Open mike 10/10/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 10th, 2023 - 85 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

85 comments on “Open mike 10/10/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tsmithfield 1
    10 October 2023 at 7:54 am

    I am finding it quite hilarious with the amount of hyperbole both Labour and National are engaging in with respect to NZ First, with Labour now raising the dire prospect of US style shutdowns if NZ First is in government.

    I think the problem for Labour in engaging in this style of campaigning is that it is not giving a reason to vote Labour. If voters do take notice of all the over-the-top rhetoric, then the only likely beneficiary will be National.

    That is, because, based on the polls, the simplest way to get a stable government is to vote NACT. So, the result of the combined scare campaign could be potential NZ First voters holding their noses and voting NACT to keep things simple.

    • alwyn 1.1
      10 October 2023 at 8:08 am

      It may not matter anyway if National/ACT are on 60 seats on 3 November.

      National will almost certainly pick up an extra MP in the Port Waikato by election and they will go to 61 with an overhang seat.

      • Ad 1.1.1
        10 October 2023 at 8:16 am

        Yes that is a pretty tough twist of fate against any alternative government to National.

      • SPC 1.1.2
        10 October 2023 at 8:17 am

        Why would the Port Waikato by election result in an overhang?

        • SPC 1.1.2.1
          10 October 2023 at 8:25 am

          The Electoral Commission confirmed if Bayly subsequently won the by-election his list spot will go to the next National candidate on the list. That would give National one more seat than it would have won in the election.

          https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/election-2023-national-will-almost-certainly-get-an-extra-mp-after-death-of-act-candidate-neil-christensen/D6FXTX4M25E5XBQPJLLETPWO74/

          Oh it’s because either the EC are morons, or their rules are.

          Common sense would indicate that given a National list MP is running in Port Waikato he would simply change status from list to electorate MP on winning – thus 120 MP's still – as per votes per party allocation.

          • tsmithfield 1.1.2.1.1
            10 October 2023 at 8:50 am

            I think it is a bloody stupid rule tbh. What is the bet that there will be a conspiracy theory come out that the Nats assassinated the Act guy lol.

          • Ghostwhowalks 1.1.2.1.2
            10 October 2023 at 3:07 pm

            Yes. The party vote distribution is done for 120 seats – which MP it is is decided by party list and who wins an electorate

            The Port Waikato seat is to be decided by a by election- even though the current Mp hasnt died so the distribution should be done for 119 seats

            If its not done this way then the Sat vote should still occur to elect an MP who will be immediately subject to a by election.

            Its ridiculous that the proportionality is destroyed by an event known before election day

          • Mike the Lefty 1.1.2.1.3
            10 October 2023 at 3:19 pm

            I have been thinking about this, this is surely not the first time this has happened and yet I never remember having had a by-election before. Perhaps this was a change done when we switched to MMP and nobody noticed?

            It seems so National that they rely on an electoral technicality to get an extra MP in the house, can't do it by honest (ha ha ha) campaigning.

            Would certainly be an interesting situation should the NACTS get a majority of 1 or 2. Court challenges would be inevitable.

            • Belladonna 1.1.2.1.3.1
              10 October 2023 at 10:34 pm

              I don't recall there ever being another candidate who has died after voting has started, but before it finished (in that 10 day window). Certainly not since the longer voting period started – and I don't recall one in the FPP era either.

              There seems to be no wriggle-room in the law as it's written – so no basis for a legal challenge.

      • Bearded Git 1.1.3
        10 October 2023 at 8:48 am

        The MSM seems to think that the death of the ACT MP will help the Nats win the election. This is wrong.

        If the Left get 48% and the Right gets 47% (5% wasted) then the proportion of the seats will be decided by these percentages in exactly the same way as they would have been before the death, and Labour will form a government.

        The by-election will come much later-National will win this and so they will have an extra seat then. This will only be an issue if the Left's government only has a majority of one.

        • mikesh 1.1.3.1
          10 October 2023 at 10:34 am

          I have always thought it rather silly that the parties who don't make it into parliament see their votes apportioned amongst the parties that do. It doesn't change the proportions within parliament so why not leave them out altogether. If nothing else it would save money on MPs' salaries.

          If we can have overhangs why can we not have underhangs?

          • Ghostwhowalks 1.1.3.1.1
            10 October 2023 at 3:16 pm

            Misunderstanding on your part

            There isnt more Mps because wasted vote isnt used to count the number of Mps

            the number is fixed at 120 plus overhangs but thats comes from winning extra electorates than the party vote would account for

            • mikesh 1.1.3.1.1.1
              10 October 2023 at 9:26 pm

              That's beside the point. The Votes received by the winning parties never add up to 100% of the total vote.. So why do all the seats have to be filled. Why do the have to have 120 MPs.

              • Ghostwhowalks …
                11 October 2023 at 5:01 pm

                yes they do .

                Theres two stages , those parties that dont win a seat and are under 5% are excluded from any party vote allocation.

                The remaining partys votes will certainly add up to the total vote that is counted for party allocation purposes.

                If you keep saying the number of seats doesnt have to be 120 or all seats shouldnt filled , theres something missing up top.

                The seat allocation method -Sante Lague- requires the number of seats to be known at the very beginning . Its been 120 from the start of MMP

                • Ghostwhowalks …
                  11 October 2023 at 5:33 pm

                  better explanation of Sainte Lague distribution

                  https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/14-09-2017/mmp-maths-how-party-vote-percentages-become-seats-in-parliament

                  While % are used in the cheats quick method before the election , the actual result works via the total votes for each party thats passed the threshold/ electorate seat hoop.

                  Unfortunately theres amny that think the % is the final method and never realaise that each list MP has actual votes that get allocated

                • mikesh …
                  11 October 2023 at 5:54 pm

                  However, if some of the 120 seats were treated as "phantom" seats, would this not satisfy the Sante Lague requirements?

                  Being a ghost yourself I’m sure you would understand that.

                  Alternatively you could allocate all the seats, as if there was no threshold, and then cancel the seats allocated to members whose parties scored less than 5%.

    • SPC 1.2
      10 October 2023 at 8:13 am

      Except the ACT vote is in decline because the little jerker for class landlord greed said he would make demands because the poll numbers gave him the mandate to do that.

      And National is exposed as running a marketing scam (tax policy) that would have it up before the Commerce Commission for fraudulent misrepresentation – and they still cannot show how it all works either.

      The observant can see they are unelectable grifters.

      There is less and less likelihood the centre will countenance a NACT regime and the renters and workers need to get out and vote to protect MW becoming a LW and benefit from the FPA Industry Awards.

      The Greens need to say they will insist on a 3% cap on rent increases and GR and DP should advise agreement (this should have been done at the start of the campaign). .

      • AB 1.2.1
        10 October 2023 at 8:32 am

        less and less likelihood the centre will countenance a NACT regime

        That's the point and it's why Bishop is freaking out. There is so much in the NACT programme of systematic looting by the wealthiest among us, that even cynical, self-aggrandising old Winston will find it too objectionable.

        But nobody on the left should vote for NZF, because for NZF to have this effect, it must take votes from NACT to keep NACT no higher than mid-40’s. . Left voters switching to NZF does not lower the NACT vote.

      • Chris 1.2.2
        10 October 2023 at 12:40 pm

        Luxon's tax relief for the rich needs to be exposed, too. His calculator says a double income family with no kids on $400,000 a year will get $80 more a fortnight. A double income family with no kids on $100,000 a year gets an extra $68 as fortnight. There'll be more telling examples.

      • Ghostwhowalks 1.2.3
        10 October 2023 at 3:34 pm

        "the ACT vote is in decline because the little jerker for class landlord greed said .."

        Good catch. Have you noticed Seymour doesnt even appear on TV ads for ACT anymore .

        Un precedented for the deputy leader to talk about ACT and why you should vote for them- although she is trying to spin their negativity of electing ACT into positives . She did after all work for Hooton for some time

  2. Muttonbird 2
    10 October 2023 at 8:04 am

    ACT already costing the taxpayer c. $1.2 million for a by-election. I wonder what they will cut to offset this cost imposed by their candidate? Perhaps ACT should be made to pay for the by-election from their own campaign funds…

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/10/election-2023-by-election-to-be-held-right-after-election-after-candidate-dies.html

    • Jester 2.1
      10 October 2023 at 8:09 am

      The guy didn't die on purpose you know! In fact he would probably rather not have caused a by-election. It does seem a crazy rule.

    • alwyn 2.2
      10 October 2023 at 8:11 am

      You really are sick aren't you? Blaming ACT because a candidate died.

      I'll bet you didn't complain about the cost of a by-election after Norm Kirk died.

      • AB 2.2.1
        10 October 2023 at 8:42 am

        To be fair, I think MuttonB is not aware yet of what the Electoral Act says. Bit much to call him "sick" imo.

      • Ghostwhowalks 2.2.2
        10 October 2023 at 3:36 pm

        User pays Alwyn , Have you never heard of it

      • Muttonbird 2.2.3
        10 October 2023 at 10:12 pm

        You have to admit it is ironic the first order of business for the party of austerity, disciplined spending, small government and zero regulation is to have us waste $1.2million on a by-election.

        It makes $25k on a Pacific leaders business event seem like decent value for money…

        • Belladonna 2.2.3.1
          10 October 2023 at 10:42 pm

          Dear me. Amazing how a by-election (which the Left have no prospect of winning) suddenly becomes a 'waste'.

          One of the costs of having a democracy is that of holding elections.

          It would be soooo much cheaper to just install a dictator /sarc/

          • Muttonbird 2.2.3.1.1
            11 October 2023 at 8:32 am

            ACT being the party of personal responsibility does bear responsibility for candidate selection. Yet they are happy to socialise the cost of that selection.

            • Belladonna 2.2.3.1.1.1
              11 October 2023 at 7:00 pm

              Are you expecting ACT candidate selection to use psychics? I really don't think that parties can be expected to foresee the sudden death of candidates.

              ACT haven't asked for or required a by-election – it's required under the MMP legislation – perhaps you should address your outrage to the lawmakers – including the ones who have been in government for the last 5.5 years. Why didn't they predict this situation and pre-emptively act to address it? /sarc/

              • Incognito …
                11 October 2023 at 7:12 pm

                Andrew Geddis (from TS Feeds) has written a highly informative piece on this rare situation and says it is written in the Electoral Act 1993 and “really is a throwback to pre-MMP days”.

                https://www.pundit.co.nz/content/what-does-port-waikatos-plus-one-mean-for-our-election

                • Belladonna …
                  11 October 2023 at 9:14 pm

                  Thanks, an interesting post.
                  It's one of those rare situations that it's going to be impossible to get absolutely fair to all parties.

                  The death of a candidate while voting (and campaigning) is still going on – must have some impact on the vote in that electorate.

                  For that matter, it may well have an impact on the party vote for ACT in the electorate – not having a high-profile candidate actively canvassing (or, alternatively, increasing vote due to a sympathy vote)

                  In an electorate with a close race (i.e. not Port Waikato) – and if the situation affected one of the main contenders – it would seem that there must be a by-election.

                  The question of how this affects the proportionality of parliament seems to be a difficult one. At first glance, the most sensible solution seems to be to ignore the electorate seat, and go on the party vote – for allocating the seats within Parliament. This would potentially mean dropping a sitting list MP, once the by-election was held. (e.g. if the electorate was won by Labour, then the last-ranked Labour list MP would lose their seat – assuming that it's not an MP currently in parliament who is elected)

                  This has the merit of reflecting the will of the people – as expressed on election day. Though seems rather tough on the MP at-risk of being booted out.

                  However, that solution would treat a by-election during this very specific period, differently to a by-election at any other stage of the election cycle.

                  Exactly the same distortion of electoral proportionality happens when there is a by-election of a Government MP during the term of Parliament. This very frequently results in the loss of a seat to the Government – by-elections notoriously punish the party in power – changing the balance of Parliament as voted on during the previous election.

                  Unlike the death-during-voting scenario, this has happened with a reasonable degree of frequency during the MMP era – most recently with Sharma – when the Government did lose a seat (although arguable whether they lost it to Sharma becoming an independent, or to the by-election). And no one has been desperately unhappy with the parliamentary distortion which results.

              • Muttonbird …
                11 October 2023 at 8:41 pm

                I am surprised you, a relatively intelligent person, refuses to acknowledge the wider issue. ACT demands risk/reward be managed by the individual, not the collective or the state.

                A health check of candidates might have been in order for such a party of individual responsibility. Perhaps the party itself might have considered insurance for candidates rather than shipping the fucking cost onto the taxpayers who they pretend to represent.

                But no, we all pay because they didn't do their homework.

                • Belladonna …
                  11 October 2023 at 9:38 pm

                  And we all paid for the by-election for Sharma – where Labour notoriously 'didn't do their homework' and anointed a flake to be swept in on the 2020 Labour tidal wave.

                  We all paid for the salary of Kerekere to sit in Parliament representing herself, rather than the GP voters who elected her. Where was their 'homework'?

                  We all paid when Horomia died in office (after notoriously bad health), triggering a by-election. Should he have been screened out by Labour because of ill-health?

                  If you want to ensure that individual parties/MPs carry that risk — then you have to accept that this cost would then be incurred by all parties/MPs. I seriously doubt that you'll gain much support for this radical view – nor would it be welcomed by the Left whom you claim to support.

                  I'm surprised that you, an apparently intelligent person, seem to confuse the personal with the collective. Do you think that all MPs only gain personal benefit from being elected? And there is no collective benefit to the country of having a representative democracy? If so, then indeed the cost should be personal. Though your opinion casts a rather jaundiced light upon those politicians you claim to support.
                  However, most people believe that an MP is a representative of the people who elected them – and therefore the benefit is to the electorate rather than to the individual MP.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    12 October 2023 at 7:17 am

                    How convenient ACT demands risk management from constituents, but not from itself nor its candidates.

    • Mike the Lefty 2.3
      10 October 2023 at 5:37 pm

      One way of looking at it is that this kind of rule reflects how lucky we are in New Zealand to have a stable democracy and that the death of a candidate in such circumstances is so rare.

      They can't hold an election in India without at least a dozen candidates murdered during the campaign.

  3. Ngungukai 3
    10 October 2023 at 8:04 am

    Looks like Winston & NZF are your best bet then.

  4. Bearded Git 4
    10 October 2023 at 8:42 am

    Chris Trotter is a frustrating writer. Sometimes he is hopelessly old fashioned, living in the past, and he always hates the Greens. But at other times he is brilliant, as he is in this article below:

    https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/09/chris-trotter-reckless-speculation/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chris-trotter-reckless-speculation

    Conclusion: Chris Bishop may well have lost the election for the Right.

    • Dennis Frank 4.1
      10 October 2023 at 8:57 am

      Indeed. While you were posting this I was writing a response to Trotter, see below.

      Things got interestinger due to the Bishflap… surprise

    • Tricledrown 4.2
      10 October 2023 at 11:21 am

      The reason he hates the Greens is because they pulled the plug on the Alliance which included his party New Labour. After that only Jim Anderton won a seat. The Greens have carried on. Going back in time Pam Corkery whistle blew Jim Andertons bullying with new MPs

      • Ghostwhowalks 4.2.1
        10 October 2023 at 3:20 pm

        New Labour had 2 Mps for a while , Anderton was the only one , before and after , who ever won a seat for Alliance

      • Bearded Git 4.2.2
        10 October 2023 at 6:22 pm

        Tricle-thanks for that background; it explains a lot.

    • vivie 4.3
      10 October 2023 at 2:44 pm

      Re this comment by Chris Trotter: "Lacking Peters’ restraining influence, the resulting National-Act government would have free-rein to impose the swingeing austerity programme required to pay for Luxon’s under-funded tax-cuts. That so many of us are willing to see so much pain inflicted upon our fellow citizens, strongly suggests that there is a fair amount of sadism mixed in with all that masochism. Hardly a pretty picture of our national character, and even less so of those NZ First voters bounced so easily into abandoning their nobler impulses by the prospect of a second election". https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/09/chris-trotter-reckless-speculation/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chris-trotter-reckless-speculation

      Trotter's reference to sadism and masochism might explain the seemingly incomprehensible deep-seated resentment and vitriol many NZers' have towards Labour, and their support of National. This is despite repeated evidence that National's tax/fiscal plan doesn't add up and that the implementation of any such plan will cause considerable, compounding socio-economic damage to NZ, through cuts to public services and workers' rights, and by allowing foreign buyers to purchase properties. This policy will increase house prices, inflation and rental costs, and exclude many more NZers, other than investors, from the property market.

      Chris Bishop has claimed that Labour was playing "gutter politics", because Grant Robertson stated fact about National's tax plan and called it a scam. https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/05-10-2023/labour-calls-national-tax-plan-a-scam-after-claims-of-gutter-politics

      Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis have dismissed as incorrect, Goldman Sachs' analysis that National's tax plan is inflationary, as they have done with other critics of the tax plan.

      https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2310/S00025/nationals-tax-plan-likely-to-push-up-kiwis-mortgage-rates.htm

      "The new analysis from Goldman Sachs reported in the Herald today follows economist Cameron Bagrie when he said: “National tax plan is inflationary.” And economists Michael Reddell, Sam Warburton and Nick Goodall have said the policy to lift the foreign buyer ban for houses over $2m will cause greater house price inflation in New Zealand below the $2m mark as well".

      After repeated challenging of National's tax plan: https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/05-10-2023/nicola-willis-confirms-only-3000-households-will-get-full-250-a-fortnight-tax-cut

      National's repeated lying about their tax plan, and their constant deflection and projection when challenged about this, seems to be finally sinking into voters' awareness. Bishop's threats of the possibility of another election might be opening up people's minds to the chaos of National trying to form a government with ACT and/or NZ First.

    • Mike the Lefty 4.4
      10 October 2023 at 5:55 pm

      Yes, Bishop forgets that the electoral system doesn't depends on what he thinks.

      As I understand it, after election figures are confirmed (or before if the result is pretty obvious) the leader of the largest party meets with the Governor General and the GG asks the leader if he/she is able to form a government. If the answer is yes the GG consents to the leader doing so, if the answer is no, he/she asks the leader of the next biggest party the same question. If neither is able to form a government then legally the outgoing government has in effect caretaker executive powers until a new government is formed. The GG, not the Nats and especially NOT Chris Bishop, has the right to call for a new general election if he/she thinks it isn't possible to form a new majority government or coalition government on the election numbers.

      That is, of course, a simplification of the process but I wonder just what kind of spin Luxon will put on the GG if he is put in that position.

      Remember the bleating of the Nats in 2017.

      But we won the most seats!

      How are we not the government.

      Its an injustice, it is!

      A corrupt system!

      We didn't lose……we was robbed!………..

  5. Dennis Frank 5
    10 October 2023 at 8:53 am

    Trotter's hot to trot:

    Why would National’s Campaign Manager, whose party is currently attracting by far the largest share of voter support, suddenly start babbling about a second election? …What we do not expect is for the party with the largest number of votes to say: “No, we don’t like the hand you’ve dealt us – deal us another one.”

    Not to mention having to pay for the damn thing! Threatening the voters is a novel political tactic from the Bish.

    The question now, in the backwash of Bishop’s intervention, is how will the voters – especially those currently intending to vote for Winston Peters – respond to National’s threat?

    Head for the hills in all directions, I suspect.

    Will “instability” simply be coded as “personal insecurity” in conservative voters’ brains, causing them to tug their forelocks and, suitably chastened, step back into National’s ranks? https://democracyproject.nz/2023/10/09/chris-trotter-reckless-speculation/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=chris-trotter-reckless-speculation

    Nah, fore-lock tuggers have been voting Labour since the 19th century! Analogues in the Nats just say bugger softly, before morphing into the right stance for survival.

    Trotter then segues into masochism/sadism. The hung parliament I predicted some weeks ago gets a mention, then this:

    Where the polls land in this, the last week of the election campaign, may produce a truly spectacular result.

    Weds evening?? He's using (unaware) the Soros reflexivity principle of market forces. The electorate is the political market: voting rather than selling is the behavioural engine powering the voting portion of the populace. Trotter is correctly flagging the spectacular possibilities inherent in the collective reflex response to a poll this week…

    • mikesh 5.1
      10 October 2023 at 10:48 am

      Harold Wilson got away with it. When first elected he decided his majority was insufficient to govern effectively so, a couple of months later, he called a snap election and got himself a bigger majority.

      However this was not anticipated prior to the first election.

      • Dennis Frank 5.1.1
        10 October 2023 at 10:57 am

        I suspect his situation was simpler. Complex contingency planning is vulnerable to seemingly random field effects occurring in the tacit realm of the psyche, consequent of a deeper order within things.

        Similarly Einstein's "spooky action at a distance" take pointed us to such invisible causal factors. If HW was typically human, he'd have intuition as reader of situations within, prompting him to take the gamble.

        • mikesh 5.1.1.1
          10 October 2023 at 3:05 pm

          On the other hand it was probably true that HW was not able to govern effectively given the numbers. I might also be argued that a snap election was the most honest approach to take.

      • Ghostwhowalks 5.1.2
        10 October 2023 at 3:28 pm

        Wilson in 1970 was 17 seats short of majority, so was was well short . It wasnt a small majority like you think. Conservatives were only a few seats behind labour

        Heath wanted a coalition with Liberals ( 14 seats) but couldnt/wouldnt agree

        Wilson became a minority PM and the second election gave them a bare majority of 3

      • Belladonna 5.1.3
        10 October 2023 at 10:48 pm

        I really don't see what the outrage is on the Left at the prospect of another election – if neither National nor Labour are able to form a coalition government.

        There has been considerable glee on TS over the apparent holes in the National financial plan – and conviction that the electorate are beginning to see through them; along with an evident belief that ACT have peaked and are beginning to drop.

        If all that is true – surely the Left would welcome a new election – especially if they can blame NZF for it – and a second chance to gain a majority.

  6. tsmithfield 6
    10 October 2023 at 8:58 am

    IMO I think Labour was premature in ruling out NZ First.

    The reason being that the only path to victory now is a dramatic turn around in the polls. And even then, that is likely going to require a coalition including TPM which is likely to disincentivise a lot of voters.

    At the time they made that decision, they may not have realised that they would be so low in the polls. But the problem now is that many voters likely think that a vote for Labour is a wasted vote. Hence, many Labour voters might think there isn't much point voting at all, compounding the problem for Labour.

    • Dennis Frank 6.1
      10 October 2023 at 9:20 am

      Depends if handbrake theory influences their decision – it's on the right still, so a matter now of what could switch it back to the left. Hipkins coming on strong in his new style on MR was fluent enough to catch my attention. An impressive simulation, that performance, with enough apparent authenticity to make floaters wonder.

      • mikesh 6.1.1
        10 October 2023 at 11:05 am

        Inclusion of Winston in a coalition would not would not be harmful to National probably, as far as policies are concerned. They would not get their tax cuts enacted, but that would not matter since the tax cuts are only an election bribe anyway, and they can blame Winston for their non enactment. Winston may also be a foil to some ACT policies which National generally doesn't like but which some Nats are willing to support.

        However some one would have to wonder what ACT's reaction to this would be.

    • Bearded Git 6.2
      10 October 2023 at 9:22 am

      tsmith-Winston may yet go with Hipkins after the election election, depending on the result.

      For instance:

      Lab 30 Gre 14 TPM 4 =48

      Nats 35 ACT 8 =43

      If NZF gets around 5.1% (4% wasted vote) it may feel the only way to form a government that is able to rule is to go with Lab/Gr/MP. The problem for Luxon has been the gradual collapse of the ACT vote.

      • tsmithfield 6.2.1
        10 October 2023 at 9:47 am

        “tsmith-Winston may yet go with Hipkins after the election election, depending on the result.”

        That would require a major backtrack on the part of both Labour and NZ First.

        I heard Hipkins on the radio again asserting that there was no way he or Labour as a party would do any deal with NZ First. If Labour were to do such a deal, I imagine that the credibility of both parties would take such a hit that it would be terminal for future election prospects.

        Probably more of an issue for NZ First who would likely be better to sit on the cross-benches than do any such deal.

        But who knows, you might be right. The allure of power makes people do some fairly contradictory things at times.

        The other thing is, what would happen if Labour/Greens/TPM/NZ First had a lead of one seat, but there was the likely prospect of National picking up the extra seat at the bi-election later this year?

        In that case, there could technically be a government formed, but an almost certain hung parliament within a couple of months.

        • Michael P 6.2.1.1
          10 October 2023 at 11:57 am

          "…what would happen if Labour/Greens/TPM/NZ First had a lead of one seat…"

          No party or combination of parties could have a lead of 1 seat with an even number of seats available. (120)

          • tsmithfield 6.2.1.1.1
            10 October 2023 at 12:00 pm

            Under this scenario there would be an extra seat though.

            • Michael P 6.2.1.1.1.1
              12 October 2023 at 7:33 pm

              Yea but not until the by-election and you were talking about a lead of one seat before the by-election.

          • alwyn 6.2.1.1.2
            10 October 2023 at 5:54 pm

            There is certain to be at least one overhang seat in the next Parliament after the by-election in Port Waikato regardless of who wins. There may be others, probably for TPM, who would seem to be the only party that could more electorate seats than their share of the party vote would justify.

            The next Parliament certainly have at least 121 MPs unless some party has foolishly put less people on their list than they might be allowed by the party vote.

            • Michael P 6.2.1.1.2.1
              12 October 2023 at 7:35 pm

              Yep but I was replying to a comment about a one seat lead before the by-election, which would be impossible as there will be 120 seats until the by-election.

        • mikesh 6.2.1.2
          11 October 2023 at 8:53 pm

          If it was a matter of keeping National/ACT out of power Hipkins may consider that he has a duty to the electorate to deal with Peters, no matter how distasteful he may find such a prospect. They say "that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds".

          His statement that he will not work with Peters is not a binding promise; merely a statement of intent. He can change his mind.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 6.2.1.2.1
            11 October 2023 at 9:19 pm

            yes It's not as if Hipkins and Peters have promised to resign rather than talk.

            But someone did promise to resign – someone… or did she?

            Under pressure to release the full costings behind the foreign buyer tax element of the overall plan, Willis refused to say whether or not she’d resign over whether that added up. “I haven’t even got the job yet,” she told O’Brien.

            https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/15-09-2023/willis-would-resign-as-finance-minister-if-she-cant-deliver-tax-reduction

            If that’s the solution, was there ever a crisis? [1 Oct 2023]
            It will be fascinating to see if Willis and her team can persuade the fiscal ferrets to forecast anything like the revenue she expects to book from the foreign-buyers tax.

            A pack of sugar-free gum says they won’t.

            In that case, if National is true to its word and willy-nilly delivers its tax cuts (an undertaking by Willis on pain of resignation), then the cash will have to come from elsewhere.

      • mikesh 6.2.2
        10 October 2023 at 11:10 am

        In that case NZ 1st would perhaps not support either party, but sit on on the cross benches and vote on each issue that comes before the house, in accordance with their conscience. (If they have one.)

      • mikesh 6.2.3
        11 October 2023 at 6:15 pm

        He could enter into a C&S agreement with Labour. Labour couldn't prevent that even if they were unwilling to be associated with NZ1st.

    • James Thrace 6.3
      10 October 2023 at 9:22 am

      Not really.

      Under MMP there is more than one way to skin a cat. It is old media thinking that constantly frames Labour or National as the two main parties around which all others orbit.

      For example, NZ1, Greens, and TPM have not said they would not work with each other. In fact, Shaw and Peters have praised each other.

      I said this yesterday, but one possible scenario (and all seat numbers are best guess on current polling) is that NZ1 / Green and TPM form a minority coalition government with just 35 seats. Labour with its 32 seats could then offer C&S to Green and TPM, and say that it will support the budgets they put through. Labour and NZ1 would not have to agree to anything, so it meets the "no coalition or C&S rule". Each bill could then be supported by Labour as required. If Labour were genuine in their support for all NZers, they would have no problem supporting those progressive, pro-worker, pro-family, pro-student, pro-beneficiary, bills. Same goes for the bills that aim to limit the rapacious greed of some.

      Under that scenario, which is entirely possible, NZ would have either, co-prime ministers Davidson and Shaw, or (and as a price for his support), Prime Minister Peters.

      Now, wouldn't that be a legacy Winston would like. NZ's first Māori PM, and not just "acting PM who is Māori". He would also be the oldest elected PM …

      • Dennis Frank 6.3.1
        10 October 2023 at 9:37 am

        Good thinking. smiley Would require more big-picture adventurism than the folk involved seem capable of – but in principle anyone can transcend during, or in response to, catharsis.

        Even negotiating it would be fraught. One would have to address co-governance via consensus politics & adept framing.

        • mikesh 6.3.1.1
          10 October 2023 at 11:18 am

          I'm inclined to agree, though such a coalition might find themselves a bit short of talent when it comes to filling cabinet posts. However Labour might still be offered the odd cabinet post if that were the case.

      • Ngungukai 6.3.2
        10 October 2023 at 6:09 pm

        Maybe the time is right for a Cross Party Coalition of NZF/Greens/TMP I think NZ has had enough of Pepsi & Coke.

    • Tricledrown 6.4
      10 October 2023 at 11:42 am

      Tsm Labour will be happy for National to have NZ first as a coalition partner which will mean no tax cuts how long will National voters take that looking back 1998 didn't work to well for National.Given Nationals history of belittling Peter's, Peter's will exact revenge of undoing all of National and ACT'S policy. 3 yrs of hobbling good punishment for Nationals callus policies of rewarding those who have done well through covid while 70% have done it hard and are still doing it hard.Allowing tax deductability the lowering the Brightline capital gains tax will push the price of houses up with landlords coming back into the property market bidding up house sales getting a tax refund while home buyers pay tax and interest.

    • Ngungukai 6.5
      10 October 2023 at 3:43 pm

      I don't understand why NZF & Labour are at logger heads, I thought they were quite constructive in Coalition 2017.

      • tsmithfield 6.5.1
        10 October 2023 at 4:19 pm

        I think a lot of voters likely remember that as well, which is why they are likely not paying much attention to the hyperbole from both main parties at the moment.

      • Incognito 6.5.2
        10 October 2023 at 6:43 pm

        They say that a week is a long time in politics but some people view the present as if it has been frozen for six long and challenging years, not to mention the ones who still blame Labour of today for what happened in 1984 or thereabouts. No wonder that Trotter still has a fan club of diehards because he’s not the only one firmly stuck in the past.

        • SapphireGem 6.5.2.1
          10 October 2023 at 9:16 pm

          Incognito – Although Trotter is often insufferable and stuck in the past, in this case, as noted by Bearded Git@4 and vivie@4.3, Trotter makes salient points about possible reasons for voters voting against their own interests to stick it to Labour.

        • gsays 6.5.2.2
          11 October 2023 at 5:13 pm

          "not to mention the ones who still blame Labour of today for what happened in 1984 or thereabouts."

          Is there much that current Labour have undone of 1984 Labour (and National for that matter).

  7. joe90 7
    10 October 2023 at 10:03 am

    Awful times ahead.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told President Biden on Sunday that Israel does not have any choice but to unleash a ground operation in Gaza. "We have to go in," the Israeli leader said, according to three Israeli and U.S. sources briefed on the call.

    https://www.axios.com/2023/10/09/netanyahu-ground-invasion-gaza-israel-hamas-biden

    Israel warns: If Hezbollah joins the war alongside Hamas, Hassan Nasrallah will be forced to face the full force of the IDF, with the assistance of the American naval force that is making its way to the eastern Mediterranean

    In messages delivered to Nasrallah from the Israeli side through senior officials in the French government, he was warned that his joining the campaign would result in Israel even considering, in the style of "the landlord has gone mad", to attack his important ally – Syrian President Bashar Assad, and Damascus would also be destroyed like Da'ahiah. In other words, in an attempt to deter Nasrallah, Israel is using American power and the threat to the Syrian regime, including Assad's personal security, to the point of eliminating him.

    https://www-ynet-co-il.translate.goog/news/article/sktkysb11a?_x_tr_sl=iw&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true

    edit:

    Steve Herman
    @w7voa@journa.host
    Follow

    Total of 300,000 reservists now mobilized, announces IDF LTC (Res.) Jonathan Conricus.

    https://journa.host/@w7voa/111206343634532910

    • Bearded Git 7.1
      10 October 2023 at 10:39 am

      UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said this today in response to Israel cutting off food, water and electricity from more than two million civilians in Gaza at the same time conducting a series of bombing attacks on Gaza:

      "While I recognise Israel’s legitimate security concerns, I also remind Israel that military operations must be conducted in strict accordance with international humanitarian law. Civilians must be respected and protected at all times. Civilian infrastructure must never be a target.

      The reality is that it grows out of a longstanding conflict with a 56-year-long occupation and no political end in sight. It’s time to end this vicious circle of bloodshed, hatred and polarisation."

  8. Dennis Frank 8
    10 October 2023 at 10:38 am

    Factoring in the future:

    ChatGPT, the generative AI that went viral at the start of the year, is a good example. Is it an entertaining gimmick, an apocalyptic portent for journalism and the arts, or something in between? It’s hard to say, although we do know one thing: recent improvements to ChatGPT have the potential to utterly destabilise politics as we know it. https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/09-10-2023/chatgpt-could-transform-politics-and-not-for-the-better

    Simulating the perfect left-wing politician via this tool ought to become a trendy performance art for leftist politicos then, eh?

    ChatGPT has a bad habit of ‘hallucinating’ and providing incorrect answers with boundless confidence, but it is still an impressive tool – especially for a work in progress.

    See, I was right!! wink

  9. SPC 9
    10 October 2023 at 2:47 pm

    Is Nicola Willis, as Minister of Finance, a reboot of the Ruth Richardson years?

    Back then those in state houses were facing market rents and benefits were slashed – and at the same time the estate tax on the wealthiest families was removed.

    Today Nicola Willis said that the only way she knew how to help those who could not afford to own property (and never would under National policy) meet their cost of rent, was by making it the best time ever to be a landlord.

    The brightline test down to 2 years, easy removal of tenants and changing other rules of rental property to suit landlords, slashing the capacity to inspect properties for regulatory compliance and of course restoring the mortgage cost against rent income.

    She pretended to believe that this would mean a lower rate of rent increase – as if she did not believe there was a rental market based on supply and demand but a cost plus oligarchy, where landlords determined price based on how much money they were making.

    She plays dumb on the impact of NACT's worker migration policy and intent to slow the activity of Kainga Ora, Kiwbuild and assistance to own on this housing market in which those who cannot afford to own rent.

    Is Nicola Willis, as Minister of Finance, a reboot of the Ruth Richardson years?

    https://thedailyblog.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Screenshot-2023-10-08-at-3.55.25-PM-768×711.png

    • mikesh 9.1
      10 October 2023 at 3:23 pm

      Keeping interest non-deductibility may encourage some of the more highly leveraged landlords to exit the market in the longer term, once interest becomes fully non-deducible. This would be a welcome development as it would ease pressure on property prices.

      • SPC 9.1.1
        10 October 2023 at 3:43 pm

        Sure, and the point was to encourage a re-direction of investment to new builds – for which there was an allowance to deduct mortgage as a cost.

  10. Red Blooded One 10
    10 October 2023 at 3:31 pm

    Do we know the cause of death of the ACT Candidate? The Media haven't even used the old standbys, "after a long/short illness" "suddenly" "no suspicious circumstances" etc. Under the unusual situation of being so close to the Election I don't think it's too goulish to be interested to know.

    • Roy Cartland 10.1
      10 October 2023 at 4:04 pm

      It's a good point. If, God forbid, it were to be a "no suspicious circumstances", that would be pertinent to parties' stances on mental health funding. If long/short illness, stances on cancer funding.

  11. Dennis Frank 11
    10 October 2023 at 4:37 pm

    Environmentalist flies solo:

    “I’m here to declare myself an independent candidate for president of the United States,” Kennedy said in remarks in Philadelphia… A Reuters/Ipsos poll of a hypothetical three-way race between Biden, Trump and Kennedy conducted last week among likely voters found 14% of voters supported Kennedy, with 40% supporting Trump and 38% supporting Biden.

    With over a year until the general election, it’s unclear whether the Kennedy campaign can translate that level of support into votes in November 2024. Kennedy said he hopes to win the election by pulling in both Biden and Trump supporters. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/09/politics/kennedy-independent-campaign/index.html

    Clowns to the left of him, jokers to the right of him, here he is stuck in the middle with the third of the US electorate that doesn't identify as left or right. Go the moonbat!

  12. Ffloyd 12
    10 October 2023 at 5:33 pm

    Why, I don’t know but I just watched a debate between Grant Robertson and the forever rude, bad mannered, ranting, screeching undisciplined Willis. It was terrible. Why oh why does she think that shouting and yelling without stopping for breath and not allowingEitherGrant or Simon a word in edgeways makes her an opponent to be feared. Screaming accusations about Grants management of our economy over the last6years just shows she is running scared an cannot let anybody speak in case Grant succinctly corrects all her wild ravings with the verifiable truth. She is out of her depth and her constant reciting Nacts catch phrases, slogans, sound bites etc just shows that she is floundering in deep water. That’s all the parrot knows.

    I hope there is an antidote for her. Just about had a panic attack at the constant onslaught

    But it does deflect from the fact that she is no finance expert.That she likes to keep hidden by sudden attacks of verbal diarrhoea. I thought Paula Bennett was bad news but this one just plain horrible and nasty.