Page 862 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 April 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Eighteen per cent said "Yes"; 77 per cent, "No"; 2 per cent, "Not concerned about the issue"; 2 per cent, "Not enough information". As the Liberal Party have an amendment before the house not to allow public funding, I will agree with that one. We asked:
Should the term of the next ACT Legislative Assembly be either: 2 years? 3 years? 4 years?
The results were 29 per cent for two years, 34 per cent for three years and 32 per cent for four years. Over 60 per cent want either two years or three years. Because of that, I will agree with the three-year proposal that has already been agreed upon by members of the house.
We asked other questions concerning the security of voting. (Extension of time granted) This is the next question:
To restrict the possibility of people voting at more than one polling booth should voters be required to cast a postal vote (sealed in an envelope with the person's name and address on the outside and with confidentiality preserved when opening) unless they vote at the polling booth nearest their home?
Fifty-five per cent said "Yes"; 33 per cent said "No"; 6 per cent said "Not concerned"; 6 per cent said "Not enough information". I will move an amendment later on so that people will vote at the polling booth nearest their home. I will bring that up in the detail stage. Another question was:
When an elector votes, should they mark the ballot paper with a: Pen? Pencil?
I thought the result was interesting. Eighty-five per cent said "Pen"; 7 per cent said "Pencil". Our final question was:
Should voters be required to show proof of identification and address, (eg, driver's licence, phone or electricity account, etc) at the polling booth?
Sixty-six per cent said "Yes"; 32 per cent, "No". I will also be introducing an amendment in the detail stage to require that voters at the polling booth show evidence of their identification and address. I will talk about that in the detail stage. Another vital question was:
Should there be voting tickets for parties, groups and independents? (a voter can mark one square only to vote for the list of candidates as registered by the party, group or independent).
The result was 54 per cent "Yes", 28 per cent "No", 8 per cent "Not concerned" and 10 per cent "Not enough information". Because of the referendum result, notwithstanding that I said that the referendum was a fraud, I do not propose to vote for that. But it highlights that there were not fair choices in the referendum in 1992.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .