Final report - Voting centre accessibility

6.1 Introduction

Even where voting centres meet entry and circulation requirements, barriers can still arise if voting centres do not have the right equipment. This chapter examines what it means to properly equip voting centres with inclusive resources. It considers the Victorian Electoral Commission’s (VEC’s) current practices with voting centre furniture (Section 6.2), reading and writing tools (Section 6.3), assistive listening systems (Section 6.4) and a virtual Auslan interpreting service (Section 6.5). The Committee finds that there is scope for improvement in the way that all of these things are provided.

This chapter also considers other technology that could reduce barriers for voters, including:

• reading support technology and pens (Section 6.6)
• communication boards (Section 6.7)
• electronic voting (Section 6.8).

The Committee notes the importance of providing voters with the opportunity to vote independently, confidentially and with dignity. While the VEC provides some accessibility tools to support this, there is more that could be done. The Committee encourages the VEC to provide whatever supports it can to reduce the burden on the voter to bring their own solutions or be compelled to use postal or telephone-assisted voting.

It is also essential that people know what equipment is available before they get to a voting centre. This helps people to know whether or not voting at a voting centre will be a practical option for them. By informing people in advance what is available, people can also feel more confident asking for the supports they need. This is discussed further in Section 7.6.2.

6.2 Furniture supplied by the VEC

The VEC supplies a range of furniture to voting centres, including voting compartments, tables, privacy screens, ballot boxes, queuing barriers, signage stands and seating. This furniture needs to meet the needs of all users of the voting centre, as well as the logistics needs of the VEC.

Through this Inquiry, two major areas of improvement to voting centre furniture were identified: making voting compartments more accessible and providing seating for voters to rest before, during and after voting.

6.2.1 Voting compartments and voting screens should support safe, accessible and confidential voting

A voting compartment (also referred to as a ‘voting booth’) is a designated, enclosed space provided at a voting centre, where a voter can mark their ballot papers privately and without interference. A voting screen is the section of the voting compartment, or a portable table-top item, that provides vertical barriers to protect the secrecy and integrity of the vote.

The VEC generally provides three types of voting compartment in voting centres:

• standard voting compartments, which are self-supporting cardboard structures that include a flat surface for filling out ballot papers, with vertical screening around three sides to provide privacy
• low-level voting compartments, which are wider and lower and have space for a chair or a wheelchair user to be positioned at the compartment
• table-top voting screens, which consist of just the flat surface and vertical screens, which are placed on tables.

For mobile voting, the VEC also uses ‘pizza box’ compartments (which can be folded down for transport) and ‘mobile screens’ (for use at a bedside or in an armchair).^[1]

At the 2026 Nepean District by-election, voting centres were supplied with 8, 12 or 16 standard compartments, and 1 or 2 low-level voting compartments. No other compartments were supplied to voting centres at that by-election. Table-top and ‘pizza box’ compartments were supplied in small numbers to election offices.^[2]

Figure 6.1 illustrates the three different compartments listed above.

Voting compartments could be better designed

The Rights Information and Advocacy Centre told the Committee that:

Many issues stem from the standard cardboard polling booths used in most elections. These generally fail to meet the needs of people with mobility limitations, vision impairment, or those using Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) devices.^[3]

In addition, neither low-level nor standard options appear well suited to people who require a support person to assist them.^[4] The Australian Institute of Architects recommended that every voting centre have at least one ‘Double width (1350 mm wide) accessible polling booths—located away from other booths to provide acoustic privacy—preferred/recommended especially for neurodivergent voters, and those with a support person’.^[5]

There may also be other design changes which could reduce barriers for voters with disability. The Electoral Commission of South Australia advised that it provides: ‘A black outline around the desktop and edges of polling stations to help voters with low vision identify where to complete their ballot papers.’^[6] This can potentially help voters with low vision by improving visual definition and navigability and may also help others with a reduced capacity to distinguish items or surfaces of similar tone or colour (such as people with dementia).^[7]

Although the Committee has not reviewed any evaluation of South Australia’s approach, it considers that this represents an opportunity to improve accessibility. The Committee encourages the VEC to consult with stakeholders in South Australia on the success or otherwise of this initiative and to consult with relevant stakeholders about implementation in Victoria.

There needs to be enough low-level voting compartments or table-top screens and they need to be available for voters who need them

The number of compartments, low-level voting compartments or table-top screens was considered inadequate by some submitters.^[8] Some submitters believed that this problem was exacerbated by low-level or table-top compartments being used by people who did not need to use them, resulting in increased wait times.^[9]

If there are insufficient low-level or table-top compartments, or if voters are using these compartments, then voters who require this option may have to wait in throughway areas or relocate until the compartment becomes available. If they require seating as they wait, it may not be available.^[10] There is no indication in VEC operational guidance documents that voters with accessibility needs should be given priority use of these compartments. Nor do the compartments have any signage to indicate this to voters.

6.2.2 Seating is needed before, during and after the voting process

Multiple organisations and individuals with lived experience highlighted the need for seating at all stages of the voting process—before, during and after voting.^[11]

Submitters linked waiting without seating to fatigue, physical exhaustion and pain.^[12] They described sitting on steps while queueing^[13] or having nowhere to sit while waiting for a free voting compartment.^[14] Self-identifying to access assistance can create additional barriers (see Section 5.4.1). Others felt that they had to rely on postal voting to avoid problems,^[15] resulting in inequitable voting options.

The Rights Information and Advocacy Centre specifically called for ‘chairs with backs and armrests for people who need to sit while voting.’^[16] Evidence also indicates that some voters require seating after voting to rest or recover, as the process can be physically and psychologically demanding.^[17]

The importance of seating is noted in the VEC’s training materials. Voting centre managers are instructed to set up ‘seating for electors unable to stand while they wait,’ advised that chairs may need to be set up if access from the car park to the building is ‘a long distance’ and to place two seats at a low-level voting compartment or table-top screen.^[18] They are also instructed to check if there is an ‘adequate number of adult-sized tables and chairs’ before election day.^[19]

Voting centre staff are also advised to ‘Ask anyone using a mobility aid, such as a walking frame or crutches, or who appears to be having difficulty standing if they would like to come to the front of a queue or offer them a seat,’ and to ‘identify electors with special needs, and provide assistance where necessary, for example, bringing an elderly elector forward in the queue or providing a seat.’^[20]

However, the VEC only supplies one or two chairs to voting centres for voters’ use (though more may be available with the venue).^[21] The experiences shared with the Committee suggest that there are not always enough. Much of the VEC’s instructions also rely on the voting centre manager’s discretion or judgement as to when seating is required, and what constitutes ‘a long distance’ and ‘adequate’ provision. This is compounded by staff having to ‘identify electors with special needs’ to offer seating. The combination of vague guidance and reliance on staff to recognise individuals who may require assistance creates a risk that barriers will remain unaddressed, resulting in inequitable experiences.

It was argued that seating should be treated as a requirement, not an optional extra.^[22] Whether or not seating is available should not depend on staff discretion. Minimum seating standards should be applied state-wide to ensure consistent access and dignity for all voters.

6.3 Reading and writing devices

The VEC equips voting centres with a range of accessibility tools to assist with reading and writing. On its website, the VEC states:

Voting centres will have:

• at least one accessible voting screen or a table-top voting screen
• magnifying sheets
• maxi pencils.^[23]

However, the Committee was told about staff not knowing what accessibility tools are available or where they are located.^[24] Rather than being built into the default voting experience, accessibility depends heavily on staff awareness, voter confidence to request assistance and how equipment is set up on the day.

In addition, the VEC’s Distribution checklist (which lists the items sent to a voting centre) does not explicitly reference magnifying sheets and large-grip pencils. Including these as separate items to be checked off may help ensure that they are consistently considered, supplied and available when needed.

Voting centre managers are instructed to set up a magnifier in one or more voting compartments, attach magnifiers to the voting compartment(s) with string and attach a label indicating each magnifier. No specific number is indicated. They are also instructed to set up a table-top voting compartment with magnifier and large pencil attached.^[25]

It could be inferred from these instructions that more than one magnifier and large pencil are available. Even so, at the recent Nepean District by-election, one submitter found it difficult to access either of these items.^[26] The instruction to tie these items to a voting compartment limits their usefulness unless they are attached to every compartment and may cause unnecessary delays for voters who require a magnifier, a maxi pencil or both, but do not require a low-level voting compartment or table-top screen.

Current processes also partly rely on voters knowing what is available and requesting the tools that they need. There are no general signs about what tools are available or where to find them. Staff are instructed to attach a label to voting compartments with magnifiers. However, this may not be useful for some people with vision impairment. Compartments with maxi pencils are not labelled.

As discussed in Section 7.6.2, there is scope for improving the communication about what is available before voters arrive at a voting centre. There is also scope to make it easier for voters to get the appropriate tools at the voting centre. Signs in the voting centre indicating what is available would help some voters. Making some equipment (such as maxi pencils) freely available for voters to take (rather than having to request them) would also provide a more discreet and dignified way for voters to get what they need.

6.4 Assistive listening systems

Hearing loops (also called induction loops) and similar technology (such as Auracast) transmit sound directly to hearing aids or cochlear implants, improving hearing clarity for people with hearing loss. Personal hearing amplifiers are devices used by individuals, who can listen through headphones or similar devices, or the device can connect to hearing aids or implants. The use of hearing support devices at voting centres was suggested by some submitters.^[27]

The VEC told the Committee that it supplies personal hearing amplifiers at early voting centres and low-sensory voting centres but not election-day voting centres. The VEC advised that it does not supply the devices at election-day voting centres ‘due to a limited number of devices.’^[28] The Committee assumes this is a budgetary constraint rather than a lack of supply. The Committee would like to see the VEC make the most effective use of the devices that it is able to access.

As with other accessibility tools, it is important to ensure that voters are aware in advance of which voting centres have assistive listening systems (see further discussion in Section 7.6.2).

6.5 Auslan interpreting service

At the 2022 election, the VEC engaged Convo Communications Australia to provide virtual Auslan interpreting services before the election and during the voting period.^[29] Voters could scan a QR code in the voting centre to connect with an interpreter via video. The service was offered on demand, with no need to book in advance.^[30] This allowed Deaf voters to communicate with staff at voting centres.

Todd Wright from Convo Communications Australia, the organisation that provided the service, explained:

We have received feedback from deaf voters. For some of them it was their first opportunity to ask questions directly to the electoral commission. By asking those questions, they have actually realised they have been voting unintentionally the wrong way their entire lives. It is not about what they cannot do, it is just a simple lack of access in the moment when they need it the most. This obviously really shifts what we are talking about here: when access is available at that moment of intent, at the point when you need it most, it does not only help but really empowers people—giving people confidence to ask questions, to understand the process and to be able to participate fully in the process. Importantly, it really gives people something fundamental: it gives people dignity, confidentiality and ownership of their own vote.^[31]

Regarding the use of the service at the 2022 state election, the VEC reported that ‘Overall connection numbers for the election were lower than expected with 25 interactions totalling 1.7 hours of interpreting time taking place.’^[32]

The Australian Electoral Commission also engaged this service, with a similar rate of use at the 2025 Australian Commonwealth election (adjusting for the larger number of voters at a Commonwealth election).^[33]

The VEC sought feedback on the service through its post-election evaluation. The evaluation found that only 30% of the voters who were Deaf or hard of hearing were aware of the Auslan interpreting service. Of the voters who were aware of the service, only 9% actually used it. However, the Committee notes that this sample size was relatively small, with only 23 people being aware of the service.^[34]

The VEC concluded that better promotion may be appropriate at future elections:

The VEC will consider better promotion opportunities for Auslan interpreting services with the aim to boost access and usage.^[35]

The Committee notes that the service has not featured clearly in communication at previous elections (see Section 7.6.2).

In its submission to this Inquiry, the VEC reported that its commitment to consider better promotion opportunities is not yet actioned. The VEC stated that it ‘will be progressed in future elections.’^[36] When asked what changes to the promotion plan for this service have been made for the 2026 election, the VEC told the Committee:

The VEC will again offer these services utilising Convo, a global private company offering interpretation services. The service will again be available at all early voting centres and election day voting centres. Signage will be at all voting centres alerting voters to the service, and public communications will highlight the service’s availability.^[37]

It is not clear from this response whether this will involve better promotion than in 2022.

The VEC has listed an Auslan interpreting service as an available support at voting centres in its submission to this Inquiry.^[38] However, there is no mention of this service in the 2026 state election service plan. Nor does it appear in the Disability education and engagement plan and associated documents (see Section 9.4.1).

The Committee also notes that there has been a lack of evaluation of this service (see Section 9.3.1). As a result, the VEC does not know why the service has had a lower level of usage than expected. It is therefore not clear whether increased promotion is the best response.

Deaf Victoria provided the Committee with details of its experience at the 2025 Commonwealth election. The organisation noted that QR posters were often placed in locations that were not seen until later in the voting process, limiting early access to interpreters. Staff were unaware of the Auslan service or failed to display posters, assuming no Deaf voters, and one voter felt dismissed when requesting better signage. In contrast, where QR posters were clearly displayed at entry points, voters reported improved access and visibility of Auslan services.^[39]

This suggests that factors other than promotion may have contributed to the low uptake of the service. The Committee encourages the VEC to expand its consideration of why the Auslan service had a lower level of usage than expected.

6.6 Some additional reading and writing tools would be helpful

Accessibility tools that support reading, writing and marking are essential to ensuring that voting is inclusive, independent and dignified for all voters. Many people experience barriers when completing written materials due to vision impairment, cognitive conditions, physical limitations or fatigue. Providing appropriate tools helps reduce these barriers by enabling voters to engage with information more easily and to accurately complete their ballot papers.

Importantly, these tools reduce the need for voters to seek assistance or disclose their vote to other people. While some tools are supplied by the VEC (see Section 6.3), additional tools may also be helpful.

6.6.1 Reading support or text access technology

A text-to-speech pen is a type of assistive reading technology—a portable device that scans printed text and reads it aloud to help people read and understand written material.

Text-to-speech pens would support access to voting information, including what is on ballot papers, and reduce dependence on assistance. They would enable some people who currently rely on support to complete ballot papers independently. The Australian Electoral Commission and the Western Australian Electoral Commission provide text-to-speech or reader pens at selected locations.^[40] However, these have not been offered by the VEC.

6.6.2 Pens are better than pencils for some people

Standard 2B half-size pencils^[41] are provided for voter use in each voting compartment. These can be difficult to handle, particularly for individuals with dexterity impairments. For voters with vision impairment, both the pencil and numbers written with a pencil can be difficult to see.^[42] This increases the risk of errors or informal ballot papers.

Directly or indirectly requiring voters to bring their own writing instruments undermines equity and creates immediate barriers. It assumes prior awareness that assistive tools are needed and the ability to prepare accordingly. It also places an additional burden on voters and their support networks, who may not anticipate or remember this requirement.

One submitter suggested supplying pens for people to use when voting.^[43] Providing a choice of writing implements would allow voters to select what works best for them, rather than putting the burden onto the voter.

6.7 Accessible communication enables dignified, independent participation

Some voters have functional communication difficulties which can make interacting with staff in voting centres difficult. These can include aphasia after a stroke, traumatic brain injury, intellectual disability, autism, degenerative neurological conditions, hearing loss and low English literacy.

A variety of accessibility tools and services can assist with communication. ‘Augmentative and alternative communication’ is when a person uses something other than speech to communicate. Tools such as assistance cards, communication boards and symbol-based expressive communication tools can facilitate communication for people with communication difficulties. However, the use of these accessibility tools at voting centres is not widely reported.

This represents an unaddressed accessibility gap for voters who experience difficulty communicating verbally.

6.7.1 Communication boards can support clearer and more inclusive interactions

A communication board is a device designed to support people who have difficulty speaking or are nonverbal. It displays text and/or images that a user can point to or gesture at to communicate, including asking or responding to questions. Communication boards can also assist staff to communicate with people who have difficulty hearing. They are a well established, low-cost support, often provided in public-facing service environments.

In addition to reducing barriers for people with disability, communication boards can also facilitate communication for people with low English language skills.

The VEC’s Voters Voice app used to provide an electronic communication board

The VEC introduced the Voters Voice app for the 2018 state election. It was developed from feedback from the Electoral Access Advisory Group and included an electronic communication board to replace paper-based talking boards that had been supplied to all voting centres in the past.^[44]

The Voters Voice communication board contained prepared voting phrases and common responses. It allowed voters to type in additional information. The app also included information about enrolling and voting in a variety of formats, including plain English, Easy English, audio and visual formats.^[45] A screenshot of the communication board can be seen in Figure 6.2.

The VEC stated:

The Voters Voice app was designed to help people with complex communication needs including people with low literacy, English language difficulties and people who use Auslan, to vote in person at Victorian elections. The Commission worked closely with disability support agencies, primarily Scope, in the development and testing of this application as part of a co-design project.^[46]

A representative of the VEC at the time explained:

We identified a potential segment of voters who were either avoiding going to a voting centre or avoiding voting at all due to the difficulty they had communicating with election staff.^[47]

The app was developed together with disability support agencies and was downloaded 2,280 times.^[48] The communication board feature was viewed 807 times, accounting for 10.9% of the screen views on the app.^[49]

The Voters Voice app was well received but has been discontinued

In-app reviews gave the product an average rating of 2.2 out of 3.^[50] Comments from users indicate that several of the 1 out of 3 ratings were because people expected the app to have different functions, such as allowing people to vote through the app or providing information about candidates or their policies.^[51] Some positive reviews specifically mention the communication board:

‘Love the functionality and how it’s user friendly especially with the communication board and speak function’

‘Thanks for the good application so we communicate with VEC’

‘This app is the best app that I have seen in ages and will better assist everyone with communication problems thank you The Victorian electoral commission for making it happen.’^[52]

Voters Voice was discontinued after the 2018 election. The VEC explained to the Committee:

Feedback received was generally positive. However, the key features used in the app … indicated that improvements to the VEC website would be a more effective solution than maintaining a separate product, therefore making the website the only VEC source of truth.^[53]

The Committee notes that a communication board is not available on the VEC’s website. While the VEC views its website as a ‘more effective solution’ serving as the ‘only VEC source of truth’, this represents a shift from the original purpose of the Voters Voice app. It was originally designed as an accessibility tool to support people with complex communication needs, with the communication board described as its ‘central feature’ at the time of release.^[54] The app now appears to be viewed primarily as a platform for providing information. The decision to discontinue the app appears to be based on this function rather than an assessment of its value to users facing barriers to communication.

Paper-based communication boards may be a cost-effective solution

Paper-based communication boards were available in voting centres before the development of the app.^[55] Printed communication boards have been used at the VEC’s reception since 2013 and were updated in 2023.^[56] However, no communication boards are produced for voting centres. When asked about printed communication boards in voting centres, the VEC stated, ‘we are currently unable to provide communication boards due to cost’.^[57]

The Committee notes the routine use of communication boards or books across health,^[58] local government^[59] and justice,^[60] where frontline services regularly support people who have limited or no verbal communication. In these sectors, communication boards are treated as a standard accessibility measure rather than a specialist or exceptional adjustment. This widespread use reflects an established understanding that accessibility must address expressive communication needs.

The VEC has primarily focused on receptive communication (Easy Read guides, videos, signage), staff assistance and physical access adjustments. This leaves a gap for voters who may understand information but cannot easily communicate their needs or questions within a voting centre environment.

The VEC has claimed that the costs of producing communication boards are prohibitive.^[61] However, it may be possible to produce effective paper-based communication boards at a reasonable cost and distribute multiple copies to voting centres along with other material. This was possible prior to 2018.

The Committee notes the importance of providing reasonable adjustments for people with disability (see Section 2.3.1). Communication boards would enable this for some people.

6.8 Electronic voting

A number of stakeholders called for some form of electronic voting for people with disability.^[62] One way to do this is through electronic terminals with headphones that voters could use in a voting centre to cast a vote unassisted. This could benefit people with vision impairments and people with motor impairments.

Victorian legislation currently allows for electronic voting in voting centres for people with vision impairment, motor impairment or low literacy skills in English.^[63] The VEC trialled electronic voting kiosks at selected early voting centres in the 2006, 2010 and 2014 state elections. However, there was very limited use of the service, with only 605 voters using it in Victoria across the three elections.^[64] The VEC concluded that:

Irrespective of the VEC’s efforts over the three State elections, the number of target voters using electronically assisted voting remains very low. There has been no interest among voters who are not fluent in English, and only a small minority of blind and low-vision voters used the system despite increased promotion. The only group of voters showing interest in greater numbers are those voting overseas, who are not part of the target cohort.

Evidence suggests that for the target cohort, many of whom find travel difficult, getting to the early voting centre is a significant inhibitor to using the products on offer. Indeed, feedback from the VEC’s disability advocates is that, though appreciative of the VEC’s efforts in providing an electronically assisted voting service, they believe that true uptake of electronic voting for this group of eligible electors will only be realised if they can vote from home or another familiar environment.^[65]

The Australian Government, in responding to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, noted the large cost per vote of its trial of electronic voting.^[66] A variety of other concerns have also been raised about electronic voting in general, particularly in relation to voters’ ability to verify that what they entered into the system is what is counted.^[67]

Electronic voting on kiosks in voting centres involves multiple complex matters that are beyond the scope of this Inquiry. The Committee has not been able to explore the necessary integrity, cost and technical evidence in this Inquiry to make recommendations about electronic voting. However, particularly in light of the decision in Given v Australia (see Section 2.3),^[68] the Committee encourages the VEC and the Government to regularly review developments in electronic voting and assess whether it is an appropriate way to enable people with disability to vote independently, privately and on an equal basis with other voters.