By Grant Duncan*
Sometimes it feels as if election year has begun already.
Winston Peters has declared New Zealand First won’t join a governing coalition with Labour after the 2023 election. He wants to win back those who abandoned him in 2020 by effectively saying a vote for him isn’t a vote for another Labour-led government. But he didn’t explicitly back National either.
In reply, National leader Christopher Luxon was evasive but didn’t rule out working with Peters. As in 2017, when Bill English led National, Luxon may be willing to negotiate. He may have to.
Though still under 5% in most opinion polls, New Zealand First does have a chance of returning to parliament next year. Peters will try to repeat the trick he pulled off in 2011: after winning no seats in 2008 and suffering a term in the wilderness, he asked voters to put him into opposition, not the Beehive. He achieved that goal with 6.6%.
Many voters will recall Peters explicitly ruled out National before the 1996 election and then formed a coalition with them anyway. So they may not take his present rejection of Labour very seriously. And anyway, the parties will do what they must to form a government, if they can.
Luxon won't rule out NZ First coalition after Peters says no to current Labour Party https://t.co/Wq42nKNydm
— Newshub Politics (@NewshubPolitics) November 21, 2022
Return of the kingmaker
What of other scenarios? Could Te Pāti Māori play a role in government, assuming they win at least one of the Māori electorates? Their Tiriti-centric vision makes them more compatible with the left-wing bloc, especially the Greens, but quite incompatible with both ACT and NZ First.
It looks unlikely, then, that the party could be the kingmaker, as they couldn’t play one side off against the other in a hung parliament. For now, the real jockeying is on the right.
National’s decision to review its tax-cut policies makes the party look more compatible with New Zealand First and less so with ACT. Spotting an opportunity to steal more National voters, ACT’s David Seymour taunted: “We don’t need Labour with blue paint.”
So, Peters has kicked off the game, but others are joining in. Parties to a pre-election coalition could make a written agreement, as Labour and the Greens did in 2016. Or they could make an informal concession, as National does to allow ACT to win the Epsom electorate. Between the Labour-Green and National-ACT blocs it’s anyone’s race at this stage.
But what if neither team gets a majority of seats? Depending on final election results, a minority coalition could form a government if it has the support of another party (or parties) on confidence and supply votes. That could even mean a minor party abstains on motions of no confidence.
And it’s possible to have a neutral party on the cross-bench that agrees to support a minority government on confidence and supply only, takes no ministerial portfolios, and keeps its options open to vote with or against the government in the House. Could that be a role for New Zealand First?
The basic criterion for forming the government is that a prime minister-designate can assure the governor-general that they lead a party or coalition of parties that has the confidence of the House.
Rugby as election curtain-raiser: after the All Blacks won the 2011 World Cup in New Zealand, it was straight into the campaign. Getty Images.
The bounce of the ball
And then there’s the rugby. Since 2011, prime ministers have normally announced the election date early in the year. New Zealand hosted the 2011 Rugby World Cup, so it made sense to clarify whether we’d go to the polls before or after that tournament, rather in the middle of it.
After the All Blacks won the final against France on October 23, it was straight into the election campaign. Polling day was November 26.
As it happens, the All Blacks and France will kick off the 2023 Rugby World Cup on the morning of September 9 (New Zealand time). The final is October 29 and the entire tournament will occupy a lot of media attention.
If the election dates set in 2014, 2017 and 2020 (before COVID intervened) are any guide, we’d expect the election to be on September 23. Fortunately, New Zealand doesn’t have a pool match scheduled around that day.
The latest possible date for the next election is January 13 2024. And putting the election off again until November 25 to accommodate the World Cup final is well within the rules. But the final vote count and the government formation negotiations (which could be drawn out) would then come close to the Christmas break.
In any case, while wins and losses in major sporting events do affect people’s moods, there’s no consistent evidence they affect support for incumbent parties. The choice of election date shouldn’t be seen as a bet on the All Blacks’ performance.
In 2020, the prime minister first announced polling day would be September 19. But a pandemic intervened, and the second lockdown meant some parties felt they’d be denied a free and fair campaign, so the whole thing was delayed by four weeks. The turnout, though, was relatively high. Labour won an outright majority and we knew on the night who’d form the government.
In 2023, there could be some weeks of negotiations before we know who’ll be prime minister. It’s not really over until the government’s sworn in. Between now and then, expect the unexpected.
*Grant Duncan, Associate Professor, School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
147 Comments
WP’s strategy here is obviously more pragmatic than subtle. Voters on the right side of things will have neither forgotten nor forgiven the coalition with Labour in 2017 particularly if it is thought that the present sole Labour government, now upon them, could only have happened because of that. Therefore it makes sense for NZF to target Labour especially when the government has made a pretty big bullseye out of itself. If some of the right voted for NZF in 2017 to stymie the Greens and then in 2020 for Labour, to do that again, I bet you my bottom dollar that will not recur next election as the purpose has hardened to removing Labour from government, full stop. Therefore NZF can only target traditional Labour swing voters and don’t think there will be the numbers there that are needed.
Yeah thats my view as well, I think he will get about 2.5-2.9%
Everyone I know on the RHS is debating Act vs Nat party vote, this could really surprise people. I know several people who went to the ACT conference (Not that type myself to waste a weekend on politics...) and like the message.
On the LHS the greens may get a boast, no one likes voting for a loser.
In the middle all the rural voters who did not want Green/Labour coalition will vote Nats this time, estimates made it around 6% of the vote. Polling can hide big swings like this, who predicted Labour only last election.
Current betting odds from Sportsbet Aussie.
National 1.81
Labour 1.95
... at this moment , the giant bloviating windbag is on NewShrub Nation ... generating emissions ... enormous quantities of hot air ... Robbo in full flight is quite a sight ... 100 % sure of himself ... puffed up ... righteous ...
Recall but , Robbo was the architect of WFF & Interest Free Student Loans ... which Cullen used to sneak Labour over the line in 2005 , and scupper Don Brash ... what's Robbo got up his sleeve for 2023 , can he repeat his 2005 Houdini act ...
I think you are twisting the truth a bit there foxy,it's 60% required to repeal it's protections against privatisation...big difference.
I guess we can extrapolate out that to mean the Nats / ACT would like to privatise..
https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/26-11-2022/national-blast-as-unde…
A provision in the three waters legislation requiring a 60% vote to repeal its protections against privatisation has been called “unconstitutional and undemocratic” by the National Party.
The provision, adopted by the house during the committee stage debate, means the support of 60% of MPs (or a majority vote at a referendum) will be needed before any future parliament can allow privatisation of the “water entities” set to be created by the law.
.. basically it's a form of tyranny , and an abuse of the power of entrenchment ... the philosophy of the current government seems to be , " we know we're screwed at the next election , let's burn the house down ... and the Gnats victory will be a steaming pile of ashes to clean up " ...
So loss of equality of suffrage now requires a 60% majority to overturn. So kind of Captain Cindy. It was nice while it lasted I guess.
Loving the privatization smoke screen.
"Clause 117 of the 164-page first piece of legislation would allow services to be contracted out for up to 35 years.
Dr McNeill, a Massey University resource and environmental planning senior lecturer, said it would allow foreign companies to reap profits from rates paid for public service water services.
"It's a de facto kind of privatisation ... it's the management that is actually a real key to things," he said."
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/474584/three-waters-35-year-contra…
It's also 60% to return ownership of Watercare assets to Watercare, from what I understand. You know, after you stripped them from Aucklanders.
But sure, let's start arbitrarily entrenching hugely unpopular policies and burning huge amounts of political capital to defend it, but under no circumstances could do that to address capital gains taxes or benefit reforms.
3 Waters , Mr F ? ... I thort that inflation had blown it out to 5 ...
... I saw Chris Luxon with Jack Tame on the telly this morning ... OMG ... he's not the guy who should be head Gnat , far from it ... Nicola Willis would be better ...
Hopefully Dave Seymour will have a big say-so in the next government ...
... are we surprised Labour are using the 60 % vote to entrench their odious policies ... we've had 5 horrible years watching them lie & cheat at every turn ... this is no different ... clearly the vast majority of citizens & local councils can see " 3 Waters " for what it is , a theft by government of ratepayers' assets , and a divestment of control to Nanaia Mahuta's tribe , Tainui ...
... nothing to do with water quality or treatment ... it's all about theft & control ... 60 % vote will enshrine that forever ...
Stop talking nonsense ... I'm in an excellent mood today ... got 30 % off a boot full of plants & seedlings from Bunnies & Oderings ... fizzingly happy ...
... hey ... there's a rare need for entrenching law by 60 / 75 % votes ...
3 Waters isn't there ... wakey wakey NZ , the liars in power are pulling a fast one ... stop this B.S. now ...
And did you see Jack Tame with Chris Luxon? Ouch. Ouch. Ouch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgbO1IzbIBg
... that's fine to point out ... except Labour have 2 clowns to the Gnats 1 : everyone knows our PM is an ideologically driven lightweight , she's no Helen Clark ... not by a country mile ... and #2 Labour clown is Robbo ... so full of himself , yet so patently incompetent ...
2023 will be a matter of selecting which major party had the least stupid ideas ... and that's the Gnats , by a long run up ...
Mandate not quite the right word there. They have the parliamentary majority most certainly & that is most certainly interesting, if not unique under a MMP system. MMP was calculated to stop the occurrence of a FPP result , and largely voted in because the electorate was more than tired of those governments, in particular the one of Muldoon, his last term most definitely. But somehow here in NZ, the electorate last time, which I suggest was sufficiently motivated by a view to again sideline the Greens, and consequently the mechanism of MMP was used to defeat the principles of MMP, and deliver Labour as a virtual FPP government. Folk are fond to say only in America but this one is only in New Zealand for sure because this current New Zealand government is demonstrating all the negative and autocratic characteristics that MMP was supposed to prevent.
I felt so sorry for him when cross-examined on the 'tough on crime' compulsory military service policy - that I sent him an email afterwards and gave him a new idea on how to end ram raids: prevent vehicle theft.
Give every vehicle owner a free steering wheel clamp on registration or rego renewal.
I can't get over the number of stolen vehicles reported on the FB community pages I've register with - and all I can think is - there'll be another crash; ram raid; hit and run; burnout fest; car trashed, etc. Think of the police resource alone spent on vehicle theft.
Prevent vehicle theft.
How easy is that?
Agree, some of us in this band, don't have a problem with being taxed, we would like to see it spent on health or police though, not on $800 million cost of living handouts (My partner got it FFS). Again why not change the lower tax band so ALL lower paid get a tax rebate every week to help with the cost of living? Nats have lost the plot on this upper band crap.
Lol. Labour will win easily. All labour needs to do is keep underlining the facts and 80% of the population wont touch luxon...
'National is the party of the rich.. their main policies are tax cuts for the wealthy, tax breaks for landlords. Hell luxon even owns 7 houses himself.'
Plenty of lawyers, doctors, engineers, IT specialists etc earning 180k - hard working professionals, not bludgers or rent seekers. And they're also getting squeezed by living costs, particularly with massive increases in interest rates.
To me, National would have been much better off to scrap their tax policy on rental properties (there is a distinct freeloader element here), and keep the signature policy to repeal the 39c rate.
What politicians; Leaders, say before they get their job, and do afterwards, can be two different things. Both John Key and Jacinda Ardern come easily to mind.
Slightly off-topic, but an article I'd recommend to every reader:
“Lowering rates or providing ample liquidity when problems materialise, but not raising rates as imbalances build up, can be rather insidious in the longer run. They promote a form of moral hazard that can sow the seeds of instability and of costly fluctuations in the real economy.”
Who wrote that? The current Governor of the RBA, in 2002 before he became Governor, and who then dropped their cash rate to 0.1% to deal with exactly the crisis he forewarned of, and held it there for an extended period. Hence, my first sentence.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/nov/27/conflict-of-interest-h…
And worth repeating:
Monetary policy "gets into all the cracks". Excessively low interest rates pump up all manner of asset bubbles as investors desperate for some return on their money snap up property, shares, and...cryptocurrency. All these extraordinary low interest rates have got into everything. If we say we have 'the everything bubble', it sort of follows then that you’re going to have 'the everything bust'.
Just yet another opinion, of course.
What $50 billion is this? If you are referring to QE then this reduces the governments debt by repurchasing it and then holds it on the Reserve Banks balance sheet. QE is purely a monetary policy instrument to help lower interest rates anyway and has nothing to do with financing spending.
Standard and Poor's explains here.
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/mrcbg/programs/…
Who did Labour borrow this $50b from? Was it China? Was it the same place we borrowed $50b from between 2009 and 2013?
An earthquake and a GFC you might say?
- 1) $26b out of the $40b estimated total rebuild cost was paid out by insurance companies by 2015 (according to RBNZ)
- 2) Did we borrow money and hand it over to the troubled American banks?
They borrowed it from future taxpayers. You know, the ones they were going to help out with better housing incomes, and then didn't.
But hey, what happened in 2009 beats the hell out of critically examining the actual current government we have now, a decade later, right?
I mean, otherwise we'd have to hold them to the same standard, right? And we definitely can't have that.
Bringing up what happened in 2009 and critically examining the Government today are not mutually exclusive...…I am just drawing the parallel that both major parties are just as culpable as each other when it comes to gross mismanagement of debt.
Those who make a whole lot of noise today will likely be silent if National get in next year and continue on the borrowing spree to fund their tax cuts.
This is why I vote ACT, because we need fiscal restraint.
"What politicians; Leaders, say before they get their job, and do afterwards, can be two different things. Both John Key and Jacinda Ardern come easily to mind."
Throw in Winston as well. Curb immigration. Did nothing. Get the Treaty out of legislation where it's not required. Did nothing. Not there for the baubles of office. Grabbed with both hands. There's a reason why NZF is called Winston First
He's got my vote. Don't like ACT, Nats, Labour or the Greens.
Wasted vote, probably but at least I have the mental comfort for voting for the least worst. The other option is not to vote at all.
The only reason we didn't have a communist left government in 2017 is because Winston while in Government put a stop to the looney policy suggestions of our numerically incompetent finance minister and our Marxist leaning prime minister.
We all owe Winston a debt of gratitude for his steadying of that ship during 2017-2020. He has my respect for that.
Winston now knows that there are a group of people who have voted labour all their life only to be kicked in the guts by this incompetent labour government as it spends recklessly and brings in stupid policies and apartheid in reverse. This is the most left leaning labour government in history and it is the most financially incompetent one.
Labour is a party that is meant to support the worker. And it is meant to be fiscally responsible. This government is out of touch with it's base and it doesn't know the definition of a balanced fiscal setting.
There is a void for those labour voters who don't support reverse apartheid or tree hugging or reckless accumulation of debt for our grandchildren to pay as they sleep in poor rental accommodation because they can't afford to live properly or buy a house and Winston will flag his election campaign on rebuilding a free and fair society where you as an individual can work hard and achieve a decent outcome. Good on Winston age has made him a sensible man which politics has very few of these days.
Oh and as you go and pay 25% more at the supermarket for your "basics" (don't get me started on the price of eggs) just know this:
The reason why you are paying more is because the Government literally printed money during the pandemic. $100 billion of it.
They didn't earn it or borrow it from overseas. They just created it out of thin air
And then they handed it out.
And you know what, the rest of the world did that too..
But they don't tell you that do they? Every western country we compare ourselves to did this and now every western country has inflation heading towards 10%.
There is NO free lunch.
We are now all paying for this.
Think about that as you shop and think about that as you consider who you want to manage the economy during 2023-2026.
Now we all have to pay for the free money and think about that as your mortgage rates rise and your friends and family start to lose their jobs during the next 24months.
Every day now 20 people are dying from Covid our economy is open. Think about how we locked our economy down over 1 case. In a sense we made the economic consequences far worse than it needed to be by taking stupid steps to look our economy down. We did not take the lead in getting vaccinated, we were far behind other countries in vaccination rates despite having 2-3 months to prepare as we watched Covid cases rise in Europe.
Things could have been done much much better, namely high vaccination rates early. The extent of the lockdowns were unnecessary and now you are all paying for it in your supermarket bill and your mortgage rates. You can thank yourself for that especially if you voted labour in 2020. You can redeem yourself by voting against labour in 2023.
Well actually if you drill back on the news at the time you will see the right wing (as you put it) was advocating for higher vaccination rates early. And if you look at the right wing government in Australia at that time, they were locking people down based on their "postcode". So no, I don't accept your argument that a right wing government would have done the same.
And when we did lockdown over just 1 case, the rest of the world media said: "NZ is doing what?".
Drill back on time and prove me wrong. Don't just "assume".
If I recall none of the right wing leadership in and outside of NZ really had that much of a decent grasp of the situation.
"Open the border with Aussie, this is all fearmongering nonsense"
A few moments later....
"The crazy lefties need to shut the bloody border!"
The vast majority of our money is created by the banks through their lending as the Bank of England explains here. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/money-creati…
The only reason we didn't have a communist left government
Is that there's isn't a high profile communist party vieing for votes.
If you're anti communist, presumably you're pro business, and if you know much about business you'd determine the inflationary issues we have extend well beyond the money printing.
A years a long time in politics...
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/11/27/qa-luxon-train-wreck-interview-is…
Shots fired.
Jack proved why he deserved his award win as best News and Current Affairs Presenter with his devastating interview of Luxon today.
Luxon claimed he was always against spending and inflaming inflation.
Jack very clearly laid out the timeline of how many times National had called for tax cuts and Billion dollar spendings press while the Reserve Bank was ramping up the OCR.
It was devastating.
It showed National have been all over the place and can’t seriously be proclaimed as expert managers of the economy.
Jack then challenged the craziness of National’s military boot camps and ankle bracelets of 10 year old children.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
The number of serious repeat ram raiders is about 100, 80% of whom are already known to welfare agencies who are the kids from John Key’s draconian welfare reforms that saw kids in cars, state house tenants thrown onto the street for wrongful meth testing and whose parents were incarcerated in our private prison industry.
How will more draconian policies fix the problems the last set of draconian policies created?
There is 30% of the electorate who have been frightened, angered and disgusted by the never ending media shock diet of crime news – who are old testament eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth justice types – who will always vote for suffering and punishment. Leaders speak to the angels of our better nature, not envoke their wrath.
Shouldn’t National be intellectually and philosophically ashamed to roll out reactionary knee jerk counter productive social policy like Military bloody Boot camps?
What most screaming ‘something must be done’ are missing is that the age of criminal liability is already 10 years of age in NZ, something the UN has challenged us on?
What are you get tough on crime cheerleaders demanding here? We arrest these children as soon as they come out of the womb?
How does trying to out-ACT ACT by putting ankle bracelets on 10 year old children win the political middle?
National is to the right of Caligula now!
Ram Raid news stories make news producers orgasm.
They are cheap, easy to produce and present as live breaking news and the kids committing the crimes boasting on social media for notoriety guarantees a self feeding loop which terrifies the middle classes and sets the get tough on crime lynch mob off.
How much responsibility should the media be held accountable for sparking the latest moral panic?
Luxon was smashed all over the place by Jack on this nonsense attempt by National to win back ACT Party vote and it was merciless!
Climate Change was another glaring example of how captured National are by the polluters. Luxon couldn’t point to one policy where National will reduce emissions.
His performance today reminds you that National selected him as their Leader, not because he was the best, but because Judith spite rat-f**ked Simon Bridges.
It was either Luxon or Muller again.
National have finally dumped their stupid top tax rate cut and will have to stop bleating about spending they know is essential (and won’t really change under them). Despite the recession and Labour’s woeful delivery, National still can’t capture any real support for their own totally rudderless economic vision.
It’s like a game of rugby where the National Party are on foot and the entire Labour Party are on crutches and National is still only ahead by 2 points.
The Right in NZ have mistaken the animosity towards Jacinda as proof positive they will win the 2023 election and are already doing the victory laps.
Luxon’s woeful performance on Q+A today highlights how misplaced that triumphalism is.
You raise some valid perspectives vman. Not unwarranted.
Traditionally a swing, moderate voter I was hopeful Labour could rectify some of National’s less than ideal policy implications circa 2016. My profession is healthcare.
At this stage Labour makes me almost physically sick. It’s a clearly tracked strategy of reduction of freedoms, erosion of democratic rights, apartheid by stealth and complete disinterest in those boring day-to-day services (Health, Law & Order, Education). Education is now about indoctrination and I’m sad my daughter was asked at 13 on a weekly basis if she’s bi-or-gay at secondary school. I almost do not recognise this country from 5 years ago.
If it is the will of the people at the next election to reappoint the present Labour/Greens mix, so be it! I hope Luxon learns from these interviews and improves. Much depends on his ability to inspire vision and hopefully execute if given the opportunity.
It’s odd, surreal in fact, that the Deputy Prime Minister would state that the government has produced a health system to make New Zealanders safe when there is so much publicity that that is not the case as explained to Minister Little by a large group of clinicians who actually do the job. I wonder about all politicians generally, but particularly so now about those in this government, that they believe what they say must be true simply because they are saying it. Delusional behaviour at its finest.
Neo-liberalism is the root cause of our problems and by voting for an even larger dose of it by voting National Act won't fix anything. Many of our problems lie with the bureaucrats in the treasury who advise the government and we don't get to vote for them at all and politicians have very little understanding of economics themselves.
Weird, I generally see Treasury telling the government something is a bad idea and then the government attacking Treasury for not just rubber-stamping what they want to do, and then doing it anyway.
Guess that explains why all those centralisation projects are on-time and on-budget, huh?
Well I did vote for JK in his first term...and I think I gave a vote to Winny once (hangs head in shame)
I aren't a born & bred Labourite and I am probably in the "Nats" demographic ...but I haven't seen a plan from them that excites me.
And having been in a business run by Luxon,I know he is a fundamentalist Christian that thinks he has been annointed by God to do his work on earth.
I actually felt sorry for Luxon - is he briefed on nothing?
And have they even consulted with the Defense Force hierarchy about whether their soldiers want to be baby sitters for youth criminals? I seem to recall the forces weren't happy at all about being COVID quarantine sitters.
You can't compare their military forced-training camp idea with the current LSV programme - as the 'V' in LSV stands for volunteer and the min age for volunteers is 18.
It might be silly, but sitting back and letting petty crime escalate to the extent that it has isn't the ticket either, and at some point 'doing something' is going to sound better than what looks like 'doing nothing'. Rather than ripping on Luxon for pulling a thread, maybe the emphasis should be on the actual problem to begin with, and what the government with an absolute majority for the first time ever under MMP is actually doing about it.
There simply shouldn't be any threads to pull.
Wake me up when the actual government of today gets held to anywhere near this level of scrutiny.
There is a huge laundry list of policy and project failure under this government, not once has a minister been held to account over it to this level or extent by media.
Journalists like to talk about speaking the truth to power, but in NZ they're still speaking the truth to a government we haven't had since 2017. But when you aren't the ones stuck in a dead-end town in a run-down motel with no hope of anything better, you probably forget that crappy and ineffective government comes with a human cost. You know, the one you cared so much about right up until Labour had to actually do something about it.
You never right anyone off...
https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/politics/victorian-election-2…
Excerpt:'
Daniel Andrews has celebrated a resounding election victory with a speech to "every Victorian", even those who did not vote for him.
He almost immediately addressed the way he handled the pandemic with four words that his detractors will find hard to swallow.
"Hope always defeats hate," he said.
"The fact that Victorians stuck together … looked out for each other … went and got vaccinated because vaccines work … because as a community were not divided but united in our faith in science … that sense of kindness and connection has been confirmed today."
Lol "hope defeats hate".
Some footage of Dan's goons distributing "hope".
Australia is a big place with many state jurisdictions.
Victoria has too much of a woke police state vibe to it for me. But it's mostly an improvement over Auckland.
Besides, if one wants to suffer cold damp winters might as well go the whole hog and upgrade to London.
At what point are people going to just face up to the fact the vax didn't work ? How many times do you have to catch Covid before the light bulb comes on ? 2 ? 3 ? more than 3 times ? The thing I really do not get is that how come I was not vaxxed, have still not had Covid and yet some vaxed people have had it 3 times ? I still see a few people at the supermarket wearing masks, I guess they are trying to avoid catching it for the 5th time.
I have just been in Singapore,been having a bit of a covid wave again recently,a mixture of folk wearing / not wearing masks in public...but mandatory on public transport...don't even think about not wearing a mask in that situation...a man with a side arm will be reminding you of the requirement.
And certainly don't question the government in public about their handling of yhe pandemic or have a go at some one for wearing a 'face nappy'...some of the anti vax big talkers in here would be getting an attitude adjustment over there.
No but can tell you about South Korea. Armed military all over the place and when you try and get a Hotel overnight they look at you a bit strange as they only charge you by the hour. The bed electric went up in all sorts of angles and an English translation was not required for the pictures on the card on how to use it in various "Positions". All together a very enlightening trip just don't ask what it is you are eating.
Statistics does tell us that it reduces the severity of symptoms and can prevent deaths particularly in older people and that it reduces hospitalisations. Who can forget those terrible scenes that we saw in the British hospitals where they were overwhelmed by cases and with patients with tubes down their throats and struggling to breath and with so many deaths.
Maybe he was out in support of his Samoan brothers and sisters who are still waving flags, blocking roads and tooting their horns into the early hours of the morning to celebrate their rugby defeat a week ago. Well I assume it's to do with the rugby, and not a case of turning a blind eye to rioters.
FFS the whole country has been held ot ransom to satisfy one mans ego for 5 years now -- after all without his intervention Labout would not have been in a position to win a second term - and the pain will be felt for generations
Luxom needs to grow a pair -- say he wont work with Wiinne and then its all over red rover -- bye bye bye for ever --
You might be surprised. It's easy to get caught up in ones own echo chamber and believe that society as a whole shares the same disdain you do for Labour. But the majority of people vote for the leader not the policies, and I suspect a good majority of society probably still unfortunately love Cindy.
They'll see Luxon as the "pale stale evil corporate man" whose job is to "make the rich richer and suppress their wages".
Anyone else here see the possibility that Labour call a snap election to avoid an election inside the coming recession? It's quite a risk for Labour as they do not know how deep or sharp the recession will be, By about March next year we will be in recession or Mr Orr will have moved OCR to 5.5% to make sure its near.
Yesterday's Herald: Rebuilding Better - Political parties on the five ideas to improve New Zealand
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/rebuilding-better-political-part…
This was revealing. Has certainly helped me make my mind up about who I'll be supporting. Note it is unfair to labour since they are the party in government; whatever they proposed would be countered with "why haven't you done it".
Has anyone else found it useful?
Labour
- Building resilient infrastructure
- Climate change action
- Child wellbeing
- More public (state) houses
- Trades training
National
- Focusing on what matters
- World-class education
- Responsible economic management
- Better public services through social investment
- Deepening international connections
ACT
- Share the GST on home building with local councils
- Make reading mandatory for parole
- Make Child Youth and Family colourblind
- Have a referendum on the meaning of the Treaty
- Have one body responsible for mental health funding
Greens
- A guaranteed minimum income
- Capital Gains Tax or a Wealth Tax
- Excess profit tax
- A rent freeze, landlord register and rental warrant of fitness
- More clean energy; more public transport and safe options to walk and cycle
Maori
The Te Pāti Māori didn't submit their ideas by the publication deadline
Here we are once again looking for simple answers to complex questions. The problems facing the country are coming from many directions. Both internal and external. So much of what is occurring in this country economically comes from global factors exacerbated by an intellectually outgunned Reserve Bank. I think it is beyond either of the two main parties to solve the problems we face. We need a radical resetting of our values and what unites us as a country. We need to change direction as a nation. Which includes abandoning the worst of the neo liberal policies that have brought us to this state. Surely we have enough intellectual capital in our country to come up with a new plan that steers us in a new direction. The hardest sell being that we need to make financial and lifestyle sacrifices in order to eliminate poverty. Poverty I think presents the greatest threat and opportunity for our country. Until we all feel we are getting a fair share of the nations wealth we will remain divided and continue the slow downward spiral to national despair.
Across much of the world, Education is seen as a way out of Poverty, but it does not seem to be valued in NZ by people who are in Poverty? There are so many jobs going in NZ, it's not that hard to be a bus driver, why are people living in emergency housing in Rotorua when they could be driving a bus in Auckland or Wellington? Some things are complex but some things are obvious answers. My partner got her heavy vehicle license over a weekend recently, she was the only female of 20 on the course. Some where WINZ sponsored and I approve of this spend, it's a good investment to spend $1000 to get someone employed vs the dole week after week. The payback for this investment should be very short. Simple idea not complex at all. After a year or too in NZ these drivers could get a FIFO mine truck driving job paying 150k..... sounds simple to me.
I grew up in poverty and many of my extended family are still in poverty. So my opinion is based on my own experiences and observations. The worst thing about poverty I think is the lack of hope through having to live hand to mouth and surviving day by day. People growing up this way have very low self esteem and view the world through fearful eyes. Many of their peers and elders are probable drip addicts and/or criminals. Any one who gets a break leaves and never comes back because the atmosphere they are leaving behind is often filled with despair and self loathing which is not readily apparent to outsiders. Many of these people do not take available opportunities because of lack of confidence in being able to succeed in a world they are not familiar with. That is why I think poverty is such a destructive state for all involved. the bedrock of crime, violence and drug abuse. To me its greatest crime is the loss of all this potential for our communities and country. It breaks my heart to see my extended family still caught up in it. Trying to communicate with them from my position is met with district and resentment as they think I am behaving in a superior way to them. It is so difficult to reach this community by government agencies as they are treated with suspicion. The only way out of it I see if that we feed, house, clothe and treat people in poverty with dignity. To remove their need to behave in a survival at all costs mentality. To show that they matter to us. Then they will start to see the world through different eyes and begin to participate in the world most of us live in.
The fundamental flaw I see from this approach is you can't just package up dignity and self esteem and give it to people, it needs generating from within for it to have any true value.
I went through a more optimistic period as an employer, taking on people I felt just needed a chance. Gave higher than normal wages, assisted people through aspects of their personal life, etc. In every case I just ended up with staff who saw that as me being a soft touch, so took the piss and advantage, and all ultimately let me down and cost the business.
The foundations of these problems start at a far earlier age and are very hard to surmount once a person matures.
As you explain yourself it is not the poverty (lack of money) that causes despair; it is the low status. When I was young in the Highlands of Scotland many lived in financial poverty but they thought themselves the equal of anybody (maybe the effect of the Church of Scotland). They were poor but produced a remarkable number of graduates at a time when about 5% of school leavers went to university. Some graduates went on to the top jobs in Britain and others just went back to being crofters and fishermen. I'm not sure how we can change our society to have values beyond cash and possessions. My only suggestion is a generous, universal child benefit - no carrying the stigma of being a 'targeted' beneficiary.
Education that there is a better way, Education that there are better opportunities in the World, Education that they can take part in this better world. IMHO IWI must take the lead here, as you say many feel marginalised. Having a job gives you pride. We must lift these people off benefits (Not because it costs money but because they are soul destroying), Maybe we need vocational training at schools so people leave with forklift licenses and heavy goods licenses etc etc etc. University is not for everyone
whakahokia mai - In your opinion, whats stoping people stuck in poverty getting good work to lift them out, or do they have jobs just minimum wage ones? Poverty is defined as a lack of money? Depression and self worth are clearly associated but not limited to earnings. many in middle income suffer from simillar issues.
I think having a job is a big part of the solution along with of course education. In terms of my Iwi we are only now seeing a slow recovery from becoming impoverished overnight from having our land stolen from us with the land confiscations from the 19th century. We went from a thriving community exporting to Australia and relative wealth to landlessness and impoverishment virtually overnight. We lost 43% of our men over this period. It is hard to understand the catastrophic effect on the self esteem of a group and the feeling of injustice, being cheated and powerless to do anything about it. When we drive around our robe (tribal area) we do not see the beautiful countryside all we see is land taken from us unjustifiably. As described in the various treaty settlement acts of parliament along with an admission of guilt and apology. This has had a profound intergenerational effect on the descendants living in an area where as you look around you wealth is being generated by others without you getting any share of this. The anger and bitterness in ongoing to this day. Manifested in the high rates of incarceration, suicide, poor health and drug abuse. Leads to a sense of shame (whakama in te reo) in being Maori which has pervaded the generations until today. The question I ask is how do you give a people back their self esteem and dignity when so much of it stemmed from their land?
The very notion of self esteem implies it derives from one's own actions rather than an external source (in this instance land).
You raise a very real issue though, and not one unique to NZ; i.e the arrival of a new culture with very different values and modes of operating, that ends up supplanting the existing culture. Given the often large disparities in fortunes over generations of such a cultural divide, I don't really know the answer to try and rebalance things. The short answer is that Maori need to operate at a level at or in excess of the norm, which is obviously way easier said than done, for the reasons you've outlined.
I don't really know the answer to try and rebalance things.
I had this very discussion with a friend via email the other day. Here's my thoughts on it:
My point is that co-governance by legislative fiat (even shared-governance) isn’t ever going to end this endless argument about tino rangatiratanga. And, I believe we need in public/common lexicon to refer to shared-governance, as opposed to co-governance in the meantime. This allows rational argument around the proposition that Māori ought to have equal numbers in representation on all these new statutory entities being implemented by the government.
I believe we could fulfil this desire for tino rangatiratanga via an upper/second house – not unlike the House of Lords in the UK which is peerage-orientated in its make up. The work of the second house would be constitutionally limited to examining legislative breaches of ToW, and ToW in the sense of its articles, not its principles (a point made by Debbie N-P that I was pleased to see) – similar to the role the A-G current has in relation to NZBORA. Ability to veto/send back to the House of Representatives one time for recommended amendment, but no powers of veto after that. Also, perhaps certain legislation (e.g., Crimes Act; Care of Children Act) and/or certain parts of the Executive Branch (e.g., Corrections, Oranga Tamariki) to be governed by the second House with opposite veto powers being given to the House of Representatives.
On establishment of the second House, the Māori seats in the current House of Representatives go (and ideally similar voting rights that local government entities might have given to iwi and hapū go too), and the principles of the ToW are removed from all existing legislation – replaced with reference to the Treaty text itself.
Wow, thats sounds like a lot of very expensive bureaucracy. While I appreciate that some benefits may trickle down (not proven by past experience), I am not sure this will change poverty at ground level. I thought we where talking about Poverty as in income? Happy to expand it to cultural poverty (Though Stats NZ doesn't provide much insight on this). How will this have any meaningful impact on Non-Maori Poverty in NZ?
Stats NZ https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/latest-release-of-child-poverty-statisti…
In the year ended June 2020, 17.1 percent of Māori children (49,500) lived in households with less than 50 percent of the median equivalised disposable household income before housing costs are deducted. The rate was slightly higher for Pacific children (19.1 percent or 28,000). These rates compare with 13.8 percent for New Zealand overall.
Pacifica Poverty is higher than Maori? How would shared governance help address Pacifica poverty?
To be fair whakahokia mai raised issues in specific to Maori. But yes fundamentally while there is no actual solution known to these problems, just redefining governance in and of itself is unlikely to make any substantive change.
Any meaningful solution is likely generations in the making.
I think you both miss the fundamental point made by whakahokia mai;
The question I ask is how do you give a people back their self esteem and dignity when so much of it stemmed from their land?
The answer is you have to address tino rangatiratanga - self-determination - as understood to have been guaranteed with the signing of te Tiriti.
Self-determination starts with self-governance - hence a second House.
It's not at all more bureaucracy - indeed NZ is quite unique amongst democracies in that it is unicameral (has only one house). Two houses adds additional checks and balances - like for example regarding the current 3 Waters legislation - if the Māori House agreed with the opposition and was opposed to this idea as well (as I believe Te Patī Māori are opposed) - then, that's a good thing for better decision-making.
Another check on the power of the Executive.
Something that is needed in our constitution but isn't quite there yet (the establishment of Select Committee processes went some way toward better checks and balances, but more are needed)..
If the average person feels our politicians are out of touch and failing to represent the populace, I'm less than convinced that greater co-governance is going to trickle down to a greater feeling of self esteem and dignity amoung those floundering in society.
Fundamentally it's just a change in management structure.
Two Houses is not co-governance - it's a true partnership/shared-governance - both Houses having their own rules/responsibilities within the democratic system. Think the US having both the House and the Senate - same for Australia. And the reason I use Britain and the House of Lords as the example for a second house is that we have always been very much a Westminster parliamentary democracy and I think it superior to a more republican form of government (as per AUS and the US with their separate states and state legislatures). That latter model would to my mind be too bureaucratic for NZ..
To those struggling - you have two houses that both have to sign off on the budget. So, for example, a National government might want to bring in further benefit sanctions, but the Vote required in order to bring that into practice could be ruled out by the Māori house as being a breach of Treaty responsibilities, given Māori are over-represented in those unemployment statistics. And, as I mentioned above, you could also give the Māori House certain Executive Branch responsibilities (i.e., Ministries) - where Māori as clients/users of the services are statistically over-represented - such as Corrections and Oranga Tamariki, This would allow for a te ao Māori approach to management being fully implemented.
Keeping people in poverty is largely a government choice. Two houses might change that.
Just taking corrections for instance, is the solution having oversight that's more representative of inmate demographics, or actually amassing the best minds and practices and implementing them?
I just find it's what we're doing (or not doing) that's the issue, and less so representation.
Indeed. We should focus on being New Zealanders instead of trying to resurrect apartheid. We've had two centuries of interbreeding and nation building pass by now.
Just because I've got some fraction of "Maori DNA" doesn't make me more special than anybody else born and raised here and everybody claiming to be "Maori" is actually some kind of mixed race these days.
Nor does it mean I believe in some prescribed "world view" or mythology or enjoy corporate or government brownwashing.
Give it a break. This country is going nowhere fast while this divisive idiocy continues.
If we want to give special privileges to only those who are genetically pure enough I'm all for it, at least it would be a coherent ideology and it would cut out 95% of the riff-raff.
One you're watered down enough you're out for the count. No more grievance.
Cousin botherer might have a leg up though.
Having a grounding in a particular culture is a great thing. I'm very Irish Catholic in culture but it's three generations ago that anyone I whakapapa to lived on Irish soil. Watered down genetics has no meaning really - it's having a sense of who you are, where you come from and where you feel you belong.
That said, yes, I agree - being New Zealanders must come first. And that is how all our Chinese, Persian, English, etc. friends here feel. NZer first.
The problems extend beyond genes though. As in, there's a genetic component to being Maori, but also identity, culture, social norms, etc.
A tribal culture got supplanted by something with fairly contradictory values, and along the way blew apart that existing culture. That is in its essence a recipe for failure for the existing culture. So long as we still hold values around egalitarianism and fairness, it's fairly hard to ignore.
The short answer is "suck it up and move on", but the path from point A to B is a little more fraught.
Hi Kate. Maoridom need something to unite us as a people. Not based on treaty grievances but on the principles that bind us together. Whakapapa and tikanga among others. Things unique to us as a people that we all share. For this to occur the pending change in the NZ history curriculum is an important step. As education is always an important step. I am hopeful this new information for these young Maori diaspora will encourage them to discover their own whakapapa and learn about tikanga for these connect us all. From there who knows? The children entering the school system for the next 40 or so years will be the ones to come up with a more equitable system in this country. We have come a long way in my lifetime and I feel very optimistic for the future. Many of my pakeha friends are very impressed with what they have learned about tikanga and think these principles are a great set of ideals with which to live their lives.
Yes, I have really enjoyed and benefited from my understanding of te ao Māori and my grandchildren whakapapa Māori. So far, what they are mainly 'taking home' from the education system is a colonization story - not a creation story. In other words, they are not getting enough te ao Māori and are getting too much of a backwards-looking blame game.
Granted history is important - very important - but it is. It cannot be changed, only the future can be changed.
I too have a lot of hope for the future. But, unless the country addresses the fundamental issue of tino rangatiratanga/self-determination, I believe our society will never realise the ideal of working across our two key cultures successfully.
We are in reality a franchise arm of a much larger global economy. Overall that does seem to bring with it the greatest amount of prosperity, you need a lot of resources to go it alone, or accept lower living standards.
Many of the issues facing us are cultural, and I'm not sure they can be changed by changing government. Instead of people earning their right to be here, it's a list of demands on what should be provided, and if someone lacks anything it's because they feel they're marginalised in some way.
More people will die in Europe this winter because of Vladimir Putin’s “energy weapon” than have perished on the battlefield in his war in Ukraine, according to a new analysis.
The Economist modelled the effect of soaring electricity prices on deaths during winter and concluded that the current cost of energy will likely lead to an extra 147,000 deaths if it is a typical winter.
In a particularly harsh winter that could rise to 185,000, but even if it is a mild winter the figure would still be 79,000.
That really depends on how far Russia weakens itself but even if Russia hits rock bottom they have two aces in hand. Firstly they have nukes & secondly at what level does China become involved, if necessary to shore up not only a supposed ally, but the overall presence & image of let’s say, a communist bloc. Audaxes posted here a paper quite a while ago by Henry Kissinger spelling out why Ukraine’s neutrality was vital as both a buffer and filter between the West and the East so to speak. It makes more sense today even than it did then.
The National government introduced full market rents in 1991 to reduce the state role in housing provision..... (It) introduced one of the most radical reforms in the history of state housing: the removal of income-related rents and the establishment of a government accommodation supplement....For hundreds of state house tenants, the impacts of the reforms were detrimental.....Two years later, emergency housing workers in South Auckland reported that many people, unable to afford market rents, were moving in with friends and relatives, often in overcrowded and unhealthy conditions.
https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/we-call-it-home/the-state-steps-in-an…
From 2008 Funny how Labour say 7 house Luxon, seems just to be following Labour ministers example from the past
KEY POINTS:
Colourful National MP Bob "The Builder" Clarkson has nine houses. So does exiled Labour MP Taito Phillip Field. Helen Clark, is a wee way behind with five while Winston Peters has only two - neither in the electorate where he hopes to be the next sitting MP.
The Register of Pecuniary Interests for MPs was tabled in Parliament last week and gives an intriguing insight into how the country's 121 MPs choose to invest their money.
Despite the volatility of the housing market, the numbers still show property remains the investment choice of many MPs - but when it comes to things such as superannuation and banking for many it's a case of "do as I say and not as I do".
While all 121 MPs have listed some form of superannuation savings, only five have signed up for KiwiSaver, the Government's flagship retirement savings scheme - and Finance Minister Michael Cullen isn't one of them.
Fair point. However people use her Fish and Chip shop job as an attack vector rather than her adult experience which is why I drew that comparison. Imagine if people tried to undermine you by referencing your first job as a kid.
I guess it's easy for knuckle draggers who don't understand what "career politician" means to instead pick on someone's childhood. Probably the same people that drag Neve into their memes and trolls.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.