Talk:New Zealand Parliament

message: How are List MPs called on in the House?Keeperoftheseal 06:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By their name.  The standing orders were changed with the introduction of MMP to allow references to MPs by their names.  Names must be either in full, or by surname.  First name only is unacceptable.--Midnighttonight 06:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Forms of Address 

message: Is it worth writing an article about the Leader of the House? Brian | (Talk) 11:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is in my opinion.  The Leader is a significant position within the House. --Midnighttonight 01:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Leader of the New Zealand House of Representatives]] 

message: I propose moving this article to Parliament of New Zealand.  The reasons for this are three-fold:
*It's the correct name of the institution.
*It's the same formula for the articles for almost every other country's Parliament (Parliament of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, India, Italy, etc).
*Most non-Kiwis aren't aware that 'New Zealand' can be an adjective.  Consequently, the current name would seem awkward to the average user.
Parliament of New Zealand has only ever been a redirect to this article. Bastin 09:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: support.  David McGee's (the Clerk of the House) book Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand (2005) gives the official name as "Parliament of New Zealand". --Midnighttonight 09:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the article now. Bastin 23:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: The article suggests Labour supported MMP. Is this true? I believe at least Helen Clark was (from memory of an article I read a few days ago) opposed to MMP. I'm guessing Labour itself was either officially neutral or opposed Nil Einne 17:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: About 70% of Labour MPs supported it, but all the top dogs opposed. --Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 19:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Until the 1992 referendum that is... --Lholden 08:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the question remains though is it accurate to say Labour supported MMP (as I presume we did then and do now)? Did they have an official position on it? If so what was it? If not then it would seem misleading to suggest they supported MMP at the time, even if the majority of their MPs did. Nil Einne (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Labour supported MMP? 

message: Has there been any recent talk of reviving the Senate proposal yet, and if so which model are they basing it on?  Which Senate model were the original proposals based on?  -Daniel Blanchette 00:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. It's an issue that comes and goes, but it was only properly dicussed in 1992. It was really a distraction from the debate taking place on the electoral system, albeit a useful one. --Lholden 00:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a speech by Douglas Graham from about 1998 called Reflections on the Constitution (Graham the Attorney-General at the time) which has some vague details. His proposal was for half of the senators to be appointed by traditional Maori means (i.e. the leaders of various Maori iwi would make up half the members of the Senate) with the other half elected by FPTP. So basically a bit like the Lords (prior to New Labour) but with some elections. --Lholden 01:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Why wouldn't he have wanted it based on something like the Australian Senate or even the US Senate, with seats for the Maori?  Or even allowing PR (via STV) for Senate elections?  In Canada we have a Senate similar to the House of Lords, and (except for the Tories and the Liberals) a lot of people, like the NDP, want it abolished. -Daniel Blanchette 20:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason was probably because the proposal was made at the height of the debate over whether New Zealand should change its electoral system from First Past the Post to Mixed Member proportional (See Electoral reform in New Zealand). The Maori seats proposal was probably a sop to Maori, as they had the most to gain in some respects from MMP. --Lholden 21:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

text: So, let's take the idea into the real world.  Other than the Maori seats, how would've the seats in the Senate been alloted? -Daniel Blanchette 21:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They would've been elected by First past the post (FPTP) elections in Senate electorate (riding) seats. These seats would've been larger than the seats in the House of Representatives --Lholden 19:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  How large would these ridings have been? -Daniel Blanchette 20:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  At a guess, similar in size to Maori electorates, which divide NZ into about half a dozen regions. The comparison with the Senate in Australia, Canada or the US isn't really valid, as New Zealand is a relatively small unitary state. (That's one of the arguments against an upper house in NZ, although far smaller places in the world still have one.) I'm not sure about the Senate being elected by FPP - I remember reading Hansard debates in Wellington library, which seemed to suggest that Graham accepted STV for the Senate. Anyway, National seem to have accepted MMP, so have lost interest in the Senate idea. Quiensabe (talk) 18:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The Senate would have been elected by STV, not FPP, see here  Quiensabe (talk) 17:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the Senate proposal 

message: Where would a para on Trivia go?? Hugo999 11:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia?

message: There should be an article on the demographics of NZ Parliament. --Postbagboy (talk) 05:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Demographics

message: There should be a section about the Maori seats, as this is a unique feature of the NZ electoral system.  But I don't know enough about it and don't have the time to go researching.  If someone else could add something, that would be great.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.152.15 (talk) 12:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about Parliament as an institution. There's a separate article on the Māori seats. --Lholden (talk) 19:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Maori seats

message: I moved the second template a bit lower (just under the title 'Sovereignty'), so now the article looks far more orderly without that ghastly gap. I hope you'll like it :) --B. Jankuloski (talk) 05:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Aesthetic change

message: Reading about the recent elections, I also looked around for the formula for converting election results into actual seats in the parliament.  I think it definitely merits mention but to someone from the USA (and other countries with simpler, winner-take-all or even different complex formulas), this process is a bit novel and complicated.  I believe I have a pretty good grasp of it now (http://www.elections.org.nz/voting/mmp/sainte-lague.html) but I would still rather someone else more familiar with it add it to the article.   Thanks  --  Jieagles (talk) 18:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  election formula 

message: These days all one reads in connection with the parliament is the word 'urgency'. Can anyone explain please? The first three pages of the Google search yield nothing useful. Benni B. (talk) 10:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Urgency is a parliamentary process. It should be under the legislative process section. --Lholden (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urgency 

message: Oppose: the House of Representatives surely merits its own article, while at least half of the material here at Parliament of New Zealand would be out of place in that article. (Odd, by the way, how no one seems to have taken any notice of the proposed merger in nearly five months!) Moonraker2 (talk) 17:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merger with [[:New Zealand House of Representatives]]

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on New Zealand Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vdig.net/hansard/content.jsp?id=35166
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.casi.org.nz/submissions/smelref93.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602174657/http://www.cis.org.nz/policy_monographs/pm109.pdf to http://www.cis.org.nz/policy_monographs/pm109.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is there any way we could respect the most correct colors, but change the Maori (or Labour) party colors as laid out in the graphic showing number of seats in the parliament to be more distinct from one another please? Currently they look very similar, both red, and barely a shade different. TY. — Moops ⋠T⋡ 21:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colors for Maori and Labour nearly identical 

message: By my count there are two independent MP's. One being Elizabeth Kerekere and the other being Meka Whaitiri. --Spekkios (talk) 23:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent MPs 

message: @AusYou @Hazhk. The current seating plan has two vacancies, and that should be reflected in the seating plan. Until the vacant members are sworn in, we should show that. As the Green Party doesn't really have "15 seats" and can only vote with 14 at the present moment. Same with National being down one. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 04:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You claim that the parties "claim" these seats. There is no such thing as that. You are sworn in as a member of parliament, and you represent your party in that seat. You cannot claim a seat when you don't have an MP to be in it, even if you have won that seat in the election, and that is confirmed when the parliament seating diagram shows the vacancies. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 05:02, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I get your point but the problem now is that all reliable sources state that the National Party has 49 MPs and the Green Party 15. Not only news media but the Parliament website too: See here. The infobox states there are 123 MPs in total, but now the numbers below don't add up. I think the infobox should simply reflect the number of elected MPs the parties have, but perhaps footnotes should be added for the National and Green figures to indicate that members have not yet been sworn in? Of course this is a temporary issue because the two MPs should be sworn in soon.I should have started a discussion first and I apologise for reverting your revision to your own graphic because that was impolite. Your work in creating the seating plans is really appreciated. --Hazhk (talk) 16:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, not your fault. I think a footnote would work untill they are sworn in. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seating plan