Your views, August 23

Reaction to PM lets mongrel off leash in leaders debate [link at bottom of page]

Having read some of the commentary, it appears many have not realised that this was a debate. Niceties are nice, however the purpose of the debate was to provide a vehicle for the two major leaders to show they are competent, strong and able to lead our very small country in the very big world. Ms Clark has shown she is capable for the last six years and again last night. She may not have the charisma of a David Lange, but she has a similar grasp of the minutiae. She has credibly represented New Zealand on the world stage. The many gaffes from Dr Brash may be condoned by the New Zealand public now, but if he is to be Prime Minister he must stop making it blaringly obvious that he has only been an MP for three years.
- Ken

* * *

After last night I will be voting for the professional, poised and polite Don Brash. I dislike the rude slinging match that politicians usually degrade to (Helen) and prefer an honest upfront debate. A PM who looks at the country as a whole is the only way to go.
- Susan

* * *

Last night's debate was utter [cheap to produce] rubbish we get from TVNZ. The audience shouldn't have been there - they ruined it, Clarke exhibited no self control and Mark Sainsbury did not control the show. Now for all those who are going wow Clarke won hands down she is so good here's something to think about .... who would you rather work for Clarke or Brash? Get it wrong and Clarke would eat you alive, you wouldn't get to put your case and you'd be out the door. On the other hand I would expect Brash to be fair and understanding - like he was last night. Time for a change I say.
- Nik

* * *

Don Brash won hands down for me. Helen Clarke was rude in the extreme talking over the top of him persistantly. She may well have got some of her points across, but she also portrayed a lot of her personality and character traits. Somethings that she may well have been better keeping under wraps. All politicians tell you what you want to hear at this time in an election campaign, I am more interested in the type of person who is running my country. Quite frankly my 5 and 3 year olds have better manners than Ms Clarke. Maybe I am being a little naive, I do realise that there is a lot of this kind of behaviour in politics, but I don't think that "we've always done it that way" is an acceptable excuse for this kind of behaviour.
- Andrew Murray

* * *

Helen won overall, by a small margin. I deplored the partisanship of the audience, on both sides, but especially of Brash's supporters. Isn't there some way of controlling such vociferous behaviour in future? Give them a "worm" or whatnot to express their feelings about specific issues. But keep them quiet so that others, not just the debaters, can think coolly and clearly.
- Raymond Bradley

* * *

The debate was spoiled by Mark Sainsbury's lack of control. On numerous occasions when Don Brash was asked a question he was shouted down by Helen Clark's bully-girl tactics. If each was given uninterrupted time we may have been given a clearer picture of each argument. Instead, Clark only evoked a feeling of disgust. My points went to Brash.
- Graeme Hunt

* * *

I think the main impression and message that came through to me are that HC is a stronger leader and she and Labour have been in Govt and have done a reasonable job keeping their commitments and the country moving forward. DB and Keys etc are unknown re leadership qualities in Government (quite different from within the PS where your objectives are quite clear and narrow and you don't have to deal with a wide range of competing interests and challenges, e.g. race relations, different economic needs of NZers, Waitangi Treaty issues).
- Sam Leung Wai

* * *

You could hardly call it a debate. Good debating is reasoned arguments and stated points of views. All Clark seemed to do was continually try and talk over top of Brash. I also fail to see what benefit a baying crowd has achieved. Fine at a rugby match but if we have another one of these get rid of Sainsbury and tell the crowd to shut up.
- Gerard Casey

* * *

Last night's leaders debate was a shambles, Mark Sainsbury's inept adjudicating has just accelerated TV One's slide in the ratings.
- Richard Fraser

* * *

No one can deny Helen Clark is a strong personality but the debate showed her as a caged animal backed into a corner. Her style was embarrassingly crude and seemed to consist mostly of interrupting, shouting, and dropping one-liners. Last I checked this was not an American Presidential campaign. Don Brash is not a natural politician as was made obvious at the debate and it is clear he's still finding his feet but it's hard to deny his expertise when it comes to finances given his pedigree. His views on race relations and political correctness are a much needed breath of fresh air and I'll even forgive him his alarmingly frequent flip-flops, for at least he doesn't spin afterwards. Overall, the debate confirmed that all parties pander to the common denominator and that's to be expected.
- Robert van Deventer

* * *

I think Helen Clark showed her strong debating skills and her ability to think "on the hoof". She does appear a bit of a bully at times and a lot less gracious than Don Brash. Helen has been a good PM although I think it is time for a change so that power doesn't corrupt too much. I am starting to think that Don Brash could be ok as a PM because he is not so bullying and he has some very intelligent people around him.
- Julia

* * *

Clark edged out the debate but once again displayed her desperation to win at all costs. It seems that most Kiwis only start to take an interest in politics at election time and therefore conveniently forget the past six years - the out and out lies and character failings, the executive decisions without referendum, the "U-turns", the incompetence.
- Carl

* * *

Helen Clark showed her leadership quality but Brash showed his professionalism. To lead a country, leadership quality is more important than professionalism. Brash is emphasising more on theory than practical situation. He is good as a secretary to Prime Minister.
- John Varghese

* * *

I believe Helen Clark won if it could be considered an entertainment, but the tick in her left upper lip belied her seeming confidence and strident arrogance. However, Don Brash, came across as sincere, honest and the ordinary bloke who could be trusted...even though he didn't make many winning debating points. So in the end I think my vote will go for him as the Abe Lincoln type rather than devious Helen, despite her strident shouting, who looks like she should be a member of Sopranos.
- John Waugh

* * *

I would love it if Don Brash pointed out that the reason why he doesn't have to lead like a totalitarian dictator is because he doesn't have a circus of incompetent ministers to keep under control. I don't know why the public is so in love with cheesy super-hero type political leaders. Take a look at Roger Douglas - a mild-mannered chap and a true shaker-and-mover who saved the country from bankruptcy.
- Andrew Atkin

* * *

What a tragedy if the ability to bully, badger distract from the facts, and demean are hallmarks of a national leader. An even greater tragedy if that it what the majority of us want and vote for. Helen has learned from her poster boy Tony Blair. When there is any risk that fact and understanding may develop overwhelm it with spin, proscription, condescension and fear.
- R Nicholls

* * *

I agree Helen Clark let the 'mongrel' off the leash and 'destroyed' Don Brash with her venomous wit. If I had been watching a game of rugby I would have been highly entertained. But to have to choose been Clark's frothing at the mouth 'personal vision' for New Zealand and Don Brash's rather limb 'nice guy' approach I'd have to say that if these are the only 'credible' choices we can get, I will have to join the brain drain.
- Luke

* * *

Don Brash was a perfect gentleman unlike Helen Clark who cannot resist showing her true colours! It's about time we had a leader who has some manners.
- David Stevenson

* * *

Audrey Young was clearly watching a different debate last night than the rest of us. It was hard to pick a winner. Neither struck decisive blows in the debate. I didn't see any real gain for either party. Now however we do have a decisive philosphical divide on taxation. National have offered the big carrot to the wider populous. Labour as targeted its offer to families only. National clearly has to now defend the affordability of its package. Labour has to defend the consequential high marginal tax rates created by the families package. The most effective targeted tax relief would be to reduce GST from 12.5% to 10%. A reduction in GST provides an immediate benefit to every taxpayer.
- Mark Petersen

* * *

Don Brash won the debate easily, especially with his tax policy and honesty. His tax policy means that more people like myself will benefit, rather than me paying tax only to recycle the money to beneficiaries.
- Raymond Surujpal

* * *

I would have to go with Brash. Here we had an intelligent man with a sensible yet affordable way forward for NZ verses a conceited career politician determined to buy her way back into power using our stolen tax money. I hope this election sees the last of her sort of smug "we know best for you" attitude & a debating style high on misinformation scaremongering but very thrifty with the facts. Here's also hoping for a debate free of the studio rabble rousers on both sides that made a mockery of the word debate. It was a shambles & should not be repeated.
- Peter Redward

* * *

Helen outpointed Don: her clarity, high level of energy, balance and fairness. Note how dispassionate and fair she was in assessing Don's career. No equivocation, no politics, factual and honest. That says volumes for the context in which she likewise presents her case in context of results achieved and changes for the future. Why has no commentator such as A Young or C Espiner attributed that quality of fairness which shone through last night and is the clear basis for Labour's family tax cuts? The Nats are targeting me with my $100K+, I'm neither bribed nor impressed. Labour will most likely win because it has learned from its experience in Government and is refreshing its policies and its performance.
- Noel

* * *

1. There was no debate, rather a slanging match. The PM does not resemble the picture placed on street placards (this may lead to voter confusion). I found her attitude just plan rude and reeking of desperation. Dr Brash was far more dignified.
2. Tax cuts - the less money people earn...then the less they will get comparatively in tax cuts (commonsense 101 Helen!).
3. The studio audience dominated proceedings. Next time, turn them down or turn them off.
- Paul Petersen

* * *

Policy and finalities aside, Don Brash got his bottom spanked last night. As far as debatting is concerned and going head to head, he was shown a lesson by Helen Clark, in how to shut your opposition down and interject. Don Brash looked uncomfortable most of the time and continually repeated himself, in order to get his point accross. I didn't learn too much more about policies or details, but as far as being a strong leader and good debater/speaker, Helen won hands down. I think the National spin doctors have their work cut out to recover this one.
- Tony

* * *

Helen Clark won this debate easily! I would much rather follow her into battle than Dr Brash. People need a leader,not a pleader!
- David Willson

* * *

Helen Clark clearly won the debate, but Don Brash was better than in his previous performances. He's improving, but he still can't compete against an experienced and wily scrapper like Clark.
- Greg Sawyer

* * *

An interesting debate but won hands down by Helen Clark. Don Brash seemed to get a little flustered and was not very good at talking over the noise and heckling.
- Wahine

* * *

Helen Clark won, she was more credible, and seemed more confident.
- Nigel Wade

* * *

Well done to our present Prime Minister, heaven help us if Brash and his rich party make it. People should not forget the Shipleys, Birches and Richardsons of the past. I am afraid their shadow still looms large.
- John

* * *

Helen Clark destroyed a rather dorky looking Don Brash. You can't help but wonder what the consequences of having such a man represent New Zealand would be, would we be laughed out of international summits?
- Tan Copsey


Reaction to Election Blog [link at bottom of page]

In respond to Alistair Kwun's comment today about immigration policy, if we compare Labour's current policy with what the National and NZ First government had, it is very clear that Labour's policy is more racist, for example, raising the language limit to something higher than most of the high school Kiwi kids' level.

Even now the new immigrants who are yet to receive citizenship have a 3-year probation period, and what National proposed is just to extend that for one more year. If these new immigrants feel that staying here for one more year is so intolerable, then perhaps they don't really want to immigrate here at all.

I'm Asian, I detest Winston Peters, and I also want to minimise his impact on all of us. However, do we want a Labour government which is so afraid of Peters' criticism and over-does the immigration policy every time he makes a comment or a National-NZ First coalition government which can seek a compromise and make him whine less? Although I hate Peters, I still believe he is a human being like the rest of us, and the last thing he wants is to criticise his government's policy and embarrass himself in front of the entire nation.

Here's something very interesting from last night's debate. Helen Clark claimed she went to all those Indian or Chinese festivals etc. to show how NZers can work together. I find it absurd. Why doesn't she celebrate St. Patrick's day or other European celebration events? This kind of special attention to the Asians is meaningless and cheap. It's not "working with" us, but rather like patronising us.
- Jerry Chang

* * *

It baffles me when people make the incredibly obvious statement that the richer you are, the more money you will get back under National's tax proposals. Some people are obviously upset at the idea of the richer folk receiving about $30 a week more than the not-so-rich. Funny how they ignore the fact that it is the higher income earners that are contributing the most amount of tax in New Zealand...now you don't see many not-so-rich earners complaining about that one do you?

Perhaps instead of moaning about the lack of instruments Mrs Harre's sons school has, she could take the initiative of providing the school with the money needed to buy these instruments, so that her poor son doesn't have to undertake the arduous task of taking his guitar to school. I hear the price of a snowboard can make a lovely swap for a guitar on trademe.
- Ryan Donovan