POLL: Which voting system do you prefer?

[Swoop]

A candidate should not be able to stand for an electorate AND be on the party list. If they lose in their electorate - bye, bye charlie. No second chance through the back door on the list.




STV.

[Jantar]

My first choice would be PV. It is a simple system with only one representive per electorate. It does disadvantage the minor parties which can lead to closet collaboration between the major parties.

A close second is STV. The disadvantages are too many representives per electorate and a more complex counting system

[Ocean1]

Isn't that the one where in two consectutive elections in the mid 1980s the party with the largest number of votes got the lesser number of seats in parliament?

Lesser than the runner up, yes, by a small margin. The result of the inevitable variation between the total individual votes and the electorate vote.

Isn't that the one that gives the voting public the least representation in parliament?

Nobody votes for list MPs. Nobody votes for composite governments formed by negotiations voters have no part in after the polls have closed. Take those annomolies out and then count votes again.

Who voted for the current mix of parties? Nobody, it wasn't an option on election day, was it?

FPP must be the worst system we have ever experienced.

I repeat, it's the system most likely to return the government voted for by the highest number of voters.

[Ocean1]

Sadly, that couldn't be further from the truth. FPP resulted in massive landslide victories with only minority voting numbers. I recall one election where National triumphed with far fewer votes than Labour.

Bit of an exageration. The problem there was, (and Labour was as guilty) allowing the government of the day to fuck with electoral boundaries in order to maximise their voting power. Remove that power and you'd have a fairer apportionment of voting blocks.

I reckon STV would create the best balance.

It's one of the systems most likely to require back room deals to decide who forms the government. Hardly ballanced.

[Shadows]

What I don't like about MMP is that the fringe parties end up holding the balance of power. The tail should not wag the dog. The make up of the government rarely represents the will of the majority as a result, much like FPP, which was at the other extreme, the only difference being it was then a two horse race.

MMP needs to be fixed properly, whereby if one loses the contest in one's own electorate one can't get back in on the list, whereby a party win in a single electorate does not mean half a dozen others get a free ride into parliament, whereby if one leaves one's party whilst in office one also loses the mandate to be there at all, whereby smaller coalition party members cannot hold positions of power above the level of mandate granted to them by the electorate, and whereby the Maori seats are abolished as they are nothing but another form of "reverse rascism" against the majority.

As there is no guarantee a review of MMP will result in even any of the above being corrected, I'm considering voting SM because for every coalition formed since the introduction of MMP that was a rort and/or a joke and/or a fuck up, SM would have provided a more stable and accountable government, more representative of the will of the majority, along with the minorities being granted the voice they deserve in a democracy.

If we get one more government formed by a bunch of minorities with maybe one decent policy each, and the rest of their ideas being simply fucktarded, contradictory and controversial, I feel another Guy Fawkes coming on and after that you will all be growing potatoes to feed my army.

[Motu]

Back in the FPP days I had to vote communism for my vote to be noticed,with MMP I can give my vote to the party,or person that will stir the most shit. MMP gives the most voice to those who don't want to vote in a 2 party race.

[Bikemad]

umm.........shoot em all i say..........but for me STV gets the nod...........only coz my big bruver nutted it all out and reckons its the only system that will hold the bastards somewhat accountable an if we dont like the way the first pricks doin his job we can give our second choice guy a crack at it or something like that......i really dont think it makes fuck all difference...........first MMP election we didnt have a Govt for something like 10-12 weeks while they sorted the mess out......people still got paid,ships and planes came and went,people made and lost fortunes......it all still goes on without those pricks............
rant done.....carry on

[Coolz]

[QUOTE=Swoop;1130186237]A candidate should not be able to stand for an electorate AND be on the party list. If they lose in their electorate - bye, bye charlie. No second chance through the back door on the list.

They have a system of MMP in Wales where the candidate has to choose to be on either the electrol or party list,not both. Sounds like a good idea to me.

[oldrider]

Even though STV results in a *coalition, I feel that candidates need to pay more attention to the requirements and wants of the electorate that votes for them!

MMP allows the parties to ignore the electorate and focus on themselves and what value they can be to each other! (rather than the electorate)

FPP is a proven disaster and was soundly rejected therefore it should not be an option this time, only the MP's profit from it!

*Coalition governments are an after event that you never know about until the MP's have picked it to death usually with their own interests 1st! Jack!

[Shadows]

Even though STV results in a *coalition, I feel that candidates need to pay more attention to the requirements and wants of the electorate that votes for them!

MMP allows the parties to ignore the electorate and focus on themselves and what value they can be to each other! (rather than the electorate)

FPP is a proven disaster and was soundly rejected therefore it should not be an option this time, only the MP's profit from it!

*Coalition governments are an after event that you never know about until the MP's have picked it to death usually with their own interests 1st! Jack!

The problem with STV is that for a large part of the voting population, a two vote system is about as complex a proposition as they can cope with.

I know people who can't even put a set of random numbers in order.

[Robert Taylor]

The one most likely to return the government the majority of people vote for. FPP.

If you feel the need to fuck with that so some of the losers feel better then Supplementary Member is the least odeous of the other choices.

Except that it sounds really rude.

Yes, FPP as opposed to MMP ( mickey mouse politics ) Then you have likely only one collective bunch of idiots not to vote for.

[Robert Taylor]

Back in the FPP days I had to vote communism for my vote to be noticed,with MMP I can give my vote to the party,or person that will stir the most shit. MMP gives the most voice to those who don't want to vote in a 2 party race.

It also gives a disproportionate amount of power to minorities, especially when their votes are required and trade offs unpalatable to most of society occur. Sue Bradford and her anti smacking bill being a prime example. In many ways it used to be better when we had priministers who didnt suffer fools and ate journos for breakfast.

[Gremlin]

I think a form of STV is used during our local body elections, and tbh, I hate it. I've got one or two people I want, but have to select 4, so I end up making up the numbers with the rest, and I think it shouldn't be like that.

I also disagree with the fucken fetish for 120 MPs. We as a country have already said we want 99. Hell, I think we need a Lord Mayor and a council. Wouldn't require the thousands it currently does, huge cost savings and less hot air.

SM is the I agree with the most, but drop the 120 MPs to something more like 50.

[MisterD]

SM is the I agree with the most, but drop the 120 MPs to something more like 50.

Even if we stay with MMP (which is what all the parties want because it gives them a nice bunch of votes in the house that aren't going to be swayed by actual voters in constituencies) why do we actually need list MP's?

What the fuck use to they serve? Just give the appropriate number of votes to be cast by the party leader and we don't have to pay for some mong to sit there and raise their hand.

I'm going PV, but what I'd really like to see is some form of primaries so that even MP's in "safe" seats can be deselected in favour of a different donkey wearing the appropriate-coloured rosette. Won't happen though, for exactly the same reason as the parties want to stay with MMP.

[oneofsix]

What does it matter. It isn't binding so if they don't like the alternative we propose there wont be anything more done. If they hold the second referendum then you know we have played in to their hands. And then after this referendum the commission is going to review the way we do MMP but not the shit we want looked at like the number of MPs and list MPs staying in parliament after leaving the party who's list they got in on. The whole referendum is a waste of money and pissing in the wind.
FFS do not vote FPP, if you think the minor parties hold too much power it is probably because you don't vote the minors (and nether do I usually) but it is better than the business round table or the unions holding ALL the power as the minors force them to moderate their policies and we the voters have more sway over the minors.