Electoral reform in New Zealand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
New Zealand

This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
New Zealand








Other countries · Atlas
 Politics Portal
view  talk  edit

Electoral Reform in New Zealand has, in recent years, become a political issue as major changes have been made to both Parliamentary and local government elections.

Contents

A pro-MMP poster [1]
A pro-MMP poster [1]

All New Zealand elections from 1914 to 1996 consistently used the British system of 'first past the post' (FPP) for parliamentary elections (bloc voting and runoff voting were also used in some elections before 1914). This system had consistently favoured the two largest parties, since 1936 being National and Labour. Indeed, the system distorted electoral results, such as in 1978 and 1981, when National won more seats even though Labour had won more votes. Both parties would focus their efforts on marginal electoral seats, and 'safe' seats with large working class or farming populations were taken for granted.

In 1984, Labour was elected to power. Deputy Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer, also Minister of Justice, established the Royal Commission on the Electoral System in 1985. The Royal Commission's report, in 1986, entitled Towards a Better Democracy recommended the adoption of Mixed Member Proportional. The report was, initially, largely ignored outside of academic circles.

At the 1987 election, Prime Minister David Lange promised to hold a referendum on changing to MMP at, or before, the next election. None was held, and thus at the 1990 election, National (under Jim Bolger) promised to hold a referendum before the 1993 election.

In 1992, a non-binding poll was held on whether or not FPP should be replaced by a new, more proportional voting system. Voters were asked two questions: whether or not to replace FPP with a new voting system; and which system should be adopted instead. A second, binding, referendum was to be held the following year, in which voters would choose between FPP and the new system chosen to replace it. Voters favouring a new system could choose between the following:

  • Mixed Member Proportional (MMP); also known as the Additional Member System used in Germany, Scotland, and Wales; in which roughly half of the seats are elected by FPP; and the remainder are filled from party lists to top-up the local seats so as to ensure a proportional overall result;
  • Single Transferable Vote (STV); a proportional system used in Ireland and Tasmania; in which the country is divided into multimember constituencies; and voters rank candidates in declining order of preference;
  • Supplementary Member system (SM); commonly called the parallel system, used in Russia and (previously in) Italy; a semi-proportional mixed system with proportional representation used only for the seats filled by lists; and a larger proportion of seats elected by FPP.
  • Alternative Vote; used in Australia and Fiji elections; similar to FPP but with voters ranking candidates in declining order of preference (now called Instant Runoff Voting in the U.S.A).

The result was in 84.5 per cent favour of replacing FPP, with an overwhelming majority of those favouring a new electoral system voting for MMP. The percentages of the vote cast for the four possible electoral system options offered in the second question were:

  • Supplementary Member 5.5%
  • Single Transferable Vote 17.5%
  • Mixed Member Proportional 70.3%
  • Alternative Vote 6.6%

The second, binding, referendum was held at the same time as the 1993 election, and favoured MMP. The first election using MMP was held in 1996. Details of MMP in New Zealand can be found at Electoral system of New Zealand.

National and Labour have thus lost their dominance in the House. Neither has yet been able to hold a majority within the House. Instead, MMP has introduced New Zealand to coalition governments. Indeed, since 1998 there have been minority coalition governments relying on supply and confidence from parties outside of government.

Prior to the switch to MMP, New Zealand largely had a two party system, with government interchanging between Labour and National since 1935. With the introduction of MMP, particularly with New Zealand's unique provision for parties to win list seats despite getting less than the 5% threshold if they win one local seat, there has been a widening of political parties represented within the House. After the 1996 election, there were seven political parties, and with the creation of the Māori Party in 2004, there became eight parties. The number of political parties is expected to fall as happened in Germany after their adoption of MMP.

The transition to MMP has caused disproportionality to fall.

Election Disproportionality
1946-1993 average 11.10%
1996 4.36%
1999 3.01%
2002 2.53%
2005 1.11%

(source: Jonathan Boston, Stephen Church, Stephen Levine, Elizabeth McLeay and Nigel Roberts, New Zealand Votes: The General Election of 2002 (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2003) [2]

Up until the 2004 local body elections, all territorial authorities were elected using the bloc vote (although often referred to as first-past-the-post). In 2004, at the discretion of the council, they could use the single transferable vote. Eight local bodies will use STV in the 2007 local body elections. All regional authorities must still use FPP. All District Health Boards must use STV.

Advanced Search
Included Web Search Engines


Safe Search

close

Top Matching Results

Occasionally Search.com will highlight specialized results that are based on the context of your query. Examples of specialized results include specific links to news, images, or video.

Top Matching Results may highlight information from other Search.com pages, content from the CNET Network of sites, or third party content. The listings are based purely on relevance. Search.com does not receive payment for listings in this section but our partners that provide this data may get paid for listing these products.

Sponsored Links

This section contains paid listings which have been purchased by companies that want to have their sites appear for specific search terms and related content. These listings are administered, sorted and maintained by a third party and are not endorsed by Search.com.

Search Results

Search.com sends your search query to several search engines at one time and integrates the results into one list which has been sorted by relevance using Search.com's proprietary algorithm. You can customize the list of search engines included in your metasearch from the preferences.

The search engines that are used in your metasearch may allow companies to pay to have their Web sites included within the results. To view the Paid Inclusion policy for a specific search engine, please visit their Web site. Search.com does not accept payment or share revenue with any search engine partner for listings in this section.