Has the Electoral Commission got it right on MMP?
10:58 AM Monday Aug 13, 2012
Press Gallery in the Debating Chamber, Parliament, Wellington. Photo / Ross Setford
The Electoral Commission has proposed abolishing the rule which allows MPs who win an electorate seat to bring others into Parliament on their coat-tails even if they fall short of the party vote threshold, saying it was the most unpopular feature of MMP and should go.
As part of the MMP Review, the Commission has also recommended lowering the party vote threshold needed to get into Parliament from five per cent to four per cent - a move which would mean parties would need about 23,000 fewer votes to get into Parliament than at five per cent.
The two rules had created some apparent discrepancies in the past - including 2008 when former Act leader Rodney Hide won Epsom and brought four other MPs to Parliament with 3.65 per cent of the vote while NZ First fell just short of the five per cent threshold but could not return to Parliament.
Has the Electoral Commission got it right on MMP? Here is the latest selection of Your Views:
If an MP wins an electorate seat, why shouldn't the party votes get carried in as well? Otherwise those votes are wasted. Now there will be even more distortion is a supposedly "proportional" voting system: say 3% of the population vote for ACT and an ACT MP wins the Epsom electorate.
Those 3% of votes will now only get 1 seat in Parliament. But if 6% of the population vote for the Greens, they will get 7 seats (6% of a 120 member Parliament). So for getting 50% more votes, they get 7 times more seats in the house. And none of those MPs are directly elected!
MMP is a joke. It isn't proportional, it isn't fair, and it undermines direct democracy by embedding political parties into the voting system.
So yes, the commission is partially getting it right.