Parliamentary Demographics
November 30th, 2011 at 9:00 am by David FarrarI’ve done an initial analysis of the demographics of the 50th New Zealand Parliament. This is based on initial results and is assuming Brendon Burns retains Christchurch Central, and hence Raymond Huo is not elected. I can update for final results.
The information is taken from public sources. Sometimes I have had to guess an age, where it is not documented. Happy to update with any corrections, if any details are wrong. Sexuality is of course based purely on public status. Only those who are openly gay or lesbian are classified as such, and all others are classified “straight”.
Gender
- 83 Males, 69%
- 38 Females, 31%
Ethnicity
- 90 European, 74%
- 21 Maori, 17%
- 6 Pacific, 5%
- 4 Asian, 3%
Age
- 2 20s, 2%
- 14 30s, 12%
- 37 40s, 31%
- 48 50s, 40%
- 19 60s, 16%
- 1 70s, 1%
Area
- 41 Auckland, 34%
- 16 Wellington, 13%
- 14 Christchurch, 12%
- 22 Provincial Cities, 18%
- 28 Rural, 23%
Islands
- 90 North Island, 74%
- 31 South Island, 26%
Sexuality
- 114 “Straight”, 94%
- 4 Gay, 3%
- 3 Lesbian, 2%
I was disappointed the number of women in Parliament has dropped. But apart from that, overall Parliament looks pretty diverse and not too distant from what NZ as a whole is.
UPDATE: Two minor errors corrected.
Related posts:
- Parliamentary Demographics
- MPs compared to the population
- Ministry Demographics
- The alcohol purchase age breakdowns
November 30th, 2011 at 9:06 am
Is it at all relevant to include sexuality? I do not think so.
Why not go the whole hog and say who is circumcised? or left handed? or vegetarian?
[DPF: Sexuality is just one of many demographics. I don't think ignoring it means it is has no political signifcance. While Parliament decides on issues such as gay marriage, adoption etc, sexuality is of some significance]
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:13 am
Well said James. Surely in 2011 the sexuality of our MP’s is irrelevant.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:18 am
Nope — sexuality as you call it is still highly contentious. And rightly so. I will never believe that homosexuality is okay. Neither should any right-thinking New Zealander.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:26 am
Nvm, can’t read. Pretty interesting, though.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:32 am
There’s a certain amount of hilarity in the idea of feeling the need to include an MP’s sexuality, and then where this cannot be confirmed just tagging them as straight.
DPF, did you not stop halfway through thinking up that solution and realise that logic was working against that whole idea?
[DPF: Gaynz.com has profiled the gay and lesbian MPs extensively. I see nothing unusual about including their information. I think it is a good thing that Parliament is more representative of the diversity of NZ]
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:42 am
Scott
Are you trolling or are you serious?
It might not be your cup of tea (nor mine as it happens) but do you really think those who are born gay should be pilloried for the rest of their lives?
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Being gay is relevant only when behaviour is concerned (Dirty Darren) or when someone like Chris Carter makes it an issue or is in a job like Minister of Education. In my view, unless you have children yourself, I fail to see how you can make short or long term plans for the welfare of the nation’s children. The same applies to the straight childless too of course.
Vote:But it is all part of the rich tapestry and many of them for whatever reason have chosen to make it public what they like to do in bed. Beats me why anyone would bother or why it is anyone else’s business as long as kids and animals are safe.
November 30th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Brownlee is in his 50s.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:48 am
This is going to be an epic thread. Scott’s here, now we just need Kris, Lucia and Lee to help spread the love and tolerance.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:52 am
Agreed that there’s no need for sexuality to be considered when selecting individual MPs, but the same can be said about the rest of the demographic information. It is important, however, that parliament is diverse demographically, as it’s one way to ensure diverse views get represented. NZ does quite well with this overall I think.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 9:52 am
Hurry up homophobes; I need to read your comments for shits & giggles before my 10.30am meeting.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:04 am
“gingercrush (149) Says:
November 30th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Brownlee is in his 50s.”
No dont think – I’m just 50 and Brownlee was a couple of years behind me at school. (unless he was a 3rd year 5th former)
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:08 am
Hi David
Vote:I will do a complete breakdown of age,gender,ethnicity,and occupation when i finish my profiles and compare this Parliament with past ones.The occupation details are sometimes tricky as some MPs like to be known as a “farmer,teacher,journalist etc but that may not actually be what their career actually involved,especially in recent times.
November 30th, 2011 at 10:08 am
I’m sure a couple of those ‘S’s are waverers…
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:13 am
@vor: According to Parliament’s website, Brownlee was born in 1956. Makes him around 55.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/a/3/6/50MP12301-Brownlee-Gerry.htm
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:18 am
Last time I looked 6% of the population was not gay, maybe 2%.
Vote:50% are obviously woman but other than that, pretty close I guess.
November 30th, 2011 at 10:22 am
voice of reason (339) Says:
November 30th, 2011 at 10:04 am
“gingercrush (149) Says:
November 30th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Brownlee is in his 50s.”
No dont think – I’m just 50 and Brownlee was a couple of years behind me at school. (unless he was a 3rd year 5th former)
Actually I must be talking bollocks Gerry is mid 50′s – obviously the Brownlee at St Bedes was a different one.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:22 am
I think an interesting stat would be the number of children per MP for each party.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:28 am
Congratulations Scott…. you just lined yourself up for a gay son.
Gerry Brownlee and Nick Smith are in their 40′s? Really?
Vote:And Sharples is in his 70′s?
that just seems all wrong
November 30th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Trev only is his 50′s – hell – seems like he has been there forever
How old is Winston First?
I think sexuality is important. One of the problems with Labour is that they have had (do have) an abundance of Gays, and this has contributed (along with the union faction) to the disconnect from the people of NZ. How can a gay male who drives a merc, lives in Oriental Bay and sips champagne from his multi-millon dollar apartment really understand the concerns and stresses of a tradesman living in struggle street with a young family who wants to get ahead. I personally do not think such a person could. One or two gays would be fine – but to have som many in a small caucas brings a distortion.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:34 am
Asians and Pacific Islanders seem under represented?
Maori seems over.
Not sure about the white fellas
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:35 am
Scott sounds like a real piece of shit. His vote was wasted no doubt.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Amy Adams is from the South Island, not the North
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 11:07 am
Predictable breakdown. Too many Maori and men, and not enough Asians.
Regarding the gay demographic – interesting and relevant. Would also be curious how many of them pretend to be Christian. Even Ron Paul pretends to be one, and he’s the most honest politician I know of.
Would be interesting to know how many vegans and smokers and academics and business owners there are in parliament too. And how many approve of gay marriage and decrimininalizing cannabis.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 11:09 am
I hope Scott (@9.18am) and his homophobe mates enjoy the fact that their votes for NZ First elected Denis O’Rourke.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 11:23 am
I think the ‘gay’ thing is irrelevant to most voters.
I heard the other day some of the commentariat talking about whether Grant Robertson would be acceptable to New Zealand voters because he is gay.
And it seemed to me to be setting up a false debate. In other words, that if Labour didn’t pick him as leader it was because they felt he could not be sold to New Zealand voters because of his sexuality.
I don’t believe New Zealanders care any more. Many of us, I suggest, have a friend or family member who is gay.
I think what New Zealanders do care about – and it’s not just the so-called Christians or moral conservatives – is when gay people, particularly MPs and Cabinet ministers such as Christopher Carter, want to push their idea of ‘tolerance’ on to them and on to their children.
We’ve had serial adulterers as premiers, prime ministers and Cabinet ministers. We’ve had closet gays as MPs and ministers.
No-one really ‘knew’ about it. Discretion was everything.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
What is the remaining 1% sexuality? Rounding error?
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
First I thought that rating ‘sexuality’ was a bit oddd.
Vote:But thinking about it I realise that my votes have been determined by many things, including the perspective from which a candidate might view things. So age affects that. As does gender, and work background and indeed sexuality. Also frankly – children or not. Divorced or Not. Former occupations are important. Being Self Employed or only ever been a Wellington Bureaucrat is an important distinction to me.
Helen Clark wore a lot of uncivilised abuse about being childless. But I would also believe that having chilren changes your view of how the world works. And what it needs. So it’s an important factor to consider when voting.
So sexuality is included -good. Actually though DPF, the more interesting catagory for me would be work history cv. Although not sure quite how to catagorise such simply.
November 30th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Work Category – “U for Union scum, T for Teacher scum” etc etc
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
If the homosexuals in the closet were added to the ones out of the closet they would be over represented.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
JamesS (102) Says:
November 30th, 2011 at 9:06 am
I agree, sexuality isn’t a demographic. It is a choice.
How does one count all the lesbians and homosexuals DPF
Vote:Is it reverse order by gender?
November 30th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
This is the least important aspect of parliament … analysis of the demographics.
Vote:Where do you stop, IQ, whether or not they have freckles, hair colour …
November 30th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Mick Mac,
Demographics is the study of the statistical characteristics of a population. This is not limited to genetically inherited attributes. Otherwise things like religion, employment status, home ownership etc. wouldn’t be demographics.
Also, the consensus of experts is that sexuality is not a choice but is generally determined by a range of factors outside the control of the individual, most likely being a combination of genetic factors and the early uterine environment.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
So Damien O’Connor was wrong and there is no gaggle of gays in Labour? Going off DPF stats there appear to be hardly any rainbow faction at all in Labour.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
No AC/DC’s on the list?
Who do you think keeps a foot in both camps?
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 3:16 pm
So we male pale and stale straight guys RULE YES!!!!!!!!!
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 3:27 pm
I tend to think that a category stating if the MP has children or not is more important than their sexuality.
I know that nothing the corrupt Klark did pissed me off more than when she started talking about the “family” and ‘children’, Klark was a childless MP, she had no right at all to tell the parents of this nation how to raise our kids.
The same rules should apply today, an MP who does not have kids has no place making or talking policy that involves kids or the family.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
@big bruv “…an MP who does not have kids has no place making or talking policy that involves kids or the family.”
Are you also suggesting that the Minister of Police should have a Police record, that only a former farmer should be the Minister of Agriculture and only a former teacher could be the Minister of Education?
That rules out all career politicians!
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Sorry I can’t respond to all comments as I have work to do. But I have never heard a good argument for homosexuality being OK. Generally what happens now,as in this particular thread is that defenders of homosexuality go straight to verbal abuse. You are either a bigot or a homophobe or both if you genuinely believe that homosexuality is wrong.
As regards MP’s in my opinion it shows that there moral character is deficient if they are a practicing homosexual. That is why I would not vote for one.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
Scott I do not think Chauvel, Robertson and others are ‘practicing homosexual[s]‘ – I am sure they have the hang of it by now
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Scott
I’ve lost my list of places where I can and cant put my penis. You know – the one God hands out. Can you send me a copy of yours please?
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
I might well vote for a childless person going into a position where they are making decisions about families. But I would think about it and it is a factor to be balanced up with the other 247 factors in my voting decision. It’s always a compromise. If I only ever voted for the person who had the complete list of correct characteristics I would not even vote for myself to represent me.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Vinick wrote
I hope Scott (@9.18am) and his homophobe mates enjoy the fact that their votes for NZ First elected Denis O’Rourke.
Are you sure you are talking about the same Denis O’Rourke? Not that it matters at all, but the profiles here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_O'Rourke and here http://www.vote.co.nz/2011/candidates/profile/denis-o-rourke make no mention of his sexual orientation? Seems like he might be quite a good MP, has had some involvement in running businesses etc
I dont care what orientation/ gender/ colour etc they are myself. For me its all about policies.
Regards
Vote:Peter J
Webmaster for http://www.sensiblesentencing.org.nz
November 30th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
It seems to be missing redhead/blond/brunet categorisation.
On a more serious note I’d be interested in seeing number of children and number of divorces; both would give a perspective on “family values”.
Another thing I’d like to see is how many new MPs took a salary cut to enter parliament.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Interesting to note that only one of the ” Brown Hatters and Dikes ” was ELECTED..
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
What we need is a category showing lifetime earnings received from taxpayers. i.e. Salaries and expense claims etc.
That way people can see exactly how many lotto wins Phil Goff has received from the taxpayer over his political lifetime.
Vote:November 30th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
Scott,
If you believe homosexuality is wrong then the onus is on you to say why it is wrong. It has nothing to do with you and it affects you in no way. For you to believe it is wrong is meaningless. For you to seek justification is pointless as you are immaterial. Just leave alone what other consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom and get a life.
Vote:December 1st, 2011 at 9:11 am
Weihana-no, the radical elite who changed the social fabric of this nation need to explain why homosexuality is right. Again — there is not one argument about why homosexuality is right. That is because it is not right. It is part of the “going to hell on a handcart” rush to oblivion that our civilisation is hellbent upon.
Vote:December 1st, 2011 at 4:14 pm
Scott,
I gave you a reason: it doesn’t affect you therefore it’s none of your business and your opinion on the matter is worthless.
Vote: