A year or two back I registered with the Australian Electoral Commission as an "Itinerant" voter which mainly means I am not required by law to vote - although I retain the right to vote. I wish to vote at the forthcoming election and after fruitlessly combing the AEC website phoned them, this is the result:

I may apply for a postal vote but they will only send it to the address shown for me on the electoral role.

I may attend any polling station in my (and I think other) state and vote in person - presumably this includes a pre-poll vote.

My vote will be counted in the electorate in which my electoral role address resides.

I assume I'll need to show ID with my electoral role address when voting.

That's it, not too difficult once one understands the system.

Now: let's see if there's a "Free beer for Harding" party.... :)

On The Move wrote:

---

Great to have the freedom to vote or not.

---

Perhaps... but do not forget that a great many have died over the years fighting to ensure you had a right to vote.

It is not compulsory to vote in Australia.

I remember that in Queensland a few years back there were also many people who had died that still continued to vote, Mike.

OK I'm confused , if its not compulsory then how is it you can be fined for not voting ,,,, please explain .

https://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/

this tends to suggest that you are wrong .

I don't know the exact wording of the law but, essentially, you must attend a polling station or return a postal ballot but you do not have to cast a vote, a blank ballot paper is fine.

In any event, I see it as an insult to those who have died fighting in order I have that right if I do not exercise it.

----

Dmaxer: probably Joe supporters :)

OK , splitting hairs now . According to the link i posted the wording states that its compulsory to vote , as its a secret ballet there is no way for officials to know what you actually wrote on your ballet paper . but hey if twisting words so you sound right make you feel good go right ahead .

-- Edited by bratboy on Wednesday 20th of April 2022 05:48:05 PM

Exactly,  the right to vote or not, called  democracy 

Mike Harding wrote:

---

I don't know the exact wording of the law but, essentially, you must attend a polling station or return a postal ballot but you do not have to cast a vote, a blank ballot paper is fine.

In any event, I see it as an insult to those who have died fighting in order that I have that right  if I do not exercise it.

----

Dmaxer: probably Joe supporters :)

---

 Great post Mike. So few understand that, as you suggest, to not vote would be an insult to those who made the ultimate sacrifice in order that we all have the freedom to vote. Some years ago I met a woman (certainly not a lady) who refused to vote, saying "Derr, what difference will my vote make". They are amongst us, and they breed. Cheers

bratboy wrote:

---

OK , splitting hairs now . According to the link i posted the wording states that its compulsory to vote , as its a secret ballet  there is no way for officials to know what you actually wrote on your ballet paper . but hey if twisting words so you sound right make you feel good go right ahead .

---

 "Secret ballet". Hmmm. Will this perhaps cause voters to become prima donnas?  Cheers

Saying people went to war and died so that we all may vote is like saying we went to war so that future generations could continue to play cricket. We went to war in WW1 because we were a dominion of the UK and in WW2 we entered the war with the rest of the empire for virtually the same reasons. We were under the control of the UK militarily in Europe and North Africa and the USA in the Pacific theatre.  It's a bit like saying people died for the Australian flag when it didn't come into existence in its present state until 1954. Democracy and what flows from it is a factor but not the primary reason. It is a bit odd claiming that 18 year old people were going to fight a war so that if they returned alive and reached the age of 21 they could vote.

I think it is in the interests of the various political parties to keep mandatory voting as no matter how hopeless one party may be, there will always be the rusted on and ignorant voter who will vote in the way their family has for years without knowing one policy and believing dogma from decades before that may have been attributed to certain parties. In countries where voting is not compulsory, the brain dead and clueless do not bother to vote and the ones that either seek change or wish to maintain the status quo control the outcome. I think this is more democratic as not only does it allow the choice to either vote or not vote but also allows those that are interested in various political policies to maintain or change without having their considered vote diminished by some dead head who is just voting the same way as their great grandfather did in 1923.

There is nothing like receiving a stirring lecture from someone who fails to recognise that Australia lost men fighting wars for both flags.
Every election time there is always a contingent of those who want change for the sake of change.
Studies in other countries can show that non compulsory voting or first past the post voting can have detrimental results similar to our system.
But for whatever reason those who want change and at the same time consider that Australian men and women who gave their life to ensure we all have the life we have, died for no cause then how about you pack up and move to China or Russia or similar.
The ramblings of anyone with those thoughts show that they have never stopped to consider their unfortunate existence if we were ruled by a regime controlled by Hitler or the emperor Hirohito.

Attending or registering to vote is compulsory, we do not have an officer making sure we put the eX in the box and for the better than that we dont have an officer making sure we do put the eX in the box they want us to without a choice.

Those men and women gave their life so we could tick a box that we have chosen.

Giving an opinion is a not a "stirring lecture". Your warped view of history seems to omit that in a democracy people are allowed to have views that may be contrary to your own.

What I find totally offensive is the fact that you attribute comments to me that I have not made and then commence to criticise and lecture me on making them. I did a thesis post graduation that was ultimately peer reviewed and then published in relation to aspects of World War Two. This came about after I had travelled overseas in the mid seventies to retrace my father's and uncle's military movements through Libya, Greece, Crete, Egypt and Syria when they were in the both the 6th Division and then the 9th Division. Just remind me of your qualifications in this area if you would. Perhaps you would also be kind enough to tell me which particular battles were fought with the aim to ensure compulsory voting.

I think you and a couple of your mates would certainly benefit from an intensive course in remedial reading.

Wizardofoz wrote:

---

Any idea when 'Absentee' voting is available...I have searched and so far it seems that you can't vote absentee at the moment?

---

 We applied for a postal vote, we'll be away on a trip on polling day. thank goodness.

https://forms.aec.gov.au/PostalVoteApplication/Form/Apply/d2e0ebe6-cbc1-4d4b-98b3-ae6600ac6760?mode=SingleForm

 Edit: Link not working for some reason?

DMaxer wrote:

---

Saying people went to war and died so that we all may vote is like saying we went to war so that future generations could continue to play cricket.

---

In some ways it is exactly that.

Watch the old BBC series Dad's Army if you get the chance especially the episode where it seems Godfrey's cottage is going to be demolished in order to extend the runway of an RAF field, it catches the mood well. It highlights how the British *very strongly* considered they were fighting for their way of life including both cricket and the right to vote.

I grew up, in the UK, directly in the shadow of the Second World War when the talk most times I overheard adults was of "The War" whether that be the "Land Girls" who worked on farms because the men were at war or the soldiers who had enlisted. My father was in the Royal Nave and his ship was twice torpedoed which saw him in the water of the north Atlantic where survival time in winter is 12 minutes, Dad believed he was fighting for freedom for himself and his yet to be born children. Every other British soldier I came to know over the years, and that was a lot, thought the same. None glorified it but they all felt it was the "right thing to do", to preserve their country and traditions. Freedom had been hard won in the UK and it was not that many years prior to WW2 when working men got the vote and, by God Dmaxer, they fought hard enough for that, they were not about to let some upstart take it away.

I consider it a very small tribute to those men and women who sacrificed so much that for me to cast a vote and care about its consequence is of little hardship and a great privilege.

DMaxer  

you just said this. And these words are the way you began your post yesterday to condemn Robs Drivers view on the SCAM that Lightbulb posted.( my view)

*Giving an opinion is a not a "stirring lecture". Your warped view of history seems to omit that *in a democracy people are allowed to have views that may be contrary to your own.*

Note the highlight in bold.

What I might suggest is that you try to apply your preaching to your own posts.

It was only yesterday or the night before that you called Rob Drivers post a *stirring lecture* because you didnt agree with what he said.

Today I most certainly did not agree with what you said above so it is horses for courses.

If you are prepared to condemn anothers views then you need to realise that some may retaliate just as you did today.

I think you need to settle down and deal with it.

I agree with your sentiments completely Mike. I know from my grandparents and great uncles service in WW1 to my father's, mother's and uncles' service in WW2 that they all detested the oppression of a dictator in Germany and an imperialist military government in Japan and their murderous regimes. I think every country that participated on the side of the Allies had armies full of volunteers who were there to protect their respective homelands and the free world in general.

What I disagree with however is to equate particular single issue matters to the sacrifice our soldiers and Allied soldiers made in two wars. Compulsory voting at a Federal level was not enacted until 1924 in Australia so it was hardly a reason why our troops went overseas on WW1. In WW2, our immediate allies such as the UK, USA, Canada and New Zealand did not have and still do not have compulsory voting so it was hardly likely that we were there for an issue peculiar only to ourselves.

I vote each election because I believe in the political process and wish to express my view on which particular party suits my beliefs. If someone does not wish to vote, then in a democracy they should not be forced to vote. How is that democratic?  In the world at present 85% of the countries do not impose compulsory voting, 13% do impose compulsory voting and 2% do not have elections. Perhaps one of my detractors would like to explain to me why our system is superior to the 85% of the world's countries that do not force citizens to vote.

In our democracy we are given the opportunity and freedom to have a say at the ballot box. If people are not interested or do not wish to have a say, then so be it, that is democracy. Have a look at our Parliament or even the United Nations. Members frequently abstain from voting on certain issues. Should they be forced with the threat of a fine or gaol for wishing to remain silent?

Those of us that want to vote can go and vote. Those that don't want to should be able to refrain. If they do, then they lose the opportunity to criticise decisions that may be made against their interests.

DMaxer wrote:

---

Saying people went to war and died so that we all may vote is like saying we went to war so that future generations could continue to play cricket. 

Unfortunately, after your comment above regarding our men and women who did not return from conflict, any other post you make, no matter what the explanation, is your attempt at *polishing a turd*

And then there is this.

It's a bit like saying people died for the Australian flag when it didn't come into existence in its present state until 1954.

Democracy and what flows from it is a factor but not the primary reason. 

 

I personally find your comments abhorrent.

With those views it beggars belief what you do on Anzac Day 

Mike Harding wrote:

---

I don't know the exact wording of the law but, essentially, you must attend a polling station or return a postal ballot but you do not have to cast a vote, a blank ballot paper is fine.

In any event, I see it as an insult to those who have died fighting in order I have that right if I do not exercise it.

----

Dmaxer: probably Joe supporters :)

---

 Voting is compulsory but one can vote informal once you've been crossed off the list saying that you've voted.

I could imagine that if voting wasn't compulsory then a minority of Australians would vote, considering how apathetic many Australians appear to be. Especially if voting is still on a Saturday. 

If one doesn't want to vote one just needs to turn up and have their name crossed off the AEC list. One then just votes informal and that's it.

However, if one doesn't vote then one shouldn't complain about the policies of the ruling party.

Well Clarky, every Anzac Day except for the last two, I attend the Dawn Service at whatever locality I may be in. Due to Covid restrictions I had last year's Dawn Service in my mum's driveway and the year before that outside my caravan near a river.

After the Dawn Service I used to spend time  with my mum and talk about my late dad and uncles and a few of the remaining members of my family that served during WW2.

I don't go out on Anzac Day as I find it is usually ruined by jingoistic morons,

In 1995/96 I was working in South Africa when a federal election was called in Australia, at the time I felt pretty strongly about the 2 parties and I wanted to have a say. I rang the Australian High Commission in Pretoria and asked if they could send the forms for us to vote. The girl on the phone said by the time they posted them, the time it took to get to us and then the time it took for us to return them it just wouldnt be worth all that effort. I said to her regardless of that I would still like her to send me the forms -  she said again it just wouldnt be worth the effort so in frustration I hung up. To rub salt into the wound a couple of months later my mother who was handling our mail said that we had just received a please explain letter and potentially a fine for failing to vote in the last federal election .

BB

What really galls me is that the political parties receive just under $3 per vote for every vote placed in the election. As just under 17 million people are on the electoral rolls that is $50 million to be handed out to the parties. minor parties, independents and solo candidates. Given that about 80% of the vote goes to the two major parties, that equates to $40 million into the parties' coffers courtesy of the tax payer. Some dud candidate who has a platform on one issue, say, Save the Planet, who may get 1000 votes picks up $3,000 courtesy of us.

Spread this little earner across Federal, State and Local elections and you can see why the politicians love compulsory voting.