Campaigning thought of the day #1

79 comments on “Campaigning thought of the day #1 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Saarbo 1

   23 February 2014 at 8:41 am

   Yes, we are going to have to work hard to change the government later this year. Especially with a continuous flow of articles like this that highlight the benefits of this government if you are on the top of the Rich List. This article from Eric Watson even reckons that National/John Key have “Reduced our borrowing” and have implemented “Policies that have brought about growth”…is that what you call a $40 billion earthquake.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11208050

   Greedy people whose lives are focused on money will lie through their teeth to make another dollar.
   • Murray Olsen 1.1

     24 February 2014 at 2:46 am

     Eric Watson thinks it’s great that Auckland has more expensive housing than Melbourne, despite the fact that wages in Melbourne are a lot higher. He should stick to what he does badly – running a league club.
2. Tiger Mountain 2

   23 February 2014 at 8:58 am

   Good post Micky. We have many ideological and other debates online but eventually people need to enrol and vote if the Key gang is to be denied a third term.

   My partner tells me her union as part of Unions Auckland has approached the Electoral Commission about placing some of it’s mobile early voting stations in areas and at times where there are concentrations of union members and workers. Early voting has been available in libraries etc before but is being expanded apparently in light of the worryingly high non vote last election.

   One on one organising is definitely a proven way to put your left politics into action re young people.
3. Chooky 3

   23 February 2014 at 9:48 am

   +1 Good Post

   ..i dont know how the Left counters the crap on some of the commercial radio stations….but a lot of young people listen to them….and they get misinformation about NACT and Key…to the detriment of Labour and the Left

   ….. John Tanihere imo…( despite his insensitve interview with the girl victim of the Auckland sex rape gang) …. had quite a following amongst youth and put out the Left view with Willie Jackson very effectively to youth ….i hope he is reinstated
   • Disraeli Gladstone 3.1

     23 February 2014 at 10:42 am

     Wanting JT reinstated is just an admission that a person doesn’t give a damn about improving New Zealand society and culture and its out of date attitudes towards women if it messes with another side of the left’s values.

     Essentially, it shows a person puts equality and the issue of sexism below a lot of other things. Which is a privilege that some people don’t have.

     Why don’t we find new voices to explain the value of the left? Young people, old people, Maori, Pacifica, Pakeha, Asian, women, men, trans. People who aren’t raving sexists who claim of vast feminist conspiracies working against him.
     • Chooky 3.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 12:46 pm

       @ Mr Cambridge Man from United Kingdom( recent arrival?)

       You have already framed and accused me of racism and now it would seem sexism if I support John Tamihere being reinstated …and of course I dont give a damn about improving NZ society ….when of course you do!…also for you Winston Peters is totally untrustworthy and a liar and Julian Assange is probably guilty of sexual assault

       ….in addition to all this you know better than most New Zealanders about what is good for them and what is good for the Left

       Are you sure you do not belong to Act ?…
       • Disraeli Gladstone 3.1.1.1

         23 February 2014 at 1:11 pm

         Recent arrival? Over 12 years now. So I doubt it.

         And again, there’s some assumptions there. I don’t know if Assange is guilty or not. I just hope we don’t brush away claims made from potential victims because we like his stance on some issues. That’s a pretty big difference.

         If anything the Assange issue and JT’s action are linked. Both of them breed a culture where victims of sexual assault are afraid of coming forward because they’ll be attacked and have their judgment questioned in the most inappropriate ways. Or in Assange case, just be accused of being liars.

         If you’d like, I will gladly take back any comment of racism. I think it’s far more a case of xenophobia onto your list, if you like. You seem strangely obsessed with my immigrant status.
         • Chooky 3.1.1.1.1

           23 February 2014 at 2:08 pm

           …12 years ?…i take your word for it…still not a very long time !….certainly not as long as Winnie or JT….and you dont deny you are a member of Act!

           …it is pretty clear Assange was framed so you are reframing him….but then that suits his enemies

           ….JT ….imo he should be given another chance….simply because he has a powerful voice that is listened to on the Left and by youth ..and on commercial radio ..especially when he is with Willie Jackson ( in my son’s view he is not sexist….and while i dont listen to JT or commercial radio ….i do know that my son is not sexist!…he has been surrounded by very strong stroppy feminist females…he wouldnt dare! ).

           ..I find it quite amusing that you consider me sexist…..when I was in my teens I wished Germaine Greer was my mother …I wonder what Germaine Greer would think about you?….sometimes sexism is more dangerously paternalistic and covert in cunning people….as for racism …well i am pleased you take back this accusation…..considering one of my ancestors signed the Treaty of Waitangi

           xenophobia ….nah…i take people as i find them…..more a patriot for New Zealand ….like Winnie
4. Lanthanide 4

   23 February 2014 at 9:49 am

   Winston Churchill:
   “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
   • Ad 4.1

     23 February 2014 at 10:08 am

     And thankfully he got kicked on his ass in 1945 after delivering other stolid vacuous maxims.
     See the film “The Spirit of 45” by Ken Loach.
     • Tiger Mountain 4.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 10:18 am

       “I propose that 100,000 degenerate Britons should be forcibly sterilized and others put in labour camps to halt the decline of the British race.”–Churchill as Home Secretary in a 1910 Departmental Paper.

       He also edited a partisan pro employer propaganda national newspaper “The British Gazette” during the May 1926 General strike whilst Chancellor of the Exchequer, threatening the Labour Party and Trade Unions–“Make your minds perfectly clear that if ever you let loose upon us again a general strike, we will loose upon you – another “British Gazette.”

       Lovely chap. Why Lanthanide has dredged him up here I am not sure.

       Get your rellies enrolled though!
     • well I never 4.1.2

       23 February 2014 at 10:03 pm

       shame it isn’t on TV, showing what happened before a strong Labour party etc. Had not realised it was quite so bad in the 30’s, having benefitted from Labour’s influence. Looks like we are heading right back there again though
   • Disraeli Gladstone 4.2

     23 February 2014 at 10:45 am

     Winston Churchill never said that. It’s a quote which is misattributed to him. There is no record of him ever saying that.

     Furthermore, it makes very little sense, since Churchill was at times a Liberal and a Conservative throughout all his life. If anything he was a conservative in his younger years, a liberal in his 30s and 40s, and then a conservative again at his peak.
     • felix 4.2.1

       23 February 2014 at 11:38 am

       That doesn’t necessarily mean it doesn’t make sense; it could just mean Churchill had no heart and no brain 😉
   • amirite 4.3

     23 February 2014 at 2:27 pm

     Yes, the utterings of a pickled brain.
   • Lloyd 4.4

     23 February 2014 at 5:59 pm

     Just remember Winston Churchill was directly involved in those gloriously victorious military campaigns of Gallipoli and defending Greece from the Nazis, both of which involved the death of many New Zealanders. The terrible military planning and the deaths can be laid at his feet. Why New Zealanders have any regard for is the opinions of this incompetent alcoholic idiot I cannot understand.
     • Disraeli Gladstone 4.4.1

       23 February 2014 at 6:22 pm

       “Why New Zealanders have any regard for is the opinions of this incompetent alcoholic idiot I cannot understand.”

       Because despite his horrible, horrible flaws, he was a beacon of light in an otherwise dark world during the early stages of the WWII.

       He was a terrible peace-time leader. He held some ghastly opinions. He made several strategic blunders.

       He was also absolutely crucial to the defeat of Nazism across Europe. Without him, it may have been a completely different story. The US may have been less forthcoming in aiding the Allies (Churchill was key to that relationship). Hilter may have been less of a fool in declaring war on the US after Pearl Harbour (with less overt American aid to Britain, Hitler may not have saw the need to declare war). Britain may have surrendered in exchange for freedom across the Channel and to leave mainland Europe to the horrors of the Nazis (Hitler would have offered peace and it was more likely to be accepted by someone who wasn’t Churchill).

       Churchill was a great man who perhaps wasn’t a good man.
   • Lloyd 4.5

     23 February 2014 at 5:59 pm

     Just remember Winston Churchill was directly involved in those gloriously victorious military campaigns of Gallipoli and defending Greece from the Nazis, both of which involved the death of many New Zealanders. The terrible military planning and the deaths can be laid at his feet. Why New Zealanders have any regard for the opinions of this incompetent alcoholic idiot I cannot understand.
5. veutoviper 5

   23 February 2014 at 10:22 am

   Good post, MS. Getting people enrolled to vote is definitely the first step.

   But it is not just young people who need to enrol and then vote, although I agree that it is essential to get this age group to do so.

   Over the last year or so, I have been amazed at the number of people in the older age brackets (40s, 50s and even 60s) that I know who are not currently enrolled – and some of them have never enrolled or voted. They are mainly lower income workers or on benefits. I only found out that they were not enrolled or did not vote by asking them directly, rather than assuming that they would be enrolled and past voters.

   Their explanation to me is that they don’t know enough about politics – who the parties are, what they stand fors and/or who to vote for. . Other comments have been that they don’t understand the issues, and what they see about these is too complicated – and focussed on issues that they are not interested in or have no understanding of.

   A big one is “what difference will their vote make anyway” . What they usually mean is what difference will it make to their everyday lives and the issues that directly affect them – eg cost of living, employment, pay and benefit levels etc.

   So, lets not forget or ignore these people. I am in the process of helping some of the ones mentioned above to enrol, and continuing to gently persuade the others to do so.

   IMO, that will be the easy part of the process – getting them to focus and interested, AND ACTUALLY VOTE will be much harder. (Same with young people).

   In thinking about how to achieve this, one method that springs to mind is one/two page handouts/letterbox drops that compare each party’s stance on the main issues that will make a difference to their everyday lives set out in simple, clear language (or tables), accompanied by a list of the party candidates for their electorate. So, this is what I am thinking of doing for the people that I know closer to the election, and once I have them enrolled.
   • veutoviper 5.1

     23 February 2014 at 12:32 pm

     After writing the above, I decided to check the statistices re enrolment at the Electoral Commission website.

     Here is a link to the page that breaks down enrolment by age group at 31 January 2014 – against estimated population statistics as at 30 June 2011 (Provisional) using 2006 census data.

     http://www.elections.org.nz/research-statistics/enrolment-statistics-electorate

     This page covers the entire country but you can check by individual electorate by using the Electorate option.

     This shows that the 18-24 and 25- 29 age groups are the lowest enrolled groups by percentage of estimated population; with percentages increasing as the age groups rise.
     18 – 24 age 69.63%
     25 – 29 age 79.90% etc

     I am quite surprised that enrolment percentages are that high. Percentages vary by electorate – eg Rongotai shows 18-24 at 63.55% and 25-29 at 68.95%, both below the national averages.

     These tables also appear to ‘disprove’ my comments above about older people not being enrolled, with older age groups showing over 100% enrolments at many of the older age groups.

     But I stand by my unscientific finding albeit from a very small group! The number of age groups showing over 100% enrolment tends to suggest that the estimated population figures may be low in that they are 30 June 2011 estimates using 2006 census data

     Although Maori Roll enrolments are included in the page linked to above, there is also a separate page for the Maori electorates. This only provides actual enrolment numbers by age group, for the full Maori Roll and by electorate. No percentages against estimated population.

     http://www.elections.org.nz/research-statistics/maori-enrolment-statistics-electorate
     • Skinny 5.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 3:41 pm

       Thanks for putting the links in viper much easier than wading thru ourselves. Interesting how a campaigning topic brings out the Right brigade.

       The thought of the Left mobilising and door knocking to register people on the roll, and on polling day spraying National, ACT and United Future while doing the rounds will cause a little hissy fit. I carry a mock voting form and show punters the drill if they appear confused. Another thing I do is mark them off on a spreadsheet whether we need to revisit or drag their sorry arse down to vote. Know of a young activist who carrys a packet of pot joints as a carrot to get em to vote, apparently it works very well with the stoners, hmm may give that one a try sounds like a time saver if they appear that way inclined, Shrilland would be proud of me 🙂
       • veutoviper 5.1.1.1

         23 February 2014 at 8:58 pm

         LOL. I am not a user of that particular ‘weed’, but some of the people I referred to are. At this point I am just trying to get the non-voters I know to enrol, and at the end of the day, vote – preferably for one of the left aligned parties. On the basis, that evey penny (vote) counts. I am finding that they are more responsive to a ‘neutral’ – it is your choice who you vote for – breaks through, rather than pushing just one party line. To a degree, at this stage, I am an undecided left voter and I find that my own honesty on that score, sparks interest.
6. big bruv 6

   23 February 2014 at 10:54 am

   Does that include the usual left wing tactic of voting early and often?
   • felix 6.1

     23 February 2014 at 11:40 am

     Yep, lefties generally vote at least 4 times each. It’s amazing we keep getting away with it 🙄
     • RedLogix 6.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 11:45 am

       And I’ve got a couple of dead babies who always vote Green ….
       • Anne 6.1.1.1

         23 February 2014 at 12:05 pm

         At least we don’t steal other peoples’ identities (dead or alive) like righties do.
         • big bruv 6.1.1.1.1

           23 February 2014 at 1:06 pm

           No Anne, you just have Labour party candidates who are convicted of election fraud.
           • felix 6.1.1.1.1.1

             23 February 2014 at 2:12 pm

             Good thing your lot are all squeaky clean then. How is Banks doing btw?
             • big bruv …

               23 February 2014 at 2:25 pm

               Mr Banks is doing fine as far as I am aware Felix.

               Tell me, how is good old Philip Tito Field doing, or what about Darren Hughes, or David Benson Pope?
               • felix …

                 23 February 2014 at 7:04 pm

                 Why don’t you want to talk about electoral fraud any more?
         • Blue 6.1.1.1.2

           23 February 2014 at 1:47 pm

           No, but you do get convicted of corruption 🙂
7. TightyRighty 7

   23 February 2014 at 10:55 am

   raise the age of retirement to 70. you talk about young people looking to future policies, they can see the looming cost of the baby boomers who already deny them so much. that’ll get them out in force
   • RedLogix 7.1

     23 February 2014 at 11:08 am

     If we take that proposal at face value the next question is; – are you also willing to put in place employment law that effectively prevents age discrimination in the workplace.

     Otherwise you will simply see a pool of people aged 50 plus spending a decade or more on the unemployment benefit.

     Or is that you intention – a larger pool of desperate people willing to work for sod all?
     • TightyRighty 7.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 12:35 pm

       so you are saying the only way we can have affordable aged care is by passing a law that explicitly states no discrimination on the grounds of age? taking your requirement at face value, this law only applies to those over the age of 15 right?
       • RedLogix 7.1.1.1

         23 February 2014 at 1:00 pm

         Of course. What you have done is explain to yourself the hole in your own proposal.
         • TightyRighty 7.1.1.1.1

           23 February 2014 at 1:56 pm

           and you’ve completely missed the contradiction in yours.

           there is no hole in my proposal, people live longer and are able to work till much later in life. why should retirement be 65. it’s a dinosaurs way of thinking.
           • felix 7.1.1.1.1.1

             23 February 2014 at 2:19 pm

             The jobs, Tighty. The hole is the jobs.

             Bunnings can only employ so many greeters on minimum wage.
             • TightyRighty …

               23 February 2014 at 2:36 pm

               people working longer, earning more money than the pension will create more jobs? if it keeps the super bill down it costs the country less so there is more money in the economy. works the same way as the minimum wage theory. higher minimum wage, mpre money being spent in the economy.
               • felix …

                 23 February 2014 at 7:01 pm

                 Ah, so it goes against everything you have ever said on these forums.

                 Goodo.
                 • Colonial Viper …

                   23 February 2014 at 7:04 pm

                   Do all these righties live in a parallel, reverse polarity negative-gravity universe or something?
8. Skinny 8

   23 February 2014 at 11:00 am

   With the dismal showing at the last General election where over 800,000 people didn’t vote, the Electoral Commission should be required to target the areas which show where voter turnout was low.

   Mobile voting stations, fleets of hired camper vans traveling the suburbs of the likes of South Auckland and other large pockets which showed low turn-out in 2011.

    The EC may want to consider providing some for Epsom where the residents of the leafy suburb may need things made very, very easy, possibly even door knocking. One can hardly blame some of the people living in Epsom for not wanting to vote, after successive letdowns by a system that allows propping up of a patsy party, effectively a second tier branch of National.               
   • srylands 8.1

     23 February 2014 at 11:58 am

     “the Electoral Commission should be required to target the areas which show where voter turnout was low.”

     Why? I agree that the EC should advertise how to vote, and make it as easy as possible to vote. However if someone does not want to vote, I don’t think they should be harassed by mobile vans and door knockers.

     On Epsom, doubt many Epsom voters feel let down my much in life at all. Also ACT was destroyed, which is why it recently polled zero. The Party seems to have drawn a line under that. They should get 2 MPs.
     • felix 8.1.1

       23 February 2014 at 12:09 pm

       Your last paragraph sums up your moral bankruptcy very well.
       • emergency mike 8.1.1.1

         23 February 2014 at 2:46 pm

         “Your last paragraph sums up your moral bankruptcy very well.”

         I’m alright, my mates are alright, everything’s alright.
     • bad12 8.1.2

       23 February 2014 at 1:07 pm

       SSLands, you should save dreaming for when you are tucked up by mummy into your cot, you obviously have no need of a dummy at your age having become one,

       With the walking case of Brain Damage, barely able to string a sentence together in understandable English as the campaign manager, Richard Prebble, the wreckage of the campaign that He will wreak should ensure that a ‘smart’ campaign by the left in Epsom puts the already dead ACT party out of its misery…
       • srylands 8.1.2.1

         23 February 2014 at 2:57 pm

         ” you obviously have no need of a dummy at your age having become one,”

         Says the smoker who lives in a State house.
         • bad12 8.1.2.1.1

           23 February 2014 at 3:33 pm

           SSLands, guess what, the smoking despite all of Slippery the PM’s worst efforts cost me less than the rent on the State House does,

           Now!!! about that fridge that National/ACT policy says cannot now be bought through WINZ second-hand, as my adopted bill payer SSLands i offer you choice, my new fridge??? white or silver???…

           Oh and PS, i went ahead and bought the new washing machine courtesy of your tax dollar and the National/ACT flush the cash party and surprise i do know how to operate one, doesn’t that just rip a painful one round your lower appendages SSLands…
     • Skinny 8.1.3

       23 February 2014 at 1:38 pm

       “ACT should get 2 MPs” Don’t be too cock sure of that happening Shrilland. Not if my sister and her husband who live in Gardner rd, Epsom are any thing to go by. One voted candidate Green other ‘good old Bankie’ Act, 1 party voted Green other National. Since I’m an all round activist we openly talk politics (not that I give them a choice) and over the last 4 years I’ve ground the Remmers boy down to openly admitting ‘he didn’t need a tax cut’ he acknowledges the poor should have got the tax cut.

       They have become quite the social conscience couple, selling the 6 rental properties ( in the 1st home buyer market) and moved into the more ethical commercial property market, this is years ago when I use to give them absolute rings about buying in this market. Remmers boy is cheerleading for a CGT on house properties.

       Back on subject… this election it’s 2 party votes Greens and neither are voting Candidates put up by either ACT or National. You could call them the new blue turned Green voters although my sister has always remembered her roots are Left.

       Their stopping in shortly for lunch on the way off surfing up Sandy Bay. I might see if they want to front a Left ad;

       “As a wealthy couple we didn’t need a tax cut we would rather those Kiwi’s that life is a struggle got Government charity”.

       I might just video it myself and post it on You Tube never know it could go viral and touch a cord with previous non voters, or rich pricks who want to join the trend of Blue to Green?
       • bad12 8.1.3.1

         23 February 2014 at 3:25 pm

         Skinny, you raise some good points with your comments, BUT, do you really think that Labour or the Greens have a proverbial snowflakes chance of winning the Epsom electorate,

         Better advice to give to your Sis and her hubby is to vote National as their electorate candidate…
         • Skinny 8.1.3.1.1

           23 February 2014 at 3:56 pm

           Well yes previously you would have thought so, however Miss JA Genter is quite popular amongst the younger Blue-Greens so perhaps not. I think the status quo will continue however the numbers party voting ACT will remain low again.

           Must tell my sister in the unlikely event Prebble goes out door knocking himself, to give em a swift karate chop in the nuts for our old who got ripped off buying Transrail shares. She can say some shady looking old pervert had been spotted stealing womens knickers off clothes line in the neighborhood.
           • bad12 8.1.3.1.1.1

             23 February 2014 at 4:09 pm

             Skinny, Labour’s David Parker was also pretty popular in the Epsom electorate in the 2011 election gaining around 5000 electorate votes, had Parker convinced half of those who gave Him their electorate vote in 2011 to instead give that electorate vote to the National Party candidate there would right now be no ACT Party,

             David Hay the Green Party candidate pulled quite a swathe of electorate votes to Himself in 2011 and the same view of the numbers says that should He have convinced a large cohort of those that electorate voted for Him in 2011 to vote for the National Party candidate John Banks would have been defeated,

             Hopefully Julie-Ann Genter campaigns among Green Party supporters in the Epsom electorate in a far far ‘smarter’ manner than previous candidates from the left,

             Raising the electorate vote for the left in this electorate is dinosaur first past the post ego politics and anyone believing that the left can actually win this seat is at the least naive…
       • Chooky 8.1.3.2

         23 February 2014 at 5:01 pm

         Skinny you are a wee gem….have you ever thought of standing for Parliament?…you obviously have very good persuasive skills ….and I bet philip ure wishes you would visit him to get his vote with your wee incentives
         • Skinny 8.1.3.2.1

           23 February 2014 at 6:52 pm

           Why thanks Chooky I did give it some serious thought a couple of times. Once when Clark was scouting for new talent, then for another party when I couldn’t stomach Goff’s leadership of Labour. I’ve learnt you get good results by working with Opposition MP’s to get action on issues that matter. There are genuine good MP’s, but regrettably ego’s and baubles of office turn many into slippery characters.

           The joint comment was a wind up to the trolls, drugs is not my scene 🙂
           • Chooky 8.1.3.2.1.1

             23 February 2014 at 7:17 pm

             ah yes i thought as much….a political statement of incentive …you should definitely stand for some party on the Left ….just dont go down the slippery slithery slope…..
9. anker 9

   23 February 2014 at 11:35 am

   Great post. Hopefully many more ideas like this to come. Even though the msm are spinning it and the danger is people buy into that spin and think there is no point in voting as National is going to win. We can’t let that become the dominant narrative………..

   We must still believe it is possible for us to win (and it is) and work hard to achieve this.

   Tip two I suggest is starting to talk up Cunliffe. Tell people what he has done that is great. I can think of many things…great, witty, intelligent interview with Paul Henry, and nearly every t.v. clip I have seen with him has been good. We need to tell an alternative narrative.
10. tc 10

    23 February 2014 at 11:47 am

    Good point MS, use any opportunity to inform expats to vote from overseas by checking if they are enrolled and where they can vote or send a vote home.

    over xmas I spoke to quite a few kiwis who were shocked at how the nact are kicking out the ladders of opportunity and gifting big business consents, laws, taxpayer dosh etc

    they were not up with the real situation as granny and fearfacts serves up govt friendly spin. Mostly 20 somethings starting to realise after observing more effective democracies with independant media how skewered the MSM are here.
    • RedLogix 10.1

      23 February 2014 at 11:57 am

      Good point MS, use any opportunity to inform expats to vote from overseas by checking if they are enrolled and where they can vote or send a vote home.

      Does anyone have some data on expat voting at hand? Bear in mind that there are 618,000 New Zealanders who are SCV ‘guest workers’ in Australia alone, most of whom will all eventually have to return to NZ. I wonder what proportion of the missing 800,000 voters in the last election come from this group?

      They have a very real stake in NZ elections.
      • srylands 10.1.1

        23 February 2014 at 12:11 pm

        They can’t enrol to vote if they have been away from New Zealand for three years.

        There were 529,000 New Zealand citizens in Australia at 2009. So the vast majority of New Zealanders in Australia have been away for three years.

        But if they return to New Zealand for a visit, the three year count starts all over again. Of course they need to keep track of when they come and go and how that affects their eligibility. Which is probably too much hassle for a number of them.
        • weka 10.1.1.1

          23 February 2014 at 12:44 pm

          Doesn’t sound onerous to me srylands.

          Voting in a general election from overseas

          You can vote from overseas if you are enrolled and:

          you are a New Zealand citizen and have visited New Zealand within the last three years, or
you are a permanent resident of New Zealand and have visited New Zealand in the last 12 months.


          Voting papers are not automatically sent to voters who are overseas.

          Voters who are overseas will be able to obtain their voting papers from two and a half weeks before election day in one of the following ways:

          Download their voting papers from this website
Apply to the Electoral Commission for postal voting papers
Vote in person at an overseas post


          Voters who are overseas will be able to return their voting papers in one of the following ways:

          Fax their voting papers to the Electoral Commission (+64 4 494 2300)
Post or courier their voting papers to the Electoral Commission
Post, courier or hand deliver their voting papers to their nearest overseas post


          Voting papers returned to the Electoral Commission must be received no later than 7.00pm (NZ time) on Election Day.

          Voting papers returned to an overseas post must be received before the close of voting at that post usually 4.00pm (local time) the day before election day (subject to local holidays). Please check with your nearest overseas post for their closing time.

          If you have any further questions about enrolling or voting from overseas,

          Click here to contact the Electoral Commission http://www.elections.org.nz/contact-electoral-commission

          From within New Zealand call 0800 36 76 56.
          From outside of New Zealand call +64 9 909 4182.

          http://www.elections.org.nz/voters/get-ready-enrol-and-vote/enrol-and-vote-overseas
        • RedLogix 10.1.1.2

          23 February 2014 at 1:12 pm

          But if they return to New Zealand for a visit, the three year count starts all over again.

          So we cannot vote in Australia and it costs us an airfare to vote in the NZ election. Not onerous at all I guess.

          http://www.visaaustralia.com.au/post/65948526921/important-information-for-kiwis-living-in-australia-on

          So any kind of criminal offending (however old or ‘spent’) will prevent you from visiting NZ and returning to Australia, effectively disenfranchising you completely. Interesting; wonder how many people are in this boat.

          For what it’s worth Kiwiblog had a good guest post on this a while back.

          http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/08/guest_post_new_zealanders_living_in_australia.html
      • tc 10.1.2

        23 February 2014 at 12:15 pm

        Yup and alot are up in the NW of aus on mine sites, so hardly close to a consulate.
        • veutoviper 10.1.2.1

          23 February 2014 at 12:45 pm

          They don’t need to be near a consulate etc. They can enrol online or via other means as set out on the Electoral Commission website. Here is a link to the page on overseas enrolments and how they can vote.

          http://www.elections.org.nz/voters/get-ready-enrol-and-vote/enrol-and-vote-overseas

          SNAP – I see weka has provided the information about voting from this page in her comment above – and the link. But the page also covers how to enrol.
          • weka 10.1.2.1.1

            23 February 2014 at 1:02 pm

            Oh yeah, enrolling too. Thanks.
      • weka 10.1.3

        23 February 2014 at 12:36 pm

        Didn’t the GP get an extra MP one year because they had targeted the Australian vote? (I think it came back in the specials after the election)
      • veutoviper 10.1.4

        23 February 2014 at 5:27 pm

        RL, your question “Does anyone have some data on expat voting at hand?” sparked my interest.

        I have found some data etc – in between doing other things today. Will pull it together and post it either later tonight, or more likely tomorrow. It is quite interesting. Cheers.
      • veutoviper 10.1.5

        24 February 2014 at 10:23 am

        RedLogix

        Basic data on the number of overseas votes cast in elections can be found on the electionresults.govt.nz website, under the Statistics section for each general election.

        For example these pages for the 2011 election, provide overseas votes by Party and by Electorate votes (but don’t include overseas votes found to be invalid).

        http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2011/e9/html/e9_part10_1.html

        http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2011/e9/html/e9_part10_2.html

        These pages show that the number of overseas votes in 2011 were 20,333 valid special declaration votes and informal votes for Party votes; and the same number of valid spec dec votes and informal votes for Electorate votes.

        In the 2008 election, the equivalent pages show higher overseas vote levels at 32,522 Prty votes and the same number of Electorate votes.

        The parliamentary Justice and Electoral Committee report into the 2011 election that I referred to in my comment at 15 below also provides some statistics and discussion on overseas voters that are of interest.

        http://www.parliament.nz/resource/0001871776

        Relevant pages are pages 29, 32 and 33. Some intersting discussion on possible e-voting, and continued use of obsolete technology eg Faxes.

        Page 29 quotes statistics slightly different to the above – ie 21,496 overseas votes in 2011, a 35% drop from 33,278 in 2008. These may be total numbers, including invalid votes not included in the figures above.
    • Skinny 10.2

      23 February 2014 at 12:19 pm

      Yes very good point about the overseas vote tc.

      I have a friend who lives in Switzerland who came home for a holiday last year. I never really knew her political flavor until she starting talking about guilt for not bothering to vote from abroad. She was absolutely horrified at how bad thing were here for the average Kiwi. She had quite a rant about noticing the difference in quality of live for the haves and the have nots, and how they really detest smug John Key and his National Government.

      Nice to hear her reassure me she would vote to help remove this regime in power. I better give her a catch up call possibly ask her to write a letter to the editor of the NZH voicing her opinion about the stark contrast from her previous visit under Helen Clarks days in power.

      Like we say every voice and vote counts.
11. tricledrown 11

    23 February 2014 at 12:01 pm

    Tightarse almighty
    Their is no compulsory retirement age.
    Raising the age of National superanuation will only affect those who aren’t in kiwisaver which kicks in at 65 having compulsory kiwisaver will put an end to that argument.
    The baby boomers who have denied them are the likes of stephen joyce cutting funding for tertiary education.
    • tc 11.1

      23 February 2014 at 12:22 pm

      Yes and many are still drawing salaries and super, double dipping IMO if you are still in the workforce.

      one i know thinks its a rort, most just change the subject when you point out their wealth and their job could go to someone without one.
      • RedLogix 11.1.1

        23 February 2014 at 1:25 pm

        Yes and many are still drawing salaries and super, double dipping IMO if you are still in the workforce.

        But of course you are still paying tax if you are working. The only alternative to a Universal Super is means testing and we know from repeated experience exactly where that ends up.

        The correct answer is to extend Universal Super to all ages. – ie a Universal Basic Income.
12. Bearded Git 12

    23 February 2014 at 12:52 pm

    Have just sent the enrolement link (above) to my 2 sons and told them to send it on to their friends. My sons in the age bracket 18-24 (see Veutoviper above) where only 69.63% enrolled.

    Have you done this yet fellow Standardistas?
13. aerobubble 13

    23 February 2014 at 1:11 pm

    They were not the gurus of wall street, the simple fact of the last thirty years of economics is increasing cheap high density full coming onto the market. And this has created a generation of politicians, media and business people who manufactures lots of leaky businesses. Businesses that leak profits. Its simple physics, hire monkeys get lots of peanuts. Now the world economy has hit a plateau, where gas is barely keeping up with growing demand, and all those leaky profitable entities are ill-adapted. Central banks came to their rescue, instead of letting profit leaking entities go bust they started poring in more money to stabilize the world economy. The GFC has been put into rehab, a smooth constant supply of value drugs (debt) keeps the addict from going cold turkey.

    Ive wonder for the last few decades why so many stupid people get to speak into my home via TV, and its been down to the notion that because they got under the waterfall of profits flowing from the great gush of cheap middle east oil that somehow they were smart or more gifted in their rancid neo-liberalism.

    And here’s the problem for the progressives, how to invoke within voters that they know what is going on, yet not scare them into thinking a collapse is inevitable (which it is). Well unless governments in the western economies can purge boardrooms, media rooms and parliaments of really stupid people who only got there because they want to be under the shower of profits and thought by repetitively reciting the dogma myths they too would be let in.

    Key is so rancid and weak it does shock me just a little that Labour haven’t got a think tank coming up with a conveyor belt of put downs, which both indicate understanding but also dish the Key party as the wasters they are.

    Capitalism has been on sweat easy times, now we are returning to a more nasty capitalism that requires parliaments to stand up to business, cut into the cream and pass it to the people so the whole economy doesn’t come to a grinding halt. Government you see is a balancing act that got wedged by neo-liberalism for the last thirty years and so needs to regrow balls. Key’s reciting
    small government, and defending business least their weak hollowed out bodies die, are the politics of weakness, the politics of disaster, the politics of the past.

    Wobbly governments, or dictatorships, they go one way or other when the political-media-business elites fail to grasp that we-the-people, of-the-people, and by-the-people are the rulers.
    Not the almighty profit flow aka National.
14. Stuart Munro 14

    23 February 2014 at 6:06 pm

    Well, I’m one of those disenfranchised by the 3 years overseas rule.

    Increasingly I’m starting to think like Jones and Olken: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/25760274?uid=3738392&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103558396503

    I’m getting really tired of neo-liberal government wrecking my country and prospects, be they Labour or National.
15. veutoviper 15

    24 February 2014 at 8:46 am

    Yesterday, at 5.1 I provided data from the Electoral Commission website on the lower rates of voter enrolment for the 18-24 and 25-29 age groups compared to older age groups (plus the links to the relevant pages of the EC website).

    I have since found two more sources of information on enrolment and voting trends (including that of young people) that are well worth reading.

    Firstly, the parliamentary Justice and Electoral Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2011 General Election” report released in April 2013.
    http://www.parliament.nz/resource/0001871776

    This report contains some very interesting discussion on all aspects of the election, voter participation etc and is relatively easy to read and not too long.

    Section 4 (page 20 onwards) covers voter turnout (including a shocking graph on the decrease over the years) and some comments re young voters,

    “We were particularly concerned to note not only a continuing trend of declining turnout by
    18–24-year-olds, but also research now indicating a marked drop in the number of 24–29-
    year-olds who are voting. This supports evidence we received that 18-year-olds who did
    not vote in their first election do not establish a habit of voting, and continue not to vote in
    subsequent elections.

    There is also an informative discussion on submissions etc on civics education in schools, with a recommendation that the Government consider requesting the Electoral Commission to liaise with the Ministry of Education on the feasibility of incorporating ongoing civics education into the curriculum.

    The second report is Statistics NZ’s ” Non-voters in 2008 and 2011 general elections: Findings from New Zealand General Social Survey” issued in January 2014.

    http://www.stats.govt.nz/~/media/Statistics/browse-categories/people-and-communities/well-being/civic-hum-rights/non-voters-2008-2011-gen-elections.pdf

    This report presents reasons people gave for not voting. It includes selected characteristics of the non-voters, including their age, feelings of income adequacy, labour force status, and migrant status.

    More non-voters in younger age group
    There were more non-voters aged 18–24 years than the older age groups. Only 5.2 percent of people aged 65 years or over did not vote in the 2011 General Election, compared with 42 percent of people aged 18–24 years.

    When compared across the two elections, the proportion of non-voters in the 45–64-year-age group increased significantly from 10 percent in 2008 to just over 13 percent in 2011. For other age groups, the voting behaviours were quite similar.”

    Both reports cover overseas voting trends and data – and I will do a separate comment on this shortly as this was discussed in the comments earlier on this post. In particular, it will addresss RedLogix’s query about data at 10.1 above.
    • karol 15.1

      24 February 2014 at 9:10 am

      veuto, this is being discussed on The Daily Blog, with two schools of thought. Discussion under this post on “poll positions is Cunliffe’s time running out”, by Chris Trotter:

      One side (criticised as being centrist Labour-status quo) – from Rob Salmond, who responded:

      “This, in a nutshell, is Cunliffe’s dilemma. To win he needs to mobilise the young, the brown and the poor who stayed home in 2011.”

      Chris, you are misinformed about which New Zealanders moved from the VOTER to the NON VOTER column in 2011.

      This incorrect assumption is completely understandable, because *typical* or *habitual* non voters do indeed tend to be young, poor, and/or brown. Habitual non voters, however, are the most difficult group of the missing million to get into the booth, as they have no history of participating.

      They are not the best targets for any political party this year.

      The best information I have is that the *new* non voters, who did vote in 2005/2008 but did not vote in 2011, likely do not conform to these stereotypes. They come from a wide variety of economic backgrounds, and are just as likely to be European as to have other ethnic identities.

      New non voters are also much more likely than habitual non voters to cast a vote in 2014, because they have a strong history of participating in elections. Among the people who did not vote in 2011, these are the best targets for all political parties in 2014.

      Because of this (as I said, entirely understandable) misinterpretation about the profile of new non-voters, the rest of your prescription does not hold.

      There followed some discussion including comments from Bomber, who said:

      But to win Cunliffe does need to ‘mobilise the young, the brown and the poor who stayed home in 2011.”

      Selwyn Manning replied to Salmond:

      Rob, I respect your work and your analysis but your argument here on this issue speaks to a strategy derived through a beltway lens. And to win this election, Labour needs to get out of a Wellington mindset and smell the real New Zealand.

      Outside the beltway, it is clear, for Labour to win the 2014 General Election and form stable Government it needs:

      * south Aucklanders to turn out to vote in record numbers;
      * the Green Party onside and returning a party vote result above 12 percent;
      * swing voters to give it the nod in the provinces.

      In December I dug in on this premise and published this feature:

      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/12/01/special-feature-nationals-electoral-boundary-strategy-designed-to-erode-labours-votes/

      But to paraphrase the feature, in my view, to draw voters unto itself, Labour needs to articulate a clear Government-in-waiting policy message based on this simple methodology:

      * Identify the big challenges facing multi-sector/socio groups in NZ;
      * Identify the causes of those challenges;
      * Frame the effects of those causes using real life examples;
      * Drive home solutions and how those solutions will be paid for.

      The strategy needs to be rolled out like a machine. It can’t wait until later. And it needs to display an accord on key policy with the Norman/Turei led Green Party. After all, there is common ground among the Green caucus even while the Green membership, especially in Auckland, is hostile to joining a coalition with Labour.

      If Labour cannot do it, then it hasn’t got a show in the General Election and the vacuum that currently exists in political science terms will be filled by another… albeit likely fragmented into meaninglessness.

      Salmond said he’d explain more in a post on his own blog. The full discussion under Trotter’s post at the link above.
      • veutoviper 15.1.1

        24 February 2014 at 10:00 am

        Thanks, Karol. Don’t often visit The Daily Blog as it seems to take an age to get into it. But will look at that. But have never commented there, and not sure I want to.

        I didn’t mean to do a “Penny Bright” in my comment, but having found those documents, I thought I would share them for anyone interested – as they cover a lot of suggestions/recommendations for the future as well as analysis of what actually happened.

        Just about to do a response to RedLogix on overseas voter numbers, having found stats – but will be short and I might as well record what I found.
16. captain hook 16

    24 February 2014 at 12:42 pm

    does national act have a mandate to wreck the education system to appease the right wing nutters and theologasters.
    National promised to do something about noisy vehicles but they are on the rise again. do these pinheads figure National wont do anything this time around?
17. captain hook 17

    25 February 2014 at 11:42 am

    where are the jobs?

Links to post

1. The Daily Blog Watch – 23/24 February 2014 « The Daily Blog: posted on 24 February 2014 at 8:18 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS