The Union Forever: A TL

Submitted for the approval of this Timeline's author, an update on the Political History of New Zealand, from 2001-2010

Here is a link to the previous update I made for New Zealand


New Zealand: 2001-2010


List of Prime Ministers of New Zealand
Sir William Fox (No Party) (1861-1862)
Alfred Domett (No Party) (1862-1863)
Sir Frederick Whitaker (No Party) (1863-1864)
Sir Edward Stafford (No Party) (1864-1869)
Sir William Fox (No Party) (1869-1872) *
Sir Francis Dillon Bell (No Party) (1872-1875)
Sir David Monro (No Party) (1875-1877)+
Sir Charles Clifford, 1st Baronet (No Party) (1877)
Sir William Fitzherbet (No Party (1877-1878)
Sir Charles Clifford, 1st Baronet (No Party) (1878-1886)
Sir George Maurice O'Rorke (No Party) (1886-1889)
Sir William Steward (Liberal) (1889-1892) **
Sir George Maurice O'Rorke (Liberal) (1892-1897)
Sir Robert Arthur Guiness (Liberal) (1897-1901)
Richard Seddon (Liberal) (1901-1906) +
Sir Robert Arthur Guiness (Liberal) (1906-1911) ***

Sir Frederick Lang (Reform) (1911-1920) ****
Sir William Newport (Reform) (1920)

Sir Rupert Scrivener (Liberal) (1920-1922)
Vincent Brimble (NZ Whig) (1922-1923) *****, V*
Nigel Plaskitt (Liberal) (1923-1926)
Malcom Terris (Reform) (1926-1934)
Nigel Plaskitt (Liberal) (1934-1937)
Malcom Terris (National) (1937-1940) V**
Terrance Dicks (Liberal) (1940-1950)
Richard Irvine Hurst (National) (1950-61) +
Lawrence Williams (National) (1961-1963) V***
John Robinson (National) (1963-1964)

Margaret Lewis (Liberal) (1964-1968) V****
Sir Nigel Hughes (Liberal) (1968- 1976) X

Sir Robert Irvine Hurst (National) (1976-1983) X*, X**
John Partridge (Liberal) (1983-1990) X***
Ronald Levin (Liberal) (1990-1993) X****, XV
Jacob Hewit (Liberal) (1993)

Audrey Bevin (Social Democrat) (1993-1995) XV*, XV**
Jacob Hewit (Liberal) (1995)
Jonathan Braxton (National) (1995-2000)
Michael Mateparae (National) (2000-2004) XV***
Christopher Brown (National) (2004-2006)

Denis Hewit (Liberal) (2006-) XV****

*Title officially changed from "Colonial Secretary" to "Premier"
** First Official Political Party, the Liberal Party, Founded in 1891
*** Title officially changed from "Premier" to "Prime Minister" after New Zealand Achieved the status of Dominion
**** The Second Official Political Party, the Reform Party, Founded in 1911
***** The Third Official Political Party, the New Zealand Whig Party, Founded in 1921
V* This is the first coalition government, NZ Whigs and Reform Party
V** The Reform and NZ Whigs combined to form the National Party
V*** Forced out of office by vote of no confidence
V**** First female Prime Minister
X Lost an election due to his opposition to New Zealand's involvement in the war in India
X* The son of former Prime Minister Richard Irvine Hurst
X** In 1980 Prime Minister Robert Irvine Hurst along with a number of other Commonwealth leaders are knighted
X*** Legislature Reform Act of 1984 passed
X**** First Jewish Prime Minister
XV Stepped down after scandal
XV* First Social-Democrat Prime Minister
XV** Removed by a vote of no confidence
XV*** First Ethnic Maori Prime Minister
XV**** Brother of Prime Minister Jacob Hewit
+ Died in Office


The 1995 election brought the National Party back into the government for the first time in 12 years. National Party Leader, Jonathan Braxton, was elected as Prime Minister. He and the National Party campaigned on restoring the free market and "Fiscal Sanity" to New Zealand. They privatized the industries that had been nationalized under Audrey Bevan and walked back other programs that had been expanded under the Liberal-Social Democrat coalition governments. They abolished Universal Higher Education and reduced the number of winners from the Lower Income Scholarship Lottery. They began a gradual plan to privatize the health industry, hoping to have it completely privatized by 2005. One project that the Nationals kept from the Partridge Government was the Cook Straight Tunnel. After new assessments, it was determined that it would not be finished until the year 2001. Despite the increased costs of doing so, the Nationals kept the project. The late 90s was a period of calm recovery for the New Zealand Economy, and in the year 2000 the Nationals called an election. This election gave the nationals majority in the parliament, but they kept the Maori in the government along with a few independents.

The biggest development that came out of the 2000 election was Prime Minister Jonathan Braxton stepping down, choosing not the run again. He was the oldest member of the National Party and was initially given the leadership of the party as an honorary thing. They then gave him the Prime Ministership because he was the least controversial. But he stepped down to retire from politics, and his chosen successor was Michael Mateparae, a 40-year-old, ethnic Maori, who was elected outside of the reserved Maori seats. He became the first Maori Prime Minister.

At the 2001 convention for the Social Democrats, party leader John Fitzpatrick called for the party to be dissolved, and rejoin the Liberals. There was a contentious debate, but after 3 days 70% of its delegates voted to officially dissolve the party. 5 of the party's 7 Assembly members, along with the party's single Senator, would join the Liberal Party. Of the remaining two, one became an independent, and the other, Norman Hawthorn, joined the Technocratic Party of New Zealand. The New Zealand Technocrats didn't have enough voters in any single constituency to win a seat in Parliament. However, there were several MPs who supported technocratic policies throughout all the parties. Norman Hawthorn was one such MP. He chose to run as a Social Democrat because he believed they were the closest active party to matching the platform of the Technocrats. With the Social Democrats no longer active, and none of the other parties strong enough on Technocratic issues, he decided to change affiliation, and give the Technocrats their first official MP.

The major political issue dominating the early 2000s was the IEF Civil War, and in what way New Zealand should be involved, especially in regards to refugees. There was bi-partisan support and opposition to the issue of refugees. The Liberals, being more socially progressive, tended to be in favor of more open immigration. However, within the ranks of the Liberals, especially among the former Social Democrats, and labor activists, there was opposition to allowing IEF refugees into the country. The MPs from blue collar districts were less keen on allowing foreigners to come in and compete with citizens for jobs. Within the National Party, there was support among the more religious members who had been influenced by the Rainbow Revival. However, there was also opposition from more traditional conservatives who didn't want poor foreigners to come in and overload an already, as they saw it, overburdened welfare system. In the fall of 2002, a bill was passed by a coalition of pro-refugee MPs, including Prime Minister Michael Mateparae, and Liberal Leader Denis Hewit (brother of former Prime Minister Jacob Hewit). This bill allowed for greater immigration from the IEF, or any IEF refugee living in a Commonwealth Country, to relocate to New Zealand if they are willing to begin the Citizenship process. The bill was very divisive within both parties, and in order to calm down the tensions, the PM called an election for November 2002.

The National Party lost its majority in Parliament, while the Liberals and Technocrats both gained seats. Most in the media were surprised to see the Technocrats actually gaining seats, instead of Norman Hawthorn losing his. Two constituencies normally held by the National Party were taken by the Technocrats, the same occurred with the Liberals. The last seat that was lost by the National Party went to a new party that sprang up within the month between when the election was called. The Anti-Refugee Party had only one official plank to its platform, block all refugees from coming into the country. The process of building a government was complicated due to the refugee issue. Both major parties were split. The leadership of both parties supported the Refugee Bill. This lead to a government containing members of all parties being created (the Anti-Refugee Party was excluded). Michael Mateparae retained the Prime Ministership, but the position of Deputy Prime Minister had to be given to Liberal Leader, Denis Hewit. The new governing coalition made a public statement that they would maintain this current government until either the IEF Civil War ended, or the 5-year parliamentary term ran out, whichever occurred first. After which, a new election would be held.

This government held onto power from December of 2002, until February of 2004, after the Geneva Accords. Not much in terms of policy was conducted during the Rainbow Government. It was frequently referred to as the "Do Nothing Parliament" by commentators. This was due to the highly divisive coalition, but this didn't stop both major parties from being harmed in the 2004 election. The Technocrats were the biggest winners of this election, being the only party to gain seats. The single Anti-Refugee Party MP managed to retain their seat. Despite the IEF Civil War being over, the refugee problem continued and expanded. On top of IEF refugees, in late 2004 there were refugees from a Tsunami that hit Indonesia. After losing seats in two elections in a row, Michael Mateparae stepped down as leader of the National Party, and was replaced by its deputy leader, Christopher Brown.

2005 marked the 25th anniversary of the end of the Pacific War, which became a popular subject of film, television, and literature. It was also at this time that former Prime Minister, Sir Robert Irvine Hurst, published his memoirs, titled At the Bottom of the World, which became a best seller in New Zealand, and fairly popular within the Commonwealth realm. He died on October 21st, 2005, at the age of 83, just 3 months after the publication of his memoirs. In 2006, a memorial was built in his honor near the Parliament Building in Wellington.

Christopher Brown was seen as a mediocre Prime Minister. Unoffensive, but uninspiring. Declining poll numbers forced him to call an election for July of 2006. After 11 years in Power, the National Party would no longer hold the Prime Ministership. He would be replaced by the Liberal Leader, Denis Hewit. Denis Hewit was a strong supporter of free trade, open immigration, and a moderate welfare state. The National's had failed to privatize the health care industry, though most commentators recognized that this was due to the confusion of the early 2000s and the Refugee crisis that forced the Nationals to make coalition governments with parties that supported it. Denis Hewit wanted to increase economic ties within the Commonwealth and even proposed that the Commonwealth should make a trade deal with the United States and the LAR. His government also lowered corporate income taxes to 10%, the lowest in the English Speaking world. His Hopes were to bring in more revenue by growing the economy, and enticing more international corporations, especially tech companies, to relocate their headquarters to New Zealand. Along with this came a revamping of the welfare state. Legislation was passed to modernize the system, with an emphasis on globatrix integration, reducing paperwork administrative costs. This plan seemed to work, as New Zealand would see an economic boom through the late 2000s.

2000 Election
Assembly
National: 65
Liberal: 40
Maori: 10
Social Democrats: 7
Independent: 3


Senate
National: 18
Liberal: 9
Maori: 7
Social Democrats: 1

Governing Coalition: (National-Maori-3 Independents)

After 2001 Dissolution of the Social Democrats
Assembly
National: 65
Liberal: 45
Maori: 10
Technocrats: 1
Independents: 4

Senate
National: 18
Liberal: 10
Maori: 7


Governing Coalition: (National-Maori-3 Independents)

2002 Election (AKA: The Refugee Election)

Assembly
National: 60
Liberal: 47

Maori: 10
Technocrats: 3
Anti-Refugee: 1
Independents: 4

Senate

National: 15
Liberal: 12
Maori: 7
Independent: 1

Governing Coalition: (35 Nationals-25 Liberals- 3 Technocrats-6 Maori-4 Independents) (AKA: The Rainbow Coalition)

2004 Election
Assembly
National: 55

Liberal: 42
Maori: 10
Technocrats: 8
Anti-Refugee: 1
Independents: 9

Senate
National: 11
Liberal: 9
Maori: 7
Technocrats: 4
Independent: 4

Governing Coalition: (National-Maori)

2006 Election
Assembly
Liberal: 53
National: 50

Maori: 10
Technocrats: 10
Independent: 2

Senate

Liberal: 14
National: 10
Maori: 7
Technocrats: 4

Governing Coalition: (Liberal-Technocrat)
 
Per the terms of the Treaty of Manila (1980), Japan was prohibited from processing aircraft carriers and naval tonnage was limited to 150,000. On land, Japan could retain no more than 500,000 troops including reservists. By the end of the year, these provisions officially expired and on December 22 the Diet approved a bill funding a limited Japanese rearmament. While relatively modest, the military expansion set off shockwaves in the Technocratic Union. Large well-organized protests erupted in major cities throughout East Asia. Chinese leader Yu Qishan bluntly stated that Japan’s actions posed an “existential threat” and declared he would “not allow a destabilization” of the balance of power.
The next war might be between China and Japan, and there has been too many Technocratic aggressions for the international community not to react.
 
Last edited:
Technocrats are in a governing coalition, even though most of the west hates them?

Also I have a hard time believing a party would call themselves "anti-refugee"
 
During the spring, American scientists Valentina McCune and Denis Pavoni announced a breakthrough in regenerative medicine with the first successful transplantation of tissue engineered from adult stem cells from a patient’s bone marrow. Many hoped that in the future, similar methods could be used to grow entirely new replacement organs.

Some very good news on that front. Seems like the ethical debate has been bypassed or nipped in the bud, and they're sticking with the one.

Over the past decade, Beulens and others had spread the contemporary evangelical Christianity of the Rainbow Rival

Did you mean the Rainbow Revival? As the Rainbow Rival made me think of this:

A New Rival Approaches.png


In late June, Orabi Pasha University in Egypt opened a full sized reconstruction of the Lighthouse of Alexandria. Having already reopened an enormous museum and research facility in honor of the ancient Library of Alexandria, this latest achievement allowed OPU to compete with other centers of learning in the Arabic world such the Royal Islamic University in Jeddah and Syria's Aleppo University.

That's pretty cool, to be honest. Probably a big competition to just become to lighthouse keeper as well. Think the duties would be relegated to a student on campus or that they'd hire somebody.

Good to see Aleppo getting a break here. Anything happen in Syria, recently? I know there were grumblings about them trying to form an anti-Persian/Turk alliance among the remainders of the Middle Eastern nations. Didn't know if that would be a thing. A bilateral Syrian-Egyptian treaty modeled on (and perhaps even associated with) the Turin pact?

Per the terms of the Treaty of Manila (1980), Japan was prohibited from processing aircraft carriers and naval tonnage was limited to 150,000. On land, Japan could retain no more than 500,000 troops including reservists. By the end of the year, these provisions officially expired and on December 22 the Diet approved a bill funding a limited Japanese rearmament. While relatively modest, the military expansion set off shockwaves in the Technocratic Union. Large well-organized protests erupted in major cities throughout East Asia. Chinese leader Yu Qishan bluntly stated that Japan’s actions posed an “existential threat” and declared he would “not allow a destabilization” of the balance of power.

Hrm... Japan is rearming. What of India? I can't remember their terms...

Nah, Japan knows better than that. The next major war most likely is going to be the Technocratics via the US and friends plus people who want to kick the Chinese down a few pegs.

Eh, if anything, Japan would be the target. Then that'd only draw in the PTO. Then the defensive guarantees of the LAR wouldn't kick in, and the ComNat would be hard pressed to all join in. Some likely would join in ayways, but it makes things much more difficult among the PTO nations and forces them to wrangle their disparate alliances together.

The best target after that would be Siam, because the addition of the CSAA wouldn't mean too much to the Chinese, and that might be able to get India to join in on its side.

Basically, if China goes the route of the war, it has to be fast. Give the PTO's members to put together their alliances, and get overstretched, and they're inviting trouble. That's especially if Russia, after having some time to slap itself back together, decides to rumble into Manchuria while Chinese armies are overseas or stuck in Indochina.

Technocrats are in a governing coalition, even though most of the west hates them?

Also I have a hard time believing a party would call themselves "anti-refugee"

A bit odd, considering that they're one of the founding members of the PTO (the anti-Technocratic Union alliance, basically). Though, that is through 2006 (especially odd considering the annexation of Machuria in 2005 on a 97.1% vote)
 
Good for Japan

The next war might be between China and Japan, and there has been too many Technocratic aggressions for the international community not to react.

Nah, Japan knows better than that. The next major war most likely is going to be the Technocratics via the US and friends plus people who want to kick the Chinese down a few pegs.

Good comments guys. We will have to wait and see.
 
War might break up soon and probably it is started by China. USA is surely participate to the war. And Russia might try re-capture Manchuria. And it is possible that there use too nuclear weapons.
 
Knowing the Chinese early and often . They don't have morals and people with nukes and no morals will always end badly. I hope the US has good ABM systems
China using nukes liberally would make it a pariah. If a world war ended in Chinese defeat, RIP them holding on Manchuria, probably.
 
Top