About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

December 19, 2013 2:00pm by David Farrar

Final CIR results

The final results are here.

Not Vote 54.93%
Vote No 30.30%
Vote Yes 14.59%
Informal Votes 0.14%
Invalid Votes 0.05%

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment32

NZ Politics
Asset Sales
referendum

Comments (32)

Login to comment or vote

Mobile Michael

Yawn.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:06pm
ciaron

so… what was the CBF vote?
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:13pm
Graeme Edgeler

so… what was the CBF vote?

It’s right there, in the first line of the results that DPF provides.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:25pm
Tom Jackson

I don’t see the “not vote” on the linked page… because it doesn’t matter.

Don’t throw your toys out of the pram. Your side lost.
2 12
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:26pm
ciaron

It’s right there, in the first line of the results that DPF provides.

So it is. Guess I just CBF looking that hard…
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:29pm
Graeme Edgeler

I don’t see the “not vote” on the linked page… because it doesn’t matter.

It’s pretty clearly there:

Voter turnout is 45.07%. Turnout is calculated by taking the total votes cast of 1,368,925 (being total
valid and invalid votes) as a percentage of the total number of voters enrolled as at 21 November 2013 (3,037,405).
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:37pm
Tom Jackson

It’s pretty clearly there:

No. They have the percentage that turned out, not the percentage that didn’t turn out.

David calculated the latter himself and put it at the top of his post no doubt because he’s experiencing severe butthurt over the result (quite why I cannot fathom, since it’s nothing more than a popularity contest).

The referendum told us nothing we already didn’t know in that the majority of people don’t like the sale of assets for ideological reasons. This should not be surprising because it’s common sense.
1 11
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:45pm
YesWeDid

There is nothing to suggest that the people who didn’t vote felt any differently to the people who did vote.

In fact every political opinion poll samples something like 0.03% of the population and uses that to say how the whole population would vote.

Here’s an opinion poll that samples 45.07% of the population, I think the margin of error in extrapolating this out to the whole population would be very, very small.
1 8
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:48pm
Cunningham

Tom Jackson (1,922 comments) says:

“Don’t throw your toys out of the pram. Your side lost.”

No they won at the last election which Labour called a referendum on asset sales. That was the one to win and Labour got their ass’s handed to them! Most people see this for what it is – a complete waste of time and money.
8 1
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:51pm
rangitoto

@Yeswedid. A poll at least tries to be a random sample whereas this sort of vote – many didn’t vote because it was a pointless exercise. No government has ever taken any notice of CIR’s let alone a GIR.
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:51pm
Cunningham

Tom Jackson (1,922 comments) says:

“The referendum told us nothing we already didn’t know in that the majority of people don’t like the sale of assets for ideological reasons. This should not be surprising because it’s common sense.”

OK then why did those fuckwits waste 9 million dollars of taxpayer money then? Oh that’s right because they were bitter and embarassed at how poorly they did in the last election.
9 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 2:54pm
eszett

Tom Jackson (1,922 comments) says:
December 19th, 2013 at 2:45 pm

It’s pretty clearly there:

No. They have the percentage that turned out, not the percentage that didn’t turn out.
David calculated the latter himself.

Sorry, but now you are just being a childish smartass.
Do you think he used a super-secret formula?
6 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 3:15pm
eszett

The referendum told us nothing we already didn’t know in that the majority of people don’t like the sale of assets for ideological reasons.

The majority of the people don’t care one way or the other enough to vote.
5 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 3:18pm
RightNow

Less than 1/3 of eligible voters said they are against the partial asset sales.
That’s all she wrote. The fat lady has sung. Elvis has left the building. Haters gonna hate, crybabies gonna cry. The rest of us have shopping to do.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 3:22pm
RightNow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 3:25pm
Kleva Kiwi

The result is very telling. Only 30% of the voting population care enough to actually bother to vote.
Its also a logical conclusion that the 55% who did not vote represent realist who know that this CIR was a joke from the get go and will change nothing, nor mean anything. There is good argument to note that the people who did not turn out either a) do no care or b) support the governments actions.

The CIF was a terrible waste of money to begin with.
– It was not a citizens referendum, but a political stunt pushed by Labour and the Greens
– The questions where misleading and unrepresentative of the scenario. Where was the “support more than 49% sold/less than 49%” etc, or the “sell all government run business/buy more business” etc. Completely loaded CIF as per usual.
– The mandate was given to the government last election WHERE THEY WON after Labour declared the election was a referendum on the sales program!

Tom Jackson (1,922 comments) says:

“Don’t throw your toys out of the pram. Your side lost.”

Correction, your side lost at the last election!
6 1
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 3:27pm
Nick R

I love all the posts about how the CIR was a waste of money from people who support the asset sales policy. What has that cost? Quite a lot more than the referendum.

Personally I am surprised the turnout was as high as it was. People voted despite being told very clearly by the Govt that the referendum would not affect the asset sales.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 4:08pm
Judith

Does anyone have the last General Election figures in the same format? It would be interesting to see the percentage of the voting population that didn’t vote, and those that voted for the various parties.
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 4:38pm
Judith

@ Nick R (399 comments) says:
December 19th, 2013 at 4:08 pm

I know many people that decided not to vote because JK said he would not be acting on it anyway. Of course there are those that say it people were against the sales they would have got out there and voted to show JK he was wrong, but that argument can go both ways, JK supporters could have ‘got out there and voted’ to show that JK was right!.

Personally I think the results were indicative of other surveys, and are a pretty good indication of those for and against the sales.
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 4:40pm
Judith

@ RightNow (5,977 comments) says:
December 19th, 2013 at 3:22 pm

Really? So based on that logic, what percentage of the voters in the last general election vote AGAINST National and JK being Prime Minister or are we not allowed to apply your logic to that question? The sorts of arguments you are using can work both ways and sometimes come back to bite you!
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 4:42pm
RightNow

“So based on that logic, what percentage of the voters in the last general election vote AGAINST National and JK being Prime Minister”
About 34% Judith (approx 1 million out of 3 million), applying the same logic.
Care to try and trip me up dreary? I’ve kept my powder dry for your next question 🙂
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 5:22pm
RightNow

Judith, this I think will be the stats you’re after:
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2011/partystatus.html

It doesn’t show how many didn’t vote, but the total electoral roll is about 3 million.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 5:25pm
RightNow

Actually total electors on rolls (combined) was 3070847
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2011/e9/html/e9_part9_1.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 5:28pm
RRM

The referendum told us nothing we already didn’t know in that the majority of people don’t like the sale of assets for ideological reasons.

There are four million New Zealanders, about 75% are enrolled voters, about 45% of them bothered to vote onthis, and 67% of 45% of 75% said they want something… that is not a majority, and to say it is a majority is being creative with the truth even by a politician’s standards.

But then, that’s the problem with labour’s whole approach to this issue.

It has been couched in weasel words since even before the 2011 election… when NO-ONE in the real world was talking about asset sales, until the Labour party decided it was the pressing issue of our times and something they could campaign on.

See also: The Clark Govt’s response to the smacking referendum.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 5:47pm
Rick Rowling

YesWeDid (975 comments) says:

There is nothing to suggest that the people who didn’t vote felt any differently to the people who did vote.

Wrong – people who didn’t bother to vote obviously felt less strongly about it than people who did.

Here’s an opinion poll that samples 45.07% of the population, I think the margin of error in extrapolating this out to the whole population would be very, very small.

Misleading. The CIR is NOT a valid opinion poll because it is self-selecting, and there was a major marketing effort towards getting response for the “no” vote, with no corresponding effort for the “yes” vote. Add to that the much discussed problems with the wording of the question, and this, like all previous CIRs will rightly be ignored by the government of the day.

Especially so seeing as the margin on this CIR was much less than most (all?) of the others.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 6:05pm
ross69

There is good argument to note that the people who did not turn out either a) do no care or b) support the governments actions.

That is the sort of braindead argument put for forward by a Tory. The most likely scenario is c) people who didn’t vote were opposed to asset sales and realised, if they didn’t vote, it would make little difference to the outcome. They were right.
0 5
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 6:27pm
ross69

I do find it ironic that those whining about the turnout have forgotten that only a third of voters voted for National in 2011.
0 5
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 6:29pm
BlairM

The Right needs to wake up and take notice of this result, though it confirms what we already know: The public do not like publicly owned assets sold off when there is nothing in it for them personally. It’s nothing short of stealing.

I stand by what I said here: http://blairmulholland.wordpress.com/2012/08/01/stop-these-left-wing-asset-sales/

What has happened is that the Right has taken a very good principle – that governments should hold no interest in commercial enterprise – and turned it into a very bad idea – that governments should simply sell off those assets already paid for by the sweat and blood of taxpayers, then instead of distributing the proceeds, throw them into the gaping maw of the consolidated fund. It’s become a blind ideological goal that ends up with people feeling (rightly in my opinion) that they have been ripped off.

You can’t laugh off or fudge this result. It is very real and reflects real public sentiment. Key and National are in government in spite of this policy, not because of it. They spent political capital on this timid nonsense, and I pray that they are not caught short when it’s time to pay up next year.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 6:38pm
YesWeDid

@Rick Rowling and others.

In February 2012 3 News published a poll that had 62% against asset sales and 35% for asset sales with 3.5% undecided, this is very similar to the CIR result.

So to suggest that the 54% who didn’t vote in the CIR are either don’t care or support the sales is really just ignorant or wishful thinking.
0 3
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 8:10pm
YesWeDid

RPM – ‘The Clark Govt’s response to the smacking referendum’.

Do people really need reminding that John Key was the PM when the smacking referendum took place? The smacking referendum was in August 2009, Key won the November 2008 election.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 8:23pm
RightNow

“So to suggest that the 54% who didn’t vote in the CIR are either don’t care or…”

I actually do believe there really are that many people in NZ who just don’t give a shit either way. Call them undecideds if it helps you sleep better.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 19, 2013 8:57pm
RRM

BlairM – that is an extremely good point. One of very few things I’ve read on here that I really wish I could vote up more than once!

Yes We Did – I stand corrected then.
I must have been thinking of all the left political commentators who insisted the result of the smacking CIR was “wrong” and should be ignored… many of whom are doubtless now demanding Key heed the “result” of this referendum! 😉
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
December 20, 2013 1:14pm

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« A new line up for Seven Sharp

Dom Post on living wage »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Top Stories

General Debate 02 November 2024
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply
Keep them away from GST
You can target men's issues, without it being at the expense of women
Save Kiwis, not feathers
General Debate 01 November 2024
Bezos on endorsements
Meet a peace activist
ERO on chronically absent students
Has Biden lost Harris the election?

Recent Posts

You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women 2 November 2024
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply 2 November 2024
General Debate 02 November 2024 2 November 2024
Keep them away from GST 2 November 2024
Save Kiwis, not feathers 1 November 2024
Bezos on endorsements 1 November 2024
Meet a peace activist 1 November 2024
General Debate 01 November 2024 1 November 2024
ERO on chronically absent students 1 November 2024
No we shouldn’t ban Candace Owens 31 October 2024
Has Biden lost Harris the election? 31 October 2024
C&R win again 31 October 2024

Recent Comments

Keep them away from GST
Fentex
Guest Post: Thoughts on New Zealands Power Supply
Fentex
Keep them away from GST
fredonas
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
NZer In Exile
General Debate 02 November 2024
Steve Todd
General Debate 02 November 2024
Ghost
General Debate 02 November 2024
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
alwyn.a
Keep them away from GST
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
NZer In Exile
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
Rumblestrip
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin
You can target men’s issues, without it being at the expense of women
RichardX
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin
General Debate 02 November 2024
G the giant from Dunedin

Links

"The paradox of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is that the phrase is used only by the very people who are suffering from it."
Not PC
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Dumpster Fire: White House Press Office Faced Internal Criticism Over the Rewriting of President Biden’s Garbage Comments
Utopia
SEEMS HOW EXPENSIVE DOES NOT MATTER.
No Minister
Some sporting reflections
Point of Order
American Election Predictions: It’s Apocalypse in the USA
The Daily Blog
Open mike 02/11/2024
The Standard
The High Court says "Land Back"
No Right Turn
Why you should reject the term “Christian nationalism”
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
MILLION DOLLAR REWARD
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 7
Stats Chat
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d