Why the Cross-benches suddenly got very popular this election


This election the power is in the cross benches.

NZF, TOP, the Māori Party and now ACT have all stated they will sit on the cross benches rather than join a Government.

In NZ, all a Party needs to form the Government is a segment to the Governor General that the can get a majority vote for their budget.

That’s it.

Previously with MMP most smaller parties become part of the Government and get tripped up by the collective responsibility obligations of Cabinet and tend to get blamed for decisions while gaining little in wins.

What we are seeing this election is smaller parties choosing the cross benches and instead off being bound by majority decisions, will wait for the legislation to come to them and then cherry pick what they want.

We haven’t seen that type of MMP before, but it’s very much how MMP works overseas.

Take the example of a Labour led minority Government with supply and confidence with the Māori Party.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

The Māori Party would demand concessions from the Labour led minority Government in exchange for their supply and confidence vote and then move to the cross benches on all other policy.

If the Māori Party make demands on legislation that the Labour led minority Government felt was too extreme, that leaves the Labour led minority Government to go to National to get the votes instead, so there is a built in hand break to stop policy that is too extreme.

Seeing as Labour and National vote together 70% of the time, this isn’t much of an issue.

NZers have had a very FPP MMP for 30 years, this election looks to splinter the MMP spectrum and deliver us a very different style of democracy.

I think that would be a far better outcome.


Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media



  1. Well if you rely on Parliamentary parties manoeuvres for your world view and the country to function that is one thing.

    It seems quite likely now after the first rounds of COVID that Direct Action and Community Organising will be the defining model for the next few years. What’s that? the dirty tories and Actoids say…well look in the mirror…what are Groundswell, conspiracy 5G/Antivax fear movements, online abuse campaigns and the Parliament precinct occupation but Direct Action?

    What is needed now is left focused Direct Action and Organising.

  2. I find ideology to be absurd. I think feminism has gone further from being anti male to anti female. When we think about feminist thinking you might think about the right to vote and equal opportunity but at the very core of feminist ideology is the idea that being a mother is oppression and that once they’re liberated from baby making factories then they will take there rightful place as CEOs and open- side -flankers in the Rugby Championship.

    The Standard is just the tip of the iceberg because most people don’t understand it. Feminist and Marxism go together like Netflix and chill. The standard is full of reasons why the introduction of private property is the reason woman are subordinate to there husband’s because as we all know woman were the ones who wore the pants, fought off the barbarians and were the frontline warriors in battle. And beginning with weka also believe that woman’s economic oppression begins with in the family home the actual misconception being that throughout history men ploughing fields and manning the front lines weren’t actually doing it to feed there families the misconception is they were doing it to oppress woman. The only way to proceed Weka contends is by dismantling capitalism there by destroying the nuclear family so that woman can be released from there shackles and play in the Rugby championship.

    There came a point when I realised that I was at war with people on the standard. What was I fighting against and what was the nature of the beast and well one of them was powerdown and doughnut economics, permaculture and Net Zero. These are virtuous terms for cutting immisions and killing all the cows. There are ways of fixing poverty that are far more effective at reducing immisions than simply saying to 16 year old boys that his dream of owning a 300 horsepower car by age 16 is to good for him. And wekas response is we have to do even more stupid virtue signals faster to get to net Zero, where the Zero in Wekas is, is a dream. Meaning Zero for everyone one else. Wekas solution being unsustainable non production. That’s her solutions. No meat, no cars because the grid won’t take all the charging station. No solar because that uses precious mining technology and that’s far to macho for the workforce.

    So how about we have the worst of both worlds weka says “we” have to get used to less, lower standards of living and by “we” Weka means “you, not “her.” Because all the people getting everyone used to lower standards of living will be cruising around in the Epson tractors (Electric cars) deciding how to do that while eating vegan icecream am impossible steaks. I don’t think it’s a theory, I think that Weka is very open in her collaboration.

    So, Net Zero can not be to takeaway away owning an automobile while giving freedoms to elites, the freedom to get on a plane, the freedom to eat meat. She wants you to put insects in your diet the interesting thing is her “disability” means she can’t eat insects. What could go wrong!

    No. Net Zero to me means that if you make things so expensive that no one poor can afford it then you don’t get to govern.

    • I had to go back to check the subject of the post. What has feminism got to do with it?
      To reply to the diversion – how about women as just fellow people with differences a million miles from rendering the sexes opposite from each other.

      As to the second deviation, I agree. If those pushing for zero-carbon don’t push even harder for the interests of the working class, the working class will break the movement. Don’t think we won’t and don’t imagine this hasn’t already begun.

      Play electric cars (and other virtue signals) all they like – and with zero positive effect outside of their own imagined images – But – the PMC and its wannabes will not push the working class (further) under the bus.

      The middle class is unbelievably obtuse and it will take a while for the truth to pentetrate the arrogance of what they imagine they know, but they will learn.

      • You sound as intelligent as Weka and Incognito over at the standard. New Zealand culture is turning sour. Not as overripe as Americas old age influence on the president but sour and bitterness.

        Having men in woman’s bathrooms has had a huge effect on woman’s confidence and dignity particularly with the fact that trans woman are New Zealanders of the year and trans woman competitors in Miss World New Zealand and in sports.

        Accomplished and influential woman in business, entertainment, media seem unwilling or unable to define what a woman is, or say anything about woman that can be taken as a critique of transhumans. These apostles of second wave feminism have finally found a group of men that they can submit to.

  3. Maybe they can have a Grand Coalition. Then the ‘Tory wets’ and ‘Labour dries’ could push through all the unpopular ‘pro-globalisation’ policies, with no chance that it gets voted down.

    (e.g. War with China/Russia, C.B.D.C., banning cash/gold/Bitcoin [the ‘Going Direct’ policy], negative interest rates, programmable currency, compulsory electronic national I.D. card, carbon allowances, Dutch-style farm closures, mine closures, banning short-haul flights, taxes on cars and meat, blocking off streets…)

    • Never seen a grand coalition that worked. The problem really is that the suits are not in government because they believe in the country and want to do good, they are there as a nice to have on their CV when they go shopping for job that comes with company shares and golden parachutes.

  4. I am with you on that.
    It will be interesting how this approach will affect voter preference.

    Listened to TOP this morning.
    Their “wealth tax” is starting to take shape. I expect labour or national may well steal from them. But it is great news that this election will be about rebalancing tax.

    Society, for once, may well turn out to be the winner and who can argue against that.

    • What, Act know what?…

      “National for a thriving New Zealand economy and all the benefits that bringe to everyone.”

      What’s this “bringe” you talk about Bob, remember these are your profound words?

      • Silly boy,cross benches.
        Well an interesting word “bringe” it results when you accidentally hit e after spelling bring.I know much too complicated for you Countryboy to have worked that out,but you are showing slight improvement.

  5. ” In NZ, all a Party needs to form the Government is a segment to the Governor General that the can get a majority vote for their budget. ”

    That’s it.

    Not entirely Bomber.

    They have to convince the Governor General they have secure confidence and supply which is of course the budget needs the confidence of the house to pass when it is presented usually after a governments trem begins.

    The role of Governor-General is to see where the confidence of the House lies, so that a government can be appointed. In making this determination I will look for both “quantity” and “clarity” in the public statements made by the party leaders. “Quantity” refers to a government being able to show it will have enough votes to succeed in a vote of confidence in the House. “Clarity” means clear and public statements by the party leaders about their intentions on matters of confidence.

    That is why any negotiations after the vote is pivotal to ensuring stable and effective government after the general election.

    Its been a long time since a government has been bought down on a confidence vote in the NZ parliament unlike in the U.K in 1979 when the Labour government lost a confidence vote by one over devolution in Scotland which ushered in Margaret Thatcher and her neo liberal reforming Conservative government in March 1979.

    ” Once it is clear who has the confidence of the House and can therefore form a new government, the Governor-General appoints the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister recommends the appointment of other Ministers, and a ceremony is held to formally establish the new government.

    ” The Governor-General summons the new Parliament on the advice of the newly appointed Prime Minister, and the new government has the opportunity to show that it has the confidence of the House ”

    The cross benches and who is sitting on them will dictate the direction of legislation and more importantly the confidence when its required in the house to maintain the governing arrangement.

  6. For improved government to work with minor parties holding the balance of power you would assume major party policy decisions in certain areas are all shit, and minor party decisions are all good. Of course Minor parties have policies that for the most part only are judged in our minds where as the major parties succeed or fail on the quality and practicability of their policies. A case scenario might be a good government policy on anything, being held to ransom unless an impractical minor party policy becomes law. IMO some good may come of this situation but there is even more likelihood of a paralysed government getting nothing done. This Labour coalition is doing this to itself trying to implement it’s own ideas even without interference of the passive green party.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.