The message is rather simple.
If you largely supported what Helen Clark and Labour did in government from 1999-2008, but just want a "cup of tea" for three years, and a few tweaks in the other direction, then National is your party. That's what this government is doing - little different.
If you largely opposed what Helen Clark and Labour did in government from 1999-2008, and want a net reduction in taxation, reduction in the size of the state, then National is NOT your party (and frankly neither are any of the others in Parliament). Only Libertarianz has done that and would do that.
If you want to grow the size of the state, so that it takes more money to spend on "public sector employment" you can choose Labour, "Maori" you can choose Maori Party and "all you can think of" you can choose the Greens.
In fact if you want the state to grow in the areas of telecommunications and roads, you can choose National.
National is a conservative party. It almost never reverses what Labour does.
The Labour Party has set the political, economic and social agenda of New Zealand since 1935.
The National Party, with the exception of trade union membership, has adopted that agenda and sat tight with very few exceptions.
So why would anyone voting National expect any significant change?
If you largely supported what Helen Clark and Labour did in government from 1999-2008, but just want a "cup of tea" for three years, and a few tweaks in the other direction, then National is your party. That's what this government is doing - little different.
If you largely opposed what Helen Clark and Labour did in government from 1999-2008, and want a net reduction in taxation, reduction in the size of the state, then National is NOT your party (and frankly neither are any of the others in Parliament). Only Libertarianz has done that and would do that.
If you want to grow the size of the state, so that it takes more money to spend on "public sector employment" you can choose Labour, "Maori" you can choose Maori Party and "all you can think of" you can choose the Greens.
In fact if you want the state to grow in the areas of telecommunications and roads, you can choose National.
National is a conservative party. It almost never reverses what Labour does.
The Labour Party has set the political, economic and social agenda of New Zealand since 1935.
The National Party, with the exception of trade union membership, has adopted that agenda and sat tight with very few exceptions.
So why would anyone voting National expect any significant change?
3 comments:
Jonkey: "hee haw hee haw. As David Lange once observed, even drug dealers pay GST.. hee haw hee haw"
Nope - Jonkey is being a LABOUR PM.
"If you largely opposed what Helen Clark and Labour did in government from 1999-2008, and want a net reduction in taxation, reduction in the size of the state, then National is NOT your party (and frankly neither are any of the others in Parliament). Only Libertarianz has done that and would do that."
You haven't mentioned ACT which has always been pushing for a reduction in the size of the state and a low flat income tax.
Melissa: I haven't seen ACT be loud lately, I've seen ACT support a big new mega-council for Auckland. ACT has in its history supported no income tax, then flat tax, then two tier income tax. I know many in ACT want less government, but whilst ACT obviously can't wield much influence given its numbers, it can make its thoughts known.
Pardon me if in the current environment ACT looks spineless. About the only thing I saw it had a spine on was opposing special Maori seats in the Auckland mega council, which of course, should have gone without saying.
Post a Comment