Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: Election '11 - Counter-Factual #1

28 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • NBH,

    Graeme, given all the discussion about the future of ACT, Banks being a natural fit for the Conservatives etc., I had a question about the point at which proportionality is fixed with regard to the threshold. Specifically, what would happen if Banks shifted affiliation to the Conservatives now? If entitlement to list seats is fixed at the point of the election, then that point must presumably be when the final count is announced (i.e. Dec 10). But what about the threshold exemption for winning an electorate? Surely that must relate to the results of the final count as well, so what would happen if Banks changed his affiliation to Conservative before the announcement of the final count?

    I presume that any such shenanigans are avoided through party affiliation of electorate candidates being formally determined at the point of nomination, so Banks would be an 'ACT' candidate even if he'd resigned from the party and joined National the day before the election. Just wanted to make completely sure that was the case though - it could be amusing if there was no explicit statement to that effect...

    Wellington • Since Oct 2008 • 97 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to NBH,

    I presume that any such shenanigans are avoided through party affiliation of electorate candidates being formally determined at the point of nomination, so Banks would be an ‘ACT’ candidate even if he’d resigned from the party and joined National the day before the election. Just wanted to make completely sure that was the case though – it could be amusing if there was no explicit statement to that effect…

    Banks was nominated as an ACT candidate. End of story.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • tussock, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    3, 4, 5, 7, 9, ++2 are interesting as divisors, but it's a small gap between ACT having 1 overhang or 3 seats. Maybe that's the point, get one or the other, treat one-seat parties as independents unless they hold some wider support.

    We'd have far more overhang this time. ACT 1, UF 1, Māori 2, Mana 1. 125 seat parliament, 3 Con, 60 Nat, 9 NZF, 1 Māo, 34 Lab, 13 Grn; plus the overhangs. NAU-Conservative total 65/125. Assume a couple NZF flip back to Labour, and maybe one or two Nat to Con.

    One might suggest it would encourage the majors to drop a lot of pseudo-independent MPs in safe seats in their own Micro-party, for the free overhang. At least now Dunne, Banks, and Hone just take their fair share of list seats away from someone.

    Since Nov 2006 • 607 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.