Tuesday, 28 June 2011

Vote for “change”?

As Lindsay Perigo used to say, one of the maddening delusions of our time is the knee-jerk idea that changing our voting system is going to protect our freedom—far more important, we would say, to put our freedoms beyond the vote altogether.

The knee-jerk idea is back again nonetheless, with a group of worthies, unworthies and former examples of both  announcing this morning a Vote for Change organisation to promote a voting system that allows voters to throw bums out the front door, without them coming in the back.

Unusually for me, I have no opinion on them, their arguments, or the various voting systems they suggest we (might) change to.

How about you?

NB: The 2011 referendum on the voting system gives you five systems to vote for.

  • More Morons in Parliament (MMP);
  • First Past the Post (FPP);
  • Preferential Voting (PV);
  • Single Transferable Vote (STV);
  • Supplementary Member (SM)

All five are summarised here.



Anonymous Marcus said...

FPP is the best system by a country mile. It's still used for the UK general election and US Presidential elections. Produces a clear result without the need for coalitions - mostly.

29 Jun 2011, 00:39:00  
Blogger Cerium said...

It's not the system that's then problem, it's how it's used.

We would have Less Morons in Parliament if we the voters used our votes more wisely. Some electorates seem to have figured it out, like Epsom, Ohariu, and the Maori seats. Why don't more electorates use the only power they have?

I won't suggest most voters are morons, but many just don't bother to think much about their vote.

29 Jun 2011, 11:01:00  
Anonymous Ashley said...

MMP Advantages - proportional
MMP Disadvantages - Electorate MPs voted out can get back in on the party list; parties not voters effectively select (rank) party list MPs

FPP Advantages - generally provides a clear overall winning party and losing party, even if total vote difference is small; incompetent governments can be wiped out and then politicians "get the message" (refer Canada)

FPP Disadvantages - not proportional; disadvantageous to minority groups e.g. refer most African "democracies"; incentive for parties to concentrate pork barrelling on maybe 10 marginal electorates and put the interests of the rest of the country last

PV (Australia) Advantages - as per FPP, but swings are less

PV (Australia) Disadvantages - as per FPP, plus parties policies tend to coalesce around the "pragmatic" middle compromise (as most seats determined on two-party preferred basis)

STV Advantages - somewhat proportional, there is no "party list" for rejected MPs to sneak back in

STV Disadvantages - creates pork barelling fiefdoms, government captured by special interests, refer Ireland disaster

SM Advantages & Disadvantages - as per MMP and FPP

2 Jul 2011, 16:35:00  
Blogger reed said...

I'd like a system where I can vote against parties/individuals.

It would make the voting so much easier.

4 Jul 2011, 11:38:00  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home