How to fix our democracy

I am still getting my head around how National could shed 9% points of its 2023 result yet still be in power.

Although it is not certain, National retaining power is currently the most likely result.

As pointed out by Helen Clark there there are a few factors at play.

Proportionality

The overhang looks likely to save National.

The only way it can be described is that it is a rort. National received 29% of the party vote but at this stage has 32% of the Parliamentary seats. This is not the way that MMP is meant to work.

One of the problems is that the refusal to increase the number of MPs has over time meant that the system is less and less able to adjust to ensure proportionality.

In 1996 there were 55 list seats and 65 electorates.

Over time with population changes the number of electorates has grown to 71 but this is at the cost of list seats. Instead of adjusting the figure up successive Governments have chosen to eat into the initial allotment of list seats.

The population has grown by 42% since 1996. Normally you would expect the size of the House of Representatives to grow over time to approximate this.

If the House of Representatives was increased to 150 seats then according to my calculations National’s overhang would be gone and the major parties would receive their correct number of seats.

There would still be the separate issue of Te Pati Maori’s seats. In 2025 Germany changed its constition to not allow overhang seats. If this was the rule locally then all parties would need to compete and succeed in gaining sufficient party votes to be elected. This would be contentious and I do not at this stage have a firm view but it is something that could be added to the mix if the system is to be reviewed.

Funding

The parties on the right were well funded. Between them they received $6.14 million in declared donations over the sum of $20,000.

By contrast Labour the Greens and Te Pati Maori only received $1.7 million.

Opportinity received $491,660 in large donations. Interestingly one of its donors, Brian Cartmell, also donated to Act and NZ First.

It was the third party funding that presents a particular problem.

The Tax Payers Union Ltd (sarc) is now a company so it does not have to disclose where its funding comes from. In 2023 it spent $3.33 million on its operations including naff debt clocks and fake pig suits. And it received that year $2.8 million in donations and subscriptions. Who knows how much it has received this year. Short of a leak there is no way to find out.

And there was the Henry Mowbray/Voices for Freedom/Don Brash axis pushing hard for the overhang strategy which on the face of it has been an outstanding success. Mowbray has funded right wing parties previously and despite previously promising to be open and transparent with its funding Voices for Freedom is also hiding behind a corporate veil and refusing to provide any information.

He Arotake Pōtitanga Motuhake, the Independent Electoral Review committee recommended that Government addresses “an existing vulnerability in our system by preventing registered third-party promoters using money from overseas persons to fund election advertising in the three months before an election”.

It also recommended that registered third-party promoters should have a separate election campaign bank account for campaign donations and election expenses, that records should be kept of election campaign donations, and that promoters that spend more than $100,000 on election expenditure during the regulated period should also disclose donors who donate over $30,000 in total during an electoral cycle, if the donation has been used for election expenditure.

It also proposed that only registered electors are able to make donations and that these donations are capped at $30,000.

Former Paul Goldsmith refused to implement any of the major recommendations made by the Committee.

Turnout

In reviewing the election Labour needs to work out what happened in South Auckland. The election night turnout in the three South Auckland stronghold seats were between 20,300 and 23,200 votes. By comparison the West Auckland Labour seats was between 28,000 and 33,600 votes.

Changes to the electoral law clearly hurt, along with the publicity that those not on the roll could not cast a special vote.

The number of special votes reduced dramatically. In 2023 there were 603,257 special votes cast, 20.9% of total votes compared to 17% in 2020 and 2017. This year there are an estimated 399,000 special votes to count.

Overall turnout was 74.6% down from 78.2% from last time.

I believe there are three primary reasons:

1. The early shut off of enrolments and associated media commentary meant that fewer people tried to cast a special vote. This is unfortunate because people who were on the dormant roll could still vote although clearly those who were never enrolled could not. But the messaging may have persuaded many people not to even try.
2. The date chosen was against the Electoral Commission’s advice. Christopher Luxon was told that the date chosen was challenging and was offered other dates that were described as being administratively more feasible.
3. The whole tone of the campaign was negative. There was little joy and hope. The right do better in these circumstances as it supresses turnout. This is something Labour will need to reflect on.

As a matter of urgency the next progressive Government needs to reverse the enrollment changes. There should not be artificial limitations on Kiwis who are entitled to vote being able to vote.

Conclusion

As Helen Clark states:

These disturbing aspects suggest a need for an in-depth inquiry into the functioning of the electoral system. Overhang distorting proportionality, a loose electoral funding regime – including for 3rd parties, & enrolment periods which exclude many should all be addressed.”

Until these matters are addressed the right will continue to have a built in advantage.