The Government today announced its 36-point action plan, the successor to its 49-point 100-day plan, which was completed on March 8.
The new plan includes items such as delivering the Budget, and legislating for tax cuts, and “take decisions” on a dozen things, such as the reform of the Holidays Act.
It also included raising “the energy” New Zealand brought to its international relations.
The 36-point plan can be found here.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the plan was focused on three areas – rebuilding the economy, restoring law and order and delivering better public services – a key messaging line from the party’s 2023 election campaign.
In response to the announcement, Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick said there were no surprises nor “meaningful solutions” in the Government’s “bingo card for environmental destruction and trickle-down economics”.
“Christopher Luxon is not in the boardroom anymore. The irony is these bullet points wouldn’t even hold up in the corporate world: vague, immeasurable and untethered from reality and evidence as they are.
“What on earth does raising the energy New Zealand brings to international relationships mean? For who precisely, and how in reality, does the Government want to ‘improve the rental market’?”
She said when someone showed you who they were you should believe them and the Government had shown that its focus was “squarely on gutting environmental, climate and social gains in order to line the pockets of a few at the top”.
“They could at least be honest about it.”
1News
So, now we’ve heard the Greens’ response to the Government’s 36-point plan, calling it “PR spin” and “as pointless as it is hollow.”
But let’s take a step back and ponder, is it really the Government that’s untethered from reality, or perhaps the Greens themselves?
The Greens seem to be painting themselves as the champions of meaningful solutions, yet their critique lacks substance.
Swarbrick questions the vague nature of the plan, but isn’t her own criticism equally vague?
Instead of offering concrete alternatives, she chooses to throw stones from her glass house.
It’s easy to criticise but it’s much harder to propose real solutions.
And what about Swarbrick’s assertion that the plan is focused on “environmental destruction and trickle-down economics”?
That’s a bold claim, but where’s the evidence?
It’s easy to toss around buzzwords, and slogans but, without backing them up with facts, it’s just empty rhetoric. We saw all too well what happens when a foolish leader spouts only slogans as when Jacinda Ardern was Prime Minister.
But what about Labour?
Labour’s deputy leader Carmel Sepuloni said the Government “should ‘raise the energy’ on cost of living support for New Zealanders”.
“Our country isn’t a company and shouldn’t be run like one.
“Kiwis deserve a Government that chooses cost of living support for those who need it, like free prescriptions, half price public transport and free and healthy school lunches, rather than $2.9 billion for landlords.”
She said it showed the Government’s “latest list” showed coalition partner ACT had “won out over New Zealand First “in a big way”.
“It makes us wonder who’s calling the shots.”
1News
Carmel Sepuloni echoes the sentiment that our country isn’t a company and shouldn’t be run like one.
Sort of a fair point. But does that really mean we shouldn’t strive for efficiency and accountability in government?
We saw what happens when you run a government like a drunken sailor. Grant Robertson’s borrowings were the largest of any government in New Zealand, ever!
And what do we have to show for it?
Pretty much nothing.
The 36-point plan, flawed as it may be, at least attempts to outline priorities and set goals.
Isn’t that what responsible governance is all about?
Meanwhile, ACT leader David Seymour proudly declares that his party’s policies make up half of the actions in the plan.
Love them or hate them, ACT is undeniably making waves within the coalition Government.
It’s a reminder that politics is a game of compromise and, sometimes, the loudest voices aren’t always the most influential.
As we dissect the latest political drama, let’s remember to question not only the actions of our leaders but also the motives behind the critics.
Are the Greens and Chloe Swarbrick truly the arbiters of reality, or are they simply playing their part in the never-ending game of political theatre?
Cam Slater is a New Zealand-based blogger, best known for his role in Dirty Politics and publishing the Whale Oil Beef Hooked blog, which operated from 2005 until it closed in 2019. Cam blogs regularly on the BFD - where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
Carmel says the country isn’t a company and shouldn’t be run like one. How would she know?
Has she ever run a company?
Has she run the Country, yes, into the ground.
So why would we listen to the opinions of a person who has failed miserably?
Having goals and objectives isn’t a bad thing. China has a five year plan, which is well known, these are targets for the Country to aim for.
The Liberal left hate goals because they can be measured against them.
Chloe believes she is smart, that is all that she has, really. Beyond flailing words around in a salad of emphatic negativity about anything anyone (other than her) does - where is she at? When is she positive and open - maybe when she is scoring political points and thinks she might be winning. You just don't get the vibe she truly cares about anything other than winning the current debate. I had hoped she could be more.
Chloe hasn't been ANYWHERE or done ANYTHING. She hasn't run a business, taught young people or managed a school, hasn't built a house and doesn't have children.
I am a nobody but I had achieved most of these milestones ( with my own money) by the time I was her age. She is just another annoying shallow career politician. I do wish she would clear off overseas stick her neck out and WORK for 10 years for other people. Then she may just have something of real value to offer the country.
Chloe proudly said a couple of years ago, that the only things she owned were her couch and her clothes.
She has never been responsible for anything needed to run her life, she depends on everyone else to provide the things she needs.
Never run a company, never been financially responsible for anyone but herself - agreeing in Coalition with Labour to waste NZ to burn billions is not prudent financial experience.
So what gives her the right to challenge the best decisions of others who are providing for her and the rest of NZ ?
Every time I see her, I'm reminded of a petulant Greta Thunberg, drizzling that nobody is doing what she wants, no matter how hypocritical her demands.
I have no connection to Chloe Swarbrick or her electorate. But if Mr Slater's description of her is OK then this is in response to fat sleazy Mr Slater. On the night of the serious flooding in Auckland while Mr Brown and his team were paralyzed with indecision, because Ms Swarbrick got no answer from the emergency response team she left home and went to their building to find out first hand what was happening so she could keep the community informed.
Actions like that - grassroots practical things for the people regardless of political affiliation is something she is very well known for. They may not be the same as the people here who seem to think business experience is the be all and end all is what's needed in a politician. They are a different set of skills - called being community minded - that are surely quite useful for people whose role is to represent and look after their community.
And Auckland Central has elected her twice, showing that whatever the stunningly wise/ignorant Mr Slater thinks, is totally irrelevant to her and the people who see her quite differently to him, and so his comments are a waste of space.
Wonder if Swarbrick will ever realise that her co leader as per usual is MIA
Anonymous @ 8:41
Auckland Central voted her into govt.
Twice.
Doesn't say a lot for them does it.
To anon @ 8.41. It is very clear you have missed cams point . I'm guessing you are a leftie in disguise and cams got under your skin, if so fantastic!
Cam is merely highlighting what was said. Cam has critiqued the govts plans so he has presented some balance, more than the left EVER do.
Chloe 'from the river to the sea' Swarbrick has not offered any better solution other than sitting there whinging , like she usually does. Please feel free to come back and produce actual evidence on Swarbrick plans, ie anything with any substance on how she is going to make nz a better place. Now we are very different from the lefties here, we actually want facts, honesty and the truth. Please post links to Swarbricks plans and way forward for nz's big issues, not her talk which is why most kiwis with a brain realise what she is everytime she opens her mouth.
Keep up the great work Cam.
I used to watch Chloe and David Seymour on TV3 on the AM Show. One of her mantras was the vital importance of 'evidence based' policies and actions. Always good for a chuckle given that man made (women would never do such irresponsible things) CO2 and it's destruction of life as we know it, is at the very core of the Green's raison d'etre. Credibility zero.
Post a Comment