Applied Democracy: The Local Electoral Act

August 2001

The Triennial Local Government Elections on 13 October will be the first to be conducted under the long awaited Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA).

The LEA, which came into force in July this year, is a vast improvement on the old legislation with provision for greater flexibility, time saving technologies and closer alignment with central government election processes.

The new Act tidies up several technical issues in the previous legislation, while introducing a number of new features. Importantly, it allows for the introduction of new technology to be applied to the vote collection, recording and counting process. It will apply to elections and polls conducted on behalf of Territorial Local Authorities, Regional Councils, Community Boards, Licensing Trusts, and, for the first time this year, District Health Boards.

STV system coming to local government

The application of the legislation to District Health Boards, in effect, forces the hand of local government to accommodate another voting system.

District Health Boards must be elected by Single Transferable Voting (STV) from 2004 according to the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act.
The Local Electoral Act provides for first past the post (FPP) as the only electoral system for the election this year, but allows the local authority to change its electoral system by resolution at any time up to 12 September in the year that is two years before the next election. An electoral system must be either FPP or STV. There is also a right for a minimum five percent of electors to call for a poll on the electoral system, or a local authority can itself resolve to hold a poll to determine which system should apply. Once determined by poll an electoral system remains in place for a minimum of two elections, and for all subsequent elections until the local authority resolves otherwise, or there is another poll.

As systems will need to be designed to conduct an STV election for the District Health Boards from 2004, it seems inevitable that at least some local authorities will opt for such a system for their own elections.

Voting Methods

The new Act also makes provision for changes to the voting method to be adopted by resolution. The Act defines the voting method as including booth voting, postal voting, electronic voting, any combination of the foregoing, or "any other method of voting". However, for now the Local Electoral Regulations 2001 restrict local authorities to a choice of booth voting, postal voting or a combination of the two. In any event the default voting method is postal voting, which was the universal voting method applied at the last local government elections in 1998.

Candidate Profiles

The option for candidates to provide candidate profile statements to the electoral officer, who must then provide copies to electors with their voting documents is a new provision. A candidate profile can contain a passport size photograph of the candidate, and up to 150 words of text containing information about the candidate or any group they are affiliated to, and their policies and intentions if elected. Candidate profile statements have been used in elections conducted under other legislation and have proved useful to electors.

Vote Processing Efficiencies

The innovation at the 1998 election which allowed votes to be processed (but not counted) in the week to prior to the polling day has been extended in the new Act. This move was popular with many local authorities because it allowed votes to be processed more efficiently and enabled the final count to be undertaken quickly after close of voting. Local authorities can now resolve that voting documents are to processed throughout the voting period which in the case of postal voting means the 22.5 days preceding noon on polling day. Votes can be processed, but not counted until after the close of voting. Although scrutiners are not permitted to be present during early processing of voting documents, the integrity of the process is preserved by a requirement that Election Officers appoint Justices of the Peace to observe early processing.

Electoral expenses limited… and stiff penalties for breaches

Potential candidates will be interested in new provisions limiting electoral expenses. Within 55 days of the declaration of election results all candidates must provide the Electoral Office with a return stating their electoral expenses, and recording all donations of $1000 or more. This return is open for public inspection for a period of six months before being destroyed. The limit on electoral expenses varies according to the population of the local government area, ranging from $3,500 in a local government area with a population of less than 5,000 to $70,000 where the population equals or exceeds 250,000. If a candidate is standing for more than one election, the election expenses may not exceed the highest amount permitted for any of the elections in which they are standing.

Significant penalties are imposed for any breach of these provisions. There is a fine of up to $5,000 for exceeding the expense limits. Failure to submit a return attracts a fine of $1,000, and, if the candidate was successful an additional $400 per day until the return is made. A false return can result in up to two years in prison or a fine of up to $10,000 if made knowingly, or otherwise a fine of up to $5,000.

Nor should these provisions or the other offence provisions of the Act be treated lightly. An Electoral Officer is required to report to the police any complaint made to him that an offence has being committed, or a belief that an offence may have been committed.

Other changes

The Act makes numerous procedural changes to the old legislation, including changes to the form of election documents and the manner in which electoral rolls are compiled. For example awareness of the ratepayer franchise will be boosted by a requirement to include an advice notice in a rates assessment delivered before September in an election year. The Act also clarifies the situation when an individual is elected both to a local authority and to a Community Board within that local authority district. If the local authority wishes to make that person one of its appointees to the Community Board, they must first resign as an elected member, and an extraordinary vacancy will be created which is filled by the next highest polling candidate.

These and other changes should please Electoral Officers long frustrated by the provisions of the Local Elections and Polls Act 1976. Dale Ofsoske of Independent Election Services Ltd, and the Electoral Officer for Auckland City Council and others, was a member of the SOLGM working party involved in the legislative review. According to Ofsoske "We are very pleased with the outcome which has made the legislation far more flexible and workable than previously".

Future technology

The most practical effect of the new legislation is likely to be the provision allowing new voting methods to be adopted. Elections are costly and labour intensive. But it is essential to the democratic process that they are conducted efficiently, in a manner which ensures complete public trust in the process, and produce a swift and reliable result. It is to be hoped that emerging technology will allow elections to be conducted in a manner that both reduces costs and meets these objectives. The new Act should ensure that such technology is rapidly integrated into the electoral process.