The one electorate seat threshold should be abolished we want to discourage minor parties working at electorate level The party vote threshold for list seats should not be lowered below 5%.

Some have raised concern that small parties will disrupt the workings of Parliament however with a number of existing parties only having one MP this has been shown to not be so and in fact to the contrary it adds to the richness of the parliamentary landscape.

The party vote threshold for the allocation of list seats should be lowered to 4%. I support this recommendation; it is a reasonable compromise between making the threshold attainable by viable small parties, and setting it high enough to limit the number of more fringe parties that might have passed a much lower threshold. However, I would not oppose a 3% threshold.

I support the removal of the one electorate seat threshold for the allocation of list seats. This provision is unnecessary, tends to be abused by parties and has resulted in unfairness in previous elections. I support the lowering of the threshold to 4% but I would not support a further lowering below this.

In brief, I totally agree with the recommended changes, and more importantly I agree with the Commission's reasoning in reaching those decisions. While initially concerned about the effects of lowering the party vote threshold, I am convinced by the Commission's initial report/proposal's explanation that rarely if ever could the number of minor parties lead to government instability, and that on past evidence it would have had a mostly minor change to the composition of past NZ governments. Considering how much of past election coverage has been on Epsom, its clear that the current electorate seat threshold is a waste, and is disproportionately affecting the shape of Parliament in comparison to the size of the Epsom electorate.