web analytics

Two good polls for Labour – and a call to arms for the Greens

Written By: - Date published: 7:05 pm, August 9th, 2017 - 95 comments
Categories: class war, jacinda ardern, labour, leadership, Metiria Turei, national, polls - Tags: , , , , , ,

Newshub’s poll has Labour up to 33% and Jacinda Ardern neck and neck with English in the preferred PM question.

The Herald has also leaked a second poll ending today:

The Herald can also exclusively report leaked results from the latest UMR poll, which finished today. That shows Labour has surged from 23 per cent a fortnight ago to 36 per cent. Support for the Green Party collapsed from 15 per cent to 8 per cent.

In the UMR poll support for New Zealand First dropped from 16 to 8 per cent. National went up 1 per cent to 43 per cent.

Labour is back!

However, we need a strong Green vote too. Hopefully this dip is just temporary, a consequence of the frenzied attack on Metiria Turei. I’m sad and angry that she has been hounded into standing down. The risk is that a lot of those who were inspired by her will now say fuck it and not vote at all. That’s what those who were attacking Metiria really want. Don’t give it to them. Don’t get mad, get even. The Greens need you now more than ever!

95 comments on “Two good polls for Labour – and a call to arms for the Greens ”

  1. Brendan 1

    This is within striking distance of National. If it stays at this level, Winston is still King, but we could have a hung parliament or Labour sellout again and gives NZF the coalition spot. That might allow the Greens to be on the crossbench and recover from the damage done by the Metiria witch-hunt.

    But, if the trend continues, as The Fonz would say: “eeey.”

  2. Union city greens 2

    While a bit down with the news about the green’s share, I think the only way too look at this is with one eye at a positive slant in the battle to change the government. Momentum for the win.
    The overall results are what the majority on the left have been dreaming of for a while – labour mid thirties and the left block firming up.
    I’m confident the green slide isn’t terminal, so when they make up lost ground, and the gap between the main parties narrow during the campaign, it may not be out of the question that ruling without NZ1st is a real possibility.

    A sad green day has an upside. So when the emotions subside and people look at the bigger picture, the importance of staying loyal to our cause and voting green to keep labour honest is vitally important, now more than ever.

    Bandage, and get up to fight some more.

    • Carolyn_nth 2.1

      It’s a hard one. I’ll continue to support any party that campaigns strongly for the least well off, working and beneficiaries.

      But at the moment I am remembering that when the going was getting tough for Turei, Labour’s new leading team kicked her, and beneficiaries who had been given hope, under the bus. And that was a turning point.

      • Union city greens 2.1.1

        So the perfect response, even if for revenge, is to get as many green mps in coalition as possible. That hasn’t changed.

        • Carolyn_nth

          I’ll make my decision in a couple of weeks. The GP need to show me that their MPs will continue to campaign strongly against poverty, income and wealth inequality and to reform the social security system, etc.

          • Bill

            Over at checkpoint, Shaw gave an interview to Campbell. If that interview is anything to go by, then I’d say you needn’t have any concern.

            • Carolyn_nth

              Yes I saw that on my TV. But I’ll need to see more than that – a strong showing from GP spokespeople on these issues.

              • Bill

                Fair ’nuff.

                • dukeofurl

                  Thats the point, its the ‘Greens policy’ that you are most interested in. It was a huge political mistake for metira to make herself a poster child for the current hard welfare policies. A huge mistake no matter what the policy.

                  Her opponents will go hard after any wrinkles in her back story and if they find any its a ‘twofer’, they can destroy the politician and her policies.
                  Its stunning that metira hasnt seen this so much sooner.

          • LivinInTheBay

            The best way to help beneficiaries and combat wealth inequality, poverty etc. is by creating an environment where there is strong employment growth, more jobs than there are people so that to find someone you have to pay them well.

            Getting people working does a number of other things – it shows their family/community etc. that they can do better, helps with self esteem, and that’s not even taking into account financial benefits.

            So which party is going to be able to do all that? Or is it better to just throw money at people and expect them to do better?

            • Carolyn_nth

              it’s necessary for both an environment that supports workers, living wages, etc, plus supports those in need of social security.

              To do one without the other, divides the least powerful into deserving and undeserving, and, in the current cultural climate, risks reinforcing the demonisation of those unable to work for whatever reason.

      • NewsFlash 2.1.2

        Carolyn _nth

        There are many ways of supporting beneficiaries besides increasing benefits, I witnessed during the Clark era one of the biggest changes for long term beneficiaries that I have ever witnessed, and do know what that was?

        It was work opportunities, I lived in an area of the highest unemployment in the country, and when NZ’s unemployment rate got down to 2.7%, my local area was still 10%. The long term beneficiaries had obtained jobs for the first time in their lives, and when I spoke to them, they were overjoyed, they now were in charge of their own futures, able to cloth the kids, buy that car, put food on the and no interference from WINZ, it changed their whole lives for the better.

        They were now contributing to the economy and had found, finally, independence for themselves and their families, along with that came pride an d fulfillment.
        My point is, stop importing people we don’t need, aim for FULL employment with policies that drive towards that outcome, and it will mean that there is more funding for those who can’t work, and more for Health and Education(the biggest investment in NZs future).

        • Carolyn_nth

          Some of that I agree with. However, not all beneficiaries are able to work, either temporarily or permanently.

          So they bennie-bashing punitive welfare system also needs to be changed. Currently, some terminally ill people are being pressured to look for work.

          • NewsFlash

            Yes I’m aware of that, and no one should expect them to work if they can’t, but we have an army of able workers who would love to be able to work for a Fair wage, but the huge migrant import has deliberately undermined the employment market and wages, the Nats love it, but it’s really bad for NZ and the economy.

            It will take time to repair the bad things the Nats have imposed on Nzers, but change should incremental.

            You realise that during the Clark years, that there was never once a case of public bene bashing, it’s something rwnj’s get a kick out of, lack of empathy, just hope they haven’t affected too many Kiwi’s, although I know many inlaw rellies love to put the boot in, Key changed NZs way of thinking for the worse, NZ is a much better place than that.

            • Carolyn_nth

              Yeah. There wasn’t as much overt bennie-bashing in Clark’s time. But Labour still followed a tough on beneficiaries line of policies – pandering to the undermining of beneficiaries.

              They didn’t want to look to supportive of beneficiaries. They didn’t do enough to improve the system. NACTs got in and tightened the screws even further.

              • NewsFlash

                There wasn’t any. full stop.

                Unfortunately, in the real world, there are people who will take advantage of any situation and rip the system off, I’m not defending what happened, but any Govt has to make sure the recipients of welfare are valid, make it to easy and pay too much, every one will want to be on it, the other aspect is if you pay too much you risk alienating those who do work for a living.

                Imho, the way in which beneficiaries are treated is appalling, humiliation and disrespect is a common right wing way of deterring applicants, is it right?, no way.

                We need to work out a better system, that is respectful towards people applying for a benefit, fair and smart enough to discriminate those who
                don’t qualify.

                • Bill

                  …in the real world, there are people who will take advantage of any situation and rip the system off.

                  Lovely bit of projection there NewsFlash. Lovely.

                  • yep horrible sentiment from flashy there

                  • LivinInTheBay

                    But he’s right….the Turei case is a prime example. Like it or not there are people that rip the system off.

                    He’s also right the the government has to make sure that recipients are valid.

                    Here’s another point that people miss – welfare should be below minimum wage otherwise there is no incentive to find work. Sure there are people who can’t work due to disability/injury etc. and those people need and deserve our help. Others who are fit and able to work should work.

                    • weka

                      So why set benefits for people who can’t work below the poverty line? (as was the case for Turei).

                    • Sabine

                      and what if there is no work?
                      they should move to where there is work?
                      and what if there are no houses?
                      they should live in cars?

                      what is all this whinging about the ‘automation of work’ putting people out of work?

                      no welfare should be set at a point where people can have a minimum of living standard, i.e. pay the rent, electricity, water and food. and maybe have a dollar or two for sanitary products so that the girls can go to school when they have their menstruation, and maybe for a pair of sports shoes so that the boys can play soccer/rugby, and maybe even a dollar or two for a birthday present and cake. so that people on welfare can still be socially active as that is good for the mind and heart.

                      with your attitude it is no wonder people people get ill, mentally and spiritually ill.

                    • LivinInTheBay []

                      But there is work isn’t there. Unemployment has dropped to quite a low point.

                      And yes people should move to where there is work. I did it. I moved to somewhere I could get a job and eventually upskilled and got a better one.

                      What you are asking welfare to do is to provide a lifestyle. Which isn’t its intention. If you’re part of society you should contribute to society. Is it hard? Yes it is. But that shower isn’t stop people trying to be better.

                      What’s more, the less people on welfare, the higher the tax take, the less that gets paid out, so more could be spent in other areas – like education, health and law and order.

                    • One Two []

                      I won’t spend time addressing the falsehoods in your comment, as there are too many

                      Which is what happens when there is no truth in the words that were written.

                      You ‘didn’t do it’…you made it all up…

                      Have a word with yourself…

                    • KJT []

                      There are only plenty of jobs if you count one hour a week, as work! As National does.

                    • McFlock

                      I think you did yourself in when you said that “welfare should be below minimum wage otherwise there is no incentive to find work”.

                      Firstly, minimum wage should be the minimum needed to live reasonably. Anything less than that means that you’re expecting beneficiaries to live at an unreasonable level.

                      Secondly, most people don’t need an “incentive” to work. They want to work, to participate in society, to contribute in some way. All your comment does is say that you think the bulk of people are lazy and shiftless.

                      Your contempt for people warps your social policy ideas.

        • weka

          “My point is, stop importing people we don’t need, aim for FULL employment with policies that drive towards that outcome, and it will mean that there is more funding for those who can’t work,”

          That’s not how it works unfortunately. There is no cap on the welfare budget (unlike Health), so when unemployment drops there should be an increase in beneficiaries getting assistance. We know this didn’t happen under Clark, and that Labour at that time removed the needs based hardship grant and capped the replacement. They also created WFF which actively excluded beneficiaries.

          Full employment (whatever the looks like in today’s world) is necessary but not sufficient. We have to transform welfare too. That’s what the Greens are on about.

          • NewsFlash

            I don’t disagree with you over welfare payments, and solo parents were probably bearing the brunt of that, but in my lifetime, I have never seen a perfect Govt that provided all things for people, but the Clark did more for NZ than any Govt in the last 40 yrs, I didn’t agree with everything they did, but I sure as hell preferred them to the alternative, yes, National.

            It’s been so long that we had a Govt that actually provided for a majority of NZers that we’ve forgotten what it even looks like, and no matter who wins the next election, the complaints from the public will not abate.

            I come from a solo parent family, so I know personally how difficult it is, a family of six kids, I can remember my mother only having 20c to last the rest of the week, I could tell you stories that most today would shudder, it was a lot harder then that it is now.

            • Korero Pono

              Bloody rubbish. That is all, rubbish.

              • dukeofurl

                Yet you fell for Metiras flawed story ?

                Anyway a government had to govern from the middle, any attempt to do it just for your narrow base is called Trumpism

  3. NewsFlash 3

    The Greens can recover, its not all bad, a week in politics is very long time ( and we’ve just seen that) and you never know what’s around the corner, we all must remain optimistic, the election is still five weeks away.

  4. Ad 4

    It’s not enough to just slosh vote around between Labour, Greens, and NZFirst.

    Labour still needs to launch policies that actively take votes off National. They aren’t.

    Labour is clearly good at generating policies that tax us more, and promise more from the state by raising our taxes.

    That is not going to get votes off National.

    I want to see Labour come out with a tax policy that aggressively takes it to National.
    Like lowering income tax for those under $75,000 right down.
    LIke 0% income tax or the lowest brackets.

    Ardern is not going to win this on Shiny New Car Smell.

    • greywarshark 4.1

      You don’t mention secondary tax, reduction of the clawback on beneficiaries so that they can never get ahead no matter how much extra piece work they do.
      Also re organisation of GST so it is split off to various purposes in regions, giving them some funds for infrastructure and supporting small business initiatives and jobs.
      Taking tax off interest that is below $50.
      Going some way to taking the major burden of tax off disposable income, and putting it more onto discretionary income.
      Charging on petrol and diesel tax to pay for rail so that free roads contribute to the rail system that is starved of funds.

    • Wayne 4.2


      How would that tax policy “aggressively take it to National”?

      National already has a tax reduction policy on the two bottom rates, that Labour opposed.

      Jacinda Arden would have to dump a large part of Labour’s other policies on WWF, etc to make this affordable. Cutting the bottom two rates is enormously expensive, since they affect everyone.

      It seems to me that Labour and National have already made their big spend policy choices for this election. For Labour it is more government spending generally (WWF, health, education, public transport, environment, police, social housing etc). For National it is a mixture of tax cuts and government spending. In both cases they add up to a similar figure, though Labour’s is a bit higher since they delay paying debt.

      Jacinda has hinted at a new tax package, but it is one of a new top rate on those over say $150,000. It won’t generate anything near enough to reduce the bottom rates.

      Yes, Labour has changed its leader with obvious positive effects. But she is limited in how much she can change policy, without looking like it is all made up on the hoof.

    • NewsFlash 4.3


      Cutting tax doesn’t solve anything, it just fucks the country economically, increasing employment rates and pay rates are far, far more important, more people with more money is the only solution.

      • Ad 4.3.1

        As you can see above, cutting tax is a major problem for both the left and the right of politics. It seems harder for the left.

        I don’t think Ardern has much choice but to put fresh policies out there, particularly on tax.

        Because there’s two parts to attractive policy in an election:

        how to redistribute taxes raised


        how to make people wealthier

        Labour only have the first bit.

        • WILD KATIPO

          We used to have a very effective progressive tax system ,- and plenty of cash for a world class health and education system. None of this sort of apologists bullshit about how we cannot afford this or that.

          Frankly I’m sick to bloody death of hearing all the excuses about ‘why we cant’.

          The fact is this , plain and simple : all this bloody bullshit about lack of funding came hot on the heels of Douglas and his neo liberalism. It is the DIRECT RESULT of treating hospitals and educational facility’s LIKE A BUSINESS.

          As for the schools rotting in Northland and degraded hospitals that 33 years ago were run efficiently , – again , – a DIRECT RESULT of the neo liberals deliberate under-funding to pave the way for private education / health systems.

          We operated a Keynesian system before NOT a neo liberal one. We were considered world class in those and many fields.

          And how was it funded?

          By MAKING SURE that top earners and these take all – give nothing corporate’s and multinational bastards paid their fair bloody share. And that means company taxes have to go back up , and these piratical pricks need to be chased down , forced to pay their dues and laws passed so they can no longer hide behind their trusts and their offshore accounts.

          • Ad

            Both National and Labour are promising to go harder after the corporations who contribute little.

            In the end the voter with their ballot paper is going to ask a pretty important question that Labour better have a really direct (as opposed to indirect) answer to:

            What’s in it for me?

            • WILD KATIPO

              Whats in it for me ?

              For a kick off, – no more of this melodrama about why things cant be done. Basic things that make a country work – like infrastructure , and your health education etc. That’s the collective benefit.

              No more story’s of long waiting lists , shortages , schools crumbling down around our ears , no more bulldust about why housing cant be fixed, no more using the bloody cops as a political football.

              All that’s been done for the last 3 decades is underfunding , allocating funds to one outfit and starving the other. And whats the root cause of all this bullshit?

              Lack of adequate taxation to raise the coffers. Its that plain and simple. Basic.

              Whats in it for me ?

              Why has the price of items steadily increased while wages are far out of whack with the actual costs of living?

              So there’s another answer . And another answer as to who rigged the system and for what reason. A good clue as to that is groups like the NZ Initiative ( Business Roundtable ) and Ruth Richardson and her 1991 Employment Contracts Act.

              Ken Douglas, then president of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, recalled in the 1996 documentary Revolution:

              The Employment Contracts Act was deliberately intended to individualise the employment relationship. It was a natural outcome of the ideological propaganda of rugged individualism, of self-interest and greed and the appeal to individuals that you could find better for you by climbing over the tops of your colleagues, your mates, and so on. Ruth Richardson was very clear, very blunt, very honest about its purpose. It was to achieve a dramatic lowering of wages, very, very quickly.[5]

              Ruthanasia – Wikipedia


              If people really think a miserable tax cut at the expense of a shitty broken down health and education system is worth it along with all the other areas necessary for a functioning society , – well go ahead , – knock your selves out.

              Just don’t bleat and cry and try to get all philosophical about why it is when the reasons are blatantly obvious.

              • Ad

                Very sweet and predictable, but none of that will persuade a loyal National voter.

                That’s the task ahead for Ardern.

                • Yep ,… you remember when we used to hear the excuse about ‘ a lot of pain now but then we will reap the benefits later. ?

                  Bullcrap !

                  They never had ANY intention of equal wealth distribution. Its been 33 years now and we are still waiting.

                  So here’s a little something of their own medicine back … how about Labour , or any other party say to these characters … ‘you will feel a little pain now, but you will reap the benefits later’ – and reintroduce a progressive tax system. And adjust GST to the lowest earner if you still insist on having it. Better still , abolish it.

                  Then we can start having a look at these third world wages Bill English is so proud about as the economy is so ‘ strong’ and we are living in the ‘ brighter future’…

                  I tell you something… owners of large businesses are the minority. Middle earners and workers are not . You want a few more soft National voters?

                  Give em a pay rise instead of a tax cut and govt backed job security instead .

                  That’ll bring in your soft National voters.

                  I can see the neo liberal scumbags running for cover even as it is suggested.

                  • Jerko

                    WK! You write well and are better informed than most. Did you submit some of your ideas on tax reform to Labour after the last election when they called for people to do that and get on their committees to write their policy’s? They have been working on that for a while. I made a few suggestions. Like having ACC funded Trauma centers. Currently trauma occupies a huge amount of public hospital space and other surgery is regularly deferred because of trauma. The way they fund the Public Hospitals according to my understanding is that ACC bulk funds it for trauma. Including ACC operating lists at Burwood Hospital. Now this is a good thing because it stops ACC propping up the Private Sector but they are not funding Public the same way they do the Private. There is a shortfall in funding. So that needs to change. Labour are looking at that issue as I have given them my limited knowledge gained from working in that system. The Burwood model is very efficient and is of very high standard. It needs to be promoted and extended throughout the country. National notoriously have had no policies and/or steal the Labour Party ones as soon as they are made public. People like yourself need to get in there and get your ideas promoted. I believe they should bring back the old MOW for a start. They used to get whole villages built in weeks. As you have pointed out its all because of ” what’s in it for me”

          • LivinInTheBay

            Please can you tell me what ‘their fair bloody share’ is? Considering these people you castigate already pay more tax than most others both directly and indirectly (via businesses they run and staff they employ in those businesses).

            Round the world our business tax rate is among the highest, and you want to increase it further, potentially making NZ less competitive in a global market.

            Make it too hard for Google, Apple, Facebook, andnothers could even get to the point where they pack up heir bags and bugger off. Not that I do not agree with hem needing to pay tax on profit they derive from this market – of course they do. But that said, it should be at a rate that compares with the rest of the world.

            • WILD KATIPO

              One particular authoritative site I often quote is this one.

              New Right Fight – Who are the New Right?

              I see you focus on the taxation issue.

              We have a wage issue as well.

              We have a funding issue aka things like health / education.

              Read that site by Hugh Price ( of Hugh Price Publishing ) and you will see who , why , – and how New Zealand was subverted under Roger Douglas from 1984 onward’s. The problems we have today are a DIRECT CONSEQUENCE of the neo liberal reforms.

              Essentially it is all to do with wealth redistribution , – upwards. And everything to do with the plundering of the Commons wealth.

              Please read and take on board the writings of Hugh Price. It is the one of the most graphic , easy to read and understand sites for NZ’s unique circumstances I have seen , – free from difficult jargon or long wordy exercises in explaining the Genesis of Douglas’s treason.

              It is directly relevant to where we find ourselves today and , more importantly , – why.

            • KJT

              Make it too hard for google, Facebook and co here, someone will just start a home grown version. Or do you have so little faith in Capitalism. Do you idiots ever have an original thought?

            • KJT

              So they should because they use most of the tax payer provided resources. But, in reality they don’t. The bulk of all tax is paid by PAYE payers on incomes between 50 and 70k. School teachers, machinists, technicians and Gp’s.

      • Tricledrown 4.3.2

        The sugar hit of tax cuts hides the long term weaknesses in the economy with less employment
        From technology advances .
        Then this countries Reliance of commodities which are cyclical and prone to droughts floods and bio incursions.
        Access to retraining to tertiary education is a no brainer.
        Auckland gridlock is not being addressed by National ,
        National are just putting bandaids on festering wounds as usual and hoping enough voters are being sucked in by tax cuts.
        Businesses are losing 25% + of profitability due to Nationals laissez faire approach.
        Even the Greens have a better policy on fixing Aucklands gridlock,by building rail to the Airport before the Americas Cup ,we will be the laughing stock of the world when all the attention is focused on NZ because no one can get anywhere.

  5. Hanswurst 5

    It looks rather as though Labour has drawn off support from the Greens and NZF. Given that the change in Labour leadership is already definitely registering in these polls, as evidenced by the preferred PM stats, there is no solid basis for ascertaining whether or not the Turei affair has made any significant contribution to the Greens’ fall. That the numbers are being sold that way by Newshub is simply further evidence of an agenda against left-wing policy.

    • Carolyn_nth 5.1

      I was just going to say that. If the poll is to be believed as an indication of the way public sentiment is going, Labour looks to have taken a similar proportion of votes from NZF and the GP.

      The support of most other parties remains about the same as the last poll.

      • Jerko 5.1.1

        Yes but, if you read some of the comments on Jacindas FB page there are quite a few young people out there who say they have voted for National in the last few elections but are now going to vote for Labour/ Jacinda. Not wishing to judge these individuals but it seems they are swayed by youth and personality. They were probably Key supporters. We may see a lot more Party vote for Labour this time which will give them the numbers required to lead outright. Because they like Jacinda but will still vote for their National Candidate. Time will tell.

    • The Lone Haranguer 5.2

      The Nats were pushing the “unreliable circus/joined at the hip” line thick and fast and it was sticking enough that the Nats werent leaking and significant support to Labour.

      Turei walking the plank tonight has removed that direction of attack. So maybe in the next poll, Labour will pull some Nat supporters.

      Meanwhile ToP and the other minor parties have been completely starved of oxygen for two weeks now. The Greens panicked today and the small parties will be panicking too.

  6. mosa 6

    Now if Labour can start taking support from the National party and move Winston down another 4-6 points then we have a real contest.

    Labour needs to match National and move ahead in polling numbers the next 4 weeks and be the largest party.

    The Greens will recover and i hope will be part of the next government.

    • Hanswurst 6.1

      I suspect that the appearance of a shift by the Labour Party into the mid-to-upper thirties will siphon off some of the National vote that sees polls as an indication of which party is getting things right. I’m talking about a contingent of semi-interested voters who see a poll and think, “Oh, so-and-so is rating well, they must be doing something right”. If that starts happening, then the effect could very well snowball for Jacinda Ardern, like it once seems to have for John Key. My feelings towards that prospect are decidedly mixed.

      • ScottGN 6.1.1

        I agree, there’s a real possibility for momentum to start to build around Jacinda. Voters on the margins of National may well start to peel off if it looks like Labour is moving into a more commanding position.

      • Dennis Frank 6.1.2

        Yeah, the sheeple effect. Some random movement by one affects others similarly, & via contagion they all end up heading in the same direction feeling confident that it’s the safe one.

        The UMR poll has the Ardern effect significantly greater than the Reid poll. The parity of the drop of NZF & the Greens is striking. The spinners who are interpreting the Greens drop as due to the outrage about Metiria have no evidence in these polls to prove themselves right. I predicted a significant drop due to her but in the confluence of the two factors looks like the Ardern effect far outweighs the other…

  7. Eco maori 7

    Don’t worry to much about polls as the party that’s in power manipulate all of the data to make them look good we will have go get every one to vote

  8. ScottGN 8

    I wonder why and how UMR polls keep getting leaked?

  9. Michael 9

    Anthony Robins – I detect a whiff of patronisation in your post. Don’t forget that Labour’s surge in the polls only happened because your caucus replaced its leader; it certainly hasn’t come out with progressive policies that will help ordinary New Zealanders handle the challenges of life in a 21st century world. The “National-lite” charge still applies to Labour and, without some substance, that sudden popularity will collapse jsut as quickly.

    • Hanswurst 9.1

      Unless, of course, “National lite” is exactly what voters are looking for. Don’t forget that we’re talking about an electorate that bought National as being “Labour lite” in 2008, and kept voting the party in because John Key. I think it’s a very real possibility that the greatest and most enduring appeal in the political environment of contemporary NZ is to be achieved through presenting “status quo lite” (whatever the status quo happens to be) plus a leader with widespread on-camera appeal.

      • Incognito 9.1.1

        I think you’re spot on but I have no idea how to reconcile this with the supposed appetite for change and so-called rising anti-establishment sentiments. Or with the fact that neoliberalism is apparently on its deathbed.

        Does “contemporary NZ” include the Precariat, the poor, the disabled, the mentally and physically sick? I thought the answer would be clear & easy but it seems I might have been wrong.

        Status quo lite = status quo.

        • Hanswurst

          All valid musings and I don’t really have any answers. My above comment is as it is largely because of two contributing factors:

          1. I’m jaded and generally pessimistic in my electoral expectations. I would love to see a permanent end to the prevailing liberal orthodoxy. While I have paid considerable attention to Sanders and especially Corbyn, as well as the Brexit Trump votes (the latter slightly less so, because Trump’s election to the office of US president was an artefact of the US electoral system, whereas he came second in the popular vote), I am sceptical of their applicability to NZ elections. NZ has both a different electoral system and a different media environment from the UK, and this seems to be reflected both in the nature of the NZ Labour party and the attitudes of hte electorate.

          2. I don’t live in NZ, and haven’t done for about one and a half decades, so my analysis, if you can call it that, is very much that of a foreigner looking on with considerable interest.

          In terms of your statement that “status quo lite” = status quo, I absolutely agree, and think that it’s one of the great travesties of political media packaging. My use of the expression “status quo lite” referred purely to the attitudes I perceive (or guess at) within the electorate, not to any substantive policy.

          • Incognito

            All good and thanks for the reply.

            • Michael

              Isn’t it the job of progressive political leadership to present alternatives to the status quo? There isn’t much evidence of Labour doing so, although i have to say the hysterical right-wing reaction to Labour’s fresh water policy (which I think is a good one) illustrates the difficulty faced by anyone wishing to disturb the status quo in any direction. Of course, Labour could have spent the last nine years in opposition developing alternative policies, and working with its grassroots members to refine them, but it chose not to. Talented and able as Jacinda Ardern is, it’s asking too much of her to run a campaign that appeals to anyone outside Labour’s target market (metropolitan, middle to lower-middle class mortgagors or aspiring mortgagors).

              • Incognito


                Not so sure about the water policy; water should not be treated as a commodity and royalties (FFS) is simply buying into this capitalist framework that everything, incl. the environment, is for sale and profit-taking, and ownership, of course. Not impressed so far.

  10. infused 10

    What you don’t suspect it seems, is that Labour will be going after the Greens, in an attempt to remove them so Labour+NZF is an easier choice.

    You watch.

    • red-blooded 10.1

      Don’t be paranoid, infused. Labour and the Greens are campaigning separately and each is keen to build their own vote, but that doesn’t mean they’re “going after” each other.

      When the Greens surged in the previous poll at the expense of Labour, did you make accusations that the Greens were going after Labour? I said at the time that we had to try to grow the left vote and not just swap votes between the two parties, and I’ll say that again now, but I don’t recall too many accusations like yours.

    • Hanswurst 10.2

      I agree, although I don’t think there’s any “will be going after the Greens” about it. Ardern’s choice of policies to highlight for maximum advantage while a warm spotlight shines on her freshly-minted leadership already is going after the Greens by trying to hoover up the Green vote.

      I’m not convinced by your statement about their motives, though. Labour has no reason to want to rely on Winston Peters. Past experience suggests that that is a risky strategy for winning the coming election, and also a risk to them in government if they do. I think that Labour are going after the Green vote simply because that is where they see the best chances of pulling over votes and building momentum.

      • red-blooded 10.2.1

        So, Hanswurst, were the Greens going after the Labour vote when they chose their welfare policy as the main one to highlight at their AGM? Their vote jumped up at the expense of Labour – did that mean they were being predatory and cynical? The shift away from the Greens in this poll is pretty much equivalent to the percentage that shift from Labour to them in the previous poll. It’s probably not the same people moving, but it’s a similar percentage. Votes move around – Labour is keen to attract as many votes as possible, but they’re certainly not trying to “hoover up” Green votes in particular.

        As for Ardern’s choice of policies to highlight – the water and Auckland transport policies were established months ago and I’m pretty sure the plan to roll them out this week was pretty well-established. Yes, Ardern has reviewed and tweaked some policies, but I don’t think either of these was changed.

        • Hanswurst

          So, Hanswurst, were the Greens going after the Labour vote when they chose their welfare policy as the main one to highlight at their AGM?

          No, they were promoting the sort of policy that was once Labour’s bread and butter, but hasn’t been for a long time.

          In any case, I don’t see the need for your mild aggression. I don’t have a problem with Labour chasing the Green vote. The Greens have neither a monopoly on nor a God-given right to the most attractive environmental policy, and there are a lot of variables in play. Considering that they are two parties trying to be seen as viable together, it’s obvious that there are upsides as well as downsides their occupying similar turf. It was good to see Shaw welcoming Labour’s policies, too. That sort of situation has been handled with considerably less aplomb at times in the lead-up to previous elections.

          • red-blooded

            I’m not sure why asking you a question is seen as mildly aggressive, Hanswurst. Regardless, I think it’s interesting that you see the motives of the two parties so differently. Both parties have agreed to campaign separately and of course each wants the most support possible. Labour has longstanding policy priorities that include water and transport. There’s nothing unexpected or aggressive about announcing those policies.

            • Hanswurst

              The point I was trying to make was actually that what Infused refers to “going after the Greens” is in fact very likely going after the Green vote, and neither a betrayal nor an act of aggression, but simply a part of trying to get elected.

              • Dennis Frank

                Both major parties have been responding to the public mood exemplified in trending majority support for prominent Green policy initiatives by adopting or copying Green policies. The Green Party must become more adept at riding the wave. Playing the zero-sum game with Labour hasn’t worked as the Green caucus expected. They need to get smart pronto.

    • Tricledrown 10.3

      Confused desperate diatribe Labour want more than one term.

  11. Doggone it. Labours starting to build and that’s a real positive… OK then , its the Greens need shoring up . Just changed my vote for September. I’m voting Green.

    One way or tuther , – National has to go.

    • SDCLFC 11.1

      If you want National to go then vote Labour.
      Every vote the Greens get comes from Labour, who lose another one to Winston.

      • Tricledrown 11.1.1

        Winston has lost as much support as the greens to Labour slicfcr

        • SDCLFC

          Yes, which agrees with my point – when labour is up they take votes from winston – when labour is down, it is because the greens are taking votes from them and at the same time winston gets them too

    • ScottGN 11.2

      Your vote for the Greens will be most useful if lit looks like they may be losing more support (a real possibility after yesterday’s events which weren’t captured in the polling) and sliding towards the 5% threshold.

  12. savenz 12

    It should be obvious now that the 3 opposition parties need to chip at National support – not just rearrange the votes depending on what smear is going on at the time in the MSM.

    Remember the ‘safe seat’ of Northland? If the message is presented well enough (aka protest vote against National) then people will vote for it. Very clear messaging, instead of ping pong of the polls. Last poll Andrew Little under the gun dropping his poll support and invent new headlines, now Metiria and Greens dropping when surprisingly her revelation actually initially increased Greens vote. If NZ First starts gaining before the election probably Winston Peters will get some beat up, but right before it.

    Remember the very sudden revelation against Colin Craig at the last minute last election? Basically something very odd happens to anyone who seems to be gaining on the Natz, or who has a dangerous message, such as giving beneficiaries enough money to compete in our low wage economy.

  13. Exkiwiforces 13

    Just remember polls are like assholes everyone has one?

  14. ScottGN 14

    Labour gains 13 new MPs on the Newshub poll including Priyanca Radhakrishnan, Willow-Jean Prime, Kiri Allan, Greg O’Connor, Tamati Coffey and Willie Jackson regardless of how they do in their respective constituency battles. Good news.

  15. Chris 15

    I wonder if this poll indicates a shift towards the left? Or is Labour merely taking votes from the Greens and NZ First? Adding up their losses gives Labours gain.

    • red-blooded 15.1

      Since when is NZ1st “left”? And, to quote Shaw and Turei when speaking about the last poll, you can’t “take” votes, because no party owns them. The spike in the Greens’ vote came from Labour; it looks like that’s been balanced out by people who’ve switched from Green (down 3.8%) to Labour and from NZ1st (down 4.7) to Labour. I agree we need to try to take down National’s share of the vote (in fact I’ve been trying to argue that for quite a while on this site). It does look like about .5% may have come from the Nats, but we definitely need to aim for more.

  16. SDCLFC 16

    Who cares about the Greens. The reason Labour is back is because of the shrunken Green Vote – Labour hasn’t taken anything from National yet but now they have a chance to because they can attack with some strength and momentum.
    The only thing that is going to help the people Turei was campaigning for is a change of Government and that’s not happening without Labour threatening 40 and that means taking votes from the Greens.
    This will give Ardern the space to move them left – they haven’t been able to do that – 3 weeks from the election, free tertiary education to get not just the students but their parents too.
    Sorry, but Greens being down is the worst news National could have hoped for, and that means its’s a good thing.

  17. swordfish 17

    Comparisons (2011-17)

    UMR (One Month out)

    UMR Aug 2017 ………. Aug 2014 ……….. Oct 2011
    Nat 43 …………………………. 45 ……………………. 50
    Lab 36 …………………………. 27 ……………………. 28
    NZF 8 …………………………… 6 ………………………. 3
    Green 8 ………………………. 15 ……………………. 13

    Newshub Reid Research (One Month out)

    NRR Aug 2017 ……. Aug 2014 ………. Oct 2011
    Nat 44 ………………………… 48 ………………….. 57
    Lab 33 ………………………… 29 ………………….. 27
    NZF 9 …………………………… 5 ……………………. 2
    Green 8 ………………………. 13 ………………….. 10

    NRR Preferred PM
    NRR Aug 2017 ………………….. Aug 2014 ………………. Oct 2011
    English 28 ……………………….. Key 44 ……………………. Key 55
    Ardern 26 ……………………….. Cunliffe 10 ………………. Goff 6

  18. ankerawshark 18

    I also had a look on Yougov polling regarding Corbyns rise in the polls from two months out from the election. Week by week it was nothing like we have seen in the last week for Labour here. It was a gradual lift, sometimes three points up, one back. No dramatic shifts………………..This is different. I am hoping it continues.

    Jacinda’s performance IMO has been impeccable.

  19. Michael 19

    “The risk is that a lot of those who were inspired by her will now say fuck it and not vote at all.” That is precisely what will happen in my case and that of a lot of other people I know. Labour gives us no reason to bother voting, while most of us aren’t ready to empower Winston’s populist xenophobia.

  20. ankerawshark 20

    Michael @19………..good luck with another three years of National then.

  21. ScottGN 21

    Everyone is assuming a straight up swap of votes from NZF to Labour and National steady. But, perhaps, it’s more complicated that that? Maybe we’ve seen the start of soft National urban voters moving to Labour but that’s been masked by a move of provincial voters shifting back to National from NZF?

  22. tas 22

    I think the Greens will drop a bit more before they begin to recover. The latest poll only partly reflects the events of the past few days.

    Labour+Greens are 41.4% — still 3% behind National. If that gap closes and Jacinda passes Bill in the preferred PM polls, then I think the election becomes a tossup.

    It comes down to who Winston picks. I think he will go with whichever block is most credible (in terms of seats and popularity and likelihood of not falling apart during the term), which is currently still National, but could easily change.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Poroporoaki: Titewhai Te Huia Hinewhare Harawira
    Ka papā te whatitiri, Hikohiko ana te uira, wāhi rua mai ana rā runga mai o Huruiki maunga Kua hinga te māreikura o te Nota, a Titewhai Harawira Nā reira, e te kahurangi, takoto, e moe Ka mōwai koa a Whakapara, kua uhia te Tai Tokerau e te kapua pōuri ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 days ago
  • Enhanced Task Force Green Approved following Cyclone Hale
    Carmel Sepuloni, Minister for Social Development and Employment, has activated Enhanced Taskforce Green (ETFG) in response to flooding and damaged caused by Cyclone Hale in the Tairāwhiti region. Up to $500,000 will be made available to employ job seekers to support the clean-up. We are still investigating whether other parts ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • General Election to be held on 14 October 2023
    The 2023 General Election will be held on Saturday 14 October 2023, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. “Announcing the election date early in the year provides New Zealanders with certainty and has become the practice of this Government and the previous one, and I believe is best practice,” Jacinda ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announces resignation
    Jacinda Ardern has announced she will step down as Prime Minister and Leader of the Labour Party. Her resignation will take effect on the appointment of a new Prime Minister. A caucus vote to elect a new Party Leader will occur in 3 days’ time on Sunday the 22nd of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Trade and Agriculture Minister to attend World Economic Forum and Global Forum for Food and Agricult...
    The Government is maintaining its strong trade focus in 2023 with Trade and Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor visiting Europe this week to discuss the role of agricultural trade in climate change and food security, WTO reform and New Zealand agricultural innovation. Damien O’Connor will travel tomorrow to Switzerland to attend the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Government funding relief for flood-affected Wairarapa farmers and growers
    The Government has extended its medium-scale classification of Cyclone Hale to the Wairarapa after assessing storm damage to the eastern coastline of the region. “We’re making up to $80,000 available to the East Coast Rural Support Trust to help farmers and growers recover from the significant damage in the region,” ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Government provides support to flooded Tairāwhiti communities
    The Government is making an initial contribution of $150,000 to the Mayoral Relief Fund to help communities in Tairāwhiti following ex-Tropical Cyclone Hale, Minister for Emergency Management Kieran McAnulty announced. “While Cyclone Hale has caused widespread heavy rain, flooding and high winds across many parts of the North Island, Tairāwhiti ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Government support for flood-affected Gisborne Tairāwhiti farmers and growers
    Rural Communities Minister Damien O’Connor has classified this week’s Cyclone Hale that caused significant flood damage across the Tairāwhiti/Gisborne District as a medium-scale adverse event, unlocking Government support for farmers and growers. “We’re making up to $100,000 available to help coordinate efforts as farmers and growers recover from the heavy ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Monkeypox vaccination available to eligible people from next week 
    A vaccine for people at risk of mpox (Monkeypox) will be available if prescribed by a medical practitioner to people who meet eligibility criteria from Monday 16 January, says Associate Minister of Health Dr Ayesha Verrall.   5,000 vials of the vaccine have been obtained, enough for up to 20,000 ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago