Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
ummm ... full. But I think you got it anyway.
-
Well clearly the lowest the threshold can be is 1/120th of the total party vote, since there are 120 seats. Any lower would make no sense.
It depends what you think a threshold is. A legal threshold (which we currently have) is the minimum level of support a party needs to qualify for seats in the House. You could abolish the threshold, but that wouldn't mean that everyone who gets a vote is election, you just go through the process of working out who gets the seat until you've filled up 120 of them.
We don't have thresholds in our first past the post elections, or in our STV elections. And local bodies are fill to the brim of people who've been elected. And you don't need them in MMP. Passing a legal threshold doesn't have to mean you'll get a seat, it could just mean that 'we'll bother working out whether you're entitled to one'.
-
Steve - doesn't quite work like that - the list seats are top-ups:
[Assume no threshold]
Get 1 electorate seat, and 1% of the vote. 1% of 100 seats is 1 seat - you've already got a seat so you don't get a list seat.
Get no electorate seats, and 1% of the vote. 1% of 100 seats is 1 seat - you don't already have a seat so you get a list seat.
In a 120 seat Parliament, one seat is worth 0.8333% of the vote, but that's not the threshold, a party could get a seat even if they fall short of that. For example, in 2005, Destiny NZ got 0.62% of the votes, but without a threshold, would still have qualified for a seat.
-
Which makes me wonder what happens when parliament is tied in a vote. The speaker doesn't vote do they?
Not any more. They used to not vote on stuff, and then cast a casting vote. Now they vote on everything, and don't get a casting vote.
Since MMP, and the changes to standing orders that followed, a tied vote is a lost vote.
-
When you run a race you can usually assume that if you run the race faster than everyone else, then you will have won. Not so say Nike.
That is a great story ... Nike sucks. Even their solution (she's been declared "a" winner) is still lame, and the whole story just gets you misty-eyed:
As for O'Connell, she's not bitter. After all, she got her best time ever, had a nice weekend in San Francisco and comes home with a story.
This is a sports story.
-
it's unlikely that there could be two blocks that fulfil that, unless a party agreed to abstain on confidence for both sides.
No - someone would have to agree to support both sides for that to happen.
-
Now this is a clever campaign :-)
Um, and don't forget to vote...
-
I would like to apologise for the US election result. It just happened, guys, I'm sorry.
-
The idea that any party that reaches over 50% of the vote can be kept out by a group of small parties is one I have real ethical difficulty with.
Why? I don't get it. If the right wing gets 60 seats and the left wing gets 61...
For example, in 1978, in a 92 seat Parliament National (the right wing bloc) got 51 seats. Labour got 40 seats, and Social Credit got one.
Well, the right have won - they got more that half the seats - what's the ethical problem? Well National got 39.8% of the vote, and Labour got 40.4% of the vote (social credit got 16.1%).
In 1993, National got 35.05% of the vote and 50 seats (out of 99). Problem? They got a majority of the seats, and government, but Labour and the Alliance got 52.89% of the vote between them.
Your "error" is looking at seats, rather than votes. If a party gets 50.1% of the vote, then a majority of the public have indicated they want that party to form the government.
-
Graeme, it's not like you to fail to read the terms of use ...
I'm pretty sure it's very much like everyone...
That said, now that I've read your excerpt, I think NZ on Screen needs a new lawyer if they don't want me saving it without breacking the law :-)
Saving a video for one's personal use (e.g. so you can watch it as one documentary without waiting for each new segement to download a sufficient buffer after the earlier ones have finished) does not seem to be prohibited by those terms of use.
*Personal or educational, non-commercial - check
*You agree not to ... download ... or otherwise exploit for any commercial purpose - check.My downloading (were I to actually do it...) would not be for a commercial purpose (and "commercial purpose" clearly applies to the whole bit).