The Convention of the Mandate in New Zealand Politics: Partial Privatisation under the "Mixed-Ownership Model"

Abstract

The Fifth New Zealand National Government (2008-present) claims it has an electoral mandate for its controversial programme to partially privatise State-owned assets as a result of highlighting the policy during its successful 2011 Election Campaign. The concept of an electoral ‘mandate’ is an important democratic convention in New Zealand, with its roots in nineteenth century British Parliamentary tradition. The mandate concept plays an important role in encouraging greater democratic accountability. The theoretical basis of the mandate is the delegate model of political representation. There are two important components of a mandate. First, the elected government’s right, and second, its obligation, to implement policy in a manner consistent with the public manifesto it presented during the election campaign. This thesis demonstrates that the National Government holds both a general mandate to govern and a specific, if very weak, mandate for its policy of partial privatisation. Perceptions of the legitimacy of the National Government’s specific mandate have been weakened by public opinion measures and strengthened by newspaper editorials and opinion pieces. The Fourth New Zealand Labour Government (1984-1990) neglected the convention of the mandate, resulting in an angry New Zealand public abandoning its support for Labour at the 1990 General Election. These events reinforced for the Fifth National Government the importance of gaining an electoral mandate in the case of major policy changes such as the privatisation of State-owned assets. Prompted by a petition to Parliament, a Citizen’s Initiated Referendum on partial privatisation was held in late 2013: 67 percent of respondents opposed the policy. This outcome did not negate the specific mandate, but rather, it further undermined what was already a very weak mandate. Governments adhere to the doctrine of the mandate in order to increase or maintain voter support. Given the strong public opposition to partial privatisation in this case, the National Government should disavow its specific mandate and halt partial privatisation. This would lead to increased support for National from the considerable majority of voters who oppose the policy.