Toyspeed.org.nz Message Board

What are your thoughts??

Personally I prefer FPP, as it stops all these 'deals' (coalition govt's with minor parties) going on.

And it will silence some of the idiots (guys that cause more red tape than actually get things done) (Hone, Peters, Hyde etc)

admin can you please add the option of

SM -Supplementary Member

it wont let me edit it now

Done.

Also, FPP for me as I too dislike parties which gain the majority of votes being held to ransom by minor parties. Plus I have no idea what the other non MMP options are and have no interest in looking it up.

MMP sounded like such a great idea at the time. But turns out all it does is give minor parties a bigger voice than they have earned by way of votes.

10c

FPP gives the other parties NO voice, which they are entitled to in proportion to their votes.

the reason we changed in the first place was due to bitching about minority governments etc.

in general i think you guys are over-stating it, the minor parties will get one or two concessions in a coaltion and then they have to kowtow to the bigger parties demands.

MMP has its problems but without it, there would be no right to silence as the National led government would have just passed it and a handful of other contentious issues with an outright majority.


MMPs downfalls are nothing compared to FPPs downfalls.

SM for me.

I think it will bring in more electoral representation to parliament, as there are fewer 'list' MP's.

It will also stop this utter BS around if you get one electoral seat then suddenly your 2% or whatever of the party vote entitles you to more seats, but someone who got 3% of the party vote with no electoral seat gets nothing.

Maybe I should look into it then...... really cbf

Personally I want MMP with the threshold LOWERED to 1 or 2%, the more minor parties you get in the LESS power they would each have as there are more options for the major parties to team up with.

Callum

I say $&#$% them all and make me King.

What could possibly go wrong?

Mr Revhead wrote:I say $&#$% them all and make me King.

What could possibly go wrong?

Won't somebody please think of the kids!

MMP for me, lesser of the evils sort of thing.
Although Don Brash did bring up some interesting points about SM in the debate, pity nobody knows anything about it.

Preferential voting for me

1I1 wrote:

Mr Revhead wrote:I say $&#$% them all and make me King.

What could possibly go wrong?

Won't somebody please think of the kids!

Clever pun?

MMP for me, but with a few small changes.

As said already, MMP is the lesser of two evils.

I also think its important for all parties to have some input in Govt, as there is no silver bullet in politics and all parties have good and bad ideas, so its crucial to give them all a chance to put them forward.

Something FPP cant offer.

from my understanding, SM is similar to MMP but with less list mps getting a free ride in. Also looks to lessen a total majority rule type situation from one party. That'l probably get my vote.

It doesn't make 3/5ths of SFA difference, its still representative democracy. You have to chose from a bunch of wankers and hope

He/She
1) Keeps the promises they publically made to the voters
2) didn't make too many backroom deals to get elected/re-elected/their mates into supporting positions (tea party tape anybody?)
3) actually is smart/educated enough to make intelligent decisons. (Trying to ban Di-hydrogen Monoxide etc.)
4) is actually in touch on a daily basis with a wide cross-section of the populace, and not just hanging out in the northern club or the CTU office and getting hot air blown up their ass by their idealogically motivated "mates".

The orange guy explains all here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/ReferendumN ... re=pvchclk

FPP, easy most votes wins. no pissing about with coalitions etc

we seriously need to reduce the number of MPs, get rid of racially based parties and seats also.

d1 mule wrote:FPP, easy most votes wins. no pissing about with coalitions etc

No, most seats wins. There were plenty of minority governments under FPP and a number of ocassions where the party with the most votes across the nation was not the government. Everything tended to hinge on a couple of key electorates, with the majority stuck in "safe" seats and there vote basically being worthless.

Callum

coalitions give a better representation of what people actually voted for, and provide some kind of temperance to the larger parties. if national wins 47% of the seats or whatever, does that really give them the right to dictate to the 53% of the country that didnt vote for them?

just for gods sake stop voting for winston