National loses 2 seats after special votes, Labour and Greens gain 1 each; NZ First unmoved - Peters keeps Kingmaker position

New Zealand First remains the Kingmaker, although Labour and the Greens have closed the gap with National to two seats after the Electoral Commission announced special votes results.

National lost two seats compared to election night results to sit on 56 seats on Saturday. Labour gained one to 46, the Greens gained one to 8 seats. New Zealand First remained steady with its 9 seats. ACT had its 1 seat. The Parliament will comprise 120 seats.

In terms of the final vote count, National came in at 44.6%, Labour 36.9%, NZ First at 7.2%, the Greens at 6.3%, ACT 0.5%, TOP 2.4% and the Maori Party 1.2%.

The two-seat swing between the Left bloc and National was expected. It would give a Labour-Greens-NZ First government 63 seats - a buffer of two above the 61 seat majority required. Meanwhile, a National-NZF government would command 65 seats.

Green Party leader James Shaw was first out of the blocks in terms of commenting on the results, saying they increased the case for a Labour-Green-NZ First government. Labour Party leader Jacinda Ardern issued a press release saying the final results strengthened the Left's mandate for change.

Meanwhile, National Party leader Bill English said the results showed National 10 seats ahead of Labour and still ahead of the combined Labour-Greens bloc. He said National would seek to form a strong government with New Zealand First.

Read further comments from all three further below.

17% of the vote

The special votes - 446,287 of them - comprised about 17% of the total vote. They included ballots from New Zealanders overseas who had been out of the country for less than three years (61,524), and those made by people in New Zealand who enrolled at the same time as voting ahead of election day.

In terms of government formation talks, they are the final piece of the puzzle required before New Zealand First enters serious talks with both National and Labour. NZ First leader Winston Peters has said he is aiming to have a decision by the time the results are presented to the Governor General on 12 October - within a week of today.

This might not be all we hear about the specials, however. Peters on Thursday questioned whether the results could be fully relied upon. Speaking to media in Parliament after his initial talks with National and Labour, he made the following comment:

“You do know that, even before the election they were running out of ballot papers, even though there was special voting happening before the election, running out of ballot papers on election day and a whole lot of people being misinformed about their rights, and I want to know that they are capable of completing the count properly – that’s the operative word – properly by two o’clock, Saturday.”

The comment may well have been Peters positioning himself for the possibility that the Labour-Greens and National votes ended up so close that a recount could be called for to determine the biggest bloc.

Based on the final counts today, National attracted 1,152,075 votes against a combined Labour-Green count of 1,118,627. There is a difference of 33,448 votes between the two blocs. The Electoral Commisison said 27,484 votes had been disallowed, while there were also 10,793 party informal votes - together 38,277.

It has also been noted that a shift of about 5,000 votes from National to Labour would result in a seat-change between the two, giving the two blocs 55 seats each.

Shaw: Time for a mature MMP government

Green Party leader James Shaw was the first leader to comment on the results. He said they increased the case for a Labour-Greens-NZ First coalition. Jacinda Ardern is set to speak at 3pm, and Bill English at 3:30pm

Shaw said a lot had changed since Peters had ruled out working with the Greens in government in 2005 - the Greens were now looking at areas of policy overlap with New Zealand First.

Interestingly, Shaw said he was pushing for a "mature form of MMP government" where Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First were all included under a coalition deal. He said there was potential now for New Zealand to have its "first true MMP government". He said such a combination would be stable.

Shaw maintained the line that talk of a tie-up between the Greens and National was "smoke" and "noise". He wasn't expecting a call from Bill English, he said.

Meanwhile, Shaw told media in Auckland that while he hadn't had much to do with Peters, he got on well with New Zealand First MPs Fletcher Tabateau and Tracey Martin.

Ardern: Mandate for change

Labour Party leader Jacinda Ardern issued the following statement after the results were released:

Today’s final election count has strengthened the mandate for change, and for negotiations to continue in earnest, says Leader of the Opposition Jacinda Ardern.

“We congratulate Angie Warren-Clark on becoming Labour’s 14th additional MP, which expands the Labour caucus to 46 MPs.

“Angie brings valuable experience to our team through her role helping the most vulnerable in her community as manager of Tauranga’s Women’s Refuge. She will also strengthen Labour’s presence in the Bay of Plenty.

“The final vote tally shows how this election galvanised people to enrol and vote with the highest turnout since 2005.

“Today’s result lifts Labour’s final vote to 37 per cent, and the left block of seats to 54. The majority of people voted for a change to the status quo.

“This reinforces the mandate for negotiations to form a stable, durable and progressive Labour-led government, a government I would be proud to lead.

“Over the coming days, Labour will focus all its efforts on completing negotiations,” says Jacinda Ardern.

Speaking to media in Auckland Saturday afternoon, Ardern said the final result gave Labour a strengthened mandate to continue coalition negotiations, arguing that the majority of New Zealanders had voted for change.

In a much more up-beat performance compared to her election night speech, Ardern said she would be proud to be Prime Minister of a Labour-led government. She said Labour could deliver "durable, stable coalition government" with the Greens and New Zealand First. She said a 63-seat reading for the three had her feeling more comfortable than the 61 seats on election night.

Asked about getting negotiations completed by Thursday, Ardern said talks would now begin in earnest this weekend, although she wouldn't say whether she'd talk to Peters over the weekend. Labour would move as quickly as it was able to and hold separate talks with NZ First and the Greens during the process, she said.

However she added that Labour would hold talks in a responsible manner, indicating she would not rush things. Having said that, she said her expectation was that talks could be completed by 12 October.

Ardern again repeated that Peters would not be given the Finance Minister role by Labour. She talked about how Labour had worked well with Peters and New Zealand First between 2005 and 2008 to deliver stable government.

She said Labour and New Zealand First had similar policy platforms both aimed at delivering better outocomes for New Zealanders.

English: voters chose National over Labour

National Party leader Bill English issued the following statement:

With all the votes now counted it is clear that National has finished ten seats ahead of the Labour Party and also ahead of the Labour/Green grouping, says National Party Leader Bill English.

“I want to thank the more than 1.15 million voters that placed their trust in the National Party, and I remain as determined as ever to lead a strong, stable government for the next three years that will deliver on the hopes and aspirations of all New Zealanders”.

“Not since 1969 has the National Party finished ahead of the Labour opposition at four successive elections, and I want to thank everyone involved in this historic achievement.

“Now that the special votes have been counted it’s time for political parties to get on with the job of forming a strong government to take New Zealand forward, and I look forward to engaging with Mr Peters and New Zealand First over the coming days to achieve that”.

“Voters had a clear choice at the election between the two major parties that had a realistic prospect of leading the next government.

“They signalled very clearly that they wanted National to perform that role and we will now get on with the job of trying to give effect to their wishes.”

Speaking to media in Arrowtown, English said the results confirmed National as the largest party, 10 seats ahead of Labour and the Labour-Greens combination.

He said National was looking forward to forming a stable and enduring government, with negotiations with New Zealand First to proceed at some pace through this week.

English said it would have been nice to keep the two seats that National lost, but that this didn’t fundamentally change the equation. National was significantly the largest party, he said.

He said the result didn’t weaken National’s negotiating position “significantly at all.” The fundamentals hadn’t altered, he said. Negotiations would focus on the economy and issues raised by New Zealand First and voters, than on the final seat counts.

English was asked whether bigger concessions might now be required to get Peters on board, such as Finance Minister or co-Prime Minister. He said the result didn’t fundamentally change the negotiations. National were negotiating with NZ First on the basis of a strong election result, with 10 seats more than Labour.

The focus of the negotiations would be around how to maintain the positive direction New Zealand was heading, and dealing with issues raised during the election campaign. The numbers reflected a desire for the New Zealand economy to stay on track, he said.

“This is the result MMP has given us,” English said. MMP had delivered successful governments for the last three-or-four elections he said. He expected National would be able to form an enduring government in these circumstances, he said.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment or click on the "Register" link below a comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current Comment policy is here.

219 Comments

Game on Winston!

up
22

BE now will have twichy bum syndrome, he may have won the battle but is going to lose another election.
i fully expect WP now to go with labour greens as the margin is comfortable and policys more aligned.
the only way national can do it is to hand over PM and would they stoop that far?, who knows they have shown that they will do anything to stay in power

up
10

Would they stoop that low? Be more like, "Oh, while we're down here".

up
24

Also 44. 9% (National + Act) voted for government and the Rest 55.1%for change.

This election is and was for change

up
12

Glad we special voters could help Labour & Greens out
National does not have a mandate at all Mr English
NZ can do better than employ a accommodation expenses fraud
The fact is it was FRAUD
Knowingly making a claim for expenses that wasn’t required
Winston should take note change is what’s required for NZ not more of Bill English

Greens and Labour both saying the extra 2 seats strengthens their case, is in fact an admission that National does have the mandate, but sadly progressives lack logic, and can only talk in narratives. Case in point the narrative today is that people voted for change while ignoring the fact that National has more votes than both of them combined.

Some commentators on here say they voted NZ First for change. I know of National voters that gave them the party vote hoping NZ First would go with National. Sounds like WP could be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't which ever way he goes.

I notice how arrogant Bill English was on election night and subsequently on TV that he will automatically be PM. He thinks as he has the largest vote he has the God given right to Govern.
On Nationals 9 year record he will have eat humble pie if Winston goes with him.

... who was it ... Austria or Denmark ? ... who recently went 10 or 11 months without a ruling government ... and life for the average Swen or Swenlina went on as normal ... folks went to work ... the kids went to school ... the traders and artisans went to their usual places of trade & commerce ...

Take your time Winnie ... seriously , there is no urgency to make a decision ... weigh it all up carefully buddy , then place the baubles upon the scales of self-interest , and figger out who's best suited to lead our grand land ( girt-by-sea ) deep and successfully into the services & information age ...

... Gummie's got a spare 50 c piece if you need to flip on it .... ha ha de haaaaaaaaaaaa !!!!!!!

up
19

Yes, GBH, no harm with a Govt on hold that can’t pass new laws.
After all, this National Govt prided itself on doing nothing, and being totally non_interventionist - unless the polls/ public attention overwhelmingly forced some actual action.
So really the last 2 or 3 weeks have just been a normal National Govt - non-interventionist.

up
35

I wonder how many Auckland property speculators just broke out in a cold sweat.

up
12

Anyone holding a lot of property especially in Auckland and Christchurch where they are already dropping.

Gordon, god you are childish if you get something out of trying to piss me off.
The news is that it doesn't,

It clearly does as you cannot keep off the keyboard. All your contacts comments of late are full of anger and panic. And so you should be. I can only imagine you count up the value of your as is portfolio daily. Must be depressing as it devalues daily down there. I thought you were going to stay off this site. You can't as you had to vent your anger and panic as Labour rose from the dead. It has been so amusing to watch you and your fellow agents panic.

Why?
WP will never allow a comprehensive CGT or land tax or inheritance tax or whatever.
To do so would be political suicide as property investors have very big teeth.

up
22

If he gets his way on immigration and foreign buy up of real estate, a capital gains tax will not be such a pressing issue.

up
33

Big cuts to immigration happening regardless of which way he leans. That will be a bottom line. And I think likewise for foreign buyers.

Negative gearing is gone if he goes with Labour.
KiwiBuild is happening if he goes with Labour.
Foreign buyers are banned if he goes with Labour.

Why would Winston give a rats ass about two ticks blue property speculators.

WP is also very anti Labour's water tax on farmers

It isn't a water tax on farmers though is it? It's a water tax full stop, which among many other heavy users of water includes farmers and more importantly commercial water bottlers.

I'd recommend checking on the relative volume usage for farming as compared to water bottling. Water bottling usage is a round-off error as compared to farming usage. Makes great headlines to feed the anger of ignorant voters...

You are right. Property investors and wealthy speculators are in National politicians pockets and politicians will do as they are told or loose a great deal of money.

They remind me of the RMA in America regarding gun control.

up
31

Ha ha the nz herald headline is 'shock result'.
Morons

The NZ herald is little more than a tabloid sadly. sine the Auckland Star wrapped up there has been no-one to keep them honest.

I know its MMP, but this is truly odd. A party out of power in the 2014 election with 11 seats and 208,300 votes, gets only 186,700 in 2017 and its leader gets voted out in his electorate - but he gets to decide the result.

His share of the vote in 2014 was 8.7%, but in 2017 it is 7.2%. Even ACT's support didn'r fall that hard.

up
36

Was it odd when Act / United Future / Maori got to decide with a tiny number of seats?

The reason MMP does not appear to be working well or is clunky, is because MMP is supposed to be proportional, but like our housing market, we have put artificial boundaries around it to make it NOT proportional currently (5% threshold anyone?). The last review suggested a 4% threshold, but did not take into count national psyche on the "wasted vote" idea. There is no reason whatsoever for a threshold. If there were a few little parties with seats in the middle, TOP and Maori for example on this last election result, then the policy concessions would have to be spread around PROPORTIONALLY so that Winston, GM and Flavell would all gain a bit of ground for the citizens they represent. Also, I have no doubt that TOP would have achieved a higher proportion as well without a threshold. There would be no kingmaker, but a true representation of our country. so simple, and yet Nats and Lab both love the threshold for obvious reasons. The system you are labelling and blaming problems on is not MMP, it just smells like MMP.

DC : obviously FPP was not a great system of voting ... and now , we've shown that MMP isn't perfect either ...

... and the Ozzies have proven that even the venerated STV system has it's faults , and can lead to a hung parliament ( oh .... there's an image which warms the cockles of my cold Gummy heart ... ropes at the ready , hoist away chaps ! ) ...

So what do we do ... change the system again ... or accept it as it is , warts and all , and make the best of it ...

... basically , MMP doesn't work so well in Godzone because one of the major-minors ( the Greens ) still play as if it is FPP ... ironically ignoring the fact that they only came into existence because of and during the reign of MMP ..

Green, NZ First, Maori Party are all offshoots of Labour.

check your history NZ first is an off shoot of national, WP started it when national kicked him out
he has stayed pretty true to the Muldoon era and policies, it is national that moved away from him

.. and the Greens were a combination of the old Alliance Party and the NZ Communist Party ... if memory is correct ...

NZ Maori were a protest group formed after Helen Clark's foreskin and sea-bed legislation enraged the Maori MP's and people , generally ...

LoL that legislation should've been circumsized much earlier ;-)

Correct. My mistake.
National moved away from the middle and Winston stayed there.

NZers were never given the full story on STV
The Bolger govt made sure it would be a choice between either MMP or FPP in a bid to give FPP the best chance to be retained
STV should’ve been the new NZ voting system as regardless of the recent Aus experience STV is superior to MMP
However no system operates well with bad people The present US government a sad example

The modifications to MMP that were recommended after the 2012 review, would have gone a long way to improve the system, so naturally, they were not taken up by the government (guess who) of the time

The mathematics of voting. An argument for STV.

Democratic symmetry.

FIFTEEN mathematicians went out to buy drink for a party. They decided to buy a single beverage in bulk to save money, but they wanted to choose which one in as logical and fair a way as possible. So each listed the three drinks on offer (beer, wine and milk) in order of preference. Six preferred milk, followed by wine and then beer; five liked beer the most, followed by wine and then milk; and four were wine-lovers whose second choice was beer, followed by milk.

The question was how to decide the outcome from these preferences. One milk- lover proposed a plurality vote, in which each person casts a single vote for their first choice. This would give milk six votes, beer five, and wine four, ensuring that his own favorite would prevail. Not so fast, said a beer-drinker. Given that wine was the least popular first choice, why not stage a run-off between milk and beer? Since the four whose first choice was wine said that they preferred beer to milk, this would mean that beer would win, by nine votes to six.

Humbug, said a wine buff. She suggested a more elaborate approach: pairwise comparison. Taking all stated preferences into account, it was clear that, given a choice between wine and beer, a majority (ten of the 15) would choose wine; given the choice between wine and milk, a majority (nine of the 15) would also choose wine. Although it had the smallest number of first choices, in other words, wine had the broadest appeal.

This sorry tale has a serious point: that the outcome of an election is a reflection of voting procedure as much as voters' wishes. In 70% of three-candidate elections, changing the procedure changes the final ranking. So the results of real-world elections can seem paradoxical, or downright unfair. In a paper just published in the journal Economic Theory, Donald Saari, a mathematician at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, claims to have got to the root of the problem. It is, he says, all to do with symmetry (technically, with something called the wreath product of symmetry groups). Essentially, says Dr Saari, voting paradoxes arise when the system fails to respect natural cancellations of votes. In a two-candidate contest, for example, nobody would deny that the candidate with the most first-preference votes should win. One way to explain this is that votes of the form AB (ie, candidate A is preferred to candidate B) should cancel out votes of the form BA. If this leaves a surplus of AB, then A wins.

These cancellations are a form of reflectional symmetry. But votes in a three-candidate election should cancel out, too. Consider three votes in such a contest: ABC, BCA and CAB. Each candidate is placed first, second and third once, so it is clear that these three votes should cancel each other out. This is a form of rotational symmetry, since the three votes form a rotating cycle.

Taking these two symmetries into account, it is possible to characterise all paradoxes for a three-candidate election under any voting procedure. Dr Saari's results can also be generalised for elections with more than three candidates using more complicated, but closely related symmetries. it is thus possible to evaluate the "fairness" of different voting systems.

Plurality voting, one of the most common democratic systems, fails to respect reflectional symmetry. Since it is only each voter's first choice that counts, a voter with preference ABC fails to cancel out an equal-and-opposite voter with preference CBA; instead, the result is one vote for A, and one for C. As a result, paradoxical results are possible under plurality voting. Similarly, pairwise comparison does not respect rotational symmetry, so it can lead to paradoxes too.

The fairest voting system, says Dr Saari, would respect both symmetries. The only system that fits the bill is the Borda count, proposed by Jean-Charles de Borda in 1770 to elect members to the Academy of Sciences in Paris. In an election with x candidates, each voter awards x points to his first choice, x-i to his second choice, and so on. The results are added up and the candidate with the most points wins.

Admittedly, this is more complex than plurality voting and cannot be used with current American voting machines (though it is used in Australia). Also, if voters are not familiar with all candidates, and do not rank them all, the unassigned points must be divided up evenly between the unranked candidates. But for small elections, the system is ideal. And our thirsty mathematicians? Having read Dr Saari's results, they should now be merrily quaffing wine.

The Economist March 4 th 2000

STV still allows 'strategic voting'. Fonterra uses STV and strategic voting e.g. 5 candidates but only giving a ranking to 2 of the five and leaving the other 3 blank, can occur.

You could equally say the greens have the balance of power: they could decide to go blue. So now you have both greens and NZ First deciding the result, 13% of the electorate - is that more acceptable?

But they dont! By having the MOU with labour the voters knew that a vote for the greens was a vote for labour and vice-versa.

It is not possible to go with National without betraying their base, and therefore a kamikaze move.

NZF has always kept their distance from the big parties and aimed to have their policies decide who they join. cunning but pretty obvious really. Greens could revert to a conservation party and do the same thing but would they survive..................

True. And Lab and Nat could run together. Its only Winston's call because that's how the main parties have decided to play it.

up
18

I'll tell you what's odd David. ACT with 0.5% of the vote having 1 seat in Parliament. If their support fell any further, they'd be through the trap door and gone forever.

Would make no change - Epsom would then be an additional National electoral seat. Act voters vote for Party vote National in Epsom already.

Issue is the numbers now are so low they can't drag in additional Act party seats.

Act has now passed it's used by date I suspect.

what are you talking about! national take the party vote from epsom so getting the act candidate is a way of getting an additional seat. to ditch their agreement loses 1 seat from that coalition

@theglc exactly right, funny how national party voters don't even seen to understand how badly the nats have rorted the mmp over the years, Acts and United futures seats are both bonus seats they were getting, that otherwise would not have been 2 extras seats to that nats, they would have been 0 extra seats, if the nats hadn't rorted the system.

JB I'd suggest you have a good think about what you wrote, and why it's completely wrong, it shows a complete lack of understanding of how the nats have been rorting MMP.

"he gets to decide the result"

Utter rubbish - Both majors can and could say no deal - go and sit on the cross-benches

So - really - guess who decides the result - the major who puts on the most lipstick, fishnet stockings, hot-pants and 8" stilletos

Bill " walk on the wild side " English , then ...

... hmmm .... puts a whole new meaning on the term " Double Dipton " , doesn't it !

Oooooohhhh .... la la ...

couldn't stop laughing

If, for example, for the whole nation, there were 1,000,000 votes for National and 1,000,000 votes for Labour and say 1 special vote who chose Labour, would you be saying that one person decided for the whole country. Clearly that is a ridiculous proposition because the other 1,000, 000 also chose Labour. Surely it is the same in this situation , NZ Firsts 9 seats are just 1 part of a block of 65 seats that decided the election. The point being that 54 other seats were for change.

The hardest part is deciding who the 1,000,001st person was you could blame them but hey you'd have 1,000,001 choices - take yer pick

Another way of looking at it, is to say that just because somebody is the biggest bully in the playground, no body should be forced to play with them; and the rest are perfectly free and probably better off playing amongst themselves.

David chaston. In a way they all decide. Greens could decide to go with national, nz first could decide to get with labour but greens could decide no. Many combinations. The only reason peters is up front is because the other parties know there direction. But they all decide in the end so it’s very fair

What I find odd is that 21 years after the first MMP election stalemate we're dealing with the same king maker this time around. It will be a nice change to have someone other Winston Peters making the decision next time.

Let’s you and I form a party of the centre

Is's called MMP. We get what we ask for and the Politicians are only to glad to dish it out. It is in deed time for a change, a big change in our Political system. Less career Politicians and more candidates with the right CV for the job of running the country for the benefit of all New Zealanders not just a few on each end of the Spectrum

up
35

See you Bill.
Time for the change of Government.
Before NZ’s hospitals, schools, universities, infrastructure collapse with underfunding.
And before the deluge of unnecessary immigrants overwhelm existing infrastructure & housing supply.

up
13

That's dead right, but I imagine the new govt, if it turns out not to be National, will need to be sitting down before finding out how much our services have been underfunded, and how much will be needed to bring them back up to speed.

You only get what you pay for. Sadly most New Zealanders want a Utopia that other people have paid for.

up
19

Yes all that foreign exchange brought in by new migrants seemed so alluring to Mr Ponytailpuller & co
They neglected the fact the infrastructure of the country would require billions to meet the new population demands
Good luck for a change of government

This is a rubbish comment, shows the same mentality as Politicians

up
11

Hohohohoho ahahahahaha ha ha ha, ha, ha ha hahahahahaahahahahahhaahahahahahaha.

up
13

who were the clowns on here saying it wasn't a close election

Also Labour were only 5000 votes away from pulling a third seat (2 for Labour, 1 for the Greens) from National.

Little update in there now. I wonder if Peters might call for a recount, based on comments from Thursday? A gap of 33,000 votes between the Left and Right. I'm sure he'll talk soon

up
20

So National got 44.4% and Labour n Green got 43. 2% and if we take overall picture 44.9% (National + Act) voted for government and the rest 55.1% for change.

Sorry Deja Vu for Bill English.

Labour and Green 43.2

Not only that, Mana, Maori, TOP if there were STV would have predominantly been Labour/Green I'd imagine, only the Conservative party, maybe United Future would have gone National - that's another 100k votes in the change bank.

Conservative party would not exactly be a plus

.. yes , Fritz ... NZF were not campaigning for a change ,, and their supporters knew that ...

They were voting in support of their own policies , regardless of who their major-partner might be ...

up
14

I don't give a toss what he does - just so long as he drains the swamp

... why ? ... are there some ancient kauri logs at the bottom of it ...

I'll alert the Marsden Point Refinery , and the Auckland Airport fuel depot ...

... Kiwis with a 10 tonne Hirepool digger and a healthy " Barry Crump " DIY attitude , can achieve any-bloody-thing they want to ... ha haaaaaaa !!!

Gee - thanks - hadn't thought of that - I'll be there at daybreak with my 10 tonner

Judith Collins' wife will probably beat you to it.

... I'll nip into the Warehouse and get us each a hi-viz vest ...

No one in NZ needs an explanation or an I.D. card ...

... a hi-viz vest opens all doors , let's you get away with any-bloody-thing , any-bloody-where ...

You fire up the 10 tonner ...and I'll put the Speights on ice ...

I know several people who voted for NZF as an "insurance policy" to limit National's malign policies in the event Labour didn't get over the line.

And vice-versa.

abnz1 - how the hell did you make that massive assumption? Only two parties campaigned on a change of Govt, Labour and the Greens. Combined, they still totaled well less than National even after the specials. NZF openly stated to voters that it could go with either party, so was a NZF voter actually voting for change, or had other more important motives than just change for change sake ?.

On top of that we do know in a poll since the election that at least a third of NZF voters confirmed that their preference was for a National/NZF coalition - I didn't think simple maths was the hard ?

........"Combined, they still totaled well less than National even after the specials"............

Suggest you replace the batteries in your calculator.
National: 1.152 million votes for 56 seats
Labour-Green: 1.119 million votes for 54 seats
a difference of only 33,000 votes
5000 more votes for Labour would have triggered another seat and if would have been 55 seats each

Maybe labour greens NZF shouldn’t have compaigned on change. Maybe they should of campaigned on national getting in. Haha

Peters said the words himself he wanted change when he was talking to the media late election nite and many other times. Thing is what is change. Is it change of government totally or change of certain policies like immigration and foreign home ownership etc etc etc. One things for sure tho. A lot of things will change which ever way you look at it

Makes no difference really Winston will still go with National.

And if he chooses Labour then the Greens will once again be the bridesmaid and that's fine by me.

This is the message from most of the NZ Media, & Media ‘personalities’, aided and abetted by their global paymasters of course. And NZ’s shadow government which has infiltrated parties & media.

I'm still waiting on a cheque from George Soros.

Sure they will, Delboy, sure they will...

Did you put your bet on Green's being wiped out in the end?

up
15

The mood of the nation is CHANGE. Win Win situation for labour as will and should be forming next Government and if by chance Winston goes with National will be going against not only the mood of the country but also of the people who voted him so is finished and when the next election happens will favour Labour.

National finished Maori party and now next on the list is Winston Peter :)

WP is not stupid politically if he wanted to go with national would have gone before the special votes were counted BESIDES he too campiagned for change SO will be left party government.

... no , the mood of the nation is MOOD ...

We are grumpy feckers ...

... the rest of the world is being shot up , starved , or having North Korean cruise misslies flying over their Saturday afternoon BBQ's ....

And we , here in lucky old Godzone , are bitching about whether it's right or wrong for our democratic process to work it's way out in the manner that we originally voted for ...

SIGH !

vl1975nz agreed, every NZ First Billboard I saw had two works on it "Had Enough?" if that's not promoting a change what is?. NZ First voters would be disingenuous if they thought Peters would never go for a change in government.

If your'e in opposition like NZF, and you aren't touting for change, what are you there for ? NZF wants change and has been quite clear that he doesn't care how it gets the change it wants, whether through National or Labour/Greens - what's new or questionable ?

Seriously, Don't think Winston will go left.
If he does the 3 party coalition will be a one term government. It is going to stuff the country for the next 3 years as none of the 3 have got any idea on how to run anything as they are all inexperienced from top to bottom.
CGT won't be coming in anytime soon.
Ridiculous that the most popular party can lose under this MMP.

up
20

You really have to lose that FPP mentality. Nats might be the single biggest party but they have one tiny lick spittle mate. There is little to no alternative parties for right wingers to vote for, which is easy to understand as they only vote on one thing - what's in it for me.

Sorry Pocket Aces that is the view of the Left not the Right

Utter rubbish as shown so eloquently by the complete absence of support for your opinion.

A couple visiting the Upper (or was it Lower) Hutt RSA when Mark Sainsbury took his show on the road prior to the election sticks in my mind. Sainsbury pulled them aside for a bit of an interview to gauge their views, and asked them how they were voting. They said National, as voting Labour would cost them some infintessimal amount, about $20 a week maybe. They did mention they had more than the pension to live on.
They ended the interview saying they were heading home for lunch. Sainsbury asked them what they were having. "Lamb" they replied. And there it was, in a few words, the what's in it for me vote, for far too many people now, having lamb for lunch is a distant dream. They had no intention of seeing the playing field evened up.
Case closed.

up
28

The country is already stuffed under National's mismanagement. I welcome the fresh and diverse viewpoints that Labour / NZFirst / Greens will bring.

Agree entirely !

... you learn a whole lot more from making brand new fresh and diverse mistakes , than you do from endlessly repeating the same old tired ones ...

Step up to the batter's plate , Miss Jacinda .... Game on , new innings !

Still wishing :)

Panic stations.

This is outrageous. We've now got a 36 year old refugee from Iran in Parliament who wants to end poverty! Probably muslim and she's a woman!! Next thing, she'll want to be Prime Minister. Oh..... wait a minute

up
15

Gained a human rights lawyer and got rid of a believer in woo http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/81106358/National-MP-rethinks-pos... that's a great swap in my book.

Doesn't look like it to me

If she was a true-blue dinky-di practising muslim she would have been married off by now with 12 kids with stretch-mark from here to there and wearing a head-scarf

up
26

The country is overdue for policies focusing on housing affordability, immigration, adequate hospital funding and poverty. Let's hope that a lot of this happens within a context of economic and environmental sustainability.

Biggest issue to be faced is that Labour plan to fund their big spend with a reversal of the April 2018 tax cuts which NZF will never agree to as WP voted for them and they will benefit his super annuitants under the 66% of after tax wage calculation.

Greens supported these tax cuts as well - unlikely to do a 180º ?

Without this revenue - some $ 2.8 Billion per annum the budget hole becomes a chasm.

Watch for this issue to emerge as a decider.

Whoohooo. A coalition of the clueless is almost a done deal

#notmygovernment.

up
14

Not so, National may not be there.

#sulk

Expat yes the clueless would be NatNil

National's policy
#MAGA
Make Auckland Grateful Again
................eventually ran out of steam

That Greens fella head huncho as acting as a prime minster is on the wrong planet why are the smaller parties acting like they have power yes more morons in parliment
National/NZ First still have more seats even National / Greens have more seats the the whole 3 parties of nzf/labour/greens

"National/NZ First still have more seats even National / Greens have more seats the the whole 3 parties of nzf/labour/greens." This is not relative but I dont know how to make it simple enough for you to understand.

FYI I'm told - at this point - nothing expected from NZ First today. Maybe tomorrow, but then again perhaps not.

Thursday , Alex ...

... all will be revealed then ...

Have a little patience , for Winston to stand upon his whine box ... and announce to us all the baubles he has garnered for himself , the trinkets and fripperies for the fellow NZF MPs and supporters ...

... oh yeah ... and he'll let us know whom he has decided to be our PM , too .... tee heee heeeeee !!!

National will go all out as the leaders in power has everything to loose infact if not voted to power may have to retire so will be ready to offer anythi g and everything as their survival depends on retaining power.

Result will be that both National and WP will be going against what they campaign for and willbe betrayal to people who voted them (Though now who cares).

https://thestandard.org.nz/and-the-final-result-is/

Yup Bill's pants will be so far down, his arms won't be able to stretch to pull them back up again.

Everyone NOW calling the current NZ situation "Stuffed" or hoping that it will be "Gods green paradise on Earth again " and " demonising the country's progress and success" .. etc , better memorize their words, trolls, and comments ... and I would dare them to stay on here and repeat that in 12 - 18 months time if a L/G/NZF coalition is formed....

Should you start to complain or moan about things getting worse ( or have little changed) then you have no one else to blame other than YOUR shortsightedness and nonsense ( I wont use any harsher terms) .... We are not going to tell you " We told you So " but we will laugh at your stupid trolling at the time when you distance yourselves from the crap you voted in to justify a "Change" .... and we are not going to tell you that " you have been taken for a ride" and ended up as Mugs because we have been doing that for the last 6 months ... meanwhile keep laughing and celebrating your demise.
For most of us who are wise enough not to vote for change, we will keep doing Ok regardless and wait for the change of tide as we know that change only happens when the a majority decides that it is due and on order ....

An old saying comes to mind, and it goes:
SOME ARE WISE, and SOME ARE OTHERWISE !

"Gods green paradise on Earth again "

Green as in the Selwyn river?

up
12

It is no surprise that those that have made the most gains out of National being asleep at the wheel are now the most upset. I expect that as our young become more experienced they will start to vote more, so sorry specuvestors but the next election will probably see the start of Nationals end.

Very simple maths, 45%>37%, most New Zealanders voted for National lead government.

up
15

Very simple maths - 51% (technically it's 50.83333) is required for a majority and to form a Govt, most people didn't want National as a majority. Welcome to MMP.

Does China have a democracy?
You know, that thing where citizens vote? And enjoy human rights?

But the good thing is that China has been developing very fast. In terms of human rights, it’s better to go to any city in China and ask people on the street how do they feel.

up
15

.. no need to go that far ... just ask some Chinese in Orc Land how they feel about human rights ...

The Chinese Communist party has a stooge ensconced as a Gnats MP here in NZ ... in case anyone missed that little fact ..

.. we are very rapidly becoming a satellite country of China ... the Gnats are just way too trusting and stoopid to see it's happening under their very eyes ...

up
10

No, they are smart and calculating, they gamed the system for personal gain. Previous Dear Leader Key has quietly packed his 30 pieces of silver into one of his now non blinded trust accounts, and departed in the direction of an exclusive golf course.

I know it’s MMP, But not all the voters voting for NZ first want to a Labour government. I think Bill English is right that this election result shows most people want to keep the current direction but Do need some changes. I welcome NZ first’s policy about tightness of immigration and restrictions for foreign ownership etc.

There's 120,000+ wasted votes as well Cherry Tree, most of which were not votes for more of the same - TOP in particular took votes from the left.

Yes that might be right but how do we know how much percentage of NZF voters support which one. Therefore, we cannot say it means for change.

Doesn't matter they don't get to vote for another 3 years. It's Winston's call now

Cheerytree your'e correct - the last poll asking the NZF voters that question showed just over a third wanted a coalition with National

So almost two thirds wanted a coalition with Labour, welcome to maths.

Wasn't the point being made

Um two thirds is bigger than one third, you and Cherrytree are arguing that NZF voters might not have voted for change, your own stats point to the fact they did by a factor of 2 to 1. You're welcome.

Dear Solidname, it doesn’t mean two third support NZF with Labour coalition (many do not know, other says should go with most votes, also some says depending on policies). Moreover, Not all Green voters support Labour. One of my friends voted for Green just for the environment but if only choose from two major parties she will vote for National. So under MMP, we can only be sure is that 45% vote for National, 37% for Labour (it’s not 100% - 45% = 55% vote for Labor or vote for change). No more than 50% vote for National doesn’t mean for change, actually under MMP it’s hard for any major party pass 50%. Otherwise National had won on 23 Sep.

up
14

Bill English lied constantly about taxes Labour was going to bring in even after Ardern said she would do nothing without consultation. Why would anyone in NZ First go to National now? No one likes a liar.

those that voted for national knew he lied but did not care, those that voted for others knew he lied and also did not care.
it was other issues that were the driver of this election
same as what we have now government
against
we need to spend more on services and infrastructure.

Boring.
We left FPP behind 20 years ago

Much to Winston's delight.

Aw, and you usually do simple so well. Might want to review what "most" means.

“Most” means two major parties National vs Labour, National wins. Means most people support National as a leader party. But National do need other party support to form a government, means they need change some policies. That’s a democracy.

This is MMP, not FPP. We understand all the Nat voters are scrambling around to retain power, but just because your party has no mates so all votes for the bloc it comes from go to it, does not mean most people voted for them. They did not.

This is MMP, not FPP. We understand all the Nat voters are scrambling around to retain power, but just because your party has no mates so all votes for the bloc it comes from go to it, does not mean most people voted for them. They did not.

No, they didn't

once again that James Shaw thinks he is the king maker , he making statements already yawn yawn

...King Jacinda ... or Wild Queen Bill ... the mind boggles ...

"Shaw: Time for a mature MMP government". Comment of the election, I think. As if such a thing were possible ...
except in dreams.

Can anyone explain why the overseas voters tend to vote for the Green and Labour.

up
10

Because they want a lower exchange rate and lower property prices so they can afford to move back!

I guess this may be one of the reasons, if we suppose most voters vote from their own interests. Or they hope a good natural environment after they move back.

Because they do not pay NZ taxes . I say there should be no representation without taxation .

You live with your blinkers on mate - NZ is run by foreign money that pays no tax. It is a rich man's paradise.

Said what ? Does that alleged foreign money vote ?

Their money votes by way of donations to keep the big party's policy's as the elite want.

Because they want positive change - the way National get credit for global monetary policy us a joke. They should have achieved sooo much more for 9 years of incredibly easy economic conditions.

Exactly right, how many times did the pony tail puller try to claim low interest rates was his doing, when near lowest rates in history was happening in just about every other developed country world wide. The double dipper probably said the same kind of thing.

Because they like the idea of free ponies for everyone, but don't actually have to foot the bill themselves.

We need to cancel the ability for NZ citizens to be non residents for tax purposes. Every dollar earned overseas should be taxed and taxed hard.

Did you vote whilst overseas Expat?

Yes, and was a NZ tax resident as I had an enduring relationship. A pity I couldn’t actually access anything much my taxes paid for while overseas. I met a number of Kiwis that did their absolute best to pay nothing into the pool but put their snouts in the trough e.g. flying spouses home for free maternity care. We should adopt the American system. Worldwide taxes if you want any access to tax payer funded services.

If Capital Gains tax is introduced I think tax non residents should be unable to claim any property in NZ is the family home.

"We should adopt the American system. Worldwide taxes if you want any access to tax payer funded services."

That's not exactly how it works. In the US there is a fairly hefty exemption for overseas income, $90K+ USD/year for an individual. Alternatively, you can choose a foreign tax credit.

You can use a deduction for tax paid overseas in New Zealand as well. Every country allows that (up to the local rate). It's a funadmental part of DTAs.

That is regressive thinking at its best

Hey Regressive thinker, the idea is to attract & retain the best minds in NZ & reverse the brain drain. Our best minds currently explore global opportunites as NZ policy doesnt cut it

up
12

I imagine that, generally speaking of course, kiwis living abroad are more liberal, well educated and open minded. Hence they lean to the left

Kiwis living abroad might be more reflective of NZ's more traditional overall population too.
The national party seems to be very boosted by the fact that people only need to live in nz for one year, before they can start voting for the national party.

Watching the crowds for that national party during the election coverage was a real eye opener, there were very few of there supporters that were not of Asian descent.

speaking for myself(5 years abroad), you realise how precious our relatively clean green environment is , and want to protect it .

up
15

My brother has been overseas for 20 years and said he was shocked last time he was back at the amount of homelessness and child poverty he witnessed. I think kiwis overseas often notice these things more, compared to the self interested mobs here who are effectively oblivious to it

.. me too , Mr F ... as I split my time between stints in NZ , Oz , and Asia ...

Corporate NZ / Fonterrible is taking a fearsome toll upon the Kiwi environment ... shatty water systems are de rigueur ... cheap imported labour shunting Kiwi citizens aside from jobs , keeping wages at the poverty line ...

... not to mention the stressful conditions imposed upon the dairy cows themselves .... nary a word from the SPCA as our " farmers " abuse the welfare of these poor creatures ...

And as for our citizens , the fuming beings on Struggle Street ... oh dear , lawdy me ... where is the venerable John Banksie when you need him .. .. it's a mess ... she's a shambles , mate .... and getting more shambolic with each passing 3 year election cycle ...

could be because as they come back for visits, holidays and see and hear the way their country is changing, homeless people more visible than ever, traffic jams, rivers and lakes they can not swim in.
they feel something needs to be done to fix it more strongly so will always vote anti current government

I find it interesting that people are concerned about ' rivers and lakes they can not swim in.' but have no problem with beaches that they cannot swim in. Does that not suggest a hypocrisy in their views?

National supporters will be disapointed as were over confident but will slowly realize and will come out of denial - May be after 12 October.

.. no Joyce bells peeling long and hard in the Gnat's cloak-room , then ?

Deeper in de nile than the Egyptian olympics swimming squad ...

Winstone has not spoken don't forget he could be at his mad hatters tea party tonite wake up dead tomorrow from to much partying

Watch TV1 tonight - Moving Out with Tamati - advice for Auckland families (who find Auckland too expensive, too congested, etc) to move to the provinces.
This programme illustrates the pressure on Auckland families in the mortgagebelt.
So who created this situation? And was it intentional?

Anecdotes can prove anything. I know a couple that moved to Taupo for the familiar reasons. Job no issue (works for the Government). They are back in Auckland after less than 1 year.

My anecdote is just that, just like the TV1 ones. The proof is in the overall data. And that does not show any significant movement that I know of.

I first moved to Auckland in 1987. It was expensive then and that hasn’t changed in 30 years with successive Left and Right wing governments. People go where the opportunities are, and for most people they aren’t in Hawera or Taupo.

BTW we just welcomed a friend back to Auckland after 18 months up North. They couldn’t adjust to the slow pace of life up there and found jobs difficult to find. Horses for courses.

My wife and I both watched that absolute farce.

A professional actor moves to Hawera (where he clearly has a historic connection of some sort), then commutes back to Auckland for work each week.

His wife works from home (Seemingly for the production company that produced the show), but is struggling to gain contracts, and ends up in Auckland most weeks as well.

They buy a larger house, but the kids still don't get their own room, as they now need a permanent "Guest" room for visitors.

So, instead of a 2-3 hour commute each day (missing time with the family and one of the main reasons for the move) he has a 10+ hour commute each week and spends 4/5 days away from the family entirely.Kind of ironic really.

I don't know about everyone else's definition of living out of Auckland, but I would have thought that still working in Auckland, and spending the bulk of each week there would mean you never really left.

Really it was a show about a relatively well off family buying a holiday house/weekender in a small town outside of Auckland.

10,000 refugees moving out of Auckland to the provinces per year, I guess are dwarfed by 75k immigrants & 100k students moving into Auckland.

The person selling a $400,000 home in Hawera is laughing all of the way to the bank though. What is the median household income there? Who will buy it off them later on? They might as well be In Timbuktu.

Ex Expat, your comments are increasingly supercilious. Perhaps individuals in Hawera or indeed Taranaki, do not spend all day worrying about their homes value. As an exercise , which region of New Zealand has the highest per capita GDP.

My inlaws are from the Naki so I visit there often Those that still live there are either farmers, oil workers or lifestylers. Those with more diverse interests live elsewhere. My wife’s will states that her ashes must be returned to the Naki. She doesn’t want to return permanently before then. Life is about options. There are more in Auckland than the Naki so one size doesn’t fit all.

Taranaki comes out tops on this measure;

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=1193...

And wages grew 19.88% in the Naki whereas they only grew 14.51% over the same period in Auckland. In fact Auckland's wage growth was below the nationwide median wage growth.

Now I wonder why that would be?

The figures are somewhat misleading. They cover a four year period, a time when for the first 2 years at least, oil prices were still relatively high, as were dairy prices (Taranaki's main industries)

Now however, is a very different tale. I would imagine that looking at year on year results the last 12 months would look pretty grim in Taranaki.

Oil Exploration has ceased (not even any surveys this year) and Shell are in the process of pulling out of NZ completely.

Most dairy farms have deferred maintenance for the last 12 months. Many farms are also cutting down on seasonal help (calving etc) and instead roping in free labour from family.

The large Ammonia/Urea plant is also unable to start construction of a new plant due to a lack of investors.

End result it that a lot of local companies are downsizing or worst case closing completely. This in turn has seen a lot of people, particularly in the 20-40 year old age group (i.e. families) leave town to find work.

Anecdotally
- A lot of Main street NP is emptying out/up for lease.
- Kindy/daycare/primary school teachers are noting a lot more dad's are doing the drop-off/pick ups as they are either out of work, or on reduced hours.
- Several of my peers have left town solely for work reasons, 1 to Nelson, 1 to Tauranga, 1 to Wellington, and 1 to Hawkes Bay. A further 3-4 are under or unemployed in NP.
- House sales are stagnating, and house prices have definitely plateaued if not on the decline.

The article isn't saying that Taranaki was in a 'boom' period, simply that it's wage growth was keeping pace with its house price growth - in other words, both sides of the ledger were in sync, or in a steady state.

What you're saying is that now it is in a 'bust' period - and if so, as long as house prices drop along with the high end of the wages spectrum leaving town - then it is still in sync, so to speak.

Elections nite Jacinda wasn’t smiling that much . Understandable. But today I wouldn’t have expected much different. But you’d think she had won. The meeting with peters must have gone very very well

Fingers crossed for her :)

I guess we can expect 1 of 2 things today. 1 peters goes with labour for change or 2 he goes with national and wipes out immigration and foreign ownership

I'll be deeply disappointed with Winnie if he:
a) doesn't go with Labour; or
b) goes with the Nats and does not demand much re: immigration or foreign property speculation

I'll go further and say I'll be hacked off if he goes with Gnats and only negotiates 1 or 2 things for pensioners, and Pike River

... my guess , Mr F ... is that Winnie would prefer to throw his support behind a new regime , rather than prop up a fourth term government ...

It's a stretch beyond comprehension that the Gnats could win a fifth term , in 2020 ... so , NZF don't want to be connected with a losing government ...

... and , if he cuddles up to Miss Jacinda ( and who wouldn't want to , huh ! ) ... but then it all peters out .... he can blame them for their inexperience ... rather than cop it sweet himself ...

The legacy of the WP party will live on ... to whine and dine another day !

and on the plus side a lot of old national and labour l MP's will retire and not stand next election leading to new blood
ie BE, (who will get his sir) NS GB SJ
same on the labour side TM will get speaker then retire next election
and maybe we will get a more diverse parliament less old white males running the place

I reckon BE deserves a knighthood - especially for his excellent management of the economy over a number of years.

NZ could have done a lot worse without BE.

Agree, and hopefully he can be our PM for one more term.

I think it's a stretch a 3 way coalition would make it to the end of the first term. It could work if Winston and Jacinda put the Green MPs into their usual back bench roles.

If they put a end to this stupid immigration numbers and firm policies stopping foreign ownership I’d be happy. But labour nz first greens will do just fine . There’s always some arguments but there 3 leaders are very bright . Try not to worry things generally work out. Don’t forget the bar isn’t that high from national

Fritz. Peters doesn’t have to go with national and get a bad deal. He could get a good deal on a lot of has policies with hardly no change to labour’s policies. At the end of the day because peters and labour are closer. The deal with national will have to be a monster or minor with labour to get the same result. I’d say labour has a very good chance of winning peters over. No brainer really

I’d pay to watch the Labour, Greens, NZ 1st in government purely for the entertainment value. All the skeletons and in fighting, inter-dispersed with Winston’s alcoholism and Jacinda’s nervous breakdown ensuing would be entertaining.

Best observed from a safe economically insulating distance of several thousand km.

I don’t think they’re going to damage much economically when they get in, because I don’t think they will do much of anything. Winston will be the sand in the gears and Kelvin will revert to type. He has his eyes on the prize I.e. the position that slippery cinders will have on Thursday.

This is the best time for the Nats to be in opposition. It’s akin to leaving the kids in the house alone for a couple of days. When they’ve run out of noodles, are living in filth and the infighting starts they begin to want the order that strong parents bring. The promise of a rainbow-farting puppy is no longer enough

Any party in many countries could open the flood gates to create a housing boom then leave the bust to another party to try and fix . Exactly what English and his party did . Stuff all for 2 terms but lift taxes and sell everything then give the country (Auckland) away to foreign ownership to the point of a massive bubble. Prices that have gone recently from up $20000 a month to negative and that just started. Ya to bill English and there team of one term wonders

English should be knighted as a 2 times loser

No, he is not loser this time in terms of voting result. Even if he finally cannot form the government but he still won 45% votes vs. Ardern’s 37%. That’s for sure.

Are you kidding. Any government could buy votes with high immigration and foreign ownership creating greedy homes owners willing to vote national to try keeping there ponzi going. Naturally that couldn’t go on. O that’s right it hasn’t

Don’t worry, No matter who is the government this time there will be no foreign ownership and much less immigration as both parties have to agree with Winston on these issues. That’s good things for NZ. But if we want to keep our economy going well it’s better to have National manage the country.

up
14

Who lied about putting up GST? Who said we would have no more asset sales before selling more assets?
Who tried to get any evidence from Pike River buried under tonnes of concrete, thus preventing it from ever being discovered? Who has run the health and eduation systems down so far they are at the point of collapse? Who has allowed rampant foreign buy up of land and houses, all the while denying it was even happening? Who has allowed a culture of rorts in the export education system, to the point that I think it now as the NIgerian Princeton Univeristy? Who proudly boasted that we have a low wage economy? Who has used their position in government for their own personal gain? Who forked over millions of dollars to a Saudi businessman for no good reason? And that is just the stuff I can think of in a couple of minutes off the top of my head, I did not even go near the craziness of ever intensifying of dairying on marginal land.
So, if we are to keep our economy going, it looks like we will have to keep rorts going, lies being told and believed, the squeezing out of kiwis from their own land, and hospitals to continue to run into the ground. Yeah, good one, maybe it is time for someone else to have a crack, eh.

up
10

I don’t think its fear to give the keys to one that created the problem. Hardly fear. National did stuff all about foreign home ownership and were never willing to change immigration. And at a time they sold all the state housing and was it really wise to not lift interest rates or introduce LVRS so late in the cycle. No national definitely don’t deserve anything and labour on a bad day can only do better

we certainly need a stop put on stuff like this and WP will be the one to do it, national wont

Overseas investors are being offered off-the-plan Auckland apartments in a new property-for-residency scheme

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=1193...

I’m against overseas investors buying second hand homes because they upset the balance of the market house wise and price and rental balance but letting overseas investors build new homes increasing stock and rentals could be good. Should help to keep house and rental prices fair because they’re adding to the stock and economy. If anyone’s willing to build new homes you’d think thats good . Specially Auckland maybe not Christchurch but investors would soon stop if there’s over supply although they haven’t in Tauranga. They’ll wake up soon

One holiday apartment for an overseas buyer, not too much of an issue, but we need exactly zero foreign landlods and we need even less than zero, foreign landlords picking up welfare out of the public purse via accommodation top ups.

You’re probably right

Vincent Street is a hole. It sounds like a scam to get finance from offshore investors because the banks won't fund shoebox apartments in a falling market and most kiwi's won't touch apartments because most have weather tightness issues and huge ground rents. I actually approve them trying to sell them off the plan to unsuspecting foreign buyers. The same issues are happening now in Australia and developers are desperately trying to sell, before the banks ruin them.

National do not control the Reserve bank

Would've fooled me

The TPA is a set of handcuffs, and Wheeler and English + Key were at loggerheads over LVRs and DTIs and macro prudential tools and 5+ properties being subject to business interest rates, and other recommendations which English refused to give permission

Yeah she’s definitely got it bad. Some national supporters are so one sided don’t you think. When people are so one sided it’s hardly worth a read. I guess if you really tryed you could find hundreds of rubbish with view on ether side. Why even look

I still feel this could be one that Labour and Greens would be best NOT to win. If National's ponzi policies fall over you'll have all sorts of knitwits trying to blame everything on the Labour government despite the obvious reliance on debt-fueled housing and unsustainable immigration over the last National terms.

Completely agree, although it would be nice to have a change, it's probably one that's not too bad to lose. Sitting on the sidelines as the "rock-star" economy is exposed as the "emperor's new clothes" economy is not a bad place to be.

That had crossed my mind as well, and for pretty much the same reasons. National and their supporters seem to be happy to blame anyone and anything other than their own actions for the outcomes we have. Yes, if, as we suspect, a "bit of a correction" to put it mildly, is on the way if not underway, when it becomes patently obvious, the government of the day, will cop the blame.

It is the nature of politics for the party in opposition to eliminate the positive and accentuate the negative when commenting on everything government does. That extends to their supporters as we've read here over the last few months. Expect no quarter when the Coalition of the Clueless forms a government this week.

I agree bud but Jacinda was ask something about best to wait and she said people need change now there’s focks hurting, if the national stupidity rares it’s face we’ll keep reminding them the housing cycle ended well in there watch in fact LVRS and the stopping of overseas investors was in 2016 , plus everyone knows the interest rates weren’t lifted to slow the market

NZ moral fiber won case closed!