ob�����ӿ�

I’ve always been a fan of MMP. And I still am, but there’s one thing about it that I do struggle with – the list MPs.  

I know it took some of us a while to totally understand why we have list MPs. I understand – but I don’t necessarily like it.  

Which is why I thought retiring Labour MP David Parker raised some good points about MMP in his valedictory speech in Parliament.  

He reckons we should replace it with something else. His preference is the single transferable vote system, and he thinks we should have another referendum to see if people want to stick with the MMP voting system. I don’t think we need a referendum because I think most people are happy with it. I am, anyway.  

Where I am with David Parker is list MPs. He didn’t say straight out that he thinks they’re a waste of time. That’s probably because he’s a list MP himself – or he was, anyway.  

But he thinks that, even if you're a list MP, you should be connected to an electorate.  

I know you see some list MPs driving around the place with signage on their vehicle saying “so-and-so, so-and-so, your such-and-such MP in wherever you might be”. Example: Tracey McLellan bills herself as a Labour list MP based in Banks Peninsula.  

But that’s just optics. It’s just done to make us think that a list MP is just as approachable and interested in their local community as someone specifically elected to represent an area.  

And I think list MPs have got a big sell job on their hands to convince us of the value they bring.  

I know they say they work frantically. But how does that stack up when we’ve got the likes of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon dealing with everything that comes with being PM – plus he’s also the MP for Botany.  

So David Parker is right to be saying that list MPs need to do more than just meat in the room at Parliament when it comes to voting in a pack.  

I disagree with him though when he says MMP is to blame for polarising people.  

He says MMP has based politics in New Zealand on identity, but I thought that’s what MMP is all about.  

Because identity politics is when you get a political view based on things like ethnicity, race, nationality, religion, denomination, gender, sexual orientation, social background, political affiliation, caste, age, education, disability, intelligence and social class.  

My response is: what’s so bad about that?  

It’s not as if we didn’t have special interest political parties before MMP. We had Christian Heritage and the Christian Democrats. And the Values Party was pretty much an environmental political outfit. Even Social Credit had a particular identity –it wasn’t just another mainstream political party.  

Another thing I disagree with is David Parker's view that MMP is bad because it polarises people.  

He says under the first-past-the-post system, New Zealand was one of the best countries in the world and that, with MMP, the place was meant to get even better.  

But he says it hasn’t. He says politicians are more divided than ever and New Zealand society is more divided than ever.  

But I don’t think MMP is to blame. People are polarised all over the world – more so after Covid. And there are many different voting systems all over the world.  

Nevertheless, David Parker thinks MMP has run its course and he reckons it’s time to put it to the people and have another referendum to see if we’re still happy with MMP, or whether we’d like to change to something else.  

Even though I've got issues with list MPs, I'm good with the way things are.