new zealand electoral commission research

The Spinoff

Politics January 17, 2024

Electoral review’s major recommendations ruled out on release of final report.

• Share Story

The independent electoral review has released its final report, including more than a hundred recommendations. But the new minister for justice has already signalled that he won’t be taking many of the major changes on board. 

As he released the final report of the Independent Electoral Review yesterday, justice minister Paul Goldsmith simultaneously ruled out implementing several of its major recommendations.

The review was commissioned in 2022 by then justice minister Kris Faafoi, with an independent panel of experts appointed to take a comprehensive look at the electoral system, with the goals of increasing fairness, updating laws and processes and making the system clearer and more accessible. 

It received more than 7,500 submissions and in June last year released its interim report , which recommended some substantial changes including lowering the voting age to 16, reducing the party vote threshold, and holding a referendum on the length of the parliamentary term.

The final report retains those recommendations, but while the new government has not yet released its formal response to the review, Goldsmith said in a press release that it would not be accepting many of the bolder recommendations – including increasing the number of MPs in accordance with population growth, allowing prisoners to vote and lowering the voting age to 16.  

Here’s a quick round-up of the major recommendations in the final report and how the government’s immediate response to them. The formal response will likely include more details about whether the government plans to implement any of the other recommendations, including around election financing. 

Yes to a four-year term referendum

The electoral review has recommended a referendum on whether New Zealand adopts a four-year electoral term, or retains the current three-year cycle. A referendum, rather than a straight-up endorsement of a longer term, is an attempt to balance arguments for and against a longer term, the report says. With one year out of three currently consumed by campaigning, a longer term could make the government more effective, create more time for scrutiny of legislation in select committees and save money on election costs. But these advantages aren’t guaranteed, and with fewer checks on the New Zealand government than systems with a lower and upper house there’s an argument that this would reduce the power of voters to change governments they’re unhappy with. 

The new coalition government is certainly supportive of a longer term referendum. In 2021, Act had a member’s bill proposing the government adopt a four-year term. Instigating a referendum on a four-year term was part of the National-Act coalition agreement that formed the current government. 

“The Independent Electoral Review’s endorsement of Act’s plan for a referendum on the parliamentary term is a bright spot amid a list of otherwise dopey ideas,” Act leader David Seymour said in a press release after the final report came out yesterday. 

There’s historical precedent to a referendum on term length – a longer term was also recommended by the panel that proposed MMP. Referendums in 1967 and 1990 rejected extending term length. The Future for Local Government review has also recommended that local government elections in New Zealand move to a four year cycle. 

Te Tiriti and elections

The review says that the rights of Māori to be represented in the political system, as laid out in te Tiriti, have not always been applied in the New Zealand political system. The panel recommends clarifying the role for te Tiriti o Waitangi in how elections are run and governed. This includes making upholding te Tiriti principles a key objective of the Electoral Commission under the Electoral Act. The review also recommends working with Māori to enable Māori governance over Māori electoral data and creating a new fund for engaging with Māori communities and candidates throughout the election process. 

An “entrenchment” rule in New Zealand’s electoral law means that some provisions, such as the age when you are allowed to vote, cannot be changed unless 75% of parliament supports them – meaning there must be widespread support for any changes. The review advocates that the existence of Māori electorates be included in this entrenchment provision. Because Māori are younger and more likely to be imprisoned than the New Zealand population as a whole, the review panel said that changing voting eligibility for 16-year-olds and prisoners would also help uphold the Treaty. 

Goldsmith did not comment on these recommendations, but given the review of legislation referencing the Treaty principles promised in the National-NZ First coalition agreement, the support of a Treaty Principles Bill to first reading in the National-Act agreement and the varying degrees of scepticism of all parties towards co-governance, it seems unlikely they will be taken up. In the Act press release, Seymour confirmed “special protection of Māori interests” would be one of the recommendations his party would block.

No votes for prisoners or kids

In June 2020, the Labour-led government amended electoral eligibility to allow prisoners who had sentences of less than three years to vote. The electoral review has gone one further, recommending that all prisoners should be allowed to vote “because disenfranchisement should not form part of someone’s punishment”. It also recommended that people in prison should be allowed to stand for parliament. 

Reviewing research from other countries, the review also recommended that those 16 and over be given the right to vote, as “16-year-olds are just as capable of making informed decisions about how to vote as 18-year-olds”. A lower voting age could also increase political engagement. Because elections occur every three years at the moment, this would mean in practice that many people would still be casting their first votes at 17 or 18 instead. 

Young people supporting the idea of voting for those 16 and over filed a complaint in the Supreme Court in November 2022, resulting in a declaration that not allowing 16-year-olds to vote was age discrimination and inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.

Goldsmith said that both these recommendations would be “ruled out immediately”.  The previous Labour government had initiated the legislative process to allow 16-year-olds to vote in local government elections, with a law passing its first reading, but this will presumably not be supported by the new government. 

Another recommendation Goldsmith ruled out was the repeal of the offence of “treating” voters with food, beverage and entertainment before elections.

Electorate ratio and MMP threshold

The report recommended that the ratio of list and electorate seats remain the same. At the moment, new electorates are added when the population grows, so that each electorate represents about the same number of people; because the number of MPs has been 120 since MMP came in (unless there is an overhang, as happened in 2023), this means that there are fewer list seats over time. In the first MMP election there were 65 electorate and 55 list seats; in 2023, there were 72 electorates and 48 list seats. 

The electoral review report says that maintaining a ratio of three electorate seats to two list seats would mean that parliament continues to represent people proportionally, as the MMP system attempts to do, and maintains diversity – more women and Māori are elected from lists than electorates. This would mean that the size of parliament would slowly grow. However, this recommendation has also been ruled out by Goldsmith.

Another recommendation to make sure people’s votes are represented would be to lower the threshold for a party to get into parliament from 5% of the vote to 3.5% of the vote, about 100,000 votes based on the current Aotearoa population. Other countries with proportional systems have lower thresholds – Denmark’s is 2%, and Austria and Sweden’s are 4%. The review said that 5% was a barrier to new parties, and created more “wasted votes”. Neither Goldsmith nor Seymour commented on this proposal, so its fate remains unclear. 

More Reading

Where does political money come from.

Private donors are a huge source of cash and controversy in New Zealand politics. Parties also get cash from the government’s broadcasting allocation to spend on advertising . The review panel has a number of suggestions to increase transparency and reduce fears of undue influence on politics. This includes changing the rules so only individuals registered to vote can donate; corporations, iwi, trade unions and private trusts would not be allowed to give parties money. It also suggests increasing the frequency of donation reporting during election years, lowering the amount that can be donated anonymously to $500, and placing spending limits on parties for advertising. Instead of the broadcasting allocation, which provides money for advertising, the report recommends a pool of state funding, with a base amount for all parties, then more depending on size. 

Goldsmith has yet to rule out adopting these recommendations but, Act, which gets more private donations per MP than any other political party, was not supportive. “Taxpayer funding for political parties would have a corrosive effect on our democracy,” Seymour said.

The Spinoff’s political coverage is powered by the generous support of our members . If you value what we do and believe in the importance of independent and freely accessible journalism – tautoko mai,  donate today .

View all Ministers

View all Portfolios

Independent panel appointed to review electoral law

Justice Minister Kris Faafoi today announced appointments to the independent panel that will lead a review of New Zealand’s electoral law.

“This panel, appointed by an independent panel of experts, aim to make election rules clearer and fairer, to build more trust in the system and better support people to exercise their democratic right to vote,” Kris Faafoi said.

“We do have a world-class electoral system. But we need to make sure the rules remain fit for purpose and meet the needs of our future voters.”

The Government announced the review last year which will take place in two parts: a broad review led by the independent panel over the next 18 months, and targeted changes ahead of the 2023 General Election.

The Independent Review will look at elections rules such as:

• voting age and overseas voting
• funding of political parties
• the length of the parliamentary term
• the Electoral Commission’s recommendations on MMP:
• changes to the party vote threshold
• one seat electorate rule
• ratio of electorate seats to list seats
• the overhang rule

The independent panel, which was appointed through a bipartisan process, will be chaired by Deborah Hart, a highly experienced director, lawyer, and chief executive.

The other members are Māori academic and political commentator Dr Maria Bargh; electoral law expert Professor Andrew Geddis; disability advocate and law student Alice Mander; former Chief Electoral Officer Robert Peden; and lecturer and New Zealand Election Study co-lead Dr Lara Greaves.

“Maintaining public confidence in elections is critical for our democracy. This review is a once-in-a generation opportunity to consider how to make our electoral laws clearer, fairer, and more accessible,” Kris Faafoi said.

“I have consulted with all parliamentary party leaders and Parliament’s Justice Committee on the Terms of Reference for the review. Consultation also included other groups, such as Māori organisations, youth organisations, universities and the New Zealand Law Society when seeking nominations for potential panel members.

“It is critical that the review has broad public and cross-party support. Appointing an independent panel will ensure that the review is fair and impartial.

“I am confident that the panel members have the right mix of skills, expertise, and diverse perspectives to lead this important mahi. Public engagement will be a key part of the review, so New Zealanders will have a chance to share their views before the panel makes its recommendations,” Kris Faafoi said.

The independent panel will consider a range of issues including the length of the parliamentary term, the voting age, the funding of political parties, and the Electoral Commission’s 2012 recommendations on changes to MMP.

Panel Chair Deborah Hart says “The review is a significant opportunity to independently evaluate all our electoral laws by listening to the voices of the people to ensure the overall framework and regime is fit for purpose and future proofed to best serve Aotearoa New Zealand. I am honoured to chair that review.”

The independent panel’s final report is expected by the end of 2023.

More about the panel members:

Deborah Hart (Chair) is a consultant with experience as a lawyer, director, chief executive, and government relations specialist. She is currently chair of the Consumer Advocacy Council and the Holocaust Centre of New Zealand, on the board of DocEdge, and is the director of ASH NZ. Since 2013, she has been a panel member of the Human Rights Review Tribunal and has previously served on the expert reference group for the Family Justice review and undertaken the independent review of the Banking Ombudsman.

Dr Maria Bargh (Deputy Chair) (Te Arawa, Ngāti Awa) is an Associate Professor at Victoria University of Wellington and the former head of Te Kawa a Māui – School of Māori Studies.  She has served on a range of governance boards and currently serves on several academic editorial boards, including the Policy Quarterly Journal. Her research focuses on Māori politics and representation and the New Zealand electoral system and was recognised by a Royal Society Te Puāwaitanga Research Excellence Award in 2020.

Professor Andrew Geddis is a leading academic from the University of Otago and a commentator on public and electoral law. He has written a much-cited textbook on electoral law in New Zealand and was a member of the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee.

Dr Lara Greaves (Ngāpuhi/Pākehā/Tararā) is a political scientist at the University of Auckland specialising in New Zealand and Māori politics. She has expertise in the New Zealand electoral system and the wider constitutional context, including Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Alice Mander is the co-president and founder of the National Disabled Students' Association, as well as being a full-time law, film, and sociology student. She has won numerous academic awards, including the NZ Law Review prize and the Chris Highfield Memorial Prize in Public Law. She is a strong advocate for removing barriers to participation for the disabled community.

Robert Peden is a former Chief Electoral Officer and chief executive of the Electoral Commission who oversaw three general elections, four referendums, and many by-elections. He has significant experience providing advice to ministers on public, constitutional, and electoral law and policy.

• Ngā kōrero mō mātou
• Whakapā mai
• Whai putanga

The 2020 General Election and referendums: results, analysis, and demographics of the 53rd Parliament

Click here for PDF

Executive Summary

• The General Election of 17 October 2020 was New Zealand’s 53 rd since New Zealand held its first in 1853, making New Zealand the ninth-oldest representative democracy in the world.
• The final results confirm five parties have won a total of 120 seats in Parliament, comprising 72 electorate seats and 48 list seats.
• New Zealand’s per capita representation, at 2.4 MPs per 100,000 population, is lower than the 37 OECD member average of 2.7 MPs per 100,000 people for lower chambers.
• The Labour Party captured 50.01% of the party vote entitling it to 65 seats in parliament.
• This result is the highest share of the party vote, the highest number of seats, and the first single-party majority government achieved under MMP.
• Under FPP it took an average 14.4 days from the date of the election to the swearing in (government formation) of ministers; under all MMP elections the average is 25.4 days.
• Of 72 electorates, 37 were won by candidates with a majority (over 50%) of valid votes.
• Jacinda Ardern (Labour) achieved the largest winning margin (21,246) in Mt Albert.
• Willow-Jean Prime (Labour) had the lowest winning margin (163) in Northland.
• A record 58 women were elected in 2020, comprising almost half (48.3%) of the 53 rd
• There are 25 MPs who have self-identified as being of Māori descent, compared with 28 in the previous parliament. MPs of Māori descent comprise 20.8% of the 53 rd
• There are a record 11 MPs who identify as being of Pacific Peoples ethnicity (9.2% of Parliament).
• There are eight MPs who identify as being of Asian ethnicity (6.7% of Parliament).
• For the first time the New Zealand Parliament has two MPs from the Middle Eastern/Latin American/African (MELAA) grouping.
• The youngest MP is 26 years old; the average age of the 53 rd Parliament is 47.3 years; the oldest MP is 68 years old.
• Over two-thirds of MPs (68%) are beginning their third term or less in 2020; that is 82 MPs have six years or less of parliamentary experience.
• There are now over a million voters (1,078,100) in the 60+ age group, which now accounts for over one-quarter (28.6%) of all voters.
• Of an estimated 3.8 million people eligible to vote in 2020, almost 900,000 people failed to do so. Of these one quarter (25.4%) were not enrolled, while three-quarters (74.6%) were enrolled, but did not turn out to vote.
• Nearly two-thirds (65.9%) of voters approved the referendum on the End of Life Choice Act.
• Just over half (51.2%) of voters did not support the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill.
• The next General Election in New Zealand is likely to be held before Saturday, 13 January 2024.

Final Results after Special Votes

The General Election of 17 October 2020 was New Zealand’s 53 rd since New Zealand held its first in 1853, with the first Parliament convening in the (then) capital Auckland in 1854. This makes New Zealand the ninth-oldest representative democracy in the world, when ranked in terms of representative parliaments nationally elected on a continuous basis. [1]

The 2020 election was the ninth election conducted under the Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting system that was first used for the 1996 general election, and the first to return a single party majority government using MMP. Following the counting of special votes and the release of the official results, there are five political parties and 120 members represented in the 53 rd Parliament.

This research paper summarizes differences between the preliminary (election-night count) and the final election results, compares the 2020 election results with those of 2017, shows trends in voter turnout, and analyses the demographic makeup of the 53 rd Parliament. It also examines the results of the two referendums held at the same time as the 2020 election – the referendum on the End of Life Choice Act 2019, and the referendum on the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill.

Voting in the 2020 General Election began on 30 September 2020 when eligible overseas voters were able to cast a special vote – either by post, or in person at overseas posts. Voters in New Zealand were able to vote in advance of polling day by casting an advance vote during the advance voting period from 3 October to 16 October.

Several measures were put in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These included: advance voting starting two days earlier than initially planned; 1,552 advance voting booths (compared to 485 in 2017) to help reduce queues and give voters more space; larger venues used for voting places such as schools, halls and marae; more limited use of voting places in shopping malls due to the need to provide room for physical distancing. [2]

Overall, almost two million (1,976,996) advance votes were cast in the 2020 election, over two-thirds (67.7%) of the nearly 3 million (2,919,073) total votes cast. In 2017, just over 1 million (1,240,740) voters cast an advance vote (47.2% of the total cast); in 2014, 702,137 voters cast an advance vote (28.7% of the total cast); in 2011 324,336 advance votes were cast, or 14.2% of the total cast. [3]

Table 1 shows trends in the number of candidates, seats, and parties for every MMP election since 1996. It shows, for example, that the total number of candidates contesting the 2020 election (654) was the highest since 2008. The 53 list only candidates was the lowest under MMP. The 48 list seats are also the lowest number of list seats in parliament to date (40% of all seats); the number of electorate seats is now 72 (60% of all seats), up from the 65 electorate seats first allocated in 1996. In its 2012 review of MMP, the Electoral Commission noted that consideration should be given to fixing the ratio of electorate seats to list seats at 60:40 to help maintain the diversity of representation and proportionality in parliament. [4] The 60:40 ratio (72 electorate seats to 48 list seats) was reached at the 2020 election as a result of the redrawing of electoral boundaries by the Representation Commission following the 2018 Census.

Also of note is that 2020 is the fifth election under MMP when no overhang has been created, and that both the 2017 and 2020 elections have returned just five parties to parliament, the lowest number in MMP elections to date.

Table 1: Candidates, seats, parties at New Zealand general elections, 1996-2020

The number of members of parliament (MP) per capita in 2020 was 2.4 MPs per 100,000 people, or one MP per 42,512 people. Table 1 shows that this represents a 25 percent decline on the 3.2 MPs per capita in the first MMP in 1996. This has occurred as a result of the number of seats being fixed at 120, while New Zealand’s population has grown substantially in the last quarter of a century. Under the First-Past-the-Post (FPP) voting system, the number of seats was periodically adjusted upwards as New Zealand’s population grew.

Compared to overseas jurisdictions, New Zealand ranks 14 th highest among the 37 members of the OECD, in terms of per capita representation, but still below the OECD average of 2.7 MPs per 100,000 people for lower chambers. Of the 37 OECD members, over half have bicameral parliaments and 17 members (including New Zealand) have unicameral parliaments. The average among these unicameral parliaments is 4.3 MPs per 100,000 people. On this measure, New Zealand ranks 12 th out of 17 OECD members, with just five OECD members – Portugal, Hungary, Israel, Turkey, and the Republic of Korea – having lower levels of representation per capita than New Zealand.

Table 2: Final party vote and seat count [5]

Table 2 shows the impact of the final vote count (including 488,776 valid special votes – accounting for 16.9% of the total valid votes cast in the 2020 general election), on the election night count. The final count saw the vote share of the Labour Party increase 0.9 percentage points to 50.0% of the vote, entitling the Labour Party to 65 seats, one more than on election night. The National Party’s final share of the party vote dropped 1.2 percentage points to 25.6%, resulting in the National Party’s initial allocation of 35 seats being reduced to a final entitlement of 33 seats. Te Paati Māori’s final share of the party vote increased 0.2 percentage points, enough to entitle the party to two seats in total, one more than on election night. For other parties, special votes altered their final share of the party vote without altering their final seat entitlement. The total number of MPs in the 53 rd Parliament (120) was not affected by the final count.

Figure 1 shows the impact of special votes on the provisional election night allocation of seats across MMP elections to date. In 2020, for example, special votes impacted three parties and four seats. The Labour Party and Te Paati Māori gained one more seat while the National Party lost two seats from their election night total. More extensive changes occurred in 1999 when the impact of special votes meant five parties and 14 seats were affected. Significantly, the 1999 election-night coalition majority enjoyed by the Labour and Alliance parties was removed after the counting of special votes; subsequently those parties operated as a minority coalition government. Special votes in 1999 also markedly affected the Green Party. On election night it had no seats in parliament; after special votes were counted the Green party was entitled to seven seats in Parliament, including one electorate seat. In 2005 special votes reduced the total number of MPs in parliament from 122 to 121 and thereby reduced the threshold required for confidence and supply for the governing coalition parties.

Figure 1: The impact of special votes: seat Gains or losses by party

Table 3 compares the 2017 and 2020 election results for those parties with parliamentary representation in either 2017 or 2020. The New Zealand Labour Party saw an increase in both its party vote share (up 13.1 percentage points) and its seat entitlement (19 more seats) between the two elections. The National Party lost 18.8 percentage points and 23 seats compared to 2017. The Green Party gained 1.6 percentage points and two seats, ACT New Zealand gained 7.1 percentage points and nine seats, and the Te Paati Māori achieved the same party vote in 2020 as in 2017 but gained two seats. The New Zealand First Party lost 4.6 percentage points and all nine seats it won at the 2017 election.

Table 3: Party vote share and seats by parliamentary party: 2017 and 2020

Government formation 1969 - 2020

New Zealand’s Westminster parliamentary system requires that ministers can only be appointed (issued ministerial warrants) if they have been elected as members of Parliament. This ensures direct accountability of those ministers to the House. There is however no statutory timeframe (contained in legislation) for issuing ministerial warrants (forming a government) following a general election.

The government formation process can begin immediately after election night. This is despite the official results of the election not being returned in the writ until two to three weeks after polling day and, as can be seen above, the potential for special votes to have significant impacts on both parties and potential coalition majorities. Although the government formation process can begin after election night it cannot conclude (by the issuing of ministerial warrants) until three conditions have been met. 

First, that, in the absence of a single party commanding a parliamentary majority, parliamentary parties need to have successfully concluded an agreement to form a government; second, that public statements have been made to that effect; and third that the Governor-General can have confidence that those public statements are correct and or that the proposed government has the confidence (majority support) in Parliament.

By constitutional convention, the Governor-General’s task in the government formation process is to ascertain where the support of the House lies, so that a Government can be appointed or confirmed in office. Accordingly, the Governor-General will, by convention, abide by the outcome of the government formation process in appointing a new ministry or accepting the right of the incumbent Government to remain in office. The Governor-General will also accept the decision of the party or parties as to which individual will lead the Government as Prime Minister.

According to Boston and Bullock, the shift to MMP was expected to make the government formation process more complicated and protracted than under FPP. [6] This was because elections resulting in single-party majority government were thought less likely, requiring negotiations among multiple parliamentary parties before a government that had the support of a majority of MPs could be formed.

Table 4 shows that the government formation process, on average, has indeed been more protracted under MMP than under FPP. Under FPP it took an average 14.4 days from the date of the election to the swearing in (government formation) of ministers; under all MMP elections the average is 25.4 days. To date the longest time to form a government was 65 days following the 1996 election, which was perhaps to be expected, given that this was the first time the government formation process under MMP took place. Excluding the 1996 election the average government formation time under MMP has been 20.5 days.

Table 4: Government formation following general elections 1969 - 2020

Table 4 also shows that the government formation process in 2020 took 20 days, which is the fourth-longest period under MMP elections to date. This is perhaps surprising, given that 2020 is the first time a single party majority government has been able to be formed, and one that did not require any negotiations of support with other parties. On 31 October, Jacinda Ardern announced that, despite the Labour Party having won enough seats to continue the Sixth Labour Government on their own, they had invited the Green Party to participate in a “cooperation agreement”. The subsequent agreement set out three areas of cooperation: achieving the purpose and goals of the Zero Carbon Act; protecting New Zealand’s environment and biodiversity; improving child wellbeing and marginalised communities. [7]

There is also no statutory requirement for ministers to be appointed prior to the opening of Parliament. A new Government would normally be in place before the new Parliament meets, but in 1996 Parliament opened before ministers were appointed, meaning that a caretaker government continued for four days beyond the opening of Parliament.

Table 4 also illustrates the legislative impact of the Constitution Act 1986 that sought to ensure a greater degree of accountability of ministers to Parliament, primarily by requiring Parliament to meet not later than six weeks after the day fixed for the return of the writs for that election. [8] As can be seen from the table, the average duration between the formation of the government and the opening of Parliament was 78 days (11 weeks) under FPP elections, compared to under two weeks (13.5 days) under MMP.

Government type 1996-2020

Table 5 shows the type of government formed following general elections, the party or parties that are a formal part of the government, and the party or parties supporting the government. As the table shows, New Zealand's experience of multi-party governments under MMP takes one of four forms: single-party majority government, coalition majority government, single-party minority government and coalition minority government.

1996 is the only election to date to result in a coalition majority government. Minority coalition governments have been most common, with five occurrences since 1996. Single-party minority governments are the next most common, with four instances during the MMP era. The 2020 election is the first to result in a single-party majority government, confirming the comment by Boston and Bulloch above that the move to proportional representation has made this type of government less likely under MMP.

Table 5: Type of Government formed under MMP elections 1996-2020

*Government support party / parties refers to those parties who promise either support or abstention on votes of “Confidence and Supply” in exchange for either ministers or spokesperson roles outside cabinet. See Jonathan Boston and David Bullock, ‘Experiments in Executive Government under MMP in New Zealand: Contrasting Approaches to Multi­Party Governance’, in New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law , Special Conference Issue: MMP and the Constitution, Vol. 7(1), June 2009.

Party Vote Share and Seats in Parliament: 1969-2020

Under elections conducted under the FPP voting system, from 1969 to 1993, representation in parliament was dominated by the two major parties, Labour and National. The MMP voting system, introduced in 1996, has seen the combined vote share of the two major parties decrease by about ten percentage points, but has more than doubled the vote share of those minor parties achieving representation in parliament. 

For example, over the nine elections conducted under FPP voting system, from 1969 to 1993, the National Party averaged 41.7% of the vote while the Labour Party averaged 41.4%. Over the nine elections conducted under the MMP voting system, from 1996 to 2020, the National Party has averaged 37.1% of the party vote which compares to the 35.9% average for the Labour Party.

However, the total vote share for the minor parties gaining representation in parliament has more than doubled under MMP compared to FPP elections – from an average of 8.5% over the FPP elections from 1969 to 1993 to an average of 22.5% under MMP elections from 1996 to 2020. In 2020 the three minor parties gaining parliamentary representation obtained well below this average at 16.6% share of the party vote; this is the second lowest (after 2017) combined share of the party vote for the minor parties in any MMP election.

Across the nine MMP elections to date, for the other current parliamentary parties who have contested more than one election, the average party vote share has been: 7.5% for the Green Party; 3.9% for ACT New Zealand; and 1.6% for Te Paati Māori.

Figure 2 shows that the Labour Party’s share of the vote in 2020 (50.01%) is not only the highest it has achieved under MMP elections to date, but also higher than any election since 1969. In fact, in only two elections in Labour’s history has the party achieved a better result – the 1938 election (55.8%) and the 1946 election (51.3%).

For the National Party the 2020 election was its worst result since 2002, and the second-worst result in the party’s history. The National Party’s best election result under MMP was achieved in 2011 with 47.3% of the vote; in only four other elections in National’s history has the party achieved a better result – 1946 (48.4%), 1949 (51.9%), 1951 (54.0%), and 1990 (47.8%).

Figure 2: Party vote share of parties represented in Parliament: 1969-2020

Differences can also be seen in terms of the share of seats in parliament under FPP or MMP elections. On average, the National and Labour parties captured 98.8% of the seats in parliament from a combined average of 83.1% of the vote from 1969 to 1993. In MMP elections between 1996 and 2020, Labour and National together have, on average, won just over three-quarters (76.7%) of the seats in parliament from a combined average of less than three-quarters (72.9%) of the total party vote. In the 2020 election, the two major parties won 81.7% of the seats between them (98 seats) from 75.6% of the total party vote.

Under FPP elections from 1969 to 1993, minor parties that gained parliamentary representation won about 1.1 seats on average each election – about 1.2% of the seats from an average of 8.5% of the vote. In MMP elections, from 1996 to 2020, minor parties that gained parliamentary representation won, combined, around 28 seats on average each election – or less than one-quarter (23.3%) of the seats from less than one quarter (22.5%) of the vote. In the 2020 election, the three minor parliamentary parties won 22 of the 120 seats (18.3%) from 16.6% of the vote – well below both the average seat share and the average vote shares for the minor parliamentary parties under MMP (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Seats won by major and minor parliamentary parties

The Electorates

Following the 2019/2020 boundary review by the Representation Commission, 35 electorates (30 general electorates and five Māori electorates) saw varying degrees of change to their boundaries. The main areas of change were to electorates in the Auckland, Waikato, Canterbury, Otago and Southland regions. A new general electorate, Takanini, was created in South Auckland, taking total general electorates to 65. The number of Māori electorates remained at seven, taking total electorates to 72. 

Of the 72 electorate candidates who won their seats on election night, 69 were confirmed as the electorate representative after the counting of special votes and the final count. In three electorates (Whangārei, Maungakiekie, and Northland) the electorate winner on election night was overturned after the counting of special votes.

Of the 72 electorate seats, a majority (46) were won by the Labour Party, 17 more seats than it held following the 2017 election. The Labour Party won 17 seats from the National Party: Whanganui, Hamilton West, East Coast, Rangitata, Hutt South, Wairarapa, Ōtaki, Nelson, Northcote, New Plymouth, Hamilton East, Ilam, Tukituki, Maungakiekie, Upper Harbour, Whangārei, and Northland. In addition, it won the new electorate of Takanini. The Labour Party lost the seat of Waiariki to Te Paati Māori.

The National Party won 23 electorates, 18 fewer than the number of electorates it won in 2017. In addition to the 17 seats it lost to the Labour Party, National also lost the seat of Auckland Central to the Green Party. ACT New Zealand won the Epsom electorate, the same electorate it held after the 2017 election. The Green Party won Auckland Central from the National Party. Te Paati Māori won the Waiariki electorate from Labour, the seat it last held in 2014.

Of 72 electorates, 37 were won by candidates with a majority (over 50%) of the valid electorate votes; 35 electorates were won with a plurality (less than 50% of the votes but more votes than any other party) of the valid electorate votes. The electorate with the lowest share of the electorate (candidate) vote was Auckland Central, where Chlöe Swarbrick (Green Party) won with 35.5% of the electorate vote. The electorate with the highest share of the electorate (candidate) vote was Māngere, where Aupito William Sio (Labour Party) won with 77.1% of the electorate vote.

Table 6 below shows both the ten electorates with the highest winning margin over the second-placed candidate, and the ten electorates with the smallest winning margin. For example, Jacinda Ardern (Labour Party) achieved the largest winning margin (21,246) in the Mt Albert electorate in 2020; Willow-Jean Prime (Labour Party) had the lowest winning margin (163) in Northland.

Table 6: Electorates with the ten largest and ten smallest winning margins in 2020

Figure 4 below looks at the top ten electorates for each party in terms of the highest number of party votes. For example, the Labour Party’s top ten electorates are spread evenly between the North and South Islands, with five top polling electorates in each island. Four of its North Island electorates are in the Wellington region, with Mangere the only Auckland electorate in Labour’s top ten. In the South Island the Taieri and Dunedin electorates are the highest-polling electorates for the Labour Party. Two Christchurch electorates and Nelson round out the Labour Party’s top ten polling electorates for the party vote. (Please note that some electorates in Figure 4 feature in the top ten electorates for more than one party.)

Figure 4: Ten electorates with highest party votes by party

By contrast, the National Party has no South Island electorates among its ten highest-polling electorates for the party vote. Five of National’s top polling electorates are in the Auckland region, with Whangaparāoa its highest-polling electorate. The remaining five highest-polling electorates are in the upper half of the North Island.

The Green Party’s ten highest-polling electorates are concentrated in the main urban centres: four in Auckland, three in Wellington, two in Christchurch, and one in Dunedin.

The Selwyn electorate in the South Island was ACT New Zealand’s highest-polling electorate. Three other South Island electorates featured in the party’s top ten, along with three from the Auckland region.

For Te Paati Māori, all seven Māori electorates featured in its ten highest-polling electorates for the party vote.

Table 7 shows the contribution of the ten-highest polling electorates to each party’s total party vote.  It shows, for example, that the Labour Party was supported by just under five in ten voters (45.1%) across its top ten electorates; this is slightly lower than its party vote share across New Zealand as a whole (50.01%).

The National Party averaged 27.7% party vote support across its top ten electorates, somewhat higher than its party vote share across New Zealand as a whole (25.6%). Likewise, both the Green Party (13.8%) and ACT New Zealand (8.9%) did considerably better across their highest-polling electorates than nationwide. Te Paati Māori had almost four times (4.5%) the party vote support in its highest-polling electorates than across New Zealand as a whole (1.2%).

The final row in the table shows the relative contribution the top ten electorates made toward each party’s total support. An even distribution would see about 14% party vote support for every ten electorates; figures higher than this show the level of concentration of party vote support among each party’s party vote support. For example, Te Paati Māori had the most concentrated support with nearly three-quarters (73.6%) of all party votes for the party coming from just ten electorates. Over a third (33.7%) of all Green Party votes were concentrated in its ten highest-polling electorates. ACT New Zealand and the National Party saw some concentration of support with 22.5% and 20.8% support respectively in those parties’ ten highest-polling electorates. The Labour Party had the least concentrated support, with less than one-fifth (17.3%) of total Labour voters coming from its ten highest-polling electorates.

Across all 72 electorates, the Labour Party achieved a majority (>50%) of the party vote in 34 electorates, and a plurality (less than half but more votes than any other party) in 37 electorates. Epsom was the only electorate in which the National Party (37.5%) achieved a greater share than Labour in the party vote (36.0%), a difference of 590 party votes.

Demographic Makeup of the 53 rd Parliament

As a proportional representation system, MMP helps voters’ party preferences to be proportionally reflected in the party composition of parliament. This has resulted in a greater number of political parties gaining representation in parliament than occurred under the FPP system. Indirectly, MMP has also contributed to achieving a parliament that is more diverse and more representative of the New Zealand population as a whole; parties are able to choose candidates who resemble the electorate in terms of demographic characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, and age. Consequently, it is argued that “one central virtue of proportional systems is the claim that they are more likely to produce a parliament which reflects the composition of the electorate”. [9]

Until the 1980s, for example, the representation of women in parliament rarely exceeded 5%.  Figure 5 shows that on gender grounds, the representativeness of parliament has increased significantly since the advent of MMP in 1996 and is now approaching the gender balance in New Zealand society as a whole. The 2020 general election saw a record 58 women elected to the 53 rd Parliament, surpassing the previous record of 46 women elected to the 52 nd Parliament in 2017. Overall, women now comprise almost half (48.3%) of the new Parliament, the highest share obtained by women since women were first eligible to stand for parliament over a century ago (1919).

Figure 5: Number and share (%) of women in Parliament after general elections 1919-2020

Internationally, this level of representation of women in parliament places New Zealand in 5 th place, up from 17 th place in 2017. According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, only Rwanda (61%), Cuba (53%), Bolivia (53%), and United Arab Emirates (50%) have higher proportions of women represented in their lower chambers. [10] Mexico (48%), Nicaragua (47%), and Sweden (47%) have similar levels of representation of women in their lower chambers as New Zealand (48.3%).

Even after the introduction of MMP, however, there are still noticeable differences between the proportion of list MPs who are women and the proportion of electorate MPs who are women. (Electorate MPs are elected through the electorate vote which is conducted under a FPP voting system). From 1996, women have been able to achieve a higher level of representation in the list seats when compared to their levels of representation in the electorate seats. Figure 6 shows the gender differences in representation between electorate and list seats.

In 1996, for example, less than one-fifth (15%) of electorate MPs were women, compared to 45% of the list MPs. In 2002 and 2014 these gender disparities were less marked, with less than a 2% divergence. In 2020 there was a ten percent divergence – 44% of electorate MPs were women compared to 54% of list MPs. Nevertheless, the 2020 election saw record levels of representation, both in women MPs’ share of electorate MPs (44%), and women MPs’ share of list MPs (54%).

Figure 6: Share of women in electorate and list seats 1969-2020

The party list mechanism under MMP has also enabled a more ethnically diverse range of candidates to be elected (see Figure 7). The 53 rd Parliament has 25 MPs who have self-identified as being of Māori descent, compared with the 28 who did so in the previous parliament. Overall, MPs who identify as being of Māori descent comprise about one-fifth (20.8%) of the new Parliament, about the same proportion of the total New Zealand population who stated they identified as being of Māori descent in the 2018 census (19.1%, or 896,567 people). [11]

The new Parliament has a record 11 MPs who identify as being of Pacific Peoples ethnicity, three more than in the previous Parliament. Overall, MPs who identify as being of Pacific Peoples ethnicity comprise 9.2% of parliament, slightly above the proportion of the population who identified as being of the Pacific Peoples ethnic group in the 2018 census (8.1%). [12]

The 53 rd Parliament has eight MPs who identify as being of Asian ethnicity, the same number as in the previous Parliament. Overall, MPs who identify as being of Asian ethnicity comprise 6.7% of the parliament, which is less than half the share (15.1%) of the population who identified as being of the Asian ethnic group in the 2018 census (15.1%).

Figure 7: Parliaments by ethnic share 1981-2020

For the first time the New Zealand Parliament has two MPs from the Middle Eastern/Latin American/African (MELAA) grouping used by Statistics New Zealand. Overall, MPs who identify as belonging to the MELAA grouping comprise 1.7% of the 53 rd parliament, which is similar to the share of the population who identified as being of the MELAA grouping in the 2018 census (1.5%).

There are 13 MPs in the 53 rd Parliament who have publicly stated that they identify as a member of the Rainbow or LGBTIQ+ community. [13]

In terms of age, Figure 8 shows that those aged 18-29 years, and those aged over 60, are under-represented in the 53 rd Parliament. These age groups comprise nearly half (21.1% and 28.6% respectively) of the New Zealand voting age cohort (18+) population, but just one-seventh (3.3% and 10.8% respectively) of the New Zealand Parliament. By contrast, the 40-49 and 50-59 age groups are over-represented in parliament when compared to the general 18+ population.

In generational terms, over two-thirds (69.2%) of the 53 rd Parliament are ‘Generation X’, less than one-quarter (23.3%) are ‘baby boomers’. There are no MPs from the generation born prior to 1946 (also known as the ‘silent generation’). In 2020 the New Zealand Parliament also has nine MPs (7.5%) representing the “millennials” (also known as “Generation Y”), or those born from 1986 to 2005. [14] The average age of the 53 rd Parliament is 47.3 years; the median age is 48.0 years. The youngest MP is 26 years old; the oldest, 68 years.

Figure 8: The composition of the 53 rd Parliament by age group

Table 8 sets out the previous occupations of MPs as a share of successive parliaments since 1996. In 2020 23 MPs (19% of all MPs) listed their previous occupation as ‘businessperson’. Since 1996, this has usually been the single biggest previous occupational category in New Zealand parliaments, apart from 1999 and 2008 when ‘teacher’ and ‘manager / administrator’ were the highest respectively. Lawyers make up about one-fifth (19%) of the 53 rd Parliament, the highest share in any parliament since 1996. A further 13% of the Parliament listed their previous occupation as a ‘manager or administrator’, confirming a recent trend for increasing numbers of these professionals to enter parliament.

Public servants, the education sector, and local government are the other most frequent occupational backgrounds for MPs, with teachers featuring less prominently from 2011. Farmers were more common in parliaments up till 1999, although teachers have outnumbered farmers in parliaments since 1996.

MPs who had a media background have become more numerous since 2011. Three percent of MPs in 2020 were previously union workers, the second-lowest share in the 1996-2020 period, while declines in the share by accountants and engineers can also be noted.

Table 8: Previous occupations of MPs as share of Parliament (%) [15]

Figure 9 shows the number of parliamentary terms for MPs in the 53 rd Parliament. The number of terms served by an MP includes complete terms and any partial or incomplete terms. The number of terms is cumulative and does not necessarily represent continuous service; that is, an MP may have had a break in their parliamentary service due to an unsuccessful election. In 2020 there are 42 new MPs without previous parliamentary experience (1 st termers), or over one-third (35%) of the 53 rd Parliament. The second-largest category is the 24 MPs entering their second term in 2020, one-fifth (20%) of the Parliament. Over two-thirds of MPs (68%) are beginning their third term or less in 2020; that is 82 MPs have six years or less of parliamentary experience. One MP has completed 11 terms and is beginning their 12 th term in 2020; that is, they begin the 2020-2023 parliamentary term with 33 years’ prior experience in parliament.

Figure 9: Parliamentary experience of MPs by term in the 53 rd Parliament

Voter Enrolment has increased since 2017

For the first time, the 2020 election saw people able to enrol and vote on Election Day. In previous elections, they had to enrol by midnight the day before Election Day. At the 2017 election approximately 19,000 people who turned up to a voting place and cast special votes on Election Day didn’t have their votes counted because they weren’t enrolled.

By the close of polls, over 3.5 million people had enrolled to vote in the 2020 general election. This was 94.1% of the estimated 3.8 million people eligible to vote (voting age population or VAP) – about one percentage point higher than the average enrolment ratio for all MMP elections (93.3%) to date. Figure 10 shows that the 2008 enrolment rate (95.3%) is the highest enrolment rate achieved under MMP to date. Under FPP elections, enrolment rates tended to be higher until 1981; from 1984 to 1993 the average enrolment rate under FPP (92.5%) was somewhat lower than the MMP average (93.3%).

Of the estimated 548,997 Māori descent population eligible to vote, 535,472 (97.5%) were enrolled for the 2020 election. Of enrolled Māori descent voters, 276,013 (51.5%) were enrolled on the Māori roll and 259,459 (48.5%) were enrolled on the general roll. Collectively, the 535,472 New Zealand voters of Māori descent who were enrolled comprised 15.1% of the total New Zealand voters enrolled for the 2020 general election.

Figure 10: Enrolment rates of the eligible voters under FPP and MMP elections 1969-2020

Despite a relatively high overall enrolment rate there are significant differences in enrolment rates across different age groups, which are compounded by the relative size of each age cohort.  For example, Figure 11 shows there are now over a million voters (1,078,100) in the 60+ age group, which now accounts for over one-quarter (28.6%) of all voters. In 1993 this cohort accounted for just over one-fifth (21%) of the total eligible voters. By comparison, while voters under 30 in 1993 accounted for over one-quarter (26%) of all eligible voters; in 2020 the share of this cohort has declined to about one-fifth (21.1%).

Figure 11: Age-group shares of voting age population, enrolment, non-enrolment 2020

Figure 11 combines these age cohort shares with enrolment rates by age group. The lowest enrolment rate is for those aged 18-24 (78.0%); the highest for those aged 50-59 (99.8%). Voters aged over 40 years tend to enrol at a higher proportion compared to their share of the total voting age population. On the other hand, while age cohorts under 40 years of age comprise just over one-third (35.3%) of the total enrolled, this cohort accounted for almost nine in ten (88.4%) of the 222,520 people who failed to enrol for the 2020 election. Nearly half (44.6%) of the total who failed to enrol were aged 18-24.

Enrolment by electorate is also not uniform. Of the ten electorates with the lowest enrolment rates, eight are located in cities with high student populations: Auckland Central (73.7% of the VAP enrolled); Wigram (83.7%); Southland (84.7%); Christchurch Central (85.6%); Manurewa (88.5%); Hamilton East (88.7%); Dunedin (89.8%); Hamilton West (90.4%); Rangitata (91.1%); Palmerston North (91.2%). [16]

Voter Turnout Increasing since 2011

Figure 12 shows that total voter turnout (total votes cast as a proportion of enrolled electors) for the 2020 General Election was 82.2% overall, eight percentage points higher than the lowest MMP turnout that occurred in 2011 (74.2%). The highest turnout under MMP to date was the first MMP election in 1996 when 88.3% of those enrolled voted. Over two-thirds (69.1%) of those enrolled on the Maori roll turned out to vote in 2020, 11.5 percentage points higher than the lowest Maori roll turnout that occurred in 2002 (57.6%).

Figure 12: Voter turnout by roll, 1981-2020

As a measure of political engagement, total voter turnout in New Zealand under MMP between 1996 and 2020 has averaged 80.5% – a high level of voter participation when compared with other Western democracies. [17]

In FPP elections from 1981 to 1993, average total voter turnout was somewhat higher at 88.9%.

In 2020 turnout of eligible voters, or VAP (voting age population), was 77.4%, the highest since 1996. The lowest VAP turnout since the Second World War occurred in 2011 when it was 69.6%. In total, 877,614 people did not vote in 2020. Of these 222,520 (25.4%) were not enrolled, while 655,094 (74.6%) were enrolled but did not turn out to vote.

Table 9 lists the general electorates with the highest and lowest turnouts in 2020. Of the ten general electorates with the highest turnouts (valid votes cast as a percentage of enrolled electors), four are from the Wellington region and four are from the Canterbury region. All ten of the general electorates with the lowest turnout are from the Auckland region. As can be seen from Table 7, the general electorate with the lowest turnout (Panmure-Ōtāhuhu, previously Manukau East) had lower turnout (67.6%) than all but two of the Māori electorates.

Table 9: Selected electorates by turnout 2011-2020 (%) [18]

Since 2014 the Electoral Commission has been providing a breakdown of voter turnout by age band. [19] Figure 13 shows that those age cohorts over the age of 50 had above average (81.5%) turnout in the 2020 election. Those aged 65-69 had the highest turnout (89.1%), followed by those aged 60-64 (87.3%). The age cohorts under 50 had below average levels of turnout in the 2020 election; those aged 25-29 had the lowest turnout, with under three-quarters (74.4%) turning out to vote.

Nevertheless, improvements in voter turnout rates can be noted for all age cohorts when compared to their participation rates in previous elections. The 18-24 age cohort showed the most improvement, increasing their voter turnout by 8.8 percentage points between 2017 and 2020. When compared to 2014, voter turnout among those aged 18-24 has improved by 15.3 percentage points. Other age cohorts to have increased voter turnout since 2014 include those aged 25-29 (12.3%), and those aged 30-34 (7.1%).  Despite this improvement in turnout for younger cohorts, close to half (46.3%) of those who were enrolled in 2020 but who did not turn out to vote were aged under 40.

Figure 13: Voter turnout by age band 2014, 2017, 2020

Referendum Results

Two government-initiated referendums were held at the same time as the 2020 general election – a binding referendum on the End of Life Choice Act 2019, and a non-binding referendum on the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill.

After final results, nearly two-thirds (65.9%) of valid votes cast approved the referendum on the End of Life Choice Act. Referendum papers for all electorates went into the same ballot box at voting places which means the Electoral Commission is unable to provide a separate count by individual electorate; that is, only combined figures for both general and Māori electorates are available. On this basis, of the 65 combined electorates, 63 approved the referendum on the End of Life Choice Act, ranging from Mt Roskill / Tāmaki Makaurau (55.7% voted Yes), to Auckland Central / Tāmaki Makaurau / Te Tai Tokerau (76.9%). Three combined electorates did not approve the referendum:  Māngere / Tāmaki Makaurau (38.4%); Manurewa / Tāmaki Makaurau (46.8%); Panmure-Ōtāhuhu / Tāmaki Makaurau (47.5%).

The End of Life Choice Act will come into force 12 months from the date of the final results, that is, 6 November 2021. Until then, assisted dying remains illegal in New Zealand. The End of Life Choice Act will be administered by the Ministry of Health.

After final results, just over half (51.2%) of valid votes cast did not support the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill. The referendum result will mean that recreational cannabis use will remain illegal in New Zealand.

On a combined electorate basis, 46 of 65 combined electorates voted against the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill, ranging from Botany / Hauraki-Waikato / Tāmaki Makaurau (33.2% approval) to Remutaka / Ikaroa-Rāwhiti / Te Tai Hauāuru / Te Tai Tonga (49.8%).

A further 19 electorates out of 65 voted for the Bill ranging from Northcote / Tāmaki Makaurau / Te Tai Tokerau (50.4% approval) to Wellington Central / Ikaroa-Rāwhiti / Te Tai Hauāuru / Te Tai Tonga (73.3%).

In accordance with Section 8(1) of the Electoral Act 1993, the Electoral Commission must report within six months of the return of the writ (20 November 2020), on the administration and delivery of the 2020 General Election. [20] Among other matters, the Commission must report on enrolment and voting statistics.

It is also usual for the Justice Select Committee to hold an inquiry into each general election; the Committee initiated its inquiry into the 2020 general election, including the cannabis and end of life choice referendums, on 9 December 2020.  The committee called for submissions from the public by 6 April 2021. The committee chose four key themes it is particularly keen to investigate. [21] These themes are:

• The resilience of New Zealand’s electoral system in the face of civil emergencies, with a particular focus on lessons learned from the Covid-19 pandemic.
• The integrity and security of New Zealand’s electoral system in light of emerging challenges, with a particular focus on technology and social media.
• The rise of advance voting, with a particular focus on whether any rules governing the regulated period should change in light of the increase in advance voting.
• The accessibility of the voting system for people with disabilities and New Zealand’s growing ethnic communities whose first language may not be English.

The 53 rd Parliament must dissolve by 12 th November 2023, a writ for the next general election has to be issued by 19 th November 2023, and the writ for the next general election must be returned 60 days later or by 18 January 2024. Allowing for the counting of special votes, the date for the next New Zealand general election is likely to be on or before Saturday, 6 January 2024.

[ On the 19 th of January 2023, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced that the date for the 2023 general election would be the 14 th October 2023 .] [22]

Selected References

Official results for New Zealand’s parliamentary elections – The New Zealand Electoral Commission, http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/

Enrolment Statistics – The New Zealand Electoral Commission, http://www.elections.org.nz/research-statistics/enrolment-statistics-electorate

2020 General Election and referendums: Voter turnout statistics for the 2020 General Election – The New Zealand Electoral Commission, https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/historical-events/2020-general-election-and-referendums/voter-turnout-statistics-for-the-2020-general-election/

Inquiry into the 2017 General Election and 2016 Local Elections: Report of the Justice Committee , December 2019,   https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/SCR_93429/5dd1d57eeba54f36bf9f4da96dba12c073ed7ad8

Parliamentary Voting Systems in New Zealand and the Referendum on MMP, John Wilson, Parliamentary Library Research Paper, 2011/03, November 2011, Parliamentary Library. http://ourhouse.parliament.nz/en-NZ/ParlSupport/ResearchPapers/9/0/f/00PLLawRP11031-Parliamentary-Voting-Systems-in-New-Zealand-and-the.htm

For electorate results by electorate, and census data by electorate (including social and economic statistics), see the electorate profiles compiled by the Parliamentary Library at: https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/electorate-profiles/

Dr John Wilson, Research Services Analyst,

Parliament, Law and People Team,

Parliamentary Library

For more information, contact [email protected] , or Tel: 817 9358.

ISSN 2253-5624 (Print)

ISSN 2253-5632 (Online)

[1] Based on the year from which a national elected representative parliament was first assembled and then continued in regular sessions without interruption due to civil war, occupation, military coup or other event. It does not necessarily mean the parliament so elected was by universal suffrage or was a “responsible” or an independent parliament. The ten-oldest representative democracies on this basis are the United States (1789), United Kingdom (1801), Norway (1814), Belgium (1831), Iceland (1845), Netherlands (1848), Switzerland (1848), Denmark (1849), New Zealand (1854), Sweden (1866). See T. Mackie, R. Rose, 1991; The International Almanac of Electoral History ; Inter-parliamentary Union, 1992.

[2] Electoral Commission, Media Kit: General Elections and Referendums 2020, p. 4. https://elections.nz/assets/2020-general-election/Media-Kit_September-2020.pdf ; see also https://elections.nz/assets/BIM/Electoral-Commission-2020-BIM.pdf

[3] Electoral Commission, Media Kit: General Elections and Referendums 2020, p. 21. https://elections.nz/assets/2020-general-election/Media-Kit_September-2020.pdf

[4] Electoral Commission, Report of the Electoral Commission on the Review of the MMP Voting System, 29 October 2012. Available at: https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/50DBHOH_PAP23784_1/d31fb79f2760c226a746e78a40c48df760635ae3

[5] Electoral Commission: http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/

[6] Jonathan Boston and David Bullock, ‘Experiments in Executive Government under MMP in New Zealand: Contrasting Approaches to Multi­Party Governance’, in New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law , Special Conference Issue: MMP and the Constitution, Vol. 7(1), June 2009, p. 46.

[7] New Zealand Labour Party & Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand Cooperation Agreement, 53 rd Parliament, 6 November 2020 at: https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/beachheroes/pages/14331/attachments/original/1604127899/Labour_Greens_Cooperation_Agreement.pdf?1604127899

[8] Constitution Act 1986, Section 19; http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0114/latest/DLM94245.html?search=sw_096be8ed80762277_opening+of+parliament_25_se&p=2&sr=25

[9] P. Norris, ‘Choosing Electoral Systems: Proportional, Majoritarian and Mixed Systems’, International Political Science Review , Vol. 18, 1997, p. 309.

[10] Inter-Parliamentary Union, Monthly ranking of women in national parliaments, October 2020, available at: https://data.ipu.org/women-ranking?month=10&year=2020

[11] Statistics New Zealand, Deriving the 2018 Māori descent electoral population , Wellington, September 2019, p. 7. Available at: https://www.stats.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Methods/Deriving-the-2018-Maori-descent-electoral-population/Deriving-the-2018-maori-descent-electoral-population.pdf

[12] Pacific, Asian and MELAA ethnic population data can be found at Stats NZ, Census ethnic groups dataset. Available at: https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/2018-census-ethnic-groups-dataset

[13] LGBTIQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer or other). Sources include the MPs maiden speech, official party websites, official party social media, or public statements.

[14] Although there is much debate about the dates and lengths of these generational cohorts, it is generally accepted that for meaningful cohort analysis a generation is about 20 years long, and that all generational cohorts should be the same length. Here the pre-World War Two generation is defined as those born from 1926 to 1945 inclusive, baby boomers are those born from 1946 to 1965 inclusive, Generation X are those born from 1966 to 1985 inclusive, and Millennials / Generation Y are those born from 1986 to 2005 inclusive.

[15] Sources include NZ Official Yearbook; MPs’ biographies as listed on public websites, social media, and political party websites.

[16] For voting age population turnout and the demographic characteristics of electorates see individual electorate profiles compiled by the Parliamentary Library at: https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/electorate-profiles/

[17] See Electoral Commission, Media Kit: General Elections and Referendums 2020 . Available at https://elections.nz/assets/2020-general-election/Media-Kit_September-2020.pdf p. 21.

[18] NZ Electoral Commission, 2020 election results, https://www.electionresults.govt.nz/

[19] See, for example, Electoral Commission, 2020 General Election and referendums: Voter turnout statistics for the 2020 General Election

[20] See Electoral Act 1993 available at: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0087/latest/DLM307519.html

[21] New Zealand Parliament, Inquiry into the 2020 General Election and Referendums at https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/53SCJU_SCF_INQ_104172/inquiry-into-the-2020-general-election-and-referendums

[22] Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern Headshot (2020), General Election to be held on 14 October 2023 , Press release, 19 January 2023.

Related links

Note: The below document(s) are provided as an Adobe PDF (PortableDocument Format) file. you can download a free viewer for PDF files from Adobe's web site .

• 2020 General Election And Referendums: results, analysis, and demographics of the 53rd Parliament (pdf 899KB)
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share via Email

Log in / Sign up

About NZCER Contact Us Our Team Latest News NZCER Blog Careers NZCER Assist Login Newsletter signup 

Search form

You are here, the electoral commission and schools.

The Electoral Commission’s vision is that young people become active and engaged citizens who understand and value what it means to live in a democracy, who have confidence in their voice, and who value and use their vote.

To contribute to this goal the Electoral Commission provides resources and support for schools and teachers to deliver to the curriculum. The aims of its resources are aligned to the concepts of civics and citizenship - that is, to encourage students to participate as critical, active, informed and responsible citizens now and in the future.

Purchase the full text of this article

Our report on the 2023 General Election has now been released. read more

• Media & news |

The Electoral Commission's values (Ngā Uara) are underpinned by the concept of kaitiaki.

Tūhonotanga

(v) to join, bond, attach, connect. Connecting / building and maintaining relationships Ka tūhonoa ngā tāngata e tipu ai te uru ki ngā punaha manapori. Bringing people together to increase participation in democracy.

(v) to conduct, lead, point out, guide. Knowledge Transfer Ka aratakina kia mārama Guiding towards greater understanding

(n) vigour, energy, dynamism, enthusiasm Energy / dynamism / innovation Ka uakaha, ka hihiri hoki, te whakahaere. Being dynamic and energetic in what we do

Manaakitanga

(n) hospitality, kindness, generosity, support. Power Transfer Ka ngākau nui, ka whakamana Demonstrating generosity and empowering people

(adj.) be true, valid, honest, genuine, sincere Integrity and honesty Mahia ka tika; ka tika te mahi Doing things right; doing the right things!