MPs Metiria Turei & Carmel Sepuloni have been asking Written Questions about the issue.
Provided Anne Tolley meets the Standing Orders deadlines, answers should start to appear at the above link in the next day or two.
To state the obvious: Auckland uses the First Past The Post voting system, and will do so for the October 2016 election. (It could be changed for 2019 if there is the political will.)
That *should* drive the actions and strategy of people and groups. (As RB observes, that's not the case for the Nats.)
If a Council uses Single Transferable Vote then all the levers change.
By “randomised” I meant “are they different on every ballot?”
No. (This came up on Twitter y'day) What's being used is described as "pseudo-random" in the Local Electoral Regulations for Council elections.
The Electoral Commission drew lots - in front of a Judge - to determine a random order, and that order is being used on all voting papers.
The Electoral Commission also has a useful page on advertising rules, here.
Is there a place where I can see the official submissions besides the media links from Rob's post?
The 214 submissions to the Justice & Electoral inquiry are here
Scrutiny of the rolls was a live issue 30+ years ago, when the rolls were an absolute mess. Indeed, that was one of the key points of the Hunua electoral petition following the 1978 election. Last Thursday I thought it might be useful for the select cttee to hear evidence from the winner* of Hunua, to tell them what things were like then.
But as a result, NZ Post was given responsibility for the rolls - now morphed into the Electoral Enrolment unit of the Electoral Commission. The rolls aren't a problem, and scrutiny has not been a live issue for many years.
* the winner was one W Peters.
As an aside, to add in that the website with all NZ's legislation has been tweaked to improve accessibility. See the bottom of http://t.co/V8sqO3kcNg
Blog in haste, repent at leisure.
Yes, Thu 2 April.
We agree on one thing: statute law does not cover all bases, and clarity is needed.
My inner purist thinks the Electoral Act should be amended to prohibit an MP standing in a by-election; my inner pragmatist tells me this is unlikely to happen.
I addressed the specific situation you posed,and I think that would be a matter of 'straightforward mechanics.'
However I'm saying that there may be many complicated scenarios that could arise, and it may well be that Privileges becomes involved.
In the last 24 hours we've seen Peters frame the debate in terms of whether he will decide to bring in a new MP or not. He's been very good at putting himself centre of the frame going back to (at least) the Antoinette Beck saga.