That was not as good as was hoped for

Written By: - Date published: 9:52 am, October 15th, 2023 - 129 comments
Categories: act, election 2023, greens, labour, maori party, national, national/act government, nz first - Tags:

The people have spoken.

Every party except Labour and the small parties had a pretty good night.

The Greens picked up three electorate seats although I suspect they will be disappointed their party vote was not higher.

Te Pati Maori performed well in the electorate contests and are currently ahead of Labour in four of the Maori electorates and two of the others are close.  Meka Whaitiri had the ignomy of being punished for being seen as a Labour MP even though she was no longer one.  At one stage of the night Parliament looked like it was going to have a significant overhang.

At this stage National Act have a majority although I do not think that this will last.

There are apparently 570,000 special votes and these tend to go left.

In 2017 Labour and the Greens picked up a seat each after the counting of special votes.  In 2020 Labour and Te Pati Maori picked up one seat each after special votes were counted.  And in 2014 the Greens picked up one seat from National after specials were counted.  That phone call to Winston may be required although the Port Waikato by election should provide a buffer to National.

I had been hoping that this election would resemble 2005 more than 2014.  Clearly this was not the case.

In Auckland we struggled badly.  All electorates took hits.  In South Auckland the turnout was disastrously low.

National’s three year campaign of gloom and its enormous war chest took its toll on a population that was really tired from the Covid lockdowns and the recovery.

As for Labour it is time to rebuild.  Hipkins’s future must be in doubt and the need for new blood is clear.

The one and only positive event was that Greg O’Connor caused Nicola Willis’s credibility to be severely dented by beating her in the Ohairu electorate.

I expect National and Act to engage in a flurry of changes.  Expect a mini budget and a series of short legislative tweaks to sentencing law, the RMA, the reintroduction of 90 day fire at will and maybe to add to the sense of chaos something for the base like the wind back of self identification laws.

This could get really ugly.  Stand by ..

129 comments on “That was not as good as was hoped for ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. weka 1
    15 October 2023 at 10:02 am

    Hard result for Labourites, and that's terrible news about the South Ak turnout.

    I don't think I saw anyone talking about the turnout last night (I was just on TVNZ all night though), and I couldn't find any figures. Does anyone have any MSM or EC pieces? Or has done the maths?

  2. Dennis Frank 2
    15 October 2023 at 10:20 am

    Re south Ak, the couldn't be bothered voting thing, Labour will need to discover why that happened, huh? Will they blame the weather?

    TDB dead quiet so far. Bomber struggling to get out of his hangover.

    • Cricklewood 2.1
      15 October 2023 at 10:48 am

      In short Covid mandates, they caused alot of division and unhapiness within some of the big Pacifica church communites in South and West Auckland. Without their support on the ground the vote doesnt get out.

    • mickysavage 2.2
      15 October 2023 at 7:31 pm

      Any need for you to insult South Auckland? It is a rich vibrant community and there is no need to feed into right wing framing of the community.

      • Dennis Frank 2.2.1
        15 October 2023 at 7:35 pm

        Are you hallucinating? I was commenting on a political effect someone else had mentioned – lack of turn-out in a geographical area. Just a fact of life. Nothing to do with anyone seeming to insult anyone else whatsoever. Get it yet?

        Why not try to be constructive and learn from that fact of life??

        [your comment about turn out was framed in a certain way. To me it came across as saying that South Auckland people were too lazy to vote, and this buys into a trope about South Auckland and Māori/Pacifica people specifically being lazy and/or disengaged. I suspect that micky read your comment similarly. In the current political climate, this is a problem on TS, with particular reference to the bit on the Policy about tone or language that has the effect of excluding others.

        If that’s not how you meant it (and I accept it’s probably not), then the issue here is primarily one of care in commenting. It’s been obvious this year that you choose to insult people in your comments fairly regularly, this strikes me as a change from how you commented before.

        I would strongly encourage you to dial that right back. We’re in a tense time, people are feeling strongly about a range of things, and we’re probably in for a bumpy few months.

        The other issue here is that instead of responding to the post author’s comment with consideration you choose to react defensively, miss his point, and then go on the attack. We protect authors here more than commenters.

        While this was relatively low level by TS standards, the thing moderators watch for is patterns of behaviour. I’m noting a pattern of behaviour here.

        You might want to also read this post https://thestandard.org.nz/moderation-notes-in-election-year/

        This mod note is giving you an opportunity to take some feedback and change how you comment here. At some point stronger moderation may be used.

        • weka]

        • weka 2.2.1.1
          16 October 2023 at 9:10 am

          mod note. Please let me know you have read and understood.

          • Dennis Frank 2.2.1.1.1
            16 October 2023 at 10:09 am

            Failure to vote is the political fact I commented on and I agree my framing was an opinion about the motivation producing that failure, and I was puzzled that MS didn't comment on the political fact or any plausible reason for it.

            Instead, MS speculated about my motivation for expressing my opinion. I thought I was making an accurate guess. I have no idea why anyone would want to assume any other type of behaviour. I can't see any logic in your reference to tone of language – but I can see why you made that correlation.

            I didn't mean to imply anything about the nature of south Ak Labour voters! I know they are simply expressing their human nature by not voting. The mystery is lack of turn-out and we all of us can only guess why. Yet the site is for such guesses and discussions of them. Leftists ought to try & learn why centrists think differently – it's the only way center-left governance will ever happen.

            [As a moderator I don’t care what your political views or arguments are. I care how you behave on this site. To me your response basically ignores my moderation and says that you believe you are right and don’t have to abide by the rules of the site and that you can tell us how to run the place. Further, I gave youthe link about wasting moderator time, but here you are arguing about moderation. I have even less time and patience as a moderator now than I did during the election. I paid you the courtesy of a lengthy mod note on the problem and as guidance, which you have ignored. Two day ban. You are welcome to ask for clarification on this and I will do my best to explain. Any further arguing about it will be taken as wasting mod time – weka]

  3. Dennis Frank 3
    15 October 2023 at 10:26 am

    Steve Abel takes stock:

    <

    blockquote>
    plenty for the Green Party to celebrate: two new electorates, four more MPs, holding an electorate seat for more than one term for the first time, growing their party vote to its highest proportion in a decade.

    New Green MP Steve Abel, who narrowly missed out on coming to Parliament in 2020, described the result as a mix of emotions.

    “It’s felt like a sort of four year job interview, but I'm super proud and humbled to represent the Greens. It's an incredible result and we've grown the number of MPs we have and we’re facing one of our best results so that's an incredible thing.” However, he said the fact there would be a National-Act government had dampened spirits.

    “I feel concerned for the country on the whole in terms of how much damage they can do, in terms of our climate and our environment, in terms of social inequity and lack of action on that. So I am concerned about that.

    “We will certainly hold a National government to account and that's our role, and we will execute that role to the greatest of our ability. And we will make sure it's a one-term government … we will come back even stronger and make the Greens stronger still.”

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/bittersweet-election-night-wins-for-greens

    <

    blockquote>

  4. alwyn 4
    15 October 2023 at 10:27 am

    "The one and only positive event was that Greg O’Connor …. "

    I don't see that as being a plus for the current Labour Party. It is a reflection of the fact that Greg represents the old Labour Party. He was totally out of step with the current party leadership. After all he was so offside with the leadership that he was offered a totally derisory list position and chose to go electorate only.

    Greg is old Labour, not the professional politicians that they have in charge now. People who went from Student Politics into MP's or Minister's offices and then into Parliament without ever having done anything else. Greg had down something else.

    I did like the post heading by the way. Did you intend to make it so like Hirohito’s remark about the atom bomb?
    “the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage,”

  5. Tiger Mountain 5
    15 October 2023 at 10:29 am

    Time travel is possible-we are back to the 90s-Bennie bashing, union busting, direct assault on Maoridom, massive wealth transfer upstairs to the parasite class.

    Well done Greens and TPM.

    Labour-time to retire monetarism and Rogernomics.

    NZCTU-class left struggle required to retain 10 days sick leave and resist other measures. State sector workers were happy take on a “soft” target Labour Govt. please extend same to the dirty Tories.

    Anyway, heads high people, community organisation and direct action needed more than ever. Time to occupy empty houses in a political movement for a start.

    • Grey Area 5.1
      15 October 2023 at 11:36 am

      "Labour – time to retire monetarism and Rogernomics."

      Sadly it's not in their DNA. Labour have been wedded to neoliberalism since 1984. It's a cancer that's crippling this country and yet we have the two major parties (and two minor ones) still under its spell.

      People will be looking for a real alternative in 2026, especially with the climate crisis punching us in the face but the Labour Party has lost its heart. It is part of the problem not the solution.

      Will a saviour rise from the Labour ashes? Don't hold your breath.

      • mikesh 5.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 12:20 pm

        ACT, and other neoliberal parties, would seem to be "on the wrong side of history". History, as far as I can see favours social democratic governments, underpinned by keynesianism. We have come to think of the good times we had in the fifties and sixties as an aberration, but as times get tough I think it likely we move toward an economy designed more along Scandinavian lines. Labour needs to get in behind such a movement.

    • Anne 5.2
      15 October 2023 at 11:53 am

      I'll tell you has the brains and the nous to sock it to the NActs in full measure and that is Megan Woods. She would run rings around Luxon any day of the week, and make mincemeat out of Willis' shoddy accounting. She would make David Seymour and his side-kick (whatever her name is) cry if she wanted to.

      She comes from the same school as Helen Clark and she doesn't strike me as being a "monetarist" at heart.

      They would be so flipping scared of her… they would toss coins to see who was going to face her in the House 😮 .

  6. observer 6
    15 October 2023 at 10:34 am

    To all Labour MPs: please get off the treadmill now. Don't do what opposition parties (Labour and National) have done in the past, barking at the passing cars, thinking that the public care about the insider soap opera, who did a gotcha today, who scored a point in the House, and so on.

    After defeat in 2008 Labour MPs could have spent a year at the beach, for all the difference it made. Anyone remember what was taking up your time and energy back then? What was Phil Goff talking about in the media? Richard Worth? Some forgotten headline? It didn't matter at all.

    So spend as much time as you need reflecting on why you are there. If you don't know, then leave.

    Then get together with the Greens and talk about your vision for the next government. This one will fall apart, and the public will turn against them when the promises are broken. But you won't benefit unless you stand for something.

    • Craig H 6.1
      15 October 2023 at 12:38 pm

      I'm not a fan of opposing everything for the sake of it either, but in practice, oppositions don't oppose everything.

      There will still be Select Committee work to try to avert the worst outcomes, and not using all the time for speeches in Parliament increases the amount of legislation that can be passed.

      All that said, agree that there's not much point being relentlessly negative in the early stages – best leave that till 2026.

      • Jack 6.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 4:19 pm

        Labour had been relentlessly negative all campaign. Why should they stop now?

        • In Vino 6.1.1.1
          15 October 2023 at 7:32 pm

          Utter rubbish. The accusation of negativity was used by the Right to deflect valid criticisms of National's Tax-Cuts con-job, etc.

          • Jack 6.1.1.1.1
            15 October 2023 at 7:49 pm

            I’m very happy for Labour to carry on with their current campaign into opposition. Chippie and his nodding donkey self congratulating routine when he thought he landed the fatal blow in the debates. It worked so well for him. He’s got at least 9 years in opposition to perfect that routine. Glad to know you think it’s positively the way forward for Labour.

            • JeremyB 6.1.1.1.1.1
              16 October 2023 at 10:31 am

              "his nodding donkey self congratulating routine"
              weird how it seems to work for Rimmer but not Chippy

  7. Belladonna 7
    15 October 2023 at 10:42 am

    I'd say that the trend against Labour in the West/South Auckland 'safe' seats shows two things – which are probably related.

    1. The demographic changes in these electorates. These are now immigrant-heavy areas, with a strong small-business focus. Don't underestimate how hard these communities have been hit by the ram-raids and associated crime waves. People telling them that 'crime has gone down' when their local shopping centre has been hit for the 4th time in a month – are simply not believed.
    2. The extended Auckland lockdowns – which seemed to be largely pointless (Covid went on spreading among the people to evaded lockdown). The impact on businesses and families was massive – and the government appeared to be out-of-touch with the reality on the ground. The 'we saved lives' message, again, just isn't believed. Most people have had Covid, now, and it wasn't that bad [Before you shoot the messenger, yes I understand the science, I'm talking about the way 'ordinary' people think and feel]

    And Deborah Russell and Michael Wood – and probably Phil Twyford – are not the candidates to appeal to these demographically changed electorates. I said this about Russell earlier – and was shot down in flames over her 'outstanding' 2020 result. Well, the 2023 results are in, and it's clear an ivory-tower intellectual is not the candidate to appeal to the New Lynn electorate. She might squeak in on specials – reversing a 750 National majority – but I wouldn't bet on it.

    Time for Labour to seriously think about candidate renewal in all of these 'tight-result' electorates. None of them have been outstanding MPs – except in the case of Wood and Twyford, for the wrong reasons – time to move on….

    I think it’s likely that these seats may well be the new swing electorates – certainly some of the old ones no longer are (like Northcote – with Halbert only winning in 2020 due to the Ardern bounce – and being comprehensively defeated by 7K by Bidois in 2023)

    • Dennis Frank 7.1
      15 October 2023 at 10:46 am

      Outgoing list candidates for Labour: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nanaia-mahuta-michael-wood-and-the-other-senior-labour-mps-who-wont-be-returning-to-parliament/OBOXVENXMJB2VK2QBOVBMU5E3U/

      I looked for McNulty, who lost by a country mile. Herald doesn't list him with the outgoing so maybe he seems set to survive? Haven't yet seen a full list breakdown.

    • mikesh 7.2
      15 October 2023 at 1:02 pm

      Electorates are run on FPP type voting systems. In some electorates Labour and the greens were splitting the left vote, allowing a National candidate to sneak through. Whilst I have not looked closely at all the results I think this factor operated more where there was a strongish Green candidate than in the bluish electorates – I note that ACT didn't do particularly well in this election, gaining only one extra seat, while the other parties were feasting more liberally on the Labour carcass.

      Perhaps some sort of preference system would be better.

      • Belladonna 7.2.1
        15 October 2023 at 1:50 pm

        That's FPP thinking.

        Who wins an electorate doesn't really matter (unless it's your electorate, of course) – for the purposes of forming a government – what the party loses on the electorate swings, they gain on the list roundabouts.

        What is important in those electorates is the party vote – and Labour lost heavily in all of them to National – some by a substantial margin.

        The local electorate MP or candidate is primarily important as the local 'face' of the party – in 'selling' the party to the community. I think all three of these MPs failed (for various reasons) – but being out-of-touch is the primary one.

        • mikesh 7.2.1.1
          15 October 2023 at 7:40 pm

          Yes, I know all that. But I was talking about the electorate votes. These matter to the people standing in the various electorates. Kaupapa, and all that.

        • Michael P 7.2.1.2
          16 October 2023 at 7:59 pm

          "Who wins an electorate doesn't really matter…"

          Are you sure?… MMP isn't fully proportional so the more electorate seats you win, the more seats you have in Parliament.

          (Or am I missing something)

          • Belladonna 7.2.1.2.1
            16 October 2023 at 9:01 pm

            You're missing something.

            Party vote determines the number of seats you have in parliament. If your party vote qualifies you to have 30 seats, and you have 14 electorate seats, you get another 16 off your party list.

            If the election result changes in one of the electorates, and you get 15 electorate seats, you lose one of your list allocation. If it works the other way around, and you get only 13 electorate seats after the specials are counted, you get another one in off your party list. Either way, it just makes up the 30 to which your party vote entitles you.

            There is an exception to this. What happens if you get more electorate seats than your party vote entitles you to? In that case, you keep the electorate seats – and there is an overhang in Parliament (instead of a total of 120 MPs, there will be 121 – if you have one overhang seat). It is possible that TPM may be in this situation in this election. They currently have a party vote allocation of 4 seats, and have 4 electorate seats. Following the specials, it is possible that they might have an additional 1 or 2 electorate seats – giving them a total of 6 seats – two more than their party vote entitlement – and a Parliament of 122 seats.

          • lprent 7.2.1.2.2
            17 October 2023 at 9:02 am

            MMP isn’t fully proportional so the more electorate seats you win, the more seats you have in Parliament.

            It is fully proportional in NZ within the following restrictions.

            1. A party must get votes across the whole country above the threshold (5%) or win at least one electorate
            2. A party must be registered to be able to be voted for (no sign-in votes)
            3. It uses a particular formula (whose name I can never remember) to allocate the differences between party vote and electorate seats across all parties. This allows for an overhang in parliament when a party gets more electorate seats than their party vote entitles them to. So far I think that the max has been 1 seat.

            So if a party wins a lot of electorate seats, then their number of list seats declines. It they win more electorate seats than their party vote then they don’t get any list seats and the size of parliament is adjusted to make the parliament roughly proportional to the party votes in terms of numbers of seats.

            So yeah, you’re missing something very important in your education about local civics. Try wikipedia
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_representation

  8. barry 8
    15 October 2023 at 10:53 am

    Predictions:

    NZ First will moderate ACT's excesses, and stop raising the age of Super this term. Maybe they will be used as cover for failing to get any significant tax from overseas buyers.

    Immigration will again be used as a means to bolster a failing economy. Winston will not be able to stop this.

    National's mini-budget will implement austerity (because that is all they know) leading to cuts in most government departments deeper than Labour's cuts, leading to loss of jobs over the next few months, and loss of service.

    Tax cuts will kick in later next year, so the budget squeeze won't happen until 2025. After a sugar hit in the next 6 months, business profits will slide and tax take will slide further into 2025. When they realise they don't have enough money to provide services they will look for further cuts in 2025 budget. They will look for another source of revenue, perhaps increasing GST.

    In 12 months time unemployment will be 6%, inflation will be down in line with predictions to about 3-4%. Export income will be up as the Chinese economy recovers a bit, and the benefits of the new trade deals start to show.

    House building will slow down further and prices will rise faster than inflation again. National will cut support for apprenticeships as we couldn't possibly need any more builders in the future.

    The prison population will increase quite quickly, back to 10 000 by 2026. This is one thing that all 3 parties agree on.

    Look to get more money allocated to roads, and public transport again withering. It will take a few years to transition away from petrol taxes to road user charges. Look for them to spend billions on electronic toll charges.

    Government spend on consultants will increase by 30%.

    • Belladonna 8.1
      15 October 2023 at 11:15 am

      NZ First will moderate ACT's excesses, and stop raising the age of Super this term.

      I'm not so sure about this. It's pretty core policy for both National and ACT – and doesn't really affect Winston's voter base.

      The proposal is that the age of entitlement gradually increase over about 15 years or so – so no effect on the current 65+ cohort, who are a significant voting group for NZF.

      My pick is that Peters would claim he couldn't stop it, but has managed to modify it to protect the 50+ contingent – ignoring the fact they were already protected.

    • Ad 8.2
      15 October 2023 at 11:24 am

      I agree with a lot of that. Maybe not the consultants.

      My particular issue is the absence of a national energy policy, which Labour didn't have and National doesn't have.

      With more major wars breaking out I fear for a a barrel price heading over US$100, since NZ is so vulnerable to it.

      • barry 8.2.1
        15 October 2023 at 12:00 pm

        My particular issue is the absence of a national energy policy, which Labour didn't have and National doesn't have.

        Yes, energy and climate change mitigation/adaptation is harder to predict. It would be nice to see a strategy, but that seem to be hard. Labour was inconsistent – on the one hand supporting EVs and the climate commission, but OTOH subsidising petrol when the price rose enough to soften demand. Knee jerk reactions to somebody cutting the avgas pipeline, and shortages, along with the closure of Marsden Pt have not been followed with strategic thinking.

        My prediction is that buyers will return to the emissions trading auctions, which will give the new government some money to return as cuts, but probably not as much as they predict. If they really mean the ETS to do the work of reducing emissions then the carbon price will have to rise a lot (Labour predicted 40c a litre for petrol). I think this will be too much for them to stomach (as they campaigned on cost of living). So I predict that they will wind back on their commitments and our emissions will start rising again from next year. National's pledge to net zero by 2050 will be exposed as hot air (but not in time for accountability).

  9. Dennis Frank 9
    15 October 2023 at 10:56 am

    Look at how the floaters produced a sharp last-minute up-tick for the Nats!

    On the polling trend-line graph presented here: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/500190/analysis-christopher-luxon-gets-the-job-as-pm-and-deal-making-headache

    RNZ's analyst:

    In his victory speech and media appearances afterwards, Luxon cited a comment from Peters about being "willing to help". He said he hadn't called Peters but wanted to "acknowledge" the remark. All very non-committal.

    Luxon and his advisors know they need to keep the line to NZ First open. There are half a million special votes still to count. National and ACT might lose a seat from those. Or, they might gain a seat. Maybe more either way.

    National will win the Port Waikato by-election to be held next month. Where does all of that leave them? It's hard to be much more precise than: with a margin that's slim to non-existent… a deal with NZ First would be insurance against a rogue MP from National or ACT bringing the government down.

    Prudent risk management to create a 3-legged stool then!

    • Belladonna 9.1
      15 October 2023 at 11:10 am

      While I really, really, really, dislike Peters – and would much prefer that he were not in Parliament.

      I can see a few potential advantages to National in reaching out (even if they don't need his votes immediately).

      • Better to have him inside the tent, pissing outwards, rather than the other way around.
      • Minor parties, without an electorate seat base, who are in coalition, have typically not done well at the next election.
      • Vote buffer in case anything goes wrong with an electorate MP (Port Waikato aside – by-elections typically punish the sitting government)

      I guess it will all depend on the price that Winston charges for his votes. Likely to be at least a bauble of power for him (Foreign Minister, Speaker?) and a sop to Jones. I doubt that they'll get a lolly-bag like the Provincial Growth Fund, this time – but who knows?

      And, struggling to be fair, Winston was not a bad Foreign Minister last time, and he certainly understands the speaker's rules inside-out.

      Of course, Winston also knows the potential advantages to National, and disadvantages to himself. He may prefer to remain a burr under everyone's saddle from the cross-benches.

      • Dennis Frank 9.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 11:33 am

        That's a good summation. Goodwill is the key. If Lux can alchemise that sufficiently to make peace between the other leaders, his experience at securing managerial consensus will kick in & the country will benefit from that. Sticking points in negotiations will be the test of his realism! At the risk of being too satirical…

        "Right, team, we're cleared for take-off. David will be our steward, supervising behaviour in your seating arrangements. He will yap, sorry, I mean instruct anyone who gets out of line. Winston will be navigator, telling me where to go. He's already done that several times but I'll overlook such regrettable tendencies for now. We'll be flying high, steering around any cumulo-nimbus storms climate-change sends toward us. I hope the airport security crew managed to nab all those delinquent senior colleagues trying to escape thro side-doors a la Brownlee. In-flight movie will be Flight of the Conchords, so watch carefully & learn them smart moves!"

      • mikesh 9.1.2
        15 October 2023 at 1:22 pm

        Of course, Winston also knows the potential advantages to National, and disadvantages to himself. He may prefer to remain a burr under everyone's saddle from the cross-benches.

        At the end of last night's TVNZ coverage Simon Bridges commented, though he admitted it was a long shot, that ACT may well prefer to sit outside the tent, pissing in. That may be a possibility if Luxon wants to include NZ 1st in his coalition.

        • Belladonna 9.1.2.1
          15 October 2023 at 1:57 pm

          I'd say a very long shot. ACT are panting to be in government and effect the change they've been campaigning on. I feel that they are in for somewhat of a shock when they realize just how hard it is to turn the ship of state around.

          • mikesh 9.1.2.1.1
            15 October 2023 at 7:46 pm

            They have also said they do not want to be in a coalition which includes NZ 1st. However, now that most of the results are are in they seem more conciliatory. Apparently willing to swallow a dead rat in order to be at the table. But like the Greens, in respect of the latter's relationship with Labour, they can't really support anyone else but National in any case.

            Given the figures as they stand on the night, if the right lost a couple of seats in the specials, Winston would be in a position to ordain Labour if he wanted to.

            • Belladonna 9.1.2.1.1.1
              16 October 2023 at 9:22 pm

              Winston would be in a position to ordain Labour if he wanted to.

              He would, indeed. However, it seems to have been comprehensively ruled out by both sides pre-election.

              While I have consummate faith that Winston would manage to weasel around the wording of the NZF rejection of Labour – it would almost certainly require Hipkins to step down as Labour leader (not sure who would replace him – but it would have to be fairly disruptive).

  10. Kirosta 10
    15 October 2023 at 11:07 am

    Labour ruling out CGT made me vote for an actually socialist party

  11. Kirosta 11
    15 October 2023 at 11:09 am

    When Labour ruled out CGT it made me vote for a party with policies that might actually see some change to the structural inequalities we're now plagued with

  12. Descendant Of Smith 12
    15 October 2023 at 11:17 am

    Once Labour decided not to implement WEAG at a point in time when they had massive public support to do so why would poor people vote for them?

    This is the tragedy of Labours nine years. When they had an opportunity they blew it. The advice they said they got from MSD to not increase benefits further was not surprising. The COVID response with its two tier rate of assistance with displaced workers both getting more than those on benefit and Labour showing that they could disregard spousal income when they wanted showed both their disdain for those on benefit and that in fact money was not an issue at all. Their claiming of reversing Ruth Richardson's benefit changes by only adjusting for the $20-00 per week cuts and not for the disparity caused by NZS being adjusted for average wage and benefits by CPI which impacted far more over the years than the $20.00 per week cuts all left our most vulnerable in greater poverty than it needed to be.

    A simple bringing back of stamp duty on property sales could have both dampened the market slightly and bought in revenue. (Somewhat ironic that National is effectively bringing back effectively a form of stamp duty for sales over $2 million dollars to raise revenue it is a laughable as when John Key gave sole parents a decent one off benefit increase after years of Labour neglect.). Arguments about complicated wealth taxes simply allowed National to drive the narrative.

    What Labour has done is put our most vulnerable in a worse position than they could have been otherwise should National ever get back into power. That lack of foresight and long term thinking I find weird.

    The labour politicians of the 1930's and 1940's could articulate a long term vision for things like having everyone housed, people living in dignity, freely educated, etc.

    Where was the talk from Labour about the impacts of our population aging in health and planning for this for instance – not that National have any apart from increasing NZS. Where was the understanding about the disconnect between housing shortages and the massive immigration allowed in sone COVID-19 or the disconnect Labour has between low unemployment due to this mass immigration and higher benefit numbers. Do they see any irony that many of the immigrants they have allowed in are not likely, certainly in my area, to ever vote Labour so you end up hoist by your own petard.

    Maori Party and Greens were clear about their vision and good on them.

    I've railed against this shit from Labour for years now – ever since their year of consultation followed by a year of strategy, don't release policy too early, keep your powder dry bullshit. They as I said back then need to work out what they stand for and build support over time. Maybe go back to looking at some of those old Labour polices and ask where do we stand on these today and tell people – stop focusing on the National Party narrative that you will get dragged into – benefit numbers, waiting lists, number of gang members etc.

    I go back to when Labour proudly had the 8 hour working day 40 hour working week highlighted on their website. I queried why this was there and did they still believe in it? A few weeks later it went off their website.

    State housing is a good example – I could not tell you if Labour believe in state housing for homeless, for working people or whether they should be able to stay in their for life – or is only the notion of long term tenancies for the private sector and we have different rules for the state just like the timeframes to do healthy homes. Give people certainty 10 or twenty year tenancies if for life is too hard to get your emotions around.

    Labour really really need to think about who and what they stand for. We shouldn't have to put up with kneejerkery.

    Labour will continue to lose while they themselves are lost.

    • Ad 12.1
      15 October 2023 at 11:31 am

      Nothing could have reversed Labour's post-2020 decline once Ardern had set it in motion so deep and fast.

      Labour's 2020 Parliamentary majority was a crisis-jacked sugar-rush that covered a multitude of non-delivery sins. So when that camouflage was pulled away, we ran away from the truth it revealed.

      It wasn't the absence of useful tax policy that killed Labour's hopes off. If it was, Greens would be at 20% today.

      What Labour need to do is reach out to the Greens and allow the Greens to revive them. A joint conference of Labour and Greens in 2024. Greens is where the new political energy is whether one likes it or not and Labour leadership need to respect their new position in our politics.

      • Dennis Frank 12.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 11:44 am

        A joint conference of Labour and Greens in 2024

        Will only happen if both parties suddenly become competent. A better way would be to plan for one summer after next – early '25. That would only work if they each carefully select a team of their best policy-writers & negotiators as a task force, to create the design basis, via intellect & consensus decision-making, and output a plan for the joint conference. Meeting in secret, non-smoke-filled rooms till job done.

      • Descendant Of Smith 12.1.2
        15 October 2023 at 11:46 am

        “Labour's 2020 Parliamentary majority was a crisis-jacked sugar-rush that covered a multitude of non-delivery sins.”

        Always saw that as an aberration but do think the first half of the pandemic was mainly handled well. Part of the backlash though is the survivor effect – the same thing when people go on about health and safety – only the survivors get to moan about the inconveniences. The dead aren't here to talk about it.

        Things like the different payment rates, the slow response to Maori and Pacific vaccination because it was decided to solely used aged based priortisation, etc did them no favours.

      • SPC 12.1.3
        15 October 2023 at 8:56 pm

        The universalism of the protection and the universalism in the income replacement – such as the higher rate to those from employment to those on benefits – was very middle class egalitarianism.

        Thus of 2020 and not 2023 – help to those in the lower half did not appeal to those in the middle class paying a higher mortgage or even some struggling to pay the rising cost of their tenancy (food and transport).

        It wasn't the absence of useful tax policy that killed Labour's hopes off. If it was, Greens would be at 20% today.

        Wrong.The middle class wanted something from Labour to make it fairer to those on work incomes and got nothing (just the continuance of the phasing out of tax deductability of mortgage cost against rent income for existing property). Not even support for the Greens rent increase cap. They could have compensated for the lost tax off rising rent income by having a windfall profits tax on banks and supermarkets. That and a 5% stamp duty on houses over $2M to fund the change to the IETC made by National. And said they would look at an estate tax (eg 10% over $2m and 25% over $4m), rather than a wealth tax, to reduce dependency on workers paying income tax to fund government. 24 of 36 OECD nations have an estate tax.

        • Belladonna 12.1.3.1
          15 October 2023 at 9:01 pm

          Wrong.The middle class wanted something from Labour to make it fairer to those on work incomes and got nothing

          If that is really true, then the GP and/or TOP would have done a lot better in this election, since they are offering most of what you claim the middle class wanted.

          Instead, most of these voters shifted to National and/or NZF – neither of whom are offering any of this policy suite.

          • SPC 12.1.3.1.1
            16 October 2023 at 10:24 am

            No, they just wanted Labour to use the money from the 5%ers to help them, not re-distribution to the poor (Greens/TPM) or the younger generation (TOP).

    • Grey Area 12.2
      15 October 2023 at 11:40 am

      "Labour will continue to lose while they themselves are lost." Well put.

    • SPC 12.3
      15 October 2023 at 8:40 pm

      Key brought in a 2 year brightline – Labour to 5, then 10 years to make it real.

      Luxon will bring in a 15 % stamp duty on homes over $2m for foreign buyers – Labour can campaign on again banning foreign buyers, but have a 5% stamp duty on houses over $2m – about the same rate as Oz at that level.

      State housing – long term where disability and sickness impact on work capability, lower income ACC and those older not owning …periodic (such as sole parent from tenancy on loss of employment or partner) and review (the higher level of PT work income before abatement and TIA as pathways to the private market once we have rent caps and or lower immigration). I see homelessness as a transition housing thing.

      Working Conditions – FPA Industry Awards – was a path to look at the issue of work hours, such as requiring shift work for FT employment …

      And yes, migration. Require (within safe occupancy levels) housing to be supplied by the employers who need the foreign workers. And limit study here and work residency to those on a limited occupation list, or post graduate study.

      Peters was the only one focusing on the lack of a plan for an increase in aged care places.

  13. adam 13
    15 October 2023 at 11:33 am

    In Auckland we struggled badly. All electorates took hits. In South Auckland the turnout was disastrously low.

    Not hearing good things from activists on the ground in South Auckland. Seems they made it as hard a possible for people to vote.

    Lack of forms – I said this was happening before the election day here.

    The easy voting card being used as a weapon to put people off. One example – People having to lodge special votes because name not on roll – even though they had enrolled weeks and even months before.

    In turn making

    Long queues.

    and my personal cluster fuck favourite – crashing computer systems being used as an excuse to turn people away.

    I wonder how many people when turned away came back to vote – my guess from experience is very few.

    • SPC 13.1
      15 October 2023 at 7:15 pm

      I raised this on here last night.

      The only media outlet covering it – RNZ a reporter on the ground as voting closed – he was disgusted.

      If there is no enquiry there is something rotten in the state of … late delivery of cards to south Auckland, on the day system crash, long queues, being turned away, lack of forms.

      Incompetence, or deliberate corruption on the US model.

      Nothing to see here …

      And not just south Auckland, the on line crash might also impact on out of electorate voting of young students – Green voters (depending where students enrolled as they are yet to finish the year).

      • adam 13.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 7:23 pm

        Was happy with Te Maori Party turn out last night, until this morning heard from some the south Auckland people.

        I hope we get some transparency on it – as you say it is "Incompetence, or deliberate corruption on the US model"

        Either way, I think heads should roll.

        Just not good enough.

  14. pat 14
    15 October 2023 at 11:41 am

    "That was not as good as we hoped for"

    For two seperate and differently impacting causes.

    The loss was largely down to the economy, with the cost of living as it is impacting all the chances of being reelected were small…however the level of rejection had different causes more in line with dissatisfaction with the apparent desire to address cultural issues (identity politics) ahead of the fundamental needs of the entire country.

  15. tsmithfield 15
    15 October 2023 at 12:27 pm

    I think National will do at least a confidence and supply deal with NZ First, regardless of whether they have a technical majority. If there is still a majority after specials and the bi-election, it will be wafer thin, and I think Luxon will want the confidence to govern without problems.

  16. Darien Fenton 16
    15 October 2023 at 12:46 pm

    The fact is we have a National/ACT government coming in, perhaps enabled by Winston Peters. The majority voted for them. Just as they are voting out incumbent governments left and right all over the world post COVID – not to mention the floods, cyclones and no doubt drought coming our way. Can we please think about the people who are going to be affected by this change in government. Because we are going to have to as the battles ahead line up before Xmas.

    • Mike the Lefty 16.1
      15 October 2023 at 2:32 pm

      "Enabled by Winston"

      Shudder.

      I know that Winston DID give us Jacinda in 2017 and I suppose it would be churlish not to thank him that but he has definitely gone a bit ga ga since then. Throwing in your lot with conspiracy theorists and anarchists shows sanity???

      We'll see how great the new NACT government is when the first big weather event hits and people are needing to be rescued and rehoused. ACT will be telling them to set up a few sausage sizzles and Gala days to raise the money. Government aid??? – f….off you bottom feeders!

      • Anne 16.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 5:44 pm

        "Throwing in your lot with conspiracy theorists and anarchists shows sanity???"

        Had nothing to do with sanity or otherwise. He saw it as a pathway back into parliament which is why he went and visited them when they camped on parliament grounds.

        The irony about that visit, he was consorting with Maori gang members which he now professes to despise.

    • Belladonna 16.2
      15 October 2023 at 2:39 pm

      Dave Letele was scathing about the performance of Labour on the ground after Cyclone Gabrielle on the RNZ election coverage last night.

      Doing better seems a pretty low bar to achieve (though, of course, time will tell – and no one wants a disaster to test the new government)

      • Peter 16.2.1
        15 October 2023 at 7:25 pm

        Over the duration many were scathing about the way covid was handled. I'm sure the erosive residuals were important.

        Notably, those who were scathing weren't killed by the virus.

        • Belladonna 16.2.1.1
          15 October 2023 at 7:32 pm

          I'm not quite sure how the government's handling of Covid has any material impact on their handling of the Cyclone Gabrielle flooding situation.

          But, no doubt, there is a significant connection in your mind.

          The point that Letele was making (and he is in no way a Right supporter) was that he and his teams were on the ground, helping people, for weeks, and the Government was nowhere to be found.

          Not helped by first Nash and then Allan, as lead ministers, departing Parliament.

        • Michael P 16.2.1.2
          16 October 2023 at 8:25 pm

          "Notably, those who were scathing weren't killed by the virus…"

          Yea, coz if they were killed by the virus, then they wouldn't be scathing….

          sigh…

  17. William 17
    15 October 2023 at 2:21 pm

    In both Wellington Central & Rongotai electorates National have come third in the Electorate MP vote and the Party Vote!

    Of the only two seats in the region where they had some success (Ohariu with the party vote & Hutt South with the party vote & electorate MP) the margin was not large.

    This surely must cause them to rethink their intentions to cancel the Let's Get Wellington Moving projects and replace them with more roads for private cars.

    • Belladonna 17.1
      15 October 2023 at 2:32 pm

      If they're being hard-nosed about it… Why would they?

      Why throw money at people who aren't going to vote for you? So far as they are concerned, this result shows that Wellington electorates don't matter.

      Especially as a major platform plank for both National and ACT is reducing the bureaucracy and consultancy numbers (and this is one area where Winston would be cheering them on). This is going to fall, heavily, on the Wellington electorates – who are not going to be happy with them.

      Why try and work with a Green mayor who is implacably opposed to everything that the government wants to do?

      The utterly ineffective LGWM program seems to achieved nothing but hot air since it was established. Why would they even consider continuing funding it?

      • Michael P 17.1.1
        16 October 2023 at 8:28 pm

        "Why throw money at people who aren't going to vote for you?"

        To get them to vote for you?

        • Belladonna 17.1.1.1
          16 October 2023 at 8:52 pm

          Money jar isn't bottomless. You need to prioritize your spending to where it's most effective.

  18. Mike the Lefty 18
    15 October 2023 at 2:26 pm

    But on the bright side: National did not achieve an overall majority on its own like Labour did in 2020. In fact it has a majority of 1-2 depending on special votes. With the truckloads of dosh the NACTs had at their disposal a 1-2 seat majority is a bit underwhelming, although they are pretending not to notice.

    • Belladonna 18.1
      15 October 2023 at 2:46 pm

      National did not achieve an overall majority on its own like Labour did in 2020.

      It was most unlikely that it would do so. It's never previously been achieved in our MMP environment, and the 2020 election that produced it was the result of a situation unlikely to ever be repeated. [It's also, entirely arguable, that it was a bad result for Labour, in the medium term]

      Going into the election, the question was whether National and ACT could govern alone in coalition. Or whether they would need NZF – as the polls seemed to be showing. The jury is still out on this one. But for them to have the possibility of governing in a 2 party coalition – has to be seen as a win for them.

  19. aj 19
    15 October 2023 at 2:58 pm

    Might I suggest that we also had a referendum buried in our election yesterday – on co-governance.

    New Zealand can't gloat about our mythical 'better treatment' of the Tangata Whenua. It may not be so deeply held here as many do in parts of Australia, a slight streak of racism runs wide in this country. And we know that was heavily exploited by the right.

    I would suggest if New Zealand was to run a referendum on scrapping the Treaty we would get much the same result as Australia just did. But with a huge outbreak of, at best, civil disobedience.

    • observer 19.1
      15 October 2023 at 3:18 pm

      There will be a test soon, if (big "if") Luxon goes ahead with his promise to abolish the Maori Health Authority.

      Fighting the medical professionals never wins votes. Attacking co-governance is for opposition rabble-rousing. But in office … a different story.

      • alwyn 19.1.1
        15 October 2023 at 4:22 pm

        I know a number of medical professionals, as you call them. They are Doctors, not people in the Health Head Offices. They tell me that Little's abortion of an organisation is a disaster and the Maori Health Authority has absolutely nothing good about it.

        You certainly wouldn't be picking a fight with them if you reduced it to simply a component of the health system, rather than a independent group.

        • Descendant Of Smith 19.1.1.1
          15 October 2023 at 5:17 pm

          Interestingly I know a few as well. All but one, who has come here from South Africa, are supportive of the changes – the demarcations between DHB's, the unwillingness to utilise unused resources for people in other areas, the variation between services from one hospital to the next, the funding allocation models they found all problematic and saw the reforms once bedded in helping fix some of that.

          I guess the difference might be why anecdote is never that useful. Might also depend which DHB you are with and how much you work between public and private – lots of variables and variation.

          The ongoing commercialisation of both GP and dental into big corporate models is also having a negative impact. I expect this will continue under national – at some point we will have removed so many services from rural areas we will be breaching treaty obligations – personally I think we already do.

    • Mike the Lefty 19.2
      15 October 2023 at 6:15 pm

      Well said, aj.

      Most of us have overlooked that in the heat of the moment.

      We will now get our own "voice" and it promises to get a lot nastier than the Aussie one.

      There will be hikois aplenty and attempted parliamentary grounds occupations. Only this time the police will have been told to start breaking skulls with their batons.

    • That_guy 19.3
      15 October 2023 at 7:30 pm

      Oh god, this again. For practical reasons I support co-governance but not all opponents of it are racist. Some people just don’t think allocating power on the basis of race is a good idea ever. Some people have reasonable concerns about checks and balances or lack thereof.

      It’s lazy thinking to assume that because a method of governance isn’t working for Māori then the next method of governance will work. They could both be crap.

      I’m not a fan of any allocation of power with insufficient transparency and checks and balances, whether you are pink, brown , purple or green.

  20. observer 20
    15 October 2023 at 3:11 pm

    Nobody analyses Special Votes in more detail (and without partisan bias) than Legal Beagle. This is worth a read …

    Election '23: The Special Votes • Legal Beagle • Public Address

    Short version: National likely to lose seats. National/ACT to lose overall majority.

    The timeline is really important here, which most media commentators don't seem to have grasped yet. National will certainly add one after the Port Waikato by-election, but neither Luxon nor Peters will want to sit around twiddling their thumbs while they wait for that seat. (Luxon can't go to the Gov-Gen and say "Look, we're obviously gonna win that one, so swear me in already!". Governments are not formed on the basis of forecasts).

  21. Willem 21
    15 October 2023 at 3:57 pm

    78.4% turnout is a sign of a healthy democracy and society.

    There are many faults however we are lucky not to have the extremes of UK, US & Australia.

    There are some in the Nat/Act camp wishing for extreme changes however the high level of engagement is a warning to their leaders that voters will assert their will.

  22. That_guy 22
    15 October 2023 at 7:15 pm

    As I recall, and I may be wrong, Chippy said no wealth tax while I am leader of Labour, so roll him. Nice guy, no problem with him, but he needs to be rolled, ASAP.

  23. SPC 23
    15 October 2023 at 7:26 pm

    It's 61 to 60 before the specials are counted – and there are more than usual (100,000 leaving in the past year).

    NACT will lose at least 1 and LG up at least 1, so at best for NACT 61-61 after the PW by election.

    So the polls were just right, it will require a threeway.

    But NZF needs a 2 seat decline on specials to NACT, so it is 60-62 after PW BE, to have leverage in negotiations.

  24. SPC 24
    15 October 2023 at 8:09 pm

    Labour have won 18 electorates (atm) and have a chance of three more Nelson, Te Atatu. and Banks Peninsular.

    If they stay at 34 off the list, then RT, DR and CB miss out, if they go to 21 electorate seats.

    https://www.parliament.nz/media/2170/parliament-brief-parliament-and-the-general-election.pdf

    • alwyn 24.1
      15 October 2023 at 8:40 pm

      Could you spell out the people you are talking about?

      Initials like RT, DR and CB are quite meaningless to me, and I suspect most other people. Even just a surname would be better.

    • Craig H 24.2
      15 October 2023 at 10:44 pm

      I think if Labour collect those 3 seats by specials, they will also get an extra seat or two from specials. Tracy McLellan (Banks Peninsula) is also currently getting in on the list, so if she gets an electorate instead, it won't change the list composition below her i.e. Camilla Belich would still be returned to Parliament.

      • SPC 24.2.1
        15 October 2023 at 11:17 pm

        If they win 21 electorate seats and gain one from specials, the extra list seat would go to RN/Rino Tirikatene.

  25. Jester 25
    15 October 2023 at 8:14 pm

    Nanaia Mahuta been in parliament since 2022. Now gone. What has she achieved in 21 years?

    [You have been on TS since 2011. Now almost gone. What have you achieved in 12 years?

    Mahuta’s valedictory statement will be compulsory reading for you – Incognito]

    • Peter 25.1
      15 October 2023 at 9:02 pm

      Was she there when things were done? That means she was instrumental in doing things.

      Can you name a member who ‘achieved’ something and that was solely, only down to them?

      Not simply sticking up for the woman but the question reminds me of the banal comment I often see about members. Because someone isn’t in the news they’re ‘doing nothing.’

    • Incognito 25.2
      15 October 2023 at 9:37 pm

      Mod note

    • alwyn 25.3
      15 October 2023 at 11:22 pm

      "Mahuta’s valedictory statement will be compulsory reading for you – Incognito]"

      If by that you mean her valedictory speech in Parliament you are going to have to wait for a very long time. She doesn't get one. You have to retire voluntarily to have the ability to make that speech to Parliament. If you lose your seat in an election you miss out.

      If you mean something else by "valedictory statement" what is it?

      [lprent: If you want to play at being a snark, then it pays to be accurate. Technically there is no such thing as a “valedictory speech in Parliament”. It is, as incognito said, a “valedictory statement“.

      Being inaccurate just makes you look like a snarky idiot attacking a moderator – something that will draw my attention. Try to avoid doing that. It irritates me because it gives me unnecessary work.

      You are however correct that MPs that lose at an election don’t get a valedictory statement. ]

    • Jester 25.4
      16 October 2023 at 7:43 pm

      Are you sure I have been on TS since 2011?

      I have only had this computer for the last four years and never visited the site or had a log in on my old computer.

      Are you able to link to one of my first comments in 2011 as I can then let you know if it was me or not as I would be interested. (maybe someone has previously used the name "Jester"?

      Thanks

      [lprent: There is a built-in fuzzy search accessible to users on the desktop (not mobiles). It is in on the “Comments” tab on the right. Clicking on the Handle will give you a link like this to dispaly all comments by that handle and/or ‘e-mail’.

      https://thestandard.org.nz/search/%40author+%22Jester%22/?search_comments=true&search_posts=true&search_sortby=date

      Note that we generally only allow a single obvious person to have a particular handle. The gravtor indicates the ‘e-mail’ associated with it. So it does look like you may be a different ‘e-mail’. ‘Jester’ has also changed their ‘e-mail’ several times, but managed to convince moderators to allow them to do it. If you are not them, you’re going to have to change your handle. Ideally without me having to do it – because I tend to just bulk change the handle with a sense of sense of “humour”. ]

  26. aj 26
    15 October 2023 at 8:55 pm

    'Luxon was bankrolled by the richest people in New Zealand': Dita De Boni says it's outrageous to say Luxon's own efforts got him across the line'

    https://twitter.com/NewshubNationNZ/status/1713369447723913302

    'Labour abandoned all hope when they went negative,' says Mark Jennings. Dita De Boni says they didn't go negative, and that's 'just a National party talking point'

    https://twitter.com/NewshubNationNZ/status/1713314483571949735

    Also on NewsHub Nation….

    Luxon can't avoid Māori media and tough questions 'forever' – Mihi Forbes

    Labour couldn't sell co-governance to non-Māori' says Dita De Boni. 'It was explained poorly, and they've paid for it,' says Mihirangi Forbes.

    'Winston Peters is a cynical, retail politician,' says NBR senior journalist Dita De Boni. Mark Jennings from Newsroom predicts Peters will be a part of the next government.

    • Anne 26.1
      15 October 2023 at 9:25 pm

      'Luxon was bankrolled by the richest people in New Zealand': Dita De Boni says it's outrageous to say Luxon's own efforts got him across the line'

      Absolutely. According to a couple of insiders I know, he was a lousy Air NZ CEO. A very wise Indian gentleman I know said to me "behind the face you see is another face and its not a nice one". I believe him.

      I agree about the co-governance. It was explained so poorly, it allowed National and ACT to foment mis and disinformation about it.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 26.1.1
        16 October 2023 at 3:52 am

        Heard similar stories from Air NZ employees. Luxon hated anything to do with workers when he was CEO. After he became a politician, was all smiles and handshakes everytime he went on a plane. So I was told.

  27. Ovid 27
    15 October 2023 at 9:30 pm

    It sucks. It really, really sucks. But this is the rhythm of politics. Hopefully Labour's caucus won't repeat the internal strife that followed its loss 15 years ago in 2008.

  28. SPC 28
    15 October 2023 at 10:15 pm

    An unsurprising take from the right wing narrative embedder the New Zealand Herald

    the era of unkindness is with us

    when National governs over us

    for the haves, not the have nots

    when print ink infills with bots

    They cite Elon Musk and the Daily Telegraph as there in world kind lipdribble.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/election-2023-political-bloodbath-and-the-end-of-the-jacinda-ardern-era-world-reacts-to-national-partys-victory-in-new-zealand/GQ7Y4SQYQRHRRHKOI3RIKIAG7I/

  29. Reality 29
    16 October 2023 at 11:59 am

    The callousness of the new government in wanting to make thousands of government employees redundant has, as an earlier commenter mentioned, raised an interesting response regarding Ohariu. A general impression gained from people I know was that people simply did not like Nicola Willis and would not vote for her especially if their career was at stake. A few of my younger family members who don't pay much attention to politics have commented on her screeching voice and smugness and questionable ability to be a minister of finance.

    One thing to make up for the loss for Labour will be observing how Luxon copes or otherwise with the media. His minders (and personal adviser Sir John Key) will have to have lots of cue cards ready for him.

    Although people are over having Covid dominate our lives, it saddens me that it was Labour that had to deal with that for three years and I wonder if it took so much effort and energy in government. People have short memories.

    • Michael P 29.1
      16 October 2023 at 9:10 pm

      "The callousness of the new government in wanting to make thousands of government employees redundant…."

      As someone who has been in the position of having to make redundancies, as well as having lost a job through redundancy in the past, I would say that redundancies aren't in anyway made with a disregard for the affected employees nor without a great deal of thought.

      Remember, it is the position rather than the person that is being made redundant. If a position is no longer needed for the organization to function then it would be really bad management of that organization to keep that position going and waste money (taxpayers money in this case) paying for it.. This is a fact of life in our working world and just because you are paid by taxpayers doesn't change that.

      Obviously it's very hard on the people who are going to lose their job but it's a fact of life. The average salary for a public sector employee is over $90,000 and most roles have redundancy provisions for pay and notice so they are a lot better off in terms of their redundancy compensation than most private sector employees

      If the government makes essential roles redundant then obviously government will stop functioning and they will answer to voters.

      • Descendant Of Smith 29.1.1
        17 October 2023 at 11:30 am

        "it is the position rather than the person that is being made redundant"

        That is highly theoretical. Often it is a reduction in positions say from 10 to 5 where all have to reapply or a "change" to a job description that enables those in favour to be replaced by those who are not or those on high salaries replaced by those on lower salaries to reduce costs.

        • Michael P 29.1.1.1
          20 October 2023 at 10:03 am

          I was just looking at it from my own experience and the legal side of things.

          I agree and have no doubts that unscrupulous employers have, do and will continue to break the law on this..

          However in this instance, with the positions being in the public service and with the amount of press coverage and publicity already received it will be fairly difficult for the new government to do anything underhand without the public knowing about it. (as long as there's still a few journalists around who do their job properly)

  30. nukefacts 30
    16 October 2023 at 3:20 pm

    Reading and listening to comments about the election, it really feels like we're in Brexit-land. PMC/upper class identitarians are either saying 'couldn't see that one coming' or blaming it on Covid, while working class have a totally different take that is 180 degrees apart.

    Talking to a set of friends from the working class, the three most commonly sited reasons voters turned to Natz included:

    – the un-mandated, secretive shift to co-governace and branding anyone critical of it as 'racist' has seriously ticked off a lot of working class kiwis who previously voted Labour

    – the posey-parker travesty in Albert park seriously turned off lifetime Labour/Green voters (myself included). Where once we fought for Women's rights, we saw entitled men threatening and enacting real violence against women, and Labour and Green politicians, and the MSM, actively cheered the men on and then gaslight NZ'ers pretending it was all 'trans love'. Hard to row back from that fiasco. This was also a big issue for all the PMC friends I know.

    – serious crime has really trended upwards and has many, especially immigrant, communities deeply worried, especially coupled to Labour's 'cultural report' and home detention fiascos

    Three other issues that were also cited, but of lesser importance, for everyone I've spoken to include:

    – education – declining standards, pushing Matauranga Maori into science, absenteeism, and gender ideology at schools is a red flag for many

    – welfare dependency – rightly or wrongly, everyone I spoke to has a story about someone sitting on a benefit and not working where once they would have been pushed into work

    – bureaucratic bloat and incompetence – key issues here were the polytechnic merger disaster, the health restructure disaster, the missing $1.9 billion mental health disaster …

    We are entering dangerous territory when these two sections of society are so far apart on perceived reality.

  31. joe90 31
    16 October 2023 at 9:20 pm

    NZ1st, apathy and a mood swing stitched up my electorate. NZ1st party vote tripled, turnout was down by 15%, Labour's incumbent/party vote were both half that of 2020 and the winning Nat/party vote were up 2k on 2020/

    henry cooke

    @henrycooke

    Turnout dropped quite a bit: 82.2% to 78.4%. But it didn't drop evenly – some of Labour's safest seats saw the biggest drops in overall votes, with two of the famous "M" electorates in South Auckland dropping to around 20k valid votes, half of the votes in safe blue seats.

    https://twitter.com/henrycooke/status/1713250234581631174

    https://www.henrycooke.news/p/a-closer-look-at-labours-shattering