?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Say no to MMP - abates
Brilliant but slightly odd but very nice

Alden Bates
Date: 2010-05-09 10:39
Subject: Say no to MMP
Security: Public
It's come to my attention that, following the recent election in the UK, there are rumblings about switching from First Past The Post to MMP, like New Zealand did. Let me give you my reaction:

NO

I would point out that we recently had a referendum to change from MMP to something else and the results were in favour of changing. Unfortunately it hasn't yet happened, but I'm hopeful.

Also, math:
The BNP got around 1.9% of the votes in the 2010 election. British parliament has 650 MPs. Under MMP, the BNP would get 12 MPs in. Good or bad? You decide!
Post A Comment | 6 Comments | | Link






Acetal: Oxygen
User: acetal
Date: 2010-05-08 23:03 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:Oxygen
I think a very large part of why MMP was voted in in the first place was that it was pushed so very strongly. It makes it impossible for voters to get rid of those members who are so far up the party list that they'll automatically get in thanks to the people who vote the same way every time.

Personally, I'm in favour of STV (single transferable vote).
Reply | Thread | Link



Alden Bates
User: abates
Date: 2010-05-08 23:52 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Yeah, I'm leaning towards STV as well. The trick is getting the opportunity to change our system. :/
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Daveosaurus: orange guy
User: southerndave
Date: 2010-05-09 01:30 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:orange guy
"I would point out that we recently had a referendum to change from MMP to something else and the results were in favour of changing."

... Actually that referendum won't be held until 2011 so the results aren't yet available to anyone without a TARDIS at their disposal.

Also, under the NZ system, the BNP wouldn't have got any MPs at all as they have never won an electorate seat (ACT, for example, would be out of parliament entirely if Rodney Hide hadn't won Epsom).
Reply | Thread | Link



Alden Bates
User: abates
Date: 2010-05-09 01:51 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
That's only because we have a 5% threshold on our system. It's possible the UK may have a lower threshold because they have a bigger parliament, but we won't know until they come up with a plan.

I must be thinking of the anti-smacking referendum (Or maybe I do have a TARDIS :)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Kiri
User: kiri_l
Date: 2010-05-09 02:32 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Hang on.. NZ votes parliamentary seats that sit in London (or wherever in England they decide to yap at each other)

Don't you have your own government?
What is an MMP?
First past the Post?! what ... you having derbies?

*deeply confused*

Edited at 2010-05-09 02:33 am (UTC)
Reply | Thread | Link



Alden Bates
User: abates
Date: 2010-05-09 02:48 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
We have our own government. What I'm talking about is the voting system we use to choose our members of parliament.

First Past the Post (FPP) is what is used in the UK, and what NZ used to use. The country is divided into constituencies, each of which votes for the person they want to be MP for their area. The person with the most votes in a constituency becomes MP for that area.

Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) is the system NZ uses now. As well as voting for the MP for your constituency, you get a "Party vote", and the proportion of votes a party gets over the entire country (mostly) determines how many MPs they get in parliament.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
Journal
links
August 2016