David Cunliffe enters the leadership race

Written By: - Date published: 2:41 pm, August 26th, 2013 - 530 comments
Categories: david cunliffe, labour - Tags:

Cunliffe leadership announcement-2And then there were three.

David Cunliffe has announced that he is also entering the race to become Labour’s next leader.

His speech can be read here.  In it he sets out his vision for the country’s future.  Some highlights:

Like all of you, I am sick and tired of watching hope die in the eyes of our young.

I refuse to stand by and let these kids become part of the first generation to do worse than their parents in this country.

This has got to stop.

I want to make New Zealand a fairer place, by strengthening and supporting the most vulnerable members of our society and by giving every Kiwi kid a fair chance.

By strengthening not shrinking, support for our schools and hospitals.

By strengthening, not shrinking, the ability of every New Zealander to have a warm, comfortable home.

And, above all, by strengthening a high-value, high knowledge sustainable economy that will create the value that we can all share.

The time has now come for Labour to rise and join with our communities to build this strong and fair New Zealand, a New Zealand where our finest traditions of ‘a fair go’, our precious environment and a peaceful, principled society get a new beginning.

In short, I will be making sure that my children and your children are part of a New Zealand that is coming together not coming apart.

If you want to like his facebook page the link is here.  For the sake of completion Grant Robertson’s facebook page is here and Shane Jones’ facebook page is here.

Disclaimer – I am involved in David Cunliffe’s campaign and could be accused of being hopelessly biased …

530 comments on “David Cunliffe enters the leadership race ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. yeshe 1
    26 August 2013 at 2:45 pm

    Welcome to your hopeless bias !!! With you all the way … great talking points and will pay well on tv news .. love the ” coming together, not coming apart”. We have hope again !!!

    • Core_Labour_Voter (Tory troll) 1.1
      27 August 2013 at 12:01 am

      Already apologising to Robertson for cutting & pasting Robertson’s announcement….what a joke…come on guys get your act together.

      • Tom Gould 1.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 9:14 am

        Tend to like where he is heading, but that launch performance was cringe-worthy. He really does need to calm down and drop the histrionics, and figure out that talking to the room on TV is just dumb.

  2. beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 2
    26 August 2013 at 2:47 pm

    Really brilliant news!

    This is the first time for a long time that I feel a real chance that NZ peoples’ interests and democratic principles might prevail.

    Good stuff. I hope Mr Cunliffe wins the Labour leadership contest because I suspect that won’t be the only contest he will win in the coming year.

    • fender 2.1
      26 August 2013 at 2:51 pm

      +1

      Thank you D. Cunliffe, your country needs YOU.

      • Takere 2.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 8:22 am

        Cunliffes announcement yesterday was an absolute embarrassment! Tell him to pull out now! That kind of performance bumbling through like an amature will just scare voters away in droves! Something labour can’t afford. Jones & Robertson is the only choice now.

        • Tracey 2.1.1.1
          27 August 2013 at 8:32 am

          Yup, Jones announcement was much more polished and full of how he will change the country.

          He’s lucky NZ has grown up so much, haven’t seen a single discussion of his race in the way I have seen discussions about Robertson’s sexuality. He sure is lucky those who oppose him have more maturity than he. Example calling women “geldings”.

          Of all the people I have seen posting you seem to know the most about Jones. Can you outline for me what he stands for and what policies he supports for NZ? Specifics please.

        • fender 2.1.1.2
          27 August 2013 at 9:45 am

          Mr WaiTakere man: Your comments are an embarrassment, as is your Jones preference (tell him to pull out now, the toaster is plugged in ffs). It’s well known that Jones has been well educated but it seems all he learnt was how to talk like a pompous misogynistic prat. Labour need people who can draft good legislation, not good letters to penthouse forum.

        • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 2.1.1.3
          27 August 2013 at 11:47 am

          @ Takere,

          I thought Mr Cunliffe’s point about how the right of the political spectrum like to pull the ladder up behind them and how his side of the political spectrum don’t and won’t do this, was a very astute point made spontaneously and said with the level of passion that leads me to trust he has oodles of the right stuff to improve things for many NZers. This however, will mean that he has some very powerful enemies. Takere, are you working for one of them?

          Having observed Mr Cunliffe ripping shreds off Mr English’s b/s (on Q&A I think it was) prior to the last election, comments he’s made when interviewed for voxpops for the TVNZ news, and his parliamentary speeches I wouldn’t place his speech yesterday as one of his strongest, however from these prior observations I know he has the skills, political philosophy and level of passion to effectively assert major improvements for people, such as those involved in the Unions, who you say you are appealing to.

          I find your comments not very credible at all, especially as I see no evidence showing that you have spent any time at all to comment on Mr Shearer’s complete lack of ability to communicate confidently. However I do recall this conversation, where you did not back up your claims and I and others could find no evidence for them, which, again, leads me to question whose agenda you are working for.

          In summary, I could see that Mr Cunliffe’s skills, aims and likely effectiveness, could lead some very powerful interests being right peeved off at the thought of him gaining power. I seriously question your agenda.

          • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.3.1
            27 August 2013 at 12:00 pm

            We’re going to have to work hard to provide Cunliffe with the covering fire he deserves and needs to get important political work done on behalf of the nation.

            You’re dead right in saying that he has many powerful and moneyed enemies. I believe the evidence of the last 2 years amply demonstrates how dedicated certain interests are in opposing him.

            • Chooky 2.1.1.3.1.1
              27 August 2013 at 2:08 pm

              @ CV…re “powerful and moneyed enemies”…if anything they will be the most formidable NZ and NZers have ever faced….

              Yes Cunliffe is going to need watchers and minders…..and organisers and reinforcers….I keep thinking back to Rod Donald…..people are going to have to look out for him and make sure he doesn’t overdo it….eats properly and safely, gets enough rest …takes breaks, gets family time etc

              ….I guess that means formidable organisation around him ….and delegation and more delegation

              • Tracey …
                27 August 2013 at 2:13 pm

                he hasn’t won yet.

                people thinking this is a foregone conclusion are putting their health in danger.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  27 August 2013 at 2:19 pm

                  IMO the unsafe assumption is that Cunliffe’s enemies are going to wait a month before they start attacking him.

                  • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard …
                    27 August 2013 at 2:41 pm

                    @CV,

                    re: The enemies waiting a month before attacking

                    Lol of course they are not! Gee, to be a fly on the wall of the grubby little desperate minds and offices of those wielding power at present…the strategies they will be scrabbling to put into place…

                    It is truly time to stop listening to the absolute rubbish we are being fed. I sincerely hope that people have started working this out that this is all it is: absolute nonsense, made up by those who don’t give a damn about anyone apart from their own ill gained positions of privilege and keeping them.

                    It is time to say no and call a halt to the utter lack of good governance going on in the Western world. We really have nothing to lose that isn’t already well on the way to being lost already, as we speak.

                • Chooky …
                  27 August 2013 at 4:53 pm

                  @ Tracey …call me a Mother Hen…yes he first has to win….but I am .just being realistic and looking ahead to his probable win….look at Norm Kirk….often those closest to a political leader, or one in waiting, ignore the stresses because they are so focused on their hopes for what the politician can do for them and the country that they do not spare them because the politician concerned does not spare themselves….

                  ….the undermining will already have begun….the Right are very scared

        • weka 2.1.1.4
          27 August 2013 at 12:05 pm

          “Cunliffes announcement yesterday was an absolute embarrassment! Tell him to pull out now! That kind of performance bumbling through like an amature will just scare voters away in droves! Something labour can’t afford. Jones & Robertson is the only choice now.”

          Yeah, yeah, you said that already yesterday, change the record.

  3. PJ 3
    26 August 2013 at 2:52 pm

    Facebook link not working?

    [Oops now fixed – MS]

  4. Tiger Mountain 4
    26 August 2013 at 2:53 pm

    Keep the beard happening tho… gives the more intriguing rather than just another suit look.

  5. Colonial Viper 5
    26 August 2013 at 2:55 pm

    Simple question to ask yourself people – who can take the fight to John Key starting RIGHT NOW? Robertson or Cunliffe?

    Tiger Mountain +1 on the beard haha!

    • Ant 5.1
      26 August 2013 at 2:59 pm

      From the presser performance, Cunliffe has made his case unequivocally.

    • red rattler 5.2
      26 August 2013 at 4:14 pm

      NOW is what some of us have been saying for a long time on TS.
      Good to see that Cunliffe agrees.
      I made the point on another thread that Cunliffe should demand to speak in parliament on the TICS and not just on Fishing! Though it would not be past him to connect the two without holding up teaching aids.
      Failing that he can embarrass the ABC but putting up his vision on repealing all the spy crap in the speaking tour.

  6. gobsmacked 6
    26 August 2013 at 2:58 pm

    Question afterwards:

    “Will you raise taxes on the rich?”

    Cunliffe: “You bet”.

    (Shearer/Robertson: “Look, the bottom line is, hard-working New Zealanders, waffle dodge waffle dodge …”)

    • Zorr 6.1
      26 August 2013 at 2:59 pm

      Cunliffe – a man for all tax brackets… ^_^

    • Hannah 6.2
      26 August 2013 at 3:01 pm

      second question, whats the threshold? Rich is how much?

      • gobsmacked 6.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 3:06 pm

        All the follow-up questions on detail are valid, of course.

        But the point is, he knew his own answer, so he gave it immedately. No thinking it through five times and then stuffing it up. What a contrast with his predecessor.

        • Hannah 6.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 3:16 pm

          that’s fabulous, now I would like the detail.

          • gobsmacked 6.2.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 3:26 pm

            The detail is for an election campaign in 2014, not a party leadership launch in 2013.

            He can hardly release tax tables today, can he?

            • weka 6.2.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 3:40 pm

              +1

              • Colonial Viper …
                26 August 2013 at 3:43 pm

                The thing with Cunliffe…you just know that he has that detail, And that its going to be hard edged and exactly what this country needs after 6 years of sideways, directionless Tory coasting.

                • AmaKiwi …
                  26 August 2013 at 7:30 pm

                  Agree with the first sentence but not the second.

                  It has not been directionless at all. It has been the destruction of the state as a regulator of the private sector, a self-off and sell-out of state assets and the environment to big business, a relentless undermining of living standards, eroding of everyone’s privacy except those at the very top.

                  • SpaceMonkey …
                    27 August 2013 at 12:10 am

                    Agreed. National have been executing a well planned takedown of the NZ economy. It’s both brazen and masterful in it’s ability to be done right before the very eyes of all NZ. John Key is a technocrat working for Wall St and the US Fed. He’s happily taking on more debt to NZ because he will benefit from the future payday… when he’s back with his bankster buddies.

                    I liked David Cunliffe’s announcement a lot but I hope that he really understands what is happening to NZ and what NZ needs. Taking on John Key is taking on the international banksters at the same time… and they’ve got NZ by the throat. Whoever steps up will need some pretty big kahunas.

            • Sufi Safari 6.2.1.1.1.2
              26 August 2013 at 5:18 pm

              It’s no use playing populist to the activist base today and then expecting to be able to play populist to the whole electorate tomorrow. If he can’t give satisfactory answers to the follow-up questions he’s just delivered a stick for National to beat him with if he wins the leadership.
              If he’s got a great strategy to short-circiut the dominant narrative on taxation he’d better be ready to roll it out asap, because “You bet!” is the kind of money line that could win him the leadership and lose him the election.

              • Foreign Waka …
                26 August 2013 at 7:12 pm

                Not really. This was a very clever answer. If Mr Key would campaign that Labour is a party to raise the taxes, well…yes, already mentioned, no LIES. Secondly, there needs to be BALANCE in the way people are being treated, valued and participate as part of a nation. To have 2% holding an extraordinary amount of wealth is absurd if not immoral.

                • AmaKiwi …
                  26 August 2013 at 7:33 pm

                  “To have 2% holding an extraordinary amount of wealth is absurd if not immoral”

                  and dangerous.

                  This is how violent revolutions begin.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    26 August 2013 at 7:42 pm

                    The US intelligence and security apparatus know that all too well, and have planned and practiced for it.

                  • Richard McGrath …
                    26 August 2013 at 10:45 pm

                    Yep, whatever happens we musn’t let people work hard and become wealthier.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      27 August 2013 at 1:46 am

                      Hard work is no longer the way to wealth.

                      Appropriating state assets for a song, financial fraud, property price speculation, socialising your losses on to the community, cronyism, and central bank market manipulation are the ways to wealth.

                      Where have you been hiding since the GFC? Under a rock?

                    • Tracey …
                      27 August 2013 at 12:29 pm

                      actually what we are doing is letting people work harder and not become wealthier or even get paid for the extra work.

                  • SpaceMonkey …
                    27 August 2013 at 12:27 am

                    Hence the need for the GCSB and TICS legislation. The spooks are saving every electronic transaction and communication that we make. If that revolution comes, there will be plenty of material to choose from and to hang the revolutionaries with.

              • Shaz …
                26 August 2013 at 8:43 pm

                Hang on. Three days ago the government had not costed the partial payment of shares for an actual policy of selling down a power company. Progressive politicians need the support of civil society – Standard commenters perhaps – to develop out the argument on issues like this.

                It goes:
                one side is being asked an unanswerable question and the other side let off despite not having a clue. As for additional taxes the easy answer I suspect is that we start by getting the $1bn back that was given away to the rich in 2010.

          • Jackal 6.2.1.1.2
            26 August 2013 at 6:30 pm

            I really don’t understand this wanting policy details at a press conference to announce being a candidate for Labour’s leadership? Cunliffe did exactly what was required…short, sharp and catchy. If there was too much detail, people would just tune out and switch off.

            • The Fan Club 6.2.1.1.2.1
              26 August 2013 at 7:01 pm

              It’s pretty suspicious to say you’d raise taxes and then dodge any follow up questions. Nobody was forcing him to take a position on taxes. He wanted the lefty cred without the tough choices, and that’s sleazy.

              IrishBill: I’m keeping an eye on you. Start smearing anyone and you’re banned.

              • gobsmacked …
                26 August 2013 at 7:22 pm

                What did he dodge? You have a transcript or audio link?

                He was asked if he would raise taxes on the wealthy. Labour’s CGT policy means the answer is “Yes”. So he said it. There is no current policy on income tax, AFAIK.

                • The Fan Club …
                  26 August 2013 at 7:33 pm

                  So he didn’t say anything different to current policy? That’s the big shift from Shearer, repeating the same policy?

                  He didn’t answer the questions on income tax.

                  • karol …
                    26 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

                    None of the candidates are going to announce major new party policy in this contest. The most they can do is show their values and priorities, and their ability to articulate and lead the caucus. It’s as much about how they do it, as what they say.

                    • The Fan Club …
                      26 August 2013 at 7:49 pm

                      Yeah yeah. Cunliffe’s throwing out the fancy words to the base, and then he’s going to cut and run to the centre as soon as this is over. If you can’t get him to commit to anything now, when he’s deperate for votes, you never will.

                  • gobsmacked …
                    26 August 2013 at 7:46 pm

                    Don’t play disingenuous, Fan Club. You’re not stupid.

                    A candidate launching a leadership campaign doesn’t rewrite policy on the hoof. There’s a proper process, as you know.

                    Labour’s problem under Shearer was not the policy development, but the communication thereof. Shearer had little role in the former, but was largely responsible for the latter.

                    The “big shift” is that voters are finally hearing the policy, instead of the incoherent babble that drowned it.

                    • The Fan Club …
                      26 August 2013 at 8:33 pm

                      Personally I thought our big failure was to articulate big picture left policy, but if you think the policy was OK but we just needed better PR, OK.

                    • lurgee …
                      26 August 2013 at 8:48 pm

                      A candidate launching a leadership campaign doesn’t rewrite policy on the hoof. There’s a proper process, as you know.

                      Odd, people complained about Robertson not doing that at his launch, and how Robertson and Jones weren’t challenged on policy on Nine to Noon. Bit of a double standard, or should I say Standard?

                    • the sprout …
                      26 August 2013 at 8:57 pm

                      Fan Club, have you not heard?
                      Shearer is gone. Get over it.

      • Colonial Viper 6.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 3:16 pm

        Hannah – tax money flows back into society and into every corner of the community. A brilliant opportunity for SMEs and entrepreneurs to lap it up!

        Don’t be afraid to be taxed – your voice will be heard. No taxation, no representation!

        • McFlock 6.2.2.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:02 pm

          No taxation, no representation!

          um – doesn’t that mean that net tax recipients will be disenfranchised? 😈

      • Core_Labour_Voter (Tory troll) 6.2.3
        27 August 2013 at 12:04 am

        Rich is 60,000 and above as per Helen Clark’s definition. So let us increase the tax over 60K.

        [lprent: Interesting reading your previous comments and handles back to 2012. I have relabeled your handles to reflect your true nature. Please make sure that it remains part of your handle in future comments. ]

        • lprent 6.2.3.1
          27 August 2013 at 1:00 am

          I believe that was a policy made in 1998 and campaigned on for the 1999 election. The targeted capture was for the top 5% income earners in the country to pay an additional 6% taxation on dollars earned over $60k

          So how much inflation has gone on since then? What would $60k in 2000 when the policy took effect be in present days terms? $75-80k? (Someone with a plugin should try the inflation calculator for this bozo http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/monetary_policy/inflation_calculator/ ). Updated: 60000 in q1 2000 = 83724.90 in q2 2013 using general CPI.

          So how many taxpayers had incomes about $60k in in 2000 compared to now? Between 2000 and mid 2007 the number of people subject to the 39% tax rate rose from 5% to 14%. These days even with the GFC, I’d expect that it would be in the order of 25%.

          The problem with the tax rate wasn’t that it was there, it was that it wasn’t moved as the inflation rate and general affluence of the country increased. This is a problem known as fiscal drag. Governments are reluctant to move tax rates as fast as inflation for several reason. Partially it is because they get increased tax takes. But often it is simply taht it is an enormous expense for both government and businesses to do so.

          The point I am making is that you are basically a fool living on an out of date slogan. And that is a problem that is still with us. Even with the minimal rates of inflation and wage increases, you’re slowly being dragged into paying more income tax, not to mention GST. Are you going to condemn this current government for the last 5 years of fiscal drag on everyone earning less than ~$40k as well as the imposition of a 33% increase in GST? What is that? A poor tax?

          BTW: Basically you read like just another idiotic an unthinking troll more concerned over slogans than a “core labour voter”.

        • the pigman 6.2.3.2
          27 August 2013 at 1:57 am

          At risk of being seen to comment on moderation policy, I like your new moniker Core_Labour_Voter, and I hope people do take the time to read your recent contributions to remind themselves of all of the transparent pieces of shit like you that spend your time here attempting to mislead.

    • Ron 6.3
      26 August 2013 at 3:10 pm

      Dam. John key was just going to make a donation to your campaign. Guess he wont now!

    • Polish Pride 6.4
      26 August 2013 at 4:09 pm

      oh for someone in politics to have vision beyond simply taking from one group to give to another be they from politics of the Left or the Right. Now that would be grand!

    • Ennui 6.5
      26 August 2013 at 4:11 pm

      I was wondering where that should be the other day, as I am in the top bracket. It occurred to me that the head of Telecom was earning around $3mlln, so about $60K per week. Then I heard a power company CEO was on similar obscene wages…and I thought about the bill I got from them. I divided the customer base into his wages and figured I was paying him and the fat cat execs in his company the equivalent of atleast 15% of my bill. That is the tax I pay to the rich. If they don’t want my approval for Cunliffe to tax them a high rate they should try earning a realistic wages.

      • Colonial Viper 6.5.1
        26 August 2013 at 6:33 pm

        89% tax rate kicks in at 10x the median wage = $41,000 pa

        • McFlock 6.5.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 6:44 pm

          Why 89, not 90?

          My figuring is to put together a wishlist of health, education, research, economic (gst elimination), and welfare items, see what the cost is, and see what the gap is after CGT and other tax ideas.

          Set higher tax thresholds at round percentile decimals of income, and work on a sort of asymptotic tax gradation where 100% is zero. See how much of a gap there is then, and see if we can afford more after the economy improves as a result of newly-funded policy.

          • Colonial Viper 6.5.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 7:45 pm

            89% is a historical figure used in the US income tax code pre-1970. There was also a 91% rate.

    • QoT 6.6
      26 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

      God, Corin Dann looked so pissy when he was asking his questions. I think he thinks he’s hard-hitting and insightful, but his questions just sounded like they’d been lifted from Kiwiblog comments.

    • Saarbo 6.7
      26 August 2013 at 7:56 pm

      Yes, very refreshing response after Shearer and Shearer MKII.

  7. billbrowne 7
    26 August 2013 at 2:58 pm

    The weight is light in this statement too

    Yoda was in A New Hope wasn’t he?

  8. just saying 8
    26 August 2013 at 3:01 pm

    Mickey, I reckon the stale Labour cliches such as “hard-working mums and dads” have been so overused as to inspire nothing but cynicism. I’d like to see Cunliffe being more”real” – talking like a person rather than a political machine. Please pass this on.

    He’d seem much more sincere if he dropped the crap. We’ve been hearing this kind of uninspiring shit from Labour for years now. It’s a turn-off. (And doesn’t work as a dog-whistle anyway).

    • karol 8.1
      26 August 2013 at 4:11 pm

      Cunliffe also gave some examples, like the mother who can’t afford to buy milk for her baby, and the hard working taxi driver who works long hours for meagre pay.

    • geoff 8.2
      26 August 2013 at 4:15 pm

      Yeah agreed. It’s obviously not just Cunliffe but most of the politicians spewing out this dross and it’s as if they don’t realise that everytime those words are heard, half the audience is thinking ‘tosser’

      • North 8.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 5:27 pm

        Cliche maybe but not near the order of the cynical lie – “Mum and Dad investors”. What an utter crock !

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 8.3
      26 August 2013 at 8:35 pm

      But Cunliffe has knows the meaning of poverty, he’s made sacrifices just like the rest of the workers. Hell, his family was so stressed by his wife’s choice to breastfeed her child that the only thing he could do was to buy a house in Herne Bay so she didn’t have to travel so far.

      Median house price in Herne Bay: $2 million.

      Damn, that guy has done it tough.

      • Jim Nald 8.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 8:55 pm

        As a former resident of Freemans Bay, I’d be happy to have David and Karen, their two children, and their HB home, as an aspirational model.

      • Core_Labour_Voter (Tory troll) 8.3.2
        27 August 2013 at 12:07 am

        My heart bleeds when I read about his sacrifice…

      • Colonial Viper 8.3.3
        27 August 2013 at 1:03 am

        Geeez you righties, when did you guys suddenly start pushing the politics of envy?

        Tall poppy syndrome is such an ugly thing for you aspirashunal types to contract.

        • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 8.3.3.1
          27 August 2013 at 12:24 pm

          I don’t begrudge the guy for having a multimillion-dollar house in Herne Bay. But for him to say “I had to buy a house in Herne Bay to cut down my wife’s commuting time” is a bit of a “let them eat cake” moment.

  9. Steve Wrathall 9
    26 August 2013 at 3:07 pm

    “By strengthening, not shrinking, the ability of every New Zealander to have a warm, comfortable home.”
    So he’s going to free up the supply of land? Reform the RMA so that you don’t have to spend 5 figures to add a room? Dump the ETS and its extra costs on energy?

    Nup, thought not.

    • Te Reo Putake 9.1
      26 August 2013 at 3:13 pm

      Nah, he’s probably going to do sensible stuff instead, Steve.

    • bad12 9.2
      26 August 2013 at 3:13 pm

      Hopefully SW, David Cunliffe is going to tax the hell out of you and build a whole pile of State Houses so the ‘working poor’ have decent houses for them and their kids which allows them to pay the rent and put decent food on the table ‘more’ than once a day…

      • Steve Wrathall 9.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 4:29 pm

        Under such a scenario, why would these “poor” bother to keep on “working”?

        • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:36 pm

          what work?

        • framu 9.2.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 4:57 pm

          1) they would be better off
          2) taxes never stopped anyone from trying to earn more

        • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 9.2.1.3
          26 August 2013 at 5:00 pm

          @ Steve Wrathall,

          Why would people keep working?

          “[to] have decent houses for them and their kids which allows them to pay the rent and put decent food on the table ‘more’ than once a day…”

          That is a very strange question you pose to Bad12’s comment; which has the answer contained in it. I suggest you read comments before responding to them in future.

        • bad12 9.2.1.4
          26 August 2013 at 5:30 pm

          SW, i am not about to waste my time answering what is essence the quibble of an idiot…

        • Murray Olsen 9.2.1.5
          26 August 2013 at 7:40 pm

          We’ll find out why they start working when the state houses start to be built, SW. At the moment, they’re not working because the jobs aren’t there, so your question makes no sense at all.

        • QoT 9.2.1.6
          26 August 2013 at 7:44 pm

          And yet again we see that the Right believe all people are basically lazy and have to be bullied into having rewarding careers which allow them to use their talents and contribute to their communities.

          • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.6.1
            26 August 2013 at 7:50 pm

            Except for CEOs of course, who deserve a few thousand dollars a day to “incentivise” on the job performance.

          • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard 9.2.1.6.2
            26 August 2013 at 8:05 pm

            @QOT,

            True, I guess confusion is created because people do need to be bullied into agreeing to working for shit wages and conditions. And that seems to be the general aim of right whingers [sic]

            • QoT 9.2.1.6.2.1
              26 August 2013 at 9:26 pm

              Ah, of course! Refusing to pick fruit for shitty, insecure seasonal pay is a sure sign of laziness and moral degeneration.

              • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard …
                26 August 2013 at 9:37 pm

                ….and forcing others to do your dirty work for you and not paying them fairly…. isn’t……

                • QoT …
                  26 August 2013 at 10:52 pm

                  The rich have money, ergo they are hard workers and deserve tax cuts. Didn’t you get the memo?

                  • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard …
                    26 August 2013 at 11:35 pm

                    Must have missed that one.
                    (Perhaps the GCSB forgot to send it on to me after intercepting it.)

                    Monopoly on money therefore must have the monopoly on hardwork…yeah…right..of course. How silly of me to have thought otherwise…

      • Polish Pride 9.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 4:34 pm

        And keep us locked into the right vs left paradigm so that we can simply bounce backwards and forwards from National to Labour/Greens every 6 to 9 years. Just too awesome, Can’t wait!!

        Is that seriously the best you can do? – take from one group and give to another?
        You do realize that this is exactly what National do also. Take from one group and give to another.

        Whilst we continue to stick with this, very little that actually needs to change will change.
        It is possible to have a system that does not take from one group to give to another and still have everyones needs and wants catered for.

        I am sure guys like yourself get pissed off at the Nats handing out corporate welfare.. but you are happy doing exactly the same thing and giving it to those you think need it. And I’m sure some do. But the next time there’s a corporate welfare handout and your pissed off about it, just remember the same thing happens on the left. Its just a different group receiving the money.

        • framu 9.2.2.1
          26 August 2013 at 5:03 pm

          i get you point PP – plus i feel your frustration. Left/right is really just a big divide and conquer exercise these days as far as our interactions with power go

          just a couple of things meant more as points of discussion

          1) are corporate welfare and the welfare state that comparable on a $ basis?
          2) society costs quite a bit – sharing the costs seems to be the most efficient method
          3) apart from ideas like universal benefit (right term?) i cant think of any other answers – would love to hear some from, well anyone, that could work

          • Polish Pride 9.2.2.1.1
            27 August 2013 at 12:55 pm

            1) are corporate welfare and the welfare state that comparable on a $ basis?
            2) society costs quite a bit – sharing the costs seems to be the most efficient method
            3) apart from ideas like universal benefit (right term?) i cant think of any other answers – would love to hear some from, well anyone, that could work

            1) I’m not sure – On a straight dollar basis I think policies of the left would cost more….. Unfortunately even if that were the case it is not that simple. Right wing ideology cannot just be looked at from what money political parties give out to their pet groups.
            Right wing policies of removing union power and watering down Labour laws are also a form of wealth redistribution. Even immigration policy plays an important part in driving down wages (more people often prepared to work for less = greater competition for the jobs that are available). This is also against a backdrop of Companies ‘restructuring’ offshoring and automating all of which has the result of creating more competition in the job market which will overtime combined with everything else result in lower wages.

            2) Society does cost quite a bit (well the really important things such as houses and anything to do with infrastructure) . The question is, should it. After all everyone has the same basic needs and everyone although not the same has wants. If your needs and wants are met then in theory you should be happy. If the guy next door has more wants than you and more resources are consumed to meet his wants then provided the resources are available, this fact shouldn’t affect your level of happiness.
            Probably didn’t quite address the question as you would have liked but the point is yes things are expensive. The problem is that we are competing in a global economy now and money which was originally introduced as a mechanism for exchange, has well and truly become a barrier for many people being able to obtain needs and wants under the current system. At the same time we enable banks to generate record profits after creating money out of nothing through fractional reserve banking. The problem is that the system does not work for those that it should. Those that it does work for is at the expense of others and that just isn’t a good system.
            I get your point with sharing costs. The problem and the important point is that in the current political system, there’s as many people on the left who share your view as there are on the right who don’t and they all have a vote. That is the problem and why the solution no matter how noble will not be found within the current system.

            3) Resource Based Economy – satisfies the wants and needs of everyone, resources permitting of course. Take away planned obsolescence and designing products as cheaply as possible and we would have an abundance of resources.

        • North 9.2.2.2
          26 August 2013 at 5:33 pm

          Well clearly it’s not the same. Giving to meet dire need is in no way like giving to those not in dire need. You can complicate it as much as you like but it doesn’t kill the clear difference.

          • Polish Pride 9.2.2.2.1
            27 August 2013 at 1:00 pm

            Unfortunately this doesn’t matter.
            All that matters is that there are the same amount of people that think right wing policies of giving money to corporates will create jobs.
            They like you also each have one vote. You will have your day in the sun where Labour Greens will get into power for 6 -9 years before the pendulum swings back again and National changes things to fit the ideology of the right.
            The question is how long do you want to stick with the right vs left paradigm before you realize it doesn’t have the ability to deliver what you want except temporarily?

        • bad12 9.2.2.3
          26 August 2013 at 5:41 pm

          LOLZ, Polish Pride, if employers paid their employees a decent wage ala the middle class income i suspect by your rant that you have in your pay packet every week i would have no need to be calling for the State to be building more State Housing,

          Yes you and Peter Dunne have no time for ‘the left/right paradigm’ despite the fact of it’s continual existence, the right wing of that paradigm being the one that keeps working New Zealanders in need of State redistribution with their abysmal wages for the lower paid working class…

          • Polish Pride 9.2.2.3.1
            27 August 2013 at 1:06 pm

            No Bad
            If we had a system that was designed around making people happy and ensuring that peoples needs and wants are met, Well then you wouldn’t need to call on the State to build more state housing.
            As for what I make I can pretty much guarantee that right now it will be less than you 🙂

            Peter Dunne is part of the Left vs Right paradigm. Whether he thinks he is or not is irrelevant. Our entire political system is the Left vs Right paradigm in action every single day.

        • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 9.2.2.4
          26 August 2013 at 5:42 pm

          @Polish Pride,

          Your comment appear to miss the fact that by and large those who amass wealth are benefitting from the system we have, and those who are losing out are experiencing disadvantage from the system we have.

          There is a clear difference between taking from those that are advantaged by the system we have and giving to those that are disadvantaged by the system we have, than vice versa; giving further advantages to those that are already advantaged at the expense of those that are already disadvantaged.

          Your comment doesn’t appear to acknowledge this inequity.

          • Polish Pride 9.2.2.4.1
            27 August 2013 at 1:10 pm

            Nope not missed at all. That is exactly the case

            What is being missed is that the solutions you seek will unfortunately never be found within the current political system …Yes they maybe enacted for 6 -9 years but will simply be undone when the party with a more Right wing ideology gets back into power.

            The things you all want are indeed possible, you are just looking in the wrong place to have them delivered. Unfortunately that I what is being missed.

        • Tangee 9.2.2.5
          26 August 2013 at 6:20 pm

          Its the more needy that is getting it now rather than the rich.

        • quinnjin 9.2.2.6
          27 August 2013 at 12:45 am

          Same old rhetoric.

          A few counter arguments, Taking from the poor and middle class and giving to corporations is giving to those who don’t need it, it is in effect giving to wealthy shareholders, by and large only ten percent of the population, and the CEO’s, the vast majority of the people ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK, i.e. front line staff, have seen their wages fall in real terms over the course of 40 years of neo liberal emporeres new clothes economics. They aren’t getting what their labours actually worth, and in fact the same old big corporates line up the contracts, which they merely administrate, take all the meat off, and then pass on to sub contractors, this happens over and over again until the guy at the bottom, doing the actual work, finds out he’s not actually making any money, no matter how many extra hours and how efficiently he manages to cut every available corner while still doing reasonable work.
          Taking a bit extra from those with more than they need, and who benefit the most from public infrastructure, i.e, healthy, educated staff, roads, communications, power and everything else, most of which was more or less paid for by our grandparents and much then sold to piratical private monopolies who then proceeded to price gouge us all…
          Anyway to cut it short, as any 1st year economics student could tell you, or anyone with half a brain that matter, wealth tends to accumlate, and it tends to monopolise.
          Taxing corporates and the wealthiest and redistributing via services is one small way of keeping the economic wheels turning, as well as being inherently fair for the reasons just described.
          The neo liberals have had more than enough sway over the last decades of NZ economic theory, here and through out the world, what has it given us? Jobs shipped off to slave economies and factories that would be illegal in any civilised western democracy, entire nations living on credit, fiat currency/ fractional reserve fake debt based money pumped into assett bubbles, and bugger all money in productive business.
          In short, deregulating labour and the finacial sector and the banks, cutting back services and tax cuts for the rich has had more than enough time to work. It hasn’t.
          To put it even shorter, the GFC is the final straw. the experiment failed, and there is no trickle down effect.
          There never was, just propaganda from the wealthy ‘elites’ who have monopolised the political discourse along with everything else and run things in their own favour, to the detriment of the environment and the vast majority of ordinary people. The median most common wage in NZ is around 40,000 dollars. Do you get that? That is most people.
          taking from most people and giving to those at the top, IS NOT COMPARABLE to the reverse, in any meaningful sense. Actually, it is the country and everyone in it, and the DEMAND that creates the work, and the wealthiest that are always able to position themselves, like the fat fish in the pond, to profit from it.
          They didn’t create the demand or the work. Or the infrastucture that allows country to function, ordinary kiwis did. And without them there is no wealth.
          Go live on a dessert island and see how far your wealth or financial wizardry gets you.
          No it’s time for NZ ers to take their country back from these deluded charlatans.
          Let them leave in their droves, people that really appreciate what NZ has to offer and want to live in a safe productive country with well educated healthy people and beautiful pristine environment. If they want to make millions a day, let them live in LA and bullets.
          If you want neo liberalism, go live in the congo and watch 12 year olds being sent down mines at gunpoint. That’s the unregulated free market for you.
          Hell on earth. Now snap out of it.

        • quinnjin 9.2.2.7
          27 August 2013 at 1:36 am

          @ Polish Pride

          Same old rhetoric.
          A few counter arguments,

          -Taking from the poor and middle class and giving to corporations is giving to those who don’t need it, it is in effect giving to wealthy shareholders, by and large only ten percent of the population, and the CEO’s, the vast majority of the people ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK, i.e. front line staff, have seen their wages fall in real terms over the course of 40 years of neo liberal emperors’ new clothes economics. They aren’t getting what their labour’s actually worth, and in fact the same old big corporates line up for the contracts, which they merely administrate, take all the meat out of, and then pass on to sub contractors, this happens over and over again until the guy at the bottom, doing the actual work, finds out he’s not actually making any money, no matter how many extra hours and how efficiently he manages to cut every available corner while still doing reasonable work.
          Taking a bit extra from those with more than they need, and who benefit the most from public infrastructure, i.e, healthy, educated staff, roads, communications, power and everything else, most of which was more or less paid for by our grandparents and much then sold to piratical private monopolies who then proceeded to price gouge us all, is not the same as raising GST, cutting education and health, and giving tax cuts to the rich.
          Anyway to cut it short, as any 1st year economics student could tell you, or anyone with half a brain that matter, wealth tends to accumulate, and it tends to monopolise.
          Taxing corporates and the wealthiest and redistributing via services is one small way of keeping the economic wheels turning, as well as being inherently fair for the reasons just described.
          The neo liberals have had more than enough sway over the last decades of NZ economic theory, here and through out the world, what has it given us? Jobs shipped off to slave economies and factories that would be illegal in any civilised western democracy, entire nations living on credit, fiat currency/ fractional reserve fake debt based money pumped into asset bubbles, and bugger all money in productive business.
          In short, deregulating labour and the financial sector and the banks, cutting back services and tax cuts for the rich has had more than enough time to work. It hasn’t.
          To put it even shorter, the GFC was the final straw, the experiment failed, and there is no trickle down effect.
          There never was, just propaganda from the wealthy ‘elites’ who have monopolised the political discourse along with everything else and run things in their own favour, to the detriment of the environment and the vast majority of ordinary people. The median, ie most common wage, in NZ is around 40,000 dollars. Do you get that? That is most people.
          Taking from most people and giving to those at the top, IS NOT COMPARABLE to the reverse, in any meaningful sense. Actually, it is the country and everyone in it, and the DEMAND that creates the work, and the wealthiest that are always able to position themselves, like the fat fish in the pond, to profit from it.
          They didn’t create the demand or the work. Or the infrastructure that allows the country to function, ordinary kiwis did. And without them there is no wealth.
          Go live on a dessert island and see how far your wealth or financial wizardry gets you.
          No it’s time for NZ ers to take their country back from these deluded charlatans.
          Let them leave in their droves, people that really appreciate what NZ has to offer and want to live in a safe productive country with well educated healthy people and beautiful pristine environment will take a bit of a cut for the privilege. If they want to make millions a day, let them live in LA and dodge bullets.
          This isn’t even to begin talking about labour relations and fair wages, when ordinary people have more money to spend, they spend it. It doesn’t languish in one off luxury assets, tax havens and trust accounts, or get pumped into housing bubbles…
          As for your ‘entrepreneurs’, the ones who aren’t just privileged little shits with daddies money will make a cut of this new cash flow in the economy. Them and one of the (count them) 2 supermarket chains in this country, the one phone lines company and it’s investors ( chorus ) and the half privately owned, and fully publicly paid for, power companies, that all those greedy national voters have been lining up to fill your already fat pockets from. (Mum and dad investors my arse,)
          I’m sure all those starving landlords out there, who own the houses most young kiwis will never be able to afford under current conditions, like the five that own the entire suburb I live in, will get their cut of the extra the odd local café or restaurant get’s as well, when people can afford a few luxuries, especially when they bump up the rent, as they always do when they see some hard working, REAL entrepreneur actually doing well out of their hard work.
          Don’t worry, a little extra in the average man’s pocket will usually end up in someone else’s.
          If you want neo liberalism, go live in the congo and watch 12 year olds being sent down mines at gunpoint. That’s the unregulated free market for you.
          Hell on earth. Now snap out of it. Neo liberalism has had it’s day and it’s a big fat failure.
          I don’t buy the left right punch and judy show either, it’s really just about common sense, what’s best for the country and the economy, the environment and ordinary kiwis.
          I’m not advocating command and control economic micromanagement, I’m talking making sure there is a level playing field, everybody get’s a fair go, that those who need it get help, and that we all get a fair share of the wealth created from the countries resources, the infrastructure our ancestors worked and paid for, and from a country that couldn’t function with out us all playing our part.
          For the record, psychological health is best in countries with the least income disparity.
          I’m talking about evidence and facts and common sense. Not reconstituted, tired old drivel endlessly recycled by corporate sponsored think tanks, personality cults, and their free market evangelist converts.

          • quinnjin 9.2.2.7.1
            27 August 2013 at 2:02 am

            Sorry about the overly expansive rant and the double post…. the 2nd is the one I wanted… maybe a bit OTT… but I always find these reductionist arguments and slogans, back and white thinking… and tired old soap boxes make my blood boil… as one of the “young whose hope …[has very nearly died out all together in the last 6 years of national party crapolla]

            • weka 9.2.2.7.1.1
              27 August 2013 at 2:06 am

              Nothing like a good rant. Paragraph or line spacing would help next time 🙂

            • LynWiper 9.2.2.7.1.2
              27 August 2013 at 7:59 am

              Thoroughly enjoyed reading your ‘rant’ quinnjin, especially as I identify so much with it. Sometimes I feel so overwhelmed by NZ’s current political situation I could almost give up. But then I come to The Standard and see the battlers are still out there. So keep up the great job LPrent and Co as this forum with its postings and commenters is very sustaining and provides a cathartic outlet for comments, as above. With Labour now entering its interesting new leadership model let’s hope Labour voters voices will finally be heard.

            • Polish Pride 9.2.2.7.1.3
              27 August 2013 at 12:18 pm

              Good now listen up and listen good :).

              It is truly great to see you have actually sat down and thought a lot about the true nature of the problem/s we as a society face.
              Everything you put forward is correct except the solution to the problem.
              Your solution (to over simplify it) is to implement left wing policies.
              The problem is we live in a country that has a political spectrum made up of hard left voters, hard right voters and everything in between.
              Lets say you get what you want. Lets say Labour and the Greens get in and implement every single policy you want. That’s great isn’t it!?!
              Well for a period of time yes until enough people having their earnings taken from them and given to others have the numbers to Vote Labour out and National back in. At which time of course they will enact policies that move us more to the right. They will water down labour laws, they will seek to create an environment more conducive to doing business. Over time they will seek to undo much of what you wanted done.
              That is at least the theory.
              The reality is that both sides want to capture the voter sitting in the centre as this is where elections are won and lost. For the same reasons they do not want to piss off the centre vote when they get into power for if they do, they will likely find themselves in opposition again at the next election.
              The result is that there’s at best some tinkering with policy that shifts things a little to the left or a little to the right, but nothing that really fixes the problems that we face and certainly not without creating new problems.
              A good example of this is Beneficiaries and third generation beneficiaries with a mentality that the state will pay. Another is those on the DPB that when their children get to the age where they might need to come off the benefit, whatever contraceptive they are on fails and they find themselves pregnant again. Both scenarios might sound harsh and uncaring but they happen (and there is a point to all this so bear with me).

              The point is is that even if Labour and the Greens get in and make the changes you want, well you only need to look at history to see that National will be back in 6 to 9 years so we can repeat much of what we have experienced in the last 5 years. Extrapolate it out over the next hundred years….. where are we? Have the problems been fixed? I doubt it.
              Are things worse or better? My pick is that they are worse, far worse.

              The real question is what are you going to do about it!?!
              The reason I said listen up and listen good is because of the following:
              -The system we have was built by men.
              -Everyone, be it Bill Gates or Blanket Man has the same 24 hours in the day. The only difference is what they do with that 24 hours.
              Your age group (I am taking a punt here because you said you are one of the disaffected youth) has more people in it than the Baby Boomer generation. If your age group gets politically motivated and thinks for themselves (which you have already shown you can do and do very well) You more than any other age group can change the world.
              Many in your age group DON’T buy into the rhetoric that the System is the System and that’s just the way it is.

              This is great because to get the things that you want to see happening. It will never happen with the current system.
              Some of the reasons for this are:
              The Left vs Right political paradigm and their opposing methodologies that are both based on wealth redistribution. (An earlier poster eluded to – yeah but which side takes more! This is a moot point. The point is that those having it taken from them will not want it taken from them and will likely vote for representation that will change things to take less from them. Hence continuously bouncing from left to right like a painfully slow game of tennis that no one ever wins except those at the very top of the food chain – the 1% if you like).
              The profit motive – Companies, businesses etc etc. will ALWAYS look to increase profit. One of the biggest expenses is staff wages. Hence they will always look to support policy and lobby for watering down of labour laws. They will look to offshore operations to places where the cost of labour is cheaper. They will always look for opportunities to consolidate and automate. They will always be helped to do this by voting for the Right.

              Planned Obsolescence: Closely intertwined with the profit motive but leads to massive waste of resources.

              You mentioned first year economics students… pull up a copy of Maslows Hierarchy of Needs. This is both the key and the path to the solution to all of the problems we face.
              Maslow was correct on everything in his ‘hierarchy’ with the exception of one item.
              Employment.
              People only need to be employed under the constraints, boundaries, rules of the current System.
              Under a game with different rules however people do not have to work and earn money in order to be happy.
              So as part of changing the system people need to understand that Maximum Employment is not the end result we are after. You will note that both sides of the political spectrum
              ( L & R) will say that their policies or their idealogy has the answer to maximum employment. (okay they might not say it exactly like that but you get the picture)

              So what are we after – Well everything else on Maslows Hierarchy.
              Surely ‘Happiness’ is the goal that we are all after in life. Surely that is what we are working for. Surely this is even why you want policies designed to redistribute wealth so that those living in poverty can have their lives improved a little bit and can be happier with their life.
              Now ask yourself the question. Does the system we currently have provide this for everyone?
              Does the system we have provide this for the majority even?
              The quite it simply doesn’t.
              So why are you looking for the answers you want from within a system that does not and simply cannot provide them.

              You said

              “I’m talking making sure there is a level playing field, everybody get’s a fair go, that those who need it get help, and that we all get a fair share of the wealth created from the countries resources, the infrastructure our ancestors worked and paid for, and from a country that couldn’t function with out us all playing our part.”

              lets change it a little bit and see if you are still happy with the statement, because after all I’m picking it was written within the bounds of the current system….

              How about:
              “I’m talking making sure there is a level playing field, everybody get’s a fair go, that those who need it get help, and that we all get a fair share of the countries resources, the infrastructure, and from a country that couldn’t function with out us all playing our part.”

              We are technologically advanced enough to do away with over half the jobs currently being performed in society today.
              Take away the profit motive and transition to a system that is built around Maslows
              Hierarchy, without employment, i.e. a system designed around what people need to be happy.
              There is only one system that conceptually will do this. That system is the Resource Based Economy.
              Or you can continue to do what we are doing now for another 100 years and I’m picking you won’t get anymore than 10% of what you’d really like to see.

              Your generation has the ability to change the world. I sincerely hope you do for all our sakes.

          • Tracey 9.2.2.7.2
            27 August 2013 at 8:10 am

            Great stuff. Plus1

            here’s the fundamental problem and one reason Shearer couldn’t “make it”. The media want 30 second sound bites. They don’t think we can think for ourselves.

            They don’t hink long term.

            Accordingly we are not well served by them.

            The BEST journalism in this country, imo, is the journalism which runs in “series”… one topic traversed over several weeks or days.

            I wanted Shearer to be leader and I wanted him to succeed. I am much older than you but I haven’t lost that part of me that believes that the virtues Shearer brings are what will actually begin top down change.

            But he was bullied, vilified and worn down. Possibly from inside as well as out.

            sigh

            We say we don’t trust politicians but we don’t support those ones we do.

            I don’t know what the answer is. My gut tells me the current Labour bunch will simply give us a similar version of national.

            That’s why I lean strongly toward the Greens. Some say wasted vote but I say it enables me to send my message about the type of people and country I want to live in. I will die with hope in my heart.

          • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 9.2.2.7.3
            27 August 2013 at 11:09 am

            @ Quinnjin

            +1 Well said, I couldn’t agree more.

            Notice also (as QOT indicated above) how those accumulating money make themselves out to be the hard workers. Your comment makes explicit how this, also, is propaganda from the ‘elites’.

    • framu 9.3
      26 August 2013 at 3:32 pm

      “free up the supply of land”

      i love this one

      OK steve – can you outline exactly how this works? (accounting for all factors of course)

      in short – it wont lower house prices untill you release vast tracts of land at the same time*, force building to start roughly around the same time everywhere, force developers to not land bank, force developers to build houses that arent solely about profit maximising, and force any savings to be passed onto the consumer

      * “same time” being a measure relative to building houses

      • Naturesong 9.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 3:44 pm

        You forgot to add the increased cost of infrastructure that comes with sprawl.

        • Colonial Viper 9.3.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 3:47 pm

          Well, you simply socialise the cost of the infrastructure on to the public, while you privatise all the profits in the hands of the property developers. usual formula.

          • Lanthanide 9.3.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 8:08 pm

            National are talking about stopping councils from charing developers $$$$ for roads and utilities etc. Which means it would be ratepayers who would have to cough up the cash. Socialising the losses.

            • Tracey 9.3.1.1.1.1
              27 August 2013 at 8:13 am

              and there is NO evidence that Developers will pass on those savings to home owners rather than see it as improved profit for them.

              there is a reason only designers and builders now carry a ten year personal liability for their work on buildings (and not developers). the national government lunches dinners and breakfasts with developers, not the $35 per hour builder or the $13.50 per hour apprentice. Thsee guys aren’t anonymously donating to Act and national, developers are.

        • framu 9.3.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 3:50 pm

          i was kinda trying to make it easy on the wee fella

          dont want to confuse him with too many variables now 🙂

        • Steve Wrathall 9.3.1.3
          26 August 2013 at 4:32 pm

          “Sprawl” is just the name that this generation gives to next generation’s “close-knit community”

          • Colonial Viper 9.3.1.3.1
            26 August 2013 at 4:38 pm

            Sprawling suburbs are dead in an era of peak oil. $150/week petrol bill in Auckland is commonplace.

            Not sustainable.

            • Steve Wrathall 9.3.1.3.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 5:01 pm

              Great, then no need for urban limits at all. As everyone will voluntarily live in high rise projects clustered around railway stations that they can easily walk to gaily whistling the red flag.

          • framu 9.3.1.3.2
            26 August 2013 at 4:56 pm

            OK steve – now can you outline exactly how this works?

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 9.4
      26 August 2013 at 3:47 pm

      I know! He could adopt Steve Wrathall’s pitiful policy delusions and then he wouldn’t have to worry about the caucus or the affiliates or the members because Labour would get one vote.

    • weka 9.5
      26 August 2013 at 3:51 pm

      “Reform the RMA so that you don’t have to spend 5 figures to add a room?”

      Is that the RMA? I thought it was changes to the building codes that had done that (apart from 5 figures being an exaggeration).

      • quinnjin 9.5.1
        27 August 2013 at 1:51 am

        Yeah just let Hardys and their mates write “acceptable solutions” for the building code with a sufficient lack of bothersome government oversight using their sub par products that turn to custard in the NZ environment, and then blame it on the guys doing the actual work ( the builders) when the proverbial hits the fan….

        • s y d 9.5.1.1
          27 August 2013 at 9:35 am

          fletcher buildings profit statement made for interesting reading. Majority of their sales and turnover offshore, majority of profits from NZ – even in a depressed building industry.

    • Foreign Waka 9.6
      26 August 2013 at 7:17 pm

      I doubt that he will be inspiring to property investors, but rather more to home owners. There is a difference.

  10. bad12 10
    26 August 2013 at 3:07 pm

    Excellent news from David Cunliffe, ‘the vote’ cannot come soon enough, then hopefully, we can all get back to spending all our energy ripping out the guts of this abysmal Slippery National government and examining the entrails…

  11. Just Julie 11
    26 August 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Viva la Revolution!

  12. Takere 12
    26 August 2013 at 3:08 pm

    What an absolute disaster! Cunliffes speech was pathetic and the persona of the coming of the “Lord”, Amurican style presentation was diabolical! Keep it up David and you’ll lose the leadership challenge again! What a cock! Haha!

    • bad12 12.1
      26 August 2013 at 3:16 pm

      Ah Tory fear Takere, it’s so great to smell the stench after so many years…

      • Takere 12.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 3:28 pm

        Dude …. the tories wouldn’t care if david did win. He’s lame and will be ineffective and no different that the right-wing advocates! With that kinda self promotion, he’ll appeal to some of the ballheads but not to any of the 880,000 votes labour needs!He’s dog tucker!

        • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 3:38 pm

          well, no worries then eh, Key and English must be confident of cruising in!

        • Pasupial 12.1.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 3:39 pm

          @ Takere

          Do have any actual information to back up your assertions, or is this just a droll depiction of how an idiot would troll?

          “What a cock! Haha!”

          • Takere 12.1.1.2.1
            28 August 2013 at 11:43 am

            Which fact are you referring too? The 880,000 non voters? Electoral Commission website. Cunliffes a loser? Labour won’t win the 2014 election, well you’re right there its my prediction based on the fact he wasn’t the parties first choice last time & he has no way of connecting with the massive non vote. Relying on the maori caucus to haul them in ain’t gunna work because you’ve got two lazy arses and a newbie and Jones.

            • weka 12.1.1.2.1.1
              28 August 2013 at 11:50 am

              How about you start with back up for these two statements:

              – he wasn’t the parties first choice last time

              – he has no way of connecting with the massive non vote.

              You are welcome to believe that of course, but if you want to state them as fact, then provide some evidence.

        • weka 12.1.1.3
          26 August 2013 at 3:42 pm

          “the tories wouldn’t care if david did win.”

          Yeah that’s why they paid Hooton to say as much undermining shit about Cunliffe as he could fit in in 20 mins today on Nine to Noon.

        • bad12 12.1.1.4
          26 August 2013 at 3:57 pm

          Dude???, calling me Dude is an open invitation to receive a hostile mouthful of nasty abuse in return,

          Meh, Labour with as little as 36% of the popular vote will see the Slippery little shyster scarpering for Hawaii with His tail between his legs and National with another 9 on the Opposition Benches,

          Bring it is what i say, after which i will simply reply to the Takere’s of the world with one simple standard message, and this is how that message will run,

          ”Ha Ha Ha”…

        • Anne 12.1.1.5
          26 August 2013 at 4:27 pm

          Well, why was Hooton in full dress panic mode on Nine to Noon today.

          • Anne 12.1.1.5.1
            26 August 2013 at 6:26 pm

            Hell, the above was a reply to Takere at 12. I hit reply too. Doesn’t seem to work too well these days.

        • Tangee 12.1.1.6
          26 August 2013 at 6:23 pm

          @ Takere ;that is what you hope for David to lose haha well sorry not this time dude and now you are wrong and yes we can sesnse the fear factor here lol. In fact this has made his profile become more of an impact so you should concentrate on John Keys lies.

        • Tracey 12.1.1.7
          27 August 2013 at 12:35 pm

          Can I just say how impressed I am that your grammar and spelling has improved so much in 24 hours?

          I am particularly impressed by the correct placement of the apostrophe in “He’s”.

    • Zorr 12.2
      26 August 2013 at 3:17 pm

      Apparently someone was watching Yes, Minister instead of Cunliffe’s announcement…

      Try trolling the other one

  13. dewithiel 13
    26 August 2013 at 3:09 pm

    A bravura performance if ever I’ve seen one: confident, relaxed, exuding intelligence, proud of his community and on top of the game. Most impressive.

  14. Pete 14
    26 August 2013 at 3:19 pm

    What is this I’m feeling … could it be hope? It’s fitting that this comes at the end of winter.

  15. Short Plank 15
    26 August 2013 at 3:20 pm

    And I remember how exciting and inspiring Barak Obama’s 2008 vision for the future of his country was. But now?

    Is there any longer any reason to believe any of this hot air, whomsoever it comes from?

    While Key was gaining his $50 million pushing bits of paper and gambling Shearer “spent nearly 20 years working for the UN, managing the provision of aid to countries including Somalia, Rwanda, Liberia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Iraq” (Wikipedia) and earned his MBE doing something useful rather than politics, which is why I would have voted for Shearer. Cunliffe, Robertson, et al have done what exactly for humanity? Made some good-sounding speeches?

    Sorry, but I judge a man by his actions rather than his words.

    • just saying 15.1
      26 August 2013 at 3:25 pm

      Made mega bucks as an executive at the UN. Canny career move for a mere school teacher.
      Takes something special to see a lucrative career when looking at starving kids fighting over mango skins.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 15.2
      26 August 2013 at 3:26 pm

      Barack Obama didn’t deliver so no-one else can? Are you sure?

      Anyway, since Saint Shearer is no longer available I guess you\ll have to just vote for John Key then.

      • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 15.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 3:33 pm

        @OAK

        Short Plank wouldn’t possibly vote for Key if they are a person who sticks to their principles:

        Sorry, but I judge a man by his actions rather than his words.

        …then again perhaps Short Plank might be providing the hollow words they accuse others of?

      • Colonial Viper 15.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 3:39 pm

        Barack Obama didn’t deliver so no-one else can? Are you sure?

        Technically speaking, Obama did deliver…

      • Short Plank 15.2.3
        26 August 2013 at 4:33 pm

        What on earth makes you think I’d vote for Key, Knucklehead? His actions have shown him to be an empty vessel.

        My point is simply that we have descended to the crass beauty-contest that US politics already is. From articles and comments posted at this site in recent days it is apparent that Cunliffe’s best quality to you is his ability to out-Key Key in sharp repartee and rhetoric. Cunliffe is a polished performer. Sure he can ooze sincerity. So did Obama when he needed to. So does a successful used-car salesman when he needs to. I can even recall Key doing it. Cunliffe’s probably better at it than Robinson and Jones so he has to be our man, he? The winning is all.

        I believe Shearer would have been a damn fine Prime Minister. The Tragedy of the Commons is that he never would have been given the chance because he wouldn’t have won the political beauty contest, just as female beauty contests are won by the roundest, firmest pair of tits rather than the most rounded mind in thought, education, imagination and talent and the firmest in belief.

        Democracy need not have descended to the lowest common denominator. That it has is our fault, my fault and your fault, so we can hardly complain when it delivers the worst possible outcome.

        Unless something remarkable happens I anticipate casting my party vote next time for the Greens and my electorate vote for Labour, whoever happens to be Labour’s leader, and I’ll have to hope that if he makes it into the top job Cunliffe won’t be the disappointment Obama turned out to be in the US and Clegg turned out to be in the UK – polished PR performers both.

        “Between the idea
        And the reality
        Between the motion
        And the act
        Falls the Shadow”

        T.S Eliot – “The Hollow Men”

        • Colonial Viper 15.2.3.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:42 pm

          I believe Shearer would have been a damn fine Prime Minister. The Tragedy of the Commons is that he never would have been given the chance because he wouldn’t have won the political beauty contest

          apart from your ridiculous misuse of the term “Tragedy of the Commons”, Shearer’s lack of Parliamentary experience and lack of understanding of basic Labour Party processes meant he couldn’t last in the position.

        • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 15.2.3.2
          26 August 2013 at 4:49 pm

          @ Short Plank

          The more people who vote for the smaller parties the more choice everyone ends up having, so I think that is a good thing you intend to support a smaller [yet, growing larger] party. (I am assuming here that that the more support smaller parties get, the more people consider them a viable choice.)

          You write as though you discount the possibility that someone with strong rhetoric skills cannot also have strong substance behind such.
          I would have thought that having substance behind good debating skills is what Mr Cunliffe is thought to have. Only time will tell on this one.

          It certainly seems difficult to get into power, and thus have an influence, without some of the qualities that you are railing against. It is fine to object to the way things have gone politically in this regard, (I agree, it isn’t an excellent state of affairs) however it needs to be remembered that simply disliking these facts, don’t make them disappear and principled people ignoring such strategies on principle can lead to positive principled political approaches being left out of the main arena altogether.

        • One Anonymous Knucklehead 15.2.3.3
          26 August 2013 at 5:35 pm

          If the whole point of voting Labour is the Leader’s resumé why are the Greens a better alternative?

          As for out-Keying Key, perhaps you’ve mistaken me for some other knucklehead.

        • gobsmacked 15.2.3.4
          26 August 2013 at 5:51 pm

          @Plank

          You ask for “the most rounded mind in thought, education, imagination and talent and the firmest in belief.” Agree 100%.

          But when did Shearer demonstrate those qualities as Labour leader? We waited, and waited, and … nothing.

    • the sprout 15.3
      26 August 2013 at 9:11 pm

      What Shearer did was believe his delusions of adequacy as an NZLP leader enough to get duped by Robertson and the rest of the ABC into taking the role, when Robertson was only ever interested in a lame duck to keep the leader’s seat warm for him until he felt ready to make a pitch for it.
      The irony being that Robertson isn’t much more ready for the job now than Shearer was.
      Yet another reason why Robertson is Shearer Mk II.

  16. gobsmacked 16
    26 August 2013 at 3:23 pm

    Shearer has resigned. That was his action. Get over it.

  17. Treetop 17
    26 August 2013 at 3:25 pm

    The following would top the day off for me. For Jones and Robertson to withdraw their name from the Labour leadership race. I reckon that the poll rating for labour would go up in the next two weeks.

    Why piss about?

    • Pete 17.1
      26 August 2013 at 3:34 pm

      Well, there’s going to be a campaign over the next three weeks, which will seize the news cycle from the government. Then there’s going to the conference and a by-election in Christchurch East. Then the summer recess and Labour should be strongly positioned for election year. National’s only circuit breaker will be with the budget and maybe the Chistchurch rebuild ramping up, which I don’t think will be enough for them.

      • yeshe 17.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 3:55 pm

        and pse don’t forget the Kim Dotcom court hearings next year to blow Key’s fuses .. and while I’m here, I think Judy Collins knows Key will be toasted and she is ready with her particularly poisonous butter and jam .. heaven help us ! But wait — we will have David Cunliffe !!!! YAY !!!!!

        got my popcorn ready ….

    • Tangee 17.2
      26 August 2013 at 6:37 pm

      I disagree the longer this remains in the news the better and by the end of it all the baggage is out and it will be old news if it gets referred to in election time. This is great to build up Labour profile within the public especially after such a quiet period.

  18. Pasupial 18
    26 August 2013 at 3:32 pm

    @ Treetop

    Democracy.

  19. BM 19
    26 August 2013 at 3:51 pm

    The messiah has arrived.

    Hope he lives up to all your expectations.

  20. Mark 20
    26 August 2013 at 3:54 pm

    This selection has all the possibilities of becoming divisive and damaging for the Labour Parties chances at the next election. Shane Jones’ entry into the contest is probably a bit mischievous on his part and it is hard to imagine that he is a serious contender for leader.

    I am not sure that Cunliffe is the answer but you have to think he has a better chance at making dent in the National Party support than Robertson does.

    For Labour to win the election it is not going to be a mission of winning over the swinging voters in the middle of the spectrum but making sure that the Labopur voters get out to vote, especially those in greater Auckland. Cunliffe seems to have a better shot at mobilising that vote than Robertson does at this point in time.

  21. weka 21
    26 August 2013 at 3:54 pm

    Cunliffe’s got some corportate sponsorship

    http://www.vodafone.co.nz/

    • Takere 21.1
      26 August 2013 at 4:04 pm

      ….He’s also got a lot of religious baggage thats not needed in politics!

      • weka 21.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 4:08 pm

        Really? I hadn’t noticed that.

      • bad12 21.1.2
        26 August 2013 at 4:09 pm

        Whereas you just seem to have ‘baggage’ by the tonne which you need to vent here, pray tell us all of this ‘religious baggage’ that are the basis of your insinuation…

      • Pasupial 21.1.3
        26 August 2013 at 4:11 pm

        Why Takere, man? Religious baggage like Savage? Or maybe it is; Ratana, that is “not needed in politics” in your opining…

        • weka 21.1.3.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:15 pm

          “Why Takere, man?”

          Lolz, pun of the day.

          • Takere 21.1.3.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 6:22 pm

            If the unions back Cunliffe. Labour are Dog Tucker in the 2014 election. By the way … my name is Wai Takere!

            • Jackal 21.1.3.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 6:55 pm

              Firstly, the Unions don’t get to back anybody because there is no block voting.

              Secondly, if David Cunliffe becomes leader he only has to increase Labour’s support by a few percentage points to ensure the left win. From his performance today, I think that’s a distinct possibility.

              Thirdly, we need better wing nuts.

              • Skinny …
                26 August 2013 at 7:22 pm

                I think you will find there is bloc voting as it depends on the unions setup.

                I love the way Cunliffe has got under Keys skin already, saw Keys response to something said by a reporter. The money trader was absolutely venomous in his response. Now this is exactly what DC brings ‘ a ugly side to Key for the public to see.’ great stuff! I also like DC’s rapid answers, no flowery beating about the bush!

                • karol …
                  26 August 2013 at 7:25 pm

                  The rules specifically say no block voting.

                  • Skinny …
                    26 August 2013 at 8:07 pm

                    That’s puffery depending on how the setup is. I have just checked a message from the boss and what I’m saying is correct. It does differ for the servo’s I’ll grant that. Outside of that Union wise heads give the representatives the steer where their interests are best served and everyone votes accordingly, I would call that bloc voting, and in my opinion there is nothing wrong with that. Having members voting relatively blind is not in the interests of the collective fullstop.

                • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard …
                  26 August 2013 at 8:12 pm

                  @ Skinny,

                  Yes, good point re already getting under Key’s skin – and ditto for your point re bringing out Key’s ugly side too.

                  Comment of Key’s re Labour being like some sort of ‘Political Idol’ reality series with their current activities was poorly aimed and pathetic; weak and bitchy is my summary and yes, venomous.

                  • Skinny …
                    26 August 2013 at 9:26 pm

                    Yes very noticeable Key went zero to angry man at the mention of what Cunliffe said. A deep seeded resentment that DC being from similar humble beginning & same could be said in relation to their financial background. Where they differ is Cunliffe has a social conscience, opposed to Keys psychopathic corporate mongrel nature.

            • bad12 21.1.3.1.1.2
              26 August 2013 at 7:02 pm

              Lolz, being a minor scholar of Te Reo there are a number of translations which can be applied to the word Wai,

              One of which would make you Takere Who, fitting the opinion i have of you, perhaps you would like to enlighten us all…

          • Clement Pinto 21.1.3.1.2
            26 August 2013 at 6:44 pm

            Lolz, day of the pundits!

      • Colonial Viper 21.1.4
        26 August 2013 at 4:21 pm

        Some clever writing from the NZ Herald haha

        Last November Mr Cunliffe was demoted by Mr Shearer due to his leadership challenges. Mr Cunliffe was reluctant to back Mr Shearer publicly, which Mr Shearer saw as a sign of his leadership being undermined.

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11114489

        • karol 21.1.4.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:24 pm

          Yes. I noticed that – a move away from stating that Cunliffe actually did make some challenges, even while stating there were such challenges. Slippery.

          • Anne 21.1.4.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 4:48 pm

            Cunliffe was approached by the media in the days leading up to last year’s conference and each time he made it abundantly clear that Shearer had his full backing. By the time the conference arrived he, not surprisingly, became fed up with the media harassment (which continued unabated for the entire week-end) and refused to answer any questions. Some of his caucus colleagues used this as ‘evidence’ of a challenge. I well recall the look of bemusement on the face of Sue Moroney who was collared by TV media as she climbed out of a car on the Sunday – and who obviously didn’t have a clue what they were talking about. She represented the bulk of the delegates present at that conference who were equally puzzled by the accusation.

            In other words, only the ABC club and their media mates saw the evidence. Nobody else did.

            • Skinny 21.1.4.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 8:28 pm

              If you believe that your a tad too gullible ‘Sue Moroney’ and some of the NZC has been proactive in undermining/ dog whisling Shearer/ Nash and anyone else in that camp from the start of the last Leadership contest. Snarky dog whistling, back stabbing no wonder the ABC had their heckles up, but they just couldn’t prove it. And good on them if they were. Chalk it up to keeping the party from heading further right. The rate things were heading a collation with the Nats was not beyond the relms of possibilities.

              • the pigman …
                26 August 2013 at 8:33 pm

                Evidence please. None? Alright then, you can stfu then..

                Like the way you put “Sue Moroney” in inverted commas though (if that is her real name!)

                [lprent: STFU is something that only the moderators can really say with any authority. ]

                • Skinny …
                  26 August 2013 at 8:47 pm

                  Hey pigs arse I have seen it face to face so you can stfu mr comments police.

                  [lprent: I am the comments police. Neither of you two are. I tend to remove commenters that look like they are being completely pointless ]

                  • the pigman …
                    26 August 2013 at 8:54 pm

                    If you’re going to make bald assertions about the machiavellian antics of members (“‘Sue Moroney’ and some of the NZC has been proactive in undermining/ dog whisling Shearer/ Nash and anyone else in that camp from the start of the last Leadership contest”, whatever that is even supposed to mean), you can expect to be asked for evidence/examples thereof. If you can’t provide it, lashing out is not the correct response.

                    • Skinny …
                      26 August 2013 at 9:41 pm

                      Point taken thepigman put up or shut up, guess it’s the later, not polite telling tales.

      • Chooky 21.1.5
        26 August 2013 at 4:52 pm

        @ Takere ….at least it isn’t “gelding” baggage..smirk.

        • McFlock 21.1.5.1
          26 August 2013 at 4:54 pm

          Game of Thrones spoof, anyone? 🙂

          • Chooky 21.1.5.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 5:10 pm

            @ McFlock….might be a bit risque….but it has definite imaginative possibilities with Shane in a starring role

            ….bags you write it!…smirk

            • McFlock 21.1.5.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 5:52 pm

              lol
              Let’s see, playing to the political meme stereotypes we have:

              Jones as an obvious amalgam of Robb Stark (failing to be “king of the north”) and Theon Greyjoy (writes itself);
              Shearer as an amalgam of Stannis Baratheon and Hodor (Team Cunliffe casting agency: good man under evil influence, some communication issues);
              Cunliffe as Daenerys Targaryen (mythic leader who can do no wrong and has magic powers long since thought extinct in the Labour world 😈 ) ;
              Mallard as Tywin Lannister.

              I reckon we could bung in Gower/Garner as buffonish gravediggers. WS not GRRM, but what the hey. 🙂

              • weka …
                26 August 2013 at 6:17 pm

                Cruel McFlock.

                “WS not GRRM” =??

              • Chooky …
                26 August 2013 at 6:17 pm

                @ McFlock…unfortunately I don’t watch Game of Thrones …too rude for me ( males seem to like it)…but I do have an imagination and visions of Shane frolicking with the geldings …has great possibilities….like in some old paintings where they are all plump and lascivious

                ….I have to pass on this one to someone who knows Game of Thrones

                • McFlock …
                  26 August 2013 at 6:29 pm

                  yeah, it’s HBO.

                  As for the gelding reference, a character gets his fifth limb (of which he had been quite proud) removed. Meh, it only caused trouble for everyone, anyway.

              • QoT …
                26 August 2013 at 7:53 pm

                Oh fuck off, McFlock, Mallard wishes he were one-tenth the strategist Tywin Lannister is.

          • Pete 21.1.5.1.2
            26 August 2013 at 9:14 pm

            There was a very good Game of Thrones spoof of the Aussie election released in the last day or so – Youtube – and Julian Assange actually performs in it.

      • Foreign Waka 21.1.6
        26 August 2013 at 7:27 pm

        Do you mean the one where they teach you not to lie, steal etc…. ?

  22. Boadicea 22
    26 August 2013 at 4:31 pm

    Go Cunliffe.
    You have the moral core and mental grunt to be a very effective Prime Minister.

    Keep looking forward.

  23. lurgee 23
    26 August 2013 at 4:32 pm

    He even remembered to wear a red tie. Nice to see he’s not all about image.

  24. North 24
    26 August 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Reckon you’ll find Takere is of the North and is a mate of Jones’. Talking shit just like his mate although less pompously. Small mercies. Thank God.

  25. Dan1 25
    26 August 2013 at 5:03 pm

    I work in a mainly blue environment, and field the regular jibes with patience and good humour. What has been fascinating over the days since Shearer resigned is the interest in the leadership of the Labour Party. The comments are not in a jibe fashion but rather seeking reassurance about Cunliffe. People are not too impressed by Robertson as they see him as a party person rather than a people person. The reality is that many blue mates dislike Key intensely and are waiting for a credible alternative.
    I am positive we are on the cusp of a major rollover in NZ politics. Cunliffe has the potential to be a PM with the likes of Kirk, Lange and Clark. He needs to front foot policy and to be inclusive of those with whom he has disagreed.
    The desperation of some of the trolls on this site suggest the blue team are equally worried.

    • Chooky 25.1
      26 August 2013 at 5:32 pm

      +1 Dan

    • Colonial Viper 25.2
      26 August 2013 at 6:25 pm

      My blue mates reckon that Key has had an easy job of walking all over Labour in the last year. Too easy in fact. They’d like to see Key buck his ideas right up as they know he has been getting careless. And they know that Cunliffe will make him do that.

    • Waffler 25.3
      26 August 2013 at 7:29 pm

      +1.

      Additionally, I’m enjoying the look of fear in the eyes of the acolytes.

  26. weka 26
    26 August 2013 at 5:04 pm

    Anyone got a link to the full announcement from Cunliffe today on video?

  27. bad12 27
    26 August 2013 at 5:18 pm

    David Cunliffe on RadioNZ National just now, good skills, Cunliffe says He can work with anyone that the Caucus elects as the Deputy Leader…

  28. Chooky 28
    26 August 2013 at 5:35 pm

    @ bad 12 …yes but the Deputy needs to ideally be a woman to attract the 50% woman vote.

    • Dan1 28.1
      26 August 2013 at 5:43 pm

      Cunliffe with Adern as deputy has much going for it: substance and feminine youthfulness, with high places in the cabinet for Shearer, Jones and Robertson!!

      • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 28.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 12:48 am

        Yeah, because if there are two things that work in NZ politics they’re youth and femininity.

    • NZFemme 28.2
      26 August 2013 at 5:50 pm

      I think that Cunliffe is going to attract a good chunk of women voters regardless of who his deputy is.

      Especially if he grows back the beard. 🙂

    • bad12 28.3
      26 August 2013 at 5:55 pm

      Chooky, i totally disagree, Slippery the Prime Minister has attracted a lot of that ‘women vote’ across to the National Party despite having as deputy Bill from Dipton,

      i was talking to a very interesting woman today who supports Shane Jones for some strange reason, so i don’t think gender is a huge issue, and to invite a slap i find pushing of any gender is a bit ‘sexist’,

      i didn’t examine the woman i was discussing Labour’s leadership with today on exactly why she seen Shane Jones as leadership material as i was more interested in what she had to say about the Christchurch rebuild vis a vis the National government,(something to get into in another comment at another time)…

      • Chooky 28.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:00 pm

        @bad12…I think it is the need for balance…yin and yang…and fairness and equity

        ….a lot of woman don’t vote for Mr Sex Appeal (in this regard certainly not John Key! and certainly not Shane Jones! omg! imo!)….but for the best person for the job

        ….that said a lot of woman also want to feel that the political party represents them as women and 50% of the population by showing them the respect of having a woman in a leadership role

        As Cunliffe is clearly the best as Leader for the Labour Party by a long margin and he probably will be leader of the Labour Party ….I dont see the problem on having a woman as Deputy…in fact it would show the party respects 50% of the population….also there are some very good women candidates ….better than what is offering in Jones and Robertson

        • bad12 28.3.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:46 pm

          Better than Jones, now that bar is not highly set so i can do nothing but agree with you 100%, better than Robertson, debatable, i score grant as the number 2 in the Labour team as far as speeches i have watched in the House and how they come across on that all important,(not to me), TV,

          Jacinda Adhern??? in 9 years i would say Jacinda will be ready to lead the Labour Party and i don’t know if the deputy leadership now would help or hinder Her,

          For a bit of radicalism the Caucus could vote Louisa Wall for the deputy, other than the marriage bill i havn’t seen much of Her but am impressed, i sense there’s a far deeper performance or 10 lurking just below the surface there,

          As far as gender balance goes i think the Party does need a mechanism to ensure that balance heads for the 50/50 ideal with perhaps the Party able to step in adjusting the Party List if the branches are not listening,

          And out of the blue, a plug for a good performer in the House who deserves a seat up front for being loud, passionate and able to make a coherent speech to the House without resorting to notes, Su’a William Sio the Member for Mangere,( lolz not for deputy or as a woman either)…

          • Chooky 28.3.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 10:25 pm

            @ bad 12 …in the end what matters is that Labour reclaims the 800,000+ non voters from last election…and WINS!!!

            …(hopefully ousting the John Key Nact govt by a very good margin)

            …..may the best woman win as Deputy

            Robertson can still contribute his talents as a Minister and in caucus…..(also I am not as convinced as you, of his trustworthiness or judgment)

            • bad12 28.3.1.1.1.1
              27 August 2013 at 12:05 am

              Chooky, having watched Grant Robertson on Native Affairs tonight i am now in agreement with you about Grant Robertson and will have a re-think on who would be the best Labour MP to support David Cunliffe as His deputy,

              Tomorrow is a good time to continue this debate…

              • Chooky …
                27 August 2013 at 5:10 pm

                @ bad 12 …..I dont really have any firm ideas as to who should be Deputy…just that I don’t think it should be Robertson or Jones or Goff or Shearer

                ……and I think ideally for a NEW LOOK Labour Party which appeals to 50% of the vote….it should be a woman

                ….probably a feisty thick-skinned fighting sort of woman…loyal to Cunliffe… and who can hold the floor when Cunliffe is not there

  29. MrSmith 29
    26 August 2013 at 5:43 pm

    This really is great news, lets hope after winning he takes a broom or large whip to those that dragged shearer into the leaders role.

    I just listened to Cunliffe being interviewed on radio nz, precise, clear, articulate, and confident. Labour party supporters must be feeling relieved and energized.

    Maybe a little to late but better late than never.

    • Pete 29.1
      26 August 2013 at 5:55 pm

      I don’t think there would – or should – be a purge. Cunliffe will have to be concilliatory. I think there’s some generational change ahead and a few members may exit gracefully and choose not to stand at the next election. I think Mallard will be satisfied with the speakership. Members like Louisa Wall and David Clark merit some advancement, though.

    • gobsmacked 29.2
      26 August 2013 at 5:59 pm

      Likewise, I listened to Cunliffe on 3 radio stations this PM, and he was in good form. Very conciliatory about ABC, so I don’t expect a broom or whip … more of a nudge.

      The contrast with the past 20 month is indescribable. Until last week I was afraid to turn on my radio.

    • lprent 29.3
      26 August 2013 at 6:14 pm

      …he takes a broom or large whip to those…

      Bad idea. Put people in positions because of their talents and/or performance. To do it on a fractional basis is a deadly toxin. I can’t think how in the hell the people inside the caucus ever forgot that lesson. But forget it they did…

      • Bill 29.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:23 pm

        What if Labour is ‘reborn’ – rediscovers its principle values – but some old hands cleave to the neo-liberal past? Are you suggesting that gets overlooked and they potentially get senior positions anyway? Call me mad, but that sounds nuts…a recipe for skullduggery… as well as a sure fire way to have the brakes and accelerator both pushed to the floor and all types of calamity to ensue.

        • lprent 29.3.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:00 pm

          There are always positions where people can use their talents effectively. For instance have a close look at the variances between the talents in the first Labour government. For instance how the housing policy was formulated.

          Micro parties can ideologically pure and usually wind up as fiefdoms of a single individual. Larger ones work out how to bridge wide personal and ideological divides to work together.

          • weka 29.3.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 9:03 pm

            and there’s always those who will choose their career/pension over their neo-liberal ideals.

  30. Waffler 30
    26 August 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Wait… so Gower’s political analysis includes critiquing some old poetry?

    FFS.

  31. cricklewood 31
    26 August 2013 at 6:05 pm

    Heard him on live and he was very up front and came across very well… he sounds much better in an interview format the clips of the announcement speech I heard he sound like he was trying a bit hard or something. Needs to be a bit more natural with the speeches imo

    • karol 31.1
      26 August 2013 at 6:16 pm

      Yes, he was projecting his speech as if in a bigger hall or in the House. Requires toning down for a more intimate setting with TV in his face.

      • CeeH 31.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 1:35 am

        Thanks karol and cricklewood. Some media were saying his announcement was a bit over the top but to be fair is this the first time we are seeing him in a new light – showing excitement and jubilance? LOL did seem unnatural but one on one with the media he is brilliant.

        • karol 31.1.1.1
          27 August 2013 at 9:04 am

          Well, I think Cunliffe’s style is different from the “average kiwi bloke” style Key has cultivated. A definite shift in gear as far as the MSM is concerned and must be a bit of a shock to them.

          It remains to be seen how well that will go down with the voters.

          However, I think it’s good for Cunliffe to define his own style and not try to compete in Key’s terms – which is what was done with Shearer.

        • Tracey 31.1.1.2
          27 August 2013 at 9:27 am

          CeeH

          Not some commentators, Patrick Gower. Whatever the fuck that means. I enjoyed his work leading up to the last election, but since Garner went he has moved to TV blogger style and away from journalist.

  32. Raine 32
    26 August 2013 at 6:22 pm

    disappointed.

    i hoped he’d come up with a speech more interesting and inspiring than the same old lame platitudes jones and robertson spouted. family values, new beginnings, blah, blah, blah …

    then we’re given a page to do what with exactly? plug your email address into and get god knows what back. i don’t think so.

    finally his whips kick in and tell us “this is his page”. yea naah .. give us something we can sink our teeth into.

    • Colonial Viper 32.1
      26 August 2013 at 8:54 pm

      Its a long game man, you have to stay cool with the myriad ups and downs. More to the point if you’re already disappointed, your expectations were probably set wrong.

  33. cricklewood 33
    26 August 2013 at 6:28 pm

    Other interesting comment was that he dudnt think it appropriate for the greens to hold the finance portfolio.

    • QoT 33.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:57 pm

      … where did he say that?

      • karol 33.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 8:00 pm

        It was in response to a question from a journalist. Reported here:

        He said Green Party co-leader Russel Norman would be unlikely to be Finance Minister under a Cunliffe-led Labour government, but he looked forward to working more closely with both Mr Norman and fellow co-leader Metiria Turei.

        PS; I was also pleased Cunliffe included Turei, and didn’t treat Norman as the sole Green Party leader.

        • QoT 33.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:34 pm

          “would be unlikely” isn’t exactly “didn’t think it would be appropriate” and certainly isn’t “ruled out”.

          • karol 33.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 9:43 pm

            It isn’t “ruled out”, but it is close to it.

            • QoT 33.1.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 10:55 pm

              I disagree. I know it’s basically a semantic thing in general conversation, but in terms of politics there’s a significant difference between “probably never going to happen but if they got 20% obviously things would be a bit different” and “never never never”.

              It’s why things like Winston’s 1996 betrayal was so shocking. He didn’t play semantic games, he said “I will not go into coalition with National” and then he … went into coalition with National.

              (Andrew Geddis has helpfully compiled a list of relevant Winnie quotes here.)

              • karol …
                27 August 2013 at 9:07 am

                I guess, QoT. But also, if Cunliffe is leader or back on the front bench, Norman won’t have so much of the front running with economics.

                That’s no bad thing, IMO. It would maybe result in the Greens foregrounding Turei more with her focus on social security, poverty and the need to decrease wealth/income inequality.

    • millsy 33.2
      26 August 2013 at 10:17 pm

      To be fair, I dont know anywhere in the world where the junior partner in a coalition holds the finance portfolio.

  34. Takere 34
    26 August 2013 at 6:52 pm

    What an appalling speaker Cunliffe is! It was a pitiful performance! And having some useless have been union member MP’s sitting behind him was kinda sad. If he wins this race, Labour are definitely Dog Tucker! What an embarrassment, having a picture of himself behind him! Delusional, grandiose! Absolutely pathetic!

    • Te Reo Putake 34.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:01 pm

      Drugs. Just Say NO kids.

    • bad12 34.2
      26 August 2013 at 7:05 pm

      Ha ha, as the Tory fear cuts deeper into it’s psyche it’s rants become all the more irrational…

    • Jackal 34.3
      26 August 2013 at 7:12 pm

      You mean the pictures of former Labour Prime Ministers such as Michael Joseph Savage, Helen Clark, David Lange and Norman Kirk etc. There was no picture of David Cunliffe on the wall behind David Cunliffe you moron, which you would know if you weren’t on drugs. There was a picture of David Cunliffe behind the reporter Corin Dann when he was speaking outside to the camera. You can’t seriously be getting them confused?

      • karol 34.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:17 pm

        There was a painting of a younger Cunliffe on the wall behind Cunliffe to his right. I didn’t realise it was him til someone (Gower?) mentioned it.

        I thought it was just a usual part of the decor, and wouldn’t assume Cunliffe was responsible for it being there.

        • Jackal 34.3.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:34 pm

          Can’t find a pic or Patrick Gower mentioning it karol. Would you happen to have a link?

          • karol 34.3.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 7:48 pm

            I am only going from memory of being at the event. I’ve just added a photo to the bottom of my post, “the momentum of expectation”. It’s the only I have that has any part of the Cunliffe painting. It’s the one on the top left of the photo, with the blue stripe t-shirt.

            • Jackal 34.3.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 8:05 pm

              Not that it really matters. If all the RWNJ’s can come up with is that there’s a picture of David Cunliffe behind David Cunliffe during a press conference that nobody has a photo of, Labour is home and hosed.

              • karol …
                26 August 2013 at 8:08 pm

                That’s true, jackal. And from the photo at the bottom of my post, you can see that Cunliffe was hardly positioned so that the painting of him would be a prominent part of the on camera announcement.

                • Akldnut …
                  27 August 2013 at 9:22 am

                  Even if there was a picture of him on the wall with Mickey Savage etc. that would make him something the Nats have been crowing about for the past 4 1/2 years or so.
                  Aspirational.

                  Can’t have it both ways – or can they?

    • Pete 34.4
      26 August 2013 at 10:16 pm

      What about this guy?

  35. vto 35
    26 August 2013 at 6:55 pm

    What have the Nats got lined up to nail him with?

    • karol 35.1
      26 August 2013 at 6:58 pm

      Flexible super?

      • bad12 35.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:09 pm

        Karol, that one from Dunne tonight???, i am interested in the detail, just because the proponent is a miserable little snake of the worst variety we shouldn’t dismiss this out of hand, might be worth a post on it’s own…

        • Treetop 35.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

          Key is treating Dunne like he is the revenue minister.

          Not sure when Muldoon lowered the NZ super age to 60, I do recall not having compulsory superannuation clinched the 1975 election for Muldoon.

          Winz just have to bully a few more people age 60+ and they will vote for flexible super.

      • Foreign Waka 35.1.2
        26 August 2013 at 7:36 pm

        The opening door to have the age raised by stealth to 70. Cos you cannot survive on the few cents you get before that age. After that, you have perhaps 10 years to save for your funeral…..What great dignifying approach. Why not have a pill instead?

  36. Jackal 36
    26 August 2013 at 7:02 pm

    I’m disappointed that both Robertson and Cunliffe have ruled Russel Norman out as Minister of Finance. Despite the right wings criticisms, he’s perhaps the best financial mind available.

    • Treetop 36.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:13 pm

      There will be some sort of financial portfolio for Norman e.g. revenue minister.

    • bad12 36.2
      26 August 2013 at 7:13 pm

      i missed them ruling out Russell as Finance Minister, there’s still a coalition to negotiate befor that can actually happen and i would expect the Green Party to chisel a significant role out of such a negotiation for Dr Norman in the Finance Ministry…

    • Bill 36.3
      26 August 2013 at 7:16 pm

      Ruling out Minister of Finance isn’t that surprising seeing as how social democratic parties are essentially competing to manage the economy by their preferences. But didn’t Cunliffe say that if Labour was in coalition with The Greens, then they would potentially have fairly a senior finance portfolio?

      • karol 36.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:19 pm

        Yes, I think Cunliffe did mention tat possibility, Bill.

        • gobsmacked 36.3.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:32 pm

          He didn’t rule out Norman, in the same way as Jones didn’t rule out standing for leader (he said it was “very unlikely”, and now he’s there). It’s poli-speak, never say never.

          Generally the major party should expect to hold the Finance portfolio i.e. the one who delivers the Budget speech. It’s been given to a minor party once (Winston 96-98) and that was a flop.

          If the Greens get 15-20% that could change, but it’s not Cunliffe’s job to encourage that.

          • weka 36.3.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 7:45 pm

            “As part of the coalition agreement, Peters was made Treasurer, a newly created position superior to but co-existing with that of Finance Minister.”

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_National_Government_of_New_Zealand

          • Jackal 36.3.1.1.2
            26 August 2013 at 7:46 pm

            Corin Dann said on One News that both Robertson and Cunliffe wouldn’t have time for Russel Norman as Finance Minister.

            I don’t think this is a good thing in terms of developing a working relationship with the Greens, to preempt any coalition discussions that might be required to form the next government is pretty silly.

            However it is good politicking in a wider sense, being that it closes down one of the main attack lines the Natz have been using on David Shearer. Unfortunately it also rules out having the most qualified person in the job.

            • Lanthanide 36.3.1.1.2.1
              26 August 2013 at 8:24 pm

              “I don’t think this is a good thing in terms of developing a working relationship with the Greens, to preempt any coalition discussions that might be required to form the next government is pretty silly.”

              I don’t think the Greens would see it as anything other than political posturing. What shakes out depends entirely on the election result and how many seats each party gets. Mana and MP being required or just bolt-ons is another consideration.

    • Foreign Waka 36.4
      26 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

      Yes, I agree. As there is really no one else other than Cunliffe himself to take the finance portfolio.

      • Colonial Viper 36.4.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:54 pm

        Cunliffe shouldn’t be PM and Finance Minister at the same time.

        Way too big a role.

        • Foreign Waka 36.4.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 8:38 pm

          Sorry, I did not express this properly. The only capable person that is able to hold the finance portfolio within labour is Cunliffe. If he is the leader, the next best person in Dr Norman. I also belief that this would give a bit of balance to Cunliffs ego.

      • Te Reo Putake 36.4.2
        26 August 2013 at 9:00 pm

        I seem to recall Muldoon kept the finance portfolio when he became PM. Kept control of the chequebook and kept control of cabinet. Nobody’s pet project got up unless he authorised it. Great way to build unity 😉

  37. Raine 37
    26 August 2013 at 7:13 pm

    where are the hard core followers telling me i’m wrong? slapping me back into reality and saying i just read it wrong? karol? mr gobsmack? soooooosie and that viper dude?

    • bad12 37.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:21 pm

      What the hell???, i realize that the thought of David Cunliffe being leader of the Labour Party induces in the supporters of the present Slippery little shyster we have as PM heightened levels of abject terror,

      Insanity as well??? go and have a lie down, your babbling incoherently…

    • karol 37.2
      26 August 2013 at 7:22 pm

      What makes you think your comment has any relevance to the discussion that’s going on here? Tryhard.

    • gobsmacked 37.3
      26 August 2013 at 7:36 pm

      Raine

      Not sure what you want to discuss. Your position was … having no contest is better for Labour, is that right? You’re not alone in that, but I think you’re wrong. Time will tell.

  38. bad12 38
    26 August 2013 at 7:17 pm

    TV3 News tonight was an interesting watch, someone should have told David Cunliffe not to ever make apologies for were he lives to an insignificant speck of human dross like what 3News’s Patrick Gower is,

    When that little s**t asked Cunliffe that question he should have told the little wipe to go and ask everyone in the room if they had concerns about where He, Cunliffe lives, and then He would answer the question…

    • karol 38.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:21 pm

      Cunliffe added a good line about how, from where he lives, he can see John Key’s helicopter carrying him from Parnell to Key’s electorate at Helensville.

      • bad12 38.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:25 pm

        LOLZ, i missed that bit i was already swearing at the TV, i would have been happier if Cunliffe had of laughed in Gowers face and said, ”Oh piss off Paddy no-one gives a big fat one where i live”…

        • karol 38.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:30 pm

          When Mr Glower (which is what I will now call him, after having seen his constantly frowning demeanour in the flesh today), kept on asking about where Cunliffe lives, Cunliffe did brush it aside as something he’d already answered.

          He then added the point about how he and his wife were a couple of kids from modest backgrounds, and unlike the Nats, they don’t pull the ladder up after themselves.

          • Colonial Viper 38.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 7:35 pm

            Bloody Paddy, if you don’t sharpen up the quality of your questions into something relevant, you’re going to find yourself being left well behind!

          • bad12 38.1.1.1.2
            26 August 2013 at 7:56 pm

            Lolz Karol, i wouldn’t mind seeing the Alfred E Nuemann of television Jonolism in the flesh, i have something i need to give Him so as to alleviate the stress the little s**t-bag has loaded into my mind with His absolute bull-s**t…

    • BM 38.2
      26 August 2013 at 7:34 pm

      Cunliffes excuse of why he lives in one of the most expensive parts of Auckland was lame beyond belief.

      “Yes, yes I really wanted to live closer to my people in South Auckland, but my wife needed to be near her work so she could rush home and breast feed our children, oh the pain and suffering we’ve had to endure, but I’ve done it for you my children”

      Jesus, that’s some serious bullshit there, can’t believe that was the best he could come up with.
      He’s obviously being working on how to get around that question.
      Back to the drawing board for that one, bud.

      • weka 38.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:52 pm

        Interesting criticism. What exactly is wrong with what Cunliffe said?

        • Raine 38.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 8:28 pm

          what’s wrong is he just needs to be a little bit more honest.

          no-one really cares where he lives if he’s honest about it and he can’t get away from the fact he lives in a rich area so why not own it? “i live there because i wan’t to, it’s a nice area and i can afford it” everyone will get over it if he tells the truth but if he tries to fudge it they’ll just keep at him. it’s like grant owning his gayness, shane owning his penchant for naked ladies(or men … i don’t know what was on his blue movies) and key owning his dis-taste of telling the truth … people over-look those things . david needs to do that too and stop letting people make it an issue.

          • weka 38.2.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 8:39 pm

            Which bit was he dishonest about? His wife wanting to breastfeed? How close/far her work was? What?

            • BM 38.2.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 9:10 pm

              Umm

              Because It’s complete shit,Cunliffe is a rich prick who lives in a rich prick world.
              Which is just the way he likes it.

              The guy needs to drop the whole “Madiba” persona and pull his head out of his arse.

              • weka …
                26 August 2013 at 9:19 pm

                “Because It’s complete shit,Cunliffe is a rich prick who lives in a rich prick world.”

                Maybe he is, but that’s not what I asked. Do you know the personal circumstance of his wife’s breastfeeding and work, or not?

                What’s ‘madiba’?

      • bad12 38.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 8:00 pm

        Cunliffe needs NO excuse for where He lives in Auckland, take a poll of the Standard BM and see what we think of where He lives,

        After November 2014 i have it on good authority that the Cunliffe’s are all moving to an even flasher place, it’s up on Wellington’s Tinakori Road…

        • Colonial Viper 38.2.2.1
          26 August 2013 at 8:07 pm

          bad12 you are a class act my friend.

        • BM 38.2.2.2
          26 August 2013 at 8:36 pm

          Nah, Cunliffe is going to struggle.
          Why, because the media think he’s an arrogant bull shitting cock.

          For me this is Cunliffes Achilles heel, the media doesn’t like him and he’s made no effort to whoo the media.

          If anything he thinks he doesn’t need the media and that’s going to be where he fails.

          • Hanswurst 38.2.2.2.1
            26 August 2013 at 11:41 pm

            “… the media think he’s an arrogant bull shitting cock.”

            I must say that I’ve never seen a bull that shits cock before. It’s rather a disturbing image. Are you sure you’re feeling alright?

          • Jim Nald 38.2.2.2.2
            27 August 2013 at 12:28 am

            Cunliffe’s responses today made Dann look even more dour and Gower look more sour and sound like an idiot.

          • geoff 38.2.2.2.3
            27 August 2013 at 8:40 am

            Yeah cos we’ve never had an arrogant, smug PM before have we??

            I think it would be hilarious if John Key tried to run the line that Cunliffe is arrogant and smug!

            Still, seeing as National party supporters generally are irony deficient, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.

          • Tracey 38.2.2.2.4
            27 August 2013 at 9:34 am

            Wow, care to share how you received such insights?

      • karol 38.2.3
        26 August 2013 at 8:05 pm

        New Lynn (Cunliffe’s electorate) is in West Auckland. And getting into the city from here at peak periods can be a nightmare.

        • Colonial Viper 38.2.3.1
          26 August 2013 at 8:19 pm

          Although the question needs to be called out as being what it is – irrelevant. “Do you have a question relevant to the Labour Leadership campaign launch Patrick? If not, I’ll move on and we can talk later.”

        • Tracey 38.2.3.2
          27 August 2013 at 9:36 am

          He could have bought a run down house in a poor area and pretended he lived there. I think even Key drew the lying line at that when suggested to him.

  39. BrucetheMoose 39
    26 August 2013 at 7:21 pm

    The I Want To Rule The Worlders, Sociopaths, Narcissists and I’m All Right Jacks, will be in a flap down at the Natzi Club tonight.

  40. Ms X 40
    26 August 2013 at 7:27 pm

    perhaps I wont resign my Labour Party membership after all. Bit close though.

  41. infused 41
    26 August 2013 at 7:35 pm

    I find it mind blowing how speeches like this energizes everyone. It’s the same shit rehashed. You’re like sheep with your head up your ass.

    I’m no fan of anyones speeches, right wing included.

    Nothing new here.

    • Treetop 41.1
      26 August 2013 at 7:44 pm

      “Nothing new here.”

      Did you read all 214 comments?

      • infused 41.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 7:48 pm

        What am I meant to be seeing that’s any different?

        • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard 41.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 7:58 pm

          Well for a start, Infused, the excitement isn’t over a speech.

          • infused 41.1.1.1.1
            27 August 2013 at 12:22 am

            could have fooled me.

            What else is new here? list one new thing that’s come out today that wasn’t known previously.

            • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard 41.1.1.1.1.1
              27 August 2013 at 12:35 am

              It has been confirmed that David Cunliffe is standing up to be leader of NZLP.

              This has come after a recent and surprise resignation of the old leader a couple of days ago and prior to this has been months and months of observing the apparent ‘best’ the largest leftwing party has to offer is a series of awkward moments.

              The excitement is not over one speech.

        • Treetop 41.1.1.2
          27 August 2013 at 9:46 am

          “What am I meant to be seeing that’s any different?”

          1. The capacity that Cunliffe has to be the leader of the Labour Party.

          2. That Cunliffe will be heard loud and clear.

          3. New beginnings are exciting.

    • weka 41.2
      26 August 2013 at 8:00 pm

      “I find it mind blowing how speeches like this energizes everyone. It’s the same shit rehashed. You’re like sheep with your head up your ass.”

      I think it’s a testimony to how long we’ve had to put up with left-wing neoliberalism. Crumbs seem like cake.

      Cunliffe is good though, for who he is and the position he is in. The problem is that expectations are now so high.

      • Colonial Viper 41.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 8:06 pm

        It’s not a problem. Because meeting high expectations is the only way that we will get Key next year.

        There’s a massive ground game organising around Cunliffe now. And it will need money, volunteers and expert input, lots. This is, in essence, the start of the Labour campaign for 2014.

        • weka 41.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:00 pm

          Yes, start of the campaign, and maybe on the expectations (high expectations require someone to live up to them).

          I saw Cunliffe’s media Q and A after the speech. His response when he was asked about Key came across as someone who had just been chosen leader of the Labour party, not someone at the start of the selection process. I guess this is the arrogance that people refer to (I hadn’t seen it before). Not necessarily a problem or liability, but a bit risky I think.

          • Colonial Viper 41.2.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 9:34 pm

            This isn’t Cunliffe the Conciliator, right now. Its Cunliffe on the campaign trail for the country’s top job. Its good to see him back himself because he can get it done for NZ.

            When does confidence cross into arrogance? For me, it’s when someone has forgotten their humility and their humanity. And nowadays I don’t think Cunliffe does that for even a split second.

            • weka 41.2.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

              Have to say, he did stare down the journo who asked the question about Key, and I thought yes! someone with a backbone and a brain.

              “When does confidence cross into arrogance?”

              Timing in this case. It wasn’t that he should have been conciliatory. I just thought his demeanour was of someone who had already won, and I can see how that would come across as arrogance. Like I said, it might not be a problem.

    • bad12 41.3
      26 August 2013 at 8:16 pm

      Aaah i smell more Tory fear, the stench will become more palpable the closer we get to November 2014…

      • infused 41.3.1
        27 August 2013 at 12:25 am

        no fear. if national lose, I predict one term labour govt.

        but I don’t think labour will win. the following election, sure.

        maybe it’s time for something new.

        labour come in, reverse everything national do. national come in, reverse everything labour do.

        Where is the middle ground? No it’s not the greens.

    • Tracey 41.4
      27 August 2013 at 9:53 am

      Finding out Key had 50m in personal wealth and used to be a currency trader made many folks in NZ soil themselves with excitement and he hasn’t had to say anything of sense since.

  42. toad 42
    26 August 2013 at 7:59 pm

    Difficult choice for a Green, MS.

    A Cunliffe victory may well gain votes from the Greens, which is not what I want to see, because I think the Greens need to be a major player in the next government to ensure reversal of the neo-lib dominance since 1984.

    Conversely, a Jones victory will deliver votes from Labour to the Greens and may gain votes to Labour from the Nats. But it would make a coalition deal much more difficult for the Greens.

    As for Robertson, I still have no clue where he positions himself on economic issues. He’s good on human rights issues, but then so is Maurice Williamson (apart from the right for workers to collectively organise).

    • Colonial Viper 42.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:00 pm

      I hope Robertson’s invisibility on economic issues is dispelled soon. He seems to have gone out of his way to not be explicit about it. I’d like to know what his political economic ideology actually is.

      • geoff 42.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 8:47 am

        I wager that he has none.

        If self-promotion is your sole goal then you don’t have the time or inclination to bother really getting to grips with economic theory.

  43. bad12 43
    26 August 2013 at 8:06 pm

    As a fellow Green Party member i will be as happy as hell if Cunliffe is voted leader of the Labour Party,

    What you say is of course entirely relevant, and, we should be arguing those points right up to and beyond November 2014,

    My advice as usual to the Green Party and MP’s is to start working on that coalition agreement, budgets and all, there’s no point going into a coalition without a full 3 year plan of what the Green Party expect as far as legislation goes,(and obviously there are too many points of agreement for me to bother to list them here)…

    Lolz, what happened there, i put this up as an answer to another comment, god knows where the other comment has gone…

  44. What Rebuild 44
    26 August 2013 at 8:10 pm

    Talk about tripe,that was one of the most cliche crammed shit sandwich speeches I’ve ever heard-insipid rather than inspirational .And delivered by some one who thinks they are the next Churchill or Obama. show some humility and sincerity. Ya know I really want to like cunliffe and believe in labour again but this just ain’t doing it. Advice to DC if you want the voters just be real. drop the BS and the whole facade otherwise you will out smarm key and that’s saying something. C for effort. Must try harder.

    • Colonial Viper 44.1
      26 August 2013 at 8:15 pm

      Seems like the X factor is working a treat, judging by your response.

    • the pigman 44.2
      26 August 2013 at 8:37 pm

      “Ya know I really want to like cunliffe and believe in labour again but this just ain’t doing it.

      Ya know I really want to like you too, but your Tory Concern Tr 🙄 ll act is just fucking stale.

      EDIT: C for effort.

    • mickysavage 44.3
      26 August 2013 at 9:35 pm

      Oh dear another troll. No doubt he will post soon that he is/was a Labour voter …

      [lprent: good prediction. here and here. But you never know. It might even be accurate – stranger things have been known to be coincidence 😉 ]

    • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 45.1
      26 August 2013 at 8:24 pm

      That’s got to be a record, from start to Muppet Show in less than 24 hours.

    • karol 45.2
      26 August 2013 at 8:52 pm

      But that's not anywhere to be seen on Cunliffe’s FB page now.

      And I see that the above linked FB account only opened 9 hours ago – so since about midday.

      So where is the page the NZ Herald is talking about?

      • Nicolas 45.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:01 pm

        Cunliffe has removed it. He even apologized for it; it’s on his Twitter account.
        Still, surely it doesn’t mean their announcements, supposed to reflect their individual ideas, are written by the same people?

        • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard 45.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:29 pm

          @ Nicolas,

          Does sound a bit like it… 😐

        • karol 45.2.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 9:32 pm

          I think it’s more likely the IT person, tasked with posting the statements online, copy and pasted the wrong one to Cunliffe’s page.

          • mickysavage 45.2.1.2.1
            26 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

            Yep. Nothing to do with DC, someone is now having a bad evening. We should all forgive and understand when mistakes occur.

            • vto 45.2.1.2.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 9:47 pm

              Look clever cogs, it is clearly done by someone outside of the labour party.

              I would bet donuts to dolittles it was the same people who bunged up the stop the asset sales petition with countless wrong names, and the same people who put David Shearer’s name up to register for shares in mighty river power.

              Think quicker and much much smarter Labour, you just got done in the eye again by the wide boys from Parnell.

              Sharpen up!

              • Colonial Viper …
                26 August 2013 at 10:32 pm

                Hey mate, lighten up. If MS understands what the issue was and who was responsible, then its not going to happen again.

                • vto …
                  26 August 2013 at 10:42 pm

                  Fair enough, maybe you’re right… maybe the boondox is making me see things in the water. Maybe the wide boys would never consider such a thing. Maybe the security screens are in place.

                  me, I wouldn’t put anything past them. Watch for the coming ankle taps fullas – there aint no refs watching for ya…

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    26 August 2013 at 11:06 pm

                    Although your warning is definitely not irrelevant either.

                    I’m sure the Cunliffe campaign is under pressure to get a huge amount done in very little time. Give them a week to gel together as a campaign team and the thing will be rockin’

              • weka …
                26 August 2013 at 10:38 pm

                vto, micky savage is part of the team working to get DC elected as leader. Who do you think knows what really happened, you or him?

                • vto …
                  26 August 2013 at 10:44 pm

                  don’t you know that in certain spheres parallel lines meet?

                  • weka …
                    26 August 2013 at 10:51 pm

                    but abstract for me I’m afraid vto 🙂

                    • vto …
                      26 August 2013 at 10:59 pm

                      Part of a historical geometry paper at vic some many years ago. Nowadays google takes care of it all.. try googling “parallel lines meet”. It is most fascinating. Things are sometimes not as they seem, which seemed appropriate (more to my wanderings than any reality that MS deals with I suspect)

                    • weka …
                      26 August 2013 at 11:05 pm

                      No, I understand the parallel lines bit, just not how it related to what I said.

    • Mary 45.3
      26 August 2013 at 8:56 pm

      Maybe they thought this is what unifying the party means.

    • karol 45.4
      26 August 2013 at 8:58 pm

      Cunliffe tweets it was a technical glitch:

      That was a technical glitch. Whoops, at least we’re all speaking with one voice. Sorry @grantrobertson1.

      I agree with Alistair Thompson – we need more of an explanation for such a glitch.

      • Colonial Viper 45.4.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:26 pm

        indeed. Would be very interested in how this actually happened, or could happen. The source material seems to be Grant’s.

        • QoT 45.4.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:39 pm

          Quick hypothesis: some staffer was in charge of social media monitoring and posting. Had copied Grant’s post to save in a Word document or some other abomination of social media tracking, suddenly remembered they needed to post David’s announcement, hit Ctrl+V and didn’t double-check the text because it looked vaguely appropriate.

          • mickysavage 45.4.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 9:49 pm

            Not a party staffer but when shyte happens we should move on.

            • QoT 45.4.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 10:58 pm

              Not necessarily a “party” staffer, just whoever was minding the computer (and sending tweets while Cunliffe was on the telly) made a booboo. It happens. The Microsoft clipboard is a whimsical beast.

              (And don’t tell me “move on”, mate, I’m trying to help by showing that “how this could happen” doesn’t have to involve any dark secret content-thieving plots.)

  46. What Rebuild 46
    26 August 2013 at 8:56 pm

    Sorry to be a party pooper at the CAP : cunliffe admiration party but today was a fizzer and the Herne bay response was utter crap. He should have told gower to get stuffed. Who gives a shit where he lives? how does that make you a better or worse leader? Its going to be a very interesting 3 weeks. x factor viper? More like fear factor!

  47. hush minx 47
    26 August 2013 at 8:58 pm

    A strange sort of flattery perhaps? Or the mysteriousness of computers and people hitting send at the wrong moment? At least we know they agree on some stuff!

  48. phillip ure 48
    26 August 2013 at 9:01 pm

    native affairs is about to have the three contenders live in the studio..

    f.y.i…

    phillip ure..

  49. phillip ure 49
    26 August 2013 at 9:07 pm

    with his new love for all in labour..’seeing the good in all’..

    ..cunnliffe sounds like he’s spent his time on the backbenchs ‘e’-ing..

    ..robertson proclaims he is ‘in the middle’ of labour..

    ..and cunn and rob are having a luv-fest with each other..

    ..phillip ure..

  50. Sam 50
    26 August 2013 at 9:11 pm

    Seems to me that once again Cunliffe is a divisive figure, just going on what has been written here. GR has no traction outside of Welllington, being homosexual brings back memories of Chris Carter. So the best option would be Shane Jones, with Trev Mallard as deputy duck.

    • karol 50.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:13 pm

      How very divisive of you, Sam.

    • the pigman 50.2
      26 August 2013 at 9:25 pm

      So it looks like we are going to have 3 weeks of “well-meaning” advice from tory concern tr 🙄 lls bringing their most enlightened whalespew to the table. I mean, suggesting Mallard as deputy while adopting the very lexicon of the RWNJs, do you think anyone here will take you seriously?

      • Colonial Viper 50.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

        Perhaps its time to bring Hooten onboard to offer PR advice to the candidates?

        • the pigman 50.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:56 pm

          Luckily it’s too cold for BBQs in NZ at this time of year. However, if Jones somehow does get elected leader, Hooten will need to distribute a shit-ton more Bollinger…

    • BM 50.3
      26 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

      I agree with you Sam.
      Shane Jones should lead labour, he’s the only guy out of the three who has the goods.

  51. Raine 51
    26 August 2013 at 9:13 pm

    god you lot no wonder shearer lasted so long! you can’t even brook the slightest of constructive criticism against cunliffe or your opinions and somehow construe it into a personal affront or attack.

    some of us just want cunliffe to live up to the hype and what we all know he can achieve. his speech today was boring! his excuse for where he lives defensive when he doesn’t have to make excuses … his website is lame and uninspiring. no-one will give it more than a cursory look.

    it’s a given now he’ll win “this” election … but it’s the next one that counts. i thought the man wouldn’t need any advice from us but it’s obvious he needs decent PR advice from someone.

    [lprent: Direct your comment at someone, do not direct it at the site because then you are talking to me (read the policy). I’m a irritable and quite impolite sysop who has been reading shitheads like yourself making the same dumbarse mistakes for the last 30 years. I’m bored with stupid jerkoffs who think that they know how to do things that the greeks invented 3k years ago.

    I tend to get quite irritated with dipshits using silly strawman arguments which is why that is in the policy. If I see it again, then you’ll receive a ban for trolling. ]

    • weka 51.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:24 pm

      Your criticism isn’t ‘slight’ though is it. I’ve been critical on ts of Cunliffe’s website, and then his response to a media question. Others likewise. Your problem is that hardly anyone agrees with your wholesale condemnation of Cunliffe as mediocre.

      • Raine 51.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:35 pm

        it is slight in my mind. when robertson came out (for leader last night …), people here analysed the crap out of his speech and damned pretty much every word he had to say.

        i kind of agreed with them and expected much better from david. instead we got the same … yada, yada, something about grandchildren …

        you know i’m only being tougher on david because he’s the only one i give a hoot about. you all might take my stance with a different view … i’m not particularly worried about that.

        • weka 51.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 9:43 pm

          Yeah, but as with Shearer, it’s probably because lots of people here think that Cunliffe can do a better job and Robertson is not the right person. You can write that as hero-worship, but I don’t think it is, and there are many intelligent, thoughtful commenters here, so unless they’ve all been brainwashed I can’t see how the criticism stands.

          “you know i’m only being tougher on david because he’s the only one i give a hoot about”

          School of hard knocks? You said a whole bunch of negative things that make it sound like you think Cunliffe is crap. I just don’t think that is a particularly useful approach if you want someone to win.

          • Raine 51.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 10:04 pm

            yes and all those crap things surround his PR machine (or lack there of) and not his business acumen or potential as a Prime Minister.

            what’s wrong with wanting him to be the whole package? we all can say anything we like … no-one give a flying froggy what we think or do … he otoh has to come across as flawless as he possibly can …

            • weka 51.1.1.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 10:19 pm

              You want perfection? What planet are you from?

              I agree the website isn’t too flash, esp compared to the pre-campaign one that I saw this morning. If it still looks that mediocre at the end of the week we can analyse that. We can even talk about it today if you like, but if all you are bringing to the table is “I want DC to be like THIS, and he hasn’t so I’ll diss him”, then you are just going to sound liek someone having a tantrum. Which is your perogative 🙂

              • Colonial Viper …
                26 August 2013 at 10:24 pm

                Shearer stepped down on what – Thu? Cunliffe took say 48 hours to figure out whether he was going to stand. That’s Fri and most of Sat gone.

                What we got today was rough and ready no doubt – but that’s what happens on these compressed timeframes.

                Basically Raine is talking from the point of view of someone who has never had to execute a political campaign before from a standing start.

                • weka …
                  26 August 2013 at 10:31 pm

                  We can assume that someone did the website this morning and had to have it ready by 2.30. Seems a tight time frame to me, esp if the usual webmaster wasn’t available.

                  This is at the bottom of the FP

                  Maintained by members and supporters of the campaign to elect David Cunliffe as leader of the New Zealand Labour Party.

                  Still, the site is looking a bit sad again tonight. All the photos have gone. The content looks basically the same as this morning, except for the FP which now has the speech on it.

    • gobsmacked 51.2
      26 August 2013 at 9:38 pm

      There is no “you lot”.

      There are people to the left of Labour (Greens, Mana etc), there are Labour people of various stripes, there are liberals, there are folks like me who just want this government replaced by a (much) better one. And so on.

      It only seems like “you lot” because Shearer was so poor at his job that he managed to unite a very disparate bunch in wanting him gone. His replacement will probably be Cunliffe and that will be better for Labour and the broad left. Doesn’t make Cunliffe a superhero. Just a big improvement on both Key and Shearer. That’s a good start.

      • weka 51.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:44 pm

        +100

      • Raine 51.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 10:07 pm

        and that right there is the problem if all you aspire to is “a good start”.

        i’m sorry dude but that’s not good enough for me. i want more. a lot more.

        • weka 51.2.2.1
          26 August 2013 at 10:15 pm

          You’re just being argumentative. Obviously gobsmacked has been talking about more than a good start alone.

          • Raine 51.2.2.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 10:40 pm

            maybe i am. you saying that makes me think … should i back down and be quiet or should i stand up for what i think?

            most the time i actually believe in half the crap i spout. when it comes to cunliffe it’s more of a 99.9% split.

            he’s behaving like a light-weigh just because he knows he has this race in the hand. my sources tell me he does too. this election is a farce staged to appease “the membership”.

            • weka 51.2.2.1.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 10:46 pm

              “should i back down and be quiet or should i stand up for what i think?”

              Do whatever you like. Myself, I don’t see the point in being wholly critical without offering solutions. At the moment I’m just getting a lot of negativity about DC from you, yet you say you support him. Doesn’t make sense.

              “he’s behaving like a light-weigh”

              Give me three examples from today.

              • Raine …
                26 August 2013 at 10:52 pm

                i’m sorry you feel that way but it’s not my job to make you feel better or explain myself to you especially when i’ve already answered the question you pose.

                reading comprehension is a very good skill. 🙂

                • weka …
                  26 August 2013 at 11:02 pm

                  You can’t call the website an example of DC behaving as a light weight.

                  The speech… well it wasn’t Martin Luther King, but it wasn’t Grant Robertson either. Light-weight compared to what?

                  I didn’t see his answer to the where he lives thing, so can’t comment on that.

        • Colonial Viper 51.2.2.2
          26 August 2013 at 10:21 pm

          i’m sorry dude but that’s not good enough for me. i want more. a lot more.

          Maybe you should start contributing, instead of just asking for more and taking, eh?

          Gawd I sound like those Labour Party acolytes having a go at CV 😈

          • Raine 51.2.2.2.1
            26 August 2013 at 10:46 pm

            bah! maybe you should listen more than you talk. hundreds of thousands of dollars are going to spent on a done deal race . happy now?

            • weka 51.2.2.2.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 10:50 pm

              And this is DC fault?

              • Raine …
                26 August 2013 at 10:53 pm

                no i did not say that.

                • Raine …
                  26 August 2013 at 11:11 pm

                  or maybe i did … i can’t recall. someone just had a big hissy fit at me. geez … whatever happened to free speech? i’m not a troll. i’m just opinionated like lots of you are. 🙁

                  [lprent: There is no “free speech” here. Just like the rest of the world there are always limits. We set outside limits on how you can behave. You can pretty much say what you like (opinionated or not) within the site rules but you should read them so I don’t have to waste my time telling you about them. Wasting moderator time is a fast way towards getting banned. You’d better find out what the other ones are.

                  If you don’t like them, then I really don’t care. However if you want to comment here, then you will follow them. I really don’t have time to engage with silly dipshits who don’t listen. You’ll find that I use quite plain language without a pretence of politeness to make damn sure that I only have to say this once.

                  Putting you in auto-moderation until I am sure that you have read the policy. ]

                  • weka …
                    26 August 2013 at 11:23 pm

                    Don’t take it to heart too much. You can say whatever you like here (within the rules), but you have to allow others the same free speech 🙂 I’m not sure if you are new here (your user name is), but people here have been waiting for Labour to sort their shit out for a long time. It’s going to be a crazy now it looks like they actually might.

                    I understand you want more. I do too (hell, I don’t even vote for Labour). I just think DC should be given support given he’s really the only option at this point in time. I’m keen to see him in action in public too.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    26 August 2013 at 11:29 pm

                    Raine, “hundreds of thousands of dollars” are not going to be spent on this leadership selection.

                    The amount each candidate can spend has been strictly limited by NZ Council.

                  • Raine …
                    27 August 2013 at 12:17 am

                    you know what? i don’t know who you are or why you’re following me around giving me a hard time buddy but you can just naff off ok! and stop talking to me weirdo!

                    [lprent: Perhaps you should read the about as well. I run the code and the servers, and you have about as much chance of losing my attention once it gets focused as a snowball’s chance in hell.

                    If you don’t demonstrate that you have read the policy shortly and will follow it, then you will be added to the list of people shovelled automatically to auto-spam very shortly.

                    You’re starting to look like a complete fool who is silly enough to argue with a sysop. Perhaps you should drop to a blogsite that tolerates fools. Just at present it looks to me like your natural environment would be either Whaleoil or Trademe forums. ]

                    • Raine …
                      27 August 2013 at 12:53 am

                      do you actually think i’m going to bend to your will? with an ego like that maybe you should run for leader. no-one will listen to you though cuz you act like a dick.

                      i hear you though. you want me off your site. whatever … i’m flattered you even noticed me. cya …

          • weka 51.2.2.2.2
            26 August 2013 at 10:47 pm

            rofl @CV.

            Difference is, you suggested an alternative 😈

  52. Swan 52
    26 August 2013 at 9:15 pm

    I have to say, I think Cunliffe is too far to the left. Jones may be the underdog but I think he is a better bet and may be a dark horse.

    • Colonial Viper 52.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:40 pm

      OK come out with it then. How many million fish did Jones save?

    • lprent 52.2
      26 August 2013 at 9:59 pm

      Not particularly surprising bearing in mind your previous comments. However in my opinion and looking at him with both my business and political hats, I think he is a useless dickhead who hasn’t shown any particular competence at anything he has ever done. He has no visible centre.

      Over the years he has demonstrated a complete inability to deal with or to attract women voters, and I strongly suspect that will reflect directly into any vote for any party he leads. He seems to be more interested in acting as a local corporate stooge than representing the voters of NZ

      As a politician he is glib and vacuous. I really really don’t like him. Even the thought of having him in the leadership contest makes me shudder for the future of Labour.

  53. What Rebuild 53
    26 August 2013 at 9:24 pm

    Pigman you know shit.I’ve voted labour my whole life except for greens last election. Get over your paranoia. The party deserves a better leader than CS. I’m bloody disappointed.

    • Jackal 53.1
      26 August 2013 at 11:10 pm

      You’re “bloody disappointed” that CS is the new Labour leader? These concern tr0lls aren’t even trying to make sense anymore.

  54. Saarbo 54
    26 August 2013 at 9:28 pm

    Native Affairs:

    Cunliffe once again showing his strategic acumen and courage by not ruling out buying back SOE’s
    While Jones/Robertson ruling it out, which is short sighted and clearly shows that they are still wedded to Neo Lib orthodoxy. Labour has had to purchase back Air NZ and NZ Railways, there can be a number of reasons to purchase assets back…to point blank state that you are not going to buy back SOE’s shows Robertson sits on the Right of Labour (imo).

    • karol 54.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:30 pm

      Also, Cunliffe’s response was short, sharp and clear. Robertson fluffed around equivocating.

      • Saarbo 54.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:53 pm

        Its going to be a interesting few weeks: Cunliffe has the brains to take on Neo Lib orthodoxy, great that he said he would not rule out buying back SOE’s. Robertson and Jones both ruled it out because they wanted to be “upfront” because of the demands on our resources. Incredibly short sighted, I took from this that a Robertson led Labour Govt would only be in power for one term. But his response will appease the Right…Robertson is everything Chris Trotter has said he is.

        The response to Sky City. Robertson said “if we have to pay them out to change it, then we will”…nice work Grant, I’m sure Sky City have noted that!!!

        Cunliffe “..we reserve the right to regulate in the public interest…” , one thing is for sure, Cunliffe wont be getting any invitations to Sky City Corporate Box in a hurry. Brilliant.

        • Colonial Viper 54.1.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 10:18 pm

          Cunliffe’s positioning is brilliant in several ways. The most fundamental is this: by putting a stake in the ground, Cunliffe has given a future Labour Government negotiating space.

          Jones and Robertson have already given up any negotiating leverage that a Labour Government might have had over Sky City.

          Simply put, this is where Cunliffe’s top tier private sector corporate experience romps away from the other candidates. Day one of the contest and it is already obvious.

          • felix 54.1.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 11:17 pm

            Indeed. And I was going to add that it romps all over Key’s skills as well.

            Then I remembered that Key’s shitty deals for NZ are actually pretty good deals for the foreign corporates he represents. He’s never actually sat on the NZ side of the negotiating table.

          • Saarbo 54.1.1.1.2
            27 August 2013 at 6:30 am

            Yep.

        • Jackal 54.1.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 11:23 pm

          Saarbo

          Robertson and Jones both ruled it out because they wanted to be “upfront” because of the demands on our resources.

          That’s not correct Saarbo. Robertson said words to the effect that they would need to prioritize where those resources are spent (mainly because of the huge national debt). He said they would look at it once they had a clearer idea of the economic position New Zealand was in after National’s mismanagement. In other words he didn’t rule it in or out.

          • Colonial Viper 54.1.1.2.1
            26 August 2013 at 11:26 pm

            Keeping options open (fudging) in other words? I guess that’s OK.

            Robertson said words to the effect that they would need to prioritize where those resources are spent (mainly because of the huge national debt).

            Let me remind all lefties here of something fundamental:

            Money is NOT A RESOURCE

            • Jackal 54.1.1.2.1.1
              26 August 2013 at 11:43 pm

              Have you been drinking? When you say resources it can include money. Here is the first part of the Wikipedia entry on Resources:

              A resource is a source or supply from which benefit is produced. Typically resources are materials, money, services, staff, or other assets that are transformed to produce benefit and in the process may be consumed or made unavailable.

              Next you’ll be telling me that Labour will be onto a winner if they just ignore the (currently $82.6 billion) national debt.

              • Colonial Viper …
                26 August 2013 at 11:57 pm

                Coal is a resource. Top soil is a resource. Titanium is a resource. Fresh water is a resource.

                Money can be generated a billion dollars at a time, by simple effortless keystrokes.

                Money is NOT a resource.

          • felix 54.1.1.2.2
            26 August 2013 at 11:51 pm

            “In other words he didn’t rule it in or out.”

            Good for him. I prefer the guy who in actual words ruled it in.

          • Saarbo 54.1.1.2.3
            27 August 2013 at 6:51 am

            Jackal,

            You are dreaming, have another listen, he did NOT say anything about “prioritizing”, he pretty much ruled it out because of the debt that Labour will inherit. To me that would suggest that his horizon of government is so short that he doesn’t ever expect to turn around the debt. There are also other circumstances that require a government to purchase back SOE’s, like when the private sector fails running a strategic asset.

            Robertson is Shearer MKII.

    • weka 54.2
      26 August 2013 at 9:35 pm

      How can Labour rule out not buying back SOEs after campaigning on the No Assets Sales petition?! Oh, we won’t sell any assets, why would we when we’ve got NACT to do it?

      • Colonial Viper 54.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 9:44 pm

        Robertson is simply staying true to his word that he won’t interfere with the markets. Watch the right wing media flock around like seagulls around snapper.

        • Jackal 54.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 11:36 pm

          Stop talking rubbish CV. If New Zealand cannot afford to meet its debt obligations and buy back those SOE’s what do you propose Labour does?

          If you watch the Native Affairs video again, you will note that David Cunliffe doesn’t actually give a categoric “yes” to buying back the partially privatised SOE’s.

          “If it is in the publics best interest” he said, which is clearly not the categoric “yes” that some are making it out to be. If we cannot meet our debt obligations and maintain infrastructure, then it is not in the public interest to buy back those assets.

          • felix 54.2.1.1.1
            26 August 2013 at 11:49 pm

            I expect them to “regulate in the public interest”.

          • Colonial Viper 54.2.1.1.2
            27 August 2013 at 12:01 am

            Stop talking rubbish CV. If New Zealand cannot afford to meet its debt obligations and buy back those SOE’s what do you propose Labour does?

            Why wouldn’t NZ be able to meet its debt obligations? The cashflow from owning the generators is huge.

          • Tracey 54.2.1.1.3
            27 August 2013 at 7:49 am

            Isn’t that what National wanted? Run up our debt, sell our assets and leave Labour unable to do anything about it.

      • Tracey 54.2.2
        27 August 2013 at 7:50 am

        because, they will be more expensive to buy back than we got for selling them… and we are in debt, thanks to the Nats.

    • Nicolas 54.3
      26 August 2013 at 9:50 pm

      More revealing was Jones’ idea that he doesn’t like “messing with contracts”, when asked whether he would attempt to correct for the disgrace that was the Skycity deal. Looks like he should have been with Goff, Cosgrove and King in that VIP box the other night…

      • Saarbo 54.3.1
        26 August 2013 at 10:04 pm

        Yes, but at least with Jones he is upfront about being on the Right in labour, no surprise there really. Robertson however…he’s going to be found out…

      • Tracey 54.3.2
        27 August 2013 at 7:47 am

        It seems to me that Jones isn’t even National lite… he’s National. Why do so many MPs join Labour by mistake. It’s been happening for a few decades now.

    • karol 54.4
      26 August 2013 at 10:28 pm

      Tracy Watkins and Vernon Small: “Labour leadership debate uneventful”

      uneventful?

      What do they want? Blood in the water?

      • weka 54.4.1
        26 August 2013 at 10:34 pm

        They must be listening Karol, now the headline is “Labour leadership hopefuls get down to business”

        • weka 54.4.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 10:35 pm

          “And he ruled out a ticket with former running mate Nanaia Mahuta, who he said had told him that with a new baby she would not look at being the deputy leader.”

          • Tracey 54.4.1.1.1
            27 August 2013 at 7:46 am

            thanks for this weka. Appreciate. Jones will be pleased, now, if she would only quit her job and be at home permanently she would be his archetypal woman.

      • Mary 54.4.2
        26 August 2013 at 10:36 pm

        Is this the right link? Can’t see any reference to “uneventful”.

        • karol 54.4.2.1
          27 August 2013 at 9:14 am

          Mary the “uneventful” line was the headline for the article featured on the Stuff mainpage. The headline on the actual article was different.

      • QoT 54.4.3
        26 August 2013 at 11:03 pm

        What do they want? Blood in the water?

        Yes. If Cunliffe could throw a few homophobic slurs at Robertson, who could make a retort about the size and location of Cunliffe’s house, and Jones could sit off to one side screaming “FRONTBUMS FRONTBUMS FRONTBUMS” it would pretty much be eleven Christmases all at once for some parts of our media.

        • weka 54.4.3.1
          26 August 2013 at 11:08 pm

          Lol.

          Please tell me your sabbatical doesn’t extend over the duration of the leadership challenge.

  55. What Rebuild 55
    26 August 2013 at 9:33 pm

    Pigman you know shit.I’ve voted labour my whole life except for greens last election. Get over your paranoia. The party deserves a better leader than DC -I’m bloody disappointed.

    • Colonial Viper 55.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:42 pm

      Gawd, I guess we’ll all have to live with that then.

    • karol 55.2
      26 August 2013 at 9:49 pm

      There’s a fairly small caucus. Who in the current caucus is more redy to take on the leadership?

      • Mary 55.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 10:58 pm

        That’s unfortunately the situation Labour is in at the moment. The depth just isn’t there. That doesn’t mean Cunliffe can’t cut it. Key is a hollow man who can be easily blown over. The fact Labour hasn’t been able to manage even this merely shows the state of dilapidation Labour’s been in lately. Cunliffe can do it. He mightn’t be liked by everyone inside Labour but surely this shouldn’t matter if there’s a shared belief in traditional Labour values and a committed and united party to convey those values to voters.

    • felix 55.3
      27 August 2013 at 8:19 am

      “I’ve voted labour my whole life except for greens last election.”

      I think you mean you’ve trolled the standard your whole life except on wednesdays when you do polling.

      Seriously, you suck at this.

  56. Sanctuary 56
    26 August 2013 at 9:48 pm

    Anyone seen how sour Hooten’s tweets have become? He knows Cunliffe is going to give the Nats a real run for their money.

  57. Colonial Viper 57
    26 August 2013 at 9:50 pm

    “I know Cunliffe’s speech must have terrified the right because about 5 minutes after Cunliffe gave his speech, Matthew Hooton was texting me screaming abuse. The Right are frightened. Very frightened.”

    Good old Bomber

    – See more at: http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/08/26/david-cunliffe-leadership-challenge-speech/#sthash.qY1SIcGh.dpuf

    • lurgee 57.1
      26 August 2013 at 9:54 pm

      Bomber’s mad, though. Very mad.

      • beGone Craven Spy Bill leopard 57.1.1
        26 August 2013 at 11:49 pm

        Did you miss out a word or two there Lurgee?

        “Bomber makes me mad, though. Very mad.”

        Its that what you meant to say?

    • karol 57.2
      26 August 2013 at 10:00 pm

      Yep. There’s a new energy in the air. About a weak ago I was despairing over the state of the Labour leadership, and thus for the left in next year’s election.

      Now there is a glimmer of “new hope” and a “new beginning” – not so much of a glimmer of a new vision or direction, though.

      But new hope and beginning is an improvement.

      And smell the frenzied fear of many right wing commenters.

      • Anne 57.2.1
        26 August 2013 at 10:11 pm

        And smell the frenzied fear of many right wing commenters.

        Its made my day!

        • Jim Nald 57.2.1.1
          26 August 2013 at 11:05 pm

          Yeah, I am even walking around with a bounce and fresh ‘spring’ in my steps.

        • Chrissy 57.2.1.2
          26 August 2013 at 11:12 pm

          So lovely to see these guys in action tonight: a week ago seems like another country: this is a much better Labour party doing its thing!

      • weka 57.2.2
        26 August 2013 at 11:11 pm

        I agree Karol, and it comes on the back of the GCSB protest and mobilisation. It’s been a long time coming.

        • Chrissy 57.2.2.1
          26 August 2013 at 11:21 pm

          Dunno if anyone else has noticed but on Native Affairs these guys were starting to get their act together: and the act is a funny one: there’s a tall, straight guy, and a shorter, rounder funny one. And another wacky one. So, I’m thinking Abbott and Costello (or is it the 3 stooges, I dont know that stuff well. The Goodies, perhaps!) Anyway, it works: Cunliffe is high and profound and seriously smart/ clever, Robertson is funny and agile, and Jones is, well…. Between them, working off each other, they will seriously do a job on the Nats et al. Watch em do it!

      • Sanctuary 57.2.3
        27 August 2013 at 8:07 am

        “…Now there is a glimmer of “new hope” and a “new beginning”…”

        I am dusting off my Snowspeeder, time to halt the advance of the Sith Lord Key and the Nat’s AT-AT walkers!

  58. Clement Pinto 58
    26 August 2013 at 10:36 pm

    I am glad that Mr Cunliffe kind of ruled Dr Norman out of Finance Ministerial post. Russel as Finance Minister will ruffle many feathers and cause financial/economical instability and harm the country. I fail to see in what way Russel is qualified, even remotely, to hold such a post. As far as I know, his doctorate was for political science PhD thesis on the Alliance Coalition.
    Keen to hear your views.

    • QoT 58.1
      26 August 2013 at 11:07 pm

      ruffle many feathers

      God forbid that any economic/business feathers get ruffled, after that whole global financial crisis caused by smug corporations who don’t even pay their due amount of tax, who assumed growth would be infinite and knew they’d get bailed out by taxpaying citizens across the world because they’ve convinced us we’ll perish without them.

      And Dr Michael Cullen wasn’t an economist, either. It probably helped.

    • Tracey 58.2
      27 August 2013 at 7:42 am

      Yes, afterall the crazy bastard was suggesting we use similar tools to the USA and UK to get the economy moving. How outrageous was that?

  59. millsy 59
    26 August 2013 at 10:40 pm

    And then there were 3…

    Cunliffe, Jones and Robertson — 3 different personalities. Good luck to all 3, and I hope all three give a comprehensive articulation of what a Labour party under them would be like.

    It is going to be an interesting few weeks, that’s for sure.

  60. tricledrown 60
    27 August 2013 at 12:22 am

    Raine this is putting labour on the front page of every paper and on the tv blogosphere day and night priceless.

  61. Colonial Viper 61
    27 August 2013 at 12:52 am

    437 comments on the Cunliffe announces post.

    That says something good. Something very good.

  62. Jim 62
    27 August 2013 at 7:27 am

    Vernon Small on Stuff is implying a split – one candidate taking caucus and the unions, and one taking the rank and file vote.

    If any candidate won through the caucus and union votes, without also securing the support of the rank and file and/or the public, oh what a self-destructive mess it would all become.

    • Te Reo Putake 62.1
      27 August 2013 at 7:39 am

      Can’t see how that works, Jim. All 3 sectors will deliver split votes. It’s actually possible that no candidate gets a majority vote in any sector at all, hence the STV voting system to ensure a result.

    • Sanctuary 62.2
      27 August 2013 at 8:34 am

      “…Vernon Small on Stuff is implying a split…”

      The impression I get is the press gallery is completely outside it’s comfort zone on this and are guessing. Remember, they are only experts when reporting on the horse race within parliament. When it comes to the rank and file and the unions, or wider NZ in general, they’ve really got no more real information to work on than you or I.

  63. Tracey 63
    27 August 2013 at 7:57 am

    If Robertson is to the right of Labour, why would the Unions be swinging in behind him as some suggest?

    Des anyone know how many unions are not affiliated to Labour (if any)?

    • Colonial Viper 63.1
      27 August 2013 at 8:24 am

      Union membership and union leadership can be two quite different things.

      Quite a few unions, including newer ones like Unite, but also much more powerful ones like PSA, TEU, FINSEC, Assoc of Salaried Medical Specialists are not Labour affiliated.

      • Tracey 63.1.1
        27 August 2013 at 8:27 am

        Thanks CV. The media continues to speak as though ALL unions are affiliated to Labour. I suspected this was incorrect and appreciate your clarification. I presume the Police (Union) Association is not?

        • Colonial Viper 63.1.1.1
          27 August 2013 at 8:29 am

          Indeed. For the sake of being “officially neutral” in the service of and relationship with all shades of government, unions like the PSA and the police are not affiliated.

  64. Tracey 64
    27 August 2013 at 8:25 am

    Any insight into what he has in mind when he says “transformative ideas”?

  65. Colonial Viper 65
    27 August 2013 at 8:27 am

    NZ Herald’s “Oh Noes!”

    Wait…there’s a consensus between National and Labour on “economic fundamentals”???

    When the fuck were they going to tell the NZ public about this?

    Like a US primary, it will be a very public campaign for the votes of a partisan electorate. Candidates will be under pressure to take more extreme positions than they would in a general election.

    This carries risks not just for Labour but for the good government of New Zealand if the consensus between the two major parties on economic fundamentals is undermined by a leader’s public commitments in a campaign for the party’s vote.

    There is good reason to confine these elections to a party caucus. MPs are generally well briefed on policy issues and aware of the national interest.

    • Colonial Viper 65.1
      27 August 2013 at 8:44 am

      Sorry, I see this has already been posted on Open Mike…

    • billbrowne 65.2
      27 August 2013 at 9:38 am

      Oh won’t someone think of the national interest!

    • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 65.3
      27 August 2013 at 12:05 pm

      Gee, the word ‘national’ really has changed its meaning over the last few years hasn’t it?

      It used to refer to ‘of a country’ or ‘of a people in a given country’, now it appears to refer to ‘big money’.

      I suggest that readers replace any reference to ‘national’ in main stream media twitterings with ‘big money’ and see if the real meaning is made any more apparent.

      (Some recent examples “national interests” and “national security”.)

      Yep, that works.

    • swan 65.4
      27 August 2013 at 12:25 pm

      This is a real concern. Of course the middle class will be OK, they will emigrate to Oz as required until wage rates re-equilibrate. Its the poor that I am concerned about who may not be so mobile.

      • beGone Craven SpyBill leopard 65.4.1
        27 August 2013 at 12:39 pm

        Swan,

        The middle class will be alright?

        Haven’t you noticed that the middle class are under attack in Western countries? How did you miss that?

        The poor are increasingly made up of people who used to be middle class. This is what the increasing gap between rich and poor is all about. Moving to Austalia won’t fix this.

        It would be really good if the middle class noticed this and stopped consoling themselves with international flights and started voting for political approaches that serve their, and ‘the poor’s’ interests. This is an international phenomenon. How does moving to another country with the self-same political approaches going to help stop the rot catching up with them eventually?

      • Colonial Viper 65.4.2
        27 August 2013 at 1:07 pm

        The middle class will be OK? You mean the top 10% to 20% of the citizens?

        Whats in Australia – apart from a massive mining, retail and economic slow down?

        You can sell your house in Hamilton or Wellington to move to Australia – what will it get you there? A family home in Bendigo or Newcastle maybe?

  66. Sable 66
    27 August 2013 at 9:06 am

    So Labour’s new catch phrase is “Own Our Future” the question is “who” will the owner be? If, like National, Labour continue their current policies of selling New Zealanders out to foreign multi nationals whilst making people pay twice for education and health services (once in taxes and again in uni fees or private medical insurance) then we know the answer don’t we.

    • the pigman 66.1
      27 August 2013 at 4:44 pm

      Think that slogan comes from the 2011 campaign, it was designed to highlight/counteract National’s planned asset sales but appeared in a lot of Labour Party social media stuff.

  67. Tracey 67
    27 August 2013 at 10:55 am

    Claire Trevitt writes today in the Herald

    There were also rumours that Mr Cunliffe was offering positions to some MPs in return for their support. Mr Cunliffe has denied that but the rumours indicate the campaign might not be as clean as the party hierarchy is hoping.

    Without revealing sources couldn’t a journalist write that one MP told me he had offered them a higher position etc etc…

  69. Colonial Viper 69
    27 August 2013 at 5:02 pm

    This one time I met David Cunliffe

    Seems like a 2-3 day stubble is the optimum. Someone tell his campaign team lol

    Then his taxi came, and he got in it, and went home, probably to do some hard-out working, because he seems like that kind of dude.

    You know the kind.

    Someone who will work himself to the bone putting back together a country that is coming apart at the seams under a corrupt, corrosive hand.

    An articulate person; the kind who can string a coherent sentence together without a speech-writer.

    http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/08/27/this-one-time-i-met-david-cunliffe/

Links to post