Submission

Submission on Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) and Supplementary Order Paper 203
7th May, 2004

Rural Women New Zealand’s Submission relates to Part 3 Clause 22 (3) and Clause 23 5B relating to Single Transferable Voting.

Rural Women NZ submit that each Local Government has different concentrations of rural communities and one system of voting in Local Government elections does not fit all. In rural based Local Government area’s the current system of rural wards has accommodated and represented rural interests adequately. However under STV we refer to a South Canterbury example in that Timaru urban will field more of the votes under the proposed system, because fewer rural members are known outside the urban community. Therefore the rural sectors outside Timaru will not get representation and the services they require for growing communities and represent the larger landholders in a local government area. Urban candidates are known to urban and rural candidates known to rural simply by the exposure urban receives over rural in media etc. The fact that a candidate will be successful due to population should not comply where rural communities hold the bulk of the land area.

Effective representation requires peer knowledge of a community and urban-based representatives are unlikely to have a rural focus or knowledge of a rural community. The change to the voting system will effectively deny rural communities the right to vote for rural candidates because the rural candidates are not identified on the ballot for as rural.

As discussed with Dr Bruce Anderson, Ministry of Health regarding the impact on STV system on District Health Boards, the District Health Board consultation on STV’s did not have rural interests listed as a minority group and yet rural represent 16% of the local government electorate. Whilst cultural groups (Maori, Asian and Pacific Island) are listed as minorities (less than 16%) for which particular concessions are provided e.g. Ministerial appointment where there is a lack of representation, rural are not accommodated.
We also note that rural have not been included or invited into the consultation process as a minority and figures outlining the percentage make up of the population have not been correlated.

We propose that:

• Rural are consulted, and not just through local government
• Ballot forms should clearly state if the candidate represents rural or urban interests
• Rural is provided with a ministerial appointment if no rural candidates are elected.
• Rural receives recognition that as the majority of land within a local government area is owned by rural and therefore rural should receive adequate representation.