Banks for Epsom

May 10th, 2011 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Derek Cheng reports in the NZ Herald:

The Party is expected to open nominations for the crucial seat of today and former Auckland Mayor is “quietly confident” he has the inside running.

Mr Banks made it clear last night that he wanted to follow a proper process.

“I’m not looking for any easy ride to the line. If a high-quality candidate steps up to the plate, someone of outstanding ability, then I’m happy to step aside and support that person.”

Mr Banks has already had a huge endorsement from the party’s new leader, Don Brash.

If ACT get to even one third of the 15% they claim they can now get, then Epsom doesn’t matter to them. However if they fail to get 5%, then it is crucial to their survival.  There are many interesting questions to be resolved.

  1. Will Banks win the nomination uncontested?
  2. Whom will stand as their candidate. If it is local electorate chair , then there could be a fascinating Bhatnagar v Banks contest.
  3. Who will Labour stand in Epsom?
  4. Will Labour supporters be urged to vote for their candidate or to vote strategically for Bhatnagar (or whomever is the National candidate)?
  5. Will National aim to win the seat back, on the basis of ACT claiming it will get 15%?
  6. Who will win if it is a full-on contest?
  7. If ACT do not get 5%, but Banks wins Epsom, will that make Banks more powerful than the Leader?
  8. If there is a National-led Government, one can only presume that Banks would be one of the ACT MPs made a Minister, considering his experience. So Boscawen and Roy might miss out.

Epsom is going to remain one of those must follow races.

Tags: , , , ,

50 Responses to “Banks for Epsom”

  1. shady (246 comments) says:

    Not being a numbers person, what would be the effect of the Epsom voters still voting strategically, but reversing it, ie. National for their local candidate and Act for their Party vote – if Act do believe they will get over the 5% threshhold?

    [DPF: If 7% of Epsom voters shifted their party vote from National to ACT, then that would increase ACT overall vote by 0.1%]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Pete George (23,562 comments) says:

    4. Will Labour supporters be urged to vote for their candidate or to vote strategically for Bhatnagar (or whomever is the National candidate)?

    That’s an interesting one, voting for a National candidate to try and beat National overall.

    7. If ACT do not get 5%, but Banks wins Epsom, will that make Banks more powerful than the Leader?

    Depends if the leader wins another seat, he’s talked about having a go. In any case the leader may still get in on the list.

    Epsom is going to remain one of those must follow races.

    We need more seats around the country like this, where candidates and parties have to work for their votes, and the voters have more tactical options.

    Why don’t other electorates give themselves far more power rather than woolly headed voting?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. trout (939 comments) says:

    It has all been sorted David, were you not there when the deal was done? Banks by a country mile with the aquiescence of the Nats.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. tristanb (1,127 comments) says:

    I will not be voting for ACT if Banks is in Epsom. (I’m not an Epsom voter). Don Brash needs to realise that John Banks is not the answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. James Stephenson (2,180 comments) says:

    I don’t really get why Don isn’t standing himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. nasska (11,510 comments) says:

    Banks stands for Epsom & the ACT list vote goes down the toilet.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Michaels (1,318 comments) says:

    It’s time National stand up and win every seat they can.
    ACT will be a whole new kettle of fish if they get back and National should do their best to not need a coalition partner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    @James Stephenson 1:22 pm

    I don’t really get why Don isn’t standing himself.

    Because Brash is so toxic to mainstream voters that he would never win an electorate – not even Epsom.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. BeaB (2,123 comments) says:

    What a peculiar selection of people we have in politics. Can’t see many who represent me. Or whom I would want to have a cup of coffee with. We really don’t need this ridiculous set up of every man and his dog wasting their time and ours in Wellington at enormous expense.
    Why, in the 21st century, can’t we design a form of governance that doesn’t originate in the Middle Ages?
    I’d love to see a small executive with some hand-chosen members as well as elected ones, a popular chamber of limited size based on regional interests as well as gender and ethnicity perhaps and more plebiscites via digital polls.
    And I still can’t see why I can’t vote using my phone or computer instead of that insanely anachronistic visit to a voting booth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. PaulL (5,981 comments) says:

    If DPF’s scenario plays out, then Brash and Banks around the cabinet table. There’s an inspiring team to lead us into the future – definitely the guys I’d pick if I was rebuilding a party for the long term. Not.

    I’d actually have more problems voting for ACT with Banks there. He doesn’t fit. Unfortunately, with ACT’s principles flapping in the wind a bit, you have to look at the people as well as just what they say. And Banks doesn’t fit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. dime (9,972 comments) says:

    toad – whats mainstream? the 60% that didnt vote for brash in 2005?

    why so much banks hate?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. James Stephenson (2,180 comments) says:

    so toxic to mainstream voters that he would never win an electorate

    Well I suppose the Green Party spokesphibian would know all about that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. trout (939 comments) says:

    More hopeful speculation by the Left. 171,542 voters in Auckland did not apparently share their distaste for John banks and wanted him for Mayor.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Magenta (5 comments) says:

    Is ACT a party that stands for freedom of the individual or social conservatism? Or both I guess, although the two don’t go together very well in a few policy areas! Surely Banks represents social conservatism?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    I’m of the opinion that Brash wants Banks to stand in Epsom rather than himself, so that if ACT don’t get the result Brash hopes for, he can walk but still influence the party through Banks, the automatic heir since he would hold an electorate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Enzo (45 comments) says:

    So how does the ACT selection process work? Is it up to local members who live in the electorate to choose the candidate?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. bchapman (649 comments) says:

    The other option for ACT would be to place someone like Cameron Brewer in Tamaki and ask Nat voters to put Allan Peachey in as a list MP. That would effectively double their bets.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Bad move. I reckon a lot of Epsom voters will remember Banks’ abortive Meadowbank highway. And what a nasty little dollup of fail he is. All talk. Classic little man.

    Brash for Epsom. Lead from the front, Don.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. nasska (11,510 comments) says:

    trout @ 1.57pm

    It’s not just the left. I don’t live anywhere near Auckland but I accept that Banks has his loyal followers & many of them may live in the Epsom electorate. Trouble from ACT’s point of view is that an electorate MP & a couple of hangers on doesn’t constitute a viable party. If they wish to exert influence in the next government they need the extra seats that the list vote will bring.

    There is believe it or not an area of NZ south of the Bombay Hills. In it dwell people to whom Banks is toxic & they will not tick ACT on the vital list vote if the smarmy arrogant tosser is likely to drag his recycled arse into Parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. trout (939 comments) says:

    Another vituperative attack on the man rather than the policy. Te Meadowbank highway was promoted by leaders in South Auckland who wanted better access to the City. Sure the locals in Meadowbank and Orakei came out in force and stopped the project (having bought property that was close to the land already designated for highway). The highway will be built at some time in the future because it is an essential link.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “Because Brash is so toxic to mainstream voters that he would never win an electorate – not even Epsom.”

    In fact he is very popular with mainstream voters Toad. But your not one, so how would you know? Most mainstream Kiwis think the Green Parties mix of socialism, maori nationalism, and sympathy for terrorists and violent crims is toxic.

    By the way, which electorate have the Greens won?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    Lee01-“By the way, which electorate have the Greens won?”

    Coromandel. That’s one more than Brash has ever won.

    It might’ve helped to have thought that point out a bit more clearly. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Grendel (1,002 comments) says:

    oh the delicious irony of the greens talking about someone being so toxic they cannot win an electorate.

    mad cath stood for many years in wellington on every local body thing she could find. and becuase people actually had to choose her, she never got anywhere.

    Kennedy Graham ‘might’ be the only electable one of the lot of you, and thats a push.

    Do you see Gareth “i’m standing for the greens so my kid does not need to ask permission to have kids when hes my age” (despite the greens being the only party with a population policy), ever getting an electorate? would he dress up as ronald again?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Grendel (1,002 comments) says:

    Shazza thats also less than Act have won. which of the current greens have ever gotten close in an electorate battle? and Grandma Jeannette held her seat for 1 election only.

    Shit prebble managed to win Wellington central, a seething pit of whiny lefties if there ever was.

    Actually if you ignore the racist maori seats, ACT have done the best of all the minor parties in electorate seats.

    Jim, Dunne, the greens and Winston First have only had one.

    Act have at least had two, though it would be nice to have two at the same time :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    Toad>Because Brash is so toxic to mainstream voters that he would never win an electorate – not even Epsom.

    Whereas Green MPs are so organic and fluffy and lovable that they’re always winning electorate seats. Wikipedia says that only one Green MP has ever won a seat and she was dumped after one term and replaced by Sandra Goudie, but Wikipedia is obviously wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    “Jim, Dunne, the greens and Winston First have only had one.”

    Jim’s won two, the Alliance under his leadership won two general electorate seats in 1993. Social Credit also won a few general electorates.

    And back to the topic funnily enough, New Zealand First almost won two general electorates in 1996 when John Banks in his last stint in parliament held on by just 200 or so votes against Brian Donnelly of New Zealand First. It was only the special votes that saved him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. s.russell (1,642 comments) says:

    I can’t see Labour urging their supporters to vote for a Nat, even on the quiet. a) the voters wouldn’t do it, and b) it would make Labour look absurd…. more absurd.

    Even if National declares it REALLY wants to win Epsom, their own voters won’t believe them.

    Bhatnagar v Banks might be all perfectly cosy with nods and winks all round. Bhatnagar may even get on the list as compensation.

    Yes, Banks would have more power if he wins Epsom but Act fails to get 5% – just as Hide did, and Anderton did in the Alliance. And Banks is certainly a forceful personality…

    If Act does get 5%, or more, they might get more than two ministers. And it would be prudent to have someone positioned for the future.

    Banks and Brash are both toxic to SOME voters. But not many of them live in Epsom. Both have proved that there are a lot of people who have high regard for them – regardless of the croaking of certain amphibians. Even if a million people are repelled, there are plenty of other voters in the electoral sea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Grendel (1,002 comments) says:

    Shazza, stand corrected about Jim, i had forgotten about the clusterfuck that was the alliance.

    oh well, change my comment to be about current parties in parliament then :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “Coromandel. That’s one more than Brash has ever won.”

    Heh, true, screwed up on that. Nevertheless, how long did they hold it for, and which electorate do they currently hold?

    Also, Brash won 40 percent of the vote in 2005, the Greens represent 6-7 at most, and in reality thats somewhat inflated between elections.

    Toads concept of mainstream is laughable. This from a party which told nearly 90 percent of Kiwis that they were fundamentalist child bashers for opposing Bradfords anti-smacking legislation.

    They wouldn’t know mainstream if the fell over it in broad daylight.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. publicwatchdog (2,595 comments) says:

    FYI – I have distributed hundreds of ‘partial rate$ revolt’ postcards (where Auckland ‘$upercity’ citizens and ratepayers can pledge to consider not paying this proposed Auckland Council 4.9% rate increase), to retailers in the Remuera, New Market and Parnell shopping centres.

    The vast bulk of these EPSOM citizens and ratepayers to whom I have personally spoken, had NO idea that a proposed 4.9% Auckland $upercity rates increase (for both residential and commercial ratepayers) was looming.

    Unfortunately for John Banks – he was a loud and proud $upercity supporter from ‘day one’ – as he told audiences during the Auckland Council Mayoral campaign.

    In my considered opinion, as a fellow Mayoral candidate, this is probably the main reason why he lost by over 60,000 votes?
    (Along with his rather nasty personal style of work).

    If John Banks/ACT (National “B” Team) – think citizens and ratepayers living in their high-value Epsom properties are going to think highly of a nearly 5% rate increase – (when they were led to believe that there would be ‘economies of scale’ from the forced amalgamation of eight previous councils – in which these same people had no democratic say) – then I suggest you think again?

    Of course some of you may be out there mixing and mingling and talking to actual voters in the Epsom electorate – like I have been – and got a different reaction?

    You have found that citizens and ratepayers in the Epsom electorate are fully aware of this proposed Auckland Council 4.9% rate increase and are VERY happy to pay it?

    yeah right……………

    And those of you who want to jump on the band wagon and blame Mayor Len Brown and the ‘left-leaning’ Auckland Council might care to check out the voting record of Citizen & Ratepayer representatives on the proposed rate increase prior to the finalisation of the Auckland Council Draft Annual Plan?

    It is my considered opinion that John Banks is a shallow, often nasty little man – full of empty ‘one-liners’ and broken promises, and that Epsom voters should not be treated with contempt.

    You may well find that some Epsom voters have developed a ‘dead rat’ allergy – and may find John Banks – now transmogrified AGAIN back from John Banks ‘lite’ – to John Banks ACT – just a bit too much to swallow.

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordspress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “And those of you who want to jump on the band wagon and blame Mayor Len Brown”

    Well, he IS the one proposing the massive rates rises, so most people with more than two braincells to rub together know that it is his fault. He wants to fund train sets and unelected Maori “representatives”, not the Right.

    You can try your bait and switch tactic all you like, but we know Red Len is to blame.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. alex Masterley (1,517 comments) says:

    If Banks is the answer, what is the question?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. william blake (109 comments) says:

    Classic RRM 2:19 ” Banks; nasty little dollop of fail” makes my day…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. big bruv (13,895 comments) says:

    Toad

    “Because Brash is so toxic to mainstream voters that he would never win an electorate – not even Epsom.”

    Righto Toad, a chocolate fish bet that Banks will win a seat before ANY electorate votes mad Delahunty into the house.

    Actually, I will make it easier for you, I wager that Banks will see a higher party vote for ACT in Epsom than that mad Delahunty gets in the electorate she stands in.

    Are you brave enough Toad?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. nickb (3,687 comments) says:

    Banks is a soft centrist in disguise who did nothing useful except hike rates as mayor of Auckland.

    Why Brash wants to become Act leader with deadwood hangers-on like Banks as his sidekick is beyond me.

    Get some people like Newman and Mitchell on the list, maybe even Stephen Franks, then you’re talking!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. grumpyoldhori (2,362 comments) says:

    Would Labour voters vote Nat to get rid of some sod of a ACT type, like a shot.
    Remember if the Labour types had voted for the Nat candidate in the last election the Nat bloke would have bolted in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. big bruv (13,895 comments) says:

    nick

    So you don’t know a lot about John Banks then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. PaulL (5,981 comments) says:

    big bruv – did you mean party vote or electorate vote? Banks getting a higher party vote than Delahunty does…party vote? Or electorate vote? I’m assuming you meant electorate for both, in which case I agree.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. jonnobanks (148 comments) says:

    Bankies?! What has happened to the ACT Party?? I once thought it stood for the party of liberty, both social and economic. Now it has become the party of muppets.

    If only NZ had its version of Ron Paul or even a young version of Roger Douglas.

    Bankies is a conservative, not a libertarian.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. publicwatchdog (2,595 comments) says:

    Ok folks – the FACTS:

    (You will note that young National Party ‘Wonder boy’ (?) Jami-Lee Ross supported a 3.9% rate increase? )

    http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/meetings_agendas/committees/Pages/strategyandfinancecommittee.aspx

    Auckland Council Finance and Strategy Committee meeting 13 December 2010 (Pgs 7-8)

    12. Annual Plan 2011/2012 – High Level Budget Review

    (c) That the Strategy and Finance Committee agrees a rates target of 4.9% for 2011 -2012 to inform the Mayor’s development of the draft annual plan.

    MOVED by Councillor Wood seconded Councillor Fletcher

    That a rates increase of not more than 3.9% be struck and officers work to identify further savings.

    A division was called for, voting on which was as follows:

    For

    Councillors

    Cameron Brewer
    Hon Chris Fletcher
    Des Morrison
    Callum Penrose
    Noelene Raffills
    Jami-Lee Ross
    Sharon Stewart
    George Wood

    Against

    Councillors

    Anae Arthur Anae
    Len Brown
    Dr Cathy Casey
    Sandra Coney
    Alf Filipaina
    Ann Hartley
    Penny Hulse
    Richard Northey
    Sir John Walker
    Wayne Walker
    Penny Webster

    Councillors Michael Goudie and Mike Lee were absent.

    The division was declared lost 8 votes to 11
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    The Auckland Council ‘books’ are NOT open.

    If a giant scalpel were to be applied to all that consultant and private contractor BLUBBER, and core council services returned to ‘in-house’ provision (cutting out all these private ‘piggies-in-the-middle’), in my considered opinion, rates could be slashed by hundreds of millions of dollars.

    That’s why I’m standing in the Howick by-election.
    To help achieve that.

    ‘OPEN THE BOOKS! – CUT OUT THE CONTRACTORS!’

    PS: If you think replacing the ‘bureaucracy’ with the ‘contractocracy’ is so ‘efficient’ – ask yourself this one simple question.

    Over the last 20 years – have YOUR rates gone up or down?

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Rodders (1,755 comments) says:

    “Remember if the Labour types had voted for the Nat candidate in the last election the Nat bloke would have bolted in.”

    Not even close:
    ACT Rodney Hide 21,102
    National Richard Worth 8,220
    Labour Kate Sutton 5,112

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. publicwatchdog (2,595 comments) says:

    # Rodders (857) Says:
    May 10th, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    “Remember if the Labour types had voted for the Nat candidate in the last election the Nat bloke would have bolted in.”

    Not even close:
    ACT Rodney Hide 21,102
    National Richard Worth 8,220
    Labour Kate Sutton 5,112
    __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Good on you Rodders!

    A considered opinion based on FACTS!

    WHAT a refreshing post on Kiwiblog!

    :)

    Penny Bright
    http://waterpressure.wordpress.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. big bruv (13,895 comments) says:

    PaulL

    Nope…so confident am I that the mad Delahunty wimin will again be rejected by the people of NZ that I am prepared to wager that Banks will win more PARTY votes for ACT in Epsom than the Delahunty creature wins (electoral votes) in whatever seat she decides to stand in.

    Delahunty is a stupid bint, she is toxic and unelectable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. jonnobanks (148 comments) says:

    Delahunty, Banks, neither should be in parliament. Lets’s hope ACT puts someone decent in Epsom, not a has been.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    Personally I wish Banks would drop dead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. KevinH (1,227 comments) says:

    Don Brash has mentioned that he was conducting his own private polling in Epsom to sound out the electorate. As I recall there were approx three questions, ie Do you want Brash, do you want Banks, and would you vote ACT. The results of that and other polls will determine who will be standing for the seat. There is a possibility that Don will stand if the electorate wants it.
    Both Don and John have pull nationally, outside of Epsom, and that is where the 5-7% will come from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Clint Heine (1,570 comments) says:

    If Banks is the ACT candidate for Epsom then I suspect National will throw their hands up and admit it’s not going their way for another 3 years and go for the party vote. Seems fair. Of course how many ACT party members will be willing to chew on all those dead rats knowing they replaced Rodney for Banksie in Epsom?

    Simply dreadful.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. big bruv (13,895 comments) says:

    Clint

    I suspect that ACT members in Epsom will be quite happy to have Banks instead of Winston Hide, had Hide stood for ACT in Epsom then I imagine the ACT party would have been finished.

    Banks might not be everybody’s cup of tea but you cannot accuse him of being hypocritical or somebody who can be silenced by the baubles of office as is the case with Winston Hide.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Clint Heine (1,570 comments) says:

    Banksie isn’t a hypocrite, you’re right there. But that is where the simularity ends. Why didn’t National spilt in two, or Brash go form his own party? Banks for ACT turns ACT into a mini Tory party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Manolo (13,774 comments) says:

    Banksie is a conservative, not a libertarian.

    You forgot to add he is also an animal rights zealot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote