Labour surges in latest Roy Morgan

Written By: - Date published: 6:15 pm, October 2nd, 2013 - 141 comments
Categories: labour, national, polls - Tags:

Roy Morgan5221-nzvote-large

Well it is official.  A further poll points to a surge in support for Labour since David Cunliffe became leader.

The latest Roy Morgan poll has Labour on 37% up 4.5%, National on 42% and the Greens on 11% although down 3.5%.  National is up slightly to 42%.

I expect support will settle back a little in the next series of polls but I think it can be safely said that National now has a battle on its hands to win the next election.

141 comments on “Labour surges in latest Roy Morgan ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ScottGN 1
    2 October 2013 at 6:30 pm

    I like how Gary Morgan says:

    “If Cunliffe can enunciate a consistent and concise message of the Labour Party policies and how they will improve the lives of New Zealanders and the country in general over the next 12 months, Cunliffe stands a real chance of being elected as New Zealand’s next Prime Minister at next year’s election.”

    He’s doing a pretty good job so far.

    • Mary 1.1
      2 October 2013 at 8:45 pm

      Yes, that’s right, and he’d do even better if he just said his piece calmly but firmly without embellishment of any kind. He just needs to keep sticking it to Key clearly and consistently in ways everyone can understand. He does do this most of the time but he just needs to stay calm and measured and he’ll do extremely well.

      • finbar 1.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 11:25 am

        Exactly Mary.He has had his eye on the job for some time, and now he has it.Now he has to front up, without the quips and settle into what he could be a Prime Minister,that history will reflect as a leader of substance and compassion.

        We have the Nats in the corner,(and has that not taken us some time) and they know it.Time for Dave,to grasp that nodding bastard purple thistle,and lead his team to victory.

        • Tom Gould 1.1.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 12:43 pm

          A cornered Tory is a dangerous beast. For what Cunliffe and Labour can expect, check out the Herald to see what they are doing to Miliband in the UK.

          • Craig 1.1.1.1.1
            3 October 2013 at 1:10 pm

            Er yes, but the Tories have their own troubles, spelt UKIP. Their own voter share is being eaten from the far right.

          • finbar 1.1.1.1.2
            3 October 2013 at 2:05 pm

            All depends Tom,should your fathers sins be laid on you.Or should you, as your fathers son, and a leader of a Labour Party be proud of your father!s socialist leanings..

            Milliaband, has been handling it well, avoiding the elephant of Marx/Engels obvious foundation in all Labour Party!s.Myself,im not drawn to him as Britain!s Labour leader,but that!s my mind.

    • Core_Labour_Voter 1.2
      4 October 2013 at 6:30 pm

      I think Labour/Green/NZ First/Mana government is a done deal. Why are we still saying the election will be a close call?

      • fender 1.2.1
        4 October 2013 at 6:47 pm

        Because it will be close?

        Because complacency is for fools?

        • McFlock 1.2.1.1
          4 October 2013 at 7:22 pm

          and because that’s a similar attitude to what National had, and now they’re in the shit.

          Train hard, fight easy.
          If you assume the fight will be easy and you train easy, you’ll have to fight hard (and could well lose).

  2. Disraeli Gladstone 2
    2 October 2013 at 6:33 pm

    Two important things to note:

    – Labour’s rise is solely from cannibalising fellow opposition party votes. That’s good and bad for Labour. The closer they get to 40%, the less National can play the “how can the biggest party not govern?” card. However, National does seem to have a bottom support level of at least 42% which is still a winnable position, if difficult to do so.

    – The “Is NZ on the right track” question saw a massive increase. The fact that National didn’t benefit from that is interesting. Either, voters are thinking that NZ is on the right track but just sick of the National Government itself, or optimism is improving across all voters, which may help National come election time. Floating voters tend to go with better the devil you know if the country is feeling secured.

    All this talk that National or Labour already has the election won is rubbish.

    All still to play for.

    [Sigh. You’ve got to look beyond a single poll. Yes, in this instance the Greens fell but from their highest result all year and back to close to their average of 12.5% this year. The Greens’ trend is flat. Labour is at its highest level since before Key came to power and the trend is clearly up. National has been under Lab+Green for the past four Roy Morgans and is clearly trending down. JH]

    • Pascal's bookie 2.1
      2 October 2013 at 6:44 pm

      Yeah nah on the first point, re where Labour’s extra support is coming from.

      Look at the graph. National is down to around 40, and the minor parties have hardly moved. Where has the lost National vote gone?

    • Francis 2.2
      2 October 2013 at 6:45 pm

      National gained 1% in this poll, so they’ve at least gained something this time. Presumably, that came from NZ First, who dropped 2% in the poll.

      I’d say that a lot of this is the left-wing voters swinging back to Labour, with (presumably) 3.5% from the Greens and 1% from NZ First.

      Notably, National still really hasn’t recovered from the GCSB issue. Whether they ever will really depends on how much the left-block keeps raising issues with the National government.

      • ghostwhowalksnz 2.2.1
        2 October 2013 at 6:49 pm

        1% in this context is not a ‘gain’, its just the margin of error you would expect.

        Certainly what is helping is Keys media offensive, making sure he is seen everywhere and with everyone.

      • karol 2.2.2
        2 October 2013 at 6:51 pm

        1-2% is well within margin of error.

        5% didn’t name a party.

        • bad12 2.2.2.1
          2 October 2013 at 7:02 pm

          But that 5% who didn’t name a party is said by Roy to be down 1% so Labour is obviously getting the better % of the undecided’s…

          • Rogue Trooper 2.2.2.1.1
            2 October 2013 at 7:06 pm

            there is something, forgive me, that i do not understand, why are such meals made of morsels; hopefully ;), not the Politics of Hope .

    • Colonial Viper 2.3
      2 October 2013 at 6:54 pm

      The counter-argument is simple. The largest party doesn’t form the Government if it cannot pass a Budget, and if it cannot fund its policies.

    • gobsmacked 2.4
      2 October 2013 at 6:57 pm

      Taking votes (back) from NZ First isn’t cannibalising. It’s removing Key’s only hope.

      Maybe Winston will get 5%, and maybe he’ll go with National. But it’s a dead cert National can’t govern without those two maybes coming true.

      • Francis 2.4.1
        2 October 2013 at 7:10 pm

        Hopefully he does get 5% (or close, anyway), but at the expense of National voters rather than Labour ones.

        • Lanthanide 2.4.1.1
          2 October 2013 at 7:24 pm

          The largest bloc in parliament benefits the most from wasted votes.

          So Labour would be better off with NZ1 getting 4.9%, even if more of the votes came from the left than the right, than they would be with NZ1 getting 5.0% with more of the votes coming from the right than the left.

      • Craig 2.4.2
        3 October 2013 at 1:16 pm

        That’s the problem with Winston- he’s opportunist, populist and wants to waste money that should be reserved for public health, education and welfare services on vanity referenda on non-issues that obsess his followers. No bloody way! At least the Greens are reliable coalition partners and a centre-left party.

    • Salmon 2.5
      2 October 2013 at 6:58 pm

      An interesting point.

      Labour/Greens made huge gains against National in the Roy Morgan poll after Shearer resigned, during the leadership election. So the surge occurred in anticipation of a new leader.

      Then after DC was elected, in this poll, Labour took a big chunk out of that from the Greens, and National remained the same. Good news as Labour needs to be closer to 40% to be a credible opposition.

    • Craig 2.6
      3 October 2013 at 1:13 pm

      I suspect part of the voter share increase is coming from the demise of New Zealand First’s protest voter share as Labour firms up its leadership, policy development and as National’s incumbency fatigue starts to eat away at its own voter share. After a while, the metaphorical (policy) turkeys come home to roost…

  3. Intrinsicvalue 3
    2 October 2013 at 6:39 pm

    If DC can roll out a few more blunders like that with Kanik Mongia, the honeymoon won’t last long.

    • gobsmacked 3.1
      2 October 2013 at 6:43 pm

      Please keep believing that right wing blog obsessions = voters’ concerns. Please, please, pretty please. More attacks on Cunliffe and you could get Labour over 40. Good luck!

    • bad12 3.2
      2 October 2013 at 6:56 pm

      Oh Labour only need slightly alter the criteria for it’s KiwiBuild program to weed out the would be speculators like the one you mention,

      Simply put a 5-8 year condition on the sale of a KiwiBuild home where it can only be sold back to the Government at cost plus paid up equity on the program and hey presto anyone trying to get onto the scheme to get a free ride into property speculation will be outta luck…

    • ScottGN 3.3
      2 October 2013 at 6:57 pm

      If Nick Smith just makes a few more housing policy announcements National might not make it to the 40s in the next poll.

  4. Rogue Trooper 4
    2 October 2013 at 6:53 pm

    Yes

  5. Colonial Viper 5
    2 October 2013 at 6:56 pm

    Part of the polling period was before Cunliffe was announced as leader.

  6. bad12 6
    2 October 2013 at 7:08 pm

    Lolz no wonder Slippery’s trip across the ditch to Oz is being conducted at the speed of light, (or is that the speed of a frightened mouse),

    There and back in a mere few hours probably to keep the whining of His Caucus to a bare minimum…

    • Red Rosa 6.1
      2 October 2013 at 7:25 pm

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9235949/Key-to-meet-with-new-Australia-PM

      Good analysis here.

      So what has Key achieved, apart from a couple of photo ops with Abbott?

      Precisely nothing. As did McCully with Bishop.

      The raw deal dished out to Kiwis in Oz by the Howard government, of which Abbott was part, is hardly likely to rate a serious mention. Easier to kowtow to the Mad Monk, then back home to lord it over the peasants again.

    • Colonial Viper 6.2
      2 October 2013 at 8:01 pm

      There and back in a mere few hours probably to keep the whining of His Caucus to a bare minimum…

      The sound of whispers in back rooms and knives being sharpened…

      • bad12 6.2.1
        2 October 2013 at 8:08 pm

        Plastic sheeting silently rolled out in the Caucus room preparing for the blood-bath to follow…

    • Ron 6.3
      2 October 2013 at 9:47 pm

      At least some of Key’s caucus are leaving politics Labour needs to be encouraging some of our MP’s to consider it time to go.
      It would really be nice to have a good influx of new MP’s when we regain the Treasury Benches

  7. weka 7
    2 October 2013 at 7:29 pm

    Well it is official. A further poll points to a surge in support for Labour since David Cunliffe became leader.

    The latest Roy Morgan poll has Labour on 37% up 4.5%, National on 42% and the Greens on 11% although down 3.5%. National is up slightly to 42%.

    I haven’t put this into an MMP calculator yet, but I’m struggling to see how this is good news for anyone other than Labour*. Please explain how a left-wing coalition govt could be formed?

    *unless people are believing that right wing spin that Labour need to have a higher percentage than National.

    [the calculator gives Nat: 54 seats, Labour 48, Greens 15. That’s a clear 2-party majority with no alternative led by National. The rest, it doesn’t change the result. I used be ACT: 0, MANA: 2, Maori: 1, UF: 1. JH]

  8. Tracey 8
    2 October 2013 at 7:46 pm

    Bad12

    I thought there was a famiky illness

    • bad12 8.1
      2 October 2013 at 8:01 pm

      Tracey, yes appears to have been a quick one, i am still of the opinion that the ‘family illness’ was Slippery Himself taking another turn for the worse,

      Fit people don’t just crap out in the middle of walking up the street and i would suggest that our PM has got something wrong with either His head or heart,(of a medical nature Lol)…

      • karol 8.1.1
        2 October 2013 at 8:16 pm

        bad, I feel that is likely as well, but, it may not be actual – just a suspicion.

      • Ron 8.1.2
        2 October 2013 at 9:56 pm

        One you certainly can take ill like that regardless how fit you are, Anyone who has had an attack of dysentery can understand that.
        And please don’t wish Key out of National Leadership. The alternatives are much worse. (Think Joyce/Collins)
        Regardless what we think of Key’s politics we at least got a relatively liberal person which has allowed some of the legislation that we would normally support get passed. Of course it also got us some legislation we hate but ‘them’s the breaks’

        • Pasupial 8.1.2.1
          2 October 2013 at 10:23 pm

          It happened at (or outside) a pub didn’t it? His medical condition may be ethanol related. He certainly lets that drunk look show more when photographed.

        • bad12 8.1.2.2
          3 October 2013 at 8:36 am

          Lolz, so what your saying is that He s**t Himself, thought He may have gone all dizzy after having been tweeted the numbers of a previous poll myself,

          Perhaps such a dizzy fit did include Him losing control of His bowels…

  9. newsense 9
    2 October 2013 at 7:57 pm

    July 15-28, 2013 53.5 44
    August 12-25, 2013 47 51.5
    August 26 – September 8, 2013 43.5 54.5

    Nats v opposition numbers. Seems to be a good trend, especially as Labour has a larger share of the vote.

    Though Peters is included in opposition and he always plays his cards close to his chest.

  10. Anne 10
    2 October 2013 at 8:02 pm

    Actually I don’t believe this latest poll trend (in one poll remember) is something for the Greens to be concerned about. David Cunliffe is a very strong environmentalist. I have complete trust in his integrity and his predilection to form a coalition with the Green Party. Indeed Global Warming makes it imperative that the parties of the Left form a coalition and work together to mitigate the effects as best they can. It can never happen with Tories and their ilk because their brain cells are insufficient to comprehend the catastrophic future that lies ahead. They prefer to close their eyes and block their ears because they can’t face the truth anyway. It flies in the face of their greed and selfish ideology.

    My best guess is that Cunliffe/ Norman and Turei will map out a pathway ahead that will be inclusive and, where possible, they will not tread on each others’ toes. Here’s hoping.

    • weka 10.1
      2 October 2013 at 8:19 pm

      I’m not overly concerned about the GP numbers either (they jump around a bit). More of a concern is the sense that some Labourites want to get more votes at the expense of the GP. If that happens consistently over the next year, then Labour and the GP will go into the election in direct competition, and I’m not sure that is good for the left.

      • Colonial Viper 10.1.1
        2 October 2013 at 8:52 pm

        Well, Labour could go back to targetting soft National/centrist voters…

        • Rogue Trooper 10.1.1.1
          2 October 2013 at 9:08 pm

          chuckle

        • weka 10.1.1.2
          2 October 2013 at 10:37 pm

          So you don’t think it’s an issue CV?

          • Colonial Viper 10.1.1.2.1
            2 October 2013 at 11:04 pm

            The risk of Green vote cannabalism by a resurgent Labour Party is a definite issue.

            What this means is that the Greens and Labour need to elucidate their respective political philosophies much more clearly, including their commonalities and their differences.

            They need to work together to increase the public’s understanding of left wing liberal, green and modern socialist values.

    • karol 10.2
      2 October 2013 at 8:20 pm

      Maybe just a little re-positioning, Anne.

      I wasn’t happy with the Greens shuffle centre-wards while the Labour caucus was struggling somewhat.

      I would like to see some strengthening of the Greens as a truly left party, putting pressure on Labour over things like social security, state housing, TPP etc.

  11. Te Reo Putake 11
    2 October 2013 at 8:11 pm

    Here’s a couple of outcomes, assuming that Mana, UF, ACT and the MP retain their current seats.

    Green Party 15
    Labour Party 47
    Mana 1
    Māori Party 3
    National Party 54
    United Future 1
    ACT New Zealand 1

    Left 63, Right 59.

    And if Winston scrapes in:

    Green Party 14
    Labour Party 45
    Mana 1
    Māori Party 3
    National Party 51
    New Zealand First 6
    United Future 1
    ACT New Zealand 1

    Left 60, Right (incl. Winston) 62.

    And if the MP don’t win an electorate seat, 60 all.:

    Green Party 14
    Labour Party 45
    Mana 1
    National Party 52
    New Zealand First 6
    United Future 1
    ACT New Zealand 1

    • weka 11.1
      2 October 2013 at 8:13 pm

      Thanks.

      edit: would love to hear from the left wing voters who still think having Peters in parliament is a good thing (esp those who have voted for him).

      • Eddie 11.1.1
        2 October 2013 at 9:49 pm

        If Peters wasn’t in this term, if he had fallen short at say 3 or 4%, then National would have an outright majority right now. Without Dunne’s (pathetic) brake on National’s agenda, Jami-Lee Ross’s strikebreaker bill would not only pass, it would be government policy. the government’s whole policy agenda would be more extreme.

        So, he’s useful this term. Next term, probably not so much.

        • Lanthanide 11.1.1.1
          2 October 2013 at 10:13 pm

          Did the calcs above at #7.2. If NZFirst had gotten 4.99% of the vote, with their excess party votes going to Labour, National would presently have 62 seats out of 121.

          In such a vote reshuffle it’d be likely a good chunk of those excess party votes would have gone to National instead, giving them ~64-65 seats.

          • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1.1
            2 October 2013 at 11:33 pm

            Indeed. Winston is a sharp operator, and you can’t run a democracy – or hope to put together durable coalitions – but accepting and discarding the minor parties as it suits you.

        • weka 11.1.1.2
          2 October 2013 at 11:42 pm

          “So, he’s useful this term. Next term, probably not so much.”

          You say that like the left has a choice. Can’t have it both ways.

      • Chooky 11.1.2
        2 October 2013 at 11:26 pm

        @ Weka

        Winnie is always good in parliament!….especially as Minister of Foreign Affairs for a Clark Labour led government….. and he is very good in opposition….. he was also once very good at bringing down a National government

        …people hate him….but others enjoy him ….he has more guts and intelligence than most politicians Left or Right or their hack supporters ( he appeals to cynics who say “a plague on both your houses”) ….he knows how to slug it out…..and he has shown up many hypocrites….he is a stirrer par excellence…( admittedly not entirely trustworthy….he is a Trickster!….but bloody good entertainment at times …and people will vote for him for these reasons..).

        ….he also has principles…he has never been a sexist…in fact he has been an outspoken feminist….he has always been for the oldies ( devoted to his Mother)…he opposes sale of state assets and foreign ownership of NZ land and property….

        ….whether Winnie and his band of disreputable pirates get back into parliament ….who knows?…( there is less need on the Left to strategically vote for him, because Labour now has a viable leader in Cunliffe)…but Winnie will have supporters …and I think he would prefer to go with Labour again ..rather than National ( but if Labour shuns him….who knows what he will do?…in fact I dont think it would be wise for Labour to shun him

        • weka 11.1.2.1
          2 October 2013 at 11:38 pm

          So basically you’re ok with the right having a third term? Or at least you are willing to risk that.

          (btw, Peters not being overtly misogynist and offering women some level of respect doesn’t make him feminist).

          • Chooky 11.1.2.1.1
            3 October 2013 at 9:29 am

            @weka …No I am NOT ok about the right having a third term!……I think you are spinning! ….. for what reasons I dont know!

            ….didnt Winnie support Clark’s govt and wasnt he a very effective Minister of Foreign Affairs?…. or would you say Helen Clark is a right winger and Labour was a right wing govt?…( in which case I dont know where you are coming from)

            Why are you so determined that Winnie is a right winger? ….They hate him!…..he brought down one of their governments over selling of state assets…..they hounded him unrelentingly for almost a year over the Owen Glenn affair….John Key hates him and it is mutual …Winston’s attacks on this Nact government over the GCSB Bill were brilliant

            Dont patronise me!……I have been a long time feminist and I am female …..and I know when a politician (without crowing about it) supports women and feminist issues…Winnie has never put a foot wrong here, from way back when ….and in fact I can remember him standing up for a woman on a feminist issue ,when no other politician was doing so…( are YOU a feminist?)

            I might add that Winston was a very effective and ethical Minister of Gaming(?) under the Labour govt….and I know this from a highly ranked public servant who worked closely with Winston on this issue( and this person made redundant under National)…..He said Winston was one of the most professional and most intelligent ministers he had ever worked with…Winstonlistened very closely to experts and he paid great attention to detail….he was a pleasure to work with

            • weka 11.1.2.1.1.1
              3 October 2013 at 11:15 am

              I think you have the wrong end of the stick Chooky. I don’t think that Peters is a right winger. I think he is primarily self-serving (and his politics sit left and right depending on which policy you are talking about). This doesn’t mean he hasn’t done good for NZ, or good for his constituents (he has). My main problem with him is that he is unreliable and untrustworthy.

              The problem I have with your position is that you selectively pick the bits that support your contention that Peters is good for the left. But there is an illogic in that, yes, he has supported Labour, but of course he has also supported National, and in the past he has betrayed his left leaning voters. All I’m saying is that we have no way of knowing what he will do next year, esp given the GP will be part of govt.

              So, by all means support Peters at whatever level you want. Just don’t pretend that this isn’t a risk for the left.

              “and in fact I can remember him standing up for a woman on a feminist issue ,when no other politician was doing so”

              How about you put up some specific examples then? I might be wrong, but I can’t say I’ve noticed Peters as being particularly feminist. Like I said, it’s possible for a man to support or respect women in some ways without being feminist.

              And yes, I am a feminist.

              • weka …
                3 October 2013 at 11:22 am

                btw, Key might not even be in parliament after the next election (you think he will stick around if Collins rolls him?).

                So how about you explain how Labour will form a govt with the Greens AND Peters. Or do you think that if Peters has a choice to go with NACT or Labour, he will be happy to have him and his half dozen MPs sit outside of govt completely. I’m open to there being a way this can be done, but the onus is on lefties who support Peters to explain it.

              • Chooky …
                3 October 2013 at 2:05 pm

                @ Weka..We are going to have to agree to differ…you think Winston is “primarily self -serving”…(.I dont)…..You think he “is unreliable and untrustworthy”….(I don’t)

                *You know the reasons why Winston supported National ( see Helen Clark documentary) …because it has been discussed here before…. but I dont think you wanted to hear or accept those reasons.. Clark couldnt form a govt with him anyway because she didnt have the numbers( Jim Anderton’s party wasnt supporting her)

                *….you say there is an “illogic” in my arguments …..(I could say the same about yours…and males are not supposed to be illogical, dont you know?…this is supposed to be a female defect and put down)

                *….you say I “selectively pick the bits that support” my arguments ….(I could say the same about you)

                *Sorry I cant remember what the particular feminist issue was( and I cant be bothered trawling through old newspapers to find the evidence for you)….but you are not going to persuade me that I am wrong….( nor I am sure, will I persuade you that Winston is a feminist….but you say YOU are a feminist….I am not asking you to prove it , I take you at your word……)

                *sigh….I know Key might not be in parliament after 2014..(and what has Collins to do with it?….I haven even mentioned Collins)

                Personally I hope there is a Left coalition govt between Labour and the Greens….and they win outright…..and I think this is highly likely…..But I dont see the point in conducting some sort of vendetta against Winston to try and annihilate him before the election…..or alienate him from the Left ( this is just what the Nacts would love!….and I take it that you are not a Nact!?)

                ….if it comes to the crunch Labour may need him again…..and I think that if he were to be given Foreign Affairs he would be very amenable….( he is older now and the Greens and NZFirst ( which was once on 30%) are now no longer competing for the same alienated Labour voters)

                • weka …
                  3 October 2013 at 2:25 pm

                  Please give three credible sources apart from the single documentary that the reasons you give for NZF going with National in that election are true.

                  “why prejudge?”

                  Because we cannot afford a third term of NACT. That’s all I’m saying: Peters is a risk for the left. You might think it’s a risk worth taking, I don’t.

                  “on the evidence I would say he is a better fit with Labour and he has worked well with them in the past”

                  I might agree with you if we were looking at a Labour govt. But we’re not. We’re looking at a Labour/GP coalition govt.

                  Can you point to where Peters has said he can work with the GP as part of a govt?

                  “*Sorry I cant remember what the particular feminist issue was( and I cant be bothered trawling through old newspapers to find the evidence for you)….but you are not going to persuade me that I am wrong”

                  I’m not interested in proving you wrong. You can hold any opinion about Peters that you like. I was just trying to ascertain that there is no factual basis to the idea that Peters is feminist, and I think I’ve done that now.

                  • Chooky …
                    3 October 2013 at 3:34 pm

                    @ Weka…this is getting ridiculous! You think that you have ascertained now that there is no factual basis that Winnie is a feminist?……( well what can I say?….do you think I am telling fibs?…Do you think you have proved there is evidence that Winnie is not a feminist?)….Why would you even want to prove Winnie is NOT a feminist?…you say you are “not interested in proving me wrong” and I am allowed to “hold any opinion about Peters that [I ] like”….( well thanks for that….)

                    I wont ask you for the “factual basis” for your assertion that You are a feminist ! (lets not go there…lol)

                    Conclusion: Chooks should not argue with Wekas….because they will keep going around and around the Matagouri bushes and get absolutely nowhere

                    (Remind me on which party you belong to and I will try and keep well away….lol)

                    By the way….I have no evidence, factual , empirical, phenomenological, metaphysical …. that the said Winnie has said “he can work with the GP” and therefore there is probably no factual basis that he can or would work with the GP…(but I have a hunch that if given Foreign Affairs he wouldnt need much interaction with them anyway and he wouldnt try to stop them being in a coalition Cabinet…you Weka , will of course, probably disagree)

                    • weka …
                      3 October 2013 at 6:37 pm

                      If you don’t want to argue, you are probably on the wrong site.

                      All I was doing was pointing out the difference between belief/opinion, and a fact. You can assert that Peters is a feminist, but unless you can back that up somehow then I’ll treat it as your belief. I don’t think you are lying, but I suspect you are trying to make reality fit your perception.

                      Am pretty sure that my creds as a feminist are well known on ts. Likewise that I am a member of the GP, but that I favour pragmatic voting over ideological voting. None of that is a secret.

                      “but I have a hunch that if given Foreign Affairs he wouldnt need much interaction with them anyway and he wouldnt try to stop them being in a coalition Cabinet…you Weka , will of course, probably disagree”

                      It’s not so much that I disagree, it’s that I’m not inclined to base the future of the country on your hunches. Sometimes hunches are useful but in this case Peters has been shown to be unreliable, so the next election is a bit of a crap shoot irrespective of Labour and the GP (unless they do so well that NZF above 5% is irrelevant). He is also on record as saying that he will never work with the GP. Perhaps he has changed his mind, in which case why not tell us? Or perhaps he hasn’t changed his mind. Who would know?

                      Back to the arguing. I started this part of the thread by asking the people on the left who support Peters to explain how Peters being in parliament is a good thing for the left. You’ve had a good try at that, but there are still my points largely unanswered. My view is that the way things are going, the left would be far better off if in the next election NZF was below 5%. If someone can show how that’s not true, I’ll consider changing my opinion.

                      btw, just a heads up. Each time I see that doco trotted out as a rationale for Peters’ worth, I will be asking for some evidence that your theory is true (that Peters went with National because he had no choice, and it was really down to Anderton anyway). I seem to remember last time this came up I went and watched the bit you suggested and I don’t think it counts as evidence in the way you are claiming. It’s a pretty well known piece of NZ history, so you shouldn’t have too much trouble finding back up elsewhere.

            • Delia 11.1.2.1.1.2
              3 October 2013 at 12:19 pm

              What say Winnie goes with National, he has before.

              • Chooky …
                3 October 2013 at 1:25 pm

                @ Delia…please watch the documentary on Helen Clark and you will see why Winston went with National….Labour had no chance of forming a govt because Jim Andertons’ party would not support Labour…I think all this has been discussed before here. He also brought that National govt down when they continued with state asset sales

                Ok Winston may go with National ….but he may not….why prejudge?….on the evidence I would say he is a better fit with Labour and he has worked well with them in the past

      • jaymam 11.1.3
        3 October 2013 at 11:58 am

        Wombat!

        • Chooky 11.1.3.1
          3 October 2013 at 9:00 pm

          @ weka …They haven’t given you a reply button ( I wonder why?…maybe it is because you argue for the sake of arguing?)

          …so I will just have to use jaymams’ reply button ( and say “cows!” in reply to his “wombat!” in passing)

          …..weka….I also favour pragmatism…and I dont think you should try and sink Winston, because he is likely to rise up like a phoenix…and the Left may need him…that is pragmatism! ….You dont want Nact wooing him and succeeding

          Incidentally my 18 year old son ( no discussion or prompting on my part) has said he will either vote Labour or for Winston……so shows Winston still has pulling power( not just amongst the oldies)…

          Conclusion:…. only fools try to right Winston off!.. the smart thing is to try wooing him instead of dissing him

          • weka 11.1.3.1.1
            4 October 2013 at 9:48 am

            I’m not writing off Peters, quite the opposite (honestly, are you reading what I’m writing?). I also haven’t gotten to the point of suggesting that anyone should try and ‘sink’ NZF. As I mentioned, I think you have a tendancy to try and make reality fit your perception.

            The reason there is no reply button to my post is because eventually the threading replies get too long, the comments get narrower, and the system stops presenting reply buttons. You can just go back to the last reply button that is in line with the last comment and then your comment will appear in the right place. Sorry to disappoint but that has nothing to do with my debating style.

            As for the idea that I might be arguing for the sake of arguing, if it were true what does that say about you who keeps replying to me?

            In fact there’s been plenty of things to point out about both Peters and your arguments and I notice that you still haven’t replied to many of the points I have raised.

            “You dont want Nact wooing him and succeeding”

            Indeed, which is core to what I have been saying all along. Peters could go either way, and people on the left who support him should be acknowledging that this is a risk for the left being able to form the next govt.

            • Chooky 11.1.3.1.1.1
              4 October 2013 at 6:29 pm

              @ Weka… you said you …”would love to hear from the left wing voters who still think having Peters in parliament is a good thing (esp those who have voted for him)”.

              ….you wanted my opinion and I gave it……but you didnt like it….

              ….because you want everyone to vote either Green or Labour or Mana….and not waste it on Winnie( because he is a BAD BOY)…… and then you think that the Left will be assured of a victory

              …. well that is just one argument….I think I have shown that there are others…

              ….the reality is that people will vote for whom they like….and it is not necessarily based on Reason…….it can be based on a preference for certain personality types ……and I happen not to like DADDY authoritarian types who want to railroad me into thinking and voting their way…whether it be the Left ( Labour or Green or Mana)…or the Right (National or Act or Conservative or Religious)

              Winnie doesn’t fit exactly into the Right or Left…. I might add the Labour Party with Roger and his accolytes @ Rogernomics didnt exactly fit the Left either ….and at that time Winnie was far more Left than the Labour Party….so I am afraid Weka you just have to live with life’s little contradictions ….and naughty irrational people ( rude finger sign)

              • weka …
                4 October 2013 at 11:10 pm

                It’s not really about who people vote for, it’s about the reasons why they do. By all means vote for Peters. I’m just wanting the left to be honest about what voting for Peters means.

                I don’t dislike Peters because he is a BAD BOY (not even sure what that means). But your suggestion tells me that you’re not really listening to what I am saying.

                you said you … ”would love to hear from the left wing voters who still think having Peters in parliament is a good thing (esp those who have voted for him)”.

                ….you wanted my opinion and I gave it……but you didnt like it….

                Actually, I was wanting some rational discussion about it, esp from people who would otherwise vote further left and instead vote for Peters strategically. There is nothing wrong with you voting based on your feelings, it’s just not what I was asking about. Next time I’ll be more specific.

                It also raises the issue of whether it’s ok to challenge people on their voting choices. In this case, I’m asking for people to justify their choices. Given what is at stake, and the context, I don’t think that’s unreasonable. This is a political blog after all.

    • bad12 11.2
      2 October 2013 at 8:24 pm

      Think your last 2 examples including the Maori Party retaining 3 seats in the next Parliament is over-ambitious on their behalf,

      Based upon the swing to the Mana Party from the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election the only seat the Maori Party can retain in the 2014 election is Te Tai Hauauru, and as Tariana Turia will not be standing again that seat is probably wide open for Labour to take back as well,

      Should Annette Sykes topple Te Ururoa Flavell in Waiariki, He has a 1000 vote majority the left would have a 61 v 60 majority…

      • Colonial Viper 11.2.1
        2 October 2013 at 8:49 pm

        Not enough to last 2 terms; much more work to be done.

      • Te Reo Putake 11.2.2
        2 October 2013 at 9:56 pm

        True, Bad, but I thought it best to show the position from the perspective of the best the right can do. I reckon the Maori party are history, actually. Te Tai Hauauru should head back to Labour, now that Turia’s done one. Waiariki’s interesting; I imagine Labour will probably win, based on the solid party vote, with Sykes second again. I do think mana have a good chance of getting a second seat anyway, via the list.

        • bad12 11.2.2.1
          3 October 2013 at 12:14 pm

          Lolz, we are showing our biases here are we not, i pick the Mana Party to win Waiariki if Annette Sykes stands again, i base that solely upon the results of the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election where the Maori Party slumped by something like 20% and the Mana Party gained most of that vote,

          Should the same occur in Waiariki at the 2014 election, and i expect it to, Sykes will clean up there,

          Labour of course if they were forward thinking would simply not stand a candidate for Waiariki, as has been shown by National this term, if there is no up and coming probable support party in the political spectrum then there is electoral trouble for whichever party of the big 2 has none,

          For the left to retain the treasury benches for 3 terms or more i would suggest that a party like Mana is needed and needed to the extent of having 4 seats in the Parliament, maybe not for the 2014 election but looking further out to 2020,

          We of the left should be thinking in such terms instead of just ‘beating National’ at the one election…

  12. lurgee 12
    2 October 2013 at 8:30 pm

    Hmmmm, yum, humble pie time. Double portion for me! Can I have it with custard?

  13. North 13
    2 October 2013 at 9:04 pm

    I’m appalled by it being felt necessary to argue politely against this shit about the biggest single party having the moral entitlement blah blah blah.

    ShonKey Python had no qualms about brazenly bribing broadly nothing parties of the Right, ACT, the Kupapa Party and The Hair, to have his way. Where does he get off whining a non-existent moral convention ?

    Respond by all means but only to dismiss it as the constitutional howler and moral joke that it is.

    It’s patent that the whine has nothing to do with the biggest single party or percentages……..it’s about entitlement simpliciter, the hubris of a preening narcissistic schoolboy presently occupying the ninth floor. Imagined entitlement to be top of the pile no matter what. The One Percenters have been found out. Fuck your once subliminal now throbbing sense of entitlement ShonKey Python. Found Out Fraud !

    And what’s this shit about flying to Australia solely to have a “Well done Tony” dinner with Abbot. What’s that all about ? To get traction for Kiwis long-resident in Australia ? No. Can’t be. Before he’s even left he’s acknowledging the case won’t be advanced. So what’s it for ? To engage the “gloating celebrity” recently identified by a frequent commenter on The Standard ? Credit to the commenter whose name I don’t recall.

    Just picture ShonKey Python’s braying Parliament and Granny Herald’s ugly old jaw dropping Dame Edna like if Helen Clark had done this. “Dinnergate Dinnergate Wah Wah Wah !”

  14. marty mars 14
    2 October 2013 at 9:08 pm

    Good on Cunliffe and Labour – I am pleased with this poll and the trend it hopefully exposes. Mana is going to have more ability to help those most in need if Labour take the legs off the gnats. The enemy are those exploiters of everything – the keysterbator and his minions. I’m happy to first get rid of them and sort the rest out later.

  15. Martin 15
    2 October 2013 at 9:52 pm

    If we give Key a bottle of Gin will he call a snap election?

  16. Skinny 16
    2 October 2013 at 10:01 pm

    The upwards trend of Labour in the polls is great news, however the PR spin by the Government is coming out thick and fast.

     Crime down, savings due to Welfare reforms, restructuring of ACC, Nike Smiths first home buyers package, are just a few that I’ve heard in the media this week. All ‘noise’ designed to paint a pretty picture of a Country heading in the right direction. 

    Labour & Greens & us activists need to keep pumping the high unemployment, the continued corporate handouts, failing NZ manufactures, housing crisis, rising power prices, commercial fishers over recreational fishers. Over priced vehicle licensing, only looking after the rich in society etc.

     Really driving home to the public the stupidity of asset sales, like billions in surplus within ACC so why the need to flog off the silver? get maximum referendum exposure out on the streets, link in a Govt not listening to it’s citizens, just like forcing their spying bills on us, all to appease the USA.

    Think you all get the drift!  

  17. Saarbo 17
    2 October 2013 at 10:05 pm

    This is really good news, and I notice that Labour are being reported on every issue and coming across strong, I reckon that this trend will only improve in labour’s favour BUT National will react. I suspect that National will pull out all the stops to ensure that they announce a surplus in 2014, and given the big dairy payout it could be a goer. Then they will try and sell themselves hard on this one point, and it will be a powerful point in many New Zealander’s eyes, unfortunately.

    Winning in 2014 will come down to how well Labour can sell itself as a responsible caretaker of the books and also its ideas on economic development (This is not what I personally want to see, it is what I think many swing voters want to see).

    As expected DC is doing a great job so far, I’m looking forward to the next year.

    • Colonial Viper 17.1
      2 October 2013 at 10:28 pm

      To win, Labour must lead with me ideas and vision, not act like managerial “responsible caretakers of the books”.

      • Colonial Viper 17.1.1
        2 October 2013 at 10:30 pm

        “New ideas and vision” dammit.

        • Skinny 17.1.1.1
          2 October 2013 at 11:05 pm

          +1 Cracking great policies come about by the input of the core membership who the Labour party listen too. Visionary thinking by socially conscious Kiwis.

        • Tangee 17.1.1.2
          2 October 2013 at 11:38 pm

          Not necessarily new ideas but the same issues with better ways of dealing with them that are explained well so the people understand that these are possible to achieve without breaking the bank, like the living wage, the first time buyers not being shut out, the electricity the tax on housing and other issues that affect the everyday person.

          • Colonial Viper 17.1.1.2.1
            3 October 2013 at 12:51 am

            are explained well so the people understand that these are possible to achieve without breaking the bank

            In fact, since the NZ Government is an issuer of NZD, so there are no real fiscal (spending) constraints* on the Crown, apart from those that we think are sensible to adhere to, taking into account the economic conditions that we find our business community and citizens in.

            *There are other constraints of course, but the only ones that real attention need be paid to are the ‘real economy’ ones, as well as the condition of the financial markets.

        • Saarbo 17.1.1.3
          3 October 2013 at 7:39 am

          agree CV, I have no doubt that DC has tonnes of ideas, that his forte.

      • swordfish 17.1.2
        3 October 2013 at 12:12 am

        Colonial Viper: “…not act like managerial “responsible caretakers of the books.”

        Yep, they call that “managerialism” in Pol Sci, don’t they. Massively downplay ideological/policy differences – just emphasise you’re a better bunch of managers than the incumbents.

        Same old Tweedledum/Tweedledee Neo-Lib consensus. Basically, the same bunch of elites and alternative elites going endlessly through the revolving-door. Time to elaborate a true Social Democratic alternative. Clearly, both Cunliffe’s and Robertson’s emphasis on the need to swing Left hasn’t done Labour any damage in the polls at all. Quite the opposite. Now, what was that Jane Clifton, Tracy Watkins, Claire Robinson and various editorial writers were saying again ? Oh yes, voters will only countenance a swing to the Right.

        • newsense 17.1.2.1
          3 October 2013 at 12:30 am

          I think that’s a negative way to look at it.

          The polls suggest that they want a Labour leader who can actually make it work, be competent and run a tight ship. The important thing to remember is that actually Tories quite often are shite money mangagers: Super Fund, Asset Sales, Early Childhood education, roads of national significance and so on and so on…fucked CBA and bad deals for kiwis.

          The country doesn’t love their ideas, just the sense that they aren’t going to implode in government. Being repsonsible caretakers is something Cunliffe with him and Parker is trying hard to project. Would be nice to see someone with a bit of flair there too…Clark had the love from Havo and Newsboy and was into her opera and arts…be nice to feel there was someone in Labour who was genuinely able to advance our culture and give it scope to grow and express itself…not sure if DC would make such interesting conversation on Bfm brekkie.

          • Colonial Viper 17.1.2.1.1
            3 October 2013 at 12:58 am

            Governing a nation is about leading a nation, not about ‘managing money’ or ‘balancing the books’. Are the finances and funding of a nation crucial? Yes of course. But it is merely the means not the ends.

            As swordfish implied – they’ve* tried to distance politicians from philosophy/values and instead make “Government” all about ‘managing the means’ instead of defining a political economic mission and leading the country.

            *Who? An interesting question.

            The country doesn’t love their ideas, just the sense that they aren’t going to implode in government. Being repsonsible caretakers is something Cunliffe with him and Parker is trying hard to project.

            Seriously, why do you think that Cunliffe and Parker are only interested in being “caretakers”? Is this what you believe the NZ people are looking for now, status quo “caretakers” who do a bit of a clean up here, a bit of a fix up there?

  18. Chooky 18
    2 October 2013 at 10:46 pm

    +1 CV…..and no secret TPPA deals!…

  19. ak 19
    2 October 2013 at 10:48 pm

    Simply delicious watching the MSM studiously ignore this – may even treat oneself to a peek at the sewerblog reaction, no harm in a little shadenfreude in moderation eh what… poor little chaps really, one shouldn’t, of course…..

    • McFlock 19.1
      3 October 2013 at 12:29 am

      oh, they’ll cover it ad nauseum when RM goes down next poll, or the poll after that, or the pol…

      edit: reminds me a bit of the old cliche about totalitarian states reporting their progress in a war – our chaps make a massive advance, then it’s reported for a while that they’re fighting nobly, then all of a sudden they’ve heroically captured a point 15 miles inside the territory they captured on their massive advance. And damned be anybody who dares to remember the discrepancy.

      • Colonial Viper 19.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 1:04 am

        Indeed. The reports of the Wehrmacht soundly defeating the Red Army at Kiev (again) a few years after the first time was a bit of a dead giveaway that something had gone badly wrong, somewhere along the way.

        • McFlock 19.1.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 1:39 am

          My favourite was when I was reading contemporary news reports of the “Soccer War” on microfiche several years ago. Going by the official briefings, each side simultaneously advanced several miles into the other’s territory while meeting light resistance. I kind of imagined thousands of soldiers tramping in around in circles the jungle and never actually running into the other guys. Although much of that might have been due to a Honduran general who had lots of soldiers on paper (and the accompanying pay cheques), but they didn’t actually exist.

          Or maybe they were just really really really good at camouflage 🙂

  20. Leak detection 20
    2 October 2013 at 11:09 pm

    It’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained! Looking forward to your next post.

  21. xtasy 21
    3 October 2013 at 12:29 am

    Finally, some light at a very, very, very long, dark tunnel!

    ACT MP John Banks was trying to distract from his own court case (remember the Dotcom donation saga) and his party’s dismal showing overall yesterday, raising his party’s misgivings about Nick Smith’s recent housing plans, to allow first home buyers to buy cheaper homes in the provinces, while getting a government hand-out.

    Also I note that Peter Dunne is desperately trying to get media attention with all kinds of new ideas, suggestions, and supporting the Labour member’s bill pulled from the ballot, to reduce the alcohol limit to 0.5 per mil.

    These two are getting WORRIED, as their luck and days are going to be over soon!

    I look forward to some interesting Question Time showdowns in a week and a half, and also to some interesting policies, that Labour and also Greens must and will present.

    John Key, your days are numbered too, and Judith is in her kitchen at home every night, sharpening the many LONG blades of her kitchen knife collection!

  22. Tracey 22
    3 October 2013 at 7:27 am

    Banks spoke out against Smith’s state housing announcement, clearly tryin gto position himself;

    a. back in the public eye
    b. to the right of national

    Does Banks winning Epsom change anything?

    • bad12 22.1
      3 October 2013 at 8:59 am

      Do you mean ‘change anything after the 2014 election’ Tracey, if Banks gets to stand again in Epsom and loses then National have one less vote in the House,

      Same with Ohariu, if Dunne loses Ohariu it doesn’t matter that much who wins when that seat is looked at in terms of National’s ability to form a Government, National would be light one vote even if that Party should win that electorate,

      Lolz, bizaare as it may sound the voters in the Ohariu electorate should vote for the National candidate to ensure that National will not be the Government…

      • Tracey 22.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 9:02 am

        Yes, I mean if Banks wins in 2014, how does that change the above results?

        In epsom many non act/nat voters voter nat to keep banks out, but nat voters voted act to keep him in.

        everyone cancelled each other out, but nat always has more voters than the others… for some strange reason in this very white million dollar home area! 😉

  23. Aotearoean 23
    3 October 2013 at 9:36 am

    Tell the skipper that there is another rat in the lifeboat..

  24. Brett Dale 24
    3 October 2013 at 10:40 am

    what do the trends say?
    The only surprise would be if they didn’t surge with all then publicity.

    National will still bolt in.

    Greens at 11% still 1% higher than they will poll at the election.

    • bad12 24.1
      3 October 2013 at 12:27 pm

      Lolz, the trend in the Roy Morgan shows National going DOWN, sorry clown your party has blown it big time in a number of policy areas and must now pay the price,

      Another 1-1 1/2% slide for National and even if, a big IF, Winston Peters wanted to support a National Government it will be impossible to form one, (and that’s even factoring into the calculation Banks (the convicted), and ‘the Hairdo’ that poncing little sellout from Ohariu keeping their seats,

      Given it’s actions from 2008 to 2011 i actually expected this National Government to be a shoe in for 3 terms, unfortunately for you lot your star performer, Slippery the PM, lost the plot,got rolled on policy by the Party and now you are in for another 9 of Opposition…

      • Brett Dale 24.1.1
        3 October 2013 at 1:17 pm

        bad12:

        Strange, then how come, when a polls as showing national up and labour down, the comments were, the polls meant nothing???

        • bad12 24.1.1.1
          3 October 2013 at 1:33 pm

          Pratt Dale, please provide the proof of that assertion, or, please stop putting up ‘strawman arguments’,

          i have as yet to see a Post or a majority of comments in a Post which say that polls are meaningless,

          Take some remedial English lessons while your at it…

        • Colonial Viper 24.1.1.2
          3 October 2013 at 9:12 pm

          Strange, then how come, when a polls as showing national up and labour down, the comments were, the polls meant nothing???

          Actually, looking at those low polls I’m pretty sure (some) people were saying that we needed a new Labour Leader…

          • McFlock 24.1.1.2.1
            3 October 2013 at 9:21 pm

            heck – even when the polls were up some people said they meant nothing 😉

            But even now I think there’s a spread of the degree to which people place importance on the three poll snaps this week. I’m still reserving judgement for the next couple of RM polls, and am cautious of a Rudd bounce. But expected worst case from my perspective is Labour go back to the pattern of a shallow growth trend over the next year.

            • Bill 24.1.1.2.1.1
              4 October 2013 at 2:08 am

              Weren’t you more than happy with that flat lining in the polls with Shearer? I seem to recall you were all ‘she’ll be right mate’. But now with a bounce/surge you’re being all ‘Aw…I dunno’. WTF gives McFlock?

              • McFlock …
                4 October 2013 at 12:32 pm

                They weren’t “flatlining”. As I said at the time, they were on a shallow increase trend up until that two month period where Labour got 3 or 4 consecutive RM falls. When the consecutive setbacks occurred, I was concerned at the time. Then, if I recall the sequence correctly, RM had a bounce back into friendlier territory, a few days later Shearer quit, and here we are today.

                Just as I became concerned after a few consecutive falls, I’ll be happier with a few consecutive boosts.

                Very recently we have seen over the puddle that an increase in polls immediately after a change in leadership might merely reflect other factors, such as the media coverage of the party during the leadership challenge, and can disappear into a void just as quickly. Labour had excellent media coverage during the leadership campaign, barring an idiot former comms professional. So I expect one or two more RM rises, then a “sudden” dip back to the low/mid thirties, and back to a trend of more modest increases leading up to the campaign (and after that starts, nobody knows).

                I also expect some chicken littles and gloating tories during the dip, but that seems to be par for the course.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  4 October 2013 at 3:55 pm

                  Doesn’t matter who the Labour Leader is any way, I think your previously stated position is.

                  And stop those idiots praying for a saviour as Labour Leader.

                  • McFlock …
                    4 October 2013 at 4:16 pm

                    hence why I think there’s a good chance that after some fluctuation (mostly caused by the good coverage over the leadership contest, according to my model) Labour will return to a long term trend of gradual increases.

          • The Al1en 24.1.1.2.2
            3 October 2013 at 9:37 pm

            Good job someone was listening.

      • lurgee 24.1.2
        4 October 2013 at 12:40 am

        “Lolz, the trend in the Roy Morgan shows National going DOWN”

        If you average the RMs over several polls to iron out sample variation (Doesn’t everyone do this? How do you keep yourself entertained?) they’ve been very consistent, putting National 44-35% and Labour at 32-33%. there doesn’t seem to be much movement in them at all since the election.

        Which is why the current bounce might be a bit exciting. It will need to be sustained, but with two seperate polls both showing a lift it probably isn’t just statistical variation – two companies getting it totally wrong at the same time seems a bit unlikely.

        • McFlock 24.1.2.1
          4 October 2013 at 1:27 am

          Not entirely uncommon, though.

          I tend to look at 3-5 samples (at a minimum) from the RM, because they’re the only ones vaguely frequent enough. Back before the two-month decline at the end of Shearer, it had a pretty solid pattern of three up, one down, with the occasional 4ish point shift. My theory is that they cycle four different sample populations or demog weightings, but who knows.

  25. lurgee 25
    4 October 2013 at 3:41 pm

    Didn’t Roy Morgan admit the Shearer Slide was actually a bit of a bollux on their part? Or did I imagine that?

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