Petition organisers remain hopeful
By Jon Bassett, Otago Daily Times, Friday, 1 November 2002
Public support in Dunedin yesterday for a petition calling for a referendum on the single transferable vote (STV) shows people want to choose how they elect their councillors, local STV proponents say.
Otago STV action group spokesman Sam Huggard said more than 200 signatures were collected in three hours by group members near the Dunedin Public Library.
The group needs 4200 signatures by December 11 to compel the Dunedin City Council to hold a referendum. So far, 1620 signatures have been gathered.
"The majority of people who signed [yesterday] expressed to us it's an issue of fairness, to choose the [voting] system," Mr Huggard said.
In September, the Dunedin City Council decided to keep the first past the post (FPP) system of electing councillors.
A majority of councillors opposed STV on several grounds, including that a referendum would be binding.
Green Party co-leader and STV advocate Rod Donald was in Dunedin yesterday to support the signature drive.
The result of a Dunedin STV referendum could "trigger" other local governments to choose the system, he said.
"One of the key reasons for Dunedin being fertile ground [for STV] is when the council did limited consultation in September, there were 33 [people] against and 150 for STV."
Mr Donald said 70% of people approached in Dunedin had signed the group's petition.
Wellington City, Whangarei, Masterton and Opotiki councils had decided to have STV referendums, he said.
Mr Donald also attended a meeting on STV at the Dunedin Town Hall on Wednesday night. He said the 20 people at the meeting were supporters of STV, who discussed ways of getting more signatures on the petition.
The DCC: hardly `exciting' yet crucial
By Melanie Bunce, Otago Daily Times, Friday, 25 October 2002
AN AWFUL lot of people find the Dunedin City Council dead boring. I can sympathise with them. It's hard to get passionate about the people who manage your sewage. Local body politics just isn't that exciting. There's no intrigue, no street appeal, no funk. The council spends our rates and provides our utilities. It's not really the stuff of glamour.
In the past, I've always found local body politics pretty boring. Other than Jeremy "renegade" Belcher, our councillors aren't that interesting. There's no-one with the cheesy audacity of Tim Shadbolt, or the absurd agenda of John Banks. Unlike national politics, there are no juicy scandals, no fraudulent CVs, no pot-smoking politicians, no drunken punch-ups outside bars.
But on top of all that, it never really seemed like the DCC had that much relevance to my life. Their jurisdiction consisted of things like fairy lights in the Octagon and making sure that bagpipes play on New Year's Eve. As a result, it didn't really bother me who was on the council.
Then, over the last couple of months, issues began to arise that affected me and people my age. The DCC was making judgement calls; judgement calls that would make a difference to young people, students, and their place in this city.
For those of you who have never been to Arc cafe, you need to get out more often. Arc is one of the best places in this city. It does good coffee, cheap beer and is run by wonderful people on a non-profit basis, whereby all profit is put back into the community. Arc did a heap of stuff for the Fringe Festival and provides a venue for all sorts of local performances, poetry, jazz, movie screenings and live bands.
Right now, the council is investigating complaints relating to the sound levels of the cafe. If there are any consequential restrictions placed on the venue, it will have a marked affect on the live music scene in this city.
Last year, the council banned skateboarding in the city and began fining all people who breached the ban. At the time, they made promises that they would build an inner-city skate park. The promised skate park is yet to be built and skateboarders have no place in the city.
The council is also planning to build a sea wall at St Clair beach, which will cause problems for surfers in this city.
When it comes to issues such as these, the council is required to make judgement calls in the same way they do on an array of other issues: Is it permissible to have a gratuitous painting of David Bain on display? What should we give more money to - recycling or advertising? What shall we do with arson-minded students?
Because they involve value judgements, it's extremely important that we have councillors whom we feel represent our own sets of values. STV is a system of electing councillors that requires the winning candidate to have support from a majority of the voting public. This means that once elected, they represent and have the support of more people in this city. STV means that votes are not wasted if your first selection of candidates does not get elected. It is a more democratic system of voting, and one that is being introduced for electing district health boards.
A month ago, the DCC decided not to change the system under which we elect our councillors. They voted for the city election to remain under FPP rather than switch to the STV system of voting. There is currently a petition going around Dunedin calling for a referendum on this issue. If 5% of the Dunedin population sign, the council is required to hold a binding referendum on the issue of STV voting.
Referendums are the most direct form of democracy we have. Even if the results show that the majority wishes to remain under FPP, at least it is the people who have decided and not the city council. The city council may not be glamorous or exciting, but it is important. It is therefore essential that it represents the people of Dunedin in a meaningful way.
Melanie Bunce is a Dunedin student.
Letter to the Editor: STV voting
By Lyndon Weggery, Otago Daily Times, Wednesday, 23 October 2002
"CIVIS" (ODT , 12.10.02) questioned the efforts of Sam Huggard and his team of enthusiasts in gathering enough signatures from the Dunedin public to force a single transferable vote poll on the Dunedin City Council. The point that Mr Huggard is trying to make is that in a democratic society the Dunedin City Council should have taken a lead from the overwhelming majority of submitters in favour of STV and put it to the people to decide, as the Wellington City Council has done.
This is true democracy, or people power. All Sam and his team are doing is trying to collect 4198 signatures from the good citizens of Dunedin to give them that right to determine their own voting procedure for the future. That has nothing to do with the level of council service but everything to do with the democratic relationship between Dunedin electors and their councillors.
Many people are signing the petition and many are signing for the simple reason that they don't like having this decision made for them by the city council without a referendum.
Lyndon Weggery
Kew
All stories are copyright the Otago Daily Times. The Green Party seek never to break copyright, but in this case we were forced to because the Otago Daily Times website prevents deep-linking. Read a discussion of why Deep Linking is Good Linking
