Appeal of the up or out approach

Ian Pottinger’s bid for the Invercargill mayoralty has one characteristic that distinguishes him from many previous councillors to challenge Sir Tim Shadbolt’s epic tenure: Councillor Pottinger is not hedging his bets.

After 12 years as a city councillor he is not seeking re-election in that role.

Essentially he’s saying he has contributed what he can as a councillor and it’s time either to step up for the leadership position and, if unwanted there, to step aside and make room for a fresh presence.

It’s an approach that has much to commend it. One that other potential challengers around the council chamber would do well to consider.

Other sitting councillors are also understood to be contemplating a crack on the job – former deputy mayors Darren Ludlow and Rebecca Amundsen both did so last time and were re-elected as councillors.

By seeking both positions they gave some of their softer supporters a fallback option of putting their mayoral vote elsewhere and returning them as councillors in something of a consolation prize.

The result could hardly be called stabilising. The council has this term proven a particularly tormented one for all concerned, with Sir Tim, older, slower and ever-increasingly subject of the charge, internally and externally, that he is no longer capable of routine disciplines of chairmanship, let alone vigorous leadership.

For his part, Sir Tim casts himself as persecuted, or at least picked upon. Unsupported. He would undoubtedly welcome the all-or-nothing approach from his opponents. In a recent column in The Southland Times he pointed to Pottinger, Ludlow, Amundsen and Alex Crackett as a group he believes has bullied and belittled him. Clearly he wants them gone, urging electors to ‘‘vote for new people who are not part of the current equation’’.

In any case, one point of agreement for voters regardless of their views on the mayor may well be that there is little point in repeating the present, rather malfunctioning, dynamic of returning all the present parties to their positions.

The need for some sort of cleanout is clear. What voters need to decide is the nature of it – whether just one departure, or some, or many will be required. And that depends in no small part on the calibre of the alternatives.

Conventional wisdom is that the more candidates who oppose an incumbent, the more the vote for change is likely to be split and the safer the sitting mayor will be. There’s an element of truth in that, though one of the strengths of the democratic process is that it often requires a challenger to campaign strongly to emerge from the herd.

To be fair, Pottinger’s all-or-nothing approach isn’t exactly unique among the mayoralty challengers this year. Also seeking the job from outside ICC ranks is Southland District mayor Gary Tong, who is departing that role to pursue his Invercargill candidacy.

Whether the other declared challenger, Noel Peterson, will seek to retain his Bluff Community Board membership is not yet clear, though it would be stretching things to consider that worthy role as much of career safety net in any case.

The ‘‘promote me or drop me’’ approach is hardly an unheard of strategy in local body elections.

In fact Sir Tim’s predecessor, Eve Poole, at the time a top-polling councillor, took the same approach in 1980 when she stood against the incumbent, Russell Miller.

It didn’t work, and she spent three years out of office before successfully seeking the role three years later. Then she prevailed and retained the mayoralty until her death.

The need for some sort of cleanout is clear. What voters need to decide is the nature of it.