John MacDonald: What's so bad about political parties having a go at council elections?

David Seymour says the ACT Party wants to put up candidates in this year’s local body elections because “it’s time for a clean-out”.

Whatever his motivation is, I think his plan to get ACT involved in local councils is a good thing.

Some people think political parties shouldn’t be involved in local councils, but what would you prefer?

If someone’s wearing a party badge, at least you know what they stand for. Anyone else, and it can be a guessing game. And I agree with Seymour when he says it would be way better to know where people stand when you vote for them for your local council.  

I’d go further than what he says. He reckons that people end up voting for people they have no idea about, but I actually think that people don’t bother voting in the first place because they’ve got no idea about the candidates.  

Or more to the point, they’ve got no real idea what the candidates stand for.  

Yes, every candidate trots out the usual lines, but you never really know them. Which is why you seem to see so many ex-media people in local government.  

They have a profile and people end up voting for them just because they recognise their name, which is a terrible thing to base your vote on.  

Which is why I think it would be great if, not just ACT, but more political parties were upfront, selected candidates, gave them a party t-shirt, and said “this is our person. Vote for them”.  

The reason I say “upfront" is because we all know that one of the local government groupings in Christchurch is the Labour Party in plain clothing. This is People’s Choice.  

There are other groupings too, but everyone knows that People’s Choice is Labour.       

If you have a look at their website, it looks pretty similar to Labour’s website. But the most obvious thing is right at the bottom of the People’s Choice homepage, where it says: “Authorised by Reuben Davidson”. Who, of course, is Labour’s Christchurch East MP.   

So David Seymour says his reason for wanting to get ACT involved in local body politics is that he doesn’t think councils have read the room and haven’t taken it on board that people are sick of councils blowing money left, right, and centre.  

On the money side of it, Seymour says ACT won’t be financing the campaigns of their local body candidates. They’ll have to do their own fundraising to pay for their campaigns.  

Which I think is good. As he puts it: “You’re not going to see helicopter candidates funded from outside your town. If you can’t fundraise money for your campaign, maybe people are trying to tell you something.”  

So, for me, it’s a win-win and I’d like to see more political parties doing the same. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from news Talk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
You know David Seymour. Actly to David Seymour, he cracks
me up. He's saying today that the ACT Party wants
to put up candidates and this year's local body elections
because quote, it's time for a cleanout. It's time for
a cleanout and the ACT Party is the solution. But
I think his plan to get ACT involved in local

(00:35):
councils is a good thing. In fact, I'll go further.
I think it's a great thing.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
Now.

Speaker 2 (00:42):
Some people think political parties shouldn't be involved in local councils,
but what would you prefer if someone's wearing a party badge,
at least you know what they stand for. Anybody else
was a guessing game, which is how David Seymour explained
it when he was on with Mike Eurlier.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
Often people will say to me, well, my counsel sent
me the little book. I look through the I didn't
know them and I wasn't really sure what I was getting,
but I ticked someone anyway. As a result, we end
up with counsels that tend to disappoint people. I think
having a team of people under a common brand and
with a common set of beliefs on your counsel could

(01:24):
actually restore some of people's trusts and hope for what
their council can do for them, or in many cases
not do because I would say they're doing too much, and.

Speaker 2 (01:33):
He reckons counsels with a few of his people around
the table would be a good thing.

Speaker 3 (01:37):
But I just feel that if New Zealand has had
people in front of them who they know what they're
getting because they're part of a brand, that the people
who are committed to reducing wastes and rates, helping people
get where they want to get on their terms, not
socially engineering them into cycle ways, and believe in universal

(01:57):
human rights where we no longer divide people by when
their ancestors arrived. Those are three things where I think
has a strong brand. I think there might be people
in each community who want to stand under that banner
and we'd get better local government as a result.

Speaker 2 (02:12):
He never misses a chance, does he. But despite his politics,
I do agree with David Seymour when he says it
would be way better to know where people stand when
you vote for them for your local Council. In fact,
I'd go further than what he says. He reckons that
people end up voting for people they have no idea about.
But I actually think that people don't bother voting in

(02:32):
the first place because they've got no idea about the candidates,
or more to the point, they've got no real idea
what the candidates stand for. Yeah, they all tried out
the usual lines, but you never really know them, which
is partly why you seem to see so many ex
media people in local government. You know they have a profile,
and people end up voting for them just because they

(02:54):
used to like listen to them on the radio. It's
the terrible thing to base you vote on, which is
why I think it would be great if not just Act,
but more political parties were upfront selected candidates, gave them
a party T shirt and said this is our person,
vote for them. The reason I said upfront just then

(03:16):
is because we all know that one of the local
government groupings in christ Church is the Labor Party and
Plane Clothing. This is people's choice. There are other groupings too,
but everybody knows that people's choice is Labor. If you
look at their website, it looks pretty similar to Labour's website,
but the most obvious thing I was looking at it before.
The most obvious thing is right at the bottom of

(03:37):
the People's Choice homepage where it says quote authorized by
Reuben Davidson, who of course is Labour's christ Church East MP.
So David Seymour, he says his reason for wanting to
get ACT involved in local body politics is that he
doesn't think councils have read the room and haven't taken
it on that people are sick of councils blowing money left,

(03:57):
right and center. Just on the money side it. David
Seymour says the ACT Party won't be financing the campaigns
of their local body candidates. They'll have to do the
fundraising to pay for their own campaigns, which I think
is good. As David Seamour puts it, quote, you're not
going to see helicopter candidates funded from outside your town.
If you can't fundraise money for your campaign, maybe people

(04:18):
are trying to tell you something. So for me, this
is a win win, and I would like to see
more political parties overtly involved showing off their brand in
local body politics because you know what they stand for.

Speaker 1 (04:33):
For more from Canterbory Mornings with John McDonald. Listen live
to news talks It'd Be Christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio