Sometimes, especially in an election campaign, the political reporter’s role is to stand out of the way and let the protagonists slug it out. Really, all we need do in some circumstances is let them say what it is they’ve prepared, report it accurately, and let the public decide.
Like most people, I’ve never seen John Key’s balls (and I don’t want to) … but it seems to me Phil Goff’s attention-seeking comment is aimed directly at the risk-averse incrementalism approach National has taken in government … despite what some point to as bold claims of brave and principled ‘leadership’ in Key’s 2008 election campaign.
Some lay this poll-driven timidity and hesitancy at campaign manager Steven Joyce’s feet. My own view is he’s not alone. It’s natural after nine years in Opposition to be transfixed by an urge: to-not-want-to-screw-it-up.
Another factor, surely, in the Key government’s arguably ‘cautious’ performance has been the series of once-in-lifetime, larger than life situations and disasters thrust upon the country. They, surely, would give anyone pause.
It will be interesting to see how far the Labour message: ‘Labour haft more mmmm political courage’ line goes. It may strike a chord. Parties in Opposition really do have the luxury of speaking from principle … without much fear of being held to account — and fair enough too. There have to be some perks for losing an election!
Let’s admit this: pulling the ‘Raise the retirement age’ debate out right now DOES seem pretty bold of Labour. So does floating a Capital Gains Tax.
Electorally attractive? Hmmm Dunno. Not likely.
But, like the Mana Party — at least they’re emphasizing a point of difference with these policies. And getting talked about.
– P
So when Labour propose unpopular legislation its Ballsy but when National do the same its just unpopular.
And I disagree with your view on National not wanting to screw it up. National have done more for NZ in this short tenure than Clark’s whole boring reign.
No, I think you misread my point. (And I don’t have anything like the partisan view you imply.)
The Key/Joyce/McCully approach is, it seems to me, to avoid doing anything ‘unpopular’ …
On your second point, would you care to share some examples of these achievements (“National have done more for NZ in this short tenure …”) ?
I’m interested.
– P
I did read your point correct, and you missed my point. National at least have pushed this country forward sure some unpopular moves but you cannot please all, all the time. Labour did bugger all popular or unpopular, so even if National are avoiding unpopular decisions, (which they are not) Asset Sales for one Potential Mining for two. Labour have bugger all to show for themselves from Clarks stand. Oh sorry they did push through the disgusting Anti Smacking bill of a discraceful piece of you know what.
Firstly and most importantly National gave Tax cuts a considerable Tax cut. Funny how NZers have already forgotten that one and now sticking their hand out for more. Labour used this carrot for years and years but did not have the Balls to do it. National step in Key made it happen. Extra $$$ for Parents.
And in my region a big piece of work infact this is happening all over NZ. Roading. Tranmission Gully has been pipe dream for years the longer Labour left it lingering the more $$ in was going to cost to implement and the more $$$ NZ long term would waste. National knows its needed stepped in and put their foot down.
And personally the biggest one Ending Treaty Claims if they continue the Govt whomever it is will run out of money, its no wonder this country is in deficit. Labour would not touch this with a barge poll.
Ok your turn Labour efforts?
Ouch! Fran O’Sullivan in today’s NZ Herald:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10762345
Now my eyes are watering.
O’Sullivan’s last few paragraphs touch on what I was trying to say about the timidity of National’s poll-attentive political management in my post ‘Methinks Mr Joyce doth protest too much’ (http://www.thepaepae.com/?p=19833 ) …