Why I voted two ticks Labour

Written By: - Date published: 9:02 am, September 20th, 2017 - 64 comments
Categories: election 2017, greens, labour - Tags: , , ,

I voted yesterday.

The electorate vote was simple. Dunedin North – Labour’s David Clark is a great MP and a lovely guy, very easy to vote for!

I struggled with the party vote. I happen to be a Labour Party member, but that’s mainly a historical accident. I’m not “Tribal Labour”, I have voted Green and Alliance before. Obviously this time it was a tossup between Greens and Labour. Difficult. In the end, I’m pretty sure that the Greens are over the line (do vote Green!), and after that the exact size of their vote is not too much of a worry. So I went with Labour, because it would be good (but not necessary) if their vote exceeded National’s, and that is looking like a very close call indeed.

Parties aside, I voted for change. Labour + Greens + the majority of public opinion on NZF represents a strong and clear mood for change. Don’t lose sight of this in all the spin about the Labour vs National horse race. The Nats have no mates.

I voted for change because the Nats are liars and scaremongers who play the dirty politics game. They have helped the rich get richer while watching poverty and homelessness get worse and worse, while the environment degrades and the impact of climate change accelerates. Nine long wasted years. They do not deserve to lead this country.

I voted for change because a Labour led government will be, as always (ok with one notable exception!) – good for NZ and its people. Because their hearts are in the right place. Because their record shows them to be competent and innovative. Because they believe in inclusive politics. Because Jacinda Ardern has inspired me. Because it’s time for generational change.

I voted two ticks Labour.

64 comments on “Why I voted two ticks Labour ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bearded Git 1
    20 September 2017 at 9:14 am

    That logic doesn’t work really Anthony-I think you got this wrong.

    Lab 42+Gre 6 with Nat 43 is best because we get a Lab/Gre government.

    But Lab 44 Gre 4 either leaves us either with a National government (Nats 43+NZF 7) or leaves us with a Lab/NZF government. (Lab 44+ NZF 7) .

    Surely you would prefer Lab/Gre to Lab/NZF?

    It follows that when in doubt Party Vote Green

    • r0b 1.1
      20 September 2017 at 9:24 am

      Yup, that’s exactly the struggle! But I’m not in (significant) doubt that the Greens are going to make it.

      (Labour + Green) > Nat, but it will help the perception / stability of the next government if Labour > Nat on its own.

    • Anne 1.2
      20 September 2017 at 9:35 am

      It can equally follow that when in doubt Party Vote Labour.

      I’m also a Labour Party member who toyed with giving my party vote to the Greens. Two weeks ago I might have done it, but the Nat campaign of fear, lies and innuendo
      has left me with no alternative but to vote Labour. I wish it could be otherwise but until voters stop being led by the nose by a corrupt National Party then I don’t have a choice.
      My priority is a Labour led government.

      • Bearded Git 1.2.1
        20 September 2017 at 9:49 am

        Then you are happy either with Nat/NZF or Lab/NZF??

        From what you say you should be voting Green in order to be sure of a progressive Labour-led government, which will not be the case with Lab/NZF.

        • Anne 1.2.1.1
          20 September 2017 at 10:33 am

          Then you are happy either with Nat/NZF or Lab/NZF??

          No. I want a Labour/Green coalition government. But if it transpires the dirty Nats have succeeded in scaring the pants off too many of the voters… then I would accept a Lab/NZF govt. but only at a pinch.

          Leopards don’t change their spots and Winston is the same untrustworthy bastard he’s always been. I hope it’s Lab/Green.

          • DoublePlusGood 1.2.1.1.1
            20 September 2017 at 8:16 pm

            So the scare tactics scared you into voting in such a way that a Labour-led government is less likely, because of the risk of the Greens missing 5%. Good work.

      • cleangreen 1.2.2
        20 September 2017 at 10:07 am

        100% Ane,

        You mirror us too.

        Some of us willl split Labour/NZ First too.

    • spikeyboy 1.3
      20 September 2017 at 11:16 am

      Totally agree Bearded Git. I was surprised ro find a lot of previous Green supporters going the same way as Anthony and am now more worried about the greens making it than I was. I have party voted green as I know it is essential for them to remain in parliament.which doesnt bear thinking about really.

  2. Thomas Forrow 2
    20 September 2017 at 9:25 am

    And if the Green party gets a greater percentage we have more strong capable women in Parliament.

    • ianmac 2.1
      20 September 2017 at 9:49 am

      That would be great Thomas but the same applies toLabour. The most optimistic projection had Labour with 50% women over the line.

  3. ianmac 3
    20 September 2017 at 9:52 am

    My thinking is much the same as Rob and Anne and will vote accordingly. I think that my wife and sons think likewise but I have never asked them directly.

  4. cleangreen 4
    20 September 2017 at 10:00 am

    Both NZ First & Greens will both get over the line that is final;.

    Although today National said on the media they need to wipe both the greens and NZ First out to be the next government!!!!!

    So if we can mend our fences people!!!; – and get the ‘all three’ back on board in a ‘grand coalition this will secure we will win!

    We need to run a labour lead government with the greens/NZFirst alliance because Hellen Clark did this successfully in 1999 so in their success we should do it again.

    The alternative national and ‘bitsa’ government will finish us all in NZ off as they drag us into the jaws of TPPA.

    • Anne 4.1
      20 September 2017 at 11:06 am

      Umm… talking of the Nats. Received a phone call this morning from the National Party reminding me of “advance voting”. He had a thick accent and at the end of the call he announced he was ringing from… I think he said Curia and he mentioned a Wellington address which I didn’t catch.

      I live in a true blue Auckland electorate so my assumption is there is a major panic on, and Farrar and co. have been instructed to ring enrolled voters in all their ‘true blue’ electorates.

      Edit: lived here 30 plus years and its never happened before.

      • Enough is Enough 4.1.1
        20 September 2017 at 1:59 pm

        Of course there is major panic on. You make that sound like bad thing.

        I am panicked that National may retain power.

        I hope that sense is shared by all on the left and I hope that Labour and Green are taking similar measures to the call you which received. I hope they are getting their supporters out to vote.

  5. Bob 5
    20 September 2017 at 10:03 am

    All you undecided voters who want a Progressive Govt. Need to vote party vote green,
    NZ DOESNT NEED TO BE HELD HOSTAGE AGAIN, by NZ FIRST.
    Bumbling Bill wants to discourage anyone voting for the Left wing minor parties, as it gives Labour more choice, he has no mates, Dunne is gone, & Seymour is dissing him on a daily basis.
    LAB/ GRN is for me the most progressive way fwd.
    James Shaw & Jacinda work well together, Winnie just won’t cut the mustard, he’s so last century!!
    I’m prepared to endure Winnie if nessacary.
    It’s Generational change we want, after all Shonkey learnt On the job.
    And NZ NEEDS TO BECOME A WORLD LEADER IN THE Right Things, not the WRONG THINGS, like suicide & Poverty.
    And Tax system needs to be overhauled completely, the Gnats will never do this.
    I’m listening to Shamabeel the man.
    TAX IS LOVE #letsdothis

    [lprent: SHOUTING is discouraged here. I won’t tell you again. Once is enough. ]

    • Warren Doney 5.1
      20 September 2017 at 11:14 am

      I party voted Green partly because I see Winston First as dangerous too. I’m picking that a lot of Labour’s new support would melt away if they went into coalition with him. I really hope they think very carefully and do some polling if it comes down to a choice. I know there are elements in Labour who would like him, but I think he would totally derail the movement for change that’s happening now.

    • Bob 5.2
      20 September 2017 at 9:50 pm

      My apologies, thanks for pointing this out.

  6. Dot 6
    20 September 2017 at 10:13 am

    I look forward to your blog stories rOb, they are insightful and concise and keep me coming back to ‘theStandard’.
    Following lots of unpleasant days,
    the weather is fine and sunny in Auckland today so I am hoping for a fine day on Saturday with lots of people going out to vote for a change.

  7. Andre 7
    20 September 2017 at 10:17 am

    My party vote went to the Greens. Because my big issues are climate change, the environment and taxation fairness, and the Greens policies are much closer aligned to my views (on those issues) than any other party (and I’m confident they’ll get over 5% so it won’t be a wasted vote).

    My electorate vote went to Deborah Russell (Labour). Even though she’s been parachuted in, I want her tax expertise in Parliament and I’m sure she will also take on board local issues and represent them well. But mostly because Garcia is such a social troglodyte that I don’t want him anywhere near Parliament, and I’d be appalled if a split left vote let him sneak in. At first glance it appears his list placing (50) should be high enough to get him in, but there’s a bunch of newbies in safe Nat electorates lower on the list than Garcia, so it will take quite a high Nat vote to get him in on the list.

    • Draco T Bastard 7.1
      20 September 2017 at 12:30 pm

      Yep, my vote went Green party and Labour electorate.

      I would much prefer it if the electorate voting was changed to a preferential system. Then we’d actually get the electorates preferred candidate rather than the least preferred with a plurality of votes.

      IRV has the effect of avoiding split votes when multiple candidates earn support from like-minded voters. As a simple example, suppose there are two candidates with similar views, A and B, and a third with different views, C, with first-preference totals of 35% for candidate A, 25% for B and 40% for C. In a plurality voting election, candidate C may win with 40% of the votes, even though 60% of electors prefer both A and B over C. Alternatively, voters are pressured to choose the seemingly stronger candidate of either A or B, despite personal preference for the other, in order to help ensure the defeat of C. With IRV, the electors backing B as their first choice can rank A second, which means candidate A will win by 60% to 40% over C despite the split vote in first choices.

  8. peterh 8
    20 September 2017 at 10:22 am

    I voted Monday I changed to two ticks Labour, But now having 2nd thoughts, we need Winnie, just to shove it up Joyce every time he does a hit on the government, and there will be a lot of hits coming, Every time Peters has been in govt he has done a good job

    • ScottGN 8.1
      20 September 2017 at 2:29 pm

      Joyce will off like a robber’s dog if they lose. He ain’t gonna stick around helplessly on the Opposition benches.

  9. riffer 9
    20 September 2017 at 10:33 am

    I’m with Anne. I’m currently laid up in Wellington Hospital Orthopedic Ward following a major motor vehice accident last week – a combination of people not following standards in road safety on the Transmission Gully Road and other driver idiocy. Chris Hipkins is my local MP and through engagement with him and his support of causes I am aligned with we have become friends of sorts. He’s even ridden on the back of my Italian Supervise in support of charity. I will support him to the end. I have last three elections voted Red/Green but this time wanted to make my intention clear with a strong Labour vote and I too believer the Greens will have no trouble getting there. I’m 50, raised in a staunch National household but I rebelled at an early age. I was a union member from day 1 of working life. I fully believe in the power of unionised labour. There are some things I don’t like about Labour but they are far outweighed by the positives. A Labour Green government will do more to make me feel better than all the painkillers money could buy.

    And if you were wondering, my care in Wellington Hospital has been first class.

    • Tautoko Mangō Mata 9.1
      20 September 2017 at 10:41 am

      Hope you receive the Labour -Green painkiller that speeds up your recovery, Riffer.

    • Tracey 9.2
      20 September 2017 at 12:52 pm

      Good luck with your recovery

    • Macro 9.3
      20 September 2017 at 2:10 pm

      All the best for your recover riffer.
      I had a similar experience in Waikato a few years back. And excellent care. The damaged shoulder (and it was hugely smashed up) is back to 99% of its original capability.

  10. riffer 10
    20 September 2017 at 10:34 am

    Oh yes. Voting early. I voted on Monday. The people coming around the wards were so helpful.

  11. Ad 11
    20 September 2017 at 10:45 am

    Our household is voting two ticks for Labour.

    We usually find the bluest voting place we can find in our electorate and go there, just so we feel like we stick it to the neighbours a bit.

  12. gsays 12
    20 September 2017 at 11:32 am

    Cheers for the post Rob.
    I have voted in palmy.
    I have one quibble, that there has been only Labour government that wasn’t good for the people. I assume that was lange’s reform government of the ’80s.
    I suppose the Labour governments that followed did some good things, buy kiwirail, Cullen fund etc, but they did nothing to undo the market dominance thinking of Aotearoa.
    It could be argued that they helped entrench the system, with the wff, rent subsidies etc, accepting the idea of working poor and welfare for landlords.
    I want wages to rise and conditions to improve and welfare to drop.

    Abolishing secondary tax is a good wee step.

  13. bill brown 13
    20 September 2017 at 11:45 am

    Just voted at Wellington Central Library. Steady stream of voters at 10AM.

    I was tossing up between Green and Labour for party vote – but could not bring myself at the last moment to vote Green – just too tribal.

    • Bearded Git 13.1
      20 September 2017 at 11:50 am

      You are entitled to be tribal Bill….but will you be happy with a Nat/NZF or Lab/NZF government if the Greens don’t get in?

      • bill brown 13.1.1
        20 September 2017 at 12:44 pm

        Well you know _some_ people have to make up the Lab side of a Lab/Green coalition. I just happen to be one of them.

        • Bearded Git 13.1.1.1
          20 September 2017 at 1:44 pm

          Now if you had voted for Seymour I’d be pissed off with you Bill…..looking forward to raising a cold pale ale to Jacinda on Saturday at 7.30 (because the rumour is that the more than than a million advanced votes will be counted quickly and should give a very early result)

  14. left_forward 14
    20 September 2017 at 12:07 pm

    For all of you who have already party voted Labour with the confidence that Greens will get over 5% despite you not supporting this possibility, I don’t know where you get this confidence from (surely not the polls?) – we can only hope that you are right. If you can live with a Lab/NZF or even a Nat/NZF coalition, then fair enough – but if not, you have chosen a flawed strategy.

  15. marty mars 15
    20 September 2017 at 12:10 pm

    We voted yesterday a combination of Green and Labour. I have been so impressed with Jacinda and cannot wait for her to be the Prime Minister.

  16. Chris 16
    20 September 2017 at 12:35 pm

    “I voted for change because a Labour led government will be, as always (ok with one notable exception!) – good for NZ and its people.”

    You forgot to mention how the three Labour-led governments from 1999 to 2008 were not good for New Zealand or its people, certainly not for the poor. The poorest NZers were screwed senseless over that time and it was pretty much done under the radar.

    It mightn’t be time to dwell on that right now given how important a change of government is at the moment, but we should never forget what Labour-led governments are capable of and that period of time – the Clark years – was one hell of a lesson, and one that I hope no future Labour-led government would ever choose to repeat.

    • left_forward 16.1
      20 September 2017 at 12:42 pm

      I assume you are referring to the one Labour-led Government, elected three times – I entirely disagree with your hyperbolic claim – they certainly could have gone further – but compared to any other since the mid 1970s – the Clark Government was by a long, long way, simply the best.

      • Chris 16.1.1
        20 September 2017 at 1:09 pm

        As I said, what Clark and her mates did to the poorest NZers went under the radar.

      • Anne 16.1.2
        20 September 2017 at 1:15 pm

        And the reason why they couldn’t go further than they did was because the electorate was still too mesmerised by the neoliberal experiment. It significantly reduced their options. It wasn’t ideal, but far rather a Labour-led govt. from 1999 -2008 than a National led one.

        • left_forward 16.1.2.1
          20 September 2017 at 2:13 pm

          Totally agree – I recall the heavy flack they got from the media and electorate for their ‘closing the gaps’ program.

          • Ad 16.1.2.1.1
            20 September 2017 at 2:35 pm

            On the back of which Brash nearly stole the entire election from Labour with an attack on Maori and beneficiaries that was far bolder than anything we have seen this year. It got close to a very, very different country right there.

  17. swordfish 17
    20 September 2017 at 2:20 pm

    I’ll be voting on Saturday – as Mother Nature intended.

    Entirely share your mixed feelings vis-à-vis Labour vs Green Party-Vote.

    My 3 priorities (in order of urgency) are

    (1) a Labour led government
    (2) a Left-leaning government
    (3) Ensuring the Greens make that 5% threshold

    On the one hand – I want the Greens in both Parliament & Govt (to ensure priority (2))
    Which suggests strategically Party-Voting Green on Saturday.

    On the other – I agree with you that “it will help the perception / stability of the next government if Labour > Nat on its own.”

    One or two Polls over the past decade have suggested strong public sentiment in favour of the idea that the party receiving the most votes should form the subsequent Government (eg 79% agreeing in a 2008 Colmar Brunton).

    Then again Jacinda-mania may have somewhat mitigated this view – the usual MSM suspects haven’t been pursuing this line in the way they did during previous campaigns & a recent Herald ZB Kantar TNS poll found more voters feeling NZF should make any coalition decisions on the basis of policies it can get (38%) rather than simply going with the largest party (35%) – with 27% Unsure.

    So – on balance – still suggests strategically voting Green

    But now we get to the core issue that continues to irk me as I contemplate a strategic vote to help lift the Greens over the 5% threshold = What do the Greens intend to do if NZF wants to lock them out of power – by insisting on a Lab-NZF coalition with the Greens relegated to c & s support outside of Government

    Let’s say =
    Nat+NZF 62 Seats
    Lab + NZF 57 Seats

    NZF tells Lab they strongly prefer Lab-NZF coalition over Nat-NZF one – but only if the Greens are relegated to c & s = otherwise “we” (NZF) will be forced to choose National

    Green MP Barry Coates, rang alarm bells in July when he said the Greens would refuse to support Lab-NZ First Gov (indeed might prefer to force a second election) & said Green MPs had discussed this in caucus.

    The MSM subsequently suggested Turei had argued along similiar lines in her speech to the Greens’ campaign launch in Nelson.

    According to Gower, “Barry Coates should be congratulated for showing in public what the Greens have been keeping private”. It is their “how do we stop Winston and Labour from shafting us” plan”

    & Bryce Edwards has suggested “other Greens have been quietly talking about this option, too. One Green MP – not Barry Coates – informed me of this (strategy) earlier in the year …. the Greens didn’t want this option to be widely discussed: The problem for the Greens has always been to keep this option quiet until after the election. They want the option in post-election coalition negotiations but don’t want potential Green voters to be aware that the party could well sink the chances of a change of government”

    Shaw – subsequently forced into damage control – partially reassured sympathetic Labour supporters = saying Greens’ “have no intention of forcing an early election” – but then indulged in waffle on other scenarios (ie in the event that Winnie vetoes Green involvement in any possible Labour-led government).

    “Frankly I think that there’s a lot of scenarios that could play out at this election and we just think everything is hypothetical until you know how many MPs each party has got… I don’t think it’s particularly helpful to chuck round lots of different scenarios because there are actually lots of different scenarios… Look there’s a lot of scenarios I don’t want to get into what all of the hypothetical situations are”

    Now I appreciate the Greens have few options in dealing with the very realistic danger of a Winston veto where they’re shut out of a left-of-centre coalition, as in 2005 – hence the high-stakes game of political chicken with the threat to pull the plug on a Lab-NZF Government – but they need to realise they’re in a beggars can’t be choosers position = if you want sympathetic Labour supporters like me to cast a strategic vote for the Greens to lift them over the threshold – then we could do with some clarity & reassurance that by doing so we’re not inadvertently making a change of government less likely

    The Greens need to give a categorical answer on whether they would ever pull the plug on a Labour-led government if they were left out of it.

    Or are they considering the cross benches & abstaining on confidence and supply
    under this scenario – supporting a Labour-led government, on a case-by-case policy basis & using their effective legislative veto to extract concessions piecemeal

    While I agree the Greens participation will ensure any Labour-led government is more likely to be Left-leaning & progressive – such a message is arguably a little deceptive in its ethereal abstraction

    Green-sympathetic Labour supporters deserve clarity on the cold hard practical consequences of strategically Party-Voting Green on Saturday

    • Psycho Milt 17.1
      20 September 2017 at 2:27 pm

      Green-sympathetic Labour supporters deserve clarity on the cold hard practical consequences of strategically Party-Voting Green on Saturday

      I agree, but that should be accompanied by the Green Party getting clarity on whether Labour would screw them over for a deal with NZF. There’s obfuscation on both sides.

    • Ad 17.2
      20 September 2017 at 2:38 pm

      Alternatively just avoid all that ‘deceptive ethereal abstraction ‘and just vote for Labour to get National out. Keep it simple Sword.

    • ScottGN 17.3
      20 September 2017 at 2:46 pm

      Call me old-fashioned but I’m going to vote on Saturday too swordfish.

      In his TVNZ opinion piece today John Armstrong canvasses the possibility that Labour may get slightly fewer seats than National but still end up in government with NZ First. He likens it to similar outcomes in the Scandinavian democracies.

      He notes that all the Aussie betting agencies are betting on which party will deliver the PM rather than which will win the most seats. Currently they all favour Labour to do this. Right now Sportsbet has Labour paying 1.65 versus National at 2.20.

    • Bill 17.4
      20 September 2017 at 2:49 pm

      So hang on Swordfish.

      The idea is that NZF may well play silly buggers (potentially vetoing any Green presence in government) and that NZ Labour will enable that but….the Greens get to do all the justifying and explaining??!?! How’s that work?

      If you don’t want NZF to be in a position to “game” the result, then make sure the Green vote is much higher than the NZF vote. Sod this 5% rational that (I suspect) is a line dreamed up and pushed by more conservative sections of NZ Labour’s caucus.

      • Bearded Git 17.4.1
        20 September 2017 at 5:52 pm

        agreed bill…swordfish making it all too complicated but he is right about coates who should have kept his trap shut

    • left_forward 17.5
      20 September 2017 at 3:21 pm

      They will almost certainly go with confidence and supply in your scenario – they will not want a Nat/NZF Government – who on the left would!?

      • DSpare 17.5.1
        20 September 2017 at 6:32 pm

        Not every MP for a left party is necessarily of the left themselves. My nightmare scenario is where a Nat/ NZF coalition is just short of the numbers and some of the righter Labour MPs jump over to the NZF waka (probably at the same time as Jones becoming deputy and heir apparent).

        GP giving C&S and horse trading for support on a bill by bill basis would be preferable to that!

  18. red-blooded 18
    20 September 2017 at 6:29 pm

    OK folks, so the latest Colmar Brunton has the Greens sitting pretty on 8% (which is where I and others always argued their core vote was likely to settle). One problem – all those Labour/Green supporters who’ve shifted over to the Greens in order to ensure their presence in parliament have had a significant effect on the Labour vote. At 37% (with the Nats on 46) it makes it much harder to argue that Labour are likely to lead the next government.

    I desperately want a left-leaning government. I gave my party vote to Labour and I’m proud of that. Those of you who haven’t voted yet should consider who you want to lead the next government. ‘Cos at the moment it looks like English, Joyce, Bennet, Collins and co are going to keep on grinding down public services, selling off state assets, cosseting polluters and avoiding the hard issues like climate change. But hey, at least we’ll get tax cuts!

    To change the government, party vote Labour.

  19. Tanz 19
    20 September 2017 at 6:37 pm

    Proudly voted NZ First, no contest.

  20. Tanz 20
    20 September 2017 at 7:07 pm

    Voting for the party that aligns to the best outcome for New Zealand and one’s own values is never a wasted vote. The Conservatives for the electorate vote.

  21. Delia 21
    20 September 2017 at 7:44 pm

    I was voting Labour this year, because I cannot bear another minute of National, let alone three years. I dislike this dishonest govt which hides it’s machinations from New Zealanders.

  22. mosa 22
    20 September 2017 at 8:29 pm

    I am voting Green to be in government or failing that in a strong position in the 2017-20 parliament.

    National will be the LARGEST party next week and backed by NZF but the Greens need to be in parliament.

    • red-blooded 22.1
      20 September 2017 at 9:32 pm

      The Greens will be in parliament. If you want them to have any chance of being in government, you need to ensure that the Labour vote picks up. The best way to do that is by giving Labour two ticks.