Hard News: Dear John
83 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
If he doesn't display the obvious intellect of Helen Clark, he has made good use of a quality that often eluded Clark – charm.
I'm probably going to get spat on for saying this, but aren't Key and Clark almost identical in this respect:
I'm not a fan of parlour psychoanalysis, but I don't think anyone has really nailed the extent to which Clark was determined the bloody civil war that FUBAR'ed the Labour Party in the 80's and early 90's was just not going to happen on her watch. The Labour Party would be moderate, pragmatic and disciplined enough to be more than a one-term wonder. And if the ideological fringes of her own party didn't like that -- tough and chewy titty.
You don't have to look too hard to find folks nuking Key as a "Labour lite" squish, but it sure seems that Key has read the mood of an electorate not hungry for radical change better than his critics -- or, dare I say it, most of the commentariat who were convinced he was Ruth Richardson in man-drag who'd have New Zealand on Trade Me by lunch time on the day after the election.
On the other hand, the ground must surely be shifting on the feet of Phil Goff. Goff is competent, experienced, principled – and so far apparently devoid of the gifts of popular leadership. While some of his caucus have begun to deliver on promise (Charles Chauvel) or been rehabilitated in the hurly-burly of the blogosphere (Trevor Mallard), Goff seems stranded. And unlike the All Black coaching team, he doesn't have a contract that guarantees him the job until 2011.
And I certainly gag on saying this, but I suspect Goff is a convenient scapegoat for a Labour Party that seems to be in the same state National was nine years ago. It must be the psychic equivalent of a kick in the crotch of the find that, almost literally overnight, you're not top of the greasy pole anymore -- you don't have the resources, deference and sheer ability to set the agenda you had in Government. And you spend way too much time going through your five stages of grief and flailing around.
-
I'm probably going to get spat on for saying this, but aren't Key and Clark almost identical in this respect:
I'm not a fan of parlour psychoanalysis, but I don't think anyone has really nailed the extent to which Clark was determined the bloody civil war that FUBAR'ed the Labour Party in the 80's and early 90's was just not going to happen on her watch.
No spitting from me. I think there's something in that.
-
We'll hear "common sense" conjured as a means of diversion from troublesome advice – and perhaps we should be worried about that. Because sometimes "common sense" is the most dangerous thing.
Preach it, Russell! This is the main thing that really worries me about this government. The seemingly willful dismissal of policy based on evidence and research in favour of what feels right (e.g., Tolley's education standards), or what will appeal to the Talkback Taliban (e.g., car crushing). Other than that, I have to give it up for Key. Just after the election I spent a lot of time worrying that he was the cardboard cutout in front of a cabinet line-up of unreconstructed 1990s privatisers and razor-men - whom he would be powerless to stop if they decided to actually run the country.
Actually... I still worry about that. But he does actually seem - against all odds - to be in charge. Still, the qualities that appear to have gotten him there - and that appear to be maintaining his position - seem predicated on exactly that kind of appeal to truthiness that bothers me.
Actually... now I've just gone and talked myself out of the respect I just claimed I had for him...
-
As Albert Eienstein put it, Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen
-
No spitting from me. I think there's something in that.
It worked under Helen Clark. It's not working now, because it only works when you're able to paper over disputes in the service of winning. About now would be a good time for Labour to work out some of these issues.
-
I've never forgotten that hastily-canned tourism clip of Our John joyfully, boyishly even, extolling the virtues of NZ. It was the same persona that graced his Letterman performance - and that's what charms the folks at home. It's because he comes across as 'take me as I am, an ordinary guy made good'. I've even heard him refer with a laugh to his own muddly oration on TV news. He connects.
-
. I've even heard him refer with a laugh to his own muddly oration on TV news. He connects.
Just as, in a funny way, people connected with Helen Clark's rather flinty and awkward media persona as a sign of strength and seriousness. And I'm not being catty or misogynistic here -- Clark would be the first person to admit she's not a Bill Clinton-style media performer (neither is Key, come to that), and had to work damn hard to overcome her deep discomfort with the media.
-
Key has read the mood of an electorate not hungry for radical change
This seems about right - he's a perfect "modern conservative" in some ways. He gently reassures the country that we're going to keep truckin on because everything's pretty much fine as is.
That doesn't work for me personally, as I'd like to keep lifiting NZ in various ways, but works in the polls when you're at the tail end of a pretty sunny period in NZ history.It completely undermines his "keep the best and brightest in NZ" lines of course.
-
Just to remind a few people, 9 years ago Jenny Shipley was ...still, the new face of National.
There was a while to go before Bill English made his entrance on the Beehives Got Talent show.But dont you think its a bit strange that Joyce is being lauded ... so soon,as the the new John Key.
Once the Key children are on to University, I think the boy wonder will move on to fresh pastures -
I am keen to see how Key's leadership pans out - whether he has enough control over the zealotry to maintain his 'aw shucks' image and not to unleash policy that might scare the electorate; or whether he really is the cardboard cut-out figurehead for the razor-gang.
But at this stage, a year after the election win, it still seems to me that they have little or no actual policy other than maintaining most of the status quo and making up 'policy-lite' according to the whims of the public/electorate mood.
IMO Labour aren't engaging with anyone, they are just a feeble opposition at this stage. I don't know if this is because they are a riven party or it is just Goff's leadership style but it certainly isn't doing them any favours. They might feel that they have another 12 - 18 months before they have to front-up to the electorate but they might get to that point & discover that no-one is listening to them any longer.
-
It was the same persona that graced his Letterman performance - and that's what charms the folks at home.
Cue soft focus and soothing voiceover: It's morning again, in New Zealand.
From the "been here before" file ... Time magazine, on Ronald Reagan, 1986:
"Here is Reagan, still getting away with a campaign gambit, divorcing himself from any governmental action, even his own, that seems unpopular. He has an eerie gift for distancing himself from failures, for behaving, in a bizarre and cagey act of dissociation, as if what he had just done had nothing much to do with him, as if it had just vanished into the air, passed into nonexistence. ...
And Reagan committed so many press-conference fluffs and bumbles and misstatements and fantasies wrapped in anecdotes that eventually no one paid that much attention anymore, assuming that that was just the way Reagan was. Who cared? The results seemed to come out all right."
Policy debates are for pointy-heads and politicians. We have a President.
-
seemingly willful dismissal of policy based on evidence and research in favour of what feels right
Roughan offers a perfect example about Joyce:
Auckland's western ring road had to come into Waterview rather that take the more obvious route along the Rosebank Peninsula, he explained, because it had to be the city-to-airport route.
He'd been advised there was no doubt travellers from the city would take the northwestern motorway as far as Waterview before turning towards the airport but they would not go as far as Rosebank.
Figures, when you think about it.
Just lapping up the truthiness. Who on earth would have provided that advice? For out of towners, the Rosebank exit is the very next one, 3 easy kilometres further along the three-lane motorway.
Rosebank peninsula is also a major industrial spine concentrating freight transport - rather than low density residential suburbs like the chosen route. There were some engineering reasons against Rosebank, sure, but not the willingness of private car drivers to go another few kilometres at motorway speeds to get to the airport faster.
Do you have to be fawningly gullible to be a journo these days?
-
Policy debates are for pointy-heads and politicians. We have a President.
Even those who most shamelessly fawned over Reagan's supposed political skills would have probably conceded, in their most private moments, that there was some truth in the claim that he could never have a Watergate because nothing that important would ever land on his desk. While Key might appear a touch 'presidential', there doesn't seem to be any suggestion that he's anything like such a hands-off frontman.
-
Sacha, I do have to say that it feels like a really long way between Waterview and Rosebank. I know it's psychological, but I actually wouldn't be in the least bit surprised about the accuracy of that assumption.
Also, it's not the distance from Waterview to Rosebank that matters, but rather the distance from CMJ and the CBD. That extra three km is, what, another 50% of the CMJ-Waterview distance? More? -
Psychological? - it's a straight piece of three lane motorway over a causeway, free flowing at maximum speed except at evening peak.
It's 4.8km from CMJ to Waterview, then another 30km to the airport. Going to Rosebank adds about another 12th onto the journey. At the usual 100km/hr on that stretch, you're looking at another couple of minutes at most.
And that's assuming the route is mainly to get speeding cabinet ministers from central Auckland to the airport, as opposed to connect masses of freight and travellers in an alternative north-south connection from Manukau to Joyce's home in Albany.
-
I am keen to see how Key's leadership pans out - whether he has enough control over the zealotry to maintain his 'aw shucks' image and not to unleash policy that might scare the electorate; or whether he really is the cardboard cut-out figurehead for the razor-gang.
There are people who will go to their graves absolutely convinced that Helen Clark spent nine years as the finger-puppet of a Marxist-femiNazi-homosexual cabal of unmitigated malevolence -- though a remarkably ineffectual one, if you're foolish enough to let any reality into that room. How the hell do you disprove a conspiracy theory?
-
So who are the real beneficiaries of the Waterview connection?
The residents of Epsom.
-
Craig,
There’d be just as many people convinced she was more than just the finger puppet for that cabal too.
Want to know where to find them?
-
Sacha, hate to break it to you but all the intellect in the world can't convince me that it doesn't feel like a long way from Waterview to Rosebank. I know the hard data, but it feels like a very long way.
Also, if it's 4.8km from CMJ to Waterview, that 3km from Waterview to Rosebank means that CMJ-Rosebank is 62.5% further than CMJ-Waterview. So thank you for confirming to me that 3km is a hell of a long way relative to the distance from CMJ, but you haven't done a damned thing to convince me not to feel like it's a long way between Waterview and Rosebank.
-
So who are the real beneficiaries of the Waterview connection?
The residents of Epsom.
Epsom is the only suburb through which vehicles travel to the airport? Really? I'm sure the residents of Royal Oak, Mt Roskill, Hillsborough, Waterview, Avondale, New Windsor, Rosebank, New Lynn, Te Atatu and sundry other suburbs that lie between the Southern and North-Western motorways and the South-Western motorway will be relieved to hear that they actually imagine that their suburbs are utilised as conduits for airport-bound traffic originating from throughout the isthmus north of Greenlane.
-
his political vision has been quite parsimonious in my view
This
I have a good friend who is as far right in his views as I am left. We both agree on this point - John Key has no vision for New Zealand whatsoever. His only interest is to get re-elected. And so policy is decided by essentially avoiding down-side risk over the 3 year time frame.
New Zealand as a country and as an economically or socially viable entity are irrelevant. The only thing of importance is getting elected.
Hence education policy, city planning, retirement policy, ACC policy, taxation policy are all to be dealt with expediently (urgently?) and with as little risk of dissent as possible and no view to the long term issues.
As for Goff, I'm less worried. I really think it is irrelevant what the polls say this year or the next. New Zealand voters have at best a 12 month memory and mostly closer to 6 months. There is no point in trying to win over voters now and Labour and Goff know that. What happens 12 months from the election is what matters and that's when Goff must shine. In many ways engineering the polls so that Goff is rising and Key falling from 12 to 6 months out is probably the ideal and hence paradoxically having Goff low in the polls now is probably a good thing.
-
Matthew, I'm not counting on changing your perception any more than Roughan's but the example given was the route to the airport, not just the first stretch along the motorway.
-
WTF is this CMJ that has entered the frame wrt the motorway?
And if the airport link was to have gone via Rosebank Rd people would have no real option but to go the designated route. -
the only commentator in the country to declare himself "in awe" of Anne Tolley's performance as Education minister
Does thinking she's awful count?
-
New Zealand voters have at best a 12 month memory and mostly closer to 6 months. There is no point in trying to win over voters now and Labour and Goff know that.
National are doing a spectacular job of setting themselves up as one-term wonders. Think it through. ACC changes will be legislated next year (after the report from Caygill's group is delivered, which is scheduled for June), which means probably in October if there's no unseemly use of urgency; something that National have signalled won't happen. Changes to ACC will be implemented in sync with the tax year, meaning April 2011. The report will potentially open the way for "competition" in other accounts, and that's easily turned into a Yank-style tort-horrors bogeyman.
The RWC is shaping up to be a total shambles. Public transport in Auckland is going nowhere fast, and people won't care that Labour could've got us electric trains in time. The blame will be laid right at Joyce's feet, and he certainly has to shoulder a lot of blame. Similarly it's looking very unlikely that we'll have integrated ticketing, and that one is even more squarely Joyce's failure. I won't go near the TV debacle, either, but we all know that that hot potato is likely to end up looking more like a certain green stem fruit.
Both of those things will be forefront in the public's collective consciousness come the election. Unless the AB's can reverse history and do the business at the RWC, National will be facing down a very hostile electorate at the election right at a time when a number of their policies will be festering nicely, ripe for Labour to bandy about.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.