Mustn’t complain

88 comments on “Mustn’t complain ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Socialist Paddy 1

   6 March 2013 at 11:31 am

   Aye.

   The theme is building up that ABC would prefer John Key being New Zealand’s Prime Minister after the next election rather than David Cunliffe.
   • Treetop 1.1

     6 March 2013 at 11:58 am

     Where Labour can be strong is rebuilding a foundation which puts community first, this is where the votes are. A leader who speaks with conviction is required to instill confidence and confidence in a major policy gets the votes.

     Cunliffe attacks the problem better than Shearer does.
     • SpaceMonkey 1.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 12:56 pm

       “Where Labour can be strong is rebuilding a foundation which puts community first, this is where the votes are.”

       The Greens are already working well at that level and why I believe they may become the dominant left-leaning party within the next decade.
       • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 5:42 pm

         I know party activists who have literally been waiting 25 years for Labour to find it’s Left wing socialist roots again.

         Perhaps in another 25 years?
         • QoT 1.1.1.1.1

           6 March 2013 at 6:05 pm

           If you think about it, 25 years is only 50 more iterations of “give them 6 more months” …
           • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1.1.1

             6 March 2013 at 6:09 pm

             That’s just cruel and unusual.
         • McFlock 1.1.1.1.2

           6 March 2013 at 9:15 pm

           I know a few idiots, too.
           All the actual lefties I know in real life either never joined labour because lab4 was before their time, or left during lab4 term 2.

           You can complain that the chicken moos, or you can milk the cow.
           • felixviper 1.1.1.1.2.1

             8 March 2013 at 11:58 am

             Send the hideous diseased beast to the works and go organic.
             • McFlock …

               8 March 2013 at 1:08 pm

               also a valid option, but there’s a risk that your small seedlings won’t grow.
               • felixviper …

                 8 March 2013 at 1:53 pm

                 Very true. There’s also a risk that the moo-er you’re milking turns out to be a bull 😉

                 (how far can we take this metaphor…)
                 • McFlock …

                   8 March 2013 at 2:17 pm

                   Well, you can’t have a herd of cows without a bull to help out at the beginning. Stud fees can be highly profitable, so you can probably buy more milk with the proceeds than if you owned only one cow in the first place. Take the bull by the, er, “horn”, as it were…
         • prism 1.1.1.1.3

           8 March 2013 at 11:06 am

           Labours activists haven’t been active enough then over 25 years! So often one hears people blathering on about being passionate about their job, their sport or interest. Perhaps some of that passion floating around could have been captured by active activists and put into cleaning out Labour’s Augean stables.

           (Wikianswers – Augeas had an enormous herd of divine cattle. These produced an unimaginably huge quantity of dung, and no-one had ever succeeded in cleaning their byre. (Heracles was given only one day).
           Cleaning the Augean stables is proverbial: it means a job so dirty and so huge that no-one can hope to succeed at it. (Except maybe Heracles).
           Note Merriam-Webster refers to Hercules. It seems that it is very hard to find the right man/woman for a difficult and delicate job.)
           • McFlock 1.1.1.1.3.1

             8 March 2013 at 4:55 pm

             Hercules is the Roman/Latinised name for the Greek Heracles. Same dude by any other name, and probably smelled as sweet after that job 🙂

             And Merriam-Webster publishes, if I recall correctly, an American dictionary. Not English 🙂
   • muzza 1.2

     6 March 2013 at 2:00 pm

     SP – getting warmer

     All the players are actually on the same team, its only the attempted illusions/diversions/distractions, which keep some believing there is a difference.

     Perhaps if DC want to show how for the people he is, he can come out and spill his guts about the filthy goings on, which our parliamtarians engage in on a daily basis, assuming he is not just a part of the act!
   • tc 1.3

     6 March 2013 at 3:17 pm

     Dunno SP, I reckon they’re so full of themsleves being disconnected career troughers who take no responsibility that they’re convinced it’ll all be OK and that nice man DS will do for them what that nice man JK did for the NACT in 2008.

     They probably assume the people will wake up to the plunder and destruction of environment/working conditions/basic rights helped by a strong and objective MSM and turf the NATS out in 2014.

     Should go well then.
2. Saccharomyces 2

   6 March 2013 at 11:38 am

   Would Cunliffe benefit from splitting off and forming his own party? Leave Labour to attack the middle and try attract ex National voters, the Cunliffe Party can take the traditional progressive left/socialist territory… divide and conquer.

   Or would he just end up being another United Future (can’t remember that guy’s name)…..
   • One Tāne Huna 2.1

     6 March 2013 at 11:41 am

     Can’t see any of that happening.
     • Saccharomyces 2.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 11:44 am

       No, I guess not, and a coalition government of the left with that many factions would be nightmare material…….
   • SpaceMonkey 2.2

     6 March 2013 at 12:53 pm

     No… Cunliffe just needs to wait it out. As much as I want to see the back of John Key and his corrupt technocracy, I’m not convinced a Shearer-led Labour party is going to make it over the line next election… even with the support of the Greens.
3. Jester 3

   6 March 2013 at 11:41 am

   Is this the same ChCh Stonewood Homes that is a business partner with Mainzeal Living that recently locked all its contractor out of the sites?
   Is this the same ChCh Stonewood Homes that is rumoured to hold its labour only contractors and suppliers to 90 day payment terms when 7 and 30 day terms are industry standard?

   Is this the same ChCh Stonewood Homes that Goff mentioned in Debate 2 that they would employ 20 apprentices if Labour won the election, ignoring that they only use contract labour anyway?

   Strange bed fellow David.
4. Te Reo Putake 4

   6 March 2013 at 11:48 am

   Well, it’s hardly a surprise that Shearer doesn’t get Labour values. However, he has a firm grasp of caucus values, venal as they are. I really hope Cunliffe has a future leadership role, perhaps under Robertson or Little, but the sad fact is that he’s missed the boat in terms of leading the party.

   On the upside, Shearer is going to be forced by the next conference to promote left wing policies, including re-nationalising the stolen assets. If he is still leader at that point, then he is going to face a stark choice; go with his bourgeois instincts or go with the members. The answer might be to just go. His legacy could be to have done his best and resigned when it was clear it wasn’t enough, as Geoffrey Palmer did and go into the history books with some dignity or grimly hang on till defeat like Phil Goff.
   • felixviper 4.1

     6 March 2013 at 12:25 pm

     “His legacy could be to have done his best and resigned when it was clear it wasn’t enough”

     I think that ship has sailed. Oh well, option 2 then…
     • Te Reo Putake 4.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 12:59 pm

       Dunno, felix, I’d hate to start another coup rumour, but I keep hearing whispers from differing sources that the 2 of the four factions are ready to move on him if the polling isn’t up by conference. Assuming the Cunliffe camp join in, then it’s curtains for DS, but no guarantee that some other equally poor compromise candidate will be foisted on us.
       • geoff 4.1.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 1:43 pm

         “…no guarantee that some other equally poor compromise candidate will be foisted on us.”

         Please don’t let it be TREV!
         • David H 4.1.1.1.1

           6 March 2013 at 2:45 pm

           What, then you will really see the polling below the Maori party.
       • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.2

         6 March 2013 at 5:52 pm

         TRP – something must be up – you spent the last 3 months telling all and sundry “the Feb vote is a done deal, Cunliffe is buried in history, Shearer is the way forward, that’s just the way it is”

         Unfortunately, I think today that Labour’s issues run far deeper than just who has the no 1 spot, and they are issues which will require years of renewal work to get through.
         • Te Reo Putake 4.1.1.2.1

           6 March 2013 at 8:29 pm

           Nothing’s up, CV, at least nothing helpful for DC. He’s not going to get the big gig, because he just doesn’t have the numbers. No combination of the groupings is going to get him majority support in caucus. So Shearer it is, unless the polls get really bad and self interest sharpens the appetite for change.

           QoT: Camps DC and DS, the rest split between GR and AL. That’s how its playing out now, as I understand it, anyway.
           • mickysavage 4.1.1.2.1.1

             6 March 2013 at 8:34 pm

             TRP

             Do you think we should have a whose got talent session and choose most likely?

             And what happened to camp SJ?
           • geoff 4.1.1.2.1.2

             6 March 2013 at 9:28 pm

             Would Grant Robertson be better than Shearer?
             • Arfamo …

               6 March 2013 at 10:00 pm

               Would enough people vote for Grant Robertson to be PM. I would if I thought he could lead the country and he clearly articulated policies I agreed with. But will homophobia and religious bias be a relevant factor on polling day? How many people won’t openly say it but just wouldn’t vote for Labour if he’d then be PM because he’s gay and they don’t approve of the gay lifestyle? It’s one thing taking a stand on the principle that it shouldn’t make any difference, there’s clear public support for gay marriage now, and who needs the votes of bigots, and quite another doing a hard nosed risk-assessment of whether his being gay could silently cost them some votes they will need.
       • QoT 4.1.1.3

         6 March 2013 at 6:08 pm

         four factions

         Oh Jesus say it ain’t so. There’s only fucking 34 of them …
       • Jim Nald 4.1.1.4

         6 March 2013 at 6:31 pm

         Well, if one of those two factions are ready to move grant robertson forward, then do it quick asap and start making Labour a meaningful opposition party with real alternative. No point sitting around and waiting for polls to drop further before [insert date or event]. If it is not clear enough by now that Labour has sunk to as low as it reasonably can with its staunchly loyal or blindly supportive voters, then it is high time for the ones running the leadership facade to actually do something to have a good chance at being in government before 2017.
         • s y d 4.1.1.4.1

           6 March 2013 at 9:13 pm

           I thought Hooten was happy with the way things are going
   • just saying 4.2

     6 March 2013 at 1:01 pm

     When and where is the next conference TRP?

     I don’t think there is any chance of Shearer doing anything other than whatever his noble head deems fit and furthering his own career interests, of his own volition. He talks about a theoretcial future Labour-led government in terms Mussolini woulde be proud of: “I will do xxx…” “When I’m Prime Minister I will…” All very feudal. People don’t expect someone who can barely string a sentence together to be a wildly overconfident, egomaniac, somehow bumbling is associated with humble and not just because they rhyme. But Shearer’s vanity knows no bounds imo. There will be no realistic self-assessment or falling on his sword for the greater good.
     • Te Reo Putake 4.2.1

       6 March 2013 at 2:14 pm

       I’ll try and find out (I have been told, but just can’t recall, South Island though, I think).
       • just saying 4.2.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 2:19 pm

         Dunners perchance?

         Although Christchurch wuld probably be the most appropriate under the circumstances.

         Thanks TRP, look forward to finding out.
         • Arfamo 4.2.1.1.1

           6 March 2013 at 2:44 pm

           Do you really think Shearers’s “I will do…when I’m Prime Minister I will…Any of my MP’s who did that would be …” etc is really driven by egocentricity? Seems to me more like he’s attempting to follow advice from a PR consultant that he should try to present himself as a strong & decisive leader by adopting a more egocentric approach with the media. Doesn’t seem to come naturally to him.
           • just saying 4.2.1.1.1.1

             6 March 2013 at 2:57 pm

             Yup. I think he is a vainglorious plonker.

             Have you seen any evidence of humility? Ever? Any example will do, big or small?

             Btw, LPrent something very weird going on in the commenting section. It says all along the top and the bottom of the page”div#strcontent.page-single”.
             are you working on the site?
             • Arfamo …

               6 March 2013 at 3:01 pm

               I don’t see any evidence of humility from any politician anywhere these days – except where they get badly caught out and have to perform a ritualised apology that nobody believes is sincere. Which party leader do you think does show evidence of humility?
               • just saying …

                 6 March 2013 at 4:58 pm

                 I think DS is worse than most. And it isn’t based on any particular talent, skill or ability.

                 Of the three candidates for the leadership, he was the only one who couldn’t think of anything when asked what his weaknesses were. But it’s more than that. I think the extent of his egotism and ruthless ambition is camouflaged by his bumbling ineptitude. Most, even his most fierece detractors, say “but he’s a nice guy” sympathetically and blame Mallard et al for his blatantly macho posturing and heartless tory attitudes as if he were an innocent babe in the woods. I don’t see him as an “innocent abroad”. He threw his hat in the leadership ring in his first term, with no relevant experience beyond overpaid stints as a wonk at the UN. He spent the first three months of his leadership doing nothing but skiting about what a hero he was, big-noting, and playing guitar. He still sees no particular need to improve on his performance. He thinks he’s wonderful.

                 It’s not just that he shouldn’t be leader. I don’t see any evidence that he has what it takes to be an adequate backbencher. I think his career is an extended real-life instance of the Peter Sellers’ movie “Being There’. The more he fluffs around and talks rubbish, the more some will claim that it shows what a brilliant mind he has.
                 • Arfamo …

                   6 March 2013 at 5:18 pm

                   🙂 I see your point.
                 • Murray Olsen …

                   6 March 2013 at 7:52 pm

                   Unless you’re prepared to think he’s stupid or delusional, js, what you say is the only reasonable conclusion I can see.
         • Te Reo Putake 4.2.1.1.2

           6 March 2013 at 7:57 pm

           Still trying to confirm its in Chch in Nov, js. Long day bearing witness to the damage Key’s hand’s off apathy is doing to provincial NZ, but I’ve got time to chase it up now. It doesn’t seem to be on the LP website, but then, what is?
       • hush minx 4.2.1.2

         6 March 2013 at 6:39 pm

         I think it’s beginning of November?
         • Colonial Viper 4.2.1.2.1

           6 March 2013 at 6:45 pm

           So Shearer’s about to start rehearsing his conference speech?

           Looking forward to another slam dunk policy like the housing one.
     • Jenny Kirk 4.2.2

       6 March 2013 at 5:02 pm

       The next Labour conference is going to be in Christchurch, some time in November – don’t know
       exact details yet.
   • Anne 4.3

     6 March 2013 at 5:59 pm

     I really hope Cunliffe has a future leadership role, perhaps under Robertson or Little, but the sad fact is that he’s missed the boat in terms of leading the party.

     Judging by what I recall in a few of your past comments, you know quite a lot about Andrew Little TRP. Based on what I do know about him, a Little (leader) and Cunliffe (deputy/ finance role) could be a very good combination at some point in the future. A presentable contrast to the Key/English combination? What say you?
     • Te Reo Putake 4.3.1

       6 March 2013 at 7:47 pm

       Be fine by me, Anne. But then I’d vote for the drover’s dog, if it had a red rosette pinned to its collar. Really, it’s about who can inspire the electorate to back the policies, we, the members, are going to campaign for. I still think Shearer can get the left over the line, but I’d actually prefer a Lange style shellacking, ta!

       Little can deliver the kind of soapbox oratory that Lange specialised in, though with a tad less rasping wit and a tad more spine. He can and does connect with workers and if he could get then enrolled and voting, that wouldn’t be a bad thing. Cunliffe can deliver an economy worth being a worker in by getting productive NZ working again. Yeah, wouldn’t be a bad combo, I reckon.
   • The Fan Club 4.4

     7 March 2013 at 12:43 pm

     Oh for fucks sake, renationalisation of assets? Jesus Christ if we’re going to die in a ditch over something, can it at least be something actually fucking left wing, like free health care, or free education?
     • McFlock 4.4.1

       7 March 2013 at 1:36 pm

       Actually (if conference gets to demand policy) picking core left 5 issues like renationalisation of public services, free education (incl tertiary), free healthcare (incl dental), barring scabs from freeloading on union terms&conditions, and making all government departments and policies part of a “full employment” objective (e.g. Reserve Bank Act tweaking, local producers being preferred suppliers of, e.g., train carriages, and so on) would be an interesting way of seeing if any neoliberals actually remain. And even if caucus make sluggish steps towards those objectives, it’s still and improvement on lab5.

       Of course, that rests on all of those policies having the active support of a majority of Labour members.
5. kiwi_prometheus 5

   6 March 2013 at 2:31 pm

   I’m not sure you guys would actually be satisfied that your world view was being promoted if you got Cunliffe in as leader anyway – after all he is no more an angry black lesbian than Shearer is.
   • Murray Olsen 5.1

     6 March 2013 at 2:40 pm

     Lucky you’ve got a stupid white moron to promote your world view, then KP.
   • RedLogix 5.2

     6 March 2013 at 2:41 pm

     That’s an ‘angry maori, one-legged, lesbian ditch-digger’ if you please kp …. you keep mucking up your tokenisms.
     • kiwi_prometheus 5.2.1

       6 March 2013 at 2:48 pm

       They are your tokenisms actually, but I do apologise for not familiarizing myself with them enough.

       Its just really frustrating having only a choice between various shades of Neoliberalism or Left Cultural Relativism when it comes to politics these days.
       • IrishBill 5.2.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 6:38 pm

         Left Cultural Relativism

         Crikey – you’ve been edumicating yourself KP.
   • QoT 5.3

     6 March 2013 at 6:10 pm

     Oh, k_p. Your tragic little obsessions parody themselves.
     • kiwi_prometheus 5.3.1

       6 March 2013 at 7:35 pm

       How about your little feminist rape obsession?
       • alex 5.3.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 8:43 pm

         How about you go fuck yourself?
       • NickS 5.3.1.2

         6 March 2013 at 9:22 pm

         Preferably with a nice hot chilli.

         Or maybe you could bother using this thing called “google”, especially google scholar and do some reading on the impact, prevalence and oft crap response by those who should be there for the victim.
6. mac1 6

   6 March 2013 at 2:43 pm

   Zetetic, can I just point out that taking two dissimilar events out of context and putting them together to create a story of a connection, doesn’t make much sense and is very unfair. It may be a starting point for a discussion, but a very leading one.

   For me, this seems to be a manufactured opportunity to have a go at Shearer and to boost Cunliffe.
   • kiwi_prometheus 6.1

     6 March 2013 at 2:50 pm

     Well what do expect from this crowd? They are constantly grinding the axe about Shearer.
     • bad12 6.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 3:01 pm

       A bit like you wing-nuts having Bill English as a candidate to be Prime Minister perhaps???, even half the Tory vote stayed home for that event…
7. irascible 7

   6 March 2013 at 3:06 pm

   Zeietic, this is a rubbish posting with as much credibility as Fran O’Sullivan and Patrick Gower opining about the state of the Labour Party.
   The jucstapositioning of these two comments by the two MPs and then extrapolating a confused message about Labour’s policies is, in my mind, irresponsible and immature… about the same level of competence as Hekia Parrota has exhibited as Minister of Education and 2i?c Novopay.
8. mac1 8

   6 March 2013 at 3:08 pm

   k-p, I am worried that you support me on this, given your many other pronouncements which I very much disagree with.

   One concern around this issue is motivation as to why people join in the debate. Yours is, I feel, to stir the pot. Mine is to protest at unfair comparisons.
   • Colonial Viper 8.1

     6 March 2013 at 6:47 pm

     Mine is to protest at unfair comparisons.

     Please feel free to present an alternative, fairer comparison then.
     • mac1 8.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 10:40 pm

       Simple. Compare like with like. What does one person believe as compared to another on the same same subject/s.

       To say that Cunliffe believes this (whatever it is based on a twitter statement) and that Shearer believes that (whatever it is based on a photo opportunity in an up market housing development) is wrong on two fronts.

       1. They are not like.
       2. The extrapolation of what both men believe is not based on the same grounds.

       If both men were asked for their reaction to the same or similar event, then we would have a comparison that would begin to be fair. If both men were asked the same question, then that would begin to be fair.

       What Zetetic has put up is inherently flawed.

       Asking me to present a fairer alternative would be simple.

       “Mr Shearer, Mr Cunliffe, what is your reaction to the fact that Mr Slim continues to be the richest man in the world, made from the continued degradation of both tobacco farmers, workers and the consumers of his manufactured product which is a legal poison” (no leading question there! hah!) and
       “Mr Cunliffe, Mr Shearer, what do you think of these buildings which are giving work to thousands in the building and related industries as we rebuild a quake-torn Canterbury?”

       Easy peasy, CV. And if you can’t see that Zetetec’s model is flawed, then I must conclude that your opinions affect your judgment, and that therefore most or all of your opinions are also flawed, tainted by the same myopia- Shearer bad, Cunliffe good.
       • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1

         8 March 2013 at 11:01 am

         Oh Mac1 I agree with your process entirely. Ask Shearer and Cunliffe the same question at the same time about the same events and then weigh up their answers on that level playing field basis.

         That’s exactly what a Labour Leadership contest would have done.
         • mac1 8.1.1.1.1

           8 March 2013 at 12:49 pm

           And the leadership process went through its course.

           If the caucus had not given Shearer the support he got, then I would have been happy to have attended a leadership round. Absolutely. Listened fascinatedly. Attended diligently. Voted wisely. I’ve never helped choose a Labour leader. I’ve only ever cast one successful vote in 15 national elections where my candidate of choice won.

           However, the rules, as amended by Conference, were followed. And, as I did for 14 elections, I acknowledged the vote …….. and carried on.
9. Paul 9

   6 March 2013 at 5:31 pm

   A Manchurian candidate
   According to the Urban dictionary;” a candidate running for office who publicly supports one group to win election, but uses his executive or legislative powers to assist an opposing group”
   David Shearer is the Manchurian candidate.
   • Colonial Viper 9.1

     6 March 2013 at 6:11 pm

     Yep. Or the NZ version – a Hollow Man.
     • Paul 9.1.1

       6 March 2013 at 6:33 pm

       Is Shearer stays in charge, voting will be a choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum.
       The Greens or Mana are the only 2 parties offering an alternative to the neo-liberal revolution.
       • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.1

         6 March 2013 at 6:39 pm

         Labour should be leading the counter-revolution. Instead it’s trying to dress it up a little more nicely.
         • Paul 9.1.1.1.1

           6 March 2013 at 7:33 pm

           I reckon that because the attack on NZ’s basic rights originally came from the Labour Party in the 1980s, out of clear sky, NZ has had a harder job than most fighting the new right agenda than other countries where the attack came from more predictable sources.
           With 1980s Labour Party members still in the caucus, there is yet to be an acceptance of the need to change.
           • Colonial Viper 9.1.1.1.1.1

             8 March 2013 at 10:50 am

             Labour is a centrist political party which is sympathetic to an economy dominated by free market and private sector drivers.
10. gobsmacked 10

    6 March 2013 at 6:58 pm

    Shearer’s been busy filling in his census form …

    https://twitter.com/DavidShearerMP/status/309048477827100673/photo/1

    Not sure it’s a great idea to post his personal details on Twitter. Especially as he’s doing it wrong (you’re not supposed to tick the boxes, David. If you want to be PM, you’ll need to learn to read the instructions).
11. The Al1en 11

    6 March 2013 at 8:10 pm

    So name the motion at conference ‘Oi, Shearer, get the fuck out of the way. And take that idiot Mr Speaker with you’.

    Do that and I promise I’ll pay to sign up for the vote.
12. Annette King 12

    8 March 2013 at 9:06 am

    Perhaps some context is needed to David Shearer’s visit to see building at Stonefields. It’s too easy to make assumptions. I too visited this building site, not to look at expensive houses but to see how houses can be built REDUCING. the cost, improving urban design, looking at building materials and how quality can go with an affordable home. The 100,000 homes to be built under Labour will be built by builders in the private sector. They need to understand what we want. That has been part of an intensive work programme we are undertaking, continuing with Phil Twyford. I suppose you could also argue if you visit a big business to talk you about jobs some how you are not concerned about the unemployed. In my mind its about knowing what is going on in our community.
    • higherstandard 12.1

      8 March 2013 at 9:12 am

      Makes perfect sense Annette, unfortunately it doesn’t fit with the current mindset of the collective at this blog.

      [lprent: I love how you made that quite ambiguous – probably deliberately so. Rather dangerous as you know because it is up to you to be unambiguous when referring to this site here because I will always take the worst interpretation. However I’ll explain what you clearly were incapable of doing.

      The site isn’t a collective, it is a cooperative. There is usually quite a big difference. The difference here is that unlike a Labour cabinet (and increasingly the NZLP caucus) we act don’t run with a collective responsibility. Instead we have a range of political views amongst commentators from the “rusted-in” Labour support of Mike Smith to the left anarchism of Bill and damn near everything between. Public dissent between authors is encouraged.

      If you are talking about the commentators. Well the NZLP is still capable of organising supporters right? If they don’t mindlessly attack authors, troll or initiate fighting then the moderators will treat them like any other commentator – we will ignore them. ]
    • felixviper 12.2

      8 March 2013 at 9:20 am

      Fair enough Annette, but that doesn’t change the messaging which seems to be a huge problem for Labour right now.
      • Colonial Viper 12.2.1

        8 March 2013 at 10:47 am

        Labour won’t risk any policies, moves or messaging which will successfully depress Auckland property prices.
    • Colonial Viper 12.3

      8 March 2013 at 10:43 am

      The work to build 100,000 homes should be undertaken by a renewed Department of Public Works tasked not only with building the homes to the most forward thinking standards, but also training a new generation of trades people and professionals.

      Billions of dollars of profits over the next ten years should not be skimmed off by the private sector going to private shareholders.

      Further, it’s risky to continue allowing the build up of 30% of the country’s population in 0.3% of the land area. This is going to lead to a near-unmanageable set of issues (well it already is).

      The bottom line for me is: why is Labour continuing to rely on private sector markets and companies, and indeed to feed them massive new funds, when they have been an integral part of the Auckland housing failure.
      • The Al1en 12.3.1

        8 March 2013 at 10:52 am

        “The work to build 100,000 homes should be undertaken by a renewed Department of Public Works tasked not only with building the homes to the most forward thinking standards, but also training a new generation of trades people and professionals.”

        Immediate double return on the dollar spend, with windfall bonus ad infinitum. Sounds like a proper thought out policy.
        • Colonial Viper 12.3.1.1

          8 March 2013 at 10:56 am

          Yep. All Labour needed to do was look at their history and it would have been bloody obvious. They’ve done it before and it could be done again.

          (Hmmmm history pre 1980’s thank you…)
          • Anne 12.3.1.1.1

            8 March 2013 at 12:13 pm

            Oops can’t edit. I’m telling the caucus ‘babies’ to study the real history of the LP – not you. You have obviously done so.
13. Anne 13

    8 March 2013 at 12:07 pm

    The problem is CV half the caucus were knee high to a grasshopper during the 1980s. I fear they base what they know about the history of the LP on the 80s. It goes some way to understanding why they don’t seem able to comprehend the message members (and conference delegates) have been trying to pass on to them. Go and study what happened in the 1930s/40s/50s/60s and 1970s and see how Labour solved the same problems in a commonsense practical way, without resorting to neo-liberal claptrap and global corporate greed and corruption.
    • mac1 13.1

      8 March 2013 at 1:23 pm

      Since we’ve established, Anne, that we go back a bit in terms of history 🙂 , I recall hearing John A Lee speak in Room C at Canterbury University in the late sixties. His central point then, as I recall it, delivered in a huge voice that needed no amplification, was that a programme of building houses again would help pull NZ’s economy up, as it did in the first Labour administration, and also meet a social need.

      We must know our history, but allow solutions for our times.
      • Anne 13.1.1

        8 March 2013 at 3:29 pm

        We must know our history, but allow solutions for our times.

        Precisely mac1.

        No two situation are identical and solutions have to be devised in the context of the present, but that doesn’t mean Labour can’t use the solutions of yesteryear and adapt them so that the outcomes are the same. But if they don’t know enough about the successful solutions of yesteryear then they’re not going to repeat them and NZ is stuffed!

        Since we’ve established, Anne, that we go back a bit in terms of history…

        Awful admission to have to make. 😳
14. Annette King 14

    8 March 2013 at 3:37 pm

    Thank you for your comment Colonial Viper. Thousands of workers are employed in the building and construction industry relying on work for their pay packet. Building houses in NZ at an affordable cost will ensure they have work and ability to support their families. Setting up a public works department to build houses is not needed. The trades people are. Perhaps you didn’t pick up but KiwiBuild requires training of men and women in building/ construction skills. It’s part of the overall approach. I know house prices are more affordable in some places like Dunedin but both rental and home ownership is being priced beyond the means of many people in an increasing number of places around the country.

    Felix Viper I take your point about messaging which is why I wanted to set the record straight so the wrong messaging isn’t reinforced.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS