Voices for Monash
PAL Rating
- AEC Electorate:
- Website: https://www.v4m.org.au/
- Candidate Status: Endorsed Candidate
- Candidate: Deb Leonard
What the group says about their processes
The Voices for Monash executive committee initiated a structured candidate selection process by establishing a dedicated selection committee. This committee comprised two executive members, a community representative with relevant experience, and a professional with HR expertise.
The process included an open nomination period, with advertisements placed in local newspapers and other public platforms to encourage expressions of interest. The selection committee conducted a rigorous vetting process for all nominations. Two shortlisted candidates were then presented to members at a public event, which allowed for both in-person and online participation. The event featured pre-determined candidate presentations, followed by member-submitted questions.
After the event, members were given 24 hours to cast their votes digitally, with a minimum threshold of 100 votes required to validate the outcome. This thorough process ensured both transparency and legitimacy in selecting the preferred candidate, with the winner announced promptly.
Key elements included public advertising for expressions of interest, regular digital updates to supporters, and encouraging members to participate actively in the voting process.
PAL Commentary on Candidate Selection
Voices for Monash ran a structured and seemingly well-advertised candidate selection process, though some details of the process remain unclear. The selection committee included two executive members, a community representative, and a professional with HR expertise, but it is not clear why this specific composition was considered ideal. Questions also arise about what expertise the executive members brought to the process, why the committee consisted of four individuals, and how broader representation could have been achieved.
While an open nomination period was held, it is unclear whether additional efforts were made to engage harder-to-reach individuals or groups who may not have been reached through newspaper advertisements or other traditional methods. Further transparency about the public platforms used and strategies for ensuring diversity in the pool of nominees would enhance understanding of the process.
The vetting process remains somewhat opaque, including the criteria used to shortlist candidates and what materials or evidence nominees were required to submit. Similarly, the group has not publicly disclosed how many members attended the candidate event or whether the data from the digital voting process will be made public, which could further demonstrate the legitimacy of the outcome. Overall, while the process appears to have included some best practices, greater detail and clarity on these aspects would provide a more complete picture of how inclusive and robust the selection process truly was.
How they measured up
[Insert long text here]
Key comments
[Insert long text here]
Survey Response:
Survey
| Questionaires | Answers |
|---|---|
| 1. Do you have a selection committee for your Independent candidate? | Yes |
| 2. How is your selection membership committee chosen? | Firstly our Voices for Monash exec committee passed a motion to run a seperate selection committee and we landed upon a process involving two members of the exec committee as well as someone with good experience from the broader community as well as someone in professional HR to best vet potential candidates. |
| 3. What is the selection membership committee decision-making processes? | Concensus |
| 4. If there was a deliberative process, like a Townhall or Kitchen table conversation, how was the decision about the candidate reached? | We had an open period for potential candidates to nominate, ran ads in newspapers etc. Then had a vetting process run by the selection committee. We ran a campaign encouraging supporters to become members. Then presented the two candidates that met the requirements to our members and held a public event where members were able to attend in person or online where the two candidates presented via a predetermined framework including member questions at the end. Upon completion of the event members had 24 hours to cast a vote digitally via a link we emailed to all registered. We set a threshold of minimum 100 votes to legitimise the process and then announced the winner the next day |
| 5. In your candidate selection process is there input from community members within the electorate? | Yes |
| 6. If so, describe how you engage community members in the candidate selection process. | Public advertising for EOI, regular digital communication about the process with supporters and members, encourage supporters to become members to have a vote, provide opportunity for members to ask questions at the event and then prompt them to vote on their preferred candidate. |
| 7. Would you be interested in discussing your candidate selection for the electoral campaign more with Progressive Action Lab? | Yes |