Monday, September 26, 2005


Well, I’ve been unwinding after the excitement of the past few weeks. There appears to be nothing to do now except wait for the Special votes to finally determine the outcome of the election.

A friend of mine, who has contacts in the National Party, told me that they (The Nats) were hoping that after the counting of the special votes, the Greens would slip below the 5 percent threshold and that National would then be level with Labour in terms of votes cast.

I suspect that this is unlikely for several reasons. One, it depends on the National Party receiving a significantly higher percentage of the Specials in proportion with the other parties and that the other parties don’t increase their votes very much, thus allowing the National Party to pull ahead.

The second reason is that Labour and the Greens in particular, have done well on Specials. In the past two elections, 1999 and 2002, the Greens actually increased their vote after the counting of the Specials allowing them extra MP’s. In the case of 1999, it actually brought the Greens into parliament after they narrowly failed on the Election Night Results. I think that the Greens can feel reasonably confident that the Specials, the bulk of who are overseas voters and students, will keep them in parliament and quite realistically return Nandor.

It seems far more likely, that the Specials might count against parties like United Future, who have not done well in Specials. A bad result for National would be if United Future’s vote when down after the count and the Greens went up. The very worst result for them would be if the Progressives actually increased their vote as well, enough to place Matt Robson back in (I can’t see it, but you never know) and Labour gained another seat.

However, I’m confident that next week there will be a Labour led government and the National Party will have to wait their turn until 2007 or 8. (When, I suspect that they will win).

I’ve been following with interest though, the comments on Span’s blog about the Alliance and whether it could/should pour all its resources into a seat? I think that the more pertinent question is what has happened to the democratic left in this country? And can it be rebuilt?

I think that it probably can, but not under the existing Alliance logo. The democratic Left is now fractioned into so many different groups – With left people involved in The Greens, The Progressives, and The Alliance and of, course, those who simply don’t vote or support any party any longer (New’s Zealand’s participation rate fell yet again). The real trick will be putting Humpty Dumpty back together which I suspect will mean stowing a lot of baggage that has been built up over the decade.


At Tuesday, September 27, 2005, Blogger Jordan said...

There is also another enduring question, which is the relationship of the democratic left to the Labour Party. Of course I come with my own baggage, but my view is that we need to be able to live with each other in order to help both of us. This campaign saw quite a few Alliance-type people working with the Labour campaign. That is interesting, but not something I regard as a durable way for things to end up.

Another enduring question is the Greens. How does your "democratic" left mix up with them?

At Tuesday, September 27, 2005, Blogger Comrade_Tweek said...

Yes, I agree. I don't think that it is a durable way for things to end. I feel that a number of people reluctantly support the Labour Party (and the Greens) on the basis that there is nothing else or nothing major to the left.

In terms of the Greens, I think that while they are a left party, they are not a party of the left.

I saw that you commented in an earlier blog of yours about the the Alliance and how it's demise has not aided the left cause. Sadly, I feel that by not having a party of the left, Labour is electorally weaker in that it has to depend on the support of people like Peter Dunne as well as ideologically weaker.


Post a Comment

<< Home