Labour on student debt – beware of clickbait headlines

Written By: - Date published: 12:48 pm, August 10th, 2016 - 125 comments
Categories: debt / deficit, education, labour, tertiary education - Tags: , ,

Wow this sounds exciting!

Revealed: Labour’s plan to wipe student debt

Excellent!

Andrew Little has let slip a major policy initiative that would see a Labour government writing off student loan debt.

Tell me more!

The Labour leader has revealed it is considering wiping existing student debt for those who take public service jobs in the regions.

What – “considering”? In some narrow circumstances? What about your headline?

“I don’t have any particular promise to make. We’re looking at ways that we can assist students to effectively write off at least a part of that student debt, through things like taking a public service job somewhere outside of one of the main centres and for the length of period that you’re there let’s look at a write-off sort of regime.”

Mr Little made the comment when asked about student debt during an interview on Victoria University student radio station Salient FM on Tuesday.

A reasonable suggestion to consider and get feedback on (we have to do something about monstrous student debt!). I for one would support it. But – that headline though. Sigh. And I fell for it. (And make it worse by linking to it.)

125 comments on “Labour on student debt – beware of clickbait headlines ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Enough is Enough 1
    10 August 2016 at 12:53 pm

    Just wipe it.

    If Labour is serious about making University free they need to be fair to those who paid and are now indebted for life.

    Just wipe the lot and start again.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.1
      10 August 2016 at 2:49 pm

      +1

      Exactly. There should never have been student fees or student loans to start with.

      • Colonial Viper 1.1.1
        10 August 2016 at 3:16 pm

        What else can you expect from the ‘centrist’ political party which introduced student fees in the first place.

        Student debt drives young Kiwis overseas and damages the rate of new household formation.

      • Jones 1.1.2
        10 August 2016 at 8:23 pm

        Agreed. Student loans are insidious. Slowly strangling the economy one young person at a time. Many young people I know are not making the leap into tertiary education because they’ve seen their older friends or siblings come away from it in debt and with no greater certainty of a job that will enable them to pay it back.

        Throw in the cost of a house of top of that and they’re stuffed. What a way to transition into adulthood and your working life.

        I would absolutely support wiping this debt out and starting again.

    • The New Student 1.2
      10 August 2016 at 3:24 pm

      Hear hear

    • Leftie 1.3
      10 August 2016 at 6:17 pm

      Agree Enough is Enough.

    • Chooky 1.4
      10 August 2016 at 8:09 pm

      +100 Enough is Enough…and DTB

    • Sigh 1.5
      10 August 2016 at 11:11 pm

      I’m constantly stunned by the lack of actual political and economic sense among commenters here. I want to wipe all student loans, I imagine most Labour MPs would want to wipe out all student loans. But left-wing governments can’t just magic up money. They have to make trade-offs, like increasing taxes or cutting spending elsewhere. They also have to win a majority, which traditionally doesn’t trust left-wing parties to run the economy.

      It’s easy to say ‘they should just wipe all debt’ or ‘they should just tax everyone earning over $80k at 60%’ or ‘I’ve got some kooky theory about printing money’. But you have to a) pay for stuff, and b) build a coalition of at least 50% of the voting public.

      Labour can’t just promise to wipe everything overnight, in its first term. What it can do move the dial leftwards and start to shift the conversation so that more progress can be made over time. I know we’d all love to have Mana’s policies, but they’re polling at around 0% for a reason.

      This is a good, progressive and – in the current political environment – bold policy. I’d have thought anyone who calls themselves left would be welcoming it as a major progressive shift from Labour that will make a real impact on people’s lives.

    • Natalie 1.6
      15 August 2016 at 12:46 pm

      Why all this focus on university though? Less than 30 per cent of school leavers actually go to university, and I suspect, only half of that percentage actually complete their studies. What does this say about real and actual under-investment and under-promotion in other forms of post-school education?

  2. BM 2
    10 August 2016 at 12:58 pm

    So Labour intends to grow the public sector, what a surprise.

    Ugh, more tax dollars wasted on bureaucracy and unemployment number fudging.

    • Infused 2.1
      10 August 2016 at 1:08 pm

      The only way Labour can win anything is by blowing large amounts of govt cash.

      • r0b 2.1.1
        10 August 2016 at 1:35 pm

        How’s that flag referendum working out for you infused?

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2
        10 August 2016 at 2:51 pm

        And yet it’s always been Labour that paid off government debt and grows the economy while National blows the budget and destroys the economy.

        • Leftie 2.1.2.1
          10 August 2016 at 6:17 pm

          Very true Draco T Bastard.

        • mosa 2.1.2.2
          11 August 2016 at 8:18 am

          Cullen left substantial savings including a surplus you could actually see not an imaginary one in 2008 and Key is still lying about ” a decade of deficits” when asked about his appalling record on anything he can’t give an answer for.

        • maninthemiddle 2.1.2.3
          11 August 2016 at 12:09 pm

          National inherited a huge deficit from Labour in 2008/09, and a predicted decade of deficits into the future. Today we have one of the best performing economies in the OECD. I realise you are a vinyl for left wing mantra, but seriously, you need to get out more often.

      • Dv 2.1.3
        10 August 2016 at 2:56 pm

        How did you feel about 1.6billion on SCF Infused?

      • Lanthanide 2.1.4
        10 August 2016 at 3:00 pm

        The only way National can win anything is by offering tax cuts, and then selling assets to pay for it.

      • save nz 2.1.5
        10 August 2016 at 8:58 pm

        Scenic hotels is very needy cause.

    • r0b 2.2
      10 August 2016 at 1:33 pm

      So Labour intends to grow the public sector, what a surprise.

      Just like National then?

      Rise in number of core public service workers

      Public servant numbers climb

      Hottest jobs in the public service

      Ugh, more tax dollars wasted on bureaucracy and unemployment number fudging.

      Labour’s suggestion applies to the regions, unlike the Nats employing legions of Wellington spin-doctors.

    • The New Student 2.3
      10 August 2016 at 3:25 pm

      LOL

    • Matthew Whitehead 2.4
      10 August 2016 at 3:35 pm

      You say “grow the public sector” like it’s a bad thing. 8)

      This is one of those debates where, having actually worked in the government sector, the centrists actually have it right. Labour tends to throw resources at government problems sometimes and would be better off hiring less indiscriminately, (not that it doesn’t also manage to under-resource some areas…) but National requires way too much out of the public sector with way too little support and for instance lost a lot of money firing public employees and casualising their work into contracts that usually went to the very people they had just fired.

    • Craig H 2.5
      10 August 2016 at 6:02 pm

      Maybe, or maybe they intend to give incentives for teachers, doctors, nurses etc to take up jobs in smaller towns and rural areas.

  3. Reality 3
    10 August 2016 at 1:10 pm

    BM, can we take it, then, that you think public service nurses, police, conservation staff, teachers, social workers, school caretakers, prison staff, etc etc, are not valuable if they are paid by the state? Even your idol Aunty Judith is considering more police. I guess you will not be happy about that.

    • BM 3.1
      10 August 2016 at 1:30 pm

      All those professions listed do a valuable job, it is my preference though, to have a lean government than one fill of bloat and waste.

      • WILD KATIPO 3.1.1
        10 August 2016 at 2:07 pm

        @BM

        Sooooo,…

        ” All those professions listed do a valuable job ”

        Perhaps the rubbish collectors that come weekly to take away your stinking , foul smelling rubbish should let it accumulate in your driveway for a year or two…

        By your comments also the plumber that comes round to unblock your disgusting smelling toilet is barely one cut above being a mere peasant in your eyes as well..

        See that is the inherent snobbery and devaluation of other human beings not of your ilk that goes with the territory of being a far right wing fanatic. You trip over yourselves every time in revealing what you really believe.

        Perhaps you should consider relocating to corrupt Cambodia . The govt there doesn’t enforce taxation as well. There you could not pay your taxes, operate your corporation’s HQ from there and then use John Keys tax haven here in NZ to launder the profits to declare even less taxation.

        And so long as you don’t mind living right next to a slum on one side and a stinking rubbish tip on the other side of your walled compound you could throw the peasants some old food scraps on your way to your self important seat at the meeting to relocate those same peasants out of sight.

      • Sabine 3.1.2
        10 August 2016 at 2:31 pm

        Ok do which of the current National Party led Government operatives would you like to let go?

        How small would you like your government to be? Small enough to drown it in a bathtub? Small like the Brownback Government in Kansas?

        Now this guy has virtually implemented any and all of the programmes that would lead to a small government with low taxes on businesses that will then lead to increases in jobs and income and ponies.
        at least this is what the national review ( a conservative leaning publication) told its readers a view month ago
        http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434885/kansas-tax-cuts-wont-starve-government-beast

        how ever the local newspapers a few month after that would like to disagree

        http://wisconsingazette.com/2016/06/24/kansas-cuts-taxes-to-stimulate-economy-now-in-record-debt/

        really, after all these years of people saying they want less government, i would like to know which minister in parliament – and from their own party – they would like to let go. Whom do you think should be gone for that smaller government? John Key? Bill English? Nick Smith, 2 lane Bridges, Parata, Bennett, Collins, Brownlee?

    • WILD KATIPO 3.2
      10 August 2016 at 1:32 pm

      Nice one , REALITY,… those two drips above you just cant see that the domestic economy is stimulated by the public service being of a significant size. But then again, the far right wing fanatic never wants to share any wealth , do they… they’d rather re-appropriate it to themselves instead.

      What they would rather see is rising crime rates , unemployment and impoverishment instead.

      Goes along with their far right wing fanatical ideology. And their non paying of the tax dollar which , … is not in sync with the amount the same earns per annum. They would rather the low and middle earners shoulder the burden of tax to provide for their leafy suburbs and health and education. Though one must admit also, the gross amounts they rort by not paying their fair share of the taxes means they can go private in education and health services instead.

      Then support govt policy’s that deliberately underfund social services to close them down to provide a back door for private social services – which they and their mates either own or have significant vested interests in.

      AND THAT’S the real reason they hate the public service sector…. and small business. Because it eats into their profit margins through competition.

      As for education of New Zealanders… yes… wipe the debt. As for foreign students – sure – they pay. Unless there are exceptional circumstances whereby stringent regulations monitor any potential for rorting the system.

    • Matthew Whitehead 3.3
      10 August 2016 at 3:39 pm

      Can we please stop leaving administrators and other support staff out of these discussions about valuable public employees? I know it’s not a glamorous area, but doctors, conservation staff, police, and teachers all get to do more of their job if someone specialised is filling out the paperwork and answering the phones so that they can stick to frontline stuff and only do office work that can’t practically be done by backline staff.

      This myth of frontline staff being the only acceptable public workers is harmful and stupid. I don’t want to pay doctors to fill out forms, I want medical admin staff doing it.

      And ironically, “shrinking the public service,” as BM puts it, often targets specifically these people who deal in paperwork, meaning that we have people paid a doctor’s salary (or something else equally specialised) filling out necessary paperwork because the government won’t push to get or retain enough support staff to meet the actual needs of the office. Some areas can maybe be trimmed but a lot of the public service does need a bit of expansion to be correctly sized for demand.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.3.1
        10 August 2016 at 3:52 pm

        This myth of frontline staff being the only acceptable public workers is harmful and stupid. I don’t want to pay doctors to fill out forms, I want medical admin staff doing it.

        QFT

      • weka 3.3.2
        10 August 2016 at 6:22 pm

        +2 Matthew

        • GregJ 3.3.2.1
          10 August 2016 at 7:56 pm

          +3 Matthew

          National’s goal is always to destroy capability in the public service, blame the Public service when it can’t do it’s job because of the funding cuts and capability reduction, then outsource the work to the private sector to allow corporates to suck on the taxpayer’s neck like a vampire.

          The last Labour lead government spent the best part of 3-4 years restoring capability after the last National-led government and any new government will have to do the same.

          • Colonial Viper 3.3.2.1.1
            10 August 2016 at 8:02 pm

            The problem is that it is always far easier and far faster to dismantle than to build. So at this rate, we will always be going three steps back as a country for every step we take forward.

            • Jones 3.3.2.1.1.1
              10 August 2016 at 9:50 pm

              Which is exactly what has been happening for the past 30 years.

            • Matthew Whitehead 3.3.2.1.1.2
              12 August 2016 at 8:51 am

              Which is of course exactly why every left-wing party in Parliament needs to support quickly jamming through omnibus repeals for everything objectional National did during their last government every time the government changes hands, so that the easy stuff is out of the way right out the gate. National basically does it to Labour governments, so I think it’s fair play to do the same thing back to them.

  4. indiana 4
    10 August 2016 at 1:40 pm

    So I’m a student, with a huge debt…I vote Labour because I want this policy…I get a job in some regional town as a public servant…my debt gets wiped…3-6 months later I get job that suits my qualifications overseas…thank you Labour! You’re the best!

    • r0b 4.1
      10 August 2016 at 1:47 pm

      Unless – gasp! – the policy includes a bonding requirement.

    • WILD KATIPO 4.2
      10 August 2016 at 1:49 pm

      So I’m a student , with a huge debt… I vote National because I’m an immigrant on a student visa . I don’t get a job in a regional town as a public servant … 3-6 months later I finish my study’s and I get a job that suits my qualifications back in my homeland and don’t pay my debt… thank you National! You’re the best !

    • Stuart Munro 4.3
      10 August 2016 at 2:39 pm

      But you know, a real government wants you to succeed – it doesn’t want to strand you in NZ in debt peonage for all eternity. You should be able to get on with your life – abroad if that’s your thing. Though of course if the local economy were not utterly munted you’d be able to get a decent job right here if you choose.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1
        10 August 2016 at 2:59 pm

        +1

        It’s the lack of economic development that’s driving our young to other countries for their careers.

      • Leftie 4.3.2
        10 August 2016 at 6:21 pm

        Heaps of plus 1’s Stuart Munro, very nice.

      • Chris 4.3.3
        10 August 2016 at 8:11 pm

        And this government thinks it’s okay to put beneficiaries into more than $80k of debt because of a need for emergency housing. What’s going on with these debts? Are people still getting lumbered with them? Is sickening to think about it. Hope Tolley / Bennett et al get done over for what they’re doing here.

        • Stuart Munro 4.3.3.1
          11 August 2016 at 12:40 am

          Dead right – there is no public interest in burdening folk who cannot pay with lifetimes of debt. A mechanism for zeroing it out will be required.

    • Lanthanide 4.4
      10 August 2016 at 3:06 pm

      If you think that working for 3-6 months would clear you of your debt, then you’re dreaming.

      I’d expect a bonding period that is at least as long as the degree was. And whatever the scheme ends up being, it might just be writing off dollar for dollar each payment you make on your loan via your salary.

      There already is a voluntary bonding scheme for doctors, dentists and other health professionals, to get them to work in ‘hard to staff’ communities and areas.

      The maximum payout under that scheme is $10,000 to doctors in their 3rd, 4th and 5th continuous year of employment, eg after 5 years you get a maximum of $30,000.

      http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/health-workforce/voluntary-bonding-scheme

      To suggest you’d get your complete loan paid off, for taking up a government job out in the wop wops, is simply fantastical thinking.

      • indiana 4.4.1
        10 August 2016 at 3:57 pm

        So, if you have to be bonded for say the length of your student loan…whats the incentive to work in a regional town on relatively low to medium public service wages? Is this another case of Labour throwing up an idea and seeing how quickly people will poo poo it? 3-4 years of you life is a long time, you could have started a relationship, brought a house, started a family – but if you on low to medium wages in a deadbeat public service job with no career prospects why would you take up this gift of free money?

        • Lanthanide 4.4.1.1
          10 August 2016 at 4:11 pm

          “3-4 years of you life is a long time, you could have started a relationship, brought a house, started a family”

          Funny, I thought that’s why towns existed. You know, houses, relationships, families and such.

          “but if you on low to medium wages in a deadbeat public service job with no career prospects why would you take up this gift of free money?”

          You’re the only person saying it is low-medium wages in a job with no career prospects.

          This bonding scheme isn’t for everyone. Just like the medical bonding scheme isn’t for everyone. If the incentives don’t stack up for you, then you don’t take it up. You know there are quite a lot of people that come from provincial areas, and would like to go back there and live, but they can’t get jobs or the incentive just isn’t there. Assuming Labour also has a policy in place to create government jobs in provincial centres (and I believe that they do in fact have such a policy), then these policies together could be quite attractive to a small segment of the population, even if they aren’t your personal cup of tea.

          Did you also criticise Paula Bennett’s $5,000 cash to leave Auckland policy, because less than a dozen people have taken it up, after they were projecting 100s of people would? Or do you only criticise Labour, for ideas they haven’t even fleshed out yet?

      • Chris 4.4.2
        10 August 2016 at 9:49 pm

        Yes, but what is good is that a discussion about relieving students of the debt is beginning, and which then necessarily means talking about free education. The thinking behind user pays in education is thoroughly entrenched. Generations have passed which means current students now believe they should should pay for their tertiary education. Labour talking about relieving student debt might just spark what’s needed to start the journey back towards free tertiary education for every New Zealander.

        • Leftie 4.4.2.1
          11 August 2016 at 9:04 am

          It already started some months ago when Labour announced it’s policy of 3 years free post school education.

          • Chris 4.4.2.1.1
            11 August 2016 at 5:56 pm

            You call that getting the debate about whether tertiary education should be free back on the agenda? The very thought of free education is still a fantasy. Labour’s announcement was laughed off as a joke. On top of that nobody believed them because anything positive they’ve announced since saying they’d reverse the 1991 benefit cuts they’ve reneged on. Labour’s got a heck of a lot of trust to rebuild before anybody on the left (well, truly on the left) will take them seriously.

            • Leftie 4.4.2.1.1.1
              11 August 2016 at 6:09 pm

              Lol you quickly changed your tune from 4.4.2 when pulled up Chris.

              • Chris …
                11 August 2016 at 10:14 pm

                Labour’s announcement in January didn’t spark a debate. And I’m probably being hopeful that their latest announcement (how ever ill-conceived because there’s no shortage of public servants in the regions) will change that, either. But we all live in hope. I would’ve thought you’d be pleasantly surprised to see a vaguely positive comment about something Labour’s said or done.

                • Leftie …
                  12 August 2016 at 11:20 am

                  That’s not true, Labour’s 3 years of free post school education did spark debate. You must of been hiding in your cave or something. Nothing you post is positive, it’s disingenuous, there is always some put down in it somewhere, and you change tack when you don’t get the kind of reaction you want. You’re a pretender Chris and your ego and anger often times shows your true colours, and there’s nothing remotely progressive in that.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 4.5
      10 August 2016 at 4:24 pm

      The only study you’re qualified for is rote-learning right wing gobshite and revealing your moral vacuity.

  5. Righty right 5
    10 August 2016 at 1:49 pm

    I don’t see why students should get there debt wiped if anything there should interest put on how we now there didn’t durn coaches and piss our money up the wall as a tax payer I want debtor to pay what they owe with interest and penalties because I had to,

    • Wensleydale 5.1
      10 August 2016 at 2:38 pm

      Erm… say again?

    • Enough is Enough 5.2
      10 August 2016 at 3:59 pm

      WTF did your student loan pay for?

      Clearly not year 5 English.

      • Leftie 5.2.1
        10 August 2016 at 6:23 pm

        Lol

      • red-blooded 5.2.2
        10 August 2016 at 6:30 pm

        Hey, you don’t have to agree with R-R (if I’m honest, I thought one of his/her comments yesterday was satirical, mocking right-wing extremist views… maybe I was wrong). Leave the criticism of language skills, though. Not everyone has English as a first language.

        • Psycho Milt 5.2.2.1
          11 August 2016 at 6:50 am

          Not everyone has English as a first language, but everyone who has a significant student debt from a New Zealand university should be able to write English. Righty right seems to have wasted the money he/she borrowed.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2.2.2
          11 August 2016 at 7:49 am

          I also think R-R is lampooning National Party values.

    • Anno1701 5.3
      11 August 2016 at 9:37 am

      “I don’t see why students should get there debt wiped”

      i say hearty floggings all round

      bludging students, with there i phones and sky…..

      yawn….

  6. Reality 6
    10 August 2016 at 1:52 pm

    BM, I understand there are very increased numbers of (shock horror, public servants) employed in the Prime Minister’s personal office and Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, compared with Helen Clark’s tenure. Any comment?

  7. Colonial Viper 7
    10 August 2016 at 3:18 pm

    Most of this student debt is never going to be paid back, similar to the 5 million or so long term student debt defaulters in the USA, so it hardly matters what Labour does.

    • Sigh 7.1
      10 August 2016 at 11:03 pm

      As someone who has a student loan, actually it does matter what Labour does. You are so far out of touch it’s hilarious.

    • righty right 7.2
      11 August 2016 at 6:37 am

      that is why debtor prisons should exist so they can work off there debts the moral hazard of giving know debtors a reduction in there sentence is appalling student debt defaulters are stealing from society and savers by not paying interest. default is theft same applies to mortgage debtors call up harry the hatchet to brake there legs makes sense they owe what they owe

  8. Enough is Enough 8
    10 August 2016 at 3:56 pm

    Are ACC, WINZ, MBIE etc struggling to get skilled workers outside of Auckland and Wellington?

    • Craig H 8.1
      10 August 2016 at 6:08 pm

      No, it’s the opposite – public service jobs in most regions are highly sought after, and turnover is low. There are exceptions naturally, but most of the vacancies in the public service are in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch.

  9. Macro 9
    10 August 2016 at 4:08 pm

    I add the following quote for historical perspective:

    Goff’s moves to introduce a student loan scheme (later canned because the banks would not take part) and charge university fees of $1250 had not gone down well among students used to free tertiary education. Goff’s argument that it was the only way to prevent capping student numbers fell on deaf ears.

    Goff emerged from opening the Hunter Building at Victoria University in March 1989 to find students lying on the ground all around his car. He walked back to Parliament, trailed the whole way by students chanting “Phil Goff F*** Off” – led by the then Victoria University Students’ Association president Andrew Little.

    my bold

    • Leftie 9.1
      10 August 2016 at 6:24 pm

      Lol brilliant !!

      • save nz 9.1.1
        10 August 2016 at 9:05 pm

        Hilarious Macro

        Pity the had to jettison Phil to Auckland mayoralty to get rid of him.

        Get rid of one problem, add another.

    • Colonial Viper 9.2
      10 August 2016 at 7:07 pm

      Andrew Little lol

      And Phil Goff is still around.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 9.2.1
        10 August 2016 at 7:49 pm

        …is he like, still an NZLP member or something? I guess no-one with the courage of their convictions would want to be one of those, eh.

        Thank goodness you aren’t one of them.

        • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1
          10 August 2016 at 8:41 pm

          I wonder if Andrew Little is still against student loans. Or has comfortable middle class-ness and orthodox economic thinking finally overcome his better instincts.

          • Sigh 9.2.1.1.1
            10 August 2016 at 11:01 pm

            You are actually quite stunning in your relentless negativity. Andrew Little has committed the Labour Party to free tertiary education and is talking about writing off student loan debt, and you have the audacity to question his politics on this. It’s more than any Labour leader has done since 1984 to make tertiary education free and right the wrongs of the past.

            • Leftie 9.2.1.1.1.1
              10 August 2016 at 11:09 pm

              Good points Sigh.

              • Chris …
                13 August 2016 at 6:32 pm

                “It’s more than any Labour leader has done since 1984 to make tertiary education free and right the wrongs of the past.”

                How can you agree with this when according to you Labour moved away from neo-liberal thinking when Clark arrived?

                http://thestandard.org.nz/labour-on-student-debt-beware-of-clickbait-headlines/#comment-1216937

                What a load of shit. If anything she made a number of things worse – things you’ve refused to acknowledge because you’re a pathetic little shill for the Labour Party without a bone of critical analysis in your body, you hypocritical little fuckwit.

                • Leftie …
                  13 August 2016 at 6:58 pm

                  Hello? Anyone home? when is pointless abuse “critical analysis” ? You can take your constant abuse and shove it back up your bum. You bring nothing to the discussions on these threads Chris, you appear to be this angry person who just wants to be abusive whenever you can.

                  Is that what you think of Anne too? because it is Anne’s post that you are referring to, she made a good point that I acknowledged her for. I don’t see you ripping her apart for what she says.

            • Anno1701 9.2.1.1.1.2
              11 August 2016 at 9:39 am

              “You are actually quite stunning in your relentless negativity”

              it would be impressive

              if it wasnt just really a bit depressing…

    • Anne 9.3
      10 August 2016 at 8:55 pm

      Interesting read. Thanks Macro @ 9. I would add one point to Goff’s 80s and 90s ‘right’ credentials and his subsequent return to left of centre politics:

      Roger Douglas was a powerful persuader. Phil Goff was by no means the only one to be mesmerised by his ‘market forces’ rhetoric. Quite a number of members – parliamentary and ordinary – became disciples of Rogernomics. But it didn’t last. By the time the Clark government came to power, the majority of them had come to reject the ideology and returned to the Labour Party.

      I doubt Goff regrets the experience because the 80s and 90s proved a valuable learning curve for Labour. Despite what some people here might say, the experiences of those years has, imo, made it impossible for such a takeover to be allowed to happen again. Certainly not in the foreseeable future anyway.

      • Leftie 9.3.1
        10 August 2016 at 9:47 pm

        +1 Anne.

      • Lara 9.3.2
        11 August 2016 at 10:04 am

        Really? News to me.

        I thought their sabotage of Cunniliffe was rather indicative of the remaining neo liberal ideology within Labour.

        • Draco T Bastard 9.3.2.1
          11 August 2016 at 10:18 am

          /agreed

          Can’t really say I’ve seen Labour move away from neo-liberalism.

          • Leftie 9.3.2.1.1
            11 August 2016 at 10:46 am

            Disagree, policies like 3 years of free post school education etc shows Labour are heading away from neoliberalism.

            • Chris 9.3.2.1.1.1
              13 August 2016 at 6:20 pm

              Like every other promise Labour’s reneged on since saying they’d reinstate pre-1991 benefit levels, you fucking dickhead.

              • Leftie …
                13 August 2016 at 6:38 pm

                No need to be pointlessly abusive Chris. Whilst you are banging on endlessly about the previous Labour government that has not been in power for over 8 years, how is that helping kiwis currently being grossly and unfairly targeted and punished by the current National government, who has broken every promise they made? Because whilst you bang on about Labour of the past, you are not talking about National and what they are doing to Kiwis today.

                • Chris …
                  14 August 2016 at 12:44 am

                  As I said, just “like every other promise Labour’s reneged on since saying they’d reinstate pre-1991 benefit levels”.

                  That’s your Labour Party, you little fuckwit.

        • Leftie 9.3.2.2
          11 August 2016 at 10:43 am

          Was your disrespect in spelling David Cunliffe’s name done on purpose? and since when was infighting solely reserved for the neolibs?

          • Lara 9.3.2.2.1
            12 August 2016 at 10:24 am

            Whoah.

            I mis spelled his name. It was a spelling mistake, not any disrespect intended to David. Who I like and would fully support… except I think he’s in the wrong party.

            I never said infighting was reserved for neo liberals either.

            YOUR disrespect towards me is clear.

            My distrust of Labour is from following and watching (and previously voting) for them for decades. I used to be a Labour Party member.

            • Leftie 9.3.2.2.1.1
              12 August 2016 at 7:50 pm

              I have heard that before. And no disrespect intended, I did query if you spelt his name incorrectly on purpose, because during the 2014 election, a number of nasty right wingers were spelling his name disrespectfully just like you have done in your error.

      • Chris 9.3.3
        13 August 2016 at 1:52 pm

        “But it didn’t last. By the time the Clark government came to power, the majority of them had come to reject the ideology and returned to the Labour Party.”

        Really? Try telling that to beneficiaries and the poorest of our poor? Labour carried out a ton of structural damage to our social welfare benefit system during the Clark years that many people on the left were never aware of – damage that has never been addressed and that National has used as a springboard to take things even further. Why do people on the left continue to ignore this?

        • Leftie 9.3.3.1
          13 August 2016 at 4:57 pm

          For the majority of New Zealanders the past pales significantly in comparison when Kiwis are bearing the brunt of John key’s cold and brutal, amoral and heartless regime.

          That poor homeless lady summed it up best when she said on Al Jazeera “I knew New Zealand back in the days it was a lot easier than what it is now, for the families I have met out on the streets, they all shouldn’t be on the streets at all, we all should be in our own homes and not lying on the streets to survive. “

          <a href="http://thestandard.org.nz/al-jazeera-on-nz-homeless-watch-it-and-weep/o

          That’s what you don’t get Chris, despite posting on how bad it is that the National government is indebting these vulnerable Kiwis, that I would say National is punishing them for being poor and homeless, you still don’t get it.

          • Chris 9.3.3.1.1
            13 August 2016 at 5:40 pm

            It wasn’t that long ago I pointed out a whole bunch of nasty stuff Labour did and how Labour continues to this very day to support by way of voting with Key’s government on the very latest legislative attacks and the poor. You refused to believe it with a pathetic whine of a request for “links” – links to the official record of changes to legislation. Two other posters here then kindly pointed out to you the flaming obvious by providing the links but of course you still refused to believe it. You then whine about anyone who attacks Labour for doing such things as well as for not showing equal disdain for Key et al – again though pointing the flamin’ obvious. It’s the hypocritical toss-pots like you who think you’re “lefties” who’re fucking our country by accepting anything and everything that your precious neo-liberal Labour Party says and does. I’m not sure if that comes from a place of nastiness or stupidity but I suspect it’s a bit of both – a most dangerous combination – given the complete and utter inability you have to apply even the slightest bit of critical analysis to anything the current Labour Party says or does. Your approach represents pure shill for our so-called main opposition party and is a symptom of everything that’s wrong with the left in New Zealand today. You deserve every bit of disdain the left can muster to throw at you. You are filth.

            • Leftie 9.3.3.1.1.1
              13 August 2016 at 6:09 pm

              Blah blah blah….already been through that with you ages ago, and you still don’t get it do you Chris? Easy for you to ignore the truth at 9.3.3.1, it’s absolutely beyond you isn’t it? Maybe that’s because you are a bitter and twisted Nat.

  10. One Anonymous Bloke 10
    10 August 2016 at 4:20 pm

    Write off all student debt and make tertiary education free, like it is in Germany and other powerhouse economies. There is no alternative.

  11. Craig H 11
    10 August 2016 at 6:30 pm

    Keep the scheme but don’t make income deductions as repayments – write off the loan capital with the interest so people are incentivised to stay here with their training.

    • righty right 11.1
      11 August 2016 at 6:53 am

      package the debt up and sell the toxic shit (aaa rated debt) to goldman sachs thats the answer screw the students then flog it off to kiwi saver funds

      • Leftie 11.1.1
        11 August 2016 at 9:17 am

        The neolib way has already proved itself a loser Righty right. Can’t you think of something new?

  12. In Vino 12
    10 August 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Well, I agree with Draco TB. Student fees should never have been imposed in the first place, and are a penalty imposed upon learning and education. It happened in a shameful era when greed (remember ‘profit is not a dirty word’?) took precedence over civilisation.
    Well, profit-gouging is dirty, and that is what we now have. Top of the list of profit-gougers – so-called investors and speculators in housing. Call them what they actually are.
    And keep the profit-gouging motive well OUT of our education system. Profit-gouging poisons everything it touches.

  13. Michael who failed Civics 13
    12 August 2016 at 1:10 am

    Of course Labour won’t do anything about student loan debt: its friends in “the business community” won’t let them. And new friends are so much more fun than old ones, aren’t they? Particularly new friends with lots of money to slosh around. Labour no longer represents ordinary New Zealanders, or even middle class ones. It is unfit for office.