National’s List
May 29th, 2005 at 2:32 pm by David FarrarNational has released its party list. Congratulations to those candidates who have got winnable places, and commiserations to those lower down. Never a nice process to go through. Also well done to the List Ranking Committee who have the difficult and often unpopular job of having to produce the list which inevitably pleases some and disappoints others.
What is important is not just the list, but what we call the effective list. This takes into account the seats a party will win.
On today’s SST poll National would get 45 seats. Now National currently holds 21 seats so if National does not win or lose any seats (in reality I expect National to win a few) then there would be 24 List MPs. Those MPs would be:
1 Don Brash
2 David Carter
3 Katherine Rich
4 Tim Grosser
5 Clem Simich
6 Georgine te Heuheu
7 Pansy Wong
8 Chris Finlayson
9 Nicky Wagner
10 Tau Henare
11 Jo Goodhew
12 David Bennett
13 Chester Borrows
14 Chris Auchinvole
15 Jonathan Coleman
16 Mark Blumsky
17 Eric Roy
18 Kate Wilkinson
19 Nathan Guy
20 Jacqui Dean
21 Jackie Blue
22 Anne Tolley
23 Craig Foss
24 Paula Bennett
And one would also have Allan Peachy in Tamaki and Colin King in Kaikoura. Again I stress this is based on no change in electorate seats and while I am not going to start naming seats I think National will or can win, I do think a few will be picked up. However most of these are contested by candidates in the top 45 on the list, so it may not change things greatly.
People (including the candidates who read this blog) may be interested at who would get in at what level of party vote. Well based on a 5% wasted vote (votes for parties that do not make it into Parliament) the Party Vote table would be:
PV20% – 25 MPs – 4 List MPs – Tim Grosser (No 13) last list MP in
PV25% – 32 MPs – 11 List MPs – Jo Goodhew (No 31)
PV 30% – 38 MPs – 17 List MPs – Eric Roy (No 37)
PV 33% – 42 MPs – 21 List MPs – Jackie Blue (No 41)
PV 35% – 44 MPs – 23 List MPs – Craig Foss (No 44)
PV 37% – 47 MPs – 26 List MPs – Fepulea’i Ulua’ipou-O-Malo Aiono (No 47)
PV 40% – 51 MPs – 30 List MPs – Moira Irving (No 51)
PV 43% – 54 MPs – 33 List MPs – Mike Leddy (No 54)
PV 45% – 57 MPs – 36 List MPs – Gilbert Stehbens (No 57)
PV 50% – 63 MPs – 42 List MPs – Allison Lomax (No 63)
Please note that none of these projections are based on any *inside* knowledge. It is simply a mathematical projection based on public information. And again at the 20% to 35% scenarios the outcomes will be affected more by what seats National picks ups.
For those who like to focus on diversity I note that the top 10 likely List MPs include four women, two Maori New Zealanders and an Asian New Zealander.
Based on today’s SST poll, and assuming no electorate seats change hands, the stats for the National Caucus would be:
45 MPs
12 women (27% of Caucus, and women make up 28% of candidates)
3 Maori (te Heuheu, Henare and Paula Bennett)
Nthn Region 18 MPs (currently 13)
CNI 7 MPs (5)
LNI 7 MPs (2)
CW 8 MPs (5)
Sthn 5 MPs (2)
Auckland 15 MPs (10)
Wellington 3 MPs (0)
Christchurch 4 MPs (2)
Provincial 10 MPs (4)
Rural 13 MPs (11)
Based on the current poll result, looks to be pretty well balanced regionally and geographically.
As a long-term LNI and Wellington party worker I am looking forward to having some more MPs. Of course it all depends on the Party Vote, and Mark is not certain to get in if we had a bad party vote nationwide, so I know he is still set 100% on winning Wellington Central as he does have the luxury of a top ten place like the incumbent MP.
No tag for this post.
May 29th, 2005 at 3:08 pm
Craig Foss should be much higher, and certainly ahead of Eric Roy. What were the Nats thinking?
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:12 pm
DPF,
what led to decision to use the phrase “Maori New Zealanders”? Whilst it makes perfect sense, it’s not actually something I’ve heard before.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:27 pm
David,
Why does National only have 65 people listed in it’s list? Does this mean that if there is a dramtic surge in National’s popularity and it gets 60% of the vote then it will not be able to occupy all the seats it’s entitled to?
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:31 pm
Looks like a good list to me, although I do disagree with the strategy that sitting MPs are automatically in the top 30. They should work for list rankings like all other candidates. Still, I guess it is a good strategy for minimising disputes.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:33 pm
RightKiwi – unlike other parties you would have to ask every single delegate in Otago what they were thinking and then every single delegate in Wellington. That should give you an idea of why each candidate was placed were they were in their region. Then you would have to talk to every single person on the list ranking committee which is responsible for melding the regional lists together. Democracy is a funny thing.
That said I would have liked to see Craig Foss a little higher.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:36 pm
Well, I can say that the Northern region candidates ranking was largely in line with the sentiment of members at the Northern conference. Tau gave a pearler of a speech there – so not much of a surprise he did well with the members.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
I’ve quickly worked out some “rises and falls” for candidates, and it looks like Judith Collins and John Key have the biggest rises among sitting MPs, and Georgina Te Heuheu and Pansy Wong have the biggest falls. The rises I expected, but the falls I didn’t. Any speculation as to why? Any does Mark Blumsky’s position broadly reflect what you expected? (I’m not saying that I agree or disagree with anything on the list. This is pure curiosity).
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:50 pm
Right Kiwi – I would certainly like Craig higher as I think he would be a great MP. Plus he is a second time candidate and has stayed loyal. But I expect Nats to get at least 35% and Craig to be there.
Graeme – I decided on spur after writing Maoris and Asians and deciding I didn’t quite like how it sounds. One thing I like about the US is how people are afircan-americans, asian-americans etc – saying their nationality not just their race defines them.
Simon – Basically the rules which say it shall be elect candidates plus up to five list only cands. With not standing in the seven Maori seats, the maximum is 67. To be honest if National managed 65 MPs then it would have absolute majority in Parliament and not be so concerned if it missed out on a couple of MPs.
If for some reason polls showed National at 55% to 60% I suspect some additional list candidates would quickly be found
Aaron – the strategy is for this election *only* based on the concept that if one knows all current MPs will be safe (as getting 20 new MPs) then why not avoid the tensions of ranking them. I do not expect to see it next time.
Grant – Grant is right that the regional rankings are highly persuasive on the national rankings, and are democratically voted on.
Aaron – yes I heard from many that Tau did very well at that conference.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 3:54 pm
BTW, very nice statistical analysis of who might get in. I wish this sort of thing was available for all parties.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 4:00 pm
Maramatanga – the MPs are ranked in their caucus order so none have been promoted or demoted by the List Ranking. It is merely a reflection of where the Leader currently has them in Caucus. The List MPs in Caucus have six of the top seven spots so I suspect are all very happy.
I told Mark I expected him to be between 35 and 40, so 36 is at the slightly higher end of what I was expecting.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 4:12 pm
Ah, I hadn’t noticed that they were in caucus order. Silly of me – thanks for pointing that out.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 4:45 pm
Aaron – Tau is one of the highlights of this list. I am looking forward to his persausive brand of commonsense coming to caucus.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 5:31 pm
On the diversity question, are there any gay New Zealanders on the list? What about “classical lib” type candidates?
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 5:34 pm
An impressive list.
Vote:This shows that National truly is a “national” party,as it has people from all walks of life. Not just failed school teachers and trade Unionist which makes up Labours list
May 29th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
Nick – I don’t know the sexuality of all the candidates. Tends to be a pretty private thing for many. Classical liberals is a subjective term but if one is asking who would I regard as socially liberal as well as economically liberal I would include (on top of current MPs such as Rich) Blumsky, Finlayson, Wagner and Bennett. Probably more but I haven’t integgorated them all
Matt – yes a hugely diverse range of backgrounds. In fact might include backgrounds in next post.
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 6:16 pm
Matt Comment in respect of the Labour party list is not quiter fair – they also have a smattering of social workers and dental nurses (making up the remaider of the ranks)
Vote:May 29th, 2005 at 7:36 pm
I wouldn’t worry too much about Eric Roy’s place on the list…I suspect Invercargill’s voters are going to dole out a bit of pay back over the schools review and the Labour candidate is going to have to work pretty damned hard.
Vote:May 30th, 2005 at 2:44 am
Eric is an experienced operator and was a very well regarded Dep Speaker during his last stint. No surprised to see him up there.
Don would do well to give him a role in the operations side of the party internally.
And I agree with Michael in terms of expecting him to win his seat in any case.
Vote:May 30th, 2005 at 3:08 am
David – while I am thinking about such things, did Dale Stephens seek selection this time round in a LNI seat?
Cheers
Vote:MR
May 30th, 2005 at 3:14 am
No Dale did not seek selection this time.
Vote:May 30th, 2005 at 1:59 pm
They all look pretty good. But I have to say the Labour Party is far better in the black arts of politics. They seem to select people who have a track record there, gone right away from people with impressive looking CVs. National really does have a weakness there, its team is quite inexperienced at politics, all you have is Murray McCully and literally 1 or two others.
Vote:May 30th, 2005 at 4:35 pm
Tim
Vote:That weakness just might turn out to be their strenght. After all National was looking for a new type of candidate that had integrity and could be respected for that ( polls show that M.Ps in general are not held with great respect by the country) National wants to reverse that and they have done so by selecting top notch high quality candidates who have entered politics out of love for their country, not out of love for political life
May 30th, 2005 at 5:29 pm
I just think National lacks political smarts, especially in dealing with the media and rough and tumble political tactics. The left do not dominate intellectual opinion the way they used to, indeed I regard the left as generally quite thick, bureaucratic and conservative.
Vote: