THR

I noticed that you have a general election next Saturday. I'm not entirely sure whether the timing of your election is very wise only four days after the US-elections which will hijack all attention. Well, perhaps there is some thinking behind that, if nothing else, the fact that the term has expired.

I have a question for you: As you have a voting-system of two votes, one for the local-candidate and the other for the party-list, do you split your vote so that if you think that a candidate from party x is the best to represent you in your area but you think that the party y is the best equipped to govern the country?

If any of you is old enough to remember the old voting-system, do you prefer the current system or would you like to return to the single-member constituencies and one-party governments?

southerner

We did a split vote last time around - not sure what we'll do this time.

On balance I would say I prefer the MMP system to the old First Past the Post system - although I can see how core National (the main party on the right) supporters might have a different view as they don't seem to have been good at playing the coalition game.

There are pros and cons with any electoral system.

NakiMan

This will be my first election under proportional representation and I must say I find it a bit strange.

The concept that there are Members of Parliament that dont have responsibility for, and are not answerable to a constituancy, is totally alien to me.

And the fact that it will inevitably result i a coilition government, I find a bit worrying.

As far as splitting my vote, I think I probably will. My local MP happens to have done a decent job both locally and nationally, but is National. But I think Labour are probably better equipped to run the country.

Batty

This Labour Government has ridden the coat tails of a world wide growth so no matter how badly they were doing nobody could actually tell. As soon as the wheels fell off the wagon their aptitude to run any country was very quickly shown to be nil. Over $8 Billion just GONE! Because their only answer is to keep paying out. It's just lucky the country doesn't owe that $8bn because if it hadn't been there to bail them out that's exactly what would be the case!

And no, I'm not splitting my vote. We have to have a clear winner because if anyone cobbles together a Government just through their allegiances with minor parties that is not democracy and doesn't reflect the will of the people.

THR

When I started reading your post I thought you are were too young to have experienced any other elections but when reading more closely I realised that you only have moved to NZ very recently and you are still more familiar with the British FPTP-system.

Indeed, in every country whenever a new electorasl system is introduced, the first election under that system is bound to be buggered because there will be all too many people who have not understood the system and have unintentionally spoiled their ballot-paper.

lapsed kiwi

I agree with Batty - there is too much chance that National could get the most votes and yet Labour will form the government because they will do a deal with anyone to get back in power. Due to the maori seat overhang phenomenon, there is also a very real chance that National could get clearly more than 50% of the party vote and still be denied power. I think it's time to review the system, and also time to get rid of the maori seats. Maoris get fair representation through a normal constituency, the same as Europeans, Chinese, Korean, etc etc

THR

That is impossible. The party-vote is the first vote to be counted and the more important of the two.

ex_exile

MMP is a stupid voting system, added to the Maori seats this election is going to create an unrepresentative result.

NakiMan

Given the possibility that MMP could still result in the majority party not becoming the government, (because of Coilitions and the Maori seats) is it time to rethink the whole system?

Not being an expert, it seems to me that the only system that is truely PR would be to have a Party vote ONLY, with NO constituencies. But thats just creates a whole other raft of problems

Are there any other PR systems that NZ could adopt or should we go back to FPTP ?

How do other countries with PR manage?

Someone was saying on the TV this morning, that it could be weeks before a government emerges from Saturdays election. Thats just plain stupid !!!!

Batty

MMP is the system in Ireland but you get a 1,2,3 vote for candidates and no party vote per se. There's a first count and when there's no clear cut winner the 2nd and 3rd votes get counted. There still always seems to be a coalition Government.

southerner

People recently arrived to the country often make the assumption that the party with the biggest vote should be in parliament.

The fact is that the Green Party, Maori Party and Progressive Party are all in effect factions of the Old Labour party, and only became parties in their own right when the MMP system was introduced. They would naturally form a coalition government if they could cobble the numbers together and agree on which of their collective policies they can live with. If we went back to a FTP system those parties would likely merge back together over time.

What makes recent elections a bit more complex is that NZ First (and also United Future in the last election) is middle of the road on the political spectrum and tend to pick their partners based on expediency.

That said, National have ruled out NZ First, and United have pledged to go with National, so in my opinion it probably is fairly clearcut which coalition you are voting for next week. In the red corner: Labour, Greens, Progressive and Maori parties, in the blue corner National, ACT and United. And knocked out on the canvas NZ First (unless Winston can squeak home in Tauranga).

Yep - the Maori party will have to have lots of huis up and down the country before they do what everyone expected them to do anyway.

southerner

There was some recent comment in the press that the so-called Maori party overhang might be less than previously thought; ie. those voting for their local Maori party representative will also likely vote for the party this time around.

ex_exile

Ah, but the maori party Hui (if they are asked to join a governing group) will be open to all Maori many of whom will have already voted for Labour but will get to double dip to prevent a national led coalition. Its all bullshit.

lapsed kiwi

You're wrong I'm afraid, it is a real possibility. Have a look here:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/tag/overhang
Also, the official NZ election website will explain to you how overhangs work.

luvwelly

Regardless of one's views either way, in the UK the 'first past the post system' was always good at giving absolute power for up to 5 years to a party with around 40% vote or less....I think the reason for declining turnout in the UK is that too many people know their vote won't count in a 'safe seat'.

Disappointed the UK Blair Government didn't deliver on its electoral reform promise (as I hated 17 years of Tory rule) although I accept it did implement it with the new regional assemblies..and promptly lost power to Nationalists as a result lol..

'First past the post' tends to deliver Governments with strong majorities but on lowish shares of the vote, whereas PR systems force MPs to work together which can't be a bad thing i.m.v. UK politics has always been far too divisive and confrontational compared to the rest of EU.
Ironically Germany seems to work well...that has a mixed system a bit like NZ's new one.