Goff should rule out Winston – right now

12 Nov 2011 10:06p.m.

Jake wrote:

Funny thing about Winstone Peters, hes so right about a lot of issues, also it was Winstone who got the policy about our parents being able to retain some of their assets if they have to go into residential care which trickles down to their children in the end and boy will we need it. Foreign ownership again Winstone, he may be a slippery banana but whats John Key the glibbest tongue in the west, any more trust worthy I don't think so, What Winstone has to say is cold hard facts and he has earn't some respect' he wont kowtow and he doesnt bow down to be popular, What he has to say fits in with the Greens and Labour and the Maori party, These candidates are genuine and passionate about my country, my countries assets, and its people and social structure.I seriously cannot believe that people are still trusting National, I did not think there were enough elite left here to support them, Oh thats right the bottom rungs dont know what they are doing and the rest have already left. !!!

11 Nov 2011 09:19p.m.

Don't Drink the Water wrote:

Richard P.
A good explaination which I had previously had problems understanding.
It was a minor stumbling block which will now see us four adults confirm our vote for NZ First.
Winston Peters is the only person who can front up to Key,English and Joyce(the slippery one in the background)
As for this article, same old, same old. Please do some homework.

08 Nov 2011 10:18p.m.

Geoff W wrote:

Obviously anne hasn't been watching patrick gowers political reports in the last week. He's so pro labour, anti KEY its rediculous to pretend his reporting is impartial political coverage.It is more accurate to describe his work as a labour party political broadcast. If Mr Gower wants to be considered a political reporter he should try to cover things without showing his political bias. Or maybe the labour party are shouting him on one of their tax payer subsidized christmas holiday trips to an overseas destination they all enjoy.

08 Nov 2011 12:22p.m.

Turel wrote:

@ anne

Um, didnt see you complaining before the last election when the media was pro-Labour & anti-National.
And before the usual reply, No im not a national or act voter, sorry.

08 Nov 2011 09:36a.m.

anne wrote:

Why is it that all media sources in nz can do is show labour in a bad light? has the media been paid?
Why would labour dismiss peters,he has worked with labour before,a party can work on the cross benches and just have a memorandam of understanding and dont have vote with the govt much the same as the greens did with national.
So what's the problem? an needless beat up.
If the media did its homework and investigative work they would find that national have lied,guilty of corruption,mis-lead parliament,keys throat sliting gesture got next to no coverage,scf was not investigated,when english changed terms and conditions to allow scf investors to claim off taxpayers,the bmw's were blamed on labour when there was an out clause,a payment of $600 grand went to sky tv from nz on air,possibly for tv7,a payment went to fonterra and the meat industry of $300 grand for promotion and advertising costs,when english's farm went from sheep to dairy,millions of tax payers money was given to yachting,nats had their own officials put into auckland council for the rwc and they were to blame for the fiasco at the beggining,but blamed the mayor and council members,because they are labour.The media should cover what is going to happen to nz should the nats win this election,i would say what they plan will be damaging for nz,and its future,is issuing $35b worth of govt bonds at a cost to taxpayers of$100-$150 mil
a yr selling assets,good for the country,is the fact that
the PM sees child poverty as needing national standards in all schools and victims rights as the answer,the media need to focus on all of the above.

07 Nov 2011 02:09p.m.

RolanTheRat wrote:

This is one reason why MMP should be dropped.So a low polling party can not hold the country to ramson.

07 Nov 2011 01:21p.m.

Mike wrote:

Mr Gower obviously has the blinkers on when it comes to Winston. Presuming his 10 years in journalism has taken him a little away from the reality of the situation that relates to today. Key is a tinkerer who smiles and slips a crippler and then smiles again. If the polls are right we have too many lemmings who want the best but just leave it to the smile. There are no policies for growth. The prescription seems to be to leave it to big business with a couple of hail marys When Fonterra produces 28% of our exports ( a wonderful result for them and that is great news) but we struggle to even comprehend what is required of a government that needs to set the framework for the various advantages and capabilities we have over many areas. This country has been singing out for strong leadership that can set the parameters, sway the people and stick to it. Talking about Germany in the mid 1990's.There is none of that from this crowd. So they tinker hoping the confidence trick works.Labour are struggling after Helen left a dreadful legacy. Then there is the Maori Party, Act and the Greens - a woeful bunch in terms of actually potentially providing a government that could do anything constructive. So we come back to someone who actually has some business nous in Winston. He upsets many because he is against asset sales and wants the foreshore left for us all. From the election policies I have read he seems to be the only leader enunciating an export regime to sort out and work through the current mess we are in. I sometimes despair about just how much frittering away of the opportunities has gone on over the past while we see middle NewZealand still focussed on their property values as if this will solve anything. It is a shame and we we get the level of journalism here that prefers to operate in snide opportunistic lances to push their obvious predilection. You have to be concerned. I have seen Peters bagged enough but he has the ability to pick out what some in this country think is important - dismiss him these days at your peril

07 Nov 2011 12:42p.m.

Richard Prosser wrote:

Nice try Patrick, but you're missing the obvious scenario. Winston saying he won't work with National doesn't mean he will stop them governing, just that he won't help them with it. Plenty of people, probably most of them, would prefer a National Government again, but most people also don't want asset sales.

So NZ First holding the balance of power, allowing a minority National Government to keep governing, but stopping it from selling assets, is an arrangement which will appeal to many National voters.

Likewise there are plenty of Labour voters who aren't comfortable with the extremes of policy proposed by the Greens, and who would be quietly happy for NZ First to be there as a handbrake if Labour and the Greens manage to put a coalition together.

Winston saying he won't work with either side doesn't mean he will get in the way of whoever gets the single largest share of the votes being able to form a Government - only that he won't be involved in it, preferring to simply stand in the way of the worst excesses of either side.

07 Nov 2011 11:19a.m.

Chargone wrote:

this sort of thing is why i have no faith in the idea of 'impartial' reporting, let alone truthful or accurate reporting... i mean, the politicians are bad enough on their own. this is just sad, even it it is an editorial.

07 Nov 2011 10:20a.m.

Pokies wrote:

Goff would do a deal with the devil to get in. He will promise the world even if he cannot deliver. A bumbler and exactly what we don't need at this time. That is it in a nutshell.