This is an excerpt from the chapter I wrote for 'Back on Track? The New Zealand General Election of 2023', a book edited by Professor Stephen Levine, which comes out in October 2024.
He never would have, because he and Nicola Willis (ex NZ initiative board director) wanted to be in coalition with ACT. Christopher Luxon before the election said he & David Seymour had a number of meetings, and he was happy to be in coalition with them. The fact that they gave ACT so much power and key ministries shows that either they were completely weak or it was all a nudge nudge wink wink.
Thanks for your comment – I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts! I totally get where you’re coming from. ACT aside though, if Raj had won Ilam, the dynamics in the coalition could have been very different, and NZ First might not have had such an easy path into government. It’s fascinating (and frustrating) how these little shifts can lead to such big consequences in the overall balance of power.
One of the main things I was aiming to explore is how our current approach to campaigning and voting still feels stuck in an FPP mindset. We’re missing out on the full potential of MMP, where we have so many more levers as voters and politicians to shape a more truly representative government. It feels like we’re just scratching the surface of what’s possible, and it’d be great to see more creative thinking and collaboration in how we approach elections and politics as a whole.
Thanks again for engaging with this – I’d love to hear your thoughts on how we can shift away from this FPP mentality and make better use of MMP. Do you have any thoughts on that?
I think one of the big flaws is that in NZ we have no checks on the house parliament. Obviously we can’t and shouldn’t have a house of lords. Whether a type of citizens assembly would work. Geoffrey Palmer would likely have thought about this most deeply and could frame something up.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts – you raise a really interesting point. The lack of a formal check on Parliament is definitely a unique challenge in our system. I agree that something like a citizens' assembly could be worth exploring as a way to bring more balance and ensure a broader range of perspectives are considered. I know Wellington City Council tried something along these lines, but it seemed to lose steam, or at least they didn’t make any outcomes from that exercise visible.
I’m curious how it could be structured in a way that feels genuinely representative and doesn’t just become another layer of bureaucracy. It’s the kind of idea that could bring real value if done right – and as you mentioned, someone like Geoffrey Palmer could probably offer some solid guidance on making it effective.
What do you think would be the biggest obstacles to introducing a citizens’ assembly here?
He never would have, because he and Nicola Willis (ex NZ initiative board director) wanted to be in coalition with ACT. Christopher Luxon before the election said he & David Seymour had a number of meetings, and he was happy to be in coalition with them. The fact that they gave ACT so much power and key ministries shows that either they were completely weak or it was all a nudge nudge wink wink.
Hi Sarah,
Thanks for your comment – I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts! I totally get where you’re coming from. ACT aside though, if Raj had won Ilam, the dynamics in the coalition could have been very different, and NZ First might not have had such an easy path into government. It’s fascinating (and frustrating) how these little shifts can lead to such big consequences in the overall balance of power.
One of the main things I was aiming to explore is how our current approach to campaigning and voting still feels stuck in an FPP mindset. We’re missing out on the full potential of MMP, where we have so many more levers as voters and politicians to shape a more truly representative government. It feels like we’re just scratching the surface of what’s possible, and it’d be great to see more creative thinking and collaboration in how we approach elections and politics as a whole.
Thanks again for engaging with this – I’d love to hear your thoughts on how we can shift away from this FPP mentality and make better use of MMP. Do you have any thoughts on that?
I think one of the big flaws is that in NZ we have no checks on the house parliament. Obviously we can’t and shouldn’t have a house of lords. Whether a type of citizens assembly would work. Geoffrey Palmer would likely have thought about this most deeply and could frame something up.
Hi Sarah,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts – you raise a really interesting point. The lack of a formal check on Parliament is definitely a unique challenge in our system. I agree that something like a citizens' assembly could be worth exploring as a way to bring more balance and ensure a broader range of perspectives are considered. I know Wellington City Council tried something along these lines, but it seemed to lose steam, or at least they didn’t make any outcomes from that exercise visible.
I’m curious how it could be structured in a way that feels genuinely representative and doesn’t just become another layer of bureaucracy. It’s the kind of idea that could bring real value if done right – and as you mentioned, someone like Geoffrey Palmer could probably offer some solid guidance on making it effective.
What do you think would be the biggest obstacles to introducing a citizens’ assembly here?