Mandatory Proportional Governance (MPG)
A thought exercise on a collaborative government approach
I’m a systems thinker with lots of big ideas, small ideas, and everything in between. I don’t always write them down, but this one has stuck.
Every time I’ve mentioned it, people have been curious.
I’ve created System Possibilities as a place to put my ideas when I think they may prompt interesting discussions. Not polished solutions, just "what ifs" that might reframe how to think about systems.
This is my first one, so, why not start big? Why not start with the system of our country?
I’ve been wondering if the way we do politics is keeping pace with how we live?
Life is more complex. We form opinions differently. Politics seems more adversarial than ever.
I wonder if that’s a cycle. Politics reinforcing society, and society reinforcing politics. If that’s true, could we break that cycle?
MMP gave us proportional representation in Parliament, but what if we had proportionality in forming the government itself?
We talk a lot about representation in Parliament. We talk much less about representation in governance.
So, what if……?
I believe that systems can set people up to succeed or let them down. I wonder if our political system is setting up politicians to succeed on our behalf, or not.
If they aren’t, how might the system improve that?
What better way to explore a big system idea than to develop a new one? Kind of a visual hypothesis to trigger ideas and concepts.
I’m calling it Mandatory Proportional Governance (MPG).
From MMP to MPG perhaps?
Instead of governments being formed by the parties most able to agree, what if the first 61 seats automatically formed the governing group?
What if the system required parties representing the largest share of voters to take a greater responsibility in working through solutions, despite their differences. What if that visible effort of collaboration became the more dominant way of showing voters what parties stand for, rather than simply campaigning against each other?
What if influence wasn’t only about forming a government?
The MPG idea is pretty simple: the majority party still leads, but the governing group reflects the first 61 seats.
Smaller parties might have less influence over executive formation, but could have more freedom to be genuinely representative. No longer so focused on positioning themselves primarily as potential governing partners.
They could focus on, ideas, policies, communities, scrutiny and long term advocacy, and continue to persuade voters to grow their support.
The majority party could not always rely on their co-governing parties to vote on their policies, so their relationships with smaller parties would require ongoing investment and collaboration.
What if that meant smaller parties helped society think about influence differently? A seat at the table, influence in the room, a powerful vote both in and out of government?
What if smaller parties campaigned on the specific influence they’d have, on health, environment, education, on the communities they stand for, on their vision of a legacy for New Zealand?
What if our systems could evolve?
I imagine a system that might seem like a radical shift, but at its heart preserves:
- leadership
- accountability
- proportional representation
- opposition
- multiple party representation, and
- scrutiny
But it does introduce an obligation for major parties to work through their differences towards better outcomes for the country.
What if politics could model collaboration in action?
What if no vote felt wasted?
While it might not seem feasible at first glance, public servants spend their careers implementing policies and delivering services they would not necessarily have designed themselves. Their responsibility is not to agree with every decision. Their responsibility is to give objective, free and frank advice, based on research and evidence. Elected Governments make decisions and then public servants make them work as intended.
What if politicians also worked this way, but:
- with public visibility if they didn’t agree with the plan,
- clear they would go in another direction with more influence, but
- committed to working as a governing party to make the best of policy decisions. To serve everyone.
Is MPG the next big political shift?
Highly unlikely. But can it provide food for thought? Is it a tasty brain snack?
What if it sparks a completely different idea from someone else that is the next shift?
That is the purpose of a System Possibility. Not to find the answer, but to prompt more questions.