Here's a simple question, or two, around MMP. 

Why is it a couple of billionaires who have supposedly destroyed the system? Which, by the way, they haven't. But that's the question being asked. 

Why is it a couple of billionaires and not the Māori Party? 

And did either of them destroy the system, or simply utilise the system so they could maximise their advantage? Sort of like the whole idea behind elections, where you say and do stuff that will get you the support you need. 

National's electorate success is actually an outstanding result, given how well 42 people clearly did in their local areas. The Māori Party is the same – a good result. 

Most importantly, none of this breaks any laws or rules. The upset seems to be based around intent. 

What is the intent of MMP? The intent is to elect a government. 

Like all systems, if you want, and we have, you can debate the ups and downs, the good and bads and the simplicities and complexities of any given system. None of them are perfect. 

But the real trick is when you get a result you don't like, don't whine. 

Personally, the weak point of MMP for me has always been the coattail. An electorate win carries more weight than a party vote. One seat and 2% is another seat for free. It's stupid, but it's worked for various people over various elections. 

This time National did well electorally and gets an overhang, but so did the Māori Party. Why bang on about billionaires? Why is the billionaire play any more or less egregious, or clever, than the Māori play? 

The gnashing of teeth is all coming from the left and the left are sore losers. 

The Greens are still banging on about voter suppression, when the real story is the one million people who were enrolled and could have voted for them, but didn't. 

Where is the outrage over laziness and complacency? And, by the way, do we have a single story about anyone who turned up on Saturday to vote but couldn't because they were unaware they had 10 months to enrol? It's made-up aggro. 

The moment you have electorates dividing up the countryside, and two votes, and an element of proportionality with various machinations, you have a potpourri of potential outcomes. 

And that is all that has happened here. It's not a scandal. It doesn't need to be a bitch-athon. It is an election under the system we voted twice for. 

End of. 

Here's a simple question, or two, around MMP.&nbsp;
Why is it a couple of billionaires who have supposedly destroyed the system? Which, by the way, they haven't. But that's the question being asked.&nbsp;
Why is it a couple of billionaires and not the Māori Party?&nbsp;
And did either of them destroy the system, or simply utilise the system so they could maximise their advantage? Sort of like the whole idea behind elections, where you say and do stuff that will get you the support you need.&nbsp;
National's electorate success is actually an outstanding result, given how well 42 people clearly did in their local areas. The Māori Party is the same – a good result.&nbsp;
Most importantly, none of this breaks any laws or rules. The upset seems to be based around intent.&nbsp;
What is the intent of MMP? The intent is to elect a government.&nbsp;
Like all systems, if you want, and we have, you can debate the ups and downs, the good and bads and the simplicities and complexities of any given system. None of them are perfect.&nbsp;
But the real trick is when you get a result you don't like, don't whine.&nbsp;
Personally, the weak point of MMP for me has always been the coattail. An electorate win carries more weight than a party vote. One seat and 2% is another seat for free. It's stupid, but it's worked for various people over various elections.&nbsp;
This time National did well electorally and gets an overhang, but so did the Māori Party. Why bang on about billionaires? Why is the billionaire play any more or less egregious, or clever, than the Māori play?&nbsp;
The gnashing of teeth is all coming from the left and the left are sore losers.&nbsp;
The Greens are still banging on about voter suppression, when the real story is the one million people who were enrolled and could have voted for them, but didn't.&nbsp;
Where is the outrage over laziness and complacency? And, by the way, do we have a single story about anyone who turned up on Saturday to vote but couldn't because they were unaware they had 10 months to enrol? It's made-up aggro.&nbsp;
The moment you have electorates dividing up the countryside, and two votes, and an element of proportionality with various machinations, you have a potpourri of potential outcomes.&nbsp;
And that is all that has happened here. It's not a scandal. It doesn't need to be a bitch-athon. It is an election under the system we voted twice for.&nbsp;
End of.&nbsp;

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show.

Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda.

The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion, delivers the best talent, and always leaves you wanting more.

The Mike Hosking Breakfast always cuts through and delivers the best daily on Newstalk ZB.

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show. Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda. The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion, delivers the best talent, and always leaves you wanting more. The Mike Hosking Breakfast always cuts through and delivers the best daily on Newstalk ZB.

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show.Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda.The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion,...

The Mike Hosking Breakfast

Mike's Minute: A rort of the system or what we voted for?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/a75534e5-9821-415f-bc54-b4fe0163b67a/transcript