Fair enough, Rhian.

>>If I was to attempt electoral fraud using multiple votes, I’d pick someone else’s name not my own.<<

But wouldn't the Electoral Commission then be able to subtract the multiple votes?

Seems a no-brainer to me.

Hi Pericles
I think Herbert’s point is that these ballot papers would not be identified and removed from the count, so the fraud would stand

Yes, you are quite right Pericles. There are a number of instances of multiple voting in every election which occur either because people forget they voted and do it again, or because the electoral officer inadvertently rules through the wrong name.

It hardly ever happens because of deliberate fraud. No major political party is stupid enough to try to do that.

It would depend how close the election was as to what the electoral commission would in reality do about those multiple votes. If it were so close that they gave grounds to a challenge then you may well have a new election. Otherwise people get please explains and nothing happens.

There have been some fraudulent enrolments in Australia, but it more often than not has been to do with internal machinations in the ALP - see the case of Karen Ermine and the Shepherdson Inquiry.

Thanks for the insight Graham. On the evidence, then, electoral fraud under the present rules is a relatively minor issue in Australia.

As far as online voting is concerned, I really cannot see the likelihood of fraud being reduced through widespread use of the Internet. While there are legions of script kiddies out there who would find elections the perfect target for their exploits, the act of having to physically turn up - for the most part - at an election booth, is in itself a substantial prophylactic against manipulation of the outcome.

In the present set-up, I would imagine that there is far more scope for fraud in the area of postal voting, where the presentation of election-time credentials is also accomplished remotely.

And while I am perfectly comfortable to provide the necessary authentication to my Bank, on the basis that we have a mutual interest in keeping me secure, there isn't the same motivation visible from the government side.

That was not my principal concern about the article, though. Sure, technology is "available" to put in place the framework for identifying the next government ahead of the Election date.

But I still question whether this is a sensible move.

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

Not sure I entirely agree Graham.

Having seen the length to which people go to have themselves appear in the catchment area of desirable public schools –and the ease with which they do it .

I would have thought it not too difficult a task to temporarily stack a marginal electorate with new enrolees – you’d only need a handful of addresses , who would know/check. And if each voted multiple times, there goes your seat.

I don’t see it as likely to come from the major parties, it’d more likely be something an advocacy group with a grudge would pull off.

For example: It would be interesting to peruse the number and names of new enrolees to Bennelong leading up to election 2007 and compare it to the number who didn’t show in 2010 , after Howard was ousted.