MMP Quiz
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:00 pm by David FarrarThe Electoral Commission has an Advanced MMP Quiz. Give it a go. Many of them are trick questions that will catch out all but the experts.
I managed 9/9 but had to think very hard about some of the answers. Post your scores below.
June 3rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
8 out of 9 … but I’d dispute the answer to question 7 (spoiler alert, spoiler alert!!!!)
The quiz claims the correct answer to question 7 is that “When electorate boundaries are re-drawn the maximum population of each electorate is 5% more or 5% less than the average electorate size.” This isn’t true. Granted, the “maximum population” of an electorate is 5% more than “the average electorate size” (actually, it is 5% more than the relevant population quota for the South Island, North Island, or Maori electorates … but that’s quibbling). The “MINIMUM population” for an electorate is 5% less than that average. So the statement is false … the maximum isn’t one or the other, it’s only the former.
Hence, my answer (“Each electorate has approximately the same number of eligible voters”) is more correct (albeit at a more general level). Hence, I got 9 out of 9. Hence DPF couldn’t have done so.
Anyway … that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!
[DPF: You make a good point about the imprecision of the question but them being within 5% of an average is closer to the truth than all being approx the same]
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Dang, 3/9. I should have paid more attention to your comment about trick questions …
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
7/9 – wow – never knew about the problems caused by pledging allegiance to a foreign prince!…does that include the artist formally know as?
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
5/9
I got questions 4, 6, 7 and 9 wrong.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Really bummed out – 3/9
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
3/9 – this stuff’s hard, as Sarah Palin once said about learnin’…
I console myself that anyway I am more interested in reducing political deeds to basic right and wrong, good and bad than I am in the technical minutiae…
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Presumably, Prince Charles is foreign?
I guess it could still be an issue if you pledge certain allegiances to him before he’s King?
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
At this rate, the average must be coming down.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
6/9
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
5/9 – embarrassing!
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
I got 3/9. Truely tricked by the foreign prince one.
However I disagree with them on Question 4:
The percentage of party votes cast for a party is used …
Answer:
to help decide if a party has crossed the threshold
This is of course correct, but their other option was “to be used in the calculation for the distrabution of seats in parliament”
This is also correct, and I couldnt decide which one to choose. I obviously chose the wrong one.
I assume that what they are getting at is that the % of party votes doesnt correlate directly to the proportion of seats in parliament, cos of wasted vote (and also overhang). But the % of party vote is still effectively used in the calculations.
I also disagreed with the one about the electorate seats having to be within 5% population of average electorate size. I got it wrong saying that they seats had to have approximately the same population. But isnt that waht the 5% rule does, it ensuere roughly equal population. My answer was correct just less precise.
[DPF: The percenatge of party vote is a trick question. People think it is used to calculate seats but it is not. The St Lague formula used actual number of votes]
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 1:56 pm
I agree with you, Comrade MOT. In fact the supposedly correct answer “to help decide if a party has crossed the threshold” is inadequate without defining what the threshold is. Whereas your option is unambiguously correct.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 2:04 pm
“[DPF: You make a good point about the imprecision of the question but them being within 5% of an average is closer to the truth than all being approx the same]”
And if that was what the statement said, it would be correct. But it isn’t what it says. So it’s not right.
The correct statement would be “When electorate boundaries are re-drawn the TOTAL population of each electorate MUST BE 5% more or 5% less than the average electorate size.”
You can’t just rewrite each statement to make it say what you want it to … otherwise every answer would be “right”, if it were only worded differently! And that would be silly!!
[DPF: Rereading the question I now agree with you]
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“[DPF: Rereading the question I now agree with you]”
Hooray! Given that, do I win a chocolate fish?
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
If you are going to ask tricky questions then the answer must be precisely correct. NONE of the Q7 answers are precisely correct.
a) is plain wrong
Vote:b) the maximum issue referred to above makes this wrong, but ALSO, as AG points out, the average population is not the criteria, it is the NI and SI quotas – which can be significantly different.
c) Boundaries are set according to electoral population, NOT eligible voters. The numbers can be quite different, eg if an electorate has a high proportion of children.
d) Te Tai Tonga straddles both NI and SI.
June 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pm
s.russell …
“c) Boundaries are set according to electoral population, NOT eligible voters. The numbers can be quite different, eg if an electorate has a high proportion of children.”
Urk! You’re absolutely right!! I just read the answer I wanted to … (ie that each electorate contains roughly equal numbers of people, not voters)!!! So mea culpa – I got that one wrong too … no need for a chocolate fish, DPF.
Frankly, this is why multi-choice is such a bad way of testing knowledge. I had a friend involved in setting a University exam paper with 3 others – they thought a multi-choice component would save them a heap of marking time (no need to read bad handwriting and work out whether students knew their stuff). They then spent 2 days fighting over which answer to each question was the “most right”. God knows what the students made of the whole exercise.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 3:30 pm
I got 7 out of 9, and claim that as an immigrant I did ok.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 3:41 pm
4/9 – ouch. Those questions were tricky – a nerdish IQ of 160 is obviously required
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
7/9. Really a bit tricky and at least 2 I had to choose 50/50 on two most right answers.
I got Q9 wrong as I hoped it wasn’t the right answer.
I guess now under the Treaty of Waitangi we should get rid of voting in the Maori seats and just appoint 7 people. Or maybe Pita can present a paper suggesting that each Iwi should appoint its own representitive and that automatically they should collectively be called the Maori party.
I also got the foreign prince wrong, guess they must first be the king. Who decides if a by-election is required if somebody resigns, or is it not WORTH (list MP not withstanding) it.
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I am impressed with me. 7/9
Your Score: 7 out of 9
77.8%
Average Score: 5.8 out of 9
64.8%
You answered 2 questions incorrectly. Here are the correct answers:
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 7:35 pm
“[DPF: The percenatge of party vote is a trick question. People think it is used to calculate seats but it is not. The St Lague formula used actual number of votes]”
It uses the actual number of party votes, but the number of party votes a party is only relevant when compared to the total (non wasted) vote. So if a party than gets 15,000 votes it does not determine the number of seats. It is only relavant as a proportion of the total. Sure the St Lague formula doesnt actually calculate the %s then use those values but it is the perscentage/proportion that influences the outcome of the calculation.
Also the wording that the party vote % is “to help decide if the party has crossed the treshold” for the “correct” answer is bad because it doesn’t help decide, it DOES decide.
[DPF: Wrong on all counts. The total number of votes has no bearing on the St Lague formula. And also wrong on corssing the threshold as one can cross it by winnign an electorate seat so help decide is correct]
Vote:June 3rd, 2009 at 8:11 pm
There is no mention of “threshold” in the Electoral Act so it is completely ambiguous what it means. It could just mean attaining 5% or it could mean qualifying for entry to the list members calculation. In the first case “help” is incorrect whereas in the second “help” is accurate.
Vote:June 4th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
No. That option is substantially wrong. Electorate boundaries are drawn by reference to population – this includes those under 18 – not by reference to voting-age population. The Maori electorates, and other electorates with a disproportionately small or large population of young people have vastly different numbers of voters.
Vote: