Voting by Numbers

By James, Colin | New Zealand Management, September 2005 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Voting by Numbers

James, Colin, New Zealand Management

As fast as one party goes out of Parliament, another comes in, it seems. We appear to be stuck around seven. How come? Mauri Pacific, the post-1998 New Zealand First splinter, disappeared in the 1999 election but the Greens came in. The Alliance disappeared in 2002 but left behind a splinter, Jim Anderton's Progressive party.

This election will confirm the Maori party, a splinter of Labour, to make up the numbers if ACT goes. If Anderton makes this coming term his last, Destiny is out there fishing in the moral conservative catchment.

Why this diversity? After all, it took the Germans, whose system we copied, just four elections to get to three.

First, society is more diverse than in the halcyon two-party-politics days (in 1951 National and Labour shared 99.8 percent of the vote). So you would expect a spread of parties. Germany now has five.

Second, the system was skewed by the 1986 royal commissioners' recommendation of full proportionality for parties which win an electorate seat. This special "waiver" of the five percent threshold was copied from Germany along with the rest of MMR The commission's chair, Sir John Wallace, volunteered in April 2002 that it was a mistake.

Self-evidently so. In 1996 the Christian Coalition got 4.3 percent but no seats. In 1999 New Zealand First got 4.3 percent and five seats, thanks to Winston Peters winning Tauranga by 63 votes.

If Peters had been a lone MP after 1999, would he have rebounded in the 2002 election to 10.4 percent of the votes and 13 MPs?

Maybe. Peter Dunne survived as a lone MP from 1996 to 2002 before his windfall in that election and Peters did do a stint as a lone MP in 1992/93. But it is hard going. Few MPs, Peters included, would relish indefinite lone representation.

What might reduce the numbers?

First, the two main parties might lift their combined share of the vote and squeeze small parties into a smaller space. In 1996 and 2002 National and Labour left 38 percent for small parties and in 1999 31 percent. At the time of writing that space looked likely to be smaller than 25 percent this time. If a smaller space becomes the norm, small parties without electorate seats would struggle, as ACT has this time.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Voting by Numbers


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?