Stuart Nash

Why is Nathan Guy Lying?

Agriculture spokesman dressed up as some form of Minister for Primary Industries, Nathan Guy has continued in the path of David Carter and is lying about water.

Today Nathan Guy berates Labour for changing their policy on water storage. Maybe it has never managed to penetrate through Nathan’s monobrow or to the manor born outlook on life but Labour have never agreed to piss away money on bludging farmers. They have never had a policy on supporting a specific project, let alone National’s sop to bludging farmers, the $500m irrigation fund. This lack of insight means Nathan comes up with a particularly moronic statement.

Minister for Primary Industries Nathan Guy says he is shocked at the Labour Party’s u-turn on supporting the Ruataniwha water storage scheme in Hawke’s Bay, despite previously indicating their support.  Read more »

Stuart Nash’s Not So Secret Hypocrisy

Stuart Nash has joined up with his enemies at a little read blog site and for his first post has a piece titled:

Screen Shot 2013-05-02 at 7.04.54 PM

The problem is that just as Truth exposed with Nicky Hager and his secret trust structure paid for and set-up by his own legal expert and holding at least two properties;

Screen Shot 2013-05-02 at 7.08.05 PM Read more »

Nash going all in on Key

Stuart Nash is making a bold prediction on John Key:

I will go out on a limb and predict that John Key will not lead the National party into the next election.  I have thought this for a number of months now, however, the events of last week, with Key fainting in a Christchurch restaurant, have reinforced that belief.  We all know Key doesn’t need the money, and who could blame him for leaving the most stressful job in the country to spend more time ‘at home with his family’.

There is a reasonable amount of speculation floating around on this…some of it might have credence…but is mostly wild speculation.

I even have heard that the reason Key went to Antarctica and attempted to go to the South Pole was to tick off his bucket list of things to do while PM. Clark certainly made a couple of trip to Antarctica in her time, which was a shameless photo op with Sir Edmund Hillary before he died. The more wild speculation too is that his failure to get to the pole meant he came back and changed his re-shuffle plans to be more bold so he could have a crack at 2014 rather than just watching the clock wind down.

Nash though has other reasonings:  Read more »

Shearer’s appalling lack of talent – A Guest Post

A leader with mediocre talents weighed down by a caucus whose bitterness is only matched by its shallowness. That is the plight of the Labour Party, and David Shearer’s next moves will entrench that perspective.

In light of his summary execution of David Cunliffe for failing to be a devout disciple in the face of sagging poll numbers, Shearer now faces the task of welding together a shadow cabinet. This task will be a study of the man’s ability to think about what’s best for himself and his party.

Cunliffe was arguably Shearer’s strongest asset on the front bench, a point Cunliffe himself knew only too well. Ironically he will now sit on the back benches with one man who is clearly the equal or perhaps better than most of the government’s front bench: Shane Jones.

Post Cunliffe, Shearer’s options are limited. Grant Robertson is deceptively smart, but he is the Environment spokesperson. Environment is not about green issues; rather it is about the apportionment of property rights in a world where human progress intersects with nature. What’s the point of ranking the Environment to number two in the caucus rank when Labour has no analysis of private property rights, let alone how those rights ought to be upheld?

Shearer is heavily reliant on David Parker in both Finance and now Economic Development. Parker is a clever politician, a lawyer by trade and has experience as a Cabinet Minister in the latter stages of the previous Labour government. But Parker’s is hog-tied to a party that is either incapable or unwilling to wean itself off a diet of big spending commitments. Why for example is Labour committed to KiwiBuild, a strategy that would see the state involve itself in the construction of 200,000 new homes? (More than three times the total stock of Housing New Zealand properties).

Shearer places great faith in Jacinda Ardern in Social Development. Aside from being disliked and isolated from the majority of her female caucus colleagues, Ardern is both linear and doctrinaire. Her default position is to argue every issue from an ideologically left perspective, something that more adept operators like Annette King and Phil Goff would periodically avoid. As a result Ardern has little in common with blue collar conservative voters, many of whom consider welfare to be an unfair wealth transfer from the battlers to the bludgers.

Clayton Cosgrove is a formidable debater in Parliament. But like Robertson he struggles to make an impression due in part to Labour’s lack of analysis for the ownership of assets or the future of New Zealand’s capital markets.

Maryan Street continues to be overrated and ineffective both inside Parliament and on the hustings. Labour has been completely outgunned by Tony Ryall in Health, and Street’s perseverance in that portfolio (while earnest) fails to close the yawning gap between the Labour and a historic Achilles heel for any government.

Nanaia Mahuta has never been popular with her caucus colleagues.. Nicknamed “the princess”, Mahuta has done well to hang on to her Tainui constituency. But she has performed poorly in Education, and is consistently bettered by her junior colleague Chris Hipkins. The trouble for Shearer is demoting Mahuta will send a signal to the Kiingitanga movement that their designated representative in Parliament is less valued, a tough sell coupled with the fact that Mahuta is a Cunliffe supporter.

William Sio is not to be underestimated for his links within the Pacific community. But Sio is a social conservative in a party that is seeking to redefine marriage to allow men to marry men and women to marry women. This strategy both offends and tests Labour’s ties with the Pacific community, a point that Sio himself has made publicly.

Phil Twyford has done well to dig in in Te Atatu and has scored headlines on local government and transport issues. But that in itself is small fry compared to the task of building an alternative government.

Beyond that Shearer has a caucus of candidates who are in the twilight of their careers (e.g. Parekura Horomia, Trevor Mallard, Phil Goff and Annette King), or who are simply too lightweight to be taken seriously (e.g. Sue Moroney, Moana Mackey, and Louisa Wall). Some options are simply not trustworthy (e.g. Charles Chauvel and David Cunliffe himself), or have yet to make an impact (e.g. Claire Curran).

Shearer could and probably will promote Chris Hipkins and Andrew Little. But neither man has any reason to show loyalty to Shearer long-term, particularly if Shearer is unable to reverse Labour’s sagging poll ratings.

Labour’s caucus is the by-product of a party and a selection system that rewards cronyism over talent, gender and sexual orientation over competence and union-dominated fiefdoms over political smarts. That is why Darien Fenton rather than Kelvin Davis or Stuart Nash sits behind Shearer at question time. The lack of talent means Shearer turns up to a gunfight with John Key holding a bread and butter knife rather than a loaded firearm.

It’s no wonder Labour’s rank and file members are itching to have a go at shaping that party’s leadership. Maybe they should start with their own MPs too.

Comment of the Day

Yesterday I wrote a post about Stuart Nash and the bludger farmers who want to burden ratepayers of the Hawkes Bay for a dam that only they will benefit from. Some commenters passed judgement that I was full of crap and this was investment in infrastructure blah blah blah…then along came Brennan McDonald and his comment:

If the farming sector is so productive and profitable, or would be made so by this dam, why do they need to get every other ratepayer to chip in?

If they really needed it, and weren’t just looking for a handout they’d write the cheque themselves.

The farming sector’s return on assets is dismal. If it wasn’t for capital gains and the tens of billions of dollars banks can’t afford to write down on agricultural debt the loans would have been called in years ago.

Interest cover ratios are abysmal in agriculture.

As for sports stadiums, the economic literature and real world experience is clear they are a waste of money.

There is no difference between saddling Hawke’s Bay ratepayers with a $600 million “productivity enhancing” boondoggle and Dunedin ratepayers $200 million stadium for a rugby union that traded while insolvent.

Both force higher rates in the long term for something they might not even benefit from.

Just look at the Mangawhai sewerage system stuff up!

He is dead right…if this dam is such a commercial genius of a plan then why don’t the farmers form a company, raise funds on the stock market and run it as a commercial venture? Because the plan is crap, the numbers don’t stack up and dollars to donuts there is some dodgy ‘science’ behind the council projections and justifications.

Nashy on Socialism in Hawkes Bay

Stu Nash is the man who got away from the Labour Party. They wanted more poofters, maoris and unionists so they looked less like modern New Zealand, and Nashy isn’t any part of this, even if he does appeal to middle New Zealand.

Nashy also struggles in Labour because he isn’t a total socialist. This also means he wouldn’t fit in National who believe in socialised farming, and subsidising the bludgers who want free water and a free right to pollute.

He’s written a good article on why Hawkes Bay shouldn’t be pissing away $600m on an irrigation dam.

The Ruataniwha Water Storage scheme is being promoted by the HB Regional Council as the single biggest economic development project for decades. In terms of total spend, this is undoubtedly true. The question is, however, if given a choice as to how to spend $600 million driving economic development, is a dam the best use of scarce funds?

Nashy just lost the bludging farmer vote, who want the taxpayer to kick in for a big dam so they can get a big capital gain and make bigger profits. And by the sounds of things it won’t bring more work for the unemployed in Hawkes Bay, it will just bring in lots of cheap foreign labour.

The Ruataniwha dam project will create employment, but it will largely be the type of jobs that are currently taken by seasonal labourers on the RSE scheme who come in to pick our fruit. As many will know, we have an immigrant workforce that comes into the Bay around November and leaves once the picking season is over. They are very efficient and the fruit growers love them due to their work ethic and reliability. While I don’t doubt their efficiency, the problem is that nearly every dollar these workers earn is sent back to the homeland. Very little is spent in the local economy.

The Minister of Immigration says it is wonderful for our foreign aid programme. That may be the case, but it is dreadful for our local economy and struggling communities.

The jobs created by the development of the dam may well be the same. Many of the agricultural labouring jobs across the country these days are taken by Filipino workers. Again, because their work ethic is tremendous and they are prepared to work long hours for very little.

Socialism and foreign aid. Sounds like exactly what National pretends to stand for.

Tweet of Day

Nashy shows some stones, if only other politicians would do the same. The crim hugging wing of Labour have tee’d off on Nashy. No doubt they think the killer is some poor, misunderstood, bottle fed person who just needed a cuddle and some more taxpayer cash.

Good on Nashy. I am sure there are plenty that would help him.


That guy who killed toddler JJ Lawrence should be shot. Would happily pull the trigger.!
@StuartANash
Stuart Nash

Stuart Nash Hits Back At Critics

Stuart Nash has again blogged on Recess Monkey clarifying his post after he joined a list of Labour’s enemies.

Just to clarify, however, my initial post wasn’t actually about Louisa or the Marriage Equality Bill at all, but about the strategy Labour has pursued so far this year.

That is right, Nash was not responsible for that strategy. So who was?  How much strategic input has say Grant Robertson or Jordan Carter had?  Can they all just blame Trevor now Nash has said “not me”?

One thing is for sure, Nash is confused about his mate David Parker.

I know that David Parker has been doing some serious thinking about this and he is a man of huge integrity and intelligence; and a man of courage. I expect to see some pretty revolutionary ideas to come from his office.

Right so this is the same David Parker who allegedly breached the Companies Act for filing false declarations to the Companies Office when of all people, a trained lawyer and Attorney General?

Mr Parker and Helen Clark described Mr Parker’s declarations as a “mistake” and Mr Parker said he believed many other people filed such declarations to “cut corners”.

By ticking the box, he saved himself $400 or $500 a year in audit fees.

“In respect of my own life I’ve done a lot more in my life than a lot of people have and overall I am proud of my achievements, but I’m certainly ashamed of this particular mistake,” he said last night. With the benefit of hindsight I was a bit glib in the way I ticked the form and sent it in.”

Parker is the last man who can comment about declarations, returns and forms and it has not held him back from being the next big thing in Labour years on.

The hypocrisy of the Labour Party know no bounds.

 

The Enemies of Labour

I am a bit disappointed not to make it to Jane Clifton’s list of the enemies of Labour:

They’re everywhere – and the official list is getting longer and longer.

It’s getting to the stage where someone – not sure who would get to decide whom – is going to have to issue an official list of Enemies of the New Zealand Labour Party. Just so we’re all clear.

As far as I can gather, reading the online effusions of those who profess to care deeply about the future of the left in our politics, including politically declared journalists, party activists and anonymous Green supporters, the official list of enemies so far includes:

the leader of the Labour party David Shearer for, among other things, opposing benefit fraud, but mostly for not being David Cunliffe;

at least half of the Labour caucus, including most senior spokespeople, for the crime of voting Shearer into the job;

deputy leader Grant Robertson, for his perfidy in supporting the leader and for the fact that he is often touted as a future leader, when Everyone Knows the only acceptable future leader is David Cunliffe;

former party advisor John Pagani and unsuccessful Porirua selection contestant Josie Pagani, for the atrocity of endorsing and defending the party leader in their roles as pro-Labour media commentators;

former MP Stuart Nash for his temerity in questioning whether too much Labour focus was going on issues like gay marriage and adoption, and not enough on core policy;

Su’a William Sio, Damien O’Connor and Ross Robertson for their treachery in treating the conscience vote on gay marriage according to their consciences;

David Parker, for not being David Cunliffe either, and for being in the vicinity of all of the above without even bothering to dogwhistle any ideological discomfort …

And still the list is growing.

She left Trevor off for some reason…I am sure he is an enemy of Labour by now.

Caption Contest

“Look there’s the Paganis over on the right”