DOCSLIB.ORG

Date Printed: 04/22/2009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Date Printed: 04/22/2009 Date Printed: 04/22/2009 JTS Box Number: IFES 67 Tab Number: 120 Document Title: The Referendum. The Guide. Document Date: 1993 Document Country: New Zealand Document Language: English IFES ID: CE01218 D - D D .. -~ -' ':"'" - - -: . .. ....:-- ....: -" - -.:. - . -.~. :':,.: .,-"-.,~~ ~.-:':',.->.'--'.. " .:~ .-.:- ... :.~,.~;-.-: " • 1 ,_ 'I •• :-: :_ :t ....- .... _·~· ~•.. ," - ' .. ' ..... ~ - - ' .. ' .. ·,.The·· :·ReferendUID • .. ;;. '" '.'" .The' , ,.. ' . ~-'. -' ",; . .:.:' .-', Guide., .' .... WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE? La systen , i, the sal systen + .. referel electi< Tl infom its oth Unive Tl fOlW,lI agains of tho, Th home~ thepa will b, a spec I, 0, ~ tionCi comir. John I Chail] 'f.. A MESSAGE FROM THE ELECTORAL REFERENDUM PANEL Last September. in the 1992 Electoral Referendum. New Zealand voters had their first say about the type of voting system they wanted. This was an indicative referendum. A second and binding referendum is being held this year. on the same day as the general election. This referendum offers voters a final choice between the First -Past -The-Post system (FPP) and the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP), the preferted option in last year's indicative .. referendum. The option preferred in this referendum will be the way Parliament is elected at the next general I election which will normally be in 1996. The Electoral Referendum Panel is an independent body established by the government to oversee a public information programme funded by taxpayers. The panel is headed by the Chief Ombudsman, John Robertson, and its other members are Sir Hugh Kawharu, from Auckland University; Professor Margaret Clark, from Victoria University; and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, David McGee. The panel's task is to make sure that voters are factually and impartially informed about the two options put forward in the referendum. I ts terms of reference expressly prohibit the panel from putting forward arguments for or against the two electoral systems. It was considered that these will emerge from the public debate and the campaigns of those supporting particular options. The panel has already issued a pamphlet comparing the facts of both options and this was recently delivered to homes throughout New Zealand inside community newspapers. As well as this Guide, the panel is also posting a further brochure to every voter on the electoral roll. There will be a variety of briefings and community based activities using all tItis information, ··>-I-·~i:. ,~~ a specially prepared video, and a wide range of advertising in all types of media. , On behalf of the Electoral Referendum Panel, I ask you to consider this informa- tion carefully, to participate in the public debate, and to take the time to vote in the coming) 993 Electoral Referendum. John Robertson eBE Chairperson, Electoral Referendum Panel CONTENTS Th. It is WHAT THE REFERENDUM IS ABOUT 3 erscho( Th. HOW THE 1993 ELECTORAL REFERENDUM WILL WORK 3 • 1 I • • 1 HOW VOTERS VOTE UNDER FPP 4 0 ~ HOW VOTERS VOTE UNDER MMP 5 THE NUMBER OF MPs 6 Thi: MAORI REPRESENTATION 7 Memb. Zealanc The opt HOW MINOR PARTIES ARE AFFECTED 8 electior Wh, MPfOrl HOW PROPORTIONAL ARE THE TWO SYSTEMS? 9 ' . looks iii HOW A GOVERNMENT IS FORMED 10 THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION 11 HOW CANDIDATES ARE SELECTED 11 REDRAWING ELECTORATE BOUNDARIES 11 FILUNG VACANT SEATS 11 !, It APPENDIX A: ST LAGU~ FORMULA 12 r APPENDIXB: CRITERIA FOR JUDGING VOTING SYSTEMS 14 I I APPENDIX C: A BRIEF HISTORY OF NEW ZEALAND'S , ELECTORAL SYSTEM 15 "" WHAT THE REFERENDUM IS ABOUT The electoral referendum is about how New Zealand voters elect their Members of Parliament. It is not about how governments operate, or how Parliament conducts its business. It is about how New Zealand­ ers choose other New Zealanders to represent them in the place where laws are made. The referendum offers a choice between two different ways of electing our Members of Parliament: • The First-Past-The-Post system (FPP) is the system we have now. Its details are set out in the Electoral Act 1956. • The Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP) is the alternative system being proposed. It was the preferred option in last year's indicative electoral referendum. Its details are set out in the Electoral Act 1993. HOW THE 1993 ELECTORAL REFERENDUM WILL WORK This year's electoral referendum is being held on the same day as the general election. As well as voting for their Member of Parliament, voters will be asked to make a final decision on what voting system theywant for New Zealand in the future - either the First-Past-The-Post system (FPP) or the Mixed Member Proportional system (MMP). The option selected in this referendum will fix the way that Members of Parliament are elected from the next general election which, based on a normal three-year parliamentary term, should be held in 1996. When electors go to vote they will be given two ballot papers. One will be the paper they will use to vote for the MP for the electoral district where they live. The other ballot paper will be used to vote on the electoral referendum. It looks like this: Vote Here --------------------I vote for the present FIRST-PAST-THE-POST SYSTEM as provided in the Electoral Act 1956. TICK ONE PROPOSAL I vote for the proposed MIXED MEMBER PROPORTIONAL SYSTEM as provided in the Electoral Act 1993. Electors vole by putting a tick (,/) next to the electoral system they prefer. 3 HOW VOTERS VOTE UNDER FPP FPP The Present First-Past-The-Post System (FPP) MMP Each elector has one vote. They vote by putting a Eacl tick (,() next to the name of the candidate they want to which" see elected. 1 VOTE to voter. The ballot paper looks like this: M• • FPP Ballot Paper • I. The candidate with the most Vote for only one candidate votes in the electorate (not CARSON, Michael necessarily a majority) is PAOGAESS PARTY elected. HARVEY. Linda FREEDOM PARTY On, KATENE. Hemi Elector JUSTICE PARTY the car MORRISON. Susan Th. UNITED PEOPLE'S PARTY theMe STAFFORD, Zoe REPUBLICAN PARTY VOl ent to' WADSWORTH, David CONSERVATION PARTY The-P< Th vote, fc The candidate who gets the most votes becomes repres the Member of Parliament (MP) for that electorate. To bYliut be successful, candidates do not have to win more the tol than half the votes cast. A candidate can be elected Parli31 with fewer than half the votes so long as no other Total MPs for each party; The number ofelectorate MPs Tt candidate contesting the election receives more votes. elected for each party in single­ electo (For example, in 1990 the winning candidate in one member electorates. partie, electorate received only 33.1 per cent of the votes cast but this was enough to win the seat.) V< chaos FPP usually produces a clear winner because ) electo one party tends to win more than half the seats I in Parliament. This means coalition govern­ I party ments are less likely. Minor parties find it harder L. They, to get seats in Parliament, and a party's share of beth. MPs in Parliament does not necessarily reHect I party its share of the votes cast. , r1 ., 4 HOW VOTERS VOTE UNDER MMP MMP The Mixed Member Proponional System (MMP) Each elector has two votes. The ballot paper, which will be divided into two pans before it is handed to voters, looks like this: 2 VOTES MMP Bellot Paper ~ MMP Ballot Paper ~ Electorate Party Un ..... ..... "':..-.: QQ Nationwide Party list MPs One vote (the Part A vote) is for an electorate MP. x56 Electors vote by putting a tick (.f) next to the name of the candidate they want to see elected. The candidate who gets the most votes becomes To win party list the Member of Parliament for that electorate. seats 8 party must win at least 5 per cent Voting on this part of the ballot paper is no differ­ of the nationwide party vote or at ent to voting for an electorate MP under the First-Past­ "Ieasi one electorate. The-Post electoral system. The other vote (the Part B vote) is a nationwide vote, for the party the elector would most like to see represented in Parliament. Electors vote for that party The number of nationwide MPs a party receives is by putting a tick (.I) next to its name. This vote decides the total number of seats that each party gets in decided in two steps. First, its percentage of the total nationwide party list vote is worked out. Then, the Parliament. This part of the ballot paper is the same for every number of nationwide MPs it may receive is adjusted electorate: all electors choose between the same according to the number of electorate MPs it already parties, regardless of the electorate they live in. has. This is so that its total number of MPs matches its Voters don't have to use both votes. They can share of the nationwide party list vote. choose to vote just for the person they want as their Total MPs for each party = The number ofelectorate MPs electorate MP, or they can choose to vote just for a elected for each party in single· party they would like to see represented in Parliament. member electorates plus They can also vote for a candidate from one party to the number ofnntionwide party be their electorate MP, and for a different party in their list MPs elected (adjusted so that a party's total MPs are in propor­ party vote. tion to its share ofthe total nntionwide party list voting). MMP is less likely to produce a clear winner, and coalition governments or agreements between parties are more likely. Each party's share of MPs in Parliament reflects its share of the votes, and minor parties find it easier to get seats in Parliament.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The 2008 Election: Reviewing Seat Allocations Without the Māori Electorate Seats June 2010
    working paper The 2008 Election: Reviewing seat allocations without the Māori electorate seats June 2010 Sustainable Future Institute Working Paper 2010/04 Authors Wendy McGuinness and Nicola Bradshaw Prepared by The Sustainable Future Institute, as part of Project 2058 Working paper to support Report 8, Effective M āori Representation in Parliament : Working towards a National Sustainable Development Strategy Disclaimer The Sustainable Future Institute has used reasonable care in collecting and presenting the information provided in this publication. However, the Institute makes no representation or endorsement that this resource will be relevant or appropriate for its readers’ purposes and does not guarantee the accuracy of the information at any particular time for any particular purpose. The Institute is not liable for any adverse consequences, whether they be direct or indirect, arising from reliance on the content of this publication. Where this publication contains links to any website or other source, such links are provided solely for information purposes and the Institute is not liable for the content of such website or other source. Published Copyright © Sustainable Future Institute Limited, June 2010 ISBN 978-1-877473-56-2 (PDF) About the Authors Wendy McGuinness is the founder and chief executive of the Sustainable Future Institute. Originally from the King Country, Wendy completed her secondary schooling at Hamilton Girls’ High School and Edgewater College. She then went on to study at Manukau Technical Institute (gaining an NZCC), Auckland University (BCom) and Otago University (MBA), as well as completing additional environmental papers at Massey University. As a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA) specialising in risk management, Wendy has worked in both the public and private sectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Workingpaper
    working paper The Evolution of New Zealand as a Nation: Significant events and legislation 1770–2010 May 2010 Sustainable Future Institute Working Paper 2010/03 Authors Wendy McGuinness, Miriam White and Perrine Gilkison Working papers to Report 7: Exploring Shared M āori Goals: Working towards a National Sustainable Development Strategy and Report 8: Effective M āori Representation in Parliament: Working towards a National Sustainable Development Strategy Prepared by The Sustainable Future Institute, as part of Project 2058 Disclaimer The Sustainable Future Institute has used reasonable care in collecting and presenting the information provided in this publication. However, the Institute makes no representation or endorsement that this resource will be relevant or appropriate for its readers’ purposes and does not guarantee the accuracy of the information at any particular time for any particular purpose. The Institute is not liable for any adverse consequences, whether they be direct or indirect, arising from reliance on the content of this publication. Where this publication contains links to any website or other source, such links are provided solely for information purposes and the Institute is not liable for the content of such website or other source. Published Copyright © Sustainable Future Institute Limited, May 2010 ISBN 978-1-877473-55-5 (PDF) About the Authors Wendy McGuinness is the founder and chief executive of the Sustainable Future Institute. Originally from the King Country, Wendy completed her secondary schooling at Hamilton Girls’ High School and Edgewater College. She then went on to study at Manukau Technical Institute (gaining an NZCC), Auckland University (BCom) and Otago University (MBA), as well as completing additional environmental papers at Massey University.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Proportional Representation on Election
    THE EFFECTS OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION ON ELECTION LAWMAKING IN AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND by Joshua Ferrer A Thesis Submitted to the Politics Programme University of Otago in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts January 2020 ii iii ABSTRACT It is widely recognized that most politicians are self-interested and desire election rules beneficial to their reelection. Although partisanship in electoral system reform is well- understood, the factors that encourage or constrain partisan manipulation of the other democratic “rules of the game”—including election administration, franchise laws, campaign finance, boundary drawing, and electoral governance—has received little scholarly attention to date. Aotearoa New Zealand remains the only established democracy to switch from a non-proportional to a proportional electoral system and thus presents a natural experiment to test the effects of electoral system change on the politics of election lawmaking. Using a longitudinal comparative case study analysis, this thesis examines partisan and demobilizing election reforms passed between 1970 and 1993 under first-past- the-post and between 1997 and 2018 under mixed-member proportional representation (MMP). Although partisan election reforms have not diminished under MMP, demobilizing reforms have become less common. Regression analysis uncovers evidence that partisan election lawmaking is more likely when the effective number of parties in parliament is lower, when non-voters have more leverage, and when reforms are pursued that diminish electoral participation. iv To Arthur Klatsky, with all my love v PREFACE This thesis would not be what it is without the generosity, time, and aroha of countless people. For the sake of the Otago Politics Department’s printing budget, I will attempt to be brief.
    [Show full text]
  • Māori Representation in a Shrunken Parliament
    New Zealand Journal of History, 52, 2 (2018) Māori Representation in a Shrunken Parliament IN A REFERENDUM held in conjunction with New Zealand’s 2011 general election, Māori overwhelmingly supported the retention of the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting system introduced in 1996. Māori support for MMP was significantly less equivocal than that of the general population.1 The extent of support is understandable. MMP brought many benefits for Māori voters, most obviously a large increase in Māori representation in Parliament.2 The bulk of Māori votes were no longer tied up in just four electorates where they could often be safely ignored. With all votes being equal, political parties had a heightened motivation to pay heed to Māori aspirations and to put forward Māori candidates. The benefits of MMP for Māori were increased through the retention of seats reserved for voters of Māori descent, along with the innovation of linking the number of such seats directly with the numbers enrolled to vote in them. In 1996 the number of Māori seats increased to five under the new rules, and further increased to seven in 2002.3 Previously the number of reserved Māori seats was fixed at four, and had been since 1867.4 New Zealand adopted MMP following a binding referendum held in 1993. In 1990 Ranginui Walker summarized some of the faults with the electoral system then in place, pointing to both historical and ongoing discrimination. Whereas the secret ballot applied in European electorates from 1870, it did not apply in Māori electorates until 1937.5 There were no Māori electoral rolls until 1949 and compulsory voter registration was not introduced for Māori until 1956.
    [Show full text]
  • Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election
    A BARK BUT NO BITE INEQUALITY AND THE 2014 NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION A BARK BUT NO BITE INEQUALITY AND THE 2014 NEW ZEALAND GENERAL ELECTION JACK VOWLES, HILDE COFFÉ AND JENNIFER CURTIN Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Creator: Vowles, Jack, 1950- author. Title: A bark but no bite : inequality and the 2014 New Zealand general election / Jack Vowles, Hilde Coffé, Jennifer Curtin. ISBN: 9781760461355 (paperback) 9781760461362 (ebook) Subjects: New Zealand. Parliament--Elections, 2014. Elections--New Zealand. New Zealand--Politics and government--21st century. Other Creators/Contributors: Coffé, Hilde, author. Curtin, Jennifer C, author. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press This edition © 2017 ANU Press Contents List of figures . vii List of tables . xiii List of acronyms . xvii Preface and acknowledgements . .. xix 1 . The 2014 New Zealand election in perspective . .. 1 2. The fall and rise of inequality in New Zealand . 25 3 . Electoral behaviour and inequality . 49 4. The social foundations of voting behaviour and party funding . 65 5. The winner! The National Party, performance and coalition politics . 95 6 . Still in Labour . 117 7 . Greening the inequality debate . 143 8 . Conservatives compared: New Zealand First, ACT and the Conservatives .
    [Show full text]
  • Proportional Representation and Country Quota Bill
    /1/.i , '-7 54 ve 9 , PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION AND COUNTRY QUOTA BILL. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM. IN this Bill the quota of votes necessary to ensure the election of a candidate is that known as the Droop quota, first explained by Mr. H. R. Droop in a paper read before the Statistical Society in 1881. Mr. Hare proposed to ascertain the quota by dividing the number of votes cast by the number of members to be elected. Mr. Droop's method is to divide the number of votes cast by one more than the number of members. His was the method adopted in the Legislative Council Act, 1914. It is preferred by the majority of proportionalists, and its chief advantage probably is that it ensures representation for a smaller minority than is possible under the Hare quota. In a three-member constituency, for example, one-fourth of the electors would be assured of representation. The elector is left free to mark as many preferences as he pleases. Should he mark only one preference his vote cannot be used (that is to say, transferred) in the event of the candidate he prefers being elected without his vote, and it is apprehended that voters will soon realize that their ballots will Be more effective by marking more than one candidate. On the other hand it is not consistent with the principles of proportional representation to compel the voter, on pain of invali- dating his ballot-paper, to mark every name on the list, and on the whole the vast majority of proportionalists agree that it is preferable to leave the voter free to record as many transfers as he pleases.
    [Show full text]
  • Men, Women and Electoral Politics, 1893-1919
    GENDER COUNTS: MEN, WOMEN AND ELECTORAL POLITICS, 1893-1919 ______________________________________ A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in History in the University of Canterbury by Linda Miriam Georgina Moore _________________________________ University of Canterbury 2004 Abstract Gender has seldom been considered in accounts of electoral politics and voting in early twentieth century New Zealand. This thesis approaches the question of gender and electoral politics in three ways. The first is a case-study of the 1893 election campaign in Christchurch based on qualitative data. Gender threaded through both political organisation and debates in this election campaign. Men and women organized separately and invoked gender difference in the discussion of election issues. The second approach is a quantitative study across time and space comparing men's and women's participation rates in general elections from 1893 until 1954. Women's turnout was significantly lower than men's in the 1890s, but the difference had largely disappeared by the late 1940s. Moreover, although broad social changes increased women's participation relative to men's, factors such as party organisation and the nature and content of political debates were also important. The third approach is a statistical analysis comparing men's and women's voting preferences on the liquor issue and for the political parties at electorate level from 1893 until 1919. The analysis is of an ecological nature. It is designed to overcome the absence of individual-level voting data and to limit the ecological fallacy problem which is the error of assuming that relationships evident at the group level reflect relationships at the individual or sub-group level.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing New Zealand's Electoral Law 1927
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ResearchArchive at Victoria University of Wellington Consensus Gained, Consensus Maintained? Changing New Zealand’s Electoral Law 1927 – 2007 A Thesis Submitted to Victoria University of Wellington In Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Political Science James Christmas 2010 To JMC 2 Acknowledgments In submitting this work, I acknowledge a substantial debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Professor Elizabeth McLeay, for her guidance, constant attention and interest. For their encouragement, I thank my parents. For his patience, this thesis is dedicated to James. James Christmas Christchurch 2010 3 Contents Abstract 5 List of Tables and 6 Figures Chapter One Introduction 7 Chapter Two The Electoral Law in Context 15 Chapter Three Milestones: Three Eras of Electoral 27 Amendment? Chapter Four Parliament and Electoral Rules 49 Chapter Five Boundaries, Franchise and Registration 70 Chapter Six Election Administration and Electioneering 92 Chapter Seven Assessing Trends and Motivations 112 Chapter Eight Conclusion 132 Appendix A Acts Affecting the Electoral Law 1927 – 2007 135 (in chronological order) Appendix B Unsuccessful Electoral Reform Bills, 1927 – 154 2007 (in chronological order) Bibliography 162 4 Abstract In the eighty years between the passage of New Zealand’s first unified Electoral Act in 1927, and the passage of the Electoral Finance Act 2007, the New Zealand Parliament passed 66 acts that altered or amended New Zealand’s electoral law. One central assumption of theories of electoral change is that those in power only change electoral rules strategically, in order to protect their self-interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Participation and Electoral Change in Nineteenth-Century New Zealand John E
    Political participation and electoral change in nineteenth-century New Zealand John E. Martin This paper is reproduced with permission as published in Political Science, vol 57, no 1, June 2005 Abstract: This article suggests that it is important to look at the early decades of elections in New Zealand’s political history, a time when many believe that politics was undemocratic and political participation was low. In order to evaluate this issue statistics on the numbers voting and electorates contested have been generated by extensive newspaper research for the general elections in the period 1853 to 1876, on which there is little information. In these early elections the issues lay more in the failure to register on the electoral rolls and considerable numbers of uncontested electorates than in exclusion due to the property franchise or failure to vote by those registered. The article concludes that politics was more democratic and participation higher than usually thought. In the latter part of the nineteenth century increases in registration and in voter turnout are examined as a precursor for political parties and high levels of political participation that became characteristic of modern-day electoral politics in New Zealand. The introduction of MMP and the emergence of a more complicated electoral calculus than existed under the two-party system has heightened interest in patterns and trends in voting. The publication in 2003 of a book by Neill Atkinson, Adventures in Democracy, to mark the 150 years since the first parliamentary elections took place in New Zealand in 1853 has underlined the existence of a gap in understanding of our electoral past.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Was First Inhabited from Eastern Polynesia Around 800 AD
    Research on Best Practices for the Implementation of the Principles of ILO Convention No. 169 Case Study: 5 Good Practices of Indigenous Political Participation: Maori Participation in New Zealand Elective Bodies By Dr. Alexandra Xanthaki, University of Brunel Dr. Dominic O’Sullivan, University of Waikato 2007 Programme to Promote ILO Convention No. 169 1 The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles, studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the International Labour Office of the opinions expressed in them. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 4 OBJECTIVES OF THE CASE STUDY.................................................................................... 6 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 7 CONTEXTUAL OVERVIEW .................................................................................................. 9 The Declaration of Independence ........................................................................................ 14 Maori Autonomy and Development .................................................................................... 16 IMPORTANCE OF THE CASE AS A POSITIVE EXAMPLE ............................................. 18 RELATED ARTICLES OF CONVENTION No. 169 .............................................................. 22 GUARANTEED
    [Show full text]
  • The Hunters and Gatherers of the River Mouth Tom Dillon from Manawatu with Last Month I Dropped in on the Whitebaiters at the Oakura River Friend June Neale
    he akura essenger SEPTEMBER 2005 The hunters and gatherers of the river mouth Tom Dillon from Manawatu with Last month I dropped in on the whitebaiters at the Oakura river friend June Neale. mouth to see what the scoop was on whitebaiting and why people do it. THIS MONTH Lyn Buttimore - an excuse to be lazy. Have your say - The weather was absolutely fabulous and Tom Dillon from the Manawatu was Community Plan meetings the conditions were ideal for lounging making a week of it along with friend See Council ad, page 3. about on the riverbank and that seemed June Neale. They said it was a very to be what most of the fisherpeople were sociable way to spend the day. People ELECTION SPECIAL! doing! were coming and going all day and it Check out the candidates Lyn Buttimore was thoroughly enjoying was good to chat to them. Their and parties and what they herself – her set net was looking after enthusiasm hadn’t waned at all after 40 have to offer . itself while she read her book. She says, hours. The chilly bin was out, the coffee pages 18 to 21. “It’s just a good excuse to be lazy.” . continued on page 4 1 FROM THE TOM ZONE Editorial I hope everyone has had a good look at the proposed CBD upgrade and are happy with the proposed Hi folks! scheme. It has turned into a bun fight with Transit It’s great to see the design that has been created for completing doing a u-turn according to the Kaitake Community the streetscape of Oakura’s CBD.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Commons at The
    http://waikato.researchgateway.ac.nz/ Research Commons at the University of Waikato Copyright Statement: The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). The thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: Any use you make of these documents or images must be for research or private study purposes only, and you may not make them available to any other person. Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the author’s right to be identified as the author of the thesis, and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate. You will obtain the author’s permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Not a Fair Go: A History and Analysis of Social Credit’s Struggle for Success in New Zealand’s Electoral System A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of Master of Arts in Political Science at University of Waikato by David Calderwood The University of Waikato 2010 Abstract This thesis is an examination of the main issues Social Credit contended with while trying to succeed in New Zealand politics. Its historical and political analysis is in the context of the electoral system. The first section argues for and describes the changing electoral context and outlines how this created difficulties for Social Credit. It concludes that the movement faced very adverse electoral periods for third parties. The second part examines founder Major C.H. Douglas’s Social Credit vision and charts Social Credit’s political adaptations from its New Zealand beginnings to the time Bruce Beetham took over as leader in 1972.
    [Show full text]