With STV every voter is treated differently, with many failing to elect - or assist in electing - a candidate.
The difference between and STV and FFP:
Single Transferable means only one vote, and that is all everyone gets with STV: only one vote. If your first preference candidate polls poorly and is excluded, your vote may be transferred to another candidate.
As a voter, the following is the bestyou can do in an STV election. Annette Main was the highest polling candidate in the 2016 Whanganui DHB election, with the greatest number of surplus votes to transfer. Her "Keep Value" was .381436861, meaning the 4235 voters who had her as their first preference had .6185632 of a vote transferred to their second preference candidate.
If that candidate was duly elected, part of that .6185632 of a vote was kept by that candidate and the balance transferred to the voter's next current preference etc. (By then the third and other preferences may have been excluded).
All other elected candidates had fewer votes to transfer, with the last elected candidate having no surplus votes transferred. The 833 voters whose first preference candidate came eighth in the poll failed to elect a candidate, and none of their preferences were used.
With STV every voter is treated differently, with many failing to elect — or assist in electing — a candidate. Compare this to the 2016 WDC first-past-the-post election, where instead of just one vote, the average number of votes cast by each voter was more than nine. Every tick is counted.
Why would we want such a complicated system as STV?
Data from the 2016 Whanganui DHB STV public report, was used to compile this letter. Questions, comments: 027 4535 814.
I thought Carol Webb's criticism of councillor Graeme Young was most unfair and ill-informed.
There's a lot more to being a district councillor than having an active mouth at council meetings. In fact, in the last three years, if there had been less hui and more do-i, we would have been home a great deal earlier.
The most frustrating aspect of being around the council table is the talk often aimed at the camera or the newspaper coverage.
On the other hand, Graeme is a highly qualified civil engineer, with 40 years commercial engineering experience in the Whanganui area. He deliberately measures his words.
This experience and knowledge is exactly what is needed at the council table. Not only to provide his skilled advice to council staff, but also to assist ratepayers who are having difficulty. We need him back on council, in my view.
David Bennett's letter (September 13) says Article 2 [of the Treaty of Waitangi] gave Māori title (itself something new in the pre-European times) to their land, forests and fisheries. No mention of water etc.
This is wrong. But don't blame David; blame our governments. They have used the wrong English version. James Freeman was secretary to governor Hobson, and was simply to take notes, write letters and make dispatches to be sent out.
But Freeman put together James Busby's rejected notes. He was never authorised to write an English treaty, only to make an English copy of the Māori Tiriti o Waitangi. He copied from early drafts, made several copies and they were all different.
Busby's Final Draft was translated into Māori.
The true Article 2 says The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property. But the chiefs of the Confederation and the other chiefs grant to the Queen, the exclusive rights of purchasing such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to sell at such prices as shall be agreed upon between them and the persons appointed by the Queen to purchase from them.
Hobson had already verified that there was only one true Treaty written in Māori, to be read to Māori in Māori and explained carefully for their consideration.
IAN BROUGHAM Tawhero
•Send your letters to: Letters, Whanganui Chronicle, 100 Guyton St, PO Box 433, Whanganui 4500 or email letters@wanganuichronicle.co.nz