+- Too Many Message Boards (https://tmmb.co.nz/forums)
+-- Forum: General Topics (https://tmmb.co.nz/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Opinion and Politics (https://tmmb.co.nz/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=75)
+--- Thread: MMP or FPP? (/showthread.php?tid=4375)
MMP or FPP? - harm_less - 12-10-2025
We're all well aware of the voters' potential actions under MMP and the more senior of us will still have distant memories of FPP that preceded MMP.
So, which system do you favour and why?
RE: MMP or FPP? - Praktica - 12-10-2025
MMP - I believe in the widest representation possible - we could even reduce the proportion of votes required to get a seat, perhaps to 3.5%.
RE: MMP or FPP? - harm_less - 12-10-2025
Likewise, MMP. It results in a far more representative government and provides much needed traction for smaller parties. FPP was disastrous for minor political parties and heavily favoured the encumbant major ones. Social Credit polled as high as 20% of the vote but never did better than 2 MPs in parliament under FPP. The Values Party similarly struggled under FFP.
RE: MMP or FPP? - nzoomed - 12-10-2025
Both have advantages and disadvantages.
FPP with a good party in charge can lead to a more stable government, but shuts out opposition and doesn't let smaller parties have much of a voice.
On the other hand, MMP allows more parties to have a voice and a more even representation but can lead to more instability, especially if the election results in parties that have difficulty working alongside one another.
That's probably why the threshold is at 5%, or else it means coalitions would potentially need to work with a greater numbers of parties.
1% threshold and 100 seats would give 1 seat for each percent, i dont know if any country works in this format? It would mean a pretty accurate representation of the population.
RE: MMP or FPP? - Olive - 12-10-2025
(Yesterday, 06:39 PM)nzoomed Wrote: Both have advantages and disadvantages.
FPP with a good party in charge can lead to a more stable government, but shuts out opposition and doesn't let smaller parties have much of a voice.
On the other hand, MMP allows more parties to have a voice and a more even representation but can lead to more instability, especially if the election results in parties that have difficulty working alongside one another.
That's probably why the threshold is at 5%, or else it means coalitions would potentially need to work with a greater numbers of parties.
1% threshold and 100 seats would give 1 seat for each percent, i dont know if any country works in this format? It would mean a pretty accurate representation of the population.
MMP for me for the above reasons.
RE: MMP or FPP? - Zurdo - 12-10-2025
MMP, but it doesn't live up to expectations, the minor parties get a chance to power trip and stop any real progress.
RE: MMP or FPP? - Lilith7 - 13-10-2025
MMP....but we have to improve it.
Perhaps an excellent first step might be to lower MP's pay rate...
RE: MMP or FPP? - amrist - 13-10-2025
Govt.nz allows each of us, 1 vote but the house of "representatives" is still made of 2 oppositions. We pay both sides to sit there and do nothing. Govt.nz functions 365 without us. The "representatives" sign on our behalf, before nipping off to Bellamy's.
lower MP's pay rate, yes. But we don't want them dropping tools and going on strike.
RE: MMP or FPP? - Lilith7 - 13-10-2025
(5 hours ago)amrist Wrote: Govt.nz allows each of us, 1 vote but the house of "representatives" is still made of 2 oppositions. We pay both sides to sit there and do nothing. Govt.nz functions 365 without us. The "representatives" sign on our behalf, before nipping off to Bellamy's.
lower MP's pay rate, yes. But we don't want them dropping tools and going on strike.
Oh...I dunno. The idea sounds strangely attractive...
