Had my eighth and final safari drive around Kruger.  It sounds a bit silly, but eight hours a day driving around is actually quite tiring work – these are not smooth roads you’re on but you’re bumping up and down all over the place.

I loved this sight. Three buffalo bulls having a mud spa pool to cool down. I half expected them to be playing poker also.

A wart hog.

And this little fellow we almost ran over is a grass owl.

The vultures in a tree meant there was some carcass nearby but the predator was also still around, hence they were waiting up there for it to be safe to feed.

And we found the dead antelope, which had been killed by a leopard.

A lioness enjoying the sun.

I told you the wild life goes pretty much everywhere. Can you imagine walking out your door to have an elephant staring at you from two metres away?

The split votes analysis is interesting. The number of peopel who split their vote continues to grow – almost 31% split their votes in 2011. Looking by party we see:

• 63% of ACT voters voted for the National candidate
• 40% of Conservative party voters voted for a Conservative candidate, 28% for a National candidate and 12% a Labour candidate
• 44% of Green voters voted for a Labour candidate, 34% for a Green candidate and 14% a National candidate
• 57% of Mana voters voted for a Mana candidate, 18% for a Labour candidate
• 48% of Maori Party voters voted for a Maori Party candidate, 18% for a Labour candidate
• 43% of NZ First candidate voted for a Labour candidate and 17% for a National candidate

In my Herald column I hand out some awards. The summary:

• ACT MP of the Year – Rodney Hide
• Maori Party MP of the Year – Te Ururoa Flavell
• Green MP of the Year – Gareth Hughes
• Labour Mp of the Year – Damien O’Connor
• National MP of the Year – Gerry Brownlee
• MP of the Year – John Key

Last week Scott Yorke blogged a comment of mine about Waitakere from 2010, in an attempt to embarrass me. My comment on Waitakere was:

Sepuloni is probably the candidate with the best chance to take the fight to Paula Bennett. I don’t think she’ll beat Paula, but she’ll do better than a white middle aged guy would, to be blunt.

Scott was of course trying to gloat that I was wrong, as at the time Carmel had won the seat. I guess he is feeling rather foolish for not holding off his post now.

But the irony is that even if Carmel had won the seat, I still stand by my 2010 comment. I said that Carmel had the best chance to beat Paula of any of the Labour nominees, but that I didn’t think she would actually win. I think that was a very mild and fair comment 18 months before the election.

If I could be bothered I could trawl through the left wing blogs for all the quotes about how Little was going to crush Young in  New Plymouth, how all the polls except Horizon were wrong, and how Labour would be Government after the election. But frankly I’ve got a life.

Last week the Herald reported:

A marathon UN climate conference yesterday approved a roadmap towards an accord that for the first time will bring all major greenhouse-gas emitters under a single legal roof.

If approved as scheduled in 2015, the pact will be operational from 2020 and become the prime weapon in the fight against climate change.

This is the first useful step forward in some time. Any agreement that does not include the major emitters has next to no environmental value. It is significant that China, US and India have all agreed in principle.

Actually gaining agreement on the details of post 2020 reductions will be incredibly challenging. As there is  an economic cost to reducing emissions, there will be resistance from vested interests.

Parliament Today reports on the Select Committees established by the House. Always interesting to see which ones have a Government majority.

• Commerce – Nat 5/9 – Nat majority
• Education & Science – Nat 5/10 – tied
• Finance & Expenditure – Nat 6/11 – Nat majority
• Foreign Affairs – Nat 4/7 – Nat majority
• Govt Admin – Nat 3/6 – tied
• Health – Nat 5/10 – tied
• Justice & Electoral – Nat 5/9 – Nat majority
• Law & Order – Nat 5/9 – Nat majority
• Local Govt & Environment – Nat 6/12 – tied
• Maori Affairs – Nat 5/12, Nat+Maori 6/12 – National minority, Govt tied
• Primary Production – Nat 4/7 – Nat majority
• Regulations Review – Nat 3/5 – Nat majority
• Social Services – Nat 6/11 – Nat majority
• Transport & Industrial Relations – Nat 5/9 – Nat majority

From a Government point of view, these are much tidier than in the previous Government. Only one committee can pass things against National’s will, and that is Maori Affairs. Four further committees are tied (if all opposition parties vote together) and nine committees have a clear majority.

Stuff reports:

An Auckland mother found guilty of horrific child abuse went to jail saying she is “not really a bad mother”.

The woman, 31, who has name suppression, was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison with a non-parole period of five years when she appeared in the Auckland District Court yesterday.

The 10-year-old girl is so terrified she has nightmares her mother will get out of jail, find her and continue the beatings.

Emotional pleas by the girl and her eight-year-old brother were read to Auckland District Court yesterday as their west Auckland mother was jailed for sustained and horrific abuse against them.

“I still have nightmares about what happened to me. In my dreams my mother and father are out of jail and trying to find me to hurt me some more,” the girl said in a victim impact statement.

Her brother, through a statement he insisted was read to court, told judge Brooke Gibson he wanted his parents to stay in jail for a long time.

“I was hurt for a long time so I think they should stay where they are for a long time too.

“There is nothing nice about my mum. I can’t think of any good things. I can think of lots of bad things. I don’t know why I was hit so much but I think it was because I wasn’t good enough.”

The case came to light last year when the girl, aged nine at the time, was found hiding in a cupboard in her home.

She was starving, dehydrated, bruised and suffering from broken bones and anaemia from internal bleeding and her scalp had been half torn off.

The case appalled the nation and has been dubbed one of the worst abuse cases in which a child had lived.

The mother pleaded guilty to 25 charges, including tearing off the girl’s toe nail and pouring boiling water and salt over the bleeding toe.

She wrote abusive comments on the girl’s body, kicked her in the vaginal area, and assaulted her with weapons, including a machete, broom handle and table leg.

The mother also abused her son, who was seven at the time.

The mother has spoken out, saying she is not a bad parent and was simply trying to protect her other three children.

“I’m a bad mum for what I done to the child but I’m not really a bad mother at all.”

Umm, yes you are a very bad mother. In fact you are a rather bad human being.

“My submission is that both the Prime Minister and the Minister for Social Development failed both [the child] and her mother.”

Yes, of course it is someone else’s fault. They made you pour boiling water on your children.

Just reading the impact statements to the court from the brother and sister makes you want to cry. An eight year old boy who says:

Her brother, through a statement he insisted was read to court, told judge Brooke Gibson he wanted his parents to stay in jail for a long time.

“I was hurt for a long time so I think they should stay where they are for a long time too.

“There is nothing nice about my mum. I can’t think of any good things. I can think of lots of bad things. I don’t know why I was hit so much but I think it was because I wasn’t good enough.”

Hopefully her kids can now go on to have a safer more loving life.

Some extracts from the speech:

The Maori Party is right to force poverty into the Government’s line of sight.

And today I repeat my invitation to the Government: Make that committee a committee of this House.

The Prime Minister should know this is not an issue to play politics over.

It sounds very nice to say let’s all work together to fight poverty, just as it sounds very nice to say let’s all work together to reform the tax system. But the reality is that the parties have massive policy differences on these issues. Yes they tend to agree on the desired outcome, but just two weeks ago Labour’s policy of giving beneficiaries an extra $70 a week to be on a benefit got rejected by the electorate, and National’s welfare reform policies for effectively endorsed.

If David Shearer is saying there is a realistic possibility that Labour will support the outlined welfare reforms, support the starter wage to get young people into work, and will drop its $70/week pledge – then there might be some merit in a multi-party approach.

This Labour Party will put growing the pie for all New Zealanders at the front of our agenda.

We cannot be content dividing an ever shrinking pie. It means growing the nation’s wealth.

Labour will grasp the mantle of economic leadership. We will look to expand opportunity for all New Zealanders, wherever they are born or whoever they are born to.

Excellent. A Labour Party which talks about growing the pie is a good thing.

We must build an economy that produces good jobs and decent incomes.

Yes, but for an un-skilled 16 year old seeking some part-time work after school, $12 per hour is a good job and a decent income. It may not be for a skilled 35 year old in full-time work who is the primary income earner, but let’s be careful in our desire to lift wages for the latter category, we don’t destroy jobs for the former. Decent incomes come from increases in productivity – not via legislative fiat.

We need a school system that gives our children the confidence and skills to be leaders in a new economy.

It’s too easy for a school leaver to drift out of school, and they’re lost.

I agree. I look forward to Labour supporting national standards as a first step to identifying those who need assistance before they become lost.

I’m never going to agree with most of Labour’s policies. However there are some glimmers of hope there that there will be at least some things I agree with. The focus on growing the cake, not just dividing it up, is especially welcome.

I make 20 predictions for 2012 at Stuff.

This could be a new road safety initiative for New Zealand. place lions on random roads, and watch the average speed drop!

This male lion is around three years old.

These three lions don’t normally live here, so once the resident lions learn of the interlopers there could be a gang war.

Quite beautiful.

We’ve been told to keep our rooms locked because otherwise baboons will happily come in and throw their shit around – literally.

You have to feel sorry for the waterbucks having a target like that as a natural feature.

A big beak for a small fellow.

Part III is not that different to Part II – rejuvenation again – but of caucus, not Cabinet.

Labour failed to rejuvenate their caucus in 2005. They did a much better job in 2008, and that strengthened their caucus considerably. They failed in 2011, protecting incumbent MPs with the result being the only new List MP is Andrew Little.

National did not rejuvenate greatly in 2011. There are three new List MPs, and six new electorate MPs, but this is out of a caucus of almost 60.

A caucus needs to have a balance of MPs. Not all MPs are going to be Ministers, and many MPs whom do not become Ministers still provide excellent value to their constituents and to Parliament through work on select committees. However service in Parliament as a backbench MP should not be seen as a life-time work (as it has been for Labour’s Ross Robertson) but something you do for a limited period.

It is essential that for 2014, National clearly indicates to caucus that MPs will not be automatically be given winnable spots, and that new aspiring candidates will be ranked higher than some MPs if their regions back them strongly enough. The Party Board and leadership need to send out unequivocally clear signals in 2013 about the 2014 list, so that MPs can make an informed choice about whether they retire with dignity, or wish to risk putting themselves forward for list ranking, and possibly ending up with an unwinnable ranking.

With electorate MPs it is of course between them and their electorate, if they stand again. The hierarchy get little say in this – especially in the stronger seats. It is worth noting though that incumbent MPs have faced challenges. John Key, Judith Collins and formerly John Carter all became MPs by defeating an incumbent for a nomination.

This might all sound rather negative talking about Ministers and MPs needing to “go” the week after an historic victory. That is deliberate. Winning a third term will be far more challenging than winning a second term.  There should be no complacency that the popularity of the Prime Minister will guarantee a third term. I am pointing out the need for rejuvenation now, so that it is not seemed aimed at any individual Minister or MP. It isn’t. I don’t have a list of whom I think should or should not stay on past 2014. What I’m talking about is the need to recognise early on that winning a third term will require some people to put the overall good of the National Party before their individual desires.

For the third day running we had a go at getting a sighting of the lioness who was protecting her cubs.  As you head into the bush you do not feel particularly safe, as the vehicle is literally making its own path in, and even in an emergency would only be able to reverse out slowly.

The biggest protection is being in the vehicle – not that it would protect you if a lion attacked, but that unless you stand up in it, they generally do not recognise you as prey.

After a couple of minutes in this spot, we heard a loud growl and looking to our left was mama lion.

She kept watching us but not moving, and a couple of her cubs popped their heads up also. Being so close to a lioness and her cubs is cool, but you also know that is when they are second most aggressive – only more aggressive when mating.

We did look up these birds as we saw them, but I didn’t note the names down.

A less submerged hippo.

And a hippo family.

We drove into a huge herd of buffalo – around 300 or so.

Unlike in NZ when you honk at cattle on the road, you just patiently wait for them to move.

Another rhino.

We were really lucky to see some of these – the African Wild Dogs. These are very rare – sometimes people will go for years without seeing them.

They look quite cute there, but they are very efficient killers. Around 80% of their hunts end in kills, compared to 30% for lions. They kill by disemboweling and then will feed their young later by regurgitating meat up for them.

They have the strongest bite relative to their mass of any extant mammal carnivore.

I love the giraffes. They are so, well African, and just dominate an scene they are in.

After the morning drive on the third day I commented to the guides that I had yet to see any elephants. Now by pure coincidence this elephant walked past the lodge while we were at lunch. How is that for room service!

He had a drink from our pool.

After lunch we went out and found another elephant – a slightly bigger one.

The guide had said that if you are on foot hippos are probably the most dangerous, but elephants are the most dangerous in a vehicle, as they could over turn it easily. Well this elephant got a bit snarly with us and did a minor charge of two to three metres towards us. I didn’t wet my pants, but lets say I did turn somewhat white.

Later on we came across a leopard and two mating lions. The lions mate every 15 minutes so you can often hear them. As were were heading towards them the vehicle got stuck in an unseen ditch, so we all had to get out, while it was freed. Now mating lions can be very aggressive, so there was a degree of nervousness about being out of the vehicle as if they see you out of it, they may regard you as prey. The gun was ready to go, just in case.

As it happens the lions went away. We saw the leopard briefly, but not in time for a photo. Have now seen all of the big five, but I count it as four and a half as I only saw the leopard’s arse.

Every evening just before sunset we stop and have some drinks. Very nice.

And after the sun sets we spend an hour or so using a spotlight to spot more beasts, usually getting home around 8 pm for dinner.

We go out in the afternoons from 4 pm to 8 pm. It’s still really hot at 4 pm, but by around 6 pm is starting to cool nicely. It’s a wonderful feeling driving through African bush in a land cruiser with the sun shining, wind blowing, all the noises and sights of Africa to observe and listen to.

A shy wee turtle.

Who then happily took off, or crawled off.

Mr Hippo.

He’s a big one.

See that log in the background?

It’s not a log, in case you try and sit on it.

We had lunch next to these three crocodiles. Luckily they stayed in the water.

But this is what happens just after a crocodile tries to eat a bird.

A couple of members of the new Labour front-bench, I’m sorry I mean a couple of hyenas 🙂

And in case you can’t tell, that hyena is eating a dead baby elephant. You won’t believe how much noise they make eating either.

They would not have killed the elephant themselves.

Never thought I would be saying this. Catherine blogs:

I am concerned by media reports that the Ministry of Education is considering taking off boards of trustees the role of hiring their school’s principal.

Rumours about such a significant proposal should not be swirling around in the media without a confirmation or denial from the Ministry. School boards and parents should be formally notified if this change is really on the table.

Prior to the election the National Party gave no signal that the Ministry would be taking over this role. It wasn’t mentioned in their policy.

The Government’s rhetoric around education is extremely contradictory at the moment. One minute National says parents need more choice via charter schools and the next it’s taking away choice from communities by removing the power of boards of trustees to appoint their own principal.

Giving local communities a degree of control over their school was central to the Tomorrow’s Schools reforms. I haven’t seen any evidence that the hiring of principals is too difficult a task for schools. It is more likely that the Government wants to make principals answer directly to them rather than the kids and parents in their local community.

I would be amazed if National is considering any such move, and the story linked to quotes various teacher politicians as their sources, so it is probably just scare-mongering.

But I am glad to see the Greens support school boards being able to appoint their own principals. I hope this means they also support school boards being able to manage their own budgets, decide on their own property needs, hire their own staff and pay them what they think is appropriate for that school?

Because why would you say the board is good enough to appoint their own principal, but not to manage their own budget?

This death is truly one to be mourned.

Havel died aged 75.  He was one of the most inspiring freedom fighters of our generation. He fought communist rule of his country for 20 years and then in 1989 became the last President of Czechoslovakia, later serving as President of the Czech Republic and seeing it enter the EU.

When one thinks of the term that the pen is mightier than the sword, I often think of Havel.

I 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 (23^rd 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).

I’m liking Shane Jones on the front bench of Labour.

First he says:

Labour MP Shane Jones says his party has to realise that National has the numbers to push through state asset sales, and he will not criticise iwi which wish to invest in them.

Yesterday Mr Jones said that although Labour opposed state asset sales they were now inevitable and iwi wanting to invest in them for commercial reasons should not be pilloried.

He indicated a more pragmatic stance on the issue was ahead as Labour sought to re-build its links with business and enterprises.

I suspect Labour may make the mistake of trying to refight the 2011 election in 2014. I doubt asset sales will be an issue in 2014. They will have occurred, and the sky will not have fallen in. Prices would not have gone up beyond normal, and the only difference is we’ll have less debt, lower dividends plus lower interest payments on the reduced debt and 100,000+ new shareholders in them. I doubt National will promise any further part-sales in 2014, and most people will wonder what the fuss was about.

Anyway today Shane has also said:

Labour’s Shane Jones is back on the front bench and signalling his intention to shake things up by championing mining for job-starved regions.

Jones was one of the winners in Labour’s refresh yesterday, returning to the front bench after a fall from grace over revelations he charged blue movies to his ministerial credit card while a minister in the Helen Clark government.

His return signals his rehabilitation is complete and he is being lined up by new leader David Shearer to take on NZ First leader Winston Peters, who will square off with Labour from the Opposition front benches.

Jones picked up the regional development, associate finance and Maori economic development portfolios and he said yesterday unemployment in provincial New Zealand, responsible for other social ills, would be his big focus.

That meant weighing up job opportunities in “the extractive industries”, including mining, against the party’s environmental message.

Excellent. This is looking to be a far less ideological front bench – and that is a good thing.

In Part I, I talked about the need for ongoing policy reform, and for the Government not just to aspire to be better administrators than Labour, but also driving a better policy agenda. If you try to compete just on being better administratoes, then eventually people think why not try that other lot.

In Part II I want to talk about Ministerial rejuvenation. After National first got elected in 2008, I pondered what Labour did wrong in their latter years, and what National may need to do to get a third term and maybe even the holy grail of a 4th term.

One of Clark’s mistakes was she left ministerial rejuvenation too late. Halfway through their third term and the Cabinet was still dominated by the same names – Clark, Cullen, Anderton, Goff, Maharey, Mallard, Hodgson, King, Dyson, Dalziel.

I sketched out that with a ministry of around 24 (National) Ministers one should be looking at rejuvenation of around 25% at regular intervals. The first 25% by the beginning of the second term, the second 25% by the end of the second term, and a third 25% around halfway through the third term – and in that third tranche you may even have a leadership succession.

It is important to stress that when one talks about ministerial rejuvenation, this is not saying that incumbent Ministers are performing badly, and their successors will be better than them. In fact new Ministers often do struggle initially compared to more experienced Ministers – one reason why you do rejuvenation gradually. But have no doubt about it – New Zealanders will not generally keep voting for the same line up election after election. The media and your opponents paint you as ired and out of ideas, and labels do stick. Plus it is correct that new Ministers will sometimes bring new ideas and energy to a portfolio.

Now to date, the Key Government is pretty much on schedule, in terms of what I see as the ideal pace of rejuvenation. Seven of the 24 Ministers are new, as in not there at the beginning of the 49th Parliament – they are Hekia Parata, Nathan Guy, Craig Foss, Amy Adams, Chris Tremain, Jo Goodhew and Chester Borrows.

But I do believe to enhance National’s chances of a third term, there will need to be a reshuffle before the 2014 election. Towards the end of 2013 some of those who have been Ministers since 2008 should consider following in the foot stops of Simon Power and Wayne Mapp and getting out while on top. Their party will thank them for it, even though they personally could be quite capable of continuing on. Ideally they should even be prepared to spend their final 12 months in Parliament on the backbenches, so that new Ministers can come in before the election.

It may be tempting to think hey let’s wait until after the election, and then do a reshufffle. The problem is there is no guarantee you will get that third term.

If National can go into the 2014 election with around half its Ministry being new faces (as in not original 2008 Ministers), then its chances of winning are enhanced. Of course you need more than just ministerial rejuvenation, but it is a key component of it.

The reasons I raise the issue early, is because the best rejuvenation is that done voluntarily. The PM needs to be very clear to Ministers that a warrant today does not mean they are automatically going to be Ministers if there is a third term, or even for all of this term.

Five years as a Minister is a lot better than most MPs achieve. Stepping down after five years or so should not be seen as a bad thing, but as Simon Power showed us – getting out on top.

I was reading up about buffalo after seeing some, and how they were often quite altruistic. That lead me to this story about an amazing eight minute video shot in 2005 called Battle at Kruger.

You see the lions sitting in wait on the small group of buffalo. As they get close, they pounce and the lions chase a couple of adult buffalo and a young buffalo. One of the lions tackles the young buffalo knocking him into the water. Three or four lions start mauling him and pulling him out of the water.

At this stage a crocodile grabs the young buffalo, who becomes the meant in a tug-of-war sandwich between lions and the crocodile. Eventually the lions win and drag the buffalo onshore.

Just as they start their meal, well have you ever seen a film where the cavalry charge in and save the day? Just watch this video. Incredible sights and amazing someone was there to record it.

The details are here.

I’m somewhat amazed that Jacinda has been put ahead of David Cunliffe into Spot No 4. Good God, if she had actually won back Auckland Central, I can only imagine they would have made her Governor-General.

Don’t let anyone think I don’t rate Jacinda’s abilities. From before she entered Parliament I was sure she would be front bench some day, and maybe deputy leader or higher. I’m just not sure what has been achieved in her first term, that would have you at No 4. When you compare what National’s No 4 Steven Joyce has achieved both outside and inside Parliament, it seems a mismatch.

Nevertheless it is a huge opportunity for Jacinda. If she performs well, she will be a strong contender for Deputy Leader, when Grant becomes Leader.

It is interesting that while the lineup is fresh in terms of MP experience, three of the most senior members are all former Prime Ministerial staffers for Helen Clark – the deputy leader, the No 4 and the chief whip.

Cunliffe against Joyce in Economic Development is a good choice. Should be some spirited jousts.

Cosgrove gets SOEs and Trade. Will be nice to have a Trade Spokesperson who sounds like they think it is a good thing.

The addition of Jones into the front bench is smart, but as usual his portfolios are lightweight. Will we see more than a press release a month from him?

Mahuta in Education is interesting as she will be up against Parata.

Interesting reversal of fortune for Sue Moroney. She had been given the heavyweight education portfolio and was the third highest ranked (effective) list candidate. But now she is out of the shadow cabinet entirely.

The biggest winners:

1. Jacinda Ardern +15
2. Nanaia Mahuta +12
3. Chris Hipkins +8
4. Shane Jones +7
5. Phil Twyford +6
6. William Sio +6
7. Clare Curran +5
8. Darien Fenton +4

The biggest losers:

• Ruth Dyson from 7 to unranked
• Parekura Horomia from 11 to unranked
• Sue Moroney from 13 to unranked
• Moana Mackey from 18 to unranked

Labour’s Shadow Cabinet vs National’s Cabinet is:

• 13 elect mps and 7 list mps vs 14 elect mps and 6 list mps
• 13 men and 7 women vs 14 men and 6 women
• 16 European, 2 Maori, 0 Asian, 2 Pacific vs 18 European and 2 Maori
• 2 in 30s, 6 in 40s, 11 in 50s, 1 in 60s vs 9 in 40s, 10 in 50s, 1 in 60s
• 70% North Island vs 70% North Island
• entered Prlt on average 10.8 years ago vs 10.3 years ago

Not a huge difference between the demographics of the Shadow Cabinet and Cabinet. For the front benches:

• 4 elect mps and 4 list mps vs 5 elect mps and 4 list mps
• 6 men and 2 women vs 6 men and 3 women
• 6 European, 2 Maori vs 7 European and 2 Maori
• 1 in 30s, 4 in 40s, 3 in 50s, 1 in 60s vs 3 in 40s, 6 in 50s
• 75% North Island vs 78% North Island
• entered Prlt on average 7.8 years ago vs 10 years ago

Also fairly similar in terms of demographics. This is quite a change from the last Parliament where Labour were much older and been around much longer, plus had many more women in their top ranks.