The bill amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 to ensure postal vote application forms may only be submitted directly to the Australian Electoral Commission by voters themselves, prohibiting political parties and candidates from collecting or forwarding applications on behalf of electors.
This reform responds to rising postal voting rates and addresses widespread privacy and trust concerns by preventing parties and candidates from harvesting personal data through unsolicited postal vote application packs.
The Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Protecting Voters) Bill 2025 implements recommendation 21 of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters by amending Part XV of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. It replaces and clarifies section 184 to require that postal vote applications (PVAs) may only be delivered by electors to the Australian Electoral Commission at its nominated addresses. The bill expressly prohibits political parties, candidates, agents or any third party from distributing unsolicited PVAs or from collecting, recording, using or forwarding PVAs on behalf of voters.
Key changes include:
The bill has no net financial impact, and the Attorney-General’s Department certifies that it is compatible with the implied freedom of political communication under the Constitution.
Protecting electoral integrity and trust. Postal voting now accounts for over 13% of all votes, yet current practices allow parties and candidates to intercept and harvest electors’ personal information under the guise of forwarding applications to the AEC. By closing this loophole, the bill removes an avenue for data-harvesting and eliminates confusion about where applications go, thereby preserving confidence in the system.
Upholding privacy rights. International and domestic privacy norms guard against unauthorized collection and use of personal data. This measure aligns Australia’s electoral framework with the right to privacy, ensuring that sensitive information (name, address, email, security questions) is submitted only to the independent electoral authority.
Simplicity and minimal burden. The amendment imposes no new costs on voters or the AEC. It merely restores a clear, uniform process—electors send their own applications—while maintaining existing channels for assistance (e.g., AEC offices or approved carers) [Judgment].
Risk of reduced accessibility. Many elderly, remote or mobility-impaired voters rely on party-distributed postal vote application packs to avoid travelling to post offices or AEC offices. Banning this practice without providing an equivalent, proactive AEC outreach could unintentionally disenfranchise those who cannot easily request forms themselves [Judgment].
Administrative duplication and confusion. Electors accustomed to returning pre-packaged forms to a local “processing centre” may overlook the new requirement, leading to increased invalid or late applications and delays in ballot dispatch. This could undermine the very electoral participation the bill seeks to protect.
Overly broad prohibition. Rather than a total ban, clearer labelling requirements on party-distributed PVAs or mandatory disclaimers might achieve the same transparency goal with fewer side effects. A measured regulatory approach could balance privacy concerns against the practical needs of vulnerable voters.
2025-11-03
House of Representatives
Before House of Representatives
Unspecified
Unspecified
Democratic Institutions, Civics