I'm not sure how he can say there is a mandate for asset sales when this was also the lowest election voting turnout for a long time, and there is no clear link between their policy on asset sales and people voting for them... autocracy anyone?

Notice how the "Stuff poll" shows less than a majority in favour of asset sales...exactly mirroring the election results.

Key can claim want ever he wants but he is a liar if he says New Zealand gave him a "mandate to sell SOE's" .He received LESS than 50% of the votes and in fact got less votes than in 2008 .So clearly two things are clear ,Key has not received a "mandate" and he twist real facts to get his own way at the expense of New Zealand .Unlike Key New Zealand will survive the next election and we must hope the damage done by Key is recoverable.

While John Key may have been able to claim a mandate on election night (despite overwhelming public opposition to asset sales), now that the special votes have been counted National +ACT who support and campaigned on asset sales have 60 seats, while all those who campaigned against it have 61. Any mandate John Key may have thought he had is now gone. We can only hope that the Maori Party and the Progressives will vote as they campaigned.

Im Trying to get a blog going

http://nzassettsalereferendum.wordpress.com/2011/12/04/hello-world/

Google "Privatization" and read the horror stories worldwide of selling off state owned assets and mineral and water rights etc. Privatization is very ugly; based mostly on greed and led by the banksters and narrow minded politicians and corporations who care less about the negative impact on the quality of peoples lives or the damaging effects on the environment. All about money, short term thinking and a very bad idea. We need to think long term and have a government and leader who cares for all of the people and all of the eco systems and all rivers and the environment and our future financial sanity and not a short term, quick fix, nightmare that is what " Greedy Privatization !! " is all about.

Key says "When you think we've delivered the biggest result in MMP history and the biggest result in our history since 1951, you've got to say we've got a mandate." Those numbers may be so, but of those NZers who voted more voted for parties other than National. That's hardly a 'mandate'. National may have received more votes than any other party, but they did not receive a majority of the votes. MMP is supposed to deliver a collaborative Parliament, not a divisive FPP Parliament. Key and his colleagues still live in the FPP past with a 'winner takes all' approach to governing.

Just want to support those others who think this is a bad idea. no need to explain why, but I believe this will be hotly opposed in parliament and on the streets.

In my opinion John Key is exactly right. The asset sales and resulting capital made available in the form of the future investment fund is central to the National party's strategy. If you voted for the National party based on policy you have supported the partial sale of assets. If you have voted National for smile and wave politics, because your parents did or because you didn't know better I'm sorry but you've had your chance and will have to simply live with this policy. No one likes selling assets or paying more tax but then again no one likes being in debt, waiting for excessive periods of time on urgent medical care or sending their kids to a sub-standard school either. It's about whats practically best for NZ in the current global economy.

Just because somebody votes for National that doesn't mean they are voting for every single policy. Personally, I voted Green but the principle is the same. If we want a true democracy, referendums should be binding. There are many things wrong with our political system. No party should be saying we will or wont work with any other party. All parties are meant to be working for the greater good of all NZ'ers. The only way to achieve this is for all parties to work to find solutions that suit everyone. To say "we will not work with so and so" is to disrespect all the NZ'ers that voted for so and so. It is a devisive system. John Key has no mandate. Clearly most people think most of his parties policies are better than most of the other parties. That does not constitute a mandate for this particular issue. If he is so confident let him have a referendum. He won't because he knows 80% of NZers don't want asset sales. And that 80% includes many people who voted for him for other reasons.