Now that Labour has released its candidate list and a policy, a new subsidy for public transport fares, it is time to pose questions about its plans, should it return to government this year. If you seek power, you deserve to be pressed on why the public should trust you and what you intend to do.

Labour has not been a party of policy courage, or meaningful redistribution in favour of working people, for a decade. Nor has it much to say about restraining corporate monopolies in favour of families, and raising incomes with pro-competition rules, regulatory innovation or more public control. Instead, identity and climate still seem higher priorities.

If Labour has done any hard thinking about what it got wrong in government, it’s not obvious. For example, it has not been able to explain why it got its KiwiBuild pledge to build 100,000 new homes so wrong, nor what changes need to be made to the public sector to improve its ability to deliver government priorities.

Governments that succeed start with a big idea, a purpose, an analysis of what is wrong and a plan to fix it. They level with the public about the need for effort, even sacrifice, and time to get great things done.

Josie's column in The Post is here.

Josie was on Newstalk ZB's The Huddle to discuss the Labour Party's candidate list for this year's general election, and signs that housing rents are going down.

I did not expect the Government to decide that too many people are giving too much money to charities.
It is removing the tax exemption for major acts of philanthropy, limiting deductions to $100,000

Regular small donations from generous Kiwis, the bedrock of all charities, are drying up. The cost of living is increasing demand at the same time it is reducing families’ ability to help out. But charities are growing more dependent on big contributions from major donors, philanthropists, and family foundations. These are the donations targeted in the budget.

But charities are growing more dependent on big contributions from major donors, philanthropists, and family foundations. These are the donations targeted in the budget.

Josie's column in The Post is here.

Not all Māori want to be represented by one party any more than all Pākehā want a single Te Pāti Pākehā. Divisions have always existed within Māori politics: protest versus governing, bicultural reform (adapting Pākehā institutions) versus specifically Māori institutions.

For New Zealand First, just as Māori-led as Te Pāti Māori, the path is pragmatic. Shane Jones wants to get his infamous “nephs” off the couch by using resources, whether fisheries, land or minerals, to create development in the regions where Māori live. For TPM, a protest haka in parliament and a hīkoi to Wellington will wrest power into Māori hands, where the priority is more about who has power than what power is used for. Cutting across these divisions is a debate between rights derived from the Treaty, and special attention to disparities between Māori and non-Māori. They are not the same.

Today, some in New Zealand First and National see a New Zealand in which Māori and non-Māori are entwined. Some see the future in co-governance where power is divided, which is perhaps where Labour is headed.

I predict we are headed to a future in which we do what the Treaty says: Māori delivery, to those Māori who opt in, of schools, health care, social care, regional development.

As Mariameno Kapa-Kingi leaves Te Pāti Māori to start a Te Tai Tokelau party, Josie analyses strands in Māori politics.

Josie joined Heather du Plessis-Allan on Newstalk ZB's Huddle to discuss criticism of the school curriculum, Act's policy on immigration, and is there a gender issue in politics?