View from the left – Labour Green election prospects

A thoughtful view on Labour and Green election prospects from Te Reo Putake at The Standard. I have a bit of a history of clashes with TRP but this is out of (his usual) character, I think these comments are a useful and realistic look at what the near future may hold for the political left.

If Labour Needs to Move Left, Why are the Greens Stuck in the Teens?

A couple of themes that occasionally pop up in The Standard’s comments are the need for the Labour Party to adopt more left wing policies to ‘win’ the next election and, less often, and far less likely, predictions that the NZLP will soon be the junior partner on the left.

I’m in favour of Labour adopting left wing policies and I will be doing my best to make sure we have credible, well thought out left platforms adopted at the next national conference, in Christchurch, this November. Those policies will be binding on caucus and the party will expect the campaign to be fought on the ideas, issues and solutions the membership want taken to the electorate. I suspect some policies will be dead rats for Shearer and the coterie around him, but tough. That’s democracy.

But if the Labour Party presents policies that are as left wing as some of those espoused by the Greens, will that make the difference? Will that lift the NZLP vote into the high thirties/low forties, where it should really be under MMP?

I suspect not.

Whether Standardistas like it or not, a leftist, or even leftish, platform, by itself, does not guarantee support, let alone victory, in Western Parliamentary elections. If it did, then the Greens would already be outpolling Labour. But they are not; and, I confidently predict, they never will.

There are two reasons for it. Firstly, the Green’s branding limits them to single figures, or just above. The party name suggests that environmental policies are the limit of their ambition. Not true, of course, but that is how they are perceived and the results reflect that fact.

It is to the considerable credit of kiwi greens MP’s and activists that the GP has been more successful than any other Green Party worldwide, but that’s as far as its likely to go.

Secondly, the NZ Labour Party has history on its side. It has been, and remains, the only credible alternative leader of Government in NZ. It’s been National or Labour for 75 years and for a lot of voters, it’s barely different from choosing Ford or Holden when Bathurst rolls around each year.

National and Labour are the Big Beasts of NZ politics and MMP has not changed that.

So, what’s the other factor in getting a left Government in place? Well, it’s leadership, obviously enough. And David Shearer’s minor oversight in forgetting he had $50k or more socked away in a yank bank tells me that he doesn’t have what it takes for the kind of victory the NZ people deserve.

I’m not saying that he won’t be PM after the next election, but the majority will be painfully thin, when we should be heading for a repeat of 1999. But, then, in ‘99, we had a clear alternative Government to vote for: Labour/Alliance. Few signs yet that NZLP and the Greens will be able to present a similarly credible bloc to vote for this time round.

My prediction? NZLP 35%, Greens 12%. I’m not even sure that the Greens will be part of the next Government. It could well be a minority LP/NZF with GP support on confidence and supply, because the continuous slippage in National’s vote since the last election will help shore up Winston and I believe Shearer will opt for the least challenging coalition partner, being the pragmatist that he appears to be.

One final point on Winston; he doesn’t seem to be as belligerent toward the Greens as he was six years ago. Perhaps he’s ready to swallow a dead rat of his own?

The dead rat link and other links don’t work. If they are fixed at The Standard I’ll fix them here.

Improvement in economic indicators and National’s re-election chances

There are some indications that the economy could be on the improve after an extended sluggish period.

The housing market has been improving for some time. Retail spending has been improving too.  And the Canterbury earthquake rebuild is starting to crank up.

If some of these trends continue through to next year, if at least some of National’s MOM asset floats are successful, and most importantly if unemployment finally starts to trend downwards, then National’s relection propspects will improve considerably.

Labour and Greens have put a lot of effort and resources into the anti asset sales petition, hoping that the referendum will be a posituive lead in to the election. Greens in particular have used the petition/referendum as a means of campaigning between elections.

But if the MOM floats go ahead regardless, as is likely, and if they are reasonably successful, that will negate one of the opposition’s main weapons.

There are other significant factors:

  1. Whether Shearer and the Labour caucus can look cohesive and deserving of a shot at Government
  2. How Shearer will perform in the election campign, presuming he stays as leader
  3. How much scrutiny Green policies are given
  4. How much consideration voters give to the prospect of a government significantly influenced by the Greens
  5. Whether NZ First makes the threshold and survives the election
  6. What mistakes National may make
  7. How much perception of arrogance of power there is of National
  8. Whether any viable coalition partners for National survive or emerge by the election

But the three most important factors will be:

  1. The economy
  2. Unemployment
  3. The economy

National will be hoping that emerging positive trends will convert into sufficient jobs in time to make a serious dent in unemployment numbers.

Elections – won on personality or policy?

Two views have been posted on this, first from Labour evangelist Te Reo Putake (as well as more of his “Ra Ra, a win in any form is good enough!”)

There is an election to win. Clearly, that election can’t be won on personality, nor should it be.

We, on the left, are about making the lives of NZers better and that will take appropriate, acheivable and financially sound policy from the LP and the Greens. There are good signs in both party’s housing proposals that they can dovetail their thinking and the Manufacturing Enquiry shows they can work together well.

I don’t much care whether readers here vote two ticks Labour or one tick Green, one tick red, but we have to move on to convincing our respective parties to put up policies that voters will care enough about to both get on the roll and then get down to the both on the day.

If the left don’t win the next election, it won’t be Shearer’s fault, it’ll be ours.

And a response from ‘fatty’:

The last two have been (and arguably every election before that). Donkey’s current popularity is personality based.
Personality is more important than policy.

That doesn’t mean Labour needs a leader who will do the gangnam on the day of an important treasury report…it means the Labour leader’s personality must resonate with voters needs and wants.

The current Labour leader’s personality must include these traits: decisive, coherent and confident.

You are right that the election shouldn’t be based on personality, but you are wrong that it won’t be based on personality.

I’m very much on fatty’s side on this. Plausible policies are important, but most people most often ultimately base their vote on personalities.

The best snake oil in the world won’t be bought if the salesman is not believed, trusted or liked – and there’s a fair bit of like in that mix.

Election summary

Summary 

National seem assured of two or possibly three majority options. John Key has said that he will include all of Maori Party, Act and United Future in coalition talks, it is highly likely all parties will be able to negotiate arrangements.

Likely majorities (61 required):

  • National (59-60) + Maori Party (3) = 62-63
  • National (59-60) + Act (1) + United Future (1) = 61-62

Possible majorities (special votes pending – if National stay on 60 seats)

  • National + Maori Party = 63
  • National + Act = 61
  • National + United Future = 61

 

Polling Places Counted:

6,310 of 6,310 (100.0%)

Total Votes Counted:

2,014,334

Special Votes:

220,720

 

 

Party

Party
Votes

%
Votes

Electorate
Seats

List
Seats

Total
Seats

National Party

957,769

47.99

41

19

60

Labour Party

541,499

27.13

22

12

34

Green Party

211,931

10.62

0

13

13

New Zealand First Party

135,865

6.81

0

8

8

Māori Party

26,887

1.35

3

0

3

ACT New Zealand

21,446

1.07

1

0

1

Mana

19,898

1.00

1

0

1

United Future

12,159

0.61

1

0

1

Conservative Party

55,070

2.76

0

0

0

Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party

9,516

0.48

0

0

0

Democrats for Social Credit

1,432

0.07

0

0

0

Libertarianz

1,405

0.07

0

0

0

Alliance

1,069

0.05

0

0

0

 

69

52

121

A key highlight is a very low turnout, it looks like being around 75%. It’s difficult to be sure who this affected the most, National voters may have stayed away from voting because National looked comfortable, and Labour voters may have stayed away because it looked like a lost cause.

What it all means for the parties:

National
Good: increased votes and seats, two or three majority options, may give them an excuse to put asset sales on hold
Bad: no absolute majority, may put pressure on asset sales policy, reduced options for 2014

Labour
Good: not as bad as Bill English, Phil Goff finishes his leadership career with credit, impetus to clear out and rebuild
Bad: terrible result, lost some good MPs, stuck with too much old guard

Green Party
Good: excellent result with a number of new MPs, strength to get some policy arrangements with National
Bad: disappointed they didn’t get more (is this as good as they will get?), still out of government

NZ First
Good: fantastic result, chance to be a positive opposition party
Bad: out of government, difficult a quirky peak?

Maori Party
Good: still in the mix, a balance of power option
Bad: lost another seat, will be difficult to rebuild with both leaders retiring

Act
Good: hung on via Epsom, will be balance of power option
Bad: decimated, difficult to recover from this

Mana Party
Good: held Te Tai Tokerau so still in there
Bad: no gains, sidelined from government influence

United Future
Good: retained Ohariu with improved margin, balance of power option so could get policy gains
Bad: dwindling party support, difficult regeneration options

Conservative Party
Good: creditable result at first attempt in short timeframe
Bad: high cost with no real success, may be peaking conservative/Christian demographic

United Future protects against Peters/Brash/Banks

The reality of the election has become clear. If you don’t want National to rule on their own there are obvious choices. Two of those choices are worrisome, one is safe.

  • If you don’t want Brash and Banks holding the balance of power and pulling National right vote United Future.
  • If you don’t want Parliament and the country being held to ransom by Winston Peters vote United Future.
  • If you do want the continuation of a steady reliable government in precarious economic times vote United Future.

And wait, there’s more.

  • If you want sensible policies vote United Future.
  • If you like a family friendly party vote United Future.
  • If you value continued access to the great Kiwi outdoors vote United Future.

The media likes drama and division. United Future demonstrates common sense and working together.

It’s a no nonsense no brainer – vote UnitedFuture.

Mediamunted democracy?

Much is said of MMP, it’s flaws and how it is misused by parties.

Much is said of politicians, how they need to be accountable and how things like hypocrisy and poor standards need to be exposed.

The media do most of the saying – or at least they decide what people see of what is being said. The media have a lot of power, and they know it, and they use it. Especially at election time.

The media choose what messages get coverage. They decide what politicians and parties get coverage. And they decide what tone that coverage has.

More than that. At times the media make their own stories, and pick props and actors to promote and reinforce their stories.They is been very evident over the last couple of weeks.

The media claim to hold politicians to account. But who hold the media to account?

There is little journalism involved. There seems to be little (or no) consideration to fairness, balance, breadth or depth. To the media it is a show and they are the directors.

It seems to be driven by egos and advertisers.

And our democracy suffers. Badly. So our country suffers. Which means the people suffer. We don’t have the best governance. We have the best squirming and bowing to media. Not completely – parties still choose policies and politicians still decide what policies pass.

But media, especially at election time, think they call the shots, and they shoot our democratic process in the foot.

What holds the media to account? Not their consciences.

We have a mediamunted democracy.

(Note: much of ‘the media’ is reasonable and useful, but there is a significant part of media, especially at times when some in media see an opportunity to flaunt and abuse their power – like now – all of media is easily tainted).

The Kiwiblog candidate

MP for Dunedin North and Kiwiblog?

My number one focus as a candidate in this election is building a better way of representing Dunedin. This is proceeding well, cross party and multi-MP support has been assured for establishing a strong Dunedin democratic voice. At candidate meetings the best response I have received has been for promoting people of Dunedin combining to have a much stronger city voice.

This will change the way Dunedin does democracy, and with interest from elsewhere in the country it has the potential to change the way we do democracy in New Zealand, with a much better online and in-person communication between the electorate and the elected.

My involvement after the election will continue as an activist politician or a political activist – that’s when my campaign steps up a notch.

But I don’t and I won’t forget where much of this has developed – on Kiwiblog.

I have been the most prolific commenter on Kiwiblog over the past few years, and have often been criticised for that. I’ve been using Kiwiblog as a tool for my aims. I’ve been involved in sometimes protracted and heated ‘debate’, ironically having often been called a fence sitter by those I have battled with the most.

I acknowledge I sometimes haven’t taken a strong position on issues, that’s because I’ve been promoting discussions and learning from responses, unlike some commenters who start with an opiniion and won’t budge from that.

Skills (and knowledge) I have learnt on Kiwiblog will help substantially in my political quest. Many of the ideas and opinions – and encouragement and support – have helped me get to where I am now.

I don’t agree with everyone on Kiwiblog and everyone on Kiwiblog don’t agree with or like or support me – but that’s how it should be. We need to understand that we can only move forward accepting there will always be differences, and compromise, pragamatism – and democratic process – are all essentials. None of us can rule the world exactly as we might wish.

I’ve been blasted and abused often – sometimes fairly and sometimes nastily. This can be useful as a reality check but it has also helped me to develop a thick skin, an essential if you are to survive in the political arena. One of the biggest challenges to being successful in politics is to be able to deal with or deflect criticism but to maintain an open mind and open ears.

Earlier this year I started to firm up on what action I would take, after realising that going round and round in blog circles moaning about everything that was wrong was going to achieve nothing. The only way of changing things is to actually do things to encourage or force change.

So I’ve made some decisions and taken steps towards doing something. I’m already very pleased with what I have been able to achieve, whatever the election result I am succeeding.

There’s still an outside chance of me becoming an MP, and I’ll work through until election day looking at ways of achieving that – if I become an MP it would not only rock the political world, it would add impetus to what I’m doing. Some might see these most of these as lotto dreams but look at the possibilities:

  • United Future gets 6.2% and I get in on the list (matching the UF 2002 result so not out of the question)
  • United Future gets a few MPs in (quite possible) and I win Dunedin North
  • Dunne wins Ohariu and I win Dunedin North
  • Dunne loses Ohariu and I win Dunedin North

The last few are unlikely but they are possible, just like it’s possible for Susan Boyle to become world famous, just like it’s possible for a penguin to be the biggest news for a month, just like it’s possible for Nek Minute to spread around the world web wide.

In our  democracy any of those are possible if enough voters decide to ditch the same old and make a real difference. We just need to believe we have the power to make a difference, at least once every three years.

I’m going to keep exploring possibilities and keep pushing for change. Much of this will have to be done person to person, but social media and blogs are becoming a powerful force – waiting to be harnessed more effectively.

Kiwiblog has played a major part in me getting to where I am now. It (and other online communities) will play an important part for me as I keep pushing the boundaries of politics for ordinary people with an interest.

My main goal is to build a better democracy in Dunedin and spread it from there. Kiwiblog (as long as DPF allows) will continue to be an integral part of this campaign.

I’ve come a long way in six months, it’s now starting to come together and gather momentum. I’d love to become MP for Dunedin North and Kiwiblog, but whatever happens in the election this is just a step along the way to changing from grass roots up – and from silicon roots up.

Speed date, non-democratic democracy

Guest Post: a campaign speech by Marty Gibson, UnitedFuture candidate for East Coast

So . . . three minutes to persuade you to vote for United Future.

That’s one minute less than a conversation at a speed dating evening.

>Now I’ve never tried speed dating, but a woman I know did, and the men she met sounded a lot like the political parties on offer here tonight.

  • There’s Labour trying to impress you with their money . . . which is all borrowed, or else your money once they have you in a relationship.
  • There’s National –the most attractive prospect in the room at this stage, but pretty superficial, and they have some dubious friends.
  • There’s the bad boy “devil take the hindmost” ACT – “What are you selling Donny? What have you got?” although obviously Don Brash is no Marlon Brando.
  • There are some unemployed artists, actors and activists talking about their hi-tech high-paying green jobs . . . which don’t exist . . . and certainly not 100,000 of them.
  • The Maori Party aren’t here, but I guess if they were they would be the bloke who expected my friend to go out with them because they were the same race.

And I guess United Future is the quiet decent sensible guy who should have talked himself up more . . . should have spun a bit more of a line so he got remembered for more than just having thick luxuriant hair.

If I sound cynical it’s because I think New Zealand’s party system is non-democratic democracy.

The management of the East Coast on Wellington’s puppet strings has never delivered the golden future we get promised every three years, has it?

We get given the same cookie cutter solutions as everyone else.

We get divided and ruled along lines of race, income, rich poor, old young, left right when we should be finding ways to work in harmony and decide on a vision for our wonderful part of the world.

Safe happy kids?

All our rivers planted?
No-one hungry?
A job for anyone who wants one?

Why not? With the right plan and agreement here it is entirely possible.

Politicians are mostly nice, well-meaning people, but they work in a system where their main focus is grabbing and clinging onto power, rather than improving things for us here on the East Coast.

It’s their party, not Te Tairawhiti that has their primary loyalty.

What we need is representation of the East Coast in Wellington instead of representation of the Wellington’s political parties here.

I reckon it is up to us to acknowledge our problems, recognise how unacceptable they are then get to work together to change things in the long term, rather than three year terms.

I believe Wellington should cooperate with us where they can, and get out of our way where they can’t.

When United Future asked me to stand on the East Coast, that’s pretty much what I said to them.

I thought that would be the end of it, but to my surprise, they thought it was a good idea, so I got like-minded people in other regions to join them too.

I had a better look at their policies. Most of them are pretty good – but I can’t explain them in three minutes.

United Future are a centrist, family-focused, community-minded, political party that believes in moderation, self-determination, resilience and common sense, and that all sounded good to me.

United Future sees policy through the prism of whether or not it would make New Zealand the best place in the world to live work and raise a family, and that sounded good to me as well.

Environmentalism not tied to extremes of socialism and feminism where people are seen as part of nature rather than its enemy? Wonderful!

United Future will be a non-National Party member of a coalition government after the next election – perhaps the only one.

Your vote can be a voice for the East Coast in this year’s election. In government, pushing for our right to be united, innovative to make the East Coast the best region in the world to live work and raise a family.

If that sounds good to you, party vote United Future.

Vote for me too if you get really excited. Thanks.

Sunday diary

1.00 Argentina v Georgia
2.00 NSW cup final
3.30 ABs v Canada
4.00 Toyota Cup final
6.00 Wales v Fiji
7.30 NRL final
8.30 Ireland v Italy
10.30 mow the lawn

What election?

As a candidate what can I say here?

During an election campaign there are strict rules regarding party and candidate advertising.
According to the Candidate Handbook:

3.1 Election advertisements published at any time, in any medium, must contain a promoter statement.

Hoever there are exemptions for online content:

3.5 What is an ‘election advertisement’?

The legislation makes it clear that the following are not election advertisements:

  • editorial content,
  • personal political views online,
  • a Member of Parliament’s contact details.

Editorial content

There is an exemption for the editorial content of a periodical, a radio or television programme, or news media Internet site. The Electoral Act does not define ‘editorial content’ but the Electoral Commission’s view is that it includes any part of the publication except advertising or advertorial. A periodical is a newspaper, magazine, or journal established for purposes unrelated to the election, that has been published at regular intervals and that is available to the public.

Personal political views online

There is an exemption for the publication of personal political views by an individual on the Internet or other electronic medium, provided the individual does not make or receive payment for publishing those views. Individuals expressing personal political views on social media such as Facebook and Twitter are covered by this exemption and will not need to include a promoter statement.

This exception does not extend to political views expressed on behalf of a party because the exemption is restricted to the publication of personal views by an individual.

Where content posted on a Facebook or Twitter page that is an election advertisement is ‘liked’ or ‘retweeted’ by another person, it is the Electoral Commission’s view that the individual content appearing elsewhere on Facebook or Twitter will not require a promoter statement if it appears on those other pages as the expression of personal political views by an individual who does not make or receive payment in respect of the publication of those views.

My interpretation of this is I can express my opinion online without a promoter statement, but a promoter statement is required if I quote party policy or other official party material.

Electorate Candidate Handbook – Part 3: Election Campaigning

Note: I am a candidate in the election campaign, standing in Dunedin North for UnitedFuture.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 80 other followers