Don Brash

Guest Post – Douglas wrong about National

A guest post from Lindsay Mitchell.


Making some otherwise sound recommendations to his old party, Labour, Sir Roger Douglas made this statement:

 “National’s do-nothing, status-quo approach to economic and social policy provides Labour with a real opportunity to get back up on its feet.”

In the last six years National has done more to address working-age welfare dependence than Labour did in the prior nine.

A Labour supporter would reject my claim on the basis that numbers on the unemployment benefit took a nosedive over their incumbency. That’s true. Work and Income put enormous effort into those on an unemployment benefit, and Labour luckily oversaw an economic boom (giving them full credit for which is as questionable as blaming National for the GFC.)

But chronic welfare dependence, a crippling social and economic issue for New Zealand, lies in the other main benefits:  pre-reform they were the DPB  and Sickness/Invalid benefits combined.

In 2009, National set up the Welfare Working Group, and from there, commissioned the Taylor Fry actuarial work which exposed where long-term reliance is concentrated. The revelation that teen parents and other young beneficiaries entering the system at 16 or 17 would stay there the longest was no surprise.

Through the early 2000s, while only 2-3 percent of the DPB total at any given time was teenagers, between a third and a half of all recipients had begun on welfare aged under twenty. Throughout Labour’s administration I argued that average stays on welfare were much longer than government issued figures. Point-in-time data produces much longer averages than data collected over a period of time, but it suited Labour politically to use the latter data to minimise average stays and downplay dependence.

To understand this statistical phenomena imagine a hospital ward with 10 beds. Nine are occupied year around by chronically ill patients; one is occupied on a weekly basis. At any point-in-time 9 patients have an average stay of 12 months and one, an average stay of one week. But calculated over the year, 85 percent of total patients had an average stay of just 1 week. Equate this to spells on welfare and you can see how long-term dependence can be disguised.

Here is the huge difference between National and Labour.

National looked for what Labour had denied.   Read more »

The most powerful man in New Zealand Politics according to Martin Martyn Bradbury.

Super Politics Guy

Super Politics Guy

Just how powerful is this man that Martin Martyn Bradbury can’t stop blogging about?

Apparently he is incredibly powerful and can control government organisations and individuals  as well as the MSM.

According to Bradbury he is Super Politics Guy, able to leap two story OIA requests in a single bound. When he snaps his powerful fingers things happen and people get rinsed.

Here is a selection of quotes from a number of different posts written by Bradbury about Super Politics Guy.

 

He can control the Police:

Which begs the question, did a friendly cop who likes ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ decide the hard drive wasn’t stolen…

While we are on that, could we ask again why ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ had his complaint against Hager actioned within 36 days when Don Brash couldn’t get his actioned after a year?

Super Politics Guy ‘ on the other hand has an investigative journalist’s house raided within 36 days of making his complaint.

I. Dont. Understand.

 ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ makes a complaint to the NZ Police that his emails were hacked and stolen on August 28th. By October 2nd, the NZ Police had 5 Officers search Nicky Hager’s house for 10 hours. That’s 36 days.

That’s unbelievable isn’t it?

Super Politics Guy ‘ whom the PM calls regularly and describes as ‘colourful’, gets his complaint actioned within 36 days with a 5 cop, 10 hour search. Don Brash, the leader of the Opposition at the time, gets nothing after a year.

The Labour Party made a formal complaint regarding the allegations in Dirty Politics on the 1st of September, the Greens made a complaint on the 14th of August, yet it is ‘ Super politics Guy’s ‘ complaint made on August 28th that has had priority. Whose interests are the NZ Police serving here?

 

He can control the MSM:

…the mainstream media. Their slavish, uncritical devotion to Key for 6 years has been caught out by their deep involvement with ‘ Super Politics Guy

In short, while the compromised mainstream media who have empowered  ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ as much as Key has tries to claim Key will win by a 50% landslide

It’s incredible that TV3’s 3rd Degree had the money and resources to use ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ as a source again to track down 3 of Kim Dotcom’s former workers in the Philippines for the shock horror revelation that he may have called NZers ‘cheap arsed farmers’ once and yet not one single member of the entire NZ news media can seem to track down and interview Jason Ede…

They don’t want to investigate Dirty Politics any longer because most of them are all complicit in helping and enabling

Super Politics Guy ‘ and want that conveniently forgotten.

Look at this picture…

Chart showing Super Politics Guy at the centre of all things Political

Chart showing Super Politics Guy at the centre of all things Political

 

…what’s missing? Conveniently all the mainstream media contacts Super Politics Guy ‘ fed.

I certainly believe that there are many in the mainstream media who are complicit with ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ in progressing the Dirty Politics agenda of demonising anyone they see as a threat

Every day I have rushed to read the paper to see if a breaking story on the Ede-‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ emails had broken yet. They haven’t. Day after day, where are these emails? We know Rawshark sent the emails to David Fisher and Matt Nippert, yet nothing

 

He can control the Labour Party:

Both of ‘Super Politics Guy’s‘ mates leading the Labour Party?

That’s just too depressing to even consider.

So let’s give the sleepy hobbits what they want, uncomplicated boiled meat and 3 vege politics led by ‘Super Politics Guy’s ‘ mate, Stuart Nash as leader.

The graceless win of ‘ Super Politics Guy’s ‘ mate in the North, Kelvin Davis is difficult to swallow. Here ‘ Super Politics Guy’s ‘ mate in the North is shitting on Hone Harawira by calling Hone all steam, no hangi as Kelvin rubs his ganged up win into Hone’s face.

 

He can control the election result:

Can Labour be saved? Why ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ & National won and why we need a new media

So why did ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ and National win such a thundering victory?

 

He controls the SIS and the GCSB:

Did the SIS/GCSB just take down @whaledump from Twitter?

As Whaledump gets close to releasing the ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘/Ede emails, the deep State has moved to shut down what is now being seen as a national security issue.

 

He controls the National Party and John Key:

Working-for-Whale-Oil2

The farce whitewash that Key is trying to push through here for the inquiry into Judith Collins role in a hit on the SFO should enrage any NZer, regardless of how they vote.

Super Politics Guy ‘ won’t be forced to appear, it’s happening after the election and the scope is as tiny as Key can make it.

It’s a farce, a whitewash, a joke.

How could ‘ Super Politics Guy ‘ have known what was in OIA request before he got it?

 

National 2002 vs Labour 2014

A reader asks:

It would be helpful to hear an explanation as to why the Labour situation is so different from the National Bill English situation. Is it that National, even though getting such a low result in that election, still had numerous highly qualified up and coming talent? That the election was a burn off allowing greater growth rather than in this case which seems to be more of a spilling of weed killer which just keeps spreading? A compare and contrast exposition would be great (if it hasn’t already been done).

Regular readers will know that I was calling this election months ago as a redux of 2002.

What were the indicators that allowed me to make that prediction?

Well there were numerous, many of them anecdotal, but having experienced 2002 I was able to draw inference from those anecdotal items.

Dis-satisfaction with leadership, moribund poll ratings, no cut through on policy even when it was good, an abundance of policy papers, poor team work, then as the election campaign got going the slow slide in poll ratings leading to the sudden crash at the end.

It was almost identical.

BillEnglish’s Wikipedia page has a sanitised but honest appraisal of what went on between 2001 and 2003,

In October 2001, dissatisfaction with party leader Jenny Shipley had failed to abate, and English secured the backing of a majority of National Party MPs. English replaced Shipley as head of the National Party and thus as Leader of the Opposition.

However, English failed to improve the party’s performance. In the 2002 elections, National suffered its worst electoral defeat ever, gaining barely more than twenty percent of the vote. Both party insiders and the general public were split as to how much to blame English for this loss, but most of the party believed that English would be able to rebuild National’s support.

By late 2003, however, National’s performance in opinion polls remained poor. The party had briefly increased its popularity in the year following the election, but by October its support had fallen to levels only slightly better than what it achieved in the last ballot. English also appeared in a boxing match for a charity against entertainer Ted Clarke. This “stunt” did not boost his polling or that of the National party either, with suggestions that it devalued his image as a serious politician. Don Brash, former governor of the Reserve Bank and a relative newcomer to politics, began to build up support to replace English. On 28 October, Brash gained sufficient backing in Caucus to replace English as leader

Where this gets interesting though is the aftermath and that is what the commenter is asking about.   Read more »

Cunliffe is tits at fundraising

On election night and the day after Labour’s worst election result in more than 80 years David Cunliffe claimed that Labour has no money.

He was using that as an excuse for the loss.

What Cunliffe forgot is that the people most responsible for fundraising are firstly the leader. If people don’t like you then raising money is doubly hard. As we have seen 75% of the voting population decided to cast their votes elsewhere and that is due in a large part to the unlikeability of David Cunliffe.

Secondly the President and General Secretary are also responsible. My Labour sources, both inside Fraser House and in the wider party tell me that fundraising efforts were vetoed or blocked by Tim Barnett and/or Moira Coatsworth. At the same time they refused to fundraise themselves, thinking it was beneath them.

David Cunliffe has been dead set useless as Labour leader. He has managed to tank Labour’s vote to an undeniably bad level.

One of the worst parts of Cunliffe’s leadership, just as it was with Phil Goff and David Shearer’s leadership, is their inability to raise money.

Instead of working their guts out like Don Brash did to rebuild National’s war chest Cunliffe blames everyone elseRead more »

Why couldn’t Don Brash perform like this when he was National Leader?

I’ve always been reluctant to believe in media conspiracies, but having watched the way in which Radio New Zealand and TVNZ have been covering this election campaign I have to conclude that those driving the election coverage on those channels are either wildly Left-wing or plain ignorant, and I’m genuinely not sure which explanation is the more plausible.

The media have almost entirely ignored what ACT has been saying, even when Jamie Whyte drives a horse and cart through the economic policies of other parties. They give only minimal coverage to what the Taxpayers’ Union is saying about the cost of the political promises made by most parties, even though those comments are based on the research of an economist who did the costing of election promises for the Inland Revenue Department for a number of years.

The media give extensive coverage to the comments of Winston Peters, even though his promises are so outrageous that the policies of New Zealand First are the only ones which the Taxpayers’ Union has been unable to put a dollar cost on – they are extremely vague and very expensive.
Winston is portrayed as an honest politician, even though he was the man who held up the “NO” sign for the media when he should have admitted that yes, New Zealand First had indeed received a large donation from Owen Glenn. Read more »

David Cunliffe’s Challenge

What's it to be David?

What’s it to be David?

Today David Cunliffe challenged me to release information obtained from Labour people. I am not sure if this is a good idea either for David or Labour.

The nature of a political blog is that when there are campaigns on people try pitching stories against their opponents. There have been a number of nasty campaigns going on inside Labour, and so I have received a lot of stories from different people in Labour.

There are some absolute crackers.

Like the ABC faction member who has briefed about the two mystery donors to his leadership campaign trust.

Or the identities of all the anonymous bloggers on the government payroll that blog for the Standard.

Or the DC faction briefing against a leadership opponents spouse’s corruption problems.

Or the fly on the wall at Fraser House who gives details of the financial position of Labour.  Read more »

This just in from the GCSB

This just came in from my good friends in the GCSB.



SECRET

From Wellington

To Moscow

Personal message from Ambassador to President, not for normal distribution

OPERATION DIVIDE AND RULE

Mr President

Can I thank you personally for agreeing to my recommendation that New Zealand be exempted from the sanctions that were imposed yesterday.  This will drive a useful wedge between the 5 eyes nations and cause some to question further whether New Zealand should remain part of the club.

Our strategy on the ground here is working well.  The support provided years ago to Comrade Kim to set up his internet piracy operation is paying enormous dividends.  As you can see from this video his funding of our Comrades in the New Zealand Communist movement has New Zealand on the cusp of revolution and the overthrow of the old Zionist controlled order is at hand. Read more »

Russell Blackstock on Labour’s only hope

Russell Blackstock has read the tea leaves and has declared the election all but over for Labour.

However, there is one slim bit of hope:  That National stuff up and have a pivotal election moment.

Cunliffe’s [pivotal election] moment came at the beginning of last month when he told the Women’s Refuge forum that Labour would put an extra $15 million a year into refuges and other groups supporting the victims of family violence.

“Can I begin by saying I’m sorry,” he said. “I don’t often say it. I’m sorry for being a man right now, because family and sexual violence is perpetrated overwhelmingly by men against women and children.”

His message went down well with the overwhelmingly female audience. Refuge chief executive Heather Henare described Cunliffe’s speech as “inspiring”.

But the backlash was swift and brutal and Cunliffe was still talking about it two weeks later before conceding it was a misjudgment.

If that misjudgment proves to be Cunliffe’s undoing, he will join a long list of leading New Zealand politicians to blow it on the countdown to polling day.

A lots of polls showed, support for Cunliffe’s apology was around 20%.   Turn that around, and you have a lot of potential voters that aren’t impressed with you.

But the thing is, this one was personal.  It hit home.  Because the left, overplaying its hand, flooded the nation’s conscience with the stats that one our of three women are subject to a situation that some class as rape.  In short, New Zealand had a rape culture.   Read more »

Don Brash on Paul Little’s HoS attack against Jamie Whyte

Paul Little wrote a column today in the Herald on Sunday where he attacks Jamie Whyte’s call for the end to race based policies and describes it as a “vile play”.

Don Brash responds on Facebook.

I know how Jamie Whyte will be feeling today, attacked on all sides by media commentators. One article, by one Paul Little in today’s “Herald on Sunday”, is headlined “ACT’s race card a vile play”. It really is astonishing that somebody who calls for an end to race-based legislation can be accused of “playing a vile race card”.

In his article Mr Little accuses Jamie Whyte of “recycling the tactic that failed so spectacularly for Don Brash. Of course, Brash did it to get some political notice when his party was in the doldrums. It succeeded in the short term but helped finish him off in the long run”.

Mr Little is completely wrong. A commitment to ending race-based preferences was one of the five goals I outlined in my very first speech in Parliament after becoming Leader of the National Party in October 2003, and had nothing to do with any short-term desire to get noticed.   Read more »

Could convergence become an issue

Labour continues to be mired in the 20s, the Greens are slowly climbing towards the 20s…hoovering up the disaffected hard left of Labour as The Cunliffe continues to disappoint.

Could convergence become an issue, where the Greens supplant Labour as the largest opposition party.

Matthew Hooton discussed that in his column at the NBR:

Don’t rule out convergence.

Labour’s disastrous decision to replace David Shearer with David Cunliffe and spend nearly a year swinging to the far left has inevitably crashed its poll numbers.

The recent ploy to swing back to the centreappears to have come too late. The days are long gone when Mr Shearer had Labour polling around the mid-30s and, with the Greens in the low teens, well on track to become prime minister. In both the major polls released this week, Roy Morgan and Fairfax-Ipsos, Mr Cunliffe’s Labour was languishing under 25%.

Both polls were taken mainly after Mr Cunliffe’s apology for being a man, but also after his major education announcements. Despite Labour strategists privately claiming their internal polling responded favourably, the public polls suggest that the promises of cheap laptops and slightly smaller classes have failed to capture the imagination of middle-class parents.

Worse for Labour, while there may be good evidence the polls tend to overestimate National’s support by around 5% at the expense of smaller parties, the trend line for Labour in at least the last two elections has almost exactly predicted its actual party vote.

In 2011, Phil Goff led Labour to its worst result since 1925. If Mr Cunliffe’s tilt to the centre continues to fail, he risks taking New Zealand’s oldest political party below the 24% it won in the first two elections following the World War I.

Poll numbers also have an element of self-fulfilling prophecy. People don’t like voting for losers. As the election nears, Labour risks losing a crucial few further points to the Greens, Internet-Mana and NZ First.

Bill English currently wears the electoral dunce cap in the New Zealand parliament, having led National to its 21% debacle in 2002. The finance minister may dare to hope he might finally get to pass it on to Mr Cunliffe after September 20.

For all this, the risk of a change of government remains high.   Read more »