Labour surges, National drop following terrorist attack


In 1985, when France attacked the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland, the French Government calculated that it would divide New Zealanders. They calculated that the New Zealand people would lose faith in the Labour Government and its nuclear free stance. They could not have been more wrong. Labour was returned to office in 1987. More significantly, when National finally did win the 1990 election, despite concerns that we needed to repair our relationship with the U.S., the policy survived and is still in force today.

It is too early to tell whether this Labour led Government will enjoy such a bump in support as a result of the terrorist. However in the immediate weeks that have so far passed, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s decisive handling of the new firearms legislation, her empathy and warmth shown to the Muslim community have caused Labour to surge in the latest Colmar Brunton poll, which shows the Sixth Labour Government at an as yet all time high.

If an election were held today that would give the following seats to the parties in Parliament:

  • National; 51
  • Labour; 60
  • Greens; 8
  • A.C.T.*; 1

The results are clear. Labour and the Greens could comfortably govern as a left of centre coalition. National and A.C.T. would be resigned to watching legislation pass through the House and hope that enough people are following through the media to be aware of what is happening.

Assuming no seats are won by its M.P.’s, New Zealand First would not be in Parliament, having failed to make the 5% threshhold. A.C.T.* would re-enter Parliament on the assumption that its sole Member of Parliament David Seymour retakes Epsom.

National Leader Simon Bridges remains unchanged on 5%, which is probably okay given he has barely had a look in in the last few weeks as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s leadership basks in the praise heaped on her by national and international media. That said, Judith Collins, well known for her more conservative outlook and popular with the right wing of the National Party is thought to be agitating for a crack at the leadership. More ominously for Mr Bridges, she is in the Preferred Prime Minister stake at 5%, which is the same as him.

It is perhaps New Zealand First who should be the most worried. Despite their record of comebacks in elections, M.P. and Minister for Regional Development Shane Jones is widely viewed among the voting public as a bit of a loose cannon. This combined with a party that failed to ignite support among South Island voters at the last election, will would have proved a serious hindrance if not a fatal blow in a hypothetical election.

But this is all hypothetical. What it does not show is the significant number of issues that this Government faces, the problems it is having with its Ministers and the middling economy. Soon they will make themselves known.

Change in Census processes needed


It is very obvious that the 2018 Census was a farce. But the fact that the chief statistician Liz MacPherson thought she did not have to come clean on the full extent of the problem until being threatened with Contempt of Parliament, tells me that it is more than just a colossal failure of data gathering systems. It tells me that officials responsible for the Census are operating with contempt of Government, which is a serious allegation for anyone to make.

According to Ms MacPherson when she finally told Parliament about the full scale of the data loss, as many as 1 in 7 New Zealanders failed to complete a census, something that has to be completed for every single person in New Zealand on the assigned night. The scale of the data loss as a result of thousands of New Zealanders not being able to complete or even attempt the census is severe enough, that combined with Ms MacPherson’s failure to be honest with Parliament and ultimately New Zealand it is not unreasonable to ask for her head.

National Party Member of Parliament Nick Smith said that New Zealand should seriously consider having another census as early as 2021. In suggesting that, Dr Smith indicated it would be in line with the original schedule of Census nights. That was knocked out of kilter by the Christchurch earthquakes which forced thousands of people from their homes and the 2011 Census would have been conducted during the earthquake emergency, when as much as 1/5 of Christchurch had left town.

What Dr Smith overlooks is the under investment that his party made in statistics, which is in line with a general dislike for “paper shunters” – bureaucrats and office workers who do what to many are boring, yet essential jobs. The premature transit from the old data system to a new one was so bad that thousands of New Zealanders could not log in to do the census, could not submit census if they managed to complete it.

Green Party M.P. and Statistics Minister James Shaw appears to have his head stuck in the sand bank. The results are as good as useless and will affect planning for a myriad of services, functions, ministries and programmes. The next census is not scheduled until 2023, but can New Zealand really hang tough with such a monstrous failure meaning that the next four years are really just going to be a hodge podge of guess work for the people who need the data? I think not. And so, I tend to favour Dr Smith’s redeeming suggestion that a new one be held before then, which Mr Shaw rejects.

Maybe Mr Shaw might find himself following Ms MacPherson walking the gang plank.

 

Strike 4 Climate student protest not a joke


When Swedish school girl activist Greta Thunberg faced down politicians of all stripes at Davos, Switzerland at their annual economic forum, many politicians thought she was just a lone student gone rogue. They thought that high school students were disinterested in the world around them, disinterested in politics. A lesson is coming for them.

Now we are seeing the birth pangs of the next generation of activists. And what birth pangs they are. On 15 March 2019, a world first will happen. School students all around the world will go on strike by refusing to attend school, arguing what the point is when catastrophic climate change threatens to leave them without a future in which they could use their education. Two decades ago organizing a world wide student protest would have been impossible and principals would have shut it down before any cohesion could be gained. A decade ago when the Fifth Labour Government was in office and teachers went on strike, the strikes lasted long enough that students were able to co-ordinate a limited counter strike to protest the continuing disruption to their education.

But this is quite different, and an order of magnitude more impressive, as well as concerning – and encouraging. In terms of being different, this about students lives after they leave high schools and the future of the planet we all live on. This is a global emergency they claim and politicians are not doing enough to respond.

And there is a ground swell of support across the education sector, ranging from researchers, to teachers, principals, lecturers and more who have all signed a petition to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

Not all are in support of this action. National and A.C.T. Members of Parliament think they should wait until the teachers strike on 03 April – which I think is their way of wanting the coverage likely to be generated to be buried by a bigger news item. Many of the same Members of Parliament claim it is a serious issue, yet none have offered alternative ideas about how to deal with this and it kind of puts a question mark on their sense of urgency.

Labour and Green Party Members of Parliament like the idea behind the protest, but are reluctant to be seen endorsing massive student strike action that involves disruption to learning. But as youth are beginning to realise that it is this Government or the next which must try to make serious policy in roads into tackling climate change, it is important to note that they cannot afford to be seen as too distant either.

I am not sure where New Zealand First sit on this. It is an issue that the party did not seem to know which direction it wanted to go in, whilst I was a member. Many members are from rural backgrounds or are socially conservative and would frown upon this action. However in order to maintain a connection that it has been trying to build up for years with youth, I cannot imagine it condemning it in the way National and A.C.T. are.

And how many schools will participate? Some schools might be quite happy in controlled circumstances to permit a strike to go ahead and use it as an educational opportunity. There will be some schools that are there in spirit, but which insist on students attending classes in return for assisting with actions on school grounds such as letter writing, or petitions or perhaps showing The Day After Tomorrow. And then there will be a few schools that do not want a bar of it, and will make their students have a normal Friday of classes.

In Mixed Member Proportional era we are still very much First Past the Post


In 1993 New Zealand voted for the Mixed Member Proportional (M.M.P.) system of representation to replace First Past the Post (F.P.P.). The historic vote changed how New Zealanders vote at the polls. It was an attempt to broaden the spectrum of political parties so that more fringe leaning parties such as the modern day Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand and Association of Consumers and Taxpayers (A.C.T.) could be represented.The new system as it stood in 1993 was also intended to hold in check by requiring coalition arrangements with other parties, some of the more extreme policy.

But 22 years and 7 election cycles later, are we really an M.M.P. country?

If one looks at the range of parties that have existed in the M.M.P. era, one could argue that on the first count, yes M.M.P. has succeeded in doing what it was meant to. Since 1996, in one form or another a host of minor parties have existed and been part of coalition arrangements, or formed out of disgruntlement with bigger parties. They include the Alliance, Greens, New Zealand First, Maori Party and Mana, A.C.T. have all had time in Parliament. New Zealand First and the Greens as well as A.C.T. are the only minor parties currently in Parliament.

Outside of Parliament two notable attempts at creating brand new parties centred around well known figure or a businessman with a high profile have occurred. One is Conservative Party of New Zealand, which was led by Colin Craig and has contested the 2011, 2014 elections before Mr Craig brought himself into disrepute with alleged advances on his female secretary. The other is The Opportunities Party, which is run by Gareth Morgan, a prominent businessman who is perhaps better known for his crusade against domestic cats because of their predation of bird life. T.O.P. might have done better in the 2017 election had Mr Morgan resisted calling now Prime Minister Jacinda a “pig with lipstick on”.

Neither of these two external parties have made the 5% of the party vote threshhold or won an electorate seat to claim a space in Parliament.

And then there is New Zealand First. Originally the party that made National and Labour look nervously over their shoulders, the party that had the best policy platform of any in Parliament along with a charismatic leader in Winston Peters, New Zealand First are still in Parliament supporting Labour in this particular instance. However the brave policy making, the determination to stand on principle and the slow natural, but relentless aging of Mr Peters who probably has no more than one more term left in him if even that, is gone.

However, the state of the political parties these days is not entirely their fault. All have spent much time and effort trying to mobilise the youth vote where the 150,000 people between ages 18-24 stayed home in 2017 would have done much to swing results had they made the effort. And if one looks at the reasons, perhaps a lack of civics being taught in schools compulsorily, a loss of confidence in politicians or the system.

Of National and Labour though, even after 22 years, there is no doubt that these are still very much the right and left of New Zealand politics respectively. Never mind that there is a centrist party in New Zealand First, a Green Party and an advocate party for consumers and taxpayers. Even after all of this time – and some spectacular political fails along the way – none of them can do anything without the co-operation of National or Labour. Just like in 1990 when Ms Ardern and A.C.T. leader David Seymour were still at Primary School, Mr Bridges in High School, when Mr Peters was a National Party Member of Parliament.

Whilst the number of parties in Parliament has fluctuated considerably in that time, the thinking and the acting in an M.M.P. environment and rapidly changing world is still that of an F.P.P. Parliament.

 

Analysis suggests $28 billion loss if NZ oil and gas ban happens


An analysis of the intention to phase out oil and gas with no new exploration allowed, suggests that New Zealand might lose $28 billion IF the ban goes ahead. The ban, which was announced last year by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was meant to address the impact of carbon from man made emissions on the climate.

I say IF for a simple reason. At some point, National is guaranteed a return to power and possibly with A.C.T. as a coalition partner or supporting party. It is only inevitable that one or both parties or some other combination of centre-right parties will try to either overturn the ban, or so weaken it by indirect action that it is no longer a workable mechanism of reducing our man made carbon emissions.

The concerns I have about the likelihood of succeeding in completely winding up oil and gas exploration are matched by concerns about the feasibility of electric cars. Yes there might be a surge in the number of Nissan Leaf’s entering the market, along with new models from Toyota, Mitsubishi and Kia, but looking at the range of these vehicles, only two of them could make the 189km trip from Christchurch to Kaikoura even if they left completely charged up.

Other companies – namely Tesla, Renault, B.M.W. and Hyundai – offer vehicles in New Zealand as well, but the prices as an article on Stuff in October 2018 suggested are far higher. Who is likely to want to shell out for a N.Z.$59,000 Hyundai Ioniq EV? For that matter when one considers disposable income in most New Zealand households, who can even afford one?

The death hold Toyota Corolla’s have on the small vehicle market is growing. A hybrid version now exists, which is basically $38,500 and their very popular petrol version continues. Toyota also have medium size Camry’s, again with a hybrid option.

There is another problem too. Many New Zealanders simply don’t see the need for flashy complicated vehicles and as long as they can get cheaper ones that have had numerous owners and still run fine, then it is a losing argument on simple economic grounds.

Also IF this ban is to be effective, New Zealand needs a comprehensive plan in place to make this happen. So far all I have seen is Green Party chest thumping over getting the ban in place and a lot of hot air from National and A.C.T. about how the economy will be crippled whilst completely ignoring the environmental impacts. A New Zealand Energy Voices advert on Facebook promotes oil and gas.