Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, July 4th, 2023 - 87 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
The incisive venturing of banal views comes readily to old hacks:
I suspect the word service was intended to follow the word public. However such subtleties are no doubt lost on Herald readers and the days when the Herald could afford to employ copy editors are long gone.
Soper is on solid ground simply reinforcing the findings of the Independent External Review into Bullying and Harassment in Parliament just 3 years ago.
https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/how-parliament-works/office-of-the-speaker/corporate-documents/independent-external-review-into-bullying-and-harassment-in-the-new-zealand-parliamentary-workplace-final-report/
The Prime Minister has declined to offer confidence in the Minister and will deal with her once she comes back from extended leave.
All it would have taken from Allen in the last 4 weeks is a simple "You know, I can always improve, and I'm sorry for any unintended slight. Public servants are here to help and I am too."
Isn't that hard.
Isn't that hard.
Funny how folks are so inclined to knee-jerk into denial. On one of the tv breakfast shows Hipkins was worriedly explaining himself to the camera & interviewer.
His time-out strategy for her seems compassionate and reasonable. However it does make him look procrastinating rather than decisive.
I still think the timeline factor is the sleeper in this controversy. Haven't seen any satisfactory explanation yet. PM seems to think officials using the traditional sweep it under the carpet disposal tactic will impress the public just because it worked for a year. Doesn't seem to be based on compelling logic though.
There's another factor apart from that kind of logic- 'the right thing to do". Sometimes we just have to do it. Then let people catch up as to why.
That is also a crucial factor in being a leader- being out front.
Yeah Mac, doing the right thing is often a necessity. Knowing the right time & place to do it makes a huge difference to the doing!
His oblique reference to the `separation of state powers' doctrine & its implementation in our democracy is a salient point.
Given that the system protects media sources, and thus the alligators, sorry, allegators, we naturally expect the parliamentary ecosystem to contain such predators. No surprise that top officials relish playing that role.
Fair enough that he feels the state makes him impotent? To counter their predatory behaviour, I mean – whilst not forgetting they also may genuinely believe they are doing the right thing. Wouldn't it be nice if the state were to grant them the right of free speech? He could say so…
There is this. Not read it but it is a 2022 rewrite of the PS rules and says in its opening sentence, "Kia ora koutou katoa,
All New Zealand workers, including public servants, must be able to raise concerns without fear of punishment or reprisal.
Today I welcome the publication of the updated Acting in the Spirit of Service Speaking Up model standards(PDF, 336 KB) as an organisational platform for public sector staff to raise wrongdoing concerns."
https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/news/speaking-up-in-the-public-service-made-easier/
The road to hell is paved with good intentions (trad saying) so perhaps officials see that 2022 signal as sanctimonious?
When trad ethos runs counter to such virtue signals, it's understandable that officials have more faith in the system than the signal. Unless a convention were to develop, and embed, that transformed the ethos, their scepticism would be more likely to drive their behaviour.
However I agree that the spirit of public service is overdue for regeneration and have expressed similar views onsite here in the past.
I know how my wider family member was treated after doing the right thing and raising concerns about a couple of managers in the public service. Went through all the right channels. Group harassed by the collective managers to the point of them leaving and an abject refusal to even interview her now for jobs.
The sad thing is that after other staff saw how she was treated they then stopped raising concerns lest it happen to them. Treating one person badly definitely impacts more than just that person in ensuring silence.
I notice from a few comments here previously a few others have been through similar.
Thanks for sharing that. It saddened me. So easy for someone to fall victim of the state system. The PSA was meant to protect members, I assumed (similar to a union). Maybe they no longer bother.
Agree Ad. The whole saga seems to still have legs simply because the Minister has not apologised, that is my suspicion. There would be no story had the PS been moved to add about the shouty phone call 'oh and the Minister rang me some minutes later to express her apologies and we have worked well together ever since.' It could have been something praiseworthy ie did do this, was ashamed and rang to apologise. Then she could have said
Well as I said at the time 'You know, I can always improve, and I'm sorry for any unintended slight. Public servants are here to help and I am too."'
Xi moves to solve financial problem…
Seems to be all about liaison with other central banks in key nations. Biden is sending Janet Yellen over later this week for that purpose.
We have just received a personal letter from Christopher Luxton no less. Amongst other wonderful things for pensioners like maintaining the winter energy top up, is this gem ….
"…we'll scrap Labour's instructions to prioritise surgery by ethnicity. Access to healthcare should be based on need, not ethnicity."
Excellent news! It means I as a 70+ pakeha can get knee surgery to be able to keep up my exercise regime playing golf on an equal footing (excuse the pun) as a Maori forestry gang worker with a family of 5 to feed!
And then the gnats would squeal if we called them racist.
"Excellent news! It means I as a 70+ pakeha can get knee surgery to be able to keep up my exercise regime playing golf on an equal footing (excuse the pun) as a Maori forestry gang worker with a family of 5 to feed!"
Based on need alone the forestry worker would have greater need thus have priorties. Now if the ethnictices in your comment were to be switched then things get more complicated.
I not only consider this policy politically and societally divisive, but the discussion points put forward in support as often fundamentally racist.
As Cricklewood points out, reverse the ethnicities and see how it sounds.
This is a pit which RW/libertarian/anti-Tiriti people never fail to to fall into. The, 'reverse the ethnicities' argument only works if you revere the ethnicities historically also.
All too convenient for the RW to ask for ethnicities to be switched now after all the gains made by one ethnicity over the decades.
it also denies the role that systemic racism plays and assumes the issues are white/non-white, instead of colonial history and power relations.
This colonisation grievance is a particularly failing one.
There are recent demonstrations of Maaori losing property to the Crown – Bastion Pt – but this is not a systematic reality in legislation, policies and services. Every NZer has access to education, health, infrastructure etc.
Intermarriage from the first contact, means most Maaori contain both colonised and coloniser.
This focus on keeping the colonisation fires burning, requires a separation of self, into a contribution responsible for all the ills, and one with no autonomy.
Everyone knows life is more complex than that.
Generations of working class families existed also. It took improvements in access to health, education and opportunities for all for the emergence of the middle class.
It's not necessarily racism that keeps people in financial poverty. In fact, this assumption is not often backed up with robust evidence, just drawn from correlation.
There is, however, a repetitive strain of racism in lumping all Maaori together, with no diversity of thought, self-determination, resilience, values, ethics, political views
When this occurs, not only are Maaori not clearly seen as individuals, we are also denied the recognition of every other flawed human, which includes being unethical, self-serving and making mistakes.
My mother used to say the same thing. 'People lump all Maori together and then ascribe all manner of ideas that they do or do not have to the whole group'.
It used to bug her as in our large mixed family there were good and bad – in a word just 'people', doing 'people' things, making mistakes, accomplishing etc etc.
Another RW/libertarian (particularly libertarian) tactic is to reduce Māori to the individual.
Focus on the individual runs throughout RW thought in NZ and is born from white British colonial Presbyterianism. We see it in the way Pākehā New Zealanders prefer individual family units rather than multi-generational family structures.
It's an important weapon used by the RW, and particularly the ACT party, to attack Te Ao Māori by dividing them. If Māori identity, culture, language and collectivism can be eroded then the process of sociological assimilation (a job started two centuries ago) will be complete.
The homogenisation of New Zealand is the end goal for Pākehā on the right. Will this help Māori? Very, very unlikely. What will it mean for Māoritanga? Extinction.
"Another RW/libertarian (particularly libertarian) tactic is to reduce Māori to the individual."
Ya-huh. It appears everything that cannot be discussed is labelled RW/libertarian.
But you are discussing it right now.
You called it, "a repetitive strain of racism", when we allow (lump in) Māori to collectively decide what is best for Māori. It's clearly RW colonial assimilative thought to try to atomise a culture into non identifiable parts.
This thinking is re-colonisation actually. What proponents are saying is Māori still don't know what's best for them so we white people will have to damn well teach them again.
If we want self determined 'public services' then we can always vote Act and receive their vouchers for education, health etc to be used with the provider of our choice.
That idea dosnt appear to have much support
Nope. This is also way wrong and benighted colonist thinking. A complete dissolution of community thought. The alternative to that thinking is the ability for minority cultures in NZ to embrace their identity and be allowed to promote it with normal progressive support from the public sphere.
Your idea is to further the assimilation of cultural identity to the point it is a meaningless tourist sideshow.
Im sure you believe there is some logic in there somewhere but I am unable to locate it.
As I said RW/libertarians like to de-collectivise (and de-culture) at any and every opportunity.
If you could be honest for one moment, what do you think is the end result of education vouchers?
Act (those RW/libertarians) would argue (and do) that the voucher system provides exactly that which you are claiming Maori desire….the ability to make their own decisions and use the providers that meet their requirements.
If you could be honest for a moment what do you think will be the result of a health system allocated on the basis of ethnicity?
Still reducing Māori (and everyone for that matter) to individuals in order to assimilate the culture until it means nothing.
The second point is a further example of alarmist RWNJ racist thought. A health system which recognises need over a range of criteria? I'm all for that.
Are you capable of conversing in any form other than slogans?
"But you are discussing it right now."
Yes, I was.
"The homogenisation of New Zealand is the end goal for Pākehā on the right. Will this help Māori? Very, very unlikely. What will it mean for Māoritanga? Extinction."
This is patronising drivel. The idea that Māori culture and people have remained static, and only retain value through purity and rigidity is a racist view from my perspective.
That you hold that perspective is not a surprise at all.
Well, you've got one thing sort of right
"There is, however, a repetitive strain of racism in lumping all Maaori together, with no diversity of thought, self-determination, resilience, values, ethics, political views"
But you've used it to draw a conclusion that's exactly the opposite to what is happening in real life. In the real life I see, it doesn't matter how well or poorly Māori do, how educated, rich or anything else, racist attitudes in the dominant culture (as a group) means Māori are treated reflexively (as a group) that is unteachable and untreatable, who could do better if only they tried harder to overcome. Or alternatively, the biological determinists – they believe Māori are inherently incapable so why bother expending resources to improve their lot.
"We know that ethnicity, by itself, is an independent risk factor for poor health outcomes."
Despite the evidence that decision-makers in everyday life, at best make decisions that passively accept some people will do badly because they are Māori (at worst they actively avoid, discourage, exclude), you seem to believe people treated like this should still come knocking instead of avoiding so-called the structures that could (if decision-makers could be bothered) help "them".
People with these views, in my experiences are also those least likely to attribute personal Māori success to the person – they'll attribute that to 'jumping the queue' or 'handouts', for example.
Similar process occur in other places and generally we accept that colonisation is detrimental to the health, wealth and happiness of the colonised populations – to take colour out of it – see for example Scottish and Irish history. But not here, oh no, because …. ??
As for 'that' article, see https://e-tangata.co.nz/media/the-real-racist-tools-were-in-media-not-health/
Or, the 4th strongest military in the world are waging war on a refugee camp where >40% of the population are under the age of 15
Tariq Kenney-Shawa
@tksshawa
·
Israel, a nuclear power with an elite, well-funded military, equipped with the most advanced technology the world has to offer vs. teenagers with no military training, fed up with life under military occupation.
https://twitter.com/tksshawa/status/1675840158208278530
There are many thousands of Israelis who do not support the extreme far right government….and their ever expanding "living room".
The Peace Now group, and many actually in the Israeli military and police see the very real damage that far right Netanyahu and his accomplice' are doing to Palestinians…and Israel.
I wanted to give credit where credit is due.
I am very glad to hear about the government increasing the wages of nurses to a much more realistic and competitive level. From whatever perspective this is looked at, I think it is a good and necessary thing to do. From my perspective, it is clear we are in an international market for nursing talent. Therefore, paying a competitive salary is absolutely essential if we want to maintain an effective health workforce.
Follow the money:
What goes up must come down. The trick is know when the market has peaked. Players ride their luck. Intuition rules. Then google Soros reflexivity…
From the left, Gordon Campbell issues a bleat:
Vested interests profiting from the system? A stunning revelation from ole Gordy! Will folks be able to pick themselves up off the floor?
Grant will be furious!! Gordy is virtue-signalling at him, imperilling his knighthood. How can one operate successfully as a lap-dog of the capitalists with morally-righteous folk like Gordy around?? Gah!
Well..given hipkins has ruled out the greens eminently sensible policies to help renters currently being kicked around/exploited by greedy slum landlords…
Those wanting some changes to this poor suffering the most. .
Well..they now know who to vote for…eh..?
(Suggested tagline for labour:..)
Vote labour..for more of the same..
And kinda interesting/defining how the reasons rolled out by hipkins not to echo what is already in place in more caring..(for want of a better word).. countries..
Hipkins just trotted out that neoliberal playbook bullshit the bankers economics 'expert' olsen recently insulted us with…
..(I paraphrase)..'it will hurt the market…'
And surely left leaning labour supporters in this forum will be somewhat dismayed by this turn/refusal to help the under seige renters from hipkins..?…you"d think..?
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/07/chris-hipkins-says-labour-wouldn-t-consider-rent-controls-after-greens-policy-announcement.html
There was a snippet of good news for the homeless/travellers yesterday..
Rnz reported that a law had been passed…that means homeless new zealanders can no longer be fined for freedom camping… nationwide..
The grey men have been vanquished..and this is a very good thing..
John McKenzie, Minister of Lands in the 1891-1905 Liberal Government would have approved.
https://teara.govt.nz/en/biographies/2m17/mckenzie-john
"Sometime in May 1845 the five-year-old John McKenzie was woken by his father before dawn and marched off on a 16-mile walk to the small Presbyterian church at Croick in eastern Ross-shire, Scotland. On the way the young McKenzie saw something he would never forget: the once proud people of Glencalvie huddled in a graveyard after being evicted from their land by an unscrupulous landlord. This memory would shape his whole life's philosophy and work."
One can imagine the questioning of a five-year old boy. "Why, Dad, why? Why are those poor people sleeping out in the open in a graveyard, Dad, why?"
Now we need to ask, "Why are there homeless, Dad? Why? Why?"
Aha John McKenzie one of my heroes in the Liberal Govt that broke up the 'great estates', particulalrly in the South Island and enacted all manner of socially responsible legislation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Liberal_Party
Yes, that's him and the story behind what drove him. My ancestors benefitted from his breaking up the big estates, and I guess, then, so did I. They were raised up from being farm workers to becoming farmers and well off enough to send their children away to high school. When McKenzie balloted off the Cheviot estate, from memory about 80 families were involved on about 34000 hectares.
"Between 1892 and 1911, the Crown offered 3.4 million ha of land for settlement, subdivided into 33,000 holdings. This included 209 estates totalling 486,000 ha bought for a total of £6 million (more than $1 billion today) and subdivided into 4800 holdings."
Yes, McKenzie is one of my heroes. Passion, anger, social justice, and above all political action and will.
McKenzie was so reviled by some in the community that the name McKenzie was dropped in favour of Cheviot.
Just makes sense.
Yep..!..it does make sense..
They wouldn't be short of things to do…
Now and into the future..
I https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300920423/live-health-minister-outlines-plan-to-battle-8000worker-shortage
what have Labour been doing for the past 5 plus years? Allowing this problem to snow ball
fucksake anker, there was a global pandemic, which, like many countries in the English speaking world, NZ was largely unprepared for. The pandemic had many impacts including stress overload for people working in government departments, the health sector, and parliament.
People are pretending that the pandemic is over, but we still have covid issues, long covid issues, and residual issues across health, supply lines, staffing and so on. Phone any call centre in NZ and most of them are short staffed or staffed by people new to the job who aren't very experienced. How do you expect systems to function well with that?
In the past five years Labour also dealt with the Mosque terrorism attack and the work with social media companies since, White Island, and multiple extreme weather events which we haven't been recovering from.
This is the slow collapse of civ under multiple, compounding crises. Pandemic, war, climate, social disintegration. Taking hardman positions about how people and political parties should perform just adds to the mess. The health system won't survive climate collapse on our current trajectory, our only hope is to drop GHGs fast and that requires transition to a completely new framework for society and running the country. This will include changing expectations about services.
By all means critique the structural and procedural issues within Labour and the decisions they have been making, but please don't ignore the number of elephants in the living room that Labour, or any government, have to contend with.
Don't forget the chronic underfunding that the Nats left, which was a concerted choice. Sure they could fix it overnight, so why aren't you pressuring for higher taxes on significant-richies?
I think I have said on this site before that I think Tops land tax is a good one.
I have. said many times on this site that the new health authority was the wrong priority. Front line staff is what the health system is, not bureaucrats and ideologues.
I am not convinced a wealth tax will work, because rich people will find ways of dodging that
TOP want to tax all land irrespective of the wealth of the owner. That means low income people including those on benefits or retired.
I am surprised at this criticism as for me if that is so the Greens wealth tax does similar. Many retired have only their family home and no expandable income to meet even a tiny amount of wealth tax. Those still to retire may have worked hard to pay down their mortgages and pay for their retirement by using KS and they are classed as 'wealthy'.
If there was a cut out for the family home and for Kiwisaver savings then The Greens wealth tax would be much fairer.
There is a $2m exemption per person. The average home is valued under $1m. Old people can defer payment – and while doing so the home goes up in value faster than the wealth tax liability.
Given the advantages of the revenue for poorer families …
Hey Shanreagh, let's create some scenarios based on what happens in real life and see how the play out.
You said,
Can you give me some more detail. Let's run the scenarios for couples and individuals. How much are their houses worth? How much KS do they have?
Ok, These are rough as guts. Just to show how in particular KS mounts up.
So a single person on 60,000 as at 2007 when KS starts. Decides to put in 8%. Employer puts in 2.5%
PAYE 11,020
8% of 60,000-11020 = 40980 x8% = 3278 plus 1500 from employer = 4778 say $5000 x 16 years $80,000 in contributions. I have no idea how much a KS balanced account would be returning over 16 years and there is the effect of compound interest. I worked part-time from 2007 to 2017 and I was surprised at how much had built up.
My points all along have been
1 To tax KS again ( KS has been paid from tax paid income ie after PAYE has been taken out) because someone has been financially prudent in putting away money for their retirement seems to me to be working against commonsense. NZ wants people to put aside for their retirement, successive Govts have encouraged this.
Younger people who have contributed say from 2007 and are not due to retire until 2052 will have built up a sizeable KS asset.
2 In the larger cities houses can be valued at say $1m, now. Even in my south Wellington suburb, always classed as a quirky but not high value suburb there are four properties for sale, two sections at $365,000 each and two houses for sale at $945,000. People live in their homes as family homes.
Many at retirement age may have their home, with a mortgage paid or nearly and a KS fund and not much cash yet they are expected to be paying a wealth tax because someone thinks that living in a city and contributing to KS makes you a rich fat cat.
A better option would be death duties, stamp duties or transaction tax on real estate sales. People often sell and usually die and these are painless way points.
But again if there is poverty, and there is, then this is a Govt function to do something about it. Extra $$$$ should be explicitly budgetted for in Vote: Social Welfare or Vote: ACC. The costs should be set up against other costs to be met by government.
General tax rate/PAYE should be reviewed. (this is part of the Greens plan). Then reimpose death duties or other taxes/levies etc if there is a shortfall across govt spending.
From my experience The Treasury does not favour tied tax preferring that the tax take go into the consolidated fund for the Government of the day to make its spending decisions on.
If a property is jointly owned then will each owner be assessed on their share? Does this mean that single people will not be able to 'divide' the assets as a partnered couple will be able to.
Do you realise that in the scenario you presented the person wouldn't pay any wealth tax?
Let's say the KS from 2007 to 2027 was $300,000. The house is worth $1m. That person is still $700,000 away from starting to pay any wealth tax.
I forgot to factor in the Govt's contribtions to KS was $1000pa and now is $500 apx pa.
It is the inequity of paying or having KS being counted towards a wealth tax bearing in mind it has been taxed once already, is likely to contain about $15-20,000 of Govt top-ups etc (why should a person pay a tax on a Govt top-up and has been a fundamental component of govts encouragement for people to provide for their own retirement.
If the property owned by .7% is what is called wealthy why is every property owner subject to the wealth tax? Or put another way why, if the family home, is known not to be in the league of 'wealth' why is it still included? Something doesn't tie up to me.
Sledge hammer to crack nut or in fact city dwellers with a long history of KS are going to get caught.
Why actually are
1 KS funds not excluded
2 the family home is not excluded
I know the answer will be administration but then dealing with nil returns can be a burden. Far better to have it targetted so it doesn't catch family homes or KS funds. It would still catch the wealth held in other property.
Do you accept that the scenario you provided wouldn't be affected by the tax?
So when you talk about the family home and KS, you seem to be talking about a principle, rather than what would actually happen.
You could make the arguent that all landowners in NZ are wealthy to some degree.
Well that seems to be the presumption that The Greens wealth tax is derived from.
no, it's really not. The Greens want to asset tax the top .7% of New Zealanders.
https://assets.nationbuilder.com/beachheroes/pages/17574/attachments/original/1687385898/Tax_Full_Policy_Document_22June.pdf?1687385898
Did the policy formulation take into account Kiwisaver balances? If so why are these not exempt from any calculation. Surely to have people saving for their retirement through KS is an individual & society good that should remain.
Are you able to provide the basis for the bolded figures
Almost all family homes (source please?) in Aotearoa come under the threshold for the Green Party’s proposed Wealth Tax, whether individually or jointly owned.
The Wealth Tax will be paid by 0.7% (source please?) of New Zealanders – the wealthiest few property owners (how many 'few' is not very specific) in the country, who can afford to contribute more.
Actually I am not that fussed on getting the figures that are bolded.
I just know that if the Wealth tax can be levied on a person like me, not me specifically though, that something has gone wrong with the parameters.
Having a home in a major city and KS balance should not mean that a person is classed as wealthy.
As I have said before The Greens are not on my favoured list for voting.
I do like the Healthy Homes part and the list of landlords/agents possibly? but there are more things I don't like in the policies released to date.
FIFY
Exactly and I don't believe that people with a home in the city and a KS balance especially ones who started in 2007 and have a while to go to retirement fall into the .7% of wealthy NZers.
If so we are poorer as a country than I thought.
IRD did a research paper on high net worth indivuals ie the type that most of us would truly call wealthy
https://www.ird.govt.nz/-/media/project/ir/home/documents/about-us/high-wealth-research-project/hwi-research-project/factsheets-supporting-hwi-report/tax-and-the-economic-income-of-the-wealthy.pdf?modified=20230420234159
My view is that these papers seem to me to be robust and a foundation for targetted policies at the truly wealthy rather than the catch-all blunt instrument in the Greens wealth policy.
https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-04/twp23-01.pdf
‘Explanation
Compared to the rest of the population, the
wealthiest people in New Zealand tend to earn
more through their investments rather than
from a salary or wage. The graph over the
page shows the personal taxable income of the
wealthiest families in New Zealand alongside
other forms of economic income.’
The Greens wealth tax treats homeowners as having an investment the family home?
"what have Labour been doing for the past 5 plus years?"
One of the things is to repeatedly undermine the nurses position and erode the trust between the workforce and 'the ministry'.
The latest example is announcing the offer made before the membership has voted on it. This was against the strong advice of the union. I spose the state is betting on the offer being accepted. Strike action is not a good look in election season.
For goodness sake gsays, they are treating nurses like s..t. It I was a nurse, I would be looking to go somewhere else where I was valued. The "ministry" or rather the bureucrats in charge of this need to go.
Roy Morgan is out , TPM on 7% – the summary from RM wildly misses the mark imo.
https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9292-nz-national-voting-intention-june-2023
that is a weird write up.
Bit of a concern that both Lab and GP dropped, but the RM is an odd poll. I'd like to see the numbers laid out in a chart.
I'm also not buying ACT at 15%.
They're also giving TOP as 3%. Of course, the critical issue for TOP is can Raf Manji take Ilam. If he can, then that 3% is anything but wasted vote.
Here's the comparison to the rest of the recent polls – which gives them all in chart form.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2023_New_Zealand_general_election
Seems rather freakish, that 7%, but maybe the Maori king has put the word out that Labour is no longer worth supporting.
So Bomber's analysis the other day was indicative of the overall trend…
Some puzzling stats in this poll.
In the all important female 18-49 bracket, Greens are on 8.5%, TMP are on 15%, Labour on 26% and National on 31%.
Will be a Curia out in the next few days….was polled Sunday night.
Will be interesting to see how aligned (or not) their results are.
The election is not very far away at all now, We've heard policies from every party now, it's time "Labour" released some policy.
At the very least to change the media narrative and to give voters a reason to vote for them, because it really feels they have ran out of steam and have no ideas and think they'll be able to win an election by scaring people about the other lot.
The greens and top are giving great reasons for people to vote for them. Act and National have released many policies… Hipkins has been leader for six months and all he's done is got rid of policies not announced them
It feels like labour is scared of releasing policy or just straight up has no ideas, if they do have ideas , tell us a couple so the public can look at them.
Market failure:
I predict that none of them will! Political parties producing policies in response to minority group pressure is a thing of the past. They all know they must serve the system.
That would be socialism. Ain't no political parties ever going to support that anymore. System controllers deem it taboo. Suit-wearers love landfills!
They can and will. Jeez, you'd think an ex-Labour minister might have learnt something in office: not to be disingenuous! Oh, Labour may prompt one of its team to do a bit of sloganeering at the situation. Perhaps even citation of a list of things Labour has actually done to help the strugglers. The ungrateful wretches seem to be in denial of those.
A bit of marketing nous would not go amiss here: call it a Labour food plan. Nats would never create any such thing. I presume he's going to the media because his ex-colleagues told him to bugger off…
Well it sure looks like socialism when a government actually provides lunches to children and young people up and down the country, for free.
Through Budget 2023, the Labour Government has provided funding to continue the Ka Ora, Ka Ako programme until the end of December 2024.
In 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Ka Ora, Ka Ako was expanded to include around 214,000 students, including secondary students.
"Healthy Lunches have literally changed the āhua in our kura over the last couple of weeks. Prior to lunches we had a lot of tamariki coming to school hungry and looking for kai from their friends and teachers. A lot of our tamariki were disengaged and unmotivated. Now, after two weeks of free lunches we have happy kids and happy teachers. Our children seem to be more motivated to learn and are more engaged.
Principal"
https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/overall-strategies-and-policies/wellbeing-in-education/free-and-healthy-school-lunches/
it sure looks like socialism
Correct. Note however, the number of Labour ministers that have described it as socialism! In a country where the trad ethos is to call a spade a spade…
Market failure, political parties, the system, food rescue, marketing nous, bugger off…
https://zerofoodwastechallenge.com/food-rescue/
https://www.foodbank.co.nz/
And a good website layout so folks can see the collective enterprise heading for nationwide coverage. Community enterprise at its best. Noteworthy absence: political party policy support. Hence my prediction…
I may have been too cryptic. I applaud the enterprise of the ex-minister and was just trying to make the point that democracy seems to transform politicians into aliens who feel entitled to do their thing separate from humans. Hence my prediction. I bet time will prove it right!
The first priorities of any social safety net are adequate wages and secure, affordable housing. I strongly feel that relying on first-responder charity model to plug gaps in government support is disgusting. And prone to stress as even more government funding is withdrawn, as seen in the UK, and as we would see under UK policy-loving Luxon.
foodbanks not the solution for austerity, June Guardian article
'12 years on the frontline had taught Bentley food banks were unsustainable, a fraying sticking plaster. “It was time for change,” she says, “You can’t keep throwing food at poverty.” The UK has witnessed a massive expansion in charity food over the past decade, a sector that is based on the idea that that the efforts of volunteers, together with thousands of tonnes of free surplus food, could meaningfully address the explosion in hardship and destitution created by years of austerity and cuts to social welfare. Now all that is starting to be questioned: have food banks actually worked? '
Yes, you open up an important dimension there. Yet from a Green perspective (movement, not party) bottom-up organising is essential. It's actually a form of biomimicry. Survival is based on ecosystemic relations & the organic processes they originate. Top-down state organising has been seen as a relative failure, historically. A model based on complementarity, in which both options are integrated into an holistic design, is likely where we are headed (globally).
Why are the act party so fucking piss weak?
The do nothing but punch down.
Avarice, they worship.
Willing to use the jackboot of the state to smash Tongan, Samoan, Indian, Cook, Han, Filipino, Korean, Slav and of course Māori.
Willing to talk about the corporations who dictate our affairs, in only fawning ways.
Willing to cause division for a grasp of power.
Crass, ratfuckers who make national look polite even.
Clueless on what we need to do to stay functioning in a world with higher average temperatures.
Clueless on the consequences, of well, almost anything.
Clueless on building, growing and enhancing community.
If you earn under $150,000 a year this party is about to screw you and yours up bad.
If your middle class you need to realize that act economic policies will smash more people into long term poverty, this is not good for your health and safety.
If you have aspirations, act is not the party for you, as they are the new zen masters of pull up the ladder politics.
Mind you, if your into vulgar cupidity, civil strife, organized crime, dirty politics, and love beating up on the weak – then act is the party for you.
Or if you just want to protest vote – try Te Pāti Māori then you know somewhere someone palled.
The party poses as libertarian but wants to abolish the Human Rights Commission, Waitangi Tribunal, re-write the TOW and having more people in prison. Criminalising the resulting protest – Maori, civil rights and human rights activists would do that.
The protection of the private property rights of those who were gifted government leasehold land, formerly land collectively owned by iwi (acquired by annexation by force) is what it is – part of the British Magna Carta (post Norman conquest land title) tradition. But sometimes common law – Anglo-Saxon law – reminds one that might is not right.
Parliament is a meeting place where voters are to be heard. Not just ACT lick spittle of privilege.
Is there any link between this
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/prepare-cybersecurity-revolution-zero-trust-strategy-unveiled-becker
and this paywalled story in the Herald?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/secret-cybersecurity-shakeup-little-confirms-defends-plan-smoked-out-by-protest-letter/FT5IP7SJ5BEXZC3KLUI2GINW24/
Also paywalled, but different first sentence:
nbr claims government to put CERT (computer emergency response team) into the National Cybersecurity Centre, without consulting industry stakeholders
Without further info, can't tell whether squawking is about industry losing government contracts, or it thinking the new org chart won't work.
The NCC is part of the Government Communications Security Bureau.
CERT
https://www.cert.govt.nz/about/about-us/