Bradford Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Bradford Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6408] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 One of the critical areas where the Government has got it wrong with this legislation is in relation to the voting system. The Green Party and many other individuals and organisations in Auckland strongly believe that it is absolutely vital that the single transferable vote system (STV) be used from the time of next year’s local body elections. I have an amendment in front of the Committee to that effect and I encourage all other parties to consider supporting it including ACT and the honourable Minister Rodney Hide who has just repeated again that he does actually support STV. 
The Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill as it stands adopts the first-past-the-post system for the election of the mayor councillors and local board members. I propose that we use STV instead for all three categories. 
It is a real pity that a majority on the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee went with first past the post as progress towards the super-city presents us all with a prime opportunity to provide much better democratic processes for Auckland rather than sticking with an old system that has mostly failed minority interests. For example we were told during the select committee hearings that no Maori person has ever been elected on to the Auckland City Council in its entire history. What an indictment on the voting processes used to date and on the power of Pakeha wealth and privilege that has allowed this to happen. This is a true relic of our colonial past. Using first past the post for the new arrangements will serve only to help maintain that power and privilege at a time when not only Maori but also other so-called minority groups such as Pasifika and Asian peoples are becoming a greater and greater proportion of our city’s population. Lianne Dalziel asked the Minister a very good question just before: what happens if there are no Maori councillors on the entire council? That is totally possible if we continue with the first-past-the-post voting system. 
The single transferable vote system is a far more democratic way of ensuring that all citizens will have their voices heard and their representatives elected. The majority of those who made submissions to the select committee on this question of voting systems supported STV. STV ensures that elected candidates while not necessarily being the preferred candidate of the majority of voters at least have majority support. It works by voters ranking candidates in order of preference—one two three and so on—with the candidate with the lowest number of votes being eliminated and that candidate’s votes showing second preferences and so on being transferred to other candidates until the quota is reached. 
For example with STV the new Mayor of Auckland could be voted in only with the majority of voters’ preferences—that is with at least 50 percent plus 1—and not by a minority of voters which could happen very easily under first past the post. We are talking about one of the most powerful positions in the whole country. It is very important that we get it right. What could happen under the first past the post system for example is a result like the one that happened in the Rodney District mayoral election in 2007 when the mayor was elected with the support of just over 20 percent of the voters and with less than 10 percent of registered electors declaring their active support for that candidate. 
Given that the Government has made the outrageous decision to refuse to allow guaranteed Maori seats on the new council it is even more critical that we have STV to maximise tangata whenua participation and representation. Although STV is at times derided because it is slightly more complex than first past the post there is no evidence that is has discouraged voter participation in other areas like Wellington where it has been used for local body elections. 
The Green Party believes that in the longer term STV may well increase voter participation as voters not only come to understand how the system works in practice but also see that it provides more legitimacy to local government by providing representatives who more truly typify their interests and aspirations. STV is fair because it is proportional. It is positive because nobody’s vote is wasted. It is representative allowing greater diversity among those elected. 
This legislation is the biggest change in local government arrangements ever made in this country at least that I know of. The Government is manifestly proud of what it is trying to accomplish. I challenge National and ACT to think again on the question of STV. I understand that National is genuinely keen to make the most of this dramatic new arrangement for Auckland. Why not use the best possible voting system right from the start rather than sticking with a process that is a poor second-best?