John and Fran on John

June 29th, 2013 at 3:10 pm by David Farrar

writes in the NZ Herald:

National’s decision – very much ’s decision – to bite the bullet and set a 2020 start for building the $2.9 billion Auckland City Rail Link is a political masterstroke.

Once again. Key has trumped National’s opponents and neutralised the political advantage they had held by jumping across the political divide and setting up camp in their territory.

He first did it with nuclear ship visits when he became National’s leader in 2006. He simply used his honeymoon in the job to declare the anti-nuclear law would remain intact under his leadership. And that was that. It may not have greatly impressed the Americans. But in an instant, a political millstone had been removed from National’s neck.

On numerous occasions since, Key has likewise swallowed hard and taken positions which do not sit that comfortably with National ideology but which spike the guns of the party’s enemies and leave them with nowhere to go.

Regardless of the merits of the City Rail Link (and I actually think it does have merits), one can look at this in a very calculating way.

The Government has said it will fund it by 2020. It is unlikely this Government will actually be in power in 2020, so the actual funding for it will be an issue for the future. The announcement though gives certainity.

If they had not announced future funding for it, well what is the probability that there will not be a change of Government before 2020? Very very low. Even Labour can’t get stuffing up for that long. And if a change of Government means it would then be getting built anyway, well what is the point in holding out?

But there are other advantages. By agreeing to it now, it removes the ability of Labour and Greens to sabotage the Puhoi to Wellsford motorway extension which they were promising to scrap to fund the CRL. Are they now going to keep campaigning on scraping what they call the holiday highway? I doubt it.

So yes, a masterstroke – and one that doesn’t really impact the books long-term as it was inevitable it would be built anyway when there was a change of Government. Instead, it now happens on a more affordable time-frame.

With yesterday’s confirmation of a tunnel as the second harbour crossing plus sundry motorway extensions and developments, Key has mapped out National’s vision for Auckland transport and, perhaps more importantly, laid out the stages by which that vision will be achieved.

In one swoop, he has taken the steam out of what, after housing affordability, is the thorniest issue in the country’s biggest city – traffic congestion – and one on which, according to opinion polls, National’s management has less than impressed the public.

In particular, Key has now marginalised Labour and the Greens in the one aspect of public policy where those parties thought they safely had it all over National – public transport.

Armstrong also points out:

Apart from shoring up National’s support in Auckland, the go-ahead is intended to remind the rest of New Zealand that National – unlike its opponents – looks at the big picture and gets things done whereas they are consumed by the relatively trivial, such as the fate of Peter Dunne and his parliamentary allowances.

And their obsession with the GCSB. Don’t get me wrong – the GCSB is of importance, but it seems the opposition have talked about nothing else for the last few weeks or months. The average family really does not care that much about the GCSB. They care about having a job, a growing economy, better schools and better healthcare.

Fran O’Sullivan also writes:

John Key’s lip-smacking munificence has been writ large as he moves into agenda-setting mode in Auckland and Christchurch, the two cities that will decide next year’s election.

Key’s spreading plenty of pixie dust about, promising multi-billion-dollar transport projects in Auckland – including the City Rail Link which his transport ministers have seriously dissed – and big-ticket projects in earthquake-savaged Christchurch, like a new convention centre.

I joked on Twitter that John Key has spent more in one week than Rob Muldoon spent in nine years on Think Big!

But the comparison, even joking, is unfair. The transport projects are not (generally) being funded by taxpayers. They tend to get funded out of the national land transport fund which is basically user pays funding through petrol tax and road user charges.

Labour’s Auckland issues spokesman, Phil Twyford, was yesterday reduced to carping about the cost of the city’s transport projects and complaining that the timing for some of the construction was still vague.

Which they are, but they allow the planning to begin such as route protection for the harbour crossing.

But he later confined himself to telling journalists it could come from various sources, including (take that, Labour!) the Future Investment Fund, into which his Government is tucking the proceeds of its partial privatisation programme; the Land Transport Fund, which holds the proceeds of petrol excise tax and road-user charges; taxpayers through the Consolidated Fund and even the private sector through some nifty public/private sector partnerships (PPPs).

I think using the proceeds of asset sales to help fund the CRL would be wonderful! Labour then has to argue that shares in a power company are more valuable than the CRL!

And Christchurch mayoral challenger and Labour MP Lianne Dalziel was reduced to complaining from the sidelines as Key and Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee cosied up publicly with Parker to announce agreement had been reached on $4.8 billion of investment in Christchurch – $2.9 billion of it coming from the Crown and $1.9 billion committed by the Christchurch City Council – so that projects like the new stadium and a convention centre can proceed.

Key couldn’t resist having a flick at Labour during yesterday’s stand-up, telling reporters he could understand why the public wasn’t warming to Labour because it was “too negative”.

Labour need to learn that endless negativity is not appealing.

The big question is how much further the PM will drive the knife in; particularly as speculation has now been sewn that Labour leader David Shearer has been given two months to turn his party’s dismal poll showing around or face questions over his leadership.

The parallels with Australian Labor leader Julia Gillard are obvious. Their respective publics warmed to neither of them.

The posturing was obvious at the US Embassy’s Independence Day festivities (celebrated early) in Wellington on Wednesday night.

Shearer and two potential leadership pretenders – Grant Robertson and David Cunliffe – maintained a studious distance from each other.

Tick tock, tick tock …

Tags: , ,

49 Responses to “John and Fran on John”

  1. jaba (2,120 comments) says:

    this whole transport announcement has been a hoot. Labour and the dopey Greens are fighting over whose policy this is BUT also slagging the Govt off over issues that they themselves would not have thought out yet .. this is a start which is why it has a delayed start BUT as our Rach once said “it won’t happen overnight, but it will happen”.
    Key has fkd both Labour and the Gweens once again

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Regardless of the merits of the City Rail Link (and I actually think it does have merits),

    Explain these merits please DPF

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. bchapman (649 comments) says:

    Is that O’Sullivan article the most cynical article she has ever written? The money’s not there, but its still good pork barrel politics.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    bchapman – to an extent, but Governments have to be able to plan long term like this without having worked out all the funding – they can’t this far out. Otherwise we just lurch along on a three year cycle.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    they are consumed by the relatively trivial

    That’s unfair.

    Labour’s master strategist has probably already worked out a schedule of points of order for next week, and made appointments with journalists to leak to undermine Cunliffe or Shearer or whoever his current target is.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    Key the capitulator. Standing proof that the Nats today are nothing more than socialist appeasers who stand for nothing.

    We are governed by a revolving door socialist coalition and all we get to vote on is the leadership.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 24 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Len brown will be having his meals fed to him through a straw before a inner rail loop gets started. The PM has been brilliant, like promising the kids an ice cream to shut them up so you can drive another 100 miles with it being mentioned.

    Auckland does need another harbour crossing but it needs to be future proofed i.e make it a 6 lane tunnel minimum so this isn’t getting addressed in 40 years. Throw in a couple of rail lines as well.

    There is no merit at all in an inner city rail loop. The first thing is Britomart is a major fuck up there are only two lines to get in and out so traffic volume has to stay low as there is no where for increased services to go. No future proofing, the same problem that the Auckalnd motor way system has suffered from for years

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    The Government has said it will fund it by 2020. It is unlikely this Government will actually be in power in 2020, so the actual funding for it will be an issue for the future. The announcement though gives certainity.

    If also somewhat forces the Oppsitions’ hands on Mixed Ownership Model – use the Future Investment Fund to buy back the shares and there is no money left for the rail loop.

    Other than massive borrowing of course (for both the share buy back and rail) – but that could prevent Labour and Greens getting the treasury benches in the first place.

    Very, very clever. What’s it to be Russel and Davids? Scale back rhetoric on asset sales and bank the rail loop, or try to fool the public you can do both (asset buy back and rail loop) without massive borrowing?

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. BlairM (2,314 comments) says:

    They should contract out to the State of Texas for the second harbour crossing. I reckon it will cost around 1/4 of some of these ridiculous estimates. They can build about ten highways here for that sort of money.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Keeping Stock (10,270 comments) says:

    Pauleastbay said

    Explain these merits please DPF

    Here’s one; the Greens’ Auckland HQ by the New North Road/Dominion Road off-ramp is going to have to be demolished to accommodate the rail corridor; the irony of that is just precious :D

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    KS

    Well lets have a whip around and kick this thing off then

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (872 comments) says:

    Folks – After Shearer wins the 2014 election he will be in power from 2014 -2023. So the rail loop will be started and half completed during his regime. That is bad news for you guys.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. RF (1,371 comments) says:

    Sir Cullen’s Sidekick.. 4.31pm. What the hell are you smoking ??? The way you are burbling on its not good shit and causing brain damage.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Keeping Stock (10,270 comments) says:

    @ Sidekick – Shearer has to survive the next 65 days first, and that’s by no means a given, especially if Labour gets run close in Ikaroa-Rawhiti today, or even more unthinkable, Labour loses.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Sponge (157 comments) says:

    KS @ 4:36 – Imagine the bloodbath if Labour do loose this afternoon. It would be hilarious.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. swan (659 comments) says:

    Of course the CRL (and the other projects) have merits, the question is do they exceed the costs. For the CRL the last government report showed a BCR of less than 0.5. Same for the AWHC. Neither project would be able to be funded by its users – the price/demand combination would never be sufficient to fund the projects at any price. As for the third major project, east-west link – there isn’t anything much we can say about it as it isn’t even a project. There are various options but they aren’t even in the same general area, nor do they have the same goals in terms of problem solving. And nothing has been priced.

    So we have two projects we know are uneconomic and a third non-project which isn’t much more than -“lets do some stuff in this general area of Auckland”. Thats the core of the governments announcement. WTF?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    “On numerous occasions since, Key has likewise swallowed hard and taken positions which do not sit that comfortably with National ideology but which spike the guns of the party’s enemies and leave them with nowhere to go.”

    This is just politically naive idiocy. The left have won, they do not need to go anywhere. getting a train set, and forcing people to use that train IS WHAT THEY WANTED.

    Not for any other reason other than that it allows them control. Takes a little more of our freedom and individualism. And the subsidiary reason that it helps cripple our economics a little more and helps them towards their ultimate objective- the complete destruction of capitalism.

    Margaret Thatcher never found it necessary to capitulate like Key. Neither did Ronald Reagan. They took the fight to the left and beat them with the power of their conviction and their rhetoric and their belief in the free enterprise capitalist system.

    Key has no courage, he has no rhetoric, he has no belief, so he’s hamstrung. He can’t fight for what is right when he doesn’t believe in it or even know what it is.

    Those of you who applaud Key for taking the wind from the left’s sails are not seeing the big picture. Thinking too short term. The way to defeat the left is to face them down, and destroy them for ever. As Reagan and Thatcher did. All Key has done with this move is given the left a huge beachhead in their mission to control us.

    Key and the Nationals are too ideologically bereft and too politically stunted to appreciate this fact. They are politically ignorant compromisers and cowards, short and simple, and this country will rue the day they applauded this pathetic bunch of spineless yellow backs.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    @RF,

    Sir Cullen’s Sidekick is a parody. I’m not sure who it is a parody of, but would certainly make a good #heyclint

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Winston (43 comments) says:

    Well, Mr Farrar, you, as a Wellingtonian, may well think that Len’s pet project has some merit. But as an Auckland resident, all I can see is that it will do bollock all for me, bollock all for traffic congestion in Auckland, and will increase my already hefty rates bill massively.

    With regard to the rail nonsense, negativity is very much appealing to those expected to fork over a large chunk of money to people who charge you enormous rates and then expect you to mow their berm on their behalf.

    Pretty much nobody will use the rail loop, because it will be too hard to get to a station, given the shitty bus system in Auckland.

    The rail loop is a white elephant from the start. The only reason Len Brown got elected in the first place was because the alternative was John Banks.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    @bh

    Isn’t Redbaiter a parody too? Parody versus parody. They both stick to their roles very well.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. bhudson (4,736 comments) says:

    @PG,

    The difference is that Red is a parody of himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    Remember how National so enthusiastically supported the RMA?

    We know now what a destructive act this was to the economic well being of our country.

    We know now what power it gave the government over the citizens.

    We know what cowards the National Party (Nick Smith especially) were to endorse this extreme left policy. A policy that flew in the face of the National Party’s founding principles

    This spineless capitulation on light rail will one day be recognised by the idiots applauding it here today as another RMA, a foolish and short sighted initiative that we will pay for for decades, and that will deliver so much control to the socialists.

    The National Party is lost. It does not exist any more. It has morphed into 1960’s Labour while the Greens and Labour have moved even further left.

    There is nothing to lose by withdrawing your vote from National. So do it. There is no better time than the present. Throw these left wing turkey’s out on their arses until they have an epiphany and return to the principles that the party was founded upon.

    “To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. marcw (243 comments) says:

    I actually think it is a positive for the mayoral election battle in Christchurch that National have taken the initiative and announced their plans – this will take the politicing away from pork barrel contests to see who can promise the most. Hopefully then we can have a contest on who will be the best LEADER for the city into the future. Lianne Dalziel has plenty of ammunition to show why the incumbent has let personality politics influence good governence.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. emmess (1,422 comments) says:

    I have always been in two minds about the CRL.
    I think it would be great as an occasional train user but not commuter and it is somewhat inevitable anyway.
    Obviously, the high cost is a down side.
    But something that I have not seen anyone else pick up on is that if the new harbour tunnel is to have rail included or at least future proofed for it. Then a large chunk of the cost would have to be spent anyway to connect the harbour tunnel railway to Britomart. I would very roughly guess that cost would be a third or so of the total cost of the CRL, i.e. the expensive part which includes a lot of a land purchases for demolition.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    The analysis you won’t get from NZs left cabal who cal themselves “journalists”.

    George Will in The Daily Beast.

    Forever seeking Archimedean levers for prying the world in directions they prefer, progressives say they embrace high-speed rail for many reasons—to improve the climate, increase competitiveness, enhance national security, reduce congestion, and rationalize land use. The length of the list of reasons, and the flimsiness of each, points to this conclusion: the real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.

    To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.

    Time was, the progressive cry was “Workers of the world unite!” or “Power to the people!” Now it is less resonant: “All aboard!”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. db.. (80 comments) says:

    Redbaiter – repeating the same blurb, time after time and getting the same result.

    That’s pretty stupid, “by definition”..

    db.. waiting..

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. duggledog (1,505 comments) says:

    BlairM @ 4.05:

    ‘They should contract out to the State of Texas for the second harbour crossing. I reckon it will cost around 1/4 of some of these ridiculous estimates. They can build about ten highways here for that sort of money’

    Blair correct me if I’m wrong – I think that sometimes our roading infrastructure costs so much is because NZ is like a bit of crumbly feta cheese compared to America’s continental bedrock? And hence our projects require god knows how much catering for that and ongoing repairs.

    Not just taniwhas and RMA etc

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Komata (1,162 comments) says:

    Ignoring the politics for a moment, one aspect of theproposed inner city loop and harbour-crossing tunnels interests me from a professional viewpoint: the geology of the area.

    We all know that Auckland sits on a volcanic field, and that the field is dormant although still active. Therefore, logic says that under the city and harbour there is likely to be some sort of volcanic area, an area that will possibly be encountered during the tunnelling, depending upon how deep the tunnels are placed.

    Curiously, despite a wide amount of searching, I have found nothing which written about this aspect of the Auckland city transport plan. Perhaps it is being (wilfully?) ignored in the euphoria of having achieved the funding?

    Presumably someone, somewhere has in fact written something (a report perhaps) about the matter, but can anyone direct me as to where it might be found?

    Thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. slijmbal (1,227 comments) says:

    @Komata – a tunnel would be barely deeper than some wells.

    Volcanic stuff happens a lot deeper unless it’s actually busy being a volcano in which case sticking a tunnel there would make no difference as we would all be busy imitating Pompeii anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Blatant , predictable vote buying…yawn.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (872 comments) says:

    Well folks – John Key’s vote buying tactics have flopped miserably already. In the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election, John Key has been dealt a huge blow. Labour candidate has won that seat in a landslide and Shearer is being hailed as a hero at the Labour HQ. Take that John Key.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. wiseowl (861 comments) says:

    I’m afraid Red’s right.
    Key and his advisors think they are clever acting to check mate Labour at every turn.
    The latest appeasement play which sets policy years out, when Key is gone and the Nats are in disarray,is just gutless stupid,lacking intelligence,condescending and shows how bereft of ideas and leadership this governing party is.

    Discussion around cabinet table.

    “lets just oil every squeak from Loopy Len or Labour”
    “that’s a good idea, seeing we don’t understand our own party principles’
    “means we don’t have to think about anything eh”
    ‘tee he ,we will be in power for years’.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Komata

    the maximum depth of Lens folly is 45 meters, I don’t believe this depth will take us in to magma but seeing as its proposed by the Auckland Council nothing would surprise me.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. wiseowl (861 comments) says:

    The volcanoes are all owned by the iwi so any attempt to tunnel through or under will mean disturbing some sacred body so more costs involved.

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

    Wiseowl, National’s principals are in the house every time more evidence comes in of National doing much more then Labour did with less. i.e. Bill English paying off more debt then Labour with about half the GDP. Tony Ryall getting much better outcomes in Health then Annette King did, when Annette King doubled the budget for Health! The public service, long standing systemic computer systems issues aside, delivering the same or better services with thousands less paper shufflers. Some improvement in educational outcomes for brown people, no more prisons being build whilst still being tough on crime, and the first real effective change in housing and social welfare in about 25 years of people suffering in the dark in shit houses being handed a cheque for their vote by the left.

    I’d say National have more then enough principal to make political decisions now and then mate.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. exile (34 comments) says:

    @pauleastbay.

    You proclaim that Auckland doesn’t need a rail loop, and then go on to state that Britomart needs ‘future proofing’ by allowing through trains.

    No trains will run in a circular pattern around the Central Rail *Link*. The CRL *is* the future proofing. It is critical to enable allow high frequency through services at Britomart, and in turn, high frequency services on the entire network.

    The CRL is needed because nearly 25% of regional employment is in the CBD and surrounding suburbs. In numerical terms, 135,000 people are employed centrally in Auckland. 60,000 students attend University within the same area. In the West, South and East of Auckland, over half of the population live within a 10 minute bus ride or drive of an existing rail station. 50% of all jobs in the Greater Auckland are broadly along the rail corridor. There are no comparable road projects that come close to unlocking the same passenger volumes within greater Auckland.

    And far from a ‘brilliant’ strategy, this is triage from National. Their pronouncements on Auckland have gone down like a lead ballon with Auckland voters in the past few months. According to the recent Horizon poll, Auckland voters of any political affiliation have been universally disapproving of policy so far. Breaking ground on a 5 year project, 7 years from now is a pretty weak commitment.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    10Bn more than Labour did up to 2008

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Monique Angel (272 comments) says:

    I’m with Red and Wiseowl.
    It’s ridiculous how small the governments vision is. And any defense of Ryall and and English is laughable.

    They are both typical of the forty to fifty something generation. In private enterprise they cut costs but didn’t ensure future growth of the business. They didn’t tend to star in the corporate world, with the exception of Key so just like their Labour counterparts they scurried into politics.

    Hats off to English for cutting costs and reducing operating costs but where is the incentive for private enterprise to thrive?

    A good growth driven right wing government would have done the following:

    Taken a fucking chainsaw to Palmer’s RMA. This is the one pice of legislation that has done the most to increase inequality in NZ since the 80’s.

    Taken a fucking chainsaw to any rail anywhere in New Zealand. Okay, not fully, I’m in favour or medium rail to pull in the suburbanites to the central city city, much the same way that my own San Francisco BART (Bay Area Rail Transport pulls in 400,000 commuters to central SF. But if it’s in the wap wap’s it needs to be decommissioned.

    There needs to be a good freeway triangle from Wanganui/Palmerston North to Napier to Wellington

    Health system needs total reform. Compulsory insurance for elective and preventative health measures.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. wiseowl (861 comments) says:

    Shows how sad National is with supporters that don’t know the difference between a principal and principles.
    No wonder they don’t know what they are doing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    Yep, is there anyone with a brain left in this country? A bunch of no hopers who keep voting for National because they perceive the Nats as slightly better than the other bunch. Where do they think that is going to end up? Where do they think this will take the country?

    (Further to the comments of Upandcomer, should someone who doesn’t know the difference between principle and principal even be considered as qualified to vote? FFS what a mire we find ourselves in.)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Paulus (2,603 comments) says:

    Go to see Len now supporting the free Sky City Conference Centre – I wonder how he was bought off ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. UpandComer (528 comments) says:

    Wiseowl I do know the differences between principles and a principal actually, don’t be such a twat. What is certain, is that if National adopted yours or redbaiter’s particular version of what their ‘principles’ should be, Labour would never be out of Govt, because your principles are commendable but politically stupid and unworkable. You have no idea what you are on about, and it’s obvious.

    Monique, have a bit of a harder look at what national has been doing. Also your call for complete health reform is a bit silly to be frank. Health has had the shit reformed out of it for years, it’s already benefiting from those previous reforms to the point where it’s a non-issue portfolio.

    In NZ, you can’t just take a chainsaw to the RMA. You have to do things incrementally, or you get chucked out of office. Would be good if some more National supporters showed some more percipience, awareness and respect for the job that Tony Ryall and Bill English are doing and have done.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    Hey loser its hopeless ideologically bereft surrender monkeys like you who drive me crazy.

    You’re so ignorant of history it is pathetic.

    Look at Reagan and Thatcher- two of the most successful Conservative politicians in recent times, and they didn’t become that by surrendering to left wing ideology because they were scared they would be “thrown out of office”.

    You losers are too cowardly to even try anything.

    You losers are too dumb to utter the words that would convince voters to support you.

    You losers are too ignorant of your own party’s principles and you couldn’t understand them even if you knew what they were.

    You losers are too intimidated and frightened of and too good friends with a left wing media cabal that you should be confronting rather than cowering to.

    You only get “chucked out of office” if you can’t draw the voters with you.

    That is your damn job loser. You stand for you party’s principles and you convince voters they are the best choice.

    If you don’t think you can do that then fuck off and join some other party whose principles you can sell.

    Damn coward. Selling this country out to the left and constantly making excuses for your abject failure to fight.

    Just a fucking hopeless bunch of despicable losers.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. wiseowl (861 comments) says:

    Downandgoner,
    Red actually quoted the founding principles of the National Party and you are too thick to realise or if a party member ,have never been enlightened about their existence.
    Seems you call your own partys’ principles politically stupid.

    Duh

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Redbaiter (8,371 comments) says:

    Damn right.

    That loser read them, didn’t even realise where they came from and wrote them off as “politically stupid and unworkable”.

    He writes in a way that suggests he’s somebody who has something to do with policy in National.

    Which just goes to show you how fucked the party is. If this fucking loon is writing here saying the principles of his own party are “politically stupid and unworkable” then WHAT THE DAMN HELL IS HE DOING IN THE PARTY? (if he is)

    Its what I have been saying for sometime now- the National Party has been infiltrated and taken over by the centre/right wing of the Labour Party, and each election then only becomes a contest between Labour party factions as to who leads the country.

    If there was anybody with any balls leading National there would not be anybody like downandouter writing policy that is for sure. He would have been fired after his first policy suggestion. Fucking clusterfuck of far left surrender monkeys.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. UpandComer (528 comments) says:

    Learn to read Wiseowl. I make a clear distinction between the principles, which I support, and the way you and idiot boy redbaiter would put them into effect.

    I think you’ve got a little bit of dementia or something.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. UpandComer (528 comments) says:

    To be fair to you both, I possibly didn’t make that that distinction clear enough. My point is just that unfortunately we can’t get what we want as fast as we want it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    I suppose Winston could trump them all by saying “well let’s just not let the 1 million come and settle hear” or perhaps ” let’s charge new migrants a tax for the strain they put on infrastructure”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. hj (6,871 comments) says:

    Wah back in Houston Tx!! burble…. etc

    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.