Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 268

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897343 8-Nov-2017 09:50

6FIEND

Yes it was a stunt and yes it caught them off guard, but it was a swearing in ceremony not day to day Bill voting. I hope they oppose well, but if its playing games, making up stuff and no detail as was the case in the campaign and recently from Joyce, the people wont put up with that. Labs have had a couple o hiccups but they are new and are not playing silly buggers. The Opposition needs to be strong (in effort, the numbers arent there) and they need to be accurate and back it up.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1897344 8-Nov-2017 09:50

tdgeek:

rjt123:

The likelihood of the Nat's actually pulling off the coup was slim, but the principle of it was they challenged the Government on numbers & their majority, which is a fundamental principle of how government works. It wasn't going to ever have any long-term impact, but it shows that they are indeed a large opposition force and nobody had really taken their threats seriously. but there's two points to mention:

Firstly, when labour-NZF joined in their coalition the Labour supporters were gloating over anyone who complained the largest party had been sidestepped. They said "that's how MMP works, get over it, you lost..." or words to that effect. What those same people also need to recognise is that, yes, Labour's in Government, but it's on the principle of a majority & that majority is slim. So to say it was all just political, desparate, posturing, etc,... may be true, but if Labour claims to have the majority they need to prove it in the house, because that's what counts, there's no other option but to say yes, National had them at ransom for a moment. If they were confident of winning they would have ignored National, they weren't confident so how are we supposed to have confidence in them?

Secondly, people are making ridiculous comments about National just causing disruption and they should be working for the good of NZ. However, government is actually about politics, if you didn't already realise... and if the National party have been voted in strongly based on their policies at the election, then for them to turn around and support labour's policies (which they (and I) don't believe are actually beneficial to NZ) would be a snub to their voter base. Furthermore, do do the best for NZ in some situations will be to oppose some of labour's proposed changes, especially around workplace relations. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble but parliament has never been a place for cooperative agreement, and labour was no example of that in the last nine years, they just never had the numbers to be an effective opposition

Bubble not burst but thats rubbish. They have a majority, National doesnt, end of story. prove it in the House? Yesterday wasn't "in the House" they werent losing a vote for a bill, they werent losing a vote for the Speaker, she wanted an unopposed Speaker, so she compromised and got that.

When yesterday happens for all the bills that get voted on and they cannot pass them, then get back to me.

BTW, numbers doesn't make an Opposition effective, as they will always lose the vote as they are a minority, subject to any conscience issue. What makes an Opposition effective is true and real opposing, not what Ive seen from National so far, Joyce continues to whine, but give no detail. Just as he did in the campaign. Justified criticism of JA was that her campaign had little detail, I agree. Joyce is the same, and worse. $75 bottles of wine? Thats BS and what another MP tweeted, so when we talk about crap from Labour, we need to look around. The Opposition needs to do its job for NZ, not play silly games and make things up as has happened in the election. Labour needs to prove itself, it may not. National may harm itself it it plays these games of no detail accusations and so on, so plenty to unfold yet

There's virtually nil value in electing the speaker unopposed. That's just spin from labour to cover their inability to count. you're right, they won't struggle on every bill, however, the green party technically only are on a confidence and supply agreement, which is only confidence votes, not every bill. If the green shad any backbone (which i have my doubts) they could earn the respect of NZ'ers by getting gains for their voter base in labour's policy and legislation, but they'll probably just follow labour like sheep... but my point is that if the greens oppose a bill he coalition is a minority.

regards your comments about detail. There is no detail from the labour party yet, so the opposition can hardly attack them ion detail, which is why they are attacking them on the lack of detail. And $75 for a bottle of wine for dinner is quite cheap compared to flying to australia for brunch.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897347 8-Nov-2017 09:53

networkn:

JA was adamant they wanted an unopposed speaker. yes they had a couple missing and a couple not yet sworn in but they stated they had the numbewrs, unless your suggesting they lied? National didnt say they had the number they said they had an assumed majority. National wanted more3e seats in select committees so they forced a vote so it would not be an unopposed Speaker, so she compromised and got what she wants and Nats got what they wanted. Or if you wanted examples of Nats not being able to count or being immature, or lying to the public, feel free to ask. If people want to decide on a criticism, best to check it doesnt apply with National as well, as it does. Could Labs have planned and managed yesterday better? Yes.

I've read this three times and still don't understand what you are saying. Your account of the story is at odds with what the media have reported.

If Labour had what they needed, why would they capitulate on the select committee seats ? Makes no sense.

They didnt have what they needed, they wanted an unopposed Speaker. National wanted to vote, so she compromised, then they both got what they wanted

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897349 8-Nov-2017 09:57

They didnt have what they needed, they wanted an unopposed Speaker. National wanted to vote, so she compromised, then they both got what they wanted

Your account of the situation doesn't concur with the vast majority of what has been written by even pro labour politicos.

What value does Labour get from an unopposed Speaker? Nothing. It's their way to weasel out of having made a mistake and the potential embarrassment.

I notice a theme in your replies, of almost always taking a devils advocate position on almost any (political) discussion, is that intentional? (it doesn't matter much either way, but just something I have noticed).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897351 8-Nov-2017 10:00

rjt123:

There's virtually nil value in electing the speaker unopposed. That's just spin from labour to cover their inability to count. you're right, they won't struggle on every bill, however, the green party technically only are on a confidence and supply agreement, which is only confidence votes, not every bill. If the green shad any backbone (which i have my doubts) they could earn the respect of NZ'ers by getting gains for their voter base in labour's policy and legislation, but they'll probably just follow labour like sheep... but my point is that if the greens oppose a bill he coalition is a minority.

regards your comments about detail. There is no detail from the labour party yet, so the opposition can hardly attack them ion detail, which is why they are attacking them on the lack of detail. And $75 for a bottle of wine for dinner is quite cheap compared to flying to australia for brunch.

An unopposed speaker is what she wanted and was adamant, but you seem to know more than politicians

Greens can go the other way, they just need to find a policy to go the other way with which isnt there

Inability to count, ask Joyce re the made up 11B hole. It was right there in the document, but he either coudnt count or he made it up, you choose

$75 bottle of wine? You are avoiding that aren't you. I could say that MP could not count, but thats incorrect, he just made up a lie to fool the NZ public as to how much wine will increase under the water royalty. I have no idea why you tell me that its cheaper than a flight to Oz and brunch. Very strange thing to say

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897359 8-Nov-2017 10:09

networkn:

They didnt have what they needed, they wanted an unopposed Speaker. National wanted to vote, so she compromised, then they both got what they wanted

Your account of the situation doesn't concur with the vast majority of what has been written by even pro labour politicos.

What value does Labour get from an unopposed Speaker? Nothing. It's their way to weasel out of having made a mistake and the potential embarrassment.

I notice a theme in your replies, of almost always taking a devils advocate position on almost any (political) discussion, is that intentional? (it doesn't matter much either way, but just something I have noticed).

The value that was stated by I think whoever wrote the article was that an unopposed speaker is far more desirable than one that is voted in by a very small margin, a show of confidence. She was adamant, that what it said

My opinions are just my opinions. I feel free to oppose something I oppose and I can agree when say Labour in this context has made a mistake or hiccup. But having said that, replies here, yours included are only about bagging Labour. Its fine to say they are immature, cant count and so on, but conveniently avoid where National has done the same. To me that lacks credibility, and as I mentioned before that makes this thread a bashing thread not a discussion thread, its should be renamed

And in a bashing thread such as the old days of Apple vs Android, the response is the same. The difference is some are ONLY one way responders.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897371 8-Nov-2017 10:34

There is quite a disparity in this thread. Its so not cool to touch National. Seems to me that Labour winning the election will explode this country like nothing else before, that's the sentiment from some here. End of the day I am happy they will get a chance to do things that have been badly let go, its not a national disaster, (pun not intended) as some feel. I dont expect Labour to break anything, I would not be surprised if they did very well, or if it was very very meh. Its more preferable than deferring needed expenditure so that we can say the books are in good shape. We can all do that by cancelling maintenance on our house and cars, thats really not a good idea. Thats my feeling. This whole Government change is not the huge deal that its made out to be.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1897419 8-Nov-2017 10:56

tdgeek:

There is quite a disparity in this thread. Its so not cool to touch National. Seems to me that Labour winning the election will explode this country like nothing else before, that's the sentiment from some here. End of the day I am happy they will get a chance to do things that have been badly let go, its not a national disaster, (pun not intended) as some feel. I dont expect Labour to break anything, I would not be surprised if they did very well, or if it was very very meh. Its more preferable than deferring needed expenditure so that we can say the books are in good shape. We can all do that by cancelling maintenance on our house and cars, thats really not a good idea. Thats my feeling. This whole Government change is not the huge deal that its made out to be.

What happened yesterday has nothing to do with being a national supporter or not.

Its all about the new Governments failure in the house yesterday...they screwed up. It wasnt serious, the government will not fall, but they showed that they have a lot of work to do to shape up and be a serious Government. It was a huge failure on the Government whips to know what the numbers were in what is going to be a tight house. The opposition did their job extremely well and did not force a vote but rather showed that they are going to be a tough opposition.

Then the Government tried to put some weird unbelievable spin on it all about electing speaker unopposed....what utter dribble. Their failure cost them a lot in select committees for the rest of the term and yet...they didnt need to give away anything.

Not sure this has ever happened before.

I have said before that this grossly inexperienced and inadequate government will be a huge source of entertainment and they havnt let me done. Even Winston is performing well...all good stuff from the Dep PM. What a joke.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897422 8-Nov-2017 10:59

tdgeek:

There is quite a disparity in this thread. Its so not cool to touch National. Seems to me that Labour winning the election will explode this country like nothing else before, that's the sentiment from some here. End of the day I am happy they will get a chance to do things that have been badly let go, its not a national disaster, (pun not intended) as some feel. I dont expect Labour to break anything, I would not be surprised if they did very well, or if it was very very meh. Its more preferable than deferring needed expenditure so that we can say the books are in good shape. We can all do that by cancelling maintenance on our house and cars, thats really not a good idea. Thats my feeling. This whole Government change is not the huge deal that its made out to be.

I guess we will find out. I disagree with most of that, the problem is I don't think the damage will be immediately visible. It may take years to become apparent.

Why is there a disparity in the thread? Perhaps because a significant number of people didn't want Labour in power, and some that voted NZF expected them to go with National (including a large part of their own caucus supported by the fact WP wants a law to prevent those members from jumping ship).

I feel National getting in would have been better, I think with them back in surplus they felt more comfortable taking a more social agenda as was indicated in their policies. Are National going to be as socialist as Labour, no, because then there would be no point.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897430 8-Nov-2017 11:07

Ah jeeze, the PM's cat is making breaking news headlines on the Herald. Spare me.

It's sad, but my cat was hit by a car and I didn't get on the news!

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897445 8-Nov-2017 11:15

networkn:

tdgeek:

There is quite a disparity in this thread. Its so not cool to touch National. Seems to me that Labour winning the election will explode this country like nothing else before, that's the sentiment from some here. End of the day I am happy they will get a chance to do things that have been badly let go, its not a national disaster, (pun not intended) as some feel. I dont expect Labour to break anything, I would not be surprised if they did very well, or if it was very very meh. Its more preferable than deferring needed expenditure so that we can say the books are in good shape. We can all do that by cancelling maintenance on our house and cars, thats really not a good idea. Thats my feeling. This whole Government change is not the huge deal that its made out to be.

I guess we will find out. I disagree with most of that, the problem is I don't think the damage will be immediately visible. It may take years to become apparent.

Why is there a disparity in the thread? Perhaps because a significant number of people didn't want Labour in power, and some that voted NZF expected them to go with National (including a large part of their own caucus supported by the fact WP wants a law to prevent those members from jumping ship).

I feel National getting in would have been better, I think with them back in surplus they felt more comfortable taking a more social agenda as was indicated in their policies. Are National going to be as socialist as Labour, no, because then there would be no point.

The disparity is its just a bagging thread. I have no issue if they are called cant count. Nats have as well. Its selective to the point in biased bagging, IMHO

Where I feel Nats let themselves down is deferring too much, that is the surplus. Bill said that the books will decrease, I assume as due to the election Nats needed to have policies that spend more. Thats the key reason I bailed this term, the surplus isnt really a surplus, its savings from deferring expenditure. That was my beef. I agree re the social agenda but is that election caused? Probably. What has disappointed me is the lies and I hope in Opposition they stay true to NZ and stop those games. People dont like things being made up. The hole, the bottle of wine, Peters and rthe global slowdown, which he did NOT say, he repeated what an economist said, Joyce's attacks with no detail continue. Having said that they have good people not just the vocal ringleaders. Bill and Bennet have been quite good since the loss IMO. Labour has yes had some missteps but the world isnt ending and they are new and fresh. Lets see what happens in Parliament and move past the ceremonies of yesterday, thats all they were

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1897446 8-Nov-2017 11:16

networkn:

Ah jeeze, the PM's cat is making breaking news headlines on the Herald. Spare me.

It's sad, but my cat was hit by a car and I didn't get on the news!

State funeral?

No expense spared.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897447 8-Nov-2017 11:19

networkn:

Ah jeeze, the PM's cat is making breaking news headlines on the Herald. Spare me.

It's sad, but my cat was hit by a car and I didn't get on the news!

Fully agree, another 2 inches on news columns wasted. Its good that she has some personality extra stuff, a lot like Bill and his spaghetti pizza's, but if she comments on TV I will spew, thats a bit far

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897449 8-Nov-2017 11:20

Pumpedd:

networkn:

Ah jeeze, the PM's cat is making breaking news headlines on the Herald. Spare me.

It's sad, but my cat was hit by a car and I didn't get on the news!

State funeral?

No expense spared.

I can think of one person who wont be invited

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1897452 8-Nov-2017 11:24

tdgeek:

Pumpedd:

networkn:

Ah jeeze, the PM's cat is making breaking news headlines on the Herald. Spare me.

It's sad, but my cat was hit by a car and I didn't get on the news!

State funeral?

No expense spared.

I can think of one person who wont be invited

Haha, has anyone checked if he has an abilbi for the night in question? :)

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 268