This followed a social media video in which Kiriona said local businesses had suggested the Government \u201cconsider tax relief\u201d as a means of helping them.<\/p>\n
Now Labour doesn\u2019t appear to be contemplating tax relief this election. Its only tax policy is a tax increase (Capital Gains Tax), and the only other tax policy the party is openly discussing is a ban on interest deductions, another tax increase.<\/a><\/p>\n It was an embarrassing flub, which showed that one of Labour\u2019s highest-ranked candidates doesn\u2019t actually know what the party is campaigning on. The embarrassment is heightened by the fact that Labour isn\u2019t so overflowing with policy ideas that it\u2019s easy to forget one.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a micro-scandal that\u2019ll have approximately zero impact on politics, but it\u2019s a good lesson to Labour and every party contesting the election to school up all their candidates on party policy. It doesn\u2019t take much for a mid-list candidate to derail a front bench stand-up.<\/p>\n Of course, the big story of the week is the candidacy of Police Superintendent Rakesh Naidoo. He\u2019s ranked a very high 13th, and just one spot behind the party\u2019s current police spokeswoman, Ginny Andersen.<\/p>\n It emerged on the day Labour announced its list that Naidoo had been less than forthcoming with the police about his intention to become a Labour candidate.<\/p>\n Despite the police manual stating that police who intend to run for elected office must \u201cadvise their district commander or director at the earliest opportunity\u201d, Commissioner Richard Chambers was informed only last Thursday that Naidoo was considering running for Labour, and told only on Sunday that Naidoo had accepted the list position.<\/p>\n It was clumsy and careless stuff from Naidoo<\/a> \u2013 and somewhat undermines one of the reasons for having him on the list in the first place, which is to resuscitate Labour\u2019s reputation on law and order. What\u2019s the point in having a cop on the list if they don\u2019t even follow police rules?<\/p>\n And it seems quite clear those rules are broken. A special recruitment process was run for Naidoo, given his employment with the police. It stretches credibility that this special process would have been run without both Labour and Naidoo both having some understanding that Naidoo would eventually accept a role as Labour candidate. That process clearly didn\u2019t begin last Thursday.<\/p>\n The Naidoo scandal capped off a pretty rough Monday for Labour, whose big list announcement was buried under headlines of scandal. None of it feels enough to stick (more on that later), but it should shake the party\u2019s confidence in itself that it struggles to make a big campaign announcement that doesn\u2019t go wildly awry.<\/p>\n Last year\u2019s capital gains tax announcement was leaked, first to the Herald in part, and later to RNZ in full. A health policy was botched after it was accidentally announced, unbeknownst to leader Chris Hipkins, and now this, the list buried under a pretty chaotic news cycle.<\/p>\n In politics, you can expect your set-piece announcements to come under a bit of pressure from the opposition, but Labour should ask itself some serious questions about these unforced errors \u2013 particularly when it\u2019s made a point of not doing much policy announcing anyway.<\/p>\n Unless there\u2019s more to the Naidoo stuff-up than meets the eye \u2013 and there\u2019s absolutely no evidence there is \u2013 none of this feels seriously destabilising. Unfortunately for Labour, it overshadowed the fact that it has some good new candidates. <\/p>\n Alongside Naidoo, there\u2019s Sophie Handford, ranked at 26, who is campaigning to win the marginal K\u0101piti seat (which relies heavily on very expensive commuter trains, making Labour\u2019s public transport policy very enticing). She won selection some time ago, and is highly spoken of by existing MPs as one to watch.<\/p>\n There\u2019s also Max Harris, who is unlikely to wrest the seat of T\u0101maki from Act and National, but, depending on how Labour fares in the electorates, stands a decent chance of getting into Parliament from his place at number 29. Harris is something of an anti-Hipkins.<\/p>\n Author of the 2017 hit The New Zealand Project, a wonkish manifesto for a better New Zealand, Harris is not much of a small targeter like Hipkins. His work in Britain for then-shadow chancellor John McDonnell suggests he\u2019s probably not of a feather with Hipkins\u2019 relative conservatism, but his strong ranking is a healthy sign the party feels comfortable enough with itself to embrace a bit of ideological diversity.<\/p>\n Likewise Warrick Cleine, at number 30, a top KPMG exec in Asia, might help mend Labour\u2019s bruised relationship with business.<\/p>\n That\u2019s not to say Labour isn\u2019t without its ideological problems. Everyone wants to know what smart and hardworking Arena Williams did to be ranked so low (41). Equally and oppositely, what did Willow-Jean Prime do to be ranked so high (7)?<\/p>\n It has the look of a factional squabble the party is keen to avoid tumbling into the public domain.<\/p>\n Napoleon famously advised never to interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. Sadly for the coalition, it spent much of the week doing just that.<\/p>\n Police Minister Mark Mitchell had a grizzle on Monday afternoon about Naidoo\u2019s candidacy, saying he could have been privy to sensitive information. The remarks had the faintest air of sour grapes that Labour had bagged a top candidate in one of the few policy areas in which the coalition has a strong lead. <\/p>\n Police Commissioner Chambers later got in on the game on Tuesday, announcing a review to be sure Naidoo hadn\u2019t passed any \u201csensitive\u201d information to a third party (read: Labour).<\/a> Naidoo created a rod for his own back in handling his announcement so poorly, but launching such a public review without a shred of evidence that Naidoo had passed any information to Labour was a clear overreaction from police.<\/p>\n Things got even more ridiculous when Mitchell and Andresen faced off during their weekly Newstalk ZB debate on Wednesday morning.<\/p>\n Mitchell noted Naidoo\u2019s botched candidacy wasn\u2019t helping police recover from their recent \u201cintegrity issues\u201d \u2013 a comment that may be the biggest overreach of the year. Being a bit tardy in informing police of his candidacy is one thing \u2013 it\u2019s ridiculous to the point of being defamatory to imply that it was implicitly bundled up with the Jevon McSkimming and Andrew Coster scandal.<\/p>\n To adapt a phrase Judith Collins used when the McSkimming cover-up was revealed<\/a>, this doesn\u2019t look like a duck, it doesn\u2019t quack like a duck \u2013 it ain\u2019t a duck.<\/p>\n Labour seized back the initiative, announcing a public transport fare cap on Wednesday.<\/p>\n Anecdotal reaction to the policy has been extremely positive, although it\u2019s hard to know without more polling whether it will shift the dial for Labour. Even in Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch, where public transport is best, there are large pockets where services are slow and infrequent. The last time Labour tried a policy like this, officials said that improving service frequency was as important as price in shifting people on to buses and trains<\/a>.<\/p>\n Although to be successful politically, people only need to think they\u2019ll take it up \u2013 regardless of whether or not they actually do.<\/p>\nSuperintendent Rakesh Naidoo, MNZM, with Governor-General Dame Cindy Kiro after he received recognition in 2023 for services to the New Zealand Police and ethnic communities.<\/p>\n
Labour candidate Max Harris. Photo \/ LDR<\/p>\n