No wonder voters don’t care — the Govt doesn’t
Auckland has a few crises at the moment: housing, transport, climate. After the recent local government elections, is it time to add local democracy to the list?
Auckland Council spent $1.6 million on the “Love Auckland” campaign in the past two elections, trying to get Aucklanders to vote. In 2016, 93 per cent said they were aware the elections had been on. But only 38.5 per cent voted. This year it is down to 34.7 per cent.
Although those involved congratulate themselves on the level of “awareness” achieved, they miss the point that we may love Auckland but we do not love the council — and so do not see much point voting for it.
Although the country’s largest city received its lowest voter turnout, the country’s 11 cities collectively dropped to a new low of 37.8 per cent.
The parliamentary inquiry into the 2013 local elections (then the lowest turnout election) investigated and made a series of thoughtful recommendations.
These included creating a national voting campaign rather than 80 separate ones; shortening the voting period; moving the date to avoid school holidays; making ballot boxes more widely available; trialling online voting; introducing civics teaching into the classroom and improving the voting form.
None of these were accepted by the then government. A key reason was that the “local government sector holds the expertise in running local elections”. But how is that working out? The worst turnout ever, six years after the worst turnout ever.
The 2016 inquiry has now been rolled in with the 2017 equivalent and there is hope of alignment with its recommendations, for example, having the Electoral Commission promote local elections and reduce the polling time. These are relatively easy to achieve and would address the two key reasons Local Government NZ (LGNZ) research said people don’t vote: they do not have enough information about the candidates or their policies, and they lack interest.
LGNZ also found local governments internationally with a greater range of responsibility and functions received greater turnout: cities in Denmark and Estonia get more than 60 per cent. But, despite successive Productivity Commission reports recommending it, nothing like it is on the government agenda.
Online voting should be trialled but AUT’s Policy Observatory reported that when Ontario introduced it, turnout rose by only 3.5 per cent and more than half the voters did not vote.
National political parties running candidates directly in local elections or endorsing them is not a panacea either. In England, where the Conservatives, Labour and others all compete, turnout is lower than in New Zealand. In the Auckland areas where Labour local candidates dominate, turnout is lowest.
Councils can wait for governments to act, but there is no sign it is a priority. Local government or election reform do not feature in either of the governing agreements the Labour Party has with the Green Party and NZ First, and Labour had no specific local government or elections policies in 2017.
The $1.6m Auckland Council spent on this year’s election amounts to just $1.50 for each of the eligible voters in Auckland. It is easy to see why we got so little return from such a paltry investment. Unpopular as raising council spending is, this will be essential if governments fail to act.
But the council should stop running the campaign itself. It is constrained by its “good news” communications approach and does not have modern, marketing capabilities. We know this because it ignored its own thoughtful 2018 study on Increasing Voter Turnout Using Behavioural Insights. This found personto-person campaigning, direct mail and social pressure or comparison advertising had the most impact. We could have done this with other innovative initiatives. Perhaps it will cost $1-$2 more per voter. Shall I start passing the can around?