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 | ... | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | ... | 268

8036 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3827

#1961661 21-Feb-2018 16:01

Helen Clark loved inquiries. If any conduct issues arose she set up an inquiry. When someone complained about the number of inquiries, she set up an inquiry to look into that too.

Inquiries and review committees have their place, but they are pointless without clear objectives and are not a substitute for action or actual change.

I suspect what labour will do is spend this term largely reviewing and developing policy in time for the 2020 election. It will be interesting to see how that goes with labour supporters - so far so good according to the polls.

Mike

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1961679 21-Feb-2018 16:17

MikeAqua:

Helen Clark loved inquiries. If any conduct issues arose she set up an inquiry. When someone complained about the number of inquiries, she set up an inquiry to look into that too.

Inquiries and review committees have their place, but they are pointless without clear objectives and are not a substitute for action or actual change.

I suspect what labour will do is spend this term largely reviewing and developing policy in time for the 2020 election. It will be interesting to see how that goes with labour supporters - so far so good according to the polls.

It's going to be interesting. If they don't get much done but have lots of plans, they are basically opening themselves up to getting a lot of people onboard with a lot of promises about major changes, whilst convincing them that the fact they didn't deliver on promises already made during the past election campaign isn't a bad thing. If housing doesn't improve and all the things that Labour accused National of neglecting don't get sorted, it's a hard sell.

On the other hand, National will have a new leader and be fighting the incumbent.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1961747 21-Feb-2018 18:10

Another broken promise:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11998883

elpenguino

3579 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2943

#1961794 21-Feb-2018 20:00

networkn:

Another broken promise:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11998883

Did you read the article?

The issue discussed was never an official labour policy or as you call it promise.

An attempt to make a story out of nothing.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1961809 21-Feb-2018 20:21

networkn:

Another broken promise:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11998883

They have really backtracked on health for some reason. This is weird really considering poverty and health kind of are intertwined.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1961815 21-Feb-2018 20:49

elpenguino:

networkn:

Another broken promise:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11998883

Did you read the article?

The issue discussed was never an official labour policy or as you call it promise.

An attempt to make a story out of nothing.

I did read the story, it's a little all over the place, but in my eyes Labour gave the impression they were going to do something about this fund. May not have been a policy or a promise, but definitely was clear enough that this charity feel Labour have not delivered on what they said.

Clark uses usual policito speech to say money will still be made available, but I am guessing much less easily accessed than a specific and separate fund.

I expect Labour to have made a few of these "pledges" that it will not deliver on. Clark talks about the coalition but there was no coalition prior to the election when talks were held with this charity.

People don't just make up numbers like 20M.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

gzt

18756 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7883

Lifetime subscriber

#1961893 21-Feb-2018 22:20

No one read the article all that well:

NZHerald: Today Dr Clark told Newstalk ZB Labour made no specific commitment in terms of the coalition agreement when the Government was formed, but he had taken it upon himself to commit to coming up with a solution.

The policies of Labour, NZF, Green all agree on an increase in treatment and discuss that in relation to the pharmac model. Ie; it's more about how they will deliver that.

Looks to me like they will increase the funding as planned in practice. The funding model and formulas seem to be tricky for them. Get it wrong and the price goes up and you get less value.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1961900 21-Feb-2018 22:38

gzt: No one read the article all that well:

NZHerald: Today Dr Clark told Newstalk ZB Labour made no specific commitment in terms of the coalition agreement when the Government was formed, but he had taken it upon himself to commit to coming up with a solution.

The policies of Labour, NZF, Green all agree on an increase in treatment and discuss that in relation to the pharmac model. Ie; it's more about how they will deliver that.

Looks to me like they will increase the funding as planned in practice. The funding model and formulas seem to be tricky for them. Get it wrong and the price goes up and you get less value.

Well, I am not certain, but how I read that was:

1) Pre-Election, Clark told the charity he was going to sort around 20M in funding for their cause. How staunch that pledge was, I don't know as I wasn't there, but charity seems to think it was pretty much set.

2) Coalition was formed and this wasn't taken into account

3) Clark is now saying they are going to handle it differently, which is worse for the charity and it's sufferers (in their opinion or actually I am not 100% clear as not enough detail).

Which leads me to conclude that Clark spoke out of turn when he made his pledge in step one, either from a lack of understanding on how the system worked, and or over promised and under delivered, which based on the evidence of Labour in Government so far, is modus operandi (and before you shout at me, check out the past 6-9 pages for evidence).

Labour lost 500M of it's healthcare budget in giving Winston the earth for his "loyalty", this will impact not just this promise but so many others.

As evidenced by my prior posts on GP loads vs fee's it's alarming to me how much "learning on the job" this Government is doing.

gzt

18756 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7883

Lifetime subscriber

#1961906 21-Feb-2018 23:13

#1. Yes agree. 20 million over four years.
#2. Yes, does not prevent post election policy agreement.
#3a. I honestly don't think the method will matter much to the resulting increase. It's a win.
#3b. +charity is upset about govt reviewing govt funding to that specific charity this year

Looks to me that National already had something in place with availability of 5m last year. All the other parties have policy to increase this type of thing and or do it better.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1962692 23-Feb-2018 09:41

Interested to hear the alternative viewpoint on this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12000196

I pretty much agree with this. JA says she is upset that the focus is only on Universities when she wants trades to get the focus, but in typical poorly thought out fashion, it was universities she stood in last year crying out "Next year is on me!".

There are some exceptions, but I would say my experience has been that humans don't value what they get for free.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1962776 23-Feb-2018 10:43

If they had just stuck to trades focused institutions, or specific courses it would have been a better policy.

Quote from that article:
"What's the measure on that going to be for Hipkins? More students got to study, but fewer passed? How is that beneficial?"

That's the key to any policy is a clear and concise reason and expectation of what you hope to achieve. It would have been more effective if it was finely tuned to increase the number of teachers where they know there is a distinct lack, rather than an ad hoc approach.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1962797 23-Feb-2018 11:03

networkn:

Interested to hear the alternative viewpoint on this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12000196

I pretty much agree with this. JA says she is upset that the focus is only on Universities when she wants trades to get the focus, but in typical poorly thought out fashion, it was universities she stood in last year crying out "Next year is on me!".

There are some exceptions, but I would say my experience has been that humans don't value what they get for free.

There is little doubt that the policy was poorly thought through. I predict that this will be the 'Government Of Unintended Consequences'.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1962804 23-Feb-2018 11:11

networkn:

Interested to hear the alternative viewpoint on this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12000196

I pretty much agree with this. JA says she is upset that the focus is only on Universities when she wants trades to get the focus, but in typical poorly thought out fashion, it was universities she stood in last year crying out "Next year is on me!".

There are some exceptions, but I would say my experience has been that humans don't value what they get for free.

I got to the sentence that read "not to mention potentially pushing students into studying courses they simply won't or can't pass".

What a load of BS, universities can and will set limited places for courses they offer and select students based on academic criteria. They already do this, if they think that "free fees" have an impact on this, then they better take a damned hard look at their own academic governance policies.

I have absolutely no doubt that there's coordinated kick-back and extreme negativity ATM, from certain politically biased individuals working at governance level in NZ's tertiary education sector, that being an inevitable consequence of a 3 term government.

OECD data doesn't paint a rosy picture of NZ's performance in equality of access and achievement in education from the day children enter the school system - and it's been getting worse since the 1990s - the gap is widening. Cost of (tertiary) education is a huge barrier.

There's also more to getting trades training up to speed than just changing the tertiary education sector. Once upon a time, the largest employer of apprentices was Govt, through NZED, MOW etc. That's now shifted to almost entirely the private sector, the nature of competitively tendered contract work means that continuity of work can't be guaranteed, that's a disincentive to take on trainees, fluctuation in demand for workers for individual projects being satisfied by subcontracting fixed-term labour only positions through labour-hire providers, offering semi-skilled trade assistants to work under supervision rather than trainees. End result is an average age of many tradesmen being mid 50s, an insufficient number of trainees coming through to meet existing demand - let alone increased demand as 1/2 the present workforce reaches retirement age over the next decade.

Hipkins and Ardern are on the right track, things need to be shaken up - and it's not just "some" things - it's almost "everything".

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1962932 23-Feb-2018 12:29

Fred99:
networkn:

Interested to hear the alternative viewpoint on this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12000196

I pretty much agree with this. JA says she is upset that the focus is only on Universities when she wants trades to get the focus, but in typical poorly thought out fashion, it was universities she stood in last year crying out "Next year is on me!".

There are some exceptions, but I would say my experience has been that humans don't value what they get for free.

I got to the sentence that read "not to mention potentially pushing students into studying courses they simply won't or can't pass".

What a load of BS, universities can and will set limited places for courses they offer and select students based on academic criteria. They already do this, if they think that "free fees" have an impact on this, then they better take a damned hard look at their own academic governance policies.

I have absolutely no doubt that there's coordinated kick-back and extreme negativity ATM, from certain politically biased individuals working at governance level in NZ's tertiary education sector, that being an inevitable consequence of a 3 term government.

If you had kept reading you would have seen the sentence: "Hipkins has hit back saying universities won't be getting an extra cent, despite universities claiming the new system has increased their workload."

For sure the universities are vetting the candidates, but increased demand causes higher costs... Not hard to figure that out.

I read the first sentence. So true. Universities are dyed-in-the-wool labour strongholds generally. The policy must be really bad if they don't agree with it.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1962935 23-Feb-2018 12:40

Fred99:

I have absolutely no doubt that there's coordinated kick-back and extreme negativity ATM, from certain politically biased individuals working at governance level in NZ's tertiary education sector, that being an inevitable consequence of a 3 term government.

No doubt based on what evidence? Why would they do this? Universities love Labour, policies be pretty bad if education departments don't like it.

Hipkins and Ardern are on the right track, things need to be shaken up - and it's not just "some" things - it's almost "everything".

Just changing things without thought to the consequences, will not improve our OCED standings, let alone the results of our students.

I'm amazed at the categorical stand Hipkins took of denying any chance of additional funding. Doesn't sound reasonable to me.

Do you think the current policy of free years study, in it's current form with no limits is well thought out and likely to result in significant improvements to our OECD Numbers?

1 | ... | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | ... | 268