Missing Ballots Recovered! (Barton)

NO! Not again!?

One whole box.... missing for days... recovered...intact!

It might be natural enough to think that once the votes are in and counted the ballot papers matter little? Not so! Far from it. Very far!

The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) evidently did not have perfect transport operational systems in place during the election period.

What else than system failure lies behind the Hurstville (Barton Division) ballot paper fiasco:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-14/aec-investigating-after-ballot-papers-missing-barton-sydney/105286812       

Curiously, the AEC has since released a statement on this: 

https://www.aec.gov.au/media/2025/05-14.htm (extract below)

This story of (temporarily) “lost” ballots was in the news and has been in the AEC media release.

According to the AEC data, there were 1,867 used ballot papers in the scrutiny at Hurstville polling place.

Those ballots were packaged for delivery to a “materials return hub” that night and ultimately to “Out-posted Centre”. There were two boxes for the House and 5 for the Senate.

The time for recount at the Out-posted centre arrived but it could not happen - Hurstville ballots were missing! It transpired that one box of House ballots was still in the possession of the Saturday night delivery driver. See the AEC Media release. It appears the “AEC transport officer” was unconcerned and not easy to contact. No explanation appears to have been given on why that officer acted in such an extraordinary way. (I presume that officer was a temporary official for the election.)

"inadvertently maintained possession...  challenges in communicating...  indifferent to the implications and our serious concerns"

Really? The happening was unique. No other transport delivery failed in such a (spectacular) manner.  The percentage (temporary) failure then, was tiny. A very large number were successful - perhaps all the rest? On "Election Day" 2025, there were 6,630 polling locations in use. So that probably means something like 6,629 transport and delivery arrangements worked as intended! The one (temporary) failure does rather stand out. (However, I could unkindly refer to the 2013 WA Senate fiasco, when 1,375 ballots were quite disappeared..)

The AEC Report on Election 2025 does not list the position of "transport officer". It does list "Security Assistant (Return of Materials)", with the position description: "Supports the end-of-day tasks in a polling location and is responsible for returning election material to the counting centre or other locations once polling activities are finalised". That sounds eminently sensible and workable. Perhaps that is the worker concerned at Hurstville?

"election material" is a broad term - does it cover, in addition to used ballot papers, the unused, the Absent votes, the unused stationery,  the essential accounting returns, performance of service return, all written records, rolls (paper and electronic), lists of streets, etc? (The media release mentions only 7 boxes of ballot papers.) That is an unknown question.

HOWEVER, surely the AEC has a delivery note, or some such, signed by driver and supervisor?

Surely the accountable items delivered to the hub were receipted?

Surely any discrepancy would be noted? Surely?

Surely payment for service depended on certified performance of service?

That is one set of questions.

However, missing from the “soft” self-exonerating AEC media release (see below) there is no mention of time of day or specifics. Nor was the official’s hours of duty mentioned.

Had there been a lengthy delay at Hurstville polling place? Even if paid, was the "transport officer" just waiting, waiting, waiting?

Was it VERY late at night after a VERY long and demanding day? (The AEC would know the times at which the counts were reported.)

Was the Hurstville arrangement unreasonable?

Was the Hurstville scrutiny and pack operation less than optimally managed?

How many “overtime” hours were paid at Hurstville?

Did the "transport officer" get paid, even before the missing box was "found" and processed?

Do the AEC mandated systems need adjustment or change? Perhaps the JSCEM might get answers to these questions. I hope so.

From the AEC Media Release 14/05/25

On polling night, all votes were counted in the Hurstville polling place (Division of Barton) in the presence of candidate-appointed scrutineers with all results reported onto the AEC’s tally room in real time. As per normal practice in all 7000 polling places, the ballot papers were securely packaged in the presence of scrutineers with an AEC transport officer collecting seven ballot paper transport containers (five Senate and two House of Representatives) from the Officer in Charge of the polling place for delivery to a materials return hub and then on to our Out-posted Centre (counting centre) to await further processing.

In the days following polling night, the AEC undertakes fresh scrutiny (the mandatory second count of all House of Representative ballot papers) - which begins on the Tuesday. When AEC staff got to the point of conducting fresh scrutiny for the Hurstville polling place, they were initially unable to proceed. The AEC’s tracking processes for ballot paper transport containers identified that one of the two House of Representatives containers for the Hurstville polling place was not returned to the central counting centre it should have been. All other six transport containers for the polling place were accounted for.

The AEC exhausted numerous avenues of inquiry, ascertaining that the authorised transport officer inadvertently maintained possession of the single missing container. It was recovered from the transport officer fully intact, with all uniquely coded security seals unbroken, and without any damage.  All ballot papers were still in the recovered ballot paper transport container and were promptly returned to the counting centre and have undergone fresh scrutiny. The fresh scrutiny count matched the initial count and the election in the Division of Barton was unaffected by this incident.

This shouldn’t have occurred, and the AEC is deeply concerned that on this single occasion our process did not prevent the issue on polling night when ballot papers were initially returned. However, the further layers of ballot paper tracking processes in place for many elections did ultimately identify the issue and help rectify the situation. Nonetheless, work is already underway to further investigate this incident to understand what, if any, elements of the return of materials process need to be changed for future elections.

While respecting the privacy of the individual concerned the AEC did experience a number of challenges in communicating with this person as we explored all possible avenues of inquiry. We are of the view, with evidence available to us at this time, that the transport officer inadvertently overlooked the return of the transport container and was indifferent to the implications and our serious concerns. This does not appear to be a deliberate act. 

Perhaps the training or the paperwork needs serious review, AEC?

Yours sincerely

Allen Hampton

Coburg

achamptonmob@gmail.com

Images courtesy AEC website; copyright of Commonwealth