If National wins ...

[tim23]

That's why I liked Garners column - I think hes kind of saying they have achieved nothing too!

W69, I think we're still 17 months away from an election, and while I can't understand how National gets away with it, I have to accept the poll results. Within limits. While National/Act and 'Not-National' are fairly evenly balanced, Labour has performed the poorest between polls, and I think Andrew Little has to take a share of the blame. He will not be replaced before the next election, that's for sure. But he needs to get some more media training, it's not that hard is it? 17 months of Labour acting as though they will win the 2017 election in coalition, not being on the back foot, and perception will be reality. No ums and arrs in front of the camera, Andrew.

Good PR will work, National have proven it. But they've had their three terms, they're corrupt liars, they have achieved nothing, they have to go.

[elZorro]

That's why I liked Garners column - I think hes kind of saying they have achieved nothing too!

There are a lot of people comparing what this government has done, compared with the Clark Government under Labour. Don't forget what it was like during that time, NZ started to come to an even keel, we started feeling like we were living in a great country again.

Here's the full data from Colmar Brunton, including historical trends.

http://colmarbrunton.co.nz/wp-conten...016-prelim.pdf

W69 is right, John Key is becoming less popular over time, and of the people who are quite likely or very likely to vote in the next election, 13% won't say which way they would vote at the moment, or are undecided. That's higher than usual. People are starting to think a bit, but they're not sure about Andrew Little yet.

Just over 1000 people on landlines were surveyed in this poll. So they are older households, perhaps more conservative. Lots of younger households don't have landlines, or are unlisted. The error in the party vote is about +/- 3.1% for 3D certainty for National, and about +/- 2.5% for Labour. The percentages are also rounded up or down with no decimal point, we're not told the actual data.

Let's take a Labour-positive view of the results. National could have had 49.6% of the party vote +/-3.1%, so worst case is 46.5%.

Labour in best case is 28.4% +2.5% or 30.9%. Add 13% unknown/undecided votes and Labour could achieve 43.9%, that is statistically a small possibility. Add Greens, and a Labour/Green coalition would have power in 2017.

This poll was completed before the news about the tax havens was well known. It certainly didn't include the effect of the multiple articles about NZ's need to do something about it, and John Key's inappropriate response.

[elZorro]

I've had a look at the 8 months report on the Government Books. While they had a higher than expected tax take to produce a $300 mill surplus on operations, they also deferred over $500mill of predicted costs into the next annual year, and expect the tax take to drop away in the next quarter.

Our financial instruments held by ACC, Super Fund, also showed losses, which are on the capital side, but they are still important. A big loss of $5.1bill. So adding all that in, NZ's net worth dropped by $4.6bill over the last 8 months. Great going.

The NZ Govt is now spending more than $2,500mill on finance costs (interest) every 8 months, on a debt of over $84bill. That looks like 4.4% interest on average. $3,750mill on interest costs a year, that would pay for 150 flag referendums.

[BlackPeter]

Interesting poll ...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...s&bid=30981464

Maybe its time Labour starts to listen instead of just telling people what they think is best for them ...?

[elZorro]

Interesting poll ...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...s&bid=30981464

Maybe its time Labour starts to listen instead of just telling people what they think is best for them ...?

Labour's spending a lot of time listening. There's nothing wrong with virtually any of the policies they put forward at the last election, it's just National are so organised and well funded that they're a tough nut to crack.

Which party would be better for NZ as a whole? No question, that's Labour.

[iceman]

Our financial instruments held by ACC, Super Fund, also showed losses, which are on the capital side, but they are still important. A big loss of $5.1bill. So adding all that in, NZ's net worth dropped by $4.6bill over the last 8 months. Great going.

Imagine what the loss would have been if the Government had borrowed more to invest into the Superfund, like you and your party wanted

EZ are you serious when you say there was nothing wrong with any of Labour's policies at the last election ? Have you forgotten that nearly 3/4 of voters voted against it ?

[BlackPeter]

Labour's spending a lot of time listening. There's nothing wrong with virtually any of the policies they put forward at the last election, it's just National are so organised and well funded that they're a tough nut to crack.

Which party would be better for NZ as a whole? No question, that's Labour.

Well, EZ - obviously everybody is entitled to their own opinion, just looks like that not too many other New Zealanders share your political views. Obviously nothing wrong with that, as we all know - the majority is not always right. However given that this is a democracy might it be an impediment for Labour to move back into government.

Interesting to note that not even Labour voters support Little ... only 7% of all voters (i.e. just a meagre quarter of all Labour supporters) want to see him as future PM.

Do you really think that trying force such an inept leader down our throats is evidence for Labours listening skills?

If yes, than I don't think National needs to worry too much about the next handful of elections, though it obviously would be better for the country to have a capable opposition instead of the sad bunch of naggers, bad-mouthers, mud-throwers and day-dreamers we have to endure these days.

[westerly]

You seem to be missing my point that NZ doesn't seem to figure prominently as an "offender" in this matter. New Zealand's leading opposition to apartheid was well known internationally. Do you really see NZ taking that lead on this issue?

More likely NZ is a small country in a remote part of the world and despite our opinion we are of importance on the world stage, in reality we are not newsworthy. (Unless the antics of our PM are a little unusual) The majority of the world population would have no knowledge of NZ

westerly

[Daytr]

Hi Macduff, well the Guardian is only one source (however one of the better media outlets around) and plenty of others, including the group that has released the documents is suggesting NZ has had a reasonable part to play in all this. Its early days and NZ will be one of many countries that are no doubt caught up in an unravelling scandal that has already seen one prime minister resign and pressure on another, being Cameron.
The fact is that NZ does not insist on the same level of scrutiny that our peer nations do. Its being suggested that NZ has been identified as a soft target by those wanting to set up these offshore trusts. Sure we may not be waiving a tax haven banner like the Cayman Islands, however we may only be one notch down.
One thing I am sure of, much more will come of this.
I have been waiting for Winston Peters to say the line...
This is not the wine box, its the whole bloody vineyard! LOL

You seem to be missing my point that NZ doesn't seem to figure prominently as an "offender" in this matter. New Zealand's leading opposition to apartheid was well known internationally. Do you really see NZ taking that lead on this issue?

[Daytr]

They are not mad, they are saints, well if you believe in saints.
Its certainly a vocation & you aren't in it for the money, that's for sure.
I know people who work in these care positions and I take my hat off to them.
Anyway I was going to say, on the face of it I like what National is proposing.
However I just hope its not a wolf in sheep's clothing, like much of the 'environmental' policy and its not just an attempt to save money or outsource responsibility. It appears they have learnt something from the SERCO debacle,. Not before time.

After 30 years of dealing with the results the only way is to revamp the parents. Anyone who goes into that line of work is mad. You will be given a whole bible of what you cannot do and just when you think that you have that off by heart, you will be given lessons on the sanctity of the tangata whenua and how they must be seen as the supreme authority in all matters. Meanwhile the left, the right and the centre will tell you where you are going wrong and how they would deal with the problem if they were in power, carefully ignoring the reality that they WERE in power, several times, and failed, several times.