It seems that this country has a large number of so-called "safe seats". The MPs that hold these seats have done so for years, and generally it is taken for granted that they will continue to do so until they choose to retire, both by the people, and by the MP themselves.
Why is that?
MMP's two vote system is supposed to allow people to choose the PERSON they think will best represent thier ELECTORATE, who will do the most for them, who will ensure that they get a fair share of the pie, and who can relay thier voice to parliament - regardless of party political lines. In my opinion, one should not consider too much "what party is this person standing for", they should consider "what can this person do for this electorate" when casting thier electorate vote.
So before you vote for your incumbent Electorate MP in the General Election, why not take a few minutes to ask yourself "what has this MP done for this electorate in his last term?". I bet in many cases, you'll be hard pressed to find something, so how about you give somebody else a go.
In many of these electorates, perhaps it's time to give those long standing incumbants a wake up call to say "hey, if you want to be our MP, you better get working for this electorate first, and the rest of the country second".
Other related posts:
Live by the sword
Diabetics - Deadline For Strips On Repeat - 1 March
3 News: What is your personal imcome...
Comment by TinyTim, on 21-Oct-2008 07:22
Last time I voted for Blumsky (Nat) for Wellington Central, even though I didn't give National my party vote. Blumsky is passionate about Wellington, he did a great job as mayor, so I thought he'd be the best choice as MP.