Comparing front benches
December 20th, 2011 at 10:43 am by JadisI thought I’d do a ‘quick and dirty’ analysis of the Labour front bench vs the National front bench based on individual electoral performance.
1. David Shearer holds Mt Albert with an impressive personal majority (23rd highest majority in the country) and took a face-saving 37% of party vote for Labour
2. Grant Robertson holds Wellington Central, but Labour took a huge hit in the party vote (finishing third behind National and the Greens)
3. David Parker holds no seat and barely made a difference in Epsom even at a strategic level (15.5% of party vote for Labour). It also must have hurt having to tell voters to vote for the National candidate.
4. Jacinda Ardern has now failed multiple times to win a seat. She couldn’t even get back the Labour stronghold of Auckland Central even with strategic voting by the Greens… scary to think that Tizard can hold that seat but not the anointed Jacinda. The Labour party vote in Auckland Central was rather low as well (25.4% – Greens just behind Labour on 22%)
5. David Cunliffe holds a pretty good personal majority (over 5000) and, like Shearer, recorded 37% for the party vote in New Lynn
6. Clayton Cosgrove. Labour website stillsays Clayton holds Waimakariri but he actually lost it to Kate Wilkinson. Clayton returned 23.4% for Labour party vote
7. Shane Jones failed to win a seat again but did return one of the more respectable party votes for Labour (41.5%)
8. Nanaia Mahuta won Hauraki-Waikato again (by over 6500) and recorded the fifth highest party vote for Labour at 46.5%.
So, in all not exactly a stunning front bench as far as results. Based on electoral performance, the Cunliffe/Mahuta combo certainly is more formidable than Shearer/Robertson but Shearer and Robertson are the ‘nice guys’.
Now let’s have a look at National’s front bench:
1. John Key recorded a massive electorate vote (won by over 21,000) and party vote at 65.8%
2. Bill English also recorded a formidable electorate vote (won by over 16,000) and party vote at 62.9%
3. Gerry Brownlee won Ilam by over 13,000 and a very respectable party vote at 60.4%
4. Steven Joyce, doesn’t hold a seat and didn’t stand in one in 2011. However, as the Campaign head could claim the 48% party vote across the country
5. Judith Collins won the Papakura seat by almost 10,000 and captured over 59% of the party vote
6. Tony Ryall won Bay of Plenty by a massive 17,000+ and captured over 67% of the party vote
7. Hekia Parata lost Mana but is closing the gap in a traditionally Labour-held seat. Recorded an increase in the National party vote to a reasonable 42%
8. Chris Finlayson is a List MP. At an electorate level he only captured 33% of the party vote for National but this was an increase from 2008. Annette King proved herself once again to be a formidable opponent at electorate level.
Both front benches have a mix of electorate and list MPs, however based on the last election it is easy to surmise that National’s front bench have (as a whole) also done the work at the electoral level (even those only seeking the party vote).
Related posts:
- Labour’s front bench
- Front Bench still all Clark era Ministers
- Front Page Whoops
- A fresh new front bench?
December 20th, 2011 at 10:56 am
Interesting, but how much is performance at electorate level (or scoring a plum electorate or having a better electorate team) related to ability to load ability to run a portfolio?
I sense that much of the Labour disgruntlement is because Shearer has jumped the queue without needing to do the hard electorate yards.
It’s common for top sportspeople to excel at the highest level but go through the motions at lower levels. Same can happen in business.
Our old political models haven’t been great at getting the best talent in the most important places. Maybe parties should put more thought into political specialists – electorate specialists, cabinet (and shadow) specialists, leadership specialists. Some may graduate from one to the other, others would be best not to – or at least their party and their country may be better for them not to.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 11:00 am
Pete, I think you are right in many ways. Like I said in my opening sentence, it is a ‘quick and dirty’ analysis. While I don’t think it is useful to have a linear progression to the front bench I do think it is important that the majority of the individuals there can show some ‘connection’ to the end voter.
I like National’s front bench because there’s a real mix of those that perform at electorate level (both personally and for the party vote) and there are also those, like Finlayson, who are on the front bench for their specialist skill set.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 11:12 am
The South Island doesn’t appear represented by an elected member in the Labour top eight, yet Dunedin is their last traditional bastion.
Vote:That seems a kick in the guts to me. Curran would seem to have made a greater and more industrious impact than Aderne or Mahuta.
Christchurch seem to have recognised the inadequacies of Labour dogma, yet again Labour shows its contempt for the South by appointing COSGROVE who failed to win his seat, to the front bench as Shearer’s attack Chihuahua (small,loud, and nasty by nature).
December 20th, 2011 at 11:22 am
‘Christchurch seem to have recognised the inadequacies of Labour dogma’
How does a whole city ‘recognise’ something? Do you think we had a big town meeting in which we debated which way to vote and the overwhelming conclusion was we didn’t like ‘Labour dogma’? Maybe we also got out our pitch forks and flaming torches to add to the drama.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 11:29 am
Ah, tricked by the old Jadis v’s DPF thing. Actually, the post could easily have come from DPF.
I agree that the National leadership in general have stronger showing than Labour. But that’s kind of obvious given they won – if all the Labour front bench had higher electorate majorities/party votes than National, then they’d be in power right now.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 11:31 am
YesWeDid (581) Says:
December 20th, 2011 at 11:22 am
Do you think we had a big town meeting in which we debated which way to vote and the overwhelming conclusion was we didn’t like ‘Labour dogma’?
Yes.
It was called the “election campaign”.
Labour lost.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 11:57 am
Yes, but. Labour did actually get votes from a reasonably sized proportion of the country, in fact if National had lost 1-2 more seats, we’d have a Labour led unholy alliance at the moment. So I’d say the whole “we won, you lost, eat that” attitude is a bit over the top. Yes, National increased their vote, but largely because ACT and UF shrank. The centre right vote is down a bit. On the left, by comparison, the vote is down a little, but the Greens up and Labour down. NZF of course is taking up a bit of space in the middle. I’ll avoid categorising them as left or right to avoid offending too many people – let’s just describe them as being in their own dimension.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Backster – but would you have Curren in your cabinet ? She would always be complaining.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
So only four of the eight could persuade an electorate to vote for them and only three managed to get a third of the party vote. Fresh and new? Tired and failed I would say. Comrade Ardern is there for some reason known only to Shearer and few of them have any chance of making a dent in the Government front bench.
Where was Winston today when Parliament was opened?
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
“PAULUS:……….Backster – but would you have Curren in your cabinet ? She would always be complaining.”
No way, she’s cheap and nasty which enables her to project the typical Labour persona best, but she battled away non stop while the Comrade led a more gentile less industrious existence, and the Wahine sat on the back rows at the home marae where she could be seen but not permitted to be heard.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
If it were all about popularity contests Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga would be the best musicians in the world.
Luckily, theres more to good politics than votes, like theres more to good music than radio hits.
Still it will be interesting to see how the matchups go in the debating chamber and in the media. Be fun also watching Key and Shearer in a race to the bottom to capture the limited attention span of the average kiwi battler of middle NZ fame.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Maybe parties should look at a different model of dual leadership:
Vote:#1 Claytons leader, expert one liner and entertainer of journalists
#1 someone who can lead a party and run a country
December 20th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Electorate results are so irrelevant. I’m sure having a strong candidate makes a difference. Just as a school having a good principal makes a difference. The fact is demography matters more than personality – there is a reason that most decile 10 schools have higher test scores than decile 1 schools. The reason that Shane Jones got 25% more Labour party vote in Tamaki Makaurau than David Parker did in Epsom has pretty much nothing to do with performance.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
This is a ridiculous comparison… comparing the front benches with electorate results. For instance Adern stood in the Waikato electorate ( drafted in from the UK less than 10 weeks from the election) in 2008, with a list ranking in late 20′s. A National strong hold held/still for many years by Tish, that’s MMP plonker. In 2011 Auckland & Wellington turned Green, and Kaye deserves credit for being a hard working MP on the way up in the National camp.
Also if Key packed it in can you name a popular replacement? Joyce ‘no’ & slugger Bill is far too serious. Now that’s a worry isn’t it?
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Woah. Seriously? This is a fairly pathetic post. A new low probably.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Pollywog: classic left wing attitude. For what reason do you think that Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga aren’t the best musicians in the world? Because you don’t personally like them? Because they’re not snobby enough for you? I personally don’t like Bieber, Gaga is OK. But I also recognise that different people have different opinions. By any measure they are enormously successful.
Your line of argument leads to the conclusion that just because more NZers voted for a John Key led government, doesn’t mean we should have one. Because people are stupid. In fact, what we need is a political class who decide what’s good for us, and then pass laws to force us to do things that are good for us.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 6:29 pm
For what reason do you think that Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga aren’t the best musicians in the world?
Because by any measure other than mainstream media success, there are so many better musicians/songwriters/singers out there.
Maybe by your reasoning we should just have made Richie McCaw PM instead.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Looking at the labour front bench I reckon someone went out and purchased themself a blue dress.
Vote:December 20th, 2011 at 8:18 pm
pollywog: not sure how that relates to making Richie McCaw PM. If a majority of people in NZ voted to make him PM, then I’d agree (and, if he stood, I wouldn’t be surprised if he were successful. People are stupid…). As for whether any particular musician is the “best” musician, I’d guess that depends on your measurement of best. If it includes lots of people liking them and buying their music, then they’d be in with a shot. Personally I’d have some criteria in there relating to longevity, but ultimately anything that purports to measure “best” is always going to be subjective, and therefore best left to people’s individual tastes rather than some central arbiter. Like other things such as education, health. Hmmmmm
Vote:December 21st, 2011 at 4:28 am
I am astounded to see that Labour (Shearer) has not appointed a spokesman for Defence. Must be the first time that this has been the case. I note that there is a Disarmanent appointment though.
Vote: