The Northland by-election delivered a 4,000 vote majority for Winston Peters which is being described as a hiding for National.
But how could our candidate, Mark Osborne, counter all of the left plus some of the centre and centre right who might, or might not, not have understood the consequences of their voting?
One against too many others united in opposition to him was too much.
Given what he was up against and how little time he had, he did well, but sadly not well enough.
I’m not pretending this is anything but bad for National. The party will be doing serious soul-searching and must learn from this.
But National isn’t the only loser.
After the knee-capping by Labour leader Andrew Little, that party’s candidate wasn’t expected to do well but just 1,315 votes must be galling for Willow-Jean Prime.
What does the result say for the left as a whole? The Green party didn’t stand and Mana scraped up only 55 votes.
This wasn’t a win for the left who have lost any moral high ground they might have had from which to criticise National for not campaigning to win electorates.
Previous Labour leaders struggled against Russel Norman who did a better job in Opposition and now Little will have to counter a stronger Peters.
What does this result do for Northlanders? They’ve now got an MP who doesn’t live in the electorate and who will be distracted by his party-leadership responsibilities.
They’ve got two and a half years to work out whether that’s what they need.
And New Zealand, after nearly getting a majority government on election night is back to where it was in the last term with National dependent on Act and the votes of at least one other party to pass legislation.
Ah well, that’s politics and today we’ve got sport to enjoy – Go the Black Caps.
Homepaddock 
David Farrar has some good reasons why National lost:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/
Two stand out for me
a. the bridges bride
b. the suit brigade- Wellington/Auckland running the show
LikeLike
The left wanted National to have their Parliamentary majority reduced, thats WHY they voted for Winston. Its really that straightforward.
LikeLike
the left are pathetic. Labour/Green/Mana .. huh
BUT National have dug a big hole. The rest of NZ will now want the attention that the election gave Northland and by attention I mean $$$
LikeLike
The Nats have only got themselves to blame for throwing money at the by election. The seat of Northland was extremely unlikely to ever go to the left jabba, but by getting Winston in National are down 1 vote in Parliament. Nothing pathetic about that result. After Sept 2014, National could pretty much do what they liked, now only 6 months later, they are reliant on Dunne or the Maori party. The RMA reforms are going to be less drastic, I’m pleased with the outcome. Not as happy with the cricket so far, hope this 3rd wicket partnership holds up for a bit more. All on the same side for that eh?
LikeLike
yep,the smart people of Northland have managed to put our future (next 2 years) in the hands of Peter Dunne and the Maori Party .. brilliant
LikeLike
Let’s get it right…it was a “buy election”…I’m unimpressed with any facet of the whole saga.
LikeLike
Maybe some good will come from this. Peters will be very aware that he has taken a RURAL seat from National. How many provincials abandoned small parties and voted National from sheer, stark terror of the hard left alternative? I know I did.
I don’t like Peters, but I can live with most of his policies. The “New Zealand First” concept resonates with many in the productive sector. Some question where our politicians’ loyalties lie…National is perceived as being too close to foreign corporations, Labour is just a branch of the UN, the Greens puppets of NGO’s like Greenpeace, WWF etc.
LikeLike
This isn’t true, Ele. If it was purely the left against the right then National had an advantage because they were the only real party on the right and the left would have been split. It was clear that even past National voters decided to support Winston.
The combined party vote from the Greens, Labour and NZ First in the 2014 election totaled just 14,314, while National had 17,412. Sabin got 18,269, well beyond the combined support from the other candidates. This was clearly National’s loss and nothing to do with: “One against too many others united in opposition”
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/electorate-35.html
One of the reasons the Greens didn’t stand a candidate was because it was unlikely that National would lose when it had such a huge majority in this electorate. There was no deal done with either party before.
National should have had an advantage: it had much greater resources than any other party, it drove in heaps of Ministers in Government BMWs, it mobilised teams of Young Nats from Auckland to knock on doors, it offered lots of bribes in bridges, roads and broadband that only it could really deliver, it threatened to remove support if the vote didn’t go its way and it threw lots of mud at Winston.
The fact that a wily, 69 year old (70 early next month) campaigner can drive an old bus around Northland on a minimal budget and beat the governing party is actually quite an achievement.
The messy exit of Sabin (that made the Bye-election necessary) didn’t impress many Northlanders and they didn’t actually like the bribes and threats either. Northland has been overlooked and has suffered under past governments too but National did little to address the real issues of education, health and housing. The fact that none of these were addressed in National’s campaign upset a lot of people I know up there and demonstrated that the party was out of touch. It didn’t even consult on which bridges should be widened.
Osborne actually seemed like a nice guy (as I have stated before) and was gracious in defeat. Although I don’t believe he was the strongest candidate he was actually let down by a poorly conceived campaign from his party’s leadership.
“…smart people of Northland have managed to put our future (next 2 years) in the hands of Peter Dunne and the Maori Party .. brilliant.”
I totally agree, Jabba. Dunne is beginning to show some backbone and commonsense and is questioning changes to the RMA and showing concern about what the GCSB is doing.
Marama Fox impresses every time she speaks and she is very focussed on kids and struggling families and will clearly do her best to add a little more compassion into this Government.
There is potential for both Dunne and Fox to do much more than Winston could in opposition to address inequality and our growing corruption: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/better-business/67511312/bribery-and-corruption-a-growing-threat-in-nz-deloitte
I wonder if National does build those bridges and install broadband as they promised, or if things will just revert to how they were before: http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2015/03/northland-speaks-and-national-still.html
LikeLike
Dave – I didn’t say it was purely the left against the right, I said it was the left plus some of the centre and centre right.
This might surprise you, but I agree National got lots wrong with the campaign. It probably won’t surprise you that I don’t agree giving more power to Dunne and the Maori Party is good.
As for compassion and inequality – two of the best ways to help the poorest people are to get those who can work off benefits and in to work and to improve educational outcomes. That’s why National is putting so much effort, and money, into those areas.
LikeLike
Ele, it probably won’t surprise you that I have difficulty with important legislation being pushed through with a majority of one (often using urgency and restricting public input).
Getting people into work sounds like a reasonable solution, but with 95% of us in work already the big issue is not so much more jobs but more hours and better paid jobs. We spend around $2 billion a year on Working for Families and this is essentially a wage subsidy. We need to change our trend in becoming an increasingly low wage economy.
LikeLike
” We need to change our trend in becoming an increasingly low wage economy.”
Which leads inevitably to the question of in which area of global economic activity NZ possesses an economic advantage, because clearly our wage rates are relatively high compared to emerging economies.
We can’t pay higher wages in industries where other countries are more competitive.
Of course , this has been discussed ad infinitum over the decades, but the majority of the population have no desire to work in the industry where we possess the most natural advantage . . . the production of high-value , clean , green , and healthy food.
Free-range, grass-fed is what we do best.
LikeLike
Dave – some people are unemployable but I am optimistic enough to believe that it is fewer than 5%. I have no argument with the need to improve wages.
The best, possibly only, way to do that is by economic growth. That isn’t incompatible with environmental protection and enhancement and requires labour law which allows flexibility without allowing worker exploitation.
FB – our agricultural wage rates are far higher than the global average because there’ so much subsistence farming. But How well do they compare with those in other developed countries?
You are right about our natural advantage but my experience of wages for those who work in, service and support primary production isn’t of low wages.
LikeLike
So it is not the wage rates , per se , which seem to dissuade NZers from working in agriculture, to the point where we import labour from overseas , while employable NZers remain unemployed?
Something is not right there.
Of course people do not work for money alone.
LikeLike
farmerbraun when we discuss this we tend to see people as game pieces we can move around at will and not as individuals, with lives hopes and aspirations of their own.
Its not hard to comprehend, surely, that someone who has grown up in Auckland (say) , has friends and family there as well as all the amenities they have grown up with and take for granted are not going to rush off to rural Southland to milk cows. This would be an environment as foreign as the Philippines to many
LikeLike
Farmerbraun-f and Ele,
I don’t consider our ability to grow high value clean green healthy food a natural advantage. Massive area exist in the temperate zone that are largely under utilised for food production. Huge areas of South America and Russia share a similar climate and could dwarf NZ, yet perform poorly.
Our advantage is our clever, well balanced, hard working people, often known as farmers. Combine that with communities and a political system that supports farming, and we have achieved a great deal.
LikeLike
Mr E, surely you were somewhat remiss in failing to mention the application of sound science to the growing and utilisation of perennial pastures ,as one of our key advantages.
LikeLike
Andrei , so the decision to be unemployed in Auckland, rather than employed in rural Southland, is entirely justified?
LikeLike
Of course it doesn’t justify that, farmerbraun. But a poor person-job fit may mean that such a worker soon reverts to being an unemployed person in Invercargill because it’s no good just getting a job – it needs to be kept.
More could perhaps be done to educate and prepare people for the opportunities that exist.
LikeLike
Farmerbraun (without F, with black print),
‘surely you were somewhat remiss in failing to mention the application of sound science’
They were included in this ‘Combine that with communities and a political system that supports farming’
But yes – our science and willingness to adopt science is a huge driver.
LikeLike
You are denying people free will and personal sovereignty farmerbraun and the end of that road leads to slavery,
My own childhood was marked by significant disruptions, moves, starting at new schools, five different primary schools, with three different languages spoken and gaps in my schooling – its not that easy being a stranger in a strange land and it leaves its scars even though it worked out well enough eventually.
Its easy to be parochial and think your community offers everything a person might need to flourish and be content because that is what you are used to and you don’t miss what you have never known.
LikeLike
“…it leaves its scars even though it worked out well enough eventually.”
Rings true of anyone who grew up on the land.
A person may be scarred by leaving what they know behind but also by staying with what they have always known and never knowing any different.
LikeLike
That was a question Andrei, but you did not really address it.
I was not suggesting compulsory relocation , or forced labour.
Personally I am inclined to think,disruption and dislocation aside, that life is what you make it.
But I have often felt like a “stranger in my own country”: I like to be an independent thinker, possibly as a consequence of that feeling.
LikeLike
When you consider that the settlers of NZ all travelled vast distances in perilous conditions , in order to better themselves and their offspring, then you might conclude that things are so much better,even for the unemployed, that our changed character means that moving to another district for work and self- advancement is now considered neither necessary, nor desirable.
LikeLike
That’s right Farmerbraun and when it comes down to it most of us work to live not live to work.
Look at those things that give your life structure and meaning, which may include the way you earn your daily bread but also the other things, like living near to an aged parent, your Church maybe, the park where you played with your kids when they were small, your friends and imagine loosing all this – it takes a fairly big carrot or very desperate circumstances to part with all you cherish
Easier when you are young and unattached of course but that doesn’t alter the fact that moving to an isolated rural community when what you have known all your life is an urban environment with all its facilities is a big step which few are prepared to undertake
For the Filipinos, life is desperate and a new and better future is the goal but those people who take the risk are a very small subset of Filipinos most of whom prefer the devil they know
LikeLike
Ele, it probably won’t surprise you that I have difficulty with important legislation being pushed through with a majority of one
Obviously you have not thought through your unquestioning support and the consequences of MMP then.
LikeLike
New Zealand was once far more egalitarian than it is now and there are many OECD countries that have far higher median wages than us. We cannot have an economy that serves all of us while many jobs are low waged and mainly in the service industry. Most of our exports are low value commodities.
Most of our wealth is tied up in property and much less than should be is invested in our productive industries. Our domestic economy is being strangled by the ever dropping disposable incomes of ordinary workers and families. A higher and higher percentage of our incomes are being sucked up by rents, mortgages, loans and electricity charges.
The profits of our big Australian banks are astronomical now. They claim their profits are due to a stronger economy, and while that is true, things would be so much better if billions weren’t sucked out of our economy by their aggressive approach. They pay minimal tax and most bank employees will tell you how much selling unnecessary debt packages underpins their income. Their profit after tax was almost $2 billion in 2013 alone.
Click to access pwc-new-zealand-banking-perspectives-february-2014-final.pdf
Electricity and ACC charges are used as a form of taxation when they could provide businesses with an economic boost if they were charged realistically.
Investing in fossil fuel is dumb when prices are dropping, we have already suffered the $600 million collapse of Solid Energy and we could be extracting high quality silica instead to feed the growing solar industry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/business/7857005/Silica-potential-highlighted
The Government has also constrained growth by ignoring the regions. Southland earns 12% of our export income but road funding is population based. Our logging trucks and milk tankers are forced to drive on substandard roads and the Southland District council id forced to spend most of its income on road maintenance after central government cut support.
There are so many things we could do better.
Ray MMP is still better than FPP when a party could win 30% of the vote and govern outright. However MMP could improve if we made it mandatory that crucial decisions like sending troops to fight or amending our constitutional legislation needed at least 65%. Most organisations I am involved with do not accept 51% as a workable majority.
LikeLike