Colin Craig says

November 24th, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Andrea Vance interviews Colin Craig. He is clearly after NZ First voters:

The other – less palatable – coalition option for Key is NZ First. And Craig, at 45, sees himself as a fresh-faced alternative to political warhorse Winston Peters, 68.

He claims to be eating solidly into Peters’ core constituency of the older, socially conservative voter.

Members have switched allegiance, particularly after NZ First’s annual conference in October, he says. “We are enjoying seeing Grey Power no longer invite Winston, but invite me instead . . . there is a sort of transition. We are slowly taking over that space.”

Craig says one of the reasons Peters is in decline is that “he’s lost the mojo”.

“He’s not the Winston he was . . . and I know he thinks he is going to be here till whenever, but there is a point at which you start to lose credibility . . . my impression is that he was, last time, the protest vote. Now we have offered that opportunity in a similar policy space.”

Senior citizens appear to like Craig’s morally conservative views combined with an anti-asset sales stance.

I’ve often said that NZ First and the Conservatives are in pretty similar space.

Andrea also reveals some policies that Craig has supported over the years:

  1. Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year
  2. Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars
  3. Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri
  4. Scrap the ETS
  5. Against fluoride being added to water
  6. Schools should teach children how to garden
  7. Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves
  8. Dump Working for Families
  9. Binding CIRs
  10. Close the Waitangi Tribunal
  11. Work for the dole
  12. Tax-free threshold of $25,000 and a flat rate of $20,000
  13. Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools

I agree with 7 and 11. Not quite sure what he means by 12, but generally support tax-free thresholds and a flatter tax system.

Tags:

188 Responses to “Colin Craig says”

  1. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    What, in that both Winston First and the CCCP are personality cults espousing populist nostrums and appealing to social authoritarianism, David? If I were the Nats, I’d listen to Peter Dunne and not trust Colin C one iota.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    I’d vote for him if there was a chance he could act on 8.

    Alas, National will continue to support communism as it is politically expedient. Meanwhile NZ’s middle class is turned into beneficiaries

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year – yes please

    Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars – fuck yeah

    Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri – um ok? dont know what powhiri is, i guess its some maori shit forced on people somewhere.

    Scrap the ETS – fuck yeah

    Against fluoride being added to water – weird

    Schools should teach children how to garden – not a silly idea

    Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves – nice

    Dump Working for Families – fuck yeah

    Binding CIRs – pass

    Close the Waitangi Tribunal – nice

    Work for the dole – will never happen but shows he no bludger lover

    Tax-free threshold of $25,000 and a flat rate of $20,000 flat rate over 20k? seems FAIR to me

    Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools – no idea.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. big bruv (12,352 comments) says:

    ” plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars”

    FFS!

    Great idea that one, it has worked so well in the USA. What on earth could possibly go wrong.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 20 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. WineOh (428 comments) says:

    Why do we need to ramp up our defense spending?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. David Garrett (5,131 comments) says:

    My first reaction on reading this was to ask how Craig had managed to get such a reasonable write up from Vance…CC and his party is not ACT but pretty close on some points…and vance has a vitriolic hatred of ACT and anyone connected to it..

    BB: With respect you are confused about what “the castle doctrine ” – which Craig supports – actually is. At least as I understand it, it means that you have the right to do what you will with impunity to someone unlawfully IN YOUR HOUSE…i.e. NOT someone who is knocking on your door, or even prowling around outside.

    I fully support that. Of course no-one wants to see the situation in some parts of the US, but in my view if you are in someone’s house uninvited – particularly at night – you can expect to get whatever treatment is meted out to you.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. flipper (3,269 comments) says:

    Mmmnnnn….

    Don’t see very much religious garbage in that policy plank list, some of which are desirable (flat tax, powhiris, Waitangi), but some (binding CIRs, right to shoot), are just potty….

    Still, if that is his manifesto, I suggest that many more will prefer it to the red melon/union rubbish that would come with Cun*life and wussel.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. liarbors a joke (1,069 comments) says:

    you’ve got my vote Colin..I especially like number 10.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Longknives (4,048 comments) says:

    “Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri”

    This has won me over- One vote for Conservative.. (On a day where the pathetic NZ media is going ballistic over the Irish apparently ‘Disrespecting the haka’)

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    Craig may be confusing two demographics that vote for Winston First – conservative greys and the general protest vote – last election this may have been significant, the ‘not Key but Labour don’t deserve it’ vote.

    CCCP may compete for the grey vote with NZF but I don’t see them attracting much general protest vote.

    Another demographic that CCCP are targeting that they don’t share with NZF is the Christian conservative vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. duggledog (1,111 comments) says:

    1: Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year

    Sounds good. Our borders are porous and we are an embarrassment when we have to do our bit and our gear breaks down and is shit. Plus military hardware is cool. Boys love it. Can be affordable once numbers 4,7,8,10.11,12 are done

    2: Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars.

    Not sure about this but it would clean up the rock apes who can currently beat the shit out of you and get away with 3 years manslaughter. Burglary is rife especially in outlying rural areas, good job.

    3: Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri

    Hilarious, kind of silly, designed to upset the Maoris. Fine by me.

    4: Scrap the ETS

    Should have been done years ago

    5: Against fluoride being added to water

    Weird, but I don’t give a shit as I have my own spring. I can overlook it considering the other policies

    6: Schools should teach children how to garden

    Weird. Grandparents should. I can overlook it considering other policies

    7: Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves

    Weird. I can overlook it considering other policies

    8: Dump Working for Families

    Great. Not possible though as there are too many povos

    9: Binding CIRs

    No. As PG said, daft, but with some provisos maybe.

    10: Close the Waitangi Tribunal

    Tomorrow please Colin. Maori have something in the order of $40 bn in assets, pay no tax in some cases as they are iwi trusts and don’t often pay rates on their land.

    11: Work for the dole

    As long as work is actually completed. NZers now have a terrible rep in their own country which is why there are thousands of Filipinos and South Americans working down South milking cows

    12: Tax-free threshold of $25,000 and a flat rate of $20,000

    Sounds fair at least Douglas can pop off with a smile on his face, the guy deserves to see this happen

    13: Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools

    Would be hilarious to see this happen even if for the reaction

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    The moment a reporter actually asks some meaningful questions of Craig and the Conservative Party, as opposed to vox populi hit pieces being written by people who don’t know the bloke, he gets some reasonable support. I see this trend continuing. Once the blind critics have gasped their last, the Electorate will separate the wheat from the chaff, and decide on the merits of the man, not on the poison of the media pen. Well done Andrea Vance.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win” (Ghandi).

    The CPNZ is already up to step 3, and the Electorate are still a year away from an Election.

    Is that the 5% threshold I hear rapidly approaching in the distance?

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri”

    I can’t imagine how a diplomatic visitor to Godzone would prefer a cup of Bell’s to a display of a huge naked brown arse unless they either weren’t gay or a straight Pommie diplomat (a rarity given the public school system) ….. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Loved the line about the United Future Conference: “It’s not a Conference – it’s a support group”.

    Yes, and a dwindling one.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    @DG

    “I fully support that. Of course no-one wants to see the situation in some parts of the US, but in my view if you are in someone’s house uninvited – particularly at night – you can expect to get whatever treatment is meted out to you.”

    I sort of support it an of course much more so at night. I would not like to see someone come home and kill a 12 year old who is burgling their house. Having said that I keep a machete at home and would use it if someone invaded my home and worry about the consequences later.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. duggledog (1,111 comments) says:

    Shit – hang on!!! Oh my god, I heard someone say he might believe in… God and that he prays! Noooo! That means he is clearly mentally ill.

    Even though 99.9 % of people would be on their knees praying to God, Allah, McDonalds and Buddha if their child was in an operating theatre, or there was an asteroid approaching and nobody knew if it was going to hit us.

    Watch the media try and destroy him over the coming months. They are already hard at it and it will be some outlets’ #1 priority. Did anyone see the hatchet job Campbell’s acolyte Rebecca Wright did on him the other day as he went round the Pak n Sav supermarket carefully filling his trolley with budget items? Complete with corny music and shots of Wright looking faintly disgusted, bemused, patient, and condescending.

    She really is a turd. A complete own goal, as many many people outside her neighborhood would relate to and admire his thrifty ways.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    “My first reaction on reading this was to ask how Craig had managed to get such a reasonable write up from Vance”

    It might be because Colin did not try and hit on her?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    Great idea that one, it has worked so well in the USA. What on earth could possibly go wrong.

    Guns don’t kill people, etc etc…Would you rather guns only be found in the hands of the Graeme Burton’s of NZ?

    That said, I don’t really see where Craig is getting at here and what mischief he is wanting to remedy. People in NZ can own a gun if they are licensed, and I can attest to the fact it isn’t hard to obtain one.

    Maybe he is talking about handguns and how they require special endorsements.

    We also have absolute defense from prosecution if acting in self defence, see the case of R V Oates as just one example of where a killing has been justified on the grounds of self defence. I am not sure what he is proposing to strengthen this defence. And I don’t know of any cases where injustice has been served because of a supposed weakness in our self defence laws.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Colin does have quite nice hair. As long as he avoids emailing Andrea he should have a good future in politics! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    What Colin Craig means by tax free threshold of $25,000, and a flat rate of 20%, after that $25,000, and no working for families, is for those who are working, on the first $400 per week they earn, they get the same amount of accommodation supplement as someone on the dole, approximately half of their rent paid. Then for every dollar they earn, they get taxed and lose 25 cents of their accommodation supplement.

    So if someone earns $100 more than $400, they lose $25 of their accommodation supplement. What Colin Craig is saying, is scrap the accommodation supplement, and replace it with no tax on the first $500 per week. I must stress this would be for those who work. This would also mean those in Auckland who can work at home via computer, would consider moving to the outskirts of Auckland, to save on rent, and if the savings were enough, they would visit their friends in the weekend, and the savings on rent would pay for this cost of travel. At the moment the more you pay in rent, the bigger accommodation supplement you get, up to a certain point.

    For those looking for work, if he scrapped the accommodation supplement, he would give them less in accommodation supplement, but make the benefit go up somewhere between $50 and $100. This would ultimately mean, those working would get taxed, but not have their accommodation supplement abated and 25 cents per dollar earnt. Which would give them the incentive to earn more. It would mean those earning $800 a week and not getting the accommodation supplement, would receive an immediate tax cut on their first $500. Then after the first $500 per week they earnt, they would pay 20% on all their earnings, after the first $500 per week earnt.

    And it would mean, those investing in real estate would no longer get a guaranteed return. This would give a chance to those companies, wanting to borrow for more productive machinery. I’m saying I like this part of his ideas, and no I’m not a Conservative voter or member.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    4:Scrap the ETS
    8: Dump Working for Families</blockquote

    Buy that man a beer!

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Reid (15,531 comments) says:

    “Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri”

    In the olden days when another tribe visited a pa the home tribe would do the powhiri and the visitors would send their fastest runner to pick up the patu because that was the signal for the home tribe to charge. If I was a politician my policy would be to reinstate that tradition as I think if there was a chance to see visiting dignitaries running for their lives it would return viewers to the TV news and make the sale of TVNZ much more viable and would also generate lots of overseas publicity for tourism as well. I may write to Colin and suggest it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    My first reaction on reading this was to ask how Craig had managed to get such a reasonable write up from Vance..

    Maybe he got some advice from the infatuated fantasist from Ohariu-Belmont?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Some of the chaps that offer the brown arse challenge may have to lose 25kg Reid or they’ll cark it before they get to the patu! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    Did anyone see the hatchet job Campbell’s acolyte Rebecca Wright did on him the other day as he went round the Pak n Sav supermarket carefully filling his trolley with budget items? Complete with corny music and shots of Wright looking faintly disgusted, bemused, patient, and condescending.

    Yup. Pretty disgusting really. How can we claim to have an impartial MSM where superficial and biased chit like this fills our TV screens?

    And don’t get me started on how sports, entertainment, and other journalists all want to seem to weigh in on politics to give their left wing biased 2c when it suits them… Richard Boock, NZH’s “tv blogger” Paul Casserly, on and on ad infinitum.

    Why on earth would I care what a mediocre TV blogger thinks about politics??? FFS

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. mister nui (880 comments) says:

    Sounds pretty good to me. My comments;

    1. Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year – Great.

    2. Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars – Yep, should reduce our prison costs

    3. Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri – Brilliant! Slap in the face for all those white maori PC fuckwits

    4. Scrap the ETS – Gone by lunchtime

    5. Against fluoride being added to water – Not in favour of this one, and it is a bit of an antithesis to number 9 – saying that the people have the right to choose.

    6. Schools should teach children how to garden – Maybe, but our fuckwit teachers would have them only growing mungbeans and lentils, all the whilst singing the praises of veganism

    7. Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves – No problem with this.

    8. Dump Working for Families – He can wrap it up with the ETS and nuke ‘em both before lunchtime….

    9. Binding CIRs – This needs very careful consideration, generally I wouldn’t be a fan

    10. Close the Waitangi Tribunal – See 4 and 8 above

    11. Work for the dole – Why not? Government PPPs need workers on their side

    12. Tax-free threshold of $25,000 and a flat rate of $20,000 – About fucking time. I wonder if he mans a flat rate of 20%? Corporate tax needs lowering too.

    13. Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools – How does that smack in the face feel teachers unions?

    What it’s missing to truly transform the economy;

    14. All capital purchases of plant and equipment to be 100% tax deductible in the year of purchase.

    15. Corporate tax and personal tax to be at a flat rate of 20%, which I’m not sure if that is what he is alluding to in 12.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. big bruv (12,352 comments) says:

    David Garrett

    I have no problem with the right to beat to a pulp any low life who is stupid enough to break into my property. Once they have got past the dogs (fat chance of that happening) then I reckon they would be easy prey for my trusty Slazenger V600 cricket bat.

    My point is that we do not need any more fucking guns in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 15 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Au contraire bb. For chaps like yourself (with a batting average close to zero) there is a huge market for cylinder-bored scatter guns to sort out nasty crims wot encroach on your little empire! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (522 comments) says:

    Scarp the bloody ETS.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Oh the humanity Sir Cullen. Chaps would rush out to purchase the last of the FPV’s or an HSV 6.2 litre!

    Think of the planet for pity’s sake! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    At least Fairfax put out a balanced article with the reporters name. The Herald published a dishonest, distorted and cowardly anonymous attack.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Colville (1,774 comments) says:

    4, 7, 8, 10, and 11 sound good to me!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    My point is that we do not need any more fucking guns in NZ.

    And this would be why…? Because there are so many murders and crimes committed with actual firearms?

    We have less than a quarter of the guns per capita than the USA. We have less guns per capita than countries like Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Finland. All high crime countries they are right?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. tas (527 comments) says:

    Craig should move to the US and see how many of his policies are working. I don’t really agree with any of this (apart from 11. Work for the dole).

    1. Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year
    Is that in absolute or relative terms? That’s a lot of dough.

    2. Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars
    Please don’t try to convince me that promoting US-style gun culture is desirable.

    5. Against fluoride being added to water
    FFS

    7. Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves
    Sounds good, but I want specifics. Labour claim to support balancing the budget…

    9. Binding CIRs
    Imagine if the asset sales referendum was binding? Many US states have this and the result is multiple referenda per year about ridiculous things.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    FFS some of you are lemmings. The “Castle Doctrine” is in no way open slather to shoot burglars like Andrea Vance states (shows she has approached the interview with an open and impartial mind).

    I don’t think it is necessary as NZ already has good self defence laws. But to label the implementation of a “Castle doctrine” (which as I have said won’t even change our self defence laws much) as promoting a “US-style gun culture” is one of the most retarded things I have ever read on this blog.

    Lucky I’ve found a party which has some great gun policies so you can vote accordingly next year:

    https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/justice#P12

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    But we don’t get to own proper guns here nickb:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khyZI3RK2lE :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. JC (838 comments) says:

    I see both Cunliffe and the Herald editorial have attacked his views on climate change.. planetary tilt, sunspots and planetary alignment are mainstream science.. the debate is over how much weight to give them.

    As for his statement on NZ females being promiscuous, well..

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/22444/Kiwi-women-most-promiscuous-in-the-world

    I dont warm to the man.. the CIR is awful and grotesquely out of touch with reality.. but some of his other points look like he’s in touch with the public.. but probably only to the extent that there will be many who are looking for a partner to the Nats.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. wikiriwhis business (3,286 comments) says:

    ‘personality cults espousing populist nostrums and appealing to social authoritarianism, ‘

    sounds like John Key to me

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Recent headlines from Auckland would suggest that elderly New Zealand males and Chinese females are very promiscuous as well JC! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Colville (1,774 comments) says:

    We have the best gun laws in the world. Leave them alone!

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. smttc (638 comments) says:

    With 1 and 2, you could be forgiven for thinking that Craig is expecting war in the not too distant future.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. wikiriwhis business (3,286 comments) says:

    ’9. Binding CIRs
    Imagine if the asset sales referendum was binding? Many US states have this and the result is multiple referenda per year about ridiculous things.’

    Sounds like healthy direct democracy and keeping parliament honest.

    absolutely needs trying and once in would be hard to remove which is why it would be resisted by the powers that be.

    Hat tip: They don’t like democracy. TPP will show that

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. thor42 (772 comments) says:

    There *are* some good policies there but the problem is that the stupid policies “obscure” them.

    1. Match Australia’s defence spending (an extra $1.5b to $4.9b) a year.
    Stupid.

    2. Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars.
    Ok. I have no problem with these.

    3. Allow visitors to choose a cup of tea over a powhiri.
    I’d just dump the powhiri altogether. Does Japan welcome visitors with someone dressed as a samurai? Does the US welcome them with an Apache ceremony?
    Drop the damned powhiri and stop throwing culture in people’s faces and thinking that they will appreciate it.

    4. Scrap the ETS.
    Excellent move.

    5. Against fluoride being added to water.
    Dopey move.

    6. Schools should teach children how to garden.
    I have no problem with this – a number of schools already do this.

    7. Wants to scrap more legislation than he approves.
    Good.

    8. Dump Working for Families.
    Excellent.

    9. Binding CIRs.
    Bloody dopey.
    See? Just as he is building up a head of steam with a number of good policies, a dopey one like this comes along.

    10. Close the Waitangi Tribunal.
    Excellent move. One of his best policies.

    11. Work for the dole.
    Excellent.

    12. Tax-free threshold of $25,000 and a flat rate of $20,000.
    A “flat rate of $20k”? Does he mean 20 *percent*?
    The tax-free threshold is probably too high to do immediately. I think $10K immediately would be a good start.

    13. Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools.
    Good move. All the MoE does is write useless reports and get in the way of good education anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. wikiriwhis business (3,286 comments) says:

    ‘With 1 and 2, you could be forgiven for thinking that Craig is expecting war in the not too distant future.’

    Happening right now and the US ain’t taken its fleet away from Iran

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    Ha. Hunting would be restricted to using BB guns if some people had their way JB. Or banned altogether

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Nonsense nickb. “The Game Animal Council” will ensure “Hunting in our time”…… :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. duggledog (1,111 comments) says:

    Tas

    This is not the U.S. It’s not f***ing Sweden or Norway either. It’s NZ and we need NZ answers to NZ problems in a NZ CONTEXT.

    Sorry I’m not shouting at you.

    Remember Craig’s List (see what I did there) is meant to be a bit zany and over the top to get us chattering. It’s mostly extreme stuff that he knows and National knows and we know will never see the light of day, but it’s good to debate the issues, and good to see what is realistic and popular

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    Concerns over primary school sex ed

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Concerns-over-primary-school-sex-ed/tabid/423/articleID/322581/Default.aspx#disqus_thread

    This is why we need a conservative party or parties. The two main socialist parties we have believe that children are basically the property of the State but with the parents footing the bill and held accountable for their behaviour when the State has undermined parental authority and introduced legislation over the last 40 years that has encouraged the breakdown of marriage.

    Parents should decide on the discipline of their children within guidelines determined by the vast majority of parents not a handful of MPs.

    Parents should decide on what sex education their child has and who is that educator – them or the school.

    Schools should not provide contraception or abortion.

    Hopefully the Conservative Party and/or NZF will represent parents and grandparents who agree with the above.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    8. Dump Working for Families

    On it’s own that’s either naivety or a blatant pander to a demographic disregarding reality.

    I support doing away with WFF but it can’t just be dropped, the effect would be too drastic for too many people now so many rely on it. WFF needs to be addressed along with a major revamp of tax – PAYE, company and trust tax, possibly GST and possibly CGT. At the very least doing away WFF needs to be done in conjunction with PAYE reform.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Are you standing for Peter’s team in 2014 PG or do you see a new opportunity with Colin’s outfit? :)

    Bearing in mind that Colin see’s the south as untapped conservative ground… :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. burt (7,085 comments) says:

    Pete George

    I tend to agree – but let’s not forget it was implemented with virtually zero restructuring. Arguably it could be dropped with little or no severe consequences other than electoral popularity – which is arguably why it was implanted like it was.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. burt (7,085 comments) says:

    Colin Craig has indeed got a Winston First popularity hot button approach to politics. Put enough hot buttons in a list and capture a percentage of the votes….

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

    Burt I do agree that WFF is hard to ditch, as people rely on it. That’s why, Colin Craig has come up with the idea, of no tax on the first $500 a week people earn, and then a flat tax of 20%, after this. WFF was designed to give more to those working on a low wage. It was designed as low income assistance. If the first $500 is tax free, then people wouldn’t need it as much. I’m not saying I agree or disagree with Colin about making it $500. I personally would be in favour of the first $200 having no tax for singles, and $400 for family, but if these people want it, they give up their accommodation supplement. And keep the child tax credit as it is. After three children, you don’t get a child tax credit, so this stops people from having many children if they aren’t earning money. Also I think $70 per child is very generous, so that’s another thing I think needs to be looked at.

    WFF was not designed for those on the dole, it was designed to supplement working people’s income. And when it was introduced, those on the dole, knew they would get more so in 6 months time, unemployment went to below 4% in decades.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. nickb (3,629 comments) says:

    I support doing away with WFF but it can’t just be dropped, the effect would be too drastic for too many people now so many rely on it.

    Uh… not if you just didn’t take the equivalent amount of money off people in the first place by reducing personal income tax instead of churning it through thousands of IRD employees with hundreds of millions of compliance costs?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    BINDING CIR

    i can understand people’s opposition to this as it is not practical. The Greens want the taxpayer to pay everything and would be happy with that if we had the income off oil that Norway has as Matthew Hooton pointed out on Q & A. Imagine if a referendum could stop partial asset sales. The next thing would be oil exportation and dairy conversion. A country could obviously not be governed that way.

    However, I yet to see a justification for allowing conscience votes on issues like smacking that were not in any party’s manifesto. I will be voting for a party that supports binding referenda on these issues. In other words a voters veto. The problem of wording makes most CIR referenda unworkable.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    In regards to climate change, I am not a climate denier, but I don’t see how our ETS is helping. If you agree that you should save the environment by buying a new fridge that’s more fuel efficient, and you try to save up for it, you have to pay a tax on your energy, in the meantime. How bout the tax you’ve paid goes into a fund, and if within two years you buy a new fridge, you can take your money out. And after that, then your tax goes into a fund, and you can use that to buy a new washing machine. And once all your appliances are fuel efficient, no energy tax

    This would actually give people what they need to be more fuel efficient. I don’t see how this ETS is helping us. I’m not a climate denier, I just can’t see it helping us. Those who are climate deniers either say, we should have no ETS, full stop, or they go, that’s a better way of doing things. Another thing I cannot understand, is I don’t use a car, yet I have to pay the same ETS that someone who has a car has to pay. Again I can’t see how this ETS is helping us save the environment.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    WFF was just an election bribe to get the hideous Helen back in command. The same results without WFF could have been achieved by tax reform instead but that would not make the peasants so beholden to the government of the day.

    That is why JK has not removed it. He is, as some say here…… just “Labour Lite”.

    Let’s face it we are a Nation of bludgers and weaning us off the Gumint tit will not be easy. Colin could do it but he will need say 25% of the vote minimum, not the 2-5% he is likely to get. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “In regards to climate change, I am not a climate denier,”

    “I’m not a climate denier, I just can’t see it helping us.”

    Thank Christ you stopped at Twice times denial there Meatloaf…………….. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Harriet (4,010 comments) says:

    13.Cut Ministry of Education funding by 50% and give it direct to schools.

    That alone will smash to pieces the influence that the National/Labour monolith is having on each and every generation of kiwis.

    Young kiwis today think that ‘parental choice’ where education is concerned is not ‘normal’ behaviour.

    Well it’s not normal behaviour for a government to directly control the education of 92% of children – that’s propaganda.

    The WFF payment should be increased with a $10k school voucher. It can then be wound down gradually.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Thank goodness I went to Scot’s College Harriet or I wouldn’t believe any of your anti-statism nonsense! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    I sort of agree with you. At first I thought WFF was a great idea, as it would get more people off of the dole. But in reality, you get more, if you pay more for your rent, which makes real estate investors rich, a guaranteed return. And what about those factories that need a loan, to buy new machinery? So, if we had perhaps just said the first $200 is tax free for a single person and the first $400 for the family, this would have done exactly what the WFF does, except not subsidise housing investors. Oh and the Councils get more rates, when house prices go up.

    My big issue, is that less than 10% of us produce things, which means the other 90% are bidding for what that 10% produce. We need truckers to make those goods produced travel. So we need a certain amount in services but not 90%. If 40% of us were producing things, their would be plenty of work for the other 60% of us to do. This is the real issue to me. Solving this would take away the need for these low income tax rebates called WFF. Oh by the way according to Gareth Morgan, we have the 3rd least capital intensity per person. Capital intensity, is machinery, equipment, and tools per person. If our capital intensity were #1, it would be like using a petrol lawn mower, when other are using a push mower. So, capital intensity is the issue I want to see addressed this election.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    Herald editorial: “Craig is a man who doesn’t believe in evolution,”

    And in a recent NBR online Q&A Craig didn’t deny he believed in creation and said it should be taught in schools.

    Do you believe the world was created in seven days?

    Don’t know, I wasn’t there.

    Seems there are lots of theories and opinions. I realise it is important to some people but I just don’t know the answer.

    What is your position on teaching the theory of evolution in New Zealand schools?

    Schools are meant to educate. This is a widely known and respected theory so should be taught.

    Do you believe creationism should be taught in schools as a valid alternative to evolution?

    This is the predominant world view (although in various forms).

    As above schools are meant to educate and so I think it should also be taught.

    Is that why he wants schools funded directly – so they can do their own fundie curriculum?

    He might get away with those pro-creation and mushy on evolution views in the US but it will only be accepted by a fundamentalist minority here.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    I’ve always been happy with my allotment of tool Meatloaf. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    “He might get away with those pro-creation and mushy on evolution views in the US but it will only be accepted by a fundamentalist minority here.”

    fundamentalist?

    everyone has a fucking label in this country.

    how about “it will be accepted by a lot of good people who go to church”.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Well Johnboy, this is great news, so I will give you a positive tick. We need more people who are productive, in this country.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    I’ve always tried to do my best Meatloaf, even after the bastards did away with the sheep retention scheme. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Harriet (4,010 comments) says:

    Well put Dime.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Oh really Johnboy, are you saying that in some way you work or used to work on a farm, or have. Because, without the farmer, we wouldn’t have much wealth flow into this country. Anyhow, what was the sheep retention scheme. I’m not a farmer.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. tas (527 comments) says:

    wikiriwhis business (2,222) Says:
    November 24th, 2013 at 1:35 pm
    ’9. Binding CIRs
    Imagine if the asset sales referendum was binding? Many US states have this and the result is multiple referenda per year about ridiculous things.’

    Sounds like healthy direct democracy and keeping parliament honest.

    absolutely needs trying and once in would be hard to remove which is why it would be resisted by the powers that be.

    Hat tip: They don’t like democracy. TPP will show that

    See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_ballot_propositions It’s about 10 a year. The list is so long that wikipedia split it into multiple articles.

    Binding referenda don’t keep politicians honest. They just provide yet another channel for shit to get passed — in addition to what the pollies do themselves. You can imagine Labour using binding CIRs to pass legislation just to frustrate the govt, as they are trying with asset sales referendum now.

    I like the Australian model. Constitutional changes require approval by parliament and a referendum.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Good grief Meatloaf….It couldn’t be true surely? The stilted English, the lack of knowledge of the sheep retention scheme. The subtle suggestion of a sausage-eater in your nom-de-plume!

    You’re not Dotcom are you? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    “Binding citizens-initiated referendums and a 100-day delay on initiating legislation to allow it to be overturned by the public: A deal-breaker in any coalition. “Although other parties might not like the idea much, if it is a choice between government or not, I expect them to be receptive to the idea,” Craig said. This appears to be a not-so-sneaky way to make gay marriage illegal again.”

    Colin is a very bright guy and a hard worker to have achieved what he has by 45. I think he is honest so that must mean he is very political naive. There is no way either Labour or National will accept his CIR policy so there is no way National will gift him a seat to sit on the cross benches.

    No responsible government could allow binding CIR after this stunt by the Greens. Let us say we have an agreement on minerals and the loony Greens start a petition for us to legislate our way out of it they could conceivably get it passed and NZ’s interantion credibility would ber gone.

    A binding referenda on smacking or the drinking age would not have that effect. Colin should promise what is remotely achievable.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Whenever I ask a question, that people don’t want to answer, they get nasty. Usually if they’re making stuff up, they feel threatened by my question. Their’s nothing wrong with my english, and no one knows everything. And no I usually don’t eat sausages, or am I Dotcom. I was humble enough to ask a question, and then you go off at me.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Do you usually not eat Currywurst or Bratwurst Meatloaf?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    My last comment is to Johnboy, no one else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Be at rest Meatloaf. No one other than me has read your last comment! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. DJP6-25 (1,229 comments) says:

    #1. Can’t see the point of spending that much. Maybe reinstate the fighters though. Not a short term project.

    #2.That would require careful planning. Adding a large dose of civics would pay dividends later. The Castle Doctrine sounds just fine.

    #3. Works for me.

    #4. Gone by breakfast time!

    #5. Obviously one for the crazies. I guess this is not a policy they’d die in a ditch for.

    #6. Wouldn’t do any harm. Might do some good. Implementing it would not require the swallowing of any dead rats.

    #7.Yeah and hell yeah! Set up a website with all the current NZ legislation on it. Have a vote. The top 100 items get scrapped by lunch time the next day.

    #8. Very hard. The middle class have got used to it. Something just as enticing would have to be there to replace it.

    #9. This is doable if treated with enough caution. Require say 300,000 signatures within six months. No paid volunteers doing it. Then require 66 % of the population to vote on it in a postal vote. You’d be surprised at how few would get off the ground.

    #10. Fix the remaining grievances if any, then close it.

    #11. Works for me.

    #12. ditto.

    #13. Only 50 %. Oh, well, it’s more than anyone else is offering to cut it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Jack5 (4,220 comments) says:

    Craig has tiny United Future in a panic, if Pete George’s posts are an indication.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Jack5: UFNZ and Peter Dunne have essentially issued a political declaration of war upon CPNZ: which is pretty silly thing to do, because to win a war, one needs an army, and Dunne ain’t got one.

    Craig on the other hand has almost 6000 troops and counting, the favour of a Governing Party, and the MSM having to all of a sudden sit up and take notice of the new boy on the block.

    Dunne just bought a knife to a gunfight – and Craig’s going to do the political version of this, to Dunne:

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    Should Mr Craig be successful in getting his Trojan horse full of religious reactionaries past the electorate we will look back on 2014 as being the start of New Zealand’s descent into a new Dark Age. Creationism will be followed by book burning, victorious anti abortionists will turn their attention to banning contraception……everywhere the heavy hand of religious fundamentalism will be attacking human freedoms. In fifty years witches will be staked & burning while exorcism will replace modern medicine.

    It happened in 6th century Europe & it could easily happen here.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Do you think we will strip the Witches naked before burning them nasska?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. OneTrack (1,963 comments) says:

    “everywhere the heavy hand of religious fundamentalism will be attacking human freedoms.”

    You mean the Greens in 2014?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    It’s just that I haven’t been to a striptease since the House of Bamboo caught fire inexplicably! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    The House of Bamboo? Tell us more. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Nasska: Are these CPNZ policy statements? I looked on the CPNZ website, and………….oh wait a minute, here they are………”Witch-burning for Beginners”: “Take one pile of kindling, apply to large pile of logs, summon baying crowd…………………”

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. OneTrack (1,963 comments) says:

    “Do you think we will strip the Witches naked before burning them nasska”

    Only the good looking ones.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    What would you like to know nasska?

    Greek mafia. Vivian Street…..Gay/whatever bath house/strippers/jelly wrestling/up market tarts blowing their marks in full view etc. It caught fire unfortunately when someone never paid their dues. …… Fun while it lasted! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    Strangely Steve, I doubt that the electorate would embrace such policy if it were freely published. We will be fed pig swill such as the planned opposition to fluoride being added to water while Messrs Craig, Baldock & the rest of the merry men work on the real agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    ….”strippers/jelly wrestling/up market tarts blowing their marks in full view”….

    Such exciting lives you city dwellers enjoy JB. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Nothing at all to what the sheep get up to nasska! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    A tax free threshold up to $25,000 was their policy at the last election.

    It was sold in a pamphlet advertising the increase that this would result in for those on super, which is calculated according to net after tax income.

    The increase in super each week for a superannuant was large and the total cost increase each year would have a huge impact on a budget.

    I have seen no costings, has anyone else?

    As for WFF, replacing it with across the board cuts means less allocation to those with families, – given many families are reliant on the WFF tax credits to pay their mortgage this has implications for home ownership and banking.

    Ending WFF, would be to place more families into economic distress. Expecting children to do after school gardening to feed the family is a novel approach to this problem though.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “Ending WFF, would be to place more families into economic distress. Expecting children to do after school gardening to feed the family is a novel approach to this problem though.”

    Works in Wainui SPC. A kid can pull $50,000 pa if he knows how to prune the buds correctly. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Naaska, I’ve read a number of your posts on this blog. You don’t strike me as uninformed or unintelligent. I thus have reached the conclusion that on this issue you are most likely procuring the urine :)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    What about a graduated withdrawal of WFF? And what about reining in the spending of Councils? Kaipera = bankrupt; Auckland City = debt growing at $1 million a day.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    When Colin Craig said he was challenging NZ First for the old people vote, he was not kidding.

    The idea of financing a huge increase in weekly super payment to those on Super, financed by taking tax credits off their children and grandchildren, may turn a few stomachs though, unless their offspring were living over in Oz.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor thinks you have a clue nasska. Amazing really! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Paul Marsden (935 comments) says:

    The only group of society against ditching the TOW gravy train will be be Maori (but actually, only a handful) and one pakeha chap, lawyer and unelected member of parliament, by the name of Finlayson.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Since I’ll be 65 in 13 months SPC I suspect that CC is my man. I never did like that wizened Murri bastard. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    Only bloody 2 to go! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. wat dabney (3,455 comments) says:

    Do you believe the world was created in seven days?

    “Don’t know, I wasn’t there.”

    Just another fake “Christian” then.

    It’s no different from ‘Do you believe a character called Jesus was crucified 2000 years ago.’

    Don’t know, I wasn’t there.

    A man so ready to deny his supposed religion for political advantage is simply a charlatan and not to be trusted.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. radvad (620 comments) says:

    I am not a fan of Craig or his party. However I do find it amusing to read the diatribes from Nasska. What a strange world it must live in.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    Closing the Waitangi Tribunal is shorthand for doing so when the last of the iwi has had its claims processed. It’s just borrowing from ACT the idea of a full and final settlement, and National’s ambition to get claims sorted asap.

    It actually adds nothing and means nothing. But to those who have noticed how drawn out the process has been, it seems radical.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    We had work for the dole in the 1996-1999 period. There was more expense managing those on it and they found work more slowly than those not on it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. radvad (620 comments) says:

    And Nasska, you left out stoning gays. Oh, silly me, I forgot, that was an MP from another party.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    As for being against fluoride being added to water, the impact on children of poor dental health lasts for the rest of their lives. It first impacts on their ability to learn.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. big bruv (12,352 comments) says:

    johnboy

    “Greek mafia. Vivian Street…..”

    Please tell me that you never crossed the street when you noticed that bunch of pussies walking toward you Johnboy.

    I have never met a big bunch of tosspots in my life, the lot of them could not fight sleep let alone anybody else.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    ….”you left out stoning gays”…..

    Surely you don’t think the CCCP would support a move like that radvad…..that would be an unchristian thing to do. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. duggledog (1,111 comments) says:

    Nasska

    You’re not serious. We’re… a bit different to how we were in the 6th…

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. adze (1,695 comments) says:

    If the CCCP keep their noses scrupulously clean, they may be a useful scratching post for the fluffy suburban cats of the Green Party to bite and kick their hind legs against. If they can manage that without any crazy/stupid stuff like Creationism in schools, they could be an acceptable coalition partner and a counterweight to both the Greens and Mana.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Yvette (2,589 comments) says:

    Is Johnboy away having the sustenance of a beverage and perhaps hug a sheep or three while deciding on what to deliver his 12,000th comment?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    duggledog

    I admit to using a liberal dollop of hyperbole in my 5.52pm. For all that fundamentalism is a threat to the way of life we enjoy in 21st century NZ & there’s no shortage of religious extremists who would insist that the tenets of their faith is the one & only true way. There is little point in the electorate putting their hands over their ears & looking away convinced that religious extremism could never happen. Witness the effects of Islam in Iran or Egypt.

    In any case I am quite relaxed with the direction National has taken & I see the CCCP as cannibalising votes that would otherwise be Nationals while offering little in return.

    Time will tell.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Adze: I don’t think that the CPNZ will actually go into “coalition” with anyone. The Greens have much to teach minor parties about this issue. I suspect CPNZ will probably offer Confidence & Supply, and then vote issue by issue. Unlike UFNZ of old however, C & P will most likely not be unconditional from CPNZ. The MSM forgets that CPNZ is drawing votes from across the political spectrum. Classical Conservatism transcends “left” and “right”.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. wf (317 comments) says:

    Damn I had to login so I can hand out a few thumbs up.

    I wish we had a grin to tick – there are a couple of nice comments here today.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Nasska: Fundamentalism isn’t restricted to religion. Faith paradigms can be secular as well as theistic. The Greens would be the most religiously extreme in Parliament, as their faith paradigm ultimately leads to nihilism.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    ….”The Greens would be the most religiously extreme in Parliament,”….

    You’ll get little argument from me on that score Steve…..I don’t think much of them either.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    Dunne just bought a knife to a gunfight – and Craig’s going to do the political version of this, to Dunne:

    Really? I’ve got $50 on Dunne – to outwit and dust him to the floor at the same time.

    The dude’s got nothing but bone. He looks like he hasn’t touched a fly in his life and his verbal is wavering, hesitant, and self concious at the best of times. He looks like he’s going to soil himself everytime I see him on camera.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    ….”The Greens would be the most religiously extreme in Parliament,”….

    You’ll get little argument from me on that score Steve…..I don’t think much of them either.

    But nasska, the Conservatives are obviously dirty greenies themselves:

    6. Schools should teach children how to garden

    Be careful now you know he’s one of Craig’s men, he’s trying to butter you up (to coin a phrase you would never hear in CCCP) with his absolutely charming, non-fundamentalist, non-Christian, non-faith based, purely secular, non-judgemental compliments.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Itstricky: Ok, I’ll play, if you are serious. But let’s not play for change.

    The bet is that CPNZ gets more Party votes than UFNZ in 2014.

    The bet is also that CPNZ will get more MP’s in Parliament than UFNZ in 2014.

    I’m in for $500.00 -you in?

    The readers of this post are the witness to the bet, and as I post under my real name, I’m easy to find.

    So, how do I find you if I win, to collect?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Itstricky: I’m my own man :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    Hence my earlier reference to the CCCP Trojan Horse itstricky. If Mr Craig has, as I suspect, been counselled by a media expert he will have been told not to refer to Christian policies so as not to scare the horses.

    From now until the elections, references to religion will have to be extracted from Mr Craig in a manner similar to removal of teeth.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    The experience of Peter Dunne in the 2002-2005 demonstrates that a leader can be surrounded by aliens in his own caucus.

    Identifying the nature of the party list of the Conservative Party should be a media objective in 2014.

    Whereas the Alliance caucus in 1999-2002 was alienated from its leader – especially in 2002.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    Wow, Steve! I don’t know what part of town you’re from or how much Craig pays you but $500 blows my budget my friend.

    Rather than seats, I’d like to see a hair bout. Dunne will down his waif figure with one swish of his dyed grey locks.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor

    I’m not much of a fan of any of the small parties…..that includes policies & personalities.

    I would suggest although that Winston Peters could still wipe the floor with the CCCP. Winston, like him or not, is a practised campaigner & has come out of nowhere before. On the other hand Mr Craig is gaffe prone & IMHO likely to get tripped in the run up to the elections.

    No money on it (as I’m an impoverished agriculturalist) but I’d be backing NZ First to cross the line.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    From now until the elections, references to religion will have to be extracted from Mr Craig in a manner similar to removal of teeth.

    I think they’ve blown it already:

    2. Introduce national service in return for free tertiary education, plus the right to bear arms and shoot burglars

    Is that not just the most Texan thing you’ve heard for a vvveeerrrrryyyyy llllooooonnnnnggggg time?

    Whoops, I meant, the most non-fudamentialist, non-religious, non-conservative, non-judgemental thing you’ve heard?

    Reminds me some what of that thing cha posted a few days back for some reason:

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=538407489574159&set=vb.489198237828418&type=2&theater

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi itsricky:

    West Auckland, I’m not on Craig’s payroll, and if its a bet on hair, then your bloke will win hands down :)

    Is there perhaps another UFNZ supporter who wishes to stand behind Mr Dunne and take up the two-part bet against me, considering Itstricky’s dignified retreat? Pete George? Anyone?

    Surely Peter Dunne wouldn’t have shot off at the mouth in the MSM unless he had some serious backing or evidence for his attack on Craig?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Naaska: Yes, I wouldn’t be so confident to place $500.00 on the table against NZ First – yet. There may soon come a time however when I will be – watch this space.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    Whoa, I don’t know where I said I was a UF supporter Steve, you’ve got way ahead of yourself. I’d definitely back Dunne in a verbal or physical over Craig any day of the week however…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. lolitasbrother (346 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor ,
    are you thinking that Colin Craig will be given an easy ride in his electorate, and take some NZ First and conservative voters.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Itstricky: I withdraw and apologise regarding my assumption on your support of UFNZ.

    Verbal? We have no reference point for this, but I would like to see it – maybe Dunne could issue Craig a challenge to a debate?

    Physical? They are both probably too dignified.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor

    If Mr Craig flukes a seat or two in next year’s election he is going to have to wring a meaningful concession or two out of the major party as a sop to his supporters.

    What do you think they will be?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Lolitasbrother: It seems that CPNZ are already drawing voters from across the political spectrum – Conservatism transcends any particular party line.

    I think the MSM is getting itself a bit “het up” regarding the Electoral seat issue.

    CPNZ are on track to cross 5%, so my view is that National will probably do all it can to further secure what is already looking like a sure bet. The challenge for Key is that Craig will most likely work with him, without actually needing him.

    Craig has built up 5 successful businesses – Key has only ever been an employee of someone else’s business. The difference in skill set is daylight.

    Key probably hasn’t considered this difference yet. He will probably need to, in time.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Nasska: I don’t think Craig does “sops”.

    Craig will most likely lay down a bottom line (BCIR I’m picking), and if Key balks, Craig will not take offence – he’ll simply take his MP’s to the cross-benches, and vote issue by issue.

    Key will quickly realise that, like Thatcher, Craig is “not for turning”, and THAT will be the key feature that CPNZ voters will be voting for.

    Key’s not dim – he’ll get it in time.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. nasska (9,517 comments) says:

    You obviously have a much higher opinion of Mr Craig than I Steve. He’ll buckle at the knees if the price is right.

    Power corrupts. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. itstricky (1,139 comments) says:

    Awww, Steve, you’re just so nice (in a non-Christian way)

    No, I was taking the mickey – of course they’re not out for fisticuffs.

    Anyway, I must shoot, I feel like I’m, like, giving you ideas and, like, stuff.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “Is Johnboy away having the sustenance of a beverage and perhaps hug a sheep or three while deciding on what to deliver his 12,000th comment?”

    Not at all Yvette. I’m sorry we never met. I’m sure we would have liked each other. Au revoir my dear. :)

    See y’all! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    CPNZ are on track to cross 5%, so my view is that National will probably do all it can to further secure what is already looking like a sure bet.

    I hope this is the case. If so, what would happen to the whore Dunne?
    Would he prostitute himself supporting Labour? Never in your lifetime as long as there is ministership to fill!

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Nasska: Yes, I probably do have a higher opinion of Craig than you do – I wonder (and I don’t know) if you have ever had the chance to meet Colin Craig and talk with him?

    I have, and what I like about the guy is that the bloke you see on the TV is the same bloke who you talk to in person – he doesn’t seem to “pitch” to different audiences the way that (for example) David Cunnliffe does.

    I agree that power corrupts in the absence of core values – I just don’t think that Craig can be “bought”, and this is going to take some time for MP’s from other parties to “get”, so to speak.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    Steve – if you want to bet on the election try https://www.ipredict.co.nz/

    I wouldn’t put any money on UF or CCCP party votes. For the former I don’t like their chances with that, and for the latter it’s far too unpredictable.

    CPNZ are on track to cross 5%

    No they’re not. We’ll start to get a reasonable idea 1-2 weeks before the election, before that is either speculation or trying to talk something up. I suggest you check out support patterns for NZF in the months leading up to the 2011 election.

    Craig has built up 5 successful businesses – Key has only ever been an employee of someone else’s business. The difference in skill set is daylight.

    Remember David Shearer? And he had prior experience working in Parliament plus he had a party with many decades of political and parliamentary experience around him. Running a Parliamentary party and dealing with other parties in politics is not like running a business.

    Craig may end up being able to seduce enough voters to get in (a big budget will help) but he will find Parliament a hugely difficult challenge and he and everyone else have no way of pre-judging if he will hack it or not, except that at the very least it will take some time to get himself and his MPs and all his new staff up to speed and effective.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Itstricky: I post under my own name – doing so maximises the chance that what I write in this forum will be respectful, and considered.

    I’m always open to ideas – no one person holds all wisdom (although I’m pretty sure Winston Peters thinks he’s pretty close).

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Manolo: I’m picking Dunne to win his seat in 2014 – longitudinal name recognition, and the fact that he is actually a pretty hard-working Electorate MP are both in his favour. He’ll have to pull his head in a bit though staring at 5 – 9 CPNZ MPS sitting close to him in 2014 :)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Pete: I’ll take your answer as a “No, I won’t be backing my bloke in the bet”.

    CPNZ is outpolling NZ First 2:1 at present this time last Election cycle.

    Yes, I remember David Shearer. What bought him down was multi-factional alliances within the Party he was trying to lead, and the fact that there were so many knives being shoved into his back, his nickname should have been Sonic the hedgehog :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    I don’t have a “my bloke” to bet on.

    Shearer had an early political opportunity most MPs don’t come close to getting – and he blew it through political naivety and inexperience. Craig is politically naive and far less experienced. If Shearer had been a competent leader the knives would have stayed in their sheaths.

    If CP succeed in getting in and if they have a plan to stay there for the long haul they will pretty much have to sit on the cross benches. It will be difficult enough for them to get up to speed with the basics.

    5 MPs is less than 5% of the party vote, so making the threshold isn’t a given in your expectations after all?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Dazzaman (1,114 comments) says:

    Conservatives are looking better all the time! After National went soft cock on the gay “marriage” debacle the options for real conservatives, unlike the fiscal hardliners/social liberals that National now pander too, were slim.

    Winston First is a vote for ossification of the economy as well as giving only token defiance to the unravelling of societal cohesion, to the detriment of decency & stability in society, that Labour kicked along & the Nats have happily watched continue…..the freaks, creeps & trash show of today’s secular clueless NZ society.

    The brylcreem geezers of NZ First are the parents of the “Holden/Ford” generation of trash that have spawned exponentially.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Pete, I can’t predict exactly how many – I just believe that they will be there – the evidence is gathering towards this conclusion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Pete: Solomon himself couldn’t have managed the Labour Party in its current format. Shearer needed a front-and-back stab-proof vest, not more experience.

    I think you may be over-estimating the complexity of the Parliamentary process. Once one has the Standing Orders sussed, the rest actually looks to be pretty basic in terms of process.

    The level of debating is appalling in terms of argument, rhetoric, philosophy, or skill.

    Possible exceptions: Finlayson, Flavell, Joyce, and Wall.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. Harriet (4,010 comments) says:

    Really ?

    How good has gay marraige really been for you?
    Legalised prostitution?
    Carbon tax?
    No smacking?
    Full on, no choice state education?
    WFF -where people decide how to spend taxpayers money on their own ‘nessecities’ – except of course their children’s education?
    A health service where you paid for a hip replacement in your last year of work in 2000 -at age 60- but 10yrs later when you need it – you are then put on a waiting list?
    Bill English and John Key doing a ‘line by line’ review of all public sector jobs so as to save money and appear responsable – but now the need for a ‘DPF inspired taxpayers union’ to put ‘an end to the waste’?

    Nothing to see here. Give your party vote to the Conservatives.

    The National/Labour public service monolith is now in it’s last year of reign. Enjoy!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. Harriet (4,010 comments) says:

    “….The level of debating is appalling in terms of argument, rhetoric, philosophy, or skill…..”

    In general – unconstructive.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Shazzadude (467 comments) says:

    Steve Taylor (175) Says:

    November 24th, 2013 at 9:25 pm
    Hi Pete: I’ll take your answer as a “No, I won’t be backing my bloke in the bet”.

    CPNZ is outpolling NZ First 2:1 at present this time last Election cycle.

    Absolutely false. Roy Morgan (the only poll that predicted NZF’s election result with any accuracy) polled NZF at 3% in both of their November 2010 polls. The Conservatives polled at 1.5% in the latest Roy Morgan poll, so it’s the opposite scenario-NZF in November 2010 are outpolling the Cons in November 2013 by a factor of 2:1.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. igm (859 comments) says:

    Wouldn’t take too much notice of anything “Snake” Vance writes . . . time she pissed off out of NZ and back to UK, taking her criminal obese friend from Germany.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    If National wants a coalition partner they should simply drop the threshold to 4% and stop the coat tailing. The voting public are sick of these jack ups.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    National can’t “simply drop the threshold to 4%”. And they have made it clear that any changes need a wide party mandate.

    Craig makes a big thing of his openness and honesty, but this clashes with his lack of openness regarding his Christian connections and views. That lack of candour could be his achilles heel and backlash – if this happens during the campaign it could swing his chances.

    Talking of openness and honesty, Steve, you have an obvious interest in promoting Craig and the Conservative Party, what is your connection there? Your efforts seem to be far more than as an interested observer or supporter.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    Talking of openness and honesty, P.G., you have an obvious interest in promoting Dunne and UnitedFuture, what is your connection there? Your efforts seem to be far more than as an interested observer or supporter.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    Its interesting to see that, while many people in the media pillory CC and his party as fundies and nutjobs, he has a lot of people here agreeing with most of the policies outlined in this interview. Obviously not everybody will agree with everything a party puts forward, but Craig seems to have policies which strike some strong chords. This good for NZ politics and the coming election will be very interesting if he keeps this up

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    Oh, and on the ‘fundy’ thing…. as an atheist myself, it makes me laugh that the only faith allowed in NZ is the official Global Warming/eco-fuck state religion :D

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    But could they end up extracting defeat from the jaws of ambiguity? Here’s one possibility. The general public finds the Conservatives too extreme and bolts. There is an increased electoral turnout as a consequence, driving Con voter share down. Guilt by association occurs, driving National’s own poll ratings down. Or…another fundamentalist microparty arises, dissenting from the Conservatives over climate change, welfare policies and binding referenda (Christian Democrats to their “Christian Heritage”). Or…the Cons reject National as a coalition partner. Or…United Future and the Maori Party refuse to work with CC.
    Or…the party doesn’t withstand detailed, critical and investigative media scrutiny.

    If I were a centre-right social liberal voter, I’d insure United Future is there as an insurance policy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    “National can’t “simply drop the threshold to 4%”. And they have made it clear that any changes need a wide party mandate.”

    There is a private member’s bill before Parliament. If National support it it will be law.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    I’ve been open and honest Manolo – far more than you’ve been, so very hypocritical you taking that line of attack.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    “There is a private member’s bill before Parliament. If National support it it will be law.”

    But that bill doesn’t just propose lowering the threshold.

    Labour MP Iain Lees-Galloway said the bill lowered the party-vote threshold from 5 per cent to 4 per cent and removed the coat-tail provision that allowed major parties to do deals with minor ones to help them into Parliament.

    And as DPF said:

    It is worth noting that this bill does not implement the recommendations of the Electoral Commission in full. It cherry picks the recommendations they agree with, but doesn’t implement the recommendation to get rid of overhang seats or setting a ratio of electorate to list seats.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/11/labour_says_no_need_for_consensus_on_electoral_reform.html

    And With his approach to this bill Lees-Galloway isn’t seeking consensus nor does he expect it to succeed, saying it would “put an end to tea party-style stitch-ups” but “Lees-Galloway acknowledged he would probably struggle to get support for the bill”.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    Seriously, someone needs to sit down with Peter Dunne and get him to rebrand United Future as the Liberal Democrats of New Zealand and adopt comparable policies to the German Free Democrats/ British Liberal Democrats. That way, centre-right voters will have a real choice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    “But that bill doesn’t just propose lowering the threshold.”

    I already stated that in my email. It will get rid of jack ups.

    If the bill goes to a select committee National could say they want it to implement the recommendations of the Electoral Commission in full. I am sure Labour would support that.

    It could also make it easier to get rid of the Maori seats. Almost 16% of the population identify as Maori. If they cannot get 4% that shows that the vast majority do not think they need special representation.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    ChardonnayGuy – they sort of are trying that Lib-Dem branding but it’s not something the media are interested in reporting, and most of the voting public aren’t interested in political labels.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    Seriously, someone needs to sit down with Peter Dunne and get him to rebrand United Future as the Liberal Democrats of New Zealand and adopt comparable policies..

    You expect too much from the whore Dunne, who is nothing more than a weathervane ready to swing the way the wind blows. He has no policies, he has no scruples.

    UnitedFuture will strike a deal with whoever wins the next election, and in the unfortunate case the prostitute winning Ohariu-Belmont, he’ll demand the baubles of office: the Minister of Revenue title. TAB paying $1.01 on that bet.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    I think it’s extremely unlikely UF would strike a coalition deal with Labour based on Labour’s own current policy positions (Dunne has made it clear he won’t) and Labour+Green makes it even more out of the question.

    It’s very unlikely any party will “win” the next election.
    There’s been no Ohariiu-Belomont electorate since 2008.
    TAB don’t take bets on politics.
    Dunne has proven to have scruples.
    Dunne/UF have extensive policies – http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/policy/

    Manolo at 8.06 am “Talking of openness and honesty…” – you can talk about it but when you keep showing your ignorance and lying it makes a mockery of yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    Pete, I think a comprehensive rebranding might well work. Let’s face it, “United Future” refers to two defunct political parties. And from I know about Dunne, he’s been sympathetic to much of the Liberal Democrats classical liberal strand for several years.

    Added to which, I suggest that disgruntled classical liberals who are dissatisfied with the current wooing of the Cons might well want to colonise UFNZ. Granted, they’d have to grimace at Dunne’s anti-pot stance, but if the pot lobby was better organised as a social movement, this wouldn’t have had to happen. However, the Cons are too unpredictable and extremist to allow into government. For all his past Vicar of Wakefield tendencies, at least Dunne is a dependable Nat ally. One would just have to insure that populist numbskulls don’t sabotage it the way ACT was destroyed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. Dave Mann (1,126 comments) says:

    Hey Pete and Chardonnay: You might well be right about UF’s position and strategy…. but I think that party has a hopeless uphill battle if it wants to convince the electorate that its a serious party, not a one-man band led by a ponce with a silly hairdo. Its about perception and much as the electorate has set in place its perceptions of ACT and NZ First, these perceptions get to a point where its impossible to shift them, frankly. The Conservatives, on the other hand, don’t yet have the ‘baggage’ attached, so they will probably be taken more seriously (at least in the first instance).

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    Admittedly, Dave, Dunne’s brand was damaged by the ill-advised faustian bargain with the former Christian Democrats, unleashing that mad fundie carpetbagger contingent. Granted, Dunne may have got their infrastructure to replace United’s ruins, but at considerable loss to his own credibility and reputation. And predictably, in 2007, Mephistopheles- aka the Kiwi Party- decided to return and try to cart Dunne off to electoral hell by decarpetbagging United “Future”.

    As for the Cons, it’s a year before the next election. There’s plenty of time for things to go wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    Hey, has anyone read Rob Hosking’s article on the Cons in last week’s NBR? That epitomises most of the unease and ambivalence I’ve heard from most classical liberals I know about them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    Dave – I agree that UF as a party has an uphill battle and is seen as a one man band. But CP is also seen as a one man band. And looking at the CP list from last election Craig may want to keep the focus on just himself. He’s playing a high risk game that he may get away with. Winston came back with a bunch of MPs who were political unknowns.

    But CP candidates may get the spotlight shone on them, if not led by the media expect Labour and Winston to be competing strongly and trying to expose them if they look like being National’s life-line.

    Craig will also have to prove himself in political debates. He might not be matched against Key and Cunliffe but he should be up against Norman and/or Turei, Peters, Dunne, Harawira and Flavell as well as whoever leads Act into the next election.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. Pete George (21,806 comments) says:

    ChardonnayGuy – to get what you want out of UF it will take an injection of new personnel into the party. It’s there for the taking, and opportunity for anyone wanting to fasttrack and avoid the huge hurdle of starting a party from scratch. I think National needs it – they need alternatives, not reliance on one unproven party – and our politics needs a solid centrist-ish party. But there seems little interest in making it happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    I’m picking a party room coup in ACT if Banks’ attempted judicial review goes against him. If that happens, I think he’d be replaced as party leader and Epsom candidate with Catherine Isaac, whom National might find far more philosophically compatible, politically experienced and disciplined. However, “if it ’twere done, ’twere well to be done quickly.”

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Shazzadude, you stated in reponse to my claim that CPNZ was outpolling NZ First 2:1:

    “Absolutely false. Roy Morgan (the only poll that predicted NZF’s election result with any accuracy) polled NZF at 3% in both of their November 2010 polls. The Conservatives polled at 1.5% in the latest Roy Morgan poll, so it’s the opposite scenario-NZF in November 2010 are outpolling the Cons in November 2013 by a factor of 2:1″.

    Take a look at this Reid Research Poll: http://www.reidresearch.co.nz/TV3+POLL+RESULTS.html

    The figure to look at is the Sep/Oct 10 polling.

    NZ First 1.2% Oct 2010

    Compared to:

    CPNZ 2.8% Oct 2013

    i.e. at this time in the election cycle CPNZ are polling more than double what NZ first were and NZ First easily passed the 5% threshold (i.e. 7.7% at the Election 13 months later).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. Than (371 comments) says:

    Steve, you keep focusing exclusively on the October poll. That 2.8% result is an outlier, and was in fact contradicted by the latest poll that had them back down to 1.5%.

    Comparing NZF and CCCP polls at this time in the electorate cycle is pointless. NZF got comfortably over 5% not because of earlier polling or steady growth. They got it because of the teapot saga and Winston Peter’s talent for grandstanding. Colin Craig just doesn’t have Winston Peter’s political instincts or oratory skill, so that kind of sudden jump is not going to happen for the Conservatives.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Than: Wanna bet? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. Than (371 comments) says:

    Steve – Sure.

    I’d prefer a stake that was non-monetary. While I realise Colin Craig disagrees, I don’t like politics being about who can afford to spend the most. So how about this;

    If the Conservatives reach the 5% threshold with no assistance from National (no electorates without National candidates, no cups of tea, etc.) then you win. If National provides assistance to the Conservatives the bet is called off. If National provides no assistance and the Conservatives fail to reach the 5% threshold, I win.

    The loser has to post in GD once a day for a week saying “I’m a stupid liberal/conservative and I bet against/on the Conservatives. What an idiots I was.” (or something to that effect, open to discussion on the wording), plus they can’t comment on any KiwiBlog discussions about Colin Craig or the Conservatives for six months.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    You guys & girls, you’ve given me an idea. How bout, the party vote gets cast, two weeks after the electorate seat vote. If this had happened last election, people would have known, the Conservatives wouldn’t get an Electorate seat, and so those who wanted to give their party vote to Conservative would rethink that idea, as they didn’t get that 5%.

    This way only those parties that are very likely to get in would get voted for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Than, you have changed the rules of the game.

    You stated: “Colin Craig just doesn’t have Winston Peter’s political instincts or oratory skill, so that kind of sudden jump is not going to happen for the Conservatives”.

    The comparison here is NZ First performance vs CPNZ’s performance, such performance being influenced by the political and / or oratory skill of each Party Leader.

    The bet would thus be: “If CPNZ beat NZ First in terms of securing Electorate seats and / or Party votes, I win; if NZ First beat CPNZ in terms of securing Electorate seats and / or Party votes, you win; if it’s a draw, the bet is called off”.

    I’m up for the non-monetary option you raised, and I’m good with the wording you suggest, and the non-comment time you have tabled.

    On those terms, I’m in – how about you?

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

    Hi their, actually if I had to make a bet one way or the other, it would certainly go to Mr. Peters. Out of everybody in parliament Mr. Peters has the soundest financial understanding. He’s also witty. So you don’t here him say “NZ woman are the most promiscuous” which is what Mr. Craig said. Mr Craig has great ideas, but he just doesn’t seem to know how to back up his arguements, and be tactical. My fear, is that if Mr. Craig gets NZ First voters, NZ First might not get that 5%.

    Anyhow, so what I’m saying, is I’m pretty sure NZ First will have more votes by 2:1, if not greater. Anyhow, I’m not a betting man, but if I was to bet, I honestly don’t think the Conservatives will get anywhere near 5%. And if they lose the electorate seat, than all those votes will be absolutely wasted. Furthermore, I think New Zealand First is a better party.

    I can remember my girlfriend and I were watching on tape the 2002 Finance debate. She was angry because she said Mr. Peters knows what he’s talking about, and these others don’t. Rodney Hide’s answers were always tax cuts, no matter what the question was about. I’ve always looked at everything from an economics point of view, and I certainly thought Mr. Peters has better ideas, but I see the world in only an economics view point. Well not quite, but more economics than anything else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Oh by the way, this election things are going to be different this time. I’m going to base my vote on a different issue. Less than 10% of us produce something. This means the other 90% of us are bidding for the wealth of that 10%, and willing to offer a service, in return. I’d like to see 40% of us producing things. This will keep the other 60% of us busy providing a service. Ravi Batra says when you have 40% producing stuff, and the other 60% providing a service, you have a very prosperous economy.

    So what I’m saying is I’m not necessarily going to give my vote to any particular party. I’m waiting to see, if any party is going to address this issue. I’m fed up with parties arguing about the minimium wage, and this and that. Their’s only one issue I care about at the moment, because if we resolve that issue, other economic issues will work themselves out.

    That’s just me, though, and every election my vote has been entirely determined on the issue that I’m concerned about the most.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. Than (371 comments) says:

    Steve –

    Hi Than, you have changed the rules of the game.

    The bet would thus be: “If CPNZ beat NZ First in terms of securing Electorate seats and / or Party votes, I win; if NZ First beat CPNZ in terms of securing Electorate seats and / or Party votes, you win; if it’s a draw, the bet is called off”.

    Fair comment. I’d make two modifications to the bet you suggest.

    First, if National endorses or assists either NZF or CPNZ then the bet is called off. The realities of MMP mean John Key has more influence on the outcome for both parties than their respective leaders.

    Second, if both NZF or CPNZ fail to get into parliament the bet is again called off; I’m not interested in quibbling over CPNZ getting 4.2% of the party vote versus NZF getting 3.9%. If either gets in then the winner is determined by party votes.

    With those changes I’m in. Acceptable terms?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. big bruv (12,352 comments) says:

    ” Out of everybody in parliament Mr. Peters has the soundest financial understanding.”

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…..

    That is genuinely hilarious.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Hi Than, on those terms – I’m in.

    I agree with you about Key having more influence than Party Leaders – which I suspect will mean that neither of us will be able to collect :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. Steve Taylor (189 comments) says:

    Big Bruv: Meatloaf may be right – while I don’t understand quite how $158,000 vanished into thin air, and then reappeared in the hands of the Charitable sector, Mr Peters has been a Treasurer and all, so he probably can explain it……………oh hold on……….he tried to, to the Privileges Committee – but then they didn’t get it either and censured him………….Oh I give up.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    Steve, I was not happy with that either but about 6.6% of the voters were prepared to move on and it appears John Key is as well. I signed the Family First pledge that I will not vote for a party whose leader voted for the redefinition of marriage.
    The most important issue for me is that legislation generally of a moral nature and decided by conscience vote must be ratified by a referendum before it becomes law.

    NZF policy on referenda is closest to that. CPNZ calls for CIR. National will not accept that. I do not think National will assist a party only to have them sit on the cross benches.

    Colin seems to think he can do what hardly anyone else has done. That is get over 5% of the vote with never having been in Parliament. The only person I can think of who has done that is Bob Jones.

    If Colin was really smart he would not have been openly attacking Winston like he is. The two parties combined would easily make the 5% without being beholden to National.

    I share Meatloaf’s concern that Colin’s present tactic could see neither party make in in to Parliament and the loony left in control.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    In this case, I don’t think I’ll be voting for Mr. Peters. Other people have been telling me about other scandals, and now your telling me about the scandals you know of. What I meant was what he puts on his website, seems to be solid economic policy. So now that, their’s all these scandals he’s accussed of, I’m not sure anybody is worth my vote. People can put great things on their website, and practice something different.

    Well I’ve got another year to work it out. Maybe I won’t vote for anybody. So big Bruv, you really are a big brother in pointing that out, and you and Steve get a positive tick from me. Anyhow, I still don’t think the Conservatives will get anywhere near 5% of the party vote. NZ first will either get less than 5% by a small amount, or will get a little more than that 5%.

    So as far as the bet is concerned, if I were making the bet, Conservatives won’t get 5% and NZ first will get more than the conservatives.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Thanks Chuck Bird, I’m with you on everything you’ve said in regards to social policy. Although I’m still not sure who to vote for. And it certainly won’t be Mr. Craig, cause he just doesn’t seem to have a good way of expressing his views tactically.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. ChardonnayGuy (1,023 comments) says:

    For those who find Colin Craig and his sycophants disturbingly untested, could someone please create some sort of lobby group to insure that National does have a coherent and mainstream centre-right coalition party as an alternative to the unacceptable? Either rebrand United Future and transform the organisation, make sure Catherine Isaac is selected in Epsom if Banks either resigns or is forced to do so, or merge ACT and United Future. Can anyone think of any other Centre Right Alternatives for discussion?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. Meatloaf (62 comments) says:

    Ah yes ChardonnayGuy. About 6 months ago, Focus NZ put an advertisement out in the East and Bays Courier paper for Auckland, asking people a few questions. It looked like a competition, to write a paper on four issues. Within a short time they were talking to me, and presenting their views.

    Ever since that time I have been comfortable with Focus NZ. They started as a party representing the farmer, and then became more mainstream with the exporter, and manufacturer. Their policies are designed for this. So in other comments I have made, I’ve said New Zealand has a low capital intensity per person according to Gareth Morgan.

    This is an issue I have talked with them about, and they have talked amongst themselves about what they can do. If you think this is some sort of ploy, just ask them if one of their members has brought up the whole finance situation for those producing goods. So when I said, I’m not sure who to vote for, I was meaning in terms of the people everybody knows about. You’ll also see me say the one issue I care about, is that only a few of us are producing goods, and that I’d like to see more people producing goods, like 40%, and then the other 60% involved in services. So now you know who I really am. Their policies are all about the exporter, the producer and the farmer, cause if those people do well, their will be plenty of work for everybody. And their is a very good chance they will win their Northland seat.

    Ever since I’ve been on board, I’ve lost interest in New Zealand First’s policies. I still think he has some great ideas, its now with Focus NZ, well things are different.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. Than (371 comments) says:

    Hi Than, on those terms – I’m in.

    I agree with you about Key having more influence than Party Leaders – which I suspect will mean that neither of us will be able to collect

    Done.

    And while I’d love if it National ignored both NZF and CPNZ and backed themselves to govern alone, I agree an arrangement seems likely.

    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.