So who's new then?

Having said goodbye to a whole bunch of MPs, we shouldn't forget that it isn't the end of the story. We're getting another lot, and one more! Don't blame me, I didn't vote for any of them!

Now David Farrar has kindly provided the list, and while he is generous about most of them (he does love politics and politicians a lot he does), I thought I'd do my dash through the lot to see if there are libertarian reasons to like any of them (or any other random reasons that might make up for anything else). I did, after all, go through all the Labour candidates and didn't have enough time (or commitment, or willingness to sacrifice employment) to go through the Nats. So, because it's harder this way, let's look at the parties in reverse order of number of new MPs.

The rating I'll give an MP elect is tentative, after all what WILL he or she do? However it will be fairly simple: pro-freedom, status quo or anti-freedom with a mild or a strong. Note none are libertarian, being pro-freedom means compared to the status quo, it isn't necessarily consistent.

Maori Party
Rahui Katene (new MP for Te Tai Tonga) Father was cousin of Eva Rickard, she's a lawyer who graduated from Victoria, career been in Maori Legal Services and contracting as a legal consultant to iwis. Nothing that indicates much one way or the other, except she IS in the Maori Party and does mention the Marxist Angeline Greensill. Verdict: Anti-freedom given her party affiliation, but really too early to tell.

ACT
Sir Roger Douglas we all know. Roger does believe in less government, privatisation and more consumer choice, but we also know he likes efficient taxation and maintaining the welfare state and universal health and education access funded by the state. He's pro freedom, but no libertarian.
John Boscawen is significant for being behind the campaign against the EFA, that's enough to say Pro-freedom on this issue at least.
David Garrett from the Sensible Sentencing Trust is more worrying. While I'm supportive of a tougher line on crime, SST wants everyone arrested to have to supply DNA. This is further than National's policy. I'd like David to clarify what he thinks should be done. Anti-freedom if he believes in a Police state to Police us, awaiting clarification.

Green
Kevin Hague. Former Health Board CEO. History of causes from opposing apartheid to promoting Treaty of Waitangi. Another gay MP. Clearly strongly socially liberal but also keen to use the state to compel being liberal. Odds are he wants more governmet. Anti-freedom.
Catherine Delahunty Mad as can be Marxist who believes in overthrowing the capitalist system, is anti science (GE) and anti free trade. Strongly anti-freedom.

Labour
Rajen Prasad Nice guy, but as I said before he is into a carefully constructed society that wipes every tear. Now that isn't that scary when you have met the guy, he is a very gentle man, but it doesn't bode well for less government. Mildly anti-freedom
Jacinda Ardern Member for London. Look if you joined Labour this recently you have to love Nanny State. Anti-freedom.
Raymond Huo Nothing much to tell here, I'll give him benefit of the doubt. Status quo.
Phil Twyford He's firmly on the left loves government. Mildly anti-freedom.
Carol Beaumont Turned a safe Labour seat to National, is ex. CTU and believes in "activism". Wants to strengthen democracy so is deluded about the EFA. Anti-freedom.
Kelvin Davis Actually not half bad, but he's Labour. Status quo
Carmel Sepuloni Believes in participating in all levels of decision making, is involved in local government, believes in social justice and equity, so clearly approves of Nanny State. Mildly anti-freedom.
Stuart Nash. Fairly empty profile, nothing exciting here though DPF says he has real charisma (maybe why he never mentions Labour on his profile). Status quo.
Clare Curran - Dunedin South. Like I said before, vile little PR spinmistress. Promoted How to position National as the “enemies of the people”. Cheerleader of Nanny State and truth stretching. Strongly anti-freedom.
Grant Robertson - Wellington Central Into redistribution, equality and affirmative action. Strongly anti-freedom.
Chris Hipkins - Rimutaka Deluded into thinking NZ led the world on fighting apartheid and the Vietnam War, but he loves the state running health and roads. Strongly anti-freedom
Iain Lees-Galloway - Palmerston North He says "Do we continue with positive, progressive, inclusive change that delivers for all New Zealanders or do we change back to the bad old days of individualism and division? Of the politics of the few at the expense of the community" Strongly Anti-freedom.
Brendon Burns - Christchurch Central Well he's a PR hack for Labour, and got passionate about stopping the privatisation of local power companies. ugh. Anti-freedom

shudder, now the Nats, surely there is some hope here?
National
Steven Joyce. Founder of Energy FM New Plymouth, quite an entrepreneur. Managed the 2005 campaign for National. Mildly pro-freedom given background
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga - Maungakiekie. Lawyer, city councillor, involved in the voluntary sector. Who knows?
Hekia Parata - Ex bureaucrat and runs a "business" selling Maori consultancy services primarily to the state sector. Doesn't tolerate dissenting views. Anti-freedom.
Melissa Lee - Korean born journalist, not many other signs of ideology. Who knows?
Kanwal JS Bakshi Businessman who works in the voluntary sector too, and a migrant. Who knows?
Paul Quinn Big on Treaty issues, businessman, successful in sports. Hard to tell this one. Suspicious of anyone who has been part of the Treaty industry who doesn't explain what's wrong with it. Status quo.
Michael Woodhouse. Private hospital manager, got to be some hope in that. Mildly pro-freedom
Simon Bridges - Tauranga. Calming down from him slaying Winston, he's a Crown Prosecutor, and struggle if I may, I can't figure out what he believes in.
Amy Adams - Selwyn. Lawyer, fought against Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill, believes in personal responsibility. Mildly pro-freedom.
Louise Upston - Taupo. Business woman, project manager and something called a Business Excellence Evaluator (ugh). Who knows?
Todd McClay - Rotorua. A diplomat who believes "that healthcare is a fundamental right that should be affordable and available to all". Mildly anti-freedom, given his father's credentials.
Tim Macindoe - Hamilton West. CEO of Arts Waikato, is a parishioner and appears to have sought local and central government funding for several causes. That's not good for freedom. Mildly anti-freedom.
Aaron Gilmore - Yeah he's ok. Mildly pro-freedom.
Nikki Kaye - Auckland Central - Scientist, training to be a lawyer, but is partly popular due to her looks and unseating Judith Tizard. However, nothing much to say she'll do anything about freedom. Who knows?
Cam Calder - A dentist, website never mentions freedom or individuals, but talks about resourcing health and education. Status quo.
Jonathan Young - New Plymouth. Venn Young's son (As in Venn Young, Muldoon era). Teacher and preacher. Mildly Anti-freedom surely.

So, calmed down now?

Let's wait till the special votes are counted, and then the maiden speeches. Maybe they will tell us more. On balance though quite a few believers in big government and a whole bunch of people who didn't ever say what they thought the role of the state was, or mention freedom, or individuals, or what government shouldn't do.

What DID leftwing campaigners tell some people?

This report that some people rang the Police when the election results were coming through is alarming in several ways:

1. That people thought their benefits would disappear because National was being elected. What sort of untrammelled nonsense have the left been spreading about such a situation? How despicable are those who promote such lies among people who are clearly rather unhinged? How many were persuaded to vote Labour or Green or else their benefits would dry up?

2. What do people think the Police will do? Arrest John Key and Rodney Hide? Call an end to general elections? Do they think when things don't go their way the Police should be called in? How scary is that?

3. Most disconcerting is the helpless dependency of such people who think the only way forward is to remain dependent on money taken by force from others. How insipid has the welfare state become that there are people terrified at the prospect of having to earn themselves a living?

Sorry folks, it's when the word Libertarianz replaces National that you might be worried, but by then the culture would have to have changed so radically that you wouldn't be scared anymore.

The excuse a few on the left will use

Low turnout.

Yet Barack Obama didn't achieve 78% and his victory was somehow legitimate.

Time to take some morphine for sore losers. Under MMP voters had a vast choice, let's consider what all the parties stood for:

Labour - status quo
National - status quo with minor changes and a new team
Greens - leftwing environmentalism
New Zealand First - conservative nationalism
ACT - freer market economics and a cap on government
United Future - something between Labour and National
Progressives - something between Labour and New Zealand First
Maori Party - anything that advances Maori but something between New Zealand First and the Greens depending on who you talk to
Kiwi Party - something between United Future and New Zealand First with a Christian based moral tinge
Family Party - evangelically led Christian theocracy
Bill and Ben Party - having fun and a bit of a joke while voting
ALCP - Legalise cannabis then we disband
Pacific Party - Polynesian based Christian morality
Alliance - socialism
Democrats for Social Credit - lunatic theory on money combined with conspiracy theorists
Libertarianz - individual freedom
Workers Party - communism
RAM - socialism mixed with lunatic conspiracy theorists
Republic of New Zealand Party - Farewell Your Majesty

Now there is no excuse that there isn't a choice, unless you're a Nazi, Islamist or Hindu nationalist perhaps. Indeed, the likelihood of a National led government has been pretty much on the cards for the last year or so, so if the lumpen proletariat didn't like it, they could have voted. The people have spoken - and an overwhelming majority voted against a Helen Clark led government. A majority of voters voted for a government including National or ACT.

They won, you lost, eat that.

Bye bye to the losers

So who is no longer there to vote on how the government spend your money and tell you what to do or not to do? Time to celebrate the disappearance of:

Labour
Judith Tizard
Martin Gallagher
Harry Duynhoven
Russell Fairbrother
Mark Burton
Damien O'Connor (though will be awaiting specials as he is next on the list)
Mahara Okeroa
Lesley Soper
Louisa Wall
Dave Hereora

Pacific Party
Taito Philip Field

NZ First
Peter Brown
Winston Peters
Dail Jones
Ron Mark
Pita Paraone
Barbara Stewart
Doug Woolerton

United Future
Judy Turner

Independent/Kiwi Party
Gordon Copeland

The MMP slippery slide back
Darren Hughes out of Otaki, but back in on the list
Steve Chadwick out of Rotorua, but back in on the list
Lynne Pillay out of Waitakere, but back in on the list

RETIRED

Tim Barnett
Mark Gosche
Paul Swain
David Benson-Pope (de-selected)
Steve Maharey
Marian Hobbs
Jill Pettis
Dover Samuels
Margaret Wilson

Mark Blumsky
Bob Clarkson
Katherine Rich
Clem Simich

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

So who is the one YOU are most happy to see the back of? Other than Winston of course :) For me, it is Fairbrother, a wet apologist for some of the vilest individuals in the country.

Dear Peter Dunne

Oh Peter, it's just you again. The worm didn't come to save you, the Kiwi Party broke away from you (ah yes remember Anthony Walton and Future NZ? Yes we wont talk about what he got up to!), and United Future has been punished for straddling the middle muddle ground of mediocrity, whoring between Labour and National, supporting either, both and neither. People wanting Labour wanted Labour, people wanting a change voted National and ACT. There was no good reason for people to support United Future, even though your tax policy was better than National's - who knew?

John Key doesn't need you, nobody else does either. Be content being the member for Ohariu. Let the Families Commission disappear - you can't seriously believe it does anything worthwhile. Forget Transmission Gully, buy a dog, it will be a more friendly, rewarding and less costly pet.

However, take the offer as Speaker. You are a fair man, you could do it well, far better than the incumbent.

Dear Winston

Oh well, goodbye, farewell, amen.

You did well, starting with milking discontent from Bolger's broken election promises, then making a clean sweep of the Maori seats, leading a bunch of mediocrities into government, and recovering just enough to become Minister of Foreign Affairs. You milked latent racism against Asian immigrants, blatantly, and applied xenophobia against foreign investment, foreign goods and services. You even got some policies implemented, but how many pensioners now thank you for eliminating the vile Superannuation Surcharge that Labour implemented, National promised to remove but didn't - until you entered a coalition with National.

You're slippery as can be, always looking for a conspiracy, milking the talkback whingers and moaners, their bigotries, with flickers of intelligence - the key one I saw was your understanding of the burden of national superannuation, and seeking a way to break that by shifting it to individual contributory accounts. It was rejected because you wanted it compulsory and because your name was attached to it, but it wasn't a bad idea in some respects - compulsion being the key problem.

However, I wont miss you. You played the game of the lowest common denominator. You played the race card, without really believing it. You don't believe in choice, you don't believe in freedom, you don't judge people by what they do, but by what they are.

While you're at it, can you just arrange your party AGM early and wind up? Be a shame for those people to keep wasting their lives in your party now you're retiring.

Enjoy your retirement, after all I was forced to pay for it.

Dear Jeanette Fitzsimons

Well done, you have a couple more MPs. However I know it is disappointing you didn't do better. There are some reasons why.

1. It's a recession. You don't like economic growth, you want to spend more of people's money on things they don't want to be forced to pay for, and you want to put "the planet" ahead of people. Your environmentalism is about guilt and feeling bad for living a Western lifestyle, a lot of people frankly are fed up with your evangelical finger pointing. They want to be left alone.

2. Your patronising message about putting "our children" and "the planet" over tax cuts doesn't wash. People have children. They are not yours, families get pissed off with you and your comrades nationalising the people's children. People want tax cuts because they work fucking hard for that money - it is THEIR money - NOT yours. They know they know best how to spend it on their children NOT you. Learn that. Secondly, people see "the planet" and see that what you want them to do - ride a train, use a different lightbulb - will make no difference. After all, you talk a lot of scaremongering bollocks about oil (noticed petrol prices dropping), cellphone towers and anything "nuclear", people don't believe the end of the world is nigh - but they do care about their own lives and loved ones.

3. Most people most of the time don't want to be moralised at. It's what you self satisfied lot love to do, you love telling people what to do, telling them what not to do, telling them how "we" should spend money on things you like. Think again about being control freaks.

However you wont worry I am sure. You have, once again, been saved from being in government. Government after all harms small parties. You'll no doubt complain when National spends less of other people's money, regulates less of people's property (though I am sceptical that will happen) and gives people more of their money back. You'll frighten people about their food, about climate change, about cellphone towers and insist the planet can only be saved if people use trains more, regardless of cost.

So, given you're dyed in the wool lovers of big interfering taxing and spending government, here is one small piece of advice.

Use reason. It means not worshipping at the altars of scares like peak oil, like trains are best, like cellphone towers bad, like US military power is bad, like organic good/GE bad. It means not being scaremongers, not applying a religious fervour to matters that is a matter of faith not evidence. Then you might get more respect.

While you think about that, read Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand. Do it quietly, you might learn something.

Dear Helen Clark

Good for you conceding graciously and resigning.

You've learnt enough in politics to resign in dignity, as you've done worse. 1996 saw Labour's worst ever result with the first campaign you led the party into, in the meantime you have managed to decimate virtually every party you govern with - the Alliance and NZ First out of Parliament, United Future a one man band along with Jim Anderton. However, your greatest victory must surely be to have essentially "won" with the punters on policy. You got re-elected twice after increasing taxes, increasing the size of the state, pouring people's money into expanding welfare, state health and education, and increasing regulation and subsidies. It is what people wanted. National has been elected, largely on a platform to not alter what you've done in most cases. No privatisation, no essential change in state health and education, no end to Working for Families, Kiwisaver or the Cullen Super Fund. No end to ETS, or the anti-nuclear policy. Imitation is the highest complement, so you shouldn't fear your legacy - National was not elected on dismantling it. The views I support did not win National the election.

You've led three governments I have, almost without exception, disagreed with vehemently. You changed the law to get around the illegality of campaigning in 2005 with taxpayers' funds. You implemented many policies unannounced at the previous election. However, most of all you regarded the "state as sovereign", your love of the state and what you think as it being helpful has appalled me, but I give you credit for one thing. You still have some principles you hold onto dearly, and you, by and large, have stuck by them. Trade unions, state provided health, education, welfare and housing, state directed spending on the arts, telecommunications, transport and embracing the ecological agenda. A barely shrouded dislike of US foreign policy as well, has been part of your administration. If there is one thing to admire about you, it is that you've believed in all of this, fought it, and been determined to be consistent about that. It is more than most National Party leaders do.

So I hope you step back, resign as member for Mt Albert appropriately, and write a book. I hope, as you'd expect, that the National/ACT government does dismantle much of what you have done. That does not include civil unions and legalising prostitution - though neither measure was a government one, they were measures that did advance freedom a couple of steps. However, freedom is more than that - it is the chance to make your own choices about how you spend your money, about you and your families healthcare and education, and about adults interacting voluntarily - not having a finger pointing nanny telling them what's best. New Zealanders deserve far better than that. You spent nine years enjoying a healthy economy because of what two previous governments did to ease the size and extent of nanny's pointing finger - the free ride is over.

Goodbye, farewell, amen to you - but your policies? Well, don't worry too much.

Wellington Central: National won the party vote

Bureaucrats for the incoming government have voted for it, sort of. National came first, but add Labour and the Greens and it exceeds National and ACT.

National 11863
Labour 11339
Greens 6657
ACT 1403
NZF 531
United Future 351
Maori 272
Progressive 234
Bill and Ben 148
ALCP 73
Kiwi Party 72
Workers 33
Libertarianz 32
Family 29
Alliance 17
RAM 11
RONZ 6
Democrats 2
Pacific 2

Too early to compare with 2005, need specials for that!

Blogging the NZ election

Yes I'm going to do it, madly on the laptop, as quickly as results get interesting. That means the party vote patterns, and the electorates that are more likely to shift hands. You know the ones that matter, like Tauranga, Ohariu, the Maori seats.

It's going to be the political scientist in me, with a libertarian tinge :)

Have fun voting kiwis, it should be ticks that you are glad to give to a person and a party.

So off to bed!

My prediction for what it's worth

Party name	Party Votes won	Party seat entitlement	No. of electorate seats won	No. of list MPs	Total MPs		% of MPs
Act New Zealand	3.20%	4	1	3	4		3.33%
The Greens	7.30%	9	0	9	9		7.50%
Jim Anderton's Progressive	0.70%	1	1	0	1		0.83%
Māori Party	2.90%	4	4	0	4		3.33%
New Zealand Labour Party	35.30%	45	25	20	45		37.50%
New Zealand National Party	44.70%	56	38	18	56		46.67%
United Future New Zealand	0.90%	1	1	0	1		0.83%
Totals	95.00%	120	70	50	120		100.00%

Simple points:

National's support overrated, Labour's underrated. Previous elections have demonstrated this time and time again. ACT also underrated. Greens a little overrated, a bad economy does not make people that Green oriented. Maori Party has peaked somewhat, more likely to get more party votes which isn't going to help it. Dunne and Anderton both shrinking single man acts. NZ First gone and Libz? Substantially better than last time.

Think of what politics is

Why do people get into politics? It is a truly filthy sport. It is about trying to convince the greatest number of heads that what you and your party want to do to them is the right thing.

Most who enter politics claim to do so out of "service". You heard that a lot in the US campaign, both Obama and McCain talked about serving their country. I don't mean the military, I mean politics.

However what IS politics? It is the pursuit of power - power to make laws, power to take money from people and spend it on what you think is best for them. Take it from me, the people who do this are no better than most of you - they are mostly average - most are not particularly clever or bright - yet so many of you trust them.

The power they wield is enormous. Passing laws means that if people go against them, they could be fined or imprisoned. That is not something you can do to people, it is called using force.

Politicians seek the power to use force, to use violence.

If your business or charity or other voluntary organisation wants money, it has to earn it, persuade people to buy your services or persuade them to donate money.

Politicians don't do that, they can make you pay for what they want - not only do they do that, but they have made it so you're guilty till proven innocent if you get it wrong. Taxes are the tool of the politician. Statists say it is the price of a civilised society, as if it is civilised to make people pay for that which you cannot convince them of.

Across the spectrum they have plans for you and your money, the things they don't want you to do, the things they want you to pay for - for your own good.

The Greens for example have a long list of things they want to ban, subsidise and compel. They are control freaks par excellence. Labour isn't far behind, it believes it knows best to buy you health care, control your children's education and to save for your retirement. It buys you a railway that you didn't want to buy. The Maori Party also believes it knows best.

National will do less, but it wont reverse anything. Most disturbingly it wants the state to maintain a database of DNA of everyone arrested of certain offences, whether guilty or not. The state shouldn't be spying on you if you've not broken the law. National also thinks it can pick winners in spending your money on infrastructure whether or not you will use it. It offers nothing more than a better version of Labour - beyond the Electoral Finance Act, National will repeal nothing of substance that Labour has done.

I would like politics to be peripheral. Government is essential. The state provides for law and order, to protect us from those who will do violence to us, who will defraud us. That is a given and the priority. However, beyond that government is incompetent. I know it will take a long time for people to take responsibility, for their healthcare, for their kids education, to consider charity instead of welfare, and to stop thinking the government can fix problems they can't solve.

Politicians who promise they can change and fix things by spending your money and making people do what they want are shysters. Your only chance to say no to this advance auction of stolen goods is to vote for less of it.

Helen Clark and the Greens participate in it, gloriously and argue strongly that it is the only way things should be.

National participates in it, somewhat reluctantly, unable and unwilling to say no. Unable to say - sorry the government can't fix this, but it can get out of the way of those who might have a chance.

The government you get after the election tomorrow will be different, it could be John Key leading a semi-fresh team, of which he is probably the best person in it. I honestly wish him well, and I hope that all of the vote gathering is style not substance, and Key will change New Zealand for the better by getting the government out of the way and changing the culture of dependency on the state. Sadly I see little to prove to me that he will, even if a handful of ACT MPs push him a little further.

If Helen Clark and the Greens and Maori Party get elected then you'll see change, and it wont be pretty. However you can watch the next three years like I have watched the last 9, and see National unwilling to reverse almost everything Labour did.

Politics you see, is a nasty game. A game of surrendering principle, of kissing babies and promising to people that you'll give them things, without being honest about what you're taking from them. It is about kidding the vast masses of people that you can make their lives better, when the truth is people can really only do this themselves.

The election is about counting heads, not what was in them, but I hope you too will enjoy at least the sight of many politicians losing power, the sight of Helen Clark probably no longer being able to claim to be a victim of her own success as a popular and competent Prime Minister.

However as you do so, remember these people only have the power you have granted them. That is power you granted through your vote. I voted Libertarianz as the only power I want the state to have is to protect me. What power have you said you want the state to have over your life?

Why Libertarianz and NOT Act

My reasons for 2005 are here, but since then National has moved to the left and ACT? Well it has changed too.

Those on the small government side of the spectrum are split between those who advocate voting for ACT, and those who say vote Libertarianz. The arguments on both sides are fairly short and sweet.

ACT advocates say:
1. A vote for ACT is a vote to move New Zealand towards less government, albeit at a far slower pace, degree and extent compared to Libertarianz.
2. ACT is almost guaranteed Parliamentary representation because Rodney Hide will almost certainly win Epsom.

So it comes down to ACT is pointing in the right direction and is in Parliament. However what does “the right direction mean”?

Being fair to ACT, the party looks better now than it has ever done. It has more policies to hinder the growth of the state than ever before, Rodney Hide has upped his game, and having Sir Roger Douglas on the ticket is notable, as he is light years ahead of any National MP in terms of courage and intellect.

ACT is better than National, but it didn’t need to work hard.

You see for me, I want to see six major changes in policies:

1. At least the option of opting out of state health and education.
2. Serious shrinkage of the welfare state
3. A significant reduction in the size of central and local government.
4. Significant reductions in tax consistent with the above.
5. Protection of private property rights.
6. Repeal of victimless crimes.

Obviously the Nats will do none of the above. How about ACT?

1. ACT policy is education vouchers, a step forward, and talks about an option for people to buy private healthcare. So, that gets a tick.
2. ACT would shift sickness beneficiaries towards an insurance based approach. Not exactly cutting the welfare state, but an improvement, so on balance the right direction.
3. ACT would cap central government to growing spending at the rate of inflation and population growth. That isn’t shrinking the state, it’s maintaining it at the same level as Labour. Standing still isn’t a direction. It would shrink local government, so why not central?
4. ACT’s tax policy sends mixed signals. It wouldn’t cut taxes until 2011. That is LESS than National. However, if you don’t shrink the state it is hardly a surprise. ACT also advocates a carbon tax. Yes you read right, it would replaced ETS with a carbon tax.
5. ACT would review the RMA so it would only supplement common law principles, but it doesn’t mention private property rights, except in terms of “where private property is taken or regulated for public good purposes.” So where are private property rights again? Why is it afraid of saying it?
6. Victimless crimes? ACT never discusses them, never touches them. It is tough on crime, but that doesn’t include reviewing criminal law. It has a “national security policy”

So with ACT I get something positive on health, education and welfare, I get the government of the same size as what Labour has left us with, and no tax cut for two years (but might get a carbon tax). I get the RMA reformed, but with no mention of private property rights, and of course ACT is silent on victimless crimes.

How, honestly, can a libertarian say that is worth voting for? I want tax cuts, I want the state to shrink. I don’t believe New Zealanders should have to put up with government as big as Labour has left us with and no tax cuts for two years. I want private property rights protected, I want a government that knows the difference between real crimes, like murder and theft, and victimless crimes, like bans on cigar magazines, smoking cannabis and allowing smoking inside your bar.

A vote for ACT is saying none of those things matter enough. To me they do. So vote ACT if you wish, but to do so you are accepting compromises with those who don’t want tax cuts, those who don’t want to protect private property rights from the RMA, those who believe zero tolerance should apply to all crimes, whether there is a victim or not.

I voted some days ago for Libertarianz, because I want to make a statement with my single vote, that the government shouldn’t own my life. Some Al Gore supporters in 2000 complained that those Americans who voted for Ralph Nader took Democrat votes off of Gore. They didn’t, they voted for what they wanted.

Your vote is a tiny indicator of what YOU believe in. It is nothing more than that. It isn't a veto - after all, it takes tens of thousands of votes to shift a single MP from one party to another.

So I am not “robbing ACT or National” of “their” vote. It is my vote. I voted for more freedom, less government – I invite you to do the same.

Legalise Cannabis?

Well if you believe adults should be able to peacefully consume cannabis on their own property, then your choice is rather simple.

The Green Party has abandoned pursuing this, partly because Nandor Tanczos has gone on to do other things, but also because it didn't really fit the ban/regulate/compel agenda of the party, and more importantly talking about it frightened middle class voters who thought the Greens approved of smoking cannabis. A vote for the Greens to get cannabis decriminalised or legalised is a wasted vote.

The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party has been on a long path to nowhere. It is completely dormant between elections. In 1996, it got 1.66% of the vote, in 1999 1.1%, in 2002 0.64% and in 2005 0.25%. As a one issue party it will never cross the 5% threshold, and has frittered away its support year after year. It also doesn't care about responsibility, doesn't care about healthcare or the right to ban cannabis users from private property. Ticking the leaf will mean nothing other than you only care about cannabis.

Libertarianz would legalise cannabis, and other drugs safer than alcohol, for sale and adult consumption on private property. It would also ensure users of such drugs would be responsible for paying for their own private health consequences, and while such consumption would be a right, it would be the right of private property owners to ban it on their own property, and for employers to insist employees do not enter their premises under the influence of the drug. Legalisation does not mean approval or disapproval, it is simply not the business of the state to tell you what you must or must not ingest.

So I urge those who regard the cannabis laws to be oppressive, those who see the current laws as being an abject failure, and those who believe they should choose what they ingest (but also be responsible for the consequences of consumption), to vote Libertarianz. Odds are that Libertarianz will beat the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party this time round, given the trends of both parties, and a vote for the Greens on this point will be wasted. The Greens failed to make a change in the past 9 years of government that they effectively endorsed.

You think the small government vote is split?

Forget ACT vs Libertarianz. If you really believe in really big government, then the two main ends of THAT spectrum, the Marxist and the conservative are all very split as below:

If you have a Christian bent to politics:

Kiwi Party- The Future part of United Future, divorced. It wants to raise the drinking age, criminalise buying sexual services, make drug laws on a par with murder, raise the minimum wage and use GST instead of road user charges to fund roads? Weird - a mix of all sorts of stuff. Shame Rebekah Clement hasn't left, she is brighter than Gordon Copeland.

Family Party – Destiny NZ with a new name. Tougher version of the Kiwi Party and little regard for separating church and state. The morality of Brian Tamaki and all that is about.

Pacific Party – Philip Field, and the morality attached to him.

Ah better than Christian Heritage right?

However, if you miss the Soviet Union, loathe capitalism, individualism, business and believe nothing would be better than to unite the workers so they’ll never be defeated by the beloved people’s government, and you think Helen Clark is a sellout to global capitalism. You can choose:

The Alliance – Yes, nationalise, keep those foreigners and their money out, make everything free and pine about Muldoon (quietly) and how Jim Anderton is a sellout.

RAM – Foaming at the mouth conspiracy theory led Marxists who think big money is running everything, and only when they control things through the state can they look after themselves, I mean you. This is where the really crazy Alliance people went, I know, I talked to one and I wondered where her straight jacket went.

Workers' Party – You can’t make an omelette without cracking a few eggs, so think of the firing squads, gulags, political prisons and the 100 million slaughtered by communism as a small price to pay to defeat capitalism. Workers' Marxist Leninist dictatorships have such a record of poverty, executions, torture and despair, but hey that was all cooked up by the American Zionist conspiracy - all those fake witnesses to murder in those workers' paradises. Not quite North Korean friendly, but wouldn’t have been distressed had North Korea won the Korean War.

Greens – Yes the Marxist party you have when you want to seem respectable. Policies on almost everything, science replaced with faith based ideologies, enthusiasm to regulate, ban, compel, tax and subsidise all they hate and love respectively, AND most of the MPs have Marxist backgrounds. Allegedly about the environment, but doesn't let reason, science and economics get in the way of a good bit of telling people what to do.

So why shouldn't you vote National?

Given I’ve already told you how to vote in your electorate, it’s time to think about your party vote.

I’ll make a few assumptions:
1. You want a change, not an Obama like bland “change” without saying to what, but you want rid of the Labour led government, you want a change in direction, you want...
2. Less government. Government that doesn't assume that government should regulate, compel, tax or subsidise – and that is in business and personal life.

So as a result you have to rule out Labour and all parties that would grant Labour confidence and supply. The Greens, Maori Party, Jim Anderton’s Progressive Party, United Future and NZ First are all in this vein. If you like the views I express here, but intend to vote for one of those parties then I can’t help you anymore.

So National?

National has swung to the left since 2005. It has policies that in principle and substance are no different from Labour – they are different forms of the same thing. National would cut taxes more than Labour, but its interest in controlling the size of the state is about efficiency, not abolishing departments, and not reducing the amount of legislation. National promises to spend a fortune of your money on infrastructure whether or not you use it, and to subsidise the telecommunications sector. It wont make a fundamental difference to health, education or the welfare state, in fact it will increase the welfare state. It promises to keep a DNA database for every person arrested of an imprisonable offence, whether guilty or not. National and freedom do not go together, it will trade off having “one law for all” and “colourblind state spending” for a coalition with the Maori Party.

What will it do?

- National will continue to make you pay for the state controlled queue rationed health system. You wont be able to opt out, or get your taxes back for using private healthcare.
- National will continue to make you pay for the centrally funded and controlled state education system, whether it suits you or your childrens' needs or not.
- National will maintain and grow the welfare state, and retain all of Labour's increases in it (Working for Families, income related state housing rentals).
- National will maintain and grow the state's role in the economy, including Kiwibank, Kiwirail, Air NZ and subsidise a state controlled broadband telecommunications network.
- National will amend the RMA to protect private property rights and to accelerate state funded infrastructure projects.
- National will maintain the Maori seats and maintain state broadcasting in all its forms, Maori, Pacific Island, TVNZ and Radio NZ.
- National will, somehow, ban gangs, whilst building a DNA database for everyone arrested of a serious crime, whether found guilty or not.
- National will continue and strengthen the war on drugs.
- National will keep local government's powers of general competence and grow its role, by involving it in 20 year plans. It wont cap local government rates or spending.
- National will not abolish a single government agency, including the Families Commission.
- National will continue to force you to pay into the worst pension scheme in the country, with no guaranteed returns, whilst forcing that scheme to invest 40% in New Zealand.

A vote for National is a vote to change heads, a vote for people who – in a quiet discreet moment – might agree with much of what I believe in, but haven’t the courage, skill or conviction to argue for it, or implement it. In which case, why be in politics if all you want is a different version of the status quo?

By ticking National you are saying that even going back to National's policies in 1999 is too radical, you're endorsing most of what Labour has done since 1999 since National will repeal so little. The best you can hope for is:
- Slightly bigger tax cuts than Labour.
- Less enthusiasm for more government than Labour.
- Repeal of the Electoral Finance Act.
- Tougher approach to law and order where it matters (but also victimless crimes too).

No. If you believe in less government, you can't tick National for your party vote. You will change the government by name and by people, but not in substance. Instead of moving left at pace, New Zealand will move left at a snail's pace. It's hardly surprising. Every National government, except 1990-1993, and even then it included the RMA, has at best just adopted Labour's past policies and changed little, at worst it went far far further into Nanny State (Rob Muldoon).

You can't expect the National Party to change anything - it exists for power, that is, to stop Labour having it.

So what about ACT then?

Libertarianz pro-cycling? sure

When Cycling Advocates’ Network asked political parties what their policies on cycling are, Libertarianz had a very easy response. Cycling isn't special.

You see the question was:

Do you support increased provision for cycling through policy, funding or implementation?

So the answer is, yes, if people choose to fund it. It is no if it is about forcing people to fund it. Cycling is a great activity if you like it, cyclists share road space which they don’t pay for (except for rates on local roads) and if cyclists or others want to pay for bike paths, lockers and the rest, then there shouldn’t be barriers on them doing so.

However CAN was looking for subsidies. It wants to make you pay for cycling infrastructure, whether or not you are a cyclist or want to support it. It is no different from asking general taxpayers to pay for roads, electricity or telecommunications - those are all subsidies – and in fact Labour has subsidised all three.

Libertarianz wont make others pay for cycling facilities, but it wont make cyclists pay for what others use too. Cyclists shouldn't pay to subsidise buses with their rates, or to subsidise roads used heavily by trucks. No other party will do that.

After all, what should cyclists expect from the government?

Libertyscott's Electorate voting guide

The electorate vote is not as important as the party vote, with a few distinguished exceptions. So how should you vote? Taking the lead from Blair Mulholland, I've thought long and hard about all of them.

So here is the Libertyscott guide to your electorate vote. It is based on the following premises:

1. Vote for the candidate who most supports giving you back your freedom and taxes.
2. Vote for the candidate who is most likely to defeat the worst candidate.
3. Let a mediocre incumbent who has little chance of being unseated alone by voting for the person who is least objectionable.

Some are more important than other. The names in bold are those that you can vote for positively OR which make a difference against someone quite loathsome.

I've endorsed 26 National candidates, 16 Libertarianz, 15 ACT, 11 Labour, 1 Maori Party and 1 seat I can't pick at all.

Now most of you who love freedom can't disagree with that can you? After all National only won 27 seats in 2002!

Auckland Central - Nikki Kaye - National

This is a chance to defeat Judith Tizard. Nikki Kaye is smarter, harder working and as a bonus, better looking that the former Minister assisting the Prime Minister with her handbag. Tizard is a mediocrity. It is time to remove the peculiar Tizard dynasty from New Zealand politics. She is not high up the Labour list enough to be safe. National needs the likes of a young ambitious intelligent woman like Kaye. Your electorate vote counts here, give it to Nikki Kaye.

Bay of Plenty - Frances Denz - ACT

Tony Ryall has this seat in the bag. He is one of the mediocre “brat pack” who helped National achieve its worst defeat ever in 2002. He doesn’t need your vote. The Labour alternative has no chance and is hopeless as well, and we don’t need Peter Brown. ACT’s Frances Denz is ex. Labour and should be rewarded for moving in the right direction. Give Frances your electorate vote.

Botany - Kenneth Wang - ACT

Botany is a new seat that has become the Wang Wong show. Kenneth Wang doesn’t have a profile on the ACT website, but does have a website. Pansy Wong is in on the list anyway. You might tick Wang, but if ACT only gets enough party votes for 3 MPs, then Wang pushes Roger Douglas out of Parliament because the third MP, after Hide and Roy will be Wang. Funnily enough leftwing voters in Botany might find it preferable to vote for Wang if they dislike Douglas. For me, Wang seems the better choice, because Wong has hardly been that impressive.

Christchurch Central - Nicky Wagner - National

Brendon Burns is the Labour candidate, who was Labour’s chief spin doctor in the Beehive. He’s well up the Clark hierarchy so it is important to vote against him. Nicky Wagner the National candidate is already a list MP. She speaks in favour of many mad Nat policies, like 40% local investment from the Superannuation Fund, so is otherwise loathsome but this is about Burns. Burns is lowly ranked on the Labour list. Wagner will be elected regardless so electing her as the local MP will deny Burns from Parliament, and will mean she is an electorate MP, not a list MP – in Labour heartland. So hold your nose and vote for Wagner.

Christchurch East - Aaron Gilmore - National

Lianne Dalziel has this one cornered, with National’s Aaron Gilmore having little chance. I know Aaron’s wife, and she is intelligent so I trust her judgment. Give Aaron your vote to try to get Dalziel’s share of the vote below 50%.

Clutha Southland - Roly Henderson - ACT

Bill English is a shoo in, so you can happily vote for someone who believes in freedom. Roly Henderson of ACT is a sheep farmer who says “We don’t need our government to do more for us, we need less government so we can do more” that’ll do nicely.

Coromandel - Sandra Goudie - National

Sandra Goudie of National did good work in removing Jeanette Fitzsimons from this seat and she isn’t half bad. Give her the tick, Jeanette comes third in this seat that she once held – a fairly devastating verdict.

Dunedin North - Michael Woodhouse - National

Pete Hodgson is another shoo in, so tick Michael Woodhouse of National. He is President of the NZ Private Surgical Hospitals Association and was previously the Vice President of the NZ Private Hospitals Association, so he’d bring a useful perspective on private sector provision of health care to the National caucus.

Dunedin South - Conway Powell - National

Clare Curran is out to capture Benson- Pope’s seat for Labour. She’s a vile little PR hack who is seeking to portray National as enemies of the people. As a result, Dr Conway Powell, a centrist scientist standing for National is worth a vote to try to keep her out of Parliament.

East Coast - none of them

Anne Tolley took this from Labour last time, but Anne Tolley has a problem. She likes censorship. Now while I agree with her concerns about child pornography, she drafted a (defeated) bill that would have banned any material that “deal with” sexual conduct by young people. It would have banned a vast range of novels, films and indeed information leaflets.

Drafting kneejerk bills about laws you know little about isn’t encouraging. Moana Mackey? Well she is leftwing, she likes unions, compulsory Maori language and bleats on about the 1990s being a horrible time. The bright side is she is a scientist and supports allowing genetic engineering on a case by case basis. Judy Turner from United Future doesn’t deserve your vote either, and Catherine Delahunty is on the far left of the Greens. Advice? You don’t want to be associated with any of these control freaks. Don’t bother.

East Coast Bays - Elah Zamora - Libertarianz

Murray McCully is a shoo in, so vote for Elah Zamora of Libertarianz and know you’re voting for someone who is hard working and a determined supporter of freedom. The Labour candidate here is especially awful, so don’t even think about her if you hate McCully. Zamora is the moral choice.

Epsom - Rodney Hide - ACT

Richard Worth tried to paint Rodney Hide as being pro drug liberalisation, as if it were a bad thing. Rodney has been a good MP. Richard Worth is so awful I’d like Rodney to remain MP for Epsom. He is one of the better MPs in Parliament.

Hamilton East - David Bennett- National

National’s David Bennett took this from Dianne Yates, which was good although the Nat’s website lies about his age. His maiden speech talked about less welfare, more personal responsibility and tax cuts. Give him a chance and secure this seat from the awful Sue Moroney.

Hamilton West - Tim Wikiriwhi - Libertarianz

Labour’s Martin Gallagher could well face serious defeat here, BUT the National candidate – Tim Macindoe leads Arts Waikato, which seeks taxpayer money from Creative NZ and from local authorities. So he likes big government, so not really much point switching men but not philosophies. Vote for a man who has turned his life around, and who is passionate about what he does, and works very hard – Vote Tim Wikiriwhi, Libertarianz, Parliament wont know what’s hit it.

Hauraki-Waikato - Nanaia Mahuta - Labour

It’s a two horse race here, Nanaia Mahuta against Angeline Greensill. Greensill is seriously Marxist, so vote for Princess Mahuta. It also reduces the Maori Party overhang.

Helensville - Peter Osborne - Libertarianz

John Key doesn’t need your vote, he is in on the list and the awful Darien Fenton from Labour would be worse. Vote for Peter Osborne of Libertarianz. He’ll work hard calling National list MP John Key to account, without backtracking on his principles

Hunua - Bruce Whitehead - Libertarianz

The awful patronizing prick Paul Hutchison (I am speaking from experience here) will think he has this in the bag. He so doesn’t deserve it. Jordan Carter hasn’t a hope of Cubanisation of this seat, but Sir Roger Douglas does add some colour. However, Bruce Whitehead from Libertarianz deserves you vote. He says “money taken from you (via tax) to fund someone else's "great idea" without your permission is theft”, Sir Roger for what he’s worth would never say that. However he is a strong second choice, better than Hutchison.

Hutt South - Phil Howison - Libertarianz

Trevor Mallard doesn’t need your vote here. Paul Quinn of National negotiates Treaty settlements. Now I know both the ACT and Libz candidates here. Lindsay Mitchell is well deserving, but the young and very smart Phil Howison gets a hard time from most of the other candidates here and deserves your vote. He’s come through the state education system and survived to be spokesman on education. Give Phil Howison your electorate vote, after all Mallard will win anyway.

Ikaroa-Rawhiti - Parekura Horomia - Labour

Three in this race, the Greens aren’t worth considering, so it is Derek Fox vs Parekura. Fox is a long standing leftie who while wily and smart would also increase the overhang of the Maori Party. Hold your nose and vote for the big man Parekura Horomia – he will be in anyway on the list, but Fox doesn’t deserve to enter Parliament.

Ilam - Brian Davidson - ACT

Gerry Brownlee will slide into this easily, and Labour’s Sam Yau is too nice a guy to elect into Parliament. Brian Davidson for ACT doesn’t want to be an MP and says “He has been motivated to stand for the ACT Party in the Ilam Electorate by the propensity of this Labour Party to tell us how to run our lives and watch over us in an over regulated society which is strangling the enterprise and vision of this wonderful country”. Shrink Brownlee’s majority by giving Brian your electorate vote.

Invercargill - Shane Pleasance - Libertarianz

Eric Roy should manage to keep Lesley Soper out of Parliament (she’s just another braindead unionist), and Roy is just one of the mediocre middle ground of National. So give Shane Pleasance your electorate vote, he’s the Libertarianz candidate, Director of the Southland Chamber of Commerce and he believes in Invercargill, freedom and personal responsibility.

Kaikoura - Colin King - National

National’s Colin King is comfortable here against Labour’s nutty Brian McNamara, and he isn’t bad enough to vote against. I don’t know enough about ACT’s Dave Tattersfield to give him the nod, so make your own pick. I’d pick King, because Labour needs a hammering and it is nice to discourage a leftwing Labour candidate.

Mana - Richard Goode - Libertarianz

Winnie Laban is in under the list anyway, and the awful “Pakeha owe Maori loads” public sector consultant Hekia Parata of National is simply vile - from personal experience. Richard Goode of Libertarianz is mild mannered and one of the most rational speakers on liberalising drug laws in New Zealand today. Vote for Goode.

Mangere - Sua Sio - Labour

This is a race between the awful Philip Field, and Labour’s Sua Sio. National has Mita Harris, who works for DOC and has a past in Treaty claims. ACT has Michael Tabachnik, a university student. Look, Field would create a overhang if he won. So grin and bear it, vote for Sua Sio, because strategically this IS moderately important. Keep Field out.

Manukau East - Kanwal Bakshi - National

Ross Robertson is one of the Labour MPs I dislike least, and he isn’t on the party list which means if he wins, it helps keep the likes of Judith Tizard out of Parliament. However, he is pretty much guaranteed to get elected. Kanwal Bakshi of National is a businessman who set up a voluntary organization to help teenagers. You can’t go wrong voting for this man.

Manurewa - Cam Calder - National

I’m not so generous to George Hawkins. He was a hopeless Police Minister, and while he is on the right side of the Labour Party, and his victory also denies Labour one of its list members, this man isn’t exactly a stunning talent. Dr Cam Calder is National’s candidate and he is no libertarian, but seems decent enough. So take your choice. The ACT candidate doesn’t even have a profile on the ACT website. Hawkins or Calder hmmm.

Maungakiekie - Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga - National

The vile Carol Beaumont of Labour is vying for this seat. She’s a unionist and thinks Labour has benefited democracy. Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga is National’s candidate, he seems to have done well in business and in community work, so you can vote for him positively to keep the Marxist Beaumont out of Parliament.

Mount Albert - Ravi Musuku - National

Clarkistan means you want to feel positive about who to vote for. Sadly it’s not great here. The ACT candidate has no profile on the ACT website. National’s Ravi Musuku is a Methodist pastor, who is a mechanical engineer, not the party’s best. I’d probably give Musuku the tick, only because Clark is so so much worse, and he will come second.

Mount Roskill - Phil Goff - Labour

Phil Goff or Jackie Blue, hmmm there’s a choice. Goff could be Labour’s next leader, he’s one of the few left who could bring it back to the centre, but think how far he has slipped. Blue is in on the list, so she doesn’t need your vote. ACT’s Shawn Tan hasn’t given me enough reason to support him. I want more than that. Don’t feel bad about ticking Goff because he’s the most Rogernomic part of Labour left, but if you can’t then ticking Blue or Tan.

Napier - Chris Tremain - National

Chris Tremain is the successful businessman who is now the local MP, a Nat. The apologist for vile criminals, Russell Fairbrother is standing for Labour and it is too important to keep that man out of Parliament. He isn’t on the list, so keep him out. Vote for Tremain to keep Fairbrother out.

Nelson - Maryan Street - Labour

Maryan Street is one of Labour’s best and smartest candidates. Yes she is part of the Clark government through and through, but she isn’t Nick Smith. Nick Smith is the most loathsome of National MPs, a little control freak, who doesn’t believe in private property rights, who embraces the RMA. So vote Street, because for all she is, she is better than Smith.

New Lynn - Tim Groser - National

Local MP Silent T is a vile nasty character, whose intelligence belies a cold instinct to love power and step on those who get in his way. National’s Tim Groser is a solid supporter of free trade and damnit we need that. Vote for Groser to give Silent T a kick where it hurts and to support one of the better Nat MPs.

New Plymouth - Mike Webber - Libertarianz

Harry Duynhoven is probably a shoo in here too, for some reason this town’s just wild about Harry. Mike Webber of Libertarianz is good at giving the bastards heaps, he’s a feisty chap and deserving of your vote.

North Shore - Michael Murphy - Libertarianz

Wayne Mapp will win this, so you’re safe giving the good natured, hard working and far more entertaining Michael Murphy of Libertarianz your vote. He’s President of Takapuna RSA and done more to serve his country than the others combined.

Northcote - Peter Linton - Libertarianz

Dr Jonathan Coleman is the Nat MP. He’s a clever chap but at 26 on the list he’s in anyway. Pick Peter Linton of Libertarianz. He’ll stir them up and be a strong advocate for your self defence and your right to decide on your health care and education.

Northland - Alan Wood - ACT

Hone Carter’s seat of course, so you can vote elsewhere happily. Blair suggested Shane Jones of Labour. ACT’s Alan Wood is a lemongrower. I have no other reason to vote for him, but it’s better than Hone or Jones, so give Alan Wood your tick.

Ohariu - Katrina Shanks - National

Ahh yes a very important seat. It’s simple. Dunne has to go. This man has voted to keep Labour in power for two terms and to grow bureaucracy. Katrina Shanks is National’s candidate. Charles Chauvel is a Clark lackey and National could do with more clever women. Vote Shanks to remove Labour’s right hand man.

Otaki - Peter McCaffrey - ACT

Darren Hughes will lose this seat, but Nathan Guy is into Transmission Gully, his maiden speech used the word “free” once and he talked favourably about how important Nandor’s “Waste Minimisation Bill” is. You can’t seriously vote for this guy, beyond how he apparently is good looking says Cactus Kate. Peter McCaffrey of ACT leads ACT on Campus Wellington, which is worth supporting. Give him the tick.

Pakuranga - Maurice Williamson - National

Maurice Williamson’s seat. Maurice is one of National’s better MPs, being an opponent of the awful move to the left of English in 2002, and supporting Brash in 2005. Key has stomped on Maurice, so that’s enough reason to give Maurice the benefit of the doubt.

Palmerston North - Malcolm Plimmer - National

Labour candidate Iain Lees-Galloway is trying to succeed Steve Maharey, and he is worse. This man is just vile, being anti-individualism and a unionist. Vote to keep him out, Malcolm Plimmer of National is uninspiring, but this is about keeping Lees-Galloway out of this seat. Turn Palmy blue.

Papakura - Judith Collins- National

Dave Hereora is one of Labour’s under performers, give Judith Collins the tick in the hope she might be a future National leader. Seriously, there isn’t really anyone else with the capability to succeed Key.

Port Hills - Geoff Russell - ACT

Dyson is awful, and Social Credit nutbar Terry Heffernan is worse. Dyson is in on the list anyway, so voting for her to keep Heffernan out makes sense. If you can’t stand that it is Geoff Russell of ACT who might give you an out, but seriously Heffernan stood for Social Credit, the Alliance and NZ First, umpteen times and failed. The Nats need to be punished for adopting this fool.

Rangitata - Jo Goodhew - National

Jo Goodhew is the Nat MP. There is no good reason to vote against her, she described herself in her maiden speech as one who “juggle work and family, who scorn political correctness, who value self-reliance and believe that working hard should bring personal benefits, not increased taxation”. Not great, but not bad, so give her a tick.

Rangitikei - Jean Thompson Church - ACT

Simon Power insurmountable fortress. You might tick Steve Gibson, an independent, because he’s a cop who cut crime in Taihape, but he also issued over 100 speeding tickets in one day. Jills Angus Burney had no profile on the Labour website, showing she’s not interested. Jean Thompson Church is ACT’s candidate, and she is quite elderly. Let her get her deposit back and give her a tick, because Power will get in regardless.

Rimutaka - Nigel Kearney - ACT

Now Swain is off with his young new bride, it is a bit more wide open. Richard Whiteside is the National candidate (the Labour one – Chris Hipkins is far too leftwing to endorse) and is a lot like John Key in that he doesn’t really say anything. ACT’s Nigel Kearney has a blog and expresses views that aren’t far removed from my own. So give him the tick, don’t worry – Ron Mark wont win here.

Rodney - Beryl Good - ACT

Lockwood Smith is one of the most disappointing of National’s MPs. He showed his testicles were inert against teachers’ unions in the early 1990s. He deserves to be out, but Conor Roberts – a student unionist, has no hope of doing this. Vote Beryl Good for ACT as she has more interest in freedom than Lockwood, and you wont feel so dirty voting for her.

Rongotai - Mitch Lees - Libertarianz

You have the smart and apparently good looking Mitch Lees of Libertarianz to vote for. He’s smarter and better looking than the rest, but the main reason you want to vote for him is to beat Gordon Copeland and Russel Norman. Annette King is hardly threatened by Chris Finlayson, although he is one of the better Nat candidates.

Rotorua - Fred Stevens - Libertarianz

Steve Chadwick is finished, but Todd McClay is from that National family. So really you’d feel better voting for Fred Stevens of Libertarianz, at least so he can beat the nutty RAM candidate.

Selwyn - Amy Adams - National

Amy Adams of National will almost certainly pick this one up, and she’s alright, better than Labour’s David Coates. Give her a tick, the Nats need more intelligent women in their caucus.

Tamaki - Allan Peachey - National

Allan Peachey is a sensible National MP who will win and who there isn’t really good enough reason to vote against. Jo Bartley of Labour was invisible when I searched for her, so give Allan your vote.

Tamaki-Makaurau - Pita Sharples - Maori Party

Louisa Wall isn’t good enough against Pita Sharples, who for all that is wrong with him is better than she is. He’s by far the best of the Maori Party caucus so deserves to win again.

Taranaki-King Country - Bill Izard - ACT

Shane Ardern, yawn. Yep, what a star. Bill Izard of ACT seems invisible too. The Labour candidate is invisible as well. I’d probably tick Izard given Ardern nearly was beaten by Owen Jennings, and the electorate that voted Jim Bolger in incessantly needs a shake up.

Taupo - Louise Upston - National

is a Labour seat likely to go to the Nats. Voting Louise Upston would help seal the deal to get rid of Mark Burton who is too low down the Labour list to remain.

Tauranga - Simon Bridges - National

You know what you have to do. Vote Simon Bridges National to put your nail in the coffin for Winston’s political career. Even excluding that he aint half bad.

Te Atatu - Tau Henare - National

Chris Carter will remain in on the list. Tau Henare will make things more interesting, and I can’t tick an ACT candidate who is law and order obsessed. The main value in Henare is he will shake up the boring Nat caucus.

Te Tai Hauauru - Errol Mason - Labour

You can’t vote for Tariana Turia, she’s mad as can be. Tick Errol Mason, he’ll help keep Judith Tizard out as he is well down the Labour list.

Te Tai Tokerau - Peter Tashkoff - ACT

The loathsome Marxist Hone Harawira doesn’t deserve your vote, Peter Tashkoff of ACT does, if only to show that the Maori seats aren’t a two horse race.

Te Tai Tonga - Mahara Okeroa - Labour

Mahara Okeroa will keep the Maori party away from overhang. There is no other reason to vote for him.

Tukituki - Craig Foss - National

Yes well Craig Foss is the Nat MP, Rick Barker was the Labour MP and to be fair to Foss he’s been fighting hard on the HBDHB issues with the government. The ACT candidate Duncan Lennox founded a Christian school, which of course is enough of a reason for an objectivist to say – tick Foss.

Waiariki - Mita Ririnui - Labour

Mita Ririnui will keep the Maori party away from overhang. Again, no other reason to vote for him.

Waikato - Mark Davies - ACT

Lindsay Tisch hasn’t been a star, and Jacinda Ardern the young London based Labour candidate is standing. She’ll be in on the list, so don’t give her a second thought. Mark Davies of ACT is saying the right things, so give him a tick.

Waimakariri - Clayton Cosgrove - Labour

Keeping Clayton Cosgrove around will annoy the Labour left and Kate Wilkinson of National is already a list MP. So why not tick Clayton Cosgrove, he was a Mike Moore acolyte and must be a moderating influence.

Wairarapa - Richard McGrath - Libertarianz

Vote for NZ’s most freedom loving GP – Dr Richard McGrath for Libertarianz. He’s a fine man, and given the Nat’s John Hayes will win, you don’t want someone called Amy Tubman from the Alliance to beat him now do you?

Waitakere - Paula Bennett - National

Paula Bennett of National needs your vote to try to unseat the Marxist Lynne Pillay.

Waitaki - David Parker - Labour

Yes, take Blair’s advice, swallow a hard drink and vote David Parker, the Labour candidate. Jacqui Dean is the current MP and an enemy of freedom, voting against her is like voting against Jim Anderton. Her website says “Jacqui thrives on hitting the road”, make her hit it with her fist on all fours in disappointment. Parker is in anyway on the list, so hold your nose and vote Parker.

Wellington Central - Bernard Darnton - Libertarianz

Now I know it is wide open, and you might just think Stephen Franks is worth a shot, but the man is no libertarian. He is intelligent and articulate, but did he try to take Helen Clark to court for breaking the law? No – Bernard Darnton - Libertarianz Leader did – he deserves your vote here for fighting for the rule of law and liberal democracy. Franks doesn’t deserve credit for moving from ACT to National, and National doesn’t value him enough to put him high up the list – so vote for freedom, vote for Darnton.

West Coast-Tasman - Damien O'Connor - Labour

Chris Auchinvole is the Nat list MP standing against Damien O’Connor. He is ok, but there is a good reason for voting for O’Connor. He will take a list position from someone else who is bound to be worse. O’Connor is on the Labour right and doesn’t pander to political correctness. So hold your nose and vote for him. It’s not that there is anything wrong with Auchinvole, but this is about keeping the rump Labour party from being the mad unionist cabal it looks like being.

Whanganui - Alan Davidson - ACT

Chester Borrows is the Nat MP here, he thinks all children are ours and like Sue Bradford says “I want to live in a country that claims all children as their own and accepts the glory and the responsibility of that”. The Labour candidate isn’t worth ticking, the ACT candidate Alan Davidson wont win but his profile does talk about not telling people how to run their lives. You can tick that.

Whangarei - Helen Hughes - Libertarianz

Phil Heatley is another shoo in here, so you can safely vote for someone who does passionately believe in individual freedom. Vote Helen Hughes for Libertarianz, with pride. She’s more charismatic and better looking than Heatley any day.

Wigram - Ben Morgan - Libertarianz

Jim Anderton isn’t under any serious threat here, because the vote against him is split two ways. ex. United Future MP, now Nat Marc Alexander doesn’t deserve your vote, as he isn’t really a believer in individual freedom. The Labour candidate Erin Ebbor-Gillespie is much worse than Jim Anderton, even though voting for her would probably increase the chance of Labour being defeated (as she’d replace a list MP, and ousting Anderton would shrink the left vote). Ben Morgan of Libertarianz stands for freedom, and so it’s time people in Anderton’s seat stood up for it too.

National wont get 50% of the vote

It didn't happen for decades under First Past the Post, Muldoon got 47.6% in 1975. With ACT, United Future and even NZ First and Libertarianz, part of National's core support will be elsewhere.

So the questions become this:

Can Labour cobble together the Greens and the Maori Party to govern?
Or will National need ACT, the Maori Party and Peter Dunne altogether?

The answer could be how well Labour does in the Maori seats - you see the more Maori seats Labour wins, the better it is for National. An electorate seat win by Labour is a swap for a list seat - no net gain or loss. However an electorate seat win by the Maori Party (assuming party vote remains low) increases the size of Parliament and the threshold needed to form a government.

So how can overhang best benefit the left, and how can it benefit the right?

For the left it should want to have electorate MPs overhanging that are on its side. That means a party vote for the Maori Party is a wasted vote. It also means a party vote for Jim Anderton's Progressives is a wasted vote. You want Jim's seat to be an overhang, along with the Maori Party ones. The Greens have no chance in any electorate so as long as they get 5% the left should be happy, regardless of whether it is bled off Labour or not. However, the left needs the Greens to reach 5%, otherwise it is over. NZ First breaking 5% would help the left immensely too.

For the right, it needs the same. Let's be clear, that means a vote for United Future is a wasted vote. Peter Dunne as an overhang would be good for National. ACT clearly has enough party votes to not overhang, even if it picks up Botany. More clearly it needs NZ First to not reach 5%. The Greens missing 5% is also important. However it is better for the Maori seats to go Labour and for Maori to vote for the Maori Party, to avoid THAT overhang.

However, if National is willing to do a deal with the Maori Party that it is willing to do - which may be questionable, then it is another story.

Me? Well I'll tell you later how I think you should all vote in every electorate.

Green policy means keeping kids indoors

It's so stupid it is worth highlighting again:

The Green Party electromagnetic policy includes "Minimise exposure to electromagnetic radiation especially for children and pregnant women."

Electromagnetic radiation includes visible light.

So the Greens presumably want kids keep indoors during the day, and at night, keep the lights out.

Oh and if that isn't good enough for you, it would include wifi internet, it would include all computer monitors, TV screens, and even radios - they all emit electromagnetic radiation.

Do you still trust the Greens on anything scientific?