In New Zealand, we enjoy many freedoms. The constraints and demands the State imposes on us are minimal in comparison to our liberties. It is hardly onerous to expect people to go to a polling booth once every three years. If nearly one million people are too disengaged to make this negligible effort, they need to be compelled to do so. Whether they put a blank, scribbled upon or correctly filled out voting paper into the ballot box remains their choice - their democratic rights aren't being violated. Compulsory polling station attendance recognises that democratic rights are inextricably linked to participatory responsibilities, even if casting an invalid vote is the extent of someone's political involvement.
Another reason it is erroneous to justify non-compulsory voting in terms of people's freedom of choice is that socioeconomic status and education are related to political participation. Socioeconomically disadvantaged and poorly educated people have limited opportunities to become politically savvy. Such unfortunate life circumstances are, at the very least through people's formative years, not freely chosen. So, it is nonsensical to defend such people's political unawareness, disconnection and resultant voting abstention in terms of freedom of choice.
Such a justification is disingenuous because it covers the real reasons for disenfranchised people's political withdrawal with lip service to freedom of choice that was never genuinely free.
Legislating to compel political participation is not enough. Regardless of political belief, people who vote generally appreciate the intrinsic value of the democratic voting process that we enjoy in New Zealand. It is exceptional to exercise a right that cuts through ethnic, generational, philosophical and socioeconomic divides. Although laws could be created to get people into polling booths, such legislation could not make people feel the inherent decency and goodness of having a democratic, untainted voting system.
In Australia, where voting is compulsory, some critics point out that obligatory voting masks the deeper problem of political disillusionment, particularly among young people. Clearly, requiring people to go to polling booths on Election Day is just a small step towards addressing political apathy. It is not a magic potion. Longer-term solutions need to be considered.
Civic education in schools is a possible bulwark against youth political alienation. Students would need to be given a holistic account of political history. It would be useful to have occasional guest speakers from other countries who have risked their lives to vote, as well as inviting MPs from a range of parties to speak. Surely, confidential voting could be incorporated into at least a few aspects of school life, thus giving students a dry run before they vote in general elections.
Recently, John Key said, "If you don't vote you can't complain." He's right. It is hollow to abstain from voting, yet complain about the election outcome and resulting policy decisions. It is called voting by omission - if you don't vote by casting a ballot, you tacitly vote for the status quo by sitting on your backside. Unspoken approval of the present state of affairs is only one explanation for non-voting. There are also age, immigration and socioeconomic factors, as well as pre-election polls creating a feeling that one party has victory in the bag, thus making voting seem futile.
Urgent action needs to be taken to address political disaffection in New Zealand. Mandatory polling booth attendance and civic education are just two strategies amongst many possible ways of making people feel politically efficacious.
Gemma Claire works in the deaf community as a freelance New Zealand Sign Language interpreter.
