Have your say
The Issues Being Reviewed
|Date received||Tags||Submitted by||Submission|
|29 Mar 2012||
I believe it is important for our electoral system to be fair (equality between voters), and that representation is proportional and reflects the diversity of NZ voters.
For these reasons, I believe the 5% threshold for a party to enter parliament should be lowered to 2%.
For MMP to deliver proportionality and diversity, there need to be enough list seats. For this reason, list seats as a proportion of the total parliamentary seats should not fall too far. I think 50 list seats in a parliament of 120 is about as low as it should go, there must be at least 40% list seats.
|15 Feb 2012||
List seats need to be in step with the parliamentary seats. i.e., parties need to be prevented from standing candidates in a seat they may well lose, and then being able to sneak them in on the list. A candidate must choose to stand on the list or for a seat, but not both.
The order of the candidates on the list is up to the party, but as we saw at the last election, a poor list selection will be noticed.
I feel that the proportion of electoral seats to list seats is fine. There should be no reduction in this area.
|17 Feb 2012||
In the German MMP system a party has to win three seats before it is allowed to bring in its percentage of members in the coat tail effect. In New Zealand it's only one. I suggest it be raised to winning TWO electorate seats before the coat tails effect takes place.
|18 May 2012||
I think we should keep the one electorate seat threshold. If a candidate wins an electorate seat then it is only fair that that particular candidate should be able to represent his or her electorate in parliament. However, I think that if a party wins one electorate seat it should only be entitled to extra list seats in parliament if it receives at least 4% of the party vote. This would prevent parties with policies that are not supported by the majority of voters from being over-represented in parliament.
|25 Apr 2012||
• Order of list candidates:
• Proportion of electorate seats to list seats:
|7 Mar 2012||
Thresholds - I think the thresholds should be lowered to no more then 4% ideally 3%
|13 Mar 2012||
I disagree with List MP's but if the threshold was lifted to 10% it would reduce the likleyhood of a knee jerk reaction to a single event as happened in the last election giving NZ First any seats in parlement.
|19 Feb 2012||
The party list MPs are much less accountable than electorate MPs.
List seats should be allocated to the party leader as votes to be cast in Parliament by the leader.
There would be no bodies attached to these votes.
The party vote should be cast only for the policies and positions of the particular party, and in my view this is best done by the party leader.
These seats should not be turned into individual votes by members that can (and have) abandon party policies in mid-term. If parliament needs more members to assist in running the country, they should be electorate MPs (more created if required).
The number of politicians should not overlap the mechanism used to create the politicians.
|17 Feb 2012||
||Alastair B Timmins||
The 5% threshold is too high. The threshold should be reduced to no more than 4% but no less than 3%, as NZ has now accepted the multi party dynamics that MMP brings.
The electorate seat exemption to the current 5% threshold should be removed as it has resulted in major parties endorsing other parties in Electorate seats, in an attempt to maximise coalition options. This practice has resulted in perverse voter decisions, such as in Epsom last election.
Proportion of electorate seats to list seats should capped at a 2:1 ratio (80 to 40), to preserve MMP's proportionality.
Other: Proportionality should be preserved in the event of a by-election. This may result in the last list MP leaving parliament early to maintain proportionality.
|31 May 2012||
I support a lower than 5% threshold. I support a lower than 5% threshold.