Snow Tane, who placed second in Kaipara's tight mayoral race, says a voting process that disenfranchises a majority of special voters isn't fit for purpose. Photo / RNZ, Peter de Graaf
By Peter de Graaf of RNZ
Court documents have revealed more than 60% of special votes cast in Kaipara’s knife-edge council election were disallowed.
The figure comes from a judge’s ruling on a recount request by mayoral candidate Snow Tane.
In the preliminary results for last month’s Kaipara mayoral election, Tane was just five votes behind previous deputy mayor Jonathan Larsen, while third-placed Jason Smith was 26 votes behind Tane.
The gap widened once special votes were included, giving the win to Larsen by a 21-vote margin.
Tane then applied for a recount, saying the margin was narrow, the number of special votes and disallowed votes had at that point not been made public, and ensuring confidence in the election process was in the public interest.
The judge’s ruling revealed that 468 special votes were cast, more than 22 times the winning margin.
However, the majority of those – 288 votes, or 62% of the total – were disallowed.
The main reason for that, leading to 197 votes being binned, was that the person was not on the electoral roll or their enrolment details were not up to date.
Another 82 votes were rejected because a separate declaration form, which must accompany any special vote, was incomplete.
A further nine votes were rejected because the person had tried to vote twice, once using the original voting papers and again using a special vote.
In his recount application, Tane said a number of members of the public had raised concerns with him after casting special votes at mobile voting stations, which had been used for the first time in Kaipara.
The consistency of those concerns suggested the high number of disallowed votes could reflect “systemic or procedural failure in the how voters were guided through the special vote process, and not necessarily a failure on the part of the voters themselves”.
Tane said if a process was so bureaucratic or complex it caused a majority of voters to be disenfranchised, it could not be regarded as fit for purpose.
He said there was also uncertainty about whether voters on the Māori roll had been misclassified or inadvertently removed, given that the election coincided with the abolition of Kaipara’s Māori ward.
Judge Kevin Kelly said the problem with Tane’s arguments was that the application was for a recount of the votes, not an inquiry into wider conduct of the election.
Questions about whether electoral laws were fit for purpose were a matter for the Government, he said.
Kelly said a narrow margin on its own was not enough for a recount.
The candidate also had to have reasonable grounds to believe a result was incorrect, but Tane had not provided evidence of irregularities to back up that view.
The recount application was therefore dismissed.
Meanwhile, candidate Ash Nayyar asked for a recount in the Wairoa ward, where he also raised concerns about the high proportion of disallowed special votes.
Nayyar also claimed “pressure and coercion” had been applied to council and electoral officials during an emergency meeting in Mangawhai in the final days of the election.
In the Wairoa ward, a similar proportion of special votes, 143 out of 235, or 61%, had been disallowed.
Judge Kelly said he did not wish to downplay Nayyar’s concerns but said they were also outside the scope of a recount.
In the final count Nayyar was 187 votes behind the lowest elected candidate – so even if all 143 disallowed special votes had gone to him, he would still not have been elected.
Therefore Nayyar did not have reasonable grounds to believe he might be elected on a recount, the judge said.
Concerns about high numbers of disallowed special votes were also raised after Auckland’s local elections.
In that case, around 40% of the 10,000-plus special votes were thrown out.
Chief electoral officer Dale Ofsoske told RNZ that some special voters had filled out their voting form, but the separate declaration form that had to be dated, signed and witnessed was incomplete.
The person also had to provide a reason for casting a special vote.
If any one of those pieces of information was missing, the vote was rejected.
Ofsoske earlier described the special vote process as robust but complex.
“I think it would be worthwhile to have further discussions with lawmakers to see how we can streamline this process. Do we need to be so rigorous with our declaration, for example, simply because the law tells us we must do? That’s been raised with the Department of Internal Affairs because of this election.”
In the meantime, however, that was the law, and he had to follow it.
Ofsoske said another common mistake that led to special votes being rejected was people not updating their details with the Electoral Commission.
He said people also needed to have lived at an address for at least one month to be eligible to vote in that district.
To qualify for a recount under the Local Electoral Act 2001, candidates must show they have reasonable grounds to believe a result is incorrect, and that they might be elected on a recount.
One more recount application, by Otamatea ward candidate Mark Vincent, is still pending.
In that case, three candidates vying for one seat are separated by just three votes.
A decision is expected early this week.
– RNZ