Guest Post: The First Election Debate

March 9th, 2014 at 8:30 am by David Farrar

First Election Debate Goes to Craig (Gower/TV3)

by John Stringer, a Christchurch spy in Jaffaland.

I was in Auckland last night, so went along to the first election debate for 2014 which kicks off the 2014 campaign.


600 people in the Fisher & Paykel Auditorium, Business School of Auckland University.

Organised by the Dept. of Politics. Gold coin entry, so not a free-for-all.

Gridlock Auckland traffic delayed the debate 20 minutes as not all speakers could arrive on time.

Winston Peters was a no-show. Colin Craig was the last to arrive and received a celebrity welcome.

MC’ed by Patrick Gower, who gave a good humoured mockery introduction of each candidate. Shane Jones of Labour was put down as the Porn King; Jamie Whyte of ACT derided as Mr 0.00% and a potential lecturer of Incest 101 and Polygamy 102; and other good-humoured put downs of each candidate.

According to Patrick Gower of TV3 interviewed on RadioLIVE Marcus Lush this morning, the night went to Colin Craig, who was received as something of a rock celebrity, with students queuing up afterward to get a selfie with him.  As reported here. Craig was the last to leave,

The format was two minutes each, on the following:

1. Each parties basic framework

2. Economy

3. Social Issues

4. Tertiary Education (Funding model) 

1. Each party’s basic framework

Debate commenced with a humorous address by

Colin Craig, Conservative who opened with “honesty” and  some anecdotes about fishing and rugby and blew a whistle (“invented by a NZer,” ie innovation).

John Minto, Mana.  Read his speech, standing for the poor and those left behind by 30 years of neo-liberalism, and those slipping backwards through inequality and poverty. Attacked the “obscenely rich.”  Will abolish GST and feed kids at schools.  Also promised jobs through regional development and to “abolish the dole.”

Gareth Hughes, Greens.  Talked up a progressive government, usual Green environmental policy, solar panels, protecting beaches, attacked National, swimmable rivers and use of smart technology.

Jamie-Lee Ross, National.  “Patrick Gower comedy show, better than Paul Henry.” A NZ that is more free, creates jobs through a competitive economy.  Growth at 3%; talked up results under National, especially growth in jobs (rebutting Minto), also covered education and health.

Te Ururoa Flavell, Maori.  Patrick introduced him as “T-Flav.”  Spoke about Maori Party’s protest beginnings (Foreshore and Seabed); Clarified his party not just for Maori. Shared values between Pakeha and Maori.  Emphasised cooperation with National but holding National back on key policies, such as environmental protection under RMA.  Keep National honest and moderated.

Shane Jones, Labour.  “Explained Colin was welcome, we waited, it’s a long way from the Moon.”  Fairer more equitable power system in NZ; going to introduce a capital gains tax. Assistance for families with a  parent staying at home.

Jamie Whyte, ACT. Began very quietly, lectured on nature of what we think politicians do. Said ACT rejects current definitions. Property rights discussed in context of Foreshore and Seabed.  Education as a consummable and economic sovereignty for all.

[Aside] Capital Gains Tax.

Gower noted the applause for Capital Gains Tax announced by Jones, went to Craig:

• Why no capital gains tax? Craig said CGT doesn’t drive down prices for housing; its not an answer its an impediment.

• Minto supported CGT. Gower to Hughes: why only on housing? Hughes: over investment in housing, locked up and not spent on innovation, IT, clean-tech which are all capital starved.

• Gower to Ross, why National not helping with housing?  Ross agreed with Craig, that  a CGT won’t work (cited Australia) and said Labour was being disingenuous.

• Flavell admitted they didn’t have a policy on CGT but interested in better housing for Maori.

• Jones said Gower’s face is “made for radio.” (slightly booed for that) which he called ‘The Derp face.’  Avoided the question and put a plug in for lifting the retirement age.

• Whyte: opposed to CGT, capital has already been taxed as savings on income. Said land prices are artificially scarce which has pushed prices up.

2. ECONOMY, specifically the Minimum (& Living) Wage.

• ACT opposes minimum wages; can’t legislate incomes and minimum wages pull people out of the labour market.  People need skills. Unfair as it imposes a burden on employers and the consumers of goods; artbitrarily allocates the policy to those doing the most – providing the jobs. Spread the problem across the whole population.

• Jones. Labour will put up the minimum wage, a living wage, Working for Families; challenged listeners to think about whether people can afford to live on $13.50?

• Flavell talked about struggling workers on low incomes, part time workers, and being unable to fulfill their obligations as parents. Set min. wage at $16.00; and $18.80 as a Living Wage.What’s good for Maori is good for NZ, look after the lower end.

• Ross. Only 4 countries in world that have a higher minimum wage comparatively with NZ. [This stat. was later broadly challenged by Gower and several speakers]. Increased it every year they’ve been in office. Ramping up min. wage increases unemployment. Grows welfare, we need more jobs; growth of min wage naturally rather than arbitrarily.

• Hughes emphasized Greens impact on hauling Labour toward a min. wage and living wage. Plan for higher tech, IT jobs, science jobs that pay more.

• Minto. Mana would make living wage ($18.80) the min. wage.  Compared the workers’ share of income over several decades; lower now than it was.  He swore the most. “If bullsh*t was tarseal, you could road the whole country with all of National and Acts policies about this.” Called people bloody bastards and pricks.

• Craig castigated Minto, that he probably paid more tax than Minto did, and at a higher rate [to applause from audience]. Attacked National’s tax cut but said they had been misapplied.  Favours tax cuts better targeted where it benefits most.

Gower challenged Ross’s figures re only 4 countries having higher minimum wages, and min wage rates internationally. Ross spilled anti-Labour statistics on wages. Gower said Labour’s policy was closer to National than Greens or Maori, Jones said to wait for the election. Whyte cited Singapore and Switzerland as nations without a minimum wage. Whyte attacked Labour’s arbitrary pricing of min. wage, because they know “damn well that $20 would create mass unemployment.”  

Gower to Hughes: would it cost jobs? Greens support it because it’s fair; couldn’t clarify if it was a Green priority to push Labour up on the min. wage.  Minto attacked the rich, called them vicious, and tired class struggle rhetoric. Gower challenged him. “Are you saying Colin Craig is a bludger?”  Craig replied Consv. intends to close tax loopholes and largely in agreement with Minto.  Gower was shocked…“Conservatives and Minto in Coalition!”  Craig then traversed over to Education as a metaphor for success and equity regarding income and paying tax.

3. Social Issues with emphasis on Alcohol regulation.

Gower asked each speaker what their personal drinking was.

• Jones: drinking is a conscience issue for him. Not convinced minimum pricing of alcohol will change NZ drinking habits. Cited Geoffrey Palmer’s reforms but disagreed with whipping caucuses on this issue.

• Ross.  Doesn’t drink. Supports age at 18. Agreed with reducing blood/alcohol levels and zero-rating at age differentials.  Access to alcohol should also be restricted.

• Hughes. Drinks a few beers a week. Disagrees with targeting youth; it’s a societal and historic problem. Cited stats re youth drinking being down comparatively.

• Minto: light social drinker now but heavy before. Attacked the booze barons advertising alcohol to teens, and promoting binge drinking culture.

• Whyte, “I’m a slow and steady drinker..I always knew I had it in me.”  [Big applause]. Alcohol should be regulated, but by individuals not the State.  Opposed regulation of venues, should be done by pub owners.  Supported the 18 year age limit.

• Flavell drinks one beer a week.  Moved to Maori policy on tobacco and a smoke-free NZ, and gambling. Maori to attack these issues by addressing price, advertising, marketing and branding as well as caring for those affected by the results of abuse.

• Craig is a light social drinker, beer and wine. “Depends on the number of BBQs.”  Spoke about the reports and the huge costs of subsidising this problem, such as hospital admissions. Most violent crime fueled by alcohol. Audience went quiet while Craig talked on these issues and he got the loudest clap of the night on this topic which seemed to resonate.

[Aside] Have You Ever Smoked a Joint?

Gower asked Craig if he’d spoked a joint and if he supports decriminalisation of cannabis. He may have passively smoked at Auckland University “in the Quad.”  Craig attacked libertarianism, saying people can’t do what ever they want because it affects other people.  Decried synthetic cannabis.

Gower asked Minto, who had smoked a joint.  His personal view is that marijuana should be decriminalised.

Hughes: “I’m a vegetarian Greenie who used to sail on the Rainbow Warrior, what do you guys think?”  Prohibition doesn’t work, supports decriminalisation.

Flavell.  Utterly opposed to decriminalisation because of the severe damage he sees in his communities.

Jones. “I come from Kaitaia, so…”  Not a smoker. Grows like a weed in Kaitaia, not interested in supporting decriminalisaion.

Whyte.  Doesn’t smoke.

4. Tertiary Education.  What is the best funding model?

• Hughes attacked National on capping entries and blamed them for NZ universities slipping in international rankings. Repeated his Green mantra, “Smarter, Greener New Zealand.”

• Ross. Talked up the heavily-subsidised system we have now. Ross suggested Winston Peters didn’t bother to turn up, as the 600 people present did not represent his demographic.

• Minto.  All the speakers, except perhaps for Gareth, got their educations for free. Labour brought in student fee as and National increased them, now at a level above infaltion. Mana wants tertiary education and all education) free for citizenship.

• Craig. The country, universities and students are going into debt to pay for the current system, because we pay for bottoms on seats. We need a more varied system, compete for it and make our universities the best in the world.  Disagreed with Minto’s approach.  Mass education through university (bums on seats) was not the way to go was well supported by the audience.

• Whyte. ACT supports fee subsidisation but is against interest free loans. Let consumers set the market for tertiary education through the vocation sector setting need.

• Flavell. Unfairness in sector due to price hinderances for many people.  Maori want fee reduction policies, a universal student allowance, set at the same level as the unemployment benefit, and repayments set to actual earning levels.  Maori wants to decrease student debt.

• Jones. Praised the scholarship he received that gave him access to tertiary education.

The debate finished with questions about University Councils.


Overall the debate was good-willed with a few barbs and a tenor of university humour as led by Patrick Gower’s deprecating style.  The 2 min. session game time for each speaker to get away some content and policy substance. Jones was the most humorous but suffered from cheap-shot syndrome trotting out the predictable recycling of his colleagues hiccups.

Gareth Hughes did very well, he was polished and got his party’s bullet points away (which surprised me) as I’d debated with him recently, and he was not nearly as good.  Jamie Whyte has a long way to go, nice man, but like Richard Prebble says, “not a politician.”  Ross held the flag for National; Minto seemed from another decade; Craig had lots of celebrity support and was given the night by Gower. Flavell injected a much-needed different perspective on many things, which enriched the debate.  It was a bit long at 2 hours.

The two best spears in my view were Hughes and Craig.  Jones was the funniest but a bit of a buffoon.

Most humorous line of the night was probably Hughes re Rainbow Warrior joint-smoking or Gower mocking Whyte over Incest and Polygamy.

29 Responses to “Guest Post: The First Election Debate”

  1. tvb (5,542 comments) says:

    The response to Colin Craig I found very interesting. I hope Colin Craig is getting first rate political and media advice. He can afford it. He looks good and the political spectrum is wide open for someone espousing traditional values. Winston comes close but Craig is far more telegenic.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. rouppe (1,249 comments) says:

    I do get irritated with the constant refrain that tertiary education was free in the 80’s.

    Yes the fees were subsidised (75% from menory). There was a universal student allowance of about $30 a week which was just enough to pay for accommodation.

    But that was it. If you didn’t have some other source of funds you still couldn’t go to university. You still had to pay for books, transport, clothes and food. You either had to have parents who could afford to pay some money, or you had to work the term breaks and Christmas holiday period.

    Not really free, from my perspective

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (13,436 comments) says:


    The usual Craig haters are conspicuously quiet this morning.

    As Cpl Jones would say “They don’t like it up ’em”.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Ryan Sproull (7,984 comments) says:

    Sounds like a great exchange of views. Sorry to have missed it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Southern Raider (2,119 comments) says:

    Seems to be
    – Conservatives will do well this election as they fit with a natural segment of the electorate eg traditional values
    – ACT are dead. I can’t see how this dry boring academic is going to attract any votes. Spewing out academic shit from liberal text books does not show any idea of what motivates NZers and what policies are needed to continue moving the company forward
    – Greens could actually benefit NZ if they stuck to clean rivers, smart technology eg and dropped all the communist bullshit. There is no reason why a true environmental party couldn’t work with National

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Peter (2,138 comments) says:

    Hughes keeps going on about IT but never explains *how*

    I’m the IT-centric entrepreneur who would listen to that message, but I know what we need. We need less compliance, lower taxes, deeper capital markets and the access to capital this brings, and more offshore companies based here.

    This appears to be the exact opposite of what the socialist Greens will deliver.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Harriet (7,625 comments) says:

    I’ve been saying it for a long time now:

    Conservatism is now the counter culture – so we’re the cool ones! 😎

    And if the uni students like that, then societal change is coming – that will also become tomorrows middleclasses – and parents.

    Mr Craig is now a rockstar – and the no-show Peters is now a gravestone. 😎

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. lolitasbrother (1,331 comments) says:

    Yes thanks Mr Farrar for this summary. Can you remember the days when we bought newspapers on Sunday.
    If Patrick Gower had me on TV and asked me how much I drank or smoked,
    I would ask the little ugly poof how he fucked his wife, and then I would break his jaw in three places

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. iMP (2,665 comments) says:

    Charming lolita. demerits if I could (hint DPF).

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. ChardonnayGuy (1,618 comments) says:

    In the interests of fair scrutiny, here’s an excerpt from my latest Gaynz.Com article on Colin Craig. What exactly are his entitlements to be known as a “fiscal conservative?” Or is his fiscal conservatism “clip on” and secondary to his religious social conservatism?

    Craig seems to favour some degree of venture capital and mentoring for small business establishment and growth, as in Taiwan and South Korea. He fudges questions about raising the age of eligibility for Superannuation to 67, and we’re left unclear about what he intends insofar as KiwiSaver is concerned. He’s similarly unclear about what he’d do with Working For Families, citing an anecdotal case where it was used to support an individual and his family who gave up work. So where’s the evidence that such abuse is widespread apart from what might well be an unrepresentative case?

    Perusal of the Conservative Party’s “Ask Colin” website also discloses several other embryonic economic and fiscal policies- a tax-free threshold of $25,000 and 25% tax rate beyond that threshold; opposition to increasing the minimum wage, allegedly because it would impose “adverse costs” on business owners; abolishing the Emissions Trading Scheme due to his belief in climate change denial; support for free checks and healthcare for children (until what age?); opposition to the introduction of a capital gains tax (again, short on detail why Colin Craig opposes this alternative fiscal management policy, preferred by Labour and the Greens); competition for Christchurch rebuild project allocation; restrictions on foreign worker entry, despite the domestic skill shortage; support for increased government investment in apprenticeship training; polluter pays water purity penalties; school horticultural training; ambiguity when it comes to increased proportion of government foreign aid; increased defence spending; opposition to “quantative easing” bank regulation; a housing policy which lists land availability, development costs, environmental regulations and property costs as its primary concerns.

    Colin Craig is concerned about the “leaky buildings’ crisis. As he was a former property developer himself, that is quite logical, and to be fair, he has stated his concerns about that failure in lax building industry regulation. However, given that the Canterbury Television building collapse is also a question of lax building regulation, why hasn’t he similarly commented on questions raised in that context, as it is surely also related to his own professional expertise within that industry?
    In the same Investigate article, Colin Craig refers to the genetically modified crops debate last decade, which sowed dissension between the Clark administration and the Greens. He used that as a hypothetical example of what might have led to a binding citizens referendum at the time of that debate, although he doesn’t seem intent on re-opening that can of political worms, as any such referendum would necessarily involve messy litigation that would surround abrupt cancellation of any corporate contracts for GM crop development. In any case, the Greens appear to have accepted tacit criticisms that the campaign against GM crops was an “eco-populist” one and that there is no current discernible long-term risk from their production and use. One also wonders if the use of that example was based on his professed admiration for the United Kingdom Independence Party, which has a policy that any GM ingredients within food industry products need to be clearly labelled as such.

    Craig has also stated that if property developers do not actively utilise land purchases and allow them to lie fallow and unused, any coalition government that includes him will engage in compulsory reacquisition of that land. Given that property rights are a benchmark of centre-right political philosophy, this policy has alarmed many business commentators in the National Business Review and other such publications. Not even the Greens have gone that far, they protest.
    Like the US Republican Tea Party faction, Colin Craig also states that the Conservatives are intent on fiscal responsibility and limited government. How do they square this with their declared support for frequent binding citizens referenda, given that even non-binding referenda are highly expensive for a recovering post-recession economy like ours, costing nine million dollars apiece? Where is that money going to come from? Which public services will Colin Craig cut to achieve this objective?

    The Conservatives also support charter schools, much like ACT and National. However, Colin Craig also wants “choice” when it comes to public health expenditure. He argues that public health institutions should spend money on ‘alternative’ health nostrums such as chiropracty, homeopathy, acupuncture and other measures that are not evidence-based. This may horrify some conservative Christian supporters, who view the ‘alternative health’ movement as “New Age” and “neopagan” or open to “demonic” Eastern spiritualities. However, there has always been a right-wing constituency that has supported ‘alternative health’ and distrusted mainstream evidence-based medicine, so perhaps this policy may appeal to that constituency. Some mainstream voters may look askance at it, however. Certainly, some centre-right voters will. Notably, this was the subject of a Conservative Party parliamentary submission, so it actually seems to be party policy.

    The Conservatives do do provide links to parliamentary submissions on some issues, but as yet, they have no policy papers, nor do they have any reference footnotes and links to sources for their policy positions. The submissions include two on religious social conservative issues, namely marriage equality and the anti-sexworker Manukau City (Regulating Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill. They also include submissions on issues like the Natural Health Products Bill, Constitutional Review (opposed to greater Treaty recognition and supporting Maori seat abolition), MMP Review (supporting a diminished four percent list-only parliamentary representation threshold) and a sole submission on economic matters, the Mixed Ownership Model Bill. If I were a centre-right voter, I’d be concerned at this.

    These are canvassed with variable detail, but significantly, none of them appear to be properly costed. Or, if they have been, what evaluative tools, frameworks, options and outcomes were used in such analyses.

    Fiscal conservative? It seems a mixed bag, to say the least. And again, where are the costings for these policies?

    Not Recommended:

    Ian Wishart: “True Blue” Investigate: 2/2014: 10-15.


    Steve Braunias: “Uncle Colin” Metro 381: March 2014: 52-57.

    Gordon Campbell: “The Blank Slate Boy: An Interview with Colin Craig” Werewolf:

    Audrey Young: “Inside the Mind of Colin Craig” New Zealand Herald: 13.12.2013:


    Conservative Party: Submissions:
    Conservative Party: Ask Colin:

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. dime (13,132 comments) says:

    “If Patrick Gower had me on TV and asked me how much I drank or smoked,
    I would ask the little ugly poof how he fucked his wife, and then I would break his jaw in three places”

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA and that ladies and gentlemen wins Dimes comment of the week.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. ShawnLH (14,567 comments) says:

    Good to see Craig doing so well, especially in front of a Uni audience. I have suspected for some time now that when you get beyond the media bias, he has far more political nous and ability than he is given credit for.

    Minto. Meh. Is there a reason we cannot deport him to North Korea? The language says it all, he’s a dangerous Stalinist thug with no class and no clue.

    The Greens. I wonder if there is a bigger/deeper split in the party than we are led to believe? On one side the “smarter/greener” folks who actually believe that slogan, on the other side Norman and the Communist watermelons. Norman’s attack on Craig has backfired badly and damaged the parties claim to be above personality politics. Now he’s demanding, if ever so politely, that the party bails him out of the mess he made. I think we may see either a split or an internal fight for control of the party post-election, especially of the Greens do not do as well as they expect. Hopefully the “smarter/greener” folks will give Norman and the Commies the boot, then we may end up with a Green Party that is actually useful to the country and that can work well with both Labour and National.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. bc (1,755 comments) says:

    Wow really dime?

    A threat of violence from a keyboard warrior (although probably not much of a threat – the keyboard warrior would probably run away in real life if he got an actual chance to do what he says) is your “comment of the week”?


    How sad.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Michael (1,071 comments) says:

    Sounds like Craig and the Conservatives stacked the audience, given the way he was constantly applauded.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. dime (13,132 comments) says:

    bc – yeah. the anger cracked me up.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Harriet (7,625 comments) says:


    You missed the bit about conservative healthcare – you know – the bit that suggests people shouldn’t recieve free healthcare for sexual diseases and services – due to their own irresponsability – while others like cancer patients – both young and old – don’t recieve funding for expensive and advanced medicines because ‘our healthcare system can’t afford them’.

    Healthcare is not about supporting a reckless lifestyle.

    Having young people flood the healthcare sector due to irresponsable sexual behaviour is unaffordable. They should have to pay for those treatments.

    Women recieving pre-natal healthcare for several months – only to change their mind and abort – should also have those services billed to them.

    People are selfish when it comes to healthcare and my bet is that both ACT and the Conservatives will help change that.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. ShawnLH (14,567 comments) says:

    “Sounds like Craig and the Conservatives stacked the audience, given the way he was constantly applauded.”

    Or the audience just recognized common sense when they heard it, a far more likely explanation than your amusing conspiracy theory.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. ShawnLH (14,567 comments) says:

    “Not Recommended:

    Ian Wishart: “True Blue” Investigate: 2/2014: 10-15.


    Steve Braunias: “Uncle Colin” Metro 381: March 2014: 52-57.

    Gordon Campbell:”

    I would take Ian Wishart over Campbell any day.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. bc (1,755 comments) says:

    lol dime

    When I read the comment, my reaction was – how pathetic. But each to their own I guess.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. dirty harry (751 comments) says:

    “the night went to Colin Craig, who was received as something of a rock celebrity, with students queuing up afterward to get a selfie with him. As reported here. Craig was the last to leave,”


    Last words heard from Pete Georges lounge..

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Harriet (7,625 comments) says:

    Pete George has stopped being so critical of the Conservatives – in the belief that Dunne can ride on the rising tide of conservatism that is happening in NZ and overseas. Fair enough and it shows that PG is rather astute.

    If Dunne doesn’t ride that wave of conservatism then he may find it much harder to get re-elected – as personal responsability is conservatism – something that National, Act, the Maori Party and the Conservatives all support publicly.

    imho anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. chickadee (23 comments) says:

    Patrick Gower could eat an apple through a tennis racket 🙂

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Michael (1,071 comments) says:

    Shawn, I’m glad you are amused. Because the description of applause at a Uni meeting is not what I’d expect. (I’d have picked Gareth Hughes’ constant largess for students would have been more popular)

    But between not being sure about moon landings and thinking chemtrails are a thing I find that Colin is the actual joke.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. emmess (1,856 comments) says:

    Smart Green is an oxymoron

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. ShawnLH (14,567 comments) says:


    your assumptions about Uni students are just that, assumptions, and not very good ones. That uni students saw more to applause from a decent bloke instead of a dope smoking radical lefty is a credit to them.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. DJP6-25 (1,830 comments) says:

    tvb 8.59 am. Yes, I can’t imagine him holding up a NO sign.

    PS: Thanks for the guest post John.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Louis Houlbrooke (9 comments) says:

    Good job on the summary John, though being there myself, it has to be said that different people would have different takeaways from the event.

    It seemed obvious to me that Jamie Whyte was in his element. Students actually responded well to his ‘lecturey’ style and his positions on drugs/alcohol, and he had some great lines. “When it comes to drinking, I’m like a marathon runner – there’s always a bit in me.” “I do believe in alcohol regulations – individuals regulating their own drinking.” “If you can’t guess my position [on cannabis], you all deserve to fail your courses.”

    Also, the Debating Society organised a bar for attendees to meet at afterwards – Jamie was the only debater who showed up. He hung around for ages and had students of all political persuasions literally queuing up to meet him.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. itstricky (4,110 comments) says:

    “Sounds like Craig and the Conservatives stacked the audience, given the way he was constantly applauded.”

    Or the audience just recognized common sense when they heard it, a far more likely explanation than your amusing conspiracy theory.

    Colin Craig is into rugby, fishing and BBQs? Really? I should like to ask him some debating questions on the ’87 world cup, synthetic fly fishing (instead of cannibas) and the best pork cuts.

    Does he think he is John Key? The guy can’t even walk without looking, errr… queer. Pathetic. Simulatenously proven to be a pile of kak by Harry clapping like a seal. I bet you knives cut through him like butter.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. NK (2,078 comments) says:

    Thanks Louis for some perspective. Students don’t vote anyway; and if they do I severely doubt they will vote Conservative.

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