There is an old joke about the politician who dies, and arrives in heaven to find that market forces have taken hold, and that heaven and hell are offering one day trials so that he can decide where to spend eternity. The politician takes up the offer and spends a delightful, restful day in heaven listening to harp music. He goes down to Hell and has a great time partying, eating, drinking and generally having fun. He goes back to heaven and tells St Peter his decision’s made, its Hell for him. When he gets back there he finds none of the fun, but just a brutal, cold, barren landscape. He seeks out Satan, and asks what’s happened to the Hell he saw the day before, and Satan says, ” you’re a politician you should understand, yesterday we were campaigning, today we’re in office.”
In the election campaign we have just had, the paying down of debt and the return to surplus were big issues. The “show me the money” moment was just one where John Key brandished his credentials to lead us to the promised land of surplus by 2014-15. It was a certainty, and it could happen even earlier. Yet, six weeks on, the dampners are on. Key now says its only a “reasonable probability”. Another $1 billion have been knocked off the forecast. Truth is little is different in the challenging global environment now from when the promises were made, except the PM is not campaigning any more, he is in office. Not for the first time he gave the public the message they wanted to hear about economic growth, but now its time to lower expectations.
The so-called State of the Nation speech from the PM yesterday was a dull and miserable affair. Gone is the brighter future we were all promised just a few weeks ago. What plan there is has at is centrepiece more cuts to the public service. Regardless of the wisdom of those, they will be a drop in the bucket of improving the government’s finances.
No one is underestimating the challenge in front of the government. But what’s happened to the sunny optimisim of our PM? Actually there is every reason to be optimistic about New Zealand’s future if the government is prepared to do things differently. The world has changed, will the government? There is opportunity to reset fiscal and economic policy, and make the investments that will support innovative growing companies, grow our skills base and ensure that everyone reaches their potential.
But there was none of that in the speech. Not just a lack of economic vision either. And as Pita Sharples (yes, he is a Minister in the government) points out nothing on dealing with poverty or inequality. Nothing on the issues that need to be dealt with to unlock the potential of thousands of New Zealanders.
It was a defeatist, sad and tired effort. A bit like an old joke.
This is good messaging. Critical, but also framing National as the negative party, and Labour as the party of hope and optimism that things can be better.
Well done!
I think the relevant joke here is the one about the economist whose wife divorced him on the grounds that he never consummated their marriage, but merely stood at the end of the bed every night beating his chest and promising that things would improve in the medium to long term.
Grant, being a politician you must understand that the public choose based on options. While the national parties optimism and ability were a deciding factor for most people, the silent intention was to not let the left of centre parties in government. If only billion has been knocked off nationals forecasts, the public can rest easy. A billion isn’t much when the economy is heading back to prosperity *fingers crossed* 2014-15, but more likely 2015-16 thanks to the bewildering arrogance of europe in it’s current state. If labour were holding the treasury benches, a billion on top of the other 12 billion you were going to spend in excess of government income would be a disaster. surplus when? 2020? back then you were campaigning and you couldn’t show the public the money. Now your trying to have a second bite and you still can’t pony up with the figures? choices Grant. we make them ourselves, you just make it easier.
Still being negative guys. Think about a different kind of politics.
Great joke Grant!
!!!!!!
Yeah, his speech didn’t do much for me!
The tea tapes were good!
Same old, same old, eh? Labour blames the govt for global economic gloom and has nothing constructive to say. Yawn.
“It was a defeatist, sad and tired effort. A bit like an old joke.”
pot-kettle-black
You’ve got to offer a different vision, one that changes the terms of the debate. If you simply attack the government nobody is going to listen to you – you need to provide people a diagnosis and a cure.
Loved the joke Grant
It didn’t take long for the government to come out with a changed outlook on the plans for recovery. It was pretty evident during the campaign that false hopes of a quick recovery were being sold.
The government finances won’t improve unless the peoples finances improve.
Ghost jobs = ghost tax income for the govt.
When Labour focuses on the bright future they can help bring about, and back it up with numbers, then the public will listen.
Restating the meme “John Key is a boofhead”, over and over again, hasn’t worked. Isn’t a sign of madness doing the same thing and expecting different results?
A better joke:
Two peanuts were walking down the road. One was assaulted.
Also, on the above joke, I’m pretty sure Satan and Hell Inc. would be liable for all sorts of misrepresentation and false advertising lawsuits, given that market forces still require private law and corrective justice to ensure that the rights and duties of interacting parties are upheld.
John Key said that he would not sell our land for all the tea in China. Nek minit…
What lollercaust said.
Ditto to Lollercaust, Peter & well x 3
Grant – is this post meant for the wider public? Just wondering what happened to the well-intentioned re-thinking Red Alert which I assume would have been synonymous with ‘lets have a look at why we lost and change tack’?
These kinds of posts will always get your supporters drumming their chests in support, but do they change the view of the voting majority? History would say no.
State of the Nation – since when are these speeches anything other than a dull affair? Only politicians & media find this stuff interesting. Even as someone who quite likes politics I can only handle a quick summary at best.
As for “sunny optimism” – I have never found JK to be that way at all. He is rather monotone but also informative without being condescending and appears to have a quirky sense of humour that does not make people skirm…..things which have been a nice change for sure. Being personable doesn’t make you an airhead with all smiles & no substance with no substance and I am sure, given you have probably met him many times, that on a personal front you probably think he is a very smart guy.
What I am most curious about is why the left has been so silent are all & sundry have apparently listed to what everyone now agrees was clearly a ‘storm in tea cup’ rather than the content vital to the public interest….
To me “sad” is when those who clearly make mistakes do not have the guts to admit it and “dull” is when the same rhetoric is spouted out for over a decade.
Re:
lollercaust says:
January 27, 2012 at 9:11 am
Grant, being a politician you must understand that the public choose based on options.
I wonder if the last election was won on oxygen. Media oxygen is the life blood of politics. Maybe policies/options no longer matter except in the way that they can provide media oxygen
I think the public service does need a kick in the arse.
Grant.
Read the cuppagate transcript and think about what JK says about negativity and ad hominem.
I’m a Labour supporter but I can’t really see how Labour would be handling the economy any better or much differently.
Great post Grant!
What on earth lollercaust, dion, thomas, gn35 etc are on about boggles my mind.
The public have been duped once again, as we expected, by the smiling waving idiot.
What the aforementioned people want new Labour to do is to start being as vacant and selling empty promises like JohnKey.
Labour is being real, JohnKey is being deceptive, and the NZ public (like the 32% of the enrolled electorate that voted for the Smiley-Wavey-Blue party on Nov 26th) are proving their lack of intelligence on important issues.
@lollercaust “the national parties optimism and ability were a deciding factor for most people”
In case you missed it, the point Grant is making here is that was pre election. Now is a different story; would the lack of optimism shown now by Key still be a deciding factor for most people?
“If only billion has been knocked off nationals forecasts, the public can rest easy.”
The public can rest easy? What tosh. The public can do no such thing. Which extra public services do you think might be cut further down the track? Or will it not matter to you personally if you happen to be a white male in a secure well paid job with no dependents or mortgage etc ? Fingers crossed eh. Why the obsession with a surplus anyway? Why not an obsession with unlocking potential, creating jobs and tapping into our own wealth, including the potential of our youth by growing our skills base.
@Peter – I fail to see the point you make here with regard to Labour only being listened to when they can ‘back up with the numbers’ when National are already 1 billion behind their own estimations.
“I think the public service does need a kick in the arse.” It’s getting one!
“Read the cuppagate transcript and think about what JK says about negativity and ad hominem.” And old people!
“I’m a Labour supporter but I can’t really see how Labour would be handling the economy any better or much differently.” LOL
Well, a REAL Labour supporter would know about the CGT, the $5,000 tax free zone, the 24 7 health care for the tinies, not selling off our best land to foreigners… 
That’s the way Spud – alienate supporters. Lord knows Labour has too many people voting for it.
Michael Nolan – your comment epitomises all that is wrong within Labour. I trust you are on the outside of their caucus or executive but if you are not the party is surely on a slippery slope.
steelykc – if the deficit is not quickly brought under control the country is on a slippery slope ah la Greece and other European countries. More borrowing for feel good projects is not the way to go.
A great way to kick off the Labour response would be Shearer and the party adopting Green policy on opposing all farmland sales.
One of the two major parties has to listen to the majority of New Zealanders on this.
Oops shocking lack of proof reading in my previous comment!
Grant one more thing – have you asked the voters whether they actually vote on Budget surplus timeframes? I suspect not. My guess is that the vote was a sharp left/right divide between those who support welfare in its current form and those who do not, those who support NS and those who are not, those who believe a National led government headed by John Key is the best option in hard times and those who do not.
I am just not sure that the whole 2014 vs 2020 thing really mattered to anyone (other than the politicians and their enthusiasts) in the campaign. I think it is what the government does now and plans to do with our money that matters most, along with how well they are seen to be managing a crisis.
No doubt there are plenty of people who have yet to feel that the recession has ended in their own lives (e.g. still jobless) who still voted for National, people who probably don’t give a rats about something as intangible (to the ordinary NZer) as a Budget surplus or a deficit.
As far as I am concerned, and as far as many NZers are probably concerned, getting to surplus in 2014, 2016, 2020 or even 2050 is irrelevant in terms of NOW. Debating possible book values that may exist in 3 years time means absolutely nothing to most people TODAY.
Most people I suspect are more concerned with their own budgets, their own families and such things as buying stationary & uniforms for the new school year etc and don’t really think that far ahead. If they did they would all be king budgeters and well, we wouldn’t need quite so much welfare!
The negativity in the comments makes for difficult reading. I want to devote my comment to responding to what grant actually stated in his post. First he said that john key was dishonest about the economy when he was campaigning. Then he said that key is out of new ideas for managing the economy. Then he said that key failed to mention some pretty important stuff in his state of the nation speech. And in there somewhere he indicated labour’s intentions for the economy: fairness (equality) and jobs. Something like that. Being a labour party member, i am pretty depressed about certain aspects of how labour campaigned, but leaving that aside and focusing just on what grant has put forward here, i wonder how anyone can disagree with him. Was key dishonest? Yes. Is the national government hidebound? Yes. Does labour have a nation-building set of policies? Yes.
How many posts saying Labour shouldn’t be negative about key? On the Labour website of all places. Bless
I’m quite sure Grant’s post is a fair reflection of how the 50% plus that didn’t vote for key, actually feel about his poor governance and lack of vision for NZ.
I see every attack on the nats lamentable performance, double standards and NZ for sale policies as part and parcel of politics and no less than I would expect as a Labour supporter.
Winning the next election will be a three year battle, and I’m glad the gloves are already off.
The f.u to the heartland – Thanks for the votes, now sell your milk to your competitors.
Selling farms to foreign investors ahead of kiwis
Asset sales to boost chinese mum and dads investment portfolios etc…
When the blue bubble burst, and it so surely will.
I hope the party will be kind and keep the I told you so’s to a miinimum of a couple of terms.
@Curious – I don’t believe that you’re a supporter
@Al1ens – Dem local farmers sure did get shafted!
!
Steely, I think if lollercaust is a white male ,in a secure job with no dependants, he is probably taxed heavily enough to support those who make poor life choices to also not worry about public services being cut. The problem with taxing people like lollercaust, if he is a white male with a good job and no dependents so heavily is they then remove themselves from the care of the public service and thereby justifying the view that taxpayer dollars are squandered on the indolent and ungrateful so services should be cut. A self fulfilling prophecy I would of thought. Good on you for labelling a tax paying voters views tosh. All he asked was for grant to pony up with the figures before having a crack at John key. As a lefty I am wholeheartedly sick of unsubstantiated attacks that end up blowing up in the lefts face. We need to do what we claim to be so good at, logically grounded and rational arguments.
Michael Nolan,
So, you’re saying the people who voted for Key are idiots. Might I suggest calling voters idiots because they didn’t choose the red team is not the way to win voters back.
Forget Key. Craft a Labour that working class Trev n’ Sharon will happily vote for because you offer them a brighter future. They’re not going to vote Labour simply because Labour keeps calling John Key a twit.
Accept that Trev n Sharon made a rational choice.
Their choice was not Labour.
Even as a National voter, I think now is the time for Labour to be attacking Key. It’s not an election campaign, they’ve got two years to be the opposition before they even need to think about another vote, and absolutely it’s Labour’s job to question the government.
That’s exactly how the adversarial legislature (parliamentary system) is supposed to work. Perhaps not worth the effort to attack his personality, the election proved that was futile, but this is one of the most intelligent posts I’ve read on Red Alert in a long time. I disagree with some of your points, but at least it’s a well reasoned critique.
@Spud
I’m not sure if you are an idiotic Labour supporter or a clever National supporter pretending to be an idiotic Labour supporter to make Labour supporters look bad.
This will be the last time I respond to any of your posts as you are either a troll or an idiot either way.
I thought when he got to hell and found it frozen he’d think the Hurricanes have played like a cohesive team and won the Super 15!
I agree with Joel.
And a little bit of optimism and vision from the PM wouldn’t go amiss.
accusing people of being trolls is a serious matter. Spud is a regular contributor here, Curious is not – so who’s trolling?
Considering what a big deal the Nats made of the trade gap – “show us the money!” – during the election campaign, it would be dereliction of duty for Labour NOT to call Key on this. Grant does it in a light-hearted way, but if you’ve already bought into the meme that Labour is negative, you’ll see it that way. Whereas the media give Key an easy ride whenever the “nice guy” mask slips.
Well said Dorothy, nice to hear sense re media and meme’s.
Thanks Dorothy,
Mostly it’s about perception (reality is irrelevant). For example Rebecca uses the example of welfare to differentiate between the party people wanted and the one they didn’t. In reality National has done almost nothing differently to labour in previous government. In particular the culmination in 2007 of very rigorous auditing/review/crack down on benefit fraud and criteria checking etc.
National said what they were doing was cracking down and that labour didnt (or implied it or allowed the falsity of Labour not cracking down to permeate), saying that they wanted to stop people being on the benefit and not looking for a job (which Labour had cracked down on and if you know people who are on unemployment benefit, you will know that miss one job interview, or one seminar about job interviews, you are stood down for 6 weeks (a Labour initiative). SO, on this matter the reality of what has actually changed about welfare between 2006 and 2012 is almost nothing, but people like Rebecca believe there is a gulf and voted accordingly. Now this can also be put down, perhaps to Labour not telling everyone that they did or were doing this stuff, which would be odd, because they would have alienated one constituency (according to most here on the right, beneficiaries vote for labour) while not compensating by telling middle and upper NZ that they were cracking down.
“First he said that john key was dishonest about the economy when he was campaigning. Then he said that key is out of new ideas for managing the economy. Then he said that key failed to mention some pretty important stuff in his state of the nation speech. And in there somewhere he indicated labour’s intentions for the economy: fairness (equality) and jobs”
That’s what I read him saying too. It read like he was holding an elected official to account for comments made during a campaign
Didn’t I hear a quote from Joyce from during the campaign about the road work north of Kapiti not rising beyond projections, only to be told its risen or rising by nearly a billion? I only heard snippets so stand to be corrected. The issue is not, as Brownlee suggested, one of commitment to infrastructure, it’s an issue of a Minister being untruthful during a campaign.
I find it staggering that people who (rightly) were infuriated with the former PM signing a painting she did not paint are happy to defend things like
No rise in tax (GST went up)
Have to change our laws and give a tax break to Warners or we will see the Hobbit go offshore (never in danger of going offshore and known by Minister)
We had to have the BMW’s because Labour locked us in (Labour did not)
We will do whatever it takes to get those men out
North of kapiti road costs are not increasing beyond projection (yes they are)
I’ve tried to imagine what would have happened in 2005 if the former PM had been recorded in what she described as a bland conversation and used the police to stop its release… Seems odd it’s been leaked now (no not a conspiracy theorist) am just intrigued by who would leak a bland conversation now and to what end?
Nearly 50% of the voting public cast to the left of centre so to suggest labour’s poor polling is a sign that “left” ideological views are waning seems a little superficial in reasoning.
“think about what JK says about negativity and ad hominem.”
I don’t recall him publicly calling for s top to the negative ad hominems that abounded toward the former PM and spouse. Happy to reap the benefit though while ensuring it always came from :somewhere else”. Would that be better curious, if Labour stopped saying what they thought and got others to do it for them?