Concerns not enough candidates for local elections as nominations draw close
Photo:
RNZ / Nate McKinnon
Regional and Unitary Councils Aotearoa is concerned there aren't enough candidates putting their names forward for the 2025 local elections.
With nominations closing tomorrow, several councils across the country do not have enough candidates to fill the positions that need to be filled in certain electorates, or have vacancies that will go uncontested.
As of Wednesday afternoon across the country's 16 regional and unitary councils, 47 regional council seats either wouldn't have an election, or would trigger a by-election because of the lack of candidates.
Te Uru Kahika was calling for more New Zealanders to put their names forward for the 2025 local elections.
New Zealand's longest serving regional council chair and current chair of Bay of Plenty Regional Council Doug Leeder was encouraging people who were considering standing to go for it.
"This is about democracy being exercised by people in the community," he said.
Regional and unitary councils make critical decisions that affect the environment, public transport, water quality, land use, flood protection, and climate resilience.
"If you want a say in how your region prepares for climate change, manages rivers and lakes, or invests in public transport, this is your opportunity to step up," he said.
"Councillors don't need to be experts, but they do need to be people who can listen, think about the issues, and want to make their communities and environment a great place to be.
Leeder said if there was not enough candidates to fill a council's vacancies then a by-election was called.
Leeder could not recall that happening in his 24 years in local government.
Leeder himself will not be standing for re-election.
Across the 16 regional and unitary councils Horizons Tonga Māori Regional Constituency and the Tasman District Council's Te Tai o Aorere Māori Ward have no candidates.
While all 16 councils have constituencies or wards with either less nominations than vacancies or uncontested vacancies.
A number of district councils also appear to be a few candidates short.
Election management services company electionz.com is tracking candidates for a number of councils.
As of Wednesday afternoon data published on its website showed no nominations had been received for the Mayoralty vacancy at the Rotorua Lakes Council, while Central Hawke's Bay District Council, Chatham Islands Council, Hurunui District Council, Manawatū District Council and Selwyn District Council all had just one nomination.
Several council at large or ward vacancies, as well as community boards also had less candidates than vacancies or were uncontested.
Among them is Carterton District Council which had four nominations for eight council seats and Chatham Islands Council which had three nominations for eight council seats.
In 2022 Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) also noted "concerningly low" nominations in some parts of the country.
On Tuesday, LGNZ chief executive Susan Freeman-Greene said electoral officers were reporting that overall candidate nomination numbers were generally on par with the same time last election.
"[We] know from past elections that many candidates choose to wait until the final week to submit their nominations," she said.
"We strongly encourage candidates not to leave things to the last day, to allow time for information to be checked and any issues resolved."
Nominations close at noon on Friday, 1 August.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Nobby Clark not impressed by brother's surprise mayoral bid
Invercargill Mayor Nobby Clark is not supporting his younger brother's bid for the job. Photo: RNZ / REECE BAKER Invercargill mayor Nobby Clark is not backing his brother's attempt to take over his job when he finishes up this election. Nelson-based Andrew Clark is running for mayor in the southern city while simultaneously standing for Tasman district mayor. Up there, he is running as Maxwell Clark. The move has irked big brother Nobby, who is finishing up as mayor after just one term at the helm. "I do not support my brother's nomination," mayor Clark told Local Democracy Reporting. "Why is he using Andrew and not using his known name (Maxwell) - while he is also standing for the Tasman mayoralty for the fifth time?" Andrew Clark said he told Nobby he was running for mayor on Thursday after his nomination went in. He hadn't said anything earlier because he didn't want to rely on "connections". It could be difficult to get hold of Nobby, he said, and he didn't want to overload him in light of recent health issues. Andrew Clark, who also goes by middle name Maxwell, is standing for mayor at opposite ends of the South Island. Photo: Supplied The Invercargill mayor was hospitalised in late June following a minor stroke. Andrew wasn't sure why his brother hadn't taken the news well, but said the two were conversing. "I think there's a lot of stresses and strains in his life," he said. As for Invercargill, Andrew said he had been there "a few times" and would move down if successful. "I have a belief that ratepayers should come front and centre, and as a mayor I would treat the public's money in the same way I treat my own - carefully, intentionally and with accountability." The mayoral hopeful is not completely unfamiliar to council. At a June 2024 meeting, he surprised elected members by making his way to the table mid-meeting to introduce himself and thank them for being supportive in a time of need. Mayor Clark was under fire at the time for a code of conduct matter relating to comments he'd made at a private event a few months earlier. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Electoral Commission rejects claims of Māori roll tampering
Photo: Getty Images / Hagen Hopkins The Chief Electoral Officer is adamant his commission is not changing people's enrolment details without their consent and is pleading with people struggling to access their enrolment details to get in touch. His comments come amidst a flood of claims on social media from Māori who allege their enrolment details have been changed, or erased, without their knowledge. Te Pāti Māori are seeking an explanation and has advised Crown Law it wants to look into the reports as part of a two-pronged legal action against the Electoral Commission. Chief Electoral Officer Karl Le Quesne. File photo. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver Speaking to RNZ, the commission's top officer, Karl Le Quesne, said they have not and would not change anyone's details without their consent. "I can give you an assurance that we are not moving people from the Māori roll to the General roll or the other way, unless they're requesting that we do that," he said. The commission had been monitoring their online enrolment system "really" closely this week and had so far received 30,554 enrolments and updates - 92 percent of them made online. "We understand some people are having some trouble, so if you are, we really encourage you to call us on 0800 36 76 56 and we'll help you resolve it." Le Quesne said. It was likely those who could not find their details online were on the dormant roll, he said, echoing comments made by the commission's deputy chief executive of operations, Anusha Guler, earlier this week. "When we check today, we've got 114,451 people on the dormant role." According to the Electoral Commission 2023 General Election Report , the dormant roll contains voters who have been removed from the main roll for their electorate because they no longer live at an address and have not updated their enrolment details. At the election, there were 96,406 people on the dormant roll, and of those, 86 percent were on the general dormant roll while 14 percent were on the Māori dormant roll. Le Quesne said being on the dormant roll did not mean people had been taken off their main roll. "We don't switch roles for them when they go on the dormant role. We just need an address from them so we can update their enrollment." He said the system was designed to protect people's information, and getting your details "exact" was really important. The "auto-fill" feature on some people's mobile phones and laptops could be messing with an online entry. "We're really encouraging people to either turn off that auto-fill, or when it auto-fills, you delete it and try and find your address from the drop-down box, because that'll find the address that matches your enrollment record. "I tried myself this morning, and the auto-fill on my phone put in one address, but it wasn't exactly the address that I was enrolled under." People can go online to to enrol, check or update their details, or call 0800 36 76 56. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
What officials said about pay equity changes
Photo: RNZ The minister who ushered through the pay equity changes said any limitations on workers' rights were justified in order to reduce the risks to employers. A document dump from the Treasury and the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE) showed the processes the government went through to change the pay equity framework, and then return contingency funding to the Budget allowances. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden, who introduced the legislation, acknowledged the changes would likely be contentious, but were necessary to meet the government's policy objectives of keeping a pay equity system, while changing the framework for assessing whether there is sex-based undervaluation. The government worked on the changes in secret, before announcing the amendment bill in May and passing it under urgency. New Zealanders protested the changes to the Equal Pay Amendment Act. File photo. Photo: RNZ / Tess Brunton At the Budget, Finance Minister Nicola Willis revealed the changes had saved $12.8 billion over the forecast period. The short timeframe to get the bill passed before the Budget meant there had been "limited testing and analysis" of the policy proposals, and the retrospective provisions in the bill were "inconsistent" with general principles. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii MBIE acknowledged the transitional provisions would likely be "contentious" but without them it was unlikely the amendments would "meet the policy objective of ensuring the regime achieves pay equity, whilst better managing claims, and ensuring costs are related to sex-based differences in remuneration." The legal risks remained redacted, and the bill had no Regulatory Impact Statement. The process was also kept secret to prevent a surge of claims being lodged and potentially determined under the existing Employment Relations Act. The acting Attorney-General, Paul Goldsmith's consideration of the bill concluded that while it imposed limits on the right to freedom from discrimination, the right to justice, and freedom of expression, it was still consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. The paper van Velden took to Cabinet for approval, included in MBIE's document dump, shows she considered any limitations on the rights to be justified. "I consider that this is justified to meet the policy intent of allowing employers to better manage their operations, reducing potential risks to an employer's financial viability, which may lead to a reduction in employment or the quality or quantity of services provided," van Velden wrote. In December 2023, shortly after assuming the government benches, the finance minister requested more information on how the pay equity forecasts worked and whether there were any upcoming large claims. In February 2024, the Treasury reported back, saying the approach brought in by the previous government had contributed to higher cost outcomes, as it disincentivised agencies and funded sector employers from taking a lower-cost bargaining approach. "While the current Pay Equity process does require agencies to seek a bargaining contingency prior to the bargaining phase, this occurs late in the process, and many of the potential parameters for settlement are already largely agreed between the parties," officials said. "The absence of financial incentives during the pre-bargaining phase may have contributed to agencies adopting approaches which exceed the minimum requirements of the Equal Pay Act, for example, agreeing to higher paid comparators when lower paid ones would be appropriate." It also meant the Cabinet had "poor visibility" of the costs, until parties were at or near settlement. Treasury said pay equity costs were managed outside of Budget allowances, and there was merit in exploring an approach that brought some or all of the costs back within Budget allowances. By April 2024, Cabinet had agreed to a reset, bringing pay equity funding into two centralised tagged contingencies: one for the funded sector, the other for the public sector. This still allowed the government to meet its legal obligations as an employer, but was deemed to support the coalition's fiscal strategy. However, by the end of 2024, the government was looking to disestablish the funded sector contingency, identifying it as a significant spending commitment. It expected service providers to manage their own claims, with any cost pressures they created managed like any other cost pressure: through the Budget process. Nicola Willis chose to close the funded sector contingency and return the funding to the Budget 2025 allowance and capital allowance. This saved $9.6b over the forecast period. For the public sector contingency, Treasury recommended it be retained, but at a reduced level. "On balance, we consider retaining the contingency at [redacted] for residual costs to protect future allowances to be preferable given the legal obligations on the Crown as an employer under the new Act and Treasury's judgment that we can quantify the impacts with more than 50 percent confidence," Treasury wrote. The government adopted this approach, with the tagged public sector contingency reduced by $3.2b over the forecast period. In total, the changes returned around $12.8b to the Budget 2025 operating and capital allowances. Closing or reducing the contingencies without some certainty from Cabinet on policy change, however, was seen to potentially "strain the credibility" of future Budget allowances. And so, the future approach to pay equity was developed. Van Velden's legislation discontinued 33 claims and increased the threshold for what qualified as work that was "predominantly performed by female employees." All review clauses under settled claims became unenforceable. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
