Supporters of David Cunliffe criticise David Shearer for erring towards the centre rather than the left.
That says more about their place on the political spectrum than Shearer’s, but how different are the policies of the two men anyway?
Rob Hosking says they’re not:
Nothing in Labour leader David Shearer’s Sunday speech was at odds with anything economic development spokesman David Cunliffe has been saying, not only this year but before the election, before his demotion from the finance spokesmanship. . .
But there is a problem:
. . . It should be stated that all these policies or goals are not bad in themselves. Some are highly desirable.
It is just they do not hang together as a coherent programme. Economically, they are contradictory and they will cause more problems than they solve.
And this is the first difference between the two. Mr Cunliffe is economically qualified enough to know they are incoherent and will strain against each other. Mr Shearer has no such knowledge and probably believes what he is saying. . .
What’s worse – a party leader who is ignorant of economics doesn’t understand economics or one who wants to be leader and pretends ignorance?
. . . As noted, Mr Cunliffe is economically savvy enough to know all this, and is shameless enough to peddle it to people who do not know any better. It is one of the ironies of all this that many of those who do not know any better are in the Labour Party and include its current leader. . .
Many of those who don’t know any better support the party too.
The only other reason they could favour policies which would increase spending, taxation, and welfare for people in greed rather than need is putting their short term interests before the longer term interests of the country.