The sad thing is that she would be deemed as a nazi in some peoples views and from what we remember or have learned of crimes nazis committed but that isn’t a fair portrayal of her either.
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
Very good Election result by Luxon for National
Increase in the party vote from 25.6% last election under Collins (who really had little chance against the backdrop of Covid and the leadership changes National made in quick succession) up to 38.06% this election. Number of seats in Parliament increased from 33 to 48.
The 38.06% in Luxon's first election campaign is more than Jacinda achieved in her first election with 36.9%
Will be interesting to see how the coalition arrangements work and what wins the Government can make this term in order to ensure votes stay with the center right block for 2026.
Increase in the party vote from 25.6% last election under Collins (who really had little chance against the backdrop of Covid and the leadership changes National made in quick succession) up to 38.06% this election. Number of seats in Parliament increased from 33 to 48.
The 38.06% in Luxon's first election campaign is more than Jacinda achieved in her first election with 36.9%
Will be interesting to see how the coalition arrangements work and what wins the Government can make this term in order to ensure votes stay with the center right block for 2026.
Is this Green Party statement below not clear enough on the parties view on the topic?
Doesn't really read hard left now does it...
Meanwhile the Act party have only condemned Hamas and not commented on Israel targeting civilians...
The Green Party is deeply concerned about the unprecedented escalation of violence in Israel and Gaza.
We condemn the targeting of civilians by any armed group in the strongest terms, no matter the context. Both Hamas and the Israeli Defence Force have a clear obligation to protect civilians from harm.
We call on Hamas to allow the safe and immediate release of all Israeli civilian hostages, without condition.
While the attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians was unconscionable and constitutes the gravest war crimes, nothing justifies the indiscriminate retaliation upon the trapped civilian population in Gaza by the Israeli Defence Force.
Two million people – including one million children – live in Gaza and have nowhere to go to escape bombing that is destroying their homes, schools, and hospitals.
Withholding access to water, electricity, or humanitarian supplies and blocking border points, while the ongoing military assault on Gaza continues, is a clear breach of international law.
We are concerned that ongoing escalation will have devastating consequences. The international community must stand against these crimes against humanity and prevent ethnic cleansing.
We stand with humanitarian groups, the United Nations Secretary General, Israeli and Palestinian voices for peace and an end to the occupation and the blockade.
Together we call upon Israeli leaders for immediate cessation of the assault on Gaza and opening of aid corridors and supplies. We call on the international community to unite to support a ceasefire and a durable, just peace.
The only sustainable path forward for peace in both Israel and Palestine is respect for the dignity and rights of both communities to self-determination, through an end to Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, freedom of movement, equal rights, and a path to statehood for Palestine. The global community must take all steps to secure a lasting peace.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Labour leadership vote: Chris Hipkins to reveal whether he’s staying on
By: Thomas Coughlan and Adam Pearse
7 Nov, 2023 01:05 PM
Chris Hipkins has been endorsed as the Labour leader and will continue as party leader.
Kelvin Davis will not continue as the deputy leader and Carmel Sepuloni will take over in the position.
Labour’s caucus met in Upper Hutt today to discuss many topics including the party’s leadership following a dismal 2023 election result.
The leadership vote was a secret ballot so he didn’t know whether there were any dissenting votes in the leadership vote. There were no other candidates for the leadership.
On the messages to the caucus on unity in Opposition, Hipkins said he felt he didn’t need to give that message and said it was obvious.
Hipkins said Davis had not stated he would retire from politics altogether, but had earlier told Hipkins that he wanted to step down from the role of deputy party leader.
Hipkins said it was his intention he would be Labour leader for the 2026 election campaign. He said he was confident he would be leader then.
He said Labour would have a “refreshed policy platform” going into the 2026 campaign.
“We start effectively with a blank page ... we start again,” Hipkins said of Labour’s policies.
“We need to take stock, we need to refresh. We start again with a blank page.”
He said there had been a brief conversation on tax at today’s meeting but nothing specific.
Hipkins formerly ruled out a wealth tax under his leadership, but is indicating that could change in the run-up to 2026.
He didn’t believe tax was the issue that defined the election result. He wouldn’t answer whether ruling out a wealth or capital gains tax was a mistake, repeating that Labour started with a blank page.
Hipkins believed a lot of vote splitting occurred in the Māori seats, which led to Te Pāti Māori winning six of the seven Māori electorates.
Hipkins nominated Sepuloni to be the next deputy leader of the party and she was unanimously supported by the caucus.
He didn’t agree that he was still leader because no one else wanted the job.
Sepuloni said Davis had indicated he wanted to step down and therefore there was no need for negotiations over the position.
She said Auckland was a problem for Labour, as evidenced by the election, so the party had to “think broadly” about why it fell short in the city.
The deputy leader job was about relationships within caucus, the party and stakeholders, Sepuloni said.
The first part of Labour’s Opposition was reflecting on what it did right and what it did wrong over its six years in government and the election. It will also involve “very vigorously” holding the next government to account.
EARLIER
As MPs filed into their meeting room this morning, several said they were supporting Chris Hipkins ahead of the leadership vote.
Senior Labour MP David Parker refused to say whether he will endorse Hipkins but did rule out contesting the leadership.
“The question of endorsement will come up, it’s a matter between me and the caucus,” he told reporters.
Phil Twyford, who won back Te Atatū after special votes were counted, believed Hipkins had the “experience and the skills” to lead Labour but wouldn’t say whether he’d support him as leader.
“Those are things we discuss in the caucus room, not outside.”
He did admit he’d be surprised if Hipkins wasn’t leader after today’s vote.
Peeni Henare confirmed his support for Hipkins.
He also stated the party would officially request a recount of the result in his electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau, which he lost by just four votes to Te Pāti Māori’s Takutai Tarsh Kemp.
“Four votes is too close to call, so we’re going to ask for a recount.”
Education spokesperson Jan Tinetti was tight-lipped on who she’d support, but did say Hipkins had been a good leader.
Finance spokesperson Grant Roberston was adamant in his backing of Hipkins and was absolutely sure Hipkins would be leader come the 2026 election.
Asked whether he expected any challengers, Robertson said the caucus was about to meet but, “no, Chris is our leader”.
Ginny Andersen, the former MP for Hutt South which neighbours Hipkins’ Remutaka electorate, said Hipkins would always have her support and backed him to lead Labour in the next election if he wanted to.
“I think Chris is the right guy for the job and I’m backing him.”
Neither Mt Albert MP Helen White nor former Rangitata MP Jo Luxton would reveal who they would support in the leadership vote. Health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall said leadership discussions were for caucus only.
Former Te Tai Tonga MP Rino Tirikatene, Manurewa MP Arena Williams, Ikaroa-Rāwhiti MP Cushla Tangaere-Manuel and Christchurch East MP Reuben Davidson all said they would vote for Hipkins.
If Hipkins were to lose that vote, the caucus could try to elect another leader from its ranks, which would require two-thirds of MPs to agree on a candidate. Failing that, the question would trigger a leadership election using the party’s electoral college system, which gives members and unions a vote.
On Friday, Hipkins said he was “still in the fight” and he has received the explicit backing of multiple MPs since the election result.
Soon after the election, the likes of Willie Jackson and Megan Woods swung in behind Hipkins.
“We’ve gotta find out what Chippy wants to do, and hopefully he wants to stay,” Jackson said ahead of Labour’s first post-election caucus last month.
The party’s campaign chairwoman Megan Woods said she had “no doubt” Hipkins would win the confidence vote.
That support has continued to build.
Andersen told TVNZ’s Breakfast on Monday she was behind Hipkins “100 per cent”.
“I believe that Chris Hipkins is the best person to be leading us right now,” Andersen said.
Today’s caucus meeting is not going to take place in the party’s caucus room in Parliament. Instead, the party is decamping elsewhere in the Wellington region, where MPs can gather away from media who typically blockade the caucus room, turning even an innocent toilet break into an opportunity to gather insight on the party’s deliberations.
Instead of a typical meeting, which lasts roughly a couple of hours, this meeting will last most of the day.
The meeting will be the first since Labour MPs met in the week following the election to discuss the result. That first caucus meeting had a tense moment when MPs discussed whether it would be appropriate for them to explicitly endorse a leader prior to the vote.
There had been rumblings of a challenge by senior MP and former interim leader David Parker. This was mounted mainly by Auckland-based MPs frustrated at the party’s dire performance in the Super City this election, and other MPs frustrated at Hipkins’ decision to rule out a wealth tax, which Parker had designed in his role as Revenue Minister.
Parker does not appear to have the numbers to mount a challenge, or even to stop Hipkins from clearing the threshold required to confirm he has the confidence of his caucus. He would need just 14 votes to block the confidence motion. Without the numbers, it seems unlikely Parker would even put his hat in the ring.
Most people spoken to by the Herald think Hipkins is still the only person for the job, and is the party’s best bet for 2023. Others think the party needs to reckon with the fact that he led Labour to a historic defeat and Labour’s share of the party vote declined under Hipkins’ leadership.
Labour’s caucus will continue to discuss the campaign and what went wrong. The party’s remaining Auckland MPs are likely to be particularly vocal, given the scale of the party’s defeat there.
The party’s rather thin 2023 manifesto is also likely to be a topic of conversation, with some MPs frustrated Labour did not put more incisive policy on the table after Hipkins’ 2020 pivot to the centre soon after he took the leadership.
www.nzherald.co.nz
Really the best and probably only option for Labour at this point.
Hipkins needs to channel his concession speech from election night rather than the negative campaign previously and he will be better for it.
By: Thomas Coughlan and Adam Pearse
7 Nov, 2023 01:05 PM
Chris Hipkins has been endorsed as the Labour leader and will continue as party leader.
Kelvin Davis will not continue as the deputy leader and Carmel Sepuloni will take over in the position.
Labour’s caucus met in Upper Hutt today to discuss many topics including the party’s leadership following a dismal 2023 election result.
The leadership vote was a secret ballot so he didn’t know whether there were any dissenting votes in the leadership vote. There were no other candidates for the leadership.
On the messages to the caucus on unity in Opposition, Hipkins said he felt he didn’t need to give that message and said it was obvious.
Hipkins said Davis had not stated he would retire from politics altogether, but had earlier told Hipkins that he wanted to step down from the role of deputy party leader.
Hipkins said it was his intention he would be Labour leader for the 2026 election campaign. He said he was confident he would be leader then.
He said Labour would have a “refreshed policy platform” going into the 2026 campaign.
“We start effectively with a blank page ... we start again,” Hipkins said of Labour’s policies.
“We need to take stock, we need to refresh. We start again with a blank page.”
He said there had been a brief conversation on tax at today’s meeting but nothing specific.
Hipkins formerly ruled out a wealth tax under his leadership, but is indicating that could change in the run-up to 2026.
He didn’t believe tax was the issue that defined the election result. He wouldn’t answer whether ruling out a wealth or capital gains tax was a mistake, repeating that Labour started with a blank page.
Hipkins believed a lot of vote splitting occurred in the Māori seats, which led to Te Pāti Māori winning six of the seven Māori electorates.
Hipkins nominated Sepuloni to be the next deputy leader of the party and she was unanimously supported by the caucus.
He didn’t agree that he was still leader because no one else wanted the job.
Sepuloni said Davis had indicated he wanted to step down and therefore there was no need for negotiations over the position.
She said Auckland was a problem for Labour, as evidenced by the election, so the party had to “think broadly” about why it fell short in the city.
The deputy leader job was about relationships within caucus, the party and stakeholders, Sepuloni said.
The first part of Labour’s Opposition was reflecting on what it did right and what it did wrong over its six years in government and the election. It will also involve “very vigorously” holding the next government to account.
EARLIER
As MPs filed into their meeting room this morning, several said they were supporting Chris Hipkins ahead of the leadership vote.
Senior Labour MP David Parker refused to say whether he will endorse Hipkins but did rule out contesting the leadership.
“The question of endorsement will come up, it’s a matter between me and the caucus,” he told reporters.
Phil Twyford, who won back Te Atatū after special votes were counted, believed Hipkins had the “experience and the skills” to lead Labour but wouldn’t say whether he’d support him as leader.
“Those are things we discuss in the caucus room, not outside.”
He did admit he’d be surprised if Hipkins wasn’t leader after today’s vote.
Peeni Henare confirmed his support for Hipkins.
He also stated the party would officially request a recount of the result in his electorate of Tāmaki Makaurau, which he lost by just four votes to Te Pāti Māori’s Takutai Tarsh Kemp.
“Four votes is too close to call, so we’re going to ask for a recount.”
Education spokesperson Jan Tinetti was tight-lipped on who she’d support, but did say Hipkins had been a good leader.
Finance spokesperson Grant Roberston was adamant in his backing of Hipkins and was absolutely sure Hipkins would be leader come the 2026 election.
Asked whether he expected any challengers, Robertson said the caucus was about to meet but, “no, Chris is our leader”.
Ginny Andersen, the former MP for Hutt South which neighbours Hipkins’ Remutaka electorate, said Hipkins would always have her support and backed him to lead Labour in the next election if he wanted to.
“I think Chris is the right guy for the job and I’m backing him.”
Neither Mt Albert MP Helen White nor former Rangitata MP Jo Luxton would reveal who they would support in the leadership vote. Health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall said leadership discussions were for caucus only.
Former Te Tai Tonga MP Rino Tirikatene, Manurewa MP Arena Williams, Ikaroa-Rāwhiti MP Cushla Tangaere-Manuel and Christchurch East MP Reuben Davidson all said they would vote for Hipkins.
If Hipkins were to lose that vote, the caucus could try to elect another leader from its ranks, which would require two-thirds of MPs to agree on a candidate. Failing that, the question would trigger a leadership election using the party’s electoral college system, which gives members and unions a vote.
On Friday, Hipkins said he was “still in the fight” and he has received the explicit backing of multiple MPs since the election result.
Soon after the election, the likes of Willie Jackson and Megan Woods swung in behind Hipkins.
“We’ve gotta find out what Chippy wants to do, and hopefully he wants to stay,” Jackson said ahead of Labour’s first post-election caucus last month.
The party’s campaign chairwoman Megan Woods said she had “no doubt” Hipkins would win the confidence vote.
That support has continued to build.
Andersen told TVNZ’s Breakfast on Monday she was behind Hipkins “100 per cent”.
“I believe that Chris Hipkins is the best person to be leading us right now,” Andersen said.
Today’s caucus meeting is not going to take place in the party’s caucus room in Parliament. Instead, the party is decamping elsewhere in the Wellington region, where MPs can gather away from media who typically blockade the caucus room, turning even an innocent toilet break into an opportunity to gather insight on the party’s deliberations.
Instead of a typical meeting, which lasts roughly a couple of hours, this meeting will last most of the day.
The meeting will be the first since Labour MPs met in the week following the election to discuss the result. That first caucus meeting had a tense moment when MPs discussed whether it would be appropriate for them to explicitly endorse a leader prior to the vote.
There had been rumblings of a challenge by senior MP and former interim leader David Parker. This was mounted mainly by Auckland-based MPs frustrated at the party’s dire performance in the Super City this election, and other MPs frustrated at Hipkins’ decision to rule out a wealth tax, which Parker had designed in his role as Revenue Minister.
Parker does not appear to have the numbers to mount a challenge, or even to stop Hipkins from clearing the threshold required to confirm he has the confidence of his caucus. He would need just 14 votes to block the confidence motion. Without the numbers, it seems unlikely Parker would even put his hat in the ring.
Most people spoken to by the Herald think Hipkins is still the only person for the job, and is the party’s best bet for 2023. Others think the party needs to reckon with the fact that he led Labour to a historic defeat and Labour’s share of the party vote declined under Hipkins’ leadership.
Labour’s caucus will continue to discuss the campaign and what went wrong. The party’s remaining Auckland MPs are likely to be particularly vocal, given the scale of the party’s defeat there.
The party’s rather thin 2023 manifesto is also likely to be a topic of conversation, with some MPs frustrated Labour did not put more incisive policy on the table after Hipkins’ 2020 pivot to the centre soon after he took the leadership.
Watch live: Chris Hipkins stays on as Labour leader, Kelvin Davis steps down as deputy
The Labour leader will almost certainly survive a leadership vote today.
Really the best and probably only option for Labour at this point.
Hipkins needs to channel his concession speech from election night rather than the negative campaign previously and he will be better for it.
Did tough on crime Luxon or Seymour comment on the baby case?
Tough on Crime - but not not tough on war crimes
Swarbrick is quoted in articles today explaining what she meant.
Perhaps go and watch some of the clips Rizzah has posted in the thread before dropping your pathetic laugh emojis about a polictician calling for a ceasefire - "Barbarous death and destruction" is a very apt term for what is happening.
"I recognise that there are different views on what this statement means, but I also think it is really important for us to point out that this is a purposeful distraction that is being used the world over to shut down peace activists from Jewish and Palestinian backgrounds,” she told RNZ.
Swarbrick said she abhorred and decried “barbarous death and destruction” and antisemitic notions.
“I believe that it is deeply antisemitic to conflate the actions of the Israeli government with Jewish people, not the least when Jewish peace activists worldwide are protesting these actions.”
You are really triggered aren't you? Did somebody dare question Chloe about what she meant. That mean David Seymour, how dare he!
Like I said before, posting about free speech to try and get a bite so you can get up on your soapbox. From the above it looks like you may have stacked a few on top of each other.
The laughing emoji is because I found it funny that you were using your free speech to get butt hurt about David Seymour using his free speech to get butt hurt about Chloe using hers. I'm pretty sure that's what the little emojis are there for. It's even funnier knowing that a laughing emoji sets you off this much too.
I'm looking forward to seeing if you can use the word glib even more.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
I was merely pointing out the hypcrosy of Seymours actions. It's funny how the biggest proponents of free speech are the biggest hypocrites & the ones who demand apologies.You are really triggered aren't you? Did somebody dare question Chloe about what she meant. That mean David Seymour, how dare he!
Like I said before, posting about free speech to try and get a bite so you can get up on your soapbox. From the above it looks like you may have stacked a few on top of each other.
The laughing emoji is because I found it funny that you were using your free speech to get butt hurt about David Seymour using his free speech to get butt hurt about Chloe using hers. I'm pretty sure that's what the little emojis are there for. It's even funnier knowing that a laughing emoji sets you off this much too.
I'm looking forward to seeing if you can use the word glib even more.
TBH I'm just glad I'm not the guy on this forum who has shown more sympathy for NRL referees than the innocent civilians of Israel and Palenstine.
Yes, it’s very clear….. Israel is within the Palestinian Territories. They are calling for the end of Israel.
The PalestinIan’s also want the occupied West Bank returned to them because it includes the city of Jerusalem. The problem is that the West Bank wasn‘t part of Palestine but part of Jordan.
Do you genuinely think the protest was more about ending the senseless violence or calling for the end of Israel?
Although I can agree the term was clumsily used.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Free speech is not free from consequence. You seem to be struggling with this concept.
I'm not struggling at all.
For instance, why wouldn't Seymour answer on or apologise for the Pacific Peoples line? or the Act Party line "Tough on Crime - Best for Maori"
I know the answer...
What do you think is the difference between Seymour's 'Tough on crime - best for Maori' comment and Chloe's 'From the river to the sea..' comment?
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Perhaps the difference is one line was used in an election campaign and the other was used in a public protest calling for a ceasefire...
and you think I'm the one struggling...
Its ok to say you don't know.
enlighten me then you scholar
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
No, this is for you mate. You have made the comparison. If you cant identify the major differences between the two comments then there isn't a lot more to discuss.
one is a very stupid & offensive election slogan workshopped to dogwhistle up votes from racist idiots.
one is a phrase that pre dates its adoption by the terrorist organisation Hamas..
What exactly is the purpose of trying to get me to identify the major difference between the quotes? to make you look clever?
Not to make me look clever at all. I don't need that.
It is clear to me that you can't appreciate the difference between the two comments you compared, other than its David vs Chloe.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Didn't I just explain the differences?
How about you explain to me
How Seymour refused to apologise for joking about blowing up the ministry of pacific people...
But wanted an apology from the maori party for the leader joking he would poison him with karaka berries. Even going as far as saying in the media
“I'm genuinely concerned that the next step is that some slightly more radical person doesn't think it's a joke,”
Like I was saying, the biggest proponents of free speech are always the biggest hypocrites.
You seem to need to desperately defend the weirdest things - NRL refs, Seymour... Truly odd
MEANWHILE how about all of our politicians condemn the violence in Israel and Palestine?
Classic right wing - only freedom of certain types of speech.
