Demand the debate

52 comments on “Demand the debate ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Sanctuary 1

   13 July 2021 at 8:54 am

   The leaking is out of control in National, the more Collin’s tries to control her caucus the more party discipline slips through her fingers like quicksilver.

   I mean, this whole racist dogwhistle piece was clearly designed as an expensive, major branding set piece to shift the debate away from covid and get a little oxygen on an issue that National (for whatever reason, my guess is He Puapua has become a Benghazi moment for some in the Nat’s caucus) thinks is divisive and might help it in the polls.

   And it has been completely ankle tapped from within their own caucus, wrecking the strategy before it even got going.

   Just extraordinary.
   • Cricklewood 1.1

     13 July 2021 at 9:16 am

     Tbh the party will implode on its self shortly and then the rebuild begins in earnest with whichever faction survives.

     Seems to be the cycle now thinking back to David Shearer… question is do they have an Andrew Little type figure who can stabilize the party and then has the humility to step aside for the good of the party.
     • Anne 1.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 10:37 am

       … question is do they have an Andrew Little type figure who can stabilize the party and then has the humility to step aside for the good of the party.

       My guess is: Shane Reti could fulfil the role until such a time as the ideal leader becomes apparent – which is pretty much what happened with Labour.

       I would be interested to know the motivation behind the latest leak. Was it because he/she/they were genuinely appalled at the dog whistling tactics? Or was it because they belong to the anti-Collins faction and want to get rid of her and install their preferred candidate.

       A mix of both maybe.
2. pat 2

   13 July 2021 at 9:03 am

   Judith isnt quite as silly as she looks…i suspect her goal is to hang on to the leadership (rather than come up with an election winning strategy) so as to be in place when the shit hits the fan for the Government and win the subsequent election by default….oppositions dont win elections, governments lose them.
   • McFlock 2.1

     13 July 2021 at 12:28 pm

     I suspect that’s her hope, but oppositions need to be in a position to credibly threaten the government.

     That’s why Little quit, and unless she starts moving the nats up to the mid thirties, it’s why Collins won’t ever be in a position to win.

     National were sauntering to victory in 2017. They lost because Labour getting a spark under its arse made it a credible coalition partner for NZ1.

     If the government and the main opposition party are both phoning it in, a third group reaches prominence.
     • pat 2.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 12:30 pm

       If the property bubble bursts before the next election there is every chance the Leader of the National Party will be our next PM, irrespective of who they may be.
       • McFlock 2.1.1.1

         13 July 2021 at 12:44 pm

         Hell no.

         I strongly suspect the propertied class is already solidly weighted towards the right wing.

         And when the accursed bubble pops, there will be a bunch of folks for whom actually owning their home, with the stability that brings, will become an achievable dream.

         But even if your prediction about a bubble pop leading a swing to the right works out, by that time national could be on 11 and ACT on 24.
         • pat 2.1.1.1.1

           13 July 2021 at 1:06 pm

           Its not a swing to ‘the right’….its apportioning blame to the incumbent, the crash (when it happens) will be blamed on whoevers in power at the time, nevermind its causes are decades old.

           As to improving homeownership rates, that wont happen immediately, there’ll be a world of pain before any improvement, assuming there is one….that will depend very much on the response.
           • McFlock 2.1.1.1.1.1

             13 July 2021 at 1:22 pm

             Agree about blame on the incumbent, but what do people do with that blame?

             One thing I’m waiting to see is whether Labour can manage a caucus leadership refresh without losing after term 3 (which seems to be a traditional fail point for NZ govts).

             The CGT and a couple of other things Ardern ruled out might be opportunities for if she decides to retire when the writing is on the wall. I’d love to say “fourth term”, but policy fatigue seems to set in around term 2.5. So a few senior leaders leaving, with the places filled by current associate-level ministers with new and leftisher ideas might be a plan.
             • pat …

               13 July 2021 at 4:58 pm

               I’d suggest they will be lucky to avoid a recession before the end of the current term
               • McFlock …

                 13 July 2021 at 5:16 pm

                 Yeah, because the rest of the world will drag us down. especially if the Chinese economy tanks and their growth turns out to be largely illusion.

                 As opposed to a recession of our own devising.

                 I suppose some of Labour’s social policies might (or could be spun to) alienate some voters, but again we need to ask how much of the fomenting by nats will be preaching to the choir?

                 And if National don’t pull finger, where will the Labour support go? Some of it will go right, maybe ACT, most likely something like the nat-lites. Or split 10% amongst five 2% far-right parties. But some of it will go Green, Māori or NZ1 (I’m still reluctant to declare it dead lol).

                 National are fighting ACT for the far-right turf, but I don’t think the rest of NZ are anywhere close to that ground. And Juco will never be the face of natlite like Key was.
                 • pat …

                   13 July 2021 at 5:19 pm

                   The potential triggers are manifold and unimportant…as you agreed, the incumbents will carry the can.
                   • McFlock …

                     13 July 2021 at 5:26 pm

                     “We still have done better than most of the planet through various global crises” is a much smaller can to carry than “we deregulated, screwed up, and now you’ve lost all your money to an aussie speculator”.
                 • pat …

                   13 July 2021 at 5:31 pm

                   In the scheme of who ends up PM that dont matter
                   • ken …

                     13 July 2021 at 6:16 pm

                     But the Nats don’t even have a credible candidate.
                   • pat …

                     13 July 2021 at 6:29 pm

                     Lol…are any of them credible before election?….I submit Trump and Boris.

                     Credibility is secondary to timing
3. Ad 3

   13 July 2021 at 9:23 am

   By the time Labour are out of power again in 2029, most of the key institutions will have had big Maori governance components long since built into them that will be pretty hard to unwind, including:

   – water

   – land transport

   – national parks

   – intellectual property

   – local government

   – defence

   – sport including the key national teams

   – arts

   – broadcasting

   – justice and courts

   – health

   – social welfare

   – fisheries

   – public holidays

   It would also not surprise me if by our bicentennary in 2040 we had an Upper House with at least a third Maori seats in them.

   I would rather this than we end up like South Africa or Fiji.
   • pat 3.1

     13 July 2021 at 9:26 am

     2029?….PMSL
     • Ad 3.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 10:00 am

       It’s going to take that long for National to sort itself out, or for Act to grow enough to supplant them. Pretty similar to growth of the Alliance 2 decades ago.
       • Enough is Enough 3.1.1.1

         13 July 2021 at 10:51 am

         A week is a long time in politics, 8 years is several lifetimes.
         • Ad 3.1.1.1.1

           13 July 2021 at 11:07 am

           Well as an old saw that’s fine. But New Zealand’s current record since 1987 is: 9 years, 9 years, and 9 years. And the current government’s been given the largest political gift of a generation in its second term.
           • Enough is Enough 3.1.1.1.1.1

             13 July 2021 at 3:14 pm

             A printing press with no opposition is a good gift, so you are probably correct.

             The record of non-delivery must catch up with them at some point though.
             • Ad …

               13 July 2021 at 3:18 pm

               Most governments now only have two Departments that mean anything:

               Treasury and Health.

               And TBH that’s all a winning party needs.
             • ken …

               13 July 2021 at 6:20 pm

               You think that Labour will be punished for not instantly sorting out problems that started with Prebble and Douglas, and were made worse by every government since?
               • Enough is Enough …

                 14 July 2021 at 7:48 am

                 Yes – voters are fickle
           • Anne 3.1.1.1.1.2

             13 July 2021 at 5:15 pm

             current record since 1987

             1990.
       • Stuart Munro 3.1.1.2

         14 July 2021 at 7:31 am

         Quicker if they dissolve and start afresh.
4. Stephen D 4

   13 July 2021 at 9:36 am

   It also begs the question about National Party finances. Having to go cap in hand to Don Brash to raise funds suggests that their own Party finances aren’t in great shape. That would be even more of a worry for caucus, most of whom seem to derive the bulk of their campaign funds from the party.
   • tc 4.1

     13 July 2021 at 9:48 am

     National have little to offer in opposition aside from division, dog whistling and dirty politics.

     Money flows in once the likelihood of power is there i.e. once Collins in gone as she’s unelectable.
     • Pete 4.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 1:56 pm

       Division, dog whistling and dirty politics don’t work? Hook those up with a few other things?
       • tc 4.1.1.1

         13 July 2021 at 2:04 pm

         Look at the polls. Kiwis appear to have finally woken up to the national MO for a moment at least.

         The pandemic focus folk on what means most, a well funded and working health system, effective border control and timely science based decisions.

         None of that is in national’s DNA.
   • woodart 4.2

     13 July 2021 at 10:53 am

     having to go cap in hand to someone who openly states that he is more interested/connected to another party should be a huge slap in the face for all of the rural shitkickers that still think the nats is their party. perhaps if judith was honest(tui ad there!),the debate would be; what exactly does national stand for?
5. Jenny how to get there 5

   13 July 2021 at 11:28 am

   Demand the debate
   Written By: MICKYSAVAGE

   If there is to be a debate. Someone to ably skewer the racist narrative embraced by Brash (and Collins), Ex RNZN Ngāti Awa, Joe Trinder

   Demand the debate;

   “…..On a Radio New Zealand interview with Kim Hill, Dr Don Brash made this bizarre comment “The people that arrived before Māori were Moriori then the Māori slaughtered them“.
   Dr Brash is quoting his School Journal of July 1916. During world war 1 New Zealand was going through a celebration of British colonisation and the history of the Moriori people was “adjusted” to vilify Māori as conquest over a pre-Polynesian Moriori settlers.
   This false history was used to justify a benevolent colonisation of New Zealand by the British. A way of painting a picture if Māori destroyed the Moriori civilisation then that justifies what the British colonists did to Māori. It also helped undermine Māori as being indigenous to New Zealand Aotearoa…..

   “Turituri Brash!
   Moriori are Māori”
   Joe Trinder

   http://mananews.co.nz/wp/?p=10479
   • Ad 5.1

     13 July 2021 at 12:12 pm

     Not so fast there Joe.

     https://e-tangata.co.nz/reflections/moriori-still-setting-the-record-straight/
     • Nic the NZer 5.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 12:36 pm

       This highlights one of the major issues with using CRT as a framework for racial justice in New Zealand.

       While in a post the other day Mickey suggested its purpose was to analyse legal frameworks as a cause of racial inequity. But even on its own terms its clearly a political analysis of American race relations post slavery. There are plenty of American cultural fads which New Zealand should not adopt. Using CRT to discuss NZ is going to really screw things up if it happens two Maori tribes implemented slavery onto the earlier Moriori settlers. Especially as one of the main CRT goals is ultimately reparations payments.
       • Ad 5.1.1.1

         13 July 2021 at 12:40 pm

         For our purposes it would be much more useful to generate a theoretical historical structure based on the multiple volumes of Treaty of Waitangi claims. To that end Part three of Belich’s 3-volume Making Peoples was about as close as I’ve seen to a specific localised narrative put into a global context.
         • Nic the NZer 5.1.1.1.1

           13 July 2021 at 1:18 pm

           Agree. Adopting US politics here is fundamentally dumb.

           CRT also seems to be incompatible with UK politics where the govt report concluded that different eras of UK immigration lead to different class localities for those immigrants and that actually the latest generations of immigrants are having better outcomes than average brits. e.g the existance (or not) of racism doesn’t really cause the outcome of inequality anyway.
   • Jenny how to get there 5.2

     13 July 2021 at 8:13 pm

     Joe Trinder interviewed by Sam Hudson on racist Lee William’s midlife crisis

     S.H. Racism has, is becoming a recent trend in New Zealand, after an individual named Lee Williams, also known on-line as ‘Cross the Rubicon’, has more or less sent inciteful messages to thousands of people mocking the Haka, Maori culture, heritage and History.What can we do about it?

     J.T. Where I believe it comes from, is Donald Trump and the leader of the National Party Judith Collins.
     When politicians start to go after ethnic minorities, what it does, is emboldens people who hold malignant racist views to speak up about their prejudices in public, and announce them.
     So it really starts with world leaders….

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK55uWnwp0Q
     • Jenny how to get there 5.2.1

       13 July 2021 at 8:27 pm

       Joe Trinder debates John Ansel

       https://www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com/uploads/1/3/1/2/1312301/ansell_trinder_debate_raw.mp3
6. paulhenry bewick 6

   13 July 2021 at 2:35 pm

   We are so narrow and benign in our thinking one has never learnt from history.

   The Treaty was to reflect one thing — Democracy — freedom of speech, freedom to choose , the right to disagree, one vote one person and the right to peacefully protest. — Democracy is over 2000 years old — how narrow minded are we today.

   Today — Democracy is seriously being eroded by this Government.

   The passing of legislation without public debate or accountability, legislation that was never part of Labours mandate, constitutes nothing more than — deception, lies, fraud, an a untrustworthy Government.

   This Government should resign immediately forthwith.

   Socialism / Communism destroys the very fabric of ones natural rights –Democracy.

   The Past :

   It is done and dusted we should move on and forget the so-called blame- game.

   — we should move forward with vision, hope, integrity and faith —

   Unfortunately the world we live is about to blow itself apart with bombs,viruses and insane politicians.

   RegardsPaul
   • solkta 6.1

     13 July 2021 at 3:21 pm

     The Treaty was to reflect one thing — Democracy — freedom of speech, freedom to choose , the right to disagree, one vote one person

     What complete nonsense. Working class men did not get the vote in Britain until 1918 and working class women 1928.
     • Jenny how to get there 6.1.1

       13 July 2021 at 4:38 pm

       There was only one vote per person in this country to relatively recently. What democracy there has been has been limited and perverted to suit the interests of white colonial establishment.
       On the founding of New Zealand parliamentary system, because of the preponderence of Maori in the population, Maori were not officially allowed to enrol on the general roll as late as 1975, this was done to prevent Maori dominating the politics of this country, in the early days.
       Maori were given a very limited number of Maori seats way below their percentage of the population and what they could have won on the general roll.
       If Maori had been allowed to vote on the general roll from the beginning of our parliamentary system. For one thing, parliament would have been prevented from trying to legislate against indigenous Maori language and culture. Maori not English would be the first language of this country, just as Fijian is the first language of Fiji and Samoan is the first language of Samoa.
       Those who want to abolish the Maori roll, now that the demographic has changed in favour of New Zealanders of European descent, should remember that the Maori roll was established not for the benefit of Maori but to the benefit of Europeans to curtail Maori influence.Nowadays the Maori seats are all that allow Maori to have any independent say in parliament. To remove the Maori seats now, would be to complete the project to disenfranchise Maori.
       • solkta 6.1.1.1

         13 July 2021 at 4:59 pm

         Not sure how your rant is relevant as to whether the Treaty was about democracy. The Treaty did not establish a New Zealand government, this did not come until 13 years later. The Treaty was between Maori Iwi and the British Crown.

         You did though leave out the bit about how only land owning men could vote. The Maori seats were set up originally because Maori owned land collectively and so could not qualify for the general roll.
         • Jenny how to get there 6.1.1.1.1

           13 July 2021 at 5:59 pm

           The fact remains, Maori were prevented from registering on the general roll by law. This prohibition remained on the statute books right up to the point where Pakeha New Zealanders became the undisputed overwelming majority.
           This racist legislation makes a nonsense of paulhenry bewick’s completely ignorant claim, “The Treaty was to reflect one thing — Democracy — freedom of speech, freedom to choose , the right to disagree, one vote one person, the right to peaceful protest”

           The last. the right to peaceful protest was denied Maori most infamously at Parihaka, with rape and mass internment of peaceful Maori protesters on their own land that the settlers wanted to steal.

           It might also be noted here that when the treaty between the Crown and Maori was signed, Maori outnumbered European settlers two to one. And the land wars were launched by the Crown when Europeans outnumbered Maori by two to one.
           • solkta 6.1.1.1.1.1

             13 July 2021 at 10:01 pm

             Still not sure how your rant is relevant as to whether the Treaty was about democracy. When the British Crown offered the Treaty they would have had no inclination that many decades in the future New Zealand would have universal suffrage.
             • Jenny how to get there …

               14 July 2021 at 11:17 am

               The point is, the treaty was never intended to be honoured, it was signed at a time when the British Empire colony, compared to the indigenous Maori was militarily weak.
               When military supremacy was reached, loans were raised in London for a full scale military subjugation of Maori. The Treaty was conviently shelved away and forgotten. But not by Maori who remembered the treaty and referred to it often.
               Maori have never given up agitating for the promises contained in the Treaty to be honoured.
               • solkta …

                 14 July 2021 at 12:37 pm

                 No the point is that the Treaty was not about democracy. Whether or not there was an intention to implement, that does not change what it says.
7. Descendant Of Smith 7

   13 July 2021 at 3:42 pm

   lol one vote one person.You realise only land owners could vote originally. Far cry from one vote, one person. Oddly in New Zealand Maori men got the right to vote before European men.

   Early electionsThe electoral franchise established under the 1852 New Zealand Constitution Act was theoretically colour-blind. In reality, though, very few Māori men could qualify under the property requirement because they possessed their lands communally (as iwi, hapu or whanau groups) and not under individual freehold or leasehold title as Europeans did. Only about 100 Māori voted in the first general election in 1853, out of a total electorate of 5849. In 1859 the British Crown Law Office confirmed that Māori could not vote unless they had individual title granted by the Crown.
   European colonists generally welcomed this state of affairs because they did not think Māori were yet ‘civilised’ enough to exercise such an important responsibility. They were also worried that if large numbers of Māori were enrolled, they could swamp the votes of settlers in many North Island electorates.

   https://nzhistory.govt.nz/politics/maori-and-the-vote/setting-up-seat
   
   
   And here’s a useful resource about the use of urgency which was at its peak in the 80’s and 90’s.

   Both National and Labour governments have used urgency in quite similar amounts. I oft think it is unwarranted.

   The other trick is to move stuff into regulation from legislation which means things can be changed more easily vis government agencies.

   It’s a nongy suggestion however that its a communist plot…..

   
   

   https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/public-law/publications/books-reports/publications/Whats-the-Hurry.pdf
8. JustMe 8

   14 July 2021 at 6:03 am

   When did a previous National government allow public debate of the following:The proposed TPPA. John Key in fact denigrated NZers who protested against the TPPA.$8million on an mansion for ONE person in Hawaii.$12million for an apartment for ONE person in New York.Many millions spent on 34 beemers with bum warming seats.$10million on bribing a Saudi ‘sheep farmer;$20billion spent on the NZ military.A couple of bribes running into the millions on both Rio Tinto and Warner Brothers.And so many other spending sprees to massage the ego of the National Party leader at the time or keep their masters in say America happy. When it comes to National they believe they hold the monopoly on intelligence. But whilst they carry on about having a debate I am 100% certain that if they were in government they wouldn’t give a toss what the people think. In fact would I be so wrong to say that National would HEAR the people(during a debate)but never LISTEN to the people? Hearing and Listening have different meanings.

   Judith Collins and her sycophantic followers are just not DOING IT for National. Meaning they are demeaning the NZ National party with everything they say and do. As soon as Judith Collins opens her mouth to speak on radio or the telly you know she is about to say something stupid. She has become THAT predictable.

   National have now become a minor political party with ACT over-taking them at almost every poll. The problem with ACT is their leader comes across as a clown and not quite leader material either.

   Lets leave these two CLOWN acts to undermine each other and themselves in their race to the bottom of the barrel.
   • JO 8.1

     14 July 2021 at 1:44 pm

     Great description of the Ancien Régime for Bastille Day.
9. JustMe 9

   14 July 2021 at 6:40 pm

   I look at National and its current batch of MPs with the viewpoint they didn't listen to NZers in the past and so it's unlikely they will listen to NZers today(in the present)or into the future.

   And so this Demand the Debate by them is just a white-wash and we know for sure they will conveniently forget about any 'discussion' with the public when it suits them and their agendas eg making money for themselves and their cronies.
10. georgecom 10

    14 July 2021 at 11:19 pm

    Yes lets have a public discussion, in fact I expect it. I heard Willie Jackson saying as much. A mature, genuine and in depth discussion. Not some stale trite ramblings from divisive Don or some glib Judith Collins billboards. I suspect a national debate may not serve National that well. Forget about a Maori Parliament but lets have a discussion about greater Maori involvement and management of things. Increasingly Maori are having input into the management of water assets, not ownership, but certainly lets look at management. And more involvement in things like Oranga Tamariki, lets seif that can turn around some of the shocking violence and abuse of children. Same with health and justice, lets see if health and crime outcomes can be improved for Maori. You could argue that from a Treaty of Waitangi perspective, you could also argue that better social outcomes for Maori is good for the country. Well worth discussing.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS