63 Comments
User's avatar
Robin Capper's avatar

It amazes me that the 'great negotiator', former CEO don't you know, gifted so much power, policy, and prominence to his minor (in votes) partners.

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

Luxon needs ACT as a strawman to implement the distasteful policies that he wants to implement, but doesn’t want the taint on his own hands. And he simply wants to be President…er.. PM and he’ll crawl into bed with anyone to achieve that aim. Just look at the constant self promotion/aggrandisement

Expand full comment
Robin Capper's avatar

PS, the 'Line by line' man lacks detail?

Expand full comment
David D's avatar

Chris Luxon weak! You should critique NZ media. On the latest QnA Jack Tame and TVNZ were shamelessly shilling for the racist apartheid state of Israel, running cover for the unconscionable and blatant genocide being committed against. Pity the poor innocent Palestinian souls subjected to Israel’s brutality and pity is Kiwis poorly served by pathetic journalism. Unlike Ireland, Spain, Nicaraguan et al, NZ has greatly diminished in terms of an independent voice punching above its weight in this troubled world.

https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2404/S00138/israeli-ambassador-to-new-zealand-s-unchallenged-on-tvnz-q-a-programme-allowed-to-spread-misinformation-and-untruths.htm

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Yes Israel's response to the October 7 attack is very disproportionate and a lot of innocent Palestinian civilians have been killed and made homeless. But when it comes to civilian casualties of war let's remember that the Allies' victory in World War II owned no small part to intensive bombing of civilian populations in Germany and Japan and dropping the atom bombs on the civilian cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Expand full comment
David D's avatar

It’s not about Israel’s war crimes post and pre October 7th, it’s the woeful reporting from NZ media and our diminishing relevance in the international community. It’s clear that Israel is a racist apartheid state that is committing genocide and has been committing atrocities against Palestinians and disregarded international law for decades.

Expand full comment
David's avatar

"our diminishing relevance in the international community" - yes agree re this. It seems like a long time ago when NZ was last on the UN Security Council in 2015-16 and before that Helen Clark was a PM who pushed for our status in the international community to be maximised.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

What's your evidence that Israel is a rasist state David?

Expand full comment
David D's avatar

The way they treat ethnic citizens of occupied Palestine. I’ve also reap accusations that they have racist policies in regards to black Ethiopian Jewish citizens of Israel.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

Palestinians are not a race.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

And there is no evidence that there is any discrimination against Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Of course their attentions between the different ethnical groups the same tensions that exist in New Zealand and in Australia and in America.

Expand full comment
David D's avatar

I’m not going to get into that debate with you, I’m anti-semantic. Keep educating the kaka fraternity, but be cool. Peace.

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

Area bombing of the civilian populations of both Germany and England had little impact on either public morale or critical production. OTOH Hiroshima and Nagasaki did instantly end the war

Expand full comment
Garry Moore's avatar

I watched this today and it did challenge my black and white approach to this topic

It's an address by the son of one of the founders of Hamas at the United Nations https://youtu.be/pjOEJumoABg?si=K7L-p_G-Tt1wkKJV

Expand full comment
Mike C's avatar

I think its become clear that National didnt really do much in opposition. It's not just Lee but most of them seemed to used their spokesperson role as a platform to complain about the government, but it seems like their work to develop policy beyond a one-liner "we'll give tax cuts" for example has only started once in Government.

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

Actually they did. Let's not forget Chris Bishop "... the job of the opposition was to gum up the works to stop Governments from governing"

Expand full comment
Sarah Sutherland's avatar

I thought that was simon bridges but i could be wrong

Expand full comment
Keith Simes's avatar

A bit rich Nick Leggett talking about a free lunch now when he did so much lobbying to fill our roads with bigger and more destructive trucks - remember councils saying that the trucking industry wasn’t paying for the damage they caused. What are the odds on Simeon’s new e-charges being fair?

Expand full comment
Andrew P's avatar

Guess two measures on fairness:

Are charges directly related to weight and distance travelled.

Is there an alternative mode of transport- ie other than AirNZ?

Expand full comment
VoiceofReason's avatar

Well rail wont be an option if Simeon gets his way. He seems to have an active dislike for Rail as a mode of transport and what with the defunding of new Ferries decision it plays beautifully into Air NZ 's monopolistic hands

Expand full comment
Andrew P's avatar

Well no conflict of interest there surely?

Expand full comment
Robert L Taylor's avatar

always remember:

the damage to a road caused by one fully loaded truck and trailer is greater than the damage caused by ten thousand (10,000) medium cars

therefore, if a car is charged/tolled 0.1 cents per km then a truck and trailer unit should be charged/tolled $10 per km. obviously that will not be done/happen.

Expand full comment
Carolyn Röhm's avatar

Both flavours of government seem to do endless reviews. I would be fascinated to know how many reviews have been done, what the recommendations were and how many times the same recommendations have been made, just in new reviews.

How do we get a better crop in politicians? Ones who care about all the people, are prepared and do the right (sometimes hard) thing?

Expand full comment
Alice Miller's avatar

For starters we need a better way to protect MPs from bullying and threats, that is off putting for many I think

Expand full comment
Tracy Harrison's avatar

Agreed. Rory Stewart put it bluntly in his interview with Alex O' Connor: as a politician you're forced to die inside. https://youtu.be/nXGzxJoLhwg?si=pce4lNg0yiIise6-

Expand full comment
Sarah Sutherland's avatar

Thanks that was a really interesting interview, I liked particularly the bit in the middle about how difficult it is to get things built in england because it is hard to measure things like beauty and the temptation to go away with all the planning regulations so you can build the x number of houses and in z years time you have just created hideous cities

Expand full comment
Merav Benaia's avatar

Political parties mostly don't appreciate outside the box thinkers and those willing to rock the boat. And you can't get elected unless you belong to a party.

On top of that, those who vote tend to prefer the status quo. So unless those who stand to lose from the current system go out and vote, nothing will change.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

Why Merav? We have the Opportunity party who think outside the box. We have the cannabis party. There are other parties out there. Just not enough people supporting them to get them into power. In Israel the threshold to get into parliament is 2.5% for example, so a lot more parties are represented. Way too many in fact which causes significant political problems. So part of the problem may be our high 5% threshold rather than absence of ideas?

Expand full comment
Merav Benaia's avatar

With the shit show that is the elections in Israel I would not look at it as a model for anything.

Having said that, our MMP system could probably do with some tweaks to make it better.

Specifically about TOP, I was actually considering them until they ruled out working with Labour. And after not succeeding in the elections Raf Manji chose to move on instead of staying and building a movement.

Expand full comment
Bernard Hickey's avatar

Sadly, they are a reflection of what the median voter wants.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

Have not we had one of those Carolyn? Jacinda?

Expand full comment
Carolyn Röhm's avatar

@Alister: we need a better crop, one person does not make a government. She has charisma, and talks an excellent game; but led a government that (imo) did not do nearly enough in terms of tackling housing, health, mental health, education, our environment or the climate crisis. She managed to alienate a significant proportion of the population by labelling whole industries as ‘bad’. In addition, she led a government that started with so many reviews.

Perhaps I’m naive, but I expect the opposition to do more than bark at every passing car. I expect them to do the work and have an actual thought through and well evaluated plan so that they understand the impacts of their actions when implemented. Despite having reviews out the wazoo, we’re still seeing the same problems; they haven’t gone away.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

100% agree Carolyn. But I guess she came the closest to being the sort of politician you ask for. I do not think that in a democracy it is possible to have a politician who cares for all. Politicians are elected and need to cater for their constituencies. Politicians who care for all have no chance of being elected. Who will vote for a politician who cares about landlords and tenants at the same time for example? This is why labour tried to vilify landlords so much. To gain renters votes. It shot the renters in the foot while doing it, and sis not get the votes. The bottom line in my view is that Politics is necessarily partisan and politicians represent interests.

Expand full comment
Carolyn Röhm's avatar

Agree with you re politicians by definition need to stand for something. I suppose I would just like the elected government to govern the whole country and work towards prosperity for all, rather than focussing on their ‘mates’ and selected interests at the expense of actual people.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

Tounge in cheek response for you Carolyn 😃. A politician of the kind you look for exists! https://youtu.be/-_YQgCDxpXQ?si=sHsDGPU_0UdLkTox

Expand full comment
Carolyn Röhm's avatar

😂

Expand full comment
Robert L Taylor's avatar

your seventh sentence is erroneous/false/incorrect/untruthful.

The current government has enacted extremely immoral nasty legislation that gives residential rental property investors and speculators a colossal financial advantage over people who are buying/purchasing a dwelling for themself (and family). it is a terrible injustice they (the current government) have perpetrated against people who want to buy/purchase a dwelling for themself (and family).

Always remember both Labour and National governments have for years given and continue to give residential rental property owners billions of dollars accommodation supplement (renters/tenants are only intermediaries).

Expand full comment
Sarah Sutherland's avatar

Actually Jacinda did not label whole industries as bad she was accused of that by people like Judith Collins saying she hated farmers. Part of the reason of not getting a deal with the agricultural sector re Green house emissions she was really trying to get consensus so that any action would not be overturned and maybe was naive not to understand many were acting in bad faith and had no intention to do anything just delaying things until National got back into power.

Expand full comment
Alister's avatar

She was happy to vilify landlords. That's a group of people. The current hatred toward landlords has all been built during her era and was supported and encouraged by her and the labour party.

Expand full comment
Tracy Harrison's avatar

Come along team Kaka, let's get this over the 100-uptick mark, and share today's Kaka like crazy!!!

Bernard, your words about the status quo ring true. There is nothing quite like the massive inertia of the status quo.

One of our human delusions is that in the face of the evidence that this is not so, we think that because it ever was thus (or so it feels), so it must be forever more.

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

Done.

Expand full comment
Bernard Hickey's avatar

Done and many thanks. Open now.

Expand full comment
Francisco Blaha's avatar

that language... open to business (when were we closed?), blatant financial mismanagement (so why are we still AAA?), growth for all (so why do they kick people out of work so others can get tax rates?), I'm a businessman, so I make executive decisions (yet your coalition partners are out there doing things as if they had a voting majority!). It is all just posturing and treating people like idiots who don't know what they need. I work in countries that had their independence only a few decades ago, and I see that contempt for the locals from the former colonial masters in the form of "rich saviourism"... Shut up: we know better what is good for you!.

I'm having the same feeling about this goverment back home now.

Expand full comment
Andrew Riddell's avatar

Those comments from the Infrastructure NZ lobby group CEO show a lack of awareness of

- what being a currency-issuing government means for funding infrastructure, and

- the very real privacy issues around real time tracking of vehicles, and

- the need, as Bernard points out, for alternative routes/modes to roads being charged for in order to avoid regressive measures against those on lower incomes.

Expand full comment
Rob C's avatar

Imagine what the Reality Check Radio crowd will make of their every car journey being tracked and recorded.

Expand full comment
Waikato Matt's avatar

I'm not remotely in the Reality Check radio sphere but part of me feels uneasy about real time tracking especially, as Andrew points out, privacy issues. I know there is the ability for number plate tracking on a limited basis but full time tracking... I agree road use needs to be charged fairly but is real time tracking the way to go?

Expand full comment
Rob C's avatar

Totally agree, real-time tracking seems like a terrible idea.

Just imagine the logistics of the installation process for a start, and somehow making it tamper- proof. I would not want anyone messing with my cars to install the things.

Expand full comment
Andrew Riddell's avatar

And enforcement - how do you stop cars driving around without one of these snooping devices?

Expand full comment
Sarah Melville's avatar

I would imagine that tracking erodes trust and therefore has a corrosive effect on moral / motivation / loyalty / productivity?

Expand full comment
Merav Benaia's avatar

I would add personal safety issues. Who will make sure your personal driving habits don't get shared accidently? What about those running away from family violence?

Instead of applying the logic staring at us - build rail (!) they are looking to complicate things in order to maintain a solution not fit for purpose.

Expand full comment
Hamersley's avatar

Wow, never thought I’d be ok with a cut from National, but I despise SaaS businesses and wouldn’t be mad if these businesses had less help from gov. I’ve heard SaaS referred to as ‘subscription serfdom’ and I find it an apt description.

I remember the good old days when you’d buy an Adobe product and own it, and it was fine. Now you have to pay monthly and overall a lot more for a subpar product.

Expand full comment
Andrew P's avatar

It’s those rentiers again!

Expand full comment
Hamersley's avatar

Exactly! Maybe National don't realise it fits their landlord class mindset? I recently came across a company called ONCE. They were the original developers of the software that now powers things like Spotify.

"Today, most software is a service. Not owned, but rented. Buying it enters you into a perpetual landlord–tenant agreement. Every month you pay for essentially the same thing you had last month. And if you stop paying, the software stops working. Boom, you’re evicted." https://once.com/

Expand full comment
Bernard Hickey's avatar

Ha! Software landlords! Never thought of it like that.

Luckily there's no such thing as news landlords...

Expand full comment
David's avatar

In today's world of employees being expected to log in from anywhere and often on their phone, the web-based SaaS model is where we're at. I partly agree re the govt programme though - NZ SaaS companies should perhaps only be eligible for it if they're early-stage and not if they're making healthy profits.

Expand full comment
Hamersley's avatar

I've worked remote for the last 7 years and our org only has one SaaS program, Adobe. And even then we just share the one account between 20 of us (thankfully we don't use it too often). We're a not for profit, we can't afford SaaS products even if we wanted to use them.

Expand full comment
Sarah Melville's avatar

I wish to contest the punctuation of today's 'rolling' quote of the day.

After "me" replace comma with period product. tiktok tiktok.

This is how I roll. This is how I lead. This is simply about me. Looking across my team, I want to make sure I've got my aces in their places.” PM Christopher Luxon in a news conference announcing the reshuffle.

Expand full comment
WendtK's avatar

Brilliant range of info on here Bernard. Heaps of detail to set me off on weekend follow ups.

I keep thinking of the Underground - in war. You give us many clues to protest but can we also look for ways to pull rugs out from under foot? Sorry if this sounds nuts but I feel that is a method used a lot by the “right”

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

But he has yet to come up with this..."Giving people a heads-up going forward to maximise potential synergies across several silo-ed platforms thereby ensuring policy-relevant key performance indicators that are time-bound and minimise positivism deficits"

Expand full comment
jb's avatar

"apply user charges at different rates per kilometre for travelling on different roads at different times in vehicles with different weights."

The CEO of a low cost carrier in the UK I worked closely with once said "I try not to employ too many graduates. They'll come along and twiddle around with a perfectly functioning simple system to make it more complicated purely to justify their salary and existence. I like simple"

Road damage is a function of axle load. Tax heavier vehicles more.

Distance travelled drives emissions for ICEs. Use a mix of fixed and variable charges to influence driver/owner behaviour. A higher base tax based on specific emission and measure distance travelled by using odometer readings taken every 6 months at WoF inspections and charge retrospectively for km driven.

Implement variable tolls or time-zoned congestion pricing via plate recognition.

Each of these measure has a hardwired and easily recognisable incentive - the lighter your vehicle, the less you pay. The cleaner your vehicle, the less you pay. The less you drive, the less you pay. Traffic jams need traffic - reduce traffic density and you reduce traffic jams.

Full disclosure: Not a graduate. I like simple.

Expand full comment
Bernard Hickey's avatar

Many thanks to all our paying subscribers. We got over 100 likes. So I’ve opened this one up for public reading, listening and sharing. Only paying subscribers can comment.

Expand full comment
B Insull's avatar

Thank you again Bernard.

Expand full comment