Remember this?

23 comments on “Remember this? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. IrishBill 1

   1 December 2009 at 11:00 am

   The travesty is that Caygill is still a Labour party member and still has input into decisions made by the party’s property trust.

   I’d suggest that a clear signal from Labour that it had put the dark neo-liberal days behind it would be to expel him from the party.

   I also suggest that emailing phil.goff@parliament.govt.nz asking for this to happen might be a good idea.
2. andy 2

   1 December 2009 at 11:02 am

   Don’t the Business Round Table do these type of ‘Productivity’ reports for cheap?

   Its not very efficient in market terms to pay these guys $500k to get the same result as the $30 + GST version.

   http://www.nzbr.org.nz/topic.asp?Topic=EconomicReform
3. vto 3

   1 December 2009 at 11:09 am

   remember? remember?

   Ok then, lets remember. The ‘someone elses country’ vid is a good starting point as it describes very exactly the date at which things changed for the worse, in the eyes of the standardites. Yes.

   So Muldoon it is then. Eighties and nineties were all wrong. Back to Muldoon policies.

   ha ha ha ha ha. fools.

   sheesh, there really are a lot of massive support columns missing to the endless half-cocked posts on this whole subject here. duh.
   • Daveo 3.1

     1 December 2009 at 11:11 am

     False dichotomy. The left doesn’t want a return to Muldoonism, but then that’s not the only alternative to the New Right.
   • IrishBill 3.2

     1 December 2009 at 11:12 am

     That’s right vto we can choose between reckless neo-liberalism or authoritarian conservatism. They’re the only two ways of governing in NZ. Yup.
   • vto 3.3

     1 December 2009 at 11:24 am

     Just following the ‘remember’ title.. It should certainly be remembered what NZ faced at that time when trying to evaulate things now. It should also be remembered that it was Labour that did all of that.

     And I would suggest they did it because of their concern for their fellow man in the street. Lange, Douglas, Prebble, Caygill, Clark, Cullen.. they all followed these policies because they considered that they would help the average person. (Now of course the predictable screams will launch forth about conspiracies with their ‘rich business mates’ and the like. poppycock).

     Whenever Prebble or Douglas etc talk about these policies they have a strong conviction that these type of policies will work. They also always relate it back to the benefit to the manwoman in the street. Those people were left wing. I think they still are. Perhaps it is you guys on the current left that have no new ideas and simply keep regurgitating the same old disproven beliefs and policies. For a lot longer than 25 years. Wake up folks and come up with something new then. Not the same old failed policies of the typical left – which is all I ever see on here.

     Apply your own post to your own brainwaves mr zet.
     • Draco T Bastard 3.3.1

       1 December 2009 at 11:47 am

       No, now it’s pointed out that the policies of the last 4 decades are all BS and that we should be looking for a better way. Helen Clark tried with her Third Way unfortunately that’s still mired in the failure that is capitalism and so will never work.
       • vto 3.3.1.1

         1 December 2009 at 11:53 am

         How can they be BS when they worked (as much as they could given their relatiovely poor implementation)?

         Helen Clark tried with a third way? What? She tried nuffink. Sat on her tuffet eating her curds and whey.

         What did she try Draco? What big efforts did she make to achieve top half OECD by 2011? (which is 13 months away now…)
         • Draco T Bastard 3.3.1.1.1

           1 December 2009 at 12:43 pm

           They’re BS and don’t work because they’re based upon a theory that assumes away reality and uses failed mathematics.

           Third Way

           She took the edges off the prevailing neo-liberal paradigm.
           • vto 3.3.1.1.1.1

             1 December 2009 at 12:52 pm

             That link doesn’t explain what she did as part of the ‘third’ way or to try and reach top half OECD by the end of next year.

             What specifically did she do?

             This post after all is about coming up with new approaches. The left doesn’t have any new ideas and hasn’t since, well, probably 1917.
           • Draco T Bastard 3.3.1.1.1.2

             1 December 2009 at 1:00 pm

             The link wasn’t supposed to explain what she did, it was supposed to give you some indication of the ideology that she was following and therefore be able to recognise what she did yourself.
           • vto 3.3.1.1.1.3

             1 December 2009 at 1:11 pm

             How can she have followed an ideology when she didn’t do anything? Her stated aim of top half OECD was complete and utter political bullshit and lies. Clark was a bullshitter. Just like some in the current govt.

             Look, your failure to provide some new ideas fits exactly with this post.

             The left has no new ideas.
4. Tim Ellis 4

   1 December 2009 at 11:20 am

   There’s also a clip of Mr Goff shouting at a protester about benefit reform in that documentary.

   Mr Caygill was the last Labour Government’s Mr Fixit in electricity.
   • felix 4.1

     1 December 2009 at 11:22 am

     Tim, is Mr Caygill a hard-right neoliberal or not?
     • Tim Ellis 4.1.1

       1 December 2009 at 11:58 am

       I don’t know Felix, but if he is I wonder why he’s still in the Labour Party if that’s the case. I doubt he was more of a hard right neo liberal than Mr Goff was in the fourth labour government. Also I wonder why Labour made him the Mr Fixit man of the electricity industry if he was.

       Let’s see some of Labour’s appointments for him:

       1. Chaired ministerial inquiry into the electricity industry.
       2. Appointed to Electricity Commission
       3. Made Chairman of Electricity Commission
       4. Appointed to EECA board
       5. Appointed deputy chair of commerce commission
       • felix 4.1.1.1

         1 December 2009 at 12:21 pm

         You’re arguing that one with yourself, Tim.

         Do you agree that Caygill is a hard-right neoliberal?

         Yes or no, Tim.
         • Tim Ellis 4.1.1.1.1

           1 December 2009 at 12:29 pm

           I don’t know Felix. Asking the same question over and over won’t get you the response that you want. It doesn’t seem likely to me that Labour would have appointed a hard right neoliberal to so many key positions in the last government, so on balance I would suggest not.

           The only thing I have to judge on is his time as a Labour Minister, when he was no more hard right than Mr Goff was at that time.
           • felix 4.1.1.1.1.1

             1 December 2009 at 12:39 pm

             Then show an example of a quote from Caygill on economics which couldn’t be classified as hard right neoliberalism.

             Show an example of him taking a position against the likes of Brash.

             Show him ever disagreeing with anything of the sort.

             If what you’ve said has any merit whatsoever it should be very, very easy for you to do so.

             Tick tock.
           • Daveo 4.1.1.1.1.2

             1 December 2009 at 12:47 pm

             Weird, that came up as someone else who shares my network.

             Anyway, my point is we all know Goff was a right-winger and has now changed his views. That doesn’t change anything, tt’s just a transparent attempt on your part to wedge.

             The evidence shows Caygill still holds his neoliberal views from his time as finance minister. We see it in the Brash letter, we see it in the 2025 taskforce.

             There’s no argument there, and I don’t know who you think you’re fooling. The fact his personal relationships have secured him Labour appointments doesn’t change that.

             [lprent: Weird, that came up as someone else who shares my network.

             There has been a problem with cookies caching in some proxy servers. It is a pain and I’ve tried a number of ways to resolve it. Obviously without success to date. Starts looking for the next hack to try. ]
           • quenchino 4.1.1.1.1.3

             1 December 2009 at 12:51 pm

             Goff’s not so much a right winger, as relatively conservative on left liberal/ identity issues. Whether he can reclaim the Labour Party’s working/middle class roots as an economically socialist party remains to be seen.
   • Daveo 4.2

     1 December 2009 at 11:25 am

     Yeah, but Goff’s moved away from his days of neoliberal excess. I don’t see Caygill doing the same, in fact judging from this report he’s only got worse.

     I see you keep bringing up the fact Labour has appointed Caygill to stuff. Presumably this is due to personal relationships and Caygill knowing where the bodies are buried.

     But in terms of the current argument, so what? None of that changes the fact he’s a fringe neoliberal ideologue, even if for god knows what reason he still sends the Labour Party his $15 a year.
5. d14 5

   1 December 2009 at 11:56 am

   It is clear that there was an editing error in the title.
   It was meant to be 1995 Taskforce.

Links to post

1. cc wilder: posted on 1 December 2009 at 1:30 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS