The Northland byelection

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

“Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”

— John Key ... Wednesday, 4th March 2015

   

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The New Zealand Herald....

Editorial: RMA looks likely to stay largely intact

EDITORIAL | 5:00AM - Tuesday, March 31, 2015

THE Prime Minister was quick to “rip up” the Government's intended reform of the Resource Management Act after the Northland byelection. Suspiciously quick. He may be oddly relieved to lose the numbers he would need in Parliament to force National's policy into law. It wants the act's guiding purposes to include economic development alongside its present list of environmental and heritage protections. It seems reasonable both should be on the RMA's scales but this is not the first time Mr Key has backed off the idea.

He spent much of the previous term trying behind the scenes to persuade partners Peter Dunne and the Maori Party to drop their opposition to the measure. Last May he publicly announced he had failed to get their support and he said he would take the issue to the election in September. But sometime between May and September the party decided not to make it an election issue and the subject was barely heard in the campaign.

When the election result gave National the numbers to push through laws with the support of ACT alone, Mr Key did not claim it was a mandate for his RMA reform, he still hoped to gain wider support in Parliament for a reform bill. Now he has no choice. The loss of the Northland seat leaves him needing the votes of Mr Dunne or the two Maori Party MPs to pass any contentious legislation.

If he sounds happy enough to “rip up what we've got now, go back to the drawing board and have another go” on RMA reforms, the reason might also be that legislation in this area is proving to have limited value. The Government was able to write economically balanced legislation for offshore drilling and mining on the continental shelf but the Environmental Protection Agency, set up to issue permits, has set the environmental bar so high that it is hard to see any new project getting consent.

The EPA's decision-making panels are composed of environmental lawyers and planners who may be steeped in an RMA culture that would be hard for any government to change. The central principle seems to be that development should not be permitted unless it avoids or mitigates damage to the natural environment. The suggestion that economic benefits should be balanced against the harm is not welcomed. Balance is not easy to define in legislation, as former Environment Minister now Justice Minister Amy Adams has conceded. Balance is even harder to promote in public debate. Environmentalists can easily paint the issue in black and white, arguing the scales will always favour development. Despite the recent EPA decisions they were protesting on Auckland streets this weekend against offshore oil and gas exploration.

From the Key Government's first year, when it backed down from prospecting on conservation land, it has been wary of public sentiment on the environment. Its own polling must be making it so. After Northland, the RMA looks almost certain to survive much as it is. Minor procedural improvements might be agreed between the governing parties, little more. Mineral wealth is probably off the scales.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11425475

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The New Zealand Herald....

Govt soul-searching over lost strongholds

By JOHN ARMSTRONG | 5:00AM - Tuesday, March 31, 2015



WINSTON PETERS cut a swathe through the wealthier parts of the Northland electorate in Saturday's byelection, securing the most votes in the National bastion of Kerikeri and matching the number cast for the ruling party in Wellsford.

While the figures relate to the less important constituency vote, rather than the crucial party vote, National Party strategists will be concerned by the extent of Peters' reach into areas where support for their party has traditionally been rock solid.

An index of deprivation produced for a profile of the electorate compiled by the Parliamentary Library shows that the better-off areas of Northland are in the southern part of the seat plus the hinterland around Kerikeri more to the north.

Any booth-by-booth analysis of Saturday's result is complicated by the high level of advance voting in the seat ahead of byelection day — up by more than 3,600 votes on the 9,478 cast by early voters at September's general election.

Nearly half of the total votes in the byelection were cast in advance.

National's 2014 candidate, Mike Sabin, secured 60 percent of the votes cast in Wellsford at the general election — well above the 53 percent he averaged across the whole electorate. National's share of the advance vote in Wellsford in the byelection was 47 percent, just below the 48 percent recorded by Peters. However, National's Mark Osborne narrowly won the most votes cast in the town's polling booth.

The New Zealand First leader won the advance vote in Kerikeri along with the votes cast in the town's three polling booths. National's vote in those booths fell from just over 1,300 last September to 821 on Saturday. Part of that gap can be explained by advance voting. But part of it would also have been due to defections from National to New Zealand First.

Peters won 60 percent of the advance vote in Dargaville and was close to that mark with respect to votes cast in polling booths. Last September, Sabin picked up 58 percent of the votes cast in those Dargaville booths. Backing for Osborne — Sabin's successor — fell to 36 percent on Saturday. There was a similar outcome in Kaitaia, where the deprivation index is highest.

• John Armstrong is The New Zealand Herald's chief political commentator.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11425506

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The New Zealand Herald....

PM ‘acting like a spoilt brat’ over RMA reform

Peters castigates Key after claims NZ First would not work
with National on legislation even if outcomes would
benefit newly elected Northland MP’s constituents.

By CLAIRE TREVETT | 5:00AM - Tuesday, March 31, 2015


Winston Peters says National has not tried to co-operate. — Photo: Getty Images.

NEW ZEALAND FIRST leader Winston Peters says Prime Minister John Key is “acting like a spoilt brat” by saying he doubted Mr Peters would work constructively with National.

Mr Key said yesterday reforms to the Resource Management Act would have to be scrapped or diluted because National no longer had the numbers to pass them. He said he doubted Mr Peters would work with National on such issues even if they benefited Northland because Mr Peters was an oppositional MP.

Mr Peters said National had not even put anything in front of him to consider. “I'm not going to have Mr Key roaring when his toys have been taken out of the cot, as they were last Saturday, making these sort of protestations. What you're getting now is protestations of innocence and good faith which don't exist. The National Party has not come to us.”

He said Mr Key was now trying to lure him into supporting the Resource Management Act reforms by claiming it was holding Northland back. “That's diabolical humbug.”

National had talked up the stability of its Government, so should not now try to lay the blame on him if it could not pass the RMA reforms. “It should go across to the parties that they own in every respect.”

Mr Peters' win has meant National can no longer rely on only ACT to pass legislation, giving increased influence to United Future's Peter Dunne and the Maori Party.

However, Mr Peters said he had no intention of letting those parties flex their muscle. “I've made it very clear that we didn't slog it out up north to have them in any way think they are going to be the beneficiaries of it. No way will Peter Dunne, the ACT Party or Maori Party be allowed to behave in this way.”

He would not reveal how he would stop it, but said it did not mean he would sweep in on his white steed to support legislation so National didn't have to go to Mr Dunne or the Maori Party.

NZ First was willing to talk to any other parties over “reasonable measures” and had worked with National over the GCSB legislation, though ultimately did not support it.

Mr Peters returns to Parliament today after a month of campaigning.

After earlier raising the possibility he would not resign his list seat to take in an extra MP, Mr Peters has now confirmed he will resign.

He was getting legal advice on whether that should be before or after final results were confirmed on April 8th and he was sworn in as Northland MP. If he resigned before then there could be a short period in which he was not in Parliament and NZ First numbers were down to 10.

NZ First President Anne Martin said the board would meet after final results to discuss issues including who would take up the next list slot. Parliamentary staffer Ria Bond is next on the list but if she says she is not available for the role, it would go to Mataroa Paroro.

The board cannot decline on her behalf but could ask her to decline it if they felt someone else was better suited to it. It is understood there is no objection to Ms Bond taking the seat, although nobody in NZ First would confirm that. Mr Peters said it was a board matter and although he was on the board he did not want to circumvent the process.

• Claire Trevett is The New Zealand Herald’s deputy political editor.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11425508

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

Meanwhile, the Nats hold a post-mortem....

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The Dominion Post....

Nats will look to grab seat back off Peters

By TRACY WATKINS and VERNON SMALL | 5:00AM - Tuesday, 31 March 2015


ELECTION NIGHT 2014: Ria Bond,
Invercargill candidate for NZ First,
arriving at the Appleby tavern in
Invercargill, her party base.
 — ROBYN EDIE/Fairfax NZ.

NATIONAL is not giving up on wresting Northland back off Winston Peters after its demoralising by-election defeat.

The NZ First leader is poised to resign as a list MP once he is confirmed in Northland after an emphatic victory on Saturday. That will enable NZ First to bring in a new MP, and will also boost its party coffers by $86,000 in extra annual funding.

The next person on NZ First's list is former Invercargill hairdresser Ria Bond, who has been working at Parliament as an executive assistant to two of the party's MPs.

Peters blindsided National with his decision to contest Northland and announced on Sunday that he would stand in the seat again at the 2017 election.

Prime Minister John Key said 2017 was a long way down the track and winning a by-election was not the same as a general election. Peters had previously held Tauranga but was toppled by a local candidate.

“Bob Clarkson beat Winston Peters [in Tauranga]. Politics can be funny in a general election, it can be funny in a by-election. It just depends on the circumstances and the mood. Two-and-a-half years is a long way away and I do think there was a whole lot of people up there who said this is our opportunity to make sure Wellington doesn't ignore us.”

Labour pollster Stephen Mills said past experience suggested Peters would hold on to the seat through at least one general election. “I think with a celebrity as their MP, unless he drops the ball there, I suspect they would re-elect him,” he said.



But National will be under pressure from Northland locals to make good on its promises on the campaign trail, including 10 new bridges, which come with a price tag of tens of millions of dollars.

Delivering on the promise could court a backlash in the rest of the country, however, and undermine National's credibility over its claim to be the more fiscally responsible of the major parties.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/67556722/Nats-will-look-to-grab-seat-back-off-Peters

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The Press....

Peters' by-election victory raises host of new concerns

By CHRIS TROTTER | 5:00AM - Tuesday, 31 March 2015



IT WAS Winston's finest hour. The sheer scale of his Northland by-election victory had the commentariat scrabbling for superlatives. Even old enemies got into the act. In a generous tribute to the NZ First leader he betrayed, Tau Henare told TV3's The Nation that Winston Peters must now be ranked as “the greatest Maori politician since Aprirana Ngata”.

In answering all the questions about whether or not it could be done, however, Peters' historic by-election victory has raised a host of new concerns. Let us examine three of the more important questions his win has posed.

To hold Northland will NZ First be required to veer to the Right — thereby alienating the thousands of Labour supporters whose votes provided the foundation for Peters' upset win?

Will the National Government, looking ahead to 2017 and beyond, begin to re-position itself as NZ First's future coalition partner?

How will Peters' Northland victory influence Labour's political positioning — especially its relationship with the Greens?

Labour, if it is wise, will seize the opportunity provided by Peters' victory to put even more distance between itself and the Greens.

In his continuing effort to “re-connect” Labour with its traditional constituencies, Andrew Little must already have marked the numerous ideological affinities that draw non-National provincial voters towards one another. These are conservative people, whose personal morals and political values often place them at odds with the more “progressive” voters of metropolitan New Zealand.

The extent to which Labour's Northland voters defected to Peters indicates that, at the very least, the NZ First leader's political values presented no insurmountable barrier to Labour's people following their own leader's tactical advice. Indeed, just about all the insurmountable barriers to the re-connections Labour must make if it is to regain the status of a “40 percent party” have been raised in the cities — not the provinces.

Even in the cities these obstacles persist. Labour's traditional urban working-class supporters have more in common with their provincial brothers and sisters than many Labour Party activists are willing to admit.

Shunting-off their social revolutionaries to the Greens might decimate the ranks of Labour's membership, but it could, equally, swell the ranks of those willing to vote for the party in 2017. Shorn of its radical fringe, Labour not only becomes a much more comfortable fit for NZ First — but also for working-class New Zealanders generally.

National's strategists will not have overlooked this potentially decisive strategic opening for the centre-Left. So long as the voters continue to bracket Labour and the Greens as indispensable components of any future alternative government, National's dominant position on the political chess-board will remain unchecked. There are simply too many voters ready to believe that a Labour-Green Government must involve a ruinously radical shift to the Left. A re-positioning towards NZ First would, however, allow Labour to present itself as an eminently electable party of the moderate centre.

To forestall such an eventuality, National's strategists would also have to give serious consideration to re-positioning their party towards the moderate centre. Prime Minister John Key's highly successful strategy of “radical incrementalism” (as close advisers, Crosby/Textor call it) would have to become a lot less radical and considerably more incremental, but the party would, almost certainly, regard slowing down the pace of economic and social reform as an option to be preferred well ahead of losing the Treasury benches altogether.

Peters, meanwhile, describes the Northland result as a “seismic shift” in New Zealand politics. In the light of everything he has just achieved, we would be wise to take him at his word. But a shift to what? That is the crucial question.

Peters would no doubt describe his prescription as “common sense”. And if by that he means offering solutions based not on ideological assumptions, but on the pragmatic assessment of what needs to be done, and who, or what, is best placed to do it, then he is almost certainly on to something.

All over the world, from Greece to Queensland, voters are growing tired of being told, usually by the very politicians they elected to help them, that they cannot be helped. That forces over which mere politicians neither can, nor should, exercise the slightest control have already determined their fate, and that there's nothing anyone can do.

Peters great insight is that what human-beings have made, they can also unmake: that change is possible; and that New Zealanders, more than anything else, yearn to meet one another halfway, between the extremes of Right and Left.

Twenty-one years ago, Winston Peters wrote: “When one walks down the centre of the road one foot falls slightly to the right, the other to the left, but the head and the heart remain in the centre. So it is with New Zealand First.”

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/67556627/Peters-by-election-victory-raises-host-of-new-concerns

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The Dominion Post....

Editorial: Northland win a shot in the arm for Peters

EDITORIAL | 5:00AM - Tuesday, 31 March 2015



UNEXPECTED VICTORIES are political Viagra: at almost 70, Winston Peters has a new lease of political life. And his rush of power might spread further than people realise.

Peter Dunne is wrong that Peters is “irrelevant”. Peters' victory in Northland has in fact stopped Dunne from being irrelevant. The UnitedFuture MP now has the ability to veto National's attempt to turn the Resource Management Act into a charter for developers. Whether Dunne has the bottle to do this is up to him.

National has gone too far in trying to please its business wing. Its gutting of the emissions trading scheme, its pro-employer industrial law changes, and its attempt to make the planning laws more “balanced”, look like the actions of a bosses' government. They are also quite widely unpopular, as was proved when Cotton On tried to remove its workers' right to tea breaks and then faced a consumer boycott. Peters' victory helps puts more brakes on excessive employer power.

Peters has also changed the political discourse by showing that “unfair” is a cry that can hurt the Government.

Other impoverished regions will reach for the Northland argument in dealing with the Government. It would be risky to just ignore them.

NZ First is now a stronger Opposition force. If Labour continues to languish in the polls, voters may be more likely to turn to Peters. He, after all, is a social conservative with a natural appeal for hosed-off National voters. Prime Minister John Key must know that Peters is now a bigger threat to his government at the next election.

And Northland gives him a new role. As the watchdog of the north, he will harry the Government to prove it is doing something to help the poor whites he now represents. Peters can play the role of the independent force that “keeps the bastards honest”. And that is a dress-rehearsal for a bigger role as king-maker and pest after 2017. The public might grow to like him in that role.

It's exactly for that reason, in fact, that Peters can't afford to do any policy deals with the Government, as Key would clearly like him to do. He has to keep his distance and allow National to follow the natural trajectory of the third-term government — downwards.

Key has shown he is only human and his supporters have perhaps realised that their devotion to him is neither compulsory nor even necessarily sensible. They have gained permission to think dangerous thoughts.

Perhaps Key and his colleagues now also realise that they will have to think of some new and more interesting policies if they are to keep power. Suddenly, “slow and steady” might not seem like a race-winner.

Lastly, the by-election has thrown up a possible way of renewing NZ First in the longer term. The old charmer can't hope to spend many more decades in Parliament, and till now there was no sign of a plausible successor. But now Shane Jones is hovering near, looking vaguely hungry. And as a Right-wing northern Maori with a weird charisma, maybe Jones could seize the torch in, say, 2020 when it falls from Peters' aged hand.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/editorials/67556530/Northland-win-a-shot-in-the-arm-for-Peters

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

[reality]

"

....."After all, the thing he does best is bring attention to himself"...that's Winnie...it's all about him..not the people he is paid to represent😳

Paul Little: Waking up to Winston the day after

5:00 AM Sunday Apr 5, 201533 comments

Northland's head felt very fuzzy. That had been quite a party - what she could remember of it. Gradually it came back to her. Those guys from Auckland were sleazing all over her and she had been glad to see the last of them and that handbrake local mate of theirs.

She'd dodged a few bullets, or more likely blanks. But if she hadn't ended up going home with any of them, why could she hear snoring? Fearing the worst, she slowly rolled over and ... Oh, God, what had she done?

Otherwise sane people, desperate for an alternative to the cynical populist Government of John Key, have been bowled over by cynical populist Winston Peters' charisma and celebrated the return of personality to politics.

But personality, as in the case of David Lange, the most overrated prime minister of the 20th century, can cover up an awful lot of underachieving.


Fewer than 25 hours after a stunning victory, Winston was up to his old petulant antics in a way that made the Australian cricket team look like models of decorum and good sportsmanship.

TV One's Q+A wanted him to go on TV and, unsurprisingly, he was happy to do so. They also wanted to discuss the election result with National's Steven Joyce and Mark Osborne, who'd had a bit to do with it. Winston didn't like that and threatened to pull out. He actually said: "I've had this all through the campaign."

He forgot that democracy involves other people. Everyone has a voice and has a right to be heard and what the losers have to say in a hotly-contested byelection like this - especially when those losers are the ones running the country - needs to be heard.

And he began playing what on past form could be the first of many guessing games, by dangling the possibility of not replacing himself by bringing another New Zealand First list MP into Parliament, on the grounds that New Zealand First policy supports a smaller Parliament.

But although he'd probably be the first to agree he's irreplaceable, everyone can use an extra pair of hands around the House.

Perhaps he was going to keep the dignity card up his sleeve to produce in the house of representatives. And if getting to your feet and saying "Boo" to the Prime Minister at question time is dignified, then Winston displayed dignity in abundance.

But once the gloating over National's drubbing is done, the question remains: Will this result make a difference to anyone's fortunes except Winston's? Will the people of Northland get the help they so desperately need to lift themselves out of the economic mire?

The election should have been about Northland. It was about the popularity of the National Government and the handling of Mike Sabin's resignation. Winston didn't even have his own slogan, appropriating Andrew Little's "Send them a message".

What Winston can do for the region, given the numbers in Parliament, remains to be seen. Perhaps he can make a difference. After all, the thing he does best is bring attention to himself.

If he can share the spotlight with the electorate and focus attention on its needs, perhaps he will bring change for the better.

That his victory came in the same week the Minister for the Environment confirmed support for the likes of a giant oil drilling deal in the Reinga-Northland basin, which has all sorts of benefits for the Norwegian oil company behind it but no demonstrable benefits for the North, illustrates just how daunting Winston's task is.

[nitpicker1]

re
Paul Little: Waking up to Winston the day after

5:00 AM Sunday Apr 5,

“Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”

— John Key ... Wednesday, 4th March 2015

   

[reality]

Yes...if people can't make any valid points....just post a video or cartoon😜....you and your idol Ktj are like the dumb and dumber tag team...😀

[nitpicker1]

Yes...if people can't make any valid points....just post a video or cartoon....you and your idol Ktj are like the dumb and dumber tag team...

I 'spose you were in Krungthepmahanakornamornratanakosinmahintarayutthayamahadilokphopnopparatrajathaniburiromudomrajaniwesmahasatharnamornphimarnavatarnsathitsakkattiyavisanukamprasit when the film " The Poseidon Adventure " was shown in movie theatres in the real world.

Nemmind - go search, then ya just may see the irony in that message.


Meanwhile 
Read more by Bernard Hickey
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11427924


Bernard Hickey: The winds of change

5:00 AM Sunday Apr 5, 2015

China's massive, polluting building boom has had ripple effects throughout the world's economies. Photo / Getty Images

Chaos theory calls it the butterfly effect. It's the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon could cause a tornado in Texas.

The New Zealand economy has plenty of its own butterflies changing the weather for GDP growth, jobs, interest rates, inflation and house prices. Not all cause tornadoes, but there are plenty of head and tailwinds for different parts of the country.

One of the flappiest at the moment is the global iron ore price. It's barely noticed here but it's an indicator of growing trouble inside our largest trading partner, China, and it is knocking our second-largest partner, Australia, for six.

It fell to a 10-year low of almost US$50 a tonne ($67) this week and is down from a peak of more than US$170 a tonne in early 2011. Australia and Brazil are the biggest suppliers of iron ore to China.

China embarked on an infrastructure spree after the global financial crisis. Over the three years to 2013, China poured 6.4 gigatonnes of concrete, which was more than was poured in the US in the entire 20th century.

All that concrete needed reinforcing with steel and China didn't have enough iron ore and coking coal to make it.

That building boom created a glut of apartments and debt, which China now needs to digest. The elevation of President Xi Jingping to China's top leadership post in late 2012 was a key moment in the flapping of those iron ore wings.


He realised China needed to move to a more consumer-friendly economy with cleaner air, water and food. Dirty steel plants have closed and projects mothballed.

Apartment prices have fallen sharply over the past six months and demand from steel foundries has slowed.

At the same time, iron ore production in Australia has only now ramped up to its peak levels. Weak demand met high supply to produce a price slump.

This all may seem irrelevant to New Zealand, but it's not. The Australian dollar has fallen in response to the iron ore crash, while New Zealand's dollar has remained strong because our economy is humming along, thanks to building surges in Christchurch and Auckland and plenty of spending and investment.

That divergence between the Australasian economies drove the New Zealand dollar to a record high of well over A.98 this week. Westpac has started offering $1 for every A$1 sent by telegraphic transfer.

Dollar parity would make all those winter holidays on the Gold Coast and trips to shows in Sydney and Melbourne cheaper and generate a fierce headwind for manufacturing exporters and tourism businesses here that sell to Australians.

President Xi has reinforced the contrasting effects of the changes in China on Australia and New Zealand by encouraging consumers and investors to spend more of China's big trade surpluses overseas.

Tourism from China was up 40 per cent in the first two months of this year from a year ago, and there remains plenty of demand from investors in China for New Zealand assets.

The dark side of this tornado in New Zealand after the flapping of the butterfly's wings in China was felt in Nelson this week.

The region's biggest logging trucking firm, Waimea Contract Carriers, was put into voluntary administration owing $14m, partly because of a slump in log exports to China in the past six months.

That's because New Zealand's logs are now mostly shipped to China to be timber boxing for the concrete being poured in its new "ghost" cities.

The Chinese iron ore butterfly has flapped and now we're seeing Gold Coast winter breaks become cheaper and logging contracts rarer.

- Herald on Sunday

[reality]

“Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”

Looks like JK was right again😜

[nitpicker1]

“Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”

Looks like JK was right again

 

...National has held the seat for decades and had a majority of more than 9,000 votes in the election last year. The byelection was sparked by the resignation of former MP Mike Sabin, following reports he was under Police investigation.

The poll also also indicates there is some discomfort about the circumstances and National's handling of the resignation of Mike Sabin. Asked whether voters should have been told Mr Sabin was under investigation, 71 per cent said yes - including half of National voters. ...


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11412416

 p s: 

...National's woes in the seat were also exacerbated by the circumstances of the by-election. Mr Sabin's sudden resignation and the reasons for it did the party no favours. ...

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/270285/national's-turning-point

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

“Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”

Looks like JK was right again

Oh, dear....the torture-loving idiot (have the authorities investigated him associating with kids yet?) shows his total lack of grip on reality when he claims JK was right again after JK publicly said (speaking to a television reporter with the interview being filmed) on Wednesday, 4th March 2015 that, “Mr Peters has ‘zero’ chance of winning the Northland byelection.”, even though Winston Peters subsequently DID win the Northland by-election (by reversing a 9,000+ majority for the Nats to a 4,000+ majority for himself); yet that idiot reality is still having delusions that JK got it right when he made that idiotic statement.

Jeeeeezus H Faaaaaarking Christ....if I was such a dumbfuck as reality, I'd fire a bullet into my head to improve things. Somehow I think he'd be too stupid to even carry out a simple corrective action such as that! He'd probably spend hours trying to work out which part of the gun was the trigger, and even then he'd get it wrong.

[reality]

 Haha...it wasn't Peters......it was Peters...plus the party that got thrown under the bus .....Labour...that makes 2 parties....hardly a fair fight😜

So ...no. .Peters did not do it a lone😳

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The New Zealand Herald....

Resurgent Peters out to rally the regions

After Northland win, NZ First leader has sights on National’s heartland.

By JOHN ARMSTRONG | 5:00AM - Saturday, April 04, 2015


The renewed relevance that Peters' huge victory has accorded his party prompted a series of positioning
statements from the leaders of National and Labour. — Photo: John Stone.

THE humiliating defeat that Winston Peters inflicted on the National Party in last Saturday's Northland byelection has changed nothing. At the same time, it has changed everything.

It has changed nothing in the short term despite the widespread assumption that the loss of a parliamentary seat will put the minority National Government more in hock to United Future's Peter Dunne and ACT's David Seymour.

Peters' triumph has changed everything longer-term. His game of divide-and-rule which has him pitting voters in regions which have suffered economic stagnation against their big city cousins is the most serious challenge he has mounted to National's centre-right hegemony since he climbed aboard the anti-Asian immigration bandwagon some two decades ago.

With other parties now also arguing for curbs on the number of immigrants, Peters has been casting around for an equally potent substitute for some time. He has now found one.

To deal with National's minor party allies first, the notion that they now have more leverage is more myth than reality.

The dynamics which govern the relationship between the dominant ruling party and its support partners is more than just a simple numbers game.

The reality is that the influence Dunne and Seymour have been able to wield over National since last September's general election is akin to that of an ant crawling up an elephant's backside. The impact of a slight change in the balance of power is likewise negligible.

The evidence for saying that is that neither leader has gone to John Key to demand concessions and rewrite their confidence and supply agreements accordingly.

Both men are acutely conscious that their survival as parliamentary entities is contingent on them adhering to an unspoken pact with National-leaning voters that neither politician destabilises the Government.

If they were to do so, those voters would turn on them, tossing them out of Parliament at the first opportunity.

It all makes Dunne's opposition to now-dumped amendments to the Resource Management Act very much a one-off. Neither he nor Seymour can exercise such veto rights very often — and they know it.

On top of that, if a piece of legislation risks being knocked down, then National will not put it up.

It is also hard to envisage a third-term administration — especially one led by Key — bringing contentious legislation before the House anyway.

If parts of National's legislative programme are too soft ideologically or unacceptably interventionist for Dunne or Seymour then odds-on Key will get the necessary numbers from elsewhere.

Enter Peters stage centre on Wednesday with an “olive branch” — his words — offering to do just that by being willing to negotiate with National over amendments to the Resource Management Act to help National get the broad thrust of its intended reform into law.

It was the New Zealand First leader's way of underlining how the byelection has changed everything.


Kerikeri 14-year-olds Hannah Bindon, left, and Issy Joe get a photo with NZ First leader Winston Peters.
 — Photo: Peter de Graaf.

The renewed relevance that Peters' huge victory has accorded his party prompted a series of positioning statements from the leaders of National and Labour.

The most significant was Andrew Little's declaration that as Leader of the Opposition, he felt obliged to ensure Opposition parties operated in a cohesive fashion and presented a united front. He acknowledged that did not mean Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens should not seek to maximise their vote. But it did mean those parties should not trip over one another in attempting to defeat the common enemy — National.

Little's call for unity is a complete departure from the pre-election stance adopted by his predecessor, David Cunliffe, who spurned an offer from the Greens to campaign co-operatively. Cunliffe later conceded that had been a mistake, saying that the "progressive forces of politics" would have done better if they had been better co-ordinated.

Cunliffe may have been too hard on himself, however. His rejection of the Greens' offer had much to do with the fact that Peters cannot abide the Greens and believes (correctly) that they are toxic to the kind of voter he is seeking to reach.

Given Labour and the Greens were never going to win enough seats combined to dethrone National, Cunliffe judged it was better to get Peters on board and leave the Greens, who had nowhere else to go, with no choice but to prop up a Labour-New Zealand First administration.

If Little can find a solution to that continuing conundrum, he will be judged a politician of rare skill.

National believes Little's call for Opposition unity is far more self-serving than he is letting on, however. National argues that weighing in behind Peters' candidacy in Northland brought an abrupt end to Little's growing momentum as Labour's leader and that he has consequently handed Peters a huge advantage in the run-up to the 2017 election.

No one seriously believes Little can pin Peters down and keep him under Labour's wing. National thinks Peters is on such a roll that he now believes he can supplant Labour as the second biggest party, at least in provincial and rural New Zealand. Thus did Key taunt Little in Parliament by referring to him as the “Junior Leader of the Opposition”.

National has little to be smug about, however.

With his talk of “two tiered economies” and “second-class citizens”, Peters is already looking well beyond Northland's boundaries to sell his message of Government neglect to the inhabitants of other regions, such as Gisborne, Hawkes Bay, eastern Bay of Plenty, Wanganui and the West Coast, who — rightly or wrongly — feel they too have been chucked on the economic scrapheap while metropolitan New Zealand prospers.

Key's initial response to the Northland landslide was to position himself as having no truck with Peters.

That only succeeded in prompting Peters to try to force Key to eat his words by offering to come to the party on the Resource Management Act.

Key's dilemma is whether to risk being seen to kowtow to Peters by accepting his offer to negotiate and thus look weak or ignore the offer and look arrogant and seemingly failing to heed the lessons of the byelection defeat.

The prevailing feeling within National is that bitter experience suggests trying to negotiate with Peters is a waste of time because nothing useful comes of it.

That view will be reinforced by the provisos attached to Peters' “olive branch”, namely that amending the act does not further stoke the Auckland property market and force up interest rates and the dollar to the detriment of the rest of the country.

What will really be troubling Key, however, is that Peters' repositioning of New Zealand First as some kind of “Country Party” will see him wreaking havoc behind National's well-fortified frontline — territory previously considered to be impregnable.

That is Key's nightmare. Not that he will be allowed to sleep in peace anyway.

The fall of Northland means there will be sleepless nights for nervous National MPs who thought their seats in National's supposed “heartland” were safe forever.

Those MPs will be keeping Key very much awake to that no longer necessarily being the case.

• John Armstrong is The New Zealand Herald's chief political commentator.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/john-armstrong-on-politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502865&objectid=11427538

[reality]

"The reality is that the influence Dunne and Seymour have been able to wield over National since last September's general election is akin to that of an ant crawling up an elephant's backside. The impact of a slight change in the balance of power is likewise negligible."

Yes..I agree....only 2 years of good govt to go.....then let's move to the left to bring our high dollar down......ffs😜

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

from The New Zealand Herald....

Byelection: Winston Peters' majority increases

By AUDREY YOUNG | 12:05PM - Wednesday, April 08, 2015



WINSTON PETERS' majority in the Northland byelection increased to 4,441 votes, according to the official results.

The preliminary results of the March 28th byelection had his winning margin at 4,012 votes.

But since the addition of 1,579 special declaration votes and overseas votes, his majority has increase by 429 votes.

Mr Peters, the New Zealand First leader, beat National's Mark Osborne and first-time candidate who polled 11,648 votes.

Labour's Willow-Jean Prime polled 1,380 and will not get her $300 deposit back because she did not get at least five percent of the votes.

Only Mr Peters and Mr Osborne will get refunds on their deposits.

The Electoral Commission said the turnout was 65.4 percent of the 45,955 voters enrolled.

Of all the votes cast, 30.17 percent or 13,869 votes were advance votes.

The byelection took place after the resignation of Mike Sabin for undisclosed personal reasons.

The Electoral Commission said it expected to return the writ on April 14th showing the successful candidate, assuming there were no judicial recounts.

However that may be delayed by a few days; the lowest polling candidate, Adam Holland, told the Herald he plans to apply tomorrow for a judicial recount.

The final results:

• Adrian Paul Bonner, Independent — 17

• Joe Carr, Focus New Zealand — 113

• Robin Grieve, ACT New Zealand — 68

• Herbert Maki, Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party — 94

• Adam Holland, Independent — 16

• Mark, Osborne, National Party — 11,648

• Rob Painting, Climate Party — 39

• Winston Peters — 16,089

• Rueben Taipari Porter, Mana Movement — 60

• Willow-Jean Prime, Labour Party — 1,380

• Brunce Rogan, Independent — 24

• Informals — 42

• Audrey Young is The New Zealand Herald’s political editor.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11429470

[reality]

Yes...I agree...must be great to have an opposing party leader throw their candidate under the bus in your favour 😜

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

[reality]

Yup..

ACT went backwards about................ 130 votes compared to the general election result....

Labour went backwards about ........7600 votes compared to the general election.....on the orders of the new leader of course😳

Labours Willow-Jean Prime may have had a chance in a real contest...but I guess maybe now Little has screwed her political career, makes ya wonder if she may be just a little bit bitter😏

Before the last general election Peters had a big parliamentary speech about principles and elections should not be fixed....then happily accepts the fruits of a fixed election....so much for Winston having principles...but as is often said....Winston is a populist politician...and says only what he thinks people want to hear....he has turned it into an art form...just a pity that it does nothing for the country...but keeps him on a very good income at the public trough...for a 70 year old😜

[Kiwithrottlejockey]

Yes, it was very astute of Andrew Little to go with the option which caused the most damage to the Nats in the Northland electorate and compensate his candidate by giving her the no.10 spot on Labour's party vote list, virtually guaranteeing her a seat in Parliament in the next general election.

Bravo....it shows that Andrew Little thinks strategically over the long term for the good of the country, rather than short-term gain like the Nats do things.

[reality]

...mmm...I think labour voters have habit forming voting preferences , maybe they will vote for Winnie...haha

...only 2 long and gruelling years to go...enjoy😜