A LOOPHOLE in the law allows candidates who do not live in or own property in a local government area to stand as candidates in that council's elections on Saturday week.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The issue has aroused passions in the Ashfield council campaign, in which two of the candidates do not live in the area.
Nick Adams is a Liberal-endorsed councillor who lived at his mother's house in Ashfield at the last elections in 2004 but this time has given an address at Croydon in the Burwood council area. An associate of Cr Adams, Tom Watson, who lives at Concord in the Canada Bay council area, is also a candidate.
After the 2004 election there were allegations of candidates for Ashfield and Hurstville giving false addresses.
Karin Cheung was elected to Ashfield council but resigned in 2006 after the Administrative Decisions Tribunal ruled she should be dismissed as she did not live in the municipality but at Hurstville.
Similar allegations about Ms Cheung were made after the 1999 elections.
It was also alleged that three candidates in the Hurstville council poll did not live in that council's area. Helen Filipopoulos resigned from that council after the tribunal was asked to examine her eligibility.
According to the NSW Electoral Commission a person who owns property but does not reside in a local government area can nominate another person to represent them on the non-residential roll. Anyone on this roll, or on the residential roll, can vote in a council election and can also stand for election to the council, a spokesman said.
This is confirmed by the general manager of Ashfield council, Ken Gainger, who concedes there may be a loophole for the Department of Local Government or the Electoral Commission to close.
"In the case of candidates Adams and Watson they were nominated as the 'nominated elector' by the owners of business properties [who] were prepared to sacrifice their own entitlement to vote in favour of the nominees," he said.
"It is arguable that the intent of the relevant provision of the act is to allow business operators who work within a LGA but reside elsewhere, to nominate a representative of the business to vote at a local government election for that LGA. If that is the case then this is a 'loophole' that allows non-residents of a LGA to become eligible to stand for election and/or to vote at an election for that LGA provided they can find a 'friendly' local business owner."
Some residents are arguing that the law is being misinterpreted and that it clearly intends only for absent owners to be able to nominate someone else to vote on their behalf.
According to the former Ashfield councillor Emma Brooks Maher the act says candidates must be "entitled" to be enrolled as electors, not just nominated.
"The key word is 'entitled' because this goes to the fundamental qualification of who has a right to be on the electoral roll," she said.
"Even if the act is deemed ambiguous, which I don't believe it is, then the act itself spells out that interpretation must be in favour of the aims of the act - which are for community involvement."
hgrennan@smh.com.au
