Was Turei reckless?

Green co-leader Metiria Turei launched an attack on Winston Peters and NZ First on Sunday, starting on Q+A and continuing at the Green campaign launch later in the day. She continued yesterday, saying she wouldn’t back off.

Winston Peters bit back.

Then last night the latest Colmar Brunton poll was published. This had both Greens and NZ First up a bit, and Labour down to a precarious looking 27%.

Turei may have already known about the poll result before she let loose on Sunday.

Her attacks have raised a few eyebrows amongst those who think that the best way to oust National is with a strong Labour-Green campaign, but Turei seems to have dealt that a serious blow.

Barry Soper: Greens Party co leader Metiria Turei’s comment on Winston Peters reckless

The Greens Party co leader Metiria Turei should know better. She’s been in politics for the past 15 years and knows what it’s like to come so close but to end up being so far away.

For Turei to come out and say Peters approach to immigration was racist was reckless, particularly if she wants The Greens to have any influence in the next Government.

But perhaps Turei and the Greens have conceded that their ‘game changer’ memorandum of Understanding with Labour was not just a flop, it put the Greens at risk of being dragged down by Labour who are in a precarious position.

Labour in Colmar Brunton polls leading into the 2014 election:

  • 21-25 June: 29%
  • 19-23 June: 28%
  • 9-13 August: 26%
  • 23-27 August: 28%
  • 30 Aug-3 Sep: 26%
  • 6-10 September: 25%
  • 13-17 September: 25%

In the election on 20 September Labour got 25.13% so things are looking grim for them right now, trending down on a similar path.

Soper:

After last night’s poll, all bets are off the table and if Turei’s able to zip it, who knows, they could just be in with an outside chance.

The Greens attached their election chances to Labour. Quietly sliding with Labour is not a good option for the Greens.

NZ First getting more votes than Greens (which looks quite possible) is another bad scenario for the Greens, even if Labour+Greens+NZ First have enough votes together to try and form a government.

Greens may well have decided that they have to do whatever they can to hold or grow their own vote, and if that’s at the expense of their coalition chances then so be it.

I think Greens would rather be strong in opposition rather than weak in a very risky coalition.

Turei is certainly taking a big risk for the Greens, but she may be fighting for survival, or at least for sustaining their support. That may be self interested rather than reckless. Greens don’t owe NZ First a dominant role in government.

Leave a comment

58 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  July 11, 2017

    Turei’s approach to politics is racist. Don’t see her in a position to criticize Winston on that. Suspect the electorate will see it that way too.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  July 11, 2017

      Yeah, I don’t see any pluses for her in bagging NZ First. If Winston comes clean on whether he intends the Maori seats should be subject to a referendum of the whole electorate, or just the Maori electorates, and it’s the latter, he’s got an even chance of NZ First getting the Party vote from me for this election.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  July 11, 2017

        Speaking of which – come in Chuck Bird?

        You were going to find that out from Winston himself at the Family First Conference on 7 July. Did someone ask Mr Peters & what answer did they get?

        Reply
        • Chuck Bird

           /  July 11, 2017

          Drop me an email and I will show you the evidence if you do not repeat it on this or another blog. Every vote counts. chuckbirdnz@gmail.com

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 11, 2017

            No chuck I don’t share my email until I think I know & can trust people really well. It’s a simple enuff question & whether I party vote for NZ First depends on two things:
            1. Whether it’s a referendum of only the Maori electorates, and
            2. Whether Winston will publicly say that.

            Reply
            • Chuck Bird

               /  July 11, 2017

              Why do you think we should have separate Maori seats?

            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              Why won’t Winston publicly state whether his policy on the future of the Maori Seats is for a general referendum, or a referendum of the Maori Electorates only. Doesn’t not doing so mean his Maori Affairs spokesperson is telling me, & maybe Maori one thing, and he is suggesting to pakeha Maori-bashers another completely different policy?
              Isn’t that an outrageous con on at least one group? Is this integrity?

              I think he’s being dishonest not coming clean on this.

          • Gezza

             /  July 11, 2017

            I’ll add, if it isn’t a referendum of only the Maori electorates, or he doesn’t say, there’s a strong possibility I’ll party vote Maori Party.

            Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  July 11, 2017

            G, would you share your email with moi? Just curious. No offence if not

            Reply
  2. I believe that the Larper lady is aiming for the higher vote. I believe she thinks it will give them a moral authority in any post election negotiations. She doesn’t get that Labour have never gone with them and only will when they’re absolutely in a corner. The Greens, by showing they’re only Labour’s stooge have shown themselves to be weak and dispensable.

    They may have principles but they’re no good at politics. The politics of real change that is – i.e governance.

    Reply
  3. Maggy Wassilieff

     /  July 11, 2017

    Well, she has put Greens back into the news. They were disappearing over the horizon.

    Reply
  4. Gezza

     /  July 11, 2017

    From PG’s Colmar Brunton post yesterday:

    * Refuse to answer 5%
    * Undecided 15% (up from 13)

    That’s a pretty sizeable chunk up for grabs.

    Reply
    • High Flying Duck

       /  July 11, 2017

      It’s just under the amount that don’t bother voting come election day. Not sure the undecideds at 15% will swing anything.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  July 11, 2017

        I’ve never bothered to look before – numbers aren’t my friends, think its just the way my brain works. What’s the historical rate in previous elections?

        Reply
        • Pete Kane

           /  July 11, 2017

          Pretty normal. Bigger Q – snow in the Capital?

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 11, 2017

            Be unusual. Lived here since 1974. Only ever seen snow in the city or burbs twice. Last time was August or Sept 2011 I think. Stunning though. It fell lightly on & off at night & all the following day & out here in North Welly. Not enuff to be a major nuisance, & it looked a picture in the trees, back lawn, garden & stream.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              Funny thing – there was no wind & it wasn’t all that cold, as I recall.

            • Pete Kane

               /  July 11, 2017

              August.

      • Gezza

         /  July 11, 2017

        PS: A further thought occurs – how many of those who don’t bother to vote would also just decline to be surveyed? If I’m not in the mood for phone poll surveys or I’m doing something else I just say not interested thanks. Can we assume the refuse to answers & undecideds are the same group as non-voters?

        Reply
        • High Flying Duck

           /  July 11, 2017

          Just slip yourself into Pete’s next post and you’ll probable get all the answers you need. Covers off the undecided’s and non-voters pretty well.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 11, 2017

            No H, I’m not sure that it does. There’s nothing in that post of Pete’s that clearly links those who don’t vote to those who are undecided in polls. Possibly the refused to answer group are likely to be the same. But that depends on what “refused to answer” means. Refused to answer the phone? Refused to answer the question? …

            Reply
  5. How many vote for themselves and what they get directly? Helen went for that with the cynical interest free loans

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  July 11, 2017

      National does the same with tax cuts. People at the bottom end get pennies, at the top they get heaps.

      Reply
      • High Flying Duck

         /  July 11, 2017

        Yep, it’s that never ending tension of rewarding people for work, while putting in a safety net that covers off hardship without discouraging working.

        Unless you think the Government should be able to take more than 1/3 of your income off you in tax, the Government cuts were as fair as they could be – everyone on a remotely reasonable income got the same $$ cut. Wealthier people got a far lower cut as a % of income.

        Here is an extreme example of the issue in looking after people vs incentivising joblessness –

        In Alabama they introduced Food Stamps to help the unemployed and had no work requirement attached. Food Stamp claims went through the roof.

        When they reintroduced the work requirement (job training or looking for work) Food Stamp claims fell by 85%.

        http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/06/alabama-just-replaced-work-requirements-on-food-stamps-and-heres-what-happened/

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  July 11, 2017

          No the people didn’t all get the same amount of $ back. Some got a tiny amount extra in the hand from their income each week. Others got a bit more, & a few got a lot more is my recollection. It’s not as simple as you suggest, a fair reward for hard work.

          And there is a considerable difference not only between how hard people work and how much reward they get for working hard, but in what work they do in return for how financially rewarding it is. It’s not a level playing field, never has been, & probably never will be.

          I’ve never paid more than a third of my income in tax to other taxpayers & the government’s creditors & as long as the government spent it wisely on the things I wanted it to I never minded sharing that burden with other New Zealanders to get the kind of society we’ve had – except for those who could earn but preferred not to & preferred to sit at home & have the taxpayer pay them to produce fatherless kids & a host of downstream problems for themselves, their kids, & everyone else as a result of that decision.

          If there’d been tax cuts this last budget I’d have got zero dollars extra in the hand, in all likelihood.

          Reply
          • High Flying Duck

             /  July 11, 2017

            The tax cut was that simple Gezza – thresholds moved & everyone earning at or above the level of the new threshold (not high) gets the same extra amount in.

            The Independent Earner Tax Credit of $10 per week was removed (introduced by National in the first place), which only affected people with no children, was an odd sort of rebate with perverse results in some cases and wasn’t well taken up. These people are still better off with the tax cuts.

            WFF payments went up, but the abatement levels increased – everyone is better off with a skew to poorer people being helped more and higher earners less.

            Labour tried to muddy things and used their painful non-logic to suggest otherwise, but it was a genuine tax cut skewed to help poorer working people more than higher earners. This is why the Greens supported it and the majority of Labour voters were in favour.

            Reply
            • High Flying Duck

               /  July 11, 2017

              Forgot to add the Accommodation supplement also went up – as such, the less well off got the same tax cut as everyone else, plus more accommodation supplement + more WFF payments.
              If you got the IETC you were better off than before, but comparatively less so than others. However this is a small subset of people.

            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              I have no doubt it was generally fairer than a straight percentage tax cut across the board with no other adjustments to a complex transfer payment system, & I don’t know what Labour was saying I tend not to pay much attention these days because it all jus get lost lost in the blur of Labour automatically claiming everything the government does, or announces, is bad for someone – these days apparently the “ordinary New Zealanders I talk to every day”, who I’m starting to think are the same people travelling everywhere with him on a bus.

              I still believe that out of these tax cuts people with the highest incomes got the most extra income in the hand. I don’t get any kind of government payments, except the rates rebate, which this year for the first time didn’t cover a whole quarterly rates bill & for which some councillors will be paying at the next elections at this whare.

  6. PDB

     /  July 11, 2017

    I’m not sure what is worse for Turei/ the Greens?

    1. Attacking a party you need to form a govt with post-election, especially something as serious an accusation as racism.
    2. Saying that regardless of NZL First being racist that isn’t a deal-breaker to working with them to form a govt post-election.

    Reply
  7. Zedd

     /  July 11, 2017

    “Stop making sense Metiria” you’ll confuse the ignorant & upset the right, who dont like the ‘clean green, 100% pure earth/environment’.. & maybe startle the horses too 😀

    Reply
    • She’s got to haul her ample into government to do anything zedd. What is it with some that don’t understand this pesky factor.

      Principle – meh

      Reply
      • I did see Seymour call her out on achievements, him being a minnow but in government, as opposed to her political activism from the outside.

        Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  July 11, 2017

      You mean people like me who actually live and work in the clean, green countryside with horses and not in a stone castle or a city office with rural fantasies?

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  July 11, 2017

        I don’t think Metiria would last a day in my garden. It’s over an acre and produces more than 4 tonnes of bio waste annually. I have lost count of people eager to give me a hand. Most last until smoko, especially if we are weeding. Funny thing is they all receive a text saying they are needed at home for a family emergency lol. I would have Metiria up the ladder pruning my Andean Walnuts. The Greens want Green, I’m their man.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  July 11, 2017

          I’m pretty sure she wouldn’t enjoy spraying my gorse either, Corky.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 11, 2017

            Rip it out with ya bloody bare hands & a grubber, man. We don’t stuff about with the bloody stuff making walking tracks down here. 💪

            Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  July 11, 2017

            Gorse should be viewed as a nursery plant Al. Ideal canopy for young natives. You would never make s greenie my dear old thing

            Reply
            • Anonymous Coward

               /  July 11, 2017

              A few years ago DOC had the school kids of Porirua rolling native seeds into mudballs that they dried out and then lobbed them into the gorse with tennis racquets. Gorse is all but gone now.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  July 11, 2017

              Good story ac. If you want to regenerate native bush, leave the bloody horse alone

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  July 11, 2017

              I don’t want my pasture to be a nursery for native plants, C. I have more than enough kanuka already. Likewise gorse on tracks.

              Yes, I’m well aware of the DoC line that gorse is a nursery shelter. In my experience it is crap, at least in human lifetime spans.

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  July 11, 2017

              20 or so years ago the Rimutaka’s used to be golden with gorse flowers in the summer and now it’s all new natives.

            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              Seems to be true down here Al. A lot native bush is regenerating naturally through the gorse in many of the areas I’ve hiked in & over around the region. I didn’t believe it when I heard that either but the bushies & hikers tell me it happens, & I’ve personally seen it happening in some nearby fringe hill farmland pledged to the council by developers that I helped cut a track into & plant out on the sides a couple of years ago.

            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              The thing I don’t like is the barberry bushes that seem to be spreading unchecked thru the Makara hills AC.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  July 11, 2017

              If Al was a real cocky he’d just graze hard with sheep. Problem solved

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  July 11, 2017

              Agreed and I’ve often thought about that, C. Just too much risk that undesirables will set up a home kill operation at my expense because of ease of access and no effective security possible with no-one on site.

            • Gezza

               /  July 11, 2017

              Is that a fairly common problem up there Al? It was on the East Coast a few years back as I recall.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  July 11, 2017

              Yes, G. I’ve a friend who runs some sheep right next to his home and has lost them – also to dogs and disease though. Also had cattle on a block previously and the grazer’s electric fence units kept walking off the place too. Mine is wired into a locked shed. The other issue is fencing would have to be upgraded especially beside what is a fairly busy road.

        • Andean walnut huh. Mightily impressed. I’m starting a new sub tropical orchard soon. I’ll first be concentrating on getting some citrus in this month as a starter

          Reply
  1. Was Turei reckless? — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s