Goff’s end of year speech

Written By: - Date published: 11:45 am, December 16th, 2010 - 41 comments
Categories: phil goff - Tags:

A very good close of year speech from Phil Goff in the House yesterday.

I think this is the kind of thing we want to see more of next year. Phil’s job is to crystalise the vague sense of dissatisfaction that most people feel with the Key Government with himself as the spokesperson for those Key has betrayed and let down.

Phil needs to be up there saying:

‘John Key promised us a brighter future and he hasn’t delivered.

In fact, most people’s lives are worse after three years in which Key frittered away opportunities to improve the lot of everyday Kiwis and gave backhanders to the wealthy.

Key has betrayed us and broken the promise he made to us.

The Labour government I lead will be one that is innovative and focused on getting Kiwis into better paying jobs and improving our public services. We will not be a government of vague promises and no follow-through. What we promise, we will deliver.’

41 comments on “Goff’s end of year speech ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Colonial Viper 1
    16 December 2010 at 12:13 pm

    Fantastic speech by Goff. Great energy, great messages. Took the bat to National and made important points about following through on our commitments as a country.

    Needs to be seen by all.

    • Kevin Welsh 1.1
      16 December 2010 at 12:53 pm

      Unfortunately the MSM will either ignore it or come out with some crap like his tie doesn’t go with his suit.

      • Jim Nald 1.1.1
        16 December 2010 at 6:31 pm

        Looks like symbolic chessboard-like tie:
        hey nat nut, check mate.

      • Gina 1.1.2
        17 December 2010 at 11:36 am

        Radio With Pictures

        I have a few ideas for labour’e website which I think might help people see important speeches like this.
        At election time you could have fresh audio updates daily or weekly. In your TV advertising you could tell people they could get low bandwidth audio updates on labours website.

        As we all know may people dont watch movies becuase they take too much bandwidth. And audio files on their own are a little boring.

        There is a compromise and that is to make an audio playlist player and couple it with appropriate images for each audio of the speaker/s.

        You may need to get your own player code specially written made to couple the audio’s with individual picutres of the speakers. It really wouldnt be too hard for a professional to do this as it would just require a few xtra lines of code and customization for you website.

        Go to
        http://www.wix.com/jinnyd/jupiter6

        You can download Phill Goff’s speech in a 4.6 meg audio file I’ve extracted from the video above.

        Ive cobled together a player that comes with this free website and an image of phil goff in parliament. This particular player plays as may files as you like and you just toggle from one file to another so on Labours front page you could have a large number of audio files that people could listen to without taking up much space.

        I’ve called it “Labour Radio – With Pictures” so people know they are not going to be using up bandwidth.

        • Gina 1.1.2.1
          17 December 2010 at 12:10 pm

          OK I’ll reply to myself. Why is it whenever I post to this Blog I get nothing but resistance. I’m trying to help.

          You don’t want me contributing then fine Ill go. Ive even posted before to find people discussing my sugestion on another thread and when checking the timing noticed it was after my suggestion but no one said OK that was a good suggestion Gina or discussed it with me.

          I wont bother with you people again. It’s clear the people in the Labour office hate my guts and I guess you might know those people or perhaps you are just rude. I have been categorically and viscously told not to call your office. This was after I recommended that Andrew little should be put to the front of the media more. The suggestion seemed to be follewed shortly after which was good but the nastyness of your office staff left me gutted.
          They made it very clear I was a nobody and had no right talking to them.

          You can bet I wont be voting National. I may still vote labour if I like your final policies as Im not affected by personal insults. I make impartial judgements.

          Any criticisms I might have given were intended to help you people win the next election not to insult.

          • lprent 1.1.2.1.1
            17 December 2010 at 12:35 pm

            You’ll find that many commentators here don’t like Labour for one reason or another, from all sides, and frequently offer helpful and unhelpful suggestions – it gets rather boring after a while.

            It isn’t a Labour party site. Actual Labour members like myself appear to be a minority amongst the authors, and we don’t work for the Labour party except in a voluntary status. While people from LabourHQ or the parliamentary wing do read the site and even comment, you have to realize that they also frequently dislike what the authors say…. I get told so occasionally. But we’re quite independent of any political party or union or any other organisation. We blog from the left, but that is a bloody wide political arena.

            None of us have anything to do with Labour website that I’m aware of, although I have had a lot to say about it in the past (little of which was complimentary). You’d be better off putting comments about it up on Red Alert.

            Getting impatient on a post for a response that is a day old is a bit futile. I read the comments by date/time but most of the readers concentrate on more recent posts unless they have a particular interest in the topic.

            • Gina 1.1.2.1.1.1
              17 December 2010 at 12:44 pm

              OK Iprent

              Thank’s for that. I guess Ive encountered a few unfreindly office workers and maybe now a bit paranoid 🙂

              Im going to suggest we form a new Left wing party that advise our supporters to vote labour or green with their electorate vote so as not to split the left vote in seats but to give an alternative Left party their party vote. This may be a way of returning labour to the true left so we could start a new left party without splitting the left vote in seats and so avoid giving seats to NACT by default.

  2. Monty 2
    16 December 2010 at 12:36 pm

    is there a transcript of the speech for those who cannot access video play ?

  3. Deadly_NZ 3
    16 December 2010 at 1:06 pm

    An amazing speech , this is what he needs to keep on doing right upto the election don’t give em a minute to catch thier breath.. Because also people are starting to see what he is saying in thier pockets and thats not good for the Teflon John and his mob..

    Keep it up Phil well done

  4. Deadly_NZ 4
    16 December 2010 at 1:07 pm

    An amazing speech , this is what he needs to keep on doing right upto the election don\’t give em a minute to catch thier breath.. Because also people are starting to see what he is saying in thier pockets and thats not good for the Teflon John and his mob..

    Keep it up Phil well done

  5. TightyRighty 5
    16 December 2010 at 1:42 pm

    Should be his end of career speech. You’d think he would be opening an all day pancake house for all the waffle he was talking

    • Kevin Welsh 5.1
      16 December 2010 at 4:06 pm

      Strike a raw nerve TR?

      Phil Goff leaves Key in his dust in these situations. Fantastic speech delivered with the intensity and conviction that Lange would have bought.

      Will the MSM take notice?

      Garner was probably too busy tucking into his Chrissy gift from his beloved leader to notice.

      • infused 5.1.1
        16 December 2010 at 6:23 pm

        Not really. Goff is useless. He can talk, that’s about it.

        The speech was shit. People out of work, yeah, well, happening everywhere isn’t it?
        Pulling the race card
        GST off fruit and veg – doesn’t even make a difference

        Why is aussie making jobs? Because they are digging up the earth, stupid. Something you are all against.

        • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.1
          17 December 2010 at 1:30 am

          Digging up the earth and selling it now means that it’s not there for tomorrow. Great economic advise from a RWNJ – now you see it, now you don’t (and that’s the entire economy gone).

      • TightyRighty 5.1.2
        17 December 2010 at 7:39 am

        so because i point out the overall flaw in his speech, i.e. the policies are basically bullshit and no one cares and goff knows it, my nerves are raw and being struck?

        you really are desperate if you cling to a throw away comment as a sign of panic. I’m not even rank and file.

  6. feijoa 6
    16 December 2010 at 2:06 pm

    Great speech. Big tick for Phil. More of exactly this stuff in 2011 and the Nats should be worried

  7. Danyl Mclauchlan 7
    16 December 2010 at 2:35 pm

    Phil’s job is to crystalise the vague sense of dissatisfaction that most people feel with the Key Government

    The polls and all the persuadable voters I talk to suggest that most people are very happy with the Key government.

    • lprent 7.1
      16 December 2010 at 2:42 pm

      I guess that is the view from Wellington?

      There isn’t nearly as much ‘satisfaction’ in Auckland as there was a year ago.

      Last year it was a hard sell to say that Key and NACT were dickheads. Now it isn’t.

  8. Danyl Mclauchlan 8
    16 December 2010 at 2:49 pm

    I guess that is the view from Wellington?

    Yeah, far-right, National Party lovin’ Wellington.

    • lprent 8.1
      16 December 2010 at 3:04 pm

      You specifically said ‘persuadable’. That is who I was talking about. The relatively small proportion of the population who will shift their vote.

      It doesn’t matter what the overall voting is in an area, a voting change comes from the ‘persuadable’ in that area, especially under MMP. Of course the polls aren’t exactly sensitive when you look at regions due to the smaller sample sizes. So in the absence of area specific polls you have to do it on less ‘scientific’ data (oh and of course local body election data).

      But I guess you’re more into pedantic sarcasm than any substantive debate.

      • TightyRighty 8.1.1
        16 December 2010 at 3:31 pm

        sneer at anybody who disagrees with you. substantive something else going on there

        • lprent 8.1.1.1
          16 December 2010 at 4:21 pm

          It is true that I’m not given to tolerating fools or foolish comments. I really don’t have the time or the inclination to be nice to them.

          In Danyl’s case above, then I’d characterize it as a foolish comment. I’d responded to his comment with a non-sarcastic response that said I wasn’t seeing what he was seeing in Wellington here in Auckland.

          He chose to respond with a flippant sarcastic response. I explained what I was talking about and appended a appropriate sarcastic retort in the same line.

          I don’t care if people disagree with me.

          But I do consider it a duty to deal with stupid behavior by shoving stilletos or broadswords in and twisting for maximum damage. That discourages repetition of the behavior. After all they’re wasting my time either when I’m moderating or because I left a comment. I’d prefer to spend that time on other things like writing code or with Lyn.

          If people have a problem with that – then I really don’t give a shit.

          • TightyRighty 8.1.1.1.1
            17 December 2010 at 7:42 am

            it’s not foolish to disagree with you, you have been wrong before.

            capcha: point

  9. Stan 9
    16 December 2010 at 2:51 pm

    I wish he could come across with this kind of passion outside of the house, especially in TV sound bites. That would mean that people who don’t watch parliament (or read this blog) would get to see and hear the real Phil Goff.

  10. rich 10
    16 December 2010 at 2:52 pm

    Basically, what Goff’s saying is that he’ll manage the country on behalf of global corporate capitalism, but he’ll be a nicer foreman than Key.

    We’ll still have unemployed builders and a shortage of homes, because “prudent fiscal policy” prevents those builders working on new state houses. Meanwhile, the mega rich will carry on paying miniscule rates of tax on their stolen billions, because we can’t drive “wealth makers” like Hubbard and Hotchkin away.

    That *really* makes me want to vote Labour.

    • Craig Glen Eden 10.1
      16 December 2010 at 4:14 pm

      Im not quite sure how you got that from his speech but anyway……………………….

    • SPC 10.2
      16 December 2010 at 9:55 pm

      Fair point – what exactly is wrong with saying – we’ll borrow $10B and build 30,000 new state houses in Auckland.

      Every single house can later be sold to occupiers to pay back the $10B – meanwhile we create jobs while we have unemployed workers – the government gets tax off the wages and savings in benefit costs.

  11. Dean Reynolds 11
    16 December 2010 at 3:55 pm

    Phil speaks with passion & fire in his belly, in contrast to Key who speaks like a smarmy opportunist

    • Carol 11.1
      16 December 2010 at 6:41 pm

      Goff sounds like a politician. Key sounds and looks like a caricature of a politician. It seems hollow because Key isn’t being a politician, but is a corporate & PR front-man masquerading as a politician.

  12. Jim Nald 12
    16 December 2010 at 6:37 pm

    Saw some glum faces on the govt benches.

    Be angry, middle NZ, be very very angry.

    • Herodotus 12.1
      16 December 2010 at 7:16 pm

      Jim perhaps you can do what Phil cannot or will not, and define Middle NZ.
      For many being middle NZ is a state of mind, and like driving everyone is an average or above avg driver. Most I would say consider themselve middle NZ.
      is someone earning $2m p.a. yet living in a $500k house in Papatoetoe
      Living in Vicky Ave yet earning family income $100k
      living in Botany in a $525k house household income of $100k
      or someone taxable income of $50k , 3 rentals &a family home and qualifying for WFF?
      No matter who is in govt Middle NZ should be scared. Lab sharfted us big time (remember all those increases in regressive taxes:petrol, power, ACC and tax creep) and so is Nat. All we can do is to aspire to move upwards. If there is hope even if it is false hope we can sleep having nice dreams, and being model citizens and a pawn in the neolib reality.

  13. SPC 13
    16 December 2010 at 9:58 pm

    Probelm is the news story is now how he promised to sell (said he would) his house and now he says according to the rules (set by whom?) he does not have to.

    Trust is an important part of leadership.

  14. Bill 14
    16 December 2010 at 10:44 pm

    Why was he constantly turning to face his own party when articulating broadsides intended for the government? Strange body language in such a situation. Not exactly ‘in yer face’.

    And also. Sorry. But bagging National for their supposed economic failures and the unfairness of their tax cuts and so on isn’t just like shooting fish in a barrel. It’s pointless. They’ll suck it up and be relieved that he didn’t call bullshit on them.

    They’ll be relieved that he didn’t attempt to go to the heart of the matter and expose their deliberate running down of the economy and cynical negligence and piece meal dismantling of social provisions. They’ll be relieved that they carry on fabricating excuses for ‘policy failures’ until such times as they get to unleash ‘solutions’ for the dire situation they are presently engineering.

    In the name of ‘efficiency’ and ‘value for money’ and amid claims that There Is No Alternative given the fiscal situation, they will enact policies to transfer public wealth into private hands and public services to corporate entities. And they will hope that a public, demoralised by an ever worsening situation over a period of time, wont stir up too much of a fuss when they do.

    It seems they certainly don’t have to worry about the parliamentary opposition getting them in its sights

    • Lanthanide 14.1
      16 December 2010 at 11:57 pm

      “They’ll be relieved that he didn’t attempt to go to the heart of the matter and expose their deliberate running down of the economy and cynical negligence and piece meal dismantling of social provisions. They’ll be relieved that they carry on fabricating excuses for ‘policy failures’ until such times as they get to unleash ‘solutions’ for the dire situation they are presently engineering.”

      I think at this stage that’s a bit too paranoid for the leader of Labour to be talking about, because there isn’t any hard facts to back it up.

      Better to wait for National to strike first (like at budget), and then bring that out. While you might see what is going on, and would appreciate such a line, the general public don’t and wouldn’t.

      • Bill 14.1.1
        17 December 2010 at 7:33 am

        I do get that if the whole thing was broached in the wrong way, then it could sound paranoid. But strong circumstancial evidence is there. We are moving in directions that will have us approximating the conditions of the UK and Greece, Ireland and the US etc. It’s not difficult to point out that the fiscal conditions in those countries are being used to ram through neo-liberal ‘reforms’. And it’s not hard to draw parallels between NZ 84 and our current trajectory. And it’s not hard to argue that the policies put in place by National to date can only lead us further down the path that will ‘necessitate’ neo-liberal reforms.

        eg Instead of simply saying that the government borrowed to give tax cuts to the rich as though that was the whole picture, why not point out that such borrowing weakens the economy and pushes us in a direction of ‘crisis’. And challenge the government to state how it will deal with such a crisis should it eventuate. If they say such a crisis is not on the horizon, then indicative examples can be used to lay bare the lie….as well as picking up on the statements coming from members of the Act Party. they are already saying that this situation isn’t tenable. They are already saying that Key is simply focussed on ‘not scaring the horses’ and moving incrementally on neo-liberal reforms rather than ‘just doing it’.

        And the basic same lines of exchange can be used on issue after issue. (Unemployment policies, public sector staff cuts, prison privatisation, employment law etc, etc)

        Put another way. Key is desperate to ‘not scare the horses’ according to Ruth Richardson. And Brash and Douglas are being air time to promote the need for neo-liberal reform. Labour could let off some fire crackers…put the bastards on the back foot. Why not?

        If they don’t, then they are open to accusations of complicity in my mind.

      • Bill 14.1.2
        17 December 2010 at 7:54 am

        Edit function ain’t quite working, so what I wanted to add was simply this.

        There is a formula that those seeking to impose neo-liberal ‘reforms’ follow. It’s not a secret. It’s set out in all their literature. Labour could all a spade a spade and talk directly to that formula and highlight it with real life examples of policy and their effects.

        Hell. As I type I’m hearing of a ‘working group’ saying that GST should rise and further tax cuts should be implemented! These ‘working groups’ often act as slow drip feeders to introduce us to potential policy ideas. Even where they overshoot bounds of acceptability, they open us up to ‘moderated’ policy that moves in the same direction.

        If Labour was going to comment on that, what do you think we would hear? Something on fruit and veg and a promise not to raise GST? Or would they put it into the context of neo-liberal ideology?

        • just saying 14.1.2.1
          17 December 2010 at 8:46 am

          Bill, you have no idea how relieved I am that you can crystalise arguments that would take me 20,000 incoherent words try and fail to explain, but that nevertheless, I’m bursting to say.

          You write a mean sentence!

Links to post