Final report - Voting centre accessibility

5.1 Introduction

In addition to selecting accessible venues, voting centres also need to be operated in an accessible way. The systems, processes and practices at a voting centre should be designed using an accessibility-first approach to ensure all voters can participate effectively, independently and with dignity. As Ngaweeyan Maar-oo explained:

Operational accessibility needs to be treated with the same seriousness as physical access. This means standardised requirements for signage, lighting and safety controls (including wet weather and crowding contingencies), fatigue-friendly queue arrangements (including seating options), and a clearly signposted priority assistance pathway. Each centre should have a designated escalation lead responsible for resolving accessibility issues on the day.^[1]

People will arrive at a voting centre by various means, and should be able to enter and exit the building safely, no matter how they arrive. Section 5.2 looks at what is needed to provide an accessible route into the voting centre. Section 5.3 discusses the significant limitations on the VEC’s ability to manage campaigners outside voting centres and how they interact with voters and each other.

Queues should be managed effectively to reduce wait times, with clearly available options that remove or reduce barriers for people with disability. Section 5.4 discusses the Victorian Electoral Commission’s (VEC’s) current queue management processes. It also looks at strategies to decrease wait times, including fast-track and priority queues, real-time queue tracking and performance measurement for future planning.

Section 5.5 discusses two additional forms of voting based out of voting centres: voting outside the voting centre (for example, in a car) and takeaway voting. Both have the potential to benefit some people with disability.

The voting centre layout also impacts accessibility. The availability and placement of suitable furniture and equipment, queueing equipment and the organisation of voter flow is the subject of Section 5.6. The Committee examines the guidance provided to voting centre managers by the VEC and evidence provided by submitters to identify improvements.

Independent, confident and dignified navigation to, around and out of a voting centre depends on clear, consistent and accessible signage. Section 5.7 looks at the quantity and location of signage outside and inside voting centres.

Ultimately, the actions of voting centre staff will play an important role in determining how accessible a voting centre is. To help staff make consistent and appropriate decisions, accessibility needs to be embedded into processes determined by head office. Section 5.8 examines the need for a stronger focus on accessibility in processes and manuals developed by head office.

Ensuring that voting centres have the right equipment and that staff have the right training are also integral to operating voting centres. These matters are covered in Chapters 6 and 8 of this report.

5.2 Voting centres need clear, safe, accessible approaches

A clear, safe approach to a voting centre is essential. This includes all paths of travel from public transport stops, parking and drop-off points to the entry/exit of the voting centre.^[2] Submitters identified barriers including physically challenging or uneven paths,^[3] inappropriate lighting,^[4] inadequate signage,^[5] a lack of accessible parking^[6] and a need for drop-off zones.^[7]

Blind Citizens Australia provided the following recommendations relating to physical access and wayfinding:

• Step-free access from the street, car parks, and public transport.
• Tactile ground surface indicators where appropriate.
• Logical, predictable placement of entrances, exits, and voting desks.
• Accessible toilets and designated areas for toileting of dog guides.
• Clear path of travel to the entrance, devoid of obstacles including party campaigners.^[8]

The Committee acknowledges that much of the physical approach to the voting centre is beyond the VEC’s control. However, several submitters noted the importance of clear, accessible signage,^[9] which is discussed in Section 5.7 of this chapter.

The VEC currently looks at accessible parking spaces and the route from them to the entrance as part of its assessment of potential venues.^[10] Staff are also instructed to consider establishing an accessible parking space if needed.^[11] However, not all voting centres will have accessible parking or will have enough accessible spots. In addition, not everyone who has difficulty walking is entitled to an accessible parking permit. Therefore, it is important for there to be an alternative accessible way for people to enter voting centres who cannot use an accessible parking space.

Several stakeholders suggested drop-off areas, where cars could drop off passengers in a safe space with an accessible path to the entrance.^[12] For example, one stakeholder suggested:

When the car park is full you need to be able to drop oldies or people you are supporting at the front so they don’t have to walk as far. But there is no seating and no shelter if it’s raining or very hot. Accessible parking is one option but chairs and even umbrellas would be an easy fix. Doesn’t have to be everywhere but a centre with designated drop off area would be good to know.^[13]

The Committee considers that this would be a valuable addition where practicable.

5.3 Campaigning needs to be restricted for low-sensory voting

Entering a voting centre can present sensory barriers to some people. Voters are confronted with lighting, noise, queuing equipment and signage, along with the conglomeration of campaigners, election officials and voters who may be exiting as well as entering.

The presence and behaviour of campaign workers at voting centres was identified as a significant barrier to accessibility by a number of stakeholders to this Inquiry. They reported crowding, unsolicited interaction, sensory impacts and psychosocial impacts that deterred or prevented them from attending voting centres.^[14]

It is important to note that these submitters are not referring to the generally unacceptable behaviour discussed by this Committee previously.^[15] In this context, it is the normal campaign behaviour that creates a barrier for voters. This is particularly relevant for voters with sensory sensitivities, psychosocial conditions, neurodegenerative conditions or cognitive impairments. However, the VEC has found that a significant portion of the general population have also reported problems with campaigners.^[16]

Moderating the behaviour of campaigners was considered particularly important by the VEC as part of low-sensory voting (see Section 4.4). The VEC stated that the behaviour of campaigners at the initial trial of low-sensory voting ‘led to many voters turning away and not casting their votes.’^[17] The VEC noted the inadequacy of the current limitations in place on campaigners, the lack of tools available to the VEC to manage campaigners and the need for legislative change to address these issues.^[18]

The Committee previously recommended:

That the Government introduce legislation amending the Electoral Act to provide the VEC with the ability to apply an extended campaigning exclusion zone at specified voting centres and for specified times, so that the VEC can provide dedicated periods of low-sensory voting. This should include an obligation for the VEC to adequately inform election stakeholders, with a defined notice period, when an extended exclusion zone will apply.^[19]

The Government supported this recommendation in principle, noting the need for consultation.^[20] The Electoral Commissioner has issued determinations regarding the powers of voting centres staff outside voting centres,^[21] but no legislative changes have been made to address this issue. The Committee continues to believe that this legislative change would be helpful.

While this would assist with low-sensory voting, campaigners can also be a barrier at regular voting centres. Priority queues may be one way to assist people (see Section 5.4.1).

5.4 Queues should be managed in ways that maximise accessibility for all voters

Queueing and queue management were consistently identified as an operational barrier for voters. Long wait times,^[22] a lack of seating,^[23] unclear paths,^[24] uncertainty or anxiety about skipping the queue^[25] and chronic pain exacerbated by standing^[26] make voting centres difficult or impossible for many people with disability. Long, crowded or noisy queues can also be a barrier for people with sensory sensitivities.^[27]

Clear queue processes, proactive staff support, accessible signage and appropriate attention to voters’ needs can reduce wait times. Where significant wait times cannot be prevented, helping voters with disability to avoid queues can make voting centres more accessible.

5.4.1 The VEC’s queue management strategies

In its 2026 election service plan, the VEC states:

We will manage queues inside and outside EVCs [early voting centres] and election day VCs [voting centres] to ensure voters can move quickly through the process and that voters who require assistance receive appropriate support.

At busy venues, we will assign staff as queue controllers with the primary responsibility of managing queues during peak periods. Queue controllers will also act as a point of contact for questions and assistance and will direct voters to the correct district issuing point or to the declaration issuing point if they are voting outside their district.^[28]

In the VEC’s manual for voting centre staff, staff are instructed to assist electors in confirming that they are in the correct district, to actively manage queuing by directing small groups to issuing points, to monitor voter flow, to provide wait-time estimates, to apologise for delays where necessary, to group electors with the same family name for processing and to organise orderly queues under shelter where possible—potentially using structured layouts such as ‘snake-style’ lines.^[29]

This guidance reflects a strong operational focus on efficiency, crowd management and voter flow within the voting centre. However, it is primarily aimed at optimising in-centre processes rather than addressing broader accessibility challenges for voters who may struggle to enter or navigate the voting environment.

Staff are advised to look for people who may need assistance while in the queue and give them priority access or seating:

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.^[30]

However, many people who struggle to stand in queues have hidden disabilities. It is important that instructions relating to queue management include attention to other conditions that can make queueing difficult.

As a bare minimum, the election officials’ instructions should be updated to encourage staff to ask any person wearing a Hidden Disabilities Sunflower lanyard how they can help. It should also be recognised that not all people with a hidden disability choose to wear a Sunflower lanyard. To further promote accessibility and inclusion, appropriate staff could wear a Sunflower Supporter lanyard, which may help individuals with a hidden disability (or their support person) feel more comfortable approaching staff for assistance when needed.

The VEC provides a ‘priority poster advising voters in queues to come to the front of the line and notify staff if they require any assistance with wheelchair use, difficulty standing or other needs.’^[31]

A priority poster requires voters first to see it, and secondly to self-identify and self-advocate. Self-identifying and self-advocacy can be difficult, embarrassing and can cause real or perceived resentment in other voters. Submitters explained:

It’s always super frustrating and people kind of give you looks if you jump the line as well, especially because I have a hidden disability. I get all the nasty looks and things like that.^[32]

I kind of have to build up the courage to self-advocate and to go up to whoever the staff member is and be like I can’t wait in this long line, I’ve got a disability, I need you to escort me to the front of the line.^[33]

The Committee considers the poster to be a good idea. It helps to establish that it is acceptable to ask for support and that support will be provided. It will be helpful for some people. However, it should not be relied on as the only way for people to get support.

Barriers also arise when information and announcements about queuing are not provided in accessible formats. Deaf Victoria explained:

When times are busy, voting centre staff often make voice announcements walking up and down the queue, and this practice needs to be accompanied by visual and written information. Deaf and hard of hearing people have reported that they were standing in the wrong queue and could have voted quicker when they realised there was a separate and shorter queue for voters who are voting from out of their area.^[34]

This barrier could be addressed through operational changes to ensure instructions are provided in accessible formats and staff are trained so important information does not rely solely on spoken communication.

It is important that queue management strategies are planned with an accessibility-first approach so that accessible options are clear and available, and the need to request or be offered assistance should be an exception.

Several other strategies were suggested as part of this Inquiry.

Priority or express queues

As an alternative approach, several submitters proposed separate priority lines that voters may join if they are unable to wait in a long queue.^[35] One submitter also suggested an alternative ‘quiet line’ with seating and a low-sensory environment.^[36]

Other submitters disliked the idea of separate queues, feeling that it ‘othered’ them or singled them out.^[37] This difference of opinion highlights the view that one size does not fit all, and that it is better to identify and eliminate barriers wherever possible, rather than create work-arounds. This is in line with the accessibility-first approach recommended by the Committee (see Section 1.4.1).

Real-time tracking tools

One way to help people avoid queues and the associated barriers would be to provide real-time information about waiting times. This was recommended by the Council on the Ageing Victoria as a tool that could help people to choose a voting centre where queuing is not an issue.^[38] This could be provided on the VEC’s website or via an app.

The Committee has not investigated the feasibility of this idea, but would like to see the VEC explore it. This may be something made possible through data from the use of electronic roll mark-off or from performance monitoring as discussed in Section 5.4.2.

Seating

The need for seating was repeatedly mentioned.^[39] The Election official manual suggests that staff offer seats to people who appear to be having difficulty standing in a queue (or take them to the front of the queue).^[40] However, it is not clear how many voting centres are sufficiently equipped with seats to make providing seats possible in practice.

Ensuring that sufficient seating is provided before, during and after voting would significantly assist voters (see further discussion in Section 6.2.2 of this report).

5.4.2 Evaluation to inform queue management planning could help reduce barriers

Queuing and queue management have been the subject of previous Committee recommendations. These recommendations have focussed on the development of measures and targets to assist with planning.^[41]

The VEC has not agreed with the recommendations. Instead, the VEC has focussed on demand management strategies such as increasing the number of early voting centres and extending hours.^[42] The Committee notes that the absence of queue measurement will make it very difficult to evaluate whether these strategies improve accessibility in practice.

The VEC has argued that queue measurement requires intrusive technologies that involve high costs and privacy risks.^[43] The Committee does not believe that this is necessary. For example, the VEC could acquire useful data through manual logging by staff at regular intervals.

5.5 Voting outside the voting centre could be of assistance

To avoid barriers associated with queuing and entering voting centres, voting outside the voting centre (for example, from a car) is allowed in Victoria, but not advertised. A second method—takeaway voting—is available in New Zealand. The Committee considers these could provide a helpful alternative for people facing barriers when entering and voting inside a voting centre.

These options have generally been considered for people facing barriers associated with mobility. However, these options would also help address barriers faced by people who cannot enter a voting centre due to sensory sensitivities, including barriers presented by campaigners outside a voting centre (see Section 5.3).

5.5.1 Victorian legislation allows voting outside the voting centre as an accessibility measure

Victorian electoral laws currently allow voting outside the voting centre:

If an elector satisfies an election official that the elector is physically incapable of entering the voting centre, the election official may allow the elector to vote outside the voting centre, in close proximity to the voting centre.^[44]

The legislation does not provide further details about where the voter would complete the ballot papers, but this could include on a table outside the voting centre^[45] or in a car.^[46] In-car voting is known by various names and is available in other Australian jurisdictions as well.^[47] Endeavour Foundation recommended improving access to in-car voting as part of this Inquiry.^[48]

Voting outside voting centres provides some of the advantages of going to a voting centre (see Section 3.3.2) for people who face barriers entering a centre.

The VEC’s staff manuals recognise that voters can vote outside the voting centre. The Election official manual explains that ‘An elector (or someone acting on their behalf) may ask to vote outside the voting centre.’ This is followed by further instructions about how to issue the ballot paper if the voting centre manager approves.^[49]

However, the Committee was unable to find any information on the VEC’s website that informed voters that an option to vote outside the voting centre is available. The VEC explained to the Committee:

The environmental layout may also impact the available adjustments. For example, the distance of car parking from the voting centre itself or any traffic management in place may limit the ability for voting centre staff to assist voters with mobility impairment to cast their vote from their car.

As adjustments are not always available, are context-specific and are generally at the discretion of the voting centre manager, we cannot advertise these as available services more broadly as has been previously suggested by the Committee. This risks misleading voters with accessibility needs about the voting experience and impacts their ability to plan ahead.^[50]

The VEC adds a footnote that voting outside voting centres, ‘is permitted, but not required, under section 94(3) of the Electoral Act’.^[51] While this may be a correct interpretation of the Electoral Act, the VEC should obtain legal advice regarding whether this service is part of the reasonable adjustments required under other legislation (see Section 2.3). Regardless of the legal requirements, the VEC should set a higher service standard by offering this service more readily.

5.5.2 The ability to vote outside voting centres needs to be communicated

The Committee considers the VEC’s approach to voting outside voting centres to be impractical. It is only offered to people who ask for it. However, it is not communicated to voters, so people do not know that they can ask for it. Asking for it requires voters to make contact with a member of the voting centre staff, which may be complicated for some people who have difficulty entering voting centres. It is also not offered consistently, but left at the discretion of the voting centre manager, meaning that a voter will not know whether or not it is available at a voting centre without going there and asking.

The VEC’s approach contrasts with more explicit and operationalised practices in several other Australian jurisdictions. The Committee notes that the Queensland and Western Australian electoral commissions provide upfront information about the service on the relevant pages on their websites, with Queensland also providing information about the process.^[52]

The Queensland electoral commission provides a phone number outside the voting centre that voters can call to request in-car/car-side voting assistance.^[53] This allows voters to independently request assistance without relying on a support person and without the contradiction of having to enter the voting centre in order to ask for help outside the voting centre.

The Committee would like to see the VEC adopt a more helpful approach to voting outside voting centres. This would include communicating about it, establishing a practical process for requesting it (such as signs with phone numbers in parking lots) and providing clear information to voters about which voting centres can offer it and which cannot, so that voters can plan where to go.

5.5.3 Takeaway voting may also help some voters

Takeaway voting is provided by the New Zealand Electoral Commission.^[54] It involves the voter completing an application (similar to a postal voting application) that the voter, or another person on behalf of the voter, submits at a voting centre. The person submitting the application is given a declaration or postal-style ballot pack to take away and the completed ballot papers are returned to the voting centre by the close of voting.

This service is similar to postal voting and provides the same advantage of allowing a voter to complete their ballot papers in an environment that suits them and with the support that they need. However, it has the advantage that the application can be made, the ballot papers received by the voter and the completed ballot papers received by the VEC in a short period of time (including all steps happening on election day).

This could benefit people who did not apply for postal voting in time or who are concerned about ballot papers not arriving or not being received in time. Many people with disability have fluctuating conditions which make their capacity to attend a voting centre unpredictable. Takeaway voting could also be very useful to people who are unexpectedly hospitalised, unwell or debilitated. This could include people in inpatient psychiatric units (see Section 3.2.1).

Where the VEC is unable to offer in-car voting, takeaway voting would enable a family member or support person to offer a similar experience to a voter.

When asked about takeaway voting, the Electoral Commissioner told the Committee:

it is not something we have particularly turned our minds to, because it is currently not allowed really under the legislation. We are not aware of a particular drive towards that, so it is not something we have particularly studied.^[55]

The Committee therefore encourages the VEC to consult with the New Zealand Electoral Commission regarding its takeaway voting model and to investigate its potential application in Victoria. This should include assessing the benefits and the operational feasibility, integrity safeguards and communication requirements needed to support such a service as an accessibility option.

5.6 Internal layouts should be designed for universal accessibility

Multiple submitters reported features in the layout of voting centres that acted as barriers to accessibility, privacy and dignity. They noted the importance of sufficient space for mobility aids and guided assistance, an absence of clutter from temporary equipment, good lighting, sufficient voting compartments and seating inside and outside the voting centre.^[56]

The VEC has recognised the importance of accessible internal layouts. Voting centre managers are advised that ‘Furniture and equipment placement must maximise access for all electors.’^[57] Early voting centre managers are additionally advised that there are four key principles for laying out a voting centre, of which the first is ‘Accessibility: Is the EVC [early voting centre] as accessible as possible for all staff and electors?’^[58]

Submitters and witnesses to this Inquiry noted two major areas where there could be improvements: how voting compartments are placed and how accessibility tools are made available.

5.6.1 Voting compartments could be placed better to meet the needs of voters with disability

The VEC provides several types of voting compartments (also referred to as ‘voting booths’) in voting centres, including standard compartments, low-level compartments and table-top screens (see Section 6.2.1). The last two types are designed to accommodate a chair or a wheelchair. Voting centre managers are instructed to place two chairs in front of the low-level compartment or table-top screen and to attach a magnifier and maxi pencil to the table-top screen.^[59]

The placement of voting compartments is determined by the voting centre manager with guidance from the VEC.^[60] Voting centre managers are instructed to place voting compartments in a line along one or two sides of the room and to:

Place low-level compartment or table-top screens in the same line as other compartments, with a chair for the elector and a second chair in case the elector needs assistance. These screens are designed so those who use mobility aids, or who need to sit down, can vote in private.^[61]

While this configuration may support easier management, it is not necessarily the most practical in terms of accessibility. A wider space between compartments may assist people using wheelchairs, mobility aids, guided assistance (whether human or animal) or support people. Voters who are being assisted by support people or election officials may also need a larger space between them and other voters so that they can talk without losing the secrecy of their vote. People with sensory sensitivities may benefit from a space that is less crowded.^[62]

This has been recognised by the VEC and staff are instructed to provide additional space around voting compartments at low-sensory voting venues.^[63] However, this has not been integrated into instructions viewed by the Committee for other voting centres.

Some submitters also raised concerns about the width and design of voting compartments. This is discussed in Section 6.2.1 of this report.

5.6.2 Accessibility tools need to be readily available

It is also important that accessibility tools (such as magnifiers and maxi pencils) are readily available for people who need them. Voting centre managers are instructed to attach a magnifier and large grip pencil to the table-top voting compartment, and a magnifier in one or more compartments.^[64]

It is important that accessibility tools are not only available in low-level or table-top compartments. Not all people who need these tools use wheelchairs and it would be helpful to have these devices readily available for use in other compartments where appropriate. In addition, if these devices are only available in the table-top compartment, that may push people to use the table-top compartment who do not need to use it, making it unavailable to people who do need it.

Regarding pencils, a solution may be to provide maxi pencils as the default pencil used in all voting compartments, rather than making them only available on request. This could be phased in by all future orders of pencils being maxi pencils, replacing the existing pencil stock as it is used up.

5.7 Signage must be clear, unambiguous and placed for optimal coverage

Well placed signage that provides clear wayfinding and information in a variety of formats is key to ensuring that voters have the information they need.

Submitters see signage as a critical accessibility tool, with some noting that it can be inadequate, inconsistent or poorly placed.^[65] Improving it would significantly help people navigate voting centres independently and confidently. Submitters called for clear, consistent and standardised signage protocols across all voting centres.^[66]

Some submitters noted a lack of directional and wayfinding support outside and within the voting centre. Some called for better signage to assist with navigating queues, layouts and knowing where to go next.

5.7.1 Wayfinding and informative signs outside voting centres would assist navigation and help voters be prepared

The VEC provides very limited instructions to voting centre managers about signs outside the voting centre, focusing only on the voting centre banner, an accessible parking sign and designated entrance signs.^[67]

Concerns about a lack of directional signage outside voting centres have been raised at meetings of the Electoral Access Advisory Group in 2022 and 2023, with the VEC committing to look at having directional signage on the outside of buildings, including signs relating to accessible entries.^[68] Similar concerns were raised in submissions to this Inquiry.^[69]

The Committee particularly notes the importance of taking a ‘whole of journey’ approach to signage (see Section 1.4.2). This may include wayfinding signage from public transport stops to the voting centre, as well as the full path from arrival points through to exit, with multiple, strategically placed signs.

A lack of outside signage reduces accessibility, as voters may become frustrated, disoriented, fatigued or require assistance to locate the correct entry points. In addition to wayfinding signage, it is important to include other key information outside voting centres. When key information is provided only once voters are inside the venue, it may not be available in a timely manner to support informed decision-making.

5.7.2 Signs inside voting centres would support preparedness and informed decision-making

The VEC provides a range of signs and posters for display inside the voting centre. The Voting centre manager guide includes general instructions to ‘display’, ‘use’ or ‘place’ the signs in locations such as ‘near the head of the queue’ or ‘near where electors exit’ and to position critical signs ‘where they can be clearly seen’.^[70]

The Committee notes numerous references in the guide to a singular poster or sign being provided. However, it is important for recurring signs and posters to be displayed in numerous places along the queue and in the voting centre. Signs should also be in a range of formats, be placed at accessible heights^[71] and be located at clear decision points. This will make it easier for voters to understand what is expected, will reduce anxiety and will reduce reliance on spoken instructions.

Deaf Victoria noted that, at the Commonwealth election, posters with QR codes for Auslan interpreters were sometimes not visible before reaching staff desks, although voters may need access to this service when first arriving at a voting centre.^[72]

In terms of content, in addition to signs relating to processes and how to vote, it is also important for there to be clear information about what support and accessibility tools are available. Providing this information through signs means that voters do not have to rely on prior research or having to disclose their disability to staff and ask about options.

5.8 Accessibility needs to be built into processes and manuals

It is ultimately the actions of voting centre staff that will determine whether a voting centre is operated in an accessible way. To support the staff, head office must provide clear policy direction, appropriate standards and consistent guidelines. Voting centre managers must be supported by reducing the reliance on discretionary decisions. Head office should also promote and support the consistent use of available adjustments and accessibility tools. Election managers and voting centre managers must implement these adjustments and accessibility tools effectively on-site, ensuring staff are informed, supported and responsive to voters’ needs.

As noted throughout this chapter, voting centre staff are required to make many decisions which affect accessibility, such as:

• whether to have a staff member managing queues and what supports they offer to people who may struggle to stand in queues (see Section 5.4)
• whether to provide voting outside the voting centre (see Section 5.5)
• the layout of voting centres (see Section 5.6)
• where to place signage (see Section 5.7).

The Committee understands the need for flexibility in the way that voting centres are operated. However, the Committee would like to see more direction to voting centre staff to help them consider accessibility in making these decisions. The manuals examined by the Committee often do not provide much detail about how to take into account accessibility and the needs of people with disability. For example, they do not provide criteria for deciding whether or not to provide voting outside the voting centre or suggestions about logistics (such as going to a voter’s car or taking a table out of the voting centre). While the manuals identify accessibility as important in determining layouts,^[73] detailed guidance about what is required in practice is lacking.

The Committee would also like to see manuals and training materials treat adjustments for people with disability as an obligation which should be provided unless there are compelling reasons not to. This is in line with the recommended accessibility-first approach (see Section 1.4.1) and the legal obligations on the VEC (see Section 2.3). It would also help to provide voters with a more predictable experience, making it easier for voters with disability to select the most appropriate way of voting for their circumstances.