Much scolding media carry‑on about the mediocre turn‑out in the local body elections. Are people simply not interested?
Actually, I think they are and attribute the low vote singularly to dismay at the candidates on offer. I hesitate to criticise them but the hard fact is that local government has always been a vehicle for the nondescript, in many cases seeking an income they’re otherwise incapable of earning, plus a degree of “fame”. That said they pay a hell of a price in tedium.
The Wellington mayoralty change didn’t surprise me, indeed I suggested its likelihood on this site. The mayor was widely seen in the CBD as soaking wet and bound up in irritating wokeism. A rainbow coloured pedestrian crossing to show empathy with the sexually confused, for example, simply irritated people with its infantile tokenism. It brought back memories of a previous mayor’s nonsense, namely declaring the capital nuclear free in billboards everywhere. Still, who knows? Arguably it worked (applying some Socratic logic) as while the signs were up, China, Russia, India, America et al, restrained any impulse to nuke the city.
But back to the low turn‑out. Here’s a possible explanation. Given how seemingly easy postal voting is, could an explanation be that people have forgotten how to post a letter and thus found it rather inconvenient?
Postscript: Since writing this I’ve discovered the Herald’s cartoonist Emmerson drew a similar conclusion. His cartoon showed a restaurant with all diners gazing at their phones and one saying, “I have only one question about the low voter turnout. What’s a Post Office?”