The article critiques New Zealand's infrastructure policy, highlighting inefficiencies, political partisanship, and a disconnect between government spending and public willingness to pay, while drawing on historical examples like the 1920s electricity referenda to argue for more民
How the framings classify across 5 articles. Each framing is labelled by a small AI stance classifier; see the methodology page for details.
Stacked weekly counts; colour by lean. “n/a” covers government and iwi-Māori sources where lean isn't applicable.
How this topic has been named, week by week. A new alias winning out is usually a framing shift.
Verbatim segments from politicians speaking on podcasts and radio shows about this topic. Sourced via the voice-reference library — each speaker has been confirmed manually from their voice clip. Click play to stream the original audio from the publisher, pre-seeked to the moment the quote starts.
No, absolutely. And look, I think when you look back through the research from MB, from Productivity Commission, even from the Reserve Bank itself, you can quite clearly see that New Zealand has some structural challenges, but also that we have work to do, long, long standing work to do that we haven't really managed to turn the ship around and it's a slow moving ship. It won't be one government's job to solve. But, you know, we fundamentally have been failing to allocate capital to the most productive sectors. We focus on this residential property, not R&D. Sorry.
Up to 12 framings spread across orientations. Each framing is a short phrase the topic extractor generated to characterise the piece's stance — not a quote from the source. Click through to read the original.
high spending with poor outcomes compared to peers
Housing, infrastructure and finance freedomSocial-media signal on the same topic, drawn from the social lens. Engagement is likes + 2×shares + 3×replies, the same weighting used across the digest cards. View on /social →
Spotted something wrong on this page? Report a correction.
