The campaign, and in fact the last three years, has been tough. It has been pretty clear right through that leading a government was going to be a big ask but at times we looked tantalisiing close.
I want to say thanks to Phil who worked relentlessly when an enormous amount of shit was thrown at him and to a campaign team consisting of candidates, managers and thousands of activists who worked their butts off.
We have lost some incredibly talented MPs. Some will be back. And our caucus has some brilliant new additions.
We did some things well. There is plenty of room for improvement.
There will be plenty of internal post match analysis. This is a place for you to have your say.
I used to vote Labour. I would probably like to vote Labour again, but it needs to be a ‘new’ Labour.
You need to get rid of the ‘tax and spend’ philosophy.
You need to abandon ‘cradle to grave’ welfare.
You need to get people into parliament who are experienced in ‘work’, not picking people because of race, sex, sexuality or union history.
You need to acknowledge that agriculture is the foundation of the NZ economy, so agriculturalists (farmers to you) need to be supported by your policies.
You lost me on fruit and vegetables sorry. To me this policy typified Labour’s unreadiness and a need to get back in touch.
Our food bill does not soar from buying fruit and vegetables in season. Plus we grow a bit.
Also, removing GST from fruit and vege is in denial of forces of supply and demand.
Our food bill inflates through MEAT, DAIRY PRODUCTS and BREAD principally!!
Free laptops to Socio Economic Level 1 was unimpressive too. I would have thought the reasons for that would be absolutely obvious!!
I think 99% of the policies were great!
!
The Leader was great, just had too many wolves after him
The debates were a highlight!
!
The signs with the policies were cool!
Good work Trev,
I hope the following is of some help:
I’m a political leftie, sometimes Labour supporter, and I don’t hate or mistrust John Key. Just sayin’.
Also:
There’s also no trade union for what I do, and if there was I don’t imagine I’d join it. Sir Peter Leitch > Darien Fenton. (I’m sorry Clare, Tracey, et al, but he is.)
There is huge support for the Nats’ proposed welfare reforms. Saying there should not be huge support for it just alienates potential voters. When you talk about a $70/week WFF shot in the arm for beneficiaries and only a $10/week one for those workers that provide beneficiaries their living, you only reinforce that Labour is for beneficiaries not workers.
You really, really missed the mark by trying to tell the country what they should think about partial floats of certain SOEs.
And Phil Goff shone right at the and as a good, solid bloke. If he sticks around, please give him some decent ammunition next time!
Hey, while I think of it, the Greens are going to try to get action on their three talking points this term. If Labour could pass it’s CGT this term, and get a commission going about the retirement boom, that might be a good idea.
I mean, you lot vote with National half the time, you may as well get something out of it. If they won’t give it to you, you could always spend three years being pointlessly antagonistic, keep yourself in the public eye as an alternative.
Hey, try and sneak some things through as the four-headed opposition monster, if the numbers close up enough on specials. Make a big song-and-dance about National voting down good policy anyway. Get people wound up, ready for 2014.
You lost me on fruit and vegetables sorry. To me this policy typified Labour’s unreadiness and a need to get back in touch.
How come this policy has been operating in Sth. Africa for years. No problems – technical or otherwise. When the customers reach the Super Market check-out the computer automatically removes the GST on the fruit, vegetables and – in their case – basic grains.
It is relative to income Evans and for those at the bottom of the income heap it makes all the difference the world. They can’t afford fruit and vegetables so they have to go without altogether but you don’t care about that? You don’t care about their children who end up with serious health problems? No, like all the other selfish Kiwis you blame it on them for being on such low incomes.
@ Anne What about meat, milk, bread, petrol, power, water, rates, rent .. does that clarify my position further?
I don’t see removing GST from fruit and veges as impacting greatly on price or consumption. More $ for the growers or the supermarket most likely.
@Anne – Labour’s election-night vote dropped by 165,000 from its 2008 election-night tally. National’s vote was up by 7000. Using your logic this was a victory for Labour becuase bugger all people voted. Again 165,000 walked away from Labour. Any interpretation of this other than a rout, is hysteria. I’ll explain it to you as I would a child, if the total pot of available votes has dropped, but one proportion of that vote has remained static, this is an increase in proportion of those who voted for that proportion relative to the toal percentage of voters. If the turnout goes down and another proportion (Labour votes) goes down by a greater proportion than the nett loss of total voters, this is a massive loss of support. If on the other hand the turnout goes up and one proportion (a party’s vote) goes up but not at the same rate, this is a loss in suppport, equally if it goes down whilst the nett total goes up it is a massive loss. If it remains static it is a loss but not such a bad one. Do try to keep up.
I do hope the ‘new’ leadership of the Labour Party read the comments on this blog and learn from people like Lou, Evan etc. From the comments that they have written here, their views represent a big portion of potential Labour voters. If not, I suspect the greens will get an even bigger gain in support in 3 years. Listen to us instead of telling us what to do.
@ Richard Mayes – Wellington
That’s a good point, Sir Peter Leitch is > Darien Fenton. He’s done more for the community that she ever has or ever will. Same goes for Sir Peter Jackson. Labour needs to develop a lot of humility and realise it is not entitled to anyone’s vote. I voted Labour 2008, but Green this election because I felt that Labour has become to vitriolic and aggressive towards those who it disagrees with.
I’ll start by saying that Phil Goff ran a strong campaign although he needed to repeatedly present his opposition to asset sales with the examples of Telecom and Rail with their maximising dividends and non-existant investment in infrastructure to effect an eventual socialisation of losses/upgrading costs. Unfortunately for Phil, he is tainted in the eyes of the NZ public, being a minister in the Lange/Douglas government of the 80’s that started this disastrous ideological mess. For this reason I believe Labour should have chosen a leader that was not tainted by history and someone who can move the party to clearly defined territory, rooted in Labour party principles.This is probably a reason for a lot of voter apathy because ‘their both the same, and there’s no point in voting for a small party’- you’ve heard it before! Many voters would have felt that Labour was a rather lame opposition in the last 3 years, but I would suggest that the corporate media gave opposition parties virtually no oxygen in that time, constantly grooming Key, culminating in the openly shameful & undemocratic bias in the run-up to Saturday. The teapot saga actually helped Key, because his corporate media crafted personna could not be anything other than of the highest integrity- simply aspirational, in the eyes of many voters. Hence, others (with the exception of Winston)had to ensure they did not criticise his character for fear of alienating the swing voters. Witness the reaction when Phil said Key was a ‘liar’!This was election by media.
The neo-liberal funny money con is rapidly unravelling however, and this is an opportunity for Labour to appeal to the victims of the con, which will be the vastly growing unemployed and broke, by the next election.The voter psyche has been shaped by the corporate media over ther last 30 years to believe that interventionism,tolerance,socialism,collective,& community is bad while individualism,punishment, achievement,finance & material wealth is good. Democracy in NZ is seriously under threat and it will take the inevitable economic and social pain to wake up the deadheads.
I think 99% of the policies were great!
The Leader was great, just had too many wolves after him
The debates were a highlight!
The signs with the policies were cool!
Good work Trev, don’t change a thing!
Is Banks the full quid? With some friends from the US who heard him on the radio news, and asked me if he has a speech defect, and were admiring of him overcoming his disability, figuring he had had a stroke or something. Nah, he’s just nuts, one of the locals said.
I’ll tell you who can lead Labour to victory in 2014
= Damien O’Connor.
Not wading through that verbiage L Peters. The subject matter from memory was around comparative percentages of the total vote – nothing more. I suspect you are trying to suggest the average price of a kilo of apples is wrong because the average price of a kilo of oranges is different.
@Anne – agreed, we’re stuck in Toryville for another 3 years!
!!!!!
Get rid of the hatred Jennifer. You are the face of the party that is not only turning people away in droves but stopping centrists like me coming Labour’s way. I think that you will find that John Banks is much more than the full quid. He’s another Nat rags to riches man whose father spent much of his life in prison & JB spent time on the streets. He got no benefit handouts and has worked bloody hard to get where he is. You may dislike his politics but there’s no need to insult him personally. Labour has to become more inclusive – try and move with the times.
Several things,
1, Capital gains tax. A great idea to take the heat out of property speculation. Unfortunately the horse bolted when nothing was done to take the heat out during the bubble. Hence it wasn’t really seen as bold in this environment and suffered from a 9 years previous hangover.
2, Labour used to be a working class party it has to a degree shifted away from that thus loosing some popular support amongst middle income types.
3, To much negativity and a poor reading of public opinion, extending WFF went down like a cup of cold sick. Yes we know about child poverty but it would have been better for example to campaign on funding breakfast in low decile schools or something. Because like it or not middle nz is of the opinion that if you give a bene more it will either encourage them to stay on it/have more kids or the money will go on booze and smokes rather than the kids.
I voted Labour every election from the first time I voted in ‘93 until 2008 when I strategically voted Greens. I left because I didn’t feel I could engage with the political process. Get more people wanting to engage regularly instead of keeping it exclusive.
Also at the moment the left seems to be more about ‘brand’ politics and cheap shots across the bow over ideology than democracy. Get that engagement and positioning right and pick up floaters like me and you’d be home free.
Agree Cricklewood. Having disquiet about extending wff is not bene-bashing. Spend the money on health and education. But give it out and it WILL find it’s way to a pokie (the stats on this are solid) and not on home insulation.
I like CGT (didn’t go far enough though) and 67 superannuation. But I also like mixed ownership (asset sales) esp if it involves iwi. And I hated the GST on veges and industrial relations policy. So Labour was slipping on my scorecard… but the clincher was prob the deadwood in the top 20.. esp the “John the gambler” 4 (Street, Dyson, Mackey etc) .
Lab have become an issues party perceived to be run by the special interest factions- rainbow, Maori, union etc. More please of Damien O’Conner and Grant Robertson- less of the old guard.
Get rid of the hatred Jennifer.
Stick with it Jennifer. You’re a thorn in the Nat. bastards’ sides.
Change the Narrative Immediately:
Resist the media’s pressure to tell a story about changing leaders or leadership challenges. The media are looking for a story about Labour: so give them the story that a strong team are doing some deep soul-searching and are figuring out how Labour can change in order to create its vision of a better New Zealand.
Identify how to improve:
Ed Catsmull, the cofounder of Pixar gave a 54 minute-long presentation to a class at Harvard Business School about how to manage an organisation of talented individuals and how to review huge projects (and overcome the natural tendency to dismiss or superficially deal with the things that went wrong). This video is packed with wisdom.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2h2lvhzMDc
Have a strategy:
Figure out what you want to achieve over the next three years, and over the next twenty years. Go deeper than “We want to win”. Figure out a specific vision: “We want New Zealand to look like [X]“, and describe this vision to yourselves in a way that hits you emotionally, and that speaks in everyday language.
Then, like Therese Arseneau said, choose the leader who can execute your strategy. You don’t need to choose a leader immediately
Communicate your Strategy:
Tell the public about how your strategy is shifting. Red Alert is a reasonably good vehicle for this. Shareable Youtube videos (that are shorter and punchier than the ones you produced with David Cunliffe and Carmel Sepuloni) are even better.
Create a Strategy Team:
Have them define the goals they want to hit over the next three years. Have them identify how they want to shape the national conversation. Review how they’re doing, regularly.
A dedicated Internet presence:
You need a full-time moderator for Red Alert, one who isn’t an MP. This moderator’s job is to foster strong, robust, challenging debate but to make Red Alert a community people feel safe about posting in.
In addition, you need a full-time internet maven who is combing every single blog, looking at the comments threads, and collecting ideas – good, negative, fascinating, challenging, things you agree with; things you disagree with. Have your Strategy Team review these every Monday morning – see how these ideas fit with or challenge your strategy, and adjust accordingly.
Be an Opposition:
Take bold, value-based stands against legislation you disagree with. Even if you can’t win, and you think you’ll be able to modify and soften the legislation by compromising. Communicate to the public WHY you are opposing it. Make your opposition to it the story.
Make attacking John Key a secondary focus:
The Prime Minister will become less popular over this second term, and it’s fair enough to keep hitting at him. But bear in mind that he won’t be Prime Minister forever. Labour needs to have embedded a strong critique of the National party into the public consciousness, one that will stick once John Key has gone.
Provide information immediately; Control the news-cycle:
During debates, have a full team on stand-by that includes at least one senior MP and the people who update your website. Whenever the leader is challenged in a debate to provide details, they should be able to give a brief explanation and then say, “The full details will be up on our website in two hours.” From there, the team on stand-by produce the content, and perhaps even a short video, providing the extra detail. And then you arrange for the leader to be interviewed on Morning Report at 6.20am the next morning.
@Anne
Instead of promoting the removal of GST from fruit and veges why not use some money to promote people growing their own. You know, like our parents and grandparents did? And eating fruit and veges that are in season, not complaining about expensive tomatoes in July?
If people live in apartment type blocks then maybe councils and govt can try accomodate communal farming through public land like what is happening in the UK? Surely that is a true Labour type of idea?
There’s your problem Ann. I’m not a Nat and I don’t think that I’m a bastard either. How many thousands of potential Labour voters felt like me on Saturday and if they couldn’t bring themselves to vote Nat (most probably) then they went Green or FP. I don’t believe that you realise the damage that your attitude is causing.
If you don’t fix it and hopefully the new leadership will then Labour could be the junior partner in a Greens led coalition if not in 2014 then in 2017.
I have no axe to grind, only my vote to offer.
Good on ya Gazza
. Tell it like it is.
A case in point….over the Rena I suggested Labour come out and instead of pointing fingers at National over what they did or didn’t do, they needed to offer a response to NZ as to what Labour would do to a/ work out what happened to get a ship stuck on a reef of NZ and how to prevent it occuring again and b/ a plan that if it did happen again (or similar) a thorough response plan including resources, funding etc. I was basically told I was in lala land and that’s not how politics works.
Rena should never have been a political issue Bryce. It was an ecological timebomb just waiting to explode and needed an absolutely united effort to prevent that. Fortunately the government departments seemed to swing into action pretty well and we are now (fingers crossed) well past the worst of it. The whole process could well have been drafted during Labour’s tenure, if so then bloody well done but it was not a time to be pointing political fingers.
Gazza44: have a look where the comma is mate. I was referring to bastards’ in the plural – as it relates to Jennifer’s comments.
I thought Labour’s website and print ads could have been improved. The type was unappealing and key messages weren’t clear. Although at times Labour emphasised the need to protect children, the website and hydro dam ad didn’t show how policies like state ownership would benefit children and the vulnerable. Key messages, like the gains from a continual flow of dividends benefitting all NZs, weren’t made clear. Taking GST off fruit and vegetables seemed to resonate well with low income families and Labour needs to work out a way of connecting with people who live week by week and who don’t have time to worry about the longer term. Paying school stationary bills is perhaps more of a concern for low income earners than paying for laptops, which have no educational benefit anyway. I also think Phil Goff should downplay his long hours – although undoubtedly true it might be better if he emphasised the need for work practices that made it possible for parents to get home on time. National’s commitment to cutting expenditure leaves it vulnerable on issues like ece and paid parental leave and Labour needs to connect with voters on these issues. Not having a proper campaign launch was a mistake. Labour also needs to concentrate on the party vote in future. This was probably an unwinnable election, but Labour needs to draw lessons from it.
@Gazza44
The fact is the Rena was always going to be a political issue given it’s timing in relation to the election. How Labour handled it was wrong in my view.
There were actually strong local campaigns – labour held or increased its electorate vote in some places (like Hutt South and Rimutaka), held Palmerston North against a provincial swing that has been happening for three elections now, regained the westcoast and gave Paula Bennett the fright of her life. Good labour candidates who connect well with mainstream locally and with strong local organisation Labour do OK. The indiference party won too many stay home votes. We all know the leadership issues. But where is the fresh team on the list appealing to non geographic consituencies, building profile and building bridges with the caring part of middle NZ? (including the Brown voting bit of it in Auckland)
Labour needs to stand up and say we lost, we stuffed up, the campaign sucked, lets move on and rebuild…..and a good start would be fore Trevor mallard to retire
For me, Phil Goff did a wonderful job during this election campaign and I felt really fired up by the way he handled the TV debates. (I renewed my (20 year lapsed) membership after the first debate.) The policy was gutsy, exactly what NZ needs for the next 3 years. There may have been some glitches in how it was communicated (eg pamphlets to Sole parents) but mostly it was spot on. The stars were not aligned for a Labour win this time. Key & The Nats had the benefit of publicity around the earthquakes and Pike River disasters, the RWC, ECAN etc. The Love affair the media has with Key is phenomenal. Phil has not been given a fair go by the Media for most of the last term. I support Phil continuing as Leader for this next term, or if he really wants to step down,he should take his time. Labour should do what is best for the future, rather than be pressured by the media.
@ Gazza44, I know the Banks reconstructed and repackaged narrative, and the real one, so give it up. Sanctimony only gives you away.
I’ve always been a loyal Labour supporter. That result is very disappointing. I don’t think it’s good enough having Grant Robertson saying we staged a good campaign, when 3/4 voters did not vote for Labour.
In this election Labour (1) offered no vision, (2) demonstrated no passion and (3) showed no obvious commitment to its traditional voter base.
Labour thought the issues were asset sales, superannuation and capital gains. They offered no apparent incentive for hard working families to vote for Labour.
This election was about the economy. New Zealand firmly believed John Key and Bill English were better custodians of our economy. Our performance at the Press Leaders Debate in Christchurch was a disaster. The “show me the money” fiasco reconfirmed the perception that Key could better handle financial matters.
When it comes to the economy, National hoodwinked the public to make them think good stewardship involved “debt management.”
Don’t forget they are the party that introduced tax cuts that have cost us $2bn, hardly fiscally responsible.
The true issue with the economy is the disparity in incomes. Such policies as National’s tax cuts have increased the gap between the haves and have-nots.
NZ has deep founded roots in equality of wealth. Labour has always rallied hard to fight for the rights of wage and salary earners.
I firmly believe New Zealand still wants a fair and just society and a continuation of equal access to opportunities.
Labour failed to show that they were in a unique position of being able to build the bridges that would bring us together to sort this issue out?
Labour needs to stop “differentiating” the electorate and start working on “conciliation”. It needs to re-establish meaningful dialogue with Maori, the “working poor” and most importantly with middle New Zealand.
Labour needs to own the “social justice” space. Labour needs to show they care. If you show you’re committed (or even just interested) then the electorate will come back and vote for you.
Labour also needs policy that supports business and it needs to be articulated in a manner that builds confidence with NZ enterprise.
First step is to wipe out the egos that are dividing the party.
We need a leader who can reunite us, as we get ready for our great come back in the 2014 election.
There is really only one question that needs to be dealt with in some depth:
” WHY VOTE LABOUR ?”
There is a need to identify the real constituencies as NZ First and Greens and Maori Parties have done.
You don’t need a strategy on everything, and in particular the niche parties may be the ones to really go for Conservation and Maori issues.
But Labour needs real strength to offer alternatives to all the things we all strike in life. Education, Health, Social Welfare, Employment.
I think it was Philip Kirk who said to a meeting I attended that Labour should stand for the “little people”. The powerful can inflict such damage.
Not fruit and veges. Even the Capital Gains tax was overplayed, as well as retirement age. Never never stuff.
First – Well done to Phil Goff. He finally let down his guard and showed the nation the man behind the mask and got some traction. I don’t buy the media beat up anymore, (exception Guyon Espina kept cutting off Phil just as he seemed to score points) especially as John Campbell scored more hits on JK than Helen Clark (who looked tired and worn out) in the last campaign. The preference for the Left is noticeable from most commentators as well as they are starting to get pissed off at the media management of JK, at the heart of the teacup saga, he does not want to front the questions that distract him & his image of happy land. Remember the speaker will loose one vote for Nats so asset sales at least this could be a close contest.
I did also vote for Trevor Mallard. Please don’t listen to those who put you on the rest home list. The Hutt has just responded and we want you. I’m concerned for all the cities though that the party vote swung to Nats some almost to 50%. I will say now that I voted for NZ First as a strategy to get multiple members opposed to the long term policy of asset sales, knowing that labor was out of the race. I also like what the Greens stand for but cant stand what they stand against.
The loss was not inevitable – There were 4 major public mobilizations during the last 3 years.
ACC Bikers rally. Early days, but was forgotten by election time. Also see ECE cut only to later say increased expenditure when it went back up.
The Hobbit – Ironically the crisis was over amicably before $$ were offered & Richard Taylor organized his parade. At the behest of Peter Jackson who was delaying the publication of this fact, so Key/English could cobble together a 65m photo op. There is a paper trail to prove this gross act of mismanagement and media manipulation yet Key was not effectively called on this the 3 times he mentioned saving 3000 jobs & the Hobbit.
Mining – Greens led this effectively. Fair enough. But Labor needed to play both constituencies, pro jobs and environment. Not sure if this was done or confused.
National Standards – This was played as parents vs teachers. The issue Nact picked up on was parents uncertainty over feedback. Truly Trev “50% of our students are below average”. As soon as Trevor left portfolio this fight seemed to loose momentum/ attention. So two fingers to those who think Trevor is “deadwood”. More did need to be said about cutting funds to state schools while increasing to private?
Along with the earthquakes (standout was Lianne for connecting personally with the community, but well done for all ChCh MPs), Pike river (also well done for Damien reminding his voters he represents them to the party not the party to the Coast) and Rena. These though tend to play the return to safety (eg bush after 9/11)
There was simply not enough hits on Health, Law (Justice), Education, Industrial relations, Poverty. The MPs are responsible for this in the house and the media (and forcing the Govt/PM to front). There does need to be community /union help to push this onto the front page.
I believed Labor had put more effort and had a more believable budget but it needed to come out before the debates. The electorate did not agree. This was reinforced by the throw away policies, eg the in work tax credit for those who don’t work, yes it discriminates – for good reason – to gets around the high abatement rate. The requirement age was not a gutsy policy. Just one nicked off the Aussies that advantages the wealthy and misses the baby boomers that are the real concern just to phase it in as the cost starts to pull back. Why not say we are concerned and will seek a multi party accord/discussion first. The budget debate needed to move from headline figures (new one every day from labor kept this going) and onto JK optimistic sources.
CGT – Could this be a tax switch rather than new extra burden of the high tax work longer party??? No corporate welfare, rolls off the tongue just as easy as taxpayers money for JKs backers.
Strategy wise – Get Goff or team on billboards. Get policy out early so voters have no confusion about what you stand for, and where the trade offs come. Should have called Keys bluff over debates. Yes they worked well for Phil personally, but Key blows off criticism very well, how would he cope when 2,3,4 leaders are agreeing and his “facts” don’t sound like facts anymore. Even better if he refused and Phil was on TV every second night. How do you think the voters would react to such a subversion of democracy. At each “Key moment” “please stop with the teapot” (correct call) you seemed to be playing by the PMs rules. Where was the English Cunliff etc debate?
As It seems Phil will step down, I would say do it now, or not at all. I see no point creating speculation. Parker Robinson sounds good w Cunliff holding Finance. Or an interim Leader of house Mallard with deadline Feb.
I personally would prefer Goff to keep going with a strong contender as deputy. If the passion is still there a mid term (quick n clean) fight would establish credibility in the role.
Above all of this remember Labor will never get 50% because of the competition but National need it because no-one agrees with them. The swing away is a worry (especially under the electorate wins) but not a rout. Dont dwell too much on those who want apology’s for standing by your principals/constituency. Labor did not loose 2008 on policy but because National adopted Labor policy with a fresh & optimistic leader. This 3 years has been the PM trying (& succeeding) in moving the debate to the right (What decade of deficits?). Why did no-one remind the voters of the Bill English tapes? hidden agenda anyone? Why not just replay John Keys ads re Australia, just insert Phil at an appropriate time. Perhaps this is where Labors support has gone???
Don’t stop collecting material, we will need to remind people of what was promised.
Some good Labour party propaganda, for y’all.
Good homes, good education, good health, good jobs. When National hints that we shouldn’t be good to the poor (in their own delightful ways) you just say that we’re a stronger country together.
Kick young mums off the DPB? Nah, make sure they’ve got a good home, their kids are getting a good eduction, they’re all in good health, and that there’s good jobs that will take single mums part-time. Back it all up with real, detailed, costed policy, that you all know inside out, like that training allowance for the DPB.
Stop fighting the left, stop fighting yourselves, find a message you can agree on, back it up with policy that differentiates you from the National party, and go get yourselves into government. If you do it well enough they won’t even make 2014.
@indiana – Trevor did not lose the bike race to whaleoil. He beat him soundly, despite being injured. Can you see past your hard-tory-bias and constant disdain for the MPs who post here for a change?
Everything I could add has already been offered (variously) by other commenters as above… JK has almost been a wartime prime minister with NZs multiple disasters. Phil did an incredible job in the campaign in the face of 3 years of the media running the Nats’ “Phil In/Phil Goof” policy.
Now that voters (including Labour voters) have a sense of who he is, I agree that he would be a safe pair of hands for Labour to ride out what will probably be a genuinely telling National term (think asset sales, the effect of employment law changes biting more swing voters etc).
The Camp David story (while I suspect it is likely that Cunliffe and others may have their eyes on leadership) is just another distraction reinforced by the MSM line. Another Labour leader (particularly another male, given the swinging female voter habits) is not what NZ wants, especially off the back of such a visible election campaign. If anything those voters were traumatised by Helen Clark’s very public hara kiri last election night and their votes went with her.
There is also a lot of right-wing nonsense spouted last night that just repeats the memes of the whale, the penguin etc. Completely tosh from the usual faces (you know who). There is one (sarcastic) comment above which does resonate with me, however:
“Thank god Raymond Huo, Rajen Prasad, Moana Mackey, Sue Moroney and Maryan Street have made it back into parliament.
The list is now an issue (I doubt for the campaign, because the swinging/non-political-junkie public was not even aware of it). However, it is an issue for the future of the Labour Party. Stuart Nash should not be leaving parliament.
And neither should you, Trevor.
http://tvnz.co.nz/election-2011/parker-frontrunner-lead-labour-4577996
If Phil Goff is planning to resign today don’t replace him yet. Give youselves plenty of time to think things through away from the media limelight. Don’t be pressured. Talk to the rank and file. Some of them know Joe and Mary Bloggs – and what they look for in a political leader – far better than most of you do. And finally, set aside your personal likes etc. and choose the person who will resonate best with the populace, and who has the ability to foot it with blue-boy Key and his merry band of MSM media lackeys.
One of your problems is the constant call for you to be business friendly. However from 1999 to 2008 you were very business friendly and moved far more toward this side than national have moved toward employees. This will always be the perception, that Labour is anti business. NZ’s rankings for ease of business remains very high and was very high under the last labour government. You guys did move to the right (rightly or wrongly) and still you were painted as enemies of business.
Without Michael Jones as National’s poster boy South Auckland improved drastically for Labour.
It’s sadly all about perception. National plays this game better than you, possibly because they have more money in the coffer to build their marketing/branding/PR = perception platform.
NZers are basically fair people, they don’t like seeing people suffer.
A door to the media opened for you guys during the campaign, nuture it. Find a way to make facts sexy and palatable.
LEADERSHIP
DO NOT RUSH.Already people are leaking information to the media. Running a country is not a game, it’s not rugby it’s the future of our children and grandchildren. help people to see that these assets will be sold under the advice of the very people responsible for the GFC, that they will be creaming millions (rumours say $100m for one SOE alone).
Why don’t you conduct a Labour version of huis, take your bus and go around the country over Christmas and New Year (yes forego your holidays), speak with people in camping grounds, at the beach, in the cities, on their farms, and find out what they want from your party and Leadership.
Let your leader announce his resignation but not in effect for 6 months.
That’s an excellent idea.
To succeed there are at least two pre-requisities, though:
1. The people engaged with need to be ordinary people not party supporters / union activists. Don’t cherry pick locations where you think you’ll get an easy ride.
2. You need to win back those who have deserted you, so allow them the freedom to tell them what they didn’t like about you. Listen, don’t talk. Don’t try to convert them – it’s three years to the next election so it doesn’t matter at the moment. Even if you hate what they say nod politely, note the comments and use them in the internal discussions you’re going to have. I’m not suggesting that you take on board everything you hear – you can ultimately reject the views given – but if you look on the exercise as a crusade to convert you’ll end up learning little of value.
Jeremy says – ” There was simply not enough hits on Health, Law (Justice), Education, Industrial relations, Poverty. The MPs are responsible for this in the house and the media (and forcing the Govt/PM to front). There does need to be community /union help to push this onto the front page. ”
Reflects my earlier post really. Also Labour has traditionally been the leader in social policy. Have all the battles now been won? Really? It is a bit harder to campaign on moves to give greater recognition to minorities – all the same the Labour record would stack up better than National’s
OG, do you think National should stop listening to business people, stop seeking them out, and stop having them in their party and government?
I’m also concerned that many who say they used to vote for Labour (not you OG) actually supported them in the 80’s. That makes them national or ACT not Labour.
“Listen, don’t talk. Don’t try to convert them” Agreed, you’re not going out to sell anything to them but to gather info from them. Can promote your red alert site at the same time.
OG interesting comment about Grant Robertson. I think you are right he has been judged as a person (until the media started referring to him as “openly gay” I didn’t know his sexuality). It is unfortunate the media feel it’s necessary to comment on it at all. I see a political commentator commented on it again today. The media do have a knack for focusing on the unimportant as though it matters.
I think it’s important that it’s acknowledged. It is ‘out of the ordinary’ (although perhaps not by quite as much as some people would have us believe) so his best bet is to have it acknowledged as an aspect of his personality but one that is as unimportant as whether he prefers league to union or wine to beer.
No. But I also don’t think that they should treat what they hear from these sections of society as indicative of what ordinary people are thinking.
In that regard I think they’ve been more on the ball than Labour has in the recent past as far as feeling the pulse of the nation is concerned. As much as many who post here detest the fact, John Key is one of the most well liked PMs there has ever been. That wouldn’t happen if he was out of touch. He’s clearly engaging more widely that the business roundtable.
Certainly Labour should listen to and engage with the organisations active in the areas where they naturally position themselves – e.g. the unions, ’social’ charities and pressure groups etc. But they need to avoid the mistake of limiting the extent to which they engage outside the tent, or of assuming that what their friends tell them is typical of the nation at large.
Only one comment that hasn’t been covered:
Accept that the Greens are a serious player and work with them.
Don’t assume that votes will come back to Labour from the Greens in “good years” as some have opined – do not waste effort and dollars fighting for them. You will lose. That ground has been permanently lost.
Go for the centre swing. Capturing these marginal votes are what allows the formation of government.
The campaign was not a good campaign. It was not a strong campaign. It was a total, unmitigated disaster.
This is not a value judgement. It is self-evident to anyone looking at the results! You went backwards. You went backwards because you didn’t connect with New Zealanders. If you can’t grasp that simple truth, as National did after 2002, then you won’t win in 2014, either.
It’s not just about changing the narrative. It’s about fundamentally changing the party to align with the wishes of New Zealanders.