Labour and Greens joint State of the Nation speech Sunday 2pm

77 comments on “Labour and Greens joint State of the Nation speech Sunday 2pm ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Sacha 1

   27 January 2017 at 8:40 pm

   Looking forward to seeing this. But who decided to hire a ‘comedian’ as MC?
   • UncookedSelachimorpha 1.1

     28 January 2017 at 3:54 pm

     “Guy Time” on the Jono and Ben show is often the only left-wing satire seen in the mainstream media at all, these days.

     If you haven’t watched him, look him up on youtube – hilarious, and no friend of the NActs.
     • Chris 1.1.1

       28 January 2017 at 4:47 pm

       Sure, and his opinion pieces have been nicely scathing of Key and the nats etc for a while now. But MC for an event like this? He’s got the face and presence of someone that makes you want to laugh before he opens his mouth. Is this really what the event’s about? For every one thing Labour does that looks like they might finally be getting some traction it seems as if they always have to do something else to help stuff things up. What the heck have Labour’s senior strategists been doing lately?
       • Leftie 1.1.1.1

         28 January 2017 at 5:29 pm

         Some people need to get a grip on their melodrama. He is just an MC for christs sakes, he’s not the main feature of the event.
2. billmurray 2

   27 January 2017 at 8:46 pm

   Thanks for info, will probably attend.
3. Anne 3

   27 January 2017 at 10:22 pm

   I hope TS can provide a replay for those of us who do weekend work and can’t attend or watch it live.
   • weka 3.1

     27 January 2017 at 10:51 pm

     I think the stream link should work after the event. If I’m around I’ll put the direct links up (and maybe a discussion post).
     • lprent 3.1.1

       28 January 2017 at 7:40 am

       I will go. Will need the break from coding about then.

       Will check about the streaming..
       • lprent 3.1.1.1

         28 January 2017 at 3:54 pm

         Looks like streaming is available and we should be able to put up the video afterwards. Chasing details now.

         I’m going to start archiving some of this stuff at our vimeo account on the general basis of the number of old missing links to video we are getting in the 20k posts
         • weka 3.1.1.1.1

           28 January 2017 at 6:27 pm

           I’ve put a draft post for tomorrow in the backend. I’ll put in the direct Facebook links if I am around, and embed if I can.
           • lprent 3.1.1.1.1.1

             28 January 2017 at 6:36 pm

             Saw that. I will have a look at it in the morning and start pestering people if we don’t have something to put up. It is election year and these kinds of events are going to be important to publish on a blog that gets read as much as we do here. Time to remind the staffers of that 🙂
             • weka …

               28 January 2017 at 6:45 pm

               That would be good. I tweeted the Greens and Labour and was told the livestream would be going up around 2pm. Which means someone here has to be online at 2pm, find the link (in the past it hasn’t been put out and I’ve had trouble finding it on the Greens FB page), and then edit the post in time before the speech starts. People need time to click on the link and get it working too. All doable, but not that streamlined so to speak.

               If you’re at the event, feel free to do updates in the post.
   • Carolyn_nth 3.2

     28 January 2017 at 6:11 am

     Agree, Anne.

     Thanks, weka.
     • Leftie 3.2.1

       28 January 2017 at 12:02 pm

       Second that.
4. WILD KATIPO 4

   27 January 2017 at 10:41 pm

   Lets rejoice with a resurgent Left !

   And let the joy be spread to all and sundry !!!

   Goodbye to neo liberal National and ACT !!!!

   And Hello to a REAL govt in waiting !!!

   Here’s a song !!!

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-bD0ZG5_2w
   • James 4.1

     27 January 2017 at 10:46 pm

     Looking at the last polls “resurgent left” might be a bit of an exaggeration.
     • WILD KATIPO 4.1.1

       27 January 2017 at 10:56 pm

       Awww…your just a shriveled up old spoils sport… of course there’s going to be a change of govt,… you’ve only got to look at the damage Key caused and his successors lack of snake oil salesmanship…

       Time for a change , Jamsey boy… and relax !

       Honesty , approach-ability , accountability …

       You’re gonna love it !
       • Sam C 4.1.1.1

         28 January 2017 at 11:04 am

         WK, I applaud your positivity, even if it is somewhat misguided!
         • Leftie 4.1.1.1.1

           28 January 2017 at 12:16 pm

           That depends on what view you have, I do not see Wild Katipo’s comments as being misguided, I think he is bang on.
     • Sacha 4.1.2

       28 January 2017 at 7:08 pm

       A resurgent movement is not the same as polled voters.
5. Muttonbird 5

   27 January 2017 at 11:24 pm

   Hoping for a lot but not expecting much.

   Guy Williams is a decent, socially conscious person and I think it’s a good idea to have creative performers involved as another contributor toward change.

   There are a lot of talented young people who know the country is going in the wrong direction.
6. Sabine 6

   27 January 2017 at 11:29 pm

   hmmm that will be interesting to watch. Will follow the life streams as we are busy moving.
7. millsy 7

   28 January 2017 at 6:49 am

   But do we have policy?
   • Rosemary McDonald 7.1

     28 January 2017 at 8:22 am

     “But do we have policy?”

     Who cares as long as Jacinda looks like this…..http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11790320

     Bugger me….have the PR reptiles taken over the entirety of politics or have these people got shit for brains?

     Maybe I should be perfectly clear.

     Labour/Greens…..

     ….looking good, being ‘telegenic’ is NOT going to compensate for flimsy policy and perceived lack of commitment and competency.

     Too late to get it together now.
     • The Chairman 7.1.1

       28 January 2017 at 10:44 am

       “Looking good, being ‘telegenic’ is NOT going to compensate for flimsy policy and perceived lack of commitment and competency”

       Indeed.

       The problem with Jacinda
       http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/01/23/the-problem-with-jacinda/
     • weka 7.1.2

       28 January 2017 at 11:18 am

       You’re using Audrey Young as a reference? lol.
       • Leftie 7.1.2.1

         28 January 2017 at 11:59 am

         +1 Weka.
     • Leftie 7.1.3

       28 January 2017 at 11:58 am

       But National got away with it until key jumped ship and bailed out.
     • Psycho Milt 7.1.4

       28 January 2017 at 12:37 pm

       ….looking good, being ‘telegenic’ is NOT going to compensate for flimsy policy and perceived lack of commitment and competency.

       It’s not an either/or. I’m sure Jacinda Adern can walk and chew gum at the same time, too.
       • alwyn 7.1.4.1

         29 January 2017 at 10:16 am

         “can walk and chew gum at the same time”.
         That is a rather bowdlerized version of the original quote isn’t it?
         Why not use the real words that Lyndon Johnson said about Gerald Ford?
         Most of the people here are old, and hardened, enough not to faint.
         • Psycho Milt 7.1.4.1.1

           29 January 2017 at 11:41 am

           Unusually for me, I prefer the bowdlerised version in this instance – it feels clearer in its meaning. Also, benevolent sexism precludes me from speculating publicly (albeit figuratively) about a lady’s bodily functions.
   • weka 7.2

     28 January 2017 at 11:16 am

     “But do we have policy?”

     AFAIK this is not a policy announcement speech. It’s about the State of the Nation and how the Greens and Labour will work together to provide an alternative to National. I could be wrong but I wouldn’t expect any formal policy announcements.

     Both the Greens and Labour already have a lot of policy, with some large overlaps. I expect them to release more policy as we get into the election year.

     https://www.greens.org.nz/policy

     http://www.labour.org.nz/announced_policies
     • Rosemary McDonald 7.2.1

       28 January 2017 at 11:58 am

       If Jacinda sincerely believes that promoting her ‘babe’ image is going to do the trick then that’s her choice. It doesn’t work for me. She comes across in that photograph, that she clearly posed for, as a ….poser. There s a very good reason why the right like her.

       The very public twitter outburst from Julie-Anne Genter and the subsequent apology (but not, we note, a retraction) and the twitter cuddle from Laila Harre looks really, really bad…and especially bad if Labour and the Greens are going to go full noise on the ‘image’ thing. Remember that what prompted the reaction from Genter was the carefully constructed PR piece that Harre obviously willingly participated with in order to get her name back out there into voter land.

       It beggars belief that Ardern, Genter and Harre are so…I struggle to find the appropriate word…silly… not to realise that these are very, very dangerous times and that they should be minding very carefully how they present themselves to the public.

       Tempus is fugiting folks…..
       • Alan 7.2.1.1

         28 January 2017 at 4:05 pm

         sage observation
       • weka 7.2.1.2

         28 January 2017 at 4:33 pm

         “Tempus is fugiting folks…..”

         Indeed. I reckon we get one pop at this. Labour have thrown their lot in with the Greens and if that doesn’t work out I think the temptation will be to go centrist again. So for me the question is how can I best support that working? I like constructive criticism. But I think there is a line over which it becomes slagging off. Then I can’t see the strategy, because I seriously doubt that Labour or the Greens MPs or staffers are reading these comments and taking notes. What we write here is for voters, so if the message today is oh Labour and the Greens are just interested in how they look, then I fail to see how that serves the cause.

         Fwiw, I found the article about Harre helpful. It was a good recap of history, Harre’s place in it, how she sees not just her place (including fuckups), but what her skills are and where best the can be used. I don’t care if the journo wrote it as carefully constructed PR piece (I don’t think he did), because it worked to serve the public in terms of informing about this particularly public person who may become a politician again.

         The Genter thing was not that big a deal. It hardly raised an eyebrow on twitter, and got sfw attention from the media. What I see from both you and TC is a kind of negative analysis that again I find hard to understand the strategy of. The people reading your words are unlikely to be Genter or Harre or staffers, and the message I am getting from you is that politicians aren’t allowed to make mistakes and when they do and they manage it well they are still to be condemned. My own position is that that (your and TC’s condemnation without offering anything constructive) is what we can no longer afford.

         “Harre obviously willingly participated with in order to get her name back out there into voter land.”

         Yes, that’s what politicians do. There’s actually nothing wrong with that.
         • Rosemary McDonald 7.2.1.2.1

           28 January 2017 at 5:16 pm

           “… and the message I am getting from you is that politicians aren’t allowed to make mistakes and when they do and they manage it well they are still to be condemned. My own position is that that (your and TC’s condemnation without offering anything constructive) is what we can no longer afford.”

           Agree Labour/Greens cannot afford much more in the way of condemnation.

           If the “Genter thing” failed to raise any other eyebrows than mine then maybe I hold those who would rule us to a higher standard of behaviour than most.

           Seriously, a much touted union between two political parties is put at risk when an MP from one Party impugns (in not one but a whole string of tweets) the integrity of a prospective MP from the other Party is deplorable.

           There are mistakes, then there are blunders.

           And I’ll bet you…those tweets will quietly disappear, and anyone bored enough in the months/years to come to read this exchange will wonder what we’re banging on about. 😉
           • weka 7.2.1.2.1.1

             28 January 2017 at 6:12 pm

             “If the “Genter thing” failed to raise any other eyebrows than mine then maybe I hold those who would rule us to a higher standard of behaviour than most.”

             It’s not that people wouldn’t have noticed it, it’s just that once Genter apologised there is no big deal. People make mistakes, it’s what they do with them that matters. For me that’s the higher standard. Genter handled it well, there’s been no major fall out or backlash. Hell, even Kiwiblog failed to make a molehill out of a molehill. Do we really want to be helping them?

             I also think the fact that this is a rare misstep for the Greens means it’s hard for it to play out badly in public like it might with other parties.

             I think it’s unlikely that the L/G relationship would be put at risk over a minor tweet spat. It wasn’t even a spat really, esp not by twitter standards. (it has to be string of tweets because of the word limit. Otherwise it’s impossible to communicate what one means). If the relationship was put at risk by such a mistake, then we’ve got way more serious problems than this one mistake.

             Thing is, Labour and the Greens are going to be under immense pressure this year, including the individual MPs and some of the staffers in a very public way. We should be supporting them to do the best they can. The relentless negativity that sometimes characterises TS is not helpful IMO esp in an election where perception of competence is going to be a core factor.
     • Leftie 7.2.2

       28 January 2017 at 12:08 pm

       +1 Weka.
     • The Chairman 7.2.3

       28 January 2017 at 2:25 pm

       How the Greens and Labour will work together and how that transforms into benefiting us depends a lot on their policy.

       Voters want to know what shape will their policy take when working together.

       However, when it comes to policy, Labour’s page is looking a little thin.

       Unfortunately, Little has recently warned not to expect much more.

       Therefore, not only is the problem Labour’s policy package is lacking, but more importantly, the polls indicate they’re not significantly resonating with voters.

       Labour are struggling to win the trust and support from a number from the left let alone voters overall.

       The Mt Roskill win and Key’s departure has boosted Labour’s confidence, which seems to have made them overly complacent.

       A Mt Albert win will further boost their confidence, thus complacency.

       However, Labour can’t afford to overlook the polls and brush off the criticism. They need to quickly up their game. Call the team together, formulate new policy and a direction that will wider resonate.
       • Leftie 7.2.3.1

         28 January 2017 at 4:03 pm

         “They need to quickly up their game. Call the team together, formulate new policy and a direction that will wider resonate.”

         Labour is already doing that The Chairman. Labour will be focusing on core policies in the upcoming election and are not going to flood the campaign with an enormous amount of policies like they did in 2014. Voters will know more during this time. It pays for the opposition to not show its cards too early, because when it comes to policy, Labour’s page is looking a hell of a lot healthier than National’s visionless, bereft of ideas page of the same old and tired abuses of the last 8 years. At least Labour and the opposition parties have real policy. What’s National got? BTW, the resounding success of the Roskill by election has shown that Labour can win the trust and support from a number from the left and from voters overall. Even so, I can see that Labour and the opposition are not taking anything for granted.
         • The Chairman 7.2.3.1.1

           29 January 2017 at 12:17 pm

           “Labour is already doing that The Chairman.”

           No, they’re not. Little said not to expect much more.

           They are largely doing as you said, focusing on a small number of core policies.

           It wasn’t that Labour flooded the campaign with an enormous amount of policies in 2014, it was more a case of their policy largely failing to resonate. So much so, Little dropped a few when he took the reins.

           “It pays for the opposition to not show its cards too early”

           I disagree. It pays more to put your policy out there. Allowing time for a momentum around them to build.

           National are not the only ones competing in the election. Peters and the Greens will challenge Labour’s support. Both of which have a lot more going on when it comes to policy.

           “What’s National got?” 

           Better poll ratings.

           “The Roskill by election has shown that Labour can win the trust and support from a number from the left and from voters overall”

           Yes. However, there was a low turnout, thus it was a small number (around 11 thousand). And they pressed a lot of flesh to achieve it, knocking on 25,000 doors. So it was a struggle.

           Moreover, we can’t overlook the fact the Greens didn’t stand (potentially strengthening Labour’s support). Additionally, National’s candidate wasn’t the best. But more importantly, general elections seldom replicate by election results.
           • Leftie 7.2.3.1.1.1

             29 January 2017 at 2:08 pm

             Labour is already doing that The Chairman.”

             Yes, they’re are. Little is not going to flood the campaign with a huge amount of policy like Labour did in 2014, and they did The Chariman, despite your denials, and I never said “small number” besides, it is not the number of policies that count, it’s the ones that have more importance to more Kiwis that do. As the new leader Andrew Little is correct in reviewing Labour’s policies. National’s dirty politics and msm running attack and smear lines went a long way in assuring Labour’s message wouldn’t get through.

             “It pays more to put your policy out there” At election time, not beforehand for the reasons already stated in my original comment. National don’t and as Newsflash pointed out, National didn’t run any policy in the 2014 campaign, except to stay on the same course, kind of meme.

             It’s an election, every party is competing for votes, and it’s not just Labour’s support that will be challenged, National’s too, as with other parties. Mind you, National is on the back foot, housing is one of it’s Achilles’s heels.

             Poll ratings are not policy.

             By elections always have low turnouts. It was an obvious struggle for National , you mean, that was quite a drubbing National took, despite the boundary changes that favoured National and the party gaining more in party votes in 2014. As msm said, key was there in Roskill to mop up the seat. Was it mere coincidence that John key resigned 2 days later?
       • NewsFlash 7.2.3.2

         28 January 2017 at 5:06 pm

         Chairman

         Maybe you can remind everyone here exactly what the Nats policies are, going to the next election, from memory, the last election there was none, none what so ever, so to assume that a lack of policy being cited has any influence on the outcome of an election is completely false, history has clearly demonstrated this!!!
         • Leftie 7.2.3.2.1

           28 January 2017 at 5:18 pm

           +100 NewsFlash, good point.
         • The Chairman 7.2.3.2.2

           29 January 2017 at 12:21 pm

           Newsflash is reporting fake news, lol.

           https://national.org.nz/plan/our-policies

           When it comes to policy, it’s not only quantity but also quality that helps influence the outcome of elections.

           Currently, Labour are lacking in both areas.
           • Leftie 7.2.3.2.2.1

             29 January 2017 at 2:15 pm

             Disagree, as it is National that is lacking, and despite your link, Newsflash is still correct, National didn’t run any policy during the 2014 campaign. The party were completely reliant on it’s figurehead John key to pull them through. Now, he has bailed and ran away.
       • Gabby 7.2.3.3

         29 January 2017 at 10:38 am

         You show me yours first.
8. Enough is Enough 8

   28 January 2017 at 11:49 am

   Guy Williams?

   Are you fucking kidding me
9. red-blooded 9

   28 January 2017 at 1:33 pm

   I don’t like the idea of female politicians being used as “eye-candy”. Having said that, politicians pose for photos all the time (think of the one of Bill English a few weeks ago, standing in the center of the empty UN building – he looked damn silly, but it was still a posed photo). The article wasn’t about Ardern’s looks, it was about renewal and tactics to appeal to younger voters.

   I think King and Ardern are both strong politicians and I agree with the columnist that King was the right choice for the time. I certainly wouldn’t be calling for her to go – she’s a smart, experienced politician and she makes a strong contribution as deputy leader. I’d understand the tactics of making a change, though.

   Anyway, I’m keen on the MOU and looking forward to the livestreaming.
10. Sacha 10

    28 January 2017 at 7:03 pm

    Looking forward to seeing the relationship between the parties demonstrated tomorrow. Do they seem like they are ready to share power? Can we picture them fronting for media as Ministers in a coalition government?

    Most people simply do not vote on policy, except us tiny proportion of wonks. And Labour will not be taking advice from arch-Nat tool Audrey Young.
11. Ad 11

    28 January 2017 at 7:58 pm

    I’ll be there.
    Hope springs eternal.
12. mlpc 12

    29 January 2017 at 7:51 am

    This is just Labour Party desperation.

    It will give the MSM the opportunity to shine more light on the differences between Labour and the Greens than on the similarities.

    And it will focus attention on the mutual antipathy in some sections of the two parties.

    The Greens are way to the left of about 90% of NZers, so how could it possibly be a good idea for Labour to cuddle up to them?
    • Johan 12.1

      29 January 2017 at 9:22 am

      To mlpc:
      Another RWNJ stating an opinion, as if they were fact, what else is new.
      • mlpc 12.1.1

        29 January 2017 at 11:08 am

        Ok then.
        Tell me how this is going to win votes for Labour.
        All it does it tell people that Labour doesn’t believe it can get anywhere near victory without support from the tree huggers and people haters.
        The Greens couldn’t before further divorced from the ordinary working man and woman.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.1

          29 January 2017 at 11:41 am

          people haters

          Right wing projection on top of pretending opinion is fact.

          “We’d love to see wages fall”, “lazy druggies”, “get tough”, “Iwi/Kiwi”, “bludgers”, etc etc etc.

          This is the real rhetoric of hate.
          • mlpc 12.1.1.1.1

            29 January 2017 at 11:53 am

            You could always try addressing my point instead of just accusing me of hate.
            • Robert Guyton 12.1.1.1.1.1

              29 January 2017 at 12:07 pm

              mlp – your use of the term, “people haters” is idiotic.
            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.1.1.2

              29 January 2017 at 12:10 pm

              I’m addressing your point projection about the Greens. You know, where you accuse them of being “people haters”. Other than projection, I didn’t accuse you of anything, unless of course, you routinely employ, defend or agree with the rhetorical examples I gave.

              Since you are projecting, your “point” is based on a false premise.

              You demanded that someone tell you how this will help the Labour Party win votes. Not very polite, so that’s projection and rudeness I’m accusing you of now.

              This business about ordinary men and women (like you, for example) do they want their kids to be able to swim in the rivers or not?
        • weka 12.1.1.2

          29 January 2017 at 12:30 pm

          “Ok then.
          Tell me how this is going to win votes for Labour.
          All it does it tell people that Labour doesn’t believe it can get anywhere near victory without support from the tree huggers and people haters.”

          That would be because Labour can’t govern on its own any more. Wake up and smell the MMP roses.

          Presumably you are also against Labour forming a coalition with NZF. Or any other small party. Which gives National a 4th term, unless they also have to rely on smaller parties, so who is going to run the country then?
          • mlpc 12.1.1.2.1

            29 January 2017 at 12:51 pm

            It would make much more sense for Labour to ally with NZF.
            NZF are much closer to the ordinary working man and woman.
            • weka 12.1.1.2.1.1

              29 January 2017 at 12:54 pm

              So the whole thing about people not liking that Labour thinks it can’t govern on its own was a smokescreen.
            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.2.1.2

              29 January 2017 at 1:01 pm

              much closer

              Party vote 2014: Greens 11%. NZ1st, 6.6%.

              I see what you mean. No, wait, I lost it again.

              So let’s say that 6.6 > 11, just for fun.

              Running around pretending to espouse people’s opinions for votes is what the National Party does, whilst pursuing a completely separate legislative agenda.

              Personally I think Labour and the Greens should stick to their well-defined existing principles and find common ground. Leave the weathervane act at Cabinet Club taking bribes.

              On your terms that makes me extraordinary, or something.
        • Johan 12.1.1.3

          29 January 2017 at 2:07 pm

          To mlpc:
          Instead of trying to get away from your first BS statement by asking another question, why don’t you first tell us that you LIED!!!
          • Leftie 12.1.1.3.1

            29 January 2017 at 3:56 pm

            Johan +1
13. Cinny 13

    29 January 2017 at 9:56 am

    Looking forward to watching via the stream, thanks for posting the links 😀

    All the best to those attending, and to the Greens and Labour, love your work, enjoy the moments, see you on the screen 😀
14. Fisiani 14

    29 January 2017 at 12:11 pm

    Every wacky comment by the Greens has to be endorsed by Little or evidence of a schism. Either way I cannot understand why the Labour dog allows itself to be wagged by the Green tail. Why align with the only party in parliament that has never been in government?
    • One Anonymous Bloke 14.1

      29 January 2017 at 12:14 pm

      The tail wags the dog like National’s The Greens’ home insulation policy. Oh noes! The Green tail wagged the weasel Nat. Oops.
    • Johan 14.2

      29 January 2017 at 2:11 pm

      To Fisiani
      Of course under MMP National is not influence in policy making by ACT or do-nothing- for- NZ Peter Dunne. Yeah Right, think again.
15. Bill 15

    29 January 2017 at 12:34 pm

    Am I the only one harbouring reservations that this ‘coming together’ of Labour and Green is a sign of ossification?

    As the perceived distance between parliamentary left and right has diminished, is there not an argument to be made for the Greens staking a claim to the social democratic ground that Labour’s abandoned in favour of its more liberal positioning?

    The thing about ossification (yeah, yeah mixed metaphor coming up, but I like the word 😉 ) is that as things crystalise they begin to crumble due to stresses and strains inherent to the process…which is arguably what has been happening in the UK and US as well as elsewhere.

    Anyway. All of that aside.

    I would really like to hear someone speak on looking out for one another as a society because that’s what makes for a decent society, as opposed to the objectionable “equal opportunity” spiel of how we all deserve a “fair go” – in other words, social democratic leanings shunting the liberal democratic discourse off to the side.

    Maybe I’ll be surprised. I would be if that shift in approach took place. I’m not holding my breath.
    • weka 15.1

      29 January 2017 at 12:45 pm

      The thing about the Greens (which I’m sure you’ve heard me say before) is that they were more aligned with the social democratic ground in the past. Since they’ve become more mainstream they’ve gotten more votes. The Greens know who they appeal to and they’re going to appeal more and more to that, which means that people that want the Greens to take over from Labour’s traditional positioning are going to be disappointed. NZ had their chance to vote for the Greens when they were more left and didn’t. We get the Green party we deserve. Their policies on the other hand would be attracting more votes if people voted on policy, because their policies are to the left of everything else on the plate.

      Laila Harre said in the Spinoff interview the other day (worth a read to understand some of what is going on), that she’s realised that at this stage there won’t be any party arising to the left of the Greens and Labour, so she has rejoined Labour to do the mahi there.

      Best bet I can see is a L/G coalition, with a strong Green presence, and either after 2 or 3 terms something more left will arise, or CC/PO etc will overtake us and we’ll be glad to have a liberal centre-left govt instead of a RW proto-fascist one. I’m glad that Harre has gone back to Labour for that reason.
      • Bill 15.1.1

        29 January 2017 at 1:01 pm

        The rush to the (radical) centre…hasn’t been working out very well of late for a number of political parties in various countries.

        Which I wouldn’t really give two hoots about in terms of those parties fortunes, except that it’s potentially opening up a space for populists like Trump.

        And sure, that space probably won’t be filled this time around in NZ.

        But we know where ‘the lesser of two evils’ and the rush to occupy the supposed safe central ground can lead in terms of what voters will eventually opt for.

        Social democracy isn’t really much of an ask…and wins hands down over liberalism these days in ways it just didn’t, even in the very recent past. So there’s an opportunity for someone to get just a little ahead of the game in NZ and possibly ‘weigh their votes’ in the near future.

        But it’s not happening (not that I can see) – so I’d argue that NZ’s probably entering into a bit of a dicey phase in terms of its electoral politics. Which, aside from anything else, is really fucking boring up til the point where it crumbles.
        • weka 15.1.1.1

          30 January 2017 at 10:10 am

          I wouldn’t call the Greens the radical centre by any stretch of the imagination.

          “Which I wouldn’t really give two hoots about in terms of those parties fortunes, except that it’s potentially opening up a space for populists like Trump.”

          Quite. I’m not that interested in their fortunes either other than how that affects NZ. I guess the issue for me comes down to strategy. This year we have an opportunity to change the govt. I think that’s the priority over everything else because everything else is dependent on us not being on the back foot all the time under a modern RW neoliberal govt.

          Radical progressives are going to struggle because that does mean appearing to support liberalism. We could of course have a discussion about what social democracy is in the NZ context and do that without undermining L/G at a time when support for them is critical. There’s a balance there obviously, between support and not endorsing things that shouldn’t be supported, but IMO too much of the commentary on TS falls into the undermining category. Not by intention necessarily, but because we are so used to being critical without building something.

          tl;dr is is possible to work for a change of govt in NZ this year and challenge liberalism without handing the right more power?
          • Bill 15.1.1.1.1

            30 January 2017 at 8:45 pm

            Challenging liberalism entails calling a spade a spade, no?

            See, here’s the bit that kills me….there is nothing ‘good’ about parties that cleave to liberalism. They all posit the economy (capitalism) as something that individuals ought to rightfully engage with (capitalism’s a good thing)….and it’s that which gives rise to their ‘equal opportunity’ nonsense.

            So if Labour/Green form a government on that individualistic premise (the liberal premise) all that will improve a little is ‘opportunity’.

            And if critiques – even those based on social democratic values – are to be sidelined and hushed, then nothing beyond that ‘opportunity’ guff will be sitting on any horizon during any Lab/Green term of government.

            Maybe I should pen a post on what I take to be the difference between social democracy and liberal democracy? Or maybe I’ll just settle for simply stating – and yes, I acknowledge it’s a bit more complex than this and that grey areas abound – that one seeks to utilise capitalism for broad social good (free education and health care etc…insofar as it’s paid for by the public purse) while the other completely accommodates capitalism and merely seeks to devise ways by which individuals can engage more effectively (and thus provide for their own private education or health care).

            What’s the direction of travel of the Greens and/or Labour? You’ve stated yourself that the Greens have become more ‘mainstream’ in a comment relating to social democratic values…and for a number of reasons, the lesser of evils isn’t something I want to endorse.

            Plenty of others, no doubt will.

            And in three years, five years or whatever, those same people will (if liberals successfully silence left critiques) scratch their heads and genuinely wonder where and how NZ’s version of Trump came to be.
            • weka 15.1.1.1.1.1

              31 January 2017 at 1:46 am

              I think we are talking about different things. Yours is the bigger picture theory around what should be happening (and I don’t disagree with a lot of it). Mine is the urgency of what’s going to happen this year. I don’t see anything in Labour that suggests a shift left other than the cautious one they are doing. Not this year. So that’s the line I’m talking about. How to support them to be in govt with the Greens as well as talk about what the problems are.

              “Maybe I should pen a post on what I take to be the difference between social democracy and liberal democracy?”

              Yes, I think that would be great to have up as a post. I’m not suggesting hushing, and I think putting up such a post is a bloody useful way to keep talking about the issues.

              I don’t see the Greens as lesser of evils. Clinton was the lesser of evils in the US for me because the Democrats were never going to head in a better direction (unless they’d gone with Saunders). With the Greens I think there is still hope for them to do better than they are, esp if they get support.

              And in three years, five years or whatever, those same people will (if liberals successfully silence left critiques) scratch their heads and genuinely wonder where and how NZ’s version of Trump came to be.

              Yep, and likewise the people that spent their time pulling down Labour will no doubt be feeling satisfied or not 😉 In other words, this isn’t all on the liberals. (can’t see the liberals silencing left critiques tbh, but would be interested to hear what your concerns are there).

              (don’t really see NZ as getting a version of Trump, we’ve got National after all).
              • Bill …

                31 January 2017 at 10:12 am

                Okay.

                But I’m probably not going to be voting for either the Labour Party nor the Green Party.

                And National have just put a proverbial monkey up front as their leader. And what’s more, that monkey is fairly despised by numbers who might otherwise be tempted to vote on the right of the parliamentary political spectrum.

                So the situation, as compared to a month or so back when JK still led the National Party and the Labour Party had more or less resigned itself to losing again….okay, that’s all gone now, and the Labour Party and the Green Party should cake-walk this. Now, I’ve a hunch that they might not….that for a number of reasons that are wholly to do with themselves, that they might just kind of scrape over the line.

                Meanwhile, with half an eye on the polls, my attention’s probably going to be on mana and TOPs…

                And I’ve little doubt that post after post after post here on ts will be promoting, supporting, and in whatever way, cheering on the Labour Party, and (to a lesser degree) the Green Party while a fair number of posts will echo Labour Party lines that dismiss Mana and cast aspersions on TOP.

                That’s life.

                And short of actual real world campaigning (knocking on doors and what not), there’s not a lot that anyone says on TS that will affect much of anything voting wise
                . (I’m told that it used to be the case that the site was a bit of a headache for The National Party in terms of media interference etc, but hey)

                Now, if instead of promoting individually favoured parties as government partners or whatever, writers got back to speaking in broadly leftist terms that afforded room for broadly critical and healthy debate, while having a laser focus on National Party policy and New Zealand First Party policy…

                It won’t happen though. The cheerleaders will be out meaning that reaction and criticism will be at that party/party leader level – and then the whole “but you’re tearing down (insert party of preference)” when we need to change the government will start up.

                I think there’s an opportunity (and please excuse the rambling nature of this comment) – but I think there’s an opportunity for the nature of debate on TS to evolve. So if and when Andrew Little comes out with another liberal cracker, the debate would be on liberalism, the framework of liberalism, alternative frameworks/needs/possibilities/examples, as opposed to what a huge disappointment Andrew Little is. But again – back to the start of the previous paragraph…”It won’t happen though. The cheerleaders…”

                Breathe – and coffee… 😉
16. Sanctuary 16

    29 January 2017 at 2:33 pm

    I could give a better stump speech than Metiria Turei, she is absolutely awful.
    • Carolyn_nth 16.1

      30 January 2017 at 10:24 am

      It looks to me like Turei was the match-up to Bennett, with respect to some Key areas PB is using in her DPM make-over.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS