A Better Democracy, Thanks to MMP

Abstract

New Zealand changed its electoral system in 1996 from a first-past-the-post to a Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) one. The motivation for the change was complex but reflects a gradual breakdown over many years in trust and confidence in a key part of the nation’s constitutional arrangements. The system ensures that New Zealand’s single parliamentary chamber more or less exactly represents the level of support received on election day by the various parties contesting elections. This has had a range of consequences for public policy. MPs require a number of attributes to be effective, both individually and collectively. Clearly, however, a Parliament that is reflective of the various population groups within a particular jurisdiction has greater potential to inspire confidence than one that does not. This is particularly the case in New Zealand, where the single chamber is named, and therefore presumably ought to look like, a House of Representatives. As a result of the 2008 election, of the 122 MPs, some 34% are women; some 16% identify as Māori; just under 5% identified as Asian, some 4% identify as being of Pacific origin; and around 4% identified as gay or lesbian New Zealanders. While there is some way to go before it can be said that the composition of the House represents that of the general population, especially as to gender, these statistics compare very favourably on an international basis, and indicate the evolution of a significantly more representative chamber after nearly a decade and a half of MMP.