Recently, you chose 5 of the 9 small, registered political parties to interview for your news item. Your commentary announced that they would all love people's vote. You explained they all face an enormous hurdle because they must win over 5% or gain an electorate seat.
Unfortunately, leaving out 4 parties increases the hurdle for them, as they are missing out on vital coverage. It's the case that a̲l̲l̲ the small, registered parties would love people's vote. It would be more equitable to ensure all these parties had an equal time allocation.
Historically, it's been shown to be impossible for any new registered party to get over the 5% threshold. No new party has ever managed to gain a seat - since MMP - that has not waka-jumped from another party already in parliament.
Small registered parties can have excellent new ideas, new thinking, and well thought out policies. However, the entrenched parties always prevail. Why is this?
One major reason is due to media exposure - or lack thereof. It is your responsibility as our fourth estate to give all political voices adequate and equal opportunity to share their messages with New Zealanders so they can make fully informed decisions about their voting options. Informed voters are a key part of our democracy so there is a real responsibility that lies with you. If you do not allocate more time to small registered parties, we will continue to blatantly cement in the two party system, because it is impossible for small parties outside parliament to get their policies heard.
As such, I want to let you know that doing a piece on small parties but leaving out four of them is not good journalism.
I ask that you specifically include all registered parties in your future items because #allpartiesmatter
Link to item referenced:
Combined press release from some small parties on the broadcasting allocation inequity https://www.socialcredit.nz/publicly-funded-broadcasting
Social Credit Candidate