Steve Baron: FPP voting filled with flaws

Steve Baron

By Steve Baron

AT HIS last Whanganui District Health Board meeting it was extremely disappointing to hear board member Allan Anderson calling for the health board to go back to using the outdated first-past-the-post (FPP) voting system.

I can understand Mr Anderson's frustration over invalid votes, given that the public often gets confused at election time and tick the health board voting papers rather than numbering them, but the single transferable vote (STV) system used by the board is fairer.

More than 1200 votes (just under 6 per cent) were invalidated at the recent election but that does not mean there is a problem with the STV voting system. What it means is that election officials have done a poor job of highlighting to voters that they need to use numbering instead of ticks.

It would also be advantageous if the Whanganui District Council elections were also held using STV.

For a start, this would eliminate the confusion of using two voting systems at local elections.

Secondly, using STV for council would be a more representative system giving the most preferred candidate, on aggregate, the nod.

More importantly, votes would not be wasted under STV as they are under FPP.

STV is more representative because it elects the most preferred candidates on aggregate.

For example, I want Jones to be mayor but should my choice of Jones end up with the fewest votes (which means my vote was wasted), then my second choice of Smith still has a chance if enough people think like me.

It also reduces the chance of the least preferred candidate being elected. That may sound strange but it is always a possibility.

Take, for example, Whanganui Mayor Hamish McDouall, who received more than 6000 votes. This represented 39 per cent of the vote, way less than a clear majority of 50 per cent. It meant that more than 10,000 voters (around 60 per cent) thought another candidate was a better choice than Mr McDouall.

Effectively, Mr McDouall could have been the least preferred mayor Whanganui has ever had. The people who voted against Mr McDouall could have thought he was the least appealing and least capable person on the planet. I doubt that is the case, but you can see my point.

Of course, Mr McDouall may have been their second choice, so therefore he would have won anyway under STV. We will never know, however, because first-past-the-post does not show preferences.

With the single transferable vote system, each voter has a single vote that is transferable. Voters number their candidate preferences: 1 for their favourite candidate, then 2, 3 etc.

In the case of electing 12 councillors, candidates who reach the quota (using a specific quota formula) from first preference votes are elected. In addition, if Ms Jones was by far the most popular candidate receiving 10,000 votes but only needing 7000 to be elected, the extra 3000 she received would then be transferred to those voters' second preference.

This saves any votes being wasted on candidates when they get more votes than they need or when votes are cast for candidates who never had a chance of being elected.

Though STV is a fairer system, it is, unfortunately, complicated. However, that should not stop us from using it. Few of us know how an internal combustion engine works, but we are all happy to drive a car.

It is a shame that the previous Whanganui District Council chose not to use STV in a 2014 vote on the issue. It is a system used by a number of councils throughout New Zealand, as well as by all district health boards.

Being of an era that only ever used the old FPP system, perhaps the previous council did not understand the advantages of STV. Our new district council may revisit the option and make a change for the better. I certainly hope so.

Steve Baron is a Wanganui-based political commentator, author and Founder of Better Democracy NZ. He holds degrees in economics and political science.