In Auckland, nearly 2000 special votes were chucked in the bin because people failed to list their occupation.
At Auckland Council’s planning and policy committee last week, councillors took turns lamenting people’s growing disinterest in them and everything they do. Turnout in Auckland’s 2025 local election fell to a putrescent 29.3%, down from a merely fetid 35.4% in 2022. As is tradition, the figures were particularly dire for young people and Māori. Councillors bounced a host of ideas around on how to improve the situation, from holding local and central government elections at the same time to abandoning the archaic postal voting system that a thin majority of them voted to retain last term. Several of the measures were sensible; some potentially gamechanging. But one small yet impactful measure went undiscussed in the debate. It might help restore people’s faith in our voting system if we stopped throwing hundreds of their ballots out for no real reason.
Look at the reports on special voting in Auckland from 2025 and a few things jump out. One is the number of people who used that method to cast their ballot. People cast special votes for a range of reasons. They might have moved house and forgotten to enrol in their new area or missed the deadline for putting their voting ballot in the post box. It’s a slightly more complicated process that involves filling out a declaration at a polling place. Despite that, the number of special votes rose 33% to 9,306 in 2025 in an election where overall turnout declined by 6%.
The second standout number from the report is the number of those ballots that were chucked in the recycling. Only 5,896, or 63%, of the special votes cast in Auckland were actually allowed. Don’t worry, it gets worse. Of the 3,410 votes that got binned, nearly 1,700 were disallowed because aspiring voters left the occupation field on their special voting declaration blank.
With all due respect, what the shit? Despite recent government efforts to stop people it considers to be dropkicks and tax sympathisers voting, New Zealand has a proud history of extending the democratic franchise to as many people as possible. Excluding people from an election because they forgot to write “Waitangi dildo expert” on their voting paper is the antithesis of the spirit that propelled Kate Sheppard and her white camellia onto our $10 notes.
There doesn’t seem to be a good reason for a mandatory occupation field on special votes. It’s recently been removed as a requirement for casting a special vote in central government elections. Asked why it remains for council elections, local government minister Simon Watts refused to comment, saying it would be inappropriate to do so given the administrative and legal procedures for the 2025 local elections are currently the subject of a justice committee inquiry.
We know the person who runs Auckland’s local elections isn’t a big fan of the rule. Election Services managing director Dale Ofsoske says the mandatory occupation field on special voting declarations is a requirement carried over from past local electoral regulations. His company supports a review of the rule, which he notes has been discarded for central government elections. “Particularly around the special vote declaration and disallowing a special vote on a technicality (one field of information not provided),” he says. In their report on the 2025 local election, Auckland Council staff recommend getting rid of the requirement. They note 12 local boards specifically support removing the mandatory occupation for special votes, while others have asked for a broader simplification of the special voting process. “The feedback indicates majority support for targeted reform to reduce avoidable disenfranchisement,” they conclude.
Julie Fairey, a justice of the peace and Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa councillor, says having to list a name, address and occupation is often the trickiest part of statutory declarations for the people she talks to during election time. “It makes sense to align with the central government and get rid of this requirement for special votes, as it is clearly a barrier for people having their say.”
Though the number of disallowed special votes may seem small in the scheme of things, they can have an outsize impact in low turnout, low engagement elections where even winning politicians only garner a few thousand votes. City Vision candidate Raphaela Rose lost out on a seat on the Puketāpapa local board by seven votes in the last election, with 4,355 ballots cast for her to 4,362 for Communities and Residents candidate Brendan Larmber. She remains pained over the possibility that discarded votes may have helped confirm a conservative majority on the board, which represents suburbs including Three Kings, Mt Roskill and Lynfield.
“Why should providing your occupation determine whether your vote is counted?” Rose asks. “For me, it prompts a broader concern about why we are making it so difficult for people to exercise their democratic right to vote. Voter turnout in local elections is shockingly low compared to national elections. Are these administrative barriers intended solely to discourage further participation?” She wonders whether it might suit some candidates and decisionmakers to keep vote-limiting rules in place. “We know that when turnout is low, election outcomes are more likely to skew to the right, not reflecting the true position of a community or population.”
Whatever the reason, we know 1686 Aucklanders who wanted to vote in the 2025 local election had their ballots discarded for reasons almost everyone agrees are spurious and unnecessary. That would be disappointing in any election, but particularly one that 70% of people already ignore. Votes at a local level are in such short supply. If someone is passionate enough to go to the effort of trudging down to their local library, asking for a special voting paper, and filling it all out perfectly bar one field, perhaps it would behoove us not to throw their ballot into the bin.
