What if Labour blew a dog whistle and no one listened?
That’s the sentiment in the wake of Labour increasing only 1% in Sunday’s Colmar Brunton Poll from the critics of Labour’s use of Chinese sounding names to make their point of overseas speculation inflating the Auckland Housing market.
Who wrote this…
A week after deciding to fuck a hornets nest by sallying forth with a xenophobic dog-whistle over NZ’s housing market problems, how’s it going for Labour? Some within the party had expected a bounce in the polls and, well…the Colmar Brunton poll out today has Labour up 1%. So the bump hasn’t happened. Labour are flat.
But wait, it gets better.
The amount of political capital burned by Labour on their ‘Chinese money’ nonsense, might well be showing up in people giving Andrew Little absolutely zero benefit of the doubt when he made statements around the ‘Fire at Will’ legislation that could uncharitably have been interpreted as back peddling.
Them’s the breaks – thoroughly deserved.
Now, I guess Labour could double down on their ignorance and arrogance and decide they just haven’t been base enough in trying to ‘sell their message’. Or they could cut the crap and get back to being a solid and conscientious social democratic party of the left. That means they’d have to work, and work hard, to regain the trust of a substantial proportion of their base that is, quite frankly, sick and disgusted.
Which way will they go?
We’ll see.
…Kiwiblog? Whaleoil? National Party press release? No. It’s the Standard.
Labour are aiming at the ‘middle’, those who voted Helen, but now vote for Key, and that ‘middle’ are struggling to buy their children a home in an under regulated market that is saturated with domestic and foreign speculators.
The ‘missing million’ voters in NZ are considered too disconnected by poverty and social dislocation to ever woo back to the ballot box so Labour are chasing the middle and if they tread on liberal toes to do that, that’s to the benefit of the Greens.
It’s all part of Labour’s broad church ‘40%’ strategy. Do I think that can work? No. I argued and fought to use MMP tactically last election with Labour-Green-NZ First-InternetMANA as the majority, but Labour and NZ First wouldn’t have a bar of that and ganged up on Hone in Te Tai Tokerau. For Labour to become a 40% Party again requires a watered down policy platform that would make them almost indistinguishable from National and while that might ‘win’, it’s not really ‘winning’ if you are progressive.
It will need the next poll to see if Labour’s stand makes an impact, but what I do think this Poll shows is a deeper problem for all opposition parties – put aside the issue of Labour pointing directly at a specific race and blaming them (rather than decades of inaction and lax regulation), the simple fact is that National are still at 47%!
That’s an incredibly high percentage despite a failing economy, despite a housing market out of control and despite no real direction or vision by the Government.
Twitter might hate John Key, but a majority of NZ love him the way a shark loves blood.
Sure we have a compliant mainstream media and wall to wall Hosking and Henry to point to as a reason for National’s success, but it goes deeper than that. Key taps into NZers anti-intellectualism in a way few leaders before him have managed. That National can still be on 47% says that it will take a hell of a lot more than Chinese sounding last names to move an electorate who are intellectually intimidated by soy lattes and culturally excited by Dancing with the Stars.
I partly agree. However, that poll is skewed in favour of the right, it always is. I prefer the Roy Morgan poll as a more true indication of what NZ voters really intend.
And, I note that TV-One did their best to spin the result in favour of the right, as they usually do.
I am convinced that Labour is gaining ground from the housing fiasco.
Like Peter Archer, the difference between the two polls should be considered as the right poll so NatZ are slipping no shit. down to 45%?
I think Martyn is right to state Labour must use MMP tactically as the NatZ cleverly always have to do to get over the line every election remember?
So over a cup of tea? so why cant we start a Tea Party and invite Labour, Greens and NZ First to get into a collective block finally.
Because this would send a strong message to the voter that finally the opposition have got their shit together and are realising they are onside to defeat the NatZ finally and restore this country for our future children and not sell their birth right as the NatZ are doing every day the clock ticks.
+100 Peter Archer…agree polls are deceptive…used as PR weapons….and wise not to put too much store by them
….also think Labour is on the up and up…and will win if it plays correctly and mends old wounds…and takes the rest of the Left with it (ie Labour + NZF + Greens + Mana/Int…this means compromises like Kelvin going list and letting Hone and Mana have TTT)
…as regards the Post on the Standard…i wouldnt take it too seriously…there are a number of different Posters on the Standard…and who is Bill?…does everyone agree with him on the Standard?…I dont think so
Yes Chooky, Bill is an oddity.
When I used to contribute to TS bill was an oddity I recall.
A number are there more than here, especially the NatZ trolls.
I prefer the softer TDB style than the hasher TS model.
That’s why I came here in July 2014, and love to stay.
Absolutely CLEANGREEN 🙂
I dont agree that Labour were wrong in claiming that Chinese investors are over-represented in housing sales. No one is claiming that is the only reason. Of course Nick Smith is right in saying that under supply is an issue (though whose fault is that? – perhaps you can dig up the data for the number of state houses built by National).
In a previous comment to TDB, I pointed out that the Auckland Chinese banks appear to be orchestrating the activities of Chinese investors; that our government appears to be smoothing the path for these banks and that a number of ex-National MPs (Don Brash, Jenny Shipley and Chris Tremain) are on the board of the Auckland Branch of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China.
Perhaps when the would-be NZ house buyers grasp the blatant conflict of interest this implies, things may change. Kiwis are slow to move. In the meantime I suggest that Labour keeps on researching the dubious links between National and Chinese banks. This is a genuine issue.
The ‘missing million’ voters in NZ are considered too disconnected by poverty and social dislocation to ever woo back to the ballot box’.
Someone should replay Mhairi Black’s maiden speech to Andrew Little, and may be he’ll get it.
Yes…..I too was a IMP voter – and glad I did as well .
I used to see Hone as negative influence…however…when IMP was formed…the sheer dynamic message of a fair society overtook all previous concerns. And now I’m a Hone supporter.
And I’ll still vote for MANA again.
As those principles DON’T change. Also …as a person who has strong national sovereignty ideals…I’ve always supported NZ First ….but then again…I voted for Jim Anderton more than once as well.
And I was supremely annoyed that Peters joined in with Labour in supporting that neo liberal quasi ACT member parading as a Labour party member Kalvin Davis.
Peters would have been better to have adopted the Greens position and not joined in.
HOW CAN ….anyone justify John Key ….advocating their ‘arch nemesis ‘ candidate and advising his supporters to vote for Davis without there being some serious questions asked about collectively protecting the neo liberal status quo ???
If IMP had gained 3-4 seats …there was every possibility that there would have been a change of govt. And if not….the issues around entering the war in Iraq, child poverty , the TTPA , workplace safety , the overheated Auckland property crisis and foreign speculation among others would have been a constant indictment on National and its so -called rockstar economy.
You are right about Labour chasing the middle ground of 40%…it is a flawed strategy that seems to lack any cognitive recognition that if one brand product is no different from the other – chances are – that if your’e the marketing officer advocating merely parroting the opposition’s product , – and being seen as the poor mans alternative , – you will soon be looking for another line of work.
Now the reality is we are working with a dense , short sighted populace that is primarily self interested.
That’s a fact.
And that’s partially what dirty politics is all about – creating that stupified self indulgency in the population.
And it is only when there is severe economic hardship that it will budge them.
When it hits their pockets.
Same psychology as why we have traffic fines for excessive speeding. For cattle we use a cattle prod.
Same diff.
The ONLY WAY Labour is going to break out of this is by two methods…firstly – get rid of any and ALL remaining neo liberals. Starting with the original Douglas crowd. That’s the warning shot across the bows for the rest of them.
Secondly – and this is where a sense of guts and mongrel comes in – not being AFRAID TO THOROUGHLY PISS OFF AND SERIOUSLY CHALLENGE THIS CURRENT CORRUPT AND ANTI DEMOCRATIC GOVT AND THOSE UNETHICAL BUSINESS CORPORATIONS WHO SUPPORT THEM.
Without that sort of blood and guts mentality – you’ve only got a collection of wimps.
Bloody wimps.
It would be a wild ride , it would be a high risk ride….but every major movement in history was started by a radical program of reform – and in this case – reforming the deceitful ‘reforms ‘ of Roger Douglas and his treasonous ilk.
Then , and only then ,would Labour be seen as having any balls.
And until they actually learn this lesson – and they’ve had far too long to learn it as it is – They will continue to be seen as the ineffectual joke party of the Left.
Oh…and one other thing…all kudo’s to Phil Twyford for showing some guts to highlight foreign speculative buyers and the impact that’s having on current and future first home buyers and renters in not only Auckland – but the rest of the country…
Despite the cheap shot about ‘ racism ‘ being used as a smokescreen to avoid what needs to be done – implementation of a Foreign Owners Register.
And all power to Andrew Little for supporting his colleague.
This is the sort of gutsy stand that will show Labour’s got a pair.
That’s the sort of kickass no compromise approach that’s needed – not that of some sniveling little weaselly dish water apologist’s.
Remember the methodology behind Colmar Brunton surveys. The real effect of Labour’s call for arms against foreign speculation in the NZ housing market will be seen at the polling booths. Those people who refuse to vote for a total lack of motivation will have been awoken by Labour’s latest policy.
Here’s the thing .
I don’t for one second believe that poll.
I had a phone call from a well known ‘ polling research’ company who said they had questions about the economy etc and it would take about 5 minutes.
I said “fine, fire ahead”.
Second question in was , who did you vote for at the last election?
I told them “Labour”.
They responded with ” thank you sir , that’s all we have time for this evening”.
I said, “hang on a second, you said you had about 5 minutes of questions, we’ve been going 30 seconds. This looks like your research is rigged. Is it?”
Flustered by my confrontational approach he said ” yes, I mean no”, and then he hung up.
Things have got so corrupt out there now they are not even bothering to feign honesty any more!
I reckon Labour are up 4 points from the dog whistle, but lost 3% to the Greens…….
Well, when Labour comes and launches such an attack by using not 100 percent reliable statistical data, and stirs up so much discussion and debate on a topic, not heard of for probably a year or more, they should have a STRATEGY.
I disagree with those that simply call it “dog whistle” politics or “xenophobia”, what motivated Phil Twyford to release in the way of gathered statistics based on Chinese surnames of residential real estate buyers to the media. There is something to it, but it was not well presented, it was leaving Phil and Labour open to much controversy and accusations of being “xenophobic” or playing the “race card”. That is where a more considered, cautionary attack would have been the smart way to exploit the information they got.
With all the intense debate on blogs, in the media, the actual issue was side-lined, and Twyford and Labour should not let it have gone that way. Problem is, Labour still have no clear plan, they are still unsure about so much, recent comments on the 90 day trial policy the Nats brought in, and what Labour would do, raised further eyebrows. The abolition of the capital gains tax plans is another mistake, I think.
Until Labour does not manage to present itself as a valid alternative, a government in waiting, and as also having a cohesive, clear policy program, and strategy, to also attract the many disaffected, the near a million non voters, they will not get much above 30 percent in the polls.
I think though, re Twyford and the Chinese name data list, that did not yet fully impact on this poll.
And it may not just be “speculators” that drive up the rare commodity of housing in Auckland, immigration numbers may play more of a role than what many think also. There has been increased immigration, net immigration, and a high number of permanent to long term arrivals, most planning to stay in Auckland.
Add that to natural increase of the population, and the migration from some regions into Auckland, and we have the demand that is there. Re immigrants, our immigration policy favours the better off, the better qualified, and the professional and business type of person, who tend to bring with them sufficient savings and capital, that most locals here do not have. Many of them would want to get their own homes here.
So Twyford, Little, Labour as a whole, do some more homework, what you have been doing so far is still not working, not working that well, I’d say.
Good points all.
The logic of the Auckland housing issue seems to be beyond the intellectual capability of Labour and their man in the Council (Len).
Auckland’s population is growing. It’s geographically constrained by sea on both sides so to accommodate these additional people it either has to grow up (more multistory development) or grow out (move boundaries north & south). But this incompetent council will do neither.
Andrew, urban sprawl is not the answer either. All you are doing is shifting the problem north and south, in uncontrolled growth.
There are alternative, such as encouraging development and growth in other centres; a fast-rail commuting service between Auckland and Hamilton; a capital gains tax; etc.
Your solutions are simplistic and delay the problem.
What is it with Socialists and railway lines?
I suppose, like Socialism, it’s a 19th century concept.
People want to live in Auckland. They generally don’t want to live in Hamilton. ( I got a job there once but my wife refused to move).
I repeat the unassailable logic: If you don’t go up or go out, house prices will continue to rise.
Hey, I’m happy with the current arrangement – it’s turned me from being merely a millionaire into a multi-millionaire!
what is it with people like you advocating urban sprawl without thinking about the down stream costs?
Kiwis love John Key as a child is dependent upon a security blanket – an irrational dependence that insulates them from harsh realities. Although the paradox is that he is manufacturing a future of harsh realities.
This far into the electoral cycle the opinions polls are probably not worth getting too exercised over,
The Colmar-Brunton shows that everything is pretty static, most polling for the Green Party traditionally showing a rise in support which drops off at elections to the current level of Parliamentary representatives,
Labour going no-where fast in this poll isn’t any surprise to me and i would suggest that the 2 recent issues ‘Chinese house buyers in Auckland’ and ‘what Labour will do with the 90 day fire at will rules’ should be looked for in the polls over the next 3 months to gain a real sense of the impact these issues have had on the electorate,
The song then remains the same, its pretty much still a 2% election with NZFirst being the deciding factor should 2% of popular support shift from National to Labour/Green,
No-one will like me saying this, but, National while looking really dense to say the least on any number of issues that have arisen since the previous election have done the politics, by accident or design, with some cleverness,
The previous Budget which will give next year beneficiary reliant children a small income bump has not in this poll indicated any slide in support for National and as the effects of that income bump are unlikely to be translated into polling % until they are in the back pockets of the mums and dads of the kids involved,
The same can be said about the redistribution of monies from Working For Families from the top income bracket in that scheme down to the lowest income earners,(something i banged on endlessly about while commenting on WFF over on the Standard),
Remembering that it is ‘back pocket issues’ that decide elections National having hinted numerous times to its support base that further tax cuts for them are coming are definitely in the drivers seat,
Worse for Labour, should English not be able to sell off enough of the States Housing to produce his paper surplus thus showing a ‘justification’ for the hinted tax cuts National has the ability to rip the wind from Labours sails by simply redistributing another $25 of
Working For Families tax credits from the top income brackets to the bottom stream of income to shore up its support,
Its a long road to the 2017 election and the effects of the dairy crash which have not even begun to be felt might as they shake out into the wider economy just be the deciding factor…
Labour still has no idea of the mess it has landed itself is in:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11483909
quote:
“Refuting Labour’s sound-bite race politics and justifying our Chinese surnames can only do superficial damage to the party. Such petty skirmishes will not win the war. And make no mistake, people with Chinese sounding surnames, we are at war with the Labour Party. And our ultimate war aim is to prevent a Labour Government with Andrew Little as Prime Minister. Every tactical campaign, every message we send, every protest must work towards achieving this end.
We must respond to Labour’s call to arms by attacking their centre of gravity- at the polling booths at the next election. Spread this message through the bamboo networks. Vote strategically in the next election because a vote for Labour is a vote for second class status in a country we are proud to call home.”
And although I’m not Chinese, I’m with them because:
First they came for the Chinese
And I did not speak out….
Oh Andrew, your crocodile tears are risable. If anyone is exploiting Chinese, it is the like of you, supporting a bloated housing bubble in Auckland because,
(a) it is part of your naive free market beliefs,
(b) you are taking a swipe at Labour.
The problem is not Chinese. The problem is unfettered, tax-free investment in housing, which you seem to overlook entirely. Overseas investment is part of the cause of a rising housing bubble, precisely because our rules are lax and because we have no Capital Gains Tax.
I note you haven’t even touched on the problem of a lack of Foreign Buyers’ Register. Why is that?
Because that attacks the government you support.
As for quoting the Herald – a National Party leaning paper – yeah, right. The quotation you’ve provided is probably one of the most partisan and strident I have ever read – but it is also the view of only one person. You’ve simply picked one to suit your purpose. I could quote you any number of comments posted after Lim’s piece that disagree with him.
You need to look at the problem instead of burying your head in the free-market sand. Because you’re not offering a solution, you’re part of the problem.
Labour has taken a swipe at itself!
Not only has Labour declared war on the Chinese, you’ll likely find other immigrant groups have also taken note.
The Koreans, The South Africans, Islanders (if they recall it was a Labour government that instigated the Dawn Raids) and many more are now considering their options.
Over half of working Aucklanders weren’t born in NZ. Go figure.
did you read the comments? – they overwhelmingly call Lim on his weak and sloppy argument
point 1) when lim says its am attack on resident and citizen chinese hes talking shit and putting words in peoples mouths
I do disagree, this was not an attempt to label all Chinese as “speculators” or potential off-shore investors, it just so happens that there are many rather wealthy Mainland Chinese, who are keen on buying properties in many cities across the world.
So Labour were right with raising this issue, as the numbers of buyers is likely to increase with billions of capital due to flow out of China, to be invested in preferred real estate. With its low level restrictions New Zealand is very attractive to these buyers, some of them are investors, some buyers of homes for themselves or relatives to live in.
It was many in the media who spun this out of control, such jerks as that Patrick Gower (who admitted on The Nation on the weekend, that he is “mates” with that National Party supporter, who they had on “the panel”). Gower has been attacking every Labour leader there has been for years, and others in Labour, trying to damage them by making extreme allegations, and twisting the truth.
He was at it again tonight, on TV3’s news, claiming Labour “cooked up” the data from the Real Estate agency. All he did was to try and embarrass Andrew Little, and Tova O’Brien followed, doing the same.
With such a media, who needs enemies. They have been stirring this up, and sadly some within the left or progressive blogsphere followed the same idea, labeling Phil Twyford “racist” and being PC in overdrive.
This though is a report on what is actually happening:
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11478724
“Similar stories are being told around the world as wealthy Chinese investors, worried about the dramatic slowdown of their country’s economy and real estate market, pour their money into safe havens abroad.
Last month, Chinese buyers were confirmed as by far the biggest foreign buyers of US real estate, spending $28.6 billion in the year to March at an average of US$831,800 per property, compared to the national average of US$255,600.”
If Labour are ” Hunting ” in the middle then they need more than a pop gun. John will just come along with his six guns and blow them away by pinching their policies. He’s done it before and today I see he’s considering some weasely worded control on foreign buyers.
There is only one issue Labour has a real chance with and that is TPPA, National wont back down on that so it’s an issue delivered on a golden platter for Labour, but they refuse to see it. By going on the attack with the almighty missile that is TPPA – what it means for NZ backed up with all the other issues, like housing, poverty, wealth distribution, debt etc etc that this National Govt has vested upon this country, Labour would have the distinct position of not only being perceived as being a real difference but also looking as if they are taking a stand for all NZers which is what they once were and should still be, rather than being seen as a ” Lite Blue ” alternative.
I’m not holding my breath – wish it were different.
“For Labour to become a 40% Party again requires a watered down policy platform that would make them almost indistinguishable from National and while that might ‘win’, it’s not really ‘winning’ if you are progressive.”
But if Labour wants to get into power then it’s going to have to swallow the bitter bill and do exactly that with the distinction “unlike National, we care about the disenfranchised” as a way of appealing to those “Haves” who feel guilty that some are having a hard time while they get to party.
Also, Labour needs to start presenting itself as a credible opposition. In my opinion the Chinese thing was a complete disaster that will take Labour a long time to recover from.
It was a foolish move for a party with no money in the bank.
Comments are closed.