When I logged off Facebook yesterday, having failed yet again to better Mr Strange Land’s solo Scramble score (he has a top score of 265, and my top score is, alas, 261), Facebook told me:
So I did. ‘Though not in the American election, but in the New Zealand one, which is this Saturday (8 November). I packed the strangelings into the car, and we headed off down to the South Australian State Electoral Office, which is handling overseas votes for New Zealanders in Adelaide. I could have downloaded ballot papers over the net, and faxed or posted them back to New Zealand, but I thought it would be much better to go and vote in person, accompanied by my children.
When we got there, one of the officers there took us all into a small office, and got out her list of election papers. We went through the usual confusion about Karori and Karioi, and without any further fuss, she gave me the ballot papers for Wellington Central. I filled out the ‘special votes’ envelope, and then, made my two ticks on the ballot paper. In the meantime, the girls flibbertigibbeted around the room, looking at the displays about suffrage in South Australia, and asking endless questions about why I was voting, and why it was important, and why couldn’t they vote too, and of course the biggie: “Who are you voting for, Mum?”
It has been a difficult vote for me to cast, this time around. For reasons, I can’t vote for John Key and the National Party, and for more reasons, I feel that I can no longer vote for the Labour Party. So what to do?
My electorate vote was easy – a tick for Grant Robertson, the Labour candidate, in Wellington Central. I have it on good authority (his own) that Mr Strange Land intends to vote for resurrected Act-man and now National Party candidate, Stephen Franks. However, he thinks that Robertson will take the seat easily, given that turkeys would bring Christmas forward before the public servants in Wellington Central vote for Franks. Miss Ten pointed out that our votes would cancel each other out, and indeed, from time to time we have suggested that we just shouldn’t bother voting, given our tendencies towards balance. However I am fairly sure that even if we signed a blood pact not to vote, each of us would still find time to sneak off to the polls and cast our votes.
But the party vote was a different matter. In the end, I ticked the Maori Party, who along with the Greens have retained at least some integrity of purpose and action.
Mission accomplished. Votes cast, strangelings educated, civic duty done. And now, we wait, for Saturday, and the results.
In the meantime, Facebook has changed its message, presumably after someone pointed out that contra Locke, all the world is not America. This is what I saw this morning, after I logged out following yet another futile attempt to fix that anomaly in the Scramble scores.
Good for you! Enfranchised and doing it
I’ve been out of NZ so long I no longer vote. I don’t have a residential qualification any more, as I’ve sold my house in Palmerston North. Also, I feel that I am so out of touch that I can’t really make any fair assessment of the issues any more.
Yes… sooner or later there will be a point where I no longer feel able to vote, even if I have fulfilled the strict requirements. At present we are only 10 months out of NZ, and we still feel that our stay here is conditional – it has yet to become a permanent move (in our emotional commitment, that is). I guess when it does we will stop voting in the NZ elections.
mmm, no one asked me to Vote this time. I can’t remember how I did it last time but there was a lot of faxing going on. But I think I don’t qualify any more either, cause I haven’t lived in Karori for over 5 years now so it seems a little ridiculous.
I have to say I don’t feel very happy about people who don’t live here voting
We who do live here then have to put up with the consquences of your decsions, where is the fairness in that
I am really thinking of people living the good life in the UK voting Green to ease their consciences
On the other hand I have seriously thought of my party vote going to Maori. If they would go with the party that got the majority of the vote they would definitly get it, of course they are not saying that
I see your point, rayinnz. In my defence, it’s not clear yet that this is a permanent move. We have a great propensity to move (12 times in 18 years of wedded bliss, and 8 of those moves between towns / cities / countries), so I wouldn’t be laying any bets on us staying in Australia. I wouldn’t be laying any bets on us going back to NZ either. It’s all still very much a work in progress, which means that I still care very much about the government of NZ.
Besides, I like voting.
Yeah, I love voting too
Long, light evenings of my childhood waiting for the results after my parents had got specialy dressed up to vote.
I got my first vote just after my 20th birthday(they probably changed the law just for me!!)
That was in the Poolburn School
Since then I have voted for most of the parties available depending on my and the countries mood
I had the luck to be in a bell wether electorate under FFP where my and a couple of hundred other voters changed governments
So I have always been a swinging voter even if it no longer counts as much
Yes I do like to vote
I am struggling with the voting thing especially as I currently live in Auckland central. I know I should be voting but just don’t know for which party/candidate.
I find myself unexpectedly in Epsom electorate and a little conflicted…poets don’t vote right.
Slightly off-topic, but .. did you catch the third Clark/Key debate last night, Deborah? It must have gladdened your heart to hear both of them declare themselves to be non-religious – although as I recall the more timid term ‘agnostic’ was used rather than good robust atheism. I’m just reading the bit in ‘The God Delusion’ where Dawkins describes the treatment that atheists get in public life in the US. Yet another reason to be glad to be a Kiwi. I’d love to hear your views on The God Delusion.
Rayinnz:
They’re called citizens and do actually have to meet certain conditions — which, sorry, I’m too damn tired to look up but they do exist.
I don’t want to be disenfranchising citizens without a damn good reason, because the right to vote is (in my view) a fundamental expression of the notion that government is the servant of the people, not their master.
And I’d respectfully suggest that some expats I know are a damn sight better informed, engaged and thoughtful on matters at home than many residents. We’re well past the days when the only news expats in London would get of home were letters, or a weeks old newspaper.
Deborah – I admire you for being so principled – it’s not easy to vote against a party you’ve previously supported .
So, Craig, should citizens be disenfranchised after three years away from NZ (when you lose the right to vote here?). I’m inclined to think not. A branch of my family has lived in Australia for over a decade now, and they don’t get to vote either here or there, as they haven’t taken out citizenship there).
So, Craig, should citizens be disenfranchised after three years away from NZ (when you lose the right to vote here?). I’m inclined to think not.
For once, we’re in perfect harmony.
I’m sure there are any number of electoral law nerds who could explain the perfectly sensible reason why this is so, but I still need convincing.
Slightly off-topic, but .. did you catch the third Clark/Key debate last night, Deborah? It must have gladdened your heart to hear both of them declare themselves to be non-religious – although as I recall the more timid term ‘agnostic’ was used rather than good robust atheism.
Well, I can’t speak for Ms. D., but I wish one or both of them had told Sainsbury to MYOFB because even asking that question really pissed me off.
Here’s how I roll: I’m a Catholic, but unless I’m very much mistaken you don’t have to meet a religious qualification to be in Parliament. And your citizenship is not conditional on where — or even if — you worship.
I thought it was a lame little ‘gotcha!’ attempt, and while both of them handled it well they shouldn’t have dignified it with a response at all.
‘For once’..?
You’re right about the religion question in the debate – it is, and should be, irrelevant to being an elected official. But in the US it most definitely isn’t irrelevant. It would probably have been more radical to elect an atheist than a black man.
I just wish that one of them had the courage to say they were atheist, rather than flabbing around with “agnostic.”
But yes, it is irrelevant.
ReThe God Delusion – I enjoyed reading it enormously, but it didn’t shake up my thinking at all, mostly because I agree with Dawkins. But I must get around to re-reading it.
Thanks Deborah. I’m re-reading the God Delusion, as it’s our current book group project. I’ll have to say that although I agree with Dawkins and have loved his other books, I thought this one was not that successful in its stated aim of swaying fence-sitters towards atheism. I thought his attempts to use logic to prove/disprove the existence of a god were more or less pointless and perhaps even a little amateurish from a philosophical point of view. I particularly loved ‘The Ancestors Tale’ for explaining the beauty, power and richness of our evolutionary heritage, and I think that this approach is probably more successful in winning converts. A charm offensive, if you like..
Heh, I thought of Deborah too when I was watching that part of the debate!
Great to hear your tale of voting overseas and the interest your daughters took. Wriggly has already been in a polling booth, while his father cast his early vote, but tomorrow will be his first election day and I’ll take him to vote with me. This is going to sound very silly but I’ll try not to cry.
Did anyone see the abortion question in that debate? I only caught the end of Clark saying it was a decision between a woman and her doctor. I struggle to get the TV3 podcast thingies to work even when I have the supreme motivation of watching my child on telly for the first time.
But in the US it most definitely isn’t irrelevant. It would probably have been more radical to elect an atheist than a black man.
But this isn’t the United States, and I’m still unsure what Sainsbury’s rationale was except to try and ‘sex up’ a rather dull debate.
And it would have been so nice if either Clark or Key has memorised this:
“I don’t see how we can have a separation of church and state in this government if you have to pass a religious test to get in this government. And I want to warn everyone in the press and all the voters out there if you demand expressions of religious faith from politicians, you are just begging to be lied to. They won’t all lie to you but a lot of them will. And it will be the easiest lie they ever had to tell to get your votes. So, every day until the end of this campaign, I’ll answer any question anyone has on government, But if you have a question on religion, please go to church.
What a shame Arnold Vinick (R – CA) doesn’t exist.
It’ll be interesting how the specials impact the final tally in Wellington Central. I’m pretty sure they’ll not change the result. Grant’s a friend, so I’ll not pretend to be objective. His win should sees the start of what I expect will be a stellar career.