your ability to tell it like it is continues to make me a fan keith.

If David and David or a 54 year old baby boomer as a fresh face are the answer?

Because they don't expect much in return, and are just going to be serving the rest of the term before retiring, without hoping for front bench placement or great portfolios?

Phil Goff on The Nation

Given that he had the numbers, the responsibility for not being able to come up with them in the Christchurch debate rests with him. So what's with the prevailing meme of blaming David Cunliffe for Goff not being able to come?

Can anyone provide a convincing reason why not?

He should have burst out of Goff's chest, like in Alien. We expect nothing less of an effective Finance Spokesperson.

Well, if anyone could?.. ;)

Cuniliffe does seem rather slick, but I'm torn for that reason. Is slick what we need right now?
Or is Shearer the sheep in wolfs clothing?
Hard to say.
FWIW, I actually like?

Mmmhhh... given that Shearer has indicated there won't be a front bench place for Cunliffe, who says he hasn't made known to his supporters what they're getting? And how do you know Shearer's voters are disinterested? Won't they expect?

That's not what I hear.

Goff was fudging it on The Nation ("fiscal framework" doesn't necessarily mean "forecasts") because he was reluctant to be seen as a mickey mouse operation which failed to finish its homework on time. That's why I think there's been so much?

I don't really buy the idea that Labour's weak performance over 3 years is all down to Cunliffe's long game. I never heard much from Shearer either. Or anyone in Labour, most especially its leader.?

I very much doubt that the decision about timing of the release was Goff's despite what Cunliffe might say to the media about it.

Mallard is?

It's nice to read a reason that isn't tied up with reinforcement of the author's pre-existing theory, or an argument about who really carries the baggage of the last Labour government.

By the same token,?

Anyone who was at the meeting yesterday and noted the exchange between David Shearer and Judith Tizard would know which of the two candidates represents change.

Except Trevor Mallard took the rap for that on twitter after the debate. All Goff needed was a?

they've done well at stirring wedge politics inside Labour for some time

link?

Yes. + 1. Only serves to make me question my preference again . But I merely care?

+1

It has?

Who's dumping on Cunliffe for being organised? I'm dumping on him for not being organised as a Finance Spokesperson because he was too busy campaigning for the leadership.

Did they ask you not to talk about it?

Twas a sanctuary. :)

Look at all the speculation, that camp Shearer has done nothing to deny, and you won't see a senior post for Cunliffe. I guess that Shearer has to take care of another former rival in Parker, who would get finance, but still.

Depends on who goes. If they are electorate MP's (which many of the old guard are) that would require a by-election. Not such?

My guess is they were rightly keeping their powder dry until Goff stepped down, so?

Oh, I thought you meant an actual statement. I've only seen stuff like this:

They said speculation on the front bench was premature, but Mr Cunliffe said he would want Mr Shearer there, and Mr Robertson would also likely be there.

Mr Shearer said he had?

Mind you, Cunliffe has thought out loud of setting the dead wood adrift.

The basis of this post is that Cunliffe has given firm undertakings, Shearer none (not even to Parker. Yeah, right.), and that Cunliffe supporters have been bought, whilst Shearer are disinterested agents of change. One would want to?

Fair enough.

Oh, except that Goff already had the numbers and was hoping to delay their release for a couple of days. From above a comment above – http://business.scoop.co.nz/2011/11/19/phil-goff-on-the-nation-2/?

Departing leadership team Phil Goff and Annette King are expected to vacate the front bench, as are Parliamentary veterans Trevor Mallard, Ruth Dyson and Mr Horomia.

It's hard to be sure which comes first. Maybe they're not a particularly united bunch anyway. I think that's highly likely, considering how there?

Again, it's unlikely to have been Goff's call – and Mallard put his hand up already as you noted.

now that would signal a different approach

That's another thing I don't get about this post: if Cunliffe has really been scheming for a whole term (while Parker/Shearer haven't) and is so complicit with the way the list punished new talent?

I haven't got one, I'm going by the Inscrutable Wisdom of Keith. Just trying to apply logic to it.

In the case?

Word up, son.

"I'm not anti-Cunliffe perse, It's just that he is the robotic anti-christ who would spell dooooooom for everyone"

He is clearly evil as

A) he is a politician who wants?

Lots of problems for Labour, but I'm not sure they are entirely represented by Cunliffe's bid.

Yes, I feel it's likely too. The further out the?

How is it legal? You would have thought that gambling on (alleged) inside information would contravene gaming law, securities law or both.

How is it legal? You would have thought that gambling on (alleged) inside information would contravene gaming law, securities law or both.

It?s not gambling; it?s a stockmarket. One that has exemptions from securities law & is very severely constrained (in terms of value, volume and so on) such that?

They have some sort of an exemption from the Securities Commission.

*Snorts his coffee*

L

Yup, I guess anyone who loves their gambling is really hoping for short term movements as the minor pieces of news leak out, like which of the Labour people wears a toupee?

That's why he tweeted "Dear Labour Caucus. Are you going to let your vote be bought?" Finally some of that balanced reporting we're not getting from the mainstream media!

L

Technically I think it was established as a futures market. I'm not au fait with the difference between such things.

L

Might be embarrassing as and when a Reserve Bank employee gets caught betting on the OCR.

In terms of response times to questions they invited on their own blog, Nanaia came in fastest, responding to my question within 20 minutes. Cunliffe came second, at around?

Yes, I thought it was likely to be futures, but went for the more generic "derivatives" (of which futures is a subset), just to be safe.

Except that they have been extremely accurate? I don't see how?

Articulating a?

I dunno, if I were a public servant?

It's an old Kiwi favourite. It's the thinking behind life insurance.

1. Mr Goff had the numbers according to Duncan Garner who said on TV that "the numbers" were published in mid July 2011, then again Mr Goff had them in front of him on TV (the Nation) and had to refer to?

They're not looking as 'strong and popular' as they were last term, tho'.

I dunno. We had a nationwide poll a couple of weeks back with a pretty low margin of error, showed they were up on last time.

I remember that was the case with National in 2008, they held off their tax cut "numbers" till the very last minute and then had to repeal?

Well, thanks to the vagaries of the electoral system, the Nacts will only have a slim majority with whatever coalition eventually gets stitched together. I reckon Johnny-boy is going to be under a bit of pressure in and outside the house this time?

He did?

Part of my nervousness with outKeying Key, is I think that Key's smile has nearly served out its time. Smiling in the face of challenges only works for a while, there's a point where it starts to look idiotic. He's going to start getting?

Please let's not use that as our baseline standard, eh? :)

Sadly answering emails is not all of 'engaging with the public'.

it would be enough
Unlikely.

Nature of the game I guess. But yes Labour must unify and both seem a fantastic combination and together has to get everyone in caucus at 100%. should work.

It doesn't have to be against, it could be alongside with respecting differences. We are all in this together type thing.

Yes it's a grid, you always end up at the beach ;)

True, but the media rarely broadcasts any clips from the House proceedings. It takes away screen time from their political reporters. And I guess there's too much to wade through?

Media attention is not unlimited. Non-government parties certainly need to work together this term.

See my previous comment.

I'll leave it, because your greater argument – that Cunliffe represents "the old system" – doesn't stand up to elementary logic. Just look at who's voting for whom,?

Because this isn't?

Note the past-tense that I used. I didn't start out as anti-Cunliffe, but – quite obviously – I am now.

There's a good reason why the "don't be a dick" rules that cede arbitrary authority?

Have I ever told you that I love you, Ben?

You never have.

Allow me to correct that oversight. I love you, Ben.

Yeah, that's true, FWIW. And I take what I assume to be your underlying point that the gloss will be coming off the Govt this term. Honeymoon's?

It depends on what we mean by `they'. I am uncomfortable with the idea that there has been swing to the right. After all, NAT+ACT+UF have?

1. The entire thing is broadcast on Parliament TV, which is on freeview, and free online. Anyone can knock themselves out watching as much as they want.

2. If by "rarely" you mean "most sitting days" then sure.?

Politicians are motivated by the desire to change things for the better (as they see it). But they quickly learn that you need a?

If I read him correctly he is objecting to Labour operating with very much the same patterns of behaviour that left them with an awful election result. To me this is less a criticism of Cunliffe, than a criticism of a grace and?

Absolutely, as I explained above in response to Rich. Act imploded. We got a different bunch of dicks in NZ First, but they?re not part of the Government.

A lot of the ACT vote, I would argue, went to the Conservatives. In?

More that because the honeymoon is over, Key and the Nat front bench aren't going to be able to devote as much of their time and energy?

Nope.

They haven't been extremely accurate (yet), because the events these contracts cover are still far from being determined.

Sure, but it's been around for many years now, and made a lot of very accurate predictions.

More to the point though, I don't?

A good point (assuming that the question is rhetorical). Yes, there is a strong `leadership' factor at work in Winston's following i.e. voting for the person as well as the policy platform.

Putting the Greens/Labour together gives something close to 40% of the electorate who?

Agreed. I can't think?

Pretty much bang on 40% (plus Mana) of the people who voted. Than there is the small matter of the third of the electorate who didn't vote.

That's hilarious – and suggests that their tactic worked. She even said at the time that she asked permission before she 'spoke out' against the Government's proposals, in order to shore?

However, the Vatican declined to say whether or not he shits in the woods...

Actually, opposition to mining was the only effective protest-based opposition against National's policy in the first term. The middle class in this country cares a lot?

I also hear that many of them have Sky.

We were up at Coopers Beach getting a warrant. The Mechanic issuing was complaining about " DPB bludgers across the road." The other half responded."Do you know if they have cars? he replied Yes. He then said, "Surely you'd be getting work off them then? He shut up?

Nanaia Mahuta has crossed the floor.

Sure I?m not a massive fan of Cunliffe. I think he should be living in his electorate, but hey many MPs don?t including Phil Goff. I do respect him though and his ability. I simply don?t know what Shearer?s ability is. He?s much newer and?

But given everything the Nats signalled and started doing in the previous few years, and it had no impact on their popularity whatsoever

That's an incredibly short time to try to pick long term trends over. Practically every?

On one level I guess it is hideously unfair, because?

These things matter in Auckland. Location, location location. I'm thinking an entertainer's kitchen with indoor/outdoor flow. Light charcoal paintwork?

And that is the mistake that Labour has made over the last three years*, in the most generous assessment I can make. In marketing, the rule of thumb is that it can take about three to four years to firmly embed a brand perception. As NZ?

Joyce had done exactly that every day of the campaign. Opposing strategists/managers would have to be spectacularly thick – or arrogant – to ignore that.

Credible financial management was also Key's opening line?

Agree. "I answered an email" , "I posted something in Beige Alert", "Someone on T' Standard noticed me" and so on amounts to "My imaginary friend agreed with me, so I'm really, really happy in a job well done"?

Cerytainly a lot of good work lately. Where do you find the time?

I suspect he's one of those people who thinks in complete paragraphs.

(As an engineer would say, the glass is not half full or half empty, but exceeds requirements by a factor of two. A larger capacity constitutes mission creep and the people at the Skunk Works would want a full renegotiation of the contract.)

Yeah, about that: I'm told that Cunliffe is doing quite well amongst the rank and file. So that begs the question: what positions has he offered them?

It's not even about Key's background, but basic retail politics. Hell,?

I've given up on that ever being delivered. Even if we get something, I'm not expecting to go "wow, that's so much?

Not to mention the cartellised nature of infrastructure in this country, and with only political cold feet standing in its way.

Allowing an unfettered monopoly to pay out 85% dividends to shareholders year after year may have something to do that in the case of our critical telecommunications network.

And Mike Munro I believe?

Oh well. Congratulations. Your hatchet job has at least made me notice the two candidates and listen to what they are saying. The result is I am more pro-Cunliffe. He?

Criticism of a PA blog post = unpleasant tone? Surely not.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6130205/Shearer-appears-to-have-the-numbers

Well done Keith. Did you sniff that out?

I am pretty ambivalent about this issue. The only time I've heard Cunliffe speak was a year ago,?

Huh? Shearer has had the numbers from day one.

I was referring to the fact that Shearer's front bench seems pretty settled. How did that happen without him offering roles to people? Beats me :-)

I realise also, that in light of the "nasty" comment above I should be using?

No, that trio if anything, has pretty much been obvious. Sorry but Keith posted a broad look at the Party and what could be pushing buttons behind the scenes, just as much other speculation has done. He is perfectly entitled to announce?

I'm going to play this out in advance: if Parker doesn't get finance, I'll apologise to Keith. If Parker gets finance, I'll say he?

Ha. I love the vast right-wing conspiracy aspect to this... or it could just be that the political?

Yup no quarrel with you on that point. But I'm sorry I found the tone in this discussion, especially that directed at Keith, to be unnecessarily unpleasant. PAS discusses vigorously and that is great, it's what we hope for, and for many?

No, you are not alone :)

I think as I set out I was disappointed in the tone of Keith's post. It set out to diagnose problems, then simply bagged Cunliffe's bid as the cause of those problems. Especially as I respect Keith as one of the best?

This is not about a difference of opinion.

I'm just researching some stuff for an end of year show at the moment. Big protests and mass coverage in Sept 2010 when the 90 day bill was announced, and on 1 April 2011 when it came?