Shearer shows he means it

84 comments on “Shearer shows he means it ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Mouse Trawler 1

   21 December 2011 at 4:47 pm

   I think Shearer just put to bed any thoughts that he can’t foot it in the House. He spoke with passion, intellect and conviction.
2. dancerwaitakere 2

   21 December 2011 at 4:55 pm

   I think the man who ACTUALLY delivered an inspiring speech was Russel Norman. I am by no means a Green Party supporter, however the Norman delivered a very values-based vision for New Zealand, with a positive message.

   By contrast I found Shearer hard to listen to. He appeared to yell a lot and didn’t really inspire a positive feeling.

   Yes, the Prime Minister needs to be a statesman, however I the Prime Minister also needs to communicate a vision based on the CLEAR values of their party, with charm. I do not dispute that Shearer would make a wonderful Minister, however I believe that in the 6th Labour Government, he will be just that. A Minister.

   The Greens lay a massive challenge before Labour today. I hope for the good of the party I have been a member of for many years, that Labour rises to their challenge and leads the debate on progressive politics, not reverting to neo-liberal centrist politics which are the remnants of the 1980’s First ACT Government.
   • Enough is Enough 2.1

     21 December 2011 at 5:06 pm

     He borrowed that terrible right wing neo-con phrase from Farrar as well…’growing the pie”.

     it doesn’t matter how big the pie is, if the 99% only get to eat the soggy crust
     • dancerwaitakere 2.1.1

       21 December 2011 at 5:08 pm

       I was very happy that Norman had the balls to say that it is not just about equality of opportunity, it is indeed about equality of outcome!
       • dancerwaitakere 2.1.1.1

         21 December 2011 at 5:47 pm

         Unlike Shearer who sounded a lot like a neo-liberal.
         • aerobubble 2.1.1.1.1

           22 December 2011 at 10:23 am

           Yes, he sounded like Goff who was incapable of selling CGT.

           Key won because he shutdown debate as the right always have in the last three decades.

           Finding the bottleneck and then elevating it to snuff out the democracy.

           Key found the rudgy world cup and then ran the non-campaign campaign.

           (with the bonus of then adding policy after the election charter schools for gangs, cults, and big businesses).

           Shearer needs to find a backbone, Labour need to start having a sneer in their voice everytime they talk about Key and his policies.

           Unfortuately Labour are boring and arent about to alter their boringness.
       • mickysavage 2.1.1.2

         21 December 2011 at 8:09 pm

         My personal preference is equality of opportunity and equity of outcome. This suggests that we may not all be the same but there should be a minimum that we can expect.

         This is very similar to the maxim “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”.
         • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.2.1

           21 December 2011 at 8:55 pm

           Thing is, if you have a level playing field and equality of opportunity you must get “equity of outcome.”
           • mickysavage 2.1.1.2.1.1

             21 December 2011 at 8:58 pm

             Yep …

             The “equity of outcome” is to make sure there really is “equality of opportunity” … 

             EDIT actually the main reason I think it is needed is because the tories always talk about “equality of opportunity NOT equality of outcome” and I think something closer to true equality was needed.
             • Carol …

               21 December 2011 at 9:05 pm

               I think some right wingers talk about equality of opportunity within a highly competitive system where there will always be winners and losers. And once that starts, the children of the winners and losers don’t have equal opportunities. To have equality of outcomes, there needs to be a different kind of system.
               • dancerwaitakere …

                 21 December 2011 at 9:07 pm

                 Yes, because the previous outcomes decide the future starting point.
           • dancerwaitakere 2.1.1.2.1.2

             21 December 2011 at 9:02 pm

             Edit: Yeah I completely get what you mean.
     • Colonial Viper 2.1.2

       21 December 2011 at 5:11 pm

       Someone pass the memo to the Labour caucus. Whatever economic growth is currently being forecast for the world and for NZ next year…reduce it by two thirds.
       • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1

         21 December 2011 at 5:43 pm

         And then put a negative in front of it.
     • Ant 2.1.3

       21 December 2011 at 6:32 pm

       Oh good old growth to address inequity. Awesome.
     • aerobubble 2.1.4

       22 December 2011 at 10:09 am

       I was bored. Key said it was boring, that Labour hasn’t changed its policies of change and he was bored by it. Atleast Key admits to understand Labour policies, like he understands who like’s whom in Labours front bench. But really is it the job of the PM to play matchmaker of Labours front bench. Just goes to show how Key won not on the issues but on boring and distracting the NZ population. This would explain why Key thought labour would drop CGT now, like the election was about CGT not asset sales. Green pretty much started the fight back with a referendum on asset sales, and a few country wide one day strikes over asset sales should nail the smug bastard.
       Geez, like anyone cares that Key wants to be entertained with a different platform of change.
     • aerobubble 2.1.5

       22 December 2011 at 10:19 am

       Society is a dynamic system. Key to economics is social mobility. Growing the pie and social mobility are one and the same since the value in society is not what the bean counters in the temples judge is the value, the real value is how the people appreciate value. So unless or until we understand that what we value is how we create society we will continue to fail. When we value cycling over cars, kids over profits, education for citizens rather than for business needs, when we choose by our very being, by our very actions of choice, then we will grow our pie rather than some economic pie that you believe we’re talking about. Sure the economic pie will grow once more people re-engage in trading with one another over services and goods that they actually value. Take media, there’s a revolution going on, the big media get in the way of democracy and sell the eyes on the screen, so big media then turns those eyes away from debate because lobbiests pay them to. But the revolution is forcing change in any number of countries where people are creating their own media, and so valuing their own discourse over that of big media.
       The pie shrinks in someplaces while it grows in others. And the loses will be those who woke up after the election having not thought but accept the bland big media Key will win dogma, they lost a tax cut on food, a tax cut on income and removal of the tax burden of carrying capital gains speculators, and are losing when assets are sold.

       Society is dynamic, but its starts with what you believe and hold true, grow your own pie.
   • Carol 2.2

     21 December 2011 at 8:14 pm

     Agreed, dw. I’m a Green voter of late, but have never been a Norman fan. I wasn’t so keen on the start of Norman’s speech, but gradually he drew me in.

     And, while Labour are still playing the old image politics, that gained in prominence with the rise of neoliberalism, Norman stepped into the philosophical void Labour have left. This is the kind of principled direction I want to see articulated clearly by left-wing party leaders. And Norman did it by invoking the spirit of Michael Savage along the way, no less.

     Parts of these kinds of values were touched on by Shearer, but they weren’t given as clear a direction nor as comprehensive an integration of economic, social, environmental and humane values. And why is Shearer using a slogan that could have come from a blue-green party? clean, green and clever? Where is the core of values of fairness, a living wage and decent working conditions that I would expect from a party that calls itself “Labour”?

     I have no idea if Shearer will have a wide appeal in the voting public, or if he will develop a clearer political direction over the next year. But today Norman’s articulation of values worked for me.
   • Rain33 2.3

     22 December 2011 at 12:55 am

     I well remember Russell Normans first few addresses in the House..utterly uninspiring, poor delivery and extremely hesitant. Now no-one can dispute how Norman has grown as a leader. David Shearer must be commended for delivering an excellent address today, intelligent and heartfelt. I am now utterly confident he is on the path to being an excellent leader of the Labour Party. A great start.
     • Colonial Viper 2.3.1

       22 December 2011 at 12:57 am

       Can he please just get rid of his Aussie accent.
     • dancerwaitakere 2.3.2

       22 December 2011 at 10:10 am

       To say it was excellent was pushing it.

       Raising the volume of your voice does not make it any more heartfelt or true. The problem is that we do not have the luxury of the Greens, our leader has to be ready to give inspiring speeches now. They have to be ready to be Prime Minister, probably within the next year or 18 months. The Greens can afford to have leaders that grow into the role, because the reality is that they are not looked at with the same scrutiny, because they are not going to be leading the Government.

       The best thing Shearer could do would be to get rid of the Pagani-esque bullshit, and deliver a very blunt speech.
3. randal 3

   21 December 2011 at 5:00 pm

   parties come and parties go but the working man is the one who makes it all happen and Labour knows who its constituency is.
   go David Shearer.
4. interesting 4

   21 December 2011 at 5:05 pm

   I Thought he did better than most would expect….however his continual yelling with “passion” and not support from the Labourites during these moments made it look showy rather than any substance. However, he did well none the less.

   the real test though will be whether he can hack the heat during proper debate.
5. randal 5

   21 December 2011 at 5:12 pm

   listen to the ignorati knowall supporters of the nashnil gubmint looking for anything to poormouth.
   losers.
6. muzza 6

   21 December 2011 at 5:14 pm

   Does he understand monetary policy, I couldn’t tell under the yelling quite what he was on about.! – I will keep asking about monetary policy because until this issue is addressed, as to why as a country we are borrowing offshore at interest, with billions every year being paid out to service the debt, then we will forever be going backwards until we go bankrupt, at which point we will lose control over our natural resources , unless Key has managed to sell it all off before then.

   How as a country are we to create jobs when there are hardly any kiwi companies left, offshoring continues to take what is left, and billions pour out in profits, and debt servicing.

   This single issue sits in the middle of all any path the country will take, be it forward or back.

   I repeat – Until your new leader, or any other party talks about this, then you might as well stop discussing any other subject, because all it will be doing to shuffling the deck chairs…
7. JJ 7

   21 December 2011 at 5:14 pm

   What speech did you guys watch???
   He needs to do a lot better.

   In John Keys reply Grant Robertson far far out performed Shearers speech with his interjections.

   Just an observation thats all
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     21 December 2011 at 5:24 pm

     He’ll get better as the next year goes on, and less reliant on his notes.
     • oftenpuzzled 7.1.1

       21 December 2011 at 5:46 pm

       If he had an acknowledged speech impediment or was a stutterer in the past would we be so judgemental I wonder? His ‘umming’ may well be linked with such a disability, let him be, his address was very good indeed, different and I believe informed us in what he believed and stood for.
   • interesting 7.2

     21 December 2011 at 5:27 pm

     I agree with CV

     I think he did alot better than you give him credit for. He didnt bumble through his speech like he has in past tv interviews.

     I have found him to be much better when he is using a prepared speech (reading from his notes)….where he needs to polish up is on his off-the-cuff speaking. he is shocking in speaking off-the-cuff.
8. Olwyn 8

   21 December 2011 at 5:28 pm

   I will remain uneasy until I see some evidence of where David Shearer actually stands, and this speech does not give much indication. Like many others on the left, I am hyper-alert to feel-good suggestion posing as statement, and so far Shearer has offered nothing but that. For God’s sake, if you hope to lead a political party to electoral victory, you must stand somewhere. Please tell us where that place is Mr Shearer, so that I can tell whether I am still able to support the LP in its present incarnation.
   • Colonial Viper 8.1

     21 December 2011 at 5:31 pm

     Labour needs strong principled leadership and it certainly does not need to become poll and focus group driven to tell it what to do. I’ll be disappointed if thats the route we’re heading.
   • dancerwaitakere 8.2

     21 December 2011 at 5:34 pm

     Completely agree Olwyn. That is why I enjoyed Norman’s speech so much. We KNOW where the Greens stand and he communicated their values.

     Currently we do not know much about the future of the Labour Party. We hear about change, but what is the change? Is the vision for the party reliant on the 4 months in Whangarei?
     All we hear is “clean, green and clever”. I do like those three words a lot, but we needed to hear more.
     • The Chairman 8.2.1

       28 December 2011 at 8:52 am

       Ditto

       A lot of rhetoric, little substance.

       How does the party plan to achieve its future vision?

       How will it grow the pie, better distribute the wealth and make us clean and green?
9. felix 9

   21 December 2011 at 5:36 pm

   The contrast between Key and Shearer was stark and refreshing.

   Shearer spoke as a real human, a genuinely thoughtful and caring kiwi. Key offered nothing but petty party political screeching and squawking.

   Tick tock John. The days of the Shallow Men are numbered.
   • Jackal 9.1

     21 December 2011 at 7:16 pm

     +1

     Shearer spoke like an inspired PM about his vision for New Zealand offering to work with National to reduce poverty while Key spent most of his time attacking Labour in a hateful and inaccurate speech that showed him to be a childish buffoon!

     Key did not answer the many highly pertinent topics Shearer raised because he simply couldn’t. As the problems New Zealand face continue to be ignored by National who’s all too happy to drift along in their free market capitalist dream, the population will start to wake up to their incompetence.

     The public will become less accepting of the blame Labour for everything argument as they realize that it’s National who is failing them. The same economic suicide that Key facilitated as an investment banker will be his undoing. Happy days.
10. Smeagol 10

    21 December 2011 at 5:55 pm

    I’m still leaving for Aussie. Its pretty obvious that unless Labour do even worse than last time that the left should govern after the next election. Won’t that be a joy given the state of affairs Labour are in. Jacinda Ardern at number 4??? I mean seriously… NZ First might well just side with National to stop such a bloody mess from occuring.
    • Reality Bytes 10.1

      21 December 2011 at 7:40 pm

      Um what? Ardern will have 3 years more experience by that time, and at any rate she runs rings around her opponent Paula. Ms Bennett wasn’t even ready for the job she was given last term, receiving urgent tax payer subsidized up-skilling and remedial training so she knows what shes actually doing. Objectively watch Ardern talking about social issues and tell me she isn’t committed and capable of moving things forward, then look at Ms Bennett’s track record. Paula has had 3 years to prove herself already. I’m not very impressed with Bennett, give me new ideas and passion like Ardern’s any day over Bennett’s. It seems to me the only reason Paula has moved ahead is because of her party loyalty, not her actual doing the job capabilities. Wasn’t there a post here that pointed out Ms Bennetts only facebook interests being ‘supporting key and helping the national party’ or something lame like that?? wtf, what about NEW ZEALAND’S INTERESTS, i.e. that country you were voted to serve. Sheesh!

      I guess maybe you were being sarcastic, maybe I misread you. Text communications like the Internet can be hard to read like that sometimes 🙂
      • David 10.1.1

        21 December 2011 at 9:37 pm

        What’s this about Bennett receiving tax payer subsidised upskilling and remedial training?
      • Smeagol 10.1.2

        21 December 2011 at 10:14 pm

        No sarcasm at all. If Ardern is the fourth best that Labour has then they are in a whole heap of trouble.
        • Reality Bytes 10.1.2.1

          23 December 2011 at 9:26 pm

          “If Ardern is the fourth best that Labour has then they are in a whole heap of trouble.”

          Oh I don’t think so.

          Sure there may be others more deserving to be ahead on the party list if it was decided purely as a low-risk meritocracy, but that is not the case. Labour like any realistic serious party is in it to win it. Candidates will be given preference if they can effectively sell the vision of the party – regardless of their years of service etc. For example, look at Key’s rapid ascension, his background merits and vision are exactly the stuff the Nats are selling to their base, so it didn’t take him long to land his current job regardless of his short time in politics prior.

          Labour is on the rejuvenating and next-generation buzz, so appointments like Ardern’s and Shearers are only logical to establish the public’s perception that they are serious.

          People like Shearer and Ardern are a risk because of their inexperience sure, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are crap, they may ultimately do the job extremely well.

          Let’s wait and see.
          • David 10.1.2.1.1

            23 December 2011 at 9:49 pm

            Whats this about Bennett receiving tax payer subsidised upskilling and remedial training?
            • Reality Bytes 10.1.2.1.1.1

              24 December 2011 at 9:57 am

              http://thestandard.org.nz/glorified-holiday-for-bennett/

              Hmm, I forgot the story a bit. Either way she went off on a training course for 5 weeks on full pay (nice for some) when she had a lot to actually be getting on with.
    • Jilly Bee 10.2

      22 December 2011 at 11:00 am

      When are you leaving for Aussie Smeagol? Today I hope and in the words of Rob Muldoon – it will help to raise the intelligence of both countries.
11. Draco T Bastard 11

    21 December 2011 at 6:04 pm

    This Labour Party will put growing the pie for all New Zealanders at the front of our agenda.
    We cannot be content dividing an ever shrinking pie. It means growing the nation’s wealth.
    We must build an economy that produces good jobs and decent incomes.
    Our agriculture and our primary industries are the backbone of our economy, and have been for generations, and will continue to be central.
    I want to unleash New Zealand’s innovation and see New Zealand create global businesses.
    Not a vision to help 157,000 unemployed New Zealanders into productive employment so they can pay taxes.

    No change. He’s still addressing the problems in the present socio-economic system without realising that the present socio-economic system is the problem.
    • Herodotus 11.1

      21 December 2011 at 6:45 pm

      Its a game between the red and blue neo libs teams
      Wait until a nil GDP growth is considered a good result, then watch the pressure on the necessities of life: food,shelter and clothing and core businesses of the govt: Health, welfare & education having to be provided with less then add in extra funding for the maintaince of civil order with the armed forces & police
      But I am in total agreement with your statement and CV’s 2.1.2 meanwhile the silly games persist.
    • dancerwaitakere 11.2

      21 December 2011 at 10:56 pm

      “Let’s get real, we can’t dig enough coal, we can’t milk enough cows to lift New Zealand’s income to the level we need to aspire to. The bigger game is investing in clean technology in transitioning to a low-carbon, highly-efficient future. We face fossil fuel shortages, we face oil shortages around the world, and that will put up the price of energy in New Zealand. Energy in New Zealand should be abundant. We are 80-odd percent renewable in our electricity system that Bill English wants to sell to foreign multi-nationals. We’re headed to 90% and I think we should aim for 100%. And we would be one of the luckiest countries in t he world if we could do that and add in more smarts and technology. But being an extractive, low-wage, low-value economy is taking New Zealand in the wrong direction. And, what’s worse, National’s paving the road to obscurity by selling down our assets” – David Cunliffe.

      See the contrast? Very different world views. Labour needs to change.
12. fender 12

    21 December 2011 at 6:45 pm

    It’s being replayed right now.
    I read it earlier and like what he had say.
    Not the most inspiring speach I’ve heard (maybe as it wasnt the most polished delivery) but enough to convince me he has the goods and isn’t taking the party towards the centre as some would have me believe.
    Well done Dave, and best of luck for you and your team, you all have my support.
13. Granny 13

    21 December 2011 at 6:46 pm

    I just watched the TVNZ clip – a bit of an unfortunate choice for him. Or maybe it was deliberate.

    “We will stand up and fight for whatever we think is wrong” said David Shearer.

    Either his speech writer is useless, or he fluffed his lines – again.
    • Colonial Viper 13.1

      21 December 2011 at 7:16 pm

      That was not the line written into his speech.
      • Granny 13.1.1

        21 December 2011 at 8:41 pm

        Doh, obviously. But that is what he said or read.
14. randal 14

    21 December 2011 at 6:56 pm

    dont worry granny.
    heka pariata will teech you to reed when you gett your bed in the resthome.
    yo will lurn many things thear.
15. Carol 15

    21 December 2011 at 7:00 pm

    I liked some of what Shearer said, on the need to tackle poverty etc. It was quite a well-written speech. However, the delivery was pretty average, and generally he didn’t enthuse me with a sense of a fresh new direction and leadership for the Labour Party. Goff gave much better and more impassioned speeches.

    DS is definitely better than Key with his shabby and shallow song and dance act.
16. fender 16

    21 December 2011 at 7:15 pm

    The speech Key gave was mostly filled with schoolboy attempts to ridicule Labour. He must be very insecure or maybe it was to fill in time as he has no ideas, or both.
    Fuck I hate that guy and wish he would just relocate to Hawaii permanently.
    • oftenpuzzled 16.1

      21 December 2011 at 7:52 pm

      Key’s speech was an embarrassment; watching it a second time I decided he was performing entirely for his own crowd, you lot are to worship me thoroughly, a shabby performance as someone said above
    • Hami Shearlie 16.2

      21 December 2011 at 10:48 pm

      But Fender, he can’t go yet – the knighthood’s not in the bag yet! Have you ever seen a more shameless sucker-upper to royalty or a bigger name-dropper- “I’m in a room with the world’s richest man – the Sultan of Brunei!” Makes one feel unclean to see the way he operates. A pity most kiwis don’t get to see what a nasty little man he is in Parliament – so different from Photo-Op Man!
      • fender 16.2.1

        22 December 2011 at 12:15 am

        Yeah he’s conned too many for too long.

        There is something seriously wrong with the criteria for being knighted in this country at the moment. How can it be offered for the winning of a rugby game for farks sake?
        And PM’s should only get them for having an actual positive effect on their country. Haven’t seen any real positive results or achievements so far. Nothing groundbreaking going on that could warrant such an honour. And his plans for the country that the Govenor General had the misfortune to have to read out didn’t include anything that indicates a knighthood will be coming his way. imo
        ps sorry the rich have got richer and thats a positive to some
    • muzza 16.3

      22 December 2011 at 9:51 am

      Key’s speech was nothing short of complete disgrace with some bare faced lies thrown in for good measure…

      His public speaking coaches have worked treachery in the past few weeks..

      What about the way he masturbates over Gerry Brownley – What a disgrace they both are…

      “We will remove the road blocks” – Read, we will dismantle whats left of the sham democracy in NZ –

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BadtmhCjVc0

      Get a listen if you can stomach it!
17. Colonial Viper 17

    21 December 2011 at 7:22 pm

    Back to the past: Phil Goff’s response to the PM’s Statement Feb 2011

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ZiRHufpq0
18. the sprout 18

    21 December 2011 at 7:38 pm

    seemed like a good speech, contrasted nicely with key’s effort
19. Steve 19

    21 December 2011 at 8:11 pm

    That John Key is a funny man. He handed Labour their arse on a plate and even the Labour Members were laughing. Oh except the diehard venal ones
    • RedLogix 19.1

      21 December 2011 at 8:15 pm

      That John Key is a funny man.

      Yes. There is good humour that’s fun and endearing….and there is the kind of demeaning, sneering put-down humour that always appeals to the petty and shallow-minded.

      I see you’ve made your pick Steveo.
20. RedLogix 20

    21 December 2011 at 8:12 pm

    An excellent high level speech; expressing the left’s vision and values well. No-one should expect any policy detail in this kind of speech, so it’s still too soon to see exactly how a Shearer-led Labour Party would translate these values into actions.

    However he hit many of the right notes. It compares well with Eddie’s post of a few days ago, touching on almost all the same themes.. but Shearer added in some nice specific touches towards keeping it real.

    His presentation was pretty good, not flashy or over-polished, but with a solid authentic weight to it. It felt right.

    Overall I’d score it an 8/10… a useful start. Now for the work to begin… and as Shearer has made it clear, the entire Labour caucas will need to lift it’s game to match.
    • Colonial Viper 20.1

      21 December 2011 at 11:41 pm

      I would have rated it 7/10. And I found it a shame that Russel Norman seemed more keen to express the ethos and history of Labour than Shearer did.
21. Hulun Shearer 21

    21 December 2011 at 8:13 pm

    Wow, Key destroyed Labour with consummate ease.

    Note the howls from the feral Labour MPs at Key’s suggestion that “those that can work, should.” They were howling at the suggestion, mere minutes after their Party leader lied about Labour’s supposed commitment to “aspiration” and “growing the pie.”
    • RedLogix 21.1

      21 December 2011 at 8:22 pm

      Maybe they were reacting the simple truth that when the jobs are available (as they were just a few years ago before National took office) that most of those who could work were.

      Or that when a new supermarket opens and advertises .. queues form around the block with a dozen applicants for every vacancy.

      Key’s line amounts to little more than blaming the victim, and then jeering about it. From our PM it’s ugly and undignified.
    • fender 21.2

      21 December 2011 at 8:29 pm

      How were you able to tell who was “howling”?
      The way Key kept looking up to the gallery I think there were some noisy public in.
      Unless you were there I don’t believe your statement.
      Labour have always encouraged people to work so don’t see your point.

      As far as “destroyed” goes that would only be the case if the aim was to win a wannbe standup comedy night at the local pub, karaoke style.
22. Blue 22

    21 December 2011 at 9:02 pm

    The speech as written is quite good. Whoever wrote it did a decent job.

    The speech as delivered is somewhat different….

    Shearer has two tones – an angry man reminscent of Phil Goff’s finest purple-faced diatribes, and a bumbling, stumbling man who forgets what he’s saying, pauses a lot and sounds totally unconvinced by what he’s saying.

    The ad-libbing made for some funny moments, I’ll admit. Hearing Shearer say he’ll be spending the summer hooking up with people in bars and pubs, for example 😀

    I’m not sure about this line, however:

    “we will oppose with all our energy those policies that will undermine a clean, clever future that will weaken our families and communities.”

    To me that reads as if a clean, clever future will weaken our families and communities. Hmm.

    But it was still far and away better than John Key’s standard smartarse serving of empty, visionless crap.
23. Reality Bytes 23

    21 December 2011 at 9:33 pm

    Congratulations Mr Shearer for being due to be appointed our next Prime Minister. You’ve got your work cut out for you sorting out the mess we are in, and you have a most unenviable (often unthanked) job ahead of you, but looks like with your life experience that this shouldn’t be too insurmountable to you, and you’ll help progress us all! All the best!
24. Skeptic to the max 24

    21 December 2011 at 11:49 pm

    Most telling of all and what is in store for NZ was the “Speech from the Throne.”

    “My Government will…..My Government…. My Government…”. Wasnt that supposed to be “The Government…or…… Our Government” ?

    Yesterday’s addresses from Leaders to congratulate and grease up Lockwood Smith also talked of Lockwood’s previous term as Speaker praising his ability to bring standards such as respectful behaviour and speaking in the House. Key then demeaned the whole occassion as he did today. I was ashamed of NZ’s PM with his flat jokes and sarcasm, arrogance and the loud guffaws of the National party to support his nastiness. In contrast the following opening speeches by other parties were respectfully solemn and addressed serious issues. Hone too was particuarly impressive in meaningful words and deed in paying attention to other parties. 

    Then Banks in his opening speech (giving him credit) pointed out the empty seats in the House of major parties once they had had their say and had then left; Banks reflected on how this was a sad state from earlier days of the importance of Parliamentarians being IN the House when sitting. Robertson later pushed this point too. So much for the Speaker’s upholding high standards. 
    The camera pan of the near empty house was shameful and said it all; trully indicating the State to come more than any of the hollow words and heehawing of the DonKey’s opening speech. If it is not “My Government.. plans”  the Nats blatantly showed they do not want to hear the voice [ or participate bodily despite being paid to Sit ] in the democratic representation of the majority of the population that did NOT vote National.
    • insider 24.1

      22 December 2011 at 12:37 am

      The speech was given on behalf of the queen as sovereign.
      • Skeptic to the max 24.1.1

        22 December 2011 at 12:52 am

        The “My” in the speech is definitely not the Queen’s nor her representative the Governor General. The speech from the throne, is written by the incoming ruling Government, presented to the GG, who delivers it. The PM is the “My”.
        • insider 24.1.1.1

          22 December 2011 at 1:16 am

          You are right about who writes it but wrong about the rest.
25. Skeptic to the max 25

    22 December 2011 at 12:10 am

    The censoring of Merita from saying the word or discussing racism, yet being able to address sexism was stunning. The dismissal then by the Speaker later of Hone’s request for an appropriate person to close Parliament with a karakia then reinforced the undemocratic and I’ll say it racist nature of Parliament’s colonial based system. On the day of the Opening of our 50th Parliament despite the Treaty, the issues presented and the touting of “Freedom” and equal opportunity as some of its values, the voice of many was silenced by the Regime.
    • insider 25.1

      22 December 2011 at 12:35 am

      It’s not up to harawira to redefine the protocols of parliament on the fly
      • Skeptic to the max 25.1.1

        22 December 2011 at 1:09 am

        Hone did not ask to redefine “on the fly” but the Speaker can permit another form of speaking, grant or not grant tabling, admonish or make a ruling anytime “on the fly”. That’s the Speaker’s power above all others from the Queen. Maori is an official language in Parliament.Christmas blessings were permitted by other speakers to fellow Parliamentarians. Christianity rules in the Oath “So help me God.”; “On the fly” Su’a William Sio sought the House’s permission and was granted the right to say his oath in Samoan. I wonder if by your rules  Mojo Mathers will be able to sign, or have the technology aids that exist for her to participate fully as she had little assisstance at the Opening?
        • insider 25.1.1.1

          22 December 2011 at 1:14 am

          You said he wanted parliament to close with a karakia. Very different from an individual’s speech, and it is introducing a new protocol. Parliament tends to like to think about these kind of things
26. Damos 26

    22 December 2011 at 10:41 am

    Maybe we on the left are too harshly judging here but when you say “change”, what does that mean? When you say “aspiration”, to what are you saying we should aspire? When you use all these platitudes about clean green tech, how about asking Paul Callahan on the use of that language because his summation is that New Zealand is lost when it continues to focus on tourism and drawing on the clean green thing. 

    Enough of the clean green anyway, we know New Zealand is not clean and green, our rivers are polluted, our seas over-fished, our land ill-protected and we continue to drive resource through the success of the agricultural back-bone.  If we truly want these things, we need solutions, not more of this – as someone said above – pagani-esque rhetoric which doesn’t pitch well. 

    When Labour elected Shearer as leader, he promised the world, now he has to deliver and language like this is just like what Phil Goff used before. Now, the definition of stupidity has to be repeating behavior and expecting a different result surely.  

    Also, when Shearer went off script… he was woeful and you could tell when he did… this doesn’t inspire me with confidence, he HAS to know his material well enough and he just doesn’t.  The Greens have worked hard for their results and for them it is about team work, Shearer looked very much alone yesterday.  Tweets and updates from his MPs (all saying the same thing) does not demonstrate unity, it demonstrates conformity and you’ve already seen the result of that, why do it again? 
27. Jenny 27

    27 December 2011 at 12:47 am

    “This Labour Party will put growing the pie for all New Zealanders at the front of our agenda.

    We cannot be content dividing an ever shrinking pie. It means growing the nation’s wealth.”

    David Shearer Address in Reply

    What?!!

    The pie is shrinking and shrinking rapidly.

    David Shearer must be completely out of touch with reality.

    Peak oil,
    On top of –
    Climate Change,
    On top of –
    Global economic melt down, are ensuring that this will be one of the most enduring economic contractions of all time.

    Even National admits that growth won’t be returning to the New Zealand economy any time soon.

    When John Key infamously mangled the language to say “the world is global” he meant, that the economic situation was beyond the control of any government Labour or National, “And New Zealanders understand that”, he said.

    The National Party place themselves on the right of the political spectrum – and as the political champion of the well off, (and upper Middle), are determined in fighting to protect the size of their constituency’s piece of pie, even as the overall proportion of pie shrinks.

    National have made their plans.

    National are determined on “dividing an ever shrinking pie” to the benefit of their constituents.

    As the recession bites, tax cuts for the rich, and bailouts for investors, coupled with austerity for the already hard pressed, are the order of the day. (I only wish Labour were as loyal to their constituency as the Tories).

    What is Shearers response to the recession: “Grow the pie” he says.
    This is way out of line of the reality (and maybe even the possibility) for the economic outlook of global capitalism at this time.
    • Colonial Viper 27.1

      27 December 2011 at 1:03 am

      Yeah pretty much. A reinforcement and continuation of the collective mass delusion. Otherwise known as ‘pretend and extend’.

      Both Labour and the Greens have completely missed the boat here, IMO. There is not even the possibility of ‘Green Growth’ because the money supply is going to keep shrinking as the financial system at the top 0.1% hoards more and more capital.

      Each individual community, neighbourhood and family is going to have to make their own way to the lifeboats now as far as I am concerned, because the crew and the officers onboard remain determined to steam full ahead even as the good ship Capitalism is going down.
28. Jenny 28

    27 December 2011 at 1:10 am

    “This Labour Party will put growing the pie for all New Zealanders at the front of our agenda.

    David Shearer, Address in Reply, December 21, 2011

    In my opinion the theory of ‘Grow the Pie’ is the same as ‘Trickle Down’. The logic behind both these pieces of neo-liberal jargon is the same; If you give the rich more, there will be more for the rest of us.
    During the good years in the period of continuing growth, year after year, even as the pie grew, very little seemed to trickle down.

    ‘Growing the Pie’ may be good thing and it may be a bad thing, but I believe that under current global conditions ‘Growing the Pie’ is not even a realistic thing. If we are being realistic we should be preparing for a major economic contraction.

    In his speech David Shearer mentions growing inequality and poverty but the thing he puts “at the front of our agenda” is not social justice but “growing the pie”.

    Growing the pie and social justice, though they are not mutually exclusive, are not the same thing.

    It is telling which one is being prioritised.
    • Jenny 28.1

      27 December 2011 at 1:14 am

      I have witnessed horrific poverty, and believe me there is no excuse for poverty here in New Zealand.

      David Shearer, Address in Reply, December 21, 2011

      David Shearer is right, there is no excuse for poverty in this country, social justice could be achieved in New Zealand even under current economic conditions, and should be a realistic and worthwhile priority for the Labour Party. A return to growth on the other hand is unrealistic as a priority, as it is likely to be out of reach for quite some time.

      I would have been more comfortable with the new Labour Leader if he had said, ‘there is no excuse for poverty here in New Zealand, even in a recession, so we will be putting eradicating poverty at the front of our agenda.’
29. Jenny 29

    27 December 2011 at 1:26 am

    “This Labour Party will put growing the pie for all New Zealanders at the front of our agenda.

    We cannot be content dividing an ever shrinking pie. It means growing the nation’s wealth.”

    David Shearer Address in Reply, December 21, 2011

    What David Shearer should have said:

    “While we would like to see a return to growth in the global and New Zealand economies this does not look possible in the short to medium term, and possibly even longer.

    Labour being the political champion of working people and the less well off, will until the recession ends, and throughout this period of economic contraction, see to it, that no matter the size of the pie, Labour is committed to protecting those at the bottom of society from getting a lesser piece of it.

    As the global economy retracts, and the pie shrinks, Labour wants those with more than enough for their needs at the top of society, to make sacrifices and if necessary, take a lesser share of the pie and be prepared to give up some of their outsized portion to those with less.

    As long as the cold wind of recession blows through the land no longer will those with less have even more taken from them, to protect those with too much already.

    The Left Wing, New Deal, Alternate David Shearer
30. Jenny 30

    27 December 2011 at 11:22 am

    Is there a reason why David Shearer is positioning himself to the right of the Labour caucus?
31. Jenny 31

    4 January 2012 at 7:22 am

    Labour’s new leader promised a fresh approach.

    Mike Smith

    “Grow the pie” – “A rising tide will lift all boats”

    Mike, do you really think that prioritising Ronald Reagan’s failed strategy, albeit under a different heading, is a “fresh approach”?

    If so, I would really like to hear, how you think that this is “fresh”, or any different to what any other administration has been trying to do.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS