Hard News: News from home ...
253 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 11 Newer→ Last
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
That is a little ageist. Most of those 4 MPs you mention will still be under 65 in 2017. This is a growing NZ demographic which already feels overlooked in many areas. What about age and wisdom? The role of the mentor?
-
Rob S, in reply to
meathead messiah
Be handy around the Barbie. This term needs to be released into the wild.
I intend to call all of my mates a meathead messiah some time in the next week.
Getting the BBQ aprons printed asap. -
I might just add that New Plymouth has always been a highly-conservative, Right-leaning town. An oil, gas and dairy-farming town. National's Party-Vote % in NP almost always exceeds its nationwide %, while the Greens are usually weaker in the seat than in the Country as a whole. When there's a nationwide swing away from Labour, therefore, (as, of course, there has been over recent Elections) it's always far more likely to head towards National and NZ First in NP than to an Urban liberal Party like the Greens.
In stark contrast, Wellington City (like Dunedin and South Auckland) remains well to the Left of the rest of New Zealand. National's poor Party-Vote performance in Wellington Central has little if anything to do with Robertson himself and everything to do with the demographics and arguably (as a very loyal Wellingtonian) the unusually progressive values of the City as a whole. The Left vote, for instance, has held up just as well in Annette King's Rongotai seat. Indeed, National experienced a weaker % point increase there than in WC.
From Labour's viewpoint, however, a fall is a fall regardless of the destination. Robertson loses almost 5000, Little just under 3000.
-
Matthew Hooton, in reply to
Not really Hilary.
In 1980, Reagan was fresher and newer than Carter despite being 13 years older.
In 2003, Brash was fresher and newer than Bill English despite being 21 years older.
It is more about how long you've been in people's living rooms each night.
As for wisdom, sure: but that doesn't mean the people with experience need still be in parliament. Palmer, Moore, Bolger, Shipley, Clark, Cullen etc are never more than a text away. I think Key still takes advice from Jim McLay who was deputy PM to Muldoon. -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Wellington City (like Dunedin and South Auckland) remains well to the Left of the rest of New Zealand.
And I’d bet that not so long ago you’d have confidently said that about Christchurch. I’ve yet to read an honest post-mortem on what went so horribly wrong there from Labour’s POV that doesn’t involve a certain amount of whistling in the dark.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Palmer, Moore, Bolger, Shipley, Clark, Cullen etc are never more than a text away.
-
Moz, in reply to
You mean just as Labour did when Helen Clark was the leader of a minority government
Yes, exactly. I was disappointed when Labour decided that they'd govern alone or not at all. Just to be clear, the third paragraph in my post was supposed to explain that:
( I said) And if Labour choose the "anything but government" option again... that's not my preference, and my vote will have expressed that in the only way it can.
Clark seemed to understand what government requires better than the recent crop of Labour leaders, and I think one of her major failings was in tranistion/succession planning. She didn't leave an obvious successor behind, or apparently anyone both able and interested in leading. But we're hopefully past that point and the new Labour leaders will prove interested in government rather than just being "leader of the second most popular party".
I'm definitely interested in what policies Labour bring to the table, and could see myself voting for them. I'm already split voting, because of late Labour have actively campaigned for me to party vote Green, candidate vote Labour. It's very easy to do that when both parties I support are asking for the same thing. Although it feels odd when one of them says they're doing that because they hate the other, and one because they want to work with the other. But not odd enough to get me to vote for Nick Smith. TBH, I'd vote for Kim Dotcom before I'd vote for Nick Smith (and yes I know that would be a wasted vote. That's my point).
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Wetware awareness weak...
I intend to call all of my mates a meathead messiah
some time in the next week.Be aware:
make no mis-steak
- this could result in speaking with a forked tongue...
or worse, having to mince words! -
Mr Mark, in reply to
Yep. For so many years, Christchurch was Wellington's political twin. During the Clark Government, Dunedin was overwhelmingly Labour and Left-leaning, while the Capital and the Garden City were strongly so.
But then in 2008, a huge swing to the Right in Christchurch, while the swing in Wellington City was, first and foremost, from Labour-to-Green. And then, just to cap things off, an even greater swing to National in Christchurch in the immediate post-Quake Election of 2011.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
what the Dickinson?
Sir Michael Cullen, who lives in Ohope...
if only Ohope was really a thing with feathers...
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Sir Michael Cullen, who lives in Ohope…
if only Ohope was really a thing with feathers…
Dalvanius Prime once told me that, according to the lore of his Taranaki iwi, an illustrious ancestor in those parts had a knack for taming moas. His prize specimen was a flying version, which he employed in a daily shuttle service between Patea and points north of there. Perhaps Cullen could have a word to Mallard to hurry up that jurassic park project of his.
-
Tim Michie, in reply to
Cool story. If only moa had wings. http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/20157389/mike-dickison-moa-bones
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
I would like to see Trevor as speaker though. Would be the most effective and ferocious one ever.
-
Matthew Hooton, in reply to
agree
-
but it would be a bit odd ditching an orthodox policy like CGT because it was too strange and challenging for voters
Little hasn't said a CGT is too strange or challenging for voters. He said that effectively Labour lost the argument and keeping it as a policy would continue to keep it as an albatros around their neck and alienate the swing voters Labour need to get back into power. All he is doing is applying Colbert’s dictum – seeking to pluck the feathers that make the geese squawk least. Anyway, there are more ways to kill a cat than choking it with cream. Ruling out a CGT doesn't mean you've ruled out a land tax, for example. Good politics is listening to the people and and noisily dumping the CGT, whilst waiting for the Friday before Xmas to quietly announce a land tax in terms most cub reporters still at work won't understand, then never mentioning the topic again.
-
Angela Hart, in reply to
If that's good politics, no wonder thousands of us are disgusted by the antics of politicians. Quality leadership requires the taking of some decisions because they are necessary in spite of their unpopularity. Quality leadership is open and honest in its methods, and does not resort to backdoor underhand methods or lying to the populace. Quality leadership engenders trust and thereby takes the electorate along, even with unpopular policies.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Quality leadership requires the taking of some decisions because they are necessary in spite of their unpopularity.
That is true, but it also involves picking battles. I'm in favour of CGT too, but I don't see it as worth dying in a ditch over. It could easily be relegated to a second term thing, much the way National did with its unpopular asset sales.
-
Quality leadership requires the taking of some decisions because they are necessary in spite of their unpopularity.
I bet you’d make the trains run on time to. The idea that rule by a technocratic elite making “quality” decisions based on some sort of detached rational criteria is somehow superior to the rough wisdom of the commonweal as delivered by the ballot box is an unfortunate one, but it is widespread amongst certain classes.
Democracy does not concern itself with “quality” leadership in your rather Robert A. Heinlein sense. It concerns itself with who gets the most votes, with whoever gains the most votes automatically being of the highest “quality” by virtue of the act of winning. It follows then that forcing through unpopular decisions makes those decisions by definition “bad quality” in a democracy, whether or not some technocrat thinks them necessary.
The political reality of a democracy though is a party puts forward a mix of policies for the voters to peruse, a curates egg of some popular, some less so popular and some pigs, hidden at the back with lip stick and a tutu on to hide it’s porcineness. It then claims the democratic mandate of victory to implement this mix. Going to the voters pushing a hoary old squealer as one of your flagship policies is not “quality leadership” in a democracy. It is stupid leadership designed to ensure you always lose.
After all, you always campaign on the tax cut, not on how you plan to pay for it.
-
Angela Hart, in reply to
So you think we have democracy in New Zealand right now?
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Reckon we’re in the same union, but my impression is very different :) Not just democratic- delighted anytime any member is willing to put some passion, opinion, or elbow grease in.
The key thing to remember about unions, and I repeat this from my delegate and branch chair days in the Post Office Union (halcyon days!), is that they are only as good as the members want to be, and only as strong as the membership is prepared to allow. Members would come to me and say 'why aren't you doing something about x ?' and I'd say "Are you ready to strike about it? Come talk to me when you are."
The union is not for the workers - the union IS the workers. If the members (i.e. you, Andrew Geddis, in this particular discussion) are not happy with the way their union is run, it is up to them to put their shoulder to the wheel and be the change, instead of waiting for someone else to do it for them.
-
Democracy is not mob rule, hence a place for leadership.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
In 1980, Reagan was fresher and newer than Carter despite being 13 years older.
Ahahahahahahaha! Oh dear, how one's idealogy plays tricks on the facts. Reagan got the call because he was a familiar brand, as a movie star and a state governor, despite the beginnings of Alzheimers even before elected.
In 2003, Brash was fresher and newer than Bill English despite being 21 years older.
More bollocks. There was a faction in National that wanted a far right front man with no baggage. It wasn't about fresh appeal, it was about backroom conniving.
A "should do better" for you, Mr Hooten.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
She didn’t leave an obvious successor behind, or apparently anyone both able and interested in leading.
I think she did, but it was Cunliffe ;-)
-
Brent Jackson, in reply to
They’re still going to have to either find him a new electorate or perform a particularly radical turnaround in New Plymouth.
Won't Little being voted as leader actually be that turn-around. Afaics leaders and ex-leaders get a lot more electorate votes than back-bencher MPs. It is likely that he'll pull more Labour party votes as well.
-
Post your response…
This topic is closed.