National and Labour had their election campaign launches on the weekend. Here is Chris Hipkins pointing out what will happen with another term of National. (Transcript)
That’s what chaos costs you.
Three more years of drift. Three more years of cuts. Three more years of higher costs.
New Zealand can’t afford three more years of National.
There are things about that speech I can critique (and probably will in the comments). But more important, much more important, is changing the government in November.
Whatever our criticisms of Labour or the Greens, we can still vote strategically. Disappointed in Labour? Vote Green, and so on.
We can also work between now and when voting opens, to encourage people to vote Labour, Green or electorate vote Te Pāti Māori. In a tight election, every vote matters.
In an election campaign how we talk about the left parties, at work, with family and friends, socially, influences people’s thinking.
If we slag off the party we are disappointed in, we send the message to not vote for them, or to not vote at all. We can instead say we don’t like a policy or position but it’s still good to vote for this party or that one, for all the reasons Hipkins is talking about. We can still critique, but let’s not make it the only thing we do, nor the dominant voice.
Hipkins goes on to talk about what Labour will do, make a list, tell everyone about it.
I had a discussion about this recently on twitter, with some people loudly defending their right to slag off Labour. I was left with the distinct impression that their lives would not be fundamentally or materially affected if NACTFirst got another term. Mine would be, badly, and so would the lives of many, many other people. Eventually it will affect the middle classes as well as all the systems of New Zealand society come under Trumpian attack. Which at this point appears to be most of them.
Do we care about that? Then we need to talk up voting left.
Totally with you Weka on this.
👍
Hipkins is campaigning very well. When asked, if he was a shoe, who's feet would he choose to be worn by, he said, don't know who's feet but it would be the left foot – or something like that – very quick, very smart, very alert.
Luxon would have said, what I'm saying to you … and every ear would have gone deaf.
Speaking of CEO Luxon, feet and “What I would say to you” brought to mind this Guy Body cartoon.
Hey didn't lux-one say he has more to do and he is just getting started; fuck imagine if he gets another three years in power and his coalition mates are scary, they will destroy our country and its already in a mess.
What excited me most about Hipkins' speech wasn't so much the delivery (solid 8/10), but the fact that it has, finally, revealed Labour's theory of the electorate.
That said, it was also good to see Chippie looking confident, calm and comfortable making the case. Not angry, not defensive, and not apologetic about being Labour.
And there’s a lot to like about the substance. It’s punchy, focused overwhelmingly on material issues, and, most importantly, creates a permission structure for people who switched from Labour to National in 2023 to come back.
The message is pretty simple:
"You voted for change because things weren't working.
National has now had three years.
Are you better off?
If not, here's what we'd do differently."
That's a much stronger argument than telling people they were wrong to vote National in 2023. They don't have to regret that decision, or even decide Labour was right all along. They only have to look at their own circumstances after three years and ask whether the change they voted for actually delivered.
It also gives Labour somewhere to go beyond simply attacking the government. Cost of living, jobs, wages, healthcare, power bills and housing aren't abstractions. They're things people experience directly, and Labour can attach concrete policies to each of them.
That's the bit I've been waiting to see: not just a collection of policies, or another list of things National has done badly, but an actual theory about which voters Labour needs to persuade, why they moved in 2023, and what might persuade them to move back in 2026.
Whether that theory is right is another question. But at least Labour finally appears to have one. And, more importantly, an actual plan for going to those voters and making the case.
Which brings me back to Weka’s point. The wider left needs some discipline about what actually matters between now and November.
There will be plenty in Labour’s programme worth criticising. There always is. But winning arguments with other people on the left about the policy you wish Labour had adopted isn’t the same thing as persuading the people who will actually decide the election.
If Labour has correctly identified the voters it needs to win back, then perhaps the useful question isn’t whether its offer perfectly reflects our own politics.
It’s whether those voters can see something in it that gives them a reason to come back.
love this.
Plenty of time after the election to hold parties to account for their positions and policies once they are in government. Playing the long game too, next election in mind and beyond.
Without the notes, he reminded me a bit of the energy (perhaps not all of the policy) of Huey Long, out somewhere on the left of FD Roosevelt:
Labour offering 10% off student loans for those who meet the qualification standard is smart, as during National's tenure, fees for all types of courses become corpritised and costly.
Many parents and students will see this as a recognition of the sacrifice of early earning, and assistance needed as few hospitality and few low entry jobs are available for their group, 18 to 24 years of age, with unemployment at 23% for this group.
National and friends have not managed the economy to assist the lives of most people, and an increase of 50% in billionaires does not 'trickle down' to assist their lives as much as the targetted policies the left are offering.
As many say not perfect, but when did we ever get perfection? A government for the people would help. Go left at the ballot box.
Early days, but:
1. The media either rnz or stuff, I guess, quizzed luxon about how he can campaign on combining all the left parties' policies but happy to distance national from it's coalition partners. So, the more that happens, the worse national looks.
2. The left are looking cohesive while national is faced with having to cannibalise it's friends to try to get some list mps in. That's going to make the right look very divided this time. Swinging voters won't like what they see.
3. Weirdly, national isn't even trying to invent success stories from the past 3 years such is their eagerness to fake news labour, which isn't working for them, as in 1 above.
4. By luck or an ability I didn't know I had I called the last election nationals but only for one term (because I saw luxon over promising to the extent that he had to under deliver) and now I'm getting the same feeling inside that the left can take this one. I hope so.
I'm strongly considering voting strategically with Labour for the seat (Van der Molen has to go) But my poor old brain can't work where to put the party vote for maximum strategic effect? Greens? TPM?
While I am guilty of not being serious FTTT about our election – knuckling down, the choice is clear at Greens for Party and Labour for Electorate person. If we don't get some sanity in to our politics, we will be further up the creek without a paddle. And all like Wellington's dumping filth into our sea resource – round the motu spreading out wastes of all sorts. SOS time.
TPM is asking for electorate party votes.
Their party list votes would result in a seat allocation lower than the electorate seats won.
For a Labour led government, party list Green is the safest option.
The alternative is TOP (The Opportunities Party) IF Labour-Green-TPM need them to get over 5%.
There is still a risk TOP would be snared by the coalition (1 in 4/1 in 3 risk?) or sit on the cross benches.
Party vote Green – so they have sufficient numbers they can't be ignored and will drag Labour (screaming and resisting) to the left!
And also because the Greens have some damn fine mps.
if you want a strong left/green govt, give your party vote to the Greens. More Green MPs = more green/left influence in government including during coalitions negotiations.
Change of government will come from the combined Labour/Green party vote.
TPM, afaik they don't need the party vote, because their electorate seats will give them more MPs than they get from the party list.
TOP will first talk to the party with the biggest party vote, so don't try to be too clever.
Labour needs to be the biggest party share.
Then pick your electorate candidate.
Greens are not going to win many electorate seats anyway, so vote for the Labour candidates, except in the seats which Green members have taken already. For the party vote, vote Green..
As I have said many a time : Labour AND Green for a Fairer Future Nov '26. It surely cant be hard to figure how to apply this ?
It was for me, that is why I posted.
I don't see why you had to say that.
Did I reply to you? Did you think it was? I made comment on and only on Weka's Post..
I am opting for the Greens with my party vote this election because I like their wealth tax, I like their supermarket plan and I think their energy policy is a winner. But above all, because those three things all address the cost of living crisis in a muscular way that recognises that neoliberalism is a busted flush.
The last straw for me was the revolting cynicism of Hipkins volte face on the "landlords tax cut". Hipkins is incapable of the leap of imagination required to be break with the failed economic paradigm let alone lead a party like Labour, once a great party of reform that is shadow of its former self.
Totally this. I'm a Green member and voter, and anyone who reads my comments on this blog would be able to guess the things I'm disappointed about with my chosen party. They're not small things and my disappointment is deep. But when it comes to the broader question of whether we're all better off under a left-led coalition than a right-led one, those disappointments are irrelevant. I'd prefer you all to vote Green but it doesn't matter which party of the left coalition you vote for, just make sure you encourage everyone you know to vote for one of them.
Yep. I'm not a GP member, but I'm with you there, and am looking to party vote GP based on the things Sanctuary mentions above @ 8.07pm
NO NEW LUXES!!
I'm hearing murmurs just below the surface of the community that, you know, taxes are good, because hospitals, schools etc. If this is a rising tide of understanding and support for the issue of having a community we want to live in, National's 'no taxes' screeching will sink them completely. Sharing that quiet assurance about the true value of pooling some of our money for the sake of things we all need, could be the powerful driver of success at this election.
16% Happy Days!
Not only, but also, a Great Green Team on those numbers : )