Anti-MMP forces look like they are going to play dirty

Over at g.blog Toad highlights some appalling disinformation about the MMP referendum from Cameron (Whaleoil) Slater:

Cameron Slater, most likely deliberately, has got it completely wrong on the MMP referendum. Slater blogs:

Some peo­ple are already sug­gest­ing that MMP should be reformed but that is not the ques­tion in this ref­er­en­dum. What we are being asked to do is choose MMP warts and all as it cur­rently stands, or vote for change. If we vote for change then we can choose one of four other systems.

If you like MMP just as it is then vote for that option, if you like any­thing else, includ­ing a changed MMP sys­tem then Vote for Change.

That’s utter crap! There are lots of voters who think aspects of MMP could be improved. But the referendum process specifically allows for a review of MMP to consider such potential improvements should MMP be endorsed – see sections 74 and 75 and 76 of the Electoral Referendum Act 2010.

A huge fail on the facts for Slater, and an indication that the anti-democratic forces the “Vote for Change ” people represent are going to play an evidence-averse dirty game.

Agreed, Toad.  It looks like those opposing MMP have decided they can’t win on the facts, so have resorted to lies and disinformation. And as John Armstrong pointed out this morning:

Vote for Change also argues that it wants a system that is fair to voters, not the politicians. Yet there is no fairer system to voters than MMP.

11 thoughts on “Anti-MMP forces look like they are going to play dirty

  1. Oh, are there people left in the world who don’t know that Cameron Slater is a scheming, disingenuous, unethical lobbyist for far right minority politics and corporations?

    Gosh, where have they been?

    Of course, I’m sure frog can’t possibly comment.

    But as Toad has said, it really boils down to the same small bunch of moneyed individuals who have opposed MMP since 1993, some of whom tried to scuttle the STV referendum in Wellington local body elections in 2002.
    Good thing some of us have long memories and uncluttered brains, not to mention better ethical standards, hmm?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 (+4)

  2. It’s worth having a look at the video over at The Standard from the time of the original referendum. Shirtcliffe says quite clearly why he was afraid of MMP – because it would endanger the good results FPP had delivered over the previous five years – meaning 1989-1993!

    http://thestandard.org.nz/tory-astroturf-fail

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 (+6)

  3. The burglars have been playing dirty since they sneaked in, in 1984, pretending to be the Labour party.

    Are we really surprised.

    We beat them last time over MMP and it is disappointing we have to re-fight the same battle. The arguments for MMP against other forms of rotating dictatorships are still as valid.
    At least we have a little more say on who they are.

    Though it would be better to actually have democracy. It will be over the corpse’ of politicians I expect. http://kjt-kt.blogspot.com/2011/06/democracy-recap.html

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 (+8)

  4. Perhaps the question should have made it clear that a vote for MMP means a vote for looking at the current system – unless you happened to look through the legislation, then you would think that you were voting for the current system, warts and all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 (+1)

  5. Yes, stating clearly that a review will occur on the ballot would be sensible. Fortunately, the enducation programme that the govt will run before the referendum is supposed to make this point clear.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  6. Where is there any mention of the MMP referendum on http://www.greens.org.nz/election or the Green Party home page?

    If you want to keep MMP, then you should have a dedicated page about the MMP referendum and your reasons for keeping it, along with refutations of the rubbish being put forward by the various parties with vested interests. This should include links to the correct sources of information so voters can see who is biased and who is correct.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  7. I’m sure there are ‘forces’ on both sides of the divide who would like to see a return to FPP (two-party system, with a few independants). But lets be honest.. the fairest system is MMP ! As Russel Norman said.. 10% of the vote deserves 10% of the seats. Its possible that MMP could do with a bit of tweeking (as many media commentators are saying). Do we really want to ‘throw the baby out with the bath water’ I for one say “NO !!”.
    Maybe some need to be reminded of the 20% vote for Social Credit that returned 1 seat ?
    Is this really what DEMOCRACY means ?
    WAKE- UP people,we need to move forward & stop looking back.. saying “Ah the good old days” that probably were not that good anyway.
    Kia-ora

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  8. Thanks Valis – I did find it after more digging, but I couldn’t see any links to the official information.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  9. The way I read it, S75 doesn’t just allow for an MMP review, it requires it. Whether the recommendations are implemented may be another matter however.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>