Open Mike 08/09/2026

Written By: notices and features - Date published: - 63 comments
Categories: open mike


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 …

63 comments on “Open Mike 08/09/2026”

Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.

      1. 1.1.1

        Also where are they going to get their stock from. The Warehouse couldn't make inroads in the grocery sector because both supermarket chains have their suppliers under trading exclusions, that is the supplier can't supply anyone else or new, so how is the Green's idea going to work.

        It's these exclusive supply arrangements that are the barrier to more players. They are common in business and the benefit goes both ways, protecting both, or either, the supplier and wholesale customer. And some would argue the retail customer benefits as well through lower wholesale costs.

        "Market Theory" might say that more competition will give lower prices, but our current duopoly might actually be the most efficient model in our market. I doubt the Green Party's idea will do much more than snipe around the edges, much like The Warehouse does at present, cost a huge amount that could be better spent elsewhere, and get shutdown at the first change of government.

        1. 1.1.1.1

          It's these exclusive supply arrangements that are the barrier to more players.

          Their anticompetitiveness would surely provide grounds for making them illegal.

          1. 1.1.1.1.1

            Mutual exclusivity agreements are surprisingly common in retail trade in NZ. And usually both parties are very keen on them. Things like the retailer can't stock competing brands, and the supplier can't supply competing retailers. It happens in most sectors and at all levels. And sometimes they are absolutely insidious. But since both parties have agreed to it, and both are operating in a "competitive" environment not much that can be done about it, except by specific legislation.

        2. 1.1.1.2

          All very good in theory however the 2 x Players in the Industry have got everything Locked Up. The horse has bolted a long time ago.

          1. 1.1.1.2.1

            I wouldn't want to see the Greens sending horses to the knackers yard, but as a metaphor it would make a certain amount of sense.

    2. 1.2

      Are the good people of raetihi and ohakune going to get cheap food, and what happens to the people that own the 4 square, once their lively hood is forcibly acquired?

      where have the Greens said 4Square owners would be forced to sell?

      1. 1.2.1

        They're the only shop for the poor people in raetihi, so if the greens aren't providing for them then what's the point, driving to whanganui is not really an option I'm picking and fuel will get rid of any savings anyway.

        1. 1.2.1.1

          As someone who lives in teh country I agree, the policy isn't going to save costs for everyone. Small suppliers, and further from main distribution lines, always charge more, so the current system is already a problem. I think there are other ways to address that.

          1. 1.2.1.1.1

            But afaik the policy is to force the two big chains to sell some of their big stores to Kiwi Mart. I don't think those are small owner/operator stores.

        2. 1.2.1.2

          Many will be travelling to Whanganui regularly anyway, for other purposes, and would probably do their supermarket shopping at the same time.

        3. 1.2.1.3

          And who owns foursquare? The little man in a long white apron with a friendly face? Traces of citizen sentiment remain with that image and Raetihi no doubt feels part of that.

          Graeme has put up deep and meaningful factors about our supermarket food chain – that is becoming tight around our necks!

  3. 3

    National are wrecking this country. Labour should be cleaning up.

    Yet, Labour are struggling to get any traction in recent polls.

    Could it be Labour are seen as not offering enough to help with the number one issue, the cost of living?

    Is it they are losing the tax debate, failing to explain the benefits and dire need for tax reform? Thus, haven't offered enough in this space?

    Is it a trust thing? Largely the same faces deemed to have failed to deliver last time in power? Hence, do they need a big clean out?

    Or is it a combination of all of the above? Meaning they have a hell of a lot to do and not much time to do it if they want to win the election

    1. 3.1

      Ask ordinary voters (not political devotees, but not ignorant either, just regular voters) to name 3 Labour policies. Preferably 3 the voters like, but any 3 will do.

      Their lack of answer is the answer.

      Remember Helen Clark's pledge card, when she was opposition leader? Everyone (more or less) knew what was on it.

      2. 3.1.2

        Frequently asked questions about Labour's 2026 policies

        Labour's 2026 election policies include:

        • a fiscal strategy to return to surplus by 2029/30 and reduce debt while growing the economy
        • a $20 weekly public transport fare cap
        • three free doctor's visits each year for every New Zealander
        • free prescriptions from July 2027
        • free maternity scans from July 2028
        • free cervical screening for ages 25-69 from 1 October 2027
        • the Family Doctor Loan Scheme to create 4.5 million new GP visits
        • the New Zealand Future Fund to invest in Kiwi businesses
        • expanding the Apprenticeship Boost to support more tradies and young people
        • solar without the upfront cost for homeowners, renters and communities
        • a Small Business Action Plan covering payment times, an asset write-off and a higher GST threshold
        • putting Small Business first with a fair shot at work and less time dealing with the government
        • backing Māori into skilled work with Māori-led training
        • a job guarantee for every eligible graduate nurse
        • a simple targeted capital gains tax on investment property profits to fund health

        https://www.labour.org.nz/our-policies/

          1. 3.1.2.1.1

            Thanks, but I’d like to see those ‘pledges’, ‘promises’, ‘commitments’, etc., in B&W on Labour’s web site, preferably as or in considered policies rather than off the cuff comments made in the spur of a moment. Such comments can always be walked back, as we know too well from Loose-Lips-Luxon.

            1. 3.1.2.1.1.1

              We were just chatting at smoko about Labour's poor comms.

              My boss hadn't heard we were promised a pay rise and they still don't have it on their website. It makes me question their competence or sincerity.

              To lighten the mood he showed me a clip from Carpool Coalition on FB. Episode 7 is quite funny.

              1. 3.1.2.1.1.1.1

                Yes, get it in writing and always follow up in writing. There are too many smooth talkers who talk shit to further their own agenda.

        3. 3.1.2.3

          Three free GP visits for all NZers is casting the net too wide. I don't agree with the taxpayer meeting the cost for those on middle and higher incomes.

          Perhaps there won't be enough GPs to meet the demand if Labour tries this policy. Does anyone know?

          1. 3.1.2.3.1

            People on middle and higher incomes also pay taxes (incl. the CGT, for some).

            Affordability, accessibility, availability, something will be limiting for some people in some places at some times. Obviously, Labour is not oblivious to the pressures on primary health care, as you can tell from this early-released policy: https://www.labour.org.nz/familydoctorloanscheme.

    3. 3.3

      I am reasonably convinced that when the campaign starts in earnest, the polls will turn.

      One question that every voter needs to ask themself is New Zealand and my life better or worse than it was 3 years ago. Then a follow up question is, will the current CoC with their current policies improve things in the next 3 years.

      Once those questions are asked I can't see how we have anything but a change in government in 2 months.

      1. 3.3.1

        What makes you think voters haven't already asked themselves those questions?

        Further, is that the only reason you're reasonably convinced?

  4. 4

    A useful overview of the MMP overhang issue, and the fools on the Right who – like most fools – aren't half as smart as they think they are.

    They want to save "useless" Maureen Pugh and other nonentities, add more recycled third-raters from NZF and deliberately lose Nicola Willis and Paul Goldsmith. (Fine by me if National Ministers are turfed out, but is it really what they want?).

    The calls on the right to ‘rort’ MMP by engineering a National Party overhang | The Spinoff

    Whisper it quietly, DPF is right (and I will now wash my mouth out with soap …).

      1. 5.1.1

        WINZ don't give out food grants to everyone who asks. You have to meet criteria. MSD are saying those declined payments had the wrong reason code, but that they were still legit declines.

        To get a food grant you need to have an unforeseen cost eg your car breaks down, have cash in your bank account and you have to provide WINZ with your bank records to show that you didn't spend any of your benefit that week on non-essentials.

        The problem is that people are living in enforced poverty and often need food grants because that's the only extra help they can get. It's a terrible system, poverty and a mindfuck.

        1. 5.1.1.1

          Was the reasoning (food was nonessential) given to decline applications a sperate issue from the wrong code being entered to decline others?

          Because food being nonessential isn't a legit issue to decline is it?

          Further, there seems to be a number of different reasons given to decline applications. Such as the person "did not have an immediate need" or that they had "caused or contributed" to their immediate need.

          So which one (if any at all) was related to the wrong code being entered?

          Note: info came from my 1News link in the post above

          1. 5.1.1.1.1

            going off the MSD statement, it was legit to decline (because they didn't meet the criteria), but the code used was wrong. MSD could be obfuscating, but on the face of it, the people applying didn't meet the criteria.

            I don't know what the words beside the code say, or the letter, or what is said to clients. Somewhere the term not essential arose, it's not clear where.

            There is a shot of the form with the reasons to decline in the video from your link.

            Don't get me wrong, there will def be times when people are declined who should be getting the grant. And the grant is capped by amount and timeframe. The policy is a huge problem and it's likely there is pressure on staff to decline if they can.

  6. 6

    Off topic but who is going to vote TOP so they can get over the 5% and hopefully join the coalition of the left.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    2. 6.2

      Shades of 2008 when some (not many) left-ish voters talked about getting NZF over 5% to keep Helen in power (Key had ruled out Peters).

      It didn't make sense then, it doesn't with TOP now. Vote for the party you most agree with, the speculative chess games are for armchair politics, not real elections.

      1. 6.2.1

        I'm still planning to back TOP, but if they go much lower I will probably back the greens, as I did in the last two elections, when TOP were polling around 1%.

  7. 7

    I thought Hipkins did pretty well on Morning Report this morning.

    He called out the lies National is spreading on its billboards, said the Curia poll was by National's pollster and that internal polling had Labour over 30 per cent.

    Also mention a new climate change policy to be announced later today.

    2. 7.2

      Did he mention the Roy Morgan poll, which had an even wider gap between National and Labour.

      Propaganda comes from all parties LOL.

      1. 7.2.1

        Reid Research, Talbot Mills and Verian all have Labour above 30 and ahead of National.

        Unlike the three above, Curia is not a member of the professional research body and so must be treated with some skepticism. Yet the billionaire-owned Herald and ZB treat this one as gospel.

        Isn't this just a little strange Bella?

        2. 7.2.1.2

          BG – Have you read the reasons why Farrar resigned from the professional body? In the circumstances I don't blame him as it seems the complaint process was being weaponised against him. Please note – he resigned and was not expelled by that body.

          https://www.researchassociation.org.nz/Update

          https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/08/why_i_have_resigned_from_the_research_association_of_new_zealand.html

          Of course it is a he said/she said story so the "truth" is probably somewhere in the middle.

          2. 7.2.1.2.2

            Of course it is a he said/she said story so the "truth" is probably somewhere in the middle.

            If all polls were equal, then the ‘truth’ would indeed be near the middle (aka average or mean). The big question is whether they’re all equal.

            If you’re referring to David Farrar vs RANZ & complainant(s), then you’re diverting.

            1. 7.2.1.2.2.1

              Not sure how mentioning David Farrar vs RANZ is diverting. I was responding to the claim BG made: "Curia is not a member of the professional research body and so must be treated with some skepticism."

              Hipkins is just saying the same stuff that the people on the right say about Talbot. Never trust your oppositions pollsters.

              1. 7.2.1.2.2.1.1

                Your purported equivalence is quaint but false nevertheless. Only one David was mentioned as a key player in Dirty Politics; here’s a clue: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/dirty-politics-who-are-the-key-players/36CCZL4QBK3OLVZ5UU6NEOSTUE/.

                Back to Labour’s polling, which happens to be the topic of this thread:

                “If you look at the Talbot Mills, the 1News, and the RNZ polls, they all show Labour at 30% or above and able to form a government with the Opportunity Party and the Greens.”

                August’s polls had Labour on 27.8% (Taxpayers’ Union-Curia), 29% (1News Verian), 32.2% (RNZ Reid Research) and 34% (Talbot Mills’ corporate poll, reported by the Herald)."

                https://thestandard.nz/daily-review-07-09-2026/#comment-2071873

  8. 8

    All very good in theory however the 2 x Players in the Industry have got everything Locked Up. The horse has bolted a long time ago.

  9. 9

    A blast from the past

    I was enjoying this interesting discussion, Briahna Joy Gray and Vijay Prasad. Suddenly, at the 16:50 mark, the late Paul Holmes makes an appearance! He's interviewing The Highwaymen (Willie Nelson, Kris Kristofferson, Johnny Cash)….

  11. 11

    A very recent and interesting interview with Sam Stubbs.

    Sam Stubbs is rarely shy about sharing his views on politics, and so he’s paying close attention to the 2026 election, which comes at what he calls a crucial juncture for the country. He sits down with Toby to talk about KiwiSaver, about tax, and about the election campaign. Plus: given his political engagement, could he go one step further and stand for parliament?

    How National ankle-tapped Labour on KiwiSaver, with Sam Stubbs

  12. 12

    There's an interesting contradiction happening. People on the left are demanding Labour release more policy, while at the same time forgetting half the policy Labour have already announced. And when a policy is announced (as with the Greens supermarket proposal) they dream up particular cases or reasons why it might not work at some micro level.

    What the hell are left-wing parties supposed to do? Right-wing parties don't get themselves into this mess – they just parrot slogans, lie and ignore the evidence.

    Chris Dillow has an excellent and sobering post out today (https://chrisdillow.substack.com/p/good-policies-bad-politics) which suggests that winning elections may be less about having good policies than about building client groups and retaining them:

    …what all this tells us is that good policy is not the same as good politics. Good policy doesn’t necessarily win votes and bad policy doesn’t lose it. Sometimes, in fact, the opposite.

    What matters in politics isn’t “good” policies. It’s the ability to create client groups. Parties have succeeded when they’ve built coalitions of such groups, be they Labour’s post-war alliance of many (but not all) trades unionists and wealthier liberals or Tory coalitions of new and old money…..[s]erious political failures occur when parties lose such groups.

    If this is right, then the puzzle for the left is how to announce policy in a way or a form that builds coalitions of supporters who can identify with the intent, vision or direction of travel behind the policy – but doesn't drive these potential supporters into obsessively picking over the detail, or forgetting the policy entirely..

    1. 12.1

      In the almost 3 years of the current government there have been a number of disagreements between the coalition partners. I don't think you can fairly say that it's only something done by the disparate left wing parties. If they all agreed on everything then they wouldn't be separate parties.

  13. 13

    to gain power, you need to

    -give them something to be afraid of

    – someone to blame

    -sell them certainty

    National have played this game very successfully, and Labour never countered it. Now the Nats are making us all scared of tax FFS.

    In truth this COC gives us alot to be afraid of. Foreign ownership, racism, unemployment, crumbling health services, crumbling welfare and disability services, pillaging of nature, etc

    It should be a gift to the left. I am at a loss why Labour can't cut through.

Comments are closed.