FPTP vs MMP

[Gary Layng]

The issues that I have with MMP:
1) It gives far too much power to one-note parties, especially those pushing a 
radical platform, as the more "generalist" parties struggle to assemble a 
coalition.
2)  MMP governments around the world tend to be quite unstable.  Italy's 
average government was running at less than a year in length.
3)  MMP presumes that there are no independents running ever.  We've had 
independent MPP's and MP's, but how do you allocate seats to The Independent 
Party, when it really doesn't exist?  Do you appoint members of the Rhino 
Party as an alternative?

On Saturday 06 October 2007 13:11, phiscock-g851W1bGYuGnS0EtXVNi6w at public.gmane.org wrote:
> > My concern runs is that an unpopular governing party could remain in
> > power by vastly increasing it's plurality in its traditionally 'safe'
> > seats.
>
> But then they have to work with the other parties to form a coalition that
> can govern, which is the norm with minority governments. So, right or
> left, they may have to compromise their agenda to some extent to obtain
> support from another party. I would say that compromise is generally a
> Good Thing. And my understanding is that progressive legislation often
> occurs under minority governments.
>
> To some extent, it's a case of a heirarchical structure (the current
> system) or a collaborative structure. Collaboration has generally worked
> well for FOSS, maybe this is an opportunity to apply it in the political
> sphere.

-- 
there's no place like 127.0.0.1
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists