Can This Government Regain Power on Its Policies?

Written By: - Date published: 11:46 am, January 17th, 2018 - 82 comments
Categories: accountability, business, climate change, economy, Economy, employment, Environment, greens, jacinda ardern, labour, local government, nz first, Politics, science, workers' rights - Tags:

All parties in this government need to increase their vote share if they are to have a reasonable chance of being re-elected. What policy results will New Zealand have to vote for and campaign on in 2020?

Coalition agreement points, in summary Will it attract votes?
Regional development: A $1 billion per year Regional Development (Provincial Growth) Fund. No detail from Minister Jones on how this is going to work, let alone what we are going to see for our taxpayer money in 2.6 years.
Transport: Reprioritise NLTP towards rail. Significant investment in regional rail. Plenty of takers for the money, little new rail work likely to be started inside three years, high risk of voter disappointment.
Forestry: Re-establish the New Zealand Forestry Service, and planting 100 million trees per year in a Billion Trees Planting Programme. No sign of anything yet.
Zero Carbon Act and Commission: Establish Green fund for business. Include agriculture in ETS. Little sign of it yet. Useful for shoring up Green base but little else. Negative in rural community.
Auckland Port: Commissioning a feasibility study on moving the Ports of Auckland to Northport. Zero voter yield in three years.
Biosecurity: A funding increase to Biosecurity NZ and a select committee Inquiry into biosecurity. Will happen in the May budget. The best inroad the government has into rural voters.
Water and Irrigation: Honour existing Crown Irrigation investment commitments, but wind down support. Stronger regulation of fresh water. Completed projects will, reasonably, be claimed by National. Rural voter turnoff.
Monetary policy: Review and reform the Reserve Bank Act. Will discussions already held with the Minister of Finance be enough, rather than legislative change? No votes in it.
Minimum wage: Increase to $20 an hour by 2020, with the final increase to take effect in April 2021. This is a vote-winner, and well on track.
Tax: Tax working group. Increase penalties for corporate fraud and tax evasion, and introduce a tax on exports of bottled water. Tax group findings will need enormous political skill to not lose votes implementing findings going into 2020 election. Likely voter negative.
KiwiBank: Investigate KiwiBank’s capabilities to become the Government’s banker when that contract is next renewed. Lovely idea with no votes in it.
Foreign ownership: Strengthen the Overseas Investment Act and create a comprehensive register of foreign-owned land and housing. It’s as strong as it’s going to get under this government. No further votes in it.
Research and development: Increase R&D spending to 2 per cent of GDP over 10 years. To be reflected in the May budget. Relationship with entire business community unsettled at best.
Health: Re-establish the Mental Health Commission, annual free health checks for seniors with the SuperGold card, free doctors’ visits for all under 14s, increasing the age for free breast screening to 74. In reality any voter shift in health depends on massive shifts of funding into services each financial year, rather than any tinkering or structural adjustments. Await May budget.
Education: Restore funding for gifted students and Computers in Homes, pilot counsellors in primary schools, free driver training for all secondary school students, restart Te Kotahitanga teacher professional development Teachers will never be happy and always vote left. Parents are never happy. Students don’t vote.
• Defence: Re-examine the Defence procurement programme. Possibly reflected in the May budget, but unlikely. Few votes will be pulled away from National.
• Housing: Establish a Housing Commission. Kiwibuild.

 

Success depends on how fast Minister Twyford can pick up a hammer. Should be possible in three years, and should have some voter yield.
• Law and Order: Work towards 1800 new police officers over three years, investigate a volunteer rural constabulary programme, increase funding for Community Law Centres, establish a Criminal Cases Review Commission. More police on the street is always a vote winner, and superette and dairy crime for cigarettes is corrosive among specific voters.
• Social Development: Increase Working For Families. More funding for family violence networks. Free counselling for under 25s. Overhaul of welfare system to be less punitive. Some voter upside here if done well, but headline unemployment will need to stay very low to be effective.
• Superannuation: Keep age of eligibility at 65. Nothing to deliver here. Mostly a vote-share risk.
• Environment: Move to an emissions-free government-vehicle fleet by 2025/26, establish a tyre stewardship fund, piloting alternatives to 1080, work towards a Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary. No sign of anything concrete yet. Mostly vote-share risk.
• Conservation: More funding for the Department of Conservation. More predator control. Should occur in the May budget. Will help to shore up existing voter bases on left.
• Immigration: Ensure work visas reflect skills shortages and cut down on low quality international education courses, and take action on migrant exploitation, particularly international students. Policies so slight that they barely register. Real capacity to lose left votes if done badly.
• Pike River: Commit to re-entry to Pike River.

 

Should be able to be a completed project by 2020. No further votes in it.

… plus a bunch of minor process issues like review the Shand inquiry into local government costs.

 

They have made massive delivery over almost all of the 100 day list. Great work.

But of the above list, most respond to slim constituents within party bases, and attract few if any new votes.

All three political parties in government need to increase their vote share if they are to have any confidence that they can form a further government.

The above list does little to attract new votes that will achieve this goal.  That’s before Business As Usual happens to the government, which always corrodes support. Time will winnow out the good vote winners, and the losers.

The real question is: is there enough votes in these policies to regain power?

82 comments on “Can This Government Regain Power on Its Policies?”

  1. Enough is Enough 1

    I think housing is the key. It is a huge winner or loser.

    If Twyford has his building machine up and running by 2020, and there has been no further price shocks (either up or down) then this government can go to the public and say look we have fixed this.

    That was the Nats biggest failing. Allowing a housing shortage turn into a crisis.

    If things have not really moved by 2020 then National will hammer them on this point.

    • SpaceMonkey 1.1

      Probably “we are fixing this” instead as it will take a longer than the next two years to fix the housing problem. But yeah, your point still stands.

    • Keepcalmcarryon 1.2

      I think framing the housing crisis as National allowing a shortage to become a crisis doesn’t go far enough.
      National deliberately inflated the housing bubble to keep Auckland house owners comfortable and their mates rich. It wasn’t an accident, this is the tax free capital gain party we are talking about.

      • AB 1.2.1

        True – despite the mythology of capitalism, very few people become properly wealthy through actually working. There are indeed a small number of people who create successful businesses and then sell them.
        But the more common pathways are through unearned, non-labour income: speculative investment, ticket-clipping, extracting irrationally high salaries, monopoly/predatory pricing and externalising costs onto the taxpayer.
        The National Party is essentially about maximising opportunities for their supporters to use these routes to wealth.

    • Greg 1.3

      There going be a debt collapse before 2020 there good news is most current property owner voted act so there is votes with those who haven’t bought yet

    • Brendon Harre 1.4

      I agree -housing is key for Labour -it can provide Jacinda with huge credibility -of boldly addressing an issue that National failed on. It is an issue which will help define that political generational change has occurred. Housing affordability and all that goes with it wrt modernising the urban environment is consistent with the Jacinda ‘brand’ and will help define her as a ‘serious’ politician. Unaffordable housing disproportionately affects the young, poor, Maori, Pasifika…. so providing housing solutions will give a good voter payoff.

      Housing, transport and the built environment as they relate to housing affordability, climate change, inequality etc will give a good political payoff for Labour+Greens

      Regional development will give a good political payoff to NZF + Labour. If NZF do it properly they can cement their brand as a genuine ‘provincial/country’ party that will help them progress past personality politics. I think that is what Winston wants as his legacy. In fact that could have been his primary reason for choosing the Labour led coalition government over a National led government.

  2. Kat 2

    Re-establish the Ministry of Works along with the Forestry Service. All this govt has to do is announce that its in the pipeline and the ripple effect throughout the private sector will be of Tsunami proportions.

  3. Pat 3

    A fairly common theme running through your list is the lack of detail/action to date so taking this approach at this stage is unlikely to provide any insight to the question raised.
    I think it reasonable to suggest that the reelection of a Labour led coalition at the next election may well depend on factors outside of domestic control…..that may require a complete reprioritisation/ positioning on many fronts.
    At least being incumbent provides the resources necessary for this.

  4. Sam 4

    Non of those policies fit the narrative. Let’s take perhaps the easiest headline. “Defence: defence planners screw up again.” Doesn’t mater if the headline is true or not, MSM always publish false defence narratives. Kind of makes you wonder why government doesn’t work the way people think it works.

    And vote grabbing? All the easy to grabe votes have been done already. There are no easy fixes any more because people bullshit way to much.

  5. KiwiBank: Investigate KiwiBank’s capabilities to become the Government’s banker when that contract is next renewed.

    Lovely idea with no votes in it.

    It’s part of the off-shoring that people have been complaining about for a couple of decades now. So done well within a broad scope of bringing government services back in-house and getting rid of overseas ownership it would be a major vote winner.

    The biggest vote loser is Labour’s ongoing support for the TPPA and other FTAs that are increasing poverty in NZ.

    • Kat 5.1

      Agree, Kiwibank is a vote winner and should be the govt banker of first choice. Although it may also be wise to keep a conduit open to some offshore services.

      • Kevin 5.1.1

        Does it really matter?

        Kiwibank is now indistinguishable from an Australian bank in the way it handles joe customer on a day-to-day basis.

        • Kat 5.1.1.1

          Its matters as much as the New Zealand flag not having kangaroos or wallabies on it. And we own it.

      • Enough is Enough 5.1.2

        Although I agree Kiwibank is a good thing and should be the Government’s bank, I don’t think it will ever be a vote winner.

        This is hardly an issue on Struggle Street that has people talking.

        • Kat 5.1.2.1

          It sends a clear message, and that includes struggle street. Offshore banking dominance is all part of the smoke and mirrors of the neolib trickle down corporate financial services that promised struggle street a lift up but never delivered.

    • Anon 5.2

      Should totally be a vote winner. Could emphasise the “gifts” Westpac hands out to MPs, the rubber stamping of renewal instead of /actually/ following a process of reselection, and how bad of a bank they actually are including the offical reprimand they got last year for something.

      Unfortunately all the reasons to move away from westpac could be seen as going negative, which could be toxic.

  6. red-blooded 6

    Quite a lot of your commentary seems to be in the “no detail yet” mode. I’d suggest that’s hardly surprising, given the short sitting time since the election and the massive focus on the 100 days’ projects. And some of the detail was laid out before the election – eg, the regional fund. While he was still leader Andrew Little visited a number of regions and made announcements about the focus for regional funding under a Labour-led government. Here in Otago, there’s a proposal to develop a chair at Otago Uni focused on design of digital games, and create a digital gaming hub. We already have a number of small ventures working in this area and our ultra-fast broadband is also an asset.

    I agree that the housing programme is definitely going to be a measuring stick come next election, and so it should be. This was a major shortcoming of the last government and was rightly made a significant priority of this one.

    I also think that governments tend to get re-elected if they are seen as trustworthy and capable. Ardern is a major asset, and Little is making his mark. Shaw has the makings of a good Minister. Plus, things like lowering the cost of visits to the doctor help people to see the values of the government and are appreciated.

    If there are no major screw-ups, I think this government (or a variant of it) should be electable again in 2020. There are a few big factors that could undermine this, though – one being loss of pulling power if Winston finally resigns. Whether NZF would cross the line without him is unknown.

    • Ad 6.1

      Red, push the personality politics aside for a moment and go through the policies.

      By the May budget they have done close to everything meaningful that they can do.

      Quite a few of the policies listed are more likely to make electoral matters worse, not better.

      So they need more voter-attractive policies than the ones they have on the list, I think.

      • red-blooded 6.1.1

        I’m not saying that there’s not room for more development of policy. But I do think you’re underestimating the potential attractions of some policies, like the regional development fund. I wish Shane Jones wasn’t in charge, but if he pretty much sticks to the plans outlined during the run-up to the election then there’ll be action in a lot of places that have been feeling moribund or left out in recent years. Similarly, the housing policy should really stimulate the building, supplies and training industries. I think people are concerned about things like the dreadful state of support services for people with mental health needs, and there are lots of DHBs in real trouble. Plus we have commitments to replace a number of decrepit regional hospitals – and not with PPPs (again, a vote winner in a number of regions, if people can see actual progress being made).

        And it’s all very well to say “Push the personality politics aside”, but that’s not what voters do, is it? Do you honestly believe Key and co won three times based on the compelling nature of their policy platforms?

        Definitely there needs to be ongoing policy work – that’s a given. But one big way governments are measured is by looking at whether they’ve delivered what they promised. That’s the immediate priority.

        • Ad 6.1.1.1

          Guaranteed TS will have other posts on the personality-driven stuff. I decided to do a dry post deliberately – because in the end it’s the enacted policies that alter people’s circumstances.

          I will definitely revisit this post at Budget time.

          But the core theme is that the government has not raised expectations particularly high, and they need to in order to show a sharp demarcation of delivery at the voting end of the term.

  7. SPC 7

    All seen off by “metooism”, as John Key did when he adopted WFF and interest free tertiary loans back in 2008.

    It’s more about first building confidence in the government’s values (taking the public with them) and then agreement with the government on the future course – what should be done in the term ahead.

  8. patricia bremner 8

    Two issues which will be a decider at the next election not mentioned,
    Child poverty. Food on the table, health, education clothing and homes.
    Inequality. Drawing society together to narrow the gaps in income.
    The problems have become huge, and people are desperate and impatient, as well as having to deal with false news.

    The current parties of the left need to keep their “troops on the ground”

    Voters may decide according to progress and future plans. As well as…….

    Establishing Public Service and infrastructure, encouraging sustainable business models, Taxation and distribution.

    Innovations, R and D, Climate change programmes, employment and Educational rankings will play a part.

    Beneficiaries quality of life, Improved ACC, Health, Insurance on investments and Kiwi-Saver
    with safe guards for the less able/affluent. They need 9+ years!!

    • greywarshark 8.1

      When it comes to clothing it’s which category. Shoes are a problem, also school clothing.

      Some primary kids who have school uniforms to go to public schools have middle class attitudes driving them. Instead of you can wear a medium blue t-shirt and sew/stick a school logo on, they have to have a special textured blue with school logo embroidered on. I was told that one cost $70 but that was probably misheard. But when you can get ordinary children’s t shirts for $5 on special it is a quick example of the contrast between the midle class fussy and complacemnt and the strugglers that they never consider when the Board thinks of the school uniform, ir even when they do a survey on them, and don’t put in options with prices.

      Shoes are damn dear. And they get pinched. A terrible blow to a parent with demands from work and can’t always get to sales or school second hand days.

  9. Stuart Munro 9

    Looks pretty minimalist really. If they take stands on a handful of major vote losers – 1080, lowskill migrants, TPP, land sales – they’ll be in with a chance. Running Gnat light was not the job description though – how about they actually govern for a change? They could start by reforming Treasury.

  10. Ian 10

    If labour uses it’s secret weapon Peeni Henare to anything like the effect he had on the voting public today on Radio live,wave the white flag guys. It is all over before it’s started.

    • Sam 10.1

      There is adsolotly zero evidence to say Winston will ever entertain a coalition with National… ZERO… Get used to it…

      • BM 10.1.1

        I’d be surprised if Peters made it to 2020, that would make him 75.
        The guy has treated his body like a toilet, he’s on borrowed time.

        • Sam 10.1.1.1

          I don’t need your help BM…

          • BM 10.1.1.1.1

            Pal, it’s highly likely it’s going to be an FPP contest in 2020, if that situation does eventuate my money is on National.

            All this talk about policy will mean nothing.

  11. eco maori 11

    national have screwed 99% of the people of NZ buy ignoreing the advice they were given on global warming we spent ten years building houses that have no planns for wilder weather extreme. High sea levels most people don’t understand how hurricanes work they have a low pressure system in them and that causes the sea to rise like a bubble in them and that is the main cause of flooding not just the rain so all these houses that have been built with out this in the plan are vulnerable look at those houses in Christchurch liquefaction stuffed them. I say the councils have been ripping off the 99% look at the leaky home debacle they were just looking after there wealthy m8. nationals corrupt so are the council who got burned for the leaky homes know one. Who pays for that debacle the PEOPLE IT THE PEOPLE WHO PAY FOR THE government and council stuff ups not the latter the latter just cover there ass from being liable come on don’t YOU get it.
    bill english is going on about Maori he had 9 years to look after us and now he has no Mana he wants to make out he cares for us and our language bullshit.
    How do we revitalise OUR Maori language well we give our Maori culture people Mana and respect this will revive Maori language. You do not deliberately pronounce the language wrong you do not broadcast all the bad news and statistics about us Maori or lock us up in jail that is the polar opposite suppression. And forget about all the good things. This is one of my mission and I know the ECO effect is having a positive effect on Maori Mana and wairua I see that all ready You know that old saying the kumara never tells how sweet it is so you will have to look for the effects yourselves.
    Ka kite ano

  12. Ian 12

    Irony alert. Someone cares about the eco brown guys mental issues.

    • Sam 12.1

      Hello darkness my old friend. I’v come to talk with you again. Because the visions softly creeping… Muhahahahaha

  13. RedBaronCV 13

    Well my thinks:

    – There isn’t too much on the list that tackles the inequality in earnings gap where CEO’s earn more in a week than many of their staff earn in a year.

    As an example – Away from Auckland populations are older & home ownership higher and frankly when the rates bill is $50 to $100 a week and being paid by modestly earning people or pensioners, to fund Local body CEO’s with salaries in the hundreds of thousands, cutting back on that type of activity is a vote winner.

    – Nor is there much on Labour force empowerment for both wage & salary earners or the small business owner who contracts or works in their own business.

    There is no way employees and similar are going to enforce any contractual changes whether it’s wages or health & safety or privacy concerns when they have to stick their head above the parapet one at a time with a expensive lawyer pushing them up to be picked off at leisure by the ruling class.
    Start with the big employers and the softer stuff but put unions(business assistance groupings) back in on an opt out basis and the employer can pay the dues for a period. There are plenty of votes in that both from middle ground employees and existing non voters.

    – Renationalise monopolies. Whenever I hear some one telling war stories about telco’s and mutter “should renationalise” as a joke there is plenty of agreement. vote gains from everywhere.

    • Ian 13.1

      You union priks have chosen a loser with Jacinda. She is a nice girl, but soft and fragile. I am looking forward to her complete destruction in the parliament and on the street. She is not my prime minister and is only there because the poison dwarf had the snitch on a few Nat MP’s .You are talking the same demented shit as compost maori.

      • Sam 13.1.1

        Eww. That’s just creepy

      • Ed 13.1.2

        That is quite repulsive abuse.
        You seem to be advocating violence.
        Yuk.

        • Sam 13.1.2.1

          One can only imagine how a foul mind like that treats a girlfriend in private when he runs his mouth like that in public. Be carful out there girls.

          • Ed 13.1.2.1.1

            There is a clear threat of violence there.
            Totally unacceptable.

            • Sam 13.1.2.1.1.1

              I’m like meh. Thats why we have parliamentary security. But not all girls are that lucky. But this is a huge conflict of interest that I genuinely think every one should be a lot more aware of. It’s not hard to understand. Right wing males don’t just hate leftie woman, they hate all woman because they fear what’s between there legs like nerds. That’s why they say power corrupts those who fear woman.

      • Muttonbird 13.1.3

        Perhaps you’d better start your own country. You could call it Shitsville, after your filthy dairy cows.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 13.1.4

        Ian’s embracing the Brighter Future.

        Nice.

      • red-blooded 13.1.5

        Don’t be such a patronising misogynist creep, Ian. Ardern is not a “girl” – she’s a woman (a grown-up). And she’s shown that she’s by no means “soft and fragile” – she’s a smart, competent political operator. Does a female have to be “soft and fragile” to be “nice”, in your view of the world?

        As for your comments about eco maori, he’s exploring quite a complex chain of thought in his comment. Be less concerned about the mechanics and focus more on the ideas.

        • JanM 13.1.5.1

          Shouldn’t someone this disgusting be banned? It’s pretty evil stuff

          • Kat 13.1.5.1.1

            Perhaps allowing the likes of Ian & BM to mouth off here drains their urge and stops them committing any real physical or psychological crime out there in public.

            • JanM 13.1.5.1.1.1

              Cripes – really? BM is just your typical redneck,IMO, but I think there’s something very creepy about Ian

              • Kat

                Some of BM’s posts are worse. Both are full of manure with a streak of vitriol. Perhaps they should be directed to the whale oil site, would certainly raise the standards there.

      • patricia bremner 13.1.6

        Ian, Jacinda put herself out there, not like you, being abusive and not giving your name.
        We “union priks” (pricks) ….. “complete destruction” What ever do you mean Ian?

  14. Ed1 14

    I think the Kiwibank one is totally symbolic – high transaction level with low net assets held, requiring a large administrative base – Kiwibank may prefer not to bid for that work, but may well prefer to have support from their shareholders to enable them to be truly competitive with the Aussie banks – it is in the interests of New Zealand to have a smaller level of dividends flow to overseas owners . . .

    • McFlock 14.1

      The other symbolic one is Pike River – vote-neutral if nothing comes of it because an honest look confirms it’s too dangerous to progress with, but if they recover someone then it’s literally doing what the nat parrots said was impossible.

  15. cleangreen 15

    “Transport: Reprioritise NLTP towards rail. Significant investment in regional rail. Plenty of takers for the money, little new rail work likely to be started inside three years, high risk of voter disappointment.”

    Yes we need urgent regional rail restoration (Napier /Gisborne line repair & Northland.

    National are trying to push for many more millions/billions for roading for more trucks and want us the taxpayer to borrow the money for truck freight??????

    We want our own rail asset used so no thanks to National for trying to use public taxes to prop up their rich mates trucking companies.

    Save our climate = use less carbon emitting rail freight please labour.

    “Let’s do this”

  16. Anon 16

    I’d usually vote green but they lost my vote after Steffan Brownings anti-glyphosate campaign – I see the greens still have a page up against spraying parks and calling glyphosate probably carcenogenic, despite all evidence and the WHO admitting they lied. I won’t be voting for them again until they’re better than “ban DHMO” levels of science.

    Labour got my (early) vote after a bold move on abortion law, but so far it’s not been mentioned again. So far, their actual efforts in government seem pretty weak. Minimum wage returns to inflation adjusted, but Labour wants higher inflation and also canceled tax cuts for everyone to further encourage breeding, so that’s moot. Poor people are supposed to be getting cheaper GP visits, but the community card is impossible to actually obtain (check the form, the requirements are ridiculous) so that’s moot. Weed for the terminally ill, but poorly done and so limited it’s basically moot. Housing, poverty, and trees are nice promises – but they’ll take time and in that time some easy – or strong – wins would boost confidence.

    The push for abortion law reform could be that win – it’s a human rights issue they can champion against the backdrop of bigotry and hate from those who would never vote left anyway.

  17. Sparky 17

    They have already lost support with Labours hypocritical and inexplicable push to sign the CP-TPP. I’d say any chance of them being re-elected will depend on them dropping this shit and how fed up people are with the Nats.

  18. red-blooded 18

    Has it somehow escaped your notice that this government is made up of three parties, not two? The Labour-NZF-Green bloc is shown as 5 seat ahead of the National-ACT combo (which really is a combo, not involving two actual parties).

    • BM 18.1

      Act isn’t a party, National could regain the Epsom seat in a heartbeat if they wanted to, I also reckon they’ll reclaim Ohariu at the next election, that self-centred fuckwit Peter Dunne really let National down by deciding to pull out last minute.

      http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2017/electorate-details-36.html

      NZ First is a dead party walking and won’t be around after the 2020 election so it’s more accurate to compare National against only Labour and the Greens.

      • Enough is Enough 18.1.1

        I think there is room for new minor parties on the right and in the centre.

        ACT is dead but the hard right fringe still exists. They just vote for National. The Nats will have to swallow some dead rats and accept some of what Labour has done in the past 100 days. It is very hard to take candy away from a baby. That will upset the hard right and be fertile ground for a new low tax/small government party. They just need a Prebble type leader to come forward.

        Likewise the centre is open for business. I agree that NZ First will struggle without Winston. Heck they struggle with him. There will be a group of people who can’t vote National, and will be disappointed by Labour’s lack of ambition. There are votes up for grabs from people sick of the two old parties that never change anything materially.

        • BM 18.1.1.1

          I agree this current crop of small parties have just about done their dash and we’re pretty much back to FPP where it’s just National vs Labour.

          There is definitely an opportunity for a more hard right Nationalist party, the sort of party people expected NZ First to be, instead of the Northland Maori party which it actually is.

          All those Nationalist won’t vote NZ First next time around Peters well and truly screwed them over, dumb arses.

          • Puckish Rogue 18.1.1.1.1

            Indeed, WP was saying all the things rural folks wanted to hear during the campaign but once in power its all turned to nought

            I pick NZFirst under 4% over the next few rounds of polls since most of his right support will feel betrayed (and rightly so)

            If i was National I’d throw a few bones to Act over the next few years to get them a couple of points in the party vote and maybe get two or three Act MPs next time

            • BM 18.1.1.1.1.1

              I think Acts time has passed, what’s it’s purpose who’s it actually representing?

              When Act first started National was still fairly provincial/farmer-centric, Act was about getting the urban white-collar professional vote.

              Fast forward 20 odd years and National have well and truly got that sector of the population sown up and Act is nowhere to be seen

              Now, we’re in a situation where farmers are feeling a bit on the outer and not listened to.

              That is where I reckon the next party is coming from and if done properly could net at least 15% of the vote.

              Peters had an opportunity to transform NZ First into a dominant nationalist/provincial party but threw it away for baubles and utu.

              • Puckish Rogue

                I’m actually now thinking under 3% for NZFirst on the basis that not only most of the right will depart but also some of the left will drift back to Labour

                So which do you think that is most likely:

                A. A new rural based party
                B. National rediscovers its rural roots
                C. NZFirst (after WP leaves) targets all the rural community or
                D. None of the above

                • BM

                  Staring into my crystal ball.

                  A -Most likely especially if Labour and the Greens start pilling onto Farmers with water taxes, climate change rules and regulations.

                  That’s going to really kick off a ground roots type of movement that could give a new party massive amounts of momentum.

                  If National has any brains they’d actively encourage this new party and help develop it, they’re looking for a coalition partner and a rural/provincial based one would be the perfect fit.

                  Not only would it see off NZ First for good, it would also drag in many of those disgruntled nationalist. conservative voters.

                  C- Not a hope in hell, Peters signing up with the ex-socialist youth president and the greens well and truly incinerated his rural support

                  • Puckish Rogue

                    I would like A but new parties in NZ that don’t have an identifiable brand (like the Greens, don’t seem to do to well

                    They’d need to get someone pretty charismatic to run and then they’d have to look at hoovering up some of TOPs (2.4%), Conservative (0.2), UnitedFuture and NZ Outdoors (both 0.1) all while trying to take NZFirsts share of votes

                    It’d be a tough ask but is there anyone in the National party that might want to take a decent crack at it, would have to be a legit farmer though

                    • BM

                      They’d also take around 10% of Nationals vote which I don’t really have an issue with.

                      It’d be a tough ask but is there anyone in the National party that might want to take a decent crack at it, would have to be a legit farmer though

                      Amy Adams would be good, Bill English would be awesome.

                      Whoever it would be probably won’t be from the National party though it will be someone from Federated farmers.

                      Thinking about it, Federated Farmers should register as a political party they’ve got all the networks, money and connections all set up.

                    • Puckish Rogue

                      And of course if National were to step aside in a safe, rural seat…

                  • Drowsy M. Kram

                    An agribusiness party as a potential future coalition partner for National might be one more nail (if one was needed) in the coffin of the previously much hyped Blue-Green alliance.

                    • BM

                      Blue Green Alliance can never happen, Greens are more of a SJW party than an environmental party.

                      Too far apart on everything you could never get any consensus, shame really because that fundamentalist rigidity will doom the Greens to electoral oblivion.

                      A true environmental party could work both sides of the political spectrum, unlike their German counterparts the NZ Greens don’t seem to have that ability

                • Ed

                  I think you are concern trolling.

                • Enough is Enough

                  I agree.

                  If Federated Farmers and Fonterra swung in behind a rural party with tacit approval from National, there could be a 7% party.

                  It would all depend on leadership though.

                  Amy Adams yes but I think she has her eyes on a bigger prize at the moment.

      • AB 18.1.2

        “National could regain the Epsom seat in a heartbeat if they wanted to”
        Indeed – but the result would be that the number of votes at their disposal in Parliament would decline by 1. That’s why they chose to run their Epsom rort in the first place.

  19. pdm 19

    What will tip this government over – 3 things I think:

    1. The Winston factor – no government he has been part of has survived and if Clark could not control him I doubt Ardern will be able to.
    2. Alienating supporters through a failing economy (the black fiscal hole) resulting in higher inflation and particularly higher interest rates.
    3. Too many conversations – no action.

    Time will tell but I think no1 will be the biggie.

    • greywarshark 19.1

      You speak as if higher inflation was a bad thing. Low inflation tends to accompany little economic movement. Our inflation rates are on too low a movement target.

      • pdm 19.1.1

        Higher inflation affects all prices as well as interest rates.

        Based on your theory the minimum wage will need to go to $30 an hour not the $20 projected.

        • greywarshark 19.1.1.1

          That’s based on your theory. What are your reasons for naming that amount?
          And how would you cope with the way that many people though working in a productive way, are not receiving wage rises that compensate for the low CPI, so that the economy seems to operate well by leaching the ordinary worker’s wages and even many of the middle class?

  20. pdm 20

    BTW I forgot to add that this is an excellent post. Probably the most realistic and objective I have ever seen at The Standard.

    Well done.

  21. greywarshark 21

    No doubt avoiding the green lettuce.

  22. Ad 22

    …ahhh but babies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Maintaining momentum for small business innovation
    Small Business Minister Stuart Nash says the report of the Small Business Council will help maintain the momentum for innovation and improvements in the sector. Mr Nash has thanked the members of the Small Business Council (SBC) who this week handed over their report, Empowering small businesses to aspire, succeed ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Seventy-eight new Police constables
    Extra Police officers are being deployed from Northland to Southland with the graduation of a new wing of recruits from the Royal New Zealand Police College. “The graduation of 78 constables today means that 1524 new constables have been deployed since the government took office,” says Police Minister Stuart Nash. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Tax refund season ends near $600 million
    Almost $600 million has been paid into taxpayers’ bank accounts in the past two months, after the first season of automatic tax assessments. Revenue Minister Stuart Nash says the completion of this year’s tax refund season is a significant milestone. “The ability of Inland Revenue to run auto calculations for ...
    3 weeks ago