A DAY WITH THE ELECTORS... “Leadership” is the main topic

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 34012, 28 November 1975, Page 1

A DAY WITH THE ELECTORS... “Leadership” is the main topic

(By

STAFF REPORTERS)

By far the most talked-of feature of the General Election campaign has been the question of party leadership. But it may not be the question that decides the election. Electors who are not strongly committed to vote for one party or another have many other subjects on their minds. On Wednesday, “The Press” had a reporting team interview 75 electors in all parts of Christchurch — young and old people, voters of all persuasions, new voters, and entrenched partystalwarts. We found that while the leadership question was not the issue that determined the committed voters to continue their habit, it was certainly the topic that interested them most during the campaign. And it was the most prominent subject of conversation when they talked with friends or acquaintances about the election. Talking to people who had

repeatedly voted for one party we found many who deplored the prominence of the leadership debate. They object to the “bickering,” “personality clashes,” “mudslinging,? “fights on TV,” and the attention given to leadership at the expense of policy discussions. “The casting of too many aspersions clouded the issues,” one woman told us. Other electors were inclined to blame both major parties for what they regarded as too much emphasis on the party leaders. Several voters with longstanding loyalty to a party made up their minds for Saturday’s vote only this month, or even as late as this week. Among the 23 electors we identified as uncommitted voters, or as new voters, we found that half made up their minds firmly during the campaign; five made their decision this week.

Of the 75 people we interviewed, 44 were regular voters for a party; 15 were obviously not committed by regular voting for any party; eight will be voting for the first time; and on Wednes-

day another eight said they had not decided how they would vote.

The great avalanche of pamphlets into people’s letter boxes does not seem to have bothered many voters. In fact, more than half of the entrenched voters told us that they had read all the pamphlets they had seen. Many of them had read the pamphlets of all four parties. And nearly all the uncommitted voters read some or all of the pamphlets. Three-quarters of the electors listened to party broadcasts on radio, and nearly all the committed voters showed an interest in the radio programmes of all parties. Indeed, the committed voter seems to be the most attentive to political information, regardless of its source or of the medium by which it reaches him.

We met four people who had no television set. One man told us that he "switched himself off” when a special election programme was being shown on television. All the other electors have watched the special programmes. How influential was tele-

vision among the voters we met? Nearly all of our committed voters said, of course, that the programmes did nothing to alter their views. A dozen told us that their views were strengthened by what they saw and heard. Of our 15 uncommitted voters and eight new voters, 10 found that television had reinforced the views they held. Only two uncommitted voters attributed a change of heart to television programmes.

Most agreed, however, that television had helped them to understand issues. Still more felt they had a better understanding of political personalities. Hardly anyone had seen an election manifesto. Eight people had read or glanced at a manifesto, but none seemed to have changed his mind as a result. One man said that he had read the Values Party manifesto and had decided not to vote for that party.

Newspapers were the main source of information on party policies, though a few people must have relied

solely on what they learned through conversation.

Almost all the committed voters had read policy statements in the newspapers and rated these as “helpful” or “important” to their understanding. These people were also strong readers of party advertisements in newspapers and magazines, and a majority have been reading election reports and commentaries every day, or on most days of the campaign. Among uncommitted and new voters we found a greater proportion of people who never read political reports in newspapers, or who read them on only a few days during the campaign. Fewer than a quarter of the people we met had heard a candidate’s election address during the campaign. Indeed, the impression seemed strong that individual candidates have been lost from view.

In spite of the extensive door-knocking campaigns by some candidates, we found only 15 electors who had met a candidate, and none of

them were swinging voters or new voters.

All but a handful of our committed voters found their decision easy to make; and so did all of the new voters we met. This does not mean that the electors are clear in their minds about all aspects of policy. About half of those we met said that they were confused or puzzled on one or more issues.

The issue that has caused most bafflement is that of pensions and superannuation. This one particularly concerned the committed voters, and more especially the older electors among them. Although the problem was obviously not going to change their party allegiances, about a quarter of these voters were confused about superannuation proposals. When we asked electors what was uppermost in their minds in deciding how they would vote we were given a wide variety of answers: one said she did not like having a woman candidate in her electorate; others nominated the state of the economy, population policies, Labour’s

full—employment policy, economic mismanagement, health policies, policies for pensioners, “what is best for my business,” the influence of a family tradition in voting, and aversion to dictatorship by the Government on sport.

Some said that the parties’ farm policies were most important and one added that the tertiary education bursary was most important to him. Two or three electors made it clear that their final decision rested on a candidate’s attitude on abortion and homosexual law reform. Half a dozen of our uncommitted and new voters offered “leadership” as the point in mind when they finally made their decision. More were inclined to say that the leadership debate was what had made the campaign interesting.

Almost all of this group found that leadership was prominent in their conversation with other people; but the uncommitted electors offered as great a variety of j issues as the entrenched [voters when they told us what finally made up their 'minds.