Herald DigiPoll
Another poll. But nothing new to see here, unless perhaps you’re in the Prime Minister’s office and you didn’t believe what you saw the first dozen or so times. National with a whopping big lead, Labour limping along in a distant second, knowing that National is unlikely to remain comfortably above 50% but even if/when that eventuates that gap remains immense. The Greens are still the only other party safely above 5%, although New Zealand First increasingly seems to be in striking distance. The rest will be focusing primarily on winning electorate seats at this stage.
It will be interesting to see the next round of polls. I’m increasingly getting the sense that we will be having two elections this year - one competition for the centre ground where what Russel termed last month ‘Mother Coke and Father Pepsi’ race to bear hug those grumpy law and order centre voters, and one where a diverse range of other New Zealanders also try to have their issues heard in the election in range of creative and innovative ways outside the mainstream media.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
We are never told how many are undecided, so it’s hard to know how firm those proportions are. Undecideds at 20%+ would mean there was room to move. Undecideds at 10%or less would mean what we are seeing may well be what we get.
I’d love to see more digging into what people think they are voting for. This would be a fruitful path of inquiry for every party if they haven’t done it already.
It’s amazing to see people apparently voting against a nanny-state, as Chris Trotter said in the Dom the other day, while knowing close to nothing about National’s policies in areas that really WILL turn their lives upside down if the tea leaves are right and we are about to see a massive shift to the private sector in education, health and many other areas…..and a further enhancement of the power of employers with respect to employees.
One could be forgiven for thinking employees who vote National are cutting off their own noses (wrongly) thinking they are spiting Labour’s face.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
will peak oil be an election issue?
hardly seems worth commenting on, but oil has set a new record, now over $140. http://tinyurl.com/8c9ab
June 29th, 2008 at 6:22 am
I too would like to see the undecideds mentioned at each poll.
I would like to see oil supply & costs thoroughly debated at this election.
I would like to see clean water, supply and distribution (in NZ) be debated by all parties.
I would like to see National talk clear policy not just cute sound bites.
I would like folk who claim they are intending to vote National be choosing a policy and not just against the labour Govt.
I would like people to vote for a party/policy and not just “John Key’s nice smile”.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:21 am
joy
I am glad that the public do not have to play by your rules.
Did you ever stop and think that the voters have had enough of being told what they can and cannot do, they have no time for lunch box police and not time for the ever growing nanny state.
You can demand all you like but the reality is that the public have had enough, they want change.
June 29th, 2008 at 9:23 am
stuey
“will peak oil be an election issue?”
No it will not be, if they did the Greens would be polling at more than 5-7%
June 29th, 2008 at 9:25 am
And while I am on about polls, do you think that the Greens might take a hit given that you broke the EFA rules?
June 29th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Bradford’s speech should help the undecided to vote.
For someone else.
June 29th, 2008 at 11:10 am
It would be nice to see political power contested around ideas and policies. It would also be nice to have an unlimited supply of cheap oil, that didn’t cause havoc with the GHG balance on burning.
National will not fight on policies because not only would the public reject them but (at a risk of doing a Winston) the media will not pick it up.
June 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
It is interesting the comments about the quality of debate. The people who have a more self centred interest on this blog reflect the same behaviour as the likes of the National party.
I think of the classic “Empty vessels make the most noise’
A lot of the reason they don’t want or care about full debate and.the rights of others is their real issue is about power. If someone can get your emotions on fear and powerlessness and kid you they can solve things, they are asking you to give them your power. Hitler was a classic actor in this scene.
What society needs is personal empowerment and I laugh that those who support the old right ethics of power and control in economics are most vocal when it comes to others encroaching on their right to encroach on others. A full social and economic debate would establish where society expects these boundaries and we can then get on and produce and grow without having to rob or lash out at others to try and get some power back.
A society that allows some to take too much then sets the scene for others to try and get a share in despairation.
If we don’t respect the power of others to get on we can only succeed ourselves by control, bluff and deceit.
Sounds like much of the present political debate to me.
June 29th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Political debate in this country doesn’t really exist. It is the ‘debate’ of the school-ground. Nasty bullies calling each other names while the pot boils away destroying every citizens civil rights. It’s a sick joke!
I blame mainly the corporate media which controls the agenda, not wanting to see any sort of real debate on the issues of importance, because it is against their interests, which are mainly about not upsetting the status quo. (big business at the expense of the person ‘in the street’).
I fear a National Government which now seems almost inevitable, but there is a lot water to pass under the bridge before the election!
June 29th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
oldlux Says:
June 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
> What society needs is personal empowerment and I laugh that those who support the old right ethics of power and control in economics are most vocal when it comes to others encroaching on their right to encroach on others.
you mean like people who allege the legalisation of prostitution is an example of ‘the nanny state interfering in our lives’?
June 29th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
# big bro Says:
June 29th, 2008 at 9:23 am
“will peak oil be an election issue?�
No it will not be, if they did the Greens would be polling at more than 5-7%
…………………………….
True. The big issue is a sustainable vs a growth economy and the greens have defined an approach around a narrow interest. If Ayn Rand is to Act what is the Green Party equivalent?
June 30th, 2008 at 8:20 am
I think peak oil will become more of an issue once there are some political debates which touch on the issue. One would think the Greens will have the others stonkered on this one - ‘money spent on more motorways?’ etc..
June 30th, 2008 at 10:06 am
that’s true but the public wont vote green just on the motorway issue because they come with a lot of software the public don’t want (high jacked by a minority interest). Peak oil is a centrist issue, not a baby of the far left.
June 30th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
They won’t do it just on this issue, but it becomes a(nother) reason to vote Green - like any one policy. So far it is a baby of the Greens, and has been for a long long time. It should be centerist issue, but isn’t. The Greens have so much cred on this issue it isn’t funny, and no one else seems very interested.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
It’s a bit strange to link sensible policies to things such as supporting tino rangitiratanga and iwi control of foreshore and seabed. [the result of a narrow band of thinkers]
June 30th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
It is interesting the talk of the far left, as I see the harmonious life process is the balance between the needs of the community -the Left, and the needs of the individual - the right.
Our Economics and institutions swung seriously toward individuality with Rogernomics etc. and we have had a serious length of time with an imbalance and we are reaping the aftermath.
Where was the imbalance in what Rogernomics did?
An economy is an interaction of the efforts of humans(and the skills and education that goes with it), and resources which are generally finite ( the land, water and even the ecological balance processes that keep it functioning). Capital and money are the results of human invention to recognise we store things to make future processes more efficient, and with money as a tool of trade we have ended up with a Capital pool which is money itself. When this money is put into manipulating the resources to get a higher price then we have a situation where those with bad luck or effecting somehow in skill learning etc. we have a process of control which in the extreme is undemocratic.
Slavery is outlawed as it is the unjust control of labour, so the speculative control of resources can end a slavery like situation,
much like what is happening with the masses howling at Labour for the oil prices, when really National is not talking about any fundamental difference in mechanism, in fact they may sell more resources to private holding creating more injustice.
The Greens that I know are the only ones talking of taxing the resource holdings - like a rental - instead of incomes. This makes sense in an economy that is getting short on resources as population bites in.
The old Kensian economic answer of throwing more money at it only now causes more inflation. We have pushed the planet to the brink using resources without a fair price mechanism spreading the amount of resource available, and hiding the fact the resources are short in the inflation mechanism and a continual relative lowering of wages. Rentals on resources - such as rates- shifts the balance to recognise the finite planet.
July 1st, 2008 at 1:19 am
jh:
The “narrow band of thinkers” (about Te Tiriti claims) are “thinking” about the law, and about historical justice and fairness.
We are also thinking about old wounds that will continue to fester in our society unless they are healed.
By settling old grievances (which were perpetrated before some of our immigrant families even came to Aotearoa) we as a Nation will be able to move on, and it is high time we did so!
I don’t find these concepts difficult to understand.
As a child, I was always taught to think “how would I like it if someone did the same thing to me”.
I suspect that, if your family had suffered similar dispossession, you would be there, claiming back (or asking for at least an acknowledgement or apology for) that which had been taken from you. (I certainly would!)
In the South Island, many of us followed the preparations for, and the presenting of, the now completed Kai (Ngai) Tahu (et al) Claim for years (decades actually, if you count the years when the younger generation went to University and trained as lawyers, historians, and in other professions, in preparation.)
Its resolution has made a positive difference in our community, far greater and further reaching than I would have predicted.
July 1st, 2008 at 5:21 am
oldlux, bravo.
A post worth a copy and paste for future reference.
Sapient
July 1st, 2008 at 8:39 am
oldlux Says:
June 30th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
It is interesting the talk of the far left, as I see the harmonious life process is the balance between the needs of the community -the Left, and the needs of the individual - the right.
Our Economics and institutions swung seriously toward individuality with Rogernomics etc. and we have had a serious length of time with an imbalance and we are reaping the aftermath.
………..
Aren’t we talking about something different (ie) no person can manage an economy without markets as the processes are too complex? Can Sue Bradford sit there and wave her hand saying: “more here”…”less there”? Does the person around the street in the state house get more as their big dog eats a lot of meat whereas I skrimp, not expecting any handouts?
The point is that most people tend to the middle but the Greens are perceived to be in John Minto territory.
July 1st, 2008 at 8:48 am
Eredwen, Are you saying the ball the Greens want to start rolling will go a few feet and settle? The Treaty of Waitangi confirms chiefly tino rangitiratanga and gives the crown a (limited) governorship role. In addition it confirms iwi control of forests and fisheries ((Foreshore and seabed (and Uncle Tom Cobly)) etc. Note the “Indian” squatters around Suva.
July 1st, 2008 at 8:51 am
This is one aspect of immigration and associated house price effect that worries me:
The Archers’ brings the idea of a self-sufficient community to the fore
“The biggest change is disconnecting their house from the mains (known as going “off-grid”), but they have also bought five acres of land for growing vegetables, chickens for eggs and meat, goats for dairy products and a generator for emergency energy.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/06/29/eaoi l129.xml
July 1st, 2008 at 9:06 am
>>Archers
The hysterical reaction of paranoid control freaks.
What amuses me is that, if they are right, then they are only sustainable for as long as it takes the starving, desperate hordes to find them. S/he who hath the guns , wins.
July 1st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
jh
Are you really the “black / white” , “either / or” , thinker that you come across as on frogblog?
Or are you here regularly in a SUPERIOR roll to “stir”, “point score” , and generally “take the Mickey” out of these “naive” (?) / “gullible” (?) / “well meaning but misguided” (?) or perhaps even “dangerous” (?) Greens ?
I believe that either picture is “not a good look” and that is a shame because sometimes you do have worthwhile contributions to offer.
If you REALLY ARE as concerned about Te Tiriti and the Treaty Settlement process in the way you portray, I suggest your time visiting frogblog would be much better spent “getting up to speed” on the actual issues involved.
For starters, have you read Raninui Walker’s “Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou / Struggle Without End”? or Michael King’s “The Penguin History of New Zealand”? (preferably both)?
(Having lived in North America, I suggest that you add “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee” to that list. It tells the Indigenous Americans’ tales, if you can stomach it! (You know? Those people who are still called “Indians” because Christopher Columbus goofed up on his navigation and thought he had reached the Indian Subcontinent … )
It is far too simple to say “we are all New Zealanders” …
It interests me that many who obviously are very keen to hang onto their own “private property” and expect to hang on to their rights to hand this on to their children, have this totally blind spot when it comes to Maori.
My parents always said … “How would you like it if someone did that to you?”
It is that measure that leads me to the perspective I have on this issue.
July 1st, 2008 at 3:05 pm
For starters, have you read Raninui Walker’s “Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou / Struggle Without End�? or Michael King’s “The Penguin History of New Zealand�? (preferably both)?
(Having lived in North America, I suggest that you add “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee� to that list. It tells the Indigenous Americans’ tales, if you can stomach it!
………..
I’ve read Michael King’s The Penguin History of New Zealand and I have read a section of Ranganui Walkers book: the part where he portrays and downplays the Maori invasion of the Chathams as (basically) caused by Pakeha. He refers to the “Chatams myth”. I’ve also readBulls@#t & Bleeding Hearts. The confused persons guide to the Foreshore and Seabed debate by David Slack. I formed the conclusion that the treaty signatories never really agreed to anything as on the British side they had an impossible task which they got around by agreeing to Tino Rangitiratanga & kawangatanga (gambling that Maori would be assimilated) and Maori believed the demographics would stay the same. The Treaty became a myth as long as nobody looked closely and governments don’t want to dismantle it for fear of loosing face internationally.
I’ve been trying to point out the stupidity of an element in the Green Party who (I think) hold a view that sees our society as (relatively) disposable and replaceable rather than something we have to patch up and (use) compromise. Histories way of healing has been to kill and subdue and consign to the past; better to intermarry and move on (they didn’t do that in Fiji).
PS God Bless Queen Victoria and her (Queens) Chain
July 1st, 2008 at 4:13 pm
The Maori will never own the sea floor and seashore it belongs to the crown and in time when we become a republic it will belong to the people of New Zealand all of them. Also forget Tino Rangitiratanga for the good of New Zealand the rest of us will not sit by and allow it to happen. These people who believe that Maori are somehow going to get self-determination and independence within New Zealand are simply delluding themselves. Its not going to happen.