Thanks for voting Green!

It was amazing to watch the votes coming in from around the country on Election Day.

We received 10.62% of the vote, which means that we can bring at least 13 Green MPs into Parliament.

So a big welcome to Eugenie Sage, Jan Logie, Steffan Browning, Denise Roche, Holly Walker, and Julie Anne Genter.

There is also a possibility, depending on the special vote, that we could have one more Green MP join us—Mojo Mathers—we’ll let you know as soon as the overseas votes have been counted.

Importantly, we couldn’t have done it without you!

This election result means more voices in our Parliament calling for stronger environmental protections, a fairer society, and a clean green economy that works for everyone.

10.62% is the highest proportion of the vote we’ve received since Green MPs first entered Parliament in 1996. We’re proud of this result and you should be too.

Our success is due to the tireless effort of thousands of supporters like yourself. Thank you for every event you attended, petition you signed, or email you forwarded from us to a friend.

And, finally, thanks more than anything for Party Voting Green.

Over the next three years we will continue working as hard as we can to be a strong voice in Parliament for our environment, our children, and our future.

But for now it is time for us all to have a lovely Christmas break and enjoy a well-deserved holiday – we’ve all earned it!

76 thoughts on “Thanks for voting Green!

  1. Thank you for being there to vote for, otherwise I’d be left with no choice but to give my vote to Labour.

    Based upon an assumption I’m making, they must round up, when calculating the number of MPs for a party.

    10.6 / 100 * 120 = 12.72
    10.6 / 100 * 121 = 12.83

    So to get a extra MP we need to get another .6 or .7 of the party vote. Unless they use a different rounding system. The extra .6 or .7 sounds very possible. (cross fingers)

    11.3 / 100 * 120 = 13.56
    11.2 / 100 * 121 = 13.55

    The 121 is based upon the fact that at the moment there are 121 MPs going into parliament this time.

  2. Yea.. a brilliant result for the Greens & MMP so I believe..
    BUT
    the biggest loser was NZ democracy : about 30% didn’t even bother to vote..(lowest turn-out in over 100 years)
    I understand that, thats the right of anyone in a democracy..
    but it sounds like the ‘apathy’ party actually came second (ahead of Labour on 28%)

    Oh Dear !!

    Kia-ora

  3. The next time could be interesting. There is a huge opportunity in 2014 with Goff leaving as he was their best chance of winning.

    This should mean that staying over 10% in the vote is going to be realised. The question is how to adapt to the consequences of the new leadership.

    If they maintain the recent (from the Greens) moves on policy such as CGT, WFF tax credits to beneficiaries, $15 an hour minimum wage – then Greens might want to hand them over and look at becomimg a party of the centre (and swing both ways as a coalition partner). If they move to the centre, then Greens might want to replace them as the leading centre-left party and push them into that coalition partner role and take over the “government or opposition” party mantle.

  4. There is a good chance that by elections will be held in Rongotai, Mt Roskill and the Hutt.

    Will the Greens take on the mantle and seriously take the opportunity to rout Labour out of these seats?

    Or will Russel patsy up to Labour and not contest the seat in earnest?

    To cement the gains made this election, the Greens must be serious and contest the by-election opportunities on offer shortly.

    Anything less will paint them as the Labour “lapdog” again.

  5. oh gee..gerritt..

    ..and that would split the left vote..?

    ..and help the right..?

    ..which you are..?

    ..duh..!..yeah..!..good idea..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  6. and that would split the left vote

    If the Greens were a serious political party they would contest the potential by-election, irrespective of “splitting the left vote”.

    What “splitting the vote” does is say the Labour, you are the dominant left party, we will doth out cloth cap, tug the forelock and “give” you the seats.

    Time to stand up Greens, assert the Green party as a rightful contender to lead the “left” wing factions.

  7. SPC

    Why would the green party want to abandon policies they have championed just because they suddenly become popular, or some other party adopts these policies as their own? The only thing that should happen in those circumstances is that the green party should push them even harder, and make sure they stick.

    I’m not sure I like this talk of swinging both ways either.

    What your saying is crazy talk SPC.

  8. i’m sorry , i woulda voted Green , but when my friend went to visit a Green Member in Nelson ( on council I seem to remember ) to ask for help in opposing a HUGE motor racing track in a really quiet part of the Nelson Region she was told ” well really it doesn’t help The greens to oppose stuff like this – do you know how many people in NZ support motor racing ? The numbers are wrong “

  9. Just a question – if there are by elections and National wins one, does one of the party list MP’s then leave parliament?

    If so, then Greens should go for it – it’s a good way to promote someone running on the list for 2014.

  10. Sorry Gerrit… In a FPP election which is how by-elections are contested, one does NOT go to the polls with anything less than a united front. That’s just the way FPP works and I’ll be damned if I am going to support anything as stupid as splitting the vote. If it were an STV ballot? Sure. No problems mate… we’d be in to win. With FPP we know better.

  11. Currently we have Parties in Parliament, and likely in Government, that attracted 0.61% and 1.07% of the vote, yet a Party that received 2.76% of the vote has gained no representation at all.

    So why not abolish the threshold completely, and also abolish the “coat tails” provision that encourages the sort of rorts that have occurred in Epsom, Ohariu, and (since the implosion of the Alliance until this election) Wigram from occurring?

    That would be fair and representative. Much as I despise the Conservative Party’s social policies, if the likes of United Future and ACT are there with a much lower percentage of the vote, so should be the Conservatives. The people who voted for them deserve to be represented (despite them being people whose views I largely do not like).

  12. @SPC 6:15 PM

    No, once elected they stay elected, unless removed by death, resignation, corrupt practice, or conviction for a serious criminal offence.

  13. terrasea

    Surely the priority for Greens is making environment action part of government policy whatever major party is in government.

    It is already party policy to focus on a core issues – clean rivers, green jobs and reducing child poverty. Norman pointed out that only the core policies were costed, not all policies. These indicate where an effort would be made with any party in government.

    Sure there is the sustainable society part objective of the Green Party but the goal is to implement the policies by having government adopt them. This comes from major parties coming on board. Where Labour adopt Green’s more centre-left policies they promote them as part of their alternative government on offer, then Greens no longer have the advocacy role.

    The more this happens the more Greens can position themselves in the centre – a partner to Labour in implementing common (cetre-left) policy or a partner to National in achieving gains in core areas.

    This time it’s MOU on

    insulation – hopefully moving to require rentals to insulate within x number of years.
    child poverty – food in schools and health care – B4School Well Child take up improvement and catch up for all those missed at age 5. Later health checks in schools and improvements in access to dentists etc.
    waterways – nationwide standards (something beyond mere monitoring).

  14. toad, then obviously Greens should support PV in electorate seats.

    I would go further and say my “preferred” reform of MMP is now preferential voting on the party lists. This allows people who have their first choice fall short of the threshold to have a second choice counted. I would bring that in with a move to a lower threshold of 4% (as the Electoral Commission recommended) and an end to the exemption for parties winning an electorate seat.

  15. Further to my post at 6.39 – maybe there could be a requirement that all housing up for sale has to be insulated or have a plan for insulation (money set aside with the sale).

  16. BJ,

    Sorry Gerrit… In a FPP election which is how by-elections are contested, one does NOT go to the polls with anything less than a united front.

    Then how long before the Green party merges with the Labour one?

    Wont contest seat in case Labour does not get elected. Might as well be the same party.

    All one way traffic (except for Coromandel years ago).

    Without electoral seats the greens are at the whim of the Labour party, is that the Greens want?

    Waste my vote in that case. Might as well have voted Labour.

    Jees, the Greens are either an independent party or fold into the Labour camp.

    Where is the ambition to be the best the Greens can be? To be the leading left faction party?

  17. Patiently

    Gerrit… that rule only applies in FPP balloting, and in FPP the existence of more than two parties is an aberration and does not last.

    Not possible for it to last. In the USA I was a Democrat… there is no sense in being Green there as the only thing a third party can do is hand the election to someone we hate even worse. Nader vs Gore = Bush. Nader vs Kerry = Bush. We know better (I hope).

    I’d expect a quid-pro-quo with Labour that sees them drop their opposition in a seat we COULD win with their passive assist. This might not be so diffcult to negotiate.

    However, your assertion has no merit except in a FPP voting system and that is something we oppose in ANY environment.

    BJ

  18. Without electoral seats the greens are at the whim of the Labour party, is that the Greens want?

    Which is an entirely specious assertion, the party vote gives us our seats as it has for several elections now.

    BJ

  19. SPC

    “Surely the priority for Greens is making environment action part of government policy whatever major party is in government.”

    Yes it is, as that is achievable now.

    “It is already party policy to focus on a core issues – clean rivers, green jobs and reducing child poverty. Norman pointed out that only the core policies were costed, not all policies. These indicate where an effort would be made with any party in government.”

    A good strategy, go for the achievable goals.

    “Where Labour adopt Green’s more centre-left policies they promote them as part of their alternative government on offer, then Greens no longer have the advocacy role.”

    Again I say, why would the Greens stop advocating the policies they have championed, just because a major party like Labour adopts them. I would love Labour to adopt Green parties policies, but I don’t see why the Green party would drop them, just because Labour adopts them.

    Again I say that what you say, SPC, is crazy talk. Unless I’m misinterpreting your message here.

  20. @Gerrit 6:59 PM

    Other than in byelections, electorate seats are irrelevant. If the Greens were to get 35% of the Party vote in a general election, but not win a single electorate, they would still almost certainly lead the incoming Government.

    The preoccupation with electorate seats is a legacy of FPP, which has now for once and for all been consigned by the referendum to oblivion – time to move on.

  21. Clarabelle’s observation that “when my friend went to visit a Green Member in Nelson ( on council I seem to remember ) to ask for help in opposing a HUGE motor racing track in a really quiet part of the Nelson Region she was told ” well really it doesn’t help The greens to oppose stuff like this – do you know how many people in NZ support motor racing ? The numbers are wrong “ shows her friends niavity.

    Her friend should have said their was a huge corporatiuon behing the race track, and then her friend would have an army of watermelons at her side.

  22. I don’t know what is worse, ocker communists or rock snot?

    God help NZ.

    [frog: You are worse, d4j. If you have a sensible argument to make, you are welcome. If you just have your usual xenophobic and bigoted abuse you will soon be banned.]

  23. terrasea, there are only two ways to grow the Green Party further – by gaining the votes who swing from National to Labour election to election or taking over the leading centre-left party position. What option is taken will determine what policies the Green Party would focus advocacy on.

    If the goal is to both maximise the Green-Labour vote (to realise the wide range of Green Party policies) and also to leave the Greens in place to work with a National government then it would be preferable if Labour maintained its CGT and WFF tax credits being universal, $15 an hour minimum wage policies and left Greens to focus on its core (for bi-partisan implementation) programme.

    It does not change the manifesto and allows Greens to use its limited resources more effectively.

  24. Still can’t log on to associated Blogs (apologies Jan Logie[congrats!], Robt. Guyton) et al – then last week my mobile phone gets blown by a problem the various companies have ‘never seen before’. Hope there is nothing sinister about this but will report anything untoward through the msm.

    A lot of people didn’t vote!

    In my case, I live in a working class neighbourhood and couldn’t find a Voting booth within walking distance(@5 miles) – those flash german cars didn’t have this problem as they flew past….

    None of the many 18 year olds around here own a car and Public Transport is a good rumour….our system of allocating booths according income seems out of whack – ie; non-representational, and so were therefore, the Electoral Votes!

  25. Actually curmudgeon…I doubt that your method would have worked . I guess by watermelons you’re meaning Green on outside / Commie on inside ?? Jeez ,our impression was the opposite , we’ve been saying that The Greens should be called The BlueGreens . Drifting just a bit too far to the right for our liking – old chum. Its a sad day when your local Green Party member is courting petrolheads I reckon !…sorry to be raining on parades…don’t mean to be SO mean – congrats and all that, and you’re better than NACTionalMaori but not by that much

  26. Toad,

    The preoccupation with electorate seats is a legacy of FPP, which has now for once and for all been consigned by the referendum to oblivion – time to move on.

    Must be getting old, I thought parliament was a place where our local democrativcally elected representative could put forward the electorate views.

    Seems like political party elected representatives are more important.

    I guess a different type of “democracy”?

    The one you have when you cant vote for your local representative.

  27. SPC

    I’m not really sure what you’re advocating here.

    What policies will be advocated, have already been determined. The type of voter the Green party is after, is the one that agrees with these policies. It’s just a matter of getting the message out there as to what they are. It’s not going to be changed to suit a particular mood swing of the public.

  28. @Gerrit 9:27 PM

    Must be getting old, I thought parliament was a place where our local democrativcally elected representative could put forward the electorate views. Seems like political party elected representatives are more important. I guess a different type of “democracy”? The one you have when you cant vote for your local representative.

    Not at all, Gerrit. Of course your locally elected representative should represent his or her electorate, and on occasion defy his or her Party to do so if that is the will of the electorate. I’m actually hoping at least one or two National electorate MPs will be pressured by their electorates to do just that on the Nats asset sale policy, which no matter how I look at it does not make economic sense.

    But the overall composition of Parliament should be in proportion to the democratic Party vote across the country.

  29. terrasea, it’s not just about policies, it’s about offering a party that has a strategy for advocating for these via working with government.

    It’s not simply being an add on to Labour when and should they choose Greens as a coalition partner, but having a broader appeal to a wider electorate as a change agent.

    My original point spoke to how Greens have to be seen as having a stragetic and tactical flexibility not be boxed in by Labour – but have the capacity to adapt if and when Labour changes its own approach with a new leader.

  30. Mark – I am sorry to hear about your problems getting to a polling booth. The larger parties are often well organised assisting voters to the polling booths. However the alternative is to cast a special vote before election day.

    Trevor.

  31. SPC

    So what you are saying is that the Greens cannot afford to be drowned out by Labour, by them adopting Greens policies, making Greens look irrelevant? Every time they do so the Greens should start pushing in a new direction?

  32. Somewhat, it’s not as if Greens objectives or policies have to change – more that both tactics and strategy have to be seen to be flexible, so that voters realise that the party is more than a brand because it has the pragmaticism required to achieve results.

  33. I think the Greens should stick to their environmental & social justice kaupapa & avoid left/right labels.
    Mostly they need to avoid being lumped in with Labour which has slumped to its lowest level in years. Obviously in an MMP parliament coalitions are essential to get your agenda through..
    but you can guarantee that this Key-party will go all out to ram through their far-right (not centre-right) agenda. Selling assets, private prisons, beneficiary bashing, widening the gap between rich & poor, giving the biggest tax breaks to the top 10% !

    I wouldn’t be surprised if they block any legislation from the opposition parties passing the first reading.. its called playing the power-game (is this the face of NZ politics for the next 3 years ?) watch out theres a STORM coming !

    Viva the revolution (the Green one !)

    Kia-ora

  34. The party has been around awhile offering new policy ideas and despite no place in government has survived because it is established a brand around sustainability that is relevant to the century ahead. But if the party is gain either more popular support and or establish a place in government it has to “develop its role” a little more.

  35. I voted Greens last election and this. I’m looking at Mana over the next three years and will consider voting for them next election.

    I’m obviously also watching the Greens. I hope that you will be an actual opposition party, as opposed to merely furthering a few agreeable interests while staying more-or-less silent on disagreeable ones.

    Please be vocal and visible in your opposition to anti-poor, anti-worker, anti-women, anti-minority and anti-environmental policies – that’s why I voted Green.

    Congratulations, by the way!

  36. Toad,

    But the overall composition of Parliament should be in proportion to the democratic Party vote across the country.

    Never an argument from me on that score.

    The point remains that a rejuvinated Labour party in 2014 will try and regain the non electorate party vote lost to the Greens.

    Some Green party policies wrapped around more centre left policies and many? 2011 Green voters will return their party vote to Labour.

    Basically the Greens are currently an “ADD ON” of the Labour party. When voters dont like Labour (and there is not much to like at the moment) they can, with a clear conscience, party vote Green.

    From a marketing (voters) perspective, what will be the difference beween Labour and the Greens when a vote for one is as good as a vote for the other.

    And the extreme left of both the Greens and Labour have the Mana party to drift to.

    They no longer “have” to vote the Greens or Labour (this has not been possible in the past).

    Strategically the Greens must get electorate seat representation otherwise it will be at the mercy of both Mana and Labour voters.

  37. Must be getting old, I thought parliament was a place where our local democrativcally elected representative could put forward the electorate views.

    It is, in fact, old. Much as I am. Consider that when it evolved there were no telephones, no television, and it took a week to get a message from the center of the electorate to the capital.

    IN THAT ENVIRONMENT the electorate seats made sense. Now every one of us is directly connected. I can send a message to my party leadership less than a minute… and the national policies and priorities are the important things… the electorate seats are I think, throwbacks to a time when you elected someone you trusted to actually act as YOUR representative and you really had to trust that person to do right by you. No choice at all.

    Now we have a choice. The personalities are far less relevant than the policies. I have a notion that the electorates are not entirely irrelevant, but I can’t make a case for it. Not any more.

    BJ

  38. @Gerrit 7:08 AM

    The point remains that a rejuvinated Labour party in 2014 will try and regain the non electorate party vote lost to the Greens. Some Green party policies wrapped around more centre left policies and many? 2011 Green voters will return their party vote to Labour. Basically the Greens are currently an “ADD ON” of the Labour party. When voters dont like Labour (and there is not much to like at the moment) they can, with a clear conscience, party vote Green.

    Labour may try to do that, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they will succeed. Personally, I think they would be best served trying to recover the votes they lost to National in 2008, rather than those lost to the Greens in 2011, even if that means more slippage to the Greens.

    I don’t think your analysis is supported by the evidence, Gerrit. The Greens’ best performance in any previous election was in 2002. That year’s election also saw Labour achieve its best performance under MMP.

  39. BJ,

    the electorate seats are I think, throwbacks to a time when you elected someone you trusted to actually act as YOUR representative and you really had to trust that person to do right by you. No choice at all.

    The electorate system allowed you to gain access to your local MP “face to face” and have him/her take up your concerns not just in parliamaent but also with the various government departments at a very high level.

    List MP’s dont have a connection to a specific electorate or its people.

    Sure you can email, phone, discuss on web blogs, etc. But it is not “face to face” or representative.

    Remember that Parliamant doeas not sit on a friday for the reason of elected MP to return to and work with their local constituants.

    Now the Green party vote is 100% dependent upon the general voting public returning them to the above 5% level, so can see why you dont think electorates are a democratic institution in the future.

    But my point raised earlier is that the Greens are now in a left field containing Mana, Labour (and bits of NZFirst) and are totally reliant on Labour getting electorate seats to give a majority to the left.

    Labour will always treat the Greens (as experience over nine years has shown) with “little brother” attitude. Just sit in the corner and keep quit, big brother is in charge.

    Why not go for the electorate seat to cement equal partnership with Labour?

    Otherwise the Greens will always be at the call of Labour. Sort of a Labour vote when you dont want to vote Labour.

    Can see the time when the Greens and Labour will merge to form a Liberal party. Simple reason is the two parties are co-dependent (one cant function as a government without the other) and might as well become one entity.

    Radical left now have Mana, no need to be part of the Greens or Labour.

  40. Toad,

    The Greens’ best performance in any previous election was in 2002. That year’s election also saw Labour achieve its best performance under MMP.

    If the measure of performance is the number of seats in the house, then it is a “best” performance prior to 2011.

    If the measure of performance is how much Green party policy was enacted under a Labour led government, would you call it the “best”?.

    If the point of the Green existence is to prop up a “big brother” attitude Labour government, yep the Greens have a stellar 9 year performance record.

    But to attain a Green government (helped by “little brothers” Labour and Mana) you need electoral seats.

    So if the Greens are happy to be “little brother” to a Labour government, go ahead and remain static in party vote only land.

    If the Greens have asperations to be the government, go for the electoral seats.

  41. Just a thought :

    If MMP is supposed to be a proportional representation of the voting pattern.. then maybe they should leave about 30% of the seats empty, to represent the non-voting ‘Apathy Party’ ?

    Fingers Crossed the specials, bring in Mojo..
    kia-ora

  42. The brilliance of Key is that he has converted the Kiwi election contest from an honest debate about policy, to a beauty pageant for the most fancied potential prime minister, not entirely dissimilar to the American Presidential election. National has got in twice now on the back of Nice Man Mr Key in a way they never could have whilst led by Brash.

    Labour don’t have a charismatic leader to go up against Key and get any traction. Goff was the best of an awful bunch.

    However, the Greens do have a suitable candidate: the public like Russel, when he’s acting sanely and not ranting. Russel could be the next credible left-of-National leadership candidate.

    Didn’t even need to mention the policies; no-one cares any more.

  43. It’s more about the electoral cycle and about fear of too much change that prevents governments being deposed after only one term. People don’t quickly recant of a choice they made to install a new government. Eventually resentment against the direction being taken builds up and discontent with the status quo is sufficient to remove a government.

    The Green Party should use the MOU negotiation period to raise issues of concern to the public – waterways, child poverty and need to create jobs. And where National do not co-operate build up some opposition campaign momentum.

  44. Clarabelle, the Green Party does not have any representation on either the the Nelson City Council or Tasman District Council. So your friend did not see anyone there who represented the Green Party. As the MP who has been responsible for constituent contact in Nelson over the past 3 years, I can also say your friend hasn’t raised this issue with me

    Shunda, remember that because of the losses from our 08-11 Caucus we ended up with more men than women in Parliament. With the new intake we now have 6 men and 7 women.

  45. Somewhere between philu’s advice to not put up candidates in electorate seats and gerrit’s advice to try and win electorate seats, is the continuance of existing policy – to run electorate candidates (to have a presence in the process) who seek the party vote.

    Small parties unable to reliably secure 5% of the vote attempt to win electorate seats. Large parties with little competiton for the electorate vote do well in them and beat off numerous challengers (whn they want to). A medium sized party and or a growing party contests the party vote.

    Greens should support PV in the electorate seats to ensure the MP has 50% support. This ground needs to be established before moving into the electorate race contest – otherwise it’s simply expending scarce resources to decimate a more reliable coalition partner on the centre-left. This development is consistent with the retention of MMP. More so if the Green Party advocates PV on the party list – to allow those whose first choice falls below the threshold to have their second preference counted.

  46. “..Somewhere between philu’s advice to not put up candidates in electorate seats..”

    i didn’t say that..i said in some seats..(let’s call them ‘strategic-seats’.)

    i am in mt albert..so was able to click clendon without any fear of advancing the rightwing cause…

    ..whereas those who clicked green for the candidate-vote in those ‘strategic-seats’..

    ..did just the opposite..

    ..and of course greens standing in electorate seats can also encourage a ticking of the candidate for the seat..(however futile/ineffective..)

    ..and a party vote for another party…

    ..and thereby feeling they have done their green-duty…

    ..(in epsom/ohariu/auck-cen that would be called the double-shoot-in-the-feet green-vote…)

    ..each electorate should be viewed on a case by case basis..

    ..’strategically’..as it were..

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

  47. Given that parliament is male dominated, and the Greens are about equality, we should have more women than men.

  48. There are two rival approaches to MMP reform.

    A – a MMP reform that lowered the threshold to the 4% recommended by the Electoral Commission and also ended the exemption for parties winning electorate seats.

    B – The alternative of having no threshold would increase small party representation.

    There is opposition to B because it complicates the formation of coalition governments to a whole new level.

    However if A was combined with PV, it gives more parties a chance of reaching the threshold and even if they do fail then the smaller party voters whose first choice missed out could have their votes transferred to a second choice (or third choice) till their vote was made with a party over 5% of the vote.

    This would allow voters for ACT, Libertarianz, United, Conservatives on the centre-right to re-allocate their votes (and NZF who won’t reach 4% let alone 5% without Winston Peters) to a rival or to a more major party It also allows a liberal party to emerge in the centre and a party on the left to emerge to challenge Labour – without being reliant on an electorate seat or beholden to someone who has one (the weakness of the Alliance under Anderton and Mana under Harawira).

  49. Shunda

    Wow, is this the woman’s division of the Green party? I thought you guys were all about equality!!

    In terms of a percentage of the population, the Greens have it exactly right. Personally I think it’s great there’s been a rebalance towards gender equality. Fantastic!

    Parliament would be a much better place if old stalwarts like Winston Peters and sexist parties like National and Act didn’t arrange their lists in such a male dominated way. Woman bring a number of intrinsic qualities to any organisation that should not be underestimated.

  50. SPC

    I suspect that the Italian experience with the minor parties and governmental instability has to instruct us.

    I am with you on pushing for preferential votes for both electorate and party votes, and I also agree with the 4% threshold. Both are proper remediations for weaknesses in the system. The monolith Key has built is not healthy for the country.

    respectfully
    BJ

  51. gerrit, I agree that party list representation of the personal concerns of citizens is less viable than that of electorate MP’s. But as/once Greens get enough MP’s they can establish a dedicated service for constituents – first at parliament (on-line that can be managed by support staff as at electorate offices) and then via regional/weekend offices.

    On the issue of, dependence on Labour winning electorate seats – more a case of a 120 seat parliament being dependent on this. If National won 60 electorate seats because Greens and Labour split the electorate vote then the number of seats would have to increase to maintain proportionality. MMP means no electorate seats are required to form a government. Relationship strength under MMP is determined on the party list vote.

  52. Congratulations on a very good election result and welcome to what looks like some very strong new Green MPs.

    I have voted Green for the last 2-3 elections. I was very pleased with result for the Greens at first. But since then I have been nervous about where the Green Party is heading. I’ve always been very happy with Metiria Turei’s politics, values and political performance. However, I’ve never been keen on where Russel Norman is taking the party…. ie too much towards the centre.

    I am very disconcerted that the first thing the Green Party seems to be doing after the election, is to cosy up to National. This is not why I voted Green. I voted Green for a strong opposition to raft of destructive policies National will pursue, and for the articulation of a totally progressive direction.

    Any, even a minimal, deal with National just validates their government, and accepts some incremental gains that will be completely overtaken and undermined by all the wider and structurally deeper destructive things the National government will do.

    I voted for the whole Green package. This includes an understanding of the way environmental issues are interwoven with those to do with the negative social and economic impacts of poverty, corporate power, inequality, lack of opportunites for a decent lifestyle by large numbers of children and young people, and various forms of discrimination.

    National will just separate off a few environmental programmes from the wider Green package, and use it to promote their green credentials.

    I will be watching the Green Party performance closely this term, and next election will be weighing up whether to vote Mana, or maybe even return to Labour (if they do happen to have a turn of fortune and direction to become a stronger, and truly left wing party).

  53. While I support a Labour government over a National one, I see it as counter-productive to not influence better outcomes when National is in power. Greens can only increase their influence if this is the case.

    We already know that unless Labour and Greens have a majority there are centrist parties that will try and lock us out of any coaliton led by Labour and force us into the MOU role even when Labour is in power.

    If the party is for a sustainable future, is being locked into a role of opposition to National and champion of the left with (some moderate echo in the Labour party) the way to achieve it. The public wants a positive approach and for us to achieve results in the cleaner waterways, child poverty and green economy transformation jobs areas.

    And I say this as someone who supports the whole package of policies now – and am happy for either Labour and National to borrow them. Because it’s not about which team wins its about New Zealand doing better – a more sustainable economy and society with Green party policies.

  54. Carol, first off, thanks for your vote!

    Secondly, we had a Memorandum of Understanding with national in the last Parliament too. Under that agreement we got significant progress on implementing Green policy in several areas (for example home insulation), but also did not compromise our role as Opposition to the Government’s programme. We are aiming for the same approach.

  55. “..I see it as counter-productive to not influence better outcomes when National is in power. Greens can only increase their influence if this is the case. ..”

    i don’t agree with that spc…and would cite the collapse of support for the maori party after them following such dictates/imperatives..

    and yr other arguments for ‘understanding’ with national..

    ..maybre used to apply..

    ..but you ignore two facts..

    1)..the green party is no longer the out-of-step with others party it was..

    ..it is now a major presence..that isn’t going away..

    ..(and when i say..i isn’t going away’..i am talking about the green ethos that is now middle of the road…

    .whether the/this green party is/continues as the spokesperson for those imperatives..

    ..is not yet clear..

    ..and is up to the green party..

    ..i also feel the ‘there is no alternative arguments presented in favor of ‘understanding’ are flawed/simplistic..

    ..and an insult to anyone with half a brain..

    ..a green party using its’ powers for the first time..

    ..and up on it’s’ hind-legs..and roaring..

    ..over the devasatation to be wrought by nact/key..

    ..is a most appealing alternative approach…

    ..there is also equally flawed first past the post thinking at work here..

    ..as with the candidates in epson/ohariu etc…)

    we now have mmp for the forseeable future..

    ..and the centre-left has fractured..

    …with labour as less powerful..but still there..

    ..(as an aside i do find that ‘we must kill labour to live’ belief shared by many..

    ..to be also deeply flawed..

    ..labour..ie old-school labour…not that monstrosity under clark..

    ..is the natural partner..along with mana..

    .of the green party..

    ..helping each other will lead to power..real changes…

    ..so how about putting that labour must die! to one side..eh..?

    ..it is stoopid..and self-defeating..

    ..and this centre-left is the natural home of the green movement..

    ..the rightwing is not..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  56. aah..!..kevin hague..

    ‘insulation in our time’..eh..?

    ..seriosly just how often/more do you really think you can wring out of a bale of pink-batts..?

    ..every retired mp has that on their c.v.as the sole green achievement after all these years in parliament..

    ..and just more of the same..eh..?..you reckon..?

    (key-quote:..’we were going to do that anyway’…

    ..and for once..i believe him..)

    i mean..talk about flogging a dead horse..eh..?

    (and..)

    “..but also did not compromise our role as Opposition to the Government’s programme…”

    now that..is complete and utter bullshit…

    ..you forget..i am one of the few who watch questiontime..

    ..i do a bloody commentary on it..

    ..yr sad oppositional-record can be found there..

    ..the last three years there has been no opposition..

    ..not from labour…’cos they were supine..

    ..and not from the greens..because of thr ‘memorandum of understanding’..

    ..and yes..you provided the same service for clark/labour…

    ..and for them also..for so little in return….

    ..the records will also show i noted this same band-aid over mouth ineffectual opposition syndrome when you were doing it for labour..

    ..ever thought of trying a different approach..?

    ..y’know..!..something radical..?

    ..like holding the bastards to account as best you can..

    ..as any opposition is meant/voted in to do..

    ..think on..!..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  57. There is some difference between providing National with a secure majority on confidence and supply and enabling all that involves and a MOU to achieve things Greens want.

    Building sustainable policy into our New Zealand government should not be something only achieved at the right partisan moments in the political cycle.

  58. but that opposition power-vacuum you and labour dwelled in is now gone..

    next/this time we will have peters and harawira…(and labour)..

    ..doing what you should also be/have been doing…

    ..and if you band-aid up again..?

    ..and then suffer a collapse in yr support in ’14..

    ..it will be all yr own doing..

    (and as an aside..

    ..f.f.s..!..could the times be more serious..?

    ..could the need for you to be a real opposition to what these ruthless vulture bastards are going to do..?

    ..could that need/imperative be greater..right now..?

    ..not just standing wanly on the sideline..eh..?

    ..as going on yr/yr co-leaders words to date..

    ..is what you intend to do..

    ..bah..!

    ..and as far as the upcoming struggles are concerned..

    ..you will just be useless-bastards..eh..?)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  59. Getting all state houses upgraded/insulated is progress.

    But any new MOU has to push for a requirement for all rental property to be insulated within say 5 years.

    And hopefully food in schools, action on water policy/cleaner waterways -nationwide standards etc

  60. All I can say Phil is that I disagree with you completely on both counts. There is no evidence apart from John Key’s claim that the Government was going to move on home insulation anyway. The evidence is surely to the contrary, as they continued to sweep away measures that intervened in markets. And we continue to point to this achievement because of its size, but it certainly wasn’t the only progress: other areas of common ground where positive progress has been made include the NZ cycling network, pest control, cleanup of toxic sites, and a much better approach to regulating non-pharmaceutical remedies.

    And I am perplexed by your suggestion that our Opposition has been blunted. What are the areas where you feel our Opposition to National’s programme should have been stronger (and give examples please)? Perhaps limit yourself to my portfolios.

  61. i don’t know yr portfolios…

    ..and you made the same claim-game over the insulating under labour..

    ..that it was ‘down to you’..

    ..and now you are going to run with it again..?

    ..so that is nine years of (claimed) kudos..

    ..for some bales of pink-batts..?

    ..i mean..!..seriously..?

    ..and as an example of non-opposition..?

    ..hard to top this one..

    http://whoar.co.nz/2011/new-zealand-parliament-list-of-questions-for-oral-answer-thursday-6-october-2011/

    that last one from last yr..

    ..when hughes pissed a cache of about 10 (valuable..ask hone..)questions up against the wall in that comedy-routine with that national party minister…

    ..as i have noted before this was emblematic of those opposition failures/neglect on the part of the greens..

    (and yes..there were individual exceptions ..and i seem to remember you being that a couple of times..

    ..norman also occaisonally showed what he is capable of..

    ..all of which i wd have commented positively on..

    ..and all of which made the soft-pedalling most of the time all the more infuriating..)

    here is the full questiontime cache..if you can be bothered..

    http://whoar.co.nz/?s=questiontime

    btw..thanks for answering/replying…

    ..how about encouraging yr colleagues to do more of the same..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  62. i mean..questionetime was all over in about an hour most of the time..

    ..(i think 50 mins was the record..)

    ..the haste/pace it was got thru was indecent..

    ..and it couldn’t have been further from the cauldron of challenge/opposition it should be..

    ..it was zombie-democracy…

    ..i’m picking you will be startled by the difference..

    ..when peters and harawira get cracking…

    ..and should hughes feel the need for another comedy-routine..

    ..maybe you could/should donate the questions to someone who will use them..?

    ..i dunno..harawira..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  63. I party voted greens, did last election too… though I must admit, with Winston Peters coming back, it was very tempting to vote for him – he’s a real sh*t stirrer and you’ve gotta love him for it.

    There was no representation in my electorate, not that it would make a huge difference, being a huge labour strong hold – voted NZ First for the electorate due to this.

    Keep up the good work guys, make a difference for us little people! :)

  64. …and truly left wing party

    Never going to happen again, those days are gone. if you want left wing, the best you can hope for is left-tinged centre. Or unelectable.

  65. “..Never going to happen again, those days are gone..”

    um..!..are you keeping up to speed with the ongoing death-throes of capitalism..?

    ..(all predicted by marx of course..first capitalism will globalise..

    ..and then it will eat itself..which appears to be happening a bit now..eh..?..)

    any thoughts on what might happen after that..?

    ..and have you been keeping up to speed with the new wave of leftwing revolutions currently going on in sth america..?

    ..maybe you need to get out more/read more widely..?

    …just relying on our m.s.m. will just leave you both deeply misinformed and ignorant..eh..?

    ..yr end of history-success/victory of capitalism/america fantasy was entertained and then laughed at quite some time ago now..

    .eh..?

    ..do try harder to keep up to speed..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  66. phil says “um..!..are you keeping up to speed with the ongoing death-throes of capitalism..?”

    As opposed to countries who shunned capitalism and are thriving, like North Korea, and USSR…..

    phil says “.do try harder to keep up to speed..”

  67. Phil, you’ll note I’m not eating any humble pie over the election result. Not even close.

    We’ve seen the end of left wing and right wing politics; now its all centre with a lean to the left or the right.

    And as I’ve told you before, Key will be in the Big House until he stuffs up in the eyes of the people. So a few more terms to go yet.

    As I’ve told you before, get used to the look of the blue tinge: its going to be here for a while.

    And I do hoped to be proved wrong, and you were quite gung ho I’d be proved wrong just last week, but it didn’t happen.

    And in the unlikely near future case of the collapse of capitalism, then our centre will just get a bit less blue and a bit more red, that’s all.

    I don’t actually know what “m.s.m.” is, much less get informed by it.

  68. .hard to top this one..

    Yes, hard to top that one, which is why I sleep easy.

    Kevin is a good example of why you’re so wrong. He works with Wilkinson on pest control, yet has been calling for her to be sacked as Minister of Labour for months. Not exactly blunted criticism. Not exactly a sign of being worried about criticising National.

    .you forget..i am one of the few who watch questiontime..

    Can’t forget when you constantly remind us. Doesn’t mean your analysis is right. We know well that you see things that the rest of us don’t, and also miss what we see, like Kevin going hard on Wilkinson.

Comments are closed.