Don Brash

Can Phil Goff Raise Enough Money to Win a Mayoral Campaign?

Phil-Goff-clown-photo

Phil Goff is being talked up as the next mayor of Auckland.

The problem for Phil and his booster is that he is dead set useless at fundraising.

Despite spending most of his life in Parliament he has never built a donor base, and he does not have a fundraiser who can bring the money in to fund a campaign.

To run an effective mayor campaign a candidate either needs a weak opponent or about $800,000.  Read more »

Did anyone hear anything about Andrew “Who?” Little?

On Friday we asked readers to listen out for any unprompted mentions of Andrew “Who?” Little over the weekend.

Yesterday we asked for comments about whether anyone had heard his name come up in conversation over the weekend. The results were resounding. Almost no one is talking about Labour’s new leader, and those that are have been underwhelmed.

Labour seem to have selected a grey and boring leader to go next to their previous grey and boring leaders. New Zealand will not start listening to Labour until they get a leader who is actually interesting.

Note this is not just a Labour problem.

When National had Bill English as leader he was more grey and more boring than Labour, and he managed to totally tank National’s vote in the election.    Read more »

It’s time for a chat

sycophant-3I note in the comments today in the flag issue that some commenters think I am attacking JohnKey by suggesting his $30 million campaign to change the flag is wrong.

Let me tell you something dear readers…I am sick of this sort of silly accusation that somehow I am against John Key.

I am not nor will ever be in the pay of the National party. I am not even a member.

If you come to this site for a party political broadcast on behalf of the National party, or in the belief that I should operate this site in blind obeisance to St. John Key then you are in the wrong place.

I was brought up surrounded by politicians from Rob Muldoon, to Jim McLay, to Jim Bolger, to Winston Peters, to Jenny Shipley , to Bill English to Don Brash and yes to John Key….plus many supporting characters.

I have witnessed the rise and fall of many politicians. I even helped draft the caucus resolution to chuck Winston Peters from the caucus one windy, rainy Wellington night. They are gone and I am still here.

The one thing that I was brought up with was a healthy disrespect for politicians, and that healthy disrespect was encouraged and nurtured by my mother.

I watched her regularly destroy a politicians argument with reason and logic. She never cared what their position was and never shirked from telling them when they were wrong.

I learned from her that it was ok to go against the ideas and wishes of a party leader. I watched her tell off Muldoon, remonstrate with Aussie Malcolm, mock Jim Bolger and quietly whisper to Jenny Shipley…plus many others.

It is not sacrilege to oppose the flag debate…it is after all a debate…just because I am not on the side of St. John key doesn’t mean I am on the side of evil. I have simply chosen a side of a debate. David Farrar has chosen another side, it doesn’t mean we aren’t friends.

In a vibrant democracy sycophancy must be discouraged, instead reasoned and logical debate must be pursued.

John Key is not infallible, this might be news to some of you, but he isn’t. He actually does make mistakes, and you know what people are allowed to point those out.   Read more »

How about shooting the messenger?

The roadshow is over, the public yawned, and I’ll be that less member registered and voted in this leadership election than the last.

We know this to be true because we haven’t heard a peep out of Tim Barnett about the surge in membership like last time.

Grant Robertson, one of the contenders, has a long rant about why Labour lost the last election, and that it was not policies that cost Labour the election.

Pinning Labour’s poor election result on a couple of policies risks missing the much bigger issues facing the party as it rebuilds.

The roots of Labour’s loss are much deeper than any individual policy that we took to the last election.  For many New Zealanders they did not even get to the stage of thinking about our policy.  They made their minds up that Labour was not presenting as a credible alternative government well before controversy arose about Capital Gains Tax.

Our biggest task is to rebuild confidence that we are a unified Party that stands clearly and authentically for our values. That will be my first priority if I am elected Leader.  We cannot expect New Zealanders to back us to run the country if we give the impression that we are not organised, and confident and proud of who we are.   Read more »

I’m alive and have something to share

In case you hadn’t worked it out, today is my birthday.

On November 2 1968 I was born in Suva, Fiji.

This is the house where we lived…I took this photo in 2012 just before mum died. I showed it to her and she cried.

suvapoint

This was Mum and me in Suva in 1968:

Mum and Me at Statham Street

Mum and Me at Statham Street

So why am I showing you all this.

Because I am alive.  Read more »

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 else.  Read 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 »