Tamihere is running for Mayor and he has been clever enough to pull together a left-right spectrum to unify Auckland to defeat Goff.
As a former Labour Cabinet Minister, John is far more left wing than Phil, who was a neoliberal architect and the only Labour party MP who was allowed to cross the floor to vote for National’s TPPA, so any claim that John is somehow more right wing than Phil is just bullshit.
Tamihere has lined up former Mayor and right wing Councillor Christine Fletcher as his running mate and has Matt McCarten and Michelle Boag as his political strategists, so it’s a unified political spectrum up against Goff, and that’s important because the fundamental changes Tamihere is seeking in forcing Central Government to pay for Auckland’s growth and the vast increase in social housing he is proposing will demand across the spectrum support.
If elected, Tamihere would be Auckland’s first ever Māori Mayor, something that won’t go unnoticed in the South and West Auckland voting block.
Tamihere’s attack against the large vested corporate interests of Auckland has been part of his previous attack on Goff and his ‘Auckland for us not them’ narrative will be heard across the city.
The attack against Tamihere will be on his past comments which in a post Me Too environment will be judged as the greatest sins against humanity ever committed, but I think a woke attack by Goff could be terribly counter productive.
Many Aucklanders stuck in traffic every day are furious at smug pronouncements from woke activists on cycling, and if the attack against Tamihere are seen as coming from that part of the political spectrum, Tamihere could throw caution to wind, assume he has nothing to lose by enraging The Spinoffs and Simon Wilsons of the world and come out with some populist attack on cycle lanes and reap the vast angry chunk of Auckland’s gridlocked voter block.
It’s going to be a long fight till the Mayoralty election, expect it to get nasty.
Smart move by Tamahere, even though I am not a big fan of Christine Fletcher there a worse Councillors on the Auckland City Council.
Goff hasn’t cut the mustard, to interested in his hair brained schemes, lets get back to basics and do them right first.
I cannot help but wonder, what’s in it for Tamihere inc.
And Michelle Boag, Jesus wept, she’s one of the nasty Nats!
Still he is showing seriously determined political thinking and a very winnable game plan which makes a change!
Apparently there’s this low cost housing developer opened by the Auckland Super Council that is costing a billion dollars a year. That’s 2500 houses at $400k each. And Tamihere one day was like what fucken houses? And Goeff was all like, the cheetah is faster than the dandelion.
Support Tamahere and help split the Left Vote, smart thinking by Boag the Right Wing Tory, she has got a lot of political smarts up her sleeve.
a job, a wage and some power x ray
He deserves a chance imo…and so do many people in Auckland who he says he will represent!
Goff has had his chances and days in the sun
Oh, no, no no. Don’t forget the metoo movement. I can almost feel them moving now. I bet you they’re pissed Tami-hairy gets a platform for rape appology, misogony and crimes against trans. Lelz. They’re there, let’s not discount them.
the Supercity is a runaway train “on last chance power drive”, that no individual Mayor has a shit show of diverting let alone halting, unless they go full raving left…
Free Public Transport, homeless villages, modular construction small houses with small rental charges for whoever needs one-plonk them in NIMBYs back yards, binding referendum on revoking ACT’s undemocratic CCOs, slashing all the $100 grand plus Council salaries, sacking most existing HODs, and putting up the “No Vacancy” sign for a couple of years at least to cap population, would get things started!
Wait, why should the rest of New Zealand subsidise Auckland’s growth, exactly? I can’t wait to see the mental gymnastics you need to explain why a city can’t fund itself if said city is fundamentally viable. If you acknowledge it isn’t viable, why is Tamihere/you(?) advocating throwing good money after bad? Just let Auckland die (if indeed that is what happens), and people will eventually be forced to move to areas where growth is organic and financially sustainable. Surely that sounds a lot more logical than having the city continuing to haemorrhage money and expecting people outside of the city to pay for it! If I’m wrong, please explain to me how/why.
Because Auckland is about 30% of the population but creates just under 50% of the GDP. That’s why.
“Because Auckland is about 30% of the population but creates just under 50% of the GDP. That’s why.”
I dont follow the logic of this statement, Martyn. You appear to be saying that Auckland subsidises the rest of New Zealand but I think the reverse is true.
If I remember my Economics 101, Gross Domestic Product is approximately the sum total of all incomes paid in all of NZ. Putting aside the fact that GDP is hopelessly inadequate as a measure of national wealth your statement that Auckland ‘creates’ 50% of NZ GDP is simply saying that Aucklanders pay themselves a lot more than Dunedinites do, not something to be proud of I would think, and most of that goes in housing and petrol. Creation is’nt a part of it .
The main issue is that subsidies can only come from taxes. If we NZ tax payers are paying our taxes to provide facilities to Aucklanders, which we ourselves dont get, then we are subsidising Auckand. There is no escaping that.
Your statement sounds impressive but it seems to completely ignore the role of taxes and is therefore meaningless.
Now imagine what it would be like if we wern’t led by idiots and had a wellbeing budget rules.
In theory we’d have a broader set of indicators tha can actually pass a budget which solves different problems that different people keep bring up, over, and over again.
“The value of Auckland’s GDP was $101.4 billion (37.5 percent of the national economy), followed by Wellington ($35.6 billion; 13.2 percent) and Canterbury ($34.9 billion; 12.9 percent).”
https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/regional-gross-domestic-product-year-ended-march-2017
Let me be Frank, these numbers are meaningless. Unless you factor in who is paying the taxes and where the taxes are spent, they mean nothing at all. Auckland is a parasite.
Though, purchasing power parity (PPP) is probably better because PPP minimizes the nonsense like haircuts and prostitution that GDP counts which have not even the slightest to do with the productive capability of a nation.
A nation that makes a lot of luxury items isn’t going to be able to make beneficiaries as happy as a nation that makes the same value of mass produced items.
GDP as a measure is shall we say ‘challenged’
…however the point is a fact check for Mr Bradbury…Auckland does not contribute 50 % of GDP…the greater Auckland region contributes around 38%…in line with its population proportion
That makes absolutely no sense. It makes 50% of the so-called GDP, but that still isn’t enough to fund itself? How much of that GDP is just middle-men as opposed to wealth generation? You do realise that if I pay you $50 for something and you turn around and spend that exact same money to pay me $50 for something else we just created $100 of GDP (i.e. neither of us created any net wealth whatsoever)? That is what Auckland’s “economy” is: Peter paying Paul to pay Peter, which is why it’s going broke. I suspected mental gymnastics, and I got it.
I’m no big fan of Auckland, the best view of it is still in the rear view mirror, but it is the bedrock of godzone no matter how much the mainlanders hate it. I’m from the Naki so a trip to the big smoke is not too bad if ya know where to go, more goin on than anywhere else. I mean wellys too windy, chchc is too wobbly these days, dunners is too cold for us northerners so were stuck with it, just like you!
John would have my vote but not if Boag is anywhere near the campaign, having her involved is one BIG mistake.
McCarten AND Boag together???
How does that work without copious amounts of blood ending up on the floor!! If that part is true, no good will come of it.
While having a Left and Right candidates working together us a noble thing (Christine Fletcher is one of the saner Righties), how does that work in terms of policy?? Don’t forget, the Left believes in taxpayer funded social housing, whereas the Right belives it should be done by private charities.
Thar’s just one example. I’ll be interested to see how this Left-Right tension can be resolved.
Yes Kat, I agree. Wots that all about then eh…Birds of a feather flock together.
JT is NO better than Phil. Any candidate lining up with Christine Fletcher must be a bit blue at heart, certainly cannot be a lefty.
Suggesting the abolition of the regional fuel tax and making petrol cheaper again will be another nail in the coffin for those wanting to slow down climate change.
But as most Aucklanders are self serving people with own agendas, with short memories and no vision for the future, there are sadly enough idiots who may vote for JT and Christine.
I see what is evolving politically in this country, and the last remnants of hope are vanishing quickly by the day.
NZ INC is a screwed up country with largely screwed up people.
John Tamihere, vain, undisciplined and incoherent, a minor Trump who will appeal to the wilfully uninformed and be a disaster for NZ never mind Auckland.
a minor trump what a load of bull jam tomorrow
go John hope he gets it in
Comments are closed.