Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Calling the race before it's over

204 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha, in reply to Barnard,

    pantomime :)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Another Standard post about how the trigger might affect Labour caucus behaviour in practice.

    If caucus can’t agree who to support as leader, then it will go to the party and the caucus to vote on. You can guarantee that the outcome with the vote weightings of the caucus 40%, the membership 40% and affiliates 20% is not going to be simple. The party won’t reward people that are perceived to be stirring up trouble nor incumbent leaders who let things get to the state that 40% of the caucus petition to have them removed.

    I’d expect that any effective party leader will try to make sure that their most effective MP’s are fully and gainfully employed. Which is what the party and affiliates will want as well. And any MP(s) and their supporters wanting to have a shot at leader will have to be effective. These are the things that party members and affliates will look at.

    All MP’s apart from the deranged will probably prefer to keep the dispute away from the party vote because they might not like the judgement passed on them. Getting any resolution in a caucus that has less than 40% malcontents is going to be a whole lot safer than whatever the party metes out.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Barnard,

    If this desire to democratize the party is driven by concerns over the last leadership contest & a belief the wrong man is leading the party, then why can't those people say so.

    They're quite probably conflicted. It's a thing to be conflicted over, after all, since the two represent quite different tacks for the party.

    My wish? That they'd find a friggin' way to work productively together. And that's not a partisan wish, it's a wish with the good of the country in mind.

    Indeed, although I'm not sure that they aren't working together. They have managed to improve Labour's position. Maybe people actually like the idea of a party that's a bit of a chaotic meeting of viewpoints, rather like democracy, and the nation as a whole. The arse-kicking single leader thing is so second millenium.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8659 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant, in reply to Barnard,

    What's going to change between now and February other than the rules under which any vote's taken?

    We'll have had 3 more months to see if Shearer can cut it or not.

    When he was appointed leader, Labour was pretty clear that he had a year to show he could do the job. That year is almost up; judgement is in February.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1666 posts Report Reply

  • Barnard, in reply to BenWilson,

    They’re quite probably conflicted. It’s a thing to be conflicted over, after all, since the two represent quite different tacks for the party.

    Reality is though in the short term they're very much tied up, and it's silly expecting the msm to ignore that.

    Maybe people actually like the idea of a party that’s a bit of a chaotic meeting of viewpoints, rather like democracy, and the nation as a whole. The arse-kicking single leader thing is so second millenium.

    Big difference between that, and the impression of factions undermining the leadership (even if the faction is a majority of members).
    You can have strong internal debate and still present a united front to the electorate.
    Seems to me it's pointless complaining that the media are focusing on the wrong things, it's up to both parliamentary & grass roots party to ensure the focus is on Govts failings and their alternative vision for the country.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2012 • 72 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    There are many challenging jobs that it is hard to excel in. Not giving outstanding performance in such a position does not make you bad in the field you work in, nor does it make you a bad person. If less was put on the need - created by all sides and interests - to have one person as a man above all others, and we were instead able to treat them as more ordinary humans, I suspect this would all resolve a little differently.

    But these pressures will not abate (indeed, for certain corners the resolution of these events is a prerequisite of such a let-up), and things will continue their course.

    Witness the recent destruction of another minor god. Humanity is not allowed to get in the way.

    The People's Republic of … • Since Nov 2006 • 2136 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to George Darroch,

    Not giving outstanding performance

    Being able to speak coherently to media is a bit more basic than that in a political leadership role.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Andre Alessi,

    I think Gio's point on Twitter about the lack of analysis of the political differences between Shearer and Cunliffe was spot on, unfortunately. (At least I think it was Gio?) I've yet to read very much portraying Shearer vs Cunliffe as anything but a stoush between two bureaucrats with identical policies. If that's the case, it doesn't say much about the depth of Labour's bench (to misuse the old analogy.)

    I realise now I've probably moved in to some transitional phase of leftihood with no way back, but I've spent most of the last year aghast at Shearer and Co's deliberate positioning as uninspiring-to-cynical-to-downright-reactionary on many core social issues, particularly the beneficiary bashing, but also Shearer's own simply unnecessary equivocation on marriage equality (prior to Wall's excellent management of that issue, anyway.) I was expecting, or at least hoping, to hear some kind of olive branch in the direction of others like myself, who had felt let down by the thuggish populism that has undermined many of Labour's policy discussions in the media recently. What did we get instead? More stuff about beneficiaries needing to work hard and play by the rules. If that's not a dog whistle for agreeing with National's tougher line on beneficiaries, it's a pretty fair imitation.

    Devonport, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 862 posts Report Reply

  • Deborah, in reply to Russell Brown,

    The odd thing is, if the vote on the 60/40 rule on Saturday was really a proxy vote on the leadership, then David Cunliffe won it.

    Am I right in guessing it actually wasn’t?

    It would be very odd to think that it was only about the leadership, and equally odd to think that it was only about establishing a voting rule.

    I think everyone would like to see it sorted out. Constructively.

    Manawatu City • Since Nov 2006 • 1328 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    Being able to speak coherently to media is a bit more basic than that in a political leadership role.

    No doubt. But what should concern us is the context under which candidates variously more or less qualified are disallowed from stepping up or down without huge personal loss or gain.

    If this is merely about who becomes the next PM, then this behaviour makes sense. But seen from the perspective of a movement, it's intensely harmful. I think all organisations need to develop frameworks which allow their participants to step up into and out of positions as needed, with the support that entails.

    The People's Republic of … • Since Nov 2006 • 2136 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to George Darroch,

    I certainly agree with that.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16838 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Tristan,

    I hate what he said.

    Fair enough. But I'm observing from 11,000-odd km away, so I'm not getting a lot of the wider context, which may partially explain why I read Hipkins' comments differently. My take was that he was saying "let's just get this leadership issue sorted and out of the way now". Because like others, I see this as distracting in quite a destructive way. Labour should be getting on with being the Opposition and holding the government accountable and putting its message out there, instead there's constant speculation about who wants to be leader. Not helpful.

    Beijing • Since Jan 2007 • 2168 posts Report Reply

  • George Darroch,

    In reply to my above post; I was overseas at the time, but I saw how comments directed towards Sue Bradford's real or perceived inability to lead the Greens, and how her image would hurt the party, were attributed to her as a person. She's a good person, but the process wounded her and is a major reason she left for Mana afterwards.

    Politics ain't beanbag, but it needn't be a punch-up on your own side either.

    The People's Republic of … • Since Nov 2006 • 2136 posts Report Reply

  • Graham Dunster,

    Really, unless Labour stops being National-lite, it's all academic.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2009 • 143 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Andre Alessi,

    I realise now I've probably moved in to some transitional phase of leftihood with no way back

    Yup, you're screwed.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8659 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Andre Alessi,

    particularly the beneficiary bashing

    Yup. That and a return to economic nationalism have been pretty big turn offs for me.

    I'm interested to see how this new housing policy will turn out though - at first glance it seems to be a step back in the right [ahem] ...correct direction. We shall see.

    Beijing • Since Jan 2007 • 2168 posts Report Reply

  • BlairMacca,

    It may seem trivial, but while Shearer might be lacking in the comms dept, Cunnliffe obviously isn’t immune. I mean who would actually think this photo would be a good thing, at any time or place http://www.listener.co.nz/current-affairs/politics/reinventing-david-cunliffe/

    Wellington • Since Apr 2007 • 201 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to BlairMacca,

    lol

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6341 posts Report Reply

  • Glenn Pearce, in reply to BlairMacca,

    Nice touch having his Paremoremo Boys High rugby jersey on

    Auckland • Since Feb 2007 • 352 posts Report Reply

  • BlairMacca, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Wellington • Since Apr 2007 • 201 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    Am I missing something? What's wrong with the photo?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 396 posts Report Reply

  • Barnard,

    Am I missing something?

    Do all the 'It's all the media's fault', 'Cunliffe's done nothing wrong' expect us to swallow the 'there was no leadership challenge nonsense, realise they've cocked it up, or are playing some longer game?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2012 • 72 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    I was trying to explain what happened to my partner this evening, and took inspiration from Deborah's comment above, and eventually ended up writing this.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2972 posts Report Reply

  • BlairMacca, in reply to Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    I think you are missing something.

    Wellington • Since Apr 2007 • 201 posts Report Reply

  • Lucy Telfar Barnard,

    Thank you Blair, that’s ever so helpful, about as useful as the answers my 12-year old gives me when being cheeky. I’d give you “the look” but that doesn’t really work in print (it doesn't always work in person either, mind you, but 12-year olds are a tricky bunch), so I’ll have to just rephrase my question to “what am I missing”?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 396 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.