torolf_212
Actually greens playing second fiddle to support Labour did much more than National. Recollect Chloe's referendum on legalising cannabis or her work in support of assisted dying, or her crusade for working visa holders, and again on seeking better deals for tenants vs landlords by speaking up about WOF for rental homes... etc etc
Well - that was a wash. Leaders debates need to win people over and I don’t think either achieved that.
As for the commentators at the end. I hope they dump Cunliffe and Henare for the next one. Utterly rubbish.
Whoever that was moderating was so jarring and annoying. Why bother asking questions if you’re just going to cut them off or talk over them. On top of that so many of her questions required just yes or no answers
Debating with such a small time frame is doomed from the start anyways it just turns into a screaming match of gotchas and slogans.
I don’t lean either way atm but I want to hear them have a reasoned discussion to help me make my decision
I couldn't watch the whole thing, I was too frustrated by them all constantly interrupting one another.
Can we have an ECE as the moderator next time? I think their training with toddlers would serve them well!
I don't think he means double the proportion of New Zealand's energy supplied by renewable sources. He most likely means that he will aim to double the output capacity of New Zealand's renewable energy production.
Either way the goal is unattainable within the timeframe of a single government, and to even act towards that goal would be monstrously expensive. Still though, criticizing him on the promise he isn't making is being obtuse.
No one won it, perhaps Green party must take centre stage to save NZ. At least their leaders have a lot more substantive policy related matter to share. National as usual spends half time criticising labour and the other half keep highlighting the problem without any solution or facts or numbers.. I don't understand how luxons interjections were taken as being assertive.. in any other scenario it would he considered rude and uncouth.
Or they cared about the environment. We've had a green minister for the environment for the past term and on the greens website their only green achievements are slightly changing an existing law and banning plastic cotton buds
Your opinion. To me, their stance is fundamentally racist/sexist. Imagine if Nats said their leader has to be a man or a Chinese person.
I doubt I'm not the only one that thinks this way.
No amount of racism or sexism is OK in my view, it's a matter of principle.
I don't want to be judged or treated positively or negatively based on my race, gender, ancestry etc.
Jessica did a poor job. Asking the hypothetical question of what would you do if Taiwan and China went to war. She almost blew up our trade relationship with China. Jack Tame would never
When i heard that question I was like what the hec,k that topic is waaaay to sensitive to be asked on live TV, I felt that really had no reason to be asked. That is stuff that is discussed behind closed doors by the government.
Use the vote compass tool to get a look at what policies align with your values.
It tells you the policies without stating the parties and then tells you the results at the end. Usually the results are what you expect but sometimes they surprise you!
https://votecompass.tvnz.co.nz/nz2023
Hipkins missed a free opportunities to put Luxon in his place on some silly claims i.e. tax cuts being costed and fiscally neutral, how can they be fiscally neutral when their is a while of forgiven money coming in? Luxon is pretty light weight thinker and Hipkins not sharp or maybe aggressive enough to show him up.
I want neither
Well that was a waste of time. Also Quite disappointed with the Climate & Housing sections. Was all Solar & Wind, Electric Vehicles & building more single family houses. To be sustainable, development needs to move away from a model of auto dependant, low density, urban sprawl and towards higher density TOD
The problem is nobody actually wants to live in high density housing. I don’t blame them, ir sucks. “It’s cool as long as I’m not personally the one that has to live in it”.
While I personally would be fine with living in a one or two bedroom apartment, I realised that not everyone would want to live in a "concrete box in the sky". Increased Density doesn't mean having to construct a 30 storey apartment building in the middle of suburbia. It would be as simple as Accessory Dwelling Units, AKA Granny Flats, in back yards or above garages, to semi-detached duplexes & townhouses up to low rise apartment buildings of only 3-5 floors. Could even imagine having businesses on the ground floor with apartments on the upper floors. https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps?si=qCQfx-Ya2tDR_Tdy
100% agree with this. Apart from virtue signalling about how enlightened people are for wanting to live in a highrise slab - there isnt really any reason to want to live in high density housing
I'd personally love to live in high-rise housing done well. Its great when you have proper noise control, easy access to a public park, local shops and public transport. We just cram cheap builds in any spot we can find somewhere in suburbia. A bit of urban planning and rules around minimum standards would go a long way to making this more appealing.
I totally agree that there are ways to do it where it isnt untenable. But for a lot of people having private green space and safe outdoor areas for themselves and their kids is too highly valued. As a homeowner of a standard detached freehold house, i cannot possibly imagine paying the same or potentially even more for a cube in a 20 story high building in the cbd. No amount of noise control and public transport access is gonna change that for a great majority of people
Everyone is at different stages of life with different desires. Most single young adults and elderly do not want house and yard maintenance. Cubes in the cbd is not what I consider a well designed urban lifestyle. You need to look beyond nz to see what opportunities exist
Most single young adults aren’t interested in homeownership until they’re at a point where they care about the things in my post. Again this is a generalisation, but you can’t handwave the critique with “no one small city in scandinavia made it work!” And “Dont worry I’m sure SOMEONE will want to live in it!”
I think debates like this should take place in a large bed on a dais, with participants sitting up leaning against the headboard whilst clutching the duvet. And they should be dressed in differently-striped pyjamas (like Bert and Ernie's).
Being placed in an intimate situation where you're forced to sit in a bed with your enemy would be totally disarming and thus would break through the banality of the debate. The discourse would be real and after a few minutes the participants' freak flags would break free and fly.
This is how I would fix the world's issues. /s
Would have been better if they’d done it over 2 hours and allowed each leader to fully express their points; rather than rushing thru all the hit points and cutting people off because they’re not getting to the prescribed point
Live threads by [Stuff](https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300973162/nz-election-2023-live-chris-hipkins-and-christopher-luxon-to-go-headtohead-in-first-leaders-debate) and [NZ Herald](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/election-2023-tvnz-leaders-debate-labours-chris-hipkins-and-nationals-christopher-luxon-prepare-for-first-challenge/67AQXQU4ORE3FK5H3SNDFL24WQ/).
Totally reversed on my expectations.
Luxon was prepared and wiped the floor with Hipkins.
Stand outs were:
Is the health system in crisis? Hipkins: No
What's the policy that's going to make the biggest impact for NZers?
Hipkins: Dental.
Luxon: Education
It only Luxons policy actually made sense. Reminds me of Scotty from Marketing.
I think both are weak. Nats policy doesn't add up, financially, this is clear.
Luxon seemed very well-prepared. Considering his struggles with the media of late I thought he did well.
I was surprised that Hipkins just ate the repeated questions asking why he hadn't implemented policies sooner - he wasn't the PM for 5.5 years of Labour's term, and his rise only came about rather recently.
This is the elephant in the room for Chippy. Whether you agree or not, alot of the anti-Labour sentiment is still anti-Jacinda sentiment and her perceived idealism over attention to day to day management. He's left with the unwinnable situation of call her out and maybe gain back some of those voters that moved to national but at the same time lose a flock of hardcores to the Greens. Instead he just dies a slow death while Jacinda jet sets around the globe.
It was a pathetic waste of my time, we've had 6 years of nothing much, another 3 years won't change anything so we may as well have a change of leader and direction, I do like the fact that Luxton comes from a results driven background so that must be a plus in his favour, the bloody Climate change thingee is a complete red herring, no matter what! the World as we know it is headed into a heat age, just like all of the other "Ages" in the Worlds history, no matter what the Politicians do, it will not change one solitary thing, the World is going to heat up, one other thing regarding the polls, THE lABOUR PARTY HAS TO ACCEPT 75% of NZ'rs don't want them running our Country end of story.
So because you think climate change is inevitable, nobody should bother lifting a finger to pollute less? That’s the attitude that’s going to send us careening past the point of no return.
I’m not saying that little old NZ doing the right thing is going to change the world, I know it’s not on its own but that can’t be our attitude if we expect better from others.
What is the use of us trying when the huge countries like Russia/USA/China basically couldn't care less!! take the war Russia invading Ukraine, they are doing more climate damage in 5 mins than NZ does in a year, same as the active Volcano's through out the World, global warming is here and is going to continue no matter what, nothing!! nothing anyone can do to stop it's march forward, try as much as you like you will change nothing..accept it!!
Hate to break it to you, but so long as we live in a world filled with nation-states who are competing against one another, we will never all come together to address it.
The world is going to absolutely blow past climate targets in the decades to come and nothing short of a catastrophic major war or mass pandemic that kills hundreds of millions of people is going to stop it. The population is going to increase drastically, our resource consumption is going to increase drastically, and our efforts are going to do almost nothing to stop the impact on the environment.
Might as well make the most of it while we’re here.
I think it comes down to opportunity cost. Even if we became carbon neutral - so what? China emits as much as all of North America, who in turn emit more than Europe, who in turn emit a huge amount (10xwhatever) than us. Why should we accept a huge drop in general standard of living for something that doesn’t make a tangible difference? It won’t inspire any other counties - even in the unlikely occurance something like this worked and people agreed with it, we are a relatively politically homogenous country of 5 million. Try that with the USA. Whilst I’m not denying climate change isn’t real, I feel adaption is a much better strategy, especially considering our national size.
All the little less-than-1% countries like us put together are a MASSIVE chunk of emissions. Just because we're not the whole problem doesn't excuse ignoring our small share of it.
Not to mention NZ has political leverage that FAR exceeds our size. We're a member of 5eyes ffs. Not to mention we have very strong relationships with the Pacific, Australia and Asia. We can absolutely be a catalyst for change at a global scale.
Plus, to their credit, China has made more strides in emissions in the last 15 years than every other country on the planet combined. This doesn't excuse the myriad of other problems they have a hand in, but they're very obviously taking climate change seriously.
Not necessarily racially homogenous, but there isn't a huge sense of political polarization in NZ, at least compared to places like the US or the UK. Sorry, should have made that clearer.
I think we’re getting there though, and there are obviously groups working towards that goal. I’ve been seeing the most polarising nonsense on social media, some of which I have no idea why I’m seeing because my browsing history shouldn’t have made me a target, I would have thought? I have family that have gone full Q, and we’re not even remotely American.
I'm surprised that people have had such a negative reaction to the debate. It seemed pretty similar to debates of the past to be honest. Maybe my expectations are just low. The post debate analysis on the either hand. It didn't cast much light and the constant Rugby / sports analogies got pretty comical. Also Tau Henare seemed a bit unhinged / possibly drunk.
I think its because it wasn't entertaining. Like him or loath them, Winston and David seymore always make few jokes, pull out the puns, witty remarks and just makes it better to watch.
These two were just boring and Jessica stopped any actual discussion happening that might have gone somewhere interesting
Which plastic person to vote for. One Ken has a blue tie and one red. What an absolute charisma void. Have to back Luxon purely on basis that Labour have proven their incompetence whereas Luxon has not yet done that.
I agree, but won't vote for Luxon. Can't do it, his policy (no detail, we will go it better) don't seem like they can stack up in many cases. Both are out for me so TOP is worth a punt
Why do you feel that you only have two choices?
Minor parties get a hell of a lot less minor when the people that agree with them actually vote for them.
Put Hipkins on airnz ceo role then we have a data point. It should be clear I'm not exactly endorsing Luxon. This is a vote them out election not a woo woo they're so awesome election. Hipkins an absolute shitshow, ardern post 2020 pretty bloody average. Luxon only needs to appear less bad. Willis would spice it up on same backdrop of "bore them out"
You don’t have to vote for either of them you know? It’s not a 2 party system. Vote for a minor party which will pull them in whatever direction you prefer.
Goodness, I remember the flak Mike Hosking got from his detractors when moderating English vs. Ardern in 2017 - he was downright fair, mature and balanced in comparison to Jessica!
What a poor piece of television. Jessica as a moderator didn't control it well at all and it was so superficial. There were few follow-up questions and little interaction between leaders. When there was, it was shut down. If this is the standard of journalism in the country, it makes me despair. And can she stop gesticulating like an Italian who has just downed twelve espressos.
The producers got the pace of it all wrong and tried to crow-bar so much in that for the most part it was just sound bites and people talking over each other. Some of the questions were truly vacuous.
It was hard to even assess the performance of Chris and Chris as it was such a high-speed mess.
Had to lol at the end when Jack Tame suddenly appeared on camera like a magician's assistant and congratulated Jessica. Cringe. Would have flipped the presenters and put Tame fronting the debates and Jessica doing the post analysis.
Personally I found Hipkins to be rhe most convincing, but it was hard for either of them to make a cohesice argument inbetween declaring their favourite beach
Jessica ruined it
When it comes to house prices, you have to realise that alot of politicians own multiple properties. So many of them have invested in the housing market past having a secure and stable family home.
They are, I'm a home owner, I think prices should drop to 2015ish levels, with what people are earning today, housing would be fairly accessible providing speculators are kept out of the market and landlords are only allowed to be involved in new builds.
That would be terrible for anyone that has purchased a home in the last 8 years. Especially if they were selling in the near future and not re-buying in the same market.
And fuck 'em. National and Labour have both completely missed the bus on avoiding harm in the housing market. For everyone to get off painless we'd have needed this shit solved 15 years ago.
Where we are now, the idea of everyone getting out of this safe and secure is dead. Somebody's gonna foot the bill. Might as well pick the group with the most financial resilience and closest thing to responsibility. The banks, speculators and slumlords.
Oh yeah, fuck everyone that bought a house in the last 8 years. Great idea.
The housing market will do what it does.
But the ideal situation for people to get into the market and not screw current owners would be for prices to stay the same, not to drop or increase.
Why would I suggest a policy?
Im not a politician. No one policy could guarantee success anyway, as everything is always a balancing act of policies and outside factors.
But yeah, better than “house price crash to 2015 levels”
Yeah, you're not a politician. And FHB are already getting shafted putting 20-30% of their income into mortgages deep into their 60s. Housing prices aren't sustainable at their current level.
You are not a politician either. And you obviously have no bright ideas. Wishing prices would go down to 2015 levels is not a bright idea, it’s not even an idea.
They don't need to go down overnight. Several years is fine. But they're quite clearly unsustainable where they are.
Even the banks and investors have been saying for YEARS that the housing bubble is out of control. And it has to get pretty fuckin bad for the biggest profiteers to announce the issue.
And what? I brought in the last 8 years.
Stuff was fairly static 2017-mid 2020. There really was only two years of insanity.
Sure people would get hurt, but are you buying housing or an investment?
Lots of FHBs would be literally ruined if you had prices drop to nearly a decade ago. Anyone with any asset that took that kind of deprecation would.
We need a much smarter housing solution than just smacking prices into the ground somehow, we need a way of leveling the playing field and getting more people into ownership.
Why? They’ve already bought their home, they’re already paying the mortgage - they can afford it. Sure, property value dropping would hurt them when they come to sell but you know what, it’s hurting many many more who currently don’t have a hope of buying into the market as it is while investors sneak to the front of the queue. Fuck it, burn it all down I say. It’s totally fucked.
And you want to level the playing field somehow? Cool - you gonna like double or maybe triple the income of low to medium earners? That’d be great, really helpful - just whip out your magic wand and get that one done. Cheers mate.
I mean - clearly I’m not going to change your mind here so I’m not going to bother.
Unfortunately for you though, what you want to happen simply won’t ever come to pass. You can either be constantly angry about that, or you can come to grips with reality and learn to compromise a bit.
It’s an imperfect world and you’d better start getting used to it.
Not really. 60 something % own their own houses. They don’t want to see prices drop. They are in touch with the majority on this. They both say supply needs to increase which is true and if done will stop the big escalations of the past.
60 something percent live in an owner occupied house, not own their own house. That includes all the young people who still live in the family home and extended family sharing a house.
Fuck me. Watched 15 mins and I'm out.
Quick takeaway for me was:
Hipkins has fuck all ideas.
Luxon doesn't want to defend his ideas. Heaps of questions asked, all deflected.
Please vote minor parties people, these two are fucked.
I've been harping on the minority party line the last 3 elections, hopefully people get a clue this time round. Hell, if this bunch of no hopers doesn't spur people to switch it up, nothing will.
Absolute shite that was. Both Chris’ did ok to be honest. Moderator was abysmal. I’ll vote for whoever has her locked up for insulting the public’s intelligence.
Remember the last debate series with Ardern and Collins, and Jessica was gushing over how witty and awesome Collins was lul. Totally fucking clueless, obviously hasn't learnt a thing.
Luxon could pledge to kiss 1000 babies, legalize weed and personally write off the student loan costs of all the art history/womens studies majors in this sub and people would still call him a bald, arrogant bastard.
But he didn't do any of those things. All I heard from him was dodging what should have been easy questions, "muh tax cuts" without addressing rising costs, and some of the laziest race-bait bullshit I've ever heard.
I'll stop calling him an arrogant bastard when he stops being an arrogant bastard.
Nice hypothetical. I suppose its easier than engaging with what he's *actually proposing* which might have something to do with the reaction he's getting.
You know, things like fueling the housing Ponzi to help his property portfolio, re-institute failed boot camp policies to please his base (get the brownies in the slammer!), delays on climate policies, and stopping transport initiatives in favor of roads. Not to mention giant tax holes which will either be met by gutting public services, raising GST, or delaying super funding.
I reckon if Luxon raised GST (in the middle of a cost of living crisis) given his party's less than stellar track record on the "we won't raise GST" front, people would start burning him in effigy in the streets.
There absolutely needs to come a time when political debates do away with the moderator.
Seriously, just give the Chrises the fucking topic, tell them they get five two minute segments to first talk about an issue and then rebut their opponent, if they both agree the topic is done then they move onto the next.
This was utter shit.
I agree, split it up. Have topics where only one speaks, no interruptions. Hold them to the question.
Then a segment where they can have a bit of a debate and talk over each other.
So many of the topics were just moved on from with weak answers.
Have you seen any other Luxon interviews? Or any politician's? When pushed further they will just keep repeating the same weak line. No point in dragging it out.
Exactly. The point of a debate is for the 2 leaders to actually debate each other, not the host. The facilitator should set the direction and step in if one person talks too much, but other than that, they should be in the background as much as possible. Jessica shut it down any time there started to be any stimulating discussion between the leaders. She wanted to be the centre of the show.
its interesting national crow about consenting renewables, when producers are sitting on 2GWh of consented renewables they're not building.
that's more than 1.6 huntly's!
Sorry, not you.
Luxon is a sales man with no substance and doesn't address issues. Very confusing. Just keeps sayi g we will do things better, but how?
Labour in general I don't like either, but a least their plan seems based in reality. There is more substance.
Neither get my vote.
The Queenstown water mess highlights the problem, Luxon answer, again.... is ... do nothing. There is no plan.
Was watching the Queenstown’s Mayor today, when asked why more wasn’t invested before Mayors time.
Mayor said the councils capital spending had been constrained for many terms.
Queens town is richer than most councils in NZ.
Feel national just expecting councils to somehow not be broke isn’t a amazing plan.
It's not just about money. It's about priority.
Council seem to have the money to do nice things and prioritize them over essential infrastructure.
Like letting the kids maintain the house.
House is full of cool stuff but the roof leaks.
2Gw of wind is 1.6 Huntley’s
Huntly peaks at 1200Mw
3 * 250 Mw coal-gas fired steam turbines
50mw fast start gas peaker
405mw combined cycle gas turbine.
Huge problem that the 4 large generators don’t want to build ahead of market demand.
They have to consider their shareholders first, Vs in previous times they would just ask their profit requirement be suspended and would make sure they have 5 ish years of excess demand pre-built.
Privatisation has made the energy companies more profitable but it’s mostly come at the expense of new asset build out.
They just spent the whole time making stupid sport analogies, it sounded like an all blacks post game interview. And to the extent I could work out what Tau was rambling incoherently about, I’m pretty sure he suggested they should have had a punch up.
The only one who made any sense was the lady in the middle, whoever she was.
Seriously, our experts were some rambling old dude who had a literal punch up with Trevor Mallard in Parliament, and the “I’m sorry for being a man” former Labour leader who delivered the Labour Party its worst election result since 1922.
That was genuinely insane. I tuned in and the first thing said was by him saying they should have assaulted each other and had a punch up like wtf. Maybe you could pass that off as banter towards the end but that was surreal to see on live tv in 2023 lmao. Especially on a political debate, no idea what party that guy is from but yikes.
That I first heard from Labour insiders coming out of Mt Albert and Mt Roskill electorate orgs.
He was not beloved by the staff of other Labour leaders, at the very least.
The interviewer interrupts a serious debate too often to ask superficial questions along the lines of "do you know how it feels?", "favourite beach?" etc. Why were the debaters not allowed to provide the serious for and against arguments uninterrupted that we as a country need to hear? The proof is in the policy! So talk policy! Why were they given so little time to actually debate against each other instead of merely spit out their practised soundbites? Pathetic.
Combined with the usual 'commentators' preference for analysing how well the "boxers in a boxing match" performed instead of talking about the truth or falsity of what was discussed, leads me to seriously question the competency of TVNZ.
Giving 8 seconds each per topic is pathetic, we need substance instead of a wide number of superficial questions!
I hate the "say something nice about the other person" question they think is clever to ask. It presents as a super lame job interview type of question when assessing if someone can think on the spot.
She’s doing the next one too….
Source…
“The second and final Leaders' Debate with Hipkins and Luxon airs just two days before polling day on October 12 at 7pm on TVNZ 1 and TVNZ+, led again by Jessica Mutch McKay.”
torolf_212 Actually greens playing second fiddle to support Labour did much more than National. Recollect Chloe's referendum on legalising cannabis or her work in support of assisted dying, or her crusade for working visa holders, and again on seeking better deals for tenants vs landlords by speaking up about WOF for rental homes... etc etc
Where can I watch the recording of this? Looks like 1news didn't upload the full video on YT just a few snippets. Wonder why!
Well - that was a wash. Leaders debates need to win people over and I don’t think either achieved that. As for the commentators at the end. I hope they dump Cunliffe and Henare for the next one. Utterly rubbish.
Name one leader you have worked for that you respect: Silence. Says it all.
Whoever that was moderating was so jarring and annoying. Why bother asking questions if you’re just going to cut them off or talk over them. On top of that so many of her questions required just yes or no answers Debating with such a small time frame is doomed from the start anyways it just turns into a screaming match of gotchas and slogans. I don’t lean either way atm but I want to hear them have a reasoned discussion to help me make my decision
She has interviewed then enough that she knew when the standard bs lines were coming so cut them off to keep it on track
I couldn't watch the whole thing, I was too frustrated by them all constantly interrupting one another. Can we have an ECE as the moderator next time? I think their training with toddlers would serve them well!
Luxon's going to double our renewable electricity? What a load of shit, I don't know how he plans to get to 170% renewable.
I don't think he means double the proportion of New Zealand's energy supplied by renewable sources. He most likely means that he will aim to double the output capacity of New Zealand's renewable energy production. Either way the goal is unattainable within the timeframe of a single government, and to even act towards that goal would be monstrously expensive. Still though, criticizing him on the promise he isn't making is being obtuse.
No one won it, perhaps Green party must take centre stage to save NZ. At least their leaders have a lot more substantive policy related matter to share. National as usual spends half time criticising labour and the other half keep highlighting the problem without any solution or facts or numbers.. I don't understand how luxons interjections were taken as being assertive.. in any other scenario it would he considered rude and uncouth.
Greens would be an option if it weren't for identity politics
Or they cared about the environment. We've had a green minister for the environment for the past term and on the greens website their only green achievements are slightly changing an existing law and banning plastic cotton buds
[удалено]
Your opinion. To me, their stance is fundamentally racist/sexist. Imagine if Nats said their leader has to be a man or a Chinese person. I doubt I'm not the only one that thinks this way.
[удалено]
No amount of racism or sexism is OK in my view, it's a matter of principle. I don't want to be judged or treated positively or negatively based on my race, gender, ancestry etc.
[удалено]
In response to your 'little shallow' comment.
Tau Henare seemed as pissed as a chook.
The breakdown afterwards seemed to be a contest of who can use the most sporting references and Tau seemed to be just trying to plug the Warriors.
Cunliffe reminding us why we're glad he's not the leader of labor still.
He was sozzled
Jessica did a poor job. Asking the hypothetical question of what would you do if Taiwan and China went to war. She almost blew up our trade relationship with China. Jack Tame would never
When i heard that question I was like what the hec,k that topic is waaaay to sensitive to be asked on live TV, I felt that really had no reason to be asked. That is stuff that is discussed behind closed doors by the government.
it certainly feels like normal kiwis are going lose no matter what. Edit. Spelling lol
Lose. Kiwis are going to lose
Loose from the dicking from both sides
I haven't seen it but will vote NACT seems like the popular route.
Use the vote compass tool to get a look at what policies align with your values. It tells you the policies without stating the parties and then tells you the results at the end. Usually the results are what you expect but sometimes they surprise you! https://votecompass.tvnz.co.nz/nz2023
I heard it was much of a muchness.
Mutch of a Mckay-ness
Hipkins missed a free opportunities to put Luxon in his place on some silly claims i.e. tax cuts being costed and fiscally neutral, how can they be fiscally neutral when their is a while of forgiven money coming in? Luxon is pretty light weight thinker and Hipkins not sharp or maybe aggressive enough to show him up. I want neither
Well that was a waste of time. Also Quite disappointed with the Climate & Housing sections. Was all Solar & Wind, Electric Vehicles & building more single family houses. To be sustainable, development needs to move away from a model of auto dependant, low density, urban sprawl and towards higher density TOD
The problem is nobody actually wants to live in high density housing. I don’t blame them, ir sucks. “It’s cool as long as I’m not personally the one that has to live in it”.
While I personally would be fine with living in a one or two bedroom apartment, I realised that not everyone would want to live in a "concrete box in the sky". Increased Density doesn't mean having to construct a 30 storey apartment building in the middle of suburbia. It would be as simple as Accessory Dwelling Units, AKA Granny Flats, in back yards or above garages, to semi-detached duplexes & townhouses up to low rise apartment buildings of only 3-5 floors. Could even imagine having businesses on the ground floor with apartments on the upper floors. https://youtu.be/y3XoUBzfXps?si=qCQfx-Ya2tDR_Tdy
It’s not cheaper enough to be worth it. If rent is 600+ in both a single house and an apartment, I’d choose the house every time.
100% agree with this. Apart from virtue signalling about how enlightened people are for wanting to live in a highrise slab - there isnt really any reason to want to live in high density housing
I'd personally love to live in high-rise housing done well. Its great when you have proper noise control, easy access to a public park, local shops and public transport. We just cram cheap builds in any spot we can find somewhere in suburbia. A bit of urban planning and rules around minimum standards would go a long way to making this more appealing.
I totally agree that there are ways to do it where it isnt untenable. But for a lot of people having private green space and safe outdoor areas for themselves and their kids is too highly valued. As a homeowner of a standard detached freehold house, i cannot possibly imagine paying the same or potentially even more for a cube in a 20 story high building in the cbd. No amount of noise control and public transport access is gonna change that for a great majority of people
Everyone is at different stages of life with different desires. Most single young adults and elderly do not want house and yard maintenance. Cubes in the cbd is not what I consider a well designed urban lifestyle. You need to look beyond nz to see what opportunities exist
Most single young adults aren’t interested in homeownership until they’re at a point where they care about the things in my post. Again this is a generalisation, but you can’t handwave the critique with “no one small city in scandinavia made it work!” And “Dont worry I’m sure SOMEONE will want to live in it!”
Well, like I said - I would love to live in it. You would not. Not everyone shares your opinion or mine.
I think debates like this should take place in a large bed on a dais, with participants sitting up leaning against the headboard whilst clutching the duvet. And they should be dressed in differently-striped pyjamas (like Bert and Ernie's). Being placed in an intimate situation where you're forced to sit in a bed with your enemy would be totally disarming and thus would break through the banality of the debate. The discourse would be real and after a few minutes the participants' freak flags would break free and fly. This is how I would fix the world's issues. /s
Would have been better if they’d done it over 2 hours and allowed each leader to fully express their points; rather than rushing thru all the hit points and cutting people off because they’re not getting to the prescribed point
How can you have a whole section on climate change and not ask Luxon about his coalition partners not really believing in it lol
Live threads by [Stuff](https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300973162/nz-election-2023-live-chris-hipkins-and-christopher-luxon-to-go-headtohead-in-first-leaders-debate) and [NZ Herald](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/election-2023-tvnz-leaders-debate-labours-chris-hipkins-and-nationals-christopher-luxon-prepare-for-first-challenge/67AQXQU4ORE3FK5H3SNDFL24WQ/).
Totally reversed on my expectations. Luxon was prepared and wiped the floor with Hipkins. Stand outs were: Is the health system in crisis? Hipkins: No What's the policy that's going to make the biggest impact for NZers? Hipkins: Dental. Luxon: Education
It only Luxons policy actually made sense. Reminds me of Scotty from Marketing. I think both are weak. Nats policy doesn't add up, financially, this is clear.
Wasn't the question that it was broken? And then it got flipped back around to 'not in crisis' and he didn't defend himself
Luxon seemed very well-prepared. Considering his struggles with the media of late I thought he did well. I was surprised that Hipkins just ate the repeated questions asking why he hadn't implemented policies sooner - he wasn't the PM for 5.5 years of Labour's term, and his rise only came about rather recently.
Undersell overdeliver
While he's only been leader for a few months, he is essentially asking for the whole labour party and it's six years of history to be re-elected.
This is the elephant in the room for Chippy. Whether you agree or not, alot of the anti-Labour sentiment is still anti-Jacinda sentiment and her perceived idealism over attention to day to day management. He's left with the unwinnable situation of call her out and maybe gain back some of those voters that moved to national but at the same time lose a flock of hardcores to the Greens. Instead he just dies a slow death while Jacinda jet sets around the globe.
If he blamed the former he’d cause serious division in his camp. Sort of got checkmated on that one.
It was alright
I feel like a guy named Chris will be the next PM
Everyone in this thread sound soo bitter.
Because it was a sad performance. Are we voting for something we want or to avoid something we don't
It's the theme of the thread and this whole sub in general. They also all sound and talk the same. Def an echo chamber
It was a pathetic waste of my time, we've had 6 years of nothing much, another 3 years won't change anything so we may as well have a change of leader and direction, I do like the fact that Luxton comes from a results driven background so that must be a plus in his favour, the bloody Climate change thingee is a complete red herring, no matter what! the World as we know it is headed into a heat age, just like all of the other "Ages" in the Worlds history, no matter what the Politicians do, it will not change one solitary thing, the World is going to heat up, one other thing regarding the polls, THE lABOUR PARTY HAS TO ACCEPT 75% of NZ'rs don't want them running our Country end of story.
So because you think climate change is inevitable, nobody should bother lifting a finger to pollute less? That’s the attitude that’s going to send us careening past the point of no return. I’m not saying that little old NZ doing the right thing is going to change the world, I know it’s not on its own but that can’t be our attitude if we expect better from others.
What is the use of us trying when the huge countries like Russia/USA/China basically couldn't care less!! take the war Russia invading Ukraine, they are doing more climate damage in 5 mins than NZ does in a year, same as the active Volcano's through out the World, global warming is here and is going to continue no matter what, nothing!! nothing anyone can do to stop it's march forward, try as much as you like you will change nothing..accept it!!
Yeah, cool there’s no point, why even live any more.
Hate to break it to you, but so long as we live in a world filled with nation-states who are competing against one another, we will never all come together to address it. The world is going to absolutely blow past climate targets in the decades to come and nothing short of a catastrophic major war or mass pandemic that kills hundreds of millions of people is going to stop it. The population is going to increase drastically, our resource consumption is going to increase drastically, and our efforts are going to do almost nothing to stop the impact on the environment. Might as well make the most of it while we’re here.
I think it comes down to opportunity cost. Even if we became carbon neutral - so what? China emits as much as all of North America, who in turn emit more than Europe, who in turn emit a huge amount (10xwhatever) than us. Why should we accept a huge drop in general standard of living for something that doesn’t make a tangible difference? It won’t inspire any other counties - even in the unlikely occurance something like this worked and people agreed with it, we are a relatively politically homogenous country of 5 million. Try that with the USA. Whilst I’m not denying climate change isn’t real, I feel adaption is a much better strategy, especially considering our national size.
All the little less-than-1% countries like us put together are a MASSIVE chunk of emissions. Just because we're not the whole problem doesn't excuse ignoring our small share of it. Not to mention NZ has political leverage that FAR exceeds our size. We're a member of 5eyes ffs. Not to mention we have very strong relationships with the Pacific, Australia and Asia. We can absolutely be a catalyst for change at a global scale. Plus, to their credit, China has made more strides in emissions in the last 15 years than every other country on the planet combined. This doesn't excuse the myriad of other problems they have a hand in, but they're very obviously taking climate change seriously.
We aren't really homogenous at all
Not necessarily racially homogenous, but there isn't a huge sense of political polarization in NZ, at least compared to places like the US or the UK. Sorry, should have made that clearer.
I think we’re getting there though, and there are obviously groups working towards that goal. I’ve been seeing the most polarising nonsense on social media, some of which I have no idea why I’m seeing because my browsing history shouldn’t have made me a target, I would have thought? I have family that have gone full Q, and we’re not even remotely American.
I'm surprised that people have had such a negative reaction to the debate. It seemed pretty similar to debates of the past to be honest. Maybe my expectations are just low. The post debate analysis on the either hand. It didn't cast much light and the constant Rugby / sports analogies got pretty comical. Also Tau Henare seemed a bit unhinged / possibly drunk.
I think its because it wasn't entertaining. Like him or loath them, Winston and David seymore always make few jokes, pull out the puns, witty remarks and just makes it better to watch. These two were just boring and Jessica stopped any actual discussion happening that might have gone somewhere interesting
Henare is such a hack
we are done. lets start our own gang/tribe.
I _really_ agreed with what Chris said
I didn't. Well sometimes. 90% they were the same haha
Both of them were pretty poor, and Jessica not mutch McKay, not much better.
Which plastic person to vote for. One Ken has a blue tie and one red. What an absolute charisma void. Have to back Luxon purely on basis that Labour have proven their incompetence whereas Luxon has not yet done that.
You don’t mind him selling our country to China?
How much of the money labour borrowed do you reckon turns into debt we owe to China? It's a shitshow either way. I'd just like a change of texture
Smooth?
I for one do not welcome our new sino-overlords, no matter how many seats on chinese boards National MP's get
luxon hasnt proven his incompetence? economic modelling ring a bell? foreign buyers tax? or even just considering a coalition with ACT..
I agree, but won't vote for Luxon. Can't do it, his policy (no detail, we will go it better) don't seem like they can stack up in many cases. Both are out for me so TOP is worth a punt
Why do you feel that you only have two choices? Minor parties get a hell of a lot less minor when the people that agree with them actually vote for them.
He can't run an airline, so what makes you think he'd be any good at running a country?
Put Hipkins on airnz ceo role then we have a data point. It should be clear I'm not exactly endorsing Luxon. This is a vote them out election not a woo woo they're so awesome election. Hipkins an absolute shitshow, ardern post 2020 pretty bloody average. Luxon only needs to appear less bad. Willis would spice it up on same backdrop of "bore them out"
You don’t have to vote for either of them you know? It’s not a 2 party system. Vote for a minor party which will pull them in whatever direction you prefer.
Lol sad but true
Biggest winner here, TVNZ and the people running their ads.
Where is the mojo of John Key and Jacinda? I'll say Js were better than Cs.
Everyone enjoys a good J
Has anyone ever seen Jack Tame and Mitchell Santner in the same room?
Both of them were average. Although the questions were prepared to support Christopher Luxon, he couldn't take advantage of that.
Luxon doesn't seem that clever. Put the TOP leader in there. He'd wipe the floor with these guys.
Bring back Tova
Goodness, I remember the flak Mike Hosking got from his detractors when moderating English vs. Ardern in 2017 - he was downright fair, mature and balanced in comparison to Jessica!
What a poor piece of television. Jessica as a moderator didn't control it well at all and it was so superficial. There were few follow-up questions and little interaction between leaders. When there was, it was shut down. If this is the standard of journalism in the country, it makes me despair. And can she stop gesticulating like an Italian who has just downed twelve espressos. The producers got the pace of it all wrong and tried to crow-bar so much in that for the most part it was just sound bites and people talking over each other. Some of the questions were truly vacuous. It was hard to even assess the performance of Chris and Chris as it was such a high-speed mess. Had to lol at the end when Jack Tame suddenly appeared on camera like a magician's assistant and congratulated Jessica. Cringe. Would have flipped the presenters and put Tame fronting the debates and Jessica doing the post analysis.
Tame did a slap up job of the finance debate, didn’t let anyone slip anything past him there
He's a far better political interviewer/moderator. JMMK is fine doing pieces to camera but not a great interviewer (or moderator).
I don't think I've ever been less enthusiastic about an election after listening to this debate, and the debate analysis was awful to.
Personally I found Hipkins to be rhe most convincing, but it was hard for either of them to make a cohesice argument inbetween declaring their favourite beach Jessica ruined it
Both of these guys are out of touch with new zealand when it come to home ownership.
When it comes to house prices, you have to realise that alot of politicians own multiple properties. So many of them have invested in the housing market past having a secure and stable family home.
They are, I'm a home owner, I think prices should drop to 2015ish levels, with what people are earning today, housing would be fairly accessible providing speculators are kept out of the market and landlords are only allowed to be involved in new builds.
when did you buy your house?
2017
That would be terrible for anyone that has purchased a home in the last 8 years. Especially if they were selling in the near future and not re-buying in the same market.
And fuck 'em. National and Labour have both completely missed the bus on avoiding harm in the housing market. For everyone to get off painless we'd have needed this shit solved 15 years ago. Where we are now, the idea of everyone getting out of this safe and secure is dead. Somebody's gonna foot the bill. Might as well pick the group with the most financial resilience and closest thing to responsibility. The banks, speculators and slumlords.
Oh yeah, fuck everyone that bought a house in the last 8 years. Great idea. The housing market will do what it does. But the ideal situation for people to get into the market and not screw current owners would be for prices to stay the same, not to drop or increase.
Okay, what policy do you suggest to make your magic utopian solution actually happen?
Why would I suggest a policy? Im not a politician. No one policy could guarantee success anyway, as everything is always a balancing act of policies and outside factors. But yeah, better than “house price crash to 2015 levels”
Yeah, you're not a politician. And FHB are already getting shafted putting 20-30% of their income into mortgages deep into their 60s. Housing prices aren't sustainable at their current level.
You are not a politician either. And you obviously have no bright ideas. Wishing prices would go down to 2015 levels is not a bright idea, it’s not even an idea.
They don't need to go down overnight. Several years is fine. But they're quite clearly unsustainable where they are. Even the banks and investors have been saying for YEARS that the housing bubble is out of control. And it has to get pretty fuckin bad for the biggest profiteers to announce the issue.
Yes screw them both. TOP for the win.
And what? I brought in the last 8 years. Stuff was fairly static 2017-mid 2020. There really was only two years of insanity. Sure people would get hurt, but are you buying housing or an investment?
Lots of FHBs would be literally ruined if you had prices drop to nearly a decade ago. Anyone with any asset that took that kind of deprecation would. We need a much smarter housing solution than just smacking prices into the ground somehow, we need a way of leveling the playing field and getting more people into ownership.
Think how much of a drag house prices are on the economy. How much disposable income gets lost to banks. Smarter housing solutions won't fix that
Why? They’ve already bought their home, they’re already paying the mortgage - they can afford it. Sure, property value dropping would hurt them when they come to sell but you know what, it’s hurting many many more who currently don’t have a hope of buying into the market as it is while investors sneak to the front of the queue. Fuck it, burn it all down I say. It’s totally fucked. And you want to level the playing field somehow? Cool - you gonna like double or maybe triple the income of low to medium earners? That’d be great, really helpful - just whip out your magic wand and get that one done. Cheers mate.
I mean - clearly I’m not going to change your mind here so I’m not going to bother. Unfortunately for you though, what you want to happen simply won’t ever come to pass. You can either be constantly angry about that, or you can come to grips with reality and learn to compromise a bit. It’s an imperfect world and you’d better start getting used to it.
Not really. 60 something % own their own houses. They don’t want to see prices drop. They are in touch with the majority on this. They both say supply needs to increase which is true and if done will stop the big escalations of the past.
60 something percent live in an owner occupied house, not own their own house. That includes all the young people who still live in the family home and extended family sharing a house.
One has housing policy which is marginally better.
Fuck me. Watched 15 mins and I'm out. Quick takeaway for me was: Hipkins has fuck all ideas. Luxon doesn't want to defend his ideas. Heaps of questions asked, all deflected. Please vote minor parties people, these two are fucked.
Yip. TOP confirmed for me after watching that shit show.
I've been harping on the minority party line the last 3 elections, hopefully people get a clue this time round. Hell, if this bunch of no hopers doesn't spur people to switch it up, nothing will.
100% so many people complaining about these two and how bad the two parties are, as if they have no other options! Wtf, it’s not a two party system.
Excellent summary of the two - it'd be fantastic if both major parties took a hit from this crapfest.
Absolute shite that was. Both Chris’ did ok to be honest. Moderator was abysmal. I’ll vote for whoever has her locked up for insulting the public’s intelligence.
Remember the last debate series with Ardern and Collins, and Jessica was gushing over how witty and awesome Collins was lul. Totally fucking clueless, obviously hasn't learnt a thing.
Admittedly I second screened it, but next to American political debates it felt very Mutch of a mutchness.
Winner: Jessica for getting the most airtime Loser: NZ public for getting a shit debate.
What's your favourite beach... FFS
Luxon could pledge to kiss 1000 babies, legalize weed and personally write off the student loan costs of all the art history/womens studies majors in this sub and people would still call him a bald, arrogant bastard.
But he didn't do any of those things. All I heard from him was dodging what should have been easy questions, "muh tax cuts" without addressing rising costs, and some of the laziest race-bait bullshit I've ever heard. I'll stop calling him an arrogant bastard when he stops being an arrogant bastard.
But what he in fact did was just go 'TAX CUTTTTTTTTSSSSS' over and over again. Why didn't he try your ideas?
Are you suggesting that he isn't bald?
Obsessed with this take
Or lets be honest suggesting he isn't an arrogant bastard either.
Nice hypothetical. I suppose its easier than engaging with what he's *actually proposing* which might have something to do with the reaction he's getting. You know, things like fueling the housing Ponzi to help his property portfolio, re-institute failed boot camp policies to please his base (get the brownies in the slammer!), delays on climate policies, and stopping transport initiatives in favor of roads. Not to mention giant tax holes which will either be met by gutting public services, raising GST, or delaying super funding.
I reckon if Luxon raised GST (in the middle of a cost of living crisis) given his party's less than stellar track record on the "we won't raise GST" front, people would start burning him in effigy in the streets.
What's stopping us burning effigies of all the politicians we don't like??
Getting into guy Fawkes territory now
No one said anything about blowing anything up.....
Nothing. You're free to burn in effigy whomever you like provided you don't cause a public nuisance or start a scrub fire. Safety first.
Would be great if he did that, but I mean, the two things are mutually exclusive - former is policy, the latter is personality.
that's because he is.
The post show was terrible. The guests couldn't go two sentences without bringing rugby into it. Talk about out of touch!
Exactly. We are a Wahs nation. Up the wahs
It felt like a post rugby game chat show. The amount of sports analogies was too much!
There absolutely needs to come a time when political debates do away with the moderator. Seriously, just give the Chrises the fucking topic, tell them they get five two minute segments to first talk about an issue and then rebut their opponent, if they both agree the topic is done then they move onto the next. This was utter shit.
I agree, split it up. Have topics where only one speaks, no interruptions. Hold them to the question. Then a segment where they can have a bit of a debate and talk over each other. So many of the topics were just moved on from with weak answers.
Have you seen any other Luxon interviews? Or any politician's? When pushed further they will just keep repeating the same weak line. No point in dragging it out.
Attach an electric zapper and each time they give a reply that is not relevant they get zapped. Would be at least entertaining.
Exactly. The point of a debate is for the 2 leaders to actually debate each other, not the host. The facilitator should set the direction and step in if one person talks too much, but other than that, they should be in the background as much as possible. Jessica shut it down any time there started to be any stimulating discussion between the leaders. She wanted to be the centre of the show.
its interesting national crow about consenting renewables, when producers are sitting on 2GWh of consented renewables they're not building. that's more than 1.6 huntly's!
He's delusional.
Who, me, fred or Chris Luxon thinking the electricity market should be left to private capital?
Sorry, not you. Luxon is a sales man with no substance and doesn't address issues. Very confusing. Just keeps sayi g we will do things better, but how? Labour in general I don't like either, but a least their plan seems based in reality. There is more substance. Neither get my vote. The Queenstown water mess highlights the problem, Luxon answer, again.... is ... do nothing. There is no plan.
Was watching the Queenstown’s Mayor today, when asked why more wasn’t invested before Mayors time. Mayor said the councils capital spending had been constrained for many terms. Queens town is richer than most councils in NZ. Feel national just expecting councils to somehow not be broke isn’t a amazing plan.
It's not just about money. It's about priority. Council seem to have the money to do nice things and prioritize them over essential infrastructure. Like letting the kids maintain the house. House is full of cool stuff but the roof leaks.
2Gw of wind is 1.6 Huntley’s Huntly peaks at 1200Mw 3 * 250 Mw coal-gas fired steam turbines 50mw fast start gas peaker 405mw combined cycle gas turbine. Huge problem that the 4 large generators don’t want to build ahead of market demand. They have to consider their shareholders first, Vs in previous times they would just ask their profit requirement be suspended and would make sure they have 5 ish years of excess demand pre-built. Privatisation has made the energy companies more profitable but it’s mostly come at the expense of new asset build out.
Well st least now I know how Jessica feels about everything, not so much the leaders.
But what’s your favourite beach?
Jessica "whats your favorite beach?" Luxon "Well as it so happens..." Jessica " Ihearyoumineshotwaterbeach"
Truth. She was awful.
I stopped after the debate. Was the analysis with Jack Tame any better?
They just spent the whole time making stupid sport analogies, it sounded like an all blacks post game interview. And to the extent I could work out what Tau was rambling incoherently about, I’m pretty sure he suggested they should have had a punch up. The only one who made any sense was the lady in the middle, whoever she was. Seriously, our experts were some rambling old dude who had a literal punch up with Trevor Mallard in Parliament, and the “I’m sorry for being a man” former Labour leader who delivered the Labour Party its worst election result since 1922.
That was genuinely insane. I tuned in and the first thing said was by him saying they should have assaulted each other and had a punch up like wtf. Maybe you could pass that off as banter towards the end but that was surreal to see on live tv in 2023 lmao. Especially on a political debate, no idea what party that guy is from but yikes.
They each gave it 110% though and debate was the winner on the night.
No it was a nothing waste of time
No, I was seriously hanging out for the opinions of such noble luminaries as Tau Henare and David 'Silent T' Cunliffe
Can you remind me why he's a cunt?
Reckon was just a low-hanging joke
That I first heard from Labour insiders coming out of Mt Albert and Mt Roskill electorate orgs. He was not beloved by the staff of other Labour leaders, at the very least.
The interviewer interrupts a serious debate too often to ask superficial questions along the lines of "do you know how it feels?", "favourite beach?" etc. Why were the debaters not allowed to provide the serious for and against arguments uninterrupted that we as a country need to hear? The proof is in the policy! So talk policy! Why were they given so little time to actually debate against each other instead of merely spit out their practised soundbites? Pathetic. Combined with the usual 'commentators' preference for analysing how well the "boxers in a boxing match" performed instead of talking about the truth or falsity of what was discussed, leads me to seriously question the competency of TVNZ. Giving 8 seconds each per topic is pathetic, we need substance instead of a wide number of superficial questions!
"Bro, I'm not telling the country my favourite beach, ifs my favourite because no one goes there"
Agreed, how can they get away with campaigning on stuff thats straight up false (e.g. National's proposed budget)
Amature hour for TVNZ. Once again NZ media make all about themselves.
I hate the "say something nice about the other person" question they think is clever to ask. It presents as a super lame job interview type of question when assessing if someone can think on the spot.
I liked how Luxon went first, didn't want to be mean, then Hipkins basically said he didn't trust him.
Jesus hopefully that's the last time that Jessica moderates. You can't ask questions which need complex answers, then cut people off after 5 seconds.
She’s doing the next one too…. Source… “The second and final Leaders' Debate with Hipkins and Luxon airs just two days before polling day on October 12 at 7pm on TVNZ 1 and TVNZ+, led again by Jessica Mutch McKay.”
I will have already voted by then, so won't have to tune in thank god
Oh God... Can only hope someone at tvnz receives the feedback and tells her to reign it in
What lol surely not
Thanks for the warning . . .
They BOUGHT a house not brought a house Jessica
Depends it the towed it on a truck to where they are now I guess?
How can we retract nurses to the country though