Latest poll result – National is being cleaned out by NZ First and Act

Written By: - Date published: 6:41 pm, October 11th, 2024 - 109 comments
Categories: act, chris hipkins, Christopher Luxon, greens, labour, maori party, nz first, Politics, polls - Tags:

I appreciate this is a Curia poll and the results should be treated with caution.

But the latest Curia poll result suggests that things are not happy in National’s ranks.

National is down 4.1% to 34.9%.

Labour is up 3.6% to 30.3%.

The Greens are down 0.6% to 10.4%.

Act is up 0.9% to 9.7%.

NZ First is up 0.8% to 7.6%.

Te Pati Maori is down 2% to 3%.

The right still has a majority. But things are looking very unstable.

Luxon’s response to the poll result, “I just don’t care” which comes out on the same day as news that he is ridding himself of a third mortgage free rental property suggests that he thinks his time as Prime Minister may not last. Maybe he is cashing up and readying himself for a quick exit.

The most significant result was that Health is rising up the list of most important issues. This issue is a slow cooker but a will develop irreversible momentum. National will not be able to cut expenditure and improve primary and hospital care. Nothing is more certain.

The Greens need to sort their stuff out. And Labour needs to be up front and offer passionate public opposition. This Government should be on the ropes. Labour needs to offer a passionate and thought through alternative.

109 comments on “Latest poll result – National is being cleaned out by NZ First and Act ”

  • Comments are now closed

  2. Tiger Mountain 2
    11 October 2024 at 7:40 pm

    Jee–zus Micky–you are West Auckland/New Lynn Labour–in your heart you surely know the answer and it is time to front up. NZ Labour has to retire Rogernomics and its toxic legacy once and for all, and become a Corbynesque Social Democratic Party with a big outreach to working class communities.

    “For the many not the few”

    • Tony Veitch 2.2
      12 October 2024 at 11:45 am

      Abso-f******-lutely!

    • mickysavage 2.3
      12 October 2024 at 5:08 pm

      Thanks TM.

      I tried to capture the sentiment with this:

      "Labour needs to be up front and offer passionate public opposition. This Government should be on the ropes. Labour needs to offer a passionate and thought through alternative."

    • Gosman 2.4
      12 October 2024 at 7:05 pm

      Being a Corbynesque party work did not work out very well for the UK Labour party under Corbyn. Why would it work for NZ Labour ?

      • KJT 2.4.1
        12 October 2024 at 7:46 pm

        Got them more votes and more members than Starmer.

        Only the vageries of their electoral system, and a knee capping from the right wing establishment in his own party, kept him out of Government.

  3. Rodel 3
    11 October 2024 at 8:20 pm

    correction…'I appreciate this is a Curia poll and the results should be treated with disdain' .

    • Muttonbird 3.1
      11 October 2024 at 8:43 pm

      That's true. Farrar and Curia have basically been expelled from the Research Association of New Zealand for corrupt polling practice. It's always worth seriously questioning Farrar's results because, by definition, there is always a political motive behind them.

      • Belladonna 3.1.1
        11 October 2024 at 10:17 pm

        But you're not (clearly, given your comments below) seriously questioning this poll.

      • David 3.1.2
        12 October 2024 at 8:39 am

        Muttonbird, you are lying. Curia left the research association, they were not expelled, and there was no corrupt practice. David Farrar’s company was subject to numerous politically motivated complaints. The time and cost now longer justified being a member. I believe the straw that broke the camels back, was the complaint about how a question about puberty was asked.

        • Morrissey 3.1.2.1
          12 October 2024 at 8:47 am

          Muttonbird, you are lying. Curia left the research association,

          Just up and left, they did. They weren't under pressure to leave the only organisation that conferred any respectability or legitimacy on them. Oh no, of course not.

          they were not expelled,

          Not formally. They left before they could be expelled.

          and there was no corrupt practice.

          You know this…how?

          • David 3.1.2.1.1
            12 October 2024 at 10:52 am

            Morrissey, accusations against someone are easy. It’s a bit like saying to someone “have you stopped beating your wife yet”

            Would you be willing to stand up publicly, and say that Farrar & Curia were expelled from the governing organisation for corruption? Probably not, what you heard is just a made up story, and maybe one you want to believe.

            Repeating stories that you don’t know for sure are true is not ever a good idea, people end up being hurt, for the benefit of toxic individuals.

            [Don’t be a plonker and try to put words in Morrissey’s mouth who asked you how you know that there was no corrupt practice rather than asserting that “Farrar & Curia were expelled from the governing organisation for corruption” – Incognito]

        • Muttonbird 3.1.2.2
          12 October 2024 at 8:55 am

          You're spinning Farrar's version of events, and he is the politically motivated entity. Political activism, lobbying, manipulation is his entire reason for being. That is why it's not acceptable for him to present himself as an impartial pollster while also being a political activist. RANZ finally accepted that after complaints, presumably from other RANZ members who are not political motivated, and operate impartially.

          They were expelled in the sense that Farrar and Curia refused to adhere to RANZ code of practice.

          • David 3.1.2.2.1
            12 October 2024 at 11:10 am

            You’re making up a story to suit your beliefs.

            If you are so sure in the truth of your story, stand up publicly, and publish it under your name.

            Sure he is a lifelong National party member and supporter of ACT, so what? We all work with, or know people from across the political spectrum. A person’s honesty or integrity is not defined by their political beliefs.

            [Second and last warning for you. Read the examples of self-martyrdom offenses here on TS (https://thestandard.org.nz/policy/#banning), particularly The Gosman (hypocrisy) ruling – Incognito]

            • Muttonbird 3.1.2.2.1.1
              12 October 2024 at 11:24 am

              He's been pinged multiple times by RANZ. He has no integrity.

              We do work with or know people from across the political spectrum but are they outspoken political activists who also run a political polling company?

              Also, stop trying to break my pseudonym, that’s illegal here.

              • Belladonna …
                12 October 2024 at 11:39 am

                But you're clearly willing to believe this poll – because it suits your agenda.

                Shows just how important your ethics are to you.

              • David …
                12 October 2024 at 12:36 pm

                Muttonbird, my apologies that you felt I was trying to break your pseudonym, that was not my intention.

                Everyday I have to act “professionally” I put aside my personal beliefs and political opinions to work alongside others. The only times I’ve really noticed that “politics” causes an issue in the workplace has been from younger people who have yet to learn to separate their personal selves from their professional/work selves.

                In Farrar’s case, his business has accepted commissions from organisations that Farrar’s political opponents disagree with. They do not like the results of several polls that Curia conducted. That is the issue, not Farrar’s professional or that of his business.

                • Muttonbird …
                  12 October 2024 at 12:49 pm

                  People were complaining about the polling questions, which then lead to misleading results. Manufactured questions=manufactured results.

                  I guess Farrar's "political opponents" are aware some organisations will use poll results to lobby and pressure decision makers. Farrar himself uses misleading stats in his arguments all the time.

                  If a pressure group, say Family First, can come up with a so called reputable poll showing support for the banning of puberty blockers, they can use this to lobby a very weak and compliant minister, say Chris Bishop.

                  The complainants, and RANZ's concern is that the results have been engineers with push-polling, something their code doesn't allow.

                  • David …
                    12 October 2024 at 2:09 pm

                    Muttonbird, Sure I understand concerns about the types of questions being asked, and how they can lead to misleading results. My neighbours and myself, received a questionnaire from our council. The questions were asked in a way that indicates council has already decided on the result, one that is contradictory to what we as residents want, council now say it is what we want… This is an industry wide issue, not just a Farrar issue.

                    As for puberty blockers, it should not be a surprise the general public has concerns re the use of puberty blockers.

                    I certainly agree that the questions need to be asked in a way to avoid a predetermined result. In this case the issue is so politically toxic, any result is always going to greatly upset one side or the other. Which maybe the reason other polling/market research companies stay away from this issue.

                    Farrar should, as a director or owner of a polling/market research business, be very careful when using his company’s data to push his political views. He should also be aware of how he conducts his research and know that it will come under political scrutiny.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      12 October 2024 at 4:10 pm

                      Muttonbird, Sure I understand concerns about the types of questions being asked, and how they can lead to misleading results. My neighbours and myself, received a questionnaire from our council. The questions were asked in a way that indicates council has already decided on the result, one that is contradictory to what we as residents want, council now say it is what we want… This is an industry wide issue, not just a Farrar issue.

                      Goodness me David, that paragraph above rings a loud bell. This attitude is par for the course for the Council in my city, Wellington. We regularly get asked about things on which council 'is to make a decision' only to find out later that the predetermination koolaid has been well and truly consumed by WCC.

                      The last consultation was about moving a bus-stop and the locals disagreed totally with it. The moving duly was to go ahead when the brave resident, whose house it would have been in front of, said 'no' to Metlink who wanted to build the bus shelter. A building that would taken the width of her house frontage, thus putting paid to anyone being able to put drive on access there in the future.

                      Well done that person as this was enough to send WCC scuttling back to the original bus stop location that has been in position for about 50-60 years.

                      All well and good you say, we did too, briefly. That was before we read the fine print and see it is much, much wider and closer to a dangerous corner, no reason given. So residents are got out their pencils and off they went again.

                      So to link back to your points about questions: we take it as read that organisations will act in good faith and acting in good faith means not asking questions where you are not prepared to act in accordance with the ideas/views you receive back, not having predetermined a views etc etc. So the format of the questions is crucial. Consultation in WCC is largely box ticking because the legislation or a policy may say 'consult please'

                      After several goes of this and having had jobs in PS that involved public consultation I decided as a person I was wasting my time in spending time, effort & brainpower writing submissions.

                      As I have knowldge of OIA processes that are similar to the LGOIA proceeses I sometimes act as the 'go to' person to get back ground material for submitters in the community, mostly using the OIA process.

                      Well dear readers who would have thought that the processes used by WCC in managing information are as a bad as the leading/pretermined question asking and the consultation assessing.

                      And now this exchange has just sparked that I need to ask an OIA question of WCC about how they test their questions for best practice and whether they use practitioners experienced in surveys to do this, and which ones?

                    • Belladonna …
                      12 October 2024 at 5:12 pm

                      @Shanreagh

                      Goodness me David, that paragraph above rings a loud bell. This attitude is par for the course for the Council in my city

                      Par for the course with AT 'consultation' in Auckland, as well.

                      We had consultation over the installation of a bus lane. Obviously the consultation over this was a sham – they had every intention of making the change.

                      However, locals did hope that we could get them to see common sense over the resulting road layout change at the intersection, where the bus lane (and car lane) go around the corner.

                      What people wanted was 2 lanes turning left (1 for buses, 1 for cars). What we got is a single lane turning left for both buses and cars. So cars have to merge into the bus lane to turn, then de-merge into a car-only lane again. The car-only lane is usually blocked solid – meaning that the buses can't get around the corner – since the car in front is waiting for a space.

                      Even the local board representatives (who are highly pro-public transport) tried to get AT to see reason.

                      Nope. No dice. Not willing to listen and act on the recommendations of people who drive the road daily; over the traffic engineers who (at best) visit once, and more likely operate from maps only. The resulting disaster is frankly dangerous (cars have to change lanes at the last minute), and (probably more importantly from the AT perspective) jams up the new bus lane, preventing the buses gaining any time advantage.

                      Result (after spending tens of thousands of dollars) is:

                      • A bus only lane – which doesn't result in buses getting anywhere sooner.
                      • An intersection which is more dangerous than it was before the change.
                      • Traffic for everyone (including bus users) which is worse than before, in the mornings (which is when the bus lane is operational)
                      • Traffic during the rest of the day builds up because of the stupid intersection layout. There are traffic jams all day, now, not just in the mornings.
                    • Muttonbird …
                      12 October 2024 at 8:42 pm

                      Hi David. Here's a link to the RANZ complaints procedure:

                      https://www.researchassociation.org.nz/Complaints-procedure

                      I suspect your council was conducting a survey rather than a poll (same thing, I guess) but the company conducting the survey may come under the umbrella of the Research Association of New Zealand and their code of practice.

                      If you feel your council has asked the research company to engineer questions to get predetermined data, make a complaint.

                      However, using your own theory, any complaint will mean you are viewed as a "political opponent" of your council and the organisation conducting its research.

                      Cheers.

              • Mountain Tui …
                12 October 2024 at 3:59 pm

                Muttonbird

                I wrote the story on it but the summary is:

                RANZ upheld multiple complaints against David Farrar's Curia Market Research and were in the process of suspending / expelling Curia – before Farrar "resigned"

                Here's one example of how Farrar manipulates data and results and they use Curia as a political tool to help their allies:

                https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/516461/changes-made-after-criticism-of-free-speech-union-report

                • Shanreagh …
                  13 October 2024 at 9:48 am

                  To Belladonna. While I am a fan of public transport I am not a fan of deliberately 'engineering ' (said advisedly) 'solutions' (also said advisedly) that make it dangerous for other legitimate road users. As in your post…crazy moves.

                  As similar situation has arisen in the last few days with the provision of a cycle lane in an area of Molesworth street that has always been a trouble spot by abruptly stopping and starting car lanes that go into a supermarket/straight ahead/motorway. This helps no-one

                  As far as I know cars etc are still a legal/legitimate means of transport. While councils/council owned entities could deter/lessen use by other means my view is they unless cars are actually illegal and seeing as they provide a valid means of transport for many, they should be provided for, safely.

                  On the point of provision, WCC only considers bike, bus and pedestrian interests when looking at future works on roads or footpaths. Their analysis blatantly leaves off impacts on motor transport. (& true to form I have an OIA there asking to see the analysis on the impact on motor vehicles for our bus stop fiasco).

                  In fact if there was a provision covering transport for devils and goblins, the grim reaper and land movements of weapons of mass destruction they would all probably be slotted in before cars in Wellington (might be some exaggeration there but I couldn't possibly comment).

                  I have said in submissions to WCC that the movement away from fossil fuels, that I agree with, is more likely to involve a move from petrol/diesel driven vehicles to electric vehicles. WCC/cycle lobby seem to believe that the future will involve a move to cycles only. I think it will be a move to public transport, electric cars. Cycles will also feature but not as a majority. Wellington, strange as it may seem, is not Amsterdam

                  There is deafening silence, so far, to my request for the WCC policies/provisions/planning relating to the impact of electric vehicles in Wellington. And there will be an impact, electric cars are heavier and silent (impacts on sensory awareness of traffic movement).

                  Anyway it is raining and I am just off on my bike to to collect some big pieces of rimu plus for my partner's woodworking projects before they are taken to landfill later today (and that is terrible) ……oh wait, I'll ring an uber (no) or take a bus (no) walk (no see you tomorrow) ……/sarc

                  • Cinder …
                    14 October 2024 at 6:16 pm

                    Gods Teeth!

                    What a perfect embodiment of the juvenile mindset of the NZ motorist.

                    1 – Yes, it is still legal to apply for a licence to undertake the privileged activity of operating heavy machinery (your roughly metric ton of metal which accelerates rapidly to a high speed) in proximity to other heavy machinery and people. It is subject to regulation and moderation at the discretion of the State.

                    2 – It is incumbent on you to comply with these regulations, laws and by-laws when operating your heavy machinery.

                    3 – If you are unable to cope with changes to the roading network or legislation which affect your licenced, privileged activity you should stop operating your heavy machinery.

                    If you think that you are being persecuted because you have to drive to these conditions, then perhaps you should hand in your licence. It betrays the mindset of someone unfit to be behind the wheel. You're so accustomed to exercising your privilege you now view it as your right .

                    I like the new bikelane on Molesworth street as I no longer get cars zooming up to within an inch of me or blocking the footpath when I'm just trying to walk without getting maimed or killed. Were you one of the many, many, many drivers I have had to remind of my rights?

                    I complained to the manager of that supermarket in the past as they used to have a sign instructing pedestrians to give way to cars at their carpark entrance. Which is the opposite of what is stated in the Land Transport Safety Act.

                    Anyhoo…

                    You could just read the last decades Central and Local transport policies and the long term plans to see what is going on, but no…

                    I'll give you a couple of hints about the root cause of all these problems you are always complaining about…

                    TOO

                    MANY

                    CARS

                    I used these guys to make tip runs and move my furniture earlier this year:

                    https://www.nocarcargo.co.nz/

                    And because they are adults with a functional brain, they have heard of wet weather gear.

                    And I used Uber to shift my fragile possessions and the lovely driver even helped me load and unload all my musical gear.

                    May I suggest you that you check on whether your vehicles exhaust is entering the passenger cabin.

                • Muttonbird …
                  13 October 2024 at 10:10 am

                  Wow, that is damning. It's takes a special kind of corruption (FSU) to make Farrar look comparatively upstanding and reasonable!

                  Farrar's solution is to say you can believe these (his own) results, but they are in fact bullshit.

                • Dolomedes III …
                  14 October 2024 at 1:40 pm

                  So if a sample of only 2.8% is considered insufficient by Professor Gray, how many political polls have any validity?

                  Professor Gray says "nothing to see here folks", but anyone who works at a NZ Tertiary Institution (as I do) knows about the climate of fear. If Professor Gray is able to express himself freely, it will be because he holds views that are deemed politically correct by his employer, and his funders. Look at what happened to the Listener Seven in 2021. The Royal Society of NZ considered expelling the three authors who were fellows of the society, and one author had to resign from an administrative position at Auckland Uni: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland-university-professor-resigns-from-acting-dean-role-over-letter-claiming-maori-knowledge-isnt-science/NF4CMOCYRJZGI5Y4DXACKKJU54/

                  As for RNZ, they regularly uncritically report "studies" that have no scientific validity, without any consideration of the studies' limitations. For example:

                  https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018957422/pasifika-women-working-for-free-due-to-pay-gap-data

                  https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/529808/maori-pacific-and-asian-psychologists-more-likely-to-experience-racism-report

                • Dolomedes III …
                  14 October 2024 at 2:15 pm

                  How do you know RANZ were in the process of suspending/expelling Farrar? Can you provide a link?

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    19 October 2024 at 1:14 pm

                    How do you know RANZ were in the process of suspending/expelling Farrar? Can you provide a link?

                    Update from RANZ Chair on membership resignation by Curia Market Research (20 Aug 2024)

                    The RANZ Professional Standards Group has made a recommendation to the Chair of RANZ in respect of this complaint [against Curia Research]. The complaints process allows that, when such a recommendation is made, the Chair can establish an independent panel to review that recommendation and to make a final decision. We were underway with this process when Curia tendered its resignation.

                    In these circumstances, the Constitution allows the complaints process to continue at the discretion of the Chair. After consulting with David [Farrar] at Curia, the complainant, an external advisor and senior members of the RANZ Board and Executive, we have decided to continue the process and bring it to a conclusion. We think this is the fairest outcome for all the parties involved.

                    Once the independent panel’s work is complete, the RANZ Board will release the panel’s decision.

                    According to the RANZ, an independent panel was/is in the process of reviewing a recommendation from their Professional Standards Group regarding a complaint against Curia Research.

                    Might be disinformation, in which case Farrar would all over it.
                    Could be a storm in a cuppa tea, although the timing of Curia's resignation is intriguing. Likely it’ll all come out in the wash – hope it’s nothing Boag-like. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Boag#Leaks

                    The Chair of RANZ received a letter of resignation from Curia Principal David Farrar on August 10.

            • mpledger 3.1.2.2.1.2
              12 October 2024 at 11:25 am

              All well and good, but it's just another thread in a tapestry that includes entries in the Dirty Politics book.

            • Incognito 3.1.2.2.1.3
              12 October 2024 at 12:18 pm

              Mod note

        • Mountain Tui 3.1.2.3
          12 October 2024 at 3:57 pm

          David

          I think it's worth mentioning RANZ upheld multiple complaints against David Farrar's Curia Market Research and were in the process of suspending / expelling Curia – before Farrar "resigned"

          And judging by the content of the complaints – and the fact an independent body judged it as merit – these claims of political bias are merely weak defences against the facts.

          Here's one example of how Farrar manipulates data and results and they use Curia as a political tool to help their allies:

          https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/516461/changes-made-after-criticism-of-free-speech-union-report

  4. bwaghorn 4
    11 October 2024 at 8:25 pm

    I wonder what jones price will be to bring nzf back to labour next election ?

    • Belladonna 4.1
      11 October 2024 at 10:19 pm

      You're ruling Peters out of continuing the leadership? Given his history – it's not a call I would make.

  5. SPC 5
    11 October 2024 at 8:43 pm

    National cannot move closer to ACT or NZF positions (the Brash move) without risk of more loss to Labour in the centre.

    And yet if they do not, any further drift to these parties risks Labour becoming the party with the most support (see National’s 2017 complaint – the largest party is entitled to lead the government).

    He and his party are getting sorted.

    Key managed the other parties by not being dependent on them, now the coalition partners are managing National.

    • Belladonna 5.1
      11 October 2024 at 10:23 pm

      National has no need to move closer to the far right – ACT and NZF (in different ways) are hoovering up that support. Just as the GP and TPM do the same on the far left.

      National and Labour are competing for the centre vote – in the absence of any centrist party (cf Peter Dunne)

      • SPC 5.1.1
        11 October 2024 at 10:50 pm

        If they hoover up much more then Labour will become the party with the most support.

        • Belladonna 5.1.1.1
          12 October 2024 at 11:35 am

          Only if the Greens don't hoover up the left wing Labour support. Which given the lackluster performance of the current leadership – seems not unlikely.

  6. ianmac 6
    11 October 2024 at 8:53 pm

    The 4.1 drop for national is pretty telling. I don't think a ruling party has dropped in its first year. So sad.

  7. Muttonbird 7
    11 October 2024 at 8:56 pm

    I'd say National have lost support to Labour either directly, or indirectly via some chair changes in ACT and NZF.

    But Luxon doesn't care. He says that a lot, and Kiwis are starting to believe it, that he simply does not care. Willis is genuinely thick and, as finance minister, has not been able to control the whacky thought bubbles of the triumvirate, to the economy's detriment.

    Dreadful numbers out yesterday on the deficit. That's what happens when you literally threaten the public and private sector with loss of jobs 24/7. Guess what, employers retreat and produce less. Imagine speaking so negatively for so long that people just give up and fuck off.

    Luxon and Willis have single handedly crippled several sectors, including Wellington, timber products and sheep and beef meat, and absolutely destroyed infrastructure must haves like IREX and Three Waters. They've also got everyone really angry with the attack on Te Reo and what's left of our founding document.

    Well done, idiots. Custodians of the economy? The public may just be waking up.

  8. Belladonna 8
    11 October 2024 at 10:15 pm

    Oh, so do we believe Curia, now? /sarc/

    If you look at the poll trends – this poll almost exactly replicates the Curia result from June this year.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_New_Zealand_general_election

    It may be a trend – with reversing popularity for National. It may be a blip – reflecting a snapshot in time, not a trend. It may be a rogue result (an outlier in the polls – we've seen them from all pollsters)

    If the trend continues, then it will be meaningful – but a single poll result isn't useful analysis.

  9. AB 9
    11 October 2024 at 10:22 pm

    I don't believe Curia polls unless they are for a reputable client – which the Taxpayers' Union isn't. If an ideologically motivated pollster is working with an ideologically motivated 'client', all warning systems should go off.

    And even if the poll is accurate, its cold comfort. ACT and NZF remain depressingly high and the right bloc is way ahead on these numbers.

    • Bearded Git 9.1
      12 October 2024 at 6:14 am

      52.2 versus 43.7 is not "way ahead". The gap is 8.5% and TPM would probably get a couple of overhang seats. The Talbot Mills poll has the gap at 2%; see Chris Trotter here.

      https://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2024/10/gut-feelings.html

      Who knows if Winston will still be around in 2 years time?

      Once the Greens have got rid of the Darleen Tana issue they will pick up. Chloe is now ahead of Winston as preferred PM.

      Luxon's idiotic comment and general lack of empathy will gradually cost the Nats more votes. The health and ferry issues are beginning to damage the Nats. The economy is looking worse under their management.

      Labour needs to replace Hipkins and then it's all to play for in 2026.

      • AB 9.1.1
        12 October 2024 at 12:47 pm

        I hope you are right BG.

        However, the cynic in me says that this is a crafted message to Luxon from the TU. They want him to think that ACT's and NZF's economically hard-right and borderline corrupt policies are popular – and if he wants to win the election he should stick with them. And that the support he is losing is really just a few Labour voters returning home as they inevitably will, and he shouldn't worry about that. I would imagine that the TU's funders are looking for exactly that to happen.

        • Bearded Git 9.1.1.1
          12 October 2024 at 4:58 pm

          The TU is really just Jordan Williams and a few other hard right mates.

          I don't think that they are that important in the greater scheme, though I realise that they are better funded these days.

  10. Mike the Lefty 10
    12 October 2024 at 8:55 am

    I think it shows falling confidence in Luxon's leadership, thus translating into support for National, rather than dissatisfaction with National's policies itself because ACT and NZ First both increased slightly. The public are starting to wake up about who is really running the government.

  11. Kat 11
    12 October 2024 at 9:20 am

    "I don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows…." Bob said that.

    I don't need a poll to know who's getting on or off the bandwagon…..I said that.

  12. SPC 12
    12 October 2024 at 9:40 am

    The C of C campaign against a bi-cultural New Zealand is more popular when the nation is not self-confident.

    The middle class then accepts less public spending and support for the less well off (including those of the Treaty/the indigenous people) to make it easier for themselves.

    More unemployment (the more being on welfare is harmful line – to infer making this unpleasant creates jobs), more poverty, more risk of crime, more spending on prisons (and who are those in prisons?)

    The whole thing is so anti-social investment in future society well being. They try and pretend that the harm they do is mitigated by transfer of smaller amounts to external providers to get away with it and so the middle class can sleep at night without any shame (tax cuts and lower mortgage rates for them, snore).

    But it gets worse, they tolerate the governments "favour" to business, or is that business favour for government?

    Hilariously the C of C have all these projects that will be fast tracked. This to feed some narrative that by fast tracking they can somehow all be afforded. And then we will have a successful economy in the future, rather than one based on growing property wealth (financed by debt repayments to foreign owned banks).

    My opinion on that, is that the high hopes to be raptured up to heaven as one of prosperity religion (having it sorted, like some boomer-in-chief) is like fast tracking the building a gondola from Omaha Beach to an elevator to the moon.

    But one cannot take the untaxed CG with you, unless it is purchase a Musk flight to a cheap motel to milk the bull, to make some cheesy face.

  13. thinker 13
    12 October 2024 at 9:42 am

    I appreciate this is a Curia poll and the results should be treated with caution

    Yes, but the natural error would likely be to talk up the present government, not the left.

    So, if anything, things might be more dire for the CoC than this.

  14. mpledger 14
    12 October 2024 at 11:39 am

    Luxon better stop being a non-entity or ACT and NZF will suck National's life-blood. (It seems like he wanted the job title and not the job – he is never prepared.)

    NZF will be looking to screw Seymour while he is deputy PM and if they bring down the govt so be it. NZF base is older people (and provincial/rural people) and they won't like their hospitals and GPs getting shafted but they tend to stay quiet until they vote – Winston is going to have to do something about that by coming out tough on National/ACT.

    Usually, it's the minor parties getting screwed by being in govt – now it National who are turning into nothing.

    • tWig 14.1
      12 October 2024 at 12:08 pm

      Luxon is worse than a non-entity. He actively presents extremely poorly on media. His eternal round of rote-learned talking points, the air of irritation, the 'frickin' inability to act with the gravitas of a statesman in a formal interview.

      Searched out for leader as a John Key-look-alike, after the Nats' first choice crashed and burned, he presents as a paper cutout of his predecessor, without the charisma or the brains.

      • Bearded Git 14.1.1
        12 October 2024 at 5:00 pm

        Luxon just doesn't care what you say tWig.

      • Hanswurst 14.1.2
        13 October 2024 at 8:05 am

        I think he's exactly like Key. The difference isn't charisma or brains; it's just that it's been done before.

      • Dolomedes III 14.1.3
        14 October 2024 at 12:54 pm

        John Key had brains? And the evidence for that is …? I think Key cut a very mediocre figure – he just had bags of self-confidence. Key's idea of a legacy (a rigged flag referendum) shows his shallowness. Improved public infrastructure would have been a far more worthwhile legacy.

  15. Descendant Of Smith 15
    12 October 2024 at 11:52 am

    Isn't the whole point of religion is to sell you something you can never have but can emotionally aspire to have.

    Isn't the whole point of the National Party to sell you something you can never have but can emotionally aspire to have.

    Isn't the whole point of the Act Party to sell you something you can never have but they can cynically aspire to take off you and keep for themselves.

  16. Susie 16
    12 October 2024 at 2:54 pm

    Yes Micky Savage to your last paragraph, and the good comment of Bearded Git (replace Hipkins).

    At this point though, is it still satisfying enough to keep chorusing ‘aren’t they awful’ in myriad ways on various blogs? Yes we know this government is wrong, bad, critically incompetent, actively dangerous, downright nasty and likely to destroy the country, while curiously getting applause from some citizens for this. What is missing is the antidote, and relying on the government shooting themselves does not feel like a good enough bet.

    What needs to happen is that the other side wins. And probably in a coalition, even a tripartite effort. However, at this point, the future prime minister looks and sounds like your friend’s son who's doing so well in his new career in the grocery sector. I don’t see a strategy. Who could succeed Hipkins, credibly? Asking this question widely, and answers genuinely sought.

    • Ad 16.1
      13 October 2024 at 8:57 pm

      McAnulty

      • Shanreagh 16.1.1
        14 October 2024 at 12:29 am

        I'd like him (McAnulty) too.

        I also would like to see an end to any form of privatisation but this may be unrealistic. I like Labour’s wealth tax better than that of the Greens but are we now opting for a capital gains tax?

  17. Nigel Haworth 17
    13 October 2024 at 9:42 am

    The biggest concern raised by poor poll results for the current government is a potential consequence that Labour will interpret the results as a reason not to innovate or consider significant changes in its status quo.

    Many of us see a changing world in which a combination of ever-greater inequality, unsustainable social provision and global economic and political disorder requires a sea-change in policy, commencing with tax shifts, but inter alia involving other rethinking of economic policy, including a focus on industrial democracy. 50 years or more after the defeat of the Keynesian Accommodation, it falls to the Left to once more innovate in the interests of working people.

    • Ad 17.1
      13 October 2024 at 8:47 pm

      Under this government most of us don't have the headspace for fresh thinking and are just barely hanging on. It's brutal.

      The Hipkins-King-Robertson ideological lineage is clear in Edmonds and locked in.

      The 2022 alternative in Swarbrick is utterly out of her depth and her predecessor preferred Infratil.

      National are minimum 2 terms until the left restabilises.

      • Bearded Git 17.1.1
        13 October 2024 at 11:41 pm

        Chloe is doing just fine…listen to what she says.

        Perhaps it hasn’t resonated with you yet that she is more popular than Winston as preferred PM?.

  18. Ad 18
    13 October 2024 at 8:33 pm

    Apparently Labour have been listening and they will reset on Tuesday. Top work Hipkins you catastrophic government-killer.

  19. SPC 19
    13 October 2024 at 10:37 pm

    Playing around with the restored search function and found this.

    In the week ahead,
    Hipkins speaks and Ardern becomes a damsel in Windsor Castle.

    https://thestandard.org.nz/jacinda-arderns-dear-don-letter/