The mad rush of policies/bribes

It’s hard enough keeping up with all the controversial political stories, including the stepping down of three party leaders, leading up to the election.

But even for those interested in following politics the mad rush by parties to attract media attention every day, the bombardment of election and spending promises is just about impossible to keep up with.

National announced new education policy in the weekend, following DOC great walk charge increases, and god knows what else, it’s all becoming a blur. National intermingle new policies with re-announcing already announced policies so it’s hard to know what’s new.

Jacinda Ardern has been busy going around the country announcing targeted carrots. In the weekend it was $300 million promised to Canterbury rebuilding, before that Dunedin was promised a $1-1.5 billion, another MP announced an Auckland bridge walkway/cycleway, Ardern promised light rail to Auckland airport and also promised not to raise some taxes while not saying what taxes Labour might raise.

Winston Peters has been drip feeding policies targeting various voting demographics.

Greens are trying to get  their campaign back on track by saying what they will do when they are in government – but they seem to be at real risk of not even getting back into Parliament. At best their influence on policies next term is likely to be not large.

And this cacophony of confusion makes it very difficult for people to know what they are voting on.

Advance voting opens in two weeks, and we have policies still being announced. This is a hopeless situation for voters.

I follow politics and have no idea who to vote for, and have no clear way of evaluating whose policies sound the best mix and the most credible.

I wouldn’t be surprised if most people, who normally have little interest in politics, are simply confused by the mess of attention seeking.


  1. David

     /  August 28, 2017

    I know it would be a bit odd but I wish one of her adoring fans in the MSM would ask her for some detail on 300 million for ChCh, is that on top of whats promised, instead of it and who in their right mind would give the christchurch council 300 million to spray around.

    • Gezza

       /  August 28, 2017

      Someone looking for votes in Christchurch perhaps – someone who sat there in the House long enough to know it’s actually Treasury’s job to figure out what National coalition bribes & handouts to cut if they get enough seats to form a coalition government instead?

  2. Corky

     /  August 28, 2017

    Jam, jam; and more jam. Sir Michael would not approve. Giving the voters hope isn’t on.