web analytics

Hide begging for his political life

Written By: - Date published: 3:02 pm, October 11th, 2010 - 74 comments
Categories: act, john banks, national, rodney hide - Tags: ,

Well this is a bit sad. Rodney Hide is now publicly begging for his political life:

National needs us, Hide tells supporters

Act leader Rodney Hide has sent a message to the National Party, saying it could lose power if it fails to give him an easy ride in the Epsom electorate next year.

That’s pretty naked isn’t it. Rodney wants an easy ride. Why is he reduced to this?

Mr Hide spoke in Wellington yesterday at the first Act Party regional conference since David Garrett resigned following revelations he had used a dead baby’s identity to get a false passport when he was in his 20s.

Mr Hide did not refer to that episode or the demotion in the weeks before it of Heather Roy as Act’s deputy leader. However, Act’s troubles have prompted increasing speculation that National could stand a strong candidate against him next year to reclaim the Epsom seat in Auckland.

Ohh that’s right, because his dysfunctional party of economic and environmental loony-tunes has publicly self-destructed. Because Rodney got his shot at the big time and blew it all on perks and arrogance. Sad. Meanwhile in other news:

Epsom tipped as place for comeback

Defeated Super City mayoral candidate John Banks says he is taking time to reflect on his future, but people around him expect his name will quickly return to public prominence.

One possibility suggested is Mr Banks standing for the National Party next year in Epsom against Act leader Rodney Hide.

Oh you lucky, lucky Epsom voters. What a choice.

74 comments on “Hide begging for his political life ”

  1. Kenny 1

    Hide won’t be around at the next election (why do you think they got rid of Garrett?)… Rodney is going to get rolled.

    They will have a candidate there and National would be foolish to oppose him/her too strongly because the seat is worth more than one MP to either party. What the elecorate make of this is another matter.

    • Zeebop 1.1

      National needs me! Says Rodney.

      National sanction and support ACT because…

      …there is more than one MP to either party… in it for them.

      National, a proclaimed center rigth party, can’t compete without ACT!

      Its own policies are not saleable, because National doesn’t believe in them, it needs ACT!

      It needs ACT in order to switch out moderate policies for further right
      policies while in government – as it has.

      Because supporting and sanctioning ACT does more for National than
      provide an extra MP or two. It means being able to offer a more
      moderate platform at the election, and make it easier when they
      win to move to the right with an ACT ally. In fact it makes it
      harder for them to sell a moderate center if the country has
      had enough og right wing politics.

      Key’s support of ACT at the next general election is thus a
      bad policy, since the country will be offered the choice of
      another three years of looney right ACT-Nationalism, and
      make it EASIER for Labour to win if ACT likely fail to get into
      parliament.

    • Margaret 1.2

      I think John Key may be in the process of dumping Rodney anyway.

      Key wanted Rodney there to do the dirty work so any mud or anger went straight to Rodney and left the National Party squeeky clean.

      Rodney has now finished the dirty job so does John Key need him anymore?

      Remember money men do not make decisions based on how it is going to effect people (skills they do not have) they only base decisions on what it is going to do to the ledger.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1

        Well, the mud has certainly stuck to Rodney and Act but I’m not too sure that National have come out of the partnership spotless.

  2. comedy 2

    Here’s a suggestion Rodney – earn the votes of the public or fuck right off.

  3. prism 3

    Epsom anagram – mopes.

  4. I think “begging for his political life” characterises it unfairly.

    Any third party – be it Greens, NZF, Act, whoever – risks losing not because its policies or its candidate(s) are unpopular but because people worry about “wasting their vote”. Things need to reach a “tipping point” as they did with NZF in 1995 whereby people are confident that a 3rd party vote will count.

    Overcoming that uncertainty is an enormous task, and one I can’t see third party candidates overcoming without deals such as Act has with National in Epsom. It also means an independent, no matter whether they’re the best candidate ever to put their name forward in the history of politics, doesn’t have a hope either. And that, IMHO, is a very bad thing… and one we should be talking aboiut overcoming, not using as a stick with which to beat Act and Hide (when there is a forest full of branches to do that with anyway).

    The slim to no chance of winning without a deal is no reflection on the calibre of the candidate, it’s yet another disadvantage of MMP (which retains FPP for electorate voting). Multi-member electorates with STV would fix this. In such a race both Banks and Hide could stand, and conceivably both could be elected. Or not. That would be a real test of the popularity of both.

    • What you describe as a disadvantage of MMP is a disadvantage of the 5% threshold. Get rid of it and your concern about wasted party votes evaporates.

      • No Graeme I’m talking about the way people think when casting their candidate vote. Each electorate run-off is a mini FPP election.

        You might, for instance, very much like the Act candidate in your electorate but as they aren’t liked much within Act itself they may be too ar down on the list to win a list seat.

        To vote for that candidate as your electorate MP many people would want to feel they had a fair chance of winning and thus that a sufficient number of other voters felt as you did.

        And for an independent, with no list on which to rely, that’s doubly true.

    • Pascal's bookie 4.2

      Hang on a minute mate, the Greens don’t have such a deal, nor do the maori Party, nor did NZ First as far as I can remember.

      And I think it is a pretty big part a reflection on the candidates and policy that they are at that tipping point you accurately describe. Big centrist parties are BCPs because most people like to think of themselves that way. Small ideological parties are SIPs because not many people think of themselves that way.

      The greens got closest to being wiped out in 05 from memory, and that tipping point was certainly an issue. It’s the only time I’ve voted for Labour and I had to get good and drunk to do so, and did so purely because of the risk that they would get 4.* percent and Brash would be PM with all that entailed for the economy, race relations, foreign affairs and all the bloody ragged rest of it. Aside from that though I’m not really seeing where the small parties avoid that problem through deals.

      NZF, Anderton’s solo act, and the Dunnie party survive(d) through having an established pollie with a loyal electorate. It’s only ACT that get in on via the nudge wink wingnut welfare system.

      Of course I could be completely batshit and missing the obvious, but I’d like to be told where.

      • Sean 4.2.1

        NZF, Anderton’s solo act, and the Dunnie party survive(d) through having an established pollie with a loyal electorate. It’s only ACT that get in on via the nudge wink wingnut welfare system.

        Of course I could be completely batshit and missing the obvious…

        No, I think you are on to it.

      • Fair points Pb, and reflective of the fact I didn’t express myself very well in the original comment.

        You’re right about the MP and the Greens… they’ve surpassed that tipping point and it’s a measure of their appeal that they’ve done so. NZF is kinda different… more akin to the Anderton / Dunne factor in that people were really voting for one man, but unlike them in that it wasn’t because of Winston’s performance as an electorate MP. But remember Anderton and Dunne had the advantage of having been MPs for a BCP for a long time; people knew what they were getting. Neither would haver stood a chance as an independent (which, for all their fiction about being party leaders, is essentially what they are). And so had Winston, for that matter.

        And also let’s remember that Dunne benefited many times from facing no, or only token, opposition from one or other BCP.

        I’m envisaging the problem faced by, say, a good candidate who can’t get enough traction in their own party to be ranked high enough on the list to get in that way, or by an independent.

        Saying that such a candidate needs to do a deal whereby they face no real challenge in order to be elected in their own right is therefore somewhat unfair. True, but unfair, in that it’s not the candidate’s fault.

        To take the Epsom example; Act is so knackered that it has no hope of making 5 percent. There may however, be a sizeable proportion of the electorate still prepared to vote for Rodney Hide… but only if their vote isn’t wasted through too many other right-leaning voters casting their ballot for National. National standing a strong candidate would thus frighten them into voting for that candidate even if they truly prefer Hide.

        Not saying that is the situation, just that it could be, and that it’s hard to divine. I’d like to see Hide (and anyone else standing, for that matter) face a situation where they were picked solely on their merits as an MP, with no extraneous considerations clouding the choice. That doesn’t happen under the mini-FPP race that decides each electorate.

        Gawd, that’s probably no clearer… *sigh*

        • Lanthanide 4.2.2.1

          I’m not aiming this criticism at you, but the whole idea of “wasting your vote” in an electorate doesn’t really make sense.

          If you prefer Rodney, but vote for National anyway (when clearly no left-wing party would win the seat), then you have effectively wasted your vote by voting for someone you didn’t want. If you vote for Rodney and he loses, I don’t really see that as “wasting” your vote, unless by doing so you let someone you really don’t like win the seat by splitting the vote.

          • Rex Widerstrom 4.2.2.1.1

            Alright, let’s try a different hypothetical. Let’s look at Mana, which is ideal because there won’t be a party vote consideration at the byelection.

            I’m a left voter. I don’t like the way Kris Fa’afoi was parachuted in. In fact, I’m so pissed of at yet another carpetbagger being put up on the assumption that myself and my fellow voters will automatically tick Labour that I want to go out of my way to make sure he doesn’t get in.

            In terms of individuals, the candidate who impresses me most is from the Greens. But if I cast my vote that way, and not enough other people follow suit, I’ll have “wasted” it. So to send a message to Labour do I vote for Hekia Parata, whom I don’t mind as a person, and just swallow the fact that I’m voting for a representative of a party I don’t like, or take the risk and support the Greens candidate?

            In fact if I’m like a lot of people I’ll watch the polls. Which is why small parties always seem to poll higher than they do on election day. Their support is effectively people hpoing “If I say I’m supporting (say) the Greens, then maybe my neighbours will too”. But then not enough people say so (it doesn’t reach the tipping point), doubt sets in, and they vote “the big party I hate least” come polling day.

            • Margaret 4.2.2.1.1.1

              Right on the button, I like what you say

              You never know though we may get braver as the year goes on and feel we want to vote for our values, and if Labour wants our votes then they have to be greener.

            • Lanthanide 4.2.2.1.1.2

              Sorry, I find your example completely incomprehensible.

              It makes utterly no sense to me whatsoever that you would vote National to teach Labour a lesson, for fear that voting Green is a waste of your vote. If you vote for the National candidate, and they don’t win, have you again “wasted” your vote? Seems all you can do is vote for whoever is going to win, otherwise you will have to consider your vote “wasted”. That makes no sense.

              • Armchair Critic

                My party vote is wasted unless I vote for the National party candidate. Dairy country, no way the farmers will vote any other way. I still can’t bring myself to tick their box, so my electorate vote is always wasted.
                What Rex suggests sort of does make sense. For example, in Epsom at the next general election it might be smart for Labour and Green supporters to vote National for the seat, and Labour or Green for the list. That would mean the National candidate would be more likely to get in for the Epsom seat instead of ACT.
                Having said that, in 2008 it would not have worked. Labour, the Greens and National totalled 16,119 votes, some 4,983 votes behind Hide, who received 21,102 votes. And we would have been blessed had Richard Worth (whatever happened to old Dickie??) instead.
                In 2011 it could be a different story. Who is to say there aren’t 3,000-odd voters out there in Epsom who aren’t that happy with Rodney and ACT.

                • Lanthanide

                  I know where Rex is coming from, but the example he’s given doesn’t make sense.

                  IMO, the only way to say your vote was ‘wasted’ in an electorate vote is if you voted for your preferred candidate who you suspected had no real chance of winning, and a result your 2nd preferred candidate who could’ve won the electorate instead lost to the opposition candidate. In that case, you wasted your vote by voting for someone who was not likely to get in at the expense of your 2nd preferred candidate.

                  The example Rex gave is pathological – you’re not happy with your generally-preferred candidate, so you vote for the opposition to punish them instead? Really in this case it makes more sense to not vote, or to park your vote where you think it is unlikely to harm either way. Of course, under my definition above, if you voted Green instead of Labour and as a result National got in despite G+L having a majority, I would say you wasted your vote by letting the opposition in when you could’ve easily won it had the vote not been split.

            • mcflock 4.2.2.1.1.3

              the other point to consider is that if you want the Green candidate to win, vote for them, and they lose, your vote is still not “wasted”.

              If Labour started getting their votes whittled down towards Green candidates in a single electorate, that is an incentive for the Labour MP to act a bit more green in parliament.

              If Labour lose by just a little bit, National have an incentive to moderate their behaviour or become a one-term govt. Do people really think that the govt would have backed down on e.g. mining, moderated the VSM bill, incrementally introduced 90 day fire at will (as opposed to 1 year FaW for everybody) etc if ACT got 12%? The fact is that they know their grip on power is tenuous, regardless of the polls at the moment. All they need is one big clusterfoulup and the polls will flip like a coin. I’m not saying it will happen, but ACT have learnt that pride goeth before the fall. So has Banks.

              Hell, if we lose the RWC badly enough the govt might lose the election.

              • Colonial Viper

                Hell, if we lose the RWC badly enough the govt might lose the election.

                Hence why Key may choose a date which falls before the start of the RWC.

          • Margaret 4.2.2.1.2

            Never ever would I – vote for Rodney, I must call myself green – red -red – green, either or, which one will get my vote?

      • Lanthanide 4.2.3

        Voting for Labour because of being scared that the greens would only get 4.*% of the vote – what if your single vote was the one that tipped them from 4.99% to 5.00% and got them into parliament, and by voting for Labour and the resulting electoral calculus let National et all slip through the middle? Obviously if the Greens were only polling around 2-3% that’d be another matter.

        Also, looking at it from a ‘worth’ perspective, 1 vote going to the greens who’re sitting at ~5% is worth more than 1 vote going to Labour who’re sitting at ~40%. That 1 vote can either push the Greens over the 5% threshold or increase their MPs from something like 6 to 7, whereas your single vote for Labour might increase their MPs from 50 to 51. If you truly care about green politics, clearly the former is in your best interests.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.3

      There’s two problems with MMP. The electorates and the 5% threshold. The electorates because they’re unproportional and the 5% threshold because it keeps parties out of parliament when they should actually be in there. To fix this we need to get rid of electorates and drop the threshold to 1/120 of the voting population.

      • My thoughts exactly, with one proviso.

        I like the idea of electing MPs at large but given that people don’t pay much attention now (cf the DHB elections where those with A, B or C surnames were more likely to get ticked) it might be asking a bit much to expect people to consider hundreds of names.

        So larger electorates, with multiple MPs, come close to the ideal while keeping things bite-sized.

        • Lanthanide 4.3.1.1

          The ballots are randomized on a per-person basis (any two random people won’t have the same order of candidates on their ballot), so the ABC surname problem has been dealt with already.

  5. prism 5

    To Epsom.

    Pomes –
    I had a little nut tree
    Nothing did it bear
    But a sour kumquat
    And a rotten pear
    The leader of National
    Came to visit me
    All because of my little nut tree.

    • hateatea 5.1

      ROFL.

      If Rodney’s ego wasn’t so out of control that he seems heading towards an imminent trainwreck, one would be tempted to let the ‘nuts’ fall where they may and let he and Banksie duke it out but if Rodney survives his own party’s internal machinations, something needs to be done for the sake of the country.

      The Supercity and ECAN are enough already!

      captcha: subsequent

      • Bored 5.1.1

        Oh how are the mighty fallen?

        Self inflicted wounds ( so lets leave him to finish himself off)>

    • Huang Y.G. 5.2

      @ prism

      Did the leader of the National
      at your little nut tree
      smile and wave
      and take a photoshot?

      • prism 5.2.1

        No Huang YG it was a behind closed doors secret meeting – no pesky reporters around to snitch on the ‘horse-trading’! I’m 99% sure of that.

  6. toad 6

    Banks is yesterday’s man. If National are serious about wanting to see the back of ACT, they won’t stand Banks in Epsom, especially now he is tainted with the Mayoralty defeat. They’ll stand Steven Joyce.

  7. ianmac 7

    In due course I hope MMP adjustment will bring the threshold down from 5% to about 2-3%.

    • Lanthanide 7.1

      I think 3.5% is a nice number. Big enough to make an appreciable difference, but still small enough for a newly-formed party to get in there. ACT might even slip in there with that threshold, but I expect that Dunne and Anderton would probably pick up a few more party votes, as well as NZF. ‘sall good.

      It equates to 4.2 seats btw, current 5% = 6.

      captcha: appreciating

      • prism 7.1.1

        I don’t think we would be served by having less than 3.5% threshhold. I remember hearing about another country with low threshholds and all the rank nutters got in and the place became ungovernable as far as hard decision making was concerned, ie deciding not to go to war, not to use massive retaliations, and sensitive social issues etc.

      • felix 7.1.2

        Isn’t that just creating the same issue at a slightly lower level?

        What’s the rationale for having a threshold any higher than the proportion equal to 1 seat?

        • Lanthanide 7.1.2.1

          As prism alludes to, having a very low threshold, 0.8% as you advocate, would easily lead to many smaller 1-person parties, reducing the ability of the major parties to form stable governments or pass legislation effectively in a timely manner. If you think the tail wags the dog at the moment, it’d be much worse in a parliament with 5-8 smaller 1-man parties.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2.1.1

            I doubt that you’d get that many “1-man” parties.

            And it appears that I owe JA and PD an apology, it appears that they did get enough votes for 1 seat each.

          • felix 7.1.2.1.2

            Hmm. I don’t see any tails wagging dogs. Which tails and dogs do you mean exactly?

            I’d like to see more independents and smaller parties – that would provide for the possibility of a wider range of views i.e. more representation. It doesn’t matter how stupid or crazy or fringe they are, if there’s a constituency for them then they should be there.

            If that means larger parties find it more difficult to dominate the agenda, good.

            The perversity of the current system is that it rewards crazy fringe dwellers like the ACT party with a degree of influence in excess of the size their constituency which is probably in reality closer to the size of the Bill & Ben constituency.

            • lprent 7.1.2.1.2.1

              To take an extreme example, perhaps you should read about the past 60 years of party political history and the subsequent governments in the Knesset? Hardly an inspiring example of lower thresholds.

  8. BLiP 8

    What’s that Winston chap up to these days?

  9. tc 9

    Methinks the ‘banks for epsom’ is either more poetic licence from granny or listening to much to the rantings of a sore loser…either way it’s pretty far fetched.

    Bet M Laws wished he could get every idiotic thought splashed throughout the MSM….oh hang on, shit he does already damm.

    • Akldnut 9.1

      umm Poetic – Epsom – Poems

      There was a young man named John
      Who really thought he was the key
      To solve Aucklands problems in one foul swoop
      So onto it, he set Rodney

      Now Rodney was full of shit
      He stole our democracy
      After he screwed us all, well he took a hit
      By taking his girl to see “Disney”.

      Now Rodney was lining us up
      He had the super city dead in his sight
      But when he left us out and set up his mates
      He found we don’t die with out fight.

      He thought that his mate Banks
      Would clean up the scum with ease
      He mis-understood that the crew from the hood
      Would bring Banksie to his knees

      Now Banksie’s got nowhere to go
      He thinks “Epsom’s a nice place” you know
      I’ll put up my hand and show that one man band
      That it’s National that runs this show.

      Poor Rodney he got it amiss
      And that Banksie, he’s just a clown
      They got their arse kicked and we take the piss
      Cause they all live in Brown Town

  10. Tiger Mountain 10

    The fact that ACT is not widely supported is what Hideney has to face. Threatening Helen Clark on the electorate, ooh scary, and undignified brown nosing of National won’t cut it for ACT in the end.

    Tweaking the threshold is needed, 4% might be a bit closer to an optimum level that would keep the “total raving looney party” out while granting parliamentary seats to parties that have a genuine level of popular support.

    • ianmac 10.1

      Not sure of the maths but even at 1% the “loonies” would have to be pretty organised and if they were that good, then perhaps they deserve to be “in.”

  11. STV isnt that what they call “first past the post in drag”!

    National know they can’t fool the population into going back to FFP thats why they have chosen STV being careful not to push it too much, they are still hopingthey cann still say “trust me I know what I am doing”.

    Maybe that’s the problem NZ’s have realised they can’t trust this man.

    • STV “FPP in drag”?

      Where are you getting your information?! Not according to the UK Fabians (that post is a guest one, written by a professor who authored an STV scheme promoted by the Lib Dems, but I assume they agree with his opinons) or local academics either.

      As the second linked article summarises things quite neatly:

      Arguments in favour of STV emphasise its fairness and its potential to effectively represent the preferences of voters. There are fewer wasted votes and those elected are more likely to have the support of a majority of voters – we will be more able to identify someone on council we have contributed to electing. Arguments against STV, though, emphasise its complexity in requiring voters to rank candidates, count votes and allocate preferences. [my emphasis]

      So while there are arguments to be mounted against it, “FPP in drag” certainly isn’t one of them.

    • toad 11.2

      No, Margaret, not with multi-member electorates. But that gets too difficult in New Zealand, because to make it reasonably proportional, the South Island and Maori electorates woul have to be huge, which detracts from the local democracy principle.

      I think in New Zealand the better option would be to have under MMP an AV/PV (Alternative Vote/Preferential Vote) election for the electorate MPs, where voters have can rank candidates, rather than just pick one, and with the preferences of the bottom polling candidates being reallocated until there is a clear winner.

      Possibly add onto that a prohibition on candidates being both electorate candidates and on the Party list.

      The combination would give voters much more ability to get rid of MPs they don’t like.

      And drop the threshold. Much as I hate the racist and populist politics of NZFirst and wish they would disappear forever, it is a travesty of democracy that they failed to get any MPs into the current Parliament despite polling higher than ACT or the Maori Party.

      But these are all reforms to MMP – not alternatives to it, as I think it is the most democratic electoral system we can have, although its current form could be improved on.

      • prism 11.2.1

        toad I found it a bore ranking my hospital board votes instead of just voting for the people I want. I rated someone 3 that I was going to rate 9 even though I was trying to do everything correctly. It is more work when you have 7 or 12 to vote for and have to read up candidate booklets. FPP was easy – and to say that voters will find STV better than MMP is a mistake. More voters are going to be put off by the demands of the STV system.

        In Australia parties know that people get flummoxed and will hand them cards showing the best way of citing preferences to agree with any deals that have been made between parties and candidates. It is a bit dodgy and the clean system can get diluted as I think, is already the case of giving progressive counts for loc bod elections while still in progress. I haven’t read when the count for DHB will be finished either. That election seems to fade in interest which gets focussed on loc bodies.

    • Draco T Bastard 11.3

      I think you’re thinking of SM rather than STV.

      • toad 11.3.1

        I presume that reply is to Margaret, rather than me. I think SM is a dog of an electoral system. It is basically FPP, with a few scraps for the parties that can’t win an electorate. On that basis, a party could get 25% of the vote, but still only 4 or 5 seats.

      • KJT 11.3.2

        SM. Sado-masochism is voting for NACT or Labour. Unless they both see the futility of the current economic and political system.
        We should have democratic control of our country. Not politicians.

        http://kjt-kt.blogspot.com/search/label/Politics.%20Democracy.

        “Follow Switzerland and make New Zealand’s Government arrangements
        a democracy instead of a pretend one.
        We should control our country, not, 122 self appointed incompetents, the OECD or IMF, or a bunch of failed idealisations from a few true believers in neo-liberalism.”

        • Draco T Bastard 11.3.2.1

          We should, yes, but we need to be sure that people are making informed choices first rather than irrational ones.

          • Lanthanide 11.3.2.1.1

            See also: California’s massive debt and repeated failures to raise taxes due to direct democracy.

            • KJT 11.3.2.1.1.1

              See also New Zealand parliaments repeated policies which are not supported by most of us.

              Direct democracy may have prevented Muldoons spending for election bribes. The 1984 Labour Governments throwing the baby out with the bathwater, Ruthenasia etc.
              We would have also had women’s suffrage and Gay rights sooner as it was the politicians that held them up.

              One unpublished study here showed that most people, given a choice of policies only, preferred green Policies. The same people when given a choice of parties chose John Key. Go figure.

              See also Wisconsin and other US States responsible decisions from BCIR. Why quote one State and one decision. Research shows that decisions arrived at by BCIR are often better and better supported by research than those made by Politicians. If people have to make a decision themselves they tend to look into it more deeply.,

              The political parties in the States are also reducing taxes to the extent they cannot pay back debt or support disadvantaged people. It is a reflection of their society, not the type of Government.

              People did make an informed and rational choice here given the available options. The only way in NZ to get rid of a parties policies you do not like is to vote in the lot you did not like last time. We only have the choice of Neo-lib heavy or Neo-lib slightly lighter.

              Lastly as “No right turn” says. “Even if we make the wrong decisions at the end of the day it is our decision to make”.

          • KJT 11.3.2.1.2

            True.
            Unlike some though I do not believe capitalism and a decent socialist society are mutually exclusive.
            The problem with badly regulated or un-regulated capitalism is the cheats prosper.

            Capitalism is fine as a means of resource allocation if it is DEMOCRATICALLY regulated to take externalities into account and so people cannot cheat the system.

            New Zealander’s as a group have proven to have a pretty good sense of fairness and justice. I think we can be trusted to get it right more often than a self selected group of marginally competent politicians.

            Often when some one says the public’s choices are un -informed it is simply because it is not “their choices”.

  12. gingercrush 12

    I dislike STV simply because I believe it adds too much complication and you would have to give parties more power. Because for STV to truly work you need to rank all candidates with those you want numbered first and those you really don’t want numbered last. Parties would have to give out those details presumably on polling day as they do in Australia. STV itself I believe would actually be a turn-off for many voters who simply could find themselves unwilling to vote.

    That doesn’t mean STV is wholly stupid. The idea that if your first choice doesn’t make it but someone else you like does certainly has its merits. Hence why for New Zealand I prefer the idea of an additional/alternative vote for both electorate and party votes. If you supported New Zealand First in 2008 its highly likely you would have preferred a Labour run party. If you were an Alliance supporter no doubt you’d prefer a Labour-Greens government. Under this scenario if your party does not make the required threshold then your additional vote is included so if you chose the Greens, they’d have an extra vote. Some votes would remain wasteful if for instance your first vote was the Alliance and your additional vote went to the RAM party. But I think on the whole instead of the 5% or more wasted vote we had in 2008 you’d get far less. Remember as it stands the wasted vote as such is passed onto all those parties that did make it into parliament. So the 500 or so RAM voters last election, most of those would have gone to National.

    The real strength would be in electorate battles where electorates like Auckland Central went to National because the Green candidate attracted a large number of votes. In any election you could have about 5-8 different results with an additional/alternative vote. It could also be used strategically for instance in Epsom at the 2005 election. Hide won that electorate by 3, 102 votes. The Labour candidate had 6, 000 votes compared to Worth’s 12, 000 votes. In such a situation a Labour voter may well prefer a National electorate MP over Hide being the electorate MP.

    In regards to the threshold. I think there does need to be a threshold. Having no threshold could give way too much power to parties that attract 1 or 2% of the vote. There is enough public upset over how much power Act, New Zealand First, Alliance, United Future have had with Labour and National government let alone parties with even lower support. 4% as originally suggested would be an idea. A threshold is also necessary as while a party could enjoy 1% vote its probable most of the country actually wouldn’t want such a party represented.

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1

      A threshold is also necessary as while a party could enjoy 1% vote its probable most of the country actually wouldn’t want such a party represented.

      It’s not up to the rest of the country to decide who represents you (Most of the people didn’t want act represented in parliament :P). Then there’s the minor technicality that the Progressives and the Peter Dunne party are in parliament with significantly less than 1% of the vote. To put that in perspective 1% of the vote is about the same as an entire electorate. Both PD and JA got plurality, not majority.

      You have to have a threshold but it should be set high enough so that 1 person voting for himself doesn’t get into parliament but also low enough so that if a party gets enough votes to represent 1 seat then they actually get 1 seat (1/120 for a 120 seat parliament). It’s not that much different from what we have now except that parties that are presently kept out by the biased system would get the needed representation.

    • Lanthanide 12.2

      There is no real requirement that you rank every single candidate in an election under STV. In fact, leaving some candidates unranked is actually worse than ranking them in the bottom half of the sheet. If they’re in the bottom half of your ranking, they could conceivably still get a vote attributed to them. But if you don’t rank them at all, then they don’t get a vote under any circumstances.

      As such, what you’ve described with alternative/additional vote is essentially STV where you get to rank #1 and #2 only, and no more. In terms of simplicity I think this would be a workable solution (people have difficulty understanding 2 votes as it is, let alone being forced or allowed to rank every candidate).

  13. ron 13

    There is a simple solution:
    National should stand Banks
    ACT should stand Rodney
    If EITHER of them get in we should chuck Epsom out of the Union – because they simply shouldn’t be allowed to continue being so STUPID.

    Captcha – nowhere

    • RobertM 13.1

      A fail safe test of the IQ and EQ and vision of the Remuera voter. And if those three abilities exist in Auckland and NZ.
      Compare with what comes out of the richest London, Jo-Burg and Melbourne seats.
      Mr Hooton I think you should retire early to a nice little bungalow on the Sydney shore. I agree with the NBR analysis. But is there really any pointwhen you stoop to being Johns errand boy and speech writer.

  14. swordfish 14

    Yep, Margaret’s definitely thinking about SM rather than STV. Nact’s pushing for SM because it “sounds” like a proportional system but, in fact, is very similar to FPP in its consequences.

    STV certainly has its advantages but I’d agree that most punters find it just a little too complex. I’d stick with MMP, establish the threshold at 100,000 party-votes (rather than a percentage), and – ah, what the hell ! – make voting compulsory as well (as in Aussie).

    Traditionally, Labour voters (especially those on the lowest income) are the least likely to turnout. Compulsory voting should therefore add, what ?, another 10, perhaps 15 % to the Labour/Centre-Left vote ? Permanent Centre-Left government. Works for me !

    • KJT 14.1

      Labour has not been left or centre left for some time. Even with 9 years of opportunity they still continued with Neo-lib policies only slightly salted with some of those we normally associate with left wing Government.

      Which i strongly suspect, along with a lot of “we know best” is why they lost the election.

  15. Ian 15

    Sad? Piss off, it’s funny.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Joint Statement: New Zealand and Australian Trade Ministers
    Hon Damien O'Connor MP, New Zealand Minister for Trade and Export Growth, and Hon Dan Tehan MP, Australian Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, met virtually on Monday 20 September to advance trans-Tasman cooperation under the Australia-New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement (CER). CER is one of the most ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 hours ago
  • Prime Minister’s Post Cabinet Press Conference/COVID-19 Update opening statement
    ***Please check against delivery***   E te tī, e te tā, nau mai rā [To all, I bid you welcome]   As you will have seen earlier, today there are 22 new community cases to report; three of which are in Whakatiwai in the Hauraki area, and the remainder in ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 hours ago
  • Major milestones for Māori COVID-19 vaccine rollout as new campaign launches
    Whānau Ora and Associate Health (Māori Health) Minister Peeni Henare acknowledges two major milestones in the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccination programme for Māori. “I am very pleased to announce more than 50 percent of eligible Māori have received their first dose and 25 per cent are now fully vaccinated,” ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Government funding to fight infectious diseases
    $36 million for research into Covid-19 and other infectious diseases The investment will improve our readiness for future pandemics Research will focus on prevention, control, and management of infectious diseases The Government’s investing in a new Infectious Diseases Research Platform to boost Aotearoa New Zealand’s Covid-19 response and preparedness for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 day ago
  • Quarantine-free travel with Australia to remain suspended for a further 8 weeks
    Suspension to be reviewed again mid to late November Decision brought forward to enable access from Australia to first tranche of around 3000 rooms in MIQ Air New Zealand working at pace to put on more flights from Australia from October    The suspension of quarantine-free travel (QFT) with Australia has ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Extra support for Ethnic Communities to share vaccination information
    Extra support is being made available to Ethnic Communities to help them share COVID-19 vaccination information within their communities, Minister for Diversity, Inclusion and Ethnic Communities Priyanca Radhakrishnan said. “We know we need to get every eligible person in New Zealand vaccinated. A fund being launched today will allow for ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • School holidays remain unchanged for Auckland region
    School holidays in Auckland will continue to be held at the same time as the rest of the country, starting from Saturday, 2 October, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “I’ve carefully considered advice on the implications of shifting the dates and concluded that on balance, maintaining the status quo ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Government continues crackdown on gangs and organised crime
    Operation Tauwhiro extended until March 2022 Since it was launched in February, Operation Tauwhiro has resulted in:   987 firearms seized $4.99 million in cash seized 865 people charged with a firearms-related offence Gangs and organised crime groups will continue to be relentlessly targeted with the extension of Police’s successful ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Speech to Body Positive 'HIV Treatments Update Seminar 2021'
    E ngā mana E ngā reo E ngā iwi Tēnā koutou katoa Ka huri ki ngā mana whenua o te rohe nei. Tēnā koutou. He mihi hoki ki a tatou kua tau mai nei I raro I te kaupapa o te rā. Nō reira tēnā koutou katoa Acknowledgements It’s a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Power bill changes bring fairness to charges
    A key recommendation of an independent panel to make electricity charges fairer across all households will be put in place, the Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods has announced. “Phasing out the regulations on ‘low-use’ electricity plans will create a fairer playing field for all New Zealanders and encourage a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • NZ economy’s strong momentum will support rebound from Delta outbreak; COVID fund replenished
    The economy showed strong momentum in the period leading up to the recent Delta COVID-19 outbreak, which bodes well for a solid economic rebound, Grant Robertson said. GDP rose 2.8 percent in the June quarter, following on from a 1.4 percent increase in the previous March quarter. This was a ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Projects create benefits into the future
    Making a well-known lake swimmable and helping to halt the decline of the endangered hoiho/yellow-eyed penguins are among a suite of new projects being supported by the Government’s Jobs for Nature programme across the southern South Island, Conservation Minister Kiri Allan says. “It’s no secret that many of our most ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Opening statement for Whāriki Indigenous Small Business Roundtable
      Kei ngā tōpito e wha o te āo e rere ana te mihi maioha ki a koutou nō tawhiti, nō tata mai e tāpiri ana ki tēnei taumata kōrero mo te ao hokohoko arā mā ngā pākihi mo ngā iwi taketake Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa – Pai Mārire.  ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • New members appointed to Kāpuia
    The Government is adding four additional members to Kāpuia, the Ministerial Advisory Group on the Government’s Response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch mosques. “I’m looking forward to having Pamela MacNeill, Huia Bramley, Melani Anae and Katherine Dedo  join Kāpuia and contribute to this group’s ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Timeline confirmed for Emissions Reductions Plan
    Cabinet has agreed to begin consulting on the Emissions Reduction Plan in early October and require that the final plan be released by the end of May next year in line with the 2022 Budget, the Minister of Climate Change, James Shaw confirmed today. “Cabinet’s decision allows organisations and communities ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Pay parity pathway for early learning teachers confirmed
    Pay parity conditions and higher funding rates for education and care services will come into force on 1 January, 2022, Minister of Education Chris Hipkins confirmed today. The Government signalled this work in Budget 2021. “From 1 January, 2022, centres opting into the scheme will receive government funding and be ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Nurses Organisation Conference 2021
    Kia Ora tatau katoa.   Ka tuku mihi ki nga nēhi, He pou Hauora o Aotearoa, E ora ai tatou.   Whakatau mai  I runga i te kaupapa o te ra Te NZNO conference.   Tena koutou tena koutou Tena tatou katoa   Good morning, and thank you inviting me ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Government investment in farmer-led catchment groups sweeps past 150 mark
    171 catchment groups have now been invested in by the Government 31 catchment groups in the Lower North Island are receiving new support More than 5,000 farmers are focussed on restoring freshwater within a generation through involvement in catchment groups  Government investment in on-the-ground efforts by farmers to improve land ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Fight to protect kauri on track
    The Government is pitching in to help vital work to protect nationally significant kauri forests in Auckland, Minister of Conservation Kiri Allan says. “Ensuring the survival of these iconic trees for future generations means doing everything we can to prevent the potential spread of kauri dieback disease,” Kiri Allan said. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Joint statement of Mr Bernard Monk; Hon Andrew Little, Minister Responsible for Pike River Re-entry,...
    [Note: The Parties have agreed on terms to fully and finally settle the proceeding and will jointly issue the below statement.] At the heart of this litigation are the lives of the 29 men tragically lost at the Pike River mine on 19 November 2010 and to whom we pay ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • More financial support for businesses
    Today’s decision to keep Auckland in a higher COVID Alert Level triggers a third round of the Wage Subsidy Scheme which will open for applications at 9am this Friday. “The revenue test period for this payment will be the 14th to the 27th of September. A reminder that this is ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Aotearoa New Zealand provides further humanitarian support for Afghanistan
    Aotearoa New Zealand is providing a further $3 million in humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan, Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta announced today.  “There is significant humanitarian need in Afghanistan, with the crisis disproportionately affecting women and girls,” said Nanaia Mahuta. The UN has estimated that 80% of the quarter of a million ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Innovative te reo prediction tool announced in Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori
    A new Māori language prediction tool will play a key role in tracking our te reo Māori revitalisation efforts, Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson announced today. He Ara Poutama mō te reo Māori (He Ara Poutama) can forecast the number of conversational and fluent speakers of te reo Māori ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Further Government support for people to access food and essential items
    The Government is responding to need for support in Auckland and has committed a further $10 million to help people access ongoing food and other essential items, Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni announced today. This latest tranche is targeted at the Auckland region, helping providers and organisations to distribute ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Half a million Pfizer vaccines from Denmark
    The Government has secured an extra half a million doses of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines from Denmark that will start arriving in New Zealand within days, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. “This is the second and larger agreement the Government has entered into to purchase additional vaccines to meet the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Inland Revenue providing essential COVID support for businesses
    Inland Revenue is seeing increased demand for Resurgence Support Payments and other assistance schemes that it administers, but is processing applications quickly, Revenue Minister David Parker said today. David Parker said the Resurgence Support Payment, the Small Business Cashflow (loan) Scheme and the Wage Subsidy are available at the same ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • New Zealand marks 20th anniversary of 9/11 attacks
    New Zealand is expressing unity with all victims, families and loved ones affected by the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks, and all terrorist attacks around the world since, including in New Zealand. “Saturday marks twenty years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States, which killed nearly 3,000 people ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Speech to SPREP Environment Ministers
    Talofa Honourable Ulu of Tokelau Faipule Kelihiano Kalolo Tēnā koutou katoa and warm Pacific greetings from Aotearoa to your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. The new science released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on 8 August paints an alarming picture of the projected impacts of climate change on the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Additional Resurgence Support Payments to support business
    Businesses affected by higher Alert Levels will be able to apply for further Resurgence Support Payments (RSP). “The Government’s RSP was initially intended as a one-off payment to help businesses with their fixed costs, such as rent. Ministers have agreed to provide additional payments to recognise the effects of an ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • More Dawn Raids scholarships announced
    Details of the ‘Manaaki New Zealand Short Term Training Scholarships’, a goodwill gesture that follows the Government’s apology for the Dawn Raids of the 1970s, were released today by Pacific Peoples Minister Aupito William Sio. “These scholarships that are targeted to the Pacific will support the kaupapa of the Dawn Raids’ ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • One-way quarantine-free travel for RSE workers starting in October
      One-way quarantine-free travel for Recognised Seasonal Employer (RSE) workers from Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu starts in October New requirement for RSE workers to have received their first vaccination pre-departure, undertake Day 0 and Day 5 tests, and complete a self-isolation period of seven days, pending a negative Day 5 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Govt boosts Pacific suicide prevention support
    Applications have opened for the Pacific Suicide Prevention Community Fund as the Government acts to boost support amid the COVID delta outbreak. “We know strong and connected families and communities are the most important protective factor against suicide and this $900,000 fund will help to support this work,” Health Minister ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Govt parks the expiry of licenses, WoFs and regos
    As a result of the Delta outbreak, driver licences, Warrants of Fitness (WoFs), Certificates of Fitness (CoFs), vehicle licences (‘regos’) and licence endorsements that expired on or after 21 July 2021 will be valid until 30 November 2021, Transport Minister Michael Wood has announced today. “While this extension won’t officially ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • COVID-19 community fund to provide support for vulnerable women and girls
    Minister for Women Jan Tinetti today announced a $2 million community fund that will provide support for women and girls adversely affected by COVID-19. “We know that women, particularly those who are already vulnerable, are disproportionally affected by the kind of economic disruption caused by COVID-19,” Jan Tinetti said. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Next phase of support for Fiji’s COVID-19 response announced
    A further NZ$12 million of support for Fiji’s COVID-19 response has been announced by Foreign Minister Hon Nanaia Mahuta today. The package builds on previous tranches of assistance Aotearoa New Zealand has provided to Fiji, totalling over NZ$50 million. “Fiji remains in a very challenging position in their response to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Robotic asparagus harvester aimed at addressing industry challenges
    The Government is backing a $5 million project to develop a commercial-scale autonomous robotic asparagus harvester, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor announced today. The Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures fund (SFF Futures) is contributing $2.6 million to the project. Project partner Robotics Plus Limited (RPL) will build on a prototype asparagus ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Additional Pfizer vaccines to arrive tomorrow
    More than a quarter of a million additional doses of the Pfizer vaccine are on their way from Spain to New Zealand, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. The additional doses will arrive in Auckland on Friday morning to help meet the current surge in demand for vaccination. “It’s been ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Young people to have their voices heard in Youth Parliament 2022
    The dates and details for Youth Parliament 2022 have been announced today by Minister for Youth Priyanca Radhakrishnan, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Youth Parliament is an opportunity for 141 young people from across Aotearoa New Zealand to experience the political process and learn how government works. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Boosting support for tertiary students affected by COVID-19
    Students facing a hard time as a result of COVID-19 restrictions will continue to be supported,” Education Minister Chris Hipkins confirmed today. The Government is putting a further $20 million into the Hardship Fund for Learners, which will help around 15,000 students to stay connected to their studies and learning. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • COVID-19: Immediate relief available for Māori and iwi organisations
    The Government has reprioritised up to $5 million to provide immediate relief to vulnerable whānau Māori and communities during the current COVID-19 outbreak Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson announced today. The COVID-19 2021 Whānau Recovery Fund will support community-driven, local responses to gaps in access and provision of critical ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago