 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||
|
Leader's LetterMARCH 2005
Understanding MMPAs we enter election year it is probably relevant to again consider the MMP electoral structure we operate under.Literally, MMP stands for Mixed Member Proportional, which is the electoral method New Zealand adopted when we decided we wanted proportional representation. By binding referendum, New Zealanders threw out First Past the Post (FPP) ,principally because of distrust of the system. A secondary reason was that many voters wanted to see more cooperation and agreement between MPs.During several FPP elections, promises were made by the two major political parties which, when they gained power,they made little or no effort to honour.The electorate was so incensed by the lack of commitment to election promises it voted for MMP with 120 MPs as against FPP with 100 MPs! In terms of co-operation and agreement between political parties, in actual fact that does occur more under MMP than it did previously. The public though sees more of the depth of the differences between parties, leading to the perception that political parties are less accommodating of the viewpoints of others than they once were. Many New Zealanders often say they prefer FPP to MMP. However, in practice, the voting record suggests otherwise. At the last election one in three people split their vote; that is,voted for a candidate from one party and gave their party vote to another.From that, one has to conclude that New Zealanders do understand MMP and vote strategically. The difference MMP has actually made is to make Parliament more transparent.Under the old system the public was seldom aware of what went on inside government about any one issue. No one knew about the debate inside the inner circle or indeed whether one took place at all. A bill simply emerged and it was recognised as Government policy and accepted as such. Under MMP no party will get an absolute majority, which means there will always be some compromises.Whilst this might have occurred within a governing party, under FPP it was not obvious. With MMP the electorate sees the differences, becomes aware of any deals, trade-offs, u-turns or backdowns.In other words, people see politics in action. After an election, discussions should take place between parties of reasonable like mind in an effort to form a coalition with a working majority. Most of the time that will be the norm, with both the major and the secondary party reaching agreements and compromises over a range of issues.
Politics is about issues.It is also about differences.It is about different opinions,
different priorities, different aims, and different solutions.
Occasionally, a coalition will not get a majority and has to rely on getting support on an as required basis. This further highlights political differences and, in the minds of some, puts MMP in a bad light. Politics is about issues. It is also about differences. It is about different opinions, different priorities, different aims, and different solutions. With a democratic Parliament these differences are examined, argued and solved by majority vote. Compromise, consensus,trade-offs, deals, etc. are all part of the process in solving any particular issue or finalising a particular piece of legislation.That is the reality. This means that any political party, which takes itself seriously must have well defined policies. Taken in total, these become the basis on which a possible coalition agreement is negotiated. Some policies are non-negotiable,others can be diluted and a compromise reached. It must be said that there are some political parties, which have no policies, which are non-negotiable.These parties simply roll over and literally agree to the best deal to suit only themselves. They justify totally giving away what the public believed they stood for by saying “it was in the interests of stability” or some such comment. Thankfully, we are not such a party. It is very obvious that there has emerged a distinct political divide. We have Labour on the left with its ‘clip on’ Green party and National on the right, again with its automatic ‘clip on’. In the centre there really is only ourselves. We have the policies, the expertise and the support base. We have the capability to negotiate a coalition with either the left or the right. There will be a need for priorities, deals and trade-offs before any coalition is reached. A coalition will involve compromise and it will need to ensure genuine commitment from any party we get involved with. The decision on whether we go into coalition or not and who with, will be made at the appropriate time after the election. Now though we must prepare for it. There is much to be done for our country and its people people. We are a party, which supports private enterprise and is committed to fairness. We are a party with values, with a strong social conscience. In the next few months, collectively, we must get that message out to the electorate at large. We want people to vote for our candidates but, more importantly, we want people to vote for our party. We are the insurance against extremism (of either the left or the right). Peter Brown MP
|
|
|||
|
|
||