Andrew Little speech: Ready for work

Written By: - Date published: 2:22 pm, November 6th, 2016 - 201 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, labour, Politics - Tags:

andrew-little-2

E nga mana

E nga tapu

E Te whanau o te roopu reipa

Tena koutou katoa

Talofa lava

Kia orana

Malo e lelei

Nǐ hǎo

Namaste

Can I acknowledge party president Nigel Haworth, and all of our hard working New Zealand Councillors.

I want to thank our wonderful MPs. You are well served by your caucus. There’s only one problem – there isn’t enough of them.

Winning Mt Roskill and getting Michel Wood adds one. Next year, we add more.

I also want to acknowledge the great team who’ll be leading the campaign next year. Our wonderful new General Secretary and campaign manager Andrew Kirton, and Campaign chair Phil Twyford.

I especially want to thank my deputy Annette King. You know, last year a journalist described Annette as a cross between your favourite grandmother and a Mafioso boss. I make no comment on that, but Annette’s doing a great job.

Last, and most of all, I want to acknowledge you, our fantastic party members.

I’ve had the chance to see many of you over the last two years.

Those of you who saw a certain rug probably got a chance to see more of me than you wanted.

Honestly though, I was very flattered by that rug’s depiction of me.

They really made my arms look much bigger than they are.

I think the style of art for that rug is called socialist realism. I’m just thankful it wasn’t cubism.
Delegates, we’ve had a fantastic conference.

Yesterday we launched out Future of Work report, which yet again proved Labour is the party of ideas in New Zealand. Grant Robertson thank you for leading this very important project.

For over 100 years now, Labour has been New Zealand’s party of ideas. No organisation in our country’s history has the same record of delivering progress for our people.

  • From building the welfare state to restoring the mana of the Treaty of Waitangi;
  • From going nuclear free to winning marriage equality;
  • From our first sovereign wealth fund to tackling the future of work, Labour is the party that has done the things that define us as a country, and that laid the foundations for progress for our great nation.

That is our legacy. It’s up to all of us to build on it.

Helen Kelly

I would like to take a moment to pay tribute to Helen Kelly.

The Labour movement has lost a warrior.

New Zealand has lost one of its greatest daughters.

And many of us have lost a friend.

All our thoughts are with Steve, Dylan, Cath, and Max as they come to terms with losing Helen.

To them, Helen was a partner, a mother, a daughter, a sister.

To all of us, Helen was a champion, an advocate, an agitator. She was an inspiration.

Whether she was fighting for fair wages, safety at work, or for access to medicine, Helen epitomised the best of New Zealand values.

When she saw others in need, she offered to help.

When she saw wrong, she strove to right it.

Helen stood in no one’s shadow, and we will miss her greatly.

But, delegates, Helen would say:

“Don’t mourn, organise.”

The best way to honour Helen’s memory is to keep fighting without tiring, without flinching. To never give up and to make the changes we need.

Delegates, I’ve been the Leader of our Party for nearly two years now.

In that time, I’ve had the opportunity to meet some incredible New Zealanders.

Kiwis who are doing amazing things, leading the world, helping others.

People like Peter Beck of RocketLab whose passion for outer space and sheer determination will see New Zealand as one of the few countries in the world offering commercial services in small satelite deployment. Which for me was unthinkable as a 15 year old bopping to Mi-sex singing Space Race.

People like the senior boys at St Thomas College in Christchurch who, every year, enter the nationwide young enterprise scheme, and insist on an entry that has social benefits, not just commercial benefits.

And who every year win recognition for the quality of their entry and the compassion behind it.

People like the young couple who ten years ago started an online retail business in their garage selling baby clothes, who now, have a staff of 15, and insist that no one gets paid less than the living wage.

It comes down to this. We are a great country because we are a great people.

We’re fair minded.

We are not, by nature, mean-spirited.

We’re ambitious and we grab opportunities with both hands.

If you give New Zealanders a fair chance, a decent shot, there’s nothing we can’t achieve.

Delegates, that’s what our party has always believed.

For 100 years now, we’ve stood for that fair go. For everyone.

Our time in government has been about building a country where everyone can live up to their potential and no one is left out or left behind.

And right now, that is the approach we need more than ever.

Because there’s another side to our country today.

For all the great things Kiwis are doing, too many people are missing out.

Inequality and poverty are rising.

The housing crisis is raging on.

And the things people rely on to give them opportunity – the health services to keep us well, the police to keep us safe, and the schools for our kids – all those things are under pressure.

So while more than ever goes to those already doing very well, it’s getting harder for everyone else to get ahead.

It’s like there’s a party on the top two floors in New Zealand, but no one else is invited.

Delegates, we have the opportunity in front of us to change all of that.

The choice we have to make

In my speech last year, I talked about the Kiwi Dream.

It’s pretty basic stuff.

A decent job, more money in your pocket at the end of the week, a warm, dry home, a good school for your kids and a healthcare system that’s there when you need it.

This year, I want to tell you about the chance that’s in front of us to make that dream a reality for every New Zealander.

We meet this weekend at a time of real opportunity for our country.

We’ve come through a rough time economically.

Fortunately, New Zealand was in a better position than most to weather that storm.

Thanks to successive governments, our banking system was in better shape than many in Europe and North America.

And thanks to Sir Michael Cullen, our public debt in 2008 was virtually zero. Zero.

So when the crisis hit, New Zealand was ready.

Our good position means we’ve come out of the shadow of the GFC faster and in better shape than most other countries.

That means we are now in a position to finally address many of the challenges we face as a country. We have billions of dollars of new debt to repay.

Contributions to the Super Fund were stopped and we are way behind what is needed for the future cost of superannuation.

And there is the urgent need to invest in our people, and invest in their future.

Delegates, it’s time that every New Zealander got to benefit from the good times ahead.

That’s the choice in front of us. That’s the decision we have to make.

Do we choose to stick with business as usual? Do we keep throwing more money at those already doing well.

Keep running down our schools and our hospitals. Keep eroding the things that give people the foundation to get ahead.

Or do we invest in people?

Invest in the things that give people opportunities.

Better schools. Better healthcare. Safer communities.

An end to the housing crisis that’s causing so much misery.

That’s the choice we have.

Delegates, that is the fight in front of us at next year’s election.

If we want to change what’s happening now, we have to change the government.

We have to win.

The last two years has been about getting our great party ready to do just that.

The results of the local elections show we can campaign to win. The polls show it’s a neck and neck race between the centre-left and centre-right blocs.

This is a straight fight, and I’m up for it, we’re up for it and I’ll tell you this:

We’re going to win.

We’re going to win because New Zealanders know it’s time to back our people.

It’s time to invest in the future.

It’s time to put people first.

National’s Plan

And look, we can do so much better than what this Government is offering.

They’ve been very clear about the path they want us to take.

We should give them credit for that, they’ve been very up front about it.

No, I’m serious. They’ve been straight up about what they’d rather do.

They’re proud of their plan. Really.

Do you know what it is?

It’s pretty simple:

Tax cuts.

That’s it. That’s their answer.

After eight years, it’s pretty much all they’ve got left.

At next year’s election, they’ll be asking you to believe that shaving a few points off the top tax rate is the height of what we can achieve as a nation.

They’ll be asking you to believe that moving from the fifth lowest taxes in the OECD to the fourth lowest is the best we can hope for.

And look, I get that this government’s never met a tax cut they didn’t like.

The economy is in trouble in 2010? Well, time for a tax cut to get things growing again! Because you know, trickle down and all that.

The economy’s on the rebound in 2016? Thank god, now we can do tax cuts!

Here’s the reality about the last lot of tax cuts: it didn’t actually make that much of a difference for most people, while the ones already doing well got a big boost.

That’s the problem with tax cuts – those who already have the most always get the most.

And when National’s talking about three billion dollars a year in tax cuts, that’s a lot of money to give away to the very rich.

And to pay for that, they’ll keep running down our schools and our hospitals. They’ll keep underfunding the very things we should be investing in.

This is an empty, small minded vision for our future. And in this election, together, we’re going to show New Zealand a better way.

Delegates, Labour offers a much more hopeful vision for our country.

While National looks to give more than ever to those at the very top, we will invest in people.

We’ll build on everything we love about our country and together we will leave it even better for future generations.

A country that is more prosperous. That is more just. That has more opportunities for all our people.

Let’s start with housing.

Everyone except National agrees we have a housing crisis in New Zealand.

Not a housing “challenge,” or a housing “issue.”

It’s a crisis.

It’s a crisis when home ownership is at its lowest level in 65 years.

It’s a crisis when speculators are having a field day but nurses and teachers and police officers can’t afford to buy a home in Auckland.

And it’s a crisis when more and more of our families are having to sleep in garages and in cars.

You’ve all heard about the family living in a van in South Auckland, with an 11 year old girl struggling to do her homework in a dimly-lit back seat.

That’s a tragedy but they’re not alone.

Lynette Haines lives in Tauranga.

She’s 69, she’s worked all her life and she’s been forced to live in a campground for the last six months because she couldn’t afford a home, and now she faces being evicted from there as well.

69 years old, a lifetime of work, and you end up living in your car.

How the hell does that happen in a country like ours?

When did we decide that was the kind of place we wanted to be?

We never voted for that.

That’s not the New Zealand I know. That’s not the country I love.

Well, I say: no more.

We’re not going to let people languish in poverty like this.

We’re not going to let our families be shut out of the housing market any longer.

We’re not going to sit on the sidelines, we’re going to roll up our sleeves, get stuck in, and fix housing once and for all.

That means 100,000 new affordable homes for first home buyers.

And we’ll establish an Affordable Housing Authority to work with developers, cut through the delays and get those homes built fast.

And we will end the tax loopholes that the big property speculators use to rack up their super-profits.

We’ll scrap the negative gearing tax break they use and if they buy a property to flip it within five years, they’ll pay the full tax on it.

That’s my message: no more free rides for the speculators and a fair shot for first home buyers at last.

With our plan, the difference is clear. We are the party of homeownership.

If you’re trying to save to buy a home, Labour will help make it happen.

And if you want to see an end to homelessness in New Zealand, Labour is the party that’ll do it.

No child in our country should have to do their homework in the backseat of a car because they don’t have a home.

It’s wrong and under Labour, those days are over.

We’ll build new state houses and invest in emergency housing as well, so every Kiwi family can have a roof over their heads.

Delegates, the next part of our plan is about investing in our future.

It’s about restoring the things that give people opportunity.

It starts with making sure we’re giving all our kids the best education we can.

I remember the first day Leigh and I sent our son Cam off to Island Bay Primary.

Letting your child go for the first time, watching them walk through those school gates on their own, it can be anxious time for every parent.

But I remember the peace of mind that came from knowing he was going to a great school, where the teachers would do everything they could to give him the best start.

Finding a good school for your child shouldn’t be a lottery.

Every Kiwi kid deserves a world class education, no matter how much money their parents have.

So we’ll turn around National’s legacy of failure on education.

That means saying no to bulk funding and larger class sizes.

It means no more public money for dodgy charter schools.

It means ending the funding freeze for our public schools.

We have some of the best teachers in the world, and we’re going to back them to do what they do best: change children’s lives.

Delegates, we’re also going to undo the damage that National has done in health.

You all know the old saying that health cuts don’t heal.

Well, National has underfunded health by $1.7 billion over its time in office.

The health budget simply hasn’t kept up with a growing population and rising costs.

And that means people are missing out.

Get this, in the last year 45,000 New Zealanders were told they needed hospital treatment, but when they got there the local hospital told them they couldn’t afford to treat them.

Every one of those 45,000 waited to see a specialist.

And they waited.

And they waited.

And you know what?

They’re still sick and they’re still waiting.

Heather Stevens was one of those people. She’s working in a dry cleaning business in Dunedin, and she desperately needs surgery on her hip.

She’s in agony, she’s not sure how much longer she can keep working.

But she’s been waiting for four years with no end in sight.

That’s so wrong, and we’re going to fix it.

We’ll restore the funding that National has cut and we’ll give our doctors and nurses and health professionals what they need to keep people well.

And there’s one more public service Labour is going to invest in.

Our police.

Our police do a really tough job, keeping our communities safe.

But years of underfunding have made their job much much harder.

This year, the Government signed off on a four year freeze in police numbers, even though we have a rising population.

And when police aren’t on the beat, crime goes up.

Just recently there was the dairy in West Auckland, held up three times in three weeks.

One store. Three weeks. Three robberies.

That’s not what we should expect in a peaceful country like ours.

That’s why Labour is going to put 1000 extra front line cops on the beat.

It’ll mean fewer crimes being committed and more crimes being solved.

It’ll mean more people able to live their lives free of the fear of violence.

Labour’s Youth Jobs Plan.

And delegates, today I want to tell you about the next part of our plan to take our country forward.
In Labour, we know that investing in our young people, in giving them the opportunity to succeed and live up to their potential is the best thing we can do for the future.

As Leader, I’ve made this a personal priority because I know how much it matters.

I’ve already announced some major policies in this area:

  • Three years free education after high school.
  • Helping businesses meet the cost of a new apprentice.
  • Professional careers advice at school to help young people make good decisions about work or further study.
  • Grants for young Kiwis who want to start their own business.

And today, I want to add the next plank.

Right now, we have 74,000 young people in New Zealand who aren’t just out of work, but aren’t in training or education either.

74,000 young people with nothing to do, wasting away on the scrap heap.

Think of all the talent we are wasting.

Young people with forty years of their working lives still ahead of them, but who aren’t getting any skills, who aren’t getting any experience.

Think of the thousands of young people with no prospects, with no hope, who feel like everyone’s given up on them.

Well I’m telling you this: we’re not going to give up.

I’m not going to give up.

Not now, not ever.

It’s not who I am.

As a parent, as a politician, as someone who gives a damn, I won’t give up on our young people.

Everyone has potential. Everyone deserves an opportunity to live up to it.

That’ why today I am announcing that the next Labour Government will introduce a jobs scheme to put those young people to work in our communities.

We won’t let them waste away, we’ll give them a job. We’ll give them opportunities. We’ll give them the fair shot they need.

My commitment is this: A future where every young New Zealander is earning a living or studying towards a career.

Here’s how it’s going to work:

Rather than pay young people the dole, we’ll set them up for six months with a job working in the conservation estate for DOC, or with a local charity or non-profit.

We’ll put young people to work serving the community, getting the work experience they need.

Now these won’t be flashy jobs, but they will be a first step on the ladder.

And every young person will be paired with a mentor, someone who can help them learn new skills and get them ready for the job market.

I’ve seen for myself how programmes like these can work.

I’ve seen courses where they gave young people who have been out of work for a while a chance.

And its hands on stuff, they make sure they get to work, they make sure they bring a lunch, and they work in horticulture, they work on the land.

And by the end of the course, they’ve learned how to stick to a routine, how to pick themselves up when things get rough, they’ve learned habits that will last a life time.

They’ve got experience, they’ve got a reference, they’re providing for themselves.

They’re ready for work.

That’s the change we can make in the lives of thousands of people.

This is about saying to our young people: we’re not giving up on you. We see the potential in you, and here’s opportunity to make the most of yourself.

Delegates, we’re going to change the lives of thousands of our young people.

We’re going to restore opportunity.

We’re going to restore hope to people.

Conclusion

New Zealand, we have a once in a generation opportunity in front of us.

And next year’s election is about whether we can seize it.

We have a chance to make a difference.

A chance to rise to the challenge, win this fight, and make this a better country.

Delegates, that chance is in front of us, now let’s go make it happen.

Let’s organise and campaign and win the changes we need.

Let’s fight for the young people who need a chance, who need a job, who need hope.

Let’s fight for the young couples who are trying to buy their first home.

For the children who want to learn and the families who need better healthcare.

Let’s fight for Helen Kelly and all the changes she wanted to see.

Let’s fight for young people like Taylor and PPV who we saw on Friday. Young people with immense talent who can do anything if we give them an opportunity.

Let’s fight for a Government that puts people first.

New Zealand, It’s time for a better way.

It’s time to raise our sights as a nation

Time to restore hope to our people.

Together, let’s rise to the challenge.

Let’s change the government and then let’s make this an even better country together.

Thank you.

201 comments on “Andrew Little speech: Ready for work”

  1. Danhob 1

    Great speech Andrew , come the hour, come the man

    • Cinny 1.1

      +infinity

      Andrew is an outstanding speaker, would love to hear the audio, he gets this ‘rev’ in his voice when he is very passionate about something, powerful speaker.

      I haven’t voted labour since Aunty left, however next year I’m thinking I will. Really like Andrews style and message, the way he comes across. Alpha Male

      Will be backing Andrew all the way this election.

  2. Jester 2

    Disappointed that the Youth Job Scheme will only pay minimum wage and not the living wage.

    • Manuka AOR 2.1

      Minimum wage is a BIG step up from what they get on UB. And, it is like an apprenticeship isn’t it?

    • Craig H 2.2

      Hopefully the minimum wage will be increased faster than under National.

      • OneTrack 2.2.1

        Why don’t Labour just put the taxes up? Then they can show they really have the courage of their convictions and pay the Survivor DOC players the Living Wage, instead of just the neo-liberal Minimum Wage. Then once the trainees have finished their 6-month rotation, they can have their Living Wage holiday on the Gold Coast, and then come back and put their name down with DOC for a permanent job using their new skills.

    • James 2.3

      I wondered that also? Perhaps it’s just a matter of keeping it economically viable?

      My wife and I had a good discussion on this today – I can see how it could be a good idea.

      • Richard Rawshark 2.3.1

        “My wife and I”

        Very posh James. You must come from a very good background.. Cambridge, Oxford?

        • James 2.3.1.1

          I don’t know what constitutes posh in tokoroa – but just using basic grammar shouldnt impress you that much. It’s as posh as you seem to think.

  3. Peter Swift 3

    A thumbs up for the jobs policy for the young unemployed. Not only does it guarantee a significantly better income than benefit money, even if only at minimum wage, it also cuts off the work for dole movement which is tantamount to slave labour. Equal pay for equal work is fair and empowering.

    Though it’s a shame it doesn’t kick in until after six months and won’t be open to those over the age limit, it’s a positive position to take from labour.

  4. Chuck 4

    Its clear Andrew Little is counting on National offering a tax cut, and is trying to counter that.

    As John Key has shown over and over again, he does not conform to traditional centre right politics. He will just as easy venture onto the left side of centre as well.

    And even the most rabid lefties here will agree…National is very good at understanding voter sentiment via continuous internal polling.

    It is just possible, taking into account voter sentiment (if its there) that National will forgo tax cuts and instead spend the surplus on the “issues of the day”.

    And / or only adjust the lower tax bracket down or even “no tax on the first $x earned”.

    Interesting times…

    • adam 4.1

      “And even the most rabid lefties here will agree…National is very good at understanding voter sentiment” Indeed that why he vote with Sue Bradford to remove the loop hole to enable parents to beat there kids. So Chuck the Slap conspiracy theorist – do you agree with Key on this?

      As you use speech marks all the time, I think I’m not alone thinking it comes from you, as you never make it clear when you are quote someone else. That said, if you are going to quote someone else, it is also generally assumed you agree with the statement they have made.

      Simple rules of politics Chucky, as you seem not to know them…

      • Chuck 4.1.1

        “As you use speech marks all the time, I think I’m not alone thinking it comes from you, as you never make it clear when you are quote someone else.”

        Well looks like I have a groupie in adam then, I might need a restraining order 🙂

        Glad you have finally worked out that it was all in your head…

        Do you have any children adam?? For the record I have three, all brought up in a caring loving family.

        BTW: Trying to score points by accusing people of mistreating children reflects poorly on you adam.

        • adam 4.1.1.1

          Delusional as always Chucky, I’ve been asking you a question for two days and a simple no rather than your continued deflections is not to much to ask.

          You started on the personal attacks, I just wanted and still want to know if you oppose the beating of children position, sponsored by those who called it the anti-smacking bill?

          You will not answer that simple question Chuck, it is a politically loaded question yes. But as you brought up anti-smacking is it not time you answered the question.

          By the way not a fan of people who deflect as often as you. Its a simple question, you are the one turning it into an accusation – by not answering a very simple question. Do you beat children or support the rights of people to beat children? I would have thought after two days Chucky you could come with an answer, and a position on a political issue like this as you seem so ready to offer your opinion on everything else.

          • Chuck 4.1.1.1.1

            adam, no amount of spinning will hide the facts.

            You made a half hearted attempt at an apology…@ 5.1

            “As you use speech marks all the time, I think I’m not alone thinking it comes from you”

            • adam 4.1.1.1.1.1

              I’m making no apology, feel free to dream on about that one. Let me remind you, you brought up anti-smacking position. I’m trying to found out were you stand on the issue.

              The constant deflections are making you look like you support child abuse.

              My question is, and has always been quite simple, I’m sure most 5 year olds would be able answer, but you are struggling. So here it is again – even more simplified as you seem to be having trouble with English the last two days. Do you hit children or support the rights of people who do? A simple yes or no – will do, as anything else seems to be too taxing for you.

  5. mosa 5

    Andrew Little and Labour have to find a way passed an hostile media to get their message out.

    A case in point last nights One news two top stories were

    1 Joseph Parker

    2 A scrub fire at Brighton beach near Dunedin

    Grant Robertsons speech on the future of work some time after the first commercial break and the PMs photo opportunities.

    The whole landscape has changed for Labours share of important air time and how the story is portrayed to the population unless the news is negative and can inflict damage on the party, a favourite one is “disunity in the ranks ” or Labour is” divided on this” issue.

    The speech was good and has real lift and positive appeal and the ability to reach out with an alternative vision of how Labour is going to address some serious problems and invoking the sacrifice of the late Helen Kelly.

    How much will be reported and how will it be conveyed is the next test.

    • Chess Player 5.1

      Who still watches the network news?
      That is now really just the domain of the aged and those unable to undertake personal research.
      Communicate with the people you want via other means (hint: the interaction means they prefer themselves) and forget about the old broadcast model.

      • b waghorn 5.1.1

        pull your head out of your arse ,i bet shit loads still get all their politics from tv

        • Richard Rawshark 5.1.1.1

          The viewing numbers are ..really low WB..real low..

          People must be getting there tv on demand and skipping perhaps news? or viewing the news on PC’s.

          I would state, internet advertising and getting the message out on a web presence will be the way of the future, if not right NOW.

      • mosa 5.1.2

        As far as i am aware the domain of the aged and those unable to undertake personal research still vote Chess Player.

        • Chess Player 5.1.2.1

          Indeed they do, and haven’t they all voted well in the past…very effective voting.

          Like I say, if you choose an outdated medium to communicate your message – one that involves an intermediary that can add their own perspective/spin – then you do that at your peril.

    • billmurray 5.2

      mosa,
      I generally agree with all your points, except to say, after reading Andrews speech, that I cannot get any real enthusiasm or lift from the speech.
      I feel as if I read it all before.
      I don’t believe the speech will get any traction for Labour in the polls simply because people are not listening to a political party that will probably have to have two other political parties with sizable electorate support to form a coalition government bench.
      I wish Andrew and the party well, but there is a feeling of staleness about this conference that I cannot shake.

      • Leftie 5.2.1

        Billmurray. If any politician and political party is stale and has gone passed it’s use by date, then it’s no future, visionless, no ideas sell out John Key and his National party, that requires the support of 3 minor political parties to govern, and it would be extremely hard, near on impossible in fact, for anyone to feel any real enthusiasm for the same old tired lies that we have all heard so many times before.

        • Richard Rawshark 5.2.1.1

          Is Dunne fully charged up yet. where is that ..grrrr

          • Leftie 5.2.1.1.1

            I am all for an understanding between Labour and the Greens to rid Ōhāriu of Peter Dunne.

        • billmurray 5.2.1.2

          Leftie, yes it is fair to say that the National party also has staleness. They are more stale than Labour by a country mile.
          But they do not suffer from making to many promise’s to the electorates, read Andrews speech and couple it with Grants speech and you have had a book (taken into account the fine print that will be needed to implement) of promise’s.
          Grant is already furiously backtracking on his tax on small employers for ‘non training’ of staff. Grant did not do his research nor did he present well.
          The $60M cost for a policy from Andrew is now being challenged and will be challenged further in the new week starting.
          Though National should not win in 2017, they have better than a fighting chance because of Labours ineptitude and lack of understanding of MMP. Labour can certainly crunch the numbers but they do not understand the key to winning in a MMP enviroment is not just numbers.
          John Key and Winston Peters are both successful politicians who understand MMP without numbers.
          Finally please read Chris Trotters latest blog (bowalley road) to get further insight of what I am trying to convey about Labours staleness.

          • Leftie 5.2.1.2.1

            Bollocks Billmurray. And Winston Peters will never support John key, and Labour have a far better track record of keeping their promises than National, who have practically broken every promise they have made.

          • Richard Rawshark 5.2.1.2.2

            I disagree in part of your comment BillMurray for these reasons.

            I think there is a real will to change this government.
            I think all of keys lies have wound people down they have had enough.
            People are aware of the dirty politics and know Keys promises are broken most of the time.

            I think when we get to full election time the list of things national has lied about, done and been nasty on are going to come home to roost if played right and policy will be forgotten to a degree.

            When the election cycle starts getting nearer the election day, policy will be side lined by slagging each other off and negative electioneering.

            If it goes to negative electioneering, labours got far to much ammo for that.

            John I think will go for a massive voter bribe, he wants to try for that fourth term,, he’s a man who sets goals and does his best to achieve.

            It’s way to early and this is nothing,(re any faults with policy announcement) we got a year to go.. They can review and correct. good learning curve for them (labours new caucus).., tough breaks like these can make a team.. a team that will improve their electioneering skills.

            Nothing ever starts perfect in my experience, it’s how you learn as a team from your mistakes. That I think is what’s going to decide this election.

      • Richard Rawshark 5.2.2

        I noted he aligned himself with the actual words centre left..

        This is where he has chosen to stand his Labour party. He will succeed or fail on how the election goes, and we I suppose shall have to listen and make our decisions.

        That be politics.

    • Richard Rawshark 5.3

      I think now if you really are interested in the election and politics, you’ll be browsing the net and reading here and there making your own mind up.

      The people are not as stupid as people think. No ones, not thinking things on an even basis.

      We all know parties exaggerate and the media is bias.

      What i’m saying is people take into consideration more than your giving them credit.

      • Garibaldi 5.3.1

        You guys are all forgetting what happened last election. The whole Country was awash with blue hoardings, the money for National dominated all the media and the left were very competently ridiculed.
        For the majority of kiwis who don’t give a toss about politics it was easy to support Key. The media are as Right as you can get (including RNZ now).
        Do you really think the Left is looking good enough to overcome all that this time around? I would suggest not and imo I totally blame Labour for that. They are the ones with arrogance and an inability to cooperate.

        • Richard Rawshark 5.3.1.1

          You can’t throw billions on failed policy.., Clintons done that, it only works when the damage of your policies hasn’t taken effect.

          I think, the mood of the electorate has changed, hence left n right block are far closer now than before in the polls

          It’s easy to blame labour, have you contributed to their campaign chest? if not, well you shouldn’t moan . really.

  6. Takere 6

    Also: What about the older folks who’ve years of experience and get traded in for cheaper youth-uni grads & qual’s?
    What is Labour going to do for the unemployed 47-65 age group who’ve been displaced by foreign workers and cheap uni students who’re useless but have a quals?
    The data says this needs to be addressed …. its a growing bubble with a tail.
    A Taniwha having a moe!

  7. Chess Player 7

    Ok, so if there are approx. 56,741 NZ Labour Party members (as per wikipedia) and approx. 74,000 unemployed young people, that means if each Labour party member employs just one person, the problem is largely solved.

    You actually don’t need to elect Labour into power to achieve this, you can simply hire a young person each and Bob’s your uncle!

    • adam 7.1

      Idiot comment of the week goes to Chess Player!

      Go read a book , live a little outside your obvious white privileged self absorbed world, then come back and add to the conversation like an adult.

      • Richard Rawshark 7.1.1

        Audrey beat him with her McCully comment..

        Should frame it for my wall as a forever keep sake, I might actually do that too.

        Audrey Young at peak intellect.

        -The threshold for a McCully sacking is higher than for ordinary ministers because despite his failings, he is good at his job. And that helps Key.

      • Takere 7.1.2

        Adam. He’s (an assumption) obviously a checkers player not realising they’re playing the wrong game!

      • Chuck 7.1.3

        “Idiot comment of the week goes to Chess Player!”

        For once I agree with you adam…that there are 56,742 NZ Labour Party members!!

        But just as accusing someone of abusing children, the same rules apply to assuming someone’s race, and then abusing them because of said race.

        • adam 7.1.3.1

          Poor chucky, the privilege getting to you…

          To much smugness and self absorption means you are not actually a good person?

          Has it dawned on you yet?

          No, oh poor Chucky.

      • Chess Player 7.1.4

        Fascinating that on the basis of one comment, you have assumed quite a lot about me. You must be a superior being.

        It’s true I am white (well, pinkish) and I’m definitely privileged, given I’m free to engage in discourse such as this and only suffer written abuse and not torture, like my relatives, however I don’t think I am self-absorbed.

        I care very deeply about people and I care about you too, adam, and so does God.
        God loves you, and he will save you from all perils, if you just let him.
        You don’t have to keep living in pain.
        Trust in yourself.

        And then, when you have started a business and employed people, come back to the conversation and tell us all about it.

        • adam 7.1.4.1

          I believe in God to Chess Player, but not the money worshiping one you bow your head to.

          You a Evangelical type there Chess Player, the follows who really are engaged in solipsism – the type churches who know all the words, but none of the meaning.

          I’m guessing that, you don’t know what love is or humanity means becasue in reality that would get in the way of your warped view of the gospels. Or that you have a dire need to embrace the old testament, because well, Jesus was a dirty communalist after all.

        • mickysavage 7.1.4.2

          How many Labour members do you think are in a position to employ anyone? I employ two young people but I am in an unusual position.

          • Jase 7.1.4.2.1

            Surely they could be employed to pop the corks on the chardonnay of the Labour Party members?

        • Chuck 7.1.4.3

          adam has an issue with white people and a very unhealthy fascination with beating children.

          I broke one of my rules and engaged with adam on the basis he accused me of child abuse…

          Just giving you the heads up Chess Player!

          • adam 7.1.4.3.1

            Yeah I want child beating to stop, so I’m asking you if you are opposed to it Chucky. But then again you lie so easy, I’m not sure you can even understand that concept.

    • Richard Rawshark 7.2

      What the hell are you on about? .., Oi who left the fucking door open, some Tory’s wandered in and looks lost.

    • Richard Rawshark 7.3

      Wonders if he should take the piss, and go to wikipedia edit the page place 4.5 million paid members for Labour. Then edit the National page on Wikipedia and put Chess player there currently single and hoping for friends. Oh change the name of their party to NZ Nazi’s just for giggles.

    • Barfly 7.4

      Do you have any skill in chess ? Or do you just wish you did?

  8. Tory 8

    I think your optimism is superbly summed up by Chris Trotter;

    “Yes, the delegates will all be there in the conference hall this weekend. The workshop debates will splutter and stutter to some sort of conclusion. Party vacancies will be filled, reports presented, and Andrew will deliver his speech. Except, this time, the political drama’s script will not have been written by a Kirk, a Lange, a Clark, or even a Roger Douglas, but by a committee.

    Labour’s villains have become banal, and her heroes are dead and gone. For me, the party’s annual conference no longer beckons. Fortunately, there’s plenty to keep me busy in my garden. This year’s roses are a particularly vivid shade of red”.

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/11/06/must-read-sunday-why-i-wont-be-at-the-labour-conference-this-weekend/

    Ready with the popcorn for TS resident Politburo Members to declare Trotter a Trotskyite and one who must be given the benefit of a show trial before being purged from Dear Leaders Ranks and sentaced to a life in the outer for his heinous crimes against Mother Labour.

    [lprent: Have you really had your head up your arse since before the 1960s? Otherwise how else can you explain the supreme stupidity of regurgitating McCarthy era propaganda designed for simpletons?

    Do too much of this low-grade stupid trolling and you will find that I start discussing exactly how much of a simple minded fuckwit you appear to be to me. ]

    • Richard Rawshark 8.1

      He’s entitled to his opinion Tory.. jeez.

      The only one of those four that can deliver, beg your pardon could deliver a speech Was lange.
      They all had flaws..

      However I would choose 2 of them to govern me because they kept things as fair as they could in an imperfect world.

      I don’t expect governments to have all the answers.., but when you fuck with a sector of society like beneficiery and the sick and mentally ill. Punish them with starvations i’ll come for you. you can bet your life on it.

  9. The Chairman 9

    Little said there were 74,000 young people not in employment, education or training, yet Labour is assuming only 10,000 would be involved in the new work scheme.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/86144698/labour-offers-six-months-paid-work-to-young-longterm-unemployed

    Moreover, it’s only six months paid employment.

    While better than nothing, at a cost of $60 million a year it’s disappointing Labour failed to come up with something more substantial.

    • BM 9.1

      According to Farrar they’ve got the sums wrong, it’s actually $120 million

      http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2016/11/dodgy_sums_from_labour.html

      • Craig H 9.1.1

        Farrar is wrong. Here is my basic costing, assuming 30 hours per week work (full-time as defined by the Social Security Act):

        Minimum wage is $15.25/hour x 30 = $457.50 per week = $389.93 net (less PAYE) per week. I used the PAYE calculator on the IRD website to calculate this.

        Net Benefit for someone < 25 is $175.10 per week per https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/deskfile/main-benefits-rates/jobseeker-support-current.html .

        Actual net weekly cost to the government is $389.93 – $175.10 = $214.83 per week x 26 = $5,585.58.

        Multiplied by 10,000 = $55,855,800.

        Admin will add to that, as will holiday pay, public holidays, Kiwisaver employer contributions, sick pay etc – somewhere between 12% and 20% typically. On the other hand, there will be some amount of savings in accommodation supplements through abatement, and increased GST (15% of the net figure of $214.83 is over $8,000,000 when multiplied out over 26 weeks and 10,000 people).

        All in all, $60 million is a reasonable estimate for a headline cost, given the complexity of the analysis involved.

        [lprent: Even a small look at the numbers indicates that David Farrar was simply lying with numbers (a characteristic of Nationals’s spokespeople). Because most of the subsequent conversation is numeric dipshit discussed by idiots.

        I’ve moved this comment up to the top of the thread as it explains the costing clearly enough that even a talking head on TV might understand it. It was originally written at about 2320.

        Craig H expanded it in a later comment ]

      • Richard Rawshark 9.1.2

        /slap, do not quote me a National party full on nut jobs bias.

        FFS BM that’s ridiculous.

        Do I use stalin for reference!

        [lprent: Looks like I should start putting some words back into auto-moderation. It is clear that you are using them without context and in a way that is guaranteed to start idiotic flamewars. I’ve already turfed an entire out-of-context thread out of this post into OpenMike that you started.

        Or I could just do the simpler solution and remove the problem for a few months. ]

        • BM 9.1.2.1

          No more nuttier than this site, you should go and do a few posts.

          David Farrar is very laid back free speech sort of guy, it takes a hell of a lot to get banned from Kiwi blog.

          You ‘d probably quite enjoy posting on his blog and fighting with the regulars.

          • adam 9.1.2.1.1

            Joke of the week there BM…Well done – your always good for a laugh mate with the shit you actually believe.

          • Richard Rawshark 9.1.2.1.2

            Ok then you go hang with him..seriously, you love him so, me i’d spew up just being in his company.

      • Chuck 9.1.3

        Just watching One News…they are tearing Andy Little and Labour apart on bogus numbers.

        Seems the fine print was that Labour has only allowed for 4 months per person and not the 6 months announced. Hence why the numbers don’t add up.

        You just can’t make this shit up…

        • BM 9.1.3.1

          It’s just amateur hour, thank goodness I’m not a left winger the incompetence would do my head in.

          • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.1.1

            Ha.. I love the Torys, the make outrageous accusations and sit back like smug arrogant arseholes because in their infinite wisdom how could the serfs ever not believe anything they ever say. They are Tories!

            you lot are completely fucking bonkers.

          • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.1.2

            amateur hour.

            Ok Bm… 1 word..McCully..

            You want to mention amateur hour spin McCully out of it.

        • Takere 9.1.3.2

          For fucksake Chump. I mean Chuck! 10,000 people won’t be signed up on day one! As more employers take up the offer. It’ll grow.
          Employers will have to make some kind of contribution. Nothings for free!
          People will and can move from one job to the next anytime!

          The decent employers will contribute financially reducing the drain on the fund!

          Currently there $873m spent every year on this!

          Are you Tory fucks that thick? Or do you have to have someone else do the thinking for you?

          • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.2.1

            NO T, you are right they are that THICK.

            as in they think the people are even thicker and will just believe any ol;d thing they say without the slightest..question.

            and they are wrong. We are not that thick. You and me, and everyone else is starting to cotton on.

          • adam 9.1.3.2.2

            Come on Takere, Chuck is the guy who runs for conspiracy, and/or polls to justify anything he says. Hell he can’t even answer the simplest of questions. He just a troll, you likes to dish it out, but can’t take it.

          • Chuck 9.1.3.2.3

            The damage has already been done Takere.

            What is the message we (NZ public) are going to take out of the Labour conference just finished today?

            That Labour cannot get there numbers right, even on one of their own policy’s…how are they going to run the Country?

            And it was Andy Little that said he had only allowed for 4 month period for each person. So why on earth did he say the policy was for 6 months?? did he not expect anyone to run a ruler over the numbers??

            • BM 9.1.3.2.3.1

              What is the message we (NZ public) are going to take out of the Labour conference just finished today?

              Incompetence, with a side helping of ineptitude, heavily seasoned with cloddishness. 😀

            • adam 9.1.3.2.3.2

              You actually believe your own spin ah Chucky….

              Makes those conspiracies easy to swallow to I guess…

            • Takere 9.1.3.2.3.3

              Mate. You’re making some “wrong” assumptions. TV LSM only give 30-40 seconds. If you’re that stupid to believe a Policy can be explained in its entirety in that amount of time … you’re a bigga fuckwit than I thought? My apologies for being rude but fuck mate you deserve a serve.
              The nuance of a policy is beyond you and life too most probably? But, I guess I’m wasting my time with trying to reason with you,however, if you just try to use your imagination just a little without the tory spec’s on, you just might see there is a benefit in this policy?
              I don’t know you so I’m not sure if you have any understanding of NZ’s political history but, National empty the cupboards & Labour fill the cupboards back up!
              They’re empty now …. again!

              Don’t think I’m biting. I’m happy to only to use “a” dying mem-cell on you so I’m good with that.

              • Chuck

                “TV LSM only give 30-40 seconds. If you’re that stupid to believe a Policy can be explained in its entirety in that amount of time”

                That my friend is politics these days. News bites…by Labour fucking up the numbers it was the lead story re – Labour conference.

                All Andy Little had to do was cost the policy to match what he said. Simple really.

              • BM

                Isn’t this just taskforce green or those PEP schemes from 20+ years ago.

                What’s the difference?

                • Takere

                  Yep. The numbers. It worked then, and it’ll work again. The only thing(s) that has changed is the evolution of capitalism. Same shit, just a different day.

                  It ain’t rocket science stuff if you break it down and relate it to with what has changed tech advancements.

                • Richard Rawshark

                  I was in a pep scheme as a youth.. some of the best parties I ever went to got organized there, between sunbathing on the roof, or doing nothing…

                  the god damn people pleasing crap parties have presented as solutions in the past eh BM talking both sides here.

                  • BM

                    Wicked parties, sunbathing, chillin out, sounds like taxpayer money well spent 😉

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      It was wonderful time, and when you worked for the MOW and it rained you got paid for playing cards in the caravan for a week or so..

                      and when it was sunny, pot holes took a week to repair because there had to be extensive conversations around safe shovel handling and the proper way one should lean on it whilst gathered together.

                      ahh the good old days.

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      Takes a pep manager to enable that!

                • Stuart Munro

                  A lot of those got canned because Gnat cronies were rorting them for cheap labour. Goodman Fielder Christchurch used to ‘train’ folk to stack flour bags for two months, then dump them & take on a new lot. A refugee I was teaching got screwed like this – he was a senior hospital administrator back home – not very impressed. He’s in OZ now.

            • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.2.3.4

              Your the public..right,

              cancel the election, just ask Chuck.

          • Well Fed Weta 9.1.3.2.4

            “10,000 people won’t be signed up on day one! As more employers take up the offer.”

            The announcement made no mention of the cost while the option was taken up, it simply talked of an annual cost of $60m. They clearly got the sums wrong. The result is that instead of debating a policy with merit, the focus will be on Labour’s inability to get basic sums right. Sad.

            • Takere 9.1.3.2.4.1

              Semantics. Nuance..watch da finga’s on the gat.

              • Well Fed Weta

                Takere, it isn’t semantics. It is an error, and is being painted as such already. My point is that such a fundamental error is politically inexcusable, because it gives the government an opportunity to hammer Labour, and to change the narrative of the discussion around what could have been a good policy.

                • Takere

                  Dude, breathe. Give the imagination some room to grow. Its ok? Some of us have a handle on these “Big” things the little people like you cant imagine or handle, its ok. We’ll do the heavy lifting for those of you that can’t. You just relax and don’t fuck’n stress mate! Have a Cup-O-Tea?
                  Jeeeezzus!? Have I turned up on the wrong fuck’n day or what?
                  Anal or micro managing? Who gives a fuck about MSMTV. Nobody watch’s it or believes it anymore. Well, I mean only dumb fucks do. And those are the people I like meeting every day and I like to fuck their day up with some good ole home truths.

                  • halfcrown

                    “Anal or micro managing? Who gives a fuck about MSMTV. Nobody watch’s it or believes it anymore. Well, I mean only dumb fucks do. And those are the people I like meeting every day and I like to fuck their day up with some good ole home truths.”

                    Great

            • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.2.4.2

              Thanks, though i’d rather believe a team that’s worked on policy for months to have done the sums and know what and how they are going to budget for it.

              For you to say they have no integrity and they just put up any old figures is an insult to them me and everyone else.

              I trust them far more than YOU TVONE, Paul henry Mike Hosking or any other of the crooked and well known biased media.

              You get me someone with a respectable and unbiased opinion i’ll listen till then enjoy your make believe faults. I ain’t impressed.

              • Well Fed Weta

                Richard the maths are simple.

                The minimum wage is $15.25 per hour.
                The policy is for 10,000 participants.
                A working week is 40 hours.
                There are 26 weeks in six months.

                $15.25 x 10,000 x 40 x 26 = $158,600,000.

                I’ve tried to get back to Labour’s figures, using 37.5 hours per week, and the minimum youth wage of $11.80, and I still get $115,050,000.

                I stand to be corrected, but if, as you suggest, they have worked on this policy for ‘months’, how can they have got this so wrong?

                • Richard Rawshark

                  They are already paid a benefit say?, so perhaps it’s like they get an extra 20 dollars a week?

                  So extra cost is negligible?

                  or taking into account the benefit they were already getting that’s why they can do so much with so Little as it’s the extra cost over and above what it already costs the government to support them.

                  of the top of my head.

                  • Well Fed Weta

                    If the target audience are on a benefit, and they are paid the youth wage used in my calculations, no-one would take up the offer.

                    Conversely, if they are on a benefit and switch to being paid the minimum adult wage, the cost would not be $60 million.

                    Either way, Labour’s numbers don’t add up.

                • Craig H

                  Full time is 30 hours per week in the Social Security Act (the benefit act), not 37.5 or 40. Also, deduct the benefit being paid originally, because that would be paid anyway. The $60 million is the net increase in costs to the government, since some of it was being paid anyway.

                  • Peter Swift

                    Plus factor in the the deductions of income tax the workers would be paying each week.

                  • Well Fed Weta

                    No-where in Labour’s policy is 30 hours mentioned. But, giving them the absolute benefit of the doubt:

                    $11.80 x 10,000 x 30 x 26 = $92,040,000. And that doesn’t include any administration costs.

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      Factor in properly all they already receive, these are always based on extremely good looking figures for the party proposing a policy, both parties do that.

                      But what I will say WFW, is this.

                      It’s god damn piss poor when we are all struggling to work it out, even if it’s right.

                      When we need to impress the electorate, this is crap. It should have been down in the policy exactly how Labour did these figures and I am not impressed. Not because I think they are wrong.

                      But that it is clear, this policy’s funding is unclear.

                      It’s almost like they have an incredible capacity to shoot themselves in the foot.

                      However, when National can explain where all the asset sales and borrowing went to in detail, the RW can moan. Till then, i’ll give it what it deserves..my support.

                      .

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      Rough figures.

                      Per person

                      hourly rate 15.8
                      hours 40
                      weeks 26

                      15.8x40x26=16,432

                      – tax Over $14,000 and up to $48,000
                      17.5%
                      = 13,554.6

                      x 10000
                      = 135,540,000

                      less what they were getting by way of, maxing it too, accommodation, basic benefit, supplementary. etc.

                      they here have after tax so i’ll skip that

                      $175.10 basic 18-19 example and the nest zone 1 accommodation supplement is a massive 145.oo

                      so
                      175.1 + 145 = 320.10
                      times 26 weeks =8,332.60
                      times 10000= 83,226,000

                      then we subtract..

                      135,540,000
                      – 83,226,000

                      = 52,314,000

                      that’s a glowing best case they live in an area 1 accommodation supplement area and are ages between 18-19 and are not living at home.

                      Why oh why Labour would you make it like that, we in the grand scheme of tax take are playing here with pocket change.

                      if I changed it to zone 4 accommodation supplement it may soak up the other 7.7m.. probably does off the top of my head.

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      administration costs, you really want to growl at this don’t you, no admin costs, freaking do the same work when they call in the office weekly to report!!!

                    • Richard Rawshark

                      That took me, oh 5 minutes this morning, first look at it..

                      How long you been working out sums now?

                      and they say we’re numerically illiterate!

                      only on second coffee..

                      I am invincible.. love that from..what was it, x-men.

                    • Well Fed Weta

                      Hi Richard.

                      A few observations on your numbers.

                      1. If we’re genuinely talking ‘youth’ here, there would not be much in the way of accomodation benefits.
                      2. The tax rate on the $0 to $14,000 income bracket is only 10.5%.
                      3. The admin costs have to be factored in. The systems to administer welfare are already in place. The systems to administer a ‘make work’ scheme are not.

                    • Well Fed Weta

                      Here’s a better explanation of the costings from Labour themselves:

                      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11743712

                      I’m still reminded of the old adage “explaining is losing”.

        • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.3

          I don’t watch the media TV here to bias.

          as for claims he fiddled numbers, are you serious, they would do that..

          Spare me the integrity insult.

          I’d wager they have found a way via Farrar to discredit it, somehow, and they will not give Andrew or Labour the chance to correct them at all.

          • Red 9.1.3.3.1

            They did not fiddle the numbers it’s just plain incompetence,

            • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.3.1.1

              what is?.. precisely explain to me what the bloody bally hoo from you lot is all about.. gawd.

              it’s like you found the holy grail..

              stop the world.., what is so bloody bad.. then.?

            • Craig H 9.1.3.3.1.2

              It’s not incompetence, it’s a lack of understanding of the policy. The $60 million is a net increase in costs to the government based on having to pay a benefit anyway.

              • Well Fed Weta

                That’s not mathematically correct, and it isn’t even the way Labour are explaining it.

                • Craig H

                  I’ve costed it out elsewhere here, and $60 million is a reasonable estimate.

                  • Well Fed Weta

                    Only for four months. Even Labour have admitted that now. The numbers do not add up when applied to the way the policy was announced, and now Labour are trying to argue that out in public with NZH. Foolish.

            • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.3.1.3

              sadly a quick look at the figures shows as usual, the RW have the biggest issues counting things, like um social costs, health costs, getting to a surplus without fiddling the books by selling stuff to yourself!!

              Perhaps if national went to Labours conference and joined some of their workshops it’ll help the National Caucus work out what’s between 1 and 10..

              lol BURN…:)

        • Richard Rawshark 9.1.3.4

          One news the Bastion of bias free non government interfered straight up, truth.

          FUCKING A, THE MAN IS TVONE…

          lets all sit back and laugh at the tories.. you lot are fubar honestly.

          You will grab anything at all to brag.. my god we all laughed yesterday at the RM poll. this is even better.

      • The Chairman 9.1.4

        Just seen One News. What a shambles.

    • Richard Rawshark 9.2

      The youth employment problem.

      First thing admit some of them at the moment are unemployable full stop.

      I have no answers, I have bitter experiences with youth and engineering.

      I’d rather hire an adult.

      • red-blooded 9.2.1

        Richard, have another look at the speech. Andrew’s actually talking about getting people into an employable state; helping them develop work skills and giving each one involved in the scheme an active mentor to help address any issues that might be a barrier to employment. Plus, people change – especially young people. They grow and develop. In a scheme like this they’d have a chance to grow in a positive direction.

        It’s not the complete answer, but it’s a good start. Put it together with the education and training policies and it’s certainly a positive set of plans.

        • Richard Rawshark 9.2.1.1

          I understand that, for the willing.

          here’s my issue, as Bi-polar my youth was spent floating around getting drunk and stoned, in trouble, all sorts of bad behaviours. 70’s 80’s I was a menace.

          i’m only saying that to show, I recognize their is an antisocial group.. it’s those i’m more directed at.

          Because I believe for the most part that’s the demographic of youth hard to get on a correct track and propping up unemployed youth statistics. trust me i see a lot of them in Tokoroa i was one.., you just know. So wanting to work, turning up, and wanting to learn how do we do that..

          the only thing that would have changed me back then was a proper prospect of a future ,a good apprentiship with conditions, those being I sorted my shit out.

          I think.. at that age it may have worked.

          I cannot think of anything else that would have not made me go get fucked if they wanted me to do something for nothing.

          I have no answers at all. I really was a fucking shit of a kid.

    • greg 9.3

      its a start of a repair job after 9 years of national i still don’t think we know the full extent of the damage and what state the books are in we know English is very good at moving money around to give the appearance that all is well

  10. Takere 10

    I’m sure this dovetails into the bigger economic strategy? I’m guessing they’ll leave the scary stuff till later? Like restructuring the economy? Pull those levers that bring about a structural (macro-micro) change in how NZ(ers) earns a living domestically & internationally?
    Rebalance the economy …. I’m guessing? Or else I won’t be voting for them! Haha! It’s been a long wait for me, 20 years!

  11. fisiani 11

    Where was the bold policy? Where was the vision? Fairly insipid stuff. Why would a National voter of 2014 switch to voting Labour in 2017? What in that speech is believable?

    • Richard Rawshark 11.1

      Thanks fifi.

      your contribution to the standard is noted, passed and flushed.

      Does it hurt passing shit that big?

    • Draco T Bastard 11.2

      It’s far more policy than National have.

      In fact, all that National has is tax cuts for the rich and entrenching Trickle Down Economics even more.

      In other words, All National have is proven failure.

      • Richard Rawshark 11.2.1

        NO DTB, you completely missed the whole Tory way.

        First they make up any old policy, the easier the better and if it helps the rich jolly good.

        Then they invent the result that confirms that it is working.

        it’s perfect and so devilishly clever they use it in banks, I think they called it a Ponzi scheme in banking.

      • Chess Player 11.2.2

        It’s not National’s policy you need to worry about – it’s Winnie and Gareth’s policy.
        I don’t think anyone really expects great policy ideas from either National or Labour (the Greens discount themselves as they are really just Labour’s annoying little sister and so look to differentiate themselves with all manner of absurd utterings).

        The next election will be most interesting entertainment for quite some time.

        Winnie will find one chink in the armour (fear of being old and poor, fear of missing out on prosperity, etc), and work it for all it’s worth, just like he did with the Gold Card and in Northland for the by-election.
        Gareth will come out with lots of ideas and few people will be able to get their head around them, as they are so used to the traditional smile and wave/everything ‘s fine/aren’t the ABs doing well (Invincible!) National approach vs the traditional You Have Stuff We Want So We Will Tax You approach from Labour.

        National’s time will definitely run out – but what the replacement looks like is not clear. And Labour is not the default.

    • Takere 11.3

      Arrh because about 4% of the National vote are swingers!

      • Bob 11.3.1

        National received 700,000 more votes in 2014 than they did in 2002, I think you underestimate the NZ swing vote. Not everyone votes for a party because they always have.

    • Cinny 11.4

      Why would a National voter of 2014 switch to Labour in 2017?

      Two words… Michelle Boag

    • Richard Rawshark 11.5

      Thought the swing to National took place in 2008,

      those swing voters.. they will remember kids locked in rooms..

      They will remember you didn’t fund Keytruda

      They will remember the lovely Lecretia Seales I certainly will

      and Helen Kelly too what a fantastic lady.

      there are some shockers I could go on but that will do for an example

      you got some repairs to do..

    • Richard Rawshark 11.6

      Your total ignorance of the bad things under nationals term confounds me fisi.

      If you don’t address them your asking for trouble.

  12. Draco T Bastard 12

    It’s a crisis.

    It’s a crisis when home ownership is at its lowest level in 65 years.

    It’s a crisis when speculators are having a field day but nurses and teachers and police officers can’t afford to buy a home in Auckland.

    And it’s a crisis when more and more of our families are having to sleep in garages and in cars.

    You’ve all heard about the family living in a van in South Auckland, with an 11 year old girl struggling to do her homework in a dimly-lit back seat.

    That’s a tragedy but they’re not alone.

    You know what?
    That’s exactly the problem that this study says will happen:

    These factors can lead to collapse when they converge to generate two crucial social features: “the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the ecological carrying capacity”; and “the economic stratification of society into Elites [rich] and Masses (or “Commoners”) [poor]” These social phenomena have played “a central role in the character or in the process of the collapse,” in all such cases over “the last five thousand years.”

    Currently, high levels of economic stratification are linked directly to overconsumption of resources, with “Elites” based largely in industrialised countries responsible for both:

    “… accumulated surplus is not evenly distributed throughout society, but rather has been controlled by an elite. The mass of the population, while producing the wealth, is only allocated a small portion of it by elites, usually at or just above subsistence levels.”

    There’s really only one way to resolve the problem and that’s to get rid of capitalism and the rich.

    That means 100,000 new affordable homes for first home buyers.

    That’s not the solution. In fact, it’s part of the problem as it entrenches private ownership even more.

    Yes, we need the 100k homes – but make them state homes rented out to anyone on a first come, needs basis. And then offer to buy peoples homes off of them but allow them to stay on the same great rent of 10% of household income and a lifetime lease.

    Make it so that people don’t want to own a home because doing so costs far more.

    • fisiani 12.1

      Quite right. No one should own a home. The state should own all the houses and all the companies. Everyone should earn the same. No one should ever die. Chocolate should be free.

      • Ad 12.1.1

        Will you be my rainbow-tailed unicorn pony?

      • Draco T Bastard 12.1.2

        No one should own a home.

        What’s the point of owning a house?

        Please note: I said house, not home. People living in state houses have a home. Well, they do until National sells them all off to their bludging rich mates.

        All private business should be cooperatives with no one having ownership in them.

        Everyone should earn the same.

        I tend to be more in favour of getting rid of money altogether but for now I’m happy with just putting in place a maximum income of $100k.

        • fisiani 12.1.2.1

          I cannot tell if you are joking. I hope so. i cannot believe you are serious.

          • Chess Player 12.1.2.1.1

            Oh, she’s serious.
            And you? You will conform…

          • Draco T Bastard 12.1.2.1.2

            And I know that you’re serious about making life ever more difficult for the majority of people just so that a few bludging rich people can be ever richer.

            • infused 12.1.2.1.2.1

              Majority? I don’t think so some how.

              • Draco T Bastard

                Yes, the majority.

                As Adam Smith said (Paraphrased): You need lots of poor people to support one rich person.

                National are working to bring about lots of poor people.

            • Tory 12.1.2.1.2.2

              In the mean time the left “wanks on” about “the living wage” and your big policy announcement uses the minimum wage; hypocrisy at its best.

  13. fisiani 13

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/nznews/did-labour-plagiarise-newshub-2016110619?platform=hootsuite

    Cannot count and cannot come up with a fresh idea. What a disaster.

    • Richard Rawshark 13.1

      meh morry minor, and with Jacinda to look at ,this male gets side tracked by her beauty.

  14. Richard Rawshark 14

    So really you’ve had a full 2 days now to rip shit out of labour, and not a lot..

    I think it’s going well..

    • Tory 14.1

      Dick, we don’t need to “rip shit out of Labour”, you lot are achieving that quite successfully yourselves without any input from the right.

      • Richard Rawshark 14.1.1

        I see, so all day yesterday the massive influz..of Tory Dicks attacking the standard and it’s memebers and everything anyone said..

        was just a figment of my KDS ..

        I see…

        clearly now.

      • Richard Rawshark 14.1.2

        Here’s something for you to think about Tory.

        When you look at yourself as a poster here, you have come to a left wing blog. You have called yourself Tory.. at a left wing blog. That’s an interesting name in itself.

        To call oneself Tory on a left blog, invites people to attack you..it’s bait in itself, and carefully chosen, your intent by that name is to invite the posters here to focus on you..it’s well thought out and deliberate in itself.

        Then the content of your posts is always of a critical nature, you contribute little to the site but thrills for your own amusement.

        The derogatory nature of offence intended by the use of this name here is tantamount to posting on a jewish web site and calling yourself Hitler.

        The bullshit mock offence you guys put up yesterday left me so side split with laughter, taking the above into consideration that I wondered where all the admins were.

        I don’t go to your RW sites, call myself Commie and attack anyones idea’s or thoughts there, so if getting a leftie back for stuff they post on RW sites is your intent..your not well.

        From here on Tory..i’ll do my bit to just plain out ignore the fuck out of you..or just be really rude to you.

        because all of the above is pretty much spot on. IMHO.

  15. Jenny 15

    “We owe it to our kids – I owe it to my son – to do our part in the fight against climate change – because they don’t have a future if our planet doesn’t have a future.”

    Andrew Little speech to the Green Party AGM 2016

    http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_speech_to_green_party_agm_2016

    Ready for work?

    Well not quite.

    Not quite ready just yet to face up the greatest work we will ever have to do, as a government, as a nation, as a people, as a world.

    Whatever happened to, “The government I lead will make our country a leader in the fight against climate change.” Andrew Little, delivered to the Green Party conference?

    Or even the passing nod given to climate change in Grant Robertson’s Future Of Work speech yesterday?

    https://thestandard.org.nz/grant-robertson-speech-future-of-work-commission-results/#comment-1255662

    • Leftie 15.1

      .”We owe it to our kids – I owe it to my son – to do our part in the fight against climate change – because they don’t have a future if our planet doesn’t have a future.”

      “The government I lead will make our country a leader in the fight against climate change.”

      I haven’t seen a change from that, so what makes you think there has been Jenny? It’s impossible to fit in every detail and/or plan in a speech, but you definitely get the idea of where the party is heading.

      • Jenny 15.1.1

        “It’s impossible to fit in every detail and/or plan in a speech, but you definitely get the idea of where the party is heading.”
        Lefty

        Websters English dictionary
        the elephant in the room
        DEFINITION
        a major problem or controversial issue which is obviously present but is avoided as a subject for discussion

        http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=banksy+elephant+in+the+room+barely+legal+exhibition&&view=detail&mid=9F4FA361C75D4AA52F579F4FA361C75D4AA52F57&FORM=VRDGAR

        • Chris 15.1.1.1

          Another elephant in Labour’s room is fixing the safety net for the poorest of the poor. Labour doesn’t want to do that. Labour might be a party for the workers, but if you’re an unemployed worker or someone who’s unable to participate in the Labour market, then Labour offers you nothing except life on the scrap heap.

          • Jenny 15.1.1.1.1

            Hi Chris, in lesser words you could have said, ‘I think the benefit cuts need to be reversed’. Which is a fair comment, but a bit off topic.

            Forgive me if I am wrong, but since your comment was in reply to my comment, I am guessing that you are trying to make a rather round-about point that my comment was off topic.

            This thread is about Labour’s Future Of Work policies. It is in my humble opinion that addressing climate change will be central to the future of work, and to ignore that reality represents a glaring ommission. You may, or may not, have a different opinion, and could have said that.

            In his speech Grant Robertson mentioned the words climate change just once, and then only in passing. Explaining that his use of the phrase “just transition” had been borrowed from the environmental movement. Almost apologetically, Grant added, “Climate change and its global impact was ever-present in the work of the Commission.
            In our report we are calling for decent work that supports our move to a low-carbon economy.”

            (You could argue, I suppose that, that amounted to two mentions of climate change by Grant.)

            Andrew Little in his speech, chose not to mention climate change at all.

            Lefty in his comment, apologetically, explains, “It’s impossible to fit in every detail and/or plan in a speech”

            The “detail” Lefty mentions, is nothing less than the greatest crisis that humanity has ever faced. If our leaders ever do eventually start to properly begin to address the challenge presented by climate change, it will be the beginning of the greatest work we ever do.

            • Anne 15.1.1.1.1.1

              Jenny!

              Can I suggest to you that…. just because the words “Climate Change” do not appear in each and every speech by leading Labour politicians does not mean they don’t care or are not interested. Indeed the opposite is the case. I was at the week-end conference and the subject matter was referred to in one form or another at both policy sessions I attended – and not just once but several times.

              Together Labour and the Greens represent the best chance this country will ever have of dealing to Climate Change in a timely and realistic manner. There’s much more goes on behind the scenes than is apparent in the one-off conference speeches. Labour’s CC spokeswoman, Megan Woods is very well informed – and that comes from someone who was once in the climatalogical business.

            • Richard Rawshark 15.1.1.1.1.2

              Greens and Labour have a memorandum of understanding, best the greens do what the greens do and labour does what it does, do you not think.?

              For Grant to make ANY comment on climate change etc, really opens up a can of worms, and a can of kick ass for the media, they will exploit any, slightest, friction, or differences.

              I think it’s covered, labours entering government and it will be along side the greens, Let the greens deal with their field of expertise and labour there’s.

              • Lefty

                Green party co leader James Shaw was highly complementary of Andrew Little.

              • Leftie

                Co leaders of the Green party were special guests at Labour’s conference, James Shaw was very complementary of Andrew Little.

                • Leftie

                  Apologies for the doubling up of comments, having a few probs with posting.

                  [your comments are going into Spam for some random reason. It takes time for them to be released manually – weka]

            • Lefty 15.1.1.1.1.3

              It was a statement of fact, and I wasn’t being apologetic.

            • Chris 15.1.1.1.1.4

              Nothing leftie says is important. He’s a shill for the Labour party. People reading the shit that pours from his mouth need to take this into account.

              • Leftie

                Lol That’s rich coming from a nat fan troll like yourself, Chris. You are showing yourself up.

          • Lefty 15.1.1.1.2

            You’re trolling Chris.

          • Leftie 15.1.1.1.3

            You’re trolling Chris

            • Chris 15.1.1.1.3.1

              Fuck off, you pathetic uncritical Labour party shill. You disgust me.

              [Settle down, cobber. No need for that kind of mindless abuse. Only warning. TRP]

        • Leftie 15.1.1.2

          I view painted elephants like that as a form of abuse.

  16. Craig H 16

    Here is my basic costing of the Ready For Work policy, assuming 30 hours per week work (full-time as defined by the Social Security Act):

    Minimum wage is $15.25/hour x 30 = $457.50 per week = $389.93 net (less PAYE) per week. I used the PAYE calculator on the IRD website to calculate this.

    Net Benefit for someone < 25 is $175.10 per week per https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/deskfile/main-benefits-rates/jobseeker-support-current.html .

    Actual net weekly cost to the government is $389.93 – $175.10 = $214.83 per week x 26 = $5,585.58.

    Multiplied by 10,000 = $55,855,800.

    Admin will add to that, as will holiday pay, public holidays, Kiwisaver employer contributions, sick pay etc – somewhere between 12% and 20% typically. On the other hand, there will be some amount of savings in accommodation supplements through abatement, and increased GST (15% of the net figure of $214.83 is over $8,000,000 when multiplied out over 26 weeks and 10,000 people). This ignores excise taxes (alcohol, tobacco, gambling), petrol tax and what happens when the beneficiary concerned has children (working for families and childcare subsidies increase).

    All in all, $60 million is a reasonable estimate for a headline cost, given the complexity of the analysis involved.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 16.1

      Your estimate makes sense to me.

      Plus quite a few beneficiaries might already be getting some supplementary assistance, above the $175.10 you mention, which could also be displaced by the new scheme (plus there are administration costs of the existing benefits, such as rubbish “work for you” seminars etc).

    • Gabby 16.2

      It’s a real shame that calculation, or conveying it, seems to have been beyond its proponents. Maybe they’ve got their act together now, I don’t know.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 16.2.1

        Actually they have been ambushed by obviously misleading (and I suspect malicious) calculations produced by opponents.

        Maybe Labour’s background could have been more detailed up front, but you can’t predict every lie a liar will make – only after they lie do you know what to respond to.

        • Gabby 16.2.1.1

          Well I’d’ve thought a ‘showmethamunny’ was pretty predictable. Christ help them come election time.

  17. Jono 17

    People from the top end of town don’t like these policies cause they get in the way of there agenda for higher profits. If you have train a kiwi to do a job it costs more than importing a skilled migrant. To the top end of town they see less $$$… I think Little is on the right track here but i also think he needs to introduce a Universal Basic Income. So people are less reliant on the top end of town and can take the risk of starting up there own businesses.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 17.1

      I agree, Jono. Labour’s sentiments and policies show a much better direction than NAct, but we need to do more – and a UBI would be a great step.

      Andrew talks a bit about the lack of tax/contribution from the top end of town, but could go further, given it is the elephant in the room. Could start by putting some pressure on John Key – a 1%er who also happens to be PM – to reveal his tax vs his wealth.

    • Draco T Bastard 17.2

      …but i also think he needs to introduce a Universal Basic Income. So people are less reliant on the top end of town and can take the risk of starting up there own businesses.

      And that is why it’s going to take a while to get a UBI through. It totally removes the need for rich people.

  18. Richard Rawshark 18

    Morgans pushing for the UBI,

    here we have the perfect left, each working to gather votes from those who want specifics.. once the votes are counted we get all three benefits.

    Greens Labour Morgan

    we may not need the wolf in McCully’s clothing Winston at all, and would that not be a spectacular sunrise.?

    It’s like ACT UF Nats and Maori but with the other parties actually contributing instead of pushing the main party over the line for their own benefit.

    This is how you do it folks.

  19. Nessalt 19

    What is so stupid about current labour and it’s policies is that they can’t see past the traditional model of implementation, tax, or the grounds for them, socialism. Instead of taking two mediocre and individually rather useless, if not punititve policies, like levying businesses not providing training to New Zealanders and providing free tertiary education if you meet certain criteria at some point in the future, Why not behave like a government with all the statistical and institutional resources a government has.

    Why not identify current and future skill shortages, which don’t arise overnight, and provide free education in those skills and retraining and perhaps subsidised apprenticeships for those in the workforce or in areas where tertiary training isn’t relevant.

    Show that they’e thought about the problem and the future of it. not just looked at some clickbait headline and released a clickbait policy to match exactly that headline.

    Small wonder no one seriously thinks they are ready to govern.

    • Richard Rawshark 19.1

      WHAT!

      Well if you won’t drop the negativity and ACTUALLY LOOK, we will never change your perception.

      I read that and just shook my head everything you moaned about they did!! FFS

  20. rsbandit 20

    Is this all we get? Tinkering around the edges? Like National, only red coloured.

    Where is the unwinding of neoliberalism? I can only conclude they still agree with it, even if they posture otherwise.

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts