Nat/act/nzf 2023

[Balance]

I'd love to see that. However, could you imagine? Ironically, the MSM would then cry foul that the govt is now interfering in the fourth estate

But okay for them to receive bribe money in return for blindly supporting Labour's racist policies and kissing Ardern's arse.

[causecelebre]

But okay for them to receive bribe money in return for blindly supporting Labour's racist policies and kissing Ardern's arse.

Exactly, hypocrites. That PIJF.....

[mistaTea]

But okay for them to receive bribe money in return for blindly supporting Labour's racist policies and kissing Ardern's arse.

They know it would be bl00dy cheeky to ask the current govt for any favours given the hostility etc. Won't stop them, but they do know it is cheeky.

Perhaps their aim is to try to inflict as much damage as they can in the hope voters will install Labour again and the gravy train can continue.

National/ACT/NZF just need to make sure that they do start showing some tangible results in the months following the budget. The proof will always be in the pudding.

Was watching some of the debate in parliament earlier. Good for a bit of a giggle.

Was hilarious watching Marama try quiz the PM. Such lazy questions about fast track legislation, and she didn't seem to understand that a supplementary question does in fact need to relate to the primary question Nor did she understand that no organisation has gone the fast track process yet, so any questions about potential conflict of interest are moot at this point.

Hipkins tried to do a few points of order to bail her out, but just looked like a muppet as usual.

I never hear about any of this stuff from Maiki for some reason. Hmmmmmn.

Baldy did well I think, he is getting better as his experience grows.

[RTM]

They have certainly given numbers on the number of people getting the sack at the various ministries, as well as overall dollar amounts of savings.

But I dont really know what those roles are, and what it means in terms of executing the fundamental purpose of each organisation etc.

It 'sounds like' a lot of these roles are just not necessary, and the current govt believes they can reduce headcount, save cash and refocus the remaining resources. That sounds good and prudent to me.

But MSM paint a different picture, and give the impression that the job cuts/cost savings translate to a reduction in quality and quantity of service/care as a result. Govt reducing services left, right and centre so they can give tax cuts.

This is where communication from the current govt is more important than ever. They are in an environment where they are forced to make some really tough decisions to try and steady the ship as a start while also dealing with a hostile media.

And if anyone still doesn't think the MSM is hostile to the current govt, please go back and watch the 11 minute hysterical presentation on 1 News by Maiki Sherman on the recent poll. They dedicated damn near 20% of their show to Maiki all but dancing the Commala on stage.

Thats a great summary, especially last paragraph.

But I wouldn't want them to spend an undue amount of time on comms at this stage. It's a no win. They need to push on, get stuff done and working more efficiently. They will be judged on results, and they have about thirty months to achieve those results. And another point..unrelated, a three year term is hopeless, especially when there is a change of government. Should by 5 years for the first term when the government changes, reverting to 3 thereafter.

[mistaTea]

Thats a great summary, especially last paragraph.

But I wouldn't want them to spend an undue amount of time on comms at this stage. It's a no win. They need to push on, get stuff done and working more efficiently. They will be judged on results, and they have about thirty months to achieve those results. And another point..unrelated, a three year term is hopeless, especially when there is a change of government. Should by 5 years for the first term when the government changes, reverting to 3 thereafter.

Yeah, a balancing act for sure in terms of enough comms to take the people on the journey versus spending so much time trying to comms everything that you lose focus and fail to actuall deliver.

As per Parliamentary term... I think someone once said that three years is nowhere near long enough for a good government, but far too long for a bad one!

Careful what you wish for...

Under a 5 year Parliamentary term we may have ended up with 10 years of Labour and we would 100% be bankrpupt by the time they eventually got the boot

[RTM]

Yeah, a balancing act for sure in terms of enough comms to take the people on the journey versus spending so much time trying to comms everything that you lose focus and fail to actuall deliver.

As per Parliamentary term... I think someone once said that three years is nowhere near long enough for a good government, but far too long for a bad one!

Careful what you wish for...

Under a 5 year Parliamentary term we may have ended up with 10 years of Labour and we would 100% be bankrpupt by the time they eventually got the boot

Nah....5+3 = 8
Just an extension for the first term. 3 is not long enough to turn the ship around.

[nztx]

Nah....5+3 = 8
Just an extension for the first term. 3 is not long enough to turn the ship around.

Just look at Labour's 2 x 3 for ripping success of sorts

Given any longer they would probably have the legs coming off the Parliamentary chairs & tables for firewood ..