Tonight in Russell the Duke of Marlborough will host the first in a series of ‘Meet the Candidates’ meetings for the Northland electorate.
The candidates from National, Labour, Greens, NZ First along with Mike Shaw (Independent) will be present. The ACT candidate has sent his apologies … apparently he’s off campaigning down country with the ACT Party roadshow.
Memo to ACT. If you are going to stand a candidate in an electorate then it is somewhat arrogant and thumbing your nose at voters to have your candidate campaign outside the electorate in favour of showing up where it counts.
No Minister 
Once heard of an ACT candidate who was asked what the party was proposing to do for the specific constituency and was a bit stumped for an answer. Which is kinda right because as they are opposed to local pork barrel politics means that any benefits from instituting wider ACT policy – including cutting back in the RMA and other regulations like Health & Safety in the workplace, or adopting the “log it, drill it, mine it” approach, or building motorways and highways will have a different immediate affect on regions. But I’m theory “lift all boats” in terms of overall national prosperity,
So really ACT are targeting those with a more cerebral “big picture” priority. Plus it is very hard for candidates who are not current MPs (electorate or list) who are unlikely or have no chance of winning and have to hold down a job to give up time for lots of events when the only ostensible purpose is to fly the flag for the party vote. That applies to any candidate or party. Especially in an large electorate like Northland. Mass media is the story nowadays unless it is a tight race to win the electorate- which doesn’t apply to ACT in Northland.
How high up the ACT party list is the candidate in question?
So Mark Cameron is a local dairy farmer who is 8th on the list which means ACT have to get a party vote of 6.67% for him to make it in:
https://www.act.org.nz/mark-cameron
Kimbo … this guy is number 8 on the ACT Party List (so he’s in with a chance). He lives in Northland and, your comments notwithstanding, he is cocking a snook at the electorate by not fronting up. No signage, no presence, nothing. The body politik deserves better than that.
He’s actually a very approachable person, who is presently campaigning for ACT on a nationwide tour.
@ unconfined
Yep, likely to be their agriculture spokesperson so arguably does better for his party in that role than trying to squeeze out another 20 votes for ACT in the Bay of Islands.
Plus, Vet, if you want to complain, how about the absence of National candidates in the Maori electorates? Yes, they would have no show of winning and they are the largest in the country to traverse, but unlike ACT, National does have pretensions if being the largest party in government.
Plus with minor parties, unless by some anomaly they win the seat like David Seymour in Epsom or Winston Peters in Tauranga or Northland, or Jim Anderson in Sydenham, they are primarily trying to get in on the list. Which means the party vote is primary. Hence the importance of participating in a high-profile national roadshow.
Yes, running in an electorate affords profile, which hopefully will translate into more party votes (electorate votes are incidental). So is up to the candidate and the party to try and work out which is the best way to leverage off any electorate profile, and how much is worth the time, money and effort.
But in general for small parties local profile is incidental and maybe counterproductive if they are needed elsewhere to harvest a likely better yield. Shaking hands in local electorates may have been the only game plan in the past. But then so was rugby forwards being expected to dribble the ball. Times and priorities and strategies change, even if “Disgruntled of Russell” does feel neglected.
Days of
Sounds like the author should be doing a bit of research on the MMP system, particularly if they are going to be hosting Meet the Candidates Events.
Further, 5 or more parties, each bringing along 10 supporters in the crowd , as well as admin staff, you are alread at 75 people before you start to include any persuadable people. At a maximum of 100 in a crowd due to covid restrictions, it is a waste of time for ANY party candidate to be attending meet the candidate events this election.
Kimbo … if you are opposed to the concept of Maori seats then choosing not to stand a candidate in them is a principled decision. And I don’t care if Cameron is approachable. You choose to stand in an electorate and you front up … end of story. I put him in the same sorta basket as the Jones Boy. Too lazy to establish an office in the electorate when he had the ability to do so … not prepared to do the hard yards and expects to win on the back of the PGF which has been slammed by the Auditor-General with Jones accused of operating a (slush) fund within a fund.
Yeah, nah, at least certainly not in the “establishing an office in the electorate”. The only people who usually do that – other than the sitting electorate MP – are list MPs designated by their party to make the electorate their patch. And they get paid taxpayer dollars to do so.
Nonsensical to expect an ACT candidate in Northland to have any other base other than his, of his electorate chairperson’s home or existing business premises. Including the party or the individual wasting valuable time and funds in such a low-vote-yield gesture.
And I doubt Collins is in any hurry to abolish Maori seats so it is a virtue signal policy and everyone knows it. So there are 7 electorates, so by the same measure you are tearing a strip off Cameron as lazy, same for National. Unless, they too have rightly concluded it is not worth the time, effort or resources, hence no candidates can be found to do the thankless task.
But not the first time I’ve disagreed with your talking points, so interesting to see how others assess priorities.
Given your opinion of ACT policy Veteran I would have thought you’d be very happy not to have him there. Anyway when a party is campaigning for the Party vote the local electorate isn’t necessarily “where it counts.”
Unkind and inaccurate to “put him in the same sorta basket” as Shane Jones. He is campaigning for the party vote. He is standing in the electorate for name recognition for the party. But some billboards would be useful, even if the evidence is that you’re better using the money elsewhere eg social media. Mark Cameron, whom you decline to name, is actually on the ACT bus. Bit difficult to be in two places at once unless you qualify for travel paid by the taxpayer.
Is like disproving a negative. Is it possible ACT and Cameron DO have signs throughout the far flung Northland electorate that have escaped the Vet’s steely gaze?! 😳😂
Max … my simple point is that Jones was too lazy to establish an office in the electorate where his Party pinned their hop[es on winning and remaining in parliament. Unkind on Cameron … no, this is a farming electorate and one might have thought their agriculture spokesman and candidate would at least front up. You know and I know the team on Party buses are bit players at best. The focus is always on the leader.
Kimbo … my jibe was directed primarily at Jones. When Peters won the seat National established an OOP office in the electorate and did the hard yards leading to Peters ousting in 2017. But candidates, all candidates, need to front up … end of story. Don’t understand your convoluted reasoning re National and the Maori seats. Yes, the Party vote is paramount and having a candidate makes sense if that is the sole determinate. But if your Party is committed to abolishing the Maori seats then you’re making a principled stand when you decline to stand candidates in those seats. National ain’t gonna win Mangere either but has always stood a candidate there.
Lindsay … I’m still trying to figure out much of ACT’s policy past the slogan bit.
But National don’t say that it is because of “principle” they don’t stand candidates in the Maori seats. The reason is…no one can be found to go the thankless task to rummage up, at most, a few hundred more party votes.
And you’ve ignored the economic reason why ACT (or likely the Greens, or any other minor party) don’t have an office in the electorate. You only do so if you are an electorate or sitting list MP with the tax payer dollars to do so. And even they likely still keep in touch with people on the ground primarily through that new tangled interwebby thingee. 😳😂
Kimbo … your 2.23. Point to one. I get to travel the electorate a fair bit and so far zip, zero, zilch. It is a truism that he who wins the Kerikeri/Paihia/Russell/Opua axis will probably win the electorate. I can certainly confirm that in this area there’s not one ACT sign. So perhaps ACT has written off Northland as a waste of time and money and have gone off to shoot where they think the ducks are … their privilege just like it’s my privilege to call them out on it.
A waste of time and money to what? Win the electorate?!
Well, no, no chance of ACT doing that. But party vote? Well, maybe as their agriculture spokesperson Cameron is getting in the ear of a bunch of industry heads, media, or giving key specialist advice on the spot to his leader as required in the heat of a national campaign…which will likely win more votes than are to be had at the Kororareka War Memorial Hall.
But yeah, call him out by all means, although your strategic and tactical advice looks about as valid as the French army generals on the eve of World War I insisting that troops with sufficient elan troops and wearing red britches was a suitable preparation when charging Germans firing machine guns! 😬
Kimbo … you just don’t get it do you. Your point would be valid if Cameron were a List candidate only. But he ain’t. He’s standing as an electorate candidate and, as such, voters have a right and expectation that he will front up.
p.s. There ain’t no War Memorial Hall at Kororareka … there ain’t not much at all.
Candidate meetings are largely a waste of time as an earlier commenter has mentioned.
As for ACT policies, they are available as per the link below.
https://www.act.org.nz/policies
No, I don’t think you get it.
Almost ALL list candidates also put their names down to run in their local or a nearby electorate, even though they have no expectations of winning. As has been pointed out to you by me and others, they do it to try and raise a bit of profile, where possible, for the PARTY vote. Which, as you’ve pointed out means they do, where possible, turn up at local meet-the-candidates meetings.
However, like decisions to spend a limited national campaign budget on billboards and where to place them if you do, the candidate can’t be everywhere at once. And in Cameron’s case it’s been decided his time and effort is better spent elsewhere.
Am astounded a former military man is struggling with the concept that a political campaign, like a war, is a fluid situation where limited finite resources need to be husbanded, and often redeployed according to dynamic circumstances.
Yes, the Kororareka Hall was an attempt to capture the essence of what Richard Nixon would typically label what was important in, “Spittoon, Nebraska” irrespective of the issue to make the point that in the grand scheme of things, whatever they thought in that locale had little relevance to national politics. And ACT have decided the same.
I’d like to comment if I may as the act Candidate and rural spokesperson for the party.
Yes I did extend my apologies last minute.
This event was previously rescheduled and I had every intention of attending
Sadly I had to be back on my operational dairy farm but for one day ,this since my return from Waitomo yesterday.
I appreciate this may appear something of an excuse however I have another event tomorrow and the day after I resume the National bus tour in the South Island on behalf Act seeking party votes for the act party. I hope this brings clarity to the concerns of those at the Duke of Marlborough
Mark … thank you for your comment. I stand by my contention that if you offer yourself as an electorate candidate then it is incumbent on you to attend candidate meetings. Perhaps I’m old fashioned and yes MMP changes the dynamic a little but the 200 people who attended the two meetings tonight were disappointed that you weren’t there to speak on your vision for Northland and answer questions. Other parties who, like ACT, aren’t in the running for the seat were there to argue their case for the Party vote. ACT needed to be there.
Fascinating Shane Jones telling the meeting he was closet right wing … a real chameleon is ‘our’ Shane always on the lookout for the ‘Main Chance’. Next time round one would not be surprised were he to try and stand for ACT completing his metamorphosis. But I suspect ACT would say thank you but no thank you.
I think this thread has done its dash.
Very unwise to post on the internet you had a gathering of more than 100 people at the moment. We are still under Level 2.
Literally no one has backed you up Vet, maybe you need to reassess whether your thoughts are reasonable or not.
Whats illegal about that bruh?
State The Obvious
The Vet does not engage in groupthink in which you and your friends take a vote on what is right or wrong and the majority vote defines what is right. That is the way of chardonnay swilling latté sipping socialists.
State the Obvious … read my comment idiot, read my comment. There were TWO meetings held half an hour apart each restricted to 100 rigidly enforced. As for the rest and I don’t need people to back me up in stating the obvious that candidates are expected to attend candidate meetings. And, to a degree, the ACT candidate acknowledged that in his post.
Yeah, nah, candidate meetings are preloaded with party faithful, not potential voters looking for information.