Sunday, May 10, 2015

Aah But Would It Improve The Outcome?

Farrar at kiwiblog has done an exercise based on MMP using data from the national totals of FPP votes cast for UK electorate candidates.

First big difference is that Cameron's Conservatives would be a minority and Miliband's mob even smaller in representation, so then it comes to assumptions as to Blocs.
Now here in NZ there is always a big variance between how a vote is cast for a candidate and the votes in that electorate cast for a 'Party' to achieve the proportionality so desired by many confused people. In the UK elections it is quite shallow to assume that say UKIP would be an automatic fit with the conservatives as immigration and other bullet point policy had support flowing to and from Labour, Conservative and Lib Dems on the National scene and then toss in the extraordinary sweep by The SNP across the Scottish region that rejected devolution so recently.

South African Rugby has messed with Race quotas in selection at many levels and it is rapidly apparent that players selected with their racial makeup as a criteria will illuminate two problems very quickly.
One, a player may not be as talented, disciplined or skilled as the reject who just happens to not be of a  favoured different racial group and secondly such a selected player will know how the selection arrived at his naming as will his fellow team members with  scorn, distrust and disapproval simmering beneath the surface. It is the same when quotas for any reason are imposed on a selection whether it is Race, Gender, shape, colour, orientation or whatever.

That highlights the weakness of MMP over FPP where a dodgy party hierarchy decides the list ranking and total dropkicks with minimal talent become members of the legislature and can in fact become pivotal in decision making.

An interesting exercise for sure on the UK results but the first problem it highlights is the weakening of the policy mix voted on by the national voters who can now hold Cameron to his pledges without the letout that having to absorb sometimes lunatic parochial village pump policies that will be only a handbrake on what needs doing.
Whanau ora anyone.

After all the connotations and convulsions that MMP has produced in its two decades in NZ, it is yet to demonstrate any significant benefits due to the introduction of the narrow mandates that preclude bold decisive decision making such as Douglas introduced to smash the corrosive and seriously threatening megalomaniac rule of Muldoon who erroneously believed he knew best that had NZ Inc on the brink of bankruptcy.

As time passes it will be much more interesting to dig deeper into the bunch of candidates who failed so miserably in convincing voters they had something to offer as I am sure many who lost their deposit will be undeterred and agitation for proportional representation increases.

My final thought lies with the now discarded odious and discredited George Galloway whose tortured and divisive stance could have had him survive to sit in the commons and worse he could have ended up as a game changer, that his 40 000  voter electorate saw fit to send him packing is reason enough to leave the system alone.


The Veteran said...

Adolf ..., the proponents of MMP will never accept that their system is anything else but Gods gift to democracy.

They will ignore tail wags dog; dirty deals; parish pump compromise; non elected members; the transfer of power from the people to Party apparatchiks ... the list goes on, and all prostituted on the alter of proportionality.

All systems have faults. The problems with FPP are well documented but there are advantages too which are equally well documented. But don't come on with holier than thou claptrap that MMP is clean and pure because it's not.

The big advantage that the UK electorate has is that they can now hold the Conservatives genuinely to account to their manifesto commitments. Something we can never do in an MMP environment.

Howie said...

FPP is a nonsense system producing governments at odds with the will of the people. MMP has flaws which the National Party refuses to fix because they favour them. Other than the David Seymour provision though, it is infinitely preferable to locking in power for two established party machines.

Don't get dropkicks under FPP? Mike Sabin was an electorate MP, so was Brian Connell and so is that little boy, Todd Barclay. My God, you can't even rid yourself of a vicious bully like Judith Collins. Under MMP the whole country gets a say and if they don't like the calibre of the candidates on your list, you're stuffed.

In terms of outcomes, we don't get things rammed through by a government carrying the support of just a third of the electorate (the mass botched privatisations for Douglas, for example). Good enough for me.

The Veteran said...

Howie ... I have no great wish to extend the debate but doesn't your argument fall flat when Judith Collins is elected in her constituency while your leader is twice rejected in his?

And now you've outed yourself as a member of the Neanderthal left you should reflect on what just happened when Milibrand attempted to shift Labour back to the future.

As for viscous bullies ... ever met Clayton Cosgrove? just askin

Howie said...

"but doesn't your argument fall flat when Judith Collins is elected in her constituency while your leader is twice rejected in his?"

No. If enough New Zealanders shared your virulent and irrational hatred, Little would not be in Parliament. Sadly, Collins still would be.

You're right to have no desire to continue the debate, as your ass has been handed to you once already.

gravedodger said...

Howie surely you jest, Little Angry Andy took marginal New Plymouth to a safe National seat in three elections and scraped in in last seat allocated by the list in 2014

Without the covert activity of the trade unions that are a total negation of democracy, Little would have the profile of a solo dad ripping the welfare off, not even rating a mention in a suburban giveaway.

The Veteran said...

Howie ... others will judge on the 'ass' kicking bit. My experience is that self promoted 'winners' tend to be sorry losers. Note too that as you've got a clear monopoly on "virulent and irrational hatred" there's not much left to go round.

BTW ... look at the demographics. Papakura should be a red seat yet the good people there keep voting for Judith. Guess you can't handle the fact that she grew up in a Labour voting family and is happily married to a Samoan.

Re Clayton Cosgrove. Reminds me of the time I had great pleasure in recommending to the Minister of Internal Affairs that he not be reappointed as Chair of Lottery Youth after I found he had stacked the committee with virtually the entire executive of Young Labour of which he just happened to be the boss .... an exercise that Tammany hall would be been proud of.

Howie said...

You're the only one talking about Clayton Cosgrove, chief. Knock yourself out, it shows you have no argument. Married to a Samoan? What an odd thing to bring up. She's married to a director of Oravida, and secretly lobbies on their behalf while on taxpayer funded junkets, remember?

The Veteran said...

Howiue ... I was talking about 'dropkicks' ... your word. Don't come the aggrieved with me when it gets thrown back in your face.

As for the Labour background and Samoan bit ... have to wonder whether that 'colored' your thinking and fueled the vitriol.