Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Labour Party looking at yet another electoral rort

The next loser of the 2014 election, David Cunliffe, is making noises about removing the coat-tailing rule in the highly unlikely event Labour beats National at this year's election.

Before 1996, Labour whined and moaned when they got more votes than National in a couple of elections yet lost the elections.  They thought FPP was unfair.  So they lobbied for, and got, a system that suited them - MMP.

In 2005, Labour was again desperate to stay in power and to do so had to overspending by over $400,000 with its "pledge card".  The Police decided not to prosecute, but that didn't stop Labour from retrospectively validating it's illegality.  

Then came the Electoral Finance Act which was Labour's attempt at silencing their opponents absolutely.

And now Labour is having its fourth attempt at embedding its electoral advantage by abolishing the coat-tail rule.

You see, it's this simple.  The Labour Party is essentially determined to govern at any expense.  It couldn't care less about bringing in "their" system to suit themselves, and it cares less about fair elections, and fair election laws.  And when it can't win, it advocates for removing the advantage its opposition has.

At the end of the day, if the coat-tail rule goes, National could just stand aside in 5-6 seats for the Cons and Act if that was required.  And Act has scored over 7% in two previous elections, and over 6% in another.  It's not beyond Act to score that again.

If it does, wait for Labour to increase the threshold to 8%.  Because I think they actually believe no one else has the privilege of governing except them.


Angry Tory said...

Hey Labour is half right - we do need to abolish the rule that lets unelected "List Members" into parliament if their party wins a real seat.

We just also need to abolish the rule that lets unelected "List Members" into parliament if their party wins over 5% of the vote.

Then, of course, we'd need to make the electorates fair again: every electorate should be the same geographical size (geographically proportionate).

And finally, we need to restore the important principle from NZ's original electorate Act that was abolished when the Labour Party was founded --- No Representation without Taxation. Non-nett taxpayers don't qualify for the privilege of the franchise, on conflict of interest grounds if no others.

Anonymous said...

Completely agree with your last paragraph A.T.

The old adage- If the Govt robs Peter to pay Paul, they can always rely on Paul's vote, should outrage every law-abiding, tax payer in this country.

Mrs Danvers