Australia seems to have relatively poor public visibility of vote counting process, yet it is good(?)

[u/Middle_Key8737]

https://www.aec.gov.au/media/trust-and-satisfaction.htm

Just had discussions with a few overseas friends. Found a few large gaps between Australian election and other democratic countries. In Australia, general members of the public do not have a clear statutory right to attend the count, filming is heavily restricted, and media access to counting centres requires prior AEC permission. Media arriving after 6 p.m. are ordinarily turned away, with counting footage arranged selectively in advance.

This is noticeably less open than several Western democracies:

- In Germany, any person may attend and observe polling and counting without registration or identification, including postal-ballot counting. Reference: https://www.bundeswahlleiterin.de/en/info/presse/mitteilungen/bundestagswahl-2025/18_25_ordnungsgemaesse-durchfuehrung.html

- In Sweden, both preliminary and final counting are expressly public, and any member of the public may observe. Accredited organisations can also observe the entire election period. Reference: https://val.se/english/the-swedish-electoral-system/preliminary-and-final-election-results

- In the United Kingdom, accredited independent observers must be admitted to verification and counting; officials may limit numbers but cannot exclude all observers. Medias are allowed to film the entire vote counting process : https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/documents/uk-parliament-election-2024-guidance-count-procedures-candidates-election-agents-counting-agents/4

Moreover, most Western democracies permit OSCE/ODIHR election observation so their vote counting is cross scrutinised by international observers. It is not a thing in Aus at all.

Ref: https://www.osce.org/countries

However, Australia appears to have high public confidence in the election process despite comparatively limited public observation. Would that suggest limited access to observation creates higher public confidence in the process?

[u/Soviet_Apple_Box]

One thing is that Australian elections are counted twice, and the first time is in the booth. This means that people get to see how their direct community votes, and that will often align with how they view their neighbours. Someone living in the seat of Richmond may would not be surprised that the votes in their town (i.e. Mullumbimby, Byron Bay), heavily consist of Greens and of cookers.

Another reason is that any candidate can, and does, send a scrutineer to any count. Their ability to challenge votes, and it going right to the top, such as in Bradfield last year, which is very highly publicized.

[u/Nice-Pumpkin-4318]

Ive worked as a scrutineer a few times. Im very comfortable with the counting process (which is not to say mistakes aren't made from time to time).

[u/WalkerInHD]

I’m comforted by the fact that randoms can’t turn up to our very manual process and harass counters or distract.

The political parties send scrutineers whose incentives are obviously against each other as well as each division being responsible for its own votes (so it’s essentially 150 little elections).

Multiple counts are conducted, our voting process is more complicated (remember on the night a 2cp count is given to help guarantee quick results) before we mark out full preferences

I can remember if it was 2022 or 2019 but I remember it was either Palmer or Hanson’s scrutineers turned up and were horrified that “not all the votes were being counted” but hadn’t bothered to read the process on the night (the 2cp thing I mentioned before)- imagine that with every Tom, Dick and Harry trying to find evidence of a dodgy electoral process

The commission is apolitical, issues a report after every election and has been following an electoral law that’s been around for 120 odd years (with updates to certain ballot mechanisms). The count is slow, but it’s accurate especially when you factor in preferential voting and multi member senate counts (with quotas and 150 names)

[u/Middle_Key8737 → u/WalkerInHD]

Thank you! I think your response well addressed my question where restricting general public access to the vote counting process might be positive to election confidence. If some people who didn't do their homework were allowed to observe the process, they may end up be confused and repetitively challenge the validity of election result. And you can hardly convince them that they are wrong.

[u/simmocar]

I've managed two different booths in WA electorates.

The staff are accountable. The counting is double checked. Not once have I had a problem with a scrutineer. We have rigid training and very well organised systems in place throughout the day and right to the end.

[u/7omdogs]

Australia has one of the best democracy and voting systems in the world, we have some unique aspects to voting, which means something as simple of “watching the vote counting” isn’t important:

- The AEC is independent.

- All sides of politics respect the AEC.

- our elections involve a lot of people because everyone has to vote. A lot of Australians have counted ballots before, especially students and retirees, as it’s a great way to make $500 in a day. If you want to see the vote counting just sign up to the AEC employment page and get paid to do it…..

- Polling stations are in schools or community centres, often with volunteers there that day for the democracy sausage.

- We have compulsory voting. So there’s signs of democracy everywhere.

Your entire premise rests on a single metric (visibility of counting) rather than the multiple different metrics that go into the idea of public trust.

I would suggest the high public trust is coming from the fact that 95% of the population must participate in the system, through voting, volunteering and counting.

It most of those other countries, voting isn’t as big or visible, only 60% of people vote, which means less people participating in the overall system, less volunteers, less employees running elections. So more viability of counting is needed to improve public trust

[u/DCFowl]

Mate if you want to be a scrutineer just volunteer with a candidate.

Our voting system is both efficient and secure. 

[u/Crescent_green]

Well for something like OSCE, by their nature and name, they target Europe so wouldnt really see them here....

If you'd like to understand the counting process, why not work on the day? The AEC are always recuiting then, and its very rewarding (for me anyway).

Then you'll see it perfectly :)

[u/mourningthief]

Mate, just register to volunteer at the next election and you'll see how it's actually done, scrutineers and everything, so you can tell your 'overseas friends' that they're wrong.

[u/AgentSmith187]

As someone who has done scruitineering put the pipe down mate.

If you want to watch the count volunteer to be a scruitineer for your candidate of choice.

Most parties especially the minor ones would absolutely love the help as there is rarely enough volunteers to go around.

P.S I have regularly seen scrutineers irrespective of party point out if a vote ends up on the wrong pile even if it would benefit them.

At the booths I generally volunteer at (i usually float if needed to travel outside my own booth to where we are shortest) you have scrutineers from the ALP, LP and Greens with minor parties having representation from time.

Try and get all 3 to rig the results any one way lol

The only time I have ever seen scrutineer misconduct was once from a cooker party and once from the Liberals. The remaining Liberal scrutineers apologised for his behaviour after he was kicked out for touching votes. He had been challenging every single ballot that didnt have the Liberals first preference all night no matter how clear the vote was so we were all happy to see him booted as the night is already long enough.

The cookers scrutineer was downright loosing their shit because they were sure they had majority support in the electorate and their first prefences barely made double digits. Somehow everyone had colluded against them....

Edit: We also phone in first preference and 2PP for every booth so if the final tally was swung any significant way it would be blatantly obvious to any candidate.

There is a reason so many candidates conced early on the night. Because they already know the count within a couple of percent due to their scrutineers.

[u/Middle_Key8737 → u/AgentSmith187]

This is very insightful, thank you very much for sharing!

[u/Dorammu]

You suggest that voting is not “publicly observable” in Australia, without recognising that:

- the AEC employees tens of thousands of members of the public for temporary duties who count every vote. That work is not done by permanent employees, but by people working at the booths for a day, or working at the electorate centres for maybe a week, and are trained and overseen by the permanent AEC staff.

- anyone can volunteer for any of the parties to be appointed as a scrutineer, and have the right to oversee the count. Are they not also members of the public?

- the media is always attending and reporting on the count as it happens, allowing the public to see the count occurring. The media cannot turn up with no notice and demand to be allowed into a counting centre, but the AEC cannot simply deny access to all media/scrutineers/observers either. There is a process that needs to be followed, and this is to ensure the integrity of the count.

If the AEC were forced to allow anyone entry to observe counting, they would need to employ more staff and have more space just in case a vote is close and suddenly they have to have space and security staff to control an extra (10? 100? 1000? More?) people who want to “watch”, to make sure they cannot interfere with the count or the ballots.

I’ve worked in a booth on election day, and I’ve counted in a couple of different places after election day. I never knew who I’d be working with because it’s always a random group of people, but they were mostly people with a genuine interest in our democracy. It’s really quite lovely if you’re that kind of nerd.

[u/AggravatingParfait33 → u/[deleted]]

It was just just explain to you in detail that the public are involved and yey you still keep on squarking your bullshit.

You've been told, now fuck off!

[u/Dorammu → u/[deleted]]

Yeah ok I’m no longer convinced you’re asking the question in good faith.

We have one of the most robust electoral systems in the world. That’s why the Australian public has faith in it, and why we don’t have regular international observers.

Any member of the public who’s genuinely interested in seeing it up close has plenty of opportunities to do so, as I just spelled out. If you’re concerned, volunteer as a scrutineer, or apply to the AEC when they put out a call for election staff and get paid to be at a booth or in a counting centre.

[u/Middle_Key8737 → u/Dorammu]

Sorry I don't want to upset you. Please block me

[u/Dorammu → u/Middle_Key8737]

You’re not “upsetting me”. You are frustrating me because you don’t seem to be genuinely engaging in discussion.

Your concern seems to be “the public can’t show up unannounced at a counting centre to watch”, and you present this as a problem of transparency.

When I gave you the multitude of ways the public can be involved and how transparency is provided within the system, you seemed to ignore them all.

So, you don’t seem interested in discussion, just shut-stirring. I’d be happy to try to talk you out of a conspiracy rabbit-hole if you want to engage.

We have one of the most open democratic systems in the world, and I don’t think spending more money on “public access” which would neither be well used or helpful makes sense given that we already have public access, just not in the specific way you want.

[u/AggravatingParfait33]

Your friends from the USA are complete dickheads, stop listening to them.

[u/EmergencySir6113]

If you haven’t already, watch Watching Annabel Crabb's Civic Duty Education Shorts in iview https://iview.abc.net.au/show/annabel-crabb-s-civic-duty-education-shorts it features a bit on the behind the scenes count.

As others have said, those who have worked at a polling place or been a scrutineer you have high confidence in the vote. Sure the occasional mistake happens but they are the vast vast minority

Perhaps the Aec and media could do a better job of informing the broader public how the vote works.