Wait, WHAT? Beneficiaries have more chance of getting a benefit increase by Christmas from Santa than Jacinda?

1. Exactly. Tony Blairs reign in the UK will give you an idea of how Jacinda will most likely progress.
   SADLY there is NO real left wing party in NZ to vote for that can presently get into Parliament. So we’re stuck with a ‘John Key’ lite right of center ‘Labour’ party.

2. The 50 NGOs need to add a few more groups to their ranks, and become the de facto representatives of the NZ working class, a loose alliance that gets into community organising, and direct action, as is tactically appropriate and widely supported.

   All those new Labour Electorate MPs need to have their offices picketed, and get regular approaches from the “NGO alliance”. “You got our votes–now demonstrate some accountability”–passivity is not the answer to Jacinda and Grant’s intransigence. Biggest Labour Party suck ups of all, the NZCTU, are in for a shock if they think Fair Pay Agreements are going to just be enacted–they will need to be fought for, and fought hard.

   “NeoKindness” is not a mistake, or timidity that Jacinda will snap out of, it is a real time re-run of Blairism, where every human situation imaginable is reduced to a transaction. Firm pressure and direct action is the only thing that will shift the PM and BFF Robbo.

   I am glad there is not a National/ACT/Conspiracist Govt. because it gives us the political space to organise and pressure the Labour Caucus into using that Parliamentary majority for the mass of the NZ people not the 1%ers and their 9% loyal enablers.

   • Yes beneficiaries urgently need relief and a background of policies that increase wages across the workers spectrum.

     “Blairism” is being thrown around as a term of abuse but I would be useful for the intended meaning to have some hard indicators of where “Blairism” applies to NZ with specific and detailed examples.
     Blair was a con man and killer turning the workers vote into a dangerous support of neo fascism.
     Iraq was one of Blairs cries for blood but to fill the pockets of military suppliers and transnational oil cabals.
     NZ sent in some troops sporting that, but we were told had a task of “reconstruction” we find later is largely bullshit. NZ SAS took over from US troops and were aggressors killing native people as Nicky’s book gives evidence about.
     NZ Defense is tightly tied in with US/UK defense and NZ’s top Defense personnel have to have US approval before appointment. Grooming is a part of their careers.
     Both NACT and Labour may struggle with this to varying degrees but cannot over throw the established US/UK/AU alliances entrenched.
     Kirk tried.

     • Good point. I mean “Blairism” as describing neo liberal managerialism, SOEs, State Sector Act, Reserve Bank Act, allowing penetration of private capital into public infrastructure, e.g. roading, public transport.

       Welfare and ACC is run on punitive lines rather than a service model. Previously publicly owned entities like power generation and supply and oil refining operate in specially created artificial markets that hammer consumers. Public housing has been relegated to the extent that neo rentiers are a real thing, rents exploitative and home ownership declining for younger people.

       As for Military, Intelligence and Policing; it is true that by and large NZ has not gone as low as Tony Blair’s Britain did over Iraq and the arms industry, but we are fast catching up with surveillance of citizens, and our unquestioned obedience to 5 Eyes.

       So that pile of unpleasantness amounts to “Blairism” NZ style, though I guess some people do use the term to needle the Prime Minister and her supporters, with Jacinda Ardern’s track record of working in his office.

       • Thanks TM
         I think we are on the growing Kiwi track of demanding more social legislation for families which means the Thatcherism embodied in Blair’s mantra, be rejected outright.
         Where NACT has eagerly built of Lange’s govt’s betrayal of its Labour socialist roots, the lot needs to be regarded as an entangled mat that will take step by step action to unravel.
         Helen took back ACC from privatisation but ACC remains open to incremental privatisation still.
         Before ACC a Kiwi who hurt him/her self just went to the local hospital and got care as a part of the public health system. No forms, fuss or bother about eligibility or review just care as needed.
         ACC has become a corporate style organisation separate to the health system making everyday injuries associated with an ACC file, letters to the “client” and a top heavy load of accounting, data collection for excluding clients on quasi policy matters and nit picking. Bonuses were paid to case workers who managed to exclude clients leading to another industry of private ACC Advocates to push for claims and using the courts where ACC deny assistance to an injured person. The costs to the injured person can be unaffordable and case managers seem to rely on that to dissuade legal redress.

         But the govt we elect is not the power behind the direction of NZ.
         A govt has to fight the pressure placed upon it collectively and individually as the various lobbies manipulate on behalf of Business NZ and large offshore based corporates
         .
         MPs all have vulnerabilities which are researched and used as levers to force MPs on issues critical to powerful players.

         As often described our countries has three tiers of political spectrum.
         The wealthy corporate and financial world including business organisation, some of whom take direction from off shore hard right wing think tanks, the elected MPs after MSM has driven public thinking and the worker families as electors.
         The present govt elect has yet to show their credentials and MSM, on behalf of the owners, will shape how Kiwis will see those discussions.
         TDB does swing its direction according to who authors the contributions and how they feel at that point. The great thing about TDB is that readers get a much wider perspective than what is available in NZ TV, radio or the main newspapers who tend to pass on propaganda from Reuters.

         If NACT was govt during the last term we would have been is a real mess now both healthwise and economically.

         Small actions dring 2020 such as refusing to follow demands from Business NZ but instead listening to Scientists in Health, has had an enormous benefit to NZ and the world by example.
         But Blair is an rotten to the core “killer” who used the excuse of “the third way” to move UK Labour closer to Thatcherism.
         Ardern carries that association but must be judged by her actions rather than associations.
         We need socialist activisim within the Labour govt and see evidence of effective change.
         There are so many fronts NZ has to move on in reducing poverty ( sharing the wealth), Climate change action ditching fossil fuels and sorting out the increasing damage to our rivers and ground water while supporting farmers to change, creating on shore supply of goods and food as locally as possible and sorting a transport system based on rail and reviving coastal shipping.
         Above all we must reduce our energy consumption along with curbing population increase.
         The Thatcherite market economy is a massive problem to tackle. Tactical regulation seems a likely option as revolution is not looking too good.

3. So apt because to a lot of supporters of the Blairite this will be like explaining to your kids Santa isn’t real

   • Ha ha ha ha, fantastic comment.

4. Does Labour actually know its voters?

5. She did hint at the possibility of this happening after three Christmases from now.

6. Those deserving a benefit due to physical or mental disability should get more and those that can work need to have more help with getting work and work ready . People should be encouraged to come and go off the benefit without hassle.Once someone gets the feel of pride in earning a living and finding out a wage gives them the chance to do more they will be more likely to stay employed.
   Unfortunately I will not be holding my breath for any inovative moves by this government now they have 3 years of no accountability.

   • Remind me what National initiatives were again Trevor?
     Here’s one of Labours policies, if you had bothered to do some research. And also a reminder of what National and Paula Bennett did…

     Labour is promising to provide up to $4515 for low-income families to help them get qualifications, and to increase the amount of money people working part-time can earn while on a benefit, should it return to Government after the election.
     Party spokesperson for social development Carmel Sepuloni said reinstating the Training Incentive Allowance (TIA), which was cut in 2009 for Level 4 qualifications and above, would assist with the costs of getting a degree-level tertiary qualification.

     “Access to support for higher level courses under the TIA was taken away by National, despite the responsible Minister Paula Bennett herself having benefited from this support,” Sepuloni said.

     • If we are going into history your own MB took Sepuloni to task in 2018 about the way MSD treated those claiming benefit The answer from Sepuloni was changs were IMMINENT. This was before covid had made matters worse for so many and the government had introduced a two layer system.
       How long do you go on blaming National Key Douglas for the problems facing current benefituries.

       • The blame continues until we rid ourselves of every last drop of neoliberalism. So change is imminent, undoing everything National put in place, including their punative measures takes a little bit of time. Be patient Trevor good things come to those who wait.
         As an aside how long are you going to try and protect National and I notice no response on Bennetts appalling policy.

         • Last point first I support a National approach to running the country it does not mean I agree with all their policies just as I am sure you are not always happy with Labours approach.
           I am an amateur in sorting out neoliberalism but to say this current Labour government is getting ride of it is a long shot. The failure to make an effort to holt the rapid climb in houses prices is surely capitalism gone mad and Jacinda refuses to look at tax . I was always against this type of tax but sometimes you need to change your outlook as situations change

           • “I was always against this type of tax but sometimes you need to change your outlook as situations change”

             Trevor this we can agree upon.

7. No chance, Mr Santa.

   A man who GIVES away toys and expects no payment in return, in complete disregard for the sacred practice of capitalism? CLEARLY, he’s a SOCIALIST. He even wears COMMIE RED.

   Not in our team, you bugger.

   • Manfred, It was capitalist giant Coca Cola who costumed Santa Claus in commie red – oh no! Cultural appropriation ! And St Nicholas did expect children to be good in order to be rewarded with lovely surprises. Such surprises were originally often home crafted gifts made with loving hands. Then shop-purchased products which enriched the strangers who owned the factories, came to replace home-made presents, and Christmas became firmly established as yet another capitalist enterprise.

     In fact celebs- from Auckland of course- can make even more money out of the dead saint by flying their children to his alleged Scandinavian birthplace, then get written up about it in a women’s mag with big pix of how they add meaning to their lives in a glossy photogenic sort of way, to impress the plebs who buy the mags, and make the other strangers who own them that much richer. Communism ? Nah.

     It was a young Galilean guy who asked people to be kind, and give all they have to the poor, and we all know what they did to him. So a PM saying one thing and then doing another, is sort of understandable in this context. What really pisses me off the are people who bastardise language and tinker with words so that they come to mean the opposite of what they should. Even a philologist wouldn’t try that – but these are tricky capitalist politicians where anything goes.

     • Thank you for the feedback, @Snow White.

       Yes, cocacola marketing always tries to sell its carbonated sugar drink with a deflated zeitgeist…

       Regardless of a red, a green or no coat, here summons a wise man:
       Pope: Help the poor, no excuses
       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEjphgksEWM

       • Yes, he’s a good Pope isn’t he – and from Sth America, the home of Liberation Theology, a concept not always found comfortable by the traditional Roman or European clergy – or by New Zealand clergy – or by politicos. An effective politician should be able to sell a reasonable story, but they don’t bother
         because they don’t really care, not here they don’t. We’ve stuffed up.

8. Fortunately I was never conned by Ya-sinned-eh, not from the very beginning, when she touted a load of nonsense about ‘dealing with climate change’…yeah, right! Saw through that one straight away. No intention of ‘dealing with climate change’ -other than perhaps promoting a few more financial scams.

   So now we have the student of Tony B Liar in charge for another 3 years, which will be very ‘interesting’, since the economic system is progressing inexorably towards collapse, as is the environment.

   NZ doesn’t feature on the graph but lies somewhere between Germany and the US, at around 200 Gigajoules per capita. Which means we have an awful long way to fall.

   https://ourfiniteworld.com/2020/11/09/energy-is-the-economy-shrinkage-in-energy-supply-leads-to-conflict/

   • The world and NZ have to use less energy and follow a program of reorganization to use progressively less energy .
     The graphs shown in your link do not seem to show the all inclusive energy use or harvesting for export but proportion across the countries seems about right.
     You may notice that China uses about 100 Gigaunits per capita whereas the USA uses close to 300. The pollution in GHG for China per capita is one sixth of what the USA emits per capita.

     Energy use is tied to pollution, consumption of shrinking Non Renewable Natural Resources, climate change and economic instability.

     Iceland harvests energy from geothermal using it primarily for heating buildings in their cold climate so emissions are low and NRNR used mainly for infrastructure and maintenance. Iceland’s GHG emissions are about 12 tons per capita which is four fifths of the USA 15 tons per capita.

     Norway emits about 9 tons per capita but Canada emits 16 tons.
     New Zealand uses about twice as much energy per capita as China but emits about the same GHG per capita at close to 8 tons of CO2 equivalent.
     Our hydro generation is close to maximum as we have used all the rivers available without going into heavier environmental damage.
     Our food supply is dependent on oil and that has to change.
     Local supply and labour based permaculture points to a better balance of meeting local food demands. Reliance on animal products cannot be sustained anywhere near the present pattern and that is in the short term.
     Feedings locals must be our first priority without using fossil fuels.
     While we have fossil fuels that convenient but destructive energy source should be applied to making the system changes necessary for longer tern fossil free food production.
     To the average Kiwi that seems an impossibility while we are locked into present thinking.
     There are leaders worth listening to.

     https://www.newsroom.co.nz/ideasroom/mike-joy-my-message-to-jacinda

     Many farmers and small business are in an awkward position for change as established methods of business will be affected by reduction and eventual elimination of fossil fuel dependency. Help and transition will need to be managed, perhaps regulated and Govt support given across the board.
     Banks will have to take a haircut after 150 years of open slather money generation and enormous profit sucking the life out of Kiwi prospects.
     The long term economy depends on the govt leading and supporting change.

9. One thing they could do before Xmas is take restrictions off so you get the full benefit regardless of whether you flat or live alone. I also think Labour can easily be pushed to at the very least raise welfare for the unwell and disabled and that can be painted in a way that won’t give middle NZ palpations.

   Budget comes out in May.

   That gives us months to organize and Put enough pressure on them and they will raise them. Real pressure though like protests, rallies community meetings. Mass letters to mps from ngo union members and constituents.

   But the same media outlets pretending to be outraged by Ardern not raising welfare are not Lefty’s friends, the second Ardern raises them they’ll be frothing at the mouth about so called bludgers and welfare queens (all the while with their hands out demanding corporate welfare ) the media genuinely just wants to take the gloss off Ardern cos they are salty that the public like her and the left more than they like them, so they see left wing factionalism and promoting constant negative disappoinment stories about Ardern as the best way to get their mates in blue back in power, and it usually works and Labour and the center left globally are too arrogant to see it happening everytime.

   Ps A lot of people think Labours base would be offended if they don’t reform welfare, that’s not the case welfare is a tricky topic and most labourites would never cut welfare but will say “Labour means work” “Labour is the party of workers” “if the left doesn’t like it where are they gonna go? The greens ? The Maori party, we don’t mind if they do” and there’s a lot , a lot of welfare shaming in the working class and middle class “why don’t I get free money? ” One of my fave comments “Typical Labour only helps bludgers not the battlers” when Labour does literally anything, it’s deeply ingrained in our culture and that’s what we’re up against. We need to change hearts and minds and force Labour to have the political will.

   • Some things are bigger than party politics. This is one of them.
     People need enough to survive on.
     The “Two tier” system is cruel and dishonest. It needs to end.
     I don’t care what his political stripes are, Duncan calls it here.

   • Corey, You are right about media outlets (and some of the regular commenters!) “pretending to be outraged” and “promoting constant negative disappointment stories” as a way ultimately “to get their mates in blue back in power”.

     It makes honest discussion and debate and real progressive thought difficult. It can easily become a time waster, correcting some of the dishonest crap that’s thrown around. It’s a kind of sabotage.

     I think one answer is to stick with real, concrete progressive changes that can and should be made. Bernie said that progressive change results from grassroots movements. So that’s real people with a clear goal or objective in mind.

10. “Why vote Labour if they rule for National?”

    Labour is a neoliberal party (Rogernomics, remember?), the leader of which is a Blairite. I’m not sure why you’d expect anything else.

    By 2018, it was obvious that Labour is just what it has been since the 1980s: neoliberal to its core. That’s why I decided at that time not to waste my vote on it ever again. And I didn’t. Were it not for the coronavirus, the voters would have tossed it out at this most recent election.

    • D’Esterre – it was the best of a bad bunch, that’s all. I can’t remember when I last voted Labour, and have voted minority parties with no chance of winning, but that’s not really good enough either. I’m pinning all my hope on Maori for the environment, but Labour and National are unprepossessing, and the Nats currently are
      totally talentless – fascinatingly so.

      • Snow White: “I’m pinning all my hope on Maori for the environment….”

        I’m not. I note who’s done the heavy lifting with regard to species rescue over the years since conservation efforts got underway here.

        I therefore have no expectation that Maori in general will be any different in that regard from any other group of humans. Some will give their heart and soul to the work of conservation; the rest will carry on as they always have. That’s people for you.

    • D’E
      Who would you replace labour with.

      • John W: “Who would you replace labour with.”

        I voted ACT. Yes I know, it’s a far cry from Labour, but there you have it. For all its deficiencies, I prefer it to any of the alternatives. Especially to Labour.

        At least ACT is honest about its intentions and its political plank. There’s much about it that I do not like, but I rate Seymour for the End of Life Choices Act, and his support for free speech. I also liked ACT’s Mental Health policy.

        I am seriously worried about the HRC’s completely bonkers (and probably ultra vires for it, so to speak) campaign against “hate speech”. Can it define what that is? It apparently cannot, yet it wishes to impose upon the rest of us legislation sanctioning something about which it’s unable to be specific.

        • Act have no direction towards decreasing the inequity as their policies will increase the shift of wealth towards the financial elites.
          Mont Perelin stuff.
          Ultra capitalism surely.
          A range of present and future problems just not featuring on the ACT horizon.

11. Capitalism its profit lend borrow, is the cancer of all our world woe!s.

Comments are closed.