Little’s leadership

Written By: - Date published: 11:09 am, February 1st, 2015 - 97 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, leadership, polls - Tags:

Two positive pieces in The Herald today on Andrew Little’s leadership. First:

Has Key met his match?

More than half see potential in new Labour top man

The public’s honeymoon with new Labour leader Andrew Little is showing few signs of easing more than two months after he was chosen to lead a divided party.

A 3 News Reid-Research poll has revealed 55 per cent of voters think Little is potentially a better match for Prime Minister John Key than his Labour Party leader predecessors.

The poll, which has a margin of error of +/- 3.1 per cent, is part of a series of polls on the post-election political situation that will be broadcast on 3 News tonight. 3 News political editor Patrick Gower said the poll result was a huge boost for Little.

Early days yet, but things still going well for Andrew Little’s leadership. I wouldn’t expect any big movements in the 3 News poll tonight, but that 55% positive support for Little is good news.

Rodney Hide penned the second piece:

Little captures our attention
…
Little’s speech was more interesting [than Key’s] by far. … And here’s the money quote: “As a union leader I was always conscious that wealth had to be created first before it could be shared. We need to do what’s right for business so we can do what’s right for workers and their families and to keep skills in New Zealand.” Little recognises the need to create wealth before it can be spent.

As did the Labour leaders before him, who all produced surplus budget policies.

And he acknowledges that business creates wealth – and, by implication, not Government. That’s a big statement from a Labour leader. He told us how as union leader he helped business to help workers and their families. He’s not a “worker-versus-business” guy. He worked with Fonterra to achieve productivity gains and so boost the pay to workers and farmers. The bit about farmers is important. He understands the economy is interconnected and farmers are part of his economic equation. It’s all good news.

Little spoke of reducing inequality. Good. And even here he was interesting: he says the spin-off of reducing inequality is better growth. That, too, would be better for business and farmers.

Reducing inequality is better for growth. If only the Nats understood this too.

Jobs and growth are his focus. And small business. That sets him apart from Key who, in his deals with Warner Bros, SkyCity and Rio Tinto, is tied to the big end of town.

And so on.

Now I know some are reading some Machiavellian “reverse psychology” intentions into Hide’s support, but I think they overestimate both his complexity and his influence. I take the comments at face value, that Andrew Little’s leadership is receiving broad-based support. And that’s good news, because that’s what we need for the Left (as a whole!) to win.

97 comments on “Little’s leadership ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. aerobubble 1
    1 February 2015 at 11:29 am

    Zero hour contracts means workers can earn less than the benefit in a week; driving down employment stats as employers can retain more staff on flexible time, all for the greater good of 🙂 the nation; stand downs make it impossible to get a benefit to make up the shortfall. so why should workers bear the burden of keeping nz competitive. surelylexibility should mean a higher wage than a full timer as its a burden extra

  2. Skinny 2
    1 February 2015 at 11:32 am

    Playing the National lite card only to grasp power, if successful then Labour switch to their radical Left agenda. This will be headlines close to the 2017 election.

  3. One Anonymous Bloke 3
    1 February 2015 at 11:36 am

    The Herald reminding the National Party who decides the outcome of elections around here.

  4. Neil 4
    1 February 2015 at 11:40 am

    It is good to see something positive about Andrew Little & Labour, I was so amazed that Rodney Hide actually wrote something positive about Andrew Little, that I just about fell off my seat. I was equally amazed that the Herald published something positive about Andrew also considering the Herald has been pro National for so long & anti Labour. Lets all hope publications like the Herald have seen the light & are starting to see through Key for what he really stands for.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1
      1 February 2015 at 11:51 am

      Don’t hold your breath.

      This is The Herald reminding Key and National the value of propaganda. The war criminal Blair gave evidence at the Levenson media enquiry:

      He described the Murdoch press, “in a speech before leaving office as “feral beasts,” he said he had decided to “manage” rather than confront them, for fear of “being torn to pieces” if they turned against Labour, or against him personally.”

      The Herald is still a short distance away from the tabloid excesses of the British media; that doesn’t mean they aren’t playing the same game.

      • Pete George 4.1.1
        1 February 2015 at 12:11 pm

        How daft is it that you turn good coverage into a bitch about something?

        It almost looks like you’re trying to sabotage anything positive about Labour here.

        Little has built on a good start and it’s being recognised. He could do well for Labour but will need support from the base. That obviously isn’t your interest.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 12:17 pm

          🙄 and 😆 at poor butt-hurt Petty lashing out.

          Cynicism about The Herald equals sabotaging Labour, ‘apparently’.

        • Skinny 4.1.1.2
          1 February 2015 at 12:24 pm

          We all know Little has started well. Do you think if Little had come in as leader instead of Cunliffe he would have got such a dream run? I bloody doubt it, and it’s years away from the next election.

          Hide is just pumping up ACT the extreme Rights stocks so they can rebuild as a force in politics. I note Hooton has been doing the same. Snakes & ladders of the political game.

          • weka 4.1.1.2.1
            1 February 2015 at 12:30 pm

            “Do you think if Little had come in as leader instead of Cunliffe he would have got such a dream run?”

            I’ve been thinking about that. It’s almost like Labour needed to go through the Cunliffe year, get things off its chest, or even just have things in plain sight, and then it could move on. I also doubt that Little would have been ok if he’d come in as leader at that time.

            • Skinny 4.1.1.2.1.1
              1 February 2015 at 12:42 pm

              The son of a preacher was too fake, you either liked him or hated him so to speak. Little would have won the election in my view. He simply wins in 2017, Key will be overthrown next year. They will probably have to go to the polls with Brownlee as PM.

  5. Anne 5
    1 February 2015 at 11:56 am

    Now I know some are reading some Machiavellian “reverse psychology” intentions into Hide’s support, but I think they overestimate both his complexity and his influence.

    Couldn’t agree more. Far from dumb, Rodney Hide is nonetheless like many NZers who have a less than esoteric understanding of the complexities surrounding some political (and other) topics. I give as an example an argument I had with Hide many years ago about the importance of preserving historical buildings for posterity. He genuinely didn’t comprehend. All he could see was a bunch of shabby wooden structures which he couldn’t conceive of being restored to their former glory. Waste of money he thought… “Pull em down and put modern buildings in their place” he said to me.

    Such people don’t like or trust intellectuals for the same reason, and I believe this was the underlying cause of their antipathy towards Helen Clark and more latterly Phil Goff, David Shearer and David Cunliffe.

    Andrew Little on the other hand has had years of valuable experience dealing with such people from the pinnacle of the business world… through to the local union representative. He knows how to get his message through to them without upsetting too much their ‘black and white’ view of the world.

    • weka 5.1
      1 February 2015 at 12:05 pm

      “Now I know some are reading some Machiavellian “reverse psychology” intentions into Hide’s support, but I think they overestimate both his complexity and his influence. I take the comments at face value, that Andrew Little’s leadership is receiving broad-based support. And that’s good news, because that’s what we need for the Left (as a whole!) to win.”

      It is of course possible to be both.

      It’s not reverse psychology so much as he probably does see positives about Little. But how he presents them amongst the dogwhistles is what makes him not to be trusted.

      Gower’s got his anti-Green thing in full spin too. I think it’s fine to see positives in the media about Labour and Little and to highlight them, but let’s not forget that the likes of Hyde and Gower are fundamentally opposed to a left wing govt to the point of doing what they can with their power to prevent that from happening.

  6. weka 6
    1 February 2015 at 12:08 pm

    Glad to see Labour getting some good news, and well done Little and his team. I think his cautious response about these things going up and down is wise too.

    Gower, “The Greens will have their worry beads out.”

    🙄 I think the Greens will be going, fantastic, now we have a chance of being part of a left wing government. It’s hard to see how Gower could make his bias any more obvious (either that or he’s stupid).

    • Pete George 6.1
      1 February 2015 at 12:16 pm

      Maybe you should wait until tonight’s poll result. Which is presumably polled pre-Norman’s announcement on Friday.

      It’s going to be a tricky leadership transition period for the Greens, especially if Labour pick up their support again.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1.1
        1 February 2015 at 12:19 pm

        🙄

        Because Labour support could only come from the Greens, Gower’s little parrot.

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 12:27 pm

          I’m just curious how the GP is supposed to get in govt if Labour don’t do well.

          Besides which, the GP want change not power. Unlike Gower. Or Mr Beige Vower.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 12:37 pm

            Gower’s lies aren’t meant to make logical sense: he just has to repeat them over and over again: dann lĂŒge grĂŒndlich.

            A manifestation of prejudice designed to reinforce prejudice, rather than present any sort of argument. A substance-free appeal to emotions.

            Only a beige parrot would mistake them for serious political analysis.

  7. Stephanie Rodgers 7
    1 February 2015 at 12:30 pm

    I know some are reading some Machiavellian “reverse psychology” intentions into Hide’s support

    I wouldn’t call it “Machiavellian”, both because that term is woefully, inaccurately over-used but also because it’s not about some grand, complex scheme. The fact is, Hide says:

    The David Cunliffe experiment of tacking left is over.

    … when many people’s criticisms of Cunliffe’s leadership is that he moderated his initially strong leftwing statements.

    Praising Labour leaders for ~appreciating the middle voter, not those crazy Greenies~ is bog-standard rightwing dogwhistling, designed to make lefties freak out that Little is selling us all down the river.

    This is classic Hide/Hooton/Farrar say-whatever-needs-to-be-said-to-spread-the-narrative. In this case, reinterpreting Little’s state of the nation as an appeal to “the centre” so as soon as he announces any definitive, progressive policy they can say “oh dear, he’s tacking left, middle New Zealand won’t like that.”

    • b waghorn 7.1
      1 February 2015 at 12:43 pm

      You may be right about Hyde playing games I don’t know ,but as a middle of the road sort of person I saw it in a positive light towards little and I doubt many Joe average kiwis wouldn’t see it that way to.

      • Stephanie Rodgers 7.1.1
        1 February 2015 at 12:48 pm

        You’re right, most people don’t read newspapers/political opinion pieces/with the same critical analysis as a pols geek like me.

        Which is exactly the point: most people reading that column are going to get a vague sense of:

        – Rodney Hide likes what Andrew Little is saying
        – This is because Andrew Little isn’t a crazy leftie
        – Unlike those whacky Greens, but he does still have to work with them
        – Hmm, maybe I’ll keep voting National / this is why voting is pointless they’re all the same

        And lo, it came to pass that voter turnout was depressed and a lot of people like That Nice Mr Key.

        (I must point out that none of this is because I think people are stupid, and I do not subscribe to rubbish like Martyn Bradbury’s endless bitching about “muddle Nu Zilind”. I just acknowledge not everyone is a political animal and not everyone works in professional communications like me.)

        • b waghorn 7.1.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 1:39 pm

          I think Little might be lefter than he’s given credit for but he knows he’s going to have to box clever and not scare the masses ,
          I’ll be interested to see what he says on the green party when it comes up.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 1:49 pm

            Don’t worry, there’ll be no shortage of right wing vested interests buying as many scary column inches as they can afford.

    • marty mars 7.2
      1 February 2015 at 12:45 pm

      I agree and I also think that these right wing commentators use praise whether faint or loud to set up there own ‘credibility’ base – as in “look I’m fair, I wrote that and now I’m writing this” when they unleash their real agenda – that agenda is to ensure the right stay in power.

      • Stephanie Rodgers 7.2.1
        1 February 2015 at 12:50 pm

        Exactly! “How can you call me a rightwing hack, I said nice things about Andrew Little that one time”.

        Slater does the same based on his semi-regular attacks on parts of the National Party which he doesn’t like.

        • Sacha 7.2.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 1:26 pm

          And Farrar’s Taxpayers Onion tells off govt departments too, so there. Innoculation is not a new tactic.

          • emergency mike 7.2.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 3:17 pm

            Agree with Stephanie and marty’s points here. It’s like some people haven’t heard of the ‘build them up so we can knock them down’ technique perfected by the British press.

    • Incognito 7.3
      1 February 2015 at 2:12 pm

      The way I interpreted Hide’s opinion piece was that he’s trying hard to build a (new) narrative to box in Little. Perhaps the “Angry Andy” narrative wasn’t powerful enough.

      • Pete George 7.3.1
        1 February 2015 at 2:54 pm

        It was a stupid narrative and only Slater seemed to be trying to push it.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 3:07 pm

          And John Key.

          And the New Zealand Herald.

          And David Farrar.

          Only they didn’t “seem” to be doing it – I’ll leave the weasel words to you.

          • Sacha 7.3.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 3:21 pm

            Just a beige coincidence, surely. Oh, you mean someone wrote a book last year about similar conniving?

          • Pete George 7.3.1.1.2
            1 February 2015 at 3:42 pm

            Are you making that up or do you have evidence?

            I don’t remember seeing Farrar use it. Nor Key. Only once by Steven Joyce in Parliament on 26 November (the “cut the crap” day which I thought was good from Little).

            Searching NZ Herald they reported that from Parliament but that’s the only hit on ‘Angry Andy”.

            And only from Slater (frequently) since.

            If you have other evidence I’ll add it to my post.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.1.1.2.1
              1 February 2015 at 3:47 pm

              Yes, I have evidence, gained from one simple Google search using the terms “Andrew Little angry”.

              Google tailors its results though, so I expect you’ll just end up reading interesting facts about beige.

              • Pete George …
                1 February 2015 at 3:55 pm

                Well it will be simple for you to prove it with your evidence.

                And if you don’t I’ll presume you’re buillshitting again.

                • Incognito …
                  1 February 2015 at 4:06 pm

                  A Google Advanced search on “Angry Andy” on the Kiwiblog site or domain gave me 50 hits. Do you want me to list all 50 links for you?

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  1 February 2015 at 4:11 pm

                  🙄

                  No-one cares what the chief fact-checker presumes. Sad and true.

                  Can you do something for me, Pete? Every time you plagiarise my remarks at Yawns, include the following disclaimer, there’s a dear.

                  OAB says: get your petty unoriginal shite, right here at Yawns, with Petty George, the beige parrot.

                  • Pete George …
                    1 February 2015 at 4:15 pm

                    So you must have bullshitted again. And have switched to your usual diversion and evasion.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      1 February 2015 at 4:26 pm

                      Or, I’m not providing you with links on principle. I told you how to find them, and that was more than you deserve.

                      No wonder your fact checking website was such a complete embarrassing failure, just as everyone said it would be.

                      I’ll post the links if you’ll give me your word that you won’t use them, or any material they contain, at Yawns.

                      Edit: and 3News.

                    • Pete George …
                      1 February 2015 at 4:28 pm

                      You’re digging yourself deeper. Caught out lying? Unless you can prove you weren’t.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      1 February 2015 at 4:45 pm

                      Key, Joyce, Farrar, 3News, The Herald, even Jamie Mackay has no trouble finding the facts.

                      Either find the links yourself, or commit to not using them at Yawns. Your choice.

                    • Pete George …
                      1 February 2015 at 5:47 pm

                      It seems clear “you are unable to substantiate with some proof”. Hard to see that as anything but a lying smear followed by lame excuses diversions.

                      Thanks, you’ve been helpful.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      1 February 2015 at 6:09 pm

                      What you find hard is none of my concern. What you find credible loses credibility thereby, as a result of your persistent banal unoriginal mendacity, as has been demonstrated here many many times.

                      You’re a liar, your website is a vehicle for lies. My contempt for it is matched by my contempt for you, and what’s more, it’s widely shared. The contempt, that is, not your website.

                      This website’s boring, mindless, mean.
                      Full of pornography.
                      The kind that’s clean…”

                      Apologies to Johnny Clarke

                    • Pete George …
                      2 February 2015 at 5:30 am

                      OAB – so you either made a false assumption or dishonestly made up an accusation, then in any case turned it into a lie with a series of lies when challenged, and then you resorted to making dirty insinuations.

                      Not a good look is it. You couldn’t get much lower or dirtier, but knowing you you’ll try.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      2 February 2015 at 6:44 am

                      🙄

                      You can lash out angrily as much as you like, Petty (although puce and beige don’t really mix), my position won’t change 😆

                    • Pete George …
                      2 February 2015 at 6:56 am

                      I’m not angry at all. Are you? You’re the one who keeps lashing out.

                      I’ve just calmly held you to account and put your lies and abuse on record.

                    • Clemgeopin []
                      2 February 2015 at 4:22 pm

                      You are quite a mendacious thread derailing litigant. Then you go and use all these comments to write detailed articles about TS conversations to fill pages of your boring website like you did yesterday and like you do so very often! Seems like a cunning, poor and silly scheme of a nincompoop! Try writing about some real worthwhile issues man!
                      For example, how about writing about the huge wealth and income inequality, Key’s dodgy traits, the brilliance of Catton, the RW rogues…Just four topics for you to grapple with as a start.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      2 February 2015 at 7:14 am

                      🙄

            • marty mars 7.3.1.1.2.2
              1 February 2015 at 3:56 pm

              “If you have other evidence I’ll add it to my post.”

              Good that you are admitting your comment-rolling is to help build your posts – well done you 🙂

      • b waghorn 7.3.2
        1 February 2015 at 3:04 pm

        I hoped Little would of taken ‘angry andy’ and run with it ,started the odd speech with ‘damn right I’m angry and this is why…..’

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.3.2.1
          1 February 2015 at 3:08 pm

          “I’m angry”.

          Do you write headlines for The Herald by any chance?

          • b waghorn 7.3.2.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 5:49 pm

            There’s a lot to be angry about at the moment in this world , shying away from showing it because a mentally I’ll blogger is trying to use it against you is no good.

        • Murray Rawshark 7.3.2.2
          1 February 2015 at 11:44 pm

          Not a bad thing being angry when short sighted fools are relashed bout that and at the end o the day, most kiwis dowan an duncare about any worrung about a owzin crys. They know my gumint is a trong gumint an will looafta their bestrests.

  8. rhinocrates 8
    1 February 2015 at 12:32 pm

    Pastimes for the irrelevant:

    Milo tasting.

    Nit-picking.

    Cross word puzzle.

    Very cross word puzzle.

    Nit counting.

    Shipwreck in a bottle.

    Finger wagging aerobics (to the tune of Beige Monday)

    Sorting the James Last and Val Doonican collection in alphabetical order

    Nit sorting.

    Sorting the James Last and Val Doonican collections in chronological order.

    Nit circus.

    Sorting the James Last collection in alphabetical order and the Val Doonican collection in chronological order.

    Sorting the James Last and Val Doonican collections collectively in chronological order.

    Integrating the Roger Whitaker collection with the now combined James Last and Val Doonican collection.

    Realising that the Roger Whitaker collection was integrated with the James Last and Val Doonican collection in alphabetical order.

    Apoplectic word puzzle.

    Resort combined Roger Whitacker, James Last and Val Doonican collection in chronological order.

    Segregate Roger Whitaker, James Last and Val Doonican collections and sorting them all in alphabetical order.

    Sorting out entire Internet.

  9. Penny Bright 9
    1 February 2015 at 12:35 pm

    Labour, in my view, need to show that they have well and truly ditched neo-liberal Rogernomic$.

    So – when are Labour going to come out hard and strong against the proposed Wellington Supercity, and the disastrous Auckland – PROVEN ‘Supercity for the 1%’ – which has PROVEN to be ‘Rogernomic$’ at local government level?

    Penny Bright

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

  10. Penny Bright 10
    1 February 2015 at 1:13 pm

    I note that two people who are pushing very hard for the proposed Wellington ‘Supercity’ are Porirua City Councillor Ken Douglas (in my considered opinion – a most treacherous ‘Rogernome’ – who arguably did very nicely himself out of ‘Rogernomics’), and Fran Wilde (Greater Wellington Regional Council Chair) who from 1984 – 1987 was the Chief Labour Party Whip during those pivotal ‘Rogernomics’ years.

    Lest we forget ….

    Penny Bright

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

  11. Justme 11
    1 February 2015 at 1:19 pm

    55% say Little is a POTENTIALLY better match to Key, than the other labour leaders.

    I wouldn’t be celebrating on this one. It is like being asked which would you prefer, a kick to the nuts, or having them cut off, and then proclaiming that most people prefer getting kicked in the nuts, as a positive thing.

    The big question is, do people prefer Little to Key? Remember, the wording of the questions.

    • The Chairman 11.1
      1 February 2015 at 1:55 pm

      Indeed, Justme.

      To claim Key has met his match or Little is a formidable opponent based on the result of that question is clutching at straws.

    • Skinny 11.2
      1 February 2015 at 3:23 pm

      Which Gower will spin around to, this is not a great result for Andrew Little considering the others all failed, yet a strong 45 % still doubt Little can beat the flogged also rans.

      The poll result details clearly has Pete G fizzing at the bung.

  12. The Chairman 12
    1 February 2015 at 2:07 pm

    The first political poll of this year has actually seen Labour slip down 1%

    http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=200809

    Labour’s new leader, coupled with their support of new surveillance laws, SME tax defaulters amnesty, and zero tolerance failed to muster voter support.

  13. The Chairman 13
    1 February 2015 at 2:10 pm

    Rodney Hide says the David Cunliffe experiment of Labour tacking left is over, claiming it’s good news for Labour as he believes they have to win the middle to win Government.

    Well here is something to ponder:

    Labour’s housing policy to fill market voids and build new homes comes from the left and was widely liked by voters across the political spectrum.

    Therefore, why is it often assumed (largely by right-wing pundits and a number of right within the left) Labour has to tack right to win the centre vote?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1
      1 February 2015 at 2:42 pm

      What makes you think they believe it?

      • The Chairman 13.1.1
        1 February 2015 at 3:06 pm

        That’s assuming I believe they believe it, which of course is irrelevant and doesn’t answer the question asked.

        Whether they believe it or not it’s what they often tout and advocate.

        We are now seeing similar happening to the Greens with the departure of Norman.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 3:11 pm

          Well, you asked “why is it often assumed…?”

          If you think they don’t believe it the answer to the question is pretty obvious: they’re acting in bad faith, with who knows what motive – and I can think of a few.

          • The Chairman 13.1.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 3:31 pm

            If acting in bad faith is the answer, why is Labour taking the advice on board ?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1.1.1.1.1
              1 February 2015 at 3:57 pm

              Who says Labour’s taking the advice on board? On any given day, you’ll find everyone from John Key to John Armstrong to Matthew Hooton to Gosman to Fisiani to Redbaiter offering “advice” to the Left, not to mention a steaming pile of beige banalities from wannabes.

              If you think Labour has moved to the Right make your case. If you think they’ve done so on the advice of tr*lls, salaried or otherwise, I think you may be wrong 😉

              • adam …
                1 February 2015 at 4:50 pm

                One Anonymous Bloke, I believe labour don’t have to track to the right. They are right. If we measure a party on the most important issue – political economy – Labour is a right wing party. No tracking needed, just a bunch of fluff, some pretty pictures, and bang – the left can get fooled again – or is that stabbed in the back again, by these traitorous lovers of liberalism.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  1 February 2015 at 5:05 pm

                  There are lots of different ways to look at that: on the one hand Lab6 will be farther to the left than Lab4, so clearly they’ve tracked left in the meantime. How “Liberal” is Kiwibank or WFF?

                  On the other hand some cynics say that the Sheeple are like a metronome with a decadal pulse, which implies that all you need to get reelected is to wait your turn irrespective of policy.

                  Still others that the media controls the narrative, or that possible narratives are controlled by other external factors, or that Labour represents a marriage between pragmatism and principle.

                  Reality is somewhere in all of that. Labour are to the right of me, I know that much.

                  • adam …
                    1 February 2015 at 5:26 pm

                    But Franco could have been considered left of Mussolini. Still didn’t make Franco a left winger.

                    What worries me, and always worries me – is that we will be feed fluff again, lies again and told this or that is left wing – when in reality it is not. Kiwibank is still a part of liberalism and fits a liberal approach to economics. Working for families – again, still part of a liberal economic approach – no matter how much the right in this country may want to call it communism. Both help working people, and don’t get me wrong, this is a good thing – but both are a good fit with liberal economics – which essentially is a nightmare for working people.

                    I’m not convinced labour can do anything fundamentally good for working people. They have sucked from the sewer of liberalism for so long – they just can’t change people lives for the better.

              • The Chairman …
                1 February 2015 at 5:24 pm

                Labour’s appeal to SMEs of late clearly implies a further re-positioning to the right.

                I’d point to new policy, but it’s yet to be announced.

                But Adam is correct. Labour are most closely aligned with National.

                Kiwibank was a product of Alliance and WFF is an employer subsidy, aiding business while keeping wage demand down.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  1 February 2015 at 5:39 pm

                  Replying to both Adam & TC:

                  There’s little I’d disagree with in either of these comments. I think good solutions to the problem are to be found in the question “what are the possible* narratives” – and what are the forces that shape them?

                  Much beyond that is infertile territory for public discussion – as eloquently articulated by Pascal’s Bookie recently.

                  *electable, for example.

  14. The Chairman 14
    1 February 2015 at 2:26 pm

    Jacinda Ardern says Mr Little’s speech was a “vision for where Labour wants to go and he couldn’t be expected to come out with the nitty-gritty of policy -TV3.

    Meanwhile, while the aspiration desired was widely accepted, aspirations mean little if they can’t be seen to be achieved. Therefore, many were left asking how will these aspirations be fulfilled? Thus, wanted to hear the nitty-gritty.

    With a number from Labour recently laying the election loss on voters not understanding their policy, one would think policy would be clear and at the forefront this time around.

    • Colonial Rawshark 14.1
      1 February 2015 at 3:10 pm

      Labour has fucking shitloads of policy detail. At the last two elections Labour issued a magnitude more policy than National did. However it is Labour’s credibility, sincerity and unity which has torpedoed them time and time again.

      • The Chairman 14.1.1
        1 February 2015 at 3:18 pm

        Yes, they do have policy. A number of which wasn’t well liked.

        But as far as their new vision goes, the policy detail was lacking.

        Perhaps they know that will also be widely disliked, thus are largely trying to get through on rhetoric?

        The speech got attention, thus it was a failed opportunity to get the policy across. If they really wanted to put it out there that is.

        • Colonial Rawshark 14.1.1.1
          1 February 2015 at 3:38 pm

          Fair enough.

          At a macro level, creating jobs is easy. You have to spend into the economy. After that point you only need to decide: how to fund the spending (in our current system you have to have a mix of debt and taxes), what proportion of public/private spending you want, and what exactly is going to be invested in.

          • The Chairman 14.1.1.1.1
            1 February 2015 at 4:01 pm

            How will the money be spent into the economy?

            And what safeguards will ensure that expenditure results well paid jobs, let alone creates new jobs?

  15. Colonial Rawshark 15
    1 February 2015 at 2:57 pm

    As did the Labour leaders before him, who all produced surplus budget policies.

    Government budget surpluses are a major mistake for a nation which suffers from chronic current account deficit. Labour still doesn’t appear to understand this.

    Insisting on a government budget surplus means that the government will force the private sector, especially households, into a deficit position.

    In other words, a government budget surplus means that it is extracting more money out of the NZ economy than it is putting in. And because the current account is in deficit (money is being lost overseas) it means the domestic private sector will be the big loser.

  16. Penny Bright 16
    1 February 2015 at 5:28 pm

    I was VERY involved in the Engineers Union in the 1970s / 1980 – 1981, was Vice-President of the Wairarapa Trades Council, and knew Ken Douglas from those ‘olden days’ – when he, in my considered opinion, was an advocate for working people – not the corporate 1%.

    Penny Bright

    http://www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

  17. A Voter 17
    1 February 2015 at 8:21 pm

    Dont you get tired of someone who has raised the national debt to the level and more of prior to Helen Clarkes govt and blaming it on the global recession ,falling dairy prices, increasing av oil prices,etc
    WHEN it is the chronic adherence to trad Tory concepts, hatred of socialism ,depowering the masses , involving the country in wars that are none of our business even to the point that military leaders of our country get to influence the policy of the elected govt by declaring media cannot be dissenting in their publishing information about the activities of the govt and its allies, also eavesdrops on everyones private communications and lies to the nation that it happens
    Selling the govt assets to feed the rich under the guise that trickle down will eventually raise the standards of all
    Well fuck you Key and all who swear allegiance to your self serving govt
    you are the worst that has happened to NZ on a par with Sid Holland
    You are a fascist or a bloody Zionist take your pick or add them together
    pretty much sums you up
    GO gettum Andrew and teach him a lesson about ethics that he wont forget

Links to post