Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, August 24th, 2026 - 75 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 …
Labour has announced they will be keeping to the same fiscal constraints, that has limited State investment and NZ's economic development, since 1984.
The social, infrastructure and investment deficits will continue.
What, is the actual point of Labour!
To be a slightly less distructive version of National?
National have now promised "no new taxes".
This again brings up the possibility that they will increase GST because, in their vapid arguments, it is an existing tax not a new one.
I have consistently argued that National have been looking for an excuse to raise GST, and would have done so already if economic conditions weren't so dire, but obviously they won't mention it before voting.
The Opposition should challenge them hard on this.
As I said yesterday.
Quite right. When National parrots their "no new taxes" slogan they actually mean no new non-regressive taxes, i.e. no new progressive taxes. The wording also gives them wriggle room to increase the rates of existing regressive taxes such as GST.
And it seems to me that a GST increase will just further dig the economy into a hole by destroying even more domestic demand by making more people poorer. It might just make Willis's insane fetish of achieving an unnecessary and undesirable (in the current circumstances) fiscal surplus possible. But it will be deeply damaging – like pulling the cladding off the house and selling it in order to pay off the mortgage.
They were very clear on the tv news – no NEW taxes doesn't mean existing taxes don't go up.
However, I seem to remember National campaigning on both an end to people being over taxed and an end to borrowing. Post-election, we got both.
Part of what Labour is campaigning on is to have an independent body to review election pro-forma budgets, which would be a good idea.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics_election-2026/1081146/labour-releases-fiscal-strategy-promises-to-slash-debt.
National doesn't like the idea. They say it will make the country borrow more. IMHO, that's not necessarily the case – say, if the RBNZ or Treasury was tasked with it. I just think it's a level of rigor too far for them.
Reid Research poll today:
Lab 32.2 Gre 10.2 TPM 3.0=45.4
Nat 29.1 NZF 11.9 ACT 7.7=48.7
Opp 5.3
So Opp, the party that will subsidise data centers, is taking enough votes (mostly off the Left) to choose the government. But if Opp's vote slips 0.4 it is a wasted vote.
The racist party vote has risen which is disappointing.
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/opportunity-in-position-to-play-kingmaker-in-latest-poll-r142mchv
That sure ain't the only disappointment in this one.
yep
The polling period was 14-21 August 2026 – so after the spectacular own-goal that was the challenge to Luxon's leadership.
Which appears to have had virtually no impact on the polls for Labour or National at all.
I'm sure Labour would have been hoping for a bump in support.
I'd have to look up the timing, but don't opinions lag behind political events? ie they don't show up in polls taken so close to the event.
Might be more obvious in a poll the following week (so this week).
I don't think so.
The Luxon leadership challenge was on August 12 – this online poll was between the 14-21. If this was going to be an issue in shifting voter preference, it is most likely to be present immediately after the press coverage.
Slow burning issues – or ones which have more and more coming out over the following weeks (thinking here of the Turei controversy) – do reflect in later polls. But that's because the negative media coverage is continuing. I don't see that this is the case with the Luxon issue. So far as the media coverage – and therefore the popular opinion – is concerned, it's over and done.
Not surprising. To save constant repetition I'll just link, from 12 days ago:
Winning the battle but losing the war « The Standard
"It is wishful thinking (common on the Standard!) to equate voters' dislike of Luxon (very strong) with a desire to elect the opposition (very weak).
People dislike Luxon for many different reasons. "Too weak" to a rightie means something different than to a leftie. To non-political people (which is most voters) he's just a dick.
TOP will benefit, and probably NZF and ACT too. Labour a bit, and that may be enough. I hope so."
There are so many reasons, it's hard to know which one to focus on to do him the most damage.
Do you think we can do Luxon "damage"?
Yes (not physically, of course). But only if we focus on just the one or two issues that really matter to the electorate, instead of trying to damn him over every last thing.
We don't actually know that. I'll have a look later, but there was some polling about where TOP's vote was coming from, and it seemed to be across the political spectrum.
What we really need is one of those graphics that shows voter intention compared to last time they voted (it's a visual representation of where the flow of votes goes, and it's complex)
We also need to look at how polls are guessing the TPM seats and if there is an overhang.
is anyone looking at the non-vote in currently polling?
The Spinoff published some polling from Talbot Mills about a month ago that showed close to a quarter of people intending to vote for TOP had voted for National in 2023.
By comparison, 18% had voted Labour, 11% NZ First, and 8% Green.
So I’d resist the temptation to frame TOP as simply “stealing” votes from the left. Its support appears to be coming from across the political spectrum, and looks at least as much like dissatisfaction with the two-bloc horse race as a revolt against Labour in particular.
thanks! I think it's just as likely that there is movement between Lab and Greens, as well as the usual movement from swing voters.
TOP are the wild card, and I'm more and more inclined to see their presence in the election as a good thing because it's shaking up the status quo.
This after the latest poll,
https://x.com/LewisHoldenNZ/status/2091645000107139567
Don't know how likely that is, but this is what should be happening. Smaller parties pulling the bigger parties leftwards, because the bigger parties can't do it on their own.
LVT still sucks though.
Them there are the breaks. We vote parties in, then they get to try to put together a government.
And in that task, I suspect Hipkins will have a much easier time of it than Luxon. Labour and TOP aren't really that far apart on most things. even if LVT is the obvious sticking point.
And they have the major advantage of not having publicly ruled them out in a fit of hubris when the polling looked temporarily good.
And the media haven't yet picked up on the crucial factor in recent elections: the change in numbers between election night and the real result, 2 weeks later.
In both 2017 and 2023 this made all the difference to the government that was formed.
If the current coalition has a one seat majority on election night there's no way they will sit back and hope that majority survives after special votes. They'll be buying insurance from Opportunity.
Sure, they can try.
Whether they succeed, however, is a different question entirely. TOP could well say, “Actually, we aren’t interested in being your fourth wheel.”
And even if Luxon were prepared to sell out whatever remains of his own “principles” to get a deal done, Peters and Seymour may not be willing to reopen theirs.
The path for Labour is much simpler: negotiate the differences between Labour, the Greens and TOP, then sign a coalition deal.
National would have to add a fourth party to an already difficult three-party arrangement. That is not quite the same thing as “buying insurance”. Assuming, of course, that TOP is for sale. From the current polling, it would appear that they aren't.
I agree. But my point is that Luxon's "rule out working with" doesn't mean anything. There are multiple post-election options and I've yet to hear an interviewer ask Luxon about them. They're stuck on Question 1, and seemingly incapable of the logical follow-ups. And there are many.
Would National MPs accept Luxon refusing to make a phone call to Qiulae Wong? Obviously not. Which means … (etc).
Sure, it would be cool if the media asked those questions. But ultimately it’s Labour’s job to ask them.
If Luxon has created a contradiction between his public position and the likely post-election arithmetic, Labour should be forcing him to explain it every day.
Fair comment Res…that is interesting. Could well be that I am wrong.
"The racist party vote has risen which is disappointing."
Your statement is true but it's only an increase from 2.3% up to 3%. It could have been a lot worse.
And, like almost all of the changes which obsess commenters – it's well within the margin of error – so meaningless.
Bella-Alwyn is making a joke that should see him banned for a while.
Sorry, my bad – I only looked at the difference between the numbers, not at the numbers themselves.
In other words: an increase of just a bit under 33%.
The RNZ link:
RNZ-Reid Research poll: Opportunity in kingmaker position, Luxon and Hipkins approval slumps | RNZ
Scroll down to the less prominent but very telling numbers for net approval. Hipkins is not good but Luxon is truly dismal, for a first term PM.
See the decline on the graph, from when he was new and said voters were still getting to know him. See what happened as they did.
A 19 point difference in net approval between Hipkins and Luxon.
However, his personal unpopularity doesn't seem to be translating into votes away from National, in any significant numbers.
Just as Hipkins relative popularity isn't resulting in a surge for Labour.
Yes, Bearded Git, people want to vote for TOP. It's a democracy.
And perhaps if we spent more time asking why those voters find TOP attractive, and addressing their concerns, rather than telling them they're stupid, wrong, or wasting their votes, fewer of them would feel the need to look elsewhere.
Political parties aren't entitled to anyone's vote. They have to earn it.
It has been interesting discussing this TOP surge with my teen (first time voter), and friends. And figuring out what is important to this demographic.
Of course, anecdata, and a small sample.
The UBI is attractive to the uni students, and unemployed, but not to those working. Several are concerned about the impact of property tax on their grandparents (no multi-million dollar mansions, here – just ordinary brick-and-tile houses in suburbia).
All of them like the idea of Kiwisaver being outside the current salary compensation and raised to 6-10% (matching Australia). Particularly as they don't believe that there will be automatic super when they hit 65.
They are all very concerned over the immigrant population, who are in direct competition with them for jobs. Either part-time, for the uni students or full-time, for the rest. There is a perception that the current immigration policy is being widely rorted – and that 'no one' is interested in doing anything about it.
Australia is still a very attractive destination for them.
Yeah, I think there's an element of us older millennials (almost 40 here) and Gen X types trying to work out "kids these days."
What I find particularly interesting there is that Israel/Palestine doesn't appear to be especially salient, despite the amount of attention it gets in discussions about young voters.
And the concern about immigration is worth paying attention to as well. If you're young and competing for entry-level or part-time work, you may experience immigration primarily as a labour-market issue rather than through the ideological frames older political obsessives tend to put around it.
Obviously a tiny sample, but perhaps we're projecting our idea of youth politics onto a generation whose immediate concerns are rather more material.
Which brings me back to dialectical materialism: perhaps we should pay more attention to the material conditions shaping their politics than to the politics we assume they ought to have.
I didn't list Israel/Palestine – because it was only a hot-button topic for about half of the group (the rest were 'meh, bad stuff happens'). And, even those who cared, didn't appear to be choosing a political party to vote for on that basis (i.e. it was important, but not more important than economic factors). Those who cared, were passionate and articulate about it – which might persuade observers to think this was a significant issue.
[Interestingly there was one kid who was all into the international Jewish conspiracy theory – I couldn't work out whether he was winding everyone else up, or was serious…..]
I do find that this group is very pragmatic. They are mostly interested in the impact of policies directly on them (and to a certain extent to their families).
Yeah, and I think that distinction between caring intensely about something and voting on it is really important.
The people who care about an issue are naturally the people we're most likely to hear talking about it, which can make it look much more electorally salient than it actually is.
you can say that again. The left's biggest problem at moment imo.
Any poll that has National in double digits is disappointing.
Luxon reneges on Bed Tax and Auckland Regional Deal.
Auckland and Queenstown mayors (among others) are ropeable.
“Queenstown Lakes District mayor John Glover told RNZ it appeared to be a “complete u-turn” on policy, after the government agreed to consider the accommodation levy for visitors in both the already-signed Auckland Regional Deal, and the deal for his region, which was almost signed a week and a half ago”
John Glover was ropeable last week too on RNZ about councils having to bear the brunt of fast-track costs.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2019048044/mayor-fears-residents-will-bear-brunt-of-fast-track-costs
Regardless of the political nuances, consumers will pay the bed tax.
I like the idea of a taxes that are on profits or on activities that most don't engage in. Eg currency speculation and excessive profits: banks and supermarkets.
Well they ARE tourists when they visit Queenstown.
This is far from being just about international visitors.
Yep. There's a general principle in that. Avoid taxing socially useful economic activity so that we get more of it. Instead, tax economic activity that is socially useless in order to destroy jobs in that area – thereby freeing up real resources that can shift to socially useful areas. Is domestic tourism socially useful? Mostly – apart from the carbon emissions. So don't tax someone for just being a domestic tourist, tax them if they travel by carbon-intensive means.
Yep. There's a general principle in that. Avoid taxing socially useful economic activity so that we get more of it. Instead, tax economic activity that is socially useless in order to destroy jobs in that area – thereby freeing up real resources that can shift to socially useful areas. Is domestic tourism socially useful? Mostly – apart from the carbon emissions. So don't tax someone for just being a domestic tourist, tax them if they travel by carbon-intensive means.
"taxes that are on … activities that most don't engage in".
Am interesting concept. We only have about 25 or 30 neurosurgeons in New Zealand. Let's tax the hell out of them.
[We will miss your trolling until 13 Jan 2027 but then again, you don’t add much else here – Incognito]
Mod note
Thanks.
Removes the inclination to tell Alwyn to stop being a wanker for removing a word from a quote to skew my meaning.
The elected representatives Alwyn favours may be slippery and misleading with their words, I prefer honest straight talkers.
On reflection that may be a tad aggressive but the last month I have had guts full of the cuts to the Health System and those that defend the indefensible.
My elderly, type 2 diabetic, incontinent father in law was in ED, query a heart event for over an hour before being seen.
After triage, sent back to a chocka block waiting room to 'wait'. Urgency increased when he collapsed onto the floor in a diabetic coma. During this time he was with an ex ED nurse of 28 years experience. She was shocked how far things had gone backwards in 3 years.
After 27 hours in ED be ended up with in a ward for a few days. An overworked understaffed ward.
Fortunately he is blessed to have caring loving daughters. They were able to ensure his meds and insulin were given on time while also cleaning up after his incontinence.
Patients shouldn’t have to bring staff with them to receive appropriate care.
Now my Mum has a fall, maybe a cracked rib or so and we have decided that it's better she is cared for by us in her home.
This dire situation is deliberate. Those that care more for 'economy', debt and fiscal responsibility are to blame. Them and their enablers.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics/1079849/the-54-nurses-dodgy-stats-and-the-real-health-workforce-data
Willis and Brown are so ideologically bound that the only method they know is to cut. Cut staff. Taking a year balance sheet approach costs us all more in the long run.
I don't think it was overly aggressive. Alwyn is a troll and he knew what he was doing. It was a shitty move even without knowing about your personal situation.
Part of my healthcare now is avoiding accidents so that I don't have to go through those kinds of experiences. I remember are few days before lock down I was climbing through and over some fallen trees and suddenly realised what I was doing and what it would mean if I hurt myself. It wasn't a high risk situation particularly, but it wasn't no risk either. Shameful that we are still in those kind of conditions with the health service. Also shameful that people don't think about the risks they take and how that impacts on people who have no choice like your elders. We still need to have fun, but I don't think we can take the emergency health system for granted at the moment.
Bye bye, alwyn – thanks!
The fix is in, thanks to farming sector lobbyists.
The government is going to stall Plan Change 1, which would have set up farming regulations designed to improve water quality in the Waikato river (Herald, 22 Aug).
The new requirements won't start, if they do start, until 2032. It seems they were "costly, complex and duplicative."
We have the most environmentally destructive government ever.
Further to Incognito's observation that Simeon Browns ideology and actions in health are the most damaging the COC have done.
Deliberate under staffing, essentially a hiring freeze the impacts of which starting to ripple through.
A pox on Labour's house for kowtowing the economic orthodoxy. Fund according to need. Not to try and appease a sector of the community (DEBT DEBT DEBT!) that are never going to vote for you.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/health/1092928/absolute-nightmare-patients-left-waiting-in-soiled-beds-at-north-shore-emergency-department
I think that a clear view is emerging from the stats and the actions of most leading MPs, that they are not interested in the country and people at all. They just want to keep enough of the country going to maintain national revenue to suit an upper-class of people interested in money (to which they are fused).
The moneyed class are satisfied with their standard of living and their position, opportunities; their feeling of superiority and levels of attainment in society and as humans; they feel no pressing desire to share or help other citizens on their journey. The better-off middle class and moneyed have energy to be used doing things that interest themselves. People and the planet are collateral; complainants are boring.
The approaches to advancement and opportunities for lower income people now, seem similar to those of the 1800s nobility and tradespeople v poor who became anxious to get educated to read and write. But the mercantile class didn't want them to have that option which would lead to greater unrest about their lot if they were educated. To get a feeling of those attitudes, Catherine Cookson's books about northern England in early 1900s eg poor miners families', then the Great Depression followed by WW2 was hard for ordinary people. Georgette Heyer's 'A Civil Contract' is about a wealthy merchant who seeks to purchase a titled husband for his daughter so they can move up in society. She sets her characters in the history of early 1800s and with good faith on both sides, it works out. But those social and attitudinal barriers can be hard to surmount.
I am anxious seeing them becoming cemented in NZAO again – will we sink back 100 years and wipe out the social advancements, and even technical ones, replaced by this pervading tech control, by insidious, encroaching means. Chained to tech we will be limited as to what we can reach out for to know more; mentally contained to a greater extent than in the 20th century which did not lead to wide education and understanding of the social/human realisation type learning, to match that of the advances in STEM.
Thing is, the pollies that act, speak and behave the way you describe are powerless.
They only get to have influence because there are enough of us to tick their voting paper to give them power.
So often voting against their own and their whanau interests.
A National party brochure is perpetuating National's lies about the cost of Labour's planned policies. Under the title "Labour's Hidden Bill", the brochure lists a range of supposed taxes at a cost of $18 billion.
As explained in the following linked article, National's claims don't make sense. Nicola Willis and her cronies are relying on fear, not fact, to try to increase support. Yet another example of their lack of integrity.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/08/11/national-uses-nonsensical-ai-website-to-attack-labours-tax-policy/
Voters will likely recall National's false claims made during the 2023 election campaign, including Christopher Luxon's and Nicola Willis's initial pledge that families would receive $250 per fortnight in tax cuts, before adding the qualifier "up to". However, Willis has been unable to identify any family who received this amount.
National running a sparse campaign, requiring an endless series of 'a-tax!' attacks.
Monday morning is the PM's media rounds, and a chance to set the agenda.
Instead, thanks to his own incompetence, he has to talk about the Opportunity party. The party he personally – and accidentally – boosted.
I don't think leftish voters should be worried about that. The TOP policies will be scrutinised more in the campaign as they are declared "kingmaker" by the media. For now, Luxon digging himself a deeper hole is the much bigger (and funnier) story.
"Police found the child in a critical condition after being called to a house on Basingstoke Street just before 5pm on Friday. They later died at the scene."
Tragic!
Our brave boys in blue.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/crime-and-justice/1005049/mps-shocked-by-fatal-aranui-dog-attack
Not clear what your point is here.
The sentence was hilarious; that was the point Mercurio was making.
Thanks, mikesh – they, eh!
Res publica, mu vote for top isn't gaurenteed but it's top 3,
My normal pattern is labour strong vote green, labour weak vote labour, but if can sense a chance to send either nzf or act to the knaxkers yard permanently oh hell yes.
Big ups to lprent for making Reply function work for my Oppo phone.
I really appreciate this function.
Hear hear!!
Works for Samsung, too.
Much appreciated.
Wohoo happy days in samsung land,
https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/08/24/clean-up-lobbying-in-nz-politics-or-see-trust-in-government-drop/
Thanks to the superb negotiating skills of Christopher Luxon, the Coalition was captured by the tobacco industry to serve & protect its interests.
No shit!
One cannot expect anything different from a Government whose Minister of Health constantly over-reaches and appoints appointees with questionable conflict of interest to the Medical Council, to name just one dangerous move by this dangerous man.
I haven't been following the news for a while, but I do recall something about Simeon Brown saving our health service recently – by giving a ten year contract for some health services to a private medical provider. I don't recall any details, but it seems consistent with the Atlas policies that the government parties are following.
[Third and last time: Please stick to one e-mail address here, thanks – Incognito]
Mod note
Sorry, will change.
Spotted on Molesworth St.
https://bsky.app/profile/jordanriversnz.bsky.social/post/3mtl2eefltc23
[Image resized]