MMP system is flawed, should be reviewed: Letters to the Editor
Translated from English and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- A reader argues that the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) electoral system leads to distorted results and suggests a review.
- The reader points to the potential for Parliament to expand to 132 members due to overhang, increasing costs for offices and staff.
- The article suggests that the current MMP system's flaws warrant a public referendum on its future.
The New Zealand Herald's "Letters to the Editor" section features a strong critique of the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) electoral system. A reader, responding to a previous article by Heather du Plessis-Allan, argues that MMP produces distorted election outcomes, justifying Prime Minister's call for a review.
Imagine the extra costs of additional MP offices, office staff, and additional seating in the Chamber to accommodate 132 MPs because of an overhang, a reader says.
The letter highlights the potential for an "overhang" in Parliament, which could increase the number of Members of Parliament to 132. This expansion, the reader contends, would lead to significant extra costs associated with additional MP offices, staff, and seating in the parliamentary chamber.
Everything wrong with MMP
The author suggests that the inherent flaws in the MMP system are substantial enough to warrant a public referendum. This would allow citizens to directly decide on the future of the electoral system, rather than relying on parliamentary review alone.
Therefore, our Prime Minister was correct in saying it should be reviewed.
Originally published by NZ Herald in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.