Brian Rudman: Mall owner puts $2500 tag on community spirit

You don't become the world's biggest owner of shopping malls by letting a money-making opportunity - however small - slip through your fingers.

But Westfield New Zealand gives new meaning to the word "grasping" in its demand for $2500-a-week rental for each voter-enrolment stall set up in its shopping centres.

The Warehouse and supermarket chain-owners Progressive Enterprises and Foodstuffs have no problems finding a free corner in their stores for the voter enrollers, but Westfield does.

Westfield's rules seem odd. Political candidates are free to tread the hallowed malls, meeting, greeting and harassing potential voters, because such activity is "non-profit".

Also, says spokeswoman Linda Trainer, it "allows the community to be able to make informed decisions when voting for their local member".

Which sounds fair enough. But somehow, ensuring these newly "informed" members of the community are actually enrolled and thereby able to cast their vote is another story altogether.

Westfield's hang-up centres around the fact that the vote-gatherers seeking access to its malls are being paid for their work.

Westfield New Zealand director John Widdup argues that as a commercial organisation, these contractors to the Electoral Enrolment Centre should pay a fee for use of the mall like any other commercial operator.

Face-to-Face Communications, which is seeking access to the malls, is paid a bounty for each valid enrolment its staff obtain. If the company did it for free, it seems, Westfield would let its staff in because, all heart, Westfield "sees itself as very much part of the community".

Now I would have thought that if Westfield saw itself as part of the community, then encouraging people to vote would be a fundamental aspect of that community-mindedness.

The fact that people are being paid to entice the slackers not already on the rolls to sign up is hardly a matter to start fretting over. After all, aren't these people aiming to provide a service to Westfield customers who are not already enrolled for the upcoming election?

The malls provide kiddie cars and motorised scooters - the latter, admittedly, at a price - for customers, so why not a voter enrolment facility? It makes Westfield's website boast that "looking after our customers is our number one priority" rather hollow.

I'd have thought Westfield would have been proud that its malls are now seen as community centres. After all, that's what it set out to achieve.

The whole thrust of the mall-ification of suburban life here and overseas has been to try to replace the old neighbourhood town centres with one-stop, fully covered shopping and entertainment destinations.

 

In a very deliberate way, Westfield and its rivals set out to replace - or at least duplicate - existing town centres, luring people away from the traditional gathering places, where shops rubbed shoulders with halls and libraries.

It was in these public facilities that community activities such as enrolling voters could be based in easy reach of the passing parade.

Having enticed us into its malls, the least Westfield can do is allow a small portion of their spacious interiors for community activities such as enrolling voters.

That the person endeavouring to get the last 7 per cent of potential voters on to the system is being paid, and by results at that, is hardly the point.

Late last week, enrolment centre manager Murray Wicks estimated 93 per cent of eligible voters were enrolled, but that still leaves more than 200,000 to get on the rolls before the printed roll closes this Wednesday. After that, people have another month to get on the special roll.

I've heard it said that if people haven't got themselves on to the roll by now it's their own lookout. I agree it's not hard. Pick up a form at your nearest Post Shop or dial the 0800 number and they'll mail one out.

But I'm still a dreamer enough to believe the more people you can get to participate, the better your democracy is going to be.

The guys wanting to set up stalls in Westfield malls reckon they could sign up to 1000 new voters a week, or twice what they could snare on an outside site.

Where's the harm to multinational Westfield's bottom line in letting them have a go?