The Government’s plan for a modern and prosperous New Zealand

Written By: - Date published: 2:36 pm, September 16th, 2018 - 130 comments
Categories: Deep stuff, greens, jacinda ardern, labour, nz first, Parliament, Politics, winston peters - Tags:

Text of Jacinda Ardern’s speech from beehive.govt.nz

Te whare e tu nei
Te marae e takoto ana
Tena korua
E nga mate maha
Haere, haere, haere

Nga tangata whenua o tenei rohe o Tāmaki Makaurau, tena koutou
Tatou nga kanohi ora e hui mai ana
Tena koutou, tena koutou, tena tatou katoa

After seeing a busy ‘show reel’ like that, I have a couple of observations.

First, I really do hug people a lot.

But secondly, and much more importantly, that collection of achievements makes me feel incredibly proud.
Next month marks the first anniversary of this Government. Not only have we achieved a huge amount, we’ve done it as the most pure form of MMP government New Zealand has ever had.

And perhaps it’s because we have never had a government quite like ours that we cause a little bit of chat.
It should come as no surprise though, that as three distinct parties, we will have different opinions and ideas. Those didn’t begin and nor did they end at the negotiating table.

But ultimately, we make those differences work as much as we make our consensus drive us forward.

Today, I’m here not just to recap on what we’ve done as a government in the short time we’ve been in office, but also to share with you what we’ll keep doing, what’s driving us as a government, and what you can expect.

Today I’m here to share our plan.

That in itself is pretty unique. Other MMP governments have had coalition agreements and confidence and supply agreements that set out specific policies they will progress. But rarely does that capture the big picture. It’s a bit like a road trip that tells you who’s in the car, where you’ll be stopping, but doesn’t tell you where you’re going.

I can tell you, that as the person driving that car, that wasn’t enough for me.

That’s why as our 100 Day Plan started to draw to a close, I started to look for phase two. A road map that we, as three distinct parties all agreed on, wanted to track our progress against, and could share with you, the people who put us here and said ‘make it work’.
And today, that’s exactly what we are doing.

But first – context matters. And as far as context goes, here in New Zealand we are not immune to the challenges that other economies and countries are facing. But nor are we destined to face them in the same way.

After all, we have always been inclined to do things differently. Or to do them first.

Whether it’s Kate Sheppard championing the right to vote, Michael Joseph Savage designing the welfare state, or Sir Edmund Hilary reaching brave new heights – we don’t mind if no one else has done something before we do.

But we do mind being left behind.

And we do mind when others are left behind too.

That has been a big motivation for this Government. As you will have heard someone say quite recently, for us, the modified status quo wouldn’t do. Especially when there were a set of challenges on the horizon that we can’t ignore.

It’s a whole new world we’re moving into, everyone knows that. Digital transformation, the future of work, climate change, social isolation and the long term impacts of poverty.

When you elected us, you didn’t just tell us to govern, you asked us to fix existing problems, anticipate emerging ones, and to make sure we weren’t caught off guard because we had done neither.

You asked us to make sure New Zealand wasn’t left behind.

But there are things that were also a bit unspoken. An undercurrent if you will. Perhaps I picked it up from the next generation of voters, or perhaps it was just the vibe of the thing. But we also decided that we would do things differently.

We decided that there was a place in government for concepts like compassion and kindness. That being active and intervening from time to time was a good thing. And that if there was ever a time to be bold and to use our voice on the world stage, it was now.

In summary we are a government of change.

And people may well say that this is just an expression of good intentions. Where are the specifics?

I think this is the bit where I say hold my beer.

Or, perhaps slightly more realistically these days, hold my lukewarm cup of tea.

Today, I want to share with you Our Plan.

Let me be clear. This is not just something I’ve generated for a speech. This is our Cabinet mandated, Coalition Government work plan.

This plan represents our shared vision and priorities; Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens.

In February of this year, we started with a first cut of the priorities that we, as three parties, collectively shared.

We designed our cabinet committee structures, the different groups of Ministers who sit under Cabinet, so that they each had an area of responsibility within the plan. They debated it, added and subtracted as only committees can, and came up with a list of what we wanted to achieve, how we would do it, and what kinds of measures would tell us we had succeeded.

What I am sharing with you today, is a shortened version of that work. And an insight into the way we operate, and what is now guiding us as a coalition government.

This is our blueprint for New Zealand.

Our work is split into three key themes.

Firstly, building a productive, sustainable and inclusive economy.

Secondly, improving the wellbeing of New Zealanders and their families

And thirdly, ensuring new leadership by government.

Let me start with our economic theme, after all, so much of what we want to achieve hangs on having a strong economy, and for that, a lot needs to change.

We cannot continue to rely on an economy built on population growth, an overheated housing market and volatile commodity markets. It’s not sustainable, and it risks wasting our potential,

That’s why our first priority is to grow and share more fairly New Zealand’s prosperity.

That means being smarter in how we work. It means an economy that produces and exports higher value goods, and one that makes sure that all New Zealanders share in the rewards of economic growth.

So what will we do?

First, we need a concerted effort to lift the prosperity side of the ledger. Working alongside business, we will encourage innovation, productivity and build a skilled workforce better equipped for the 21st century.

We are doing that by bringing back significant support for businesses to expand their investment in research and development through the R&D tax incentive, a key component of building a new innovative economy.

Earning more from what we sell to the world will be key to our economic success. We are supporting exporters through progressive free trade agreements like the CPTPP. And we are committed to pursuing and signing new trade deals with the EU and the UK post Brexit.
We’re modernising the Reserve Bank so that it works to keep both inflation and unemployment low, and we’ll create a better balanced and fairer tax system.

We will face the challenges of rapidly changing technology in the workplace together with business and unions through our Future of Work Tripartite Forum.

But we also need to do better at lifting the incomes of New Zealanders and sharing the gains of economic growth.

We are extending pay equity to new groups of workers, taking the pressure off families by extending paid parental leave, closing the gender pay gap and raising the minimum wage.

And we will also enhance the SuperGold Card.

When fully rolled out our Families Package – which includes changes to Working for Families – will boost the incomes of 384,000 families and lift thousands of children out of poverty.

But we also recognise that people do well, when their town or their region does well. We want our regions to thrive, as much as our cities.

That’s why our second economic priority is supporting thriving and sustainable regions.

We will help to boost regional economies through the Provincial Growth Fund’s $3 billion investment in new jobs and opportunities. So far we have committed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to projects around the country. I know from visits to the likes of Gisborne and Northland that the difference this investment will make is huge – because the people there told me it would be.

The One Billion Trees programme is another way that we are generating jobs and environmental benefits, and comes with the added benefit of creating an actual live online tree counter.

We’re also building critical infrastructure for our regions, and the rest of the country.

Modern transport networks, safer roads and efficient public transport are essential.

We are investing a record $42 billion in net capital spending over the next five years in rebuilding New Zealand’s infrastructure and critical public services.

But none of this matters unless we are also modernising our economy, and preparing for the future. That’s why our third priority is transitioning to a clean, green carbon neutral New Zealand.

That means making the transition to a net zero carbon economy, and we want to do that by 2050. Our $100 million Green Innovation Fund will help business to tap opportunities in smart, low carbon industries.

We also need to bring back some authenticity to our clean green image by better managing the waste we produce, investing to protect our unique biodiversity and ensuring our rivers are swimmable for future generations. We have plans in each of these areas.

Our fourth priority is doing all of this, while delivering responsible government with a broader measure of success.
We will carefully manage the government books, running surpluses, and being prudent with debt so we can cope with future challenges.

We will also measure success, but first we have to ask, what is success?

We don’t believe progress as a country should be measured simply by narrow headline economic numbers. For example, we’ve enjoyed enviable GDP growth in recent years, but what sort of success is that when we have the worst homelessness in the OECD?

That’s why we are developing broader measures to better reflect New Zealanders’ lives. And we will use these measures to guide our policy work.

The Wellbeing Budget in 2019 will underscore our commitment to this new approach, and will be a world first. It will properly frame the purpose of this Government which is to change the way we view success and look at it through the lens of the wellbeing of all our people today and in the future.

Which takes me to our second key theme:

The wellbeing of all New Zealanders and their families.

This theme sits at the core of this Government – it’s a space we all feel motivated by. We want every New Zealander to have access to world-class education and healthcare, live in a home that’s healthy and in a community that is safe, and to realise their potential.

That’s why our first priority is to ensure that everyone is either earning, learning, caring or volunteering.
Everyone should have the opportunity to contribute to their community in a way that is meaningful for them. And if you’re not, we’re probably all losing out.

Removing fees for post school education and training gets rid of a significant barrier for many, and not just for the young. We are entering into a time where digital transformation means a huge number of jobs will be replaced or disappear – our answer is access to training and world class education.

We are modernising our education system, improving the quality of our schools and strengthening NCEA. We have also already provided the first across the board funding increase for early childhood education in a decade and tripled new funding for learning support.

We are investing in innovative training schemes like Mana in Mahi/Strength in Work where employers are supported with the costs of taking on apprentices, and other schemes to tackle youth unemployment.

But we also recognise that study or work isn’t the only contribution we make in the communities we live in. That’s why we’re looking for ways to better value our volunteers and our careers.

None of that counts though if you don’t have your basic needs met.

Our second priority is to support healthier, safer and more connected communities.

We are improving New Zealanders’ access to affordable, quality healthcare, and investing in better health outcomes. That’s why we’re rebuilding rundown hospitals, expanding our nurse workforce and reducing the cost of doctor visits.

We are also overhauling mental health services. Placing nurses and mental health workers in schools is one step in our plan to intervene early.

We are committed to reducing crime, especially re-offending so there are fewer victims of crime and a smaller prison population. That’s why we are recruiting 1800 more police and investing in crime prevention and rehabilitation.

We are also tackling organised crime and working hard to reduce family and sexual violence.

That sense of security though, also needs to extend to the place you call home. Feeling connected to your community is inextricably linked to your ability to put down roots. Which means hanging onto your home. That’s why our third priority area under this theme is ensuring everyone has a warm, dry home.

That’s why we’re restoring the Kiwi dream of home ownership through the KiwiBuild programme for affordable homes for first home buyers. And I cannot tell you how exciting it was to open the ballot for those first homes this week, and to know that people will be moving into them before Christmas this year.

But not everyone wants to own, or can right now. That’s why we are strengthening the rights of renters and ensuring landlords provide adequate insulation, heating and ventilation through the Healthy Homes Guarantee.

And it’s why we are committed to building 6400 more public houses and are working to end homelessness by boosting Housing First and other programmes.

Our fourth priority when it comes to the well-being of New Zealanders is one that I feel quite personally connected to. It’s our government’s ambition to make New Zealand the best place in the world to be a child.

I am the Minister for Child Poverty Reduction.

I took that portfolio because of the importance we place on lifting tens of thousands of children out of poverty.

We are determined to make a difference. This year we will pass into law the Child Poverty Reduction Bill so governments can be measured by their progress towards specific targets. But we also know that it’s not just about family incomes, but whether a child has all of their needs met, including good health, a roof over their head, a great education, and perhaps the thing that we are too quick to place last on the list – time with their parents or caregivers.

But all of that is the what. We can’t ignore the how.

Our third key theme is all about the type of leadership this Government is committed to providing.

By default, it is going to be different.

We have come in with a commitment to deliver transparent, transformative, and compassionate government. That means talking openly about the challenges we have like criminal justice and learning from the mistakes of the past, through actions like an inquiry into historic abuse of children in state care and re-entering the Pike River drift.

Another key priority is that, as government, we must build closer partnerships with Maori as we transition to a post-settlement environment. That’s why we have a new portfolio dedicated to the closer relationships we are forging with tangata whenua beyond Treaty negotiations, and into a future where we deliver on our Treaty obligations in all what we do.

Our third area, is valuing who we are as a country. It’s easy to take for granted the recognition and preservation of our nation’s history and heritage, until we don’t. That’s why we are creating more opportunities for New Zealanders to tell their stories, celebrating our history, and working to secure the future of Te Reo.

That brings me to our final priority area- creating an international reputation we can be proud of.

In this uncertain world, where long accepted positions have been met with fresh challenge – our response lies in the approach that we have historically taken. Speaking up for what we believe in, pitching in when our values are challenged and working tirelessly to draw in partners with shared views.

This Government’s view is that we can pursue this with more vigor – across the Pacific through the Pacific reset, in disarmament and in climate change, and in our defence of important institutions.

Ultimately though, my hope is that New Zealanders recognise themselves in the approach this Government takes.

We want an international reputation New Zealanders can be proud of. And while we are navigating a level of global uncertainty not seen for some time, I believe in the importance of New Zealand’s place in the world.

I also believe in this plan.

It looks beyond the three year electoral cycle and plans for the next 30 years and longer. It will, I hope, prove to be the kind of agenda that out lasts any of us as individual parties and politicians. Because that’s the kind of approach some of the big challenges we face, actually need.

Ultimately though, governments are held to account for their successes at every election. That is fair. But that’s not quite enough anymore. You need to know how we are tracking, and we do too.

That is why we are changing the way government works. Many of you will never see or hear the way our Cabinet and cabinet committee structure works. You lucky devils. Essentially they are demand driven. Ministers generate papers on their own policy areas and take them to cabinet committees for a decision. They then go up to cabinet. It can be reactionary at worst, and siloed at best. Hardly the way to deal with the difficult challenges in this modern environment.

That’s why we have split up this Government plan across our cabinet committees. Each has a new job. They will help make sure budget bids meet our priorities, that our programmes are being delivered, and that we are making a difference. Cabinet will remain however, the ultimate guardian of the priorities.

Some of the measures we will be using already exist, and some are still being developed. Whether it’s the gap between rich and poor, the number children lifted out of poverty or the waterways that are now swimmable, over time the measures will be a powerful incentive for us as a government to ensure our policies and work streams are effective. And you will be able to track them with us.

But if you ask me to sum up, overall, what we are trying to collectively achieve with this agenda it is simple.

We want to be the country that we are already pretty proud of. The one that is clean and green, that is fair minded and looks after one another, that is innovative and gives just about anything a go. Including a coalition blueprint.

But if you’ll finally indulge me, I want to end where I began.

One year on from entering into government, I wanted to remind myself of what happened the moment this Government started.

The night that I stood in my office and waited as the whole nation did, for the now Deputy Prime Minister to make the announcement as to who New Zealand First would form a government with.

Clarke filmed my face.

It’s not the most flattering piece of footage. It’s fair to say I’m looking a bit anxious. Almost a bit sweaty.

I’m standing near the couch in the opposition lounge watching the television. There are a group of MPs and staff around me. You can hear on the television the speech that the Deputy Prime Minister is making, as the camera stays fixated on my face. There is a sudden moment of realisation in my expression. It’s not the moment where the government is announced, it’s before that. It’s the moment Winston talks about the things that I believe in too. I smile, and realise that we are going to have the chance to change everything.

We are three parties who agree on fundamental principles. We agree on what has to change, and what we can do better.

We have big goals, but that doesn’t make them unachievable.

I know everyone in this room believes in the potential of this country.

None more so than this Coalition Government.

That’s why, with this plan, we are going to keep doing this.

130 comments on “The Government’s plan for a modern and prosperous New Zealand”

  1. Incognito 1

    Some early thoughts on the speech.

    To me, it didn’t feel like a “reset” as such. Basically, it’s the public release of a plan that they have been working on since “February of this year” (and probably longer). It kinda reaffirms the path/vision that they were already on.

    The plan & speech are only about what the coalition government can (and will) do for businesses (mentioned four times), the economy and for us. It mentions working alongside businesses and unions. But nowhere are the people encouraged to become actively involved. Nowhere is the obvious question asked as to what we, the people, can do, besides saying Ah!, Oh! or Booh!!, can do to support the plan. As such, this speech is a message to the people not a conversation with them as the key stakeholders.

    As always, we’re left with many (more) questions and few details and specifics. Too much feel-good stuff instead and still feeding into the so-called Kiwi Dream of home ownership; talking of a narrow path of self-reinforcing thinking.

    I haven’t hear a squeak yet from National (the Opposition) …

    • Ed 1.1

      They are telling Farrar what to say now.

    • Ad 1.2

      Ardern was very clear in the speech that home ownership is only for some, and that they are addressing the rental framework as well.

      “But not everyone wants to own, or can right now. That’s why we are strengthening the rights of renters and ensuring landlords provide adequate insulation, heating and ventilation through the Healthy Homes Guarantee.

      And it’s why we are committed to building 6400 more public houses and are working to end homelessness by boosting Housing First and other programmes.”

      This dual approach to dealing with housing was not attempted – let alone framed succinctly – by neither Lange, nor Bolger, nor Clark, nor Key.

      • Incognito 1.2.1

        Good point! Although a possible caveat seems to hide in the words “right now”.

        • Ad 1.2.1.1

          To achieve that, she would need to go a step beyond the cash incentives and ability to use Kiwisaver that first-home local home buyers already have.

          Personally Twyford has the priority right strengthening the rental market by building as many fresh rental homes as he possibly can, through HNZ and HNZ subsidiaries.

          • Incognito 1.2.1.1.1

            Yes, you’re right and I don’t believe you and I are actually disagreeing.

            The way I interpret Ardern’s words is that renting is a stepping stone towards fulfilling the Kiwi Dream. For some it is/will be, but not for all. The people who belong in the second category, by choice, do they not have a Kiwi Dream? I struggle with this ideological framing as if it is or ought to be an all-compassing dream of all people who’d call themselves Kiwis. There’s a strong element of nostalgia expressed in it too.

            • Carolyn_Nth 1.2.1.1.1.1

              Yep. As a life time renter, I’m pleased the government has at least superficially, expanded their vision to include some of us.

              But the continued framing of home ownership as the “kiwi dream”, is not a major change, and part of the problem with the current approach to the economy, society and the whole community.

              Just part of the Ardern’s government as a new third way.

            • Muttonbird 1.2.1.1.1.2

              I think you are reading too much into that. The Kiwi Dream surely is to have a safe, secure place to bring up kids (or not). Somewhere you get to know your neighbours and communities are formed, each household supporting those around them.

              Whether this be in owner occupied houses or rented ones does not make any difference. This government is addressing opportunities for both. As someone pointed out above, none of the last 4 did that at all.

              Ardern is far more compassionate than any since Savage. We should treasure that while it lasts because the next one isn’t going to be that way.

              • Incognito

                Perhaps you’re right but to me it sounds like the Kiwi Dream is very much tied up with home ownership:

                That’s why we’re restoring the Kiwi dream of home ownership through the KiwiBuild programme for affordable homes for first home buyers.

                I agree with the 1st and 2nd paragraphs of your comment; can’t comment on the 3rd.

                • Muttonbird

                  Well, given the state of tenancy law in this country it’s probably not wrong to say home ownership is the kiwi dream because the alterantive is most often a woeful existence of insecurity, Ill health, high heating costs, poor maintenance, stigma, poor community connection, amateur landlordism, and arsehole agents.

    • Carolyn_Nth 1.3

      Incognito, I’m pretty much in agreement with you.

      This is not a major change in direction that Ardern claims it to be. It’s still the economy and business as usual, but with stepping towards including well being for all, etc.

      Yep, business gets priority, and nothing about beneficiaries. It’s a bit more compassionate than the nats – kind of compassionate neoliberalism.

      I also disagree that deciding, that being active and intervening from time to time was a good thing is a shift from neoliberalism. it’s just a shift from the superficial neoliebral rhetoric. Under the neoliberal regime, there always has been strong intervention – but it’s been an intervention that benefits the already well off, and enables the wealthy to get richer – see for instance how banks were bailed out after the GFC.

      And see how neoliberal “austerity”,meant governments intervened strongly to brutally and punitively control those on low incomes.

      there are some moves towards more of a kinder government, that is welcome in the short term, but it’s not the deep seated major change that the times require.

    • Bill 1.4

      I’m in broad agreement with you and Carolyn nth Incognito.

      There is no mention of the systemic nature of inequality (class), nor mention of tackling the tax, trade and banking arrangements that mark liberalism (neo-liberalism if you prefer) that, as Dylan Ratigan angrily noted in relation to the US way back in 2011, mean that the country is being (in his words) “extracted”. (How many billions flow to Australian banks again? How much tax revenue is lost via legal loopholes? How many jobs and industries “off shored”? How much profit not taxed because of that off shoring?)

      Back to class (- ie, the absence of). Everyone is still (as per liberal ideology) an individual who merely requires or deserves opportunity. Outcomes are just that which will flow naturally from equal opportunity under a better liberal management of capitalism. So liberal economic interests will be served (with subsidies if need be) with the idea being that their interests are somehow aligned with ours, and that the better their interests are served, the better things will be for us. (It’s just another form of trickle down, and it’s a crock of shit).

      But hey! (In case you missed it) – we’re all going to burn anyway 🙂 There is that little gem of a detail contained in the speech. Net zero carbon by 2050 is not anything other than a “plan” to allow for the continued burning of fossil – and as such, illustrates a truly insane level of irresponsibility.

      • Dennis Frank 1.4.1

        The problem with pr fluff is that it only distracts the non-discerning. Opinion-leaders out there will have been noticing the lack of any admission of poor process.

        Someone in the media has also noticed: ” Most of the problems of the Government in recent weeks have arisen from Coalition management, not because there was no plan. Ardern’s outline of the plan is to be welcomed. But it wont be a substitute for better management by the parties of Government.” https://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=12126160

        • Hanswurst 1.4.1.1

          Most of the problems of the Government in recent weeks have arisen from Coalition management […].

          If you agree with that, it will probably be because of confirmation bias. The highly publicised issues with Curran and Whaitiri had nothing to do with coalition management, since they were ministers from the Labour Party answerable to a Prime Minister from the same party. The same applies to O’Connor’s statements nad Ardern’s reaction. In terms of Peters’ and Arderns’ occasional disagreements on policy over the past months, they have both suggested (and Ardern continues to hint similarly in this speech) that such differences of opinion are normal and can be expected to continue. It’s a matter of perception as to whether they are a problem or not.

          I would suggest that disagreement between the coalition partners is something that only really becomes of any note when National bang on about it, and only becomes a problem at the point when it causes the coalition partners to panic and fall out with each other over it. It’s true that conventional (media) wisdom states that differences between coalition partners undermines their viability, but it is equally true that conventional wisdom states that minor parties in coalition get destroyed because they fail to differentiate themselves from their largest partner. These two pieces of conventional “wisdom” are in direct conflict with each other, and the only way to sustain a viable coalition over more than one election cycle is to overcome one of them by proving the other wrong.

      • Incognito 1.4.2

        It seems that the three of us are more or less on the same page 😉

        My view is that here in NZ major socio-economic issues (e.g. poverty & inequality) tend to be defined first and foremost in terms of race/ethnicity and that the (intersecting) concept of class is avoided almost at all cost. One of the consequences of this is that it makes the NZ situation uniquely NZ and comparisons with other countries that struggle with similar problems are therefore downplayed. It isolates this country from others more than it should IMHO. Meanwhile, class struggle is alive and well here and we don’t even (want to) realise it, or at least our politicians don’t want to acknowledge it.

        • solkta 1.4.2.1

          Class is overlaid by ‘race’ everywhere. Nothing special here.

        • Carolyn_Nth 1.4.2.2

          I think there is as much denial of racism as there is of class inequalities in NZ. One does not have primacy over the other.

          I am coming to thinking that the NZ Labour Caucus is very much for the middle classes – compared with the Nats who are for the top 10% class. Meanwhile none of the main parties represents the bottom 10%.

          NZ parliamentary Labour has become, what used to be called, bourgeois – bourgeois economics, anti-racisim, and feminism. Basically, they will work to counter poverty so long as it does not change things for the middle classes – ie it won’t really disturb middle class, race or gender privileges. At least, that seems to be the dominant view of those with most power in the Labour caucus. I think there are some Labour MPs who are more strongly left wing than that.

          They will work towards more equity without doing what is required to make for a truly inclusive and egalitarian society. Such a society would need a much deeper restructuring of society, culture and economics.

          • RedLogix 1.4.2.2.1

            Basically, they will work to counter poverty so long as it does not change things for the middle classes – ie it won’t really disturb middle class, race or gender privileges.

            And why should it? If you DID actually help the bottom 10% (I agree they are absolutely the most disempowered, victimised and unfortunate group in any population) then exactly what would be the outcome?

            The only logical answer is that they would now be middle class.

        • Bill 1.4.2.3

          I don’t agree with the notion that socio-economic issues are defined in terms of race/ethnicity/(or gender).

          I think what happens is (as I wrote above) that society is viewed as a collection of individuals, and that the results or impacts of any given policy are then passed through a mesh that isolates on the basis of race/ethnicity/gender.

          From that, “secondary” policies to address the apparent (ie – obvious and real) disadvantages being experienced by those of us falling into given categories of ‘race’ or gender are proposed or enacted.

          Where we agree is that class is assiduously ignored. So here’s a thing…

          If class is ignored, and many white males are working class, then by extension, white working class males will rightfully feel more ignored than those sections of the working class that get get caught up in the various “policy sieves” I mention above. And that opens the door for people to wear “It’s okay to be white” t-shirts, and for that message to land and resonate.

          It astounds me somewhat that people can’t grasp or acknowledge why it is that “right wing” bullshit around ‘race’ (and to a lesser extent gender) gains popular traction. It’s just not that difficult.

          There are two sort term ways out of this that I can see.

          One way is the Trump way – populist maverick types who will mess with the status quo at a superficial level, but who will run with all those right wing tropes because they know those tropes resonate and translate into votes in the short term .

          The other way is the Corbyn, Gabbard, SNP way – social democratic platforms that are positioned in opposition to liberal platforms; that acknowledge class and addresses the deep systemic roots giving rise to inequality/disadvantage within capitalism. That’s not to say that gender or ‘race’ take back seats to a class focus, just that there is a class focus.

          With a social democratic framework, it can be acknowledged that I, as (say) ‘white’ and male, get a whammy because of my class, but that others get double or triple whammies because of their gender or ‘race’. That can’t ever be done within a liberal framework, because liberalism, predicated as it is on notions of individuals and opportunities, is simply blind to one of those three factors.

          • Carolyn_Nth 1.4.2.3.1

            There is similar process to class as for racism and misogyny. Many people of colour consider that those with power do not take anti-racism seriously enough to change the dominant European imperialist structure – ditto for many feminists and LGBT activists as regards patriarchal structures.

            hence the existence of E-Tangata aiming to increase the visibility of Maori and Pacific people in our mainstream media, and the violent struggle motivating the Black lives Matter movement in the US.

            • Bill 1.4.2.3.1.1

              Can you point me to the major (or even minor) statement or speech by a government minister in New Zealand that makes an explicit mention of the working class, or even an implicit acknowledgment that capitalist class relations exist?

              Often enough (though not seriously enough – it’s just tinkering) there will be a nod to ethnic or gender disparities and policy prescriptions or targets proposed off the back of some economic observation.

              But always (in New Zealand) any such policy or target is based on providing opportunity for individuals. So “more must be done in regards to Maori/ poor people/women” (for example) , but only as individuals who ain’t getting a fair suck at the saveloy (or whatever that saying is).

              Contrast with any social democratic agenda (eg a recent statement from Corbyn) that positions UK Labour as being “a threat to a damaging and failed system rigged for the few”.

              The difference is night and day.

              • Carolyn_Nth

                I agree. And I’ve said that those dominant in the current Labour caucus do not want to change the current system fundamentally, with respect to race, class, gender, or LGBTQ+, etc.

                Ardern quickly backtracked from her statement last year that capitalism has failed.

                But it is also the case with respect to people of colour and gender, that the current government doesn’t want to fundamentally change the structure. They still want a predominantly European-based education system. And they still want to largely keep the patriarchal nuclear family in tact. They just aim to make it easier for women and people of colour to succeed within this system. But that’s a flawed ambition.

                eg paid parental leave just leaves a patriarchal workplace in tact – a structure that was set up for men without domestic duties. Paid parental leave does not fundamentally change that system, it just gives some individuals more choices, but also tends to favour middle class families.

                BTW, Trump wasn’t particularly voted in by low income men.

                Here it shows that the majority of Trump voters were not those on the lowest incomes.

                They did tend to have less formal education than Clinton voters.

                And this article argues that it’s complex – that Trump voters are more resistant to change.

                And they tended to perceive that men, not especially working class men, were discriminated against.

                In other words, it’s now pretty clear that many Trump supporters feel threatened, frustrated, and marginalized—not on an economic, but on an existential level.

          • Incognito 1.4.2.3.2

            Thanks Bill for a great reply.

            I agree about “defined”; it was a poor word choice on my behalf.

            What I meant (to say) was that here in NZ we tend to view things through a lens of racial/ethnic divide as a direct consequence of NZ’s history. When zooming in through this lens on socio-economic issues the class aspect blurs into the background. I believe this situation suits more than one party (not necessarily political) down to the ground; one because they have less to lose this way and the other because they more to gain. Indeed, it means exclusion of other classes.

            Things become interesting when classes unite, rather than compete with each other, even if it’s only temporarily. But this takes an extraordinary leader and one who really understands the class conflicts (plural) that are the source and undercurrent of the major socio-economic issues.

            For the record, Jacinda Ardern is not that kind of leader. This is not saying anything positive or negative about her or her leadership but just making the observation.

    • BM 2.1

      There is nothing concrete in any of those links, just buzzwords and really broad sweeping statements

      Just a summary of the same vague shit that’s been spouted over the last year.

      D-

      • Ed 2.1.1

        You would say that.

        • BM 2.1.1.1

          I actually went through and read them.

          There was nothing new.

          • Ed 2.1.1.1.1

            You are a National supporter.
            Of course you won’t like the speech.

          • Ad 2.1.1.1.2

            Agree there was nothing new; it was the form that takes a bit of getting used to, because it is seeking to describe the whole of government from their strategic lens.

            The other thing takes takes a bit of getting used to, is the focus on the kind of leadership that they are using.

            Key in his first term at least, could roll off how much was being spent on each department. But it was more with a kind of large-corproation entrepreneur swagger.

            Ardern is never going to have that; hers is a startup culture in which she is willfully brining a lot of her own political “investors” very consciously with her. To most people that feels like uncertainty. Freak to some.

            To Prime Minister Ardern it is MMP in its true form.

            • BM 2.1.1.1.2.1

              Ardern is never going to have that; hers is a startup culture in which she is willfully bringing a lot of her own political “investors” very consciously with her. To most people that feels like uncertainty. Freak to some.

              There’s the reason why business confidence is through the floor.

              Ardern waffling on about radical change but only providing vague outlines of what the government wants to do we’re a year in yet nothing on how this “radical change” will be implemented.

              Christ, how about some details?

              How are you supposed to roadmap and plan if you’ve got no idea what’s coming down the pipeline?

              • adam

                Business confidence is represented as through the floor, because they stitched up the questions, keep up BM.

              • Ad

                It’s as concrete as this, from the first section of the speech, on the economy:

                – …the R&D tax incentive…”

                – “…progressive free trade agreements like the CPTPP. And we are committed to pursuing and signing new trade deals with the EU and the UK post Brexit.”

                – “We’re modernising the Reserve Bank so that it works to keep both inflation and unemployment low, and we’ll create a better balanced and fairer tax system.”

                – “…extending paid parental leave, closing the gender pay gap and raising the minimum wage.”

                “…our Families Package – which includes changes to Working for Families – will boost the incomes of 384,000 families and lift thousands of children out of poverty.”

                “… Provincial Growth Fund’s $3 billion investment in new jobs and opportunities. So far we have committed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to projects around the country.”

                – “$42 billion in net capital spending over the next five years in rebuilding New Zealand’s infrastructure and critical public services.”

                – “…$100 million Green Innovation Fund will help business to tap opportunities in smart, low carbon industries.”

                All of those practical items were in the budget, all are now being spent within the economy, none are new.

                All are concrete and costed items. All are being spent within the economy now.

                Business confidence really doesn’t matter at all when the economy is this good.

                • Tuppence Shrewsbury

                  It’s so good that labour have realised free trade agreements benefit the country, and opposition to them in opposition benefits no one.

                  • Ad

                    You mean the government.

                    What this government is doing is extending the economic growth surge that is already the longest we’ve had in my lifetime, well into the next term.

                    • Siobhan

                      This is in reply to your next comment about robots replacing agricultural workers..
                      Its very hard to find data on this issue, but you should maybe consider that the residents of HB are not all going to benefit from your vision. Remember even as it stands Hawkes Bay wages are below average. Any improvements or even stabilization of wages is due to the influx of higher wage earners. Not the locals, who if anything are under added pressure of housing costs. We are a class driven society now. Its just people with nice houses and suits don’t mix with ‘the poors’ at all anymore, so tend to forget they even exist.

                      “They found that each new robot added to the workforce meant the loss of between 3 and 5.6 jobs in the local commuting area. Meanwhile, for each new robot added per 1,000 workers, wages in the surrounding area would fall between 0.25 and 0.5 percent.”

                      “It’s also important to remember that these job and wage losses are not distributed evenly among the population. Although the introduction of industrial robots leads to “negative effects [for] essentially all occupations,” some jobs are — expectedly — more fragile than others. Acemoglu and Restrepo write: “Predictably, the major categories experiencing substantial declines are routine manual occupations, blue-collar workers, operators and assembly workers, and machinists and transport workers.” The only jobs not affected were managerial ones.”

                      https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/28/15086576/robot-jobs-automation-unemployent-us-labor-market

                • Kevin

                  Agreed Ad. HB is absolutely humming along now. I have lived here for 17 years and this is the best it’s ever been. The company I work for had just had 4 great months in a row, in the past you would get 1 in 3 or 4. As for business confidence? There are those who are still pissed they didn’t get ‘their’ government and those of us who are just getting on with it and now getting the rewards. I hope the whiners keep whining as they will get left behind and others will take their spot.

                  • Adrian Thornton

                    @Kevin “Agreed Ad. HB is absolutely humming along now”

                    Well maybe for you and the people you know, not if you are an actual worker in the orchard industry (the largest employer in the HB) minium wage for almost everybody, no real increase in picking rates in nearly 20 years.
                    What was once a great job that could provide a living wages for families, is now relegated to the status of shit job only good for imported labour and backpackers.

                    Watties ( Heinz) what was until recently one the Bays largest employers for unskilled workers (out side the orchard industry), and really offered long term security and good wages, is now pretty much all over, the new American owners have been seeing to that.

                    ” I hope the whiners keep whining as they will get left behind and others will take their spot.”…..what a fucking idiotic thing to say.

                    • Ad

                      The faster they robotize both picking and packing he better the country will be as a whole.
                      It’s mindless drudgery.

                      They can already robotize apple packing.
                      They can mechanize grape harvesting, unless you’re doing something late harvest or dessert-wine.

                      And the owners will get to mechanization if the wages get ratcheted up with higher minimum wages, and a clampdown on Pacific Island seasonal workers that undercut all the locals.

                      At 4.7% headline unemployment, there’s good jobs out there that don’t require lowest-price nonsense like fruit picking.

                    • Nic the NZer

                      You realize 4.7% is about 1 in 20 of the work force?

              • cleangreen

                BM
                Get used to MMP BM;

                You always send the message that her word is gospel and no others are having any say.

                She clearly said today that her Government was the first real MMP Government so try to learn about how MMP works now.

                • Chuck

                  “She clearly said today that her Government was the first real MMP Government so try to learn about how MMP works now.”

                  Its a double edged sword…” first real MMP Government”. While it may excite many on this blog it has the potential to turn off voters who are not as passionate about politics as here – which is the majority of voters.

                  “Get used to MMP BM”

                  The jury is still out cleangreen…unless Ardern can turn her talk into real measurable results the voters will punish MMP come 2020. It will not take much for both the Greens and NZF to fall below the 5% threshold.

          • Craig GlenEden 2.1.1.1.3

            It wasn’t a new plan it was Jacinda just showing that this Government actually has one. Un-like National Whos leader did their plans on the back of a napkin. Then there was the increase in GST plan that was a doozy. Imagine how that would have rocked business confidence. The lack of certainty must have been horrific for them.Then there was the employment summit with the cycleway plan. Shit that was a really detailed plan. The best of all though was the Simon no Bridges Bridges plan. Let’s face it if there had been anything new in this Governments plan you would be crying that it has all these hidden agendas.

          • UncookedSelachimorpha 2.1.1.1.4

            Actually – quite a bit is new. It wasn’t so long ago we had a government telling us homelessness wasn’t a problem, that it was a lifestyle choice. Telling us inequality wasn’t a problem, child poverty was nothing to worry about. Etc etc.

          • cathy 2.1.1.1.5

            so why does there have to be something new all the time?

            a coherent overview of the long term government planning is important and useful.

            if there was “something new” every month you’d be criticising for lack of continuity and commitment to a plan.

        • Muttonbird 2.1.1.2

          Some people hate the idea of hope. Especially hope for the underprivileged.

      • adam 2.1.2

        So BM how is it any different from how the national party presented stuff like this? Short answer, it’s not.

        Quite frankly if that all you got, then you got nothing.

  2. Vaughn 3

    As a cynic who typically has little time for politicians and their meaningless utterances, Jacinda’s words today are music to my ears. Sure, some will they’re fluff – but no one is listening to you, Simon – but coming from someone as genuine as JA, I believe them. Good luck, Jacinda. Good luck, New Zealand.
    After nine years of Tory crap, we need it.

  3. (Replying to Matthew Hooton’s spin) Here you go, John Key from roughly the same time in his premiership. Much less actual planning, much more politics of fear. Comparing them highlights what an insubstantial charlatan Key was: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10421543

  4. Nick K 5

    A speech where you can say a lot but actually mean nothing.

    A very impressive skill.

    • cleangreen 5.1

      Nick K said – 5
      “A speech where you can say a lot but actually mean nothing.”

      Yes we all learned that from John key didn’t we?

  5. Stuart Munro 6

    It’s a good speech and there was much to like about it – but it is the results that will tell the real story. I recall Helen Clark writing to us telling us she had underpromised and overdelivered, when that was not my experience of her governance.

    That’s a dangerous tendency, and given the absolute uselessness of the previous government and the ineffectual whining which is their sole contribution to government while in opposition, the coalition must be careful to ensure it is getting genuine negative feedback on the things that aren’t living up to their intentions. Not so much among the media or the commentariat, but down on the breadline.

    • Nick K 6.1

      This government is seriously over-promising and under-delivering.

      • Stuart Munro 6.1.1

        It’s still relatively early days – and of course the toxic crowd that supported Key would still be saying that if Jacinda hand delivered everyone their own unicorn. But maintaining contact with external perceptions is difficult, especially when media inadequacy constantly presses the government to discount criticism by making improper ones.

    • Chuck 6.2

      “the coalition must be careful to ensure it is getting genuine negative feedback on the things that aren’t living up to their intentions. Not so much among the media or the commentariat, but down on the breadline.”

      No doubt monthly internal Lab / NZF / Green polls are keenly analysed.

      Possibly the reason for today’s PR exercise by Ardern and co.?

      • Stuart Munro 6.2.1

        Polling only tells you the answers to questions you’re clever enough to ask. As with anything serious you need to triangulate a bit to get real usable information out of what can become the statistical equivalent of verbiage.

        Labour is luckier than they realize in having a leader with both a talent and a liking for talking to ordinary people; it has PR benefits, but it also lets her find out things that pollsters often struggle to identify.

        • Chuck 6.2.1.1

          As long talking to ordinary people is not clouded by bias. For example; the definition of ordinary people.

          • Stuart Munro 6.2.1.1.1

            Quite – but bias is ultimately unavoidable in such situations – so people simply tend to employ a heuristic. Folk like John Key were able to determine that the interests of foreign bankers and tax evaders were central to his interests, and it seems that Jacinda is disposed to prioritise the needs of young families. Being neither a banker nor a young family I could argue with this, but I tend to find myself preoccupied countering the creeping influence of the menkurt servants of post-soviet imperialism.

      • cleangreen 6.2.2

        Chuck = national puppet.

  6. Bewildered 7

    It’s a Beauty pageant speech by the princess

    I want world peace
    I want to feed the children

    Enough of the flowery stuff Cindy give us substance All she has spouted is a vision that no one would disagree with, but vision and ideas are fkn easy where’s the stategy,, the defined and measurable deliverables , time lines etc. Really can we take this lady seriously

    • Ad 7.2

      Bewildered, you sound bewildered.

      • Bewildered 7.2.1

        I truly am Ad

        Tell me where any of what she said goes beyond a set of vision statement vs a plan with defined objectives, policy, deliverables, time lines or is the plan hanging of these impressive vision statements no more than let’s have a conversation and form a working group ie more of the same To be fair to Cindy not seen anything more substantive or enlightening coming out of Simon and National either Basically 2 majors parties are pretty poor, the blue team slightly less, ie they won’t fk the economy but got bugger all else I will give it to NZF at lest they stand for something been Winston 😊

        • Ad 7.2.1.1

          It’s as concrete as this, from the first section of the speech, on the economy:

          – …the R&D tax incentive…” – a specific policy that they have implemented in Budget 2018

          – “…progressive free trade agreements like the CPTPP. And we are committed to pursuing and signing new trade deals with the EU and the UK post Brexit.”

          – “We’re modernising the Reserve Bank so that it works to keep both inflation and unemployment low, and we’ll create a better balanced and fairer tax system.”

          – “…extending paid parental leave, closing the gender pay gap and raising the minimum wage.”

          “…our Families Package – which includes changes to Working for Families – will boost the incomes of 384,000 families and lift thousands of children out of poverty.”

          “… Provincial Growth Fund’s $3 billion investment in new jobs and opportunities. So far we have committed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to projects around the country.”

          – “$42 billion in net capital spending over the next five years in rebuilding New Zealand’s infrastructure and critical public services.”

          – “…$100 million Green Innovation Fund will help business to tap opportunities in smart, low carbon industries.”

          All of those practical items were in the budget, all are now being spent within the economy, none are new.

          All are concrete and costed items.

          That was in the economic section.

          Would you like more? There’s more detail in the beehive site papers released simultaneously. Also note the rep-emptive release of Cabinet papers.

          • Wayne 7.2.1.1.1

            Ad

            That list is by and large what they have already done.
            A plan is what you are going to do in future. That is, a list of good things or direction then how they are going to be achieved. The “how” was largely absent, apart from a couple of more Cabinet Committees. There was reference this morning to a “kitchen” cabinet which seemed to have all but six cabinet members (plus Shaw) in it.

            Way too big for a kitchen cabinet which should be 6 to 8 people at most. If the coalition had that, with say 3 from Labour, 2 from NZF and 1 from the Greens then I think they would have no more planning problems. All key things would be agreed in advance by this group, no Minister could make a serious policy announcement without clearance through this group.

            Of course it won’t stop a party subsequently changing its mind on a commitment which I think in part is what has been happening.
            After all for NZF this is about survival, not just of the govt but of the party getting 5%. Being seems as champions of the people (3 strikes, small business, etc) helps that.

        • cleangreen 7.2.1.2

          Agreed there Bewildered,

          Labour seriously need now to listen to NZ First leader Winston Peters big time as nothing beats 35 yrs of parliamentary experience does it?

          • gsays 7.2.1.2.1

            Where is the sarcasm tag cleangreen?

            “Listen to my 60 years experiences said the old man. So we did and it turned out he had one years experience repeated 60 times”. James A Michener.

            35 years means he has overseen the wreckage that the Labour reforms of the ’80s have wrought on the community and society.

            While that rooster has influence there will be no marijuana reform, no helping children on Nauru, no CGT, an increase in defence spending, whanau ora under threat….

            Edit, I have read Your comment downstream.
            I agree let Winston off the leash to bark and snarl at the Tories, but keep him away from the steering wheel of government.

    • Ankerrawshark 7.3

      Bewildered…. =…. a party political broadcast from the national party

    • adam 7.4

      Wondered how long we have to wait till we got the misogyny – just a little over an hour.

      The rwnj’s are so predictable with their need to spout their hate. What I don’t get is – they get half the electorate is women right?

      • Ad 7.4.1

        Everyone including Cabinet should be required to replace her actual name with Sparkle Pony. It will be quite distinctive at UN Assembly, among all the Trumps, Erdogans, Putins, Netanyahus and Orbans of this world.

        In fact it’s exactly what the world needs.

        We need More Sparkle Pony 🙂

    • AB 7.5

      “All she has spouted is a vision that no one would disagree with”

      If we all agree with it – why isn’t it the current reality? Sunspots?, Alien intervention?
      Fact is, we don’t all agree with it. The effect of the vision would be a country that is significantly more economically equal – and that is utterly unacceptable to private wealth and power.
      The only thing that RW commenters on here would scream about louder than the vision, would be any concrete steps to actually implement it.
      So it’s extraordinarily amusing to hear them criticise the speech for lack of substance!

    • cleangreen 7.6

      Bewildered; – Jacinda put “heart back into Government” today again.

  7. CHCOff 8

    Good public relations.

    If the fourth estate is only capable of booing and hissing, then that is it’s loss.

    It’s unpleasant to live with market function often so dysfunctional & lacking in such cases but at least it’s drawing a clear distinction between that and a Govt. for a change, which is not a bad sign.

  8. Chris T 9

    Some of the comments on here going on and on about how bad/biased/nat plants/out to get the govt, the media are, is starting to sound eerily like a kind of kiwi version of Trump and the US media.

    All we need now is a triple down on calls from them of “fake news”

    It is getting a tad embarrassing.

    • Muttonbird 9.1

      Ok. Are you comparing Ardern with Trump like your leader has?

      Kiwis simply will not believe this line so better you come up with another angle is my advice.

      • Chris T 9.1.1

        No I’m not

        I’m comparing some posters on here to Trump

        Did you not read my post?

        • Muttonbird 9.1.1.1

          I try not to read your posts.

          And Ardern is the leader, and Trump is the leader – they are the equivalents, not Trump and some commenters on a forum.

          You know what you meant, we know what you meant, so don’t try to back out of it.

    • cleangreen 9.2

      I think today the media got the pip and hissed at jacinda for using Facebook for a neutral media instead of the usual high horse type media that spouts “I know best so listen to me”.

      Media = sour grapes.

  9. Reality 10

    Watching Simon Bridges on the news one could easily see why he is such an unappealing person. There is seriously something creepy about him. Like a dodgy nightclub bouncer.

  10. infused 11

    Yeah, no ones buying this. No one here even tuned into the news to watch it.

  11. Dennis Frank 12

    More like a mission statement than a vision statement, but won’t satisfy anyone looking for substance. But I agree it was worth doing, and could be sufficient as a pr exercise to stop any downward slide in the polls caused by Labour ministers going rogue. Probably the attendance & demeanour of Winston will make more of a substantial difference to the perception of discord in the coalition than anything else. The 12 point program is a feel-good thing & will work awhile on the basis of simplicity.

  12. Muttonbird 13

    Ever faithful National Party lapdog, Tracey Watkins, picks up the ball Bridges just knocked-on and has run with the Trump comparisons, even going as far as including a picture of Trump in her ‘opinion piece’

    Pretty transparent, and pretty disgraceful really.

    The RWNJs are on the ropes.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/107125512/after-a-horror-few-weeks-winston-and-jacinda-are-all-smiles-for-the-unity-show

  13. Muttonbird 14

    Yeah sweet. I’ll look for the first time you question a journalist on anything and tell you it’s a no-no.

    • Chris T 14.1

      All good

      I won’t be calling anyone disgraceful for having the audacity to actually print a party leaders words

      • Muttonbird 14.1.1

        And the image of Trump in the article? That is naked tabloidism, but nothing to do with her I suppose.

  14. corodale 15

    Some blue-print theme music.

  15. corodale 16

    …”prudence with debt”, courage and justice are virtues they may like to consider for next years pr.

  16. Cynical Jester 17

    Sorry? New? What’s new about this? She’s not saying anything new here? It’s almost the exact same hopes and dreams sugar sweet speech with no actual policy or plan other than good intentions that we campaigned on in 2017.

    A year in and the transformational achievements we’re boasting about are mere tweaks and virtue signalling.

    I’m 26 and I’m letting my party membership lapse. This movement is dead, lost track of the reason it was formed. This is a center right party bereft of ideas that never talks about class. It’s bourgeoisie MPs even film themselves standing outside private schools like christ college in chch central begging future tories to apply to be youth mp’s (because public schools are gross right)
    And party members the second we got in govt shrug and say so get over it when asked about poverty, suicideor areas like new Brighton that look third world.

    Too bad there’s no center left alternative to the “labour” party other than their woke neolib mates on bicycles and if this is the best labour can do I’ll almost laugh when we’re voted into opposition in 2020 because all those non voters and first time voters who believed in us will be staying home cos they don’t believe a word we say and nor should they… we’re a bunch of liberals in social democratic clothing.

    Bye

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 17.1

      I agree with a lot of what you say…but sometimes the lesser evil – is less evil.

      What about the Greens for you? I admit all current political parties, including Greens – tend to be the playthings of the upper classes.

    • Exkiwiforces 17.2

      Crickey Mate,

      It’s going to take time to fix the 30yrs+ of this NeoLib/Con BS and it can’t be done at flick of switch without crashing the economy which would cause an awful lot of pain to everyone especially the lower end of town as we all remember what Roger and Ruth co did when they went in like a bull in a China shop or fat kid in a lollie shop.

      This is going to be like turning around a Supertanker with a man overboard (about 9km’s+) or an Aussie outback road train trying to stop without losing its load (about 2-3 kms) and as Paul Kelly’s song says “Small things Big things grow”.

      • Dennis Frank 17.2.1

        Yeah, that’s sensible. If they complete this term with significant legislative gains plus no major screw-ups voters will give them another. Labour will revert to competing with NZF & National in the 2020 campaign though.

        So the government after that depends on the zeitgeist swaying voters, and whether we get another gfc. I hope the Greens will decide to go for a positive alternative to business as usual, both in respect to climate change and inequality, to provide a credible progressive option to voters – and campaign non-aligned.

        • Exkiwiforces 17.2.1.1

          Speaking of another GFC, I think it’s just around the corner especially if you are a reader of Jim Rickards, a history nerd or an economic history nerd as he nailed the 97 crash, the 08 GFC and the next will happen in the next 15mth to 24mths time. He said either of the following countries will kickstart the next one, Turkey, Argentina, Indonesia for the Trifecta and for the Quadie China.

          Jim has been a bit of a Cassandra with this and you would notice a wee trend of about 10yrs between each economic crisis.

          I’m concerned about CC, but I still won’t vote Green as their Foreign and Defence Policy as it doesn’t reflect reality on the ground and is to airy fairy for my liking. I also have issues over gun and feral animal control which is more to with wording.

          • Dennis Frank 17.2.1.1.1

            Fair enough. I have ongoing issues with them & I’m a member. 😎 Yes I have Road to Ruin & Death of Money by Rickards, plus I earlier read Currency Wars.

            I like that he uses complexity theory. I learned that back in the nineties but it’s mostly still just used by academics. Taleb’s Black Swan used it but not as well as Rickards. Just as with climate change, nobody can predict when the triggers to systemic change will kick in. So we go with people like him & Marty Armstrong at the leading edge of finance/risk just picking likely scenarios.

          • Dennis Frank 17.2.1.1.2

            Hey, I just happened on a new review of the current situation, from Britain. They’re getting the chopper out of the shed, to do a re-run of biblical manna from heaven: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12126427

            “The Fed could even print ‘helicopter money’ to fund the fiscal deficit directly, an idea floated by academics after the last crisis but deemed too radical for the political system. This variant of ‘people’s money’ injects stimulus directly into the veins of the economy rather than channelling it through asset markets, the post-Lehman trickle down mechanism that has greatly benefited the rich and entrenched wealth inequality. But it is difficult to reverse later when the time comes to drain excess liquidity.”

            “While the US could in theory experiment with helicopter money, Congress would be hostile to any such form of monetary adventurism. It would be a last resort. In the eurozone, it would be completely impossible under EU treaty law and the restrictive fiscal rules of the Stability Pact.”

            • Exkiwiforces 17.2.1.1.2.1

              Yeah, it’s pretty much what I’ve been reading of late and watching/ Alan Kohler reports in the Oz paper and on the ABC’s Finance report. Basically saying all the worlds major central banks are munted when the next financial meltdown happens as we are already got low interest rates and low inflation atm as these controls are normally used when there is major meltdown in the financial sector.

              Some of the reports I’ve seen are saying worst case scenario is something like the 1929 Great Depression or a most likely something between the 87, 97 or 08 meltdown either all it’s not a good like whatever boat you are on atm.

              The big thing over here in Oz atm is interest only mortgage loans, the over egged housing prices and very high household as a result of the very low interest rates. The basic Oz economic fundamentals ie the figures looks good, but once you strip away the paint the figures are bloody terrible, also It’s much the same in the US, parts of the EU and the Chinese figures are an absolutely shocking. The current thinking here in Oz atm if we see an RBA rate increase of .25% or .50% (not likely atm due the economy is not that flash) the whole bloody thing will go tits up.

  17. cleangreen 19

    Here is a stern warning for labour;

    Listen to Winston as he has the experience in MMP and how to tackle the national party lies and deceit.

    Open up your MP’s to working with our local NGO’s as we are waiting since November 2017 to work with your Labour MP’s.

    Fix this problem with your errant MP’s or you will fail in 2020.

    Since the election win our NGO has found a ‘wall of silence’ and loss of communication with our local Labour MP’s has been developed by the (Ministerial staff blocking all our emails from being answered by the ministers) after we request a response for a meeting with them so now we have no assistance from any Labour MP in all the regions representing the whole central North island including HB, Gisborne, and other ajioning areas.

    During the time the labour MP’s were in opposition they were always open to offer assistance but since the election have blocked any inclusion with our NGO and our issues of concern with our regions.

  18. The Chairman 20

    Incognito at one. Carolyn_Nth at 1.3. And Bill at 1.4 have largely nailed it.

  19. Dennis Frank 21

    The PM: “Our plan sets out our coalition’s path for unlocking the potential of our country and taking New Zealand forward.” https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/09/jacinda-ardern-unveils-the-coalition-s-top-12-priorities-they-ve-agreed-on.html

    “The 12 priorities, together referred to by the Government as “Our Plan”, are:
    “Grow and share New Zealand’s prosperity more fairly”
    “Support thriving, sustainable regions”
    “Govern responsibly”
    “Transition to a clean, green carbon-neutral New Zealand”
    “Ensure everyone who is able to is earning, learning, caring or volunteering”
    “Support healthier, safer and more connected communities”
    “Ensure everyone has a warm, dry home”
    “Make New Zealand the best place in the world to be a child”
    “Deliver open, transformative and compassionate government”
    “Build closer partnerships with Māori”
    “Value who we are as a country”
    “Create an international reputation we can be proud of”

    Folks are describing it as a string of platitudes. That’s unfair. Labour propaganda has always consisted of a bunch of platitudes. She’s playing to the crowd who want a Labour-led government, they think. She has to provide them with politically-correct virtue-signalling language to be understood by that crowd. But this analysis fails to account for the fact that the 12 priorities have also been agreed by the other two parties in the coalition. Therefore it is a genuine consensus-based program.

    The onus is now on National to specify which of these priorities it doesn’t agree with. They’re likely to be endorsed by most voters, so if a poll registers 60% or more support, unless Bridges endorses them he marginalises himself terminally.

  20. SaveNZ 22

    Good video, a lot better than their election efforts!

    But if you believe in people, people, people then wouldn’t your first and second themes be in reverse order? We already have had the economy prioritised before the wellbeing of New Zealanders and their families for nearly 30 years…

    “Our work is split into three key themes.

    Firstly, building a productive, sustainable and inclusive economy.

    Secondly, improving the wellbeing of New Zealanders and their families

    And thirdly, ensuring new leadership by government.”

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • New Zealand bans military style semi-automatics and assault rifles
    Military style semi-automatics and assault rifles banned under stronger gun laws Immediate action to prevent stock-piling Military style semi-automatics and assault rifles will be banned in New Zealand under stronger new gun laws announced today, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says. ...
    4 hours ago
  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    2 weeks ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Blasphemous libel law repealed
    The archaic blasphemous libel offence will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill today, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Coalition Government lassos livestock rustling
    New rules to crack down on livestock rustling will come into force following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Medieval law axed
    The ‘year and a day rule’ rule will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Further steps to combat tax evasion
    Further steps to combat tax evasion Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has announced New Zealand is expanding its global ability to combat tax evasion by joining forces with authorities in 30 countries and jurisdictions. Cabinet has agreed to add another ...
    3 weeks ago