If National wins ...

[fungus pudding]

Government of the people for the people would be a refreshing change. I say bring on the binding referendums...



BC

Call it what it is - mob rule.

[Bobcat.]

Call it what it is - mob rule.

Another way of looking at it is that it's 'mob rule' when an arrogant few politicians (many of whom were never elected as electoral representatives) choose to ignore what the people are demanding, and go their merry way with their own social engineering agenda.

[fungus pudding]

Another way of looking at it is that it's 'mob rule' when an arrogant few politicians (many of whom were never elected as electoral representatives) choose to ignore what the people are demanding, and go their merry way with their own social engineering agenda.

All politicians are elected, first by their party, and endorsed by the public in the general election. I certainly don't trust the hoi polloi to understand each and every matter thrown before them. Listen to talkback radio for a while and you'll soon see. Now's a good time - you'll discover how many have no understanding of MMP after nearly 20 years, even though the public voted for it. Like the lady caller - just heard - who said she was voting for Winston First because she doesn't like National. How often have you heard the call for reducing MP numbers to 99. (why 99 I don't know) this in spite of the fact that we've never had so few per capita, in spite of the fact very few have any idea of the workload, and in spite of the fact that it last cropped up after MMP was endorsed - which requires 120 MPs. Find someone who says we should have fewer MPs and ask them whether it should be fewer electorates, or fewer from the list. You'll get a stunned silence at such a deep question.

[fungus pudding]

Another way of looking at it is that it's 'mob rule' when an arrogant few politicians (many of whom were never elected as electoral representatives) choose to ignore what the people are demanding, and go their merry way with their own social engineering agenda.

All politicians are elected, first by their party, and endorsed by the public in the general election. I certainly don't trust the hoi polloi to understand each and every matter thrown before them. Listen to talkback radio for a while and you'll soon see. Now's a good time - you'll discover how many have no understanding of MMP after nearly 20 years, even though the public voted for it. Like the lady caller - just heard - who said she was voting for Winston First because she doesn't like National. How often have you heard the call for reducing MP numbers to 99. (why 99 I don't know) this in spite of the fact that we've never had so few per capita, in spite of the fact very few have any idea of the workload, and in spite of the fact that it last cropped up after MMP was endorsed - which requires 120 MPs. Find someone who says we should have fewer MPs and ask them whether it should be fewer electorates, or fewer from the list. You'll get a stunned silence at such a deep question.

[macduffy]

I'm guessing that 99 is the minimum number needed to provide MP's for electorates of a manageable size and to meet the proportional requirements of MMP. Too many list MP's in my opinion but I guess them's the breaks!

[craic]

The idea of binding referenda is that when an idea is formulated, it is discussed and debated over a significant period before the public are asked vote for it or against it. Not the present simple system where someone comes up with a scheme and goes around with bits of paper till he has enough to force a referendum.

[fungus pudding]

I'm guessing that 99 is the minimum number needed to provide MP's for electorates of a manageable size and to meet the proportional requirements of MMP. Too many list MP's in my opinion but I guess them's the breaks!

There are 41 and 79 electorates. The way to reduce that is to change electoral system to Supplementary member, but the public put that as the least preferred in the last referendum.

[fungus pudding]

The idea of binding referenda is that when an idea is formulated, it is discussed and debated over a significant period before the public are asked vote for it or against it. Not the present simple system where someone comes up with a scheme and goes around with bits of paper till he has enough to force a referendum.

The idea promoted by the Conservative lot is for citizens initiated referendums to be binding - no thanks.

[craic]

Election results are - whats the difference?

The idea promoted by the Conservative lot is for citizens initiated referendums to be binding - no thanks.

[fungus pudding]

Election results are - whats the difference?

Quite a difference. I very much doubt that people generally know more than one or two of the policies of the different parties, but they get some idea of the direction and the party leaders. If there's a better way nobody's found it yet. Once the govt. is elected they should be left to run the damn show. We mightn't like some decisions, but there might be some hare-brained nonsense coming out of a binding CIR. Look at the swing in opinion over capital gains tax - a popular suggestion when the punters thought it would be that other bloke who would be paying it, but the minute the idea spread that it might catch their inheritance - bang - shot down in flames.