Wednesday 7 December 2016

Winning Mt Roskill The Old-Fashioned Way.

Native Son: One of the reasons Wood was able to generate such spectacular support from Mt Roskill voters is because he is one of them. He and his young family have lived in the electorate for 13 years. During that time he has repeatedly proved himself acceptable to his neighbours by standing, successfully, in local government elections. In an electorate chock-filled with the adherents of many faiths, Wood is a self-acknowledged Christian.
 
IT WAS AN OLD-FASHIONED LABOUR VICTORY, won with old-fashioned Labour weapons, by an old-fashioned Labour candidate. Michael Wood deserves the heartiest congratulations for his stunning success in Mt Roskill. Capturing two-thirds of the votes cast is an impressive achievement no matter which way you slice it. Labour is, therefore, entitled to a few moments of self-congratulation at Wood’s success – but only a few. Because the party’s low membership, and its perilously stretched budget, will make it almost impossible to replicate Wood’s success across the country in 2017.
 
Wood threw everything bar the kitchen-sink into holding Mt Roskill for Labour. Beginning his campaign weeks before the by-election was officially announced, he made sure his name and face were everywhere Roskillians looked. They simply couldn’t escape him! Nor could they escape the vast army of volunteers Wood managed to enlist for the duration of his campaign. Canvassers and pamphlet-droppers from all over Auckland – and much farther afield – poured into the electorate in a very passable imitation of the Labour Party machine which had propelled the likes of Phil Goff into Parliament in the early-1980s.
 
And there’s the rub. Electioneering in the early-1980s took place under the rules of First-Past-The-Post (FPP). The very same rules that, in 2016, apply only to – you guessed it – by-elections. Under FPP, and in by-elections, the electors have only one vote to cast. So, there is no chance that, having identified the voters intending to vote for your party’s candidate, and driven them to the polling place, they decide to give their Electorate Vote to your candidate, and their Party Vote to an opposing party.
 
This is exactly what happened in Mt Roskill in 2014. Phil Goff won easily with 55 percent of the Electorate Vote, but National won the all-important Party Vote by more than 2,000 votes. The Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) electoral system which has operated in New Zealand since 1996, by allowing electors to “split” their two votes between two different parties, has rendered the highly effective “machine” politics of FPP frustratingly unreliable.
 
Except at by-elections. Knowing this, Wood was able to assemble and operate an old-fashioned “election-day system” to “get out the vote” in Mt Roskill.
 
An election-day system is a complex process for identifying how many of your party’s supporters have already voted; how many need a hurry-up; and how many require a lift to the nearest polling-place. How do the political parties know who their supporters are? By knocking on thousands of doors and asking. How do they know if they have, or haven’t, voted? By stationing scrutineers in every polling place.
 
It’s a fearsomely labour-intensive process, requiring upwards of 200-300 volunteers to operate effectively. But, when the canvassing work has been done; the database is up-to-date; and the scrutineers, communicators, checker-offers, telephone operators and drivers have all been trained and deployed; then a candidate can be confident that the overwhelming majority of his or her identified voters will end up casting their ballots. The veteran party leader, Jim Anderton, was so good at running his own election-day system that he could predict, with frightening accuracy, how many votes he would get.
 
This was how Wood “got out” Labour’s vote on 3 December. And, if Labour had a sufficiently large membership, it could look forward to doing the same across the whole country. The problem, of course, is that Labour does not have anything like enough members to get out its optimal vote in 2017.
 
Nor, frankly, does it have anything like enough candidates like Michael Wood. One of the reasons Wood was able to generate such spectacular support from Mt Roskill voters is because he is one of them. He and his young family have lived in the electorate for 13 years. During that time he has repeatedly proved himself acceptable to his neighbours by standing, successfully, in local government elections. In an electorate chock-filled with the adherents of many faiths, Wood is a self-acknowledged Christian.
 
Forty years ago, practically all Labour candidates fitted the above description. In 2016, however, Wood is something of a political throwback: an old-fashioned Labour man more suited to when Labour could boast 85,000 branch members and there was no such thing as the Party Vote.
 
If Andrew Little wishes to replicate Wood’s success, then he will have to make good all of Labour’s current deficiencies. He needs to increase the party’s membership tenfold and replenish its war-chest. He needs to identify, as Wood identified, the most serious problems confronting his supporters and to offer them practical and believable solutions. Finally, he needs to ensure that Labour fields candidates firmly rooted in their communities, whose life experiences and personal values complement those of their voter base.
 
An old-fashioned formula for securing the electoral support of New Zealanders? Perhaps. But as Michael Wood has proved – it works.
 
This essay was originally posted on the Stuff website on Tuesday, 6 December 2016.

28 comments:

Andrew Nichols said...

Finally, he needs to ensure that Labour fields candidates firmly rooted in their communities, whose life experiences and personal values complement those of their voter base.

This is Andrew Little ,conservative union boss we are trying to get to do this ...right?

Nope. Still going to vote Green

jh said...

IT WAS AN OLD-FASHIONED LABOUR VICTORY, won with old-fashioned Labour weapons, by an old-fashioned Labour candidate.
....
How many white working class voters vote Labour these days?

greywarbler said...

That is so interesting Chris. That point about the certainty of FPP when your voters cast their choice and now at general elections might split it.
Their definitely needs to be a dialogue with your voters as to the effect of splitting the vote. Whether it is likely to be of tactical advantage if given to another, chosen, party or is needed by the party of the candidate. We need reminding about so many political things, such as why MMP is good, enabling us to get more effect from each vote, but where it can have unintended consequences of disadvantage.

Brick said...

And yet, after all this endeavour, only a few of the faithful bothered to vote anyway. I was more surprised by the number of votes the lack-lustre National candidate was able to achieve with no support at all. Strange game - politics

Pinger said...

Boosting party membership numbers and coffers are the responsibility of the General Secretary and/or President.

Since Mike Williams left the scene Labour have been staggeringly incompetent on this front.

Barnett / Coatsworth were probably the worst egs of uselessness re the above.

Galeandra said...

Is jh part of a Trumpian vanguard, because if so he's in the wrong country. He could try the Republic of Whangamomona, but I think this year's Pres is already 'lected.

Victor said...

Chris

I agree with most of your sentiments, as expressed here.

But, as the recent US election shows, a sense of voter alienation can also be found where FPP continues to rule the roost.

greywarbler

I agree entirely. There's no perfect system. Even so, I much prefer one that doesn't ignore my vote on the grounds that I've (yet again) failed to agree with a majority of my neighbours, delightful people though many of them undoubtedly are.

pat said...

"Finally, he needs to ensure that Labour fields candidates firmly rooted in their communities, whose life experiences and personal values complement those of their voter base."

Wrong....FIRSTLY he needs to ensure that Labour fields candidates firmly rooted in their communities, whose life experience and personal values represent those of their voter base.

jh said...

Galeandra said...
Is jh part of a Trumpian vanguard
........
Only one in five white Britons votes for Labour
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/only-one-in-five-white-britons-votes-for-labour-9604547.html

"Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.

"I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

"Too the delight of some and the puzzlement of many" Spoonley

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Is jh part of a Trumpian vanguard"
Short answer - Yes.

Nick J said...

Can’t help thinking that with the rise of new young MPs and the retirement of the likes of Goff, Cunliffe and now Shearer it is time for Labour to take some bold steps and reinvigorate itself. Time for Little, King and some of the old guard to go. National have a pile of old “has beens” like English, Joyce, Crusher etc, tired and boring, staid and not in touch with reality.

What should Labour do? My prescription would be to put Finance, Education and Housing to safe old hands Parker, Robertson and Twyford (to create the image of stability) and replace the rest of the front bench with youth. Kelvin Davis for leader, with Adern, Nash, Wood, Hipkins, Sepuloni, Faafoi, Williams (to create the image of energy and vision). A good blend of gender and ethnicities that reflect NZ as it is, and young, vibrant. The theme for the election, “Youth leading everyday NZers into the future (out of the crap”)…..

jh said...

And why not? Once I would have listened to Kim Hill. This morning as I cut vines away from the fence I listen to
http://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-3epke-1efc9d8

jh said...

“Youth leading everyday NZers into the future (out of the crap”)…..
.........
The problem with that is their education

Across 11 heterogeneous Californian universities, the ratio of Democrats-to-Republicans (registered political party affiliations) was 5 to 1. The ratio was also dependent on the professors’ faculty and departmental affiliations. For example, the humanities had a ratio of 10 to 1, with sociology holding the most lopsided ratio at 44 to 1.
...
A more recent study by Neil Gross and Ethan Fosse examined political leanings across professions. For professors, 43 percent were liberal and 9 percent were conservative. However, when strictly examining natural scientists (you know, scientific facts), 20 percent were liberal and 32 percent were conservative. Clearly then, all those physicists, chemists and biologists must be redneck Tea Party members with posters of Sarah Palin adorning their university offices.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gad-saad/intellectual-diversity-on_b_6525538.html

New Zealand Universities are probably no different, after all look how Massey booted out Dr Clydesdale for his anti-immigration paper? Deemed racist.

Like Māori, Pacific peoples experience disproportionately high unemployment rates and have also been more severely impacted during economic downturns. 82 Educational achievement, while improving, still remains significantly below that of the national population. 83 The growing size of the Pacific community and its young demographic profile (median age of 22 years compared to 41 years for the European population 84) provides opportunities both for raising Pacific living standards and supporting an ageing population. 85 86
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/government/longterm/fiscalposition/2016/he-tirohanga-mokopuna/ltfs-16-htm.pdf

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that an old-fashioned approach, that is having a human face on top of a political initiative, could help Labour to assert itself in an election campaign. Not that I know anything about it but I understand that social media could be used to good effect by Labour. However, candidates need to be pounding the streets with as many supporters as they can muster. In fact, they may even collect some supporters using such an approach. So like adding cream to the coffee so Labour can stir the human face in real presence to the social media waiting to be used.

Last election, our sitting Labour MP in a safe seat, did roll up and used a loud hailer on our street corner. Who did he address? Nobody came out to talk to him. Somebody needs to tell Labour MPs and supporters that doorknocking is a better approach. It doesn't even have to be every door. The word will get around.

It's sad what has happened to Labour since the 80s. Even the Clark era has not seemed to obliterate the destruction caused by Douglas and others. If Bernie Sanders can promote a socialist name and agenda in the USA, the same thing should be able to be promoted here.

Victor said...

Galeandra and GS

Not so sure about the "vanguard" bit.

I'd have thought that vanguard membership involves something more heroic than making virtually the same comment with respect to every topic broached on on this website.

But which of us knows much of the other lives of our cyber-aquaintances?

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"Across 11 heterogeneous Californian universities, the ratio of Democrats-to-Republicans (registered political party affiliations) was 5 to 1. The ratio was also dependent on the professors’ faculty and departmental affiliations. For example, the humanities had a ratio of 10 to 1, with sociology holding the most lopsided ratio at 44 to 1. "

So what? Are you suggesting that conservatives are deliberately kept out of universities? It's interesting that 30 years ago 60% of scientists were Republican. Now it's 6%. And I suspect is nothing to do with Librul bullying so much as conservatives' complete disrespect for/disregard of science, particularly when it disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible. Like "evolution – it's only a theory." So is gravity, and occasionally I wish some of them would express the same opinion about that, and step off a high building. Just to test the theory mind.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"But which of us knows much of the other lives of our cyber-aquaintances?"

Well, that's why I said it's the short answer :). The long answer would be that it's difficult to tell what is politics are, but his sources indicate that he has become, or has always been a member of the so-called alt right. Which I prefer to call by its proper name neo-Nazi. But to be fair that might be a bit harsh. On JH, not the alt right. I wouldn't mind quite so much if the comments were intelligible, which most of the time they aren't. Relevance I have given up on.

jh said...

GS
Are you suggesting that conservatives are deliberately kept out of universities?
......
Yes by group self selection.
And the public service. How else would you have an "institutionalisation of public discourse"?

What's more mass media is a strategic resource, a resource divided between two groups: one from the Social Science and Humanities sections of our universities [RNZ] and the other business people who rely on an inflow of migrants.

As a consequence the country is being invaded. We are supposed to represent a vanguard of human progress creating a society free of judgements about group classification. More likely, we will be a powder keg held together by coercion and suppression. At worst we could finish up like Thailand.

Edit: perhaps it is the New Zealanders only who need suppressing. Older New Zealanders die out and millenials know nothing but the status quo. But in the meantime the state goes on a witch hunt against those who object to an alien invasion. Migrants benefit, most New Zealanders don’t.
......
The difference between white supremists,Nazis and the alt right is one of context. Nazis killed off those who lived among them whereas the alt right resist the multicultural project where people migrate from crowded countries to a handful of prime destination countries (mainly in the west).

Note: only 1448 people have become "new" Chinese .

jh said...

How is immigration not relevant when it affects so much against a background of defening silence from the Labour Party and liberal elite. Kerry McDonald (executive of the year ) calls it a "national disaster"; Spoonley tells Catherine Ryan: "there are one or two economists who don't think immigration is a good thing" (a small minority - when you take out the vested interests).

jh said...

GS
And I suspect is nothing to do with Librul bullying so much as conservatives' complete disrespect for/disregard of science, particularly when it disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible. Like "evolution – it's only a theory."
....
There could be an element of that but mainly it is about Franz Boas versus evolutionary psychology.
http://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-3epke-1efc9d8

Guerilla Surgeon said...

:"The difference between white supremists,Nazis and the alt right is one of context. Nazis killed off those who lived among them whereas the alt right resist the multicultural project where people migrate from crowded countries to a handful of prime destination countries (mainly in the west)."

Bullshit. The alt right are a collection of neo-Nazis white supremacists and people who invent words to show that there not racist when they actually are. I.e. 'racial realist'. Oh, and they've managed to co-opt evolutionary psychology in support of their nutty ideas. Insofar as you espouse their ideas you are a fascist. Jesus wept will you grow up.

greywarbler said...

NickJ 8/12 10.41
Hey that's a good fusion recipe. Labour go with that one. This sounds like the most doable winning possibility for the next election that I have heard. Hey Labour, LABOUR, lookee here, a great idea, calling you hoohoo - what does it take to get into the right left-lane to the gurus.

jh said...

Mai Chen
The reality is there is no reason we can't have an an Asian journalist running this or running this or running across the board, you know, here in Radio New Zealand, being head of news.
I think the difficulty is we need to change our view of what people in these positions look like. Because the reality is we're not talking about foreigners , it's not us and them, it's all about us. We are inter married, many of us have been here 1 2 3 4 5 generations. Who's "us" and who's "them"? Who are the foreigners? I'm not foreign, I live here, I have deep roots here. And so I think our whole way of conceiving people on how they look superficially needs to change. Actually I look like an average New Zealander; there are increasing numbers of New Zealanders who look like me (and you).

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/voices/audio/201826966/the-media-who-is-in-control

Guerilla Surgeon said...

JH another completely enigmatic out of context quote. Is this supposed to mean something? You know what, fuck it – I used to think we should control our emigration, but you've completely changed my mind. I think now I am gonna vote for anyone who is willing to fill the country up with migrants. Chinese, Indians, Russians, who cares. You've done this JH, you are directly responsible. I hope you're satisfied.

jh said...

United, the world in a suburb
When Cecil Lochan settled in Mt Roskill in the mid-1970s, the Fijian-Indian was the first non-European in the street. His neighbour wasn't happy.

"He would come home drunk and spit at me and yell this and that."

The neighbour eventually mellowed and the small cul-de-sac of Gregory Place is now home to three Indian, four Chinese, one German, one Pacific Island and five European families.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11313033

Well how bloody typical is that!? Racist white spitting at a migrant!? Isn't that typical of the sort of the dark forces opposed to migration!?
But don't hold back with those stories of dark racism migrants, let it all hang out: Susan Devoy welcomes your stories. Of course you're not ethnocentric yourself are you! There is no human nature [Boas].
.......
The united meme (the melting pot) assumes common goals and common interests not a climate of competition. In reality people compete with people and winners network. Evidence points to Auckland becoming increasingly segregated however, Professor Spoonley blames white racism for that.
The man delivering the gas bottles said : "now I'm just a dumb fella, but I can see, that they come from a crowded place and are coming to a better place"?

jh said...

Guerilla Surgeon said...
Bullshit. The alt right are a collection of neo-Nazis white supremacists and people who invent words to show that there not racist when they actually are. I.e. 'racial realist
....
In that case you have nothing to worry about: there is no meat in the sandwiches they are selling (for want of a better expression)? The reality is in order to create multicultural society the hegemony of the dominant culture has to die [Gramscian theory] and for that to happen foreigners speaking foreign tongues now walk Riccarton Mall and you have to love it or receive scorn as a racist.

Giovani Tiso says PC is just being kind. If so what is "an institutionalisation of public discourse" (regarding multiculturalism)?

jh said...

President of the Auckland Regional Ethnic Council, Cecil Lochan, said Prosser's comments were despicable and "totally unacceptable to all self-respecting New Zealanders."

"Not only it is in contravention of the race relation legislation, but is contrary to provisions of Human Rights Act and Geneva Convention," the justice of the peace said.

jh said...

I had an Indian neighbor we got on o.k. My friend was building a house in Invercargill in the 1970's. He told me a Fijian Indian lived around the next street and they took turns helping each other mix concrete. His mother spent "all day inside cooking". She made curry: it was "beautiful". Now he is very much against immigration. There is a difference between absorbing and being absorbed. The above piece quoting Cecil Lochan (a neighbor who spat) is part of the narrative that people who oppose immigration are unreasonable ("racist").