‘Obfuscation’ is a word that is being widely used about John Banks at the moment. Political journalists, newspaper editorials and bloggers are roundly condemning the Act Party leader for his alleged deviousness in both his political fundraising and his response to the latest allegations about the Dotcom scandal. [Read more below]
This is a big year for Maori politics. So far we have seen ongoing water claims that have (temporarily?) derailed the Government’s assets sales programme, the emergence of highly-polarising claims about ownership of the air, various Maori Party and Mana controversies, and now we are witnessing a major settlement of the Tuhoe Te Urerewa grievance. As Patrick Gower has written, this agreement is massive – see his opinion piece, Tuhoe deal 'monumental’. Most fascinating and challenging are ‘the possibilities that "Mana Motuhake" opens up for Tuhoe to develop as its own nation in the decades to come’. He also says, ‘There are many questions: how control of the park will work over time, and how much independence will Tuhoe achieve? Will Tuhoe move to a genuine "nation within a nation"?’ [Read more below]
David Shearer seems to have finally hit the right note with his education policy announcements, at least for many of his critics on the left. Although they like the policies themselves, most praise is reserved for Shearer adopting specific and direct policies on issues that the Government is increasingly vulnerable on. [Read more below]
‘Smart’ is Danyl Mclauchlan’s verdict in his blog post, A slightly more substantive take on Labour’s education policy. He says, ‘It serves the dual function of engaging with National in an area where they are vulnerable – daft policies, ambitious, egomaniacal Minister – but also sells Shearer to core Labour voters and party members after a pretty terrible six months that left his future as Party leader in doubt’.
There are many other similar expressions of support, especially on the Standard (Anthony Robins’ Education, evidence, and a tale of two leaders) but also from the likes of Darryl Evans from Mangere Budgeting Services who says that currently lunches are being stolen by kids in schools, ‘Not because they're naughty but because they're hungry’ – see Danya Levy’s Key in poverty 'la la land'. At the same time there is a growing acknowledgement that ‘National is vulnerable on education after the class-sizes backdown and because any reform it is keen on is opposed by the teaching sector. It is also potentially vulnerable on poverty’ – see Grant Miller’s Manawatu Standard analysis, Shearer hits at Nats' weak spot. Headlines such as: Child poverty costs NZ $10b a year – expert, together with an almost daily news feature and a series of hammer blows to regional employment shows that Shearer certainly has plenty of material to work with.
While copying Hone Harawira’s most memorable lines could be very problematic at times, Shearer’s ‘feed the kids’ theme is actually lifted from what was probably Harawira’s best line of the last election, also used on a Mana party campaign billboard, and the actual policy is a scaled back version of Harawira’s Breakfast and Lunch Programmes in Schools private member’s bill submitted just last week.
Only a few weeks ago there was speculation that Labour’s next education announcement would feature a swipe at teacher unions – so what has changed? Maybe this: ‘Rumours are circulating that John Pagani has been moved out as a Labour Party strategist. If that's correct, it will be the first signal that the right wing side step of Shearer's leadership has been halted. This follows the attempt to knife Cunliffe and leaves Robertson's man now running the Leaders Office’ – see Martyn Bradbury’s Has Pagani been pushed or shoved? And as evidence of moves in the wider party to halt any further rightward drift, Bradbury also claims there will be a motion at Labour’s upcoming November conference to reduce the caucus trigger point to challenge the leadership from 67% to 51%.
Pagani’s ultimate sin may well have been that his advice simply didn’t deliver: ‘he does seem to have been the strategic mastermind behind Phil Goff’s “Nationhood” speech, and David Shearer’s ‘Dole Fiddler on the Roof’ speech – both designed to sell the Labour leaders to ‘middle New Zealand’ by provoking outrage on the left. Neither speech succeeded in that aim, instead they cost both leaders support within their own party and raised questions about Labour’s unity and stability’ – see Danyl Mclauchlan’s Exit Pagani, pursued by a bear.
To outsiders on the right, the suspicion with which the Paganis – wife Josie was a Labour candidate turned media commentator of late – are viewed by many in Labour is perplexing: ‘The pigeon-holing of the Paganis as coming from the right of the party has occurred despite the fact they were founder members of Jim Anderton's New Labour Party, which split from Labour in protest over the policies of then Finance Minister Roger Douglas, and were prime movers in the left wing political party, the Alliance’ – see Pattrick Smellie’s Labour insider John Pagani moves to NZOG. And Jane Clifton puzzles why the Paganis are being added to the growing list of internal threats: ‘now the real enemy is apparently the Labour establishment itself’ – see: The enemies of the New Zealand Labour party. A look back at the Alliance’s 1993 manifesto would probably show that it is the Paganis’ views that have transformed over the last 20 years, and that the latest move to shill for the mining industry is consistent with that long-term trend.
Arguments that Shearer’s initial advisers were on the wrong track are growing after Labour’s ex-chief of staff, Stuart Nash, criticised Louisa Wall’s Marriage Equality bill as a ‘side-issue’ that took the focus off more important issues – see Stuart Nash’s guest blog post, Concentrating On The Issues That Matter. The blog Ideologically Impure was one of many unimpressed with the logic – see: Labour dudes: shut up please and let Louisa Wall lead you to victory. This was an issue that had clear and consistent support from two-thirds of voters in polling and which the Prime Minister fell into line with very quickly. If you don’t even know when you are winning, then ultimate victory will always be a long way off.
Other recent important or interesting political items include:
The decision to cancel regional elections in Canterbury relies on ‘the reasoning of dictators and the problems of the earthquakes to deny us democracy. It does not trust the voters’ says the Press editorial, Black day for democracy in Canterbury and the nation. The Press has also published a feature story by John Crone asking whether the Government’s current management of the Christchurch rebuild is ‘just a cunning strategy to get rid of the old "people's republic of Christchurch" and create a new corporate-run town? – see: The business of NZ Inc.
There was a lot build-up and reporting from the APEC meeting in Vladivostok, but nothing much actually seemed to happen. There are only so many ways you can work ‘Pussy Riot’ into a story about trade negotiations. The alternatives seem to be writing about: your hotel, waiting three hours to glimpse Putin, the buffet, bridges or interviewing your laptop about why nothing is happening. One common theme seemed to be how trade deals are being used by both the US and China to gain dominance over each other. Gordon Campbell, who has described most of the New Zealand media reporting of APEC as ‘indistinguishable from a DPMC press handout’, had probably the best analysis of the summit’s real significance and how the Trans Pacific Partnership is where the real deals are being done – see: On APEC, and its significance for the TPP talks.
Paula Bennett is a stealth radical says Matthew Hooton – see: Bennett’s quiet welfare revolution.
Are we better than that? Danya Levy reports on a celebrity video opposing legislation to intern theoretical asylum seekers arriving by boat – see: Entertainers attack NZ boat people law. View the ‘We are better than that’ video.
Hone Harawira’s use of the Malcolm X term ‘house nigger’ certainly got him some headlines, as well as support from some unusual sources. Many media outlets deemed it too offensive to say or print, although others seemed to have no qualms about repeating the phrase. Saying it and intelligently discussing it are two different things however, says blogger Mark Hubbard: ‘the mindless reportage on this is due to the way our mainstream media is only capable of feeling about issues and emoting on them, anymore, rather than thinking on issues within a framework of politick and philosophy’ – see: Language: Hone Harawira’s Use of 'Nigger' in New Zealand Politics. Even Michael Laws strongly defended Harawira’s right to use the phrase, but couldn’t resist the ultimate insult at the end: ‘Even Hone. He's a kept man: we keep him. He's in the big House now. What does that make you, bro?’ – see: Hone's ghetto language belies his mainstream taming.
The front runners to be the new Speaker of the House are, apparently David Carter, Maurice Williamson and – don’t laugh – Tau Henare. Henare’s campaign for the job has hit quite a big bump though – see John Armstrong’s Henare not up to the job, indicates PM. That Henare can even consider he has a chance points to discipline problems in the National caucus says Cameron Slater (who has multiple blog posts on the contest): ‘Joyce has created an environment where MPs are actively talking about options like Tau has taken, grabbing whatever they can, knowing that under MMP Joyce can’t afford MPs crossing the floor. With no prospect of a promotion or a big job to look forward to, MPs become embittered and start wondering how they can cause problems. My sources are telling me that more problems are going to pop up’ – see The Race for Speaker, Ctd and The Race for Speaker, Ctd.
The hit and run workings of one of our great legal minds is revealed by Steve Braunias in The secret diary of Judge Raoul Neave.
Finally, Andrew Geddis (currently in the US) has come across ‘what may be the single greatest letter ever written by any sportsperson’, written by Chris Kluwe, the punter for the Minnesota Vikings NFL team – see: “They Won’t Magically Turn You Into A Lustful Cockmonster”. The language is from the Hone Harawira school of political oration but it obliterates the target completely and utterly.
Today’s content
Labour’s education policy
Danya Levy (Stuff): Key in poverty 'la la land'
Matthew Theunissen (Herald): Optional national standards won't confuse – Shearer
Claire Trevett (Herald): Stop debating and feed the kids, says Shearer
Claire Trevett (Herald): Labour's $19m vow to feed children
Samantha Hayes (TV3): Free food & report cards – Labour's education reforms
TVNZ: Labour promises free food for schools
RadioLIVE / 3 News: Key: Govt already tackling education issues
John Hartevelt (Stuff): Let parents choose assessments, says Shearer
John Hartevelt (Stuff): Labour plans free food for some schools
No Right Turn: A good decision
Grant Miller (Manawatu Standard): Shearer hits at Nats' weak spot
Danyl Mclauchlan (Dim Post):A slightly more substantive take on Labour’s education policy
Ideologically Impure: Oh Shearer, so close!
Anthony Robins (Standard): Education, evidence, and a tale of two leaders
The Standard:A decent policy
APNZ: Child poverty costs NZ $10b a year – expert
Claire Trevett (Herald): School costs parents more
Newswire: School donations on the rise, Labour says
Scott Yorke (Imperator Fish): National's Hunger Plan
Kelvin Davis (Maui St): Feeding the kids
Herald: Editorial – Editorial: Breakfast is not too much to ask
Jody O’Callaghan and Anna Ferrick (Stuff): Free food to fill bellies will help kids learn - principal
Labour Party
Danyl Mclauchlan (Dim Post): The Big Lie
Martyn Bradbury (Tumeke): Has Pagani been pushed or shoved?
Martyn Bradbury (Tumeke): Pagani gone - A chance for Shearer?
Danyl Mclauchlan (Dim Post): Exit Pagani, pursued by a bear
Robert Winter (Idle Thoughts): An Opportunity for Mr Shearer: The Three Davids?
Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): Pagani gone drilling
Pattrick Smellie (Business Desk): Labour insider John Pagani moves to NZOG
Jane Clifton (Listener): The enemies of the New Zealand Labour party
Stuart Nash (Recess Monkey): Guest Post: Concentrating On The Issues That Matter
Ideologically Impure: Labour dudes: shut up please and let Louisa Wall lead you to victory
Jordan Carter (Just Left): Equality matters to us all
Jordan Carter (Just Left): The depoliticisation of economics
Scott Yorke (Imperator Fish): On "The Issues That Matter"
Cathy Odgers (Cactus Kate): Nash v Carter - Modern v Entrenched
Christchurch rebuild
Press: Editorial - Black day for democracy in Canterbury and the nation
John Crone (Press): The business of NZ Inc
Steven Cowan (Against the current): The new corporate Christchurch
Apec
Gordon Campbell (Scoop): On APEC, and its significance for the TPP talks
John Armstrong (Herald): Putin-Key talks short on specifics
Vernon Small (Stuff): Japan next for Key after frustrating summit
Corin Dann (TVNZ): Russian economy on the move
John Armstrong (Herald): Curse of Russky Island strikes
Duncan Garner (TV3): Dark clouds gather on Russky Island
John Armstrong (Herald): Hi-de-hi from Putins, the pollies' paradise
Vernon Small (Stuff): Putin no pussycat prospect at Apec summit
Fran O’Sullivan (Herald): Free trade deal hinges on PM's charm offensive
John Armstrong (Herald): Key to push Putin on stalled FTA talks
Vernon Small (Stuff): Vladivostok prepared for spotlight
Fran O’Sullivan (Herald): PM must make most of his opening act
Ryan Bridge (RadioLive): Russian dolls are hollow on the inside
Duncan Garner (TV3): Opinion: Can Russia deliver anything?
John Armstrong (Herald): Pussy Riot saga raises the beat at trade talks
Welfare reforms
Matthew Hooton (NBR):
Kate Shuttleworth (Herald): Kidnappers among targets in benefit plan
Kate Shuttleworth and Hamish Neilly (Herald): Beneficiaries on warrants face cash cut
Danyl Mclauchlan (Dim Post): Whew!
Asylum seekers bill
TVNZ: Boat people could head for NZ – Minister
Tim Watkin (Pundit): Asylum seekers bill a boatload of needless nastiness
Danya Levy (Stuff): Entertainers attack NZ boat people law
TVNZ: Q+A: Interview with Immigration Minister Nathan Guy
TVNZ: Q+A: The Panel on Immigration (Video)
Hone Harawira ‘House Niggers’ comment
Mark Hubbard (Life Behind the Iron Drape): Language: Hone Harawira’s Use of 'Nigger' in New Zealand Politics …
TVNZ: Ihave 'nothing to apologise' for – Harawira
TV3:Campbell Live: Hone Harawira: 'N***er' slur not directed at Maori Party
TV3: Firstline: Hone claims victory for Maori Party's hui u-turn
Alex Tarrant (Newswire): Key says Harawira's comments are offensive
Adam Bennett (Herald): Maori Party MPs dismiss insult as 'Honeism'
Michael Laws (Press): Hone's ghetto language belies his mainstream taming
Pete George (Your NZ): Harawira backtracks and contradicts
ACC
Phil Kitchin (Stuff): ACC pays millions to send its 'hatchets'
Paul Harper (Herald): ACC's use of preferred experts questioned
Herald: Editorial: ACC culture must be more fair and open
Lost in translation
Claire Trevett (Herald): PM loses at Chinese whispers
Claire Trevett (Herald): Key gets a US rewrite... to what he really said
Philip Lyth (Public Address): How the Key transcription gaffe got fixed by State
Marriage equality
Andrew Geddis (Pundit): “They Won’t Magically Turn You Into A Lustful Cockmonster”
Taryn Utiger (Stuff): Minister hopes church will perform gay marriages
Speaker of the House
John Armstrong (Herald): Henare not up to the job, indicates PM
Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): The race for speaker
Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): The race for speaker, ctd
Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): The race for speaker, ctd
Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): The race for speaker, ctd
Isaac Davison (Herald): National MP Tau Henare eyes Speaker's chair
Toby Manhire (Listener): Tau Henare launches speaker bid on Twitter
David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Who will be the next Speaker?
Parliament
Graeme Edgeler (Legal Beagle): MMP Review: Last chance!
Mark Blackham (Political Business): Rise of professional politicians - UK, ctd
Other
Gordon Campbell (Scoop): On the government’s lack of a jobs policy, and our abortion laws
Sue Kedgley (Herald): Beware GM heavyweights visiting New Zealand
Steve Braunias (Taranaki Daily News): The secret diary of . . . Judge Raoul Neave
Kate Chapman (Stuff): Former staffer gets $1.7m contracts
Deborah Coddington (Pundit): Parliament - the House of Representatives (even for the childless)
Dr Paul Hutchison (Herald): We can arrest obesity at birth
Brian Rudman (Herald): Crackdown on charlatans is tragically overdue
Q+A: The Web-only Panel (6:59): Benefit cuts and Hone Harawira
Karl du Fresne (Dom Post): Brave vote foils wowsers
Stuff: Today in politics: Monday, September 10
Stuff: Today in politics: Saturday, September 8
Stuff: Today in politics: Friday, September 7
Stuff: Today in politics: Wednesday, September 6
Stuff: Today in politics: Wednesday, September 5
They blinked. There had been quite a bit of bravado about the Crown’s chances of fending off a legal challenge from the Maori Council over asset sales, but in the end it was just too risky. Adam Bennett reports on the crucial element of yesterday’s decision: ‘The Herald understands legal advice to ministers was that the Government odds of winning a court challenge by the Maori Council were about even’ – see: Iwi pushes for shares on credit . Fifty-fifty odds on the Government’s flagship policy getting off the ground? Merrill-Lynch would never gamble on those sorts of odds and their ex-trader wasn’t about to either. [Read more below]
Is New Zealand ‘in the running to become the gayest place on earth’? That’s the suggestion of America’s gay magazine Instinct, following the passage of Louisa Wall’s marriage equality bill by surprisingly high margin of 80 to 40. The international coverage of what is happening is quite interesting – for example the Washington Post has run Nick Perry’s report, New Zealand Parliament passes 1st stage of gay marriage law spurred by Obama declaration. This includes the quote from Wall: ‘I think the catalyst was around Obama’s announcement, and then obviously our prime minister came out very early in support, as did the leader of my party…. The timing was right’. [Read more below]
The Government faces some difficult choices over the water claim, but it does have choices. Delay is probably the ‘only wise and commercially sound option’, as Tim Watkin writes in Push on or delay? National's defining, high stakes choice. Watkin thinks Key’s record shows he is willing to take the time, but the political opportunity to score some easy polling points may see him ‘give into temptation’ and push the asset sales forward. Both the tight timeframe and the uncertainty have many commentators wondering if the Mighty River Power float can go ahead this year, and whether Key’s pragmatic streak will win – see Gordon Campbell’s On this week’s arm-wrestling over water rights. [Read more below]
Leftists and liberals are deluded if they think that the latest judgment of the Waitangi Tribunal is a victory or that the Maori Council and other Maori aristocrats have suddenly become political allies. What the left fails to understand is that the corporate – or wannabe corporate – leaders who make up the Maori Council aren’t so concerned with privatisation moves, but instead are merely better positioning themselves to gain a cut of the state asset pie. The fight over water and state assets has become transformed into a muddy battle in which the left has lost its way, and could end up contributing to greater inequality and the further development of corporate Maori/iwi control of what is currently state property. That’s what guest blogger John Moore argues in this analysis of the ongoing ‘water wars’. He says that the left (and liberals) fail to deal with the big question: ‘Whose water?’
Don’t expect Bronwyn Pullar’s name to be in the New Years honours list, but there is a view she has done us all a service by forcing ACC to front up on its shortcomings. John Armstrong agrees with that assessment which was expressed yesterday by Michael Crompton, a former Australian Privacy Commissioner who helped author one of the ACC reviews – see Armstrong’s Pullar has done us a huge favour. [Read more below]
The public’s appetite for New Zealand’s involvement in foreign wars and conflicts is undoubtedly waning. The Defence Force currently has personnel deployed on 14 military operations across 12 countries. In fact over the last decade or so, New Zealand has been involved in more overseas military interventions than ever before. Afghanistan and Iraq have obviously been the most controversial, but the armed forces have been deployed in other significant so-called ‘peacekeeping’ deployments in recent years including to Bougainville, Cambodia, the Balkans, and the Solomon Islands. Currently the Defence Force is involved the conflict-ridden Syria – but the latest news is that New Zealand is extricating itself from this area too – see Tracy Watkins’ NZ troops to pull out of Syria. [Read more below]
Politics doesn’t stop when soldiers die, but it does make public pronouncements more difficult. Parties and politicians are loath to be perceived as scoring points, but all sides are reacting in a political way to news of three further deaths of New Zealand soldiers in Afghanistan. The Government’s line is: We are not for turning and to withdraw from the war in Afghanistan would be cowardly. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister has used the event to announce further details of New Zealand’s withdrawal programme for 2013. Key now says this will happen ‘early next year’, after previously refusing to be tied down on the exact timing. It has been reported that, ‘Goff believed the recent deaths had influenced the Government's decision to consider bringing the troops home early next year’ – see Danya Levy’s Pull troops out early: Opposition. [Read more below]
If your income is courtesy of the taxpayer you had better be careful about what you say publicly or who you give information to – unless you are a Cabinet minister, apparently. In the wake of Paula Bennett’s somewhat Clayton’s apology and lack of repentance for releasing the personal details of a solo mum, both Gordon Campbell (Paula Bennett’s problems with privacy) and Steven Cowan (Paula Bennett – Guilty as charged) point to the apparent hypocrisy that has seen ten WINZ staff sacked for breaching the privacy of beneficiaries. [Read more below]
It was ‘Joe the Plumber’ in the last US presidential elections, and the British Labour Party had ‘Mondeo Man’. These are the personalised manifestations that political parties often attempt to imbue their political messages with. New Zealand Labour has (so far): ‘guy sitting at his kitchen table in West Auckland doing his GST return’, ‘Rangitikei truck driver’, and now ‘neighbour of sickness beneficiary painting his roof’. Apart from the obvious need to choose one and give him a more usable handle (Chris Trotter calls him ‘Waitakere Man’), finding an acceptable characterisation of the all-important swinging voter is proving troublesome for Labour. [Read more below]
Should politicians lead political debate or follow it? Do political parties best serve democracy by ‘listening to the people’ or by articulating their own vision? These are two distinct approaches to the role of party politics, and it’s worth keeping them in mind when following the ongoing online discussion over Labour’s political direction. That debate continues unabated at the moment, despite David Shearer’s (rather late) attempts to impose some leadership and discipline on his caucus. For the best summary of this, see Claire Trevett’s Shearer warns MPs: Stop these sideshows. [Read more below]
The ‘Goldilocks’ formula has been used by the Electoral Commission to come up with its controversial proposals to change MMP. This is the age-old process by which politicians and authorities decide on compromise policies on the basis of them being ‘not too hot and not too cold’ – i.e. something between the extremes of opinion on any one issue. This is how the Electoral Commission has come up with its recommendation to abolish the so-called ‘one seat rule’ that helps small parties get proportional representation in Parliament, and reduce the 5% threshold slightly to 4%. This Goldilocks method is both explained and approved of today by John Armstrong (National faces tough decision on closing door to cosy deals) and Andrew Geddis (Should the government dissolve the people, and appoint another one?). [Read more below]
The Electoral Commission has blown its once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to significantly enhance democracy. MMP will remain Mixed and existing Members are now even safer in parliament. Apparently, though, Proportionality can be sacrificed. The report from the Electoral Commission is business as usual and the main party leaders will be pleased. The status quo has been protected and no major change is needed. [Read more below]
Sexual politics is dividing New Zealand once again, this time over gay marriage. So where are the dividing lines, and how polarising are the arguments involved? While Parliament is certainly divided on the issue, there are also interesting divides within families, religious communities, and political parties. Jane Clifton’s Listener column provides the best analysis of the week – see: Here comes the bride/groom. She looks at the impact of Louisa Wall’s Marriage Equality Bill on parties and politicians, and ponders how ‘Same-sex marriage just isn’t considered the scary monster it used to be’. Her most insightful observation is about how the ‘far right’ have done a 180-degree turnaround on sexual politics, and now ‘it’s the Far Right that’s pouring on the heaviest moral pressure in support of the bill – the reverse of the trend back in 1986, when National’s hardest-liners arrayed themselves against the Homosexual Law Reform Bill’. She also notes that John Banks ‘is now not ruling out voting for the bill’, speculating that ‘if there’s anything that can redeem at least a vestige of Banks’s shattered career before its final drain-gurgle, it would be an aye vote on this, accompanied by a heartfelt speech’. In contrast, Clifton says that the issue kills off the prospect of Act supporters moving over to Colin Craig’s conservatives. A critique is also offered of New Zealand First’s abstention on the bill. [Read more below]
Labour’s ‘palace politics’ is endangering their activist base, many of whom now have the ability to publicly express their frustrations. While the behind-the-scenes attacks on David Cunliffe have angered some, Shearer’s latest speech and Su'a William Sio’s public attack on Louisa Wall’s marriage equality bill has led to questions about the Labour caucus’ discipline and leadership. ‘Where’s the leadership?’ asks one of a number of guest posts on The Standard, saying that Su'a William Sio’s public outburst would never have happened under Helen Clark, and if it did he would have been ‘clarifying’ his comments by midday - see: Labour, WTF? – a collection of posts. [Read more below]
When you have a great idea sometimes you just want to share it so others can benefit from your wisdom. If selling prime assets to reduce debt is a good idea for the nation, then it must be a good idea for Christchurch too. Right? King Gerry has been forced to admit that he has received advice on selling the city’s public assets to help pay for the re-build – see Radio NZ’s Brownlee admits receiving advice on Christchurch asset sales. What’s more, he thinks it is a good idea because the city’s ‘rainy day’ has arrived and that’s exactly what they’ve been saving those assets for. Right? Almost certainly ‘wrong’ as far as most Christchurch residents are concerned, and the response from Corporate Services Manager Paul Anderson indicates the Council is aware of that political reality – see Radio NZ’s Council confident it won't have to sell assets. [Read more below]
Conscience votes in Parliament are not free of partisan politicking. In fact there seem to be a lot of partisan political motives at play at the moment. John Armstrong says, for instance, that the PM’s endorsement of a marriage law change is a calculated strategy: ‘Wall's bill is a cost-free means of portraying National as a "modern" party. Key may have another motive - giving Colin Craig's Conservative Party some room to National's right to carve out a niche’ – see: Key out to show Nats have another side. Not to be outdone in political gaming, Winston Peters is joining Colin Craig’s call for a referendum and says NZ First MPs will either vote against or abstain on the bill –see: Lloyd Burr’s NZ First will abstain in gay marriage vote. [Read more below]
Yesterday’s interim report from the Waitangi Tribunal won’t have surprised the Government, but it will have confirmed some tough choices ahead. As Vernon Small points out – the issue of ‘when’ is as crucial a factor as ‘what’ the final outcome is: ‘The Government's asset sales plans, for this year at least, are in trouble with a capital T. That's T for timing, T for tribunal, T for Treaty and T for title’ – see: Tribunal statement spells trouble for asset sale plans. Small thinks a Mighty River Power sale this year is looking ‘mighty unlikely’, especially if the Maori Council heads to court. Although John Key is leaving open the option of ploughing ahead with the sales before the full report in September (see: Danya Levy and Kate Chapman’s Asset sale may occur before Waitangi Tribunal report – Key), John Armstrong thinks that is not likely. Armstrong believes ‘to do so would look churlish, petty and overbearing. It would mean more friction with the Maori Party. It would run counter to National's tactic of downplaying any sense of concern about the question of water rights frustrating its privatisation plans’ – see: Tribunal's 'taihoa' squeezes timetable. It only puts off the day of reckoning, however. [Read more below]
Women appear to be increasingly turned off John Key, but at least they notice him. In contrast, David Shearer seems to be part of the wallpaper for many voters. That’s according to a Fairfax/Ipsos political poll which Tracy Watkins and Kate Chapman report on in 'Polarising' PM losing gloss: ‘Women were quickest to fall out of love with Key – also worrying for National, which has capitalised on his appeal to females as a softer face for a party traditionally seen as flinty. Women were also more likely to feel anxious about their own prospects, and unhappy about the country's direction’. The crucial issues were identified as ‘core services like education and health, asset sales, the economy, Prime Minister John Key's leadership and a growing sense of "us and them"’ – see: Key battle lines drawn in early political poll. [Read more below]
Justice and Law are too often only marginally related. So it seems to be with John Banks and his anonymous mayoral campaign donations. It’s not a good look but National had this outcome well covered from the beginning – rapidly lowering the required ethical standards bar for ministers from ‘highest’ in 2008 to just ‘legal’ in 2012. Phil Heatley resigned as a minister in 2010 for claiming $70 worth of wine as a ministerial dinner. The Prime Minister said that Heatley had been 'untidy and careless' with his expense claims. How times change. And stay the same. As John Armstrong points out, while Key needs to distance himself from Banks there are stronger motivations at work: ‘as Helen Clark did with Winston Peters, Key needs Banks' parliamentary vote’ – see: Toothless law Act leader's saviour. The local electoral law should be changed pronto, but even doing that will be too much of an admission of guilt says Armstrong. [Read more below]
Sunlight is beginning to shine into the last dark corners of Parliament. Green MP Holly Walker’s bill to bring transparency and public disclosure around lobbying directed at MPs and their staff progressed in Parliament yesterday – see: Lobbying Bill Progresses. Many MPs say they have concerns over the practicalities of how the law would work, so significant changes to the proposed legislation are likely before it could be passed. It has already had an impact, however, with Speaker Lockwood Smith bowing to pressure to disclose lobbyists who have been given parliamentary swipe cards (meaning they do not have to go through security each time they visit). The list itself contains no surprises, although we haven’t been told the most interesting information – anyone who gave up their cards rather than allow their name to be made public – see Claire Trevett’s Speaker names 15 who hold the cards. The NBR has a more detailed breakdown of those they label the ‘Swiper-ati’ – see Rob Hosking’s Parliamentary swipe card list tears lid off secret society. [Read more below]
Going off half-cocked has already caused this Government a few problems and they seem to have done it again with the loyalty programme for asset sales. Needing to show they were front-footing the issue, John Key made the announcement of the loyalty scheme. It worked – for a day. The problem is there was actually nothing much new to say and, crucially, the basic details and costs are still unknown. John Hartevelt writes ‘It suggests a rather casual, if not rushed, attempt at a newsy "announcement" for the National Party faithful at the weekend. It all feels a bit half-baked - "we think a loyalty scheme will work, but we don't really know why and we can't tell you exactly what it will look like" – see: Details vacuum befuddles both Key and his rivals. Hartevelt thinks the lack of detail actually had Labour and the Greens struggling as well. [Read more below]
$112 per head may be the price we all pay for economic nationalism in the asset sales policy. Or, rather, it is the price for we all pay to placate wavering National voters concerned about foreign ownership. The actual figure for the ‘kiwi-first’ component of asset sales is unknown – $112 is based on Treasury’s $500 million upper estimate (see Adam Bennett’s $112 a head for asset loyalty), but opposition parties are claiming it could be over $1 billion. John Key calls that a ‘crazy number’ and says Parliament's finance and expenditure committee estimate of $360 million was a ‘possible number’ – see: Vernon Small’s Key denies $1b taxpayer 'sting'. Key has also suggested today that the ‘kiwi-first’ policy is likely to cost between $60 and $80 million. That’s a big variation in estimates, but a significant cost under any scenario, particularly for a government that has argued foreign investment in New Zealand should be viewed positively and flew in the face of public opinion to allow the Crafar farms to be sold offshore. [Read more below]
The National Party’s annual conference in the weekend will not go down in political history, being a fairly dull affair. So while today there is plenty of commentary and analysis about the conference, and the party itself, the focus will quickly move on, and the weekend’s various pronouncements will soon be forgotten. Its reflective of this that one of the most interesting things to come out of the conference is an amusing set of images up on the Herald website – see: The new faces of the National Government – especially this unfortunate image of John Key. Jane Clifton also manages to capture the mood of the conference in her analysis, National Party conference a shot of anti-depressant. Clifton says the party has plenty to be angry, anxious or depressed about, but instead it’s in a state of ‘genial serenity’. Newstalk ZB’s Felix Marwick also summed it up nicely, saying the ‘weekend effort was safe, steady, but not exactly inspiring’ (National Party's weekend conference). [Read more below]
Bill Clinton famously tried to redefine some of the English language to explain away previous denials of his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Political definitions can be quite elastic and so it may be with a few key words in John Key’s assurance to the Maori Party – ‘ownership’, ‘rights and interests’ and even ‘not’. More questions are raised than settled by the joint statement, writes Audrey Young: ‘Unless the Maori Party and the Government agree on what ownership means, its concession in the joint statement is meaningless’ – see: Water ownership remains ill defined. Young also makes the point that what works as a soundbite has little bearing on the real decisions that will dictate the final outcome: ‘whatever agreements they reach, they have no control over other Maori to claim ownership rights over specific waters and have the courts uphold them’. [Read more below]
Promises have been made, explanations given and accepted, and everyone is still on speaking terms. Certainly the tension and sense of crisis in the National-Maori Party relationship has eased but, of course, the underlying issue is far from being resolved. The promise not to legislate over any rights won in court is the major win for Turia and Sharples – see Adam Bennett’s Maori Party leaders 'really pleased' with PM's meeting pledge. This had to be a bottom line for the relationship of a party forged in anger over Labour’s overruling legislation on the foreshore and seabed. TVNZ’s Corin Dann sees it as a positive outcome, at least in the meantime – see: Win-win for PM and Maori Party. If National’s commitment not to legislate is an absolute guarantee then it is a significant concession by National. It means that a negotiated settlement will be the only way forward if a court rules that Maori interests in water have to be formally recognised. But if the promise not to negotiate is only good for however long the coalition relationship lasts, then the practical effect is much more limited. The Maori Party would always have had have to walk away from the coalition if special legislation was used, so in this context the promise would really only be a statement of political reality – much like the PM’s comments about the Waitangi Tribunal. Normally a messy coalition break-up would be damaging to both parties, but the brutal truth is that National could easily turn it to electoral advantage, even if accused (and being guilty) of bad faith. Gordon Campbell thinks a break is inevitable, particularly as welfare reforms and asset sales fallout takes a further toll on Maori party support – see: Water issue strains political ties. [Read more below]
David Shearer may have just locked in his shot at becoming the next prime minister. With changes to Labour’s leadership election rules, although he will have to win a majority caucus confidence vote next year, after that the task of any leadership challenger will be much harder. The most obvious change is that of having to build support amongst members and union affiliates to win a vote. But the changes of process probably have more impact in practical terms. Under these new ‘incumbency protection’ rules, a challenge can only be initiated by two-thirds of the caucus. It’s worth noting that successful leadership coups don’t normally start with a majority, but rely on spooking enough waverers in the final run to build a majority, which is then presented to the incumbent as a fait accompli. Having to get two-thirds formally signed up before the voting even starts will make it impossible to stab your colleague in the back without having to actually eyeball them. Coups often rely on speed and stealth in the early stages, but the new required membership vote will take time and give the incumbent a huge opportunity and a public platform to fight back. The classic hurried return flight of the leader from an overseas jaunt and dreaded airport briefing from loyalists will be a thing of the past for Labour leaders. [Read more below]
Timing may not be everything in politics – but it’s right up there. With an admission yesterday that a legal challenge to the asset sales programme was ‘a high probability’, the PM’s cockiness over the flagship policy all going to plan is quickly disappearing. ‘We certainly hope it's not delayed’ doesn’t exude a lot of confidence – see: Duncan Garner’s John Key concedes likely asset sales delay. Comparing the chances of a delay to that of a meteorite hitting the earth today was probably a mistake as Toby Manhire points out that several thousand meteorites hit the earth every day – see: Facts bugger up John Key’s meteorite analogy. For a more statistically reliable measure, iPredict stocks say there is a 67.5% chance Mighty River Power will not be sold this year and a 27% chance it won’t be sold in 2013 either – see Hamish Rutherford’s Punters pick SOE sale delay. [Read more below]
Kim Dotcom’s substantial shadow may be cast over the water claim and asset sales issues. With a police decision imminent on whether to prosecute John Banks for non-disclosure of donations from the Megaupload entrepreneur the Government’s majority could be under threat, at least for a few months, if Banks is convicted or resigns. None other than ex-National and ex-Act leader Don Brash raised the scenario on TVNZ’s Q+A (read the transcript here or watch the panel discussion here), along with Greg Presland (How this Government may end) and Matt McCarten (John Key's mandate on asset sales leaking water). [Read more below]
Labour is marketing itself as the party of radical economic transformation. It says it is prepared to make the real changes that National won’t. Yesterday David Parker advocated forcing the Reserve Bank to take on exporter and worker representation, and taxing property investment profits – see: Labour talks tough on economic reform. That’s the public face, but as Chris Trotter writes, the message behind closed doors to the business sector has a very different emphasis. What is not going to change under Labour, is a commitment to returning to a fiscal surplus in two years - meaning a newly elected Labour-led Government’s first budget in 2015 would have no red ink. There would have to be a dramatic turnaround in government finances over the next few years if significant new spending is going to be seen before the following election in 2018 – see Trotter’s blogpost, No Joke: Why I'm Not Laughing At Labour's Latest Speeches. [Read more below]
The current pressure on the Maori Party over water rights is symptomatic of wider tensions within Maori society. The party’s ‘will they or won’t they leave’ dramatics are characterised by Gordon Campbell as ‘that of a battered spouse, a pitiable creature who will swallow any indignity in return for the few crumbs of what the relationships once promised to offer’ (see Tariana Turia is facing a Katie Holmes moment) but the issues go beyond parliamentary fortunes. [Read more below]
The controversy over water ownership and rights is not a distraction or a minor scandal that will eventually blow over. This is because the partial privatisation policy is at the core of this Government’s programme (whether National likes it or not). The stakes are high and, given the Government’s recent woeful political management, it was, as today’s Herald editorial says, a Bad time for PM to shoot from the lip. The Government does have options in dealing with a successful Waitangi Tribunal claim – but there is real risk in all of them. Simply ignoring any unfavourable Tribunal recommendation and hoping to fight off any legal challenge might work but would be a huge gamble, and one that previous governments have lost badly on. National would also be gambling on the relationship with the Maori Party, and Audrey Young thinks John Key should be worried, especially by the Maori party’s comments yesterday: ‘We will not tolerate any suggestion that the mana of the tribunal can be undermined…. It is of utmost concern in so far as it threatens the very heart of the treaty relationship’. Tariana Turia was keeping up the pressure today, ‘refusing to confirm that the support arrangement with the minority National government is safe’ – see Audrey Young’s Turia won't confirm govt support. [Read more below]
An opportunistic grab for a handout or a principled stand for collective rights? John Key will feel on safe political ground in rejecting the Maori Council’s water rights claim to the Waitangi Tribunal, portraying it directly as an ‘us and them’, Maori vs the rest issue: ‘As (chairman) Maanu Paul said last night, the reason is they want you all to pay for that. He said you need to pay for their water’ – see Danya Levy’s Key rejects Maori water claim in asset sales battle.The claimants have a very different view, saying the privatisation of the assets has forced them to take action: ‘Mr Wihapi says Maori have been quite comfortable for years with the Government and its agencies using natural resources for the benefit of the whole nation. But he says things have now become serious, because tribal property is set to be stolen’ – see Radio NZ’s Hapu blames Govt for water rights claim. [Read more below]
If you are going to sell out, at least get a decent price. Our politicians are far too cheap if our recent political donation scandals turn out to have any substance. The latest is Clayton Cosgrove’s promotion of a private member’s bill regarding Christchurch zoning that would advantage, among others, Independent Fisheries. The company had previously donated a few thousand to Cosgrove, but before the last election donated $17,500. TV3’s The Nation questioned the Labour MP about the issue – see TV3’s Cosgrove Clayton Cosgrove at centre of political row and read the transcript of Clayton Cosgrove’s interview on The Nation here. Cosgrove hit back, claiming TV3 was running a dirty campaign on behalf of Gerry Brownlee (see Georgina Stylianou’s Cosgrove hits back at Fisheries 'smear') and pointing out that all the donations were declared publicly as required under law. Labour is backing Cosgrove (see Adam Bennett’s Leaders back Cosgrove over donations to campaign) but, as the Keeping Stock blog points out the choice of words could have been better: ‘just remember what happened to the last Labour MP who was only guilty of "helping his constituents”’, referring to the recently paroled Phillip Field – see: Haven't we heard this before? [Read more below]
A condemned house with a cracked roof may well let in more light than a frost encrusted car on a Christchurch street. National did promise a brighter future for all last election, but that is definitely not the type of upgrade they want government ministers like Pita Sharples advocating. The Minister of Maori Affair’s suggestion was damaging, not so much because he is actually advocating illegal acts, but more because he has shattered the Government line on Christchurch housing of ‘there is no crisis’ – see Olivia Carville and Vernon Small’s Hardship but no housing crisis, says Key. With much of the housing quake damage going back nearly two years, the admission that some residents still face a choice between living in dangerous and condemned houses or freezing to death in the cars isn’t, as they say, a good look – see Olivia Carville’s Abandoned homes preferred to cars. [Read more below]
Public broadcasting has slowly but surely been strangled by successive Labour and National governments. The latest victim is TVNZ7, which goes off the air on Saturday at Midnight. The channel’s experience has been an informative example of how our political parties and politicians orientate towards quality media. There is an apparent Labour vs National campaign running at the moment that is more illusionary than real in terms of the debate over public broadcasting. The truth is that the blame for the demise of quality broadcasting in New Zealand can be leveled at both Labour and National – a point well made in the analysis of media studies lecturer Peter Thompson: Public Disservice Broadcasting: The shameful demise of TVNZ7. A third culprit might also be Sky TV – which is examined in an excellent feature in the Listener this week by Ruth Laugesen – see: Sky TV’s hold on the NZ market. [Read more below]
The Opposition parties are not about to give up on the anti-asset sales campaign despite the Government having squeaked through the sale legislation yesterday. And why would they? Not only do they have an issue that puts them onside with a sizable majority of voters, but the issue is proving incredibly useful in uniting Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First. And for a change, they have been disciplined about attacking the Government, not each other. This ability to work together and punish the Government’s many weaknesses lately – especially over assets sales – has made their political alliance appear more formidable than ever. But just how united and effective is this new coalition? [Read more below]
The Government’s newly announced ‘to-do’ list is full of apple pie targets that no-one could really disagree with. The question is, does National have the recipe and is that mock cream on top? Apparently the already slimmed down public sector is expected to actually come up with the plans and prove they are achieving them with regular updates on progress – see Audrey Young’s Key sets tough 'to-do list' for public sector. [Read more below]
The public will get three more chances to pass judgment on the Government’s asset sales despite Parliament being about to pass the enabling legislation. The first chance will be with our wallets when shares go on the market, and according to Herald on Sunday polling, nearly 60% of us would like to buy them – see: Most of us oppose selling NZ. Given the same poll also showed even more people oppose the sales in the first place it could be seen as contradictory, but as Green co-leader Metiria Turei commented: ‘New Zealanders understand that these are shares in profitable, stable companies, but that is why they should stay in public ownership, not private ownership’. Or perhaps the poll figure simply indicates that the widespread opposition to partial privatisation just isn’t felt very strongly. [Read more below]
Has ACC become sociopathic? The latest revelations about financial incentives for ACC staff who push accident victims off the books could be perceived as being part of a sociopathic – or at least bureaupathic – culture within the government agency. Green MP Kevin Hague has revealed that case managers are paid a bonus for removing long term claimants and says ‘This sort of scheme is symptomatic of a sick culture within ACC’ – see Adam Bennett’s ACC bonus pay for claimant cull. ACC argues that getting clients back to work is the focus, but the obvious next question is: how many of those ‘culled’ haven’t actually increased their work hours but have just been pushed on to a benefit or lost income? For the strongest critique of the ACC policy, read Gordon Campbell’s Scoop article On the incentive payments at ACC. Gordon Campbell argues the policy is ‘not just corrupt, it’s insulting’. [Read more below]
Should opposition parties pledge to renationalise companies being partially privatised by the National Government? It’s a question that goes to the heart of the debate over the asset sales, and it’s discussed today by John Armstrong in his column, English puts Labour on the spot during defensive week for National. Armstrong suggests that Labour is being wise to fudge the issue. He says that if a future Labour Government was to reverse the partial privatisation process this would have to be funded out of increased borrowing of perhaps $5-7b, and signaling such an ‘extravagant’ policy would be to ‘shoot itself in the foot’ as it would ‘cut right across Labour’s efforts to portray itself as a careful manager of the economy’. This is also a position pushed on Labour-friendly Standard blog, see for example: The art of the possible. [Read more below]
National lost the public debate on asset sales a long time ago, but it pushes forward regardless. Surely if the Government could turn back the clock it would not bother going down the path of partial privatisation at all. After all the whole exercise has turned out to be so fraught. This is emphasized today by John Armstrong’s column, National has failed to conquer foreign ownership bogey, in which he intelligently outlines all the ways in which National has lost its way on the issue. [Read more below]
Class war: Round Two! It seems National’s response to their bloody nose over class sizes is to get right back off the canvas and have another go at education reform – albeit with a different tactic that won them a points victory last term. The Prime Minister says Parents 'desperate' for league tables, in a clear attempt to get back onside with parents unimpressed with the prospect of larger class sizes. The ‘white flight’ debate over decile ratings provided a good opportunity to promote a public measure of schools based on more than just the wealth of their neighbourhood. The main argument seems to be that league tables are inevitable because the raw information will be public and that it is better for the Government to produce them than leave it to the media to create their own. This is the argument David Farrar echoes in School League Tables.
Winston Peters is proving to be the fly in Labour’s ointment yet again. Labour has until now had National – and John Key in particular – squirming over the superannuation age. It looked like Labour was leading a debate that would, inevitably, end up on their side. After all, Labour’s new and defining policy of reducing entitlements by raising the age of entitlement to the pension has been echoed by a chorus of commentators and lobbyists. And even the Greens have appeared to be onside for the reduction. But Peters is now, with some success, positioning himself in the box seat to be the defender of superannuation against attacks, and even looking to increase it – see: Peters: make super more generous. Peters says that he will not allow Labour to govern if that party will implement its big changes to National Superannuation. [Read more below]
