Jacinda Ardern to National – Bring It On

Written By: - Date published: 3:46 pm, November 6th, 2022 - 157 comments
Categories: jacinda ardern, labour, uncategorized - Tags:

https://player.vimeo.com/video/767679564?h=fa92ea9271

Tēnā koutou katoa

“Kua tawhiti kē tō mātou haerenga mai, kia kore e haere tonu.

He nui rawa o mahi, kia kore e mahi tonu.”

Kia haere tonu tātou

Welcome!

It’s so fantastic to be here in South Auckland, and it’s so fantastic to be here with all of you.

I want to begin by acknowledging our team here. Our wonderful New Zealand Councillors, our outgoing and incoming President, our excellent Deputy Leader of the Labour Party Kelvin Davis, our caucus and most importantly, our members. Our lifeblood and our engine room.

Last year our conference was a little different to this. We gathered in the manner which was traditional in the year 2021 – Zoom.

There are some distinct advantages to communication from the comfort of your own home. For instance, at last year’s conference speech I was essentially wearing slippers.

Our facial lines all miraculously softened, and then there were the filters which were especially good when they malfunctioned.

And by malfunction, I mean – user error – like the occasion I borrowed my Chief of Staff Raj Nahna’s laptop for a meeting, flicked the make-up function on, and neglected to tell him.

At our next officials meeting complete with senior public servants and ministers I noticed Raj was desperately trying to cover his face and a fetching shade of lipstick and rouge, which, he had no idea how to turn off.

I think it’s fair to say, it’s been a time.

And while no one expects being in Government to be simple, the last few years have not been an easy run.

A global pandemic of a scale not seen since the 1918 global influenza outbreak, followed immediately by an economic downturn the largest in scale since the Great Depression of the 1920s and 30s – twin health and economic crises that no government in New Zealand history has ever had to contend with.

There was no rulebook written.

But what we did have, was a set of values, and the history of past Labour governments.

It wasn’t a rulebook, but it was a guide.

On the 9th floor of the Beehive building in Wellington, sitting directly behind my desk, is a picture of Michael Joseph Savage. You could say he’s on my shoulder but also ever so slightly in my ear.

Of course it was Savage and the first Labour Government that lifted New Zealand out of the depths of the Great Depression. Not by cutting taxes and services, but by investing in jobs, and building a social welfare safety net. They built the country’s first state home. And not long after these social reforms – New Zealand’s living standards were among some of the highest in the world. Not for the few, but for the many.

The Finance Minister who supported Savage, Walter Nash, then led Labour’s second government as it continued to build our nation’s social welfare system, while advocating on the world stage for peace over war after World War 2.

It was Norman Kirk and a Labour government who tilted the country towards a modern future with reforms of trade, health, the arts, and education. They worked hard to foster a renewed national identity and partnership with Maōri – all the while challenging global evil such as apartheid and nuclear testing.

It was a fight David Lange continued, making New Zealand nuclear free, while also righting the wrongs of the past by legalising homosexuality, and fully abolishing the death penalty.

And of course with Helen Clark, the first woman elected our Prime Minister, New Zealand maintained a principled position on the war in Iraq, while leading a fifth Labour government that improved the economic wellbeing of Kiwi families, by setting up KiwiSaver, the Cullen superannuation fund, and Working for Families.

These were all Labour governments that despite what came their way, never lost sight of the things that matter. I believe the same can be said about us.

We are a government that cares for our people.

Their jobs.

Their families.

Their kids and grandkids and the earth that they will inherit.

Yes, managing crisis is an integral part of government – and every Labour government has had their fair share to manage.

For us, the list has been a little longer than you’d hope or even imagine – and the pandemic was especially difficult for everyone.

Did we always get everything right – no.

Could we have done more, or done things differently – yes.

But not every country can claim that over three years they saved more lives and livelihoods and lived with fewer restrictions than nearly anywhere else in the world. And that’s something every single New Zealander can be proud of.

But we’ve done more than manage crises – we’ve made progress despite them.

Before Covid we said we wanted New Zealand to be the best place in the world to be a child.

And so we increased paid parental leave from 18 to 26 weeks.

We created the Best Start payment which restored for the first time in 40 years a universal child payment for families with a newborn.

We increased the Family Tax Credit.

And introduced free lunches, and free period products in schools.

And now, 66,000 children have been lifted out of poverty and all nine measures of child poverty in this country are in decline.

66,000 kids who now have a better shot at school, at getting into work when the time comes, whose parents have the dignity of being able to provide for their children.

We said we wanted to build a mental healthcare system that didn’t just exist in times of crisis.

So we started building services in GP clinics, iwi providers and youth services.

We built and extended Mana Ake, a mental health programme for kids at primary and intermediate.

And we’ve put more counsellors in schools too.

And now, for the first time, we have an early intervention in our mental health system that has provided half a million mental health sessions to Kiwis in need, and over 30,000 counselling hours for kids in schools.

We said every New Zealander should have a warm, dry, affordable home.

And so, we introduced the healthy homes requirements.

Stopped overseas speculators buying residential homes.

Evened up the playing field for first home buyers by closing tax loop holes and extending the bright line test.

Launched the biggest state housing build and Papakāinga investment we’ve seen in decades.

And now, we have helped 65,000 first home buyers with grants to buy their own homes, lifted the share of first home buyers in the market from 20 to 24 percent – the highest since 2016 – and created more than 10,000 public housing places.

In fact, this government has created 13 percent of the total public and community housing stock New Zealand has, in just the past five years.

We said we would tackle climate change.

So we passed the Zero Carbon Act, established the Climate Commission and created an Emissions Reduction Plan.

We banned future oil and gas exploration, and the installation of new coal boilers.

We built incentives and standards which means we have now tripled electric vehicle imports.

And we’re creating a world first regime to make sure we reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, which make up just under half of our emissions profile.

We said we wanted to be a nation where we grew skills, invested in our core services, and where everyone had the opportunity to experience the dignity of work.

And so we invested in and increased apprenticeship numbers by a massive 61 percent.

Supported 5200 rangatahi into work through Mana in Mahi.

Employed 4000 more nurses and nearly 3000 more teachers.

And have now some of the lowest unemployment on record, including for Maori, in the midst of one of the largest social and economic crisis of a generation.

This isn’t a check list. This isn’t a political score card.

Behind every one of those numbers is someone’s life that has been impacted by a Labour government.

The gentleman I met in Hawke’s Bay who told me about his brand new Kāinga Ora home where his moko were finally warm.

The parents of a new autoelectrical apprentice in Gisborne who were so happy their child had stability and certainty.

The single mum who wrote to me to say she can now afford for her family to be warm over winter.

The teacher who told me what a difference lunches in schools was making to their kids and community.

These achievements make us a better country. They make us fairer.

And with economic storm clouds brewing, they form the strong foundation we need to face the future with confidence.

And it is the future I want to talk about today.

We have been through tough times, but global volatility still lies in front of us and 2023 will likely, in many ways, be more difficult than this year. That brings uncertainty and anxiety. I understand that.

So the question next year will be: who is best to help New Zealand navigate these tough times.

Who can provide the security and certainty New Zealanders need to get through, with a plan, with confidence and with optimism.

The answer is Labour.

Because we have been here before.

Because we have the track record and the experience.

Because we can manage a crisis AND make progress.

Because we are not done yet.

And in 2023 we’re not asking for people to take a leap of faith. We’re asking them to look at our record.

That doesn’t mean considering Labour vs perfection. But Labour vs the opposition, which I would argue is quite some way off perfection.

And here’s our record, in a head to head

Despite the biggest economic shock since the Great Depression, the New Zealand economy is bigger now than before Covid – 4.8 percent bigger. That is because of good economic management.

It took nearly five years for National to increase the economy by that level after the GFC.

Wages are up 17 percent since 2019. It took National six years after the GFC to deliver that.

We’ve had record low unemployment in the past year, in facts it’s half of what it was at the GFC and that includes for Maori, for Pacifica and for women.

We’re on track to return to surplus faster.

Our debt is low, with the likes of Australia, the UK, the US and Canada carrying far more.

We have record high prices for our primary sector exports.

We’ve secured new trade agreements with the UK and the EU with more in negotiation.

Tourists and international students are returning, and they are spending.

And our underlying economic position is strong.

That is not by accident, but through thoughtful decision making and an eye on putting people and families at the centre of our recovery.

Here I do want to pay special tribute to Grant Robertson. He is an exceptional Minister of Finance, considered, intelligent and kind. He has taken us through a one in 100 year crisis – managing the books well all the while putting people first in our economy.

Overseeing an upgrade in our infrastructure, in our services, and in our global credit ratings.

The rating agencies see him as an experienced, safe pair of hands, and there is no one I trust more to keep delivering financial security and stability for our economy and for New Zealand families.

If there was one thing Covid taught us, and it schooled us in many ways, it was the need to be nimble. To keep an eye on the horizon and be willing to act when we need to.

Front and centre right now, we have the extraordinary challenges of a cost of living crisis, global in origin but affecting many Kiwis.

We worked quickly to develop a suite of cost of living measures to support Kiwis struggling with rising costs. We introduced the cost of living payment for middle and low income earners, cut fuel excise by 25 cents a litre, halved the price of public transport, and increased Working for Families.

It’s a crisis that is still with the world and so with us too, and clearly more is needed.

Right now, the load for families across New Zealand is a heavy one, and while there are many pressures, we know childcare is the biggest in-work expense for families.

Traditionally, this has been an area where families have had some support. But over a decade ago, during the GFC, the National Government cut childcare assistance so severely, that the number of children supported plummeted by half, from over 50,000 in 2010 to fewer than 25,000 this year.

Conservative estimates show it is New Zealand women in particular who cannot afford to work if they want to – because of childcare costs – and they are forgoing $116 million or more in wages each and every year.

This barrier to work exacerbates a workforce shortage, but more than that, it removes the ability for many New Zealand families to choose what’s best for them.

Why did National take away this choice in 2010?

Only they can answer that.

But I would just note that it was the same year they last cut the top tax rate.

It was a massively short-sighted decision.

Over the next 10 years parents, usually women, were increasingly forced into an economic dilemma.

I want families to have choices. I want them to stay home and be a primary care giver if they choose to. Or work, if they choose to. But increasingly those choices have been removed. And if you are a sole parent, you have even fewer.

We have tried to restore those choices. We extended Paid Parental Leave, brought in the Best Start Payment, restored the Training Incentive Allowance and made changes to the In Work Tax Credit.

Last year we also took the first step of matching income thresholds for the childcare subsidy back to wage growth – ensuring more families didn’t lose out

But more is needed.

Today I can announce that the Labour Government will significantly expand childcare assistance to New Zealand families.

From April we will lift the household income thresholds on our Childcare Assistance subsidies for those with children under 5 in early childhood education, and aged 5 to 13 at an approved before or after school and holiday programme.

Our changes will mean 54 per cent of all New Zealand families with children will now be eligible for subsidised childcare assistance.

Over 10,000 additional children will become eligible for support.

And nearly every sole parent in New Zealand will be eligible for childcare assistance

To give you an example of what this will mean, a family with two parents both working 40 hours per week on $26 per hour with two children under five, who would not have been eligible for childcare assistance previously, will now be eligible for $252 per week.

These changes are on top of the 20 hours of early childcare education provided by the Government for those aged 3 to 5 and are a pre-Budget commitment that will take effect from April next year, at a cost of $48 million a year.

Thousands more children supported into early learning.

Thousands more parents able to enter the workforce.

But perhaps most importantly – thousands of parents given back the choice to do what’s best for their families.

Today I can also share that next year, for the second year in a row, there will be a significant boost to Working For Families payments.

From April 2023, the Family Tax Credit will increase by another $9 a week for the eldest child to $136 a week, and by $7 a week for subsequent children to $111 a week. Best Start too will lift by $4 a week to $69 a week.

Along with previous increases to the Family Tax Credit, a family with two children on a median family income for Working for Families recipients are now receiving over $1300 more a year since we took office.

That climbs to over $3600 for families receiving the Best Start payment.

This kind of targeted support not only reaches those who need it most, it is support we can afford that unlike across the board tax cuts, won’t have a significant impact on inflation and make the problem worse.

You will have heard it said endlessly over the last three years, that it’s been a tough time. And it has. Undeniably.

Sometimes people ask me at a more personal level, how I keep going.

Two reasons. Because of a powerful intervention otherwise known as endless cups of tea.

And because I am an optimist.

We have an amazing country. With incredible people.

And we owe it to those people to keep up our unrelenting focus on what matters most to them.

The dignity of decent work.

The best possible start for kids.

Affordable housing.

Health and education that people can rely on.

And a well-cared for environment.

And while I cannot tell you what might come our way next, because those are predictions I have learnt to stay well away from, I can tell you that Labour is the party who can tackle it head on, and make the progress we need and deserve as a nation.

I’m here for that.

You’re here for that.

So bring it on.

157 comments on “Jacinda Ardern to National – Bring It On ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Christopher Randal 1
    6 November 2022 at 4:01 pm

    If you don't have a family your struggles just get worse and worse.

    Indexing tax rates would be far more even handed

    • millsy. 1.1
      6 November 2022 at 4:07 pm

      Indexing tax rates would have just left less money for public services.

      Though this package is a bit underwhelming.

    • Herodotus 1.2
      6 November 2022 at 4:18 pm

      This government has no idea that as a consequence of their MASSIVE tax windfall is being paid in part by households and the rising cost of living. Inflation 7.4% also means that the govt GST take also increases by 7.4%, as wages rise the government takes more of peoples income as they progress further up the PAYE tax thresholds, households retain less and less as costs escalate – THIS CONTRIBUTES and the govts policies HAVE added to the stress on families. And no denying that the government is a cause is true. There is a real need for indexing tax rates, and only a 🤬wit or some nasty person ( I assume the Grant R is not dump ) would not see the need and the simple fix to assist families.

      • millsy 1.2.1
        6 November 2022 at 4:21 pm

        As I said, indexing tax thresholds basically leaves less money for things like schools and hospitals. The public sector needs all the money it can get at the moment.

        • Herodotus 1.2.1.1
          6 November 2022 at 4:38 pm

          No it doesn't!! FFS I gather you are not THAT dumb not to understand ?? That the tax take is in part at the expense of households.
          And to Patrica I fixed your error “Poor Poll results may decide in the budget to change the thresholds”

          • millsy 1.2.1.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 4:47 pm

            Households typically get that money back in public services, like healthcare education, etc. Throwing ethipets at me won't work, the reality is we need public services more than we need tax cuts.

            We should be expanding the public sector, not shrinking it.

            The government should have nationalised childcare, not poked around with subsidies.

          • Patricia Bremner 1.2.1.1.2
            6 November 2022 at 4:59 pm

            Herodotus !!Oh lol!! we will see won't we? There is ONE real poll in 2023.

        • Jester 1.2.1.2
          6 November 2022 at 10:45 pm

          The tax take has been far higher than expected. Stop wasting so much.

      • Mat Simpson 1.2.2
        7 November 2022 at 6:42 pm

        Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says the one big idea she would have if money was not a factor would be to make early childhood education completely free.

        http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2022/11/labours-morally-indefensible-choices.html

        " Another Aussie Bank posting an obscene profit while children go hungry in a land of plenty…

        Until we confront the enormous imbalances of excessive greed and profiteering at the expense of many in this economy and change the narrative we will not see any change unless the banks for example are forced by law to contribute fairly there will be only more suffering.

        LINO has shown they can act when political expediency requires them to do so.

    • Patricia Bremner 1.3
      6 November 2022 at 4:34 pm

      Randall, that may still come. She said this will be her focus in 2023. Grant may decide in the budget to change the thresholds. Let us accept this first move targets families with children. As the tax take has increased in real terms due to higher employment it would not be inflationary to change the thresholds imo.

    • Ad 1.4
      6 November 2022 at 6:57 pm

      Agree. Robertston has been getting dumptrucks more money than Treasury forecast.

      There are no new votes for Labour in more child subsidies.

  2. Darien Fenton 2
    6 November 2022 at 4:45 pm

    I thought it was a brilliant and inspiring speech. Anyone expecting big policy announcements at LP conferences should look back a bit or criticise National Party conferences for making small announcements. We are a Labour Party. We debate policy with members. We don't just make it up on the hoof. And we don't just exist to please the media. This is ONE announcement. What I heard was a true Labour PM with a signal for the government's direction in the future. What I couldn't ignore was the South Auckland vibe. Such a contrast to the men in suits National Party conference.

  3. Patricia Bremner 3
    6 November 2022 at 4:52 pm

    Agreed Darien, I watched hopefully, made a little sad at all the negative pre talk, the horrible comments from trolls and general National Act rhetoric. I left thinking..

    "Beat that you self interested limo riding nasties People first money second"

    A thoughtful speech by Jacinda Ardern, ending on an optimistic note, with policies to help over this hump and set a direction.

    I await the Budget with real interest, as we fight the Pandemic fall out and disinformation.

    Go Labour Go on with the good work.

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 3.1
      6 November 2022 at 7:16 pm

      Aye Patricia. As usual even in this thread are the white anters eating away at Labour for all their worth. Which aint much.

      Cmon Labour. Stand up ! Fight ! Back Jacinda and keep nact's poisonous claws away from NZ

    • alwyn 3.2
      6 November 2022 at 7:22 pm

      ""Beat that you self interested limo riding nasties People first money second""

      You've really got in for the members of the current Cabinet don't you? Did you count the number of them who turned up to the Conference in a Crown Limo?

      • Patricia Bremner 3.2.1
        7 November 2022 at 8:24 am

        Actually Alwyn, the PM and her people are known for using a van. I was referring to a fellow who would not walk 200 meters.

  4. Muttonbird 4
    6 November 2022 at 6:36 pm

    Heard a few soundbites from Luxon et al.

    Basically they say they have the economic plan to fight inflation. The plan is:

    • Give tax cuts to those who don't need them. More flash cars, please!
    • Abolish costs on businesses (regulation bonfire). Want polluted rivers? You ain't seen nothing yet.
    • Throw open the borders for cheap labour to compete with the most vulnerable Kiwis. Massive pressure on housing once again.
    • Slash government spending. Infrastructure deficit, anyone?

    Thing is we did open tap economics under Jong Kee and the only people who were happy with that were the wealthy. Low income and no income people will suffer and if that's what Kiwis want so they can afford to go to Fiji once a year then we are a terrible people.

  5. swordfish 5
    6 November 2022 at 6:42 pm

    .

    Latest Newshub Poll:

    Lab … 32.3% (down 5.9)

    Greens 9.5% (up 1.1)

    Lab + Green 41.8% (down 4.8)

    .

    Nat … 40.7% (up 0.2)

    ACT 10.0% (up 3.6)

    Nat + ACT 50.7% (up 3.8)

    .

    NZF 3.3% (up 1.6)

    Maori 1.9% (down 0.6)

    TOP 1.2% (up 0.3)

    .

    Ardern 29.9% (down 6.4)

    Luxon 21.5 (down 2.4)

    • Muttonbird 5.1
      6 November 2022 at 6:52 pm

      You'll be happy tonight…

      • swordfish 5.1.1
        6 November 2022 at 8:07 pm

        .

        If it leads to an exodus of simple-minded Woke dogmatists like your goodself … then I'll be ecstatic. You & your fellow numbskull-narcissists may not be the brighest sparks in the toolshed but you do represent a clear & present danger to a large segment of working people if you're allowed anywhere near power.

        Obviously your preferred vehicle, the Greens, are beyond help …as one would expect of utopian middle-class hippies, new age crystals in your pockets, utterly divorced from cold, hard social reality.

        As for Labour, a once-great party built by people like my grandparents & parents, increasingly transformed into a vanity project for self-interested professional-managerials, inherently elitist & anti-democratic, enforcing a crude, cult-like Critical Theory dogma on to an unwilling public .. core Labour supporters systematically scapegoated & forced into 2nd class citizenship by affluent Woke slobs bereft of ethics & morality, despite all your ludicrous moral posturing.

        Time to get back to core Social Democratic principles … universalism, egalitarianism, individual human rights, equality under law, liberal democratic norms, free expression of ideas … the antithesis of crude, top-down ID Politics.

        Time to get banalities like you the fuck away from power.

        • Muttonbird 5.1.1.1
          6 November 2022 at 8:16 pm

          Exodus from where? Where would you send me, Himmler?

          I am a working person, which I suspect is something you are not.

          Haven't had the pleasure of voting Greens, so far.

          How can it be a vanity project for "self interested managerials" to lift wages for low income workers? This government has done more work in this area than any other. I suspect the real issue you have is they have failed to prioritise the white working class over the brown…

          • Poission 5.1.1.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 8:30 pm

            How can it be a vanity project for "self interested managerials" to lift wages for low income workers?

            Wage increases for low income workers is endemic globally,and has been prior to Covid.The transfer of work aspirations to the service economy (where little is done more measurement then process resolution) has left a shortage of those who actually do make and fix things.

            The ultimate irony is the service area is where the greatest retrenchment will occur.

            https://twitter.com/LizAnnSonders/status/1512371151904948227?cxt=HHwWhoC-3Zfjgv0pAAAA

            • pat 5.1.1.1.1.1
              6 November 2022 at 8:52 pm

              "…has left a shortage of those who actually do make and fix things."

              aka…traditional Labour supporters….when Labour was the Party of labour.

              • arkie …
                6 November 2022 at 9:05 pm

                Anyone who works for an employer is a potential supporter for a party of labour.

                But that would have to be a party that acknowledges that there is an inherent contradiction between the desires of waged workers and those that employ them. The party must favour one side.

                That sort of analysis may illuminate a number of other contradictions of the status quo though.

                • pat …
                  6 November 2022 at 9:15 pm

                  It may also highlight something of a misnomer

                • Patricia Bremner …
                  7 November 2022 at 9:13 am

                  It is not "us and them" Arkie.

                  Climate Change brings it down to "us".

                  We are all at risk.

                  Getting to grips with that enormity means a huge shift in thinking on an individual level, to collectively working together to survive and survive well.

                  Infighting won't help. Othering won't help. Decisions not based on science won't help. We need to co-operate to survive. We need each other to avoid destructive choices.

                  • arkie …
                    7 November 2022 at 10:06 am

                    When it comes to Capitalism, Patricia, it is:

                    Employers want workers to work as long as possible for as little money as possible; Workers want to be paid as much as possible for the fewest hours possible. This is a contradiction, a party can't support labour without opposing capital.

                    Those currently on top of the Capitalist pile have been hampering and preventing collective action on inequality and climate change for decades, while shareholders and owners continue to get richer and richer, and the planet gets warmer and warmer.

                    Humanity has a choice; support everybody, or continue the extraction and accumulation of resources enriching a smaller and smaller group of individuals.

              • Patricia Bremner …
                7 November 2022 at 8:26 am

                What do you think of the apprentice programme then Pat? Plenty of doers there.

            • Gabby 5.1.1.1.1.2
              7 November 2022 at 11:05 am

              Could I possibly get a translation of "little is done more measurement then process resolution"? Thx

              • Shanreagh …
                7 November 2022 at 10:30 pm

                For those puzzled this comment comes from Poission

                How can it be a vanity project for "self interested managerials" to lift wages for low income workers?

                Wage increases for low income workers is endemic globally, and has been prior to Covid.

                How can it be a vanity project for "self interested managerials" to lift wages for low income workers?

                Wage increases for low income workers is endemic globally,and has been prior to Covid.The transfer of work aspirations to the service economy (where little is done more measurement then process resolution) has left a shortage of those who actually do make and fix things.

                The ultimate irony is the service area is where the greatest retrenchment will occur.'

                If it is read as follows

                (where little is done, there is more measurement than process resolution)

                I have my views about this fixation with measuring things (outcomes. widgets) rather than fixing processes but will let Poission comment as it is their post

        • Bearded Git 5.1.1.2
          7 November 2022 at 9:50 am

          Those "utopian middle class hippies" you talk about Sword support a workable Wealth Tax that is one of the few policies around that will achieve the goals, such as egalitarianism, you claim to support.

          Oh and BTW they also support policies that have a genuine chance of saving the world from CC disaster, unlike the so-called major parties. Not that that seems to matter to you.

          On those two grounds alone Party Vote Green sounds pretty damn good.

          The gap between Lab/Gr/MP and Nat/Act is 7% in this poll with a year to the election. It’s all to play for.

        • Shanreagh 5.1.1.3
          7 November 2022 at 12:41 pm

          Good grief. In SF comments there is some good stuff heavily wrapped in insults that hurt my head and eyes to read them. So I won't.

          What is the actual point of insulting others from the left side of the spectrum?

    • MickeyBoyle 5.2
      6 November 2022 at 6:57 pm

      The trends are very clear now. The left is losing support.

      Why the hell won't they drop these divisive policies, (that NACT will reverse anyway) and get back to core Labour principles?

      Fuck this government is a disappointment. So much promise, but pissed away because they prefer to listen to Neale Jones and Clint Smith over the grass roots.

      Hopefully our time in opposition allows many to reflect on what truly matters and how we can deliver upon that.

      • PsyclingLeft.Always 5.2.1
        6 November 2022 at 7:12 pm

        drop these divisive policies

        Which are?

        • Muttonbird 5.2.1.1
          6 November 2022 at 7:20 pm

          Maori. Some people are shit scared of them amounting to anything.

          • PsyclingLeft.Always 5.2.1.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 7:31 pm

            Aye. Theres def a NOT SO hidden racist element in NZ. Only had to look at the despicable cartoons of Nanaia Mahuta etc that Garrick Tremain did for the "anti three water"…. group.

            • Shanreagh 5.2.1.1.1.1
              7 November 2022 at 9:18 am

              Agree. I don't mind debating it but where were these posters when NZ history was being discussed, and why is the human rights movement seen as being threatening……,

            • Gabby 5.2.1.1.1.2
              7 November 2022 at 11:07 am

              Have the government done a good job of explaining how 3 waters benefits all NZers?

          • Shanreagh 5.2.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 9:13 am

            So true, so sad.

    • alwyn 5.3
      6 November 2022 at 7:29 pm

      Party next week at Robbo's place would you say?

      Or will the Caucus have given up on him as well and will move on directly to someone like Michael Wood?

  6. Anker 6
    6 November 2022 at 6:59 pm

    100% agree Mickey Boyle

  7. Ad 7
    6 November 2022 at 7:03 pm

    A 20% support collapse in 2 years says Labour leader Ardern needs replacing and fast. Only the starry-eyed remain.

    Just as Ardern came out of nowhere, so the next one will.

    Ardern is now just a communicator of official advice without the policy chops to actually lead a 2-term party.

    • PsyclingLeft.Always 7.1
      6 November 2022 at 7:11 pm

      Ardern needs replacing and fast.

      Rubbish. Are you still promoting Grant Robertson for the role? Dreaming. Labour would have a snowballs chance. Their best is get all the rest of Labour (excepting some standouts like Michael Wood etc) to start working like they want to be in Govt.

    • observer 7.2
      6 November 2022 at 7:50 pm

      "Starry-eyed"? Or … people who have seen many electoral cycles and aren't responding like Pavlov's dog to a poll. Because we have been here before, and often.

      Elections are not about approval. They are about preference. Always.

      Which is why Johnson beat Corbyn, Biden beat Trump and Macron beat Le Pen. None of the winners were popular. But the voters decided the alternative was worse. That is normal. Most elections, most of the time.

      If Luxon is National's leader at the election Ardern will win a 3rd term. Bookmark that.

      • Stuart Munro 7.2.1
        6 November 2022 at 9:37 pm

        The bullshit antisemitism campaign and the treacherous vermin that Labour harboured did for Corbyn – it sure as hell wasn't voter inspired.

        • Anker 7.2.1.1
          6 November 2022 at 9:50 pm

          "Swordfish knows that but failed to be honest about that as he wanted to call out any supporters".

          Patricia you seem like the loveliest women, but all Swordfish did was post the figures. If he is pleased with them, he's allowed to be.

          He, like me is pissed off with the capture of the party but woke elitists. Both his parents and mine have been strong supporters of Labour when it was worth supporting. I know you will likely disagree with this, but some of us think Labour has been fully captured by identity politics and the Professional Managerial Class elites who have their own interests at heart. Despite being a loyal member of the party for many years, it no longer feels like it is my party, so I am pleased when they do poorly in the polls, because I want them to pause and reflect on where they are going wrong. That of course is not going to happen. Am I bitter? try not to be. I am more profoundly disillusioned.

          • Patricia Bremner 7.2.1.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 10:48 pm

            Anker, who do you want the "managerial people to follow?" Please reflect on that.

            The cloth cap era is over. Those folk Swordfish spoke of, educated their children to become the "Managerial" class. They wanted better..not the same.

            Swordfish did not mention that those figures might be out as much as they were before the last election owing to biased attitudes and TV3 !!!##@

            However, we are all tired and looking for light at the end of the tunnel. It has been a hard 3 years.

            I may be all sorts, but I am humble enough to say a number of people here have a far better grasp of events and ability to report on and interpret them. Drowsy M Kram comes to mind.

            What do you want or need the Party to do in these times Anker to reassure you? smiley

          • Shanreagh 7.2.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 9:46 am

            I cannot bear the phrases such as 'woke elitists'. What does this please?

            The word 'woke' means anything a person wants it to mean and so is meaningless. Elitist/s similarly. Who are these people?

            I get your disappointment but we have passed the cloth cap stage. Most/many parents' greatest hope is that their children do better than they did, that there no impediments to them doing this.

            In the Labour party of old as in many socialist governments there is a concept of a fair go……, each according to his/her needs

            This is where issues such as human rights come in. ( you call these identity politics, another buzz word that is a bit of a dog whistle.) Human rights are for all are against racism, sexism, ageism, etc etc.

            Rather than harking back to a cloth cap age why not try to envisage the concept of when Maori do well we all do well, replace Maori with Women, people with a disability. When those who feature in the bottom of the wellness and other indicator do well our whole country will do well. There is plenty of scope to do well and to feel as if we are belonging to a party that values those behind the bad indicators and does some thing for them.

            Critical Race theory is a strawman introduced here from the right in the US. It no more describes our response to racism than does 'biscuit' describe a 'scone' or bread roll, or diaper a nappy etc etc.

            We have no need to see CRT peeking around the corner of every effort we make to improve our indicators. We have NZ-grown ways including human rights legislation that better suit our purpose. Those of us on the sidelines could help by looking at these NZ ways.

            ‘However, we are all tired and looking for light at the end of the tunnel. It has been a hard 3 years.’ From Patricia …….

        • Anker 7.2.1.2
          6 November 2022 at 9:51 pm

          100% Stuart Munro. The anti semetic beat up was appalling.

          • Stuart Munro 7.2.1.2.1
            7 November 2022 at 10:29 am

            And it couldn't have worked without quislings like Starmer.

            Dante had a spot for his kind on the lowest circle of hell.

    • millsy 7.3
      6 November 2022 at 7:57 pm

      Wood needs to take over sooner, rather than later.

      • observer 7.3.1
        6 November 2022 at 8:05 pm

        No. Take a moment to review the success rate of the Headless Chicken Move.

        Didn't work for National in opposition to Ardern, didn't work for Labour in opposition to Key, didn't work for Shipley replacing Bolger … when did it work?

        Little and Brash were replaced (in very different circumstances) by leaders who featured strongly in the polls: Key and Ardern.

        Wood has zero public support. Literally.

        • Belladonna 7.3.1.1
          7 November 2022 at 7:59 am

          Absolutely agree with you. Ardern remains one of Labour's greatest assets. Dropping her (or having her leave) would be an electoral disaster.

          The ability to connect with people across the country (call it stardust, if you will) – is a rare political phenomenon. Ardern has it. Key (much though he's disliked by the left) had it. Winston still has it (if NZF is resurrected, it will be entirely due to this). But I can't think of another recent politician who does.

          It's not a mandatory requirement for leadership (how could it be) – but the next leader/s coming in after a 'stardust' one, suffer heavily by the contrast.

          • Gabby 7.3.1.1.1
            7 November 2022 at 11:10 am

            I think that's why some quarters are urging her ousting as a necessity?

          • Christopher Randal 7.3.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 4:21 pm

            Yes she is, however her stance on CGT, windfall tax, three waters, and tax thresholds is likely to be her demise

    • Patricia Bremner 7.4
      7 November 2022 at 9:15 am

      Ad it has just reverted to MMP again.

    • Jimmy 7.5
      7 November 2022 at 11:19 am

      Claire Szabo will be the next Jacinda.

  8. Anker 8
    6 November 2022 at 7:31 pm

    Michael W will most likely lead Labour after the next election (should todays poll results come to pass next year

    • Alan 8.1
      6 November 2022 at 7:42 pm

      "river of filth' boy – you must be kidding

      • millsy 8.1.1
        6 November 2022 at 7:56 pm

        Let's face it, anti vaxxers are bascially that.

        • Anker 8.1.1.1
          6 November 2022 at 8:28 pm

          Why are anti vaxxers a river of filth Millsy? Even Andrea Vance who interviewed some said many were mentally ill.

          People have all sorts of odd beliefs (many Greens are alternative medicine). Guess what they are allowed to. Interesting that the vaccine mandates are gone now isn't it.

          • millsy 8.1.1.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 8:32 pm

            They opposed vaccines. They also opposed things like LGBT rights, taxation, welfare, public services, BLM, and a lot were bascially bootlickers (a lot of them would have supported the death of George Floyd, for example).

            • Anker 8.1.1.1.1.1
              6 November 2022 at 9:36 pm

              Funny, not that I paid them a lot of attention, but I distinctly remember seeing a guy waving a (trans) Rainbow flag amongst the protestors on at least two occassions and I remember seeing a lesbian couple interviewed (one was a bee keeper who'd lost her job).

              But I guess you mean Tamaki re LBGT rights. I think he might have done a U turn on homosexuality (but don't quote me on that).

              I am not sure where you get your info that they oppose BLM and support the death of George Floyd. The majority of people there were Labour and Green voters and there was a higher percentage of Maori there (especially the riots at the end). A lot ofpeople oppose taxation, but when they worked they would have had to pay tax.

          • Gabby 8.1.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 11:11 am

            Because they're germy I guess.

      • Anker 8.1.2
        6 November 2022 at 8:26 pm

        Yes Michael "river of filth boy" Wood. I have never forgotten that either Alan.

        Didn't support the protestors, but could see those of them that had lost their jobs because of the mandates (after Ardern had said before the last election there would be no mandate) had a geniune grievance.

        • millsy 8.1.2.1
          6 November 2022 at 8:31 pm

          All they needed to do was get the jab. Nothing else. Personally I wouldnt want to be treated by a medical professional who didnt belive in vaccines. You might as well have biologists who belive in creationism, etc.

          • Anker 8.1.2.1.1
            6 November 2022 at 9:41 pm

            We don't force people to have medical interventions in this country unless they are sectioned under the mental health act.

            You probably would accept treatment from someone who didn't believe in vacinnes if your life depended on it. Face it, if you needed urgent, life saving surgery and someone who didn't believe in vacinnes was all there was, I would doubt you would refuse their help, although it would be your choice.

            What about Biologists or nurses for that matter who believe that if a man declares he is a women then it must be so? If I had to I would accept treatment from them, but I would know that they were incorrect.

            • millsy 8.1.2.1.1.1
              6 November 2022 at 10:15 pm

              Only a matter of time before you started ripping into the transgenders I guess.

              • Molly …
                7 November 2022 at 7:20 am

                Like Anker, I am appalled by the capture of medical professionals who can no longer distinguish between a man and woman.

                It does not bode well for healthcare.

                You can call that "ripping into transgendered" if that is your perspective. I consider it another exposure of the lie of "No Impact".

      • Shanreagh 8.1.3
        7 November 2022 at 9:49 am

        Another one who did not actually read the speech…….I have said before it was Churchillian in its emphasis and spread.

        If you read the speech rather than headlines or NZ Herald inspired commentary you will find the difference.

    • Jester 8.2
      6 November 2022 at 10:52 pm

      What about Hipkins? He is easily the best performer in Labour. Perhaps he could be leader.

      • Anker 8.2.1
        7 November 2022 at 11:21 am

        Jester who would do the rest of the work if Hipkins was leader. But he is certainly likeable and can at least apologize (after he claimed two women in Northland with covid were prostitutes

  9. Patricia Bremner 9
    6 November 2022 at 9:34 pm

    Looking at TV3 and Reid Research history, they were way out in their figures before the last election. Swordfish knows that, but he has become so bitter he failed to be honest about that, as he wanted to call out any supporters. Sad that.

    Personally I do not see the Labour group discarding Jacinda Ardern or Grant Robertson. All incumbent Governments are under pressure and the Pandemic made/still makes it tough. imo

    Anyone looking at photos of Christopher Luxon sees self satisfaction or calculation, depending on who he is with. His face in repose is cold calculation.

    People may want a change, but nearer the time CL is going to be a liability. 12 months is a long time in politics.

    • Anker 9.1
      6 November 2022 at 9:49 pm

      "Swordfish knows that but failed to be honest about that as he wanted to call out any supporters".

      Patricia you seem like the loveliest women, but all Swordfish did was post the figures. If he is pleased with them, he's allowed to be.

      He, like me is pissed off with the capture of the party but woke elitists. Both his parents and mine have been strong supporters of Labour when it was worth supporting. I know you will likely disagree with this, but some of us think Labour has been fully captured by identity politics and the Professional Managerial Class elites who have their own interests at heart. Despite being a loyal member of the party for many years, it no longer feels like it is my party, so I am pleased when they do poorly in the polls, because I want them to pause and reflect on where they are going wrong. That of course is not going to happen. Am I bitter? try not to be. I am more profoundly disillusioned.

      • millsy 9.1.1
        6 November 2022 at 10:16 pm

        Do you really think that all social progress as 'woke'?

        • RedLogix 9.1.1.1
          7 November 2022 at 9:09 am

          When played as a divisive zero sum game – yes.

          • Shanreagh 9.1.1.1.1
            7 November 2022 at 9:58 am

            Please explain. We are trying to pierce and bring down to ordinary unadorned speech words such as woke. This phrase sounds as if a person can substitute a meaning not contemplated by the plain words.

            What is your meaning of divisive? Would other see it a righting wrongs?

          • Anker 9.1.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 11:22 am

            Thanks REd Logix. Agree.

      • Shanreagh 9.1.2
        7 November 2022 at 9:51 am

        There you go again that old dog whistle 'woke elitists'.

    • Belladonna 9.2
      7 November 2022 at 7:50 am

      While no poll is 100% accurate (they all have margins of error)
      It seems to me as though the NewsHub Reid Research ones were pretty much as accurate as any prior to the 2020 election.

      In the October one, they underestimated Labour by 5%, and over-estimated National by 6% (both within the margin of error – though only just).

      But the previous one in Sept was just about bang on for the final Labour result (it also came the closest to the final win margin – though still underestimated)
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2020_New_Zealand_general_election

      All polls in the final 2 months had Labour way ahead – but none approached the final decisive victory totals.

      Unless you regard all polls as the equivalent of reading the tea leaves – then I don't see that Reid Research are significantly less accurate than other poll results.

  10. Anker 10
    6 November 2022 at 10:40 pm
    • Not at all Millsy. I am all for social progress.
    • millsy 10.1
      6 November 2022 at 10:51 pm

      You complaining about people being 'woke' suggests otherwise.

      Though, I guess politics over the past 5 years or so has become so incredibily fucked up that nothing means anything anymore.

    • Shanreagh 10.2
      7 November 2022 at 10:10 am
      • Not at all Millsy. I am all for social progress.

      But you call it 'woke' and 'woke' to me is pejorative. They did not have a common or accepted meaning.

      Solution: describe in your own words what you mean rather than using 'woke' or 'elites'.

      Next thing you may be talking about the Lizard people and the grassy knoll and man did not get to the moon and 9/11 did not happen.

      • Anker 10.2.1
        7 November 2022 at 10:58 am

        Next thing I won't be talking about Lizard People etc Shanreigh. Stop assuming what I think. Doing so in that way is an attempt to cast me in a negative light. I don't believe any of that rubbish.

        Yes woke is commonly used in a perjoritive way: when people see things through a very narrow lens and through a process known as selective abstraction, pay attention to or filter information/experience to confirm their bias (we all do this, but it is the degree of intensity and also what follows). From there the thing that they set out to find becomes elevated to a cause that must dominate all other way of looking at things, giving the person doing the elevating a sense of moral superiority/purity. They then believe this is the right way to think/speak. Others are morally deficient and must be called out for being so, (rascist, transphobic) and told they must think diffently (I am thinking Kelvin Davis here telling Karen Chhor she was seeing things through a vanilla lens and must travel over the bridge into Te tiri).

        So we have a CHCH University musical about Charlie Chaplin being cancelled because of Chaplins dubious relationship with women (over looked he was a complexed character with the most wretched early life and a communist to boot)

        We have the Ak School Climate Activists cancelling themselves because they have been told and come to believe they are racist.

        We have a witch hunt by other academics after some senior scienctists write to the Listener (including Dr Garth Cooper who is Maori and has taught kaupapa Maori to medical students) to say while Mataraunga Maori is valuable, it isn't science. Yes other academics, who I would describe as woke petitioned for the Royal Society to investigate the Listener 7 for such heresay! The correct thing to do would have been to debate it. Siouxie Wiles (woke) was also pinged for defaming one of the scientists for claiming they wrote to students threatening them.

        The transgender issue is another good example of the woke, noticing a "marginalized group, magnifying their marginalisation and elevating their needs above everyone elses and I am sure those authoritarian inclusion and diversity officers (who are costing the tax payers a lot of money and likely earning more than nurses) get a real sense of moral purity and a kick from their authoritarian stance/insistence that people in govt departments must use the right pro nouns.

        If you are interested in finding out more read "How the Woke Won, the elitist movement that threatens democracy" By Joanna Williams. You probably won't but that's o.k.

        I will continue to use the word woke.

  11. Darien Fenton 11
    7 November 2022 at 7:49 am

    Goodness me there are some strange comments on here. All this "woke" bullshit means nothing to me except a word from both the lazy right and the left to beat others up. And the managerial classes? WTF? Who are you talking about? I am as working class as they come and I will never give up on Labour because if you do, you are giving up on the Labour movement. It takes work to make change and that means on the doorstep, in the workplaces, and on the picket lines. And it means joining the party and working hard there too. I am proud of the changes that have been made that have come directly from years of work with affiliated unions, pushing remits at conference, ensuring they are in the manifesto, getting people out to vote and following up with ministers. I can name them if you want. Fair Pay Agreements anyone? Ten days sick leave? Four weeks holiday? 26 weeks Paid Parental Leave? Minimum wage increases anyone else? If you think these things happen in a vacuum, and raging against "wokeism" will change a thing, you need to have another talk to your computer.

    • Patricia Bremner 11.1
      7 November 2022 at 8:50 am

      Darien "managerial class" was Swordfishes comment re woke etc.

      I was reminding people, children of workers were educated and often ended in those managerial jobs, but kept the values.

      Labour have always had these supporters. One I can think of was Hubbard (Breakfast cereals). Many others since, the point being, the world has changed.

      Both my sons work all day on a computer and do not get to socialise with their peers much. Work has changed, but advocacy hasn't.

      Labour people will always advocate for what is fair.
      You have shown some of the gains. Add in Collective Agreements”

      (I would add, some here need to get back on board and stop white anting.)

    • Molly 11.2
      7 November 2022 at 9:29 am

      Is it the employer that pays the 26 weeks parental leave, or is this subsidised or paid by the central government?

      The reason I ask, is that I was talking to an employer regarding the Domestic Abuse leave provisions, and they pointed out that as a business that employs mostly women, the burden of that provision would fall mainly on businesses that do the same.

      I had (unthinkingly) assumed that the central government would provide a central fund to meet this policy, so that employees could access this leave when required. However, the implementation reality is that the cost of this provision is fully borne by employers, while the government takes credit at no cost to themselves.

      So, then I considered the 26 paid week parental leave, and belatedly wondered, who bears that cost?

      If anyone knows the answer, (and I suspect the answer is the employer), then I appreciate if they could post it here.

      Don’t worry, think I’ve found it, in the IRD rather than the Ministry of Social Development.
      https://www.ird.govt.nz/paid-parental-leave/payments

      “Currently, eligible employees are entitled to 26 weeks of paid parental leave. This leave is paid by the government through Inland Revenue, not by your employer, and weekly payments range from $177-$586 per week.”

      • Shanreagh 11.2.1
        7 November 2022 at 10:05 am

        Don’t worry, think I’ve found it, in the IRD rather than the Ministry of Social Development.
        https://www.ird.govt.nz/paid-parental-leave/payments

        “Currently, eligible employees are entitled to 26 weeks of paid parental leave. This leave is paid by the government through Inland Revenue, not by your employer, and weekly payments range from $177-$586 per week.”

        Why would it be on the SW site? Or do you think it is a benefit and not a hard fought for human right in employment that gives women/child carers the same rights as men to continue their careers? And then also to give either of the parents the ability to look after their children.

        • Molly 11.2.1.1
          7 November 2022 at 11:28 am

          (I looked in the wrong place, and then left the error up in order to be transparent, in case someone had read it, gone to get the link and returned.)

          Why would I look in MSD? Because, it is a benefit to working women who meet the criteria for that benefit.

          It is not a payment accessible to all NZ women who have children, nor all NZ women who may need financial support.

          It is given to the favoured few, working women – who choose to procreate. And then payment is rated accordingly to your perceived working woman value.

          Or is this not the case?

          So, the use of an IRD payment (- which shows how the Covid payments could have been done at an individual level) provides a suitable institutional distance from the reality this is a benefit.

          Moving on, any comment on the financial impact on those employers of women who have to carry the full cost of the progressive Domestic Abuse leave?

            • Molly 11.2.1.1.1.1
              7 November 2022 at 11:56 am

              Thanks, Belladonna.

              Yes, the employer I spoke to said this was the case, as I pointed out above.

              I had just assumed it would be a central fund, accessed by employers/employees as needed, not an extra cost for employers. The employer I spoke to has 50 employees, all of them women. Statistics mean that she has more likelihood of having to cover the cost of domestic abuse leave, rather than an employer with mainly male employees.

              Statistics will also indicate that those whose workforce is more evenly balanced by sex, or predominated by males, will (usually but not always) be employing those who commit the domestic abuse.

              Women predominated industries or services are often operating at lower wages and profitability margins, so the financial impact may be exacerbated by that as well.

              For those reasons alone, I would have preferred a central fund by government to support this leave.

          • Shanreagh 11.2.1.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 12:17 pm

            I looked in the wrong place, and then left the error up in order to be transparent, in case someone had read it, gone to get the link and returned.)

            Why would I look in MSD? Because, it is a benefit to working women who meet the criteria for that benefit.

            It is not a payment accessible to all NZ women who have children, nor all NZ women who may need financial support.

            It is given to the favoured few, working women – who choose to procreate. And then payment is rated accordingly to your perceived working woman value.

            Or is this not the case?

            I am gob-smacked I really am, it is to even up the scales, to encourage women to keep their ties to their workplaces open and to return to those workplaces and their careers, perhaps using the recently enhanced childcare arrangements.

            The fact is that many women chose to work, as is their right and many women have to work through economic necessity whether partnered or not. Paid parental leave was fought for in the workplace as a progressive workplace condition, it is not a benefit any more than improving annual leave in the workplace is a benefit.

            Not all women get paid annual leave, not all men get paid annual leave…it depends if they are working or not.

            Not all working women have children so they do not get it, not all working men have children so they do not get it.

            In a workplace I worked at in the 90s we brought in family leave that would help those of the 'sandwich' generation those who had not only to care for children (they could use this to go to sports days or prize givings, children to specialist appointment) but also to arrange the care, go to appts with/for elderly relatives. It also helped those whose children had gone or who had no children but needed to look after elderly relatives. It was 5 days.

            This was so that annual leave was not nibbled away and thus depriving working people of a length of annual leave to recharge, explore, blob out. There are studies that show that a day here or a day there is not enough to do this.

            https://communitylaw.org.nz/community-law-manual/chapter-21-employment-conditions-and-protections/holidays-and-annual-leave/annual-holidays-annual-leave/

            At least two weeks to be taken in a block.

            The benefits of taking annual leave

            Annual leave is vital to promote good physical and mental health in the workplace and will improve employees work-life balance. It allows individuals to take time to rest and re-energise which can result in stress reduction and improve mood, benefiting staff morale.

            https://www.roberthalf.com.au/blog/employers/how-much-unused-annual-leave-does-your-team-have

            Reasons to encourage staff to take AL etc.

            https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/benefits-annual-leave-sarah-mcgavinAustralian write-up on the importance of taking annual leave.

            I am finding it more and more difficult to reconcile your pro women views on the idea that women may lose out when others pursue a trans agenda with criticism of these very 'vanilla' as they say arrangements for working women/parents that we have been fighting for what seems to be forever.

            I support all the types of leave we have available, and some progressive workplaces have all manner of leave arrangements depending on the makeup of their employees. I do not see them as a social welfare benefit.

            In many workplaces, those without children, or who do not have child/grandchild ties chose to let their co-workers take leave during the long Christmas/New year and school holidays. Win-Win really. Parents get time off during school holidays and others don't have to take leave in crowded school holiday times.

            I do not know enough of the background/rationale of the domestic abuse leave provisions and where they lie and would prefer not to comment until I do.

            • Molly 11.2.1.1.2.1
              7 November 2022 at 12:31 pm

              "I am finding it more and more difficult to reconcile your pro women views on the idea that women may lose out when others pursue a trans agenda with criticism of these very 'vanilla' as they say arrangements for working women/parents that we have been fighting for what seems to be forever."

              You do seem to find it difficult to reconcile any views that are not aligned with yours. In a discussion about maternity leave, you bring in my views on trans ideology, for what purpose? Stick to the topic.

              As someone who has a socialist bent, this paid leave entitlement is not progressive for ALL women, so it is fundamentally a divisive one. The children of these working women, receive a financial benefit from central government not afforded to the children of beneficiaries, or non-working women. (Extended to half a year. For each child.)

              A whole post can be written on the pros and cons of this policy, which may be an interesting discussion.

              I reiterate – I consider a progressive policy – to be one that is accessible to all who have the need, not just the select few.

              You consider this a progressive policy because it only goes to those that have earned it. Does that justification seem familiar to you?

              “I do not know enough of the background/rationale of the domestic abuse leave provisions and where they lie and would prefer not to comment until I do.”

              Thank you for that.

              • Shanreagh …
                7 November 2022 at 1:00 pm

                You consider this a progressive policy because it only goes to those that have earned it. Does that justification seem familiar to you?

                How is it unfair that a workplace entitlement applies to those in workplaces. Many women in workplaces are never eligible for any payments through SW, I worked 40 years and in times of unemployment was never able to claim any sort of benefit. I put this down to cut-offs that would benefit those whose needs were greater than mine. And fair enough.

                Many of my colleagues were the same, many had children and had dire years ahead of them. We did go to the McDonalds, the retail jobs etc, the shaky contract jobs with no certainty, some times week to week and little future. Grossly over qualified until we could get back. Some stayed in the PS and endured 12 restructurings between 1987 and 2000 and colossal stress

                I am mystified how workplace reforms can be considered wrong. I have not heard of the concept of everyone getting everything.

                As one who worked both to survive and because I wanted to I do not consider myself or my female work colleagues ‘a favoured few’ My jobs were often stressful, working long hours and these were the work conditions for both male and female working parents. Yet equal parenting leave you say applies only to the favoured few?

                • Molly …
                  7 November 2022 at 3:05 pm

                  This is a longer conversation than I am prepared to have at the moment.

                  Your comparison to annual leave as a "workplace entitlement" is flawed, as it works on a pro-rata basis for everyone that is employed, under legislation.

                  "As one who worked both to survive and because I wanted to I do not consider myself or my female work colleagues ‘a favoured few’ "

                  Of course you don't. You call it workplace entitlement, and that redirects any criticism away from the fact that this has defined a group of mothers as the ones worthy of governmental financial support, warranting extended accommodation in terms of leave and finances.

                  This extension of maternity leave comes at a cost, and makes some interesting judgements while doing so.

                  I had these concerns when the proposal was first mooted by Laila Harre (?) a few years ago. This is not because I don't see the attraction of the scheme, or the benefits to those who use it, but because I believe there is greater need for government attention for mothers and children who don't benefit from this proposal.

                  It is a boon for the conflicted – but not necessarily struggling – working mothers in NZ. It is not necessarily a progressive recognition of the value of all mothering choices.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    7 November 2022 at 8:08 pm

                    This extension of maternity leave comes at a cost, and makes some interesting judgements while doing so.

                    It is called parental leave. Covers both male and female who become parents, including becoming adoptive parents.

                    What is the cost, surely you are not talking $$$$. Every progressive move comes with a cost as we are moving from a status quo.

                    • Molly …
                      8 November 2022 at 8:12 am

                      This extension of parental leave comes at a cost, and makes some interesting judgements while doing so.

                      Yep, still works with that change.

                      "Covers both male and female who become parents, including becoming adoptive parents."

                      Yes, you are right, but when it served your purpose you made it all about the women:

                      "I am gob-smacked I really am, it is to even up the scales, to encourage women to keep their ties to their workplaces open and to return to those workplaces and their careers, perhaps using the recently enhanced childcare arrangements.

                      The fact is that many women chose to work, as is their right and many women have to work through economic necessity whether partnered or not. Paid parental leave was fought for in the workplace as a progressive workplace condition, it is not a benefit any more than improving annual leave in the workplace is a benefit."

                      "I am finding it more and more difficult to reconcile your pro women views on the idea that women may lose out when others pursue a trans agenda with criticism of these very 'vanilla' as they say arrangements for working women/parents that we have been fighting for what seems to be forever."

                      My critique of this policy, is that it reinforces a division of parents into those that are supported well by the state, and those that are supported not at all, or not as well. As an aside, are there other payments such as this put through IRD?

                      Are there stats on which parent most often uses the 26 week paid parental leave? Is it split evenly, or as we both have alluded, (you when it suits) a predominantly female utilised provision?

                      Unlike many, I don't look just at the benefits to myself or others when proposals are made. I don't assume that just because it is labelled with "benefits parents" that it necessarily does what is said on the tin.

                      I think this leave benefits "some parents" and not necessarily the parents who need the financial support that is provided.

                      A possible unintended outcome, recognising that women are the ones most likely to use this extended leave. Given that it has now been extended to 6 month after 6 months employment, do you not consider that it may have an impact on young women who are presenting for employment at an age where childbearing is most prevalent?

                    • Molly …
                      8 November 2022 at 8:30 am

                      Yes, I am talking costs: financial and societal in terms of policies that increase or entrench inequality or unequal treatment. In terms of women, might there be hidden costs during employment applications?

                      Cost to government approx $80 million/yr? How is this not a type of benefit?

                      https://www.mbie.govt.nz/assets/562330c2ea/qas-questions-answers-extending-paid-parental-leave-26-weeks.pdf

                    • Shanreagh …
                      8 November 2022 at 9:01 am

                      @ Molly. I explained the genesis of the leave which was to ensure that there were no obstacles against women working and having a career. These aspects may not be important to you but from the 1970s they were lightning rod issues.

                      This then lead the way to men being enabled to to share parental leave…many were not able to. Society evolved and it became more common for men/partners to want to share this.

                      Many people could not/did not become parents. In the work places I worked we did not see this in the terms you are expounding. ie that we also also should have got something.

                      Our leave entitlements were continually being looked at as well. One instance that I have given previously is that of family leave that was used in my workplace mainly for helping elderly relatives into care, going to appts with them.

                      Your critiques seem to lack on the ground experience. Were you in workplaces where there was maternity leave moving on to parental leave where there were problems.

                      Re treating everyone the same there is an extension of the equity argument that says that treating unequal people equally is unjust

                      'There is nothing so unequal as treating unequals equally'?

                      This came from Aristotle originally:

                      According to Aristotle, “equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally”. This principle of equality states that individuals should be treated the same, unless they differ in ways that are relevant to the situation in which they are involved.

                      The cost of parental leave argument…hmmmm. red herring I think. The $ aspects were a known consequence that were able to be budgeted for, as I said on the social side, there are huge benefits in the family unit to being able to share care of children.

                      There are stats. There is also information about the fight that women had to seek equality in employment. This actually started way back with the granting of the franchise.

                    • Molly …
                      8 November 2022 at 10:01 am

                      @Shanreagh

                      Yes, I read your perspective – again, and find again that it assumes that this approach is better because it's more.

                      I point out it's failings. You repeat it's PR points – again.

                      We're done, unless you start listening as well as you opine

                    • Shanreagh …
                      8 November 2022 at 10:33 am

                      Actually you have not mentioned the societal changes/concerns just mentioned that they exist.

                      Why am I getting two things 'dinging' (I am a bit slow sometimes as I tend to take people at face value for longer than others do and would deem wise)

                      the first is the Stepford Wives (brilliant film)

                      the other is that contrary to what I first believed with the trans issue as stated on here, it may not be around the harm of giving human rights to marginalised people but being concerned at the harm that this can do to Women's rights, but some deeply entrenched possibly Christian fundamentalism at play.

                      Wider reading especially from Helen Joyce and Maya Fortstater with their focus on women and their knowledge of women's issues ie on the ground experience has convinced me of this.

                      Happy to agree to disagree.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  7 November 2022 at 4:03 pm

                  I am mystified how workplace reforms can be considered wrong.

                  Me too – progressive workplace reforms, while not perfect (what/who is?), are a net good for society, imho.

                  Re extension of parental leave, it could be more, but 26 weeks shifted Kiwi parents up the table of OECD paid leave entitlements (Table PF2.1.A; PDF]. 'Baby steps.'

                  New Zealand hikes paid parental leave entitlements starting July [14 June 2022]
                  In New Zealand, eligible employees may avail up to 26 weeks of paid parental leave, thanks to the government's efforts in 2020.

                  Parental leave changes 'a step forward' [15 Oct 2022]

                  He [PM Albanese] said the policy change would support families and provide them with greater choice.

                  "We know that investing in parental leave benefits our economy," he said.

                  "It is good for productivity and participation, it's good for families and it's good for our country as a whole."

                  • Shanreagh …
                    7 November 2022 at 8:39 pm

                    Thank you Drowsy.

                    Me too – progressive workplace reforms, while not perfect (what/who is?), are a net good for society, imho.

                    I want every person to achieve their full worth as a person in terms of education and work. With progressive reforms to do this. Women and Maori in most NZ workplaces were under represented and their participation needed to be boosted.

                    Up until the late 60s that women who married while in the PS were required to leave. My mother who worked in the PO had to leave on marriage. As she said 'babies were a while coming', they wanted to buy a house and my dad was setting up a business and money was tight, she wanted to keep working to help. My grandmother, who had an almost inexhaustible supply of 5 Pound notes and visited once a week, was a lifeline.

                    It was only in the 1970s and the result of reforms and clamour from the feminist causes that unjust examples , that were just the way 'we did things around here' were removed. As the breadwinner in my family, my husband had a psychological illness, i was initially denied transfer expenses and access to 'pool' housing because bread-winners were male only. I had to petition the State Service Commissioners, supply all sorts of intrusive social and medical histories and keep supplying them for a period after wards, in case this illness was feigned and this was a ruse to take a house away from a male.

                    So with a fierce feminist for a mother, being 'an unreconstructed 1970s feminist myself', these happenings then doing a women's studies diploma I am well aware of the need to be socially progressive in all aspects of our life. Plus, and it is a big plus these workplaces that result are much more interesting to work in, challenging and likely to achieve more to break down stereotypes within the workplace and outside.

                    Often without specific programmes to address under representation of women, people with a disability, Pasifika, Maori we would never achieve things by osmosis. The forces arrayed against these advances and the benefits they bring would sink them without trace.

                    • Molly …
                      8 November 2022 at 8:43 am

                      "Often without specific programmes to address under representation of women, people with a disability, Pasifika, Maori we would never achieve things by osmosis. The forces arrayed against these advances and the benefits they bring would sink them without trace."

                      Seen to be doing something, is not the same as effectively addressing the impediments.

                      Many programmes limit themselves to finding a problem, framing that problem, and then solving it in a particular way.

                      The establishment of a $500 million health authority means nothing in terms of wellbeing outcomes if it is not appropriately managed and funds directed towards the most effective measures.

                      I have experienced the recent funding efforts regarding Covid vaccines, and have received three identical calls from a funded agency telling me that I can get the extra booster. I thanked the first, asked them to take me off the calling list, and received the second and third within the next fortnight.

                      When I had young children there was a targeted Māori health oral initiative. I have looked to see what the outcome was, but was unable to find this initiative outcome online. So, I was called by family members who I hadn't seen for fifteen years to sign up to this programme – for which I was to receive nothing – because the recruitment fee they received was $300 per family. (I might be forgetful, they might have offered to send through literature on how to brush my children's teeth.)

                      Over the years, there have been a few such initiatives that I have been aware of through family involvement which admittedly have a positive effect on Northland employment and funding of health parity schemes, but the health outcomes seem to be a secondary consideration.

                      So, yes, I am not someone who assumes all "progressive" labels are the best descriptors. I am someone who prefers finding the weaknesses, so that those areas can be mitigated or strengthened.

    • Shanreagh 11.3
      7 November 2022 at 9:54 am

      Goodness me there are some strange comments on here. All this "woke" bullshit means nothing to me except a word from both the lazy right and the left to beat others up.

      Couldn't agree more. Same with 'elites'.

      When the word are never explained, often stated they become, to me anyway, some thing akin to a dog whistle.

    • Anker 11.4
      7 November 2022 at 11:00 am

      Answered above Darien Fention, so I am not going to repeat myself. I am not right wing. I am a member of the Labour Party and worked my but off and contributed generous amounts of money when you were an MP.

      I have outlined what I mean by woke and provided receommended reading.

      • Shanreagh 11.4.1
        7 November 2022 at 12:27 pm

        I have outlined what I mean by woke and provided receommended reading.

        Can you link back please, don't bother here it is from Anker:

        If you are interested in finding out more read "How the Woke Won, the elitist movement that threatens democracy" By Joanna Williams.

        I will continue to use the word woke.

        That is a real pity as it means some of your writing will be inaccessible to others who do not have your definition on hand, whatever that it is…….can you summarise what you mean by 'woke' please.

        Hopefully it does not mean all things progressive that might make a difference though I very much fear that it does.

        .

        • Anker 11.4.1.1
          7 November 2022 at 5:08 pm

          Corey Humm, I am standing up and applauding you right now. You are so bang on.

          Thank you and thank you to Belladonna for the rent stats.

          You two have saved me having to answer.

          Brilliant Corey, just brilliant

          • Shanreagh 11.4.1.1.1
            7 November 2022 at 8:58 pm

            I cannot see any comment by Corey under 11.4.1

            Corey did write a brilliant piece at 16.

            Presumably you meant that!

    • Louis 11.5
      7 November 2022 at 12:21 pm

      yes Darien.

  12. PsyclingLeft.Always 12
    7 November 2022 at 8:01 am

    Fair Pay Agreements anyone? Ten days sick leave? Four weeks holiday? 26 weeks Paid Parental Leave? Minimum wage increases anyone else?

    Onya Darien ! Yea it defies belief the either short term .."memory" , white anting, or just self destruct minds of some.

    Anyway we must Stand up and fight back to keep nact away from power. Under nact NZ will revert back to the bad old days in double quick time. All our gains will..disappear.

    • Shanreagh 12.1
      7 November 2022 at 10:12 am

      Good comment PL.

      Sometimes I wonder if people have now decided to turnover stones to see what is there rather than doing their own research in trusted places.

  13. Anker 13
    7 November 2022 at 11:27 am

    Boy what a lot of push back on this thread. I know it hurts when one's party gets a bad poll.

    I acknowledge the fair pay agreements seem good. School lunches yes. minimum wage increase excellent.

    Stand back and look at the big picture……Credit Suizze, the wealthy gained the biggest increase in wealth in NZ out of all other countries. (this may look a little different now with plummenting house prices).

    People are much worse off in NZ than they were in 2017. Partly to do with the pandemic partly to do with Labour.

    • Shanreagh 13.1
      7 November 2022 at 12:36 pm

      People are much worse off in NZ than they were in 2017. Partly to do with the pandemic partly to do with Labour.

      What are the particular things that people are worse off in NZ?

      I'm in two minds if you can split pandemic and Labour seeing the pandemic response was in essence a Labour response ie it was not a whole of Govt response, the Nats did not cross the floor once to share the response or work side by side with Labour.

      If you can split it would be interesting.

    • Incognito 13.2
      7 November 2022 at 1:52 pm

      People are much worse off in NZ than they were in 2017.

      That’s such a broad generalisation that it can mean anything or nothing. Better to start with some facts and then go from there to state what you really mean. For example:

      For the year ended June 2021:

      • Median net worth of New Zealand households was $397,000; up 21 percent from $328,000 for the year ended June 2018.
      • [followed by many more bullet points]

      https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/household-net-worth-statistics-year-ended-june-2021/

      • Shanreagh 13.2.1
        7 November 2022 at 3:46 pm

        Thanks Incognito.

        That’s such a broad generalisation that it can mean anything or nothing.

        That was my thought as well and hence my request to the poster to clarify.

        My own view is that impact of the Labour Govt's policies all the way through Covid has meant that people are suffering less than they would have had we had a rightist approach to Covid/Govt.

        NZ, like its trading partners is suffering from inflation. Hopefully those who bought houses who have seen increases in interest rates will have had their ability to service the loan stress tested by the banks at the time they took out their loans. So they will be able to meet new costs. How much longer though?

        I would love for some hurry up on the supermarket competition and a tax change that looked at bracket creep, for the moment, pushing the bands back to those applying say in 2017 relatively speaking.

      • Belladonna 13.2.2
        7 November 2022 at 4:19 pm

        Your example seems to be entirely around the increased 'value' of property. So people who owned property in 2017 – were indeed notionally better off in 2021.

        I say 'notionally' as the increase in value is entirely theoretical unless you either sell the asset, or (possibly) borrow against it. And, if your associated costs (insurance, rates, etc) also increase, you may actually be worse off.

        In the meantime, the median rental in NZ went from $400/wk (which was already signalled as unaffordable) in 2017 to nearly $550 in May 2022 (for Auckland, where 1/3 of the population live, it was nearly $600). This is a real fortnightly cost out of people's pay packets.

        While there was a significant increase during Covid – the upward trend was strongly marked between 2017 and the end of 2019 (so pre-Covid) as well.

        https://figure.nz/chart/azFwYTVvUcrcxT3m-Cn6TyuSQBZ8Kacee

        • Incognito 13.2.2.1
          7 November 2022 at 5:46 pm

          Excellent reply, thank you!

          You have demonstrated my point which is that fact-free rants & reckons are a useless waste of oxygen and replying to them is an exercise in futility.

          Only once we start with an opinion founded on facts and discernible truth, we can have a constructive debate that includes context and nuance. Alas, too many commenters on this site opt for just ‘feelz’ and conflate their emotional state & response with ‘perception’.

          I’ll leave it to others to continue the convo because my job here is done.

          • Sacha 13.2.2.1.1
            7 November 2022 at 7:48 pm

            Twas only a matter of time before the discursive techniques of the right found their way here, alongside some of their cherished ideas.

            • Shanreagh 13.2.2.1.1.1
              7 November 2022 at 9:06 pm

              Thanks Incognito and Sacha.

              Tip: Incognito provided a clickable link to stats from Statistics NZ. These gave a good overview in trying to tease out a response.

              The impetus for such a response did not come from me. Also responses as to whether we ie our society are better off cannot be looked at in $$$$$ only.

          • pat 13.2.2.1.2
            7 November 2022 at 9:30 pm

            Shame on you Incognito….17 month old stats in a falling market?

            They are no basis for anything, let alone informed debate

            • Incognito 13.2.2.1.2.1
              8 November 2022 at 7:53 am

              Thank you for your contribution to the non-informed debate and missing the point. Please keep up your excellent work here or might I suggest TDB and/or KB as natural habits that might suit you better.

              Household net worth statistics: Year ended June 2021
              03 March 2022, 10:45am

              • pat …
                8 November 2022 at 5:00 pm

                We would appear to be well matched…each thinks the other has missed the point.

                • Incognito …
                  8 November 2022 at 6:38 pm

                  The imaginary equivalence is all yours. To put it politely:

                  One commenter provided a link to primary data source and starting commentary for conversation and counter arguments. (NB this was not the main objective!) The time period was clearly stated both in quoted text in the comment and in the link provided.

                  The other commenter provided nothing but pot shots and killed off any conversation.

                  • pat …
                    8 November 2022 at 6:44 pm

                    And you provided data so out of date as to be misleading….the equivalence remains

                    • Incognito …
                      8 November 2022 at 7:08 pm

                      If you feel so misled by a clearly stated time period you could have provided a more recent and up-to-date version of that same data set, which is a continual one, or another counter argument to keep the convo moving along and/or even lift it. That was the obvious objective of the comment, which was explained in a follow-up comment and clearly understood by at least one other commenter, which you missed or decided to ignore & deny.

                    • pat …
                      8 November 2022 at 7:23 pm

                      An intelligent individual such as yourself can be expected to be well aware of conditions post mid last year and to then knowingly post misleading data speaks to a lack of integrity when it comes to debate.

                      "That represented billions wiped off people savings, with the total value of the 13​ funds slipping from $27.4 billion​ at the end of March to just $23.2b​ by the end of June, despite people continuing to make contributions."

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/129398002/kiwisaver-updates-to-investors-detail-multibillion-dollar-losses

                      "Real Estate Institute chief executive Jen Baird said the median price of a New Zealand home had dropped 9.6% in the past six months."

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/real-estate/300686323/house-price-drop-over-six-months-biggest-on-record-real-estate-institute-says

                    • Incognito []
                      9 November 2022 at 8:43 am

                      Thank you for playing ball.

                      I’ll leave it to you to make the appropriate comparison(s) with 2017, if you so wish.

                      FWIW, being time-poor doesn’t always allow for in-depth research on unfamiliar topics. The collective commentariat here on TS generally is a much better resource and vehicle for moving convos along.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 13.3
      7 November 2022 at 3:00 pm

      Boy what a lot of push back on this thread. I know it hurts when one's party gets a bad poll.

      I can understand how that bad poll result might be painful to you as "a member of the Labour Party", but cheer up – it's one bad poll.

      As for people being "much worse off in NZ than they were in 2017" – yes, many are; not all. Regardless of which party takes over at the next general election, I predict that won't change a lot – deckchairs on the Titanic and all that – hope I'm wrong.

      Is it realistic to expect that the effects of global warming, the recent pandemic, and the even more recent Russian invasion of Ukraine could combine to raise living standards for all? Seems unlikely. If your standard of living in 2022 is worse than it was in 2017, just wait until the 2026 general election! And yet there's no place I'd rather be.

      ‘We’re witnessing the biggest movement in consumer behaviour in over five decades’: Food makers urged to think ‘long and hard’ at response to ‘blistering’ cost of living crisis [24 Oct 2022]
      Europe’s consumers are displaying signs of severe ‘inflation fatigue’ as they face a declining standard of living that is forcing a range of coping behaviours not seen since the austere late 70s and early 80s, warns a sobering report from IRI.

      The Living Standards Outlook 2022 [PDF]
      While 2020-21 and 2021-22 were terrible years in many respects, in terms of real household incomes, they are as good as it gets over our projection period up to 2026-27.

      Rising cost of living: effect on lower-income households [27 July 2022]
      Cost is a further consideration for the government. New Zealand’s government debt is low compared with many other developed countries. But there’s no escaping the fact that government spending to address the COVID pandemic has heaped debt onto later generations, and every new hand-out increases that burden.

      What else can be done? There are very few quick fixes. Opening the borders to more working migrants might help alleviate labour and skill shortages, which takes pressure off employers to raise prices to cover increasing wage costs. But allowing in too many migrants can be inflationary itself.

      The Government could temporarily reduce GST on basic necessities. If it can reduce tax on petrol why not food? However, this would not be a well-targeted policy as it would benefit better-off households as well as those on lower incomes. It would also be costly.

      A less eye-catching but potentially better targeted policy would be to increase Government funding that goes to community groups and government agencies whose role is to support the less well off such as the Salvation Army. The signs are that these organisations will see greater demand for their support in the coming years.

      COVID has upended our society and our economy. We have all experienced hardship to some degree over the past couple of years. But as always when things get tough, it’s the most vulnerable that feel it the most.

      • Shanreagh 13.3.1
        7 November 2022 at 3:54 pm

        I like your approach Drowsy.

        Still mulling over the idea of increasing support to Salvation Army etc now. It seems counter intuitive to do this when the theory is with less unemployment etc the need for pick up services should be less. But no…..the need for pickup. helping services is actually more as some who have not been able to get employment may have intractable and long term problems that prevent them from participating. And intractable and long term conditions need more support in terms of $$$$$.

        Also as yet the minimum wage is not a living wage.

        So thank you for jiggling the old brain cells.smiley

  14. Stuart Munro 14
    7 November 2022 at 12:07 pm

    I like the speech, and I like the nod to Savage.

    Savage however, made material socioeconomic changes that benefited workers and their families and enriched our country for decades by so doing. The handling of Covid was good, though some of the stimuli handed out during it compounded the increasing inequality we have suffered since the machinations of that quisling, Roger Douglas.

    Current inflation, on top of the speculatively driven costs of housing, are making cost of living the major issue for the government to address at this time.

    In terms of polls, Three Waters is likely proving costly. I've yet to hear what kind of accountability water consumers will be able to sheet home to Maori boards, and if there are no such processes, well, Maori are no more immune to administrative vices than pakeha.

    The point about the quality of the opposition is well made, and it is certainly true that they are unfit for anything but gardening leave. But a good government does not let a pitiful opposition set the standards for their performance, it does instead the very best it can. Years of neoliberal dogma had almost persuaded government that they can do nothing. Finally disabused of that bullshit by Covid, the government can finally do things again – and we're only thirty years behind where we would have been without Roger Douglas.

  15. Shanreagh 15
    7 November 2022 at 12:30 pm

    Finally disabused of that bullshit by Covid, the government can finally do things again – and we're only thirty years behind where we would have been without Roger Douglas.

    Never too late!

    smiley yes

  16. Corey Humm 16
    7 November 2022 at 3:09 pm

    Five years in and we're still talking about "great first steps" … Its just so disappointing and that's the greatest killer in politics.

    Her leadership since the 2020 election, is going to be studied by generations as a case study in what not to do after winning an election.

    From most popular pm in history to the walking dead in 24 months. Crazy

    Everytime I see her now I wonder what left wing economic reform she's going to "categorically rule out" this time.

    How can the left justify her ruling out comparitively popular things like a cgt and refusing to endorse weed reform because it may cost some centerist votes but then allow her and the party to haemorrhage votes on three waters, hate speech and all matter of unpopular social reforms.

    The labour party will rule out anything economically radical and screech we're a party of the center but when it comes to social policy there's nothing radical enough.

    The center applies to social policy too.

    Labour are throwing this govt away over unpopular social shit they didn't campaign on but will rule out doing next to anything economically social democratic because "we didn't campaign on that" utter hypocrisy.

    They didn't campaign on radical constitutional reforms and upholding te tiriti over the treaty and if we needed a referendum on weed then we should have a referendum on which version of treaty voters want upheld.

    Now she comes to us and says the cost of living crisis that her and the wider left ignored exiated for months while poor people, the canaries in the cold mine were screaming about it last year, now she says it's her top priority 😂😂 just like housing was her top priority them ruled out a capital gains tax 😂

    Its been awe inspiring watch this govt piss around in 2022 while it's support bleeds. They should have realized in may that the hate speech and three waters was toxic af and dropped it like a cgt and they should have been throwing everything and the kitchen sink at the cost of living crisis instead of a few tweaks and empathic nods while being interviewed.

    The govt should adjust tax rates for inflation, you're pushing people into higher tax brackets ffs!!!

    They should have gone harder and faster on supermarkets.

    We get this shitty family subsidy that looks like something from the dying days of Helen Clark.

    They need to throw everything they have at cost of living and housing and be god damned radical and drop the hate speech and three waters and if Ardern can't do that, drop her and find someone who can.

    2023 is an existential threat to the NZ left, it's time the govt realized this and dropped the social policy unless they truly want an economically hard right govt to lay waste to the workers of this country.

    • Anker 16.1
      7 November 2022 at 5:03 pm

      Corey Humm, I am standing up and applauding you right now. You are so bang on.

      Thank you and thank you to Belladonna for the rent stats.

      You two have saved me having to answer.

      Brilliant Corey, just brilliant

    • Christopher Randal 16.2
      7 November 2022 at 8:33 pm

      Thank you Corey

      You have stated my thoughts exactly

    • pat 16.3
      7 November 2022 at 8:39 pm

      The so called "left' are no longer…the most disturbing feature of the new progressives is their haste to dismiss democracy.

      Self defeating fools

  17. Shanreagh 17
    7 November 2022 at 4:02 pm

    They need to throw everything they have at cost of living and housing and be god damned radical and drop the hate speech and three waters and if Ardern can't do that, drop her and find someone who can.

    Great post Corey.

    I want them to be more radical:

    throw everything they have at cost of living and housing and be god damned radical and drop the hate speech and three waters.

    Huge ask perhaps but we have the talented people there.

    And I wish the opponents would stop conflating 'hate speech' and 'free speech'. They are not the same, a curb to hate speech does not threaten free speech unless your day to day speech includes racist, sexist, all the phobics type speech ie slanging off at people for characteristics that are immutable.

    • Anker 17.1
      7 November 2022 at 5:05 pm

      Who decides what hate speech is Shanreigh. There in lies the problem.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 17.1.1
        7 November 2022 at 5:36 pm

        Who decides what hate speech is…

        Should probably be decided in court, i.e. a law court, not the court of public opinion. No law can prevent hate speech, just as no law can prevent “a smack as part of good parental correction”, but legislators and courts can be aspirational, even progressive (or ‘woke’, if you prefer), in setting indicative boundaries. If they overstep, then repeal remains an option.

        Gay hate speech case in court as review of law announced [31 Oct 2022]
        “My view on homo marriage is that the Bible never mentions it so I’m not against them getting married … As long as a bullet goes through their head the moment they kiss,” the pastor said.

        Twitter loses online hate speech court battle in France [21 Jan 2022]

        The US Supreme Court case that could change the future of the internet
        [25 Oct 2022]
        The role of major online platforms in disseminating hate speech will be decided in the summer by the Supreme Court, when Section 230 is reviewed.

        Stop Hate Speech: Supreme Court directs GOI to take action
        [26 Sept 2022]
        SC underlines the critical role an anchor plays in stopping hate speech during television debates

        Lastly, the court ordered the Indian government (Union of India) to state, on affidavit, whether it plans to adopt a legislation that forbids inciting hate speech in accordance with the Law Commission’s recommendations. In its order, the Supreme Court stated “The Union of India will clearly indicate its stand with regard to the recommendations made by the Law Commission of India namely whether it has contemplated any legislation in terms of the recommendation.” The government should not take an adversarial stand on this but assist the court, Justice Joseph further said.

      • Stuart Munro 17.1.2
        7 November 2022 at 8:38 pm

        Although that can be an issue, the kind of thing that makes the police prick their ears up, as a probable precursor of violence, is a manageable place to set the bar. The PM evidently gets a lot of that.

        It's not the same as merely offending people. That said, heaven only knows where the government mean to draw the line – pronouns maybe.

      • Shanreagh 17.1.3
        7 November 2022 at 8:50 pm

        That is not the problem at all. We have people who decide what is misleading in terms of journalism or advertisements, all facets of discrimination. We have people who make decisions on wrongful actions through courts and tribunals. Extending this with good legislation to hate speech will not be a problem. We need to get the good legislation first. We have people who make decisions about films. I am quite sure we will build a system that works from the legislation.

        NB the correct spelling of my name Shanreagh

  18. millsy 18
    7 November 2022 at 4:53 pm

    "We get this shitty family subsidy that looks like something from the dying days of Helen Clark."

    Yep, that is what I thought as well.

    Anyway, Im picking that this goverment simply decided that it cannot deal with the backlash that it cops from people who are benefiting from the status quo for even the most modest program.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.