Northland is not a “dirty deal”

125 comments on “Northland is not a “dirty deal” ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Craig Glen Eden 1

   9 March 2015 at 11:19 am

   Yes it would be nice to see Mr Gower reporting on what actually is said and what has occurred instead of just making shit up then screaming hypocrisy all the time. To say he is a sock puppet seriously understates his actions. Oh and as for #digrace Paddy, I am offended on behalf of all graces in the world how dare you condemn all the Graces to di. #humour #tongueincheck.
   • lprent 1.1

     9 March 2015 at 12:07 pm

     Give the voters some choice and leave it up to them. They can vote National, Labour or NZ First to get their preferred outcome. If that preferred outcome is to ditch National over anything else, then they will vote that way with what they think will work.

     Meanwhile Willow-Jean Prime and her crew, plus Labour MPs and party activists from further south will be up north pushing Labour. They won’t be saying Vote NZ First. They will be saying vote Labour. NZ First can do their own campaigning. Labour’s Northland party organisation gets a workout, as does NZ First’s one.

     It means that Labour’s critical local electorate organisation remains intact to fight future elections for electorate and party vote. They don’t disintegrate after being betrayed by head office and parliament.

     We won’t see the demeaning kinds of display that we did in Epsom where Goldsmith actively discouraged campaigning for National, didn’t turn up to debates, and generally acted like an electoral fuckwit.

     But in Northland the bloody choice is in the hands of the voters. Right where it belongs.

     The idiot fantasy by-election players should take note on how this campaign has been played by both Labour and NZ First. This is how it should operate. Not by removing choice from voters, but by giving them a choice.

     If Patrick Gower can’t figure out the difference, then perhaps he needs to educate himself about real politics at the ground level.
     • marty mars 1.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 12:22 pm

       do you think the voters up there needed the hint from little? seems strange that he felt he had to spell it out without spelling it out.
       • weka 1.1.1.1

         9 March 2015 at 1:06 pm

         I think voters needed this. Lots of people won’t be following the intricises of the situation, so a message from Little is useful.
       • felix 1.1.1.2

         9 March 2015 at 1:10 pm

         It was a message to the Labour party campaign team as much as anything.
       • Sabine 1.1.1.3

         9 March 2015 at 1:43 pm

         I believe that Little did not so much address the voters of Northland, but the rest of NZ that seems to think that Labour should drop out so as to satisfy their wishes.

         labour needs to run in Northland, no matter who wins, in 2017 all parties will have to run again up there, that is what peeps might want to consider.

         I would like peeps to consider and maybe demand that National drop out. After all they ran a dirty candidate, they knew about the dirt, they are costing us a by election…why should they get to play again?

         Let National drop out.
         • Clemgeopin 1.1.1.3.1

           9 March 2015 at 2:23 pm

           “Let National drop out”

           Whether they drop out or not, they should have the decency, integrity and a sense of ‘responsibility’ and pay back at least ONE MILLION DOLLARS to the tax payers, being the cost of this by-election caused by their own stupidity and dodgy decisions.
           • Naturesong 1.1.1.3.1.1

             9 March 2015 at 5:19 pm

             Have to disagree with you here.

             I don’t think that being under investigation, or awaiting trial should discount a person from standing.

             If it did, I am sure of two things
             1. It would be misused by the police.
             2. It would be misused by a future government – hell, it probably would have been misused by John Keys govt if they’d had the power during their 1st term.

             It may seem old fashioned, but I’m quite keen on people being innocent until proven otherwise.
             • Murray Rawshark …

               9 March 2015 at 6:14 pm

               Do you think they should chair the Lawn Order select committee until their guilt is also proven?

               Would you, if you were part of an electorate committee, select a candidate whom you knew was under investigation for some pretty shocking offences? It looks like that’s what NAct did. That’s why they should suffer for it. They should have been banned from the byelection.
               • Naturesong …

                 9 March 2015 at 9:30 pm

                 No, the conflict of interest is a seperate issue.

                 He shold have been removed from the comittee, or better, never been placed there, depending on when Key was told.
             • Unicus …

               10 March 2015 at 12:32 pm

               Well here is a suggestion for those electors in Northland interested in what the charges against Sabin might be – and the role of the National Party and MSM played in withholding the information from public view.

               Check out

               Laudafinem.com / was ex-cop- Sabin
       • Sabine 1.1.1.4

         9 March 2015 at 1:44 pm

         I believe that Little did not so much address the voters of Northland, but the rest of NZ that seems to think that Labour should drop out so as to satisfy their wishes.

         labour needs to run in Northland, no matter who wins, in 2017 all parties will have to run again up there, that is what peeps might want to consider.

         I would like peeps to consider and maybe demand that National drop out. After all they ran a dirty candidate, they knew about the dirt, they are costing us a by election…why should they get to play again?

         Let National drop out.
       • lprent 1.1.1.5

         9 March 2015 at 3:11 pm

         As I understood it, he was asked a question about a poll. He answered it straightforwardly to the effect that the voters had the choice (I’d have to look up the quote).

         It is no different from exactly the same situation that happened back in 1999 in Coromandel. There were fantasy fools then in the media and amongst the Alliance uber-conspiracy-politicos who wet their pants over that as well.

         But in the real world of politics, no amount of playing fantasy politics with dumbarse games does much to sway voters for a given result. If they feel they are going to be pushed into something, then they will usually push back hard. All working electorate politicians are acutely aware of this after their first term or so. Constituents are pretty damn blunt about what they dislike.
     • Clemgeopin 1.1.2

       9 March 2015 at 12:36 pm

       I seriously wonder how some of these hopeless people are even appointed to their posts as ‘political journalists’ and indeed ‘Chief Political Editors’ ! They are often more like lying witnesses and unfair gossip peddlers instead of being objective, fair and truthful and showing some integrity to their profession. A disgrace!
     • jackp 1.1.3

       9 March 2015 at 7:59 pm

       TV 3 were almost going to fire him because the political committee on 3 were getting disgusted with him. They gave him one more chance. I wonder if that was a Steven Joyce ploy come to think of it. They probably patted him on his back and said “keep it up” and now we get this shit from him. What ever happened to real news reporting?
2. One Anonymous Bloke 2

   9 March 2015 at 11:19 am

   Patrick Gower? Are we going to discuss Michael Laws and Garth McVicar’s opinions on the matter too?
3. Tracey 3

   9 March 2015 at 11:34 am

   Can’t wait for his giddy assassination of National’s Bridges Bribe…

   Everyday is a sad day for democracy with our Fourth estate
4. shorts 4

   9 March 2015 at 11:35 am

   4. Labour in Northland: there is nothing to suggest that if Labour were to give a free ride to Winston that he’d support Labour on any policy or anything in fact…
   • b waghorn 4.1

     9 March 2015 at 1:51 pm

     Winstons talking about fixing up the rail and doing up Whangarai port , while he probably couldn’t achieve that if he wins it certainly lines him up with a labour/greens in 2 1/2 years.
5. Dont worry. Be happy 5

   9 March 2015 at 11:35 am

   Silly old Paddy with his shiny white teeth and his English Vicar way of holding his hands together.
   • greywarshark 5.1

     9 March 2015 at 1:35 pm

     Is Gower the one with the weaselly or ratty looking little face? Or is it more, ferrets that have large white sharp front teeth. Perhaps though it is really a Bugs Bunny. image that lingers.
     At the end of the day, somewhere in that group of noxious animals is his appropriate doppelganger.
     • Scintilla 5.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 9:02 pm

       He’s Goblin Gower at our house.
6. Nicholas O'Kane 6

   9 March 2015 at 11:40 am

   Interesting points. I can understand the upset over Epsom regarding the “coatailing” like how in 2008 Act won Epsom and got 5 Mps for 3.5% of the vote, but NZ First got no seats with 4.1%. However the days of Act polling like it can get a second MP from Epsom are long gone, so coatailing is no longer an issue in Epsom. Instead Epsom 2014 resembles Labour allowing Jim Anderton to win Wigram in 2005 and 2008 (the Wigram case meets dirty deals points 1 and 3 clearly, and I can’t recall a John Key- Daid Seymour cup of tea last election. Only notable difference, Jim Anderton was long established in Wigram and had genuine local popularity, and David Seymour new and largely put in place by Act and National with minimal local popularity )

   I think a close parallel to the Labour-NZ First Northland “deal” would be if in Napier John Key had pulled National candidate Wayne Walford to get the Conservatives Garth McVicar elected (with McVicar the right wing vote was split, meaning National couldn’t win, so point 1 doesn’t apply, if no cup of tea point 2, and Conservatives not a sock pocket party so dirty deal point 3 doesn’t apply).

   I don’t like calling deals “dirty” and to me these type of tactics are just part of the political game. However I can see why they are a bad look in the eyes of some voters. I think the rules can be changed to discourage these type of tactics. Removing or dramatically lowering the 5% threshold will eliminate the need to win electorate seats to get list seats in parliament. Also MPs should not get party leader status and funding unless the party they lead gets 2 or more seats at an election (no more treating Jim Anderton, David Seymour, Hone Harawira and Peter Dunne as party leaders with their sole MP parties) and treat one MP party MPs as independents. If David Seymour had stood for National in Epsom and National said vote David Seymour for Epsom nobody would have complained. But because David Seymour had the Act labbel it all of a sudden becomes dirty. This doesn’t make too much sense to me. I think Parties should be able to decide for themselves what candaidates they want their voters to back, even considering strategic voting, without it being called dirty (short of significant overhangs or the like)
   • Tracey 6.1

     9 March 2015 at 12:00 pm

     Some fair observations in there.

     The BIG difference is Anderton was personally very popular, and apart from an earthquake would probably have rolled Bob parker for Mayor.

     Seymour had no such capital, no history of serving his electorate well.

     It is a bigger difference than your post gives credit, imo.
     • alwyn 6.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 1:24 pm

       Why are you talking about Seymour Tracey? That was the 2014 election after all.

       Anthony Robins was talking about 2011 and Banks wasn’t he?
       When he writes something like
       ” National in Epsom sealed a deal with a symbolic cup of tea. ” he must be talking about Banks with whom the cup of tea was held.

       Banks was popular in Epsom. He had after all twice been elected as Mayor of Auckland before it ever became part of the current abomination. That is certainly more than Anderton ever achieved in Christchurch, although he tried.

       You should really follow the example of Mr Robins and compare like with like.
       • McFlock 6.1.1.1

         9 March 2015 at 1:34 pm

         So your criticism of Tracey’s comment is that Anderton should be compared with Banks rather tha unpopula Seymour because Banks was popular enough to be mayor of Auckland and Anderton wasn’t popular in chch?

         Sounds legit. Or at least typical nat logic.
         • alwyn 6.1.1.1.1

           9 March 2015 at 1:42 pm

           As I said a few weeks ago about you.
           “That’s only McFlock. He’s suffering from a dose of the Duh-Dos”.

           And no, that is not my criticism. Robins was clearly talking about BANKS in the original piece. We should follow his example when commenting don’t you think?
           • McFlock 6.1.1.1.1.1

             9 March 2015 at 1:53 pm

             But you just said that seymour would be a better comparison, because Anderton wasn’t mayor of chch but banks was mayor of auckland. Like with like, and all that…

             BTW, you’re using the “Duh-DoS” wrong. Asking whether you really intended to contradict yourself in consecutive paragraphs is only polite, just to make sure you didn’t have a typo or something.
             • alwyn …

               9 March 2015 at 5:48 pm

               I give up.
               Can you please explain where I ever said the “Seymour would be a better comparison”? I can’t see anywhere where I said that.
               By the way can I talk about Seymour and Banks while also talking about anderton and little, or do you think that would be rather petty?
               • McFlock …

                 9 March 2015 at 6:06 pm

                 Necessary consequence of “like with like”, given your assessment of anderton, banks and seymour’s local government popularity. Tracey really was comparing “like with like”, which is what you said she should do: “You should really follow the example of Mr Robins and compare like with like.” Seymour is much more similar to Anderton in that respect, if we agree with your assessment of anderton’s popularity in chch.

                 You can talk about Anderton and Little all you want, but that would be even less “like with like” than comparing Anderton and Banks. I don’t think Little has ever run for local office. Anderton was never a Labour caucus leader, very different from a small caucus. So you wouldn’t be following your initial advice to Tracey.
                 • alwyn …

                   9 March 2015 at 6:25 pm

                   The second statement was only suggesting, perhaps a bit subtly, that you used lower-case letters to start Seymour and Banks but upper-case for Anderton in the comment I was replying to.

                   Looking at other comments by you, including this one that I am replying to now I see that it is rather random whether you use upper or lower case for names so probably nothing was meant by it and no disparagement of the people was meant.
                   • McFlock …

                     9 March 2015 at 6:36 pm

                     It often depends on things like using cellphone or desktop, whether I have a cup of tea or pen in the other hand, and whether I’m rudely distracted by my day job and can be bothered going back to look for capitalisation issues and other typods… 😉

                     If I want to be disparaging, I’m usually pretty explicit about it.
           • Tracey 6.1.1.1.1.2

             9 March 2015 at 3:11 pm

             Go preach to Nicholas, to whom i was replying. When did you become the thread police?
         • lprent 6.1.1.1.2

           9 March 2015 at 2:58 pm

           …because Banks was popular enough to be mayor of Auckland…

           No he wasn’t. He got comprehensively beaten for the position of mayor of Auckland.

           John Banks was the mayor of a smallish region called Auckland City Council, which was a fraction of the much larger Auckland Regional area which was made up of 6 cities. That Auckland City was notable for its gerrymandered borders that made it pretty hard to elect anyone who wasn’t a hand puppet of local businesses (look at the voting rules for ratepayers and you’ll understand why).

           When he had to stand for the Mayor of Auckland, he lost.
           • alwyn 6.1.1.1.2.1

             9 March 2015 at 5:42 pm

             I always thought it was called Auckland before it was merged in with the rest of the regions and that that simply took over the name.

             That’s why I said ” He had after all twice been elected as Mayor of Auckland before it ever became part of the current abomination.” The present super-city was what I meant by the abomination and the “before it became” was meant to be the old area.

             If I want to distinguish does that mean that I should use “Auckland City” for the old area and plain “Auckland” for the present one?

             Well I live and learn. As a Wellington resident I just hope we don’t end up with the same thing here.
             • felix …

               9 March 2015 at 5:56 pm

               Yep the old municipal body that Banks was twice Mayor of was Auckland City Council, the new amalgamated one is Auckland Council.
             • lprent …

               9 March 2015 at 9:33 pm

               Nope.

               The Auckland Council took over the functions of the Auckland Regional Council and the region’s seven city and district councils: Auckland City Council, Manukau City Council, Waitakere City Council, North Shore City Council, Papakura District Council, Rodney District Council and most of Franklin District Council.

               Most of these were pretty urban in total or in major parts before the amalgamation.

               The biggest issue with amalgamation was that the fuckwits from Act split most of the city assets off into autonomous entities that were supposedly owned by the council, but which to me appear that they are in fact revenue gathering devices being prepared for monopoly sale.
       • Skinny 6.1.1.2

         9 March 2015 at 1:44 pm

         Oh you mean the cup of tea that keeps on giving. Peters may well have been living at his beach house in Northland right now, retired from politics if not for that fateful cup of tea that Key had with bent Bankie.
         • Colonial Rawshark 6.1.1.2.1

           9 March 2015 at 1:48 pm

           Blowback
         • b waghorn 6.1.1.2.2

           9 March 2015 at 1:55 pm

           The funny thing is on more than one occasion I’ve cursed key for resurrecting Winston s career but now I’m enjoying watching key sweat.
           • Skinny 6.1.1.2.2.1

             9 March 2015 at 2:17 pm

             Zero (chance) to hero. I think Key got his new buzz word from the spin department. ” we have ‘critiqued’ your lines and zero chance wasn’t one of your better ones, actually it was a poor selection.”

             Key’s reply “no fucking kidding”

             Spin doctor ” I suggest you keep a lid on that line campaigning in Northland too.”
           • greywarshark 6.1.1.2.2.2

             9 March 2015 at 6:38 pm

             @ bwaghorn
             +1 😀
       • Tracey 6.1.1.3

         9 March 2015 at 3:10 pm

         I was responding to Nicholas who mentioned Seymour, so if you have an issue with that, tell him… and try to follow the sequence of replies, it will help you with context.
         • alwyn 6.1.1.3.1

           9 March 2015 at 5:51 pm

           You are quite right Tracey. It is Nicholas who first brought up Seymour and it is he of whom I should have asked the question.
           My apologies. I got the wrong person to make my response to.
7. marty mars 7

   9 March 2015 at 11:41 am

   Does winnie want or need a deal – no

   Does labour – yes to take the edge off the inevitable loss that cannot be overcome ever

   result – spin to try and turn that loss that cannot be overcome ever as a win for the country and labour – and somehow this will positively increase how the public view labour and its leader

   I’ll say it again to deaf ears – foolish strategy with zero positive outcomes for the left, oh and labour
   • weka 7.1

     9 March 2015 at 1:08 pm

     That’s a big confusing. There is no deal.
     • marty mars 7.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 3:34 pm

       sorry, bad choice of words
8. Tracey 8

   9 March 2015 at 11:47 am

   If you believe that National is not worried about losing Northland, they have a bridge they wanna give you

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/268150/national-promises-new-bridges
   • marty mars 8.1

     9 March 2015 at 12:19 pm

     lol bridges promises bridges to build bridges
     • wyndham 8.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 12:40 pm

       It’s called ‘pork barrel politics’ ! Some would call it ‘bribery and corruption’.
       • alwyn 8.1.1.1

         9 March 2015 at 1:32 pm

         I think you could leave out the words “pork Barrel”. Just call it politics.
         At least here the people of Northland may end up with a bridge.
         Rather better that the really spectacular example of bribery in 2005 when the Labour Government promised to abolish interest on student loans. This was probably the thing that won them the 2005 election.
         What did we get out of that? Nothing but a bunch of students who don’t think they should ever have to repay their loans and a debt to the state of about $15 billion.
         • One Anonymous Bloke 8.1.1.1.1

           9 March 2015 at 1:41 pm

           They should never repay them. Scrap the whole right wing failure, because it’s a failure.

           Student debt default is patriotism.
           • Colonial Rawshark 8.1.1.1.1.1

             9 March 2015 at 1:44 pm

             At a certain stage in this game, credit card and mortgage debt default is also going to be patriotism.
             • alwyn …

               9 March 2015 at 6:01 pm

               Wow! (To OAB and CR)
               Which of you is Mel Gibson and which is Heath Ledger?
               You obviously don’t think Samuel Johnson had it right when he said
               “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” I gather.
         • tricledrown 8.1.1.1.2

           9 March 2015 at 1:53 pm

           So they must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.
           Tag team trole alwynger is left all the others must be knocking on doors desperately to save Northland.
           After how many years of neglect in the safe seat now National are highlighting that fact with simple Simons bridge bribe.
           • alwyn 8.1.1.1.2.1

             9 March 2015 at 6:07 pm

             And why on earth should I want to get involved? As I commented some time ago I only vote for the party that I think will be best for New Zealand.
             In the last 12 elections that has been 6 National, 5 Labour and one occasion when I was living overseas and chose not to vote.
         • Tracey 8.1.1.1.3

           9 March 2015 at 3:14 pm

           you know that the bridges haven’t actually been built yet alwyn? Like with like and all that.
           • alwyn 8.1.1.1.3.1

             9 March 2015 at 6:04 pm

             Yes Tracey. That is why I said “people of Northland may end up with a bridge”.
             You will notice the little word “may” in that statement.
         • rawshark-yeshe 8.1.1.1.4

           9 March 2015 at 4:42 pm

           @alwyn — seriously the mistress of non-sequiturs … connected only by the degrees of angst and negativity in every post.
         • Murray Rawshark 8.1.1.1.5

           9 March 2015 at 8:32 pm

           Education should be free anyway, not another opportunity for bankers to profit. National has had decades to do something about Northland infrastructure and what have we got so far? A new road to FJK’s local beach mansion, and logging trucks everywhere else. Last time I drove to Cape Reinga, there was still heaps of metal road.
   • Poission 8.2

     9 March 2015 at 12:43 pm

     Winston is not yet even the Mp for Northland,and already the gvt will build bridges,If elected he will undoubtedly get the gvt to fund some roads to connect them.
   • b waghorn 8.3

     9 March 2015 at 2:02 pm

     http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/67126932/National-tries-to-upstage-Winston-Peters-with-pledge-to-replace-10-bridges
     keys bridge promises are getting the treatment they deserve .
9. ghostwhowalksnz 9

   9 March 2015 at 11:48 am

   For Little is a bit of scene setting for the results. When a party that didnt stand a candidate for the electorate last time comes second, its a way of explaining the unfavourable results.

   Meanwhile national is desperately saying voting for Peters will mean an extra MP from Southland. And Peters doesnt live in in the North.

   Funny all those years the voters of Southland were voting for Bill English , who had lived permanently in Wellington since the late 90s.
   • weka 9.1

     9 March 2015 at 6:35 pm

     “Meanwhile national is desperately saying voting for Peters will mean an extra MP from Southland. And Peters doesnt live in in the North.”

     What does that mean?
     • Murray Rawshark 9.1.1

       9 March 2015 at 8:38 pm

       NAct trolls have been saying that Winnie isn’t from Northland, because he lives in St Mary’s Bay in Auckland. The fact is that he is a Northlander born and bred, and often returns to his whanau land at the southern side of the Whananaki footbridge. The Peters family, and Winnie, have a strong presence in Northland.

       The next MP on the Winston First list is from Invercargill. NAct are desperate. Six more days for the dropping of court suppression to be appealed.
       • weka 9.1.1.1

         9 March 2015 at 9:36 pm

         thanks, I’d missed all that.
10. Sable 10

    9 March 2015 at 11:53 am

    Anyone expecting fairness and objectivity let alone investigative journalism in NZ will always be disappointed. Better off reading the list of ingredients on a tin of dog food. At least its tells you its not fit for human consumption.
    • saveNZ 10.1

      9 March 2015 at 12:42 pm

      @Sable +1
    • alwyn 10.2

      9 March 2015 at 6:12 pm

      Does a tin of dog food really say that?
      I wonder what is in it that would harm a human being but not a dog?
      • greywarshark 10.2.1

        9 March 2015 at 6:43 pm

        @ alwyn
        Great attempt at deflecting thread thought with false concern for other matters.
        • alwyn 10.2.1.1

          9 March 2015 at 8:10 pm

          Don’t be so silly. Just what deflection do you think exists?
          I didn’t comment until long after this comment was posted.
          It isn’t part of a widely commented thread item.
          I remain curious about the concept.
          Do you happen to know what the answer is?
          Is curiosity forbidden in your little world?
      • Murray Rawshark 10.2.2

        9 March 2015 at 8:39 pm

        Are you softening us up for the ACT Paid School Lunch program, alwyn?
11. marty mars 11

    9 March 2015 at 12:16 pm

    “What we are saying is that I am a strong candidate, I have a good background … that I am standing on issues important to Northland, issues that are important to the Labour Party and the voters are going to have to make a choice. “

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/268135/labour-candidate-staying-the-course

    kia kaha Willow-Jean
    • Tracey 11.1

      9 March 2015 at 3:15 pm

      unlike national who have only just realised Northland needs help… after seeing the poll results…
12. tc 12

    9 March 2015 at 12:16 pm

    As pathetic as it is predictable from TV3’s political chimp
13. saveNZ 13

    9 March 2015 at 12:42 pm

    If only Mr Gowers brain was half the size of his teeth.

    Personally I feel repulsed by his snarl as he barks out pro Nat propaganda.

    I don’t think someone so politically compromised should be allowed to be a political reporter on TV.

    I certainly can’t bear to watch him and have stopped watching TV3 news now.
    • Jones 13.1

      9 March 2015 at 3:33 pm

      Yep… I struggle to watch The Nation these days with Gower’s mug alongside Lisa Owen – who is more than capable of anchoring that show herself.
14. McFlock 14

    9 March 2015 at 12:46 pm

    I think the other thing is that Littlke’s comment was good for the party – there are one or two commenters here who seem to view every vote for a party or candidate other than Labour (e.g. Greens or IMP) almost as a sort of underhanded treachery by the voter and theft by the receiving party.

    Little’s comment, which basically outlined the reality of the decision facing Labour voters in Northland more than in any other electorate, should lessen that animosity.

    I don’t think I’d like to see a clear instruction from Little for Labour voters to knobble W-JP in favour of WP, but understanding the issue facing voters in northland seems reasonable. Certainly not a “dirty deal”.
    • lprent 14.1

      9 March 2015 at 3:02 pm

      A dirty deal would have been Labour not standing a candidate, or not running a campaign.

      That is something that I am sure that voters would have viewed as being a heinously dirty thing to do to them. They would have voted accordingly, probably by not voting.

      As it is, they have the choice.
      • sabine 14.1.1

        9 March 2015 at 10:32 pm

        ding ding ding

        we have a winner.

        and it would have come back to bite labour in 2017.
15. McFlock 15

    9 March 2015 at 12:56 pm

    Speaking of “dirty deals”, National seems to be trying to buy the electorate with nearly $70mil in new bridges for Northland.

    Obviously they’ll promise to do “whatever it takes” to get elected, the callous, lying, bastards.
    • Skinny 15.1

      9 March 2015 at 1:29 pm

      Snake Oil Alert: The bridges spend was always coming to accommodate heavier trucks. Something for nothing as they say.

      Another zero chance gaff, keep it coming John.
      • Ad 15.1.1

        9 March 2015 at 4:28 pm

        There is no evidence for that from the NZTA schedule.

        Key had already accelerated a series of packages early last year – and none of these were mentioned, either by Key or by NZTA.
        • greywarshark 15.1.1.1

          9 March 2015 at 6:46 pm

          What do you care Ad about when the bridges were announced or thought about? Are you a UNACT supporter under cover?
          • McFlock 15.1.1.1.1

            9 March 2015 at 7:07 pm

            if these are newly-planned bridges, then Ad is pointing out that they are off-the-cuff porkbarrelling rather than Skinny’s idea that the bridges were already part of planned upgrades to northland roads and bridges.

            I don’t think a tory would be pointing that out.
            • felix 15.1.1.1.1.1

              9 March 2015 at 7:32 pm

              In the post cabinet press standup Key said they’ll build the bridges no matter who wins.

              Which doesn’t make it a very good bribe really.
              • Ad …

                9 March 2015 at 8:46 pm

                Which is where Winston’s policy nous today IMHO wins over the relatively minor impact of the bridge upgrades. He wants to accelerate the rail line to Marsden Point.

                Enabling NorthPort to effectively compete against Ports of Auckland by completing the rail link to Marsden Point takes most of the logging trucks off SH1. It supports Kiwirail, and supports the logic of upgrading the degraded northern rail line. These are good hard long term jobs for northland, not the single 2-year job of bridge upgrades.

                Who knows, if this went ahead, you could also see rail passengers up from Auckland to Whangarei for tourist purposes.

                It also underscores the essentially private car benefit (such as it is) from the full Puhoi-Wellsford SH1 job – which will be tolled (The BC of which has been well debated over on TransportBlog).
                • greywarshark …

                  10 March 2015 at 5:14 pm

                  Northland investment. It sounds like spending for worthwile outcomes that will help the region. If only. It is too practical perhaps. It’s one of those ideas that actually doesn’t have to make a profit every year based on business demands but looking at cost recovery, r&m and a small profit for improvements. But it would be a solid piece of infrastructure supporting Northland business and the bright and bold people that do want something to happen up there would be working on creating more business round it.

                  Trains Auckland to Whangarei, a coach with a Maori waiata theme for tourist groups. Taking visitors to their Hundertwasser museum in Whangarei, which they will fight tooth and nail to achieve past the complacent sleepers there who are dozey like sleeping princessses.

                  And it must be remembered that there are people with get up and go beyond Whangarei to the tip of the Far North. They don’t want the only major business there to be selling off the coastline to plutocrats and hock-it-off quick speculators. They want to keep their way of life but at the same time have various small thriving businesses and bustling young men and women with an interest and a purpose in life.
              • McFlock …

                9 March 2015 at 8:50 pm

                lol he has to say that, just like Owen Glenn had to backtrack on the his 2011 election bribe by saying it wasn’t conditional on national winning the election, even though in the tv interview he clearly said it was conditional on national winning.

                Make the offer, then pretend it wasn’t conditional on your party winning. Pfft.
            • greywarshark 15.1.1.1.1.2

              9 March 2015 at 7:58 pm

              Okay. Ad I took the wrong message.

              But note that we are talking about Key talking about promises to build bridges, and he can forget those if he is a winner or not. So he can brightly avow his intentions now, and then later, that’s a different story.
            • Skinny 15.1.1.1.1.3

              9 March 2015 at 9:07 pm

              They were always in the mix, even Sabin was canvassing for them. People see
              it as a bribe great it is. I wouldn’t say they have plucked it out of their arse, however voters see Peters gets results. They will also see Key spitefully pouring of cold water on Peters Marsden Point proposal as not really giving a toss.

              People see a large team of paid snake oil merchants campaigning, and a one man machine already getting runs on the board for Northland, its costing National slippage in support. Add the Sabin deceit and their in checkmate.
16. Clemgeopin 16

    9 March 2015 at 12:57 pm

    Today Winston has shown Northland that he is the 69 million dollar plus man, anyway you look at it!
17. Atiawa 17

    9 March 2015 at 1:05 pm

    I just don’t understand what Winston & NZ First stand for in NZ politics. Free trips to Waiheke for Gold Card holders wouldn’t get my vote in Kaikohe
    Do they support unions and unionism? If they are as opposed has they have been previously on this issue, then a vote for them is a vote for the right.
    So fuck em.
    • Skinny 17.1

      9 March 2015 at 1:20 pm

      Actually NZF have been solid for our unionised workers over many many years. Gold card is something every elder person i know appreciate went they get it, don’t think its the milestone thing either.
      • Atiawa 17.1.1

        9 March 2015 at 2:30 pm

        Oh really. When & where? I have never heard Winston say anything positive about his support for organised labour as the leader of NZ First.
        • Skinny 17.1.1.1

          9 March 2015 at 2:47 pm

          Someone posted NZF’s anti signing the TPPA
          Here is a quote I heard him say at Saturday’s rally.

          “Who signs are deal where you don’t know the details.”
          • Atiawa 17.1.1.1.1

            9 March 2015 at 3:18 pm

            How thoughtful of him. 100’s of thousands of NZ er’s have said the same thing – and like Winston doesn’t make them supportive of organised labour -.
            I remain unconvinced, so fuck em.
            • greywarshark 17.1.1.1.1.1

              9 March 2015 at 6:51 pm

              @@ Atiawa
              Fuck ’em all. That’s what we all say after a few beers. Doesn’t advance the political scene but vents. Don’t diss Peters. ‘Those serve who only stand and wait’- for their time in the spotlight when they have to hold the rope to stop the dingy dinghy from drifting.

              That’s what Peters might do from this by election till 2017.. Then again he might not. But consider him will you. Think about it when you’ve finished mouthing off about Winnie.
              • Atiawa …

                9 March 2015 at 7:45 pm

                Winnie the tool (burp). Whats he ever done to improve the plight of working people?
                The best Minister of Racing that industry ever had. Just another gambling industry supporter.
                The tangata whenua saw through him in quick time (burp).
                Actually I attended a public meeting to hear him during the last general election campaign in New Plymouth (burp). I mostly liked what he had to say but he was nowhere near as fulsome and on to it as Andrew Little, and
                I never once heard Winnie tell his audience how wages and salaries for working people would grow under any government he was party (burp) to.
                I’m sorry but I couldn’t trust the guy to be on my side after the dust had settled. To be honest I still can’t (hic).
                So fuck ’em!
                • greywarshark …

                  9 March 2015 at 7:52 pm

                  Keep up the fighting spirit Atiawa when your head clears! As I said, sometimes there is a right time and place for a character like Winnie. This may be it.
                  • Atiawa …

                    9 March 2015 at 8:18 pm

                    I’m a (hic) lover grey, and in more ways than one. Do you have an answer to my 17 post question?
                    Us alkies have some principles you know.
                    Now be a good soldier and #@%# off.
    • Colonial Rawshark 17.2

      9 March 2015 at 1:47 pm

      NZF are way to the Left of Labour on several issues of economic policy.
      • saveNZ 17.2.1

        9 March 2015 at 4:50 pm

        Yep.
    • Tracey 17.3

      9 March 2015 at 3:17 pm

      How has the Northland MP for national worked out recently for Northlanders?
18. Old Mickey 18

    9 March 2015 at 1:09 pm

    “If” there is a deal in Northland, it is no less dirtier or more dirty than the deals in Epsom (Nats/Act) or the Coromandel (Labour/Gweens). Accept it for what it is.

    It really is the system that we have where politicians will manipulate the voting public….As Churchill once said “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all the others that have been tried”.
    • Gosman 18.1

      9 March 2015 at 4:10 pm

      The question is why do people have a problem with it. They are not breaking any laws and people still have a free and democratic right to choose who to vote for.
19. Gosman 19

    9 March 2015 at 4:09 pm

    Let’s breakdown and analyse your reason why this is not a ‘Dirty Deal’

    “(1) National in Epsom were throwing an election they would otherwise have won. Labour can’t win in Northland.”

    – Unknown as since Rodney Hide first won the seat (without any nod or wink from National at the time) it has been held by an MP from the Act party. Regardless why does this make the deal any more or less dirty if National has a chance of winning is unclear. National might not be able to win Ohariru so does that mean the deal with Peter Dunne is somehow different to that in Epsom?

    “(2) National in Epsom sealed a deal with a symbolic cup of tea. Labour has not made a deal with Peters, and has held no special event to send a signal to voters.”

    – This was only done once in 2011. In 2014 John Key held no such symbolic event with the Act party candidate. Does this mean the deal in 2014 was less ‘Dirty’ than the deal in 2011?

    “(3) National in Epsom are keeping alive a sock-puppet party with all of the resources and funding of a real party, in the full knowledge that ACT’s vote and effectively all its funding are working for National. Again there is no such parallel with Labour and NZF in Northland.”

    – This is just your value judgement and I suggest you have no evidence to support you on that view. There are a number of key areas where Act differs from National on (e.g. the extent of corporate welfare). Just because you are unaware of them does not make the deal in Epsom a ‘Dirty deal’
    • Hayden 19.1

      9 March 2015 at 4:15 pm

      This was only done once in 2011.

      You’re right, in 2008 it was Hide, for coffee.
      • Gosman 19.1.1

        9 March 2015 at 6:38 pm

        Hide won it outright prior to this.
        • felix 19.1.1.1

          9 March 2015 at 7:09 pm

          And National have propped them up ever since, so apparently they disagree with you that act could win it alone.
          • Gosman 19.1.1.1.1

            10 March 2015 at 5:35 am

            No different in essence to what they do in Ohariru.
            • felix 19.1.1.1.1.1

              10 March 2015 at 6:15 am

              Similar, yep. SFW?
        • Hayden 19.1.1.2

          9 March 2015 at 7:42 pm

          The point is that Key partook of a hot beverage with the candidate for Epsom to signify to National supporters that they should vote for him instead of the National candidate, in 2008.
    • Psycho Milt 19.2

      9 March 2015 at 4:22 pm

      Regardless why does this make the deal any more or less dirty if National has a chance of winning is unclear.

      A couple of reasons:

      1. Epsom presents the country with a National Party candidate doing his level best to discourage people from voting for him. That makes a mockery of the election and isn’t something we’ll see from the Labour candidate in Northland.

      2. The motive for making a mockery of the election is for National to gain one more seat than its share of the vote entitles it to. That isn’t Labour’s motive in this seat.
      • Rodel 19.2.1

        9 March 2015 at 9:13 pm

        PM
        Yes it makes a mockery of the election. But wait there’s more.It makes a mockery of the very roots of democracy itself.

        Good to see that Little does draw a line in the sand whereas Key’s pragmatism does not include the concept of integrity.
20. SPC 20

    9 March 2015 at 4:12 pm

    If Peters wins Northland parliament’s political balance returns to where it would have been if National and NZ First voters had not supported a Labour candidate against Hone.

    This is a form of preferential voting in a one vote electorate system, thus unlike Epsom and Ohariu where National could have won but did not try.
21. NZSage 21

    9 March 2015 at 4:22 pm

    Just listening to Key’s post-Cabinet news conference… Gower actually feeding Key the questions Key want’s. http://www.3news.co.nz/video/livestream-pms-post-cabinet-news-conference-2015030915

    “Does Andrew Little’s comment’s constitute a deal”.

    To call Gower a “Political Commentator” is an insult to political journalist.. perhaps Fox News might have a slot for him somewhere.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1

      9 March 2015 at 4:47 pm

      An op-ed columnist with a microphone.
22. Ovid 22

    9 March 2015 at 4:24 pm

    I wonder if we could introduce STV for local MPs. That would shut down many of the nods and winks.
23. Murray Rawshark 23

    9 March 2015 at 6:09 pm

    Hopefully Gower won’t have Chippy Hipkins agreeing with him this time.
24. KJT 24

    9 March 2015 at 6:14 pm

    “Hi. My name is John. I have a bridge to sell you”
    • greywarshark 24.1

      9 March 2015 at 6:54 pm

      KJT
      A caption looking for a cartoon with magnetic attraction.
25. greywarshark 25

    9 March 2015 at 7:50 pm

    lprent
    I don’t see any of my comments after one from last night. Do they only get recorded at a certain time? Or is something not working? I keep track of mine using the search.
26. marty mars 26

    9 March 2015 at 8:32 pm

    Waatea News –

    http://www.waateanews.com/waateanews/x_story_id/OTAxMQ==/Prime-under-pressure-in-strategy-battle

    Labour’s Maori spokesperson Nanaia Mahuta says she will continue to work for Willow Jean Prime’s attempt to win Northland despite leader Andrew little seemingly throwing his candidate under the Winston Peters’ by-election bus.

    Mr Little has told Northland voters if they want to send a message to the government that they are sick of being neglected, they are going to have to pick who they want to get that message through.

    Latest polling showed Mr Peters and National’s Mark Osborne neck and neck, with the New Zealand First leader a clear winner if Ms Prime withdraws.

    Ms Mahuta says the lawyer and Far North District councillor has show she is a battler.

    “She’s very connected to community issues and issues among the iwi so definitely someone to support and watch as she grows in her political influence in Northland. She’s absolutely committed to the north so she is not going to fly in and fly out. I am certainly wanting to continue to support her because it is about her integrity on the issue she believes will deliver to the people of Northland,” she says.

    Interesting framing and harsh pun with winnies bus but good to see strong support for the candidate from Nanaia.
27. tricledrown 27

    9 March 2015 at 8:45 pm

    Labour needs a presence in the Northland byelection to keep the parties election machine intact to keep that team together.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS