Morgan poll has Greens at 9%
A second poll within the month has put the Greens at 9%. The Greens have now had significant upward swings in the Roy Morgan, TV3 and Herald polls in the last month. It will take a few months to see if this is a significant trend but hopefully it shows that the Greens are shaping up as a serious, pragmatic influence on election this year.
This time the Roy Morgan Poll also shows the gap between National and Labour closing significantly - adding to the confusion about how the race between those two parties is progressing.
The poll was taken in a period two weeks shortly before Waitangi Day, and thus before Helen Clark’s ‘no show’, John Key’s hongi with Tama Iti, and the reports of Green-Maori Party talks. Only a few of the poll respondents would have been aware of the Ministry for the Environment’s controversial ‘State of the Environment‘ report on released on January 31.
February 11th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
And none would have been aware of the suppression of Chapter 13, unless an MfE employee or two happened to be in the polling sample.
February 12th, 2008 at 10:24 am
None of that is important Frog, please have a word with the powers that be and arrange for a fine day in Hamilton, at the moment it looks like rain is going to disrupt the cricket.
February 12th, 2008 at 10:55 am
. . .
Right, because the Cricket makes politics less important objectively, rather than just pushing it out of your sphere of attention. *sigh*
This is what I dislike about summer
February 12th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Ha, well the poll result isn’t that important anyway- though a little interesting. Though I know that smacking the motherland at cricket is much more than a LITTLE interesting.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:45 am
StephenR said: Though I know that smacking the motherland at cricket is much more than a LITTLE interesting
You mean “subjecting them to some effective but non-violent discipline”, don’t you Stephen?
February 12th, 2008 at 11:54 am
lol well cricket is inherently violent, what with flinging the hard-as-a-rock ball as fast as you can at that batsman-guy at the other end. Stiff kumara for the Poms I say!
February 12th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
… meanwhile as the batsman attacks a full toss straight to silly mid on - its back to the Roy Morgan polls
what I`d like to know is why green supporters who say they support the Green party dont vote Green at the election. Can anyone tell me?
February 12th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
It’s possible they regard ‘green’ issues as a bit of a luxury, especially if you consider them a one-issue party…If the economy takes a bit of a dip, the Greens might lose a bit of support. Maybe.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
At the last election, a significant amount of “soft” Green support switched allegience to Labour over the last few weeks of the campaign. I think that reflects a lack of understanding of how MMP works.
These voters were spooked by the prospect of an extreme right wing Government led by Dr Dunny Brush into voting Labour. But given that the Greens had ruled out supporting a Brash-led government, it didn’t make the slightest bit if difference, apart from deny the Greens the 1 or 2 extra seats they would have required to avoid being left out of Government as they were.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
um..!..lame-ar*e election campaigns..?
meanwhile..
http://whoar.co.nz/2008/the-greens-hit-9and-the-pollster-tells-us-anot her-reason-why-john-key-will-not-become-prime-minister-after-the-next- election/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Just noticed the commentary from Roy Morgan Research on the poll:
voters in New Zealand deserted the Opposition National Party, down 6.5% to 45.5%, and came back strongly to the Governing Labour Party (up 3% to 36.5%) and the Green Party (up 2.5% to 9%) the latest New Zealand Morgan Poll finds.
…
Looking at the minor parties, support for New Zealand First 4%…
Interesting that the Greens are being grouped with National and Labour, and not among the “minor parties”. While I personally think at least double-figures would be required to be considered a “major party”, it’s got to be encouraging that this perception is starting to develop.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Here, here toad!
February 12th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Toad
“You mean “subjecting them to some effective but non-violent disciplineâ€?, don’t you Stephen”
Never played the game then Toad?….lol
February 12th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
i think toad knows, but the image that came into my head was very odd to say the least, lol
February 12th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
BB said: Never played the game then Toad?….lol
I have, BB. First XI at school, club cricket in Auckland and Wellington, never got a rep selection though - bowled left arm wrist-spin but was a bit of a mug facing pace as a batsman - something I later put down to poor eyesight, which wasn’t diagnosed until I was in my early 30s and had given the game away.
Unfortunately, as a bowler, I bowled lots of full tosses, as happens with all but the best bowling wrist spin, and went for plenty of runs. And apart form Jack Alabaster, who lived at the other end of the country, and Terry Jenner, who lived in Adelaide and later went on to teach the art to Shane Warne, there were no mentors within cooee for wrist spinners in those days.
But I never gave anyone a “spanking”, frustrated as I may often have been with my bowling inaccuracy or my batting ineptitude. Did get a few broken fingers though.
February 12th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
StephenR said: Though I know that smacking the motherland at cricket is much more than a LITTLE interesting.
Must be getting more than a little interesting for Mike Pero. Ryder’s cost him $6000 to date, and still going. Go the Fatman!
As for Adam Parore’s suggestion that ther is no place for fat men in cricket, two of the greatest from the last 30 years (Ian Botham and Shane Warne) were for most of their carrers seriously overweight.
February 12th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
toad
I agree about Parore, he is an idiot.
Being fat never seemd to stop Inziman (sp) either
February 12th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Inzamam, to get the spelling correct BB. He did have (I think) the worst record of being run out and/or running out his partners of any modern-day cricketer, but his test and one-day averages speak for themselves at the end of the day.
Ryder’s ponderous wandering run out in the Eden Park Twenty-20 might indicate a similar problem, but if he can eventually average over 49 in Tests and over 39 in ODIs, as Inzamam Ul-Haq did, we’ve really got a star here. Go the Fat Men!
February 12th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
BTW, BB, you might recall I named a New Zealand side on this blog over the break, and picked Jesse Ryder and Tim Southee (who was about the only player to perform with distiction in the Twenty-20s, but was released from the one-dayers to join the NZ under-19 team) in it.
So I do think I know what I’m talking about re cricket - most punters would have (and probably did) laugh. But these guys are seriously talented, and I’m glad the selectors have finally promoted risky talent ahead of stodgy stability (John Parker, John Morrison, Trevor Franklin, Gary Stead, Craig Cumming, Michael Papps spring to mind - guys who neve had the ability to get their batting average over 30 in any form of international cricket).
But I fear they will still pick Cumming for the England tests. I’d throw Ryder in at the deep end there too. It worked for Aussie, when they finally picked Mike Hussey to open when Justin Langer was injured. And while he’s back in the middle order now, the experience as an opener didn’t do him any harm - Mike Hussey has the second best Test batting average (behind Don Bradman) of anyone who has ever played the game.
February 13th, 2008 at 8:30 am
I don’t mind off topic when it’s cricket thats being talked about…the thing is with Hussey is that he had about a decade and 10,000 or so first class runs under his belt at a level that is sometimes higher than that of international cricket! I wouldn’t be picking myself up off the floor if they DID pick him if he has a good ODI series…
February 13th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Toad
I am humbled to be able to talk cricket with one so wise.
I agree with you about Ryder but will wait until Southee develops a bit before championing him.
BTW…you had better show a tape of last nights game to Sue B, that was without doubt a thrashing.
February 13th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
BB said: but will wait until Southee develops a bit before championing him
You might be right BB, but it didn’t do Daniel Vettori or New Zealand cricket any harm having him play test cricket at 18.
And I remember when the West Indies took a young pace bowler called Michael Holding with only a few first class games under his belt to Australia in 1975 and then surprised everyone by naming him in the test team. He didn’t do all that well in that series, but within a year was among the best in the world.
Southee is bowling accurately, and having just turned 19 can already bowl at a similar pace to Chris Martin. Within a couple of years, as he bulks up, he could be up to Brett Lee pace. But he’ll only develop to be a great bowler if he regularly has the experience of bowling against the best batsman. He’d learn a lot more bowling to Alastair Cook and Kevin Pietersen than he will playing under-19 cricket.
February 13th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Toad
I am all for pushing youth but I think Southee is best left with the U19’s at this stage, while I know that many want young guys in the team there is one name that should always be remembered before you chuck them to the Lions……Ken Rutherford.
February 13th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Point taken BB, although the West Indies pace bowlers in Rutherford’s debut series were Malcolm Marshall, Joel Garner, Michael Holding, Courtney Walsh and Winston Davis - probably the most fearsome lineup ever.
I don’t think England’s current test batsmen, Pietersen excepted, are likely to be too scary for a young bowler.
February 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Toad
England will be a much tougher side to beat when it comes time for real cricket.
February 13th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
I don’t see the greens wading into the housing affordabilty issue. It seems to be settled that the supply of land is the problem. Hugh Pavletich got about 10 minutes on TV1 this morning complete with slides of cheaper housing and promises of $200,000 houses.
What about the massive increase in the money supply ( Alan Greenspan and all that) and asset inflation while general inflation is suppressed by an unlimited supply of cheap labour.
Asset inflation doesn’t create wealth but creates a charge somewhere else in the economy (there has been a massive shift in wealth from those who own assets at the expense of those who don’t >>> so is that not connected to high house prices and housing affordability.
What about migration? In the press (today) a property expert talks about house prices in relation to interest rates wages and migration (no mention of the supply of land thing).
We seem to be living in a world of parallel realities. One world is Telly world and that is dominated by the interests of advertisers.
February 13th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
try to pull youself together fwwog gets 5% thats it ,
February 13th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
jh said: I don’t see the greens wading into the housing affordabilty issue.
Well, Sue Bradford did makethis speech yesterday.
But the timing is not right. The Government have scored a bit of a hit with their initiatives, and while the Greens believe they can offer much more comprehensive and effective policy initiatives than the Government in this area, it is not sensible to trot them out as a knee-jerk reaction to an announcement the Government has earned a few brownie points with the public on.
And, from what I gather from internal Party membership consultation, some of the detail of Green policy re this is still being worked through.
I am sure the Greens will enter the debate strongly in his area in the next few months, but in their own time, rather than in reactive mode to a Govenment announcement.
February 14th, 2008 at 12:14 am
JH
there has been a massive shift in wealth from those who own assets at the expense of those who don’t
Not to pick nits but could you rephrase this?. This hour of night and I;m on autopilot and sh!t like this is like a binnacle with one ball.
Tell the truth everyone, how many of you have the slightest idea what that means?
respectfully
BJ
February 14th, 2008 at 2:45 am
The only reason house prices went through the roof after the RMA was introduced is because banks added a risk premium onto loans to property developers to cover the possibility of a consent being declined due to the RMA being interpreted largely on a case by case basis and when this is compounded over the extra time it takes to get a resource consent to subdivide compared with just getting a council permit the property developers ended up having to charge twice as much to make the same profit they could previously have made by only charging half as much because they could have done the job in half the time.
Good grief, if there’s a land shortage in Auckland all you have to do is make some more land. Fill one or two of your harbours. Solves your landfill problems, gets rid of the main traffic bottleneck twixt north and south, cheaper than building a second bridge. See… a win-win-win solution. Hey, people living on Waiheke could even walk to work, how good is that for the environment
February 14th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
In case anyone has today’s Dom post, there is an EXCELLENT summary of the government policy in the letters to the editor today.
respectfully
BJ
February 14th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
bjchip Says:
JH
there has been a massive shift in wealth from those who own assets at the expense of those who don’t
Not to pick nits but could you rephrase this?. This hour of night and I;m on autopilot and sh!t like this is like a binnacle with one ball.
…………………………..
there has been a massive shift in wealth to those who own assets at the expense of those who don’t.
Due to recent credit expansion, benefiting eg those with a leveraged property portfolio at the expense of those who save and those who want to buy. Of course house prices are falling but…..
“In New Zealand, the correlation between net migration inflows and house price inflation is striking, as illustrated in graph 3″.. Alan Bollard
http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/speeches/0145812.html#fnB1
and we have a globalised property market.
No matter what you here from certain sectors there seems to common sense coming from the conservative Austrian school.
http://www.dailyreckoning.co.uk/article/180120072.html
February 14th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Thanks JH… if I hadn’t been winding down I might have figured it out myself.
respectfully
BJ
February 14th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Thanks JH… if I hadn’t been winding down I might have figured it out myself.
respectfully
BJ
google “navigators balls”