If more people express their views, believe that they will be heard and that they can get involved and make a difference then we will have a healthier more participative society. Yes?
That’s one of my reasons for standing as a member of parliament. To try to break down the cynicism that people feel towards politics and politicians. It’s one of the goals of OpenLabourNZ.
Exercising your vote is an important way to express your views. Currently, in New Zealand, it’s not compulsory. It is compulsory to be on the electoral roll.
But quite a lot of people aren’t. For various reasons. Why then shouldn’t we make it easier for them? Currently you can enrol and change your details online, but you have to print off the fom, sign it and post to Elections NZ (the Electoral Commission). You can’t vote online.
In Australia, where’ there’s about to be a federal election, where it is compulsory to vote and the rolls are about to close, the Australian Electoral Commission is refusing to allow people to enrol online. An activist group called GetUp is taking them to court .
The activist group GetUp! is taking legal action to push its case that would-be voters should be able to enrol on the internet after the Australian Electoral Commission said it would reject voters who used the group’s enrolment tool.
The commission has warned that voters who have changed address have until 8pm today to update their details.
The GetUp! enrolment website OzEnrol.com, launched last Friday, allowed people to fill in an enrolment form online, using their mouse or trackpad to sign their name.
But the commission said the “digitally constructed” signature was not allowed under electoral law, making such enrolments invalid.
I believe we should be trying new ways and making it easier for people to be more actively involved and to exercise their democratic rights. It seems arcane to prevent them from participing in the democratic process. It’s not impossible surely! With appropriate security safeguards of course.
Something for us to consider? And why not be able to vote online?
Whilst it is compulsory to vote in Aussie, many people deliberately spoil their ballot paper.
I don’t think people have a problem with politics, as you can see there is much learned debate on this site and the internet has had an immeasurable effect on politics globally. I have no doubt that most politicians enter parliament for genuine reasons, however, you and your colleagues on all sides of the fence continue to do really stupid things and that is where the apathy kicks in.
I have a suggestion that might make people more take part more. Open primaries. Not hard to do, lets the public decide who they want representing them and means we have control over our list MPs who will would then be accountable to the public and not just their parties.
I can see the appeal of online voting and enrolling, but having watched the American experience with computer voting I believe that if you want to retain a democracy then you need to have a paper trail. A definite no to any sort of computer voting from me.
Going out of the house, getting my piece of paper and ticking the box physically makes me feel I’m doing something worth while and meaningful. Though I can see how enrolling on line could be easier, and voting on line could be better for some people, I would rather go down and vote physically.
I think the internet removes a lot of the excuses that Labour and National have used to deny us extensive referendum rights…
If you really want the public to have a say pass a law like the one in Switzerland where, if 50,000 signatures are collected in opposition to a law within the first 100 hundred days of it passing, it triggers a binding referendum on that law…
This is a little to the side of the topic I know, but I actually think that compulsory voting is more democratic and challenges apathy – even if you think they are all rotters and spoil your voting paper, you are expressing a position. Imagine an election where 60% or so spoiled their voting papers – it would give pause to all political parties.
@JMH: On the other hand, the Swiss referendum system prevented women from voting until 1971.
PS. Does Australia have its equivalent of the McGillicuddys or Bill & Ben? That would take some of the heat out of a compulsory voting system.
@ DeepRed – The problem is that sometimes enough people vote for them and they end up getting in – thats how we got the greens right?
Clare, the sooner you get over your apparent obsession with the cyber world and rejoin us in the real world, the better. Seen the movie Surrogates? Even in science fiction, the real thing proves to be better in the end.
I actually find your opening sentence quite ironic. I’ve tried to express my views, believed that I would be heard and tried to get involved on this participatory blog. However, I have either been put in moderation or banned for a period of time. So I guess a view is only valid if it happens to be the same as your’s, huh.
Clare, if we look at the immediate past (Not picking on Lab, they with 9 years just ended examples are freash in memory, in a year or 2 with some history Nat will be open to similar observations). When many of us get involved e.g. S59, Seabed and foreshore political spin atempts to negate our concerns. Nat re mining have(???!!) listened to us and acted (to achieve what was the correct decision).
Many areas are of limited interest to many, e.g.The adverse effect that the Res Banking Act has had on NZ, most 99% on NZ would not even know what this is does and why, or the history that led to both Nat & Lab agreeing to this policy.
The voting for the best result in my back pocket mentality, as retirement at 65 is an isue that requires addressing but alas I canot see this happening in a constructive manner, due to the power of the above 60 vote.
I am sure that most Mp’s and those that put their names forward do mean well, yet I take it “the System” destorys their motivation and forces many to conform to the template of an MP.
And we are distracted by minor titliating issues as the other side attempt to destory credability, Bill E,S Jones, D Parker, t Grosser and many others. yet we in public land struggle with the high cost of living and the difficulty that brings.
Some could argue that Apathy is sort after as a goal for political parties as it enable simplistic headliners to capture the masses at election time without any real indept analysisi of what is being said. it is hard to argue for or against a policy in a 30 sec sound bite.
@deep red, our current legislation has sensible MoF and AG vetoes for cost and Bill of Rights issues…
Jennifer at 4:00pm is so right. I should hate to see that most important of civil rights – the right to cast a vote – be reduced to a quick, unthinking hit of a cyber button.
@A Mother – I would rather vote physically, but for a different reason – the whole no coerced voting thing. Say someone had a mute for a relative and decided to vote for them, wouldn’t that be a little criminal? mmmm? or pushy parents?
At least in physical polling booths each party can keep an eye on fairness. Plus it’s so cool to see the people there with their ribbons on (especially red
)
Another issue is that some people have no computers at all.
And then there’s the overloading thing and for poor people with dial up (or useless broadband from being used up (damn data caps! 
) or being on a student network where traffic is too busy) timing out. 
@Olwyn – there are plenty of people who just won’t vote no matter what. And what about people like Trev who refused to vote in the smacking referendum?
Olwyn – Compulsory voting is deplorable. Why on earth should someone be coerced into voting? Not voting does not necessarily represent apathy. Not voting is expressing an opinion. The opinion that you do not support any of the power hungry demagogues and charlatans otherwise known as parliamentarians. If 60% of people didn’t turnout to vote at the next election that would give pause to all political parties.
And then there’s the issue of people being busy with their work and families. They want to unwind at the end of the day, not spend hours trauling in online blogs. Which means that the majority of opinions got will be from unelected meddlers, extremists and fanatics
Commenting is a time sucker plain and simple. Says the addict
I’m not kidding, I had a genuine addiction to this site late last year.
Oh Anne!
Your comment just alerted me to another problem, what if you accidentally hit the wrong button? 
Then hit submit and then go oh Bleep!
@Quoth agreed
Surely a vote’s a vote whether it’s on paper or online. Those suspicious of the cyber world are actually already participating in it on this blogsite. I’m a university student and vote in my study body elections every year…online, and it’s no big deal really, in fact it’s convenient. Sure, I would still prefer to go to my local polling booth and take along some elderly so they can ‘tick the box’), but there are many others, younger than I, that are used to participating on-line in many polls, blogs, etc and the fact that they get to vote online may well encourage more participation. Just need to get the security aspect 100% right. Why not?
No – Mohandas Gandhi was a politician; hard to find vulgarity in his thought.
“The spirit of democracy is not a mechanical thing to be adjusted by abolition of forms. It requires change of heart.
Mohandas Gandhi
And what’s more Spud… hate to say it, but it’s more likely our lot who would hit the wrong button
Richie – Ghandi was an anarchist. He opposed the state. Here are some quotes from him
This is a tricky one. On the one hand I agree that voting should be compulsory but on other hand I believe governments cannot be trusted with the data which on-line voting will make available. There is already a transparent veneer in relation to a “secret” ballot in that the individual number of the ballot paper is recorded against the name of the voter at the booth. In addition, extrapolation of booth data provides a very good indication of how people voted on an almost street by street basis. This information is already used by political parties to target communications and effort. At the moment, the data is largely paper based and costly to compile – feeding it all through a mainframe changes that. Also, people spend enough time individualised at their keyboard – getting out and about into the community and participating in the process presents more opportunities than sitting at home clicking the mouse.
Then again – if it gets more people actually participating . .. oh, I don’t know, brain hurts. Think I’ll abstain on this one.
Your bang on BLiP. Part of the voting procedure is physically getting out there and being ’seen’ to vote. It gives one a feeling of being an important part of the process. I guess there is nothing to stop online voting to occur, but I should hate to see it recommended as an electoral preference.
Blip – So if you believe voting should be compulsory what kind of penalties would you impose for those who choose not to vote? Fines? What if someone refuses to pay the fine? Imprisonment? Why criminalise people who do not wish to vote? Why wish to see violence against those that do not wish to vote? I can’t see the rational. It’s simply perverse.
If voting were compulsory, would all or most people who otherwise wouldn’t vote, spoil their paper? I fear that many people will simply tick the first name and party on the list, or pick one at random.
If someone is going to vote, or to spoil their paper, they should be able to explain their choice.
@Anne LOL
Also, how can it be known who actually cast the votes? 
@S teely – yeah, but if your vote got lost due to a technical error for student body it’s not the end of the world, but for a general election that’s serious
- Software incompatibility – studylink is a prime bleepin example – just ask any student
The bleepin thing keeps timing out and if you go back to edit stuff you lose the whole lot 
The only place that mystudylink is likely to work is at the actual studylink office. And it discriminates against alternative computing systems – linx etc.
I don’t think voting should be compulsory – who would then be exempt? A cripple with the mental age of four, but then where do you draw the line on who is and isn’t in this compulsory voting? Who is going to enforce it
And here’s the best part 
Where are you going to stuff all those new prisoners – who if National get their way – would then lose the right to vote? 
Compulsory voting and binding referenda are useless without a comprehensive programme of civics education and trustworthy neutral information about important issues.
It is one of the main reasons Labour lost the election. Ignoring what most people wanted because they considered they knew better than all the rest of us. NACT will eventually lose for the same reason.
It is easy to be apathetic when the choice is simply a variation on the same theme.
@Quoth the Raven agreed but the point I was making not all politicians or political action is vulgar; as you quoted Michael Oakeshott.
“Was Mahatma Gandhi a Libertarian? No, he was not, his idea of “organized anarchy” constitute a meaningful government and bureaucracy”
http://www.reasonforliberty.com/anarcho-capitalism/was-gandhi-a-libertarian-2.html
He would to have forced voting..no
Richie – It depends on how you define politics. That article is using an incredibly limited sense of the word libertarian – really just American style libertarianism. The libertarian tradition has encompassed everything from anarcho-communist to individualist to egoist. If Gandhi said he was an anarchist then to many that’s just a synonym for libertarian (for others it’s not). Just one with his own idiosyncratic tradition infused with his religion and culture. Socialist is another difficult word. It’s really quite futile arguing about the meaning of these words. There are definitional problems with all of them. Ordered anarchy is just a truism. An anarchistic society doesn’t mean a disorganised one and government per se does not equal the state.
@Quoth the Raven my political leaning are going social-anarcho ,or so says those test that yourself and DeepRed posted awhile ago.
OPEN PRIMARIES!!
QTR said:
All good points and, well, ummm, I don’t know what would be a suitable penalty. Perhaps they should pay another two percent on their income tax and be banned from participating in any political blogs for two years. I guess I’m just seeking to foist my view onto those who I see as being not part of the solution. I know that everyone if my electorate had voted the result would have been quite different and better for them. When I speak to some of those who didn’t vote, the common theme that comes through is that they feel as if their vote isn’t important, that they are already excluded from the political life of the nation. It makes me angry that they feel so marginalised and impotent and, by not taking part, they are doing exactly what the ruling class wants them to do i.e., give up. Also, making it compulsory might make it easier for employees working on the day to get out of the shop for half an hour.
But, yeah, if I’m true to my anarchist principles, its up the individual – but is the individual up to making an informed decision? Also, perhaps its better for all of us if the existing political system collapses for lack of interest and the hungry begin to roam the streets in droves. At least then they’ll be properly participating.
Like I said – brain hurts, too hard.
Definitely need online voting. Add an authenticator (which should, of course, be given out when registering to vote) to boost security and there really shouldn’t be any qualms about the actual voting.
Actually, the problem there was that the US system was done by private contractors behind all sorts of secrecy. Hell, the people buying the product couldn’t even check the security and suitability of the systems before they went live. It’s not really surprising that it was a complete balls up it’s also not really surprising that a government owned by the corporations was dancing to the tune of the corporations.
That’s not really a problem. Internet cafes are available and online voting could be carried out over a period (say a month) with the counting done on a specific date to counter over loading. Yes, that probably does mean that internet cafes are probably going to have to upgrade their security systems etc.
My Online Voting: A basic Howto has a solution to this problem.
That information shouldn’t be available for use or viewing at all. You’ll get the basic stats of course, no way to prevent it but shouldn’t be able to access how individuals voted.
Why do you automatically assume that the state would need or want to use penalties? All that would need to be done is say that the people who don’t vote will be counted as having voted in the same proportion as the votes in the previous election. They are, after all, wanting things to stay the same (it’s the only possible assumption that can be made if people don’t vote). If they didn’t, they’d be voting.
/agreed
The neutral information is supposed to be coming from the ministries but that doesn’t appear to be the case any more.
Not from I could see. What happened is that the majority of people believed the lies that NACT where spreading.
@Draco – I’m coming back, I don’t have time to give an answer at the moment.
p.s. it was really decent of you to quote my emoticons
@Draco – righty I’m back
If people voted at home how can anyone be sure that they didn’t just cast a vote for little johnny non political piss head who was out for the night? 
And I would put it past NACT to sell the system to some incompetent cheap private co, then where will we be when it crashes?
Not everybody can access an internet cafe and one could say that forcing people to pay for the cafe use is like forcing people to vote. What about your local street bum with no money, no vote?
As for your last point, I mostly agree that NACT lies got Labour out, but there were a couple of things that even I got p-ed off about
Oops I meant to say like forcing people to pay to vote
Um, the same way that banks ensure that people don’t access everyone else’s bank accounts online.
Well, there is that but it doesn’t have to be that way. Have it done through http://www.elections.org.nz/ via in house software techs.
Or we ensure that voting is available from such cafes is free of charge, ie, we pay the cafes for the time used. It would just require a slight change to the login software that they already use.
Can’t please everybody all of the time
@ everyone. This is a good and valuable discussion.
My views are (at this point) that we should certainly be seriously considering allowing people to enrol and change their enrolment details online. There are many precedents for this around official information. There are security implications and verification implications. But it’s time we grappled with them.
re voting online. My raising this issue was not in any way meant to replace the physical voting system which I think is an essential part of democracy. However, there are people who may participate in the system (and who don’t now) if allowed to vote online.
It is much more convenient for overseas voters, those who need to vote before election day and those who are incapacitated in some way. There may be other reasons.
Anything that promotes further engagement in the political system is a good thing in my book. There are of course issues to be worked through. No doubt the Electoral Commission in NZ and Australia are aware of those issues and are grappling with them. But political will and public opinion are also important.
And re complusory voting. I’m for it and said so in my maiden speech in parliament. I realise it’s one of those issues where I’m likely to be in the minority. But I believe voting is a responsibility of citizenship. You have the right to spoil your vote. But you should be expected to vote.
“Um, the same way that banks ensure that people don’t access everyone else’s bank accounts online.” – I hate to break it to you buddy, but there are plenty of families that get into each other’s stuff. A parent with full knowledge of their child could easily get in and vote
Not everyone can get to an internet cafe.
You can’t please everybody all of the time, but they still got my vote in 2008, the black year
I also see online stuff as being inherently unsafe and more prone to problems. At least with good old paper you know where you are and it does the job, even in the event of a power cut.
If voting were made compulsory I would be tempted to stage a protest with the other non voters. A free country to me means voting because I want to not because somebody is making me.
p.s. who can resist those fat orange markers?
Spud, I hope you are not referring to the girls who man the polling booths by that comment!
Well, not getting rid of the voting booths immediately but if online voting is brought in that will happen over time anyway. The benefits of online voting is that more people will actually participate and that is a major benefit.
Which just means that people need to be more aware of their security and to stop giving out their details to family. If they’re voting then they’re not children and parents shouldn’t have those details available to them.
I think the paper trail is more prone to problems simply because it requires so much direct intervention by lots of people making the logistics far worse.
I am for compulsory voting as well – I also think its your duty to vote – BUT – there should be a tick box for those who want to spoil their vote where they can tick “forced to vote and dont support any party’. Imagine if the majority of people ticked that box – I may well have been one of them (and I consider myself a liberal leftie – well, mostly). This might (if there is an undecided box) help those who tend to throw their vote away anyway, have a voice. To date, there is no way you can still vote and object to whats on offer. Which, if we really stop and think about it, is quite undemocratic.
ps on reflection, forcing people to votes not that democratic either – still there are plenty of laws that are on the surface undemocratic but there for the good of the country, so this would fit that vein.
@Richard LOL
@Draco – it’ll never happen, people do stuff for other family members and know everything like DOB, IRD etc
Frequently use the same computer … 
Well the paper trail seems to be working just fine to me
Computer viruses, software incompatibility, old home pcs that can’t cope, timing out for no apparent reason and vote gets lost, server crashes, power outages, hackers, it’s just so scary
Paper doesn’t do that.
@Paul – aw
, really you would make people vote against their will? This is almost as bad as compulsory military service. Who will be exempt, I ask again? Because a mute with cerebral palsy might have to have his /her hand guided, would that constitute interference? I just believe in freedom of choice.
I look at it this way Paul, there are some people who think we have a duty to vote – but that’s a personal belief. I don’t eat meat, but I wouldn’t dream of forcing that choice on anyone else. This doesn’t benefit society in my opinion because forcing people to do it is taking away their free will. Something that would benefit society is getting rid of the excess of pesticides in this country.
IMNSHO
And they shouldn’t do. As I said, people need to be aware of their own security. People don’t default to trust worthy just because they’re family.
It works it’s just that the whole process could be done better. STV fails because, on paper, you can’t force people to mark all their preferences but you can on an internet form.
All are not really that much of a problem. In fact, software incompatibility isn’t an issue at all as we’re looking at using browsers which are cross platform now and work fine. Old home PCs that can’t cope? Go down to the internet cafe or the voting booth. Votes getting lost will be addressed through people checking to make sure their vote is counted accurately.
Really, you’re making a mountain out of a molehill.
@ compulsory voting: You just set it up so that peoples vote will be counted whether they vote or not on the assumption that if they’re not voting then they’re voting for things to stay the same and so their vote will be counted proportionally the same as the last election. This is likely to get some people off their asses and vote.