Mixed news

151 comments on “Mixed news ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ghostwhowalksnz 1

   19 July 2013 at 7:20 am

   How many stories have a labour spokepersons response. I cant think of a single story that doesnt have a comment from Key – or even if hes not available for comment- or Nationals other heavyweights.

   Pprobably labour does give some answer, but the print media would then not use it – for space reasons ??
   • Colonial Viper 1.1

     19 July 2013 at 8:32 am

     A lot of conservation fans were looking out for Labours remarks on Nick Smiths decline of the National Park tunnel application.

     Nada.
     • Blue 1.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 12:18 pm

       What could they say, CV? “What a good decision, well done Minister”?
       • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1

         19 July 2013 at 12:25 pm

         well, the Green Party did OK on it:

         Today’s decision to decline an application to build a tunnel under a World Heritage Area is a victory for the thousands of New Zealanders who have demanded protection for our spectacular national parks, the Green Party says.

         Conservation Minister Nick Smith has declined Milford Dart Ltd’s proposal to run an 11.3 km private road tunnel through Te Wahipounamu, the South West New Zealand World Heritage Area. The tunnel through Fiordland and Mt Aspiring National Parks would have run from the start of the Routeburn Track through to the Hollyford Valley.

         “This decision is a tribute to the thousands of Kiwis and supporters overseas who stood up for our national parks. More than 1200 individuals and organisations made the effort to make submissions, and more than 25,000 people signed the Stop the Tunnel petition,” Green Party conservation spokesperson Eugenie Sage said.

         “The Green Party stood alongside these people seeking to protect our national parks and we highlighted concerns.
     • Bob 1.1.2

       19 July 2013 at 12:29 pm

       Labour didn’t even put out a press release about the decision, it just seemed like either they weren’t interested or they think saying that they agree with a National ministers decision will hurt them. I think they missed an opportunity, especially when the media has been pushing that they never have anything positive to say!
       • Peter 1.1.2.1

         19 July 2013 at 1:13 pm

         No they didn’t, but that’s consistent with Labour’s general approach on press releases.

         I have a suspicion that its related to a general stasis in caucus and the leader’s office, many processes designed to either hide the failings or paper over the many divisions.
2. vto 2

   19 July 2013 at 8:22 am

   I wouldn’t worry about it. Anecdote from our corners says that Key and his lies and his dirty deal with skycity and wanting to know what books we are reading at bedtime and wanting to listen to and record every single conversation and email and letter and phone call that we have every single moment of the day is biting and people are noticing.

   John Key and his evil deceptive ways are on peoples radars – blip …. blip …. blip …. blip
   • BLiP 2.1

     19 July 2013 at 9:48 am

     ‘

     🙂
3. Santi 3

   19 July 2013 at 8:27 am

   David Shearer is standing firm, and the future is bright with him as leader.
   Victory awaits next year.
4. Boadicea 4

   19 July 2013 at 8:30 am

   Too close to call?
   We should be 10 points higher now and ahead of or close to National at this stage.
   16 points behind National?
   The call here is clear: we are not getting it right.
   If we keep with the same people and plan we will keep getting this crap result.
   • Chooky 4.1

     19 July 2013 at 10:24 am

     Agreed Boadicea…..Labour’s record is absolutely pathetic, given National’s onslaught….anyone who argues otherwise is ignoring what the general populace thinks and treating them with contempt…as well as playing into the hands of Nact, who just love Shearer.

     Julia Gillard , despite being a very competent and attractive woman , was never forgiven by ordinary Australians, for the way she ousted Rudd…The Australian Labour Party oligarchy over-road and ignored what was obvious for a long time , if you read Australian newspapers and knew Australians, …. but eventually had to bow to the inevitable if they were to survive

     ….The rank and file of the NZ Labour Party want Cunliffe!!!!….as does the ordinary left- of- centre NZ public!..At the moment Labour seems rudderless and everyone agrees the leadership is incompetent and lacking..This is glaringly obvious to everyone , except those close to and wanting to please the Labour caucus oligarchy….These polls are no time for compromise, rather everyone should be putting the heat on!.

     In these dire times NZers expect Labour to play a leadership role for NZ as it did under Clark and Kirk. It should be polling 50% at least.
     • Te Reo Putake 4.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 10:51 am

       I think you’re oversetimating Cunliffe’s support in and out of the party, chooky. While he would undoubtedly would be better as leader than Shearer, so would a few others. And Cunliffe’s stock inside the party fell dramatically after the conference (non) coup.

       If it was a contest under the new rules, I think Cunliffe would come second. I’m just not sure who would come first!

       Re: boudicea’s polling wishes, Labour are never likley to get out of the thirties again, so a ten point lift is fanciful. MMP has seen to that. The difference on the right is that National are now monolithic. They have to artificially prop up their tiny support parties just to give the appearence of diversity.

       The question is the total of the left bloc. And as Roy Morgan notes, that’s level pegging. Even at below 30%, Labour came within a couple of seats of winning power under Goff and Labour anywhere from 30-35%, coupled with the Greens in double figures, means a change of government is likely.
       • Santi 4.1.1.1

         19 July 2013 at 10:55 am

         I disagree.
         I think you underestimate David Shearer’s support in and out of the party. Forget the media who’s out to get him). Sure, he needs to speak better, but he’s leadership material. Labour should stick with him.
         • weka 4.1.1.1.1

           19 July 2013 at 11:23 am

           Fuck off concern tr*ll (just ‘cos no-one else bothered to say it).
           • Alanz 4.1.1.1.1.1

             19 July 2013 at 6:53 pm

             Santi is partly correct depending on which direction the party wants to go.

             “leadership material. Labour should stick with him.”

             – that is correct if it is leadership material to take the party to oblivion and greater factions and increasing fracture. Labour should stick with him if they are determined to see the party get more disengaged and yielding political and moral ground to left, right and centre.
         • the pigman 4.1.1.1.2

           19 July 2013 at 7:23 pm

           Fuck off, Santi, you concern troll. Back to bragging at whale oil about how you… *snicker*… sarcastically told the pinkos at the standard… *chortle, snortle*… that you thought Shearer was a *chuckle* good leader! *asthmatic, wheezing, unrestrained laughter*

           (Just because weka already told you what everyone else was thinking but couldn’t be bothered saying.)
         • Murray Olsen 4.1.1.1.3

           19 July 2013 at 8:53 pm

           Just sad. I bet the highlight of your tragic social life is counting the likes your idiotic posts get on Whalespew’s hate blog. If you’ve reached puberty, I almost feel sorry for you.
       • felix 4.1.1.2

         19 July 2013 at 11:05 am

         “If it was a contest under the new rules, I think Cunliffe would come second. I’m just not sure who would come first!”

         Anyone but Shearer? 😉

         (I joke of course. That would be a retarded basis for choosing a leader.)
         • Te Reo Putake 4.1.1.2.1

           19 July 2013 at 11:12 am

           Quite! That way lies madness. Mind you, I’ve heard that some National MP’s have put in a bid to buy the rights to ABC for the upcoming stoush between Joyce and Collins.
           • felix 4.1.1.2.1.1

             19 July 2013 at 11:19 am

             Hah!
           • mickysavage 4.1.1.2.1.2

             19 July 2013 at 7:53 pm

             Have they asked Christchurch East’s LEC?
         • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.2.2

           19 July 2013 at 11:17 am

           So it’s likely to be used then?
       • Dr Terry 4.1.1.3

         19 July 2013 at 11:15 am

         Would you consider putting Goff back as leader? Might as well do so when you cannot even snatch somebody out of the sky! Seriously, Goff might well do better than Shearer.
         • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.3.1

           19 July 2013 at 11:18 am

           That Goff would do better is definitely in the realm of possibility.
           • Chooky 4.1.1.3.1.1

             19 July 2013 at 12:33 pm

             That has to be a joke….Goff is branded with Rogernomics and the sale of State Assets….one reason for the antipathy non-vote last time. Also he is a part of the ABCs.
         • Santi 4.1.1.3.2

           19 July 2013 at 11:31 am

           The Goff option is a return to the past. No, Shearer is the leader to support.
         • Murray Olsen 4.1.1.3.3

           19 July 2013 at 8:55 pm

           The thought that Goff would do better than Shearer is just one more reason why getting rid of Shearer is so urgent. Goff is a disaster. What does that make Shearer?
       • Chooky 4.1.1.4

         19 July 2013 at 11:28 am

         You fail to account for the huge numbers of non-voters…They could be an antipathy non-vote….

         … for what they perceive is a self -serving cabal of old boys at the top of the Labour Party…and the cutting down of the one , most clearly able, future leader of the Labour Party….Cunliffe!
       • Lanthanide 4.1.1.5

         19 July 2013 at 12:08 pm

         “The question is the total of the left bloc. And as Roy Morgan notes, that’s level pegging. Even at below 30%, Labour came within a couple of seats of winning power under Goff and Labour anywhere from 30-35%, coupled with the Greens in double figures, means a change of government is likely.”

         Only on the assumption that Winston went with Labour, or that Labour/Greens are the largest bloc and NZFirst contributes a 4%+ wasted vote.

         I think it was safe to assume Winston would go with Labour in 2011, after Key explicitly ruled him out and Winston was anti asset-sales.

         But it’s not such a clear cut for 2014 that Winston would go to the left.
         • Santi 4.1.1.5.1

           19 July 2013 at 12:11 pm

           No faith in Winston Peters, none at all. So support for Shearer must be increased and the ratings will go up. Unity is needed for victory.
       • Saarbo 4.1.1.6

         19 July 2013 at 3:03 pm

         It would be a waste to make Cunliffe leader now. There is too much dysfunction within Labour, there needs to be a good cleanout of deadwood and some serious refocusing on what Labour means. If Labour win in 2014 in its current dysfunctional state, no matter who is leading, it will be a sick one term government possibly damaging the Lefts chances of governing for a long time after 2017.
         • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.6.1

           19 July 2013 at 3:19 pm

           And this perspective is not silly either.
           • weka 4.1.1.6.1.1

             19 July 2013 at 9:16 pm

             So how could a good clean out happen?
         • Olwyn 4.1.1.6.2

           19 July 2013 at 3:33 pm

           Whether or not it would be a waste to make Cunliffe leader at this stage, we need a competent and committed opposition right now. In fact we needed one in 2011, when we had an inkling of what was coming, but the caucus, in their infinite wisdom, decided that that was too big an ask. The longer Labour silly-shallies, the more entrenched this corporate tyranny will become, and the more irrelevant they themselves will become.
5. Colonial Viper 5

   19 July 2013 at 8:37 am

   Its fair to say that National has simply had two good Roy Morgans. However RM’s own headline captures National’s position better:

   Biggest lead since late February

   I think Robertson, Cunliffe and Little need to knock their heads together and deliver some action to the party. 5 years in Opposition now, and how far have we come???
   • Santi 5.1

     19 July 2013 at 8:41 am

     Spot on, CV. As you wisely imply, David S. will lead the party to a convincing victory.
   • vto 5.2

     19 July 2013 at 8:45 am

     It seems to me CV that people within Labour have promoted Shearer and would rather lose this election with Shearer, then dump him to guarantee themselves a leadership role in the Labour government to follow one further term of the Nats.

     Would this be right?
     • Colonial Viper 5.2.1

       19 July 2013 at 8:48 am

       *sigh*
       • vto 5.2.1.1

         19 July 2013 at 9:40 am

         but that’s surely not right.

         bloody human beans
   • Jimmie 5.3

     19 July 2013 at 8:52 am

     Gotta wonder if you could have 3 co-leaders of Labour? That way all the ego’s get a chance in the hot seat.

     Or for that matter what about 34 co-leaders? Almost 1 a day and draw straws to see which 3 or 4 miss out each month?

     Labour need to think outside the box here – the same old leadership ways just don’t cut it anymore – look at the Greens 2 co-leaders and punching above their weight – imagine how well they would do with 3 or 4 co-leaders?
     • Colonial Viper 5.3.1

       19 July 2013 at 11:19 am

       This was actually funny.
     • McFlock 5.3.2

       19 July 2013 at 12:03 pm

       Actually, having two coleaders would nuke the “this is the one to save us” camp mentality some seem to have, as well as the presidential horse-race that the media like to portray.
6. Struth 6

   19 July 2013 at 8:41 am

   What a low bar we’ve set for ourselves on the Left. A Shearer interview where he doesn’t come across as an incoherent mess is cheered on as a great performance, and a poll that shows Labour continuing to stagnate (and in fact going backwards) is passed off as ‘mixed news’.

   And all the while our lack of a competent opposition is giving the Tories a free hand to gut the welfare state and tear up our employment rights.
   • Red Rosa 6.1

     19 July 2013 at 9:00 am

     +1
     • AmaKiwi 6.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 9:10 am

       + 1
   • Bearded Git 6.2

     19 July 2013 at 9:08 am

     +2
     • Colonial Viper 6.2.1

       19 July 2013 at 11:19 am

       +3 🙂
   • Boadicea 6.3

     19 July 2013 at 9:17 am

     *sigh*
   • AsleepWhileWalking 6.4

     19 July 2013 at 9:50 am

     Yup. Love your name Struth ; )
   • dancerwaitakere 6.5

     19 July 2013 at 9:53 am

     Agreed.
   • felix 6.6

     19 July 2013 at 10:55 am

     *DING DING DING*
   • gobsmacked 6.7

     19 July 2013 at 12:49 pm

     Struth + more
   • Arfamo 6.8

     19 July 2013 at 9:33 pm

     +1
7. chrissy 7

   19 July 2013 at 9:14 am

   I have noticed that key is getting more and more visibility in the herald and on tv/radio.Ever since that has happened national has risen in the polls.Have also noticed that Shearer is not given much newstime at all. Maybe it is the high visibility that makes a party more popular. It certainly can’t be nationals policies and general running down of the country.I think the msm are playing games with Shearer as every thing they report is negative which is jumped on with glee by all nats and Cunliffe supporters. Good times!!
   • Paul 7.1

     19 July 2013 at 9:47 am

     The MSM is owned by corporations and they want Key to win and keep transferring the wealth of NZ and NIZers to them.
     Any wise left wing politician would never rely or trust on the corporate media. They have an agenda.
     • Colonial Viper 7.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 11:21 am

       Any wise left wing politician would never rely or trust on the corporate media. They have an agenda.

       But the corporate media was so supportive of Shearer in 2012!
   • Chooky 7.2

     19 July 2013 at 11:20 am

     Look if you are a journalist….what is there to report on Shearer without being cruel? …why go there?

     Shearer should resign and be put in as a Minister, where he would probably be very able.
   • Vagabundo 7.3

     19 July 2013 at 1:39 pm

     I’ve noticed a slight shift in tone after Duncan Garner’s self-uppercut the other week, actually. There’ve been a couple of articles portraying Shearer in a far more sympathetic light (I think the coup that never was has led a few to take a step back and reassess their coverage) and Audrey Young’s article on him basically ends with a tacit admission that the MSM needs to focus on the content of his statements, rather than the delivery (although that part could use some brushing up, even if it has improved since when he started out).
     The coverage that National and Key have been getting has been double-edged as well, with far more scrutiny being applied now to the hows and whys of the Sky City deal, which I suspect would have been outright ignored 3 years ago.
8. JK 8

   19 July 2013 at 9:22 am

   “Lefties who are keen to lay the woes of the world at the door of the Shearer leadership need to explain why it is the Greens who have dropped much more than Labour in this poll. ”

   No, Antony Robins, those who think the Shearer leadership is okay need to explain why Labour is not hitting above the average 31% to 33% when so much is going wrong under this disastardly government.
   The Greens (and other Opposition parties’) polling is irrelevant at this stage. Labour’s is not.

   There is something badly wrong when Labour cannot get any traction with voters above the average low 30s percentage.

   This poll says to me that the loyal Labour supporter is hanging on desperately, but there is nothing to attract the swinging voter. And that’s just not good enough for a Labour-led coalition to win the next election !
   • geoff 8.1

     19 July 2013 at 8:01 pm

     JK, exactly.

     Lefties who are keen to lay the woes of the world at the door of the Shearer leadership (that’d be me!)
     know that any fragile lead Green+Labour have over the right will be completely wrecked once John Key starts ripping into closer to the election.

     The pro shearer idiots are happy to send a flat-footed novice into the ring to fight a heavy weight champ.
     It it going to be carnage. The Left might not like Key but it will be 3 more years of misery (and worse) if we underestimate him.

     It seems so obvious to me that Shearer will be destroyed by Key that the only reason I can see others backing him is that they want to have a mandate to replace him when he loses the election.
     ie their thinking is, sod NZ they can suffer for another 3 years, I’ll be the new leader and then I’ll swoop in easily in 2017.
     • Colonial Viper 8.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 9:14 pm

       Neither Little nor Robertson nor Cunliffe can trigger the 50% vote individually, assuming they even wanted to. Which means that they would have to work together, in order to stop the disaster of a 3rd Tory term. I wouldn’t bet real money on it.
9. Blue 9

   19 July 2013 at 9:40 am

   Lefties who are keen to lay the woes of the world at the door of the Shearer leadership need to explain why it is the Greens who have dropped much more than Labour in this poll.

   No, we don’t. The Greens are down 1.5%, but Mana is up 1%. Seems obvious that some Green votes have gone there after Mana got publicity recently. None of this has anything to do with Labour.

   Shearer is still woeful and Labour’s vote is still slowly bleeding away, heading for the late twenties.
   • Enough is Enough 9.1

     19 July 2013 at 10:54 am

     Agreed Blue

     David Shearer is a symbol of the modern Labour Party. Unable to decide whether following the same neo-liberal policies of the past 30 years is right or whether to reject that and follow the policies which would benefit those people that the party’s name suggests it should be representing, the Workers.

     He is wishy washy and all over the place.

     Labour should be where National is in popularity. National represents only 10% of the electorate yet attract the votes of those workers who should feel at home with Labour.

     Stop making excuses for Shearer. He is absolutley hopeless. As PM he will do nothing for the workers of this country.

     HE MUST GO!!!!
     • bad12 9.1.1

       19 July 2013 at 11:35 am

       When i consider the ‘flagship’ Labour policy of building 10,000 houses for sale to those who can afford a 300-400 thousand dollar mortgage with the current Leader of the Parliament’s Labour MP’s i DO NOT see an inappropriate leader,

       i would suggest that you are mistaking Labour in terms of what IT IS versus what IT WAS and what you WONT IT TO BE,

       2 entirely different entities i would suggest…
10. dancerwaitakere 10

    19 July 2013 at 9:50 am

    Oh yes, Labour being on 31% is mixed news.

    Bad for 99% of New Zealand but bloody great for Tories.
    • James 10.1

      19 July 2013 at 10:27 am

      Nope – its great news for, well, at least everybody who chooses to vote for them. You keep forgetting that people have views that may differ from your own.

      So try and stop with the 99% bad news rubbish just because the poll dosnt reflect what you want – The world does not revolve around you 😉
      • Bob 10.1.1

        19 July 2013 at 12:46 pm

        +1
11. tsmithfield 11

    19 July 2013 at 10:21 am

    Don’t despair my lefty friends. There is still the three month rolling average to cling to. How is that tracking at the moment?
    • felix 11.1

      19 July 2013 at 11:00 am

      Link again?
    • tricledrown 11.2

      20 July 2013 at 2:39 pm

      tsm remember last election when National were cruising for a landslide and Keys cup of tea and brain fade left him with a 1 vote majority!
      Don’t Forget that tsm
      As the Kim Dotcom saga has still to play out and another brain fade will show him to be lying again nothing new their!
12. bad12 12

    19 July 2013 at 10:24 am

    Yup,too close to call is where i calculate the current state of the electorate as well, there’s a number of variables which will have a large effect on the outcome of the next election and who gets to form the next government Labour or National,

    Will the Hairdo stand in Ohariu again, i pick He will and probably be returned, although there is a chance that Labour with a good candidate can split off enough of the vote in this electorate for the National candidate to gain a slim victory which in overall terms would help lead to National’s over-all defeat,

    Will John Banks be convicted of His wrong-doings during this Parliamentary term, and does it matter in the long term for the seat of Epsom where i am sure that if the inhabitants were more than happy to elect Banks knowing His past record they would happily do so again, obviously should the ACT Board see the need in terms of political survival to remove Banks as a candidate they will do this ruthlessly in seconds and install a ‘cleaner’ candidate,

    Will NZFirst gain 5% of the vote in 2014, my pic is no, many of us on the left spent our energy whipping up support for NZFirst in the face of the ‘right’s spinnners’ putting forth the line that a vote for NZFirst was ‘wasted’ and that it was impossible for NZFirst to regain seats in the Parliament, such support wont be forthcoming in 2014 and i can see NZFirst falling just short of the 5%,

    Will the Maori Party have any MP’s left in the Parliament after the 2014 election, again i pic no, Flavell’s Waiariki seat is probably the only one of the 3 that the Maori Party has any hope of retaining but if Mana stand Annette Sykes again it’s going to be a toss up between Her and the Labour candidate and in a situation reminiscent of the Hairdo’s Ohariu where a National win would lessen it’s chances of forming the next Government a Labour win in the Waiariki seat might be seen to do the same for Labour,

    This far out from November 2014 who will be able to form the next Government is in my opinion buried within the margin of error as far as polls go, with the codicil that we all should remember that ALL the polls MOST of the time attribute to National 2-3% of support that they do not have,

    On the issue of the Labour ‘leadership’ which i don’t often comment on, i cannot quite fathom the ‘faith’ based support that the other David, (Cunliffe), has, although in terms of marketability i would definitely concede that Cunliffe followed by Robinson sit well above Shearer in the pecking order,

    Considering my view on the result of the next election being cloaked in the smoke of the margin of error i would suggest simply on the basis of marketability and telegenic ability that Labour shuffle Shearer gently sideways allowing a Cunliffe/Robertson leadership, given the nature of Cunliffe’s support such a move may gain Labour a 2% advantage, (the negative in this being that some of that % is likely to come from the disgruntled from within Labour’s rank and file who have moved left to the Green Party)…
13. Enough is Enough 13

    19 July 2013 at 11:00 am

    It is clear that there is a core 30% of voters who unconditionally support Labour.

    Labour is as low as it will go now. You could elect a dead snapper as leader of Labour and those 30% would still turn out and vote red.

    It is not all bad though. There are good people in the Labour Party who can restore it to where it needs to be.

    That won’t happen while people make excuses for the Leader and consider being in striking distance of the worst goverment in history as an achievment for Shearer.

    Labour should be at 40% minimum with the Greens at 10% +.

    Anything less than that is a failure of the leadership.
    • Colonial Viper 13.1

      19 July 2013 at 11:48 am

      The core Labour vote is closer to 25%, not 30%.
    • Lanthanide 13.2

      19 July 2013 at 12:12 pm

      I wouldn’t vote for a dead snapper, sorry.
    • Jim Nald 13.3

      19 July 2013 at 12:46 pm

      Shearer has yet to show his “natural leadership skills”:
      http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/265388/questions-over-shearer-advisors

      Hoping that in that piece, with the title stated there, it is not sheeting the blame to advisors??
      • handle 13.3.1

        19 July 2013 at 6:51 pm

        Why would you not hold advisers accountable?
        • Colonial Viper 13.3.1.1

          19 July 2013 at 7:04 pm

          Always need a couple of scape goats.
          • Alanz 13.3.1.1.1

            19 July 2013 at 7:13 pm

            6:51pm “why would you not hold advisers accountable?”

            7:04pm “Always need a couple of scape goats.”

            To those, I add – you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
      • karol 13.3.2

        19 July 2013 at 7:01 pm

        That’s just a reprint of Audrey Young’s piece from the NZ Herald.
      • Jenny 13.3.3

        20 July 2013 at 9:20 am

        Shearer has no leadership skills. He comes from a UN peace keeping background where leadership is based on rank and is conferred to individuals who play the game by the higher ups. In politics on the other hand you have earn leadership from your peers.
    • Boadicea 13.4

      19 July 2013 at 8:43 pm

      “That won’t happen while people make excuses for the Leader and consider being in striking distance of the worst goverment in history as an achievment for Shearer.”

      +1000 EisE
      • Wayne 13.4.1

        19 July 2013 at 9:50 pm

        This one of the reasons why Labour is so out of touch. NZ’ers do not believe this kind of assertion. And remember, most of them have experienced several different governments, so they can actually make a real life judgement.

        Well, I guess this is your view, but apparently not too many NZ’ers accept it, including some who don’t even vote for the Nats. If they did believe the Nats were the worst ever, they would be out in the streets en mass.

        As anyone could tell you, you first have to have a realistic assessment of your enemy before you can have a strategy to defeat them. Anything else is just wishful thinking.

        Mind you I imagine most Labour MP’s don’t buy into your idea. Otherwise Parliament would be a lot more of a mess. It is certainly nothing like it was in 1996 to 1999 or 2005 to 2008, when you could really sense a Govt struggling to survive.
        • Sidney 13.4.1.1

          19 July 2013 at 10:50 pm

          What a load of crap.
          Wayne, the only sense that you are ‘in touch’ with NZ is that you’ve got your hand in kiwi’s pockets, fleecing them for as much as you can get.

          Wayne loves… price gouging cartels
          Wayne loves… the government spying on kiwis
          Wayne loves… rich people getting richer at the expense of everyone else

          Yeah, you’re really in touch with the community, Wayne.
14. Winston Smith 14

    19 July 2013 at 11:21 am

    Don’t worry about it, a win for National is a win for everyone 🙂
    • Sidney 14.1

      19 July 2013 at 10:55 pm

      Don’t worry about it, a win for National is a win for rich pricks. Also, I Winston Smith, fellate horses

      FTFY, buddy.
15. Ivan Clarkski 15

    19 July 2013 at 11:29 am

    Labour’s distinct lack of talent is one of the issues.

    One on one, man on man, Labour simply cannot match any of their opponents across the isle.

    And the electorate knows it.
    • karol 15.1

      19 July 2013 at 11:36 am

      And the women?

      National MPs are a pretty mediocre bunch that benefit from having an excellent spinmeister as their leader, who has extensive connections amongst the powerful and wealthy, and who the MSM tend to favour.
      • Winston Smith 15.1.1

        19 July 2013 at 11:43 am

        So what? Nationals winning and thats what counts.
      • Colonial Viper 15.1.2

        19 July 2013 at 11:47 am

        Tolley and Parata are write-offs, but Collins and Bennett are formidable in their portfolios.
        • Murray Olsen 15.1.2.1

          19 July 2013 at 9:42 pm

          Collins and Bennett break laws and take no notice of parliamentary procedure in their portfolios. They have very little grasp of the issues, except for what Tory submissives like Farrar like, no regard for the truth, and what they rely on is bullying. They may seem formidable, but only because they’re not held to account. Compared to someone like Russell Norman, they are both very lightweight.
          • AmaKiwi 15.1.2.1.1

            19 July 2013 at 11:08 pm

            Bullying is praised as “strong leadership.”
          • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.1.2

            20 July 2013 at 12:46 am

            Norman has never run a minor Ministerial portfolio, let alone a major one, and he has never initiated major change through a civil service bureaucracy.

            Not that it is necessarily incorrect, but your assessment of Collins and Bennett being “light weight” can only be justified from very selective perspectives.

            Key’s light weight female Ministers have already crumbled (Wilkinson, Tolley, Parata, etc.). Collins and Bennett are not on that list.
            • Murray Olsen 15.1.2.1.2.1

              20 July 2013 at 12:56 am

              I’d suggest that your categorisation of them as formidable relies on even more selective criteria. I’m not at all impressed by the ability to pass bad law that appeals to bigots. To my mind, formidable would be stopping the violent culture of the Police, not reinforcing it, or arranging for fewer beneficiaries to go without food, shelter or medicine. Gelignite is formidable, but only if you want to destroy things.

              Besides that, they’re not even pioneers. They’re merely carrying on work started by Douglas, Prebble, Goff, and a few others, and not stopped by anyone since.
      • handle 15.1.3

        20 July 2013 at 1:39 am

        Joyce is an excellent spinmeister.
    • Chooky 15.2

      19 July 2013 at 12:38 pm

      Yup!…they cant match Key……They drive away the likes of Dalziel and Cheval…. And they sit on their best leader talent David Cunliffe and try to make sure he doesnt surface!…ABC old boys Club pathetic!
    • Jilly Bee 15.3

      19 July 2013 at 12:45 pm

      Ivan – I distinctly recall the Nats’ slogan for the 1972 was ‘Man for Man – the better team’, which went down like a lead balloon with a lot of female voters. The Labour slogan was ‘It’s time for a change’ or something very similar which really resonated with the population. Labour also had a very charismatic leader at the time, Norman Kirk who really got the voters to get out and ensured a Labour victory. Labour needs to get their act together and change the leader before all is lost and we have to endure another 3 or more years of what we have at present, which becomes more scarier by the day. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the Herald to get their Democracy Under Attack banner out again.

      I am also sick of the apologists for the present leadership on this site – bleating on about how all will be well, while the good ship Labour is slowly but surely sinking without trace.

      Like Chooky – I believe David Cunliffe needs to be installed as leader as soon as possible if a Labour led government has any chance of becoming a reality post 2014.
      • Chris 15.3.1

        19 July 2013 at 3:14 pm

        @ Jilly… ditto
    • Olwyn 15.4

      19 July 2013 at 9:55 pm

      “One on one, man on man, Labour simply cannot match any of their opponents across the isle.

      And the electorate knows it.”

      It is almost as if they or not allowed to, in case someone thinks they’re left wing or something.
    • Boadicea 15.5

      19 July 2013 at 11:55 pm

      IC, I disagree.
      Key’s success is that he kept the show running despite such a shallow pool of talent.
      One on one, at Level 2, Labour can better the Natz.
      The main problem is at Level 1.
      • Colonial Viper 15.5.1

        20 July 2013 at 12:50 am

        Key’s success is that he kept the show running despite such a shallow pool of talent.

        Key relies heavily on the likes of English, Joyce, Smith and Finlayson to keep the programme on the rails, while the likes of Collins and Bennett are more than able to run their parts of the game without supervision.

        Who are the 5 or 6 top guns that Shearer is going to rely on to keep a Labour Government on track I wonder?
16. red blooded 16

    19 July 2013 at 11:58 am

    Labour need to present themselves as a capable and united team, with a realistic, achievable and caring set of policies. Yes, the leader is a symbol and a spokesperson, but he/she is not the only one on the team. Shearer is never going to be eloquent (I’ve given up on that), but he can still show himself to be knowledgable, connected to ordinary people and a capable convenor of a team of talented people.

    I argued for Cunliffe at the time of the leadership contest, but he didn’t win. Clearly, people closer in had a different view of the two men and their talents. While I think he’s being under-untlised at present, I don’t hear people in the street calling for him to take the reins. Let’s face it, the people who argue for him to step up and challenge are already politically engaged and committed Leftist voters. They are not the people whose votes are wavering, or propping up creepy Key. Those are the people Labour needs to connect with.

    Why did it take so long for them to speak out against the draconian changes to employment law? If there was more active argument about this sort of issue, the sheen might start to rub off the Nats and the people who at present are voting pretty much on the fact that they like Key might start to see the bully beneath the smirk.

    Something’s got to change. To be honest, I think that changing the leader at this point would look like desperation, and Labour doesn’t have to be desperate. They do need to step forward more, though.
    • Colonial Viper 16.1

      19 July 2013 at 12:50 pm

      Labour need to be a capable and united team, with a realistic, achievable and caring set of policies.

      fify
    • handle 16.2

      19 July 2013 at 6:54 pm

      “Why did it take so long for them to speak out” – about anything.
17. Wayne (a different one) 17

    19 July 2013 at 12:17 pm

    “Slipping, Slipping” – Gone!!!!!
18. gobsmacked 18

    19 July 2013 at 12:44 pm

    The election is going to be “too close to call” as long as there are polls. It’s a fool’s lifeline.

    Even if National are over 50% it’s still “too close to call”. You can just lump all the others together and invent a government.

    If a patient is in a vegetative state but not actually dead, it’s “too close to call”. But it’s not exactly a recovery, is it?

    Labour can stick with their faith healer, who offers no prescription except prayers by the bedside. Or they could face reality and get a doctor.
    • McFlock 18.1

      19 July 2013 at 1:41 pm

      No, you’re wrong. RM use phrases from “well ahead” through “too close to call” to “well behind”, depending on how close the spread is in relation to their polling margin of error. I suspect that if national were polling over 50%, they would be “well ahead” of the “left” and NZ1 simply by virtue of the few percent that gets absorbed into trace-element parties (and the rotten boroughs of act/united). But either way, if nat were on 51% then even if every other party joined forces, there would still be a national government.

      Similarly, if a patient is in a persistent vegetative state, that’s not “too close to call”. That’s a clearly-defined clinical criterion that is based on evident brain activity. And without intervention, after days it transitions into another clinical state (“dead”).
19. Chooky 19

    19 July 2013 at 12:50 pm

    On the contrary , changing the leader at this time would look like a hit for realism.
20. Tamati 20

    19 July 2013 at 12:58 pm

    This is Terrible News! The worst poll ever

    It’s is too good to justify axing Shearer. Any thing under thirty and surely the tribal drums would be beating.

    Otherwise it’s just a damn bad poll.
21. Chooky 21

    19 July 2013 at 1:06 pm

    The comments seem to be out of sync today…My above comment was in reply to Red Blooded who advocated not changing the leader…because it would seem like “desperation”.

    Agree wholeheartedly with gobsmacked
    • Rosetinted 21.1

      19 July 2013 at 1:38 pm

      Chooky
      If you had replied to redblooded at 16 you would have a connecting number not your new individual number of 19. You need to press reply to get your entry in after redbloodeds one. If you put yours in at 12.50pm, your number then would have been 16.1 then Colonial Viper at 12.56pm. would have been probably 16.1.1 if he had followed on your comment. If he had pressed reply on redblooded he would have been 16.2, as he came after you.

      If there had been a flood of comments to yours they would all have been in the 16.1 succession, and CVs would then be swept down the page and could be some distance from the original, if the 16.1s were lengthy and took up column space.

      Hope you get the idea. If CV had wanted to be sure that his comment stayed close to redblooded’s he would have had to attach himself to your group, and then would have been early in the succession of 16.1s even if he didn’t completely agree with your view.

      I have decided to be careful what succcession I join as I am disappointed when my great thoughts!! shoot off to outer space sometimes and no-one would know what they were referring to or cares by the time they set eyes on them.
      • Chooky 21.1.1

        19 July 2013 at 2:02 pm

        Thanx Rosetinted…I did think I had pressed ‘Reply’ though…
22. Chooky 22

    19 July 2013 at 1:46 pm

    Has anyone considered that the Greens association with this present Labour Party leadership caucus might actually be pulling the Greens down in the polls?

    It certainly wont be doing the Greens any favours….If they are to go into coalition with another party it needs to look like a young dynamic winning party with an inspiring leader and a mandate which appeals to the apathetic non-voters in the last election.

    As a dynamic Green you wouldnt want to be perceived as going into coalition with a party of “old boy” incompetents who are intent on using you as a walking stick and a prop into power.
    • Santi 22.1

      19 July 2013 at 2:30 pm

      I believe it is the other way round. Labour is seen as too close to the Greens.
      Shearer should keep his distance from Norman and his numbers will improve.
    • Colonial Viper 22.2

      19 July 2013 at 2:30 pm

      I’m guessing that the increasing non-vote was probably the biggest group in the RM survey. Also it looks like both Greens and Labour can drop at the same time.
    • Jenny 22.3

      20 July 2013 at 9:35 am

      Has anyone considered that the Greens association with this present Labour Party leadership caucus might actually be pulling the Greens down in the polls?

      Chooky

      Indeed, I believe this is the case. As at present policy wise the Greens look to be little different to Labour. And are seen by the electorate to be so. So as Labour goes down, so do the Greens.

      I believe that this is due to the current Green Party policy of not offending Labour in the hope of getting seats in a Shearer led cabinet.

      When in fact they should be promoting policy that is radically different to Labour so that the distinction between them and Labour is quite clear.
23. gobsmacked 23

    19 July 2013 at 2:56 pm

    Labour caucus message to Greens …

    1) We’ll just add on your vote to ours, thanks

    2) We’ll piss on you in public whenever we feel like it

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/8937854/Labour-duo-keen-to-talk-jobs-and-growth

    (or it could be that the Labour spokesman doesn’t speak for his leadership, in which case it’s yet another breakdown in discipline, and the message is all over the place, as usual …)
    • karol 23.1

      19 July 2013 at 3:14 pm

      Shane Jones – supporting the oil and gas industry…. *groan*.
      • Te Reo Putake 23.1.1

        19 July 2013 at 4:16 pm

        Why ‘groan’? Labour and the Greens both support the energy sector, and recognise the value in terms of jobs and income.

        It’s also hardly surprising that Jones (a conservative) would lean toward NZF rather than the Greens. I imagine the same applies to Cosgrove, O’Connor and one or two others.
        • gobsmacked 23.1.1.1

          19 July 2013 at 5:07 pm

          The language used by Jones in that article is self-indulgent and divisive. Let’s apply the simple test: What if Norman or Turei had been equally dismissive of Labour?

          Jones’ job is to promote party policy. Not to be a freelance commentator. He wanted to be on the front bench, to be playing a lead role in the team … or so he said.

          If he is on-message, then Moana Mackey and others are not. So who speaks for Labour?
          • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.1.1

            19 July 2013 at 6:21 pm

            UK Tories approved huge tax breaks for encouraging new fracking projects. This will become “common sense” in NZ any day now.
            • Wayne 23.1.1.1.1.1

              19 July 2013 at 9:52 pm

              As indeed it seemed to be to the Environment Commissioner
          • Chooky 23.1.1.1.2

            19 July 2013 at 6:44 pm

            gobsmacked …Thanks for all the clarifications…The plot certainly has thickened….I thought the very wealthy capitalist oil and gas industry had enough support from National and Act …Jones and Little may be in the wrong party.

            “So who speaks for Labour?”……It is the grassroots who should speak for Labour. ..Maybe there needs to be direct polling or referendums put to the membership on: 1) the leadership ..and 2) multi-choice options and priorities ordered in importance , of what they want from a Labour Party representation.

            (eg tax free first $10,000 earned would be a winner!….as would a minimum living allowance for all, even before employment… this would have tax implications for the wealthy of course but the Labour Party is not meant to represent them…Gareth Morgan has been on about this I think )

            The problem I guess is that many of the non-voters, in the last election, who would potentially vote Labour, are not Labour members….but I am sure some outside commissioned polling in strategic city areas would do the trick to give an idea on how to bring in this vote.
            • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.1.2.1

              19 July 2013 at 6:49 pm

              Labour don’t want that vote.

              They want the vote of the middle class swing voter living in a household earning between $70K pa and $120K pa.
              • Chooky …

                19 July 2013 at 8:02 pm

                Well I am one of them and they wont be getting my vote until they look after those at the bottom of the economic heap…..otherwise we are all going to have a very miserable society…. Shame on them!….They are not the real Labour Party!… They are ” the pretenders”

                The large number of apathetic non-voters are not in the group they want to get to vote for them…are they stupid?
        • Alanz 23.1.1.2

          19 July 2013 at 6:44 pm

          “lean toward … rather than …”

          Labour should just rediscover its lost self and then just BE.

          All this leaning here, there and everywhere – why is that? Why need to do that when you know who you are, can speak to who you are and what you stand for, and argue for a position and defend against contrary views. Where is the leadership, where is the leader?

          For many days now, and despite numerous issues and government announcements, Shearer has not been heard. Not a pip squeek. What has happened? And where is he out in the community talking, engaging and inspiring others?

          While the Aussie Labor Party has Rudd, the NZ Labour Party looks and sounds rudderless.

          The 2011 general election had the astounding campaign of not having the picture or profile of the Labour leader being strongly put forward. The clever ‘two ticks’ campaign was consigned into the rubbish bin. Is anything changing? Are things going further down the tube of invisibility and mutenss to the point that, come next year, Labour candidates and campaigners will have neither the picture, nor the profile, nor the appearance – sight, sound or even virtual presence – of its leader???
          • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.2.1

            19 July 2013 at 6:57 pm

            Bloody brilliant…
          • JK 23.1.1.2.2

            19 July 2013 at 9:18 pm

            Shearer has gone on holiday !
            • Alanz 23.1.1.2.2.1

              19 July 2013 at 9:56 pm

              If he comes back from holiday, if he ever comes back from ‘holiday’ – in every sense of that word (physically, intellectually, emotionally and politically – engaging mind to mouth and connecting to heart) – he needs to display the “natural leadership skills” that his patron and former party leader saw, has articulated, and seemed to have had invested so much confidence and faith in.

              Natural leadership skills include fronting up, taking the buck and making it the last-stop, and very importantly, inspiring and unifying a team; a team that once was announced and demonstrated itself as functioning as a broad church. Not a self-contradictory church that is, by default, risking drift and fracture in many directions and factions.

              If he is away on holiday to look for his next job to go to, I wish him every success from the fullness of my heart and would lend him every support he wishes.

              So many people I speak with do not see those necessary leadership qualities that Shearer really needs to show. So many ears and eyes (politically astute, such as commentators here, or generally informed in public) cannot be wrong when they do not hear and see a leader-in-waiting being ready to lead a Labour Party that will govern in coalition with other parties.
              • Grantoc …

                20 July 2013 at 5:56 pm

                Good points on Shearer’s ‘leadership’.

                Realistically the only way on current polling trends that Labour will get to be the government is if it governs in coalition with the Green,s NZ First, Mana and possibly the Maori party.

                In the event that the left does get more votes than the Nats in the 2014 election, can you imagine Shearer providing the necessary leadership for such a coalition, to inspire and hold it together and to govern? I can’t.

                Shearer leading Norman, Peters, Harawera , possibly the Maori party is beyond comprehension. Peters alone would be impossible and then throw in Norman who has a barely disguised contempt for Shearer and add to the mix Harawera… need I say more.

                I’d give such a coalition maybe 6 months before it collapsed.
        • handle 23.1.1.3

          19 July 2013 at 7:01 pm

          Groan because Labour once again buys into the angle the Nats have chosen for them – denying you are ‘against jobs and growth’ is what stupid people do. If the party does not back Jones and Little’s action then what are they doing speaking to media? Who is managing them?
          • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.3.1

            19 July 2013 at 7:10 pm

            Politically incompetent. Little and the right wing of Labour have a little too much in common.
            • Daveo 23.1.1.3.1.1

              20 July 2013 at 9:17 am

              Don’t see where Little was quoted bagging the Greens. Can’t blame a guy for being photographed next to an MP he’s on a scheduled visit with.
        • Jenny 23.1.1.4

          20 July 2013 at 9:37 am

          That the Greens submit to this tripe is what makes then look identical to Labour in the eyes of the electorate.
    • Bill 23.2

      19 July 2013 at 3:15 pm

      So Shane Boy is in love with NZ1st. And Andrew Little was connected to that article….why? I mean, it was all Shane wank from whoa to go.
24. infused 24

    19 July 2013 at 3:28 pm

    Wow NZF…
25. infused 25

    19 July 2013 at 3:38 pm

    (Can’t edit now)

    So why has Labour been so quiet? Did the whole man ban scare Shearer off?
    • Santi 25.1

      19 July 2013 at 4:10 pm

      Not at all, David is keeping a strategic silence. He’ll come back as a leader stronger than ever.
      • Colonial Viper 25.1.1

        19 July 2013 at 6:19 pm

        Needs to find a new Labour MP to victimise and therefore look “strong”.
        • Alanz 25.1.1.1

          19 July 2013 at 6:48 pm

          Well, there is Shane and that piece.
          Go for it, Shearer.
          • QoT 25.1.1.1.1

            20 July 2013 at 10:47 pm

            Nah, given the number of times Jones has shot his mouth off and received no negative feedback on it, it’d just look like incoherence mixed with opportunism.
26. AmaKiwi 26

    19 July 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Dear David Shearer,

    There is no shame in saying, “I gave it my best shot.”

    Now it’s time for someone else to carry the Labour banner.
27. ak 27

    19 July 2013 at 5:19 pm

    Excellent result. Despite acres of expensive contrived coverage of Man Ban (Womanbash), Unionbash, Shearerbash and Bennybash, zero lift for the NATsies. All downhill from here lads, running out of victims.

    Only racism left on the victimbash list now. Maori won’t be conned into propping filth twice, and as soon as the bully boofs twig that, expect it any minute.
    • Colonial Viper 27.1

      19 July 2013 at 6:17 pm

      r0b calls Labour on 31% mixed news, but you call it excellent news.

      Then you deliver the well worn…”just wait another 6 months line.”
28. Rhinocrates 28

    19 July 2013 at 10:08 pm

    “Mixed news”?

    “Just a flesh wound!”

    Cancer sufferer: “Ha, but I don’t have the Black Death as well!”

    Cancer and Black Death sufferer: “Ha, but I don’t have Dutch Elm Disease too!”

    Cancer, Black Death and Dutch Elm Disease sufferer: “Ha, at least I…”

    Oh fuck it.

    The bar is too low and there are too many excuses.

    This government is awful: they’re incompetent, they’re selling our soul, they’re demolishing our democracy but we get “the opposition is outpolling plutonium-flavoured rat poison in popularity by a tiny but significant amount is sorta-kinda-mixed-OK, not great but better than being less popular than plutonium-flavoured rat poison.”

    Riiight…

    Meanwhile, what’s on the menu at Bellamy’s? Mmmmm, that looks good…
    • Chooky 28.1

      19 July 2013 at 10:30 pm

      Squawk squawk … loved that one!
      • Jenny 28.1.1

        20 July 2013 at 9:49 am

        Shearer even comes second to the Black Knight in getting his message across.

        “None shall… um, ah, er, mumble”.
29. Rich the other 29

    19 July 2013 at 10:15 pm

    Until labour kicks the greens into touch and stands alone they are going nowhere or if they are going anywhere it’s down even further, IT REALLY IS THAT SIMPLE.

    I used to vote labour, the greens have changed that but a worse example for labour is my 85yr old parents, life time labour supporters, they can’t bring themselves to vote national so the answer for them , they won’t be voting at the next election.

    Shearer is less of a liability to labour than the greens.
    • Chooky 29.1

      19 July 2013 at 10:33 pm

      Well my Mother is as old as the Queen and she is a life-long voter for Labour and next time she is going to vote Green!…so there!

      Disproved your conclusion on that small sample.
    • Arfamo 29.2

      19 July 2013 at 10:41 pm

      a worse example for labour is my 85yr old parents, life time labour supporters, they can’t bring themselves to vote national so the answer for them , they won’t be voting at the next election.

      A helluva lot of people did the same thing at the last election. They ended up with the government they’ve got.
    • handle 29.3

      20 July 2013 at 1:36 am

      Yes it must be the Greens who are lacking, not Labour. What an idiot.
30. Rhinocrates 30

    19 July 2013 at 10:19 pm

    Also, Beltway Grant had an intern draft a press release on the socks he wore today. No-one read it. Beltway Grant rolled his eyes and shrugged. “It’s not my fault that everyone’s totally indifferent,” he said. “I’ve done my job, why don’t you see that?”

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS