Stuff reports:

Wellingtonians have overwhelmingly backed a radical plan to remove cars from Golden Mile, significantly widen footpaths and turn several side streets in Wellington’s inner city into pedestrian-only zones.

Almost 2000 people gave feedback on three options for proposed changes to Wellington’s Golden Mile, which runs from 1.5 miles from the Beehive to the end of Courtenay Place.

The vast majority supported the “transform” option, the most radical of the three options to reform Wellington’s main shopping and entertainment area. The plan would cost up to $80 million and remove up to 200 car parks between Wellington Railway Station and Kent/Cambridge Terrace. …

The “transform” option would remove all public traffic from the Golden Mile, create bus-only lanes along the entire stretch, and widen footpaths by as much as 75 per cent.

The plan proposes pedestrianising the end of almost every side street which connects on to the Golden Mile, including Tory Street, Lower Cuba Street, and areas surrounding Midland Park on Lambton Quay. Service vehicles would still be able to access the streets when required.

It would also create a shared zone beside the footpath for cycling and electric scooters along Lambton Quay.

Some bus stops along the route would be closed or moved to reduce bus congestion the streets. New, larger bus stops would be built, separated from the main footpath area.

It’s a step in the right direction. But I would go further and turn Lambton Quay into a pedestrian only mall with no vehicles at all. Have cafes and bars spilling onto the street. Have pop up shops in the middle etc.

Stuff reports:

Menéndez March worked as an anti-poverty activist with Auckland Action Against Poverty prior to coming to Parliament.

“If people want to call me a Marxist because I raise the issue that a few people own a lot of homes at the expense of our homeless community and employers don’t pay fair wages – so be it,” Menéndez March said.

He said Marx had a “useful way of viewing the world” and he had no issue with being described as one.

If someone has no issue with being described as a Marxist, then it is a safe conclusion they are a Marxist.

It is interesting that Marxism has killed as many (or more) people as fascism, yet the media treat them so differently.

Imagine if a NZ MP said they had no issue with being described as a fascist!

I also note that Menendez March is trying to paint any criticism of him as being due to his ethnicity or sexual orientation. But he is polarising on the left, as well as the right. Take this tweet from a former Green staffer:

I don’t think anyone seriously suggests Clint has a negative view of Menendez March because he is Mexican or gay.

Stuff reports:

Sir Ian Athfield can rest in peace. The Nikau palms are safe, and so is his building.

In what Mayor Andy Foster called a “great news day” for Wellington, its city council on Wednesday voted unanimously to fix the Central Library designed by the late, revered architect, at a cost of $179 million.

In doing so, they turned their backs on the public’s preferred option of a new build, estimated to cost $180m.

I’ll be pleasantly surprised if it costs $180 million.

They said the town hall rebuild would cost $43 million. It now is estimated to be $112 million.

There is a clear dissonance between those who think Trump is great and those who think he is awful. Those who think Trump is great don’t seem capable of understanding why people might disagree with them, and hence just use labels such as Trump Derangement Syndrome.

But also those who think Trump is awful, often can’t understand why a lot of people do like or even love him.

I am one of those who think Trump is awful, but I understand why others support him. So I thought it would be useful to blog the ten things I most like about Trump. Tomorrow I will do the 10 things I most dislike. Finally on Friday I will blog on what my preferred outcome from the US election is in terms of not just the presidency, but also the Senate and House.

So the ten things I most like about Trump.

1 He will sometimes defy the conventional wisdom

Conventional wisdom is often wise, but more to the point is is always conventional. It is good for a leader to sometimes go against the bureaucracy and so called experts. The best example I can think of is recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Every analyst and expert and the entire State Department no doubt said this would be a disaster. That it would lead to years of rioting in the Middle East, and permanently isolate the United States. But Trump did it anyway, and almost nothing happened. There were a few protests for a few weeks, and that was it. There was violence in Gaze (no surprise) but two years later the issue is not an active one.

Note also the law of the United States (passed 374-37 in House and 94-5) in the Senate recognises Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and requires the US Embassy to be located there. It just had never been implemented as Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama had all done repeated six month delay waivers because their officials had told them it would be a disaster to comply. Trump ignore the conventional wisdom and proved it wrong.

Note I am not saying it is good to always defy conventional wisdom (especially on pandemics). But there is no point in having a President who only rubberstamps what officials recommend.

2 Judicial Appointments

Both the quantity and quality of judicial appointments have been awesome. I support the originalist judicial philosophy of Justice Scalia and it has been great to see so many Judges appointed who share that philosophy.

I think Justices Kavanagh and Gorsuch have been good Supreme Court picks. By that I don’t just mean the vote 5-4 with the other Republican appointees. Gorsuch authored an excellent piece on a case about promises made to Native Indians, and rightfully held the Government to account for not keeping their word. And Kavanagh voted in favour of the Manhattan District Attorney being able to access President Trumps’ tax records.

One reason why I think Trump’s picks have been so good, is because he has effectively outsources them to the Federalist Society. Other Presidents have had a history in politics so they often have lawyers they know whom they try to appoint. Bush tried to make his WH Counsel a Supreme Court Associate Justice. Trump has no personal favourites so he just goes along with the Federalist Society which ensures none of his picks will turn out to be David Souters

3) He tries really hard to keep his promises

Many Presidents campaign on one thing and do another. Both Clinton and Obama ran against NAFTA but then supported it in office. Trump ran against NAFTA and insisted on a renegotiation. I disagree with him on the substance, but I like the fact he actually tries to implement what he promised.

He promised to withdraw from the Iran agreement and the Paris agreement and he did. Again I disagree with him, but he kept his word.

4) His instincts are anti-interventionist

The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have turned into quagmires. There may have been legitimate reasons at the time, but almost 20 years later it is time they were left to their own devices. Trump is much more cautious about engaging in foreign conflicts than other Presidents – which is good.

However he has shown he will act when a red line is crossed, as happened in Syria with use of chemical weapons.

5) He is more available to the media than any other modern President

He doesn’t just do a couple of press conferences a month, but is constantly doing media interviews, standups etc. Other Presidents tightly scripted their media appearances, but Trump loves talking to the media.

An ABC White House reporter once remarked he had more opportunities in two weeks to ask Trump questions than he had in two years with Obama.

6) He delivered large tax cuts

He dropped the 15% tax rate to 12%, the 25% rate to 22%, the 28% rate to 24%, the 33% rate to 32% and the 40% rate to 37%. Also doubled the child tax credit.

7) He is reasonably open about his motives

Most politicians spend their careers coming up with acceptable justifications for what they want to do. Trump often tells it straight.

He admitted he sacked Comey because of the Russia investigation. He says he doesn’t want liners with Covid passengers to dock as it will make US stats look worse.

Often his staff will spend days or weeks pushing an official line, and then Trump will contradict it. I might not like why he does these things, but at least he is upfront about it. And I’m not saying he doesn’t dissemble like other politicians do. But they are more disciplined at it, while Trump often lets the truth slip out.

8) He is sceptical of regulations

Not all regulations are bad, but neither are all of them good. Governments often crush businesses with regulation after regulation, with little understanding of the cumulative weight of them. Trump’s administration has rolled back regulations. I’m sure I disagree with some of the ones he got rid of, but I approve of the overall direction of travel.

9) Middle East peace deals

We now have three Muslim majority countries that have signed peace deals with Israel. Historic.

10) He is a cultural warrior against the woke cancel culture

There is a culture war. On one side they want to relabel mothers as birthing parents, change the founding of the US from 1776 to 1619, make people pay reparations for something that ended 155 years ago, silence conservative voices on campus and have all of society based on intersectional theory.

Many politicians, even on the right, just silently acquiesce to this.

Trump is a warrior against wokism, cancel culture and political correctness. People feel he is the only one in their corner, fighting for them. This is a major part of his appeal – he is a fighter, willing to stand up to the other side. He won’t acquiese.

So they’re my ten good things about Trump. I’d encourage people in comments to list others – even if like me you are not a Trump fan overall.

As I said tomorrow I’ll do the ten worst things about Trump, in my view. Keep any negative comments for that thread.

Newsroom reports:

Cabinet was repeatedly told prior to the August outbreak that the regular asymptomatic testing of all border-facing workers was still being rolled out, despite ministers claiming ignorance, Marc Daalder reports

This is a polite way of saying Ministers lied.

At the time, Jacinda Ardern and Health Minister Chris Hipkins insisted they had been told that testing was further along than it in fact was.

“It has not been happening at the rates that, A, we have asked for, and B, we were told was happening,” Hipkins said.

“When we ask as a Cabinet for something to happen, we expect it to happen. So of course that has not met our expectations. No one of course said to any point – that I recall – that what we asked for was not happening,” Ardern said.

But documents proactively released by the Government reveal that isn’t the case. Cabinet was repeatedly told that the border testing was still being rolled out and was never given a date for completion. Cabinet was also provided specific numbers of tests of border-facing workers on a weekly basis.

So Ministers were given exact numbers every single week. They knew not all workers had been tested.

Hipkins’ promised reports began to come in weekly, keeping Cabinet updated on the slow rollout of border testing. Even in the final document, provided to Cabinet the day before the second outbreak of Covid-19 was discovered, officials are clear that weekly testing of all staff had yet to be implemented.

What a pity this information only came out after the election.

Alongside the comments, Cabinet was provided with a breakdown of the number of workers in each cohort and the number who had been tested. Of the 2,000 MIQ staff, just 290 had been tested in the previous week. Of 5,000 Auckland Airport staff, 211 had received a test. At the ports, where 2,100 people were estimated to be eligible for testing, just 12 had been tested in the past seven days.

Yet, just a week later, Ardern told reporters: “No one of course said to any point – that I recall – that what we asked for was not happening.”

So they were told only 12 of 2,100 port workers had been tested in the past week, and it didn’t ring any alarms bells with Ministers.

The level of incompetence really is staggering. Competent Ministers read reports, understand if things are not progressing at the necessary speed, and then make directions to ensure they do.

The Herald reports:

President Donald Trump’s nomination of his Kiwi staffer for the OECD top job has divided New Zealand’s political parties.

Chris Liddell, who was born in Matamata and went to Mt Albert Grammar, has been put forward by Trump to the position of Secretary General of the OECD.

Liddell currently serves as assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff for policy co-ordination at the White House and to help lead America’s Covid-19 response.

The Greens’ foreign affairs spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman said it was “literally dangerous” to back a man who helped lead the States’ Covid-19 response.

“Trumpish anti-science, anti-co-operation, politics have no place in international governance,” she tweeted.

Ghahraman said New Zealand “overwhelmingly” voted in support of the Government’s Covid response which was rejected in the United States and Liddell was “not our values”.

Liddell is also reported to have been involved in the Trump administration’s decision to separate migrant children from their parents.

But National’s foreign affairs spokesperson Simon Bridges said New Zealand should support Liddell for the position because “he’s one of us”.

“It’s in our interest to do so.

“He’s ultimately – and always will be – a boy from Matamata. Having him [at the OECD] means a foot in the door for New Zealand. We’ll have an access we just won’t get if it’s someone from another country.”

Bridges said a lot of people would “confuse” Liddell’s role in Trump’s administration and be dubious of New Zealand supporting him – but said everything he’d seen showed Liddell had his own views.

The Trump administration has taken a hostile approach to multilateral trade.

Bridges said he “would be very surprised” if Liddell, given his Kiwi and professional background, didn’t support free trade and wasn’t in favour of market-based principles.

Nominations for the position are still open and a spokesman for the Prime Minister said the Government would make a decision on who to support when nominations closed.

I am no fan of Trump, but I am equally not a fan of the argument that we should not support Chris Liddell because he works for Trump.

Let’s think about that argument, made by the Greens. It is that someone isn’t suitable for senior office if they have worked for a politician we disapprove of.

Tony Blair was hated by many on the left. He is still despised by most UK Labour people today. They see him as a war criminal or worse.

So by Green Party logic, someone who worked for Tony Blair should be deemed unsuitable for high office.

Now as it happens Jacinda Ardern worked for Tony Blair!

France 24 reports:

After teacher Samuel Paty’s gruesome murder by a Chechen extremist in the name of avenging the Prophet Mohamed, Macron vowed that France would never give up cartoons such as those which in 2015 triggered a deadly attack on the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine and which Paty showed to his class.

Macron hailed Paty as a “hero” for representing the secular, free-thinking values of the French republic, which include a long-cherished right to mock religion.

“He was killed because Islamists want to take our future,” Macron said at a memorial for Paty. “They will never have it.”

Several suspected Islamic radicals have been arrested in dozens of raids since the murder, and about 50 organisations with alleged links to such individuals have been earmarked for closure by the government.

Earlier this month, Macron unveiled a plan to defend France’s secular values against a trend of “Islamist separatism”, and described Islam as a religion “in crisis”.

France has in recent years been forced to take a hard look at its core values, perceived by many to be threatened by Islam following a string of jihadist attacks that have killed over 240 people since 2015.

No one should have to fear for their life because they showed a cartoon to a class.

Macron is right to defend the seperation of religion and state.

AP reports:

Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the Supreme Court late Monday by a deeply divided Senate, Republicans overpowering Democrats to install President Donald Trump’s nominee days before the election and secure a likely conservative court majority for years to come.

Trump’s choice to fill the vacancy of the late liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg potentially opens a new era of rulings on abortion, the Affordable Care Act and even his own election. Democrats were unable to stop the outcome, Trump’s third justice on the court, as Republicans race to reshape the judiciary.

Barrett is 48, and her lifetime appointment as the 115th justice will solidify the court’s rightward tilt.

It’s very rare for a President to get to appoint three Supreme Court Justices in one term. Here’s the list of appointments by terms:

• Trump 1 – Barrett, Gorsuch, Kagan
• Obama 2 – none
• Obama 1 – Sotomayor, Kagan
• Bush GW 2 – Roberts, Aliot
• Bush GW 1 – none
• Clinton 2 – none
• Clinton 1 – Ginsburg, Breyer
• Bush GHW – Souter, Thomas
• Reagan 2 – Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy
• Reagan 1 – O’Connor
• Carter – none
• Ford – Stevens
• Nixon 2 – none
• Nixon 1 – Burger, Blackmum, Powell, Rehnquist

Soonly Nixon for to appoint more in one term.

A very good article at Stuff looking at the successful ACT campaign and the demise of NZ First. The two are somewhat linked.

Stuff reports:

A paedophile was moved out of jail into a Wellington home with 62 children in the immediate neighbourhood, a school down the road, and one of his victims nearby.

The situation has left the Parole Board “perplexed” about why Probation – part of the Department of Corrections – did not seek nor provide crucial advice until weeks after Aaron Paul Laurence was released from prison to a house in the Wellington suburb of Newtown.

Laurence, who has now changed his name to Aaron Paul Castle and was previously known around Wellington as Lorry Haka, was recently moved to a new, undisclosed, address in an industrial area, largely due to being near so many children near the Newtown house.

His original Parole Board decision, which led to his September 1 release, said he was deemed at “high risk” of reoffending. He was sentenced in 2013 for 65 offences, including 20 charges of performing an indecent act on a boy under 12.

In one case he videoed himself sexually violating young boys, one aged between 5 and 8, while they slept.

He was sentenced in 2013 to 12 years and nine months jail. The Parole Board let him out after seven years and six months. That is only 58% through his sentence. Bow you could understand that if he was deemed at a very low risk of reoffending. But the advice was he was on the high end of reoffending risk.

But it will be even worse soon. Almost certainly his original offending would have got him a first strike. So if he does reoffend, then he would lose parole eligibility. But Labour is going to change the law so he would remain eligible for parole, so he could get early release again – creating more victims.

I put together this table of presiding officers of Parliament for the MMP era to show the normal mix of parties. The first order of business for the new Parliament will be to elect a Speaker and soon after that a Deputy Speaker and two Assistant Speakers.

The Speaker has always been from the same party as the Prime Minister under MMP. From 1994 to 1996 Labour’s Peter Tapsell was Speaker under a National Government, but that is mainly because back then the party supplying the Speaker lost a vote in the House, and National had a very slim majority.

There is no doubt the Speaker will be from Labour and no real doubt the Speaker will be Trevor Mallard. He’s done enough baby sitting of Neve to guarantee it 🙂

The Deputy Speaker is usually from the Government also, but there has been three exceptions. Anne Tolley was Deputy was 2017 to 2020 and Clem Simich Deputy from 2005 to 2008. Tolley was Deputy as National was the largest party in Parliament, so it was thought appropriate to have a National Deputy Speaker. I think the same rationale may have applied to Simich from 2005 to 2008. The National opposition was only two seats short of Labour.

The one that is a mystery to me is Geoff Braybrooke being Deputy Speaker in 1998 and 1999. Labour only got 28% of the vote in 1996. It might just have been a reflection on him personally that he was well liked and not particularly partisan.

I do not expect the Deputy Speaker to be from National this time. They only will have 33 to 35 MPs out of 120. So I expect Labour to supply the Deputy Speaker. The current Assistant Speaker, Adrian Rurawhe would seem the most logical choice.

Of the two Assistant Speakers, National will supply one. There has never been a situation under MMP where all four presiding officers are from the Government. The other will be Labour. You could have a minor party MP be an Assistant Speaker but generally smaller parties don’t want to lose an MP to be a presiding officer.

So who might be the Assistant Speakers?

Whips often make good presiding officers as they know standing officers. But Michael Wood should become an Minister and Kieran McAnulty may replace him as Senior Whip. Third Whip Kiri Allan has a good chance of being a Minister also.

So a second term MP such as Willow-Jean Prime or Jo Luxton is likely.

On National’s side, I would have though Tim Macindoe would be a good Assistant Speaker but he is sadly gone. Nick Smith certainly has the knowledge to do it, but may not want to.

The Senior Whip for National is Barbara Kuriger and my guess is she might stay there or take a senior portfolio. Junior Whip Matt Doocey is possible, as is Tim van de Molen (third whip).

Newshub reports:

On Monday morning, Ross announced Te Kahika Jr had decided to step away from Advance NZ, telling Newshub his former co-leader “wants to do his own thing” and that the decision had been swift.

In a statement sent to media on Monday afternoon, the NZPP confirmed the decision.

It said it would now be “getting back to doing what we do best”, which it says is “researching topics that the Government is not transparent about”.

What they do best is lying, conning people out of money, and spreading conspiracy theories.

In an outlandish video posted to social media after the election, Te Kahika Jr claimed the election was “rigged”, and that Advance NZ’s tiny share of the preliminary votes showed it had been “diddled”.

“I’m all okay with not going into Parliament and not winning enough votes – but not [okay] with 1 percent. I’ve been saying all week that if they turn around and say we’ve only got 1 percent then we’ve been diddled,” he said.

“People are waking up very, very quickly to the idea that this Government and this whole system is corrupt – it’s not real.”

It’s a pity there are no consequences for lying like this.

Stats NZ has released the latest population estimates. The estimated growth in each region over the last two years, in descending order is:

1. Bay of Plenty 5.1%
2. Northland 4.7%
3. Tasman 4.4%
4. Waikato 4.4%
5. Otago 4.4%
6. Auckland 3.8%
7. Canterbury 3.7%
8. Nelson 3.6%
9. Hawke’s Bay 3.6%
10. Marlborough 3.1%
11. Wellington 3.1%
12. Taranaki 2.8%
13. Manawatu-Whanganui 2.7%
14. Gisborne 2.4%
15. Southland 2.1%
16. West Coast 0.0%

By TLA, the top five growing are:

1. Queenstown-Lakes 11.5%
2. Chatham Islands 10.1%
3. Selwyn 10.1%
4. Central Otago 7.7%
5. Tauranga 6.5%

So 184,000 more people living in NZ than two years ago. 80% approx from migration and 20% through natural increases (births).

Now updated for the next three year term. They may have dumped their target, but that won’t stop us reminding people of it.

At August 2020 there were 602 Kiwibuild houses. They’d promised over 7,500 by then. By June 2023, 40,000 were promised so they have under three years to do another 39,400!

News.com.au reports:

Victorians have lashed out at the Premier Daniel Andrews after he announced today Melbourne would see no easing of restrictions despite reaching its virus target.

Victorians took to Twitter to call the Premier’s decision to withhold the announcements a “huge kick in the guts” and “beyond a joke”.

Metropolitan Melbourne had been hopeful of further easing of restrictions on hospitality and retail, after the city’s rolling 14-day average number of virus cases fell to below five today.

But today the Premier dashed those hopes of easing restrictions, saying the government would delay any announcements, pending more test results related to an outbreak in the northern suburbs.

He said further rollbacks will not be announced until Tuesday at the earliest.

“No changes to metro restrictions. This is a huge kick in the guts after constant talk of significant announcements on Sunday. This bloody never-ending year,” 10 News reporter Emma O’Sullivan said on Twitter.

“This is beyond a joke,” 7 News journalist Joel Crean wrote on Twitter.

“On Sunday we were told 2 Nov. Wednesday we were told that would be brought forward, announced Sunday. Today the carrot is dangled again. WE ARE DONE @DanielAndrewsMP … ENOUGH!”

Fewer than five cases yet the lockdown continues.

Stuff reports:

James Randi, the internationally acclaimed magician and escape artist, both praised and cursed for devoting much of his career to debunking all things paranormal – from spoon bending and water dowsing to spirit channelling and faith healing – has died. He was 92.

His educational foundation announced the death but did not provide additional details. In recent years, he had been treated for cancer and heart ailments.

An inveterate sceptic and bristly contrarian in his profession, Randi insisted that magic is based solely on earthly sleight of hand and visual trickery.

He scorned fellow magicians who allowed or encouraged audiences to believe their work was rooted in extrasensory or paranormal powers.

Those who prey on the gullible should be scorned. It annoys me no end TVNZ actually pars fraudsters to appear on TV to try and con people they are psychics.

News.com.au reports:

US President Donald Trump has announced that Sudan will normalise relations with Israel – the third such deal his administration has brokered in recent months.

Mr Trump invited reporters inside the Oval Office today as he officially sealed the agreement on a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok.

“The state of Israel and the Republic of Sudan have agreed to make peace,” Mr Trump said.

Sudan’s commitment to normalise relations follows similar agreements involving Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, both of which were also reached with help from the US.

But this one is arguably more significant. Unlike those nations, Sudan was technically still at war with Israel, making this a genuine peace deal.

Another excellent peace deal.

The Herald reports:

Donations disclosed in the last weeks of the campaign reveals Labour went ahead with its usual art auction fundraiser, despite questions about how it was disclosing the donations.

They also reveal that New Zealand First leader Winston Peters appears to have loaned his own party $60,000.

In early October, Labour declared donations of artwork from artists Karl Maughan and John Reynolds totalling $35,760 and $32,000 respectively.

Those “donations” represent how much a number of separate pieces of art sold for at auctions – that money is counted as a donation by Labour.

But Electoral Commission records don’t show who bought the artwork.

Labour has a long tradition of holding art auction fundraisers and has always treated them as donations from the artists, rather than disclosing the people who purchase the artworks.

It’s a loophole to hide donors.

Those paying $35,000 for an artwork are doing it to help Labour. They’re not doing it to buy a piece of art.

Otago University electoral law specialist Andrew Geddis said this is an area where the law should be tightened up to require disclosure of those who purchase the artworks, sometimes for much more than their value.

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is investigating a matter relating to donations to the Labour Party in 2017 but has not revealed any details of what it is investigating.

Speaking to the Herald, Geddis said this could be one of the areas that the SFO was looking into.

He said the issue with Labour’s practise of raising money through selling art is the buyer could be deliberately be paying more than a piece is worth as they know it’s raising money for a political party they support.

The market value of a painting is highly subjective. It is not like a car. Of course people are paying more than they normally would, as a way to donate.

In the weeks leading up to the election, we heard from Jacinda Ardern time and time again that she was seeking a strong mandate from voters. But a mandate for what exactly? And just what is a mandate anyway?

Labour has secured the right to govern alone. The implementation of its policy agenda does not rely on the Greens and the handbrake in the form of New Zealand First no longer exists. This means Labour can enact the policies they campaigned on without having to make concessions to another party.

This brings us to Labour’s campaign platform. It’s difficult to identify exactly what key policies on which the party stood for re-election this year. This was not the case in 2017 where free tertiary education, KiwiBuild, light rail to Auckland Airport, reducing child poverty and homelessness, and cleaning our waterways all featured.

This year, Labour broadly campaigned on stable government and a plan for the economy post-Covid. There was also a promise to tweak the tax rate for the highest income earners and for RMA reform. Beyond that, it’s fair to say there was nothing radical or transformational in Labour’s 2020 election platform.

In fact, we heard more about what they weren’t going to do (and that’s implement a wealth tax).

With that in mind, what is Labour’s mandate?

The political concept of a “mandate” is contested. There is limited agreement as to how a mandate is defined or the extent to which it has binding moral force.

For the party who has won power, however, saying it has a mandate gives democratic legitimacy to its program. It has gone to the country, put X, Y and Z before the voters, been given their vote and, as a result, has a mandate from the people to do those things. Most people agree that this falls squarely within the meaning of a mandate.

In Labour’s case, the question is whether, in this sense of the word, it has the moral authority to implement an agenda it didn’t campaign on. And if not, then what?

Jacinda Ardern’s claims her party has won a “mandate to accelerate.” If the Prime Minister is referring to policies such as light rail, which failed to progress in the previous term, a legitimate argument could be made for the existence of a mandate to accelerate it. It has always remained Labour Party policy, and it won’t be hindered by the handbrake this term.

Beyond that, does the newly elected Government have a mandate to implement radical and transformation change? Or has the electorate actually voted in favour of the status quo? My guess is that it probably doesn’t matter.

Some will want Labour to use its mandate to shift hard to the left. But Ardern, like John Key before her, probably knows that it is in her interests to hold the centre – in particular, those National voters who have jumped ship. So, regardless of the extent to which Labour has a legitimate mandate to effect significant change, it’s difficult to see her risking the political capital she has won to use it. However disappointing that may be.