Comments on: First Bob Jones now Prebble talking up Labour

By: Spud

Spud — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 06:55:08 +0000

I too would like to express my disgust at the surveillance state

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 04:31:02 +0000

Labour can posture about ACC etc. but we have a real issue with becoming a surveillance state and Labour and National are voting for it! Hell Labour introduced the bill! Why is there no opposition, Labour MP’s? What the hell could you guys possibly gain by giving this legislation cross-party support? If there’s ever an issue to jump on you’d think one about surveillance by govt. departments and personal freedoms would be it. Honestly, what did I vote for when I voted Labour in ‘08?

By: Sean

Sean — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:28:11 +0000

Prebble, to my certain knowledge, has never made a prediction without a present purpose. I think today’s revelation about Rodney Hide’s comments brings this article into more light.

Just as John Key was hailed as the coming man in 2006 before Don Brash stepped (pushed?) down, in that year Richard Prebble described John Key as the candidate from “Central Casting”, an apparently flawless fellow. Now Richard Prebble is saying Key isn’t up to the job. This article of his clearly states that Key doesn’t have the experience to win an election (odd assumption, in the face of the 2008 result).

Yesterday Mr Hide roundly abused Key’s abilities (see the article http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/politics/3032407/Key-doesn-t-do-anything-Rodney-Hide ) it appears that to the far right, Key just isn’t good enough. If experience is the main qualifier in the change wanted, I wonder who it is they want to promote? A present minister? Make John Key take direct advice from Roger Douglas?

By: Spud

Spud — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:12:35 +0000

@Andrew – I agree with you about the polls getting too much coverage.

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:36:20 +0000

Exactly Andrew, all NZers are worried about privatisation, the 80s and 90s saw to that but it seems to me always claiming there is a National privatisation agenda (while true) isn’t the best strategy when they have increased SOEs in the last year… Labour looks like the party who cried wolf after a while…

I’m glad we agree that a focus on a few key issues would be most beneficial, we will however have to agree to disagree over ACC being one of those issues…

By: Sean

Sean — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:28:45 +0000

Personally, I can’t put faith in whatever Richard Prebble says. I’ve heard and read his political predictions before, and watched them not come true. Although this is the first time in almost two decades I’ve noticed Prebble say something complimentary about Labour, I will go with other indicators.

My personal view on Labour’s first year in opposition is that for the first twelve months it is hard for any freshly into opposition party to make ground in the media. On the other hand, Labour has retained a core of support, and is beginning to build up for the next election.

Spud’s right, only one poll matters.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:04:29 +0000

Sorry for getting a bit snarky I misinterpreted your response as negative and decided to respond, my bad. Yes, of course there is a problem, a credibility problem. Any opposition has to do the grind for a few years until the public sees them as a reasonable alternative again, it has happened after almost every change of government. Labour will not be making traction in the polls till mid-to-late next year probably (setting aside transitory events). This does not ignore the voters, they turned away from Labour and it will take some work to get them back. However the problem that is occuring now is how much coverage the polls are getting in the media and Labour’s response to the polls. Indeed, jumping onto the ‘daily issue’ and harping on isn’t going to work. Theres too much of a ’snap’ mentality (like the card game, gotta get in as quick as possible.) The issues must be selected carefully, taking into account a criteria list far too long for this comment and concentrated on. (of course you can hold the government accountable for the daily decisions it makes and hammer them, but don’t make that the basis of a campaign.) You can’t prove you’re better at everything, but if you can prove your worth in a few key aspects and develop public interest and empathy in those aspects then you have got a chance. I think ACC is one of those issues which is why I have an interest in it.
I take your point on the ’secret agenda’ strategy, and yes I agree it has been overused and a rethink would be sensible (again this is linked to the ’snap’ analogy) but that does not remove it’s potency completely, as long as it is linked to an overall gameplan along the lines i’ve mentioned it can still be useful. (there is definetly an agenda, but Key appears happy to play the long game so far) Link the privatisation directly to the issues you are gaining empathy on (not just firing blindly hoping to hit a target). It is possible. But it is hard.

By: Spud

Spud — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:27:05 +0000

“you’re projecting your concerns about future privatisation onto the public…” LOL No, wait this is a comment worthy of the facial spasm emoticon

The public are concerned about privatisation and so am I. And polls schmolls – they’ll improve in the next two years.

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:20:41 +0000

Sorry if my last post came across as disrepectful Andrew it seemed to me you had just seen my reply and raced off into another spiel as it didn’t relate to my post at all, however cheap insults do not an argument win and there were many in your next post…

“And actually your ‘reasoned’ (ahem) argument was that lack of any privatisation means that stick is off the table to beat national with and no one is “screaming” anything except against the cuts in ACC services. Giving up on ACC as an issue would be an incredible mistake.”

No it wasn’t, I’m capable of putting more than one argument in a post… One about ACC, one about privatisation, a few about what I believe Labour is doing wrong… In fact you stated people were worried sick about privatisation, I pointed out there hasn’t been any and then you state it’s irrelevant… Interesting but I think you’re projecting your concerns about future privatisation onto the public…

I’m trying to be constructive here, a strong opposition is needed in our democracy and I think unless Labour lifts it’s game we will have a smaller opposition returned in the next government… As the alcoholics say, “the first step is admitting you have a problem”, look at the polls, problem… Time to try a different track one would think…

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 05:52:23 +0000

Jeremy – I have read your post – if you mean this -> “ACC will spin very well for National at the next election as levies will be lower than now so companies can attract initial customers, people will be paying less”
….. then I disagree, the levy charges will not be noticed by the average voter. People will not be analysing levy prices so much as an undefinable ‘quality of service’ which can be ’spun’ (as you so love to put it) much more easily be describing, showing and proving the reduction in coverage and the increased difficulties in obtaining service.
Levy prices are big issue now because of the coverage of them, coverage which can be shifted onto the ‘quality of service’ it about moving an argument from ‘efficiency’ to ‘quality’, its not easy, but there is no way that this will spin better for National if enough work is done on the ‘quality’ argument.
And actually your ‘reasoned’ (ahem) argument was that lack of any privatisation means that stick is off the table to beat national with and no one is “screaming” anything except against the cuts in ACC services. Giving up on ACC as an issue would be an incredible mistake.