It is election day.
Voting places are open from 9am to 7pm today. Results will start coming in soon after the polls close and election officials expect 50% of them to be counted by 10:30pm, and 90% by midnight.
It is important for you to vote. It may have been a relatively dull campaign dominated by lackluster personalities. True to form, most media accentuate the personality side of the campaigning and down play the policy positions.
But to be fair, almost all parties have a wide set of policies on offer and they would rather talk about those positions, even if TV, radio and other media push to induce 'gotcha' moments.
If you are a voter who would rather vote based on those policy positions, we have a policy comparison tool, an independent service we have offered since the 2005 general election. It is a straight comparison tool, organised by subject. It doesn't involve any compiler judgments, and only lists policy position components in the actual words of each party (and each policy is linked to its original full source). (Curated by Georgia Carr.)
We also have a useful page where you can compare the party philosophies. You can find that here.
Principled voting is out of fashion, given the pervasive nature of social media, and the rise of negative campaigning. Sadly those work, and many of us end up thinking democracy is a process of choosing the least worse. But it doesn't have to be like that. Any voter who takes the time to read party policies would be impressed with what was on offer, and the different styles of public policy approaches in the political marketplace.
The two edge parties, the Greens on the left, ACT on the right, both have coherent positions and articulate them well in their policy offerings. Labour and National will end up stealing policy from these parties while promoting their 'centerist' credentials. To be fair, National rarely has original ideas. Labour often does but usually only when they are out of power. So watching ACT or Green policy is inherently interesting.
This election, TOP is also in there with the most innovative policy offerings. They may not be everyone's cup of tea, but they are centerist, and deserve respect - and the attention of serious voters. Perhaps NZ First is the only serious party without policy that makes a lot of sense - just campaigning slogans. But NZ First, despite a barren policy platform, could end up as the tail that wags the dog later today (and over the next few weeks).
Our democracy deserves protection. And the only way that will happen is if most people participate in it, principally by voting. Checking out party policy positions would be a better action. Responding to a boring election campaign by just not voting opens the door to extremes. Your vote is important if we want to keep our liberal democracy.
We have an analysis of potential surprises that could be in store on election night. And we will be following that up this evening with result tracking, and the implications for a new government, starting at 7pm with Dan Brinskill, Eric Frykberg, and Gareth Vaughan.
And as an aside, here is an interesting factoid from Peta Alexander, extracted from his excellent newsletter to clients.
"15. Current parliamentary salaries:
- Members of Parliament $163,961
- Cabinet Ministers $296,007
- Leader of the Opposition $296,007
- Deputy Prime Minister $334,734
- Prime Minister $471,049
There has been no change in these salaries for six years." This pay is set by an independent body. Our politicians have rejected all recommended increases even over the period of much higher inflation. Meanwhile officials around them all did get increases, certainly below chief executive level. This is hardly evidence of an irresponsible set of parliamentarians.
76 Comments
We voted at the first opportunity. That’s us but it’s hard to understand that the majority of those we know are still dithering around not knowing what to do. Can’t ever remember it ever being like this before. Rather indicates quite some disenchantment with our parliament, the parties and mps on offer I would suggest.
I also voted last week, having decided who a couple of years ago.
The people who left it until today might be feeling sorry: bad weather, rain & gales & the electronic roll down so back to manual mode. Long queues & now delayed voting cutoff time. Might also have a noticeable impact on voter turnout.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/500155/more-than-2300-voting-places…
Like I've said on here before. There's so much toxicity in this country, particularly around politics where people will show huge animosity towards other people for their (often perceived) voting preference. I think the reason is that we haven't been involved in international conflict for so long, our enemy is no longer the commies halfway around the world, it's the Left Leaning "commie" next door voting Labour.
A good part of that is simply pressure. Tempo of life and requisite duties have become, often near to overwhelming. There is little respite as evidenced by the explosion in electronic communicating, I phones etc, that track, locate and demand attention anywhere, anytime. People under pressure are not disinclined to lash out at the nearest target and that, rather than the commie next door or whoever, it is sadly, more often than not, within the family home.
I had to take my niece to the medical centre a couple of weeks ago after breaking her wrist snowboarding and we were in the waiting room when this friendly elderly man and his wife started chatting to us. Then not long into our light chat which wasn't political at all he said in an serious voice "I hate Labour and I hate Labour voters".
I now think I did the wrong thing because while annoyed, in the moment I thought the better thing was to not get into any political debate (as I often need to do with my whole wider family). So I guided the conversation elsewhere which worked. I wish I'd just got up and walked away to the other side of the waiting room to at least show him how offensive he was being to a stranger in public. It was truely disgusting.
It is certainly rude to introduce a fervent assertion about politics or religion into a friendly conversation with strangers. And usually a good way of stopping a conversation. But you missed the opportunity to list a few good things Labour has done and to add that believing one in three Kiwi voters are misguided is fair enough but to hate them must be wrong. Note the same goes about Donald Trump. Some people are socially maladapt, as you say he was friendly and likely meant no harm so i think you did the right thing. You didn't jump at his bait and that may make him reconsider.
And the Israelis voted for Netanyahu, the guy who famously said the only difference between a dog and a Palestinian is that he felt sad when he had to put down his dog
The people vote for extremist parties because they've been through terrible violent times that they just want to put an end to, and they make the mistake of thinking the war-mongering, populist party is going to fix the problem through more violence
Neither the people of Israel or the people of Palestine have made good choices in who leads them, but neither of them deserve to die for it
If you're in a violent system for years and years you can be forgiven for thinking violence is normal and that the only way to end violence is through more violence
Outside of that system we have more perspective and know those approaches don't work. Bur we shouldn't judge them too harshly for those decisions they made - if we had been through half of what they had, maybe we would vote the same as them
Was Hamas elected to lead Gaza? In 2006, Hamas won legislative elections in Gaza and the West Bank but refused to join a coalition government with the opposition Fatah party — a key constituent of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, or PLO. Hamas later seized control of the Gaza Strip. A recent survey indicates that 58% of the population in the Gaza Strip stands with Hamas.
That's when more of the violent species, known as Homo sapiens, are crammed into a finite space, the more unstable civilisation becomes and yet most if not all NZ political parties officially endorse "cramming". Notice how NZ has become less tolerant and less friendly over the cramming years? This is NZs future, because violence is what humans do. Small and knowing your neighbour works.
Thanks for your policy comparison tool.
I have found it helpful to have one place to go to that I can then use to base research off.
I have avoided the debates and main stream media for weeks now as I got sick of the negativity and politicians talking about minor things for sound bites or to get a small portion of voters on single issues. eg. campaigning on reducing the number of road cones.....seriously?....haven't we got more important things to discuss?. That sort of thing from all parties (and the media) switched me off.
We live in a fantastic country and I look for those with a positive vision and plans to improve it further, especially for my children and any future grandchildren I may be fortunate to have.
The sun will come up again tomorrow :)
I find the negativity to be a positive. Why shouldn’t Luxon point out that labour haven’t delivered? Why shouldn’t Hipkins point out that National are giving tax cuts to rich property investors while cutting benefits. I actually want politicians to be passionate about their policy and scathing of the opposite. Hipkins showed that in the last debate, although way too late.
So let’s say boring party has some boring but realistic policies, and crazy opposition are promising all the lollies, is it negative for boring party to point out the opposition policies aren’t affordable? Or should boring party stick to the boring positives of their own boring policy?
i still find many people that dont know how MMP works or even why we have it, those of us with every long memeories remember how bad FPP served NZ and how for many many years rural NZ called the shots.
before MMP the national party was in charge for over twice as long as the labour party and led NZ to the brink of bankruptcy, we even had a far-right winger run a party to help stop them in their tracks before it was too late, thanks bob.
MMP has flaws, i do not like the coat tail rule, why do we even have electorate MPs (most are in name only and don't live in the area they represent) we should just vote for a party, last there should be some way of the public or members of parties having a way of voting for positions on the party list. in saying that if a party picks too many bad mps they will get punished next election
and last it should be a 4 year term, the 3-year term is to try to stop bad governments BUT it also hampers good governments they effectuality only have a year of getting something done before they start running again.
Yes, I think in the absence of the threshold being lowered from 5%, this would be a good approach and flush out the strategic voting and give more people the confidence to vote for the representation they desire the most. Not what they think they have to put up with.
I personally think that if a party should get a seat for every 1/120th of the vote that they receive. At least then the majority of the population would be fairly represented.
At the moment, the wasted vote can potentially be a reasonably significant amount of the total votes.
I remember one election, the Conservatives got over 3% of the vote. That's an awful lot of votes to just throw away. Especially when considering ACT or United Future got in previously by winning seats with a much smaller percentage of the actual votes.
I'd also be keen to do away with local electorate voting. It made sense years ago, but there's no need for it with the current level of connectivity and information flow.
On the other side of the coin, a lot of issues stem from people feeling that they're not being represented or understood by those in power.
Whilst I don't agree with a lot of the more extreme standpoints (both left and right), I do acknowledge that there are people out there that do, and they also need to feel that they have fair representation if we are to have a truly democratic society.
Only if Nat/Lab let him. I'm all for 1/120th gets representation - anything else is simply unfair.
Perhaps we should give a tax break for the next 3 years to anyone whose party votes are cast aside.
That said, small parties need to get their egos sorted out. I only recently learnt of this "component/umbrella party" rule due to none other than Brian Tamaki's party (Parties at a general election | Elections) - so he's already improved my democracy knowledge which I regard as a good thing.
As the definition suggests, there are different ways that a component party/umbrella party situation can arise.
For example:
- several unregistered parties could unite under an umbrella and the umbrella party registers to contest the party vote
- registered parties could unite under an umbrella party
- a combination of registered and unregistered parties could unite under an umbrella party
- a registered party could become part of another registered party.
- If a new umbrella party is formed, the new party must apply to be registered and must include a declaration that it has component parties. The new party must meet all the requirements for registration, including providing evidence that it has at least 500 current financial members.
Just do away with coalitions. Allow the party with the most outright party votes to have PM, and make them fight over policy during their tenure.
The whole premise of needing to be outright majority (inc. supply & confidence) is out-dated.
If a policy doesn't get through because it didn't have enough votes, it hasn't been discussed robustly enough, or is simply a bad idea.
Yes I think preferences are a much better system. So you can have confidence that your vote wont be wasted. The only thing I would change from the Aussie system is that you should be able to put a limit on the number of times your vote gets transferred, currently you have to rank all the candidates standing for order of preference, when in reality you would probably only want to provide two or three transfers to your preferred parties.
Electorate votes allow some form of control over politicians, and keeps them accountable to the very people they are supposed to represent. A party list that voters have no control over, will simply encourage more false promises to be made in elections because they suffer no ramifications for non delivery at a local level.
How about voters get one party/politician vote, there are no list MPs, the party gets the number of MPs they earned, but in order of the % vote each MP got in their electorate. So basically the party list is ordered by the number of votes each MP got. Best of both worlds and easier to comprehend.
do they, when was the last time luxon was in his electorate office on the weekends talking to the locals same with Hipkins, i doubt JK ever visited helensville except election time? i could name plenty from all parties, and then on the opposite side plenty of areas because of MMP now have multiple members and are getting more local issues pushed to the front in parliament
officials around them all did get increases, certainly below chief executive level. This is hardly evidence of an irresponsible set of parliamentarians
Public sector earnings have been going backwards in real terms for the last couple of years. Over the last 7 years, CPI has increased by 25%, Public Sector average weekly earnings by 28%, and Private Sector average weekly earnings by 35%.
Yes, thanks to interest.co for the policy comparison tool.
A very interesting revelation I had in looking at it - was:
a) shock that very few parties had a tertiary education policy and
b) IMO by far, the best of those policies comes from NZ First;
https://www.interest.co.nz/elections/2023/policy/84857/tertiary-education
by the same token have you costed what they have saved us, i am all for small parties getting some small policies through as long as on the plus side they save us overall
NZF killed the light rail 30 billion plan in return they got a 3 billion slush fund so for me the trade off paid for itself
hopefully NZF will kill the east west link road 1.6 billion for 7 km , a hugely expensive road, built in the wrong place so will add to congestion and only being built for trucking companies and refocus that money on the 4 laning to whangarei or other better roading projects
The original light rail plan they killed off was only $3 billion and a great investment. The same thing now would probably cost double, thanks Winston.
Even the current ridiculous tunnel plan is $13 billion or so, the $30 billion is just National propaganda.
I don’t get why we want a party to be preventing infrastructure investment! The last thing NZ needs right now is a handbrake.
because the light rail is not about improvement of infrastructure if so you would just run up dominion road, which would greatly improve things, from there to the airport is just politics and nuts, there are far more sensible options. like connecting the rail from Onehunga to avondale (which a lot of the land is already in place) that option creates another ring circle of trains which buses can service inside the ring, and takes the freight trains away from going through town and means you can seriously connect northport to metroport
or connecting puhinui rail to the airport before all the land is gobbled up and developed, it is a shorter stretch and would feed passengers to town and workers to the airport
Go back further. WP/NZF binned the parliamentary palace that McKinnon of National was hell bent on building. Likely he thought it would named after him. Often wondered if that was a personal ember that contributed to the ever increasing animosity toward WP that fermented within National.
Considering the calibre of MPs, their lack of qualifications, and their inability to actually achieve anything while in Government, its safe to say that they are extremely overpaid. Imagine being on a benefit all your life, a kid just out of University, or a recently arrived backpacker from Mexico, and suddenly you are gifted $163k a year plus perks like free cars and travel. Its a joke.
Umm, if he had been a backpacker from Norway then I would have said "the backpacker from Norway". However, he actually comes from Mexico. So any inferred slur on Mexico that you have assumed is only in your head. Sad way to interpret my statement. My point about him coming from Mexico (or anywhere that is not NZ) is that he is not a New Zealander, has no knowledge of NZ culture, no NZ experience, and yet he now claims to represent us in Parliament. Which he clearly does not, he is campaigning for open borders, overstayer amnesty, and immigrant family reunification so he can import the rest of his tribe over here.
And now we are paying $163k a year to a 21 year old, who has no employment history, no University qualifications, and the only justification for her being elected to Parliament is that she is related to a couple of old Maori activists.
Current parliamentary salaries:
- Members of Parliament $163,961
- Cabinet Ministers $296,007
- Leader of the Opposition $296,007
- Deputy Prime Minister $334,734
- Prime Minister $471,049
Double their salaries but half their numbers. Cost neutral. Then maybe some of the experienced Prime Ministers will remain in Parliament when they lose power.
Maybe go one step further, have their flagship election promises tied to their salary as a KPI. Say 70% of their salary is held in retention, and released at the end of the 3 year on satisfactory outcomes.
Would be quite the savings on the wage bill due to Kiwibuild.
Thanks David for a positive, considered reminder of why we vote and how we do have some options in NZ. I've voted early, currently enjoying the glorious sunshine in Brisbane. No GST on fruit and veges here so it's mango time! Even comparing with Aus we have some great benefits to living in NZ, and sometimes they're only apparent when we leave.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.