Politics NZ Politics

Who will get your vote in this years election?

  • National

    Votes: 17 26.2%
  • Labour

    Votes: 13 20.0%
  • Act

    Votes: 7 10.8%
  • Greens

    Votes: 9 13.8%
  • NZ First

    Votes: 5 7.7%
  • Māori Party

    Votes: 3 4.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 11 16.9%

  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
We have likely had 3 party coalitions in the past. The usual roadblock is Winston.

If he is this hard to negotiate with when there is only one major party imagine what went on behind the scenes when he had both major parties negotiating with him. More what he would have been willing to ask for or either party willing to give him.

I like MMP in how you can vote for a local MP who may be different to the overall party you'd prefer. Compared to FPP which I recall was vote for you MP which helped the party overall. I might be wrong on that as it was a long time ago and I may have only voted once under that system.

I'm interested to see how things work once Winston is out of the picture and if things work any easier. He could have set a bad example as a lot of the minor parties have some unrealistic bottom lines which wouldn't work in negotiating anywhere else if one side has 30-40% and you have 5%. But politics is it's own beast.
"Let's take our country back. From me!" -Winnie
Unfortunately Winnie has them both by the balls.
Having a laugh at the expense of all of us.
 
As Willie Jackson said democracy has changed!

- Only country in the world with last minute voting
- Trying to bring in 16 year old voting
- Denied Tauranga local elections after a term of commissioners
- Mahuta trying to entrench policy requiring 60% to overturn
- Disproportionate Maori wards in Rotorua stopped by Labours own attorney general
- uncampaigned on co-governance changes

There is usual political games but a lot of the hate towards Labour is because they have screwed with Democracy and tried to force long term unchangable rules in their favour.
Remind me again who is trying to eliminate the treaty of Waitangi? Which party(ies) were and still are involved in immense dirty politics? Who have extremely powerful lobbying companies that are employed right now to dictate policy? Who have swathes of private money that backed very negative campaigns, and came from donors that now want payback in terms of policy, like reigniting the housing market, fossil fuel exploration etc?

Remind me again who will privatise assets that are not theirs to sell?

It's not the parties on the left.
 
can we please please not have david seymour as deputy pm ? pleases !
(that would mean he would actually be the pm when the other one is out of teh country ... that cannot happen! imagine him fronting on a natural disaster... gross )
I don't understand why deputy PM would or should be up for grabs. National have by far the greater number of seats with two minor parties in support. They should hold the PM, deputy PM and finance positions with some cabinet positions handed to ACT and NZFirst.
 
I don't understand why deputy PM would or should be up for grabs. National have by far the greater number of seats with two minor parties in support. They should hold the PM, deputy PM and finance positions with some cabinet positions handed to ACT and NZFirst.
??I don't understand why??
Pretty simple if the two minor parties don't get some type of return they're not giving their support .
 
Remind me again who is trying to eliminate the treaty of Waitangi? Which party(ies) were and still are involved in immense dirty politics? Who have extremely powerful lobbying companies that are employed right now to dictate policy? Who have swathes of private money that backed very negative campaigns, and came from donors that now want payback in terms of policy, like reigniting the housing market, fossil fuel exploration etc?

Remind me again who will privatise assets that are not theirs to sell?

It's not the parties on the left.
If only the left had actually run the health system, schools and economy to a competent standard so the country wasn’t going down the shitter, we wouldn’t need the right. 🤷‍♂️

The left only have themselves to blame for pissing everyone off by over extending the treaty, using dirty politics as per Gaurav Sharma, listening to extremely powerful unions and special interests that dictated policy, have a biased media that oversaw a negative Labour campaign and stuffed up housing resulting in record homelessness and poverty. 😉
 
ECE teachers 'really angry and very frustrated' pay parity 'further out of reach' after cost blowout

By John Gerritsen for RNZ

The government underestimated the cost of passing on school and kindergarten teachers' pay rises to early childhood teachers by $253 million.

A September Cabinet paper from Education Minister Jan Tinetti showed the government set aside $428m over four years for the flow-on cost of teachers' pay settlements to early learning services. But it was not enough.

"The final settlements of the kindergarten, primary and secondary teacher collectives, and the change to offer funding rate parity for some education and care services with kindergartens, increases the cost of passing on salary improvements to education and care services," the paper said.

"This is $253 million above the funding set aside in the bargaining contingency to pass on the increases to the unified base salary scale (UBSS) from all three teacher collectives. Vote Education has no further capacity to absorb this additional cost.

"The pass-on of the full range of salary increases may be considered in future. It is not currently affordable for the government to continue to commit to pay parity and pass on the full settlement to education and care services."

The paper said the Ministry of Education realised in June when it was updating kindergarten funding rates in light of its teachers' pay settlement there was a "mismatch" between the amount of money set aside for extending those rates to some early learning services and the likely actual cost.

It had initially estimated the figure based on the pay gap between early childhood and kindergarten teachers and the number of teachers, but later calculated the cost of applying kindergarten subsidy rates to early childhood services that opted into pay parity.

"I have expressed my disappointment to officials for not identifying the problem sooner that has resulted in this funding shortfall," Tinetti's paper said.

"The ministry is improving its processes for managing the cost implications of new policy initiatives and calculating bargaining contingencies. I have received assurance from the ministry that I will be advised of risks such as these sooner in future.

"However, the error has further highlighted the complexities of the funding model for the ECE sector and the need to review the system so we can have better costing, modelling and accountability of public funds."

Cabinet later agreed to pass onto early childhood centres the subsidy increases that kindergartens would receive up to and including December this year, but not subsequent increases.

Early childhood teachers already knew the government could not afford pay parity, but Educational Institute national secretary Stephanie Mills said its members would not be happy to learn about the ministry's miscalculation.

"Early childhood teachers are going to be really angry and very frustrated because they've fought for pay parity to be recognised as professionals for decades, we've finally got there it seemed and now it's been undercut, not just by I guess accounting problems at the ministry but because education is still seen by government as something that is a cost - not an investment."

Mills said the ongoing mismatch between kindergarten and early childhood funding rates was bad news for early childhood teachers and also for families.

"We've already got a sector that is in crisis because we've got too few qualified teachers in the workforce, we've got a high churn because pay and conditions are pretty terrible and so I think what we are going to see is real impacts on teachers, but also on the families and the children that they serve.

"We'll see teachers leaving for Australia, we'll see teachers leaving the sector go to into primary teaching for example, we might I think also see increases in costs to families because one of the perverse consequences of this is that if services don't get funded enough to pay for parity and they need to keep their teachers they will have to pass those costs on to parents."

Mills said the incoming government should put the problem at the top of its priority list because it affected 25,000 teachers and hundreds of thousands of families.

She said early childhood funding needed a "transformative review" because funding rates were based on average teacher costs which penalised those services with long-serving, more expensive teachers.

Mills said the Early Childhood Education Agreement covering teachers working at about 100 mostly community-based services was still under negotiation.

Early Childhood Council chief executive Simon Laube said the paper showed how stretched the government's finances were.

"They had a secret allowance that no one knew at the time for the collective, but actually once the secondary teachers settled they just simply did not have enough money to flow on that outcome to 18,000 teachers in education and care services, by a huge amount."

Laube said funding for early learning was complicated and the paper showed the outgoing government had taken pay parity off the table until the system was reviewed.

"The line seems to be pay parity's off the table for education and care but we would like to do a funding review because of all these concerns," he said.

"Pay parity's just gone further out of reach."

RNZ


Expect to see more issues uncovered as we go. How Grant Robinson could sit there in front of everyone and critique the funding of opposition policy with a straight face is laughable. I wonder why this wasn't released in September :ROFLMAO:
 
ECE teachers 'really angry and very frustrated' pay parity 'further out of reach' after cost blowout

By John Gerritsen for RNZ

The government underestimated the cost of passing on school and kindergarten teachers' pay rises to early childhood teachers by $253 million.

A September Cabinet paper from Education Minister Jan Tinetti showed the government set aside $428m over four years for the flow-on cost of teachers' pay settlements to early learning services. But it was not enough.

"The final settlements of the kindergarten, primary and secondary teacher collectives, and the change to offer funding rate parity for some education and care services with kindergartens, increases the cost of passing on salary improvements to education and care services," the paper said.

"This is $253 million above the funding set aside in the bargaining contingency to pass on the increases to the unified base salary scale (UBSS) from all three teacher collectives. Vote Education has no further capacity to absorb this additional cost.

"The pass-on of the full range of salary increases may be considered in future. It is not currently affordable for the government to continue to commit to pay parity and pass on the full settlement to education and care services."

The paper said the Ministry of Education realised in June when it was updating kindergarten funding rates in light of its teachers' pay settlement there was a "mismatch" between the amount of money set aside for extending those rates to some early learning services and the likely actual cost.

It had initially estimated the figure based on the pay gap between early childhood and kindergarten teachers and the number of teachers, but later calculated the cost of applying kindergarten subsidy rates to early childhood services that opted into pay parity.

"I have expressed my disappointment to officials for not identifying the problem sooner that has resulted in this funding shortfall," Tinetti's paper said.

"The ministry is improving its processes for managing the cost implications of new policy initiatives and calculating bargaining contingencies. I have received assurance from the ministry that I will be advised of risks such as these sooner in future.

"However, the error has further highlighted the complexities of the funding model for the ECE sector and the need to review the system so we can have better costing, modelling and accountability of public funds."

Cabinet later agreed to pass onto early childhood centres the subsidy increases that kindergartens would receive up to and including December this year, but not subsequent increases.

Early childhood teachers already knew the government could not afford pay parity, but Educational Institute national secretary Stephanie Mills said its members would not be happy to learn about the ministry's miscalculation.

"Early childhood teachers are going to be really angry and very frustrated because they've fought for pay parity to be recognised as professionals for decades, we've finally got there it seemed and now it's been undercut, not just by I guess accounting problems at the ministry but because education is still seen by government as something that is a cost - not an investment."

Mills said the ongoing mismatch between kindergarten and early childhood funding rates was bad news for early childhood teachers and also for families.

"We've already got a sector that is in crisis because we've got too few qualified teachers in the workforce, we've got a high churn because pay and conditions are pretty terrible and so I think what we are going to see is real impacts on teachers, but also on the families and the children that they serve.

"We'll see teachers leaving for Australia, we'll see teachers leaving the sector go to into primary teaching for example, we might I think also see increases in costs to families because one of the perverse consequences of this is that if services don't get funded enough to pay for parity and they need to keep their teachers they will have to pass those costs on to parents."

Mills said the incoming government should put the problem at the top of its priority list because it affected 25,000 teachers and hundreds of thousands of families.

She said early childhood funding needed a "transformative review" because funding rates were based on average teacher costs which penalised those services with long-serving, more expensive teachers.

Mills said the Early Childhood Education Agreement covering teachers working at about 100 mostly community-based services was still under negotiation.

Early Childhood Council chief executive Simon Laube said the paper showed how stretched the government's finances were.

"They had a secret allowance that no one knew at the time for the collective, but actually once the secondary teachers settled they just simply did not have enough money to flow on that outcome to 18,000 teachers in education and care services, by a huge amount."

Laube said funding for early learning was complicated and the paper showed the outgoing government had taken pay parity off the table until the system was reviewed.

"The line seems to be pay parity's off the table for education and care but we would like to do a funding review because of all these concerns," he said.

"Pay parity's just gone further out of reach."

RNZ


Expect to see more issues uncovered as we go. How Grant Robinson could sit there in front of everyone and critique the funding of opposition policy with a straight face is laughable. I wonder why this wasn't released in September :ROFLMAO:
All this time the Nats critical of the lack of wage increases for this sector.
Now it's time for them to deal with wage demands.
Nicola has been very vocal in the inability of Robertson but her qualifications are not any better..
Unfortunately with our political system we always end up with second best
 
Last edited:

All the while the tax payers fronting the bill for the Kordis hotel in Auckland AND these MPs residences in Wellington.
Weren't they the party campaigning on cutting wasteful government spending.
Are you being sarcastic? A few weeks of hotel accommodation to negotiate the next government is unnecessary expenditure?

How does a few weeks at the Cordis compare with Labour's six years of housing families in motels, and quarantining 230,000 travellers from every single plane landing in NZ over the last two years into hotels for two weeks each?

Your lack of perspective is seriously comical. It is borderline satire
 
Are you being sarcastic? A few weeks of hotel accommodation to negotiate the next government is unnecessary expenditure?

How does a few weeks at the Cordis compare with Labour's six years of housing families in motels, and quarantining 230,000 travellers from every single plane landing in NZ over the last two years into hotels for two weeks each?

Your lack of perspective is seriously comical. It is borderline satire
No, its almost satire the parties campaigning on government largesse, immediately start smashing the tax paye $r for negotiations in a privately owned 5 star hotel... despite the NZ government having meeting rooms in Auckland AND the tax payer paying for all the parties involved (but Winnie) to live in Wellington.

Comparing the negotiation to a global pandemic - and my perspective is comical... sure...
 
So the dealing done at last but we are not privileged to the result.
Is this "secret squirrel shit" a sign of the future 🤔
 
Are you being sarcastic? A few weeks of hotel accommodation to negotiate the next government is unnecessary expenditure?

How does a few weeks at the Cordis compare with Labour's six years of housing families in motels, and quarantining 230,000 travellers from every single plane landing in NZ over the last two years into hotels for two weeks each?

Your lack of perspective is seriously comical. It is borderline satire
There's a difference, those in motels have nowhere else to live, the politicians have other options. I guess Luxon didn't expect it to take this long with his superior business and negotiating skills.
 
Back
Top