National has just released its policy on early childhood education for the election, specifically on Labour's forced retraining, which has single-handedly led to severe teachers shortages, and its ill-named 'twenty hours free' policy that's led to the diminution of quality in early childhood centres.
Here's the short summary of National's policy response: Me too.
11 comments:
Or the detailed summary.
We don't like Labour's early childhood policy, it is deeply flawed, but we aren't going to change anything, nothing at all, so the sheeple won't be scared.
... blooody hell.
This has gone beyond the flip-flop to, what?
Mark Hubbard
Still don't get it do you.
Who cares what National says before the election?
they are at 55% in the polls; they can govern alone;
they can finally fix the constitution!
absolutely anything that they do to put that at risk is completely stupid.
And anything that pushes say up to 10% of their voters to ACT is actually completely soundto ensure a long-term reforming government.
Telling voters to vote for Rodney is wimpy.
Ensuring ACT as "room to grow" to their right is the best possible policy
Once National - with our without ACT - is in government, only then can we know their policies.
and that's just how it should be.
Anonymous 12:39,
a) what gives you the idea National has any interest, let alone expertise, in 'fixing' the constitution (what constitution?)
b) what's ACT?
"This has gone beyond the flip-flop to, what?"
To being the same scam artist but different clothes, is what.
"Once National - with our without ACT - is in government, only then can we know their policies.
and that's just how it should be."
That's how it "should be" if you're naive enough to buy a pig in a poke.
It amounts to no more than a willingness to trust politicians--something that most grown-ups have learned the hard way is a futile exercise.
b) what's ACT?
The only viable Libertarian option to vote for at this years election.....you know of another?
According to anonymous one should support the National Socialists in spite of their previous record in government and in spite of their various scandalous behaviours and in spite of their absence of policy. He would expect sane people to support a mob of power lusters who won't reveal their policies until they unleash them against us. He applies blind faith that somehow THIS TIME will be better.
Yeah? Really?
Anonymous is self-delusional and required professional assistance.
This is the problem with mindless collectivists such as anon. They don't think too good. It's all compartmentalised excuses and shallow self-deceptions with them. Basically their scheme is that they dislike the Labour socialists for some superficiality. They decide the Labour socialists muct be removed from office (until next time when they'll put the very same critters back). Therefore they support the National socialists (for this election cycle at least). Eventually the National socialists attain the govt benches to continue the wrecking. Eventually people like anon start to develop a dislike for the National socialists for some superficial reason. They switch their allegiance to an opposition that can defeat the national socialists in the next election- oh dear, likely that will be the labour socialists again. Round and round it goes.
On an honest day, it may occur to anon that things have continued to get worse in NZ and that life is tougher, more limited and less pleasant than ever before. He/she/it may get uneasy and wonder why it is that despite a lifetime of voting for socialists of one hue of another, a steady record of voting for the national/labour socialist clones or perhaps one of their minor political prodigy, things continue to decline (as they have).
Like many NZers anon can't bring him/her/itself to admit what socialism is or consider what its antidote is. They continue voing socialist and express real surprise when they experience the deprivations of socialism. It seems that some of the most precious "values" of the NZ culture are socialist. Seems they just can't think through to the consequences. There is a disconnect between ideas and the consequences of their application.
LGM
James
ACT is not a Libertarian organisation. It neither expresses nor applies Libertarian ideology. It opposes many of the fundamental ideas and principles of Libertarianism.
ACT is not an option for Libertarians to support, let alone vote for.
Libertarians have the option of withholding their votes or voting Libertarian (which means Libertarianz). Those are their only viable options.
LGM
What's this "ACT" thing people keep going on about? Am I missing something? Is this some sort of 'in joke'?
Sean
It's a political party. It started out with a hiss and a roar some years ago. Big promises and lots of sizzle. They got some seats in parliament. Then they proceeded to do absolutely nothing. Lots of talk with no walk. Over time even the sizzle slowed and stopped. There never was any substance to them. Now they don't even have policy really.
Naturally enough, voter support fell away. At each election their number dwindled. Lately they are best known for some fat guy who went on a dance show and dropped his partner. He also went on a diet and got in the paper for going swimming to get fit or some such activity. Gossip magazine action is about the totality of what they've achieved. They've had plenty of opportunity to do something, ANYTHING, that counts. But no...
You still get people who pledge their undying support for ACT. They like to pretend that ACT has principles and that the party will actually do something perhaps maybe, one day.... Yeah, they really do. Theses types believe in pixies and gnomes and all that stuff as well. Morons.
LGM
Come on, LGM, that sounds like a fable to scare small children. No political party would be so silly to do that. That would be electoral suicide...before you knew it, they would be a fringe party that no one has heard of...
Sean
No! Surely not! I guess the joke is on them then.
LGM
Post a Comment