Raise threshold or hurdles

The Electoral Commission is urging us all to have our say on the MMP review.

Among the points up for disccussion are:

  • The 5 percent party vote threshold for a party to be eligible for allocation of list seats;
  • The one electorate seat threshold for a party to be eligible for allocation of list seats;
  • The effects of population change on the ratio of electorate seats to list seats;
  • The effect of a party’s candidates winning more seats than the party would be entitled;
  • The capacity of a person to be both a constituency candidate and a list candidate;
  • 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;
  • The capacity of a list MP to stand as a candidate in a by-election;

What isn’t up for discussion is the size of parliament and Maori Seats.

I’ll blog about most of the points separately in the next few days but will start with the threshold.

Gravedodger reckons it should be higher than 5% and I agree – unless the hurdles which organisations must jump to register as political parties are raised.

It’s ridiculous that they need recruit only 500 members.

That’s a tiny number of people to sign up when you look at the potential power MMP gives the wee parties in parliament and even more so in government.

Any other organisation which tried to change the world, or at least this part of it, with the support of no more than 500 members wouldn’t get very far.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 at 10:15 am and is filed under politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to Raise threshold or hurdles

  1. Dave says:
    15/02/2012 at 10:28 am

    I tend to cringe when you call smaller parties “wee” parties.

    Like

  2. homepaddock says:
    15/02/2012 at 10:45 am

    Dave – those of us on the right side of the Waitaki use the term “wee’ often and that’s what these parties are.

    Like

  3. Andrei says:
    15/02/2012 at 10:53 am

    The 5% threshold has never been a problem – has it? If you want a proportional system why distort it with a threshold?

    The overhang might be a problem but then if a candidate wins a seat they have won their seat fair and square – whatchya going to do about it if a party has more seats than the party vote entitles them too? Say that someone who has won a seat cannot take it up?

    I think MMP sucks but this whole exercise in reviewing it is just a waste of time and taxpayers resources.

    It’s only window dressing when it comes down to it

    Like

  4. David Winter says:
    15/02/2012 at 11:53 am

    Ha, I’m going to write advocating the to elimination of the threshold.

    I can’t stand the Conservatives or New Zealand First – but it’s hard to see why they shouldn’t be represented when they were the preferences of 3% and 4% of those that bothered to vote in the 2011 and 2008 elections respectively.

    My guess is the party vote threshold will be lowered and the electorate threshold abolished. Will be interesting to see.

    Like

Leave a comment