Winston: "The Force Is With Us"

Tribute from our good friends over at Punch Drunk Polity. 

Say what you will about these guys; they smashed the Separatists!

(and yes, "The Force Is With Us; For We Are The Force" is an actual Winston quote)

Leader of the Opposition

This morning's Herald Editorial Cartoon...

John Armstrong also notes that we've done more to be an effective Opposition in the last 3 weeks than Labour managed in the last three years!

"NZF; WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSION?!"

So Shearer decided to do dinner with Winston. I suppose the old adage "If you can't beat him, learn from him" most definitely applies.

Maybe next time we should bring our respective caucuses; leading to an introduction I imagine going something like this...

Shearer: "Ah, Winston; I'm sorry you're not able to match our commitment to Opposition with numbers..."

Winston: "Don't we... You, there [points at Fenton] ... what is your profession?"

Fenton: "I'm a Union-advocate"

Winston: [points at Horomia] "And you?"

Horomia: "Maori-advocate ... and fast-food connoisseur"

Winston: [points at Robertson] "And you?"

Robertson: "Campaign Manager"

[Winston turns to address his own Caucus]

Winston: "NEW ZEALAND FIRST; WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSION?!"

NZFCaucus: "HELL-NO! HELL-NO! HELL-NO!"

[Turns back to Shearer]: "You see, Shearer? I brought more Opposition than you did."

The Sir Robert Muldoon Center For Time-Warp Research

Every so often here in NZF Youth, something momentously cool happens.

Last week, for instance, several of us were privileged to be sitting in The House watching our MPs giving their Maiden Speeches.

To commemorate the moment I whipped out my copy of Sir Robert Muldoon's "The New Zealand Economy, A Personal View", and got our entire caucus (with the unfortunate exception of Denis O'Rourke) to sign it.

I'd been reading it on the plane down, and had been struck once again by the book's qualities as a repository for what "Old New Zealand" and a National Party better described as "Nationalist" rather than "InterNational" meant.

Where else would you find a National leader proclaiming the strong enthusiasm of the Kiwi people for trade unions; or expressing his distaste for letting theoretical economists run rampant and wild with the direction of our economy.

So many lessons, so many reflections on what we used to be and what we could have been.

It called to mind a quotation of Reagan's; who, upon being asked why he'd left the Democrats and joined the Republicans (not many of you knew he began political life as a Democrat, did you :P ) stated, "I didn't leave the Democratic Party; the party left me."

So too, New Zealand First and the Muldoonist party of old; with National leaving behind our ambition to Think Big and to Dream Even Bigger in order to trust in the abacus-tweaking, ivory-tower-endorsing, grand-economic-revolutionizing 'promises' of Rogernomics and Ruthanasia (with the end result, might I add, of "OurYouthInAsia"). 

With this in mind, this book and these signatures symbolize for me not so much a return for New Zealand to the values of the 1970s - how could we, and why should we. Rather, it symbolizes a return to Parliament of some of the Muldoonist values. A hard-headed pragmatism, a fiercely combative style that calls fools to account from across the political spectrum; a compassionate Nationalism; a recognition that "the whole concept of Government is based on Intervention"; and most important of all, a driving conviction that "economic management is not a matter of textbooks and algebraic equations. It is people".

I should thus like to end on that sage economic advice coded into Sir Rob's role in the Rocky Horror Picture Show; "It's just a jump to the left ... and then a step to the right",  and with the indelible hope that we can indeed do the time-warp again.

Hey John...

First steps toward tackling endemic youth unemployment

What of the Real Culprits - Speech by Winston Peters

"This week the government took a major step towards cementing a two tier society in place in New Zealand.

The two tiers of our society are of course the rich and the poor or as more commonly phrased, the haves and the have-nots.

This government is made up of rich people.

It governs for rich people, its policies benefit rich people and it regards the rest of the people, who are struggling to live and feed their families, as a "problem."

The first of the poor on the government's hit list are 15-19 year old teenagers who are going to be forcibly trained to work in jobs that do not exist. New Zealand First has always been for education and training, the problem is that unemployment is rife among this group with nearly thirty percent without jobs.

Their dole is going to be stopped and paid to parents or by some other means to ensure they do not waste it on booze and cigarettes. Both these products are illegal for under eighteens to buy now.

So that means if you are 17 years old and not in training you have to ask your mother - or some other person - for several dollars if you want to splash out on something reckless like a Big Mac or, heaven forbid go to a movie.

Again, New Zealand First is all for training and education. For years we have led the field in policies to give young people an allowance while they are training. NZ First is all for teaching young people that liberty is not licence. That the twin of freedom is responsibility.

But we are nervous about a system that defeats itself before it is even started because it is unbelievably stupid to try to train people for jobs that are simply not there.

Do we really need to train Australia's work force?

We have already sent hundreds of thousands of skilled New Zealanders across the Tasman and this new scheme appears as though it has no other logical outcome.

It is all a big public relations hoax of course - something that has been designed by the government's public spin doctoring department to appease certain groups in election year. My challenge to Mr Key is this - when you said in May that you would create 170,000 jobs in four years - what did you base that promise on?

New Zealand First suggested a better form of youth training several weeks ago and we gave a real incentive for employers.

Our idea is to set up crash education courses to ensure teenagers can read and write and then establish as many trade training schemes as possible.

We even have a scheme to help employers. If they give one of these youngsters an apprenticeship, we will pay them the dole the young person receives as an initial subsidy.

Such a scheme would pay for itself as the youngster starts earning a weekly wage and starts paying taxes.

It's what you call a win-win situation.

But going back to the idea of handing out food vouchers and the like, it smacks of the sort of Victorian charity that our ancestors left the Old World to escape.

And don't think for one moment that the government will only target the young.

For many weeks there has been a barrage of propaganda aimed at senior citizens.

Teams of highly paid bleaters are bleating about the cost of superannuation.

They want the age of entitlement lifted and the amount reduced.

Who is going to suddenly employ thousands of 65 or 66 year olds?

Where are the jobs?

It's just another part of the softening up process on the way to poverty.

The government is edging towards the concept that being poor is somehow immoral.

Next minute they will be referring to the ungrateful poor.

John Key is already on record as saying people should be able to live on 300 dollars a week if they budget properly.

We are sure that people in this audience could put him straight on that one.

Only a truly rich person would tell a truly poor person to be thrifty.

It's like Oscar Wilde said..."telling the poor to be thrifty is like telling a starving man not to eat too much!"

What many people don't realize is that the pressing financial problems of our age are all man made. And we can tell you which men made them.

The leaders of irresponsible capitalism - the bankers, the financiers, the futures traders, the currency speculators and the teams of monetary middlemen created this crisis.

It was not caused by anyone in this room. Ordinary people are not guilty.

Yet the pillars of the world of finance have brought the system crashing to its knees because of their insatiable greed and their willingness to do anything to make a fast buck.

Their losses were so great in the Western world that entire governments face bankruptcy baling these people out.

Governments did not believe they could let these firms collapse. So they are pumping money into the system to prop them up.

If they stop, it's been estimated that unemployment in America alone will soar to thirty percent.

It would cause a depression that would make the Great Depression of the 20th century look like a mild recession.

But as already mentioned, the people who bear the brunt of this financial folly are not those who caused it.

Ordinary people lose their jobs, get behind in the mortgage, can't look after the kids - the human cost goes spiraling down.

And at the bottom of the heap all you get told by the smiley face at the top of the heap - is you better budget more carefully.

We want to remind ordinary people there is something you can do about your plight.

You can go and vote.

You can tick a box called New Zealand First and it might be just the best tick you've ever ticked in your life.

We will not stand by and watch ordinary people being trampled on.

We identify with the battlers and the strugglers because that's how we started out in this world.

Help is on the way at the end of November.

Let me give you this assurance. If we win - you win.

I'll repeat it - we win - you win. It's what they call a win/win situation.

And remember, it can only happen if you party vote New Zealand First in November."

Without Winny

NZF's gettin' back in from the outside, from the outside, from the outside .. 'Cause we're no longer pollin' down below five, down below five, down below five..

Guess who's back..

Back again..

Winston's back..

Tell a friend..

Guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back

guess who's back, guess who's back, guess who's back..

I've created a Messiah, cause nobody wants to see Goff no more

They want Winny, Phil's chopped Labour

Well if you want Kiwi, this is what I'll give ya

A little bit of need mixed with some hard labour

Some Nationalism that'll jump start the economy quicker

than a Shock Doctrine by Ruth while I'm not co-operating

When I'm critiquing the neolib' agenda while she's operating (hey!)

You waited this long to stop the House debating

Cause I'm back, smokin' a fag and Pontificating

I don't know if you've seen the job market lately but our economy's problems're complicating!

So GST they won't let be

they keep trying to fuck around with ACC

And then shut me down on TV3

But it just feels so empty, without me

So, come on and get exports on ships

Fuck the TPPA trying to blow PHARMAC to bits

And get ready, cause this shit's about to get heavy

I just settled all my lawsuits, FUCK YOU O-Gee!

Now this looks like a job for me

So everybody, Party Vote for me

Cause we need a little, controversy

Cause it feels so empty, without me

I said this looks like a job for me

So everybody Party Vote for me

Cause we need a little, controversy

Cause it feels so empty, without me

Little Hellions, ACT's feelin rebellious

Embarrassed their economic policy dates from the era of Elvis

Privatized 3-strike prisoners helpless

'til someone comes along on a mission and yells BRASH!

A Visionary, Vision seen Clearly

Should start a Reformation, buyin' back the airwaves

A rebel, so just let me revel and bask

in the fact that I'm about to start kickin' some arse

And it's a disaster, such a catastrophe

- the Earthquake Response we got under Brownlee.

Well I'm back, na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na

Fix your Foreshore & Seabed and then I'm gonna

Get in, keep the Nation from deterioratin' any longer

The Balance of Accountability, back from Tauranga

I'm Questing, advocating Compulsory Saving

Investing in NZ's future and jesting!

"Hey Media, attention please!"

Feel the tension, soon as someone mentions me

Here's my ten cents, more of which is GST

"Ruled Out?" Heh .. have we got news for Key! :)

Tizard's in a casket, I go tit for tat with

anybody who's talkin' economic bullshit

Sean Fitzpatrick, you can get your arse kicked

Leadin' them Randian Libertarianz bastards

And Don-B? You can get stomped by Rolly

You Friedmanite baldheaded political zombie

Your policy's too old, let go

It's over, 2025 Taskforce honcho!

Now let's go, just gimme the signal

I'll be there with a whole list full of new insults

I been slick, givin' sermons on the hill

ever since Philly first abandoned his principles!

But sometimes the shit just seems

everybody only wants to discuss me

Now without too much digressing,

It's actually about the whole party!

While I'm not the first king of controversy

I am the most eloquent since David Lange

I'm just saying let's take a Corporatist approach to the economy

and use it to make our Nation wealthy

(Hey!) Vote for an approach that works

Lest any other "white motherfuckers" emerge

But no matter about Banks gettin' a vote or three

It'll be so empty, without me

Frank Si-inatra, ya-ya-ya-ya-ya

Lady Gaga*, la-la-la-la

Kiwis!

*[this will only make sense to those who were present for the now-infamous "Let's hook Vivian's iPod up to The Chief's soundsystem and re-expose him to P-Diddy" incident]

God Defend New Zealand from Bad Journalism

God Defend New Zealand from Winston?

The Herald on Sunday's editorial of the 6th of February heaps praise on Prime Minister John Key for so boldly announcing that he would not be a part of any government including that scourge of MMP, Winston Raymond Peters.

Winston Peters, we were warned, had done more to discredit MMP than any other individual. Apparently he's a skilled practioner of language, too. It's a pity the HoS editor wasn't. Verily, it was a piece of journalism as Yellow as Hide's abominable jacket.

But what of the claims made? They do warrant a response. The central claim is that Peters' style of politics is negative. Voters, we're told, have a stark choice: the aspirational and 'forward-looking' style of John Key; or the 'divisive' and 'inflammatory' style proffered by Peters. It's almost as though the secretive cabal of vested interests and media personalities regard the presence of Peters as an affront to the democratic process. How ironic.

We're told that Peters, in 1996, campaigned to topple the National Government of Jim Bolger – only to return Bolger and National to power. We're told that Peters 'dawdled' through post-election talks, keeping the country waiting for eight weeks. Then there's the curious claim that Peters is somehow responsible for making our political discourse 'vituperative'. And finally, we're told that in 2005 Peters promised to reject the 'baubles of office' – only to become the Minister of Foreign Affairs in a Labour-led government. This, we're supposed to believe, points to Peters being the scourge of MMP. More than any other individual, Peters is believed to have brought our electoral system into disrepute. But has he really? This is a rather big call to make.

Not surprisingly, what's missing from the Herald editoral is context. There is no sober analysis of the facts. Just vehemence and hostility – more personal than political. But then, that's exactly what we would expect from a newspaper.

First, the circumstances around the 1996 post-election negotations are well documented. The oft-repeated claim that Winston Peters ever ruled out a coalition with National in the lead up to polling day is false and any serious journalist would surely appreciate this.

What commentators tend to forget (or would prefer to forget) is that in May 1996, New Zealand First reached its then zenith in public opinion polls. A Heylen-One News poll at the time placed party support as high as 28 per cent – effectively pushing Labour into third place. The prospect of a New Zealand First-led government was a real one in 1996. Peters' deputy, Tau Henare, publicly ruled out ever sitting at a cabinet table with Jenny Shipley and Bill Birch. Not only did he break this promise but later went on to join the National Party itself. Peters himself was reported at the time as saying the price of a coalition with National could be Bolger's head. Peters' intention in 1996 was not simply to topple National, but to displace it as the main conservative party. By all accounts, he believed he could be prime minister. A resurgent Labour party dashed these hopes.

Post-election realities inevitably brought National and Labour to the negotiating table with Peters. NZ First's 17 seats gave it considerable bargaining power, but not the leverage it needed to bring down Bolger. A Labour-New Zealand First coalition, while possible, still needed the support of Jim Anderton's Alliance to get the crucial numbers. For his part, Anderton early on ruled out a coalition with Labour and refused to commit his party's support on all matters of supply and confidence. As political commentator Chris Trotter observed at the time, Anderton's obstinate position gave Peters and his MPs 'all the excuse they need for throwing their support behind National' (Independent, 25 October 1996, p. 13). Of course, Anderton's role is today forgotten by most - as one assumes the man and his 'Progressives' will soon also be.

The length of time taken to negotiate New Zealand's first MMP government has also been the subject of much criticism. But as political scientist Barry Gustafson noted at the time: “Things aren't being done in an alarmist or crisis way. This is a much more orderly and rational process than the pandemonium of the 1984 and 1990 elections, which people have conveniently forgotten. Those elections seriously damaged confidence” (The Dominion, 29 November 1996, p. 7). Few experts were prepared to criticise the parties for acting cautiously, and responsibly as they navigated their way through new and uncharted territory. Fifteen years on, MMP has proved remarkably stable - probably somewhat due to the fact that there was such an orderly transition the first time around. Indeed, the only hints of instability to the system seem to be introduced by minor parties in crisis who would in all likelihood still be returned to the House under an FPP system.

Peters takes a disproportionate amount of blame for the collapse of the National-New Zealand First government. The reality is the National Party and a conspiracy amidst its internal factions was far more culpable. Jenny Shipley's ascent to office can, in part, be attributed to the bitter resentment many in National felt towards their New Zealand First colleagues. Unlike Bolger, Shipley had no willingness to work with Peters. The fate of the coalition was sealed from the moment she took office.

Peters' acceptance of the 'baubles of office' in 2005 may have riled some of his supporters, and frustrated his opponents, but he wouldn't be the first politician to realise that changed circumstances might result in changed positions. Peters' archnemisis, the yellow-jacket wearing perkbuster Rodney Hide must surely take the prize for that in this current Parliament. And, indeed, a cursory examination of Peters' record in that office indicates that it was a positive outcome for the Nation.

Besides, if we're going to look for Parliamentarians who've brought our House into disrepute, Peters is not the most obvious target. The troughing by people like Roger Douglas, Rodney "Perk Buster" Hide and Bill English, the party-hopping of Alamein Kopu and numerous others, Clark's 'Paintergate' and Key's Tranzrail shares, National's broken promise not to raise GST, Hone Harawira's outright racism, and numerous other post-MMP examples spring instantly to mind. Yet according to the Herald, somehow Peters is the biggest threat to the credibility of our electoral system. Just how any journalist can state this, and then claim – with a straight face - to be 'dispassionate' is incredible. If we are to search for the most obnoxious and abhorrent ways in which our electoral system has been brought into disrepute, nothing compares to the broken promises and economic vandalism of Labour and National between 1984 and 1993.

The most bizarre allegation the Herald throws at Peters' is that he is a 'demagogue'. As if appealing to popular discontent is somehow anti-democratic. One of the things that sets Peters apart from others is his staunch opposition to elitism. But underlying this populism is a deeply conservative political philosophy which has pitted him against both the liberal milieu of the post-Rogernomics era. Peters is often criticised because we know what he's opposed to, but not what he's for. This is a mistake. Peters is for the opposite of everything he is against. Perhaps this is the reason Peters' opponents find him so frightening.

The Herald might well claim that Peters' style of politics is "rearward looking". And yes, Peters does appear to have a great respect for the better elements and values of our National heritage. However, not only was the original utterer of the 'rearward looking' jibe the same man employing familiar faces like Gerry Brownlee, Bill English and Roger Douglas, but his plan “to move on into the future” bears a disconcerting resemblance to the discredited policies of previous Labour and National governments. That strikes us as less "Path to Prosperity" and more "Shining Path".

In short, then; God Defend New Zealand - and if He doesn't, Winston will.

- Curwen Rolinson & Josh Van Veen