Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - Madam President, I will make a relatively short contribution. When the member for Nelson was speaking I said I could give some examples as to why the current system is not a good system. I can refer to an influx of Vietnamese people that we have recently had into the Launceston area - there are over 100-odd families there at the present time - and quite a number of them were registered on the general manager's role to vote in the recent local government elections.

They had very little knowledge of the voting system and how it operated. They received their correspondence and document through the post, as all people do in the local government elections today, and I received a phone call, from one of the leaders of their group shortly after they received their documentation. They could not understand it but they were able to read the first part of their voting slips where it indicated to them that they had to vote for all candidates. In the Launceston situation, this year they needed to vote from 1 to 20 for the aldermen, or whatever the number was.

It was not until I got there that I was able to read through it and I said, 'No, you need to look further on to see where this is going to lead you to', where it was later identified that they only had to vote for six candidates. There is a classic case of people who are very confused, not having a full understanding and knowledge of the English language, to begin with. Documents like this were far beyond them. If it had been at the top of the document that you need only vote for six candidates - place the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 to 6 in the boxes - then it would have been a much easier way for them to have completed a valid vote in all of the circumstances.

So it was not until I got there and I explained that to them in some detail that they were able to comprehend what was necessary of them in the circumstances. Had they voted - sorry?

Mr Parkinson - Did you tell them who you were?

Mr DEAN - I told them exactly who I was.

Mr Parkinson - That was your name there on the ballot paper, you told them? Did you point it out?

Mr DEAN - No, my name was not there and that is why I felt comfortable about doing it - so perhaps you would like to retract and withdraw that insinuation because my name was not there. That is the reason I did it.

Members laughing.

Mr Parkinson - Next time.

Mr DEAN - Had my name been there, then I would have found it a little more difficult, but it wasn't.

So that was a clear case, and if we are to be open about this, what would be wrong with having it at the beginning? For the reasons given to satisfy the Hare-Clark system and so on, why should voters need to be able to recognise that procedure? They do not need that.

Many voters do not want to know anything about voting, all they want to do is rush in to a booth, if it is by that way, and do their voting and run out again. They want to do it in the simplest way possible but many of them want to put in a valid vote.

Most people, unfortunately - and we are all guilty of it - will read through the first part of the documentation and, at times, do not go right through a document.

Mr Parkinson - But surely - through you, Madam President - if you are arguing that the system is flawed then would you not be better off arguing that we should change the system, such as to single-member electorates or something?

Mr DEAN - No, we currently have this system.

Mr Parkinson - If the system is not flawed then you support it.

Mr DEAN - That is another argument. We currently have this form of voting and I believe we should get this form of voting right, moving forward. How often do we complain about insurance claims or purchase documents when you are purchasing property - your hire purchase, whatever it might be - that it is only what you read at the very end of the document that really matters?

That is where all of the important detail and data is included in a hire purchase document, as I said, in insurance documents and claims et cetera. You read at the end, 'this claim can only be made if' et cetera. Normally it is in small print et cetera.

So here we have a voting form which says you must vote from 1 to 20 and 1 to 16 and whatever it is, and then people vote and after that they may well read at the bottom, 'to make your vote valid you only have to vote for 3, 4 or 5 candidates' or whatever it is. I cannot see the reason for doing that. Why do that at all? Why have that there?

The member for Launceston mentioned a while ago, and I think it is a very important point, why don't we make it simply compulsory, along the top, that you must vote for all candidates 1 to whatever it is and leave it at that?

Mr Wing - That would be an open and honest way of doing it.

Mr DEAN - Yes, why have the rest in there? Why do we need that? Let us amend the act to have it done that way, if that is what you want and if that is what you need to satisfy the Hare-Clark system. Let us get rid of the rest. Let us not beat about the bush.

Mr Parkinson - That is not what the honourable member for Launceston wants.

Mr DEAN - I think the member for Launceston would probably be more supportive of that position than the one we currently have.

Mr Parkinson - He wants the ballot paper to reflect the provisions of section 102, which it already does.

Mr DEAN - I think that the member for Launceston, obviously, in his answer to the debate will cover that. I agree, I can see nothing wrong with us straightening this up and fixing this up. But I might add that there are other matters we ought to sort out at the same time. We have had classic examples in the latest local government elections where candidates continually made false statements, made statements which they cannot deliver on and cannot do anything about, but they got away with it and were allowed to do it. So they need to fix those things first of all before a lot of other things we do.

Mr Parkinson - Through you, Madam President - have you also considered that if this bill passed, for example, the Parliament, the Electoral Commissioner could still do exactly what he is doing into the future and comply with the legislative change?

Mr Wing - That is not so.

Mr Parkinson - Of course it is, because it already reflects the provision of section 102.

Mr DEAN - What I am saying is that I can see no reason why it should not be articulated clearly, openly and fairly to candidates. I have had many people say to me, and I guess all of you have had, that they have gone in there, voted for the lot but then read later that they only had to vote for five or six and that that was their preference. As I said, why have it that way? If we want to force them to vote for all people let us say it at the top in bold writing, 'you must vote for all candidates'. Let us do it that way. I think we would all know where we stood then. Not everybody would be happy with the situation but they would know exactly where they stood.

So I do not believe that this is the right way to do it and I cannot see any reason that a correction could not be made to include that part that now appears at the bottom, at the top with the other wording that is included there, in open, clear wording that people can understand.

Mr Parkinson - That would lead to a highly informal vote.

Mr DEAN - As I said, not everybody is familiar with the voting system. Not everybody wants to be familiar with the voting system. We are fairly familiar with it. We know what is required and we would know and we would read right through the document, I would think, and perhaps a lot of other people would. I do not know what the percentages are, but I would think probably 50 to 60 per cent of the public out there - and if you go into the local government elections, the last ones, where we received about a 50 per cent return - do not want to know, do not care and would never even read through these documents.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - It is 70 per cent return in Dorset.

Mr DEAN - Where you only have small numbers of candidates, you always get a better return. I think that is very obvious and clear. But in the larger areas where you have larger numbers of candidates, the number you have voting are always going to be less.

Mr Parkinson - Yes, but we agree, voting should be compulsory in local government elections anyway.

Mr DEAN - Absolutely. I agree with that. I thought that the Government would have done something about that by now. There are other members talking about it and I have talked about introducing something myself in that regard. I think compulsory is essential, moving forward for local government, and I have a strong position and strong view on that. But I also have a strong view that candidates ought not be able to make untrue statements that get through the system, because it entices and causes people to vote for them. I have a good example of it that I will produce, hopefully, in an adjournment speech this week. This time, nothing happens. Go out and make a statement that you can do something about and you are in strife. I do not think I would have any problem in supporting this bill moving forward.