Open mike 07/11/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 7th, 2023 - 198 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 …

198 comments on “Open mike 07/11/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Dennis Frank 1
    7 November 2023 at 6:40 am

    Labour MPs must do the right thing today; ensure Hipkins remains leader. He campaigned well and nobody else seems a viable alternative at this point.

    So what if he seems to not have the faintest clue what Labour did to alienate so many voters? None of the others in Labour have demonstrated that they get it yet.

    Also, it would be a great help to Luxon for him to remain in place & continue being ineffectual, and poor Humpty needs all the help he can get. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/501832/labour-s-caucus-to-vote-on-chris-hipkins-leadership

    • Jester 1.1
      7 November 2023 at 7:41 am

      Other than Grant Robertson who may end up retiring, I can't think of anyone in Labour that could replace Hipkins. There used to be talk about Michael Wood and Kiri Allen but they are goneburger.

      • Tiger Mountain 1.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 8:25 am

        As a voter–Green since Mana–imo there needs to be an ABH club (anyone but Hipkins…) because that is where NZ Labour should be at if they ever want to be a major party again.

        Plus, power needs to go back to ordinary members rather than reside with Fraser House and Caucus. This election does not have to happen yet under Labour rules (3 months after GE as I understand it), and it seems a pre-emptive move to exclude the membership at large by the die hard Rogernomes.

        Chris Hipkins is a neo Blairist, under “his watch” there will be no serious impingements on the power of capital or finance capital. So if the Caucus votes for Mr Hipkins today the trajectory for Labour is pretty obvious–an election loser as opposition leader will not be a pleasant spectacle for those that want…

        –Wealth Tax and CGT
        –Union Rights not Union busting
        –Free Dental for all
        –Fare Free public transport, and retention of the wage increases for drivers and contracting methods that Michael Wood achieved
        …and many of you will know the rest of the list that basically encapsulates a “for the many not the few” approach beneficial for working class New Zealanders.

    • Ad 1.2
      7 November 2023 at 8:23 am

      26.7% support down from 50% 3 years previously is not "campaigning well".

      Having one good tv debate is not "campaigning well".

      Losing nearly all the Maori seats, and a vast swathe of previously safe electorate seats is not "campaigning well".

      Having no policy platform or manifesto is not "campaigning well".

      Having attracted near-zero donors to fight the campaign is not "campaigning well".

      Having trashed and burned most of its key policies 4 months before the election is not "campaigning well".

      Having neither excuse nor accountability for catastrophic failure is not "campaigning well."

      Chris Hipkins is Labour's worst performing Prime Minister and Labour leader in decades.

      • Dennis Frank 1.2.1
        7 November 2023 at 8:26 am

        I would have used a sarc emoji if someone had invented one & provided it to us keen users… smiley

      • Ghostwhowalks 1.2.2
        7 November 2023 at 10:37 am

        https://www.labour.org.nz/news-labour_manifesto_2023

        Orchestrated litany of …..falsehoods ,Ad

      • theotherpat 1.2.3
        7 November 2023 at 11:00 am

        i would confess that for the first time in my voting life i gave both my votes to the greens….i saw no hope with labour and the "right" but would say that "chippy" had a lot of choices made for him…hes just the leader and the wave after Labours win and Jacinders covid successes albeit telling the population you WILL do this and that had broken and they were found wanting…..people voted anything but labour mostly and its so bad that total numbnuts like seymour and peters are with us again…..scary shit.

        • Ghostwhowalks 1.2.3.1
          7 November 2023 at 12:31 pm

          Polling 'averages' had Labour roughly at the same level as National mid year, but for some reason dropped away to the final result

          Covid restrictions never came up , except for the loony fringe and they are 2-3%

          Its the economy , inflation , interest rates, petrol price rises, the constant scare about recession – which never came- but didnt change the narrative.

          National always plays the crime card , and that worked in Auckland and maybe elsewhere

          • Tiger Mountain 1.2.3.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 2:44 pm

            Various polls show that NZ Labour numbers dived after then offshore Chippy’s Cap’n’s call on wealth tax, some may say that was coincidental, many credible pundits do not, but really…given that David Parker chucked his portfolio on the Cabinet table it was both self sabotage and the die hard Rogernomes last gasp.

            • Ghostwhowalks 1.2.3.1.1.1
              7 November 2023 at 4:25 pm

              That sort of tax doesnt have public support as Hipkins noted , so your claim is counter intuitive .

              A no the push poll by the campaign for wealth taxes doesnt count

              • mikesh …
                7 November 2023 at 6:01 pm

                So what. Most of the population would not be eligible for it, so it would not stop them voting labour. Those that would have to pay it probably don't vote labour anyway. Apart from the latter I think most would be indifferent to the measure.

          • Cricklewood 1.2.3.1.2
            7 November 2023 at 8:24 pm

            It didnt come up but that long Auckland lockdown killed Labour at least in Auckland and the mandates were problematic in a bunch of the pacifica churches in that they caused some pretty deep divisions with the congregations. Pretty sure that was a big contributing factor to the poor turnout.

            Crime I think played a pretty big role in Roskill and Mount Albert with the local dairy owners having a bloody tough time of it and having Labour mps appear to minimize the issues woyld have been pretty damaging I would have thought.

      • Corey 1.2.4
        7 November 2023 at 12:16 pm

        100% worst Labour prime minister, period. I genuinely can't think of a worse Labour prime minister, Palmer… Maybe.

        I genuinely believe the man wanted Labour to lose the election, he's a small c conservative and genuinely believes in neolib econic theory and knew a lab, green, tpm govt would never be able to implement the economic policies he believes in, so spent all year tanking the govt.

        The alternative is that he's actually genuinely that incompetent, out of touch, smug and arrogant that he thought he was making good decisions this year.

        Either way. He must go.

        There's no reason to have this caucus vote before January.

        I can't believe he genuinely wants to fight 2026. Maybe he really is that delusional and smug and this WAS him trying to win.

      • Bearded Git 1.2.5
        7 November 2023 at 1:54 pm

        26.9 actually…but I agree Hipkins has to go…I think Robertson deserves a go if he can be persuaded to stay.

      • SPC 1.2.6
        7 November 2023 at 2:00 pm

        You would be a passable witch hunter in New England, finding someone to blame for a bad harvest so the community could move on without them.

        An ABH/ABC reprise is hardly useful to a party that has been down that road before.

        That said

        1.the electorate does not like disunity and there was division in the ranks over a wealth tax.
        2.the party did not lose campaigning for wealth tax, so this policy has not been impugned by election defeat (be grateful for that).

    • Mike the Lefty 1.3
      7 November 2023 at 8:30 am

      Labour certainly needs a new leader but (assuming that Grant Robertson is not interested) there is no obvious successor.

      Possible candidates in my mind would be Ginny Anderson, Deborah Russell, Keiran McAnulty, Priyanca Radhakrishnan.

      Perhaps Labour needs to take a chance, pick some relatively fresh raw recruit who will re-energize the party and promote the kind of progressive democratic socialist policies that it has become afraid of in the last few years. They will have three years to make a mark and as we saw with Jacinda, this is certainly not impossible.

      But being Labour they will probably plod on with Hipkins for another couple of years, afraid to do anything different and when they finally pick another leader for the 2026 general election it will be late to make an impact.

    • Obtrectator 1.4
      7 November 2023 at 10:34 am

      Why is Labour nearly always so freakin short of potential leaders, especially when a highly effective one is suddenly lost? Think back:

      1974: Norm Kirk dies in office, the ineffectual Rowling gets in and stays in, even when it's obvious he can't cope with Muldoon

      1989: David Lange resigns abruptly, role passes to a No2 who should never have been a No1 at all; aftermath eventually sees the panic installation of Moore as the votes continue to haemorrhage

      2008: Helen Clark resigns on election night (VERY ill-advised move – if it was advised at all); we all know what happened over the next 9 years

      2023: Ardern stages another abrupt resignation, also apparently with no proper consideration of the succession plan

      2024: As others have remarked already, who the **** is there? How many apart from Robertson have really grown or achieved the requisite high profile (for the right reasons) in their governmental roles? I repeat: where's all the bloody talent?

    • Law 1.6
      7 November 2023 at 3:43 pm

      True that !

    • Louis 1.7
      7 November 2023 at 4:49 pm

      Labour does indeed have some ideas on why they lost the election.

      "Little puts that election result down to three things: Losing Auckland, losing on crime and losing public confidence because of a raft of ministers coming a cropper over the past year.

      “Auckland was the region that had it toughest in the Covid response … there was extreme frustration. I think we lost Auckland a couple of years ago.” He said crime issues – especially retail crime – then reflected badly on the Government. “And I think it was a downward spiral from them.

      “It was a second-term Government when other things went wrong and ministers had to step out of Cabinet. That undermines public confidence in the Government of the day and I think we suffered from that.”

      Andrew Little on his exit, Labour’s chances of avoiding an implosion in Opposition, why it lost the election and his Jacinda Ardern handover

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/andrew-little-on-his-exit-labours-chances-of-avoiding-an-implosion-in-opposition-why-it-lost-the-election-and-his-jacinda-ardern-handover/FQWEQFNHJ5EYBLPYTA6P4FPP7A/

  2. Sanctuary 2
    7 November 2023 at 7:49 am

    Listening to Chloe utterly own Corin Dann on the wireless right now is delightful. She is an incredibly formidable politician, the Juliet Moses and all the rest of the astroturf Israeli/TPU propagandist fronts that have suddenly popped up must f*cking hate her.

    The unfavourable contrast with Labour’s middle class milquetoast female Auckland MPs couldn’t be jarring.

    • Tiger Mountain 2.1
      7 November 2023 at 8:12 am

      Chloe is great, partly because she is a dialectical thinker, which is rare indeed among Parliamentarians.

      A glimpse at wiki shows her depth and why young people in particular love her.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlöe_Swarbrick

      • Mike the Lefty 2.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 8:45 am

        Martin Bradbury at The Daily Blog thinks Chloe Swarbrick is the best thing since sliced bread and I think he would gladly throw his cloak over a puddle to keep her feet dry.

        Mind you, I do admire that Chloe is one of the very few left wing politicians outside Te Pati Maori who are not afraid to get in the faces and up the noses of the political right.

    • Francesca 2.2
      7 November 2023 at 8:50 am

      She is terrific!!

      I love her to bits

      • Tiger Mountain 2.2.1
        7 November 2023 at 9:00 am

        Same, and there are virtually zero politicians over the decades that I would ever have used “love” in reference to!

        • Francesca 2.2.1.1
          7 November 2023 at 9:16 am

          heart

          • Ghostwhowalks 2.2.1.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 12:25 pm

            Will end up as a 'beltway lobbyist' in Thorndon

            Her background was as a business owner from a upper middle class family, this left wing politics is just a 20-30 something 'phase'

            • Francesca 2.2.1.1.1.1
              7 November 2023 at 12:44 pm

              I don't agree.When I first came across her running for Auckland mayor I groaned .I thought , head prefect, captain of the debating team

              No, she was hopeless and unhappy at school, is "neurally divergent",(ADHD) has suffered badly from chronic depression , struggled with having been adopted and family bustup.

              She's had troubles in her life and owns up to them

              To me she doesn't in the least conform to middle class formality, although she looks that way .I think it's where she gets her empathy from .God knows where she's got her formidable intellect from

              • Francesca …
                7 November 2023 at 12:57 pm

                "normality" dunno where the f came from

              • Ghostwhowalks …
                7 November 2023 at 2:20 pm

                BA and LLB , its very middle class. for young woman from Epson Girls Grammar It seems the lost soul side of things doesnt match up with high achiever and business startup person and marketeer at 2 Degrees

                Running for mayor , it seems she was proud of per mojo and confidence

                For the past few years my partner Alex and I have started multiple businesses, so ever since I was 17, I’ve been sitting in meetings with people who are twice or triple my age and convincing them to work with me and then – this sounds so pretentious, but – blowing them away.

                However shes certainly one of the more capable people in parliament

      • Anker 2.2.2
        7 November 2023 at 11:37 am

        Is that the same Chole Swarbrick of "pure trans joy" after women were bashed in Albert Park? …………….for me re Chole yeah, no.

        • Francesca 2.2.2.1
          7 November 2023 at 11:42 am

          I don't agree with her there but on just about everything else I think she has good instincts.She may even sway me on the trans stuff.

          No one is perfectly tailor made for one's own beliefs and ideas.

          • Anker 2.2.2.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 11:50 am

            https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018914297

            Is this the interview you are referring to? Why won't she answer the question about using the phrase "from the river to the sea"?

            BTW I don't take sides on the middle east. It would be arrogant of me to do so, because I am not very well informed on it.

            But if you are taking the side of the peace activists I think you would condemn the violence on both sides. Thats what being a peace activist means. At least to me anyway

              • Anker …
                7 November 2023 at 1:49 pm

                I wouldn't pretend to know what the many meanings are of from the river to the sea are nor what it really means.

                Heard from a friend of a Jewish friend that a concert that was going to be held by the Jewish community cancelled through fear. I don't know if that is a reasonable or unreasonable reaction, but I am sorry for it.

                Chole is entitled to use the from "the river to the sea" chant. Free speech should not be shut down (unless people start directly calling for violence against Jews).

                I wouldn't begin to take sides. I neither support Hamas, especially after 7th October nor do I suport the PM of Israel whose name I can't spell

                I feel very sad for all the Israeli and Palestine people who just want a peaceful life. Its really tragic

                • francesca …
                  7 November 2023 at 3:07 pm

                  I do too Anker

                  I find tragic and terrible the 30 Israeli children killed by Hamas as well as the 4000 Palestinian children killed by the Israelis.

                  If it's an eye for an eye….where do we end up?

              • Belladonna …
                7 November 2023 at 2:30 pm

                So, even from a fairly partisan site, the meaning is complex – and highly open to 'misinterpretation'.

                A poor choice of language from Swarbrick – unless her intention was to support that brand of Palestinian nationalism that advocates for the destruction of Israel.

                • SPC …
                  7 November 2023 at 3:17 pm

                  Some would call it reading the crowd, speaking after Twyford …

                  Since the reality of 1948 and the Oslo Accord, the most common meaning is the concept of justice for Palestinians from the river to the sea – the status of Arab citizens of Israel, the right of return of refugees and an end to the post 1967 Israel occupation.

                  • Belladonna …
                    7 November 2023 at 4:37 pm

                    I have no doubt that her speech was politically motivated (she's a politician, after all), and was designed to appeal to a fairly radical pro-Palestinian crowd.

                    There are multiple different interpretations of the phrase. The one favoured by Hamas (in the centre of the current conflict), is considerably more radical than your 'most common meaning'

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea

                    Even if this was not the interpretation favoured by Swarbrick, she made a major error in using such a controversial phrase.

                    We can see this, as the conversation has shifted to how anti-Semitic Swarbrick is, rather than the situation in Gaza.

                    • Muttonbird …
                      7 November 2023 at 4:58 pm

                      Meh.

                      David Seymour not six months ago called for the Ministry of Pacific Peoples to be blown up. He wants to rewrite The Treaty of Waitangi to suit his constituency. David Seymour constantly makes major errors in using controversial phrases. The conversation for many years has been about racist David Seymour is.

                      It does him no harm at all, in fact the more radical he grows, the stronger he becomes…

                    • SPC …
                      7 November 2023 at 5:21 pm

                      Support for Palestinians is not antisemitism.

                    • Grey Area …
                      7 November 2023 at 6:11 pm

                      Not anti-Semitic. Anti-Zionist, like a lot of us. Nice try.

                      The conversation has shifted due to, as Muttonbird says down thread, it being weaponised by the usual suspects – Seymour, Moses, Farrar et al.

                • Molly …
                  7 November 2023 at 3:51 pm

                  She was either was unaware of the eradication perspective, (which makes her uninformed) – or – she was knowledgeable and chose to use the phrase anyway, instead of using a personal speech to indicate support.

                • Francesca …
                  7 November 2023 at 4:47 pm

                  The controversy is in the eye of the beholder

                  To me those words do not signify that Israel doesn't have the right to exist .But any notion of Palestinian sovereignty or freedom is an existential threat to the more nationalistic Israelis it seems

                  For many the words "woman" or "breast feeding" or" vagina" (more acceptable apparently would be "bonus hole") are considered to be controversial and existentially threatening ., even hate speech

                  Its all getting a bit overhyped and hysterical

              • Mike the Lefty …
                7 November 2023 at 4:48 pm

                This "river to the sea" business is being used as a distraction from the shambles of the political right trying to form a government.

                Mr "Free Speech" David Seymour is suddenly not so free speech at all.

                The worst thing is that the MSM is too dumb to see it.

                • Muttonbird …
                  7 November 2023 at 5:29 pm

                  Yeah, why does the conservative right suddenly want to ban phrases? Can't say, "from the river to the sea". Can't say, "trans women are women". Someone's always offended these days.

                  Freedom, liberation, emancipation seem increasing to be dirty concepts. :?

                  • Anker …
                    7 November 2023 at 8:50 pm

                    You are perfectly entitled to say trans women are women, but I will argue against that from a biological reality perspective. I won't try and cancel your speach.

                    When GC feminists say trans identifying males are not women, then the shit hits the fan. People get cancelled and accused of bigotry.

                    I am not sure Seymour said Chloe couldn't use that phrase. I think he just commented on it

          • Anker 2.2.2.1.2
            7 November 2023 at 11:57 am

            Whatever ones views are of the trans issue (or what I see is the women's rights issue) , the Greens utterly failed to condemn the violence at a demonstration they supported and attended. When Marama Davidson was asked directly if she condemned the violence against women at Albert Park, she failed to do so. This from the Minsiter of Violence and Family Violence reduction should have lead to her sacking. Chole mis-represented the protests at Albert Park as pure trans joy and failed to address the violence. This tells me she is not really interested in peace and non violence, but is wedded to her side and will over look violence.

            "She may even sway me on the trans stuff". What might you be swayed on? Trans women (biological men) are women? Trans identifying males should be allowed in womens change rooms? Sports? Of course you are entitled to your views whatever they are

            • Francesca 2.2.2.1.2.1
              7 November 2023 at 12:45 pm

              Maybe a less intransigent view of trans .
              I remain open and willing to be persuaded
              At the least I’m prepared to cut a little slack

              • Anker …
                7 November 2023 at 1:55 pm

                I have an intransigent view on biological sex. It exists, there are only two sexes and sometimes sex matters, i.e. when women's biological sex makes them vulnerable or dis advantaged (as in sport) or there is a need to protect women and girls privacy and dignity as in change rooms and toilets. Not much to ask for, but from my point of view that is non negotiable and someone like Chloe, no matter how charismatic, articulate or firebrand she is, will not make me budge.

                As to transgender people, I wish them well with their endeavours to secure suitable public toilets, change rooms sporting competitions etc etc. I think Winston Peters in his opionin on the need for sex based toilets also said something about providing alternatives for transgender people. So he could be someone they lobby.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 2.3
      7 November 2023 at 11:54 am

      I like Chloe Swarbrick, but she shows remarkable lack of judgement with the "river to the sea" chant. This phrase is aligned with hamas and while you can argue "but I mean it differently" – should you really be using an iconic phrase popular with terror groups? You can support Palestinian rights, without that.

      • SPC 2.3.1
        7 November 2023 at 3:24 pm

        It first relates to the concept of a unitary Palestinian state – the Arab position back in 1947.

        Since the reality of 1948, the most common meaning is the concept of justice for Palestinians from the river to the sea – the status of Arab citizens of Israel, the right of return of refugees and an end to the post 1967 Israel occupation.

        Hamas take it back to the original meaning. An acceptance of an interim 1967 border state (with the return of refugees to 1948 border Israel), but only as steps towards a unitary state.

        • Muttonbird 2.3.1.1
          7 November 2023 at 3:47 pm

          And Israel and pro-Israeli groups have weaponised it for their own ends.

          The usual suspects; Seymour, Farrar and Moses are having a meltdown over it.

          • Francesca 2.3.1.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 4:56 pm

            yes

          • Terry 2.3.1.1.2
            7 November 2023 at 5:18 pm

            Well given that both Hamas and Iran have more or less said that they want the destruction of Israel, which could then mean the death of every Jew, along with Muslim and Christian Israels, numbering in the millions of people. The use of this phrase could easily be seen as a way of saying death to the Jews, without saying the actual words.

            You can certainly support a Palestinian state, call for a ceasefire in Gaza and now the West Bank. And at the same time express your support for the existence of Israel, & a belief that all these people live in peace.

            If you don’t support the existence of the Israeli state, then go buy a Hugo Boss suit and call yourself a Nazi.

  3. Ad 3
    7 November 2023 at 8:17 am

    OMG so Labour members and supporters don't get a review of the election from Labour central, don't get an apology for the woeful result from anyone let alone the leader, don't get any form of performance accountability at all, don't get any ability to talk about what happened openly in the media from Labour people, don't get any alternative policy discussion from the ones that the people voted out, don't get to hear any debate such as there is within caucus, and don't get any choice about leader.

    What they get is simply the result of Chris Hipkins reconfirmed to them mid afternoon today at the same time as everyone else.

    Today is a real trashing of Labour supporters.

    • Peter 3.1
      7 November 2023 at 8:29 am

      Are you the only Labour member and supporter demanding all that?

    • weka 3.2
      7 November 2023 at 10:14 am

      write a post Ad. Give Labour members a place to talk here.

      What's happening in the LECs?

      • Tiger Mountain 3.2.1
        7 November 2023 at 12:20 pm

        Exactly, NZ Labour members are useful to the tops for door knocking but mainly separated from real power in the party despite what the rules might say. There are all sorts of work arounds to short circuit party democracy in the service of “expediency” such as delivering Jacinda–which many ultimately liked of course–and anointing rather than electing Chris Hipkins, and the infamous Cap’n’s calls on the most major of economic matters one might imagine.

        When the likes of David Parker and Robbo are marginalised on wealth tax you can figure out who is really running the joint.

        My partner was in the New Lynn LEC during the Cunliffe years, as was a certain Micky Savage.

    • Anne 3.3
      7 November 2023 at 10:19 am

      They are following normal procedures Ad. It is appropriate that Hipkins stays on as leader until such a time as a wide ranging discussion – which includes the membership – has occurred and a consensus reached as to what happens in the future.

      Immediately following an election is not a good time to carry out such an appraisal. Emotions are still running high. Far better to wait a little until things have calmed down. Sue Moroney makes some good points in this Herald item:

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/501832/labour-s-caucus-to-vote-on-chris-hipkins-leadership

      Edit: Thanks to Nigel Haworth @ 9. He makes the case very well.

    • Anker 3.4
      7 November 2023 at 12:01 pm

      Labour Party members can choose to walk as I did. God to think I was naive enough to think Labour might reach out to people like me who'd left the party to find out why, when they are not even going to reach out to those who remained loyal

      This lack of consultation with the membership reflects their elitism, we know best, we don't have to/shouldn't have to listen to the dissenters, those with "incoreect world views"……

    • Louis 3.5
      7 November 2023 at 5:24 pm

      Labour's election loss under David Cunliffe was worse than Hipkins. I do not recall Cunliffe making an apology.

      Jill Day, Labour President. October 24th 2023.

      "I'm writing to request your feedback for Labour's internal review into the 2023 campaign.

      The election result was not what any of us wanted, and we are determined to learn both what we can improve on for 2026 and beyond, and also what worked well and should be retained as the party rebuilds. Your insights are crucial to the party's rebuilding task.

      This survey is just the first opportunity you'll have to reflect on this election and what it means for Labour. Over coming months, there will be further opportunities to discuss what happened over Labour's six years in office, and how we progress forward as a progressive movement to 2026 and beyond."

      • Anker 3.5.1
        7 November 2023 at 8:54 pm

        You are perfectly entitled to say trans women are women, but I will argue against that from a biological reality perspective. I won't try and cancel your speach.

        When GC feminists say trans identifying males are not women, then the shit hits the fan. People get cancelled and accused of bigotry.

        I am not sure Seymour said Chloe couldn't use that phrase. I think he just commented on it

      • Anker 3.5.2
        7 November 2023 at 8:55 pm

        Oh so Labour are now having a review of their election result? Good for them

        • Louis 3.5.2.1
          8 November 2023 at 12:57 am

          What do you mean "now"? A review was always going to happen, it occurs after every election. I don't know where Ad got the idea from that there wouldn't be a review.

    • newsense 3.6
      8 November 2023 at 1:47 am

      Remember Young Labour chanting 3 more years in t-shirts and balloons?

      Decent review here for those guys:

      https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/07-11-2023/no-the-greens-dont-have-a-labour-problem

      15 seats the Greens. Remember no media outlet mentioning the Greens extra seat? No reason why next time they couldn’t aim for 20. Particularly with this ‘review’ from Labour, facile observations from Little…

  4. Dennis Frank 4
    7 November 2023 at 8:29 am

    Elon empowers new device:

    Elon Musk has announced the introduction of “Grok,” an artificially intelligent chatbot, for some users of X, which the billionaire suggests has a sarcastic sense of humor similar to his own.

    Musk, who has owned X — formerly known as Twitter — for a year, announced late Saturday that Grok is being trained by having “real-time access” to information from the platform. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/06/tech/grok-elon-musk-ai-chatbot-x-twitter/index.html

    Musk’s AI startup, xAI, which developed the bot, said in a blogpost that it took inspiration from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, a comedy sci-fi novel by British author Douglas Adams.

    I look forward to seeing the ratings once this gizmo starts spouting stuff. I suspect users will prefer it to Elon. If that becomes evident to many it'll be intriguing to see how he handles the competition…

  5. Francesca 5
    7 November 2023 at 9:19 am

    “Hundreds were killed in the rubble of the tunnels. The pressure on Hamas is increasing, and only when they feel the sword on their necks will they offer a deal to release the abductees in order to save their skins.”

    https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231105-israel-security-source-claim-20000-killed-in-gaza/

    Perhaps the Israelis could release their own de facto hostages and abductees, Palestinian children and others locked up in Israeli prisons without charges.

  6. Dennis Frank 6
    7 November 2023 at 9:25 am

    Bomber ain't impressed: https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2023/11/07/how-helen-white-and-mt-albert-spells-out-all-that-is-wrong-with-labour-in-auckland/

    She called media questions about her doing badly “ridiculous”. “If you look at the stats, you’ll see that [I did well].”

    Reducing a 20K majority to 20 votes is definitely an immense achievement! She didn't do that alone, however. One must give credit where its due – her colleagues & leader.

  7. Dennis Frank 7
    7 November 2023 at 9:31 am

    John Campbell ain't impressed neither:

    Q. What do you do if you want to look like you’re doing something but really don’t want to do that much at all?

    A. Hold a review.

    Yes, Labour are holding a review. Really.

    I mean, it could be useful if there are political parties on the planet who desperately want a guide on how to lose almost half your vote in three years, lose (or nearly lose) totally unlosable electorates, haemorrhage votes to a more left-wing party in a campaign being fought in the centre, and generally look as awkward as we used to feel when our cat, Peggy, proudly stole our neighbour’s leopard print g-string from his clothes hanger, and someone had to take it back. https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/11/07/john-campbell-maybe-the-time-without-a-govt-is-the-best-time/

    John may have been too harsh. Look at it from Labour's perspective: how will they know what to think unless someone tells them?

    • Craig H 7.1
      7 November 2023 at 11:20 am

      I'm not sure how else Labour are supposed to find out what people think went wrong without asking them, and what went wrong generally without reviewing what they did and considering what else they could/should have done.

      • Dennis Frank 7.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 11:44 am

        Fair enough. A cynical view assumes the review is intended as window-dressing. Depends how they go about it, I guess. If focus groups, how do they design those to eliminate group-think? Or do they even see it as a trap?

        I would have thought word of mouth makes more sense. Spontaneous feedback from non-aligned voters would be more reliable.

      • Ad 7.1.2
        7 November 2023 at 1:06 pm

        The people told them at the election.

        About 4 million of us.

        They don't deserve to be there if they can't hear all the tens of thousands of conversations they had in the campaign.

        • Craig H 7.1.2.1
          7 November 2023 at 1:44 pm

          Sure, but that still has to be put into a document so it can be considered and some findings and recommendations can be made. Otherwise everyone turns up to whatever meeting(s) with reckons and makes it up.

        • Belladonna 7.1.2.2
          7 November 2023 at 4:25 pm

          Our local Labour ex-MPs Facebook page remains an echo chamber for the faithful (now in mourning). Even the slightest hint of criticism is leaped on, and the perpetrators are banned by the admins.

          Really, I have zero idea what use it was for testing the electorate waters either before the election, or now.

  8. Reality 8
    7 November 2023 at 10:00 am

    No logic in installing a new Labour leader just to appear as if something is being changed when there doesn't seem anyone ready for the role. That person may or equally may not do a better job.

    Chris Hipkins was unexpectedly thrust into being PM and then had personally to take the fallout from his errant ministers, which was the last straw in the minds of the electorate. He still had to act as PM with overseas commitments etc. He was not able to spend months and months campaigning like Luxon did. He got Covid. His young family meant responsibilities there.

    The eras of Judith Collins, Simon Bridges and their baggage also was rejected by the voters then. Luxon if nothing else has brought discipline.

    People are forgetting the fallout from several years of Covid which I think affected the focus by the government on other important issues.

    Labour should take time to do a thorough review, and keep the ship steady, make no rash decisions.

  9. Nigel Haworth 9
    7 November 2023 at 10:10 am

    No decision on leadership of the Labour Party should be made today. Any decisions about leadership should follow a careful and comprehensive review of, first, the recent campaign, and. second, the broader settings in which Labour has chosen to work in recent years. Vicarious public dissension is damaging, but this decision has major implications, which need to be thought through. Those implications far outweigh the argument for seamless, friction-less transitions. And, of course, how can appropriate decisions about leadership and organisation be made without that comprehensive review and discussion?

    Labour has arrived at a crossroads, at a time of global crisis and challenges to both the postwar settlement and the social democratic model. It is also a time of growing and egregious inequality, both globally and locally. The postwar arrangements, weakened by neo-liberalism, face further challenges as hegemons decline and commitments to a global rules-based model weaken (not helped by COVID, regional geo-political tensions and a new breed of buccaneering Capitalists, uncertain in their support for liberal democracy).

    For some time, Labour has eschewed its historical origins in the interests of working people and chosen, instead, an emphasis on a broad framework of discrete sectional interests. Less Political Economy, more Sociology. This choice derives from three factors – the loss over decades of a focus on "real" transformation, the effects of fifty years of neo-liberalism. and the impact of Post-modernism, a philosophical view antithetical to collectivism and traditional Left politics, owing more to 1960s pluralism than to traditional Left analysis, and, in my view, a successful way in which to stifle and divert discussion of transformation.

    Labour may choose to continue with the current preference to remain in the "centre", itself an imprecise notion, a small target, at root not a threat to core developments in the system. There, it will make adjustments where it can, but, as we saw in the Captain's Call on taxation, it will not confront the fundamental challenge of inequality, even as it grows. And its growth is charted in such diverse works as those of Piketty and the NZ IRD. The litmus test for social democracy in the current period is, for me, the recognition of growing inequality and the implementation of measures to reverse that growth. Put another way, facing the chaos that global arrangements currently promises, a national strategy to build a modern version of the 1930s Keynesian Accommodation is the only option. And that requires a significant reduction in inequalities.

    Much more might be said on this issue, but the Labour Party needs to step back and think through all of the above, and more, as it decides its way forward from a major defeat. I sense that, across the LP membership, this debate is sought. Members understand that there is more at stake here than a poor slogan or ineffectual social media. Now is a time for careful, informed reflection, rather than structural commitments that may impede such reflection.

    • pat 9.1
      7 November 2023 at 10:21 am

      That is a (well) considered post.

      There is no point in Labour changing its leadership until such time as it determines what its policy direction will be ….a policy direction that is agreed and expressed in a manner the electorate can relate to.

    • Tiger Mountain 9.2
      7 November 2023 at 10:21 am

      Rare is the day in recent years I would have agreed with Nigel, but today is that day. I could almost have written the post myself.

      Post Modernism & Monetarism/Neo Liberalism are a deadly duo. How we think rather obviously guides our actions, and post modernism essentially provides for anything to mean anything!–a wide space for identity politics to subsume class left politics, PM is the antithesis of the materialist view that the world is both knowable and changeable.

      Steady on NZ Labour, no rush needed, involve the members and supporters and chart the necessary course.

    • weka 9.3
      7 November 2023 at 10:59 am

      Very good comment. Would you be interested in this being published as a Guest Post on The Standard?

    • Anne 9.4
      7 November 2023 at 11:01 am

      @ Nigel Haworth

      From my link @ 3.3:

      Former Labour MP Sue Moroney told RNZ last month she hoped the party's election loss would galvanise the party to properly reset, rebrand, and "ensure that the public knows what we stand for".

      "They actually have to take a long hard look at some of those decisions, and the political management of both policy issues and the management of people that really tripped them up in the last year or so. You just can't pretend that those things didn't happen."

      An obvious example is the division over whether to support a capital gain or wealth tax, Moroney said.

      "Then they have to build the argument around which of the paths that they've decided they're going to take because while they're in two minds about it they haven't got a hope of being able to explain to the voting public what their view is and why that's their view."

      I wholeheartedly agree with her sentiments which she made very soon after the election. They fit in well with your summation.

      • Nigel Haworth 9.4.1
        7 November 2023 at 11:11 am

        Indeed. And many others feel the same.

      • weka 9.4.2
        7 November 2023 at 11:14 am

        Former Labour MP Sue Moroney told RNZ last month she hoped the party's election loss would galvanise the party to properly reset, rebrand, and "ensure that the public knows what we stand for".

        Drop the rebranding rhetoric though. Go back to the membership, practice democracy, and engage on this issues with the public before telling them how it is.

        • Anne 9.4.2.1
          7 November 2023 at 11:34 am

          I think that is what she meant weka though I agree "rebrand" is not the word to use. Its market-place gobbledygook speak.

          • weka 9.4.2.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 1:31 pm

            I think so too, it's very off putting, like it's a marketing exercise to get people on side rather than real change.

            I hope she listened to beyond that.

      • Louis 9.4.3
        7 November 2023 at 5:29 pm

        yes Anne.

    • Sanctuary 9.5
      7 November 2023 at 11:21 am

      "…Labour may choose to continue with the current preference to remain in the "centre", itself an imprecise notion, a small target, at root not a threat to core developments in the system…"

      The problem with the "centre" is it isn't the centre at all – the public is often well to the right or left of the "centre". The centre as defended by modern Labour is really just a consensus of the powerful.

    • Anker 9.6
      7 November 2023 at 11:26 am

      Thanks Nigel. A really good analysis here.

      Something I have been thinking about is that since the Clark govt, Labour have struggled. The disastorous Cunliffe election (of whom I was a fan), then was about to be replicated by Andrew Little in 2017. Then Jacinda became leader and it was her charisma, her ability to articulate and her "youth adjacent" appeal that turned Labours fortunes around (2020 was the covid election)……

      What Jacinda did was pause the need for Labour to have a good hard look at themselves and it also allowed a further drift into post modernist identity politics.

      I left the party because of this and also their failure to deliver on much other than things that were ideologically driven e.g Maori health authority, Gender self id, to name a couple of things . There is much more that caused me to walk away from the party.

      • Nigel Haworth 9.6.1
        7 November 2023 at 11:51 am

        I think the Clark government tried to adhere to traditional Labour values, but had to deal with consequences of a decade or more of neo-liberal groundwork and ideology. it was assailed for doing so e.g. the ERA fight. Thereafter, in the roiling process whereby we arrived at Jacinda, Labour became engrossed in the mechanics of power (an effect in part of modern advertising practices) whilst also a more hierarchical politics took over (in part an effect of the 2012 constitutional changes, in part a result of the growing view in Caucus of MPs being Labour’s “professionals”, a sure sign of an incipient managerialism). Jacinda’s qualities and success through difficult times masked this transition. It was, I suggest, bound to emerge as a political issue.

    • Corey 9.7
      7 November 2023 at 12:34 pm

      The problem is the review will be narrow, short sighted and will not consult the membership.

      Labour will inoculate itself from as much criticism as possible.

      It will not reach out to members who ditched it in the last three years, nor voters who ditched it in the last three years.

      It will not dump people like Debra Russell who lost a safe seat nor will it select a new candidate in Mount Albert.

      Labour will inoculate itself and anyone who blames neolib economics, post modernism or sociology will be labeled with every ism known to peoplekind.

      They will sit there, happily in opposition not changing a damn thing hoping another jacinda comes to paper over the cracks and save them.

      And the membership these days is less a big tent and more like a hive mind, about half the party membership from grassroots up, thinks they'll be prime minister one day and thinks if they suck up enough they'll eventually climb the ladder.

      Those members are soldiers for the PLC and ostracize anyone who criticizes the PLC within the party.

      I'll wait to the review, but I don't think this caucus vote should happen till AFTER the review, this is clearly a hipkins initiative to secure power in the medium term.

      • Craig H 9.7.1
        7 November 2023 at 1:49 pm

        There has been a survey sent out with a lot of room for free text, so that was a start. I'm not sure if that went to members or campaign email recipients since I'm both.

      • alwyn 9.7.2
        7 November 2023 at 3:07 pm

        The Labour Party rules require a vote on the leadership by the Caucus within 3 months of the election. That means that it has to be held before the middle of January.

        How do you expect them to do a proper review of the election result by that date?

        It may be that Hipkins has pushed for an early vote which, if he gets 60% + 1 means he stays in the job and there is no further opportunity to change the leader by an automatic full party membership election but whoever wrote the rules is responsible for the situation. It isn't just the failed leader who did it.

        See Rule 9.11 on page 64

        https://elections.nz/assets/Party-rules/Labour-Party-Constitution-and-Rules-2022.pdf

        • mikesh 9.7.2.1
          7 November 2023 at 7:23 pm

          We won't know the result of the election, officially, until NZ1st makes its decision. So three months from then could take us to the middle of February.

    • Ad 9.8
      7 November 2023 at 4:12 pm

      The bets on Chippie generating a "step back and rethink" or "careful, informed reflection" with the Labour Party membership are very very small given how much he trashed policy without warning or consultation in the last 6 months.

      I do not know why the Labour leadership is incapable of holding a leadership contest in which policy and result reflection occurs at the same time.

      In any other job this would be called accountability, performance review, and restructure.

      It's about to occur across the entire public service.

      Only this Labour caucus believes public discourse is so insecure that it must break its own lid, nail down its own coffin days after a near-death experience, then lay down in it again to ensure no one can hold a wake.

      • Incognito 9.8.1
        7 November 2023 at 4:46 pm

        In any other job this would be called accountability, performance review, and restructure.

        In any other job, they would have to follow due process, as per employment laws and regulations. The analogy is partly flawed.

        • Ad 9.8.1.1
          7 November 2023 at 5:00 pm

          Go and find me where in the last three weeks Hipkins has squarely taken accountability for this failure. Or where he has been required to undertake a performance review. Or had to deal with an official restructure. Nowhere. But he ought to be.

          Everyone in employment is subject to those.

          • Incognito 9.8.1.1.1
            7 November 2023 at 5:21 pm

            Sure, in politics a Leader is expected to fall on his sword or be pushed out through a vote. This is the due process in politics and each Party has its own Constitution & Rules. Neither has happened with or to Hipkins. Accept it – the time for performance review and restructure might still come, IMHO.

            In employment situations, the due process is different. In any case, (performance) review and official (do you mean formal?) restructure require time & effort (incl. consultation). Personally, I’m no fan of scapegoating, managing out people, or constructive dismissal.

            Are you arguing for an instant bonfire of regulations and good principles because you want to get rid of Hipkins (and a few others)?

    • Louis 9.9
      7 November 2023 at 5:28 pm

      yes Nigel.

    • Patricia Bremner 9.10
      7 November 2023 at 8:31 pm

      Nigel Thanks.
      I think Chippy has to go back to the Members and Unions. He needs to give up "The Captain's Calls" and do more listening.

      67% of Kiwis wanted a wealth tax. He needs to lose his ego and serve.

      I for one am sorry to see a servant of the people Andrew Little go. I hope the new Leadership have clearer goals more aligned to the membership's goals.

      I came close to voting Green. There were many like me, disappointed in the direction.

      However, the loss was not huge against elections other than 2020 which was an anomaly.

      Most important is soul searching talking listening and goal setting followed by practical implementation. So funding is key and far better use of tech.

      We have good people.

      When Chippy said to Luxon, "You have lost your moral compass taking 2 billion over four years from the budget for beneficiaries, to give to well off Landlords as tax cuts."( Debate) and Luxon replied, "We will use the CPI as it has always been done", (ignoring WEAG basing benefits on wages to stop abject poverty.)

      Grant Robertson with his "We have your backs" working on wellbeing

      You Nigel, with your sensible post.

      Back to the drawing board and lots of meetings.

    • newsense 9.11
      8 November 2023 at 2:12 am

      Would you be happy for this to be a post Nigel?
      Or something similar?

      Others I know like myself simply walked to the Greens seeing the issues being unaddressed including how wealth had funneled to the Auckland property owning class and how the ‘nuclear free moment’ of floods, landslides, property and infrastructure damage had arrived, but was being taken less seriously than ever.

      I credited a frustrated and insulted James Shaw with what had been achieved and saw a Green vote as the only one left to me.

      To use an old metaphor- there is no half a cat. You can be for no cats or cats, but being a centerist and choosing half a cat means having ceded the debate to your opponent before you start. Being tentative on righting wealth distribution inequity caused by COVID subsidies and the housing market, leading with cutting back services rather than how those services were working (and if they weren’t what were the ministers doing for 6 years?), reducing climate change to an affordability (read:nice to have) issue rather the multitude of issues it is including feeling safe in your home when you hear rain drops on the roof.

      Labour’s poll buoyancy perhaps indicated a belief there had to be something on offer to the left of National. But it never arrived. No vision, little policy.

      But it also seems that the moment has passed. The moment to announce a wealth tax was before the election, not after it. Younger volunteers were with the Greens. Older ones stayed home or joined the retired few doing the essential campaign work of turning out the vote. Morale rotted from the head.

      Oh brilliant- Weka has made it so! Going to get my popcorn.

  10. Incognito 10
    7 November 2023 at 10:41 am

    If the analysis of Labour’s major defeat is only doing a simplistic comparison with the General Election 2020, it’ll be a mug’s game and an exercise in futility, i.e., the domain of lazy non-thinking pundits and angry bloggers.

    For example, compared to GE-2017, LAB lost 27% of its party vote (i.e. just over a quarter), NAT lost 14% (a seventh), and NZF lost 16% (about a sixth).

    LAB’s problems are deeper and go back (much) further than the last term or two (cf. Nigel Haworth’s insightful and intelligent comment https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-07-11-2023/#comment-1975546).

  11. Ffloyd 11
    7 November 2023 at 10:47 am

    ‘Steady on Labour, no rush needed, involve the members and supporters and chart the necessary course’ This from Tiger Mountain. Best advice so far and totally agree with it. Too much sub standard media and keyboard pundits stirring the pot.

  12. Anker 12
    7 November 2023 at 10:48 am

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/race-relations-among-most-divisive-issues-in-election-poll

    so 60% of NZders don’t believe trans identifying males should be in women’s sports and a significant number don’t believe trans identifying males should use women’s toilets.

    majority don’t support gender self ID.

    it turns out that the majority of NZders support biological reality

    • weka 12.1
      7 November 2023 at 11:12 am

      Media catching up with reality. The significant thing here is that a mainstream org finally polled on these questions. The results aren't surprising.

      To make it really clear, in answer to the questions,

      "How strongly do you support or oppose the following?"

      Allowing biological males who identify as women to compete in women’s sport

      Only 14% support this. Everyone else is either neutral, doesn't know, opposes or strongly opposes (60% outright oppose).

      Allowing biological males who identify as women to use women only bathrooms

      Only 21% support this.

      Making it easier for people to change their registered sex on their birth certificate

      31% support this. My reading of the higher support is that people want to be kind. If the questions were more in depth eg that self ID means any man can identify as a woman and should be treated as such at all times (which is the GI agenda), I suspect support would be much lower.

      We also don't know how much this issue affected people's voting. The swing to the right is complex and can't be reduced down to single factors for most people (although I know plenty who refused to vote on the left over gender/sex issues). Many people who don't follow politics closely would be filing the self ID issues under more crazy left wing shit and for the swing voters it's another reason to look elsewhere.

      Self-ID, co-governance, and now the Israeli/Palestine conflict are all examples of the left thinking we can force people to adopt our values. We can't. If we want NZ to be progressive, we have to both make our ideas attractive, and welcome people rather than pillorying and ostracising them.

      • Anker 12.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 11:31 am

        Thanks Weka for teasing this all out. 31% for gender self id isn't a ringing endorsement and I suspect if the media reported on some of what has happened overseas, there would be less support for it.

    • bwaghorn 12.2
      7 November 2023 at 11:54 am

      I'm astounded that it's only 60%

      • weka 12.2.1
        7 November 2023 at 1:34 pm

        a lot of people still haven't been exposed to the issues. Some people still want to just be kind to trans people rather than finding ways through complex processes. I suspect that there are people who don't understand the physiological disparity between women and men, and/or think that trans women take testosterone = equity.

        • Visubversa 12.2.1.1
          7 November 2023 at 5:13 pm

          Yes, and many people think we are talking about Carmen and Georgina and know nothing of "Ashley" Winter or "Pandora Electra".

        • bwaghorn 12.2.1.2
          7 November 2023 at 5:37 pm

          I think genuine trans woman , need to stand up and take one for the team , by that I mean , go through the inconvenience of having to find toilets they can use that arnt marked as woman only, there's more single stall ones around these days I've noticed. And dealbwith the fact they either need to compete against men or create their own classes.

          To protect woman and girls from the hideous beasts that are operating under the Trans gender cloak.

          • SPC 12.2.1.2.1
            7 November 2023 at 6:30 pm

            The irony is that some of the post op transgender women get called TERF's.

          • Visubversa 12.2.1.2.2
            7 November 2023 at 9:38 pm

            There is a good Facebook page "Transsexual Voices Matter" which is trying to stand up for the genuinely dysphoric who have competed a surgical and chemical treatment and are concerned about the appropriation by transvestites/crossdressers, fetishists and people with complex mental health issues or ulterior motives for their associations with ‘transgender’ community. This has prompted many transsexuals to insist on being identified by our original medical term ‘transsexual’, disassociating as much as possible from those claiming to be ‘trans’ or ‘transgender’ without any medical justification.

      • Anker 12.2.2
        7 November 2023 at 1:43 pm

        Yes but those who support or strongly support trans identifying males in women's sports are only14%. Rest are neutral or don't know.

        60% v 14% is undoubtedly a huge validation for the likes of SWS (Save women's sports)

  13. Adrian 13
    7 November 2023 at 10:53 am

    It would not surprise if in three years time ( or even quite likely, sooner ), that the barometer swings wildly back the other way. The electorate is becoming more skitterish, which is not surprising given the pandemic and the "deprivations" thereof, the British electorate dumped Churchill after "saving " them through 5 years of a most devastating war and there are other examples through history and today with surprises in most European countries

    The real enquiry should look at where the bloody money, huge money, illegal money, in a NZ context came from. Millions and millions of dollars mysteriously manifested from where ? . China ?, through 3rd parties, we know National was deep in this under Bridges. Russia ? caught interfering in the US and Poland and other Euro elections. The big mystery is where the vast amount of money for the Groundswell/ Freedom Fuckwits money came from to garner very few votes, it obviously djdn't come from the 1% of the local deluded, was this American money sourced initially from the Xtian Fundies and channeled through entities here? All these players formenting anger and angst and bile to service their own twisted and corrupt ends.

    For all that do not forget that NZ1st scraped in by 1.08 points, and how much of that money was clean given the number of bat-shit crazy aligned non-entities with dubious connections to various far-right, quite disturbing ideologies clinging on to Winstons coattails. Without that 1.08% the left could have possibly could have still formed a government. Follow The Money. I bet/hope Nicky is working on it now.

    • Ad 13.1
      7 November 2023 at 5:03 pm

      That is not a given.

      From 1949 to 1984 – 35 years – Labour was in power for a sum total of 6 years.

      • SPC 13.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 6:33 pm

        Largely because National post 1949 adopted a full employment and home owning democracy narrative. That has not been true since 1990.

    • Belladonna 13.2
      7 November 2023 at 7:22 pm

      Without that 1.08% the left could have possibly could have still formed a government

      This is the most wishful of thinking.

      People voting NZF – were very specifically *not* voting for the parties currently in power. Had they wanted to vote for Labour or the Greens or TPM – they would have done so. And there was no question that NZF would go into coalition with Labour – it had been ruled out (whether wisely or not) by both sides.

      Assuming that NZF had won 4.99% of the vote and were outside parliament; this leaves a maximum of around 1.1% which could have found a home elsewhere. Nothing like enough to get a left coalition government over the line. Even had those people wanted to vote left – which they manifestly did not.

      All that could have happened is that the wasted vote would be re-allocated – and National/ACT would have an unambiguous majority.

      Remember, "bat-shit crazy" people's vote is worth just as much as yours or mine. There is no intelligence test required to participate in democracy. Indeed, I fondly recall the McGillicuddy Serious Party from my childhood – now there was a protest vote!

  14. Anker 14
    7 November 2023 at 11:34 am

    Or Adrian maybe NZ voters looked at all the options and went with NZ first.

    The left/Labour will get nowhere trying to figure out what went wrong this election if they keep blaming it on "the others had more money".

    The Yes vote in Australia had a lot of money, some from corporate Australia, but still lost.

    • Adrian 14.1
      7 November 2023 at 2:32 pm

      Very few people went with NZ1, about 2 to 3 % who were not long term Winstonistas whom amount to about 3+%. The late comers are the flotsam of the loony right who were too loony or not loony enough to fit in anywhere else and just followed whatever wombat tagged on to Winston.. Essentially Labour only "lost " about 5 % of its core base, the rest, the other 4 % went over to National this time because…$250.00 a week yay…, hang on, sorry, fortnight… oh acshully, maybe.

      Both Nat and Labour have been around a core loyal vote of 33 to 35 % for as long as I can remember. They just argue over the floaters and you know where you can usually find them.

      • Anne 14.1.1
        7 November 2023 at 6:54 pm

        "The late comers are the flotsam of the loony right…"

        I can attest to that. Some relatives of mine (all the same family) went down the conspiracy theory rabbit holes. Voted for Winnie. blush

      • Belladonna 14.1.2
        7 November 2023 at 7:25 pm

        the flotsam of the loony right

        And you wonder why they didn't vote for the parties that you support!

        It’s like the “river of filth” rhetoric (which came back, so spectacularly, to bite Wood). When you patently disrespect people, they stop voting for you.

        • Anker 14.1.2.1
          7 November 2023 at 8:02 pm

          100% Belladonna. Wood comments "river of filth" only served to emphasize the contempt in which Labour held citizens, many of those at the protest having voted for them before.

          The turning point for me was the hostility and contempt women were treated with in the select committee on gender self id by the women of the Labour Party. Debra Russell, Rachael Boyack, Louisa Wall, Ginny Anderson (conversion practices bill). They were disgraceful and showed themselves up as being hopelessly ideologically captured. That was the beginning of me thinking these people who have treated decent women, with decent arguements with contempt aren't fit to be MPs

        • newsense 14.1.2.2
          8 November 2023 at 2:30 am

          Well which ones should be respected?

          Don’t forget we had marches with death threats made against our elected leaders. Violent, anarchic protests. Hints at the possibility of guns and explosives. Sob stories about healthy people who don’t have to deal with polio or TB refusing to be vaccinated because freedom. People playing at sovereign citizenry. People saying old people should just give themselves up for the others. Large numbers of people sharing false science or pseudoscience or fake stories about suicides.

          Don’t know who you’d invite over for a cuppa out of that lot, or who you respect, or how exactly you’d describe their behavior, but the right is heavily invested in forgetting that the 50% was a reward for handling the pandemic well because they behaved like a bunch of twits.

          The numbers we’re seeing now are a pre-Jacinda norm or a left and right block with a centrist party in the middle give or take 5 % in either direction changing government. Which gradually occurred once COVID was no longer an issue.

          • Belladonna 14.1.2.2.1
            8 November 2023 at 4:01 pm

            Which ones you respect is up to you (by which I mean the party, not you individually)

            But don't be surprised if those you don't respect don't vote for you.

            Personally, I can respect people I don't agree with. Even people who I think have a radically different (and, from my perspective, wrong) point of view. Their reality is their reality. I can choose to engage with them, and offer a different perspective. Or I can choose not to (depends on the circumstances, and/or the number of spoons I have at any given time).

            I don't believe that denigrating them (name calling, making fun of their appearance or characteristics, 'othering' them, etc.) adds anything to the political debate. Nor do I think that it has any chance at all of persuading them to change their beliefs.

            Given that Willie Jackson is already on record as claiming that Maori will "go to war" if there is a Treaty referendum.

            https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/labour-mp-willie-jackson-warns-of-m-ori-uprising-over-act-s-proposed-treaty-referendum.html

            Should we then refuse to engage with those protesting – if they are "violent and anarchic" or if they engage in threats to MPs (almost a certainty, I'd think – or what else does 'go to war' mean)?

            The 50% was a reward for handling the pandemic during 2020. Support for Labour's handling of the pandemic after that date, fell off radically. Not sure who the "bunch of twits" are from your perspective.

            • Muttonbird 14.1.2.2.1.1
              8 November 2023 at 7:00 pm

              One of Heather Stupidity-Allan's RW guests this evening claimed Willie Jackson had made a call to violence or some such crap. He had to withdraw and apologise after it was pointed out he'd done no such thing.

              But this is the interesting thing about the gaslight operation used by the RW in NZ and the world. They claim all sorts of falsehoods, until they can’t, knowing they are able to shift public opinion. You see it in the way Zionists and their hangers-on have highjacked, "from the river to the sea".

              • Belladonna …
                8 November 2023 at 8:42 pm

                Jackson's actual quote

                "I'm just giving a warning. I work amongst our people – I'm amongst people who will go to war for this, war against Seymour and his mates," Jackson said.

                https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/labour-mp-willie-jackson-warns-of-m-ori-uprising-over-act-s-proposed-treaty-referendum.html

                Should we then refuse to engage with those protesting (not Jackson but those among whom he works) – if they are "violent and anarchic" or if they engage in threats to MPs (almost a certainty, I'd think – or what else does 'go to war' mean)?

                • Muttonbird …
                  8 November 2023 at 8:52 pm

                  War can mean many things. It is however the preference for the conservative right to melt down in their crucibles phrases for their own malicious purposes.

                  War.

                  /wɔː/

                  noun

                  noun: war; plural noun: wars

                  1. a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country.

                    "Japan declared war on Germany"

                    Similar:

                    conflict, warfare, combat, fighting, struggle, armed conflict, action, military action, bloodshed, contest, tussle, battle, skirmish, fight, clash, confrontation, engagement, affray, encounter, collision, offensive, attack, blitz, siege, campaign, crusade, feud, vendetta, strife, hostility, enmity, antagonism, discord, disunity, animus, ill will, bad blood, hostilities

                    • a state of competition or hostility between different people or groups.

                      "she was at war with her parents"

                    • a sustained campaign against an undesirable situation or activity.

                      "the authorities are waging war against smuggling"

                  They, the very small group of wealthy, white, far right nut jobs are terrified of this fight, which is which we have some hapless emissaries venture out with statements like your own.

            • newsense 14.1.2.2.1.2
              10 November 2023 at 12:06 am

              Yes. Threatening violence against public officials is a crime. It's not a way to protest, it is a way to attempt to intimidate people. Why would anyone do a public good, only to receive the treatment Susie Wiles has? What do we say to young girls witnessing the flood of violent misogynist vitriol against Dame Jacinda? You can do that job too when you grow up? These are scum and criminals.

              Perhaps you don't see that as clearly because it hasn't happened to you at your work.

              Refusing to take vaccines and importantly, spreading false information about them is a crime, in my book. It can and has lead to deaths.

              The question before 2020 was 'Am I safe?'. After 2020 there were once again a multitude of questions and Labour had little advantage, in fact an enormous disadvantage in answering some of those. National cocked up its numbers, bullshitted, didn't do costings, and had shadow cabinet that didn't know basic figures associated with their areas of policy. No matter. We trust those guys with the economy.

              • Belladonna …
                10 November 2023 at 9:42 am

                And do you extend the same level of mandatory compliance to all vaccines?

                There has been an ongoing issue with some midwives who are vaccine sceptics, not giving pregnant women good quality advice. What do you think should happen to them? Prosecution? Deregistration? (that's a great plan, considering we have a national shortage /sarc/)

                https://journal.nzma.org.nz/journal-articles/confidence-in-the-safety-of-standard-childhood-vaccinations-among-new-zealand-health-professionals

                What about parents who refuse to allow their children to be vaccinated? Should they be prosecuted, and the Health Dept order mandatory vaccinations?

                It is a very, very, significant step to describe "refusing to take vaccines … as a crime". Our Bill of Rights specifically allows for people to refuse medical treatment (which includes vaccination)

          • weka 14.1.2.2.2
            8 November 2023 at 5:38 pm

            the key issues imo,

            1. Ardern's two New Zealands interview
            2. Mallard's dick move with the music and sprinklers
            3. the unwillingness of the government to look after people made jobless because of their health care choices (whatever one thinks of those, we have strong legal protections in NZ to prevent forced medical treatment except in extreme situations)
            4. the messaging around all that
            5. how many progressives took a ridicule and ostracise approach

            As Belladonna points out, the left can take positions of disrespect, but then it can't complain when people no longer vote on the left.

            The numbers we’re seeing now are a pre-Jacinda norm or a left and right block with a centrist party in the middle give or take 5 % in either direction changing government. Which gradually occurred once COVID was no longer an issue.

            Yes. NZ governments depend on swing voters. How sure are you that the negative sides of the pandemic response aren't part of that?

            We don't know whether the culture wars are impacting, but it seems reasonable to consider that they might have cost the left the election. And regardless, we cannot force people to adopt progressive positions, we have to find other ways to convince people it's a good direction, and there is little doubt that the left has failed on this in multiple ways.

            • Muttonbird 14.1.2.2.2.1
              8 November 2023 at 6:52 pm

              It was an extraordinary time and NZ was in an extraordinary position of being able to protect a lot of people.

              Part of that plan was to have as many people vaccinated as possible. Can't do that with a soft, op-out clause. Reached somewhere in the mid 90% region I think.

              There were people outside parliament directly threatening MPs with violence in speech and imagery. These were the people Michael Wood referred to as the river of filth and they were and still are filth.

              Even Belladonna would have to back Michael Wood up on that…won’t hold my breath.

              • weka …
                8 November 2023 at 7:46 pm

                Just so we are clear then. The left cannot win while we use terms like river of filth to dehumanise other NZ citizens.

                Hopefully some day soon the part of the left that has abandoned solidarity will come to understand that the left is outnumbered. Then we might change our approach.

              • Belladonna …
                8 November 2023 at 9:06 pm

                If you are expecting me to agree with the (very stupid and politically shortsighted) comment from Michael Wood in referring to people (or their behaviour) as a "river of filth" – then you are going to faint from anoxia.

                Given Michael Wood's subsequent stupid and politically short-sighted behaviour in other contexts, he does not seem to be a role model that anyone would wish to follow.

                Do I support patently illegal behaviour? Of course not.

                Do I think that politicians need to talk to constituents who have very serious and legitimate concerns (as even Wood acknowledged)? Absolutely I do.

                Do I think that actions (or inaction) from the Government, and the Speaker (Mallard, demonstrating equally stupid and politically short-sighted behaviour) made things worse? And embedded in the grievance. Yes I do.

                Does this mean that Ardern (or other Ministers) had to talk to the protestors? No. They were free to make whatever choices they wanted to. However, choices, have consequences. And, not only the protestors, but supporters from around the country, took away the message that the Government was unwilling to even listen to their concerns – let alone take action. Those people did not vote Labour or Greens in this election.

                • weka …
                  8 November 2023 at 9:27 pm

                  worth pointing out that Wood didn't call people at the protest a river of filth. It was still a very stupid phrase to use, and a great shame, because the rest of what he was saying was enough. He could have just left out the words 'river of filth'.

                  "The words I say now I say with some precision and I say really carefully because I think we need to take great care with this," he told the House.

                  "Out the front of this place, there are people who I think we all feel for. There are some people who are confused, there are some people who are scared, there are some people who have been manipulated by an avalanche of misinformation.

                  "There are some people who have been hurt over the past couple of years and they're lashing out.

                  "We feel for those people. But underneath all of that, there is a river of filth.

                  "There is a river of violence and menace. There is a river of anti-Semitism. There is a river of Islamophobia. There is a river of threats to people who work in this place and our staff."

                  https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/02/labour-s-michael-wood-warns-mps-who-want-to-support-anti-mandate-protest-it-has-river-of-filth-running-through-it.html

                  • Belladonna …
                    8 November 2023 at 10:47 pm

                    I know that he claims that he was not referring to the protestors. But in that case, who was he referring to?

                    Some unnamed organization or group which was supporting these protestors? It seems a pretty far reach, considering the wide variety of political and social origins.

                    Given that the protestors are referred to in one sentence, and the "river of filth" in the next. It seems most likely that the two are related. Certainly they were immediately connected by the protestors, by the media, and by most news consumers (well, apart from the Labour is perfect crowd)

                    It's also very passive voice in relation to the protestors: they are confused, scared, hurt and manipulated. He's not giving them much agency here. Nor acknowledging that much of the fear and hurt have been caused by the actions of his government.

                    • weka …
                      8 November 2023 at 10:54 pm

                      imo he's talking about ideology and world view. So I can see why some people take that personally. But he names racism, anti-semitism, violence.

                      Read it like this,

                      "We feel for those people. But underneath all of that, there is a river.

                      "There is a river of violence and menace. There is a river of anti-Semitism. There is a river of Islamophobia. There is a river of threats to people who work in this place and our staff."

                      Those are all legit things for him to name as problems.

                      It's also very passive voice in relation to the protestors: they are confused, scared, hurt and manipulated. He's not giving them much agency here. Nor acknowledging that much of the fear and hurt have been caused by the actions of his government.

                      I thought it was seriously compassionate and understanding. If they're worked with that instead of the ostracisation, we might be in a very different situation.

                      It is quite a skill to be compassionate and hold strong boundaries, not impossible though.

            • Belladonna 14.1.2.2.2.2
              8 November 2023 at 8:55 pm

              How sure are you that the negative sides of the pandemic response aren't part of that?

              Obviously anecdata – since there is no research.

              However, I know of two families who felt 'forced' into being vaccinated – in order to retain their jobs.

              It's all very well to claim that people have a choice, but if you have a mortgage to pay, and kids to feed, and your employer (the State in two of these cases), says vaccinate or be fired – the 'choice' is pretty much an illusion.

              They felt bitter and lied to, when Ardern first said "no one will be forced" then effectively forced people to be vaccinated.

              [I'm not interested in debate over what she actually said, or what 'forced' means – I'm reporting how they feel, and the messages they received]

              Both of these families were traditionally left. I don't think they were particularly politically motivated, but they came from working class roots (Grandma always voted Labour), and supported fairly Green choices in their everyday life (home vege gardening, concern about climate change, taking the bus or biking rather than driving, etc.). Both families have a history of vaccine hesitancy (which is seriously not uncommon in many Green-lifestyle communities) – so it wasn't just Covid.

              Both families have been adamant that they would never vote Labour or Green again. I don't know how long that will last (will they still feel that way in 10 years?)

              But – setting aside the whole crime, cost of living thing – they were primed to *not* vote left as the result of Labour's actions around what became effectively mandatory vaccination for everyone working in any public sphere.

              • weka …
                8 November 2023 at 9:06 pm

                yep. And I suspect you are right that it won't just be this election.

                Labour were right to do the mandates to save lives, but basically telling non-vaccinators to get fucked was a terrible thing to do. It wasn't solely from necessity, it was from values and ideology. I agree with Muttonbird in that Labour needed to get the vax rates up fast, but two things worked against that happening in a cohesive way.

                One was the failures of our health system, particularly in Māori and Pacifica communities. That existed long before the pandemic, and even the MoH knew the long term problems around vaccination weren't anti-vaxxers but barriers to access. The pandemic was an opportunity to redress that lack of access. Instead we've built a stronger anti-vax movement. Own goal.

                The other aspect is the ideology. The hatred for people that don't want to vaccinate, to the point of saying that people should be forced (as in legally and physically). I've seen people say that on TS. It's that mindset that meant the government didn't know any other way to get the vax rates up than by being harsh. In that sense I disagree that the two NZ approach was the only way. People couldn't see another way because of their ideological blindness, which is why are are where we are.

                It's a fairly similar dynamic that is happening in the sex/gender wars. Blows my mind that many progressives can't see that liberal values can't be forced on people against their will and still be liberal values. Progressives arguing for forced vaccination was scary, that way leads leftist authoritarianism and very very bad shit.

                • weka …
                  8 November 2023 at 9:08 pm

                  We really should sort this out before we have a worse pandemic. This one was bad enough by modern standards, but what do people think would happen with a pandemic with a much higher death rate?

                • Descendant Of Smith …
                  8 November 2023 at 9:12 pm

                  Sorry nobody was forced to be vaccinated. Not a single person was held down and injected. Everyone could choose not to.

                  Some employers were pretty shit at sorting out alternative work, etc. though when they could have but then employers generally ignored the lessons of SARS, H1N1, the pandemic planning and just buried their heads in the sand.

                  • weka …
                    8 November 2023 at 9:20 pm

                    the problem is that while it's true that no-one was forced, losing one's job/career/ability to pay for essentials was still very bad. And the left turned their backs on those people and told them they were pieces of shit.

                    I have zero doubt that there are people who chose to be vaccinated against their will in order to survive. That's terrible for those people, but also from a human rights perspective.

                    And the left needs to think about why we are willing to throw away principles. Because once we do that it's much more difficult to defend those principles when teh right are transgressing them.

                  • Belladonna …
                    8 November 2023 at 9:27 pm

                    Two people I know. One is a teacher aide, the other a librarian (working for Local Government).

                    Both were told, in writing, that if they were not vaccinated, then they would be fired. Both have families, one has a mortgage, the other rent to pay. Neither could afford to throw in a job in the middle of the pandemic.

                    Could they have legally challenged it? Possibly. Even probably, given some subsequent court cases. Could they afford to be unemployed for 18 months or so, while the case went through the courts. No they could not.

                    That is pretty 'forced' in my book. And, not corporate employers being pretty shit at sorting out alternatives, in these cases, but Central and Local government.

                    • Muttonbird …
                      8 November 2023 at 9:31 pm

                      They could of course have gone to the local chemist to be vaccinated.

                      Multiple problems solved in 5 minutes.

                    • Descendant Of Smith …
                      8 November 2023 at 9:44 pm

                      By employers I meant both private and public. Neither has a monopoly on stupidity.

                      I've said previously that I know employers who were spoken to as part of the local DHB led pandemic planning who were well forewarned about these issues, lockdowns, supply chain risk and so on. The local DHB while at the same time as driving this planning were themselves recognising how poorly prepared they were e.g. what would happen with meals on wheels, where would bodies go and how, etc etc. They at least took action to then forward plan for many of these things.

                      I've yet to find one business owner or CEO who started addressing these issues in their workplace. Highly paid ostriches they were.

                      If we have to change something it is that – how prepared are they now having been through this once? Do we have more resilient supply chains, are businesses building up cash reserves and paying down debt instead of paying out to shareholders – or in the case of power companies borrowing and taking on massive amounts of debt to pay shareholders, are they inculcating mask wearing during influenza outbreaks as normal practice and staying home when you are unwell, have they stopped cramming people into small spaces and spread staff apart more, have they good policies and systems that they can adapt to working from home, can restaurants more easily pivot to home delivery, do supermarkets have less reliance on just in time…….

                      I'd love to see some of these CEO's come out and say how prepared they are now and what lessons they have learned and implemented.

                      I would suggest the main reason a lot of intervention was needed was because of how unprepared businesses were.

                    • newsense …
                      10 November 2023 at 12:28 am

                      So what about the people that would have been more at risk from working with them? Do they have rights? Or simply because the campaign was an obviously political one from the majority we are only compassionate for those who wouldn't take the vaccine? The same vaccine taken by billions worldwide.

                      So also, no apologising to Michael Wood? You do seem to have a hot ticket on him. Turns out he had some flaws and so was human, but also had passed industry bargaining for our essential workers.

                      The other option is to make heroes of, not those who developed the vaccine so quickly, or those who enabled it to be distributed and available, but to those individuals who refused to take it and to help essential workers by banging pots at 6pm with Boris Johnson, rather than spending a life campaigning for decent working conditions.

                      Or heroes of those taking 17k from beneficiaries over 5 years to give to landlords.

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                8 November 2023 at 9:09 pm

                There's a pretty long list of vaccinations for health staff. As a consumer I'd expect them to be vaccinated. as they move from patient to patient to patient. Last thing we need is unvaccinated nurses.

                There is another list for military, foreign affairs and so on.

                As a tourist going overseas I'm expected to have certain vaccinations to go to certain countries.

                The issue isn't about needing to get vaccinated – the issue is what rabbit hole did they go down to not want to be vaccinated in a highly contagious life threatening pandemic.

                https://bpac.org.nz/bpj/2012/december/upfront.aspx

                • weka …
                  8 November 2023 at 9:22 pm

                  Not everyone who didn't want to vaccinate is down the rabbit hole. I know a large number of people who don't vaccinate, I was moving in those circles before Wakefield kicked off the modern anti-vax movement. Lots of good people, ordinary members of society and our communities.

                  • Descendant Of Smith …
                    8 November 2023 at 9:50 pm

                    Who were benefitting from the fact that the rest of us were vaccinated. so had the luxury of being able to choose not to. A luxury that was diminishing year by year, community by community as the number of non-vaccinated grew.

                    • weka …
                      8 November 2023 at 10:59 pm

                      Sure, but if we agree that breaking human rights and forcing people to be vaccinated would be wrong, then the issue is about how to manage the conflict between people's rights to their beliefs and lifestyles, and public health.

                      What I'm saying is that ostracisation isn't a good strategy. My feeling is that not insignifcant numbers of people could be convinced to vaccinate against covid but we radicalised them instead.

                      Also, as I said before, even the MoH knows that the problem in NZ isn't anti-vaxxers, it's those that would vaccinate but don't have access. Fix the goddam health system and then the problems with anti-and non-vaxxers becomes a different problem with better solutions.

                • Belladonna …
                  8 November 2023 at 9:36 pm

                  The 'flu vaccine is widely accepted as both preventing and reducing the severity of 'flu. And, if you don’t have the ‘flu then you can’t pass it on to the very sick people that you work with. Every year a substantial percentage of nurses (and other hospital workers) refuse the free vaccination offered by the DHB.

                  I can't find the figures for last year – but suspect there has been little change since these ones quoted from 2018

                  In 2018, the Ministry of Health introduced a goal of 80 percent of all healthcare workers to be immunised annually against influenza

                  National district health board (DHB) healthcare worker influenza coverage in 2018 was 68 percent, with individual DHBs ranging from 57 percent to 88 percent

                  https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/PUArticles/March2019/Flu%20Vaccine%20and%20ADR%20reports.htm

                  • weka …
                    8 November 2023 at 9:43 pm

                    yes, but covid isn't akin to the flu in terms of public health and personal risk, and we knew that fairly early on. It was reasonable to not have vulnerable people put at increased risk in certain situations like hospitals.

                    • Belladonna …
                      8 November 2023 at 9:50 pm

                      I disagree. Covid is very akin to the 'flu in terms of public health and personal risk. Both are respiratory viruses. Both can have asymptomatic presentations. Covid is more deadly in some tranches of the population. But 'flu kills hundreds of people every year. Often the elderly, and/or unwell – i.e. people in close contact with healthcare workers.

                      There are also low or no-contact roles that staff who are unwilling to vaccinate, could be transferred to.

                    • Descendant Of Smith …
                      8 November 2023 at 10:04 pm

                      While influenza still kills a lot of people each year the risk has massively reduced since the Spanish Flu epidemic because the susceptible genes were predominantly removed from the gene pool eg human beings adapted to the flu mainly by dying – not what many people seem to think is that the flu became milder.

                      As a result we pretty much know the risk influenza is and can manage it – Asia better than Western countries where mask wearing is much more normalised. Influenza injections with the current variants are part of that.

                      When something novel comes along we haven't taken the genes out of the gene pool and we generally choose to try and prevent that as it causes massive death and disruption which is what we saw. Locking down and buying time for increased understanding and vaccine development was absolutely the right thing to do.

                      Whole villages did this during the plague – let no-one in, the rich ran away and hid in their castles, in France the well off put little doors in their buildings so they could get their wine delivered which amusingly happened again during covid.

                      Without vaccination susceptible people of all ages would have died just like they did in the Spanish flu. Just like they did in many other countries who couldn't or refused to lock down.

                      Contagion management best practice is well known – we just need to be better prepared to put it in place.

                      https://abcnews.go.com/Health/debunking-idea-viruses-evolve-virulent/story?id=82052581

                    • Anne …
                      8 November 2023 at 10:22 pm

                      Descendent Of Smith 10:04PM

                      yes yes

                    • joe90 …
                      8 November 2023 at 11:20 pm

                      Both are respiratory viruses.

                      Covid is an endothelial disease. It jiggers the cells lining blood vessels, the endothelium, that regulate pretty much every aspect of the vascular system.

                      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10332421/

                    • newsense …
                      10 November 2023 at 12:37 am

                      Fuck it- we should have been Britain or Sweden!

                      The real thing was rich people didn't have any advantage against the disease. Usually in the US your money can save you. Get you better care. The best facilities. The best surgeons.

                      It's probably a coincidence RW talking points pop up where Belladonna goes. Or that threads derail. As she said, it's just a little flu that COVID.

                      Just like pundits were telling us the election was about the Auckland lockdown without any other analysis.

                      Once COVID was in, the health response was a non-issue apart from a few malcontents, so all the other issues resumed their various importances. Labour's legislation slate was poorly sold and didn't solve half the problems that needed solving. A cashed up opposition was able to pick them apart and mow them down.

                • Belladonna …
                  8 November 2023 at 10:37 pm

                  If your expectation is that nurses are routinely vaccinated against your "long list of vaccinations for health staff" – you are most unlikely to be a happy consumer.
                  Health staff are offered free vaccinations. They are not required to take up that offer.

                  • Descendant Of Smith …
                    8 November 2023 at 11:44 pm

                    Many, if not most do depending on where they work. I have several family members who are nurses and they have no problem having them. Some have worked overseas where they had no choice as well. You didn't have them you didn't get a contract.

                    If I caught something off an unvaccinated nurse who had been in contact with a contagious patient I'd be a much much unhappier consumer.

                    • weka …
                      9 November 2023 at 12:08 am

                      do you feel the same way about masks? I'm more at risk from covid with unmasked health practitioners than I am with unvaccinated ones.

                    • Descendant Of Smith …
                      9 November 2023 at 12:37 am

                      Yeah definitely have no problems with masks being worn. Any sign of anything we wear them. Have family in rest homes and residential villages, have family members with lung conditions and other disabilities. On the odd occasion I've been to GP the nurses and GP's have been wearing masks. Most of the people in the waiting area also.

                      Still see lots of people with them in supermarkets as well – not a high proportion but still lots. Was talking to an older person who stopped to chat while I was mowing my verge. She is an English immigrant and given what happened in the UK she just always takes a mask and wears it in the supermarket.

                      It is certainly more normal now and we don't have the idiots calling you a sheep, a communist, etc that we had during covid though I still come across them in the twitter cesspool.

                    • newsense …
                      10 November 2023 at 12:18 am

                      Yes, obviously during a pandemic where the disease is spread in droplets masking and vaccination is crucial and should be a requirement in everyone treating the disease.

                • gsays …
                  10 November 2023 at 6:41 am

                  About your expectations around health staff and 'vaccinations'.

                  I korero with a few health folk, ED and maternity nurses, Ambo staff etc, none of them have gone back for their pFizer booster shots.

                  All of them were strident in support of the 'vaccine' originally. Now, when asked about keeping up with boosters, they shrug and say "Meh".

                  I would suggest beyond the very old or vulnerable this attitude is common and widespread.

        • newsense 14.1.2.3
          8 November 2023 at 2:37 am

          Well which ones should be respected?

          Don’t forget we had marches with death threats made against our elected leaders. Violent, anarchic protests. Hints at the possibility of guns and explosives. Sob stories about healthy people who don’t have to deal with polio or TB refusing to be vaccinated because freedom. People playing at sovereign citizenry. People saying old people should just give themselves up for the others. Large numbers of people sharing false science or pseudoscience or fake stories about suicides.

          Don’t know who you’d invite over for a cuppa out of that lot, or who you respect, or how exactly you’d describe their behavior, but the right is heavily invested in forgetting that the 50% was a reward for handling the pandemic well because they behaved like a bunch of twits at best and at worst people were genuinely afraid for their lives if they got in.

          The numbers we’re seeing now are a pre-Jacinda norm or a left and right block with a centrist party in the middle give or take 5 % in either direction changing government. Which gradually occurred once COVID was no longer an issue.

          sorry if this is a double post!

      • Anker 14.1.3
        7 November 2023 at 7:58 pm

        Yes you are correct Adrian. Winston only gained another 3% of the vote or so.

        Some left went to Greens, some to TPM.

        Winston likely gained some votes for his stance of women's rights i.e. their separate sex based spaces/competitions. This is a mainstream view i.e. that women should have their own sporting competitions, change rooms etc as seen in the Talbot Mills poll I posted above. Some people felt strongly enough about this to move their vote to Winston. These people can't be considered the "looney right" whatever that means. The need and rights of women to have their own sex based spaces is I repeat a mainstream view.

  15. SPC 15
    7 November 2023 at 2:53 pm

    Given the meeting was held in Upper Hutt, a fait acompli.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/labour-leadership-vote-chris-hipkins-to-reveal-whether-hes-staying-on/E4WDBFVSWBFXHMOE2Y37ILJYFA/

    The opine of Moroney and Haworth is fairly mainstream.

    There is consensus on having a blank slate, as per policy direction.

    But for now it is unity behind the leader. In this they follow the Key/English model (Ardern/Hipkins) but went on to Bridges a like for like replacement of English (nor any policy change). They did this because they felt they won 2017 but for Peters and would return to power in 2020.

    In this case, there is the fact that the NACT/NZF combo may not last.

    Note Kirk lost 66 69 before winning in 1972. And the opposite Rowling losing 75 78 (close) and 81 (close).

    Moore losing 90, and then losing to the most unpopular re-elected government in our history (National 35%). The Alliance and NZF also getting some of the opposition vote action in the last FPP poll.

    Clark losing 96 and winning 99.

    Then burning through Goff, Cunliffe and then Little (till saved by Ardern and WP).

    As they say to new MP’s – and this also applies to defeated parties after an election, breathe and learn and bide ones time.

    The best way to promote change is either with a nationwide leadership contest, or an equivalent caucus meet and greet with the party members.

  16. Ecomaori 16
    8 November 2023 at 11:28 am

    Can some one get me a lawyer I'm held against my will and human rights in the Rotorua mental unit tell
    They are trying to force feed me dummies pills using h bloods as a excuses.
    No lawyer for 5 days no rights for Tanta whanau
    I say that this place should not be named mental health unit. It should be named a DE STRESS CLINIC better for the wairua just the name of this place makes my skin crawl.
    Ka kite ano

  17. Eco Maori 17
    13 November 2023 at 2:51 pm

    I'm the only person in NZ that cannot hire legal representation WTF.

    🤟 they I held them out of my whare for 3 days and ni

  18. Eco Maori 18
    13 November 2023 at 3:02 pm

    I must be the only person in NZ who can't get legal representation WTF I kept them out of my house for 3days and nights then they get a key and open the locked door and throw me in a m Unit in Rotorua if they can't beat you by the book they Cheat like the dirty asholes muppets they are.🤟