Tag: politics

Posted on

Jesse Mullligan on RNZ Afternoons Friday 15 May 2026

Bryce Edwards spoke with Jesse Mulligan on his Afternoons Show on the RNZ National Programme about Monday 11 May 2026 on the subject of the Opportunity Party. One issue raised was that small parties have difficulty advancing because of the issue of “wasted votes”.

This led to the following interview:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/afternoons/audio/2019035175/a-possible-path-for-political-parties-to-escape-the-5-trap

Here is the main part of the message I sent to Jesse, to which he responded proposing the interview:

“”
I’ve just read an article by Bryce Edwards where he mentioned discussing the TOP party with you on your programme.  He talked about wasted votes, a grand coalition, and about the suffocating effect of the 5% threshold.

There is a simple solution to this problem.  

The solution:

Add a second party vote column to the ballot paper with the explanation:  

If my first choice party does not pass the threshold, give my party vote to my second choice party instead.

This small change takes away  (no exaggeration!) all of the problems caused  by the threshold and the risk of wasted votes.  Consider the following:

  • Nobody would need to risk wasting their vote.  
  • No need for tactical voting.
  • New parties could start without  harming their allied parties.
  • Voting stays simple with fast results.
  • Being offered a second choice is common:  Think about asking someone to get you an ice cream.
  • There is no need to agree on new threshold rules.

This proposed change is, I say, better than reducing the threshold.  Reducing the threshold does not provide any of the advantages I’ve listed above for the second choice of party vote.

Bryce Edwards’ article notes that people think that a grand coalition would be a good idea in NZ.   Under MMP we are still waiting for any new party to win seats without support of an existing MP.    The existing vote-discarding threshold makes a pretty insurmountable obstacle to either of these.

The second choice of party vote gives new parties a much greater chance of success.  Because they no longer take votes from their friends and potentially make those votes go to waste.
“”

Posted on

Final Report: 2023 Independent Electoral Review

This report acknowledges the Spare Vote and make very positive comments about it.

The final report was released by the new Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith on 16 January 2024.


The main electoral system recommendations from this review report
included:
● Removing the one-seat threshold. This would mean that only
parties passing the party vote threshold could win list seats.
● Lowering the party vote threshold to 3.5%
● Changing the overhang rule to grant overhang seats, and to reduce
the number of list seats by the same amount, so leaving the number of seats unchanged.
● Fix the district/list seat ratio at 60:40 plus one list seat if necessary so as to always have an odd number of seats in parliament

I support the fixing of the 60:40 ratio.

But I fear that the other changes I’ve noted will replace existing problems with new ones.


The idea of the spare vote (second choice of party vote) was
acknowledged by the following paragraphs:


4.34 Some submitters advocated strongly for second-choice voting to be introduced for the party vote (that is, an optional “back up” vote for another party if your first choice vote did not pass the threshold), whether the threshold is lowered or not. They differentiated this idea from a full preferential voting system and noted it may improve voter participation rates, support sincere voting rather than tactical voting, reduce the proportion of votes that go to parties that cross neither threshold, reduce barriers for small and newly established parties, and only require a simple change to the ballot paper.

Then later:

4.58 Full preferential voting would allow voters to rank their preferred parties or candidates (for example, they could select a first, second, and third choice). If a voter’s first choice did not succeed, their vote would transfer to their next ranked party or candidate (and so on).


Second-choice voting is an example of partial preferential voting, where voters have the option of selecting a “back-up” party or candidate. Both types of preferential voting could make it easier for smaller parties to get into parliament because voters could support smaller or newly established parties or candidates without fear their vote will not count in the make-up of parliament.


4.59 We acknowledge the strong support these options received from some submitters during consultation, particularly second-choice voting.
However, we remain wary of changes that would complicate the voting process. Adding complexity to how MMP works could be counterproductive, particularly if introduced at the same time as other changes. For these reasons, we think improvements to representation
are better realised by lowering the party vote threshold without adding additional complexity.


I was pleased that the spare vote idea was acknowledged, and that the report notes some of its many advantages.


The final paragraph above was not altogether surprising. The spare vote is an idea that has received little attention so far. I would have been surprised to have a new idea, however good, accepted on the strength of a small number of submissions to a review.


But the report seems very supportive of the idea and the report remarks on the simplicity of the ballot paper changes required. So I feel encouraged.


The report was released by the new Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith, who stated that some recommendations were already ruled out. These included lowering the voting age to 16 and allowing the vote to all prisoners.

Details at

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/independent-electoral-review-final-report-released

It will be interesting to see which of the proposed changes garner enough support to be implemented.

Go to https://electoralreview.govt.nz/ for more details.