Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, February 5th, 2026 - 28 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Even if Keir Starmer survives February as UK Prime Minister, the Party will have to face their catastrophic polling decline. He’s toast.
But worse, this was the time when Reform's rise was finally dented. Now Starmer is going to hand the political momentum back.
But worse, apart from Finland and Sweden the demise of the UK Labour government will mean across the whole of Europe only Sweden and Finland have left-leaning governments.
In South East Asia and Oceania there's Albanese's Labor government including 5 states.
The final enclave of left government in power is South America. Where most of them in various forms are solidly left bar Argentina which is the standard cot-case.
So, much as one might be happy to see the rapid end of a centrist Prime Minister in the UK, it's one of the last of a traditional centre-left government in power anywhere. And the alternatives are entirely untested other than in minor coalitions.
Not a good day for the left.
This UK Labour government was built on sand.
It was a result of the visceral hatred of the Tory Party and of Boris. The voters elected the people they though were most likely to oust the Conservatives.
Unfortunately, Starmer has squandered even that flimsy mandate with his timidity and lack of any kind of real leadership and vision.
I think you may be a little bit out of date.
After the 1922 election Sweden formed a right wing coalition Government of the Moderate, Christian Democrat and Liberal parties and with support from the right wing Sweden Democrats.
I don't follow Swedish politics very much but I believe it is still going.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Sweden
Double irony! Who’s a little out of date now? Also, it only enforces Ad’s argument.
Yes, the continued collapse of the left does support his view.
And it is going to continue.
Why not just accept that the fact that left leaning political efforts, such as those of the last New Zealand Government, fail to provide benefits for the populations they are inflicted on? Try the approaches taken by the Singapore Government which adopts a realistic attitude to what works, even if it can sometimes seem harsh.
My observation on the decline of the left in Government other than in South America isn't new. I recall seeing good articles on it in The Economist back in 2018.
But we do need to accept that New Zealand is now a broadly centre-right country, and it takes a tough combination of outstanding campaigns and Prime Ministerial candidates and tired conservatives to get a Left government in power here.
It's getting harder. And even the Labour we could get in power in 2026 sure ain't going to have the same ambition as the Ardern 2020 government.
My hero and benchmark for effective and long lasting government is Helen Clark ably supported by Cullen and a bank of talented front bench.
Should the statement be "the decline of the left in Government in the Western World". As long as China remains a predominately Communist state it still remains common outside the West.
The problem I see is that the idea of a democracy where alternative views are debated rather than just declared invalid as being unacceptable is becoming less common. Putin and Trump are both leaning that way and it also becoming the norm in many other countries.
Here we are getting pressure to say that ideas are simply to be declared wrong and alternative views are banned. Take the view that the climate change we are having is exclusively man-caused is not allowed to be questioned.
What alternative views are banned?
It was questioned. First denial. Then after acceptance, other arguments were made for not doing much about it.
I could see why you'd say that if one went straight by the label of China's official term of "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" along a very Leninist Marxist model.
But no, I make a pretty clear distinction between the "left" broadly conceived and China's Leninist Marxism. You might want to have a look at Tony Judt's "Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945" for a clearer sense.
The "left" broadly conceived after WW2 certainly has a very strong role for the state including in economic planning, but unlike China:
(I'm going to leave the left's propensity for identitarian politics for now).
So there's still a strong institutional state like China in a leftist conception, but unlike China a strong distributive state which redistributes to give effect to stronger human rights.
Which is a long way of saying I view China as more totalitarian Marxist than "left", so I didn't include them.
Sometimes, you can be entertaining.
So, the Left is bad, Singapore is good.
Since there are hardly any left-leaning governments left in the world (i.e., Ad’s argument), things must be looking up or going well then.
Norm Kirk said it well:
Singapore – a city state with public housing and government investment led direction of the economy.
You meant 2022 and I get your point.
I hadn't noticed and, at the time I read it Inco's pointing it out was a bit too subtle for me. I badly needed another cup of coffee.
Look on the bright side.
The Labour Party has years more in government and the Reform-Tory axis is a house of cards that will lose support to Liberal Democrats.
The Green party is demonstrating that progressive politics has support.
On the other hand, if Starmer is dependent on his handler for the centre-right, Morgan Machiavelli, then he will be rolled at some point by his caucus.
That solved and with Raynor back on board, he might last the 5 years.
With migration down, house prices are flatlining etc.
In another parallel world UK Labour would now invite the Greens into a coalition.
@Visub @ 1.1
"Unfortunately, Starmer has squandered even that flimsy mandate with his timidity and lack of any kind of real leadership and vision."
And where did Hipkins go to get ideas from?
Sigh.
Exactly gsays. And did Seymour spend time in Canadian politics? It's a form of cultural cringe to just follow what the bigger more powerful gummints, parties are doing. No internal conviction mixed with practicality at all, and no interest in the supposed ethos of one's own country. It just political parties competing and coming up with a new dish du jour that can be sold to the peeps at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe!
Expect the word vanadium to pass the lips of fossil breath.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/business/360944860/fast-track-expert-panel-declines-taranaki-seabed-mining-scheme-draft-decision
The doctrine of NZ Initiative
From the position that parliament rules, on the behalf of voters, in the name of the Crown.
What does he mean?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/585236/nearly-40-percent-of-voters-think-treaty-of-waitangi-has-too-much-influence-on-government-decisions-poll
https://www.facebook.com/ShaneJones.nz/posts/900133202631884/
Inconvenient historical details
Back in the 1850's the settler parliament determined on a course to acquire or annex Maori land without any Maori participation.
The 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act
The government that wrote the 1986 legislation also referenced the Treaty in legislation.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/the-crown-versus-the-people-reclaiming-new-zealands-democratic-story-roger-partridge/
https://archive.li/uwGDe#selection-4015.0-4227.235
SPC that's fantastic news re seabed mining. Yeah!!!
We just hit Peak Jones.
To Ad above (sorry reply not working).
You forgot Pedro Sanchez and PSOE, supported by Sumar and Podemos in Spain.
This grouping, along with a number of other small parties, is doing some excellent leftish things, and the economy is doing very well under them.
Adding to the good news about the draft decision to decline South Taranaki seabed mining, Santana Minerals got told they will have to endure 140 days of Fast Track hearing and scrutiny before they find out if, and in what form, they can have their goldmine at Bendigo. Santana seem to have taken it on the chin and accepted the process, which is a contrast to their earlier behaviour demanding a 30 day process.
The acceptance is also a bit of a backdown from the day before where they issued a statement to ASX saying that CODC had "endorsed" the project. The CODC "endorsement" related to the use / lease of some CODC land if / when the project went ahead. Naturally the CODC Mayor was a bit miffed and responded. I'd say ASX will have something to say as well.
It transpired that Santana had proceeded with the Fast Track application without agreement with Ngai Tahu. Lopping the top off a mountain is something Iwi are going to be more than a little interested in and it's going to be a lengthy and in-depth process to get agreement. It's going to put cultural and political views on landscape and whenua front and centre through the election period if the applicant, and political backers, want to push the point. There might be a rather big 'if' in my last sentence. Well see.
Well, thats as maybe. Also, IMO just maybe, she should have had (now maybe has) had a word with CODC CEO Peter Kelly about the smiling, hand shaking, photo shoots with Santana's Damian Spring…
“Mr Kelly has been involved in extensive negotiations with Santana, under delegated authority, after a number of public excluded meetings held by CODC councillors. The council has declined to disclose to Crux the full nature, decision making or extent of Mr Kelly’s delegated authority to sign deals with Santana.”
https://cruxnz.substack.com/p/santana-mine-company-on-collision?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=275581&post_id=186683368&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=44sm22&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
The delegated authority thing is always going to have trust issues in the community. Doing it out in the open is going to have trust issues with the applicant / developer. There's been a lot of mistrust and doubt around Lakeview development in ZQN but outcomes there point towards a deal that was difficult for the developer to meet. Peter Kelly's smiles could be that he got a pretty good deal for the community.
140 days has resulted in a strangely polite Mr Spring however. I'm wondering if these guys haven't shot their bolt and it's downhill from here. The Crux piece is pretty scathing about the problems have with their application, they'll need all of 140 days to get through that. And then there's Ngai Tahu.
Can't see this proceeding as currently proposed, and it's going to be a full volume, full body contact, process as it coincides with the election period. There could be casualties.
are there any local bodies/orgs that want the mines to go ahead?
Local government is being very measured in their responses and actions. They have to be or the whole process gets derailed.
Santana are trying to force through the lowest cost option to maximise profit, they're there to make money so naturally they are going to do that. In many ways they seem to have seen the Fast Track process as a vehicle to expedite that, when it is actually about processing mostly compliant applications without the interference of vexatious interference that hold up many RMA processes. Fast Track is still a very through process and some applicants are finding if rather tough. South Taranaki seabed mining the first example.
Reports that would have taken months under an RMA process, mainly to keep costs approachable to applicants, are now required in days, this costs.
There's a lot of support for the idea of mining in Central, there's a lot of opposition too, and a lot who want to see what other options there are that might enable the gold resource to be utilised and retain or even enhance existing environmental, landscape, economic and lifestyle values. Trying to force this conversation into a 30 or even 140 day timeframe is unlikely to reach a viable consensus.
There's this FaceBook group, it's pretty grass roots so far, kinda dam smoko room gossip but there's some reason and criticism. Still got 3.2K members in a couple of weeks though.
https://www.facebook.com/share/g/17yiDwXKZ8/
I was meaning the councils, DOC, NGOs etc. Isn’t it quite a line up preparing to submit against?