Half disagree with current form of MMP

THIS week’s Gisborne Herald webpoll question “Is MMP (mixed-member proportional) in its current form the best way for us to elect our government?” attracted 343 responses.

The 182 of those who said “no” might not have resulted in a landslide vote, but at 53 percent they tilted MMP in its current form into disfavour.

“Ridiculous in every sense,” said one.

“It’s obviously the wrong system when the lowest polling party gets to call the shots and a secret board is able to decide which party gets to govern the country.”

First past the post (FPP) is the only way to go, said another respondent.

“Tell me what is democratic when a 7 percent party vote decides our fate?”

Another person in favour of the FPP system described MMP as a “mish-mash where those who don’t win their seat can still get into Parliament”.

This increases the likelihood of a coalition, he or she said.

In its current form MMP is neither fair, honest or democratic, said one respondent.

By giving power to many small groups, the system is designed to stifle democracy, said another.

One observation was that Germany had MMP forced on it after World War 2 “to keep them from getting much done.

"We chose it, and that seems to be the effect it is having here also”.

Among the 27 percent (94) in favour of MMP in its current form was the respondent who said New Zealand could learn from Germany and other countries how to work this system.

“It is a great democratic process but New Zealand voters will require a mind shift.”

“Nothing is perfect but this is better than first past the post,” said another.

“Some minority issues actually deserve attention which they may not get from the complacent and possibly uninformed majority.”

A return to first past the post would be “going back in time”, was the viewpoint from someone in favour of MMP.

“It got rid of the two-horse race and the gaming around that,” agreed another.

In the minority were the 60 people (17 percent) who felt only small changes were needed to improve MMP.

“MMP can work successfully, but yes, some changes are required,” was one comment.

“Just look at what is happening right now, one person holding all the strings is not MMP in its true form.”

Seven respondents, or 2 percent, said they didn't know.

THIS week’s Gisborne Herald webpoll question “Is MMP (mixed-member proportional) in its current form the best way for us to elect our government?” attracted 343 responses.

The 182 of those who said “no” might not have resulted in a landslide vote, but at 53 percent they tilted MMP in its current form into disfavour.

“Ridiculous in every sense,” said one.

“It’s obviously the wrong system when the lowest polling party gets to call the shots and a secret board is able to decide which party gets to govern the country.”

First past the post (FPP) is the only way to go, said another respondent.

“Tell me what is democratic when a 7 percent party vote decides our fate?”

Another person in favour of the FPP system described MMP as a “mish-mash where those who don’t win their seat can still get into Parliament”.

This increases the likelihood of a coalition, he or she said.

In its current form MMP is neither fair, honest or democratic, said one respondent.

By giving power to many small groups, the system is designed to stifle democracy, said another.

One observation was that Germany had MMP forced on it after World War 2 “to keep them from getting much done.

"We chose it, and that seems to be the effect it is having here also”.

Among the 27 percent (94) in favour of MMP in its current form was the respondent who said New Zealand could learn from Germany and other countries how to work this system.

“It is a great democratic process but New Zealand voters will require a mind shift.”

“Nothing is perfect but this is better than first past the post,” said another.

“Some minority issues actually deserve attention which they may not get from the complacent and possibly uninformed majority.”

A return to first past the post would be “going back in time”, was the viewpoint from someone in favour of MMP.

“It got rid of the two-horse race and the gaming around that,” agreed another.

In the minority were the 60 people (17 percent) who felt only small changes were needed to improve MMP.

“MMP can work successfully, but yes, some changes are required,” was one comment.

“Just look at what is happening right now, one person holding all the strings is not MMP in its true form.”

Seven respondents, or 2 percent, said they didn't know.

Your email address will not be published. Comments will display after being approved by a staff member. Comments may be edited for clarity.

Ken Szijarto, Canada - 1 month ago
Coalition or shared power to achieve "confidence in the house" of Parliament is better than allowing a false majority (majority of seats with minority of votes) single party government like we have today in Canada. NZ, you don't know how good you have it. Shared government means promises kept. Shared government means respecting actual voter intentions. I challenge to look closely at those who oppose MMP. Their reasons are more self-serving than logical.