It seems likely that Christopher Luxon can expect to be Prime Minister beyond 2026, and plausibly into a third term, despite his relative unpopularity.
Some commentators opposed to the Coalition and its leader have pointed to Luxon’s poor favorability numbers and controversial policy agenda as signs of a one term Government.
Anything is possible, of course, but a cursory look at the opposition does not suggest it is particularly likely.
The Green Party has suffered an apocalyptic start to the term and has come close to losing almost 25% of its caucus in the first 100 days of opposition.
James Shaw is stepping down after pulling a long shift for the party and Fa’anānā Efeso Collins’ tragic death was nobody's fault, but still both are a big loss for the Greens.
Golriz Ghahraman’s shoplifting fiasco robbed the party of one of its few experienced Parliamentarians, and now the Darleen Tana episode could easily end in another resignation.
The party will be made up of 10 first term MPs and only two with any experience of being in Government. Chlöe Swarbrick is very popular in the party but unproven as a co-leader.
Will this very green Green Party be ready to form a Government with Labour in 2026?
Running on reserves
Labour itself has similar personnel problems. Chris Hipkins has not proven to be a wildly popular or successful leader, although he fought fiercely in the 2023 election.
A party brimming with talent would probably be looking to replace him about now. It hasn’t happened because there is nobody waiting to step up — the bench is looking empty.
Lots of Labour MPs are good in their portfolios but contrast them against the National Party, where one could fairly easily pick out a handful of future leaders.
Nicola Willis, Erica Stanford, Mark Mitchell, James Meager… these names are thrown around.
The problems facing the three opposition parties run deeper than just personnel, however.
Labour needs to reinvent itself, decide where to sit on the political compass, and come up with a better platform than it had in 2023.
It has a policy council doing a bunch of this work, which Politik reports is strongly in favour of a wealth tax but Hipkins is lukewarm on the idea. He may struggle to sell it during an election.
Without new taxes, there will be little scope for the big dreams of Labour’s political allies.
Both the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori want more economic redistribution and revenue to fund progressive ideals. Neither are in the mood for pragmatic centrism.
All coalitions are chaos
Te Pāti Māori has also re-established itself as a protest party and it is difficult to see how it could fit into a formal coalition. You cannot protest the Crown and also be part of the Crown.
Perhaps the left should have a two-term election strategy, aimed at taking over the Beehive in 2029. That would give Labour a chance to recruit talent and the Greens more experience.
The counterargument is that National and Act fell short of a majority in 2023 and had to cobble together a somewhat awkward coalition with NZ First to get into Government.
It’s an arrangement that could self-destruct and send voters searching for a safe, centrist alternative. That’s a role Hipkins could play well, were he to be so lucky.
More likely is that National will win reelection in 2026 as the economy comes bouncing out of recession (blamed on Labour) and with the first effects of its positive policies being felt.
There have not been many one-term Governments in New Zealand, so Labour should plan for the far future, focus on recruiting top talent, and make sure it can lock in its legacy next time.
106 Comments
Will the lyrics change? https://youtu.be/rMePrwQfT5I?si=YFoKCLW1XL1o6KVh
A large number of large assumptions here:
- It is a coalition of chaos. It won’t last 3 terms.
- Economy bouncing out of recession. Why should it?
- National’s positive policies? Which ones are these - all I see is policy destruction, negativity and retrenchment.
- Luxon will stay - nope, he will get bored or get tired of keeping his 2 coalition clowns in line, or Willis will think she’s the next great thing and will boot him out.
The country cannot afford 10 years of do-nothing government centred on looking the other way on all serious policy issues, as well as granting landlords as much welfare support as they ask for.
all I see is policy destruction, negativity and retrenchment
Good morning Larry76, were you fine when Chris Hipster was having his policy bonfire smokescreen hoping the public would quickly forget how Ardern had slimed her way through country. He added more policies to the heap each time new contentious issues came up. Chris was as bad if not worse than Ardern herself.
As for the Ardern doco waste of public money, I am going to buy a safety guard for the TV set so it cannot cause my widescreen TV to explode
After seeing 1 or two, it was too painful watching Arderns covid briefings: head nodding, eyebrows going up and down, everyone is vulnerable, super extended Auckland lockdowns, extra money printing....
So the chances of me watching a whole documentary on her are 0.000%
A coalition of chaos? Perhaps. The unfortunate aspect of that thought though is that the alternative coalition on offer, would be undoubtedly more chaotic by a country mile. Therein lies the crux of the matter. As Chris Trotter accurately predicted here months before the election, the voters will be obliged to opt for the least worst.
Agree.
NZ is generally slightly left of centre. As a comparison, ACT would sit slightly right of centre in many Euro countries and the US.
This is reflected in the "natural" level of support of our parties. Since Clark, Labour's seem to be in the 25-35% range. With Greens 10-15%, so to get the majority they need someone else.
NZF wont last another election. Leaving TPM. The majority will vote how they did last election to stop that from happening.
Nonsense. Right of centre parties have dominated the treasury benches. New Zealand is a generally conservative country. Over the last six years people have generally favoured the left, it’s been a trend, it’s failed. Soon it will be firmly in the back view mirror.
Right of centre for NZ. Globally we are pretty liberal.
We have universal health, super, education, and a range of other benefits. We were first to give women the vote and one of the first to allow gay marriage. We have also decriminalised prostitution and abortion, and legalised euthanasia. We have religious freedom, no military service, and our prison system is based around rehabilitation.
Hardly the backbone tenets of a "right" conservative nation.
What does Left even stand for these days? Enthusiasm for clamping down on free speech? Centralising power ie. from council -> government -> supranational like the world health organization? Discrediting and silencing anyone who disagrees with them? Endless distractions with utterly irrelevant gender identity politics? wokeism ie. victim worshipping. Buying the media so we all go along with it? Trying to convince us that the world is ending because of CO2?
Whoever’s opposing all that BS has my vote for sure!
You’ve highlighted the ridiculousness, but it’s a serious matter too. A core principal of woke ideology (aka. social justice or postmodernism) is a power imbalance between oppressors and the oppressed. In that respect, the ideology is a more general version of Marxism where the Bourgeoisie have been replaced with “oppressors” and Proletariat replace with “oppressed”. It really is neomarxism, and maybe that’s what the left really stands for?
Just think about it for a sec - a coaltion with Labour, the Greens and the Maori Party.
Together, they would irreparably damage the NZ economy and society, and in less than a three-year term.
Anything, literally anything would be way better than such a nightmarish scenario.
We spoke in transit with an American couple, he an attorney, she a district judge, at AKL at the time of Obama’s presidency. They were highly critical - he was a socialist. They explained that meant that money they had earned, paid tax on and saved would be taken from them and paid to someone who had done none of those things. Yep, out from the tradesmen entrance, the traditional good workers here finally woke up and realised that’s exactly what the 6th Labour government was all about.
And why have they made you angry? The dumped the smoke free NZ policy? They are trying to remove free lunches in schools? They removed the Maori health authority? They dare to say we should have a discussion about the treaty, which National says it will do nothing about? The first 3 where not around before Labor's second term so National have gone back to the status quo 3 years ago. The last is a nothing unless people really agree. Nothing has changed since Labour last won the election. Oops forgot about interest deductiblity on loans. If you weren't angry about that before as you say why are you angry now?
I would say you are angry, the media have portrayed evil starving children, kill people through smoking. All they have done is set it back to what it was 3 years ago. Look I am not saying the current policies are better, but the reaction is just over the top.
I also expect a lot more protest, as people are convinced they should be outraged.
Perhaps look at this, assuming they follow through.
https://pointofordernz.wordpress.com/2024/03/15/heres-a-part-of-what-wi…
I agree with 3 out of your 4 points. Where I differ is I think the economy will recover (it will not be stella, there is no real plan to improve productivity to catch up with Australia, North America, Europe, or even Asia yet there will be a recovery). Inflation is falling all around the world and eventually high interest rates in NZ will eliminate inflation here too. In two- or three-years times it is likely interest rates will be significantly lower because the fight against inflation will be over. This will be a boost to the economy.
I'm still waiting for a decent recession. The normalisation of the 10-2 yield curve that's preceded the last lot of recessions back to at least 1980 hasn't occurred yet. If we get that later this year or early next year then the time the next election rolls around we may be in a fair bit more pain economically than we think we are now. Still a lot of water to go under the bridge.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10Y2Y zoom back as far as the bar will go.
Could get to the point that voter turn out keeps dropping if no one feels they can rely on the main parties perceived core fundamentals. Labour crapped on their core constituents. And National being the supposed financially literate party being in power during a decent down turn won't help their supporters either. Easy to lose trust and bloody hard to regain it so in essence, who knows what'll happen.
The question then becomes how much influence will a possibly tepid global recovery have on our economy relative to the clearly bonkers austerity driven destructive actions of the present government. Not much good if the global situation improves slightly if governments here (I am including the previous one) think that pumping and bailing out non-productive activity is a solution to anything. That sort of nonsense might fly in good times but is especially destructive in bad times.
Keep in mind that whether or not the economy is in a good place is a decision most people will make based on personal circumstances - not some careful analysis of GDP and trade statistics. I can't see personal circumstances improving for many people for a while. Even a slight fall in interest rates will still translate into "I'm still stuffed" for a lot.
Two terms I reckon. The previous government showed that a poor government can easily stay for two terms if the opposition is a rabble.
I think it’s fairly likely that the economy will be getting better before the next election although I think the upturn will be moderate.
History would disagree. No National government has done less than three terms and the first two, Holland &Holyoak did more. On the other hand, since the advent of National, only Clark’s Labour government has achieved three terms and those of Nash & Kirk were one term only. Different times now. Not only MMP but vastly different dynamics in the electorate and especially social media and other modern influences. Said all that to say Two terms as you suggest is not implausible.
I wonder if this govt will last the full three years of the first term? I can see Act or NZF refusing to play nice and the country having to go to the polls sooner than planned. But I think if that happens, National won't get punished, but will be able to form a new Govt with only one support partner and get their second term.
Look at the bigger picture, if National does their job, they will not need NZF at the next election, its as simple as that really. Three years to sort the mess left by Labour and no way Hipkins is going to get in so they have to find another leader, who would you suggest ? That's right they don't have anyone.
i think the test will be next year when DS becomes deputy PM and if he throws WP under the bus which is in his nature to do, then after the next election could be trouble, i dont Think ACT will gain as much support next time once a lot of their policies start to bite in peoples wallets so it will depend on national growing a bigger support and to be fair they are maxed out at the support they get.
DS throws everyone under the bus to advance himself, ask the 4 ACT mps from last term that were put so far down the list they had no chance of coming back, at least two had the foresight to retire from politics, the other two will most likely hang in there until DS goes or gets rolled
Labour's (and the left) problem is they had a leader - Jacinda - who could sell a vision ("let's do this" to transform NZ into a fairer and kinder country) but they lacked the team who could implement it. They lost credibility because promises were not delivered upon. Building back that credibility is their biggest task. Going forward they need to recruit and develop MPs who can understand how the systems that govern NZ work and how those systems need to change to achieve a vision that has broad public appeal (that can achieve a democratic mandate).
National and particularly Luxon problem is they are drifting away from their clearly articulated vision. In opposition they had a lot of message discipline around the main focus being cost of living. Yet in the 3-4 months that Luxon has been the PM he hasn't explained his vision for how his government is improving NZ's cost of living.
It's way too early to speculate.
The only thing they've done so far is to grease the hands (wallets) of their financial supporters to ensure they've got a massive budget to back them up going into their next election campain.
They've done next to nothing to secure a tide of actual votes. I'd suggest they've moved the tide out, not in.
Far too much emphasis on the imagined strength of the potential opposition come election time and not enough on the very real (unimagined?) policy decisions already made by the new government.
My impression is that this government don't actually understand their own supporters. National and Act supporters these days are not all fat cats but people that would have been Labour voters 50 years ago. Working class business owners (think tradies, etc). These are people that are intimately familiar with the real private sector economy because they engage with it directly. They voted right in the hope that this government would support them in their endeavours.
What has this government done for them so far? Very little that I can see. Worse, they are on an austerity binge - in some cases cutting projects that were a lifeline for these people. See the Ferry debacle and what happened to people that had already committed to Picton for a few years. These very people are the bread and butter of National and Act support these days.
People that lose their jobs and livelihood on this government's watch will blame this government even if the root cause is debatable.
I'd be surprised if this government is only around for a single term - that is a rare occurrence. I wouldn't be surprised if when we do see a change it will involve NZ First and Labour. Winston's face is nowhere near the austerity policies and people know it.
I wrote there that I think this government "don't actually understand their own supporters". I'm actually being generous. The cynic in me thinks that they do, but they don't actually care about their hoi-polloi support. They think they can satisfy their backers regardless of the costs to society at large then get away with feeding their voters more bs as the next election. Do it all upfront and as quickly as possible to have the best chance of having people forget what they actually did come election time. Maybe that's why everything is 'urgent'?
You forgot about the two Wars up north. Either one of them or even both of them could go big! Nuclear even. If that happens its going to be a long 10 years of winter after the initial flash of light.
What political party is geared up to govern a long nuclear winter?
Yes indeed. NZ is a small boat in a big sea and subject to what the big boats do and don’t do. Coming over the horizon too is USS Trump with all the ability of a thoughtless, careless buffoon who likes to play with matches. In the 1970s NZ was bent to its knees by international oil crises and still today, there is little a little country can do to protect itself and its trade when the big guys start throwing boulders.
I wad talking to a Malaysian business man this week, and he made a very thought provoking point. He moved here in 2000 and has made a fortune out of the property market. He's currently selling up and moving his money back to Malaysia. He's currently looking at buying a couple of small manufacturing companies here as they have good IP, and move the manufacturing to Malaysia. He said making money in NZ was dead...'what do I invest in?'... to be honest, I see his point. What does foreign capital invest in in NZ... property has bad returns. We have no real business to speak of. Any thoughts?
The problem is we are a small isolated country , taking advice and investment from the big players. The only field we come close to been an equal player in is dairy. In a smaller way we have property , mortgages and tourism.
So we need to think like a small business, not a big corporate.
How does a small business survive. find a niche product , excel in it , don't go down the lowest price is best route. NZ has its natural beauty and relative clean environment, which these clowns seem intent on wrecking with the sale of the big corporates.
The best thing is for that Malaysian businessman to go back home , and find a business there , to take to Vietnam , or wherever the next "low cost" centre is .
But it's like John Key says... we can't get rich selling things to one another. We need foreign investment (his words, not mine). In my opinion, the biggest challenge this government has, is making our own small businesses productive again. Our cost of operating is horrendous. I agree about finding a niche, but unless the government creates the right environment... the needy and the greedy will keep plugging money into existing housing. The next 12 months is going to be huge for this government, personally I think the public will grow restless...
There are lots of ways to 'do' foreign investment. One way is to sell existing things. The other way is to encourage investment in new things.
I like the way Norway approached this decades ago. They encouraged foreign investment to build new hydro and develop their newly discovered oil fields. It was sufficiently attractive to those with the capital even though the policy was that after 50 years ownership reverted to the state. Unfortunately state ownership is like garlic to neoliberal vampires so good luck finding someone to champion that sort of idea these days.
I like garlic (in the right dish).
we can't get rich selling things to one another
If we are making those things we can.
We really do need a government that is interested in productive small (and medium, and even large!) businesses. So far as I can tell, this government ain't that government.
Personally, I'd like to see a government with the courage to take more control over credit creation. Lower rates for business borrowing, higher rates for borrowing that contribute nothing to GDP (e.g. borrowing to purchase existing non-productive assets). Something like that seems to have worked well for Japan and Germany. Instead, we have the opposite. A government that not only encourages non-productive lending but is dead keen on bailing out those borrowers when they make bad decisions (e.g. support for landlords that clearly overpaid).
You couldn't find a more egregious example of this than the ferry debacle. Whatever way you cut it, taxes that should be used to support productive activity instead go to supporting and encouraging non-productive activity.
This is why Labour lost & also why they will be out of Govt for an extended period (at least 2 terms). Not enough voters trust the current Labour politicians / party with our democracy.
Curia poll October 2023
>3:1 voters support the Treaty Principles Bill (4:1 National, 6:1 Labour)
https://thefacts.nz/equality/31-voters-support-the-treaty-principles-bill-41-national-61-labour/
While it's true that the last government lost power after introducing a lot of unpopular policies, this isn't why they lost power in my opinion. They lost because the economy turned to poo. Not in some abstract way, but in a very real "holy shit, what am I going to do when these interest rate rises hit me? Tax cuts? Yes please!" way.
If this government carries on as they are and the global economy doesn't miraculously save them they'll go the same way. It's not inconceivable that three years from now people will look back on the Labour years fondly (as in, that time they had a job, nice house, and a future for them and their family to look forward to).
It's not even a left right thing so much as an economy thing. To paraphrase some guy - "it's the economy, egghead'.
Precisely. It is easy to look back with rose tinted glasses when the economy was booming and everyone had spare cash, wages were going up etc, however man many others remember incessant govt advertising via every media platform including ads on websites and social media which were not avoidable, being unable to see family and friends, being judged by others for silly things due to all of the advertising, having hopes up then crushed again by further lockdowns, and watching house prices skyrocket to ridiculous levels, effectively deleting many hopeful homeowners deposits they saved so hard to get. The economy was great due to being juiced with stimulants, and now that there's going to be a long recovery we all must endure irrespective of who is in government, as they were lumped with an economical hangover and high inflation to manage at an inopportune time in the economic boom bust cycle.
Dan's argument for the NACTF getting another term seems to be based on the fact that after 108 days - or whatever it is according to Luxon who likes to tell us ad nauseum - the opposition is a mess.
Need I point out that the National/ACT opposition was a similar mess for years up until about 6 months before Labour lost the election?
Far too early to make any call on what the opposition will be like 6 months before the next election. The economy, however, we can make much more accurate predictions about. [evil grin]
It is a real shame that we're at a point where we are making assumptions on the coalition success in the future purely on the fact that there is weak opposition. This is simply 'the best of a bad bunch' scenario when we desperately need real leadership and vision.
I was glad for a change of government and am happy to give this current group some time to prove themselves but I must say, I am losing hope rather quickly. I just watched Luxon being interviewed re Police pay and it was horrific. He had no idea, was oblivious to facts and figures that he should know and just prattled off the same non committed BS time after time. He looked very very amateur. It feels like this is a Govt (National anyway) that is just going to pull out the same ol playbook on a New Zealand that is vastly different from when they were last in power. I am becoming very concerned that we may be in real trouble.
It was a car crash alright, just an uninspiring leader all up. You’d think having been voted in by a big chunk of people who put dealing with crime as their most important criteria, they would’ve been mindful of being seen to be supporting the police as much as possible - eg funnelling a bit of that money their way
Dan, I think you're forgetting the deep recession that we are entering and what that will do to Nat's reputation. People will vote for the other lot if the dole queues are long, crime is up, shops are boarded up, and they can't afford coffee.
Mind you, every change of govt in last 40 years has happened when house prices are falling (or have just fallen), so I guess they could persuade RBNZ to juice the housing market at the opportune time. Or, more likely they will find a scapegoat for our malaise - migrants, bludgers etc.
Dan was given a lot of homework, back when he forst started.
I queried him a couple of times - clearly he hadn't done the homework .
And still hasn't. That's optional for the likes of the bleaters upthread - flying high, jeremyr, the usual deniers af all and any Limits - but it's not acceptable in a journalist.
Globally, the next couple of years will see major screws coming on; more and more failed states (from Haiti to the US) and it's odds-on ae see a recession, a depression - and ultimately a collapse. It would be good if we discussed what to do....
It doesn’t seem to matter what the topic is PDK you always have the same one dimensional answer no matter what the question is.
the topic is whether the current government is going to be around for 2,3 or 4 terms. You are spouting your conspiracy theories about running out of stuff again. Why? The two are not related.
Interesting comment - I've just heard it somewhere else...
And it's wrong.
The two are entirely related - which is why I regard this piece as click-bait social-media-ering at best. And a long way from journalism.
We are well across the Limits to Growth plateau, now, and geopolitics in the next two years is an interesting question-mark? More GROWTH, is the only bet not on the table... Which means theses folk can't/won't deliver; becoming obvious even now.
I find it hard to believe, but labour may well go into the next election with Hipkins still as leader. How many times do you get to fail? They will be 'buttressed' by an ever further to the left Green and Maori parties, determined to have a punishing wealth tax. labour too will have to have some form of capital tax proposal to put to the electorate.
Unless this coalition does implode, then yes, Luxon can anticipate another term in office.
I disagree. This could easily be a one term government based on the start they have made. So many cuts, yet 3 billion for housing investors, I cant get past that, and it will surely be brought up at the next election. As long as Labour makes it clear that one of their coalition partners will have little bearing on policy they could easily come right back in. Some of Labours lowest calibre MPs have now gone to other parties or resigned in the last 12 months also.
Agree. To be fair, that $3b for housing investors is just giving back what they had before. While I don't agree with interest deductibility for Landlords due to the huge distortions in the property market, I get that it is a standard "business" accounting practice (if we want to call them businesses).
However, I can imagine it won't sit well with a good number of voters who will just see the big headline $3b number for "wealthy rotten landlords" while the Police and Nurses go without, and the kids go hungry at school.
Is it really just giving back what they had before if interest costs have increased so much? Seems to me that a government seeing that big loss of revenue on the horizon should do something about it. It all really highlights the dangers in treating a non-profit making business (i.e. one that deliberately makes a loss with an eye on future capital gains) the same as an actual profit making business.
Just imagine if they’d held back on reinstating tax breaks to landlords ( sorry, “business owners”) and used that 3bn to cover the new ferries, plus huge pay boosts and benefits to keep police and nurses here and attract more to nz, and a good chunk given to subsidise startups/innovative business and STEM. THEN I would’ve said they have a very good chance of getting re-elected another couple of terms. That was all they had to do.
Yeah, it's very early days. Luxon is still coming out with clangers. I thought he might be learning, but I don't think he has a natural radar. Or he's getting confused by bad advice. With the strong personalities in coalition there's still a lot of time for it to go really bad. And remember it was hardly a convincing majority last time.
The government puts nothing into the economy, any extra money it puts in is from borrowing, which over time takes money out of the economy. Printing money also puts nothing into the economy either all it does makes more money available. We need to start producing actual thing, not just bureaucracy which in the end of the day makes everything less efficient.
NZ was very lucky indeed that last lot of turkeys were evicted from the Beehive. Chippo was going to show the rest of the world how to beat global warming. Did anyone else notice the increasing numbers of Kiwis decamping for Australia?
How was the NZ economy going to survive with tourism, farming and other industries defined as 'polluters' by the socialists destined for the axe? Maybe we could have become a world leader in Software and computers as envisaged by Aunty Helen many years ago.....hahaha
Sitting on our hands for 20 years waiting for forests to grow? Or maybe we could just build lots of new houses for immigrants with no jobs. It was reported some time back that there's 40,000 empty houses in Auckland.
If National is serious about another two terms then they need to boost the economy. They were looking to juice the housing market with the foreign buyers money but NZ First killed that so apart from reinstating tax breaks for landlords there doesn't seem to be a serious plan.
Might I suggest a New Zealand version of Biden's Build Back Better. That is far and away the best economic playbook on the world stage right now. The results are plain to see - the US is the best looking horse in the glue factory by a long shot. Europe and China are in trouble.
I am talking about the real economy which is separate from the speculative economy. The speculative world is on a roll. Judging by the bitcoin shootaway there is big liquidity out there. Where bitcoin and shares go real estate generally follows.
I can't, in good faith, back the current coalition, nor anyone really. Until we change our thought process to planning for the next 40-50years instead of the next 3 then we will always be doomed to fall prey to short term thinking and no meaningful investment in future planning. The coalition currently in power are so focused on delivering results for themselves to get another term instead of trying to convince the public that voted them in that there are some large scale investments needed such as the ferries, that will benefit everyone. Time to think about the needs of the many vs the needs of the few.
I disagree, I think we plan too far in the future, no plan will survive 40 years, its pointless all you are going to do is pay a lot of people money to plan.
I think we need more doing and less planning, Its like raising the retirement age, do it or don't it is utterly pointless to say we are going to do it in 10 years.
Hell they can't even plan the road works on a street so in the next 6 months the don't have to dig it up again, do you really expect them to plan for the next 40 years, through successive government, climate change what ever else pops up, hell no.
No plan survives first contact with the enemy
Of course you can plan for the next 40 years, it just involves setting out the framework today and sticking to it.
The last 40 years we had rampant house price appreciation from a combination of mass immigration, lowering of mortgage rates and restrictive land use policies. Those were all planned decisions.
If you wanted to build 250k houses in the next 30 years, you might start off with a trades training scheme that targets school leavers so that we have the workforce. Adopt a product approvals method that meets international standards. Rid the RMA and roll out something more simplified. etc. Some actions might be consecutive to previous, but it's a long term plan.
40 is too short, too intellectually lazy.
The North American Indians - much closer to long-term sustainability that we are - thought in terms of the seventh generation hence.
Compare that to the ignorance unthread... indeed, compare that to the chosen-ignorance underwriting the initial op/ed...
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.