New Zealand Election 2017

[Lachi]

We still have to wait till the 12th until we know who WINston will go with.


Please let it be Labour...

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

We still have to wait till the 12th until we know who WINston will go with.


Please let it be Labour...

[Pericles]

We still have to wait till the 12th until we know who WINston will go with.


Please let it be Labour...

[BigSkyBob]

WINston no longer has the, as newshub put in on election day, 'moral obligation' to join up with English, considering there is only a 2 seat difference between Nats, and Labour-Greens, and the party vote is within a point or so.

In what universe does one add the Labour and Green votes and seats, but, one does not add the National and ACT votes and seats?

There is a 10 seat difference Labour and Nationals. There is a 12 seat difference between National-ACT-NZF and Labour-Green. There is a six seat difference between Labour-Green-NZF and National-ACT. Does a 12-seat majority have a greater "moral" mandate than a 6-seat majority? Probably, it does under some moral theories [the significant plurality {10-seat} party ought to have the first shot at forming the government,] but, not under others [Aside from siding with hostile nationals directly at war with New Zealand, or soliciting graft or other illegal behavior, elected officials are free to take any decision they wish for any reason they choose, or for no reason at all.]

Personally, I have always subscribed to latter moral theory. If Peters hasn't promised the electorate to support either party, it is purely his call.

Of course, four members of NZF could break away from a Peter's decision to go with Labour, or six members could break away from a National agreement.

[Lachi]

WINston no longer has the, as newshub put in on election day, 'moral obligation' to join up with English, considering there is only a 2 seat difference between Nats, and Labour-Greens, and the party vote is within a point or so.

In what universe does one add the Labour and Green votes and seats, but, one does not add the National and ACT votes and seats?

There is a 10 seat difference Labour and Nationals. There is a 12 seat difference between National-ACT-NZF and Labour-Green. There is a six seat difference between Labour-Green-NZF and National-ACT. Does a 12-seat majority have a greater "moral" mandate than a 6-seat majority? Probably, it does under some moral theories [the significant plurality {10-seat} party ought to have the first shot at forming the government,] but, not under others [Aside from siding with hostile nationals directly at war with New Zealand, or soliciting graft or other illegal behavior, elected officials are free to take any decision they wish for any reason they choose, or for no reason at all.]

Personally, I have always subscribed to latter moral theory. If Peters hasn't promised the electorate to support either party, it is purely his call.

Of course, four members of NZF could break away from a Peter's decision to go with Labour, or six members could break away from a National agreement.

ACT will NEVER work with NZF, and vice versa. As UF, and Māori have disappeared, and NZF are king maker, they have become irrelevant in coalition building. To be fair, ACT is irrelevant legislatively as well.

[Pericles]

ACT is irrelevant as they would never be part of a National-NZ First coalition, due to the mutual hatred between ACT and Winston Peters.

[TheSaint250]

On what issues would NZ First choose to side with Labour over National?

[MAINEiac4434]

On what issues would NZ First choose to side with Labour over National?

Unlike in other western countries, the center-left party is more anti-immigration and the center-right party is more pro-immigration. So WINston's immigration views migth be more closely aligned to Labour's.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

On what issues would NZ First choose to side with Labour over National?

Cuts to immigration, banning/restricting foreign buyers of land/farms/housing, maintaining the retirement age at 65, manned re-entry of Pike River Mine (a coal mine that had a fatal methane explosion; the families of the dead deeply want to re-enter to retrieve bodies and this has been a big cause for Peters - a policy at odds with the Nats who want to permanently close it), raising the minimum wage and abolishing youth rates and abolishing coat-tails and lowering the election threshold are the major election pledges of First that would be easier done under Labour; some of those would deeply irritate the Nats, but at the end of the day they want to maintain power.

 Labour have less obvious landmines in coalition building, although that's partially obscured by the fact Peters' campaign was very anti-government in nature. Peters dislike of the Greens may present a crucial sticking point. Labour/Greens wanted to introduce water charges for farmers, which will be nixed by NZ First. NZ First have made a big deal of getting rid of the Maori seats, something Labour will not agree to quickly, especially following their sweep.

Remember that Peters is fundamentally a prickly old weirdo, and he gets more prickly, old and weird every day. A lot of the decisions he makes will be based on his eccentric and odd grab-bag of pet issues, some of which are cartoonishly populist, some amusingly  off-beat (e.g.  "Establish a Crown Company to develop 'ecoFur' as the world's only ecologically friendly fur label to support a value-adding New Zealand fur industry (wild possums, stoats and ferrets)

[Famous Mortimer]

Why does Winston hate ACT?

[TheSaint250]

Thanks guys for answering my question. NZ politics is pretty interesting

[Pericles]

Note with Winston Peters and the Maori seats that he claimed during the campaign that having a referendum on abolishing the seats was a 'bottom line' for him, but that may no longer be the case. Peters argued there may no longer need to be a referendum because the Maori Party is no longer in parliament(he hates the Maori Party too), saying that "And so some of the elements to the environment which the promise was made have since changed - that's all I can say."

http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/09/winston-peters-hints-at-u-turn-on-maori-seat-referendum.html

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

My gut feeling right now is that WINston will go with Labour.

[Pericles]

My gut feeling right now is that WINston will go with Labour.

I think so too, though it's 50-50(though I'd be fine if you said it was 60-40 either way).

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

My gut feeling right now is that WINston will go with Labour.

I think so too, though it's 50-50(though I'd be fine if you said it was 60-40 either way).

60-40 sounds about right. I'm definitely not super confident, but enough to pick a side at least.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

My theory is that the Nats are holding back cause they think a three party coalition will be a trap for Labour.

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

My theory is that the Nats are holding back cause they think a three party coalition will be a trap for Labour.

Good thing there weren't any three or four party coalitions in the very recent past.

[Lachi]

Winston doubts that a deal will be made by the end of the week.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97799911/winston-peters-last-day-of-coalition-meetings-begins

[mileslunn]

Looks like will find out on Saturday who forms the next government.  While it could really go either way I give it a 60-40 in favour of National.  The reason is with National it would be a two party coalition whereas with Labour the Greens have to be included.  I think if Labour + NZ First got a majority Peters would have gone with Labour.  Nonetheless neither would surprise me.  Besides for Labour being in opposition for another three years will probably improve their chances in 2020 and perhaps maybe even make a Labour-Green one probable whereas if going into government it could be quite shaky.  I think whichever party forms government will ultimately face a tough chance at re-election in 2020.

[JonHawk]

Still going for a NZ-National First government. No way in hell NZ First will go into coalition with the Greens, unless the Greens support Labour-NZ First from the outside which they won't.

[Lachi]

WINston will NOT be making a decision this week.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11932794

[Sestak]

Why does Winston hate ACT?

Because ACT is the only party that isn't power-hungry/spineless enough to bend to Winston's every whim.

[mileslunn]

I know this may sound a little silly, but how about one side agreeing to allow Winston Peters to be prime-minister but whichever party he forms a coalition with would get most of the cabinet posts.  This will probably due to his age be his last election so allow him to go out on a high note while whichever party he partnered with would still largely drive the agenda.

[JonHawk]

ACT leader routinely bitching about Winston highlights his butthurt at not being at the negotiating table lololol

Seymour will lose his seat next election..hopefully

[Phony Moderate]

Surely Winston's dislike of ACT is at least partly a matter of principle. They represent Rogernomics, whereas Winston is an old school protectionist.