Do we live in a true democracy? Former MP Gerrard Eckhoff, of Alexandra, asks some questions about New Zealand's political system.
It seems somehow appropriate that the 1960s singing group the Seekers, who had a huge hit with The Carnival Is Over, is coming to New Zealand - just after our general election.
Perhaps Elaine Paige could also pay us a visit and sing her superb rendition of Send in the Clowns.
No matter. The real question is - to continue with the musical analogy - did we get the piper and the tune for which we, the voters, paid?
On the surface the answer is yes we did, but if we dig a little deeper, the answer is far less clear.
We, the voters, got the (National) party most chose, but did we get the actual people we wanted to represent us in Wellington?
The answer to that question is an emphatic ''well, maybe''. Or then again an equally emphatic ''maybe not''.
We, the people (for the most part) only get to choose one political party over another.
We did not get to choose the candidates.
The various parties' bosses and their party members did that for us.
Only the slightest variation on that system of so-called democratic elections is being played out at this very moment in a completely different theatre.
The people of Hong Kong are demanding the right to choose their own candidates to better represent them
within the Chinese Government. However, the Communist Party bosses insist they must first approve of any candidate.
It may come as a shock to some, but in this key aspect, that is exactly what happens within New Zealand's political parties.
Politics in New Zealand is theoretically based on the premise that in a representative democracy, ''we, the people'' get to choose the candidates to represent us in Parliament. That simply doesn't happen.
China has only one party, which limits things even more, but the fact remains that,
just like the people of Hong Kong, we don't get to choose our candidates.
Political parties in both countries decide who shall represent us, so on polling day we either endorse the parties' choices or we don't vote.
We still have constituencies, but they are representation-lite.
MPs get nowhere in Wellington or Beijing if they do not toe the party line, although the consequences may differ somewhat between countries.
The right and freedom to choose our own representatives, freed from any party influence, is the singular most important aspect of a true democracy.
The party system of choosing representatives, rather than individuals standing before the voters in a given electorate, has evolved into appropriation of the right to choose our own representatives.
When parties in New Zealand and China decide to only choose candidates who will ''fit in'', then the sign at the door to Parliament will read: ''Independently minded candidates need not apply as the Prime Minister, the party leader (or the Premier, in China's case) will tell us what to think and say''.
That was not always the case.
The southern region some years ago had its fair share of political ''mavericks'', as non-compliant MPs became known.
Norman Jones (National) and Aubrey Begg (Labour) appeared less than subservient to their respective party machines.
They saw their task as representing the opinions of the ''South'' in Parliament - as well as to their party - regardless of their promotional chances drifting away.
We now have a situation where our MPs inform us of their party's view on any given subject and not one that perhaps better reflects the needs of their own constituents.
We, therefore, have a system not as dissimilar to China as we would like to believe it is.
The only counter to the pervasive power of Auckland or Beijing is to elect truly independent MPs who are not afraid to speak out - even cross the floor - when their party is ignoring their voters' interests.
Under MMP, it is the only way to gain a foothold of influence in Wellington, especially in rural and provincial New Zealand.
