There were 692,430 people enroled who didn't vote & another 367,608 who were eligible but didn't enrol; 20% of under-40s didn't enrol, while 1% of over-60s didn't enrol; 183,169 fewer voters than 2020
i was pondering exaclty this, this morning!! look forward to digging in. ABC broke down the voting demographics across referendums (we are still in deep mourning after the weekend, as much of the broken nation will be for some time), which showed trends across age/ education/ urban or regional etc. I enjoyed the breakdown (slight segue to this thread, as it doesn't cover the absent vote), but it still leaves us nowhere we're not listening to our young people or making decisions for future generations: 'Beyond No, here’s what we know about the Voice results' https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-15/voice-results-explained-map/102978520?fbclid=IwAR2SUWA21xHRZ1EteJRLaY6eyvxBHVyeFmExtuN-vbt11WczdG2KpyIDZzs
• making both enrolment and voting compulsory, but with small ‘citizenship payments’ for all those who vote (possibly $100 per voter to a charity of the voters’ choice), and a larger citizenship payment (possibly $1,000 per voter) for each of the first council and general election votes, rather than a fine - call me cynical but I don't think this would move voting rates much
Or how about letting parties pay voters to vote for them. Yeah, sounds like corruption doesn't it? But instead of a party spending all that money on advertising they spend some of it directly with voters.
As you fill in your voting form a party member looks over your shoulder to check you're voting correctly and they then hand over the agreed amount in tax free cash.
Devil in the detail: - should each party pay the same amount in every electorate or can it pick and choose e.g. TOP paying voters $1,000 in Ilam, but nowhere else?
We need angel investors to fund the creation of an active coordinated think tank & fact checking organisation with full time coordinators bridging academia & news media.
Preferably staffed with accredited academics & professional journalists rather than aged agitators such as myself. Although I'm willing to volunteer whatever time I can spare.
If anyone is feeling overwhelmed I recommend the bitter sweet but very droll take on Saturday’s debacle by Haydn Donnell (Spinoff). It will make you laugh and cry.
We don't know why they didn't vote, or which way they would have voted, the only thing we actually do know was there was a very significant shift against the incumbent to almost every other party, left or right leaning. That probably indicates where the problem lies.
Issues with the performance of the electoral commission need to be addressed, like election information arriving after the start of early voting as many (including mine) did.
And the electronic roll going down on the day which slowed the voting process down considerably especially for the Special Voters. Still queues at many booths when voting was due to close at 7.00pm.
Strongly in favour of lowering the voting age, increasing civic education; and voting/ engagement as a celebratory community event(s). This, plus the analysis you did on the Ack Council elections really has me wondering what can be done to solve the dis-engagement. Wish i had more to offer in the way of solutions, but I watch this thread with interest. Instinctively not keen on payments to vote, but keeping an open mind depending on the ultimate impact on behaviour and engagement. Appreciate the breakdown, thank you.
The two referendain 2020, with all the extra effort and attention these generated, gave people more of a reason to rock up. The prospect of real change beckoned. Perhaps looking at regular ballots like this could be the way to go. They could also break the flip-flop that happens when a new government is formed and the new lot chuck out what the last lot did.
We are all accountable for the democracy we create. People don't vote because they are not engaged....this occurs when you feel forced to choose the least stupid option rather than the most inspiring. We should have the opportunity to vote no confidence in any party and voting should be compulsory. By allowing you to vote that you don't support any of the options in front of you, you are creating a database of dissatisfaction that should incentivise new players to enter.
Yeah, include a party vote option called "None of the above" and if enough vote this way to break the 5% threshold then they get seats in parliament. No-one will actually sit in the seat but it is taken to always vote against any and all legislation.
I doubt anyone will ever be 100% happy with all of a major party's policies. But ranked choice voting might at least make the situation feel less 'hopeless', by allowing voters to consider the "wasted vote" parties more seriously?
Yep, that's a version of it (ranked choice voting can theoretically be implemented in a variety of ways), but basically any voting system that allows you to cast a vote with a "backup" in case your preferred choice doesn't pass some threshold - meaning no voter gets disenfranchised by a non-plurality choice
Digging a bit deeper into “ranked choice” voting, I’m tending to favour the IRV model - instant runoff voting - in electorate seats, perhaps limiting it to 1st, 2nd and 3rd preferences. Even 2 preferences would be better than the current, inadequate and deficient first past the post FPTP method. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
You're on the money, Bernard, as ever. You'll get replies enough about voting but I hope you pursue this avidly. It drives me crazy that the rich vote for their own interests - which is perhaps fair enough - but the poor don't which is a tragedy. There are more of them and the next 100 years are going to be about the commons, not private interest, if we're to have any chance of a future. Good stuff.
A pathetic voter turn-out at my daughter's college (for their board of trustee student rep election) inspired me to pen this a little while back... In my (humble) opinion, the best thing we could do for democracy is provide *topical* education at the start of a voter's journey - and there's one way to do that reliably - https://littleteapot.substack.com/p/make-it-12 ;-)
You may be interested to know, Bernard, that there are already options for including an understanding of government and the election processes - see the list of Level 2 unit standards in Legal Studies here, so there is plenty of scope for schools to offer these as a complete programme for one subject or as single unit standards.
Then its up to the school to choose to offer the subject (or single unit standards) and the student to choose that's what they want to do.
For it to be useful in a school's programme it needs to have credits attached to it because learners need the credits to achieve the Level 2 certificate.
There are other ways of doing this too: I do some tutoring for a student who studies through Te Kura. For a L2 English standard (Select, read, analyse and summarise texts) she wanted help to know about the election and how to decide what to vote so we came up with a ton of questions: What is MMP, who are the parties and what do they stand for, who are the candidates in my electorate etc.
Hi Caroline, whilst that option is encouraging, how many students out of the school population actually take Legal Studies at Level 2? I'm guessing it would be well under 10%? I'm a former Social Studies teacher, and the curriculum includes a topic on government and politics. But sadly too many social studies classes in NZ are taught by non-social science teachers just to fill the teaching spaces. We really need to make civics and environmental education compulsory subjects taught by subject specialists. Until this happens many if not most of our teenagers leave school blissfully ignorant of the world that their parents and grandparents have made such a mess of, and they are not aware of their power to enact positive changes on future society.
No idea on stats, Rick, but I thought folk might be interested to see there is some possibilities for students, depending on what subjects are offered.
Interesting ways to embed legal studies and environmental education. I'm not sure about lowering the voting age to 16. However, I went to a youth conference when I was about 14 at a marae ( many years ago) It was held over a couple of days. It was very nurturing, we were fed, listened to and given opportunities to discuss issues. Esme Tombleson talked to us and I remember Peter Boshier was there as a student. Quite a diverse range of opinions - maybe something similar could be offered now ( many years later). I guess there is always the issue of bias. I think local or council politics could be a good start.
NCEA credits are a good option but there is always the thought of teaching to credits but then again the point can get accross.
Luxon wants to merge with or acquire other parties already, didn't take him long to want to create a total monopoly 😜 In all seriousness though, his first act as PM is to be done in secrecy. He really didn't get the memo of what it means to be in public life did he? Please be vigilant to spot any future attempts to subvert transparency. NZs transparency in gov decision making is something I've admired, its not something most 'democracies' have.
Also agree with the solutions to get out the vote. Compulsory voting has served Australia well. Its not perfect, especially when civics education was guttered thanks to the neo-liberal counter insurgency of the 80/90s to today.
Additionally, young people have no hope for the future. This is why they don't vote.
Maybe the success of young candidates being elected to local governments and now to parliament will inspire more to get involved. I believe we would all benefit.
I think what would help is a vision for a different future, or the work needed to get through the transition between this 'world' and the next.
Federico Campagna (Italian philosopher): Sometimes you're born into the ending of a world. This is a thing that has happened before, in other times and places... How do you tell if the world you were born into is ending? A world is held together by a story and when a world is ending its story is coming to an end and when people talk about the future within the logic of that world, it no longer sounds convincing.
Thankyou Hamersley, it certainly feels like that especially regarding the way human beings define ‘success’ as endless growth and accumulation of wealth at the expense of the planet, each other, and future generations.
i was pondering exaclty this, this morning!! look forward to digging in. ABC broke down the voting demographics across referendums (we are still in deep mourning after the weekend, as much of the broken nation will be for some time), which showed trends across age/ education/ urban or regional etc. I enjoyed the breakdown (slight segue to this thread, as it doesn't cover the absent vote), but it still leaves us nowhere we're not listening to our young people or making decisions for future generations: 'Beyond No, here’s what we know about the Voice results' https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-15/voice-results-explained-map/102978520?fbclid=IwAR2SUWA21xHRZ1EteJRLaY6eyvxBHVyeFmExtuN-vbt11WczdG2KpyIDZzs
and for those interested in this aspect https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/15/indigenous-communities-overwhelmingly-voted-yes-to-australias-voice-to-parliament
• making both enrolment and voting compulsory, but with small ‘citizenship payments’ for all those who vote (possibly $100 per voter to a charity of the voters’ choice), and a larger citizenship payment (possibly $1,000 per voter) for each of the first council and general election votes, rather than a fine - call me cynical but I don't think this would move voting rates much
Or how about letting parties pay voters to vote for them. Yeah, sounds like corruption doesn't it? But instead of a party spending all that money on advertising they spend some of it directly with voters.
As you fill in your voting form a party member looks over your shoulder to check you're voting correctly and they then hand over the agreed amount in tax free cash.
Devil in the detail: - should each party pay the same amount in every electorate or can it pick and choose e.g. TOP paying voters $1,000 in Ilam, but nowhere else?
An element of the did not vote numbers will be discouraged voters (particularly in this case people who would usually vote Labour).
Why wouldn't they vote TOP in that case?
We need angel investors to fund the creation of an active coordinated think tank & fact checking organisation with full time coordinators bridging academia & news media.
Preferably staffed with accredited academics & professional journalists rather than aged agitators such as myself. Although I'm willing to volunteer whatever time I can spare.
Also
https://substack.com/@nzheretic/note/c-20890757
I know the conversation provides some of this role, but there is no active coordination.
https://theconversation.com/nz
If anyone is feeling overwhelmed I recommend the bitter sweet but very droll take on Saturday’s debacle by Haydn Donnell (Spinoff). It will make you laugh and cry.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/16-10-2023/winners-losers-big-losers-and-gigantic-losers-from-the-2023-general-election
"Few other parties managed to execute these complex strategic manoeuvres."
We don't know why they didn't vote, or which way they would have voted, the only thing we actually do know was there was a very significant shift against the incumbent to almost every other party, left or right leaning. That probably indicates where the problem lies.
Issues with the performance of the electoral commission need to be addressed, like election information arriving after the start of early voting as many (including mine) did.
And the electronic roll going down on the day which slowed the voting process down considerably especially for the Special Voters. Still queues at many booths when voting was due to close at 7.00pm.
Strongly in favour of lowering the voting age, increasing civic education; and voting/ engagement as a celebratory community event(s). This, plus the analysis you did on the Ack Council elections really has me wondering what can be done to solve the dis-engagement. Wish i had more to offer in the way of solutions, but I watch this thread with interest. Instinctively not keen on payments to vote, but keeping an open mind depending on the ultimate impact on behaviour and engagement. Appreciate the breakdown, thank you.
Is the inclusion of a referendum in a general election an incentive to get people out to vote?
The two referendain 2020, with all the extra effort and attention these generated, gave people more of a reason to rock up. The prospect of real change beckoned. Perhaps looking at regular ballots like this could be the way to go. They could also break the flip-flop that happens when a new government is formed and the new lot chuck out what the last lot did.
We are all accountable for the democracy we create. People don't vote because they are not engaged....this occurs when you feel forced to choose the least stupid option rather than the most inspiring. We should have the opportunity to vote no confidence in any party and voting should be compulsory. By allowing you to vote that you don't support any of the options in front of you, you are creating a database of dissatisfaction that should incentivise new players to enter.
Yeah, include a party vote option called "None of the above" and if enough vote this way to break the 5% threshold then they get seats in parliament. No-one will actually sit in the seat but it is taken to always vote against any and all legislation.
I doubt anyone will ever be 100% happy with all of a major party's policies. But ranked choice voting might at least make the situation feel less 'hopeless', by allowing voters to consider the "wasted vote" parties more seriously?
By ‘ranked choice’ do you mean STV (single transferable vote) rather than our current party vote, Tim?
Yep, that's a version of it (ranked choice voting can theoretically be implemented in a variety of ways), but basically any voting system that allows you to cast a vote with a "backup" in case your preferred choice doesn't pass some threshold - meaning no voter gets disenfranchised by a non-plurality choice
Ideal system for the electorate vote.
Digging a bit deeper into “ranked choice” voting, I’m tending to favour the IRV model - instant runoff voting - in electorate seats, perhaps limiting it to 1st, 2nd and 3rd preferences. Even 2 preferences would be better than the current, inadequate and deficient first past the post FPTP method. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
You're on the money, Bernard, as ever. You'll get replies enough about voting but I hope you pursue this avidly. It drives me crazy that the rich vote for their own interests - which is perhaps fair enough - but the poor don't which is a tragedy. There are more of them and the next 100 years are going to be about the commons, not private interest, if we're to have any chance of a future. Good stuff.
Remember how moving it was when everyone in South Africa first got the right to vote. The queues and the exuberation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwMBMfvdEsk
So a 73% government. Bit reminiscent of those unknowns in the polls.
A pathetic voter turn-out at my daughter's college (for their board of trustee student rep election) inspired me to pen this a little while back... In my (humble) opinion, the best thing we could do for democracy is provide *topical* education at the start of a voter's journey - and there's one way to do that reliably - https://littleteapot.substack.com/p/make-it-12 ;-)
You may be interested to know, Bernard, that there are already options for including an understanding of government and the election processes - see the list of Level 2 unit standards in Legal Studies here, so there is plenty of scope for schools to offer these as a complete programme for one subject or as single unit standards.
https://www.nzqa.govt.nz/ncea/assessment/search.do?query=legal+studies&view=all&level=02&_gl=1*1r4kt1b*_ga*MTg1MTM3NzA2OS4xNjY3MTY3OTI3*_ga_TFQQ681L2E*MTY5NzQwNzU4Ni4zNjEuMS4xNjk3NDA5ODg2LjAuMC4w.
Then its up to the school to choose to offer the subject (or single unit standards) and the student to choose that's what they want to do.
For it to be useful in a school's programme it needs to have credits attached to it because learners need the credits to achieve the Level 2 certificate.
There are other ways of doing this too: I do some tutoring for a student who studies through Te Kura. For a L2 English standard (Select, read, analyse and summarise texts) she wanted help to know about the election and how to decide what to vote so we came up with a ton of questions: What is MMP, who are the parties and what do they stand for, who are the candidates in my electorate etc.
Hi Caroline, whilst that option is encouraging, how many students out of the school population actually take Legal Studies at Level 2? I'm guessing it would be well under 10%? I'm a former Social Studies teacher, and the curriculum includes a topic on government and politics. But sadly too many social studies classes in NZ are taught by non-social science teachers just to fill the teaching spaces. We really need to make civics and environmental education compulsory subjects taught by subject specialists. Until this happens many if not most of our teenagers leave school blissfully ignorant of the world that their parents and grandparents have made such a mess of, and they are not aware of their power to enact positive changes on future society.
No idea on stats, Rick, but I thought folk might be interested to see there is some possibilities for students, depending on what subjects are offered.
Interesting ways to embed legal studies and environmental education. I'm not sure about lowering the voting age to 16. However, I went to a youth conference when I was about 14 at a marae ( many years ago) It was held over a couple of days. It was very nurturing, we were fed, listened to and given opportunities to discuss issues. Esme Tombleson talked to us and I remember Peter Boshier was there as a student. Quite a diverse range of opinions - maybe something similar could be offered now ( many years later). I guess there is always the issue of bias. I think local or council politics could be a good start.
NCEA credits are a good option but there is always the thought of teaching to credits but then again the point can get accross.
Luxon wants to merge with or acquire other parties already, didn't take him long to want to create a total monopoly 😜 In all seriousness though, his first act as PM is to be done in secrecy. He really didn't get the memo of what it means to be in public life did he? Please be vigilant to spot any future attempts to subvert transparency. NZs transparency in gov decision making is something I've admired, its not something most 'democracies' have.
Also agree with the solutions to get out the vote. Compulsory voting has served Australia well. Its not perfect, especially when civics education was guttered thanks to the neo-liberal counter insurgency of the 80/90s to today.
Additionally, young people have no hope for the future. This is why they don't vote.
Maybe the success of young candidates being elected to local governments and now to parliament will inspire more to get involved. I believe we would all benefit.
I think what would help is a vision for a different future, or the work needed to get through the transition between this 'world' and the next.
Federico Campagna (Italian philosopher): Sometimes you're born into the ending of a world. This is a thing that has happened before, in other times and places... How do you tell if the world you were born into is ending? A world is held together by a story and when a world is ending its story is coming to an end and when people talk about the future within the logic of that world, it no longer sounds convincing.
Thankyou Hamersley, it certainly feels like that especially regarding the way human beings define ‘success’ as endless growth and accumulation of wealth at the expense of the planet, each other, and future generations.
Can we set up an online course for democratic involvement in NZ?
Like a masterclass course lol.