The Greens and voting on the Budget

Written By: - Date published: 6:45 am, May 29th, 2017 - 150 comments
Categories: budget 2017, class war, Economy, election 2017, greens, Politics - Tags: ,

The various Bills going through Parliament currently can be seen here. Explanations of how the Budget process happens are here.

Spokesperson for Māori Development, Social Housing, Human Rights and Pacific Peoples, Marama Davidson explains in a blogpost why they are voting for that Bill that gives a little bit extra for those on low incomes,

The big headline of the Government’s Budget yesterday was its Family Incomes Package – a range of measures including changes to income tax thresholds and the Family Tax Credit.

Overall the Budget is a huge disappointment and a missed opportunity to make real progress on pressing social and environmental issues. We want more support for those who need it most, and we want that sooner than National.  To make that a reality, we need to change the Government.

But right now, we are debating National’s family package in Parliament. The Green Party is supporting these changes, not because they’re perfect – far from it – but because we want families to get more support and we strongly believe it is not our role to deny those families that.

Davidson headed the cross-party Inquiry into Homelessness last year. She spoke at the time about living in South Auckland and having multiple friends who were homeless in the past year. So it makes sense that last week she also challenged the tax cuts in Parliament, and talked about how $5 a week can make a difference and that we should be ashamed of that.

From Twitter,

Through my communities & whānau I am aware on a daily basis that I cannot stand in the way of even pittance of extra money

The Greens’ were strongly critical of National’s Budget across many areas. This is covered in another post here

Meanwhile, Grant Robertson and James Shaw look tight representing the government in waiting on TVNZ’s Q and A. They’re at ease and on the same political message, which suggests both men and parties know how to disagree at times and still work together,

Opposition MPs unite to slam government’s ‘sugar hit’ budget (video)

Labour and the Greens say they’re still committed to changing the government at this year’s election even though they held differing views on the Government’s budget this week.

Speaking on TVNZ’s Q+A this morning, Greens co-leader James Shaw explained to Jessica Mutch that his party felt it had to support National’s budget this week.

“They’ve come way too late to the party, and they’re totally under delivering. But the package they introduced last week will lift about 35,000 to 50,000 children above the OECD poverty line.

“We would do it a lot differently, we would do it a lot faster, and we wouldn’t wait eight years of government before we introduced it,” Mr Shaw said.

Labour Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson said that although his party voted against the budget, it didn’t alter the fact that Labour and the Greens would work together in the lead up to the September 23 election.

“A particular vote in parliament is what it is. Both parties have been clear on why they took their positions. But we are committed to changing the government,” he said.

Labour’s responses to the Budget can be seen here. Labour will release its own fiscal package in a few weeks.

(edited)

150 comments on “The Greens and voting on the Budget”

  1. Nope 1

    The Greens’ decision to vote for the Budget tax cuts was a disaster for the left and there’s no spinning it. It doesn’t matter what the facts are, the media thinks the left look shambolic and unready to govern, and Labour’s principled opposition to tax cuts paid for by cuts to health and education has been seriously undermined.

    • garibaldi 1.1

      The media will always say the Left are shambolic and unfit to rule. That is the reality of our market driven, paymaster subservient , totally biased and disingenuous media. All the good journalists have been culled or sidelined.
      This ‘scandal’ is a storm in a tea cup and is being exploited to the max by a desperate bunch of right wing twits.

      • weka 1.1.1

        I also think it’s a storm in a teacup and is just another in a long line of the MSM choosing sensationalism over providing a service to the public by keeping them informed. There will be constant attacks on the MoU and the working relationship right up until election day. Best we get used to it and develop some effective strategies (expecting the Greens to get in behind not being one of them).

        I think there are still some good journos around though and we should support them and their work.

        • garibaldi 1.1.1.1

          Yes Weka, there still are a few good journalists but they are sidelined and snided at by the tsunami of right wing media. I still think the media are our biggest enemy in the struggle to get the message across to the general public.

        • Anne 1.1.1.2

          Agreed weka @1.1.1
          A storm in a tea cup. What is more since the MOU was announced, both the Green leadership and the Labour leadership have been at pains to point out there will never be full agreement over everything.

          Of course their opponents will spin the usual ‘they’re infighting and in a mess’ meme but if Lab. and the Greens play their cards right they might be able to turn it into a plus for them.

          And about that Nat boat ad… why don’t Labour and the Greens produce a counter-boat ad? For example, they could have a bunch of thuggish looking louts (dressed in blue and yellow) on a row boat breaking all the rules of sailing in a desperate attempt to disable a sleek looking red/green row boat which moves smoothly over the finishing line leaving behind the louts floundering in disarray.

          • tuppence shrewsbury 1.1.1.2.1

            Took you three years to dream up a retort to an advertisement? sheesh.

          • weka 1.1.1.2.2

            A counter ad is a good idea. I thought maybe two boats, one red and one green, side by side, rowing in the same direction. But the whole competitive race thing is National’s stuff. Better to use different imagery. They could do one where they use the same National part rowing team in a river of cowshit 😉

        • McFlock 1.1.1.3

          I’m waiting for political reported to include musical scores and sound effects in their political reports and teasers.

          You know the sort of thing: “Labour voted against it but Greens voted… for it! Dun dun duhnn!!!” 🙂

        • Tuppence Shrewsbury 1.1.1.4

          you berate the media when they dare to ask questions and think through policy releases and positions of left parties when they are critical, but expect them to do the same work after they’ve been criticised to make you look better?

          Maybe a bit less criticism when they are right about a party getting it wrong and you’ll get a lot more praise when a party gets it right?

          No, that’d be taking responsibility for your actions. Far better or just blame everything on a corporate media elite biased against you

          [I’m pretty sure the corporate media elite have no idea who I am, so no, there is no bias against me. I suggest you read the Policy, and take note of the bits about not attacking authors. I especially don’t like people misrepresenting my views. Count this as a moderator warning – weka]

          • weka 1.1.1.4.1

            “you berate the media when they dare to ask questions and think through policy releases and positions of left parties when they are critical, ”

            No, I don’t do that. I appreciate the media when they apply critical thinking to political process and policy. What I berate the media for is choosing sensationalism over presenting information and fact that enables people to be informed and then make informed decisions.

            Which is what I said in my comment.

            I also don’t have a problem with people critiquing when parties get things wrong. I do have a problem when those critiques are based on incorrect facts, or assumptions made without checking.

          • mordecai 1.1.1.4.2

            Except in this case the media are being numpties. The Greens and Labour are independent parties who have signalled their intention to work together at the next election. They have not merged, and they have never claimed their policies are identical. Have the Maori Party, Act and UF voted for every single bill ever put forward by National? Frankly I despise the mainstream media. They have dumbed down their contribution to society, and have rendered themselves largely irrelevant to anyone wanting to have a deeper understanding of issues.

            • WILD KATIPO 1.1.1.4.2.1

              Are they not privately owned ?

              And do they not donate to the hand that feeds them ?

              And have not National underfunded state media ?

              So what can we expect from that cozy state of affairs ?

              • mordecai

                Not all media is privately owned. State media (RNZ) is just as bad.
                As for funding, I’m not particularly in favour of any state media that expresses an opinion about politics or such like. Funding of some public interest programming I can live with, but funding talking heads pontificating the pro’s and con’s of people who actually fund them is bs.

          • Ed 1.1.1.4.3

            Troll

    • saveNZ 1.2

      @ Nope, I don’t think so at all. Too many media reported that the Greens supported the entire budget making people think that was true. But it seems like from Metiria

      “No we’re not voting for the Budget. We voted for the Family Tax credit increase bill, but the Budget vote is next week & we oppose it.”

      Crystal clear.

    • Peter 1.3

      ….that should be ” the (MSM) media want to make the left look shambolic and will spin it any which way to convey that impression.”

  2. Incognito 2

    When a few (many?) politically very savvy people seem (!) to have got it wrong it becomes a valid question about the motivation behind the Green’s decision to vote in support of the first Bill and the way they handled the communication before & afterwards. That said, I don’t think it is as major as long as they deal with the aftermath. I’d almost accuse the Greens of being politically naïve but then I would be a hypocrite and I could be wrong as well …

    • weka 2.1

      I wonder if the naivety is assuming that the public understand the difference between the various Bills and voting on the Budget. I didn’t, and even going and looking for explanations didn’t yield much because the language used by the parliament bods is different than that used by the parties and the MSM. I left a chunk out of the post because I couldn’t be sure what it meant.

      Ditto that the MSM understand the differences and/or would bother to point them out.

      I agree the Greens could have handled the before and after communication better and I hope they do something today. I also wonder if they know from long tedious experience that there will always be a concerted effort to put them down no matter what they do and so it’s tempting to just get on with it.

      The vociferousness of the attack from some on the left has been an eye opener. I’m hoping we can put that down to people’s nervousness about winning the election, but that’s probably my own naivety.

      • billmurray 2.1.1

        weka, the genie has be let out the bottle, the MSM have spoken and In my opinion the public have listened, Andrew was humiliated, brave faces and togetherness will not breach the damage.
        The truth will be in the next poll.
        I predict damage, perhaps irreparably to Labour.
        Fuck the Greens.

        BTW can you vote in favour of parts of the budget and not others?.

        • weka 2.1.1.1

          “BTW can you vote in favour of parts of the budget and not others?.”

          As far as I can tell they can vote on the different Bills that underpin the Budget and then vote on the final Budget Bill itself (have a look at the parliament link in the post, I assume the Budget Bill is the Appropriations one). So in that sense the Greens voted for one part of the Budget but are voting against the Budget Bill itself. To my mind that is categorically not support for the Budget, nor as was being argued yesterday, support on Confidence and Supply.

          • mikesh 2.1.1.1.1

            A hypothetical question: What would have happened if one of these subsidiary bills had not been passed? Would the budget have needed to have been rewritten and represented?

            • weka 2.1.1.1.1.1

              I think so. Which is why governments have Confidence and Supply agreements sorted post-election. That way the Budget is a given and not at risk each year.

      • Skinny 2.1.2

        The Greens are clearly letting both Labour & National know they are open to trading the day after the 2017 General Election.

        So there is the possibility of a Blue/Green Government.

        • weka 2.1.2.1

          Can you please explain how the Greens (presumably the MPs and the Exec) can go against the AMG remit from the previous election that established the GP position on coalitions? Because I can’t see how they can, in which case your comment is just wrong.

          See https://thestandard.org.nz/green-politics/ (that references the 2011 one, but there was a 2013 one too that was almost identical).

          • Skinny 2.1.2.1.1

            I am not a Green member and wouldn’t have a clue what their coalition arrangements are. All I know is one of their top ranking MP’s told me this. Not that I needed to be told they will be in coalition discussions with both Labour & National after the votes are counted.

            The only real advice I could give is to ensure every candidate push the party vote first and foremost. As I have observed the odd maverick pushing themselves ahead of the party vote already.

            The reality is the soon to be Peters & Jones combo are going to be the most popular political team going into the election, they will most certainly have the MSM falling over themselves givng NZF saturation coverage. If they trounce the Greens then Labour are going to have to slam the door in their face all be it through gritted teeth. So it is cross benches or the unholy alliance of a Blue/Green government.

            • weka 2.1.2.1.1.1

              “I am not a Green member and wouldn’t have a clue what their coalition arrangements are.”

              You don’t have to be a member, I just linked to a post that explains it.

              So what did the Green MP tell you, exact words please. And when did they tell you this?

              The Greens will of course work with National and that could include an MoU post-election. What they won’t do is support formation of a National govt.

              • Skinn7y

                “So what did the Green MP tell you, exact words please. And when did they tell you this?”
                they will be in coalition discussions with both Labour & National after the votes are counted.

                Early this month.

                • The Green MP told you, “Earlier this month” and they said it “earlier this month”?
                  Your response is…lacking, Skinn7y.

                  • Skinn7y

                    It is what it is ‘a warning shot’ I won’t be going into detail on here.

                    • Gristle

                      Skinny, your claim of having a recent discussion with an un-named senior green mp has no credibility. You need to drop either your psuedonym or give the MP a name. Currently nothing can be checked, and this leads to you being irrelevant on this forum.

                    • Skinny

                      Gristle, you sound like the comments police, or more likely some control freak within either L/G or ACT.

                      Good on the Greens hold your ground don’t take crumbs when you are entitled to a good slice of the cake.

  3. Hurrummph ,… maybe I’ll have to swallow my words on Jimmy Shaw,… I’ll give anyone a second chance ,… and I did see he was going into bat for lower income earners a week or two ago and speaking about rampant free trade deals etc,… just don’t get too close to agreeing with the the Bauer family , Shaw and you’ll do well…

    Now,… that Marama Davidson is a wise head. I like her. She doesn’t mess around splitting hairs. Up front and tells it like it is. That’s the sort of person we need – no bullshit or semantics , and not afraid to be an activist when the time calls for it. Total support.

    Now it puts Robertson in a difficult place when the Greens vote for this odious govts budget , – despite all good intentions , – because it means he has to reinforce a united political front. That is not good. That is not wise campaigning despite thinking with ones heart on a temporary fix.

    The best thing could be done is to show this govt up for the absolute scumbags that they are and have been for 9 years and implement a better deal after Labour and the Greens ascend to power. Don’t agree with the shitters – just stomp all over their heads .

    Then put in place the proper social remedy’s we all know needs to be done.

    Don’t give National an inch. They haven’t given us as much.

    Destroy them at the polls this coming September.

    They deserve every bit of what is coming to them , – and it ISN’T a fourth term.

  4. Wayne 4

    Wild Katipo,

    I know you are radical but do you know much about electoral politics and the mood of middle votes. In short the ones who are persuadable and could possibly be won over from National.

    If Labour tries to paint National as “absolute scumbags” they will loose real big.

    Labour is not going to win soft votes off National if they basically insult those voters.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1

      Once in a while, the electorate needs to be reminded exactly what the National Party is. Shame is a powerful motivator.

    • You again ‘ Wayne’.

      Your implication is that National voters are A) the majority and B) is that all National voters are property speculators and that they have no regard for their children owning their own homes.

      And that is only ONE issue.

      The truth is that National have been importing cheap labour for quite a few years now , – and it has not gone unnoticed that many of those same wealthy immigrants and aspiring new Kiwis will naturally vote for the govt that enabled them. If only to gain NZ citizenship and cross the ditch for better lifestyle opportunity’s , – particularly in the case of the poorer immigrants.

      Enough of your bullshit ‘ Wayne’ , – until the day comes that this shitarse govt admits that it has directly caused the phenomenon of family’s living out of cars and garages, and entrenched such things as zero hour contracts ( albeit corrected by the hard work of Unite Union thank goodness ) , created a housing crisis and created a DSW dept that surreptitiously denies beneficiaries their full entitlements , – that’s the day when anything you say will be worth listening to.

      Until then , ‘Wayne ‘ , – your full of shit.

      And I don’t give a ratsarse even if you were a lawyer.

      ( earning shitload’s for protecting criminals, basically . ) Or worse yet – a shitty right wing politician.

      And as for me being ‘ radical’ ,… are you quite stupid ???

      Do you know anything about Keynesianism ??? And NZ ‘s long history of it ???, – and how it ushered in the greatest period of societal wealth ever ? – or did you view with lustful eyes the wealth you could plunder from the Commons by joining forces with Rogernomics and his shit Mont Pelerin Society economic theory’s? – I suspect that was more the case, wasn’t it , ‘ Wayne’ .

      Or are you so thoroughly entrenched in you crap ass neo liberalism that its caused you to take leave of your senses?

    • And lets face it ‘ Wayne’ ,… the only reason you’ve suddenly piped up about this tacit support of the Greens all of a sudden is because it supports your beloved bullshit National party- prior to that – you and your ilk would have happily shat all over the Greens and called them weirdos.

      So dont come all of a sudden preaching the olive branch for the Greens here , mate.

      You are only doing it for expediency’s sake.

      Any casual observer can see that.

    • “If Labour tries to paint National as “absolute scumbags” they will loose real big.”

      Agreed, Wayne. Even if National are, as you describe, “absolute scumbags”, Labour calling them such would be a very poor strategy. I don’t think they will.

  5. The Green caucus makes another sound decision. Meanwhile, their critics (and, disappointingly, some of their supporters) squawk and crow that the party has sold out, made a critical mistake, blown it, generally dumping on the Greens for what turns out to be a principled and well considered move to support those New Zealanders most in need. We even had the edifying experience of Wayne Mapp telling us that Metiria and Bill were as good as married now, all delivered with stentorian assurance designed to have us lesser political beings abandon our deepest beliefs and celebrate the wedding “for the sake of the environment”.
    I wonder, would it be possible, when next the Greens do something that requires a bit of deeper thinking from us, that we resist the temptation to scupper our own ship and instead give Mr Shaw in particular and the Greens in general, some grace?
    They are pretty smart operators, imho.

    • And bolix to that as well, mate.

      Smart operators ???

      A smarter operator wouldn’t have agreed with the very nemesis of their existence and bid their time to A) present a united front with their natural MOU colleagues and B ) not given popularity to a party that works against them, and C ) not have created a climate where members and the voting public would have reason to react with disquiet about senior executive decisions.

      Your in a fucking war, buddy.

      Can you honestly see Sun Tzu taking that tac unless it was to garner a tactical advantage ?

      So wheres the advantage – barring hedging the political bets ???

      • Where’s the advantage? (puts on Sun hat)
        The Greens support the Family Tax credit increase, ( “We voted for the Family Tax credit increase bill” – Metiria Turei).
        The advantage, firstly, is to those who receive the increase. Secondly, those families know that the Greens supported their increase, rather than opposed it; there would be huge opportunities for National to trumpet, “The Greens don’t care about families, THEY OPPOSED THE INCREASE!!! Thirdly, the Greens support base is assured that their representatives care about families in need enough to speak up and support a positive action, even when it comes from a party like National. Sun Tzu says, “don’t cut off your nose to spite your face”. He also says, don’t leap to conclusions without deep consideration. The Green caucus out-smarted the likes of you, Wayns Mapp, James, Goosey Loosey, Cocky Locky, Henney Penny et al, not for the sake of making the poultry panic, but by playing an honest, principled if a little more nuanced than usual, hand in a game they are getting better and better at.

        • WILD KATIPO 5.1.1.1

          If you are talking giving the appearance of some ulterior design – so be it.

          But as we all know – the simplistic reporting of the media and how easily swayed those who consume it are will not see those more ‘ intricate ulterior designs’.

          Most don’t.

          And this is not some sort of Lord of the Rings epic, either.

          That is why media / propaganda is kept simple. Maximum impact. They know most wont analyse it in any great depth. There’s no ‘ outsmarting ‘ me. That’s just commonsense.

          Why even go there when it could cause negative perceptions amongst potential Green / Labour voters? . Face it . It was a tactical cock up that put both the Greens and Labour in damage control.

          And that’s just plain stupidity.

          Thats why the World War Two slogan of the day was ‘ Loose lips costs lives’.

          • Robert Guyton 5.1.1.1.1

            Reporting that the Greens refused to support the Family Tax credit increase, Katipo?
            Can you tell me, WILD KATIPO, please, how are you going to counter that “unfriendly/heartless/uncaring” action? You know the likes of Mr Joyce would leap at the chance to attack the Greens in that way and that the media would serve him well when he did.

      • “Hurrummph ,… maybe I’ll have to swallow my words on Jimmy Shaw”
        So, what happened, WILD KATIPO, have you changed your 8:17 view already (and it’s only 9:46)?

        • WILD KATIPO 5.1.2.1

          Don’t like the guy primarily because the Greens seemed to have changed ever since Shaw came on board. So no,- haven’t changed my opinion at all. Don’t like the guy and don’t trust him.

          And I don’t like sell outs either.

          And just because he was touted before the general public as having ‘ business credentials’ doesn’t impress me either. Just because there was some desperation to gain power on behalf of some members of the Greens doesn’t mean they have to try and get it by trying not to spook the business community. There was a time when the Greens appeared to be flirting with being a potential Nats partner just before the MOU.

          And that was bad enough.

          Flirting with the enemy FFS.

          Stay the course and don’t give an opportunity to your natural foes whether assumed or otherwise. That’s what wins elections. Not watered down , signs of under-confidence.

          This is not a time to be lax and blase about loose lipped statements.

          • Robert Guyton 5.1.2.1.1

            You don’t like James Shaw. Then we can expect that you’ll be hammering the Greens repeatedly between now and the election; how dull.
            How about that Metiria though, eh!
            Didn’t she have a say in the decision to support the Family Tax credit increase? And the other Green MPs in caucus? Or has that rotten, be-suited James Shaw gagged the lot of them with his business necktie and is calling all the shots! The bounder! The stinking capitalist cuckoo!

            • weka 5.1.2.1.1.1

              At a guess I would say it was the people in the Greens who have the most to do with struggling poor people that pushed for this decision. Probably not Shaw.

              • Yeah and that’s the double edged sword, Weka,… but its akin to accepting the crumbs from the oligarchs table… whereas holding your ground ( and holding your tongue ) , staying the course and seeing it through and getting into power is the long term objective.

                THEN you can implement those much needed social reforms.

                • weka

                  That would make sense if the Greens hadn’t just spend five days being highly critical of the Budget, and presenting their own solutions.

            • WILD KATIPO 5.1.2.1.1.2

              Don’t get sarky , mate.

              I singled out Shaw. Not Metiria.

              You are generalizing. And there’s a few that agree with me as well, so its not an isolated observance, either. And the bit about being ‘ how dull ‘. The difference between you and me is I don’t blindly support idiot behavior when it happens simply because it is a group I’m loyal too , either. I haven’t supported Labour for THREE LONG DECADES because they shat all over New Zealanders.

              I will this election.

              I’m also in support of the Greens . But I also see there has been a change primarily because of the leadership that seems to have caused a shift in core emphasis. I don’t like it. And many others don’t either.

              My beef is with Shaw.

              Not the Green party.

              • “Don’t get sarky , mate.”

                “The difference between you and me is I don’t blindly support idiot behavior when it happens simply because it is a group I’m loyal to…”

                Okay.

                Perhaps I’ll ask again, Wild Katipo, about Metiria, whom you have no beef with, and the shared decision, and shared I expect the decision was, to support the Family Tax credit increase; do you think she and the other Green MPs played no part in that decision, that they were over-ruled somehow, by the dastardly James Shaw? I’m really keen to know how you view this.

                • Well,.. even you have to admit,… how long is it?… that the Greens have held office?

                  Don’t you think, in those long languid hours , that maybe, just maybe ,… a few ‘ visionaries’ would be dreaming of how nice it would be to finally be in power?

                  And that’s the lure of power , mate. People succumb to it. Thankfully , there is enough people in the Greens that don’t.

                  And another thing.

                  This Shaw. Can you provide evidence that he didn’t have a strong influence ?… really ? – perhaps stronger than Metiria had ? , and that certain Greens placed their confidence in Shaw and that Metiria acquiesced to that under general pressure ?

                  Please provide the evidence if that was or wasn’t the case.

                  • WILD KATIPO
                    I asked if you think Metiria and the Green MPs were over-ruled by Shaw and I guess I’ll have to ask again; do you?
                    I’ll gladly answer your question once you’ve filed the answer to mine, as is the usual way with dialogue.

                  • tom

                    to me, and is only my opinion from this post, you WK are blaming the Greens (when they have been absolutely crystal clear) for the MSM trying their old tricks, looks like you are falling in the trap of the PR spinning MSM, and now you have been caught in the trap and it has been pointed out, you are doing a national PR trick and doubling down on it, rather than just owning it and saying
                    ‘ shit i got caught in a spin trap that i should have seen coming a mile off, just shows how insidious that PR spin is and how those without the political nous that i have would be spun into an absolute web around this kind of crap. We have to do something about the spin machine and MSM as that is the core of the issue, and until then we cannot have any hope of a fair representation to the broader public, for the greens or labour or their MOU.’

                    Just my opinion

    • Grafton Gully 5.2

      National might lose the election, but will still be around. I support a more trusting relationship with the Greens because it legitimizes them among National voters and because I want any future National led governments to legislate more for protection and expansion of healthy, sustainable ecosystems (including the niches occupied by their supporters).

      • National ??? ,… interested in ‘ sustainability ‘ ?,… the ‘ environment ‘ ??!!

        Healthy environments ??!! … how about a little campylobacter , then – the kind that killed Rod Donald ? – didn’t we have that same sort of thing under this govt in the south west of NZ not so long ago? – and haven’t we seen under National the bullshit deterioration of our waterways in exchange for short term greed and foreign profit margins ?!!? …

        I think you are being a little bit too trusting in these National party arseholes to do ANYTHING that would seek to be in the best interest of New Zealanders.

        Vote them out this coming September and be done with them.

      • garibaldi 5.2.2

        GG ,you are being very gullible to expect that from a right wing govt. Their whole raison d’etre is to give in to business interests.

  6. Bearded Git 6

    Good post Weka. That makes much more sense. I couldn’t believe the Greens would be stupid enough to vote for the whole budget.

    As usual it is the MSM telling lies that has given a misleading impression. When will the Young, Watkins, Gower etc realise there is a difference between journalism and telling lies?

    The Labour/Green bloc really need to set up a dedicated media rebuttal unit prior to the election.

    • And that is probably the whole issue.

      But then again , it behooves those opposed to not even give the APPEARANCE of dining with the enemy. And that gets down to tight discipline and intolerance of subordinates issuing statements adverse to their objectives. Let alone senior members.

      • Jenny Kirk 6.1.1

        I agree with you, Wild Katipo. Its all very well to say the Greens supported just one or two measures in the Budget.

        It just goes against belief that they did this KNOWING these measures will not come in until April Fools Day next year (2018), and that Labour – and themselves for that matter – still have to announce HOW they’re going to fix the economic ills done by this government over the last decade.

        The Greens made a strategic mistake on this Budget legislation. Whether it was sheer ignorance, deliberate or naive remains to be seen.

        The Greens would have earned more cred if they’d said the whole Budget is lousy and this is what they (the Greens) would do instead.

        • weka 6.1.1.1

          Marama Davidson introduced a Supplementary Orders Paper that would have started the relief in July. The govt voted it down of course. But it’s pretty damn clear where the Greens stand on poverty alleviation.

          “and that Labour – and themselves for that matter – still have to announce HOW they’re going to fix the economic ills done by this government over the last decade.”

          The Greens have been releasing policy for three years on how to do that. They released the Budget for All Mothers the week before Budget Day. Labour are going to release their own fiscal package in the next few weeks, taking the time to really look at the numbers and issues.

          “The Greens would have earned more cred if they’d said the whole Budget is lousy”

          This is exactly what they did say.

          • WILD KATIPO 6.1.1.1.1

            Then we could argue it was either a case of ‘ I told you so’ , and ‘ we were right all along ‘ or , – more dangerously , – a situation whereby it was being used as a political wedge ,…

            The problem is of course that in the simplistic method that the MSM and certain pro National party commentators would employ , – is that it could be so easily slanted to seem as if the Greens are siding with National , – or – worse still… being disloyal to the MOU and illustrating the MOU and the Labour / Greens accord is a weak one. One which the right wing MSM is only to happy to exploit.

            Hopefully it will get voted down and that more-so , it doesn’t create a wrong public perception. And even more importantly , isn’t used as ammunition by National to illustrate some perceived MOU weakness.

            And that’s what its all about 4 months out from a general election. Public perception.

            • weka 6.1.1.1.1.1

              Well this here isn’t the MSM, it’s the largest left wing blog in NZ and I just spent a couple of days watching left wing people actively undermine one of the two left wing parties that are trying to change the govt. Critique the Greens, yep. Beat them with a stick for something they didn’t do? That’s fucked up.

              I don’t have a problem with the MSM as such, we know what they are and we know what to do with them. They’re on the verge of turning on National, and we should be focussed on that.

              What I’m struggling with is the likelihood that I will have to spend the next four months pointing out to left wingers ad nauseam that the GP can’t go into coalition with National because of the GP’s own position on that. I can’t believe we are still even having to talk about this shit. People can criticise the Greens for their communication, but I see far too many people here muddying the waters and not seeking clarity or facts. That’s not everyone obviously and there is also valid criticism in there too. But the irony of attacking the Greens for supposedly dumping on the left? wtf.

              • No but you are expressing a rather extreme view.

                No one seriously expects the Greens to suddenly do an about turn and go into coalition with National and say ‘ Just kidding, folks’.

                That wont happen.

                But what the point is , – is that it does no favours to what the MOU hopes to achieve. Again, – its that public perception thing. That’s the point here. I have every confidence the Greens and Labour will do well. But at this stage of the game, giving no chance for the enemy is the name of the game.

                Give them nothing , take them nowhere.

                • weka

                  what’s the extreme view?

                  The Greens can up their game. What I don’t support them to do is to change who they are in order to try and win a perception game with the MSM. There are far better ways to work with perception and the Greens are pretty good at it.

                  • Good answer, I hope they do maintain their original stand – for too long they have been painted in a bad light.
                    And four months out from an election. I hope they keep on doing just that.

                    As I have said, I would like to see a Labour led govt with the Greens and possibly NZ First. So I have no quarrel with the Greens maintaining their core philosophy’s whatsoever. I hope they do.

        • Robert Guyton 6.1.1.2

          Jenny Kirk – “The Greens would have earned more cred if they’d said the whole Budget is lousy…”
          Really? You subscribe to the idea that everything the “enemy” says has to be painted as “lousy”.
          That sort of approach is gold for the likes of National. “The Greens want to ban everything!!” they crow. “Labour and the Greens are against everything, even an increase to the Family Tax credit! Heartless Greens! Nay-saying Labour; the hate you, New Zealand!! They are stopping you getting the good stuff,stuff you deserve!!” – Steven Joyce.
          Too easy, Jenny Kirk. You make it too easy for them.

    • weka 6.2

      All credit to Karen and Sacha for raising this in a thread yesterday.

    • Sigh 6.3

      There’s no rebutting it – the Greens voted with National and against Labour on the centrepiece of the election year Budget.

    • RedLogix 6.4

      I’ve watched this one out so far, mainly because I can see real substance in what both points of view are saying. The Greens have made a nuanced and sound move from a long term pov. Labour seems to have managed things sensibly as well.

      The entire locus of the political problem lies squarely with a media who are more than happy to cynically exploit anything ‘nuanced’, anything that doesn’t line up with their embedded FPP political thinking, as an opportunity to screech smear lines … ‘disorganised, chaotic, disunited’ and so on.

      The answer is not to confront them. The media under attack always retreats into it’s ‘defender of democracy’ Fourth Estate mythological meme. The smart way forward is to snort a little derisively and then express concern at the dire economic circumstances of journalism in this country, and how this has ‘narrowed’ the range of opinion and analysis in the public debate alarmingly.

      And then point out that because of this professional weakness and lack of balance, note how they are being increasingly bypassed by politicians (like Trump) who are using social media to convey their messages directly. Note also polls where ordinary people are expressing less and less trust in what they read in the professional media. And note how these trends will ultimately terminate the role of journalists altogether unless the industry can reform itself, rebuild trust and reshape its business model in the age of the internet. Point out that in the final analysis journalism as a profession may only survive in the context of a strong, authentically independent, public broadcasting model.

      Sure hacks like Young, Watkins and the truly odious Gower are nothing more than propaganda tools. The strategy here is not to confront them head on; that will only give them oxygen. The smart way forward is to bypass them, diminish their influence and at the same time start talking about ways to rebuild responsible journalism.

      It’s not hard. The contrast between the media in Australia and NZ is stark. Over here there is a far broader range of opinion, balance and depth. The debate is far more robust and detailed. Nuance, while frequently shouted down, finds a way to the surface; spin is counterspun; soundbites get swallowed whole by long form reads.

      And while we are at it … have another read of TOP’s “Democracy Reset”. Especially Section 6 which speaks directly to this issue:

      Restoring an Independent Media and Public Service

      Media plays a crucial role in an informed democracy. With the shift to online media from print and television, advertising revenues have shrunk and largely been snaffled by large overseas corporates (which is another good reason to make sure they are taxed). Combined with heightened competition for the public’s attention, this has led to fewer resources being devoted to true public interest journalism.

      TOP will sell TVNZ (which is now a commercial operation) and use the proceeds to set up a Public Journalism Fund as part of NZ on Air. The existing Platinum Fund money will be folded into this. RNZ will be able to compete for this funding alongside other platforms.

      Finally, the public sector itself plays an important role in ensuring an informed public. While New Zealand has a good record with transparency and low public sector corruption, in recent years this has been slipping. There is an urgent need for more open and transparent government, starting with greater investment in open data, more independent evaluation of policies and a refreshed approach to official information.

      http://www.top.org.nz/top4

      • ” The answer is not to confront them. The media under attack always retreats into it’s ‘defender of democracy’ Fourth Estate mythological meme. The smart way forward is to snort a little derisively and then express concern at the dire economic circumstances of journalism in this country, and how this has ‘narrowed’ the range of opinion and analysis in the public debate alarmingly.”

        Which is pretty much what Martyn Bradbury stated here :

        Labour vs The Nation – learning a lesson from Corbyn’s recent poll jump
        thedailyblog.co.nz/…/labour-vs-the-nation-learning-a-lesson-from-corbyns-recent-pol…

      • marty mars 6.4.2

        Bad form linking to another political party imo.

      • weka 6.4.3

        I also think that going hard out against the MSM is a losing strategy. Plus the MSM in NZ is on the verge of turning against National anyway. Not all of the MSM are committed neoliberals or Nat fans. Some are just after the sensational story. National going down will probably give them that. So let Labour and the Greens keep on with presenting the stuff we need. Them working together, good solid policy, refuting the bullshit in a smart, even handed way, being honest and real.

        • WILD KATIPO 6.4.3.1

          Pretty much.

          I like this bit :

          ‘ Not all of the MSM are committed neoliberals or Nat fans. Some are just after the sensational story.’

          And as you said,… their appetite for sensationalism will assuaged aplenty if National loses. That would be a nice change , just imagine 9 years of National party greed and avarice turned back on them after all they’ve done to us by the MSM …

  7. Sigh 7

    All I see when looking at the media is:

    – The Greens support National’s tax cuts as something that’s going to help families on low incomes.
    – Labour and the Greens couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery and are unfit to govern.

    The Greens could have chosen to vote against the tax cuts. It would have actually been the more principled position given they’re paid for by gutting our public services.

    Instead they’ve made a political blunder over the election year Budget, less than four months out from polling day, covering themselves and the Labour Party in shit.

    • Sigh, your comments are puerile and offered only to dishearten readers here. Your view is completely wrong, yet you feel emboldened by the confusion to broadcast it as if it were something worth listening to. Others may be taken in by your insistence but I find your comments utterly lacking in value 🙂

      “All I see when looking at the media is:”

      I suggest you turn off your telly, mate. It’s rotting your brain.

      • weka 7.1.1

        I’m interested in just how many people are suggesting that the most important thing is media portraya and damn everything elsel. It’s important to be sure, but we all know that no matter what the Greens (or Labour) do, there will be attempts to cast them in a bad light. I fail to see how lefties dumping on the Greens helps that. I’m sure some of the reaction is fear of losing the election, but I suspect a handful of Labour voters who don’t want the Greens in govt just came out into the light feeling justified.

        (there’s a few names here I don’t recognise, so they might not even be lefties).

        • Robert Guyton 7.1.1.1

          That’s correct, weka. Beware of the over-frothy reactions seen recently here. There will be a spate of them up until the election. Sigh et al are charged with fomenting such anguish and confusion here. Let’s give them short shift.

        • Sigh 7.1.1.2

          I’m not dumping on the Greens, I’m just pointing out the Greens dumped on lefties and indeed anyone who wants to change this miserable government. That can’t be denied, whatever spin is put on it.

          • Robert Guyton 7.1.1.2.1

            The Greens…political blunder… “covering themselves and the Labour Party in shit”

            “I’m not dumping on the Greens…”

            Sigh!

          • WILD KATIPO 7.1.1.2.2

            I’ll say one thing, – better that we have positive people who look for some redeeming features in a shit govt than a govt that simply’s steals ideas and waters them down as National always has – and ALWAYS with an ulterior motive.

            In that the Greens can be forgiven their oversights.

      • Sigh 7.1.2

        I’d rather it wasn’t this way. But this is what people are seeing, and what people are telling me having seen it. It might uncomfortable, but there it is. Actions have consequences, and we are all reaping the consequences from the Greens’ decision to back the tax cuts.

      • greywarshark 7.1.3

        Wholeheartedly agree that if Sigh can’t say anything positive or show helpful ways to go round our problem mountains and find some gold on the other side, better he go out and party. He needs it, sounds like a bloke but don’t know if my gender antennae is in working order!

        Just ask yourself Sigh et al why would they do whatever? Then provide some answers from your own brain. Then bring them here and discuss if other people have same idea. Brain – use it or lose it.

      • Bearded Git 7.1.4

        ‘I suggest you turn off your telly, mate. It’s rotting your brain.”

        larf!! I needed one from this thread. Thank you Senor Guyton.

        (I only watch 3 hours of TV a week now-the delayed rugby on Saturday night and Back Benches, both on Prime.)

    • weka 7.2

      In fact they will vote against the tax cuts this/next week when they vote against the budget bill. And they will be voting the same as Labour. And the relationship with Labour appears to be in good health. So really all we have is yet another media beat up, and some lefties pissed at the Greens for not following Labour.

      I wonder how many of the people dumping on the Greens from the left will continue to undermine the left’s chances of winning the election by making up shit next week when the budget votes happens. It’s almost like some people don’t want the Greens in government.

      • marty mars 7.2.1

        Blaming others for not undrstanding what the greens are doing won’t help anyone. I think it was a gbig mistake voting, for no good or practical reason, with the gnats against labour. The perception imo is that the greens have wriggle room with the gnats and the greens deliberately set that up.

        seems like the greens have had enough of being in opposition

        • weka 7.2.1.1

          For me there are two separate things there. One is whether the Greens made a mistake. I have no problem with people having various views on that even where I disagree with them. The other is when people form views based on incorrect assumptions. It’s not that I blame people for that, given how the MSM behave, but I was surprised at how many people on the biggest left wing blog in NZ got this aspect of it wrong (the voting thing). To me it looks like we all need some civics lessons.

          The thing about the perception of the Greens and National is that the Greens will in fact work with any party on policy. I don’t want them to become a wholly partisan party. I want them to hold that ground of co-operation. This round of the perception game is similar to all the other ones, and I’m not supportive of the Greens changing baseline values and principles out of fear of that. NZ really needs to learn how to understand what the Greens do and why and to not be afraid of it.

          We went through this shit last time, it’s a powerful RW meme, and IMO people on the left need to think very carefully about what it means to support it. ‘Shaw is a neoliberal plant and the Greens will betray Labour and go with National’. That’s bizarre beyond belief and instead of expecting the Green to change who they are to combat that bizarreness, I’m looking at the people peddling falsities and what their motivations are.

          The Greens also could do better with some of their communication and media, not doubt about that. But that’s different than them changing who they are.

          • Robert Guyton 7.2.1.1.1

            Well said, weka. We lefties need to chillax; there will be headless chickens enough without our flocking to join the kerfuffle. The Greens have matured up admirably. We should too.

          • marty mars 7.2.1.1.2

            I think incorrect assumptions have come about because the message wasn’t constructed and delivered correctly. And it IS probably a big fear from labour people. Personally I do think it is a nothing story.

            Not sure how you counter right wing memes about the greens and some left and in labour I’d say do want the smarmy do gooders get the try in the corner greenies to go down – they are that bitter.

            You ignore and that keeps the memes going. You counter and everyone is still talking about the meme. Dead cat works.

            • weka 7.2.1.1.2.1

              Best thing Labour and the Greens could do now is make themselves visible working together. Ignore the bullshit and present the things that we should be voting for.

              On TS, I’ll counter the whole GP might go with National thing with facts 😈

              • And I’ll pitch in with some scornful mockery, if you think that will help 🙂
                Nah, voice of reason, me.

                • weka

                  I’ve been enjoying your comments this morning. I like the approach, it’s not one that comes naturally to me so I am learning some things, which is always good 🙂

              • Yeah you do that.

                But that still doesn’t change the fact that a large amount of NZ voters shoot from the hip and don’t read sites such as this. And that’s why caution is a good thing in these affairs. I’d like to see the Greens in power with Labour.

                But its got to be a super tight ship to get us all there. Regardless of how trivial the issue and how the MSM might like to paint things.

                Voters can be fickle. We’ve learnt that over the last 33 years of neo liberalism. To be sure.

                • weka

                  The MSM will tell lies and go for sensation to the extent that they will. What matters is how the left responds to that, and that includes us here.

          • Bearded Git 7.2.1.1.3

            +100

  8. Bill 8

    I’m not paying too much attention to NZ politics at the moment, but I don’t think it was just my inattention that led me to believe that the Greens had voted for the Government’s budget.

    Who peddled that line? Why did they peddle that line? And yeah, what’s their fucking names and addresses so I can pop around for a wee chat some time?

    • weka 8.1

      It’s Monday, so if you tune into RNZ you can probably get the latest RW smear lines straight from the Hooton’s mouth 😉

      • Bill 8.1.1

        Yeah well, fuck Hooton. If it was just him, there’d be no problem. I’m suspecting in my half attentive state there’s something a wee bit more systemic going on. And whereas I’ve no problem with people getting things wrong, I really fucking do. not. like. being lied to.

        edit – hardly ever listen to Radio New Zealand these days. It became unbearable somewhere along the line.

        • weka 8.1.1.1

          I’m putting it down mostly to the general public, myself included, not understanding how parliament actually works. There are a few people on TS that I would have expected to pick up the issue early on, that surprises me. And yes, I’m reflecting on the motives of some of those people. Interestingly Wayne Mapp referred to it first, and for obvious reasons he didn’t make a big deal about it. No-one picked it up from his comment.

          In that sense, yes the Greens could have handled what they did better i.e. put up a press release that explained it.

          The whole GP will go with National thing is a long standing meme made worse by the left. So I agree, fuck Hooton, it’s what we’re doing that’s the problem. The last few days are when I have truly come to understand what people mean when they say the left is its own worst enemy.

  9. Wayne 9

    The centrepiece of the Budget was the tax and WFF packakge. So it was perfectly reasonable for that to be interpreted as support for the budget, even though the Greens will not vote for the budget resolution.
    Of course the Greens could have voted against the package but then they would have had to explain why they are against helping low income families. Now that is easy for Labour. They are the official opposition and tribally opposed to National.

    But part of the Green appeal is that are not supposed to be tribally opposed to National, though I appreciate many Green supporters on this site are in fact so opposed, presumably former supporters of the Alliance or of Labour.

    However a large number of Green voters (as opposed to activists) are not in that space. For instance in North Shore I used to get 2000 to 3000 votes from people who voted for me for the constituency vote but Green for the party vote.

    • National and Green go together like oil and water 🙂

      • BM 9.1.1

        Not for much longer I reckon, change is coming.

        Greens used to be lead by hippies then they got taken over by the anarchists/socialists and I get the feeling the anarchists about to be taken over by the blue-greens.

        Blue-greens and National no problem.

        • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1

          Same. I’ve noticed a huge shift in the Greens towards supporting drilling and fracking for oil and mining coal, as well as intensifying dairying and massive irrigation schemes; why, the Greens are practically Tory-orcs now! It’s amazing how this happened, BM and all inside of your own head!

          • Craig H 9.1.1.1.1

            In 10 years time, electric will have largely replaced petrol as the primary means of powering small vehicles, and fracking etc will largely be obsolete. Even National won’t be able to support oil drilling because nobody will want to pay for the rights anyway.

        • adam 9.1.1.2

          Thanks BM needed a good laugh, your paranoid fantasies are always good for a giggle.

        • Skinn7y 9.1.1.3

          It will be the last thing people expect, but I am giving it a 50/50 chance. Peters and Jones will play hardball with Labour if NZF trumps the Greens on party votes. It isn’t the tree hugging hippy party any more, so yes a Blue/Green Govt is very much on the cards.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 9.1.1.3.1

            Do you think if you and the other ignoratii say this enough it will become true? The argumentum ad nauseam is usually the sort of stupid gobshite I expect from wingnuts.

            • Skinny 9.1.1.3.1.1

              Get lost it is warning to Labour and NZF.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                Right, and then Labour need to be warned because NZF are an utterly untrustworthy bunch of racists, and as everyone knows there’s no difference between Labour and National so why bother voting at all?

                Meanwhile, on Earth, the barriers to a Green/National government are 100% bleedin’ obvious.

    • adam 9.2

      Wayne no offence, but you forget two things with this. One you were the only option to vote for, seriously labour has effectively given up on the shore ever since it lost Northcote. And two, you were a very good constituent MP, which goes a long way with voters. I held my nose and voted for Helen Clark for the exact same reason.

      Good local MP’s who actually look after their constituents under MMP are worth their weight in gold. I’m finding Marama Davidson well on the way to being very good. Always found Carmel Sepulion good, but she is has got better for her time out of parliament. Sam Lotu-Iiga was good, but since he announced he was standing down, he has dropped off a lot.

  10. swordfish 10

    .Wayne

    However a large number of Green voters (as opposed to activists) are not in that space. For instance in North Shore I used to get 2000 to 3000 votes from people who voted for me for the constituency vote but Green for the party vote.

    _______________________________________________________________________________________

    Shouldn’t have thought so Wayne

    221-253 rather than 2000 to 3000 votes

    ________________________________________________________________________________

    2008 General Election Split Voting Statistics

    (1) North Shore
    Green 2,590 Party Votes
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting MAPP, Wayne = 253 … (9.77%)

    (2) All Electorates
    Green 157,613 Party Votes
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting National Party candidate = 16549 … (10.5%)
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting Green or Labour candidate = 126815 … (80.46%)

    _________________________________________________________________________________

    2005 General Election Split Voting Statistics

    (1) North Shore
    Green 1,940 Party Votes
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting MAPP, Wayne = 221 … (11.39%)

    (2) All Electorates
    Green 120,521 Party Votes
    .Green Party-Voters candidate-voting National Party candidate = 8714 … (7.2%)
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting Green or Labour candidate = 99538 … (82.6%)

    _________________________________________________________________________________

    2002 General Election Split Voting Statistics

    (1) North Shore
    Green 2,234 Party Votes
    Green Party-Voters candidate-voting MAPP, Wayne = 232 … (10.38%)

    • swordfish 10.1

      In other words, Wayne, you seem to be confusing

      (1) the entire Party-Vote won by the Greens on the North Shore
      with
      (2) the tiny number of Greens giving you their candidate-vote

      • Wayne 10.1.1

        swordfish,

        You are correct. In fact I had conflated the total vote split on the North Shore with the Green vote split. As you note the total Green vote was similar to the total vote split in North Shore.

        On reflection the bulk of the vote split came from ACT and NZF voters, with a lesser amount from Labour and the Greens.

        The danger of relying entirely on memory.

  11. swordfish 11

    Wayne

    But part of the Green appeal is that are not supposed to be tribally opposed to National, though I appreciate many Green supporters on this site are in fact so opposed, presumably former supporters of the Alliance or of Labour.

    However a large number of Green voters (as opposed to activists) are not in that space.

    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    Apart from the miniscule number of Greens candidate-voting National (7.2% 2005 … 10.5% 2008) (see the (2) All Electorates stats in my first comment) … your argument, Wayne, is undermined by the 3-yearly New Zealand Election Study (NZES)

    Amongst other things, the NZES has always shown …

    (1) Green Party-Voters overwhelmingly preferring a Labour Govt
    (eg 2008 … 77.2% of Greens wanted a Lab Govt … while a mere 9.7% preferred a Nat one)

    (2) Green Voters placing both themselves and the Green Party to the Left of everyone else on the ideological spectrum
    (eg 2008 … 3.2 mean for Green Voters on a spectrum where 0 = Far Left … 10 = Far Right … while both National Voters and the National Party were placed at a mean of 6.7 (by all voters) and 7.1 (by Nats themselves) …
    … Green Voters (3.2 mean) considered themselves to the Left of both the Labour Party and Labour Voters (3.7 – 4.5 mean)

    (3) On top of that … the 2011 NZES found

    the more Left, the more likely one is to vote Green

    • Wayne’s trying to embed the idea that the Greens are warming to National.
      I reckon he couldn’t be more wrong.

      • Bearded Git 11.1.1

        They wouldn’t get 5% and so would cease to exist in parliament if they went in with the Nats.

        Having said that, my 26 year old (who I thought I had brought up well) is trying to get me to entertain the idea that a ‘Grand Coalition” would be a good idea to keep Peters out. FFS.

        • Robert Guyton 11.1.1.1

          National would have to undergo profound change, cast off their orc helmets and armour, de-gimlet their eyes and re-fuse their tongue-tips…

          …not going to happen.

        • BM 11.1.1.2

          Having said that, my 26 year old (who I thought I had brought up well) is trying to get me to entertain the idea that a ‘Grand Coalition” would be a good idea to keep Peters out. FFS.

          That’s the way younger people think, they’re not hung up on ideological bullshit like people of your age group.

          It’s all about solutions and trying to come up something that works, if it works go with it.
          And if it doesn’t work who the fuck cares, notch that up as a learning experience and move on.
          The funny thing is that your kid is so much more advanced then what you are but you’re so trapped in that old school boomer binary way of thinking you don’t realise that.

          • Muttonbird 11.1.1.2.1

            Righto. Did you stop for a second to ask yourself why the 26 year old would have an ‘ideology’ to keep Peters out?

            You are a simpleton if you think ‘keeping Peters out’ is anything but a National Party media fed idea.

          • Robert Guyton 11.1.1.2.2

            26 year-olds are ” all about solutions and trying to come up something that works, if it works go with it.”?
            What, all of them?
            And their parents are “trapped in that old school boomer binary way of thinking” ?

            Yours is a simple world, BM, just like that of everyone your age.

            • BM 11.1.1.2.2.1

              I’m certainly way past 26, this is something I’ve noticed with the next generation, there’s no hangups, preconceived ways of doing things or fear of failure

              I expect to see some world changing discoveries happening over the next 20 years, exciting time to be alive.

              • Muttonbird

                Do you now? These world changing discoveries won’t come from the children of the vulnerable people you and your type further marginalise.

              • The “next generation” have “no hangups, preconceived ways of doing things or fear of failure”

                Do the mental health statistics correlate with your belief, I wonder, BM?

                Credit where credit’s due, though BM. You’re at least being positive in your comments about the next generation. What was it Bill English had to say about them? Something about lazy…was it useless? Wasters? Didn’t really take any notice. Perhaps you could have a word with the PM, BM.

              • Bearded Git

                I think the 26 year olds get way too many of their opinions from websites using questionable data and financed by people who support or don’t question the neo-liberal trickle down rubbish..

          • mauī 11.1.1.2.3

            Yeah the younguns are heading in droves to what works like ACT, the Maori Party, the bouffant tinky winky and the assholes their parents vote for.

            Yeah right!

          • McFlock 11.1.1.2.4

            lol

            But on the flipside, many of them are unemployable, have no work ethic, and don’t learn because you have to show them the same thing over and over again, right?

            You hope it’s the go-getting problem-solvers who vote tory. Because if it’s just idiots who manage to alienate most of the stalwart workers in their electorate office in a single term, you guys are fucked.

  12. Bearded Git 12

    From Barry Soper in the Herald today:

    .”…. the hip Greens – who like the tax relief, and probably much of the Budget.

    But if Winston Peters gets to be part of that formation, and that’s a strong possibility given that he’s described the Nats as a bunch of has-beens, Labour and the Greens are more likely to end up more disjointed that joined, given his loathing of the latter.”

    So the Greens like “much of the budget” when they have stated exactly the opposite and will vote against it. The MSM is still lying on this.

    However Soper may be right about Peters. Despite Key’s run for cover, which I thought might bring about a rapprochement between the Nats and NZF, Peters still seems to be staunch in his often rabid criticism of the Nats.

    • Sigh 13.1

      Again though, they voted for $1.8b of tax cuts that help the rich are paid for by gutting public services. It was seven times the size of the WFF changes. This will send more kids into poverty. Weird move.

    • weka 13.2

      Thanks Dave!! That’s a really good post.

  13. Sigh says National’s tax cuts will “send more kids into poverty”. That’s damning of National and only one of their many appalling attacks on decent New Zealanders. Let’s get rid of them, as quickly as possible.

  14. greywarshark 15

    11ish BM
    “I’m certainly way past 26, this is something I’ve noticed with the next generation, there’s no hangups, preconceived ways of doing things or fear of failure”

    There is also no concern about people sleeping in cars, well that’s the way it is say The Young Ones. Sometimes you’re up, sometimes down, and they have made a choice to be down.

    And the economy couldn’t be run better. We had to do things that ended up with businesses being shut because they couldn’t compete. Fair enough, if they can make things cheaper overseas it doesn’t make sense to make things here and pay more. It’s a TINA situation. And don’t tell us that they are using slave labour overseas. They are getting paid, and they have a choice as to their work. That’s not slave labour.

    And so on. Justify and rationalise. No humanitarian principles, judgmental and clique-forming.

  15. Jeremy 16

    I think the Green made a simple error thinking that the public would get the nuance of voting for part of the budget and then against it as a whole, I also believe they should have been able to guess how it would be portrayed in the media.

    I’ve been following politics with more than a usual interest since my teens just after the Greens entered Parliament, and didn’t know you could do this. I’m not surprised people who only follow politics on the news or the occasion newspaper article also had no idea. It’s a tough job to try and educate the public through the media how the budget process works.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts