NZ Centre for Political Research

*It would be my second choice. I am still in favour of STV. However, I know it is a complex system for calculation, so SM might be a more transparent method for the voting public. Anthony

*At present the people of NZ do not have a powerful voice that the Govt. will act upon. Desmond

*I would certainly prefer it over MMP, and I would like an opportunity to exercise a democratic vote on our electoral system. Robin

*We are long over due for this but once again a conflict of interest exists for the parliamentarians who are hardly going to take the views of the public who didn't put them there lying down...funny that. Darrin

*NZ needs proper representation. This means MPs elected by the electors they represent; not appointed on a jobs-for-the-boys system that is 100% subjective. In the very least, the MP should be able to prove they can contribute (instead of just falling asleep or simply shutting up and collecting a HUGE pay cheque). I am thinking here of people like Rodney H (ACT Party) who was a VERY successful private businessman before opting to ""make a difference"" in politics. We need AT MOST one MP per 100,000 people. Not ""voters"", but ""people"". And, yes, this means fewer representatives for rural areas. However, if we (NZ) don't milk cows and start to let them fart to their heart's content, NZ as we know it will disappear down the bankruptcy toilet. Government departments need to be actively eliminated: not molly-coddled and actively fertlised (more B-S is NOT BETTER). Ministry of Health CONSUME nearly 500 qualified doctors [as ""administrators""] while our hospitals SCREAM BLUE MURDER for staff. Why can each of these doctors not do 1 week in 4 of industry service? It would, for a start, keep them up to date with the changes in medicine as well as alleviating some of the shortages we are suffering at the expense of a top-heavy, inefficient and bloated bureaucracy. And, don't even try the ""oh no, we can't do that"" because, funnily enough, there is ONE honest doctor at the Ministry of Health who does EXACTLY this: his area of specialist expertise is emergency medicine so he regularly spends time in the emergency room. ""Only one?"" Yes. Then there are the thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs created by Mrs Clark in ""government departments"" like WINZ, Ministry of Wimmins Affairs, Ministry of Sport and Recreation (???) etc etc. Since her appointment as Marxist leader of the communist state of NZ, Mrs CLark has successfully added WELL OVER 20,000 public sector jobs (???). The NZ unemployment figure is [in reality] nearer 12% when you discount all the tax-payer funded, government created public sector roles. Remember, the only tax-payer funded person who contributes to the economy is a school teacher or a hospital medical professional (doctor, nurse -administrators and managers excluded). Why is it Mrs Clark and Sue-the-Slapper Bradford keep insisting we need to be ""more like Sweden"" EVEN THOUGH Sweden is repeatedly shown to be the SINGLE BIGGEST SOCIALIST FAILURE in the past 200 years? Bring on the Great Darkness! Mark

*MMP is a standing joke. It should go as should politicians who denied the public a referendum to evaluate its performance. Peter

*I personally blame Maurice Williamson for MMP. His self proclaimed computer expertise advised Jim Bolger that he would win the next election by 9 seats and that MMP would not factor. I was on MW's electoral committee at the time. Ive never forgiven him. With similar expertise he went on to stuff up the Health Board administration. Colin

*Bring it on! phil

*Anything other than MMP as long as we the people do not lose control Keith

*The upsetting factor in the NZCPR article is the reminder that Brash was dissuaded by his colleagues from presenting this topic with some force while he was in office. Jean

*I would rather have STV Barry

*most definitely !! Mary

*On balance yes although I would need to understand it better. The current system is crazy so I guess my vote is for change but to what needs discussion. I have not found any of the current system that works totally. What I mean is although I give a general mandate to a partly/member to represent me there are issues which I might want to employ a direct view which may not be the same as my general mandate. We need to find a way to empower people to achieve this if we are going to be truly represented and our voices to count. Martin

*Maybe STV would be better with all members elected by the voters Tim

*Reduction of number of MPs Ken

*let's look at all possibilities including single transferable vote, first past the post etc. mmp as exists now is a joke" Trevor

*It can't be any worse than mmp Dael

*ASAP Please. NZ is going down the gurgler and what's very scary is that unless we get rid of MMP, where the minority parties (Greens and NZ First etc.) without even an Elected Memeber of Parliament between them, are dictating to the Govt. what should become Law and what shouldn't! The other scary thing is that we have a whole generation who are growing up not having known anything different!! I cannot believe that the Greens are growing in popularity as the latest Polls suggest - are NZer's really that gullible and stupid? Dallas

*And about time too! Ross

*Very definitely!!! Preferably yesterday!!! Frank

*Of course not. Anything from Dr Brash just has to be silly. MMP needs fixing but not in the way he suggests. http://www.aknzone.blog.nz has a better answer. KF

*Personally, I would prefer that we returned to FFP, but 100 MPs is a lot better than 120+ Grant

*Yes, it merits consideration. But what about FPP? That would yield even fewer MP's. Dave

*The SM system would be better than MMP but I still think First Past the Post is more democratic. Brooke

*we are top heavy with M.P'swith only their own agenda,and not the overall good..a reduction in M.P's would reduce the money paid out in parliamentary costs Jane

*I fully support Don Brash's stance, and it is high time that extremist minority parties' huge influence on the political scene was reined in. Gavin

*mmp sucks John

*Dr Newman, The only change worth looking at is Binding Citizen's Initiated referenda Don

*There may be some debate over the number of list MPs needed but as a deocratic system Don Brash was right on the button Ross

*Anything would be better than the corrupt system we have now. Hopefully it would limit hopefuls to choosing either the electorate or the list - not both. for instance, not one member of the Greens was actually elected - they are all list MPs with too much influence. National should never have dumped Don Brash - at least he had some strong policies instead of the wishywashy 'me too' we hear from the Nats at present." Carolyn

*SM system needed to get a balanced result peter

*asap john

*MMP has given an extraordinary and inordinate amount of power to minority groups who caan hold major parties almost to ransom. Time for a change! Laurie

*The problem is that government is to one sided (mmp or first past the post). The problem we have in NZ is that referendums are not binding and as such are a farce. I believe that we should change the constitution of the country as follows:
1) Ensure that every referendum is abinding
2) Make the passing of any law so that it must have 80% of the votes of the house
3) Get rid of any list MP (or by what ever name you want to call them) I.A.W. only have elected member of parlement in Government
4) Once a member of parliament is elected they must forgo any party affiliations
5) Ensure that government as such is accountable to the people (currently they are not and can do whatever it is that they wish to do regardless if it is right or wrong for the country).
Until these thing are sorted no matter what government or governmental system we implement WILL NOT FUNCTION. John

*Boy do we ever need a change!! Margaret

*Please give a ""maybe"" type option Muriel as beliefs are on topics of this sort are rarely yes or no. Brash's idea has much merit but the retention of list MPs at all is surely a problem. Is the least discussed, and possibly, root issue, that we have no upper house to debate and counter-balance? The NZ Senate (who remembers it?) was scrapped. The Privy Council has been scrapped. One chamber, executive dominated, parlimentary ""democracy"" is promoted. List MPs are a symtom of a problem that goes back to the concentration of too much power in the ""commons"" and in the executive that controls it. Emmet

*I only voted for MMP because of the promise of another referendum two elections later. I was conned! Lindsay

*It is our voting behaviour with us still focusing on the 2 major parties that is the problem and the way the coalition is made up. The logical coalition would be National and labour. But power preceds prudence. Steven

*First past the post. 99 single member constituencies. Maximum of ten ministers; they alone to be paid . David

*We need to get rid of MMP now before any more Bradford Bills become forced down the throats of the NZ Electorate. We as a Nation were promised a chance to get rid of MMP after two elections, to have that chance taken away by clever grammar and twisted words is appalling. It is time for change Tom

*This is a change to our electoral system: not a change to the voting system. The voting system also needs change. I will send an email. Patrick

*But would still prefer first past the post Michael

*Sue Bradford is a clear example why the current system does not work. List members should have comparatively little power. Wayne

*Any system will be more fair and better than MMP Pierre

*Yes!!! MMP definitely needs to go. Currently I have no idea if Labour are the Government or the Greens are the Government. Sue Bradford and Keith Locke act as if they're the PM and Deputy PM, and Jeanette Fitzsimmons ramblings are given far too much credence. We end up with legislation pushed through because the current Government is afraid of losing support from the minor parties. IF we don't change the system we will continue on this downward spiral of appeasing minor parties who only get into Parliament by sucking up to the party with the most votes!! Margaret

*I would much prefer to see a preferential voting system with a single transferable vote - with parties not being able to trade preferences. That really empowers the voter. Kenneth

*The idea has some merit, but only as an alternative to the current circus - anything which includes non-elected list members can lead to problems similar to what we have now - putting the balance of power into the hands of non-elected MPs. The only credible idea would be to go back to FPP, where all the members are voted for. Lester & Barbara

*go back to 1st past the post Carolyn

*We need to get rid of a system that was introduced to stop the Nazi's taking power in Germany! Tim

*For the reasons you give John

*This is just ANOTHER voting system where members of parliament are 'appointed' by fellow politicians in 'smoke filled' rooms. A pox on them all! The only politicians in the house must be those elected DIRECTLY by the people of NZ. There are plenty of voting models that do this including STV and the Australian Federal Government voting system of proportional representational using the ranking of candidates standing for a seat. One may not get one's first choice but at least voters have managed to keep failed politicians' snouts out of the parliamentary trough. Peter

*The adoption of MMP was an absolute disaster foisted on NZ by the refusal of Jim Bolger to insist on a majority of the electorate voting for the system not just a majority voting on the day. SM or STV should replace MMP. Irvine

*John Key should promise to hold a binding referendum to decide whether the voters would support the supplementary member system Allan

*Not the question that I was expecting as I read through the NZCPR Weekly column. However, yes the SM system should be considered in any debate over our future parliamentary representation. Any system would be better than a return to FPP. It would be totally wrong if the statement in the column ""The system of checks and balances that normally operate in a democracy - where candidates have to satisfy the majority of voters in order to successfully represent them in Parliament - is now missing."" referred to FPP. Under that system it was usually a minority of voters who chose the candidate to be elected MP and it was often a minority of voters who backed the party emerging with the largest number of seats. On occasions the ""winner received less than 40% of the vote, although they always claimed a ""mandate"". Yet a party such as Social Credit, which got up to 20% of the vote at one stage, could only ever get two MPs. Apart from this absurd situation, there was more extreme swings in policy after every election won by the former opposition, leading to greater instability in confidence in the country. Brian

*MMP has been proven to be a disaster - the influence of smaller parties is not in the best interests of NZ. Margaret

*I still prefer the first past the post with half the number of MPs that we have know There is to much of a gravy train in Govt these days Russell

*We need to do something about these petty laws being introduced. Louise

*high time - let's get on with it ! michael

*During the last elections I asked a number of people at my work where they were going to vote and what they understood by the current system of MMP. It came as quite a shock to find that well over half had no idea of the system or the process and approx half had no intention of voting, funnily enough it was this half who were most vocal in their condemnation of the current government. Needless to say that my comment suggesting that those who didn’t bother voting should forfeit their right to comment didn’t go down very well. Irrespective of the mechanism employed, and I agree with that proposed by Don Brash, I do believe that it the actual activity of voting should be made compulsory as is the process of registration. There is little point in having a democracy if those who have it are not willing to look after it because once it’s gone it’s gone for good, and we are slowly heading down this route where voter apathy and ignorance is surely lending weight to the saying that we get the government we deserve. Ian

*although I'm not sure how the 25 are chosen, sure to be better than what we have though Jacqueline

*STV is the best option John

*We don't need 121 mps.It just seems that after each election the beuracratic gravy train gets bigger. John

*The passing of the anti-smacking bill shows how flawed MMP is. Jonathan

*If it considerably reduces the number of MPs Mary

*SM looks good, but if it doesn't get support then go for STV to ensure that no one gets into Parliament without being voted in by the wider electorate. john

*anti smacking bill proof of how insignificant parties can dominate Eneka

*It is sickening to think that we are being ruled by people who have not actually been elected. Joyce

*A system that gives an elected majority a mandate to govern is required Paul

*I never voted for MMP in the first place. It is time now to give it the boot Phil

*MMP was a con to those who did not understand the system Robin

*MMP is not doing NZ any good at all. The country is being run by a group of non - entities who do not have any mandate from voters so are not liable to be resonsible for their idiotic actions.As well I would think that if they had to stand up to an election they would have no show of being in Parliament. Bryon

*Not before time!!!! Get on with it!!! Peter

*While I belive it is past time for a change I suspect entrenched use of power by certain groups would pervent it happening Hugh

*Supplementary may not be the appropriate system for us, but looking at alternatives to MMP is definitely the right action o be taking. Donald

*I think MMP needs to be reviewed. Julian

*Yes combined with Binding Referenda Jim

*The only reason the voters' views are not properly represented under MMP is the inability of the two major parties to work together. Since about 80% of the vote is in support of these two parties, they should ally against the fringe parties rather than pander to them. The evidence of their policies' proximity is in the speed with which a popular policy espoused by one party is echoed by an announcement of a similar policy by the other party. Their desire to subjugate the other major party is in fact subjugating democracy. It is not MMP, but antiquated competitive first past the post thinking that is rogering the country. John

*It wouldn't take much to be better than MMP and its ensuing corruption. Honesty is nothing that most politicians have, neither is manners and courtesy. Ray

*Don Brash's speech is an excellent analysis of the situation that NZ finds itself in. We are now being held back by our voting system which lets small parties have undue influence and prevents fundamental reform from taking place. I wonder why Don Brash's "advisers" would not let him deliver it. It is a good speech that would have won them support - that is, of course, unless National is planning to drop it's policy of calling for a referendum. If that is the case, God help us! Sandra

*Great idea ! David

*MMP is the tail wagging the dog. John

*Change is well overdue. Mike

*Tired of small parties unduly influencing policy. Stephen

*Present system out of balance and not really a true democratic proces. John

*Agree with Don Brash and your comments. Time for new binding referendum. Would help get rid of useless party hacks well past use-by date. Ron

*The voters should have the power to chose otherwise it is not a democracy..The unwanted child smacking bill is the perfect example how MMP did us all great harm. Colleen

*Currently we have management by Committee - of disparate parts. Any management by committee is an oxymoron. Cliff

*I agree with everything you said in your article. Linda

*It is my opinion that NZ is no longer a democratic country and never again will be as long as we use the MMP system. MMP is designed to give radical and extreme left wing parties disproportional influence. Ryan

*Absolutely, way better then the Greens dominating the rest of us. Colin

*Definitely Lois

*I am dubious about using the references to Japan, Taiwan and S.Korea. I recall seeing several news clips in the past where their MPs brawl in their parliament, not something I would like to see repeated here. Vic

*But the Single Transferable system should also be considered. Ian

*The present system is not democratic. This sounds much more so. Helen

*Just meditate for a moment on what MMP gave us in Govt, for at least 6 years. This country was run by a mob of feminists, a guy with hair hanging below his backside and a Maori bloke in a dress. Sam

*Absolutely!!! At least ALL M.P.'s would be elected & not appointed based on "brown-nosing"points!!!! Dave

*This is what I would have voted for if the referendum had been correctly put to the public. June

*I never liked MMP & voted for STV at the original referendum Tom

*Most definitley. MMP as practised is not democratic Gordon

*1.- NO, because your SM alternative just reduces the membership at parliament, not giving us better government.
2.- The real question you should ask is the one of this country's voters MATURITY and DEMOCRATIC RESPONSIBILITY. From the local govt. elections just concluded the 40%plus participation indicates to me that Kiwis would live in a police state or under dictatorship, as long as they have the right to moan and complain.
3.- Good parliamentary govt. is only possible if the public is active participant in democratic rights and obligations.
3.- For a govt. in 2000 to have the audacity without challenge to say that there is no 'consensus' to address the representation question again, shows up our imaturity, apathy, and irresponsibilities.
4.- Political parties just 'ride the tide' on issues as cleverly as they are able. The numbers game is not changed by taking a few representatives away from the trough. So, we need better ideas and most of all better ATTITUDES. We don't need pundits who only can suggest a change from the 'flavour'they don't like at the moment. Franz

*Hopefully JK will institute a referendum (if he makes it to the Queen Bee's chair) Brian

*This would be a far better system. I believe the MMP process and its impact on decision making wasn't propoerly understood when it was voted in. There was clearly a view that there would be an opportunity to review this after experience with it. The electorate has been denied the opportunity of having another say, which is an arrogance from the existing Government. vs SMP wasn't Barry

*It represents a move to ensure qualified people are elceted by the people not party bosses Glen

*The present system is too full of compromise to give us good government Denis

*I feel betrayed by the politics of this country. We voted to have a better for m of government under MMP. Boy were we wrong. Or better still, we were duped. What a bunch of suckers to allow the wool to be pulled over our eyes. Democracy under MMP is now officially dead. Let's either go with Brash's idea or back to FPP. Walter

*Get rid of MMP - the tyranny of the minority! Glenn

*It is certainly time to stop the influence of minor parties. I believe that it is time to put it to the voters. If John Key has any balls he would run with it. James

*MMP is steadily destroying New Zealand. Trouble is, around 700 opponents of MMP leave NZ every week, while its supporters hang about ... John

*I have always been violently opposed to MMP and strongly supported Peter Shirtcliffe in his campaign against it. What has happened is exactly what was predicted and it is decidedly unhealthy for any democratic country. First past the post has its drawbacks and the only other system which will deliver a fair outcome is the one proposed by Don Brash.
How do we get it started? Has the Government done anything unlawfull by not putting it to the country? Can we make it an election issue? Would Labour support a change?If National have enough support to govern alone it would give them a head start on changing what we have now" Mike

*BUT this also may not be the best system for NZ. An STV system similar to Australia's may be better? Geoff

*MMP has brought true democracy while not weakening government.
Brandon

*Not a brilliant answer, but better than present. Wayne

*too many M.P.s getting paid for doing nothing tony

*Need fairness/honesty in our system Allen

*I like the idea of giving minority interests the ability to state their case without being able to enforce it as policy. Scott

*Good on you for suggesting another form of voting rather than merely hopping on the "Who Hates MMP?" bandwagon, but Preferential Voting (PV) is the best way to grant smaller parties their say if they deserve, whilst eradicating the influence of extremist parties. Marty

*Anything has to be better than what we have. Robyn

*The sooner the better ! Peter

*I voted for MMP in the referendum and believed it would make a difference. Unfortunately it has had a negative impact. I am disgusted at how it has been implemented and what is happening in government in light of the most current bills passed and now law. Especially when the public opinion was ignored. I would be happy to go back to 1st past the post over MMP. However the suggestion of the supplementary member electoral system sounds to have merit. June

*For the size of our country we have way too many politicians and the cost to the country is huge, not just in the salaries for the members themselves but the escalated numbers of support personnel that result. As a matter of interest, when MMP was "voted" in my recollection was that it was not a great turnout. This forum may like to publish the percentage of voters who cast a vote in the MMP referendum and what proportion of total voters actually voted for MMP. I think the results would be surprising and would show that this system was voted in by a minority of NZ eligible voters - Many people did not vote in the referendum at the time because they were confused as to what they were voting for! Carol

*The sooner the better. Hold referendum in 2008 and be binding and implemented at next election in 2008. Harry

*A good simple system without the complications of "ranking" but appeasing some MMP proponents. Neil

*Please anything to get rid of those unelected "hangers on" who contribute very little, if anything, in the way of good positive thoughts and actions. The current system is a mess. Marion

*The sheep wouldn't manage to cope with it. Anymore dysfunctional MPs ? Heaven forbid. DOT

*MMP has been a disaster and I wonder whether the Sm would be that much better! However, it may be a slight improvement on MMP. Barry

*We were forced to change to mmp because of Muldoon's dictatorial ways, but now it is time to at least have a poll to see if a referendom would be supported. Cam

*We should never have gone for MMP. People just wanted change and did not research the options properly. STV would have been a better option. Jillian

*How about prohibiting electorate candidates from also being on their party's list? This would prevent cases, like that of Winston Peters, of an MP being dumped by his electorate but still getting into parliament. Kerry

*The system of preferential voting as usd in Australia is also worth some investigation.Although it is more complex for voters and take longer for tally counters to get a result, the result refletcs the will of the people. Having come to New Zealand from Australia I am amazed how someone who fails to win sufficient support from the people can still end up in parliament. Colin

*I think the same system as Australia would be better, it has served Australia well plus a reinstatement of an upper house to ensure sound Government Les

*MMP was not the correct path for NZ and I think that has been proven. We had been promised that the decision would be revisited, it hasn't! Lew

*Most definitely Sally

*I, as i'm sure, many other people are sick and tired of having legisalation, that the majority of the populatin oppose, being passed into law, purely to keep radicals on side. I honestly believe, most kiwi's including myself, didn't really understand the full implications of voting for MMP. Given the opportunity of voting again, I certainly, wouldn't vote for a second round of MMP. Brent

*MMP has got to go before this country slides down the slippery slope to anarchy. Jim

*Any system would be better than MMP. However, I believe that STV in every seat would be a beter choice. That way the voters would have the democratic right to elect or reject politicians. At present we have no democracy apart from the right to elect a few MP's - the rest are appointees of the party! There is also no way of dumping incompetent or unpopular MP's at present. That's not democracy! However, there's no way the parties will support any change now as they all are desperate to get power and they need the no hopers of the little parties to support them. Any suggesion that they could be relegated to political limbo will see those little parties support the only party that wants to keep MMP. The best choice is still STV within individual seats and the cessation of party votes for lists Grant

*Anything other than what we have at present needs to be considered. When you have the likes of Sue Bradford wealding so much power then you know something has to be wrong!!!!! Bronwyn

*Absolutely. Nigel

*MMP has been going long enough for every NZs to now know what to vote for. Roydon

*As an alternative to what we have now. But personally I would prefer a fully proportional system where everybody's vote counts and we would have no electorate seats. EJ

*I still can't believe how "we" (but not me) were conned into MMP. The result was totally predictable. Otherwise unelectable candidates get in by the side door. The left has always enjoyed the support of minority parties and will fight any change from MMP simply because of that. Ron

*We used to have a robust democracy that worked, albiet not perfectly, but at least it worked. What we have now is Mugabe style politics run by extremist self serving ideologists (or should that be idiot-ologists) who are prepared to ruthlessly impose their agendas onto a population who do not support such trash. They are only able to do this because under MMP pathetic selfish power hungry fools like Hell(en) Clark who are so desperate to hold onto power and preserve their own fragile egos that they will do absolutely anything, including pandering up to extremists. The real question is who in parliment has enough guts to repeal all the trash laws that have been imposed in the last dozen or so years and restore common sense to its rightful place? Steve

*Even the Italians got rid of MMP Grant

*This system is a total farce Warren

*My own prefference is for first past the post. After all the boardrooms of all the major corporates are run on this basis as are committees in clubs and organisations throughout the country. However, if FPP is not palatable to the electorate then I would favour the Supplementary Member system as it is relativley simple. This is important because if you can find anyone who will own up to voting for MMP you will find, almost without exception that they did not understand it. In other words it needs to be kept simple. Ron

*An 'STV' NZ system may provide with accountability but other systems have not! Rev Dick Thompson

*Sounds better. Gives more weight to elected individuals rather than party chosen list. Robin

*MMP has not been good for New Zealand and I am not convinced that supplementary member system would be an improvement. I prefer first past the post. Bill

*STV is the way to go. No list MP's at all! Christopher

*However there must be a referendum on MMP alongside this proposal as I voted for MMP but expected aftter two terms to be able to vote again on this subject so please do what is right Ross

*I voted for SMP at the referendum. I could see MMP could lead to the tail wagging the dog situation while SMP appeared to give small parties a say without undue influence. With better understanding of the MMP system I am now more certain of that. Bob

*MMP seems to me very fair (though I think the 5% limit could be lowered)
it has already stopped silly schemes going ahead. Mike

*Although this has a lot of merrit, wouldn't we be better off if we went to a direct votes system where you vote for your preferred candidate directly. That way the people have a direct link to this person and if they are not doing their job they can be replaced at the next election. Politicians have to be accountable to their constituents and vote the opinion of the populus. Skip

*It is outlandish that small parties are essentially changing the policies of the party we voted for. If a voter was considered a consumer and the policies "a product" under MMP what buy, is inferior to what is delivered. Fair Trading people would have a field. howard

*I voted for MMP and now reject it entirely. It would be difficult to imagine a more undemocratic system. The tail wags the dog. Bruce

*NZ desperately needs he reason of Don Dane

*We need a binding vote , otherwise look what happend to the vote on disposing of 20 useless M.P.s voted for by over 90% of the voters! Martin

*Anything would be better than the distractions we have at present. Jaclyn

*Oh, how the NZ public get hoodwinked and still they do nothing... Stand up New Zealand... Do Something! Keith

*Yes definitely, but there will be much resistance...turkeys don't normally vote for an early Christmas. Jim

*Why not ask the people. What are they scared of. We have an election just around the corner. What would it cost to add a vote on our electoral system as well at that time. David

*We must get rid of MMP as soon as possible if NZ is ever to be a democratic society. Muriels comments in this issue are so true they make my flesh creep. Get rid of MMP. Ernest

*Definitely we should hold the promised referedu. Don's plan deserves at least to be looked at and debated Cynthia

*No longer is the power in the hands of the majority of the people. Max
SM couldn't be any worse than the extremist tactics that currently rule under MMP! Susan

*The present MMP system gives too much power and influence to the minority parties. Peter

*Anything would be an improvement on what we have now. Florence

*or go back to First Past the Post. Tony

*It is time all govements listened to the majority instead of the minority. We need MPs who work for the Tax payer & not for the Blugers. Geoff

*Capital YES !!! Fay

*However, STV would be the most intelligent way to solve the problem. MMP is a model that was designed for a totally different situation, post war Germany. Non electorate members do not fit the NZ culture well. Even so, it is too soon to change. That is for the next generation. Hugh Templeton's analysis is pertinent. Neil

*It was promised at the time. Roy

*Yes...but! Let's not get distracted by trying to guess the results of any possible referendum. The more important issue to focus on is that the public should be the masters and the politicians the servants. A voting mechanism is just that - a mechanism. The principle is that public want a House of Representatives and they should have the opportunity (basically whenever they want...whenever they can muster a loud enough voice) to determine the form of voting system to be applied at any particular point in time. It is certainly not for the politicians to tell us how they should be selected for the task of representing us. Probably we should get used to having a referendum on the general subject of representation selection methods, say, once every three Parliamentary terms - about once per decade. If that results in a series of flip flops and extra expense thereby, so be it. That is only the business of ordinary citizens, NOT in any way the business of our politicians or their party organisations. Ross

*We need 20MPs and VOLUNTARY taxation- If they can't sell us some idea then it dies! kp

*May be a better system that what we have now. Far too much power in the hands of non elected MPs and resulting Micket Mouse Legislation. Hugh

*There is no doubt that some aspects of MMP have curtailed the power of government under FPP which angered many. However the present system is not the answer with deals being done with minor parties that are unpalatable to the majority of the people. It's time for a change and the sooner the better. Bill

*MMP needs to be addressed NOW and a better alternative found for New Zealand to move forward and upwards Vivienne

*We need confidence that minor parties do not assume disproportionate influence Les

*Don Brash's proposal has a lot of merit Derek

*Quality governance has suffered badly under MMP to the detriment of NZ.(haven't you noticed the "lahar"?) Henk

*A fairer and homest pariamentary selection Alan

*We have to get rid of the current MMP system! Ian

*the sooner the better Alvin

*Desperately overdue Geoffrey

*Or... a "benevolent dictatorship" would be even better. This person would still be voted into power, but then would be free to exercise that power within the limits of their campaign promises. And no retrospective legislation please! I might even vote for Muriel Newman! Ross

*I would prefer STV. Anything is better than MMP. David

*I agree that the Minority Parties have too much influence. And I certainly want to change the way a parliamentarian can be rejected in th epoles but return as a List MP! Catherine

*MMP is not democracy. It is rule by a very few people, often with views on the fringes of society. It is time to improve on what we have. Gary

*Not sure if SM electoral system is the answer but we certainly need something different from what we have now. The current system of MMP does not seem to give the people any power whatsoever. It seems that the people get what the policitians want, not what the people want. Jacky

*Agree with his proposal. That would allow some proportionality but restrict the influence of minority groups like the Green and maori radicals. Johnny

*I would prefer on another referendum rather than one person's choice. Chuck

*Sounds good to me. Michael

*NZ needs referendum urgently on choices. MMP has cost NZ dearly in many ways. Have been robbed by a system that has stalled NZ. simon

*STV IS ANOTHER POSSIBLE SYSTEM AS IS WORKING AT LOCAL BODY LEVEL WOD

*How is it we have to endure "forced" legislation which the public of NZ have indicated they do not want BUT cannot have accepted the fact we would like to be able to vote on whether or not we wish to retain MMP! Democracy???? I suggest not! joe

*Also a prospective MP should only be allowed on one list, either as a candidate in a constituency or as a list candidate, not on both. jonathan

*Anything would be better than MMP Alec

*It meets the objectives that were stated to justify a move from FPP, but prevents the blackmail by extremist parties we have endured under MMP. Duncan

*Dr. Brash's solution gives minorities adequate representation Lorraine

*Too much small party influence is not democratic Jeremy

*It`s time for change, Leaders of the smaller party can`t loose there jobs, take Winston Peter`s as an excample Taffy

*I support a change from MMP. Small parties have to much sway in politics. Mercia

*totally agree hurst t

*The present system is absolutely hopeles, with all those listmembers coming in without brains. Jorgen

*We have to get rid of MMP at all costs as it is totally undemocratic. However, now that I have learned more a about SM maybe this might be the answer to those who don't want to go back to FPP. The problem with MMP is that we can't get rid of inept politicians as they just return via the list and have far too much influence. If SM will restrict their influence then maybe it will be the answer. Helen

*Yes But will the average person ever wake up to the mess we are in Brian

*My understanding is that Key will hold a binding referedum,should he fluke getting into power Richard

*Though I believe that the 3rd option, Single transferable vote is the best Alastair

*A definite change is needed ! Ken

*As you say, extreme minor parties have too much power under MMP Roy

*Yes, SM sounds like it would be a good system for NZ - it combines what we have now with a sensible system that takes power away from the minor parties and reduces the number of MPs as well. Amanda

*Anything would be better than MMP. Its a disgrace what is happening in NZ these days. Pete

*I hope the NZCPD picks up this issue of constitutional reform as a major piece of work - someone has to take a leadership role and push the issue. Sue

*I used to think STV would be right for NZ but I think that SM sounds better. I like the mixture of FPP and MMP. I also like the idea of fewer MPs. But how will we persuade anyone in Parliament to support a change to the system? Ted

*Why didn't National let Don deliver that speech? It would have won them support. Changing MMP before it does more damage to our economy and our future should be a priority. Don

The poll this week asks:

Do you believe the Supplementary Member system described by Don Brash would have merit for consideration in NZ?