State of the parties

The election campaign has effectively kicked off in earnest. The next six months will be a long time in politics. It’s difficult to predict many things. Everything remains up for grabs.

Two polls yesterday had similar results for the three main parties, and the recent Roy Morgan is also included.
RM=Roy Morgan, CB=One News/Colmar, RR=3 News/Reid Research

National
RM 45.5, CB 47, RR 45.9

Polls have ranged in the low forties to low fifties, averaging around the current levels which are similar to National’s last election 47%. They seem to have survived recent Labour attacks on Judith Collins and Hekia Parata reasonably unscathed.

It’s very unlikely National will get a majority of seats alone so is as much reliant on small party results as it is on keeping it’s own support up in the high forties. The Maori Party, ACT and UnitedFuture are all in doubt but stand a reasonable chance of getting several seats between them. It’s doubtful if the Conservatives will get into the mix.

An improving economy is in National’s favour which will be balanced against second term attrition.

John Key remains reasonably popular although down from the last term. He usually does well in one on one debates but has to be careful to not appear arrogant or dismissive.

If they avoid major scandals (especially involving Key) National should hold up but will be hoping for weak partners to step up.

Labour
RM 31.5, CB 31, RR 31.2

Polls have settled down in the low thirties after a brief surge after David Cunliffe took over the leadership. Recent attacks on National have failed to lift Labour, negative politics may knock the opposing party a little but it’s usually not good for gaining support, which Labour desperately needs to do.

Labour are totally reliant on a partnership with the Greens. A plus is that Greens look solid. A minus is that Labour remains unconvincing. Labour may also need NZ First and possible Mana and/or the Internet Party. A party that still looks in disarray with a difficult to manage combination of parties makes Labour’s job of convincing voters they are ready to govern again challenging.

After an initial surge of support Cunliffe keeps slipping, getting 8-9% in the latest Preferred Prime Minister polls. He struggles to look authentic and is often missing in action. Labour have not yet succeeding in recovering from the departure of the Helen Clark and Michael Cullen partnership  both a party and with leadership.

It’s possible Labour could end up cobbling together a coalition but the election and the post election negotiations will both be difficult for them. A chance of a collapse in support hovers should the voters give up on Labour’s various vulnerabilities.

Green Party
RM 14, CB 11, RR 11.3

Greens had a recent poll of 8% but that looks to be an outlier, they have otherwise ranged between 10 and 14 averaging 11-12 which means they are holding their last election support (but they often poll higher than they get in elections).

The Greens are looking very well organised and are into campaign mode. They are the one solid party of this term and if they avoid campaign disasters should come to close to maintaining their current MP numbers, and could increase them.

Their main problem is not their own, it’s their essential coalition partner, Labour. If Labour fail then so do the Greens no matter what they achieve.  NZ First are also a threat because if Winston Peters returns he will hold stronger cards then the Greens, being able to play off National against Labour. The Internet Party may take some Green vote.

Russel Norman has often looked like the Leader of the Opposition this term. He is experienced, focussed and ambitious. He is a consistent strength for Greens but his ambitions on economic matters worry some and may end up playing against him. He is being promoted as possible Deputy Prime Minister.

Metiria Turei is co-leader and is currently ranked number one in Green ranking. She tends to work with the Green base more than the wider public. The traditional media seem to dismiss her chances as Deputy Prime Minister but the Greens will decide who they want to put forward. Their official stance is co-leadership but two deputies will be out of balance in a coalition. Turei would provide an interesting dynamic in an old school Labour dominated cabinet.

Greens should do well but their fate is out of their hands, they are reliant on Labour looking like a credible Government and they would prefer NZ First and the Internet Party drop out of the picture.

NZ First
RM 3.5, CB 7, RR 4.9

NZ First is fluctuating in the polls but maintains a healthy average and looks a reasonable chance of beating the 5% threshold again. They are benefiting from National slips and Labour’s lack of traction.

The NZ First MPs are very low profile and as usual look like relying on Winston Peters. The old campaigner pops up occasionally but is mostly out of the news – but he knows how to campaign and will time his run.

Peters is a master of manipulating media and will be looking for any opportunity to jump on a defining issue in the last few weeks of the campaign. National will be doing their best to avoid another cup of tea disaster but the media seem addicted to boosting their ratings with Peters and therefore boosting his chances.

At this stage NZ First looks a good bet to succeed this election. The big question mark is what that means for any coalition possibilities and there will be fears of Winston induced instabilities. This is more likely to limit their numbers rather than drop them below 5%.

Maori Party
RM 2.0, CB 0.9, RR 1,5

Party support in polls and elections hasn’t been a significant factor for the Maori Party in the past because their strength has been in electorate seats, but this may change this year.

The Maori Party has a battle on it’s hands to retain any of it’s three electorate seats this time but the odds are good to keep at least one of it’s current three. If it only keeps one or two then their party vote may become a factor in their final count.

New leader Te Ururoa Flavell is out there trying to build a profile but is an unknown at this level. He needs to step up and find a way of getting some media attention, which could be difficult because he is (so far) uncontroversial.

The Maori Party should return but will have to battle hard to keep their numbers up. Labour’s struggles may help them

ACT Party
RM 0,5, CB 0.3, RR 1.1

ACT have recovered from poll zeroes but it’s early in their attempted recovery. All will depend on Epsom. If they succeed there they could help National retain power.

The ACT party vote could lift from their 2011 debacle when Don Brash ousted Rodney Hide and took over, and installed an unlikely John Banks in Epsom.

New leader Jamie Whyte is intelligent but intellectual. He will struggle to interest the media unless he stuffs up. He will also struggle to appeal to voters. As he builds experience and if he can appear confident he may lift things a bit.

ACT’s best chances may come from National spin-off. If enough voters want National returned but don’t want to reward National too much or don’t want a single party majority  then ACT may benefit.

Mana Party
RM 0, CB 0, RR 1.1

You can’t take much from the polls for Mana, their supporters may be the hardest to find for pollsters.

On their own Mana are unlikely to lift much in party support. This is probably why they are considering a deal with Kim Dotcom, realising lifting their own party vote will be difficult. This may help them, but it could just as easily damage their brand.

Hone Harawira is the obvious essential for Mana and should retain his Te Tai Tokerau electorate – unless there’s a backlash against the Dotcom dalliance. This is a real risk for Mana. Labour have got the respected Kelvin Davis as candidate again, he has been closing the gap on Harawira in previous elections.

Mana are a good bet to retain an electorate but the Internet Party is a risky punt.

UnitedFuture
RM 0.5, CB 0.1, RR 0.1

United Future have really struggled to impress in polls for two terms. To the voting public the party is non existent, although a surge of membership last year when UnitedFuture was de-registered shows there is still some interest out there.

Peter Dunne’s chances in Ohariu look reasonable. Labour and Greens no longer have candidates with public profiles. National are likely to assist with a low profile candidate. Dunne knows how to work his electorate.

Otherwise the prospects for UnitedFuture simply aren’t there. They don’t have a very active party and they have no people other than Dunne with any profile.

Dunne is a good bet to retain Ohariu and may help National stay in power but that is the best that can be expected.

Conservative Party
RM 1.5, CB 2.3, RR 1,9

The Conservative Party has maintained an average of around 2% with a range of 1-3. They should be able to maintain this – but doubling support to make the 5% threshold will be very difficult, despite being one of the best financed parties.

Colin Craig is determined and rich, and he has some appeal but he is also seen as wacky and is sometimes unfairly called Crazy Colin.

An easy electorate ride has been talked about but it remains elusive for Craig. National would be taking a big risk gifting him a seat and look lukewarm on it at the moment.

The jury is out on Craig’s chances. The Conservatives may pick up some ‘alternative to National’ votes but 5% looks a high hurdle. The media probably won’t do them any favours like the do for Peters.

Internet Party
RM 0, CB 0, RR 0.4

The polls were too soon for the Internet Party launch this week so don’t mean much. Roy Morgan had them on 0.5% for two polls when the first launch attempt was aborted but they got publicity. They are likely to feature in polls from now because the media will give them coverage.

It’s far too soon to tell how the Internet Party will go. Kim Dotcom will attract some support from his substantial existing following but he will put others off – and he can’t stand so either has to fade into the background or he will be seen to be interfering.

The Internet Party needs some credible candidates. They’ve said they won’t be announcing them until June but have claimed to have an existing electorate MP ready to join. There’s a lot of doubt about this, and even if they did it would be extremely difficult for such a candidate to hold their seat, they would be competing with their ex party and risk splitting the vote.

If they secure a high profile candidate I would expect the Internet party to announce it as soon as possible. Otherwise a leaderless candidate-less party will struggle to impress.

The Dotcom financed party could play a significant part in the election. It’s possible (but unlikely) they boost Mana’s seats to two or three. They may take some National vote and are likely to pick up some protest vote.

But as Russel Norman openly fears they could take votes from the left and waste them by failing to reach 5%. The Internet Party make their primary goal of defeating John Key harder for the left.

Other Parties

There are no other parties with profiles.

The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party keeps getting some support but is generally looked on as a protest or wacky baccy party. They have competed with Greens on cannabis law reform and could get some traction on this – Russel Norman said on The Nation in the weekend that cannabis law remained a Green policy but it would not be one they would be promoting.

The Alliance and Democrats for Social Credit keep chugging away but will continue to be ignored by the media so have no show. Losers are already picked regardless of their merit.

Focus New Zealand registered in January and are targeting the rural vote but will struggle with that.

Brendan Horan has been trying to get an Independent Candidates party off the ground but his own chances of retaining a seat and any party chances have been written off already. The media doesn’t do different approaches to democracy. And Horan doesn’t seem to have a significant following.

This simple fact is that it’s a near impossible for new parties without rich founders able to buy attention.

After the MMP review the threshold has stayed at an insurmountable 5%. The review recommend a drop to 4% which would have made no difference for small parties wanting to add themselves to the mix.

The large parties seem to actively avoid allowing nuisance parties to interfere with their ambitions and shut down their chances. Ironically more small parties would give the large parties more options and more bargaining power.

Summary

National may slip in support a bit but are still looking reasonably in charge. Greens are looking strong. But the rest is up for grabs, which means this year’s election is still very open – with more complicating factors than usual.

The Colmar Brunton poll showed a large wild card (or cards): Don’t know 13%, Refused 5%

The media play a major role and can make major stories out of the trivial. It’s a major concern that the balance of our democracy could swing on the whim of journalists. They have become very powerful, and they know it. And they are accountable to no one but their ratings and egos.

Our elections risk being more superficial lottery than a contest of policies and parties.

Unfortunately this year’s election may be decided on the least worst option as the positives in our politics are paltry. The parties, press and people are all culpable.

Fairfax exclude small parties from poll results

Fairfax released their latest IPSOS poll on Saturday. How did the small parties fare? It’s been difficult to find out.

If you go to Stuff’s See the latest Fairfax-Ipsos poll you’ll find detailed breakdowns of support for National, Labour, Greens and NZ First, but nothing at all for other parties (apart from a mention in the projected make up of Parliament.

I did manage to find a mention of all parties in a non-Fairfax report, so they must have shared the results.

So I’ve included all parties here: Fairfax/IPSOS poll good for National.

But in what appears to be the main Stuff coverage of the poll - National on wave of optimism – poll – the Conservative and Internet Parties get a mention (neither are currently in Parliament and the Internet Party isn’t official yet and Kim DotCom has promised to self-destruct it if as expected it fails to poll above 5%) . But there is nothing for Maori Party, Mana Party, ACT and UnitedFuture.

I tweeted my disappointment on the exclusion of over have the parties:

@dpfdpf @tracy_watkins @avancenz @VernonSmall @michaelfoxnz Very poor not publishing full party results.

One of them responded:

@tracy_watkins
Not poor. Party vote breakdown in the paper and on Stuff. Where were you looking?

I didn’t see the print version, but I’ve searched Stuff and can’t find it. I asked Tracey:

I’ve looked on Stuff in all the references to the poll I can find. Can you give me a link?

I didn’t get a reply to that.

The small parties don’t get much support in polls, including this one, and this won’t be helped when major media exclude them. The Fairfax poll coverage favours the large parties and larger small parties.

UPDATE: an Australian tweet with a link to an Australian news site has the full results.

Roy Morgan@roymorganonline

NZ PM’s National could govern alone: poll http://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/nz-pms-national-could-govern-alone-poll/story-e6frfkui-1226827958906  via @newscomauHQ

 

Small party trends with Roy Morgan

Roy Morgan polls far more often than other pollsters. While some polls can be outliers they give the best idea of trends. They graph trends…

…but this doesn’t show small party trends. Here they are in separate party charts. Note that these are rounded to the nearest 0.5% so aren’t smooth, 0% could be anything up to 0.24%.

Roy Morgan NZ First

-

Roy Morgan Maori Party

-

Roy Morgan Mana Party

-

Roy Morgan Act Party

-

Roy Morgan UF

-

Roy Morgan ConservativesPolling started for the Conservatives in July 2012.

Centre/right party preferences

After John Key’s heads up for possible coalition partners Dave@caffeine_addict has detailed all the party preferences.

John Key: “Yep!” to Peter Dunne and ACT, “Yes” to Maori Party, “Yeah OK”, to Colin Craig, “maybe” to Winston Peters.

Dunne: “Yep!” to Key, “Yes” to Maori Party ” Nope ” to Winston and Colin Craig, “maybe” to Act.

Colin Craig: “Yep” to everyone.

ACT “Yep” to Key, “Yes” to everyone else, if Key agrees.

Maori Party “Yes Sir” to Key, “Yes” to Dunne “No” to Winston, unless Key says yes, “Whatever” to Colin Craig.

Winston: “Yep” to everyone who agrees with him, “Yes” to those that might, “OK, then ” to those that won’t.

Party prospects for 2014

National will try to keep what they push through Parliament as uncontroversial as possible and be promoting the improving economic outlook as much as possible. They will sell Genesis shares and then try to consign their Mixed Ownership Model to the past. A number of their MPs have already announced their retirement at the next election, leaving openings for new talent.

Their ideal aim would be to get a majority on their own but this is very unlikely to happen (and National know this). Last election their +50% poll support eased back to a near majority but the electorate ensured they would need other party support. Their options for other parties this time are looking shaky but options are likely to emerge.

John Key will continue to hold up National support. He remains popular and despite some mistakes and lapses is mostly a masterful politician with an ordinary touch.

National would be doing extremely well to match their 2011 result (59 MPs) but are likely to ease back off this unless coalition options look unlikely and voters are scared too much by a lurch left alternative.

Labour have struggled to recover post Clark/Cullen. Goff never enthused the electorate and the Shearer experiment was a failure that took to long to rectify.

David Cunliffe did well to win the leadership battle but he has struggled to define himself clearly. He has become known for yeah/nah and talking out of both sides of his mouth to different audiences. This highlights one of his biggest challenges, how to satisfy the more left leaning party activists but attract the bigger centre-left vote. Tying Labour’s chances closely to the Greens makes this more challenging.

Labour are still very light on policies and what they have announced don’t look like election winners. Their power policy looked more like an anti-National anti-asset sale keep up with the Greens reaction rather than a well thought through policy. Their massive house building programme will worry voters about spending despite Labour’s claims the policy will eventually self-fund, and it also has a risk of appearing to be a housing lolly scramble that will only benefit the lucky.

Cunliffe had a few months to find his way followed by a timely holiday break. He has most of the year to define himself, his leadership and his party. Finding the right tone and an electable balance will test him.

Labour also have to grapple with the harder left and much closer association with the Greens – they have changed over this term from a major party competing one-to-one with National to a party dependent on the Greens as a minimum and possibly also Mana and NZ First.

Even if Cunliffe manages his own party’s political mix well Labour has to also hope that other parties to their left don’t scare the voters too much.

Labour should improve on their last election record low result (27%), but they have already conceded they won’t compete on their own with National. They will do well to make the high forties.

The Green Party Improved very well in their last term to fourteen MPs and had hoped to continue an upward trend, but polls have shown this may not be easy for them. They have pretty much flatlined – and this has been substantially helped by Labour’s lack of traction. If Labour rise then Greens will struggle to go up with them, they could even slip a bit.

The Green rise has created a problem. They have changed from a quirky environmental party with substantial partial support to a power player with aims of major financial influence in the next government. This scares many voters who otherwise like to see someone speaking up for the environment.

Russel Norman did well to appear as the de facto opposition  leader through most of the year but slipped back as Cunliffe stepped up. Norman has fought some good fights but there’s significant resistance to his economic leanings.

Co-leader Metiria Turei highlights a major Green contradiction – an obviously well dressed well fed academic upper middle class party fighting for the poor and fighting against poverty. They appear to be speaking for but not with their target constituency. Do-gooders out of touch reality.

And even on their environmental campaigns Greens are annoying some of their potential support. Most people don’t see a prosperous future for cyclists without jobs.

Green ideals of green energy and green jobs and green printed money look like little more than slick marketing.

And too much talk of taxing more to hand out more, of equal everything regardless of effort, is worrying many people.

Greens may do well to hold their number of MPs but may be disappointed in a lack of improvement, especially if Labour reverse their lacklustre efforts and make a bold showing.

NZ First are an unknown – will they make 5% or won’t they? Apart from Winston Peters their MPs haven’t made much of an impression, living in their leader’s shadow toeing his line ensures that.

Peters is showing his age and his lack of being anything other than a scattergun spoiler with far more failures than successes. Even his success last year were hardly election saving, some scored him for his attacks on Peter Dunne but his failure to back up his accusations with any evidence at all left a major taint.

In Parliament Peters is still prominent but it isn’t always pretty. He often seems to be struggling. He is fading.

And Peters cannot bet on being gifted the media attention he wangled over the cup of tea fiasco last election. His opportunism requires opportunities and he may not get them on a plate next time.

Last term Peters could devote all his time to campaigning. This time he has to share that with appearing to be credible in Parliament and running a party. It will be tough for him, and his toughness is waning.

Making the threshold is possible but will be difficult, especially if voters are scared off a Peters dictated coalition.

The Maori Party continue to struggle. They have to battle against their close association with the current Government even though they more often vote against National. And they have struggled with leadership transition.

Te Ururoa Flavell will have to step up as Pita Sharples and Tariana Turia retire. And the party will have to compete against strong Labour attacks on their electorates.

They should hold a seat or two, but that would be slipping from their current three.

The Mana Party should be safe with Hone Harawira’s seat and could manage to rise to also get a list seat but that’s as far as they are likely to get. On numbers that may not be a big improvement but it could put Mana into a powerful position of having the votes that decide a coalition, and also the votes that decide a lot of legislation if a Labour lead left bloc succeed.

This may help Mana’s chances of improving their party vote. But it may also make it harder for a left bloc to get enough votes to form a coalition – there is much wariness of a possible Labour-Green government but those concerns increase substantially with Labour-Green-Mana.

The Act Party is in disarray again. John Banks was a ring in that managed to succeed, but he is now dropping out under a major cloud. As has been the case for the last couple of elections Act is being written off by many.

But they have a chance of surviving. John Boscawen is working hard in the background and is determined to revive their fortunes.

If Act can come up with a viable candidate for Epsom they could hold that electorate (with National’s help). And if that candidate looks genuinely Act and they can put up a strong list they could be seen by voters as a legitimate alternative to National to get another seat or two. But it’s a big task.

United Future are again totally reliant on Peter Dunne. Last year was disastrous apart from the surge in membership, but if the party doesn’t get it’s act together that may hope may have been in vain.

Dunne has a reasonable chance of holding Ohariu. This will depend a lot on how much help he gets from National (it seems likely he’ll get some) and how strong a candidate Labour pout up and how strongly they contest the electorate. Greens have effectively left the electorate up to Labour by withdrawing Gareth Hughes from contention reducing the chance of splitting the left vote.

Dunne will have a big battle on his hands but seems determined to have a go at redeeming himself. He may succeed.

But United Future continues to have a major problem appealing to voters. The party is not doing a good job of even appealing to their new member base. Unless there’s a major change in approach, or unless they manage to recruit more high profile electable candidates, United Future will remain, at best, a single MP party.

The Conservative Party currently has every opportunity of making a mark. John Key has indicated he may boost their chances to help National, and late last year the media flocked to Colin Craig. This gave the party a huge lift in exposure, but it wasn’t always good exposure. The party didn’t lift in the polls.

How much help National give the Conservatives will determine their chances, especially if Craig is given a win-able electorate by National. That could get them one MP. And it could help their chances of making the 5% threshold. But that is still a huge target for an MP-less party that has stayed in the 1-3% range in the polls.

If money can buy power then Colin Craig make make it, but a huge budget failed last time. This time round it’s too soon to call.

The Civilian Party is a wild card. It has been promised by Ben Uffindell, riding on the success of his satirical blog. Starting a political party from scratch is a much bigger task, but Uffindell has proven he is innovative and smart, and has made a lot of friends in the media.

Uffindell’s biggest challenge will be motivating a younger constituency to vote, and to vote for non-status quo. How he approaches this will be interesting. How the party is positioned may matter in the balance of votes, even if The Civilian Party fails to make the threshold.

There’s huge disillusionment in New Zealand politics. If Uffindell sell something different and tap this huge voter base it could get interesting. Of course this depends on whether Uffindell launches a serious party or not.

Offering something entirely different has far more chance of interesting a few of the many who opt out of voting, and The Civilian Party may have a much better chance of doing this than the Labour-Green approach of convincing the dis-enfranchised that the same old socialism is worth voting for.

It will be an interesting year. It could be very interesting.

McCarten’s MP rankings

In his Sunday Herald column Matt McCarten ranks MPs in Battle of the egos in seat reshuffle.

  • The MPs who win marginal seats rank highest in status
  • Followed by the other electorate MPs
  • List MPs from the Greens and NZ First, which got over the 5 per cent threshold, deserve their legitimacy.
  • But list MPs from the two main parties are just voting fodder.
  • And list MPs who should have won an electorate seat but didn’t have an unspoken pariah status for letting the team down.
  • Maybe the lowest rated are the small-party MPs gifted their seats by National in the hope they’d bring at least one other MP, but who then didn’t deliver. Their self-important strutting irritates everybody.

Why do some list MPs deserve legitimacy and others don’t? That seems inconsistent.

But the most bizarre thing about this is McCarten’s lowest of the low MPs – like John Banks and to a lesser extent Peter Dunne. Banks was not expected to win so his chances were marginal, as were Dunne’s. McCarten may taking them out of his top rank and trashing them at the bottom based on nothing other than his dismay at which major party they happen to be in coalition with.

McCarten has been heavily involved with a number of parties, including the Alliance and Maori parties and now Mana. Mana are trying to work together with the Maori Party to help both their chances. Would Mana turn down assistance from Labour in tactical electorate arrangements?

Voting deciles in Ikaroa-Rawhiti

The Daily Post has done an interesting analysis of the voting patterns in the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election, looking at approximate votes per decile by matching votes per booth linked to school. See Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election autopsy.

Bradbury is over-enthusiastic about what this might mean for Mana’s chances in the next election, and bashes the Maori Party (Bradbury is paid as a consultant by Mana) but the results show a predictable leaning of low decile voters towards Mana.

The decile results for the 4 main candidates are:

Greens            2.51
MANA            2.08
Maori Party  2.52
Labour          2.57

Mana is on it’s own, significantly lower in the deciles.

Looking at just the decile 1 schools (which account for over a third of the votes taken at schools) the % vote for each party are:

Greens            12.6% of the vote
MANA            30.6% of the vote
Maori Party   18.8% of the vote
Labour          36.2% of the vote

Odd that Labour rates higher than Mana in decile 1.

It’s not surprising to me to see the difference between Mana and the Maori Party, it’s known that they appeal to different demographics.

Overall the Green Party is similar to the Maori Party and Labour.

It’s especially interesting to see how much lower the vote looks for Greens are than all the others for decile 1. The Greens try to appeal to the poor, those in poverty, those on benefits – in other words one of their major target demographics is low decile.

But the Green candidates look like they represent a different demographic – educated middle class and even well off voters. So I don’t think it’s a surprise to see them struggling to attract low demographic votes.

But having done all that it’s worth comparing the above percentages to the total vote. It’s possible to read too much from limited statistics.

Greens            11.1%
MANA            26.0%
Maori Party   19.8%
Labour          40.7%

There’s not a big variation to that, the analysed results are probably within the margin of error.

I doubt that it’s the massive election winner that Bradbury hopes for.

 

Ikaroa-Rawhiti result a bit interesting

The result of the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by election is a bit interesting but not much can be deduced from it. By-elections are generally not an accurate reflection of how an electorate or the country would vote in a general election.

For the record here’s a summary of the official results:

Michael Appleby (ALCP) 161 1.5%
Marama Davidson (Greens) 1188 11.3%
Adam Holland (Independent) 13 0.1%
Te Hamua Nikora (Mana) 2607 24.8%
Na Raihania (Maori) 2104 20.0%
Maurice Wairau (Independent) 27 0.3%
Meka Whaitiri (Labour) 4368 41.5%
Informal 51 0.5%
TOTAL 10519

As predicted the turnout was very low with about 1/3 of registered voters participating. In the previous general election in 2008 the turnout was 20,455.

Turnout in the last by-election, Te Tai Tokerau in 2011 was 13,594.

During the campaign there were claims from Mana that their candidate was polling within 5% of Labour. No evidence was shown.

It’s difficult to meaningfully compare by-election results with previous elections, especially when an icon like Parakura Horomia was involved.

Here are the last three election results:

Candidate/Party  % Vote  % Party
2005 Parakura Horomia (Labour)  53.75      58.28
Atareta Poananga (Maori)  42.80  28.06
Tauha Te Kani (Destiny)   3.47  1.97
2008 Parakura Horomia (Labour) 51.49     57.20
Derek Fox (Maori)   42.96 26.89
Bevan Tipene (Green)   5.55  3.16
2011 Parakura Horomia (Labour)    60.71  49.58
Na Raihania (Maori)  23.10  14.98
Tawhai McClutchie (Mana) 14.28   9.60

There was no Maori candidate prior to 2005 so earlier results are difficult to compare.

It generally looks like Labour support moved to Mana and the Greens.

Labour will be happy to have had a comfortable win, albeit with a significantly lower %.

Mana will be happy to have nearly doubled their %.

The Maori Party had a strong candidate (I thought he looked the best) so should be a bit concerned about their drop.

Greens will be happy, but they promote themselves are strongly pro treaty and pro Maori and got just a little more than their general poll support level. They had by far the best party leader support in the campaign from Metiria Turei.

Bottom line

The end result is that Meka Whaitiri has a new job and Labour have a new MP. And the parties and the pundits will scratch around claiming positives and negatives that don’t really mean much in the whole scheme of things.

If you want some amusement check out Martyn Bradbury’s take on it: BREAKING: Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election: Labour limp home

Shane Jones – a fundamental split “until it’s all over”

In an interview on Marae Investigates Shane Jones was asked about the leadership problems in the Maori Party. He said (subtitle translated from Maori):

In politics if you are fundamentally split it won’t be long until it’s all over.

Jones also mentioned that David Shearer hadn’t apologised to him for initiating the Bill Liu inquiry – which Jones said found no wrongdoing on his part, which denies clear criticisms of him.

This suggests there could be still a bit of a split between Shearer and Jones.

But it’s interesting when talking of the three way split in the Maori Party to also consider Jones’ own Labour Party, which seems to have significant split issues, with three Shearer, Robertson and Cunliffe factions.

Shearer+Robertson currently have an alliance but it is often suggested that Robertson is simply waiting for the right moment to make a leadership bid.

Camp Shearer is obviously split from camp Cunliffe.

Will it ever be possible for Robertson to form an alliance with Cunliffe? There have been suggestions that Robertson is waiting until after the Marriage bill has completed it’s passage through Parliament. Or that a leadership bid will be made later this year if the polls haven’t significantly improved. There are many rumours.

Or are Labour’s splits too fundamental. Will it be long “until it’s all over”?

Maori Party leadership lacking

Is three leaders more or less?

I have admired aspects of the Maori Party way. I think the way they consult with their constituents before making decisions on support or opposition to issues and policies is very good democratic practice – something other parties could learn from.

But all political systems have flaws. And mostly those flaws are related to personalities.

Tariana Turia tries to explain how their new leadership will work.

“It would be about people leading but only in very specific areas.

“Three people who would be carrying out particular roles in the interests of our people. We think that’s a very good solution.”

It may be a good solution for the three MPs wanting to retain or obtain leadership roles, but it looks very indecisive.

Turia is retiring at the next election but doesn’t want to let go of her position until then.

Pita Sharples seems to want to not let go of anything until he karks it, despite growing hints he is past his best in politics.

Te Ururoa Flavell has made his leadership ambitions clear, but there seems to be no clear way to the top.

The Maori Party may have more leaders, sort of, but it looks like less leadership, a (further) sign that they are losing focus and direction.

It’s getting crowded at the top of the Maori Party. Too many ariki, and no kaimahi.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 184 other followers