MUNICIPAL ROLL

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24898, 11 June 1946, Page 4

MUNICIPAL ROLL

PURGING BEFORE NEXT ELECTIONS MANY BELIEVED TO HAVE LOST QUALIFICATION The municipal electors’ roll will be purged before the next Christchurch local body elections in May. 1947. The necessity for this was emphasised by the by-laws committee in a report to the Christchurch City Council, last evening. It was pointed out that at the last municipal elections only 36,000 electors out of a total of 81,000 on the roll exercised their votes, and the committee contended that this indicated that the roll contains the names of many persons who for various reasons have lost their qualification. “In the past when the roll has been purged it has been the practice to engage canvassers to go from house to house to ascertain it a person whose name appears on the roll in respect of each property still resides therein,” the committee reported. “This method, however, is both difficult and expengive. It is suggested that the simplest method would be for the council to direct that the names of any persons having only a residential qualification who did not vote at the last municipal election be removed from the roll. “Authority to take this step is contained in Section 3 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1933. Such persons could then be advised by post that their names had been removed from the roll and that they would not be reinstated unless they were able to satisfy the council that they still retained their qualification for enrolment. The notice of the council’s intention to remove the name from the roll would be sent to the address shown on the roll. -If adequate publicity is given to the council’s intention, it is felt that there will be very little risk of anyone being left off the roll who has a qualification to be enrolled. The committee recommends that the course suggested be followed, giving as much publicity as possible to the intention of the council, and, if necessary, that the new areas amalgamated with the city be canvassed.” c £- s?' E ' Lyons said that there were probably 15,000 to 20,000 names on the roll which should not be there. Every citizen would be given the opportunity to see that his or her name was included. The utmost publicity should be given to the matter.