Peter Dutton’s “concern” about potential voter confusion throughout the Voice referendum is the “weakest, laziest argument” Education Minister Jason Clare says he’s ever heard.
His feedback come as Mr Dutton calls for voting within the upcoming Voice to parliament referendum be made a “fair process” amid a warning about what’s going to depend on the poll paper.
Voters are being urged to write down “yes” or “no” on the poll papers once they head to the polls later this yr to vote within the referendum, with the date – extensively anticipated to be held on October 14 – to be formally introduced on Wednesday.
But a political storm is brewing after Australian electoral commissioner Tom Rogers conceded that whereas a transparent tick would technically depend for a sure vote, a cross couldn’t be counted due to ambiguity.
Earlier this week, Mr Rogers appeared on Sky News, repeatedly asking voters to only write their response in clear English, saying he was “nervous” of speaking about different choices, however “savings provisions” existed that allowed AEC employees to depend votes that don’t strictly comply with the directions.
“It is likely that a ‘y’ or an ‘n’ would be counted under the savings provisions. But I get nervous even talking about that because then people hear mixed messages. It’s just important to write either yes or no on that ballot paper,” Mr Rogers mentioned.
“It is likely that a tick will be accepted as a formal vote for yes but a cross will not be accepted as a formal vote.”
Mr Dutton mentioned the rule – which has been established for 30 years and is in play throughout federal elections – might “skew” the vote in opposition to the No marketing campaign.
“Just make it a fair process instead of trying to load the system and try to skew it in favour of the Yes vote,” Mr Dutton informed 9 News.
“And I just think that sense of equality in terms of the arguments and people’s ability to make a decision and for it to count and for there not to be a … gerrymander in place.
“I think that is all important so people have some respect for the process, but at the moment, it’s a real problem.”
Mr Dutton mentioned he would write to the AEC to hunt solutions, which shortly prompted a rebuke from the federal authorities who accused Mr Dutton of hypocrisy, noting the Coalition had supported the laws that oversees referendums.
A authorities supply famous that Mr Dutton’s “scare” campaigns had been like a play out of the monarchists’ playbook forward of the 1999 referendum.
In the lead-up to the 1999 republic referendum; monarchists launched a courtroom problem in opposition to the republic referendum, arguing the rules for counting votes had been biased in the direction of the Yes case.
Mr Clare mentioned the principles “hadn’t caused any confusion” in 1999, and wouldn’t accomplish that this yr, and questioned why Mr Dutton hadn’t made his issues identified earlier than the referendum guidelines had been legislated by the parliament.
“I think there were less than 1 per cent of votes that were informal (in the 1999 referendum), so I think that pricks the bubble of the argument that ‘this will cause some confusion’,” Mr Clare informed Channel 7.
“These are the same rules we’ve had for 30 years and if (deputy Liberal leader) Sussan (Ley) and Peter (Dutton) are so worried about this, why didn’t they move an amendment to legislation a couple of weeks ago when it was going through parliament.
“This is the weakest, laziest argument I’ve ever heard.”
Source: www.perthnow.com.au
