Andrew Little’s speech to the Labour 2015 conference

Written By: - Date published: 12:07 pm, November 8th, 2015 - 181 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, labour - Tags:

Andrew Little Labour Conference-1

Andrew’s speech can be viewed on his Facebook page. The speech is due to start at 1:30 pm. The text will be added as soon as possible.

From the Labour website:

On Sunday November 8, Labour Leader Andrew Little will address the 99th Labour Party Conference. In his speech, he’ll outline his and Labour’s vision for a better New Zealand. Labour will create more good jobs, protect New Zealand’s sovereignty and will back the Kiwi dream.

This is a public event, open to all, at Regent on Broadway Theatre in Palmerston North. Doors open at 1pm.

November 08, 2015 at 1:30pm – 2:30pm

WHERE

Regent on Broadway
53 Broadway Ave
Palmerston North 4410
New Zealand

Google map and directions


Andrew Little’s Speech to Labour Party Conference

E nga mana

E nga tapu

E Te whanau o te roopu reipa

Tena Tatou Katoa

Over 100 years ago, a group of miners gathered in a small union hall in Waihi and voted to take a stand against a company that was exploiting them.

The dispute had gone on for months already.

The miners’ hopes were simple.

They wanted to be treated well at work, to be paid fairly, and they wanted to know that when they went to work they would come home safely.

So the miners went on strike to press their case.

The response was immediate and devastating.

The full power of a corrupt and cosy establishment was unleashed against them.

The Prime Minister of the day branded them “enemies of order.”

One miner was beaten to death.

A young union organiser, a recent immigrant from Scotland, was helping the miners with their cause, travelling the country to raise money and give speeches in support.

He saw first hand the lengths that powerful interests would go to in order to cling on to their position.

He saw that if the dreams of ordinary people were going to be possible, they needed more than a voice — they needed to have their hands on the law-making power of Parliament.

That young man’s name was Peter Fraser.

The party that he helped found, our party, has been on the job for nearly 100 years.

  • 100 years of fighting for a more just New Zealand.
  • 100 years of standing up to the smug and the self-contented.
  • 100 years of making life better for all New Zealanders;

All the people who organised together and campaigned together over the last century, people like you and me; they’ve left us an awesome legacy.

Just think of what our party has achieved:

  • Think of Joe Savage, who built our modern social safety net, our health care, our pensions, and who carried the furniture into the very first state house.
  • Think of Peter Fraser, fighting for a state education system at home, and a lasting peace abroad.
  • Think of Walter Nash and his fight for affordable home loans.
  • Think of Norman Kirk walking onto the grounds at Waitangi hand in hand with a young Māori boy, sending the powerful message that it was time to restore mana to the Treaty of Waitangi.
  • Think of David Lange and the courage it took to stand up to a superpower. To assert what he called the power of humanity, the power of decision, over the madness of nuclear war.
  • And, just a few years ago, think of all the good Helen Clark did to lift New Zealand families through the Cullen Fund, KiwiSaver and Working for Families.

Our party has never been afraid to take on the big fights:

  • To lift New Zealanders up.
  • To restore opportunity.
  • To help us live our dreams.

You know, as New Zealanders, we don’t ask for the world. We have some simple aspirations.

Owning a home; having security for the people we love; a chance to enjoy the outdoors and the environment we love; and a job that gives us the time and the money to lead a fulfilling life.

These are the aspirations that we all share.

Together, they’re the Kiwi Dream, a dream that’s central to our country’s identity.

We’ve always been a progressive, big hearted people.

We believe in looking out for each other and doing the right thing.

We believe everyone should have the same opportunities to make the most of this life.

Our forebears in this great party put these values at the heart of the Labour project.

Whenever the Kiwi dream has needed a lift, Labour lifted it.

Whenever the rights of New Zealanders needed defending, Labour defended them.

Now it’s our turn. Now it’s our turn.

We’ve come together this weekend to begin the work of rebuilding the Kiwi Dream.

I came to this party because Labour has always stood up for a fair go — for opportunity for everyone.

It’s an enormous honour to have been elected your Leader — I don’t underestimate the responsibility I hold.

But I’m not one of those people who can say I was born to Labour.

In fact, it was quite the opposite.

The first time my Mum voted for a Labour candidate was when she voted for me.

My Dad was another story altogether. He was a staunch National supporter.

He used to yell at the TV whenever political opponents came on the telly.

The people who most got under his skin? Union leaders, and pretty much everyone in the Labour Party.

So, “Andrew Little, Leader of the Labour Party and former union leader” probably isn’t the ambition he had for his son.

He’s probably up there right now going “god, look at my boy, where did I go wrong?”

But the truth is, he did a great job.

He and mum taught me some basic values.

Think for yourself. Make up your own mind. Stand up for other people and never be afraid to lend a helping hand to someone who needs it.

So Dad, you did the right thing, you were just in the wrong party.

My own political views were forged in the era of the Springbok Tour, and of the controversies over justice for Arthur Allan Thomas and justice in the Erebus Disaster.

I watched these events unfold and discovered in myself an intolerance for injustice.

When I see injustice, it sticks in my craw and I am compelled to stand up to it, and fight it.

The injustice I speak of is when the powerful and the privileged abuse their position to take advantage of the weak.

Here’s what I believe

  • I believe in dignity. The dignity of the person matters most; and every person must have the opportunity to realise their full potential;
  • I believe in equality. A system that shuts people out because of where they live, or who they are, or who they love, or who their parents are is unjust and cannot stand;
  • I believe in the great freedoms that make us who we are. Freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association.

I know that the freedom I cherish cannot come at the expense of other people’s freedom. And I am very clear: there is no freedom in poverty and deprivation.

And I believe in fair rewards, too. Everyone who works to make this country great should share in the rewards.

It’s those values that I have carried with me my entire life.

The experiences I’ve had in my working life have taught me the type of leadership you need if you want to fight and win for progressive causes.

I learnt that it isn’t about making everyone happy or trying to avoid confrontation and disagreement.

Instead it’s about taking a stand because it’s the right thing to do.

I learned that real change — lasting change — change that’s worth fighting for takes patience, and resolve and determination.

It takes a long term view, keeping your eyes on the prize, not being drawn into every battle and skirmish and never giving up on what matters.

It’s these values and a lifetime of fighting for them that’s led me to believe we need to change the direction of our country.

Because right now this government isn’t living up to our values.

We aren’t being true to who we are, and that means more people are being shut out of the Kiwi Dream.

Most Kiwis believe that hard work should bring fair rewards.

But our economy is increasingly weighted in favour of those already doing well, while throwing up barriers that stop other people getting ahead.

That’s why the incomes of the top 10 percent of New Zealanders are now ten times the income of the bottom 10 per cent. Ten times.

Most New Zealanders grew up with the expectations that they would be able to own their own home if they worked hard and saved hard.

But our houses have become playthings for speculators, many of whom live offshore — putting home ownership out of reach of ordinary New Zealanders.

That’s why in Auckland last year, the average house made more than three times as much as the average worker.

That’s right, the average Aucklander made $58,000 last year, but the average house price went up by more than $180,000.

And now home ownership rates have hit their lowest level in 64 years.

That’s crazy. We have to turn that around.

Most Kiwis also expect New Zealand to be a force for good on the world stage.

But this government is ducking its obligations and turning us into a lightweight in the international community.

We enlisted the support of many countries to get onto the UN Security Council.

We promised we would be the conscience of the world — that we would provide moral leadership.

But when we were faced with a real question of moral leadership: a humanitarian crisis engulfing millions of Syrian refugees, New Zealanders looked on in horror as the government dithered because they were waiting for a poll to tell them what the right thing to do was.

This is not the legacy of our great internationalist leaders: Fraser, Kirk, Clark.

If you want another example where this government’s lost its way, look at health.

Most Kiwis believe when you get sick, the public health system will be there to help you get well.

But our health system is stretched to breaking point, slashing services and denying Kiwis the care they need.

That’s why when Graham Higgins from Northland needed a procedure to diagnose his cancer, he had to wait over 6 months — by which time his cancer had become terminal.

I’ve battled cancer myself.

I know what it’s like to wait for the results of that test that could change your life.

So I’m making this commitment right now: when I’m Prime Minister I’ll make sure Kiwis get the care they need when they need it and I’ll give our doctors and nurses the funding they need to do their jobs.

But these aren’t the only values we’ve lost in the last few years.

Most Kiwis believe we owe it to our kids to give them a better life than we had.

But this government has turned a blind eye to appalling rates of poverty in this country.

That’s why the children’s wards of our hospitals are seeing Kiwi kids sick with third world diseases.

It’s why Emma-Lita Bourne died in a state house because her home was mouldy and unhealthy and no one was willing to help.

We must never let anything like that happen again.

New Zealand, we have to be a better country than that.

We have to turn the page on the last seven years;

We have to turn the page on rising inequality, on child poverty, on the housing crisis and on cuts to our health system,

If we want to restore the Kiwi Dream then we have to change the government.

And, once we’ve done that, we have to change the way we govern, too.

Right now, it seems the government is more interested in slapstick and personal sledging than in genuine leadership;

It’s more interested in flags and pandas than in serious issues.

It seems like the latest political sideshow is often more important than what is happening to you or your family.

I didn’t become an MP to play palace politics.

I came into politics to help people.

To change lives.

To take this country forward.

I ran for the leadership of our party because I want to lead a Government that makes a genuine difference.

Today, I want to give New Zealanders a clear idea of the shape and character of the sixth Labour Government.

I want to show you how we’ll put Kiwi values back to work in our government, so everyone can live the Kiwi Dream.

It starts with restoring the values that should underpin how we run our economy.

We need to remember who we run the economy for.

People. New Zealanders. Their families.

This government’s forgotten that.

They’ve been rewarding property speculators, tax dodgers and big corporates at the expense of Kiwi families.

And here’s the truth: It hasn’t worked.

Just look at what’s happened in the last few months

Kiwis worked hard to make it through the recession and we were told better days were coming.

But just when we should be soaring, we’re stalling again.

Just this week we’ve learned the economy lost 11,000 jobs in the last three months.

Unemployment has hit 6% and it’s forecast to reach 7% by the end of next year.

That’s the highest level since the height of the GFC.

The economy is actually going backwards in half of our regions.

If we’re going to restore the Kiwi Dream of opportunity for everyone, we need a stronger economy

That starts with getting more New Zealanders into higher skilled, better paid jobs.

Ask me my three priorities as Labour Leader?

Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.

You can ask me my top ten as well but I think you get the gist.

A job is about more than just a pay packet, it’s about the dignity of work. It’s about a place and a purpose in your community.

Every Kiwi who can work should be able to work.

Every business that needs a skilled worker should be able to find one.

And where people can’t work, the government should support them because we don’t believe in throwing Kiwis on the scrap heap.

From day one, we’ll kick-start the economy.

  • We’ll bring forward major infrastructure projects like the City Rail Link in Auckland and passenger rail in Canterbury.
  • We’ll build better schools so every Kiwi kid can learn in a modern, high quality building.
  • We’ll set up a Regional Infrastructure Fund for major development projects to create jobs and boost our regions.

We will be relentlessly focussed on the future. That’s why I’m proud of Grant Robertson’s Future of Work Commission, which is showing us how to build a better economy for the future.

We’ll help create thousands of new jobs in new industries by restoring research and development tax credits — giving our businesses a tax break on every dollar they spend on innovation.

We’ll modernise our education system so our kids are better prepared for jobs that haven’t even been invented yet.

And we’ll tackle climate change, because the only way our economy has a future is if our planet has a future.

That means aiming higher on renewable energy — we should be bold enough to say we want to see 100% renewable energy in New Zealand.

That also means doing better on reducing emissions. I want us to reach across the political divide, bring parties together and agree on ways to make New Zealand a leader on climate change. We don’t want to be a shirker on this issue. It’s too important.

That’s why Labour’s proposal for the Paris conference is a 40% CO2 reduction below 1990 levels. That’s the kind of ambition we need on this issue.

We also need to improve our social safety net so it works better in a world where people change their careers more often.

And today, I want to add the next element of Labour’s economic plan.

As you might have guessed, it’s about jobs.

It’s about the government lifting its game and living its values.

There are 151,000 New Zealanders out of work already and that number is only going to rise. 151,000.

On top of that, there’s 90,000 underemployed New Zealanders, and another 200,000 who can only find temporary work.

For everyone to have a fair shot at the Kiwi Dream, everyone needs a chance at a decent, secure job, and the government should be doing its bit to make that happen.

But it isn’t.

Not even on the most basic decisions.

The government spends $40 billion a year purchasing goods and services.

That’s huge buying power but, currently, government bodies only consider their own bottom line when they make purchasing decisions. Not the country’s bottom line, just their own.

They buy ‘cheaper’ options, often from overseas, regardless of the impact on New Zealand, even if it means Kiwis will lose work.

That’s the kind of dangerously short sighted thinking that has been behind some of the biggest government botch ups in the last few years.

  • the Hillside workshop closure in Dunedin and asbestos in imported rail wagons;
  • The Novopay debacle
  • Kiwi businesses shut out of the $1.9 billion IRD computer system contract.

At a time when our economy is stalled and our regions are struggling, there is a better way.

So today I’m announcing the first part of our jobs plan.

We’ll use the government’s buying power to create jobs here at home instead of sending them off overseas.

We will make job creation and the overall benefit to New Zealand a priority in how the government chooses its suppliers.

No more shipping tax-payers’ money offshore and starving our own companies of business.

No more sending jobs overseas when they should be supporting a stronger economy here at home.

That’s billions of dollars that we will focus on creating jobs here in New Zealand.

And because we are putting existing money to better use, this policy has little to no fiscal cost.

Our plan, which we’re calling “Our Work, Our Future,” will put people to work, boost our businesses and it won’t break the bank.

Rebuilding the Kiwi Dream also means restoring opportunity to the thousands of New Zealand kids who are missing out — robbed of their future by the circumstances of their birth.

It means shining a light into dark corners of our country where people are trapped.

We still have 305,000 children living in poverty. 305,000.

2 out of 5 of those children have a parent who is working.

This can’t continue. It is unjust and it’s not who we are.

We all know this, but we’ve shrugged our shoulders and ignored it for far too long.

Well, that ends today.

I’m committing our party to a new principle:

We will not tolerate poverty in New Zealand in the 21st century.

We won’t tolerate the poverty of the human spirit that means we choose to leave hundreds of thousands of children languishing in deprivation.

We won’t tolerate the poverty of imagination that means we stop thinking of creative ways to bring that poverty to an end.

Because I know that when this speech is over we will hear the usual chorus of jaded and cynical voices. They’ll say:

“It can’t be done. It’s too ambitious. You’re dreaming.”

To the cynics I say this:

Even if you’ve given up, I haven’t. I won’t. Ever. It’s not who I am.

New Zealanders are sick and tired of a politics that’s defined by cynicism and devoid of ambition.

It’s time to do better.

New Zealand, I’m asking you to join with me in a concerted effort to eradicate poverty in our country.

In government, we will put action on poverty at the heart of everything we do.

We’ll increase the number of hours people can work without having their benefit cut — to give more people a pathway back into full time work.

We’ll work towards 100% qualified teachers in ECE centers so every kid can get the best start in life.

We’ll feed hungry kids with our food in schools programme and we’ll make sure every child grows up in a warm, safe, dry home with our Healthy Homes Guarantee.

And we will get serious about lifting wages by working with unions and employers on modern and progressive workplace relations that lifts productivity and shares the gains fairly.

Every decision my government makes will be checked against its impact on child poverty.

So, every Budget, every year, we won’t just report on GDP growth or how much money we’ve spent, we’ll front up and tell the country how many children a Labour government has lifted out of poverty.

The final part of rebuilding the Kiwi Dream is having a government that stands up for Kiwis again.

For many of us in this room, I know the TPPA is very important.

There are many things we still don’t know about what’s in the agreement.

But there is one thing we do know.

The National Government has signed us up to a clause that says we will not be able to make laws restricting the sale of land or housing to non-resident foreigners.

That’s what they’ve done.

They’ve signed us up to a commitment to other governments, and other people who don’t live in New Zealand, who don’t want to live in New Zealand, who don’t care about New Zealand.

That commitment limits what our democratically elected representatives in parliament can do.

And it’s wrong.

It’s wrong.

It’s an attack on democracy. It’s selling out our democratic right to make our own laws.

And this matters to me because I’ve had some fights for New Zealanders under some very bad laws.

I started my law career under the Employment Contracts Act — a terrible law that cut the wages of thousands of New Zealanders.

The reason I came to Parliament was to make sure that we had laws that were good for New Zealand.

And I’m not giving that away to anybody.

But I’m not the only one with that view.

Remember Peter Fraser — one of the founding voices of our party. He saw what was happening to the Waihi Miners and he saw that for ordinary people to have a shot at their dreams they needed a democratic government on their side.

That’s what is at stake here.

Can we hold on to our democratic rights? Not if we let National trade them away.

So, I’m telling you, when it comes to undermining our democracy and our sovereignty in the TPPA, I am totally opposed and I will fight with every fibre in my body to stop it, to resist it, to make sure it never happens in New Zealand.

Our party has always backed the Kiwi Dream.

For nearly 100 years Labour has been fighting for New Zealand.

And today, it’s our turn to continue that fight.

Today, too many people feel like their dreams are slipping away.

And this government isn’t standing up for Kiwis or for what we believe.

It’s up to us to turn this around.

In just two years, we can change the government and we can change this country.

We can restore opportunity.

We can create jobs.

We can end poverty and help Kiwis get ahead again.

Together, we can rise to the challenge of a new era, and chart a better course of our country.

I’m asking all of you today to make your voice heard.

I’m asking you to join our campaign, to talk to your neighbours and your friends and your family, to show them there is a better way.

Let’s send the message out from this hall today that the days of doing the easy thing are over.

It’s time to do the right thing.

The days of cowering to powerful vested interests are over.

It’s time to stand up for New Zealand.

The days of shrugging our shoulders and tolerating poverty and inequality are over.

It’s time to aim higher and do better.

It’s time to raise our sights.

We can do this.

We must do this, and we will do this.

New Zealand, together, it’s time for us to rebuild the Kiwi dream.

181 comments on “Andrew Little’s speech to the Labour 2015 conference”

  1. Te Reo Putake 1

    Very much looking forward to the speech. It’s going to cap off what’s been a terrific weekend. 500 plus delegates at conference, a united caucus, debate without divisiveness or rancour, and plenty of humour and positivity. Top work, people!

  2. Michael 2

    I won’t hold my breath for anything demonstrating an understanding of, or commitment to, the principles of social justice. Just vague, open-ended clichés uttered to appear all things to all people and camouflage the schisms within the Party hierarchy (the grassroots haven’t counted in the Party for a long time now). The only positive that I can see is that this outfit won’t be forming a government any time soon. Perhaps another political group might take up the challenge?

    • ankerawshark 2.1

      Just got back from Palmerston North having seen Andrew Little’s speech. He was outstanding! Absolutely inspiring. Wow, just Wow.

    • Raf 2.2

      Haha! “Nothing demonstrating an understanding of or commitment to the principles of social justice.” ? Still got both feet in your mouth, Mike? Admit you were impressed!

    • Mike the Savage One 2.3

      Yes, I have my worries too, with social justice being honoured.

      Also, there will be a huge challenge for Annette King, to convince with Labour’s new direction and policy on health, which we do of course have little or no detail about, as she does continually get slammed for the long waiting queues in hospitals under Labour’s last term, and for some cancer patients having had to go to Australia for treatment.

      It is easy to get excited about inspirational speeches, it is another thing to convince with the policy and more detail that needs to follow next year. Having had a “mixed record” will mean King has to work extra hard, despite of her mature age, to turn enough middle class voters around, which Labour seems to still largely focus on.

      • locus 2.3.1

        didn’t sound like Andrew was talking about middle class voters….

        • Mike the Savage One 2.3.1.1

          It was mentioned often enough over the year, before the conference, and all Labour have done so far, is designed to win votes off National, where National did in the last elections take votes off Labour (see some electorates voting Nats for party vote and only the Labour MP for the seat). So it is a logical conclusion, which includes the reasoning for doing away again with the capital gains tax.

          • Colonial Viper 2.3.1.1.1

            And ditching the NZ Power policy. Middle class property owners don’t care if their power bill is $20 more a month. Only beneficiaries and those on low wages do.

            • Mike the Savage One 2.3.1.1.1.1

              Hey, they will get “jobs, jobs, jobs”, CV.

              It seems that there are too many malingerers that need to see their doctor again, or one of Dr Bratt’s hatchet doctors:
              http://www.gpcme.co.nz/pdf/BO%2012%20830am%20David%20Bratt%20Benefit%20were%20a%20Drug%20V2.pdf

              Trust the still employed Ministry of Social Development “expert” who was brought in under the Labour government in 2007 (taking up ideas from the UK).

              And it is all “evidence based”, people just need to work and try harder, and they will see the light, and climb up that ladder and join the middle class property owners. Question is what size and shape “property” will they be able to buy from say the minimum wage or just above?

              Renters “happily” pay those 20 extra dollars for power a month, when passed on by their landlords, will they not?

  3. Great MCing from Tamati Coffey, who introduces special musical guests The Eastern. Wow! Anybody know who sings at National Party gigs? Are they even allowed to have fun at their conferences?

    The speech is being held at the gorgeous and historic Regent Theatre. It’s packed.

  4. Craig H 4

    It’s live now on Facebook – like Andrew’s page. The speech has been emailed round as well.

  5. Keith 5

    Is it dawning on anyone yet that James Shaw is about as green as the Cookie Monster? I cannot see this guy going into government with Labour but as long as he can hold 5% of the vote his version of the “Greens” should comfortably see National back in in 2017!

    Never ever underestimate the power and the influence of corporate wealth!

    • maui 5.1

      Ok, any evidence at all that shaw is all about corporates? Or is it just because he was a high flyer in business that he must have a similar agenda. Great to see so much concern from your side of the fence, hes obviously a threat.

      • Colonial Viper 5.1.1

        Shaws not a threat, especially not to the big business establishment. And neither is Labour.

        • Olwyn 5.1.1.1

          No one is really a threat to big business until big it’s power is on the wane – the capacity for meeting that moment well is what is needed, and a less sycophantic attitude to big business, as in The days of cowering to powerful vested interests are over.

          This is a general, positioning speech, and as such, I like it. “We will not tolerate poverty in New Zealand in the 21st century,” is a strong, unambiguous statement, especially when coupled with a stated commitment to not throwing people on the scrap heap. I also like the emphasis on jobs and wages, and the non-coy mention of the unions in relation to this. I would like to hear more about housing – not just that more will own houses, or that houses will be warm and dry, but that everyone will have a roof over their head, and will no longer be at risk of being uprooted at the whim of a property developer. At the same time I can see that it will take effort and imagination to move the economy from speculative bubbles to real activities.

          But at least it is clear now that Labour is moving on from third way triangulation and violent hostility to anyone who rejects it, toward something that looks far more positive and inviting.

          • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1.1

            sorry but Labour cant even hold firm to watered down policy like NZ Power. Their ability to stand by anything truly left wing which isnt just small scale tinkering on the edges is zero.

            • KK 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Nothing would ever make you happy mate. If you’d paid attention you’d know Labour has said it’s going to tackle high electricity bills and explicitly called out overpaid power company execs. But NZ Power was too complex and bureaucratic, and people didn’t understand it or believe it would actually bring down their power bills.

              There are more ways to skin a cat and it’s a wise move to revisit that policy. But you just want to use every chance you get to attack the Labour Party. Why don’t you just leave and let the rest of us get on with trying to organise and win? All you do is drag us down and it’s time we stopped tolerating people who do that.

              • Chris

                “All you do is drag us down and it’s time we stopped tolerating people who do that.”

                You sound like a fucking dictator. I’m not a member of the Labour party so I can’t leave it but I won’t be told to stop voicing criticism of a party that holds itself out to be a left wing party but then does everything to suggest that it isn’t. The Labour party does not have a monopoly on all things left wing and it certainly cannot tell people to stop criticising it for helping to maintain the stronghold on political thought the right-wing currently enjoy in New Zealand. Believing it can be so easily “dragged down” by those it wants to silence is pretty telling.

              • Leftie

                @KK

                Completely agree with you. For some it doesn’t matter what Labour do or say, Labour are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.

              • Amanda Atkinson

                haha free speech all that …. this is why left won’t win … this attitude of … damn the dissenters, strike them down, shut them up, don’t let them speak … too many lefty Hitler nutters like you ruin it for the rest

                [lprent: You realise that I look at behaviour rather than opinions don’t you? Too many comments like this bit of stupid trolling and I will be happy to show you just how much I dislike dumbarse trolls who can’t say anything worth reading. KK wrote a reasonable comment that people may or may not agree with. It included the reasoning, and an analysis of effect.

                You just wasted bandwidth with being a stupid munter and with a clear intent of starting a flamewar. You also stated an untruth about this site, which I detest. I’d suggest that you read the policy and don’t try that again. I’m liable to start treating you as another idiot troll. This is your warning. ]

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  Your concern is so sincere and not in any way infested with malice 🙄

                • Amanda Atkinson

                  If you can’t handle the truth that some ( I repeat some) nutters on here want to silence anyone with a different view, then that says a lot more about you, than me. “All you do is drag us down and it’s time we stopped tolerating people who do that”. Words of free speech? I don’t think so. That was my point. If me calling BS on that line is trolling, fine. I have a different definition. Ban me then, and further highlight my point. Well, it won’t highlight anything, because no one will see it. I will be silenced, in silence. Nice work!

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    😆

                    Calling BS on that line, and adding several more lines of your very own malice-infested BS.

                    Slow clap. Munters unite.

            • Raf 5.1.1.1.1.2

              The power scenario is changing rapidly at the moment, with massive take up of solar, etc. Revisiting it regularly is essential – maybe this is something being chewed over with the Greens. Patience, you old moaner.

        • weka 5.1.1.2

          “Shaws not a threat, especially not to the big business establishment”

          The idea that Shaw is a right wing corporate shill is a right wing dirty politics meme. Pretty sure that maui meant that Shaw is seen as a threat by the right, not because he is right wing but because he’s the GP co-leader and can move in traditional right wing circles. He’s also set to take the GP more mainstream with the idea of picking up more votes. Hence the need to undermine the Green vote by pushing the idea that Shaw is a rightie.

          • Alethios 5.1.1.2.1

            Had the chance to meet Shaw for the first time a couple weeks ago. Interesting fellow – I certainly got the impression that he’d be very comfortable in the corporate world; he’s got the sort of brain that makes connections, sees opportunities to advance one’s position and so forth. Add this to his clear capacity to ‘speak the lingo’ and you can certainly understand why the sorts of comments we’re talking about continue to have legs. That all said, if you listen to what he’s actually saying, you’ll immediately realise he’s anything but a Tory and has a deep commitment to the Green cause.

            • weka 5.1.1.2.1.1

              I think that’s very true Alethios and I wish more people would listen to what his words directly. It also reminds me of what people used to say about Norman when he was first co-leader. The GP didn’t end up selling out or being captured by the corporate world. People fear that Shaw is a Trojan Horse, but they don’t realise that his job is to co-opt the corporate world not the other way round.

          • Chris 5.1.1.2.2

            “Hence the need to undermine the Green vote by pushing the idea that Shaw is a rightie.”

            Interesting when the same people painted former Greens leaders as the loony left. What a funny world we live in.

      • billmurray 5.1.2

        He was a low flyer in a high flying business. He has vastly overstated.

    • Chooky 5.2

      re …” James Shaw is about as green as the Cookie Monster?”…yup I think he is bringing down the Green vote…certainly some I know wont be hosting Green Party billboards again

      ….these former Green Party supporters will probably go to NZF or Labour…cant see them going to jonkey nactional (…if I were a Green MP I would be worried though)

    • b waghorn 5.3

      How’s that relevant to a post on labours speech!

      • Manuka AOR 5.3.1

        Andrew’s section on Climate Change?
        And, eg “we should be bold enough to say we want to see 100% renewable energy in New Zealand.”

        100% renewable energy!
        Imagine the Nats saying anything like that?

        • Chooky 5.3.1.1

          Labour should put David Cunliffe as spokesperson on Environment and Climate Change…it would be a BIG HIT vote winner for them!

          (…I know of environmentalists that almost voted Green last Election but decided on Labour in the last week before the Election because they were worried the Greens were going soft on jonkey nactional )

          ….that said Labour MUST come out against the TPPA…or the environment is stuffed

      • Chris 5.3.2

        Yeah. What did Little say about looking after the poor? Very Little? That Labour is the party for the workers…err…I mean the employed?

        • ankerawshark 5.3.2.1

          Chris, I was there, I heard the speech. He was talking passionately about reducing poverty and being very accountable for reducing child poverty. Read the speech. He was also talking about creating jobs, so those who wanted to work could.

          • Chris 5.3.2.1.1

            I’ve read the speech. And yes, he talked about reducing poverty. But his rhetoric was couched in terms of the mecca that is employment. No difference from what the fucking nats talk about. There’s nothing there referring to the group David Lange called “those who can’t quite cut it”. Until Labour start talking about all New Zealanders instead of just their productive contributors they’ll continue to prop up every neo-liberal government that beats them at the polls.

            • Chris 5.3.2.1.1.1

              Right-wing enough for you, Leftie? Fuckwit.

              • Leftie

                @Chris

                Obsessed much? Try and exercise some self control, people might think you are a fuckwit, no doubt they already do.

            • JanM 5.3.2.1.1.2

              Yes he did, Chris – it sounds as though you were just too exercised to be listening properly
              “And where people can’t work, the government should support them because we don’t believe in throwing Kiwis on the scrap heap.”

              • Chris

                But the rhetoric is still clamped to employment. What Little has said here (and it’s throwaway in the context of everything else he said) is no different from what Jenny Shipley, Paula Bennett or Anne Tolley today would say. If you want to get down to analysing precise words it’s in what’s meant by “can’t work”, but that’s not the point. The point is that Little has not said anything that says Labour is going to change its position on how it believes those who are not employed should be treated. At the moment that position is no different to the severe nastiness the current government is dishing out to those unfortunate to be in need of a social welfare benefit. Ask Shipley, Bennett, Tolley if they believe in a social welfare system that looks after those who cannot look after themselves and they’ll yes. So will Labour, but the reality for that group is very different. It’s not a coincidence that the government’s latest nasty legislative attack on beneficiaries was supported by Labour. How the fuck does that work?

                • JanM

                  Are you being paid to talk this rubbish?

                  • Chris

                    Labour’s position on welfare benefits is indistinguishable from National’s. This has been the case for a while now. Labour voted with National in support of the government’s latest nasty attack on beneficiaries. Are you saying this is rubbish? What has Little said at the conference that suggests things will be different? If you think that him saying “where people can’t work, the government should support them because we don’t believe in throwing Kiwis on the scrap heap” is evidence of this, what makes this different from what the likes of Shipley, Bennett and now Tolley have always said?

                    • locus

                      “Shipley, Bennett and now Tolley” chgrhchhhyuk….. furball

                      are you for effing real?

                      rtfs

                  • Leftie

                    @JanM

                    Wondering that myself, obviously he is being paid by the National party.

                  • Chris

                    Shipley, Bennett et al have never stopped saying “there will always be help for those who truly need it”. I see no difference between this and what Little said at the conference. Until he and Labour come up with the detail to back up the rhetoric that lack of difference remains. And I’m not holding my breath because not once since 2008, while in opposition, has Labour ever attempted to provide that detail. To the contrary, they’ve gone so far as supporting anti-beneficiary government legislation. I do not know why people become so hostile whenever this is pointed out. It’s as if the left no longer care and that making sure we maintain an adequate safety net for ‘those who can’t quite cut it’ isn’t fashionable anymore so we have to stomp on anyone who has the temerity to raise the issue.

        • Whateva Next 5.3.2.2

          We won’t be able to look after the unemployed if hardly anyone has got a job!

    • weka 5.4

      Is it dawning on anyone yet that James Shaw is about as green as the Cookie Monster? I cannot see this guy going into government with Labour but as long as he can hold 5% of the vote his version of the “Greens” should comfortably see National back in in 2017!

      Never ever underestimate the power and the influence of corporate wealth!

      You’re ill-informed. Shaw doesn’t get to dictate who the GP goes into coalition with, and it’s virtually impossible for the GP exec/caucus to choose a coalition with National without the members’ support. The GP, members and Shaw have all said multiple times that they are opposed to a National government and are actively working towards a Labour/GP coalition.

      Green Politics

      You are making shit up, which begs the question of why. Get your facts right, or you look like a dirty politics right wing trole.

      Posting off topic like this also makes you look like a trole.

      • Keith 5.4.1

        Its not “troleing”, its thinking wider than just this speech. To quote The Daily Blog “At this Conference, Labour were going to tell New Zealand who their preferred political partners would be so that there is no confusion about what form of coalition government could be formed post the election, but those plans of transparency were put on hold when the Greens and NZ First refused to agree to that announcement”.

        Leaving NZ First to one side, Andrew Little’s speech is looking forward, laying out a general vision but it can only work if the Greens are firmly on board! But right when Labour want to give the electorate a clear picture of where they are going the Greens go missing. I don’t know why but the pissing around with the Red Peak fiasco that bailed National out was an own goal by the Greens or was it?. So either Shaw makes the right noises and stops fence sitting or one cannot help but feel he is having a dollar each way and that would be awfully convenient for National wouldnt it, because the wheeler dealer that Key is, will milk the indecison for all its worth. I hope I am wrong and the Greens are on board but who knows?

        • weka 5.4.1.1

          Thanks for putting your comment in context. It always helps to link so people know what you are referring to. Here’s Bradbury’s comment on Waatea News,

          http://www.waateanews.com/waateanews/x_story_id/MTE2MjM=/opinion/NZ-Labour-Party-Conference-2015

          There’s a few probems with that. One is that we only have Bradbury’s word that Labour had intended to make an announcement re coalition partners and that NZF and the GP refused. I’d like to see that corroborated somewhere else (Bradbury’s stance on the whole GP/National thing doesn’t make any sense, he also hasn’t backed up his claim and I think this makes him a biased and unreliable source on this issue).

          If it is true, we’d also need to see the reasons that the GP refused, they might have been quite valid.

          The other problem is that Bradbury is expressing opinion that Shaw can make the GP form a coalition with National, but it goes against all the evidence. Please have a look at my link above for an explanation of why it’s not Shaw’s choice, and how it would be extremely difficult for that to happen even if Shaw wanted it (which he doesn’t). It would require a nationwide change of stance amongst the membership including going through a remit process at least one AGM. Have a go at explaining how you think that might happen, because I can’t see it.

          When you make factually incorrect assertions as you did with your first comment, you damage the left. What you said is almost word for word a right wing dirty politics meme aimed at undermining the GP and thus preventing a left wing govt. Is that what you want? If you can back up your statements, please do so, but I’m afraid ‘Bradbury said it’s true’ doesn’t count in this case.

          Please also have a look at what the GP and Shaw himself actually say (not what others say they say). Read/listen to Shaw’s speeches and interviews. He is very clear that he is actively working against a National govt and for a Labour/GP coalition.

    • Smilin 5.5

      Yes that is the elephant in the room and if anyone remembers how it was when Big Norm died and the party slid down the inevitable slope into Piggy’s hungry mouth only to be shat out into the shocking corporate abyss of ultraconservatism and to have the same thing with Bolger and Shipley and the ultimate insult of this present yappy yuppy govt
      We have got a battle to convince this country that once Key has done his job for the OVERSEAS INTEREST who need the strategic position of this country for their ends we wont have a country we can call our own
      Instead of ryegrass and clover it will be kikuyu and paspalum, and global warming for your future

  6. Ovid 6

    Here’s a word cloud of the speech.

    And here’s the text of the speech itself.

    • Tracey 6.1

      Thanks ovid

      As part of cost cutting at fairfax verson small is using smaller words in place of words actually used by Little

  7. Chooky 7

    Great Speech !…but unless Labour rejects the TPPA…they won’t get my vote

    • billmurray 7.1

      Nor mine

    • Korero Pono 7.2

      + 1

    • Tautoko Mangō Mata 7.3

      As far as I can see, the direction that Andrew Little has indicated with putting Kiwis first is incompatible with the TPP clauses of “no less favourable than
      that it accords, in like circumstances, to its own …”

      • Tautoko Mangō Mata 7.3.1

        Remember that Labour do not get to vote and it is the executive, ie National Party Cabinet who vote yes or no to TPP.
        I expect to see Labour out in force this coming Saturday in the marches.

      • savenz 7.3.2

        @ TPP +1

    • savenz 7.4

      +100

      And not just on the overseas buying up our country part. The TPP is dirty through and through for Jobs, education, sovereignty and the environment. In fact I am least worried about what nationality is buying up the country, compared to corporates destroying our environment (oceans, rivers, forests, urban design etc) and suing the government over not getting their own way on tenders and contracts like Serco and taking Kiwi jobs and lowering wages and work conditions, forcing ideology on us like charter schools, making us pay more for health and welfare.

      If Labour focus just on some tenuous property clause they leave the idea lingering that they still support the rest of the TPPA which destroys the above. And the China TA has already given up our property rights anyway in real terms.

    • Chris 7.5

      The only utility in his speech is that it provides broad rhetoric for showing later on that there was never an intention for anything to change and explaining how under Labour the rich got richer and the poor died.

    • Raf 7.6

      I still don’t get it – why isn’t he allowed to favour keeping the OK bits in the TPP, and reject, or demand renegotiation of, the bad bits, as he’s saying? True, the latter would probably amount to ditching the whole thing; but in the meantime, isn’t that a reasonable attitude?

  8. Ad 8

    Loved this.
    “Jobs jobs jobs”
    Yes.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1

      Labour refuses to spend extra billions into the economy ergo there will be few new jobs.

      • b waghorn 8.1.1

        “We’ll set up a Regional Infrastructure Fund for major development projects to create jobs and boost our regions.”
        Sounds like spending to me.

        • billmurray 8.1.1.1

          It is spending, higher tax’s or will he print money ?.

          • b waghorn 8.1.1.1.1

            “”We’ll use the government’s buying power to create jobs here at home instead of sending them off overseas.””
            Hire kiwis to build stuff instead of farming out the jobs to the lowest overseas bidder. It might cost more but as the wages are paid and spent here it all ads to the churn of cash in the system.

            • srylands 8.1.1.1.1.1

              For overseas companies in countries where we have free trade agreements the Government is not permitted to do what you are suggesting. Australian companies for starters.

              • Colonial Viper

                and thats where the absurdity of Labour’s pro free trade pro TPP positioning becomes obvious.

          • Ad 8.1.1.1.2

            He’s already signaled he wants a fairer tax system.
            I think you can take that to mean higher taxes. For the rich.

            • Chris 8.1.1.1.2.1

              Higher taxes for the rich might help a small number of people for a short period of time but do nothing to address the thinking that drives neo-liberal values that are now firmly embedded in our culture. Not only can higher taxes for the rich be wiped out as quickly as an election result, Labour has to actually introduce and implement them (let alone become the government, although I suppose eventually they might in government again, I guess when is the question). Labour’s track record carrying out what it says it will do is abysmal so hearing them say things like they’ll tax the rich rings pretty empty. Just look at the recent CGT announcement? I’d put a hundy on Labour trying to reintroduce lifting the age of NZS, too. They’re not even in bloody government yet.

              It all comes down to the fact that Labour’s philosophical foundation is fractured, inconsistent, incoherent, contradictory, fundamentally flawed, non-existent…whatever you want to call it it’s broken. Until that’s fixed or that some other viable option emerges that replaces the current Labour arrangement the left in New Zealand is fucked.

              • Colonial Viper

                yep, Labour is riven by class contradictions. Whereas National is the party of the self interested top 1% Labour is the party of the socially conscious top 10%.

                But each of those groups is as heavily invested in the current capitalist order as the other.

                Viewed through that lens, the behaviour of todays Labour is utterly understandable.

          • Pat 8.1.1.1.3

            or a crackdown on avoidence?

          • locus 8.1.1.1.4

            major development project = more jobs = more tax revenue = more funding

      • ankerawshark 8.1.2

        Andrew talked of ensuring govt departments procure stuff from NZ rather than overseas, worth some billion. Its a winner.

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.2.1

          foreign corporations will sue NZ if Crown tender terms are biased against them.

          • ankerawshark 8.1.2.1.1

            Does it say that in the TPPA Colonial V? Genuine question.

            • Colonial Viper 8.1.2.1.1.1

              the investor chapter of the TPP gives corporates wide lattitude in suing the government if government actions damage their business interests.

              • Lanthanide

                But, that doesn’t mean they *will* sue. Just that they can.

                I think you’d need a specific action by the government that was directly against the interests of a particular company or industry in order to engender a lawsuit (eg, plain packaging of tobacco).

                A generic / blanket change in tender terms seems unlikely to get anyone het up, especially as we’re most likely talking about government projects in the millions to tens of millions range. Very small plankton in the global marketplace.

              • locus

                another good reason that Andrew is opposing TPPA “with every fibre in [his] body to stop it, to resist it, to make sure it never happens in New Zealand. “

        • srylands 8.1.2.2

          How is he going to do that when several free trade agreements – including CER – prohibit it? If an Australian company submits the lowest price in a tender (and meets all the other tender requirements) they get the contract.

          What do you think would happen if Australian governments did that?

          What is being proposed is called “protectionism”. It is not a vote winner at all. The Labour Party will be ridiculed and lose the next election on this policy alone.

          So many easy wins out there and Andrew Little can’t see them.

          • millsy 8.1.2.2.1

            What’s wrong with protectionism?

            If we didn’t protect our industry we would still be in the 1870’s.

          • KJT 8.1.2.2.2

            http://www.paecon.net/PAEtexts/Chang1.htm
            “Almost all of today�s rich countries used tariff protection and subsidies to develop their industries. Interestingly, Britain and the USA, the two countries that are supposed to have reached the summit of the world economy through their free-market, free-trade policy, are actually the ones that had most aggressively used protection and subsidies”.

          • locus 8.1.2.2.3

            you are soooo slow –

            opposing TPPA is a quick win …. the TPPA is clearly stacked in favour of the big lobby groups, undermines the very essence of ‘free trade’ and ‘level playing field’ and runs counter to the ‘kiwi dream’

        • Chris 8.1.2.3

          The fact Little said this is good and if it actually happened it’d be good but it’s also a drop in the ocean when you’re talking about making New Zealand a fair society. It’d also be good if saying these things were intended to be part of a beginning of building a fairer New Zealand but I fear Labour’s too fractured for this to be the case. And even if it were the case, it would only take the likes of Nash and Davis and their wee army of mates to shut down anything that came close. And that’s why Labour’s fucked.

    • savenz 8.2

      No point having a job though if you can’t earn enough to live on and have zero hours to work. He did mention high paid jobs but it is the ‘high paid’ that is important and the security of the employment.

  9. millsy 9

    Is that it?

    • RedLogix 9.1

      It’s a Conference Speech, not a policy release.

      • Colonial Viper 9.1.1

        the lead up to Conference was ditching policy. Conference didn’t fill the resulting vacuum with new policy. Lets see if and when Labour can introduce ideas that it is willing to stick by.

  10. RedLogix 10

    It’s a good speech. It hits on the core issues and does so by drawing strongly on Labours heritage. It presents with clarity and a declared sense of purpose.

    If this is Little’s starting point – then I await the next steps with interest.

    • b waghorn 10.1

      Yes a bit of inspiration instead of all this aspiration rubbish we’ve had to listen to for 8 long years.

      • Olwyn 10.1.1

        +1 – That is a good way of putting it.

      • Anne 10.1.2

        If I hear a left of centre politician mention THE WORD (aspiration – oooh that hurt) even in passing… they’re off my Christmas card list. 😈

        • Puddleglum 10.1.2.1

          Well, there was “ambition”, “opportunity”, ‘the Kiwi Dream” (repeatedly, not unlike the “American Dream”), the “aspirations that we all share”, “simple aspirations” and “every person must have the opportunity to realise their full potential”.

          Admittedly, these phrases tended to be more aligned with Kirk’s comments about what most New Zealanders wanted than with the hyperventilating aspirational ‘Masters of the Universe’ rhetoric that people like John Key seem enamoured with.

          One criticism I’d make of Little’s choice of rhetoric is that it didn’t target structures and systems (not that those particular words would need to be used).

          Instead, it was still the individualistic lexicon of ‘hard work’, ‘opportunity’, who ‘can’ and ‘is able’ to work, ‘values’, etc..

          And, other than continual reference to ‘kiwis’ there wasn’t much direct reference to a sense of us being a collective – just comments about what “most [individual] Kiwis believe” or value.

          As if we are only united to the extent that we, individually, have certain values or beliefs in common. (And, of course, tomorrow some of us may ‘change our minds’ and have different beliefs or values from each other …)

    • Manuka AOR 10.2

      I listened via the fb link through the entire speech – I was applauding (out loud – my dog looks a bit bemused). I feel more optimistic about the future than I have felt at any time in the last ten years.

      • Enough is Enough 10.2.1

        Were you not optimistic when Cunliffe was rolling out policy 18 months ago, and if not, wht not?

  11. Well, that was great! A really nice touch afterwards; Andrew ignored the media and went outside to talk to migrant families (Palmy is one the main places new Kiwis are settled in).

    A couple of points from the speech stood out. Firstly, stating that the Government will spend it’s money here first and foremost. Putting those billions to work here in NZ has to be a direct and immediate challenge to the TPPA. Secondly, ‘the Kiwi dream’. I think we’re going to be hearing more of that phrase in the next couple of years. It sure beats John Key’s Honolulu dreaming.

    Speaking of Key, Little didn’t mention the current PM by name. I think that’s clever; it minimizes and diminishes National’s only asset.

    • infused 11.1

      Didn’t help the aussies in the rwc.

      • Alethios 11.1.1

        Rugby isn’t a personal popularity contest like the Nats have made NZ politics.

      • te reo putake 11.1.2

        Quite right, but I think England used the same tactic when they won their RWC. The point is that I reckon there’s a switch from focussing on what a pants government we’ve currently got and promoting what the alternative party offers. That’s possibly a quite significant change in tack.

        • Craig H 11.1.2.1

          Agreed – it’s important IMO to not just frame the issues in terms of failure of the government, but to also frame them in terms of solutions that the Opposition will put into place once in Government.

        • b waghorn 11.1.2.2

          People no this government is “pants” if labour can stay the course and avoid getting trapped by the dirty politics coming there way there’ll be a good old fashioned landslide in 2017.

    • Rosie 11.2

      +1. Good to see you back in town too, te reo putake

  12. savenz 12

    The other thing Labour should do is to concentrate on civil servant jobs (council and government) as their security is being eroded by the Natz floozies being put into every post as their bosses and constant restructuring and rebranding.

    They should also look at the difference in pay between lowest to highest worker. That will be the way to reduce inequality.

    Also a lot of people who could be voting Labour have jobs but are scared of instability
    so they should concentrate on stable change AWAY from neoliberalism.

    Not stable change INTO Neoliberalism i.e. supporting TPP.

    • Chooky 12.1

      +100 savenz

    • srylands 12.2

      “The other thing Labour should do is to concentrate on civil servant jobs.”
      _____________________

      Just take a deep breath and read that 3 times. Now you seriously think this is a strategy to win an election? It is not.

      What amazes me is how many intelligent people are still inclined to vote Labour, but simply will not do so when there is a dearth of substantive policies, and reigning Key Derangement Syndrome. So to provide a variation on a theme I have mentioned previously, how about some sensible policies that people will actually vote for?

      1. Early Childhood Education. The capture of early childhood education by middle and upper income earners is a disgrace. They can pay for it themselves. Get high quality ECE into South Auckland, in serious volume. It will change lives. Why is that not on the Labour agenda? The current policies are regressive. They should be a prime target for the Labour Party to fix.

      2. Fix schools. The last Labour government poured huge funding increases into schools. It made almost no difference. So what is the Labour plan? I don’t see one.

      3. Climate change. Reverse deforestation, and put a price on carbon. Champion international emissions trading.

      4. Be bold on housing. Auckland is a disaster. It needs a serious response. I have seen nothing from Labour that seriously responds to the NZPC report on housing affordability.

      5. Mental health in young people, especially young men. It is a national emergency and it needs to be addressed.

      6. Helping older men retrain. Too many men in their 50s are ending up on the scrapheap.

      7. Investing in infrastructure and congestion charging. Pricing access to roads is something that politicians simply will not tackle.

      8. Improving the efficiency of local government. It is a debacle. You can’t have a country with local government taxes (rates) going up in real terms forever and people being shafted by enormous consenting fees. Done properly, local government reform policies could win serious numbers of votes.

      I could keep going.

      What this very short list shows is that you could launch a credible centre-left agenda that would win votes. But it needs to be substantive. Stop the slogans and agree on some worthwhile outcomes and real policies.

      And stop dreaming that everything the current Government does is crap. Nobody is going to buy that line. Figure out what you can do better and campaign on that. Stop even mentioning John Key. Give it up.

      Or Labour can carry on like they are and National will be in office until at least 2023.

      • millsy 12.2.1

        “7. Investing in infrastructure and congestion charging. Pricing access to roads is something that politicians simply will not tackle.”

        That will basically price the poor off the roads.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 12.2.2

        2. Fix schools. The last Labour government poured huge funding increases into schools. It made almost no difference.

        Yes, comparing our PISA scores from 2003 and 2008 we were right up there with the best in the world for the whole of Lab5. Since then we’ve been going backwards.

        As you know, however, the most influential factor on education outcomes is household income. Pretending society stops at the school gate is just another way of shifting the blame from incompetent troughing public policy advisors and right wing dogma.

        • millsy 12.2.2.1

          Sry’s solution to our education system would be ‘privatisation’ and ‘competition’.

          He would probably hand over all of South Auckland’s schools to Destiny Church — end up having a generation of kids who think homosexuals are vermin and the earth was created by a magic wand.

      • locus 12.2.3

        I could keep going

        please don’t

      • KJT 12.2.4

        “take a deep breath and read that 3 times. Now you seriously think this is a strategy to win an election? It is not”.

        Unlike running down the civil service to the stage where it cannot fulfil it’s functions.

        “What amazes me is how many intelligent people are still inclined to vote Labour, but simply will not do so when there is a dearth of substantive policies, and reigning Key Derangement Syndrome. So to provide a variation on a theme I have mentioned previously, how about some sensible policies that people will actually vote for”.

        It always amuses me when the right wing tell a left wing party what to do to get votes. It almost always involve becoming more of a “right wing” party.

        “. Early Childhood Education. The capture of early childhood education by middle and upper income earners is a disgrace. They can pay for it themselves. Get high quality ECE into South Auckland, in serious volume. It will change lives. Why is that not on the Labour agenda? The current policies are regressive. They should be a prime target for the Labour Party to fix.”

        Almost sound like a socialist there, Srylands. Watch out we are infecting you.

        “2. Fix schools. The last Labour government poured huge funding increases into schools. It made almost no difference. So what is the Labour plan? I don’t see one”.

        I am not a Labour fan, but the evidence based “New Zealand curriculum”, and initiatives like Te Kotihatanga were showing signs of making a difference, until they were dismantled by National in favour of repeating failed policies from the USA and UK.

        “3. Climate change. Reverse deforestation, and put a price on carbon. Champion international emissions trading.”

        Emissions trading and carbon pricing has turned out to be yet another international rort for the “money traders”. Carbon taxes, however, have worked where they have been used.

        “4. Be bold on housing. Auckland is a disaster. It needs a serious response. I have seen nothing from Labour that seriously responds to the NZPC report on housing affordability.”

        Exactly. 12 000 State houses, CGT, limiting immigration, limiting overseas ownership, and wealth taxes on speculators would sort it rapidly.

        “5. Mental health in young people, especially young men. It is a national emergency and it needs to be addressed.”

        Yes. See above. But, but, but, that would require more taxes to pay for it. I always thought you were a closet socialist.

        “6. Helping older men retrain. Too many men in their 50s are ending up on the scrapheap.”

        I seem to remember National removed student loans for those over 55.

        “7. Investing in infrastructure and congestion charging. Pricing access to roads is something that politicians simply will not tackle.”

        Great idea. Then we could put more money into public transport and fossil fuel replacement technology.

        “8. Improving the efficiency of local government. It is a debacle. You can’t have a country with local government taxes (rates) going up in real terms forever and people being shafted by enormous consenting fees. Done properly, local government reform policies could win serious numbers of votes.”

        Start by bringing back local democracy in Auckland and Christchurch so we do not have to pay for Wellington’s grandiose ideas, like casinos and conference centres. And funding Auckland properly.

        Don’t forget that most of the council building fees are to cover their arses and keep councils from liability after the central Government boondoggle that was “deregulation” of house building, and privatisation of building inspection. Forgotten “leaky homes” already.

  13. Michael 13

    I liked the speech. Strong, progressive, and he sounds like a Prime Minister in waiting.

    • Tracey 13.1

      John key didnt sound like a PM til 20…

      • locus 13.1.1

        the current PM sounds like a shock jock, not a PM

        i expect more from my prime minister than ponytail stroking and comments about what he does in the shower…

    • ankerawshark 13.2

      Being in there in the theatre was really inspiring.

      Andrew was fantastic. Feeling very inspired.

  14. les 14

    initially had my doubts about Little.No longer,he can lead Labour back to the treasury benches.

  15. Jenny Kirk 15

    Yes – a good, straightforward speech – bringing back the Kiwi dream.

    And various changes of personality in the Party’s organisational structure appear to have also happened. I await with interest to hear exactly what these are, and who is in what position.

    It sounds to me as if this has been a change-making Conference – for the good.

    Now we’ll get all the trolls in denial, the MSM looking for the smallest bit of negativity,
    and the Nats looking a bit rattled.

  16. Hi vis 16

    Andrew , you are a good man BUT why the tacit endorsement of the TPPA .
    It is NOT a foregone conclusion

  17. Freemark 17

    Lots of tub thumping – which is to be expected given Angry’s background.
    Jobs, jobs, jobs..they are going begging in NZ. The general work ethic for trades & semi skilled is a bloody disgrace, too much entitlement mentality fostered by welfarism.
    The day we see anyone from the Parliamentary Left (& much of it’s support) putting their balls (or female bits) on the line to actually CREATE some jobs, or IP, will be the day they have some credibility.
    Otherwise it’s just a very dishonest way of saying that we will raise taxes to buy votes.

    • Colonial Viper 17.1

      please try and make some intelligent comments not based on insane US Republican sound bites.

      • Freemark 17.1.1

        Your intellectual giantism as usual goes over my head CV.
        Little wonder that even the Labour Party has cast you adrift.

        • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.1

          please freemark, come up with something original, not BS philosophy sourced from the American right wing.

        • greywarshark 17.1.1.2

          Freemark
          Perhaps your intellectual giantism is something like this.

      • KJT 17.1.2

        “Freemark” is a “wealth creator”.

        In the mould of Fay and Rich, Gibbs, and Brierly.

        Only not as rich!

    • Raf 17.2

      So, Freemark – when YOU care about stuff, you’re allowed to be angry? Only Andrew Little isn’t?

    • les 17.3

      the moniker ‘angry’ is quite pathetic,an attempt by the Natz and their acolytes to brand Little in a negative light with nothing to substantiate it ,apart from the kneejerk reaction to his very welcome comment to ..’cut the crap’!

    • John Shears 17.4

      Freemark Blah Blah Blah if you have nothing worth saying don’t.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 17.5

      …jobs, or IP…

      Hi there Cheap Mark. Been there done that. Still doing it in fact.

      Have you got any more ignorance you’d like to display?

    • locus 17.6

      The general work ethic for trades and semi skilled is a bloody disgrace

      it’s this kind of sneering arrogant rwnj comment that will win Labour the votes of the people you so unpleasantly denigrate

  18. Brendon Harre -Left wing Liberal 18

    I was at the speech. It was inspiring. I even teared up at one stage. Andrew Little came across as real, committed and genuine. I am still buzzing.

    As someone with an interest in housing. I felt Andrew is someone who can lead through genuine reforms to get rid of this fake bubble wealth -landed gentry creating nonsense and to an economy based on real productivity and a fair division of rewards.

  19. ankerawshark 19

    Bredon Harre 1000+ I was there too, it was fantastic.

    • Atiawa 19.1

      Great speech delivered with passion and sincerity. It was also an important speech for Andrew’s leadership, and I believe it has cemented & strengthened his Prime Minister in waiting credentials.
      Under his leadership Labour aren’t going to change what we are or what we believe, and for me, that is not only reassuring but also surprisingly refreshing.

  20. Mike the Savage One 20

    Speeches can be great and inspiring, but I have heard and read many speeches, and one exciting speech more does not necessarily convince me.

    From Andrew’s speech:
    “Ask me my three priorities as Labour Leader?
    Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.
    You can ask me my top ten as well but I think you get the gist.
    A job is about more than just a pay packet, it’s about the dignity of work. It’s about a place and a purpose in your community.
    Every Kiwi who can work should be able to work.
    Every business that needs a skilled worker should be able to find one.
    And where people can’t work, the government should support them because we don’t believe in throwing Kiwis on the scrap heap.”

    I particularly look at this comment:
    “Every Kiwi who can work should be able to work.”

    So the whole speech may sound promising, it means little to me, especially with such comments that can be interpreted in various ways. Who for instance is under the present welfare regime considered “able to work”? As MSD and WINZ have “learned” from the UK, and the DWP there, and as Paula Bennett has beaten the drum for the “relentless focus” on work, there is too much room for interpretation. Especially while we have such Advisors as MSD’s Principal Health Advisor Dr Bratt in charge, who stands for this:
    http://www.gpcme.co.nz/pdf/BO%2012%20830am%20David%20Bratt%20Benefit%20were%20a%20Drug%20V2.pdf

    He got his job in a newly created position in 2007, under the last Labour led government, and is also involved in developing or advising on policy:
    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/msd-o-i-a-request-princ-health-advisor-position-description-highlighted-points-jan-2007.pdf

    As for the rest of Andrew Little’s speech, and Labour’s conference, I ask, where to from here? I suppose persons like I, who expect some clearer signals, will have to wait yet another year, for some policy to be presented. To be honest, I am rather disappointed with the outcome of this conference.

    The time for nice speeches has long passed, I expect clear commitments, a clear direction, clear messages and policy, that is unapologetic “Labour” (for what it once stood for).

    • les 20.1

      no one cares ..what YOU expect…next year,is the timeline, it has been clearly stated that policy will be developed and presented.

      • Mike the Savage One 20.1.1

        Thank YOU, so we will have a continuation of UK “inspired” welfare reforms then, will we?

        As for the rest, it sounds good of course, but the devil is in the detail, and one such issue may already arise with this:

        “We’ll use the government’s buying power to create jobs here at home instead of sending them off overseas.”

        How will that be done without breaching existing trade agreements, where overseas trading partner country based suppliers may make a better offer, will they be turned down simply for not being based in NZ? Some FTAs may need to be renegotiated, how will that go, I wonder?

        And it is all good to talk about “Kiwi homes” and so, what will they look like, how large will they be, perhaps 30 sqm as proposed by Auckland Council under the Unitary Plan now in hearing processes?

        I just do not fall for speeches anymore, so will wait and see what will ultimately be delivered.

        • Colonial Viper 20.1.1.1

          people are falling for another iteration of good sounding left wing Labour rhetoric from a Labour Party which remains part of the neoliberal, pro-financial capital, ruling establishment.

          Carbon trading scheme, underfunded health boards, unemployment benefits set at poverty levels.

          • Mike the Savage One 20.1.1.1.1

            And given the fact, that next year will be the centenary celebration for Labour, I may presume, that the conference then will mainly be about UNITY, and some policy, that ALL in Labour’s caucus can live with, whatever that may then mean.

            The message will be, do not upset the unity by demanding too much, also be mindful of the potential middle class voter that does not want to lose value in her/his three or four bedroom home in Auckland or any other place. So much then for “affordable” Kiwi homes.

            • Karen 20.1.1.1.1.1

              I share your concern, but there was a sentence that did give me hope that Little intends to do more than pay lip service to reducing poverty :

              “So, every Budget, every year, we won’t just report on GDP growth or how much money we’ve spent, we’ll front up and tell the country how many children a Labour government has lifted out of poverty.”

              • Colonial Viper

                I’ve got a reputation for being a naysayer now so I’ll just continue.

                We need to lift one hundred thousand NZ families out of poverty. Labour doesn’t know how. It is locked into an economic thinking framework which prevents it from acting effectively.

                Further, I doubt Labour is going to be in government come 2017 because plans to lift that many families out of poverty would need to be radical and practical revolutionary.

                Labour apart from the First Labour Government, none since has come close.

          • Macro 20.1.1.1.2

            And dedicated to shipping NZ jobs overseas as fast as they can thru FTA’s – Labour remind me of Pooh Bear – lovable but a party of very little brain.

    • locus 20.2

      Every Kiwi who can work should be able to work

      MtSO…. you need to buck up and take things at face value

      what Andrew means is exactly what he says

      – the problem he’s referring to is increasing unemployment, and the solution he’s going to put his shoulder to is getting willing and able – but unemployed kiwis – back to work

      • Colonial Viper 20.2.1

        Is Labour going to provide every Kiwi with a jobs guarantee?

        • locus 20.2.1.1

          c’mon CV, it’s not a detailed policy speech it’s a vision speech

          • Colonial Viper 20.2.1.1.1

            It’s hard to look at the reality versus the fairy tale. I like to be able to suspend belief and enjoy the ride too. But sooner or later reality hits: Labour does tolerate poverty. It does tolerate unemployment. It doesn’t believe in opposing international agreements which costs NZ money, jobs and sovereignty.

          • Macro 20.2.1.1.2

            When are Labourites going to wake up to the very simple fact that the more stuff we ship in from off shore through FTAs the less jobs are available to workers in NZ? Your can shout “jobs! jobs! jobs!” as much as you like – but unless you get the fundamentals right – ie stop the importation of stuff we can just as well produce here, then your simply whistling in the wind. FTA’s open up our workers to competition from workers in China and elsewhere who work 7 days a week, 12 hours a day, for very little pay. It’s crazy! And the Labour Party – the party that is supposedly the party committed to workers – let this happen.

  21. upnorth 21

    Jobs are good but seriously when you paraphrase that around my background in unon life time experience – just a bad look.

    However I am really concerned about Kings speech – this is so badly set up.

    Annette is going to ban my meat pie.

    This has played into Nationals hands

    Outtake
    I am Andrew Little and I am from the union
    I want jobs jobs jobs
    We are going to ban meat pies
    We are going to run our economy based on talkfeast and community decision – markets move quick – Grant needs to be clear precise and not fluffy

    10 out 10 for clarity in message
    0 out of 10 about giving me confidence and telling me I cant buy a meat pie.

    • Mike the Savage One 21.1

      Come on, re meat pies, Annette made it clear on either Q+A or the Nation that they will NOT abolish the meat pie!

      Sugar additives in processed food is her concern, not even normal “sweets”, which is already confusing and disappointing some:
      http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/289128/failure-to-back-sugar-tax-'disappointing

      • lprent 21.1.1

        I see her point. If you look at the total amount of sugar that you eat in processed foods compared to what most people eat directly in known sugary foods, you’d probably be surprised at which is the larger contributor. Most people (like me) don’t binge on sweets or even sugary drinks. But they eat a lot of sauces and processed foods that have relatively large mounts of ‘hidden’ sugar in them. It is instructive reading the labels of your latest shopping expedition, and finding sugar in things like the breadcrumbs on fish fillets.

        • Srylands 21.1.1.1

          So stop buying processed foods. People who eat commercial tomato sauce deserve what they get.

          • lprent 21.1.1.1.1

            I’d agree. When I’m at home and doing the shopping and cooking, I certainly do. But the reality is that processed foods are often more popular than unprocessed foods for several reasons.

            1. They are often as cheap or cheaper.
            2. They are often more convenient.
            3. They are usually better presented than meat dripping blood or vegetables with their assortment of extra protein crawling over it.
            4. They are usually carefully formulated to be tastier – with sugar, spices, and salts.

            Since they also have a huge impact on the health budgets and the taxes required to maintain those health budgets running through the decades of peoples lives, then I think it is common sense for the government to control what goes into them.

            It is the same logic as to why we don’t have manufacturers adding the kinds of drugs and other nefarious products as they used to into a variety of products as they often did in the 19th and early 20th centuries. When was the last time you could buy a food product with added mercury?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1.1.2

          Hard to make bread without something sweet for the yeast to feed on.

          • lprent 21.1.1.2.1

            Bread. Who cares about the yeast in bread – what about the beer !

            Talking of which, the sun has well and truely gone down – a beer seems appropriate at this point in time.

        • Mike the Savage One 21.1.1.3

          “Most people (like me) don’t binge on sweets or even sugary drinks.”

          Same here, I do admit to eating some processed food though, exactly for the reason that it is more convenient to use and eat them, as preparing sauces and so yourself can involve a lot of work and time.

          The problem with the suggested approach by Annette King is that it may be a complex, cumbersome exercise to classify which processed food needs to get the particular attention, and how producers can be pressured to reduce the sugar contents. Labour struggled with exempting fresh fruit and veges from GST, as that caused some apparent problems to implement, so I fear this may be a bit difficult to do also, by ignoring sugar in many other products (chocolate, Milo, ice cream and so forth).

          A flat sugar tax or ban on sugar in certain products would seem more practical, but to do it may not be quite as easy. But surely something needs to be done on that front.

    • Odysseus 21.2

      Your very keen on the meat pie huh? But I thought the emphasis was on lowering sugar content of some foods, which is not really relevant to meat pies.
      Btw – have you tried the pies at The Ol Plum Duff at Shannon- superb!

      • lprent 21.2.1

        Most commercial meat pies have some sugar in them. The commercial tomato sauce that goes with them has a whole lot more.

        There are quite a lot of links on google that are accessible to even fumble fingered dickheads. But to further your education out of blissfully stupid ignorance, here is one from Consumer.
        https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/sugar

        Kiwis love tomato sauce and some people eat it with everything! But most brands are more than 20 percent sugar – that’s about 1 teaspoon of sugar in each tablespoon of sauce. You also need to check the nutrition information on products with the same name but different packaging. Wattie’s Tomato Sauce in a can has 20.1 percent sugar; but in a squeeze bottle it’s 32.4 percent. BBQ sauce and sweet chilli sauce give you an even bigger sugar hit. Most brands of chutney are more than 20 percent sugar, which is around 1 teaspoon or more per tablespoon.

        Perhaps you could try thinking with something other than your dick? Try google.

  22. Smilin 22

    Lets hope the traditional values that Andrew Little is trying to reinstill in our politics and a general attitude in the day to day lives of our people that no matter where you come from you get to live in a democracy that is open to all to benefit from equally and the majority gets to have a say in what is indigenous to this country not fuckin england or anywhere else

  23. proud poppy wearer 23

    In breaking news Labour members and activists say Andrew Little’s speech is greatest speech ever, surveys of the rest of the population show that no one else knows Labour was having a conference and Andrew little’s approval rating remains in the doldrums.

    • whateva next? 23.1

      uniting the caucus and the party is merely the first step, but the most important one, it will snowball now, meanwhile National are floundering around trying to distract and obfuscate themselves into a steaming pile of puss

  24. Rosie 24

    I have to admit I wasn’t expecting much. I had been wary of Andrew Little’s sincerity, in general, and commitment to those who are really struggling. In fact, he wasn’t my number one choice when it came time to vote in a new Labour leader. It’s fair to say I’ve been pretty luke warm about the prospect of Andrew Little leading us to a Labour/Green/NZ First victory in 2017. Harsh but true.

    But all thats been blown out of the water. I was VERY impressed. His leadership skills really showed in his hour long speech. He HAS got what it takes to be PM.

    The concept he spoke of, the “restoring Kiwi dream” was a big split from where we are now, a different vision altogether from the Key Government. “We aren’t being true to who we really are”. That’s saying it. That says we have departed from our roots, as a nation. Glad he acknowledged that.

    A few points jumped out. Was relieved to hear that public health service will receive increased funding under a Labour Government Was reassured to hear that child poverty is intolerable in the 21st and that each budget would incorporate measurements against child poverty. I liked that all goods and services purchased by the Government would be sourced from NZ suppliers, therefore boosting the profits and health of these onshore companies, which recycles back into our economy. (Remember what the natz got in they did the opposite? One example. The successful Levin company, Swazi had a contract with the defence force to make uniforms. Natz come in and cancel the contract and give it to a Chinese factory instead. The natz intentionally killed off jobs in Levin when they did that).

    That speech restored hope and it restored confidence. We CAN do it!

    • Starman 24.1

      It’s a start, but just because it was said, doesn’t mean it will happen – isn’t that the problem? The trust has been lost…..My 89yr old father, a lifetime labour supporter couldn’t bring himself to cast a party vote at the last election…what does that say?

  25. Ross 25

    “Even if you’ve given up, I haven’t. I won’t. Ever. It’s not who I am.”

    Peter Ellis will be delighted to hear that, not that he has given up thinking one day he will get justice.

  26. Hi Vis. 26

    The Leader of the Opposition spoke out against the TPPA. and addressed the ECA 1991.
    He will oppose both and for that stand I m right behind him.
    He does have a one hell of a job ahead of him and I can only wish him Godspeed.
    He will need it.
    I feel we have a good man at the helm of NZ Labour.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Strong first week of firearms buy-back events
    The first full week of the firearms buy-back and amnesty has produced a strong turnout as events roll out nationwide for the first time. “Momentum is slowly starting to build as community collection events are held across the entire country, ...
    1 day ago
  • New digital service to make business easy
    A new digital platform aims to make it easier for small businesses to access services from multiple government agencies, leaving them more time to focus on their own priorities. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister for Small Business Stuart Nash ...
    1 week ago
  • Million-dollar start to gun collection events
    Million-dollar start to gun collection events  Police Minister Stuart Nash says a solid start has been made to the gun buyback and amnesty after the first weekend of community collection events. “Gun owners will walk away with more than ...
    1 week ago
  • Praise after first firearms collection event
    Police Minister Stuart Nash has praised Police and gun owners after the first firearms collection event saw a busy turnout at Riccarton Racecourse in Christchurch. “Police officers and staff have put a tremendous effort into planning and logistics for the ...
    1 week ago
  • New Police constables deployed to regions
    Seventy-eight new Police constables are heading out to the regions following today’s graduation of a new recruit wing from the Royal New Zealand Police College. Police Minister Stuart Nash says the record high number of new Police officers being recruited, ...
    2 weeks ago