Just back from the Polls - the triennial General Election being the only occasion on which New Zealanders can vote in person. This year it's accompanied by a Referendum on the Voting System which, given the fact that the National Party are likely to romp home in the GE, is probably the more interesting decision. So, 2 ballot papers each containing 2 options.

1. The GE run under the Mixed Member Proportional System (MMP).
1a. Constituency MP
1b. Party Vote

2. The Referendum
2a. Should MMP be retained? (yes/no)
2b. Preferred alternative to MPP (First Past the Post, Supplementary Member, Single Transferrable Vote or Preferential Vote).

Afterwards, being NZ, rather than being accosted by Exit Pollers, one is just treated to the aroma of the ubiquitous Kiwi Sausage Sizzel aimed at raising funds for the hosting school.

...and how did I vote?

Well, the GE is a matter between my conscience and the ballot box - but suffice to say that I've never voted for a right, or centre-right, wing party in my life which left me with 2 choices - Labour or the Greens.

In the referendum, I voted to retain MMP - as my guess is that First Past the Post will, by some distance, win the vote on alternative systems. The later decision will split the pro-PR vote three way, although I feel that Supplementary Member (a variation on MMP that reduces the number of List MPs and restricts their allocation to List Votes only) is the only viable PR alternative.

The later comment is based on the fact that any system whereby votes are re-distributed, according to preferences, after an initial count requires that count to be 100% complete - something that takes 2/3 weeks in a country where one can vote anywhere on Election Day and (special) votes, including overseas postal ones, have to be sent back to their home constituency for counting. Don't ask me why this takes so long, in a relatively small country, it just does!

What is the general view then on MMP? Having just now briefly read on Wikipedia on how it's done in NZ, it's roughly what I'd like to see here - though I must admit that I'd prefer 'best losers' instead of a party list system, it seems to me that party lists allow for definite seats for a lucky few. Is that how it works in practice?

That one will be easier to answer by this time tomorrow.

The aspect of party list selection that's least liked is that those who lose constituency seats can still get into Parliament by virtue of their position on the list - although, here in Hamilton, that has enabled us to retain an excellent Labour MP who probably does more for the city than at least one of the 2 National Constituency MPs. Interestingly, the Party Front Benchers still feel the need to stand for constituencies - even though they are 1-20 on their respective Lists.

The other main thing that people do not like about MMP is that the allocation of list seats to minor parties is often dependent on them receiving at least one constituency seat. Without a constituency seat, they must gain at least 5% of the Party Vote - with one, they get their full allocation of list seats(which, in the past, means that 1 seat can give them 5-6 more if they have 3-4% of the PV).

Unfortunately - from the prespective of a PR supporter - this has been highlighted in the past 2 campaigns by National's clear 'desire' to lose the Auckland seat of Epsom to coalition partner ACT so that ACT will also gain List Seats. This kind of horse-trading, IMHO a disgraceful show of disprespect for the electorate (i.e. the National Candidate could not answer repeated "do you want to win this seat" questions from a TV reporter)
and the democratic process as a whole, would be removed by the Supplementary Member system. However, I think that FPTP will probably receive more votes than the combined total of the PR alternatives.

Anyway, if more than 50% vote against MMP, there may be another referendum directly pitting it against the preferred alternative. If MMP is retained, it will be reviewed by the Electoral Commission next year, so the more contentious aspects may be modified - this would be my preferred outcome.

National romped home, as everyone predicted; failing by just one seat to be the first party to secure an overall majority since the introduction of MMP. They have a couple of rock solid (single seat) partners, so the only interest is whether they will resume their strange alliance with the Maori Party (reduced to 3 seats).

Terrible night for Labour who lost seats to the Greens and NZ First, as well as to National - a reflection on a unpopular leader and a negative campaign.

The results of the Referendum wont' be released until December 10th - but the advanced votes (10%) were counted last night and were 54%-43%-3% in favour of retaining MMP. Interestingly, more (34%) failed to vote for a replacement system than any of the individual options - although FPTP (32%) was the clear winner of the 4 systems.