Submitter Details
Greenpeace Aotearoa,
11 Akiraho Street, Mt Eden, Auckland
Introduction
We thank the Select Committee for the opportunity to submit on the Electoral Amendment Bill.
Greenpeace Aotearoa opposes the following changes that are proposed in the Bill:
- The removal of voting rights for anyone who is not enrolled 13 days prior to election day;
- The removal the voting rights from all sentenced prisoners
A robust and inclusive democracy, in which all citizens have a voice is crucial to a healthy environment. These changes pose a direct threat to good environmental governance and to the health of our democracy. If enacted, they would undermine the cornerstone of our democracy – the right to vote.
In fact, the Attorney General has concluded that these proposed changes are inconsistent with the right to vote, enshrined in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA).
At a time when environmental protections are already under significant pressure from well-resourced corporate interests, excluding parts of the community from voting will further distort the balance of influence in our democracy.
All governments, of all stripes, should strive to build a stronger, fairer democracy in Aotearoa, where all people have a say on decisions that affect them and the environment they rely on. But this Bill proposes to disenfranchise thousands of New Zealanders. Furthermore, these changes unfairly target and will disproportionately impact marginalised groups in our community.
Greenpeace further opposes the following changes that are proposed in the Bill:
- The increase in the anonymous political donation threshold from $5,000 to $6,000.
- The overly broad framing of bribery offences that risks criminalising legitimate democratic participation.
In an age of growing political lobbying by fossil fuel, agribusiness and other industry groups, it is crucial that our democracy moves toward greater transparency, not less.
Any changes to anonymous donation thresholds should lower the cap, not make it easier for anonymous money to influence politics. Even small increases create more space for undue influence, especially when aggregated across multiple electorates.
The Bill also proposes new bribery offences that are drafted so broadly that they risk criminalising legitimate and innocuous electoral behaviour. As the Attorney-General’s report notes, Clause 43 could technically make it an offence to give a friend a ride to a polling booth.
We support robust measures to prevent corruption and vote-buying. But this clause, as written, overreaches and could suppress community-based efforts to increase voter turnout and engagement, particularly in underserved areas.
The Attorney General has concluded the following aspects of the Bill are inconsistent with the BORA:
- The 13 day registration deadline is inconsistent with s 12 (right to vote).
- The blanket disqualification from electoral registration for those detained in prison under a sentence of imprisonment inconsistent with s 12 (right to vote).
- The revised bribery offence, as drafted, is inconsistent with ss 12 (right to vote) and 14 (right to freedom of expression).
Greenpeace makes the following recommendations:
- Withdraw the proposed 13-day registration deadline. Maintain current provisions that allow enrollment up to and on polling day.
- Reject the proposal to disenfranchise all sentenced prisoners. Repeal prisoner voting restrictions altogether.
- Lower the existing anonymous donation threshold from $5,000. Do not raise it.
- Redraft the bribery clauses to ensure they are precise, and do not infringe on legitimate electoral activities and freedom of expression.
The following submission outlines our arguments in more detail.
Changes to the voter registration deadline
This Bill proposes closing voter enrolments 13 days before polling day. If, on voting day, a voter is enrolled but has not updated their address and now resides in a new electorate, only their party vote would be counted, while their electorate vote would be disallowed.
Greenpeace opposes this proposal. If enacted, it would disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters, and disproportionately impact marginalised communities, who rely on special voting provisions. It is an unjustified and undemocratic proposal.
Since 1993, eligible voters have been able to register up to the day before, or on polling day. At the last election, between 300,000 and 350,000 special votes were cast because voters had either not enrolled or had not updated their enrolment details. These voters are most likely to be younger, and come from areas with high Māori, Asian and Pacific communities.
According to the Attorney-General’s report, the proposed change is inconsistent with section 12 of the New Zealand BORA, which states that “Every New Zealander over the age of 18 has the right to vote.” The Attorney-General’s report states: “Preventing these citizens from participating in future elections is a substantial and unjustified limitation on the right to vote.”
Furthermore, we argue that because special votes tend to favour left-leaning parties, this reform if enacted by the current right-leaning coalition risks substantially undermining public trust in the democratic process.
Finally, the proposal is unlikely to achieve even its stated purpose of speeding up the election count. Under the Bill, anyone not enrolled when voting begins could still complete a special vote and cast what they believe to be a valid vote. Electoral officials would still be required to process the declaration before discarding it, meaning little to no time would be saved, while disenfranchising large numbers of voters.
Greenpeace recommends withdrawing the proposed 13-day registration deadline and instead maintain current provisions that allow enrolment up to and on polling day.
Banning all prisoners from voting
Currently, the Government takes away the voting rights of prisoners serving sentences of three years or more. The Bill proposes to remove the right to vote from all prisoners serving a sentence, regardless of the length or nature of their imprisonment.
Greenpeace opposes this change. Voting is an inherent right, protected under the BORA, and removal of voting rights should not be used as a form of punishment.
The Attorney-General has concluded that a blanket disqualification of prisoners from voting is inconsistent with the right to vote under the BORA. Similarly, the Independent Electoral Review, in its 2023 report, stated:
“Voting is an inherent right that should not be removed when a person is in prison without strong justification… The loss of voting rights should not generally be used as an additional form of punishment.”
This issue is compounded by the racial inequities of Aotearoa’s criminal justice system, in which Māori are imprisoned at disproportionately high rates. Any law restricting prisoners’ voting rights will therefore impact most heavily on Māori.
The Waitangi Tribunal found in its 2020 report on current Prisoners’ Voting restrictions that:
- Māori are significantly more incarcerated than non-Māori, especially for less serious crimes
- young Māori are more likely to be imprisoned than non-Māori, thereby impeding the development of positive voting habits ;
- the practical effect of disenfranchisement goes wider than its effect on individual prisoners, impacting on their whānau and communities ;
- and the legislation operates as a de facto permanent disqualification due to low rates of re-enrolment amongst released prisoners.
The Tribunal confirmed that “All Māori have a Treaty right to exercise their individual and collective tino rangatiratanga by being able to exercise their vote in the appointment of their political representatives.” It recommended urgent amendment of the Electoral Act to remove all disqualifications on prisoner voting, irrespective of sentence length.
Greenpeace opposes the Bill’s proposal to strip all prisoners of the right to vote and recommends that the Government adopt the Waitangi Tribunal’s recommendation to repeal prisoner voting restrictions entirely.
Political Donations, Transparency and the Bribery clause
The Bill raises the threshold for anonymous political donations from $5,000 to $6,000. This is a 20% increase. Greenpeace opposes this change. If enacted it would undermine electoral transparency and weaken public confidence in our democratic system.
While increasing the anonymous political donation threshold from $5,000 to $6,000 might appear to be a minor adjustment, even small increases in the threshold create more space for undue influence, especially when aggregated across multiple electorates and candidates.
In an age of growing political lobbying by fossil fuel, agribusiness and other industry groups, it is crucial that our democracy moves toward greater transparency, not less. Any changes to donation thresholds should lower the cap and strengthen real-time disclosure, not make it easier for anonymous money to influence politics.
We recommend the anonymous political donation is lowered from $5,000, or at the very least left as it is.
The Bill also proposes new bribery offences that are drafted so broadly that they risk criminalising legitimate and innocuous electoral behaviour.
As the Attorney-General’s BORA report states: “The offence is framed broadly. In turn it may capture and therefore prohibit legitimate and/or innocuous electoral activities and speech.” The report notes that the overly broad definition of bribery could technically make it an offence to:
Give a friend a ride to a polling booth;
Offer a relative petrol money to help them vote;
Donate to a candidate or pay for a campaign strategist.
This overly broad bribery definition could have a chilling effect on civic participation and political expression because the penalties up to two years’ imprisonment or a $40,000 fine are severe.
Greenpeace supports robust measures to prevent corruption and vote-buying. But this clause, as written, overreaches and would suppress community-based efforts to increase voter turnout and engagement, particularly in underserved areas.
We recommend redrafting the bribery clauses to ensure they are precise, proportionate, and do not infringe on legitimate electoral activities and freedom of expression.
Conclusion and Recommendations
In summary, Greenpeace Aotearoa urges the Committee to:
- Withdraw the proposed 13-day registration deadline. Maintain current provisions that allow enrollment up to and including polling day.
2. Reject the proposal to disenfranchise all sentenced prisoners. Repeal prisoner voting restrictions altogether
3. Lower the existing anonymous donation threshold from $5,000. Do not raise it.
Redraft the bribery clauses to ensure they are precise, proportionate, and do not infringe on legitimate electoral activities and freedom of expression.
Democracy is the foundation of a fair society and a liveable planet. It must be protected, not weakened. This Bill moves in the wrong direction and should be substantially revised or rejected.
Annex 1 – About Greenpeace Aotearoa
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organisation that acts to protect and conserve the environment and to promote peace. Greenpeace is one of the world‘s largest and oldest environmental organisations, operating for half a century, since 1971, and now works in more than 55 countries. The New Zealand branch of Greenpeace (Greenpeace Aotearoa) was founded in 1974 and represents many tens of thousands of supporters. Our mission is to ensure Earth’s ability to nurture life in all its diversity.
Greenpeace Aotearoa recognises Te Tiriti o Waitangi signed in Te Reo Māori on 6 February 1840 as the foundation for the relationship between the Crown (and so the New Zealand Government) and the indigenous hapū of Aotearoa. Greenpeace Aotearoa recognises that Te Tiriti o Waitangi affirmed the sovereignty of the tangata whenua, which has never been relinquished despite the violent colonisation of Aotearoa.
