Councils are concerned about the unknown and potentially significant fiscal cost of lowering the voting age – but they will also discover another cost.
Last month, Local Government Minister Kieran McAnulty told mayors and councillors the Government would avoid imposing new responsibilities on them, without funding those responsibilities.
But this week, councils are concerned to discover they'll be liable for "significant" costs if Parliament passes a new bill to lower the local voting age to 16.
A paper to Cabinet shows printing and distributing the additional ballot papers will cost councils a minimum $1.05m at the first election, but the wider costs remain unknown – like civics education, marketing to young people, and differentiating between those who can only vote for council and those who can also vote for liquor licensing trusts.
"Treasury has not been provided sufficient time to consider the proposal but notes that agreeing to policy decisions with potentially significant financial implications when these have not yet been costed or funded creates a fiscal risk that will need to be managed."
READ MORE: * Clock tiktoks down on lower voting age in local elections * Govt advised to lower voting age after poor local elections turnout
Local Government NZ chief executive Susan Freeman-Greene says councils are taking "a considered approach" to local government reform. "The future of local democracy is too important to be left to pre-election politicking," she warns. "Councils would be mindful of cost implications of any changes and would want to identify the support needed to implement them."
The bill will be considered next year by the justice select committee, by which point there should be firmer costings. It won't be implemented until 2027 at earliest.
After speaking to the bill in Parliament, McAnulty responded to Newsroom's questions about the lack of costings. "If the Bill passes, the majority of the cost will be for changes to the Electoral Commission’s enrolment processes," he tells Newsroom. "Costs to councils will likely be limited to printing and distributing the additional ballot papers."
"I think it's disrespectful to local government, because what they are saying is that they're going to experiment on local government." – Simon Watts, National MP
But at this week's first reading of the Electoral Legislation Bill, National MP Simon Watts told Parliament the fundamental issues that local government faced were not the electors' voting age. "It's actually around funding and finance, and dealing with climate adaptation and dealing with infrastructure as a result of the disasters."
He said the Government was trying to ram the change through local government, because the minister admitted he couldn't get the 75 percent majority needed to change the voting age for Parliamentary elections. "I think it's disrespectful to local government, because what they are saying is that they're going to experiment on local government through a reform on the voting age which they are not able to carry through at an overall national level."
Caeden Tipler, Thomas Brocherie and other members of the Make It 16 lobby group watched and listened from Parliament's public gallery, as the bill was debated.
"None of us know what it's like for a 16 or 17-year-old today in Aotearoa, trying to access the mental health system, dealing with public transport, dealing with schools, dealing with the justice system." – Golriz Ghahraman, Green MP
Act local government spokesperson Simon Court said young people didn't need the vote. "There are plenty of opportunities to join a political party, to join a youth wing, to become a volunteer, to attend debates, to support candidates, to come here and to learn how the parliamentary process works, to make submissions to select committee."
But the other impact on councils may not counted in dollars, but in the numbers of older councillors and board members who retain their seats. At present, a majority of elected members are aged over 50, but that may change.
With unspoken fears that the youth vote will jeopardise the dominant voice of older ratepayers in council elections, some MPs argued the real price was not fiscal.
Green MP Golriz Ghahraman told the House that the first reading of the bill to extend the franchise was a "historic day".
She said the cost was to parties like Act that saw young people as nothing more than volunteers. "They should be making tea for the Act Party while they campaign!"
She, on the other hand, agreed with the Supreme Court that 16 and 17-year-old should be accorded the fundamental right to vote. "Sixteen-year-olds can leave school, they can have sex, they can drive cars, and yes, they can work and pay tax – without representation.
"None of us know what it's like for a 16 or 17-year-old today in Aotearoa, trying to access the mental health system, dealing with public transport, dealing with schools, dealing with the justice system. Our decisions in this House are informed by all of our life experience and expertise. They are stronger because we take into account that range of experience, of challenge or privilege, and that is what democracy seeks to bring to all our decision making.
"That is what young people have fought for."
McAnulty argued that lowering the voting age for local elections had the potential to instil life-long voting habits. “It can allow young people to first enrol and vote during a time when they are more likely to be living at home, connected to their local community, and attending school, than in later years.”
He said the bill was an answer to a call that had gone on for too long. "We have been told time and time again by our young people that they deserve to vote and represent the communities they live in, and have a voice in decisions that will have long-term consequences for them. They've made submissions to select committee inquiries, lodged petitions to Parliament, organised protests, and appeared outside this very building. On their fight to vote, they went all the way to our highest court. As we all know, the Make It 16 group won their case in the Supreme Court. The court said that the age discrimination in the Local Electoral Act had not been justified."
He acknowledged continued criticism that young people were not mature enough to vote. "I do not agree," he said.
He quoted a 2019 study, also cited by the Office of the Children's Commissioner, showing that people in their mid-teens were generally able to make deliberate decisions comparable to voting. "From this study, the commissioner reported that when situations call for deliberation in the absence of high levels of emotion – such as voting – the ability of an individual to reason and consider alternative courses of action reaches adult levels during the mid-teen years."
"We already have young people with passion, purpose, and an eagerness to lead that are out and active within their communities. They see opportunities for positive change, a chance for something different – something better."
