I’ve published a new election website for the ABC.
It’s a site covering the twice delayed NSW Local Government Elections to be held on 4 December. You can find the site it at this link.
I assure you this is not the most riveting election site I’ve published. It’s more public service than news. Given that the NSW Electoral Commission’s website is difficult to navigate, I hope my more simple display of candidates and results will prove useful for voters and political tragics. I hope to add more content on the political composition of councils over the next week and a half.
In the rest of this post I’ll summarise some statistics on the elections and point to one or two oddities produced by the elections.
Basic Statistics
There are 128 councils in NSW and elections will take place in 121 on 4 December. Four Councils are currently under administration and will not hold elections. (Balranald, Central Coast, Central Darling, Wingecarribee). Three others did not attract enough nominations to hold an election. (Bourke, Cobar, Narromine)
Murray River Council in the state’s south has attracted only seven nominations for the nine vacancies across three wards and all seven nominees have been declared elected. However, an election will still be held as the Council had agreed to hold a referendum on moving from wards to an undivided council. Thanks to compulsory voting, Murray River Council voters will need to vote in the referendum to avoid being fined.
There are also seven councils where not all positions will be contested. Dungog has an uncontested Mayoral contest (see weird consequence below) and Kyogle (1 ward), Lachlan (4), Lockhart (1), Shellharbour (1), Tenterfield (4) and Walcha (2) have uncontested wards.
In 36 Councils, voters directly elect the Mayor. Eight councils will hold referendums to change their structure and one will hold a non-binding poll.
Bega Valley, Ryde and Wagga Wagga are holding referendums to introduce a directly elected Mayor. Dubbo, Murray River and Walcha are holding referendums to abolish internal wards. Armadale is proposing to reduce the number of Councillors from 11 to nine, while Griffith is proposing to reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to nine and to abolish the directly elected Mayor. If passed, the new council structures will be put in place at the next round of local government elections in 2024.
Inner West is holding a poll on whether voters want to de-amalgamate the council and re-establish the former Ashfield, Leichhardt and Marrickville councils. This is an advisory poll as de-amalgamation can only occur if the state government agrees.
According to my calculations, excluding the suspended councils, there are 1,225 Councillor positions and 36 Mayoral spots up for grabs, and around 3,900 candidates have nominated.
The size of councils ranges from seven to 15 and ward sizes from two to 15. The most common council sizes are nine, usually rural councils and elected at large, or 15, usually urban and normally elected from five three-councillor wards.
All council positions are elected by proportional representation. There are two main types of ballot paper.
- Simple lists of candidates, with or without party labels, where voters must number preferences equal to half of the number of vacancies rounded up.
- Upper house style ballot papers with above and below the line voting, with optional preferential voting above the line (the NSW Legislative Council system) or below the line preferences equal to half the number of vacancies rounded up.
Double Nomination
Having covered the last four rounds of Brisbane City Council elections, I have long held the view that Queensland local government has a fault in its structure.
In Queensland, candidates must run for either the Council or for Mayor.
At Brisbane City Council elections since 2008, Labor has consistently nominated candidates who do not serve on Council. The reason was that few sitting Councillors thought Labor could win, so nominating for Mayor meant giving up their Council seat and therefore being forced off council.
NSW allows candidates to nominate for both Mayor and Councillor positions. If they are elected Mayor, they are excluded from the Council vote, their preferences distributed as the first step of the count, before a usual distribution of preferences takes place.
For example, at Sydney City Council’s election, Lord Mayor Clover Moore is re-contesting the Lord Mayoral election, and heads her team’s ticket for the Council. If (as expected) Clover Moore is re-elected Lord Mayor, her Council votes will be distributed as preferences. So if Moore’s team has the votes to elect five Councillors, candidates 2 to 6 on the ticket will be elected in addition to Moore being elected Lord Mayor.
I think this is preferable to the Queensland system as it allows a council leader of the opposition to contest the Mayoral race without risk of losing their seat on Council.
This can happen in NSW because the state uses proportional representation while Brisbane City Council uses single member wards.
But there can be oddities produced by the system.
Problems with Dungog Council’s Election
Dungog Council has a direct Mayoral election. At the close of nominations, incumbent Mayor John Connors was the only nominee and was declared elected unopposed.
Which creates a problem in the Council’s A Ward. Connors is one of the four candidates who have nominated for two-seat A Ward. Two seats means that only one preference is required for a formal vote.
Any voters who turns up to vote and marks a single preference for Connors in A Ward will be wasting their time. As Connor is already elected, the first step for the count in A Ward will be to exclude Connors and distribute all his votes to the next available preference. Anyone who votes 1 for Connors with no preferences will have their vote set aside as exhausted an play no part in determining who wins the ward’s two seats.
In my opinion, the NSW Local Government Act shouldn’t allow two-person wards. Proportional representation in a two-person word is pretty meaningless, and most candidates know it is a waste of time nominating which is why so few candidates nominate in two-vacancy wards.
If two-person Wards are retained, the obvious solution is to insist that two preferences be required for two-vacancy elections. That will avoid the problem that will occur in A Ward where voters will follow the ballot paper instructions, complete only a single ‘1’ against John Connors, and have their vote exhaust because Connors is already elected.
Hi Antony,
Appreciate all your work with this.
Just from a democratic standpoint, why is the Queensland model incorrect?
In theory, isn’t it double-dipping and shouldn’t candidates commit to running either as a Mayor or Councillor?
The same problem comes up in US Presidential elections where there is often contention if a sitting Congressman, Senator or Governor runs 2 campaigns, as a back-up if they are unsuccessful for the Presidency/Vice-Presidency. The most recent example being Congressman Paul Ryan, who ran as Mitt Romney’s running mate also ran for his Wisconsin House of Representatives seat,
I recall a similar issue, a while back when O’Farrell banned State Politicians holding Local Government office concurrently.
Also re: Burwood Council, if Labor’s John Faker is popularly elected as Mayor at this election, and then decides to run in the Strathfield by-election, what happens to the Mayoralty? Does it go to the 2nd place, another party member or remain vacant?
Thanks,
LJ
COMMENT: The NSW system is not double dipping as the candidate can only occupy one position. If they are elected as Mayor, they cannot also be elected as a Councillor so they are excluded from the Council election count. A candidate who runs for Mayor and is defeated can still end up on Council which is not possible in the Queensland system. This is not the state/council issue that the O’Farrell government legislated on as that did involve one person holding two positions.
In NSW a Councillor can run for Mayor and still end up on Council as an elected Councillor. In Queensland they can’t and a consequence is that many experienced Councillors won’t run for Mayor. Three of the last four Brisbane Lord Mayors came to office by casual vacancy in the last year of the Council term, which allows the appointment of a sitting Councillor as Mayor with the Council seat filled as a casual vacancy. And the party opposing the sitting Mayor appoints outside candidates in most cases because sitting Councillors won’t take the risk of losing their Council seat by running for Mayor.
On the John Faker situation, he would have to resign from Council within 18 months. I understand Council would appoint a replacement from amongst the Councillors and the Councillor vacancy can be filled by re-count. You would have to check the details in the Local Government Act.
Antony
I will be welded to your report, although intermittently through the evening. I am astounded by the level of detail at your command, down to each polling booth, and am another who appreciates your work.
I believe Armadale should be Armidale, the former in WA.
The AEC website says that for a ballot paper with Group voting squares, voting below the line requires (preferential) votes for at least half the number of candidates (rounded up for an odd number of candidates).
However the ballot paper says voting only for first and second preferences is required, and 3 or more is optional. Hence a vote for two only would be already exhausted, if say three are to be elected per ward as in Sutherland Shire.
A polling booth official told me that the rules have changed. Why would the Electoral Office publish conflicting advice?
Which is the correct rule?
Jamie
COMMENT: The minimum number of BTL preferences is half the number of vacancies to be filled, rounded up if an odd number of vacancies are to be filled. So if there are three vacancies to be filled, the minimum number is half of three rounded up which is 2 preferences.
The first preference would count for the chosen candidate unless that candidate was elected or excluded, in which case the second preference would come into play. If the candidate receiving the second preference was still in the count the candidate would receive the vote. The vote would only exhausted if the second candidate had already been excluded or the second candidate later gets excluded.
Hi Antony,
I understand the basic feature of single transferrable vote counting at play in these elections, but how does the group tickets work in NSW LG elections? Particularly if there’s a mix of primary votes below the line with group votes.
Thanks,
Peter
COMMENT: All above the line ballot papers are imputed to have a sequence of below the line preferences, for the candidates of the first group in order, and if required, in order of the second group’s candidates, and third etc. There is no difference in treatment or counting between an ATL and a BTL votes. An ATL is simply a quick way of completing a BTL vote. Same as for the Senate and the NSW Legislative Council.
Thanks Anthony. Two questions. do the votes tallied to date include on line votes? and secondly are you thinking sometime in the future to look at on line votes to see if they show any different trends etc to in person votes?
COMMENT: The ballot paper data is all published on the NSWEC website so it can be analysed if someone wants to do it. That someone won’t be me.