Can the Democrats learn and move on from Clinton?

In the US the Democrats are in disarray after not only an embarrassing loss to Donald Trump but also their failure to win majorities in either the Senate or Congress.

Trump should never have been able to win the presidency, but alongside other factors the Democrats managed to make a mess of their selection – Hillary Clinton – and their campaign.

Is there any sign of learning from their mistakes and rebuilding their chances?

Howard Kurtz at Fox: After Hillary: Are the Democrats ready to move beyond Clintonism?

The question now: Has the Democratic Party moved on from Clintonism?

Both the left and right are asking that question as the party tries to rebuild in the Trump era. I have no idea who might emerge for 2020, given the strikingly thin bench, or whether the party wants to go further left or try to recapture the working-class voters that it lost to Trump.

It seems the Democrats haven’t really had that debate, even with the low-profile chairman’s race won by Tom Perez. But some in the media are starting to examine the rubble left by 2016.

It’s not that Hillary herself has a political future. In a Rasmussen poll, 58 percent of likely voters don’t want her to run again, while 23 percent would like to see that.

But a Clinton-like candidate might face the same lack of excitement for a program of incrementally improving government, even without her flaws as a candidate.

On the other hand, a Bernie-style populist could connect on issues like trade, but might simply be too liberal to win a general election.

But surely the Democrats can come up with someone fresher and newer than Clinton or Sanders.

Salon: To win, the anti-Trump resistance must learn from the Clinton campaign’s mistakes

What’s interesting is how Salon sees Clinton as having blundered by pretty much running as the anti-Trump:

“Of all the strategic blunders made by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, the most consequential — apart from neglecting the Rust Belt states — may have been the campaign’s ill-advised decision to portray Donald Trump as an outlier in the GOP who did not represent true Republican values.

“In the early stages of her campaign, Clinton went out of her way to defend the Grand Old Party’s reputation and highlight some of the conservative critiques of Trump, so as to emphasize her opponent’s uniquely ‘deplorable’ nature.”

That “backfired spectacularly,” the piece says, by alienating progressives and boosting Trump’s underdog status.

“The grand irony here, of course, is that liberals — not leftists — are the ones who have started to sound increasingly like alt-right conspiracy theorists. While alt-right Info-Warriors spew their conspiracy theories about the deep state’s planning a coup against Trump or about former President Barack Obama’s wiretapping of Trump Tower, liberals have gone in the other direction, embracing their own overwrought conspiracy theories with an all-powerful Vladimir Putin at the center of it all.

“But Putin is not responsible for the Democratic Party’s losing control of nearly 1,000 state legislature seats and all three branches of government during the Obama years.”

It is yet to be proven whether Russia interfered with the US election but even if they did the Democrats should have been able to benefit from the allegations. Remarkably Trump won despite being linked with Russia.

Clinton was a poor choice but even then a decent campaign is likely to have succeeded. Trump didn’t win by much (a few hundred thousand votes in a few states made the difference).

The Democrats are in a mess of their own making.

Labour in the UK are also in a self inflicted mess.

Labor in Australia have been in disarray for years.

Labour in New Zealand is trying to make a comeback after struggling after Helen Clark lost in 2008 and stood down, but they are still languishing in polls and have conceded reliance on the Greens to try and compete in this year’s election.

Are these all coincidental messes? Or are left wing parties losing their way in the modern world with no hope of success unless they rethink and rebrand?

Trump versus Australia


Donald Trump is trying to talk tough, with one of his latest targets being Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, but mixed messages are making a mockery of Trump’s so-called toughness. Perhaps he should start getting tough on his inconsistencies.

Dumping on one of the USA’s closest allies seems to be quite stupid.

Washington Post:  ‘This was the worst call by far’: Trump badgered, bragged and abruptly ended phone call with Australian leader

It should have been one of the most congenial calls for the new commander in chief — a conversation with the leader of Australia, one of America’s staunchest allies, at the end of a triumphant week.

Instead, President Trump blasted Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull over a refu­gee agreement and boasted about the magnitude of his electoral college win, according to senior U.S. officials briefed on the Saturday exchange. Then, 25 minutes into what was expected to be an hour-long call, Trump abruptly ended it.

At one point, Trump informed Turnbull that he had spoken with four other world leaders that day — including Russian President Vladi­mir Putin — and that “this was the worst call by far.”

When the phone conversation was leaked (in itself a notable thing to have happened) Trump turned to Twitter.

It may look like a dumb deal, but Trump’s way of dealing with it is dumber.

Since then he has continued. Sydney’s Daily Telegraph: Donald Trump ‘upset and angry’ over refugee deal discussed with Malcolm Turnbull

US President Donald Trump has continued his public stoush with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull by declaring he needs to make “tough phone calls” because nations are taking advantage of America.

At a speech in Washington DC overnight, Mr Trump said the world was in trouble but he was “going to straighten it out”.

“When you hear about the tough phone calls I’m having, don’t worry about it,” Mr Trump told the audience. “Just don’t worry about it.

“They’re tough. We have to be tough,” he said. “It’s time we have to be a little tough folks.

“We are taken advantage of by every nation in the world virtually. “It’s not going to happen anymore.”

On top of this there has been conflicting information from trump’s administration.

From RNZ in US ‘taken advantage of by every nation’ – Trump

The tweets threw more confusion about the status of the controversial deal that Australia made with former President Barack Obama late last year.

The United States would resettle up to 1250 asylum seekers held in offshore processing camps on Pacific islands in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. In return, Australia would resettle refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

The swap is at odds with Mr Trump’s executive order last week suspending the US refugee programme and restricting entry to the United States for travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries, including Iran, Iraq, and Syria.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer and the US Embassy in Australia have both said Mr Trump would honour the deal. In several media appearances after Mr Trump’s tweet, Mr Turnbull reiterated that he believed the deal stood.

“He is saying that this is not a deal he would have made, but the question is will he honour that commitment? He has already given it,” Mr Turnbull said.

Not surprisingly there has been a lot of criticism. Stuff details some in US media, congressmen stunned Donald Trump has picked a fight with Australia

I don’t know that Trump has deliberately picked a fight, it could be just his normal boorish arrogant behaviour.

Lawrence O’Donnell, the left-wing commentator and host of MSNBC’s The Last Word, lambasted the president for insulting Turnbull, “while having no idea that Australia has stood by us like no other ally, marched into battle with us where no other ally would go, including Vietnam, something Donald Trump would have known if he had served in Vietnam and heard those men beside him with those Australian accents, men who saved the lives of American troops”.

David Gergen, a former presidential adviser to Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, who is now an analyst for CNN, accused Trump of bullying a friend.

“Are they playing some sort of game in the White House – how many countries we can they alienate in 100 days? The list is in double digits now,” he said on the network.

“We have never had a president in my memory who has bullied our friends in this way, especially heads of government.”

Kevin Madden, a former adviser to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, said people had long expected that Trump, a mogul and reality television star known for his combative, impudent manner, would eventually conform to some level of political protocol, but that a pivot of that nature was never going to come.

“He’s just not going to change but that’s what’s problematic,” he said on the same CNN panel.

“Here we have in instance where we are already alienating one of our closest allies just over a phone call … just the tone of it was what’s already caused some consternation.”

Dealing with Trump will be difficult for probably every country. he seems to think he can abuse any one and any country he likes. He may end up isolating the US far more than he envisaged.

Deliberately or not Trump is making America grate.

Japan, Australia still backing TPP

After an official meeting the leaders of Japan and Australia have said they were committed to proceeding with the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

RNZ: Japan, Australia both back TPP

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull made the announcement after their official meeting as part of Mr Abe’s four-country trip to boost Japan’s trade and security in the Asia-Pacific region.

In his first visit to Australia since Mr Turnbull became Prime Minister, he said both leaders were committed to ensuring the 12-country TPP trade deal would come into effect.

“On the economic front we agreed that we should demonstrate anew the importance of free trade,” he said.

“We confirmed that we would coordinate toward the early entry into force of the TPP and the prompt conclusion of the RCEP [Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership].”

There is still a major problem though – Donald Trump has said made a priority of taking the US out of the TPP.

The commitment came despite United States President-elect Donald Trump criticising the TPP as a “potential disaster” for the US and vowing to prioritise withdrawing from the pact.

Mr Abe, who had previously said the TPP would be meaningless without the US, said the countries also agreed to maintain “solid cooperation” with the Trump administration.

NZ Herald report that Bill English says a rethink on the TPP may be necessary in Bill English optimistic about Donald Trump US presidency

One of Trump’s first acts will affect New Zealand’s interests – Trump has pledged to initiate the US withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership on his first day in office.

Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull and Japan PM Shinzo Abe met recently to discuss how to salvage the TPP and English said he was not ready to give up altogether either.

“I wouldn’t say it is futile, but I think along with those countries, we need to rethink our approach. It could be as soon as next week that the US executes its position and that means we need to rethink it.”

“I would hope there would be a way of keeping the US engaged in the Asia Pacific and the TPP certainly would have done that. There may have to be some adaptation or some other way of doing that.”

‘Rethink’ may mean trying to do a TPP without the US, unless Trump makes a major reversal on his stance.

‘One Nation’ wants to kick New Zealand

The Aussies have been a bit negative about the Security Council vote by Angola, China, Egypt, France, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Russia, Senegal, Spain, Ukraine, Uruguay, United Kingdom and Venezuela (and not vetoed by the Unites States) against Israeli settlements and supporting a two state solution.

None more so than One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts who wants Australia to clamp down on New Zealand immigration and immigrants in response to the vote. Crazy.

Last week Australia’s Foreign Minister Julie Bishop implied they would  have gone against the position held by New Zealand, the United States and the 13 other countries, but they can say that because they weren’t there, it doesn’t mean they would have voted against Resolution 2334.

Liberal senator Eric Abetz is reported to have been critical of New Zealand when he released his own statement condemning the resolution, but all I can find is United Nations vote on Israel:

The Foreign Minister is absolutely right to stand with Israel over the United Nations’ ill-founded and poorly considered motion in relation to Israel.

While Australia did not have a vote on the Security Council, it is concerning that the Obama Administration effectively cheered on this silly act. This kind of behaviour is exactly why the American people embraced Donald Trump and the British people embraced Brexit.

We should be unashamed in our support of Israel – the most free and democratic nation in the middle east which shares the Judeo Christian ethics shared by the Western world.

The unelected United Nations bureaucrats should take a serious look in the mirror over these latest actions which come following a long list of actions which seem to indicate it wants to be a left-wing thinktank rather than a bringer of peace and good to the world.

That doesn’t name New Zealand, it just takes a swipe at President Obama’s administration.

Now a One Nation’s Roberts has more than taken a direct swipe at New Zealand, he wants to cut New Zealand immigration and benefits.

Australia’s One Nation party says Kiwi migrants should be punished over Israel

Queensland senator Malcolm Roberts said he was “appalled” by the Security Council resolution, which called for an immediate end to any and all settlement activities in disputed zones, including East Jerusalem, which he said “have contained Jewish settlements since biblical times”.

But Roberts went further, accusing New Zealand of “stabbing our ally in the front”, while criticising the Turnbull government for not putting enough pressure on New Zealand to stop it.

“2017 marks the centenary of the ANZACs’ brave actions to free the Palestinian territory – now Israel – from Ottoman oppression of Christians, Jews and other groups,” he said.

“It would never have been possible for those brave ANZACs, charging as part of the Light Horse Brigade, to have ever thought that events 100 years later would go full circle and future generations would betray the very people they were about to liberate.

Accusing New Zealand of a “hostile attitude” towards Israel, Roberts suggested Australia take a stronger stance against New Zealand “settlements”.

“At the very least, we should look at further cutting benefits for New Zealanders living in Australia,” he said.

“Perhaps a tougher immigration policy aimed towards New Zealand would stop Kiwis from establishing settlements in Australia.”

That’s ridiculous.

Roberts’ statement presents a marked turnaround in One Nation policy, with the party previously calling for changes to make to make it easier for New Zealanders to apply for citizenship and social security.

“We have opened our borders and our hearts to people from all over the world offering them the opportunity to become Australian citizens, but not to our closest neighbours, our allies and our ANZAC mates,” the One Nation policy says.

“They are working, paying their taxes, and raising families, but when hardship hits they cannot apply to receive help from our social security system. Many New Zealanders are then left homeless, destitute and desperate.

“We believe Australians would open their hearts to our neighbours. Therefore, we are calling on the government to change the current laws.”

One Nation (or at least Roberts) sounds very flakey.

Threatening punitive measures against one country involved in a unanimous UN vote is pathetic.

There is no way Australia would do any of what Roberts has suggested, but it shows they have crazies in their Parliament too.

Not all Aussies are anti. Bob Carr, ex foreign minister and a patron of Australian Labor Friends of Palestine, wrote on the resolution – The genius of the UN’s resolution on Israeli settlements:

Both Labor and Likud governments have funded settlers, many religious extremists, and gifted them the best land.

Meanwhile, Palestinians are denied building approval for homes, even a chicken coop. If in Area C they throw up a granny flat it’s promptly demolished by army bulldozers.

If Israel is really open to giving the land back in a peace deal why allow settlements in the first place? That’s the question, if I’d been sharper, I would have put to my interlocutor. And settlements not just along the border. Thirty-five per cent are now being approved deep in the territory everyone sees as an ultimate Palestinian state.

This is the essence of the boiling US frustration that resulted in America refusing to veto Friday’s Security Council resolution.

Two former prime ministers, Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, have warned their country risks getting saddled with apartheid, proving again that searching argument and criticism are among Israel’s most resilient features.

Donald Trump can tweet and bluster. But the resolution stands as international law, to be taken seriously by cabinets and bind the International Criminal Court. After years of provocation by Israeli hawks that’s the genius of what Obama and Kerry have pulled off.

Abetz and Roberts can bluster all they like too. Australia weren’t on the Security Council.

And Carr posits:

In the meantime consider the following motion, an elegantly simple one: “Given that Israel continues to defy the 2016 resolution of the Security Council and spreads settlements so that a Palestinian state is no longer possible we move that every resident of Greater Israel be afforded equal rights. This includes the right to vote in national elections.”

Majority support Muslim & asylum seeker immigration

An interesting Australian immigration poll of  by Roy Morgan.

“Over the last year (2015) about 180,000 immigrants came to Australia. Do you think the number of people coming here to live permanently should be increased, or reduced, or remain about the same?”

  • Remain about the same 40%
  • Increased 21%
  • Reduced 34%
  • Can’t say 5%

“Judging by what you see and hear, do you think immigrants are changing Australia’s culture and way of life – or having little effect.”

Respondents who responded that immigrants are changing us were then asked: “Do you think immigrants are changing Australia’s culture and way of life for better or for worse?”

  • Better 32%
  • Worse 32%
  • Can’t say (better or worse) 10%
  • Having little effect 19%
  • Can’t say (changing us) 3%

This is a similar result for ‘better’ to a poll in 2010 but a slight reduction from a poll last year.

“Australia’s population has increased by 6 million from 18 million to just over 24 million over the last 20 years. What population do you think we should aim to have in Australia in 30 years – that is, by 2046?”

  • Under 30 million 34%
  • 30-under 35 million 24%
  • 35 million or more 24%
  • Can’t say 18%

That’s a fairly even spread, but a big reduction since 2010 in the preference for under 30 million.

“Please say whether you support or oppose (Muslim / Asylum seeker/ Skilled migrant/ Family reunion) immigration?”

  • Support 58% (54% 2010, 65% 2015)
  • Oppose 33% (35% 2010, 28% 2015)
  • Can’t say 9%

All Blacks dominant

The All Blacks have dominated the Springboks in their final Rugby Championship game, scoring seven tries in a second half rout and nine in the game to South Africa’s five penalties. The final score was a record high versus the ‘Boks, 57-12.

The All Blacks played very well but the Springboks were very disappointing. They did little but shovel the ball a bit and kick a lot.

The AB’s have dominated the whole Rugby Championship, winning all games and leaving South Africa, Australia and Argentina scrapping over the dregs.

With the latter two soon to play their final game the table already says it all, with none of the others getting half the AB’s points – in fact no matter what the result is there the All Blacks have clocked up as many or more table points than the other three teams combined.


With their dominance this year some games get boring but this game was well worth watching given the performance of the All Blacks, they played some fantastic rugby.


Wrong photo, right questions

The ODT editorial today Human rights and wrongs looks mainly at the human wrongs of detentions in Australia, with the majority being New Zealanders incarcerated. And it rightly questions the lack of action here about it.

They open with a wider world examples of human rights violations:


But I have no idea why they have included a photo of Donald Trump who is not mentioned in the editorial and appears to have nothing to do with it.

They then go on to discuss the actual target of their attention, detentions in Australia, and in particular detention of New Zealanders..

It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore another disturbing perpetrator, though; one much closer to home.

There aren’t many images of Australia’s offshore immigration detention centres and “processing” facilities. The isolated facilities on Christmas Island, Manus Island and Nauru house the world’s unwanted (mostly asylum seekers), and are largely off limits to media. There are plenty of reports, however. Reports from journalists, human rights organisations, detainees and their families. Reports of riots, of physical and sexual abuse, of deaths, of suicides. Reports now, which raise concerns about the fate of Manus Island detainees when the centre closes after Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court ruled it illegal and unconstitutional.

There are other reports, and images, regarding the treatment of juveniles in Australian detention centres. A royal commission into the detention of children in the Northern Territory has been announced, although Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has rejected calls to extend that to a national inquiry.

The documentary revealing apparently appalling practices of juvenile detentions in NT are disturbing, but there have also been attempts to justify at least some of the practices.

And it has just been confirmed New Zealanders now hold the unenviable position of being the biggest nationality of people held in Australian detention centres. These are the unlucky Kiwis, many who have lived most of their lives in the “lucky country” but, because they have committed a crime at some stage that involved more than a year of jail time, are now deemed to have failed a “good character” test, eligible to be repunished, have their visas revoked, and to be locked up ahead of being shipped “home” to a country some of them barely know.

What is going on?

Australia seems to be determined to rid itself of some Kiwi pests. Generally the pests being detained have been involved in some sort of serious criminal activity in the past.

It is worth noting that there some more extreme demands here in New Zealand to banish people with certain religious affiliations due to the criminal actions of unrelated people on the other side of the world.


Whatever the reasons, Australia seems unaware of (or wilfully blind to) the irony of its actions as it continues to push for a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council for 2018-20. Indeed, it has been slammed by the UN and human rights organisations for its record on various issues.

That does seem to be a contradictory goal.

What also continues to be concerning is the remarkable lack of interest or pressure from our Government – about human rights in general and New Zealanders’ human rights in particular.

Is it a case of turning a blind eye? After all, we have been taken to task on human rights, too. Is it a case of you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours? (We’ll support your Human Rights Council bid if you support our bid for Helen Clark as secretary-general?) Is it that, in actual fact, we don’t really care about these people either?

The apparent lack of concern for and action about what is happening to New Zealanders in Australia is concerning. Especially if there is some ‘blind eye’ stuff going on, but that appears to be just speculation.

There is no doubt some of the New Zealand detainees have been violent offenders. Many have done the crimes, but they have also done the time. Some have simply found themselves caught up in this bizarre new policy.

It certainly appears neither supposedly fair-minded country is prepared to advocate for these people. But human rights don’t work like that. They work for everyone. If a country is a signatory to international human rights conventions – not to mention hoping to be a world leader when it comes to promoting them – there’s no cherry picking. One size fits all. Leaders on both sides of the Tasman could do with remembering that.

Not just remembering that. They should be acting as if their countries’ commitments on human rights are viewed and taken seriously.


The Nation – Australia, Auckland, TPP


Election analyst/guru talks election results & political trends with  

The Unitary Plan – can Auckland build its way out of the housing crisis?

Panel and Simon Wilson from

Clapping banned

An Australian school has banned clapping but ‘silent cheering’ is allowed when a teacher allows it. Apparently. It’s hard to take this seriously. School bans clapping and allows students ‘silent cheers’ or air punching but only when teachers agree

CLAPPING has been banned at a Sydney primary school which has introduced “silent cheering”, “pulling excited faces” and “punching the air” to respect students who are “sensitive to noise”.

The school now only allows its pupils “to conduct a silent cheer” when prompted by teachers and says the practice “reduces fidgeting”.

Elanora Heights Public School, which is on Sydney’s northern beaches, announced its new “silent cheer” policy in its latest school newsletter.

In its July 18 newsletter, the Elanora school has published an item under the headline “Did you know” that “our school has adopted silent cheers at assembly’s” (sic).

“If you’ve been to a school assembly recently, you may have noticed our students doing silent cheers,” the item reads.

“Instead of clapping, the students are free to punch the air, pull excited faces and wriggle about on the spot.

“The practice has been adopted to respect members of our school community who are sensitive to noise.

“When you attend an assembly, teachers will prompt the audience to conduct a silent cheer if it is needed.

“Teachers have also found the silent cheers to be a great way to expend children’s energy and reduce fidgeting.”

What about respecting students whose eyes are sensitive to movement? And whose noses are sensitive to smells?

The latest example of a political correctness outbreak in Australian schools, which have banned hugging, singing Christmas carols, celebrating Australia Day and singing the word “black” in the nursery rhyme “baa baa black sheep”.

But wait, there’s more. Another article at Calls for intervention over Sydney girls’ school gender neutral language policy

A LEADING Sydney girls’ school’s decision to eliminate gender-specific terms from its teachers’ vocabularies has prompted calls for sackings and government intervention at the exclusive institution.

Teachers at the prestigious northwest Sydney school, Cheltenham Girls High School, have been asked to stop referring to students as “girls”, “ladies” and “women”, and use only gender-neutral language, The Daily Telegraph today reported.

The request was put to teachers at a staff meeting earlier this year discussing the implementation of the Safe Schools anti-bullying program, the newspaper reports.

It was suggested to teachers that by using such language they could be seen to be breaking the law and could be at risk of being sued by LGBTI students.

And more, from The Daily Telegraph: ‘Mum, dad’ banned under school guidelines

BOYS should dress up as girls as part of “non-gender-specific free play” and teachers should avoid terms like mum or dad when discussing parents — according to guidelines created by the NSW teachers’ union on how to deal with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex issues in the classroom.

Another strategy in the union guidelines includes displaying LGBTI posters, photographs and drawings in early childhood and primary school classrooms.

Speech control and action control seems to be getting a tad out of control.

Lessons for Key from Australia

Fran O’Sulivan points out that there are lessons for John Key and National from the Australian election (although they should have known it already).

Malcolm Turnbull’s close shave holds lessons for John Key

Malcolm Turnbull’s narrow win in Australia ought to put fellow political brahmin John Key on notice.

The election outcome proved the growing unreliability of political polling in the era of the smartphone.

I disagree on “the growing unreliability of political polling”.  The biggest problem with polling is that media misuse it as a predictor of election results, as far out as two or more years before an election. Journalists seem to have never understood how polling works or have become obsessed with news making and ignore the science of polling.

I doubt that Key or their pollster David Farrar need any lessons on the use of polling.

It took a relatively small swing to Australian Labor to bring the Coalition to the point where Turnbull was even taking advice from Key on how to run a minority Government. It would not take much of a swing in New Zealand to tip Key out.

It would have taken not much of a swing to tip Key out in 2011 and again in 2014 so next year is not much different.

Turnbull is Key’s closest political mate. While Key cosies up to Barack Obama – who has also deputed Vice-President Joe Biden to visit NZ next week to talk through pressing regional issues – the Australian Prime Minister is a different fish.

They have mutual respect as successful former investment bankers. But Key has had more success hugging the political centre.

The Key Government has successfully focused on getting back into Budget surplus and protecting NZ’s credit rating.

A succession of Australian Prime Ministers have not managed that feat.

Turnbull must find his mojo and proceed with broad tax reform – not simply the company tax cuts and relief for middle-income earners. His Government has to write a new story for the times.

He rarked up the electorate with the superannuation changes.

But that will not solve the fundamental imbalances in Australia’s two-tier economy.

And nor will all Key’s advice solve the growing imbalances in the NZ economy.

Turnbull and Australia could learn a lot off Key and New Zealand. I don’t think there’s much to learn from the ongoing political train wreck across the Tasman.