| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 79158 | 2007-05-10 05:08:00 | New Zealand Electoral System | KenESmith (6287) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 548765 | 2007-05-10 05:08:00 | I am an expat Kiwi, now living in Australia, and have in my lifetime lived in a number of countries, and cannot help but fume over the inadequacies of New Zealand's electoral system. For as long as I can remember, New Zealand has suffered Governments who do not have a real mandate - ie their legislative programme has the support of more than 50% of the electorate. This was an accepted fact about first past the post, where in multi-candidate elections the winning candidate in each electorate could have well less than 50% of the votes cast in the electorate - some of us older kiwis can well remember elections were the governing party had less than 50% of the votes cast and comfortably more than 2/3s of the parliamentary seats, and claimed they had a mandate to do just about anything they pleased. So we changed to MMP - electorate members still elected by the unsatisfactory first past the post, and the balancing done to correct the voting distortions of FPP from a panel of party favourites, who rank high on the party list. Consequently a sitting member, who may be ineffective and or be loathed by his constituents, and is voted out by his electorate, still keeps his parliamentary pay and perks, because (s)he is back in on the party list if they rank highly enough on that list. Fair on the electorate as a whole I think not. To compound the woes of who gets in with MMP, we have seen small minorities calling the shots in coalition with agendas that are contrary to the wishes of the majority of New Zealanders. No sitting member should have the right to hedge their bets and stand for an electorate and also be on the list, they should have to choose one or the other- why should members whose constituents want them out get a second bite at the cherry. A fairer system that makes very few politicians secure is the system of preferential voting per medium of a single transferable vote - not the system where parties trade their preferences. The trouble is politicians won't push for that. It is claimed that it is too complex for voters to understand - ranking candidates in order of preference - I know voters can be thick - people who blindly always vote for a particular party irrespective of the candidate or the party's policy can hardly be credited as thinking voters. If National were to stand a monkey for Fendalton, Karori or Remuera etc it would be elected - If Labour were to stand a donkey for Manukau, Otara. Otahuhu, etc etc it would be elected - There is a school of thought that both parties have done this. One final thought on MPs - Given the choice of a zealot with an agenda, or someone out to look after No 1, I think I would prefer the candidate who is there for himself - (s)he will get caught out sooner or later if they step out of line. They say a country gets the politicians they deserve - I don't believe I deserved the crop NZ has, so I moved to Brisbane - they are better here, but all still out after No 1 and on power trips. Ken S. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 548766 | 2007-05-10 05:19:00 | Agree with you 100% but this isn't the forum for it | DeSade (984) | ||
| 548767 | 2007-05-10 06:28:00 | "No political solution to our troubled evolution" The whole situation sux big time but there it is, what can one do? |
zqwerty (97) | ||
| 548768 | 2007-05-10 06:34:00 | It's said that "A country gets the government it deserves". The method of election makes very little difference. In fact, we''ve usually had "minority" governments, I seem to remember. Whatever they do, there's a majority of the public saying " I didn't vote for that". |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 548769 | 2007-05-10 07:17:00 | I raised this issue, because the inadequate system that panders to politicians and effectively dis-empowers the electorate, and it will continue ad nauseum, election after election unless people try to get it changed. I bounced the idea of changing MMP to disallow sitting members to be both a candidate in their current electorate and also on the party list on some people I know in ACT (ie they have to choose, one or the other)- "yes the idea has a lot of merit, but it won't get support from MPs" So how do Kiwis get things changed that they don't like, certainly not by doing nothing and saying that it is to hard. As an expat I can hardly raise the issue in the wider public forum, but there is a dire need for change. (If someone feels strongly enough about this they might like to try this thread out in the public forum of talkback or a National Newspaper - it is quite surprising what can be started with a bit of imagination. PS; I do not have any political party affiliations. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 548770 | 2007-05-10 07:44:00 | Most political parties only stand monkeys!! - so where do we go from here, now we all realise the statement I just made was correct. Actually, it is a bit insulting to monkeys, comparing them to politicians! Ken |
kenj (9738) | ||
| 548771 | 2007-05-10 08:06:00 | First step, politicians should not be allowed to have any business interests nor should they be allowed to own any significant assets beyond their own house and the usual possessions ie car. They must live only off the income that they get from being a politician, which doesn't seem to be that bad to me. If they want to get into politics they will have to get rid of all surplus houses, businesses etc before they can be eligible to get into Parliament if they are voted in. This will ensure that they care about the people and are not just caught up in the trip of gathering worldly goods, power etc. |
zqwerty (97) | ||
| 548772 | 2007-05-10 08:06:00 | If National were to stand a monkey for Fendalton, Karori or Remuera etc it would be elected - If Labour were to stand a donkey for Manukau, Otara. Otahuhu, etc etc it would be elected.Too late, on all six counts!! :D |
johcar (6283) | ||
| 548773 | 2007-05-10 12:53:00 | We may have some real drongos in Parliament - better that we send them to Wellington like "Remittance Men" than have them prowling around the suburbs. If not in Wellington, where would you like them kept? NIMBY, thanks. | R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 548774 | 2007-05-10 22:40:00 | I think it was Adlai Stevenson who said: "Your representatives serve you right." |
Richard (739) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||