Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Philosophy, Politics | Tags: ACT, Election 2008, Labour, Left wing, National, New Zealand, Politics, Right wing
Elections are always going to leave one section of voters elated and the other disappointed. The victors and their supporters will seek to quickly bring up the changes they’ve desired throughout the campaign. There will be some soul searching and some hard questions asked, but eventually those defeated and their supporters will move on and live to fight another day. There will be some venting, comments posted on message boards and blogs. There will be some sour grapes, but there will also be some insightful analysis and considered commentary. However many on the right slate those on the left as being sore losers for whatever comment they make on the election result on Nov 8. People have rightly said that National does not have the mandate to, along with Act, steer the country hard to the right. The election result was not a sign that New Zealand has shifted to the right, because National has gone to great lengths to adopt much of Labour’s policies and shift itself far further to the left then it was under Don Brash. National are going to find it difficult to govern this term, economic crisis aside, as the government formed comprises of many conflicting ideologies. National may have won the election my a large margin, but Labour did not lose because voters rejected the party, they merely support change. To point this out to people is not sour grapes or being a sore loser, it is merely stating fact. However rather than argue these assertions made often by those on left, many choose to brag “we won, you lost”, stoked that “Helengrad’s dykocracy” has ceased to be. Just like prior to the election many National supporters could not articulate why they supported the party apart from saying “it is time for change” and “Labour’s fucked up the country”, they can also not engage in debate or conversation following the election. Morons will only make eventual Labour victory all the more sweeter for supporters, but I encourage them to be more humble than their unintelligent counterparts.
Just as many on the left sometimes disown some of their comrades for ill thought out comments, well done those on the right capable of doing the same, and engaging in civilised discussion with opponents. Debate should not be silenced by personal attacks and slogans, although we can all be guilty at times.
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Communist League, Election 2011, Fidel Castro, Gordon Copeland, Greens Progressives, Helen Clark, Jim Anderton, John Key, Keith Locke, Labour, National, New Zealand, Peter Tashkoff, Phil Goff, Prime Minister, Rogernomics, Tim Groser
A month or so back, I saw then trade minister Phil Goff speak at a pre-election foreign affairs debate at the Owen Glenn Building at Auckland University. Despite the high calibre of political minds present, an unfortunately small crowd attended, made to appear even smaller by the huge venue. It is a shame that more did not get to witness the debate, as one politician clearly stood out above all others. Labour’s Phil Goff left his opponents in his wake; Jim Anderton was the next most impressive, a strong debater with a quick wit, Gordon Copeland was good although naive at times, Keith Locke was knowledgeable but lack assertion, and Act’s Peter Tashkoff has been living in a cave. Even National’s Tim Groser seemed to agree Goff was in a league of his own, in that despite his clear trade experience he seemed more ready to point to Goff’s superb record than illustrate his own credentials or National’s focuses in the area. When questions were fired at the stage from the audience Goff readily took the lead, fielding most the questions no matter how hostile. Almost as though intimidated, most of the other debaters left him to it, with the exception of Anderton and perhaps Locke and Grosser. I still remember the fiery response Goff gave a Communist League candidate in the audience who launched into Goff on Afghanistan. The crowd seemed universally impressed, as did the candidates. Most remarkable was how he spoke. Whilst others stood, at times, timidly behind the microphone (Locke frequently had calls to speak up), Goff walked across the stage, right up to the audience and without amplification his voice still filled the auditorium. There is something immediately impressive about someone who can speak clearly at such a volume, good humoured, not aggressive, assertive and at ease. John Key is going to have his hands full in the debating chamber at parliament and in campaign debates in three years time. Continue reading
Filed under: Politics | Tags: ACT Party, Election 2011, Helen Clark, John Key, Labour, Maori Party, National, New Zealand, Phil Goff, Politics, Rodney Hide
Considering National has had to adopt so many Labour policies, with National winning the election it is fair to say the only change most New Zealanders wanted was Helen Clark. Although I think the anti-Clark sentiment is completely unfair, the people have spoken, won over by a campaign devoid of substance and policy, rather built on empty rhetoric and sloganeering. With that in mind, it is safe to say, as most analysts have, that National have not a mandate to revert to the policies of the nineties. If the “hidden agenda” creeps into policy, they’ll be gone by lunchtime. The election was not a swing to the right for the electorate, as some have said. And Key appears to be aware of this, getting the Maori party onside has effectively weakened the bargaining strength of an Act party pushing round their weight and seek undue influence considering their small vote. To most people’s pleasure, they could find themselves undermined or cut out altogether. Winnie would be happy!
New Zealand has got what they wanted, a Labour Party without Clark. Although not in government, with Phil Goff at the helm, it is only a matter of time. Congratulations Goff, give ’em hell!
The next three years should very interesting!
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: John Key, National, Obama, Section 59
On waking up today I was greeted by the host of articles about our new, already beloved Leader. Stories of John Key’s desire to help “all” New Zealanders. A story of John Key’s fantastic sense of humour in the NZ Herald when he joked with his family that a puppy was not on the way, because that’s what Obama had promised his kids, but wait, maybe a puppy is on the way! The NZ Herald made light of John Key’s reputation for flip-flopping in this instance, and it really seems as though John Key might truly be Obamaesque change if you believe the Herald. The term “all New Zealanders” must be rather exclusive, because with a range of anti-union and anti-worker policies on John Key’s desk, it seems he is looking out for very different interests to Obama.
Personally, it disturbs me to think that a man like John Key can even draw on comparisons between himself and Obama, and that our beloved media are now even doing the work for him. It seems that if your a politician on the right of the spectrum you rarely have to lift a finger these days, as your profile will be taken care of by the media. Compare this to the misinformation spread about the section 59 repeal and its “perceived” law against smacking a child which the media perpetuated and it truly makes you wonder. The reality of the law being that only the legal argument of reasonable force was removed, but not what constitutes child abuse.
Thankfully in the face of the weakening media and the lack of background checks and research, we have a committed blogosphere where we can get a better handle on where things are actually going. Personally I look forward to be fired from my job after 89 days for no reason. At least it means I’ll get a range of work experience and will be doing my bit to get NZ back on track.
-NATURALHIGHNZ
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: ACT, Bill and Ben, Election 2008, Greens, Kiwi Party, Labour, Maori Party, MMP, National, New Zealand, New Zeland First, Politics, Progressives, United Future
Sure it might be a bit sour grapes, but the election result is not quite indicative of how New Zealand voted yesterday. Even though we are fortunate to live under MMP, which ensures most voters are counted, this year’s result clearly illustrates that changes must be made to the system. As much as I can’t stand Winston Peters at times, more people voted for his party than Act, United Future or the Progressives, yet under the absurdities of the system as it is they get MPs whilst New Zealand First does not. In fact 88,072 (without special votes) cast their vote for New Zealand First but each has been effectively disenfranchised. Meanwhile Act with only 3.72 per cent of the vote has five MPs and the greatest influence on power.
Legal Beagle at Public Address worked out what the results would have been if the House of Representatives no threshold:
New Zealand National Party – 55 seats
New Zealand Labour Party – 41 seats
The Greens – 8 seats
New Zealand First Party – 5 seats
Māori Party – 5 seats
Act New Zealand – 4 seats
Jim Anderton’s Progressive – 1 seat
United Future New Zealand – 1 seat
The Kiwi Party – 1 seat
The Bill and Ben Party – 1 seat
With those numbers, coalition arrangements would be entirely different:
Nat/Act/UF/KP: 61
Lab/Prog/Greens/NZ First/Maori: 60
Which is a different story altogether. Then of course there is the Bill and Ben Party. Which way would they go?
Election Results — Overall Status |
| Polling Places Counted: | 6,304 of 6,304 (100.0%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Votes Counted: | 2,103,842 | ||||
| Special Votes: | 208,001 | ||||
| Less than 6 votes taken in Polling Places: | 1,261 | ||||
| Party | Party Votes |
% Votes |
Electorate Seats |
List Seats |
Total Seats |
| National Party | 951,145 | 45.45 | 41 | 18 | 59 |
| Labour Party | 706,666 | 33.77 | 21 | 22 | 43 |
| Green Party | 134,622 | 6.43 | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| ACT New Zealand | 77,843 | 3.72 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Mäori Party | 46,894 | 2.24 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Jim Anderton’s Progressive | 19,536 | 0.93 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| United Future | 18,629 | 0.89 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| New Zealand First Party | 88,072 | 4.21 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kiwi Party | 11,659 | 0.56 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| The Bill and Ben Party | 10,738 | 0.51 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party | 7,589 | 0.36 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| New Zealand Pacific Party | 6,991 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Family Party | 6,973 | 0.33 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alliance | 1,721 | 0.08 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democrats for Social Credit | 1,112 | 0.05 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Libertarianz | 1,070 | 0.05 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Workers Party | 824 | 0.04 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| RAM – Residents Action Movement | 405 | 0.02 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| The Republic of New Zealand Party | 298 | 0.01 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 70 | 52 | 122 | |||
Filed under: Music, New Zealand Election 08, Philosophy, Politics | Tags: Asset sales, Deregulation, Election 2008, Environmental Degradation, Human Rights, Labour, National, New Zealand, Politics, Positive thinking, Protest, punk, Roger Douglas, Students
It never feels good when you lose. Every four years New Zealand grieves after yet another All Black World Cup early exit. However this hurts more. Because it actually matters! The only person who risks losing their job after an All Black loss is the coach, whereas more must be a little uncertain now. The environment is going to get shafted, as will workers rights and equality for minorities. But what can you do? The country has spoken, even if no one can really justify their vote for National. “Change” seemed to be all that people wanted, regardless what that might actually mean. Churchill was clearly right when he said the best argument against democracy is talking to the average voter for five minutes, but then he also said it is the best system we’ve got. Times like this it doesn’t feel like the case though. Gone is one of our most competent and experienced Prime Ministers, exchanged for a money trader with no prior interest in politics. Act has grown, taking with them New Zealand’s most hated politician ever into government. It’s going to be hard but I want to look at the silver lining. Continue reading
Filed under: History, New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: ACT, Alliance, Election 2008, Greens, Helensville, Jim Anderton, Labour, Libertarianz, Maori Party, MMP, National, New Zealand, New Zealand First, Politics, Progressives, RAM, Satire, United Future, Worker's Party
What a lovely sunny day to go out to a polling booth and express your rights democratically! What a joy! Casting my votes I felt privileged not only that I get to vote, a right not extended to all the peoples of this earth, but that we have MMP in this country so I at least get a party vote, as no doubt my candidate vote will be wasted, as I live in conservative Helensville!
If there is anyone out there who doesn’t know who to vote for, particularly if you live in Wigram, please cast your vote for Jim Anderton and the Progressives, who my little brother would vote for if he were old enough, unfortunately he turns 18 on the 13th of this month.
It is a shame that whilst my little bro, who is very interested and knowledgeable in politics, cannot vote, many who do not care or know remarkably little can vote. So to help them with casting their vote, I have constructed a diagram to inform them of what each party stands for. Rather than being based on specific policy, which people clearly ignore, I have placed each party on a continuum through time. So if you are unsure today, cast your vote for your favourite era! Continue reading
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: Election 2008, Football, Helen Clark, Labour, Leader's Debate, National, New Zealand, Politician, Politics, Prime Minister, US Presidential Election
Me! (see previous post on second debate.) Considering how uninspiring the first two debates between Clark and Key were, I thankfully did not put myself through the pain of watching a third meaningless encounter between the National and Labour leaders. I had my bum planted on the edge of a seat at North Harbour Stadium watching the highly enthralling under-17 women’s football (highly recommend you get a ticket to a game and see what I mean!). I was probably not alone in watching something else; the US Presidential Election had more entertainment value than our own dull affair.
So what did those that actually tuned in think of the debate? Who cares? I don’t and neither should you. Protest against the crap we are getting from the two major parties and cast your vote for one of the minor parties. Considering the contest is really Tweedledum versus Tweedledee, the minor parties are going to make all the difference.
Filed under: Journalism, New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: Audrey Young, Election 2008, government, Helen Clark, John Campbell, John Key, Labour, Leader's Debate, Leadership, Linda Clark, Mark Sainsbury, National, New Zealand, Policy, Politics, TV3
TV3’s John Campbell did a marginally better job than One’s Mark Sainsbury to keep the debate civil, but Helen Clark and John Key were again intent on talking over each other and providing viewers with ample reason to reach for the remote. For those of us who stayed turned there were moments of entertainment, particularly when Campbell commented that it was unprecedented for two politicians to argue over who was responsible for negotiating such an unpopular law as the repeal of section 59 of the Crimes Act. Witty remarks aside, there was very little substance to the exchanges between the Labour and National leader.
Again analysts are giving the points to Key simply because he didn’t lose. Well he certainly didn’t win either. But Clark’s effort will not slow the momentum National have and after tonight, I fear a National victory may be even closer. Continue reading
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: ACT, Coalition, Election 2008, FPP, government, Greens, Labour, Mandate, Maori Party, Matt McCarten, MMP, National, New Zealand, New Zealand First, Politics, Progressives, United Future
A lot has been said about the possibility that Labour could clinch a fourth term even if its vote falls short of National’s. As long as the Greens has a strong showing and the Maori Party, having gained all the Maori seats, decides to join with Labour, the Left could very easily deprive John Key, National and the Right of the government benches. According to polls, a large amount of voters believe the major party with the most votes should form the government as it has the mandate to govern. It is argued that a Labour coalition would not be fulfilling the wish of the people. However this just simply is not the case. If a Labour coalition could claim a majority, then a majority of people want it, not a National government. Continue reading
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics, Quotes | Tags: 2008 Election, Economy, Helen Clark, John Key, Labour, National, New Zealand, Politics
The upcoming election is of course about the economy. That is to be expected. But how bad is the economy really? Are people struggling as much as we are led to believe? The National Party promises a “brighter future”, although only the most naive would believe this package is extended to the greater population. Key will, with the help of Act, take New Zealand back down the path of the eighties and nineties, seeing the rich get richer and the poor poorer. Labour have already improved the finances for most people over the last nine years, repairing the damage of the National party’s anti-worker, anti-family policies of the nineties. Examples of this can be seen in the improvement to employment figures, accessibility to education and the increase of the minimum wage and worker’s rights. Even despite all the economic doom and gloom people have seen more money in their back pocket over the last six months. So is Key being completely honest? Considering he doesn’t know the price of milk, I wouldn’t expect the rich-list National leader to be able to empathise with financial struggle of “middle New Zealand”. I wouldn’t trust him to run down to the dairy for some milk, let alone run the country. Continue reading
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: ACT, John Key, National, Nicky Hager, Pundit, Roger Douglas
Nicky Hager has written a great article on Pundit on John Key and the National Party. Hardly anything we all didn’t already know and it is not going to slow the momentum of the National Party, but Hager has summed up why I don’t trust John Key and his mates, no matter how well oiled their spin machine is. The old faces are still there and so is the agenda. Throw Act and Roger Douglas into the mix and you get what you vote for.
National are going to have to do a lot more than install a fresh face and steal all Labour’s policies to prove they are anything other than the National Party of the nineties. Gaffes from the likes of Williamson, English and Smith confirm that there is an agenda, although it is not really so well hidden, more ignored.
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: ACT, Election 2008, Election Quiz, Green Party, Labour, National, New Zealand, New Zealand First, Politics, Progressives, Pundit, United Future
I’ve just given Tim Watkin’s election quiz a go, to see who I should be voting for on November 8. Whilst I can see how the quiz could throw up some disturbing results for some people (perhaps those who vote on personality rather than policy), my own result is pretty much spot on. Whether I vote the way the poll says I cannot be sure, I am still a somewhat undecided voter (waiting for the appropriate bribe!), but the parties I am closest to are certainly those I will be choosing between.
Give it a go, you might be surprised!
Apparently I am 85 per cent aligned to the Greens, 84 per cent to the Progressives, and 74 per cent Labour. No surprises there. However of those that I probably would only vote for after being hit by a bus, I have a 66 per cent similarity of beliefs with United Future, 65 with New Zealand First, 44 per cent with National and 28 per cent with Act. To be honest I am surprised there is even that much we have in common.
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: Economy, Election 2008, government, Helen Clark, John Key, Labour, Leader's Debate, National, New Zealand, Politics
I had expected John Key to get slaughtered by the far more experienced and capable Clark, but he didn’t do too badly. However considering the opportunities gifted to him, he should have done much better. There were chances for him to put Clark on the back foot, in particular he could have made much more of Labour’s recent student allowance announcement and the apparent hypocrisy of it. Instead Key opted to speak over Clark, repeating slogans and popular terms. He sounded like a poor man’s Obama echoing his “change” motto and became simply irritating when he continued going on about “mum and dad”. Helen Clark was not above meaningless rhetoric, but she certainly knew her arguments and articulated them well. Although Key got some good comments in, Clark arguably had the best calls of the night, when she silenced his constant interruptions and when she nailed him over the Springbok tour. Some of Key’s arguments were a bit of stretch, particularly on Labour’s influence on the economy, considering international factors. I doubt his performance will hurt him, and his supporters will likely disagree with my observations, but I think he could have potentially sown up the election with a more competent performance. Sometimes he came across like a smarmy private school boy, not a leader of a country.
Filed under: New Zealand Election 08, Politics | Tags: Budget, Economics, Election 2008, John Key, Labour, Michael Cullen, National, New Zealand, Politics, Tax cuts, Taxation
Michael Cullen’s announcement yesterday that the books were in a bad shape was seen cynically (although probably rightly) by most as an attempt to undermine John Key’s much hyped to be released tax cut policy. Now in light of the realisation that the country’s coffers are in deficit, Key has scaled back the proposed tax cuts his party will offer. I’ve said it many times on this blog that I don’t really grasp the ins and outs of economic issues, most people don’t, but I cannot help but see Cullen’s announcement as a godsend for Key. National have made great gains against Labour, not by promising impressive detailed policy but by Palinesque sloganeering. For some time National has placed their flagship tax cuts at the forefront of the agenda and following the budget have promised larger tax cuts than those Labour has penned in. And the voters have lapped it all up, despite no details. Now, with the global economy going all 1929 on us, tax cuts of the size people were envisaging from National are not affordable. And Cullen’s little trick gives National every excuse to scale down their proposed tax cuts. And if voters question the quality of the election bribe from the party in the blue corner, National can say it is all Labour’s fault. And the voters will lap it up.
Filed under: Journalism, New Zealand Election 08, Philosophy, Politics, Quotes, religion | Tags: Bethlehem College, Christian, democracy, government, Greens, Helen Clark, Herald, Jesus, John Key, Labour, National, New Zealand, Simon Collins, Tauranga, Winston Churchill
Although I initially though the Herald’s “One Man Poll” sounded like a massive vox pop (which I can’t stand) in the capable hands of Simon Collins the series was likely to be a success. And he does find some interesting people with interesting views on interesting issues. Collins finds people who do sum up what others are thinking and finds out the thought behind their opinions. Fascinating stuff at times. However, either Collins is drawn to some absolute morons, or New Zealand is a country with a disproportionate number of idiot residents.
Here’s a couple from the last few days. There are many more! Continue reading
Filed under: Journalism, New Zealand Election 08, Philosophy, Politics | Tags: Austria, democracy, Education, Helen Clark, John Key, Labour, Media, National, New Zealand, Politics, School, Voting age, Youths
Austria became the first EU country to drop the voting age to 16, in a move to counteract the influence of the country’s aging population. The new voters will be given their first taste of democracy this weekend, granted the right to vote in the country’s general election, which is forecast to be a close race. The move to allow 16 and 17-year-olds to vote has been controversial and provoked criticism from many who believe the young people do not know enough to vote. Even many young voters do not believe they are ready to participate in democracy.
“I don’t agree with the idea of teenagers of my age being given the right to vote,” said Julia Tauschek, a 16-year-old high school pupil from the Austrian town of Linz yesterday. “We simply don’t know enough about politics and we are not taught much about them at school either.” (From the Independent)
But doesn’t involving young people in the democratic process encourage them to become politically aware? And since when are older people so politically knowledgeable? Are some voters not already suffering from political amnesia when they refer to the ’90s? Continue reading
Undergroundnetwork 