Polls good for Left

Written By: - Date published: 1:30 pm, November 3rd, 2011 - 80 comments
Categories: disaster, election 2011, im/migration, overseas investment, polls - Tags:

There’s a TVNZ poll out tonight and a Herald poll tomorrow morning but, ahead of them, here’s some other new polls results that point to trouble for the Nats. 27% of young people want to leave New Zealand. 82% of people oppose farm sales to foreign buyers. 24% of people will change their vote over the Rena.

Btw, I think that only in the world of perennial National Party press sec applicant Tracy Watkins does a poll result showing one in four people will change their votes over the Rena mean National has ‘dodged Rena fallout’. Her own poll says that this election turns on 6% of voters continuing to support National or changing their mind. With four times that number of votes in flux and the momentum all one-way traffic for Labour in recent weeks, I would be worried if I was National.

80 comments on “Polls good for Left”

  1. Jimmy 1

    Maybe those 27% of young people should vote and try and get the country into a better state rather than jumping ship like rats.

  2. Roy 2

    Wanting to leave the country is not the same as being able to leave the country, Jimmy.

  3. queenstfarmer 3

    24% of people will change their vote over the Rena.

    Now I don’t know what the actual poll question was, but the stuff article says:

    But when asked if the Rena salvage and cleanup would influence who they gave their vote to at the election, 55.3 per cent of those questioned said no, while just 24 per cent said yes.

    Assuming the stuff article is correct, it is very misleading (and wishful, perhaps?) to portray “influence” as “will change”.

    • bbfloyd 3.1

      engaging in bullshit semantics again queeny….? come on mate…. you sound like you’re on the verge of an epiphany… don’t be shy….. it’s very liberating using actuality as a guide to thought….

      • queenstfarmer 3.1.1

        Semantics – the meaning of words. Well I guess some people do not like to engage in such things…

        • felix 3.1.1.1

          Actually semantics is a lot broader than just “the meaning of words”. It covers the meaning conveyed by a whole array of elements including words but also including sentence construction, accent or stress, phrasing, meanings implied by context etc etc.

          Ironic, huh?

          • queenstfarmer 3.1.1.1.1

            Actually semantics is a lot broader than just “the meaning of words”.

            Did I say it wasn’t?

            • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.1.1.1

              Yes, indeed you did. Your statement was closed and definitive. Felix, is, as usual, on the money with his more open and educated description.

              • McFlock

                Pure semantics 🙂

              • queenstfarmer

                Your statement was closed and definitive

                How so? I made no such claim. I was merely stating (briefly) one meaning of the word. Felix, and now you, for some bizzare reason appear to be claiming that I was attempting to give a definitive statement of all accepted meanings of the word (quite why I would want to do that is a mystery). And on the basis, it seems, that I did not say I wouldn’t.

                Very odd, but there you go.

                • The Voice of Reason

                  Own your words, mate. I’m not here to teach you linguistics, grammar or the English language, though I tried above because I’m in favour of upskilling the unskilled and you clearly needed the help.

                  • queenstfarmer

                    I am still waiting to hear on what basis you think my “statement” (an attempt to give a detailed list of every meaning of the word “semantics”?) was “closed and definitive”.

                    If you can’t explain, I’ll understand why.

                    • The Voice of Reason

                      I’ve already explained it.
                       
                      And, if I can digress for a moment, I don’t usually point out peoples’ linguistic or grammatical errors here, because what they say is more important. I try and focus on the ideas. The rare times I do comment are when someone like you gets pompous and then gets it wrong.
                       
                      From your comment above, I’m picking you either don’t get why your definition is, er, definitive (which isn’t a problem; not everyone took English classes as seriously as I did at school) or, more likely, that you just can’t bring yourself to acknowledge that Felix was right.

                    • queenstfarmer

                      No – you said: Your statement was closed and definitive.

                      I said: on what basis you think my “statement” … was “closed and definitive”.

                      You have not answered that – but you now say I’ve already explained it.

                      Where?

                    • The Voice of Reason

                      In comment 3.1.1.1.1.1.
                       
                      As I said, it really doesn’t matter if you don’t understand. I certainly don’t think any less of you if that’s the case and ignorance is better than the other alternative that you don’t have the grace to admit defeat.
                       
                      I’ve gotta go, but feel free to comment further and I’ll put you right again in the morning.

                    • queenstfarmer

                      Well lets see, your comment 3.1.1.1.1.1 is:

                      Yes, indeed you did. Your statement was closed and definitive. Felix, is, as usual, on the money with his more open and educated description.

                      So, the basis on which you claim to have “explained” that my statement was “closed and definitive” is… your own statement asserting (without any explanation…) that Yes, indeed you did. Your statement was closed and definitive.

                      Well that is just brilliant. It is truly “The Voice of Reason”! Or, to bring this full circle, is your handle just ironic?

                    • The Voice of Reason

                      Yes, it is ironic, queenie. I stole it from Ayn Rand, but that’s ok because I’ve fully enclosed it and it’s mine to keep now. Hope you didn’t lose too much sleep trying to work out where you went wrong; its cruel of me to tease you in that way, I know.

                    • queenstfarmer

                      Please never consider it cruel to give me opportunities to correct you. Just try to be more careful next time.

            • Bunswalla 3.1.1.1.1.2

              Come on guys, all this arguing over the meaning of semantics is just semantics, isn’t it?

        • Puddleglum 3.1.1.2

          qsf, c’mon, admit that what you meant to say – and what you did say – is that semantics is the ‘meaning of words’.

          Look at your initial comment. You bolded two words  (‘would influence‘) and then you focused on the fact that “influence” is not the same as “will change”.

          I’m not sure what you meant readers to take from that – other than the obvious point that the words  “would influence” don’t mean (i.e., don’t have the semantic loading of) “will change”.

          That is, you reduced semantics to “the meaning of words” (taken in isolation from their surrounding ‘language game’).

          Why do you fear confessing to this? 

    • framu 3.2

      further on the “would influence who they gave their vote to”

      how can anyone in the media say this means anything other than that?

      its not an endorsement of any party – it just indicates a level of change from one undefined position to a different undefined position.

      and from that we get statements like this

      “Voters have given the Government a pass mark for its handling of the Rena crisis – and most say it won’t affect how they vote at the upcoming election.”

      bah!

      (unless theres something im missing here)

    • Hanswurst 4.1

      Meh. So one poll registers – to all intents and purposes – no change. That’s not even worth the word “Bugger”, let alone three gratuitous exclamation marks.

    • insider 4.2

      So if 29% is good how does Eddie define bad? S/he needs to polish that crystal ball.

      On October 24 Eddie said: “I’m told that the Nats own numbers show them down 5% since the Rena/double downgrade/S&P lies/throat-slitting clusterfuck hit them, which puts their support in the mid-40s.” No sign on the horizon yet

  4. queenstfarmer 5

    27% of young people want to leave New Zealand.

    Eddie, on what basis do you consider this to be a poll that is “good for the Left”, when that poll was taken in October-November 2008 – i.e. after a full 9 years of Labour being in Government?

  5. gorj 6

    I moved to Sydney straight after high school in ’09. better weather, better looking women, better music scene… not much the government can do about that 🙂

  6. Anyonewhobelievesapoliticianwhentheysaytheyarehonestisafool 7

    You missed this one!

    Labour’s support has slipped in the first week of the election campaign to below 30 per cent, in the latest DigiPoll survey released this afternoon.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10763639

    Surely another win to Goff!

  7. Raymond A Francis 8

    Eddie; never forget Miss Clark’s dictum
    “Under promise, over deliver”
    Hope this is not another massive fail, mate

  8. randal 9

    looks like the nzherald is lying too.
    they can sue me if they like.
    but I bet they dont.
    they trying to do a wendell wilkie.
    but it wont wash.

    • Alwyn 9.1

      I assume randal, when you refer to Wendell Wilkie, you are referring to a famous poll that had Roosevelt losing in a landslide in an election in which he then took 46 out of 48 states.
      If so can you please get the election and the candidate right.
      It was a Literary Digest poll in 1936 when the Republican candidate was Landon. Wilkie was the Republican candidate in 1940.
      If this isn’t what you are talking about could you please tell me what the reference to Wilkie is about?

      lprent. Rob tells me that I am in moderation because I was banned by you back on 4 August, and that you are the only one who can lift it. I had, I confess, forgotten it.
      If I plead that I am sorry is there any chance of having it lifted? As an incurable nutter about politics the thought of going for the rest of the campaign in silence may be to much for me.

      [This time I’ll email Lynn. — r0b]

      [lprent: I just reread the comment. I read it as you saying that Zet was Mallard – which was just weird. I think I could have misinterpreted who you were directing the comment at or about (your comment was rather confused), so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. ]

  9. Gosman 10

    “…and the momentum all one-way traffic for Labour in recent weeks”

    Does that include in the debate last night?

    I love Eddies unfailing confidence in everything Labour. I believe a ‘Comical’ title might be in order at some stage.

    [lprent: Personally attacking my authors is bloody dangerous game. It is also one that I have already warned you about once today. Attack what they say, but don’t attack them directly or now even indirectly. I can live without you a lot easier than having authors decide to give up writing. My toleration level that you have previously earned is now down to zero. Next time you get kicked off for a few months. ]

    • Kaplan 10.1

      I think it does. Key lying about not having Labours costings again exposed himself as a conman. Sure he’s a good conman, but still a conman.
      I think the quote of the night was Goff calling out key’s whinging about potentially paying a few extra cents for a muffin if the minimum wage is raised. 🙂
      The low point would have to be Key using the nine billion portion of the deficit that he attributes to Canterbury as an attack line. Not smart.

  10. The latest poll has Labour below 30%

    The again it also has the greens above 10%

    There is no way Labour will get less than 30% of the vote, and there is
    no chance of the greens getting more than 10%.

  11. Matthew Hooton 12

    This is one of the most desperate posts I have seen on any political blog. The polls coming out in the next 24 hours are very bad for Labour, and they were taken before Phil Goff’s debacle last night in the Press debate. You need to come up with better spin lines than this. Happy to help.

    • gobsmacked 12.1

      Hooton needs to come up with better spin lines than this.

      “Very bad” redefined as “going up”. Classic.

      Presumably Matthew was talking about the One News poll. Looks like he got a little confused there, and was thinking of his old mate Don Brash, who is now in deep trouble. Will John Key save him, or stab him in the back yet again?

      Of course Labour should be doing better. But the Greens are gaining across the range of polls, and National have eaten their allies. Plenty to play for.

      • infused 12.1.1

        Err try again. Two polls today show Labour down.

        • The Voice of Reason 12.1.1.1

          Er, nope. The TVNZ poll has Labour up. Both have ACT below 1%.
           
          And, as Guyon Espiner notes: “In my view National’s numbers looks too high. I can’t see them getting 56% of the vote on election night, in fact I’d be surprised if they got to 50%.”
           
          So if he’s right, that leaves Key needing extra seats from somewhere. UF, ACT and the MP have 9 or ten seats between them now, but more likely 3-4 after election day. If National drop to 47% they will need every one of those hangers on to get to a majority. Every percentage point National drops below that is crushing to Key’s hopes, and if UF or ACT don’t get over the line, the difficulties mount.

          • Armchair Critic 12.1.1.1.1

            It leaves them a Pansy Wong or a Richard Worth away from a mid-cycle general election. Lucky there are no rorters left in the National party, so it won’t happen.

          • tsmithfield 12.1.1.1.2

            You must admit, TVOR, that its pretty sad when you have to try and see the bright side in these sorts of results.

            • The Voice of Reason 12.1.1.1.2.1

              Not at all, ts. I’m pointing out that National have to keep winning at this level to be sure of victory. Their support partners are going to come a cropper no matter what National’s eventual percentage turns out to be and the maths says that they need 47% plus to be in the game. That’s a big ask.
               
              Now, I am annoyed that Key has got the headlines today. But that’s his only result in the first week of the campaign and, really, his best day in a month. The chump even managed to sprinkle loser dust all over the William Webb Ellis trophy. We now know that he can be rattled, that his wishy washy campaign can be derailed and that Phil Goff can match him in debates. And there is plenty of opportunity for Goff to improve, while Key has clearly peaked.
               
              Just as an aside, one trend I’ve taken interest in is NZF’s inability to pick up loose Labour votes. Why isn’t Winnie winning their support? I would have thought he would cannibalise at least a point or two from Labour’s swinging voters. Waddya reckon?

    • Hey Matthew

      What I want to know is you alleged Labour was trying to distort ipredict results and I gave you a classic example suggesting that the tories were actually doing it.  What is your response?

      As a media person you have an obligation to at least pretend to be independent rather than run tory attack lines.  So do you think that Ipredict was gamed by a right winger? 

      • Matthew Hooton 12.2.1

        My response is that I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about

        • vto 12.2.1.1

          fuck

        • mickysavage 12.2.1.2

          Um
           
          You said that Labour was attempting to manipulate ipredict.  Your words are here.
           
          I then saw you commented on another Standard post and I asked this:
           
          “So Matthew …
           
          You posted an article on the electionresults site claiming that Labour was trying to manipulate the ipredict market.  Do you have the slightest shread of proof, even an itsy bitsy bit of proof that Labour did this?
           
          Yet you are strangely silent about the large shorting of Labour’s party vote at .31c?  Some one short sold 1,000 shares at that price obviously wanting to stop the price increasing beyond that point.
           
          I raised this on Red Alert and the order then magically disappeared.
          And why has electionresults not posted a very similar comment to this one that I made on the site?  After all if you are going to make these allegations on the web you should allow a contrary view, particularly one that is backed up by those fancy facty things.”
           
          Lanth also commented on the apparent attempted manipulation of the Labour Party vote here.
           
          So do you have any evidence whatsoever that a labour operative tried to manipulate ipredict or were you making shit up?  And what do you think about the apparent attempt by a presumably national leaning punter to manipulate ipredict?
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           
           

          • Pete George 12.2.1.2.1

            You’re spaced out again.

            I’m sure people with various connections try to manipulate iPredict. It’s impossible to know which ones have trading motives and which ones have political motives.

            I’ve noticed some major party moves. One example – just prior to the snapshot last week there was a big bundle that moved Nats and Greens aup and all other parties down, the smaller parties significantly.

            • mickysavage 12.2.1.2.1.1

              Geez Pete
               
              I am not complaining that there is manipulation.  I am complaining because Hoots blamed labour for one incident of it when there was no evidence whatsoever that Labour was involved.
               
              To any of these self annointed public commentators if they spout crap they should be held to account for it.
               

  12. Tom Gould 13

    In the old days, “perennial National Party press sec applicant Tracy Watkins” would be working on the gardening page and have nothing to do with politics during the campaign. How low standards have fallen.

  13. swordfish 14

    “Perennial National Party press sec applicant Tracy Watkins”

    Precisely, absolutely bloody precisely what I’ve always thought when reading her spin and Nact apologetics.

  14. gingercrush 15

    Always attack the journalist. What a bunch of lumptys. Disagree with a journalist and suddenly they’re in National’s back pocket. Very desperate stuff and sad really. Especially consider Labour also has a history of having press secretaries that were former journalists.

    I guess you lot are just going to get even bitter now that another poll is released that is bad for Labour and the left.

    • Tom Gould 15.1

      @ ginger, if it walks like a Tory, and talks like a Tory, and writes like a Tory, it probably is a Tory. Anyhow, after almost 4 years of craven promotion of Johnboy by the MSM, where is the surprise that one week of reasonably fair and balanced coverage has not closed a 20 point gap? Garner has been saying for months now that “Goff cannot win the election”, so he is hardly going to prove himself wrong, is he?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 15.2

      “Lumptys”? If you’re going to winge in Pomgolian at least you could spell it right!

  15. Willie Maley 16

    Hooten, what’s the highest National have ever polled on polling day?

    • willie maley 17.1

      Nick C, believing that is like still believing in the tooth fairy. It ain’t gonna happen.

      • Nick C 17.1.1

        Heh, who said I believed that that would be the result on election day?

        But it certainly doesn’t tell the story of a glorious Labour comeback does it, comrade?

        • Dan Hansen 17.1.1.1

          Does Eddie’s bind faith despite all evidence to the contray remind anybody else of that Iraqi information minister from the gulf war?

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Saeed_al-Sahhaf

          His last public appearance as Information Minister was on April 8, 2003, when he said that the Americans “are going to surrender or be burned in their tanks. They will surrender, it is they who will surrender”.

  16. In all of this, it’s probably worth remembering that in the 2008 general election Labour and Greens combined got 40.7% (34 and 6.7%, respectively), National got 45%.

    In effect, Labour and the Greens combined are pretty much holding their vote at this stage. As was pointed out (even by people like Hootton, if I recall correctly), it was very close last time – much closer than people appreciated. In effect, it remains the case now.

    It’s the minor party vote from last time that will count. If ACT miss Epsom but get 2 or more percent; Mana get enough for 2 MPs; the Conservative Party miss Rodney but get a couple of percent …

    If the Maori Party, for example, are needed to get National over the line, what will they do about asset sales in any negotiation? What will they do about welfare ‘reform’?

    Then, there’s Christchurch

  17. Blue 19

    This will be a very interesting election in terms of how the poll results match up to the actual election results.

    I don’t believe for a second that National’s numbers are really as high as the polls put them. It’s getting to the point where it is frankly ludicrous what the polls are saying.

    National won in 2008 with 45% of the vote. They’ve had three years in office, and the gloss has started to wear off. Judging from social media and comments on news sites, National has taken a hit in the popularity stakes, especially after the downgrades and the Rena disaster, and Labour’s strong campaign.

    Yet the polls consistently show National over 50% (which has never happened under MMP) and able to govern alone, with no impact from any of the things mentioned above.

    National’s supporters can crow, but honestly, you do have to be pretty blinkered to think that these gravity-defying results can possibly represent reality.

    I think it’s time to say that landline phone polling has gone the way of telegrams and VCRs. What you would replace it with, I don’t know, but it clearly isn’t working anymore.

  18. tsmithfield 20

    I think the problem for the left in this election is that people look overseas and see how bad things could be if we were in the same shit as Europe, the US etc. Then they probably think things are very good here in comparison.

    Because of this, I think people feel positive about their situation even though it may not have improved or may even have gone backwards compared to the days when the world economy was booming. Thus, it is quite hard for Labour to gain traction because people are cutting the current government a lot of slack due to the difficult world environment and our relatively good one.

    • Craig Glen Eden 20.1

      You raise some very fair and interesting points ts. I think you could be right with this summary.

  19. gingercrush 21

    There are actually three things to keep an eye on. How accurate will the political polls be. They weren’t that bad in 2008 while some of them were hopeless in 2005 (I do suspect the tightness and the fact National faltered due to the Bretherens was a factor). Are phone based polls better than for instance Horizon. Personally, I think there are major problems with Horizon as their results are entirely opposite to either the polls or Ipredict. Then of course there is Ipredict. Is Ipredict something that in future will add value to political commentary or is it merely a stunt and entirely unreliable.

    Personally, I believe National will be between the polls and Ipredict and will be close to or just above 50%. The Greens will be at or around 8% and no greater than 9%. Labour will be around 30%. Act will be out. And Chauvel might just sneak past Dunne (that will be dependent mostly on what National voters decide to do). I just have no idea how the Maori party will fare. Hawawira will get in but as for the other electorates who knows.

    I also wonder how helpful social media in particular is to politics. Does it open up politics or does in fact help to obscure as both the left and right use and abuse it.. I suspect elements in both National and Labour in particular are using it to falsely create impressions on politics and issues. Therefore, social media is proving reactionary and often acting against actual opinion because of how capable manipulation can take place.

    • lprent 21.1

      With the polls, what gets interesting is looking at how accurate they were to the actual result 6 months before. They always tighten up before the election as they rapidly shift when people start thinking about what they will actually vote.

      Mostly it depends on turnout. As always when there is a initial national victory, there was a low turnout last election.

      I don’t think national will be anywhere near 50%. How close they are to 45% is going to be the question. Labour the same but for 35%. Greens at 7-9%. MP I think I’d pick 3 electorate seats. Mana probably 1 electorate and maybe a list MP. Have no idea on Dunne.

      Wasted vote about 5-6% mostly from NZF.

      • Brett Dale 21.1.1

        The only thing that the polls have been incorrect every election is having the Greens too high and then its only about 2% too high, within the margin of error.

    • lprent 21.2

      And the coalition building is likely to be interesting – 1996 levels of interesting..

  20. Every single poll since National has took office, says they can either govern alone or with their coalition partner, every single one.

    Are they are wrong? Are they that inaccurate? Thousands of polls over three years and they are all wrong????

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Nats’ housing policy fails to keep pace with population growth
    Auckland got less than half the new houses it needed in the past year to keep up with record population growth, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 days ago
  • Urgent action needed on dirty rivers
    The Our Fresh Water Environment 2017 report re-confirms that we need urgent action to clean up our rivers. Meanwhile, National is standing by as our rivers get even more polluted, says Labour’s Environment spokesperson David Parker. “This report is yet ...
    3 days ago
  • Where there’s smoke and mirrors, there’s Steven Joyce
    Steven Joyce’s much vaunted pre-Budget speech is simply an underwhelming response to the infrastructure deficit National has created, says Labour’s Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Steven Joyce has belatedly come to the realisation that everyone else has a long time ago, ...
    3 days ago
  • Time to stamp out cold, mouldy rentals
    New figures show a small number of landlords are letting down the sector by renting cold, mouldy rentals. These houses need to be brought up to a decent standard for people to live in by Andrew Little’s Healthy Homes Bill, ...
    4 days ago
  • Time for fresh approach on immigration
    Latest figures showing another record year for immigration underlines the need for an urgent rethink on how this country can continue to absorb so many people, says Labour Leader Andrew Little. “New Zealand needs immigrants and is all the better ...
    4 days ago
  • Bring back the Mental Health Commission
    The People’s Mental Health Review is a much needed wake up call for the Government on mental health, says the Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little.   “I applaud their proposal to restore a Mental Health Commission and their call for ...
    6 days ago
  • And the band played on…
    Making Amy Adams the Housing Minister five months out from the election is just the orchestra playing on as National’s Titanic housing crisis slips below the waves – along with the hopes and dreams of countless Kiwi families, says Labour’s ...
    6 days ago
  • Hotel no place for children in care
    ...
    1 week ago
  • Maybe not, Minister? Nick Smith’s housing measure suppressed
    Sir Humphrey: Minister, remember the Housing Affordability Measure work you asked us to prepare back in 2012? Well, it’s ready now.Minister Smith: Oh goodie, what does it say?Sir Humphrey: Nothing.Minister Smith: Nothing?Sir Humphrey: Well, sir, you asked us to prepare ...
    1 week ago
  • Inflation data shows many New Zealanders are worse off under National
    The latest inflation data from Statistics New Zealand shows that too many New Zealanders are now worse off under the National Government, said Labour’s Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson “Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) is now running at 2.2 per cent, and ...
    1 week ago
  • Another emergency housing grant blow out
      Emergency housing grants data released today show another blow out in spending on putting homeless people up in motels, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford.   ...
    1 week ago
  • Families struggle as hardship grants increase
    The considerable increase in hardship grants shows that more and more Kiwi families are struggling to put food on the table and pay for basic schooling, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni. ...
    1 week ago
  • More tinkering, no leadership from Nats on immigration
    National’s latest tinkering with the immigration system is another attempt to create the appearance of action without actually doing anything meaningful, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Suicide figures make for grim reading
    The 506 suspected suicides of Kiwis who have been in the care of mental health services in the last four years show that these services are under severe stress, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David Clark.   “If you do the ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Pay equity deal a victory for determination and unions
    The pay equity settlement revealed today for around 55,000 low-paid workers was hard-won by a determined Kristine Bartlett backed by her union, up against sheer Government resistance to paying Kiwis their fair share, says Labour Leader Andrew Little. “Labour welcomes ...
    2 weeks ago
  • DHB’s forced to make tough choices
    The Minister of Health today admitted that the country’s District Health Boards were having to spend more than their ring fenced expenditure on Mental Health, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David Clark.   “The situation is serious with Capital and Coast ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Nats break emergency housing pledge – deliver just five more places
    Despite National’s promises of 2,200 emergency housing beds, just 737 were provided in the March Quarter, an increase of only five from six months earlier, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Research underlines need for KiwiBuild
    New research showing the social and fiscal benefits of homeownership underlines the need for a massive government-backed building programme like KiwiBuild, says Labour’s housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Social data security review too little, too late
    The independent review into the Ministry of Social Development’s individual client level data IT system is too little, too late, says Labour’s Social Development spokesperson Carmel Sepuloni. “The Minister of Social Development has finally seen some sense and called for ...
    3 weeks ago
  • More questions raised on CERA conflicts
    With the admission that three more former CERA staff members are under suspicion of not appropriately managing conflicts of interest related to the Canterbury rebuild, it’s imperative that CERA’s successor organisation Ōtākaro fronts up to Parliamentary questions, says Labour’s Canterbury ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Labour to tackle Hutt housing crisis
    Labour will build a mix of 400 state houses and affordable KiwiBuild homes in the Hutt Valley in its first term in government to tackle the housing crisis there, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. “Housing in the Hutt ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Farewell to John Clarke
    This wonderfully talented man has been claimed by Australia, but how I remember John Clarke is as a young Wellington actor who performed satirical pieces in a show called “Knickers” at Downstage Theatre. The show featured other future luminaries like ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty
    3 weeks ago
  • Valedictory Speech
    Te papa pounamu Aotearoa NZ Karanga karanga karanga; Nga tupuna Haere haere haere; Te kahui ora te korowai o tenei whare; E tu e tu ... tutahi tonu Ki a koutou oku hoa mahi ki Te Kawanatanga; Noho mai noho ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Buck stops with Gerry Brownlee
    The fact that the State Services Commission has referred the CERA conflict of interest issue to the Serious Fraud Office is a positive move, but one that raises serious questions about the Government’s oversight of the rebuild, says Labour Canterbury ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Teachers deserve a democratic Education Council
    Teachers around New Zealand reeling from the news that their registration fees could more than double will be even angrier that the National Government has removed their ability to have any say about who sits on the Council that sets ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Free trade backers are simply out of touch
    Are the backers of free trade out of touch with public opinion? This was the question asked when the Chartered Accountants launched their Future of Trade study. I was astonished by the answer in a room of free trade enthusiasts ...
    GreensBy Barry Coates
    3 weeks ago
  • John Clarke aka Fred Dagg will be missed by all Kiwis
    The man who revolutionised comedy on both sides of the Tasman, John Clarke, will be sadly missed by Kiwis and Aussies alike, says the Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little.   “I grew up with Fred Dagg and I am ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Labour’s modern approach to monetary policy
    A commitment to full employment and a more transparent process to provide market certainty are the hallmarks of Labour’s proposals for a new approach to monetary policy, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Greens back Labour’s plan for monetary policy reform
    Labour plans to change the way we do monetary policy in New Zealand and the Green Party supports them fully. We’re now of a single mind on this. Labour will move away from our reliance on a single, unelected person ...
    GreensBy robert.ashe
    3 weeks ago
  • Greens back Labour’s monetary policy reform
    Labour plans to change the way we do monetary policy in New Zealand and the Green Party supports them fully. We’re now of a single mind on this. Labour will move away from our reliance on a single, unelected person ...
    GreensBy James Shaw
    3 weeks ago