Comments on: Reflections on MMP

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 08:49:51 +0000

Sure, it is much better than single-member electorates (either with FFP or preference voting). But like Mackerras, I much prefer Hare-Clark.

I believe it should be an essential component of an electoral system to abolish tactical voting. In other words, the best result for the candidates you support are achieved by voting as you wish to do so. Hare-Clark and single-member preference voting effectively eliminates it. In contrast, both the UK/Canada FPP system and the NZ MMP system results in quite a lot of tactical voting. What it means is that it gives an unfair advantage to those who are aware of the most effective way to cast a vote, as well as resulting in distorted election results.

In New Zealand, it can go both ways. A party may miss out on getting into Parliament because voters fear their vote will be wasted if they fall below 5%, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy, whereas the party might have more than 5% support. The other way is what we saw in Epsom in 2005.

By: Oz

Oz — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 05:23:45 +0000

Criticising MMP is fun, and there are certainly flaws – just as their are with any electoral system. However, for all its flaws I still think it succeeds better than most in achieving “representative” democracy. That can be seen in the low (almost nil) discrepancy between the number of votes a party receives and their numbers in parliament.

By: Clinton Mead

Clinton Mead — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:22:59 +0000

You may of read that here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_member_proportional_representation#Decoy_lists

MMP is silly.

By: Ben Raue

Ben Raue — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:56:19 +0000

I remember reading somewhere that Italian parties had used those techniques in a similar electoral system.

I think the main reason why they don’t do it is it would be seen as hugely unethical and clearly and obviously violating the spirit of MMP.

Also, a lot of electorate candidates also run on the list, so often when an electorate MP loses their seat they are returned as a list MP. You couldn’t do that. But I think the main reason is that there would be an enormous backlash.

By: Clinton Mead

Clinton Mead — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:32:55 +0000

Why doesn’t the Labour and National parties start “Labour Two” and “National Two” parties.

For example, the Labour party could tell their voters to vote “Labour” for the electorates and “Labour Two” for the list seats.

That way, the Labor party would get all of its List Votes plus its constituencies as overflow.

MMP is silly.