I don't recall them saying anything about increasing student loans prior to the election?

bmt:

 

Remember how National promised, as a failed by-election bribe, to build 10 new bridges in Northland? 

 

Anyone know how many got built? :)

 

Are you saying that since National didn't deliver it's ok for Labour to do the same? Is that how it works?

eph:

 

bmt:

 

Remember how National promised, as a failed by-election bribe, to build 10 new bridges in Northland? 

 

Anyone know how many got built? :)

 

 

Are you saying that since National didn't deliver it's ok for Labour to do the same? Is that how it works?

 

You are being silly now. This post has nothing to do with National.

eph:

 

bmt:

 

Remember how National promised, as a failed by-election bribe, to build 10 new bridges in Northland? 

 

Anyone know how many got built? :)

 

 

Are you saying that since National didn't deliver it's ok for Labour to do the same? Is that how it works?

 

@bmt

Or are you saying that when an electorate votes against a political campaign (as they did in Northland) that the promises of that rejected campaign are still expected to be upheld?

They didn't say "vote for us and we'll build 10 new bridges" or "we'll only build the bridges if you vote for us".

It was an election bribe to try an endear themselves to the Northland voters. National were in government so regardless of the election result it should have happened; the fact that National lost that by-election is irrelevant :)

bmt:

 

They didn't say "vote for us and we'll build 10 new bridges" or "we'll only build the bridges if you vote for us".

 

It was an election bribe to try an endear themselves to the Northland voters. National were in government so regardless of the election result it should have happened; the fact that National lost that by-election is irrelevant :)

 

I assume you will be out on the streets marching against the TPP?

Amazes me the sound of silence this time round when really nothing has changed except the flipflop Government.

Pumpedd:

 

bmt:

 

They didn't say "vote for us and we'll build 10 new bridges" or "we'll only build the bridges if you vote for us".

 

It was an election bribe to try an endear themselves to the Northland voters. National were in government so regardless of the election result it should have happened; the fact that National lost that by-election is irrelevant :)

 

 

I assume you will be out on the streets marching against the TPP?

 

Amazes me the sound of silence this time round when really nothing has changed except the flipflop Government.

 

except there has been change.

MikeB4:

 

Pumpedd:

 

bmt:

 

They didn't say "vote for us and we'll build 10 new bridges" or "we'll only build the bridges if you vote for us".

 

It was an election bribe to try an endear themselves to the Northland voters. National were in government so regardless of the election result it should have happened; the fact that National lost that by-election is irrelevant :)

 

 

I assume you will be out on the streets marching against the TPP?

 

Amazes me the sound of silence this time round when really nothing has changed except the flipflop Government.

 

 

except there has been change.

 

Yes spending millions on a new race course is certainly change. 

bmt:

 

Remember how National promised, as a failed by-election bribe, to build 10 new bridges in Northland? 

 

Anyone know how many got built? :)

 

Promises by politicians are on an 'if-elected' basis.  The electorate elected Winston, which relieves National of any obligation.

I wonder what the required run-rate is looking like on the tree and houses? 

Recently Twyford was trying to argue on the AM show the trees would provide timber for building the houses.

He had to be reminded trees take ~20 years to grow.   I am sure he knows better.  But I think he grasps something several posters on this thread may not: labour don't actually have to deliver. They simply have to convince their voters (many of whom aren't that sharp) they are delivering.  Ditto Winston's voters. 

And of course the greens vote has hung in there for decades, largely getting by on sentiment alone.

This coalition doesn't need outcomes, they only need outputs.

MikeAqua:

 

I wonder what the required run-rate is looking like on the tree and houses? 

 

Recently Twyford was trying to argue on the AM show the trees would provide timber for building the houses.

 

He had to be reminded trees take ~20 years to grow.   I am sure he knows better.  But I think he grasps something several posters on this thread may not: labour don't actually have to deliver. They simply have to convince their voters (many of whom aren't that sharp) they are delivering.  Ditto Winston's voters. 

 

And of course the greens vote has hung in there for decades, largely getting by on sentiment alone.

 

This coalition doesn't need outcomes, they only need outputs.

 

 

 

We are getting a taxpayer funded racing track...cheap at $10m tax dollars. Thats an outcome.

Pumpedd:

 

MikeAqua:

 

I wonder what the required run-rate is looking like on the tree and houses? 

 

Recently Twyford was trying to argue on the AM show the trees would provide timber for building the houses.

 

He had to be reminded trees take ~20 years to grow.   I am sure he knows better.  But I think he grasps something several posters on this thread may not: labour don't actually have to deliver. They simply have to convince their voters (many of whom aren't that sharp) they are delivering.  Ditto Winston's voters. 

 

And of course the greens vote has hung in there for decades, largely getting by on sentiment alone.

 

This coalition doesn't need outcomes, they only need outputs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are getting a taxpayer funded racing track...cheap at $10m tax dollars. Thats an outcome.

 

That's an output.

An outcome could be for example fewer horse races cancelled due to bad weather or improved profitability of racing.

MikeAqua:

 

Pumpedd:

 

MikeAqua:

 

I wonder what the required run-rate is looking like on the tree and houses? 

 

Recently Twyford was trying to argue on the AM show the trees would provide timber for building the houses.

 

He had to be reminded trees take ~20 years to grow.   I am sure he knows better.  But I think he grasps something several posters on this thread may not: labour don't actually have to deliver. They simply have to convince their voters (many of whom aren't that sharp) they are delivering.  Ditto Winston's voters. 

 

And of course the greens vote has hung in there for decades, largely getting by on sentiment alone.

 

This coalition doesn't need outcomes, they only need outputs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are getting a taxpayer funded racing track...cheap at $10m tax dollars. Thats an outcome.

 

 

That's an output.

 

An outcome could be for example fewer horse races cancelled due to bad weather or improved profitability of racing.

 

Which would free private box entry for life for former Ministers of Racing who think racing is so important it needs a special minister, unlike, say, rugby or soccer be?

I believe racing provides more income for the government. But it is a dieing sport imo.