Forming a government
While I believe that Labour will get more votes than National (though, only on the balance of very even probabilities, and please don’t quote me on it), the two-horse race isn’t all-important in determining the election result. Whatever some in United and NZ First might be saying, there is no presumption - constitutional or otherwise - that the single party with the most votes has the first dibs on forming the next government.
Other countries do have “formal investiture rules” which set out methodically the process by which a government is formed after a proportional representation election. Usually, these rules involve the Head of State inviting the leader of the party with the most seats to try and form a government. Only if that person fails to form a government does the leader of the second-largest party get a go.
Now, that’s not the case in New Zealand. We don’t have a formalised process for post-election negotiations. Our election results should be interpreted by comparing how many seats that Labour and National “sides” have locked in, how many are up for grabs, and whether either “side” has a majority. Remember back to 1996. National won around 6% more of the party vote than Labour, yet it was interpreted as a Labour victory. Why? Because the media assumed - wrongly, it turns out - that Labour would have the numbers in Parliament to govern. On Saturday night, we should take a similar approach. The vital question won’t be: Who out of Labour and National has more votes? It will be: Who out of Labour and National has more seats pledged to them?
Indeed, the key to Helen Clark and Don Brash forming the next government is their ability to convince the Governor General that they have the confidence of the majority of MPs in Parliament. Dame Silvia, in this regard, will be guided by what party leaders say after the election.
So, it’s possible that from Sunday morning onwards, the race will be on between Clark and Brash to get the adequate numbers collected and locked-in. If we take party leaders at their word, Labour can count on the Greens, the Maori Party and the Progressives, National can count on Act, while United and NZ First are up for grabs.
There are two ways the post-election period could unfold. One is that Labour or National will have enough “locked-in” seats without needing the two “centrist” parties and so the result will be clear on election night. The other is that neither side will have the numbers without UF and NZF, and so the bidding will begin.
And we shouldn’t assume that United and/or NZ First will eventually fall to the side that includes the party with the most votes. They’re both saying they’ll negotiate in the first instance with the largest party, but if it became clear that the second-largest party had the best shot at forming a government, then they could quickly switch horses mid-stream.
Explained in these terms, National’s failure to come to terms with MMP remains a huge impediment to it winning this election. On our current polling figures, the Labour-led side has 64 seats, while the National-led side has 49, with the nine of United and NZ First up for grabs. So, on current polling, the election is Labour’s. National will need a significant boost if it’s to get itself in the coalition-making frame.
September 13th, 2005 at 1:50 pm
“Whatever some in United and NZ First might be saying, there is no presumption - constitutional or otherwise - that the single party with the most votes has the first dibs on forming the next government.”
Actually Frog, there is a presumption, however misplaced, that the largest party gets first dibs. The media, you and I may not buy into it, but that doesn’t mean most New Zealanders don’t, particularly after the statements of Dunne and Peters.
September 13th, 2005 at 4:23 pm
Fwwog, we have advised Bwash to ring the feminist horrid Governor general sometime saturday afternoon to announcer he can form Government,
no person in their rigth mind wait around for the wolverine,
September 13th, 2005 at 7:31 pm
capitalists running scared yet?
you lot have shot yourselves so thoroughly in both feet, you’ll be trying to put up private members’ bills to repeal gun licensing laws so that you can’t possibly ever do that again.;-)
meanwhile, those of us with regular campaign methods are hearing lots of young people suggest they will vote this time; I submit that there are more 18-25 yr olds in the country than Exclusive Bretheren, and I’d much rather see the young people feeling empowered enough to make a difference!!!
September 13th, 2005 at 8:54 pm
pq - wolverine is a new one… is this Winston Peters? Fitting, if it is. respectfully BJ
September 13th, 2005 at 11:42 pm
Labour wont go with Act
National wont go with Greens
Act maynot even be there
United wont go with Greens
NZ First wont go into a confidence and supply agreenent with Greens or Act
NZ First wont go with Greens
Maori Party wont go with National
Maori Party is last cab off the rank for Labour
Progressives wont go with any party from the Right
So that means
The most open mindeed party is United Future
The most closed minded is NZ First
The most unwanted party is the Greens ( as four parties dont want to be in coalition with the Greens)
To have stable Government there is only one option: National/United Future with confidence and supply from a minor party.
September 14th, 2005 at 12:38 am
except if Labour/Greens get the numbers, which is still the most likely outcome.
cos it’s actually the voters who get to decide… not the party leaders… hallelujah
(keep working on it Dave, I reckon you can turn that post into a sonnet)
September 14th, 2005 at 7:24 am
Dave, he’s got a point. “Confidence and Supply” is awkward, anyone have another word that can be substituted? Politically satirical stuff like this is hugely beneficial to the public image of a party that gets it together enough to sing it. respectfully BJ
September 14th, 2005 at 7:29 am
Team, what about Labour, Greens, Progressive and Maori? On the day they may regard having a real voice in a real government as more important than letting UF call the dance. As has been pointed out, the scramble after the votes are counted is way more pragmatic than the pontifications prior to the close of polling.
respectfully
BJ
September 14th, 2005 at 8:19 pm
yeah I always thought that the maori party would be more closely aligned to labour than UF.
Why the distancing?
September 14th, 2005 at 8:57 pm
Foreshore?
respectfully
BJ