# Talk:Croatian Parliament

Hi LeoC12,
people in Croatia can either be independent or a member of a political party. A political party can propose people for an electoral list in an election (in this text, an "election" is referred to the 2020 parliamentary election in Croatia, unless otherwise stated). People on the electoral list proposed by a political party don't have to be a member of that political party (e.g. Marija Selak Raspudić in the 1st electoral district) or can be in a different political party than the one that is the proposer of the electoral list (e.g. Josip Salapić in the 7th electoral district). Apart from the fact that a political party can propose people for an electoral list, so can multiple political parties propose the same candidates, under one electoral list (i.e. coalition). Apart from political parties, voters can also propose an electoral list if they collect at least 500 signatures from the voters from the electoral district they want their electoral list to be held in, provided that the electoral district is not the 12th electoral district, because special rules apply to that electoral district (in any case, that electoral list is called an independent list). Similarly to the statements before, people in an independent list can either be independent or a member of a political party.
I believe that any connection about electoral lists should be ignored in the Croatian Parliament article, because information about electoral lists are already in the 2020 Croatian parliamentary election article. So, once the election is over, those candidates get in Croatian Parliament with a specific political party (not the electoral list proposer, but the political party they are the member of, as explained before). Of course, if they aren't a member of any political party, they are classified as "independent", regardless if they were on an electoral list proposed by a political party/parties or voters. In Croatian Parliament, 3 or more members of Parliament (MPs) can form a parliamentary club, whether they are independent or a member of a political party. Parliamentary clubs can, similarly to the electoral lists, have MPs which are not part of the political party of the majority of the club (e.g. Goran Dodig is in a parliamentary club whose majority of members are in a political party he is not a member of). Although MPs in a parliamentary club can have similar ideologies with the rest of the MPs in that club, that doesn't have to be the case (e.g. in the 9th assembly of Croatian Parliament, Furio Radin was in a parliamentary club whose majority of members were members of an oppositional political party, while he supported the Government).
That said, if an MP is in a parliamentary club, that doesn't mean he has the same ideologies as the rest of the parliamentary club. As such, I believe that people who are independent, but part of a parliamentary club, should be clearly marked as "independent", because if they "agreed" with something as the majority of the members of the parliamentary club they are in, they would become a member of the political party of the majority of members of the parliamentary club, and not continue to be an independent politician.
Locky74 (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tuvixer,
you recently reverted my revisions that have to do with the infobox part on "Political groups" and the seat distribution photo and that the colors don't "correspond with the color of the respective parties". The colors I used to depict each political party with is the "main" color used on political party's logo or the website. If there was more than one dominant color present, I used a "color blender" tool to mix those two colors. Of course, to ensure that all colors are unambiguously represented in the seat distribution photo, the rules explained before weren't used for some parties, if the color that was yielded was too similar to a bigger political party (the one that has more members of Parliament than that party). The table below shows each political party's abbreviations, as shown on Political party registrar (Registar političkih stranaka) and parliament's website (Glasilo Sabora), as well as the hex code for the used color.

If two political parties form a parliamentary club, in order to ensure equality, the colors represented by the political parties are mixed together, by the same tool mentioned before. If three or more political parties form a parliamentary club, the colors represented by the political parties are mixed together in the alphabetical order of the political parties in that club (the first 2 parties' colors get mixed, then the 3rd party's color gets mixed with it, etc.) The table below shows each parliamentary club's name, the political parties that form the parliamentary club (abbreviations as shown on parliament website are used here) and the hex code for the used color.

I hope this explains which colors I used to make the seat distribution image and that I explained how the colors were assigned in a logical way.
Locky74 (talk) 21:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

The current version is much more simpler and that is how it has been done in the past. Thanks --Tuvixer (talk) 07:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer, but the current seat distribution photo and the "Political groups" section don't match at all in some parts (e.g. "HNS–Independents" says it has 3 members of Parliament, while the photo shows only 1, etc.) Also, I think the "Political groups" section, as well as the seat distribution photo should contain political parties, rather than parliamentary clubs or electoral lists because that's more specific (see talk).
Locky74 (talk) 10:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi StaroHrvat,
I noticed you recently edited part of the infobox about a political party "Centre", which concerning official reports, doesn't exist. There isn't such party in Political party registrar (Registar političkih stranaka), nor mentioned on the Parliament website (Glasilo Sabora). Also, the two MPs you claim to be part of such party (Marijana Puljak and Dalija Orešković) don't mention this party at all in their Form on officials' property status (Obrazac izvješća o imovinskom stanju dužnosnika; Imovinska kartica). According to the law on political parties, all political parties should publish their statute in the official gazette (Narodne novine) or one of the daily newspapers. Since it didn't publish its statute in the official gazette, I would like you to send me the name and the edition of the daily newspaper that "Centre" published its statute in, since this is one of the conditions for a political party to exist. There is however a parliamentary club called Klub zastupnika Centra i Građansko-liberalnog saveza which consists of three members, two of which are mentioned before, but just because the club's name contains "Centre" doesn't mean there exists such party.
Considering all above, I would like you to explain why I should keep your recent edits concerning this topic.
Locky74 (talk) 16:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Locky74,
I saw this conversation and it seems like StaroHrvat it's not going to answer so I will try. Party Centre(Centar) has been founded in November 2020 by merging Pametno and Party with a First and Last Name to form a single party (Stranka s imenom i prezimenom). Centre is also registered in Political party registrar under registration number 290 and identification number 42956743890. Also there is a list of co-presidents which include above mentioned Marijana Puljak and Dalija Orešković. These explains why edits should be considered. In case you have more questions please feel free to contact me.
Opatijac97 (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi,
you are right, shortly after this discussion started, the party "appeared" in Political party registrar (sometime around the end of January). Actually, the "new" Centre party is Pametno, i.e. it has the same OIB and registration No. as Pametno. This proves that such party exists, but which MPs are in that party is still debatable. You mentioned that Dalija Orešković is listed as co-president and as such should be a member of that party. This is a valid argument, but take a look at the party Zagreb je naš!, whose coordinator (according to Registrar) is Tomislav Tomašević, a member of Možemo! - politička platforma party. As you can see, just because someone is listed as the "co-president" or "coordinator" of a party in Registrar, doesn't mean he/she is actually a member of that party. To make the relevant changes (update Pametno party to Centre in the main article infobox), I wanted to wait a bit longer so that the two MPs in question either update their Form on officials' property status or notify Croatian Parliament about their political party affiliation, but since you "opened" the topic again, the info regarding Marijana Puljak will soon be updated. As for Dalija Orešković, she is still a member of Party with a First and Last Name, given the previous arguments. Thank you for understanding.
Locky74 (talk) 09:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I know I'm coming in 3 years later but just a note to clear it up if you haven't figured it out / someone else sees this, people can be members of multiple parties in Croatia, if the party statutes allow that. Orešković was at the time member of both parties, IP remained officially a registered party and Orešković remained an IP member because of funds the parties get (annually I think) for their elected seats. IP won a seat in 2020 so the funds for the party activities are assigned to IP (not to Orešković as an MP nor can parties legally "merge" in Croatia (the only way is for a new party to be formed or for 1 party to shut down and join the other party like it was the case with Centre when Pametno rebranded and IP members joined) so that money couldn't be transferred to Centre either). That's why she also remained listed under IP on the Sabor website. As for ZJN! and Možemo! most of their members are members of both, as M! was founded as ZJN!'s (and other local parties/initiatives') national platform, ZJN was basically M!'s Zagreb branch. Now they're merging (ZJN shutting down) CroatiaElects (talk) 10:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi JackWilfred,
you recently edited the "Structure" section of the infobox, as well as the seat distribution photo. Since the photo accurately shows distribution of MPs, I believe the photo should be the bird's eye view of the Croatian Parliament (instead of using the "circular" parliament seats diagram). Also, I believe that the "Political groups" section, which lists all parliamentary parties, is currently too detailed. Instead of in the infobox, parliamentary parties and parliamentary clubs (as it is shown now in the infobox) should be in a special section of the article (maybe "Composition of the 10th session") and that the infobox just lists parliamentary parties, without going into how they are distributed inside parliamentary clubs (just that they are part of one). I hope we will gain consensus as to how the page should look like.
Locky74 (talk) 10:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I made the change yesterday for two reasons. Firstly, that the colours on the initial diagram used a lot of customary, grey-ish colours for Parliamentary groups that was difficult to tell apart, and so I used the colour of the largest party for each group with the exception of HSS-HSU which would have been almost identical to IDS. Secondly, that the general precedent set by countries such as Poland, Israel and Spain is that groups are not sufficient, and that detail on individual parties within the groups should be included.
I agree with you that the 'birds-eye' seating plan diagram is better, and if a version of that with the new group colours was made I would support that being used instead of the boilerplate diagram I have made. JackWilfred (talk) 14:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi JackWilfred,
thank you for the answer and explanation. So you think it would be better if parliamentary groups use the "main" colour of the biggest party in that group, I suppose that makes sense. I understand there would be some confusion if a party's main colour is yellow and that party forms a parliamentary club with another party whose main colour is blue and that the colour used to represent those parties would be green (nothing like the colours of the two parties), but the reason it was like that is because that ensures equality between the parties (nobody is "left behind"), but again your idea of using the colour of the largest party also seems logical, so I will update the bird's eye view image of the Croatian Parliament to match your colour preferences (and as it looks like, the logical colour preferences).
As for the list of parliamentary parties, I still think the infobox should list the basic information about the structure of the Parliament. For details (list of all MPs, beginning and end of their term, which political party they belong to, etc...) there could be a special page, because if somebody really was interested in details how the parties are distributed in the Parliament, they would search for that information on a specialized article and not in the infobox.
Locky74 (talk) 14:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
I disagree. If you look at the page of the Polish Sejm or Spanish Congress of Deputies for example, all of the parties are listed. While I agree that some pages like the Polish Sejm are a bit much to take in, the organisation of the list makes groups easy to ascertain and doesn't hide the additional information for those who want it. Additionally, all parties get a somewhat equal representation on the list, which should be what we're aiming for.
I'm glad that we agree on the seating plan diagram and group colours though. JackWilfred (talk) 14:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Recently several members of the Homeland Movement have left the party and founded a new party of similar political standings called DOMiNO (short for Dom i Nacionalno Okupljanje, or Home and National Gathering), which alrady has 2 Sabor representatives and one Europarliament representative. I suggest this info is updated as soon as an article on DOMiNO is completed (I added some additional details to the DOMiNO article draft to help with this goal), because it's already been several days and the infobox is still outdated.  2A05:4F46:310:5C00:9182:6F04:A611:7E9F (talk) 08:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)