If National wins ...

[elZorro]

This from Vernon Small (and no doubt Crosby Textor) today:
"But how could anyone working for a party founded on workers' rights, led by a former union heavyweight, that has opposed low- and no-pay work and is campaigning to curb immigration and low-skilled work visas allow an 85 intern programme – and attendant "fantasy world stuff" (to use leader Andrew Little's own words) -–to go ahead."

But the Labour Party has fixed this issue, for example our electorate is now billeting two of the USA students, and they are helping and observing what we're doing, under the wing of a retired university lecturer, a politics student, and the candidate. They'll get the experience they wanted.

[BlackPeter]

I wonder who wrote that review, MVT?

It looks like someone who had swallowed all of the Crosby-Textor junk that was being pushed around from 2004 onwards. Labour nearly lost the previous election in 2005 after a major swing change occurring from the use of a lot more marketing money by the Nats, and pushing the CT messages constantly.

All through the good years, the Nats were arguing for tax cuts, on message, and then this editor/commenter thinks that the end of the world is near when Dr. Cullen starts to promise just that. Don't forget that Labour built up the tax base quite a bit, by growing the economy properly. They had a lot more good work to do, but were pushed out in 2008.

Of course, we all know what happened when National got in. Excluding the earthquakes and the GFC, National was determined to increase pressure on wages by sacking some of the crown's public sector employees, they borrowed big-time to pay for tax cuts at the top end that weren't necessary or useful to the rest of NZ, and they also assisted the housing market to boom with immigration, while pulling back on SME assistance for R&D.

Put together, this was a damaging set of policies that have ensured NZ treaded water, probably went backwards over the last 9 years. We have some new motorways and some fibre, but we are still exporting commodities. Many of our bigger manufacturers have relocated overseas, or been bought out. Many school leavers are not prepared for work, have low aspirations, and are not finding a useful role in our dull economy.

But MVT, I will completely agree with you on your first preposterous sentence, if you could just show me the budget surplus figures that you've imagined in your head. Labour grew some massive budget surpluses on their watch. How do you think they were able to pay off over $30-$40Bill of old crown debt in the nine years?

Never forget that it was the highly competent government of Bill English who brought us the America's Cup back, a trophy which we lost due to Helen Clark's inept reign (just check the dates - I am sure you don't need a graph ).

Ah - you mean correlation is not causation? Hold on - but in this case why do you think that a government operating in a boom period and getting in that much money through an inflated world economy that even they can't waste it all is doing better than a government which had to govern through several huge crisis (GFC, ChCh earthquake) ... and doing better than nearly all other governments world-wide?

But at the end is all of that just snow of yesteryear. If Labour ever had capable politicians, than they kicked them out. What could Labour offer for NZ's future?

Sure - a NZ First / Labour / Green government would quickly turn the immigration stream around and Kiwis would queue up again at the departure gates (as they did under Clarks inept, arrogant and wasteful reign).

Though admittedly - this actually would get property prices down and might resolve the Auckland traffic problems. Just have a look at Canberra to find out how a town looks which is build for a million but occupied by only half of that. But honestly - I think most Kiwis would prefer a booming economy compared to the tranquility offered by an economic graveyard Labour could offer.

So, I agree EZ - Labour and NZ First would quickly fix our building crisis, and they would not even need a building program ... people would just vote with their feet. What a perspective ...

[craic]

Yes Labour will get the experience they "wanted" or more likely deserve when they lose the next election.

[elZorro]

Yes Labour will get the experience they "wanted" or more likely deserve when they lose the next election.

You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

[blackcap]

You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

The Barclay affair is just a beltway issue. Will not gain traction with the voter ElZorro. My partner who is politically ambivalent (as are the vast majority of kiwis) does not even know what it is about, or even really know about it and does not care.

[fungus pudding]

You shouldn't bet on that Craic. There's a bit more to run on the Debarclay affair.

Ohhh - goodee! Hope it's a bit on the sex and drugs stuff. Juicy - eh!

[craic]

And what if the lady who complained was a labour "supporter" who switched on the machine herself? But that's unlikely - too much technology and way too much reasoning for a labour supporter.

[elZorro]

And what if the lady who complained was a labour "supporter" who switched on the machine herself? But that's unlikely - too much technology and way too much reasoning for a labour supporter.

If that were true, our clever cartoonists, research writers, artists, academics, teachers etc would all be predominately right-wing. But they're not. They are generally the first to see through National's policies. Maybe they just have more empathy.

I don't think anyone who worked under Bill English in that office would be anything other than a card-carrying National Party member.

[westerly]

Never forget that it was the highly competent government of Bill English who brought us the America's Cup back, a trophy which we lost due to Helen Clark's inept reign (just check the dates - I am sure you don't need a graph ).

Ah - you mean correlation is not causation? Hold on - but in this case why do you think that a government operating in a boom period and getting in that much money through an inflated world economy that even they can't waste it all is doing better than a government which had to govern through several huge crisis (GFC, ChCh earthquake) ... and doing better than nearly all other governments world-wide?

But at the end is all of that just snow of yesteryear. If Labour ever had capable politicians, than they kicked them out. What could Labour offer for NZ's future?

Sure - a NZ First / Labour / Green government would quickly turn the immigration stream around and Kiwis would queue up again at the departure gates (as they did under Clarks inept, arrogant and wasteful reign).

Though admittedly - this actually would get property prices down and might resolve the Auckland traffic problems. Just have a look at Canberra to find out how a town looks which is build for a million but occupied by only half of that. But honestly - I think most Kiwis would prefer a booming economy compared to the tranquility offered by an economic graveyard Labour could offer.

So, I agree EZ - Labour and NZ First would quickly fix our building crisis, and they would not even need a building program ... people would just vote with their feet. What a perspective ...

"Prior to the America's Cup regatta, Prime Minister John Key made a series of comments which appeared both to trivialise the event, as well as playing down the chances of support for Team New Zealand if it did not bring the cup back to Auckland.

His government publicly announced that it was investigating whether it had to honour an agreement to provide $36m to the team, committed to by the former Labour government.

Only recently Key downplayed the economic spin offs the cup brought when it was held offshore. Asked at the start of the America's Cup if the payment was money well spent, Key said "come and ask me if they win", adding that it would be "much more difficult" to continue funding the team if they lost. "

Not sure whether Bill had much influence on the result but he will be in for the photo opportunities for sure. They refused to fund the 2017 cup giving $5m in 2013 to keep the team together.

westerly

[iceman]

"Prior to the America's Cup regatta, Prime Minister John Key made a series of comments which appeared both to trivialise the event, as well as playing down the chances of support for Team New Zealand if it did not bring the cup back to Auckland.

His government publicly announced that it was investigating whether it had to honour an agreement to provide $36m to the team, committed to by the former Labour government.

Only recently Key downplayed the economic spin offs the cup brought when it was held offshore. Asked at the start of the America's Cup if the payment was money well spent, Key said "come and ask me if they win", adding that it would be "much more difficult" to continue funding the team if they lost. "

Not sure whether Bill had much influence on the result but he will be in for the photo opportunities for sure. They refused to fund the 2017 cup giving $5m in 2013 to keep the team together.

westerly

It is hardly the Government´s resonsibility to fund a very expensive racing/sailing syndicate and their multi million dollar salary packages.