Record Short Voting Window for Redcliffe By-election

It has passed with little public comment, but the Redcliffe by-election timetable includes the shortest period for postal and pre-poll voting that I have ever seen.

Instead of the usual 17-18 day period between the close of nominations and polling day, the Queensland government is allowing only nine days between the close of nominations and polling day.

This creates problems for anyone who has lodged a postal vote application and is travelling or wants to vote while overseas. Nothing can be posted before 10 February, but it must be received and filled in in by polling day. It is an odd situation where longer is allowed for the return of postal votes (10 days) than for the sending out of postal votes (9 days).

There are also only five days allowed for pre-poll and declared institution voting, half the usual period.

Compare the 9 days between close of nominations and polling day in Redcliffe with past practice at 17 Queensland by-elections between 1990 and 2012.

15 days - Lytton (1996)

16 days - Nundah (1991), Toowoomba South (1991), Landsborough (1990), Sherwood (1990)

17 days - Gaven (2006), South Brisbane (2012)

18 days - Brisbane Central (2007), Chatsworth (2005), Redcliffe (2005), Mulgrave (1998), Kurwongbah (1997), Mirani (1994)

19 days - Bundamba (2000), Woodridge (2000)

22 days - Mundingburra (1996)

36 days - Surfers Paradise (2001)

I can only presume there is some political reason for this short timetable as there is no administrative reason for it given past practice. The government has issued the writ for the usual minimum 25 day campaign period, but the gap between the close of rolls and close of nominations has been extended at the expense of the period set aside for voting.

In nearly all of the above by-elections, only 3-4 days passed between the close of rolls and the close of nominations. Since the 1992 Electoral Act was introduced, the only previous by-election with a longer gap than Redcliffe between roll and nomination close was Lytton (1995) with 7 days. Redcliffe has 10 days, the extra days coming at the expense of the period allowed for pre-poll and postal voting.

Very odd indeed.

Comments

[A.C.]

It’s worth considering why this short window might favour the government. 1) Increasing the nominations window gives more opportunity for independents and minor parties to nominate. The ALP is a long way in front on the polls and under optional preferential voting, a greater diversity of candidates may erode that lead. It’s a two edged sword though because it could also work against the LNP candidate. But it could also act to make the overall majority of the ALP look less decisive. It’ll be interesting to see if there are any surprise nominations cropping up. Clive Palmer has been running some advertisements on Qld television over the past day or so, and there isn’t a PUP candidate running in Griffith.
2) there is a short window between close of nominations at Noon Feb 13 and the “Cut-Off for Lodgement of How-to-Vote Cards to be distributed on Polling Day” at 5 pm Feb 14. Is this normal? It makes it difficult for parties to sort out preferences etc, and would favour a first-past-the-post style of how-to-vote card.
3) Postal votes. This again would appear to be a two edged sword. It would disadvantage candidates with fewer resources to mount a postal vote campaign. It’s not exactly clear whether it would affect the major parties. In the past in Redcliffe there hasn’t been a big difference between postal votes and overall voting for the major parties.

COMMENT: (1) We've known about the by-election for two months. Unless there is a very high profile candidate about to nominate at the last minute, someone who has left it until now to sort of running will hardly trouble the scorers.

(2) The date before polling day is normal but the late close of nominations causes problems. There is less dealing on preferences in single electorates than you think. Any smart party would lodge several versions of a how-to-vote and decide what to do later in the week.

(3) No third party is ever organised enough to organise a postal vote campaign. No doubt the ALP and LNP have or will write to every voter in the electorate giving them a postal vote application. It's why the major parties usually have a higher postal vote percentage than minor parties and Independents.

[Jeff]

Where to start?

I think the short amount of time allowed for postal votes, pre-poll and declared institution voting is further evidence that we need to move into the 21st century and develop an online voting application rather than wait for snail mail to find its way around the world - or around the state.

Though it must be remembered that there are only 33,090 electors enrolled in Redcliffe as of 6/1/14 (ECQ website) and I wouldn't expect more than 1% would be outside the country at election time, so overseas voting is only going to directly impact 331 votes maximum.

It's also worth noting that at the South Brisbane by-election held last May just 67.5% of those who were enrolled actually voted.

COMMENT: When electronic voting is introduced, postal voters and pre-poll voters, and especially overseas voters, will be the first to use it. The government should just allow the normal period for postal and pre-poll voting, not a period that is shorter than any election in my quarter century of covering elections.

The one state that does have on-line voting, NSW, requires an on-line access code to be posted to the voter, so if you have an ultra-short period for voting, a similar problem could arise, though the access code could be sent before the close of nominations where postal votes must wait for the printing of ballot papers.

The South Brisbane by-election was conducted just four weeks after the state election, on a day when it was bucketing with rain, and under odd circumstances where voters had to queue twice to vote, once for the BCC election and again for the by-election.