If National wins ...

[elZorro]

The Mirror front page

Imagine this in NZ in 2017 .... how can we avoid that happening EZ

Easy, NZ is ahead of the cycle, we'll have had three terms of National by 2017, and that'll be quite enough.

[iceman]

Artemis: Andrew Little will get there..
.

A Statesman in the making you reckon EZ http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=11445748

I think he's more likely to follow in the foot steps of Ed Miliband and the last 3 Labour NZ leaders. Sorry can't remember their names.

[elZorro]

A Statesman in the making you reckon EZ http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=11445748

I think he's more likely to follow in the foot steps of Ed Miliband and the last 3 Labour NZ leaders. Sorry can't remember their names.

Nice try, Iceman. I'd rather Andrew Little set clear guidelines about what is acceptable for his MPs, than allow ministers to stay in office regardless of whether the criminal accusations are levelled at their close family members, or even themselves, in the hope that the public won't care. The voting public have every right to expect the very highest standards from all MPs.

What about Sabin? http://thestandard.org.nz/andrew-lit...ed-politician/

[winner69]

EZ, you are a worry. You seem to becoming more and more confident of Labour winning in 2017. You tell us how HQ is developing policy and how Little has become a statesman. But then you tell me that National will lose anyway, rather than Labour winning. Such lofty expectations lead to complacency, bad.

Yesterday Crosby Textor engineered a Conservative win against the odds in the UK. If there was ever an election for Labour to win / Conservatives to lose this was it. Resounding Conservative victory and a Labour wipeout. Conservatives did better than the last election, Labour did worse. Sound familiar?

A 20 year student rolled a leading Labour guy in Scotland. She was helped by a surge of nationalisation but the real reason was Labour turning its back on its traditional support base.

In her victory speech she denounced austerity, the bedroom tax and Trident. That was the kind of language that Miliband should have using. Proof that Labour had betrayed their fundamental philosophies and that trying to take a left/right position to attract the masses is doomed. If Miliband had used that language in England probably a better outcome for them, maybe Milliband would be Prime Minister today.

Milliband has gone. Labour leaderless and in turmoil. Postmortems underway, just like here six months ago.

Here's one view of what needs to happen to Labour In the UK.

Reacting to Labour’s heavy defeat Neal Lawson, chair of the Compass pressure group has said:

- For Labour this has been five wasted years. It’s gone backwards in terms of seats and has failed to build any foundations for future renewal

- The Labour crisis is now cultural and existential

- A shift back to either New or Old Labour fails to get anywhere close to deep crisis the party faces

- Labour must not rush to anoint a new leader – it will only crown its next loser

- Instead, Labour should set up an independently chaired inquiry to examine every aspect of the party, and then select a new leader based on a deep analysis of what’s gone wrong

- The challenge for the party is to match an ability to win elections with an ability to shift the political terrain

- In light of the existential crisis it faces it should consider: backing proportional representation / striking of a German style CDU/CSU relationship with the SNP / building a progressive alliance including electoral pacts with the Greens and Social Liberals / changing its name to something more appropriate for the 21st century

- Labour should search its soul before it searches for a new leader

Before finally saying “The Labour Party is now drinking in the last chance saloon”

Seems relevant to NZ Labour to me. Did Labour address some of those issues EZ? If not I fear 2017 will not be good for Labour and we will be stuck with National for another term and all the bad that brings.

(Reposted because first go went wonky, really wonky)

[elZorro]

Yes, W69, they are taking almost all of that on board, as far as I'm aware. I am not privy to the review reports, but they've been asking the right questions, and all Labour members can give them their ideas and advice. I know I have put in my 2c worth. Very senior and clever people in the review: Bryan Gould, etc. We have a very good new party president, to complement Andrew Little, and Andrew is there for the long haul, we've been chopping party leaders far too often in the recent past.

What I didn't know from your post: Crosby-Textor, those neo-liberal sods, have been paid to help the Conservatives, I bet that lined up with more money being spent in their campaign, better slogans, better marketing, statistics massaged, etc. Just like National's doing over here. But at least we can figure out how they're doing it, and we'll own the spaces next time.

Here's an article about it, and in hindsight it appears to have worked. Stick to the decided message, safety first. (Do all the nasty neo-liberal stuff once you're back in) .

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/454aa...#axzz3ZaVjClWf

Sounds like National's plan over here, regurgitated.

[artemis]

The big difference in the UK election was the SNP. I would say that reviews will find that voters outside Scotland did not like the idea of Scotland holding the balance of power.

SNP are also the big losers, even though they collected almost all seats in Scotland, as they will have no policy leverage unless the government throws them a bone now and then. At least in the previous government Scotland had some cabinet presence.

[BlackPeter]

The big difference in the UK election was the SNP. I would say that reviews will find that voters outside Scotland did not like the idea of Scotland holding the balance of power.

SNP are also the big losers, even though they collected almost all seats in Scotland, as they will have no policy leverage unless the government throws them a bone now and then. At least in the previous government Scotland had some cabinet presence.

Agree - the fear of English voters having a Labour government with a Scottish tail wagging the labour dog was certainly a big contributor to last nights election results.

What I don't understand is - why didn't UK Labour foresee the problem? I guess the election result makes based on the input really sense, doesn't it? It couldn't have been that difficult for Labour and SNP to sit together well before the elections and come to a civilised arrangement / coalition agreement which would have taken the voters fears but presented a real alternative to the Tories?

Feels similar to what the disorganised Left was doing last year in NZ ... instead of presenting a unified front with a program which could have offered a real alternative, they all tried to occupy the most left corner of the political spectrum and promised lots of mutually exclusive stuff. Maybe the Left is just underestimating the intelligence of the electorate?

Not sure, whether I am now looking forward to a UK Labour indulging in self-pity and complaining about the stupid or misguided people just being not clever enough to see what's good for them. I think that both the UK as well as NZ would deserve a better opposition as we currently have - an opposition capable to represent the interests of a majority of people, and an opposition able to come up with an alternative political program which is credible and palatable to the people.

I know - there used to be a time when Labour was able to provide a good opposition as well as running the government. However - it looks like times have changed - Both the UK Labour party as well as its colonial daughter in NZ appear to be stuck in the class warfare of the last century. It still feels that Labour thinks they are right and just the voters are wrong. Maybe it is time for them to reconsider?

[BlackPeter]

Just to highlight one other aspect of the UK election: While the Conservatives did win (with something like 37% of the popular vote) and while Labour got "only" 31% - it is obviously just a plain stupid and unfair election system which turned this minor advantage into a landslide victory for the conservatives.

Thanks to FPP do the Tory's need only support of 1/3rd of all voters to take over the government - and I hear they call this democracy. Obviously - not the fault of the Tory's, Labour would have had plenty of opportunity to change this ridiculous system while they had been in power, but for some reason - whoever governs seems to like the ease for a minority to get control of the country. How do they say - power corrupts, nothing to do with the political colours.

Thank god that New Zealand adopted with MMP a somewhat better electoral system. I know, its not perfect either (and I doubt, there is a perfect electoral system), but it feels so much fairer ... we don't know how lucky we are

[winner69]

Agree - the fear of English voters having a Labour government with a Scottish tail wagging the labour dog was certainly a big contributor to last nights election results.

What I don't understand is - why didn't UK Labour foresee the problem? I guess the election result makes based on the input really sense, doesn't it? It couldn't have been that difficult for Labour and SNP to sit together well before the elections and come to a civilised arrangement / coalition agreement which would have taken the voters fears but presented a real alternative to the Tories?

Feels similar to what the disorganised Left was doing last year in NZ ... instead of presenting a unified front with a program which could have offered a real alternative, they all tried to occupy the most left corner of the political spectrum and promised lots of mutually exclusive stuff. Maybe the Left is just underestimating the intelligence of the electorate?

Not sure, whether I am now looking forward to a UK Labour indulging in self-pity and complaining about the stupid or misguided people just being not clever enough to see what's good for them. I think that both the UK as well as NZ would deserve a better opposition as we currently have - an opposition capable to represent the interests of a majority of people, and an opposition able to come up with an alternative political program which is credible and palatable to the people.

I know - there used to be a time when Labour was able to provide a good opposition as well as running the government. However - it looks like times have changed - Both the UK Labour party as well as its colonial daughter in NZ appear to be stuck in the class warfare of the last century. It still feels that Labour thinks they are right and just the voters are wrong. Maybe it is time for them to reconsider?

Good commentary there BP

Scots turned against Labour because Labour took them for granted and in the Scots eyes betrayed them by moving too far away from Labour once stood for ..... loved the stories of Scots in the streets yelling at Labour candidates and calling them Red Tories. That summed it up.

But then Labour didn't really do that well in England either, for much of the same reason?

[winner69]

Just to highlight one other aspect of the UK election: While the Conservatives did win (with something like 37% of the popular vote) and while Labour got "only" 31% - it is obviously just a plain stupid and unfair election system which turned this minor advantage into a landslide victory for the conservatives.

Thanks to FPP do the Tory's need only support of 1/3rd of all voters to take over the government - and I hear they call this democracy. Obviously - not the fault of the Tory's, Labour would have had plenty of opportunity to change this ridiculous system while they had been in power, but for some reason - whoever governs seems to like the ease for a minority to get control of the country. How do they say - power corrupts, nothing to do with the political colours.

Thank god that New Zealand adopted with MMP a somewhat better electoral system. I know, its not perfect either (and I doubt, there is a perfect electoral system), but it feels so much fairer ... we don't know how lucky we are

Having 45 UKIP Members (they got 14% of the vote for 1 member) would have been fun .... we might have seen that revolution after all