We should reduce the number of MP's in NZ to 100?


On average, everyone agrees with significant nonconsensus between 205 voters.

Disagree
 
Agree

Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

We should reduce the number of MP's in NZ to 100

You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.


Reasons To Disagree

Why have a representative democracy, then reduce the number of MPs causing it to be less reflective of society. Will people then find 100 MPs too many? Who loses out from the culling? Minorities do. If we want a (even moreso) predominantly white, male, upper-middle class parliament representing the diversity of New Zealand, this is the way to do it.

14 September 2005

if anything the numbers should be increased and change with our population so that the number of mps directly represents the voting percentile.

15 February 2006

Reducing to 100 would decrease representation and diversity, while increasing workloads on already overloaded politicians. Incredibly bad idea.

20 April 2006

The more MPs the more different points of view can be expressed. More democracy.

27 April 2007

Reducing the number of mps only reduces the range of abilities available for government, and reduces the access of ordinary people to lawmakers.

12 October 2007

NZ does not have too many MPs by comparison with other countries. MPs are hard working and we would not have enough to fill positions on select committees which do a great job. Also it would mean that electorates would become unmanageably large.

7 June 2008

Actually, there are 69 electorates: 122-69=53. We have 69 electorate MPs, and 53 list MPs.

27 August 2009

Fewer MP's means less representation for me. I disagree!!

2 December 2012

 

Reasons To Agree

A reduction in numbers doesn't necessarily equate to a reduction in diversity. If some parties are placing diverse candidates too near the unwinnable positions on their list then - assuming NZers want more diversity in parliament - they will punish them by voting for parties who don't.

23 September 2005

100 MPs should be enough to vote on stuff. The public servants do the real work anyway!

20 April 2006

Reduce to at least 100

1 August 2006

Reduce it to 80, that way the remaining 80 will have divided up among them, the no longer needed 360 odd analyists, researchers, secretaries and spin doctors we currently supplie each one and thus they would now have 460 odd state service sector staff to do what they don't know, because half of them havn't a clue what they are participating in. Exactly the reason why they continually get the wool pulled over their eyes by the many elements who have infiltrated the state service sector to push their own barrows

21 August 2006

Why stop at 100?

18 December 2006

For its size the present number is ridiculous, expensive and results in far too many non-performing MPs.

16 March 2007

We need more buttons on the agree side

21 June 2007

stop wasting our money on useless people

1 May 2008

100's heaps - we've too many drones in the beehive. REVISION - 1 Sep 09 - MAKE THAT 50! If you need more to be "representative" then let's ALL get on the gravy train!

1 September 2009

Absolutely. Maybe even 80, and allow the government to bring in cabinet ministers from outside Parliament if they don't have the required skills in their caucus.

10 October 2010

REDUCE the threshold off MMP, who was the EGG that SET MMPs threshold anyway, what was HE or She thinking? MMP originated from Germany and 5% of MMP in GERMANIES population IS about half NZs. Maybe you could have a split voting age to, 18 for local and 20 for National but changing the rules doesn't REduce mps but should REstrict immuture VOTERS from VOTING. Why should youngsters be aloud the privilege of VOTING anyhow, most of them VOTE for their friends and family anyway, without any political research?

11 October 2010

Dual VOTING should REsolve in less mps, mps in parliment anyway. You'd have to REduce FFPs or electrates to 60 and have 60 MMPS to REpresent listed STVs and beaurocratic lists to REplace RED tape. Dual voting can REsolve NZs democracy perfectly? Comparatively to other countries NZ has far to many MPs and the number of electrates is ridiculous to. Cabinet ministers are alright and there aren't to many but half the other 100 odd MPs should be beaurocrats. Half the MPs could become bearocrats to adjudicate for the bigger electrates. DUAL VOTING would fix the electrate problem and the MP problem, most MPs could be beaurocrats. Dual VOTING is a 60/60 govt where the biggest FFP can't get extra MPs because FFPs or electrates aren't MMP votes. Reducing 69 electrates to 60 should be easy to accomplishable. Take Four from Auckland, Three from Christchurch and Two from Wellingon. Chuck a ring around the CBDs and cut and past electrate boundaries should make reducing electrates very accomplishable?

2 April 2011

Reasons for Remain Neutral

Are 120 MP's required to deal with all the day to day runnings of the country? It used to be that ministers outside cabinet could work in their electorate and at least be seen to be doing something. Now most MP's dont even have an electorate, so what do they do all day?

25 March 2006

The number of MPs is fairly inconsequential to the provision of justice. they are just adjudicators for our voices... the more the merrier. what we actually need is a solidification of purpose, not a constriction of perspective.

27 December 2007

Reduction in the amount of MPs no more reduces the power of Parliament and Her Majesty's government to make our decisions and control our lives as they see fit, to what ever degree they desire.

7 June 2008

My View

You can make your comments once you have voted.

You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.

Back to all voting categories or
Back to "Democracy"

This website is sponsored by Website World. Click here to find out more.