This year's extremely low voter turnout is occurring despite circumstances that should be driving increased public involvement. Firstly, there are a large number of very competitive mayoral elections taking place – in which the likely outcome is far from decided. In Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, and Invercargill, for instance, it's not clear who will win, and a number of new mayors are likely to be elected. This situation normally drives up turnout.
In addition, there are a number of factors that many commentators and authorities believed would drive up participation:
• The new Māori wards in many elections were supposed to provide for better representation of an historically under-represented demographic
• There is increased media coverage of local elections and, in particular, a plethora of voices explaining the need for people to vote
• The Three Waters reforms have provided a contentious public issue for voters to vote for or against as candidates take a pro- or anti-Three Waters stance
• A much more demographically diverse range of candidates – women, Māori, young people, and so forth – standing was said to help boost turnout among sections of the public put off by so-called "pale, stale, and male" incumbents
• Local government authorities have produced huge publicity and advertising campaigns, normally incorporating te reo Māori and with an emphasis on diversity, to get people enthused about democracy.
None of these factors appear to have had a significant impact in lifting voting so far. Perhaps some of these dynamics have actually had a counterintuitively negative impact.
Could it be that the low voter turnout reflects contentment?
Of course, there are plenty of explanations for the public choosing not to vote. Some politicians and commentators have been attempting to put a more positive spin on the declining voter turnout. Much of this looks like wishful thinking. They say the declining voter turnout simply reflects public satisfaction with the politicians and their local authorities. Voters are content to just let the politicians continue doing their good work without the scrutiny and evaluation of voting.
But there is absolutely no evidence to support the view that the low voter turnout reflects contentment. In fact, there is strong evidence throughout the country that the public's unhappiness with councils has reached an all-time high.
Surveys carried out by local authorities show that dissatisfaction with individual councils is very strong this year. For example, in Wellington, when the public were asked this year about satisfaction with Council decision-making, the number of those who are "satisfied" dropped to a new low of only 12 per cent, while those who said they are "dissatisfied" jumped to 52 per cent. Similarly, those who believe that the council makes decisions that are in best interests of the city has plummeted from 50 per cent to just 17 per cent this year.
It seems that throughout the country there is a similar level of anger and disenchantment with local politicians, which should dispel any rosy idea that lower voter turnout is in some way positive.
Those pushing the "contentment theory" of low voter turnout also have to grapple with the fact that non-voters are disproportionately made up of the poor and marginalised of society. Evidence shows it's the wealthier demographics that vote in much larger numbers than others.
For example, suburb comparisons in the 2019 Rotorua Lakes Council elections showed that the higher turnouts were from residents from wealthier housing locations, and vice versa.
Overall in Rotorua, the turnout was 45 per cent, but for the affluent suburbs the turnout rates were much higher, and for the lower socio-economic areas the voting rates were about a third of this.
For example, in Rotorua's flash suburb of Springfield, 59 per cent voted - in leafy Lynmore it was 57 per cent, and wealthy Kaharoa had a turnout rate of 56 per cent.
However, the poorer suburbs had abysmal turnout rates. In disadvantaged Western Heights, it was only 27 per cent, and in the poorest area of Fordland, voter turnout was an incredible 18 per cent.
This pattern was borne out by a 2015 Auckland Council study that showed significant variation in voter turnout according to socioeconomic status.
It goes to show just how much participation in elections is a function of socio-economics. And so, a discussion of voter turnout must involve an awareness that elections in New Zealand are primarily determined by wealth.
Local government isn't working
It seems that local government isn't working for most people. And this is especially the case for the poor. Increasingly, there is a feeling that local government – much like central government – has become dysfunctional, and captured by vested interests and elites.
All around the world, voter turnout has generally been on the decline over the last few decades, driven by waning trust in authorities and politics. And this is evident in the rise of populist nationalism and the increased peddling of conspiracy theories.
A 17 per cent turnout amongst poorer communities speaks to something rotten in our democratic processes. Fixing this won't involve making superficial and mechanical changes to voting systems or just having more public education. A much bigger examination of the failings of our political system is necessary, and this needs to include looking at wider societal problems.
Without big change, our elections will decline further in legitimacy. As today's New Zealand Herald points out, the Prime Minister is being "asked this week to speculate on how low the turnout threshold should be for local elections to be considered valid". She won't answer this. But, someone is going to have to engage very quickly.
What is clear is that blaming voters for being uninspired by the candidates and the system of local government is not the answer. The public – and especially poorer New Zealanders – will just keep essentially voting "No confidence" in larger and larger numbers until it's impossible for this message to be ignored or misunderstood.
• Dr Bryce Edwards is a Political Analyst in Residence at Victoria University of Wellington. He is the director of the Democracy Project.
