LGA INDEPENDENT ELECTIONS REVIEW: FINAL REPORT SURVEY COUNCIL FEEDBACK TABLE. Responses were received from 22 Councils

Transcription

1 1 LGA INDEPENDENT ELECTIONS REVIEW: FINAL REPORT SURVEY COUNCIL FEEDBACK TABLE Responses were received from 22 Councils RECOMMENDATION 1. Maintaining voluntary postal voting for the next local government election, and seeking to maximise voter participation through the comprehensive package of reforms contained in Recommendations 2 to That State Government and the Local Government Association (LGA) work together, with: local communities local government and the Community Engagement Board for SA's Strategic Plan to promote increased participation in local government elections and the concepts underpinning SASP Target Does your Council support the SASP target? 2. Do you think this target is achievable? If your Council believes this target is unachievable, and believes there should be a different target, please indicate that target below. 3. In the promotion of Local Government, the LGA, Councils, and State Agencies can play a useful role. Who do you believe should lead the process? LGA Councils State Agencies 4. In the promotion of Local Government Elections, the LGA, Councils, and State SUMMARY OF COUNCIL RESPONSES All 22 Councils Agreed with this Recommendation. Compulsory voting would result in candidates running more high profile campaigns, which from a resource perspective may disadvantage smaller candidates. Voluntary voting avoids the intimidation and corruption of the old system of going to a polling place. Reservations regarding to what extent Council spends ratepayer funds to promote voter participation. Good for non-resident electors. 64% of Councils supported the SASP target, and 32% opposed it 18% of Councils believe the target is achievable 59% do not believe it is achievable 23% are undecided. In the promotion of Local Government, the following percentage of Councils believe that the LGA, Councils, or State Agencies should lead the process: 91% LGA 9% Councils 5% LGA and Councils jointly 0% State Agencies In the promotion of Local Government Elections, the following percentage of Councils believe that the LGA, Councils, and State Agencies should lead the process: 59% LGA 14% Councils 9% LGA and Councils jointly

2 2 Agencies can play a useful role. Who do you believe should lead the process? LGA Councils State Agencies 23% State Agencies 9% All Unlikely to achieve the target without further strategies. The State Electoral Office facilitates Council elections across the State, and State Government has set a target of 50% for Local Government elections, therefore State Agencies (via the Office of State / Local Government Relations) should take the lead in promoting LG elections. There has been no explanation of how increased participation helps the community. 45% should be the target remembering that large numbers of young people and the elderly take very little interest in Local Government. 3. That candidates be required to insert, into their profile, contact details to enable voters to find out more about their candidacy. This could be a phone number, or website address; 1 and 4. That the LGA and the Office for State/Local Government Relations (OS/LGR) 2 investigate the feasibility of ensuring that all candidates have an internet presence providing more information than the profile contained in the ballot pack. Each candidate would be required to: take personal responsibility for any opinions expressed; and indemnify website hosts and publishers from any liability arising from the publication. 3 The cost of establishing and maintaining suitable internet resources, over a nine-week postal election campaign could be funded by: charging a fee to each candidate sufficient to cover the costs. 4 The fee could be collected as the cost of nominating for election; and/or the State Government, through the OS/LGR, providing cash and/or assistance in kind (i.e. web servers, the temporary services of administrative officers for web publishing). Such a scheme would enable statewide promotion of a single web address that would lead voters to information about any candidate. All 22 Councils Agreed with this Recommendation. The contact detail should not form part of the maximum space/words available to candidate profiles. Some concern about confidentiality. 14% agree with each candidate having an internet presence 45% disagree with each candidate having an internet presence 41% are undecided In relation to who should bare the cost of establishing and maintaining suitable internet resources over the election campaign period: 41% of Councils believe it should be funded by Each Candidate 14% of Councils believe it should be funded by the State Government 5% of Councils believe it should be funded by Councils 32% are undecided Candidates that are not IT literate may be disadvantaged. Candidates should have a choice about establishing and maintaining an Internet presence during their election campaign. Whilst on the surface this is an appealing strategy to increase interest in

3 3 1. Do you agree with each candidate having an internet presence? Agree Disagree Undecided 2. Do you believe that the cost of establishing and maintaining suitable internet resources over the election campaign period should be funded by: Each Candidate Councils State Government Other (Specify) 5. The LGA, with support from OS/LGR, encourage regional organisations of councils and the LGA Metropolitan Group to develop, in conjunction with local communities and the Community Engagement Board for SA's Strategic Plan, targets for voter participation within each region and strategies to achieve these targets. elections, it may not be appropriate for some communities. This may lead to some candidates providing a higher standard/level of information purely from an affordability basis which would appear undemocratic. On the web you cannot validate the source of the comment, False IDs are easily created or the candidate can create their own illusion of popularity. 73% agree with the Recommendation 18% disagree with the Recommendation 9% are undecided Action needs to be taken to lift the profile of Local Government. Voter participation should not be SASP target. Council through the LGA would be willing to consider setting its own target. No benefit in spending large sums trying to achieve a larger turnout of voters after all most elections the result can be determined within the first 20% of votes counted. Not much use getting people to vote just for the sake of voting. Need to vote for a candidate for a reason e.g. what the candidate stands for. Council does not support establishing targets for voter participation because it is beyond the powers of Council to force people to vote. 6. that prior to the next local government elections, the State Electoral Office (SEO) in partnership with the LGA, call for tenders from suitably qualified advertising agencies to develop and implement an information and promotional campaign to: educate South Australians about the role and functions of local government and the role of elected members; inform electors how to find out more about their local candidates; encourage voting, and explain how to vote; (with e.g. pictures of ballot envelopes etc) Funding for this advertising campaign would be secured by amending section 12 of the Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 so that responsibility for election promotion is 86% agree with the Recommendation 14% disagree with the Recommendation If this recommendation is implemented, involvement should be on a selective basis. This is a role that the LGA should already be undertaking to promote LG generally. Valuable resources are wasted on advertising. There s is no proven benefit to the community. This could become very expensive. The LGA should be the driver of the promotion.

4 4 shared between councils and the returning officer. This would enable the returning officer s costs of promotion to be recovered from councils under section The creative advertising agency hired to advise on a state-wide campaign also be tasked with devising targeted strategies to address the particular issues for large metropolitan councils where turnout has previously been lowest. This would inform the statewide campaign and also assist these particular councils to undertake additional advertising using the model template, in order to reach metropolitan council and regional targets. 8. That the Returning Officer, in conjunction with the LGA and the OS/LGR, obtains appropriate professional advice to review the style, layout and content of the ballot pack and contents to ensure that they are: eye-catching, yet recognisably formal and contain instructions that are as simple as possible to follow, consistent with the need to require the voter to formally assert his/her identity. Extremely careful consideration needs to be addressed so that the cost can be controlled and appropriately budgeted for and not financially embarrass any particular Council. 73% agree with the Recommendation 23% disagree with the Recommendation 4% are undecided If an increased effort in advertising is made in the Metro Councils, then they should share the increased costs. Spending more money on advertising and promoting will not substantially increase voter participation. 86% agree with the Recommendation 9% disagree with the Recommendation 5% are undecided It is imperative that the ballot paper packaging (ie the envelope) be reviewed to improve its visual appeal so that it is eye catching and that the householder is easily able to recognise its importance (and not mistake it for junk mail or a bill). Simple as possible to allow for those with poor reading skills. Must be easy to follow and use. 9. That any person, group or body corporate property owner or occupier with a legislative right to enrolment must be offered an opportunity to enrol to vote in any local government election. Voting papers should be sent only to those who have enrolled themselves. All 22 Councils Agreed with this Recommendation. Voting papers only to be sent to those who have made the effort to enrol. Any rate payer (group or corporate body) who pays rates should be entitled and encouraged to vote. Enrolment should not automatically carry from one election to the next but be specific for each election. This would simplify the election process and reduce

5 5 confusion for the general public. 10. That the property franchise entitlement for the Adelaide City Council be adopted for the rest of local government, so that an individual natural person is not entitled to vote in more than one capacity for any election. 55% agree with the Recommendation 23% disagree with the Recommendation 22% are undecided Apply consistency across the sector. Require that individual natural persons have the capacity to vote in separate Wards represented by a Ward Vote but only one Mayoral vote. This substantially reduces the administrative workload required for elections, as it would minimise the number of people enrolled on the supplementary roll, and it would reduce the possibility of duplications and errors on the supplementary roll. One vote one value. 11. Legislating so that groups and bodies corporate that choose to enrol must be (at the time of enrolling): required to nominate the name of the natural person who is authorised to exercise a vote for the group or body corporate; and advised by the council CEO that this natural person cannot vote in any other capacity (including as a resident) for the same local government election. 12. That, as planned by the SEO, the postal voting guide produced for the next local government elections must contain at least one sentence in each of the 12 most commonly-used languages other than English, about how to obtain a copy of the postal voting guide in each of those other respective languages. 59% agree with the Recommendation 23% disagree with the Recommendation 18% are undecided This may limit residential House of Assembly vote and possibly Ward votes if properties owned in different Wards. State Electoral Commission should maintain the electoral roll. If a person is nominated to represent a body corporate, they are not voting for themselves. That person should also be able to vote as an individual if they live elsewhere in the ward. 91% agree with the Recommendation 9% disagree with the Recommendation 13. Legislating to remove two of the differences in residential qualifications between the House of Assembly roll and the local government CEO s roll. That is to say, 90% agree with the Recommendation

6 6 those who have resided in the district for less than one month; (but who may still be on the roll in respect of their previous address); and those of unsound mind ; (who therefore are not entitled to vote in State Parliamentary elections) be also prohibited from voting in their current residential district for local government elections. 14. Altering the date of future local government elections so that they fall 18 to 19 months after the date of State elections. This would require extending the current term of office of all elected councils by 10 to 11 months, to conclude with an election sometime in September or October 2011, and every 4 years thereafter. 5% disagree with the Recommendation 5% are undecided Would not only complicate the process of compiling a voters roll and allocating voting entitlements, but also bring an added political complication of possible inequity between residential and non-residential entitlements plus the risk of upsetting potential candidates. Allows for consistency with the House of Assembly roll which makes the local government CEO s roll easier to manage. Need clarification of how this would work on a day-to-day basis. 45% agree with the Recommendation 45% disagree with the Recommendation 10% are undecided Potential supplementary elections would result in increased costs to Local Government if Councillors decide to and are successful in state election. This is an issue for the State Electoral Office. The November 2006 timing of the LG General Election made completion of administrative functions difficult for staff at some Councils as the timing coincided closely with Christmas and January holidays, making it difficult to induct new Councils and negotiate with candidates about the importance of returning required papers in accordance with legislative timeframes. A Sept / October election would improve the likelihood of settling in new Councils, complete legislative functions and provide enough time for the new Council to commence delivering an agenda of business prior to the Christmas break. Let LG manage their own elections (as they used to) and there would be no conflict with dates or SEO resources. 5 years is too long. Prefer Council election prior to State Govt election. It should be to 2012, so that it can occur 2 years after the State Government elections. This should mean that there are no clashes with the Federal Election 3 year terms. Extending this period by nearly a year would be unfair to all concerned.

7 7 Likely to result in Bi-elections which are held at Councils cost. 15. Amending the Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 so that a person who turns 18 in the 3-month interval between the close of rolls and the close of voting may vote in a local government election, provided that the person was already provisionally enrolled on the House of Assembly electoral roll. 16. That the LGA consider the possibility of establishing (prior to the next election campaign): a register of experienced election campaigners (e.g. currently serving, or retired elected members from any sphere of government) who are willing to act as a volunteer campaign mentors to future, inexperienced candidates; and a mechanism for matching a would-be candidate with a suitable volunteer mentor. 17. The LGA (or alternatively the OS/LGR) develop a website that provides simple practical information to assist prospective candidates to develop and implement an effective, inexpensive election campaign. All 22 Councils Agreed with this Recommendation. 41% agree with the Recommendation 41% disagree with the Recommendation 18% are undecided This would be very useful Councils are often called on to provide advice on these matters, which is very inappropriate. Councils need to remain independent and impartial in the process. Research might support that successful candidates frequently seek out their own mentor in this regard already. Issues re maintenance of the register, complexity of setting this up, and concerns about a register s influence over election results. Too easy for corruption to occur. Campaigning and the method should be an individual candidates choice. 91% agree with the Recommendation 9% disagree with the Recommendation The website content should be determined and managed solely by the LGA to minimise the potential party political influence on LG elections. Do a survey to see how many voters use the internet to determine their vote. A better alternative would be to fund a section for all candidates in the local messenger or local paper. 18. The LGA, the OS/LGR and State agencies with specialist knowledge of currently underrepresented groups develop and implement a series of specifically targeted campaigns, using the framework outlined on page 76, to inform and support members of under- 59% agree with the Recommendation

8 8 represented groups to consider nominating for the next local government elections. 32% disagree with the Recommendation 9% are undecided Coercing candidates to stand who have no interest in the overall function of local government is not right. Information campaigns rather than promotional campaigns supported. The LGA should be seen to encourage/support all or any groups/individuals. Positive discrimination needs to be carefully considered. We may end up getting a person with only limited outlooks receiving support where as another candidate may get no help at all. It depends on who implements the specifically targeted campaigns. Process may interfere with the democratic process by specifically targeting particular groups. Care must be taken to ensure that this process doesn t lead to a council profile that is not consistent with its community profile. 19. The Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 be amended so that in council areas with a popularly-elected Mayor, any candidate may nominate for both Mayor and councillor, with the Mayoral position to be decided first. Once the Mayoral ballot has been decided, preferences can be distributed for positions of councillor. 20. Legislating so that each council is required to have a policy for caretaker rules. The legislation should require each council s policy to at least prohibit, during a defined 50% agree with the Recommendation 50% disagree with the Recommendation The current restriction in relation to dual candidacy provides more effective operation of the elected body with the potential for conflict between the Lord Mayor and Councillors limited. It would also be very complex to administer from a vote counting perspective. Electors may also find dual candidacy very confusing when exercising their vote. Keep the existing system. Proposal would prove chaotic and confusing. Messy, complicated and difficult. Also would be able to be manipulated. Council supports dual candidacy. A good candidate could be eliminated from Council. Must be on the one day. Perhaps not allow Mayoral preferences to flow to Councillor positions. Allow for automatic withdrawal of dual nomination, where Mayor is elected unopposed, and no longer eligible as a Councillor. Evidence shows many good elected members are lost to Local Government when they are unsuccessful at the Mayoral election. If a person nominating for a Mayor misses out on being elected mayor and can t nominate for a councillor, local government can loose a very capable person. In relation to the question as to whether the Act should require a Council to have a Caketaker Policy:

9 9 election period: 1. a council making decisions about the employment of a permanent Chief Executive Officer; 2. a council entering into a contract or entrepreneurial venture that exceeds a value of $ or 1% of the council's revenue from rates in the preceding financial year (whichever is greater) unless an exemption is granted by the Minister; 3. the use of council resources for the advantage of any candidate; and 4. a council publishing electoral matter (unless it contains only information about the election process) while leaving each council free to adopt more far-reaching caretaker rules, if it wishes. 1. Should the Act require a Council to have a Caketaker Policy? Yes No Unsure 2. Should the Act specify the 4 prohibitions identified in the recommendation above? (Please comment below if you support some but not all of the proposed prohibitions, or any additional prohibitions) Yes No Unsure 3. Should Council have discretion to determine all of the content of a Caretaker Policy? Yes No Unsure 21. The election period, for purposes of the council s caretaker policy, be defined as the period commencing when nominations close, (or earlier, at the discretion of the council), and ending at the conclusion of the election. 59% of Councils agree 41% of Councils disagree In relation to the question as to whether the Act should specify the 4 prohibitions identified in the recommendation: 55% of Councils agree 41% of Councils disagree 4% of Councils are undecided In relation to the question as to whether Councils should have discretion to determine all of the content of a Caretaker Policy: 64% of Councils agree 27% of Councils disagree 9% of Councils are undecided It is important that caretaker rules are not unduly limiting for incumbent Councils. The day-to-day business of Council needs to continue. It is important to ensure that other legislative requirements can still be met, including budget adoption and adoption of the annual report and annual financial statements. Councils should have total (or a large degree of) discretion with respect to the content of its Caretaker Policy. A caretaker policy should be on a voluntary basis. Councils should be able to add further to the provisions of a policy. If there are to be caretaker provisions, they must be uniform across local government this can only realistically occur by way of legislation. 68% agree with the Recommendation 18% disagree with the Recommendation 14% are undecided Nominated period is too long. The length of the caretaker period should be mandated, there should be no discretion for some Councils to have a longer caretaker period than others. The policy should commence 3 months before voting closes.

10 That the ballot draw (to determine the order of candidates on the ballot paper) be moved from as soon as is reasonably practicable after the close of nominations to 4.00pm, four hours after the close of nominations. 91% agree with the Recommendation 9% disagree with the Recommendation 23. Legislating so that voters roll data may be provided to local government election candidates only after the close of nominations in electronic format. Consistent with the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, significant penalties should apply for use of the data for any purpose (or at any time) other than campaigning in the local government election for which the candidate has nominated. 24. The Local Government (Elections) Act 1999 be amended to insert provisions equivalent to s113 (4) of the Electoral Act 1985 to better encourage the withdrawal or retraction of election advertising material that the Returning Officer declares to be inaccurate or misleading. 25. That if recommendation 14 is to be adopted, further consultation occur with local government and the public to determine how best to strike a balance between: maintaining local government representation by filling casual vacancies, especially before the delayed 2011 periodic (general) election, but also in years thereafter; and Clear expectations to candidates manageable for administration. Consideration should be given to undertaking the ballot draw after hours, so that candidates who may work full-time would have the opportunity to attend. This would provide candidates with clear direction on the time that this process would occur. 77% agree with the Recommendation 23% disagree with the Recommendation Council recommends that a legislative provision be introduced that would make it an offence to misuse the information by distribution to a third party. Hardcopy only. Not electronic form due for potential for manipulation. Voters need to be advised before hand as it is a change of use of personal details, which currently be in conflict with Council s own privacy Policy. All 22 Councils Agreed with this Recommendation. Provides improved and consistent governance through independent review. Clearer guidance and capacity to reduce inappropriate material from impacting on election periods should be encouraged. 91% agree with the Recommendation 5% disagree with the Recommendation 4% were undecided

11 11 minimising the cost to communities of an expected increase in the number of supplementary elections that might be required. 26. That there be no change to the existing provisions for the withdrawal of any candidate after nominations have closed, pending further discussions with local government and the SEO. Council elections should be every 3 years in June/July or August. The provision of no supplementary elections after 1 January in an election year be retained. Likely that the overall functions of Council will not be able to occur due to a limited number of Elected Members available to conduct the business of Council. Problems may occur if the current local government term is extended. It could be that some elected members may choose to resign following completion of their 4 year term. 77% agree with the Recommendation 14% disagree with the Recommendation 9% were undecided The Electoral Commissioner should have the discretion to continue an election if the withdrawal of a candidate will not detract from the election process. Consideration should be given to some elections proceeding normally where a candidate withdraws before ballot papers are distributed. If a candidate withdraws after nominations (for ill health or other reasons) this should be accepted. However once voting papers have been printed it is too late. 27. Amending Section 12 of the Local Government Act 1999 to provide that representation reviews may be scheduled by regulation. In the process of consulting on the regulations, the Minister and the LGA should consider mechanisms that might be adopted to ensure compliance with the schedule. 77% agree with the Recommendation 14% disagree with the Recommendation 9% were undecided Representation Reviews need to be conducted before elections to ensure the most relevant outcome is achieved. Following elections, Councils should lodge notification with State Electoral Office advising of the date of review, allowing the SEO to make appropriate resources available to certify their reviews. Council supports a rotating or staggered basis for conducting the review. Need for compliance mechanisms with respect to regulation reviews is unlikely to be necessary.