Close call VEC conduct under review

Time to reflect on days events.

Question: “How can someone win on 10% of the vote?”

Well it is 11% actually and it not clear if it is Singer or Ng on the hunt. It is close by all accounts which is why we believe there will be a recount. There is a huge unknown factor with the drift away from the book at around 40% or more.

We try and explain how the fold up might go.

The interesting close junctions are Singer/Ng virtually neck to neck at around 11%

The combined vote of Singer and Catherine Ng out polls the Greens in each case.

If Singer survives *** Morgan/Columb votes go to McMullin with drift from Morgan( now 27%) the Greens (now 19-20%) Doyle (29%) Singer 23%. Greens next eliminated bring Singer to the lead above Doyle and McMullin there is a close nexus between Doyle and McMullin exact value unknown due to drift to Doyle from Morgan But again it is close. With a McMullin/Doyle toss up Singer is best position to jump of the line either way

If Ng survives *** Morgan flows to Ng but with some leakage to both Doyle and McMullin. Ng is now on around 26-27% McMullin who is on around 25-26Doyle moves into the front at around 31% the Greens at 18% Greens are eliminated and the drift see McMullin at 33 Doyle 33% and Ng 34% It is potentially very close and the spilt can go either way Ng is in the best position as she collects most of the ticket vote and if she is ahead then the other is eliminated. So it is a question of who goes out and what value the drift is at this stage. No one is prepared to place bets at this stage. Some think it could be decided by a hand full of votes who is excluded and who is not. There is now two major junctions points Ng/Singer and the final three.

VEC Count under review

To add to the frustration the VEC failed to undertake a preliminary distribution into primary votes. reason unknown. They did do a manual sort for the city Council above the line which is the same size and effort had they distributed the leadership primary vote and did a manual count we would know the result by 12 noon tomorrow.instead it will take a good 12-14 hours to complete the data-entry and chances are there will be a recount. Under the circumstances where the VEC refused to maintain an open and transparent count and rejected the Parliamentary recommendation to undertake a preliminary first preference distribution anything within 1.5% merits a recount. (Had a preliminary sort taken place a recount would only be justified if the result was within 1%)

The Council seven have been decided on above the line preferences.
The winners are (With Primary vote indicated) Quota 12.5%

Candidate (Primary %)
JETTER, Carl (21.5%)
OKE, Cathy (18.7%)
CLARKE, Peter (9.1%)
LOUEY, Kevin (12.0%)
ONG, Ken (11.4%)
SHANAHAN, Brian (9.9%)
KANIS, Jennifer (10.4%)
(1% diff unknown)

I hope I have my maths right.

Again had the VEC undertaken a preliminary primary vote count as had been requested by most candidates the process and results would be much more clear and the count more transparent.

Apology in the offering but not good enough

I am also told that the returning Officer, Bill Lang, offered a private apology to Ray Collins who had been falsely accused by Steve Tully of threatening and intimidating VEC staff. This allegation was false and malicious.

A private apology is not good enough, Bill Lang and Steve Tully owe Ray Collins a public apology for what was clearly an act of intimidation on behalf of the VEC if not defamatory against Ray Collins. Ray Collins warned the VEC that the result was close and that a preliminary sort or manual count was the best way to proceed. They would not listen and Steve Tully made a false statement to cover up his wrong decision.

More on that soon when the count is over.

Close call VEC conduct under review

Time to reflect on days events.

Question: “How can someone win on 10% of the vote?”

Well it is 11% actually and it not clear if it is Singer or Ng on the hunt. It is close by all accounts which is why we believe there will be a recount. There is a huge unknown factor with the drift away from the book at around 40% or more.

We try and explain how the fold up might go.

The interesting close junctions are Singer/Ng virtually neck to neck at around 11%

The combined vote of Singer and Catherine Ng out polls the Greens in each case.

If Singer survives *** Morgan/Columb votes go to McMullin with drift from Morgan( now 27%) the Greens (now 19-20%) Doyle (29%) Singer 23%. Greens next eliminated bring Singer to the lead above Doyle and McMullin there is a close nexus between Doyle and McMullin exact value unknown due to drift to Doyle from Morgan But again it is close. With a McMullin/Doyle toss up Singer is best position to jump of the line either way

If Ng survives *** Morgan flows to Ng but with some leakage to both Doyle and McMullin. Ng is now on around 26-27% McMullin who is on around 25-26Doyle moves into the front at around 31% the Greens at 18% Greens are eliminated and the drift see McMullin at 33 Doyle 33% and Ng 34% It is potentially very close and the spilt can go either way Ng is in the best position as she collects most of the ticket vote and if she is ahead then the other is eliminated. So it is a question of who goes out and what value the drift is at this stage. No one is prepared to place bets at this stage. Some think it could be decided by a hand full of votes who is excluded and who is not. There is now two major junctions points Ng/Singer and the final three.

VEC Count under review

To add to the frustration the VEC failed to undertake a preliminary distribution into primary votes. reason unknown. They did do a manual sort for the city Council above the line which is the same size and effort had they distributed the leadership primary vote and did a manual count we would know the result by 12 noon tomorrow.instead it will take a good 12-14 hours to complete the data-entry and chances are there will be a recount. Under the circumstances where the VEC refused to maintain an open and transparent count and rejected the Parliamentary recommendation to undertake a preliminary first preference distribution anything within 1.5% merits a recount. (Had a preliminary sort taken place a recount would only be justified if the result was within 1%)

The Council seven have been decided on above the line preferences.
The winners are (With Primary vote indicated) Quota 12.5%

Candidate (Primary %)
JETTER, Carl (21.5%)
OKE, Cathy (18.7%)
CLARKE, Peter (9.1%)
LOUEY, Kevin (12.0%)
ONG, Ken (11.4%)
SHANAHAN, Brian (9.9%)
KANIS, Jennifer (10.4%)
(1% diff unknown)

I hope I have my maths right.

Again had the VEC undertaken a preliminary primary vote count as had been requested by most candidates the process and results would be much more clear and the count more transparent.

Apology in the offering but not good enough

I am also told that the returning Officer, Bill Lang, offered a private apology to Ray Collins who had been falsely accused by Steve Tully of threatening and intimidating VEC staff. This allegation was false and malicious.

A private apology is not good enough, Bill Lang and Steve Tully owe Ray Collins a public apology for what was clearly an act of intimidation on behalf of the VEC if not defamatory against Ray Collins. Ray Collins warned the VEC that the result was close and that a preliminary sort or manual count was the best way to proceed. They would not listen and Steve Tully made a false statement to cover up his wrong decision.

More on that soon when the count is over.

Close call VEC conduct under review

Time to reflect on days events.

Question: “How can someone win on 10% of the vote?”

Well it is 11% actually and it not clear if it is Singer or Ng on the hunt. It is close by all accounts which is why we believe there will be a recount. There is a huge unknown factor with the drift away from the book at around 40% or more.

We try and explain how the fold up might go.

The interesting close junctions are Singer/Ng virtually neck to neck at around 11%

The combined vote of Singer and Catherine Ng out polls the Greens in each case.

If Singer survives *** Morgan/Columb votes go to McMullin with drift from Morgan( now 27%) the Greens (now 19-20%) Doyle (29%) Singer 23%. Greens next eliminated bring Singer to the lead above Doyle and McMullin there is a close nexus between Doyle and McMullin exact value unknown due to drift to Doyle from Morgan But again it is close. With a McMullin/Doyle toss up Singer is best position to jump of the line either way

If Ng survives *** Morgan flows to Ng but with some leakage to both Doyle and McMullin. Ng is now on around 26-27% McMullin who is on around 25-26Doyle moves into the front at around 31% the Greens at 18% Greens are eliminated and the drift see McMullin at 33 Doyle 33% and Ng 34% It is potentially very close and the spilt can go either way Ng is in the best position as she collects most of the ticket vote and if she is ahead then the other is eliminated. So it is a question of who goes out and what value the drift is at this stage. No one is prepared to place bets at this stage. Some think it could be decided by a hand full of votes who is excluded and who is not. There is now two major junctions points Ng/Singer and the final three.

VEC Count under review

To add to the frustration the VEC failed to undertake a preliminary distribution into primary votes. reason unknown. They did do a manual sort for the city Council above the line which is the same size and effort had they distributed the leadership primary vote and did a manual count we would know the result by 12 noon tomorrow.instead it will take a good 12-14 hours to complete the data-entry and chances are there will be a recount. Under the circumstances where the VEC refused to maintain an open and transparent count and rejected the Parliamentary recommendation to undertake a preliminary first preference distribution anything within 1.5% merits a recount. (Had a preliminary sort taken place a recount would only be justified if the result was within 1%)

The Council seven have been decided on above the line preferences.
The winners are (With Primary vote indicated) Quota 12.5%

Candidate (Primary %)
JETTER, Carl (21.5%)
OKE, Cathy (18.7%)
CLARKE, Peter (9.1%)
LOUEY, Kevin (12.0%)
ONG, Ken (11.4%)
SHANAHAN, Brian (9.9%)
KANIS, Jennifer (10.4%)
(1% diff unknown)

I hope I have my maths right.

Again had the VEC undertaken a preliminary primary vote count as had been requested by most candidates the process and results would be much more clear and the count more transparent.

Apology in the offering but not good enough

I am also told that the returning Officer, Bill Lang, offered a private apology to Ray Collins who had been falsely accused by Steve Tully of threatening and intimidating VEC staff. This allegation was false and malicious.

A private apology is not good enough, Bill Lang and Steve Tully owe Ray Collins a public apology for what was clearly an act of intimidation on behalf of the VEC if not defamatory against Ray Collins. Ray Collins warned the VEC that the result was close and that a preliminary sort or manual count was the best way to proceed. They would not listen and Steve Tully made a false statement to cover up his wrong decision.

More on that soon when the count is over.

VEC occupational hazard Not enough room to breath let alone to work

Scrutineers are reporting that the data-entry of preferences is being held in a 10 x 15 metre room with 18 data-entry personal crammed in and no room for scrutineers.

It is hot and oxygen is in short supply. It is reported that many mistakes in the data-entry are being made as a result. First data-set should be available around lunch time. With 18 data-entry operators and 11 candidates in theory the room should be able to accomodate over 200 people. Fantatic logicistial planning on behalf of the VEC. If a recount is on the cards you can expect a full house

Estimated time to data entry is 14 hours based on the VEC estimate of 15 sec per vote

Crikey.com has edited censored comments about Bill Lang and Steve Tully. “Censorship at its worst”, Thanks to Vex News for publishing the facts.

VEC occupational hazard Not enough room to breath let alone to work

Scrutineers are reporting that the data-entry of preferences is being held in a 10 x 15 metre room with 18 data-entry personal crammed in and no room for scrutineers.

It is hot and oxygen is in short supply. It is reported that many mistakes in the data-entry are being made as a result. First data-set should be available around lunch time. With 18 data-entry operators and 11 candidates in theory the room should be able to accomodate over 200 people. Fantatic logicistial planning on behalf of the VEC. If a recount is on the cards you can expect a full house

Estimated time to data entry is 14 hours based on the VEC estimate of 15 sec per vote

Crikey.com has edited censored comments about Bill Lang and Steve Tully. “Censorship at its worst”, Thanks to Vex News for publishing the facts.

VEC occupational hazard Not enough room to breath let alone to work

Scrutineers are reporting that the data-entry of preferences is being held in a 10 x 15 metre room with 18 data-entry personal crammed in and no room for scrutineers.

It is hot and oxygen is in short supply. It is reported that many mistakes in the data-entry are being made as a result. First data-set should be available around lunch time. With 18 data-entry operators and 11 candidates in theory the room should be able to accomodate over 200 people. Fantatic logicistial planning on behalf of the VEC. If a recount is on the cards you can expect a full house

Estimated time to data entry is 14 hours based on the VEC estimate of 15 sec per vote

Crikey.com has edited censored comments about Bill Lang and Steve Tully. “Censorship at its worst”, Thanks to Vex News for publishing the facts.

Officially Its unofficial But there is hope that Melbourne’s Democratic Elections will be open, transparent and subject to proper scrutiny

The Melbourne Greens have come on board and Officially supported the campaign to ensure that the counting of the ballot will be open and transparent and that scrutineers will not be denied the opportunity to properly scrutinise the electronic count.

We welcome the Greens official support even though it is unofficial. We only hope that Bill Lang also excepts the need for the count to be open and transparent.

Under the terms of the Local Government Act ballot papers MUST be presorted into bundles of primary votes as part of a manual count. The problem is that the VEC has the right to vary the procedure any way they see fit under a computerised count. Descension in the absence of regulations.

The Victorian parliament in reviewing the 2006 State Election recommended that ballot papers be presorted prior to batching and data-entry. We support the Parliament’s recommendation and note that there is nothing that prevents the Returning Officer from undertaking a pre-sorting of ballot papers prior to the data-entry process.

It is a question of self regulation and honesty. The Victorian Electoral Commission has an obligation to ensure that the election count is conducted in an open and transparent manner in order to maintain public confidence. The count must be seen and be above board. (The same policy should also apply to the Below-the-line votes in the Council election)

The Offical Unoffical responce to our concerns

The Greens have made an unofficial request to Mr Lang [VEC Returning Officer for the City of Melbourne] that the VEC bundle the primary votes of the leadership ticket candidates before the data-entry stage. I have reason to believe that Mr Lang will seriously consider doing this despite being under no obligation to do so.

As we are only two days before ‘election day’, but already some months after the contracts for this election were agreed on, we consider it inappropriate to support any calls for an injunction.

We are happy for you to indicate on your blog (without copying any part of this email) that The Greens give in-principle support to the bundling of primary votes of the leadership ticket only.

Best regards,

Rohan

Officially Its unofficial But there is hope that Melbourne’s Democratic Elections will be open, transparent and subject to proper scrutiny

The Melbourne Greens have come on board and Officially supported the campaign to ensure that the counting of the ballot will be open and transparent and that scrutineers will not be denied the opportunity to properly scrutinise the electronic count.

We welcome the Greens official support even though it is unofficial. We only hope that Bill Lang also excepts the need for the count to be open and transparent.

Under the terms of the Local Government Act ballot papers MUST be presorted into bundles of primary votes as part of a manual count. The problem is that the VEC has the right to vary the procedure any way they see fit under a computerised count. Descension in the absence of regulations.

The Victorian parliament in reviewing the 2006 State Election recommended that ballot papers be presorted prior to batching and data-entry. We support the Parliament’s recommendation and note that there is nothing that prevents the Returning Officer from undertaking a pre-sorting of ballot papers prior to the data-entry process.

It is a question of self regulation and honesty. The Victorian Electoral Commission has an obligation to ensure that the election count is conducted in an open and transparent manner in order to maintain public confidence. The count must be seen and be above board. (The same policy should also apply to the Below-the-line votes in the Council election)

The Offical Unoffical responce to our concerns

The Greens have made an unofficial request to Mr Lang [VEC Returning Officer for the City of Melbourne] that the VEC bundle the primary votes of the leadership ticket candidates before the data-entry stage. I have reason to believe that Mr Lang will seriously consider doing this despite being under no obligation to do so.

As we are only two days before ‘election day’, but already some months after the contracts for this election were agreed on, we consider it inappropriate to support any calls for an injunction.

We are happy for you to indicate on your blog (without copying any part of this email) that The Greens give in-principle support to the bundling of primary votes of the leadership ticket only.

Best regards,

Rohan

Officially Its unofficial But there is hope that Melbourne’s Democratic Elections will be open, transparent and subject to proper scrutiny

The Melbourne Greens have come on board and Officially supported the campaign to ensure that the counting of the ballot will be open and transparent and that scrutineers will not be denied the opportunity to properly scrutinise the electronic count.

We welcome the Greens official support even though it is unofficial. We only hope that Bill Lang also excepts the need for the count to be open and transparent.

Under the terms of the Local Government Act ballot papers MUST be presorted into bundles of primary votes as part of a manual count. The problem is that the VEC has the right to vary the procedure any way they see fit under a computerised count. Descension in the absence of regulations.

The Victorian parliament in reviewing the 2006 State Election recommended that ballot papers be presorted prior to batching and data-entry. We support the Parliament’s recommendation and note that there is nothing that prevents the Returning Officer from undertaking a pre-sorting of ballot papers prior to the data-entry process.

It is a question of self regulation and honesty. The Victorian Electoral Commission has an obligation to ensure that the election count is conducted in an open and transparent manner in order to maintain public confidence. The count must be seen and be above board. (The same policy should also apply to the Below-the-line votes in the Council election)

The Offical Unoffical responce to our concerns

The Greens have made an unofficial request to Mr Lang [VEC Returning Officer for the City of Melbourne] that the VEC bundle the primary votes of the leadership ticket candidates before the data-entry stage. I have reason to believe that Mr Lang will seriously consider doing this despite being under no obligation to do so.

As we are only two days before ‘election day’, but already some months after the contracts for this election were agreed on, we consider it inappropriate to support any calls for an injunction.

We are happy for you to indicate on your blog (without copying any part of this email) that The Greens give in-principle support to the bundling of primary votes of the leadership ticket only.

Best regards,

Rohan

VEC’s contempt Bill Lang refuses to ensure that the conduct of the municipal election is open and transparent

The Victorian Electoral Commission is set to repeat some of the mistakes they made in 2006.

Bill Lang, Melbourne City Council’s Returning Officer, has refused calls for the Lord Mayor’s election to be counted manually. There is no justification for a computerised data-entry count. A number of candidates in the election have supported the call for the count to be open and transparent.

If the computer count is to proceed then the VEC should presort ballot papers prior to batching them ready for data-entry.

Whilst there is nothing in the legislation that requires a presorting of the ballot, other then the obligation to ensure that the election is open and transparent, there is nothing that prevents the VEC from presorting ballot papers into primary votes, as is the case in Senate elections.

The election of Lord Mayor of Melbourne is expected to be close and the presorting of ballot papers would significantly assist in the orderly scrutiny of the ballot whilst maintaining an open and transparent counting of the ballot.

Without presorting of the ballot it is impossible to effectively scrutinise a computerised data-entry count of the election.

The Victorian State Parliament in its report on the Conduct of the 2006 Victorian State election had recommended that ballot papers be presorted prior to data entry. (See comments below for copy of extract from the Parliamentary Inquiry)

By refusing to initiate a presorting of the ballot papers the VEC has thumbed its nose at the State Parliament demonstrating its level of contempt and inability to self-regulate the conduct of the election in order to maintain an open and transparent electoral process.

A complaint has been forwarded to the Minister, Richard Wynne and the Victorian Parliamentary Electoral Review Committee.