Colin Craig

Cartoon of the Day

Credit:  SonovaMin

Credit: SonovaMin

Conservative Party irony

Did you know that Colin Craig and the Conservative Party wants 67% to be the threshold at which a binding referendum result becomes binding?

BxeGK5LCQAEA-pQ

 

I guess that’s a no then, Colin.

 

H/T:  Rachel

Has Kim Dotcom Pissed Away $4 million?

Where's my four miiiiilion dollars?

Where’s my four miiiiilion dollars?

Kim Dotcom has spent a small fortune on trying to tip out John Key.

It all looks like it is going to provide an absolutely terrible return.

National is still polling at levels before the campaign started, and the key part of any replacement government, Labour, is turning into a minor party.

Kim’s big problem is he picked a pack of perennial losers to give him political advice.  Read more »

This is getting ridiculous – Labour’s numbers shown up again

It’s not often that I call for more bureaucrats, but maybe for the next election there needs to be some sort of independent government agency to cost election policy.

This year is the first in living memory that the opposition has ditched the traditional election year treasury staffer.

As a result Labour and Greens have for a second time been shown up by Taxpayers Union who hired a bloke who costed government policy at the IRD for 12 years.

Dr Michael Dunn, engaged by the Taxpayers’ Union to provide the figures for the ‘Bribe-O-Meter’ election costing website, is questioning the Labour Party’s costing of it’s flagship “NZ Power” policy.

Dr Dunn says, “Labour’s claim that NZ Power will cost taxpayers’ $90 million per year is optimistic at best. A more realistic figure is $276 million.”

“As the Government continues to own majority stakes in many of New Zealand’s power companies, NZ Power would see the Government forego much of the income tax and after tax dividends it currently receives.”    Read more »

Patrick Gower on the election

When Patrick Gower isn’t taking stories from me, he is taking stolen materials from hackers.

But today he writes in the Herald on Sunday about the election.

Try to make sense of this: it looks like John Key can’t lose an election that he can’t win.

Yes, Key in an unloseable position in an unwinnable race.

The polls show the left can’t win – they can’t get the numbers together to get a feasible majority no matter what.

The right can get the numbers together to win – but not without some serious compromises. It looks as if it’s not a matter of whether Key wins, but more how he wins.

For several years now the opposition have mocked John Key, along with the pundits like Gower, claiming he didn’t have support partners.

Now it looks like National has plenty of support partners…so many that National may be able to form a government easily with at least 60% of the vote.

Things aren’t so flash on the other side.

Let’s start with the death throes of the left.

The Greens’ tricky, cynical and reheated claim they could work with National was probably the final gasp of the left bloc this week.

It was just Greenwash, really: Russel Norman and Metiria Turei hate Key and everything he stands for, and have spent the past three years bashing National.

Labour’s election campaign is slip, slidin’ away

The election is slip, slidin’ away from Labour.

They are approaching the territory of Bill English, expect a sudden collapse of their vote in this final week as people wake up to the fact that they can’t win.

Voters don’t vote for losers.For the same reason people leave early from a rugby match when their team is getting pasted the voters will abandon Labour.

National is urging its supporters not to split their vote as our latest poll confirms the minor parties are on the rise – and Labour continues to slump.

The stuff.co.nz/Ipsos poll signals a horror start to the final week of the campaign for Labour as its support slides to 22.4 per cent, putting it on track for an unprecedented trouncing.

It appears to have bled some support to the Greens, who are on 13 per cent. But most attention is around the seeming unstoppable rise of Winston Peters and NZ First.

Read more »

Herald editorial calls out Winston

Yesterday’s Herald editorial calls time on Winston’s usual political chicanery.

Winston Peters sounds worried, as well he might be. His party has risen in our poll this week but Colin Craig’s Conservative Party remains poised near the threshold. If the Conservatives gain another percentage point or two they will offer National an option to Mr Peters, should National need another supporting party to return to office. John Key would clearly prefer to deal with almost anyone else.

The 8 per cent or so of voters who are planning to put Mr Peters back in Parliament are probably his perennial admirers and impervious to a public appeal, but here is one. Spare the country, please, another round of Mr Peters’ phony post-election routine. We have all seen it before. He makes everyone wait while he plays out a negotiation for no purpose beyond the pleasure he finds in it.

He thinks he is keeping people guessing but it has become tediously obvious what he will do in the end. If the result next Saturday night leaves him in a pivotal position there is no doubt he will put the winning party in power; he would not dare do otherwise.

The only uncertainty is the number of days or weeks he will want to delay the inevitable. New Zealand’s government should not be put at the disposal of somebody like this. Only his supporters can do something about it.

Winston likes the theatre…there are only two shows he won’t perform…a dogs show and no show.

They ought to consider that Mr Peters is nearly 70. It is well past time to retire him.

He has been in and out of Parliament since 1978, longer than any other MP. He has never come to terms with changes to the economy 30 years ago and at this election he is reaching further back to recall the protected prosperity of the 1950s.

Read more »

Show us the detail Colin! (ctd)

While it is evident that as a minor party, the Conservatives will have little effect on fiscal policy, the real issue is where this Party sits on the political spectrum. The Conservatives are quick to pan the disease of ‘entitleitis’ in the left, they are subject to the same malady when it comes to large families.

Not only would the first $20,000 of income be tax free, but there would be an unknown tax free increase for each dependent and he would also support income sharing between spouses. If this were to replace Working for Families, there would still be a huge gap in government revenue. These policies are not costed and the offset suggested “we will make savings” is simply not good enough.

This from Colin Craig’s “Ask Colin” on Conservative Party website – $20 K tax free increased for each dependant  & income splitting- so blow out lot more than $6.4 billion:

Hi Colin

What is your parties view income sharing?

If my wife and I both earned half of my current salary each our household after tax income would be $10,000 greater!

We are being penalised for choosing to have my wife stay at home and raise our 3 under 5 children (rather than sticking them in day care!)

Regards
Brendan

Read more »

Show us the detail Colin!

Guest post

As you well know, the MSM have for the most part given up on being investigative journalists. Which is why it’s up to bloggers to actually shine sunlight into darkness.

The Conservatives have been gaining a small wave of support in the wake of the Dirty Politics saga. Colin Craig has been largely untouched and has stopped discussing the moon landings. This is in part due to them not getting held to the same standard by a distracted MSM.

In addition to their usual quacky policies around binding referenda and denigrating foreigners with Winston, they seem to have positioned themselves to take votes off National and ACT. One key example is their tax policy built around a $20,000 tax-free threshold and then a flat tax after that.

The devil is in the detail and the detail is nowhere to be found.

Prebble and Whyte have crunched the numbers as ACT have been looking to pursue a a top tax rate of 24% and eventually lowering it to 17.5% by 2017.
Their findings are that because of the Conservatives $20,000 tax-free threshold, their flat tax rate would have to be 34% to maintain current national taxation levels. A 34% flat tax would go down like a cup of cold sick at Coco’s.

Conservative candidates have been saying in meetings that their flat tax would be around the 24% mark. Some have even been saying that the tax-free threshold will increase by $10,000 for every child one has. To follow that with a 24% flat tax is pie in the sky stuff, remembering that they have promised no spending cuts to help fund it.   Read more »

More Dodgy Polling from the Conservatives

Last election Colin Craig reckoned that his polling showed him a long way ahead of National’s Mark Mitchell. Colin got hammered with Mark winning a majority of 12,222.

Colin’s dodgy polling was essentially push polling, and gave him terrible results.

Questions included both unprompted and prompted aspects, and sought to differentiate the responses regarding party voting intentions from candidate voting intentions.  Relevant questions  included the following, in order of being asked:

1. For your party vote, have you decided who you will be voting for in the election?

2. Which party do you currently intend to vote for?

3. Have you heard of the Conservative Party?

4. Have you heard of Colin Craig?

Participants were read a brief preamble to provide context: ‘Colin Craig is the leader of the Conservative Party of New Zealand. In the Auckland mayoral election, Colin came third with over 40,000 votes’. Then asked


5. If Colin were to stand in as a candidate in your electorate, what would be the likelihood that you would vote for Colin to be your member of parliament (on a scale of 1 = definitely; 2 = likely; 3 = neutral; 4 = unlikely and 5 = very unlikely)?

Those who identified they were neutral or unlikely to vote for Craig were asked:

6 . Who do you intend to vote for?

There were additional questions relating specifically to how awareness was generated, as well as detailed policy questions. I’ve been advised these questions are relevant to the Conservative Party’s campaign strategy, and so details can’t be released.

To say the least I was gobsmacked with this response. Not only did it confirm the conflict of interest but it exposed the highly suspect methodology used by Research First in obtaining what they euphemistically describe as a “result”.

This is nothing short of a rigged poll. They lead respondents down a garden path and even prompted them as to what the required response should have been with poor questions. The poll surely is statistically invalid, in point of fact it is complete rubbish.

Now Colin Craig’s dodgy internal polls are telling him that Garth McVicar is winning in Napier.  Read more »