ELECTO

RAL RESEA

RCH

THE C

ORE A

ND

THE BO

UN

DA

RIES CO

NFEREN

CE PA

PERS SA STA

TE ELECTO

RAL O

FFICE

Electoral Research The Core And The Boundaries

Collaborative ventures, changing technologyand an increasing acknowledgement of therole played by analysts in their commentaryon the electoral processes has led to reneweddebate on the need for dialogue with theelectoral jurisdictions and investigation of thebasis on which such interaction can occur.

The papers contained in this volume exploresome of the issues relating to an agenda forelectoral research in Australia from theperspective of both administrators andanalysts, questions such as:

What is the core for research - past, present and future?

What are the boundaries between electoral and political inquiry?

What are the benefits and opportunities for cooperation between electoraladministrators and analysts?

Where is technology taking the industry and can it be used to further electoral research?

Foreword: Elizabeth HoKeynote Address: Colin A HughesPapers: Nicholas Economou and Brian Costar,Antony Green, Phillip Green, Andrew Hawkeyand Michelle Davy, Dean Jaensch, MichaelMaley, Alan McRobie, Rod Medew, GerardNewman, Jenni Newton, Campbell Sharman,John Wanna, George Williams

Editors: Jane Peace and Janet Taylor

Research SeriesSouth Australian State Electoral OfficeJune 2000

C O N F E R E N C E P A P E R S

E L E C T O R A L R E S E A R C H

T H E C O R E A N D T H E B O U N D A R I E S

RE

SE

AR

CH

S

ER

IE

S

South Australian State Electoral Office Editors: Jane Peace and Janet Taylor

All correspondence

State Electoral Office

134 Fullarton Rd, ROSE PARK SA 5067

GPO Box 646, ADELAIDE SA 5001, AUSTRALIA

Phone: 61 8 8401 4300

Fax: 61 8 8401 4333

Internet: http://www.seo.sa.gov.au

Authors have retained copyright to their material. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily express those of the South Australian State Electoral Office.

ISSN 1443-3621

http://www.seo.sa.gov.au

Electoral Research The Core and the Boundaries

Conference Papers

Editors Jane Peace and Janet Taylor

Research Series South Australian State Electoral Office

June 2000

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This collection of papers was first presented at a conference of electoral administrators and analysts in Adelaide on Friday 3, Saturday 4 December 1999. The conference, attended by 61 delegates, was called Electoral Research the Core and the Boundaries. It was organised and hosted by the South Australian State Electoral Office under the auspices of the Electoral Commissioner Steve Tully and opened by the Hon. Trevor Griffin, Attorney-General for South Australia.

It was the first open forum in Australia to bring together electoral analysts from the electoral administrations, academic life, the media and parliamentary libraries in Australia and New Zealand. The keynote address was given by Colin Hughes, Emeritus Professor, the University of Queensland and a conference commentary was provided by Elizabeth Ho, Director, The Hawke Centre at the University of South Australia. Her summary is presented in these proceedings as a Foreword to the volume.

The New Zealand elections and two referendums precluded attendance of administrators from there though an independent electoral consultant and a parliamentary analyst were able to be present. Invitations were extended to the media and academics.

The South Australian Electoral Office thanks all those who participated in the conference - those who gave up their time to present papers and those delegates who contributed to discussion from the floor. Professor Dean Jaensch, Flinders University, and Ms Jenni Newton, South Australian Parliamentary Library, provided valuable support to conference organisation. The office expresses its appreciation to the Electoral Council of Australia and its Executive Secretary, Janet Taylor, who provided administrative support for the conference and co-edited the papers for this record of proceedings. Thanks also to those who offered constructive suggestions for the production of this volume and to Jade Koopman for her assistance in the final copy.

CONTRIBUTORS

Brian Costar is the Head of the School of Public Policy at Melbournes Monash University. Professor Costars areas of academic interest centre on political parties, elections and electoral systems with a particular interest in the National Party.

Michelle Davy joined the Tasmanian Electoral Office in 1995, to assist in the development of new election material and procedures for the 1996 State election. She has represented the office in a broad range of electoral areas and issues, including the development of legislation and policy, dealing with offences and complaints, and the preparation of information booklets and papers. Michelle came to the electoral world from private legal practice, after completing her BA/LLB in 1989. She returned to the University of Tasmania to complete a Masters degree in Social Science (Social Research) in 1994.

Nicholas Economou teaches Australian Politics in the School of Political and Social Inquiry at Monash University, Melbourne. Dr Economou has published on Australian and Victorian politics and elections, and has been a media commentator on, amongst other things, electoral matters for a variety of media outlets including radio 3AW in Melbourne, the ABC and the BBC. He is co-editor with Brian Costar of the book The Kennett Revolution: Victorian Politics in the 1990s (UNSW Press).

Antony Green was once employed as a data analyst in the computer industry and has blended this knowledge with a deep interest in politics to become one of the countrys most respected political commentators. He appears regularly on ABC election night programs, has been involved in the coverage of every State, Territory and Federal election since 1989 and also designed the software used by the ABC on election night. Since becoming the ABCs election analyst in 1989, Antony has travelled widely observing elections and television coverage of election counts, including the New Zealand elections and the poll in Britain that saw Labours Tony Blair swept into office.

Antony is a regular commentator on politics for the Sydney Morning Herald and authored the 1996 ABC Election Guide. He has also produced a number of academic publications for the Queensland Parliament and regular publications on politics for the NSW Parliamentary Library. His academic background includes a Bachelor of Science (Sydney University) with majors in mathematics and computing and a Bachelor of Economics (Sydney University) with Honours in Politics.

Phillip Green has been the ACT Electoral Commissioner since the establishment of the permanent ACT Electoral Commission in 1994. Prior to moving to the ACT, Phil worked with the Australian Electoral Commission, which he joined in 1982. During his 18 years in the electoral industry, Phil has worked on just about every aspect of the election game. He has written numbers on tally boards and managed the National Tally Room. He has issued votes in the Northern Territory to soldiers on manoeuvres and managed election scrutinies in Canberra, Hobart, Launceston, Flinders Island and Namibia.

Phil is probably the only person in Australia alive today who can claim to have been solely responsible for writing a major Electoral Act from scratch, and the only person who ever really understood how the ACTs ill-famed modified dHondt electoral system worked. In 1999, Phil was the Chairperson of the Electoral Council of Australia, the peak body of Australias electoral administrations. Phil is also lead writer for International IDEAs forthcoming module of the Administration and Cost of Election Project on Elections and Technology. Phil has a Bachelor of Arts (Professional Writing) from the (then) Canberra College of Advanced Education, and a Bachelor of Letters (Political Science) from the Australian National University.

Andrew Hawkey expressed interest in the Australian political system at a very young age in the post Dismissal period. Having a natural inclination towards numbers and in particular statistics, this interest quickly focussed on elections. In 1989, as a year 12 student, Andrew attempted to write his own version of EC Count in Pascal for his College SRC elections. He completed his honours degree in Mathematics and Political Science with a thesis entitled Statistical Modelling of Electoral Systems and the Treatment of the Third Party. Since joining the Tasmanian Electoral Office in 1993, Andrew has managed various State Parliamentary elections, designed and managed the production of both the Hare-Clark Automation System (H-CV Auto) used for ACT and Tasmanian elections and the Tasmanian Electoral Office 1998 election website. He has also produced various types of electoral information material and reports.

Elizabeth Ho is the Director of The Hawke Centre, a major public education project of the University of South Australia, devoted to fostering a deeper understanding of the Australian democratic system and notions of political, environmental and social citizenship through its programs. Ms Ho is a Councillor of the Institute of Public Administration Australia (SA Division), an Associate of the Library and Information Association of Australia and a member of the State Heritage Authority. She previously held senior posts in the State Library of South Australia, and the South Australian Education Department and holds a BA (Honours) Degree majoring in History from the University of Adelaide.

Colin Hughes, Emeritus Professor, University Of Queensland, came to Australia already a veteran electoral reformer with experience of campaigning unsuccessfully against the property vote and for votes for women. He starting writing about Australian elections with an article on the 1957 state election in Queensland and a chapter on the 1958 federal election.

Since then he has been an inveterate tinkerer, witness before Royal Commissions and parliamentary committees and member of the EARC that reformed the Queensland system and redrew the most discussed set of boundaries this century. He is one of two outsiders ever to sit on a Commonwealth redistribution commission, and for five and a half years was the Commonwealths Electoral Commissioner 1984-89. He currently is a member of Queenslands Local Government electoral body and in 1999 finished his term as a member of the Board of Directors of International IDEA.

Dean Jaensch is Professor of Politics at Flinders University. His major field of teaching and research is Australian politics. He has been analysing elections since 1968 and has written widely about them, including a series of statistical analyses. He is the co-author of 21 books and numerous articles and chapters on Australian politics and maintains a major research interest in the politics of elections.

He is a life member of the Australasian Political Studies Association and a past President and is widely involved with public education in the field of politics. His publications include text books and research monographs and he has carried out a number of consultancies concerning elections and election systems in the federal, state and local areas. He has been a regular political and election commentator for the media since 1974.

Alan McRobie is a political analyst and independent electoral consultant with Masters in both history and political science. Between 1969 and 1990 he taught courses in New Zealand history, politics and society at the Christchurch College of Education and from 1990 to 1993 was part-time lecturer in Political Science at the University of Canterbury. He has been Visiting Teaching Fellow at the University of Canterbury, Visiting Professor of Political Science at the California State University. In 1987 he was awarded a Claude McCarthy Fellowship to undertake research into New Zealands electoral system. During 1999 he was a member of an ad hoc commission established by the Christchurch City Council to review the citys community areas and ward boundaries and was a guest presenter at a NZ Society of Local Government Managers seminar considering a redrafting of the Local Elections and Polls Act.

Alan has written extensively on New Zealands politics and history in professional journals both in New Zealand and overseas and has acted as commentator on elections and electoral politics for the electronic and print media. Published work includes: New Zealand Electoral Atlas (1989); Taking it to the People? The New Zealand Electoral Referendum Debate 1993; Co-authorship with Keith Jackson of A Historical Dictionary of New Zealand (1996) and New Zealand Adopts Proportional Representation: Accident? Design? Evolution? (1998).

Michael Maley is Director, Research and International Services, Australian Electoral Commission. He joined the Australian Electoral Office in 1982 after completing a Masters Degree in Political Science at the ANU with a thesis on probabilistic modelling of electoral bias in single-member constituency systems. He has served as an electoral consultant to the United Nations, the Commonwealth Secretariat, the International Foundation for Election Systems and the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Michael has occupied senior positions in a number of United Nations peacekeeping operations which involved elections; and has published and lectured widely on the subject of elections and peacekeeping. He is the author of a number of chapters, including that on Administration of elections, in the forthcoming International Encyclopedia of Elections.

Rod Medew is Director, IT Applications, Australian Electoral Commission. He holds an Honours Degree in Geography from Monash University. He joined the Australian Electoral Commission in 1985 and has since been instrumental in implementing many IT innovations in the AEC, including the use of Geographic Information Systems as part of the redistribution process, the use of matched polling place data to calculate swings on election night and the development of integrated election management systems. On secondment to the United Nations, he was the project manager for the development of the computer system used at the 1993 election in Cambodia, which required the development of a special keyboard and coding scheme to cope with the Khmer alphabet. He has also served as an electoral adviser in South Africa, Indonesia, and Eastern Slavonia.

Gerard Newman is the Director of the Statistics Group, Information and Research Services, Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra. He has a Bachelor of Economics from Queensland University and is currently employed as the manager of the group of professionals providing an information and research service in statistics to members of the Commonwealth Parliament. Gerard has been employed in the Parliamentary Library for 25 years. His area of subject speciality is in election results and has published numerous papers analysing Commonwealth and State elections. He has also published works on electoral redistributions and electoral systems.

Jenni Newton has been Research Director at the Parliamentary Library in South Australia since 1985. She was a National Undergraduate scholar at ANU, graduating with an Honors Arts degree and has since studied demography at ANU and accounting at the University of South Australia. After graduating she worked in a research capacity with the Commonwealth Departments of Social Security and, later, Finance. At the library, she is an electoral specialist and has written background papers and has estimated the effects of State boundary redistributions in 1983, 1991, 1994 and 1998. Her paper Making Sure that Electoral Boundaries are Fair in South Australia was used by all major parties at the 1998 Boundaries Commission hearings.

Campbell Sharman is Associate Professor in the Political Science Department at the University of Western Australia. He holds degrees from the University of Adelaide, the London School of Economics and Political Science, and Queens University in Kingston, Ontario. He has held teaching and research positions in several universities including the Australian National University and the University of British Columbia.

His teaching and research interests focus on Australian government and politics with special reference to federalism and state politics, the operation of constitutional and electoral rules, the parliamentary process, and the role of parties. He has published widely on these topics in Australia and overseas. In association with his colleague Jeremy Moon, he is a principal investigator in a long term project on Australian politics and government in the Australian states which has had financial support from the Australian Research Council and, more recently, the National Council for the Centenary of Federation. From November 1994 for the two years of its existence, he served as a commissioner on the Western Australian Commission on Government.

John Wanna is Associate Professor and Head of School of Politics and Public Policy, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland and a principal researcher with the nationally-funded Centre for Australian Public Sector Management (CAPSM) and the Key Centre in Ethics, Law, Justice and Governance at Griffith University. Dr Wanna has produced around 10 books including two national text books on policy and public management. He is currently working on a book on Managing Public Expenditure at the Commonwealth level. His research interests include Australian and comparative politics, public expenditure and budgeting, and government-business relations. He also writes on state politics and has been a regular state political commentator for the ABC, The Courier-Mail, the Australian, other media outlets and commercial TV.

George Williams is a Senior Lecturer and Fellow in Law at the Australian National University. Over the first half of 1999 he was a Visiting Scholar at the Human Rights Institute at Columbia University Law School in New York. He teaches and writes on topics involving constitutional law, human rights and electoral law. He is the author of books including: A Bill of Rights for Australia (UNSW Press, 1999); Human Rights Under the Australian Constitution (Oxford, 1999); Australian Constitutional Law and Theory: Commentary and Materials (Federation Press, 2nd ed

1998, with Tony Blackshield).

George also practises as an barrister and has appeared in High Court cases, such as the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Case and Lange v ABC, raising issues such as freedom of communication as it affects electoral law, freedom from racial discrimination and the separation of powers.

CONTENTS

Introduction 1 x

Foreword 9 Elizabeth Ho

Keynote article Electoral Research And Administration A Brief History 15 Colin A Hughes

The research core past, present and future 21

1 The Use Of Electoral Data For Research Into The Australian 22 Campbell Sharman Political System

2 A Legal Perspective On Electoral Research 28 George Williams 3 Whats So Special About Specials? 36 Alan McRobie 4 The Key To Progress: A Cooperative Research Centre 49 Dean Jaensch

The borders between electoral and political inquiry 53

5 Negotiating The Boundaries Between Electoral And Political 54 John Wanna Inquiry

6 Electoral Inquiry Or Political Debate? Analysis, Commentary And 62 Nicholas M Economou The Controversy Of Victorias Legislative Council Electoral Process and Brian J Costar

7 Electoral Research: Spread Over Many Fields 68 Michael Maley

The benefits and difficulties of collaboration between electoral administrators and analysts 73

8 Fostering Cooperation Between Electoral Authorities And Analysts 74 Gerard Newman 9 Developments In The Provision Of Information 78 Andrew Hawkey

and Michelle Davy 10 Living In Interesting Times 82 Jenni Newton

Technology implications for the industry 87

11 Geographic Information Systems In Political And Electoral Work 88 Rod Medew 12 Why Data Definition Is More Important Than Technology For

Electoral Research 93 Antony Green 13 Elections And Technology Implications For The Future 97 Phillip Green

TABLES page

Table 3.1 New Zealand Elections 1972-1996: Fate of special votes cast 46

Table 3.2 New Zealand Elections 1972-1996: Impact of special votes 47

Table 3.3 Disallowed special votes 1972-1996 48

Table 3.4a Fate of special votes disallowed 1996: Reasons for disallowance 48

Table 3.4b Fate of special votes disallowed 1996: Analysis of disallowed votes not enrolled (NOR) 48

Table 6.1 The 1999 Victorian Election Results Legislative Council 67

Table 6.2a Legislative Council provinces: marginality following the 1996 election 67

Table 6.2b Legislative Council provinces: marginality after the 1999 election 67

INTRODUCTION

The conference at which the papers in this volume were given evolved from a proposal to bring together a small number of researchers in the electoral industry to discuss the essentials for electoral research, past and present, the borders between electoral and political inquiry, the practicalities of collaboration between electoral administrators and analysts and the implications of technology for the industry.

Colin Hughes, keynote speaker, described such a gathering as:

not completely new. Almost a quarter century ago what was called the First Electoral Seminar was held at the Gold Coast - in June 1976. The first word on the cover of the transcript of the Seminars proceedings is CONFIDENTIAL, and the first names on the list of delegates are those of the Under Secretary and the Assistant Under Secretary of Queenslands Department of Justice, who were indeed the hosts.

Administrators gave the following papers, addressing topics displaying the problem addressed in the 1999 conference: Returning Officers Appointment, Responsibilities and Remuneration (NSW); Polling Officials Fees and Taxation (Cwlth); Postal Charges and Surcharges (WA); Hours of Poll and Certificate Voting (Tas); Voting by Persons in Prison (Vic); Universal Postal Vote Applications (Vic); Availability of Postal Vote Applications (NSW); Non-Voter Notices and Erasures by Computer (Qld) and Prerogative for Enforcement of Penalties (SA). The Northern Territory and the ACT did not then have their own electoral authorities.

The two academics present also presented papers: Paul Finn, now Mr Justice Finn gave Electoral Corruption and Malpractice, Hughes himself Publication of Election Results.

Hughes described the papers as portraying in a nutshell the gap which the Adelaide conference had to try to bridge. On one side of the gap are high particularity and utility; on the other side, bigger pictures and wider controversies. On the one side immediate responsibilities, on the other side remoteness from influence. He noted that it was an all-male gathering and observed that electoral administration has progressed in both openness and independence since then.1

Research Within The Jurisdictions

A brief survey of Commonwealth, State and Territory electoral administrations prior to the 1999 conference revealed that a statutory provision for carrying out research was first introduced to Commonwealth legislation in 1984. Since then the Australian Electoral Commission has expanded the services it offers within the Asian-Pacific region and its research activity has assumed an international perspective. By 1999, six Australian electoral jurisdictions had a research obligation. Four administrations specifically identified research officer positions, seven had contracted out research, particularly market research. All considered providing database information and most did. All organisations carried out literature searches with an increasing reliance on the Internet.

Electoral research within the jurisdictions (as distinct from research undertaken by the independent redistribution commissions) has included: investigation of legislative development; surveys of electoral knowledge, attitudes and service standards; compilation of database information on electoral events, candidates, members elected, districts; examination of changes to processes and procedures; the extension of access to democratic processes and decision making; informality; compulsory voting; citizen initiated referenda; compliance with how-to-vote cards and the impact on results of position on the ballot-paper.

1 Campbell Sharman pointed out during proceedings that the Canadians appear to have held such meetings between officials and researchers in 1970 and 1974. See the web page for the Centre for Election Studies at the University of Waterloo - http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/PSCI/ces.1htm

1

http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/PSCI/ces.1htm

Introduction

Research output has been used to document and analyse electoral data over time, improve processes and services and locate areas where education and public information material is needed to ensure comprehension of voting provisions and procedures.

The result is a fine-tuned sense of the past from the early days of representative democracy. Changes to boundaries, demography, land-use, modes of communication have altered the electoral map. In tandem with the physical changes have come developments in electoral thinking, acknowledgment of contemporary issues and the integration of research with mainstream electoral activities.

Environmental scanning is intrinsic to research. The jurisdictions monitor such matters as evidence of public awareness of electoral issues, manifestations of a wish for more participative decision-making and innovations which may have practical application for electoral operations. Research within the administrations has not been as ready to explore in depth the political impact and outcomes of changes to processes and procedures.

The Hon Trevor Griffin in his address at the opening of the conference, reminded those present that research can be more than critical study, examination and analysis. Conventional practices and processes can be questioned and the boundaries imposed by traditional and formal structures and thinking can be explored the legitimised areas of interest. There are no boundaries to knowledge.

In a world of increasing globalisation and ease of communication, organisations such as the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) and the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES), and publications such as Electoral Studies provide ready access to ideas. Likewise contacts outside Australia with similar concerns, with whom issues can be discussed and explored.

Electoral administrators find themselves increasingly dependent on computerised processes for operational procedures, facilitating election conduct and disseminating information. This dependence brings new risks and an impetus to accelerate the pace of procedural change withdrawal from this path is difficult. Technology has brought enormous benefits: a reduction in efforts expended on proofing and checking materials; improved ways to educate and inform the public; spin-offs of technological applications in the cross-over from parliamentary to local and non-government election conduct; better tools to capture and retrieve data, a considerable amount of which is held by electoral administrations. The allocation of resources to analysis of the data is often subject to the operational and financial constraints of the electoral cycle.

Software is being used for the management of equipment logistics, processing pre-poll votes, capturing and transmitting results, as well as mapping electoral information. However, electoral administrations are increasingly being questioned for still using the pencil and ballot-paper to record votes of electors little has changed in that respect for more than a century. The technology exists for removing the inefficiencies of manual handling of ballot materials and providing increasingly sophisticated and powerful research tools. The difficulty for the administrations, separately, is to harness that technology in a cost effective manner. Mechanisms for reducing costs may be facilitated by increasing interaction within the jurisdictions.

2

Introduction

A major concern before techniques such as telephone or Internet voting can become common-place is of course ensuring the integrity and confidentiality of the vote.2 The people need to be assured, in this rapidly changing world, that their voices will be heard, that they can freely and confidently exercise their democratic rights and their votes will be recorded and counted without violation. Research into the most effective means for vote protection will run in parallel with systems development.

The Legal Framework

The Hon Trevor Griffin made reference to the New Zealand and Australian culture of fairness and compliance with the law. For over 150 years, electoral law in Australia has largely mirrored procedural and social developments. Reform has included, to some extent, the removal of inequities and gerrymandering, for example the gradual broadening of the franchise, the development of prepoll voting mechanisms to cater for remote and increasingly mobile populations, the adoption of preferential voting and counting systems to better reflect the voting intentions of the electorate, the placing of redistribution mechanisms out of the hands of the parliaments.

The law provides an administrative tool and acceptance, security and support for processes and procedures often a codification of electoral practice. Sometimes the law has not kept abreast of change. It took nearly a hundred years for ballot-papers to begin to record candidate party or group affiliations. In some instances, legislative amendment has preceded change: computerised systems for vote-counting were only permitted after enabling legislation had been passed. Social acceptance of the new methodology had to be confirmed.

The challenge for the law is to provide a supportive framework without undue prescription, to be couched in straightforward language, remove duplication, to clarify the intent of the law-makers and accommodate the expectations of the electorate. George Williams paper dwells on the difficulties of research into electoral legislation, case law and the structures underpinning the law.

An Administrators Viewpoint

Steve Tully, Electoral Commissioner for South Australia, at the commencement of the conference, provided an administrators insight into the difficulties of research activity within the jurisdictions. He observed that when an organisation is prioritising its services and allocating resources, research can be seen to be an area from which funding can be diverted. Many electoral positions have a research component, often project based, which are targeted at operational issues and thus add value to processes.

Research focused on historical issues adds to an understanding of the whole context in which electoral administration is carried out. This has to be valued as much as applied research.

Contemporary issues also demand investigation: the incidence of informality, ticket voting, the impact of different systems on voting outcomes and increasingly how to make full use of the information accumulating on the databases within jurisdictions, particularly with the advent of computerised counts.

2 Following the conference, publicity was given (March 2000) to the first use of on-line voting in a public election in Arizona during primaries in the United States of America. Full assessment and more on-line elections before the November 2000 general election were promised. It was reported that turnout increased by >600% with some 35 000 voters (>50%) clicking rather than ticking their candidates. Technical glitches were reported to include a slowed response from the web-site due to traffic volume. Financial Times 13 March 2000.

3

Introduction

Electoral administrations are not only concerned with parliamentary election conduct. An important part of their operations is advising on and conducting industrial ballots and local government elections. Another major focus is education what is needed to encourage participation in the democratic processes and how to go about it. Resources need careful husbanding to accommodate a response to all business sectors.

Electoral offices are looking to providers from private and tertiary education organisations to supplement their own resources. Business imperatives make the identification and selection of reliable external service providers critical in meeting stated timeframes and quality and cost parameters.

Tully emphasised that information has to be transferable. Partnerships brokered between analysts and administrators need to consider customising programs for mutually desirable outputs and determine the timeframes for service delivery. From practical experience in building data bases, electoral administrations would need to have early advice of requirements to develop flexible databases.

Until now administrators have provided what they thought was required and born the costs - for example importing election statistics from software to more user friendly spreadsheet files for manipulation by analysts. If more is required the difficult question of who pays? needs to be addressed.

Likewise the question of confidence in the electoral system. Electoral administrations, which serve the public, are in a catch 22 situation. They must remain at arms length from government direction, refrain from political comment while always cognisant that public interest more generally lies in the outcomes of elections rather than its processes. Agents acting for the office must also reflect a culture of independence.

The Commissioner saw it as inappropriate for him to comment at any time on a policy matter - for example voluntary voting, the system of voting, or to publicly surmise an electoral outcome before a poll is declared. This would threaten the independence and integrity of the electoral administration. Rather he saw his role to provide information that can be interpreted, for example by the parliament, in terms of electoral policy and to satisfy the expectation for more information, not less.

Analysts from academia and the media can provide valuable critical interpretation and public commentary on results and system intricacies which add to public understanding of the electoral process, as well as acknowledging the transparency of electoral processes. Parties, analysts and the media commentators have a freedom to predict likely poll outcomes. They can express opinions on any policy matter and there will always be a place, Tully believed, for constructive critique of electoral administration as long as it values the confidence required in the electoral systems.

Other benefits of collaboration with analysts include cross fertilisation of ideas, access to scarce skills and resources, knowledge pooling and sharing, a facility to analyse events and trends that are not always a priority when core business is election conduct. The perception and construction placed on electoral matters can be broadened by their input.

The Commissioner acknowledged that his office had benefited from positive working relationships established with parliamentary libraries, universities and the media. Processes had been made transparent and access to staff and resources offered wherever possible. The courtesy had reaped rewards for the office. Information had been provided on unfolding events which contributed to

4

Introduction

accurate commentary and processes; data had been exchanged for analytical exercises for the office and the South Australian Electoral Districts Boundaries Commission; useful input had been made to corporate thinking; there had been understanding of the demands an electoral office is subject to in the midst of an election.

Tully noted that in general, political trends and data are not explored by the electoral jurisdictions though the published statistical returns for most administrations over the last ten to fifteen years showed a marked increase in the range of data with political inferences. Most included such information as the candidates affiliation, swing to lose and safety margin of a seat, election outcomes in terms of the composition of the government, two party preferred information and, quite often, analyses of ballot papers as well as a description of legislative changes since the last elections.

The South Australian Electoral Districts Boundaries Commission does examine two party preferred voting figures to interpret the voting patterns at the census collector district (CCD) level. This is to meet the fairness requirement that the group(s) gaining more than 50% of the State-wide vote has a majority of elected candidates and is able to form government. The 1998 Boundaries Commission used data from scanned rolls and two party preferred information from the results system reconfigured with a mapping tool to more readily plot new electorate boundaries.

The Boundaries Commission has also invited comment on redistribution matters from analysts outside the electoral administration such as the research director from the South Australian Parliamentary Library, Ms Jenni Newton, and Mr Antony Green from the ABC.

The Commissioner concluded by pointing out that the conference itself was evidence of the emphasis being placed on increasing liaison between analysts and administrators and freeing up some aspects of the separation between the public sector, academia and the media. There are benefits in any shared approach to raising electors awareness of electoral issues and understanding of the systems used.

Conference Outcomes

Conference rapporteur Elizabeth Ho stated that the purpose of the conference was wisely ambitious for such a gatheringthere was neither a dearth of good ideas nor any failure to communicate them well.

She noted that an additional gift to the conference was the humour of participants:

Conference humour is often ephemeral and generally lofty papers remain as keepsakes and the intelligent banter is forgotten. Examples of the very lively wit and ease of the gathering can be seen in the following two (rough) quotes from:

Malcolm Mackerras, veteran electoral analyst: I wear it as a badge of honour that I have been accused of corrupting the electoral process.

Campbell Sharman, West Australian academic: Australians have an obsession with fairness and it should stop.

In the light of weighty technological change, it can be pleasantly distracting to hear the various views on the indomitable political canvasser. Emeritus Professor Colin Hughes comments on the role of the scrutineer when he talks about Cicero in the Roman scenario

5

Introduction

the freedom of the ordinary person to vote as he wishes shall not be interfered with. The ACT administration has recently insisted on a wider berth at polling booths with the inevitable loss of dramatic effect. However, with the impending spectre of bio-tagged voters, the truly burning question is: where will the canvasser dwell in the world of on-line voting?

However, she observed that each of the ephemeral moments connected to more serious elements with repeating themes providing a framework for debate and comment on the specifics of the electoral environment. These included a culture of fairness; research as a check and balance in a democratic society; and, the power of public education.

After the conference, suggestions arising from the closing workshop session were referred to the Electoral Council of Australia. A number of issues will be addressed by the jurisdictions and analysts consulted to effect optimum resolutions to some of the problems raised.

The Structure Of This Volume

Hos summation at the end of the conference provided a foreword to this volume and the papers are presented in the order in which they were read at the conference. Referencing is as provided by the authors.

Jane Peace Janet Taylor South Australian State Electoral Office Electoral Council of Australia

June 2000

6

CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

John Alderman South Australian State Electoral Office

Clive Anson South Australian State Electoral Office

Andy Becker Australian Electoral Commission

Doug Beecroft Victorian Electoral Commission

Brian Beggs Australian Electoral Commission

Scott Bennett Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra

Judy Birkenhead Averment Pty Ltd

David Black Curtin University of Technology

Fiona Colbeck Western Australian Electoral Commission

Margie Cook Channel 9

Brian Costar Monash University

Deane Crabb The Electoral Reform Society of South Australia

Chris Craven New South Wales State Electoral Office

Greg Davis Northern Territory Electoral Office

Nick Economou Monash University

Tim Evans Australian Electoral Commission

Rachel Gibson Australian National University

Tim Glanville Australian Electoral Commission

Andrew Grant South Australian State Electoral Office

Antony Green ABC

Philip Green ACT Electoral Commission

David Gully South Australian State Electoral Office

Geoff Halsey Australian Electoral Commission

Barrie Hamilton Northern Territory Electoral Office

Andrew Hawkey Tasmanian Electoral Office

Elizabeth Ho University of South Australia

Colin Hughes University of Queensland

Dean Jaensch Flinders University

Nicole Lugg Tasmanian Electoral Office

Tan Luu South Australian State Electoral Office

Gary Lynch Electoral Commission Queensland

Malcolm Mackerras Australian Defence Force Academy

7

Conference participants

Michael Maley Australian Electoral Commission

Haydon Manning Flinders University

Louis Massicotte University of Queensland

Dezma Maxwell Australian Electoral Commission

Ian McAllister Australian National University

Greg McArthy University of Adelaide

Clem McIntyre University of Adelaide

Alan McRobie Independent electoral analyst

Kay Mousley Australian Electoral Commission

Gerard Newman Department of the Parliamentary Library, Canberra

Jenni Newton Parliamentary Library, Adelaide

Angela ONeil Australian Electoral Commission

Graeme Orr Griffith University

Des OShea Electoral Commission Queensland

Jane Peace South Australian State Electoral Office

Harry Phillips Edith Cowan University

Alison Purvis ACT Electoral Commission

David Quinn GTV 9

Phil Roberts Australian Electoral Commission

Campbell Sharman University of Western Australia

Barbara Stedman New Zealand Parliamentary Library

Janet Taylor Electoral Council of Australia

Paul Thornton-Smith Victorian Electoral Commission

Steve Tully South Australian State Electoral Office

Di Walker South Australian State Electoral Office

John Wanna Griffith University

Lawrie Waters South Australian State Electoral Office

George Williams Australian National University

Garry Wiltshire Electoral Commission Queensland

Michelle Davy was unable to attend the conference and co-author Andrew Hawkey presented their paper.

Rod Medew was in Papua New Guinea for the Australian Electoral Commission and his paper was given by Michael Maley.

8

FOREWORD

Overall, the articles in this volume lead to the assessment that the culture of fairness and compliance with the law is an underpinning theme in Australian electoral systems and the power of research is to inform that agenda. As a mature democratic nation the focus is on improvement, protection, and raising community awareness of the nature and importance of the process. It has an environment where rights and principles of fairness are embedded and if systems are not necessarily understood by the person in the street, their expectation that those principles will apply in their electoral system are generally high (see Jaensch).

Australia has a long history of representative government; it has a high degree of literacy; the compulsory system works against the potential excesses of populism and minority view dominance.

As the democracy is relatively mature, so a maturity of interest is demonstrated among these specialists in the role, purpose and future of electoral research in support of democratic intent and practice. Many insights into research, and its power to provide a check and balance, can be gleaned from the papers that follow.

As electoral consultant Alan McRobie puts it, the electoral researcher will often have as their objective, to make the electoral system as fair and accessible as possible. Just as there are safeguards within Australian society to both limit and distribute power, this objective, supported by good research, can work to dilute the effects of political self interest displayed by the party political fold. It can also complement the efforts of those administrators who ensure that elections are run properly and within the appropriate legal parameters.

In this way, the gift of check and balance from the research effort can be achieved. This must be regarded as a powerful argument for collaboration.

In making the point about the valuable influence of research findings on electoral practice decisions, a focus is offered on the importance of data preservation (Sharman) and availability (A. Green) - an affirmation of the importance of information collation, organisation and access in the maintenance of a democratic society. That libraries and archives struggle to achieve a basic level of description and resourcing to support research efforts is well highlighted. The cost of access is an issue.

Turning to public education, the contrast between the deep collective wisdom of electoral analysts and administrators and the perceived state of public political and civic education is striking. There are reminders of J. Bronowski in The Ascent of Man and his firm belief in the democracy of the intellect - that unless people with no ambition to control others have knowledge and actively participate in their society, then we make empty claims to having achieved a civilisation.1

Moving into some of the specifics that are raised in relation to research, the articles range across the role and purpose of research, and the roles and purposes of those who undertake it.

Respective Responsibilities

Looking first at spheres of responsibility, Emeritus Professor Colin Hughes gives us a comprehensive overview of the increasing convergence and strengthening relations between administrators and academics. This however does not overshadow the message that there is a legitimately independent role for each, with administrators particularly sensitive to the political potential of their investigations.

1 J Bronowski, The Ascent of Man, BBC, 1976 pp 435-6.

9

Foreword

In reflection of the power of the region in Australian politics, and the chequered history of electoral distribution, this 1964 media quote, taken from Gough Whitlams The Whitlam Government 1972-52 seems worth repeating:

Daily News 1964 Murwillumbah

The Minister for the Interior, Mr J D Anthony told a Country Party dinner at Murwillumbah that in carrying out the proposed redistribution of the Federal seats he would make sure that fewer people were required to elect representatives in the country areas than the cities. He said Australias electoral system was the finest in the world but lacked territorial representation. Representation was now based on population not area and with the result that the power in Parliament was confined to the heavily populated areas. Mr Anthony said the task of electoral reform was probably one of his worst jobs as Minister for the Interior and one on which his political future hinged.

Australian Electoral Commission Research and International Services Director, Michael Maley stresses the need for administrators to focus strongly on the scrutiny process, arguing the case for a strong applied focus in research supporting practical policy programs; a clear delineation of the rationale for research; an emphasis on an evidencebased approach; and, an assessment of assumptions at the outset. Maley also refers to the value of undertaking analyses in a national and international context across a diversity of administrations rather than taking up a single administration issue, where the sensitivity may be heightened.

Professor Brian Costar, of Monash University, focused in discussion on the fact that academics, while perceived to have freedoms not open to administrators, nevertheless are not immune to political manipulation of their expressions, out of context, with consequences, once they enter the public affairs arena.

In the context of collaboration, political scientists can play a role in democratic advocacy, supporting administration concerns in the realm of public comment.

Nick Economou, also from Monash, and Brian Costar use the case study example of the Victorian Legislative Council to highlight how an area ripe for scrutiny, based on the hard and indisputable facts of longitudinal analysis, will nevertheless be perceived to have a politically partisan origin if research is commissioned.

All of these perspectives are useful in focusing attention on the respective roles of administrator and political scientist.

The Need For Research

Turning secondly to the need for research, the New Zealand examples of Maori and special votes demonstrate the importance of analysing policies and processes in the protection of fairness. Alan McRobies insightful analysis reveals how even small numbers can affect outcomes. Clearly there will always be divergent views about what needs to be done, but a powerful force for new questions and investigations must lie in the increasing sophistication of data availability and the opportunities to interpret that data in rich ways.

For example, Campbell Sharman, University of Western Australia, demonstrates the effort devoted by himself and Jeremy Moon to the substantial long run database and at the same time draws attention to the fact that Australia does happen to have 140 years experience of competitive

2 Gough Whitlam, The Whitlam Government 1972-5 Viking, 1985 Chapter 18, Electoral Laws p664.

10

Foreword

elections and in his words, that it can provide a forum for testing a wide range of propositions about the nature of representative democracy.

Opportunities

Turning thirdly to the potential for research, John Wanna, of Griffith University, provides a sweeping summary of the opportunities for collaboration and partnerships and defines the client base for such research. His advice on the politics of research coupled with that of administrative researcher Michael Maley provide some parameter for commissions, which are naturally cautious about the nature of the research they choose to undertake.

Tasmanian Electoral Office administrators Andrew Hawkey and Michelle Davy point out the breadth of electoral resources - enrolment, boundary and election data being comprehensive mines for research projects. Medew (AEC) wishes to encourage this through the use of geographic information systems. Gerard Newman, Statistics Group Director at the Commonwealth Parliamentary Library, gives an excellent overview of the Librarys potential contribution to new research, and the level and areas of cooperation that the Library can support. Jenni Newton, Research Director at the South Australian Parliamentary Library, refers to the significant contribution that state research data analysis can make to the federal sphere and vice versa. She also notes that changes to capturing voting and preference distribution figures by data input processes open up vast research potential.

Impediments

Beyond the opportunities for new research, the conference did not shy away from debating the problems associated with undertaking research.

Among the impediments, there is a lack of access to longitudinal data although the data itself exists. There are issues relating to inconsistent deposit in libraries, ISBN identification of material produced, the effects of Desktop Publishing on legal deposit to libraries and archives, and generally a dearth of well described and accessible archival and published sources. John Wanna, for example, talks about the post election information legacy and how this could be utilised if it was more accessible. From the legal perspective, there is a lack of documentation of electoral cases, even at the High Court level (see Williams).

For the administrator, research is a secondary activity sitting behind the operational imperative to organise elections; the resourcing of research may be compromised by these competing priorities.

For the academic, the university funding environment frustrates consistent research activity, and grants may be the only recourse, meaning a hit and miss approach rather than a steady building of a body of knowledge and expertise. At the same time, there are good arguments for a strong industry link, supported through such programs as SPIRT (Strategic Partnership with Industry, Research and Training) grants.

One time educational leader in South Australia, Garth Boomer, once likened the genetic pool to the memory pool, encouraging humanity to preserve a diverse meme bank for the benefit of all. With that encouragement in mind, the lack of a consolidated research bank or network to advise areas of current research and share results is another area of concern. Similar statements can probably be found to be echoing in any number of social science disciplines.

11

Foreword

Fragmentation of the research process and the disparate nature of the product leads Flinders University Professor Dean Jaensch to deliver a spirited expose on the research boundaries issue. He celebrates the culture change that he has witnessed in electoral commissions but exhorts that resources be provided to foster ongoing research into all components of the electoral process. His prescription for action is to establish a National Election Studies Centre and to use public education arguments as a lever to secure government resourcing. The effective consolidation of information/research activity and the international potential of such an exercise are among the benefits of this vision. In similar vein, Colin Hughes refers to the value of creating a national research register and elsewhere, others make references to the building of a virtual network of collaboration.

The Legal Framework

It is worth reflecting on the fact that many Australians assume that our democracy, including electoral rights, are embedded in the language and intent of the Constitution. Many Australians would assume that their Constitution as originally framed would include reference to voting equality. Gough Whitlams interpretation is that the Australian Constitution does not entrench the right to vote for all citizens in both State and national elections, and does not refer to equal voting rights for all Australians. He notes that Section 24 simply requires that members of the Commonwealth Parliament are directly chosen by the people.3

While various challenges may be mounted about the place of the lawyer in the electoral reform context, ANU legal academic, George Williams opens our eyes to the increasing tendency to refer to international jurisprudence, where there is either no precedent or, conversely, fuzziness in Australian law.

While the prevailing ideal is that the law should be to provide a supportive framework without undue prescription, one is left with the impression that the role of law and especially international law is a potentially complex arena that could impact on legislative presumptions and thus practices. This may particularly pertain in a more litigious society. The rebuttal to this position is that Australian politicians are less likely to mount legal challenges if they feel that the same argument might come back at them at a later date. However, it appears that international legal determinations may create new complexities for commissions in the future and this is part and parcel of an increasingly global environment.

Public Education

The vexed issue of effective public education is ever present in discussions about research, particularly with the November 1999 Republic Referendum experience firmly in mind. Does it matter that people were encouraged in this case to vote No on the grounds that they did not believe they had an adequate grasp of the topic? Yes, says George Williams, they should be encouraged to self-inform.

This point stimulates some inquiry. Where is the incentive and encouragement to self-inform in such situations? What does the experience say either positively or negatively about preparation for citizenship through our schools, tolerance of political ignorance, and the level of public awareness of our democratic processes generally? How well developed is our collective national identity and valuing of the historical foundations of our system? What role can technology play in supporting more effective public education?

3 Gough Whitlam op. cit. p653.

12

Foreword

It is not possible to adequately explore the very large question of the interface between public education and research in these proceedings. Reference can be made to government curriculum investments, and the fact that electoral commissions clearly have a role as parallel education agencies. The benefits that electoral research can offer the public education function can be identified as potentially valuable in stating the case for research resourcing. It is acknowledged that more effort is required to communicate this position.

Information Technology

With the spectre of the retina-scanned voter before us, the impact of technological change both in the present and its potential for the future can be considered.

For those who are pre-occupied with the minutiae and the inevitable human frailties of any system, it is easy to overlook the fact that solutions generally create another set of problems, and it is no different in the realm of information technology.

For example, there is some preoccupation with the current quality of database design and its capacity to respond to known and future research needs. For administrators, the resource tension between IT investments for core business and IT investments for research purposes is self-evident.

A further issue is the matter of access and use. There are huge research benefits in computerised data, but a word of caution can be offered about the potential for manipulation of information previously inaccessible to external parties.4 Dean Jaensch believes that ethics and probity should be uppermost in the researchers mind when using electoral commission data. These observations leave little doubt that the ethical context of use of electoral information in a rich IT environment needs further deliberation.

Turning to some specific points raised by the three articles in the technology section, there is considerable attention paid to future scenarios.

IT Director at the Australian Electoral Commission, Rod Medew, makes a passionate plea for use of a Geographic Information System in the electoral context, and claims gross under-exploitation of this approach. He notes the benefits for electoral commissions, researchers, the media and other users of data.

Seasoned ABC election analyst, Antony Green, brings attention firmly back to the data and its definition as the primary issue, not the technology, and the principles involved in secret ballots as they relate to technological developments.

ACT Electoral Commissioner Phil Green confirms that administrative research efforts encompass IT applications and other areas of need, not just matters linked to political science. Leading us into the brave new world, he ranges across the future of electronic scanning in vote counting; voter-direct input, and smartcard technology applications.

The Future

In summary, if we are to ask ourselves why research is important, then the articles provide an answer along these lines.

Research is a major building block for transparency of process and effectiveness of policy.

4 Tim Glanville, Deputy Australian Electoral Officer for Victoria.

13

Foreword

Provided that it is well-conceived, generally concerned with advancing principles of fairness, and offers either immediate or long term benefits, research can be a powerful tool in supporting confidence in the election process and the legitimacy of the elected body (Hawkey and Davy).

How collaboration is to be supported in the future, a practical matter for discussion, is a more perplexing problem, perversely complicated by the professionalism of administrators and analysts and a profound wish to ensure that whatever is done in the way of collaboration is well supported.

One can only conclude that the development of a more defined collaborative approach is worth pursuing, aided by communication power and effective people networking. Indeed, there is considerable scope to ponder the greater uses to be made of the world wide web environment to facilitate many of the needs raised.

The benefits of the discussion on research in the papers which follow are numerous. The exploration, investigation, and analysis of research issues cover the roles of academics and administrators, analysis of data over time, trends, questioning of practices and processes, the changing environment and the role of technology. The central role of the preservation, access to, and consolidation of research findings (and law cases) are considered. A practical and a profound choice of topics are offered and an agenda for firm collaborative actions and outcomes is generated.

Being responsible for a public Centre that is devoted to the affirmation of democracy, it is an honour to provide the forword for this record of proceedings.

Elizabeth Ho Director, The Hawke Centre University of South Australia

14

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

Colin A. Hughes

Elections have been around for a very long time and they have always required people to run them. Other people have also been around for a long time: those who write about political topics, including elections and sometimes, very rarely, even electoral administration. At the end of the second millenium of the Christian era, we can still usefully go back to just before the beginning of the first millenium, and have a look at what Cicero had to say about s.340 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act (and its State equivalents), the prohibition of canvassing at the entrance to polling places.

Roman electors, who were grouped according to their notional tribes in stockpens on the Field of Mars before they were marched off to vote, complained that they were upset by canvassers yelling at them and intimidating them as they went by. Presumably, though Cicero fails to say so, the more environmentally-conscious among them were concerned that Romes quarries were being exhausted to produce the how-to-vote tablets thrust into the voters hands. A good rule to remember in this game is that very little occurs for the first time.

Ciceros starting principle was that the freedom of the ordinary person to vote as he wishes shall not be interfered with, and he went on to note that Gaius Marius when tribune in 119 BC had introduced a law (the Lex tabellaria) to narrow the gangways and thereby keep other people away from the voters.1 A sound principle and a sensible measure one would have to say. But then Cicero was not only a political philosopher, he was also a politician and a lawyer. Perhaps his other interests kept him closer to earth.

Coming back, nearer to the present in the 18th century, Rousseau2, whose ideas about democracy are still very central to electoral topics, has useful things to say about elections in general and about details like the allocation of electors among constituencies and the choice between open or secret voting. Not long after Australia had been colonised, there were Bentham and the Mills, father and son, writing about electoral reform and in Benthams case a great deal of detail about electoral administration. Item: the title Bentham proposed for the chief administrator of the neutral bureaucratic agency he advocated, the Elections Master-General, has a martial swing to it that does tempt one. Nevertheless, despite such distinguished exceptions, political philosophy for the most part failed to trickle down.

The end of the 19th century must have been an exciting time for electoral administration. Literacy had spread sufficiently for secret voting to be practicable. Close to adult male suffrage was becoming common and the enfranchisement of women was about to start. Mass parties were being formed. And, on the other side of the gap, philosophising about politics was starting to turn into the modern discipline of political science.

Notwithstanding such a favourable environment the gap between theory and practice if anything widens. True, details of electoral law and thus, indirectly, electoral administration can now be found in useful little textbooks written for lawyers and electoral agents by lawyers. But such details were seen by few readers.

1 Cicero, On Government, Penguin, Melbourne, 1993, pp.213-34. 2 J.J. Rousseau, The Social Contract and Discourses, Everyman, London, 1913, pp. 89-100.

15

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

There were exceptions like Charles Seymours Electoral Reform in England and Wales (1915) and (with a junior collaborator, D.P Frairy) his How the World Votes (1918)3. Most writers employed a broad brush and the details were ignored. Not always though. Seymour and Frairy record one episode that should be more widely known.

In France in the 1820s it was required that the lists of electors be published so that omissions from the roll could be challenged:

At times, the prefects would not publish the lists until four oclock on the morning of the day upon which the election would be held. ... At Nancy, the prefect refused to have the names listed in alphabetical order, and placed them on placards seven or eight feet in length in five or six columns. It would take a day to discover whether ones name were omitted and a ladder would be necessary to read the names on the tops of the columns.4

It is useful to be reminded what can happen with politically-appointed electoral administrators, and with drafting which fails to specify timetables and forms with sufficient care. And ingenuity like that shown by the prefect at Nancy deserves to be remembered. Such nuggets can be found from time to time in political history and biographies.

Only very late in the day did the, by then numerous, discipline of political science produce a book that would actually be useful to electoral administrators. Inevitably it was written in the United States where most of the worlds political scientists then worked, and where the fragmentation and partial privatisation of electoral administration justified such a book.

Joseph P. Harris got his doctorate at Chicago, then the most practical school of political science in existence - as did Louise Overacker who wrote the first substantial book on Australian political parties. Whilst a graduate student he became interested in voting machines. Exceptionally, his interest was then applied. He developed and sold one model (the basis for the Votomatic punch-card system), invested the proceeds wisely, and was able to give a substantial endowment to his last university.5

Harris began his teaching career at two universities with a focus on social questions and practical affairs, Wisconsin and Washington. In 1929 the Brookings Institution, one of the earliest and most productive of the American foundations which link public affairs and academia, published his book on voter registration. In 1934 Brookings published his more comprehensive study of election administration in the United States which remains today a mine of information and helpful suggestions.6

To produce that one exception, Joe Harris and his book, you needed universities with a practical bent in the social sciences, wealthy foundations which sought to promote good policies, and an individual who was ready to assemble practical knowledge and then write it down. It is a rare mixture.

Election Administrations publication was a false dawn. Harris wrote about Congress for the rest of his academic career and worked in military government and with United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) when he was away from academic life. To the best of my

3 C. Seymour, Electoral Reform in England and Wales: The Development and Operation of the Parliamentary Franchise 1832-1885, Oxford University Press, London, 1915 [reprinted Archon Book, Hampden, CN, 1970]; C. Seymour and D.P. Frairy, How the World Votes: The Story of Democratic Development in Elections 2v, C.A. Nichols, Springfield, MA, 1918.

4 Seymour and Frairy, op.cit., v.1, p. 336. 5 Joe Harris Electoral Tinkering Funds, Public Affairs Report (Institute of Governmental Studies, University of

California at Berkeley), July 1995, p.16. 6 J.P. Harris, Election Administration in the United States, Brookings Institution, Washington, 1934.

16

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

knowledge, no one sought to follow in his footsteps and write another book about electoral administration, even in the United States where circumstances were so much more supportive.

After the Second World War things ought to have got better. Enthusiasm for quantification in order to make political science more scientific, and for studying actual behaviour (rather than formal rules) for similar reasons, pushed an increasing number of political scientists into the study of elections and electoral behaviour. Once a critical mass had been reached, the publishability of that sort of research added career motivation to disciplinary fashion. The professionalisation of politicians and those in associated trades like pollsters and campaign managers simultaneously directed many practitioners towards the same subjects.

Nevertheless a gap remained as evidenced by two journals, each useful in its own way. Election Administration Reports (begun about 1970), although produced by an academic, Richard Smolka is, as it says, a newsletter for election officials. In contrast, Electoral Studies (started in 1982) is wholly academic political science, a specialized journal which deals with elections. Its articles are about voting and voting change, the course and the outcome of national elections, campaigning and its legal restraints, the nature of electoral systems and their impact upon parties, and the meaning of elections in democratic theory.7 By the current (March 2000) number, esoteric statistics have completely taken over. The two journals began and have remained administrators cheese and academics chalk.

Next in this historical survey, the international symposium at Copenhagen arranged by Tokai University in 1991 can be noted. Its proceedings were subsequently published in the Japanese Journal of Behavioral and Social Sciences under the promising title, Election Administration in a Comparative Perspective. The symposiums principal organiser, Rei Shiratori, explained that it was being held because:

the importance of election administration has not been fully appreciated by academic scholars in the past. Specialists of election studies have done an enormous amount of research work on the analysis of election results, voting behavior of the electorate and the function of party and party systems, but they have neglected the fact that election administration was one of the decisive factors in successfully holding democratic elections in all societies. Like candidate selection processes, election administrations have never been paid full attention by scholars.8

Five of its twelve papers included the words election administration in their titles, and another two had administering and administrative. The majority of those attending held academic posts, but quite a few had been closer to the action as electoral advisers and observers, and some even had experience of administrative responsibilities in the electoral sphere.

Another false dawn. When, a few years later, the International Political Science Review devoted a special number to what it called the politics of electoral reform, the editors opening sentence read:

Countries commonly introduce minor changes to the legal and procedural regulation of elections, such as revisions of constituency boundaries or campaign finance rules.9

And that was the last heard of such matters. The rest was about how politicians chose a voting system.

7 Editorial, Electoral Studies, vol. 1 no. 1, p.2. 8 R. Shiratori, Preface: Election Administration - New Dimensions in Electoral Studies, Journal of Behavioral and

Social Sciences, vol. 37, p.i. 9 P. Norris, Introduction: The Politics of Electoral Reform, International Political Science Review, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 3.

17

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

But by the early 90s a new phenomenon had begun to emerge. Bodies predominantly nonacademic and administrator-oriented were edging into the gap between practice and theory from the practitioners side. Admittedly they had a special concentration, on some classes of country rather than others. But they were doing a lot and doing it quickly.

First into the field was the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), a private, nonprofit foundation founded in Washington in 1987. Its newsletter, begun in 1990 and called Elections Today since 1993, is closer to Election Administration Reports than to Electoral Studies. It is certainly activist in orientation rather than academic. It arranges seminars and colloquia which are attended primarily by administrators, and promotes regional associations of administrators to further the exchange of information among them. It publishes manuals and handbooks for the same public.

IFES was started with financial assistance from the Office of Democratic Initiatives in the US Agency for International Development, though it also has drawn resources from private foundations. The driving force behind this new development was the deliberate promotion of democracy by a number of governments in what used to be called the Free World and the identification of free and fair elections as either the central element in that strategy or else one of two with competitive parties. More of that part of its history has been traced by Richard Soudriette.10

A significant literature which combines detail about electoral administration with larger questions about the introduction and maintenance of democratic government has emerged. The title of one very recent collaborative volume sums it up nicely by combining post-conflict elections, democratization and international assistance. Another collection interestingly brackets electoral administration with judicial systems, corruption control and central banks as agencies of restraint.11 The latter point is worth thinking about.

Following IFES in time is the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA, or often just IDEA), a small international agency within the UN family, founded in Stockholm in 1995 with originally 14 member states, Australia being one. Swedens government has provided the lions share of its resources in keeping with their tradition of overseas aid.

Some of IDEAs electoral publications are near to the academic side of the gap. Thus Reynolds and Reillys Handbook of Electoral System Design and Karams Women in Parliament sit comfortably on the shelf (or shelves nowadays) devoted to works written by academics on those topics.12 But other, shorter publications which contain codes of conduct for various classes of persons and organisations in the electoral administration field are clearly further away in the direction of administrators.

Third and finally, the involvement of various organs of the United Nations in the field of electoral assistance should be mentioned, a more complicated story than can be recounted at this point, and of regional agencies connected with their local sub-global associations eg in Latin America.

In 1991 at Copenhagen it was still correct to lament the limited effort given to the study of electoral administration. But by 1999 it is possible to point with pride to a truly major achievement of the three bodies just named, IFES, IDEA and the UN. The ACE project, embodied in CD-ROM and

10 R. Soudriette, IFES: Ten Years of Building Democracy, Elections Today, vol. 7, no. 3, p.5. 11 K. Kumar, (ed.) Postconflict Elections, Democratization, and International Assistance, Lynne Rienner, Boulder, CO,

1998; A. Schedler, L. Diamond and M.F. Plattner, (eds.) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies, Lynne Rienner, Boulder, CO, 1999.

12 A. Reynolds and B. Reilly, (eds.) The International IDEA Handbook of Electoral System Design, International IDEA, Stockholm, 1997; A. Karam, (ed.) Women in Parliament: Beyond Numbers, International IDEA, Stockholm, 1998.

18

http:topics.12http:restraint.11http:Soudriette.10

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

Website, gives both administrators and academics access to what can only be described as a major on-going encyclopaedia of electoral administration.

Supporting that spectacular monument are numerous reports, studies, seminar and conference papers, and networks, by which information, best practices, analyses of failures and successes have become known to a small but worldwide readership of election administrators though, it is feared, to only a few academics. The one complaint that can be made is that most of this work has been directed to conversion of the heathen, to carrying the gospel of free and fair elections to parts of the world which never, or hardly ever, knew them.

Australia, and quite a few of those here today share the credit for this, made a considerable contribution to this burgeoning body of material, primarily as a donor, very rarely as a beneficiary.

It is now time to ask two questions. What is the purpose of research? What might academics have to offer administrators and what might administrators have to offer academics? To the first question, the purpose of research, three separable answers are suggested. To do ones own job better by knowing and understanding information that was not previously available. To inform influentials (MPs and party apparatchiks, journalists, and even non-headquarters electoral officials) so they understand a lot more about what is going on. And, third, to inform the public, the electors, so that they understand a few basic things about what is going on.

A quick answer to the second question might be that academics are better placed to ask politically sensitive questions which may show what influences outcomes and were, though not necessarily any longer, more likely to look overseas or back in time for comparative evidence. Administrators are more ready to utilise aggregate data - and better placed to create it - and experience has given them sounder judgment with which to read often inadequate evidence.

There are undeniably problems when administrators undertake research. Research may end up attributing causes, but to find that the shifting level of support in a particular electoral district is caused by demographic change rather than the heroic efforts of the incumbent may be tactless. Attention given to new phenomena, the rise of Hansonism say, is likely to antagonise those being examined who are usually unaccustomed to such attention and also the previous principal actors who believe the problem will go away sooner if nobody says anything. Research on the outcomes of alternative electoral systems may carry suggestions that one lot have benefited from some arrangement or other, and that too can be seen as unwelcome and improper intervention in partisan affairs.

It should be added that the existence of a standing parliamentary committee charged with electoral matters is a very useful device for reducing those and other risks of research, and such a committee can also, indirectly, come up with useful ideas for research.

There are now a great many runs on the board. Annual Reports and occasional reports about technical matters like informal voting now contribute significantly, if discreetly, to the body of research. Three possible areas where research by administrators ought not to offend too much can be mentioned. The first might be called gross demography, the enormous volume of roll transactions. It is unlikely if many people outside the electoral sphere appreciate the extent of movement, and the potential for change it involves. The second is the extent of relative stability, at

19

Electoral Research And Administration: A Brief History

the polling booth level and even when gross numbers are altering rapidly. And third, again using polling booth data now there has been some experience of distributing preferences at the polling booth, seeing how uniformly preferences move within a field.

For the academics, there are different difficulties. It is annoying that over many years, the academic system has been loaded against applied work. Unless financial arrangements have recently changed, an article in an overseas journal which is refereed (and usually needs to begin with 20% of the words going to explain where Australia is) trumps an article in a local journal which isnt refereed but can take detail, whilst a submission to a royal commission or a parliamentary committee scores only as community service if at all. Australia is so expensively distant from the North Atlantic catchment area, where most of the action is, that our political scientists havent been that much involved in the specialist networks. There have been exceptions though - Ernie Chaples in campaign finance for one, Marian Sawer and Marian Simms in women and elections for another.

Finally it should be mentioned that academic lawyers have played a very small part in electoral research, apart from a few articles (sometimes misconceived it might be said). Griffith Law Review had a special number in 1998 whose editor attributed its Cinderella status to the small number of interested persons - electoral administrators, party apparatchiks and a few practitioners who had links with parties and were used to advise and conduct the occasional bit of litigation.13

13 G. Orr, Editorial: Special Edition on Electoral Regulation and Representation, Griffith Law Review, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 168-73.

20

http:litigation.13

THE RESEARCH CORE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

21

1

The Use Of Electoral Data For Research Into The Australian Political System

Campbell Sharman1

Running elections has not exactly become a major industry, but the regulation of an increasing range of activities relating to elections and the role of political parties has led to the growth of government agencies responsible for electoral matters. This paper, however, is concerned with the most longstanding concerns of those who run elections, the recording of votes and the determination of who has won representation. The paper deals with some initial issues about the role of elections and electoral agencies in the political process, moves to an examination of the accessibility of electoral information and the way it is presented in terms of its use by the general public and by researchers, and concludes with a brief survey of a project which uses long run data on elections and representation to study the evolution of the Australian political system.

The Place Of Elections And The Role Of Electoral Agencies

Our system of representative democracy requires much more than holding free, open and competitive elections for public office. It rests on a belief in the importance of the rule of law, the need to limit the powers of government, and a host of other values associated with freedom of speech, freedom of association and tolerance for those who hold differing opinions. This being said, elections do play a critical role in the operation of democratic government. Not only do they provide the component of popular representation in government which is the key to representative democracy, but they permit that most important of operations, the dismissal of one set of government officials and their replacement with another. This ability to change regime through an orderly procedure involving popular choice is the hallmark of democratic government.

What happens as a consequence of regular elections is as important as the results of the elections themselves. The possibility of losing office creates the apprehension in elected officials necessary for them to be responsive to our preferences. In addition, it generates the conditions for competitive politics in which rival groups strive to enjoy the fruits of office and to implement differing views of the public interest.

All this explains why it is vital that elections are conducted fairly and efficiently. Australia has a long history of innovation in the administration of elections and of experimentation with the use of electoral rules to ensure fairness in representation.2 Some would say that the Australian concern with fairness has reached the point of obsession and that contesting views of what is fair have become a battleground for partisan advantage.3 Compulsory voting,4 block voting, the single member district, and state funding of political parties can all be supported or attacked on grounds of fairness depending on ones assumptions about what the electoral system should be designed to achieve.

1 csharman@cyllene.uwa.edu.au. 2 Surveys of Australian electoral practices include Bennett (1996), Goot (1985), Jaensch (1995) and Wright (1980). 3 Note the comments by Elkins (1992). 4 There has been a resurgence in interest in this topic; note Mackerras and McAllister (1999), Farrow (1998), Green

(1998) and Johns (1998).

22

The Use Of Electoral Data For Research Into The Australian Political System

The result is that the task of those who administer the electoral process has become highly complex and remains politically sensitive. A large body of electoral law now regulates the maintenance of the electoral roll, the registration of candidates and political parties, and the conduct of electoral campaigns, quite apart from the way in which votes are cast and counted. Organizing a general election is a major undertaking involving hundreds and perhaps thousands of officials, both permanent and temporary. There is an increasing demand for speed in the posting of results, and expectations that the latest technology will be used to display the results, including near instantaneous display on the internet. On top of this, a scrupulous observation of the rules is expected together with a complete absence of any partisan bias on the part of those administering the electoral process.

This means that government agencies responsible for running elections in Australia have become large and expensive undertakings with obligations which often run far b