How's this for a voting idea

This was discussed here some time ago.. the idea that people have to contribute X before being able to vote.

The object isn't to discard or prevent anyone from voting on grounds other than those who have contributed by was of taxes or service are more worthy - economically and morally (you can argue this 75 ways pro or con).

I brought up the idea of 'political age' ages ago - one where people who were brought up in NZ for example can vote at the normal voting age of 18.. but migrants or those who've spent years overseas have their voting ability delayed (somehow - e.g., if they move to NZ over the age of 30 they have to wait two electoral cycles).

Inspired from reading an article in the Herald about a MPs debate in Mt Albert.. the article was about the make-up of the area's population. One guy quoted said something which blew my socks off - the utter cheek of it.



He's a guy who, having never contributed anything to NZ other than merely being here, and has been a factual, financial burden, says he'll vote for the based on whatever helps him maintain his state. Most other people do likewise - voting based on what they see as being to their benefit (misguided or not).

So, how on earth can anyone justify how this guy could have equal political power as someone who'd paid taxes their entire adult life (and maybe employed people even)? If people want equality, then this is a perfect example of how equal rights need to be justified by equal effort.

Full article: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10534286

R

Just as an extra - we're the anomaly in the OECD in this way... even when you go to the UK your visa has a clause stating that you have right to any public funds for four years.

R

we are a democracy... lets keep it that way

Ummmmmmm visa is not your residency mate.
If you're a resident you can vote. Pretty simple to me.

actually, in the UK you don't even need to be a resident to vote. You just need to be a commonwealth citizen and you can vote, even if you're just on holiday.

In aussie, you can't vote unless you're a citizen, so basically that means you have to be in the country for at least 3 years before you can vote.

I think it's a good think that you can vote if you're a resident in NZ. Because residents have decided to make NZ their home, and we're a democracy.

Rob W just hates democracy cause people might choose to vote for labour...

Work to residency visas exclude you from applying for anything - even after you get residency.

In NZ, basically being on the ground allows you most things.. unlike almost every other country in the OECD.

R

stuff what other countries do, this is our land and can we not afford to be charitable to those that choose and are chosen to live here?

an inclusive society not exclusive

Political leanings aside the notion that all people who reside in a country should be able to vote is pretty unjust if you look at it from a 'right' point of view. It's nothing to do with economic contribution (or sporting prowess, skill-set or number of children you have) but about equity.

Voting is a privilege, or so we're often told, but the benchmark to have one seems simply to be: you're here, so you can vote. There are some situations where you can't vote:

- We take away the right to vote from certain serious criminals (indictable offenses) on the grounds that they've squandered their right to what? Exist? Be considered a person in NZ?

- We also revoke the right to vote people who have been in secure care for an intellectual disability for longer than three years.

But people who have contributed nothing whatsoever and often have no intention of becoming citizens, can vote.

This is really about committing yourself - long-term to the country. Overseas kiwis can vote and, in the most part, will spend the majority of their life in NZ.

Why not make it only citizens can vote - as is the norm in many other countries?

R

The end of my post above re: requiring citizenship to vote would make it more inclusive.

Think how many people would commit to the country - whereas now they don't have to at all.

R

whose going to commit to a country just so they can vote - look at our politicans before you answer rob

3 things:
1. You have no idea whether the immigrant you bashed in your OP is a citizen or not.
2. Even NZ First only argue for extending the period of time that a PR has to be in the country. And they say 3-5 years so your horrible Indian would still count.
3. Permanent Residents pay tax. To pay tax but have no say over the spending/distribution/control of that tax seems demonstratably unfair.

Oh, and I believe the wait for residency is 5 years? after having come here on a visa and having had to apply for PR?
So your proposal could see my Irish mate who has been here 6 years, paying tax the whole time, have no say over the Govt for that whole time.


Interesting how the right are always the ones most keen to disenfranchise voters...

no, the wait for citizenship is 3 year and you go for an interview where they ask you about your rights and responsibilities as a NZer (and, in my families case at least, whether you plan on using your NZ citizenship as a gateway to living in Aus)).

Residency, you get before you arrive. So you can vote straight off the plane (well, not straight off, you have to live in an electorate for a month)

I think you need to have been in NZ for a year...

This is exactly what happens in Australia. (unless you're an NZer registered before 1984). Voting is for citizen's only in Aus.

no, it's a month.

Right - there's conflicting information on the electoral websites for that actually...

for example:
Voting is not compulsory in New Zealand but, if you are eligible to vote, you are required to enrol as an elector. To enrol to vote you must be a permanent resident and at least 18 years old. You also need to have lived here on a continuous basis for a year and have resided in your electorate for at least one month.

Only citizens should have the right to vote, because only citizens have the duty to defend their country.

You can't vote if you're a permanent resident who is living outside NZ and has been doing so for more than 12 months. Same thing as not being able to vote if you're NZ citizen who has been living outside NZ for 3 years.

But if you're in the country (and have an electorate, which is where the 1 month thing comes in) you can vote.

actually, I might be wrong. What read somewhere that it was a month, and then they changed it to 3 months, and then back to a month...

That line I quoted is incorrect then?
And I can find the same thing in numerous places:
In order to vote one must have permanent residence of New Zealand, have lived in New Zealand for at least 1 year and have lived continuously for at least 1 month in the electorate in which one intends voting.

Murky at best...

and the 3 year thing for citizenship has been changed now to 5...

nah, I think you're right and I'm wrong.

I know my parents could only vote after living here for 1 year 10 months, but that's because there wasn't an election before then, so I can't judge based on them.

Is interesting how hard it is to find a clear statement on it though.

Anyway, a little off topic there, but I still don't think that someone who pays tax and has been granted permanent residency in our country should wait 7 years to be able to vote for the usage of that tax money.

The whole point it, people who have pledged no support for the country, can leave whenever they want with no residual ties - having contributed nothing, aren't even required for service should a war and drafting be enacted etc etc etc... can still vote.

We make it very easy to have a vote.

R

So paying taxes is a factor for you?

OK then, what if they hadn't paid taxes.. such as were a beneficiary or the kid of someone, coming over when they were 17 for example..

R

all those things apply for citizens too

But not permanent residents - of which there are over 150,000 in NZ who have been here over five years (according to some stat I read somewhere).

You can't walk from their citizenship without having another one already. All of the people above do have another one I imagine...

R

How can it not be? No taxation without representation etc...

Of course permanent residents who serve should be allowed to vote

NO, I mean citizens can leave whenever they want. They don't necessarily have any more ties than permanent residents. Citizen also don't have to serve in the military. You listed a bunch of things that apparently should disqualify permanent residents, but they apply equally to citizens.

Should be something like this.

Get working visa – have access to basic state funds, emergency hospital treatment etc
Stay here and work your 5 years - Get permanent residency and full access to state funds.
Stay here another 5 - Give up any foreign citizenship, become a full NZ citizen, get an NZ passport, get right to vote.

i'm sorry, but that's completely ridiculous. You can't expect families to move over to NZ when they're told, "oh, you have to live here for 5 years and then we'll decide whether you can stay"

get a clue please trapper.

oh, and btw rob. with your idea, it means that even tho i've lived in NZ since and I was 13 (I'm 27 now), I still wouldn't have been able to vote in an NZ election. Even though I went to high school in NZ, went to university in NZ, worked in NZ and paid taxes in NZ. I'd still be too much of a dirty foreigner and too much at risk of becoming a buldger for your liking.

maybe you should consider why this person in the original story has been unemployed for so long. I'll tell you why. It's because, like this thread proves, NZer hate foreigners, thus making it difficult for them to get jobs.

You'd be fine... two electoral cycles was the basic idea I suggested. 13 + 6 = 19 as far as I can tell.

If you'd come here age 18 for example then it would be 24-ish.

Also - it has less to do with being a bludger (perhaps the example I used put you on the track it was all about using our resources) and more about being equitable - offering a political choice to those who have chosen to be committed to NZ.

Re: the citizenship comment.. Citizenship entitles you free access to a country. A NZ citizen can potentially leave for another country, you're right - but only if they make whatever the grade is at the other end. We however offer all the rights of a citizen to many people who, in time of war, can walk and avoid any of the responsibilities of a NZ citizen. It might be a small thing in the scheme of things but still significant in terms of demonstrating a commitment.

R

bahaha Of course it’s ‘ridiculous’ when you make up some fantasy edition to my post.

Where the hell did “you have to live here for 5 years and then we'll decide whether you can stay” come from??

The 'decision' would need to be made before the 5 years starts - applicants could only screw it up for themselves by breaking our laws.