Rural and provincial New Zealand have given John Key and National a thumping endorsement in 2001
So the votes have been counted and we know – or at least, we’re well on the way – to knowing what shape our new Government is going to take.
It was always going to be a fairly safe bet that the booths in rural New Zealand will have mostly punted for Prime Minister John Key and the National Party. And the results show – as in the rest of New Zealand – they certainly did.
It’s been said that the National vote is not so much counted in rural New Zealand – but weighed! This was certainly the case this year in rural heartland seats such as Helensville; Whangaeri; New Plymouth; Waitaki; Rangitata; Rangetiki; Clutha Southland and Port Waikato – to name a few – where the National party vote and candidates all came first by a country mile and daylight came a poor second. a long way back
However, much of this rural support for National is probably more by default than desire.
Some rural votes did go to ACT – most likely in support of former head Fed and its agriculture spokesman Don Nicolson. However, that party’s ugly struggles throughout the campaign will have scared many off.
There were a couple of pockets of organic-supporting, hippy types in the country who went Green. And even some strong rural support – more than likely those farmers plagued with early stages of senile dementia – for NZ First and its Lazarus-like leader Winston Peters.
It was also pretty safe to assume that both the Maori and Mana parties will not have garnered too much support in the rural hinterland – save for Northland and the east coast of the North Island.
Meanwhile, Labour’s electoral drubbing in 2011 was never more pronounced than in rural and provincial New Zealand. It copped an absolute pasting in the countryside. The party’s ever-so tenuous advances for the farming/rural sector vote probably died about the same time it released its election manifesto.
The prospect of being lumped with higher taxes, having agriculture dumped into an ETS, landed with a new capital gains tax; as well as commercial charges for irrigation and extending working for families for beneficiaries will have been an anathema to most in the rural heartland.
National made a sensible decision by ruling that agricultural emissions will only be included in an ETS when and if practical technologies are available to enable our farmers to reduce their emissions and more progress is made by our trading partners to reduce their agricultural emissions.
It was somewhat disingenuous of both Labour and the Green Party to claim that current high export commodity prices are proof that farmers can afford to pay any costs imposed by agriculture’s introduction into an ETS. The fickle nature of commodity markets means prices are likely to drop sooner rather than later. You can be assured a Labour/Green government would not offer ETS rebates to farmers if meat and dairy prices suddenly took a dive
National will have also strengthened its rural support with its proposal to pump $400 million into boosting on farm-water storage and irrigation.
Not surprisingly, the idea was shot down by its political opponents. But, again, the rationale for this opposition seemed more based on ideology than any sound policy reasons.
Much of this opposition stemmed from the idea of funding for these schemes coming from the Future Investment Fund – which will use the proceeds from National’s part asset sales proposal. While Labour and the Greens and NZ First may have problems with where this funding is coming from; surely even they can’t argue with the concept of creating a more reliable source of water for farmers will in turn mean higher productivity and income for the nation – in turn leading to more tax and jobs!
Reliable water means growth – both for our economy and the environment. All political parties – no matter if they are left, right or just plain bonkers – should have been supporting such a plan.
Those are just a couple of reasons why the countryside stayed true-blue this election!