MMP debate heats up as details revealed

Photo / Chris Skelton

The MMP debate is already heating up, with the focus on fairness and party list MPs who enter Parliament, despite being rejected by an electorate.

The Government yesterday issued details of the proposed wording for next year's referendum. Electors will vote on MMP, and on four alternatives.

If a majority vote wants to change, the Government will hold a binding referendum in 2014, asking voters to choose between MMP and the most preferred alternative. If not, MMP will remain but a review will take place.

Peter Shirtcliffe, who financed a campaign against MMP before the 1993 referendum, said the present system was a "dog's breakfast".

" The people who get into Parliament aren't accountable," he said. "It's just hopeless.

"If you take the pulse of the country, I think there's a wish to get some degree of move away from the extremes of MMP, maybe with a touch of proportionality still there.

"My instinct at this stage is to vote for preferential voting, because it has an element of proportionality, but it has an outcome that is based on electorates.

"But I won't vote for either of the two extremes [MMP or first past the post]."

Campaign for MMP spokeswoman Sandra Grey said that MMP was not perfect, particularly on the issue of list MPs, but those were issues for a post-referendum review.

She wanted to retain MMP because it was the best proportional system.

"If you get a quarter of the vote, you should get a quarter of the seats. Most New Zealanders want to see that, and that's something that we think is very important. The other thing is that Parliament under MMP looks more like New Zealand. It's much more diverse, which is a good thing as well."

Dr Grey criticised the lack of a spending cap on campaigners, saying that this had led to giving the "anonymous wealthy donors far more say than an ordinary New Zealander".

Mr Shirtcliffe said he spent "big-ticket" money in his 1993 campaign, but would not say how much.

He said he would not be repeating his campaign next year.

"I'm not interested in spending the money, even if I had it."

Labour, the Greens and the Progressive Party all support retaining MMP.

Progressive leader Jim Anderton said he originally supported keeping first past the post, but now backed MMP because it encouraged consensus politics.

But Mr Anderton also supported a review of MMP.

"People are a bit uncomfortable that you can lose your electorate seat and get re-elected on the party list."

Labour wanted to retain MMP because it was the fairest system.

But justice spokeswoman Lianne Dalziel said it was not perfect and a review was a good approach.

"New Zealanders will feel more comfortable about voting in the referendum to retain MMP if they know that aspects of the system will be reviewed regardless of the outcome of the general election."