New Zealand general election, 2005
From Free net encyclopedia
Nicknz (Talk | contribs)
/* Controversies */ Additional relocation from Helen Clark
Next diff →
Current revision
Template:Wikinews The 2005 New Zealand general election took place on 17 September 2005. No single party or recognised bloc won a majority in the unicameral House of Representatives, but the Labour Party of Prime Minister Helen Clark secured two more seats than its closest rival, the National Party of Dr Don Brash. Most of the other parliamentary parties polled less well than in the previous election, losing votes and seats, but the new Māori Party took four electorate seats, including three from Labour.
Brash deferred conceding the election until 1 October 2005, when the inclusion of special votes caused National's tally of seats to drop from 49 (on election-night) to 48.
The election saw a strong recovery by National - gaining 21 more seats than at the 2002 election, when it had suffered its worst result since it first fought a general election in 1938. Despite this resurgence, National failed to displace Labour as the largest party in Parliament. National's gains apparently came mainly at the expense of smaller parties, while Labour won only two seats fewer than in 2002.
On 17 October, Clark announced a new coalition agreement that saw the return of her minority government coalition with the Progressive Party, with confidence-and-supply support from New Zealand First and from United Future. New Zealand First parliamentary leader Winston Peters and United Future parliamentary leader Peter Dunne became ministers of the Crown, though outside Cabinet. Peters became Minister of Foreign Affairs while Dunne became Minister of Revenue. The Green Party, which had thrown its weight behind Labour before the election, received no cabinet post (see below), but gained several agreed concessions on matters such as energy and transport from Labour.
Contents |
Official election results table
Template:New Zealand election, 2005 The results of the election give a Gallagher index of disproportionality of 1.11.
For further details of results (including results by constituency) see New Zealand general election, 2005: in depth results
Analysis of results
Going into the election, Labour had assurances of support from the Greens (6 seats in 2005, down three from 2002) and from the Progressives (one seat, down one). This three-party bloc won 57 seats, leaving Clark four seats short of the 61 seats needed for a majority in the 121-seat Parliament (decreased from the expected 122 because the final results gave the Māori Party only one overhang seat after it appeared to win two overhang seats on election night). On October 5 the Māori Party began a series of hui to decide whom to support. That same day reports emerged that a meeting between Helen Clark and Māori co-leader Tariana Turia on October 3 had already ruled out a formal coalition between Labour and the Māori Party. Māori Party leaders also held discussions with National representatives, but most New Zealanders thought the Māori Party more likely to give confidence-supply support to a Labour-dominated government because its supporters apparently heavily backed Labour in the party vote.
Had Turia and her co-leader Pita Sharples opted to join a Labour-Progressive-Green coalition, Clark would have had sufficient support to govern without support from other parties. As a result, Labour needed the support of New Zealand First (7 seats, down 6) and United Future (3 seats, down five) to form a government. New Zealand First said it would support (or at least abstain from opposing in confidence motions) the party with the most seats. Clark sought a positive New Zealand First commitment rather than abstention. United Future, who supported the previous Labour-Progressive minority government in confidence and supply, said it would talk first to the party with the most seats about a support or coalition arrangement. Both New Zealand First and United Future said they would not support a Labour-led coalition which included Greens in Cabinet posts. However, United Future indicated it could support a government where the Greens gave supply and confidence votes [1].
Brash had only one possible scenario to become prime minister: a centre-right coalition with United Future and ACT (two seats, down seven). Given the election results, however, such a coalition would have required the confidence-and-supply votes of both New Zealand First and the Māori Party. This appeared highly unlikely on several counts. New Zealand First's involvement in such a coalition would have run counter to Peters' promise to deal with the biggest party. And Turia and Sharples would have had difficulty in justifying supporting National after their supporters' overwhelming support for Labour in the party vote. Turia and Sharples probably remembered the severe mauling New Zealand First suffered in 1999. (Its supporters in 1996 believed they had voted to get rid of National, only to have Peters go into coalition with National; New Zealand First has never really recovered.) Even without this to consider, National had indicated it would abolish the Maori seats if it won power.
The new government as eventually formed consisted of Labour and Progressive in coalition, while New Zealand First and United Future entered agreements of support on confidence and supply motions. In an unprecedented move, Peters and Dunne became Foreign Affairs Minister and Revenue Minister, respectively, but remain outside cabinet and have no obligatory cabinet collective responsibility on votes outside their respective portfolios.
Background
Image:NZ election billboards.jpg
The 2002 election had seen the governing Labour Party retain office. However, its junior coalition partner, the Alliance, collapsed, leaving Labour to form a coalition with the new Progressive Coalition, formed by former Alliance leader Jim Anderton. The coalition then obtained an agreement of support ("confidence and supply") from United Future, enabling it to form a stable minority government. The National Party, Labour's main opponents, suffered a considerable defeat, winning only 21% of the vote (22.5% of the seats).
The collapse of National's vote led ultimately to the replacement of leader Bill English with parliamentary newcomer Don Brash on 28 October 2003. Brash began an aggressive campaign against the Labour-dominated government. A major boost to this campaign came with his "Orewa speech" (27 January 2004), in which he attacked the Labour-dominated government for giving "special treatment" to the Māori population, particularly over the foreshore and seabed controversy. This resulted in a surge of support for the National Party, although most polls indicated that this subsequently subsided. National also announced it would not stand candidates in the Māori seats, with some smaller parties following suit.
The foreshore-and-seabed controversy also resulted in the establishment of the Māori Party. The Māori Party hoped to break Labour's traditional (and current) dominance in the Māori seats, as New Zealand First had in the 1996 election.
A number of "minor" (less successful) parties contested the election. These included Destiny New Zealand (the political branch of the Destiny Church) and the Direct Democracy Party.
Key policy platforms
Labour Party
The Labour Party campaigned on the platform of (Labour web site):
- Student loans - writing off interest if the recipient stays in New Zealand
- Health - a number of extra public-hospital operations pledged
- Treaty of Waitangi - accepting no lodgements for treaty claims after September 1 2008
- Increasing rates rebates
- A "kiwisaver" program, aimed at getting first homeowners into their own homes
- Sponsoring 5,000 new apprenticeships
- Increasing community police-force numbers by 250.
- A "Working for Families" tax relief/benefit programme aimed at lower to middle-income families
National Party
The National party campaigned on the platform of (National Party Press Release):
- Taxation - lowering the income tax rates
- Removing references to the Treaty of Waitangi from existing legislation; resolving all treaty claims amicably by 2010; and removing the racially distinct Māori seats from parliament
- Making student-loan repayments and $5000 of pre-school childcare costs tax-deductable
- "Reworking" the New Zealand Resource Management Act to make development easier
- "Removing excessive bureaucracy" in the education system, in particular by overhauling the NCEA, and by re-introducing "bulk funding" of schools
- Abolishing early parole for violent criminals. (Currently, most prisoners become eligible for parole after serving one-third of their sentence)
- A return to "market rents" for state-housing tenants, including a system of paying housing subsidies (for the poorest tenants) directly to private landlords
- Part public/private ownership of the public health system
- A "work-for-the-dole" scheme
- Abolishing the Maori electorates
Polls
A series of opinion polls published in June 2005 indicated that the National Party had moved ahead of Labour for the first time since June 2004. Commentators speculated that a prominent billboard campaign may have contributed to this. Some said the National Party had peaked too early. The polls released throughout July showed once more an upward trend for Labour, with Labour polling about 6% above National. The release by the National Party of a series of tax-reform proposals in August increased its ratings in the polls.
Direct comparisons between the following polls have no statistical validity:
| Poll | Date | Labour | National | NZ First | Greens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| One News Colmar Brunton | 29 August | 43% | 40% | 5% | 7% |
| 3 News TNS | 1 September | 39% | 41% | 6% | 6% |
| Herald DigiPoll | 2 September | 43.4% | 39.1% | 6.6% | 5% |
| Fairfax NZ/ACNeilsen | 3 September | 41% | 44% | <5% | 5% |
| One News Colmar Brunton | 4 September | 38% | 46% | 4.6% | 6% |
| 3 News TNS | 7 September | 45% | 36% | 5% | 7% |
| Herald Digipoll | 8 September | 40.6% | 40.1% | 7.1% | 5.6% |
| Herald Digipoll | 11 September | 42.1% | 38.5% | 5% | 6% |
| ACNielsen-Sunday Star-Times | 11 September | 37% | 44% | 5% | 6% |
| One News Colmar Brunton | 11 September | 39% | 41% | 6% | 6% |
| Fairfax ACNielsen | 14 September | 37% | 43% | 7% | 6% |
| 3 News TNS | 15 September | 40.5% | 38.7% | 6.8% | 6.9% |
| TVNZ Colmar Brunton | 15 September | 38% | 41% | 5.5% | 5.1% |
| Herald Digipoll | 16 September | 44.6% | 37.4% | 4.5% | 4.6 % |
No one political event can explain the significant differences between most of these polls over the period between them. They showed either volatility in the electorate and/or flaws in the polling methods. In the later polls, the issue of National's knowledge of a series of panphlets (distributed by members of the Exclusive Brethren and attacking the Green and Labour parties) appeared not to have reduced National Party support.
Candidates
For lists of candidates in the 2005 election see:
Voting
Postal voting for New Zealanders abroad began on 31 August. Ballot voting took place on Saturday September 17, from 9AM to 7PM. The Electoral Office released a provisional result at 12.05AM on September 18.
Funding
New Zealand operates on a system whereby the Electoral Commission allocates funding for television and radio advertising. Parties must use their own money for all other forms of advertising, but may not use any of their own money for television or radio advertising.
| Party | Funding |
|---|---|
| Labour | $1,100,000 |
| National | $900,000 |
| ACT | $200,000 |
| Greens | $200,000 |
| NZ First | $200,000 |
| United Future | $200,000 |
| Māori Party | $125,000 |
| Progressives | $75,000 |
| Alliance | $20,000 |
| Christian Heritage NZ | $20,000 |
| Destiny NZ | $20,000 |
| Libertarianz | $20,000 |
| 99 MP Party* | $10,000 |
| Beneficiaries Party* | $10,000 |
| Democrats | $10,000 |
| National Front* | $10,000 |
| New Zealand F.R.P.P.* | $10,000 |
| Patriot Party* | $10,000 |
| Republic Aotearoa New Zealand Party* | $10,000 |
| The Republic of New Zealand* | $10,000 |
*Must register for funding
Source: Electoral Commission
Controversies
Labour and five other political parties were investigated for alleged breaches of election spending rules relating to the 2005 election. None were eventually prosecuted [2]. Labour was accused of overspending by over four hundred thousand dollars in the 2005 general election, and using public money to finance their campaign. Under New Zealand's political system, parties may only spend up to a certain amount on campaigning. The Electoral Commission, the independent body charged with ensuring that campaign rules are adhered to referred the Labour Party to the police[3]. According to the commission's data, Labour disclosed expenditure of $2,798,603, $418,603 more than the party's $2,380,000 limit. On this point, the police decided that "there was insufficient evidence to indicate that an offence under s214b of the Electoral Act had been committed."[4] Additionally, claims allege Labour used over $400,000 of taxpayer's money to produce a number of pamphlets and "pledge cards" promoting Labour, and that this constituted advertising for the party but it was not authorised by the party secretary as required. This was also investigated by the police, who decided that "there was sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case" of an offence under section 221 of the act (which requires party advertising to be authorised in writing by the secretary). However they also decided that no prosecution should be laid, preferring instead to warn Labour that similar future offences would risk prosecution.
Claims have also been made that the Labour government allegedly used public money to promote their party in the past. Before the 2005 campaign, public funds were used to erect bus billboards showing the Labour election phrase "You're better off with Labour"[5]. However the Speaker of the House, Margaret Wilson (also a Labour MP) ruled that this was advertising for the National Budget and not the party itself.
External links
- Elections New Zealand, joint website of the Electoral Enrolment Centre, Chief Electoral Office, and Electoral Commission.
- 2005 General Election Results from Chief Electoral Office, Ministry of Justice
- nzvotes.org, comparative information on parties, candidates and electorates
- New Zealand Herald Election 2005 website
- Stuff.co.nz Election 2005 website
- Scoop Election 2005 website
- Scoop Election 2005 campaign diary
| New Zealand elections | Image:Flag of New Zealand.svg |
| 1853 | 1855 | 1860 | 1866 | 1871 | 1875 | 1879 | 1881 | 1884 | 1887 | 1890 | 1893 | 1896 | 1899 | 1902 | 1905 | 1908 | 1911 | 1914 | 1919 | 1922 | 1925 | 1928 | 1931 | 1935 | 1938 | 1943 | 1946 | 1949 | 1951 | 1954 | 1957 | 1960 | 1963 | 1966 | 1969 | 1972 | 1975 | 1978 | 1981 | 1984 | 1987 | 1990 | 1993 | reform | 1996 | 1999 | 2002 | 2005 | |
