1 in 9 signed petition twice

No wonder the Green/Labour petition against asset sales failed.

David Farrar has obtained details of the signatures under the Official Information Act and found that 1 in 9 or 11% of signatures were from people signing twice.

Not only were the Green/Labour politicians dishonest in paying for people to collect signatures but they also collected 11% of the signatures twice.

There were 393,778 signatures submitted.  They needed 308,753 to make 10%. Stats NZ found the estimated number of valid signatures was 292,291 with a standard error of 2,579.  That meant 26% of signatures were invalid.  Stats NZ commented:

The probability of there being enough valid signatures in the full petition given the results of our sample is (negligible) less than one in a billion. 

So why were so few signatures valid. The sample stats were:

  • Signatures checked 28,127
  • Unique electors 23,031
  • Ineligible signatures 4,909 (not on electoral roll)
  • Illegible signers 21
  • Duplicate 166

Now that level of duplicates may not sound high, but that is the number of people found as duplicates just in the small sample tested. If you checked the entire sample, you would get far more. Stats NZ estimates that all up, 11% of those who signed the petition signed it at least twice. That is a very high proportion, and much much higher than any other CIR where the figure has ranged from 5.1% to 8.8%.

The proportion of ineligibles was 17%, and the range in other CIRs has been between 12% and 18%. So the key difference with this CIR was not the proportion of ineligible signing it – but people fraudulently signing it more than once. 11% means one in nine signers signed it twice!

Surely there is a case now for getting our money back off the Greens for fraudulently attempting to rig a CIR.

  • AnonWgtn

    Cannot be all right. I signed different names eg D.Duck and M.Mouse on a number of different pieces of paper.
    Someone cannot count !

    • Steve (North Shore)

      M T Paddock

  • maninblack

    does anyone over 25 vote for the gweens.. (given most people think they are voting for the environment when they do.. not 1950′s commie policies)

    • spollyike

      Nope. Why else do they want to lower the voting age to 16?

    • Jman

      Sadly yes, I do know of a few green voting idiots who should know better

    • Hazards001

      Voting age should be raised to 21, as should the drinking age and the age to be allowed behind the wheel of a 1&1/2 tonne weapon.

      Come to that it should also be raised to 21 to be allowed to buy a firearm. Want to join the army at 18..OK suit yourself, you’re a big kid now. However if we are going to force someone to join the army that should be 21 as well. Only fair.
      Can’t imagine why we ever lowered this stuff…oh..wait…that’s right..it bought votes for the left!

  • Patrick

    The voter should be given more credit – clearly a successful act of sabotage against the Greens. In light of this more attention should be paid to the results of the polling companies as well. All may not be as it seems & the Greens may be polling higher than their actual support.

    • tarkwin

      Would be a lot funnier if we weren’t paying the signature collectors.

  • MrAuz1989

    To Mr U R Nutz and his numerous colleagues, a grateful nation extends its thanks.

  • Bob

    When is the two month retry period up? Must be about half way through, any news on how thy are going?

    • Col

      Norman is checking how many times he signed, and has not finished counting as yet, should be next year?

  • GazzW

    What do we do now Clint?

  • tarkwin

    Maybe they should call for an inquiry?

    • Troy

      Yup, and why hasn’t someone taken this to the Speaker to request the Privileges Committee inquiry into both Norman and Turei as co-leaders – they misled the house by submitting information that was correct. Any MP have the balls to carry out this action? It seems to be the flavour of the day given the Dunne saga.

  • Dave Broad

    How unprincipled of the Greens.

  • Mediaan

    Someone give the Greens some work to do … Quickly please.

  • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/ Petal

    People were probably encouraged to sign twice, assuming that the sheer volume of signatures would allow enough duplicates to sneak through to make it work.

  • Col

    The greens signed the green form and then signed the Labour form, this is what labour did as well. They just thought they would help each other, such a touching story?

  • JeffDaRef

    DPF’s headline says “Why the assets sale petition failed”.
    I’ll tell you why – because most hard working Kiwis don’t like being harangued by aggressive hippies to sign a fraudulent petition, that’s why.

  • Mr_Blobby

    Says a lot about the entitlement mentality. Give me more more more

  • Scott

    I wonder how many Nats supporters signed more than once just to make sure it was invalid?

  • Phil

    1 in 9 signed it at least twice.

    If you are going to sign it twice, why stop there

    • Hazards001

      They forgot their name after a quick toke.

  • Sir Cullen’s Sidekick

    Minor mistakes like this happen when people are fighting against a very unpopular Government. So let us move on. I now hear Sheep and Hippie are close to finalising about half a million new signatures. That shows how unpopular the asset sales programme has been….

    • tarkwin

      I’ve been worried about this, thanks for the warning.

  • williamabong

    I’m very disappointed I signed it four times, so some of you people obviously let the team down.

    • Tom

      Snap!
      It just seemed right to be a bit passionate about these things.

57%