What happens "in" Australia if you don't "vote"?

I'd like to introduce an Australian friend of mine, whom I'll refer to here as John. John was coerced into being "enrolled" as an "elector" when he was 18 (One way the bureaucrats keep their "electoral rolls" up to date, is by sending out pestering people to go door-knocking). John never actually "voted" though -- he used to turn up at the "polling place" on "election" days, get his name ticked off the list, then scribble an extra box onto the "voting"-sheet and the name of his cat next to that, then he'd just put a "1" into his box, drop the "voting"-sheet into the "ballot"-box, and leave. The "polling place" was only a short walk around the corner from him, so it was little hassle or time wasted to do this.

However, at the next lot of "elections" years later, he decided that he was not going to be coerced anymore - not even in the slightest degree (a major factor in his decision was some new information which he discovered (which is made available elsewhere), from which he realised a lot of new things. More on this later.). He telephoned the so-called "Australian Electoral Commission" bureaucrats and asked them to un-"enroll" him from their list - but they said there was no unenrolment option. He was amused, though not surprised by their response, and didn't bother arguing with them over it. So, he decided to see for himself exactly what would happen if he didn't show up to "vote". He also decided that if they did send him any "penalty notices", that he wouldn't reply to them. He wanted to see what they'd do, and how far they were willing to take their "voting" hoax. (I partly encouraged him to do this, because I wanted to put it all here for all to see!)

The following links provide you with copies of the actual letters/demands which were sent to John, all of which he passed on to me (I converted most of them to HTML, so you can download them quickly). Only his personal details have been changed for his privacy. (To view them properly, you'll need to use a browser which supports tables, otherwise many of them may appear to be jumbled up - refer to the Notes on using this Web-Site for more details.)

Keep in mind that John had the following intentions:

"Federal Election" on Saturday 2 March 1996:
  1. Firstly, the "Australian Electoral Commission" sent this "Penalty Notice" on 20 May 1996.
  2. Next they sent this "Reminder & Final Notice" on 15 Jul 1996 by Certified Mail (the only one sent Certified Mail so far).
  3. Then this "Electoral Roll Review" on 26 September 1996. Which was sent to one of the other so-called "electors" at the same address.
  4. Then this "Notice Of Possible Prosecution" on 30 October 1996 - stamped "URGENT" on the envelope and the letter.
  5. Then this "Charge and Summons" on 7 February 1997. The name and address was hand-written on the envelope this time.
  6. Then the falsely-called "Department Of Justice" sent this "Statement of Fines and Penalties Imposed" on 8 May 1997.
  7. Then they sent this "Notice of Intention to Enforce" on 10 June 1997.
  8. Then the pretended "Sheriff's Office Victoria" sent this "Final Notice" on 22 September 1997 (which was received on the 29th). Printed on the envelope is: "O.H.M.S." and "Victoria ON THE MOVE".
  9. [1998 Update:] Lastly, they sent another "Final Notice" on 27 May 1998 (not included here because it's identical to the one above, except for the different "DATE OF NOTICE: 27/05/98" and "DUE DATE: 24/06/98").

"Victorian State election" on Saturday 30 March 1996:

  1. Firstly, the "Victorian Electoral Commission" sent this "Notice" on 9 August 1996.
  2. Lastly, they sent this "Failure To Vote" notice on 11 October 1996.

"Council Elections" (by post) during March 1997:

  1. Firstly, "Bayside Council" sent this "Infringement Notice" on 20 May 1997.
  2. Next they sent this "Penalty Notice" on 30 June 1997.
  3. Then they sent this "Final Notice" on 28 August 1997.
  4. [1998 Update:] Lastly, they had some "lawyers" send another "Final Notice" along with a seperate letter of their own on 20 February 1998.

If you've never read such things before, then you may find they have a "shock value" to them. That is the primary intention of their threats and bits of paper - to shock you into "compliance". They prey on the fear of people who are scared of the unknown or the undesirable. Well, I've spoilt their game! If they did disturb you, even slightly since the threat isn't directed at you personally, you are at least on your way to no longer being shocked or surprised by their "legal forms", after seeing what these arrogant bureaucrats sent to John.

Some important things you should take note of, because these apply to many things in the way "government" bureaucrats operate:

John knew that he could have avoided having them send all the "Notices" they ended up sending to him, by replying to the first one with the appropriate answer at the "I did not vote because...." section (and he could think of at least five reasons that they're likely to accept - though it would look rather "suspicious" after the second one :-). Or he could have simply had someone else fill out the "Electoral Roll Review" letter to say he no longer lived there (or filled it out himself and scribbled a signature on there - not that he'd encourage anyone else to do that though). But that wouldn't unenroll him from their "Electoral Roll", and he wouldn't have had a good laugh each time the next letter arrived! There are some really funny, and most pathetic, things on those letters. The "Charge and Summons" is particularly amusing: "You have been charged with an offence against the law". As if you could offend a pretended "law" (mere words in one of their many books). The "Council Elections" "Infringement Notice" is also amusing where it tells John that he is excused from not "voting" if he is dead! Hahaha!

John tells me that he's glad that he offends the pitiful bureaucrats who administer this "voting" hoax. As well as the depraved bureaucrats that write so-called "legislation" to impose "compulsory" this, "compulsory" that.

Sadly though, these bureaucrats are rewarded for their time-wasting, unproductive activities, by being paid - probably large amounts - to write such drivel! If people had a choice to direct where their "tax"-money is spent, do you think they would have any of it spent on unproductive people who write pretended "laws" like this? Would they have it spent on pathetic occupations such as employing people to write threatening letters to those who don't "vote"? Would they spend it on having masses of employees who sit in offices all day (guess who also pays the rent for all those offices!), fiddling with masses of bits of paper and envelopes, producing nothing of value whatsoever? (John visited one of the local AEC offices one day, to obtain some information from them on why they have "compulsory voting" - as he wanted to see their story - purely out of it's potential amusement value. There were several staff in the office (and this was just one of the small sub-offices out of many), with mounds of envelopes on their desks. They did give him some information, which he also passed on to me, and which I make available later on.) What's worse, is that this is just one (proportionately small) part of a massive bureaucracy - and who knows of the whole extent of the "government" bureaucrats' time-wasting, value-destroying activities?

Contents -- Next Section

Common Law Copyright David T. Freeman, 1997. All Rights Reserved.
Downloaded from the Personal Empowerment Resources Web-Site: http://www.mind-trek.com/