Be afraid, be very afraid

November 14th, 2012 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Do not read these if you are of a nervous disposition. Bear in mind that they are not yet official Party policy. They are merely up for consideration. But nevertheless read on with horror what utopia New Zealand is planned b Party grassroots activists and read their policy remits to be debated at their annual conference. Here’s a summary:

  • Nationalisation of any partially sold assets
  • A financial transactions tax
  • Require all private boards to comply with a 50% gender quota within five years
  • A universal child benefit so millionaires get paid money for having kids
  • 52 weeks paid parental leave (why stop there – go for 18 years I say!)
  • Lower the voting age to 16
  • A gender quota for the House of Representatives (why not a race and sexual orientation quota also!)
  • Compulsory Te Reo Maori until age 15
  • End all funding of private schools (which ironically will force them all to be integrated and go from 25% funding to 100%)
  • Bring ban the food police to school tuckshops
  • Ban seabed mining for minerals oil and gas
  • Ban fracking
  • A tax on aquaculture
  • Ban all coal mining
  • A mineral exports tax
  • Ban plastic bags
  • Fund a brand new commercial free TV broadcaster
  • Fund a Pacific TV broadcaster
  • A Super Gold card for transport for under 21s
  • A rail link to the airport for Auckland (think how much taxes will be gong up to pay for all of this)
  • A petrol tax to fund rail
  • Set up a state owned insurance company to compete with private insurers
  • De facto compulsory unionism by forcing all employees to “contribute to the benefits of enterprise and multi-enterprise bargaining”
  • Turn contractors into employees
  • Reverse employment law changes and destroy NZ as a location for international film making
  • Ban companies that do not pay a “living wage” (which is much higher than the minimum wage) from winning government contracts
  • Compulsory worker representation on large company boards
  • Direct Kiwirail as to whom must win their tenders
  • restore the social obligation to the SOE Act (despite the fact they were never repealed!)
  • Insert the Treaty of Waitangi into the Constitution Act
  • Raise the age of Super to 67 – except for Maori!
  • That the Government should create state owned and managed retirement homes
  • That all single benefits be increased by $50 a week!!!
  • That any NGO receiving even minimal government funding be required to have a 50% gender quota on its governing board!
  • Bring back compulsory membership of student associations

Once you have returned from the bathroom, comment below on which ones are the most hideous. I think the fixation with gender quotas might be it for me – they want them not just for Parliament, not just for company boards but also for any NGO which gets even $1,000 of Government funding.

It will be fascinating to see which ones pass.

 

Tags:

135 Responses to “Be afraid, be very afraid”

  1. annie (537 comments) says:

    DPF – on the single issue of parental leave, it can be defended as a means of keeping mothers in employment, since childcare is hard to come by for the under-ones.

    Main advantage – these mothers are raising little taxpayers, currently something of an endangered species in NZ. A brief bout of assistance at this stage will benefit the taxpaying public in the much longer tersm.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. simo (150 comments) says:

    Barely worth commenting on…….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Manolo (13,394 comments) says:

    An inch short of declaring Mao’s birthday New Zealand National Day.
    The poor socialists have lost all sense of reality and, alongside the Luddites, will bankrupt our country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. marynicolehicks (24 comments) says:

    Congratulations, you just converted me from being a national voter into a labour voter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. queenstfarmer (748 comments) says:

    Also, free dental care for the entire population (remit 69).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ChardonnayGuy (1,136 comments) says:

    I think a better clue might be to take a look at Miliband’s UK Labour leadership’s approach to policy concerns and discern how many might be applicable to our own situation- in other words, match the existing Cameron/Key axis with one between the UK and New Zealand Labour Parties.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    Will I still have to wipe my owe arse?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. La Grand Fromage (145 comments) says:

    I know Anders Breivik was a nutter but at times like this I must confess to thinking that if someone rolled a grenade into the Ellerslie Racecourse convention room this weekend that NZ might be a safer place.

    [DPF: 50 demerits - you are now on 80]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Halconero (6 comments) says:

    Sounds like a one way ticket to the poorhouse to me; coupled with social engineering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. dime (9,470 comments) says:

    this looks like something high school kids would come up with.

    did this actually come from grown ups?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Ross12 (1,154 comments) says:

    They forgot to add in –support Aunty Helen’s push for a greater global economic role for the UN. (ie. we want control)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. alex Masterley (1,491 comments) says:

    Looks like they are trying to out green the greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. slightlyright (93 comments) says:

    The Employment Law definitely, National has been by no means ambitious in this area, really quite measured tweaking of existing systems/structure, sounds like these clowns want to take it further than where the Clark government had it! The nature of the remits do however indicate what a closed off factional bunch they have become, th programme makes for equally depressing reading, sounds bloody boring, nothing happening on saturday night (but then I guess most will have to be up early for the rainbow breakfast at 8), watching grass grow would be more entertaining

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Surely youve missed one…

    the one that eliminates the 3 yearly vote for parliament………….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. queenstfarmer (748 comments) says:

    #78: subsidised condoms for all (but only the “basic” variety – presumably to demonstrate Labour’s austerity).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    There are a handful of these I agree with, especially the stopping of public funding to private schools. They don’t have to be integrated if they fail, they should just be allowed to straight-up fail! Why should the government totally bail out and nationalise a failing business just because its a school? I also like the labour law changes around unionism. The 52-weeks of maternity leave would be nice but isn’t affordable. I can see the argument for a universal child benefit, since we already do that for seniors, but I’m not convinced. I don’t see a problem with a state-owned insurer competing with others as long as they don’t go and nationalise or ban the private ones, we alreasy have this model in healthcare anyway.

    The ones I hate, all the stuff about gender quotas, the nanny state ones about banning bad food, the ones giving Maori special treatment (raising the age to 67 except for Maori etc.), compulsory Te Reo to age 15, including the Treaty of Waitangi in the Constitution (which language version? Or the principles?!), the increases in taxes to pay for rail. I also don’t see the need for a new public channel or for funding a Pasifika channel.

    Still these are nowhere near the level of crazy the Greens put out. Labour is still just centre-left, not hard-left like Mana and Green.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Shunda barunda (2,965 comments) says:

    Still these are nowhere near the level of crazy the Greens put out. Labour is still just centre-left, not hard-left like Mana and Green.

    Nah mate, they aren’t center left, they are hard left, the Greens and Mana are in a whole new category of extreme leftedness.

    Labour are still stuck in the Clarkula years, which is quite incredible really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Compulsory unionism has to be the one which has the worst effect on the most people…back to the days of airline and ferry strikes every school holidays and paid union blackmailers strutting round every big construction site…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. The Scorned (719 comments) says:

    La Grand Fromage….snap…….I too thought of Breivik upon seeing this lefty madness……

    Is Redbaiter sedated somewhere secure….?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Rightandleft – you need to get your calculator out.

    If private schools are all closed, then you – and all the other taxpayers – will have to stump up more money.

    At the moment government provides (I think) 25% of the cost of educating a student at private schools.
    If the school disappeared then taxpayers would have to pay 100%. Taxpayers would have to pay all ther extra teachers and – just a small cost – build a heap oof new schools to house the students kcicked out of the private schools.

    It always amazes me that so many people cant see the simple financial facts of the private school arguement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Cunningham (821 comments) says:

    Rightandleft private schools take a tremendous amount of pressure off the public system. Without them the public school sector would buckle. It is cheaper for the govt to subsidise these children then what it would be if they were to go public.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    Also there’s the xenophobic land ownership one (remit 4) which ignores that we already have very strict rules on foreign land ownership as it is. I don’t know how they think this is part of economic development. It’s just straight populism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Reid (15,970 comments) says:

    What’s the bet none of the media bother to inform the public of these remits?

    It’s too “boring.”

    The idiots who wrote these show no recognition of anything the country’s going through at the mo and simply pick up where the 5th Liarbore govt left off, apparently not having learned a thing from their resounding defeat.

    Where’s the policies for Chch, dealing with the GFC, growing exports, etc etc? Oh those aren’t important, it’s much more urgent and important to do some gender balancing social engineering. There’s no practical thinking behind any of them – it could have been written by idealistic naive twenty-something uni students it reflects such little understanding of reality. Like this:

    Remit 6: Children

    THAT “It’s about our kids” remain a cornerstone policy for Labour, including commitments
    to:

    a) setting a legislative goal of ending child poverty by 2030 and passing legislation that
    will require governments to report annually on targets towards this goal; and

    b) introducing a universal component to income support for all families with young
    children; and

    c) introducing a breakfast in schools programme for all schools of deciles 1 to 3.

    So their plan is to legislate poverty out of existence. Yeah that’s going to work. But don’t stop there, why not legislate for world peace as well, and threaten to use the SAS to arrest errant world leaders who don’t obey? They could get Hulun to make a special announcement at the UN.

    I mean it’d be OK if the idiots explained precisely how giving poor people another few hundy a week, is going to be paid for. Oh wait, they’ll just tax the rich: i.e. everyone earning over $60k. That’ll stop young people going to Australia, won’t it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    Private schools educate less than 4% of students in NZ. If govt funding was cut off entirely not all of them would go belly-up overnight. They might have to increase their fees 25% in the worst-case scenario, but many of them already charge such high fees it is likely many of the parents could afford the increase and value their private education enough to pay it. Even if half of them close it would only be a 2% increase on the public system and I don’t see even that happening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Of course all these things are up for negotiation with National right?

    Or, why have I not seen a program from the “center right” party that counters this communist garbage?

    I’ll tell you why- because the useless compromising directionless reactionary pricks calling themselves the National party today don’t have one.

    They’re just Labour in drag warming the seats for the left until they regain the leadership of what is in effect a Labour-National- Greens coalition.

    We’re living in a one party totalitarian state where small slightly different far left factions tussle over the leadership.

    That is the reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. kowtow (7,652 comments) says:

    Look at that wish list and then ask yourself “Was extending the franchise such a good idea?”

    Given time ,most of what’s there will become law or official government policy.

    If you think that’s far fetched alot of it is already policy or enacted in one form or other in the bankrupted EU.

    “Equality” and other people’s money, a marvellous thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. gump (1,491 comments) says:

    My niece wants a free pony.

    If she waits for long enough it will become a Labour Party policy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Megan (12 comments) says:

    The gender one is a major for me, I find it so incredibly offensive to regulate women onto boards. This would be massive step backward for gender equality, would increase tokenistic board appointments and is also demeaning to those women already serving on company boards. I couldn’t think of anything worse for trying to gain respect of colleagues than being on a board as a result of a quota.

    The natural resources policies would eliminate a number of jobs and export earnings. Lack of agricultural policy no surprise although the remits on the TPP could have concerning implications for exporters.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. alex (301 comments) says:

    Who are all these radical leftists proposing these remits? I have not seen any evidence of leftwingery in the caucus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    Remit 9 on housing stock is actually very good. There is some truly shocking rental housing out there and it increases the cost of healthcare and thus our tax burden. Since my house got insulation (under an excellent National scheme) and a heat pump it’s made a huge difference in my quality of life.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    I’m not sure about lowering the voting age, but the complsory civics education policy would be excellent. Far to many Kiwis reach voting age and don’t understand the system at all. I believe this has been a United Future policy for some time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. projectman (205 comments) says:

    If subsidising private schools to the extent of 25%, as stated, saves the tax payer money (which it does), where is the remit that provides some benefit to all those who are paying for private health insurance, which also saves the tax payer money. The public health system would be absolutely crippled if people, on-mass gave up their private health insurance.

    Of course, not something Labour would do as it would be seen as giving money to the “rich pricks”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    David Garrett (2,808) Says:
    November 14th, 2012 at 9:34 am

    Compulsory unionism has to be the one which has the worst effect on the most people…

    Tell the to the German workers – union members one and all, and amongst the highest paid in the EU, and whose social contract with the government allowed that government to impose a significant haircut on wages when German exports were showing signs of becoming uncompetitive. Bloody nanny state!

    In addition, I can dig up a relatively recent IMF working paper actually decrying the downward trend in union membership as inherently deleterious for both employer and employee and a major factor in increasing inequality, as the most successful hunters and gatherers accumulate rewards far above the worth of their contribution.

    Whether compulsory unionism could ever work here as in Germany, however, is moot to negative given the decades of legacy Mother England class warfare that infects our politics to this day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Pete George (22,865 comments) says:

    alex:

    Who are all these radical leftists proposing these remits? I have not seen any evidence of leftwingery in the caucus.

    Relative to you maybe, but fair point, caucus is trying to go centre. But as you see on The Standard the activist base wants to pull them left. Major battle, leadership issues just a part of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. berend (1,634 comments) says:

    La Grand Fromage, sun light is enough.

    I only hope these things gets discussed on TV, but probably the MSM is too afraid that sunlight will be a disinfectant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. RightNow (6,676 comments) says:

    sure looks to me like they’re targeting Greens voters. I reckon there’ll be some vitriol between Greens and Labour prior to next elections, with the backbiting shoring up support for Nats.

    Overall, great policy ideas.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Pete George (22,865 comments) says:

    Good to see La Grand Fromage at 9.19 am demerited, that’s an appalling comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    So their plan is to legislate poverty out of existence.

    Well, the other side do their best to legislate poverty into existence!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    It’s all complete pie in the sky stuff.

    There simply isn’t a machine in the world big enough to print the money to pay for it…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Rightandleft (638 comments) says:

    Their environmental policies do read like something the Greens wrote. Eliminating coal mining and banning fracking, lots of new taxes. Totally ignored the tiny amount we actually contribute to global carbon emmissions and the terrible effect this could have on our economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Yvette (2,692 comments) says:

    Remit 11: Gender quota for the House of Representatives
    THAT Labour in government move to introduce a quota system on the number of women
    represented in the New Zealand House of Representatives.

    How will that work? Will each party have to have two lists of List Members and if an imbalance occurs, say New Zealand First win eight Electorate seats, but six of those elected representatives are male, will two have to be replaced by women from the Female Party List, and who will decide which two?
    And will male Members who act like women, count as such, or for example would Helen have counted as a man.
    Labour should quit while sort of ahead – Oops – I forgot, they don’t really have one. They keep changing it.
    No wonder there are remits like this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Longknives (4,467 comments) says:

    Well it looks like Labour have agreed to give Wussel Norman the portfolio he craves- Are Labour/Green (They are clearly now the same party) trying to deliberately collapse the economy? Anyone with an IQ over 65 can see that such policy would turn New Zealand into the Southern Hemisphere Greece within months…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Reverse employment law changes and destroy NZ as a location for international film making

    Now DPF, some of your comments placed alongside what is presumably an actual remit, and in some instances above it’s difficult to work out what the remit would actually be, as it is so intertwined with your commentary, could be construed as being deliberately misleading, as in the case of the example I have quoted.

    It is well known that the Hobbit movie was in no danger of relocation. The law change was a power play by Jackson as revenge for a lost employment case, and it happened to suit the ideology of the government of the time. QED. And this remit does highlight the inconsistency of the ‘government can’t pick winners’ or ‘government can’t create jobs’ lines so beloved of the economically illiterate.

    I prefer your style of a direct quote then your comment placed below.

    Then I can skip that line!

    It’s actually good to see that Labour does still have a grassroots alive and kicking, if somewhat weakly,but the top brass will quickly move to shut most of these down quick smart! Just as it always has.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Longknives (4,467 comments) says:

    “Compulsory Te Reo Maori until age 15″

    To be fair this abomination will inevitably happen under National as well (they seem to pander to Maori activists more than any Labour Government ever did)…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Grizz (500 comments) says:

    The Mining and mineral export tax is all academic anyway as they want to straight up ban mining altogether.

    If you make unionism compulsory for all workers all that happens is that unions become currupt and wasteful. By being voluntary they have to sharpen their game and make themselves attractive to workers. In fact I would like to see unions competing with one another for workers, but I guess competition is a foreign concept to Unions, just like in the old Soviet Union.

    However, the rail link to Auckland Airport has merits. I would run a line from South Auckland along the corridor of the Southern Airport link (SH 20B). However, as it would benefit the airport itself, Auckland Airport should pay for part of its construction. The construction and running of the line should be a private-public partnership. There may be potential for freight use which should help spread the cost. However my ideas may be too radical for this mob.

    A petrol tax to fund rail: What is wrong with rail users funding rail. This is like admitting defeat. Besides people advocating this do not want to use rail themselves but want other people to use it so they can continue to drive their cars.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. UrbanNeocolonialist (184 comments) says:

    I have some sympathy for the lower pension age for Maori – on average they have a much lower life expectancy.

    But the fairest approach would be an individually determined retirement age for each person based on the amount of tax paid during their life and an actuarially determined life expectancy and estimated cost of supporting you until death. The insurance industry already has the tools for figuring this out. You could also retire later with greater payments or earlier with reduced payments.

    Women live longer and tend to need a lot more expensive rest home care (almost double male average) so should generally not be able to retire till well after men.

    Polynesians tend to die 10 years younger than Europeans so could generally be able to retire earlier.

    Get earlier retirement if you paid lots of tax, later if you paid less.

    If you have a heart condition, diabetes, hepatitis, cancer or other serious health issue (including family history) then you could retire earlier.

    If you were on benefits all your life then no pension (stay on dole/sickness benefit if you can’t find work).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. David Garrett (6,461 comments) says:

    Yvette: Excellent comment. That this utterly stupid remit could even be proposed shows just how thick Labour “activists” must be these days.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Key is our man (789 comments) says:

    Folks – Don’t shoot me. I am sure every single remit here will be implemented when Labour-Green-NZ First-Mana will be in power in 2014 unless Winston realises this toxic coalition will ruin New Zealand and joins hand with National (highly unlikely). So get used to this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Elaycee (4,305 comments) says:

    A petrol tax to fund rail

    They mean ‘more tax to fund rail’ rather than ‘a petrol tax to fund rail’….

    I read a Report some years back pointing out that Tranzrail was paying a Road User Charge element on diesel fuel that was being used in their locos. It didn’t make sense at the time – why should a locomotive pay RUCs when the cost of maintaining the tracks etc was being borne (at the time) by the publicly listed business owner (Tranzrail) rather than the Government? The Report noted that Tranzrail was (at the time) the largest user of fuel in the country and there was a recommendation that the Government review the RUC with a view to removing it.

    All hell broke loose – the main noise came from the Road Transport Forum who complained that removal of the RUC would give Tranzrail a cost advantage over trucking companies etc… I was told that the Minister at the time (Pete Hodgson) put the report into the ‘too hard’ basket and nothing happened.

    So now we have moved full circle – and some moron now brainfarts the imposition of a tax on road, to fund rail.

    It’s staggering…… :(

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Yvette (2,692 comments) says:

    It is starting get rather dimmer outside – God has just read the proposed Labour remits

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    ” So get used to this.”

    Yep, the sad truth is that the fastest way out of this mess is to give them what they want. As in the US with Obama, the best remedy to socialism is to give the losers what they vote for, and when they’re jobless and starving, only then will they awaken to how their masters and leaders have lied to them and led them to disaster.

    Right now the propaganda forces of the left are far too strong for the weak kneed so called right to counter. The left have been allowed to get control of education and the media and entertainment, and therefore it is practically impossible to stop them.

    I repeat, the fastest way out of this mess is to give the commies the economic and social train wreck they so badly want.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Stupid people on here prepared to negotiate with these clowns- no wonder they just slowly but surely keep on winning.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Elaycee (4,305 comments) says:

    Grizz 10.15am:

    However, the rail link to Auckland Airport has merits.
    ….it would benefit the airport itself,

    Actually, it wouldn’t benefit the airport one little bit. It may benefit the passengers but not the Airport Company who operates within the airport environs.

    Because if there was an expectation that Auckland Airport should pay for a rail link, the costs would have to be passed on to the airlines / airport tenants including Air NZ / Qantas / Emirates / DHL / FedEx etc… and, as their own costs had increased, they’d have to recover margin from their own customers….

    Nah – the idea wouldn’t (ahem) fly…. any airport link would have to be part of Len’s trainset plans…. that he wants funded by the NZ taxpayer!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    There are a handful of these I agree with, especially the stopping of public funding to private schools.

    Education is of social benefit. Whether someone is educated publicly or privately, some of the benefit of that education is enjoyed by society. It seems to me to be only fair that that gets recognised in the funding model.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    However, the rail link to Auckland Airport has merits.

    But of course the taxpayer/ratepayer should be subsidising the holidaymaker going on holiday and the business people going about business…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Mark (1,367 comments) says:

    One suspects that the National Party also has its fair share of stupid remits put up to the National convention. It does not make them policy of even close so cast judgement when it starts to look like being policy as I suspect most will not see a great deal of air time.

    There is not one policy amongst those that makes any sense by the way. Probably why I don’t vote labour

    On the really weird side how can sole director private companies meet the Gender balance requirement. Emasculation perhaps.

    To most thinking people the most important issue for company directorships is competency. Gender should always be irrelevant to the issue.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. eszett (2,337 comments) says:

    Be afraid, be very afraid?
    What are you afraid of, David?

    Of Labour finally debating actual policy ideas instead of quarreling over who’s supposed to be leader?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    It may benefit the passengers but not the Airport Company who operates within the airport environs.

    Those things arent mutually exclusive. In fact, the first directly impacts on the second.

    The airport rail link was one of the worst transport oversights in a city transport structure that is wholly constructed from transport fuck ups.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    Of Labour finally debating actual policy ideas instead of quarreling over who’s supposed to be leader?

    The fear comes from the fact that these policies are still being discussed on 2012.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    But of course the taxpayer/ratepayer should be subsidising the holidaymaker going on holiday and the business people going about business…

    You mean like they do with roads?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    As a shareholder, would your confidence in your companies prospects increase or decrease if you knew that half the Board wouldnt be there if there was no gender quota?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Kimble,

    No, road users pay for their holiday highways through fuel taxes. As do the commercial users. Bus and rail are just plain subsidies from people who don’t use the services

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. ChardonnayGuy (1,136 comments) says:

    If I were the centre-right, I’d be more worried about its own lack of feasible long-term coalition partners, given that Ohariu-Belmont and Epsom are both marginal electorates, Banks is walking wounded and should be replaced with Isaacs (one hopes) as ACT MP for the latter, and the Maori Party’s hold on its three electorate seats is by no means secure. Sharples and Turia will have to retire eventually. As for the Conservatives, remember 1996? Welcome back, ‘toxic trio.’ At least Labour and the Greens have something like a functional coalition in waiting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. In Vino Veritas (136 comments) says:

    I think the most hideous one is writing the Treaty of Waitangi into the constitution. A document that has no legal standing being incorporated into the constitution? Labour have got to be kidding! Giving Maori rights and privileges not accessible to non-maori? I wonder which great thinkers in the party came up with this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. rouppe (916 comments) says:

    No capital gains tax?

    Interesting….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    “Rightandleft – you need to get your calculator out.”

    Pointless- commies can never do maths and are always incapable of any logical thought such as is required by mathematics.

    If that wasn’t so there’d never be another commie.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. ChardonnayGuy (1,136 comments) says:

    IVV, I think you need to face the fact that New Zealand will have a written constitution eventually. And incorporating the Treaty into it does seem to be a good way of diverting Maori political aspirations into parliamentary and judiciary channels rather than past extremism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    I think some of you owe Redbaiter an appology.

    You also owe me one, for the remarks made when I have compared NZ’s left with other socialist regimes. It is not a simple case of bad thinking, they are bad people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    Yep, embedding racial preference into your Constitution is the obvious path to social harmony and a sure fire way to prevent extremism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. wreck1080 (3,734 comments) says:

    Plenty of reasons I dislike national too.

    Not rebalancing the economy via a CGT or land tax (and lowering income tax rates).

    Not raising the retirement age when all the experts are saying it must be done.

    Not reversing WFF and interest free student loans.

    And not reducing government spending

    More reasons highlighted here…
    Dabbling with monetary policy will not end exporters woes

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. flipper (3,583 comments) says:

    Yippeee..
    As I write this there have been 60 comments on the labour/red melon/Mana death wish list.

    There are comments by a few sane folks, but the same tired morons who believe that this sort of stuff can actually work in the 21st Century. One or two regular, sane, commenters, have been generous (I wanted to say silly, but that would be unkind) enough to say some aspects are worth considering (and then discarding, surely ?).

    When I look at the crap set out in David’s post I wonder why we pay taxes to educate morons. Worse, we also fund tetitiary education through interest free student loans.

    But if this sort of crap gathers any legs (and it will surely run down our legs, will it not? :) ) we will inevitably join the basket case that is Europe. With apologies for the profanities…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Willie_Escaped (29 comments) says:

    We need more gender quotas:

    50% male quota for primary school teachers. Children need both male and female role models.
    50% male quota for nurses. There is stigma attached to a man becoming a nurse.

    The list could go on.

    The sad thing here is that the honorable pursuit of women holding equal status under the law has been overwhelmed by those who instead want women to be the same as men. For what reason, I can’t fathom, but they do.

    Does any young woman reading this feel comfortable raising her hand and proudly stating that she’d like to marry young and perform the indispensable and astonishing task of raising a family? Like only a *mother* can. Whatever happened to holding high the virtue of motherhood? What is so damned wrong with being the mother of a household? Can men be mothers? Hell no! Where would men be without our mothers? Covered in shit if we’re lucky and dead from starvation and lack of love if we’re not.

    These days, the non-career women are almost as stigmatized as much as the courageous young women who fought for their rights to work, vote and obtain dignity under the law in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

    Why is it that society feels it necessary to either ban something or force it? Will we now switch from the horrendous practice of banning women from voting, to the virtuous practice of enforcing female quotas? Really?

    I say to a young woman:

    Want to become a CEO? Awesome! If that is what will truly make you happy, pursue your dream. There are no barriers in New Zealand.
    Want to be a stay at home mother and raise a family? Awesome! If that is what will truly make you happy, pursue your dream. There are no barriers in New Zealand.

    If you consider statistical prevalence a barrier, and that in all or most things, there must be a 50/50 ratio between men and women, then you have *actually become one of those whom you claim to fight*.

    You have become someone who sees a “norm” that must be enforced for the good of society.

    Why is that any different from seeing the “norm” of women being stay at home mothers, and enforcing policies to ensure that happens?

    Why is that any different from seeing the “norm” of heterosexual marriage, and enforcing policies to ensure men can’t marry men?

    The foundations of your ideas are the same and the result is the same – the persecution of those who want to live their lives differently than what is the “norm”.

    Anybody who knows me knows how vehemently opposed to Helen Clark’s policies I was – certainly in her final term (her first terms were actually quite reasonable for a centrist Prime Minister).

    But these days I live overseas in various countries, and I’m always proudly ranting to any poor sod who will listen, that in New Zealand there are no barriers to those who are competent. Women can and do hold the top jobs. The Prime Minister, The Governor General and CEO of the largest companies – all have been and will continue to be women. And say what you will about Helen Clark’s policies, she’s an incredible woman and has an incredible career, and I think it’s great that New Zealand is a place where this can happen.

    New Zealand doesn’t need quota systems. What we need is to be more tolerant of people’s choices, whatever they may be. I for one, support any woman who does what they love, no matter if that is staying at home and raising children, or becoming a CEO.

    The people pursuing these policies, should really redirect their efforts towards activities that can actually help people and change lives. Turn your minds away from New Zealand where sex is no barrier, towards other helping those in appalling conditions in other countries. There’s still plenty of places where a woman being a rape *victim* is a crime, often punishable by *death*. Where there are no domestic violence laws, and where little girls have acid poured on their faces, simply for wanting an education. Helping in those places is where you can have much more positive effect on people’s lives.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Paulus (2,503 comments) says:

    Which Government sold off State Insurance to the Poms, who stripped it, and flog it off to the Aussies (IAG).
    So form a new one – yea – ignorant pigs –
    Who is going to capitalise this new Company when there is actually only one real insurance risk in New Zealand – Earthquake.
    Which overseas Reinsurers will give reinsurance cover to New Zealand – not realistically until the Christchurch payback has been achieved – that will take many years.
    If there is another one of size no earthquake will be insurable – you cannot get earthquake cover or very limited, say 15% in California and many parts of Japan.
    So how much will be required to capitalise this new Insurance company ? Many hundreds of millions to maintain an international credit rating which is required.
    After for eaxample AMI’s management debacle you would question where the quality of staff are going to be found to run such an organisation.
    And I do know what I am talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. the conservative (58 comments) says:

    No wonder people are running from this country in droves. The problem is, however, where can we run to? America has now gone, and Australia, our last bastion for sanity, is falling rapidly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. montikaza (2 comments) says:

    Where are the tax cuts for employees? Most of these vague policies have no direct relevance to me. How the hell is a Pacific broadcaster going to benefit me or my family? What about reducing my rates and power bills? To hell with Labour – no wonder they can’t rally any public support.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. lastmanstanding (1,210 comments) says:

    Communist Morons the lot of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Reid (15,970 comments) says:

    You have to ask yourself why would any parliamentarian approve such a stupid, naive, unworkable, impractical wishlist. It makes the whole party look almost worse than the Gweens and I wonder if that’s the whole idea. That instead of positioning itself to retake some of the National floaters, it’s trying to regain the ones who defected to the Gweens. What a waste of time, if that’s what they’re doing. Don’t they realise those ones will come back anyway, once they get a decent leader.

    It’s a shame people don’t listen to Goff and Cunliffe. The ideas of those two would position Liarbore far better than these ideas will. It’s an interesting strategy though, and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that if you wish to reach far-left floaters, you have to get completely nuts OTT about it, otherwise they’ll think you’re a right wing facist. I wonder why they didn’t include a remit on imprisoning people who exceeded a certain net worth threshold, they might as well have. I bet it was one of the brainstorming suggestions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. seanmaitland (455 comments) says:

    wreck1080 – how pray tell, does a CGT rebalance the economy?

    It won’t impact property investors, as they are by definition in it for the long term. I.e. it wouldn’t cause them to suddenly take their capital and start companies with it. They certainly wouldn’t buy shares (which wouldn’t really impact the economy anyway, unless they were IPOs) – as they would pay CGT on them also.

    The miniscule percentage of people who practice property speculation would get hit by it, but thats such a small part of the market it wouldn’t impact the economy in the slightest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    @Willie Escaped

    You select examples of successful women as proof that in Godzone there are no systemic barriers, but these are the exceptions that actually act to perpetuate discrimination.

    The most outstanding example is that of Obama, who is now held up as proof that the US is no longer a racist nation when, in fact, racism is embedded in its DNA. Obama’s election is also promoted as making affirmative irrelevant, thus fulfilling the angry white man’s wet dream of entrenching race-based disadvantage for yet more generations.

    And you forget the vilification these successful women (at least, the ones of the left) are subjected to, often in these very pages. so only the incredible strong-willed are willing to subject themselves to the process.

    Your final point, that we should our attention to the poor and disadvantaged in other countries begs the question of why not attend to both? In the case of addressing the ills of home, well that’s our home and we already mainly know what needs to be done and intervention at home is more immediately effective than trying to shove our precepts down the throats of others.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Fisiani (954 comments) says:

    Some may claim that the remits are ludicrous and that no party would seriously entertain them.
    However look at the constitution of the Labour Party and you will see how such remits fit the socialist goals.
    From Labour’s constitution:

    PRINCIPLES

    2. The New Zealand Labour Party accepts the following democratic socialist principles-
    All political authority comes from the people by democratic means including universal suffrage, regular and free elections with a secret ballot
    The natural resources of New Zealand belong to all the people and these resources, and in particular nonrenewable resources, should be managed for the benefit of all, including future generations.
    All people should have equal access to all social, economic, cultural, political and legal spheres, regardless of wealth or social position, and continuing participation in the democratic process.
    Co-operation, rather than competition, should be the main governing factor in economic relations, in order that a greater amount and a just distribution of wealth can be ensured.
    All people are entitled to dignity, self-respect and the opportunity to work.
    All people, either individually or in groups, may own wealth or property for their own use, but in any conflict of interest people are always more important than property and the state must ensure a just distribution of wealth.
    The Treaty of Waitangi is the founding document of New Zealand and that the Treaty should be honoured in government, society and the family.
    Peace and social justice should be promoted throughout the world by international co-operation and mutual respect.
    The same basic human rights, protected by the State, apply to all people, regardless or race, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, religious faith, political belief or disability.

    OBJECTIVES

    3. The objectives of the Labour Party are based on the above principles.
    These objectives are -
    To elect competent men and women to Parliament and local authorities through free elections for the purpose of giving effect to Party policy and principles.
    To build and sustain an economy which can attract and retain the intelligence, skills and efforts of all citizens.
    To ensure the just distribution of the production and services of the nation for the benefit of all the people.
    To promote and protect the freedoms and welfare of all New Zealand citizens.
    To educate the public in the principles and objectives of democratic socialism and economic and social cooperation

    Now tell me that that they are not Communists in drag.
    Be afraid. Be very afraid.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    If Luc Hansen, and his ilk, really considered women and blacks his equall, he would only ask they receive equall treatment, not special treatment, in order to prosper.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Reid (15,970 comments) says:

    Now tell me that that they are not Communists in drag.

    They always have been. “Red Helen” was the US’ nickname given her after she destroyed ANZUS.

    It wouldn’t be so bad if they didn’t pretend they only do it because they care.

    They care about themselves. Period. Just like the Politburo used to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. eszett (2,337 comments) says:

    Kimble (3,389) Says:
    November 14th, 2012 at 10:51 am

    Of Labour finally debating actual policy ideas instead of quarreling over who’s supposed to be leader?

    The fear comes from the fact that these policies are still being discussed on 2012.

    Really, Kimble? Maybe you should try and arrive in the 21st century then.
    Some of these policies (for better or worse) are actually already in place in other countries. 52 week parental leave, universal child benefit, quota for board members are not unheard of in other parts of the world.

    I don’t see why they shouldn’t be discussed by a Labour party in 2012.
    Why can’t you bear the mere thought of such things being debated? If they are so ludicrous, then you certainly have thing to fear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Raphael (73 comments) says:

    Ross12 Says: “They forgot to add in –support Aunty Helen’s push for a greater global economic role for the UN. (ie. we want control)”

    That would be Remit 3(second on DWP’s list)
    “Remit 3: International Financial Transactions Tax
    THAT Labour support in principle an international financial transactions tax, and institute such a tax following research into its optimal form.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Redbaiter (7,642 comments) says:

    Yes Reid, you are right, they always have been communists and they have always wanted the same objectives, and they have always agreed that the way those objectives can be reached is through “incrementalism”. (or Fabianism if you like)

    That’s what annoys me so much about the National Party. They are too cowardly even to call the Labour party socialists let alone communists, but they should, and they should talk loud and clear about the left’s communist objectives.

    Its one of the offshoots of the political correctness strategy in that it is almost regarded as verboetten to call the left communists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. wreck1080 (3,734 comments) says:

    @seanmaitland

    The Treasury, Reserve Bank, OECD and the IMF have all endorsed a Capital Gains Tax for New Zealand.

    There is a clear direction from the experts that a CGT will be a good thing for the economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Brian Smaller (3,999 comments) says:

    If Maori and PI’s die earlier on average than other ethnicities then perhaps they should live healthier lifestyles. Those proposals will see Asian New Zealanders getting the pension at about 95.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. scrubone (3,048 comments) says:

    And you forget the vilification these successful women (at least, the ones of the left)

    Odviously not someone who followed the 2008 US election very closely!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. RF (1,272 comments) says:

    And that my friends is why labour should never be allowed near the Treasury benches ever again !!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    The party that has put forward these policy remits is described, in NZ, as “centre left”. To consider this as near the “centre” shows how far left NZ has drifted. This stuff is as extreme as anything devised by communist regimes, which many lefties on KB deny having any similarity to.

    To support, some of, these ideas is to support the dismantling of our society. I consider that Treason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Fisiani (954 comments) says:

    To educate the public in the principles and objectives of democratic socialism and economic and social cooperation

    ie indoctrination at the grassroots classroom level. Pure Marxism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. swan (659 comments) says:

    On parental leave. Can everyone please note that we already have 52 weeks parental, it is just that it is unpaid. So the argument that 52 weeks paid leave will make it easier for woman to stay in the workforce actually makes no sense.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Reid (15,970 comments) says:

    It’d be quite funny if it wasn’t really happening and it was just a play or something. But it is really happening, isn’t it.

    Yet many floater idiots don’t or won’t see what is so transparently obvious and really do think they’re voting for the “compassionate” party. What is wrong with these people?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. nasska (10,689 comments) says:

    …”To educate the public in the principles and objectives of democratic socialism and economic and social cooperation

    ie indoctrination at the grassroots classroom level.”….

    Shouldn’t be hard to implement…..the teachers have the necessary brainwashing techniques under trial now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Dazzaman (1,123 comments) says:

    An inch short of declaring Mao’s birthday New Zealand National Day.

    LOL

    Halconero (2) Says:
    November 14th, 2012 at 9:19 am
    Sounds like a one way ticket to the poorhouse to me; coupled with social engineering.

    First part is right…the present National mob have got the 2nd one covered…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Sadu (129 comments) says:

    The one about raising the super age for everyone except Maori is a fucking gem. I soooooo hope they decide to go ahead and campaign on this one.

    Shearer can’t even explain what day of the week it is without stuttering and um-arring. How he could put a credible argument behind this a racially-split retirement age is beyond me.

    The fact that this item is even on the agenda proves what a pack of fucking nut-cases these people are. And that’s not even getting into the other items on the list, and there are some real gems on there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    I love my 16 year old son – give him a vote- do fuck off

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Tom Barker (103 comments) says:

    “The problem is, however, where can we run to? America has now gone, and Australia, our last bastion for sanity, is falling rapidly.”

    If you are lucky enough to locate a nation sufficiently vicious and inequitable to meet with your approval, I so sincerely hope that you and all others of a like mind choose to depart permanently for its benighted shores.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Kea (11,878 comments) says:

    Tom Barker, how about turning that around. You could move to the equitable socialist paradise of North Korea, and leave NZ for the rest of us.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. Tom Barker (103 comments) says:

    Why the hell would I want to do that? Given the list of remits above, this country’s future looks reasonably bright to me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. RRM (9,477 comments) says:

    Fuck’s sake.

    As long as the NZ Labour party continues to be steered by the desires of its lunatic base, I don’t think you National lot have anything to worry about! I can’t see the public voting for this shit in a big way. Common sense is still a long way to the right of where it sounds like these clowns are at…

    This leftie is seriously considering voting National next time around, FWIW. Labour are just an embarrassment at the moment… :roll:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    Pure Marxism.

    You’re kidding. Even Marx would look at that list of remits and claim it was too much State intervention!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. workingman (84 comments) says:

    @luc hansen 9:54am

    Tell the to the German workers – union members one and all,

    I call bullshit on that one, where do you get that idea?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Griff (6,826 comments) says:

    RRM (5,742) Says:
    November 14th, 2012 at 1:45 pm
    Fuck’s sake.

    This leftie is seriously considering voting National next time around, FWIW. Labour are just an embarrassment at the moment…

    Now if we can just convince MM …..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Chuck Bird (4,685 comments) says:

    I hope the Labour Party adopts everyone of those remits.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. JeffW (320 comments) says:

    Is Labour sponsored by the Australian construction industry? Another million Kiwis in Aus will require a lot more houses to be built.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. speters (108 comments) says:

    Yep, some of these are just ridiculous – and most of those that aren’t ridiculous are just not priorities.

    I’m with RRM – as a leftie I have to shake my head at some of this rubbish

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Insert the Treaty of Waitangi into the Constitution Act

    … but then John Key would support this one in a heartbeat if he thought it would provide him with a few votes

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. labrator (1,750 comments) says:

    I barely think you’re a leftie anyway RRM, far too rational.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. RRM (9,477 comments) says:

    On the Auckland airport rail link…

    Why don’t they make an aerial rail route available along existing road/mway corridors, and invite private proposals for a 50 year design/build/operate contract?

    A train to the Auckland airport would be brilliant, but they need to get out of this hopeless “lets just do it ourselves and charge the taxpayer” mindset.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. Monique Watson (1,062 comments) says:

    @wreck1080. Of course all those agencies have endorsed a CGT. They’re all government agencies and will instinctively plump for the socialist solution. It doesn’t mean they’re experts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. DJP6-25 (1,273 comments) says:

    Let’s all give two ticks to Labour in 2014. We’d be over the fiscal cliff by 2016. Then we’d be able to start again. Let’s get it over with! It beats spending another three years complaining.

    cheers

    David Prosser

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. Rufus (621 comments) says:

    Kea 11:57 – good comment. Nail on the head with that one. The silence from Luc is telling.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    Some of these policies (for better or worse) are actually already in place in other countries.

    And have been since last century. Whats your point?

    The fear is, these are their NEW ideas. This is their idea of progress.

    Look at the list. So many of those policies will have the opposite effect of what they intend! They will hurt the ones they are intended to help! Taxes, quotas, preferential treatment, NATIONALISATION! Same stupid crap we’ve seen for decades.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. mikenmild (10,766 comments) says:

    A nice piece of mischief fomenting from DPF. Perhaps a kind soul here will compare and contrast these with the remits from the last National Party conference.

    [DPF: Nothing radical. They voted to support allowing couples in a civil union able to adopt]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. Scott (1,710 comments) says:

    Remember Labour has its work cut out getting to the left of the National government. Their economic management is not much chop. Just look at the latest unemployment figures, the worst since 1999. What free market reforms has this government made to improve the economy? And on the social policy front they are all for the progressive agenda, Gay marriage, Gay adoption and euthanasia. They couldn’t even bring themselves to do anything about alcohol reform.
    A hopeless bunch warming the treasury benches for Labour’s return to power and the next burst of progressive social engineering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. thor42 (922 comments) says:

    @Redbaiter – “I repeat, the fastest way out of this mess is to give the commies the economic and social train wreck they so badly want.”
    Yeah…. I know what you mean……. :(

    You have to treat the left-wing voters like children. First, you tell them that voting for Uncle Shearer will completely f**k the country. They ignore you and do it anyway. The country becomes f**ked, just as you predicted, and the lefties whine and moan “woe is me! Why didn’t someone SAY something….?”

    They’re like kids putting a knife into a power-socket – they just HAVE to learn by stuffing up. Nothing else seems to work.

    ( The sad thing is that their ignorance stuffs things up for everyone else too. )

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Left Right and Centre (2,823 comments) says:

    hehe… I don’t know about the rest of you fuckers, but you can take my bloody plastic bag out of my cold dead hands.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. workingman (84 comments) says:

    With regard to German Unions, only approx. 19% of the work force is in unions.

    http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2006/01/art3full.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Harriet (4,528 comments) says:

    Under Labour being male is a crime in NZ, unless of course, a female is playing the role!

    ‘Gender this and gender that’ has overtaken equality issues and is now marching as socialism in slacks!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Kimble (4,383 comments) says:

    With regard to German Unions, only approx. 19% of the work force is in unions.

    But its the most efficient, productive part, right?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. Azeraph (603 comments) says:

    Give a 16 year old the vote?

    Then whoever is in vogue as the most popular on FB gets in parliament, Are they trying to win my people back? I haven’t seen the word Commie’s used for a long time, the reality is that whatever political persuasion you believe in will eventually be subsumed into the coming system. Interesting, giving the 16 year olds the vote. They are the next generation and these new gens will look back at our current system and think “How the hell did it survive that long”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. BigFish (132 comments) says:

    If they kept it simple and just offered more personal liberty, tax credits for research and development and a high income earners’ tax rate (say $200k+), they’d probably swing it.
    To be fair, the wishlists from the other side of the house are equally eye opening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. pq (728 comments) says:

    Farrar you are scaremongering, I am tempted to give you 10 demerit points. This would mean you have to go on another holiday immediately.
    It is true as you imply that these remits show how insane the Green Labour grouping has become. I agree we must watch carefully, but most of these remits are drivel socialist .
    When it comes to the crunch people must be prepared to get out there and do things as election gets closer.
    The thing is the changing electorate where you have many people who vote from socialist slogans, we saw this in America, where the people who voted for the 20 trillion dollar debt have no idea what is going on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. workingman (84 comments) says:

    @Kimble 12:02am

    Germany of course does have large international companies, e.g. Volkswagen, Siements, BMW, Mercedes etc and I would presume these are unionised. The majority of German firms, as in most countries, are small. Known as ‘Mittelstand’ and these are the bedrock of the German economy, employing about 70% of the workforce. These companies are not unionised to a great extent, only about 10% of them.

    There is a big difference in Germany between works councils, which by law must work with the employer on a ‘basis of mutual trust’ and unions that represent only the employees.

    An interesting point is that the old East Germany has less union and work council representation than the West.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. pq (728 comments) says:

    Most absurd remit, but not necessarily the most hideous is the rail link from Auckland Airport.
    I am in Bangkok 5 million people and it didn’t work here. Trains drop you off at train stations at 2am, you always need a taxi, or a friend .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. pq (728 comments) says:

    I am quite interested in destroying the Capital Gains Tax, and the ludicrous Gareth Morgan Capital tax idea .
    Can anyone tell me if CGT is high on the agenda for the socialists.

    http://capitalgainstaxnz.blogspot.com

    http://garethmorgantax.blogspot.com

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. graham (2,216 comments) says:

    mikenmild said at 6:50 pm:

    Perhaps a kind soul here will compare and contrast these with the remits from the last National Party conference.

    To which DPF responded:

    [DPF: Nothing radical. They voted to support allowing couples in a civil union able to adopt]

    WTF? Allowing couples in a civil union to adopt is not radical? I am assuming that, by implication, this includes gay couples. Whether you agree or disagree with gay couples being allowed to adopt, I think most people would agree that such a proposal would be seen as somewhat “radical” in little sleepy old New Zealand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Griff (6,826 comments) says:

    I think most people would agree that such a proposal would be seen as somewhat “radical”

    We don’t graham we agree with people being able to adopt their partners children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    I think most people would agree that such a proposal would be seen as somewhat “radical” in little sleepy old New Zealand.

    graham,

    Only as much as being able to shop on a Saturday.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. graham (2,216 comments) says:

    As I said Griff, whether you agree or disagree with the actual proposal, I still think most New Zealanders would consider gay couples being able to adopt to be “radical”. As in, such a proposal is fundamentally different to the current status quo in NZ society.

    bhudson: When it was introduced, yes Saturday shopping was radical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. bhudson (4,734 comments) says:

    When it was introduced, yes Saturday shopping was radical.

    Exactly my point graham – civil union [incl. gay] adoption as radical is from a bygone era

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. graham (2,216 comments) says:

    I think you may be missing the point. mikenmild made the comment that if DPF considers we should be afraid of these proposals, what proposals did the National Party have in store for us? DPF replied that they voted to support allowing couples in a civil union able to adopt, and that is not radical.

    As I said, I would consider that this is radical, in that such a proposal is fundamentally different to the current status quo in NZ society. Now whether you agree or disagree with it doesn’t alter the fact that it is radically different to what we currently have. That’s all I’m trying to say. Not whether it’s a good idea or a bad idea – that debate has been done to death in other posts.

    Hell, some of Labour’s proposals that DPF is mocking aren’t exactly radical. Lower the voting age to 16? We can debate the issues around it, but it ain’t that radical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. ChardonnayGuy (1,136 comments) says:

    Graham, how radical is gay adoption when the United Kingdom has had it for over a decade? Not to mention most of Canada.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Wazzy Righteye (1 comment) says:

    If you read Tammy Bruces books you will see similarities between a lot of this stuff and what the hard lefties are promoting in the USA, and even in the UN.
    This is their tactic – post extreme policy agendas and then “compromise” to an agreed postion; and then start the process again from the new agreed position to keep pushing left.

    These lefties promoting this crap are hung up on ideological fantacies that basically take away responsibility of individuals and transferring it to the state – Marx, Lenin & Stalin will be pleased with their comrades in the Labour & Green parties.

    Hard right capitilism and hard left communism have the end result – countries go broke, the very wealthy are protected, and the masses suffer big time. It’s just in communist distatorships where the media is censored and controlled, the rest of world doesn’t see the extent of the suffering.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.