Back to 'normal': National wins back support lost to ACT; Ardern's popularity falls

Public Policy / news

Luxon's leadership sees support for National rise, but only at the expense of ACT; Support for Ardern falls to the lowest level since before she became PM

27th Jan 22, 7:06pm by Jenée Tibshraeny

Support for National is on the rise at the expense of ACT, meanwhile support for Jacinda Ardern has slumped to its lowest level since before she become prime minister in 2017, according to the latest 1News-Kantar Public poll.

Support for National increased by four percentage points to 32% since the last poll done in early-November. But rather than pinch votes from Labour or the Greens, which both received steady support at 40% and 9% respectively, a lift for National saw a fall for ACT.

Support for ACT fell by three points to 11%, as it retreated from the elevated level it rose to in 2021, when its leader David Seymour become a de facto leader of the opposition.

Christopher Luxon’s leadership is bringing National supporters back home. Support for Luxon as prime minister rose 13 points to 17%, while support for Seymour dropped five points to 6%.

Support for Ardern continued its downward trajectory, falling four points to 35%. The drop comes as Covid-19 drags on and the Government's response receives more criticism.

Interestingly, the portion of respondents who didn’t know who they want to be prime minister rose again to 28%.

Labour and the Greens would still secure 63 seats, accordingly to the poll, only two more than the 61 required to govern. National and ACT would get 55 seats. They wouldn’t be able to get Te Pāti Māori on side; its co-leader telling 1News the party wouldn’t want to form a government with National.

Kantar surveyed 1000 people for the poll between January 22 and 26. The last poll was done between November 6 and 10.

Here are the numbers:

Preferred party:

Labour: 40% (down 1 point)
National: 32% (up 4 points)
ACT: 11% (down 3 points)
Greens: 9% (no change)
Te Pāti Māori: 2% (up 1 point)
NZ First: 2% (down 1 point)
TOP: 2% (up 1 point)
New Conservatives: 1% (no change)
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party: 1% (no change)
Don't know: 7% (no change)
Refused: 4% (up 2 points)

Seats (61 needed to govern):

Labour: 51
Greens: 12
Te Pāti Māori: 2
National: 41
ACT: 14

Preferred prime minister:

Jacinda Ardern: 35% (down 4 points)
Christopher Luxon: 17% (up 13 points)
David Seymour: 6% (down 5 points)
Chlöe Swarbrick: 1% (down 1 point)
Winston Peters: 1% (steady)
Don't know: 28% (up 2 points)
Refused: 5% (no change)

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

94 Comments

by Brock Landers | 27th Jan 22, 7:13pm 1643264021

Natbour wins no matter who you vote for.

by WhiskeyJack | 27th Jan 22, 7:29pm 1643264985

Touche lol, I'm struggling to find anyone I agree with strongly enough to bother to vote for them.

by Pa1nter | 27th Jan 22, 10:42pm 1643276522

If your generation weren't wasting so much time feeling sorry for yourselves you could use social media to create a party that'd easily get 20% of the vote and wield enough power to tip things in your favour.

by JustAnOpinion | 28th Jan 22, 7:49am 1643309388

lol super harsh and not close to reality, this has already been tried at least twice, the last time by TOP.

by Whatwillhappen | 28th Jan 22, 8:54am 1643313290

If only we could get a result like Brazil, where a clown was elected twice to Congress, by a landslide the second time.

Tiririca used his speech to Congress to blast the sloth and corruption of many of his 513 colleagues. “We are well paid to work, but only eight of 513 actually show up here often. I am one of those eight and I am a clown,” he said.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/brazil-clown-tiririca-gru…

by seareason | 28th Jan 22, 9:55pm 1643360100

Have we not had the same thing happen with Adern?

by fortunr | 29th Jan 22, 11:52am 1643410326

Well, they elected Bolsonaro, one of the greatest clowns in South America (and one of the greatest clowns in the world, with the exception of Boris Johnson).

by Brock Landers | 28th Jan 22, 7:54am 1643309640

My generation are already in power.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 11:45am 1643323548

Some of them are starting to organise: https://www.reddit.com/r/housingprotestnz/

I reckon TOP has the opportunity (no pun intended) but they need to trim off some of their superfluous policy ideas and run primarily on housing and tax reform. Become a voice for the young who've had their wealth transferred off them and handed to comparatively untaxed asset speculators.

by linklater01 | 28th Jan 22, 11:46am 1643323565

Pa1nter,

You really have become sour and embittered. I am not religious, but there is a biblical saying; Why look for the speck in your brother's eye, but fail to notice the plank in your eye?

Go and lie down in a dark room for a while.

by fortunr | 29th Jan 22, 11:48am 1643410131

Sad but true.

by Carlos67 | 27th Jan 22, 7:14pm 1643264094

National are only going up and Labour are only going down from here. The real brown stuff has not even started hitting the fan this year yet. I still predict Adern doesn't make it to the next election.

by powerdownkiwi | 27th Jan 22, 7:23pm 1643264628

Disagree, with respect. The traditional thing is to go with Nat until things get choppy, then put Lab in to soften the blow and rearrange the deckchairs (Nordy's Black Budget, heck, even '35).

I think there a good chance the c--p hits the fan in the next 12-24 months. I mean: really hit. And you don't go for corporate board/neolib types when you've been shafted by 35 years of that (when you realise your house-based ' wealth' .............wasn't. So you vote for something which will look after you. As Lab have tried very hard to do. Misguided they may have been, but genuine in the caring they definitely were.

Interesting times; and they can only happen once.....

by Roger the dodger | 27th Jan 22, 8:51pm 1643269885

The best thing to come from this labour govt is that we all now know what happens when we elect a team of academics and professional politicians.

by RickStrauss | 27th Jan 22, 9:03pm 1643270582

Who's academic?

Professional politician...like half of National too, including the last leader in power (Bill English).

Natbour are awfully similar.

by Roger the dodger | 27th Jan 22, 9:30pm 1643272245

National would be worse than this lot?

Wow.

To be fair the academics are also professional politicians. Surely noone will dispute that practical experience is very thin on the ground.

Is that a fair reflection of society? I think we will find out at the answer at the next election Rick. My money is on a major change.

by Sluggy | 28th Jan 22, 8:18am 1643311131

Its been my experience that both corporates and governments are run by people that have little practical experience, but are generally charismatic and politically savvy. Neither are ever good reflections of society. Todays internet and media exposure and lack of a bit of mongrel are a big problem.

I know a few ex corporate types who thought they could make millions in SME's and have failed, when the reports, meetings and corporate speak count for nothing, the rubber hits the road.

Unfortunately I find Luxon to be Key jr. His mannerisms, speech... arrgghhh. Ardern is just the PC queen. Rawiri Waititi I like, but he isnt palatable for the general cotton wool soaked populace.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 1:39pm 1643330341

Did you reply to the right person? (Just asking on the "National would be worse than this lot?" question, which doesn't seem related to my post.)

I was just asking who are Academics, as I can't recall any off the top of my head.

"Practical experience" is an interesting one. Of what in particular do you mean?

Why are we enamoured with "business experience" (to use the term often used elsewhere), just as past groups thought being aristocracy or having military experience was critical? I have long worked in business and this seems incredibly flawed and short-sighted to hold "business experience" as the gold standard.

We had a gambler of other people's money in for 8 years, and I voted for him twice. Fat lot of use he or his "practical experience" was. Bill English was a career politician, and Gerry Brownlee a school teacher turned career politician.

The issues we face go far beyond what most general managers, sales people, and even CEOs face. Running everything "as a business" has seen us underfunding health (make our short-term cashflow position look better), suppressing important wages (e.g. police, nurses), and looking at short term and non-useful financial measures (nominal GDP), and under-investing in R&D (as Jac Nasser famously did at Ford) and education - two critical areas for NZ's long-term productivity. We have been plagued by the Agency Problem as MPs have thought only of the short term and of inflating their own wealth, neglecting long-term issues.

We have neglected security issues in favour of short term cash - e.g. food security, and too much dependence on one country.

Instead of enamouring "business experience" that has failed us so far, we would seem to need a better mix of more strategic perspectives. The question should be where we find those.

by Roger the dodger | 30th Jan 22, 5:26pm 1643516811

Sorry I thought you were being sarcastic.

Bill English was actually a farmer.

Your example of Brownlee is interesting. Not a popular figure, but I heard so many left wingers criticise him for being "just a woodwork teacher". So often that I figured it must have been on some comms sent to the party faithful. Why is being a woodwork teacher not seen by lefties as good enough???

I'd rather have ordinary people representing me. Note this is different to the diversion being presented of "business professionals". Business managers and co imho are often pretty hopeless.

In spirit I agree with your comment about running health as a business. Although I read that the US health system held up better under pressure than Canada recently. Did we really run health as a business like the usa clearly do? Or did we just stuff it up?

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 1:28pm 1643329729

Double post, so providing a joke instead:

Q. Why don't ants get sick?

A. Because they have those little anty-bodies.

by Foxglove. | 27th Jan 22, 8:57pm 1643270229

Not exactly always PDK. Lange & entourage hardly softened the blows did they. Not meant as a criticism.In fact just wish we had some of that dynamic, innovative & entertaining personality & calibre in parliament right now. Ironically re Nordmeyer, years later, when I was part of a meeting with Muldoon towards his finish then too, going off subject he remarked quite sadly that Arnold was one of the ones in parliament that he had admired, more than most.

by Kate | 27th Jan 22, 10:58pm 1643277516

TOP is the one to watch now with Raf Manji just elected as Leader.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/127610888/raf-manji-former-christchurch-city-councillor-named-as-tops-new-leader

"Deep structural change, and fast" - yippie.

by JustAnOpinion | 28th Jan 22, 7:57am 1643309839

I voted TOP last time (yes I was the one) but after Geoff left I thought they had lost a critical element, a differentiator, someone who could talk to the policy and their effects.

I think Raf may well be a good leader, time will tell but I would have thought some introspection on the back of 2017 failings would have been in order.

To up the anti on radical policy didn't work last time and won't work this time. I won't be voting for them again as a) the electorate has rejected some of the extreme positions and going all in on them will exacerbate this and b) not changing policy to better fit what the electorate values shows a lack of leadership.

by murray86 | 28th Jan 22, 8:07am 1643310469

The problem with TOP is that it is a party set up by an economist using economic principals to base its policies. As has been acknowledged on this site many time, economists have routinely, and usually get it wrong big time! A good example was that Gareth Morgan wanted a tax on asset values, specifically houses - owner occupied ones. He justified this because OOs did not pay rent. I could not believe it when I heard this. There are so many problems with this concept that it is completely wrong, but he couldn't see that.

by kiwikidsnz | 28th Jan 22, 8:21am 1643311261

TOPs economic policy can be summed up as stealing from people who worked all their lives to provide a home for their families to handout as a UBI to people who can't be bothered getting out of bed.

by rastus1 | 28th Jan 22, 10:43am 1643319819

Overlooking that it would result in land bankers paying tax on their banked land, loss making landlords paying tax etc.

Overlooking that overall tax take remains the same with a reduction in paye.

Overlooking that the system created housing ponzi would come to an end.

Overlooking that the huge amount of tax used to run the bureaucracy of MSD would reduce massively.

Overlooking that UBI would be it - you'll have to get out of bed if you want to increase your situation..not just phone up msd.

Think again

by murray86 | 28th Jan 22, 11:58am 1643324321

Since when have you ever seen a politician implement every part of a policy structure? That NEVER, I repeat, NEVER happens.

They would tax homes of OOs, but not reduce PAYE.

Existing examples ACC, GST

by rastus1 | 28th Jan 22, 1:43pm 1643330597

You have corrupted yourself by avoiding the technical correctness of the Policy to instead focus on the behaviour of politicians.

By doing so you have exposed the politician within.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 12:01pm 1643324494

They need to change their tax focus to a simple LVT (unimproved land value) coupled with lower income taxes. Reward productive work instead of sitting around on our ass-ets.

by rastus1 | 28th Jan 22, 10:29am 1643318988

The TOP tax policy on houses evens the playing filed brilliantly and simply - but the concept is too difficult to grasp (and of course vested interests made sure the policy was never understood).

by GV 27 | 28th Jan 22, 11:58am 1643324287

If you can't sell such an amazing world changing idea to people then maybe the idea actually isn't that great. Taxing people for living in their own homes is a shitty policy, it was then and it still is now.

It's not that it's difficult to grasp, it's just a shitty policy.

by rastus1 | 28th Jan 22, 1:47pm 1643330859

From the point of view of an unimaginative and selfish asset owner who has not grasped it, yes, it might look silly.

From the point of view of asset less class and those who can see the inequity of our tax and housing systems, it's a very good policy.

But hey...lets stick with the tried and trusted policies that are delivering the equitable society and affordable housing we desire.

by Whatwillhappen | 28th Jan 22, 8:57am 1643313428

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

Or to quote C.S. Lewis:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”

The principle applies, even if we don't live in tyranny

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 1:30pm 1643329803

Describing the last decades of how we've treated NZ's young by living off their wealth?

by Pat.T | 28th Jan 22, 5:43pm 1643344995

Hope you are right.

by Beanie | 27th Jan 22, 7:23pm 1643264637

In the 2021 annual predictions I said that NZ First would fold up its tent. A year later and it hasn't formally happened yet, but it's hard to see how they can survive. Winnie is too old now and the few possible replacements have bailed. Polling these numbers and the corporate donations will go elsewhere.

by northman46 | 27th Jan 22, 7:27pm 1643264876

Lab or Nat, it doesn't matter. It's the same conclusion for me - work hard and go backwards in life.

by paashaas | 27th Jan 22, 7:42pm 1643265755

Might it just be that the problem is with yourself and not with any of the political parties ?

by WhiskeyJack | 27th Jan 22, 7:48pm 1643266138

Statisticaly speaking he is about 40% of the population, which is most of the working class. No doubt you want to blame them for not being poor enough to benefit from minimum wage increase or rich enough to benefit from inflation or tax cuts. I don't think that is an appropriate response.

by paashaas | 27th Jan 22, 8:13pm 1643267615

Would you explain what the 40% number you quoted refers to ? genuine question ..

by RickStrauss | 27th Jan 22, 9:04pm 1643270676

Probably the same as previous generations. The difference being that earlier generations of that 40% were left affordable housing.

by northman46 | 27th Jan 22, 8:58pm 1643270289

Yes I made the fatal error of not being born 10 years earlier.

by linklater01 | 28th Jan 22, 11:52am 1643323963

northman46,

Sorry to hear that and it is certainly true for some, but by no means all. It certainly doesn't apply to my sons, their wives or their friends.

by Justa comment | 27th Jan 22, 7:33pm 1643265232

I predict National will play the old trump card of tax cuts closer to the election, even though NZ cant afford them. The biggest winners in dollar terms will be those over 70k. Come on National, prove me wrong, come up with something new.

by WhiskeyJack | 27th Jan 22, 7:42pm 1643265768

Maybe we can dig our way out of this hole! Labor promises more free money, National promises to take less, tough choices.

by RickStrauss | 27th Jan 22, 9:05pm 1643270712

More years of austerity for the health sector while our population continues to age...

by Roger the dodger | 27th Jan 22, 9:32pm 1643272348

Labour had the golden opportunity to spend on health care handed to them.

They blew it.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 1:32pm 1643329933

This is a factually untrue statement re health funding per capita, which increased significantly from 2017 to now after 5+ years of austerity under National.

But they should have done it better. And National will likely once more run austerity.

Celebrating their failure to fund it enough by putting in an austerity government instead is just shooting yourself in the foot.

by Carlos67 | 28th Jan 22, 1:38pm 1643330288

Far to hard apparently Roger, you know just suddenly paying them more to retain decent staff here and attract back all those that left to go overseas. Instead we throw Billions of dollars around like its a lolly scramble and cut rates so we can buy more houses. We apparently didn't have the money to pay nurses more money but its amazing where the Billions of dollars suddenly came from for everything else.

by fortunr | 29th Jan 22, 11:58am 1643410731

NZ can afford it, if you just cut on wasteful spending, refocus our bloated welfare system, and redirect some of the existing spending to necessary areas such as, for example, public healthcare rather than on bureaucrats, strategists, pen-pushers, coordinators, PR consultants and the likes.

by WhiskeyJack | 27th Jan 22, 7:38pm 1643265536

We need a 'Get sh#t done!" leader, already I'm drowning in bureaucracy and all I'm getting promised is more water. I liked Trump's policy of getting rid of 3 regulations for every new one introduced but I'd settle for no new regs. Even the policy wonks can't keep up, new regs aren't even finalised before they are made law and even then I can't get 2 people to agree on how to comply.

by JustAnOpinion | 28th Jan 22, 8:00am 1643310044

Catch 22 for which I have some sympathy. Want performance, introduce accountability, incompetence too many layers deep, accountability stops 2 layers down, performance does not arrive, new leadership depart, working party starts, working party concludes, suggests increasing accountability.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 12:05pm 1643324750

Too much regulation is from trying to protect ratepayers/taxpayers from having to pay for the building industry delivering crappy products and services, as taxpayers had to pay to clean up in the past.

Ideally, instead we'd have mandatory building industry insurance...but unfortunately no insurance company is prepared to underwrite the building industry, based on its history.

by AndrewRiddell5886 | 27th Jan 22, 7:51pm 1643266270

Shouldn't poll reports give margins of error and previous poll results.

Otherwise it is all pretty meaningless.

by Foxglove. | 27th Jan 22, 9:11pm 1643271079

It is indeed an odd time for a poll. The holiday break, still hungover, in which the government went to ground but the activity from the opposition, except for the energetic David Seymour, was pretty muted too, Quite unexplainable when the threat of omicron was looming & being illustrated, hard and fast, across the Tasman by our enthusiastic media. The Prime Minister & her ministers are unfortunately something of a facade. Protected by swarms of secretaries & media spokespersons. Dependent on echelons of advisors, consultants and experts, you name it, and devoid of any acumen to establish if the advice they receive as such, is either practical or the best option. Hence the MoH as an example, obviously treats them with disdain, they should have been read the riot act way back for example, when they chose to disobey an executive order to test all border staff. An incompetent thief is most unlikely to catch a competent one. The opposition now have the dawning of opportunity to expose the failings of the present government but to do that they must first regain credibility and to do that, they must convince the electorate that they are united, purposeful, and present to the electorate candidates that are of substance and integrity and nothing like the trash that has been cutting them down over the last four years or so They must too, stop the shadow boxing and sound bites and start landing some telling blows.

by Jonny.Foe | 27th Jan 22, 7:57pm 1643266673

Sadly, New Zealand election results depend on who can capture the swinging centrist voters who are middle-aged, middle-income, home-owning, concerned about social inequities (but not enough to change tax structures), worried about house prices for their kids (but enjoying being sat on loads of equity). The policy agenda is designed to please them. We are doomed.

by fortunr | 29th Jan 22, 12:04pm 1643411075

I disagree.

I am one of those centrist, middle-aged, home-owning voters and I am very worried about house prices for the new generations, for the financial stability of NZ and the very fabric of NZ society.

Yes I am sitting on loads of equity but this gives me no enjoyment whatsoever, and I would be very happy for any government to act aggressively on curbing the parasitic activities of housing specufestors and on piloting a managed but significant and sustained decrease to house prices.

by HouseMouse | 27th Jan 22, 8:17pm 1643267834

I drove down to Taupo today and I have to say the Waikato Expressway is great.

Thanks to the previous govt for that.

by structural engineer | 27th Jan 22, 8:36pm 1643269008

Shame that one of the first things Labor did in 2018 was to cancel the next section from Cambridge to Tīrau.

They said they were going to spend the money on the train from the CBD to Auckland airport instead. Possibly forgot to mention that it wouldn't happen until the year 2,109,978

by JustAnOpinion | 28th Jan 22, 8:02am 1643310161

Yeah that was to buy off the Greens so now everyone is happy. Unless you want a productive society of course, but only a few do.

by AndrewRiddell5886 | 28th Jan 22, 10:31pm 1643362283

More reckons from people who have not yet heard of climate change and what it means.

by Notgreedykiwi | 27th Jan 22, 8:32pm 1643268749

So the poll is there without knowing any policies or what any government will do anything better or won't do anything.

by kiwikidsnz | 28th Jan 22, 7:51am 1643309498

Luxon said National won't do Maori co-governance. That's enough.

by fortunr | 29th Jan 22, 12:11pm 1643411516

That is indeed a big point for them. Good on them.

But I want to see details in all other main areas of policy such as how to diversify the NZ economy, how to direct the RBNZ to curb inflation, how to improve the tax structure and promote business growth and investment, how to address the housing crisis, how to curb gangs and criminality, how to make public healthcare more effective etc.

I have not seen any such points addressed with any satisfactory level of detail and at least some form of basic convincing analysis of the actions required.

by JustAnOpinion | 28th Jan 22, 8:07am 1643310441

I think at the moment it is easier than that. By comparison any party will need to get more than one thing right to be better than the current governance.

To be fair Labour are getting the most important thing right and that is definitely a strong positive but outside of the COVID response nothing has gone right.

by David Murray1 | 27th Jan 22, 8:41pm 1643269271

Um... in a multi-party MMP environment there is no "opposition" party.

Each political party has a number of seats proportional to the number of votes it got.

The party that can command sufficient votes for "confidence and supply" gets to pick the front benches.

If a coalition of parties has "confidence and supply" then the front benches may contain ministers from more than one party.

In that context there is no one party that is "the government" and no one party that is the "opposition". Those are obsolete terms from the bad dark days of First Past The Post.

by KH | 27th Jan 22, 8:54pm 1643270093

As the Nats improved votes were always going to be taken from ACT. Because ACT votes were sort of a protest vote against the Nats in their recent terrible times.

As a long time ACT voter I see another factor in ACT's vote drop. I see endless press releases from ACT, always wingeing about some government action. MIQ blah blah. Picking every hole in some covid rule might be correct opinion but it's not offering any leadership.

I am not seeing a forward vision laid out simply. All protests with no vision makes ACT hard to vote for.

by muzled | 27th Jan 22, 9:26pm 1643271985

There's a few other things that make ACT hard to vote for as well KH.

Cut and freeze the Minimum wage
Interest back on all student loans
No Kiwsaver subsidy
Cancel winter energy payment
Dump all climate crisis legislation
no more best start payments for families with new borns
cut welfare payments
no tax credits for research and development
cuts to working for families
$7b a year cut in public services
Abolish Maori seats
Abolish Human Rights Commission

by Trickledown | 27th Jan 22, 10:43pm 1643276608

This ^. I remind everyone I hear applaud ACT/Seymour of these stupid ideas.

by nymad | 28th Jan 22, 7:41am 1643308887

I always like to sum it up as ACT is, and always will be, a party for only one electorate in the country. And, when the rubber hits the road, there are stronger libertarians in the Green party than David Seymour.

by kiwikidsnz | 28th Jan 22, 7:53am 1643309629

"...there are stronger libertarians in the Green party than David Seymour." Any evidence for this assertion ?

by nymad | 28th Jan 22, 8:49am 1643312944

The NPS-UD and MDRS.

David Seymour not really a fan of letting people build things on their land.

by RickStrauss | 28th Jan 22, 1:32pm 1643329976

True, this...until ACT put their money where their mouth is they remain a meme party.

by Dale Smith | 28th Jan 22, 7:39pm 1643351966

He is criticized because the people in Epsom have said they don't want to build on their land, ie it's their choice, and you interpreted that as DS not allowing them to build on their land?

by profile | 28th Jan 22, 8:18am 1643311085

We have a Human Rights Commission? Perhaps they could revisit the aviation security vaccine mandate ruling given the Judicial Review assumptions about transmission have been blown out the water by events e.g. quad vaxxed Israel have the record high covid transmission.

"The measure is only justified if it provides a wider public benefit. And in the end that comes down to a single issue — whether the vaccine contributes to suppressing the transmission of the Delta variant of COVID-19."

"More COVID cases confirmed in Israel in January than all of 2021, data shows"

https://www.timesofisrael.com/more-covid-cases-confirmed-in-israel-in-j…

2021-NZHC-3012.pdf (courtsofnz.govt.nz)

by fat pat | 30th Jan 22, 10:54am 1643493277

I’m covid-unvaccinated!

I feel really sorry for all my fellow kiwis who’re having their arms twisted behind their backs, and threatened with the loss of their jobs.

If you’re like me and you’ve already had covid19, then it makes absolutely no sense to get this “vaccine”. The CDC just came to the conclusion that natural recovery gives you far better protection that the mrna transfection vaccines.[1], However the scientific community already knew that reinfection was rare.[2] More importantly we knew from the SARS-COV1 outbreak in 2002-2003 that natural recovery from a similar coronavirus afforded long lasting (>12 years) T-cell mediated immunity.[3][4][5]

Even if you haven’t had covid then Omicron changes the vaccine risk/benefit dynamic such that not getting vaccinated is the sensible option for the healthy majority of people. Transfecting kids with a redundant spike protein against a harmless virus just seems reckless and insane.[6][7]

Even the British Medical Journal is becoming hostile towards governments and pharma companies.[8]

by Whatwillhappen | 28th Jan 22, 9:13am 1643314431

I'd agree with about half of these. The rest are ideological nonsense and would likely be blocked by the coalition partner with an eye on the middle. Some people like to select minor political parties based on key policy platforms, most of which aren't actually doable for minor parties under MMP. I go for least worst options, which is why I held my nose when I voted last election, hating half the policies of the party I voted for.

Seymour actually picked up one of the policy ideas (not one of the above!) I challenged him on at a public meeting before the last election. He pooh-poohed it at the time, but it looks like he went away and thought about it, to his credit, because he changed his tune shortly afterwards.

by Just Some Advice | 28th Jan 22, 4:42pm 1643341349

Don't see anything wrong with any of these. Probably a stronger incentive to vote ACT tbh.

by CrispyKahawai | 29th Jan 22, 7:46am 1643395602

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."

by Just Some Advice | 29th Jan 22, 1:10pm 1643415003

So why did you post then?

by mills | 28th Jan 22, 5:51pm 1643345461

Sounds good to me, Muzled. I think you have persuaded me to vote Act.

by streetwise | 27th Jan 22, 9:37pm 1643272675

David Seymour doesn't have the street-cred to become a cult leader in the mould of say Winston Peters.

Having witnessed his street-corner electioneering speeches I was left underwhelmed....he is the least charismatic politician I have ever seen. The National disaffected reluctantly turned to him by default...there was simply nobody else on offer for their protest vote.

by AJ123 | 27th Jan 22, 9:53pm 1643273586

After this crap, if someone gets 35% approval then clearly things will be worst in the future & no one will take responsibility.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/01/prime-minister-jacinda-…

As the number one choice, we have leader refute house price increase or inflation concerns (35%) on the second position we have property investor (17%).

The property will go up and inflation will stay for decades to come.

by Brutus Iscariot | 27th Jan 22, 9:57pm 1643273835

Act's drop coincides with Seymour losing his nerve and deciding to appease the Covid freaks with his rhetoric and policy.

He was for a while the sole voice of logic in Parliament. Now he just chips away at the govt on questions of execution, rather than tackling the whole edifice of what the hell we are trying to achieve.

by Squishy | 27th Jan 22, 10:54pm 1643277248

It's probably time to shift gears and move onwards from pandemic politics anyway. We have lost two years of progress to this.

by GV 27 | 28th Jan 22, 7:42am 1643308930

Progress? We weren't going anywhere. If you weren't getting spoon-fed lines about the pandemic response, you'd be getting spoonfed them about town hall resets, the year of delivery, etc. Nothing actually got done.

by Gen X-ploited | 27th Jan 22, 11:04pm 1643277854

Voting is only worthwhile for the top 50%. They can choose the Nats who will make them rich or Jacinda who will make them richer. The bottom lose out bigtime either way.

by napierboy | 27th Jan 22, 11:16pm 1643278593

There is virtually no difference in the Left V Right vote in this poll. No pathway for the Right to form Govt. Labour still in the box seat.

Big issues next year will be the long term effects of COVID, the growing cost of living and interest rates. And who do the voters trust on health and housing issues? Labour

I predict next year's election to give Labour another majority. People will see Labour ahead of Nats, but once again don't want to see Greens anywhere near power and the centre voters will go Labour to keep the Greens out once again.

by HW2 | 28th Jan 22, 6:15am 1643303701

Centre voters will see national as a viable alternative. Smart voters will know that Greens do not coalesce with national

by solardb | 28th Jan 22, 4:01pm 1643338862

Wouldn't be surprised to see a blue green party pop up . Maybe Amy Adams and co .

by J-P | 28th Jan 22, 12:07pm 1643324835

Does anyone know if the 1m NZers overseas will be given the right to vote next year because of the border closure? They'd have a good case and that could change things up a bit...

by GV 27 | 28th Jan 22, 12:36pm 1643326605

Meh. I've never been a fan of the idea that people who permanently live offshore should get to vote in NZ elections anyway.

by pete johns | 28th Jan 22, 12:37pm 1643326652

J-P , l am one , think if you have been away less than 3 years you can vote . Jacinda and her media dont realize the anger-suffering & worse or wont talk about it........l am thinking 3-400k voters.....anyone but queen bee..

by sharetrader | 28th Jan 22, 1:03pm 1643328227

kiwis that live overseas for more than three years should not be able to vote, they are not contributing to NZ and as such (with about 25% living overseas) can have a big say with no consequences unless we want to be like the USA and then feel free to vote but also put in like the rest of us

"Americans must pay U.S. taxes on foreign income. The U.S. is one of only two countries in the world where taxes are based on citizenship, not place of residency. If you're considered a U.S. citizen or U.S. permanent resident, you pay income tax regardless where the income was earned."