Reflections on the election outcome

The election outcome has me both relieved, and sad. It’s an emotional conflict which I have had a lot of lately (a family member recently died after a long period with Alzheimers).

I am relieved because it is very likely the current Government will continue, and all the reforms of the last three years won’t be rolled back. The area where I am most relieved is education. I can handle a country with higher debt, higher deficit and even higher taxes. But what I can’t handle is a country which tolerates the kids of today being two years behind, achievement wise, the kids of 25 years ago. Nothing despaired me more than Labour saying it will abolish the minimum one hour a day in primary schools for each of reading, writing and maths.

As a person highly motivated by policy, I’m very pleased with the election outcome as the likely policies of the next three years will be far more to my liking than if Labour, Greens and TPM won the election.

But I am incredibly saddened by the loss of some great MPs, especially Nicola Willis and Chris Bishop. I’m sad not because they are a loss to National, to good Government and to Parliament, but also because I regard them as great human beings and good friends. I’ve known them both for around 25 years. We were colleagues together in the early 2000s. I was at Bish’s wedding. They both had the potential to be a future Prime Minister if they had got back in.

The only silver lining is that Jenna and Duncan and their kids will get to see more of them, and they will probably both end up in jobs that pay more, and have far fewer hours.

I’m also sad to see Gerry, Goldie and Melissa go, who I have also known for decades. Gerry especially is such a great guy, and one of National’s most loyal guys (he stood down as Deputy in 2006 to allow Key and English to unite the caucus). Goldie I worked with back in the 1990s, and Melissa I just adore. Also of course sad to lose some of the newer MPs such as Nancy, Carolos and Vanessa.

National got a relatively good result in terms of MPs, because of the strength of the electorate vote. But it should not be complacent and think that losing 9% of the party vote in its first term was acceptable. And that 9% went before the overhang campaign became a thing, not because of it.

The Government came close to being the first one term Government since 1975 and the first National Government to not get three terms or more.

National has some serious challenges ahead, which I will be writing about in future at length. It needs to elect a new deputy leader. It need to replace Nicola, Bish and Goldie as senior Ministers (if they form Govt again). It needs to ensure there are multiple MPs capable of becoming leader in the future. It needs to work out how it can lift the party vote in future so that there is the possibility of future List MPs. It needs to change how electorate selections are done, as that may be the only pathway to caucus in the future for aspiring MPs.

National also needs to work out, if they get to form Government again, how to drive an agenda that will see more people vote for the Government in 2029, than in 2026.

On the positive side for National, they did get some new MPs – Blair Cameron is a legend for winning Nelson. Emma Chatterton will be an even more amazing MPs than she was a staffer. Mahesh increased the seats for the Government by winning Tamaki. And Jess Rowe, Katie Milne Matthew Paul and Lloyd Budd bring some great talent to the caucus.

So how did other parties go. My thoughts.

Labour

Labour did grow its party vote from 2023, but to still be under 30% is a disappointing results for them – especially considering how unhappy the country was (net country direction negative for last two years). They lost four MPs (and I will also miss Deborah Russell, whom I have also known for decades, and is one of the smartest and loveliest people I know) and gained seven new ones. Some of their new MPs such as George Hampton and Rakesh Naidoo have thew potential to be very good MPs.

But a net gain of just two MPs from 34 to 36 is disappointing. They were at 35% in the polls at one stage,. Their small target strategy was a good strategy for 2025, but a disastrous strategy for 2026.

If Labour don’t form Government, then it must be very likely Hipkins will go. The potential replacements are Michael Wood, Carmel Sepuloni, Kieran McAnulty and Barbara Edmonds.

Greens

The Greens have gone from 15 MPs to 16 MPs, and will probably end up with 17. This is a good result, especially when you consider the scandals of the previous years with Mrs who shoplifted, who bullied, who exploited immigrant labour etc.

It is unclear how much of their increased vote reflects Labour doping poorly, the Greens doing well, or Māori voters voting tactically for Greens rather than TPM. But regardless they have their largest ever caucus, and the largest caucus in modern NZ history for a third party.

They lost one MP, Mike Davidson, and gained three new ones. Rohan O’Neill-Stevens has considerable local government experience and could do very well, and Tania Waikato will be a force with the Māori vote. Craig Pauling has significant environmental clout (an issue the Greens are meant to focus on sometimes!) as well as local government experience.

Their leadership seems settled, and Tamatha Paul is a potential replacement one day for Marama Davidson.

ACT

In 2012 I wrote that ACT was brain dead on life support and should be euthanised. Thankfully I was wrong. In 2014 and 2017 they remained on life support but David Seymour got them to 10 MPs in 2020, 11 MPs in 2023 and 13 MPs in 2026. It is impressive to be in Government and gain more MPs.

ACT did not lose any incumbent MPs (Mark Cameron left with ill health) and have gained James Christmas, Iain Murray, Paul Henry and NZ’s first Bulgarian MP – Antonia Modkova. They all look great gains. Paul Henry showed a level of discipline and policy knowledge that surprised many and was a star for ACT. He is very serious about making a difference. Christmas could end up Attorney-General. Iain Murray has an amazing record in education and Modkova is one of those huge brain people who is both a computer scientist and a lawyer. ACT’s biggest problem may be working out who doesn’t get to be a Minister.

NZ First

NZ First has been in Government four times. The first three were disasters for them. In 1999 they went from 13% to 4%., In 2008 they went from 6% to 4% and out of Parliament. In 2020 they went from 7% to 3% and out of Parliament. In 2026 though they went from 6% to 10%, and have gained four extra MPs.

Populist and nationalist parties are on a roll globally. But normally they gain strength when in opposition. It is no meant feat to get 50% more MPs while in Government.

Not everything went their way. At one point they were at 14% in the polls and looked viable to get well over 15%. Comments by Nash and Laws were unhelpful, as was Peters’ telling Xu-Nan to go back to China. It is a good result for them compared to 2023, but they will be disappointed they didn’t end up higher. They may lose an MP on specials also.

They have lost Jaime Arbuckle but gained Taine Randell, Alfred Ngaro, Michael Laws, Harete Hipango-Brownlee and Craig Stobo. Randell and Stobo have some serious business acumen and could end up Ministers, giving them more economic credibility. Ngaro has solid ministerial experience, good relationships with National and shores up their conservative base. Laws is one of the most cunning political minds out there, and was a huge factor in Winston’s rise to prominence in the 1980s and 1990s.

The downside is that Laws, Hipango-Brownlee and Stobo alll have the potential to say things which will cause headaches for NZ First. I somewhat pity the party whip!

Worth noting Alsop that 62% of the NZ First caucus is Māori or Pacific Island. So could media and others stop reporting far left activists calling them anti-Māori racists. What they really mean is they just disagree with their views.

Opportunity

A great result. They made it with seven MPs. The first party since ACT to make it into Parliament without an incumbent MP defecting. Q is a smart, warm and a great communicator. Their caucus looks to have significant talent in it. Of course talent elsewhere does not always translate into political talent.

They are sort of the technocratic party. They have a supreme belief that experts have the solutions to everything and all you need to do is leave it to the experts, and leave politics out of it. This is why they are beloved by public servants and academics. Their support comes overwhelmingly comes inner city urban dwellers.

Lees-Galloway deserves huge credit for his role in turning them into a professional party, and if he becomes the parliamentary chief of staff that will be a very smart move.

They do have some potentially difficult times ahead. Their policies (except land tax/UBI) are very similar to the Greens, and to a degree Labour. If all they do is oppose a likely National-led Government, they turn into just another opposition party.

However if they do get to close to the CR parties, their voters (who are very much left) may punish them for it. If the Government does need them to govern, they may be able to claims some wins like saving the Climate Commission, the Paris Agreement, bringing in lobbying reform etc. But would that make up for keeping NZ First in Government?

And if there is a hung Parliament and they force a second election, they would get slaughtered.

None of this should take away from what is a huge victory for them. It just points out now the even harder part begins.

Te Pāti Māori

TPM will be very pleased with the result for them personally. They kept five out of their six seats despite a disastrous civil war.

They designed and implemented the overhang strategy (which Helen Clark and other left apologists ignore) and it was hugely successful. Their party vote in the Māori seats plummeted to 4% in some seats, while they retained the electorates. Did forbid anyone ever stereotype Māori as dumb. Māori roll voters flocked to the overhang strategy and created a four seat overhang for the left.

However the overhang strategy backfired on the wider left, leaving National with an even larger seven-seat overhang.

It is not implausible that if TPM had never announced a deliberate overhang strategy, that there would now be a left wing Government. So the election result is great for TPM as a political party, but not great for what they wanted to achieve – a left wing government. It was an own goal, that could result in future overhangs cementing the right in power for many elections to come.

So they won the battle, but may have lost the war.