EACH triennium, Whanganui's council is asked to vote on its preference for the system to be used for the next local authority elections -- either continue with first past the post (FPP) or to change to single transferable vote (STV).
Each time this question has been considered in the past, the mayor and councillors have been unanimous: let's stay with the FPP status quo.
This time, though, the mayor and councillors are being lobbied. This time we are being told that if we don't choose the new STV we just aren't new age citizens -- we are today's equivalent of the flat Earth believers.
That's the message coming through to us from the unsuccessful council candidate and occasional Chronicle opinion writer Steve Baron.
Mr Baron sent all councillors a questionnaire, links to YouTube videos, and treated us -- through a series of emails -- to his version of why we should favour the STV system.
You can be sure that if you echo his views about the merits of STV he will publicly praise you -- but if you dare to disagree, then a public flogging would not satisfy Mr Baron.
That's an issue -- the importance of this decision is being marginalised by over-zealous lobbying.
The mayor and councillors, myself included, have not closed their minds to change.
Some of us, though, are less convinced of the merits of making that change than others.
So why would we change to STV?
Only six out of 66 New Zealand local authorities have made the change. However, all district health boards are required to use STV, and that leads to confusion among voters.
Proponents claim votes under STV are not wasted, however, the statistics tell you otherwise.
The change of voting methods on ballot papers between council and regional council votes and Whanganui District Health Board votes causes confusion and results in informal and blank votes.
For the 2016 Whanganui election, the FPP council ballot resulted in only 159 (.087 per cent) informal and 359 (2.05 per cent) blank votes. Contrast that with the health board STV votes on the same ballot paper -- 1229 (5.97 per cent) informal votes and 1657 (8.05) blank votes.
With STV the voting method of choice for health boards, there is an argument that changing council ballots to STV would lessen confusion.
However, Horizons Regional Council has already decided to stay with FPP for the 2019 election -- so even if the Whanganui District Council made the switch, the confusion would remain.
Improving voter participation and diversity would be strong reasons to convince me to support change. A better gender balance and more ethnic minorities elected -- specifically more Maori -- would be desirable, and proponents of STV claim that system leads to improvements in these areas.
If those improvements had proven to be the case, changing to STV would be worth the challenge of a voting system that has baffled many. Council is doing research on this -- however, my glance at the Palmerston North and the Dunedin Council websites did not support that voter turnout and diversity is improved at all with STV.
Palmerston North has nine men and six women, and one of Maori descent. Dunedin has 11 men and four woman -- and one of Pacific Island descent.
Here in Whanganui we have no one of Maori descent as a current councillor since the passing of Rangi Wills.
Prior to that there had been representatives of minorities elected to the Whanganui council for about 30 years.
Our council has a gender balance of nine men and four women -- not the best, but no worse than those councils using the STV voting system.
At 56.1 per cent in 2016, voter participation in Whanganui is high by national standards. Other FPP councils also have high voter turnout: Horowhenua 51 per cent, Taupo 50.2 per cent, Nelson 52.1 per cent.
Data supports that STV councils have lower turnouts -- Dunedin 45.9 per cent, Palmerston North 39.1 per cent, Porirua 37.9 per cent.
Rank orderinginstead of ticking boxes is the key difference between STV and FPP. A problem with STV is that it is seen by many to be too complex. This can lead to mistrust and sometimes to the idea that it is undemocratic. Experts accept that the system of ranking candidates does what it is designed to do -- but there is public scepticism in a system that is so complex that only computer software can declare the result.
Once votes are in, the process starts with scanning the voting papers. Can we be sure that the scanning process that turns our pencil marks into digital information is accurate?
There are many different ways of writing numbers, some of the reason for so many informal votes under STV -- 5s that look like 6s and 1s that look like 7s etc.
Then there is the ranking of candidates to consider.
For a mayoral election with about four candidates, STV works fine -- but wouldn't ranking up to 36 candidates for council be extremely confusing? Voters can rank only one, or the entire 36 -- but even just ranking for the 12 councillor vacancies would be difficult for many.
Nationwide, voter awareness of the merits of candidates is often limited to name recognition.
Under STV, while most voters might have genuine preferences that allow them to rank, say, the first six, it is probable that their second six would be selected quite randomly.
If STV was preferred by council, I believe we would need to revisit having councillors representing wards.
STV councils such as Palmerston North retain wards -- but the system was not popular with voters in Whanganui. Most voters preferred to be able to vote for the entire list of candidates, not just the few they were restricted to by the ward system.
Is it worth making the change? Would the 12 councillors and mayor elected under the FPP voting system be any different to the 12 elected under STV? Probably not.
Council is seeking feedback from the community prior to the next council meeting on September 6. An option is to hold a referendum to give the community a say -- however, there is a substantial cost, about $50,000, to stage a referendum, and I do not believe that that would be the desire of ratepayers.
The option I prefer is to hold a referendum in conjunction with the next election and include the referendum with the ballot papers at a minor cost.
The question of retaining FPP or moving to STV is too important to be decided by just the mayor and councillors. It's right at the heart of our democratic process and the community needs to be involved -- not just those who are promoters of the change and are yelling the loudest.
