Simon’s challenge to new government

Tauranga and the Bay of Plenty are national electorates, says MP Simon Bridges. Photo: Supplied.

Tauranga MP Simon Bridges put out a challenge today to the NZ First and Labour MPs Clayton Mitchell and Jan Tenetti, reminding them they are in a National electorate.

“They have gone against what most people in the Bay of Plenty wanted,” says Simon today. “The Bay of Plenty did not vote for this sort of government and they need to understand that pretty clearly.

“Todd Muller and I believe we represent the majority of the people in this area, and it's our responsibility to take it to the new government and ensure our economic direction isn't sacrificed, that the prosperity and the gains we are making don't go sideways.”

While congratulating Prime Minister elect Jacinda Adern, Simon says the result from yesterday where NZ First leader Winston Peters announcing he would form a government with Labour and the Greens, is very disappointing.

“Particularly given the strength of National's vote,” says Simon. “We were nearly one in two votes throughout NZ and more like six out of ten here locally in the Bay of plenty.

“The Bay of Plenty did not vote for this Labour NZ First Greens government, and I'll be working really hard to be part of a strong opposition that's holding this three party government to account and ensuring that the really strong gains that we have made as a country over the last nine years where we have funded a wealthier more upbeat aspirational country, aren't squandered.”

The National Party in opposition is almost the same size as the three governing parties together says Simon.

“We have a responsibility to hold them to account and ensure that they are managing the economy and the wider issues that New Zealand faces well,” says Simon.

“I think we will be very interested in how the coalition works, the dynamic of it - and we will be wanting to draw to people's attention the issues.

“I think also we will be really policy focussed. We'll have a real economic focus because New Zealand is stronger now and we don't want to go backwards and there's a range of policies that I think are worrying.”

Labour has policies particularly around employment law that are expensive, uncosted promises that won't go well, says Simon.

“They want to introduce effectively going back to the old awards negotiated sectors process. That's but one example of worrying policies we saw before the election that didn't get a lot of scrutiny, and it will be our job as the opposition to highlight and dissect.”

The former minister of communications, economic development, transport, finance and Leader of the House is unsure yet what his role will be in opposition, but he's keen to have a big responsibility.

“The exact portfolios we will work out over the next few weeks.

“The first thing is caucus next week. We will go through the result and start working on our strategy to be and effective opposition to hold the new government to account.”

Simon is unable to comment on the negotiations process because confidentiality agreements were signed, but he disagrees with some comments published so far referring to number of cabinet seats claimed and offered.

“We have actually signed confidentiality agreements. But broadly speaking I don't think those stories are necessarily correct, and it is very hard to know why Winston Peters and New Zealand First did that.”

Simon says National is a strong, unified party. Leader Bill English led them to a really good result and he intends to stick with him.


NZer, your method does not work

Posted on 16-11-2017 11:11 | By Peter Dey

NZer, your method of leaving irresponsible parents in the hands of whanau is not used by the majority of nations around the world. They sign the UN declaration on the rights of the child in that belief. Children left to irresponsible parents end up as criminal or problem adults which costs governments even more. It is not communism for governments to help prevent child mistreatment.


Posted on 15-11-2017 17:29 | By NZer

That is what Whanau is for. You should know this better than anyone.... nothing to do with Goverments... you sound like you would love communism as that is what you breath and talk. You want the govt responsible for everything... that is communsim... it about time Peter you took responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming goverments...

NZer, National left us pollution and child poverty not prosperity

Posted on 14-11-2017 16:58 | By Peter Dey

NZer, it must make sense that Governments normally accept responsibility for under-age children and for ensuring that there is enough housing for all families because children are the taxpayers of the future. Their welfare is investment for the future.


Posted on 14-11-2017 16:28 | By NZer

In was National party policy also to lead this country to prosperity so as you say its their policy so it has happened and I am glad you agree with me then.. because it was their policy.

NZer, National party policy was to intensify dairy farming

Posted on 14-11-2017 12:22 | By Peter Dey

NZer, the National party went into elections with a policy of improving our economic growth by intensifying dairy farming. The details are irrelevant. They used financial incentives such as subsidising artificial irrigation schemes to intensify dairying. Simon's government contributed deliberately to increased river pollution.

NZer, the government has to ensure housing for all families

Posted on 14-11-2017 10:20 | By Peter Dey

NZer, Civilised governments believe that they should take action when irresponsible parents are treating children badly, and that includes making sure families are housed. Children can not choose their parents and are not able to look after themselves. Civilised governments do not create homelessness for children. Simon's National government did just that. I am on a civilised planet. What planet are you on ? (Correction: National cut state housing by 7,000 not 70,000).


Posted on 13-11-2017 16:45 | By NZer

Who bought the cows? The National party or the farmers? So now that you understand that governments are not responsible to house people then you understand why they dont need to build houses. Do you expect the govt to go oh a family has just moved to NZ oh the tax payer needs to build them a house. What planet are you on mate?

NZer, the government does not have to provide free housing

Posted on 13-11-2017 15:08 | By Peter Dey

NZer, you say that it is up to people to house themselves not governments. In New Zealand that is quite true. However the government has to have plans to make sure that people are able to house themselves. The National government increased the population by 200,000 and cut state housing by 70,000. They had no proper plan for housing at all.

NZer, the statistics say that National did not do well

Posted on 13-11-2017 14:56 | By Peter Dey

NZer you are not alone in believing Simon's political spin. We will gradually work through all the reasons why people believe that National did well. The statistics show that most of these beliefs are false. National got votes by fooling people, and by giving unaffordable hand-outs.

NZer, National subsidised irrigation and signed a UN declaration

Posted on 13-11-2017 14:36 | By Peter Dey

NZer it was National election policy to intensify dairy farming. Their immigration policy allowed unsupervised exploitation of immigrants for farming. National increased the population and made no provision for increased housing. That made families homeless. That contravened the UN declaration, which was a commitment to house all children, which is not communism either.


Posted on 13-11-2017 12:51 | By NZer

National did not put more cows on farms. Farmers did. Like I said Child neglect is the fault of parents. Funny enough they usually come from the socioeconomic groups that vote is up to people to house themselves not governments. We are not communists.

MISSADVENTURE, somebody is fooling you, National did badly

Posted on 13-11-2017 11:19 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, you are repeating theories that are contradicted by facts. Over the past three years Australian annual growth has averaged 2.5 per cent. New Zealand has averaged only 1.9 per cent annual growth if you remove the effect of unsustainable immigration, which National used to boost the statistics.

NZer, Bill English contradicts you

Posted on 13-11-2017 10:53 | By Peter Dey

Bill English thought there were 100,000 children in poverty during the election campaign. Our government is signatory to the UN declaration on the rights of the child which commits governments to remove child poverty. National policy of intensified dairying has increased river pollution. National increased the population by 200,000 and cut state housing by 7,000 from 2015 to 2017.

@ Peter Dey

Posted on 12-11-2017 22:09 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Growth is easy when tiems are good, National arrived when the public (just enough) realised that labour was sending NZ into teh balck abyss and it was a one-way trip. Faced witht hat scenario any gains can only be considered as indeed a fantastic achivement - thanks for confirming that. The reason the Aussies have a little more growth is that they have dealt with the moaners inland a lot more effectively so little lifeblood is being sucked out of everyone else for no reason as is the case more and more in NZ now and for teh last few decades on an esculating basis - grander theft annually. Lets also not forget that Aussie debt is huge and that currently they are not doing so well at present. perhaps the sure/steady is better than borrow/fun/bust cycle of Aussie/Labour types.


Posted on 12-11-2017 21:17 | By NZer

Only an idiot would believe that our rivers have suddenly become polluted in the term of National. Do you actually believe in labours term they suddenly will become clean? A housing crisis is caused by a lack of builders and tradies. Nothing to do with governments. Child poverty only occurs in Africa. Child neglect is caused by bad parenting here in NZ. again nothing to do with governments. Do you really believe any govt controls parents or are you one of these people that believe the earth is flat? Amazingly they let you vote.

NZer, Statistics NZ figures are the real figures

Posted on 12-11-2017 16:13 | By Peter Dey

Statistics NZ use the same methods to collect data regardless of which party is the government.

NZer, Statistics NZ keep all our official statistics

Posted on 12-11-2017 16:08 | By Peter Dey

Statistics NZ methods do not change when the government changes. Statistics NZ figures show that average annual economic growth during the Labour government was 3.8% (Australia 2.8%), and during the National government was 1.8% (Australia 2.5%). Labour did better than Australia. National did worse than Australia.


Posted on 12-11-2017 13:29 | By CONDOR

Well this wally's performance on TV the other day in the House looked spiteful vengeful and vitriolic.How anyone could support this unhinged effort or for that matter the shambolic behaviour of any politician involved is one of life's little mysteries.Oh and how is National a stronghold in the BOP as it has only marginally over 50% and drooping.LOL


Posted on 12-11-2017 12:13 | By NZer

The figures that labour always produced are always fudged and paint a rosy picture for the believers like yourself... Reality is when the oppersition get hold of the books and tell the real figures....

Pompous Paternalism missy,

Posted on 12-11-2017 10:49 | By R. Bell

does you no credit whatsoever. Nor do your future predictions mitigate the thrashing Peter is giving you, on political reality. Robin Bell.

MISSADVENTURE, National made no good quality long term gains

Posted on 12-11-2017 10:43 | By Peter Dey

National has left us with a housing crisis, polluted rivers, a child poverty crisis, $60 billion of unpaid debt, and economic growth padded by excessive immigration that has over stressed our cities. They do not seem to have made any long term gains.

Statistics NZ growth figures: Australia 2.5 percent National 1.8 percent

Posted on 12-11-2017 10:31 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, over the past nine years National averaged 1.8 per cent annual growth and Australia averaged 2.5 per cent. National actually did not do well overall. We can expect the local economy to improve under Labour, probably because there will be more money available to low income earners who will spend it all in local businesses. This was how Labour averaged 3.8 per cent annual growth before.

current economic figures are about to pummet

Posted on 11-11-2017 17:00 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Labour is in, like all good kids, the sweets jar is way to muct to resist, all the good qquality long term gains made in 9 years will all evaporate in perhaps one year, such is the pace of destruction that will naivily be dished out to all unwittingly by utter obsession with mirage like abberations. Speaking of which, Robin, how are you doing on your catch up reading homework I set for you, I know you will hardly have staretd on that but a progress report would be good to hear.

Even Simon's current economic figures are deceptive

Posted on 10-11-2017 16:52 | By Peter Dey

NZ's average economic growth over the past three years has been 2.9 per cent per year, which looks good. However the National government artificially inflated growth by using immigration to boost the population by an extra 1 per cent per year above average. Without the immigration boost our economic growth would have been only 1.9 per cent a year and worse than Australia. The prosperity gains claimed by Simon are just propaganda not real.

Ideas that are contradicted by official statistics are nonsense

Posted on 10-11-2017 10:25 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, your ideas about Labour governments are contradicted by official government statistics. This makes your ideas fantasy nonsense.

Economic growth per year: Labour 3.8 per cent, National 1.8 per cent

Posted on 10-11-2017 08:46 | By Peter Dey

Figures available online show that average economic growth during the previous Labour government's nine years was 3.8 per cent per year, and during the just defeated National government's nine years was 1.8 per cent per year. The New Zealand economy performed far better under Labour than it did under National. There were no hand-outs. Everybody did better.

NZ economy

Posted on 09-11-2017 18:22 | By MISS ADVENTURE

That much is right, Labour socialist spendups by definition are on meaningless, unproductive activities that add nothing to the productive capacity of NZ's economy. So provide no reward or benefit to anyone useful to teh NZ Economy. By contrast, wasting money on homeless and benefit dependant persons is like pulling the hand-brake on to full for an economy. These meaningless handouts intended will add a spend factor iniitally e.g. TAB, casinos and junk food outlets for example, but that will only be short lived use. Do you understandf peter ... yes or no.

@ Dear Peter

Posted on 09-11-2017 17:55 | By MISS ADVENTURE

The Labour Governments track record speaks for itself, basiclly using the consolidated fund for all and sundry assorted and elicit activities. That for example includes Helen "buying" herself a UN job to get out of NZ and somehow that was to be the swan-song get-away move to lead her to teh top perch at the UN - failed. They obviously spotted her and figured her out as she dropped through the vote rankings, spat the dummy and ran back home (not unlike yourself almost ... you have not left yet. How can you say this is in anyway "better" that national or anyone else for that matter.

National treatment of children in poverty was morally bankrupt

Posted on 09-11-2017 15:07 | By Peter Dey

Simon's National government used political opinion polls to establish that they would not lose election votes by ignoring child poverty. Just before the election the polls changed so Bill English u-turned, and said child poverty was important. This was after nine years of dishonouring the UN declaration on the rights of the child which NZ had signed. Simon's National government that dishonoured a UN declaration and left children in poverty for election votes was morally bankrupt.

The previous Labour government managed the economy better than National did

Posted on 09-11-2017 14:40 | By Peter Dey

Simon's belief that the economy might go backward under Labour is not supported by the statistics. The previous Labour government had better average economic growth, better average unemployment, nine years of budget surpluses, and set aside $2 billion average per year for superannuation. Simon's National government borrowed $60 billion not repaid, and sold assets and spent the proceeds on themselves. They were visionless and self-centred.

Dear Peter

Posted on 09-11-2017 12:40 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Looks like a bit of a rant, clearly you have no financial acume to draw the conclusions you have somehow? They are indeed creative. Notice for all readers, Peters comments are way out left field and dont have any fact or reality about any of them, treat them as a "fictional/fastany" type story book with about as much relatiy about it all as a average Mills and Boon book would have.

295,000 NZ children living in poverty (UNICEF)

Posted on 08-11-2017 15:18 | By Peter Dey

Simon says that National has increased prosperity and made gains with the economy. UNICEF (United Nations) reports that about 20% of NZ children are living in poverty. The National government deliberately did not share our prosperity with the poorest children, despite knowing that they had signed the UN declaration on the rights of the child, which required them to ensure a good standard of living for all children. The children of the poor paid for tax cuts for the wealthy.

NZer, National was borrowing to use other people's money

Posted on 08-11-2017 13:21 | By Peter Dey

NZer, the Labour government is simply spending fairly what it can afford with no borrowing. It was Simon's National government that was spending other people's money by spending above its income and borrowing from future taxpayers to make up the difference.

Simon's government debt passed on reduces economic options

Posted on 08-11-2017 13:02 | By Peter Dey

When the Simon's National government took over they had no net debt, so that borrowing to deal with the Global Financial Crisis was not difficult. The new government just elected has inherited an extra $60 billion of debt that will make it harder for them to borrow if an economic crisis occurs. When Simon says that the National government made economic gains he is misleading because they never repaid the debt that they ran up.

Simon's National government surpluses were misleading

Posted on 08-11-2017 12:47 | By Peter Dey

Simon's National government surpluses were misleading because they did not repay the $60 billion debt that they borrowed. The NZ economy is currently healthy but the benefits have not been shared fairly. The housing crisis that we have was fuelled by National's excessive immigration, and National took no effective action to solve it. Running down state housing made the crisis worse. Immigrant workers have been exploited with too few employment inspectors.

Tax cuts, Petee missed the point again

Posted on 07-11-2017 18:45 | By MISS ADVENTURE

The national government reduced spending,then provided tax-cut to all hard working NZ-taxpayers, Guess you didn't notice that happening, likely for obvious reasons! Good busienss management requires the surplus to be there first, then reduce-tax. The labour-mob have rather different agenda, to think that they know best how to spend all and sundry on time wasting silliness and dead-ends. Like non-existent homeless(just jobs for the faithful,feel good stupids, thats all it is) like benficiaries who just need to get a real job (but so easy to just have a hand to get someone elses money for nothing) but cant do that now can we. Your understanding is reflective of preserving the gravy train for yourself, if you had a real job had to go to work and work and so to ensure you were paid then your view would be opposite on many things you profess as how it should b

MISSADVENTURE, a very childlike view of the economy

Posted on 07-11-2017 16:41 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE you repeat economic information that is clearly not correct, that you are repeating from somebody else without checking your facts. The previous Labour government had nine years in a row of budget surpluses, and saved about $20 billion into the superannuation fund. Quite clearly the economy was totally sound. The only problem was that the Global Financial Crisis had to be dealt with by borrowing.

Miss Adventure

Posted on 07-11-2017 16:14 | By NZer

Totally agree with all you have said. People like Pete and Robin believe in the communist type system and love to tell everyone else what to do and spend everyone elses money...

Pet n Robin show

Posted on 07-11-2017 11:31 | By MISS ADVENTURE

That about sums it up.

Is this a wind up, or what

Posted on 07-11-2017 10:25 | By R. Bell

You cannot escape the facts.There were no actual tax cuts nzer, at the same time p.a.y.e tax was reduced g.s.t increased. People who have to spend all income to survive are therefore penalised more than the wealthy. Fact. A place to bring up your family is a basic human right. Governments have the responsibility to make that possible. An increase in cost from 2.5 times annual av. income 1960s to over 10 times now, takes away that right. Our low wage economy prevents the working class from even getting that basic start in life. Blame whomever you like, you cannot escape the FACTS that exist here and now. Robin Bell.

MISSADVENTURE, what you believe is misinformed propaganda

Posted on 07-11-2017 09:11 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, when the National government took over in 2008, the New Zealand economy was not a mess. The government had no net debt. The Global Financial Crisis was not caused by the Labour Government. New Zealand's financial problems in 2008 were caused by international events. National was able to borrow comfortably because Labour left no net debt.

NZer, Labour voters know that tax cuts are less value to them

Posted on 07-11-2017 08:44 | By Peter Dey

Labour voters like tax cuts. They just know that other benefits like affordable housing are better.

The Pet n Robin show

Posted on 07-11-2017 02:35 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Returns, the usual circus and repeat story lines ... here we go again. It is a clear, known fact that the national Government inherited a complete mess when they got into power in 2008, the reported massive surpluses were a fiction and no mney remained in the coffers despite all crowing and chest beating that went on. result, GFC and no spare dosh to get through it as all wasted on dead loss stuff. That meant large amounts of borrowings required to restore some kind of solvency to teh NZ economy and avoid teh worst of the GFC. The bad news for NZ is that this same socailist thought (lack of) will head us all done the same meaningless destructive path. NB I do not vote for National and I am not stupid enough to vote labour or worse, the Greens.


Posted on 06-11-2017 17:43 | By NZer

Keep telling yourself that Labour voters dont like tax cuts and you will start to believe it. Robin housing is not a right. It is earnt.

MISSADVENTURE, tax cuts reduced government income

Posted on 06-11-2017 11:24 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, National's economic management was not good. The $60 billion that they borrowed and did not pay back was about 10 per cent of their income. The tax cuts did not reduce their spending it reduced their income. Any business that relied on borrowing 10 per cent of its income over a nine year period would be out of business. Only governments can borrow that much and pass the bill onto future taxpayers.

MISSADVENTURE, National did not invest for the future

Posted on 06-11-2017 10:52 | By Peter Dey

MISSADVENTURE, you share the selfish thinking of the National government in not investing for the future. The children in low income households are the taxpayers of the future. It is wise for us to make sure that these future taxpayers have a well-housed, well-supported, well-educated childhood so they can do a good job later. National's tax cuts were economic nonsense. They had to borrow $60 billion to run the country, selfishly spending future taxes for their present benefit.

NZer, housebuilding by National is irrelevant

Posted on 06-11-2017 10:19 | By Peter Dey

Whether or not National built state houses is irrelevant. The fact is that, under National, Housing NZ rental units dropped from 69,000 to 60,000, which saved them hundreds of millions of dollars. They used this money for policies attractive to National voters, like tax cuts. Low income electorates vote mostly Labour. Higher income electorates vote mostly National. Statistical fact.

Peter Dey is absolutely correct,

Posted on 06-11-2017 10:10 | By R. Bell

in his interpretation of the effect of running down State housing. The effect being less affordable housing ( a basic human right in all societies) coupled with the undeniable effect of wealthy immigrants pushing up house prices at the top end.The inevitable trickle down creating ( along with corporate greed) unaffordable housing across the spectrum. Peters figures from Housing N.Z show the link between the differing philosophy of Labour and National. He has told no lies, simply the truth, which of course is difficult for some to take. Robin Bell.

@ Pet

Posted on 05-11-2017 16:54 | By MISS ADVENTURE

You say, "Kenworthlogger, tax cuts come with hidden costs", actually that fly's in the face of all economic knowledge and good practice that has ever existed. Tax cuts (and so reduced Government spending) put money back in the hands of real workers who have a job and pay their own way in life without meaningless handouts wasted. Benefit increases merely reward these who do nothing, no job and contribute little to a community's long-term sustainability. We have already had (you lost) the discussion about homeless and the likes, the solution is simple, you know but deny. Remember ... there are actually no homeless, malnourished kids etc. There are only very bad decisions made by adults that created and foster personally disasters that for reason completely unknown to me they then expect others (the NZ taxpayer) to keep throwing money at endlessly because a hand is out demanding it.

@ Kenworthlogger

Posted on 05-11-2017 16:47 | By MISS ADVENTURE

Petes saying what he says parrot fashion, explanations cannot be given, no reasons, no logic, as there aren't any. He says it so you are required to just: believe, swallow, grin, bear it and repeat. Your questions simply result in unrelated banter, there is no capacity to discuss, consider anything else except a repeat of "exactly" what he has already said (the parrot factor) ... you do anything else then the response will not be on subject nor fact/evidence based. It will be personal.

Kenworthlogger, tax cuts come with hidden costs

Posted on 04-11-2017 09:59 | By Peter Dey

People on benefits do not get tax cuts. Tax cuts do not compensate people who are homeless or have unaffordable rents. Of course Labour voters like tax cuts. They just know that tax cuts favour National voters more than them. National saved hundreds of millions of dollars by running down state housing. The cost to non-National voters was just regarded as collateral damage.


Posted on 03-11-2017 17:24 | By NZer

I have caught you in another lie. You said National had stopped building houses. Then you go onto say they are building houses.... its all there for the record... keep digging mate!!!


Posted on 03-11-2017 17:21 | By NZer

You said the people affected were not National voters. How would you know? Did you ask them? Your credability is at about zero now..... unbelievable.....

Tax cuts

Posted on 03-11-2017 12:49 | By Kenworthlogger

Mr Day are you saying Labour voters do not like tax cuts? Can you please enlighten us all on that brash statement.

NZer, immigrants push kiwis out of housing

Posted on 03-11-2017 10:17 | By Peter Dey

Immigrants do not take state houses but they take houses away from kiwis, who then become homeless, if there are not enough houses available. The National Government policy created the situation where there are not enough houses available, but the people affected are not National voters. The money saved went into policies like tax cuts that are attractive to National voters.

NZer, not one-eyed, hilarious or silly, just factual

Posted on 03-11-2017 10:09 | By Peter Dey

Housing NZ statistics, available online, show that Housing NZ rentals were in 2003: 65,000; in 2008: 69,000; in 2015: 67,000; in 2017: 60,000. Any houses that the National Government built were simply replacements. They were not building more houses. They were running the housing stock down, and saving millions of dollars in the process.


Posted on 02-11-2017 18:14 | By NZer

You said National had stopped building houses... Now you are backing up really fast... Halirious watching you....


Posted on 02-11-2017 18:12 | By NZer

Immigrants do not need state houses. They are capable of buying their own.. As for tax cuts etc all governments know that not just National mate. How silly of you to think that.

NZer, political polling enables governments to target spending.

Posted on 02-11-2017 15:35 | By Peter Dey

NZer, the Government does not have access to how people voted, so they cannot give payments to their supporters. But they do spend large sums on political polls, which tell them what policies are attractive to their supporters. They know that cutting spending on social services like free school buses, and keeping spending on health and education up with inflation will not lose them votes, and that tax cuts will gain them votes.

NZer National targeted financial benefits to National voters

Posted on 02-11-2017 15:26 | By Peter Dey

NZer, National's tax cuts attracted National voters but were paid for by cuts in social spending such as cuts in spending on state houses. You may have seen state houses being built but overall the National Government saved billions of dollars by cutting maintenance on state houses, selling state houses and not building enough state houses to keep up with the immigration they were allowing. These spending cuts affected mostly non-National voters.

One eyed Pete is at it again

Posted on 02-11-2017 13:01 | By NZer

How was the National government giving out selected handouts to National Voters Peter? Were they going thru the voting payments and seeing who voted for them and giving them money? What utter typical One eyed Pete crap! I have seen brand new housing built by housing New Zealand in The BOP built while National have been in power over the last 9 odd years so clearly Pete is telling a fast one.... again!

National's tax cuts were paid from State housing cuts

Posted on 27-10-2017 10:47 | By Peter Dey

National's economic management has been a deception that has favoured National supporters so naturally they support National and Simon. After 75 years of Governments building State houses to ensure all families had affordable housing, Simon's National Government stopped building State houses and used the money to give tax cuts. Simon's support has been won by selective handouts to National voters paid for by cuts in service for non-National voters.

Watcher1 and caveman

Posted on 26-10-2017 16:10 | By Kenworthlogger

The reason we have 2 toll roads in Tauranga is nothing to do with National. Tauranga City Council was given the option like Waikato was wait for free road or have it now with tolls. Tauranga City Council wanted it now and choose to have tolls. Nothing to do with National govt at all. And to think people like you to get to vote when you have not a clue. God save NZ as under Labour we will be spent into even worse debt like they always do..... the poor will pay dearly and you will get what you voted for...

WOW!! Poor form Simon!

Posted on 22-10-2017 13:22 | By GT in Bay of Plenty

Your tone in this article is indeed that of a child that is now learning to share with others. I'll take integrity over so called "experience" any day. The National Party's self serving ways may have created the illusion of an ok economy on the balance sheet, but our environment and vast array of social issues are at crisis levels due mostly to the NP's gross neglect. Stop grandstanding and pontificating. You lost the election based on a legal, binding democratic process which you have been happy with for many years. Youre electorate mostly consists of self centred baby boomers desperate to look after their own interests. Jacinda is TopGun now with Winston and James as her wingmen. If I were you, I would refrain from stooping to low levels saying things like "They have gone against what most people in the Bay of Plenty wanted". SimplyNotTruthful as morewantedchange!

Oh, I forgot - Simon,

Posted on 21-10-2017 20:17 | By The Caveman

What happened to your previous bosses (JK) PROMISE some 7-8 years ago to TWO lane (eachway) 15th Avenue & Turret Road - we the people of Tauranga are still waiting !! Just like the promise to two lane 10 bridges in Northland - I understand that NZTA have started work on TWO, and that the other EIGHT were not even being considered TWO weeks before the election. PROMISES, PROMISES !!!!! But no actual DO......................

HI Simon

Posted on 21-10-2017 20:09 | By The Caveman

WHY under your nine year watch, did TAURANGA (or to be correct the wider Tauranga area) wind up with TWO TOLL ROADS ???? Perhaps, the general "senior"population are NOT happy with TOLL roads when the already pay more that 50% of the cost of a litre of petrol as TAX.


Posted on 21-10-2017 08:08 | By Captain Sensible

Simon thinks he gets in because because he is popular when we all know, the Nat's could put anyone up as a candidate and would win in this area.

Sour Grapes

Posted on 20-10-2017 23:29 | By maddog

Simon you had no idea what you were doing as a Ministry of Transport, Steven Joyce had no idea how to be a ministry of Finance, Paula Bennett had no idea what she was doing, Gerry Brownlee well do i need to say more the National Government lost the plot when John Key moved out, Bill English he was making things up as he went.

Dear Simon

Posted on 20-10-2017 21:42 | By AndyCap

You need to understand this pretty clearly - you and your electorate did not will the election and are no longer in control of the New Zealand political scene. Nationals dismal track record is hardly worthy of applause to hold anyone to account on anything.

let Go

Posted on 20-10-2017 21:05 | By roseh

Simon you seem to forget we are all not wealth that live in Tauranga,so will be a change to not only have the wealthy looked after.

Time to grow up

Posted on 20-10-2017 20:29 | By mike harman

Poor Simon it is obvious that you dont understand how MMP works. At long last we have had an election where the system has worked as it should, your boss Bill along with the rest of the nats were so sure that you had it in the bag however you didnt and instead of being a poor looser be a man and take it on the M Harman

Experience = NIL

Posted on 20-10-2017 18:34 | By carpedeum

Just saw a photo of our new Prime Minister Elect with the three New BOP Region MPs- Tamati Coffee, and two females - and quite frankly I shuddered- not one iota of Political experience between them - oh wait- Jacinda has had nine years in Opposition ( never heard of her though) and whats more she has a BA in Communication.Thanks goodness there are still Simon Bridges and Todd Muller looking after this region- albeit in Opposition.


Posted on 20-10-2017 17:54 | By Puregold

I am thankful there has been a change in govt for several reasons. Firstly jan tinetti will, I believe prove to be one of the hardest working MPs around. She will fight hard to increase social equity for the most marginalised group in this area. A group that has never been on your radar Simon. Secondly and of great concern has been your lack of regard for environmental issues and how your decision making has impacted this area. I remember when you and Jacinda were called the young guns on breakfast TV. Guess who is now Top Gun :)

Won the battle but...

Posted on 20-10-2017 17:03 | By Jayleen Wood

lost the war. The National elite will understandably remain bitter for a long, long time. It would have been sporting Simon if you first congratulated our new PM in waiting and the coalition on their success before putting the boot in. None the less, hopefully you too can look forward to cleaner rivers and a more balanced and caring society that benefits all New Zealanders. Well done and thank you to the coalition. Jacinda could well be our best PM yet. Integrity, integrity and more integrity. Proudly Kiwi.

No longer Simon Says

Posted on 20-10-2017 16:19 | By alderest

Wow, so much sour grapes, Simon bow out and give someone who will keep their word. Winston has always done what he promised, National should learn from him, NZ is sick of broken promises and watching people losing their homes so the rich can get richer. Labour, NZ First and the Greens cannot do any worse than National has, so keep your moaning to yourself and get off that high horse you've been on. Let's look forward to a government with integrity.

Why 2 Toll Roads here but NONE in Waikato, Auckland?

Posted on 20-10-2017 15:14 | By Watcher 1

Have National REALLY looked after B O.P ?, yes the majority voted for Tolls to speed up Contruction but to travel to work Paengaroa to Tauriko return for work each day costs $8 for a small car, 2 Tolls to pay each way. So why do National NOT have a Toll charge for drivers using NEW Waikato Expressways and NEW Expensive Auckland Tunnels?Here for a number of years we have had FOUR National M.P s, including the Minister of Transport responsible for various parts of the BOP electorates keeping Toll charges in place here while allowing major other districts offAs a past National Supporter it maybe was time for change of Government to help the working man and family out, Five days a week at $8 per day =$40 per week is a lot of money going out. Winstone to thank removed the last Tolls


Posted on 20-10-2017 14:47 | By penguin

...sounds like sour grapes to me. The real world has finally caught up with you!

@By normal local

Posted on 20-10-2017 14:17 | By Abobsworth

We have had nine years of stupid policies of selling our silver and looking after overseas buyers and investors and record immigration.Increase in crime and homeless.The new Government has not even started and you a crystal ball gazing.Sounds like your grapes are sour.

I told you Simon

Posted on 20-10-2017 14:14 | By tutae.kuri

I told all you National guys that you would lose the next election because of the bowing and forelock tugging to the iwi interests. None of you listened, now the limo and big salary has gone so it will be baked beans on toast twice a week for 3 years. Have you learned anything out of this ?

To quote Simon

Posted on 20-10-2017 13:26 | By waiknot

It's our responsibility to take it to the new government and ensure our economic direction isn't sacrificed, that the prosperity and the gains we are making don't go sideways. Those low income people who cant afford to rent a home may have had enough of your economic elitist economic direction.


Posted on 20-10-2017 13:23 | By waiknot

Get a grip, Winston has a responsibility to one group of voters and that is the ones who voted NZF. Labour NZF and the greens combined are the majority in government. Its called democracy. Also the BOP region do not decide the govt on there own. But now you have time on your hands perhaps you could start represent us.

hey Simon

Posted on 20-10-2017 13:07 | By Mein Fuhrer

cry me a river


Posted on 20-10-2017 13:02 | By TMcDonald

I think the only reason both Simon and Todd have a majority in Bay of Plenty is because they represent the majority of active voters in this region, most of which are older retired people and immigrants, with many only interested in protecting, benefiting and growing their own personal circumstance and wealth. To say that you will hold Labour to account is an absolute laugh seeing as National remained grossly unaccountable and in denial for much of New Zealands recent years of decline in terms of standards of living, housing, education, health, law and order, environmental issues, suicide rates and, and, and. Like spoilt children that did not get their way, they now profess the high ground with criticism, sulking and moaning for years to come. Jacinda has one thing that has been lacking in government over past years INTEGRITY! Watch and learn gentlemen.

Dear Simon

Posted on 20-10-2017 12:58 | By Abobsworth

Dear Simon still waiting for the 10 Northland bridges.To many miss truths by National in this election campaign and people lost confidence.New Zealanders had a mood for change not same old same old.To much was sold off especially to overseas buyers and investors.I am looking forward to a government that looks after ALL New Zealanders.Well done Winston.

We can only hope

Posted on 20-10-2017 12:34 | By normal local

I really do hope that Simon does what he is saying.I think we are going to need lots of assistance to try and ensure that some of Labour and NZ First's stupid policies don't get put in place.We can only hope that the good National seats can do some good to prevent the country going downhill too much before the next election.

Leave a Comment

Sorry, SunLive is no longer accepting comments on this article.

Opinion Poll

Should terminally ill people be legally allowed to end their own life or ask to have someone end their life on their behalf?


Bay Today

Hairy Maclary and his friends at dusk. Photo: Lynley Whitaker.

Send us your photos from around the Bay of Plenty.