Oh dear, National tracking down to 47%
Labour starting to pick up at 32.4%
Greens 6.4% holding steady
ACT 3.7% tracking up a little
Kiwi Party 0.59% must be pleased chasing United Future and the Progressives
Libz 463
National/ACT could govern, but like I said National is easing well back
Tizard very closely behind Nikki Kaye in Auckland Central
Christchurch Central neck and neck, but should got Labour
Hamilton West comfortably Nat
Hutt South looking tighter for Mallard now
Mangere Field looks finished against Labour
Maungakiekie looking Labour now but still close
New Plymouth nearly half counted and Duynhoven is trailing more than 1000 behind
Ohariu still a neck and neck Dunne Chauvel Shanks
Otaki Hughes just hanging on despite his tiny majority
Palmerston North settling back to Labour
Rimutaka also easing back to Labour
Rotorua a win to National from Labour
Tauranga Winston is finished, it's over!
Waimakariri is neck and neck
Wellington Central neck and neck
08 November 2008
Libz - best performing electorate candidates at 0809 GMT
Wairarapa - Richard McGrath - 152
Invercargill - Shane Pleasance - 82
well done Sheriff!
Invercargill - Shane Pleasance - 82
well done Sheriff!
Best Libz electorates: party vote
For my Libz friends, the best seats in terms of party vote are:
Wairarapa - 15
Te Tai Tonga - 14 - which of course must be nonsense, as in 2005 Libz did incredibly well in this Maori seat early on, which simply means someone can't count for that seat!
Wairarapa - 15
Te Tai Tonga - 14 - which of course must be nonsense, as in 2005 Libz did incredibly well in this Maori seat early on, which simply means someone can't count for that seat!
NZ election results live: 0800 GMT
Well it would be fair to say John Key will be the next Prime Minister. You can't have this proportion of votes counted and the gap remaining more than 10%
National 48% noticing how it is drifting downwards? Yes, watch that, watch Dunne looking insecure and the Maori Party may be looking more and more important
Labour 31.8% a long long way behind and without Winston, little chance of winning now.
NZF 4.3% comfortably fading away
Greens 6.3% picking up
ACT 3.6% will be reasonably happy
Libz 269!
Ohariu - Dunne must be worrying, this is a three way race with Chauvel and Shanks.
Hamilton West looking solidly National
Maungakiekie neck and neck Labour/National
Waitakere neck and neck Labour/National
New Plymouth isn't that wild about Harry, Nats looking good here
Pansy Wong well ahead in Botany
Waimakariri back to Labour
Wellington Central back to Labour
Palmerston North back to Labour
Maori seats look like status quo, but Te Tai Tonga is neck and neck Maori/Labour. This seat is critical, as it would create another seat in Parliament. 122 rather than 121 seats makes it harder for Key to create an easy majority.
National 48% noticing how it is drifting downwards? Yes, watch that, watch Dunne looking insecure and the Maori Party may be looking more and more important
Labour 31.8% a long long way behind and without Winston, little chance of winning now.
NZF 4.3% comfortably fading away
Greens 6.3% picking up
ACT 3.6% will be reasonably happy
Libz 269!
Ohariu - Dunne must be worrying, this is a three way race with Chauvel and Shanks.
Hamilton West looking solidly National
Maungakiekie neck and neck Labour/National
Waitakere neck and neck Labour/National
New Plymouth isn't that wild about Harry, Nats looking good here
Pansy Wong well ahead in Botany
Waimakariri back to Labour
Wellington Central back to Labour
Palmerston North back to Labour
Maori seats look like status quo, but Te Tai Tonga is neck and neck Maori/Labour. This seat is critical, as it would create another seat in Parliament. 122 rather than 121 seats makes it harder for Key to create an easy majority.
NZ election results live: 0745 GMT
The question at this stage has to be, who will the Nats govern with
Nats 48.7% tracking down ever so slowly
NZF 4.4% tracking down! Yes yes!
ACT holding 3.8%
United Future dropping to 0.8%
Bill and Ben at 1534 votes!
Libz 195, starting to leave the communists behind and catching up with the Social Credit nutters
ALCP doing well too
Electorates
Dunne challenged well as Chauvel and Shanks are running neck and neck for second, but not far behind Dunne, but he should be safe
Rimutaka and Wellington Central cliffhangers
Labour has been badly hit in many electorates, this election looks like a cleanout of the left
Nats 48.7% tracking down ever so slowly
NZF 4.4% tracking down! Yes yes!
ACT holding 3.8%
United Future dropping to 0.8%
Bill and Ben at 1534 votes!
Libz 195, starting to leave the communists behind and catching up with the Social Credit nutters
ALCP doing well too
Electorates
Dunne challenged well as Chauvel and Shanks are running neck and neck for second, but not far behind Dunne, but he should be safe
Rimutaka and Wellington Central cliffhangers
Labour has been badly hit in many electorates, this election looks like a cleanout of the left
NZ election results live: 0730 GMT
Nats 49%
Lab 31.2%
Greens 6.1% (have to be hoping better than this)
NZF 4.5% (easing back thank god)
ACT 3.4% remaining steady
Maori 2.1%
Bill and Ben 824 votes, 9th biggest party! MacGillicuddies reborn (in the joke vote category)
The left vote is definitely well down, but remember 2005, Labour pulled through at the end.
Worth noting the lunatic left Auckland based RAM is doing appallingly badly.
West Coast Tasman remains with National narrowly ahead
Maungakiekie a core Labour seat looking very close.
Rimutaka narrowly Labour
Maori seats have Te Tai Tonga going from Labour to Maori Party, but hardly a clean sweep
National still leading in most the seats I listed before:
Auckland Central
Hamilton West
New Plymouth
Otaki
Palmerston North
Rotorua
Taupo
Waimakariri
Waitakere
Libz 137 finally ahead of the communist Workers' Party!
Lab 31.2%
Greens 6.1% (have to be hoping better than this)
NZF 4.5% (easing back thank god)
ACT 3.4% remaining steady
Maori 2.1%
Bill and Ben 824 votes, 9th biggest party! MacGillicuddies reborn (in the joke vote category)
The left vote is definitely well down, but remember 2005, Labour pulled through at the end.
Worth noting the lunatic left Auckland based RAM is doing appallingly badly.
West Coast Tasman remains with National narrowly ahead
Maungakiekie a core Labour seat looking very close.
Rimutaka narrowly Labour
Maori seats have Te Tai Tonga going from Labour to Maori Party, but hardly a clean sweep
National still leading in most the seats I listed before:
Auckland Central
Hamilton West
New Plymouth
Otaki
Palmerston North
Rotorua
Taupo
Waimakariri
Waitakere
Libz 137 finally ahead of the communist Workers' Party!
NZ election results live: 0715 GMT
Far too early to tell, but the Nats and ACT may be able to form a government, but the key looks like the Maori seats. Maori Party might pick up Te Tai Tonga, and its party vote isn't doing that well.
48.7% National (still low in my view to govern very happily)
31.4% Labour (low but will pick up)
6.2% Greens (so you want your kids protected from light)
4.6% NZ First (got to hope Auckland voters will knock this down)
3.3% ACT (good effort, but likely to dribble down)
Prebble on Radio NZ saying too early to tell in Auckland Central. 14% swing needed for Kaye to take it. RNZ saying she got a lot of publicity, partly because she is young and pretty!
Wellington Central has Stephen Franks ahead but far too early to tell.
Prebble says foreign sounding names don't do well in NZ! I think he IS right, but with MMP this effect is reduced.
Other electorates to note - Rimutaka is neck and neck Labour/National as is Wellington Central - either would be the first Wellington electorate going National if you exclude Wairarapa.
Libz 109, damned communists ahead!
48.7% National (still low in my view to govern very happily)
31.4% Labour (low but will pick up)
6.2% Greens (so you want your kids protected from light)
4.6% NZ First (got to hope Auckland voters will knock this down)
3.3% ACT (good effort, but likely to dribble down)
Prebble on Radio NZ saying too early to tell in Auckland Central. 14% swing needed for Kaye to take it. RNZ saying she got a lot of publicity, partly because she is young and pretty!
Wellington Central has Stephen Franks ahead but far too early to tell.
Prebble says foreign sounding names don't do well in NZ! I think he IS right, but with MMP this effect is reduced.
Other electorates to note - Rimutaka is neck and neck Labour/National as is Wellington Central - either would be the first Wellington electorate going National if you exclude Wairarapa.
Libz 109, damned communists ahead!
NZ election results live: 0700 GMT
NZ First fourth! Don't write NZ First off yet, Winston wont win his seat, but 4.6% is perilously close to the threshold.
Kiwi Party is getting close to the Jim Anderton and Peter Dunne parties, both of which are one man shows with 5% counted.
Libz hit 100 votes :) which should mean a substantial increase in vote compared to 2005 if translated evenly.
ACT's 3.28% looks like Sir Roger Douglas will be worrying the Nats
Nats 48.6% vs Lab 31.5%
Electorates have Nats ahead in many Labour seats:
Auckland Central
Hamilton West
New Plymouth
Otaki
Palmerston North
Rotorua
Taupo
Waimakariri
Waitakere
Kiwi Party is getting close to the Jim Anderton and Peter Dunne parties, both of which are one man shows with 5% counted.
Libz hit 100 votes :) which should mean a substantial increase in vote compared to 2005 if translated evenly.
ACT's 3.28% looks like Sir Roger Douglas will be worrying the Nats
Nats 48.6% vs Lab 31.5%
Electorates have Nats ahead in many Labour seats:
Auckland Central
Hamilton West
New Plymouth
Otaki
Palmerston North
Rotorua
Taupo
Waimakariri
Waitakere
NZ election results live: 0645 GMT
Well I'm watching my guide and Not PC's guide as reference points, listening to Radio NZ (yes I know) because both TV channels are clearly unable to stream properly.
Parties
National 48.9% a bit low for this stage
Labour 31.3% very low for this stage
Green 6.2% looks very good for them (eek)
NZ First 4.6% higher than most pundits thought, but not enough
Bill and Ben Party shows you can convince 500 odd people to vote for a joke!
Electorates
National's safe seats all look safe again.
Auckland Central has Nikki Kaye narrowly ahead of Tizard
Botany has Labour coming second behind Pansy Wong, ACT's Wang campaign isn't looking like a winner.
Epsom has Rodney Hide comfortably ahead of Richard Worth
Mangere Labour's Sio is well ahead of Philip Field
New Plymouth, Duynhoven behind National's Young
Ohariu, Dunne narrowly ahead of National's Shanks
Otaki, Hughes still narrowly ahead of National's Guy
Tauranga, Winston is well behind
Maori seats, looking not much different from before
Conclusion
Nats, ACT, Greens should all be relaxed. Labour must be worried, and the Dunne/Anderton parties will be just that. Libz fighting with the Workers' Party :)
Parties
National 48.9% a bit low for this stage
Labour 31.3% very low for this stage
Green 6.2% looks very good for them (eek)
NZ First 4.6% higher than most pundits thought, but not enough
Bill and Ben Party shows you can convince 500 odd people to vote for a joke!
Electorates
National's safe seats all look safe again.
Auckland Central has Nikki Kaye narrowly ahead of Tizard
Botany has Labour coming second behind Pansy Wong, ACT's Wang campaign isn't looking like a winner.
Epsom has Rodney Hide comfortably ahead of Richard Worth
Mangere Labour's Sio is well ahead of Philip Field
New Plymouth, Duynhoven behind National's Young
Ohariu, Dunne narrowly ahead of National's Shanks
Otaki, Hughes still narrowly ahead of National's Guy
Tauranga, Winston is well behind
Maori seats, looking not much different from before
Conclusion
Nats, ACT, Greens should all be relaxed. Labour must be worried, and the Dunne/Anderton parties will be just that. Libz fighting with the Workers' Party :)
NZ election results live: 0630 GMT
Party vote (I'm going to round to the nearest tenth of a percent)
18% between National and Labour 49.1% Nat/31.5% Lab
Greens 6.1%
Kiwi Party 0.6%
Electorates
Far too early to tell. Maori Party doing well in its seats.
Bridges well ahead of Winston in Tauranga
Formerly safe Labour seat of Napier, already well ahead for National's Chris Tremain
Conclusion
Nats will be quietly relaxed, Labour must already be worried
Greens looking good
NZ First doing better than expected
ACT doing better than expected
18% between National and Labour 49.1% Nat/31.5% Lab
Greens 6.1%
Kiwi Party 0.6%
Electorates
Far too early to tell. Maori Party doing well in its seats.
Bridges well ahead of Winston in Tauranga
Formerly safe Labour seat of Napier, already well ahead for National's Chris Tremain
Conclusion
Nats will be quietly relaxed, Labour must already be worried
Greens looking good
NZ First doing better than expected
ACT doing better than expected
New Zealand election 2008: Blogging live
Gah it's 6.15am here in the UK so now I can test:
- Streaming the TV networks
- Streaming the election results website
TVNZ is completely failing, but the election results website is not, so I will have an update at 0630GMT. Results with 2.7% of votes cast already though, and the Nats are well ahead.
- Streaming the TV networks
- Streaming the election results website
TVNZ is completely failing, but the election results website is not, so I will have an update at 0630GMT. Results with 2.7% of votes cast already though, and the Nats are well ahead.
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!
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.
Pity Italians?
Well no, they voted for this vile man. As much as I didn't support Obama, this sort of old fashioned racism is just disturbing.
Look at the people who enter Italian politics and don't wonder anymore why that country is shadowing France on the EU table of stagnation.
Look at the people who enter Italian politics and don't wonder anymore why that country is shadowing France on the EU table of stagnation.
07 November 2008
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?
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?
Gordon Brown has cause to cheer
In a busy political week, the UK has seen another by-election. This time in Glenrothes, Scotland.
Labour held onto the seat, with a majority of 6,737. A smaller majority, but still a great victory for Gordon Brown personally and Labour. With the SNP having fought hard to win the seat, it shows a few things about politics in Scotland.
1. The SNP, now being the government in Scotland, finds it hard to blame others for the failings of government. Labour just says "well the SNP looks after internal Scottish matters".
2. Labour has pointed out that an independent Scotland couldn't embark on the large scale (socialist) bank nationalisations and bailouts that the UK government can manage.
3. Scotland absolutely drowns in dependency on the state and what the state can do for people. The third place result for the Conservatives that only got 1,381 votes speaks volumes, and the Conservatives are no party of small government, just less statist that the others.
So Gordon Brown will be smiling.
Labour held onto the seat, with a majority of 6,737. A smaller majority, but still a great victory for Gordon Brown personally and Labour. With the SNP having fought hard to win the seat, it shows a few things about politics in Scotland.
1. The SNP, now being the government in Scotland, finds it hard to blame others for the failings of government. Labour just says "well the SNP looks after internal Scottish matters".
2. Labour has pointed out that an independent Scotland couldn't embark on the large scale (socialist) bank nationalisations and bailouts that the UK government can manage.
3. Scotland absolutely drowns in dependency on the state and what the state can do for people. The third place result for the Conservatives that only got 1,381 votes speaks volumes, and the Conservatives are no party of small government, just less statist that the others.
So Gordon Brown will be smiling.
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.
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.
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.
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 toprotect 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?
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
- 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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)