National - FFS!

[Balance]

Now that comment is even weirder than some of your other weird posts - an insult to all NZers?? - how many whiskeys had you consumed when you posted that?

Last poll showed National at 25.1% and you (who believes employers who top up wage subsidies to their employees are beneficiaries) were adamant the poll was not rogue, remember?

Just relax, tim23 - you are losing your grip.

[tim23]

Last poll showed National at 25.1% and you (who believes employers who top up wage subsidies to their employees are beneficiaries) were adamant the poll was not rogue, remember?

Just relax, tim23 - you are losing your grip.

Oh dear - you poor individual - Labour on 53% its all over for your beloved Nats and yes COVID created a whole new band of beneficiaries including employers and that just proves my point - when a crisis comes anyone can become dependent on the state and thats okay.

[Balance]

Oh dear - you poor individual - Labour on 53% its all over for your beloved Nats and yes COVID created a whole new band of beneficiaries including employers and that just proves my point - when a crisis comes anyone can become dependent on the state and thats okay.

And there you have it - tim23 as demented as that circus clown in the White House.

Employers putting their own funds to top up wage subsidies = taxpayers and definitely not beneficiaries being bred by Comrade Cindy as tim23 believes.

Guess why the Warehouse gave Comrade Cindy & her incompetents the middle finger salute by refusing to play further her ‘wage subsidy delaying the inevitable’ game and is in the process of laying hundreds off?

[moka]

"Rainy day" access has been allowed for many years now, under the financial hardship rules or terminal illness rules.
It depends on your definition of "rainy day." The hardship criteria is very strict, and rightly so.
Bjauck was saying if you can withdraw money to get a house deposit, why shouldn't they be able to withdraw their kiwisaver money early to get money for a tenancy bond, to buy investments or a business just as those who want to buy a home can? I think it should be strict and a tenancy bond is not a good reason.

[moka]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12352128 (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12352128)
The real reason for rogue MPs. The problem of the rogue MPs is not a problem of the inherent dissolution of youth.
I don't think the problem is age or gender. It's bullies.

Remember the list? Hamish Walker MP, resigned for misusing private patient information and keeping quiet about it.
Todd Barclay MP, resigned for allegedly bullying his electorate secretary and other staff.
Jami-Lee Ross MP, still in Parliament but resigned from his party amid claims he bullied his staff and another MP. Ross is also before the High Court charged with electoral fraud.
A little earlier, Aaron Gilmore MP, resigned after claims he bullied restaurant staff. And most recently, Iain Lees-Galloway MP, resigned as a minister for supposedly misusing the power of his office. Andrew Falloon MP, his alleged sins outlined above.

BULLIES COME in all shapes and sizes. They don't become powerful because they somehow slip past the screening system. They're not aberrations. They are what the system is designed to find. They are the system.
It's true in Parliament; especially, it seems, but by no means exclusively, in the National Party. But not only there. It's true in business, in sports, in cultural organisations and everywhere else too.

Bullies. With their cocky confidence and their determination to get their own way. With their low capacity for compassion, their lack of respect for people they think are inferior to them, and that's most of us but particularly women, people of colour, the poor and the vulnerable.
Bullying is what senior MPs who are themselves bullies encourage in their junior colleagues.

[BlackPeter]

Oh dear - you poor individual - Labour on 53% its all over for your beloved Nats and yes COVID created a whole new band of beneficiaries including employers and that just proves my point - when a crisis comes anyone can become dependent on the state and thats okay.


And there you have it - tim23 as demented as that circus clown in the White House.

Employers putting their own funds to top up wage subsidies = taxpayers and definitely not beneficiaries being bred by Comrade Cindy as tim23 believes.

Guess why the Warehouse gave Comrade Cindy & her incompetents the middle finger salute by refusing to play further her ‘wage subsidy delaying the inevitable’ game and is in the process of laying hundreds off?

Any chance we could go back to kicking the ball instead of the player? Frankly - the tone of these posts is disgusting ...

[iceman]

It depends on your definition of "rainy day." The hardship criteria is very strict, and rightly so.
Bjauck was saying if you can withdraw money to get a house deposit, why shouldn't they be able to withdraw their kiwisaver money early to get money for a tenancy bond, to buy investments or a business just as those who want to buy a home can? I think it should be strict and a tenancy bond is not a good reason.

I agree moka. In fact my preference would be for no withdrawal before 65 whatsoever except for the terminally ill.

[Bjauck]

..I think it should be strict and a tenancy bond is not a good reason. It is very good reason if that would be the only way to move your family into a home. Not everyone would be able to afford home ownership even with Kiwisaver contributing to a deposit.

Anyway I think Kiwisaver should not be accessed early unless there is terminal illness.

[Joshuatree]

Dont feed the troll its like putting out fire with gasoline.This behaviour has been going on for years, This troll craves attention (fuel) and will stop at nothing to get its feed.

[artemis]

It is very good reason if that would be the only way to move your family into a home. Not everyone would be able to afford home ownership even with Kiwisaver contributing to a deposit.
Anyway I think Kiwisaver should not be accessed early unless there is terminal illness.

There are varieties of welfare available to help people pay ingoing for a rental. Not necessary to be on a benefit. Loans, grants, TAS. Possibly Sustaining Tenancies initiative that is designed to support tenants to stay in their rental if they are in danger of being given notice to terminate.

Have to say, though, that the prospective landlord will know soon enough if they can't pay the initial requirement. Either because s/he will be asked to supply information to MSD or because the money doesn't turn up so the contract is cancelled.

[moka]

There are varieties of welfare available to help people pay ingoing for a rental. Not necessary to be on a benefit. Loans, grants, TAS. Possibly Sustaining Tenancies initiative that is designed to support tenants to stay in their rental if they are in danger of being given notice to terminate.
If you are on a benefit or the minimum wage it probably won’t cover your living expenses, let alone having any money left over to save for a rainy day, or a bond.

https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/housing/move-house/bond-and-rent-in-advance/bond-grant.html#null (https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/housing/move-house/bond-and-rent-in-advance/bond-grant.html#null)
Bond grant. If you're moving into a private rental and don’t have enough money to pay bond, we may be able to help.
We can pay up to the lesser amount of either:
4 weeks of rent, or
$2,000.
You don’t have to pay this money back.
You can only get one bond grant over 12 months.
If your application’s approved, we’ll pay the bond directly to the landlord.

[moka]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/122295535/nationals-identity-crisis-is-bad-for-nzs-democracy?rm=a
National's identity crisis is bad for NZ's democracy.

Labour’s brand is that of a party that essentially is prepared to spend more on the less well-off in society. The leader represents the brand and in Ardern Labour has hit the jackpot. She is competent and compassionate.

But what does National stand for? We know it’s a conservative party. Conservatism is about putting a brake on radical change and scepticism about any grand ideas to alter human nature. It represents (over others) the doers and producers – farmers, business, the self-employed, property owners, professionals – who rely on clarity, order, prudent spending and efficiency in government.

Because it believes it represents substantial people, National presents itself as the natural party of government. It sells itself as the best team to be running the country, better than the other lot anyway. But the party is failing on all counts. The team it suggests should be running the country looks decidedly clueless and splintered.

National has been caught out by a shift in public thinking or attitude. The country has joined the world in a shift towards the Left’s view on race, equality and the wrongs of the past. It may not be much of a shift but there is no going back.

Although National promotes itself as the party of growth, growth has also lost a lot of its magic. Growth at what cost, comes the cry.

Like most parties, it is in favour of everything that is good and against everything that is bad. Labour would have no argument with a single one of its listed values except maybe with limited government. And limited government doesn’t look particularly pertinent at the moment. The pandemic has called for the sort of government intervention in the economy and elsewhere that the country hasn’t seen for generations.
Governments around the world are spending like crazy to prevent their economies from falling into depression and keep people employed. National can hardly go to the people saying it will rein in government spending and activity because that offends its founding values.
Restating National’s reason for existence is no easy task.

[ynot]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/122295535/nationals-identity-crisis-is-bad-for-nzs-democracy?rm=a
National's identity crisis is bad for NZ's democracy.

Labour’s brand is that of a party that essentially is prepared to spend more on the less well-off in society. The leader represents the brand and in Ardern Labour has hit the jackpot. She is competent and compassionate.

But what does National stand for? We know it’s a conservative party. Conservatism is about putting a brake on radical change and scepticism about any grand ideas to alter human nature. It represents (over others) the doers and producers – farmers, business, the self-employed, property owners, professionals – who rely on clarity, order, prudent spending and efficiency in government.

Because it believes it represents substantial people, National presents itself as the natural party of government. It sells itself as the best team to be running the country, better than the other lot anyway. But the party is failing on all counts. The team it suggests should be running the country looks decidedly clueless and splintered.

National has been caught out by a shift in public thinking or attitude. The country has joined the world in a shift towards the Left’s view on race, equality and the wrongs of the past. It may not be much of a shift but there is no going back.

Although National promotes itself as the party of growth, growth has also lost a lot of its magic. Growth at what cost, comes the cry.

Like most parties, it is in favour of everything that is good and against everything that is bad. Labour would have no argument with a single one of its listed values except maybe with limited government. And limited government doesn’t look particularly pertinent at the moment. The pandemic has called for the sort of government intervention in the economy and elsewhere that the country hasn’t seen for generations.
Governments around the world are spending like crazy to prevent their economies from falling into depression and keep people employed. National can hardly go to the people saying it will rein in government spending and activity because that offends its founding values.
Restating National’s reason for existence is no easy task.
You make some good points I must admit, but believe you have missed some glaring omissions also.
Like how are we going to finance this spend up.
This govt is big on throwing money about and given the circumstances some of these actions are justified but I don't think they have two clues on what drives an economy or how to manage it.

[iceman]

You make some good points I must admit, but believe you have missed some glaring omissions also.
Like how are we going to finance this spend up.
This govt is big on throwing money about and given the circumstances some of these actions are justified but I don't think they have two clues on what drives an economy or how to manage it.

That's exactly what the Left's (& moka's) utopia consist of. As he says the World has moved to the Left. It has moved to Governments spending incomprehensible amounts of money that it has not spent one hour on considering how it should pay back. This is the "new World" of living in an illusion of economic reality..
With current projected NZ Government forecasts of around $140B of extra debt, or an estimated $ 80,000 per household, the illusion this is somehow a wealth transfer from the "haves" to "have nots" is absolutely nuts as it will not be the much maligned "baby boomers" that pay for this squander. Instead it will be the next couple of generations that will be burdened with it in the form of hugely increased taxes and reduced Government services.
That's the sad reality of this madness.

[dobby41]

That's exactly what the Left's (& moka's) utopia consist of. As he says the World has moved to the Left. It has moved to Governments spending incomprehensible amounts of money that it has not spent one hour on considering how it should pay back. This is the "new World" of living in an illusion of economic reality..
With current projected NZ Government forecasts of around $140B of extra debt, or an estimated $ 80,000 per household, the illusion this is somehow a wealth transfer from the "haves" to "have nots" is absolutely nuts as it will not be the much maligned "baby boomers" that pay for this squander. Instead it will be the next couple of generations that will be burdened with it in the form of hugely increased taxes and reduced Government services.
That's the sad reality of this madness.

So the answer is somewhere in the middle.
National seems to be losing their more liberal MPs so heading further away from the middle.

[iceman]

So the answer is somewhere in the middle.
National seems to be losing their more liberal MPs so heading further away from the middle.

Agree that the answer, as always, is somewhere in the middle. The road NZ normally travels down.

[Balance]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12353188

This passes for election coverage by NZ media of issues pertinent to NZers making the right decision as to who to vote?

[BlackPeter]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12353188

This passes for election coverage by NZ media of issues pertinent to NZers making the right decision as to who to vote?

Well, in the context of all the inept and disgraced MP's National did select over the last handful of years (like e.g. Ross, Walker, & Falloon) and considering that some of the older hands of National seem to have been similarly flawed (Boag anyone) without the party being able to cleanse the filth, does this article not inspire any confidence in the robustness and integrity of Nationals candidate selection process.

It feels like a party which was too long in power and unfortunately they did not use the last three years in opposition to improve - quite the opposite. They used this time to get rid of the better candidates they still had.

I think it would be good they get some more years on the opposition benches to give them a chance to sort out their processes and get rid of all the filth. I hope they use this time - NZ does need and deserve a capable opposition with high integrity!

Discl: Voted in the past more often for National (or ACT) than for any other party while living in NZ. However - unlikely to follow this pattern this time.

[fungus pudding]

Well, in the context of all the inept and disgraced MP's National did select over the last handful of years (like e.g. Ross, Walker, & Falloon) and considering that some of the older hands of National seem to have been similarly flawed (Boag anyone) without the party being able to cleanse the filth, does this article not inspire any confidence in the robustness and integrity of Nationals candidate selection process.

It feels like a party which was too long in power and unfortunately they did not use the last three years in opposition to improve - quite the opposite. They used this time to get rid of the better candidates they still had.

I think it would be good they get some more years on the opposition benches to give them a chance to sort out their processes and get rid of all the filth. I hope they use this time - NZ does need and deserve a capable opposition with high integrity!

Discl: Voted in the past more often for National (or ACT) than for any other party while living in NZ. However - unlikely to follow this pattern this time.



Labour's problem is beyond Ardern, Robertson and a couple of others there is simply no talent. It's pretty obvious when you see the likes of Twyfod, and Davis way up in their ranks what their problem is. I don't like their coalition mates either. And I hate to think what tax schemes they're dreaming up. Death duties? Gift duties? Or a brand new surprise.

[Balance]

Labour's problem is beyond Ardern, Robertson and a couple of others there is simply no talent. It's pretty obvious when you see the likes of Twyfod, and Davis way up in their ranks what their problem is. I don't like their coalition mates either. And I hate to think what tax schemes they're dreaming up. Death duties? Gift duties? Or a brand new surprise.

Property tax & estate duties to start with - envy taxes so that they can breed more beneficiaries and for longer.

Notice how Comrade Cindy & her team of incompetents duck & dive & deflect to the need to manage the pandemic whenever they are asked about taxes?

[justakiwi]

OK Balance. before I put you back on ignore, I’m going to try something new. I have one question for you, which I would very much appreciate a mature and full answer to.

Put all your ranting and raving about Labour and Jacinda aside for a minute. Tell me exactly what you want to see whichever party wins the election - promise to do over the next 3 years post election. Give me a detailed list please clearly outlining each point on your “Government To Do List” with an explanation for how you expect said government to achieve each item on the list.

This will give you the opportunity to make your case for policy you want to see in place, regardless of which party is in power, and who knows, it might help us get a better picture of what it is you want, without the distraction of all the usual blather. No mention of Labour or Jacinda, or National or Collins. All I am interested in is policy/projects/plans for NZ for the next 3 years.

Over to you. The floor is yours.


Property tax & estate duties to start with - envy taxes so that they can breed more beneficiaries and for longer.

Notice how Comrade Cindy & her team of incompetents duck & dive & deflect to the need to manage the pandemic whenever they are asked about taxes?

[artemis]

Justakiwi, I'd like to be kind but your request is just ridiculous. You might get further if you took the lead and provided your own list on the same lines for scrutiny.

[justakiwi]

Yep, I expected at least one of you to respond with that. But tell me ... why is it ridiculous? We have had to put up with Balance’s never ending, ranting and raving for months now. The same nauseous “Comrade Cindy” and “Kiwibuild anyone?” comments, day after day after day. Some people have tried to meet him halfway with attempts a mature discussion, others, like me, have eventually lost our cool and spoken our minds. Nothing has made any difference. So what is wrong with attempting to pull back on the drama, and give him an opportunity to tell us all what it is he actually wants? Remove all the bull**** and distraction from the equation, and get down to the bare bones.

I want to know what Balance wants from the next government - regardless of which party that ends up being. I want nuts and bolts from him for once. I don’t see how that is a ridiculous request at all. It is an attempt to restore this ongoing drama to some kind of mature and respectful discussion.

But hey, if Balance (or anyone else) can’t see my post in the light it was intended, that’s fine with me. I have had my hand on the front door handle for some time now - I’m happy to walk on out and close it behind me.




Justakiwi, I'd like to be kind but your request is just ridiculous. You might get further if you took the lead and provided your own list on the same lines for scrutiny.

[RupertBear]

Justakiwi, I'd like to be kind but your request is just ridiculous. You might get further if you took the lead and provided your own list on the same lines for scrutiny.

Why exactly is Justakiwis request ridiculous? I took it as a genuine request to actually find out what it is that Balance wants from the next government without all the “Comrade Cindy” crap which quite frankly is just a smoke screen he hides behind when he actually hasnt got anything sensible or constructive to say. Thankfully even if he does reply I wont be reading it as he is already on my ignore list. :D

[Baa_Baa]

Yep, I expected at least one of you to respond with that. But tell me ... why is it ridiculous? We have had to put up with Balance’s never ending, ranting and raving for months now. The same nauseous “Comrade Cindy” and “Kiwibuild anyone?” comments, day after day after day. Some people have tried to meet him halfway with attempts a mature discussion, others, like me, have eventually lost our cool and spoken our minds. Nothing has made any difference. So what is wrong with attempting to pull back on the drama, and give him an opportunity to tell us all what it is he actually wants? Remove all the bull**** and distraction from the equation, and get down to the bare bones.

I want to know what Balance wants from the next government - regardless of which party that ends up being. I want nuts and bolts from him for once. I don’t see how that is a ridiculous request at all. It is an attempt to restore this ongoing drama to some kind of mature and respectful discussion.

But hey, if Balance (or anyone else) can’t see my post in the light it was intended, that’s fine with me. I have had my hand on the front door handle for some time now - I’m happy to walk on out and close it behind me.

I can see what you want, but I don’t care in the least what balance wants. That’s possibly what might derail your question. Balance is just one voice in the wilderness of the Internet, albeit an incessant strident voice, if you don’t like it ignore it. Better than dwelling on it like he’s some luminary which he clearly isn’t. Look after your own mental health.

[RupertBear]

I can see what you want, but I don’t care in the least what balance wants. That’s possibly what might derail your question. Balance is just one voice in the wilderness of the Internet, albeit an incessant strident voice, if you don’t like it ignore it. Better than dwelling on it like he’s some luminary which he clearly isn’t. Look after your own mental health.

Completely agree Baa Baa

[justakiwi]

I was actually trying to be the bigger person, and give him a chance to just be upfront and honest (without the drama) rather than simply putting him back on ignore without one last attempt at a mature conversation.


I can see what you want, but I don’t care in the least what balance wants. That’s possibly what might derail your question. Balance is just one voice in the wilderness of the Internet, albeit an incessant strident voice, if you don’t like it ignore it. Better than dwelling on it like he’s some luminary which he clearly isn’t. Look after your own mental health.

[iceman]

Why exactly is Justakiwis request ridiculous? I took it as a genuine request to actually find out what it is that Balance wants from the next government without all the “Comrade Cindy” crap which quite frankly is just a smoke screen he hides behind when he actually hasnt got anything sensible or constructive to say. Thankfully even if he does reply I wont be reading it as he is already on my ignore list. :D

It is ridiculous because she is asking for detailed policy plans and expected outcomes from a moniker on a chat website, while at the same time she has informed us she herself will vote for a party that has no election policies or expected outcomes to which to judge them by. As cynical as it gets, but totally in line with the party she supports.

[RupertBear]

It is ridiculous because she is asking for detailed policy plans and expected outcomes from a moniker on a chat website, while at the same time she has informed us she herself will vote for a party that has no election policies or expected outcomes to which to judge them by. As cynical as it gets, but totally in line with the party she supports.

I am expecting some election policies to be announced very soon, by all parties. Well I certainly hope so. It has been an extremely eventful year so I can understand why the run up to the elections has been somewhat curtailed while the government is dealing with a Covid pandemic.

I still dont see why it is a ridiculous question TBH but each to their own

[Joshuatree]

Its ridiculous because you cant reason with a Toon in a mirror. :t_up:

[moka]

Yep, I expected at least one of you to respond with that. But tell me ... why is it ridiculous? We have had to put up with Balance’s never ending, ranting and raving for months now. The same nauseous “Comrade Cindy” and “Kiwibuild anyone?” comments, day after day after day. Some people have tried to meet him halfway with attempts a mature discussion, others, like me, have eventually lost our cool and spoken our minds. Nothing has made any difference. So what is wrong with attempting to pull back on the drama, and give him an opportunity to tell us all what it is he actually wants? Remove all the bull**** and distraction from the equation, and get down to the bare bones.

I want to know what Balance wants from the next government - regardless of which party that ends up being. I want nuts and bolts from him for once. I don’t see how that is a ridiculous request at all. It is an attempt to restore this ongoing drama to some kind of mature and respectful discussion.

But hey, if Balance (or anyone else) can’t see my post in the light it was intended, that’s fine with me. I have had my hand on the front door handle for some time now - I’m happy to walk on out and close it behind me.
Judging from “Balance’s never ending ranting and raving” it seems that what he wants is to do trolling, not to engage in a mature and respectful discussion. He likes the drama.

Trolling behaviours typically include deliberately posting inflammatory comments and argumentative messages in an attempt to provoke, disrupt and upset others. “Trolls” may pretend to be part of the group, but their real intent is to create conflict for their own amusement. They want to cause disruption and trigger conflict among others for their own fun and enjoyment.

They agree with statements such as “I enjoy making someone angry” and “I enjoy embarrassing others”.
These are the rewarding feelings that some people experience when creating social discord, through selfish or self-serving behaviours and interactions. Individuals who troll are likely to enjoy inflicting psychological pain and distress on others.
They may achieve this through exerting negative social influence, power and strength.

This means that while antisocial personality traits do play a role, what really influences trolling behaviour is the social pleasure derived from knowing that others are annoyed by it. The more negative social impact the troll has, the more their behaviour is reinforced.

[BlackPeter]

Labour's problem is beyond Ardern, Robertson and a couple of others there is simply no talent. It's pretty obvious when you see the likes of Twyfod, and Davis way up in their ranks what their problem is. I don't like their coalition mates either. And I hate to think what tax schemes they're dreaming up. Death duties? Gift duties? Or a brand new surprise.

I agree with your assessment that Labours talent pool does have its limits. On the other hand - National lost recently a lot of good people as well (Nicky Kay, Amy Adams, Muller) just because they could not suppress their urges to play dirty politics. National as well did provide plenty of evidence that their hiring process (candidate selection) has nothing to do with looking for talent ... safe seat, no experience or talent required! Not sure what they saw in Ross, Walker or Falloon, but they clearly did get self-serving bullies with actually little desirable talents.

So - if the choice is between a bunch of bully inepts with mean aspirations and a bunch of well meaning inepts with at least good intentions, where are we supposed to go?

Re taxes ... I agree that it is likely they will rise. Somebody will have to pay the bills for Covid. Somebody will need to pay the cost for an increasing number of old people in society - and this is not just the superannuation. Somebody will need to pay to prepare the country for climate change and for still keeping this country worthwhile to live in for young people (i.e. good education, health system and job opportunities).

We can either further increase inequality by making poor people still worse off by increasing austerity and run the country down (look at Greece or Spain if you want examples), or we can find some ways to remove some surplus "fat" from the better off people (who by the way got again richer thanks to the latest crisis). What about a wee Covid windfall tax?

I don't know about you, but I am sure I won't be able to take our money to the after-live (if there is such a thing). Why would an inheritance tax be so terrible? But obviously are there plenty of other options ... Not sure what the best way is, but I am sure that we will need to pay more taxes if we want to keep living in a country which is worthwhile to live in.

[iceman]

I agree with your assessment that Labours talent pool does have its limits. On the other hand - National lost recently a lot of good people as well (Nicky Kay, Amy Adams, Muller) just because they could not suppress their urges to play dirty politics. National as well did provide plenty of evidence that their hiring process (candidate selection) has nothing to do with looking for talent ... safe seat, no experience or talent required! Not sure what they saw in Ross, Walker or Falloon, but they clearly did get self-serving bullies with actually little desirable talents.

So - if the choice is between a bunch of bully inepts with mean aspirations and a bunch of well meaning inepts with at least good intentions, where are we supposed to go?

Re taxes ... I agree that it is likely they will rise. Somebody will have to pay the bills for Covid. Somebody will need to pay the cost for an increasing number of old people in society - and this is not just the superannuation. Somebody will need to pay to prepare the country for climate change and for still keeping this country worthwhile to live in for young people (i.e. good education, health system and job opportunities).

We can either further increase inequality by making poor people still worse off by increasing austerity and run the country down (look at Greece or Spain if you want examples), or we can find some ways to remove some surplus "fat" from the better off people (who by the way got again richer thanks to the latest crisis). What about a wee Covid windfall tax?

I don't know about you, but I am sure I won't be able to take our money to the after-live (if there is such a thing). Why would an inheritance tax be so terrible? But obviously are there plenty of other options ... Not sure what the best way is, but I am sure that we will need to pay more taxes if we want to keep living in a country which is worthwhile to live in.

BP you make some good comments, many that I agree with but to point out "bullying" in National but ignoring the same happening in Labour with Ministers and the biggest bully of them all, the Speaker, undermines your argument:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/107248175/prime-minister-announces-decision-on-meka-whaitiri-inquiry
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12262363
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12350150

[BlackPeter]

BP you make some good comments, many that I agree with but to point out "bullying" in National but ignoring the same happening in Labour with Ministers and the biggest bully of them all, the Speaker, undermines your argument:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/107248175/prime-minister-announces-decision-on-meka-whaitiri-inquiry
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12262363
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12350150

Fair enough - our system is clearly geared to push bullies to the top, no matter which kind of organisation (party, company, church) we are talking. Not sure either I want to stand here as Labors defender, though I must say - if I run e.g. Adern and Collins through the bully-tester, then I am pretty sure with which of these ladies the buzzer will be louder :);

I agree that a number of the recent Labor ministers did behave in no way better than what I have seen and remember from a number of past National ministers.

I have not enough visibility of new Labor candidates to say whether they are better, worse or similar to Nationals latest harvest. Anyway - not a fan of Labor either, though I think that they would be in the current situation the smaller evil.

If we really apply the ethics test to our MP's along party lines, than I would think that the one sitting MP of ACT as well as most of the sitting Green MP's might look better than the rest ... though I am sure there are good (as well as bad) people in all parties.

I do respect Seymour (but am highly disappointed about his decision to seek support through the gun lobby) and I always thought high of the values of most of the Green MP's I know off ....

[fungus pudding]

Fair enough - our system is clearly geared to push bullies to the top, no matter which kind of organisation (party, company, church) we are talking. Not sure either I want to stand here as Labors defender, though I must say - if I run e.g. Adern and Collins through the bully-tester, then I am pretty sure with which of these ladies the buzzer will be louder :);

I agree that a number of the recent Labor ministers did behave in no way better than what I have seen and remember from a number of past National ministers.

I have not enough visibility of new Labor candidates to say whether they are better, worse or similar to Nationals latest harvest. Anyway - not a fan of Labor either, though I think that they would be in the current situation the smaller evil.

If we really apply the ethics test to our MP's along party lines, than I would think that the one sitting MP of ACT as well as most of the sitting Green MP's might look better than the rest ... though I am sure there are good (as well as bad) people in all parties.

I do respect Seymour (but am highly disappointed about his decision to seek support through the gun lobby) and I always thought high of the values of most of the Green MP's I know off ....

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms

[BlackPeter]

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms

Top line of the link you provided:


ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register,

This says it all. We do live in a world with many urgent problems. If a party makes however repealing our arms legislation to their top priority then this clearly shows it is for them more important than e.g. climate change, child poverty, education or health (to pick only some in my view ways more crucial problems). Really - either they have lost the plot or more likely they sold out to the gun lobby.

As well - I did grew up in a country with a firearms register (Germany). They do have comparatively little firearms violence (and little firearms accidents, either). I never ever felt threatened by this fire arms register. I do however feel threatened by semiautomatics any wannabe murderer could legally buy in New Zealand. A firearms register is not a threat!

Our current gun legislation might not be the best imaginable (no law is ...), but it is clearly better than the one we used to have. A firearm register is a very sensible proposal and easy to implement - hey, we are able to register cars, so why not firearms?

A party which puts repealing sensible laws on top of their priority list and which calls a sensible proposal for improving our safety a threat clearly does not share anymore my values.

And yes - I am allergic against the crooks from the NRA (North American gun lobby) and the "law repealing" crook in the white house. Not ACT's fault, though they seem to be a bit tone deaf in choosing their words these days ... or maybe they just want to join the populist gravy train ...

Sorry - I guess the money (or the votes) from the gun lobby has been more convincing for them, but they can't have it all.

[Bjauck]

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms It is ACT's gun lobby policy that is a turn off for me. Otherwise, I had narrowed my choices to three - Lab, Top and Act. Seymour had impressed. Current local electorate MP, who is a Nat, is likely to get my electorate vote.

A complete firearms register is a minimum requirement imo.

[Baa_Baa]

If a party makes however repealing our arms legislation to their top priority then this clearly shows it is for them more important than [...]
Sorry - I guess the money (or the votes) from the gun lobby has been more convincing for them, but they can't have it all.

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

[Bjauck]

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms
"ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register,"

https://www.waikato.ac.nz/news-opinion/media/2019/comprehensive-gun-register-part-of-next-stage-of-firearms-law-reform-post-christchurch-shootings
"Had gun registration been obligatory, the police would have known what type of firearms the alleged Christchurch shooter had lawfully acquired. They would have also known how many he had, where he obtained them and the frequency with which he was acquiring them.We can’t know whether this information would have raised a red flag, but it does highlight the possibility that such information may be useful to the authorities. Potential benefits could arise during normal police business. Similarly, when a firearm licence expires, police could identify any associated firearms of the former licence-holder and make sure they are taken out of circulation correctly."

Fo me a register would be a first step in combatting misuse of the weapon.

[BlackPeter]

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

Look - I was supporting them for many years ... with my vote and as well with the odd donation. Yes, I do know most of their policies. I find it interesting that they only use for their firearms policy the wording "ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register".

And hey, it is not even one of their priorities, it is the priority - i.e. the most important issue for them to achieve.

Which means - it does not matter how good their other policies are (and yes, some are ...). What's these days most important for them is a turn off for me.

This says exactly what I expressed - it is these days the whim of the gun lobby which drives them, the rest of their policies might be nice to haves at best.

I am neither shooting from the hip nor from the lip, but maybe you should read and digest their policies in total before accusing other to do what you are doing ...

Ah yes - and if possible - no shooting at all, please ... :p;

[artemis]

Look - I was supporting them for many years ... with my vote and as well with the odd donation. Yes, I do know most of their policies. I find it interesting that they only use for their firearms policy the wording "ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register".

And hey, it is not even one of their priorities, it is the priority - i.e. the most important issue for them to achieve....

I took that statement to say priority relates to repeal, not to place it at the top of policies. Suggest you are misinterpreting it.

[Bjauck]

Act put gun lobbyist near top of their list.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12343678

[Bjauck]

I took that statement to say priority relates to repeal, not to place it at the top of policies. Suggest you are misinterpreting it.
The gun law framework, is the only policy for which they promised to give a priority.

Even cutting taxes only merited an unqualified statement of future intent.

[artemis]

Act put gun lobbyist near top of their list.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12343678

Looks like that ACT candidate ticked more than one box.

I have zero interest in firearms, though plenty in my extended family are licensed, but anyone who can demonstrate logical thinking, knowledge of political processes and a heap of passion has to have a head start as a candidate.

[artemis]

The gun law framework, is the only policy for which they promised to give a priority.

Even cutting taxes only merited an unqualified statement of future intent.

Overthinking?

[fungus pudding]

Looks like that ACT candidate ticked more than one box.

I have zero interest in firearms, though plenty in my extended family are licensed, but anyone who can demonstrate logical thinking, knowledge of political processes and a heap of passion has to have a head start as a candidate.

He certainly is right up the top of the pile for logical thinking.

[Bjauck]

Looks like that ACT candidate ticked more than one box.

I have zero interest in firearms, though plenty in my extended family are licensed, but anyone who can demonstrate logical thinking, knowledge of political processes and a heap of passion has to have a head start as a candidate.

I guess given the current MPs in the House of Cards, anyone who can keep their hands off the members of staff and off the “send to all” button in relation to confidential info goes to the top of the list!

[artemis]

I guess given the current MPs in the House of Cards, anyone who can keep their hands off the members of staff and off the “send to all” button in relation to confidential info goes to the top of the list!

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[Jay]

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment. Good one artemis :)

[Blue Skies]

For those that think these ACT politicians policy to repeal the current gun laws is harmless, I would urge you to consider that our Police Force who are having to face increasingly dangerous situations, not only fully support the current Arms Legislation & want a gun register, but say it was long overdue.

if anyone thinks at the tender age of 38, David Seymour living in a bubble representing one of NZ's wealthiest & least violent suburbs is a better judge of the situation & knows more than the experienced Police Commissioner & Police men & women on the front line, then please reconsider.

Both cars and drivers need to be registered or licensed, & so should weapons and owners.

Who would it help if we do not know how many weapons we have in NZ & what sort of weapons & the number a particular individual or individuals associated with group or gang hold?
If both guns & owners have to be licensed, ultimately it will be harder for them to get into the wrong hands & easier to track them down if they do. (not just my opinion but the Police's).

If ACT were to repeal the current laws, it will put our police in greater danger.
Think about it, the Police support these laws, as does 70% of NZ's population, this is not something ACT should be saying they know better.
Their spurious claim they can make safer gun laws without a gun register is idealistic nonsense & not based on real life experience.

[fungus pudding]

For those that think these ACT politicians policy to repeal the current gun laws is harmless, I would urge you to consider that our Police Force who are having to face increasingly dangerous situations, not only fully support the current Arms Legislation & want a gun register, but say it was long overdue.

if anyone thinks at the tender age of 38, David Seymour living in a bubble representing one of NZ's wealthiest & least violent suburbs is a better judge of the situation & knows more than the experienced Police Commissioner & Police men & women on the front line, then please reconsider.

Both cars and drivers need to be registered or licensed, & so should weapons and owners.

Who would it help if we do not know how many weapons we have in NZ & what sort of weapons & the number a particular individual or individuals associated with group or gang hold?
If both guns & owners have to be licensed, ultimately it will be harder for them to get into the wrong hands & easier to track them down if they do. (not just my opinion but the Police's).

If ACT were to repeal the current laws, it will put our police in greater danger.
Think about it, the Police support these laws, as does 70% of NZ's population, this is not something ACT should be saying they know better.
Their spurious claim they can make safer gun laws without a gun register is idealistic nonsense & not based on real life experience.

What makes you think there won't be a gun register?

[Blue Skies]

What makes you think there won't be a gun register?


ACT Party Policy, ACT would - item 6, says apart from repealing the current law which is supported by the Police, they would 'stop the creation of a full register, which would include firearms which are currently category A'

[Balance]

OK Balance. before I put you back on ignore, I’m going to try something new. I have one question for you, which I would very much appreciate a mature and full answer to.

Put all your ranting and raving about Labour and Jacinda aside for a minute. Tell me exactly what you want to see whichever party wins the election - promise to do over the next 3 years post election. Give me a detailed list please clearly outlining each point on your “Government To Do List” with an explanation for how you expect said government to achieve each item on the list.

This will give you the opportunity to make your case for policy you want to see in place, regardless of which party is in power, and who knows, it might help us get a better picture of what it is you want, without the distraction of all the usual blather. No mention of Labour or Jacinda, or National or Collins. All I am interested in is policy/projects/plans for NZ for the next 3 years.

Over to you. The floor is yours.

Fair enough, justakiwi.

I will happily articulate exactly as requested.

Quid pro quo, will you stop making excuses for the numerous failures and broken promises made by this government but instead, provide us all with a full explanation of why said promises were made and broken?

The floor is now yours.

[fungus pudding]

ACT Party Policy, ACT would - item 6, says apart from repealing the current law which is supported by the Police, they would 'stop the creation of a full register, which would include firearms which are currently category A'


Isn't it only type A that they suggest do not need registering? My understanding is there will still be a register for all other guns.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms) Note item 6.


(The "general" (or "type A") licence gives permission to own and use "sporting configuration" firearms. A sporting configuration firearm is a rifle or shotgun that does not meet the legal definition of any of a Military-Style Semi-Automatic (MSSA), "Restricted Weapon" or "pistol".)

[dobby41]

Isn't it only type A that they suggest do not need registering? My understanding is there will still be a register for all other guns.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms) Note item 6.


(The "general" (or "type A") licence gives permission to own and use "sporting configuration" firearms. A sporting configuration firearm is a rifle or shotgun that does not meet the legal definition of any of a Military-Style Semi-Automatic (MSSA), "Restricted Weapon" or "pistol".)

Hard to know really
"ACT’s bottom line is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register, then set about making the world’s best firearm laws that balance public safety, firearms control, and freedom."
Then
"6 Stop the creation of a full register, which would include firearms that are presently A category"
So stop the register!
Or 'stop the register including A category'
Very confusing - it means what you want it to mean.

I still don't see the problem with a register - a step in the right direction.

[justakiwi]

you are so predictable Balance. Once again, your response is another deflection. You have not “articulated” anything in response to my questions - which well you know. Exactly as I expected.

By the way, just to clarify, I don’t recall ever making any post/comment, anywhere, that mentioned promises made by Labour, so I fail to see how I have ever “made excuses” for what you perceive as failings or broken promises.



Fair enough, justakiwi.

I will happily articulate exactly as requested.

Quid pro quo, will you stop making excuses for the numerous failures and broken promises made by this government but instead, provide us all with a full explanation of why said promises were made and broken?

The floor is now yours.

[Balance]

you are so predictable Balance. Once again, your response is another deflection. You have not “articulated” anything in response to my questions - which well you know. Exactly as I expected.

By the way, just to clarify, I don’t recall ever making any post/comment, anywhere, that mentioned promises made by Labour, so I fail to see how I have ever “made excuses” for what you perceive as failings or broken promises.

Deflection?

Seriously, what's the point for example of putting down an expectation & a promise of 15,000 houses per annum to be built via a post-war style large scale state housing construction plan to be achieved by year 3 of any new government if you are not prepared to accept that this government made a promise in 2017 to build 10,000 houses a year by 2020 and explain why they failed so totally and dismally?

And as an ex-property developer, I can assure you that it can be done - because that's what is being achieved in developing countries, let alone a first world country like NZ.

From history we learn not to repeat mistakes - but only if we accept that promises were made & broken, and more to the point, mistakes were made.

Floor as you wrote, is yours.

I have no problem articulating exactly my expectations of whichever government comes to power in Sept 2020. But why should I (or anyone) waste time when there are posters here busy making excuses and attempting to shift the blame every which way to every other party (for broken promises & failed policies) but the current government?

[Blue Skies]

Isn't it only type A that they suggest do not need registering? My understanding is there will still be a register for all other guns.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms) Note item 6.


(The "general" (or "type A") licence gives permission to own and use "sporting configuration" firearms. A sporting configuration firearm is a rifle or shotgun that does not meet the legal definition of any of a Military-Style Semi-Automatic (MSSA), "Restricted Weapon" or "pistol".)



Here's a copy & paste from ACT's policy manifesto which states they will do away with a gun register which the police want. Obviously the gangs & criminals don't want a register, makes it far easier to get hold of weapons.

The current law has cross party support from all parties except ACT & remember submissions were heard from everybody & apart from the Police including the Gun shop owner & lobbyist Mr Tipple ( indicted in the US for buying large numbers of guns using false ID & also charged at Los Angeles Airport for trying to carry 29 guns & 340 rounds of live ammunition on an aircraft & spent 21 months in jail) who frequently appeared on TV at the submission process.



ACT’S Real Solution For Fair Firearms

ACT’s bottom line is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register, then set about making the world’s best firearm laws that balance public safety, firearms control, and freedom.

[fungus pudding]

Hard to know really
"ACT’s bottom line is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register, then set about making the world’s best firearm laws that balance public safety, firearms control, and freedom."
Then
"6 Stop the creation of a full register, which would include firearms that are presently A category"
So stop the register!
Or 'stop the register including A category'
Very confusing - it means what you want it to mean.

I still don't see the problem with a register - a step in the right direction.

It is ambiguous. They want to stop a full register; not do away with the gun register.

[Blue Skies]

It is ambiguous. They want to stop a full register; not do away with the gun register.





So the way I see it, ACT's policy 'to repeal this years Arm's Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearms register,' sounds like they propose revoking the firearm register.

However, whatever the detail, & even if it was in part, there is no doubt they want to heavily water down & soften the recently introduced gun laws, a vote grabber with some fanatics in the gun lobby, the gangs & some criminals.

As we have seen with tragic results, guns shops & the internet provide devices to alter guns from one category to another anyway so having any exemptions is naive policy based on some academic principal rather than real life experience.

[Balance]

So the way I see it, ACT's policy 'to repeal this years Arm's Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearms register,' sounds like they propose revoking the firearm register.

However, whatever the detail, & even if it was in part, there is no doubt they want to heavily water down & soften the recently introduced gun laws, a vote grabber with some fanatics in the gun lobby, the gangs & some criminals.

As we have seen with tragic results, guns shops & the internet provide devices to alter guns from one category to another anyway so having any exemptions is naive policy based on some academic principal rather than real life experience.

Good on ACT.

They know that their gun policy will never be implemented, just as NZF and Greens know some of their extreme policies will never be implemented.

Get the votes and get into a position of power. That’s the political game.

[Balance]

Here's a copy & paste from ACT's policy manifesto which states they will do away with a gun register which the police want. Obviously the gangs & criminals don't want a register, makes it far easier to get hold of weapons.

The current law has cross party support from all parties except ACT & remember submissions were heard from everybody & apart from the Police including the Gun shop owner & lobbyist Mr Tipple ( indicted in the US for buying large numbers of guns using false ID & also charged at Los Angeles Airport for trying to carry 29 guns & 340 rounds of live ammunition on an aircraft & spent 21 months in jail) who frequently appeared on TV at the submission process.
[B][/COLOR]

Whatever ACT does, it does not have blood dripping from its hands unlike NZF who opposed any attempt at gun control until the massacre in Christchurch.

Read and learn:

“In the past, New Zealand First has opposed law changes, with Ron Mark being an avid shooter and gun owner.

Following the 2017 inquiry, the party said the recommendations in the report “target legitimate ownership of legally held firearms by licensed users, importers, and dealers, and recommends further restrictions on them by way of laws and regulations relating to them and their firearms”.

[justakiwi]

Because it would give you some actual credibility and would contribute to a much healthier and more constructive debate with the rest of us, than the constant ranting and ceaseless repetition of the same few catch phrases you’ve been contributing up till now.



I have no problem articulating exactly my expectations of whichever government comes to power in Sept 2020. But why should I (or anyone) waste time when there are posters here busy making excuses and attempting to shift the blame every which way to every other party (for broken promises & failed policies) but the current government?

[artemis]

Because it would give you some actual credibility and would contribute to a much healthier and more constructive debate with the rest of us, than the constant ranting and ceaseless repetition of the same few catch phrases you’ve been contributing up till now.

This is a politics thread, not ECON103. People can have opinions and offer as much or as little as they like. Continually demanding that someone else writes a 3 year economic treatise? Time to give it up.

But posters are free to write their own and post it. Nothing wrong with that.

[justakiwi]

Deleted .....


This is a politics thread, not ECON103. People can have opinions and offer as much or as little as they like. Continually demanding that someone else writes a 3 year economic treatise? Time to give it up.

But posters are free to write their own and post it. Nothing wrong with that.

[Balance]

Because it would give you some actual credibility and would contribute to a much healthier and more constructive debate with the rest of us, than the constant ranting and ceaseless repetition of the same few catch phrases you’ve been contributing up till now.

It is not possible for minds to meet when one side is pre-occupied with making excuses for failures rather than confronting the facts.

And the failures to achieve anything of substance by this government after it made huge promises to get elected are nothing short of betrayal & deceit.

[BlackPeter]

It is ambiguous. They want to stop a full register; not do away with the gun register.

Maybe, maybe not. However - their leading sentence in their published policy (and that's probably more than most people read) clearly talks about "the threat of a firearm register". They don't say a "the threat of a full register" or a "the threat of a category A firearms register".

While I still don't understand how any firearms register could be a threat to anybody but to crooks, given that we have this discussion provides already clear proof that ACT is at best obfuscating what they want to do re the firearms register.

Given that this is based on their policies their only priority for the elections (repealing the firearms act and protecting whomever against the "threat" of a firearms register) is it quite disappointing that they didn't even made absolutely clear what they really want to do ... maybe they just want the votes from the trigger happy gun lobby to cheat them afterwards?

Whatever it is - their values seem to have changed and are not anymore consistent with mine ...

[fungus pudding]

Maybe, maybe not. However - their leading sentence in their published policy (and that's probably more than most people read) clearly talks about "the threat of a firearm register". They don't say a "the threat of a full register" or a "the threat of a category A firearms register".

While I still don't understand how any firearms register could be a threat to anybody but to crooks, given that we have this discussion provides already clear proof that ACT is at best obfuscating what they want to do re the firearms register.

Given that this is based on their policies their only priority for the elections (repealing the firearms act and protecting whomever against the "threat" of a firearms register) is it quite disappointing that they didn't even made absolutely clear what they really want to do ... maybe they just want the votes from the trigger happy gun lobby to cheat them afterwards?

Whatever it is - their values seem to have changed and are not anymore consistent with mine ...

Is there any party that keeps anyone perfectly happy? NZ1st, Labour and Greens have all disqualified themselves from my options this election. Still waiting to hear more from Nats, so they remain a possibility, but by process of elimination it looks like Act will be my choice.

[Bjauck]

Is there any party that keeps anyone perfectly happy? NZ1st, Labour and Greens have all disqualified themselves from my options this election. Still waiting to hear more from Nats, so they remain a possibility, but by process of elimination it looks like Act will be my choice. Yep there is no shining beacon for me. It all depends on red lines and which issues are the most important.

[moka]

It is not possible for minds to meet when one side is pre-occupied with making excuses for failures rather than confronting the facts.

And the failures to achieve anything of substance by this government after it made huge promises to get elected are nothing short of betrayal & deceit.
And it is not possible for minds to meet when the other side is pre-occupied with focusing on failures rather than facing the facts.
And the posts with the constant focus on the failures by this government after it made huge promises to get elected are nothing but boring and repetitive, and a process of dumbing us down. How about some stimulating discussion?

[Balance]

And it is not possible for minds to meet when the other side is pre-occupied with focusing on failures rather than facing the facts.
And the posts with the constant focus on the failures by this government after it made huge promises to get elected are nothing but boring and repetitive, and a process of dumbing us down. How about some stimulating discussion?

You can start by explaining how the government can get its promises so very very wrong?

[justakiwi]

You are either incapable of understanding what moka or I are saying/asking you, or you are being a PITA for the sake of it.

As I said in my first post - tell us ​what you want from whichever party is in power, not what you’re unhappy about. We know what you’re unhappy about, so you don’t need to keep repeating it. It’s not rocket science.


You can start by explaining how the government can get its promises so very very wrong?

[Balance]

You are either incapable of understanding what moka or I are saying/asking you, or you are being a PITA for the sake of it.

As I said in my first post - tell us ​what you want from whichever party is in power, not what you’re unhappy about. We know what you’re unhappy about, so you don’t need to keep repeating it. It’s not rocket science.

As I have explained, happy to do so once Moka or you explain how a government can make such huge promises and fail so totally to deliver.

Then, I will give you the solutions.

[justakiwi]

No. I’m not playing your childish little games anymore Balance. I invited you to have a mature discussion with me, as an alternative to the backwards and forwards arguments we have had in the past, as I actually felt bad about some of those. But you are clearly not interested.

I have better things to do with my time that are much more rewarding and much less stressful.

I’m out.




As I have explained, happy to do so once Moka or you explain how a government can make such huge promises and fail so totally to deliver.

Then, I will give you the solutions.

[jmsnz]

No. I’m not playing your childish little games anymore Balance. I invited you to have a mature discussion with me, as an alternative to the backwards and forwards arguments we have had in the past, as I actually felt bad about some of those. But you are clearly not interested.

I have better things to do with my time that are much more rewarding and much less stressful.

I’m out.

That's odd. You want someone to do a whole bunch of work to support their position but when asked to reciprocate you refuse, how does that work? I don't think that you can defend that the current government has failed to deliver on quite a lot of what they promised, like most do actually, but be honest they didn't just miss by a wee bit! Luckily I suspect that nobody really believed what they promised in the first place.

I fear that this last point is actually the key one, promise big, get into power, worry about it later. Like a few on here I am honestly struggling to find someone to vote for this election

[justakiwi]

I don’t want him to do a whole bunch of work on anything. I simply want him to stop whinging and tell me what he would like to see our government (regardless of party) do in terms of policy or promises. He has been ranting and raving for months, trashing our PM and current government so surely the least he should be able to do is verbalise what it is he thinks they should be doing.

If you want the “kids in the sandpit” answer to your comment re me “refusing to reciprocate” - here it is. I asked him first but he responded with a “you show me yours then I’ll show you mine.” We could play that game till the cows come home. Once again, for those who seem unable to grasp it - I was trying to be the bigger person and initiate a mature debate instead of losing my cool with Balance (as eventually always happens). Why on earth I bothered, I have no idea.

So yes, I am out, and Balance is back on ignore. I simply don’t need or want this constant BS anymore.






That's odd. You want someone to do a whole bunch of work to support their position but when asked to reciprocate you refuse, how does that work? I don't think that you can defend that the current government has failed to deliver on quite a lot of what they promised, like most do actually, but be honest they didn't just miss by a wee bit! Luckily I suspect that nobody really believed what they promised in the first place.

I fear that this last point is actually the key one, promise big, get into power, worry about it later. Like a few on here I am honestly struggling to find someone to vote for this election

[bullfrog]

I’d like the parties to lay down where they are taking the country in a Covid world. What’s their plan to maximise the NZ advantage of being one of the only Covid free(ish) countries in the world?

I’d vote for a party that didn’t open borders, concentrated on keeping us Covid Free, let the entrepreneurs come to us and transition us from a tourist service destination into a high tech, highly skilled team of 5 million.

I’ve not seen any inspiring vision, it’s all a bit local council atm.

[macduffy]

I’ve not seen any inspiring vision, it’s all a bit local council atm

Don't expect too much of that from any of the participants, bullfrog - and you won't be disappointed.

[Blue Skies]

I’d like the parties to lay down where they are taking the country in a Covid world. What’s their plan to maximise the NZ advantage of being one of the only Covid free(ish) countries in the world?

I’d vote for a party that didn’t open borders, concentrated on keeping us Covid Free, let the entrepreneurs come to us and transition us from a tourist service destination into a high tech, highly skilled team of 5 million.

I’ve not seen any inspiring vision, it’s all a bit local council atm.


Looking back to the start of the Covid pandemic, people could predict almost anything & to an extent at some point they would have turned out to be right. The rapidly unfolding situation was unlike anything the world had seen, reliable information was scarce, you could find experts in every field with contradictory views, no one actually knew how this would evolve & importantly we still don't. We just don't have the certainty around anything which planners and policy makers are used to, in order to formulate clear policy for the future.
We just don't know yet when a vaccine or effective medication will arrive, & how effective it will be, how many people will get it etc. Are we looking at 2021 or the following year?
Most NZ'ers are supposed to be experiencing an economic catastrophe right now, but clearly we're not. Things are tough for some but not nearly as bad as economists expected by now. Those predictions turned out to be wrong, though they might be right later.
So my point is since everything is changing so rapidly, Gov'ts can only react to what's happening now, since we don't know with any certainty how this will unfold, & how long this situation will last.
Dr Fauci seems confident a vaccine will be available mid next year, but who knows. Countries like Australia which were virtually Covid free & we planned to open the border with later this year, have plunged back into a mess again.
How do you plan for this?
It seems a little bit unrealistic to expect the Parties to lay down where they are taking the country in a Covid world, when the world situation is so rapidly changing & unpredictable.
Having said that, given the world crisis, we do seem to be doing pretty well, certainly better than most.

[tim23]

That's odd. You want someone to do a whole bunch of work to support their position but when asked to reciprocate you refuse, how does that work? I don't think that you can defend that the current government has failed to deliver on quite a lot of what they promised, like most do actually, but be honest they didn't just miss by a wee bit! Luckily I suspect that nobody really believed what they promised in the first place.

I fear that this last point is actually the key one, promise big, get into power, worry about it later. Like a few on here I am honestly struggling to find someone to vote for this election

justakiwi is spot on you need to read Balance comments better they are full of personal abuse, references to Hitler, comrade Cindy on on it goes

[boysy]

Looks like that rogue poll wasn’t so rouge afterall ....

PM Jacinda Ardern maintains ‘crushing’ lead over new National leader Judith Collins

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/8489-nz-national%20-voting-intention-july-2020-202008070802

[Balance]

Looks like that rogue poll wasn’t so rouge afterall ....

PM Jacinda Ardern maintains ‘crushing’ lead over new National leader Judith Collins

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/8489-nz-national%20-voting-intention-july-2020-202008070802

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7339-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-september-10-2017-201709151750

[Raz]

As expected....

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12354807

The top new candidate on the list is Nancy Lu, who is at 26.

Lu has been given one of the few list-only slots National allows for, and is ranked above other sitting List MPs Parmjeet Parmar, Agnes Loheni and Alfred Ngaro.

Lu's high ranking follows the decision by Jian Yang - National's only Chinese MP - to retire

[tim23]

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7339-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-september-10-2017-201709151750


Yesterdays news from a yesterday person

[Blue Skies]

Visiting an ANZ bank yesterday in Auckland , couldn’t help but notice a First Security guard violently sneezing & just using his hand in front of his face ( not elbow). He then went and hung up some Covid app signs & touching other surfaces with germs all over his hands, ironical since his primary job is about protection. People were quietly saying he needs to go home, he’s obviously sick. But understandably he probably needed income to pay rent, support his family etc. I quietly suggested to an ANZ staff they suggest he cleaned his hand with hand sanitizer as he was spreading germs around the bank with every touch. They felt unable to say anything.
My point is, if we get community transmission in here, with this sort of complacency from supposedly trained security people, & others feel it too culturally insensitive to say anything, we are going to be in deep trouble.
The other point is National & Labour have pushed back on extending sick leave from 5 days for us ordinary folk while MP Todd Muller just had 2 months paid sick leave so it seems one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us. Possibly the security guard had used up all his sick leave & had no option but to go to work but in this new environment that puts us all at risk. I don’t know what the answer is, obviously 2 months paid sick leave for everyone would be ridiculous. And not having a crack at Muller, am sure Labour MP’s equally privileged.
Interested in others opinions.

[fungus pudding]

Visiting an ANZ bank yesterday in Auckland , couldn’t help but notice a First Security guard violently sneezing & just using his hand in front of his face ( not elbow). He then went and hung up some Covid app signs & touching other surfaces with germs all over his hands, ironical since his primary job is about protection. People were quietly saying he needs to go home, he’s obviously sick. But understandably he probably needed income to pay rent, support his family etc. I quietly suggested to an ANZ staff they suggest he cleaned his hand with hand sanitizer as he was spreading germs around the bank with every touch. They felt unable to say anything.
My point is, if we get community transmission in here, with this sort of complacency from supposedly trained security people, & others feel it too culturally insensitive to say anything, we are going to be in deep trouble.
The other point is National & Labour have pushed back on extending sick leave from 5 days for us ordinary folk while MP Todd Muller just had 2 months paid sick leave so it seems one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us. Possibly the security guard had used up all his sick leave & had no option but to go to work but in this new environment that puts us all at risk. I don’t know what the answer is, obviously 2 months paid sick leave for everyone would be ridiculous. And not having a crack at Muller, am sure Labour MP’s equally privileged.
Interested in others opinions.

Why don't you employ him, then you can pay him as much sick leave as you want to ?

[Blue Skies]

[QUOTE=fungus pudding;835197]Why don't you employ him, then you can pay him as much sick leave as you want to ?[/QUOTE


Ha, shot, but I think we already do employ those MP’s, but why do we give them 2 months paid sick leave & not anyone else. Should be 5 days paid like everyone else, country can’t afford it.

[dobby41]

Visiting an ANZ bank yesterday in Auckland , couldn’t help but notice a First Security guard violently sneezing & just using his hand in front of his face ( not elbow). He then went and hung up some Covid app signs & touching other surfaces with germs all over his hands, ironical since his primary job is about protection. People were quietly saying he needs to go home, he’s obviously sick. But understandably he probably needed income to pay rent, support his family etc. I quietly suggested to an ANZ staff they suggest he cleaned his hand with hand sanitizer as he was spreading germs around the bank with every touch. They felt unable to say anything.
My point is, if we get community transmission in here, with this sort of complacency from supposedly trained security people, & others feel it too culturally insensitive to say anything, we are going to be in deep trouble.
The other point is National & Labour have pushed back on extending sick leave from 5 days for us ordinary folk while MP Todd Muller just had 2 months paid sick leave so it seems one rule for MPs and another for the rest of us. Possibly the security guard had used up all his sick leave & had no option but to go to work but in this new environment that puts us all at risk. I don’t know what the answer is, obviously 2 months paid sick leave for everyone would be ridiculous. And not having a crack at Muller, am sure Labour MP’s equally privileged.
Interested in others opinions.

Could be that he wasn't sick at all.
People often have sneezing attacks for pollen or even just change of air.
Assumption seems to have been made that the guard was I'll.

[fungus pudding]

[QUOTE=fungus pudding;835197]Why don't you employ him, then you can pay him as much sick leave as you want to ?[/QUOTE


Ha, shot, but I think we already do employ those MP’s, but why do we give them 2 months paid sick leave & not anyone else. Should be 5 days paid like everyone else, country can’t afford it.

They don't work on an hourly rate, and aren't costed that way. If you would like similar treatment, go and win your electorate seat, or maybe you could gain a spot on a party list. I doubt if you would think it was a good salary and benefit package after the first month. The good ones, and every party has some good ones, certainly earn their keep.

[Zaphod]

Most of our staff consume their 5 days sick leave per year. According to figures from the EMA that's normal, apparently, so we'd need to assume all 10 days would be taken per annum when factoring this into our cost structure. That is, of course, unless a Government intend to fund this as a temporary measure via taxation, but obviously there's still a cost involved.

[moka]

I agree with Jacinda that the Opposition should channel their energy into New Zealand’s overall response to this resurgence e.g. encouraging compliance. Unity is important just as it was during the first lockdown, and which Simon Bridges observed.

One reason for Jacinda’s popularity and Collins lower ranking is that Jacinda does not do the petty politicking that Collins is doing now. New Zealanders want a government and leader that puts the best interest of New Zealand and its people first especially in a crisis, not their own party and its re-election first. Parliament is more than a place of politics. It is where the decisions about how the country is run are made. This is not a game, people’s lives and welfare are at stake.

On Wednesday Adern took a dig at the Opposition for its conspiratorial talk, refusing to say another word on the matter. Instead, she asked the Opposition to “channel” their energy into “supporting New Zealand’s overall response to this resurgence”.
She said she wanted “unity” in the response, “there should not be politics in this, it is a resurgence that no-one wanted”.
The statement is partly ridiculous.
Parliament is a place of politics – politicians are political. Collins and her party think they could do a better job of managing the outbreak, and they’ve got every right to make that case to New Zealanders.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300080900/judith-collins-dangerous-constitutional-game

[iceman]

That statement is ridiculous because the PM herself has politicised COVID for her own advantage.

[artemis]

That statement is ridiculous because the PM herself has politicised COVID for her own advantage.

Including telling the country it's a covid election.

[dobby41]

Including telling the country it's a covid election.

Like scaremongering that we should keep some masks handy for when it comes back.
Oh, hang on, it did.

[Balance]

Like scaremongering that we should keep some masks handy for when it comes back.
Oh, hang on, it did.

That’s because they knew community transmission was taking place - the gaping hole in the border to keep out the virus was exposed for everyone to see and blown apart on Tuesday night.

[Zaphod]

Winston stating he knew at a time earlier than Jacinda does not look good. That alone makes her look either a leader left out of the loop, or a liar. Probably the former, hopefully not the latter.

[Blue Skies]

Judith Collins floundering when held to account for misinformation being peddled by their deputy & herself, on RNZ 'no nonsense' Kim Hill this morning.
Nikki Kaye, Bill English, Chris Finlayson, Amy Adams etc would be rolling their eyes at the desperation & degeneration of their party.
And frankly its not good for NZ to have such a hopeless stumbling opposition in this crisis.


https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018759286/covid-19-judith-collins-hits-back-at-grant-robertson-after-he-called-opposition-claims-nonsense

[Balance]

Judith Collins floundering when held to account for misinformation being peddled by their deputy & herself, on RNZ 'no nonsense' Kim Hill this morning.
Nikki Kaye, Bill English, Chris Finlayson, Amy Adams etc would be rolling their eyes at the desperation & degeneration of their party.
And frankly its not good for NZ to have such a hopeless stumbling opposition in this crisis.


https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018759286/covid-19-judith-collins-hits-back-at-grant-robertson-after-he-called-opposition-claims-nonsense

Worse having a government of incompetents putting all of NZ at risk - first the quarantine debacle, now the community transmission debacle.

NZ may not be so lucky second time round.

[bullfrog]

Didn’t like the implication from national that labour / AB were hiding Covid facts from us, they don’t need to play that game, the nats should be running rings around labour with policy announcements, and shocking people with the financial state of the country.

While labour are distracted, hit em with the economy, don’t go trumpy about the guy who’s got his face on our tea towels. If we loose confidence in him, we’re all f**ked.

[Joshuatree]

Yes its so so so sick and low and trump like.And its been pumped out to all on facebook etc etc, many are sucked in especially young people and it quickly morphs into a reactive hate thing and its fake. The National party is prepared to take us all down the toilet then influence us with an old electric toilet brush as well as empowering the real lunatic fringes

Watching New Zealand getting red-pilled (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/300081923/im-just-outlining-facts-watching-new-zealand-getting-redpilled-in-real-time)

[bullfrog]

Yes its so so so sick and low and trump like.And its been pumped out to all on facebook etc etc, many are sucked in especially young people and it quickly morphs into a reactive hate thing and its fake. The National party is prepared to take us all down the toilet then influence us with an old electric toilet brush as well as empowering the real lunatic fringes

Watching New Zealand getting red-pilled (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/300081923/im-just-outlining-facts-watching-new-zealand-getting-redpilled-in-real-time)

Never thought I’d say this, but thank god for trump, he shows how bad things can get when this type of thing goes viral. I hope people see it for what it is, a teenager laughing his arse off in his bedroom making stuff up and getting a kick out of seeing people believing it and forwarding it. Better than tagging and lighting real fires.

[Balance]

What will really make NZers really really sick of course is this government of incompetents screwing up our border controls and welcoming back Covid-19.

Which is exactly what is happening - first the quarantine debacle and now the community transmission debacle.

Best example of how incompetent MOH & this government are :

‘We round up sheep, we do not round up people’ said Bloomfield on Wednesday morning. By yesterday, he had ordered people to be rounded up like sheep into quarantine centres.

Very clear that Bloomfield is being coached by the same PR team which coaches Cindy & her team of incompetents.

[BlackPeter]

What will really make NZers really really sick of course is this government of incompetents screwing up our border controls and welcoming back Covid-19.

Which is exactly what is happening - first the quarantine debacle and now the community transmission debacle.

Best example of how incompetent MOH & this government are :

‘We round up sheep, we do not round up people’ said Bloomfield on Wednesday morning. By yesterday, he had ordered people to be rounded up like sheep into quarantine centres.

Very clear that Bloomfield is being coached by the same PR team which coaches Cindy & her team of incompetents.

A pretty sickening post. Any chance you could lift the bar?

[Joshuatree]

The troll has no bar, answers to nothing or no one.The troll craves attention and justification every second its conscious, dont feed the troll.

[Balance]

A pretty sickening post. Any chance you could lift the bar?

Happy to but please point to which part of my post as not true?

[blackcap]

‘We round up sheep, we do not round up people’ said Bloomfield on Wednesday morning. By yesterday, he had ordered people to be rounded up like sheep into quarantine centres.

Very clear that Bloomfield is being coached by the same PR team which coaches Cindy & her team of incompetents.

Sounds pretty communist to me.

[jonu]

A pretty sickening post. Any chance you could lift the bar?

Seems a clear and coherent post to me. Your request to lift the bar would be better directed at Ardern.

[Bill Smith]

The content may well be sickening, but it's all true, unfortunately. Just keep on burying your head and all the nasty stuff is invisible!

[BlackPeter]

Happy to but please point to which part of my post as not true?

You are changing the subject. I didn't discuss the trueness of your confession of faith (which would make no sense - given that it is just a fiction of your brain), I said your post is sickening.

It was just an endless repetition of your hate against the current government. Believes appear always true to the believer (no matter how non-sensical or ugly they are) and always wrong to everybody else. Otherwise they would be facts.

Don't misunderstand me - I didn't vote for this government either, but actually - people like you might push me to do that next time. The flood of hate currently coming from the right corner is so disgusting, that I certainly don't want to side with the hate spewers. I expect many others from the liberal camp will follow me.

Looking at facts ...

Yes, there are clearly a number of issues (and I don't think you missed any of them ;) ) - where the current government clearly missed their promises and where they disappointed.

However - the same is true for the government we had before. Nationals handling of South Canterbury Finance was a disaster and did cost the tax payer billions. Gerry Brownlee's handling of the Christchurch rebuild was an outstanding example for how not to do it. Combination of attack dog and inept arrogance do not make a good government.

But hey - no matter whether it is Labor or National, they are all humans and make mistakes ... maybe we should as well treat them as humans instead of preaching hate.

If we look into the future - I agree that the next Labor government is likely to make mistakes again - but so would any other government (see above). Labors team has may weak links - and so does Nationals.

From a personal perspective - I could live with the liberal side of National (Kay, Adams, Muller), but unfortunately they are now all gone. Cutting off its liberal wing won't make National better ... and apart from that - it will be impossible for them to fly with only one wing.

Better get used to the idea of another progressive government ... and don't don't forget ... be kind :) ;

[dobby41]

National have no hope if they keep up with their sickening dirty politics.
There are ways to ask questions and ways to start false stories.
They seem to only understand the later.
They'll find out in the next poll.

[iceman]

dobby I'm not sure you are reading the electorate right. I suspect people have had enough of Jacinda's childish empty slogans and failures with nearly every single issue by this Government. The tide may well turn very quickly.

[Balance]

Better get used to the idea of another progressive government ... and don't don't forget ... be kind :) ;

Does not really matter to me - I do well irrespective of which government is in power.

What matters however is that issues are surfaced for all to see - something that Labourites here desperately try to cover up.

Will not work with me so stop trying.

Kiwibuild and effective quarantine, anyone?

[fungus pudding]

Does not really matter to me - I do well irrespective of which government is in power.

What matters however is that issues are surfaced for all to see - something that Labourites here desperately try to cover up.

Will not work with me so stop trying.

Kiwibuild and effective quarantine, anyone?

What might make the difference is which party is in when you boot the bucket. I'm sure Labour will be scheming up the bad old days of gift and cark duties.

[moka]

dobby I'm not sure you are reading the electorate right. I suspect people have had enough of Jacinda's childish empty slogans and failures with nearly every single issue by this Government. The tide may will turn very quickly.
Only a few people see what Jacinda says as childish empty slogans. Most people like and admire how she communicates. She has a different kind of leadership, one that puts kindness at the top of the agenda, and not everyone has accepts how effective this style of leadership can be.
Many people see and focus on the successes and not the failures of the government. The success of containing the virus previously. The tide has not turned yet and is unlikely to as long as she demonstrates empathetic leadership.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12352474
Colmar Brunton political poll: Judith Collins, National flounder; Labour, Jacinda Ardern rise
https://www.interest.co.nz/news/106427/latest-roy-morgan-poll-shows-pm-jacinda-ardern-maintains-%E2%80%98crushing%E2%80%99-lead-over-new
Latest Roy Morgan poll shows PM Jacinda Ardern maintains ‘crushing’ lead over new National leader Judith Collins

[Balance]

Only a few people see what Jacinda says as childish empty slogans. Most people like and admire how she communicates. She has a different kind of leadership, one that puts kindness at the top of the agenda, and not everyone has accepts how effective this style of leadership can be.
Many people see and focus on the successes and not the failures of the government. The success of containing the virus previously. The tide has not turned yet and is unlikely to as long as she demonstrates empathetic leadership.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12352474
Colmar Brunton political poll: Judith Collins, National flounder; Labour, Jacinda Ardern rise
https://www.interest.co.nz/news/106427/latest-roy-morgan-poll-shows-pm-jacinda-ardern-maintains-%E2%80%98crushing%E2%80%99-lead-over-new
Latest Roy Morgan poll shows PM Jacinda Ardern maintains ‘crushing’ lead over new National leader Judith Collins

And in the real world, this is what is happening - complete failure to adhere to very basic precautions :

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300082184/coronavirus-woman-had-to-queue-for-covid19-test-with-other-symptomatic-people

A woman tested at an Auckland pop-up clinic had to queue in a tent with other symptomatic people – with little social distancing and hardly anyone wearing a mask.

Begs the question as to what is actually happening at the border and quarantine centers, does it not?

Cindy's new slogan : Let's Keep Spreading?

[moka]

Interview with Opposition Health spokesperson Dr Shane Reti, very pleased to see the moderate considered response. But commonsense doesn’t make headline news, drama and extremism like Gerry Brownlee’s comments do.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/nationals-dr-shane-reti-offers-help-government-covid-19-response?auto=6180926790001
Despite the criticism of the Labour-led Government’s handling of the border and the latest Covid-19 outbreak by the National Party, Dr Reti says the Government is "doing its best" with its pandemic response.
“I think the Government is doing the best that it can, it’s a hard problem.”
“I went and had a meeting with Chris Hipkins and it was very productive, we have open communication channels with the Government.”
The very last thing I said with him at the meeting was, ‘Chris, how can we help? What can we do?’ and he said ‘there is something you can do. Can you speak with your GP colleagues and see if they can help us with testing?'”

[Balance]

Interview with Opposition Health spokesperson Dr Shane Reti, very pleased to see the moderate considered response. But commonsense doesn’t make headline news, drama and extremism like Gerry Brownlee’s comments do.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/nationals-dr-shane-reti-offers-help-government-covid-19-response?auto=6180926790001
Despite the criticism of the Labour-led Government’s handling of the border and the latest Covid-19 outbreak by the National Party, Dr Reti says the Government is "doing its best" with its pandemic response.
“I think the Government is doing the best that it can, it’s a hard problem.”
“I went and had a meeting with Chris Hipkins and it was very productive, we have open communication channels with the Government.”
The very last thing I said with him at the meeting was, ‘Chris, how can we help? What can we do?’ and he said ‘there is something you can do. Can you speak with your GP colleagues and see if they can help us with testing?'”

Help with testing?

When the government and MOH cannot even get basic health precautions & protocols in place?

Let’s keep spreading.

[BlackPeter]

What might make the difference is which party is in when you boot the bucket. I'm sure Labour will be scheming up the bad old days of gift and cark duties.

Just lets face it - any honest and sustainable government will need to raise taxes to pay for the cost of Covid-19, the tsunami in old people (health system & super) and the cost of climate change.

Any politician stating something different is either a short-termer (kicking the can down the road) or lying.

It is a different discussion what the best way it is to raise this money, but personally ... I don't think I would mind a lot whatever the tax rate is when I kick the bucket :); Might be even one of the less annoying (and fairer) taxes.

[moka]

Best example of how incompetent MOH & this government are :

‘We round up sheep, we do not round up people’ said Bloomfield on Wednesday morning. By yesterday, he had ordered people to be rounded up like sheep into quarantine centres.

Very clear that Bloomfield is being coached by the same PR team which coaches Cindy & her team of incompetents.
Fact checking. Bloomfield did not order people to be rounded up into quarantine centres, those people wanted to go.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12356559
When asked why families who recently tested positive to Covid-19 were now being taken into quarantine facilities just hours after director general of Health Ashley Bloomfield said New Zealand rounded up sheep rather than people, Megan Woods said they wanted to.
Woods, who is in charge of managed isolation facilities, said some of the people who were testing positive actually wanted to go into quarantine.
"They wanted to isolate themselves away from family members who haven't tested positive," she said.
Some of the families were big families living in single houses and so quarantine was a good option, Woods said.

[artemis]

Fact check. As of yesterday mandatory quarantining for positive cases, and in some cases also family members.

[jonu]

Fact check. As of yesterday mandatory quarantining for positive cases, and in same cases also family members.

It's a shame. Megan Woods shown to be almost as slippery as her boss.

[Balance]

Fact checking. Bloomfield did not order people to be rounded up into quarantine centres, those people wanted to go.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12356559
When asked why families who recently tested positive to Covid-19 were now being taken into quarantine facilities just hours after director general of Health Ashley Bloomfield said New Zealand rounded up sheep rather than people, Megan Woods said they wanted to.
Woods, who is in charge of managed isolation facilities, said some of the people who were testing positive actually wanted to go into quarantine.
"They wanted to isolate themselves away from family members who haven't tested positive," she said.
Some of the families were big families living in single houses and so quarantine was a good option, Woods said.

Spin spin and more spin - if only they spend real efforts on keeping the virus out instead.

[tim23]

Interview with Opposition Health spokesperson Dr Shane Reti, very pleased to see the moderate considered response. But commonsense doesn’t make headline news, drama and extremism like Gerry Brownlee’s comments do.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/nationals-dr-shane-reti-offers-help-government-covid-19-response?auto=6180926790001
Despite the criticism of the Labour-led Government’s handling of the border and the latest Covid-19 outbreak by the National Party, Dr Reti says the Government is "doing its best" with its pandemic response.
“I think the Government is doing the best that it can, it’s a hard problem.”
“I went and had a meeting with Chris Hipkins and it was very productive, we have open communication channels with the Government.”
The very last thing I said with him at the meeting was, ‘Chris, how can we help? What can we do?’ and he said ‘there is something you can do. Can you speak with your GP colleagues and see if they can help us with testing?'”

He was quite impressive - probably in damage control after the Brownlee/Collins sideshow

[tim23]

dobby I'm not sure you are reading the electorate right. I suspect people have had enough of Jacinda's childish empty slogans and failures with nearly every single issue by this Government. The tide may well turn very quickly.

You will be so wrong on that score and the alternative is Collins - are you for real?

[moka]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300082468/coronavirus-national-party-local-official-urges-party-to-oppose-lockdowns-as-breach-of-human-rights
Coronavirus: National Party local official urges party to oppose lockdowns as 'breach of human rights'
Allan Chesswas, chair of the Stratford branch, wrote to Collins, party president Peter Goodfellow, and several other MPs late on Thursday night asking the party oppose Covid-19 lockdown and stop buying into what he called the “overblown drama” surrounding the virus.
“I do not and cannot consent to this ongoing breach of the basic human rights and civil liberties of everyday Kiwis,” he wrote.

[moka]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12356495
Crisis tests oppositions as well as governments.
It started out well with New Zealand's Epidemic Response Committee, a cross-party vehicle of agonistic democracy, where the opposition could openly hold the government to account, even under a state of emergency.
But the subsequent leaking of sensitive information for political gain by National Party members betrayed a lack of loyalty to government institutions, and to New Zealanders who entrust them with private information.
Now, the opposition is insinuating that the government publicly withheld information about the present outbreak.
Given how swiftly this coronavirus spreads, and how much the government has to lose from its spreading, it isn't politically rational for the government to cover it up. It is a cynical suggestion – and the opposition risks that many voters will see it as such.

This is a dangerous game. The opposition is undermining trust at a time when trust is incredibly important. New Zealand's strong levels of social and institutional trust are a key factor in our relatively successful pandemic response.
Its degradation diminishes the country's capacity to fend off Covid-19.
And it feeds into the paranoia that crises conjure up.
The opposition's appeals to paranoia only add more fuel to the online inferno.

[fungus pudding]

dobby I'm not sure you are reading the electorate right. I suspect people have had enough of Jacinda's childish empty slogans and failures with nearly every single issue by this Government. The tide may well turn very quickly.

You may be right. I know my skin crawls when she refers to 5 million people with no common thread as 'a team'. A corny and childish platitude.

[jonu]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300082468/coronavirus-national-party-local-official-urges-party-to-oppose-lockdowns-as-breach-of-human-rights
Coronavirus: National Party local official urges party to oppose lockdowns as 'breach of human rights'
Allan Chesswas, chair of the Stratford branch, wrote to Collins, party president Peter Goodfellow, and several other MPs late on Thursday night asking the party oppose Covid-19 lockdown and stop buying into what he called the “overblown drama” surrounding the virus.
“I do not and cannot consent to this ongoing breach of the basic human rights and civil liberties of everyday Kiwis,” he wrote.

He's a person speaking his mind. A rare thing in the PC woke world in which Labour and the Greens exist.

moka, be so kind as to explain the exit strategy from NZ's level one and associated closed borders. I'd really love to know so that I can explain to my grandchildren why it is they are still paying of the debt in thirty years time. I don't recall Labour telling us when they committed to spending 150+ billion dollars.

From what I can tell it must be based on the gamble of a vaccine becoming available to the public within the next 12 months (backdated to April). How's that working out?

At what point do we abandon the closed borders and write of 150+ billion to experience?

[dobby41]

The very last thing I said with him at the meeting was, ‘Chris, how can we help? What can we do?’ and he said ‘there is something you can do. Can you speak with your GP colleagues and see if they can help us with testing?'”

National could help by not spreading false stories!

[Balance]

National could help by not spreading false stories!

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12356709

Paywalled

Cindy - Shameless Mistress of Spin

[BlackPeter]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300082468/coronavirus-national-party-local-official-urges-party-to-oppose-lockdowns-as-breach-of-human-rights
Coronavirus: National Party local official urges party to oppose lockdowns as 'breach of human rights'
Allan Chesswas, chair of the Stratford branch, wrote to Collins, party president Peter Goodfellow, and several other MPs late on Thursday night asking the party oppose Covid-19 lockdown and stop buying into what he called the “overblown drama” surrounding the virus.
“I do not and cannot consent to this ongoing breach of the basic human rights and civil liberties of everyday Kiwis,” he wrote.


National could help by not spreading false stories!

Agreed. Quite frightening to hear as well about the ultra right which seem to have taken over parts of the National party. Dumb and selfish bullies not caring for the country or other people. We certainly can't allow them to get even close to the reigns ...

[Balance]

Agreed. Quite frightening to hear as well about the ultra right which seem to have taken over parts of the National party. Dumb and selfish bullies not caring for the country or other people. We certainly can't allow them to get even close to the reigns ...

But it is okay though for the Maori MPs in Labour to support alienation of private land back to Maoris?

Votes there, see?

Big difference is that the ultra right & bullies (as you put them) have been there in National & Act & various ‘right wing’ parties and there is no evidence that they have ever set National’s policies in government.

But the Maoris & their MPs certainly do in Labour.

[BlackPeter]

But it is okay though for the Maori MPs in Labour to support alienation of private land back to Maoris?

Not sure what you are referring to, but no matter whether this would be right or wrong, what does it have to do with the ultra right and brainless bullies taking over National?

[Balance]

Not sure what you are referring to, but no matter whether this would be right or wrong, what does it have to do with the ultra right and brainless bullies taking over National?

I have answered your question above.

[BlackPeter]

But it is okay though for the Maori MPs in Labour to support alienation of private land back to Maoris?

Votes there, see?

Big difference is that the ultra right & bullies (as you put them) have been there in National & Act & various ‘right wing’ parties and there is no evidence that they have ever set National’s policies in government.

But the Maoris & their MPs certainly do in Labour.


I have answered your question above.

Cheers.

Not sure, though I see the logic - wasn't it National for three terms in a coalition with the Maori party and wasn't it Labor who (in the view of some Maoris) let the Maoris down re the sea and foresore demands? Maybe you just mixed the parties up ...

Re the hard right bullies ... you might be right that they always have been there ... however - so far they have been moderated by the liberals in both parties. Unfortunately - National kicked the Liberals out and ACT got taken over by the gun lovers and hard right. It didn't help as well that lots of right wing scum governing in other parts of the world (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro & Co) clearly encourages the hard right parts of National and ACT.

Whinging about the freedom to make other people sick like some National regional leaders do in times of a pandemic is just so - well, sickening.

I hope with you that we will soon have again a decent conservative / liberal block in New Zealand, but at this stage with bully Collins, inept Brownlee and many hard right wing creepy crawlies in National airing their new found freedom to behave Trumpesk ... we are clearly not there.

I hope National will use the next three years better than the last three years to clean out its pig stye.

[Balance]

Cheers.

Not sure, though I see the logic - wasn't it National for three terms in a coalition with the Maori party and wasn't it Labor who (in the view of some Maoris) let the Maoris down re the sea and foresore demands? Maybe you just mixed the parties up ...

Re the hard right bullies ... you might be right that they always have been there ... however - so far they have been moderated by the liberals in both parties. Unfortunately - National kicked the Liberals out and ACT got taken over by the gun lovers and hard right. It didn't help as well that lots of right wing scum governing in other parts of the world (Trump, Johnson, Bolsonaro & Co) clearly encourages the hard right parts of National and ACT.

Whinging about the freedom to make other people sick like some National regional leaders do in times of a pandemic is just so - well, sickening.

I hope with you that we will soon have again a decent conservative / liberal block in New Zealand, but at this stage with bully Collins, inept Brownlee and many hard right wing creepy crawlies in National airing their new found freedom to behave Trumpesk ... we are clearly not there.

I hope National will use the next three years better than the last three years to clean out its pig stye.

Long long dribble (as usual) to a simple question :

You have not answered the Maori question.

[BlackPeter]

Long long dribble (as usual) to a simple question :

You have not answered the Maori question.

Very arrogant and in the context of the discussion irrelevant post (as usual), indicating you did not bother to understand my point but prefer to change the subject of the discussion by being rude. Just because you choose to throw a dead cat on the table does not mean everybody needs to change the subject as you please ...

My point was that National lost its liberal wing, which means the the extreme right (probably in combination with some pseudo religious nutters) are taking control of the party. They are not anymore representing the majority of the people in NZ, which means they won't make it into government, unless they change ...

I didn't say that they are the only radical elements in the game ... if you feel that one or some Maori groups are as well unable to express their demands in an for the majority of decent people acceptable way than this may or may not be true, but it is irrelevant for our discussion about National.

No need to respond to your dead cat ... and I have honestly no view on the latter subject.

[moka]

You may be right. I know my skin crawls when she refers to 5 million people with no common thread as 'a team'. A corny and childish platitude.

I think it is the messenger you are reacting to rather than hearing the message.

The common thread is that we are New Zealanders. And we all need to unite to fight the virus, which means abiding by the restrictions, rules, lockdowns, and handwashing.
I think the problem is that you are uncomfortable with a woman leader, who is the leader of the Labour Party, both of which in your opinion and some others are not competent and suitable to be running the country. A woman who is occasionally called a communist.
You would be more comfortable if it was John Key as Prime Minister invoking the image of the All Blacks as a team uniting all New Zealanders to fight against the virus, and then you would be more likely to hear the message.

[artemis]

I think it is the messenger you are reacting to rather than hearing the message.

The common thread is that we are New Zealanders. And we all need to unite to fight the virus, which means abiding by the restrictions, rules, lockdowns, and handwashing.
I think the problem is that you are uncomfortable with a woman leader, who is the leader of the Labour Party, both of which in your opinion and some others are not competent and suitable to be running the country. A woman who is occasionally called a communist.
You would be more comfortable if it was John Key as Prime Minister invoking the image of the All Blacks as a team uniting all New Zealanders to fight against the virus, and then you would be more likely to hear the message.

I'm sure fungus pudding will be chuffed that you have taken the time to dive into his feelings and give advice. It's what we are encouraged to do these days along with being kind and washing hands.

[jonu]

He's a person speaking his mind. A rare thing in the PC woke world in which Labour and the Greens exist.

moka, be so kind as to explain the exit strategy from NZ's level one and associated closed borders. I'd really love to know so that I can explain to my grandchildren why it is they are still paying of the debt in thirty years time. I don't recall Labour telling us when they committed to spending 150+ billion dollars.

From what I can tell it must be based on the gamble of a vaccine becoming available to the public within the next 12 months (backdated to April). How's that working out?

At what point do we abandon the closed borders and write of 150+ billion to experience?

No answer to this moka? Any Labourite care to enlighten me as to what the exit strategy is?

[fungus pudding]

I'm sure fungus pudding will be chuffed that you have taken the time to dive into his feelings and give advice. It's what we are encouraged to do these days along with being kind and washing hands.

Yes. I'm always grateful for the services of a mind reader. Especially when supplied gratis.

[dobby41]

No answer to this moka? Any Labourite care to enlighten me as to what the exit strategy is?

Crusher isn't going to let it in either so maybe they will have the same exit strategy?

I do wonder how long we can keep the current settings though.
It seems 'experts' think elimination is still the best strategy, depends on which experts you choose like for all other advice.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300082182/coronavirus-elimination-of-covid19-still-best-strategy-for-nz-experts-say

[fungus pudding]

I think it is the messenger you are reacting to rather than hearing the message.

The common thread is that we are New Zealanders. And we all need to unite to fight the virus, which means abiding by the restrictions, rules, lockdowns, and handwashing.
I think the problem is that you are uncomfortable with a woman leader, who is the leader of the Labour Party, both of which in your opinion and some others are not competent and suitable to be running the country. A woman who is occasionally called a communist.
You would be more comfortable if it was John Key as Prime Minister invoking the image of the All Blacks as a team uniting all New Zealanders to fight against the virus, and then you would be more likely to hear the message.

I've just read your ridiculous post. For a start, I have nothing against any woman leader. I consider Ardern to be among the best PM's we have had, which is not to say I agree with her politics. However she does an exceptional job representing NZ. Her party however is a different story. When you consider Twyford is about no 4 in the party you must realise how incompetent members ranked below him are. You have no idea of my views on John Key. You have a problem - namely you are a smart-arse who would be far better off making the odd constructive comment, rather than throwing around baseless insults on matters you know nothing about.

[moka]

He's a person speaking his mind. A rare thing in the PC woke world in which Labour and the Greens exist.

moka, be so kind as to explain the exit strategy from NZ's level one and associated closed borders. I'd really love to know so that I can explain to my grandchildren why it is they are still paying of the debt in thirty years time. I don't recall Labour telling us when they committed to spending 150+ billion dollars.

From what I can tell it must be based on the gamble of a vaccine becoming available to the public within the next 12 months (backdated to April). How's that working out?

At what point do we abandon the closed borders and write of 150+ billion to experience?
I cannot explain the exit strategy because I don’t know and nor does anyone else including the politicians who will make the decisions. I don’t even know which politicians will be making those decisions after the election. They will be reacting to events as they happen. Will we contain this outbreak and if we do when will the next one be? The government knew the chance of a resurgence was likely but it didn’t know when or how many people would be affected.

So jonu lots of uncertainty. You are wanting certainty and answers in uncertain times. We are living in unpredictable times. We are in uncharted territory, we live in interesting times. A policy statement could be derailed at any time by the virus.
I don’t believe there will be a vaccine within the next 12 months

[Bjauck]

You may be right. I know my skin crawls when she refers to 5 million people with no common thread as 'a team'. A corny and childish platitude.
I guess you could say Churchill was childish and corny when he exhorted the British to unite as one to fight the Nazis on the beaches and in the fields and on the streets.

We are fighting the virus. The common thread is to protect our families and ensure that our health system is not overwhelmed.

[Balance]

I guess you could say Churchill was childish and corny when he exhorted the British to unite as one to fight the Nazis on the beaches and in the fields and on the streets.

We are fighting the virus. The common thread is to protect our families and ensure that our health system is not overwhelmed.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300083302/coronavirus-2km-queues-at-auckland-beach-chains-cut-to-closed-roads

Aucklanders show what they think of the team of 5 million.

Come and kiss the sunshine.

[blackcap]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300083302/coronavirus-2km-queues-at-auckland-beach-chains-cut-to-closed-roads

Aucklanders show what they think of the team of 5 million.

Come and kiss the sunshine.

And why not, at this stage of the year, it is very important to dose up on Vitamin D to have effective means to combat Covid. What better way then to go out in the sunshine. Hope to see more Aucklanders out there today.

[dobby41]

And why not, at this stage of the year, it is very important to dose up on Vitamin D to have effective means to combat Covid. What better way then to go out in the sunshine. Hope to see more Aucklanders out there today.

Many people in Melbourne defied the rules and look where that got them. Death rate tripled.

[Bjauck]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300083302/coronavirus-2km-queues-at-auckland-beach-chains-cut-to-closed-roads

Aucklanders show what they think of the team of 5 million.

Come and kiss the sunshine. Coz you won't be able to kiss granny goodbye as she lies alone on her death bed if you help cause the second wave from lack of social distancing. Look at the UK and the USA.

[Balance]

Coz you won't be able to kiss granny goodbye as she lies alone on her death bed if you help cause the second wave from lack of social distancing. Look at the UK and the USA.

Point is that this government has lost credibility with this second stuff up with keeping our borders safe from another virus outbreak.

Testing all frontline workers regularly is basic precaution - not an optional nice to have and definitely not rocket science.

Keeping quarantine facilities secure is basic - does not need whistleblowers to send alarm bells ringing before the government scrambled hastily to take action.

You can only fool all of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Mind you, I will concede that this government can still fool some of the people all of the time.

[Bjauck]

Point is that this government has lost credibility with this second stuff up with keeping our borders safe from another virus outbreak.

Testing all frontline workers regularly is basic precaution - not rocket science.

Keeping quarantine facilities secure is basic - not military grade requirement.

You can only fool all of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Mind you, I will concede that this government can still fool some of the people all of the time. I am sure Simon Bridges would have done a better job sorting out and overseeing government departments. Yeah right!

[Balance]

I am sure Simon Bridges would have done a better job sorting out and overseeing government departments. Yeah right!

Nobody could possibly have done worse than this government - it had one job which is to protect our border and they have fallen flat on their faces, twice!

Why? Because this government has not got a clue how to govern beyond locking us all down, it looks like their only strategy.

And spare us your pathetic trick of deflecting - it confirms you as one of the ‘some’ people who is happy to be fooled all the time.

Or are you one of those trying to fool all of the people all the time?

[jonu]

I cannot explain the exit strategy because I don’t know and nor does anyone else including the politicians who will make the decisions. I don’t even know which politicians will be making those decisions after the election. They will be reacting to events as they happen. Will we contain this outbreak and if we do when will the next one be? The government knew the chance of a resurgence was likely but it didn’t know when or how many people would be affected.

So jonu lots of uncertainty. You are wanting certainty and answers in uncertain times. We are living in unpredictable times. We are in uncharted territory, we live in interesting times. A policy statement could be derailed at any time by the virus.
I don’t believe there will be a vaccine within the next 12 months

So you agree we have a government that has budgeted 150 BILLION dollars of our descendants money, on a plan with no definable exit strategy other than a vaccine which may never arrive. At what stage do we reopen the border? Are we to be forever locked into a revolving door of alert levels? Sounds a tad irresponsible to me. I wouldn't spend 1k without thinking through whether it was a sustainable model.

[blackcap]

So you agree we have a government that has budgeted 150 BILLION dollars of our descendants money, on a plan with no definable exit strategy other than a vaccine which may never arrive. At what stage do we reopen the border? Are we to be forever locked into a revolving door of alert levels? Sounds a tad irresponsible to me. I wouldn't spend 1k without thinking through whether it was a sustainable model.

I think Moka thinks that money comes from the money tree. By the looks of his/her posts thats what it seems like.

[Balance]

I think Moka thinks that money comes from the money tree. By the looks of his/her posts thats what it seems like.

Tax & Spend

Borrow & Hope

Labour reverting back to its 'core values' - impoverish all to create an equal society

[Bjauck]

Nobody could possibly have done worse than this government - it had one job which is to protect our border and they have fallen flat on their faces, twice!

Why? Because this government has not got a clue how to govern beyond locking us all down, it looks like their only strategy.

And spare us your pathetic trick of deflecting - it confirms you as one of the ‘some’ people who is happy to be fooled all the time.

Or are you one of those trying to fool all of the people all the time? I am not sure why you expect a perfect response to this epidemic. Has any democracy achieved that? Anyway good on you if you expect that National would have done better. Perhaps even if they may have ignore government department heads’ advice? That is democracy.

[Balance]

I am not sure why you expect a perfect response to this epidemic with allowance for human errors. Anyway good on for you if you expect that National would have done better. Perhaps even if they may ignore government department heads’ advice? That is democracy.

Nobody is expecting a perfect response but failing spectacularly on the basics of protecting NZers at the border - twice?

To be blunt, it is an insult to the intelligence of those of us attempting to discuss the election & the serious implications of policies when all we get are excuses and deflections as responses of Labourite posters.

I apologize for getting aggro so let's try again:

This government has failed spectacularly twice in its one job of keeping our borders secure against the enemy - its election platform by its own admission.

Why has it not learnt from the first debacle?

It is not rocket science to require testing for all frontline staff & to provide adequate PPE so why not?

And please, spare us whether National or Simon or John or David can do better ir worse - let's discuss this government of the here and now.

Fair enough?

[BlackPeter]

Nobody is expecting a perfect response but failing spectacularly on the basics of protecting NZers at the border - twice?

To be blunt, it is an insult to the intelligence of those of us attempting to discuss the election & the serious implications of policies when all we get are excuses and deflections as responses of Labourite posters.

I apologize for getting aggro so let's try again:

This government has failed spectacularly twice in its one job of keeping our borders secure against the enemy - its election platform by its own admission.

Why has it not learnt from the first debacle?

It is not rocket science to require testing for all frontline staff & to provide adequate PPE so why not?

And please, spare us whether National or Simon or John or David can do better ir worse - let's discuss this government of the here and now.

Fair enough?

To be fair - we don't know yet, how this second out brake came into the country (or whether it was always here), maybe we still might all learn something new about the virus?

Having said that, I agree - not regularly testing border staff (despite claiming that they do) is a spectacular failure. Management 101 is checking instead of trusting that something might happen ... and they haven't been very good doing that. They failed in this category not once, not twice, but many times. They didn't even learn that they can't trust our officials. Point taken.

Not sure though why you don't want a comparison with what National would have done. Unfortunately the election (whenever it might happen) is not an academic rating exercise - it is the attempt to pick the better candidate out of a quite limited candidate pool (i.e. Labor led government or National led government - that's it).

You are correct in pointing out that the current government made a number of mistakes ... however - lets not forget that the previous National government made as well a number of capital mistakes in the execution of their crisis management (like GFC, ChCh earth quakes) at the time. It is like checking and comparing the eye sight of people with severe eye sight impairments.

Looking forward the only relevant question would be whether for the next three years a Labor government (standalone or supplemented by Green) be a better choice for New Zealand than a National government supplemented by ACT, Maori and NZ First)?

Looking at the values / policies and the leadership qualities of their respective leaders I think for most Labor / Green will stand out (unless you like a bully in the top job and are a fan of Trumpesk justice and gun policies).

Looking at the respective management outcomes I agree both "candidates" demonstrated at different points in times that there is huge improvement potential.

Lets not forget - successive National as well as Labor governments


have been responsible for running down our health system.
have been responsible for running down our environment, allowing that our once clear lakes and rivers are now sewage and that our drinking water in most parts of New Zealand is polluted.
screwed up our justice system (lock them up and throw the key away) and created that way a society with the highest number of incarcerated people outside the Trumpesk States of America.
moved our education system for what used to be in the 1950 ..ies the envy of the developed world to something quite mediocre. Interesting that many of our prisoners are not even able to read and write ... maybe there is a link between poor education and high incarceration?


So - yes, they both have a terrible track record, but at least with Labor / Green it appears they want to move into the right direction.

[fungus pudding]

To be fair - we don't know yet, how this second out brake came into the country (or whether it was always here), maybe we still might all learn something new about the virus?

Having said that, I agree - not regularly testing border staff (despite claiming that they do) is a spectacular failure. Management 101 is checking instead of trusting that something might happen ... and they haven't been very good doing that. They failed in this category not once, not twice, but many times. They didn't even learn that they can't trust our officials. Point taken.

Not sure though why you don't want a comparison with what National would have done. Unfortunately the election (whenever it might happen) is not an academic rating exercise - it is the attempt to pick the better candidate out of a quite limited candidate pool (i.e. Labor led government or National led government - that's it).

You are correct in pointing out that the current government made a number of mistakes ... however - lets not forget that the previous National government made as well a number of capital mistakes in the execution of their crisis management (like GFC, ChCh earth quakes) at the time. It is like checking and comparing the eye sight of people with severe eye sight impairments.

Looking forward the only relevant question would be whether for the next three years a Labor government (standalone or supplemented by Green) be a better choice for New Zealand than a National government supplemented by ACT, Maori and NZ First)?

Looking at the values / policies and the leadership qualities of their respective leaders I think for most Labor / Green will stand out (unless you like a bully in the top job and are a fan of Trumpesk justice and gun policies).

Looking at the respective management outcomes I agree both "candidates" demonstrated at different points in times that there is huge improvement potential.

Lets not forget - successive National as well as Labor governments


have been responsible for running down our health system.
have been responsible for running down our environment, allowing that our once clear lakes and rivers are now sewage and that our drinking water in most parts of New Zealand is polluted.
screwed up our justice system (lock them up and throw the key away) and created that way a society with the highest number of incarcerated people outside the Trumpesk States of America.
moved our education system for what used to be in the 1950 ..ies the envy of the developed world to something quite mediocre. Interesting that many of our prisoners are not even able to read and write ... maybe there is a link between poor education and high incarceration?


So - yes, they both have a terrible track record, but at least with Labor / Green it appears they want to move into the right direction.

I agree that both parties have made their mistakes over the years, and always will. Equally they have both done good and worthwhile things, leaving NZ as a highly desirable country in which to live. As a swinging voter I always vote in the most effective way to block my lowest preference. This election my least preferred party will be Labour. They certainly can provide us with the best Prime Minister - but they are short of talent with the exception of a small handful of others. National is the opposite. A reasonably competent bunch - but I'm not impressed with the leader. But overall they offer more talent than Labour, and the best way to get Nat winning, thereby denying Labour, is to vote Act. That's looking like my likely vote for 2020.

[Bjauck]

Nobody is expecting a perfect response but failing spectacularly on the basics of protecting NZers at the border - twice? ...

And please, spare us whether National or Simon or John or David can do better ir worse - let's discuss this government of the here and now.

Fair enough?
Obviously the border must improve. Let’s hope that there is someone with expert advice as to how this can be put into effect.

You had previously said that “nobody could possibly have done worse than this government” so that implied you had been making a comparison assessment with other people. However now you say that comparisons are not valid!

If you make posts condemning the current government on the National Party forum, you are presumably inviting discussion as to how the National Party handling of the situation may compare?

Former National leader Simon Bridges was the MP who could well have formed the government after the last election, if Peters had swung his way. So he is the most apt person to consider how his handling of coronavirus may have differed from Ardern’s.

Now we must consider Fletcher and how she would perform. So far my assessment is that she has taken a leaf out of Trump’s playbook. I understand that for some people that is not a bad thing.



Nobody could possibly have done worse than this government - it had one job which is to protect our border and they have fallen flat on their faces, twice! ...

Obviously in an election year (probably although that may change!) comparisons of whom you think may do the best are vital! Who would do the better job? Tbh I do not know....although by a thin margin At the moment TOP followed by ACT may get my tick.

Luckily we have a (mostly) independent public service who are responsible for the day to day running of government departments and for giving effect to policy administration.

[Balance]

Obviously the border must improve. Let’s hope that there is someone with expert advice as to how this can be put into effect.

You had said that “nobody could possibly have done worse than this government” so that implied you had been making a comparison assessment with other people. However now you say that comparisons are not valid!

My post there is in DIRECT response to the CYA excuse posted by you :


I am sure Simon Bridges would have done a better job sorting out and overseeing government departments. Yeah right!

Do you seriously assess the effectiveness of a leader (who has failed in his/her job) by referring to a competitor who missed out on the job?

By that measure, CEOS of all companies which suffer spectacular falls in earnings and fortunes can simply refer to the unsuccessful applicants for said job and say the unsuccessful applicants would have done worse.

Thing is - you have no way of knowing so it's only fair to critic the one in charge and deal with the here and now.

In this case, who could have done a worse job than this government in its failings in protecting the border? Hard to imagine anyone half intelligent and competent doing a worse job - because of the double failures at border protection. They have learnt nothing from the first debacle and in failing to learn, they have placed the whole of NZ at risk. How bad is that?

[Balance]

I am not sure why you expect a perfect response to this epidemic. Has any democracy achieved that? Anyway good on you if you expect that National would have done better. Perhaps even if they may have ignore government department heads’ advice? That is democracy.

Try Taiwan.

The island country is situated just 130 kms from mainland China and has a large population that works in the neighbouring country. It was the most likely to get infected by the virus.

From 50 cases on March 15 it quickly rose to 422 on April 20, but then managed to flatten its COVID-19 rise curve, with the current figure of 480 cases.

It recorded less than 60 cases in the last almost four months.

What did Taiwan do?

First it reacted quickly and second its efforts were directed by experts. Besides, it never opted for a lockdown, so there has been no major economic fallout.

Schools remained open throughout the outbreak, as did offices, restaurants and malls. Today, the country is donating masks and other resources to affected countries.

And yes, Taiwan is a democracy. It is actually quite a revelation to observe how robust the debates in their legislative chamber and election campaigns are.

[BlackPeter]

In this case, who could have done a worse job than this government in its failings in protecting the border? Hard to imagine anyone half intelligent and competent doing a worse job - because of the double failures at border protection. They have learnt nothing from the first debacle and in failing to learn, they have placed the whole of NZ at risk. How bad is that?

One does not need a lot of imagination to think about governments doing a worse job. Actually - just look across the ditch (Australia) or on the other side across the ocean (US and ALL middle and South American countries with the exception of Uruguay, who did a similar job to our government).

Actually - there is only a small number of governments I can think off who did a better job related to managing Covid-19. China, Taiwan and Vietnam spring to mind. There are some others, but not sure whether I trust their numbers.

Hyperbole and plain wrong statements do not increase your credibility. Same thing as for Trump.

[Bjauck]

My post there is in DIRECT response to the CYA excuse posted by you :



Do you seriously assess the effectiveness of a leader (who has failed in his/her job) by referring to a competitor who missed out on the job?

By that measure, CEOS of all companies which suffer spectacular falls in earnings and fortunes can simply refer to the unsuccessful applicants for said job and say the unsuccessful applicants would have done worse.

Thing is - you have no way of knowing so it's only fair to critic the one in charge and deal with the here and now.

In this case, who could have done a worse job than this government in its failings in protecting the border? Hard to imagine anyone half intelligent and competent doing a worse job - because of the double failures at border protection. They have learnt nothing from the first debacle and in failing to learn, they have placed the whole of NZ at risk. How bad is that?
Why make posts on the National Party thread if you do not want a discussion on how The National Party and its leaders may have performed In comparison. Otherwise discussion of Government policy alone is irrelevant to this thread.

[Bjauck]

Try Taiwan.

The island country is situated just 130 kms from mainland China and has a large population that works in the neighbouring country. It was the most likely to get infected by the virus.

From 50 cases on March 15 it quickly rose to 422 on April 20, but then managed to flatten its COVID-19 rise curve, with the current figure of 480 cases.

It recorded less than 60 cases in the last almost four months.

What did Taiwan do?

First it reacted quickly and second its efforts were directed by experts. Besides, it never opted for a lockdown, so there has been no major economic fallout.

Schools remained open throughout the outbreak, as did offices, restaurants and malls. Today, the country is donating masks and other resources to affected countries.

And yes, Taiwan is a democracy. It is actually quite a revelation to observe how robust the debates in their legislative chamber and election campaigns are.

True, Taiwan, which some regard as an independent country although that is disputed, a ”flawed democracy” , has done well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

[Balance]

True, Taiwan, which some regard as an independent country although that is disputed, a ”flawed democracy” , has done well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

It is more of a democracy than US at the present moment!

[Bjauck]

It is more of a democracy than US at the present moment! We are 4th on that list! Granted, Collins is not yet PM so she has not had time to make us fall below Taiwan’s position ;)

[moka]

I agree that both parties have made their mistakes over the years, and always will. Equally they have both done good and worthwhile things, leaving NZ as a highly desirable country in which to live. As a swinging voter I always vote in the most effective way to block my lowest preference. This election my least preferred party will be Labour. They certainly can provide us with the best Prime Minister - but they are short of talent with the exception of a small handful of others. National is the opposite. A reasonably competent bunch - but I'm not impressed with the leader. But overall they offer more talent than Labour, and the best way to get Nat winning, thereby denying Labour, is to vote Act. That's looking like my likely vote for 2020.
Which National MPs do you think are competent/talented?

[moka]

In this case, who could have done a worse job than this government in its failings in protecting the border? Hard to imagine anyone half intelligent and competent doing a worse job - because of the double failures at border protection. They have learnt nothing from the first debacle and in failing to learn, they have placed the whole of NZ at risk. How bad is that?
Here's the answer to who could do a worse job.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/122398429/let-the-market-decide-who-gets-coronavirus (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/122398429/let-the-market-decide-who-gets-coronavirus)
WARNING SATIRE NOT FACT. Let the market decide who gets coronavirus.

The recently elected National/ACT government’s policy has been declared a success – financially.
The same can be said for ACT’s recent call for private companies to “safely take over managed isolation and quarantine”, with massive profits made by private quarantine operators such as Serco winging their way overseas.
The policy was recently rammed through Parliament, even though a survey showed that two-thirds of New Zealanders supported the strict, state-run, quarantine conditions of the previous Labour government.
Our message to the security guards is simple – Don’t Screw the Crew,” said Iain Lees-Galloway and Andrew Falloon, co-owners of New Zealand’s leading workplace relations consultancy.
Health Minister Chris Bishop and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour were unrepentant about the alleged failure of the private system. “Our PQOM (Public Quarantine Operating Model) is a brilliant model in theory, that is working perfectly in Western Fiordland and on Antipodes Island,” said Seymour. “It’s just that the companies in Wellington are doing a terrible job,” added Bishop.
“It’s a very simple equation,” said local business advocate Hone Takapuna. “The business sector gets the profits from opening the borders, but the taxpayer pays the cost. For a businessperson, it’s a no-brainer.”

[BlackPeter]

Which National MPs do you think are competent/talented?

That's a good question. I could have called some previously - but they all leaving parliament and gave their valedictory speech already.

Obviously - there are new unknown names, but whether they turn into disasters like e.g. Watson or Faloon or into highly talented MP's like Nicky Kay or Amy Adams is at this stage unknown. Given that Nationals candidate selection process seems to be highly random at best: high risk to vote for them!

Nationals Top politicians these days are a sad bunch. Collins is a bully and Brownlee proved his incompetence beyond doubt in the Christchurch re-build. As well, his latest dirty politics episode was devastating. A losing combination of ineptness with a questionable character ... better keep away from any government position.

[Balance]

Nationals Top politicians these days are a sad bunch. Collins is a bully and Brownlee proved his incompetence beyond doubt in the Christchurch re-build.

Let's deal with your assertions, one at a time.

On what basis do you assert that Brownlee was incompetent in the Christchurch rebuild?

He took on what was undeniably NZ's biggest natural disaster and delivered on many fronts.

It was inevitable that there would be many unhappy property owners who wanted a whole heap more - like free handouts, especially when they could not be bothered insuring their homes. And as usual in NZ, just as we have seen in the case of Pike River, we have certain politicians and gravy train riders who pander to the 'aggrieved' - the fact that they shout out loudest does not make them right.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/91883859/gerry-brownlee-exits-christchurch-a-controversial-contrary-figure

Summation of positives & negatives - floor is yours, BlackPeter.

[BlackPeter]

Let's deal with your assertions, one at a time.

On what basis do you assert that Brownlee was incompetent in the Christchurch rebuild?

He took on what was undeniably NZ's biggest natural disaster and delivered on many fronts.

It was inevitable that there would be many unhappy property owners who wanted a whole heap more - like free handouts, especially when they could not be bothered insuring their homes. And as usual in NZ, just as we have seen in the case of Pike River, we have certain politicians and gravy train riders who pander to the 'aggrieved' - the fact that they shout out loudest does not make them right.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/91883859/gerry-brownlee-exits-christchurch-a-controversial-contrary-figure

Summation of positives & negatives - floor is yours, BlackPeter.

I suppose you are either blind or not from Christchurch ...

Well, this is sort of personal for me - and a number of my friends had their homes trashed in the earth quake and are still waiting for a resolution to their home problems. Maybe you would be less arrogant if it would be your life on halt. Brownlee did nothing for these people, and he was as well sitting over the decision to make FBU the Earthquake repairer resulting in thousands of insufficient repairs and botched job, I never ever have seen that much incompetence combined with that much arrogance in one single person.

And if you look into the CBD - the privately owned part is after ten years now sort of rebuild. In the publicly owned part (for which Brownlee was ultimately responsible) there are even after a decade still huge gaps in the landscape. Brownlee might have been good in breeching airport security for his personal benefit, but he did nothing to speed up Christchurch's repairs. Useless and inept.

We are (10 years down the track) still waiting for the repairs of our cathedral, for the completion of our convention centre, for the completion of our stadium, and for so many other things which have been destroyed in the earth quake ... 10 years down the track - that's half a generation!

Did he add value as well? Not sure, I suppose he warmed the chair he was sitting in, which may or may not have been good for the chair - but if you are after a different view, here is what stuff wrote about him:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/91883859/gerry-brownlee-exits-christchurch-a-controversial-contrary-figure


BROWNLEE'S HIGHS AND LOWS IN CHRISTCHURCH:

HIGHS:

- The Canterbury Home Repair Programme: The job was unprecedented and needed structure.

- The central city blueprint: A clear roadmap to recovery delivered in short order, subsequent delays notwithstanding.

- The Land Use Recovery Plan: Freed up space to build thousands of new homes around Christchurch. Perhaps Brownlee's best use of his powers under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act.

- Keeping his mouth shut: Brownlee could have bitten back at his countless detractors. To his credit, he never did.

LOWS:

- Anchor projects: the convention centre and metro sports facility are still years away. There is no sign of a new stadium.

- The Quake Outcasts: Brownlee went all the way to the Supreme Court insisting in a losing argument that the Government was right to offer these red-zoners less compensation. The minister at his most intractable.

- The brain fades: Along with the "clown" and the "carping and moaning", there was, among others, bursting through security at Christchurch Airport and insulting most of the nation of Finland.

- The red zone: Many residents were able to move on but the minority who were delayed and low-balled by insurers needed more support.

Needless to mention - I have a different view on most of Brownlees "High's" they are listing, but let them stand there in the interest of a balanced post (btw - something I can't ever remember coming from you ... balance :p );

[Bjauck]

I thought I would check out the websites of the Labour and National Parties for their Covid policies. The National site says there will be policy announcements to come. However currently no separate policy heading for their current Covid policy despite its having been the over-riding issue for months. They do have a general intro statement saying that we are facing one of the biggest economic challenge In 160 years but no specific mention as to the cause. So I would like to know how they would approach travel, borders, quarantine, targeted Covid assistance etc. There is not much info on their website.

Labour’s website is of more help in finding out their approach to Covid. The Covid response is first in their list of policy areas.

https://www.labour.org.nz/policy

https://www.national.org.nz/policy

[Balance]

I thought I would check out the websites of the Labour and National Parties for their Covid policies. The National site says there will be policy announcements to come. However currently no separate policy heading for their current Covid policy despite its having been the over-riding issue for months. They do have a general intro statement saying that we are facing one of the biggest economic challenge In 160 years but no specific mention as to the cause. So I would like to know how they would approach travel, borders, quarantine, targeted Covid assistance etc. There is not much info on their website.

Labour’s website is of more help in finding out their approach to Covid. The Covid response is first in their list of policy areas.

https://www.labour.org.nz/policy

https://www.national.org.nz/policy

You mean like Labour’s Kiwibuild policy on their website?

Posted to get the gullible public to vote for them with Labour having no clue as to how to deliver.

Same with Covid response - lockdown and more lockdowns.

[artemis]

Thought I heard Ms Collins say they will be publishing their border policy this week. That was before the change in election date. There is a big difference between government policy and opposition policy, especially wrt timing. Any party can choose what they release and when, and will have their reasons, but voters are particularly interested in government policy in a crisis situation that is hitting their pockets.

Otherwise it's jam tomorrow, jam yesterday but never jam today.

[Bjauck]

Thought I heard Ms Collins say they will be publishing their border policy this week. That was before the change in election date. There is a big difference between government policy and opposition policy, especially wrt timing. Any party can choose what they release and when, and will have their reasons, but voters are particularly interested in government policy in a crisis situation that is hitting their pockets.

Otherwise it's jam tomorrow, jam yesterday but never jam today. You can still be an opposition Party and have actual policies especially for the serious issues that have been facing us for months. I would have thought that with an upcoming election the opposition cannot just rely for so long on attacking and criticising, they need to come up with actual policies. Just a couple of months to put forward whatever policies they decide upon, they will have their work cut out to put themselves forward as a Party for constructive engagement with the issues as opposed to destructive negativity.

[artemis]

You can still be an opposition Party and have actual policies especially for the serious issues that have been facing us for months. I would have thought that with an upcoming election the opposition cannot just rely for so long on attacking and criticising, they need to come up with actual policies. Just a couple of months to put forward whatever policies they decide upon, they will have their work cut out to put themselves forward as a Party for constructive engagement with the issues as opposed to destructive negativity.

National for one had a whole raft of detailed policy proposals on their website, and many called for input from the public through comprehensive specific questions plus plenty of room for unstructured feedback. I gave feedback on three that I have an interest in.

I just looked at the website and there are a whole lot of policies published already.

[Bjauck]

National for one had a whole raft of detailed policy proposals on their website, and many called for input from the public through comprehensive specific questions plus plenty of room for unstructured feedback. I gave feedback on three that I have an interest in.

I just looked at the website and there are a whole lot of policies published already. It was their Policies in relation to tackling the Covid epidemic I was seeking.

[Balance]

It was their Policies in relation to tackling the Covid epidemic I was seeking.

Chill, Bjauck - election is two months away so we will all have enough time to read & assess National or Greens or NZF policies on tackling the pandemic when they are released.

Meanwhile, this is interesting reading, isn't it?

https://www.labour.org.nz/kiwibuild-2017

"KiwiBuild will deliver 100,000 affordable houses over ten years for first home buyers. Half of these will be built in Auckland. That is a ten-fold increase in the number of affordable houses being built in Auckland each year, from 500 to 5,000."

[Bjauck]

Chill, Bjauck - election is two months away so we will all have enough time to read & assess National or Greens or NZF policies on tackling the pandemic when they are released.

Meanwhile, this is interesting reading, isn't it?

https://www.labour.org.nz/kiwibuild-2017

"KiwiBuild will deliver 100,000 affordable houses over ten years for first home buyers. Half of these will be built in Auckland. That is a ten-fold increase in the number of affordable houses being built in Auckland each year, from 500 to 5,000."

Nothing to do with my question on what is National’s Covid policy.

[Balance]

Nothing to do with my question on what is National’s Covid policy.

When they are released is the answer.

You sound so eager but will just need to wait.

Meantime, you could reflect on Labour’s election policies and assess how relevant they are in the real world.

Did you read the Kiwibuild policy like I did last election?

[moka]

Chill, Bjauck - election is two months away so we will all have enough time to read & assess National or Greens or NZF policies on tackling the pandemic when they are released.

Meanwhile, this is interesting reading, isn't it?

https://www.labour.org.nz/kiwibuild-2017

"KiwiBuild will deliver 100,000 affordable houses over ten years for first home buyers. Half of these will be built in Auckland. That is a ten-fold increase in the number of affordable houses being built in Auckland each year, from 500 to 5,000."
Nothing on National’s policies about housing at all, that I could see yet. Probably because like last election when asked about the housing problem the National candidate said there is a housing shortage but it is not a problem (meaning no problem = no solution = we don’t need do anything about it = it is what it is.)

[moka]

Let's deal with your assertions, one at a time.

On what basis do you assert that Brownlee was incompetent in the Christchurch rebuild?

He took on what was undeniably NZ's biggest natural disaster and delivered on many fronts.

It was inevitable that there would be many unhappy property owners who wanted a whole heap more - like free handouts, especially when they could not be bothered insuring their homes. And as usual in NZ, just as we have seen in the case of Pike River, we have certain politicians and gravy train riders who pander to the 'aggrieved' - the fact that they shout out loudest does not make them right.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/91883859/gerry-brownlee-exits-christchurch-a-controversial-contrary-figure

Summation of positives & negatives - floor is yours, BlackPeter.
Interesting comparison Brownlee’s handling of the Christchurch earthquake and Ardern’s handing of Covid. True, Brownlee took on what was undeniably NZ's biggest natural disaster and delivered on many fronts. But only many fronts. There were a lot of holes in the system with some real horror stories re earthquake repairs, botched repairs, long delays, people’s lives on hold because of slow or no decision.
Some claims were settled quickly and the people were happy, but there were far too many that were slow to be settled and the people were/are not happy. And those were the insured home-owners.
I don’t remember if he was subjected to the same scrutiny with his response as Ardern is being subjected to. But over the years as the problems persisted I don’t remember the same negative focus on the mistakes he made, as they were revealed. The mud did not seem to stick to him.
.

[Balance]

Interesting comparison Brownlee’s handling of the Christchurch earthquake and Ardern’s handing of Covid. True, Brownlee took on what was undeniably NZ's biggest natural disaster and delivered on many fronts. But only many fronts. There were a lot of holes in the system with some real horror stories re earthquake repairs, botched repairs, long delays, people’s lives on hold because of slow or no decision.
Some claims were settled quickly and the people were happy, but there were far too many that were slow to be settled and the people were/are not happy. And those were the insured home-owners.
I don’t remember if he was subjected to the same scrutiny with his response as Ardern is being subjected to. But over the years as the problems persisted I don’t remember the same negative focus on the mistakes he made, as they were revealed. The mud did not seem to stick to him.
.

Comparing the multi-dimensional response required to a natural disaster vs a singular lockdown response to a pandemic - that’s like comparing flying a jumbo jet vs driving a car.

You figure out which is which.

What we know is that the driver of the car could not even drive without steering into the ditch, twice!

[mikeybycrikey]

Comparing the multi-dimensional respond required to a natural disaster vs a singular lockdown response to a pandemic - that’s like comparing flying a jumbo jet vs driving a car.


Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

[Balance]

Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

Yes, I am.

Once the decision is made, lockdown is easy.

Once the lockdown has been done, keeping the virus out via quarantining should be the easier bit.

Can't help it if this government is incapable of a water-tight quarantine regime.

No amount of spin by this government is going to deflect from that simple fact - they failed in the simplest of tasks, twice!

Have a look at Taiwan at how things get done.

[BlackPeter]

Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

You need to move into a dark cave without light, close your eyes, add several layers of a solid blindfold, put on very dark sunglasses and a integrated motorcycle helmet with a closed visor made out of black rubber to be able to get the same view as balance on whatever the current government might do :):

[Balance]

You need to move into a dark cave without light, close your eyes, add several layers of a solid blindfold, put on very dark sunglasses and a integrated motorcycle helmet with a closed visor made out of black rubber to be able to get the same view as balance on whatever the current government might do :):

Easier to be a sheep huh?

Then you simply follow wherever this government leads you and take in whole whatever this government feeds you.

And we know where the sheep ultimately ends up.

[BlackPeter]

Easier to be a sheep huh?

And we know where the sheep ultimately ends up.

I assume you talk from experience? Projecting? Just one thing you miss - not everybody is like you :p;

[Balance]

I assume you talk from experience? Projecting? Just one thing you miss - not everybody is like you :p;

You got it, BP. Seen sheep led to the slaughter many a times.

You simply follow wherever this government leads you and take in whole whatever this government feeds you.

[mikeybycrikey]

Yes, I am.

Once the decision is made, lockdown is easy.

Once the lockdown has been done, keeping the virus out via quarantining should be the easier bit.

Can't help it if this government is incapable of a water-tight quarantine regime.

No amount of spin by this government is going to deflect from that simple fact - they failed in the simplest of tasks, twice!

Have a look at Taiwan at how things get done.

You could also say that an earthquake is pretty easy too. If a building broken you just rebuild it. But given Christchurch is still broken many years on, maybe it’s not as simple as that.

Given barely any other country in the world has got control of this should be telling you that it’s not as easy as it seems. But at least all this complaining about Labour gives you something to do for 3 years at a time, although how you can sustain your anger for that long is beyond me.

Despite a few border issues, there’s nowhere else in the world I’d rather be right now.

[Paddles]

Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

If a global health pandemic such as Covid required half as much management as the CHCH earthquakes explain to me how our health minister can basically take a holiday while the country goes into lock down.
Can you imagine, if following the earthquakes Gerry Brownlee refused to go to work?

National couldn't see the earthquake coming, Labour had time to prepare and still stuffed it up.
Labours two 2 strategies of lock-down and print money will only fly for a short period and they know it.

[Balance]

You could also say that an earthquake is pretty easy too. If a building broken you just rebuild it. But given Christchurch is still broken many years on, maybe it’s not as simple as that.

Given barely any other country in the world has got control of this should be telling you that it’s not as easy as it seems. But at least all this complaining about Labour gives you something to do for 3 years at a time, although how you can sustain your anger for that long is beyond me.

Despite a few border issues, there’s nowhere else in the world I’d rather be right now.

I am happy NOT to be a sheep.

Very very very happy.

[BlackPeter]

I am happy NOT to be a sheep.

Very very very happy.

... and you are probably right. Our sheep would never post that much nonsense :p;

[Balance]

... and you are probably right. Our sheep would never post that much nonsense :p;

Nope. They just swallow whatever is fed to them - without question.

Before the inevitable - baaa baaa 🤣

[BlackPeter]

Nope. They just swallow whatever is fed to them - without question.

Baaa baaaa ��

It appears you don't even know a lot about sheep ...

[Balance]

It appears you don't even know a lot about sheep ...

We are talking about labourite sheep - they gobble whatever is fed to them as long as it’s from Cindy.

[artemis]

Nothing on National’s policies about housing at all, that I could see yet. Probably because like last election when asked about the housing problem the National candidate said there is a housing shortage but it is not a problem (meaning no problem = no solution = we don’t need do anything about it = it is what it is.)

There is a new opposition spokesperson on housing. I expect the policy is being reviewed before publication, noting that there has been extensive public consultation already. Including consultation on RMA reform; it has already been announced that it will be repealed and replaced.

Other housing announcements have been made as well, and since most if not all were made by Ms Collins in her previous role, it would be reasonable to expect they will not change much.

Also, I do not doubt there was and is a housing shortage, but since most households have a roof over their heads maybe the shortage is inability to rent or buy.

What would be interesting to know how many households are not able to be accepted for one of the more than half million or so private rentals so are in emergency housing, waiting for social housing or living in overcrowded conditions. And why.

Because there are nearly 10,000 rentals advertised on Trademe, and no doubt many more advertised elsewhere. Pretty much all insulated, and taxpayer subsidies available for lower income households.

[moka]

There is a new opposition spokesperson on housing. I expect the policy is being reviewed before publication, noting that there has been extensive public consultation already. Including consultation on RMA reform; it has already been announced that it will be repealed and replaced.

Other housing announcements have been made as well, and since most if not all were made by Ms Collins in her previous role, it would be reasonable to expect they will not change much.

Also, I do not doubt there was and is a housing shortage, but since most households have a roof over their heads maybe the shortage is inability to rent or buy.

What would be interesting to know how many households are not able to be accepted for one of the more than half million or so private rentals so are in emergency housing, waiting for social housing or living in overcrowded conditions. And why.

Because there are nearly 10,000 rentals advertised on Trademe, and no doubt many more advertised elsewhere. Pretty much all insulated, and taxpayer subsidies available for lower income households.
There are some rentals near me and I talk to the tenants about their struggle to find a place to live, especially when the rental is sold and they have to move. There is a shortage of rentals where I live. One of my neighbours was given several months notice because the unit was being sold and they could not find anything and ended up in emergency housing. Another tenant was in emergency housing for several months before moving in. Reasonably priced rentals in the right location for work/school are hard to find. I checked on Trademe, many were $500 or more per week which is unaffordable for low income people.

[artemis]

There are some rentals near me and I talk to the tenants about their struggle to find a place to live, especially when the rental is sold and they have to move. There is a shortage of rentals where I live. One of my neighbours was given several months notice because the unit was being sold and they could not find anything and ended up in emergency housing. Another tenant was in emergency housing for several months before moving in. Reasonably priced rentals in the right location for work/school are hard to find. I checked on Trademe, many were $500 or more per week which is unaffordable for low income people.

Shortage of rentals, or landlords doing risk assessment? Several months notice and no private rental indicates an applicant is not at the top of a landlord's list. Why?

Then there is ECON101 - prices rise if supply shrinks and / or costs and compliance rise. There has been plenty of media - mainstream and social - on costs and risks of the current government's new rules, including new tax rules. Fortunately the kind government provides generous rent subsidies for lower income households.

There is a very large and busy Facebook site for NZ property investors and those interested - nearly 40,000 members. Even a cursory glance there shows landlords are doing their best to understand the implications of existing and new rules and do the right thing. But the right thing does not usually involve being a charity and nor should it.

[Bjauck]

Is this a joke?

So you’re saying that a global pandemic that has now basically shut down international travel in many countries for almost 5 months, brought the health system in many countries to a halt and has had unprecedented effects in NZ and around the world is simple compared to the Christchurch earthquakes?

I’m not sure my assessment of the relative effect and complexity of these totally different events would quite as clear cut as yours.

I guess it depends on what one wishes to see and the depth to which one dislikes the current government. As this is the National Party Election thread, I would love to see discussion of National Party covid policy. Or maybe they don't one apart from producing a "Keep Calm and Carry On" poster?

It certainly beats me how the covid crisis affecting every sphere of our society - and every society around the World - can be minimised compared to the ChCh quakes.

[Balance]

Remember this from Chris Hipkins?

He said the rumour may have been orchestrated.

“There have always been and will always be rumours, but this one smacked of orchestration [and] of being a deliberate act of misinformation,” Hipkins said.

Well, a journalist tracked down the source of said rumour :

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/afternoons/audio/2018759997/finding-the-man-behind-the-covid-outbreak-rumour

And it was a social media spread rather than anything orchestrated.

This government is the one now attempting to tar all and sundry with mud because it has egg all over its face with its failed responses to containing the virus, post lockdown # 1.

[Bjauck]

Shortage of rentals, or landlords doing risk assessment? Several months notice and no private rental indicates an applicant is not at the top of a landlord's list. Why? ...

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

[Balance]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

The problem is lack of affordable houses, not landlords. Landlords are the solution, not the problem.

Not that you will ever know from the systemic attacks on landlords by this government, while it flounders and spins myths on a solution for housing.

Kiwibuild, anyone?

[dobby41]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

[blackcap]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

Owner occupied dwellings have less occupants than rental dwellings or so I have been reliably informed.

[Balance]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

Beneficiaries numbers grow at a much faster pace than the general population.

As long as that is the case, there is always going to be a housing shortage.

Especially when landlords are systemically attacked as enemies of housing, rather than a big part of the solution.

[fungus pudding]

Beneficiaries numbers grow at a much faster pace than the general population.

As long as that is the case, there is alwUs going to be a housing shortage.

Especially when landlords are systemically atta led as enemies of housing, rather than a big part of the solution.

Do beneficiaries require more houses per capita than the rest of the hoi polloi?

[dobby41]

Owner occupied dwellings have less occupants than rental dwellings or so I have been reliably informed.

Statistics show this but statistics can show whatever you want.
I have recently sold several houses and in each case the new family is bigger than those who had rented it.
I suspect that some rentals have a lot of people in them and this skews the result.

[Balance]

Do beneficiaries require more houses per capita than the rest of the hoi polloi?

I do not know the answer but I do know this - their numbers grow each year and the government will never be able to build enough to meet the needs.

At a recent meeting with a major community housing provider, I was informed that the provider is dealing in a state housing area with many instances of three generations of beneficiaries requiring housing - children, parents and great-grandparents.

Whose fault is it?

Always the fault of previous governments - never the fault of the beneficiaries.

[artemis]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

It is not just existing dwellings. Take into account the consents issued for new builds - looking like about a third of all consents are for multi unit dwellings (March 2020). It is clear that some developments are falling over, most will be lack of financing (probably fewer sales off the plan than expected) because Minister Woods is tipping hundreds of millions into those failing projects. Ask yourself who are important buyers of higher density developments and what the impact on the rental market might be if those buyers don't step up. Obviously some are not hence all that taxpayer money.

Next question, if the developments do proceed who will buy them? Perhaps Minister Woods has consulted the Kiwibuild experts, but more likely the deep pockets of Kainga Ora.

[artemis]

Statistics show this but statistics can show whatever you want.
I have recently sold several houses and in each case the new family is bigger than those who had rented it.
I suspect that some rentals have a lot of people in them and this skews the result.

Andrew King, executive officer of the NZ Property Investors' Federation said in 2017 that rented houses in Auckland contain an average of 3.9 people and owner-occupied 2.1 people. Every rental property sold to an owner-occupier effectively displaces on average 1.8 people.

Maybe different in Auckland than other locations but at the very least there are some actual numbers that can be rebutted. Not just opinions.

My last rental sale - 5 renters replaced by 2 owner occupiers.

[artemis]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

Unless they are new builds that aren't built.

[westerly]

I do not know the answer but I do know this - their numbers grow each year and the government will never be able to build enough to meet the needs.

At a recent meeting with a major community housing provider, I was informed that the provider is dealing in a state housing area with many instances of three generations of beneficiaries requiring housing - children, parents and great-grandparents.

Whose fault is it?

Always the fault of previous governments - never the fault of the beneficiaries.

It is definitely not the fault of the children, perhaps you should ask the grandparents why they have been able to house themselves?

westerly

[dobby41]

Andrew King, executive officer of the NZ Property Investors' Federation said in 2017 that rented houses in Auckland contain an average of 3.9 people and owner-occupied 2.1 people. Every rental property sold to an owner-occupier effectively displaces on average 1.8 people.

Maybe different in Auckland than other locations but at the very least there are some actual numbers that can be rebutted. Not just opinions.

My last rental sale - 5 renters replaced by 2 owner occupiers.
That's the stats I was talking about.

Unless they are new builds that aren't built.

That is true, someone else will build instead?
More to the point, though, is the suggestion that some owners will just leave them empty because the capital gain is worth more than the tenants rent.
That is more of a worry in my opinion.

[blackcap]

That is true, someone else will build instead?
More to the point, though, is the suggestion that some owners will just leave them empty because the capital gain is worth more than the tenants rent.
That is more of a worry in my opinion.

That is exactly what we are doing with a holiday home we are about to buy. We discussed it and the holding cost now is negligible as interest rates are near zero. So no incentive to "get a return". Rates are a low $1,200 and a bit of insurance. No need to rent it out and have all the hassle. (its in the South Island so harder to monitor). Although if we find the correct manager we would consider Air Bn B or similar.

[jmsnz]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.

That depends completely on who is renting it currently and who buys it. My son flat's in a 'family home' with 5 others so if that was sold to an owner occupier with less than 6 members then demand for rental properties has actually gone up. I agree that the house hasn't vanished but neither have the current tenants who now don't have anywhere to live.

[Bjauck]

Owner occupied dwellings have less occupants than rental dwellings or so I have been reliably informed. My anecdotal experience concurs with that. In my street, two houses which were previously owner-occupied had 6 occupants in total. Currently as rental housing they have 10 occupants in total.

So imo toughening up rental regulations is ok, provided you also provide more social housing to house the less desirable tenants otherwise accommodation overcrowding - and the associated social and health issues - will grow.

[artemis]

..... So imo toughening up rental regulations is ok, provided you also provide more social housing to house the less desirable tenants otherwise accommodation overcrowding - and the associated social and health issues - will grow.

Well over half of those on the social housing waiting list have no children and almost all of those are singles. They are seldom the overcrowding problem you mention. Not to say they don't have health or social issues though.

Social housing is really really expensive for taxpayers. There are other options, but when the only tool is a hammer ....

[macduffy]

My computer's lost the National - FFS thread!

:ohmy:

[Bjauck]

Well over half of those on the social housing waiting list have no children and almost all of those are singles. They are seldom the overcrowding problem you mention. Not to say they don't have health or social issues though.

Social housing is really really expensive for taxpayers. There are other options, but when the only tool is a hammer ....

There can be social housing for single people too. Lots of singles can be stuffed into a rental property.

Sure but then the arbitrary decision to not to have a CGT for so long has been expensive for GST and income earning taxpayers too!

[Balance]

There can be social housing for single people too. Lots of singles can be stuffed into a rental property.

Sure but then the arbitrary decision to not to have a CGT for so long has been expensive for GST and income earning taxpayers too!

Yup - friend ran a 50 rooms complex in Otahuhu for single people for a number of years. He was almost a basket case of nerves and stress by the time he quit.

[moka]

Change in policy from National.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300085183/coronavirus-national-goes-cold-on-international-student-policy?rm=a
National goes cold on international student policy.
National leader Judith Collins is distancing herself from her party’s earlier stand on allowing international students to isolate in university accommodation, refusing to endorse it as a current policy.
Asked if she thought the private sector should play a greater role in border isolation, as ACT has proposed, Collins said no.
Brownlee also declined to endorse the earlier policy, instead telling media all would be made clear when the new border policy was released later this week.

[dobby41]

Change in policy from National.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300085183/coronavirus-national-goes-cold-on-international-student-policy?rm=a
National goes cold on international student policy.
National leader Judith Collins is distancing herself from her party’s earlier stand on allowing international students to isolate in university accommodation, refusing to endorse it as a current policy.
Asked if she thought the private sector should play a greater role in border isolation, as ACT has proposed, Collins said no.
Brownlee also declined to endorse the earlier policy, instead telling media all would be made clear when the new border policy was released later this week.

How can a policy be the best thing one minute then, wham, it's no good?
How would you trust any policy?

[Balance]

How can a policy be the best thing one minute then, wham, it's no good?
How would you trust any policy?

Good question!

Kiwibuild?

CGT?

[artemis]

Good question!
Kiwibuild?
CGT?

Of course both of those policies were years in the planning and widely published as policy, including in at least two Labour manifestos. And both involved huge financial cost or revenue, not to mention very significant impact on intentions and markets.

Compare and contrast. Or not if too embarrassing.

[dobby41]

Nationals covid border policy
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/423980/judith-collins-unveils-national-s-border-security-policy

One interesting take is the need to all returnees to have a negative test before boarding to come home - not a bad idea and has been raised before.
Another is requiring returnees and boarder workers to have the covid card. Only really useful if 80% (or something) of the population have one. At best it will save them looking at the CCTV (this is also Labour's plan now). Along with that, though, will be pushing the current covid app use.
Judith suggested that rather than lock down a city they would lock down streets or suburbs etc - much like didn't work in Melbourne.

Nothing really radical that I can see.

[tim23]

Yup - friend ran a 50 rooms complex in Otahuhu for single people for a number of years. He was almost a basket case of nerves and stress by the time he quit.


Didn't realise Mike Hosking ran a 50 room complex...You are right he is a basket case though!

[Balance]

Didn't realise Mike Hosking ran a 50 room complex...You are right he is a basket case though!

They are all like you, woke pixie dusted to the core with shrines to Comrade Cindy in their rooms apparently. 🤣

Can you practise the Cindy doctrine of being kind and take down the shrines for the sake of the new manager?

[tim23]

They are all like you, woke pixie dusted to the core with shrines to Comrade Cindy in their rooms apparently. ��

Can you practise the Cindy doctrine of being kind and take down the shrines for the sake of the new manager?

You will have to translate that garbage into something resembling English because I have no idea what your message is?

[tim23]

If you toughen up the rental property requirements, some landlords will decide that it is not worth providing rental accommodation. Unless you want increased homelessness for those less than perfect tenants, the government has to provide more state or social housing. National has said to will turn back some of the reforms so presumably fewer landlords would then leave the market.

That makes no sense - if I am a landlord and sell a house the house doesn't vanish as someone still lives in it with a new owner!

[tim23]

When that Landlord sells they will either sell to someone who will live in it or rent it.
If they sell to someone to live in it themselves then they won't need to rent - the rental demand just went down.
The houses don't vanish.



Good call I just posted something similar after I read your post!

[blackcap]

Good call I just posted something similar after I read your post!

There is plenty of data to suggest that owner occupied dwellings have less people in them than dwellings that are rented. Hope you can comprehend the implications thereof.

[blackcap]

That makes no sense - if I am a landlord and sell a house the house doesn't vanish as someone still lives in it with a new owner!

We are in the process of purchasing what is currently a crappy rental in another part of the country. But once we have purchased it we are not planning to rent it out. In fact it will remain vacant for a year possibly (the cost of holding assets is pretty much nil now with these interest rates) and do it up when we have the time to go and visit.

[Bjauck]

That makes no sense - if I am a landlord and sell a house the house doesn't vanish as someone still lives in it with a new owner!
When the government introduces rental regulation changes that increases compliance costs for landlords and tenancy security for tenants, some landlords will decide to sell up.

Sure, some of the houses may well be sold to former tenants or to those who remained at home with parents - probably many of the purchasers would have been former better-than-average tenants? However as has already been said, in the absence of an increase in house building the remaining tenants will probably face further overcrowding problems.

Of course these tenancy reforms come with a cost. Only part of that cost (for example decreased profitability, fewer capital gains) will be borne by the landlords. The rest of the cost will be borne by society either by having to provide social housing or by picking up the social costs in other ways as increased overcrowding or homelessness take their tolls.

If you think the rental reforms are worth it, then you should also expect to pay for them in one way or another.

[artemis]

When the government introduces rental regulation changes that increases compliance costs for landlords and tenancy security for tenants, some landlords will decide to sell up. ...

Good post, and not just because I agree with it!

An additional factor in landlord decisions is hassle - another cost that is part financial but part is just hassle thus extra work and stress.

Sure there are hassles for tenants as well, especially when tenancies are terminated and they need to find somewhere else to live, or dealing with dodgy landlords.

The hassle factor is worst for landlords with 1 or 2 rentals - that's 80% of them. The point is - they have options.

[jonu]

We are in the process of purchasing what is currently a crappy rental in another part of the country. But once we have purchased it we are not planning to rent it out. In fact it will remain vacant for a year possibly (the cost of holding assets is pretty much nil now with these interest rates) and do it up when we have the time to go and visit.

From memory it was estimated there may have been 27-30,000 empty houses in Auckland prior to the last election. We had and continue to have policy issues around CGT, accommodation supplements etc....not shortage of housing stock.

[fungus pudding]

We are in the process of purchasing what is currently a crappy rental in another part of the country. But once we have purchased it we are not planning to rent it out. In fact it will remain vacant for a year possibly (the cost of holding assets is pretty much nil now with these interest rates) and do it up when we have the time to go and visit.

Why wouldn't you wait if you don't want to use it now? It will be cheaper when interest rates rise.

[artemis]

From memory it was estimated there may have been 27-30,000 empty houses in Auckland prior to the last election. We had and continue to have policy issues around CGT, accommodation supplements etc....not shortage of housing stock.

Number of vacant Auckland dwellings were published as part of the last census, and was a bigger number than yours but similar to previous census counts. There was a fair bit of discussion about definitions at the time. Turned out that the national count was a pretty blunt instrument as it counted all sorts of empty places including holiday homes, occupants on holiday, renovations, waiting for new tenants or buyers to move in.

Even if there is not a shortage some prospective tenants are never going to find a private rental unless the landlord is a charity or not very sensible.

[Bjauck]

From memory it was estimated there may have been 27-30,000 empty houses in Auckland prior to the last election. We had and continue to have policy issues around CGT, accommodation supplements etc....not shortage of housing stock. That is a good point. There is a newly completed housing development near where I live in Auckland. As far as I am aware all the houses have been sold. Yet when driving around it seems that many are unoccupied. Some may be waiting for new occupants, but probably some are closed up as owners remain out-of-town, abroad or being kept as an investment without the hassle of having tenants.

With rental reforms, the number of empty houses could increase. If this is undesirable, there would need to be other tax and other reforms or levies.

Auckland may have more "ghost houses" than London
https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/119636091/200k-empty-ghost-houses-why-and-what-would-get-them-into-the-market

[blackcap]

Why wouldn't you wait if you don't want to use it now? It will be cheaper when interest rates rise.

It is a holiday home on another Island. Now is a good time to buy, we are going to go there and work on it during our vacation time there. Who says interest rates will rise in the foreseeable future? Have you seen the 10 year curve?

[fungus pudding]

It is a holiday home on another Island. Now is a good time to buy, we are going to go there and work on it during our vacation time there. Who says interest rates will rise in the foreseeable future? Have you seen the 10 year curve?

No. I don't think short term with property.

[blackcap]

No. I don't think short term with property.

Neither do we. But this is a holiday home. Economic considerations are taken out of to to an extent. You know like the bach at the beach that sits empty for most of the year.

[fungus pudding]

Neither do we. But this is a holiday home. Economic considerations are taken out of to to an extent. You know like the bach at the beach that sits empty for most of the year.

Fair enough. I thought you were singing 'the advantages' of low interest rates.

[blackcap]

Fair enough. I thought you were singing 'the advantages' of low interest rates.

Well yes and no. What I mean is that the opportunity cost of holding a property vacant have all but disappeared. When r was 8% then sitting on property was costly. Now that its 1% or less, not so much. I think that is also why property prices have held up so well post covid, because the rates have come down so quickly. I also acknowledge that when and if interest rates go up that could put some serious pressure on the property market. Can't see it in the next 5 -10 years though.

[BlackPeter]

That makes no sense - if I am a landlord and sell a house the house doesn't vanish as someone still lives in it with a new owner!

Sure, however - landlords might decide to not rent out their houses to avoid the loss of value some tenants tend to inflict on their property. Less housing stock available.

If landlords sell, the now owner might as well live themselves in the house - and we learned before that less people (per house) live in owner occupied buildings - i.e. some of the previous renters miss out and either need additional space to live or live on the street.

Obviously - if renting out of houses is unattractive, than less people will build new houses for renting them out. Nobody will replace anymore houses past their use by date. Rental stock goes down.

What ever it is - the number of houses to rent will go down if government makes it less attractive for landlords to rent them out. Economy 101. Only potential remedy of this situation would be for the government to become landlord and build like crazy.

Unfortunately - I remember balance telling us how this works out ... and despite disliking the way he expresses this problem, he unfortunately has a point.

Housing stock available for rent will go down. Remaining housing stock for rent will deteriorate. Better get used to it.

[artemis]

Sure, however - landlords might decide to not rent out their houses to avoid the loss of value some tenants tend to inflict on their property. Less housing stock available.

If landlords sell, the now owner might as well live themselves in the house - and we learned before that less people (per house) live in owner occupied buildings - i.e. some of the previous renters miss out and either need additional space to live or live on the street. ....

Our lawmakers who live comfortably, most in cities, clearly have no notion of how rural and provincial folk live. For example the cost of compliance to new standards is the same - or more - for a farm cottage in the middle of nowhere as for a Parnell bungalow. Rent, slightly different!

A cottage on my grandparents farm housed locals for decades. It was basic but liveable and cheap. Now it is empty, starting to deteriorate, and will never be lived in again.

Not far from the town centre, so not isolated. It won't be the only one left empty once the owners have read the massive list of fines for landlords who don't comply, many payable to the tenants who lay a complaint.

[Panda-NZ-]

Lunchtime and rest breaks will be axed under Judy.
Sounds like a plan to employ less rather than more if the same work needs to be done?

Will her friends Mike and Heather ask how she will pay for her tax credits and other "unfunded" goodies to large business.

[artemis]

Lunchtime and rest breaks will be axed under Judy.
Sounds like a plan to employ less rather than more if the same work needs to be done?

Will her friends Mike and Heather ask how she will pay for her tax credits. probably not.

Axed? Really? Did you read the proposal?

Certainly likely many small businesses will employ fewer people in the next year or two, but changing break rules isn't going to be the reason.

[Zaphod]

Lunchtime and rest breaks will be axed under Judy.

What's your source for that Panda?