Key press conference: November 26 election

Written By: - Date published: 12:09 pm, February 2nd, 2011 - 180 comments
Categories: election 2011, john key, Media - Tags:

The PM has called a surprise press conference. According to Vernon Small at Stuff:

Prime Minister John Key has called a surprise press conference at Parliament at 12.45pm today at which he is expected to call an election.

Our political staff believe he will name November 26 as the date the country will go to the polls. …

Mr Key is also expected to make a further major announcement following those discussions.

Earlier Government sources dismissed suggestions he was poised to reveal a significant economic development.

I’ll be pleased and impressed if Key does announce the election date. But what could the “further major announcement” be? (Thanks to ianmac in comments — r0b).

Update: Election date November 26 confirmed.

180 comments on “Key press conference: November 26 election”

  1. ianmac 1

    STOP PRESS! Key to hold special Press conference at 12:45 today.
    Announce date of election?
    Major Economic Statement?

      • mickysavage 1.1.1

        Mr Key is also expected to make a further major announcement following those discussions.

        What is the bet there are a couple of dead rats the Nats hope we will swallow?

    • Deadly_NZ 1.2

      Yep july Election. We Wish
      or he is not waiting for the next election and is going to sell the power companies now.

    • Election date November 26 I bet.

      Quite cunnning politics. In one foul swoop Key:

      1. Assumes moral high ground,
      2. Continues the illision he is not really a “politician” and does not play “political games” (as if),
      3. Obliterates Goff’s announcement of the new Labour lineup.

      The down side is that Labour can now plan and if the economy goes south or the Maori Party and ACT implodes then the Nats have to limp on. Also if we do not win the World Cup Key’s leadership of the country will be questioned (hard to understand I know but it has happened before).

      • Lanthanide 1.3.1

        It’s possible we’ve entered recession in the 2nd half of last year, so Key setting an election date in November may come back to haunt him.

      • Richard 1.3.2

        Also if we do not win the World Cup Key’s leadership of the country will be questioned (hard to understand I know but it has happened before).

        I’m not sure that I buy the apparently conventional wisdom on the effect the World Cup will have. It seems, to me, more that when a political campaign fails the results of some other unconnected event (like a sporting match) are being looked at as an ad hoc explaination for the failure of a campaign (or the success of an opponent’s campaign).

        It’s just a mechanism for the political strategists to convince themselves that their politcal strategy was not at fault. It smells very much like something DPF would say.

        You might as well blame the politicians’ nativity horoscopes.

        • orange whip? 1.3.2.1

          I’m somewhat sceptical of labelling any one event as the cause of an election result.

          However it would be foolish to ignore the general mood of the nation as a factor.

          And in NZ it would be extra foolish to ignore the RWC as a contributing factor to the mood.

      • Lew 1.3.3

        4. Demonstrates that the opposition is so weak that he can afford to call it this far out, run on privatisation, and say ‘fuck you’ to both the Winstonites and Hone’s supporters, and STILL expect to win.

        Your move, Labour.

        L

      • In one foul swoop Key

        Heh. Freudian slip of the year 😀

  2. This is good news – an astonishing commitment to democracy from Key if it is true. And better than any previous government I can think of. On the other hand, it would suggest that the Nats have a significant election campaign budget that they are intending to spend before the 3 month period when spending is capped.

    • Tigger 2.1

      I find difficult to believe any government that rushes in a law change denying people the right to vote has a ‘commitment to democracy’. Key has a commitment to setting the agenda, nothing else.

      • TightyRighty 2.1.1

        who got denied the right to vote? criminalls right? who are in prison right? kind of pales in comparison to the effects on free speech that helen clark introduced in a brazen attempt to hold on to absolute power at any cost.

        • Bunji 2.1.1.1

          Try the people of Canterbury, whose ECAN election was cancelled.

          Or the people of Auckland as to what they actually wanted their SuperCity to be like.

          And yes, very minor criminals.

          And oo, wasn’t that vicious EFA chilling on free speech? There was basically no criticism of Helen Clark at all before the last election. No comparisons of her to nasty dictators and so forth. And then they were able to prevent the incredibly quick, easy, peaceful & orderly transition of power too. Democracy was so under attack that National’s new EFA has most of the same provisions in it. Yup, back to 3 months instead of a year, and slightly looser financial constraints, but still the restrictions on 3rd party advertising etc.

          • TightyRighty 2.1.1.1.1

            The people of christchurch are to blame for ECAN. if they actually cared about what happens in their region, they wouldn’t have voted in such incompetent numpties every time. and it’s not really democracy when a city decides what is best for the region around it. ECAN was out of it’s depth thanks to being packed with….. as above

            The people of auckland can have the super city how they want it. Isn’t that why they voted in Len Brown? getting what they want might be difficult, getting anything might be difficult, seeing how incompetent that man is. pattern arising here, incompetent lefties.

            No criticism of helen before the last election? just because you put your head in the sand doesn’t mean the things you miss didn’t happen.

        • Lanthanide 2.1.1.2

          “kind of pales in comparison to the effects on free speech that helen clark introduced in a brazen attempt to hold on to absolute power at any cost.”

          And that National left largely intact. Go figure.

  3. gobsmacked 3

    The “Election date guessing game” every three years is a media staple, and very boring. So good on Key if he’s closing down that particular industry.

    Of course, it won’t actually change anything in law, so if he wants to go early a pretext can always be found. Time for fixed terms.

    • Lanthanide 3.1

      It does raise the stakes for him if he wants to go early, though. He’d need something on the order of both ACT and MP disintegrating, or a massive economic shock for which he “needs a mandate to act”.

      • orange whip? 3.1.1

        Well he doesn’t need an actual economic shock, he just needs to pretend there’s one. Like they’ve done with everything from ACC to ECE.

  4. I said this in general comments.

    Quite cunnning politics. In one foul swoop Key:

    1. Assumes moral high ground,
    2. Continues the illision he is not really a “politician” and does not play “political games” (as if),
    3. Obliterates Goff’s announcement of the new Labour lineup.

    The down side is that Labour can now plan and if the economy goes south or the Maori Party and ACT implodes then the Nats have to limp on. Also if we do not win the World Cup Key’s leadership of the country will be questioned (hard to understand I know but it has happened before).

    What is the bet that the further announcement is a shocker, released to lessen its impact?

  5. Treetop 5

    I think may be about the hand over of Pike River as it was scheduled for 29 January. Possibly there may be a major change in who will be responsible for securing the mine. Will need to wait and see.

  6. r0b 6

    RNZ is going to cover it live (you can listen online), with political reporter Julian Robins on the spot.

  7. Rich 7

    He’s agreed the sale of NZ to Disney for 41.2billion, allowing all public debt to be paid off.

    I for one welcome our murine overlords.

    • Nope he did not announce this.

      He is still hoping for the cycleway to come through with our salvation but will sell if it does not resolve things by June 2011.

  8. Bright Red 8

    he’s saying he won’t deal with NZF.

    it’s just the same play as last time

    • gobsmacked 8.1

      He has phrased that carefully. “A Winston Peters-led NZ First …” “no place in my government …” (but confidence and supply?)

      Plenty of ‘outs’ there, and he’ll find one if he needs it. See numerous previous “commitments” (GST etc).

    • Key will go into government with a mysoginist party that selects and harbours an MP that stole a dead baby’s identity, whose leader will drink deeply from the public trough while calling himself a perkbuster, whose leader and deputy leader have at different times had paid time off to dance with the stars and be a territorial, who have all but destroyed Auckland’s local democracy, but will not go into Government with Winnie??

      This shows expert manufacturing of a theme. Shame about the reality.

  9. Bright Red 9

    only a four week election campaign… that’s his real reason for going for that date.

  10. Carol 10

    Jk will say he’s gonna stand down as leader of Nat because he will become a liability by the time of the election. Then he can just campaign for Nat with lots of smile and waves and hang out with Richie & co.

    • Lew 10.1

      This gets the coveted “most delusional thing I’ve read this week” award — and let me tell you, there’s been some competition.

      L

  11. Carol 11

    And it looks like the death nell for ACT.

  12. Lanthanide 12

    In the comments on stuff, 5/10 are pro-Labour or anti-National. The other 5 comments I can’t clearly label as being pro-National.

    Interesting turn around from the last couple of years where most comments on most stories were pro-National.

    • nadis 12.1

      Thought much about selection bias have we? Or non-random sampling? Or thought much?

      • Lanthanide 12.1.1

        Yeah, I remember how in my post I said that it was a serious scientific study that proves Labour will win the election.

        Oh wait, no I didn’t.

        Of the next 6 comments, 2 are pro-National, 1 is pro-Labour.

  13. Sanctuary 13

    It seems the whole privatisation announcement was part of the now signature cynical media management strategy of prime minister Kevin Taylor – get the bad news out of the way and then attempt to simply shut down politics until the five weeks after the RWC when Saint John can coast them home with warm fuzzies of him and Richie McCaw holding aloft the Rugby World Cup.

    I predict that after this week we won’t hear Key on Morning Report or anywhere else that isn’t a patsy media opportunity again for the next eight months if he can help it

    • Lanthanide 13.1

      “I predict that after this week we won’t hear Key on Morning Report or anywhere else that isn’t a patsy media opportunity again for the next eight months if he can help it”

      Quite possibly, but you can bet that Goff will take all offers, so it would start to reflect badly on Key and let Labour set the narrative.

      • gingercrush 13.1.1

        Goff is too stupid. I’m seeing Bill English 2002 all over again.

        • bbfloyd 13.1.1.1

          glad to see you finally recognising the incompetance of the deputy prime minister. unsurprising how ignorant you are of phil goff the man.

      • Sanctuary 13.1.2

        Well no, the strategy is now going to be for the government to simply not front the media, have parliament sit as little as possible and to legislate by urgency. They’ll just shut down Labour’s chance to make political hay.

        External actors – the unions, social activists – are going to have to develop a media strategy to force politics to the centre stage.

        Where there is a vacuum there is opportunity and social activists should be smacking their lips at the media vacuum.

  14. gingercrush 14

    Oh and this pays complete bullshit to Irishbill’s idea of Key going early.

  15. Carol 15

    APEC, led by the US, will meet in Honolulu in November 12-20, 2011

    http://www.state.gov/p/io/rls/othr/112087.htm

    • mcflock 15.1

      Ah, so Key will try to play “international statesman”. Whereas Labour can just ask “and how much will we pay for you to stay in your holiday home?”

  16. JS 16

    Expect extensive National Party and pro-National advertising from now until August from the party and its sponsors.

    • bbfloyd 16.1

      those would include tv1, tv3,prime, and every daily paper in nz except the otago daily times? oh and don’t let’s forget zb news. sounds like blanket coverage is the tactic, as usual.

  17. SHG 17

    Now, let’s see how many Labour electorate MPs head for shelter on the party list…

    • Marty G 17.1

      Lockwood smith? … Oh wait

      Steven joyce …. No, umm

      This game’s hard, shg

      • NX 17.1.1

        They’re aren’t Labour MPs. Fail!

        • mcflock 17.1.1.1

          And the award for “explaining the obvious basis for humour in a joke” goes to . . . NX.

          Acceptance speech: “Epic win. yous likes me, yous guys really likes me!”

          • NX 17.1.1.1.1

            A joke you say! Crikey, that’s usual. Reading the ingrediance of a shampoo bottle has more humour than the comments section of The Standard.

            • McFlock 17.1.1.1.1.1

              agreed, it wasn’t a laugh riot. But it was pretty obvious.

              Sadly, my own humour gland has atrophied to the point that I find Dilbert.com moderately funny.

    • kriswgtn 17.2

      And lets see how many Nacts lose their seats after the benefit cuts and all the kids have to return home or live on the street

      Anti-Spam-borrow

      be interesting to find out how much exactly they are borrowing and where it is going

      This will be a interesting year- Bring it on

  18. bbfloyd 18

    let’s see how many tory bigots ramp up the torrent of abuse that passes for debate in “johnny\’s bouncy castle” . and how vitriolic it gets the closer to election day we get.. i propose a weekly prize to the most obnoxious contibutions posted. i suggest a gold plated hemorrhoid on a stick as the prize.

  19. NX 19

    By announcing the election early, J Key is being straight up with New Zealanders. Such as contrast to the previous PM.

    • stever 19.1

      “By announcing the election early, J Key is” allowing his corporate and other rich backers maximum time to campaign (don’t forget MMP too!) before the electioneering money-cap starts.

      • Richard 19.1.1

        Exactly.

        Campaigning starts now and the electioneering spend does not start being regulated until 3 months prior to polling day.

        • Lew 19.1.1.1

          Doesn’t hold. Election date needn’t have been named for that to happen.

          I agree with NX, on the proviso that every politician would always play it this way if the (relatively small) gain of ‘being straight’ wasn’t dwarfed by the (relatively large) cost of sacrificing the incumbent’s tactical timing advantage. Since — as far as Key is concerned, and I see nothing wrong with this reasoning — there is no serious challenge to him from the opposition, and no appreciable threat that they’ll steal a march, there’s no good reason to do it any other way. Especially when it permits him to contrast this behaviour with Clark’s last term.

          If you want to rail and shake your fist at someone about this, rail and shake your fist at Phil Goff, whose party is so ineffectual that the government essentially enjoys impunity.

          L

          • mickysavage 19.1.1.1.1

            Shucks Lew

            You have been reading too much Crosby Textor stuff.

            You sound like Farrar, work out an attack line and then keep repeating it ad nauseum until everyone start to believe it.

            The only trouble is that I did not think you were a right winger?

            By all means get into the detail and criticise Labour for specific policy and back your comments up with analysis. But trotting out these lines is so lazy.

            Why are Labour ineffectual? Can it be something to do with the MSM and their focus in irrelevancy? Maybe Labour should get their own John Key, someone shallow and utterly useless who nevertheless smiles and waves in such a nice way that he sways the undecided Labour’s way.

            Is that what you want?

            • higherstandard 19.1.1.1.1.1

              Yes, quite right Mickey shoot the messenger. The fact Labour can;t get any traction is everyone else’s fault it can’t have anything to do with the party, its advisors and leadership.

            • Lew 19.1.1.1.1.2

              Ah, bollocks, micky.

              Blaming the ‘MSM’ is the loser’s excuse. The job of opposition is to give them no choice but to cover you and your policies and your good works, from your perspective. It’s hard, but there it is. An opposition party earns its coverage; it doesn’t get it as of right. Labour hasn’t earned it.

              The $5k tax-free threshold was bold enough to draw plenty of scaremongering about the deficit but too timid to makeanyone sit up and take notice for other reasons. (I even agree with Trotter on this). The response to the SOE float was incoherent — trying to simultaneously run the lines that it’s a desperate election-year power grab; and that it’s deeply unpopular with ordinary New Zealanders. Both can’t be true. Either would have worked in isolation, though the second is more easily justifiable. But these are just the two most recent examples: they’re symptomatic of the larger problem.

              The job of opposition is largely to make it hard for the government to ride roughshod over the 40%+ of the population whom they don’t speak for — or at least to illustrate to those whom a government is trampling that they have a viable and inspiring alternative at election time. Given the extent to which this government is taking glee in trampling or simply ignoring a wide swath of the population — the education sectors; unions; low-wage workers; tangata whenua; and so on — you’d think that providing them a viable alternative wouldn’t be too hard.

              L

              • Please, somebody print this and glue it to the mirror in which Goff checks whether he needs to touch up his roots.

                • orange whip?

                  And Mr Goff, please hire some fucking coms staff who know how to use a printer and where to buy the glue.

              • Lew

                The $5k tax-free threshold was bold enough to draw plenty of scaremongering about the deficit but too timid to makeanyone sit up and take notice for other reasons

                You have bought into the argument that Labour should release all of its policy and analysis at the same time. Why? National never does.

                The response to the SOE float was incoherent — trying to simultaneously run the lines that it’s a desperate election-year power grab; and that it’s deeply unpopular with ordinary New Zealanders. Both can’t be true.

                Labour has never said that privatisation was a desperate election year power grab. Source? Labour has said that it is financially insane however, and it is.

                Given the extent to which this government is taking glee in trampling or simply ignoring a wide swath of the population — the education sectors; unions; low-wage workers; tangata whenua; and so on — you’d think that providing them a viable alternative wouldn’t be too hard.

                And how do you measure the effectiveness of the opposition? By watching TV or reading the Herald?

                Try watching Parliament some time or read their blog. Compare it with the stuff the tories put out. Then explain to me what Labour should do differently.

                • higherstandard

                  It’s not a question of how Lew measure’s the effectiveness of the opposition it’s how the general public does and that probably is via watching TV, reading their daily paper or listening to the radio.

                • Lew

                  Micky, just a quicky, I’m about to hit the road:

                  Re releasing all policy: not at all. My problem with the policy isn’t that they didn’t release enough of it; it’s that what they did release is electorally worthless.

                  Re SOE privatisation: http://www.labour.org.nz/news/flogging-off-power-companies-a-self-interested-bid-by-national-to-cling-to-power

                  Re the effectiveness of opposition: a tricky one, I’ll admit, because hard measurements are infrequent (elections). But soft measurements — including opinion polls, media coverage (volume, type, tone, emphasis, &c) and other factors such as response to by-elections, public events and so on are pretty common. A good deal of my paid work and much of my free time is spent analysing these things — including parliament, and Red Alert, and so on. I’ve written literally thousands of words over the past couple of years — here and on my own blog and elsewhere — about what they should do differently, and I will continue to do. That’s all gratis, but I’m not in a position to formulate an end-to-end political strategy for Labour — I have kids to feed and a mortgage to pay, and in any case, it doesn’t seem like they, or most of their supporters, are interested in hearing any criticism.

                  That’s a shame, but there it is. If you’re truly convinced that they’re doing all they can, ask yourself this: how long are you prepared for them to remain in opposition?

                  L

                • orange whip?

                  The response to the SOE float was incoherent — trying to simultaneously run the lines that it’s a desperate election-year power grab…

                  Like Micky I haven’t seen Labour saying this either. What it really is (and many here missed it) is an important signal to their base. All the business leaders and hard-righties who have been complaining since the election that National aren’t doing anything, the ones who are frothing for the next phase of Roger’s revolution, they can all be reassured now that National – and Key – are on the “right” track. That this time, after the election it’s all on and no more pissing about.

                  Key has figured that by announcing it early he secures the support – and the money – of the hard-right, the business roundtable and the rest of them who will then work to make sure National gets elected by helping to sell it – and whatever other policies they slop out – to the general electorate.

                  It also gives him plenty of time to distract the public with lollipops and shenanigans, but mostly it’s about cementing the support of the base.

                  So yes, it is an election year power grab, but not in the sense that Lew suggested Labour had said, which they didn’t anyway.

                  • Olwyn

                    Orange whip, I agree with you. The ruling out of Winston is part of the same story – Winston will not agree to asset sales, or at least not of that magnitude, and the suggestion is that there is no need to worry about National’s potentially trading them off or diluting them to gain coalition partners. There is probably an accompanying hope that this will cost Winston a few votes and that they will go National’s way.

                    At the same time, I would not rule out an early election despite today’s announcement. If they find it expedient, then an early election will be called, whatever was said today. All they need is to invent some sort of crisis, and today’s announcement will add force to the “we could do no other” claim that would accompany such a move.

                • Anthony C

                  “Maybe Labour should get their own John Key, someone shallow and utterly useless who nevertheless smiles and waves in such a nice way that he sways the undecided Labour’s way.”

                  The hopeless thing is that it seems at times Phil Goff is trying to be John Key, But NZ already has one and he is already pretty good at being John Key.

          • Puddleglum 19.1.1.1.2

            “I agree with NX, on the proviso that every politician would always play it this way if the (relatively small) gain of ‘being straight’ wasn’t dwarfed by the (relatively large) cost of sacrificing the incumbent’s tactical timing advantage.”

            Well, my reading would be that these two ‘plays’ are the same, they’re not alternatives. Key has just used “the incumbent’s tactical timing advantage”. This announcement is no exception to the general rule followed by every PM, including Helen Clark and, now, John Key.

            A ‘surprise’ major announcement, sprung to maximum advantage through its unusual timing? I think your political antennae may need straightening, Lew.

            This is clearly a tactical announcement. Just because it makes it harder to ‘go early’, if not impossible, that doesn’t make it the ‘sacrifice of a tactical advantage’. It makes it the expression of a tactical advantage, as – in fact – you point out. It’s the tactic of expressing his power and confidence – like peacocks showing off huge, colourful tails that otherwise are handicaps. (evolution is full of this tactic)

            • Lew 19.1.1.1.2.1

              Yes, it is true that taking an ostentatious risk in order to demonstrate your chops does itself convey an advantage. But the point was that a risk of this sort — similar to the risk of Muldoon’s snap election, which famously didn’t pay off — is rarely ‘worth it’ in cold election year calculus. Unless you have acres of political capital and are feeling very comfortable.

              L

              • Pascal's bookie

                But the point was that a risk of this sort — similar to the risk of Muldoon’s snap election, which famously didn’t pay off — is rarely ‘worth it’ in cold election year calculus.

                This is what I’m not quite grokking.

                Seems to me the advantage of being able to call the timing isn’t often that great in real terms. I see how it’s important for political campaign managers and other deep insider types for strategic reasons around releasing policy detail, running propaganda campaigns and the like, but I don’t think it’s all that important. If they call it too early, or with too short a window for campaigning, they will be punished. Therefore the available advantages to be gained are pretty slight.

                If that’s true, then what is the big risk that Key has taken? I don’t see how it’s like Muldoon. Piggy didn’t get pasted because he called the election drunk and early, he called it drunk and early because he was getting pasted*

                The obvious response is that if isn’t such a risk then why hasn’t anyone else done it? Fair enough, but I think the answer is that there is a lot of inertia of tradition involved. The conventional narritavium dictates that there is an advantage, and that it’s all secret squirrels.

                I think Key has spotted that there is no real advantage to the timing call, and taken the opportunity to polish the brand a bit. But there is little there there, for all that it’s a smart move, it’s a smart horse racing move and that’s all. Which is important, but also, meh.

                (*and, I guess, because as Min’o’Finance he knew what the next 6 months would hold)

                • You’re right.

                  The ostentatious ‘risk’ does not have to be real, particularly in a one-off situation. But it has to look like you are throwing something away – revealing your hand early, forsaking the chance to ‘hold your cards close to your chest’, to ‘wait for an opportune moment to play your best card’, etc..

                  In actual fact, all you’re saying by announcing a date early is that things aren’t desparate for your party so you don’t need to cling on to this one decision as a (very small) tactical weapon. Key’s – or any other PM’s – position doesn’t have to be overwhelmingly strong to do this particular political act. Unless you’re as far behind in the polls, as Clark’s government was, I don’t think there’s a great deal of ‘tactical advantage’ to being ‘secret squirrel’, as you put it.

                  Being secret squirrel can scream loud and clear that you’re weak (like Gordon Brown and all the speculation – twice – over if and when an election would be called). But – and this is where Lew was wrong – the opposite isn’t the case: Setting a date early doesn’t, on its own, say anything about how overwhelmingly strong you must be.

                  In Key’s case the ‘fake risk’ looks like it’s a marker of overwhelming confidence and political capital but, you’ve convinced me, it’s more likely to be the tactic of a blowfish rather than a peacock (sorry about all this animal stuff).

                  It’s meant to reinforce the idea that Key is untouchably ‘big’ in terms of public popularity and so can take these ‘big’ (but, in this case, actually fake) political risks. Lew and I fell for the blowfish tactic on today’s announcement. (Again, Key may be overwhelmingly popular, but it doesn’t take overwhelming popularity to allow one to do this.)

                  JK is just leveraging the poll results into the world of myth-making.

                  I think Key did use political capital – and took a risk – by announcing part-sale of assets. Today’s announcement is perhaps a follow up to convince us that he is either so far ahead or so ‘principled’ that “he can just keep taking these risks” … letting us complete the sentence … “and get away with it (because he’s so popular/principled)”. This is how myths (and self-fulfilling prophecies) are created.

                  He’s kind of managing his own ‘bubble’ (as in ‘property bubble’, ‘tulip bubble’, etc.) and he’s the commodity.

                  Once again, there’s a whole evolutionary literature (and game theory logic) attached to ‘faking risks’. The interesting finding, however, is that over (evolutionary) time the display actually has to become pretty close to an accurate marker of the actual risk (hence, peacock’s tails are a pretty good/reliable indicator of male fitness).

                  All very interesting but the problem is that it’s not just a game: People’s lives and the hardships and suffering they experience hinge on how it plays out. Even if someone thinks there’s little overall difference between a National or Labour-led government, little differences can still be important in the lives of many people.

      • Draco T Bastard 19.1.2

        Bingo

        Just proves that we need a fixed date and the campaign period to be from Jan 1 of election year.

        • Lew 19.1.2.1

          Half right. Fix the dates, certainly. But a legislative bid to regulate the entire (or most of) election year already failed. It is repugnant to the NZ electorate. Any party who tries to hitch their wagon to such a nag in the near future will spend a long and deserved period in the wilderness.

          L

          • Draco T Bastard 19.1.2.1.1

            I think that this year may change peoples mind as they realise that the election campaign has been running for some months by the time we get to the regulated period.

    • Gotham 19.2

      Actually, if he was really keen on giving the public the best option of predicability and consistancy he should support a fixed election date. I would even consider supporting a 4 year term, if they fixed the election date.

      Am I wrong in thinking the Greens are the only party (?) who openly support fixing a date for the general election? I don’t know why others aren’t on board with this – I can’t see any problem or conflicting interest in this.

      Anyone…???

  20. big bruv 20

    Oh this is beautiful, with one press conference Key puts the onus back on Goff.

    Will Goff be brave enough to say that he will not work with Winston or will Goff and Labour reminds NZ just how desperate they are to regain power that they will work with anybody.

    • bbfloyd 20.1

      this is beautiful,,, big bruv shows us how desperate the nats are to hang on to the POWER! they(nats)ramp up the hypocrisy, which, after all, is one of their most effective tools in doing so, expose the reality of their own thinking.

      nice bit of blatant dog whistling ther too, i must say. your boys still havn’t forgiven peters for doing the right thing by the country and scuttling a corrupt and incompetant administration. the nats really need to get over it.

      • big bruv 20.1.1

        Key is not desperate floyd, he is not Helen Clark or Phil Goff.

        I know it is hard for you guys to understand it but Key has principles.

        Winston is a crook, Key will not work with him, Goff and Labour would work with the devil if it got them into power.

        • bbfloyd 20.1.1.1

          we know all about his “principles”… that’s only one problem. but i thank you for reminding me. i might not have noticed them(his principles) amongst all the double talk and wisecracking.

          so winston is a personal issue for you? you gotta let go the past bb. it only damages you in the long run.

        • Draco T Bastard 20.1.1.2

          How many Rail shares did John Key have? 50k or 100k? Why did his answer change?

          hmmm, yeah, it’s not because he has principles but because he’s a psychopathic liar.

        • M 20.1.1.3

          He already is in power.

      • NX 20.1.2

        Winston is corrupt.

        • Draco T Bastard 20.1.2.1

          So is National.

          • higherstandard 20.1.2.1.1

            So is ……………. (insert name of political party you don’t like)

            • Draco T Bastard 20.1.2.1.1.1

              We’ve got a lot of corroborating evidence of Nationals corruption over the last couple of years. Pretty much none from the other parties.

              • TightyRighty

                i see you are retrospectively ruling out any corruption by labour in it’s term in power by limiting the rules under which an investigation may be made.

                strange, you hated it when labour got called on doing that for election card fraud, and you hated it when national did put some similar limitations on i don’t know what investigation.

                like labour, you really need to sort out your philosophical position on things, then you, like them, may have some traction with your arguments.

                • Draco T Bastard

                  I didn’t say that there wasn’t any under Labour but one MP in nine years is a hell of a lot better than, what 5 now? (Bill English, Worth, Wong, John Key, a few more doing their nice new housing rorts courtesy of the rule changes by JK, etc), in 2. The election card was, effectively, a rule change by the AG.

                  • KJT

                    The ACTIOD’s burgled billions off us in the 80’s. Now Key and his beagle boys want to repeat the process. Any wrong doing by Labour MP’s recently is trivial by comparison.

                    Compared to them Peters is a saint.

                  • TightyRighty

                    one in five years? Dyson, Wilson, Hunt, Winnie, Field, Helen (henry), pope there are so many it makes typing boring. The election card was not a rule change, if it wasn’t wrong, they wouldn’t have had to pay the money back, durrrr.

              • SHG

                Fill in the gaps: Philip Field, the first MP in New Zealand history to be convicted of bribery, corruption and obstruction of justice, was a five-term member of the ______ caucus and served as a ______ government minister.

                Choices:

                A: Labour

                • Draco T Bastard

                  Philip Field was one.

                  • SHG

                    Silly me, you’re right – “pretty much none” IS the same as “one”.

                    And the National Ministers convicted and jailed on corruption charges are…?

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      None so far but that doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be any:

                      John Key for lying as an MP
                      Bill English for his housing rort
                      Worth for whatever he did to get fired
                      Wong for rorting the taxpayer

                      These people not being behind bars doesn’t prove no corruption but that our rules need to be looked at so that such actions can properly be held to account.

    • It’s more that National are not prepared to sacrifice their agenda to the whims of Winston Peters, that’s all. They were only prepared to postpone the greater agenda until a second term – therefore they are doubling down on the anti-Peters sentiment.

  21. Sookie 21

    It amuses me how RWNJ’s and NACT speak of Winston Peters like he’s the boogeyman. How is he any more disfunctional and crooked as the bastards in the current Coalition of the Greedy and Self Serving? Besides, I kinda like Winston. He’s good for a laugh at least. Despite the lameness of Phil Goff, anyone who earns under 70K a year and votes Nat must be a misogynist. Or thick. Or both. I guess I’ll find out how stupid and into pain and humiliation my fellow Kiwis are in November.

    • g_man 21.1

      Yeah, and of course that’s what we want in a politician – someone who’s “good for a laugh”.

      Sheeesh

    • KJT 21.2

      If you want votes for the left you also have to get the point across that anyone on over 70 thou a year or who owns a small business would be a masochist voting NACT. Their policies and rising inequality do not benefit us long term either.

      • bbfloyd 21.2.1

        good luck with that one. with the msm blocking them at every turn, it’s going to be difficult to get a coherent dialogue going with that particular group unless they want to get involved. if they’re desperate enough they might.

        unfortunately, this same group tends to think too much in terms of”what’s in it for me” rather than what would work for everyone.in my experience, they only vote labour when a donkey with cheap hearing aids and caterracts in both eyes could tell the shit’s hit the fan.

    • Bored 21.3

      anyone who earns under 70K a year and votes Nat must be a misogynist. Or thick. So true, there are oodles of them out there. Mind you, to vote for that idiot Goff might also indicate a lack of brain cells.

  22. Bored 22

    Bigger events are afoot, the election result will likely hinge on them as they will impact hugely upon the positivity / negativeness of the electorate. A positive vision to “aspire” to will favour Key, a bad scenario will favour Goff.

    The big events are focused in particular upon two linked scenarios, oil price and the finance / stock market. Anybody who is still breathing might just have noticed that there is agreement that oil production has peaked, and that Brent Crude this week topped US$100. Anybody who watches the markets might have noticed the DOW is now at its highest since the crash, hugely inflated by the the post crash invention of credit to bail out indebted institutions. The debt remains, the profits to support the debt are not apparent.

    Little events such as a hostile regime emerging in Egypt, or unrest in Saudi Arabia might just throw the balance. No wonder Key snuck in behind the Obama line on events in the Middle East, he is quietly shitting himself.

    • vto 22.1

      Agree Bored. The markets have come racing back to where they were during the boom. Thing is though that they are built on credit, or loans, again. And nobody seems to notice.

  23. tsmithfield 23

    Hate to be a smart-arse :smile:, but on the 18/1/2011 I said:

    “IMO the smart political thing to do would be to rule NZ First out again for the same reasons as last time. This will give voters a clear alternative: A national government, or a Labour coalition with NZ First pulling the strings and causing all sorts of dramas as happened last time..”

    I seriously doubt that NZ First will reach 5% now because the right leaning NZ First voters won’t want a coalition with Labour, so will probably vote National instead.

  24. vto 24

    Yes well Key seems to have been quite smart over this. Despite my own misgivings about the nats it appears in our wee world that Key is on the radar and Goff is not. For most. The dastardly things they have done, and have said they will do, have so far gone over most people’s heads. They see a happy PM who seems to take a pragmatic approach to things and who is a world apart from Clark and Cullen. And Clark and Cullen, and Winston bloody Peters are still right in front of their minds. It was only just two years ago remember.

    So says the picture in my head..

    • kriswgtn 24.1

      Well you keep listening to the voices too eh and sometime somewhere you might just *get it*

      Good luck

      anti spam- little

    • tsmithfield 24.2

      Assuming that NZ First doesn’t clear the 5% threshold, it now seems likely to be a sink-hole for voters who otherwise might have voted Labour. Also throw in another far-left party also unlikely to clear 5% that Sue Bradford is rumoured to be a potential leader of. Two parties to erode Labours party vote.

      The big question now is how Goff will respond. Will he rule Winston in, and thus look desperate and spineless?

      • mickysavage 24.2.1

        No Goff has said that he will work with any party who the New Zealand People decide should be in Parliament, even ACT, thereby looking principled.

        Not like Key who has arrogantly said to the New Zealand people that even if they decide to vote Peters in he will not work with him.

        And compare NZFirst to ACT and the question has to be, if you will not work with NZ First then how could you work with that desperate hypocritical rabble?

        • tsmithfield 24.2.1.1

          “No Goff has said that he will work with any party who the New Zealand People decide should be in Parliament, even ACT, thereby looking principled.”

          Nah… That’s code for: “I will work with absolutely anyone if it gets me enough votes to get over 50%”. That’s desperate, not principled.

          • Pascal's bookie 24.2.1.1.1

            So what is the principle key is working from? From his comments it looks like:

            Working with Winston looks like hard work, so fuck that, I don’t want the job that much, Goff will do just fine.

            • tsmithfield 24.2.1.1.1.1

              Nah, what he is saying is that the desire for power doesn’t over-rule his principles, and that he would rather lose the election than betray his principles. He is showing as strong. Goff is showing as weak.

              • Pascal's bookie

                But what is the principle?

                He has said that a Goff govt would see us all in the poor house and would be a pretty bad thing. And yet, he also says he would choose a Goff led govt over going into power with Winston.

                What’s up with that? It looks to me like he just doesn’t like Winston, doesn’t want to work with him, and that that is more important to him than whatever good he thinks he can do by being PM.

                • gobsmacked

                  PB’s point is a very good one. Let’s take it further.

                  Key is saying that if he needs Hone Harawira’s vote to stay in power, he will negotiate to gain his support.

                  But if he needs the support of NZ First MPs, he won’t.

                  So there is no principle involved here at all. If Key said that a policy was unacceptable, then that would at least be a debatable proposition. But he has actually said that a person is unacceptable, regardless of what policies that person may be willing to sign up to. Or that caucus colleagues, in on the party list (who knows which party they might prefer?).

                  John Key’s position is illogical, absurd.

                  If the NZ First caucus told Key that they wanted to support National on confidence and supply, what would he do? He can’t stop them.

                  Has he ruled out working with the Greens? Why not?

                  • The Voice of Reason

                    “John Key’s position is illogical, absurd.”

                    Key is gambling on pulling off exactly the same result as last election. And handicapping himself by giving the other parties all year to chip away at him. It almost makes him the underdog.

                    So why do it?

                    Arrogance. Because he thinks he can and because the only thing better than winning is winning against the odds. He’s gambling that Winston won’t drain his own vote, instead, take from Labour. Which requires NZF not quite making the 5% or Winston not accidently winning a seat. A seat like Epsom, in a 3 way split, say.

                    Ruling Winston out at the last election was a tactic. This time, it’s the strategy.

                    For mine, I think he’s got it wrong. The 0.8 that was missing from NZF’s vote last time were deserters to National and I think Winston’s gonna get them back.

                    • Pascal's bookie

                      He’s gambling that Winston won’t drain his own vote, instead, take from Labour.

                      I think this is more about making sure Winston doesn’t drain Nat voters.

                      Along the lines of ScottGN’s comment @32.

                    • If that’s the strategy, then I suspect that they already have some new ammunition (against Winston) ‘up the barrel’ that they will use at a tactical moment.

                      That would help explain John Key’s ‘gamble’. It would also explain Key’s determination to live his political life by the ‘principles’ that TS has been on about. (First principle, don’t go to war without ammo – or maybe even ‘overwhelming force’.)

                      It was dirty last time, beginning with Don Brash’s iniquitous, inaccurate and unprincipled comment in parliament that Clark’s government was the most corrupt in New Zealand’s history. That set the strategy for what was a three year campaign. I imagine Key will keep playing the hand that won last time, hence resurrecting the ghost of WP, as a reminder and hook back to that campaign. (It’s interesting, as the National Radio political journo put it tonight, that Key has put Winston in the centre of the election and ‘given him oxygen’. Why would anyone do that?)

                      As Colin James noted, Key is a game player not a game changer:

                      “But (a tiny few aside) traders don’t change the game; they play it. Key has talked “step-change” but has stuck to “what works”.”

                      In fact, I heard Key say as much on National Radio tonight. When asked why he ruled Winston out given that it might mean he’d lose an option to return to government his response was, words to the effect, that ‘These are the cards I’ve been dealt’. He’s playing with the old cards because he thinks they’ll do just fine and he doesn’t want to change a game that he thinks he’s mastered.

                      I think he’s in his element with this kind of game playing – and I don’t think principles come within a bull’s roar of what was announced today.

              • But TS, didn’t you just report an earlier comment of yours (on 18/1/2011) to the effect that

                “IMO the smart political thing to do would be to rule NZ First out again for the same reasons as last time. This will give voters a clear alternative: A national government, or a Labour coalition with NZ First pulling the strings and causing all sorts of dramas as happened last time..”

                ‘The smart political thing to do’ doesn’t sound like it’s driven by principle – or does it?

          • mickysavage 24.2.1.1.2

            I always thought that the people should decide who is in power, not some individual party leader.

            Key also told a fib on Radio New Zealand. He said that Peters had been fired by every Prime Minister he has served under.

            Not true. Helen did not fire him. He stood down while allegations were being investigated against him. He was exonerated by every independent inquiry into what happened.

            Sheesh I never though I would be defending Peters.

            Key also criticised him for never giving a straight answer. If only this was compulsory …

            Key also said National wants to be aspirational and forward looking. This from the party that gave us Iwi Kiwi billboards??

            • Carol 24.2.1.1.2.1

              And from the party & PM that wants to return to the failed neoliberal policies of the 90s.

            • higherstandard 24.2.1.1.2.2

              “Sheesh I never thought I would be defending Peters.”

              Greg you’d suck his cock if you thought it would see labour back in power.

  25. Tel 25

    I think people in NZ do get tired of protracted political campaigns, but with Key declaring he’ll not work with Winston so far out, leaves the Nat’s very exposed to the Winston three ring circus election year sideshow, which happily, can be very entertaining!

  26. Pascal's bookie 26

    Good to see JK intends to run a positive and forward looking campaign based on his record in government and its popular policy platform.

    Oh hang on, he just wants to talk about Winston Peters. Why is that do you reckon peeps?

    Also it’s kind of weird that he thinks Goff/Peters govt would be better for the country than a Key/Peters one. Or is the country’s well being not his top priority?

  27. Jum 27

    And by 26 November he will have signed the TransPacificPartnershipAgreement and our sovereignty away. I would be thinking that this late date suggests he’s not confident at all. He wants plenty of time to secretly take away New Zealanders’ rights before he gets rolled. What he’s already achieved has been ugly enough a burden for our children to bear but he hasn’t finished with New Zealand yet. He has not loyalty to New Zealand so will have no problem selling us and our assets out.

    • Draco T Bastard 27.1

      I would love to see Labour and the other left parties say that they will declare any FTA that was signed behind closed doors null and void.

      • higherstandard 27.1.1

        They have signed or endorsed most of the FTAs you fucking burke.

        • Draco T Bastard 27.1.1.1

          Yes, I know. They also seem to be realising that the neo-liberal economic system, which is what the FTAs are a part of, doesn’t work. Labour has also promised a more open government which, IMO, also means that the agreements that are hammered out by our politicians should be open to public view which is why I mentioned “signed behind closed doors”.

  28. Jum 28

    Key hopes New Zealanders are still as stupid as they were in 2008. So far it’s looking good for him.

    • Draco T Bastard 28.1

      That’s the scary part 🙁

      • higherstandard 28.1.1

        Are they more or less stupid than they were in 2005 how about the election prior and prior to that …………you fuckwads will learn nothing if you fall back on it’s the public’s fault for being thick or it’s the meeeeeeedias fault theys is biased against us.

        pARP

        • Jum 28.1.1.1

          Grow up Higherstandard and read my next post. Hide your head in shame for selling out New Zealand. You’re full of shit but don’t do anything concrete to get rid of NAct or are you one of them?

          • higherstandard 28.1.1.1.1

            Jum aren’t there a whole lot of police beating up the brown man you need to cry about ?

  29. Jum 29

    Draco T Bastard,

    Do you think National supporters still believe that the National party is the same party they used to vote for. I know it’s not. It’s got too many Act/ors in it. JKeyll is Act loyal. His backers are Act loyal. British and American backers of JKeyll may not call themselves Act/ors either but their goal is what Act wants. Total monetary and sovereignty control globally.

    National was always about No Change to anything, be it progress for women or fairness for all; I know this from dealings with National supporting acquaintances/friends who refuse to understand that by using all our natural resources for overseas profits they are actually damaging our country. And these are women. National supporters are not safe to allow out.

    The choice in the following election if Labour lets me down is Greens. I also believe many more left leaners will vote Green because they can not trust Labour to stand by New Zealanders and stop the TPPA from going ahead by refusing to allow it to continue when they get back in. The more important question is – can they reverse it?

    We also have to remember that Act people used to be in Labour. We know that Douglas’ history was Labour but he was planted, promising funding for fighting elections but demanding to be in charge of the party finances. We know that he was pow wowing with the Treasury a year before Labour got back into Government. We also know he was on lover terms with the business rotundtable. The business rotundtable is in charge of this government. Do the workers of New Zealand know that? Do they care?

    We might call the voters stupid for voting National but apart from most of them being ass up and heads down just surviving, media has betrayed us by not giving the whole story on all the rightwings’ secret dealings.

    I know for example that the media loved telling Labour that it could track down all sorts of people so quickly but it seems strangely quiet on what’s in National’s secret trust funds and how much money Act is actually receiving, unlike its gleeful broadcast of its so-called total funding. We know without a shadow of doubt that they could infiltrate those accounts. Why aren’t they?

    Our media in New Zealand are betraying their oath of objectivity, ‘truthful reporting and nothing but the full story’ – not the interpretation but ‘the truth’ or don’t print.

    And Labour still don’t understand that the media in New Zealand don’t work on behalf of New Zealand; they work on behalf of foreign owners. The journalists, and there are so few of them, may be objective but the headings of their articles and the general theme of all their writings are wrung from overseas, from people who would happily betray New Zealand to the money god – known as JKeyll and Hide. I won’t stay with Labour if it continues to play politics with my children’s children’s futures.

    Revolution will come if New Zealand workers are betrayed by this government but it will be too late. Why doesn’t Labour see that and use all its efforts now to report on what NAct is actually up to – betraying NZers? The normal media channels are not working.

    Someone should sue media for selling out New Zealand to global interests.

    • higherstandard 29.1

      Delusional nutjobbery thy name is Jum.

      • Mickysavage 29.1.1

        Higherstandard you should try addressing what people are saying rather than just abusing them.

        Your current responses make you look like a troll …

        • higherstandard 29.1.1.1

          While yours make you look like a fuckwit fanboy.

        • vto 29.1.1.2

          if we all responded in that manner lowerstandard the place would be ………… well, you finish it off hs

          • vto 29.1.1.2.1

            that was meant to be up there not down here. bloody computer contraptions.

          • higherstandard 29.1.1.2.2

            The Standard.

            • mickysavage 29.1.1.2.2.1

              What is the matter higherstandard, you seem to be particularly grumpy tonight. Are you getting worried about Key’s latest bet?

              So far in this post you have said the following:

              “you’d suck his cock if you thought it would see labour back in power”
              “you fucking burke”
              “you fuckwads”
              “aren’t there a whole lot of police beating up the brown man you need to cry about ?”
              “Delusional nutjobbery thy name is Jum”
              “you look like a fuckwit fanboy”

              There seems to be a pattern here. Is there something wrong? Is there anything we can do?

  30. Gotham 30

    Well, at least this has me smiling a bit this evening:

    http://www.interest.co.nz/node/52128?nocache=1#comment-form

    Sorry – with NZ First pulling more votes than Labour, I imagine some of you aren’t as happy as me…and all the other Greens….

    • Draco T Bastard 30.1

      And the Greens able to govern alone…

      It’s an interesting poll. Pity it’s not what we’d actually see in an election 🙁

  31. Brilliant,

    Rugby, Boobs and on Veitch’s show once a week to talk about absolutely nothing. In Kiwi land this equals a political landslide. Who needs to talk about economics and other silly stuff. That’s for nerds and spoil sports.

    Well played Cosby & Textor, well played.

  32. ScottGN 32

    You’re being pretty disingenuous here tsmithfield. Any left wing party with Sue Bradford involved will most certainly have Hone Harawira on board thus guaranteeing an electorate seat and representation in the next parliament. Moreover Key’s move today was mostly aimed at stemming the flow of older anti-privatisation voters (they have long memories) toward NZF and away from National (whose internal polling must be showing this scenario, otherwise what point the drama queen performance from the PM today?).

    • nadis 32.1

      please – how on earth can Hone Harawira and Sue Bradford inhabit the same policy platform. Maori nationalist politics have very little to do with hardcore socialism/communism. Harawira will never leave the Maori Party – he may miscalculate and get kicked out but that is unlikely. His posturing is a calculated display to maintain relevance and his dignity as a radical bad ass and keep that faction onside – the Maori Party is more about entrenching economic power for the tribal organisations – and that’s what it should be doing.

      • ScottGN 32.1.1

        Your comment hardly bears any response nadis – other than to say you must have been living under a rock the last little while.

        • nadis 32.1.1.1

          Right. And your comment makes no grammatical sense. Failed fifth form English lately?

          Care to have a wager on Hone and Sue forming a party together? Or explain why they actually do have mutually inclusive objectives?

  33. Frederick 33

    Micky Savage

    Forget independent enquiries – we could go into why SFO didn’t prosecute but some other time.

    But could you please tell me ….do you actually believe that Peters (Mr NZ First) was absolutely unaware that he had received $100,000 from Owen Glenn. If so, I presume you also think that Flavell, Norman, Dunne got it wrong in their privileges committee finding.

    If so (and I conclude you followed the evidence as thoroughly like I did) could you tell me on what basis you think that Peters is innocent of misleading parlaiment/the public/ you and me?

    • Frederick

      I posted my thoughts two years ago at http://waitakerenews.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-winston-may-get-off.html

      The Privileges Committee saw it differently but the Police and the SFO did not take further action.

      Peters was too cute by far, may have told fibs and deserved moral condemnation but I still think he was crucified in a political kangaroo court.

      I also hope that he never gains a position of power but I would hate to see 5% of the country’s votes not being taken into account.

      I do not think Winston is innocent, just too calculating by far …

    • Jum 33.2

      Frederick,
      Why aren’t you asking the scumbag JKeyll what’s in his trust, what’s coming in from the various corporate businesses in the guise of fundraising dinners, posters, double entendre tv advertising, manipulation of trusting New Zealanders?

      Whatever Peters did cannot be as bad as the sell-off on so many levels that JKeyll is perpetrating on this country while the media and the political left physical version of ‘The Standard’ paper that stood for working people sleeps.

      Owen Glenn set up Helen Clark. JKeyll played an instrumental part in that set up in that Glenn is connected to the business roundtable, lobbied hard against any steps against advertising/selling tobacco products, as did Matthew Hooten. The rightwing, with global support, played New Zealanders as patsies and we fell for it.

  34. ianmac 34

    Key has said that Peters was a non-starter for a Key Government. Because PMs have had to sack him all the time. (Paraphrased.) How often has a PM sacked him? I know he refused to back the sale(?) of Wellington Airport which caused the collapse of the Shipley (?) Government but fired by successive PMs? (And blocking an Asset Sale might be now seen as a good thing.)
    I have never voted for NZF but am concerned about another mis statement from our PM.

    • Jum 34.1

      He’s not ‘my’ pm. You have ’em. I don’t want him. He’s far too removed from real people – you know the ones so often referred to as ‘ordinary people’ and the others as privileged people? I have my own opinion on what ‘privileged’ people should be called. Real people worry about their mortgages; real people worry about whether they should take on a mortgage when Jkeyll is so busy taking real jobs away from them.

    • Jum 34.2

      Ianmac
      Go easy on JKeyll/Shipley if you like – but this guy Key is out to sell us off.

  35. millsy 35

    So John Key wont go with Winston. The question is, would Winston go with John Key? I can tell you right now, he wouldnt be able to hand our hydro dams and pensions over to his Gordon Gekko-wannabe mates if Winston shared the cabinet table with him.

    November the 26th. Just under 11 months for Labour to get its act together and throw these social darwinists out for good.

    Judith Collins who condones police torture and prison rape
    Nick Smith who is willing to sacrifice our childrens health for money
    Kate Wilkonson who want to make every worker an expendable beast of burden
    Gerry Brownlee who wants to turn our National park estate into a toxic sludge heap
    Tony Ryall who wants to gut the public service and americanise our health system
    Rodney Hide who wants to close down our libariries and pools.

    If you cant be bothered voting Labour, vote Winston. put in an opposition leader who will make the PM wake up in a cold sweat, and dread question time in the house.

  36. Jum 36

    Winston needs to be in Parliament unless I find out he’s quite happy to sign off the TPPA and with it our sovereignty. Then I’ll be agin ‘im.

    ‘social darwinists’ like it.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago