Parliamentary Demographics
Some interesting demographics looking at the 122 provisional MPs:
- 18 Maori MPs, 14.8% of Parliament
- 5 Pacific MPs, 4.1% of Parliament
- 6 Asian MPs, 4.9% of Parliament
- 41 female MPs, 33.6% of Parliament
The number of Maori MPs is down slightly as NZ First had three Maori MPs. The number of female MPs is up three to an all time record of 41.
What is interesting is the demographics per party.
For the first time ever National has as many Maori MPs as Labour – six each. Plus there are five Maori Party MPs and Turei in the Greens.
But in another first, National has more female MPs than Labour – 17 to 16. Now National has a bigger Caucus, and as percentages it is 29% to 37%, but it is still a historic first to have more in absolute numbers.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Election 2008, Labour, National, Parliament
November 9th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Its a pity National is still unable to attract any sizable amount of Maori and Pacific voters. It is a problem and even this election while we gained more voters I don’t think many were Pacific or Maori. Look at South Auckland, the vote collapsed. Meaning the turnout in South Auckland was much lower than last time. Good thing for National of course as otherwise we’d be in some trouble. And its not something for 2011. But National needs to overtime slowly gain more Pacific and Maori voters. Otherwise the centre-right is in for some trouble.
November 9th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I agree.
November 9th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Lets not use the term “historic” so loosely. Is it really such a big deal? Only guilt-ridden latte liberals put race and gender ahead of substance and competence. Don’t give their engine more steam by raving on about it.
November 9th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
I’d be wanting to see the lab test results before I started counting X and Y chromosomes there David..
November 10th, 2008 at 1:21 am
Both parties have been putting race (white) and gender (male) ahead of substance and competence for some time. It’s good to see this changing.
November 10th, 2008 at 4:52 am
A very positive trend for National David – a party working with the people.
As opposed to abour – aparty telling people what to do.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Can a social liberal tell me why an MP that wears panties and bra is potentially a better MP than an MP that wears mens briefs? Also, can they tell me why an MP with brownish skin is potentially better than one without?
As I suspected for some time now, the only racists and sexists left are those who “defend” women and ethnic groups against racism and sexism.
As one has already commented, a white man who has a job has got it because he’s white. Yeah right.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:34 am
I was struck by the imagery of the 2 speeches of the main party leaders on Saturday nite.
Helen was flanked by about 15 female relatives, with only 2 men, her father and her ‘husband’, both at the extremes of the stage. The shots of the crowd showed an over-representation of women in my opinion. Labour used to be the party of the working bloke. It has been hijacked by those pushing a more radical, feminist agenda and has strayed far from it’s roots.
I wonder what King Dick would have thought of the reactions to the loss.
National seemed to be a wider representation of the public in the audience. Having a family on the stage was refreshing. The Imagery there was more representative of the New Zealand most of the audience on this blog want.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:36 am
One statistic is interesting, with the election of Louise Upston to Taupo and the returning of Alan Peachey, is this the first time we’ve had both a former headmaster and former pupil of the same school in parliament together?
November 10th, 2008 at 7:58 am
So who is going to be Speaker?
November 10th, 2008 at 8:11 am
Goodgod.
Could you perhaps tell us why, if the only basis for selection was talent, parliament shouldn’t roughly match the demographics of the population as a whole? I don’t believe in “positive discrimination” by any means, and I don’t think we could accuse the National Party of that either. Case in point: Nikki Kaye, I don’t think there’s any doubt that she’s absolutely there on merit…
November 10th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Is ANY of this relevant?
Sorry but what the hell has anyones race or sex got to do with their ability to do a job?
Its thinking like this that got Obama elected. Blacks turned out in droves to vote for him for no other reason than his skin colour. That same massive turn out overturned gay marrige in several places now you have gays calling balcks nigger while they respond with fag in public screaming matches.
So much for the “new world order” of the left. Bron form focusing on demographics rather than abilities.
November 10th, 2008 at 8:36 am
ray asked:
So who is going to be Speaker?
Conventional wisdom would say Eric Roy, but if National want to be bipartisan Ross Robertson from Labour was an excellent deputy speaker in the last Parliament and would be a very good choice.
For a bolter how about Lockwood Smith?!!!
November 10th, 2008 at 8:48 am
You try my patience, but here is your answer:
Life is not statistics, statistics are a distortion of real life. If statistics were true we could, for example, find and lock up criminals before they committed crimes, treat illnesses bfore they manifest, stop car accidents before they happen. How many more examples do you need? The idea of course is ridiculous, just as saying: “hey, there are roughly 30% blue eyed people in NZ, why aren’t there 30% blue eyed people in parliament? ”
Why aren’t there more women in the construction industry? Why aren’t there more moari in retail? Why can women serve men in a mens clothing store but men can’t serve in women in a womens clothing store? And why is there about an even mix of ethnicity in fisheries?
You’re looking for answers by creating patterns to suit your own persepective. Men actually do listen to women as much as other men. To state anything else is to create a stereotype for political gain.
Nine years in opposition and no one’s learned a fuckin’ goddamn thing, have we? This celebration and amplification of diversity crap is what got Labour voted out of power. Indulge it at your own risk. It doesn’t matter how many women there are in National if all they want to do is spend. Alternately, how many of you social liberal champions of diversity would want more women if they all behaved like Roger Douglas circa 1984?
Your reasoning is shallow and superficial. Mummy’s gone, and taken her finance bitch with her.
Merit – it’s all that matters.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Only guilt-ridden latte liberals put race and gender ahead of substance and competence.
Substance and competence should certainly come first. But I am still pleased by the increased representation of Maori, women, and ethnic minorities in Parliament, and most pleased because most of them ARE people of substance and competence.
People like Nikki Kaye, Sam Lotu-Iiga, Paul Quinn, Hekia Parata, Rajen Prasad, Kelvin Davis, Raymond Huo and Amy Adams are not there because of race or gender. They are there because they are able people who have a lot to contribute.
Having a Parliament that better reflects our community is a good thing in itself – not least because of the inspiration if provides to people – especially Maori and Pacific – to strive toward greater achievement,. That greater representation also helps build the cohesiveness of our society. It shows members of all communities that they are valued and embraced as part of the whole New Zealand community.
We have seen some tokenism in the past. But the people we are getting now are not that. I am really thrilled that we are getting both great people AND a Parliament more representative of the broader community.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:48 am
John Boscawen should be speaker. That way when Labour complains about standing orders and their right to speak he can simply rule against them by saying “I know how you feel”.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:53 am
I would like to see a return of MP’s being required to ANSWER questions not just “address” them.
The surviving Labour MP’s have a lot of questions to face that require answers.
November 10th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Hmm, must ask those so called Maori MPs if they are keen on having the Maori seats dumped as soon as possible.
What is the bet that the majority will duck the question ?
November 10th, 2008 at 11:08 am
Labour, just by selecting a man as leader will automatically drop 5-8% in the polls as many of the women who voted Labour just because Clark was a woman will reconsider.
November 10th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Ray
I’m going to risk the wrath of grapes here and suggest the Speaker should be Michael Cullen!
Before everyone stabs me in the chest, think about it.
1. He is a man who loves Parliament
2. He has an excellent grasp of Parliamentary Procedure and Standing Orders (ask David McGee!)
3. His repartee is infamous, and would stand him in good stead in the Chair
4. He would have to clearly demonstrate impartiality to attain any on-going respect as a person (he’s lost it already as a finance whizz)
5. He knows all the skeletons of the ‘clever’ Labour parliamentarians, and so might be able to achieve “order’” in a house where the New Right members are open to some scathing and scratching by the pussies of the left.
6. He wouldn’t be able to scathe and scratch from the back-benches himself!
7. For as long as H1 remains a member (not too long I wouldn’t think) it will prevent them from ganging up and trying to maintain their control of the Labour Party – which should spend the next year at least dealing with in-fighting!
.
.
.
.
.
NB Like many others, I understand the wrath of people who have indulged in the goodness of the grape!
November 10th, 2008 at 11:37 am
To those who say they want an unbiased speaker my reply is …bugger off!
Labour have screwed the scrum for the last three years with Wilson and I fail to see why Key and the Nat’s should not do the same now they are in power.
November 10th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Make roger douglas speaker! he knows SOs, and is slightly mad. Perfect.