UNESA Electoral Tribunal
Decisions on appeals arising from annual election of 2004 (i) Wade McInerney - "Vote Green"
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer regarding Wade McInerney's inclusion of the words "Vote Green" in some of his publicity material. The Returning Officer did not consider this to be in contravention of the Election Regulations. Phil Schubert appealed against this decision under reg 249 by email to Helen Arthurson on 20 October 2004.
The Tribunal upholds the appeal. The Tribunal considers that the Returning Officer's decision was without evidential foundation (reg 249(1)(f)) and was so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made it (reg 249(k)). The use of the words "Vote Green" in a triangle closely resembles the logo of the "Greens" political party. It is dishonest and misleading and deceptive (contrary to regs 227(1) and (3)) in that it falsely suggests that Mr McInerney is affiliated with the Greens, thus giving his environmental claims greater credibility than they may otherwise have received.
The Tribunal noted that this breach was all the more serious in that this is the second time in three years that a finding has been made against Mr McInerney for attempting to boost his environmental credentials through dubious means.
Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal makes a declaratory ruling that Wade McInerney's conduct constitutes a serious breach of the Election Regulations.
(ii) Wade McInerney - Use of Bistro
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer regarding Wade McInerney's use of the bistro in connection with the election campaign. The Returning Officer considered there to be no contravention of the Election Regulations. Toby Robinson appealed against this decision under reg 249 by email to Helen Arthurson and Jane Davies on 14 October 2004, as did Phil Schubert by email to Helen Arthurson on 20 October 2004, and Anna-Louise Wilson by email to Helen Arthurson and Jane Davies on 12 October 2004 and 1 November 2004.
The Tribunal upholds the appeal. The Tribunal considers that the Returning Officer's investigation into these allegations was inadequate, and that the Returning Officer's decision was without evidential basis and had been made without considering relevant matters (regs 249(1)(f) and (i)).
The Tribunal finds on the balance of probabilities (reg 248(5)) that Mr McInerney, in connection with his position as President of the Union, was centrally involved in bussing Robb College and St Albert's College students to a function at the Bistro at which there were free or subsidized drinks. Mr McInerney made a political speech at the function in which he reminded the students that he was paying for or contributing towards the price of their drinks. He encouraged the students to move from the Bistro to the adjacent polling place in the Bistro Foyer to vote. He had earlier indicated to the Returning Officer that there were likely to be a lot of voters voting during the afternoon when the function was being held. Some of the other campaigners were excluded from the function, and since campaigning in a polling place is prohibited under reg 227(4)(g), he therefore obtained an advantage over those candidates in terms of communicating with voters immediately prior to their voting. Mr McInerney was subsequently personally billed for the drinks, although information received by the Tribunal suggests that ultimately UNE Union will foot the bill.
The Tribunal finds that this conduct of Mr McInerney is a breach of reg 227(4)(j) - offering gifts - and reg 227(4)(k) - using for campaign purposes University facilities not generally available to all students.
Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal makes a declaratory ruling that Wade McInerney's conduct constitutes a serious breach of the Election Regulations.
(iii) Further ruling on Wade McInerney's conduct
Having regard to the seriousness of the Mr McInerney's breaches, described in (i) and (ii) above, in addition to the declaratory rulings (reg 249(9)) the Tribunal makes a further ruling under reg 249(8) that Mr McInerney is disqualified from voting and standing in UNESA elections for a period of two years effective from 1 November 2004.
(iv) Dayne Rosolen - Claim regarding UNESA funds and referendum
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer that Dayne Rosolen's publicity material contained the false claim that UNESA spent $20,000 on the NUS referendum. The Returning Officer considered that there was no contravention of the Election Regulations. Anna-Louise Wilson appealed against this decision under reg 249 by email to Helen Arthurson and Jane Davies on 12 October 2004 and 1 November 2004.
The Tribunal upholds the appeal. The Returning Officer failed to conduct an adequate investigation into the matter, and made a decision without evidential basis and without considering relevant matters, a decision so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have made it (regs 249(1)(f), (i) and (k)).
The Tribunal finds on the balance of probabilities (reg 248(5)) that the sum spent by UNESA on the referendum was a little over $10,000. Mr Rosolen's claim that $20,000 was spent was likely to mislead voters, in breach of the reg 249(3). Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal declares that Dayne Rosolen has contravened the Election Regulations.
(v) Dayne Rosolen - Distribution of publicity material
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer that Dayne Rosolen left publicity material on tables in the dining room at St Albert's college. The Returning Officer considered that this was not in breach of the Election Regulations. Rebecca Langham appealed against the Returning Officer's decision by email to Helen Arthurson and Jane Davies on 13 October 2004 and by email to Helen Arthurson on 31 October 2004. The Election Tribunal upholds the Returning Officer's decision. While reg 225(2)(b) prohibits the distribution of publicity material in libraries and teaching spaces, unless taken directly from a campaigner, this prohibition does not extend to dining halls, which are a social space rather than a study space.
(vi) Dayne Rosolen - Interference with other candidates' publicity material
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer that Dayne Rosolen and/or his campaigners interfered with - tore down or covered up - the publicity material of other candidates in St Albert's College, replacing them with "Stop the Rot" publicity material. The Returning Officer did not make a finding that this constituted a breach of the Regulations. Rebecca Langham appealed against the Returning Officer's decision by email to Helen Arthurson and Jane Davies on 13 October 2004 and by email to Helen Arthurson on 31 October 2004.
The Election Tribunal upholds the appeal. The Tribunal considers that the Returning Officer's investigation into these allegations was inadequate, and that the Returning Officer's decision was without evidential basis and had been made without considering relevant matters (regs 249(1)(f) and (i)).
The Tribunal finds on the balance of probabilities that Mr Rosolen and/or his campaigners did interfere with the publicity material of other candidates, in breach of reg 227(4)(f), noting that candidates are responsible for the conduct of their campaigners under reg 227(2). Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal declares that Dayne Rosolen has contravened the Election Regulations.
(vii) Dayne Rosolen - Claims about UNESA funding of queer activities and aboriginal tent embassy
Complaints were made to the Returning Officer regarding claims on "Stop the Rot" publicity material, authorized by Dayne Rosolen, that UNESA had 'spent' 'thousands of dollars ... on the "Queen Space" and Queer Conferences', and had 'used' 'money ... to support and sustain the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra'. The Returning Officer did not find that these claims were in breach of the regulations. Rebecca Langham appealed against the Returning Officer's findings by email to the Tribunal on 13 October 2004 and 31 October 2004. Anna-Louise Wilson also appealed against the finding by letter on 12 October 2004.
The Tribunal upholds the appeals. With regard to the claim about funding of queer activities, the Tribunal finds that the claim was true - several thousand dollars were spent on such activities. However, the claim about the funding of the aboriginal tent embassy appears to be without basis. The Tribunal finds, on the balance of probabilities, that UNESA directed no funds to this cause in 2003 or 2004. This statement was intended or likely to mislead or deceive a voter, contrary to the prohibition in reg 227(3).
The Tribunal also finds that these claims, on publicity material authorized by Dayne Rosolen, tend to impede the conduct of the election, contrary to reg 227(4)(n). The only funding that is criticized on this publicity material is concerned with minority groups - aboriginals and homosexuals. Essentially, the poster states: 'stop the rot ... put an end to' the funding of these groups. It has a clear tendency to denigrate and humiliate the members of these groups, contrary to the University's anti-discrimination policies, and the anti-discrimination laws to which the University is subject. To attempt to win votes through this form of campaigning is entirely unacceptable. It impedes the proper conduct of the election.
Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal declares that Dayne Rosolen has committed a serious breach of the Election Regulations.
(viii) Further ruling on Dayne Rosolen's conduct
Having regard to the number of breaches of Dayne Rosolen, described in (iv), (vi) and (vii) above, and the seriousness of the last of these, in addition to the declaratory rulings (reg 249(9)) the Tribunal makes a further ruling under reg 249(8) that Mr Rosolen is disqualified from voting and standing in UNESA elections for a period of two years effective from 1 November 2004.
(ix) Samantha Aber
In appealing against the Returning Officer's findings, Phil Schubert (12 October 2004) and Toby Robinson (12 and 21 October 2004) expressed concern about connections between with Samantha Aber and the "Stop the Rot" ticket and Wade McInerney.
The Tribunal notes that candidates are responsible for the conduct of their campaigners under reg 227(2). The publicity material of Wade McInerney and that of Dayne Rosolen that the Tribunal finds is in breach of the regulations ((i) and (vii) above), both endorsed the candidacy of Samantha Aber for president. The Tribunal finds that Samantha Aber was associated with Mr McInerney and Mr Rosolen in other connections, knew of the content of these documents, and took no steps to distance herself from them. On the contrary, she was content to accept their endorsements. Therefore, the breaches of Mr McInerney and Mr Rosolen were committed in the process of campaigning for Samantha Aber. Under the regulations Samantha Aber is also in breach of the regulations.
Under reg 249(9) the Tribunal declares that Samantha Aber is in breach of the Election Regulations.
(x) UNESA - Publication of the decisions of the Election Tribunal
The Election Tribunal rules under reg 249(8) that, in addition to being released to interested parties, the present decision should be published in full by UNESA in the next edition of Neucleus, and should also be made accessible from its web-site within two weeks of the date of the decision and not be taken down until the results are declared for the annual election of 2006.
These decisions were made on 3 December 2004 by the Election Tribunal:Helen Arthurson, Jane Davies, David Hamer
Back to top.
FYIUNESA's Constituion, Regulations and Policy can all be downloaded in PDF format from:
http://unesa.une.edu.au/index.php?page=council
Some email addresses of interest:
Questions or queries for the UNESA President? Contact her at: president@unesa.une.edu.au
Want to bring up anything with the Vice-Chancellor? It's: vc@une.edu.au
Got something you want to tell the UNE Council? (That's the UNE Council, not UNESA.) You can contact the UNE Council secretary at: harthurs@une.edu.au
Back to top.
