So we are getting to about the 18 month mark leading into 2017 election cycle and Labour are taking the time to consolidate what Little’s leadership has done and what it needs to do now.
Some key Labour staff are being replaced for the 2017 fight. Think of these as upgrades for the battle ahead instead of nerves.
What Little has done is stem the bleeding from the internal factions and flirted some ideas out.
At this stage the question is will that be enough to be competitive?
Which brings us to the battlefield.
Currently the plan is to work closely with the Greens and together try and convince Winston to join by offering him a year as PM.
I think that is hopeful rather than strategic.
I think Labour need to acknowledge how likely a NZ First/National Government is in 2017 and how they need to radically adapt plans for the next election.
Labour need to make a choice or face electoral annihilation.
If we look at NZ First right now, they are soaring at unseen levels of support at this stage of the electoral cycle. This is provincial NZ, sick of Key and National promising infrastructure that never comes walking away from National, and towards NZ First.
Labour are not gaining from this opposition to Key. That makes for an interesting battlefield. There is a strong possibility that NZ First could wrench away another 5 points from National by 2017 placing NZ First in the high teens.
The provinces and rural NZ are ready for turning – but Labour won’t benefit from that.
I think Labour need to abandon a national strategy and instead focus on a two tick urban campaign. Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin need to become the sole focus and energy of Labour. To re-engage with the multi ethnic communities, LBGT community, the Pacific Island community, the working class, the Maori community, youth, elderly – all those groups who make up the democratic majority and speak to them in their language with their leaders.
This requires innovative HQs in each of those cities with a real drive to engage.
Spending resource on provincial electorates where NZ First will benefit most is counter productive at best.
Refocusing on the 4 main cities and swamping them with promises of the social infrastructure Labour need to promote to win the urban vote will do more for the Party election result than pretending it is still a national political force.
Labour need to fight smarter. Currently there are fighting for a winded ego.
Labour need 35% to have a chance of changing the Government in 2017, a two tick urban campaign is the only viable way towards 35%.
I think Labour are slowing turning around. There are some positives, they are engaging with new ideas i.e. UBI, Grant Robertson apologised for the 1980’s, have voted against the TPP, Little seems to have unified the party so that the right of centre rogernomics camp are not undermining them as much as they were, bought Cunliffe back, seem to be more on top of corruption like the panama papers and Scenic hotels.
Labour collaborated to beat the Natz in their own safe seat of Northland. They seem more comfortable with the Greens and hopefully NZ First will understand how strategically they can work together aka Northland.
I personally think NZ wants to go back to Labour. But my view is where Labour are going wrong in previous election is among other things (such as cheating by the Natz) that they are NOT concentrating on 69% Pakeha voters i.e. the Middle NZ.
While it sounds nice in print to go after the niche vote and diversity, the reality of what is not working is trying to compete for votes for the Maori vote (14.6%) who have their own parties (debacle with Internet Mana angered both sides). 9.8 Asian and 6.9% Pacific Island often prefer other candidates or do not vote at all. The amount of effort to convert them while diverting attention from the 69% Pakeha votes costs the election.
Middle NZ, does not form lobby groups, they are not available to talk to PMs, and so seem to be a lost voice for Labour. People with kids don’t have time to go to town halls, they don’t really have a voice at all. But they vote (or don’t to Labour’s peril).
Labour should go for professionals in particular doctors, nurses, prison workers, teachers, women, families, homeowners, morals, values, students, CHCH, Auckland obviously, and with urban areas having particular emphasis.
Labour needs to stop saying what they will take away from people are more what they will give to people.
They need to highlight what is being stolen before our eyes.
Would love to see a billboard with the slogan
“whose stealing our water”
picture of oravida and Collins there
Why are they buying our Farms not our Milk?
just the last 5 big farm sales and how much tax they paid.
Climate change denier
picture of Key
etc
Also think a united strategy against National could work, under vote anyone but National.
NZ First is gaining popularity because Winston understands what Kiwis are concerned about.
He also says things to Key, like you look like your are taking a widdle behind the couch etc…. he can totally undermine Key in a funny way.
Cunliffe can also undermine Key but seems under-utilised.
+100…”Labour needs to stop saying what they will take away from people are more what they will give to people.”
“Cunliffe can also undermine Key but seems under-utilised”.
…and Labour needs to ask : “Why are they buying our Farms not our Milk?”
“NZ First is gaining popularity because Winston understands what Kiwis are concerned about”.
Winston Peters would make an excellent Prime Minister …and he deserves it…he is head and shoulders above anyone else in the PM stakes.
>> Also think a united strategy against National could work, under vote anyone but National. <<
I really agree with this. The biggest problem with National is not their policy nor their personnel, but the fact that one party have such a massive chunk of the votes in Parliament. The whole idea of proportional representation was to prevent this, and allow a range of parties to share parliamentary power. That way, votes in Parliament are not a foregone conclusion. Every bill must win a large enough alliance of parties to pass, which means every contentious issue can become an open public debate, which parties listen to as part of deciding how they will vote. Democracy all year around, not just once every three years.
I also think modifying MMP so that every part that gets 1/120th of the vote gets an MP would reduce the chances of one party being over-dominant. It would allow people to vote for the party that really represents them, rather than feeling like they have to strategically choose between the parties that the polls tell them have a "realistic" chance of getting in. The way the 5% threshold works gives polls far more power to influence how people vote than anyone should have.
save nz …
“Cunliffe can also undermine Key but seems under-utilised.”
And the reason he is under-utilised is just that. He is capable of challenging and undermining FJK. NatzKEY doesn’t like him and neither do his own Labour neo libs! He’s far too intelligent to be sitting in the back benches! Such a waste really, when his input might have taken the party ahead.
Pity Cunliffe was the victim of discreditation prior to the last election, courtesy of msm! Under fairer circumstances, I think he could have won that election. If not that one, then the next in 2017 and in the process become a great egalitarian PM.
NZ’s loss.
+100 Mary
Cunliffe was elected leader by the party. The Roger Douglas group could easily have turned Key’s Jibes to make Key look silly.
Those treacherous neoliberals who stabbed Cunliffe in the back do not belong in the Labour party. Also any Labour MP who wishes to vote for the TTPA should only be allowed provided they quit the Party as Douglas and Prebble did.
Absolutely. So glad he’s staying on!
“I personally think NZ wants to go back to Labour. But my view is where Labour are going wrong in previous election is among other things (such as cheating by the Natz) that they are NOT concentrating on 69% Pakeha voters i.e. the Middle NZ. ”
That is partly true, but the trick they need to do is to gain those votes, or a fair share of them, plus somehow interest enough of the missing million to get them to vote. Then they will be there.
Labour needs to look at Bernie! Bernie is Labour when Labour had it’s Socialist roots. Labour needs to get back to those roots. Dump it neo-liberal’s and get out and represent the 99%. Tell people that MSM is corrupt which people are coming to realize that and extensively use social media. Get back to grass-roots organizing, get a leader that is passionate about the cause of the worker.
WE NEED A BERNIE!
Don’t know if you have heard but Bernie has lost.
Hows that trust going?
Jert: No he hasn’t.
Totally agree. Leave the rural areas to Winston. He will pick up another electorate. Make a commitment to pulling out of the TPPA would garner heaps of support and be an area of crossover support from NZ First.
Martyn, I sincerely hope that with this plan, Labour will employ you as there campaign manager. Based on your previous work running the Internet Mana campaign at the last election you should have no problems getting the job.
Yeah well I guess that’s what you get when neo liberals feel threatened – they all come out of the woodwork to kill anything that might threaten those juicy foreign trusts and all that cash they park in our banks , eh…
David Cunliffe being a case in point about being beaten up on…
And let that be a word of warning to you as well , Winston Peters,… we will be expecting much better from you in future than joining in with that neo liberal rabble last election. Much , much better, thank you very much. Much better indeed.
Therefore expel the neo liberal liars and thus build true governance via social democracy.
That’s what this country needs.
Martyn 35% is too low.
I see your point about the provincial vote but to be a real position of authority and show stability for their legislative agenda they must be in the 40% +range.
The only way to defeat the National party is for Labour to have a clear mandate and be the largest party.
Somehow they must reach the whole country and convince kiwis that they are a alternative government worth voting for.
The danger is that National only have to drop a few points to stay in contention.
Labour must have a coalition with the Greens and have a joint campaign heading in to September 2017.
Any vote Winston picks up needs to come from National to help drive their vote down and help with a change of government that Labour must lead.
They other way Labour can get National votes is to run a campaign against the TPPA in election year. A large proportion of National voters do not agree with TPPA – this will be a big issue in particular for 69% Pakeha voters who do not want to lose their jobs and sovereignty under the deal. Think how stupid Key is looking when Trump, Sanders and Clinton all agree it is a bum deal.
Remember Nuclear Free gone by Lunchtime, instead it was Brash gone by lunch time. Labour has a good history on this.
The Natz putting a US ship in our harbour, will be a good reminder.
When AAAP reported that Labour and NZ First supported National’s latest round of attacks on the poor (i.e. welfare “reform”) I realised that Labour is all lip service; they are wolves in sheep’s clothing and have no intention of making a stand.
The Greens are the only ones who represent the downtrodden in NZ. Everyone I know who used to vote Labour has switched to Greens so I guess I will follow suit.
The Greens are not really supporters of the ‘downtrodden’. They prefer a big all-controlling government and push for that using environmental policy as a cover. They appeal mainly to affluent white upper middle class idealists. Proof? Look at the result of the last election, 1 seat, urban Wellington.
Unlike National that sells off all publicly owned assets to their mates at bargain basement prices then buys a few shares in them then sounds off about having ‘ small ‘ govt…
While still holding their hands out for their tax payer funded exorbitant MP’s wages and quietly approving their bi annual / annual MP’s increases.
I don’t know about you mate, but I cant think of a bigger bunch of useless bludgers than that party save for the bums who park their cash here and don’t pay tax either here or in their own country…
Reckon they must trade ideas and ‘ lawyers ‘ with each other, don’t you?
Yes I agree, they’re all the same, regardless of political persuasion.
That’s why small govt works on all levels. To tell them to fix a problem they created in the first place gives them creative licence and only encourages them
Mike@NZ – rubbish. You’re simply parroting right wing paranoia with nothing else to offer as real critical analysis.
Well…they had better get cracking on it smartly no matter which plan they choose to adopt.
Still, it makes good sense to major in the areas where you have traditionally been strongest… and if they use tactics like that to effect the long term strategy , it just might be the ticket.
Just like an army , – sending one division to attack and hold one key area and sending another division to take another key position. Attack them on multiple fronts.
Sounds good. So long as there is a planned coordination and flexibility – and that flexibility being the post victory understanding of who gets / does what.
Labour still represents a combination of betrayal, incompetence, business-as-usual and totally ignoring everything that needed to be addressed long ago.
Why would anyone in their right mind vote for that combination when the world has already ‘turned to custard’ and is headed for collapse (partly as a consequence of policies implemented by previous ‘Labour’ governments here and elsewhere)?
And stop dorking their political partners
The main trouble with Labour is that the National party have evolved to become more Labour than Labour. There is not a single policy introduced in the Clark years, no matter how downright dopey or unrealistic, that has been subsequently rescinded by National.
Why? Because National have a very good system in place to check the public & political popularity of any proposal before it becomes policy. The idea is floated, proves unpopular to the majority, and is dropped without being labelled a Nats idea. To remove something as fiscally stupid as interest free student loans for example was shown to be a political mistake. This govt also tend to concentrate on laying a firm foundation for the average family to use their own initiative to progress their way at their pace, unlike Labour offering only drip fed govt assistance on their terms which effectively leaves families handout and lifestyle dependent.
If Labour want to improve their chances they need to pull back from the radical left towards the centre and trust the voting public to judge how we want to live our lives on our terms, not try to punish the middle class merely for trying to do what we believe is best for us and our families.
Ahh, in other words, ACT-style polices?
Let’s see, what percentage of the vote did ACT win at the last election? 0.69%. A fall of 0.37%.
More ACT-style rhetoric. And which ignores the many failures of market-driven dogma. Such as the steady decline of home-ownership since the 1980s.
Your ideology suits those with the money to do “what we believe is best for us and our families”. It fails everyone else. Evidence; growing poverty; homelessness; and the wealth gap.
And you want more of that, Mike?!
Ah, no. Pass.
I didn’t mention ACT, I was calling it for what it is. If I wanted to get nasty, I could reference your comments to the ‘Internet Party’ and make some smart remark about how that went down at the last election…but I wont.
My remarks were based on how the wider (read. voting) public see the Labour/National divide. Middle NZ consider themselves mature enough to run their own lives, they have seen too many broken govt promises and corruption based stuffups to trust politicians with much now, hence their distrust of ACT.
National have, for better or worse, targeted the middle vote and Labour seem to be moving towards the deeper left.
I’m just saying that the further Labour go from the middle, however good theirs (and your) intentions, the smaller their potential voting pool
Hows big Jude going over there at the anti corruption summit in the UK?
I heard she was playing coy and not yet ready to play the game as of yet?
Whaddaya reckon? … makes us all wonder if shes waiting for further order’s from lil’ Johnny once he knows which way the polls are going on the issue…
Last time I heard he was getting the message loud and clear NZ’s don’t like cheats.
So I guess big Jude wont be making any flying stop overs via China this trip as either if that’s the case…
“National have, for better or worse, targeted the middle vote and Labour seem to be moving towards the deeper left. ”
Can you give us actual examples of that, Mike? Or do we just take your solemn word for it??
Winston will NOT go with Nactional…this is ridiculous!
Peters has worked well with Helen Clark’s Labour government and disastrously with Nactional…they hate him…he hates them…simple as that
…to go with Nactional would be reputation suicide and a betrayal of everything he and NZF has stood for
( and don’t say he did it in the past…this is a tired smear…Peters was faced with the public approbrium of being responsible for another General Election being called immediately after a General Election…and the risk of his party slumping in the new vote ( Labour did not have the numbers for a coalition with NZF) or trying to get some of his NZF policies through by working with Nactional, with not selling State assets as a bottom line…as soon as Nactional had him they tried to continued selling state assets …and Peters pulled the plug….NZF as a Party was almost annihilated the following General Election for going with Nactional…imo he wont go near Nactional again with a barge poll …this notwithstanding his policy of not stating who he will form a coalition with before General Election results
Yes Labour need to step up as Helen Clark did and follow how they captured that middle ground again with her Labour pledge, “we will be a kinder gentler inclusive Government that will listen and work with everyone.”
The Party needs to study every way they sent this message that captured the popular vote then or help other opposition parties by joining together in this way, or die.
Labour are still confused where their support base is.
They need to demonstrate clear decisive policy, fence or pole sitting will not get them anywhere come the next Election 2017.
Also motivating the “missing million” probably traditional Labour voters might help, they or their parents abandoned Labour after Rogernomics.
This country has gone to the dogs in the last 30-40 years under both Labour & National.
‘This country has gone to the dogs in the last 30-40 years under both Labour & National.’
Exactly!
And the reason for that is that Labour and National have been (and still are) two faces of exactly the same coin -the international bankers and corporations coin.
In this election Labour needs to slay the Nats on policy.
Especially in policy areas where the Nats are lacking.
The biggest of these is climate change.
Yeah right. Yawn.
But don’t ignore it, climate change is the existential issue of our age.
The Nats need to be challenged on it, so do New Zealand first.
And my guess is, both will be found wanting.
And glaringly so.
That is on the condition that Labour throw their lot in with the Greens and campaign against deep sea oil and against new coal mines, and explain why.
The science is irrefutable.
They can’t lose.
The Nats and ACT and New Zealand First will have no defence.
If the Labour and the Greens work together in Northland around climate change and its subset issue deep seal oil drilling in the northland electorate.
Winston Peters in particular will face a stark choice: risk alienating those opposed to deep sea oil drilling in his electorate, which may prove to be just enough of a margin to tip him out, or stand with Labour and the Greens and keep his seat.
Another policy that Labour need to throw in with the Greens on, is opposition to the TPPA.
None of Little’s wishy washy, weak
“We will allow our MPs to vote to support the TPPA”.
Again the Nats ACT and New Zealand First will have no answers.
And again Winston Peters will be particularly vulnerable, and will face a stark choice. Risk alienating his nationalist supporters by supporting an agreement that impinges on NZ’s sovereignty and independence, or come out against the TPPA and and stand with Labour and the Greens.
Will Labour do it?
Will Labour slam the Nats over these two defining issues?
Or will the Labour Party let the Nats sleep walk to victory yet again?
“I think Labour need to abandon a national strategy and instead focus on a two tick urban campaign. Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin need to become the sole focus and energy of Labour. To re-engage with the multi ethnic communities, LBGT community, the Pacific Island community, the working class, the Maori community, youth, elderly – all those groups who make up the democratic majority and speak to them in their language with their leaders.”
Trouble is those groups do not necessarily make up a democratic majority.
The challenge for Labour is to get enough of the middle class votes AND to tap into the missing million, of which there must be a fair percentage that can be attracted with some smarter approaches to reach out to potential voters.
Most of the groups Martyn mentioned would already vote Labour or Greens, and those that do not, they may be newly won over Nat voters, who decided to leave Labour hoping the Nats may offer them a bit more. Those cannot be all that many though, and if Labour should finally manage to hammer together a policy platform, in some cooperation with the Greens, they may be convinced to return to Labour anyway.
Labour’s major problem is the negative or ambiguous perception most in the public have of the party and its MPs. Andrew Little may have forced some unity into the MPs they have, but it came at the price that no bold policy can be dared, as it will again open up internal divisions.
We got that tertiary education program release, which was not what it seemed, we got a discussion of an UBI, but as it was too difficult to defend and explain, they quietly dropped it again. Where is the rest of their policy, they had previously said it would be shaped and then released from last year on, we got little. We are now nearly half way through this year, and what we get is little or nothing.
Voters want a clear direction, clear policy and a determined direction in an alternative government, but we get little of that.
Time is indeed running out to set the terms and agenda for the next general election campaign, in the meantime Winston is reaping the rewards for hard work on the front-lines, where he holds speeches and faces off with the people in the regions.
I considered Little a leader for a transition, as he is not all that ideal a candidate, lacking the ability to hold passionate and convincing speeches. He is doing ok at times, but with a nasty, cunning and smartly operating Key leading the Nats, more is needed from a leader for Labour.
A new IT system is also not going to be enough to bring the needed change, I fear, but those are the kinds of things Labour spends time and money on.
Maybe we first need the housing speculation and price bubble in Auckland to burst, for Labour to get a good chance of winning next year, to form a new centre – left government with the support of NZ First.
Why would the missing million vote for either major party? After 30 years not one policy change has anything to do with the missing millions. The economy has become so distorted full time work is calculated at 22 hours per week.
The problem is simple. Government and business don’t won’t to pay workers a healthy living wage.
The funny thing is is that if you implement a living wage tied to inflation or the money supply you wouldn’t have to pop the property bubble.
” The funny thing is is that if you implement a living wage tied to inflation or the money supply you wouldn’t have to pop the property bubble.”
Shush Sam…. don’t let em know that … you just might expose Nationals targeted voter base and Nationals need for work slaves…
“Currently the plan is to work closely with the Greens and together try and convince Winston to join by offering him a year as PM.
I think that is hopeful rather than strategic.”
If the comments at The Standard are anything to go by then yes, that’s the plan although the feeling is Winston will side with the Left without needing any bribes. Why Winston would choose the side with the least votes I don’t know but there you go.
“Labour need to make a choice or face electoral annihilation.
If we look at NZ First right now, they are soaring at unseen levels of support at this stage of the electoral cycle. This is provincial NZ, sick of Key and National promising infrastructure that never comes walking away from National, and towards NZ First.”
NZF are stealing votes equally from Labour and National.
“The provinces and rural NZ are ready for turning – but Labour won’t benefit from that.”
NZF will never side with Labour as long as National has a bigger slice of the voter pie than Labour.
“I think Labour need to abandon a national strategy and instead focus on a two tick urban campaign. Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin need to become the sole focus and energy of Labour. To re-engage with the multi ethnic communities, LBGT community, the Pacific Island community, the working class, the Maori community, youth, elderly – all those groups who make up the democratic majority and speak to them in their language with their leaders.”
Democraticy majority? NZF owns the grey vote and National have gotten the P.I. community sown up which leaves a democratic minority.
“Spending resource on provincial electorates where NZ First will benefit most is counter productive at best.
Refocusing on the 4 main cities and swamping them with promises of the social infrastructure Labour need to promote to win the urban vote will do more for the Party election result than pretending it is still a national political force.
Labour need to fight smarter. Currently there are fighting for a winded ego.”
Yes and no. Why waste limited resources in unwinnable electorates or safe seats? Instead pour the resources in the marginals. This could be the provinces, the 4 main cities.
As for overall strategy Labour needs to present itself as a viable alternative. Then it needs to start appealling to the centre and centre-left. New Zealanders are largely conservative and don’t like change. Let’s face it, National isn’t that much different from Helen Clark’s Labour. There has been no radical changes except National has ditched the nanny state image. And if we are completely honest Helen Clark’s Labour would have supported the TPPA.
In short, Labour needs to distance itself from the looney left and adopt a “me too” strategy but with a caring face. By getting the centre/ centre-left vote and also the vote of those who feel that the current government doesn’t care about them, Labour just must have a chance of winning. Assuming of course it’s able to get it’s act together as a political party.
I’m glad National and Key calling Andrew Little – ‘Angry Andrew’.
Andrew is angry, just like the rest of us, but Key and National’s narrative is that Andrew Little is angry and John Key is the “voice of reason”
Splutter, splutter cough cough….apologies PML.
Every time Key mentions ‘angry Andrew’ Labour should retort with:
“Ponytail” pervert
Every time Key mentions ‘angry Andrew’ Labour should retort with:
“Dodgy Jonkey” would you buy a used bank off this man?
Every time Key mentions ‘angry Andrew’ Labour should retort with:
“JohnKeyUn” handing out knighthoods like he’s the dicktator of NZ?
Every time Key mentions ‘angry Andrew’ Labour should retort with:
“Kant remember Key” (I can’t remember – especially if I’m caught with both hands in the cookie jar)
Crosby Textor’s narrative of Andrew being angry is great. Andrew represents us and we’re totally pissed off with the way John Key and National treat Kiwis like half-wits.
Andrew honestly represents Aotearoa better than John Key dihonestky represents Panama Papers, so keep the angry Andrew invective coming – it will remind kiwis how much an Australian Political Ad Agency is treating residents of Aotearoa like addlepates.
…btw trolls, if you have to look up addlepates, don’t bother telling the Aussies.
Keep the angry ANdrew slogan up Aussies – oi oi oi.
Comments are closed.