Why Labour did not rise
In my Herald column I look at why Labour did not rise in the weekly Herald Digipoll:
I think the reason is because the public are not convinced Phil Goff and Labour believe in them (their policies) themselves. This is hugely important to voters. They will vote for a party if they believe the party is sincere and believes in its policies – even if they themselves do not agree with them all. …
So if you change you policies and your position, especially from just three months earlier, you need to make the case for why you have changed your stance.
The same applies to Labour’s stance on the Government’s books. Labour spent two and a half year attacking every single decision the Government took to reduce spending to get New Zealand out of the projected permanent deficit that Treasury projected at the end of 2008. They not only opposed every spending cut that the Government made, they actually argued that the Government should be spending massively more like Obama did. Right up until 2011 they were arguing that it was more important to borrow and spend to (temporarily) boost the domestic economy than to keep a lid on spending.
Then a few months ago, they realised that the voters were becoming very worried about debt, in light of the on-going troubles in Europe, and suddenly Labour stopped arguing that the Government should spend more, and said that they would spend and borrow pretty much the same as National was.
Labour’s problem again, is whether voters will believe them. It doesn’t really matter that much what numbers they announce today as their fiscal plan. The bigger issue is whether voters actually believe that the current Labour caucus really believes in spending restraint, when they have spent two and a half years arguing against it at every opportunity.
The full column is at the NZ Herald.
9(unknown*no*no*1)&guid=ON){kind=small}
November 4th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
So… to summarise, they are a bunch of liars with no credibility?
November 4th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
But there are other reasons too. The top people in Labour have been around for a very long time – especially Goff, KIng and Mallard. All highly visible and not always for the right reasons. So it is the same stuff even though Goff especially seems to have had all sorts of positions on public policy. But John Key also exposed a real weakness in Goff and that he he has not have one damn clue about economics. Goff has never held an economic portfolio. He gives the impression (now) he does not understand it. And calling Key a liar. But Goff has revealed several times he can be economical with the truth. Go back to the Darren Hughes affair, or Richard Worth, both times Goff was not straight. And Labour seem to be deliberately avoiding Goff being seen as the alternative Prime Minister. Now that in my view is a fatal mistake. Labour’s Leader MUST be seen as a credible alternative Prime Minister.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
So DPF … your conclusion is that the labour numbers might add up.
But why believe them given the performance of the last couple of years.
….. mmmmh. Yep. I can go for that.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
Labour’s problem again, is whether voters will believe them.
I’ve been saying for months (my wife pointed it out) – one of Goff’s biggest problems has been that his body language betrays his slogans.
And if you follow what’s being said on ‘other blogs’ it sounds like evey great new policy announcement is designed to turn the election around,rather than turn the country around as claimed.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:46 pm
Labour has released the figures
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/policies/5908629/Labour-releases-spending-plans
Goff says
“Labour would borrow a little more short term but the revenue from dividends on the assets and from capital gains longer term would lower debt faster. ”
Now, I have never really mastered economics and my piggy bank generally regards me with disdain, but answer me this — how do you turn capital gains into revenue and apply it to lower debt without disposing of the asset which has gained, capitally speaking? Isn’t Goff just saying that we are not going to sell assets for the time being? Is he lying?
November 4th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
some clown in the Herald, former Labour staffer, suggested that National has a lack of talent or some such .. that MAYBE true in some cases BUT look at the other sideS .. bloody hell
November 4th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
I know the reason…
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5909259/Leaders-take-the-bloke-test
Says it all really.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
Nookin
This might answer your question (from NZ Herald)
“But from 2017/2018 we will be paying back the debt faster than a National Government would because of the ongoing asset returns and the increasing revenue of our fairer tax package”, he said.”
So Labour thinks there is this big wad of cash in New Zealand that is sitting aorund doing nothing and all they have to do is think up a new way to tax it. Money will come pouring in.
In short, we are going to tax our way our of a recession.
It really shits me
November 4th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
It won’t be long before the papers will report a turn round in the Labour vote. They have plenty of helpers in the media. Look at the first week when Key wiped Goff in two debates, you had Goff declared by some the winner and a draw on the on-line poll. Bonkers!!!! There are people around trying to rewrite public opinion to suit themselves.
Labours voice piece The Standard is looking forward to polls which when they arrive spell disaster.
There seems to be very little interest in this election. The bulk of the population have made their minds, probably at the beginning ot 2011. Look at the poll graphs which has National not deviating from a straight line since the beginning of the year.
For the media to get mileage out of this election is going to take some creative reporting – unnamed sources,rumours etc. Some might call it a phony war. I call it the day of trckoning for Labour when any good Labour politician will lose their place in Parliament. Labour will end up a rump party with failed front row candidates surviving
November 4th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Good analysis David. I would add PERSONALITY as well. John Key is a principal element in National’s rise since the caning of 2002, and we saw that in the 2nd Leader’s Debate. We have affable, humorous, approachable against Goof’s awkwardness and stiffness. Cookie Bear vs a wooden Pinocchio.
Goff is also old-Parliament, while Key is relatively new and personally successful, which represents vision and new directions, in the minds of voters.
They look at Goff and they see Rowling, FushnChups and FedrationLaba.
They look at Key, and see RWC 2011, Free-to-Air and Salads at McDonalds.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:25 pm
Capital Gains tax does not raise a cent till 2016 yet they claim it will balance the book 2011-14. Do they think we are thick?
So come on Phil. Show us the money!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
Wow if having government debt and productive commercial assets is a recipe for success than the government should borrow more money, buy more assets and we will be in paradise. Governments are such good stewards of commercial businesses, this is why North Korea and Cuba are so rich – it’s a no loose scheme!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
Lipo
Maybe Goff got confused. The Stuff report definitely referred to revenue from capital gains.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:17 pm
No, its got nothing to do with any of this, cant you see???
The NZ public are stoopid. At some point in the next two weeks the scales will fall from their eyes, and the realisation that labour only want what is best for us will materialise. As if by magic. And we will all sing the red flag as we march in to vote.
And then goofy wakes up…
November 4th, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Trust and Credibility
Who would you trust more is the question?
Who conveys the most credibility?
November 4th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
No wonder it is hard to convince people with basic logic when some appear to genuinely believe in an opt in poll like the Horizon poll has any credibility.
What John key and/or Don Brash have to ask Phil Goff is how big a mortgage he has taken against his house to buy international shares.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
the problem with labour is they don’t know their target audience.
On one hand, labour are announcing right-wing policy (capital gains tax/raising retirement age), but, on the other, they are announcing extreme left wing policies (minimum wage increases/union changes).
I think , they’re scaring swinging voters who lean to either end of the political spectrum.