Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NZ Politics - Election 08  
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5288 times:

Well we are coming rapidly up to another election and even if we don't know exactly when the election will be, it has to be sometime in the next 3 months. Already there have been indications that it could be dirty campaign with the secret tapings at the National party conference last weekend.

Personally I will be voting National with my party vote and for my great new local National candidate Amy Adams (I wouldn't be surprised to see her in cabinet in 5 years if National is government). I think John Key will make a great prime minister, very interesting biographical read in the NZ herald recently ( http://www.nzherald.co.nz/feature/index.cfm?c_id=1502247 ). I like his determination and think that he values young people who I think are far too often bagged in this country. I agree with him that if the past 9 years have been the best economic years in half a century then we are in trouble. New Zealand wages are too low compared to Australia. How is a person on the average wage ever going to be able to afford a house these days? We need to grow our economy, not just sit on our hands for another 3 years rolling out social engineering projects.

While the polls at the moment would seem to indicate that National could govern alone several factors worry me. One is the potential for an overhang in parliament caused by the Maori party winning a lower party vote than would cover their number of electorate MPs. This may mean National may need 63 seats or so to gain a majority rather than the usual 61.

Anyway I have thought of a few topics of discussion and feel free to add your own
- Will Winston and New Zealand first survive?
Personally I think he has done a pretty good job as foreign minister but he has some serious questions to ask regarding the donations and funding of New Zealand First.

- Who will be the next leader of the Labour party should they loose the next election? Also do you think Clark and Cullen would stick around if they weren’t in government?
My view: I don't hold high opinions of many in the Labour party but I like David Cunliffe and think he would be good leader, otherwise it would be good to see someone from the right wing of the Labour party - Phil Goff, Clayton Cosgrove, David Parker or perhaps even Annette King. Unfortunately (perhaps or maybe not) one of the lasting legacies of Helen Clark on the Labour party is that she has stacked the back benches with her leftist mates so it will probably won’t be one of my picks. Should Labour lose I think Michael Cullen would probably go, perhaps retire at the next elections, and Helen Clark would try and get herself appointed somewhere, perhaps an ambassadorship like Jim Bolger.

- Will the American election date have any influence on Helen Clark?
I bet she will call it before the first Tuesday in November, especially if it looks like Obama is going to win. I would personally prefer a fixed election date system for NZ.


"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5284 times:

And some of my posts in the NZ aviation thread 38 ( http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4098236/ ) were deemed too political so I will repost them here:

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 5):
Can't recall if National has made any intentional (or otherwise) comment on Government ownership of NZ should they be able to form a government after the next election.

Anyone else any the wiser?

Regards
MH

I think they have made it overwhelming clear that they will not sell any state owned assets in their first term and they will clearly state intentions on selling assets in further terms before those elections. From what John Key says he believes that New Zealand has a growth rather than a debt problem so the sale of state assets is unnecessary (not like in the 90's when we had a debt problem) and we should modestly increase our debt to pay for infrastructure such as roading and power stations.

Perhaps we should also be asking whether Labour considers Air New Zealand as a non-core asset. To quote SOE minister Trevor Mallard on Agenda: "Well I'm happy to have floats as long as it's non core assets".
http://www.agendatv.co.nz/Site/agenda/transcripts/2008/July-13.aspx

Gerry Brownlee asked a question in the house of Trevor Mallard today, still seems like it is Labour party policy. As Trevor can not give a simple definition of what a non-core asset is I guess a specific question regarding whether Air New Zealand is a non-core asset would have to be asked to find out.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/De...State-owned-Enterprises-Assets.htm

Quoting 777ER (Reply 6):

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 5):

Considering Nationals latest stuff ups, like announcing their plans to sell Kiwibank this week at a National meeting and spitting their dummys when the truth was revealed when they had already promised not to weeks before, I wouldn't be surprised if National sell the governments share in NZ or any more of our countrys major things

They never promised not to sell Kiwibank, they just promised not to sell it in a first term. John Key has since indicated it is highly unlikely it will be sold by a National government. Personally I see a bank as a non-core asset as there is plenty of private sector competition, it would be interesting to know whether Trevor Mallard agrees.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 6):
I wouldn't be surprised if National sell the governments share in NZ

Perhaps but would seem unlikely (see comments above)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Quoting 777ER (Reply 8):

They promised not to sell it in the first term, so it basically is a promise. If they get in, then lets see if they manage to keep their promise or stuff up like they have repeatly with their policys being announced by mistake. I don't believe National should AGAIN put us into debt. The previous National government did and look where that put us. Labour has got us free of the National party debt, and while they were paying back the money, other departments were suffering.

Well actually the previous National government sold assets to pay off debt, before them the Labour government of the 1980's had been doing the same, including Air NZ in 1989. The government still has debt (a debt to GDP ratio from memory of 18 %), and there has been a lot of hypocrisy on increasing debt from your Labour party this week:

Not reported in the media but from Questions for oral answer on Tuesday:

"John Key: Would it be helpful for the Prime Minister if I reminded her that when she came into office in 1999 the first thing her Government did was raise the debt target from 25 percent of GDP to 30 percent of GDP, and when she was asked why that was, she said that it gave Michael Cullen the option of using additional debt to finance the Crown's activities?"

"John Key: Does the Prime Minister recall seeing a statement from the Leader of the Opposition back in 1994 - one Helen Clark - when the debt to GDP ratio was at 56 percent, in which she made the comment that the Government was putting an undue emphasis on debt, repaying it at the expense of our failing services and infrastructure demands in New Zealand?"

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/De...rowing-International-Situation.htm



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12167 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5281 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting SpinalTap (Thread starter):
I think John Key will make a great prime minister, very interesting biographical read in the NZ herald recently

John Key has been pushing his imange as a real nice person, but since his outburst and angry attitude over the secret tapping and accusing the Young Labour members without any evidence (as far as we have heard or seen), I'm now starting to have my doubts as to weither I want a man like him to be our next PM.

I will be voting Labour for my local candidate. I've knowen her for a few years as she is one of my college mates auntie. I'm still conisidering voting Labour this year as I don't want our country to get back into debt as National will put us 5 billion into debt during the first term. I'm still not yet convinced that National's promised tax cuts will not hurt other sectors where good spending is required especially when we are going into a down turn. A good example is that when National was last in power, the Police suffered with useless frontline vehicles, and it wasn't intill Labour came in that the police got better equipment. I still havn't ruled National out yet. National better come up with some excellent promises as I've always voted Labour before


User currently offlineTG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5277 times:

I'll be voting Labour and Labour.

I don't think National or any other party are self-serving demons - I believe that the majority of politicians genuinely want to serve the country.

However, I think Helen Clark and her government have changed New Zealand for the better. Parents are no longer entitled to beat their children, I am not stopped from having the State recognise my longterm partnership simply because we're both males, assets that never should have been sold are being repatriated, and the balance of power between employers and employees has been 'righted'. I think she has also skillfully negotiated foreign policy, particularly steering a fine line between not supporting the Iraq mess while not condemning the USA, which has and will result in future benefits as the relationship between NZ and the USA improves.

New Zealanders tend to chant slogans against Ms. Clark such as social engineering (that's a popular one amongst those who can't think for themselves. In reality of course, all governments engage in it to one degree or another - that's part of the reason we vote them in!)

The unfortunate fact is that New Zealanders get bored of the government who is in power (particularly the younger voters, who can't remember the alternative). When I was a teenager, I hated Labour and thought National was the way to go. Sink or swim - dog-eat-dog world, pay-as-you-use, etc.
I like to think since I've grown into an adult and have a family, that my sense of social conscience has improved.

Should Mr. Key and his party get in to power, I'll regret it. However, I'm sure he has the country's best interests at heart, just like Ms. Clark does, and I'll give him a chance to prove himself without making stupid kneejerk statements about moving to Australia and such.



-
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5271 times:

Interesting letter to the editor by Nick Smith in the weekend Press:

Quote:
Loss For All
Your editorial criticising me and other National MPs over the secret recording at a private social function, proceeding our conference, misses the point. (Aug 7). It's like arguing that Watergate was OK as the Democrats should have taken more care in storing sensitive campaign documents.

Members of the National Party (and any other party) should be able to have open and frank dialogue at social function without your assumptions that we should only say what you want printed publicly.

We need to be able to criticise policy, challenge ideas, question management, and, if we are from prevented from doing so, we kill off the grassroots of our democracy. The flow-on from these tapes is that security at conferences will be beefed up and politicians will be less open and accessible. All New Zealanders lose from these sorts of dirty tactics.
NICK SMITH, MP
Nelson



[Edited 2008-08-08 20:55:51]


"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5263 times:



Quoting TG992 (Reply 3):
However, I think Helen Clark and her government have changed New Zealand for the better. Parents are no longer entitled to beat their children, I am not stopped from having the State recognise my longterm partnership simply because we're both males, assets that never should have been sold are being repatriated, and the balance of power between employers and employees has been 'righted'. I think she has also skillfully negotiated foreign policy, particularly steering a fine line between not supporting the Iraq mess while not condemning the USA, which has and will result in future benefits as the relationship between NZ and the USA improves.

New Zealanders tend to chant slogans against Ms. Clark such as social engineering (that's a popular one amongst those who can't think for themselves. In reality of course, all governments engage in it to one degree or another - that's part of the reason we vote them in!)

Well I don't necessarily disagree with all Labour's social changes (I don't disagree with same-sex property rights or the anti-smacking legislation for example), I believe that far too much time has been wasted dealing with them rather than concerning ourselves about our economy and guess what now our economy is most likely in recession.

As concerning foreign policy, I think it would appear that having a non-Labour foreign minister has been of great advantage to New Zealand. I think Winston Peters has done a pretty good job. I'm not convinced the relationship would have warmed so significantly otherwise. Would have a Labour foreign minister visited North Korea on the asking of Condoleezza Rice?



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineTG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5261 times:

I agree Winston has been a revelation as foreign minister - dignified, skilled, and charming.

It's a pity that the NZ press is so shallow and vapid that by being less of his rabble-rousing, attention-seeking self, and more concerned with the country's welfare, he's seriously at risk of losing his seat this election because of the lack of press coverage of his achievements.  Sad



-
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25260 posts, RR: 85
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm not sure if I'll vote.

I really dislike MMP. The idea that an unelected list candidate can get into parliament is really repellent to me.

I don't vote for a party. I vote for a person.

Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 5):
Would have a Labour foreign minister visited North Korea on the asking of Condoleezza Rice?

Sure they would. The Foreign Minister should follow national - that is government - policy.

mariner

[Edited 2008-08-08 21:41:39]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5249 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 7):

Sure they would. The Foreign Minister should follow national - that is government - policy.

Well perhaps I phrased the question wrongly, would have Condi asked a Labour foreign minister?

Quoting Mariner (Reply 7):
I really dislike MMP. The idea that an unelected list candidate can get into parliament is really repellent to me.

I tend to agree, I think Single Transferable Vote is a better system. One option with STV is to have the top two (or more) candidates from a electorate elected, I think they do it that way in Ireland. I quite like that option because it means that it gives good candidates from minor parties a chance.



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25260 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5248 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 8):
Well perhaps I phrased the question wrongly, would have Condi asked a Labour foreign minister?

Sure, she could. And she will probably only ask if she has a pretty good idea the answer will be yes.

For all diplomatic intents and purposes, he represents the people of New Zealand and the policies of the government, which is, effectively, a Labour government.

He can only go anywhere with the approval of the Prime Minister - if he is on official business.

It could be a diplomatic nightmare if the Foreign Minster were a loose cannon - but the possibility of this happening is a by-product of MMP.

mariner

[Edited 2008-08-08 22:04:50]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKiwiinOz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2165 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5237 times:



Quoting TG992 (Reply 3):
When I was a teenager, I hated Labour and thought National was the way to go. Sink or swim - dog-eat-dog world, pay-as-you-use, etc.
I like to think since I've grown into an adult and have a family, that my sense of social conscience has improved.

This is sort of identical to how my impressions changed over the years. However, in recent times, I'm starting to wonder if NZ has become a little uncompetitive, and lacking in confidence. I think it's great that culturally kiwi's are more humble and quiet than most, however we always used to carry that off with underlying determination and confidence. I think this has declined, and consequently, so has some of the positivity and ambition that you could feel in NZ in the 90's.

I am starting to think that this has something to do with the government, and the phsychology of "social engineering" undermining the kiwi spirit. I think it's good to go through a dog-eat dog period for a little while, primarily because once challenged with that scenario, kiwis tend to do pretty well. I think now might be the time.


User currently offlineZKSUJ From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 7107 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5230 times:

I don't care who gets in, just as long as they sort this place out. And no, I'm not going to jump ship to Oz, but I'd like to see this place get 'cleaned up' a little.

NZ is too soft in a few departments when it comes to law etc etc etc... A tagger should be able to wear a pink vest and clean the streets without some PC council guy saying how degrading it is (or whatever it was), of course its degrading, thats what deters people from doing it in the first place.

Far too many petty crimes with soft consequences IMO. I'm not saying pull a Singapore style thing out of the bag, but many have to learn to take the law seriously and some seem to treat it as a big joke.

I agree with TG on some things regarding what Ms Clark has done, I do not however think this anti-smacking stuff is being carried out in the right way. There is a line between discipline and abuse, and I think some have that mixed up. (not the fault of Ms Clark I'd like to point out)

A review of the welfare system is something I'd like to see (many may disagree). I'm all for supporting people less fortunate than I, but I feel there has to be greater restrictions and emphasis of using social welfare as a last resort rather than a way of getting cash.
Some people need to take responsibilty and do some work. If you work and genuinly need help, then I'll be the first to give my tax money towards you.

Some infrastructure needs to be upgraded. i think we all know that. Transportation systems while getting better still need work.

I dont think it is a wise idea to outsoure things. This whole talk about wanting to sell kiwibank etc etc etc... I believe that NZ entities should stay in NZ, and not be sold to overseas. Its happened to the railways (till recently), telecom etc etc etc in the past

Government need to look longer into the future instead of being focused too much on the 'near future'. I have other things that I feel should be done slightly differently, but thats more for regional government.

On a whole, both parties have good and bad points. But who ever gets in needs to work on cleaning up the small things in the country which would make it a safer more efficient place to live

If you are going to flame me now, please be polite and we can have a civilized discussion. Don't want to have too much raw emotion and flame throwing in the NZ thread like some of the Yank political threads  Wink


User currently offlineKiwiinOz From New Zealand, joined Oct 2005, 2165 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5173 times:



Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 11):
Some infrastructure needs to be upgraded. i think we all know that. Transportation systems while getting better still need work.

Has there been any announcements as to the intended upgrade of the railways now that it's back in government hands?


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4832 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5157 times:

It seems every time National announces something positive (ie Infrastructure Investment), they shoot themselves in the foot by saying something stupid (like wanting to sell Kiwibank).
New Zealand is one of the very few countries in the world that operates a comprehensive accident insurance scheme (ACC)... it is very effective and costs the country and individuals a lot less overall than private schemes in most other places (best relevant example being Australia). Unfortuneatly New Zealand in the past has sold off too many strategic assets/companies etc to overseas interests (in comparison to what most other countries have done), as a result a lot of profits head offshore in the form of dividends to the owners making New Zealand have one of the worst Current Account Deficits in the Western World. National wants to partially privatise ACC and bring in competition (ACC is government owned SOE so competition in this instance is not needed)... the only reason why National would do this IMHO is that it is bending to the will of its financiers who want to be able to cherry-pick/cream off the profits of ACC and send them offshore.... why? Because there are no New Zealand insurers that are anywhere near big enough to get involved... only Australian primarily in this case as well as others.

So like I said, National has set a lot of positive goals etc, but then shoot themselves in the foot by things like this which IMHO are a betrayal to their voters but also New Zealand in general.
Labour is just as bad but in different areas... they have beefed up the public service sector (bureaucrats) so much that government spending is going through the roof! Let alone their PC nanny state.
They have done positives (ie buying NZ and rail+kiwibank, kiwisaver) but like National do a lot of things wrong...

It will be an interesting election... It is Nationals to lose and is possible they will be able to govern alone (although in the end I doubt it) they will probably needed United and/or New Zealand First/ ACT.
Personally I hope that they don't get to govern alone as they could ride roughshod over a lot of things... they need a conscience.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5143 times:



Quoting KiwiinOz (Reply 12):
Has there been any announcements as to the intended upgrade of the railways now that it's back in government hands?

One announcement I could find, $80mil (presumably part of the $392 mil below)
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0807/S00375.htm

Also see Micheal Cullen's third quote (Questions for Oral Answer, July 2):
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/De...erry-Purchase-Financial-Return.htm

$460 mil on the tracks over the next five years (already owned by government, bought back in 2003 I think for $1).

$392 mil (or thereabouts) - the operating business over the next five years.

--------------------------------
National's Welfare Policy Announced:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4650829a6160.html
Some sensible moves IMHO.



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently onlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7401 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5123 times:



Quoting 777ER (Reply 2):
John Key has been pushing his imange as a real nice person, but since his outburst and angry attitude over the secret tapping and accusing the Young Labour members without any evidence (as far as we have heard or seen), I'm now starting to have my doubts as to weither I want a man like him to be our next PM.

The big problem is if National don't have Key as their leader the choices below him are few and far between.

Quoting TG992 (Reply 3):
I think Helen Clark and her government have changed New Zealand for the better. Parents are no longer entitled to beat their children

The vast majority of parents didn't beat there children, NZn is going to end up with the same problem which occur where I live in Norway, children are not disaplined at all and are terribly behaved, parents here are even to scared to yell at their kids and schools can't even give a child detention, heven forbid expell them if they do someting very wrong.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 7):
I really dislike MMP. The idea that an unelected list candidate can get into parliament is really repellent to me.

I don't vote for a party. I vote for a person.

Hear hear, I wish the government would have the backbone to give NZ the promised referendum on whether we keep of ditch MMP, MMP has failed in a lot of countries and in Norway has really stiffled any form of reform.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 13):
They have done positives (ie buying NZ and rail)

Which will end being a huge millstone around the taxpayer necks for decades to come unless they get some very bright people in and stat to upgrade the network properly, replace rollingstock, locomotives, complete electricfication on the main trunk line and the Auckland urban network.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12472 posts, RR: 37
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 5090 times:

Hi folks, just a few short questions from an outsider:

1) I see that you have two votes, presumably one for the person you want as your local MP, and the other, for ? Party, PM?

2) Which of these takes precedence? Let's say one party does very well, winning a majority of seats (is it still 60?), but they don't do well on the other poll, what happens?

3) Is it two separate ballot papers; i.e. can you vote on one and decide not to vote on the other? (Is there compulsory voting?)

4) Is there much feeling about defence policy? Would a National Govt change the Clark govt's approach - maybe introduce fixed wing aircraft for air defence (not necessarily F-16s, but Hawks or similar?)

5) What are the opinion polls showing? Is there a general groundswell of opinion for or against Labour?

I'm fascinated by politics, hence my questions; I was very much involved, back at home in Ireland. I'm trying to write a book on it right now; it should be finished by the time I'm 90!


User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5077 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 16):
1) I see that you have two votes, presumably one for the person you want as your local MP, and the other, for ? Party, PM?

2) Which of these takes precedence? Let's say one party does very well, winning a majority of seats (is it still 60?), but they don't do well on the other poll, what happens?

We have what is known as Mixed Member Proportional (MMP), it has been in place since 1996 (before that we had First Past the Post (FFP) where each member represented a particular electorate).

Under MMP one vote is for the party, the second vote is for the local member (the local member vote is actually a first past the post (FPP) contest). There are two ways a party gets seat in the house. If you party gets over the "5% threshold" in the party vote then that party is guaranteed seats (5 % of them at least = 6 seats of the 120 member house)). After this it gets a little complex. If a party has failed to get 5 % but one of its members wins a local seat then they are entitled to any extra seats that their party vote would entitle them to hold . However if they below 5% and member of their party is elected as a local member then they get nothing.

Here are some examples:
In the 2005 election the ACT party got 1.5% of the vote, below the 5% threshold, however an ACT member Rodney Hide won a local race in the seat of Epsom and ACT ended up with two seats in the house (1.5% * 120 = 1.8 - there is a complex method effectively doing the rounding called the Sainte Lague Formula but I'm not going to try and explain that, see here for more details).

In the 1996 election the Christian Coalition party got 4.33% of the party vote, but because their local candidates failed to win a single electorate they got 0 seats.

Don't read this part if you thought the above was confusing! There can be what is called an overhang in parliament. This occurs when a party wins more electorate seats - has more local members - than their party vote would justify. This is actually the situation at the moment. The Maori party won 2.12 % of the party vote in the 2005 election (2.12%*120 = 2.54) but won 4 electorate seats. As their party vote would give them 3 seats they had to add one seat to parliament making a total of 121 seats. There could be a larger overhang at the current election because the Maori party are polling at I think about between 2% and 4% in the party vote but are likely to win all 7 Maori electorate seats (an overhang of between 2 and 5 seats).


Quoting Kaitak (Reply 16):
3) Is it two separate ballot papers; i.e. can you vote on one and decide not to vote on the other? (Is there compulsory voting?)

From memory I think it was only one voting paper, with both parts on it. "You are required by law to enrol to be registered on the Parliamentary Electoral Roll. However, unlike in some countries, voting is not compulsory in New Zealand."
http://www.elections.org.nz/enrolmen...l-faqs/enrolling-detailed-faq.html

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 16):

4) Is there much feeling about defence policy? Would a National Govt change the Clark govt's approach - maybe introduce fixed wing aircraft for air defence (not necessarily F-16s, but Hawks or similar?)

No, I think even though National would not be fundamentally opposed to such a move it would be prohibitively expensive.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 16):

5) What are the opinion polls showing? Is there a general groundswell of opinion for or against Labour?

National is polling around about or over 50% and has been for quite some time, Labour is in the mid-30%s (party vote).



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4832 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5062 times:



Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 17):
If you party gets over the "5% threshold" in the party vote then that party is guaranteed seats (5 % of them at least = 6 seats of the 120 member house)).

I was under the impression that they would get 5% of the List MP seats (ie the seats that are left over after the electorate seats)?



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5044 times:



Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 18):
Quoting SpinalTap (Reply 17):
If you party gets over the "5% threshold" in the party vote then that party is guaranteed seats (5 % of them at least = 6 seats of the 120 member house)).

I was under the impression that they would get 5% of the List MP seats (ie the seats that are left over after the electorate seats)?

No, look at the 2005 election results:
http://2005.electionresults.govt.nz/partystatus.html
Total electorate seats = 69
Leaving 51 list seats

The Greens for example got 5.3% and 6 seats.
If what you are suggesting was in place:
51*5.3% = 2.7 = 3 seats



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5027 times:

Latest poll results, quite a discrepancy in the performance of the minor parties between the Fairfax Media-Nielsen poll and the Morgan Poll.

Source: Nats romping ahead

Fairfax Media-Nielsen (1102 people surveyed from August 6 to August 12)
National: 54%
Labour: 35%
Greens: 4%
New Zealand First: 3%
Maori Party: 2%
ACT: 1%
United Future: "did not register"

Preferred Prime Minister
John Key 43%
Helen Clark 31%
Winston Peters 2%

Morgan (834 people surveyed from July 28 to August 10)
National: 48%
Labour: 34%
Greens: 7.5%
New Zealand First: 6.5%
Maori Party: 2%
ACT: 1.5%



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6430 posts, RR: 38
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5021 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 7):
I'm not sure if I'll vote.

I really dislike MMP.

Therefore you vote National to get the referendum in a few years time regarding this issue!

If National will be able to govern alone, I don't see a point in voting for Rodney Hide and I think he'll lose his seat if the massive gap in the polls is sustained leading up to the election.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25260 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5017 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NZ107 (Reply 21):
Therefore you vote National to get the referendum in a few years time regarding this issue!

But then I have to accept all the other things National wants to do, and while I may agree with a few of those things, I don't agree with others.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4832 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4962 times:



Quoting Mariner (Reply 22):

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 21):
Therefore you vote National to get the referendum in a few years time regarding this issue!


But then I have to accept all the other things National wants to do, and while I may agree with a few of those things, I don't agree with others.

mariner

Therefore vote for New Zealand First to act as a conscience for National (if NZF gets in then National quite probably won't have enough seats to govern alone).



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineSpinalTap From New Zealand, joined Mar 2005, 440 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4958 times:

Colmar Brunton TVNZ poll

National: 51%
Labour: 37%
Greens: 3.5%
Maori Party: 3.1%
New Zealand First: 2.6%
United Future: 0.7%
ACT: 0.6%

Preferred Prime Minister
John Key 36%
Helen Clark 33%
Winston Peters 3%



"I get what they call a stipend, a stipend is like money but its such as small amount they don't really call it money"
25 Mariner : Without wishing to discuss my politics, I could not vote for New Zealand First, nor could I regard Mr. Peters as anyone's conscience. And if National
26 SpinalTap : 3 News poll National: 48% Labour: 37% Greens: 6% New Zealand First: 3% Maori Party: 2% ACT: 2% United Future: 1% Preferred Prime Minister John Key 34%
27 Post contains links Spinaltap : Looks like Helen Clark has been keeping a big secret of her own. John Key severed ties with Winston at exactly the right moment. Clark says she knew o
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Blazing Saddles/2008 Election Similar? posted Sat Aug 2 2008 19:47:43 by TheGov
ATL Winter 08/09 A.net Meetup? posted Fri Aug 1 2008 23:02:28 by Flynavy
Ludacris Determined To Make Obama Lose Election posted Fri Aug 1 2008 11:22:51 by MaverickM11
Abortion As An Election Issue posted Mon Jul 21 2008 21:34:24 by JCS17
FOX: Bush May Attack Iran If Obama Wins Election posted Thu Jul 17 2008 19:52:39 by Falcon84
ZRH-A.NET Summer Meet '08 posted Fri Mar 28 2008 06:36:15 by Glidepath73
Presidential Election Strategy #1 posted Wed Mar 5 2008 07:34:31 by RJdxer
Facebook Contact Thread - March '08 posted Mon Mar 3 2008 08:09:06 by Flynavy
The KC-45 And US Politics posted Mon Mar 3 2008 02:58:43 by KC135TopBoom
Dems Will Manage To Lose Pres. Election Again. posted Thu Feb 14 2008 08:25:03 by DLPMMM