New Zealand’s electoral laws are getting a much-needed haircut and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is standing firm despite the predictable howling from the usual suspects. The government’s proposed changes under the Electoral Amendment Bill, as reported by Stuff, aim to tidy up what they call an ‘unsustainable’ system. The big moves? Scrapping same-day voter enrolment and requiring people to enrol by midnight the Sunday before advance voting starts – 13 days before election day. Oh, and a ban on prisoner voting, because, apparently, some folks think armed robbers should pick our MPs from behind bars.
Cue the pearl-clutching. Attorney-General Judith Collins, doing her statutory duty, flagged that these changes might clash with constitutional rights, estimating that up to 100,000 people could be “disenfranchised”. Constitutional lawyer Graeme Edgeler chimed in, calling the 13-day enrolment cutoff a “step too far”. The Spinoff went full sob-story, wailing that thousands – especially Māori voters – will be left out in the cold. Disenfranchised? Really?
First off, the claim that these changes will ‘disenfranchise’ anyone is about as convincing as a used car salesman’s patter. There are roughly 1000 days between elections. One thousand days to fill out a simple form on the Electoral Office website vote.nz. It takes five minutes, tops. If you can’t manage that, you’ve got the organisational skills of a goldfish. The same folks who are apparently too hapless to enrol in three years can miraculously open bank accounts, buy Lotto tickets, place bets at the TAB and sign up for hire purchase deals to snag a new flat-screen TV. But filling out an enrolment form? Apparently, that’s a bridge too far.
Luxon’s point is straightforward: get organised. He even pointed to Australia, where same-day enrolment isn’t a thing and nobody’s crying about it. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see the logic. Early enrolment means smoother advance voting and faster processing of special votes. It’s not about locking people out: it’s about making the system efficient. Yet, the naysayers are acting like Luxon’s personally burning their voter ID cards.
The patronising drivel about Māori voters is particularly galling. The Spinoff and others imply Māori are somehow uniquely incapable of enrolling on time, as if they’re too busy or too clueless to handle basic civic duties. This is the kind of soft racist bigotry that assumes Māori need hand-holding to participate in democracy. It’s infantilising and, frankly, insulting. As Simon O’Connor points out in his excellent piece on OnPointNZ, these arguments often come from a vanguard of self-appointed elites who think they speak for entire communities. Māori voters, like everyone else, have a thousand days to get their name on the roll. They don’t need sanctimonious academics or activists crying ‘disenfranchisement’ on their behalf.
Let’s be real: if you can’t manage to enrol in the three years between elections, you’re either lazy or have the IQ of a lettuce. And honestly, should we be bending over backwards to ensure people who can’t tie their own shoelaces get to pick our government? Voting is a right, sure, but it’s also a responsibility. If you’re too disorganised to enrol, maybe you’re not ready to weigh in on who runs the country. Harsh? Maybe. But democracy isn’t a free-for-all where we hold your hand to the ballot box.
The Ministry of Justice’s hand-wringing about ‘significant impacts’ on democratic participation is equally overblown. They’re fretting about 100,000 people who might miss out. Who are these people? The ones who rock up on election day, realise they’re not enrolled and expect the system to bend over backwards for them. Newsflash: the world doesn’t revolve around your procrastination. The changes don’t disenfranchise anyone who’s remotely serious about voting. They just demand a modicum of foresight.
Luxon’s taking heat for sticking to his guns, but good on him. He’s not caving to the caterwauling from the chattering classes who think democracy should cater to the terminally disorganised. The Electoral Amendment Bill isn’t perfect – Collins is right to point out the prisoner voting ban might raise Bill of Rights issues – but the enrolment cutoff is a no-brainer. It’s about streamlining a system that’s been bogged down by last-minute chaos for years. If you’re one of the 100,000 who can’t get it together to enrol in 1000 days, maybe the problem isn’t the law. Maybe it’s you.
The left will keep screaming about ‘rights’ and ‘disenfranchisement’, but this is just another case of them turning a pile of cow dung into a mountain. Luxon’s changes are a win for common sense and the only people losing out are those who think civic duty is optional. If you want to vote, get off your backside and enrol. It’s not rocket science and it’s not oppression. It’s just adulthood.
Cam Slater is a New Zealand-based blogger, best known for his role in Dirty Politics and publishing the Whale Oil Beef Hooked blog, which operated from 2005 until it closed in 2019. Cam blogs regularly on the GoodOil - where this article was sourced.
First off, the claim that these changes will ‘disenfranchise’ anyone is about as convincing as a used car salesman’s patter. There are roughly 1000 days between elections. One thousand days to fill out a simple form on the Electoral Office website vote.nz. It takes five minutes, tops. If you can’t manage that, you’ve got the organisational skills of a goldfish. The same folks who are apparently too hapless to enrol in three years can miraculously open bank accounts, buy Lotto tickets, place bets at the TAB and sign up for hire purchase deals to snag a new flat-screen TV. But filling out an enrolment form? Apparently, that’s a bridge too far.
Luxon’s point is straightforward: get organised. He even pointed to Australia, where same-day enrolment isn’t a thing and nobody’s crying about it. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see the logic. Early enrolment means smoother advance voting and faster processing of special votes. It’s not about locking people out: it’s about making the system efficient. Yet, the naysayers are acting like Luxon’s personally burning their voter ID cards.
The patronising drivel about Māori voters is particularly galling. The Spinoff and others imply Māori are somehow uniquely incapable of enrolling on time, as if they’re too busy or too clueless to handle basic civic duties. This is the kind of soft racist bigotry that assumes Māori need hand-holding to participate in democracy. It’s infantilising and, frankly, insulting. As Simon O’Connor points out in his excellent piece on OnPointNZ, these arguments often come from a vanguard of self-appointed elites who think they speak for entire communities. Māori voters, like everyone else, have a thousand days to get their name on the roll. They don’t need sanctimonious academics or activists crying ‘disenfranchisement’ on their behalf.
Let’s be real: if you can’t manage to enrol in the three years between elections, you’re either lazy or have the IQ of a lettuce. And honestly, should we be bending over backwards to ensure people who can’t tie their own shoelaces get to pick our government? Voting is a right, sure, but it’s also a responsibility. If you’re too disorganised to enrol, maybe you’re not ready to weigh in on who runs the country. Harsh? Maybe. But democracy isn’t a free-for-all where we hold your hand to the ballot box.
The Ministry of Justice’s hand-wringing about ‘significant impacts’ on democratic participation is equally overblown. They’re fretting about 100,000 people who might miss out. Who are these people? The ones who rock up on election day, realise they’re not enrolled and expect the system to bend over backwards for them. Newsflash: the world doesn’t revolve around your procrastination. The changes don’t disenfranchise anyone who’s remotely serious about voting. They just demand a modicum of foresight.
Luxon’s taking heat for sticking to his guns, but good on him. He’s not caving to the caterwauling from the chattering classes who think democracy should cater to the terminally disorganised. The Electoral Amendment Bill isn’t perfect – Collins is right to point out the prisoner voting ban might raise Bill of Rights issues – but the enrolment cutoff is a no-brainer. It’s about streamlining a system that’s been bogged down by last-minute chaos for years. If you’re one of the 100,000 who can’t get it together to enrol in 1000 days, maybe the problem isn’t the law. Maybe it’s you.
The left will keep screaming about ‘rights’ and ‘disenfranchisement’, but this is just another case of them turning a pile of cow dung into a mountain. Luxon’s changes are a win for common sense and the only people losing out are those who think civic duty is optional. If you want to vote, get off your backside and enrol. It’s not rocket science and it’s not oppression. It’s just adulthood.
Cam Slater is a New Zealand-based blogger, best known for his role in Dirty Politics and publishing the Whale Oil Beef Hooked blog, which operated from 2005 until it closed in 2019. Cam blogs regularly on the GoodOil - where this article was sourced.
5 comments:
There are two separate issues here. Obviously if the new enrolment criteria helps the voting system to work better, then the government is perfectly entitled to introduce the changes. Anybody who can't follow the procedures probably shouldn't be voting.
Regarding prisoner voting: Prisoners should not have their voting rights taken away. That is simply us making a moral decision. That is not democracy in action.
Are parties worried about losing votes because of prisoners voting? If this is the case, prospective parties should present irresistible policies to law-abiding citizens.
I don’t think prisoners should be able to vote. If you have transgressed against the society in which you live, then I believe your freedom and your ability to participate in the normal rights and responsibilities of that society should be forfeit until such time as you have served your time. I don’t see why convicted criminals should retain their voting rights.
Anonymous at 2.53. You have a very valid argument which would be shared by most people. My argument is that people are already being punished by being incarcerated. I would argue there could be just as many wrong-doers outside the prison walls who have never been caught who also vote. For me it's a conviction that the Bill of Rights should give each individual certain rights and one of these is democratic voting. Who knows, by voting they might improve society not diminish it. So yes, in my view it's a moral judgment of fellow citizens. This could be a slippery slope. Who is next?
Please correct me, if I am wrong - " But my under standing of NZ Law, is that if you break a Law, that requires appearing before a Judge (and possibly a Jury), that if found guilty and then sentenced to a prison for a period ??(as set by the presiding Judge) that at that point you lose all rights a Citizen, which of days gone by, would have included The Right to participate in any form of political activity as well as being able to vote in any General &/or Local Body Election[s]".
It was only the "silly" Ardern (and no doubt promoted by Her Socialist friends) that changed that.
I would call that activity " vote rigging".
The Privilege to Vote, I recall, was enshrined in Law that at the age of 21 years/ now 18 Years " required to you to enroll", so you could participate as a Voter at the Election periods set.
So, I for one, are with the current Govt of re-establishing the procedures -
1: - ensuring you are enrolled, prior to the cut off date for enrollments, for whatever elections being proposed -
2:- that on the day voting occurs, it does so, with minimum fuss to both Electoral staff & general public.
There is and always has been, publicity by the Electoral Commission (even letters to each person enrolled) -
to promote -
- check your enrollment details are correct, or change it
- "enroll now", so on the day of voting - no issues.
So if the TPM 'fellas' are concerned that their Bro's are walking away from the Maori Rolls - maybe they should go and "ask them why"?
AND... methinks RAISING THE VOTING AGE needs to be implemented. Back to 21 at least. A Bit of Maturity in civics duties...... unless the vote is given to newborns too....
Post a Comment