Local Body Election Reforms

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29831, 25 May 1962, Page 8

Local Body Election Reforms

A section of last session’s Local Elections and Polls Amendment Act was widely welcomed because it was designed to counter the indifference that resulted in the election of some local bodies by ridiculously small proportions of electors. Three experimental procedures that might produce larger polls were defined—the holding of elections over consecutive days; the use of mobile polling booths in addition to the ordinary booths; and voting by post. If proposals for the adoption of any of these methods were approved, the electoral provisions of the principal act were to be modified by Order-in-Council in each case. The Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr Goto) had a good response to his invitation, 40 local bodies asking to conduct next October’s elections by experimental procedures, 25 in the South Island and 15 in the North Island. Twentysix boroughs and cities and 10 counties sought permission to spread voting over a period ranging from 14 days to two days; four counties sought permission to hold postal ballots; and one city among those desiring to spread voting also wished to use mobile polling booths. It might have been expected that the Minister would gladly support each applicant willipg to try his plans, or at least that he would reject applicants only for the strongest reasons. “ After careful “ consideration ”, he has

selected six local bodies that may spread voting, one over 14 days, the rest over six days. Two will be allowed to hold postal ballots. Why has the Minister so drastically restricted numbers, thus reducing the value of the experiment? His decisions do not seem to be based on the capacity or otherwise of particular local bodies to hold polls under changed procedures. This is the inference from the rejection of the Waimairi County Council’s application to spread voting and the Christchurch City Council’s application to spread voting and use mobile polling booths. The Minister still has time to reconsider his attitude.

Though the Christchurch City Council is to be commended for seeking to experiment with new methods, why has it neglected the ward system, which might be the best method of increasing public interest in voting in a. large city? For too long electors have been dismayed by long lists of candidates for the council —many of them no more than names. Five years ago the Deputy-Mayor (Cr. H. P. Smith) was cogently arguing the merits of elections by wards; and it was widely expected that the Citizens’ Association would introduce the system in 1959. That election passed and it seems that another, at least, will pass with nothing done about a com-

mon-sense reform for which legislative authority already exists.