There is, of course, a considerable irony in Winston Peters' championing of legislation that would ban opinion polls for 28 days before an election. Polls can bestow a kind of legitimacy on small parties by indicating that people will not waste their vote if they support them. And no party in recent history has benefited more from polls' ability to influence and galvanise voters' choice than New Zealand First. Consequently, the Greens and Act are clearly of the view that Mr Peters' initiative smacks more of folly than irony. In opposing the Electoral (Public Opinion Polls) Amendment Bill, the two parties acknowledged, as Mr Peters seems disinclined to, that their stars have shone brighter because of the psychological impact of polls. And their resistance was an indirect tribute to the dazzling bandwagon which propelled New Zealand First to peak poll support of 30 per cent at the height of its popularity in early 1996.
Yet whether pique at the outcome of the last election or issues of principle are Mr Peters' motivation, he is not necessarily blazing a lone trail. Labour and National allowed the bill's introduction, while reserving their positions. National, in its submission to the review on last year's election, went so far as to support a ban on polling a week from an election. Clearly, both it and Labour see value in traversing the wide spectrum of approaches to polling. They will find that, at one extreme, France fears the influence of polls so much that it bans them during election campaigns. At the other, countries such as the United States believe so strongly in freedom of political information that they allow people to be polled as they leave voting booths.
Even if issues of free speech are put to one side, however, there is no logical reason for taking the drastic step advocated by Mr Peters. He is right that some people undoubtedly want to be on the winning side and, therefore, shift their vote to a party which seems to be gaining support. But why should such people be denied information on the way others are leaning? If they choose to follow the wisdom of the crowd, so be it.
Just as pertinently, opinion polls are a major ingredient of an MMP system. They are particularly important for those who wish to distribute their constituency and party votes tactically. The past two elections have also illustrated the significance of polls in party strategy. In 1996, National, fearful that Act would not struggle above the 5 per cent threshold, signalled that its supporters in Wellington Central should cast their constituency vote for Richard Prebble. Last year, Labour sent out a similar call for its Coromandel supporters to vote for Green co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons.
Both Labour and National have, of course, the financial wherewithal to organise their own comprehensive polling. Information privately gathered dictates their strategy and is relayed to party members. No such luxury is enjoyed by smaller parties, which rely to a large degree on media polling. If, as Mr Peters suggests, polls were banned for 28 days before an election, the ban by any measure of fairness would have to encompass all forms of polling - party and public. The tactical manoeuvring of both parties and individual voters would, therefore, be severely restricted.
The New Zealand First leader also rails against rogue polls which, he says, all-powerful media are loath to correct. Yet if polls occasionally produce contradictory pictures, those that are properly conducted have a fairly good record for reliability, this newspaper's included. Their ability to reflect broadly consistent trends was illustrated again during last year's election campaign. The election-night results revealed only a slight overstatement of the support for small parties and a corresponding understatement of the backing for Labour and National. That degree of accuracy is, of course, why political parties lay so much store by them and are such keen customers of pollsters.
It is also why polls have become an intrinsic part of election campaigns in most democracies. People have every right to know what their fellow voters are thinking. If they are denied that right, what source will enable them to judge electoral prospects, particularly of the smaller parties? Democracy is best served by the free dissemination of information. Polls are an integral part of that process.
<i>Editorial:</i> Polls integral part of democratic way
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.