Open mike 25/11/2023

84 comments on “Open mike 25/11/2023 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. observer 1

   25 November 2023 at 7:24 am

   Perhaps the Standard could compile an ongoing list of election promises broken by the Nats and their sidekicks? It will soon be a long one, to be constantly updated.

   This should include all such examples, regardless of whether you think the U-turn is welcome. A Luxon pork pie is still a pork pie, even if you like the taste.

   The biggest so far is the foreign buyer's tax, but there are more tax frauds to add, such as …

   "Luxon said he was confident they would find the revenue to fill the shortfall from elsewhere – and said National was no longer planning to repeal the so-called “app tax”.

   That is a tax on app-based services such as Airbnb and Uber, which National campaigned on repealing along with others introduced by Labour."

   National, Act, NZ First coalition: Incoming PM Christopher Luxon on Nats’ tax sacrifice and stopping the coalition falling apart – NZ Herald
   • Bearded Git 1.1

     25 November 2023 at 7:45 am

     Many times in the campaign I heard the Nats say that they would implement measures that would meet NZ's climate change commitments. In which case this is already perilously close to a U-turn, as the climate change minister and the environment minister have been left outside the cabinet. This is a tactical mistake and probably a crude and nasty dig at Ardern’s “Climate Change moment” that they couldn’t resist.

     Has the environment minister ever been outside the cabinet before?
     • Belladonna 1.1.1

       25 November 2023 at 10:30 am

       I think, it's possibly more relevant to look at who the Climate Change ministers are, and what their other roles are.
       Simon Watts (also Minister of Revenue) and Nicola Willis (Associate CC) – Minister of Finance.

       Two people with a very heavy financial leaning in their portfolios – I think that the new government will be looking at Climate Change very much in a financial context.

       There are also two Ministers for the Environment (both outside cabinet): Penny Simmonds (who also has Tertiary Education – and will have her plate full with that one); and Andrew Hoggard (who will be looking at it from an Agriculture perspective).

       Neither are likely to stand up to the rest of cabinet in ensuring that Climate Change mitigation is on the agenda.

       Yes, there has been a Climate Change minister outside the Cabinet, before. James Shaw was Minister for Climate Change, outside Cabinet, in 2017-2020. David Parker has been Minister for the Environment (inside cabinet) since 2017. But it's pretty much Shaw who's been doing the heavy policy lifting in the climate change space.

       All in all, I'd say that it's a very strong indication that Climate change will not be at the core of this government's policies. Which is not surprising.
       • bwaghorn 1.1.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 11:14 am

         will be looking at Climate Change very much in a financial context.

         99 out of 100 rightist politicians can't see past the $ on anything.

         Andrew Hoggard doesn't speak for all farmers , just the act aligned ones and the ones who haven't worked out that act has taken over fed farmers.
   • bwaghorn 1.2

     25 November 2023 at 8:38 am

     Bring back blip, i miss blip
   • CharlieB 1.3

     25 November 2023 at 8:41 am

     Going on this type of witch hunt is a wee bit pointless and could end up as an own goal because under MMP pre election promises mean nothing until after coalition negotiation agreements have been written and published. At that point those pledges are what you hold the government to account for.

     The danger here is that at some point the parties on the left will likely be in a position to also negotiate a government and the same brush of criticism could be used against them to paint a picture of broken promises as you are trying to use now.

     One of the areas that showed up the current National party's inexperience and possible naivety during this election was the nature of their absolute promises of abolishing this that and the other and introducing other pies in the sky. The lesson here is the dropping of the foreign buyers policy and the TAX they expected to generate from it. ACT and NZF also made promises using similar language and they both seem to have had win's in regard to getting most of those accepted in one form or another, that's the advantage of the smaller parties because they will always have the balance of power in their favour if the bigger parties want to govern.
     • bwaghorn 1.3.1

       25 November 2023 at 8:51 am

       have the balance of power in their favour if the bigger parties want to govern

       Na I have 5 working dogs to HELP me govern this farm ,

       I make damn sure they know who is boss though. One thing key did that was right is ran a coalition not letting the minions run it

       Luxin and Ardern where /are weak .
       • mikesh 1.3.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 10:17 am

         During the negotiations Peters had the option available to him of walking out and supporting Labour instead. Luxon had no other option except that of settling for the position of leader of the opposition. That gave Peters a certain amount of power, but not an unlimited amount.
         • bwaghorn 1.3.1.1.1

           25 November 2023 at 11:16 am

           Winston did not have that choice, they had ruled each other out, and a 4 way coalition hell no in any case.

           Luxon is weak ,willis ,winston and seymour are going to run rings around him.
     • observer 1.3.2

       25 November 2023 at 8:56 am

       It's not a "witch hunt".

       Income tax cuts were a cornerstone of National's campaign, with Luxon repeating "$250" until the CTU exposed his dishonesty and the media belatedly reported it.

       And prior to that, he spelled it out with no ambiguity. Not "here's a policy to be negotiated", but a cast-iron promise to the voters. If words mean nothing, then we all lose.

       "Here's my commitment to you. When I become Prime Minister, I'll reverse Labour's tax grab, National will repeal each of these tax increases implemented by Labour."

       Christopher Luxon's State of the Nation speech: Government needs to stop its 'tax grab' | RNZ News
       • bwaghorn 1.3.2.1

         25 November 2023 at 9:21 am

         There'll be tax cuts, likly targets for nat savings , the Cullen fund, kiwisaver contributions, oh and the poor they always fuck the poor.
       • Belladonna 1.3.2.2

         25 November 2023 at 10:33 am

         But can you find an equivalent bottom-line commitment from Luxon on climate change? I'd suggest not.
         • observer 1.3.2.2.1

           25 November 2023 at 10:44 am

           No, I doubt anybody voted National because they believed Luxon was going to make tackling climate change a priority. It was barely mentioned in the campaign.
           • Patricia Bremner 1.3.2.2.1.1

             25 November 2023 at 3:26 pm

             Neither was covid mentioned. They ignore the elephant in the room until they can't.
       • CharlieB 1.3.2.3

         25 November 2023 at 2:25 pm

         Income tax cuts were a cornerstone of National's campaign

         the point I was trying to make is that it doesn't matter what any party says during an election campaign because all of it is up for negotiation during the formation of a government under MMP.

         That Luxon kept on talking in absolutes all through the election just shows how naive he is and also shows how little he or his current National Party colleagues understand the nature of MMP.

         The only statements that matter after the election is the policy documents agreed on by the coalition partners, in this case the three headed dog Nactnzf, and then the speech from the throne..
2. AB 2

   25 November 2023 at 7:39 am

   Would fees-free tertiary study going from the first year to the final year of study, despite a promise to retain it, constitute a broken promise?

   They've done it to reduce total cost because it will deter some people from even starting and others will start and then drop away. There's also more than a touch of malice – they don't want to open an opportunity to a class of people who otherwise might never have started, they'd rather subsidise a class of people who were always going to go and were always likely to finish.
   • Barfly 2.1

     25 November 2023 at 7:53 am

     The points you make are valid but you miss a big one –

     Why are they doing it? Well the answer is that fees- free will not cost a cent in the next 2 years – they won't be giving anyoine a last year free that has already had one so the people qualifying for fees free will be …/drumroll Nil, No-one, Zero and Nobody. Political chicanery dressed up as "we're so fucking clever'. As Mr Creosote said “bucket!!”
     • bwaghorn 2.1.1

       25 November 2023 at 8:43 am

       willis' work nodoubt, I know her type.
     • AB 2.1.2

       25 November 2023 at 8:52 am

       Good point. It will still be first year fees-free in 2024. Then from 2025 it goes to last year. As Labour introduced it in 2018, a student would need to have started in 2017 and be finishing in 2025 to receive anything that year, which would be unusual. As you say, pretty much a 2-year hiatus on paying anything in 2025/6 and then tapering in from 2027 as some degrees are longer than 3 years.

       Given that, it would not be a surprise if National's 2026 manifesto kills the policy entirely from 2027 onwards.
       • Belladonna 2.1.2.1

         25 November 2023 at 10:47 am

         I doubt that anyone who has benefitted from a 'fees free' year at the beginning of their qualification will be able to get another one at the end of it.

         That is certainly the case, now. If you sign-up for fees-free for one qualification, you don't get another go, if you then sign up for another one.

         [NB: this has caused major issues for people, who are doing a low-level tertiary certificate – and don't realize that getting fees-free for that minor qualification – precludes them from then getting it for the undergraduate degree, they then decide to do]
         • AB 2.1.2.1.1

           25 November 2023 at 2:52 pm

           Sure – realise that and clearly if the policy is to support only 1 year of study, that can be the first or the last, not both. However, Barfly appears to be correct in saying that the act of switching from first year to last year creates a two-year hiatus where expenditure on the policy drops to almost nothing.

           If the government then uses this hiatus to 'review' the policy, it looks like a golden opportunity to cancel the whole thing at that point. Effectively, the policy would then have been killed from the end of 2024, even though the 2023 election promise was to continue it.
   • SPC 2.2

     25 November 2023 at 10:25 am

     While we can all remember the challenge to National's figures for their tax plan – especially the $700m from a tax on and return of foreign buyers CLuxon said this to the Herald about the veto of NZF on this funding

     Instead, Luxon said the tax package – National’s centrepiece in the campaign – would be funded by other means, given there were already “buffers” in its fiscal plan and there would be other savings and “reprioritisations” that could be dipped into.

     https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/nz-cabinet-announcement-live-updates-the-concessions-christopher-luxon-had-to-make-to-get-coalition-over-the-line/PAACRXJNT5FKJAEJMHDSLPQQ6I/

     So the plan all along was to fix the hole in their budget by doing this.

     1.There will be no further adjustments to income tax brackets to deliver further tax cuts — as they cannot afford to.

     2.The slight of hand over free fees

     3.No adjustment to the WFF tax credit threshold

     Hitting pause on future changes to income tax beyond next year is also not going to lose Luxon any credibility; National’s tax package was to continue adjusting the income tax thresholds for inflation only if it was “affordable and responsible”.

     Among those is the estimated $555m National will no longer be spending to lift the Working for Families abatement threshold from $42,700 to $50,000 in 2026.

     https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/nz-cabinet-announcement-live-updates-the-concessions-christopher-luxon-had-to-make-to-get-coalition-over-the-line/PAACRXJNT5FKJAEJMHDSLPQQ6I/

     None of this planned duplicity made known to voters before the election.

     So the debate over amounts and the reassurance that they were confident about the numbers was just a deception.

     The money no longer to be spent lifting the Working for Families abatement threshold from $42,700 to $50,000 in 2026 means the so called $10 a week IETC low income workers get would be outweighed by this change – they will soon be worse off.
     • Vivie 2.2.1

       25 November 2023 at 7:58 pm

       Re news that National have dropped their overseas property buyers' tax policy and need to find revenue of $740 million p.a. from other sources for their planned tax cuts, it was widely reported that this amount was never accepted as realistic by various economists.

       https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/election-2023/497974/economists-analysis-rubbishes-national-s-foreign-buyers-tax-numbers

       "National's policy document stated it expected the policy to raise $715m in the first year it was introduced, increasing to about $764m in 2027/28, averaging out to about $740m a year.

       Economists Sam Warburton and Michael Reddell – who lean left and right respectively – decided to do their own analysis using data from Stats NZ, real estate data from Corelogic, and the information National has so far publicly revealed about its policy.

       Their independent modelling resulted in a "best estimate" of $210m a year in revenue, leaving a gap of $530m or 71 percent between their data and National's proposal. A more generous "higher-end estimate" calculated at $290m in revenue – still falling $450m, or 61 percent, short".

       Did National really believe overseas property buyers would generate so much revenue? Surely they knew NZ First did not agree with this policy and might be needed to help form a government. Did National always intend to cancel this policy, and plan to cut funding and staff from public services and perhaps increase GST? How will the new government fund their tax cuts?

       Many people's resentment towards Labour overrode their willingness to see National's tax plan for the con job it was. After repeated challenging of National's tax cuts plan: https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/05-10-2023/nicola-willis-confirms-only-3000-households-will-get-full-250-a-fortnight-tax-cut Evidently many people knowingly voted for a party that lied by omission and implication about the supposed benefits of a major policy.
       • observer 2.2.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 8:19 pm

         You and SPC have summed it up.

         National knew that if they said "tax cuts" loud and often, it would work. And it did.

         They could have said they were going to pay for it by making banknotes smaller, it wouldn't have mattered. A magical treasure was needed so they conjured one up. That's all it ever was.
3. Stephen D 3

   25 November 2023 at 7:59 am

   Winston Peters

   Shane Jones

   Judith Collins

   Potentially the most corrupt government Aotearoa has ever had.
   • Muttonbird 3.1

     26 November 2023 at 8:28 am

     Judith Collins is one of the most corrupt politicians New Zealand has been unfortunate enough to be burdened with.

     Now she is the top law officer in the country. We are turkeys voting for Christmas.
4. Barfly 4

   25 November 2023 at 8:16 am

   This "strong and stable" drivel is starting to piss me off. We need a more appropriate moniker

   How about ":shitty and sadistic" or "bone-headed and backward"
   • dv 4.1

     25 November 2023 at 8:32 am

     Strong, stable and stupid!!
   • bwaghorn 4.2

     25 November 2023 at 8:45 am

     This week's buzz word is "historic "
   • Patricia Bremner 4.3

     25 November 2023 at 3:31 pm

     "Bone-headed and backward" has definite appeal
   • Ffloyd 4.4

     25 November 2023 at 3:39 pm

     Sick and sadistic would be my take on these unhinged and deranged individuals. God help us.
5. Ed 5

   25 November 2023 at 8:19 am

   There are just so many awful policies. Don’t know where to start……
   • bwaghorn 5.1

     25 November 2023 at 8:46 am

     With luck they'll bicker fight and unravel before they can get them up and running.
6. Anne 6

   25 November 2023 at 11:00 am

   https://twitter.com/NewshubNationNZ/status/1728163975827702251?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

   We need her more than ever!
   • Kat 6.1

     25 November 2023 at 11:34 am

     The Elders Group……..it wouldn't surprise me if Helen is destined for a big part in world leadership……..and great to see her wearing the colours……
7. Mr Nobody 7

   25 November 2023 at 11:01 am

   Unfortunately the new Government has a lot of work to repair the economic and social damage the last six years of a Labour/Green party has done to New Zealand.

   However based of the documents released yesterday if they achieve only a quarter of it New Zealand will still be a thousand times better off.

   [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
   

   [lprent: Authors have the option of limiting the trolls who can comment on their posts. Don’t waste my time trolling on my posts ever again. You appear to be too stupid or too lazy to actually do anything more than run the troll playbook. ]
   • Muttonbird 7.1

     25 November 2023 at 11:20 am

     You had three numbers in your comment. One was accurate, the other two plucked out of your arse.
   • lprent 7.2

     25 November 2023 at 11:27 am

     Yeah right. If you ignore the pandemic related tourism, trade and employment issues, I'd love you to actually point out any policies that actually caused any significant damage to the underlying economy. This would give me opportunities to point out again just how much of a unthinking simpleton you are.

     Unlike you, I actually appear to have been working in a growing economy. One where we've been starting to get on top of a multi-decade chronic housing shortage.

     Offhand I suspect that every example that your simple brain ( that so resembles that of a parrot) can come up with will involve something about the benefits to those who exploit them of having readily available low wage workers.
     • Mr Nobody 7.2.1

       25 November 2023 at 1:41 pm

       Lprent does this policy apply to everybody here or just the sycophants who parrot the echo chamber's preferred narative?

       We encourage robust debate and we’re tolerant of dissenting views. But this site run for reasonably rational debate between dissenting viewpoints and we intend to keep it operating that way.

       What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others.

       Link

       If you would like to actually engage in a discussion I would be more than willing to once you stop acting like a child with name calling and whining because you didn't get the election results you wanted because more New Zealanders felt your side were the worse of the available choices.
       • Ghostwhowalks 7.2.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 4:35 pm

         Debate ?

         Just pushing out Nationals pre election talking points doesnt come near to starting a debate.

         What was the specific damage to the economy- from the Labour- Greens AND NZF after 6 years – you proffer

         I noticed how you have airbrushed NZF out of its coalition role from 2017.
   • Barfly 7.3

     25 November 2023 at 11:57 am

     Please see a doctor you appear to have an untreated head injury
     • Mr Nobody 7.3.1

       25 November 2023 at 1:43 pm

       Please see a doctor you appear to have an untreated head injury

       Does this statement comply with this sites stated policy of:

       We encourage robust debate and we’re tolerant of dissenting views. But this site run for reasonably rational debate between dissenting viewpoints and we intend to keep it operating that way.

       What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others.

       Link

       [lprent: yes. It is a shorted way of saying what I said. Don’t comment on one of posts again.]
       • Barfly 7.3.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 3:53 pm

         "if they achieve only a quarter of it New Zealand will still be a thousand times better off" (my bold)

         Well ye of the thin skin I rest my case (thousand??) although I will concede you may simply be dishonest or delusional rather than having an untreated head injury.
         • Mr Nobody 7.3.1.1.1

           25 November 2023 at 4:35 pm

           Clearly you've never heard of hyperbole so hopefully, this helps.

           hyperbole

           noun

           1. exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

              "he vowed revenge with oaths and hyperboles"

           If however, that is your issue let me help you and rephrase my comment to:

           However based off the documents released (1 & 2) yesterday if they achieve only a quarter of the program of work outlined in them New Zealand will still be significantly better off than it has been over the previous Labour led government.

           I hope this change is acceptable to you.
           • Ghostwhowalks 7.3.1.1.1.1

             25 November 2023 at 4:43 pm

             Ah , the great futurologist who believes in the magic powers of one deodorant salesman

             Australias Reserve Bank has had a triple mandate for some generations now and has led to higher growth over NZ previously single focus for the RBNZ , so what higher power provides certainity that going backwards will change what was a poor past outcome

             https://www.rba.gov.au/about-rba/our-role.html

             1. the stability of the currency of Australia;
             2. the maintenance of full employment in Australia; and
             3. the economic prosperity and welfare of the people of Australia.
   • Drowsy M. Kram 7.4

     25 November 2023 at 11:59 am

     Our new govt and their backers aren't interested in 'repair', unless you mean the repair of unearned income streams. As for your assertion that:

     …if they [NActNZF] achieve only a quarter of it [their work] New Zealand will still be a thousand times better off…

     perhaps "very big brain" Willis can help you with "the technical numbers", now that her woeful miscalculation of the foreign buyers tax revenue won't be further exposed.

     Like Barry @3, I'm picking another rise in the regressive GST to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, although this lot won't wait as long as Key did – Luxon is “very impatient“.

     Key defends tax cuts for wealthy [19 May 2010]
     He [Key] was attacked by the Greens in Parliament for suggesting on Monday that people should not be envious of tax cuts for the wealthy and for its plans to increase GST.
     • Mr Nobody 7.4.1

       25 November 2023 at 1:53 pm

       Our new govt and their backers aren't interested in 'repair', unless you mean the repair of unearned income streams.

       I disagree completely, just read the policy agreement, there are so many positive outcomes for New Zealand in my opinion that as I said even if they achieve a quarter of what it contains New Zealand will be a thousand times better off.

       Take for example just the Strengthening Democracy section, these are tangible steps to reduce the massive social division that has occurred over the last 6 years by ensuring all citizens are equal, something the last Labour/Green/Maori Government seemed very keen to destroy.
       • observer 7.4.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 2:08 pm

         Can you give us examples of how you, as a citizen, have been discriminated against? Can you tell us how you have suffered, in reality? And can you tell us how the new government is going to stop that?

         And since you say "6 years", not "3 years", why are you accusing Winston Peters of doing it?

         (and by the way, you have also invented a government that never existed in the past 6 years).
         • Mr Nobody 7.4.1.1.1

           25 November 2023 at 4:25 pm

           Can you give us examples of how you, as a citizen, have been discriminated against?

           I never said I had been discriminated against.

           Can you tell us how you have suffered, in reality

           Example 1:
           I have two children with significant medical issues I have spent a lot of time over the past 16 years dealing with the medical system.

           Over the last 6 years I have experienced first hand a significant decline in the quality and availability of health care including:
           – Being told I would be better to go private
           – Being told when calling 111 for an ambulance that there were none available
           – Being told by staff that due to staff leaving treatment options previously available could no longer be provided.

           Example 2:

           This year I have had to deal with the Police on 3 occasions.
           Incident 1: I witnessed a road rage incident where a truck driver pulled the driver out of their vehicle and assaulted them before stealing their mobile phone.

           When 111 was contacted (approximatley 0900 on a weekday) the victim who I had stopped to assist was advised that there were no police cars available (Tauranga) and that he should go to the local station to report the theft.

           Incident 2:
           While parked at the beach a car arrived and parked beside a woman's car who was also in her car. The two persons obviously were known to each other and the male driver got out of their car with a length of metal (looked like re-enforcing metal crowbar) and started smashing the woman's rear window while the two screamed at each other.

           The male then fled the scene and I followed and called 111 (there were other people also in the carpark so I figured she a) wouldn't be alone and b) they could provide any assistance as well as I could).

           After following the vehicle for about 10 minutes with the operator on the line (who had dispatched an ambulance btw) advised that there were no police vehicles available.

           This occurred around 3pm-4pm on a Sat/Sun.

           Incident 3:
           Due to one of my kids medical issues I had to call 111. When the police arrived the office yelled and scream and made the entire situation worse and told us "It isn't our (the Police's) job to deal with mental issues and you should be contact CAHMS (who one of my kids is significantly involved with).

           So how will this governmental change help first off:

           • Fund Gumboot Friday/I Am Hope Charity to $6 million per annum.
             This will likely assist my kids with greater options available.
           • Renegotiate the Crown funding agreement with St John with a view to meeting a greater portion of their annualised budget.
             This will hopefully people like me are told to there are no ambulances available when people need urgent medical care.
           • Better recognise people with overseas medical qualifications and experience for accreditation in New Zealand including consideration of an occupations tribunal.
             This will hopefully means my kids might be able to start getter the medical services that were available when they were younger but which we have been told recently are no longer available.
           • Commit to training no fewer than 500 new frontline police within the first two years
             This hopefully will mean cops actually turn up when they're needed.

           And since you say "6 years", not "3 years"…(and by the way, you have also invented a government that never existed in the past 6 years

           A slight mis-quote of what you wrote which I hope you don't mind as I wanted to deal with both of your points at once.

           I say 6 years and not 3 because the state of the nation (IMHO) has decline significantly over that time period including with WP was part of the Labour led Government and the reason for my reference to a Labour/Green/Maori government because the policies, attitudes and influence has been made up significantly by these three party's.

           I accept your point however and agree I should have worded that differently/better.
           • observer 7.4.1.1.1.1

             25 November 2023 at 5:29 pm

             Thank you for your reply. I'm sorry that you have had some very unpleasant experiences.

             The question then is "Will that improve now? Can these promises be believed?".

             The evidence is clear. I'll take just one example for now, policing levels.

             First, this is what happened under National before 2017. Police numbers per capita decreased.

             NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says police numbers declined under National’s leader – Australian Associated Press (aap.com.au)

             Then after 2017 police numbers per capita increased.

             Police numbers climb by 1800: Government expected to announce target reached today – NZ Herald

             In both these examples, I've included independent assessments (a factcheck, and then the Police Association spokesman).

             It is very sad that the right-wing parties have successfully conned voters into believing their rhetoric. That only means false hopes are raised, followed by greater anger when the promises are broken.
             • observer …

               25 November 2023 at 5:38 pm

               The funding for St John's ambulances has been covered extensively in the media.

               How it was:

               Paramedics, St John want more funding | RNZ News

               How it is:

               St John offers biggest pay correction in the history of the ambulance service

               Less funding under the National government before, more funding under the one just voted out. And now the promise is only to “renegotiate”, which means nothing.

               Again, it pays to look beyond the rhetoric to the reality.
               • Ad …

                 25 November 2023 at 9:03 pm

                 Labour deliberately chose not to fund St Johns properly, or to integrate them into the new national health service when it was amalgamated. Shame on them.

                 This was despite a full independent review requesting that full service integration from late 2019, released in 2020.

                 https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/article/undoctored/release-martinjenkins-review-st-john

                 What they got was a one-off $21m in the next budget. Not sustainable funding for their 25% shortfall. So they had to cut over 100 of their staff. Those are staff that could have saved lives.

                 You may notice they have to put staff outside supermarkets to try and get subscriptions to fill this gap (and I happily have done so). This is a basic emergency service for the whole of New Zealand.

                 Response times since 2021 have worsened, their budget isn't keeping up, and they continue to have massive vacancies.

                 https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/02/ambulance-sector-shake-up-on-the-cards-as-funding-staffing-issues-plague-st-john.html

                 The staff they have are grossly overworked and present massive risks to emergency patients across NZ. So no one applies to work there.

                 https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/06/06/st-john-staff-highlight-ridiculous-exhausting-working-conditions/

                 Good on them for making it a specific coalition line. If only Labour had.
             • Mr Nobody …

               25 November 2023 at 5:43 pm

               Sorry Observer but it appears that this is not a site to discuss, debate or challenge the ideas (especially those of the host or their sycophants).

               Perhaps we will encounter each other on another site that seeks to be more than a left wing echo chamber.
               • bwaghorn …

                 25 November 2023 at 7:00 pm

                 Sounds like observer has debated you in good faith and having been soundly whipped (metaphorically) you've decided to take your ball a go home ya wee man!
                 • Ad …

                   25 November 2023 at 8:45 pm

                   It was Lprent not Observer that was the issue and you know it.
                   • bwaghorn …

                     25 November 2023 at 9:54 pm

                     He didn't ban him and the conversation could easily carry on , nobody needs either a spine or honesty
           • Ad 7.4.1.1.1.2

             25 November 2023 at 8:49 pm

             That's a solid and thoughtful answer.

             None should try and argue that mental healthcare got better under Ardern's government.

             The really tough stat is how fast gun crime and street assaults went up in Auckland in particular, again under Labour.
             • bwaghorn …

               25 November 2023 at 9:56 pm

               501s
               • Anne …

                 25 November 2023 at 11:22 pm

                 I think Ad is a secret supporter of the ACT Party bwaghorn. 😉
       • Drowsy M. Kram 7.4.1.2

         25 November 2023 at 8:10 pm

         I disagree completely, just read the policy agreement, there are so many positive outcomes for New Zealand in my opinion that as I said even if they achieve a quarter of what it contains New Zealand will be a thousand times better off.

         There are no outcomes (positive or negative) from the policy agreement as yet, but if our new govt does "achieve a quarter of what it [the agreement] contains", then please give an example of how "NZ will be a thousand times better off" – just one.

         Reckon I’ll be waiting a while for a rational example – imgo, “a thousand times better off” is simply political hyperbole.
   • Mr Nobody 7.5

     25 November 2023 at 5:46 pm

     To Lprent:

     Your house, your rules.

     All the best for the future.
8. adam 8

   25 November 2023 at 1:36 pm

   It's so simple to break down every war at the moment.

   It's one far right warmongering turd with a hard-on for violence and death verses another far right warmongering turd with a hard-on for violence and death.

   Examples in no particular order:

   Hemedti

   Russian oligarchs

   Mohammed bin Salman

   Netanyahu

   Hamas

   Ukrainian oligarchs

   Abdel Fattah al-Burhan

   Putin

   and the real meat in the pie,

   the Corporate oligarchs

   Or if you want, pick a side, and become just another jingoist with a desperate need for war porn.
   • Red Blooded One 8.1

     25 November 2023 at 2:29 pm

     Don't forget how much "Religion" and "Faith" have to do most conflicts. "Nothing more Hateful than the Love from a good Theist"
     • adam 8.1.1

       25 November 2023 at 2:56 pm

       Which one of my examples did not expound with their actions your point Red Blooded One? They all use what ever tool they have at hand, and for many speaking for/with God seems to be a common trait.

       As a theist myself – they only real answer is to hold them to account – including, but not limited to – not let them speak for/with God. Nor let them use the pageantry and trappings of a faith for their political ends.
9. bwaghorn 9

   25 November 2023 at 3:27 pm

   Fuck me just watching newshub nation ,willis is saying removing labours smoke-free policies will increase revenue for funding tax cuts!!!!!

   Most fucked thing I've ever heard.
   • dv 9.1

     25 November 2023 at 4:01 pm

     Geez.
   • Ed1 9.2

     25 November 2023 at 5:48 pm

     I am not clear on what exactly is proposed – do they intend to remove all restrictions on purchasers? Whatever it means, they are putting money ahead of lives – killing many with a horrible disease for short term tax cuts for the wealthy. Labour saved 20,000 lives; NactFirst may be trying to reverse that – CLuxon and Willis may not care about their children, but some of us care about ours . . .
     • bwaghorn 9.2.1

       25 November 2023 at 7:02 pm

       Willis was laying it at nzfs feet but was happy to not restrict outlets because it'll increase revenue, that's a level of cold that I struggle to grasp from a leading elected politician.
   • Anne 9.3

     25 November 2023 at 7:34 pm

     I had to watch the Newshub item to believe it. She laid the blame at the feet of ACT and NZ First who wanted it "and we agreed to it" she said. She admitted it would bring in an extra one billion dollars for the tax-cuts. I presume it was per annum.

     There is their political philosophy laid out in black and white. They regard the lives of [potentially] thousands of NZers to die prematurely as acceptable… in order to fund their big election bribe – tax-cuts.

     And they moaned and complained about the Covid mandates because of the loss of revenue stream. Didn't give a damn about the loss of life. They were okay cos they could escape to their holiday homes etc.

     I wonder how many of the idiots who voted for NAct are already starting to wonder what they've done.
     • bwaghorn 9.3.1

       25 November 2023 at 7:42 pm

       Don't fret Anne it's mostly poor Maori especially woman who smoke . I'm sure national voters will sleep soundly.
       • observer 9.3.1.1

         25 November 2023 at 8:31 pm

         Of course they will.

         People on the left need to get smarter about this. The tactic (imported from USA Republicans) is to provoke a response from the people National want to respond.

         We could call it Hone Harawira syndrome. John Key's government would do something questionable, "middle NZ" or swing voters would say "I don't like the sound of that" and then Hone would pop up on TV saying "f*** you National" and those voters would say "but I'm not on his side".

         The Newshub piece was, through the lens of those voters, about Maori getting angry, not health policy. Bait … and hooked. Expect much more of this.
10. newsense 10

    25 November 2023 at 5:38 pm

    This should be reprinted far and wide. If you can do it contact Webworm. Hayden Donnell has my admiration, again and again. Labour should be contacting him, because I’ll sure as f be listening to what he thinks of the results of their soul searching or not.

    ‘The World’s Biggest Hypocrites

    Free speech is actually under threat – and our loudest free speech warriors are nowhere to be found.

    by Hayden Donnell.’
11. Adrian 11

    25 November 2023 at 5:43 pm

    This has to have corruption at its very core. The scrapping of the smoking cessation legislation and wait there’s more!!!! the scrapping of the de-nicotineising of smoking products. Pressure for these measures could have only come from the industry, one of the shoddiest industries in the world which is well represented by ex ( really? ) sales people of this shit in the new government. Follow the money, if only some journalist had the ability.
    • Anne 11.1

      25 November 2023 at 7:39 pm

      Nicky Hager has but he can't be across everything.
12. Peter 12

    25 November 2023 at 5:57 pm

    It may be a bit early to be talking legacies but let’s talk Winston Peters. Tobacco, cigarettes, smoking, illness, death.
13. Adrian 13

    25 November 2023 at 6:12 pm

    Evil is being complicit in the suppling of lethal drugs for profit.
    I wonder if someone who fell out with Ardern/Labour over a difference of opinion on a matter of principle may have disappointed some influential backers who demanded value for that support. Just musing.

    Maybe we need a huge petition to present to the government.
14. Chess Player 14

    25 November 2023 at 7:26 pm

    It's great to see a progressive Maori representation in this new centre-right government, with 7 Maori ministers.

    And not just with token ministries either, unlike under Labour.
    • bwaghorn 14.1

      25 November 2023 at 7:39 pm

      You've put you're pawn in a weak position.
    • Anne 14.2

      25 November 2023 at 7:52 pm

      Oh you mean the pretend Maoris – apart from Winston Peters, Shane Jones and Shane Reti.

      None of them could be described as ‘progressive’.
      • Ad 14.2.1

        25 November 2023 at 8:42 pm

        Your moist left reflex of simple racist sneer and pearl-clutching is such a skill.
        • Anne 14.2.1.1

          25 November 2023 at 9:56 pm

          That is not only inaccurate but venal and unwarranted.

          I was referring to the likes of Goldsmith and Seymour in particular who claim to have a modicum of Maori blood in them. No doubt they do, but they are not Maori in the accepted sense of the word. Indeed Seymour is 'the racist' and a fascist to boot.

          A bit of mea culpa would suffice but I doubt you are up to it.
      • Chess Player 14.2.2

        25 November 2023 at 8:51 pm

        Disagree – progressive means continuing, developing, growing, ongoing

        There's a world waiting out there for those with dreams Anne, as opposed to resignation to victimhood
    • Ad 14.3

      25 November 2023 at 8:40 pm

      The bolter must surely be Tama Potaka who picks up Conservation, Whanau Ora, Minister for Crown – Maori relations, Maori Development, and Associate Housing.

      Casey Costello will certainly be a strong understudy to Mitchell as Minister of Police. She's a great pick and great to see in Cabinet already.

      Nicole McKee picking up Courts and Associate Justice is a big step up.

      Well done all three.
      • Anne 14.3.1

        25 November 2023 at 10:04 pm

        Nicole McKee? Isn't she ACT’s gun toting supporter of the American NRA who are closely aligned to the Trump loving Republican Party?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS