Up Front: Mmmmmm, MMP
42 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last
-
I'd like to take a moment to thank Peter Shirtcliffe: we couldn't have done it without him. That's one of the things I really like about the Kiwi psyche: any time someone spends obscene amounts of money telling us we're stupid, we really like to tell them to get stuffed.
And getting his daughter to front it was so laughably transparent.
I was so glad when MMP won. I'll never forget Rod Donald rubbing Shirtfcliffe's nose in it when discussing the 54%/46% result. He pointed out that if the referendum was decided using FPP by electorates, then MMP won 70/97(?) seats. Pwnd !
-
if the referendum was decided using FPP by electorates, then MMP won 70/97(?) seats. Pwnd !
I didnt recall that myself.... but it is indeed GOLD. :)
-
And getting his daughter to front it was so laughably transparent.
I was never quite sure how that was supposed to work. I guess they thought they had issues with being a bit 'rich white man' and Shirtcliffe's associations with big business weren't going down too well. So they got her in, and she turned out to be even more arrogant and dismissive than he had been.
-
So, if National win the election, proceed with their promise to hold a referendum on MMP (and assuming FFP would no longer pass muster), what would you folks vote for..?
I'd stay with MMP myself: Not perfect but simple to explain compared to other systems (as I've been paid to do some elections).
-
Anderton isn't really an MMP beneficiary though, these days. He's basically a one-off independent MP. You could see him being an overhang this time.
If I lived in Wigram, I'd be wondering what to do with my electorate vote - Labour, probably, but would the National candidate have a better chance of unseating Anderton?
-
what would you folks vote for..?
Firstly, I think it's more or less a fair system and shouldn't be messed with. Especially by a party that really wants to entrench itself by going back to FPP and stealing the Maori seats to boot.
However I'd suggest in order of radicalism:
- Removing the dual vote, so that a voter's party vote went to the party of their electorate choice.- A fairly complicated (in the counting, rather than the voting stage) system of my own devising; involving a single vote, multi-member electorates and a proportionality adjustment. This would retain local representation, remove two-tier MPS and allow Maori (and any other non-regional) electorates without sacrificing fairness.
- A plain list system with no electorates
-
So, if National win the election, proceed with their promise to hold a referendum on MMP (and assuming FFP would no longer pass muster), what would you folks vote for..?
MMP. I like our messy dictatorship, even if it is difficult to describe to Australians.
-
However I'd suggest in order of radicalism:
- Removing the dual vote, so that a voter's party vote went to the party of their electorate choice.I know people have had a go at this idea before, but I do think it's all drawback and no advantage. What's it supposed to do? Apart from stop independents standing for electorate seats and give people's votes to parties they don't support? If, for instance, we'd lived in ChCh central last time round I'd have given my electorate vote to Tim Barnett. I still don't vote Labour. Vote-splitting is a feature, not a flaw, and one Kiwis don't seem to struggle with.
Some of the things I like about our system aren't wedded to MMP. I like the fact that we vote on weekends not weekdays, and I really like the ban on campaigning on election day. Watching Australians run the gauntlet of 'helpers' handing out 'how to vote' cards gives me the heebies.
-
I like our messy dictatorship
Wow, that's some verbal slip-up. I was intending to say democracy, and had just chucked the comparison with executive dictatorship...
Clearly, more coffee is in order.
-
Heh. As opposed to our clear dictatorship under FPP...
-
MMP. I like our messy dictatorship, even if it is difficult to describe to Australians.
I would have thought that "being difficult to explain to Australians" would be an advantage of the system, if anything.
-
Well I voted for MMP and doubt that we will go bacj to FFP but I would like another chance at fine tuning the system
MMP while fairer does give parties that got under 5% more power that the loosing party that 35%-40% of the voters supported
It is not a good way to run a country when that percentage of electorate are unhappyWould a prortional give a better result?
-
MMP while fairer does give parties that got under 5% more power that the loosing party that 35%-40% of the voters supported
Hardly. it gives them exactly as much power as they can negotiate for. And if National bothered negotiating, rather than pouting and whining and stamping its foot whenever it didn't get its own way, maybe they could get some of it too.
(Seriously. National has let opportunities to assemble majorities and amend legislation to suit itself go begging. If they're that stupid, then I say fuck 'em)
-
"If I lived in Wigram, I'd be wondering what to do with my electorate vote - Labour, probably, but would the National candidate have a better chance of unseating Anderton?"
That is Marc (Cook me some eggs) Alexander ex-United Future.
His claim to fame is having a slap-dash-mex-cross-over resturant before going into politics. I never got sick eating their but I sure got sick of it. Best feature was it was aimed at students and other noisey drunks to eat and not notice the slop infront of you.
He panders to the self important property investers who have become landlords to the poor and treat them like serfs. They're over mortgaged and the market rents don't match their out goings, so short of any basic economics as well. Look for knee jerk over reactions and some poor family villified for his self promotion.
-
"If I lived in Wigram, I'd be wondering what to do with my electorate vote - Labour, probably, but would the National candidate have a better chance of unseating Anderton?"
Bog, I meant to reply to that.
Look at this. See the size of the swing it would take to unseat Anderton? He'd have to lose half his vote, all to one candidate.
Last time round as an expression of futility I gave my electorate vote to Tom Dowie, on the grounds that it takes some gonadal fortitude to be the Alliance candidate running against Anderton.
-
The indicative referendum was between FPP, MMP, the Single Transferable Vote (STV), Supplementary Member (SM) or Preferential Vote (PV), but blowed if I can remeber the finer points of the latter two.
Here's a comparison between FPP, MMP and STV (which many proportionality advocates preferred), although, as I said above, can be very confusing to explain to voters...
-
I'd certainly stick with MMP- not perfect, but working...even with the Winnie Factor...waaaay better than FPTP
-
Marc Alexander
OMG. What is *wrong* with the place. Is SW Christchurch some kind of wierd fundamentalist NZ version of Kabul? Emma, do you have to wear a full chador when outside, or does a headscarf suffice?
-
I'd certainly stick with MMP- not perfect, but working...even with the Winnie Factor...waaaay better than FPTP
Agree, but if there's a referendum I demand to be allowed to vote for HTTP.
-
What's it supposed to do? Apart from stop independents standing for electorate seats and give people's votes to parties they don't support?
It's a bias in favour of a one-person-party that has support in a concentrated area (Dunne, Anderton) over a genuine national party like the Greens. Ok, this would go away if there was no threshold - but I quite like not having Brian Tamaki or Kyle Chapman as MPs.
(ok, I know they got nowhere near 0.8%, but that may be because people knew they had no chance and didn't waste their votes).
-
It's a bias in favour of a one-person-party that has support in a concentrated area (Dunne, Anderton) over a genuine national party like the Greens.
Ah, see, I also think this is a feature. So if a party or a person has a concentration of support in one geographical area - because of demographic quirks or genuine regional issues or WTF factor - they get a seat, maybe two. I would like to see the threshhold lowered though.
I don't know what the answer is for how hard it is to get new parties represented. If Act were to lose Epsom and not make it over 5%, there'd be a gap for a genuinely hard-right party, as I think there is where the Alliance used to be. (Apologies to the several people I hugely respect still working their arses off for the Alliance.)
What is *wrong* with the place. Is SW Christchurch some kind of wierd fundamentalist NZ version of Kabul? Emma, do you have to wear a full chador when outside, or does a headscarf suffice?
Actually, 'chuck stuff down Emma's cleavage' is a popular party game still...
I get the Big Questions. Wigram's a huge electorate. We live two blocks away from friends who are in Ilam - also a rock-solid safe seat, Gerry Brownlee's. One thing I have deduced about Chch is that it can be very small-c conservative. Once you get a seat, or a mayoralty, you can pretty much have it til you're sick of it.
-
If MMP gets thrown out, then STV is probably the best alternative. FPP is out of the question though, and for good reason.
-
but I quite like not having Brian Tamaki or Kyle Chapman as MPs.
(ok, I know they got nowhere near 0.8%, but that may be because people knew they had no chance and didn't waste their votes).
Well, Brian Tamaki wasn't running so that counts him out, but in 2005 Destiny did get enough votes that Richard Lewis would have been elected were there no threshold.
-
Huge? Not compared to the Australian Federal electorate of Kalgoorlie, which is basically all of WA except Perth. A requirement to be the MP there is a pilots license.
-
See the size of the swing it would take to unseat Anderton? He'd have to lose half his vote, all to one candidate.
Not quite. Anderton's majority was 8548. He would only need to lose half of that, plus one (4275 votes), to the second-placed candidate, to be unseated.
It would require 26.7% of Anderton's support going to the National candidate to cause this to happen (assuming all other votes stay the same).
Given 's the National candidate in question is the odious wanker from UF (a party which makes a hobby of attracting odious wankers), that does seem unlikely.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.