Mt Roskill by-election co-operation & Labour Auckland HQ – 2017 campaign has begun

By
Martyn Bradbury
-
31
5

Andrew Little copy

News that the Greens and Labour will agree to only stand one candidate in the Mt Roskill by-election shows the strength and determination of the new MoU to defeat National.

If this level of maturity can be established in other electorates, 2017 is looking very competitive.

News that Labour will open a new Auckland HQ to be headed by some of Labour’s best strategists shows how serious Labour are going to be to win Auckland.

If you can’t win Auckland, you can’t win 2017 and the reality for all those who oppose this Government is that the back bone of any alternative Government has to be Labour, so this HQ could be a real centre for momentum from an entire cross section of the community.

The simple fact is that the 2017 election campaign has just begun.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

31 COMMENTS

  1. “The Greens and Labour will agree to only stand one candidate in the Mt Roskill by-election” – Great news!

  3. Yes.
    Auckland, love or hate it, you can’t ignore it.
    He who wants to win the election must first win the heart of Auckland.
    But that’s going to be a tough ask for two main reasons.
    The housing boom means there is a big sleepy hobbit comfort zone in Auckland and these types are not going to shift from National while it continues so National will not pour any water on it. On the contrary they will keep fuelling it hoping it will last until polling day.
    The other problem for Labour is getting their supporters out to vote. It is always a problem because there are a lot of people who are p…d off with how this country is being run but instead of voting to make a change they have switched off politics and fallen into a vacuum of indifference. To re-engage such people is very difficult.
    The mayoral election and (assumed) by-election will be a good indication of how well Labour is setting itself up for next year and how well it can work with the Greens.

    • they should get a bus and pick them up the voter s that don’t tend to vote mobilize the non voters to vote

      • 100% Michelle, How to win Auckland now is to get all opposition Parties to join in a legal claim now to take back our half of the public owned RNZ/TVNZ as is our right by court injunction.

        As we, the left/centre voters own half the public media as now those assets only represent all the right wingers and not us.

    • ‘instead of voting to make a change they have switched off politics and fallen into a vacuum of indifference.’

      It’s not so much a matter of ‘a vacuum of indifference’ that has caused a lot of people to switch of politics as the recognition that politicians have repeatedly betrayed voters, and really it makes almost no difference which party is in power, policies remain essentially the same.

      This is the narrative I hear a lot these days: “I’m not going to bother to vote because they’re all liars.”

      I suspect ‘the left’ will continue to try to ‘push shit uphill with a pointed stick’ until either the system crashes or ‘the left’ produces some leaders who are prepare to speak the truth and can actually lead. No sign of the latter at this stage.

      I don’t know how much of this is true but this is what some are saying:

      ‘The latest Roy Morgan poll shows support for National has dropped to 46%, having spiked in July following the announcement of a $1 billion housing infrastructure policy. It’s still well ahead of a potential Labour/Greens alliance, which has 40% support.

      Labour has yet again failed to get any traction, with its support levels stagnant at 25.5%. Support for the Green Party is up 3% to 14.5%, while potential king-maker, NZ First is up 2.5% to 9.5%. Despite people’s discontent around issues like housing affordability and low wage growth, 58% of voters say New Zealand is heading in the right direction.’

  4. Come the GE, it would be good to look at Nat-leaning electorates where the Green vote is strong and stand no Labour candidate there in return. Probably a few blue seats which might go Green in such circumstances.

    • other than epsom in auckland area the seat means nothing its the total vote… how many years now we had mmp and still a very big number of potential voters still dont get it.. no wonder 25% of the voters cant manage to find a polling booth

        • Yeah the last election was pretty crazy, but no person of the left would ever party vote a Nat. There is some dirty manipulation of the votes there.

  6. It seems there is some truth in a likely agreement between Greens and Labour, and it is necessary, for sure:

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/labour-greens-eye-by-election-deal-2016082921

    “Green Party co-Leader Metiria Turei says she’s open to the idea.

    “The point of the MOU we have with Labour is to form the space to have these kinds of conversations about the best electoral success for both Labour and the Greens,” she says.

    “We do very well in that electorate when we stand for the party vote and we have a really strong team in Mt Roskill… so we know that we are strong there.

    “Whether that makes a difference for their campaign, I couldn’t tell you.””

    What must be considered is that the Mt Roskill electorate has changed in composition, many new migrants, some with rather conservative social and other values, have settled there. It is no longer just the so-called Auckland “bible belt”, it is multicultural and home to many people from Indian, Chinese, other Asian, European and Pacific backgrounds.

    Also was the border extended towards the east some years ago, including more affluent parts of Auckland near Epsom, Royal Oak and North West Onehunga.

    The Nats candidate has some following there, and with a new party standing also, with a strong migrant focus, and run by Indians, there could be a very close race.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/nzs-first-political-party-dedicated-to-immigrants-2016082919

    Has this intended candidate been consulted?
    https://www.facebook.com/greensmtroskill/

  7. So , Labour are going after Auckland. The town that ‘ spends’ the money. Not to the countryside that ‘ earns’ the money. Where National’s Country con artists are campaigning farmers almost daily with endless hollow promises to steal away with farmer money.

    Labour has an opportunity to steal the farmer off National and Labour instead fiddle about in Auckland. Has Labour not seen our per capita debt ratio? Have they not been to down town Auckland to see how many Ferrari’s, Lamborghini’s, and Porsche there are? Have they not noticed the house prices? I mean ? What.The.Feathers !?

    I live slap dab in the middle of a large, fully functioning, fourth generation sheep farm and these guys work every daylight hour yet drive excrementie, second hand, Japanese cars. They work their anus’s off to manufacture their product that some featherer buys off them for almost nothing then sells that product for unimaginably high profits without ever having to spend the day soaking wet on a quad bike. Again. What.The.Feathers.!?
    Do Farmers read The Daily Blog? If so, then here’s the thing. Wake the feathers up ! You’re being swindled ! By both National AND Labour. They’re both anus-hole swindlers, swindling daily.

    There’s another simple fact @ Martyn Bradbury. We, as a country, are feathered if we continue down this path.
    Dear old Albert Einstien was known to say.” The definition of madness is to continue doing the same thing and expect a different result.
    2017 ? A fizzer in the making.

    I can’t stand this. I have to say it…. FUCK ! FUCK! FUCK! FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !

    • Len Brown had a dream, as a Labour man who became mayor years ago, to make Auckland “the most liveable city in the world”.

      He was also pushing for the Auckland Plan, to nearly double to population in the same area, built up high, make it “compact”, put more people into apartments (then even first sardine can size), and compete with “global cities” such as Sydney, Melbourne, New York, San Francisco, L.A., Paris, London, Beijing, Shanghai, Tokyo and perhaps Singapore and Dubai for conferences, “skilled” work forces, and international “flair”.

      “Multi culturalism” is meant to be part of it, and more business for the builders, developers, retailers, some manufacturers, real estate agents and definitely MORE rates to gather by Council from more households.

      Whether this will all work, that is another story, watch that space, we are becoming JUST ANOTHER big city, with over population, more stress, more traffic, more people, more pollution, more crime and ever more costs, which Aucklanders and also the rest of New Zealand are expected to pay for.

      Phil Goff will carry on from where Len left off, that is if he does indeed win, and the continuum is followed with relentlessness, because there is BIG MONEY to be made, by all vested interest holders. The communities and people will just have to swallow it and slip up closer together, squeeze in, so to say, in modern day sardine cans for housing and complexes of such.

      • Auckland; Its acting like Rome did before the fall.

        I was born in Auckland and left as a 5yr old and lived on four continents and in NZ province’s when home as I do now and country boy is right, we in the provinces are treated like poor cousins while Auckland get all the taxes we pay and we get crumbs like our roads are such crap and rail is now non existent.

        Don’t tell us about “Progress” it is a meaningless shit word to us in the provinces.

        Come drive to Gisborne and see what I mean.

      • Actually it can. I do it every day.
        Auckland, like London and New York, doesn’t actually produce anything. It’s a city almost entirely dependant on “services”, which ultimately MUST be paid for by actual tangible things that people NEED. In NZ, as Country Boy explains, it’s almost entirely from our agricultural surplus (which is exported). You can spin it anyway you like, but if a nuclear bomb were dropped on Auckland, nothing much would change in the provinces. The GDP would drop drastically (because ALL exchange of money adds to GDP), but factually NZ would be see a HUGE positive in its balance of trade figures if such an event were to occur, which would likely result in surpluses over time.

        • agriculture is only 4.35 percent of GDP banking finance and insurance is 28 percent of GDP(ponzi housing )

          • GDP is a phony measure of both wealth and the creation of wealth, of course, primarily recording the movement of money created out of thin air from one place to another, and measuring (and promoting) the destruction of society and the planet. The more fragmentation of society there is, the more destruction of the environment there is, the more earthquakes and need to rebuild after earthquakes, the higher the GDP.

            ONCE A REALLY STUPID IDEA GETS ESTABLISHED IN THIS SOCIETY it cannot be challenged, let alone eradicated -people grimly hang onto it like a handrail on the Titanic- which is why there is no hope and no future for this society.

            GDP: Global Deception Paradigm.
            GDP: Global Destruction Process.
            GDP: Generally Dumbed-down Populace.

            Most nations have never had higher GDP than now and have never been in a worse state than now or had worse prospects than now.

          • All “wealth” can be traced back to just three things if you follow the money: Manufacturing (making things), Mining (used to make said things, including energy), and Agriculture (to feed people). All the rest are unnecessary nice to have “services” (including debt) that are ultimately paid for by the surpluses those other three things produce. Trade has obviously allowed said surpluses to produced in other countries, massively disrupting the normal balance of trade requirements.

  8. I think it is overdue that the Left Block of NZ politics turn its hand to what a successful ACT party has done with successive “cup of tea arrangements”. It is the honorable way to do coalitions, open and honest. ACT is an honorable, open and honest party.

    ACT don’t mind this sort of challenge, even though it will be too little too late. If this had been done at the last election, ACT may not have had as many coalition partners if the left had gotten its ACT together (did you notice the segway/Dad joke?).

    So, as an honorable party, ACT says, bring it on, we will win anyway and then the bottom line will be the full introduction of ACT’s policies, and as avid readers of my contributions here, you know they will be about tax, tax and tax, for a better, fairer New Zealand.

    • If cup of tea arrangements of the Act Party style are “open and honest”, why did John Key then pursue Ambrose, the journalist, over his accidental recording of his conversation with Mr Banks?

      I thought you believed in “nothing to hide”, or has that now been put to rest, that slogan?

Comments are closed.