Tuesday, 27 August 2024
Committees
Electoral Matters Committee
Committees
Electoral Matters Committee
Reference
That this house refers an inquiry into possible reforms to the composition of, and voting systems for, the Legislative Council to the Electoral Matters Committee for consideration and report no later than 8 December 2025.
I would first like to thank the Electoral Matters Committee and the committee staff for their hard work. In particular I would like to acknowledge the work of the chair and the deputy chair, the member for Kororoit and the member for Narracan. The report made a number of findings and recommendations, and the government will consider each of those in due course. Section 6 of the report makes a series of findings and recommendations regarding potential reforms to the upper house, one of which was recommendation 19, seeking a further inquiry into those possible reforms. The government is seeking to acquit that recommendation today. I do not intend to go into the substance of the report, and there will of course be further time for that at a later date.
The last time that there was significant reform to the upper house it was led by Premier Bracks, the Bracks Labor government, back in 2003. The former Premier introduced the Constitution (Parliamentary Reform) Bill 2003, which following its passage came into effect from the 2006 state election onwards. The 2003 reforms established the eight regions, each electing five members. An interesting point to note is that at the 2002 state election the Greens party collected about 314,000 votes for the upper house, which is roughly what they achieved in the 2006 state election, the big difference being that under the 2003 reforms the Greens were able to secure three seats in the upper house. I might reflect on that, but I will not – others might. These are some of the same reforms that the Greens are now passionately opposed to, in my understanding.
Finding 17 from the report on the previous state election found that the proposed changes to the upper house voting system would make it more difficult for smaller parties to be represented in the upper house and made other recommendations for and against a number of other proposed changes. Given all of this, it is clear that we need to understand what the different models for the composition of the chamber could look like, how those members would be elected and what, if any, those impacts would be on representation in the house. It is now more than 20 years since we saw that first wave of significant reforms. Victoria has certainly changed a lot in that time – I might say for the better, given that during that time we have been led by Labor governments in this state – so for those reasons the government thinks it is important to refer this inquiry to identify what possible changes could look like and what their impact would be.
Emma KEALY (Lowan) (16:43): I would like to also thank the secretariat of the Electoral Matters Committee and also the committee members. We had some substantial changes to the committee over the duration of its formation. We had a change of chair, which of course made a little bit of a change to the focus of some of the elements of the committee. It also did create some challenges, I think, in terms of the flow and collection of understanding of what was required. In relation to the report, I do thank all members of the committee for their work. There was a lot of work put into ensuring that we had a comprehensive summary of all the evidence that was put before the committee and that we tried to hit the mark when it came to identifying some of the issues around the 2022 election. In my electorate we had significant issues when it came to the Stawell booths in particular running out of ballot papers and thereby removing the democratic opportunity for every single member of the Stawell community to cast a ballot.
That has an impact not just on my own vote of course but on all of the other candidates who put their hand up for election. It also created a very stressful scenario for the hardworking booth workers and booth managers over the last election. I understand through the evidence provided to the committee that similar issues were experienced in the electorate of Bass, which we know was a closer result, and I am sure that the member for Bass receives the same emails that I do to this day. I received an email this morning from a former resident of Stawell very, very concerned about the lack of appropriate distribution of ballot papers and therefore the Victorian Electoral Commission not delivering on one of its key requirements, which is to ensure that every Victorian has the opportunity to cast a ballot on election day and have their voice heard.
As the Leader of the House mentioned, this reference for a further inquiry for the Electoral Matters Committee to look at group voting tickets and particularly the upper house composition is actually summarised quite comprehensively within the report which has already been tabled. While we have looked at recommendation 19, I would refer the Leader of the House to recommendation 17. It is quite clear in recommendation 17 that there has been considerable evidence provided to the Electoral Matters Committee over what the future composition should look like in regard to the group voting ticket, and there has been a lot of discussion and a lot of evidence heard around what the upper house composition should look like into the future. I refer to and I will directly quote recommendation 17:
That the Government reform the Upper House voting system by introducing legislation amending the Electoral Act to:
• eliminate group voting tickets
• allow voters to indicate multiple preferences for parties/groups above the line, where a preference above the line is interpreted as a preference for all of the candidates of that party/group, in the order listed on the ballot paper
• have ballot papers direct voters to select at least five preferences above the line
• include savings provisions similar to those in the Commonwealth Electoral Act that a vote is still valid if fewer than five preferences above the line are indicated.
The current system for voting below the line should be retained.
There is a very important reason for this, because what we have seen is that we have had upper house members who were representing particularly regional parts of the state where they certainly had not been elected by the majority of people living within that electorate. I think most egregious was the election of Andy Meddick of the Animal Justice Party to represent an area which is largely reliant on the livestock sector to drive its economy, yet with just 2.71 per cent of the total vote we had somebody who was representing this region whose main aim was to shut down the livestock industry. It was reprehensible to think that our voting system would reflect that as a fair and a just outcome, and I note the hard work of the Electoral Matters Committee of the previous Parliament, which had made similar recommendations about reformation of the group voting ticket – that it is not providing an outcome which is democratic and reflects the intent of the electorate.
This goes to an element which I think was covered quite comprehensively through the evidence that the Electoral Matters Committee heard, particularly from the Angry Victorians Party, where they submitted and shared some video evidence of some very underhanded discussions going on in relation to Glenn Druery, known as ‘the vote whisperer’. This must be addressed. It is absolutely incomprehensible that the government would not have intent to clean this up when we have had so much evidence brought before a parliamentary committee which showed at best corruption and at worst criminal behaviour, where parliamentary budgets are being used to pay somebody off in exchange for preferences, where people who think they are voting for the ‘sack Dan Andrews’ party actually get their preferences pushed through to the Australian Labor Party. That is absolute deception of the worst kind, and people do not know where their vote is ending up. We understand that there has not been an appetite from the Labor government to change this voting system, because it works in their favour to have an upper house where they have got dodgy deals that are happening behind the scenes which are not being corrected even though they are known and there is evidence.
A member interjected.
Emma KEALY: If anyone is going ‘What?’, I suggest that they read the fabulous report by the Electoral Matters Committee which covers this quite comprehensively. The evidence is on the table.
Mary-Anne Thomas interjected.
Emma KEALY: Excuse me? On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I would like the Leader of the House to withdraw that comment.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Lauren Kathage): Leader of the House, did you direct a comment at a particular individual on the crossbenches?
Mary-Anne Thomas: I did not, but I withdraw.
Emma KEALY: Just on that point of order, Acting Speaker, it is the usual practice of the house that if somebody takes offence and asks them to withdraw, it is not whether somebody directed a comment to somebody or not. If I am offended, my understanding is that the usual behaviour of the house is someone is automatically asked to withdraw.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Lauren Kathage): Member for Lowan, I am happy to seek the guidance of the Speaker or the clerks at a later time. My understanding at the moment, as an Acting Speaker, is that part of what I have seen over the last couple of sitting weeks was a determining factor. I thank you for your feedback, and I will discuss it with the Speaker.
Emma KEALY: The evidence was comprehensive that it is the Australian Labor Party that is benefiting from this group voting ticket system.
I would like to pick up on one of the recommendations in the minority report, which makes very clear what should be taking place in terms of further inquiries of this Parliament, and that is of course recommendation 3:
Establish a Parliamentary Inquiry into the dealings of Mr Glenn Druery and Members of the Legislative Council, with the Inquiry report tabled in both Houses of Parliament and with immediate referrals to the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission … of any adverse findings.
This is an extraordinarily serious matter. It is something that has come up through this inquiry; it is something that has come up through previous inquiries. We have had reports tabled before Parliament. It is something that must be investigated, and it must be halted. We cannot have this pushback for another inquiry through the Electoral Matters Committee when we have already heard significant evidence that would help to inform us on what voting system we should have in the future and how we can structure that. I think this is where my biggest concern lies in this referral to the Electoral Matters Committee. We had a huge quantum of evidence provided to the committee. We know what the best way going forward is when it comes to group voting tickets. We have seen in previous governments that agreement has not been made. There is the absolute will of the Australian Labor Party to ignore the recommendations and the evidence put before the Electoral Matters Committee and not reform the group voting tickets, even though we have these crazy results across the state which are not reflective of what people’s voting intentions are.
Again, I will go through the examples from the previous election. Clifford Hayes, Sustainable Australia Party, representing Southern Metro district: 1.26 per cent of the vote, 5404 votes altogether. Yet through the preference whisperer Glenn Druery he ended up being a representative in this place, and of course he supported the Labor government on every single division. We got Rod Barton from the Transport Matters Party in Eastern Metro: 0.6 per cent of the vote, 2508 votes – that was it. He was elected to Parliament. Of course, because he had done a deal with Glenn Druery, the preference whisperer, he was in here. He had his deal done, and he voted in support of the Australian Labor Party. This must be called out. It is absolutely disgraceful that we have got this system in Victoria, and yet of course, because it benefits the government, there is not the ability or the appetite to reform it and make sure we have a fair democratic system in Victoria.
I do fear that this reference to again look at exactly what the Electoral Matters Committee looked at over the past two years is just to buy more time so we can see more deals done with the Labor Party and Glenn Druery, the vote whisperer, who gets to keep on doing what he has always done and making a lot of money out of it: getting elected individual parties, these micro-parties, who do not necessarily represent the views that they go out and purport to represent. It is actually something much, much more sinister: Labor is bringing into the parliamentary representation undercover people who are there just to support the Labor Party in getting their votes through the house in exchange for a profit for Glenn Druery at the end of the day, because he makes money out of the electoral allowances. That is wrong on every single level. I am very, very concerned that this default to have yet another inquiry about group voting tickets is just kicking it down the road. We will see that we have got another inquiry and another discussion about it, and more evidence will come through, but it will be the status quo for the Labor government because they do not want to see improvement. They do not want to see an end to the corruption and the rorting of the upper house voting system in Victoria because they know that they benefit from it.
It is even dirtier than that. There was a significant amount of evidence heard that directly linked the CFMEU to some of these discussions. In some instances – this was particularly around the Animal Justice Party – they were the key people who were doing the deals behind the scenes. There was absolutely shocking evidence heard and submitted, which was video evidence, that showed clearly that deals had been done. They had been negotiated by Labor’s mate the CFMEU, who we know donates a hell of a lot of money to the Labor government, and in return the Labor government would turn a blind eye to corruption on the Suburban Rail Loop. They will put a bit of extra money in there to make sure that all the union officials get that extra bit of money. Who cares how much it costs taxpayers at the end of the day? We have got an $80 billion cost blowout on the Suburban Rail Loop. Where has that gone? Well, it goes in the money cycle of going to the CFMEU and being donated back to Labor. There is no interest at all from Premier Allan to clean this up, because she benefits from it. She is Premier today because of it. It absolutely must be cleaned up.
While I hope that this inquiry does have a speedy passage, I do put a lot of pressure on the Premier to make sure that this actually results in significant change to the group voting ticket in Victoria. In the minority report we have made a specific recommendation about group voting tickets – that the group voting ticket system should be replaced to match the federal Senate system. This is from evidence that we heard from many of the fabulous and esteemed psephologists that we have in this country. We can see there would be a consistency of approach where voters would not have to consider different voting systems, whether they are voting at a state or federal election. It would therefore bring a level of transparency, but most importantly we would get rid of this preference-whispering system which only leads to corruption of the parliamentary system, of the electoral commission and of the electoral system and which is getting a hell of a lot of money that is taxpayer funds. It should be about supporting parties – micro-parties and members of this place – but is instead being diverted to pay for Glenn Druery, the preference whisperer. In all instances, the people who are benefiting from Glenn Druery the preference whisperer are Labor Party MPs. It is wrong.
Steve Dimopoulos interjected.
Emma KEALY: Well, this was the evidence. I will pick up from the member for Oakleigh that it is one of the –
Members interjecting.
Emma KEALY: It is actually in the report, so if the Electoral Matters Committee report is now some sort of conspiracy theory, then I really think that reflects greatly upon the member.
Steve Dimopoulos interjected.
Emma KEALY: I so not think the member for Euroa is here at the moment actually. I would like to think the member for Euroa and I look a little different at this point in time. We are certainly incubating different things. I certainly have never been headbutted by a wombat, so I really do not know how that confusion may have happened.
But I do recommend that this inquiry happens rapidly. The information has already been received by the committee. We have already seen recommendations by the committee from the majority but also through the minority report. There is a way forward to tidy up the group voting ticket, and I know, with respect to the Labor members of the committee, that there is an appetite for change with this. Therefore I look forward to working with the members of our committee. This will be an inquiry that I hope can go forward in a reasonably wholesome way. I think that it has been a positive committee to work on so far. We have produced an excellent report, even if the member for Oakleigh thinks it is a conspiracy theory.
I do hope that all recommendations of this report are taken into account but more importantly that Premier Allan and the Labor government have the decency to respect the will of the committee and the will of the Victorian people, who want to ensure that we have a voting system in Victoria that reflects the voting intentions of Victorians and that we end up with parliamentary representation that is reflective of the majority of Victorians in this state. That would be fair, that would be right and that is what this Parliament and what the government of the day, the Labor government, should be striving for, rather than secret deals for preferences that are corrupt, unfair and not what the Victorian people expect.
Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (17:00): I was chair of the Electoral Matters Committee and very proudly sat by the member for Narracan as my deputy. Thank you for all of your hard work, and of course the members for Lowan, Preston and others that are here as well – Prahran. It was a very good committee, and we strived to work together as well as possible. As the member for Lowan did allude to, we produced a report which I am very proud of and I am sure other members of the committee are also incredibly proud of. I want to give a big thanks, of course, to the staff who worked tirelessly behind the scenes, mainly Dr Chris Gribbin but also the other staff members, who did a lot of work.
Our committee looked into the conduct of the 2022 Victorian state election, including the experiences of voters, candidates, parties and other stakeholders. The 2022 election, as we know, was the largest in the state’s history, with record numbers of voters and candidates. Our overall assessment of the election was that it was fair and democratic; however, we did find that there are changes that need to occur.
The inquiry received more than 100 submissions. We held nine days of hearings and consulted with a number of political parties. We spoke to independent candidates, election officials, voters, representatives of the disability and CALD communities, academics, election experts and of course others. The committee’s final report makes 98 recommendations and the committee has recommended several adjustments to the election timeline, including shortening the early voting period from 12 to seven days, but with longer hours. The report recommends the introduction of a code of conduct for candidates and campaigners, and as was alluded to before, I know that we all saw a lot of very poor behaviour in 2022. That is not something that any of us wants repeated. It calls for changes to the voting system for the upper house. The committee has recommended a similar voting system to the one that is used in the Commonwealth Senate. This would include eliminating group voting tickets and allowing voters to indicate multiple preferences above the line. The committee has also recommended more support for people to enrol and vote, increasing the level of transparency around elections and measures to ensure that elections are fair for all candidates and parties.
Elections, at the end of the day, are about giving all Victorians a say as to who should represent them in Parliament, and that is the most important thing. It has been over 20 years since the previous reforms occurred in Victoria, and I am really pleased that this government is giving us the opportunity to bat on and to do another inquiry. So, thank you very much. I look forward to chairing the Electoral Matters Committee, and again, thank you to my colleagues who worked tirelessly to get the report to happen. Thank you.
Sam HIBBINS (Prahran) (17:03): I rise to speak on the motion for a referral to the Electoral Matters Committee (EMC) as put forward by the government. As has been stated by other members, the Electoral Matters Committee has just finished a very substantial inquiry into the conduct of the state election, of which I was a member, and I acknowledge the other members of that committee and the staff as well.
It was an inquiry that looked at a vast range of issues related to the previous election, but importantly, it did look at group voting tickets, which I know has been an issue of concern for many people in Victoria for a long time now. Of course, the previous term’s inquiry specifically did not look at group voting tickets, which was a decision of government. This inquiry did, and the evidence that the committee heard from political parties, from psephologists and from everyday Victorians was overwhelming as to the need to abolish group voting tickets. The fact is they are undemocratic, and they undermine the integrity of elections here in Victoria. Some of the evidence that we heard during our hearings was absolutely extraordinary.
I mean, there was evidence of cash for preference deals, of fake jobs, of parties gaming the system – this is evidence that we heard at the inquiry – not going out there and trying to get a vote during a campaign but really going out there and trying to get a backroom deal or secret promises. These are things that really undermine the integrity of elections, and the committee recommendation was very clear: abolish group voting tickets. It could not have been any clearer. What it recommended was a system that is essentially like the Senate, like we have federally. Of course Victoria is the hold-out state – the only state to continue using group voting tickets in Australia – and the committee’s recommendation was very clear: abolish group voting tickets.
The committee’s report did touch on the upper house regions and the composition of the other place. The Leader of the House seemed to indicate that the Greens have a position on this. Well, that is completely false. Our position is very consistent with what was stated in the committee’s recommendations. Importantly, what the committee said was:
Eliminating group voting tickets should occur independently of changes to the regions and must not be delayed in order to take place after or at the same time as changes to the regions.
The committee was very, very clear about that. It did refer an inquiry into the reforms of the electoral system and the impacts to EMC. Yes, look at the composition of the upper house, but in absolutely no way should it be used as an excuse to delay reforms to group voting tickets. There is one very clear reason of course. My understanding is, constitutionally, you actually need a referendum to change the composition of the upper house. You do not need that to change group voting tickets. I tell you what, the chances of getting a referendum up on any topic – let us say it is less than a 50–50 chance, one would think, at this particular juncture.
We are absolutely concerned that this inquiry could be used as just an opportunity to again kick the can down the road. We appreciate that the government has brought forward the reporting date to 2025 – not in an election year – which would give even greater scope or greater ability to enact any changes that might come out of that inquiry. But we would urge the government to urgently adopt the committee’s recommendation to abolish group voting tickets, and to do that without delay, to restore integrity and to restore democracy to the upper house here in Victoria.
Nathan LAMBERT (Preston) (17:08): I also rise in support of the motion put forward in the name of the Leader of the House, and I would like to join with other committee members in thanking the secretariat – Sarah, Chris and others – and also my fellow members. As the member for Narracan knows, we explored a lot of important issues in the report to which the member for Prahran has just been alluding – some really important stuff on data issues and information technology. I say, as someone who was involved through my work in information technology, that the thing that makes it wonderful, which is the ability to store information microscopically and change it in an instant, also means it is sometimes not the perfect thing to use in an election where that ability means that people can defraud elections easily. I thought there was a lot of important consideration of those issues in the report. Also, I might just touch very briefly on the safety of campaigners and candidates, which I know the member for Kororoit alluded to – an important issue. Unfortunately, I am not sure it is the last time that we will be looking at that issue. I suspect, in elections to come, that we may yet need to look at it further.
There has been some brief debate in this place today about group voting tickets and upper house reform. I will just say on the topic of group voting tickets, having been involved in discussions with representatives of every other party that is here in this chamber, that for many, many years group voting tickets were understood to be a thing that helped to reduce informality. They were used to that effect. Certainly, if you turn back the clock 15 years, they were operating well, and no-one who I spoke to from the Greens, from the Liberal Party or the Nationals thought otherwise. I think the allegation that they were particularly a mechanism that benefited the ALP is simply false, but I would agree with the member for Prahran and the member for Lowan that if you look at the Angry Victorians testimony and the video that the committee looked at you can certainly see that where Glenn Druery has taken group voting tickets to is somewhere very different to where they were and somewhere that we do not want them to be.
Very briefly, just coming to the nexus with upper house reform, there is a nexus of sorts there. If I can end perhaps by making one point on that, which was made as other committee members will know: it is that proportionality in electoral systems is not an endlessly beneficial good. Ultimately, while parties who get, say, 5 per cent of support in many systems are in a parliament, I think if a party gets 1 per cent or 0.1 per cent ultimately some parties are going to miss out. Some ideas deserve to die at the ballot box rather than making it into the chamber. But I will not go further in that direction, because that is no doubt something the committee will consider should this motion prove successful. I certainly think it should, and I commend it to the house.
Wayne FARNHAM (Narracan) (17:11): I am pleased to rise today on this motion. I think the important thing here, and other speakers have touched on it, is that we have already decided – the committee all worked together. There were people from all sides of the Parliament: we had the Greens, the cannabis party, Labor, Liberal and Nationals. We all sat there through the evidence. I came a little bit late into the committee, but it was a good committee. We worked pretty well together, but we all came up with the same conclusion: that group voting tickets need to be abolished. It has been very, very clearly stated by everyone that has spoken on this today that group voting tickets have to go. There is no room for them now in our electoral cycle.
It is always the way that when somebody finds a way to manipulate the system or cheat the system, the system has to change. It is as simple as that. That is what Glenn Druery has done. He has managed to cheat this system and to defraud the Victorian public into thinking they were voting for one thing when they were getting another. It is very, very simple. This is where this group voting system has to change. As far as the composition of the upper house goes, the member for Prahran summed that up quite well. It is probably not the biggest priority at the moment; the biggest priority is the group voting tickets.
As far as this goes, this motion here, this is just paralysis by analysis. We have already spent next to 18 months in a committee that has gone through all the recommendations and all the findings, and the number one thing we all agree on is the group voting ticket has to go. So why are we kicking it down the road? This government has an opportunity to facilitate change. Why won’t the government take that opportunity? You have the chance. You might not be here after the next election; you have only got two-and-a-bit years left, so you might as well jump on board with it now. It has been very clearly stated in recommendation 17 that we should go to the federal system, the Senate system they have there. The problem is Victorians do not know who they are voting for anymore; it is really quite that simple.
The government does not need this inquiry to go to December 2025, which then will be only 11 months out from the 2026 election. Let us deal with the issue at hand. The composition of the upper house will take longer – I agree with the member for Prahran – but the actual group voting ticket now has to change. There is no need for it anymore. As I said, because of Glenn Druery’s actions this government now needs to react. I do not think the Victorian public have faith in our voting system, and the Angry Victorians Party’s testimony at the committee hearings was pretty damning. If I was any upper house MP that used Glenn Druery as a consultant, I would be a bit worried, because I do not think it is all above board. I really do not think it is all above board. I do not think any Victorian believes that if someone gets 1 per cent, 2 per cent or 3 per cent of the vote, the majority of people want them in Parliament – 97 per cent of people do not want them in Parliament, or 99 per cent. How does that occur? How does someone who gets 1 or 2 per cent of the vote end up being a member of Parliament? That is actually not democracy; that is manipulation. That is what it is, so let us call it out for what it is, and let us change the system as per the committee’s recommendations. That is what we sat there for 18 months for. Why would we sit there for 18 months and then kick the can down the road for the next committee to deal with after 2026?
I believe group voting tickets were recommended to be abolished at the 2018 election, but they still went through. How long do we let this behaviour go on? How long do we let Victorians get defrauded on their voting intention? Because this is what it is: it is fraud of their voting intention. They do not know who they are voting for if they tick a box, so let us make it transparent. It is what the Victorian public want. It is what they deserve, not just what they want. It is what they deserve, so let us get on board. Government, get on board. Get rid of the group voting tickets like has been recommended, and move on with reforming this space.
Tim READ (Brunswick) (17:16): I would like to start in speaking to this motion by congratulating the Electoral Matters Committee for their excellent report and for the key recommendations that are attracting comment in this debate today. I support this motion, however, with some hesitation because, as other speakers have pointed out, there is a real risk that this motion may be used as cover by the government for dragging their feet on group voting reform. I hope that that is not the case, because the Electoral Matters Committee have explicitly recommended the abolition of group voting tickets and because they have stipulated that this must not wait for further work on the make-up of the Legislative Council.
I agree with the member for Preston and others who have spoken that group voting tickets are not working the way they were intended to. Where they are now is not where they were meant to be, and we certainly do not find ourselves well served by group voting tickets, because group voting tickets mean that we do not trust voters to allocate their own preferences. Every other relevant jurisdiction – the federal Senate, New South Wales and other states – that has ever had group voting tickets has got rid of them. The last and perhaps most notorious was Western Australia. Has anyone ever been elected to Parliament with 98 votes? Well, a guy living in the United States was elected to the upper house in Western Australia on 98 votes for the Daylight Saving Party. He was elected to the rural province of Western Australia that hated daylight saving the most. Because of group voting tickets, 98 votes were enough for this guy to have to leave his tech job on the west coast of the US and fly back to join the Western Australian upper house.
A member interjected.
Tim READ: That is right, member for Prahran – the ultimate fly-in fly-out worker, all due to the numerical mastery of one Glenn Druery. The peripatetic Mr Druery has worked for more parties than anyone else, I would imagine. He is currently Fatima Payman’s chief of staff. The man keeps popping up everywhere, and due to his expert calculations there were, I think, eight members of the other place elected due to group voting after paying Druery $50,000 or $60,000 for a seat in the other place as a result of 2018 election. He was not so successful in the 2022 election. I think he only got about three elected in the most recent election, but after the 2018 election there were I think about eight MPs in the Victorian Legislative Council who had effectively bought themselves a seat.
Members of this Assembly should at least reflect on the fact that we got democratically elected, because not everyone in the other place was, and it is a stain on this state that we allow this practice to continue. It is more by luck than good management that it was not as bad after the 2022 election, and it could be just as bad or worse at the next election if this government does not get rid of group voting tickets. We could wind up with 98 votes electing some weirdo who barely knows what they stand for because they are more answerable to the guy who can manipulate the numbers then they are to the voters.
I have nothing but gratitude for the Electoral Matters Committee and their government chair for coming up with these recommendations, and I have confidence that this government will have the courage to finally abolish this corrupt system.
Motion agreed to.