Yes this policy is definitely aimed at young middle class professionals in their 30s who don’t want to contribute to their kids education…

It’s aimed at people who vote national, totally different to the 2005 student loan policy, this policy wont help students like me one iota.

Firstly we did not receive the student living allowance nor any course related costs. When completing my BA degree in 2005/06, the time interest free loans were being introduced, I calculated that cost of a years BA courses was very similar to 40 weeks student living allowance. On that basis alone current students are no worse or better off than we were.

Because of the economic times in the 60’s and 70’s the most we could expect from our parents, in my case parent, was free board. All other living costs we had to earn ourselves. Usually this came from lower paid manual labour. Wool store barrow boys, nassella tussock grubbing, hospital cleaning and portering etc. Most of us did not have our own cars, brand clothing or holidays, especially overseas ones.

“It’s of no disrespect to the other parties”

No, it is disrespectful. You don’t get to decide if I’m offended by saying smaller parties “promise utopia”. I and many others put a lot of time and effort into smaller parties because they have policies that you should. When Labour has been in bed with the millionaires, me and my friends have been getting into a lifetime of debt just to get educated. Now you tell us that the policies we want and deserve are utopian? That couldn’t really be more disrespectful. Labour has been neoliberal since I was 3 years old. You have a lot of work to do to make up for that, and our support will only be given if you break from neoliberalism and give us some ‘utopian promises’ (or what we call representing Labour’s roots).

“On education issues, the Greens, NZ First and Labour share most of the same views.”

Maybe primary and secondary education, but the Greens and Labour are not close on tertiary education. Labour and National have been closer on tertiary education over the past 30 years, than what Labour and the Greens have.

“But you’re missing the wider point, we need to get 50% of the vote between us, so that means Labour has to appeal to a broader constituency”

No Chris, that’s Blairite logic. The Blarite strategy of trying to seduce the middle and upper class through policy will no longer work. Goff, Shearer and Cunliffe can tell you about that. Or try Ed Miliband.

This is not the 90s. We do not want your soft neoliberalism. Look at Corbyn and Sanders. Look at Podemos and Syriza. The political landscape has changed, and so too must your strategy. ‘Left’ parties need groundswells of support from their base to get into power. Chasing the middle worked in the 90s after the shock of neoliberalism, but not now. Now the centre-left Blarites have embedded neoliberalism and people want a change.

The Left are sick of so called Left parties trying to get power for the sake of getting power. No point getting hold of the steering wheel if you’re going to drive us off the same cliff.

It’s of no disrespect to the other parties, who I work with all of the time. On education issues, the Greens, NZ First and Labour share most of the same views. But you’re missing the wider point, we need to get 50% of the vote between us, so that means Labour has to appeal to a broader constituency than the smaller parties do, and yes, that will have an impact on the commitments that we make.

Suggesting smaller parties ‘promise utopia’ is unfair and will not endear you to potential voters.

It’s also petty and unnecessary to his point.

….It is far from the end goal which is free Tertiary education for all New Zealanders now …and a righting off of existing crippling loan debt burdens on young New Zealanders brought in by Labour and Nactional

…so on second thoughts maybe I won’t vote for Labour yet

And as Chris Hipkins has stated… this is not yet the full fleshing out of this policy , more is yet to come. It is a good start by Littles Labour party but by no means should it stop there.

The repudiation of ALL neo liberal ideology should be the goal and mainstay of Labour, NZ First and the Greens. And this therefore is but a small start to that process…

It is ironic that we hear the words ‘ radical’ when applied to these fledgling steps taken by Labour…when in fact it is the ‘new boy on the block’ – neo liberalism – that is in fact the ‘ radical’ one.

And as we have seen ,… neo liberalism has been a colossal failure in its delivery on just about all counts regarding the public well being , and thus needs to be given exactly the same treatment as any other public safety hazard… that of ISOLATE , MINIMIZE , ELIMINATE.

To suggest that this recent policy of Labour is in any way ‘ radical’ only demonstrates the far rights success in indoctrinating a sufficient number of the population into accepting neo liberal ideology as ‘ orthodox’…

And it has been a sign and symptom of the perniciousness of neo liberalism that the IMP was opposed so vehemently when in fact it was advocating many of these very same sort of policy’s…

It is time the Left rejected any talk by the right wingers of Social Democratic methodology as being somehow ‘ radical’ as if it was never in existence before 1984 – when in fact for the majority of the 20th century it was the norm. And it caused widespread prosperity unlike any other period in this worlds history – and it worked.

Neo liberalism and its placing the burden of payments on the population while enriching the 1% at the top is the TRULY radical doctrine , – and this latest move by Labour is a pale shadow of true former Social Democracy.

But at least its a start.

That’s what I meant when I posted that GST put tax on everything, and sure it’s a stinker.

“hitting the poor disproportionately harder than the wealthy” is something that each and every National government have done when Kiwis stupidly elect them to office….sure, I know that.