POLLS APART

I read your editorial with dismay (“Vote of no confidence”, October 22). It said, “Those with name recognition, usually incumbents, have an inherent advantage, but the dearth of scrutiny masks the fact that a worrying percentage of them are time-servers or cranks.”

I’m sure there are a few time-servers or cranks, but isn’t that what an election is for – to weed them out and put the mostly well-meaning and hard-working people who stand to try to make their local area better on the council?

The editorial also decried the lack of youth participation and then picked on one young Auckland mayoral candidate, Chlöe Swarbrick, whose platform the editorial writer obviously disagreed with.

This is plain rude. Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Kudos to the young candidate for having the guts to stand.

I think most voters do their best to become informed about candidates and their

Your editorial was spot on – polling is down because of rampant voter apathy. Clearly, candidates with name recognition have an advantage, with the voting-inclined ticking the appropriate box.

But what makes would-be voters leery is the lengthy voting form. Intending voters could have been put off after John Key said on the radio that he had not read the Auckland brochure. What an example. Brian Collins, (Aro Valley, Wellington)