Whatever the Electoral Commission did we didn’t think about it beyond occasionally wondering about boundary changes. These assumptions are under threat.
It began with the Electoral Commission requiring anyone wanting to work for it during the 2023 election to sign up for adherence to the Treaty and its principles.
You could argue that since all government agencies have to adhere to these principles nothing was out of the ordinary. But we all know that there are rules and regulations governing our behaviour. Sometimes there are particular rules concerning employment situations and around working in a government environment. There are rules around health and safety in the workplace. Some of these would be in a contract for a particular job. But there is no reason for singling out the Treaty for a basic belief of a potential worker.
Then the goodie bag arrived with a card for us to flash to make it easier when we were casting our votes. Only it didn’t arrive to everyone at the same time. Some received theirs up to a week after others.
This mattered more because we have a crazy system where you can vote early while electioneering is still happening. The late arrival of the card meant there were some who had different amounts of time for early voting than the bulk of the electorate.
You didn’t need the card to vote, but this too added confusion to the process, since without the goodie bag you might not have been aware of that.
Then the Electoral Commission in its wisdom decided to leave hundreds of voting booths out of the list of places to vote. Well at least on the official election day. Some of these were left out on the day but were open for a tantalising teaser on a random day or afternoon during the early voting period. The information in the goodie bag also told people where they could vote and when if you thought to look. But reducing polling booths is not like reducing ATM coverage when cash is going out of fashion.
Those eligible to vote could both enrol and vote right up until the close of the official election day. Those who had not been enrolled before then needed ID.
Those who had the magic card needed none. I could have scooped up various cards of various people and wandered around casting their votes for them.
At some polling booths there were complaints that the right forms were not available and people gave up and went home.
Some of these irregularities and quirks matter. And even more concerningly they matter differently to different parties.
Older people are more likely to vote, and are more likely to vote conservatively. Young people are more likely to vote Green, and more likely to vote if it is really easy. Rural people are generally more blue voting and urban people more red voting.
So a failure to deliver information and voting cards in some areas has a different effect than in others. Closing polling booths where they are less used, i.e. country areas, makes it harder for rural voters. A higher turnout favours the Left.
Accepting early votes while people are still electioneering means that those who vote at the proper time on election day are in possession of information which others do not have.
There are some changes we could make without interfering in a fair process. If we didn’t have early voting except for special voting for those who have a special reason, we could reduce the cost without losing democracy. And half a million special votes has delayed the outcome, not speeded it up. We may be able to have them counted electronically in a more efficient fashion.
There will be a review of the election process. This process will only, however, answer the questions it asks. And it will only answer according to an overall theme rather than looking at how it affected different parts of the electorate.
For example, it may review what percentage of the electorate voted, but it is not their business to look into which demographic was affected and how. It may look into whether the choices had a disproportionate effect on Māori but not necessarily on Asian voters. It is unlikely to reflect on the choice of places urban voters could go compared with those of Saturday working people in rural areas.
A review of this election is likely to raise again the idea of internet voting or postal voting. Internet voting favours those who are familiar and connected to the internet, more likely to be younger and more left leaning. Postal voting is not likely to encourage more connected voting.
Older voters are significantly more likely to vote with the current arrangements.
If the Electoral Commission wants to encourage more voting overall without fear or favour it would be better to concentrate on making an election day a celebration of democracy and encouraging a focus on everyone getting out there.
Voting is not something we should be trying to get done cheaply. Democracy is expensive. It’s because it’s worth it.
- Hilary Calvert is a former Otago regional councillor, MP and DCC councillor.
