August 2011

It is apparent as the nose on Barbara Streisand’s face that Labour has to roll Phil Goff. If that were to happen their new leader would need to really break with the past. This si what he should have in his speech.

The Speech the New Labour Leader should give

Thank you all and I am grateful for the faith the Labour Caucus has shown in electing me as their leader going into the 2011 election. Labour has needed to change direction, and I will be providing the leadership that allows Labour to change direction.

This is a hip pocket election. Middle New Zealand is hurting, and hurting badly. There is only so long John Key can go on about aspiration before someone asks him “When is the aspiration going to show up as in dollars in my bank account?”

On behalf of middle New Zealand I will be asking John Key what he has done to make all our lives better. He cannot just put up new hoardings saying “Building a Brighter Future”. I want John Key to be up front with New Zealanders and tell us when that future will arrive.

John you have had three years and we are still waiting.

I want all New Zealanders to understand that I am here to represent those who work the hardest, not those that complain the loudest. I know how much the economic downturn has put pressure on New Zealand families, and how we need a government that understands what it means to be under financial pressure.

A Labour lead government will concentrate on growing the economy for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not just John Key’s mates at the top end of town. We will do this by encouraging people to work, not to stick their hand out, to see the state as a safety net for those in need, not an ATM for those who can earn for themselves.

We also understand that we can’t ask New Zealanders to tighten their belts when the government sector isn’t tightening theirs. Labour believes in a strong state sector, but we do not believe that we have to protect it at all costs. New Zealanders are hurting financially, and cuts will need to be made to ease this hurt.

The Labour Party understands that New Zealand has moved on from the Helen Clark era. We know people are hurting, and we need to help all New Zealanders get ahead.

Labour will reconnect with its roots, the men and women who work for a living, and are proud to do so. These days workers are more often contractors than employees, small business people, not union members and concerned more about regulations getting in the way of their business rather than taking on the management. These people share Labour’s principles.

What has happened is Labour has moved away from these people, and I am sending a clear message that a Labour Party lead by me is moving back. We will listen to you, and we share your concerns about the direction New Zealand is going in.

We will work to make it easier for tradies to do business, for the hair dressing salon to deal with compliance issues and we will listen to your concerns about too many taking too much from the state – at your expense.

New Zealand has moved on from the last decade, and Labour has now moved on too. We will not be campaigning to be a government that looks after minorities, or a government that goes back to the nanny state, we will be campaigning on a platform of growing New Zealand for the benefit of all New Zealanders.

Treaty issues are have been largely dealt with. Injustice has been replaced with fair settlements, and all New Zealanders need to realise that the Treaty gravy train has to come to an end when the final settlements are made. Maoridom has been given the opportunity to shape their own destiny with the Treaty settlements they have received, and a Labour led government will encourage them to forge ahead, not stick their hands out for more.

Labour will not hold the mantra that all government spending is good, because it isn’t. Government departments are inefficient and require reviews and fine tuning just as any organisation does, and when times are tough we cannot expect hard working New Zealanders to pay for an excessive government sector that holds back economic growth.

We have a deficit that John Key has grown to historic highs, saddling all New Zealanders with debt that one day we will have to pay back. Paying back our debt is hard when young New Zealanders still want to build their brighter future overseas.

To cut the deficit New Zealand needs to control governments spending and increase tax revenue. When times are tough those who can afford to pay the most need to be asked to contribute the most. We cannot control the deficit through cuts alone, we need to increase the tax take, and we need to spread that burden fairly over all New Zealanders.

The Labour party will campaign hard on the issues that matter to New Zealand, growing our economy, helping all New Zealand get ahead, not just John Key’s wealthy mates become wealthier. We need to let middle New Zealand drive economic growth by giving them the chance to get ahead, rather than giving tax breaks to the top 2%.

Tomorrow I will outline the new policies Labour will be running on, and the policies we will be abandoning. Today I will leave you with the question, “Are you better off under John Key than you were under Labour?”

A song for Phil and co.

I would like to take the opportunity to give my heart-felt apologies to Trevor Mallard.

I mocked him and lambasted him for wasting his time on a bike race while Labour languished in the polls. I blamed him for being focused on a bike race over the campaign.

I wonder though what to say now that Labour are hemorrhaging support to the Greens when he is fully focused on the campaign instead of cycling. Does he need another distraction?

I was directed to this article about the Left Flank Guard via the tipline. It is an interesting commentary on the tactics used by groups on the left. The article is from a web site dealing with Korean history and this is the introduction to a piece on how justify support for North Korea.

In politics, a direct attack is not always the most effective. One way to proceed is to target someone or something that is seen to represent a more extreme, a more pure representation of your opponent’s ideas and concentrate at least some of your efforts here. Let us call this the “politics of envelopment.” One of the most misguided responses to such a threat of a politics of envelopment, however, is what I will call a “flank guard” form of active defense. Alas, on the political left, and especially among those who, including myself, might be described as democratic socialists, this approach is all too common. The “left flank guard” often takes the form of a spirited defense of even the most indefensible extremes on our flank. The most common ways this is actually carried out is by means of evasion (of accusations), dramatic reversals (“On the contrary, you are the terrorist!”), distraction (“Look at those literacy rates!”), and good old fashioned omission of inconvenient truths.

With the end of the cold war, the “left flank guard” has mostly been deployed in the defense of authoritarian leaders who emit that nostalgic socialist scent (e.g. Venezuela), historical figures who are seen as worthy leaders of revolution but who lost in their struggle for power (e.g. Trotsky), or any resistance or liberation movement that is seen as the best current option for opposing some hated regime (e.g. Hamas). The important point to make here is that few of those in the left flank guard really believe that freedom of expression should be curtailed as it is in Venezuela, that enemies of the revolution should be mercilessly slaughtered, as did Trotsky, or that theocracy is a good supplement to generous social policies. Yet, for some reason, their defenders believe that the survival of our political cause requires us to take a stand and vigorously defend those whose oppressive policies and brutal violence often far outmatch those of our current opponents.

My correspondent notes that:

1. The Green Party – and Keith Locke in particular – seem to excel in these tactics
2. Labour now seems to have so many factions it does not know as a party which flank(s) it is guarding so poor old Phil is continuously being left stranded and ends up suffering from “memory loss”.

Fairfax, helpfully for prevaricating Labour caucus members, has published results of their poll that specifically canvassed the various permutations around rolling Phil Goff. The numbers give a clear indication as to what Labour should be doing with their “dead horse”.

Doing nothing is no longer an option.

Labour’s slide would not be reversed if the party dumped Phil Goff as leader, a new poll shows.

Nearly two-thirds of respondents said they would not change their vote if Mr Goff was replaced.

But as speculation about his leadership rumbles on, the result is hardly good news, with 20 per cent saying they would be more likely to vote Labour if he was gone.

A leadership change has more appeal to younger voters. Among those aged under 35, almost 30 per cent are most likely to switch to Labour under a new leader.

The grim numbers in the latest Fairfax Media-Research International poll suggest Labour would lose about nine seats, and young list MPs Stuart Nash, Carmel Sepuloni and Kelvin Davis would not be returned to Parliament.

It won’t damage them to roll Goff and may soften what looks likely to be a hard landing.

Labour’s incredible bad luck with a run of rogue polls continues with this morning’s Fairfax poll.

Voters appear to be deserting the Labour Party for the Greens as Phil Goff’s election chances look increasingly hopeless.

The Greens have leapt to 11 per cent in today’s Fairfax Media-Research International Poll – and their rise has come at the expense of Labour, which has slumped to 25.7 per cent.

With 86 days until the election, there are echoes of 2002 in the latest poll results.

Labour are being smashed hard by the voters. The full results are:

Vote for Change have been uploading a few videos to Youtube. Here is one, I’ll start posting them here each day.

Remember these guys have the Labour party, the Greens and 6 unions all registered against them to spend thousands campaigning to retain MMP. If you ever needed a reason to Vote for Change it is the groups supporting MMP.

National has yet to find their courage to speak out on any side of the issue. Meanwhile the big money of the unions and the parliamentary coffers of the Greens and labour are being opened for the campaign.

Phil Goff reackons talk about his leadership is “flogging a dead horse“.

Yesterday I discovered that his dead horse was called “Leadership”. The NZ Herald even helpfully had a picture of “Leadership”. Going through the Heralds other images I found that there is a real story there about Phil Goff’s Leadership.

The Leadership Story - Phil Goff

via the tipline

Phil Goff has described discussions about his leadership as flogging a dead horse.

The Herald handily published a photo of that dead horse from Phil’s childhood. I understand it was called “leadership”.

Phil Goff and his horse "Leadership", now deceased