by frog
Just when you thought Winston Peters’ stance on coalitions couldn’t get weirder, it just did. It now seems that Winston won’t be allowing the largest party to form the next government but the largest bloc of parties. So, this means whichever bloc is bigger out of National/United/Act and Labour/Greens/Progressives would have Winston’s blessing to form the next government. At the moment, the LPG team has the advantage: 60 plays 51.
Now that NZ First’s position appears clear (allowing the biggest bloc to form a government and abstaining on confidence and supply), I will build this into frogblog’s polling averager. Basically, I will be subtracting NZ First’s seats from the total number in the new Parliament, and then working out how many seats are required to have a majority in this “smaller” Parliament. Then I will see whether either of the blocs – LPG or NUA – has a majority in this “smaller” Parliament. On current numbers, 58 seats would be needed for a majority – because the effective number of seats in Parliament for confidence motions would be reduced from 122 to 115 by taking NZ First’s seats out of the equation. Then – hey presto! – we have a “most likely government”.
Another aspect of our polling averager that I’ve changed is that the Maori Party seems likely to pick up four, not three, of the Maori electorates, as John Tamihere is well behind Pita Sharples in a new opinion poll.
Of course, knowing Winston, this position on coalitions may have changed by lunchtime 
I suspect that what most supporters of most parties in Parliament are dearly hoping for is that Winston isn’t in the next Parliament…
UPDATE: I’ve updated the polling methodology page to reflect this “new reality”.
UPDATE 2: Winston Peters has just said on National Radio: “Nope, you had it right the first time.” He’ll allow the single largest party to form a government by abstaining on confidence and supply motions. What’s not clear is what he would do if Labour or National weren’t able to form a minority government on their own with NZ First abstaining on confidence and supply. For example, how would he vote on confidence and supply motions for a Labour/Green or National/United Government? Goodness me, this is getting confusing. For the purposes of our polling average graphic, I’ll assume his answer to that last question is “yes”.
Published in Campaign by frog on Mon, September 12th, 2005
Tags: environment
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
I don’t think that’s weird at all. Given the silly idea “I’ll side with the biggest winner” it seems more consistent to me to consider blocs than parties when deciding who to side with, particularly since the clearly aligned smaller parties have been explicitly campaigning as potential coalition partners for the big’uns.
It would be simpler (and better!) of course if he just didn’t get elected.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Peters has all the finesse of the popular, rich, girl at school who just assumes an automatic invitation to your birthday party, and goes about advising “the unfortunate” how to become popular so that they’ll become a must-have partygoer too.
Anyone canvassed Courtney Place bouncers on their feelings about NZ First retaining a seat in Parliament? I’m sure his cumulative spend over 3 years would be more than offset by the reduction in streetside aggro!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
All very interesting Frog but what good is being in Government if National/UFNZ/NZF/?ACT? have more votes than Labour/Greens/Progressive/Maori?
And can a LabourGreens government back Peters’ bottom lines for abstention?
Sure you’d get to pass a budget, but the Centre/Right would get to abolish parole for serious/repeat offenders…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well, clearly both LPG and NU would prefer not to need Winston’s support in any form
And, on current polling, LPG are two seats away from being in that situation, whereas NU are eleven seats short. So, all we need is a slight lift in Labour and the Greens’ numbers. Maybe you’d like to be of some assistance in that regard?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
frog…peters stance makes perfect sense on a number of levels..not least of these being revenge….
peters is playing the long game..and i have blogged on it today..(‘peters’ revenge’)
(apologies if i may have jumped the gun on a hat-tip you were going to do..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“He’ll allow the single largest party to form a government by abstaining on confidence and supply motions”
But that sentence is inherently contradictory! You can’t allow the single largest party to form a government by abstaining on confidence and supply motions.
I’m imagining a 122-seat parliament with
8 NZ First,
8 Greens + 50 Labour = 58
2 UF + 3 Maori + 51 National = 57
If NZ First abstains then the Labour/Greens can guarantee confidence and supply, and the largest party National can’t (not even if the Maori Party supports them).
The Logic Police will come for Winnie unless he picks ONE or the OTHER of :
(a) “We will vote in Confidence and Supply motions to support … ” (who?)
or
(b) “We will abstain in Confidence and Supply motions”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
re update 2..of course he’ll say that…
the true position was a leak..and i was really surprised because it telegraphed his intentions…which is unlike him…
so that’s why he’s back to the spin position…it has that air of uncertainty he loves…but i still contend revenge against the actites in national is one of his current motivations…
and that the leaked position is the actual one..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)