Political Parties and Electoral Systems
Overview
Broad scope: elections in a broad sense; focus on how electoral systems and political parties interact. Today’s talk links to next week (electoral systems and parties) and week seven (voter behavior). Week eight covers public policy, lobbying, interest groups, social movements, and money in politics; contrasts between theory of “how things work” and the practical mechanics of politics.
Key idea: in NZ, political parties and electoral systems are deeply intertwined; understanding one helps interpret the other.
Real-world relevance: parties structure information for voters, shape candidate recruitment, and influence local and national governance outcomes.
Local government in Auckland: parties, tickets, and candidates
Everyday familiarity: most people have heard of parties or local tickets (even if not deeply engaged in politics).
2022 local elections: blue-sky overview of candidates, votes, and affiliations; Wayne Brown led on the Fix Auckland banner; ALISA Collins was a main challenger; candidates listed in order of votes (not alphabetically).
Affiliation terminology:
Wayne Brown ran under the banner “Fix Auckland” (not a formal party); in local elections, a nomination form includes an affiliation field.
National Party does not nominate local government candidates; historically, party branding has limited reach at local levels.
Independents: many candidates run as independents, some with past party ties (e.g., a councillor previously with Labour or Green).
Local tickets: groups like Putting People First (Albany ward), Communities First, and City Vision appear as local groupings rather than formal parties.
Albany ward example:
Two councillors elected to the council table (Watson and Walker) on a ticket called Putting People First.
Ticket system allows voters to cast two votes; the second vote can go to another candidate in the same ward.
A new ticket, “Jake Raw and Sylvia Yang” (Communities First) attempted to keep top spots, illustrating how tickets share a brand and priority placement.
Common local-party brands and their meanings:
CNR: Communities and Residents (formerly Citizens and Ratepayers) – sometimes linked to the National Party network; some candidates have party ties, others are independents.
City Vision: Auckland-only left-wing ticket; some members linked to Labour or Green.
Act Local: new strategy by ACT to stand candidates for local government; the aim is broad exposure and local learning rather than immediate high-profile national roles.
Other parties and positions:
New Conservative: AoR party with a local focus; local members include Ted Johnson (leader of the party’s local lineup).
Animal Justice Party, Green Party, Labour: represented across wards, with varying degrees of formal affiliation.
Electoral dynamics: most Auckland council seats are not formally party-based; voters rely on “tickets” as information shortcuts about priorities and policies.
Policy stances visible in local campaigns:
Emphasis on delivering basics (roads, water, waste management) and restoring accountability and transparency.
Some platforms push for reducing “war of cars” (prioritizing transport efficiency) and other infrastructure investments.
Local government information and participation:
Candidates’ affiliations provide a cue for voters about priorities and networks they will align with.
Gatekeeping: there is a debate about whether local bodies should have rigorous pre-selection processes; the NZ experience shows relatively low barriers to entry (nomination fee around 300) and limited centralized gatekeeping at local levels.
Tension between party-driven discipline and local autonomy: central party directions can clash with local advice and community consultation requirements.
Consultation and legal requirements:
Local councils must consult with communities on major decisions; central government can change rules but must observe consultation requirements.
Example: public consultations on shared space or road designs; local councils must consider community input when deciding.
Electoral mechanics and turnout:
Voting is primarily postal; special voting centers are limited; ballots are opened during a voting period (nearly a month).
Debate around ballot structure: should candidate order be alphabetical or randomized? Studies suggest order effects are small, but some argue that order can advantage certain candidates with easily recognizable names.
Randomization vs alphabetical ordering: NZ councils have tested both; research indicates no clear advantage to being at the top in long lists, though longer lists can affect recall and attention.
Postal voting and security concerns:
Contemporary debates around voting methods include online voting; NZ authorities view online voting as high risk due to potential overseas interference; postal voting remains the norm.
Practical concerns with postal voting: distribution to renters, mobile/temporary residents, and address updates in electoral rolls.
Summary takeaway for voters:
Local information shortcuts provided by party tickets can help voters identify priorities, but party labels may mask differences among candidates in a ward.
Voters should seek independent verification and community consultation records to evaluate a candidate’s suitability for local office.
Political parties in New Zealand: history, types, and roles
What is a political party?
An organized group seeking to win government power; aims to translate ideology and policy into governance; differs from lobby groups that influence policy without seeking formal control.
A party links rulers to the ruled by creating channels for feedback (e.g., MPs responding to party members and constituents).
Parties articulate interests, recruit and train candidates, and develop policy platforms.
Party organizational forms:
Mass membership parties: active recruitment of many ordinary members; examples include the Green Party’s relatively low fees for low-income members (e.g., 5 for low income, 30 otherwise).
Elite parties: smaller, higher-income, tightly connected to power structures; may prioritize maintaining status quo and power for a minority.
Catchall parties: broad appeal across many groups; less tied to a single demographic segment or issue.
Single-issue parties: centered on a specific policy (e.g., cannabis legalization); may attract votes but struggle to win broad-based support unless the issue aligns with a larger coalition.
Personality-driven (personality-based) parties: electoral appeal centers on a charismatic leader rather than a coherent platform.
Blue-green and other branding: attempts to blend environmental concerns with other policy orientations.
NZ party history and evolution:
1890: Liberal Party emerges and dominates early parliamentary politics.
Early 20th century: Reform Party forms as a conservative faction; Labour emerges in the early 20th century and becomes a major force by mid-century.
1938 onwards: National and Labour dominate; minor parties appear occasionally (e.g., Social Credit).
1984–1993: Major reform phase; shifts in policy and governance reshape party dynamics; emergence of new parties and coalitions.
1996: Introduction of MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional) transforms NZ’s party system from dominant two-party to multi-party and coalition governance.
Multi-party fragmentation and evolution:
Post-1996: Greater potential for multiple parties in Parliament; new parties such as NZ First, ACT, United Future, the Maori Party, and the Greens gain representation.
2023: 17 parties contest the party vote; only 6 cross the 5% threshold to gain seats; 11 fail to cross the threshold.
The question for voters and scholars: should a lower threshold lead to more voices, or should a higher threshold preserve governability?
Explanations for party-system development:
Sociological explanations (cleavages): social divisions (e.g., class, rural-urban, religion, post-material concerns) shape party alignments.
Institutional explanations (electoral rules): electoral design (majoritarian vs proportional) strongly influences the number of viable parties.
NZ’s case shows that electoral reform (MMP) can drive fragmentation and multi-party governance, though social cleavages also exist and evolve with time.
What is a party’s purpose and function inside a democracy?
Connect rulers to the ruled by gathering public feedback and aggregating interests.
Articulate policy positions and recruit/train future leaders.
Provide an organizing framework for volunteers and donors; facilitate fundraising and campaigning.
In NZ, parties have branches and affiliated groups (e.g., youth, women, LGBTQI) and often maintain formal relationships with unions and donor networks.
How parties operate in NZ's political system:
To stand for parliament, parties must register with the Electoral Commission: 500 members, a constitution, a logo, and other formal requirements.
The Electoral Commission provides information on registered parties, their leaders, websites, and governing documents.
Te Ara (the Encyclopedia of New Zealand) also contains entries about parties and their histories.
Party discipline and parliamentary dynamics:
MPs in a party may be expected to vote with the party line; deviations can trigger consequences (e.g., “swallowing dead rats” – compromising personal stance for party unity).
In NZ, there have been notable cases of MPs crossing or breaking ranks, with varying consequences (e.g., conscience votes vs. party discipline).
Mechanisms to manage party discipline have included expulsion provisions or by-elections in some periods, and attempts to introduce formal rules to remove MPs who leave the party (these rules have had mixed implementation and controversial results).
Why join a political party?
Access to networks, campaign resources, fundraising databases, and experienced campaign staff; mentorship and candidate development.
Pathways to influence policy development and future leadership roles; opportunities to influence the party’s direction.
The NZ Greens, for example, emphasize mass participation and accessibility; other parties rely on a mix of mass and elite structures.
Types of party families and political branding:
Left-right spectrum (economic policy): Labour on the center-left; National on center-right; Greens positioned on left with strong social justice emphasis; ACT more liberal on economic issues but conservative on social issues.
Post-material and other dimensions: post-materialist concerns (environment, social justice) vs material concerns (economic growth, wages, welfare).
Cross-cutting families: blue-green blends, Maori-specific parties, and issue-driven parties.
Why NZ has not a fully radical party system:
While there are many minor parties, threshold rules and the electoral system make it challenging for smaller parties to cross into Parliament consistently.
The 5% party vote threshold and district-electorate dynamics shape parliamentary representation and coalition formation.
Electoral systems and party-system theory: majoritarian vs proportional and beyond
Majoritarian (winner-takes-all) systems:
Typically produce two dominant parties; examples include majoritarian arrangements where the winner takes most representation in a district.
In such systems, coalitions and centrist parties may emerge, but governance often requires broad cross-party support.
Visual intuition: in a four-candidate race, the winner takes all; other candidates gain no seats, even if they have substantial support.A wins if they have the most votes by a slim margin, while B, C, and D receive nothing.
Proportional representation systems:
Seats are allocated proportionally to vote share; a party with 10% of votes gets roughly 10% of seats, enabling multiple parties to enter parliament.
This often leads to coalition governments and more diverse representation.
The NZ shift with MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional):
Introduced in 1996; reduced dominance of two parties and increased the number of parties in Parliament.
Possible outcomes include more coalition governments and a broader range of policy voices in decision-making.
Two competing explanations for party-system structure:
Sociological explanation (social cleavages): key divisions in society (e.g., class, rural-urban, religion, post-material values) shape party formation and alignments; cleavages create stable party blocs.
Institutional explanation (electoral rules): the design of the electoral system shapes the number and type of parties that can win seats; majoritarian systems yield fewer parties, proportional systems yield more.
Jack Nagel (1994) and the theoretical ceiling on party numbers:
Nagel’s framework considers how many parties can survive given the number of issue dimensions (cleavages) and the electoral threshold.
Extreme theoretical example: if many parties each capture a small share (e.g., 5%), and many electorates exist (e.g., 72), a large number of parties could appear; NZ’s actual outcome is more modest due to practical constraints and cleavages.
Practical takeaway: the number of parties is not fixed; it depends on issue structure, population diversity, and electoral rules.
NZ’s historical takeaway:
Before MMP: NZ had a de facto two-party system with Labour and National dominating; minor parties occasionally entered Parliament.
After MMP: fragmentation increased; new parties (NZ First, ACT, Maori Party, Greens, United Future, etc.) gained representation; 2023 saw 6 parties enter Parliament from the party vote, with 11 failing to cross the threshold.
Key terms and concepts for exams
Party and electoral concepts:
Political party: organized group seeking political power, distinct from lobby groups; forms policy, recruits candidates, and channels feedback from the public.
Mass membership vs elite party: membership size and constituency; impact on democracy and governance.
Catchall party: broad appeal spanning multiple demographics.
Single-issue party: focuses on one policy issue; may struggle without broad coalition support.
Personality-driven party: branding around a leader rather than a broad platform.
Blue-green party: branding that blends environmental concerns with liberal-conservative economic positioning.
Left-right spectrum: traditional economic orientation; Labour (left) vs National (center-right).
Post-materialism: shift from material needs (income, housing) to social and environmental concerns.
Party-system dynamics:
Dominant party system: one party consistently dominates; competition exists but a single party remains in power.
Two-party system: two major parties compete for government; smaller parties struggle to win seats.
Multi-party system: several parties have representation; coalitions are common.
Institutional vs sociological explanations:
Cleavages: deep social divisions that shape political coalitions (e.g., class, rural-urban, religion, post-material concerns).
Electoral rules: majoritarian vs proportional; threshold rules; electoral district design.
NZ-specific concepts:
MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional): dual ballot for electorate MPs and party list MPs; leads to proportional representation in Parliament.
5% party-vote threshold: to gain seats via the party list, a party must receive at least 5\% of the party vote.
2-vote system in local elections: voters can cast two votes in some wards/local boards; one vote for a candidate and one for a ticket or another candidate.
Walker jumping / carton popping: terms for party-switching behavior by MPs; implies potential shifts in party control and by-elections.
Gatekeeping and accountability: debates about how parties vet candidates; public interest in ensuring sane and capable representatives.
Practical implications and reflections
Voter information shortcuts:
Party brands help voters quickly gauge priorities, but they may obscure differences among candidates within a ticket.
Voters should verify candidate records, consult local consultations, and consider whether party platforms align with local needs.
Local governance and politics:
Local politics tends to be less party-driven but not truly non-political; branding can influence voters, while governance requires local consultation and responsiveness to community input.
Electoral design and democracy:
Raising or lowering the party-threshold has trade-offs: more voices and representation vs potential fragmentation and governance challenges.
A balance between inclusion (more parties) and governability (stable coalitions) remains a central policy question for NZ and other democracies.
References and further reading (types of sources mentioned in lecture)
Electoral Commission: information about registered parties, logos, constitutions, and party history.
Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand: entries on political parties and NZ political history.
Parliament and legislative materials: lists of current parties in Parliament; historical party dynamics.
Academic perspectives: Jack Nagel (1994) on party-system dynamics; sociological vs institutional explanations of party fragmentation.
Textbook references for further reading on NZ politics, party systems, and electoral reform.
Notable examples cited in lecture:
Cannabis legalization party (issue-based party) and its electoral performance relative to its issue salience.
Local party tickets (e.g., Putting People First, Communities and Residents) and their role in Auckland governance.
The role of party discipline and notable cases of MPs crossing or forming new parties (e.g., Winston Peters and NZ First; Jamie Lee-Ross and internal party controversies).
Quick study prompts (to check understanding)
Explain the difference between a mass-membership party and an elite party; give NZ examples where relevant.
Describe how MMP changed NZ’s party system and what its implications are for coalition governments.
What are the potential advantages and drawbacks of lowering the party vote threshold from 5\% to something lower (e.g., 2.5\% or 10\%)?
Define walker jumping and discuss potential consequences for government stability and by-elections.
Compare majoritarian and proportional systems with respect to the number of parties that typically win seats and form governments.
Discuss the ethical and practical implications of “keeping politics out of local government” in light of legal requirements for consultation and local autonomy.
Identify at least three factors that influence whether a local ticket is successful in elections, beyond traditional party branding.
Next steps for study
Review the NZ Electoral Commission site for current party registrations and recent election results.
Read about the 1994 Nagel framework and how social cleavages interact with electoral systems to shape party systems.
Examine recent NZ local government elections (Albany, North Shore, etc.) to see how local tickets function in practice and how voters respond to brand and candidate quality.
Prepare a short comparative note on how a dominant party system differs from a coalition-based multi-party system, with NZ as a case study.