Due perhaps to an ongoing lack of vision on the part of our theoretically ‘lead’ Opposition party, we’re quite used to thinking of Labour as being a watered down version of the beliefs of others.
Throughout much of the last ten years, this has meant perceiving much of Labour’s economic policy as fairly transparent attempts to be “National-lite”. The reasons for this were obvious: Labour wanted to reach out and appeal to middle-of-the-road “centrist” (and centre-right) voters in order to prise them off National and so form the basis for the next Government.
At the time, this made a certain sort of tactical sense. National rode high in the polls, while Labour’s vote continued to spiral downwards, and the twin enfant-terrible titans-in-waiting of The Greens and New Zealand First grew their own votes by eating into Labour’s left-wing and angry-protesty-vote flanks.
Unfortunately, the strategy resoundingly failed to bear fruit. Labour didn’t manage to pull National-leaning voters in by attempting to ape the monkey-business of our nation’s leading party. “Why have the inferior model when you can go straight for the source?” seemed to be the thinking.
Worse than that, Labour’s curious (for a nominally left-wing party) strategy of attempting to secure votes by delivering a budget surplus through sacrificing funding for social programs, and pleading for the “fiscally sensible” option of raising the retirement age … only seemed to drive its previous sources of support further away to other parties, without producing any meaningful electoral dividend. Its more recent lukewarm opposition to the TPPA is in a similar boat.
The Labour Party’s response to what’s pretty much its worst drubbing in living memory was predictable. First, it turned inward and attempted to marshal its creativity and nanny-state-approving social-justice-warriorness into developing authentic endogenous policy solutions that would enable it to gain some form – any form – of traction out there in the electorate.
This didn’t work out perhaps as well as they had hoped (because really – ‘coercion’ about the sugar-content of foods is hardly election-winning policy), leading them to start looking to other Parties’ manifestos and ethoi for points of inspiration.
It was in that spirit that they announced a watered-down version of a key element from NZ First’s Tertiary Education Policy earlier this year as a Labour flagship initiative. This did rather well … so they kept on going.
The end result of this is that we now have a Labour Party who, despite their own record in office, makes militant-sounding noises about protecting the ownership of Kiwi farmland, getting the ruinous influence of predominantly Chinese speculators and foreign buyers out of the Auckland housing market, defending Kiwi economic sovereignty, and a seemingly novel enthusiasm for putting a cap on immigration numbers.
The reasoning for this gradual volte-face should be clear: Labour recognizes what it must do if it wishes to reverse its seemingly inexorable decline in time for the 2017 – or, more realistically, probably the 2020 – General Election:
Adopt policy and a philosophy which *actually* resonates with voters. In this case, New Zealand First’s.
Because if there’s one Party out there who’s consistently growing – in fact, arguably the *only* Party that has continued to grow year in and year out since Labour was last in Government – it’s New Zealand First.
Small wonder, then, that Labour’s public branding has come to so closely – if inexpertly, and arguably somewhat inauthentically – mirror our own.
So while Labour’s previous comments about Chinese-surnamed buyers of Auckland housing seemed to be roundly pilloried in the media, and Little’s statements about Indian chefs were walked back live on-air a little less than 48 hours after he first made them … we should nevertheless gear up solidly for a year and a half worth of Labour increasingly attempting to sing from the same song-sheet as New Zealand First going into the next Election. Even if they appear to possess a regrettable penchant for doing so in a frequently somewhat off-key if not outright tone-deaf manner.
Perhaps this is why National insisted upon comparing Labour to Rob Muldoon this week, rather than the more contemporary point-of-similarity, Winston Peters. Because they know if they said the latter, they’d run the risk of increasing Labour’s popularity.
My son came home after living in Germany for 11yrs and now say’s Germany is screwed now with so many foreigners mainly Arabs flooding into Germany and wandering the streets all night long as they feel lost and cant handle the changes around them.
The locals are locking themselves up in their own homes for safety.
Most German’s are sick of the government so it is not a nice place for locals when all different folks flooding into very strange and different communities that they cant seem to feel comfortable in.
I think the problem is that there is too much immigration at one time – only so many people can be assimilated at once.
That’s part of it, but Germany is also in some ways a very intimidating culture to assimilate into, and there’s a lot of structural racism going on. (Plus comedians who do “funny voice foreigner impressions” are still regarded as hilarous. OMG)
I felt really uncomfortable whenever race came up as a political topic when I was in Germany, precisely because I recognised it as “oh, this is what NZF does, but on steroids.”
“Is Labour Trying To Be NZ First-Lite?”
Nope Labour are just muddling alone as usual.
It is good that Labour, NZ First and Greens are aligning more in policy for the next election.
I don’t see it as a bad thing and judging by the polls voters like the direction and the collaboration.
You have kind of contradicted yourself and I disagree that Labour are just muddling alone.
@words – sorry auto correct – I actually mean’t “muddling along”. (not “alone”).
I’m an advocate for the opposition parties collaborating!
Labour has the least clear message (so far) hence my phrase ‘muddling’.
But muddling from Labour, is still better than charging along and destroying the country like National.
I see this pattern also SAVENZ and endorse your take entirely as this combination is what can be a credible line up if they align themselves to put up a block to face these Natz thugs.
We should promote them as “A Government in Waiting”.
Labour need different branding to suit their new policies.
How’s about:
The Xenophobe Party
It certainly has a ring to it!
Andrew said How’s about: Labour -The Xenophobe Party
“give it up” your National skirt is showing!
You’d fit into Party quite nicely, judging by your racist comment on this thread:
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/03/19/no-surrender-to-injustice/
Your links broken
Is Labour Trying To Be NZ First-Lite? No. Pointing out that migration into the country should be turned down during the bad times is not only reasonable it’s plain commonsense. Most people agree with that. They also agree that the banks, that make billions of dollars in profit every year from Kiwis that flows offshore, should pass on the cuts as well.
National are losing ground, their internal polling would have told them. The Nats and their media mates are worried, hence their stupid inane attack on Andrew Little. The Nats just dropped another 2.5% in a RM poll that usually over exaggerates National’s numbers anyway.
By the way, its National who holds the title for having the worst election drubbing in our history, National led by Bill English 20.93% in 2002.
If it’s an economic argument on immigration, I’d say it should be far more straightforward to say that immigrants should be coming with needed skills or to invest. We should never be closing up those types of immigration as the economy and the country as a whole relies on it.
Caps really do sound like the first step into NZF country, even if they’re only during downtimes.
The benefit to NZ of investors is only from innovative entrepreneur/producer investors. Farm/real estate/financial investors do not benefit NZ at all. But they make National’s gross economic mismanagement less apparent by bringing in capital.
NZ’s economy is tanking under National – house and commodity prices would be tanking too, without the external cash injections. They should tank, so that kiwis impoverished by Key’s corruption and Bill’s incompetence can still buy houses. If you want NZ’s problems solved immigration must be regulated in the public (not the Treasury) interest.
Didn’t know Curwen Ares Rolinson was a National supporter.
This is far more accurate than your recent posts about the Greens stealing NZ First’s policies.
Labour’s retreat into conservatism is very disheartening for many on the left who dislike NZ First’s ideology. Little knows this and the UBI noises last week was an attempt to keep the progressive left listening. But again, it’ll all end in disaster. Labour needs to stop being ashamed of its roots and reimagine a post-neoliberal framework.
Sadly, get prepared for fourth Key term.
Only solution is NZF holding the balance of power, they will bring some common sense into Parliament.
Comments are closed.