As the Australian Labor Party prepares to be the first political party in Australia to allow its membership to directly elect its leader, the NZ Labour Party has just chosen its new leader: its first elected directly using a similar model to the ALP.
David Cunliffe won the race on primary votes in a three-way race, thanks to a very strong vote amongst the members and affiliated unions, despite winning only a third of MPs on primary votes and just short of 50% of the caucus vote on a two-candidate basis.
The NZ Labour model gives 40% of the vote to members of the party and 40% of MPs (the party’s caucus), with the other 20% going to affiliated unions. Unlike in the UK, those unions mostly cast their votes by decision of their delegates to the Labour conference, with only one union delegating the decision to a vote of its membership. The main difference between this model and the Australian model is that the ALP gives no say to unions, with the other two parts of the vote increased to 50% each.
David Cunliffe won overwhelming majorities amongst the members and the unions. He only won 11 out of 34 MPs, with Robertson winning 16 and Jones winning 7.
This was enough to give him 51.15% of the overall vote, and won him the race.
| Primary votes |
Members |
Caucus |
Unions |
Overall |
| David Cunliffe |
60.14% |
32.35% |
70.77% |
51.15% |
| Shane Jones |
13.15% |
20.59% |
11.92% |
15.88% |
| Grant Robertson |
26.71% |
47.06% |
17.30% |
32.97% |
While it wasn’t strictly necessary for the result, we also know about the vote after Shane Jones was excluded. Cunliffe even bigger landslides amongst party members and affiliated unions, and almost came back in the vote amongst MPs. If one more MP had voted for Cunliffe instead of Robertson, there would have been a tie.
| Two-candidate-preferred |
Members |
Caucus |
Unions |
Overall |
| David Cunliffe |
67.79% |
47.06% |
78.01% |
61.54% |
| Grant Robertson |
32.21% |
52.94% |
21.99% |
38.46% |
I haven’t been able to find any information on how the union vote was broken down (ie. how many votes each union holds, how they were cast), or the raw numbers of members who voted (and whether all of the Jones voters expressed a preference between Cunliffe and Robertson).
What’s the lesson for Australia? It shows a possible scenario for a candidate with solid caucus support, but not a majority, to win with members’ support. There is speculation that such a path could be the path to victory for Anthony Albanese. Under the Australian system, Cunliffe would have led with 47% on primary votes but still won a solid victory after preferences. The unions gave him a primary vote victory, but wasn’t necessary for him to beat Robertson.
It also shows how a membership ballot can be far more decisive than a ballot of MPs.
Like Australian Labor over the last decade, NZ Labour has recently been going through conflict between groupings supportive of different party leaders. David Shearer, the outgoing leader, defeated Cunliffe in 2011, and Robertson is considered closer to Shearer. Clearly the 2011 result wasn’t decisive, and Shearer has failed to last until the next election in a similar way to what we have seen in the past with Australian opposition leaders.
If the caucus were the only ones to vote, Robertson would have won – but very narrowly, 18 votes to 16. This would not have been decisive and could well have proven difficult heading into an election year.
Of course it’s possible that Cunliffe will still have trouble with a very divided caucus – but a vote of 60% of the membership (and 68% after preferences) is very solid and will probably be enough to convince MPs on the fence to fall in line, and give him a supportive caucus.
It’s an interesting election to watch as we head into our own Labor leadership election in Australia.
