At 14:39 30.11.99 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >D- The below was put on the Canada Votes email list >([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Nov. 29, 1999 by Mr. Frampton (not me). >------ ... >This shows a major flaw of MMP -- and any other mixture of constituency and >list systems. MPs defeated at the constituency level can -- and very often >do -- get right back in by winning a List seat. This violates the basic >principle of representative government my effectively preventing the voters >from removing an MP who has lost their confidence. > >Bill Frampton, V.P. >Freedom Party of Ontario >http://www.freedomparty.org/ >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Preferential voting applied to party lists Suppose that MMP were modified so that the "party vote" was not a single tick (or cross), but instead voters were given the full party list and were allowed to indicate preferences (1,2,3,...) for party list candidates. They could carry to the voting booth, sticky stickers containing their number, and once in the voting booth, they could pick the party list paper of the party that they would give their party vote for. They would apply the sticker to the paper, and also write in the numbers 2, 3, and so on beside the party candidates. The paper would have been printed to show that the first preference was for the party leader. For the country, and for each party, all the voters' preferential party votes would be added to a somewhat comparably weighted collection of votes supplied by the party. Then STV or any better preferential voting system would be used to pick the number of list MPs. The seats in the parliamentary chamber would, as in MMP, be filled in proportion to the ratios of the (adjusted) party votes. This is a modified Mixed Member Proportional scheme, which I'll named the Mixed Member Preferential Proportional method, MMPP (is that taken?). (Perhaps the Freedom Party of Ontario will explain whether MMP is surely flawed by lacking a veto when one of its variants seems to be not flawed in that way? [different name?].) (For interest, how would politicians argue that a method like this be rejected?.) -------- I note that the page here: http://worldpolicy.org/americas/democracy/table-pr.html records the method of election of unicameral legislature or lower houses of bicameral legislatures as being "mixed member" "proportional" for only, and all of, these countries: Bolivia Germany Hungary Italy Mexico New Zealand (is MMP) Venezuela. Mr Craig Carey, Auckland, New Zealand, 30 November 1999
