Filling in our future: A fourth term for Labour and what it would mean.

Over the last few months, many reporters, commentators and bloggers have speculated on what a National Government might do if it comes to power. And, indeed it is necessary to shine the brightest of lights on an agenda that would make Ruth Richardson look like a leftist.

However, all this talk about National, and what it would do might it become the government, carries a risk that the left’s only banner is one that is anti-National. Our salvation doesn’t simply lie in keeping the Tories from power, but using the power which the voters have entrusted us with to deliver along the lines of our principles.

So would Labour do, if indeed, ignoring Helen’s sympathies, with current polling being accurate, turn it around and win a fourth term. Gerhard Schroeder proved it was possible in 2003 when he defeated Edmund Stoiber of the CSU/CDU opposition, which were ahead in the polls by a substantial margin – so there is a precedent for turnaround. I obviously don’t know exactly what they will do, but I will offer my reasonably adept prediction.

N.B. Assuming the majority is made up of all parties to the left of National excluding Peter Dunne, there should be little or no problem preceding with what would be considered Labour’s core political/ideological strategy of centre-left/social democracy.

Environment:

Passing the Emissions Trading Scheme into law will give overdue effect to obligations New Zealand signed up to in 1992, but as yet has done or nothing about. The regional fuel tax, and transport emissions fuel charge will be added in at the announced delayed timeframe, but because of a moderate fall in fuel prices after the end of the Bush Administration, 91 octane will be around $1.75 – $1.90 per litre, which is 37 – 22c cheaper per litre than currently, even including new fuel taxes.

Housing

Labour needs to get its first house pilot expanded nationwide, so that young people can embrace obligations many currently see as impossible, and take ownership, quite literally, in their society. No amount of tax cuts is going to make housing more affordable. I concur with commentators who suggest a 50% of market interest rate for these buyers. The social dynamics of home ownership, coupled with a residential plan which includes the building of stylish, high-density, well connected (to public transport) urban dwellings has the potential greatly boost the living standards of all Kiwis.

Social Policy

Extending paid parental leave from 14 weeks to 6 months is the logical final step for a process which began back in the early days of 2000. It might startle some to remember, that during the 1990s, there was no paid parental leave. National certainly never supported this policy, perhaps because it believed “it would encourage employees to have children” – what a terrible thing!

In spite of this, there remains children who go to bed hungry, and to school with inadequate clothing, despite Labour’s goal of lifting all children out of poverty – a underclass certainly does exist, not just when a Tory “discovers” so. I’ve confronted poverty out when I’ve been delivering pamphlets, doorknocking, and even in some of my own life. Tackling the remaining toughest cases of institutionalised childhood poverty remains an objective to meet.

Wages

While the minimum wage and entitlements have risen under the Labour Government, in many areas in middling wages, wages have often not kept up with the sharply rising cost of living. This is one of the main reasons why Labour has felt the wrath of voters in the recent year.

It seems that in many cases, the Government’s hand is tied – they offer tax cuts to employers, corporate welfare to many, development advice, and for the most part – the preservation of a low-regulatory environment, yet employers are not coming to the party with higher wages. The only place in which wage demands are met is in the public sector. Jealousy of better treatment by the public sector of employees may be a reason behind the misdirected resentment many feel against an apparently “wasteful public sector”. And many employers are rooted to their “me only” style economics – until they realise that their industry is a “partnership” with their employees, then it is likely that this situation will continue. Some even do it for political purposes, knowing that their intransigence will simply increase the pressure on the Government.

Obviously, a remedy here would be increased bargaining powers for unions, with legal protection for otherwise wildcat strikes with 48 hours notice. Remedy employment triangles that allow companies to simply peel the profits off their franchisees, whom pay unfair rates to their long suffering staff.

It may be interesting to post some more ideas in the “Comments” section. So, tell us what you think Labour should do, should it win a 4th term in office. The day we stop believing it can happen is the day we lose.