Voter ID bill may discourage turnout and no evidence it will prevent fraud, committee says
The Coalition’s voter ID bill may discourage people from voting and “no evidence” has been provided regarding how it could prevent fraud, a parliamentary committee has warned.
The joint committee on human rights, chaired by Nationals MP Anne Webster, issued the warning in a report on Wednesday. It called on the special minister of state, Ben Morton, to explain how the bill would be effective and its impact on vulnerable groups.
If the voter integrity bill was passed, Australians would be asked to show photo or non-photo identification in order to vote.
People unable to show ID could get another registered voter to vouch for them or cast a declaration vote – after providing their date of birth and signature – as a fallback.
The controversial bill was introduced in the October sittings of parliament, prompting fears it could be pushed through ahead of the 2022 election with the support of One Nation, which has claimed credit for it, and Centre Alliance, which has supported it in principle but is yet to decide its position.
The committee noted the bill could limit the right to participate in public affairs “if a person is unable to cast a vote … or potentially if there is a lower voter turnout because of a perception that identification is required to vote”.
It suggested the bill could also limit “the right to equality and non-discrimination” as requiring proof of identity “may have a disproportionate impact on particular groups”, including homeless people or Indigenous Australians in remote communities.
The committee said “protecting against voter fraud” may be a legitimate objective, but the government had not explained “why the current laws are insufficient … and why the measures address a pressing and substantial concern”.
The Coalition majority on the joint standing committee on electoral matters has recommended voter ID in reviews of the 2013, 2016 and 2019 elections.
But the human rights committee noted the Australian Electoral Commission had found instances of voter fraud were “vanishingly small”.
The committee said that “no evidence has been provided as to how the measure will protect against voter fraud, and therefore increase public confidence in the electoral system”.
“It is also not clear how voter identification requirements would be able to prevent people from voting multiple times at different locations.”
The committee said it was “not clear if it may in fact reduce public confidence in the electoral system and discourage some voters from voting because of the perception that they cannot vote if they do not possess adequate identification documents”.
Although the committee praised safeguards including the declaration vote, it said it was “unclear” if this option would be accessible for all if further information such as a driver’s licence or passport number was required.
The committee asked Morton to provide further information about why the bill is necessary, how it would be effective, whether any modelling on turnout has been conducted, its impact on vulnerable groups, and consideration of alternatives.
Nevertheless, the committee said it had “not yet formed a concluded view”.
Webster told Guardian Australia her personal view was the bill contained enough safeguards and she supported it because “fraudulent behaviour should be stopped”.
Labor and the Greens, who have five members on the 10-member committee, both oppose the bill.
The University of Sydney’s Prof Anne Twomey has warned the bill could be challenged in court as a disproportionate measure that excludes people from voting.