What are we in for if National win?

Written By: - Date published: 9:55 pm, April 3rd, 2014 - 150 comments
Categories: election 2014 - Tags:

So apparently National has won the election.

At the moment, all the MSM political news is framed around Key being unbeatable, born to rule and how Labour, Cunliffe and the Left in general just don’t have the ‘right stuff’ to make it.

This fixation on the election is expected but it doesn’t particularly inform and it completely ignores what National is plotting for us if they win.

So what is this preordained National third term going to look like? What is a last gasp, National government going to do?

In 2011 they admitted in their campaign that they would be privatising state owned assets if reelected. That was a brazen move, somewhat risky and yet they won.

John Key was very vocal both before and after the election that the asset sales were well signaled and used that as a justification for going through with it even in the face of strong, popular opposition.

So far he has remained quiet about what he intends to do with a possible third term. I’ve heard that National’s backers have drawn up a wishlist and are tying it to donations and promises of campaign support, but so far nothing on the detail. I doubt it’ll be good news for most Kiwis.

My guess is they’ll be looking at further cuts to social services, decimating work rights and giving corporates even more free reign to rort the shit out of Kiwi consumers.

What do you think they’ll be gunning for?

150 comments on “What are we in for if National win? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. lurgee 1
    3 April 2014 at 10:21 pm

    I think it is a pretty safe assumption National will win the election, meaning they will be the largest party. Can anyone really see Labour surging to 40% and National falling below it? Unless John Key actually eats a live child during one of the TV debates, I mean?

    Whether they get to form another government is another matter, though I think Winston will Heed The Will Of The People and reluctantly – so reluctantly – allow himself to anoint John Key for a third term, in return for a few trifles.

    If Key has not really made much noise about what he plans on doing next term, neither has Labour. We have, effectively, no opposition. There is no sense of a movement straining to get into power with a burning reformist program to be implemented. Just another bunch of politicians waiting for their turn. their turn again, for far too many of them.

    • marty mars 1.1
      3 April 2014 at 10:52 pm

      “Unless John Key actually eats a live child during one of the TV debates, I mean?”

      They’d spin it, “forgetful PM mistakes baby for burger, says sorry if you were offended to nation by text from holiday home. meanwhile in destabilising news for the labour party…”

    • blue leopard 1.2
      4 April 2014 at 2:05 am

      If Key has not really made much noise about what he plans on doing next term, neither has Labour. We have, effectively, no opposition

      Nah, I think that we have a comment from someone who, effectively, has no ears.

      You are quite correct about Key having relayed no real plan, however Labour, the Greens and Mana have been sending out clear messages for quite some time as to their vision.

      Cunliffe has quite clearly stated that he understands at least some of the things that is causing major problems for New Zealander and that Labour intend to address them – things like wealth disparity, how governments need policies to encourage investment in productive enterprises and move people away from speculation, how this effects the amount of jobs in the country, that he understands how many people are not in good circumstances, either in work or out and that this needs to change, with encouraging more jobs and strengthening of work conditions. He has clearly spoken that he understands government actors need to be trustworthy and act in the interests of those who vote them in, (and it is clear that National can’t grasp this simple point) and therefore is addressing issues such as more transparency with the TPPA and changing the GCSB bill, so that such is in keeping with basic human rights.

      Greens and Mana consistently show that they would govern in a manner that they will consider people interests before narrow minded profiteering because they both know that simply aiming at profits is a theory that has failed the world over, and focussing on people issues leads to a country with more of everything, money, health and a flourishing environment all round.

      • lurgee 1.2.1
        4 April 2014 at 6:51 am

        Note I said Labour, not Cunliffe. Cunliffe is doing about as well as most people could in the role of leader of the Opposition. But the whole party seems possessed by a dreadful ennui. We would need a full frontal, continual assault on all departments. There’s no sense of energy or desperation to reclaim the government benches. Just a sense of casual drift, time serving and a vague hope that the Greens will somehow deliver an improbable ‘victory’ for Labour.

        (On cynical days, I suspect some are sitting this one out, giving Cunliffe a near singlehanded shot at an election that The Men In Gray Suits wrote of in about, oh, 2012 …)

        Labour has had six years (more if you include the final Clark years when the whole cabinet seemed to be transfixed by Key’s mesmeric eyes), three leaders and an endless stream of gaffes and corrupt behaviour by the Nats. And what is the result of all this? Praying to Saint Winston, again!

        I don’t think the electorate care who the leader is. They want ideas, big ones, and ones that relate to their lives. The TPPA and the GSCB whatsists might be of Great Interest to political obsessives, but most people don”t really care.

        • aerobubble 1.2.1.1
          4 April 2014 at 1:06 pm

          No sense of desperation. yeah, National will reap a collapse housing market, a run on the NZ dollar as China slows further and the promised recovery coming to an end (which is evitable however hard Key tries to spread the ChCh rebuild and maintain milk sales; aka Collins).

          Seriously though, the big picture, we stop pushing the boundaries of Science in the 70s when we started making result driven science grants. Essentially we started choosing engineers rather than scientists (about the same time the religion of science, the mysteries of the quantum world
          became a theology and maths became the word of God, we saw the rise of neo-liberal economics – the equivalent political preisthood). Now we are reaping the costs and risks, to the global economy (too much throttle on finite fuels, too much pollution (and abatement and unpredictable environmental costs)…

          …look you asked what will happen, Labour like National will try to do as little as possible and let the markets eat several earths. Naff said.

        • blue leopard 1.2.1.2
          4 April 2014 at 2:03 pm

          @ Lurgee,

          Mr Cunliffe is the leader of the Labour Party – the messages he conveys is Labour’s messages.

          Your comment spoke of the lack of ‘noise about what they plan on doing next term’. They have made noise, via Cunliffe, yet not solely Cunliffe.

          If you had spoken of a ‘lack of energy’ by Labour – I would perhaps have some agreement with you – I think Labour could be more energetic (although I don’t know what is going on behind the scenes and this is based on the poor coverage they are getting in our mainstream news sources) in general on viewing the parliament channel, I note they have been less energetic than the Greens over the years. Mana are pretty noisy on the streets. However your initial comment criticised a ‘lack of a plan’ and I think this is completely incorrect.

          As far as energy levels go, I think that Labour are improving and like the way that more of a variety of their ministers are appearing on News items, which seems to be a strategic move on their part – gives the impression of a team effort. I agree that they still could improve in this area of ‘energy’.

    • geoff 1.3
      4 April 2014 at 8:00 am

      though I think Winston will Heed The Will Of The People and reluctantly – so reluctantly – allow himself to anoint John Key for a third term, in return for a few trifles.

      Firstly, this post isn’t for people to push the line that National will govern after the election.

      Secondly, look at the latest Roy Morgan poll results.

      Thirdly, it is completely stupid and meaningless to say there is no opposition to National, of course there is opposition. Sounds like you’ve spent to much time reading nzherald.
      And Labour has made plenty of policy announcements. What has National announced?

      • aerobubble 1.3.1
        4 April 2014 at 1:09 pm

        Its the nagging belief that ACT protects the right of the wealthy to be above the law, that is what makes them so dangerous to individual liberty in NZ. Worse, there can now be no doubt, Whyte is now their leader, a lecturer in the dismal science, is a backdoor to Key’s ideological beliefs that Labour should connect him with more closely.

      • lurgee 1.3.2
        4 April 2014 at 5:30 pm

        First, I wasn’t aware we were supposed to push a ‘line.’ Are we not allowed to speak our own branes at The Standard?

        Second, the latest Roy Morgan shows precisely what I said – NZ First most likely holding the balance of power between National and a doubtful Labour / Green bloc. And in those circumstances, he will probably go with National, as (by far) the largest party. If it was close, he might go with Labour / Greens … but even then, I think being able to stymie the Greens would be too tempting. And on current polling, it isn’t going to be close because (important bit) Labour and the greens are separate parties. Some people round here seem to forget that.

        Third, there is this thing called hyperbole. When I say there has been no opposition (though I actually said effectively no opposition) it was obviously an exaggeration. But it contains a very big kernal of truth. Labour have been useless for the last 8 years or so. And there is little evidence of that changing.

        [lprent: No dark words from me. So you can assume you haven’t been transgressing behavior limits. ]

        • geoff 1.3.2.1
          4 April 2014 at 7:47 pm

          I never requested you to push a line, you pushed it yourself.

          On a post that was explicitly NOT about the supposed inevitable National victory and the first comment from you was about their supposed inevitable victory.

          If a right wing nut job was posing as leftwing in an attempt to derail the thread they would struggle to do a better job than yourself.

          • lurgee 1.3.2.1.1
            4 April 2014 at 8:22 pm

            Er … you complained that “this post isn’t for people to push the line that National will govern after the election.”

            Even though you titled it, “What are we in for if National win?” ??????????????????????

            Forgive me if I fail to understand how a thread about what are we in for if National win isn’t about the idea that National will govern after the election. Sorry, but the distinction is too subtle for my poor branes.

            You requested I desist from pushing a line. Even though even though the thread itself is about the very thing you requested I desist from pushing.

            Sorry, what was that you were saying about sandwiches and picnics?

            • geoff 1.3.2.1.1.1
              4 April 2014 at 8:33 pm

              I make no apologies for your lack of comprehension.

              Everybody else seems to have figured out what the post is about.

              The post is not about how National is going to win, the post is about what National might do IF they win.

              • lurgee …
                4 April 2014 at 8:44 pm

                Frantic arse-covering.

                What we might be in for if National win will largely depend on how they win.

                National on 53% is going to be rather different to National on 43%, don’t you think?

                And again, weasel words. “This post isn’t for people to push the line that National will govern after the election,” has evolved into, “The post is not about how National is going to win.”

                A de facto admission that the thread is – in its essence – about the idea that “National will govern after the election”.

                • geoff …
                  4 April 2014 at 8:53 pm

                  Frantic arse covering. Yep that about sums up your last few posts.

                  Learn to read before you comment.

                  I’m done with you.

        • lurgee 1.3.2.2
          4 April 2014 at 8:28 pm

          [lprent: No dark words from me. So you can assume you haven’t been transgressing behavior limits. ]

          I was commenting, ironically, on the implication that there is a sort of thoughtcrime in daring to suggest National might win. Even though Geoff himself titled the thread “What are we in for if National win?”

          How dare he push the line that National will govern after the election! Ungood! Doubleplusungood!

    • Tania 1.4
      4 April 2014 at 9:26 am

      We actually do not need to reach 40% to become government. It is understandable that people will think National will actually win because of all the media hype. One interesting thing is when Labour gets good polls they hype other left parties like NZfirst in today’s polls instead of mentioning labour. I believe labour will get in with the Green but it may be just with a slight majority like what national has today.

      • lurgee 1.4.1
        4 April 2014 at 5:40 pm

        The current poll suggests it will probably come down to Winston. And the likelihood is he will go with National if they are polling over 40% and Labour just over 30%.

  2. Will@Welly 2
    3 April 2014 at 10:33 pm

    Your assumption is far too kind. When Muldoon was in power, I had a dream/nightmare – New Zealand was genuinely divided into two nations, almost at war with itself. That was before the Springbok Tour.
    Now, I’d say we are a nation almost divided – by poverty, and a lack of opportunity. These last 6 years have been the worst, but really, Key has only built on the past 34.
    Muldoon left office, and he realised what he had done – that was never his intention. Douglas and Prebble seized control, and the rest is history.
    Read the Treasury papers – the National Government will not be selling off assets – no, that will be left to each Department. The Ministers hands will be clean. “Nothing to do with me.” Where have we heard that before? And with so many New Zealanders under the guise that less tax equals more freedom, watch Key and Co cut back on social services and benefits. Then once Kiwisaver is totally privatised, they’ll cut National Super. Key won’t, but he’ll set the wheels in motion.
    Oh, this guy is smart. And he doesn’t give a rats about the average mum’s and dad’s. Anyone who brought in to that spin, sure was hoodwinked.

  3. miravox 3
    3 April 2014 at 10:34 pm

    What do you think they’ll be gunning for?

    Greater privatisation of health services.

    • Mary 3.1
      4 April 2014 at 12:12 am

      …and education and welfare and anything else they can manage. The third term will be the time for Key’s unfinished business and will be when everyone understands that he’s no moderate.

      • miravox 3.1.1
        4 April 2014 at 12:37 am

        I agree Mary, they’ll put everything they can in the private sector. The health sector is overdue for an ideological shake-up courtesy of the NActs, I reckon. I wonder which lackey will get the job now Ryall is moving on?

  4. ianmac 4
    3 April 2014 at 10:38 pm

    The Roy Morgan Poll tonight has Labour/Greens at 45% and National at 43% and NZF at 5.5%. So not impossible for the gap to close further.
    But what’s up with Audrey? She has written the results of that Roy Morgan Poll in the Herald tonight. Wow! Suppose it will sink rapidly out of sight by morning.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11231762

    If National wins they will set out to destroy Education further by bringing in Bulk Funding and Performance Pay. They will cause class sizes to rise in spite of 3rd Degree focusing on the reasons that parents went with Charter Schools is because the class sizes were only 15. They paid their teachers about $16,000 more. But they do not have to follow the Curriculum nor comply with National Standards.
    So watch out Education!

    • Zorr 4.1
      3 April 2014 at 11:39 pm

      With regards that RM poll, the undecideds are up again as well and government confidence is down…

      “Of all electors surveyed 5.5% (up 1.5%) didn’t name a party.”

      I would say that the polling is not going to be going the way of National in the future – and this doesn’t even take in to account the natural bias of such polling towards over-representing the Right. No wonder National are pulling out all the stops this early.

      I personally think that if David can run a good race without stumbling again, we will be in with a real chance.

    • Awww 4.2
      4 April 2014 at 7:33 am

      I object to the lumping in of Labour with the Greens. Greens have clear stance of support for welfare, Labour do not.

      This is important because our welfare system is about to be corporatised WHEN National win a third term and aside from Mana & Green no other party seems to care.

      In the 2014 I’m voting Green to win, not to be an adjunct to an increasingly apathetic Labour party.

      • Enough is Enough 4.2.1
        4 April 2014 at 9:55 am

        +100

        If you want real change in 2014, you have only one option available to you….Green

      • lurgee 4.2.2
        4 April 2014 at 5:45 pm

        I do find the assumption that the Greens have to coalesce with Labour annoying. They don’t Labour froze them out in 2002 and 2005. Also, the Greens have their own interests to consider. Being associated with the wreck of the NZ Labour party doesn’t look like a strategic master-stroke. They might even think mitigating Nationals awfulness a better move than propping up the decaying corpse of Labour.

        • weka 4.2.2.1
          4 April 2014 at 6:01 pm

          Yeah, but you think that the GP are the enemy so it’s not surprising that you are promoting a vision that actually works against the GP.

          • lurgee 4.2.2.1.1
            4 April 2014 at 6:03 pm

            I think nothing of the kind.

            • weka 4.2.2.1.1.1
              4 April 2014 at 6:25 pm

              and yet in the past day you’ve made a handful of comments that read like anti-GP propaganda.

              • lurgee …
                4 April 2014 at 7:50 pm

                Oh, really? Quote them.

                I’m trying to imagine the decisions that the Green Party may have to make come the election – do they prop up a Labour Party polling 33%? Or offer ‘constructive opposition’ to National if the Nats’ master plan doesn’t quite work out?

                Only deluded fools think the Green’s support for Labour is a given. Why should it be, when Labour have been persistently swinish towards the Greens?

                • geoff …
                  4 April 2014 at 8:13 pm

                  Only deluded fools?

                  You’re a sandwich short of a picnic.

                  The Greens have made clear signals that they can work with Labour and that they won’t work with National.
                  As I said in openmike, it’s just as well an uncompromising person like you isn’t calling the shots otherwise you’d definitely be condemning kiwis to another 3 years of National nastiness.

                  Or maybe that’s what you want?

                  • lurgee …
                    4 April 2014 at 8:16 pm

                    Only deluded fools think the Green’s support for Labour is a given. Your own statement confirms mine: “The Greens have made clear signals that they can work with Labour …”

                    CAN work. Not WILL work.

                    • geoff …
                      4 April 2014 at 8:26 pm

                      So you’re actually arguing that the Greens might turn down the opportunity of being part of a leftwing coalition government because Labour just doesn’t seem like they’ve got it together?

                      And then after doing so they might just throw in with National?

                    • lurgee …
                      4 April 2014 at 8:36 pm

                      The greens will have to think about what is best for the Greens. That may include forming a coalition with Labour, and it may include refusing to be part of a coalition; especially if Labour are still stuck on 33% come the election and the line up of parties required to get to 50% looks unworkable. It might be in the strategic interests of the party to stay out.

                      And no, I haven’t suggested they will “just throw in with National”. ‘Constructive opposition’ was the phrase I used. Don’t try to put words in my mouth.

                    • geoff …
                      4 April 2014 at 8:44 pm

                      What a slippery fellow you are.

                    • lurgee …
                      4 April 2014 at 8:46 pm

                      What? I haven’t budged from my original position – the Greens might decide it is in their best interests not to form a coalition with Labour. And Labour and Labour supporters needs to accept that.

                      As for slippery, I am not the one inventing positions for other people.

    • The Real Matthew 4.3
      4 April 2014 at 11:33 am

      Bulk Funding was a huge success last time they tried it so we can only hope it makes a comeback.

      • lprent 4.3.1
        4 April 2014 at 2:57 pm

        Bulk Funding was a huge success last time…

        Sure was. Helped them to lose the next election.

        • Tracey 4.3.1.1
          4 April 2014 at 3:04 pm

          sent you an email from gen zero giving permission to make their koskinfs climate gaffe a guest post.

          • lprent 4.3.1.1.1
            4 April 2014 at 4:31 pm

            Yeah I am a bit remiss on everything to do with TS at present. Too much work and too little sleep.

            Almost done on the blasted bash scripts

  5. McFlock 5
    3 April 2014 at 10:46 pm

    Charter hospitals.

    Privatising schools and any remaining SOEs.

    Replacing WINZ with bonus-driven contracting companies.

    that sort of thing, I reckon

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:40 am

      Drilling mining and increased commercial exploitation of the conservation estate.

      Further embedding of toadies into public bodies: Teachers’ Council, EPA, etc. The continued replacement of independent bodies with ministerial appointments.

      Far more open relationship between political donations and legislative/regulatory favours.

  6. Labour_Supporter 6
    3 April 2014 at 10:47 pm

    No need to worry. As per latest Roy-Morgan poll, a Labour-Green-NZ First-Mana government is very much on the cards. So National won’t win.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1
      4 April 2014 at 10:12 am

      It’s National/Hairdo/Mr. Unclecousin/Craycray and Winston. That would be a real win for the right 😆

  7. Weepu's beard 7
    3 April 2014 at 10:49 pm

    ACC will go on the block.

    Oh, and a bronze statue of Sir John Key.

  8. blancwhite 8
    3 April 2014 at 11:00 pm

    “I’ve heard that National’s backers have drawn up a wishlist…”

    That’s a bold claim. Is it true or have you made this up? Who are the backers? Where did you hear this? It’s rather convenient that you don’t have any detail…….

    • Tracey 8.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:16 am

      I must say that sentence did put me in mind of WO and KB…

      • geoff 8.1.1
        4 April 2014 at 9:54 am

        I don’t reveal reveal my sources but consider this, right now is when National’s backers have the most leverage over their party, this is the time they write their election year shopping list.

  9. Clemgeopin 9
    3 April 2014 at 11:05 pm

    I am guessing that if National wins a third term, they will unleash very drastic pro capitalist, pro wealthy and pro-corporate polices as it will be their last golden opportunity to fulfill their ideology and agenda which they were a little careful with due to political expediency and to prevent huge public backlash. But you haven’t seen anything yet!

    If they do get a third time, I suspect they will move to…

    [1] Nationalise the Kiwi bank.
    [2] Stop or alter the Kiwi saver subsidy and the start up $1,000.
    ]3] Revamp the WFF payments making life harder for the low income families.
    [4] Introduce interest on student loans.
    [5] Hike up tertiary fees affecting students from poorer families.
    [6] Open more and more privately run charter schools with generous public funds.
    [7] Open vast amounts of land and sea for mineral and oil explorations.
    [8] Sign the TPP even if it will harm us in the long run.
    [9] Undermine the unions further and dilute worker’s rights even more.
    [10] Make life more profitable for the wealthy but less so for what key refers to as the ‘under class’.

    What do you think?

    That is my guess from what I have seen happen in the last two terms of this one seat majority (Banks/Dunne) coalition government. I am hoping and think that the majority of people will see through this evil government and vote them out on Sept 20 and help usher in a fairer, more enlightened and just Labour led government. Fingers crossed.

    • Lanthanide 9.1
      3 April 2014 at 11:14 pm

      They’ve said several times they won’t be privatising KiwiBank, and that they won’t be privitising any more assets in their next term.

      • Zorr 9.1.1
        3 April 2014 at 11:33 pm

        Aaaaaaand…? I am supposing you will now cite precedent where bullshit didn’t flow completely freely from the bowels of the National party? They have never met an asset that couldn’t be made better by flogging it off to their mates at fire sale prices

        • McFlock 9.1.1.1
          4 April 2014 at 12:11 am

          run ’em down, contract out to the private sector, buy from non-government suppliers even if the government still makes what they need.

          But I reckon they’ll sell a couple of things no matter what they say now.

        • Lanthanide 9.1.1.2
          4 April 2014 at 11:11 am

          They also said they won’t be putting up the pension age and have staunchly stuck to that (mis-guided) promise.

          • fisiani 9.1.1.2.1
            4 April 2014 at 7:08 pm

            National not raising the pension age and Labour raising the pension age will move Labour blue collar workers to National up and down the country. It will be a defining difference.

      • Naturesong 9.1.2
        4 April 2014 at 12:07 am

        Thats incorrect, English said there would not be any further IPO’s. The reason being that they’ve sold them all.
        Key followed that up by saying that no more SOE’s would be placed on the market as there weren’t any left.

        They were both pretty specific about the criteria. No new IPO’s on the stockmarket.

        Wholesale selling of other public infrastructure; schools, hospitals et al … who knows.
        Currently they’re flogging of the state housing to patch up this years budget.

        • Will@Welly 9.1.2.1
          4 April 2014 at 1:30 am

          Sorry to sound like a broken record, but Treasury papers said that they would “encourage” each
          department to sell off unwanted assets to develop others elsewhere. We don’t need to hold on to assets already developed. Let the Departments take the risk in building up the assets, then sell them off to private enterprise. The greatest loss in depreciation is at the outset.
          That’s why Bob Jones isn’t a property developer, he’s an investor – he lets someone else take the risk.

      • the pigman 9.1.3
        4 April 2014 at 2:24 am

        Yeah, just like they weren’t raising GST…

        GFC2014-2016 will provide all the economic justification for that agenda. Abbott is running the economic duress line in Australia right now (borrowed from Key in 2008).

      • Tracey 9.1.4
        4 April 2014 at 8:30 am

        selling state houses is underway….

        Landcorp will go…

        Lanthanide, I believe they won’t be selling any SOE’s, isn’t that slightly different from selling anymore assets?

      • srylands 9.1.5
        4 April 2014 at 2:06 pm

        “They’ve said several times they won’t be privatising KiwiBank, and that they won’t be privitising any more assets in their next term.”

        Who would buy Kiwibank? All it has done is swallow a whole lot of capital. It has never paid a dividend to its parent.

        That aint happening.

    • Bearded Git 9.2
      4 April 2014 at 9:13 am

      Clem-I think further extensive privatising of health care should be added to the list.

    • Clemgeopin 9.3
      4 April 2014 at 12:32 pm

      oops!
      #[1] should read, ‘Privatise’ the Kiwi bank….(not ‘nationalise’, not withstanding the pun)

    • Binders full of women 9.4
      4 April 2014 at 7:48 pm

      I have no problem with 4,7,8. On #3 I would do the opposite ..give those wealthier WFF families like myself a bit of a shave and give the working poor a break.

    • Wayne 9.5
      4 April 2014 at 8:48 pm

      Clemgeopin
      You are forgetting one of John Key’s trademarks. He tells you what he will do and then does it. And he doesn’t do anything major that he has not said he will do.

      These are my suppositions. No inside knowledge other than my experience

      What he won’t do
      He won’t privatise Kiwibank
      He won’t introduce interest on student loans.
      He has already said he won’t have a tax reduction policy (wait for 2017)
      He won’t do more on ERA
      He won’t make WFF harder for low income families

      What he will do
      He will keep extra spending to $1 billion per year.
      He will do TPP
      Probably another dozen charter schools
      Oil and Gas has been done
      More on innovation
      Will change the flag (referendum dependent)
      Will do more irrigation
      Will get lots of houses built in Auckland
      Will complete RONS
      Will pass reforms to RMA
      Will do Local Govt Reform
      Will seek to be a bridge nation between US and China

      No doubt there will be other things he will do and will not do.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 9.5.1
        5 April 2014 at 8:48 am

        Blip’s list. He lies and lies and lies, Dr. Mapp, and it’s all academic because he isn’t going to be the next PM.

  10. millsy 10
    3 April 2014 at 11:36 pm

    The so-called “Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights”, involving a cap on the increases of government spending has been promised by National to ACT since 2008, but has fortunately never seen the light of day.

    I am picking that we will see this actually implemented post 2014, which will undoubtedly have an impact on public services, which will have a heavy private sector involvement in delivery.

    Health will probably be the next sector to undergo a huge shake up. Ryall has learned from Upton and Birch, and will leave the mass privatisations till term 3. The hike in presecription charges from $3 to $5 per item has been a massive transfer from the poorest of NZer’s to middle class cancer patients (the increases paid for cancer nurses). Expect more of this. And expect more outsourcing.

    Asset sales will continue, but it will be the SOE’s/CRI’s/CROC’s/CE’s that will be doing the selling. Think KiwiRail’s Hillside sale, Agresearch’s farm sales, etc. In some cases, the companies will be wound up and their assets sold, like Learning Media.

    Expect more closing things down, reducing expenditure on this, reforming this, tearing down that.

    National governments have never built anything up. At least under Holland we had a chain of hotels and Muldoon we go some hydro dams and refineries.

    The Bolger, Shipley and Key governments have always torn things down.

    And another thing:

    “Tongariro National Park: Brought to you by Panasonic”

  11. Stuart Munro 11
    4 April 2014 at 12:41 am

    Revolution!

    • Enough is Enough 11.1
      4 April 2014 at 10:12 am

      Maybe not revolution but definatly violent protests on the streets. Almost guaranteed

      • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1.1
        4 April 2014 at 10:15 am

        Do you really think National Party supporters will actually start beating benes on the street? I suppose it’s possible, but why wouldn’t they send the cops as usual?

      • Stuart Munro 11.1.2
        4 April 2014 at 8:10 pm

        It has to start somewhere.

        Revolutions first and foremost are a response to atrocious governments. The Gnats have worked hard to unite New Zealand against themselves.

        http://www.cafepress.com/orderofthestick.336022673

  12. Awww 12
    4 April 2014 at 7:43 am

    Expect more of the bene bashing in the media in the lead up to the election. This type of media spin sets National on a winning course because any vote for the left is a vote for welfare.

  13. Philj 13
    4 April 2014 at 8:21 am

    Xox
    I don’t like to think about it. Scott York on RNZ Mora, yesterday was commenting on this very depressing prospect. Scott York, from the left,!!! ! His contribution was bereft of any serious content. Maybe that’s why he was allowed on this pathetic show. Where does Jim Mora/RNZ find these so called ‘lefties’? Step up JM and RNZ. We deserve better than this rubbish. Oh, Jim, you’re moving on to serious current affairs. Omg.

    • tc 13.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:08 am

      “Where does Jim Mora/RNZ find these so called ‘lefties’?” he doesn’t they’re taken by the producers from the approved list of compliant rent a quotes like pagani, williams etc

      ‘Step up JM and RNZ’ they already have stepped up for their nat appointed cronies who are very happy especially with the way they’ve counter balanced Mary Wilson and ejected the old guard.

    • Tracey 13.2
      4 April 2014 at 9:14 am

      i thought mora was gone to checkpoint?

    • Bearded Git 13.3
      4 April 2014 at 9:16 am

      Yep Philj +100.

      I was particularly incensed with his defeatist election diatribe masquerading as humour.

  14. Tracey 14
    4 April 2014 at 8:30 am

    Do children still read The Emperor’s New Clothes these days?

  15. JK 15
    4 April 2014 at 8:57 am

    Good lists, Clemgeopin and Millsy et al.

    Add to those – removal of “local” from local government – it will become too far away from the people it is meant to serve, and the big-scale multi-corps will move in on all the infrastructure jobs that they currently don’t have access to. Massive loss of jobs will occur in smaller regional areas/towns.

    State schools will have their funding cut, and private schools will have their funding increased, plus more charter schools with strange fundamentalist religious views as their raison d’etre.

    Less state housing. More caravan parks for the homeless.

    It doesn’t bear thinking about ….. time to get back to the slog of putting Labour into government !

  16. Sanctuary 16
    4 April 2014 at 9:05 am

    There was an interesting article (of the sort I would like to see this site linking to – we need to develop a new socialist project for the 21st century, not flounder about complaining and hoping that fraction of the middle class that recylces are going to provide the answers) in the Guardian yesterday discussing the capture of radicalism and vision by the right since the 1980s – http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/02/tories-own-future-left-trapped-in-past – that contained what I thought was an excellent summation of the right’s new language for dividing society up into the deserving and the undeserving –

    “…they divide society into those who think they can cope with globalisation and those who cannot, and then shower the former with praise and modest enticements – while clobbering the latter in the service of political popularity…”

    I think that comment neatly sums up the philosophy of this National government. Essentially, they will act like an occupying power for those they consider undeserving and give just enough to the deserving to keep them onside. A third term National government will try and offer to the “deserving” tax cuts and new privatised opportunities in welfare provision. Expect more charter schools and an all-out war on public education, and the out-sourcing of welfare – probably via the “Brown table” corporate entities that now allow them to divide and rule Maori.

    Of course, National will require Winston to rule by the look of it. The most likely political outcome of that will be a stalling of any ideological agenda. National will be in power, but effectively in a managerial sense only. In the policy vacuum created by Winston’s “nyet” of radical reforms, Expect the government to become hopeless mired in often media created corruption scandals.

  17. s y d 17
    4 April 2014 at 9:12 am

    cheaper piss
    more legal highs
    durries in plain packets
    roll yer owns banned
    more lotto, TABs, pokies, casinos
    more royal visits
    more army
    more planes that can drop bombs
    tighter gun control
    more pigs
    fewer judges
    more jails

  18. Tracey 18
    4 April 2014 at 9:21 am

    I think the better headline would have been

    What are we in for if the Maori party, the ACT MP, The Dunne, prop up national again.

    The four headed monster has become grotesque, unless you are

    Collins husband
    Wong’s husband
    Williamsons domestic assault friend
    Amy Adams family
    Craigs Investment partners
    Brokers
    Bankers
    Developers

  19. PJ 19
    4 April 2014 at 9:29 am

    “A brighter future”™

  20. Blue 20
    4 April 2014 at 9:32 am

    The media don’t care what happens if Key wins. It’s a horse race to them, nothing more. All that matters is placing bets on who will win and then writing up the celebrations/commiserations afterwards.

    As to what will actually happen if Key wins, no one knows. And that’s the way you can expect it to stay, given the state of our media.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 20.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:45 am

      Yeah, it all depends whether he’s replaced by Corruption Collins and her close friends and family, or Mr. Fuxit.

  21. Jim Nald 21
    4 April 2014 at 9:52 am

    “So apparently National has won the election.”

    For National’s third term and for the interest of their cronies and family members
    they will go for broke
    pull no punches
    no holds barred

  22. Rosie 22
    4 April 2014 at 10:06 am

    Apologies in advance Geoff. Maybe I’m out of sorts and /or maybe I’m just fed up with all the negativity being circulated – the henny penny line “the Left is going to lose” but the first headline I see on The Standard today is

    “What are we in for if National win?”

    Of course the predictions above, put forward by various folk are ones I would bet on, however, we all know this, so where instead are the war chants to drive our side on to victory?! Do we not want to win? If the answer is YES, then we need to be organised, talking with one another and deciding on what action to take. Is it being a volunteer for one of the Parties, is it being a supporter to the volunteers or is there some other non party activity that suits or fits around your other commitments?

    It is absolutely critical that we win 2014 even if their is only one goal in mind, and that is to remove the National Coalition Government. Considering the alternative is like giving up. I get this feeling there is a meme building “oh well, its not looking so good, might as well concede defeat now”.

    I’m not being part of that, I’m doing something about it.

    Jeez.

    • geoff 22.1
      4 April 2014 at 10:38 am

      I totally agree, Rosie. One of the reasons I wrote the post was out of bewildered frustration from reading over and over again about the supposed predestined victory of National.

      One motivation for voting Left and beating that defeatist attitude is to consider the shitty consequences that will happen if we don’t.

      I am definitively not conceding defeat.

      Have you seen the latest Roy Morgan results?

      • Rosie 22.1.1
        4 April 2014 at 10:51 am

        Thanks geoff. Your explanation for your article helps me understand your angle. Great to hear you’re not conceding defeat:-)

        No I haven’t seen the latest Roy Morgan. I’ve given up on polls. In a nutshell I see them as another tool that acts as a meme builder and am unsure about their accuracy and their ultimate purpose, – we had a chat on Open Mike about polls a few days ago and discussed this topic more fully there. I was happy to see that I wasn’t alone with my feeling about them………..

        but lol, now I am curious…………

  23. Lez Howard 23
    4 April 2014 at 11:08 am

    I really think Kiwisaver will rorted by the Greedies with Keys blessing

  24. vto 24
    4 April 2014 at 11:53 am

    Harder times for people out of work

    Nastiness towards people down on their luck

    Greed

    Selfishness

    Open slather on the conservation estate

    Money for dairy farmers

    Money for casinos

    Money for rich movie-makers

    Lots of dirty deals behind closed doors

    Less oneness as a nation

    and then they will implode in an unimaginable (for them) ball of karma fire, before sheepishly retreating to their vast dining rooms and reformulating National Party policy to reflect the left. As it has always been ……

  25. Auto_Immune 25
    4 April 2014 at 12:36 pm

    Personally think NZ will get more of the same till Key hands the leadership over to someone else… That’s when things will get ‘interesting’ (read: arrogant & ideological).

    Say what you want about JK (and it’s The Standard, so I know you will) but I’d prefer him in charge compared to many others in the National party caucus.

    • geoff 25.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:01 pm

      I agree that John Key’s ego might be the only thing that could save NZ from a very very bad third term of National. He sure does like being Mr popularity and the times when the media have successfully painted him as the bad guy (GCSB, tea tapes) he has gotten very petulant.
      So if National do win then it might just be very bad rather than very very bad.

  26. Clemgeopin 26
    4 April 2014 at 1:05 pm

    Hopefully the ‘Nigel-No-Friends National’ will be unable to form a coalition after this election. The latest Roy Morgan has indicated some glad tidings in their poll last last might.

    Labour/Greens (45%) regain lead over National (43%) for first time since January

    National………..43 per cent (down 2.5),
    Labour………….32 (up 0.5),
    Green…………..13 per cent (down 1),
    NZ First…………5.5 (up 2),
    Cons. Party…….2.5 (up 1),
    Maori Party…….1.5 (down 0.5),
    Act………………..0.5 (no change),
    United Future….0.5 (unchanged),
    Mana……………..0.5 (up 0.5),
    Internet…………0.5 (up 0.5).

    http://tinyurl.com/lnqolub

    Based on recent polls, including last night’s poll, and historical election results Vs pre election polls, and my own observation, political insight and intuition, my PERSONAL estimated arm-chair calculation is that if an election was held today, the party votes would be close to the following figures:

    National……………..40.4
    Labour……………….32.6
    Greens……………….10.8
    NZ First……………… 8.6
    Maori Party…………..1.0
    Mana………………….1.0
    ACT……………………0.5
    Conservatives………..2.0
    Internet Party……….2.5
    United Future………..0.1
    Others………………..0.5

    • JK 26.1
      4 April 2014 at 3:37 pm

      And an interesting comment from my 80-year-old cousin who has always voted National, and comes from a strong National-voting family : “Mr Key lies. Its so obvious that he lies.” But she would never vote Labour, so her choice is Winston Peters. I wonder how many other “oldies” are being put off by Key’s constant exaggerations and untruths.

      • lprent 26.1.1
        4 April 2014 at 4:37 pm

        I’m picking a pretty high disgruntled vote for NZF from the pissed off this year. Depending on turnout, somewhere about 7-8%. So far I’ve been hitting within 0.5% on every election for NZF since 1999. Of course in 2008, I was out by about 0.3% – thought they’d scrape over line despite all of the balderdash from the media.

        Wish I was more accurate on other parties though.

      • Clemgeopin 26.1.2
        4 April 2014 at 6:02 pm

        Yep! I am sure for a lot of the golden oldies, every time they look at or touch the gold card, a warm fuzzy feeling rises from the bottom of their heart to their so very lovey Winston.
        Did you know that the gold card even entitles them to get a FREE cup of coffee at the Maccas! Cool card for hot coffee! I can’t wait to get old!

      • Clemgeopin 26.1.3
        4 April 2014 at 6:17 pm

        Yes, I too think so. Never underestimate Winston. He has a knack of picking issues close to people, getting big media exposure and convincing all manner of voters to consider voting for him.
        I am also picking that the Internet party, with or without the Mana alliance, will surprise by getting a good % of party vote, most likely about 5%.

  27. Goon 27
    4 April 2014 at 1:06 pm

    A government of corporate eunuchs. It’s a wonder John Key can get out of bed in the morning with the kind of tedious boring life he leads and expects his people to lead.

  28. Gyn_Nag 28
    4 April 2014 at 3:54 pm

    Resource management reform is likely to be what they want.

    We have high housing prices and a housing shortage – National-voting property developers will want to play the middleman towards exploiting that market.

    Further, Australia’s aggressive resource use will be used as a model for bringing prosperity to NZ. If the Nats can’t have the National Parks, they’ll furiously search elsewhere for mineral wealth. Fossil fuels seem to be their modus operandi but I anticipate persistent exploration for metals too.

    National will rewrite every rule in the book to sell mineral wealth. The RMA will be gutted to that end. Environmental restrictions will face an onslaught, veiled by National’s excellent propaganda machine.

  29. outofbed 29
    4 April 2014 at 6:20 pm

    Majority think National will lead after election, but would prefer Labour
    http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/361/majority-thi

  30. BM 30
    4 April 2014 at 9:18 pm

    Good times and prosperity for all.

  31. Tanz 31
    4 April 2014 at 9:40 pm

    selling what is left of our assets, no tax cuts, more benefit cuts, maybe student loans will be in danger too.

  32. blue leopard 32
    4 April 2014 at 9:41 pm

    I will consider that I live in Drongoland if Nats get voted in again.
    Only idiots would continue to vote in someone who has proved he can’t run a country, has not got NZers interests at heart, (has proved that time and again)…and the lies and misinformation – these will simply proliferate if Nats get back in….Education will be cancelled completely….I mean Greece was forced to have a bankster run their country…yet we , we vote one of the fuckers in…yep Drongoland it will be confirmed to be if National get back in….

    • geoff 32.1
      4 April 2014 at 9:53 pm

      heh heh, I think I agree, bl

    • fender 32.2
      4 April 2014 at 9:59 pm

      +1

    • lurgee 32.3
      4 April 2014 at 11:26 pm

      Without wanting to start another fight, this attitude annoys me a bit. If National get back in, it will be because Labour were not good enough, again. People will be voting against their own interests, or not voting at all, because Labour failed to get them to do the sensible thing and vote for a passionate, articulate party with a clear vision and a plan and all the brains and energy and talent to make it happen. If Labour are languishing at 33% come election day, it will not be because 45% of the population are drongos (a lot of these will be the workers, the unemployed and the marginalised that should be Labour’s home territory) but because Labour, somewhere along the line, wasn’t good enough.

      It should be easy. Two terms of corruption, cronyism, bumbling incompetence in the biggest issue facing the country in a hundred years, poor-hating policies, fiscal uselessness … yet Labour can not drag itself out of the low 30s.

      It’s the left’s fault the right is not running scared and facing a 2002 scale decimation. Somehow, it is not working.

      • blue leopard 32.3.1
        5 April 2014 at 2:21 am

        I have had critical thoughts about Labour over the last two terms, largely equated to what you called them on in your earlier reponse in a conversation we were having – that they need to show more passion – however Cunliffe has been showing passion and, really, it has to be asked – why do you consider it is Labour’s responsibility who gets to be the next government and not the voters’?

        It is the voters that trot down to the booths and draw two ticks – not Labour after all.

        It is getting to be a very simple decision, although not ideal – the simplest way to put the question is who is the worst party? – not Labour by a country mile. The last time Labour were in they ran the economy in a manner that kept debt down – hugely down – and used the money they had in a manner that invested in wealth and wellbeing producing causes. They may have gotten a few things wrong, or done things that you or I don’t approve of – but take a look at the competition.

        This government has done nothing but get things wrong, lie about the state of play, lie about the state of the economy, take our rights away, abuse democratic processes, lower the general population’s trust and expectations of how politicians should behave, foment division amongst sections of Nzers, they have taken value away from the country such as selling assets at a time when they are worth less than they should be because it is a recession, they have not invested in things that deliver positive outcomes for the future, have taken money away from things that bear fruit in the future (education to name one), are managing higher education in a manner that will degenerate the quality of education and research, they have buggered around with school standards, fucked up paying teachers, created severe stress in people who are most vulnerable (this will create health issues). And this list is simply one off the top of my head – there is more. Did Labour do anywhere near the amount of cocked up ideas as these? Nope, nowhere near that level of incompetency and corruption.

        People in America are commonly known to be highly propagandized bunch of people yet even they managed to work out who was the best out of a terrible choice and voted accordingly – there will be 20 ish % of National voters who are completely committed to National yet I really don’t know what is wrong with the other 20 odd% who keep saying they intend to vote for this bunch of goons. It is not hard to see there is something entirely wrong with our current government.

        I recall, without remembering all the details, that when Labour was last in they were very disciplined about our countries’ debt – why the heck do people forget so quickly? It is not hard to disbelieve this government when they say they are running the economy well when one can recall Labour’s management of the economy. This government has put a lot of debt onto the books, and whilst I acknowledge the ChCh earthquake, it is pretty clear that they cut taxes and are struggling with government income levels from doing so – in response they have taken on debt, sold revenue generating assets for a song and a dance and taken money away from things that bear fruit in the future like education. They lie about any report, such as the Salvation Army one and say black is white, they put down people when they speak out (this is supposed to be a democracy, Key)

        I’m sorry but the equation is very, very simple and people who can’t work out the blatantly obvious are the ones that are erring – far more so than a political party who can’t force people to vote – they can only lead the horse to water. How obtuse are we? ‘It’s all Labours fault’ Nah

        What about Greens and Mana? There is NZ First, we have the Internet party, there is still United Future, the Maori Party – there are plenty of parties to vote for; there is simply no need to vote National even if you are a right-winger – America didn’t have this luxury of variety of choice – this is not hard – National are a bunch of corrupt, ignorant, no hopers and I’m sadly coming to the conclusion that anyone who votes for them – after the series of fiascos we have experienced since they have been in power – quite frankly are seriously deluded, corrupt, misinformed and/or challenged in the intelligence department.

        • Stuart Munro 32.3.1.1
          5 April 2014 at 5:18 am

          There’s a lot in what you say – in fact I only have one real criticism, and it may touch on the point Lurgee is getting at.

          “Vote for us, we’re the least bad alternative” isn’t what I want to hear. And it won’t drive the tidal wave of reform NZ needs to reverse 30 years or more of neo-liberal incompetence.

          It’s a lot to ask of Labour – but the need is similarly great.

          I want to be proud of my country again, and watch it succeed. Key’s removal is only the first step on that path. I’m sorry to have to ask – but the task goes a bit beyond getting a bare majority.

          • blue leopard 32.3.1.1.1
            5 April 2014 at 12:08 pm

            @ Stuart Munro

            Yes – ‘A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step’

            My comment is fairly well based on locating that first step.

            “Vote for us, we’re the least bad alternative” isn’t what I want to hear

            re ‘isn’t’ what I want to hear’

            Yes, I attempted to acknowledge that point albeit briefly by adding ‘although not ideal’.

            re >“Vote for us, we’re the least bad alternative”

            Nowhere have I written that this is the electioneering approach Labour should take – I am addressing voters making decisions – as opposed to parties being blamed for the decisions they make – and have approached the decision in a binary fashion to illustrate how this decision is a no-brainer.

            If you want ideals and an ideal situation – you are not going to get that with National – you have more chance of that with a left block government.

            If you want the major change in this country a reversal of ‘ 30 years or more of neo-liberal incompetence’ speak of, you are not going to get that with National – you have more chance of that with a left block.

            If Labour aren’t absolutely perfect it will still serve your wishes to vote left because if National get in – you most certainly won’t be getting perfect governing – this is a certainty.

            There are numerous parties to vote for – there really is no excuse to not vote or to vote for National who are not competent governors – that is the point I am making.

            Additionally in this year’s election we have a leader of the main opposition party that has publically and repetitively acknowledged there is a serious faultiness with the neo-liberal approach. This did not occur without a great deal of effort by people on the ground – I wonder if there is anywhere else in the world where that has that? No wonder he is getting shredded by our elite-owned media. It is elites who are the sole beneficiaries of continuing on with neo-liberalism after -all.

            • Olwyn 32.3.1.1.1.1
              5 April 2014 at 1:09 pm

              While we do not explicitly say, “Vote for the least bad,” we are to some extent reduced to saying, “We just have to get these bastards out!” It would be far easier if we could reassure beleaguered people that Labour has their back. While it is true that David Cunliffe has explicitly rejected neo-liberalism, as did Grant Robertson in the leadership contest, in the field of getting back the 800,000 that have abandoned ship, we have for the most part equivocations and generalities.

              The best-start program is good, but not enough to be a game-changer. No one quite knows who the 100,000 houses (over 10 years) is going to help, but many suspect it will make room for parents who already own houses to take out mortgages to set up their kids, while the rest remain in limbo. The economic renewal, it is hoped, will pick people up over time, but most want some reassurance now.

              This is what would be a game changer for me: beefed up human rights legislation, which would include the right to secure dwelling, the right to earn an adequate living and the right to organise. No, I do not mean “give everyone free stuff,” but ought implies can – you should not demand that people do things and remove the conditions that would permit their doing them. Like insisting they rent in the private sector when they cannot earn enough to do so, or take jobs when there are no jobs.

              The neo-liberal free-market was supposed, at the outset, to be capable of bringing the public good with it in its wake. Well, such legislation would set a standard for it to meet. But whatever way they do it, Labour must reassure those that have drawn the short straw that they are willing to draw a line in the sand on their behalf.

            • geoff 32.3.1.1.1.2
              5 April 2014 at 3:18 pm

              If you want the major change in this country a reversal of ‘ 30 years or more of neo-liberal incompetence’ speak of, you are not going to get that with National – you have more chance of that with a left block.

              If Labour aren’t absolutely perfect it will still serve your wishes to vote left because if National get in – you most certainly won’t be getting perfect governing – this is a certainty.

              +100 bl, your comments are nailing it. Maybe you should write a post about this stuff?

              • blue leopard …
                6 April 2014 at 1:34 pm

                Thanks very much Geoff.

                I may do a post if I deem it useful – however there are a lot of people, including yourself, who are writing great posts ( and plus I’m a little strapped for time. 🙁 )

                You are most welcome to take what you like and call it your own.

                For me, this is one of the great things about these sites where one can comment – it is information and idea sharing and I truly hope if people like what I write that they will spread the ideas around – no need for acknowledging me – after all we humans get a lot of what we think off the ideas of others – with a bit of our individual experience/ point of view thrown into the mix.

        • Wayne 32.3.1.2
          5 April 2014 at 8:38 am

          blue leopard

          Labour could campaign on your approach, but they won’t. They know that it would be an impossible job to convince middle NZ that the govt “has done nothing but get things wrong”.

          If David Cunliffe tried that on, and initially he did when always referred to the the govt as “those clowns”, people would question his soundness of judgement.

          So Labour will have to be smarter than that. But I don’t expect they will promise to reverse the last 30 years of reform. Well, they could, and the Nats no doubt hope they will. Election success would be guaranteed.

          • blue leopard 32.3.1.2.1
            5 April 2014 at 12:22 pm

            @ Wayne

            “Labour could campaign on your approach, but they won’t.”

            Nowhere have I written that this is the electioneering approach Labour should take.

            I am addressing voters making decisions – as opposed to parties being blamed for the decisions they make – and have approached the decision in a binary fashion to illustrate how this decision is a no-brainer.

            “They know that it would be an impossible job to convince middle NZ that the govt “has done nothing but get things wrong”.

            Considering your previous definitions of ‘middle New Zealand’ where ‘middle New Zealand’ appeared to be what most would refer to as the top wealthy New Zealanders you are probably quite correct. Although if the rest of New Zealanders had their best interests uppermost in their minds I would suggest to you that they already realise that this govt has done nothing but get things wrong. I guess a majority of NZers do not have the luxury – are too busy, harassed and time strapped – to be thinking of their own interests in the manner that the top wealthy consistently do.

            “If David Cunliffe tried that on, and initially he did when always referred to the the govt as “those clowns”, people would question his soundness of judgement.

            I liked when Cunliffe referred to the clowns as clowns – a case of calling a spade a spade. I think your comment has a typo – shouldn’t ‘people’ be ‘the elite’

            Your last paragraph is simply spin and nonsense -the legacy of being an ex-National MP I guess.

            • Wayne 32.3.1.2.1.1
              6 April 2014 at 10:04 am

              If the Nats are “universally loathed and reviled”, why are they New Zealand’s most popular political party?

              • Clemgeopin …
                6 April 2014 at 10:41 am

                No, they are not.
                It is Key who is cunning, spinning and grinning that is popular and this translates to National support.

                But not for much longer. Wait for Sept 20 election result and prepare yourself for backlash and disappointment.

              • Stuart Munro …
                8 April 2014 at 4:28 am

                They’re not – that would be KDC’s Internet party – signs up more members in a week than National gets in a year.

            • Wayne 32.3.1.2.1.2
              6 April 2014 at 10:21 am

              Given that I have previously said the middle NZ are typically families, with household incomes of $70,000 to $120,000, I think they would be surprised to be thought of as “the elite”.

              These are incomes typical of self employed tradespeople, middle managers, and in the state sector, teachers, nurses and police officers. Usually there is a principal and secondary income in the household. They typically own their house with a mortgage – so interest rates matter a lot.

              The Nats spend a lot of time on thinking about policies that will affect these households, and how they can get ahead.

              In my experience these voters expect political parties to be realistic, and are not that interested in solutions from the 1970’s. They have spent their entire adult lives post 1984. In fact someone who was 20 in 1984 is now 50. So for people in their 30’s and 40’s, they are not hankering for a past of which they have no direct experience of anyway.

              But when you say to them that in the 1970’s and 1980’s you had to wait 6 months to get a phone, or get a license to send money overseas, or that white wear and electronics cost three of four times what they do now, they think economic policies that did that are crazy. So they generally welcome free trade, and the cheap availability of goods that is implied by that.

              By my measure these are floating voters. At the moment they generally vote National. They could vote labour, but they would need to see a realistic Labour party.

              • geoff …
                6 April 2014 at 10:37 am

                yeah but that middle NZ is shrinking all the time, Wayne.

                And it’s shrinking because of policies that National supports and has introduced.
                It’s you that is living in the past, but I know I’m wasting my breath because you’ll be defending neoliberalism to the very last of yours.

              • Blue …
                6 April 2014 at 10:54 am

                But when you say to them that in the 1970′s and 1980′s you had to wait 6 months to get a phone, or get a license to send money overseas, or that white wear and electronics cost three of four times what they do now, they think economic policies that did that are crazy.

                Do you honestly think you can scare people with this sort of tripe? Technology has moved on so much from those days that your scaremongering is as much of a relic as you claim Labour’s policies are. Find some new lines.

                • Wayne …
                  6 April 2014 at 5:48 pm

                  I did not check my previous post, just relied on memory. OK, my recollection was out by $30,000, but it does not change my basic premise.

                  It is worth noting that a teacher with 8 years experience and no promotions whatsoever gets $70,000. Similarly nurses and police officers. And by 8 years most teachers will have additional responsibilities so more money. So a family of two 30 year old teachers is likely to have $140,000 household income. Hardly unusual. And replicated across a huge range of vocations.

                  • geoff …
                    6 April 2014 at 8:58 pm

                    Do you have any clue how few indiviuals make $70,000+ in NZ?!

                    The NZ median household income is under $69,000.

                    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11164406

                    • srylands …
                      7 April 2014 at 12:25 am

                      Your $69K includes students, the unemployed, the sick, the stay at home mums, the retired ! If you are working, an income of $70K is hardly remarkable. If you have a degree you should be on 70K within 3 or 4 years (at the outside). So a household income for educated couples of $150K – $200K is what I see.

                      Anything less than $150K you have problems. If you are in your 30s/40s with a couple of kids you can forget a decent life. Go and retrain.

                    • McFlock …
                      7 April 2014 at 12:52 am

                      SSpylands notwithstanding (because the fucker has no idea about what life is like for most NZers), it seems to me that only 15% of taxpayers get $70k or more.
                      54% get under $40k.

                      Median annual household income from wages and salaries is $51k.

                      So while the tories love to point out that NZ is really quite uncomfortable for people on a couple of hundred K per year, they have no idea how the rest of us live. So SSpylands can go and fuck himself.

                    • Wayne …
                      7 April 2014 at 6:58 am

                      Mcflock,

                      I checked your link, and went to the excel tables for 2013. As far as I can see the average household income for wages and salaries is $84,462 and the median is $70,974, which is what I would expect. Some variation from the average is what I would expect. But a mean that is less than two thirds of the average seemed questionable.

                      Of course people have a lifecycle pattern of earnings. By the time people are in their late 30’s and 40’s there are near their peak earnings, and are raising children, and paying a mortgage. Many young people earn much less, but have reasonable expectations of earning a lot more as their careers progress.

                      So as general proposition you can see why the Nats are very concerned about families on $70,000 to $120,000, or as a previous post, $100,000 to $150,000.

                    • geoff …
                      7 April 2014 at 7:14 am

                      That’s correct, Wayne. National are ignoring about half the electorate.
                      Competing with Mitt Romney for ‘most out of touch’?

                      http://news.yahoo.com/romneys-47-percent-chosen-years-best-quote-162127619.html

                    • felix …
                      7 April 2014 at 7:16 am

                      “As far as I can see the average household income for wages and salaries is $84,462 and the median is $70,974, which is what I would expect. “

                      Nope, just upthread you were saying individual average income is 70k in middle NZ. Now you’ve switched to household income.

                      It’s half of what you expected you fucking liar.

                    • Wayne …
                      7 April 2014 at 8:07 am

                      Felix,

                      You are wrong. In this whole thread I have commented on household incomes as being between $70,000 and $120,000. I then referred to the fact that teachers at the top of the scale without promotion get $70,000. The two things are consistent.

                    • McFlock …
                      7 April 2014 at 12:19 pm

                      Yes Wayne, if you refuse to count the unemployed and people on other incomes, you are correct. But that’s not the median annual household income, that’s the household income for households that get income from that source.

                      And even by your method (ignore the poor), $130K.p.a. for a household is indeed “unusual”. Typically, when someone says “middle”, they choose a range that brackets the median, rather than using the median as the low end of their scale.

                      In reality, if we chose a $50k-wide bracket for “middle New Zealand”, it would be $45k to $95K. And them at the higher end should be fucking grateful.

                      And SSpylands is just delusional when they talk about <$150k having “problems”.

                    • miravox …
                      7 April 2014 at 9:13 pm

                      “I did not check my previous post, just relied on memory. OK, my recollection was out by $30,000, but it does not change my basic premise.”

                      Not at all, what’s 30k between friends, eh? I mean people on the median household income of $45k to $95K wouldn’t quibble about a spare 30k here and there, would they?

                    • felix …
                      7 April 2014 at 9:44 pm

                      Bullshit Wayne. Here’s what byou actually said:

                      “It is worth noting that a teacher with 8 years experience and no promotions whatsoever gets $70,000. Similarly nurses and police officers. And by 8 years most teachers will have additional responsibilities so more money. So a family of two 30 year old teachers is likely to have $140,000 household income. Hardly unusual. And replicated across a huge range of vocations.”

                      miravox is right. You are so out of touch with how most people live, you think 30 or 40 or 50k is chump change and an acceptable margin of error for your broad empty waffling.

                • Wayne …
                  6 April 2014 at 5:54 pm

                  It is really to illustrate that since the 1980’s New Zealand is integrated into the world economy, and therefore consumers get world prices and have a wide range of choice. And as you concede, that is irreversible.

                  Sure you can have a debate on tax rates, the level of govt spending, privatization, etc. But the two main parties are wedded to the modern way of running the economy – the “neoliberal paradigm”as it is often described here.

                  There ain’t going to be some form of Chavista revolution in NZ, unless Mana gets 40%.

              • blue leopard …
                6 April 2014 at 1:23 pm

                @ Wayne

                “Given that I have previously said the middle NZ are typically families, with household incomes of $70,000 to $120,000…” – Wayne

                You Nats really have a poor grasp on reality and/or a tenuous relationship with truth-telling:

                Here you state ‘middle income’ to be $100, 000 – $150 000.

                What is with that Wayne?

                Perhaps you have made adjustments to your definition to take into account the damage that National have done to household incomes?

                Moral of the story to anyone reading: Do not believe any ‘information’ coming out of a right-winger – Always question what you hear from them. They actually think that lying for their own self-interest is par for the course, ‘pragmatic’ and something ‘everyone does’. That is, that lying is o.k. It is not and such beliefs are merely makes those telling lies and those trusting them and believing the lies develop an increasingly poor grasp on reality. This means there is increasing amounts of people with a poor grasp on reality, or conversely, for those who are realising what is going on there is an increasing break down of trust. This is an unhealthy and unacceptable state of affairs for our society.

                Right-wingers are untrustworthy – VOTE LEFT

              • Anne …
                6 April 2014 at 5:08 pm

                By my measure these are floating voters. At the moment they generally vote National. They could vote labour, but they would need to see a realistic Labour party.

                You righties love to pigeonhole people.The majority of them are not voting for realistic policies because if they were, they would be voting left of centre. Who dragged the country out of its failing torpor time and again? Labour. 1935… 1972… 1984… 1999… and again (we hope) in 2014. And each time Labour was slowly lifting the country to an acceptable standard of living for all of its citizens. Unfortunately they often didn’t finish the job before the so-called floating voters were beguiled with the National Party initiated pot of gold at the end of the non existent rainbow.

                Remember Muldoon and the Superannuation bribe? We’re still paying the price for that irresponsible attempt to buy people’s votes.
                Remember Key and the $50 north tax-cut for everybody? Yeah, only the top 10% got it.

                These so-called floating voters you talk of… many are selfish, greedy and they will vote for whoever offers them the most lucrative deal. They don’t care a damm for their poorer ‘cousins’ just so long as they’re doing ok, which of course is the mindset of the average Nat. The irony is: they come from ordinary working class stock like the rest of us but because they had a lucky break they start to imagine they’re better than the rest of us. I’ve met dozens and dozens of them over the years and you can pick em almost instantly.

          • Stuart Munro 32.3.1.2.2
            5 April 2014 at 6:38 pm

            “the Nats no doubt hope they will. Election success would be guaranteed.”

            The Gnats are universally loathed and reviled now. If by some extraordinary combination of mischance, media manipulation, gerrymandering and perhaps a heavy rainfall event on election day they got in, they’d likely wish they hadn’t. The current illusion of economic success, financed by asset thefts and record borrowing, does not make the treasury benches a good place to be sitting when the rock music stops.

            So in that sense I guess you can view the left coalition victory as an election success, as winning would be more costly to National than losing.