Opinion: National's dirty MMP deals are back

21/05/2013 5:37:10 p.m.

Clairbare wrote:

A few Facts: (1)The people voted to retain the status quo and stick with MMP - knowing full well its faults and still preferring that over other alternatives. (2) there was no popular mandate for any changes to MMP - there was a review which had a few suggestions based on those few people who wanted change enough to make submissions. 4,600 submissions some I guess representing groups - in the end this is a small set of interested observers - not a democratic mandate (3) no coat tailing in the last election showing that it is not a done deal and still a variety of situations can occur. (4) if coat tailing is a dirty deal then you could easily say so is a coalition government - i.e. the people don't have a say in it. Perhaps we should add in an extra vote so you can order a coalition preference - e.g. I could vote for National/labour coalition - anything to keep the Greens out with their mix of both good and loony ideas. Really worried about the loony ideas they have. (5) whatever the rules whatever the politicians think up and suggest - it is still the people who make the choice and so even your so called back door (in your majority personal opinion) if it is the will of the people it is not dirty, and the people did speak in this last election - which kind of destroys your argument - seems like the average new Zealander is smarter than you give them credit for.

20/05/2013 5:31:43 p.m.

Peter Fountain wrote:

Patrick. You already know this but there is always dirt when coming clean.

18/05/2013 3:03:54 p.m.

iain wrote:

@Boyd. Same here, I believe they could get away with murder as things stand at the moment. Don't get apathetic get louder and oppose them whenever, wherever and however you can.

18/05/2013 10:16:39 a.m.

Carlos wrote:

MPs in Parliament, with no constituency seat, represent nobody. Gilmore and Horan are the recent proof that MMP must be scrapped, so we can all see who we are voting for. First passed the post works well in the UK. There, there is a coalition government currently, a greens MP in Brighton and independent MPs such as George Galloway. They all won their seats, and showed their faces at the Election.

17/05/2013 12:34:53 p.m.

Robert M wrote:

It greatly mystyfies me why the voters in Remuera/Epsom/Mt Eden would want to vote for someone as talentless as John Banks. Who failed UE three times, ( minimum requirement in his day IQ 110).
As Peters pointed out yesterday in the House, Banks has never cut it in Parliament. Banks is a squeaker. Someone who's oral contribution is an insignificant squeak. In that he resembles most succesful modern day male law students. MOst hetro males can't endure the politically correct bullshit, the fancy Latin tags beloved by gay lecturers and the overwhelming heat of all the mindblowing chicks sittin next to them. Banks is never distracted. But still its a mystery why Matthew Hooton and Bill Ralston ever worked for Banks other than for mega loads of lolly. Banks is like is council sideskicks Quax and Walker, my father often pointed out to me that QuaX and Walker had tiny brains about the size of a pea or a wild animal brain. Such idiots can do nothing to hold the govt or the Auckland city planners to account.

16/05/2013 9:48:24 a.m.

Kathy wrote:

@Matt what an ill informed pile of rubbish. Problem gamblers normally go to pubs because they are theoretically banned from the casino's. Putting up 400 Million dollars for a convention centre, well.. who cares?. Is this something that will benefit 99 percent of kiwi's? will they even use it or care that its even there?. No, National have invited more gambling issues with its associated violence and family breakups into our communities when there is already more than enough of that there already. National have caused a further breakdown in societal values, and shown a lack of ethics and moral backbone themselves by selling Kiwi Law for profit, to the detriment of the wider community. Locking the country into a 40 year deal with a corporate, that lacks ethics and morals itself is just stupid behaviour from this government and perhaps the legislation simply needs to be repealed to fight the corporate takeover of government. Making dirty deals with corporations against the best interests of the country is all National have done here Matt.

16/05/2013 9:40:18 a.m.

Aaron wrote:

Seriously??!! So over this guy and his dribble. He's clearly not watching the same house proceedings the rest of us are!

16/05/2013 7:04:57 a.m.

Whatever next wrote:

.......and how much tax payers money have the National Party wasted on a review/ enquiry they had no intention of respecting( unless it recommended FPP again) .........easy to waste our money eh?

15/05/2013 9:46:21 p.m.

max wrote:

Patrick, I think the public and more importantly, the fourth estate of a democracy, the free press should press this government in the case of the MMP changes to forget what the individual political parties prefer, but the government should simply put the recommendations of the electoral commission to vote in parliament but give the MPs CONSCIENCE vote. If over 50% of MPs agree, then that part of the recommendation will stand for 2014. MMP could then be reviewed again periodically every 10 years time or so by a future review/parliament. The Commission presented its final report to the Minister of Justice on 29 October 2012 with the following recommendations: [1] The one electorate seat threshold should be abolished (and if it is, the provision for overhang seats should also be abolished); [2] The party vote threshold should be lowered from 5% to 4% (with the Commission required by law to review how the 4% threshold is working); [3] Consideration be given to fixing the ratio of electorate seats to list seats at 60:40 to address concerns about declining proportionality and diversity of representation; [4] Political parties should continue to have responsibility for selecting and ranking candidates on their party lists but they must make a statutory declaration that they have done so in accordance with their party rules; [5] MPs should continue to be allowed to be dual candidates and list MPs to stand in by-elections. It is now up to Parliament to decide what to do with the Commission’s recommendations. [I suggest this should be a conscience vote and not a party vote]. What do you think?

15/05/2013 8:26:03 p.m.

Boyd wrote:

Nothing suprises me with this Government anymore...