public hearings begin on October 18 before jumping to conclusions.

In fact, the ICAC is legally forbidden from making findings of guilt. All it can do is recommend that the Department of Public Prosecutions or another body consider taking criminal action based on evidence it uncovers during its investigative hearings.

People that live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. James McGrath is correct to a point when he suggested that politicians don’t have a good reputation. Demonstrably it has nothing to do with the election process but more to do with actions the politicians are alleged to take during the political parties’ pre-selection processes or after election. Is it too cynical to suggest that the sudden legislation requiring voters to provide identification prior to voting is Morrison’s version of Boris Johnson’s ‘dead cat strategy’ where a dramatic or sensational topic is introduced to a discussion, solely to distract attention from the inconvenient truth?

What do you think?


This article was originally published on The Political Sword

For Facebook users, The Political Sword has a Facebook page:
Putting politicians and commentators to the verbal sword

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button


Login here Register here
  1. New England Cocky

    How can you branch stack if every member is required to show personal ID at the polling booth?

    Funny how Nazional$ forget their history. The 1997 feral election in the New England electorate saw Stuart St Clair pre-selected by the Nazional$. He was a new boy in Guyra (population about 1900) who closed the local saw-mill to cash in on NSW government subsidies.
    At the nomination meeting St Clair had the highest number of votes of all the candidates, about 1300 in number. Experienced political sceptics noted this figure and grinned quietly to themselves. Given that the Guyra population at that time was about 1900 persons, it meant that this newcomer to town had inspired ALL the adults residents, including all the Labor voters, to join the Nazional$ Party. The sceptics suggested that there had been a little bit of vote buying or branch stacking in the numbers.

    St Clair survived one term of three years before being swept from office in 2000 by Tony Windsor (Independent) who served with distinction until 2013 when New England got former Queensland Senator Barnaby ”Beetrooter” Joyce when family commitments caused Tony to retire from feral politics.

  2. Terence Mills

    Turnbull said of branch stacking :

    “I recruit people to the Liberal Party. I’m entitled to recruit support from wherever I choose.”

    Branch stacking only becomes contentious when public money or public resources are used to recruit new branch members.

  3. Kaye Lee

    I find it interesting that James McGrath wants to counter “the current mistrust of politicians”.

    In 2011 the then 38 year old campaign director was revealed as the architect behind a scheme to pay disgruntled former Labor staffer and candidate Robert Hough for dirt on government MPs.

    The LNP dirt file detailed a minister’s epilepsy and childhood adoption, claims about some politicians’ sexuality, sex lives, drinking habits and health matters, and included details of the schools of the children of government MPs.

    He was “strongly reprimanded” and then rewarded with a senate position.

    Ooh Ah James McGrath

  4. wam

    wow 2352 start with a lie: If you are over 18 you will be legally required to vote in a Federal Election between now and next May. and finish with the truth: a dramatic or sensational topic is introduced to a discussion, solely to distract attention from the inconvenient truth? The LNP introduced a new PM for each election to get the sympathy vote. This scummo is the first to take two bites of the cherry and I hope he chokes on the pit but he is flush with chrissy’s cash and the bandit’s 9 looms?
    kaye it is soul destroying to hear the beliefs of the qld nats. I know personally a central counsellor and he is a lovely man whose blind allegiance is beyond my understanding from his acceptance of trump to his lauding of beetrooter.

  5. Kaye Lee

    What will they do about postal votes?

  6. Michael Taylor

    Kaye, speaking of dirt files…

    In 2007 our department was instructed by the minister to find as much dirt on Therese Rein (Kevin Rudd’s wife) as we could, given that our department operated the programs that involved Rein’s businesses and the election was just around the corner.

    We had to remind the minister that the public service was apolitical. So we basically told him to fuck off.

    Geez it felt good.

  7. Andrew J. Smith

    Not sure Oz media is helping things much… By presenting this as simply another local innovative electoral tactic for the LNP government misses the point entirely.

    Did anyone else notice that the UK Tories are also proposing the same with similarly credulous media, why?

    It’s neither original nor grounded in local electoral processes but is just one tactic in the imported strategy of voter suppression cooked up for the ‘owned’ GOP which is looking for permanence…..

    This Voter ID is straight from the KochNetwork ‘bill mill’ ALEC which is paranoid about emerging diversity, empowerment and youth in electorates versus preferred rusted on middle aged and older who tend towards conservative; Brexit was partly successful due to youth staying away on a bad weather day but older voters were negatively committed, mostly for Brexit.

  8. GL

    “What will they do about postal votes?” Nothing. With the ongoing delays and stuff ups by Australia Post it’s most likely any postal votes would get lost in the system and show up way too late. Case in point: I’m still waiting for a parcel from Canberra that posted eight weeks ago.

  9. Bronte ALLAN

    WHY oh WHY must this fucking scumbag even “NEED” a voter ID system? He is so bloody corrupt & a liar of the worst kind, does he need any form of voter ID to ensure his useless lying, flat earth, happy clapping, robo-debt introduction, rail station parking crap, new airport over “funding”, sports rorts, lying to Australia about the French President, holidaying overseas whilst Australia burnt etc etc & so the list goes on & on. We do NOT “need” any form of voter ID system, as we are already obliged to vote whereby our name is crossed off when voting anyway! This country has NEVER had any voting corruption with “double-dipping” at voting time, WTF??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: