Open mike 17/11/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 17th, 2023 - 72 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 …

72 comments on “Open mike 17/11/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. SPC 1
    17 November 2023 at 7:24 am

    Your WIFI and AI and you.

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/ELs1d94vKjFF/

    And then one day along will come quantum computing.

    Humanity has been making gods for thousands of years, and this may be the one to truly rule – though in America they are trying to build a hybrid and call its emergence a millennial realm. The deep state has been preparing for this capability of "oversight" management of the civilian population for some decades at a lesser tech level on a subset of the human population (psy ops).

    By the time half of the New Zealand population reaches age 65 having never owned their home, that will be the least of their worries. A society order capable of managing inequality, not mitigating it, is being built. The prosperity gospel made manifest – for some.

    The halcyon days are behind us.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 1.1
      17 November 2023 at 8:51 am

      The halcyon days are behind us.

      Amen.

      John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address [20 Jan 1961]
      To that world assembly of sovereign states: the United Nations. . . our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support. . .to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective. . .to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak. . . and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.

      Peak Convenience [July 2008]
      I know people who would circle the Walmart parking lot 10 times before they would walk from a parking spot that isn’t within 50 feet of the front door.

      Since then (2008), spaceship Earth has gained another 1.3 billion human passengers.

      Still, best foot forward…

      https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/country-overshoot-days/

  2. GarethNZ 2
    17 November 2023 at 8:18 am

    For people commenting on the support or lack thereof for Palestinians in surrounding countries, it might be helpful to reflect on the ethnic and religious divides in the area.

    Palestinians are Arab and Shia Muslim. Other countries that have Shia Arab majorities are Azerbaijan, Bahrain & Iraq. Countries with a significant Shia Arab population are Yemen, Syria and Lebanon. These are the countries where the most support for Palestine is found, although Azerbaijan is in the middle of a war and Iraq is still rebuilding after the end of the two wars it's just gone through.
    Iran is Shia Muslim, but they are Persian, not Arab so they're sympathetic but don't want to get involved.
    All the other countries around Israel are Arab and Sunni Muslim. Again, sympathetic to fellow Arabs, but Egypt taking refugees would be like Irish Catholics taking in some fleeing Protestants 80 years ago.

    • SPC 2.1
      17 November 2023 at 8:43 am

      Are you aware that Hamas are a branch of Moslem Brotherhood – a Sunni group? Egypt's (military government) problem with Hamas is because they deposed the Morsi led MB government.

      Thus more in common with Erdogan's regime than the one in Iran.

      They were in fact on the side of the Sunni Islamists fighting against Syria's President Assad (left wing Baath Party rule dominated by a minority Alawite Shia) who was supported by Hizbollah and Iran.

      The Palestinians are problematic for some in the Arab League – because Moslem Brotherhood and Fatah (secular left like the Baathists of Iraq but to be government of a democratic Palestinian state) are both anathema to the top down rule of dynastic families and military regimes.

      Iran is Shia Muslim, but they are Persian, not Arab so they're sympathetic but don't want to get involved.

      Now that is so absurd, that it is just funny. Who arms Hizbollah and Hamas (and for what purpose)? Which nation apart from Russia was most involved in fighting for the Assad regime? Which nation runs the Shia militias in Iraq to the point of influence there akin to that they have with Hizbollah in Lebanon. Who arms the Houthis in Yemen.

      • GarethNZ 2.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 11:01 am

        I'd say that Hamas in the 80s when it broke away from the Muslim Brotherhood was a very different beast than it is now. There's video floating around of the current leader of Hamas talking about how he's committed to peaceful negotiation with Israel back around 2000.

        Iran arms Hizbollah, Hamas and the Houthis but you never see them putting troops into the conflict. The Arab groups are pawns, not equals. They are useful in disrupting the US-Arab alliance. Just like Assad in Syria is useful to Russia. Iran has publicly called Hamas apostates and animals in the past.

        • SPC 2.1.1.1
          17 November 2023 at 11:15 am

          You don't see American troops in Ukraine (continuance of a Cold War with Russia means no actual military conflict) or Israel (the US poses as the peace broker) either.

          For Iran, as a Revolutionary Islamic Republic, sponsorship of Shia Moslem self-government and anti-West political leadership is its foreign policy. Of course active involvement of its own military outside of self defence (it was invited into Syria) is nation state aggression.

          Hamas would appear to be the first Sunni Moslem group it has sponsored and based on having the same goal elimination of the Israeli state.

    • Ad 2.2
      17 November 2023 at 9:30 am

      So why is Sunni Qatar the primary Middle East supporter of Hamas?

      • GarethNZ 2.2.1
        17 November 2023 at 10:53 am

        Why do you say that it is?

        Qatar reached out to Hamas in 2006 at the request of the US to be a middle man in negotiations and it's the home of Al Jazeera so it's not too surprising that Hamas leadership base themselves there. Qatar is ~10% Shia so there's definitely support there and it's a rich oil state.

        It's also a bit of the last place left. Saudi cracked down on Hamas after 9/11, Syria kicked them out in 2011, Egypt kicked them out after the 2013 coup which caused the Muslim Brotherhood to lose a lot of its influence.

        • Ad 2.2.1.2
          17 November 2023 at 11:27 am

          Well my answer about the importance of Qatar right now for Israel and Hamas is multiple:

          – Is a very strong ally of the US, with a relationship near to that of NATO membership

          – Has the largest US military base in the Middle East

          – State-influenced Al Jazeera is the primary news feed for much of the Middle East and of EU viewers, and manages to offend everyone in equal measure with their reporting which is admirable

          – Harbours most of the Hamas leadership right now

          – Is a consistent and massive donor to Gaza via Hamas, which Israel has permitted

          – Sufficiently independent from either Saudi Arabia and Iran

          – Has normalised relations with Israel

          – Has highly skilled diplomatic corps with a very strong track record, even with Mossad

          Way too early for anything useful to emerge diplomatically, but it certainly will.

  3. SPC 3
    17 November 2023 at 8:18 am

    Our Pacific neighbours are allies, not beneficiaries

    https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/nz-news/350111844/our-pacific-neighbours-are-allies-not-beneficiaries?utm_source=stuff_website&utm_medium=stuff_referral&utm_campaign=mh_stuff&utm_id=mh_stuff

    It's paywalled, but the headline says a lot, and quite a bit more than New Zealand's relationships with nations in the South Pacific.

  4. Ad 4
    17 November 2023 at 9:23 am

    Just in case it needs stating that the Queenstown-area economy is an airport-fuelled bubble of growth and wealth amidst the otherwise mediocre 90% remainder of New Zealand.

    https://www.scene.co.nz/queenstown-news/business/economic-star-still-burning-brightly/

  5. gsays 5
    17 November 2023 at 12:41 pm

    Since the highly publicized event in Hawkes Bay of the state ham-fistedly, attempting to uplift a new born baby, there appears to be a more hands off role from Oranga Tamariki.

    In this example there were verbal agreements for the vulnerable child not to be left alone with it's eventual killer.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/133306235/southland-toddler-hit-multiple-times-by-mums-partner-before-death-coroner-says

    This is not to pour scorn on the mother nor social workers.

    Surely, this is an ideological position of OT. One that appears to be failing our most vulnerable. In a chat with someone in the know, a recent child murder in Wellys, the three adults in the house were all on P, leaving no-one as a protector for the child.

    How many more infant's must die, let alone the thousands more harmed, at the hands of their 'care-givers' and family before policy changes?

      • joe90 5.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 2:22 pm

        It's Oranga Tamariki, not Oranga Adult Feels.

      • gsays 5.1.2
        17 November 2023 at 7:00 pm

        That's grim reading.

        I want to get my head around the situation. How much of this is because of under resourcing and under staffing? Is there an ideological 'capture' among workers and management? Biased reporting by media?

        • Belladonna 5.1.2.1
          17 November 2023 at 8:06 pm

          The Moana case was pure ideological capture within OT. Apparently at the case-worker level, but supported by management.

          However, on the broader scale OT is damned if they do (uplift children) and damned if they don't (kids being killed, because of drop-kick adults in their life – why didn't OT intervene?)

          A child-centred view would (most of the time) result in uplift of the children, and re-settlement either within the wider whanau (if possible) or with long-term foster parents.

          Notably this resettlement has to be permanent, or as close to permanent as feasible. The damage done to kids as they ricochet between foster care, to whanau, to parents, and back to foster care, is considerably worse than a stable re-settlement.

          OT is mostly parent (mother) centred. While, yes, *if* the Mum can be supported to turn her life around, then this is the best possible outcome. The problem is that most of the time it doesn't work. And, by the time OT admits it isn't working, the kids have been severely (arguably permanently) damaged – or are dead.

          • gsays 5.1.2.1.1
            17 November 2023 at 9:04 pm

            Celia Lashlie started advocating for the mums and highlighted the tendency for the 'authorities' let down the vulnerable while at the same time holding them to account for every shortcoming.

            • Belladonna 5.1.2.1.1.1
              18 November 2023 at 10:23 am

              I don't think that standing aside while your child is beaten to death is a 'shortcoming'.

              • gsays …
                19 November 2023 at 8:58 am

                Obviously, but failing to supply evidence to WINZ, not getting to appointments on time, truancy/education issues, as examples are merely shortcomings. When compared to the resources, power and control of the state compared to a parent, juggling limited income/ budget priorities, work commitments etc.

                Tracey Watkins touches on this (although the article casts more heat than light)

                "We also know that members of the household were known to police, and probably to child protection agency Oranga Tamariki (OT) as well.

                But OT continues to hide behind privacy as its excuse for refusing to talk about what it knew.

                So who is speaking for Baby Ru? Not the people who were last to see him alive. And not OT. The inference is that they are not to blame for his death. But they have failed him, even in death, by refusing to give him a voice."

                https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/nz-news/350113478/who-speaking-baby-ru

                • Belladonna …
                  19 November 2023 at 11:29 am

                  The only people speaking for Baby Ru are the wider whanau – the ones who cared for him and loved him for the first year of his life, primarily his great aunt, and his uncle.

                  OT is liable. Concerns about the safety of child within the household were officially raised with OT by the wider whanau. OT did nothing to address the issue. Once again, demonstrating that they are not child centred, but parent centred.

                  This is such a tragically typical situation, when children bounce back and forward between whanau, foster care, and the primary parent. There is a lot of research about how important it is for a child in the first couple of years to have a stable caregiver. Baby Ru should never have left the care of his great aunt.

                  The words I'd like to use for the adults living in the house, who either murdered him, or stood aside for others to do so – would not be acceptable on TS.

                  It's time for a law change, for child murders, because the right to silence has become a right to murder.

          • KJT 5.1.2.1.2
            18 November 2023 at 8:20 am

            Given the "success" rate of State care it is almost always a better option to support the family to care for children.

            There are cases where Social workers are in a damned if you do and damned if you don't. Difficult all around.

            Easy to judge with 20/20 hindsight. But, without a crystal ball……

            • Belladonna 5.1.2.1.2.1
              18 November 2023 at 10:19 am

              Statistically many more kids die and/or are abused in the care of drop-kick parents, than are killed/abused in State care.

              I think that you are biased by some of the (tragic) history from the mid-20th century. There are much greater controls and checks on foster parents, than there are on the families that OT is 'supporting' (I've seen actual examples on both sides)

              A child-centred approach would look first at whether it's realistic to support the family. But it requires a lot of intervention (no, you can't have care of your children if you live in a house with Meth users; no, you can't have care of your children while you live with someone with a history of family violence; yes, OT caseworkers will be checking up on you and on the people you live with; yes, you have to check with OT before moving; yes, you have to have a police check on any new adult moving into your home).

              NB: these are all basic/ongoing checks that foster parents have to pass.

              Many people are not comfortable with that level of state intervention. In that case, the child-centred approach is to remove the children from the highly risky environment. If Mum (and it usually is Mum – since Dad is long gone) isn't prepared to put the welfare of her kids first, then the State has to do so.

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                18 November 2023 at 11:50 am

                "Drop-kick parents" = parents who physically abuse their children? And/or perhaps very neglectful parents who are at the opposite end of the parenting spectrum to helicopter parents and snowplow parents?

                https://www.govt.nz/browse/family-and-whanau/adoption-and-fostering/fostering-a-child-caregiving/

                Maybe Aotearoa NZ needs a ‘fostered generation’ to disrupt the cycle of children of "drop-kick parents" becoming "drop-kick parents" themselves? There but for the grace of God…

                https://www.abuseincare.org.nz/

                • Belladonna …
                  18 November 2023 at 10:03 pm

                  My sympathies are with the kids being physically abused and killed.

                  Your mileage clearly varies.

                  And, yes, I have personal acquaintance with people in this situation. Including kids whose lives have been pretty much ruined by the decisions made by parents (and supported by OT). And with foster parents who are doing their best to turn those kids lives around.

                  I've seen parents who come from really sh*t backgrounds themselves, absolutely determined to make sure their children never suffer what they did. Basically, it requires putting the needs and welfare of your kids first. Something which is really evident isn't present in almost every reported case of abuse – and would be clearly visible to every case-worker involved.

                  Whanau adoption can work really well – unfortunately it's not supported in many cases by OT – because the mother doesn't want to 'lose' the kids. A classic example of where OT is parent-centred, rather than child-centred. This recent case is a prime example – the baby was safe, cared for, and loved with his great aunt – but dead once he was returned to his mother. I can only imagine the depth of grief the kuia feels.

                  https://www.teaonews.co.nz/2023/11/07/tell-the-truth-is-the-reremoana-whanau-plea-to-those-responsible-for-the-tragic-death-of-baby-ru/

  6. Red Blooded One 6
    17 November 2023 at 12:45 pm

    I see the annointed Leader of the Keystone Kops Koalition is still shooting off his mouth without actually saying anything of substance as usual. <a href=”http://Luxon defends negotiating skills as coalition talks continue Luxon defending his ineptitude.

    [link fixed]

    • Ad 6.1
      17 November 2023 at 12:49 pm

      Bring back Helen Clark.

      • Red Blooded One 6.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 1:13 pm

        Couldn't agree more, much more substance than CLuxon.

        • Visubversa 6.1.1.1
          17 November 2023 at 4:02 pm

          Helen knew how to manage Winston. Lots of first class airfares to nice places as Foreign Affairs Minister with 2 other Ministers to do the actual work – Chris Carter for the relationships stuff and the "schmoozing," and Phil Goff to do the grunt work. All Winnie had to do was to turn up, give the speech, shake the paws and have a good time.

    • AB 6.2
      17 November 2023 at 1:11 pm

      Luxo can't be as banal as he sounds. He could be playing a longer game to discredit and overturn MMP.

      • observer 6.2.1
        17 November 2023 at 4:30 pm

        No. That is exactly the problem here … people understandably think "well, he can't be that bad, so there must be some cunning plan." Opponents are tempted to think it, not just supporters or commentators.

        You only have to listen to his longer interviews (though I can appreciate why you wouldn't want to waste your time). Once we're past the scripted soundbites to any real follow-up, interviewers probing for actual answers, he is lost. He – quite literally – has no words. No vocabulary. It's not an act. He is that shallow.

        • gsays 6.2.1.1
          17 November 2023 at 6:36 pm

          All of which speaks to the ineptitude of Labour.

          Going from an unprecedented majority, political capital up the wahoo to burn, to losing to that mob lead by a rookie first term MP.

          He must be doing something right.

          • observer 6.2.1.1.1
            17 November 2023 at 6:46 pm

            As I said elsewhere (and is frankly obvious) Labour's failure was not Luxon's achievement.

            Can you give any examples of things he has done right? "Not being Labour" is not an answer. Seymour and Peters are "Not Labour" and they run rings round Luxon. The Greens and TPM are not Labour, and have gained support.

            The election was a referendum on the government, and they lost. The Labour votes went in 5 different directions (plus the "stay at homes", up 5%).

            • gsays 6.2.1.1.1.1
              17 November 2023 at 9:12 pm

              "Can you give any examples of things he has done right? "

              He introduced discipline to a rabble that, you would have to acknowledge, had been prepared to eat their own young, in the desire for power.
              Witness Boag, Bridges, Collins, Kuriger etc.

              Unified a caucus.

              • joe90 …
                17 November 2023 at 9:58 pm

                Unified a caucus.

                Right up until they cotton on that they've been sold a pup and that Christopher "I was into mergers and acquisitions" Luxon is an empty suit.

  7. ianmac 7
    17 November 2023 at 1:39 pm

    Matthew Hooton tells it the way that many see Luxon. A man totally unfitted to the role that he has claimed. (I envy the way that some can present the same ideas and beliefs that I have, but I am unable to present them effectively.)

    By 11pm on election night, it was clear to anyone who could do year 10 algebra or operate an Excel spreadsheet that Luxon needed both Act and NZ First.

    Hours later, proudly wearing his All Blacks jersey, the incoming Prime Minister seemed to agree, declaring that “I’m a person who likes to bring teams together and make sure that I get the best out of that team and use all the skills that are in that team.

    “I’ve done a lot of mergers and acquisitions,” he boasted. “I’ve done a lot of negotiations.”

    Back in Wellington, Luxon criticised the way Jim Bolger, Helen Clark, John Key, Bill English and Jacinda Ardern had conducted coalition talks, insisting he had a better way.

    “I’m going to use the next three weeks until the special votes are fully counted,” he proclaimed, “to actually progress the relationships and the arrangements with each individual party.”

    Alas, he failed….

    Act, NZ First and National insiders say Luxon is a talker rather than a listener. He never asked how Act or NZ First thought negotiations should proceed, or what they wanted from them.

    The smaller parties’ priorities differ from National’s and from each other’s, and they have very different styles.

    Act prepared detailed policy papers for National, hoping to prompt in-depth discussions. National teased them for being so diligent with their homework and didn’t respond.

    In contrast, Peters held his cards tight, waiting for Luxon to ask for his view of the world and priorities. Luxon never did….

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/matthew-hooton-whatever-happened-to-those-christopher-luxon-negotiating-skills/BHVSDPU53RBTLD55A7R2PTE4CU/

    • Incognito 7.1
      17 November 2023 at 2:11 pm

      Luxon is a legend, in his own mind.

      • ianmac 7.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 3:21 pm

        He so clever and so successful and needs no advice from anyone and has already managed a huge turnaround for the NZ which he said so often was a basket case to today declaring that NZ is a strong progressive country. Wow! Such power. Such skill.

        Or is it all a a fundamentalist dream?

      • observer 7.1.2
        17 November 2023 at 4:52 pm

        Some classic Luxon quotes in today's reporting:

        Tells reporters they don't understand confidentiality … (which happened in all previous MMP negotiations).

        Says parties turned up with their manifestoes and went through them … (which happened in all previous MMP negotiations).

        Election 2023: Coalition talks continue with National planning to remain in Auckland over weekend | Newshub

        He's like the guy who listens to a Beatles song and says "hey, you should check this band out, I've just discovered them for you, I'm telling you they're good, listen to my advice".

        Things only exist when he finds out about them.

        • ianmac 7.1.2.1
          17 November 2023 at 5:04 pm

          Things only exist when he finds out about them.

          That is exactly how Trump operates. It is though Luxon reads a mythical Self Help book by Trump.

          And according to Hooton, Luxon mocked the homework done by David for the conversations and never bothered to ask about Winston's views. Probably because he knew all the answers and preferred his future partners to just do what Luxon tells them to do. Hmmph!

    • observer 7.2
      17 November 2023 at 4:17 pm

      Thanks for that, Ian.

      I hope people are finally seeing through the empty man. Not just predictable lefties but swing voters and "soft" Nats.

      Luxon had three great gifts. Jami-Lee Ross self-destructed (so Luxon got Botany). Judith Collins self-destructed (so he got the leadership). And Chris Hipkins failed, so Luxon will be PM.

      None of those events were because of Luxon's own talents. This is his first test. A laughable failure.

      • Belladonna 7.2.1
        17 November 2023 at 8:23 pm

        TBH – the negotiation time-frame only seems to matter for political tragics (myself included) and journalists. The rest of NZ are supremely unmoved (indeed, uninterested) by the negotiations.

        The test for them will come when they see the policy that the new government puts up – and decide whether it will deal with their primary concerns (cost of living, crime, education)

    • gsays 7.3
      17 November 2023 at 6:43 pm

      If you want a tad more Hooten, he is very cynically and darkly good in The Working Group this week. A couple of times him and Grant get a bit boisterous but generally he is on form, especially getting stuck into Luxon.

      He doesn't spare the media either. The press gallery, rather than rush about trying to get gotcha soundbites, they may have to read reports, do analysis research etc.

  8. pat 8
    17 November 2023 at 4:23 pm

    How many would have bet on a deal inside of 2 weeks of the counting of specials?….not many I suspect.

    • observer 8.1
      17 November 2023 at 4:36 pm

      How about "within 5 weeks of your opponent conceding the election"?

      It's not Bolger v Clark, English v Ardern. It's Luxon v Incompetence.

      Support from ACT: 100% certain. From NZF: 95% certain. Only one outcome possible, and yet he's stuffed it up.

      Imagine if he's in a room with other countries' negotiators, who have other options.

      … shiver …

      • pat 8.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 4:51 pm

        Luxon may well be incompetent….however as stated i doubt many would have risked cash on Winston doing a deal inside 2 weeks.

        And in the grand scheme of things it means little.

        • observer 8.1.1.1
          17 November 2023 at 5:01 pm

          True, the time taken means little. But what it reveals about the strengths of the 3 leaders means a lot. The PM will be the weakest.

          We'll get a government, there will be handshakes, Ministers sworn in, etc. Nice positive words will be uttered.

          Then they have to make decisions, the harder ones. This was the easy one.

          • pat 8.1.1.1.1
            17 November 2023 at 5:07 pm

            It means nothing more than it did prior to the election…Luxon is still Luxon and Peters and Seymor are the same as they always were.

            And sadly politicians gave away most of their real influence decades ago.

            The likes of Hooten et al are doing what they always do, stirring an old pot (and being well remunerated for it) and we lap it up.

            Meh

        • Muttonbird 8.1.1.2
          17 November 2023 at 7:46 pm

          What is the grand scheme of things? Hollowing out public services, a war on Māori, selling public assets, a house price explosion?

          • pat 8.1.1.2.1
            17 November 2023 at 7:54 pm

            I suspect your view is a little too local in a globalised economy.

            Let google be your friend.

    • Incognito 8.2
      17 November 2023 at 4:39 pm

      Luxon might have, being a property investor, and he’d have lost the bet with enough egg on his face to bake a pavlova.

      • pat 8.2.1
        17 November 2023 at 5:18 pm

        I suspect Luxon would only bet with someone elses money….a no lose proposition.

        But I ‘d eat a slice of the pav.

  9. Thinker 9
    17 November 2023 at 5:50 pm

    I saw the articles today, too, and couldn't believe how well I'd predicted things going. It was all I could see, but it sounded too unlikely that it didn't seem possible things would go the way I predicted. As I've said in earlier posts, if we couldn't have a secure left win, having this kind of outcome will help the left get back in in 2026 more than if the left just scraped in in the recent election.

    What next?

    I think Luxon will have lost all credibility within the National leadership. No more the "next John Key" reputation, methinks. In politics, you can't afford liabilities. If the dog can't hunt anymore, you shoot it and I think what's keeping Luxon in place now is the total embarrassing and completely unthinkable situation of dumping him in the midst of negotiations. Something tells me Luxon still believes he's doing a good job though. As they say in politics, his tail's being eaten but the message hasn't reached his mind yet. Were I Nicola Willis, I would be clearing out her appointment book for the first part of the new year.

    Matthew Hooton told us the inside goss is that Luxon believed he was negotiating from a position of strength against two weaker coalition partners, so made them some lowball offers that insulted them (and, although Hooton didn't spell it out, must have brought Peters and Seymour closer together than ever thought possible).

    I agree with Hooton and what he said spoke volumes about the "I'm the great negotiator" atmosphere to this whole situation. I have a slightly different spin on it though.

    Many ex-CEO's of big organisations who can't see a future next-step in business for themselves imagine a natural progression to the political arena however unless they spend time learning politics (and have the humility to see themselves at the lower rungs of a new ladder, I might say) such an imagination can be fraught with danger.

    Despite what Roger Douglas taught the country about level playing fields, big organisations generally negotiate under situations where the bargaining power of suppliers is low. That means, for example, I might own a big company and need some new computer monitors. My contract is worth having, due to my size, and there are many different suppliers. More to the point, there's not a lot of difference between an HP monitor or a Dell monitor. These factors mean that my big company negotiates with HP and Dell from a position of power and strength (hardly a level playing field at all). To many corporate executives "As long as I win, I don't care if you lose" is good negotiating.

    But, politics (and particularly MMP) does not make those distinctions when forming coalitions. Politics is about "win-win" (which can sometimes be another way of saying "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours") and the relative size of the National/ACT/NZF share is out the window to some extent.

    Good negotiators from other walks of life learn about something called a BATNA. This stands for Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. In other words, having a Plan B. It's the plan you fall back on if you can't reach agreement with the person you're negotiating with. Luxon went into the coalition talks without one. He has to reach agreement with Peters and Seymour if he is to save his own face and his party's political future as the most solid right wing party to vote for.

    According to Hooton's article, Peters and Seymour went into the talks with a BATNA that was, if they didn't get something meaningful for themselves, they didn't have to risk their reputations by forcing another election, they could offer Luxon the alternative of a National government, backed by their confidence and supply and the difficulty of arguing out each situation as it came up.

    Let's say, for instance, that as soon as the preliminary votes were counted, Luxon had gone to the Greens and said "Look, we don't see eye to eye on most things but there are limits to the extent I can cope with Winston holding my face to the stove. Can we at least explore some things I can offer that would allow you to do a confidence and supply deal with me?" He could then have gone into negotiations with the BATNA of a National/ACT government, underpinned by the Greens. Note that he doesn't necessarily have to conclude that negotiation, he just needs to be seen to be exploring it, to give him so much more control over the negotiating process. For those Greenies who say the Green Party would never enter into anything with National, remember that not long ago, who could have seen Peters/Seymour so much in harmony, but pragmatism brought them together.

    So, in summary, in this negotiation, Luxon has positioned National into a negotiation where it has no Plan B – it has to reach agreement with both Seymour and Peters. Seymour and Peters, however, have used the time since the election to talk pragmatically and develop a workable Plan B that puts them ahead of the game.

    Whatever happens, I think this spells disappointment for those who saw Luxon as the next John Key, both in longevity and in calibre – IMHO.

    • pat 9.1
      17 November 2023 at 6:27 pm

      Did anyone seriously think Luxon was a Key clone.?….we have had a couple of years demonstrating otherwise.

      • AB 9.1.1
        17 November 2023 at 7:42 pm

        Did anyone seriously think Luxon was a Key clone?

        Not that I've seen or heard. But plenty who wanted him to be – which I imagine is what Thinker is saying. And a good deal of what Luxon/Willis (Luxlis?) propose to do is a rerun of the Key playbook.

    • observer 9.2
      17 November 2023 at 6:35 pm

      Good comment.

      Luxon was never John Key 2.0, and it's amazing how many people on the left accepted that framing (it's been repeated on here, a lot).

      As though they're unable to say "I don't like or support Key but he was good at politics for National, and I don't like or support Luxon and he's bad at politics for National". Understanding your opponent is not approval.

      Being a good bullshitter is a common characteristic of politicians. Key was a good bullshitter, Luxon is hopeless at it.

    • SPC 9.3
      17 November 2023 at 7:51 pm

      The Green Party would never give c and s to a NACT government, or even a National-NZF one.

      They might offer c and s to a National minority government (together they are a majority) if Luxon showed them what he had negotiated with ACT and NZF and would they please save him and the country from the consequences of his first attempt at governance.

      The ultimate fall back position for National, is talking to the Greens.

      Help with affording their tax cuts

      1. without allowing foreign buyers – just match the 5% stamp duty of Oz on homes over $2M – $300-400M pa
      2. The 4 big banks made a profit of $6B – a 5% windfall profits tax – $300M
      3. Add a windfall profits tax on supermarkets as well.

      National can guarantee its landlord friendly policies would help hold rent levels down by agreeing to the Greens 3% rent increase cap – they do believe what they say don't they?

      They can abide by our international committments – Paris Accords. They do say we have bi-partisan foreign policy don't they?

      They can agree to increase the MW and continue with Fair Pay Agreements/Industry Awards. Because they do not want locals to have to go to Oz to get a fair wage do they? And they do need a rising tax take to manage the governments finances don't they?

      And continue with the state house building (and buying) programme and the shared equity scheme for first home buyers and take note of Winston Peters warning about planning for future aged care needs. They do believe in a home ownership based democracy and income based rent provision for those in need, don't they?

  10. Eco Maori 10
    18 November 2023 at 2:07 pm

    gisborne man is komutu.
    Don’t fuck with te taniwha

  11. Eco Maori 11
    18 November 2023 at 4:10 pm

    Gisborne man could not catch me and put me in his hinaki so he cheated useing the Mental Health Act against me you see whanau if the neanderthals can't win fairly then they cheat like the devil himself.

    Ka kite Ano

  12. Eco Maori 12
    18 November 2023 at 4:11 pm

    Gisborne man could not catch me and put me in his hinaki so he cheated useing the Mental Health Act against me you see whanau if the neanderthals can't win fairly then they cheat like the devil himself.

    Ka kite

  13. Eco Maori 13
    18 November 2023 at 4:19 pm

    Exactly like what he did to my uncle 46 years ago

  14. Eco Maori 14
    20 November 2023 at 7:40 am

    Minority poor people can't sue the system for Mel practice. In other words the system bends over the poor and ##### them we can't sue.

    The rich can sue any time they want.

    WTF

    They say the great acc experiment it's a lie they new exactly what would happen with acc they taken the poorest right to sue government or private enterprises for our abuse of human rights indigenous rights. Its fraud they broadcast lies about the system to make the nieve to believe there system is perfect.

    Its shitting on poor people and the rich doesn't give a fuck about the poorest
    tangata. that is why none of the system negative stats for the poorest tangata never decrease9