Local body electoral farce?

Once every three years we get to postal vote for a number of local bodies, from city councils through to health boards and every conceivable quango in between. At least in Auckland this year it is simplified.

Outside of the mayoralty, virtually none of the other candidates are widely identifiable, but certainly there may be some subconscious recognition in local areas for local people.

Party politics is alive and well, but slightly buried so it is not obvious. Citizens and ratepayers have always been National in drag.

Thank god we are not like Australia where it is compulsory to vote (at least in national Politics). Can you imagine what the outcome could be if this were the case in local body politics in NZ? 

For heaven’s sake, the top polling mayoral candidate in one poll, for the Auckland super-city elections, was Bob Parker. He is mayor of Christchurch and not standing in Auckland.

As an aside, responding well to crisis is a sure fire election winner. Parker is top of the pops in Christchurch as well, so an earthquake saved him from an Anderton-led route. Now here is an idea. With Act in disarray (I can’t think of any self respecting person who would want to share a room with Rodney and his lot let alone a bed), and the Maori Party continually playing Oliver Twist, why not have a snap election as well? Key would romp in; he is looking every bit a statesmen.

Back to local body politics. Historically only around 30 percent of the registered voters vote - which is fortunate as if the other 70 percent voted in Auckland they would be looking for Bob Parker, and wouldn’t find him, so they probably would go random, and the net result is a lottery, or is it?

Well not quite, the 30 percent  who know what they want, will form logical blocks around the lead candidates and since local body elections are still first past the post, hey presto the right guy likely will still win. But the bleeding heart liberals will say that the leader duly elected under such a system has no moral mandate, because likely in a race like the Auckland mayoralty with a 100 percent turnout the winning candidate might only have 10 to 15 percent of the total vote.

Assuming the 30 percnt who do vote, vote because they care and are passionate, then it’s likely they are informed and the Bob Parker factor won’t be an issue. The dopes in Auckland who want Parker for Mayor probably won’t vote any way.

I have in the past been deeply concerned that NZers don’t vote, and felt that apathy is what allows bad things to happen. I challenge all shareholders to vote and behave like owners. It is better than it was, but shareholder voting statistics still resemble local body politics. Maybe I was wrong. Stupid, uniformed voting is worse than having the vote restricted to those who care.

However, some care too much and are not beyond trying to rig the polls. First past the post is susceptible to this, particularly with marginal electorate manipulation. In local body politics, low turnouts can mean quite small numbers change things.

Now before I complain about the apparent manipulation of the Papatoetoe ward in Auckland by the Indian Community, I should fess up to doing the same thing myself in 1984 (I wouldn’t want to be caught out like some Act MPs). In 1984, I lived in Mount Albert. A Labour horse could get elected in Mount Albert, and arguably  this occurred. So I deliberately moved into Mount Eden so I could vote Labour to get rid of Muldoon.   I did actually move into Mount Eden for the requisite three months, and I only moved myself, not my entire family and I also didn’t register myself multiple times or use false identities.

What happened in Papatoetoe is a number of Indians allegedly moved into the area to most likely vote for the Indian candidates. Certainly overcrowding in South Auckland is an issue, but 80-plus electors in one house? Clearly Electoral Act offences have been committed and the police are investigating.

You might well ask why they would do this? Democracy is a very western concept and is anchored in our values and beliefs, it is naive of us to attempt to impose democracy on others without understanding their cultures and beliefs.

So the farce of local body politics, is this, small turnout, means low numbers matter, those who care can and do fight it out, and it sometimes becomes quite dirty. It is a once- in-three year wake up call for the rest of us, about how little most of us care, and how uninformed and stupid most of us are politically.

The new issue this time, is the role of immigrants, and the impact beyond their numbers that they can have in local body politics when they behave in our country as they might in their own (and even with MMP their impact can be decisive in national politics too).

We really do need to confront the issue of universal suffrage head on. Should permanent residents to our country really have the right to vote the moment they jump off the boat?

My argument is that only citizens of our country should be entitled to vote. Anyone who is here without taking a citizenship stake in our country should not be entitled to vote at all. Citizenship should be special, and we should all take pride in our citizenship of NZ. So I would go a step further, and say, every citizen must swear an oath of allegiance to NZ and no citizen may carry a passport other than a NZ passport. All those who want foriegn passports as well should be denied NZ citizenship.

Why do I think this? Because voting is important. It is about setting the path for our country’s future. I would prefer to trust those that have nowhere else to go with the future of this country than a bunch of immigrants fresh out of the transit lounges of our airports.

Now I took this line in a speech around a month ago, and an English immigrant to NZ, said to me afterwards , that he had lived in a number of countries, he is an intelligent and desirable worker, and this is the first country he has ever been entitled to vote in as soon as he landed. He was astounded and agreed with me.

So lessons out of the local body farce.

• Better that those who care vote and those who don’t, don’t. Low turnout is likely to be better than a big turnout.

• First past the post appears to still work,  particularly as it neutralises the random voting of the stupid.

• Crisis is good for politicians, if they behave well.

• Immigrants don’t understand our culture and can have devastating effects on our electoral processes. They see democracy in a different light to us.

It is time for NZ to find its national identity and some pride in that identity.