Why some campaigners prefer Supplementary Member over any alternative to MMP
Stuff has reported that the Right has MMP in its sights, and has named National - linked bloggers David Farrar and Cameron Slater as part of the discussions. ACT has yet to decide what electoral system it supports, but it's leader Don Brash publicly supports SM ( Supplementary Member).Cameron Slater ( aka WhaleOil) does not particularly like list MPs, and does not like First Past The Post (FPP). He prefers the Preferential Voting (PV) system. He was pleased that Maggie Barry won her selection for National on the North Shore on the first ballot ( meaning she got more than 50 percent of the vote), using a similar system to the preferential voting system. [update: the difference to PV is that the lowest polling candidate is dropped and rather than the candidate with the fewest number of votes being eliminated and votes reallocated, the lowest polling candidate is dropped and a new ballot held until a clear winner emerges].
David Farrar calls the campaign a pro SM campaign. Farrar prefers the SM system over FPP, thinks PV is too complicated ( despite telling a select committee of his desire for a preferential ballot to rank electoral systems on the upcoming referendum on the electoral system). He thinks SM and STV (Single Transferable Vote) have some merit">. But he prefers a run off between MMP and SM to decide our electoral system, despite considering that SM is "significantly disproportional".
So both Farrar and Slater, along with campaign leaders have discounted STV and PV as they are complicated and difficult to explain. They don't want to got back to FPP as they quite like that people such as Don Brash can get into Parliament without winning a constituency. So if any electoral system is to run off with MMP (if a majority of voters do not want MMP), it should be the Supplementary Member System .
Hence the campaign - to get that run-off.
Tomorrow or the next day, I`ll be looking at the five electoral systems in more detail, for those who think SM, STV ,FPP,PV and MMP are just strange groupings of letters.
3 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brash would get elected under FPP if he stood for National in a really safe seat like Taranaki-King Country. A block of cheese could get elected for National in that seat. Which just goes to show, electorate MPs aren't necessarily more deserving of their places in parliament than List MPs.
The reason they're backing SM is because they want to take us back to the tweedledum vs tweedledumber 2 party system but they know the voters don't want FPP. So they're pretending SM is some sort of compromise between FPP and MMP. In reality SM is just FPP with lipstick. It only gives minor parties token representation and we end up with votes in safe seats being less important. And if you're lucky enough to live in a marginal seat where your vote can make a difference you're forced to choose between just two parties or your vote will be wasted.
You are incorrect at how National party selections work.
There is a ballot if a candidate gets over 50% of the vote there is no need for a second ballot. If as is often the case no candidate gets over 50% in the forst ballot then the lowest polling candidate is dropped and a new ballot held. And so on until thre is a winner.
It is not done by ranking as in PV, it is completed with separate ballots, each time dropping off the lowest scoring candidate before the next ballot.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home