Written By: - Date published: 2:49 pm, October 24th, 2008 - 83 comments
Categories: polls -
Tags: roy morgan
And the polls keep coming. Today’s Roy Morgan poll has Labour down 5.5% and National up slightly, while the Greens rise to an astonishing 11.5% – that’s 15 MPs. NZ First drops just below the threshold to 4.5%.
Under this scenario an LPG+M arrangement is possible, but only just, with 61 seats out of 121 between them.
And Roger Douglas would be back in Parliament.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
NeilR, Labour & The Greens are close enough in the main things they agree on, that they could be considered as representing a possible 36% + 10% = 46%. Pretty much equal to Nats, if they got about 45% of the vote.
The real test is if a coalition can be agreed with parties that represent the majority of the seats, so that they will be able to get their policies/bills passed in parliament. It’s possible that Nats with 45% could make such an agreement with the MP.
But if the MP decided to go with the Nats, only on the basis of the Nats having the (dubious idea of) “moral authority”, it’s possible that coalition would only last 2 minutes before another general election was called. The government has to be able to get a majority vote in parliament for most of the things they propose, otherwise they’d be a lame-duck government. If the MP was very strongly opposed to some Nats Bills, they could say that they will no longer support the Nats on confidence and supply. The government would fall – an election would be called.
OTOH, Clark (leading with a minority of Labour party seats) has shown she is very capable of negotiating successfully with several parties. Consequently it’s possible that she plus the Greens, could negotiate with the MP to ensure that the proposed Bills are passed, and that none of the coalition partners become so unhappy that they withdraw confidence and supply.
When the government is formed in the first place, they have to have a sufficiently strong coalition agreement to look like they will survive the parliamentary term.
Actually, for me a very good outcome would be a shaky coalition between the MP & Nats. The government would probably fall very quickly. In the subsequent election Labour (with proably a new look, new Leader) would then be likely to win the most votes.
So I say, if the MP want to go with the Nats because of the (dodgy) “moral authority” argument, then go to it.
Lynn,
Is matt taking part in your project yet?
[lprent: No but from that sample it looks like a good candidate]
NeillR: “can you explain why Phil Goff was the only Labour MP who put “Labour MP for ‘ on his “information kit’?”
Occam’s razor. I’m not buying this wild and wooly KBR conspiracy that he’s locked in a grim battle for dominance with David Cunliffe, and further that he would purposefully sabotage his party’s fortunes in order to gain an advantage. Since when was looking incompetent and losing an election a good career move? just look at the last person who fits that description – he’s back to tending his kiwifruit orchard.
Honestly, pull the other one.
L
The seat distributions from this poll don’t recognise the number of electorate seats the Maori Party will win. They will likely take 6 or 7 of the seats, leaving a larger overhang, and a higher chance of a centre-left govt.
I doubt Labour will come in this low, my pick would be somewhere very close to 40 per cent. i also think National will be close to 45 percent, but will struggle to find enough coalition partners. I think National themselves are coming to a similar conclusion, hence the scare-mongering from John Key, and the ever-increasing bile levels on Kiwiblog.
what Single Malt said
Carol, i’m not sure if you’ve caught up with this one: Can a party that “loses” a general election form a government acceptable to New Zealanders?, but there’s a clear majority who think that a government formed by a minority party wouldn’t be legitimate.
Like i said, you may not agree with it, but a majority of the country would be outraged at the idea that a lower polling party would be able to enjoy “the baubles of office”. The backlash would be more than it’s worth.
NeillR
Sixty percent would be in favour of capital punishment too, in an opinion poll. Fortunately, instant opinion does not make laws. We have a debate first.
“Finishing second” is nonsense, as a moment’s thought would make clear.
If National get 36% and ACT 15%, we won’t get a Labour government, even if Labour get 37%. I won’t like the result, but it’s totally democratic, and I’m not going to fake outrage and stir up a backlash just because I can’t count.
Some people have short memories I can remember Brash trying to stitch together a coalition last election didn’t here much screaming from the Herald and the KBR then
you may remember labour was the biggest party
Obviously the Bastards are worried
NeillR: Are you genuinely suggesting we change NZ’s electoral rules if an election produces a result the NZ Herald’s focus group doesn’t like?
Aside from the obvious idiocy of electoral reform by straw poll, the question to which they responded was particularly fallacious. According to the link above, “they were asked whether New Zealanders would see a party that finished second as the rightful government.” Let’s be crystal fucking clear: a party does not form a government, unless it gets a majority. Parties comprising a majority in parliament form a government. That means, on the basis of the hypothetical five-party coalition, Labour would not be the government, they would be a part of the government, and the remainder of the government would be formed by other parties who between them made up majority. The question is misleading, so it’s hardly surprising that the answers are meaningless.
L
Lew,
What you are touching on is a scary level of ignorance in the wider population about how government really works, and in particular how MMP works.
I remember thinking about years ago is how, for all their faults, the USA does actively teach the subject of Civics in its schools. I’m not sure if that by itself is the whole solution, but it has to be better than the default ‘know nothing’ position on politics many New Zealanders seem to take a perverse pride in holding.
If a decently informed group of people had been in that Herald focus group they would have likely, as you did, rejected the question put to them as meaningless. Instead as a nation we are largely the ill-informed pawns of disinformation and misdirection.
if key didn’t keep ruling out coalition partners maybe the nats would have a chance
Hes ruled out Winnie
He’s ruled out Act with Douglas
I mean fuck lets let you govern on 45%
RL: Yes, I think I’ve said before that if I were Minister of Education, civics from Plato to the present day would be taught in every high school. But that wouldn’t change the tendency (and just as evident among the supposedly politically aware and active types in this and other fora) that ignorance is a virtue.
L
This “poll” the Herald is quoting is a load of nonsense. it is based on just 100 responses (they don’t even say how many people didnt respond), and the response is obviously prompted. This is really of very little interest.
Having said that, i think there would be some perception of a lack of mandate if National’s lead was over about ten per cent. i dont think it would be a problem if the margin of 45-40, but if it is 48-35, then i think we might have a problem. Note i view that as a problem of perception, rather than reality.