I spent more time throwing terse comments at the screen than I expected, each side got about the same amount, the dog seemed equal parts confused and disinterested with the fuss, suspect he represented the average voter more accurately than I did
Sadly, in my view, both parties pandered to their focus group findings, rather than actually lead a discussion focused on necessary structural change, especially of deprivation of Maori and children.
Labour missed the chance of a Douglas-style blitzkrieg approach early in their second term (I don't accept Covid as an excuse) and they're paying the price.
Good point, Happipat. Labour has squandered its opportunities in this last term. The covid crisis was exactly the time to gain support for structural change. They used it as their motive for centralising the health system. Our online Stuff survey in 2020 found majority support, especially on left and centre, for reforming the economic system. Large majorities across the spectrum supported the idea that "We need to use this opportunity to recognise the economic value of voluntary caring and community work".
Yes, Labour state that covid constrained its ability to execute large scale reforms such as within tax & welfare. However they executed massive reforms in health & education, so this excuse doesn’t really fly. They should have used their majority to execute meaningful reforms
Thanks for this analysis Grant. It was clear from the outset that Luxon and his National Party minders had prepared a Trumpian debate strategy of bluster, interruptions, fibs (National invented Maori for Maori; all health indicators going backwards) and rash claims (boot camps will work even if they've been proven not to; Labour is an agency of the gangs). And that the moderator allowed this to happen. And was far too soft on the economic credibility issue. Hipkins being the reasonable one, allowed Luxon to talk too long. Also clear that neither leader has the vision and courage for bold policy - like a fair and progressive tax system. (This appears only in the realm of the smaller parties Green and Te Pati Maori - maybe they should have been in on the debate. At least young New Zealanders wanting to get a home might have had some comfort). For Hipkins to say that a capital gains tax takes some time to for the income to be seen, is too tame and not a valid reason to avoid such a necessary move. And as for Seven Houses Luxon claiming... All of which was unfortunate for all of us. Alex Stone
Fair comments, Alex. There's data on the RNZ site that show Luxon spoke the most. I don't think it's the moderator's job to pass judgement on fibs, though, and Luxon later qualified his incorrect statement that National had invented by-Maori-for-Maori. Hipkins is going the way of other Labour parties (Aus and UK) in abandoning progressive policy.
Agree Alex that Luxon’s comments in these areas were nonsense & shouldn’t have gone unchallenged. Hipkins should have jumped down his throat about the gangs comment & should have challenged him much more strongly on other points. Also disappointing the media didn’t go to town on Luxon’s gang statement. They simply mostly peddled the narrative that Luxon ‘won’ the debate, which I think is a stretch
I spent more time throwing terse comments at the screen than I expected, each side got about the same amount, the dog seemed equal parts confused and disinterested with the fuss, suspect he represented the average voter more accurately than I did
Hi Grant
Sadly, in my view, both parties pandered to their focus group findings, rather than actually lead a discussion focused on necessary structural change, especially of deprivation of Maori and children.
Labour missed the chance of a Douglas-style blitzkrieg approach early in their second term (I don't accept Covid as an excuse) and they're paying the price.
Good point, Happipat. Labour has squandered its opportunities in this last term. The covid crisis was exactly the time to gain support for structural change. They used it as their motive for centralising the health system. Our online Stuff survey in 2020 found majority support, especially on left and centre, for reforming the economic system. Large majorities across the spectrum supported the idea that "We need to use this opportunity to recognise the economic value of voluntary caring and community work".
Yes, Labour state that covid constrained its ability to execute large scale reforms such as within tax & welfare. However they executed massive reforms in health & education, so this excuse doesn’t really fly. They should have used their majority to execute meaningful reforms
Thanks for this analysis Grant. It was clear from the outset that Luxon and his National Party minders had prepared a Trumpian debate strategy of bluster, interruptions, fibs (National invented Maori for Maori; all health indicators going backwards) and rash claims (boot camps will work even if they've been proven not to; Labour is an agency of the gangs). And that the moderator allowed this to happen. And was far too soft on the economic credibility issue. Hipkins being the reasonable one, allowed Luxon to talk too long. Also clear that neither leader has the vision and courage for bold policy - like a fair and progressive tax system. (This appears only in the realm of the smaller parties Green and Te Pati Maori - maybe they should have been in on the debate. At least young New Zealanders wanting to get a home might have had some comfort). For Hipkins to say that a capital gains tax takes some time to for the income to be seen, is too tame and not a valid reason to avoid such a necessary move. And as for Seven Houses Luxon claiming... All of which was unfortunate for all of us. Alex Stone
Fair comments, Alex. There's data on the RNZ site that show Luxon spoke the most. I don't think it's the moderator's job to pass judgement on fibs, though, and Luxon later qualified his incorrect statement that National had invented by-Maori-for-Maori. Hipkins is going the way of other Labour parties (Aus and UK) in abandoning progressive policy.
Agree Alex that Luxon’s comments in these areas were nonsense & shouldn’t have gone unchallenged. Hipkins should have jumped down his throat about the gangs comment & should have challenged him much more strongly on other points. Also disappointing the media didn’t go to town on Luxon’s gang statement. They simply mostly peddled the narrative that Luxon ‘won’ the debate, which I think is a stretch