Huge Whale fail on MMP referendum

Cameron Slater, most likely deliberately, has got it completely wrong  on the MMP referendum.  Slater blogs:

Some peo­ple are already sug­gest­ing that MMP should be reformed but that is not the ques­tion in this ref­er­en­dum. What we are being asked to do is choose MMP warts and all as it cur­rently stands, or vote for change. If we vote for change then we can choose one of four other systems.

If you like MMP just as it is then vote for that option, if you like any­thing else, includ­ing a changed MMP sys­tem then Vote for Change.

That’s utter crap! There are lots of voters who think aspects of MMP could be improved. But the referendum process specifically allows for a review of MMP to consider such potential improvements should MMP be endorsed – see sections 74 and 75 and 76 of the Electoral Referendum Act 2010.

76 Scope of review
(1) The matters that the Electoral Commission must review are—
 
Thresholds
(a) the requirement that a party must achieve at least 5% of the total number of party votes before it may be eligible to be allocated the number of list seats (if any) needed to ensure that the party’s total number of seats reflects its proportion of the total party vote; and
(b) the alternative requirement that a candidate of a party must win an electorate seat before the party may be eligible to be allocated the number of list seats (if any) needed to ensure that the party’s total number of seats reflects its proportion of the total party vote; and
 
Proportionality
(c) the ratio of electorate seats to list seats that results—
(i) from the effects of population change on the number of general electorate seats; or
(ii) if a party’s constituency candidates have won more seats than the party would be entitled to as a result of the party vote; and
 
Dual candidacy
(d) the capacity of a person at a general election to be both a candidate for an electoral district and a candidate whose name is included in a party list in a general election, and the capacity of a member of Parliament who holds a list seat to be a candidate in a by-election; and
 
Order of candidates on party lists
(e) a party’s ability to determine the order of candidates on its party list and the inability of voters to rank list candidates in order of preference; and
 
Other matters
(f) any other feature of the voting system referred to the Commission under section 5(d) of the 1993 Act.
 
(2) In addition to the matters specified in subsection (1), the Electoral Commission may, in undertaking the review, consider other aspects of the mixed member proportional representation voting system.
 
(3) Despite subsections (1)(f) and (2), the Electoral Commission must not review—
(a) Māori representation:
(b) the number of members of Parliament.

A huge fail on the facts for Slater, and an indication that the anti-democratic forces the “Vote for Change ” people represent are going to play an evidence-averse dirty game.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Huge Whale fail on MMP referendum

  1. Mostly, I think the way the referendum has been set up is fair. My only complaint (other than the absence of appropriate funding regulation for campaigners) is that MMP isn’t given a chance to refine itself and deal with some of its perceived flaws before the referendum. So people feel like the choice is between an MMP that they perceive as flawed, vs an amorphous and ill-defined alternative. Getting rid of the coat-tailing and lowering the five percent threshold would address many of the fairness issues people have with MMP. But instead the decision is being presented, by Whale Oil and others, as put up with the flaws or get rid of MMP all together.
    On the whole most people agree with the starting principle that everyone’s vote should count equally. MMP is the only system of the five on offer that puts that principle first and foremost. It has a few minor flaws that have, ironically, mostly been exploited by remnants of the FPP era. Those minor flaws can easily be solved but only if we vote for MMP not against it.

  2. Pingback: Freaky coincidence or BASTARD PLAGIARISM? | mydeology | mydeology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s