Compare and contrast: Little vs Corbyn on immigration

Written By: - Date published: 10:44 pm, March 16th, 2016 - 284 comments
Categories: discrimination, Economy, employment, jobs, workers' rights - Tags: , ,

Presented with no additional comment:

Andrew Little:

Labour leader Andrew Little says ethnic restaurants should be employing New Zealand Indians and Chinese chefs instead of bringing in staff from overseas.

Mr Little said large inflows of semi-skilled migrants were putting pressure on jobs, especially in Auckland. If in Government, Labour would immediately place a cap on immigration levels until economic conditions had improved.

Jeremy Corbyn:

The Labour leader insisted Britain must instead celebrate the “enormous contribution to our society” that migrants have brought over the years and suggested the UK should look at immigration as “a very great opportunity”.

Migrants had “helped our economic growth and had boosted the NHS, the social services and education in the UK, Mr Corbyn said as he told his critics: “Don’t look upon immigration as necessarily a problem”.

Rather than looking to restrict immigration to the UK, the Government must be “far more focussed” on ensuring they deliver more doctors, school places and housing to meet demand in highly-populated areas.

Updated by r0b. I guess CV was unaware of this response by Little:

Andrew Little responds

The way comments made by me have been reported are baffling. Of more concern, however, is that they may have offended anyone. I would never want for anyone in this country to feel they are being somehow targeted. That’s not what I stand for and it’s not what Labour stands for either.

I was asked last week by the Hutt News when I visited Lower Hutt about apparent concerns locals had with immigrant chefs. As I recall, I pointed out the China FTA specifically allows Chinese chefs to be recruited for Chinese restaurants and there was a case for other ethnic chefs to be recruited on the same basis.

I said at some point I would expect with larger ethnic communities that chefs would be able to be recruited within New Zealand. I said there was an issue with semi-skilled people being recruited under skills shortages categories but I doubt whether this related to chefs.

I was asked about Labour’s policy on immigration generally. I said our approach was that as the economy slows there is a case to “turn the tap down”. I also pointed out ours is a nation built on immigration and that people bringing skills here from all parts of the world is essential for us.share on twitter

I was asked about the same issues today by other reporters. I again pointed out the right under the China FTA to have Chinese chefs recruited into New Zealand. I repeated my statement about the immigration tap being turned down as the economy slowed. I said how important immigration was to New Zealand.

So, to be clear, Labour’s policy on immigration hasn’t changed. We need to moderate our intake at times when we are struggling to find jobs and houses for newly arrived folks as well as locals.

I will always support a progressive immigration policy and welcome all people who want to make a future for themselves and their families to be part of our beautiful country.

                                                                                                                                     

UPDATE 2 by CV

Danyl at The Dim-Post:

Here’s what I love. Labour’s gone and done some research and found out that a bunch of persuadable voters want something done about immigration. And they’ve looked at the US and UK and seen what a successful issue it can be…

There are almost certainly lots of people in the country that want the government to do something about ‘immigration’. But are there ten people in the whole country – outside of the Labour leaders’ office – who think we have too many skilled migrant cooks in our restaurants? It’s almost adorable the way they’ve tried to do something cynical, but executed it in a way that totally undermines their own attempt at divisiveness.

Giovanni Tiso also comments on Twitter:

Tiso

284 comments on “Compare and contrast: Little vs Corbyn on immigration ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jumia 1
    16 March 2016 at 10:54 pm

    You’ve once again bought the media spin to attack Labour out of your own personal vendetta.

    Andrew Little responds to this story here: http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_responds

    Looks like it was once again a media setup. I don’t know how we on the left are ever going to win so long as we buy into the dirty politics and eat our own.

    • Colonial Viper 1.1
      16 March 2016 at 11:50 pm

      Andrew Little is concerned that his comments may have offended people? OK.

      • billmurray 1.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 3:42 pm

        Little is now claiming he was misunderstood and he is baffled, is Little for real or am I in a bad dream?.

    • Colonial Viper 1.2
      16 March 2016 at 11:52 pm

      And Little doesn’t want any particular ethnic group in this country to feel like they are being targetted?

  2. Kiwiri 2
    16 March 2016 at 11:01 pm

    Should I applaud or cry for Andrew Little and the Labour Caucus?

    • James 2.1
      17 March 2016 at 8:07 am

      Laugh would seem most appropriate.

    • Raf 2.2
      17 March 2016 at 11:10 am

      You should be ashamed for taking the media’s interpretation of anything – especially anything related to Labour – at face value. Think a bit harder, eh?

  3. ropata 3
    16 March 2016 at 11:04 pm

    Please remind me whose country is it? Whose taxes paid to build it? Whose land was it originally? Why should Kiwis go through the trauma of colonisation all over again? Is it just to keep the property bubble going?

    I despise the dishonest racial framing and outright lies that people like you and FJK perpetuate.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      16 March 2016 at 11:10 pm

      The articles speak for themselves re: the difference in attitude between Little and Corbyn on the issue of immigration.

      On another note the Alternatives for Germany party seems to have met with recent electoral success by leveraging voter concerns around high unemployment levels and high immigration levels.

      BTW I am on record saying that NZ needs to control immigration levels far more carefully in future.

      • Jumia 3.1.1
        16 March 2016 at 11:12 pm

        So you agree with Little and Labour then.

      • Kiwiri 3.1.2
        16 March 2016 at 11:40 pm

        Hey CV,
        First, Chinese-sounding surnames.
        And then Chinese chefs.
        Who do you think will be next?

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.2.1
          16 March 2016 at 11:44 pm

          Well they definitely have Indian cooks lined up.

          As for who is after that? Dunno. This smells like another Grant Robertson designed media tactic with Andrew Little signing off on it.

          Labour want the NZ First vote back.

          • Kiwiri 3.1.2.1.1
            16 March 2016 at 11:57 pm

            So, presumably there weren’t really significant number of votes for Labour from voters with Chinese-sounding surnames buying up houses last time round.
            And also not many (if any) votes from Chinese chefs this time.

            *Of course, presumably those are two distinct subgroups given the low-paying Chinese chefs would not likely be able to afford expensive Auckland houses. And those Chinese chefs might not be able to vote anyway, given their type of visas for entry into the country.

            Anyway, looks like statistics were dispensed with this time and Labour just went for it:

            “He did not know how many chefs were coming into the country through the FTA provision.”
            (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11606664)

            • Colonial Viper 3.1.2.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 12:02 am

              There IS real concern throughout Auckland that Chinese buyers have been rapidly pushing up house prices even further than their already lofty levels.

              No denying that.

              But Labour did not know how to properly capitalise on that mood and transform it into actual electoral support, and instead launched their hamfisted media strategy last year.

              I think it will be the same this time around.

              I mean, the FTA letting in Chinese chefs is Labour’s FFS. People can see the obvious complicity, just like they could with unaffordable Auckland house prices.

            • Keith 3.1.2.1.1.2
              17 March 2016 at 7:16 am

              The National Party buddy banter is cute guys!

  4. ropata 4
    16 March 2016 at 11:10 pm

    50% of kiwis suffering from AKL housing crisis don’t get a say?
    Quote: http://thestandard.org.nz/hickey-on-auckland-housing/#comment-1142061

    I think the better way to frame the debate is to understand there is two sides to NZ.

    There is leafy suburban NZ where roughly 50% of NZ adults live and they live in roughly two-thirds of the houses, which they own. The vast majority of them are satisfied with their lives. They live in a stable community. I suspect this side of NZ easily buys into John Keys and Mike Hosking superficial -life is great in NZ …… Many from this side of NZ do not understand their is another of side of NZ. Demographically this side of NZ are older, wealthier, whiter and more likely to vote -probably in a way which reflects their high levels of satisfaction in NZ life.

    The other side of NZ also contains roughly 50% of NZ adults and they live in roughly one-third of the houses, which they rent. Statistics show they are much less satisfied with their lives -especially if they have children. Because for this group life is much grimmer -because they are the transient community side of NZ. They do not have security in their lives – landlords can and do regularly evict them on short notice. So this group do not have long term relationships with GP practices, schooling, community groups, sports teams…. This group live in much less space and that space is often older, colder, moldy and overcrowded -leading to diseases, stress, social problems and mental illness…. This side of NZ is despondent and cynical that society is interested in helping them. Demographically this side of NZ is younger, poorer, browner and less likely to vote -probably because life has taught them to be cynical of politics.

    • vto 4.1
      17 March 2016 at 7:57 am

      These two sides really have little to do with each other, especially in larger centres.

      Hickey has described the phenomenon succinctly and well.

  5. AmaKiwi 5
    16 March 2016 at 11:31 pm

    I look at what is essential for life. You will die if you do not have:

    Air (approx. 5 minutes)
    Water (approx. 4 – 7 days)
    Food (approx. 21 days)
    Shelter and medical care (can be a few hours or much longer)
    A violent attack (can be instantaneous)

    Corbyn is focusing on two of the three: doctors and housing. Both are substandard for some us.

    On the other hand, “jobs for locals before foreigners” is a message that has won many votes for Sanders and Trump. In a tough economy it’s a winning theme.

    • Colonial Viper 5.1
      16 March 2016 at 11:40 pm

      Personally I think this latest tactic will work for Labor just as well as the Chinese sounding last names one did for them last year.

    • Mike S 5.2
      17 March 2016 at 2:01 am

      You left out sleep. Which is around 11 days I think from memory. Less than food anyway.

  6. boyonlaptop 6
    17 March 2016 at 12:13 am

    I didn’t vote for Little and ranked him last on the ballot. I’ll be the first to say the media hasn’t treated him well and his first year of leadership was incredibly promising. But this week Labour has endorsed subsidizing farmers, a bizarre OCR policy and is now using immigration rhetoric that would make Winston proud. Many of us had real concerns when Little proposed scrapping the OCR and raising the retirement age almost unilaterally without discussion in the wider party and now seems to be making up policy as he goes along. This is not the Labour party, I joined, campaigned for and voted for. If he keeps this up, I’m not campaigning for or donating to Labour. I don’t like a lot of Green policy but at least they’re consistent. Seriously Little needs to shape up and fast.

    • Kiwiri 6.1
      17 March 2016 at 12:18 am

      How about seeing it this way – that Little is consistent. Consistently surprising some of us.

    • Grantoc 6.2
      17 March 2016 at 3:38 pm

      Actually Winston’s pissed off because Handy Andy is stealing his immigration policy.

      I love the irony of Winston growling about how Hapless Andy’s is dog whistling on this issue of too may (foreign) cooks in the kitchen.

  7. Draco T Bastard 7
    17 March 2016 at 12:31 am

    Nothing Little said was of any great moment. All of it was simple logic.

    If a country is having difficulty looking after the people already here then bringing in more isn’t going to help.
    If there are enough Chinese chefs already here then importing more through the Skills Shortages provisions of immigration/FTAs then someone is obviously lying and bringing them in isn’t valid according to the law.

    Instead of people looking at these things logically we get a lot of them jumping up and down and screaming about xenophobia and racism when none was involved at all at any time. Really, what a bunch of fucken idiots. Learn to look and assess before going off half-cocked in a knee-jerk reaction to misreporting by the MSM.

    • mickysavage 7.1
      17 March 2016 at 6:21 am

      Agreed. This is such a beat up. It is CT strength spin. We could never talk about immigration if some of the views expressed here were followed.

      • RedLogix 7.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 7:00 am

        Immigration rules are by design something which discriminates against various classes of people. By the usual calculus that racism = prejudice + power; whenever a white male over the age of 40 (because this class of people have all the privileges) talks about immigration, they are by definition being racist.

        When viewed in this light, all immigration controls as implemented by white dominated countries are inherently wrong. Immigration is such a wonderful, unalloyed benefit to a nation, that it should be entirely unrestricted. There must be several billion people who would love to come to Aoteoroa and turn it into a wonderful non-racist paradise, where white males over the age of 40 are a tiny minority and we don’t have to hear them anymore.

        Little should have kept his big fat racist mouth shut. CV is right, this is a topic people of our age, gender and race are too privileged to be allowed an opinion on.

        (Christ, now I’ve written this even I can’t tell if I’m being ironic or not)

        • tinfoilhat 7.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 8:29 am

          “….now I’ve written this even I can’t tell if I’m being ironic or not”

          LOL

        • mickysavage 7.1.1.2
          17 March 2016 at 8:30 am

          Level of irony is extreme …

        • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.3
          17 March 2016 at 9:00 am

          Let’s make no mistake – NZ Labour are going to lower and cap immigration levels because of economic reasons – the contrast with UK Labour’s attitude is pretty clear.

          And I am someone who supports far tighter and more strategic application of our immigration laws.

          Just like I support preventing foreign residents buying NZ property.

          But talking about Indian cooks and Chinese chefs was just a descent into the absurd (especially since Labour signed off on a foreign chefs FTA with China), followed up by the non-apology apology of being “concerned” that certain people may have been offended.

          I mean, get serious.

          • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.3.1
            17 March 2016 at 9:09 am

            NZ Labour are going to lower and cap immigration levels because of economic reasons

            You mean the only reasons that actually apply? The ones that mean that people actually have a good living standard when they come here and so do the people already here?

            • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.3.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 9:11 am

              They’re coming to take our scarce jobs and our scarce resources.

              It’s a sentiment which is winning lots of right wing parties right wing votes in Europe.

              For good reason.

              Trump’s going to build a big wall to keep those job stealing Mexicans out.

              A valid position, no?

              • Draco T Bastard …
                17 March 2016 at 9:29 am

                There are many economic reasons to consider:

                1. Do we have the infrastructure to support an increase in population?
                2. Are there jobs for the new immigrants considering high unemployment?
                3. What’s going to happen employment as automation ramps up?
                4. Do we have the resources to support them?

                The answers will probably surprise you. They’re:

                1. No
                2. No
                3. Even higher unemployment
                4. No

                Now, do you really want to import more people under those conditions or do you think we should stop and consider and then plan?

                Oh, and on #4? We have a few hundred million tonnes of iron sands off of our west coast. I estimate that at our present rate of digging it up and exporting it it’ll last another ~50 years and then we won’t have any more steel. Our entire present ‘economic system’ works on pure consumption and is not sustainable. That includes immigration.

                So, we really do have to change our ways and become sustainable and that, ATM, means stopping immigration.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  17 March 2016 at 9:41 am

                  As I have said before, I agree on having strict, strategic limits to immigration.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    17 March 2016 at 10:10 am

                    So, WTF are you complaining about?

                  • mickysavage …
                    17 March 2016 at 10:16 am

                    So you agree with Andrew.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      17 March 2016 at 12:02 pm

                      It’s like foreign buyers for NZ land. I want the practice banned.

                      But I don’t trust Labour to raise these issue without clumsily putting a target on the forehead of Chinese or Indians or whatever race they decide to mention to a journalist next.

              • Ad …
                17 March 2016 at 10:24 am

                After all, it’s CV’S fault that Little is being laid waste to on talk back, TV news, and the Prime Minister.

                Hey CV, you John A Lee you, the Emperor really is clothed after all!

          • Olwyn 7.1.1.3.2
            17 March 2016 at 10:03 am

            CV, you did notice, since you have reported it, that Andrew Little was answering a question – he did not initiate talk of Chinese chefs. I was asked last week by the Hutt News when I visited Lower Hutt about apparent concerns locals had with immigrant chefs. The question was asked by someone working for a local newspaper, it is not a “local chef at home painting his roof because the foreigners have taken all the jobs” anecdote.

            The question may well have had a sucker-punch intent, so that any answer, or refusal to answer, would allow a negative headline containing the word “Chinese.” I know that you are of the left and have had a gutful of Labour, and I respect that. But I can’t help but fear you might have stepped into a trap with this one, and are responding as the questioner intended.

            Edit: Looking back I see that rOb added the bit about the question coming from the Lower Hutt newspaper. Thanks rOb.

            • greywarshark 7.1.1.3.2.1
              17 March 2016 at 1:01 pm

              Mr Little’s comment as shown above in the post.
              “Labour leader Andrew Little says ethnic restaurants should be employing New Zealand Indians and Chinese chefs instead of bringing in staff from overseas.”

              The reasoned reply would say that “Ethnic restaurants offer needed diversity reflecting what the world has to offer, and Labour welcomes that But they cannot be an excuse for bringing in a large number of ethnic workers. These restaurants must give training opportunities for skilled and semi-skilled NZ resident staff to learn the new skills required.”

          • greywarshark 7.1.1.3.3
            17 March 2016 at 12:48 pm

            The non-apology – ‘concern’. That’s been done before and always sounds contemptuous and sly.

          • Gabby 7.1.1.3.4
            17 March 2016 at 1:04 pm

            ‘As I recall, I pointed out the China FTA specifically allows Chinese chefs to be recruited for Chinese restaurants and there was a case for other ethnic chefs to be recruited on the same basis.’

      • Anne 7.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 9:41 am

        This is more than CT strength spin mickysavage. This is straight out Dirty Politics again and the MSM is complicit.

        I’m very disappointed in CV – who I have so highly regarded in the past – for allowing himself to be duped into adding to the DP spin. I don’t have the time these days to go into much detail but suffice to say Little’s comments in answer to the questions asked sound eminently sensible to me. There is no racism… there is no back -tracking from past policy… there is no discrimination. Just plain commonsense

        • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2.1
          17 March 2016 at 10:13 am

          +1

        • Anne 7.1.2.2
          17 March 2016 at 10:15 am

          In haste forgot to hit reply. The above comment was in reply to micksavage @ 7.1
          since when Olwyn has responded with more detail.

        • locus 7.1.2.3
          20 March 2016 at 9:06 pm

          yep… i only just started reading the post and comments (already 280 comments) and i’m amazed at how many commenters who regularly talk sense have bought in to the pathetic right wing media framing and spin relating to the way Little answered some questions

          and (avowedly left wing writers) recirculating this ‘racist’ meme, by repeating lies and distortion about what Little actually said only helps to give this bizarre dirty politics framing a bit more validity

          …. and to suggest that Little concocted this (falsely reported statement) as some kind of vote winning strategy, is an opinion that imo shows a high degree of gullibility and/or no respect for the decency and intelligence of the man

          • Anne 7.1.2.3.1
            20 March 2016 at 9:50 pm

            Most of the corporate media who are making these allegations know it is false framing. To some extent Little had the words put into his mouth by the journo who asked him the “chef” question in the first place. They are simply following Key’s lead because they are as ‘up themselves’ as he is. I once worked in Broadcasting and I know exactly what they are like – especially the TV journos and presenters.

            The joke is, the moment JK falls from favour they’ll be out of the Key tent and crawling into the Little tent as fast as they can. I hope Little chucks them out – nicely of course. 🙂

    • Keith 7.2
      17 March 2016 at 7:18 am

      DTB, Keys response is transparently shallow this morning, wanking on in xenophobic outrage. National are being exposed here.

    • Expat 7.3
      17 March 2016 at 10:49 am

      Draco T Bastard

      +1

    • saveNZ 7.4
      18 March 2016 at 8:08 am

      +1 Draco

      Importing chefs under the ‘skill shortages’ is illegal under the immigration law if their are local chefs who can do the job!

      Likewise all the other vocations. Immigration policy is supposed to only import Labour if there is a shortage and there is proof they can’t get a local to do the job.

      That’s the law!

      My concern is, that something is seriously wrong with how the law is being applied under National!

  8. Sanctary 8
    17 March 2016 at 2:50 am

    CV is becoming an embarassment to this site. I cant speak for others, but I find his constant “all about me” hijacking of threads and his insistance we all get to suffer all the time his petty vendetta against the Labour party is getting really, really tiresome. He is a MAJOR turnoff for this site not because he is a contrary voice, but because he has been wallowing in the stench of self pity for so long you dry retch everytime he posts. His singular achievement has been to make Clare Curren look reasonable. Amazing. He needs a long holiday somewhere far, far from the internet.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 8.1
      17 March 2016 at 5:53 am

      +1

    • Halfcrown 8.2
      17 March 2016 at 8:30 am

      I would not like to see anybody banned from here, unless they broke the rules, and when they do they are soon reminded of the Standards policies. There are quite a few that come on here that are a real pain in the neck, but that is the point
      You don’t have to agree with them, you don’t even have to read what they write, though it pays to, to try and work out how their twisted thinking works. That is what the Standard is all about, free speech. Very refreshing after all the lying denying crap we are fed by the MSM. Unless you really break any rules, you can express yourself as much as you like. I cannot say the same for other sites.

      • lprent 8.2.1
        17 March 2016 at 9:34 am

        It isn’t really ‘free doesn’t. There are a number of behaviours outlined in the policy that limit all kinds of tiresome speech and the grunting of wannabe parrots. But generally if you stay on post and derived conversation topics (outside psyche soapbox posts), manage to express your own opinions don’t attack or endanger post authors or the site or our policies, then the moderators usually don’t give a shit about what you say. Just expect others to opine on how much bullshit your opinions amount to.

        That is the type of site it is.

        • alwyn 8.2.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 3:14 pm

          Yes. If a site starts deleting or banning everyone who doesn’t stick to the same songbook it dies.
          Look at Red Alert. When it started you could make comments that didn’t agree with Labour Party dogma. It was worth looking at.
          Then someone (Trevor or Clare?) started extreme censorship practices. It might as well have been a collection of Press Releases.
          I gather it has finally died. It certainly wasn’t worth looking at after about the end of 2012.

          • lprent 8.2.1.1.1
            18 March 2016 at 9:45 am

            Yep. And I got involved in its demise when I detected in real life use of the information on the site to target individuals – way beyond acceptable. Which I countered by saying in public (and private) that I thought it was happening.

            But generally moderation should be about limiting bad online behaviour – like diversion comment ploys. That helps debate. Limiting intelligent arguments, even when you acting as a moderator disagree, does not. A comment in response is more appropriate.

    • Jenny Kirk 8.3
      17 March 2016 at 8:59 am

      + 100% – yep – CV’s tirades against Labour and Little have become tiresome. I had some sympathy for him once, its now long gone .

    • Colonial Viper 8.4
      17 March 2016 at 9:07 am

      Sanctary – stick to the post. This is about contrasting NZ Labour who are going to limit immigration because of unemployment and economic reasons – and UK Labour – who see that there are more important things to get on with.

      You attack me one more time on my own post and you are goneburger.

    • Expat 8.5
      17 March 2016 at 11:05 am

      Sanctary

      +1

      And the worst thing is that when asked to “validate” his conclusions with factual evidence, he doesn’t, and that’s because there is none to back up his constant BS, he’s a “hit and run”.

      He has absolutely no comprehension of good socioeconomic policy, which is probably why Labour have rejected him, and why he holds such an indefensible grudge against them, as most readers here have seen.

      CV, STOP lying about Labour

      • Colonial Viper 8.5.1
        17 March 2016 at 12:06 pm

        Factual evidence? Of what? The news article makes it clear that NZ Labour is going to reduce and cap immigration levels for economic reasons.

        It makes it clear that UK Labour and Jeremy Corbyn are taking a completely different approach.

        As for lying about NZ Labour, mate they don’t need any more help with their media strategies.

        They are doing just fine by themselves.

        BTW new Roy Morgan poll coming out in the next day or two.

        • Expat 8.5.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 3:40 pm

          CV

          Like JK, you manipulate information for your own purposes, taking information out of context, and present it as “FACT”, all anyone wants to see is some “balance” to your comments and objectivity, hell, that’s what’s wrong with MSM at the moment, and you just seem to be parroting them.

          Back to the story though, Corbyn is good man and has succeeded in igniting interest in Leftist policies, some would argue too far left, but in reality, the world has gone so far right that he appears hard left when is ideology really only matches politics from twenty years ago.

          The sad thing about the UK is that he will not get elected into power, Rupert Murdoch decides in the UK who runs the country, and has done since Thatcher.

          With regard to immigration policy, political correctness has made it so migrants coming to a country are placed on a pedastool over and above the general public, their rights are suddenly more important than that of the needs of the recipient country, AUS claims to have the most successful multi cultural society in the world, yet at Xmas time your not allowed to place a Cross on to the top of a Xmas tree (in public spaces) as it is disrespectful to some other religions, but wait a minute, whos country is it, migrants need to assimilate to their new countries, retaining their own culture is great, as long as it is not at the cost to the host country.

          The other interesting point about the China FTA, is in Aus, Labour forced the govt to regulate protection of local jobs, as there are 1.3B Chinese and only 24M Ausies, the media tried the same thing there too, calling it racist, but Countries need to protect their own workers first, and I think even you would agree with that.

          • Colonial Viper 8.5.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 3:53 pm

            I’m for strictly controlling and limiting immigration into NZ. Just like I am for banning the sale of NZ land to foreigners.

            Won’t go about it Little’s way though.

            • mickysavage 8.5.1.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 3:54 pm

              Well then you should agree exactly with what Andrew said. He laid out no hard and fast policy. He talked about how immigration can be regulated according to the country’s needs. I am astounded that this has to be pointed out to you repeatedly.

              • Colonial Viper …
                17 March 2016 at 4:02 pm

                McLauchlan, Tiso, Trotter, all barking up the wrong tree as well?

                I agree on halting foreign encroachment on our economy. But to keep the TPP but single out low paid semi-skilled foreign workers as being a part of our economic problems makes me chuck.

                Just like singling out Chinese house buyers for media attention but not following up by banning the sale of houses to non-residents.

                Labour doesn’t even know how much good will it is burning through.

                • mickysavage …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:11 pm

                  McLauchlan is a staunch green and has no time for labour. Tiso is a staunch lefty and has no time for Labour. Trotter has no time for the right of Labour. They are all succumbing to the theory that Little’s comments from a couple of days ago were dog whistles. They were not. Apart from never saying anything I dont know how Little can avoid these sorts of attacks. And they are very disappointing. CT must be grinning wildly.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    17 March 2016 at 4:35 pm

                    Little making this comment or that comment is to me, like whatever.

                    My serious problem with Labour is that they are willing to give away huge parts of our economy to foreign control via staying in the TPP but then proceed to talk about how low paid semi skilled foreign workers pose a real problem for Kiwis trying to work.

                    It is utterly inconsistent.

                    Like I said, it makes me chuck.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 4:55 pm

                      It’s really a pity you didn’t put some of this in a post CV. You’re all over the place today.

                      I agree about the inconsistencies within Labour’s policy, but the place to criticise them is their TPPA stance, not their immigration stance (which you appear to agree with).

                      And it’s not like Labour made a big announcement out of something, it was a small town newspaper interview from a week ago that’s come back to bite him. It’s contextual. Labour don’t actually have a policy of restricting Asian chefs immigrating to NZ.

                      A post pointing out the problems with trying to control immigration while not pulling out of the TPPA would have been really useful. This is what people mean when they are telling you that your Labour hatred is clouding your view. You picked the wrong target and the wrong way to talk about it.

            • joe90 8.5.1.1.1.2
              17 March 2016 at 4:14 pm

              Won’t go about it Little’s way though.

              So, you won’t respond to questions, query whether immigration policy was being rorted or support qualified NZ residents getting first dibs on jobs….righto…

            • Expat 8.5.1.1.1.3
              17 March 2016 at 5:22 pm

              CV

              “I’m for strictly controlling and limiting immigration into NZ. Just like I am for banning the sale of NZ land to foreigners.”

              I’m 100% with you on that, but it shouldn’t matter on the “way” in which the message is telegraphed, as long as the message gets through and lets be clear, the comments from Little were in reply to question, not a public policy statement.

    • greywarshark 8.6
      17 March 2016 at 1:25 pm

      Sanctuary
      I have seen you get emotional about another subject before, when feminism was discussed. Now it’s about analysing and criticising Labour, and whether it has any convictions and if so, what, and what commitment to fill them. There will be a huge opportunity cost (economic term) if we support Labour and find that they are not ‘passionate’ about winning and serving their constituents and setting NZ on national path that is people, small business, and climate-ready path.

      Labour and Little have to change from the current mild-mannered Clark Kent to Superman. When there is a hard message of change to get over, emotion isn’t helpful. It needs judicious consideration, of past, present and likely future happenings if a different approach and thinking is not adopted.

      CV is attacked for warning people about Labour and its previous lack of will to work for the good of the people, even though the past terms and recent months are seen favourably. That is why he speaks, and the fact that he has stood for Labour, been close to it, you might try considering, enables him to see just where the problems are from being face to face, toe to toe with the Labour people and in the general public. In criticising him you are taking the RW meme and running with it. That is a big mistake. I criticise him for wasting time trying to tell the truth and at least get people here to study his points, but he is made of sterner stuff and keeps trying.
      edited

      • weka 8.6.1
        17 March 2016 at 1:35 pm

        “CV is attacked for warning people about Labour”

        I don’t think that is right. I see people having a go at CV for his behaviour i.e. it’s about how he criticises Labour, not that he does it all. For instance, in the past when I’ve been critical of Labour a lot here, I don’t get attacked, I get Labourites expressing concern about it. People are sick of the bullshit with CV. It’s not like lots of us don’t have similar understandings of what Labour’s problems are, and it’s patronising in the extreme to think that CV is teaching us something.

        Labour will never be Superman. Not in the next few electoral cycles anyway. Our hope lies in them being steady and solid and able to present as competent to govern, and then forming working relationships with coalition partners. Time to stop tilting at windmills.

        • greywarshark 8.6.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 2:01 pm

          @weka
          Good reply. I think Labour have to come on Like Superman or near to Corbyn anyway. Too much of the jogging on, inserting themelves into the polity with a big toe? Pffah! Time doesn’t allow for that. We are not being treated kindly in NZ by climate, or the world’s oligarchy, or our recent governments.

          Labour has to step up, and I agree get together with the others, but there you start speaking in hope about forming working relationships with coalition partners.

          It is the perfect time to tilt at windmills. People who need change don’t get it by asking prettily, or nagging, or presenting uncontrovertible facts, they have to be bold, and canny. perhaps using all those approaches and with extra sauce. And go for as much as possible. No good adopting meek, polite, conformist NZ ways of the past. We have been walked on, like soft doormats, need to be spiky now.

          • weka 8.6.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 3:03 pm

            I don’t think you can manufacture people like Corbyn or Sanders. Little isn’t that man, but that doesn’t mean what he can do is no good. I think we should be supporting him in his skill base, and encouraging change that is possible. The big problem with Labour is still the number of neoliberals in caucus and the fact that the structure of Labour means no-one can do much about that. Little doesn’t have enough support in caucus to make radical changes. My understanding is that if Little demoted a bunch of them to the back benches then there would be a leadership coup which basically hands Labour to the neoliberals for another generation. I don’t like any of that, but I don’t think it’s Little’s fault. I also think that his avowed strategy of rebuilding a centre-left party is probably as good as it’s going to get realistically.

            I’d like him to get more savvy with the media, but I gather that how he gets advised is a big part of what is going on too.

            So, yes we need big bold moves, but I just don’t think we are going to get them from Labour and I don’t think Labour can change that much. Expecting people to have skills that are well outside their capacity is to invite disaster. There are other people we can look to instead, the Greens are full of talent and people who are naturally more left and more progressive and more aware of the true nature of the crises than most Labour MPs. My main criticism currently is of the leftwing people who bemoan Labour and yet still won’t vote Green. If we had the Greens on 20% for the past 5 years things would look very different. Try asking some of the diehard Labour critics why they don’t vote Green and see what happens.

            For me leadership is something that is a service to the community. I don’t see politicians as any more skilled at knowing what needs to be done than the rest of the population. We have ourselves as well and I look at how we are on the standard and think we are actually no better than those we criticise. I’m not talking the politics, I’m talking the behaviour and what we choose to prioritise.

            • Arthur 8.6.1.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 3:34 pm

              Leaders need to be relatable to the public.

              The only reason Donald Trump is liked by the public is because he speaks ‘straight up’. He speaks about issues that a lot of people are thinking, but dare to say. That doesn’t mean Trump is suitable to be President, hardly.
              But that is why people like him. People want ‘honesty’ coming from the mouths of politicians, they love it. People also love boldness, decisiveness, passion, and rash blunt language. No beating around the bush – people hate that, all the stuttering, and dancing around ‘the major issues’ that are affecting New Zealanders, people hate overtly secretive politicians – who don’t answer questions, they hate it.

              For example- Winston Peter’s was loved when he spoke out about putting the clamps down on immigrants, it is not because New Zealander’s hate immigrants, they just hate them taking over – so fast.

              In China, we are not allowed to buy their land (they have so much of it) but over here they can buy all of it – it is ridiculous. Just because China is bigger we succumb to their immensity. Little NZ is becoming an embarrassment.

              Growing up for me- we were Nuclear Free, we stopped American warships coming into our country – we had pride, passion and integrity and all over the world we were seen as this magnificent powerful individualistic nation. We spoke up, spoke hard, and spoke out- we laid down the law.

              New Zealand isn’t like this anymore – and it is pissing people off.

              Labour need to change their attitudes, become a bit more bolshy and outspoken – set some “ground rules”.

              Bring back the ‘integrity’, and ‘vision’ that we have lost as a nation.

              • Expat …
                17 March 2016 at 5:00 pm

                Arthur

                I grew up at the same time and agree with you, but as every one here points out on regular basis, Key and the media “misrepresent” what is being promoted by Labour, the media tend to repeat JK’s interpretation, rather than quote the original text in full, they (Labour) have become easy targets for every one to have ago at, mostly, it’s “distractionary” to take the spotlight off the poor performance and outcomes they’ve (Nats) achieved, you know the NZ media is extremely bias, and there is plenty of evidence to support that, you only need to read the Herald.

                • Arthur …
                  17 March 2016 at 6:32 pm

                  Well the Labour party need to release press releases themselves, continuously, via video link, from their own website, regarding everything, their policies and their opposing views to government policies.

                  Then nothing would be edited by the NZ media.

                  Also, when the NZ media, in their hordes, are interviewing Andrew Little, Andrew Little (and others) need to repeat themselves, so only the repetitive message reaches the airwaves, and nothing else.

                  And if Andrew Little were to be a little outspoken, not in a hot-headed exasperated way (like usual), but in a purely ‘intentional’ orchestrated way – even if the media don’t want to advertise Little, the media LOVE an outspoken robust politician – keeps the networks going.

                  You must be clever to win over the voters, and the media.

        • Colonial Viper 8.6.1.2
          17 March 2016 at 3:50 pm

          I don’t think that is right. I see people having a go at CV for his behaviour i.e. it’s about how he criticises Labour,

          Yeah the old leftie school teacher approach.

          I put up a post.

          It describes very clearly a difference between UK Labour and NZ Labour when it comes to viewing foreign workers, jobs and immigration.

          So what behaviour there are you criticising? That I made the contrast crystal clear?

          That was my intention.

          • McFlock 8.6.1.2.1
            17 March 2016 at 4:05 pm

            It describes very clearly a difference between UK Labour and NZ Labour when it comes to viewing foreign workers, jobs and immigration.

            Apart from the fact that it doesn’t.

            Corbyn is talking about migration in general.
            Little is talking about semi-skilled migration in a geographic and industry area that he was specifically asked about. And then his comments were assumed to apply to migration in general.

            Even if you ignore the fact that NZ net migration as a percentage of population is around twice that of the UK, they are still discussing different aspects of the same subject.

          • weka 8.6.1.2.2
            17 March 2016 at 5:03 pm

            CV, I can see that you thought you were being clear, but I don’t think you were. I read the post and tried to figure out what you were implying and couldn’t. You needed to explain it. Explicitly. Otherwise peopel are going to ahve their own interpretations.

            And people are reacting to your history not just what you wrote today.

            “Yeah the old leftie school teacher approach.”

            Nah, more like an Aunty giving you a smack around the ear for being an arse.

  9. b waghorn 9
    17 March 2016 at 6:44 am

    Thanks rOb between the soper on the herald henry ,the moron he keeps in the bunker and CV I was wondering wtf , dirty politics is alive and well it would seem.
    Of course the irony is there will be a few rednecks who will read the the head line that little is against immigration and think that’s great.!

  10. Keith 10
    17 March 2016 at 6:56 am

    This blog is what i would expect the sycophantic MSM to write for their love buddys in the National Party. If you can’t see that National, for years now, have used and exploited cheap immigrant labour in the form of student visas dangling the carrot of residency to supress wages and stifle worker rights then you are either wilfully blind or quite simply a spokesman for National. The scam that is student visas is real and i know it personally because when so many are doing it, it becomes hard to keep it quiet.

    Not only is it exploitive, lowers work and earning standards in this country all round, it is also dangerous because such exploited people work beneath the protection of labour laws.

    These people work without question on appalling wages and worse conditions in the hope of residency. Things get real creative too, they become “managers” when all they are doing is a vague supervisory role but on base rates etc etc and bing, they are executives. And National turn the blindest eye to it.

    The question is, does NZ need more taxi drivers, more couriers, more shop staff or is there a large unemployed pool to go to if we did?

    And it is abundantly obvious we have had flat to declining wage growth for years except for Keys minimum hourly rate rises.

    Larry Williams and Mike Hosking et al do a far better job of cheerleading for our dear leader and their fave party to justify their revolting policies, official or not, so give us a break!

    • RedLogix 10.1
      17 March 2016 at 7:12 am

      Not only is it exploitive, lowers work and earning standards in this country all round, it is also dangerous because such exploited people work beneath the protection of labour laws.

      I got the outside of my new house in Wellington plastered at a fraction of all the other quotes by a couple of wonderful Asian guys. Barely more than the wholesale cost of the materials. God knows where they got it from. But it was inspiring seeing them working in t-shirts and jandals, three stories up in a wet southerly gale, and not once did they stop even when one of them slipped and nearly tumbled off the planks they’d rigged up.

      The locals are lazy slobs who’ve been coddled for generations on benefits and taxpayer handouts. Hard-working immigrants are just the thing to wake up our ideas if we are going to compete in the modern world.

      • millsy 10.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 9:10 am

        It is people like you who are contrubuting to the decline of living standards in this country.

        The countries that have the loosest immigration policies are the countries that have the lowest wages and conditions.

        If the immigration taps were turned off over night you would see youth unemployment and child poverty eliminated.

        • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 9:18 am

          He was being sarcastic. Unfortunately, shit like that does actually happen in NZ. Hear it all the time from my family in the construction trade.

      • left for deadshark 10.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 11:10 am

        An that Hawaiian shirt you wear from Bangladesh looks good on you,, along with those shoes, Red.
        Part of the problem or do you want too be part of the solution , and no it does not mean you have to pay top dollar, also stop supporting unsafe work practices. 👿

        edit: sarc is that right.

  11. Ad 11
    17 March 2016 at 7:30 am

    Explaining is losing Little.

    Indians and Pakistanis are core Labour voters. Don’t get pulled into policy positions until you have one.

    • Colonial Viper 11.1
      17 March 2016 at 9:09 am

      How many Chinese, Korean, SE Asian, Indian or Pakistani MPs does Labour have in its caucus? Together those ethnic groups make up 10%-15% of the NZ population.

      Answer: None.

      • Ad 11.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 10:12 am

        The voter base is huge. And still loyal.

        Nation has a couple of Indian MPS so they sure get it.

      • mickysavage 11.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 10:20 am

        A few more percent in the party vote and there would have been a number.

        • Colonial Viper 11.1.2.1
          17 March 2016 at 12:08 pm

          Yep. But funny how there were so few – to none – in the top 30 positions of the Labour list. None in winnable electorate seats either.

          National have got it covered. A far more ethnically diverse caucus than Labour.

          • mickysavage 11.1.2.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 12:49 pm

            The benefit of having better polling.

            But wait, seven tangata whenua and five pacifica are in Labour’s caucus.

            Your implication is not correct.

            Is there anything that Labour does which you approve of?

            • weka 11.1.2.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 3:09 pm

              He offered conditionally to make a donation to Labour for something the other day, can’t remember what, but it stood out 😉

            • The Fan Club 11.1.2.1.1.2
              17 March 2016 at 3:25 pm

              No, it’s not about better polling. It’s about a leader and moderating committee that didn’t prioritise ethnic voices and wasn’t willing to make tough decisions to ensure we had an ethnically diverse caucus. (Or a gender balanced caucus, but that’s another story).

              Sorry that isn’t very pleasant to say, but you have to honest about the realities here, and the reality is Labour doesn’t work hard enough to represent immigrant and Asian communities.

              Suppose that even just instead of Clayton Cosgrove, Sue Moroney we’d had Priyanka Radhakrishnan, Raymond Huo. It’s be a different and better caucus that wasn’t more representative of NZ.

              • weka …
                17 March 2016 at 4:02 pm

                +1

                What we don’t know why this is, or why they came out with the stupid Chinese sounding names thing. I don’t feel qualified to know if this is overt racism or covert racism stemming from stupidity, or both.

            • Colonial Viper 11.1.2.1.1.3
              17 March 2016 at 3:46 pm

              MS – basically it reflects how weakly Labour’s Ethnic/Asian sector is organised within the party.

              But wait, seven tangata whenua and five pacifica are in Labour’s caucus.

              OK that’s 38% of the Labour caucus.

              Again – where are the Asians/Indians/Pakistanis in caucus? Yes I know, they were there on the list, just lower down, and in unwinnable seats.

              Approx 450,000 Asians in NZ as per Census 2013. 0% of the Labour caucus.

              And it shows.

              • mickysavage …
                17 March 2016 at 3:58 pm

                Yep the party anticipated getting 25% last time.

                Here is the list of the next MPs that would have made it with a slightly better result:

                Maryan Street
                Moana Mackey
                Raymond Huo
                Priyanca Radhakrishnan
                Rachel Jones

                The low result meant that a whole lot of talent did not make it. But don’t interpret this as some sort of lack of commitment on Labour’s part.

                • weka …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:03 pm

                  So could Labour exec move one of the candidates further up the list?

                • The Fan Club …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:31 pm

                  Except it is a lack of commitment. Instead of saying to someone like Sue Moroney or Clayton Cosgrove “thanks but no thanks” the Labour Party gave them a sweet safe list spot and put Asian candidates in marginal slots.

                  We literally said that we’d prefer to run the risk of having no Asian MPs at all than get rid of Clayton Cosgrove, or Sue Moroney, or Stuart Nash, or…

              • weka …
                17 March 2016 at 4:04 pm

                “MS – basically it reflects how weakly Labour’s Ethnic/Asian sector is organised within the party.”

                Are there structural reasons for that?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:08 pm

                  Many historical reasons, but the other sectors like Maori and Pasifika are far more organised with much more sway in the party. Which is evidenced in the results – far higher list rankings for their members and far more seats in the caucus. On MS’ figures, 38% of the Labour caucus is Maori or Pasifika.

    • alwyn 11.2
      17 March 2016 at 3:41 pm

      “Indians and Pakistanis are core Labour voters”
      What evidence is there for that statement?

    • Expat 11.3
      17 March 2016 at 5:42 pm

      It does’t look like anyone has considered the fact that most migrants (a high proportion) prefer “right wing policies” and therefore tend to show up in the party ranks, that’s why Nats have introduced so many migrants into NZ, the rate two times that of the UK on a per capita basis (thanks McFlock), however, last year the Herald reported that from 80K migrants, the net gain was only 40K, I just hope it’s not all students going on their OE.

  12. RedBaronCV 12
    17 March 2016 at 7:34 am

    I don’t think we should just focus on the lower earning end where an excess supply of labour has kept wages down – its happening right across the board – for all but a sliver at the top/

  13. vto 13
    17 March 2016 at 7:59 am

    Andrew Little has come out with some doozies the last few days. I think he is taking a leaf from the Trump book before the nats do, with a careful Labour twist to it…

    He is going to grab the disenfranchised by fair means and foul…

    Go Andrew!

    • cowboy 13.1
      17 March 2016 at 9:00 am

      Agreed.

      Little is actually articulating what many people are thinking. There is something wrong when New Zealanders are being priced out of their own country. How have we allowed an average house in our biggest city to be 9x median income? Yes there is supply side issues but it is impossible to deny demand from immigration(and foreign investment) at these extreme levels is not a significant driver.

      Yes we get an initial consumptive boost to GDP but our already stressed infrastructure is groaning and health and education services are stretched. The Brits are screaming about immigration over there but we are importing people at 3x their per capita rate.

      Winston has been right about this issue and its time to have a reasoned debate without rushing to play the xenophobia card.

      • Colonial Viper 13.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 9:04 am

        How have we allowed an average house in our biggest city to be 9x median income?

        It climbed to at least 6x median income under Labour.

        By 2006 international reports were coming out saying that Auckland was severely unaffordable for housing.

        • Draco T Bastard 13.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 9:15 am

          And it was Labour who decided, against the will of the people, that full open borders and selling to offshore owners was the thing to do back in the 1980s. The result is that NZers are being priced out of their country.

          Everyone knew it was a bad idea then and now we’re reaping what Labour sowed. Labour does seem to be learning from it even if it is taking them a long time.

        • cowboy 13.1.1.2
          17 March 2016 at 9:26 am

          If that govt was still in power we would asking the questions of them. This is all about where we are now and what we are going to do about it.

          • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.2.1
            17 March 2016 at 9:31 am

            ordinary workers on $40K to $80K pa have been priced out of the Auckland housing market for a very long time. From well before John Key, PM.

            They remember.

        • Olwyn 13.1.1.3
          17 March 2016 at 9:28 am

          I was at the 2008 Labour campaign launch. They were cognitive of the fact that house prices in Auckland had got out of hand, and expressed an intention to address this. As I remember it, their program in the face of the GFC roughly followed the lines suggested by Stiglizt. They were not elected.

          It is one thing to see that a course of action you have taken will hit the rocks if you don’t adjust your course, and quite another to hold to that course, while at the same time increasing your speed. The party that did end up getting elected followed the latter course. It is misleading to say that Labour started it, since the problem lies with National’s refusal to make adjustments when it became clear that adjustments were needed.

          • Draco T Bastard 13.1.1.3.1
            17 March 2016 at 10:16 am

            +1

          • Expat 13.1.1.3.2
            17 March 2016 at 11:38 am

            Olwyn

            Olwyn

            +1

            The 2014 OECD report on the NZ economy stated that NZ was one of 28 member countries that all had the same problems with high “house prices”, the only one that didn’t, is Germany, the trend of ever increasing house prices is a global phenomena, all with the same outcomes, unaffordability for locals.

            If you look at number of Building permit approvals, between 2000 and 2005, there was a rapid increase (the largest number ever recorded) in the number of new homes being built (hence the increased debt during that period), in the last 6 years that number has decreased to half, if you look at Germany, excess housing stock is imperative if you want low house prices.

            Let’s not forget that in 2011, there were fewer new homes built in that year than had been built since 1965, and the Govt of the day still refuses to take responsibility for their lack perception (and poor management) of the ongoing and future problems that has caused, YOU can lay all of the blame for the current housing shortage on the inept National govt for the current position, and further more the rampant speculation in housing (an economic strategy) during the last few years has only exasperated the problem.

        • ianmac 13.1.1.4
          17 March 2016 at 9:49 am

          Oh gosh CV! The Housing Crisis is all Labour’s fault. Original thought that.

          • weka 13.1.1.4.1
            17 March 2016 at 10:37 am

            But Labour did it too!!!

          • Expat 13.1.1.4.2
            17 March 2016 at 11:42 am

            A quick reality check, there were more new homes built under the previous Labour Govt than any other time in NZ’s history, it won’t stop CV from blaming Labour, but, hell, facts don’t matter to him.

            • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.4.2.1
              17 March 2016 at 12:11 pm

              A quick reality check, there were more new homes built under the previous Labour Govt than any other time in NZ’s history

              Oh yes, great homes they were, very well weatherproofed.

              And still the house prices skyrocketed, and all the MPs and all their property portfolios did fine.

              • Expat …
                17 March 2016 at 12:48 pm

                CV

                The “Leaky home syndrome” was created by National, through Murray Mc Cully in the late 90″s, you seem to be out doing yourself today in “FALSE” information. I will ask you again, STOP lying about Labour.

                Please try to be more objective and base your comments on verifiable evidence, rather than your own wishful thinking, your only embarrassing yourself.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  17 March 2016 at 3:02 pm

                  Helen Clark didn’t take reports of those bad house builds seriously until far too late.

                  If I recall, she called reports of the problem a media beat up.

                  That really upset a lot of people.

                  • Expat …
                    17 March 2016 at 4:42 pm

                    If you remember, the first point of call for affected home owners was to the local council for approving the construction, they were ultimately responsible for the building “compliance” approval, with all the checks and balances.

                    The problem was when McCully was minister for housing, he approved construction material changes, which was the cause of the problem, he has consistently claimed it had nothing to do with him as he was only following what the consultants had advised on the changes, what he failed to tell everyone, was that the consultancy used was paid for by the lobby group pushing for the changes, and because that lobby group had donated a large sum of money to the Nats, the outcome was expected.

                    I worked in the construction industry at the time and questioned the legitimacy of the decision, knowing, like so many experienced builders that “untreated pine” has a life of less than 6 months in damp conditions, previously H1 treated pine for interior use (framing) would last upto 10 years or more outside in the weather. The corporate construction and timber suppliers new this, but made large profits from not having to “treat” the framing timber, and the worst thing was that “they” saved money and cost of timber increased.

                    Did you know that in Auckland (where most of the problems occurred) monolithic constructed housing from that era are near impossible to sell, and, no one wants to build new of that type for fear of “unsaleablity”.

                    • greywarshark …
                      17 March 2016 at 9:22 pm

                      I have heard of retired people with ruined houses that are worth nothing as they are, and to fix require about another quarter of the original price to be spent. Some are committing suicide, don’t know how many, but to see a lifetime of savings and following the prescription to work reliably and do a good job, live carefully and save for a suitable, nice home in your retirement – all gone – has been a shock too many.

                      How the politician standard-demolishers, and builders happy to take advantage, can live with themselves I don’t know. I’m reading the book Affluenza and the way that one man copes with his life, is to have constant challenges, be busy all the time, make deals that result in profitable ventures in housing, have a professional practice in another discipline, and constantly look at making friends and relationships with people who have useful skills or knowledge. Never having to think about what life is about, only about making money and getting things, and as a clever saying goes, concentrates on doing, with little thought about being.

                      Why did so many countries suffer from housing high prices? Because it suited them to have money invested in some assets that couldn’t be moved out of the country. And all were no doubt following the neo liberal economic prescription.

                      I have a 2008 Press with a large headline that warnings of a housing shortfall are widely heard, and that if there was no change, the next year would see a serious lack. There is no excuse for either of the governments behaviour in not instituting training, which I heard this morning was at one time down to 5,000 building trainees, and they should have been starting work on State housing, properly designed and built in two storey type, not mono-mania clad. But pollies’ tiny hands and heads were frozen by a Pavlovian reaction each time they reached for the notepad to jot policy ideas on.

                  • ianmac …
                    17 March 2016 at 8:47 pm

                    So it was Labour’s fault that they didn’t correct the huge errors created by National in the 90s. Leaky houses were McCulley’s fault backed by Bolger/Shipley. As Opposition Leader should have told them to get it right.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      17 March 2016 at 9:01 pm

                      I was living in Auckland in the early 2000s.

                      Apartments and townhouses were going up everywhere.

                      Everyone knew that these properties were being built fast, cheap, using materials which had never been proven.

                      But prices were skyrocketing and resale was strong.

                      However, more than a few people must have known of the weathertightness disaster in Canada which had come to light a few years before.

        • greywarshark 13.1.1.5
          17 March 2016 at 12:39 pm

          We looked down our noses at Tonga selling passports to get into that country as a way of raising revenue. We are the mighty advanced NZ and do …the same, but on a more sophisticated system of sale, we charge millions and require setting up a business. Probably in real estate, or for son, daughter or wife to run while the real deals are done overseas.

        • Expat 13.1.1.6
          17 March 2016 at 3:54 pm

          CV

          The 2014 OECD economic report on NZ discusses this issue, the other 28 member countries all suffered from extreme price increases in housing (except Germany), Labour may have been in power, but NZ is NOT immune to global trends, just look at the commodity prices right now, NZ has no control over them.

  14. Clean_power 14
    17 March 2016 at 8:49 am

    Time for Andrew Little to shape up or else. Enough of inane proposals that make people laugh.

  15. Jenny Kirk 15
    17 March 2016 at 9:03 am

    Has The Standard been taken over by the loony rightwing ? and thanks rOb for correcting CV’s pumped up line . Appreciated that.

  16. Observer (Tokoroa) 16
    17 March 2016 at 9:12 am

    @ Colonial Viper
    .
    Why are you so dishonest ?

    Why can you not understand the difference between lessening the immigration flow in slower economic conditions and allowing an open slather immigration come hell or high water.?

    Why do you enjoy being so disreputable?

    Why do you think the National Party trolls on here congratulate you and flatter you?

    Why do you think you are the most twisted and disliked commentor on this good Blog? Not a day goes by without you being despised Mr Colonial Viper.

    For once be a man, and apologise to Andrew Little.

    • Expat 16.1
      17 March 2016 at 12:41 pm

      Observer (Tokoroa)

      “Why do you think you are the most twisted and disliked commentor on this good Blog? Not a day goes by without you being despised Mr Colonial Viper.”

      It’s because Labour rejected him and his ideologies, and now he’s trying to pay them back.

    • left for deadshark 16.2
      17 March 2016 at 5:59 pm

      If you reach down, the other brain cell is there on the ground, Sarc
      You are quite right in disagreeing, but stop doing a John Key. bully

      👿

  17. Ben 17
    17 March 2016 at 9:36 am

    Reminds of a Not the Nine O’Clock News sketch:

    “Now a lot of immigrants are Indian, or Pakistani… and I like Curry, I do. But… now that we have the recipe, is there really any reason for them to stay?”

  18. weka 18
    17 March 2016 at 9:55 am

    This post is based on a lie. I’m appalled to see an author on the standard using Hooton-esque sound bites to support their own bigotry and agenda when it’s gobsmackingly apparent that the media source being quoted is manipulating the story.

    Yes, there are problems with how NZ handles immigration. There are also big problems with how NZ talks about immigration. But this post isn’t going to do anything other than create further conflict, retenchment, resentment and confusion Thanks for that CV.

    We could have used what Little said and how he was misrepresented by the MSM as a springboard to look at what immigration means for NZ, and how can we talk about it without being xenophobic and racist. It’s a complex conversation not easily reduced to the black and white argument in the post (ffs, if you can’t understand the massive differences between immigration issues in the UK and NZ probably best not to try and compare and contrast them). Pity that’s not going to happen now.

    r0b, huge gratitude for the edit, both for setting the record straight re Little and for how that’s going to allow the conversation to be fact based instead of starting from bigotry.

    • Ad 18.1
      17 March 2016 at 10:14 am

      No, Rob and Weka, this feels too deliberate.

      This is a midweek fu kup and Little deserves the serve.

      • weka 18.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 10:16 am

        I’m not saying Little didn’t fuck up, I’m making a comment on CV misuing an obvious MSM misrepresentation for his own agenda and doing so on a topic that’s already difficult enough for the left to talk about.

        “this feels too deliberate.”

        What does?

        • Ad 18.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 10:28 am

          Little’s choice to switch to an immigration story midweek of an agricultural-banking attack.

          • weka 18.1.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 10:31 am

            What would be their rationale for deliberately shifting to an immigration story when in the middle of the dairy/bank/land one?

            • Puckish Rogue 18.1.1.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 10:51 am

              Panic combined with seeing WinstonFirst raise in the polls as preferred PM?

              I mean if, for the sake of argument, Little didn’t mean to sound xenophobic surely he or his advisors would have taken note of what happened after the Chinese house buyers debacle and thought to themselves to maybe work on the message at the very least?

              I personally think Little’s making a play for the red neck or working class vote which Winston pretty much has sown up

              • mickysavage …
                17 March 2016 at 10:53 am

                Gee it is weird all these righties are coming out supporting open door immigration policies.

                • weka …
                  17 March 2016 at 11:03 am

                  I agree. Too many weird things going on today.

                • BM …
                  17 March 2016 at 11:07 am

                  How come Little has nothing to say about Pacific island immigration, especially the Samoan quota ?.

                  1100 Samoans each year with no special skills are allowed to immigrate and live in NZ with the vast majority making Auckland their home.

                  I can’t see how this helps the NZ economy in any way.

                  • mickysavage …
                    17 March 2016 at 11:10 am

                    He spent all week talking about dairying. He was asked about a local issue and gave an answer. There is no requirement to talk about every single issue every single week.

                    And do you support open door immigration?

                  • weka …
                    17 March 2016 at 11:11 am

                    What do you mean by immigrate? Do you mean they gain residency? Or do you mean they are here on temporary work visas?

                    I’m guessing he didn’t talk about PI immigration because he was asked specifically about Asian.

                    • BM …
                      17 March 2016 at 11:17 am

                      http://www.immigration.govt.nz/opsmanual/46617.htm

                      The Samoan Quota Scheme allows up to 1,100 Samoan citizens to be granted a resident visa each year. The total number of Samoan citizens approved under this category includes principal applicants, their partners and dependent children.

                      http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/stream/live/samoanquota/

                      Now I’ve got nothing personally against Samoans but as Andrew Little said, when the economy starts slowing down, we need to seriously look at immigration.

                      1100 unskilled , semi skilled positions being filled by non New Zealanders doesn’t really make sense.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 11:27 am

                      I think immigration criteria should be cultural and social as much as economic.

                      Unskilled/skilled is a useless designation.

                    • BM …
                      17 March 2016 at 11:44 am

                      I think immigration criteria should be cultural and social as much as economic.

                      Unskilled/skilled is a useless designation.

                      So, more Whities less Darkies?

                      Makes sense I suppose, going off the flag referendum NZ is still a rather conservative country with obviously strong cultural ties back to the UK.

                      Culturally and socially Caucasians would probably be a better fit.

                      Personally, I’m not really that fussed and prefer the skill based approach to any sort of cultural, social criteria.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 11:52 am

                      Did you just classify all Pacific Islanders as unskilled labour?

                      How you got anything racial from my comment is beyond me apart from you being a troll I guess. If not, try reading it again and see if you can think about what I might mean, not your RWNJ projections.

                    • BM …
                      17 March 2016 at 11:57 am

                      Maybe you could explain what you meant by

                      I think immigration criteria should be cultural and social as much as economic.

                      I’m not a mind reader.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 12:49 pm

                      Always happy to clarify if someone wants that.

                      “I think immigration criteria should be cultural and social as much as economic.”

                      If we place economics much higher than anything else, we end up accepting people that will compete in a country that is already short of jobs on the basis that having a job is the only way to contribute (or having money in a bank account).

                      If we place other considerations along side that, we will also get people that have high cultural and social value as well as economic value. There’s been some examples recently of people with disabilities refused residency on the basis that their disability might cost the country later. Might, not will. The two cases I am thinking of, the people should have been assessed on other criteria such as what they would bring to the disability communities in NZ.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    17 March 2016 at 12:39 pm

                    1100 Samoans each year with no special skills are allowed to immigrate and live in NZ with the vast majority making Auckland their home.

                    So, next question: is Labour also going to cut back on Samoans coming to NZ, along with their capping the number of immigrants from India, Pakistan and China?

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 12:51 pm

                      citation needed for Labour having a policy of capping numbers of immigrants from India, Pakistan and China?

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      17 March 2016 at 3:00 pm

                      Labour is going to reduce and cap immigration numbers. That is Labour policy.

                      Indian and Chinese semi-skilled workers have been mentioned.

                      No others have been.

                      So my question is: will Labour include Samoan immigration numbers in their immigration reduction and cap.

                    • BM …
                      17 March 2016 at 3:07 pm

                      You’d certainly hope they would otherwise it does look like appalling favoritism.

                      Maybe Paul Henry or Mike Hosking can ask Andrew Little next time he’s on their show?

                      Be good to get a a clearer picture of what Little is proposing.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 3:12 pm

                      Labour is going to reduce and cap immigration numbers. That is Labour policy.

                      Indian and Chinese semi-skilled workers have been mentioned.

                      No others have been.

                      So my question is: will Labour include Samoan immigration numbers in their immigration reduction and cap.

                      in other words “capping the number of immigrants from India, Pakistan and China” is some shit you just made up.

                      Little referred to the FTA with China and said there was a case for this to be extended to other ethnicities.

                  • Gabby …
                    17 March 2016 at 1:14 pm

                    That would be a historical matter. I don’t believe we invaded China and administered it for decades.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  17 March 2016 at 11:28 am

                  I’ve always supported immigration

                  • weka …
                    17 March 2016 at 11:32 am

                    no borders immigration?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      17 March 2016 at 12:43 pm

                      To clarify: the current immigration policy

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 12:50 pm

                      So you don’t think the current immigration policy should ever be adjusted?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      17 March 2016 at 1:05 pm

                      Possibly (never say never of course) but what has Andrew Little got against Asians?

                      I’ve enjoyed the cultural enrichment immigration has given us (especially girlfriends and food!) so its a little worrying to hear Andrew Little keep banging on about Asians in a negative light

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 1:16 pm

                      I’m not convinced Little has something against Asians. He was asked about Asians in that particular community. Without knowing the detail he probably should have replied generically, avoiding mention of ethnicity, but if you look at the article you can see that much of the phrasing is from the journalist not Little. He does his own too. Without the transcript it’s too hard to tell what was actually said.

                      Compare and contrast with this,

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

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      17 March 2016 at 1:21 pm

                      But Weka (this conversation feels somehow familiar…) he knows how his words can be allegedly misconstrued , he knows what the media is like so how long will take until he stops being own worst enemy and stops providing the media with ammunition?

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 1:31 pm

                      so you’ve changed our mind and it’s not that Little has something against Asians but instead is that he doesn’t choose his words more carefully? Which is it?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      17 March 2016 at 2:00 pm

                      “allegedly misconstrued ”

                      I’m still not convinced, I think he knows exactly what hes saying

                      so hes either dog-whistling or has a serious case of foot in mouth disease

                      which is it?

                    • McFlock …
                      17 March 2016 at 3:13 pm

                      I’m tending towards not even “misconstrued”, but more “purposefully misrepresented in a manner most likely to provoke controversy”.

                      That’s not foot in mouth disease. Nobody can placate people who will intentionally look for the worst possible interpretation of comments that are either in or even out of context.

                      No media training can help. All you can do is either say it how it is, or shut up. If you speak, people will look for the wrong end of the stick. If you remain silent, they’ll cast a bad light on that, as well.

                      PR’s false dichotomy is a case in point, trying to paint little as either fomenting hate or simply being verbally incompetent.

                    • weka …
                      17 March 2016 at 4:18 pm

                      I tend to agree. Part of me wants Little to win the next election just so we can say fuck you to all the underminers of the previous 3 years. I have some admiration for his naivity with the media and am in two minds about whether he should do something about it. In some ways it’s refreshing to see someone saying they are perplexed about what the media is doing. Honesty.

                      Labour’s problem is that they did that Chinese sounding name shit and so that’s going to be the focus. Probably the stupidest thing they’ve done in a long time. For that reason alone, Little probably has to be ultra careful about anything he says about Asian immigrants.

                      PR has been running astroturfing troll lines all day, I wish someone would give him a good slap down.

                • yabby …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:46 pm

                  1: Open door immigration keeps house and land prices soaring.
                  2: The well-off have nothing to fear for either their socio-economic or social status – they’re both enhanced.
                  3: More people = bigger market to sell to/buy services

                  Not surprising to me that it’s the right who favour higher immigration. As long as they’re not the dependent sort like refugees that is.

              • weka …
                17 March 2016 at 11:00 am

                Why choose the Upper Hutt paper then and not the Herald? Your argument seems based on wishful thinking not something that’s likely to have happened.

          • Ovid 18.1.1.1.2
            17 March 2016 at 10:50 am

            Why? Labour had enjoyed a very good week with a win on zero hours, looking compassionate on the dairy crisis, attacking the banks for not passing on the OCR cut and Key’s looming referendum defeat. Why on earth would Little want to change the tone from that?

            National and their sympathisers know they must change the tone. They also know that they need to portray Labour as disorganised and not ready to govern. So they spin what is a reasonable comment – it’s patently obvious Little means immigration should be managed in a manner that best benefits New Zealand – into some kind of racist bogeyman.

            • Puckish Rogue 18.1.1.1.2.1
              17 March 2016 at 10:53 am

              The blame here should not be put on National though, Little could have said what he said in any number of ways but instead he chose to make it sound the way he did

              • weka …
                17 March 2016 at 11:09 am

                who is blaming National?

                Little said what he said, and the journalist reported it in a way that misrepresented that. And you blame Little not the journalist? I guess that makes sense given you support the Dirty Politics party.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  17 March 2016 at 12:46 pm

                  Repeating what Andrew Little says is now considered Dirty Politics?

                  “The immigration department no doubt applies that for other ethnic chefs. But the reality is we have big ethnic populations, certainly Indians, certainly Chinese, and I would have thought we could outsource chefs locally rather than have to rely on immigration to get them.”

                  • Gabby …
                    17 March 2016 at 1:17 pm

                    i.e. we have local chinese and indian cooks. True or false d’you reckon?

                  • weka …
                    17 March 2016 at 3:18 pm

                    Little wants local Indian and Chinese chefs to have first pop at the jobs. What is wrong with that?

              • Draco T Bastard …
                17 March 2016 at 1:08 pm

                Ah, no. What he said was quite reasonable. It’s then been blown out of proportion and out of context first by the MSM then by stupid fucks who believed the MSM and, of course, by the RWNJs who are just out to attack Labour and the Left.

                • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell …
                  17 March 2016 at 1:12 pm

                  It’s then been blown out of proportion and out of context first by the MSM then by stupid fucks who believed the MSM and, of course, by the RWNJs who are just out to attack Labour and the Left…

                  …and colonial viper.

                • Halfcrown …
                  17 March 2016 at 6:58 pm

                  “Ah, no. What he said was quite reasonable. It’s then been blown out of proportion and out of context first by the MSM then by stupid fucks who believed the MSM and, of course, by the RWNJs who are just out to attack Labour and the Left.”

                  Well said Daraco. What has surprised me, nobody has picked up on this where Micheal Hill wants to keep Queenstown EXCLUSIVE for his rich mates to play on his golf course and keep every bit of trash out. Be it NZ’ers or others.

                  Pity Prat Henry did not take that up this morning instead of political point scoring.

                  http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/14205814/Top-5-comments-on-keeping-Arrowtown-exclusive

          • Expat 18.1.1.1.3
            17 March 2016 at 11:49 am

            Ad

            can’t you read? the comment you make is in direct contrast to the to the information provided, your not doing yourself any favors.

    • Expat 18.2
      17 March 2016 at 11:45 am

      weka

      +1

      The author you speak has no objectiveness, just a grudge.

    • Colonial Viper 18.3
      17 March 2016 at 12:14 pm

      weka – no comment from you on Little’s non-apology apology? You know, being “concerned” that some people may have felt offended or singled out?

      Labour is going to reduce and cap immigration because of what they say are economic and employment issues.

      Little talked about immigrant cooks as part of that.

      That’s the guts of it.

      Where’s the spin?

      • weka 18.3.1
        17 March 2016 at 12:25 pm

        I see it differently and I don’t really want to go an rehash what is wrong with your post, because it’s too complex and too many people are pissed off and the actual politics are getting lost under that.

        But reading your comment now, I don’t get what your point is. Labour want to control immigration to NZ. Is that a problem? You say yourself elsewhere that it’s not, so what is your point?

        • Colonial Viper 18.3.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 12:34 pm

          The post shows a stark contrast between the Leaders of NZ Labour and UK Labour and how they view immigrants, immigration and jobs. That’s the point.

          People want to ignore that difference and pretend its not there? Fine. That’s not my problem.

  19. weka 19
    17 March 2016 at 9:58 am

    I agree with much of the criticism of CV beyond what the topic of the post, but I also agree with him that he is allowed to write what he wants and not be personally attacked for it. Can I suggest that the people that want to have a go at him for things other than this post take it to Open Mike? Plenty of space there.

  20. Bruce 20
    17 March 2016 at 10:35 am

    Um, my Labour Comrades, have you stopped to consider how many migrant workers – temporary migrant workers – brought in on semi-skilled visas do or actually ever will receive the benefits of New Zealand citizens or residents?

    In the wine industry, in the dairy industry, “immigrants” (what’s the formal definition?) are brought in temporarily to do work in conditions usually technically illegal under NZ labour law.

    They are rarely granted residency or citizenship and the benefits that bestows. They are here as slaves, essentially, and then sent packing when they have served their usefulness.

    They are not generally recruited through WINZ, but through unscrupulous labour hire agencies seeking to exploit them. Their contracts are with the agencies, not with the companies, just like on the contacted banana plantations in the Philippines that prevents Dole and others actually having to call them employees and being responsible for them. They typically don’t receive the wages companies pay to the hire agencies to be distributed to them, hypothetically.

    Many of these jobs are filled via these agencies and any job ads posted list intentionally unliveable conditions in a token way because the dairy farms and so forth never actually seriously intend to employ locals.

    WE are not talking about immigrants, in general. How were the workers at the various restaurants Little referred to actually hired? Well, ads with terrible conditions are posted, no one goes for them and if they do they are put off. They then claim they have to get overseas employees to fill the roles, employees from places who will accept terrible conditions.

    Labour didn’t do a good job of putting this across.

    But to any journalist with the time I ask you: how many workers hired by labour agents are now employed in offending industries compared to 10 years ago, when jobs were more plentiful? Why the change? Labour conditions were preferable, and the labour pool was more competitive.

    If you are happy to call an immigrant worker – in reality, a temporary worker – and “immigrant” in the sense it is commonly understood, you should perhaps attempt to quantify such changes in the labour market. Calling Little’s comments racist, given the context, is an accusation that lacks some serious context.

    • mickysavage 20.1
      17 March 2016 at 10:38 am

      I agree with your comment but Andrew’s statement was a short response to a question. It was clearly not meant to be an encyclopaedic cover of all of the issues.

    • weka 20.2
      17 March 2016 at 10:58 am

      Good points Bruce. I’d also note that Little said the jobs should go to NZ Indian and Asian chefs, but I didn’t see anyone stop to consider what that means (It means that he’s suggesting that some of the jobs go to people who have immigrated here and attained residency/citizenship. How is that anti-immigration?).

      It’s also important to understand that as well as the casual work immigrants that Bruce names, there are many people in NZ on temporary visas who are here to work and play, hang out and have fun, and some try and get residency via that, and those people are also soaking up jobs that locals then can’t get. They’re not enduring the really bad conditions that Bruce names, but they are willing to work on no contracts and/or cash jobs with none of the security that should come with employment in NZ. Plus they’re happy with low wages. That negatively affects the employment culture for people that live here permanently.

  21. Observer (Tokoroa) 21
    17 March 2016 at 10:56 am

    @Weka
    .
    Look it is fine if a person wants to savage a writer, if he has misrepresented the clear words of another person.

    Another good reason for savaging a writer occurs when a commentor on here wants to drag on about some policy that Labour / Greens / et al / did or didn’t carry out in the past.

    You see, it is an utter waste of time to play around with bygone stuff when what we have to do is build and rebuild now. Politics is a now thing; not a past thing.

    The best writers on here weigh up proposed policy …policy ….policy and give their assent or their dissent. It makes for stunning reading. The TPPA is a striking example.

    Writers such as Mr Colonial Viper and other Trolls, are locked onto a compulsive grieving past, nourishing themselves on the flattery of highly compulsive conservative friends.

    It is totally despicable that a grown man on here would misrepresent Andrew Little so deliberately. The Standard does not need such writers.

    • weka 21.1
      17 March 2016 at 11:03 am

      I also think that the standard would be better off if CV took a break, but nevertheless the rules of the place state you cannot attack an author. There is a difference between calling someone out on what they write and attacking them as a person, and many things in between, most of which don’t belong on this thread. Every standard author has a right to not have their post derailed.

    • Colonial Viper 21.2
      17 March 2016 at 12:32 pm

      Look it is fine if a person wants to savage a writer, if he has misrepresented the clear words of another person.

      All I have done is compare and contrast Little versus Corbyn on the issue of economics, immigration and immigrant workers.

      Quote me where I have misrepresented Little or you’re gone from this post.

    • te reo putake 21.3
      17 March 2016 at 12:58 pm

      Hi, weka. I agree with much of your comment. The post itself meets the Standard’s definition of trolling (“A troll is generally defined on this site as someone who clearly isn’t bothering to engage their brain when commenting.”). Using the line “Presented with no additional comment:” clearly puts the post into that category. It’s not the normal ‘author’s opinion’, because no opinion has been put forward. ie, no engagement of the brain.

      And, as we know, CV is a women hating, ageist xenophobe, whose hypocrisy is legend. But the Standard is tolerant of having a bigot for an author. Beats me why that should be, but that’s the way it is. And, to be fair, I have skin in the game. If it was up to a couple of the more conservative authors and a fair percentage of the readers, I wouldn’t be here either.

      So, I guess I’m going to sit on the fence with this one. What I do know is that CV and John Key have at least a couple of things in common; the thought of a Labour doing well gives them both the shits. And a Labour led Government is something both will fight tooth and claw to stop happening.

  22. Hami Shearlie 22
    17 March 2016 at 11:03 am

    Little is right – by making these kinds of jobs available only to NZ workers, by retraining, etc, you help to solve so many more other problems – if the worker is already here, they don’t require another house in Auckland, they are already registered for health care, so no new costs there, their children are already in a school, so schools won’t be overloaded with new pupils, no more cars on the road, the drivers are already here. The list goes on and on and on. A good government will look after the welfare of their own people first every time.

    Bringing in foreign workers when we have so much unemployment keeps wages down – how does that help NZ people? It helps big business only. Apprenticeships for the trades are very popular right now, because kids can earn as they learn and end up with no huge debts like Varsity students. There are enormous opportunities for the trades right now especially in Christchurch, but so many foreign builders, plumbers and electricians etc are being brought in to work there – if the apprenticeships had been beefed up right after the earthquake, all those kids would be qualified and working down there, and fewer foreigners would be needed.

    NZ’ers should be first in line for all jobs, if they need training or retraining to do them, then do it. Why bring in over 60 thousand foreigners every year? With modern technology, the number of jobs over the next few years will decline BIG TIME! What will we do with all these extra people then?

  23. saveNZ 23
    17 March 2016 at 11:04 am

    Labour always had tighter immigration policy than National. Labour are pro immigration but with some sort of criteria to have it as an added value to NZ.

    Under National the passport doors to NZ is open to anybody, whether living here or not, with a job here or not, with dependants using the state here or not, whether they speak english or not. If they want to buy up property as an investment for not.

    The consequences of years of this, has been a shortage of properties both to rent and to buy, escalating house prices, job shortages, lack of investment in anything other than construction, tourism and Dairy by the government, lack of investment in kids and young people with schooling and university (we can just import more people ‘with skills’,) wages stagnating even in areas which should not be, Kiwis leaving and being replaced by middle class migrants who out compete young and old Kiwis for jobs, further discrimination to Kiwis who have no other place to go and actually have paid taxes here for years.

    In my view some of the immigrants coming in, are just organised immigration scams. Companies are bringing in people who are supposed to have a certain skill but just don’t have it. Who knows how much they pay to the NZ go between but I have heard it is $50,000 to $200,000 to come in here or marry someone to get a passport. People are desperate to leave with the neoliberal and globalism and I don’t blame them migrants if they use any way they can to get out. Obviously cheaper to pay someone to work in a restaurant or what have you than to brave the refugee way in a leaky boat.

    If you try to get your telephone put on by Chorus for example, good luck. You need to try about 3 technicians before one will turn up who can do the most simple connection and most speak very little english. Connecting a telephone used to be a skill that was taught to young Kiwis under an apprentice scheme, it is not difficult. But try getting the new neoliberal business model to get one on. Everyone in Chorus now operated their own small business, the technician often does not speak much English and can’t do the job, there are 3 or 4 companies in between and it is often run by a call centre which may or may not be operating from NZ.

    This is not improving NZ, in any way. It is ripping off end consumers and businesses by having some sort of incompetent but highly expensive system that funnels money to the end elite with as many people as possible clipping the ticket. Then to top it off, Chorus are rushing around asking for corporate welfare and government bail outs, because they are going broke, no wonder, if they can’t do their core business adequately and hire someone who can get a phone on first time. That’s the least efficient system possible.

    I’m not against immigration, but as well as NZ not having enough jobs or houses for migrants and they are displacing Kiwis. The migrants themselves are also often being exploited. In Nelson it was found that hospitality immigrants were being paid $2 p/h and having to work a 66 hour week.

    I agree with Andrew Little, and labour should stick to their guns and NOT let National turn the tables around in attack politics. Why do we have to import so many chefs when we have our own unemployed chefs who need a job???

    Remember McCully and his idea we need migrants to work the horticulture ‘because they have big hands”.

    Don’t think National can play the race card, they have so many skeletons in their caucus!

    As for the rise of Winston Peters, although nobody is allowed to talk about any policy under National without being attacked for it, we all know he want’s to try to put some sort of system in to keep NZ is mostly NZ hands and tighten up immigration. That is actually what NZ used to have under Labour and previously immigration criteria was never considered some sort of race card to be pulled out when challenged.

    With the rise in P, the rise in offshore gangs, and so forth, immigration should be tighter with very thorough investigations.

    England is in the toilet due to their own mismanagement of immigration, now they have various distractions like wars in the middle East. At least if they get Corbyn he is intelligent enough to get the country back again with the amount of migrants. But they can’t wait to get rid of people. Kiwis and anyone they can chuck out are being deported as we speak.

    England has infrastructure, taxes and the EU. We don’t have that in NZ. If we keep importing people who end up on social welfare, we can’t actually pay for it.

    I’m all for getting migrants who excel in their field into NZ – but it seems more like immigration scams and displacing Kiwis and selling off our country is how the current National run government have the immigration system working for them.

    Exploit, exploit.

  24. Colonial Viper 24
    17 March 2016 at 12:19 pm

    This post clearly contrasts a material difference between Andrew Little and Jeremy Corbyn on the matter of economics, immigration and immigrant workers.

    Some commentators here can’t handle the fact that there is a difference and that it is a material difference, not a difference of spin or framing.

    UK Labour under Jeremy Corbyn is not pointing the finger at immigration and unemployment as an issue which goes hand in hand.

    Maybe he should – I think that there is a connection there.

    Little on the other hand, has gone all the way there. This is Winston Peter’s classic vote winning stomping ground.

    Some commentators here can’t handle the fact that I would put a post up on it – without any personal comment – and let the media stories speak for themselves.

    • BM 24.1
      17 March 2016 at 12:23 pm

      Do you think Labour is trying to take Peters out?

      Steal enough of his votes to drop NZ First below the 5% threshold?

      • Colonial Viper 24.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 12:27 pm

        With this and the Chinese sounding last names thing, I think that Labour is taking a far stronger stance on foreigners’ economic activities in NZ.

        Not foreign corporate activity mind you – Labour supports the TPPA after all – but the activity of individual foreigners.

      • saveNZ 24.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 12:51 pm

        @BM nope they are just more in agreement which bodes well for a change of government next election.

        It is National and MSM trying to put ‘race’ into the mix, immigration criteria never used to get be so controversial.

        Possibly the Natz are not polling so well on how they are handling immigration – remember Key when he said ‘he didn’t want Kiwis to be tenants in their own country”.

        His policy says otherwise.

          • Ben 24.1.2.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 2:26 pm

            It looks like the utopia espoused in the “Rowing Together” post lasted all of 4 days. Imagine those 3 sharing power!

            • BM 24.1.2.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 2:57 pm

              The perils of assumption.

              You watch Peters, he’ll make Little dance like a monkey.

              • saveNZ …
                18 March 2016 at 8:29 am

                @BM – I’m looking forward to Key dancing like a monkey instead trying to do a deal next election, with Maori in particular.

                that’s if Key lasts that long and the Crusher does not come down and crush his “relaxed” about the economy, management style.

                I hear Hawaii has great cocktails and golf so he can be “comfortable” with that.

                Key’s done his duty to serve the ideology of putting ‘money’ before people. I’m sure a knighthood is not far off.

                And he will always be welcome on John Oliver show to keep up his thirst for photo ops.

          • ianmac 24.1.2.1.2
            17 March 2016 at 3:10 pm

            If you gritted your teeth and listened to what Andrew actually says to Mike in your link, you might be better informed Puck. Mike is like you, he hears what he wants to hear than as soon as Andrew leaves the room he twists and misquotes.
            A good interview Andrew. The follow up comments from Mike are very poor.

      • Stuart Munro 24.1.3
        17 March 2016 at 9:55 pm

        I doubt any NZ party would scruple to steal another party’s voters if they could. But that doesn’t mean everything they do is directed to that end.

    • weka 24.2
      17 March 2016 at 12:44 pm

      “Some commentators here can’t handle the fact that I would put a post up on it – without any personal comment – and let the media stories speak for themselves.”

      Yeah, because there’s absolutley no context at all at all.

      /sarc

      Two contexts. One is you are well known for hating Labour and sloganeering in misleading ways as a result, so of course people are going to be thinking about that when they read the post.

      The other is that the NZ media link you use is obviously not telling us the whole story, yet you treat it as gospel without any intepretation or comment. This just reinforces people’s perception that a lot of the time (not always) your comments are not trustworthy.

      • Colonial Viper 24.2.1
        17 March 2016 at 2:54 pm

        Little hasn’t back tracked or withdrawn any of his comments. He wants immigration reduced and capped. He used foreigner cooks as an example.

        Corbyn on the other hand has a very different viewpoint on jobs, foreigners and economics.

        You can’t stand the fact that there is a big contrast there, and that it’s real not just spin, well that’s not my problem.

        My edit to the post above should also make it clear to you how both Giovanni Tiso and Danyl at The Dim-Post view Little’s comments.

        • Puckish Rogue 24.2.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 3:28 pm

          He used to have a different view:

          http://www.epmu.org.nz/news/show/171102

          “On the issue of temporary labour we believe a good balance has been struck. The limit of 1000 Chinese migrants for up to 3 years is a sensible control that should help relieve skills shortages without putting downward pressure on New Zealand wages.”

          • McFlock 24.2.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 3:47 pm

            “up to 3 years”.
            That period ended in 2011, 5 years ago.

            Irrelevant to the situation now.

            Another example of tory bullshit.

            • Puckish Rogue 24.2.1.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 3:53 pm

              Not really, the issue to change isn’t there so theres no reason to target the Chinese (again)

              • McFlock …
                17 March 2016 at 4:13 pm

                🙄

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  17 March 2016 at 4:23 pm

                  Oh c’mon, are you saying he learnt nothing from the previous shellacking he (rightfully) received the last time he brought up race?

                  He could have mentioned Polynesian immigrants, African immigrants but no once again he went the Asian bashing route

                  It didn’t work previously and it won’t work now

                  • McFlock …
                    17 March 2016 at 4:35 pm

                    We have Polynesian or African chefs immigrating on work visas, whether or not as part of a free trade deal?

                    Keep beating up that line, you might have better luck with it than you did with “angry andy”.

        • weka 24.2.1.2
          17 March 2016 at 3:59 pm

          “You can’t stand the fact that there is a big contrast there, and that it’s real not just spin, well that’s not my problem.”

          No, what I can’t stand is you fucked up the post when you could have actually made your point clearly. Instead you relied on a soundbite from an unreliable newspiece and that just looks like spite. Whether it is spite or just the fact that you’ve burnt too many bridges here doesn’t really matter any more, esp as you’ve allowed this to run for over half a day before attempting to clarify. You’re easily as bad as Little at this.

          “Little hasn’t back tracked or withdrawn any of his comments. He wants immigration reduced and capped. He used foreigner cooks as an example.”

          You also want immigration controlled. What is wrong with using foreign cooks as an example?

          “Corbyn on the other hand has a very different viewpoint on jobs, foreigners and economics.”

          The UK and NZ have completely different immigration issues, multiple ones.

          If you have any points beyond pointing out the bleeding obvious that a left wing politician and centre left on view things differently, have at it.

          Tiso, who I generally admire, is pro-immigration in a way I am not, so I’m going to disagree with what he says on this (saw the initial comments on twitter yesterday).

          Danyl’s post is just another potshot at Labour (which they may or may not deserve).

          • Colonial Viper 24.2.1.2.1
            17 March 2016 at 7:36 pm

            You also want immigration controlled. What is wrong with using foreign cooks as an example?

            Because it’s Labour targetting Asians, again.

            The UK and NZ have completely different immigration issues, multiple ones.

            The problems caused by immigrants in the UK are far more severe than in NZ.

            Yet UK Labour has made it clear that they see nothing to be gained by singling out immigrants as being an economic problem.

            esp as you’ve allowed this to run for over half a day before attempting to clarify. You’re easily as bad as Little at this.

            Thanks for the praise. He gets paid a quarter a million a year by the tax payer to be this bad.

            • weka 24.2.1.2.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 8:02 pm

              You might not be on 250K, but you do have a level of privilege as an author on the largest left wing blog in the country that many don’t have. There is a responsibility that goes with that and making out that Little should be working to higher standards because he’s on a salary tells me quite a lot about your politics.

              The differences between the UK and NZ are more than you name, which is strange seeing as how you want to compare and contrast. But only the bits you like, right?

              “Because it’s Labour targetting Asians, again.”

              Which was wrong.

              • Colonial Viper …
                17 March 2016 at 10:02 pm

                Little isnt just “on a salary”, he’s on well within the top 1% of incomes.

                Big pay, big expectations, big performance. If you’re not ready for the big job, you shouldn’t have applied.

  25. saveNZ 25
    17 March 2016 at 12:55 pm

    “Mr Corbyn said as he told his critics: “Don’t look upon immigration as necessarily a problem”.

    Rather than looking to restrict immigration to the UK, the Government must be “far more focussed” on ensuring they deliver more doctors, school places and housing to meet demand in highly-populated areas.”

    Where are the new doctors, schools and housing and jobs n NZ?

    And how are Kiwis supposed to pay for it all, when National are pushing current resident Kiwis off the hospital lists, selling state houses and closing schools?

  26. weka 26
    17 March 2016 at 1:21 pm

    Does anyone know where Little was when the Hutt News asked the questions?

    • joe90 26.1
      17 March 2016 at 1:30 pm

      Andrew Little
      ‏@AndrewLittleMP

      @toby_etc Questioned on immigration while at Hutt carpentry school. Chefs was raised with me, not by me. Pointed out access under China FTA

      https://twitter.com/AndrewLittleMP/status/710001451767095296

      • weka 26.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 1:38 pm

        Thanks.

        I guess all the people who think this was an intentional move on Labour’s part to try and take votes from NZF must be right. I bet Peters is kicking himself that he didn’t make a play the race card announcement from the Hutt carpentry school this week too.

      • Ben 26.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 2:23 pm

        This article suggests otherwise:

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77711512/Little-Could-staff-at-ethnic-cuisine-restaurants-be-sourced-locally

        It appears that Little raised chefs as an example, then proceeded to dig himself a hole.

      • yabby 26.1.3
        17 March 2016 at 5:13 pm

        This is interviewing 101. So much political discourse – left vs right is based on reaction of a politician based on their response to a subject raised by the journalis. The response is reported out of context and unfavorably if it looks like being a headline catcher. If we’re honest we all know that the left love this when its Key or Collins on the back foot, but it sticks in the craw when the other lot gain brownie points by feigning indignation and hop about tut-tutting. It’s pretty well politics at its most pure and simple.

        Thing is for Little, how does he become more guarded in his responses without appearing to be defensive, be better advised without appearing schooled and wooden, use more diplomatic language while seeming to be casual and off-the-cuff, how can he be less reactionary while appearing engaged ???

        It’s a difficult game and only the best players win.

        • weka 26.1.3.1
          17 March 2016 at 6:56 pm

          I’d prefer we moved in the direction of honesty being valued rathr than everyone learning to be dishonest.

          I’m not sure if Little’s words were taken out of context. Did you listen to the audio?

        • Gabby 26.1.3.2
          17 March 2016 at 8:34 pm

          How? He needs to get a bit aggressive on the interviewer who quotes selectively. ‘That’s not what I said, is it? What did I say? Roll the tape if you can’t recall.’ Etc.

    • Ben 26.2
      17 March 2016 at 2:20 pm

      On another planet?

  27. cricklewood 27
    17 March 2016 at 1:34 pm

    I can see where CV is coming from. Andrew Little has talked about Chinese investment in property/farms now Chinese/Indian chefs have been identified.
    I’m yet to hear him rail against US, UK and Canadians who have purchased the vast bulk of land in NZ in the last 5 years nor have I heard him talk about Irish builders or fruit pickers from the Pacific. Whilst his point has merit I don’t understand why he is singling out those of Asian ethnicity and why pick on Chefs who work bloody hard do work that isn’t ‘low skill’ but it is low pay. These immigrants are people who should labour should be bring into the tent not pushing them out…

    • weka 27.1
      17 March 2016 at 1:42 pm

      Because he was ASKED. By a journalist. Specifically.

      I haven’t seen him single out Chinese chefs negatively. He pointed out that NZ has obligations under the FTA with China to allow 200 chefs to immigrate here and that there was a case to be made for other ethnicities. How is that anti-Asian?

      • cricklewood 27.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 2:07 pm

        I’m not saying what Andrew is saying is negative per say, it’s more that people of Asian ethnicity are mentioned when conversations around immigration and land ownership are had. Prompted by media or otherwise I don’t see it as been particularly good strategy to mention certain ethnicities ahead of others. Why not talk about immigrants as a whole or maybe use immigrants/investors from European countries as an example.

        • weka 27.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 4:11 pm

          I completely agree with that. One of the reasons that I have less of a problem with what Little has said than others is that I live in a part of the country where local jobs are filled by people on temporary work visas who are basically on holiday and paying their way as they go. They get 12 or 18 months here, they often don’t stay on one place for that time so there is a continual transient population that creates instability in the community, and they will work for pay and conditions below what NZers expect and need, thus undermining the ability of permanent locals to get enough work. Those people are generally European or British or North American. I’d be really happy if politicians started talking about that.

          And I don’t have an inherent problem with people doing that, having working holidays (apart from the whole impending climate change crisis), except I agree with Little that it’s not ok when we have so many unemployed and precariously employed people in NZ. The whole immigants bring cultural benefits thing looks quite different when the immigrants are temps who come and go and don’t form the basis of strong communities.

  28. weka 28
    17 March 2016 at 1:46 pm

    The journalist who interviewed Little on this last week has put the audio up online,

    https://soundcloud.com/user-72695242/andrew-little-on-semi-skilled-migration

    Blake Crayton-Brown ‏@BlakeCBrown 19 mins19 minutes ago

    Last week I interviewed @AndrewLittleMP. We talked wages. And migration. And migrant chefs. Audio here: https://soundcloud.com/user-72695242/andrew-little-on-semi-skilled-migration … #nzpol

    https://twitter.com/BlakeCBrown/status/710260718294052864

    • tinfoilhat 28.1
      17 March 2016 at 2:24 pm

      Listening to the audio it seems i’m in the sad position of having to agree with Hooten’s comments over at the dimpost.

      • weka 28.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 2:52 pm

        If you take off your hat we’ll be able to read your mind.

      • joe90 28.1.2
        17 March 2016 at 3:06 pm

        In the Hutt interview Little, when prompted, doubted whether chefs met the skilled labour stipulation and in the TV3 interview posted over at the DimPost he said there may already be resident New Zealanders with the skills required by ethnic eateries.

        • Jenny Kirk 28.1.2.1
          17 March 2016 at 5:14 pm

          Blimey – even when sheeples and Hooten have the actual audio of the Little/Hutt interview in front of them, they still don’t get it right.

          AL said it was “fair to say immigrants had some (adverse) impact” – especially in “the semi-skilled level” which was not the target for immigration qualification therefore Labour “is justified to look at” who comes in and make sure NZ is getting the right mix and balance of immigrant people.
          The reporter then said the most people coming in seemed to be Chefs.
          AL agreed and said there was a question to ask about that, and could “NZ source those labour needs internally.
          He finished by saying “we (NZ Labour) need to have a close look to check we’re getting it right”

          This was – in the space of several repeated sentences – a very clear statement by Andrew Little that NZ needed to look at whether we were getting the right skills in people who immigrated here. And to review the processes and skills levels required.

          BUT sheeples on The Standard and other so-called lefty pages would prefer to believe the twists from the MSM and known Nat supporters ! ! ? ! ? ?

          • Macro 28.1.2.1.1
            22 March 2016 at 11:21 am

            Have to agree – I’ve been astounded at the commentary here and elsewhere on this – it is pure beat up by the MSM and dirty politics 101 all over again. Some mouthers on the left have to learn to look beyond total political correctness at all costs and keep their eye on the bigger picture.

  29. Craig H 29
    17 March 2016 at 2:33 pm

    We have special work visas for Thai, Indonesian and Chinese chefs for anyone who is interested to know.

  30. Mike Steinberg 30
    17 March 2016 at 2:35 pm

    If he’s going to raise immigration do it in the context of house prices, or the impact on interest rates and the exchange rate hurting the tradables sector. Not chefs. Ex-Reserve Bank’s Mike Reddell:

    “And then there are population choices. When migration works well, it usually complements economic success that was already underway. Rapid population growth, all else equal, tends to put upward pressure on a country’s real exchange rate – it involves a high demand for non-tradables, putting upward pressure on non-tradables prices relative to those of tradables (set globally). Norway’s population growth rate has increased quite a bit in the last decade, but over the full period since 1970, here is the chart showing the ratio of New Zealand’s population to that of Norway…

    Our population has grown faster than that of Norway almost entirely because successive National and Labour governments have chosen to bring so many non-New Zealanders into the country (more than offsetting the upsurge in those leaving, mainly for Australia). Doing so has helped impede the sort of the sustained downward adjustment in the real exchange rate one would have expected if governments had simply stayed out of the way. It has made even harder for New Zealand to turn around the decades of economic decline.”

    http://croakingcassandra.com/2016/02/27/new-zealand-and-norway-a-real-exchange-rate-that-hasnt-moved/

    http://croakingcassandra.com/2015/06/23/immigration-policy-106-per-cent-of-net-new-housing-demand/

  31. Grim 31
    17 March 2016 at 4:06 pm

    what a sec… Population growth effects house prices? how does that work?

    Houses will be built if it is profitable
    If wages are high enough to buy a house
    if wages are high enough to rent a house
    then houses will be built.
    But a house will only be financed if it is a good investment(ROI for rentals)
    So all house prices must increase at or above the mortgage rate to be financially viable

    if builders are scarce
    if resources are scarce
    demand out weights supply and prices can go up
    but if this happens builders will be trained and new resources employed

    Location will effect suburb price differences.

    financing is extended based on the purchasers ability to repay the loan, wages.

    Hence the limiting fact on building houses to meet demand is wages, if inflation adjusted wage increases are less than mortgage rates your ability to finance house building reduces, to avoid addressing this underlying issue increased immigration of wealthier house buyers has been employed.

    The big lie is that house prices are going up due to lack of supply and increased demand from immigration.

    The truth is salaries and wage earners ability to buy houses has decreases and this decrease results in less houses built, not the other way around.

    • weka 31.1
      17 March 2016 at 4:14 pm

      I think one of the issues is that people overseas have the benefit of cheaper credit and the exchange rate and land here has seemed cheap compared to other places. That has all increased property values. You also see it down south where Aucklanders are migrating with bigger bucks than locals can afford so prices are spiking.

      • Grim 31.1.1
        17 March 2016 at 4:36 pm

        Agreed, but that is a flow on effect, take immigration out of the picture, over the long run house prices will go up at a steady pace, with peaks and troughs but consistently upward the exception being disasters/population depletion.

        houses are built to met the market, if you earn too little you are no longer part of the market, house supply does met demand, but the average Kiwi has fallen out of the bottom and is no longer measured in demand, see the difference?

        Did house prices increase, or works wages decrease?

        Whats the difference?

        Huge, do you address wages or housing affordability?
        If you focus on housing affordability you can ignore and distract from the root causes and the system continues to transfer wealth from the bottom to the top.

        • weka 31.1.1.1
          17 March 2016 at 4:48 pm

          I would see it more as chicken and egg.

          House prices increased far beyond any wage increases were ever going to keep up with even if wages had been improved. The main reason that so many people still own their own homes now is because many households have two fulltime or near fulltime incomes. My parents’ generation could afford the same kinds of houses on half the income (although houses are bigger now too).

          The push for homeowning to be a financial investment rather than a home is a factor too.

          I agree that focussing on housing affordability at the expense of wages is a huge problem.

          • Grim 31.1.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 5:30 pm

            “The push for home-owning to be a financial investment rather than a home is a factor too.”

            agreed, as a financial investment you want to borrow the maximum amount and any increase in value above mortgage rates is exponential profit, drives the need for flash houses vs bare-bones necessity. This also ties into lack of job stability and the need to upgrade skills and investments constantly to keep pace because standing still is now going backwards/downwards.

            Buying a family home with job security and living there till you died, seems like a dream.

          • saveNZ 31.1.1.1.2
            18 March 2016 at 7:59 am

            +1 Weka

            Also Kiwis who own homes bought them earlier before the massive property boom.

            In the 1990’s young people were still leaving and able to go overseas to save money, bring back to NZ and buy a house. Nowadays the traditional Kiwi OE also seems to be a thing of the past.

            Sadly the OE that traditionally broadened young Kiwi experiences of the world, created opportunities and was a way for Kiwis to gain valuable experience is being lost.

            Now it is very hard to go to the UK and get a job, and the UK are deporting as many people as they can.

  32. Halfcrown 32
    17 March 2016 at 7:16 pm

    We have all this political point scoring going on by the likes of Prats Henry and Hoonton about what Little said or not said about the Jappaty makers migrating to this country, but no mention of this shit in Arrowtown. where Micheal Hill wants to make this place EXCLUSIVE for his rich golfing buddies and keep the riff raff (NZ’ers) out.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/14205814/Top-5-comments-on-keeping-Arrowtown-exclusive

    • weka 32.1
      18 March 2016 at 11:12 am

      It’s a pity that this was raised by Hill, and that he didn’t employ someone to do his PR for him. Because he is right. We should be capping tourist numbers, and we should be managing tourism to generate income from high earning business. It’s essentially the same argument as with industrial dairying. Instead of selling lots of cheap stuff that damages the environment we should be looking at the value added services and selling those in the context of protecting the environment.

      Plus, climate change. There is no way around the fact that flying large numbers of tourists to NZ is going to have to stop.

      I don’t know how many people know the Wakatipu Basin, but it’s basically a bowl surrounded by mountains. You can only fit so many roads and buildings there. For people that live in crowded places it might seem ok to fill it up, but for people that live in semi-rural areas we like it to be more spread out. That is entirely reasonable.

      The big issue in Queenstown is how workers can find affordable housing. And there are definitely snobs there who don’t want to live next door to the people serving them petrol or who clean hotel suites. But leaving aside those idiots, that’s a parallel issue with infil and overcrowding and there is no good reason why you can’t do urban/rural design to manage both issues well.

      What exactly is wrong with capping numbers?

      • pat 32.1.1
        18 March 2016 at 11:17 am

        What exactly is wrong with capping numbers?

        nothing….if you have an alternative economic policy….and we currently don’t.

        • weka 32.1.1.1
          18 March 2016 at 11:39 am

          The tourism industry understands the issue of quality vs quantity very well, it’s just choosing not to do it. Likewise, we have alternate dairying systems in NZ, but most businesses are choosing to go with the big, easy bucks. I don’t think we need an alternative economic policy for these things to occur, although it would certainly help if the govt led on this, and where needed legislated.

          • pat 32.1.1.1.1
            18 March 2016 at 11:46 am

            we currently have two main economic drivers ….tourism and construction….both of which are fueled by high levels of overseas entry, be it temporary or permanent….restrict either of those and what will be the result?
            For years (if not decades) the call to develop high(er) value niche markets have been pretty much ignored by our politicians (and by extension the voting public)…..migration and tourism are low value activity andall the numbers show this….so we add the inevitable costs and problems by increasing our environmental footprint AND reduce our ability to earn in one fell swoop……brilliant.

      • Halfcrown 32.1.2
        18 March 2016 at 3:06 pm

        The way I interpreted the article, it was nothing to do with the environment or the number of tourists, it’s all about elitism.

        Hill appears to want only the “right” kind of tourist. Who is going to be the judge as to who is or is not the right kind of tourist and who the fuck is he to judge?

        • weka 32.1.2.1
          18 March 2016 at 3:41 pm

          The article is pretty short (I assume you are not suggesting that the five comments are representative of what Hill is saying).

          Sir Michael Hill wants only the right kind of tourists in “unique and precious” Arrowtown.

          Hill, one of the region’s most prominent citizens, believes tourist numbers and development needs to be capped to maintain the simplicity of the area.

          Hill said he was fearful too many tourists would destroy Arrowtown’s fragile community.

          What is wrong with that? He’s lived there for a long time, so he has a historical perspective on the growth. Lots of people who live in areas inundated with tourists and tourism growth feel similarly, and most of those people have normal income by NZ standards. Would you say that their opinions on what is happening to their town were irrelevant?

          If you are suggesting that Hill is acting from a sense of entitlement and hypocricy I’d probably agree (I remember what Arrowtown was like before all the uber rich arrived), and his language is elitist and prejudiced. And his point is still valid.

          There’s a better outline of the issues here,

          http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/77806483/Keep-Arrowtown-exclusive-target-the-rich-says-Sir-Michael-Hill

          • Halfcrown 32.1.2.1.1
            18 March 2016 at 8:59 pm

            Yeah read that as well and it still stinks of elitism

            Though, I really feel you have a valid point of view. These tourist hot spots have to be controlled better for the sake of the area and as you stated the “locals” There are other area’s that are also suffering, like the Blue Springs at Pataruru. We have been going there for years and we would be the only ones there all day, a delightful spot but now being ruined with wall to wall people with clowns swimming in the springs.

            I think perhaps something like the National Trust in the UK could be set up
            We visited a small picturesque village in North Devon, shit I can’t remember the name of the place. The only way you could get into this place was park your car in a large car park and then pay to WALK only through this village. It was good as the numbers were controlled and was a delight with no parked cars . The last time I visited Arrowtown to take some photos it was wall to wall, people with cars everywhere. Came away taking not a thing. Perhaps something like the national trust could be set up in all the tourist area’s.

  33. Wainwright 33
    17 March 2016 at 10:20 pm

    Bad politics badly executed. Labour has to do better than this. What idiot thought it was a good idea to attack the Chinese again? Make all the excuses you like, Labour isn’t getting the Chinese or Indian vote back any time soon.

    • saveNZ 33.1
      18 March 2016 at 7:49 am

      @Wainwright – Labour never had the Chinese vote in the first place. Why do you think Natz get their knickers in a twist whenever Labour talks about immigration and why National are increasing NZ population something like 65,000 migrants per year, 60% settling in Auckland? We can’t ‘afford’ more than 750 refugees apparently but migrants who vote National, no problem.

  34. saveNZ 34
    18 March 2016 at 8:02 am

    For those still in denial about migration and high property prices – this is what the real estate agents are sending out in Auckland, (actual quote from a real estate agent below).

    ” I was reading a commentary by Tony Alexander the Chief Economist at the BNZ. Tony always seems to me to be very logical and speaks in such a way that it is easy to understand. As he sees it there is one significant key Market Driver to consider when looking at what the market may do this year and that is net Migration.

    Here is a summary of how he sees it:

    In 2015 NZ received a net population gain from migrant of 65,000 people.
    About 60% of the net migration choose to live in Auckland
    On average in Auckland there are 3 people per household
    If you use those figures for calculating the number of extra houses needed to handle population change. Auckland would need 13,000 additional homes in 2015 alone.
    In 2015 there were 9,200 consents issued for new houses to be built, however history shows that only 80% of those will result in actual homes
    The shortage is expected to grow in 2016
    It all comes down to supply & demand – there isn’t enough stock out there – and some say what’s there isn’t affordable.”

  35. Colonial Viper 35
    18 March 2016 at 11:18 am

    Winston Peters declares ethnic restaurants a front for immigration fraud

    A sign of the new team work between Labour and NZ First. Peters pointing the finger at Chinese business owners as immigration scam artists now, 2 days after Labour commented on the issue of immigration and ethnic cooks.

    I am soooo looking forward to a Labour/NZF coalition come 2017. /sarc

    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/376656/restaurants-fronts-immigration-fraud-peters

    • BM 35.1
      18 March 2016 at 11:26 am

      Don’t see any working as a team dynamic going on.

      That article reads more like a “Get the fuck off my turf”.

      • Colonial Viper 35.1.1
        18 March 2016 at 11:30 am

        Yeah there’s that tinge to it. Peters can now make proceed to make a big splash on the issue of Asian immigration (again) without fear that Labour will contradict him.

        • BM 35.1.1.1
          18 March 2016 at 11:46 am

          I reckon working with cats would be easier than trying to work with Winston Peters.

          • Das 35.1.1.1.1
            18 March 2016 at 1:29 pm

            Wouldn’t surprise me if Winston and NZF are polling very well and will register more strongly in upcoming Roy Morgans, etc.

            Meanwhile, Grant Robertson is sounding, speaking and coming across well, especially with his latest call for big multi-corps to be paying their fair share of taxes. Grant has coordinated this with his electorate colleague and Greens co-leader, making both Labour and Greens sound good. His latest press release comes right after Little’s OCR call which created a bit of noise but was otherwise somewhat lack lustre, as well as Little’s “ethnic chef” media episode. Grant is definitely a sleek MP, Finance spokesperson and a clear leader-in-waiting.

          • Halfcrown 35.1.1.1.2
            18 March 2016 at 3:17 pm

            “I reckon working with cats would be easier than trying to work with Winston Peters.”

            Ha I like it.

  36. Incognito 36
    19 March 2016 at 2:23 am

    The title of this post says it all: it is a false dichotomy to “Compare and contrast: Little vs Corbyn on immigration” yet is has already attracted 279 comments (+1).

    Such waste of mental and other energy for no gain at all.