Labour concedes 2011 election

56 comments on “Labour concedes 2011 election ”

• Comments are now closed

1. swimmer 1

   13 June 2010 at 10:13 am

   Ha! 😀
2. ianmac 2

   13 June 2010 at 10:24 am

   Clev-er Rob. 🙂 But the undertone poses the serious questions about how do we get the population to care about the big issues?
   • kriswgtn 2.1

     13 June 2010 at 11:30 am

     Just wait until all the new taxes kick in.and We all are made to pay for water.
     Wait until we have hundreds of people with children living on the street because they cant get a benefit.

     I hope Labour get Nats expenses released from the 1990’s released

     i bet it will be much worse than Labours 🙂
     • Lazy Susan 2.1.1

       13 June 2010 at 12:00 pm

       Like the satire but the thing is we can’t wait for the consequences. Once the damage is done, in many instances, it will take a generation to undo.

       Wodders and Nact are setting up for the wholesale transfer of local body assets into private hands for up to 35 years.

       The opposition must not get destracted by sideshows like the expenses beat up. Return to policy again and again. Focus on the selfish irresponsibilty of this Government and their real agenda.
     • the pinkpostman 2.1.2

       13 June 2010 at 2:55 pm

       Im picking that the Xmas spend will make people realise just where this Right-Wing lot have taken them.W
       I have no idea how we get people interested in the main issues,In fact after over 60 years of ploitical activity I still do not know how working people vote for Tory governments. Of course the huge ,and scary propogander machine the worlds political Right has plays a big part.Even in Aotearoa the press is totally owned by Right-Wing business/
       Local councils (although claiming to be independent) are overwhelmingly National. Then there’s the what I call the third force ie. the so called “family groups ‘ and religious right. Chamber of Commerce,
       Employers Federation ,the list goes on . In our favour we have the unions which have not recovered from the ECA. I could go on but Immmaking my point. The answer just keep battling never give up and never let these creeps go unanswered .
3. micky savage 3

   13 June 2010 at 10:27 am

   You mean climate change is more important than having pristine hotel bills?
4. Name 4

   13 June 2010 at 10:28 am

   Trouble is GST, inflation and rising costs, continual attacks on education or plans for mining and privatisation from a National government aren’t news. Shane Jones having a quick wank in his hotel is.
5. SHG 5

   13 June 2010 at 11:14 am

   The moment a reference was made to Goff actually saying something to the media about the Labour expense-claims scandal you knew it was fake.
   • ianmac 5.1

     13 June 2010 at 11:21 am

     Phil Goff is due back in the country today but I guess that he could just copy John Key’s habit of dodging answering any questions on important issues. He has fronted up 3 times for Morning Report interviews this year ie 6+ months!
     I do think that Phil Goff will make a statement next Tuesday. It might take a while to separate the facts from the spin but he can do it and be fair.
     • SHG 5.1.1

       13 June 2010 at 1:16 pm

       Seriously, Goff’s invisibility on this fiasco has been terrible. It blew up on Thursday after MONTHS of buildup.
6. swimmer 6

   13 June 2010 at 11:25 am

   Absolutely he will – he at least needs the chance to see those involved in person and perhaps get over some of his jetlag. I’m sure the media will lie in wait at the airport.
   • Anne 6.1

     13 June 2010 at 11:37 am

     “Phil Goff is due back in the country today…”

     At the start of Q@A Holmes read out a list of politicians who wouldn’t front up this morning. I think Phil Goff was the first name mentioned. You gotta laugh… he was 30,000 ft up in the air?
     • swimmer 6.1.1

       13 June 2010 at 1:25 pm

       I think apart from Key and Anderton, Holmes didn’t give any explanations as to why the others didn’t show up.
       • Anne 6.1.1.1

         13 June 2010 at 2:53 pm

         Yes swimmer I think you are correct but to elaborate on my comment:

         Holmes made a point of excusing Key at the start of the programme on the grounds that he had a family appointment this week-end. The Anderton explanation only came later because he (Anderton) rang to tell Holmes he had never received an invite in the first place. There was no mention of the fact that Goff could hardly attend if he was still winging his way back from China. That smacks to me of unacceptably sloppy research at best, or an attempt to show Goff in a bad light.

         I am inclined to suspect it was the latter because I havn’t forgotten Holmes’ interview with
         Goff some weeks ago on Q&A, where he refused to allow Goff to even start answering the questions. It was a deplorable display of bad manners on Holmes’ part, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Goff (or someone on his behalf) laid a complaint to TVNZ about it. It would certainly have been justified.
7. ianmac 7

   13 June 2010 at 11:35 am

   SHG: Did you change your statement? Cunning move if you did. My response to your original stands but now I don’t know what your new one means. Huh?
   • lprent 7.1

     13 June 2010 at 11:49 am

     That is what the re-edit is for. It gives 6 minutes of think again time
8. Zaphod Beeblebrox 8

   13 June 2010 at 11:46 am

   You think journos actually have a clue what is going on in the electorate? They are always the last opinion poll behind the eight-ball. If he did he’d know that National are extremely susceptible- falling real wages, high inflation, rising interest rates, the effects of declining government investment in the economy. They won’t be voting based on Shane Jones viewing habits next year.
   • RedLogix 8.1

     13 June 2010 at 11:59 am

     ZB,

     I’m seeing some really mixed messages out there on mainstreet. While some bits of the economy have rebounded off a very low slump (eg the building sector was for a while not even keeping pace with replacement demand) others, especially some retail sectors, are looking very fragile.

     What’s happened is that people have become very debt averse, and are repaying it down as fast as they can. Given that NZ’s Total Debt to GDP ratio is something in the order of 130% this is a process that has no bottom…for the foreseeable future.

     Given also that global GDP is flattening off, that the gap between oil supply and demand is now forecast to begin widening dramatically over the next decade, given the so far badly managed transitional impacts of AGW climate change, and the pent up forces resulting from decades of increasing economic inequalities and injustice…there are no happy golden outcomes here.

     Of course none of this is news, it’s not fit or proper that us ordinary people think about that sort of thing.
     • Zaphod Beeblebrox 8.1.1

       13 June 2010 at 1:19 pm

       Yep, and now that governments are pulling back rapidly on spending, things are going to get a lot worse by next year. Remember National promote themeselves as having a superior economic strategy. Sideshows like this sell newspapers, but when it comes down to it- it will be economic issues everyone will be talking about next year.
9. Santi 9

   13 June 2010 at 12:14 pm

   Who is Goff, but a weak leader without the guts to sack Chris Carter or Shame Jones?
   He’s conceded 2011 already. No satire needed.

   [lprent: You’re been acting like an idiot for the last couple of days on this topic.

   1. Goff is outside the country.
   2. It is primarily a caucus decision, and caucus hasn’t met since this blew up.
   3. You’re starting to piss me off with suggesting that reactions should not be considered rather than your immediate reactions being what the Labour caucus should do.
   4. You’re also starting to piss off other people for the same reason. I’m seeing too many reactions to your comments essentially saying that you’re acting like an idiot.
   5. So I’m going to follow your advice and have an immediate unconsidered reaction.

   Take a week off to consider why instantly jerking off in public isn’t considered to be polite. ]
   • Patrick Starr 9.1

     13 June 2010 at 4:01 pm

     “Take a week off to consider why instantly jerking off in public isn’t considered to be polite. ]”

     but jerking off in a hotel room watching taxpayer funded porn is apparently perfectly acceptable
     • lprent 9.1.1

       13 June 2010 at 4:11 pm

       As I understand it, the hotel bill was paid as a single payment – of which almost of the amount was legitimate accommodation charges. The service in question (watching movies) is legal and was part of the hotel bill. As I understand it, the amount for the service was reimbursed after the trips.

       How is that “taxpayer funded”? Looks to me like you’re jerking up a bill-paying procedure into something that it isn’t.

       Ministerial services shouldn’t pay for movies IMHO. But I can’t see why minister should do a line by line reconciliation at the checkout. But there are rules for ministerial services (just like there are here) and it looks like they were followed (like I just did)
       • Inventory2 9.1.1.1

         14 June 2010 at 11:44 am

         I disagree lprent – we stayed at an Auckland hotel a few weeks ago, and it was no problem whatsoever on checkout to have one account for the accomodation (personal) and one for internet access and car-parking (business). A hotel which is unwilling to provide a service like that to its clientele will see its occupancy rates plummet.
10. really 10

    13 June 2010 at 12:16 pm

    But, but, but – Labour has effectively conceded the 2011 election.

    It will be interesting to see the effect on the Maori electorates.
11. gobsmacked 11

    13 June 2010 at 12:42 pm

    The trouble with satire is … sometimes you just can’t beat the real thing.

    This isn’t the first time Colin Espiner has predicted an election outcome. Here’s his previous attempt at telling voters what they will do, before they’ve done it:

    Mt Albert likely to be a close battle

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/2369860/Mt-Albert-likely-to-be-a-close-battle

    With wisdom like that, who needs fools?
    • r0b 11.1

      13 June 2010 at 1:03 pm

      It’s also fun to check out Colin’s coverage of National’s multiple peccadilloes. Apparently none of them are going to cost National an election. Well gosh, whoda thunk?

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/2301397/Has-Worth-jumped-the-camel
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/2484958/Curiouser-and-curiouser
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/2910245/English-must-halt-housing-shambles
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/3026384/Everyone-else-does-it-so-why-can-t-we
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/3045033/Rodneys-apology-leaves-nowhere-to-Hide
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/3363366/Take-the-scissors-to-the-plastic
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/3534114/Heatleys-rapid-return
    • really 11.2

      13 June 2010 at 1:20 pm

      yes gobsmacked, it’s hard to beat satire, such as robs, that is in fact the political reality. Labour have just deep sixed their 2011 chances courtesy of Carter, Jones et al.
      • gobsmacked 11.2.1

        13 June 2010 at 1:31 pm

        @’Really’

        Because time doesn’t pass? Because polls don’t change?

        Except for Kevin Rudd, John Howard, David Cameron, John Major, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Don Brash, Helen Clark, and almost every other politician in modern democracies, you’d be right.

        If election results are certain, a year in advance, why aren’t you rich?
        • really 11.2.1.1

          13 June 2010 at 3:49 pm

          because Labour are doing so poorly in the polls, have no continuity, haven’t got a true leader, have got an old guard of troughers etc
12. Grapethroat 12

    13 June 2010 at 12:56 pm

    When averaging two movies a night, I’d suggest ‘quick’ is the wrong adjective.
    Goff should be trying to turn this into a positive. If Jones and Carter could be convinced to do a Heatley and resign, and sacked if they refuse, that would probably be the best way to make a statement to the public that Labour doesn’t condone this behaviour and is committed to higher standards in the future.
    While I’m sure many people can forgive Jones for being ‘red blooded’ he’s irredeemably tainted now. I can imagine foreign dignitaries thinking twice about whether to shake his hand.
    If Carter stays he will be Labour’s albatross. Best to have him go now, with full mea culpa, and for Labour to strive to be squeaky clean in the public eye.
    • RedLogix 12.1

      13 June 2010 at 1:11 pm

      While I’m sure many people can forgive Jones for being ‘red blooded’ he’s irredeemably tainted now. I can imagine foreign dignitaries thinking twice about whether to shake his hand.

      In that case I can cheerfully confirm for you that you probably don’t want to shake my hand either. And are your’s squeaky clean too?

      Or are you just here to dress up sniggering innuendo as argument?
      • Grapethroat 12.1.1

        13 June 2010 at 2:59 pm

        I think you should disregard the innuendo if it upsets you. Given the blog post actually says he had a quick wank I didn’t think you’d be so precious about a little innuendo though.
        And I don’t think I would ever have cared about whether or not YOUR hand was questionable, until you raised the mental image. That’s the point, if it wasn’t raised, fine. Now it is, he’s tainted.
        If you mention to me that you watch porn, of course I’m going to assume you have a wank when you do it. The point is while you might discuss this sort of stuff with certain people, you don’t want it out in the public domain.
        I sympathise with the guy, and am really really happy not to be in his shoes. Personally I think his biggest mistake was disclosing the nature of the movies.
        • RedLogix 12.1.1.1

          13 June 2010 at 3:48 pm

          That’s the point, if it wasn’t raised, fine. Now it is, he’s tainted.

          And guess what, this is why we have a concept called ‘privacy’.

          But seeing as how you seemed happy to make innuendo about Shane Jones (as have many righties commenting about this), I reasonably assumed you were an adult about this sort of thing and wouldn’t get too iccky about me candidly talking about something almost all humans do. I do it, I’m pretty certain you do too… and so has everyone else whose commented here or anywhere else.

          Now either you can admit that the whole ‘porno’ angle to this beat-up amounts to nothing more than an adolescent, sniggering outbreak of mass hypocrisy… or accept that maybe, just maybe, we should have respected Jones privacy all along.
          • Grapethroat 12.1.1.1.1

            13 June 2010 at 4:32 pm

            Privacy huh? I think when he puts it on our tab it loses the protection of privacy. Seriously – if he wanted to keep it private he could have paid for it himself. That’s the way I would have done it, and I know hotels all happily accommodate the request.

            BTW, how come it is ok to say Jones was having a quick wank in his hotel, as per the main post, but when I make a little innuendo it is over the line?
            • RedLogix 12.1.1.1.1.1

              13 June 2010 at 4:50 pm

              I think when he puts it on our tab it loses the protection of privacy.

              A pretty low threshold for discarding an important human right you have there.

              What if someone taped John and Branaugh Key having sex in a hotel bedroom, and posted it to the web…using the excuse that the ‘room wasn’t private because it was paid for on a Ministerial credit card”? Preposterous, but not all that far removed from your reasoning.
    • ianmac 12.2

      13 June 2010 at 1:38 pm

      Grapethroat: What do you mean by “sacked”? You cannot sack an MP unless for criminal coviction. Just loose talk from you?
      • Grapethroat 12.2.1

        13 June 2010 at 2:52 pm

        Maybe he can’t sack them, I don’t profess to know. The point was that the individuals are just that, individuals. Some sacrifices perhaps might be useful for Goff to make to give the party a better image. I am purely speculating about how he might turn the negative into a positive. He could show NZ that he supports the higher standard this new transparency provides for, and remember that National are actually the ones for the next year or four that are under the spotlight as far as ministerial expenses. Goff could (as one of the options) take a strong disciplinary action that makes a statement that Labour expects higher standards, allows for some reshuffling in the benches, and puts the heat on Key to consider such action among National ministers at the same time.
        The outcome of this saga has at least a very positive consequence for NZ, it sets a new level for conduct by our representatives. National will have to stay squeaky clean now, I’m sure there’ll be some very close scrutiny of their receipts done.
13. deemac 13

    13 June 2010 at 1:05 pm

    meanwhile back in the real world, I was out doorknocking for Labour yesterday. We got a great response, people are worried about living costs – and no-one mentioned porn.
    • mickysavage 13.1

      13 June 2010 at 5:09 pm

      Good on ya Deemac
    • Herodotus 13.2

      14 June 2010 at 7:24 pm

      So someone within Lab has finally got their hands dirty. So now someone within Lab has found out that there has been and is hurt out there what will change from when Lab was in power. Remember much of this hurt being experienced by the public has been going on for over 5 years. Yet Lab did not do anything to reduce this sufferring.
      Wage growth and min wage only increased by a similar rate as inflation, and thene just to make sure that we the PAYE worker could not get ahead there was tax creep and the OCR peaking at 8.5% and floating mortgages at over 10%.
      And for 9 great years of so called ecomonic growth who really benefited? The rich list, property speculators and those who were able to use tax mechanisms to reduce their tax and claim in some cases benefits. yet PAYE guys got shafted by Lab.
      Nat may have some of their management questioned, but at least they have started to address the tax system that Lab believed was Ok and with some increase in disclosure of Mp’s activities. Once we have matured and decided that what has just occured (Minister credit cards) is not of any real issue(Some sympathy for Mr Jones as the reality TV has for me lost any entertainment value), other than for the spin drs to earn their money by either justifying their teams actions and /or pointing the finger at the other side for their actions.
      In summary I await with growing expectation for Lab to actually have good policies for their support base and NZ. that is if deemac lab can work out what they are and values they stand for.
    • Chess Player 13.3

      14 June 2010 at 7:34 pm

      When you say you were ‘door knocking for Labour’ do you mean you were trying to find out whether any one knew about Labour, or you were introducing Labour to people, or you were trying to find yourself some Labour to do?
14. deemac 14

    13 June 2010 at 1:11 pm

    @Grapethroat: why is putting porn on expenses worse than any other non-official expenses? It’s all wrong. The only difference is that Bill English’s rent cost the taxpayer a lot more than Shane Jones’s videos.
    An alien arriving from Mars would assume no-one else in NZ has ever watched porn. What hypocrisy – Jones didn’t have to go to a sleazy sex shop, porn is available in very respectable hotels. There’s a reason for that – most men watch it. I’d love to see someone ask the self-righteous journos whether they have ever done so.
    • Grapethroat 14.1

      13 June 2010 at 4:21 pm

      I’m not sure what you think my position is deemac. I personally think all non-official expenses were in the strictest sense theft. There had been clear instructions repeatedly that the cards were not in any circumstance to be used for personal expenditure.
      I’m happy to forgive Jones for being human, I think his biggest crime was getting caught. But I’m not ever going to be convinced that putting porn on the taxpayer’s tab is ok. You’re welcome to your opinion on this but I’m sticking to mine.
15. freedom 15

    13 June 2010 at 1:17 pm

    we are well over the hump of this term of Government, Labour should be asking one question and one question only ‘Mr Key, where are the promised jobs ?’
16. ghostwhowalksnz 16

    13 June 2010 at 1:17 pm

    Of course Goff should have shrugged, said he ‘relaxed about it’ and then said time to’ move on’.

    He can still do so as hes not back yet. That would put the reef fish in a quandary- for 2 milliseconds
17. Oliver 17

    13 June 2010 at 1:22 pm

    http://oag.govt.nz/2009/ministerial-accommodation-entitlements/analysis.htm/?searchterm=bill%20english
    • ianmac 17.1

      13 June 2010 at 1:47 pm

      Well worth the read Oliver. It does not absolve English morally. It just says that the rules of definition of what is primar residence is what the MP say it is. No real rules to break. Its a bit like the police quandry over a man walking around Dunedin with a sausage hanging out of his fly. No law that says you can’t!

      This bit was interesting. The MP fills in a form and it is checked for any flaws? You mean that Parl Serv have a job to do in case some MP might mis-speak or mis-write?:
      “When the form is returned, the Parliamentary Service checks it for any obvious deficiencies or inconsistencies then passes it to the Speaker. The Speaker considers the information on the form and he may ask the Parliamentary Service to follow up any questions that arise”
18. Craig Glen Eden 18

    13 June 2010 at 1:45 pm

    Espineer is a muppet he is not a real political Journo like say Colin James, quite frankly Espineers so called political reporting is more like listening to that guy Hartnell on Hollywood, the media love it but people in the real word get on with making school lunches and paying the bills.

    Espineer probably also predicts the success of a marriage on how good the wedding day goes as well and we all know Melissa Lee was a beautiful bride wasn’t she.
19. Irascible 19

    13 June 2010 at 2:52 pm

    Salacious fascination with relationships, sex and “celebrity lives” are easy writing for the “investigative journalist” in N.Z. and other countries. It doesn’t require thought – simply a holier than though moral stance imported from the 19th century pulpit as Holmes, Espiner & Co see themselves as the “High” priests of society. Hence we will get no real analysis of issues from the sanctimonious.
    • Mac1 19.1

      13 June 2010 at 5:38 pm

      “There are two things which cannot be attacked in front: ignorance and narrow-mindedness. They can only be shaken by the simple development of the contrary qualities. They will not bear discussion.”
      Lord Acton

      Looks like we will just have to foster outgoing knowledge and broadmindedness. To paraphrase Lord Acton, no sense in engaging with the stupid and the closet-minded.
20. the pinkpostman 20

    13 June 2010 at 3:12 pm

    The two faced actions of Key and co surprise even this old Leftie.What a two faced lot of barstards they are.
    Here we have English rorting the tax payers for thousands and even defending it, We had them howling with rage over the so called pledge card claim, whilst at he same time dodging and refusing to pay GST on their purchase . They have still not paid it. We have Creech and Luxton involved in the Blue Chip scandal . Graham being investigated it goes on yet Shane Jones who after all said and done has fronted up and has paid back the money being blasted none stop. The NZ press has a lot to answer for.
21. kaiserm 21

    13 June 2010 at 4:16 pm

    election prediction:

    Nats up 2 or 3 but entirely lose chch central
    ACT down 2
    Maori down 1
    Labour up 2
    no more progressives
    Greens stagnate
    United sits with peter for another 3 years
    • Lanthanide 21.1

      13 June 2010 at 10:08 pm

      Progressives have a chance to win Wigram if Anderton annoints a successor.
22. theseeker 22

    13 June 2010 at 4:48 pm

    there are plenty of issues out there and it so fustrating but is labours front bench right for carrying the message.i have argued that it needed to be changed months ago.and it wasnt going to until november if it wasnt for credit cards.
23. kaiserm 23

    13 June 2010 at 10:22 pm

    nah they don’t really , Alliance vote counts down here show that, the seat will go to labour, Nat will make a good show but won’t change the mood of that electorate – most of the other progressive/ex-alliance/NewLabour are very Auckland relating people now or also on the cusp of retirement…aso the fact Jim’s party no longer runs a party list suggests strongly Matt Robson ain’t coming into the fray again
24. Quasimodo 24

    16 June 2010 at 10:43 am

    Damn .. is that it ? Really ?

    Are you just going to roll over and let a bunch of Remuera millionaires and their property consultants tickle your belly .. or worse ?

    The men and women of Aotearoa / New Zealand deserve better.

    Where is the dedication to the common good that fired the bellies of our forebears ?

    Are you going to let them destroy our green belts, strip mine our environment, and foul our shores with the sticky ooze of deepwater blowouts ?

    Will you let them suppress critical thought and narrow the horizons of our youth to those of helots surviving on the largesse of a self-interested rural aristocracy with newly minted titles from some scriptwriters imagination ?

    Where is the fire in your belly ? Where is the grit, tenacity, and resilience required to achieve any worthwhile goal ? Where is Hillary’s self-deprecating grin as he planned new routes across uncharted territory ?

    Instead, we have a nation of poseurs brought up on transient images with the notion that gratification is a few key-strokes away, a new investment, a new property deal.

    It is the oldest rort in the land, as old as Wakefield and The New Zealand Company, greased with the promise of easy credit. A lot of people in North America are discovering that dreams don’t always have happy endings.

    That is increasingly happening here too.

    The Nats are running scared. They had to release parliamentary credit card details NOW to derail burgeoning popular disaffection, and to destabilise Len Brown. They cannot bear the thought of losing Auckland .. or Christchurch.

    R0B, you can do better.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS