Reactions to leaders debate #2

It was a Newshub run debate so I’ll start with them – Newshub Leaders Debate: Who won?

Media seemed obsessed with who ‘won’. Each debate is just one part of a month-long campaign.

The leaders were quicker off the mark and shed some of the starchy politeness of the previous leaders debate.

While there was some dissent over who won the debate, the bulk of Newshub’s panel gave the night to Ms Ardern.

Morgan Godfrey said Ms Ardern felt like the Prime Minister in waiting, saying the reason was because “she got to speak about vision and values”.

Fairfax’s Tracy Watkins said Ms Ardern was “not as nervous” this time around, but said both Ms Ardern and Mr English “came out firing.”

In a column Watkins wrote “This time we have a genuine bare knuckle contest on our hands” – see Jacinda Ardern and Bill English both passionate and fired up

But commentator Matthew Hooton said Mr English won the debate with his commitment to reduce child poverty.  “Bill English’s historic announcement that he wants to reduce child poverty by 100,000 in about two and a half years was the most major and important aspect of the debate,” he said.

Hooton seemed uncomfortable in what otherwise looked like an Ardern fan club panel.

And he was wrong on this – it wasn’t an ‘historic announcement’. English made it clear that legislation was already in place that would enable 50,000 kids to be lifted out of poverty, all he did was commit to lifting another 50,000 in a few years if there was enough money.

Annabelle Lee from Three’s The Hui said Ms Ardern was the winner. “It’s one thing to be relentlessly positive. It’s another to debate with compassion and conviction as she did tonight,” Ms Lee said.

Lee is obviously a fan of Ardern, as many are, but I saw more repeat rhetoric than passion.

As Mike Yardley says at Stuff: Labour and Ardern big on rhetoric, short on substance

Labour’s campaign tactics bare an uncanny resemblance to the dumbed-down simplicity that swept Donald Trump to an improbable victory. Not that they’d ever admit it. It’s all about sloganeering and threadbare policies. “Better healthcare, better schools, better jobs . . .”

But beyond the aspirational rhetoric, the sizzle and soundbites, the substance is glaringly lacking – just as it was for Trump. Labour has opted to paper over its policy detail dearth, by simply fire-hosing its election platform with $19 billion in new spending.

Ardern talks a big game on being “clear and transparent”. Show us your hand then. It’s time to walk it with courage, conviction and clarity.

But one could say that Ardern is ‘lying by omission’ about her refusal to commit on Labour’s tax plans other than saying she will take advice from an undefined expert group.

Stacey Kirk:  In a numbers game Bill English has the edge, but Ardern no pushover

Explaining is losing, but not by much. And Jacinda Ardern spent part of the second leaders debate on the back foot, largely unable to dig deep into her party’s numbers to explain their spending plan – effectively only able to “stand by it”.

Knowledge of fiscal and economic matters is one thing, but an innate sense of how it all intertwines only comes with time and experience.

English was banking on it and capitalised when he tore apart Labour’s Kiwibuild policy based on their immigration plan. Ardern claimed 5000 Kiwibuild visas would be enough to fill the 56,000 builders apparently short to build the number of homes needed.

She had no response to how the other 51,000 construction jobs would be filled.

He also perhaps can be awarded the line of the night, after being asked how he was different now to when he lead National to a record defeat in 2002.

“I got back up.” It was aspirational – much more so than the much-used “I don’t accept” prefix, Ardern has taken to beginning her sentences with.

Ardern had her own one-two punch though, straight to the heart of English’s hallowed Social Investment policy: “It’s called early intervention and Labour was built on it”.

If there was a deadlock to be broken it wasn’t in the Newshub leaders debate, but voters did get a sense of how the two leaders handled themselves under pressure.

Stuff: Who won the second leaders debate?

Associate Professor Grant Duncan, who teaches political theory and New Zealand politics at Massey University’s Albany campus, called a win for Ardern.

“Indeed, she was more confident and more visionary on most questions, for instance abortion and home affordability. Bill struggled too often. Jacinda won.”

A policy analyst at the New Zealand Initiative, Janesa Jeram said English won this one — just.

“Ardern held English to account on the housing crisis and homelessness under his watch, while English managed to land some blows on Labour’s tax and immigration policies.

“Crucially, and what swung it for me, was Ardern backing herself in the same corner as John Key when it comes to superannuation, and struggling to assure New Zealanders of how Labour’s tax policy will affect them.”

Political commentator Liam Hehir said: “Bill English won the debate through greater mastery and communication of details.

“[Ardern] was good at stating her values, but too often it looked like she was returning to this as a crutch. Ardern was rattled at times and this one goes to the Prime Minister.”

Stuffs non-scientific online survey “Who won the debate?”:

  • Bill English 54%
  • Jacinda Ardern 40%
  • It was a draw 6%

NZH: The verdicts on Bill English vs Jacinda Ardern second leaders’ debate

Audrey Young: Bill English

English showed some determination to take the fight to Ardern – and even the unflappable Ardern was flapped under some pressure over her answers on housing.

Liam Dann: Jacinda Ardern

Ardern was stronger this time. She still struggles with two big holes in Labour policy – ill-defined tax plans and a belief that you can slash immigration and build more houses.

English was forced to interrupt, at risk of appearing overly aggressive. He had his moments and made a big bold call on child poverty. But he was on the back foot.

Toby Manhire: Bill English

English and Ardern comfortably beat their Thursday selves. It was a bigger risk for English, and if at worst he was interrupty and condescending, at best it looked passionate.

Ardern was better, too, but if anything there was too much values and vision and “how people feel” – she’s so far ahead of her opponent on this stuff that laying it on so thick starts getting mawkish.

English edged it tonight, but it could come back to bite.

Heather du Plessis-Allan: Split decision

English’s winning moment came when he got angry. He argued for solid projects over Ardern’s “vision”.

Ardern’s moment came when she sounded less like a politician and more like a human.

If it was a boxing match, Ardern won the first half, English took out the second.

The NZH unscientific online survey: Who do you think won tonight’s second leaders’ debate?

  • Bill English 51%
  • Jacinda Ardern 39%
  • Don’t know – too close to call 39%

RNZ:  Leaders debate: The greatest hits

Leave a comment

44 Comments

  1. Tipene

     /  September 5, 2017

    I think the audience won – watching the reactions of the people in the crowd to the speakers was much more telling than Ardern whining “It’s based on Prefu Bill, it’s based on Prefu”, or Bill pretty much admitting that all politicians all have to lie sometime, because “no-one is perfect”.

    Gowers no Hosking, is he?

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  September 5, 2017

      Bills lying was on cue…’English’s claim that he would swim in the Oreti river. You can not swim in the Oreti river, even around Dipton.’TS.

      Reply
  2. David

     /  September 5, 2017

    Hard to call an overall winner but everyone knows Jacinda cares about the children but who knew that those nasty Tories do as well and have solutions.
    Jacinda wants a house for everyone but didnt have any clue on what affect it would have on existing house prices.
    The 11 billion “hole” may or may not exist but she is not a numbers person.

    The things that interest Gower are not things that excite many others..Todd Barclay, really and of course Jacinda hasnt lied because she has never done anything of interest and womans magazines hardly put ones feet to the fire. The more Gower allowed her to waffle on the more she looked like nicely intentioned but lacking in any substance.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  September 5, 2017

      yes the Tories have alot of empathy and concern for the poor and homeless,but alot more for speculators,financial parasites and….motel owners.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  September 5, 2017

        Sleepless night…Blaze? Relax, Jacinda did OK. In fact, if I was Bill, I would feign illness and miss the final debate.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  September 5, 2017

          If I was Bill I would feign illness and miss the whole …election.He has ‘Barkers syndrome’.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  September 5, 2017

            I was tying to be magnanimous. I can afford to be. I can’t be wrong. You can.

            Reply
  3. This assessment of the debate is not surprising:

    Reply
  4. The Waterview Tunnel came up in the debate.

    Reply
  5. Blazer

     /  September 5, 2017

    did I hear Gower right..200,000 workers needed in hospo industry!

    Reply
  6. Corky

     /  September 5, 2017

    Mikey nails it again. Probably New Zealand’s best SUCCINCT political commentator. However, he needs to keep an eye on the second wave of political enrolment’s some are predicting. These will be a group who vote on the most whimsical issues. How do I know that? Because they enrolled days out from an election. Doesn’t point to an ordered lifestyle, or prioritising of important decisions.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  September 5, 2017

      Doesn’t point to an ordered lifestyle, or prioritising of important decisions.
      Not everyone’s anally retentive about having ordered lifestyles – doesn’t necessarily imply they’ll take a whimsical approach to voting.

      Reply
  7. PDB

     /  September 5, 2017

    Some random thoughts on the debate………

    *Gower was woeful. Asking ‘school boy questions’ using stupid hypothetical situations is not a good thing. Surprised he didn’t get them to play paper-rock-scissors, best of three.
    *English won the debate handily, he won the last one too but Ardern was given bonus points by many for not saying anything ‘too dumb’.
    *Bills worst moments was his march for being PM and his stammering about what he would do with his extra tax money.
    *Arderns worst moments were many & on more serious subjects: Her 10% child poverty reduction looked pitiful against Bills promise (I note she has matched his promise this morning), her inability to come up with credible economic numbers and continuing to flail around on what taxes Labour are going to foist onto people.
    *Her worst moment however was a huge ‘show us the money’ type moment regarding her 5000 construction workers to deal with a problem that actually 55000 construction workers are required to deal with. With immigration cuts she seemed to be trying to suggest dole-bludgers would make up the shortfall (we know it wont come from NZ youth under Labour as they will all be off for some free money/higher education).
    *The panel was a left-wing/Ardern love-fest, apart from Hooton who looked like he had been beaten with a large stick for a couple of hours before the programme aired. Even then he was the only one who appeared to have watched the debate and concluded Ardern only confirmed her lack of substance.

    Reply
  8. Zedd

     /  September 5, 2017

    Jacinda was on message.. “lets do this !” 🙂

    meanwhile English is out marching, for his right to be PM ? :/

    btw; did you see M Boag on AM show doing a rant about ‘how wonderful Bill was’ ? so predictable 😀

    Reply
  9. Zedd

     /  September 5, 2017

    Hooten was just as predictable as ever.. “Natz… rah rah rah !” BORING dude

    9 LOOOONG years.. 3 more; “HELL NO !” 🙂

    Reply
    • Bill

       /  September 5, 2017

      Zedd as a fellow Cannabis reformer, what’s your take on Labours lack of commitment to any policy to reforming the outdated Cannabis laws in this country.

      Reply
  10. Kevin

     /  September 5, 2017

    For me the two most important bits were when Ardern mentioned quotas and Bill English on decriminalisation.

    If I heard correctly Ardern will enact legislation that will make it so that cabinet has to be 50% women. Excuse me? Since when has what genitals you were born with trumped merit? And I don’t care if say 75% of cabinet were women. I still wouldn’t support a cabinet based on gender politics.

    Secondly Bill English said that he’d support decriminalisation if it could be shown that it reduced the harm from drugs. Um, no one has said that decriminalisation reduces the harm from drugs. What it does do is reduce the harm caused by prohibition. But do you know what does reduce the harm from drugs? Legalisation. This is because street drugs are a lot more dangerous then legal and properly regulated drugs. And we can see this starting to happen with the pseudo-prohibition of cigarettes and blackmarket cheaply-made cigarettes.

    Reply
    • Bill

       /  September 5, 2017

      Yeah what I see is English is signalling a ramp up on the war on Drugs with their new policy and Ardern doesn’t want to see almost anyone going to jail for Cannabis, but thinks we don’t need to change any laws to do so.

      Reply
      • Kevin

         /  September 5, 2017

        Given the lightness of penalties for even possession of class A drugs what we have is a kind of pseudo-decriminalisation. Unfortunately if say a young guy gets caught with a joint he still risks getting a criminal record.

        Reply
    • pickled possum

       /  September 5, 2017

      Yes Kev and they have a cheek to call the latest ‘killa’ drug Synthetic cannabis,

      in actual fact no-one knows what is in this toxic grass herb,
      I have heard from some that there is insecticide herbicide fly spray drain cleaner etc anything toxic.

      The facts; 9 – 10 ?? users, have died recently
      while inhaling this synthetic drug.

      Does this mean there is a drought on the real stuff.
      You know the ….The organically grown, spray free, medical cannabis?

      My elderly relly takes it for the pain of living past her use by date. her words not mine.

      They (government) made it easier for the Importers to bring in the pills
      to make the dreaded Meths
      2008 60% cut in border control.
      They (government) set millions of dollars aside from housing health and education
      to set up ‘help’ for the ones who are drugged beyond reality.
      Our Corrections stats tell a very different story.

      The estimated social cost of drug-related harms and intervention costs in 2014/15
      was $1.8 billion. Details are given below;
      https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/publications/nz-drug-harm-index-2016-2nd-ed-jul16.pdf

      Holy Shit Bat Man!!!
      What the Hector is going on with our governments.
      Really!! and just for clarity … FFS

      Reply
      • Bill

         /  September 5, 2017

        Yeah possum, unfortunately the drug harm index by McFadden Consultancy is as its predecessor Berl was, nothing more than a tool to fund the police arm of the drug war. They rate Cannabis as having almost 4 times the social costs than Meth, when they should of stated prohibition of Cannabis has a social cost 4 times higher than Meth. The drug harm index was widely discredited for false information and paid for by the Police.

        Reply
        • pickled possum

           /  September 6, 2017

          Too True Bill

          Amphetaminetype
          stimulants …
          Personal harm $(m)256.4
          Total social cost $(m) $364.2

          Cannabinoids …
          Personal harm $(m)256.4
          Total social cost $(B) $1,282.6

          Personal harm; is equally harmful if you smoke crack,
          p or any of the toxic chemical highs … as well as Cannabis!!
          According to another fudged smudged in-dependant study
          A Cameron Slater of the survey ilk …

          Really I cannot remember a time where a knife slashing gun toting
          GBH dude went crazy after having a puff of cannabis.

          The government making money out of cannabis already
          Why make it legal
          When they can make millions
          Out of it being Illegal.

          Reply
  11. Corky

     /  September 5, 2017

    Noticing Lefties are becoming more animated. Like a crook who hasn’t got another lag in him, they realise if Jacinda doesn’t show them the promised land they won’t be able to do another three years under National.

    I find this situation simply delicious. Lets hope they don’t get too rough. We are short of Righties on this blog. And where’s Alan Wilkinson when you need him?

    Reply
    • Bill

       /  September 5, 2017

      Pretty hard to tell left from right from the debates corky, both sides are trying to suck up so hard, its like following an Asian tourist over the motorway.

      Reply
    • Kevin

       /  September 5, 2017

      Looks like Paddy is going to become more hated than Hosking, lolz.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  September 5, 2017

        They could have a face-off to sees who gets the biggest petition to have them removed from the screen.

        Reply
      • Bill

         /  September 5, 2017

        AH, they’re both just trying to bring a little bit of American style into NZ politics. The media knows they have the biggest chance of being the King makers.

        Can’t wait for the minor party debates, set to be the funniest yet, hell they should’ve got Jeremy Corbett to do it as a 7 Days yes minister special.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  September 5, 2017

          There already has been one. Lisa Owen compered. It doesn’r seem to have been given any attention here or by the msm but I found it interesting. Only 44 minutes though, and hosted by Lisa Owen, – so there was an obvious limit to how useful it could be.

          Reply
    • Gezza

       /  September 5, 2017

      I am, of course, privy to Sir Alan’s current whereabouts, but do not feel at liberty to disclose his present location to the riff raff, the merchants, or the owners of hovels-for-rent who post on this blog – in case some of the more questionnable fellows characters should take an unhealthy interest & make disparaging remarks.

      Sir Gerald.

      Reply
      • pickled possum

         /  September 6, 2017

        Really Gez Just because Al is MIA from YnZ
        Doesn’t mean we not gonna have a go at his pot washing skills
        or lack of them. 😎
        think …. pot + black smoke + new dish cloth = idiots!!

        And by the by … Whoz all this ‘riff-raff’ you talking about.
        And ‘owners of hovels-for-rent’
        Jez Gez I haven’t seen any of those people here!!!
        What do you know I don’t ? 😎

        Riff-Raff Lives in Hamilton , doesn’t he?
        Isn’t there a statue of Him there …
        Say Hi to the new mum

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  September 6, 2017

          Hey sis
          Howzit goin up there. Sht day here again, il bloody pleut yet again!
          Good weather for ducks I suppose, tho tbh even Charlie Prettygirl are looking a bit mizzo & pistoff with it.

          Hey I did read that article on BP kaupapa & I understand why thry say they were originally formed. But it seems to me that it’s morphed a bit in places into an org where their aspirations & activities are not ne essarily all that noble. Ther were things in there that I thought were still quite disturbing. From memory it really only described Welly BP’s kaupapa, notwithstanding it was talking about the theoretical national president.

          But I intend to read it again & maybe talk more with you on the bush telegraph. I appreciated your giving your perspective on things here because you often seem like a lone Maori voice in a sea of Pakehas.

          Reply
      • pickled possum

         /  September 6, 2017

        Whoopseee!!!
        Riff Raff lived in Tauranga
        Gone Home Now.
        ‘O’Brien emigrated with his family to Tauranga, New Zealand, at the age of 10,
        where his accountant father had purchased a sheep farm.
        He returned to England in 1964’
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_O%27Brien

        Reply
  12. Zedd

     /  September 5, 2017

    Listening to ZB last evening, it sounded like the Natz had all jumped on the phone.. in force. Nearly all said ‘Bill won Hands down !’ (scripted ?) with little else said, to backup why they thought so !

    one guy (who disagreed) said sounds like the ‘Lord Nelson party’ (all ‘one eyed’) are hard at work 😀

    Reply
    • PDB

       /  September 5, 2017

      “Nearly all said ‘Bill won Hands down !”

      Probably because he clearly did. Though ‘winning’ isn’t the point really and is a bit of a crock – he put across his own strengths and highlighted his opponent’s weaknesses better than Ardern did last night.

      Reply
    • Corky

       /  September 5, 2017

      Truth:

      ”The quality or state of being true.”

      Therefore: Bill English won the debate. Or he communicated his ideas and vision to the audience in a superior manner.

      Reply
      • robertguyton

         /  September 5, 2017

        Didn’t he rely on Joyce’s lie to gain the “high” ground?
        What’s truthy about that?

        Reply
  13. Ray

     /  September 5, 2017

    Who won seems to match people’s political preference.
    Interesting to note that Brian Edwards, someone who no one would call right wing but is an expert in schooling pollies in the art of being a good tv politician gives it to
    Bill English
    http://brianedwardsmedia.co.nz/2017/09/thoughts-on-the-newshub-debate/jacinda-ardern-bill-english/

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  September 5, 2017

      hes been right wing for quite some time,age does that.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  September 5, 2017

        Damn, it seems to be catching: Brian Edwards, Chris Trotter, Michael Bassett, Rodger Douglas and Richard Prebble.

        All these men have seen the light….the RIGHT light.

        Time for you to leave the dark side, Blazer. Leave your angst and hate behind. Become light of heart and spirit.

        Reply
      • Gezza

         /  September 5, 2017

        I think he’s certainly become more conservative as he’s aged but that’s quite normal for most people & just reflects experience & maturity. I’d hardly describe him as right wing – more of a centrist – & I think he struggles for relevance & attention these days, & it shows in his musings.

        Reply
  1. Reactions to leaders debate #2 — 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