0 Labour backs a loser

There has been a lot of xenophobic fighting talk this year from Labour over immigration. David Cunliffe promised to slash immigration numbers, then progressively backed away from that, as he is wont to do.

But if Labour was hoping to out-Winston Winston Peters in its attacks on immigration, it is going to fail; Stuff reports:

Scaremongering by opposition parties on immigration seems to be misplaced, with the issue barely registering as a concern among voters, a new poll reveals.
Labour and NZ First are raising the impact of migration on housing and interest rates as September's general election approaches.
But in the latest Stuff.co.nz/Ipsos poll, just 4 per cent of respondents cite immigration as the most important issue the country faces.
The economy (20.6 per cent), education (21.6), health (19.2) and unemployment (14.3) are the top four issues important to voters. A little over 12 per cent were worried about housing affordability.
In the past year, around 71,000 immigrants arrived in New Zealand - the highest number in 11 years. The poll asked if migration levels should change; 44.5 per cent said they should not.
However, most respondents believe a policy that would restrict non-residents buying property would be "somewhat effective". Among Aucklanders, in the midst of a housing shortage, the top response was "very effective".
Last month Labour leader David Cunliffe blamed immigrants for rising house prices.
"It would take 80 per cent of our housing supply just to accommodate this year's migrants - and National is doing nothing," he said.
Among Asians (15 per cent) and those not in paid employment (7.4), immigration was of most concern.
Labour has signalled it will look at controlling inward migration and work permits as a way to dampen housing demand and general price inflation. 

Under Helen Clark's leadership, Labour regarded itself as the natural home for those who have chosen New Zealand as a destination to migrate to. A lot has changed in six years however, and Labour is now openly hostile towards immigration, in the worst traditions of Peters. 

But it would appear that there is only room for one anti-immigration party, and Peters already has the market cornered:

Immigration has long been a touch-stone for NZ First leader Winston Peters, who claims it drives up property prices and inflation and will make NZ Super unaffordable. Concern is highest - at 8 per cent - among those who intend to vote NZ First.
The poll also shows Kiwis have an accurate perception of the levels of migration. It asked respondents to estimate what percentage of the population was born overseas. The average response was 25.92 per cent - very close to Statistics NZ figures, which recorded 25.2 per cent for 2013. 
Immigration minister Michael Woodhouse said the results were not surprising. "It suggests to me that Messrs Cunliffe and co are missing the point. I would interpret it as saying there is a minority of people who think it should decrease but actually it's not that important to them."
Labour's immigration spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said the debate around economic tools should not be stifled because some people took a racist approach. "You can't ignore migration because a small proportion of New Zealanders are racist." The question was whether more could be done around "peaks and troughs" of migration. 
"Where you can see a net spike then it is worth looking at ways you can level that off . . . I think it is important the tools work both ways - that it is pro-migration in a negative cycle and knowing the peak of migration when the economy is overheated."
Peters said the result was wrong and he did not listen to polls. 

The last sentence there is illuminating. Of course Winston Peters listens to the polls; they tell him when it is time to intensify the anti-immigration rhetoric in an election year.

This year however, David Cunliffe has already cut Peters off at the pass. His attacks on immigration though have been far less successful than those of Peters, partly because Labour's immigration policy has been so confused.

But the damage has been done. Labour has tried to steal a political march by going feral on immigrants, when immigration is low down on the list of thinks that matter to voters, except the dwindling number of voters who support Mr Peters. And to give him a rare bit of credit, at least Peters has been consistent in his xenophobia for 20 years, whereas David Cunliffe is a latter-day convert.

But once again, Labour has backed a loser. This is becoming too much of a trend.

0 Quote of the Day - 29 May 2014

The Dom-Post manages to send a strong message to David Cunliffe and Labour whilst barely naming them. Under the headline Immigrants aren't scapegoats the Dom-Post opines:

Immigrants are easy prey for political vultures. Demagogues can win votes by using foreigners as scapegoats, as has happened repeatedly in New Zealand's history. So the argument about the effect of immigration on housing could easily turn poisonous. It's important not to let that happen.
The Budget's big surprise was the revelation of a turn in the usual tide of migration. The outward flow has turned into a net inward movement, mainly because fewer Kiwis are moving to Australia. Now there is concern that the inflow will push up house prices.
Panic measures will not help with this problem, as Labour seemed to realise soon after pledging a cut in net immigration. Asked exactly how big the cut would be, Labour faltered and fudged.
Immigration flows cannot be turned off and on like a tap. The present trans-Tasman inflow could quite quickly reverse as the rebuilding of Christchurch reduces, our growth rate falls, and Australia's economy rebounds. Big cuts in immigrant numbers would then exacerbate the renewed outward flow.
The country is entitled to control immigration and there might be room for some temporary reduction in immigrants. This would have to be done carefully, together with other measures to control house prices, such as interest rate rises. The danger is that immigration will become a hot topic and governments will over-react.
The effects of a moral panic about immigration go much wider than the immediate issue of house prices. National's scapegoating of Pacific immigrants in the 1975 election caused great harm to race relations. It led directly to the dawn raids and an outpouring of repressed prejudice.
Winston Peters' anti-Asian campaigns in the 1996 and 2002 elections also caused unnecessary alarm. There is always a receptive audience for this kind of trouble-making, especially among the older, the frightened, and the bewildered.
All the loose talk about the "Asian invasion" and the predictions of racial trouble turned out to be hollow. Auckland now has a large Asian population, but there has been no bloodshed, no ethnic violence, no outbreaks of hatred. New Zealand has shown that it is on the whole a tolerant and welcoming society which copes well with change.
Immigration has, in fact, made the nation a more interesting and vibrant place, and this is probably a more cogent reason for liberal immigration policies than any strictly economic one. A major report last year by the OECD on immigration concluded that the effect on public finances of immigration is "small, generally not exceeding 0.5 per cent of GDP in either positive or negative terms". 

It's hard to disagree with the sentiments expressed here. Winston Peters' past xenophobic scaremongering has no place, and the signs that David Cunliffe is trying to out-Winston Winston are alarming. Helen Clark in particular would be disgusted at Cunliffe's recent anti-immigrant rhetoric.

If Labour loses significant support in places like South Auckland this election, it only has itself to blame. Leave the xenophobia to Mr Peters, who if nothing else has at least been consistently xenophobic, not a latter-day convert like Mr Cunliffe.

0 Cunliffe tries to out-Winston Winston

David Cunliffe will slash immigrant numbers if Labour is elected in September; 3News reports:

Labour leader David Cunliffe has taken his hardest line yet against immigrants, blaming them for rising house prices.

It follows a 3 News-Reid Research poll which shows almost two-thirds of voters say immigration should be restricted.

"It would take 80 percent of our housing supply just to accommodate this year's migrants - and National is doing nothing," says Mr Cunliffe.

Mr Cunliffe is already copping a backlash from within Labour. DPF blogs about that here, including a tweet from a Labour Party activist who sought the Christchurch East nomination last year. And Twitter is full of disparaging comments today about Cunliffe's xenophobia. There are plenty of comparisons to Winston Peters, and none of them flatters David Cunliffe.

But wait, as they say on the infomercials, there's more. Check out this tweet from Patrick Gower:

Yes Dear Readers. One one hand and to one audience, David Cunliffe wants to slash the numbers of immigrants coming to New Zealand. But on the other hand, he's quite prepared to do a deal with a party formed by a convicted criminal, a immigrant facing extradition the the United States to face serious criminal charges, and a immigrant who has been shown to have some very unsavoury personal characteristics.

The writing should have been on the wall however. There has been no denial that Kim Dotcom helped to write Labour's ICT policy, and it is common knowledge that Labour's now-ICT Spokeswoman Clare Curran visited Dotcom's rental house in Coatesville at least twice.

We wonder how Helen Clark is feeling today. Under her leadership of Labour, the immigrant community was seem as Labour's, almost by right. A lot has changed in six years, and we look forward to hearing David Cunliffe take his "Sorry, you're not welcome" message to the Chinese, Taiwanese, Korean, Indian and other immigrant communities.

Perhaps David Cunliffe is angling for Winston Peters' job leading NZ First. But David First doesn't have quite the same ring to it, does it?

0 Compare and contrast

John Key has set National apart from other political parties; the Herald reports:

Prime Minister John Key laid out the welcome mat for foreigners yesterday and said it was a point of contrast between National and other parties.
"We don't put up the fear factor you see from other political parties about the multicultural society that is emerging in New Zealand," he told more than 300 delegates to National's northern conference at Waipuna Hotel yesterday.
"We welcome tourists that come from overseas; we welcome people that are going to come and study at our schools and universities; we welcome people who want to invest in New Zealand and we welcome people who want to make their home in New Zealand," he said. "And yes, we welcome people who want to buy a home here and raise a family. That's what a multicultural, confident society is about."
New Zealand's future lay in selling things to the rest of the world and the future of the world was about being more connected, he said.
"Do any of us think we are really going to get rich selling things to four and a half million New Zealanders?" Mr Key said.

As we blogged yesterday, it's only a matter of six years since Helen Clark regarded the Labour Party as the natural home for immigrants to Aotearoa. How much things have changed since Miss Clark departed for the greener pastures of the United Nations. Labour is now openly hostile towards immigrants, especially those from China.

New Zealand has always been a country of immigrants; it is part of our heritage. It is sad to see Labour so desperate to stay onside with Winston Peters that immigrants have become their whipping boys.

Labour's continued anti-foreigner rhetoric will cost it votes. There's only room for one redneck party, and Peters has that market cornered.

0 Tweet of the Day - 4 May 2014

Graeme Edgeler is the legal counsel for the Internet Party. Some of those who have dealt with Herr Dotcom have suffered selective amnesia as a result, but Graeme's rapier-like wit has not been dimmed at all. Here he gives Labour MP Nanaia Mahuta a right good social media slap-down:

There's a more serious undertone to this exchange however. Under Helen Clark's leadership, immigrants were seen as the sole preserve of the Labour Party; Ms Clark considered Labour to be their natural home.

What a difference six years has made. David Cunliffe's Labour Party considers immigrants (and especially Chinese immigrants) to be the cause of many of New Zealand's woes, from house prices to corruption. Hidden in the fine print of Labour's Big Tool is a plan to stem the flow of immigrants. Helen Clark must look back in disdain.

When David Cunliffe and his lackey MP's like Nanaia Mahuta start playing the Winston Peters xenophobia card, as Cunliffe has done today, Labour has lost its heart.