Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, September 5th, 2023 - 79 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
But..but..he's 82 ! Yea now he's 82. Been trying to dodge this ..for years. Those poor people… crushed. 115 killed.
I heard a passing mention on the tranny this morning (early, I hadn't woken up yet), about this.e
The PTB were more aiming at the engineering governing body and we're trying to hold them to account.
IMO..the Police passed on it….It cant be that 115 people just died…for nothing.
PTB what is this please?
PTB = Powers That Be.
NZ Labour. And the kind of moron we are up against.
A..trump supporting ! fuckwit.
Some take MAGAism way too seriously, but the political fruitcakes do need to be monitored just in case, as the Christchurch Mosque massacre tragically showed.
Act wants the return of semi-autos along with mounting attacks on workers rights and benefits–voters will keep an eye on them hopefully on Oct. 14!
For sure. Not only Chris….but previously Jacinda. And of course Greens James Shaw…attacked in a public street and suffered a fractured eye socket.
After a couple of sleeps I gotta say the CTU ad having a crack at Luxon feels like a mis-step.
Far rather the meagre resources were spent high-lighting why members should support Labour.
A punchy sentence about FTA for example. Or encouraging and supporting folk to vote.
This negative, personal strategy leaves a bad taste and implies people can't work through the issues themselves.
So far the only defence Ive read is 'They do it too…'
Pic in this article for those that haven't seen it
https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/04-09-2023/is-the-ctu-doing-psyops-for-the-national-party
Thanks weka, that helps.
Now that I look at that image on a laptop there is a jarring brutal irony.
Here is the CTU and all it's might having a dubious crack at Luxon.
They appear to be rather mute on the other issue in the image. Namely Michael Woods and Andrew Little's
Migrant Visa ScandalApproved Employer Scheme.Where is the CTU on that? (Not asking you, just getting rhetorical).
they're campaigning, they're not going to attack Labour, they want Labour to win despite the limitations.
It is possible to stick up for the workers, stick it to the accredited employers/labour hire companies without attacking Labour.
CTU has made a few submissions on immigration-related policy and legislation in recent years and have been consistently in favour of measures to eliminate exploitation.
Submission on the Worker Protection (Migrant and Other Employees) Bill
9.5-9.6 continue their general opposition to work visas being tied to employers.
Submission on Modern Slavery and Worker Exploitation
Submission on MBIE's Temporary Migrant Worker Exploitation Review
3.1 continues their general opposition to work visas being tied to employers.
Submission on the MBIE Consultation on a New Approach to Employer assisted Work Visas and Regional Workforce Planning
Recommendation 7 recommends not tying work visas to employers.
One thing that did come up in this quick check was that the current accreditation model was intended to reduce exploitation because it could be used to remove access to migrant labour (by revoking accreditation) and CTU supported that but also made comments about resourcing needing to be sufficient to actually carry out the enforcement. Obviously that hasn't happened to date.
Thanks Craig.
It is a flawed strategy–don’t use your opponents image for starters–from an organisation that has been very low profile for decades apart from the Helen Kelly period. The NZCTU excels in being subservient to State Sector affiliates & “welcoming” anything and everything that the Labour Caucus deigns to announce.
The NZ working class have long needed a fighting class left central labour organisation since the demise of the NZ Federation of Labour in 1987. But this is not an easy build given the substantial collapse of private sector union density since the Natzos first union busting ECA in 1991. Sure FIRST Union, Unite, Etū, Maritime and Dairy Workers have done some great work, but a Mick Lynch ain’t going to happen at the CTU while the PSA and friends are in charge.
NActFirst have ECA mkII well in train–a blatant attack on the NZ working class in favour of capital. Rather than attack Baldrick, the ad could better have led with the Natzos hit list of minimum wage etc. etc. etc. and a call to arms and defence of the gains made since 2017.
I absolutely agree with yr final paragraph. Some enjoy easy potshots at Luxon over his appearance, they come across as shallow and petty. Go him for his conflict of interest in being a landlord and proposing making landlording more profitable.
Your mention of Helen Kelly and thinking about Ardern, I doubt this CTU ad would have got approval from either of them.
I'm sure the ad, billboards and other sundries cost a pretty penny and it seems squandered. Kinda fitting.
It's a sliding scale. Something like Citizens for Rowling in 1975 was clearly a misstep – a group of liberal intellectuals who were pretty much right in what they said about Muldoon, but clearly gave the impression of talking down to voters. The condescension of it was grist to the mill of Muldoon and his so-called "Rob's mob", which was an earlier incarnation of "Waitakere Man". And it made no difference to the election result.
The CTU ad is not so clear cut. It's a trade union organisation with members who have legitimate interests, not a self-appointed group of supposed thought-leaders. The ad plugs into a commonly noted fact that many people are not really comfortable with Luxon in the way they were with Key.**. It is well-timed by following the grubby fiasco of letting foreign buyers back in. It gave Hipkins a chance to point out that the Taxpayers Union is a National Party front. It was a lead-in to discussing the implications for workers of National's policies. It provoked a response from National which will now make them look hypocritical if they respond with similar ads – I suspect these are already sitting in the pipeline – and they may be thinking about whether they need to pull some of them or not.
The only thing about it that crossed a line was how it made use of Luxon's unprepossessing physical appearance. In that feature alone I think it started to look like some of the unsavoury stuff that comes from the right. It's a common tactic though, for example the NZ Herald subtly uses pictures of Hipkins suffused in an orange wash, while Luxon is mostly crystal-sharp and making decisive hand-gestures like a man in the act of 'getting things done' (not spouting inane, scripted lines). So overall I'm not certain it was a misstep.
** Key's supposed likeability always baffled me. I am probably odd or unusual, but after seeing Key on the telly I always felt like I should be hosed down with antiseptic for my health's sake.
And many others..incl me ! sir Key always struck me as not as affable/likeable as he purported. A fake even….with quite a strange sleazy component. That poor Waitress for one….
Yes, sir Key seemed “off” for sure, even Winston asked if “the carpet matched the curtains” and introduced the nation to a new kink…trichophilia–hair fetishism.
“Shonkey” (rhymes with “Jean Qui“ a friend said), certainly had twin turbo boost support from Finance Capital one way or another in his political affairs. The off shore Trust debacle for instance…there is quite a trail there that so many NZers seemed totally oblivious to.
Critics need to appreciate:
The CTU is not talking to the general voting public. They are talking to their own people. I refer to the factory workers, the road workers, forest workers, cleaners, carpenters, transport workers, port workers etc. etc.
What better way to get the message across than wrapping it in the newspaper with the largest readership as well as hoardings in cities across NZ – assuming they are in places other than Wellington.
Good point Anne.
IE Me….and many thousands of others..who NAct will standover….and steal from.
I'm one of them too. E Tu. That's why I have a bee in my bonnet on this, I reckon my fees have been squandered.
Whatever..take it up with them. Or NAct if they win…
I'm going hard out to prevent that…
"Whatever.."
I suppose that passes for modern solidarity.
I take yr point about Luxon/Key. Whenever I see Key I reckon you would have to count yr fingers if you shook his hand. Too smarmy for my liking.
As to hypocrisy, that would be anyone who bemoaned dirty politics/Bretheren/Whaleoil but think this CTU effort is ok.
You really see equivalence? Bizarre.
You either play with a straight bat or not.
lol..whatever . I call bizarre equivalence.
So labour bas someone in the office next to the pm feed hit prices to the ctu?
That's what national was doing with whaleoil
Let's not get carried away.
Not for a moment do I think that Hipkins didn't know about the ad.
Maybe you should be telling Luxon, Bishop and the other Nats that.
Luxon has been slogging to cow corner ever since he became leader.
Well this is interesting…
IMO doesnt pass any independence test….
Is'n that the University that paid just under $1million to Steven Joyce for his consultancy services?
Matey..you are so correct. Not even pretty legal. IMO Dodgy as fuck
This is a big issue Psyc. It needs to be pushed into the debate as often as possible, with mention of the million for Joyce too.
Very close to corruption.
Man, I reckon. The very high collusion level of them. Its does really look corrupt.
Who happens to be the sitting chair of the RBNZ.
Rob Campbell….?
https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/about-us/our-people/our-board-members#Neil_Quigley
Oh really? Good on you find that too ! I was kinda gobsmacked with just the Shane Reti Nat connection.
Pretty sure he's the son of former National and later ACT MP Derek Quigley, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Quigley
This gets shadier and shadier….there are votes in this for the Left.
There is a power outage where my server is. I just shifted to a different UPS.
Depends on Vector about how long the outage takes to deal with. In the meantime, I have involuntary lunch time. What can I have without power…
Time to raid the fruit bowl?
I would, but there was only a shrivelled apple and a mandarin with a green-blue blemish.
I didn’t have time to shop on the weekend because of work, and my partner was finishing a course before heading offshore with her dad.
Anyone generating sympathy for 60,000 indolent millennial louches at the Burning Man mess?
Mostly amusement.
some of the most satisfying schadenfreude all year.
No.
It is only news because it is happening in the USA.
… the sign of a rainbow.
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2023/09/03/multimedia/burning-man-explainer-jtcv/burning-man-explainer-jtcv-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp
Elon Musk and Paris Hilton turned up
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/03/style/what-is-burning-man.html
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Burning+Man+mess%3F#ip=1
The one in 2022 was the first since 2019 (COVID).
A return to the dust bowl years, the grapes of wrath and the old south. Post Weimar Republic and the Trumpian era.
Carnivale
[lprent: deleted as simple minded spam with no apparent content.
Gloating by simpletons whilst wanking should wait until after an election. Something that has to be won first.
This is your only warning. ]
Havent you got a bridge to be under?
Go on Lynn. Ban me then you [deleted]
[lprent: First rational and responsible thing you have said. Bye. ]
Truth hurts eh Lynn. See ya lol.
You have about as much of relationship with “truth” as Trump does.
What are you worried about? I simply did what you asked for. Banned you on your request after I’d dealt with you spurting spam on my site.
Being a ignorant sexual fetishist isn’t a problem. Stupid spam in the site is. And the truth is that you asked to be banned.
You really are a bit of a knuckle dragger.
thanks. He's been warned before.
I can never understand why Labour cannot encapsulate in a really simple way the fundamentally flawed ideas around neo-liberalism and how such a system sucks wealth into one small corner of the world's population, so that average voters can understand. Instead, it lets the nactoids off the hook by letting them get away with "national's the party with the economic smarts" etc. Surely it's these really basic ideas that need to be at the heart of Labour's campaign.
One of the reasons they don't diss neo-liberalism is that they are the main practitioners of it.
Snap.
Dumb comments like this plays to the "they are both the same" meme.
The policies of the Left are very different to those of the Right being put forward at this election.
Please acknowledge this gsays.
I wouldn't say very different. I see the two main parties as the the two closest aligned parties in Parliament.
And not only dumb….there is this.
Now that it's not first thing in the morning, I have re-read yr comment.
There is nothing dumb in observing that this incarnation of Labour is dyed in the wool neo-liberal. To imply otherwise is very shallow thinking.
Little's new Te Whatu Ora is an example. Going for 'efficiencies' in the back office functions, payroll and IT systems. All well and good but still out-sourcing catering, laundry, security, grounds, parking…
Woods and Little and their Approved Employer Scheme. Because, for some reason, we can't train welders and drivers anymore. So subcontract it. Neo-liberal as. Nurses, doctors, dentists the list goes on.
Maybe the onus is on you to demonstrate how they are not neo-liberal.
Beginning to think we need a post forecasting NZ after a term of ACT with 20% of Cabinet.
only if it's to scare lefties to stand up and fight for this election.
Latest election polling from Roy Morgan – has ACT on 18% to National's 31% – with the combined right total having enough seats to govern (i.e. not needing NZF or another 3rd party).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2023_New_Zealand_general_election
In this scenario – ACT with over half of the National total (23 seats to National's 39) would theoretically be in a very strong position in a coalition – in terms of getting their policy enacted. Especially as they've increased 4% (compared to the previous poll by this pollster) – so going up, while National has dropped slightly.
I don't recall a minor party with such a strong position vis-a-vis the major one in a previous NZ election.
Should the polls reverse (as is always a possibility) – the strong performance of the GP is putting them in the same position in relation to Labour.
As others have been saying – the policy platform of the 'minor' parties is more relevant than ever in this election.
I think it was Hooten that observed a few weeks ago about how the two main parties share of the vote was at an all time low. If they both keep trending down as they appear to be the minor parties may not ne so minor in October.
Its traditional for minor parties to do well in polls prior to election day but once people get to vote many slink back to one of the two main parties. The exception to the rule are the Greens who tend to be the other way round. They do less well in pre-election polls but come up trumps on election day.
I guess it depends on how far back you go for your tradition.
It doesn't seem to have been the case for the 2020 and the 2017 elections – where the minor parties final election results were well within the margin of error of immediate (as in the month before) poll results.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2020_New_Zealand_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_New_Zealand_general_election
You have to go back to 2014 to find a significant variation – and that was the GP polling around 2-3% less in the final election than they had in the polls immediately prior. The rest of the minor parties were within the margin of error.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2014_New_Zealand_general_election
In the 2011 election, the GP again dropped around 2-3% from the month prior polls (or more, if you look at the 2 immediately before election day) – but NZF actually polled significantly higher on election day than they did in any poll apart from the one immediately before election day
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2014_New_Zealand_general_election
I don't see a pattern of all minor parties polling well immediately before election day, and then have a significant difference in the final election result. And, indeed, the only party that this has happened for in the last 12 or so years, has been the Green Party.
Another interesting point is what it (this high vote for the minor parties) does to the electorate list for the major ones.
Given that (apart from Swarbrick for the GP, Seymour for ACT and the TPM winning 2-3 electorate seats) – the vast majority of the electorates will go to Labour or National. So if there are high numbers of party votes for ACT/GP and possibly NZF – it's pretty unlikely that many list MPs from Labour and National will be getting into parliament. If ACT get 23 seats – 22 of them will be list; if the GP get 16 seats, 15 of them will be list. If NZF get over the line, that's another 7, all list. That's leaving only 15 or so list places to be split between National and Labour.
Likely to make a big difference to the government – whichever side wins. At the current polling (and bearing in mind that electorates may switch from Labour to National, 'freeing up' list places) – it doesn't look likely that Rurawhe, Little or Parker will in the next Parliament.
Harder to tell for National – since the majority of their top list places are standing in winnable electorates as well.
At the 24 poll level – 30 seats (maybe up a few more with the wasted vote re-allocated).
In the past Labour got around 25 seats with that party list vote. Higher or lower based on the Maori electorate numbers.
In the past, Labour didn't have the high numbers of list seats being taken up by ACT and the GP.
Of the 30 seats they'll get (at 24%) – the vast majority look as though they're going to be electorate seats (safe Labour seats). That leaves very few to come in off the list.
It makes no difference to Labour's cjrcumstance, if National or ACT/Green gets the party list seats, when Labour is at 24% in the polls.
It will still be c25 electorates and 30 seats either way.
Though good Greens are at a higher level.
It could mean National will win a lot of electorate seats back (2020) and more (2017-2014-2011-2008). But at a low 31% of the poll.
Labour 25 MP 2-3 ACT 1. National 43-44 electorates – no list seats whatsoever. Maybe some overhang.
I know it makes no difference in the total number of seats. But it has the potential to make a huge difference in the representation. If the majority of the Labour party in parliament are the electorate MPs in safe seats, rather than a mixture with the list. Just go and have a look at the list-only MPs at the top of Labour's party list. That's a lot of experience that's at serious risk of not being back in parliament.
The same as other elections between 2005 and 2020 and those at risk, Parker and Little do not care – they are there for a third term, not to do another 3 years in opposition and retire in 2026.
The New Zealand Party, The Alliance, New Zealand First, so not so unusual Belladonna. It happens at cross roads when big events have clouded choices.
So which year would this be then? I've checked back to 2011 – and not seen any evidence.
Are you talking about last century? It can hardly be a tradition if it hasn't happened in the last 20 years……