Some questions about political parties being involved in the 'Absentee Voting' process!

Should political parties, in particular the majors, like Liberal and Labor be involved, or should this be wholly under the purview of the AEC?

A friend recently sent me through some SMS’s from the major parties, namely Liberal and Labor. Here. 👇

The 2022 federal election was an anomaly due to the pandemic where 1.6 million postal votes were cast, a significant increase from previous elections.

Let’s have a look at some of the reasons to allow for postal voting:

• Absence on Election Day:

  • Voters who will be outside their home state or territory on election day.

  • Voters who will be traveling and unable to attend a polling place.

• Distance from Polling Places:

  • Voters who will be more than 8 kilometers from a polling place on election day (or 5 kilometers if the polling place is a mobile polling team, such as in remote areas).

• Health or Mobility Issues:

  • Voters who are unable to attend a polling place due to illness, infirmity, or disability.

  • Voters who are approaching childbirth or caring for someone who is seriously ill.

• Work or Other Commitments:

  • Voters who cannot attend a polling place because of work or employment obligations that prevent them from leaving their workplace during polling hours.

• Religious or Cultural Reasons:

  • Voters whose religious beliefs prevent them from attending a polling place on election day (e.g., if the election falls on a day of religious observance).

• Incarceration or Safety Concerns:

  • Voters who are in prison (serving a sentence of less than 3 years, as those serving longer sentences are generally ineligible to vote under Section 93 of the Act).

  • Voters who are silent electors (those whose address is not listed on the electoral roll for safety reasons, such as victims of domestic violence) and are not registered as general postal voters.

• General Postal Voters (Automatic Eligibility):

  • Some voters can register as general postal voters (under Section 184A of the Act), meaning they automatically receive a postal vote for every election without needing to apply each time. This includes:

    • Voters who live in remote areas (as defined by the AEC).

    • Voters who are permanently unable to attend a polling place due to disability or illness.

    • Voters who are overseas for an extended period.

    • Silent electors, if they choose to register as general postal voters.

I posted this on my X account and then asked GROK if my assertion was accurate.

Is the assertion about the last Australian federal election in this post accurate?

This is what GROK returned:

• The assertion in the post claims that during the last Australian federal election, political parties were addressing postal votes back to their offices, which the user believes should be handled solely by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).

• The last Australian federal election occurred on May 21, 2022, before the date of this post in March 2025.

• AEC guidelines state that political parties can send out postal vote applications with their branding, but the AEC has no control over what these parties do with personal information before forwarding the forms to the AEC for processing.

• Historical reports from the 2022 election, as noted in AEC submissions and media like The Guardian Australia, confirm that political parties often distribute postal vote applications, and there have been concerns about delays or mishandling when parties collect and forward these forms to the AEC.

• A 2022 AEC report highlighted that around 1.6 million postal votes were cast, with some voters experiencing delays because political parties held onto applications before sending them to the AEC, aligning with the post’s concern.

• However, there’s no direct evidence from the 2022 election that parties were systematically “addressing” postal votes back to their offices in a way that interfered with the AEC’s process, though the practice of parties handling applications has been criticized for transparency issues.

• The Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024, mentioned in the web results, aims to address some electoral process concerns, but specific changes to postal voting procedures are not detailed in the provided information.

Should any political party be involved in the application for ‘Post in voting’ or should this sit firmly under the purview of the Australian Electoral Commission?

I believe so. Let’s have a look why.

My follow up question to GROK 👇

Could This System Benefit Major Parties Over Smaller Ones?

Yes, this system has the potential to benefit major political parties (like Labor and the Liberal-National Coalition) over smaller parties (like the Libertarians, One Nation, People First or independents). Here’s how:

1. Resource Disparity: Greater Reach and Distribution Capacity

• How It Benefits Major Parties: Major parties have significantly more financial resources, volunteers, and infrastructure to distribute postal vote applications on a large scale. They can afford to print and mail out branded application forms to a wider audience, targeting key demographics like elderly voters or those in remote areas who are more likely to use postal voting.

• Impact on Smaller Parties: Smaller parties often lack the funding and manpower to compete at the same level. They may not be able to distribute as many forms or reach as many voters, limiting their ability to influence this segment of the electorate.

• Example: In the 2022 federal election, the AEC reported that 1.6 million postal votes were cast, a significant portion of the total vote. Major parties, with their larger budgets, likely had a greater ability to target these voters with postal vote applications compared to smaller parties.

2. Data Collection and Voter Targeting

• How It Benefits Major Parties: When voters return postal vote applications to a political party, the party gains access to personal information (e.g., name, address, contact details) before forwarding the form to the AEC. Major parties, with their sophisticated data analytics teams, can use this information to build detailed voter profiles, refine their campaign strategies, and target specific voters with tailored messaging in future campaigns.

• Impact on Smaller Parties: Smaller parties often lack the resources to collect, store, and analyze voter data at the same scale. This puts them at a disadvantage in understanding and mobilizing their voter base, especially for postal voters who may be harder to reach through traditional campaigning methods.

• Privacy Concerns: As noted in the web results (web ID: 0), the AEC has no control over what parties do with this data before forwarding the forms. Major parties, with more established systems, are better positioned to exploit this loophole for strategic gain.

3. Potential for Delays or Selective Forwarding

• How It Benefits Major Parties: The X post raises a concern that political parties were “addressing these back to their offices” during the last election (2022). While there’s no direct evidence of systematic interference, historical reports (e.g., The Guardian Australia, 2022) have noted that some voters experienced delays because parties held onto applications before forwarding them to the AEC. Major parties, with larger operations, might have the capacity to prioritize forwarding applications from areas where they have stronger support, potentially influencing voter turnout in their favor.

• Impact on Smaller Parties: Smaller parties, with fewer resources, are less likely to engage in such practices at scale, and they may also struggle to monitor or counteract any delays caused by major parties. Additionally, if major parties delay applications from areas where smaller parties have strong support, it could disproportionately suppress postal votes for those smaller parties.

• Example: In the 2022 election, the AEC noted that delays in forwarding applications by political parties led to some voters not receiving their postal voting packs in time. If major parties strategically delayed applications from marginal seats where smaller parties or independents were competitive, it could have impacted the outcome in those electorates.

4. Voter Perception and Trust

• How It Benefits Major Parties: Major parties often have greater name recognition and are perceived as more established or trustworthy by some voters. When a voter receives a postal vote application branded with the logo of a major party like Labor or the Liberals, they might feel more confident submitting their application through that party, especially if they’re already inclined to support them.

• Impact on Smaller Parties: Smaller parties may struggle to build the same level of trust or recognition. A voter receiving a postal vote application from a lesser-known party might be more hesitant to use it, fearing it’s not legitimate, or they might prefer to apply directly through the AEC, which doesn’t give smaller parties the same data collection opportunity.

• AEC Guidelines: The web results (web ID: 0) note that the AEC encourages voters to apply directly through their online form to avoid delays, but many voters still use party-branded forms, especially if they’re unaware of the direct option.

5. Influence Over Coalition Dynamics

• How It Benefits Major Parties: As noted in the web results (web ID: 3), minor parties or independents often need to align with a major party to form a government if no single party wins a majority in the House of Representatives. Major parties can use their dominance in the postal voting process to strengthen their position in coalition negotiations. For example, by securing more postal votes, they can win more seats outright, reducing their reliance on smaller parties or independents.

• Impact on Smaller Parties: Smaller parties, with less influence over postal voting, may have fewer seats and thus less bargaining power in coalition negotiations. This dynamic reinforces the dominance of the major parties in Australia’s political system, often referred to as the “duopoly” in the X post.

6. Historical Context: The 2022 Election

• In the 2022 federal election, postal voting played a significant role due to the COVID-19 pandemic, with 1.6 million postal votes cast. Major parties like Labor and the Liberal-National Coalition, with their established networks, were better equipped to distribute and collect postal vote applications compared to smaller parties.

• Reports from that election (e.g., AEC submissions) highlighted concerns about transparency and delays in the postal voting process, particularly when applications were handled by political parties. These issues likely disproportionately affected smaller parties, which rely on every vote to secure seats in a system where major parties already dominate.

Conclusion

The system of allowing political parties to distribute and handle postal vote applications can indeed benefit major political parties over smaller ones, primarily due to their greater resources, data collection capabilities, and potential to influence voter turnout through delays or selective forwarding. These advantages reinforce the dominance of the “duopoly” (Labor and the Liberal-National Coalition) in Australian politics, as highlighted in the X post. Smaller parties, with fewer resources and less influence, are at a disadvantage in this process, which can limit their ability to compete effectively in elections where postal votes play a significant role.

If the goal is to level the playing field, reforms like those suggested in the X post—such as restricting postal vote application handling to the AEC—could reduce these disparities. The Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024, mentioned in the web results, might address some of these concerns, but without specific details, it’s unclear how far it goes in tackling this issue.

If you are OK with this dear reader, do nothing.

If you feel there needs to be change in our electoral processes as well as constitutional reform, you could get involved in the conversation and become a member of Australian for Better Government.

Here is recent interview with Founder and Presiden, Steven Tripp.

I also talked into making your vote count here.

In any case, please stay aware, informed and vigilant.

Good luck out there.

---

Click here if you’d like to buy me a coffee instead! or scan 👇

Disclaimer: All content is presented for educational and/or entertainment purposes only. Under no circumstances should it be mistaken for professional advice, nor is it at all intended to be taken as such. The contents simply reflect current newsworthy items for many varying topics that are freely available. It is subject to error and change without notice.

Neither this Substack nor any of its principals or contributors are under any obligation to update or keep current the information contained herein.

Although the information contained is derived from sources which are believed to be reliable, they cannot be guaranteed.

Disclosure: Mark Neugebauer accepts no advertising or compensation, and has no material connection to any products, brands, topics or companies mentioned anywhere on this post. However individuals on a personal level may subscribe financially to Mark’s Substack