12.40am. If the election had been single-member first-past-the-post on current boundaries, the result would have been National 41 seats, Labour 21, Maori 5, minor parties 3. Make that preferential, and give Labour 75 per cent of Greens preferences and split the others evenly, and there’s little change: National 40, Labour 22, Maori 5, minor parties 3.
10.55pm. Regarding that ninth Green Party seat, Antony Green writes: “Unlike Australia, they do not count special (absent, postal etc) votes progressively, but as a lump in about 12 days time. It will be two weeks before they do the final allocation of seats.” Strong Green performance on special votes has been a notable feature of past elections.
10.45pm. Green Party leader Jeanette Fitzsimons addressing supporters. Haven’t mentioned them much because the result has left them marginalised. The party has gained two seats, from six to eight, although Fitzsimons is holding out for an ninth. Not bad, but less than the polls had indicated.
10.38pm. Labour and NZ First principals venting about the media, in time-honoured fashion.
10.33pm. Peter Dunne confirmed in his speech 10 minutes ago that he would back a National government, and there’s no doubt left that that’s what we’ll be seeing.
10.28pm. However, Labour has taken the lead in Christchurch Central, where they trailed earlier after winning by 23.7 per cent in 2005 – though I can’t speak for redistribution effects.
10.20pm. Nikki Kaye has won for National in Auckland Central, in what seems to be the biggest electorate seat boilover. Labour won by 9.3 per cent in 2005, presumably on different boundaries.
10.14pm. Remember that when Elections NZ says 90 per cent counted, they mean 90 per cent of booths counted. The ones outstanding are presumably big ones, mostly in Auckland. So the current 45.6-33.6 gap might narrow a little further than you’d think.
10.01pm. Peter Dunne home and hosed in Ohariu, Maori seats now definitely 5-2. Only question is how things are looking beyond 61 seats. National still slowly losing ground, but will win at least 58 seats, ACT NZ looking very good for five, maybe only four if they’re unlucky. No question that we’ll be seeing a National-ACT NZ government.
9.48pm. Antony: “The best estimate I see for the new Parliament is 58 National, 5 ACT plus Peter Dunne – Right with 64, then 44 Labor, 8 Green, Jim Anderton, giving the Left 53, plus 5 Maori. 122 seat Parliament.” Third on the ACT NZ list is Roger Douglas, Treasurer in David Lange’s Labour government in the 1980s famed for his free-market reforms, who could well be back in cabinet.
9.45pm. National vote edges down enough to cost them a seat, so make that National 59 and ACT NZ 5.
9.37pm. We’re likely looking at an overhang of two, so 61 will be a majority with an independent Speaker. Current figures suggest National 60 and ACT NZ five, although the former are fading a little.
9.33pm. Little change in Te Tai Tonga with a big advance in the vote, so the Maori seats are firming up as five Maori Party and two Labour Party, with a very remote possibility that Labour might yet make that 4-3 with Te Tai Tonga.
9.30pm. Big advance in the Ohariu count, but the vote has changed very little, so Peter Dunne should be home.
9.28pm. National Party down to 46.7 per cent with 56 per cent counted, so the prospect of majority government is diminishing.
9.21pm. Antony sticking with his 45-35 prediction.
9.20pm. New Zealand First surely gone now, fading to 4.3 per cent with 47.4 counted.
9.19pm. Labour beginning to gain a little on the National Party as the southern Auckland vote comes in.
9.18pm. Maori seats. Labour home in Ikaroa-Rawhiti; probably done enough in Hauraki-Waikato; only slightly behind in Te Tai Tonga 44.2 to 41.8 per cent, but with 60.3 counted the Maori Party candidate is probably home. Other four seats held by the Maori Party.
9.15pm. Local observers excited the National candidate is ahead in Auckland Central, and in the hunt in Christchurch Central.
9.13pm. Silly woman on Radio New Zealand complaining that UNZF and Progressive Party are in parliament with a small share of the national vote. Of all the criticisms to make of MMP …
9.11pm. Peter Dunne back down from 33.2 to 32.6 per cent in Ohariu with 26.1 per cent. Still likely to win with Labour second on 29.7 per cent, though worth keeping an eye on. It’s probably only his own seat that’s at stake: party’s national vote is 0.9 per cent, whereas they would need at least 1.5 per cent for a second seat (more if NZ First makes the threshold).
9.04pm. National vote count up to 34 per cent, and the National vote still a strong 47.8 per cent. However, ACT NZ is looking at five seats and far the most likely result is a National-ACT coalition. Antony Green discusses talk of Peter Dunne being made Speaker.
8.58pm. Count in Ohariu up to 19.6, Peter Dunne gains a bit of ground from 32.1 to 33.2.
8.54pm. Antony: “Really looking like National 45%, Labour 35% at this stage. National plus ACT still looking at just reaching a majority.”
8.53pm. Commentators on 3News expect NZ First to lose ground when special votes are admitted.
8.51pm. Assuming NZ First don’t pull a rabbit out of the hat, it’s looking like the vote for excluded parties will be 6.5 per cent, meaning the National Party will need a bit under 47 per cent to get a majority.
8.50pm. Labour looking increasingly safe in the Maori seat of Ikaroa-Rawhiti, leading 51.3 to 41.6 with 28.2 reporting.
8.44pm. Antony confirms that the booth votes should even up the vote in the terms I suggested earlier, to about 45-35 in favour of the National Party. Booths currently coming in are very small ones. City booths later on should see Labour and the Green Party go up (from 31.3 and 6.3 at present, to the National Party’s 48.7).
8.43pm. Jim Anderton has opened up a handy lead in Wigram, 42.4 per cent to 32.4 per cent National.
8.42pm. 15.2 per cent of booths in from Ohariu, and Peter Dunne has faded a little further to 32.1 per cent, against 29.2 per cent Labour and 28.3 per cent National.
8.35pm. Maori Party still looking good in Te Tai Tonga, leaving two of the seven in doubt but favouring Labour.
8.29pm. Labour still looking good in the Maori seat of Ikaroa-Rawhiti: leading 49.7 to 43.7 with 12.9 counted (that’s 12.9 per cent of booths, not votes).
8.27pm. No great change in Ohariu with count up from 4.3 to 8.7 per cent.
8.21pm. Commentator on Radio NZ makes the point that the higher NZ First gets without crossing the threshold, the lower the vote the National Party needs for an absolute majority. At present the NZ First is almost exactly where the National Party would want it – 4.5 per cent.
8.17pm. Count in Ohariu up from 4.3 per cent to 6.5 per cent, and Peter Dunne is up from 33.2 per cent
8.15pm. Much as we saw in ACT, we appear to be in a lull between the entry of “advance” votes and booth votes in significant numbers.
8.10pm. Peter Dunne of United Future NZ is down on raw figures from 45.9 per cent to 33.2 per cent in Ohariu with 4.3 per cent counted. He may have suffered from the redistribution which changed the name of his seat from Ohariu-Belmont. At the moment it’s a tight three-horse race: Dunne 1197, National 1032, Labour 1001.
8.03pm. Antony: “The advance votes tell us National will win. But did the gap between National and Labor tighten at the end of the campaign? If it did, then it might be closer. Will Labor plus the Greens come close to National plus ACT? It doesn’t look like Peter Dunne or Jim Anderton will do anyhting other than elect themselves.”
7.58pm. No change in Maori seats: the Maori Party leads in five, but trails slightly in Ikaroa-Räwhiti and Hauraki-Waikato.
7.50pm. Antony on the advance vote: “in 2005, Labor rose from 36.8% to 41.1% at the end of the count, National from 43.5% to 39.1%, Green 4.8% to 5.3%, NZ First 6.1% to 5.7%, United NZ 3.0% to 2.7%, Maori 1.6% to 2.1%.” Does that mean the current raw figures of National 49, Labour 31.5, Green 6, NZF 4.5 should be adjusted to National 44.5, Labour 36, Green 6.5 and NZF 4?
7.48pm. Winston Peters now getting thrashed in Tauranga, and NZ First national vote has faded a little to 4.6 per cent with 4.6 per counted.
7.45pm. ACT NZ on 3.3 per cent so far, and I imagine would go higher with big Auckland booths, compared with 1.5 per cent (two seats) in 2005.
7.41pm. TVNZ projecting a slight National Party majority with 63 seats out of 123, the remainder going 40 Labour, 8 Greens, 6 Maori, 4 ACT New Zealand, one each for Progressive and United Future New Zealand. Even if the National Party is reined in a little from here, they could surely rely on backing from ACT NZ.
7.34pm. Antony (hell, just read his blog): “Models are looking better for Labor than the raw vote, but still not enough to prevent a change of government.”
7.30pm. Antony reckons we’re in for “quite a wait” to see if the National Party wins a majority – but if those are the stakes, it seems there’s very little prospect of any kind of Labour government being formed.
7.28pm. However, Labour leads 730-632 in Ikaroa-Räwhiti. Maori leads of varying sizes in the other five.
7.26pm. Antony projects five of seven Maori seats going to the Maori Party, but the first one I’ve looked at is the one reckoned Labour’s best chance of hanging on (Hauraki-Waikato), and Labour’s lead is only 490-475.
7.24pm. Antony Green reports: “Early models are matching votes up in line with current percentages, which would point to a National majority government.”
7.19pm. Very early results provide hope for NZ First: they’re bobbing around the threshold mark, and Winston Peters leads in Tauranga 236 votes to 224.
7.18pm. National vote with 3 per cent counted: National 49, Labour 32, Green 6 per cent, NZ First 4.5 per cent.
7.17pm. Jim Anderton comfortably ahead in Wigram with 2 of 64 booths reporting.
7.15pm. Peter Dunne only slightly ahead in Ohariu, with 2 of 46 booths reporting.
7.12pm. Antony Green says the “first advance votes” are in line with the polls: National high 40s, Labour mid-to-high 30s, Greens 7 per cent, NZ First 3.8 per cent.
7.10pm. It doesn’t look like they’re providing booth-level figures for tonight’s count either, which pretty much leaves us completely in the dark. In 2005 the early count looked diabolical for Labour to the untrained eye, but that was because rural booths were coming in early. If any media outlets are making the effort to match booth results, I would be pleased if someone could bring it to my attention.
7.02pm. Curses to the NZ Electoral Commission, which claims to have CSV files of booth-level results from 2005 on its site – but all the links are broken. Let’s hope it gets a lot better from here.
7.00pm. A quick guide for beginners. New Zealand has a proportional representation electoral system, which normally means the non-local observer need look no further than the national vote. However, mixed-member proportional brings the complication that minor parties must clear one of two hurdles to win seats proportional to their vote share: either they must win 5 per cent of the national vote, or win at least one constituency seat. The minor parties in play are:
- The Green Party, who current polling suggests are sure to clear 5 per cent. Notwithstanding party leader Jeanette Fitzsimons’ win in Coromandel in 1999, they will probably need to.
- New Zealand First, closely associated with its troubled leader Winston Peters and presumably in big trouble. Peters lost his constituency seat of Tuaranga in 2005, but his party scored 5.7 per cent of the national vote despite a 4.7 per cent swing. In spite of everything, Peters might have some hope of recovering Tauranga with the retirement of one-term National Party MP Bob Clarkson.
- The Maori Party, believed likely to capture most of the seven dedicated Maori electorates (it currently has four), potentially causing a significant overhang (see below).
- ACT New Zealand, the free-market party led by Rodney Hide, who retained his seat of Epsom in 2005 with 42.3 per cent of the vote against the National Party’s 33.7 per cent.
- United Future New Zealand, led by Peter Dunne, who is very likely to be re-elected in his seat of Ohariu.
- Progressive Party, led by veteran Jim Anderton who polled 46.6 per cent in his seat of Wigram in 2005.
In normal circumstances, the parliament will consist of 63 general electorates, seven Maori electorates and 50 list seats. However, these numbers can be increased in the event of an overhang, which occurs if a party wins more constituency seats than it would normally get from its share of the national vote. This is almost certain to be true of the Maori Party, which might win as many as seven seats despite having a national vote of between 2 and 3 per cent according to the polls. The Progressive Party constituency seat is also likely to be won from a negligible national vote that wouldn’t account for a seat. Taken together, that could lead to an overhang of between two and five seats, for a total of up to 125 seats rather than 120. As such, attention here will be focused on the national vote; Tauranga, Epsom, Ohariu and Wigram; and the Maori electorates.
6.10pm (NZ time). Welcome to my live coverage of the New Zealand election count. I’m getting in early here to advertise the fact that I’m doing this – polls in New Zealand do not in fact close until 7pm.
Why should I be “forced” to pay taxes for things I don’t use, or for programs I don’t support?
[ITEP. My view of democracy is that a government “of the people, by the people, for the people” is a pipe dream and was first spoken of by a politician who wanted to get elected in a faraway land that has since turned septic tank.]
Do you know what form of government that the system described by that motto replaced? Would you really want to go back to that earlier system, where the average person had no say whatsoever?
[No but if democracy is about freedom and choice why should people be forced to vote if they dont like anything on offer?]
Democracy is about governing ourselves. It’s not just about a “vote”. Not engaging in the democratic process is not “democratic” because it gives you “choice” it’s undemocratic because you aren’t taking part in a system of government designed for the purpose of giving you the right to decide what kind of society you want to live in.
[That’s why I much prefer PR-STV, Hare-Clark, whatever you wanna call it.]
It’s a major problem with NZ’s system but say you had to number candidates like in the ACT. How many people would turn up to number hundreds of candidates?
Unless I misunderstood and you mean dividing the party list into different electorates as well?
ShowsOn, do you think people who vote Greens really want a Labor Government? No, they’d prefer either a Greens Government or a Government that is forced to negotiate with the Greens. That doesn’t necessarily mean it will be unstable.
WB – would you give a cabinet position to Roger the Dodger? He is a pretty big whale for a brand new PM to try to push around I would have thought.
He previously said that Douglas wouldn’t get a cabinet post, but I think ACT’s position was publicly “fair enough then” and privately “well we’ll see what he says when we have the balance of power!”
No ShowsOn I would not. I am simply stating that we have not reached this ideal and I don’t think we will. No harm in keepng trying though eh?
Peter Dunne’s called it, FWIW. Elf, I personally would like to see it happen, but what I don’t know about NZ politics could fill a warehouse.
How’s this for a compromise:
At the bottom of every ballot there’s an option “None of the above”.
If people genuinely can’t find anything good about any of the candidates they tick that. If “None of the above” gets the most votes, there has to be another election.
I reckon Hare-Clark would work fine in NZ, I don’t see why it wouldn’t. If you divided the country into 24 five-member electorates to elect 120, you wouldn’t have that many candidates. Personally I prefer the way that candidates are listed in Ireland to Robson Rotation. In Ireland there are no party columns, and candidates are listed in a random order, like in our House of Representatives. It encourages parties to only run as many candidates as they think they can win, and most constituencies have max. 10 candidates running for 3, 4, or 5-member constituencies.
Indeed, Ireland is bigger than NZ, with 4.4 million people, compared to 4.2 million in New Zealand, and they’ve used the same system for 80 years.
Why is National getting 59 seats with 45/46% of the vote? Is it because there aren’t enough smaller parties getting over the 5% threshold?
[Why should I be “forced” to pay taxes for things I don’t use, or for programs I don’t support?]
Because if you don’t, there will be no compulsion on others to pay taxes for programs you do support and use.
Because taxes are needed to sustain the State into the future, so you can use your democratic right to reform it, so it does more closely represent your views.
Because some things your taxes pay for are beneficial to others, which in the long term may help you, even if you don’t directly use them. For example, a university can educate people, which lifts their wages, which could lower tax rates in the longer term. Or criminals are put in prisons that you helped pay for, which makes society safer for all.
[That’s what you think ShowsOn. I don’t think minority governments are necessarily unstable. It just means there needs to be more of a consensus on policy formation. Under PR/MMP WorkChoices would never have passed as it never should have.]
Of course that’s what I think, that’s why I wrote it. I don’t think WorkChoices is a good example, because it demonstrated the current voting system working effectively, a silly policy ended a government.
Does anyone follow NZ politics closely enough to know exactly what issues brought Clark undone, or was it just that they were sick of Labour after three terms?
It was a rhetorical question, ShowsOn. You really need everything explained in words of one syllable, don’t you?
ShowsOn, are minority governments always unstable?
[I don’t think WorkChoices is a good example, because it demonstrated the current voting system working effectively, a silly policy ended a government.]
I disagree.
By the time the election came along it was too late for some people and Labor for whatever reason gave us Workchoices Lite.
Adam
Seem to be the same as here. The populace was sick of the Government but happy with the governing! Go figure. That is why Key campaigned like Rudd – very similar policies to the Government. Who said pollies don’t learn?
I don’t think there was anything particularly awful, although a few bills were particularly controversial, including the Electoral Finance Act.
I think it was a combination of things Adam, but mostly an ‘it’s time’ factor. I also think people were getting sick of social policies such as the ‘smacking’ law.
Speaking of the smacking law, they will have to hold a referenda/plebecite on it at some stage under their citizen initiated referendum law.
Itep they did win or are winning 41 electorate seats…that’s why.
She was in for 9 years just about as much as people can take before they want a change.
[Does anyone follow NZ politics closely enough to know exactly what issues brought Clark undone, or was it just that they were sick of Labour after three terms?]
There aren’t any “issues” in NZ. Labour and National over there are closer in policy terms than Labor and Liberal here, and that’s saying something.
“That weird looking lady’s been in for a while… we’re in something called a “recession”… let’s give that other bloke a go, he knows something about money”.
Jeanette Fitzsimmons says that the Greens may get a ninth MP on special votes.
Oz:
“That weird looking lady” wishes she was still campaigning in a time before TV. She’s a good radio pollie.
[Itep they did win or are winning 41 electorate seats…that’s why.]
They could win 0 electorate seats and still win Government, it doesn’t make a difference.
[Jeanette Fitzsimmons says that the Greens may get a ninth MP on special votes.]
Good on Jeanette.
What are “special votes”?
ITEP, that made no sense at all.
I hate to ask what the “smacking law” might be.
No ‘smacking” allowed of any sort. No smacking a child and no smacking up your nose!
Sorry for that last bit.
What is Key’s position on IR? Did Labour run a scare campaign suggesting that Key would bring in a NZ-WorkChoices? If not, why not?
[The party has only gained one seat, from six to seven, although Fitzsimons is holding out for an eighth.]
I thought they were pretty much guaranteed 8?
[It was a rhetorical question, ShowsOn. You really need everything explained in words of one syllable, don’t you?]
Why do you always question my intelligence? I have only called you intellectually ignorant, but never stupid.
[ShowsOn, are minority governments always unstable?]
Not necessarily. I just think our system is better because the executive comes from the legislature. If the executive was appointed by the head of government from outside the legislature, then I would support a proportional representation voting system for the lower house. Because then it wouldn’t determine how governments form and fall.
Yes Oz, that was a mistake, since corrected.
Because Adam, that would be dishonest.
Also im sure Key isnt that stupid he saw what happened to Unca Howie and he wants to stick around for some time yet.
Turnbull must be envious of Mr Key right now, wonder if he’s calling him asking him how’d you do it?
[Why do you always question my intelligence?]
Because you consistently say such idiotic things.
Who are you quoting, Oz? They are fairly solidly sitting on eight seats. I think she was talking about absentee votes, postal votes etc, which tend to benefit the Greens. They are on 6.5% now, they got 7% in 2002 and won nine seats, and considering that there will likely be a lot more wasted votes this time, due to NZF being wiped out.
Adam:
stops child abusers being able to get off scot-free by claiming “reasonable chastisement”
no adult would accept the kind of treatment given out to kids – the blaise attitude towards child abuse in some quarters also sticks in my craw
[What is Key’s position on IR?]
Pro-union, funnily enough.
See? Weird country.
So here’s what I learnt tonight; Antony Green hates Winston Peters.
My boy Malcolm will be PM inside 4 years. Just remember, I called it first, right here with The Poll Bludger.
aren’t there more important things for government to do than smacking laws?
A brief question from the Sunset Home for the Terminally Confused.
I’ve seen references to ACT getting 3 or more seats from the lists. Yet, they appear to be stuck on 3.7% even further from the threshold than NZ First.
I know that they have a constituency seat in Auckland (Rodney? Hide as the Member), so that accounts for 1. Do they have any other constituency seats? Otherwise I can’t see how they will get 3-5 seats, and it seems even more inexplicable that they’ll get any list seats.
Elf
“My boy Malcolm will be PM inside 4 years. Just remember, I called it first, right here with The Poll Bludger.”
NZ aint big enough for his ego
[Turnbull must be envious of Mr Key right now, wonder if he’s calling him asking him how’d you do it?]
He’ll say “Well you have to not be an arrogant, greedy idiot”. So bad luck Malcolm.
[Who are you quoting, Oz?]
William, but he said it was a typo.
Mary Hannah Wade
This is not the forum for this discussion but….duh. The smacking law in NZ went way further than you obviously think. It actually STOPPED ALL smacking, actual true reasonable chastisement included. Therefore no child in NZ can legally be ‘chastised’ with a quick smack on the bottom. This so-called “Law” WILL be overturned.
[Also im sure Key isnt that stupid he saw what happened to Unca Howie]
Oh not this uncle business again.
[Because you consistently say such idiotic things.]
LOL! 😀 That you just dismiss without being able to argue against!
Peter Fuller, once you win an electorate seat you don’t need to meet the 5% threshold any more.
If you get a constit seat, you then get allocated list seats proportional to your vote. So they 3.7% of 122, minus they one they already have.
Adam and ShowsOn – are you 2 in love or something?
[Yet, they appear to be stuck on 3.7% even further from the threshold than NZ First.]
Peter, there’s two ways to get list seats. One is to cross the 5% threshold and the second way is to get just one electorate seat. So now they’ve got one, they’ll get list candidates based on their vote.