this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
16 points (94.4% liked)

NZ Politics

562 readers
1 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

 

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

National has lost 2 seats, while TMP has gained 2, and the Green party has gained 1. NACT now need NZF to govern.

Rachel Boyack has won Nelson by 21 votes, and Phil Twyford has won Te Atatū by 131 votes.

122 seats because of the overhang, which will rise to 123 after the Port Waikato by-election.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dave 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm honestly not sure what to think about this. I think NZ First's involvement will temper some policies, but they are again in a position of a lot of power. Plus, I'm sure Act had previously said the will refuse to work with NZF so coalition agreements may take some time. Honestly it may be easier to go with a Labour/National coalition 😆

[–] TagMeInSkipIGotThis 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's only dumb because those two parties only real reason for existence these days is in opposition to each other as the natural parties of government (in their minds).

If National jettisoned the religious fundamentalists, now Labour has lurched to the right in an ill advised attempt to not lose the election there's even less between the two of them. Mostly just old fashioned racism really holding them back from being the same thing.

[–] Dave 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, they are closer to each other than other parties but that two sides mentality holds back a Labour/National coalition. I'd love for it to happen though, even just to see if it worked.

[–] TagMeInSkipIGotThis 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd like them to both splinter and form new modern versions of themselves rather than holding on to something 100 years old that bears little relevance to modern problems.

[–] Dave 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suspect we have already started to see the splintering. Both National and Labour are much smaller than they have been in previous years.

[–] TagMeInSkipIGotThis 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And of course Labour already went through some of this with Act, Alliance, Greens etc all coming out of their ructions from the end of the 80s. But unfortunately the two brands remain; sucking most of the financial support and media narrative out of our political environment.

[–] Dave 1 points 1 year ago

Greens actually get donations on par with (and sometimes more than) Labour. And the same with Act and National, though their donations are many times what Labour/Greens get. And if you count the unreported donations to their lobbying arm you'd probably find Act gets the largest share of the donation money.

[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wish we would get nat/lab coalition.

Any hope of nat/green?

[–] haydng 3 points 1 year ago

The Greens run coalition agreements as an internal democracy, so their membership would have to vote in favour. I can't really see that happening

[–] Dave 3 points 1 year ago

National's candidates come across as very right wing to me, to the point that many I would guess would be happier in Act but had more chance of getting into parliament with National. I don't think there is a world where a Luxon-led National would work with the Greens.