2012
EVALUATION REPORT AND STATISTICAL RETURNS
ELECTORAL COMMISSION QUEENSLAND
QUEENSLAND ELECTION 24 March
SOUTH BRISBANE BY-ELECTION 28 April
2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
QUEENSLAND STATE ELECTION 2012
Held on SATURDAY 24 MARCH 2012
EVALUATION REPORT AND STATISTICAL RETURNS
ELECTORAL COMMISSION OF QUEENSLAND
Electoral Commission of Queensland GPO Box 1393 BRISBANE QLD 4001 Telephone: 1300 881 665 Fax: (07) 3229 7391 Email: [email protected]
© Electoral Commission Queensland 1 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
Queensland State General Election 2012 Statistical Returns
Electoral Commission of Queensland ABN: 69 195 695 244 ISBN No. 978-0-7242-6868-9
November 2012
2 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
CONTENTS
Page No
Letter to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice ...... 5
Part 1: Foreword ...... 9
Part 2: Conduct of the Election ...... 13
Part 3: Client Feedback ...... 21
Part 4: Electoral Innovation ...... 29
Part 5: Where Can We Improve? ...... 33
Part 6: Statistical Returns...... 37
Part 7: Ballot Paper Survey ...... 277
Part 8: South Brisbane By-Election ...... 299
Appendix A: Survey Data Tables ...... 313
© Electoral Commission Queensland 3 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
4 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
21 November 2012
The Honourable Jarrod Bleijie MP Attorney-General and Minister for Justice Parliament House Cnr Alice and George Streets BRISBANE QLD 4000
Dear Attorney
I am pleased to submit for presentation to Parliament my report on the State General Election held on 24 March 2012. The report contains detailed results of voting in every electorate and a survey of ballot papers cast in a sample of districts.
The report also incorporates an evaluation of stakeholder feedback based on comprehensive surveys based on recognised random sampling methodology. I am pleased to record that public feedback has once again been highly supportive of the efficiency of the Commission’s election operations. In addition you will note a number of recommendations for legislative change aimed at enhancing the effectiveness and accessibility of Queensland’s electoral system.
The report contains information and statistical tables in relation to the South Brisbane By-Election, which was held on Saturday, 28 April 2012.
Pursuant to section 18(3) of the Act, the report should be tabled within three sitting days of your receipt. Once tabled, a copy of the report will be made available to the public on the Commission’s website.
Yours sincerely
David Kerslake Electoral Commissioner
© Electoral Commission Queensland 5 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
6 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 1
FOREWORD
© Electoral Commission Queensland 7 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
8 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 1: Foreword
PART 1: FOREWORD
The Electoral Commission of Queensland (ECQ) is an independent body charged with responsibility for the impartial conduct of Queensland parliamentary elections. The General Election held on 24 March 2012 was the eighth conducted by the Commission since its inception in 1991.
The writ issued for the 2012 State election differed from other recent State elections in two significant respects. In the absence of fixed term elections the Commission normally has no advance notice of when the election will be held. In this instance, however, the (then) Premier of Queensland announced the date of the election beforehand (on Wednesday 25 January 2012), approximately 25 days prior to the actual issue of the writ on Sunday 19 February 2012. In addition, whereas the election period for the two previous elections was the minimum allowed under the Act, for the 2012 election the campaign period was one week longer.
All other things being equal, these differences would have allowed the Commission to administer the election under a little less pressure than is the norm. The Commission was also responsible, however, for the conduct of the 2012 Local Government elections, with an actual overlap between the election periods for the two events. The rescheduling of the Local Government elections (from just before to just after the State election) added further to the level of complexity. As a small agency with only 50 permanent staff, the Commission’s resources were tested to the limit.
To inform the evaluation of its election operations, the Commission undertook random surveys of a range of stakeholders including voters, candidates, political parties and polling place officials, independently validating the survey methodology. Feedback was also obtained from the ECQ’s own staff as well as Returning Officers. The evaluation findings are outlined in Part 3, with the related survey data tables provided in Appendix A. Part 4 comprises detailed election statistics, including the results of polling in each electorate. Part 5 contains a ballot paper survey outlining levels and types of formal and informal voting in a sample of electoral districts.
The successful conduct of two major electoral events within such close proximity was no mean feat and I thank all of the Commission’s staff for their tireless efforts and professionalism. I would also like to thank all of the Commission’s stakeholders for their continued cooperation and constructive feedback.
David Kerslake Electoral Commissioner
© Electoral Commission Queensland 9 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
10 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 2
CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION
© Electoral Commission Queensland 11 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
12 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 2: Conduct of the Election
PART 2: CONDUCT OF THE ELECTION
Election snapshot
Electoral districts 89 Total number of candidates 430 Enrolled electors 2,746,844 Votes counted 2,499,763
Polling places:
Polling Booths 2,100 Declared Institutions 579 Pre-Poll Centres 439 Employed election staff 7,951
Cost:
Cost of election operations $19.185 million Public funding for candidates and parties $14.745 million
Election Timetable The chain of electoral events was triggered by the issue of the writ on Sunday 19 February 2012. The first key event was the process of voter registration – every Australian citizen aged 18 and over is required to enrol to vote. In previous elections, once the writ was issued, electors had a period of five days in which to enrol or to update their enrolment details. Following recent amendments to the Electoral Act 1992, for the 2012 State election electors had up until the day before polling day to enrol for their current address. The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) provided assistance with the processing of these enrolments and the production of roll data on the eve of the election.
Nominations for candidates closed on Monday 27 February 2012. Unlike federal elections (where a 24 hour processing period is allowed after the close of nominations), at a State election the Commission’s Returning Officers are required to conduct the draw for ballot paper positions immediately.
Electors unable to attend a polling booth on Election Day had the option of voting beforehand at a pre-poll centre (which for this election commenced on Friday 2 March 2012). Once the ballot paper draw was completed, the Commission had to begin printing ballot papers immediately in order to meet this deadline.
Polling day for the 2012 Election was Saturday 24 March 2012, 34 days after the issue of the writ. Although the elector’s involvement ceased at that point, electoral officials were required to continue counting votes for a period of 10 days after polling day to allow for the return of postal votes, as well as conducting a full preference count. Results in a number of electorates could not be declared until a full preference count
© Electoral Commission Queensland 13 Part 2: Conduct of the Election 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
was concluded. The result of the General Election was formally communicated to the Governor on Monday 23 April 2012, the deadline specified in the writ.
Key dates
Issue of writ Sunday 19 February
Close of roll 5:00 pm Saturday 25 February
Close of nominations 12:00 noon Monday 27 February
Pre-poll voting Start: Friday 2 March End: 6:00 pm Friday 23 March
Electoral visitor voting Start: Tuesday 28 February End: 6:00 pm Saturday 24 March
Declared Institution voting Start: Tuesday 13 March End: 6:00 pm Saturday 24 March
Cut-off for lodgement of How-to-Vote Cards to 5:00pm Friday 16 March be distributed on polling day
Cut off for postal vote applications 6.00 pm Thursday 22 March
Polling day 8.00am - 6:00pm Saturday 24 March
Cut-off for return of postal ballot papers 6:00pm Tuesday 3 April
Deadline return writ Monday 23 April
14 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 2: Conduct of the Election
Election costs The Commission receives a budget appropriation for the conduct of State elections. The overall cost of the 2012 Election was $19.19 million compared with an initial estimate of $15.28 million. The increased expenditure is mainly attributable to the election being called at the last possible date and a longer election period than is normally the case (for example requiring pre-poll centres to be open for an extended period). These factors were beyond the Commission’s control. A full outline of the Commission’s election expenditure for the State General Election is set out in the following table.
Cumulative Final anticipated Item expenditure as at costs 30 June 2012 Staff & Related Payments $7,666,540 $7,718,399 Pre-poll Voting $698,950 $699,186 Scanning Operations $184,850 $184,850 Tally Room $262,970 $262,970 Super Centre Polling Booths $65,440 $65,440 Call Centre $482,740 $476,186 Election Warehouse Operation $83,970 $77,489 Finance & Payroll Process $98,810 $106,347 Central Postal Vote Process $711,220 $712,417 Returning Officer Offices $2,041,100 $2,074,498 Media/Advertising Campaigns $2,514,720 $2,514,720 Election Operating Costs $2,213,420 $2,279,281 Printing $1,357,630 $1,357,630 Courier Costs $575,840 $576,427 Training $79,930 $79,930 TOTAL $19,038,130 $19,185,770
In addition to operational costs, the projected cost of election funding for political parties and candidates is $14.7 million.
Communications strategy As in the 2009 election, a letter was sent to each enrolled elector advising them of their obligation to vote, the district they were enrolled in, voting options and the location of polling booths in their area. The letter incorporated a small tear off slip with a unique number for each elector, making it quicker and easier to mark them off the electoral roll and issue the correct ballot paper. The letter continues to be well received and widely used by electors, with 65% of electors surveyed reporting that they took the tear off slip with them to the polling booth and 79% confirming that they found the list of polling booths to be useful.
A small number of electors questioned the use of the letter and associated costs. The letter is in fact very cost effective, reducing the level of costly media advertising that would otherwise be required.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 15 Part 2: Conduct of the Election 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
Dealing with elector enquiries At each election the Commission receives a huge volume of enquiries from members of the public, typically wishing to check their enrolment details, voting options or the location of polling booths in their electoral district. For this election, the Commission’s call centre to handle such enquiries was located and managed in-house (a considerable saving compared with 2009 when it was outsourced). Casual enquiry staff were engaged and received election-specific training, with permanent staff responding to more complex enquiries where necessary.
Even though electors could obtain information from the Commission’s website, the number of telephone calls increased substantially to almost 200,000 in 2012 compared with approximately 79,000 for the 2009 State election. Hits on the Commission’s website also increased substantially to approximately 67 million, compared with just under 31 million in 2009. The number of hits on the virtual tally room alone was over 16.8 million during the month of April 2012.
The Commission’s website contained a description and maps of electorate boundaries, as well as a portal which allowed individual electors to check their enrolment status. The website also contained: • the election timetable; • an explanation of Optional Preferential Voting; • Google maps showing polling booth locations (including disability access); • information on alternative forms of voting; • information for prospective candidates; • names of candidates; • employment opportunities; and • election results.
The website was positively received, with 85% of electors surveyed rating it satisfactory or better.
16 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 2: Conduct of the Election
Voting The Electoral Act allows voting to take place in a number of different ways, depending upon electors’ particular circumstances – where they live, their state of health, whether they are working or travelling on Election Day, their religious beliefs, and so on.
The following table sets out the number and percentages of electors who voted in different categories.
Vote Category Count Total Votes (%) Ordinary 1,810,047 72.41% Postal 211,619 8.47% Pre-poll 245,247 9.81% Absent 212,611 8.51% Electoral visit 1,763 0.07% Declared Institution 18,476 0.74%
TOTAL VOTES 2,499,763
Voting at polling booths A total of 2,100 polling booths were in operation across Queensland on Election Day, from 8.00am until 6.00pm. As shown in the table above, a total of 1,810,047 votes were cast on Election Day, or 72.41% of all votes cast in the election.
Assistance with voting was available from polling staff for anyone who requested it, such as blind and vision impaired electors or people with writing difficulties. Magnifying sheets for vision impaired electors were provided in every polling booth. Electors were also entitled to be accompanied by an interpreter or to seek assistance from a friend or family member.
Postal voting Electors were entitled to a postal vote if they: • would not be in their electoral district on Election Day; • would not be within eight kilometres of a polling place on Election Day; • would be travelling under conditions that prevent voting at a polling booth; • were ill, pregnant or had a disability that would prevent their attendance at a polling booth on Election Day; or • were unable to attend a polling place because of their religious beliefs.
A total of 211,619 electors voted by post, an increase of 17.38% on the 2009 State election. In addition, 36 electors voted by post using braille ballot papers.
Special Postal Voters The Commission maintains a Register of Special Postal Voters (silent voters or electors in remote areas) to whom ballot papers are sent automatically as soon as they are available. 28,594 electors used this service.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 17 Part 2: Conduct of the Election 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
Pre-polling votes Pre-poll voting is similar to Election Day voting in that the elector is required to physically attend a polling centre.
Unlike previous elections, there was no legislative requirement to make a declaration of eligibility. Electors were free to vote early if they wished and for the most part could do so as an ordinary vote. A total of 245,247 electors (9.81% of the total vote) voted in this way, compared with just under 151,000 in the 2009 election. The almost 60% increase reflects an ever-increasing tendency for electors to vote early.
Declared Institutions and Electoral Visitor voting For electoral events the Commission arranges for certain institutions, such as nursing homes and aged care facilities, to be declared mobile polling booths. Residents of these institutions find it difficult, because of infirmity, to attend a polling booth on polling day. Electoral officials visit the institutions at a pre-arranged time leading up to 6.00pm on polling day and issue votes to electors. Other electors who, because of illness or disability, have difficulty attending a polling booth on polling day, may apply for an electoral visit vote. Electoral officials made arrangements to visit residences before 6.00pm on polling day to ensure electors could cast a vote, with candidates advised of the times and places of visits to enable them to have scrutineers present. Queensland is the only jurisdiction in Australia to offer home electoral visits.
For the 2012 election, a total of 18,476 votes (0.74% of the total vote) were issued at declared institutions and a further 1,763 electoral visitor votes (0.07%) were recorded.
Remote polling The conduct of remote polling has always been a challenge. The Commission deploys a combination of aircraft, boats and four wheel drives to ensure that people in remote areas are able to vote. For the 2012 election, polling officials visited 20 communities in the Torres Strait and the Gulf of Carpentaria, taking votes from 2,079 electors. Mobile polling occurred as follows:
Badu Island Boigu Island Coconut Island Darnley Island Dauan Island Hammond Island Injinoo Kubin (Moa Island) Mapoon Maubiag Island Murray (Mer) Island New Mapoon Saibai Island Seisia St Pauls (Moa Island) Stephen Island Umagico Warraber Island Yam Island Yorke Island
18 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 3
CLIENT FEEDBACK
© Electoral Commission Queensland 19 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
20 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 3: Client Feedback
PART 3: CLIENT FEEDBACK
As part of its election evaluation process, the Commission conducted a random sample of 12,900 electors and other stakeholders. The Commission engaged the Institute for Social Science Research at the University of Queensland to provide independent advice: • on the survey questions, to ensure that the questions posed were appropriate and would not prejudice the responses and hence the outcome of the survey; and • on the sample sizes to be selected at random, by employing statistical techniques to calculate the minimum sample sizes sufficient to obtain the required number of responses to support a 95% level of confidence with a +/-5% precision.
The survey covered the different ways of casting a vote with survey forms sent to each of the following categories– • Ordinary (attendance) voters (2,200); • Postal voters (1,500); • Special postal voters (1,200); • Pre-poll voters (2,000); • Absent voters (5,000); and • Polling officials (1,000).
A table summarising the University of Queensland’s quantitative advice follows: Survey Data 2012 State General Election University of Queensland Evaluation Survey Projected Data Actual UQ Actual UQ Actual Number in Proposed Number of Anticipated Survey Each Surveys to Surveys Survey Responses Category be sent out sent out Responses Received
Attendance Voters 1,810,047 1,785 2,200 385 637
Postal Voters 183,025 1,109 1,500 384 597
Special Postal Voters 28,594 1,006 1,200 370 544
Pre-Poll Voters 245,247 1,603 2,000 384 634
Absent Voters 212,611 3,610 5,000 384 645
Polling Officials 7,951 935 1,000 368 479
TOTALS: 2,487,475 10,048 12,900 2,275 3,536
The Commission also conducted surveys of other key stakeholders. These were: • All candidates (430) contesting the election. • All registered political parties (6) who endorsed candidates for the election. • All Returning Officers (89) and an assistant Returning Officer. • All Commission staff.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 21 Part 3: Client Feedback 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
The surveys assessed satisfaction with key operational objectives such as the quality of information supplied by ECQ, the convenience and effectiveness of the call centre and other contact options, the impact of ECQ advertising and utilisation of the website for key information. The survey also sought to determine the level of service provided at the polling booth and to gauge desired methods of voting in future. By the return deadline of Friday 31 August, a total of 3,536 elector responses (27.4%) and 161 stakeholder responses (30.6%) were received.
The overall feedback from electors and other stakeholders was positive. A summary of the responses is set out below. Survey data tables appear in Appendix A.
1. Response to generic questions • Overall, only 17% of respondents contacted the Commission during the election period, the vast majority using either our Helpline or website to obtain the information they were seeking.
• The website was positively received, with 85% of all respondents rating it satisfactory or better.
• 87% of all respondents reported that they received their Voter Information Letter in a timely manner, with 78% of all respondents finding the list of polling booths useful, while 65% of respondents took the tear off slip to the polling booth.
2. Attendance voters Stakeholder group = 2200 randomly selected electors from State Electorates Responses received = 637 (29%)
• Only 6% of attendance voters reported that they had to wait longer than 10 minutes to cast their vote; 98% found ECQ polling staff helpful; and 97% found the standard and location of the polling booth of a satisfactory or better standard.
• 51% of respondents would prefer to keep voting at a polling booth or pre-poll centre, 24% would prefer to vote via the internet in the future, and 24% of respondents chose postal voting as their preference for future elections.
• 91% of respondents found the list of polling booths and accessibility details in the Voter Information Letter useful.
3. Postal voters Stakeholder group = 1500 randomly selected electors from State Electorates Responses received = 597 (39%)
• 31% of respondents contacted the Commission during the election, with 83% of this group seeking postal voting information. 46% of these respondents made contact via telephone, with waiting times less than 3 minutes 46% of the time.
• 91% of respondents received their Voter Information Letter in a timely manner, with 85% finding the information useful.
• 95% of respondents received their ballot material in time to vote, and 98% found the instructions clear and easy to use.
22 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 3: Client Feedback
• Only 6% of respondents reported experiencing problems with the postal voting process, mostly due to time constraints in the voting process.
• Postal voters were divided on their preferred voting method, with 52% preferring voting at a polling booth or pre-poll centre, 22% by post, and 26% by the internet.
4. Special postal voters Stakeholder group = 1200 electors randomly selected from State Electorates Responses received = 544 (45%)
• Only 13% of respondents contacted the Commission during the election, with 69% of these seeking information about postal voting.
• 78% of respondents found the information in the Voter Information Letter useful.
• 98% of respondents felt that the Postal Vote Application and the Declaration Vote Instructions were clear and easy to use.
• 94% of respondents reported receiving their ballot material in time to vote.
• Only 7% of respondents reported experiencing problems with the postal voting process, principally related to time constraints (76%).
5. Pre-poll voters Stakeholder group = 2000 electors randomly selected from State Electorates Responses received = 634 (32%)
• Only 16% of respondents contacted the Commission during the election.
• Of these, 34% sought information about postal voting, and 25% about other voting matters.
• 89% of respondents received their Voter Information Letter in a timely manner, with 79% finding the list of polling booths and accessibility details useful.
• 97% found the Commission’s pre-poll staff helpful.
• Only 7% had to wait longer than 10 minutes to vote.
• 97% of respondents felt that the ballot papers were clear and easy to use.
• 96% found the location and standard of voting places satisfactory or better.
• 49% of respondents indicated that they would like to continue to vote at a polling place or pre-poll centre, with 27% preferring to vote by post, and 24% on the internet.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 23 Part 3: Client Feedback 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
6. Absent voters Stakeholder group = 5000 electors randomly selected from State Electorates Responses received = 645 (13%)
• 42% of respondents who contacted the Commission did so by telephone, with 81% of these waiting less than 10 minutes for a response. 35% used the Commission’s website to obtain information.
• 97% of respondents found the polling staff helpful, with 78% able to vote in less than 10 minutes.
• 90% found the absent voting process clear and easy to understand.
• 97% found the standard and location of the polling booth of a satisfactory or better standard.
• 53% of respondents indicated that in future they would like to vote at a polling booth or pre-poll centre, while 25% would prefer to vote by post, and 22% over the internet.
7. Polling staff Stakeholder group = 1000 randomly selected polling staff from State Electorates Responses received = 479 (48%)
• This group provided the largest response to the survey with 48% of stakeholders returning their surveys before the due date.
• 97% indicated that they would like to work on polling day in the future.
• Over 94% of respondents found the training, forms, manuals and equipment helpful.
• Polling staff estimate that 50% of voters presented their Voter Information Letter when voting.
• 79% of polling staff found the Voter Information Letters very helpful to the voting process.
8. Candidates Stakeholder group = 430 Candidates Responses received = 104 (24%)
• 63% of respondents required information from the ECQ, with 38% of these talking to an ECQ Officer, 28% accessing the Commission’s website, and 9% using the Voter’s Helpline.
• Information sought included booth locations and policy advice (21% each), postal voting (15%), and enrolments (12%).
• 87% of respondents recalled receiving their Voter Information Letter, with 82% finding the information on polling booth locations and accessibility helpful.
24 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 3: Client Feedback
• 24% of responding candidates had a complaint, with 48% speaking to the Returning Officer, 30% to ECQ staff, and 21% to polling staff. Of the 74% who received a response, only 45% were satisfied with the response.
9. Political Parties Stakeholder group = 6 Parties Responses received = 1 (17%)
• It is not appropriate to comment with only one political party responding to the survey.
10. Returning Officers Stakeholder group = 90 (89 Returning Officers and 1 Assistant Returning Officer) Responses received = 56 (62%)
• All but 1 respondent had previously worked at an ECQ run election. On average, the respondents had worked over 15 elections each.
• 75% of respondents said that the training provided was sufficient.
• 49% of respondents suggested that the workload was high, with 54% experiencing difficulties carrying out the required tasks on the Sunday after the election.
• However, 87% of respondents indicated they would like to work as a Returning Officer in future elections.
• Only 1 in 2 respondents believed they had sufficient resources available to them during the election, with 45% needing more computer equipment.
• A significant majority of respondents rated the Commission’s computer applications and processes either satisfactory or better, with the exception of the process to scrutinise votes (36% rating the process as poor).
• Returning Officers reported approximately 1 in 2 booths as ‘problem booths’, with the main issue being understaffing for declaration voting at both pre-poll centres and polling booths on Election Day.
• The barcode scanner was rated 98% satisfactory or better, the iRoll was rated 89% satisfactory or better.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 25 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
26 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 4
ELECTORAL INNOVATION
© Electoral Commission Queensland 27 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
28 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 4: Electoral Innovation
PART 4: ELECTORAL INNOVATION
The Commission put in place a number of organisational and technological innovations for the 2012 State General Election.
SMS reminder service An SMS reminder service was provided for the first time to all electors who signed up on the ECQ website within the prescribed time. As part of the service provided by the Commission, two separate messages were sent to electors during the election period. The first reminder was sent a week prior to polling day and the second on polling day. By all reports from those who utilised the service, it was a great success and they intend to use the service again at the next election if available.
Email election alert for registered overseas voters Because Australian news has limited coverage overseas and the majority of electors travelling or working overseas find out about the election too late to cast a postal vote, the Commission developed a database containing the contact email address for those electors.
As soon as details of the election dates were known a broadcast email was sent to the electors providing information on casting a vote overseas or by post and a link to the Commission’s website for further information. The feedback received from the electors was extremely positive.
An added benefit to the Commission was the updating of enrolment records where an elector no longer resided overseas which in turn led to a more accurate roll.
Enrolment and voting up to polling day At previous State elections, persons only had up to the official Close of Rolls date to enrol or to effect changes to the address they had registered on the roll. Under legislative amendments enacted in 2011, electors are now given a second opportunity. They can lawfully enrol, or update their enrolled address, at any stage up to and including the day before Election Day.
While this is beneficial for the electors concerned and increases participation, it does pose some administrative challenges for the Commission. Between 25 February 2012 (the ‘official’ roll close) and 23 March 2012, a further 64,618 enrolment transactions were required to be processed, 18,908 first time enrolments and 45,710 notified changes of address. Details of the enrolments were progressively notified to the 89 Returning Officers to enable the elector’s vote to be admitted to the count.
The AEC provided valuable assistance in the processing of enrolments during this period and the provision of updated roll data the night before polling day.
Funding and disclosure A number of reforms to the funding and disclosure provisions also came into effect for the first time in the 2012 State General Election. The reforms changed how election funding was administered and the requirements for disclosing electoral donations.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 29 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
30 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 5
WHERE CAN WE IMPROVE?
© Electoral Commission Queensland 31 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
32 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 5: Where Can We Improve?
PART 5: WHERE CAN WE IMPROVE?
Nominations - draw for ballot paper position The Electoral Act requires the announcement of candidates for election as soon as practicable after noon on the cut-off day for nominations. The draw for positions is currently carried out at approximately 3.00pm on the day of nomination. The short timeframe available for verifying candidate nominations increases the likelihood of an error being made. The ECQ notes that for federal elections an additional day is allowed and would support an identical provision applying to Queensland State elections, especially in the light of the number of candidates (and sometimes parties) who leave it until the very last minute to lodge nominations.
Returning Officer training Without a firm date for the State election, the Electoral Commission commenced initial training for its State Returning Officers in May 2011, with refresher training planned for December 2011. However, when the Commission was given responsibility for the 2012 Local Government elections, training for the local government Returning Officers was conducted in December instead.
Feedback from Returning Officers has indicated that, whilst there was sufficient training on the computer systems and applications used by the Commission, it would be beneficial to devote more time to other operational processes. The ECQ acknowledges the merit in this proposal and will place added emphasis on operational training in future, either face-to-face or online. It is also planned to investigate options for online training of polling booth officials.
Postal voting One of the biggest challenges facing the Commission is the significant increase in postal voting. With this trend expected to continue, the Commission is cognisant of the heavy reliance on the reliability of postal delivery services, most particularly in regional and remote areas. After the election instances came to light where some electors did not receive their ballot paper material until after voting had concluded, even though it had been despatched at least two to three weeks prior to Election Day. While the number of electors who experienced difficulties was very small in relation to the total number of electors enrolled and even the overall level of postal voting activity, it remains unacceptable that the vote of an enrolled elector may not be able to be counted because of such delays.
One possible solution would be to allow postal voters in more remote areas to vote via the internet, as is now the case in New South Wales elections. Absent such legislative change, the ECQ will encourage a joint approach to Australia Post by all Australian electoral authorities under the auspices of the Electoral Council of Australia.
Current legislation also allows an elector to apply for a postal vote up until 6.00pm on the Thursday before polling day, when the reality is that few if any electors are likely to receive their ballot material in time to vote if they leave it so late to apply.
This is one area where in the ECQ’s view Queensland’s local government electoral legislation is a step ahead. The Local Government Electoral Act 2011 sets the deadline for postal vote applications as 6.00pm on the Wednesday before polling day, making it more likely that late applicants will receive their ballot material in time to vote.
© Electoral Commission Queensland 33 Part 5: Where Can We Improve? 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
Nominations - payment of fee The Electoral Act requires that nominations must be submitted in person and be accompanied by a deposit either in cash or in the form of a bank cheque.
At every election there are candidates or parties that experience difficulty with the payment of the nomination fee, for example expecting to pay their deposit by personal cheque. The Commission would support legislative provision for both nominations and deposits to be lodged online.
Non-voter processing In similar vein, the Commission sees no reason why the legislation cannot allow the payment of non-voters fines to be effected electronically.
Secret voting for people with disabilities For some time now the Commission has been advocating for the introduction of telephone and internet voting options for people who are denied a secret vote because of a disability that prevents them from filling out the ballot paper without assistance. Many electors in this category (such as blind and vision impaired) have special telephone or computer equipment in their own homes that would enable them to vote independently. Modern technology would enable the Commission to facilitate voting by these means and the Commission has already set some funding aside. All that is required is the legislative authority to proceed.
The Commission considers that internet voting is also a viable option for electors in remote areas, or who happen to be interstate or overseas, particularly where those electors may otherwise be disenfranchised.
34 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
PART 6
STATISTICAL RETURNS
© Electoral Commission Queensland 35 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
36 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 6: Statistical Returns
CONTENTS
Page No
Part 6: Statistical Returns ...... 37 Statistical Fast Facts for 2012 State General Election ...... 39 2012 Queensland Election Map ...... 40 Sunshine Coast Map (INSET 1A) ...... 41 Outer Brisbane - Gold Coast Map (INSET 1B)...... 42 Brisbane Map (INSET 2) ...... 43 Table (1) Returning Officers - 2012 State General Election ...... 44 Table (2) 2012 State General Election Timetable ...... 45 Table (3) Close of Roll Figures and Deviation from Average Enrolment...... 46 Table (4) List of Candidates at the 2012 State General Election ...... 47 Table (5) Successful Candidates by District ...... 52 Table (6) Summary of Vote Types for State Elections held in 2009 and 2012 ...... 53 Table (7) Vote Responses By Electoral District ...... 54 Table (8) Vote Types By Electoral District ...... 56 Table (9) Votes For Candidates By District ...... 59 Table (10) Electoral Districts Won by Registered Parties ...... 61 Table (11) Election Writ...... 62 Table (12) Gender of Candidates Comparison for State Elections held in 2009 and 2012 ...... 63
Table (13) Comparative Analysis for State Elections held in 2009 and 2012 ...... 64 Table (14) Historical Record of State General Elections 1860 – 2012 ...... 66 Electoral District First Preference Votes and Distribution of Preferences ...... 67 District Profiles...... 157 District Maps ...... 181 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations ...... 272
© Electoral Commission Queensland 37 Part 6: Statistical Returns 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns
38 © Electoral Commission Queensland 2012 State General Election: Evaluation Report and Statistical Returns Part 6: Statistical Returns