Espiner says no chance of Maori-National coalition
Colin Espiner has been talking to Pita Sharples and on the basis of that conversation says there is no chance of a Maori-National coalition – a gutsy call:
Sharples wants to improve the lot of Maori. He wants to do this from a position of power, believing, unlike the Greens, that the best way to do this is from government.
But Sharples is a man possessed. He’s possessed by the knowledge that no matter what the Maori says or does during its current courtship dance with the National Party, his followers know only one party – Labour. He’s frank about this, and when you push him, he admits that the chances of the Maori Party entering into any sort of coalition arrangement with National is extremely unlikely.
I’ll go further. I’ll say this: the Maori Party will not go into a coalition government with National. If I’m proved wrong after the election, I’ll print out this blog and eat it, live on webcam.
That in itself should be incentive enough for such a coalition 
Note that I’m not saying the Maori Party won’t offer confidence and supply to National (although I think this, too, is highly unlikely) or that it wouldn’t consider abstaining to allow National to govern. But I believe a coalition is out of the question.
If Colin is right, then Helen Clark is going to be very happy.
At the end of our conversation today, Sharples conceded that it would be much easier for the Maori Party if Labour won the most votes on election day. He’d rather deal with Labour, too, I suspect. Even if Labour isn’t the major party, Sharples would look to a deal that included New Zealand First and the Greens first.
As a last resort, if the “other door” was completely shut, the Maori Party would talk with National, Sharples told me, but even then he was doubtful about whether the Maori Party’s supporters would back such a deal.
I am just imagining a Labour/Greens/Maori/NZ First Government trying to cope with the financial crisis and live within its means. More likely are huge tax increases.
So with two and half weeks of the campaign to go, it’s Labour, NZ First, the Greens, and almost certainly the Maori Party on one side. And National, ACT, and United Future on the other. ACT is probably good for four or even five seats, but United Future will be lucky to get more than one.
That means National needs to get very close to 50% of the party vote to have any hope of forming a government.
Or National has to agree to something that the Maori Party want – and that Labour won’t or can’t agree to. I’m thinking seabed and foreshore legislation here.
The maths is cruel, but there you have it. The polls mean very little against the reality of MMP. The only message National should be pushing now is this: If you want to change the government, you must party vote National. Virtually anything else (except ACT) will see Clark reinstalled in Premier House for a fourth term.
I agree that is the desired message.
October 23rd, 2008 at 6:59 am
I wouldn’t be surprised if Hulun is prepared to concede the Foreshore & Seabed for the sake of a 4th term. That’s really the only trump card National has.
October 23rd, 2008 at 6:59 am
No surprises about this. I have always maintained that National will need ACT. They have no other obvious coalition partner. But the Nats still seem to think they can get over 50% of the vote. They won’t, and its going to cost the country dearly I fear.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:17 am
What sort of democracy is it when a single party can get near 50% of the vote – I don’t remember any party achieving this level of support – yet still not be able to form a government.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:38 am
And i suspect that Sharples has learnt his politics a bit faster than people have realised. I don’t think the Maori Party really want to do a deal with Labour. In effect by coming out and virtually ruling out a coalition with National he is inviting swinging Labour voters to go with National if they really want to change things.
And in doing so, the MP is playing the long game – allow National to get a majority with ACT, or offer C&S if appropriate, let National run their program and show it’s not as bad as Labour are making out, then bring Maori around to the idea of coalition with National in 2011 to get their own policies enacted.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:39 am
Espiner forgets what history tells us, all parties under MMP say one thing BEFORE coalition talks start and ANOTHER during the talks. It’s happened every time since MMP was introduced.
Policy positions change rapidly when parties see the possibility of being in power.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:48 am
I think NeillR is onto it. Both Sharples and Key have said that they have common ground, and Sharples has said they could *talk* to National. All this is pre-election posturing. Didn’t Heilen say that the MP is the last cab off the rank?When the votes are in, the talking will start and the deals made. Until then, all is poise and style.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:49 am
Perhaps it is time for National to run its own attack adds, warning voters about how dangerous a Labour/Green/Progressive?MP/NZF coalition would be. Un-weildy, big spending, high taxing, and potentially (likely) extremist. Certainly it would mean high octane nanny state, the very thing most kiwis are sick of.
DPF you need to get the message to your party. They have so far been cruising and playing nice on the basis of the polls, but its time to take the gloves off.
“What sort of democracy is it when a single party can get near 50% of the vote, yet still not be able to form a government.”
Its not a democracy in any real sense. The anti-smacking act, from a minor party that most kiwis think is nuts, and passed against over 80% of the countries wishes, with Clark dismissing most kiwis as “fundamentalists” was the first clue that real democracy is dead in NZ.
MMP, along with the EFA and Labour’s ongoing abuse of taxpayers money means that real democracy is not on show this election.
“I have always maintained that National will need ACT.”
I’m sorry but that is wishful thinking. ACT will not be enough. Just getting Nat supporters to switch votes to ACT does NOT enlarge the overall party vote of both, something ACT boosters who post here do not seem to understand. Unless National can enlarge its own share of the party vote by scaring the crap out of moderate voters, they are also going to need UF, and it would not hurt if the Family Party could win an electorate seat or two.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:49 am
Sharples wants to improve the lot of Maori?
Buy them a plane ticket to Australia.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:52 am
As I personally have no problem with the Maori seats, I would be happier if JK came out and said that he would give way on the issue.
Seriously what do people care most about? Maori seats, or a Clark-Cullen-Green regime???
I’ll take the seats thanks.
October 23rd, 2008 at 7:59 am
The opportunity is gone now, but Bill English and Gerry Brownlee should have left the National party and started a right side version of the Progressives. A separate party in name only, guaranteed electorate seats, bugger all party vote and distortion of the MMP system in the right direction (and I mean that both ways..)
OK, now being serious, what chance is there to roll the Maori’s aspiration to entrench their seats into a wider constitutional re-think including the MMP referrendum?
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:02 am
Of course the Maori Party prefers Labour, because Labour have no compunction about stealing off New Zealanders and giving the proceeds to Maori.
In my humble opinion the Maori seats are reverse racism and should be abolished. Socialism/Marxism sets up a victim group then uses the supposed victimisation to justify oppressing the supposed oppressors:
http://kiwipolemicist.wordpress.com/2008/09/06/i-am-pakeha-and-i-am-oppressed/
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:03 am
MMP is stacked in favour of left wing governments, because minor parties (with the exception of ACT) will always focus on obtaining something for their own constituency. That something usually involves government expenditure or prohibition of some activity. It’s like if you can find 51% of the electorate who want to be subsidised for something, then you’ll be able to form a government.
Priority number 1 for an incoming National Government (who really should stop playing safe and start telling people about the 9 wasted years that have left the NZ economy on the brink of disaster with Labour having spent all the money that we’d saved for a rainy day) must be to go to the country with a referendum on the electoral system. Including MMP. Including repeal of the EFA. Including a ban on governments spending taxes to subsidise their election campaigns. Including racially based seats. (We’ve just heard about how the visit of a racially selected sports team from another country was a defining moment in NZ history and should be an election issue 27 years later, but the people who opposed the tour are happy to maintain a similar electoral system.) The referendum can’t wait. It needs to be in 2009 for implementation in the 2011 election.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:16 am
Isn’t there a special name for minority race based policies?
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:22 am
If the Maori party gets 3% of the vote and wins 7 seats then there will be an overhang of 4 or 5 seats in parliament, meaning that proportionality is distorted. Further, this gives Labour a permanent head start in any election. The backlash over this will almost certainly doom MMP. The Royal Commission on electoral systems recommended that the introduction of MMP coincide with the abolition of the Maori seats, and this is exactly why. I would not be surprised to find Labour targeting Maori roll voters with direct mail seeking the party vote. If successful this could increase the overhang.
davidp – spot on. All the smaller parties except ACT are into redistribution to their constituencies, so automatically are left-leaning. Just to think that it was that genius Jim Bolger who agreed to hold the referendum which gave us MMP. Maybe he just wanted to be the last long-term leader of a centre right government in NZ. It’s given him plenty of baubles from a very grateful Labour government – chair of this and that, an almost permanent seat in corporate boxes at major sporting events and $250,000 a year on top of his super. Nice work if you can get it, shame about the country!
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:25 am
Lee – “DPF you need to get the message to your party. They have so far been cruising and playing nice on the basis of the polls, but its time to take the gloves off.”
I fear you are wasting your breath with this tack, I wish it were not so, but the evidence suggests that National would make superb defence lawyers for the worst offenders (Labour) , and crap lawyers for the victimised. (National voters).
sorry.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:29 am
National has been in opposition for 3 terms because of the “two ticks National” strategy. Do it again and it’s at your own peril National! All Helen has to do over the next couple weeks is slowly chip away at Key, and get her MPs to nudge the Maori Party and say all the right things to them and that will be it!
ACT is climbing in support and if we have 5-8 ACT MPs in there National will certainly be in Govt.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:39 am
I can see it in slow motion. Labour ankle taps National several times over the next couple of weeks. John Key has ruled out Roger Douglas from cabinet – it’s all two ticks, and National is gone. Labour cobbles together government with a school of small parties. They all exact their price. Taxes go up in the mini-budget to fund it. John Key is replaced as leader. Labour holds office for six terms on the trot as people finally give up on NZ and flee to Aussie. The housing market falls further, along with the NZ dollar. Goodbye NZ.
By the way, what exactly that Roger Douglas did would National repeal? Labour haven’t repealed anything. So why is Roger Douglas lumped in with Winston Peters as the only two people Key won’t deal with? Pathetic.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:41 am
I see a certain irony in that National cruised into power for years under FPP with a minority of the vote but now likely to be frustrated by not being able to do the same under MMP. I deplore the ‘black and white’ situation of National and Labour, each with their hangers on. I would hope for a government ruling the country for the benefit of the country rather than a segment of the country … akin to the situation during WWII when politicians joined together to fight a common enemy.
As far as re-distribution of wealth I think the essential difference is that the left wish to carve up the cake before it is baked which is why I support[ed] ACTs policy of the helping hand instead of a cradle. The left’s ambitions are admirable but their implentation is half-baked. Further you cannot have a responsible society unless the populace are responsible. I am also left with the feeling that most on the right are totally self centred asnd completely irresponsible except to their self interest.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:44 am
I heard Turia accepting Lockwood Smiths apology for so-called racist remarks on National Radio this morning. I would like her to apologies to me for her insistence that we continue to have apartheid-like racially allocated parliamentary seats.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:47 am
I have a morbid curiosity to see how a Labor/ NZ First / Green / Maori Party/ JAP government would run.
Iceland of the South Pacific & then IMF bailout.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:48 am
Let’s not kid ourselves.
There is pressure being applied through the media on politicians and Maori voters to make
sure the Maori Party support Labour. Which is exactly why Espiner is writing a column on it!
This is part of Labour’s overall and ONLY strategy
1. Attack John Key’s credibility
2. Bribe the Greens
3. Pressure the Maori’s to form a coalition with Labour
That is why they have no policy, and continue to be reckless with our economy.
For them it has never been about winning fairly. It has always been about winning at all cost.
We need to keep up the pressure ourselves, on the blogs, talkbacks etc to retain the integrity of our democracy.
As stayathomemum says:
“What sort of democracy is it when a single party can get near 50% of the vote …yet not be able to form a government”
John Key ruled out a coalition with Winston because he cannot be trusted
The NZ public will rule out Labour and Helen Clark on the same basis.
WE CANNOT ALLOW OUR DEMOCRACY TO BE COMPROMISED BY BRIBES AND CORRUPTION.
If the Maori Party support Labour then why bother having an election at all?
The may as well support The Greens, and Winston and Labour right now.
This is why it is a problem to have race based parties in politics.
I have heard the Maori Party encouraging non-Maori people to vote for them
But will they have consultation with these same people after the election.
And who wants another period of weeks of instability (the finance markets don’t) while we try and figure out
the shape of our government.
The Maori Party must put aside their historical ties and do what is not only best for the country
but also what is THE WILL OF THE NZ PEOPLE
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:53 am
Remember Labor/NZ First/ Green/ MP & JAP govt then IMF bailout.
The IMF will set our economic agenda on the right course something that can’t happen under MMP.
October 23rd, 2008 at 8:56 am
There seems to be a consensus emerging in this blog that one way tickets to Australia will only be available via touts and scalpers.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:03 am
david said:
Thanks — you have crystallised in my mind the very reason that MMP must go.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:04 am
The Maori Party is a big reason for the permanent and long term departures that are the subject of another thread. Once political parties are established on the basis of race, a country is on a long term path to destruction. Pita and his cohorts need to check out how many Maoris are on those planes leaving for better places and times.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:06 am
The sort where a parliamentary majority of one or more parties gives them a mandate to govern – what a weird concept!
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:13 am
stephen, You’re being obtuse. The Right is always accused of selfishness, when in reality it’s multiple self-interest groups from the Left that combine under MMP, the result being a country wrecked by an aggregation of lazy selfishness.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:20 am
LabourMustBeLiquidated: I agree with you that National has blinkers on in regards the workings of MMP. If they fail to form a government this time we will witness one of the greatest exoduses of good people this country has ever seen.
As much as I agree with you that Act is an obvious partner for National, unfortunately many New Zealanders do still feels that they are “scary” (and perception is reality)
If National sat down and worked out a strategy that would suit the majority of New Zealanders (and that is what you need to govern) then they should look seriously at who they can genuinely and constructively work with.
To me the Family Party is the obvious player. Not only have they been working very hard in the Labour heartland (Mangere) which means that every vote that they take of Labour is a vote for National. They have also been doing the work underground and below the focus of the media to date. (Although I have heard from a good source that the media is just waking up to what is going on)
If they do win a seat (which I believe they will) I believe a mix of National and the Family Party would produce a government closer to what the majority of people want. Perhaps more so than a National / Act government.
And before I get all the negative Kama from the Act supporters I have always maintained the three of them could work well together! I am just giving my opinion from mainstream New Zealanders. In my work I talk too many of them.
For a new minor party (that has a depth of experience) I have been amazed at what they have produced on what must be a very tight budget. From their TV ads to billboards and flyers the quality has been exceptional. There must be some very good people working behind the scenes.
They obviously woke up very early to the restraints of the EFA, worked out a plan and have worked the plan without deviation.
For one, I wish them great success. If there is ever a time our Nation needs such a party it is now. Check them out for yourself. http://www.familyparty.org.nz
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:21 am
I’ve said it before on another link a few days ago, but my thoughts haven’t changed since.
Don’t rule out National-NZ1.
1. Peters has already made it clear that he will not support a govenrment that includes the Greens.
2. John Key has said that after the election his party will not work with Winston Peters.
3. Whichever party wins the election will need to raise money quickly, and from within NZ, to keep the banking system afloat. One way of doing this is to float 25-40% of Kiwibank, with a stipulation that only NZ residents can buy the shares. the same would go with Kiwirail, although that is such a dog that no-one with any business sense would buy shares in it.
Following the election, National gains the most seats and votes, but falls short of a majority. NZ First gets back into Parliament, but Peters realises that a Labour-NZ First-Greens-Maori Party-Jim Anderton party government is untenable. the banking system is on the verge of collapse, and John Key is forced to choose between tax cuts and injecting money into the banking suystem. Peters offers to go with National, with the understanding that Kiwibank can be floated on his terms, and that National must uphold NZ First’s commitments to NZ Superannuation (which National has already done). This enables National to go through with tax cuts, and to allow partial privatisation.
Either Key puts the Party ahead of himself, and resigns as National Party leader. Bill English becomes PM, and Winston Peters becomes deputy PM
or Key and Peters argue the accommodation is for the national (small ‘n’) good, and Key stays on. Neither Nationals, ACTs, or NZ First’s supporters complain.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 am
Democracy itself is stacked in favour o’ left-wing governments ‘cos it’s real easy for politicians to promise 60% o’ the population what the other 40% have got.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 am
I’m not sure why anyone could imagine the Maori Party going with National in the first place.
Maori are over-represented in those dependant on benefits or on low-paid jobs; i.e. the ones who suffered most from the neo-liberal governments of 1984-99, whose agenda National continues to represent. Maori know what it’s like to have a National government in power and it hurts. Cuts to health, education, working conditions, benefits, these all affect the most vulnerable the most, and to a diproportionate degree this includes Maori.
So when the Maori Party goes on its series of hui after the election and asks its members their views on coalitions (as they’ve promised to do), the view is going to be pretty clear. Tariana Turia and Pita Sharples might talk about going with National, they might even mean it (they are still pissed off with Labour after all) but if they want to be allowed back onto a marae, they won’t back a National Goverment. As Gordon Campbell points out on Scoop, to do so risks electoral annihilation in 2011.
Somehow, I don’t think Colin Espiner will be eating his blog…….
Cheers
Tane W (not the Tane from the Standard)
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:23 am
“Pita and his cohorts need to check out how many Maoris are on those planes leaving for better places and times”
In 20 yrs (maybe sooner now) 1 in 3 Maori will live in Australia and 50% of Maori children will be born in Australia.
The Maori Party will be able to hook up with NZ First as their voting demographic will be all old.
I suspect the Maori Party MPs know this as they sound so shrill all the time.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:33 am
Tane W
If the Maori Party are going to make their decision on who they support purely based on hui
Why don’t they save time (and the uncertainty this would cause after the election) and ask their “people” right now?
And if the answer is Labour
Why bother having an election at all?
THE REASON WE ARE HAVING AN ELECTION IS TO FIND OUT THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY
The Maori Party must reflect the will of the democracy
and ironically put aside their race based affiliations
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:46 am
I think Espiner’s missed a trick, and just posted an alternative scenario.
Murray asks, “Isn’t there a special name for minority race based policies?”
I suspect he’s thinking of “affirmative action” or :posotive discrimmination”, but if he meant to say “minority race-based politics” then the answer is “Southern Strategy” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy).
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:55 am
Say the unthinkable does happen and Klark is able to cobble together a coalition of the axis of evil, those of us who do decide to stay in NZ will be left with the reality that the Nat’s will NEVER again form a govt under this corrupt MMP system.
There will be no point pissing and moaning about the system as the axis of evil will never change something that guarantees them power, the Nat’s will need to have a total rethink about how they are going to fight future elections.
The reality is that I doubt the current National party leadership has the balls to do what will be necessary.
For the Nat’s (or the center right) to ever gain power again they have to have strong and natural coalition partners, it is painfully obvious that at this point in time that they are a party with no natural partner apart from ACT, and ACT are never going to provide them with enough numbers to govern.
So what can the Nat’s do about this?, the answer is to create another coalition partner, the only way for the center right to achieve this will be if the Nat’s split into two, lets just say that the Nat’s do not form the government and end up with 50-55 MP’s, it would make perfect sense for the party to split down the middle, one side could continue with Key’s more middle of the road policies and the other could push a more traditional National party line.
This is the only way that I can see of the right ever gaining enough of the party vote to have a better than even chance of gaining power.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:59 am
“I suspect he’s thinking of “affirmative action””
I suspect he’s thinking of something beginning with F. Remember the Aryans?
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:03 am
I am not sure that Pita Sharples is not just positioning his party to get the best deal.
The media like to report figure like “Only 10% of Maori want National”. The implication is that 90% of Maori oppose National. Sometimes they will add that “40% want Labour”. But what about the other 50%? Most of that is going to the MP. And what do they want, apart from success for their party?
Another set of polls asked the question “Which party (Lab or Nat) would your prefer to see the MP deal with? The result favoured Labour of course, but only by about 70/30. If you take out the voters who actually back Labour or National (or strongly aligned parties such as Act, the Greens etc) this suggests that MP supporters are actually about evenly divided. And it is these people who the MP will listen to when they consult after the election, not Labour supporters!
I also suggest close examination of what Sharples actually said. Yes, a coalition is out of the question. But a confidence and supply arrangement, or an agreement to abstain on such issues is not. He said it would be easier for the MP if Labour got the most votes. Of course! Then the MP would be fully justified in dealing with Labour. But that is not going to happen is it? So what this shows is that he realises that if National gets most votes he will face significant moral pressure to acquiesce to “the will of the people”.
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:04 am
“Door still open for National”
“Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia says the party will still talk with National after the election”
From the NZPA
I still think people ruling out the MP going with National under any circumstances are wrrong. Pita and Tariana may well be playing a good cop bad cop game to try and pry National away from its Maori seats policy.
People forget that Turia has an almost visceral hatred for Clark, and for good reason.
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:11 am
getstaffed you have a point about “obtuse”, but it was a simple answer to a simple question.
Kinda like FPP, right, except the party with the second highest amount of votes could actually win. And National sure isn’t going to be ‘selfish’ – they’ll be throwing handouts all over the place if they get in too!
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:13 am
What about a deliberate gerry-mander. Form the “List only National Party” and then the “Consituency only National Party”. The List only party doesn’t stand in any seats. The Constituency only party does not register for the party vote.
Then we would have a parliament of 160 MPs.
Then Labour would do the same, and we would have 220 MPs.
In effect that’s what the Maori party is doing winning 2-3% of the vote and getting 7 MPs.
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:14 am
Several posters have expressed outrage that a party that gets “nearly 50%” of the vote might not get to be in Government.
I would like to point out some fairly basic maths. If there is another party – or group of parties – that gets more than 50% of the vote (or at least more than the first party) then THEY have the moral right to form the Government. That is called democracy, and I back that 100% no matter how much I might loathe the parties involved.
IF National and its allies got more votes than all other parties, and were shut out as a result of an overhang + the MP backing Labour, that WOULD be an outrage. (Though, I point out, no more so than 1978 and 1981 when National got less than 40% of the vote, got less than Labour and still had more seats than all other parties together.)
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am
What we have is the right consolidated into two parties, and the left into five parties. What we don’t have is a truly viable centre party to swing both ways. Dunne is not getting the coverage and seems unlikely to pick up a second seat.
None of this is a fault of National that the right has only two parties. It is also not a reflection that the Nats don’t understand MMP.
In fact it would be worse for the centre right if the left were not so disjointed.
What we do need is a few uninformed undecideds taking a fancy to the cowlick that swings both ways!
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:37 am
This is one of the faulty parts of our current MMP system
The largest party should automatically have to work with
the next largest party. If not Labour then at least the next
largest. Which in this case may be the Greens.
The people must be the Kingmakers
Not the politicians.
The state of the parties at the moment, is a reflection
of what was happening with the vote when we changed to MMP In which case this election was won or lost
depending on your persepective several years ago
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:45 am
sheesh..!..dpf..!
..i’ve been trying to tell you there isn’t a snowballs’ chance in hell of a national/maori party gummint..
..ever since the (ludicrous)/fanciful idea was first floated way back when..
(..by adolf..wasn’t it..?..)
..and a big ‘dream on!’ to those still trying to talk that little chimera up..
..tho’ i can understand nationals’ looking around for those/anyone(!) to coalesce with..
..and they are getting rather/somewhat desperate and dateless..
..eh..?
(and..when will you be wheeling out your ‘finance minister’..?
..wodger douglas..?..)
that should scare away even more punters..eh..?
..then of course..there is key..and his ship of fools..
..the lockwoods/the maurices’/the bills’..
..eh..?
..all in all..
..it’s not looking too crash hot for you lot..
..eh..?
..going the way of mccain..
..as it were..
..eh..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:46 am
STV
October 23rd, 2008 at 10:54 am
democracymum, you’d want Labour to work with ACT then?
October 23rd, 2008 at 11:03 am
s.russel – your theory is philosophically and morally irresponsible because it allows, theoretically, 20 small parties, all promising one extreme concession, to band together and rule. Think about it. What you’re saying is that 51% of NZders could decide to commit nationhood suicide, regardless of the remaining 49% of sane people who are interested in the basics of life – The Jonestown of the Pacific. What you’re saying is that NZ must have the right to self destruction. What you’re saying is that life is not worth anything. Check your head.
As for the maori party, there must be a legislative end to race based parties. National do not need the likes of racists propping them up. John Key must state now that he will not deal with racists and rule them out of a coalition.
It’s make or break time – anything less that a centre right government this time means communism within 20 years for NZ. This is it people, National need to turn this into a FPP election.
Key’s middle ground party would always drift to the left. Eventually you’d have the same problem as yo have now, several leftwing parties, one centre right, one right.
October 23rd, 2008 at 11:16 am
I am going to be so annoyed if Labour are able to form another government.
I am sick of their ‘handouts to bludgers’, ‘castigations of hard workers or those who want to get ahead with their lives’, ‘high tax’, ‘we know best’, ‘lowest common denominator schooling’, ‘die on waiting list’, bureaucratic bullshit!
FFS New Zealand, vote National for a positive change!
October 23rd, 2008 at 11:42 am
Sharples is playing hard to get as a form of foreplay. Yes Maori traditionally vote Labour, but the Maori Party know Labour screwed them over the Foreshore and Seabed, and their policies HAVE NOT WORKED in making NZ a more prosperous nation, and Maori are leaving for Oz in significant numbers. 50% of Maori young men leave school without recognised qualifications. Labour have failed. They’ve had 9 FRIGGEN YEARS of the best financial weather, and tons of cash milked from the electorate. WHAT ELSE CAN THEY TRULY OFFER NZ???
Sharples will do a deal with National. He just wants people to know its not a foregone conclusion.
I’m beginning to think the best thing National/ Maori can do is open the way for NZ to join the Australian Commonwealth, before its too late. Our democracy has been distorted by the left. We need something more robust to keep it in line – like a Federal government in Canberra. I never thought I’d say it, but its time we thought about it seriously.
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:06 pm
This is not democracy….
There should be a law change made so that the party that gets the most votes in an election is the only one that is allowed to form a government.
Some of the smaller parties may not be as close in ideology to the party that wins, but isn’t that the point? When we voted for MMP that was the idea, that we could vote for the party we liked, they could get into parliament and keep the bigger parties honest; however, it’s turned into this deal-making thing between the bigger and smaller parties.
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Only Pita Sharples knows his real intent but if he did allow Clark to form a 4th Labour led govt he may inadvertently be allowing a 2011 landslide of the right who may abolish the Maori seats instantly and remove all subsides to Maori organisations. Pita will know the countries mood is for change and if he effectively prevents this will be held responsible for whatever goes wrong – and it will believe me – the world recession is not getting fixed overnight and the Cullen/Clark axis have shown their inabiity to sucessfully manager a good economic era. The shame is Tariana appears to believe in democracy in practice by consulting her voters who seem to favour Labour and may not be able to be persuaded otherwise which may result in the demise of the Maori party.
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Our democracy should be based on the concept of “one man (or woman) one vote”
Therefore the election should be decided mathematically and NOT
based around politicians personal preferences.
And another thing – (and this is my real hobby horse)
The election result should be known on the day!!!
Not weeks after the event!
Otherwise election day is like like sex without an orgasm
An interesting use of your time but ultimately unsatisfying!
(I thought I would continue with “the foreplay” metaphor mentioned above)
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:45 pm
On a brighter note – John Keys apparent optimism may be totally justified – Winston First 2% no electorate seat, Greens 4.9% & no electorate seat, Act 1 electorate seat and 10% party vote – 9 seat overhang, Jim 1 seat, Dunne – gone, Maori 7 seats – 4 seat overhang, National 65 seats, Labour – who gives a fuck. Gee I feel better already but tomorrow reality will return
October 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pm
National need to stop pussy footing around and stop hope that they either won’t need the Maori Party or can buy them off cheaply with some devolved Maori run services.
They need to start warning the country now of the severely disenfranchising effect that the Maori seats are causing.
It’s one thing to do that now and entirely another to do it after the election when the National/ACT have a higher share of the vote but less seats than L/NZF/G/MP/P seven headed monster.
Unlike say the 2000 election in the US where if that is the case it benefit either side, this undemocratic result has been seen coming from mile aways.
National: Let the people know now this is highly likely to happen and avoid sounding like Al Gore/Michael Moore etc when it’s too late
October 23rd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
democracymum suggests:
Sadly, the diametric opposite is true. MMP functions by encouraging the flourishing of parties whose concern isn’t for all NZers or even for the majority. Instead they represent subsets of people (those of a particular race, those with a curious affinity for snails, those who believe they need to sharpen the ends of their walking sticks to defend us against the Yellow Peril etc) who, while they have every right to a voice in politics do not, by virtue of their numbers, have a right to a deciding voice – but this is what they get.
Most people don’t vote strategically and even those who want to cannot because they would have to to know for certain the intention of the majority of other voters.
So every three years we have a lottery to see which minority interest comes up trumps and wins an influence vastly exceeding its level of support.
To me that doesn’t even approach democracy, whether that party is Maori, Green, NZF or Act. And let’s not forget that the bulk, if not all, of those party’s MPs will not have been able to garner the support of a majority of any electorate but will instead owe their positions to manoevuring and favour-seeking within their own parties in order to win a high list ranking – as will a fair proportion of National and Labour MPs.
And this is an improvement on FPP?! It’s time we admitted we were conned into swapping one undemocratic system for another, and demanded the chance to explore and then choose an alternative.
October 23rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Rex
I sense genuine concern amongst New Zealanders many of whom are now just waking up to what MMP really means for our democracy
I just listened to Willie Jackson say it is because Maori will finally have some control and become Kingmakers
and white NZers aren’t happy about having to have Maori taught in schools, Maori history etc.
I don’t think NZers are happy with any tail wagging any dog.
After yesterday’s media beat up, many are left wondering why we even have a Maori Party
From Stuff today
” A Marlborough vineyard contractor says three-quarters of his Pacific Island workers had to be shown how to flush a toilet and clean a shower, demonstrating there was some truth in National MP Lockwood Smith’s controversial comments about foreign vineyard workers.
Grapeworx managing director Mack Pouwhare’s comments come after Dr Smith, National’s immigration spokesman, told The Marlborough Express that some Asians were more productive vineyard workers because their hands were smaller, and that Pacific workers brought into New Zealand under the Recognised Seasonal Employer Scheme needed to be taught to use toilets and showers.”
I don’t think many anticipated that MMP would result in our election being purchased by the highest bidder against the will of the majority of the people.
October 24th, 2008 at 3:36 am
Looks like National will be scrapping the Maori seat a little earlier than 2014. Probable guess is that they’ll be gone by lunch time.
That outcome would be good for New Zealand.
October 24th, 2008 at 10:48 am
This is one thread I definitely have to comment on
First of all, Maori don’t know only one party. Winston proved they can be side tracked.
But,,
Maori always put themselves first, if that means the country goes down the tubes, so be it. Even the educated ones have no glimmer of what Liarbour is doing to this country. Maori cultutre is about networking anyway, so socialism is natural to them. The right of the individual is always superceded by the direction of the mob.
The only situation in which Maori would go against Labour en masse is if Hullun gave up the country to the Muslims.
This could become a very real paradigm in the future. More Kiwi’s are leaving, as they have over the decades because of both parties. More immigrants are entering, esp Muslim Somali’s. Which is interesting, because if their God was great, their country would be great. But they have to flee from it for sanctuary in Christian countries.
I also notice on Maori tv, Turiana and Pita alwys appear with Labour MP”s.
But at the end of the day, the Maori party wil do whats best for them. I find it very naieve of the commentator to say he will print this thread and eat it if Maori go with National. They will go with the winner.
At this stage, that’s looking like National. Though they won’t be able to govern alone.
But,,
the commentator is free to add salt and sauce to the thread
October 24th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Maori household incomes are improving, Maori coffers are worth billions, yet people are still trotting out the same comments that they were ten years ago about Maori. Pita Sharples should realise that Maori fortunes are also reliant on having a good economy and although he says what is good for Maori is good for New Zealand, I don’t think continually increasing taxes to pay for underpriviledged Maori is good for either Maori or New Zealand.